death may in some respects be compared to that of Christ, but not in all. In relation to an example of love, a comparison may be instituted, but not in relation to the merit of satisfaction. The particle xales, as, denotes similitude, not equality. Its power may be learned from its use, in Matt. v. 48. "Be ye perfect, even as (xalos) your Father in heaven is perfect." No one will presume to say that we are here commanded to be equally as holy as God.

Another source of proof, in favour of Christ's having made such a satisfaction as that for which we contend, is derived from those portions of holy writ in which Christ is said to have borne our sins, and on account of them to have been afflicted, to have been wounded, to have died.*" He bore our sins in his own body on the tree." The Chaldee Paraphrase, and the ancient Jews, consider the prophet Isaiah as treating of Messiah, in this chapter of his prophecy." He hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows— he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities—the chastisement of our peace was upon him— the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity" (i. e. the punishment) "of us all he shall make his soul an offering for sin." In proving the atonement from these texts, we reason as folis. 1. From bearing our sins:-though to bear and to carry metimes, by a figurative mode of speaking, are put for taking away and pardoning, yet there is no good reason why we should understand them in these passages in this figurative sense. Nay, there are most weighty rea sons, which forbid us to depart from this primary and most common signification, as Socinus himself acknowledges.+ To bear sin, is the same thing as to, bear the punishment of sin.

The word

which sometimes relates to a simple taking away of sin, is indeed used; but the word which signifies the bearing of a burden laid upon one, is also used, and clearly intimates the suffering of punishment. 2. The

* 1 Pet. ii. 24.

Prælec. cap.

tExod. xxxiv. 7. and Numb. xiv. 13.

manner in which the sins are borne, confirms us in this view of the passage. The sins are borne by being bruised and wounded. Sin is also said to be laid upon him. None of these could be said, unless Christ took upon himself and suffered the punishment of sin. 3. Christ made his soul an offering, and laid down his life an offering for sin, bore sin in the manner of a victim; nay, he made himself in reality a victim by suffering death, and shedding his blood in the room of sinners. 4. All things which indicate a real satisfaction occur in this portion of scripture-our sins as the moving, the meritorious cause," he was bruised for our iniquities," v. 4, 5, 6-the suffering of punishment due to sin; "he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows," v. 4—the impu tation of our sins to Christ, by God as a judge; "the Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all,” v. 6-the voluntary under. taking of Christ as our surety; "he was oppressed and afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth," in complaining of his sufferings, or in refusing to bear them, v. 8-an expiation for sin and a full payment of the debt; "yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin," v. 8. 10. Now, with what degree of propriety, could all these things be affirmed; if Christ laid down his life merely to exhibit an example of patience, and love; and not to make satisfaction for sin? It would be an idle pomp of language.

In Matt.viii. 17. we are, indeed, informed that this prophecy of Isaiah was fulfilled, when Christ healed bodily diseases, which, properly speaking, he did not bear, but take away;. yet we cannot infer from this, that the same thing may be affirmed of sins which are the diseases of the mind; for the diseases of the body are to be viewed in a different light from those of the mind. In healing the former, it was not necessary that Christ should himself become sick; it was only necessary that he should exercise his power. Not so the latter. He must first take them upon himself before he could take them away from us. Hence he is held forth by the prophet as wounded and bruised, which were not necessary to the healing of bodily maladies, but to bearing those

of the mind alone; from which it is easy to infer what the mind of the Holy Spirit is in this prophecy, and how it is said to have been fulfilled when Christ healed corporal diseases. Without doubt, it relates primarily to spiritual disease, and debility, i. e. to sin, the punishment of which was laid upon him, that he might suffer its desert in our room. But bodily infirmities and pains, are a part of the punishment of sin, and on this account, in a secondary and subordinate sense it refers to them; because Christ had a right to heal them. Thus what the prophet declares in general, concerning all diseases, Peter applies in particular to the diseases of the mind, and Matthew to the diseases of the body, not excluding, but rather including those of the mind. He demonstrates, that by removing the cause the effect was taken away. Spiritual and physical maladies are intimately connected with each other; the former draw after them the latter, while the latter presuppose the former. Christ is said to have borne both the diseases of both the body and the soul, but in respects different, according to their; different natures. Bodily griefs he bore only by efficaciously taking them away, not by undergoing them in his own person; but he bore spiritual griefs, in two respects, by suffering them himself, and by taking them away. Nor if Matthew asserts, that Christ healed the sick, and thus fulfilled this prophecy, may we thence rightly infer, that the spirit refers to them alone; because it is well known, that in the scriptures, a prophecy is said to be accomplished, not only when it is completely and ultimately fulfilled, but also when a partial ac complishment of it is begun.

The truth of the atonement is also confirmed by those scriptures, which assert, that Christ was made sin and a curse for us.* How can he be said "to have been made sin,” i. e. a victim, an offering for sin, by God as a judge; and a "curse" i. e. a subject of the malediction, which the law pronounces against sinners; not indeed for himself, seeing he was most holy, and supremely beloved by his father, but

* Gal. iii. 13. and 2 Cor. v. 21. Lev. viii. 9.

as being substituted in our place, and taking upon himself, that curse which the law justly pronounces against our sins, in order that he might bear it, and by bearing it take it away? Thus he was made a blessing, by procuring for us the remission of our sins, and a right to eternal life. What would more examples avail here? How could mere confirmation of doctrine effect all this? Is it not most evident, that there was a real substitution of Christ in our room; and in consequence of this substitution, that a real satisfaction, expiation, or atonement has been made, and that this is the doctrine taught by these scriptural phrases? The force of this argument cannot be evaded, by objecting, that Christ is not said to have been a curse, on account of having really borne the curse of the law, which could not have been laid on him, a perfectly blessed and holy person; but because he suffered crucifixion; which, under the law was denominated a curse. The very words of the apostle, and the redemption from the curse of the law, which Christ by his death procured for us, evince the futility of the objection. How can he be a curse, and that for the express purpose of delivering us from the curse, unless he took upon himself the curse due to us? It is no solid objection to this reasoning, that he is the only begotten Son, and the ever blessed God, because he did not endure the curse, in, and for himself as the Son of God, but as our surety and on our behalf. Hence as to his person, he is styled "blessed forever," and in his official character as our representative, he is said to have suffered the punishment due to our sins.

Hence we are enabled to understand the force of the expression," he was delivered for our offences."* Socinus contends, that all which is here intended, is, that an occasion for the death of Christ, was given by our offences, or that Christ died only with the view that he might by his example, incline us to leave off the commission of sin, and render us certain of its pardon. All which is incompatible with the scriptures quoted above, which teach us, that the meritorious and

* Rom. iv. 25.

moving cause, for Christ's being delivered over to death, was our sins, that he might suffer the punishment due to them, and take away their guilt. He is said to have been delivered for our offences," as sacrifices were offered for sin, doubtless, on account of its guilt, and to take it away. Hence the guilt of our sins was the meritorious cause of the death of Christ, and its final cause, or chief end, to expiate, and remove this guilt. The truth of the atonement is further proved, from the sacrifice of Christ when he expired on the cross, and of which the scriptures so often speak. Why should Christ be so often, and so expressly called a priest, truly and properly a priest, far more excellent than all the Levitical priests; having by his oblation appeased the wrath of God, and obtained eternal salvation for us, unless, because a full expiation for sin has been made by his satisfaction; and unless a more luminous display of the truths shadowed forth by the ancient figures, has been made in Christ? As by the sacrifices under the law, doctrines were not confirmed, examples of love and obedience were not given, no covenant was entered into, nor could they, by their own efficacy, either take away sin, or appease the wrath of God; these sacrifices must have been instituted with a primary view to represent a real satisfaction, an atoning sacrifice for sin. This is more particularly confirmed: 1. From the nature of the priesthood which Christ sustains. He is constituted a priest in things pertaining to God, to appease him by an atoning sacrifice. 2. From the nature of the victim which is substituted in the room of sinners, to bear the punishment of death due to them, as evinced by the rite of imposing hands upon the head of the offering, and over it making a confession of sin. 3. From the threefold effect of the sacrifice-in respect of God, making reconciliation-in respect of sin, purging it and in taking away its guilt: from the expiation of sin, and its pardon, which follow the reconciliation made with God. A person cannot be freed, and obtain pardon,

* Isai. liti. 10. John i. 29. Eph. vi. 2. and the Epistle to the Hebrews, passim.