and the doctrine of two persons was probably rather ascribed to him as a consequence of his other opinion, than held by him as an article of faith. The design of the Church in thus explicitly stating that Christ had one person, was to distinguish the nature of the indwelling of the Godhead in him, from all prophetical inspirations. Thus, though the Mosaical degree of prophecy was far the most eminent, yet we have seen that Christ is placed in a rank quite superior to Moses. With respect to the latter, God is said to have spoken to him, and to have appeared to him; but he was ever with Christ, and gave him the Spirit without measure."

Lastly, these natures shall never be separated. Thus, in Rev. v. 13., the characters of blessing, honour, and glory, are represented as offered " to the Lamb for ever and ever." There is a text, however, which seems to contradict this conclusion. In 1 Cor. xv. 24., St. Paul speaks of the end, "when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God the Father." This, however, refers merely to his mediatorial office, which having been undertaken for the salvation of men, will, therefore, cease, when that salvation is effected, and thus no objects remain for which it can be exercised; but his own personal glory shall never end. Indeed, if every Saint

"See Whitby's Annot. in loc.

shall inherit eternal happiness, much more shall he whose merits obtained it for them, be for ever possessed of his glory.

3. As to the sufferings endured by Christ in this character.

These are facts concerning which there can be no dispute, if the history that relates them be acknowledged as authentic. Indeed, their truth was never denied, either by the friends or the enemies of Christianity, except by a number of sects called Docetæ,a and by Mahomet, who supposed that Christ was withdrawn, and a Jew substituted in his place.

4. As to the design of that Incarnation.

This may be considered in two respects, one of which is a consequence of the other; as to the manner of the sacrifice, and as to its effect in reconciling us to God. And here may be explained the meaning of that assertion, that Christ's death was our sacrifice. When the world had sinned, and that God wished to reconcile them to himself, it was necessary to do this in such a way as should demonstrate both the guilt of sin and his hatred of it; and at the same time evince his love and compassion for sinners. A free pardon without an atonement would have

a

They were so called from their opinion that Christ had not a real body, and, therefore, seemed (dokɛw) what he was not. See King's History of the Apostles' Creed, p. 157.

been inconsistent with the majesty of God's laws, and would have served as an encourage. ment to men to continue in sin. He, therefore, offered this pardon through a Mediator, that so " he might be just, and the justifier of him which "believeth." (Rom. iii. 26.) This Mediator fully showed the heinousness of sin in the eyes of God, from the sufferings he underwent in order to remove the guilt of it, both in body and mind. As to the latter, his agonies in the garden of Gethsemane, are a sufficient proof of this; for though we cannot form a correct notion in what these agonies consisted, yet they seem to have arisen from a deep sense of the enormity of sin, and the corruption of human nature; while he appears to have been deserted for a time, by the indwelling of the Eternal Word, and to have been left to the firmness of his faith, and to his patient resignation.b

с

(1.) As to the manner of the sacrifice. The idea universally attached to an expiatory sacrifice, both by the Jews and the Gentiles, was, that the sin of the individual was transferred to the beast, which was thereupon offered up to God

See Butler's Anal. Part. 2. c. 5.

See Scott's Com. in loc.

That this notion prevailed among the Gentiles as well as the Jews, is fully proved, in a learned discussion on the subject, which

will be found in Archbishop Magee's Work on the Atonement, v. . 1, PP. 96, 257 and 379.

in the stead of the offender; and that by this oblation, the punishment of the sin being laid on the sacrifice, an expiation was made, and the sinner was believed to be reconciled to God. This, as appears throughout the book of Leviticus, was the design and effect of the sin and trespass offerings among the Jews, and particularly of the scape-goat which was offered for the sins of the whole people on the great day of expiation. Hence, a vast variety of phrases was used with respect to these sacrifices, such as its being offered instead of sin; it is said to bear sin, and to be a sin-offering; and to be the reconciliation and atonement of the sinner. Now, these terms thus appropriated to expiatory sacrifices, are frequently in the New Testament applied to the death of Christ. The conclusion, therefore, manifestly is, that his death constitutes a true sacrifice for sins. Thus, he is said to have borne our sins in his own body on the tree." (1 Pet. ii. 24.) "To have been made sin for us." (2 Cor. v. 21.)c "He gave his life a

a

a For the unanswerable argument of Archbishop Magee on this phrase, see his Work on Atonement, v. 1. p. 395, et seq.

b Thus, in 1 Jo. ii. 2., Christ is called the propitiation for our sins." The word here used is Maouoc, which in the Old Testament is frequently put for sin-offering.

In 1 Tim. ii. 6., Christ is said

Lev. vi. 6. Num. v. 8.

to have given himself a ran

som for all." The word here used (avriλvrpov) is particularly

ransom for many." (Matt. xx. 28.) "He is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world.”

(1 John, ii. 2.) "Once in the end of the world

66

he hath appeared to put away sin by the sacri"fice of himself." (Heb. ix. 26.) "He was once offered to bear the sins of many." (Heb. ix. 28.) These texts plainly point out Christ as the sacrifice for our sins, who suffered in our room. But not only did he thus suffer, but (2.) He effected a reconciliation of us to God. Thus, it is said, that" in him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins.” (Eph. i. 7.) "By him hath the Father unto himself." (Col. i. 20.) eternal redemption for us."

66

reconciled all things "He hath obtained (Heb. ix. 12.) “We offering of the body "We are redeemed

(1 Pet. i.

are sanctified through the "of Christ." (Heb. x. 12.) with the precious blood of Christ." 19.) These, and many other texts of similar import, plainly prove, that our reconciliation to God is due to the sacrifice of Christ. Notwithstanding the evident tendency of these passages,

forcible, as it properly denotes the ransom paid for the life of a captive, by giving up that of another person in his stead. See Estius on the Ep. of Paul.

a This price paid for our redemption is opposed to "silver and gold," in the preceding verse. Now these are certainly true and real equivalents given for the purchase of any thing. The death of Christ, therefore, must be also a real equivalent paid for our salvation. See Turretin's Inst. Theol. L. 14. Q. 17. sec. 6, 7.