Images de page
PDF
ePub

or that, in intrinsic worth, they are capable of making atonement for a single sin more than those for which they were endured.This scheme proceeds on the assumption, that in every sin, there is a definite, calculable amount of demerit, and that his can be liquidated only by an equal amount of countervailing merit; in the same manner, as a debt is cancelled by the payment of the amount. Now, for this representation, we think, the scriptures afford no warrant: For, though they speak of sin as a debt, the design of this, obviously is, to represent in one point of view, the complete deliverance of the sinner from the claims of the law, by the substitution of the Saviour in his place, who is able and willing to answer all its demands against him,-to intimate that his deliverance is as real, and complete, and just, as that of the debtor, when his surety satisfies the demands of his creditor against him. This, we conceive to be the true design of this metaphor; and not to intimate the existence of any analogy between a debt and sin, as that in which the precise amount of evil can be ascertained by any calculation. On the contrary, in reference to its true character, and without any figure, it is represented as a crime, --a violation of the Divine law,-a rebellion against the Most High God. Considered in its various characters and relations, it is an evil of infinite magnitude; and though committed by a creature, is such that no creature can make an adequate atonement for it. No person ever supposes that the demerit of a crime can be made the subject of calculation, or that there is any scale by which the precise amount of evil can be ascertained; nor is any such calculation necessary to the ends of justice. Neither, on the other hand, is it ever supposed, that when a criminal suffers for his iransgressions, there is in his sufferings an amout of merit equal to the demerit of his crime. Both these, are things to which calculation cannot be applied. But justice is done, and the law is satisfied, when the punishment which it denounces against its violation is inflicted. So it is here. The justice of God is satisfied and the law is magnified and made honourable, when the curse denounced against transgression takes its full effect, and that perfect obedience which it requires is rendered. All this was done in the sufferings and obedience of Christ unto death; and we have no data in scripture warranting us to say, that less could have sufficed for the salvation of but one soul, or that more would be necessary if the number of the redeemed were double what it is, or extended to the whole human race.

Another unwarranted principle, that seems to be involved in this system, is, that it represents sin as being expiated by certain degrees of suffering. On the principles of this theory, a certain

amount of guilt is expiated, by a certain degree of suffering, on the part of the Saviour, terminating in death. If more guilt is to be expiated, an additional quantum of suffering must be inflicted; if less, something must be deducted. So that death being a thing common to both, it is the difference in the amount of suffering that constitutes the difference in the value of the atonement made. As for example; a certain degree of suffering, terminating in death, is necessary, as an atonement for one sinner. To make atonement for another sinner or another sin, or any number of these, an increased degree of suffering is all that is requisite; so that that alone which makes atonement for this additional guilt, is the additional quantum of suffering. In other words, it is according to the degree of suffering, that the value of the atonement, for the expiation of sin, is estimated. But is this agreeable to the representation of scripture? Is it not there uniformly declared that it is the DEATH of Christ, under the curse of the law, by which the atonement is made; without determining any thing respecting the degrees of suffering that preceded it?

II. A second theory respecting the atonement, is that, which represents Christ as dying for all men, without exception or limitation, and is known by the designation of a GENERAL atonement. Among the abettors of this opinion, there is some variety of views. Some maintain that Christ died equally and alike for all, thereby removing the guilt of original sin, and rendering salvation possible to all, on condition of gospel obedience; that is, sincere, though imperfect obedience; the atonement making up the deficiency: Such are denominated Neonomians. Others believe, that we are justified solely on the ground of the righteousness of Christ; but that our own faith and obedience and perseverance in them, is the condition of obtaining this justification And though these are acknowledged to be the work of the hy Spirit; yet all men having power to comply with, or effectually to resist his operations for the production of them in the soul, it still depends upon their own free will, to accept or rect them.

others who

Such are the views of the Arminian. There ar plead for a general atonement, who believe th while Christ died in a special manner for the elect, so? Infallibly to secure their salvation, yet in some sense, he d for others also; and though this some sense is never accely defined, it is supposed to procure for them the dispenon of the gospel, and is the source of the additional blesegs and comforts they enjoy under it. For the true charact of all such blessings as these, enjoyed by the uregenerate, we refer our readers to a very able paper in our second volume, pages 188, 224, 275. In the mean time, we VOL. III.

8

think it sufficient to state, in opposition to every view of a general atonement, that according to the doctrine of scripture, the representation of Christ, his atonement, and intercession, are of equal extent. And that as Christ, in the everlasting covenant, stood engaged only for those who were chosen in him, and given to him; and intercedes for them, and not for the world; they, and they only, are the persons for whom the atonement was made.-John xvii, throughout. And further, as no blessing which is the direct result of the death of Christ, or belongs to his purchase can be enjoyed without union to his person, there is no sense in which it can be said, that the atonement extends to them who are not united to him.

This theory of a general atonement, in one or other of its asaspects, is advocated by all Arminian Methodists and Baptists; by a great majority, if not by the whole body, of Episcopalians. and by no inconsiderable portion of Presbyterians in America.

III. The theory of the atonement, termed DEFINITE, is the doctrine of the Westminster Confession of Faith, and of all the truly orthodox in the Reformation churches. It is the doctrine of the Bible. This theory teaches, that in the everlasting covenant, Christ had a certain definite number of mankind sinners given to him by his Father to be redeemed, whose surety and substitute he became, and that in the fulness of time "the Lord Je sus, by his perfect obedience and sacrifice of himself, which he through the eternal Spirit once offered up unto God, hath fully satisfied the justice of his Father; and purchased not only reconciliation, but an everlasting inheritance in the kingdom of heaven, for all those whom the Father hath given unto him." (Con. Faith. Chap. 8, Sec. 5.) And " to all those for whom Christ hath purchased redemption, he doth certainly and effectually apply and communicate the same-in his own appointed and accepted tine, effectually calling them by his word and Spirit," (Con. Faith Chap. 10, Sec. 1.) and that being thus effectually called, he also freev justifieth them; "not by infusing righteousness into them, but b: pardoning their sins, and by accounting and accepting their persons as righteous: not for any thing wrought in them, or done by then but for Christ's sake alone: not by imputing faith itself, the act believing, or any other evangelial obedience to them, as their rig.. *eousness; and satisfaction of Christ u them, they receiving and resting on but by imputing the obedience him and his righteousness by fa.. which faith they have not of themselves, it is the gift of God." (p. 11, Sec. 1)_And being kept by the mighty power of God, through faith, unto lvation; ey can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of

grace, but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved." Ch. 17, Sec. 1. And though "Christ, by his obedience and death, did fully discharge the debt of all those that are thus justified, and did make a proper, real, and full satisfaction to his Father's justice in their behalf, yet, in as much as hew as givEn by the Father for them, and his obedience and satisfaction accepted in their stead,and both freely, not for any thing in them, their justification is only of free grace; that both the exact justice, and rich grace of God, might be glorified in the justification of sinners," Westminster Confession of Faith, Chap. 11, Sec. 3. See, also, an Act of the Associate Synod concerning Arminian er

rors.

Though the atonement in the Scriptures and the Confession, is thus limited and difinite, as it respects the objects for whom it was made; yet, such is necessarily its perfection and intrinsic value and sufficiency, that in itself, it were sufficient for the redemption of every sinner of Adam's race, had it pleased God to appoint it for that end. Being the fulfilment of that law, under which all of them equally are; wrought out by one in human nature who, in this, was equally related to all; and being a salvation equally suitable for, and necessary to all, a general call is addressed to all without exception; inviting and re<quiring them to accept of this salvation, with the assurance, “that whosoever believeth on Christ shall never perish, but have evernal life." Con. Faith, Chap. 7, Sec. 3, with the texts quoted.— Act of the Associate Peesbytery, concerning the Doctrine of Grace, Art. 1. Proceedings of the Associate Synod with Mr. Mair. Part, 3, Sec. 2, Art. 1, and 2.

IV. The Fourth theory, called the INDEFINITE or HOPKINSIAN theory, is totally different from the above, and overthrows the very foundations of the system of mercy. According to this, Christ was not the representative nor substitute of any; had no sin imputed to him, did not endure the punishment due to any sin; did not obey the law, given to man, so as to work out a rightcousness to be imputed to any; did not die in the stead of any; but that the atonement was a great public measure, to show that God was displeased with sin; and this having been done, God offers eternal life to all, and bestows it upon all, who will accept of it: yet, such are never considered just before God, but enter heaven itself, with all their guilt upon their heads. These sentiments, exhibited in their naked form, must strike with astonishment every one who knows the truth. Their prevalence in the churches of the United States, to so great an extent, is truly alarming. We thererefore consider it a duty, to furnish our readers with every thing valuable,

that comes under our notice, calculated to expose these perniciou doctrines, and to establish them in the truth. Influenced by such views, we readily transplant into our pages a series of letters, from the Christian Advocate, on this subject. They appear to have been written by a decided friend of the doctrine of a DEFINITE atonement; and are distinguished for the clear and sound views of the truth which they contain, as well as for the successful refutation of the Hopkinsian heresies. We cannot help, however,dissenting from thewriter,when he expresses hisopinion, that the difference between those who hold the doctrine of a general atonement, and those who represent it as defiuite, is "rather verbal than real." The difference, we think, is wide, palpable and important. For the reasons of this judgment, we refer to what we have stated above. respecting a general atonement, and to the preceedings of the Associate Synod at Edinburgh, with Mr. Mair, Part 3, Sec. 1. Gibb's. Display, vol. 2, p. 149. Edinburgh, 1774.

LETTERS ON THE ATONEMENT.-No. "I.

[merged small][ocr errors]

The doctrine of the atonement made by our blessed and Divine Lord, is, you well know, of unspeakable importance. It lies at the foundation of a sinner's hope of salvation. Had no atone ment been provided, darkness must forever have shrouded our guilty world; no ray of light from heaven would have cheered our hearts; the whole race of fallen man must have sunk beyond recovery, under the tremendous curse of a violated law. But infinite mercy beheld our ruined and helpless condition; it pitied our misery, and determined on the salvation of sinners, by a method at once safe for them, and glorious to God.

As this method was devised, so it was revealed, by infinite wis dom; and consequently nothing in relation to its true nature and blessed effects can be known, but what the sacred scriptures have taught. To the scriptures, then, must be our appeal in every dispute on this all-important subject. What they teach it behooves us carefully to inqure and cordially to believe; always remembering that philosophical speculations on matters of pure revelation, are apt to mislead. If Jehovah is pleased to conceal any thing from us, it is vain for man to attempt to discover it.-"Secret things belong unto the Lord our God: but those things which are revealed, belong unto us and to our children for ever."

Two theories on the subject of the atonement are advocated by members of the Presbyterian church. The one is the definite, the other the indefinite scheme. The advocates of the former have been denominated The Old School, and the advocates of the lat ter The New School.

« PrécédentContinuer »