Page images
PDF
EPUB

asserting that this was ever done? Of the ability of Christ to suffer, and of his having actually suffered all that was necessary for the salvation of the human race, we cannot entertain a single doubt. But, that he suffered eternal punishment, we can by no means admit, because the thing appears to be unsupported by scripture, and to be impossible in the very nature of things.

The comparative ability of different creatures for enduring punishment, to which a reference is made in the above extract, is a fact which is freely admitted; but, at the same time, such reasoning affords no evidence that momentary punishment, however intense in degree, can amount to everlasting punishment. God himself could as easily compress everlasting duration into the length of one of our days, as he could concentrate everlasting punishment into the sufferings of a few hours! The one involves the same impossibility as the other. Between that which is momentary, and that which is eternal, no comparison can be instituted. Every attempt, therefore, to prove that Christ suffered as much as the sins of all mankind deserved, must utterly fail: not for want of ability in the sufferer, but because, according to the nature of the atonement which was made, the thing was clearly impossible. Had the Redeemer of men engaged to suffer everlasting punishment in the behalf of all sinners, or of any part of them, we have no right to dispute his ability for such an undertaking. But as he did not do this, it is both contradictory and absurd

to affirm that he suffered the entire penalty; or, to say that his sufferings were equivalent to it.

SECTION II.

It cannot be maintained that Christ endured the whole penalty of the law, or the full amount of punishment due to the guilty, without involving the subject in the utmost confusion and improprieties.

Had it been possible for Christ literally to suffer all that justice required at the hands of the sinner, without subjecting himself to eternal damnation, yet there are other considerations which would lead us to question the propriety of his having rendered such a satisfaction. The following observations are intended to show how greatly the notion of a legal atonement, has involved the subject in darkness and confusion.

1. If Christ has endured the full penalty of the law, it is sufficiently obvious that the law would receive, at least, two satisfactions* for the sins of all who die in impeni

And if we could admit the views of the advocates of calvinian election, justice has received equally as many satisfactions in behalf of all that are saved. Î. According to them,

T

tence. First, from their substitute; and secondly, from the punishment of the transgressors themselves, upon whom the entire penalty is again to be inflicted in a state of endless torments in the world to come! But

how any of the fallen sons of Adam can be sent to everlasting perdition, to suffer, over again, the full punishment of their sins, after that punishment had been endured by their substitute, it is indeed impossible to conceive. Such a requisition would be contrary to all our notions of a righteous, and just, and equitable transaction.

But it is said that, "Christ suffered voluntarily, and agreed that the benefit of his death to the offenders should be suspended on the condition of repentance, faith, and obedience. "* This we most readily grant; but then, who does not see, that this consideration of itself,

Christ perfectly obeyed the law for all the elect, and gives them the full advantage of such obedience; as much so as if they had perfectly obeyed it themselves. This is what we are to understand by the righteousness of Christ imputed to his people-the robe or wedding garment, in which they are to stand, and, without which, they cannot be acquitted at the judgment day. This looks very much like salvation by works; a doctrine so abhorrent to the feelings of our calvinistic brethren, that one could scarcely have supposed, that they would have ventured so near it as this sentiment undoubtedly places them. 2. But perfect obedience to the law, it would seem, was not sufficient to meet the demands of justice. The Redeemer must take upon himself the entire penalty also, and suffer, in his own body on the tree, the full desert of all their crimes! 3. And as if to render this system of absurdity complete, the sinner is represented as being still in need of pardon !!

* Isaac's Works, Vol. iii. p. 2.

completely overturns the notion that Christ suffered the full penalty of the law. The very idea of conditions, to be fulfilled on the part of the sinner, is a sufficient proof, that all claims against him had not been discharged. If the penalty of the law had been endured, either by the offender or by any other in his stead, it is perfectly clear that justice could require no more. To say that Christ suffered the full penalty, and, at the same time, to affirm that the sinner is still liable to be punished also, involves the absurdity, that justice has claims on those, for whose crimes a full satisfaction has been made!!

The conclusion, therefore, is irresistible, that if the sufferings of the Lord Jesus Christ were intended to satisfy the full demands of justice, all must be delivered from guilt and condemnation, for whom this satisfaction was rendered. To say that Christ and the Father agreed that the benefit of his death to the offenders was suspended on certain conditions, after justice had been fully satisfied, is a contradiction in terms, and implies a reflection discreditable to the whole transaction; because it represents the father and son as agreeing to exact more than justice required. What justice required of man before he had sinned, was obedience to the law; after he had transgressed the law, he became obnoxious to everlasting punishment, which punishment justice required at his hands and no more. With this it would have been perfectly satisfied, because its infliction would have given the fullest exhibition of God's infinite ablior

rence of evil. But if justice required no more from the sinner than his suffering the penalty, by what kind of logic will it be shown that, after the penalty had been endured by Christ, in the sinner's behalf, divine justice should still have claims on the transgressor? That certain conditions should yet remain to be fulfilled? This would imply, at least, that the sufferings of Christ were less efficacious-less satisfactory to justice, than the same sufferings would have been, if endured by the sinner! But as such conclusions would degrade the subject; and as it would be impossible for the righteous sovereign of angels and men, to require the full penalty to be twice endured for the same crimes, we may rest assured that the Lord Jesus did not suffer all that a sinful world deserved to suffer.

2. It is not less evident that, had Christ suffered the full penalty, the grand doctrine of justification by faith would be completely overturned-would be reduced to a thing without signification or importance! For, if all the demands of law and justice have been fully discharged, how, we would ask, in consistency with reason and the nature of things, can men have need of pardon? Surely, if justice has received a full satisfaction by the death of Christ, for the sins of mankind, it cannot still have claims upon them, to be removed by any act of forgiveness; unless we mean to assert, that, after justice has been fully satisfied, it may, nevertheless, yet demand satisfaction! But, if justice has no claims against

« PreviousContinue »