On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
sacrifice of its Founder , i » universally represented as an ordinance of mercy , it argues as much presumption as weakness in men to insist on its being : a manifestation of wrath , towards either the ransom or the redeemed . A sufficient refutation of this error is found in the parable of the prodigal son ; a passage of scripture which bears as directly on the controverted point as any which can be adduced .
"It is remarkable how perfectly this parable precludes every idea of the necessity of vicarious suffering , in order to the pardon of the penitent sinner . Had it been the special purpose of our Lord to provide an antidote for such a doctrine , it Is difficult to conceive what could have been devised better adapted to that end ; and I verily believe that this parable has done more to counteract the natural effects of the doctrine of
vicarious punishment , than any other portion of Scripture . Suppose an attempt should be made to improve the parable , and to accommodate it to the popular theory of atonement a » d forgiveness , by interpolating or adding such clauses as the following : c Prior to the return of the son , the father had taken care to secure the honour of his law , by inflicting the penalty due to the prodigal oq an innocent substitute ; and on this ground
only , the pardon was granted . ' Who can deny that such an addition would mar the beauty of the parable , and change the character which our Lord gave to the forgiving father ? But would such marring effects result from the supposed addition , if the doctrine of substituted punishment were the glory of the gospel ? I may further ask , Does not the doctrine of vicarious sacrifice mar
the gospel , as much as the supposed addition would mar the parable ? Such , it appears to me , is the lamentable fact . " —P . 215 , At the present time , it is difficult to say what the popular doctrine of the atonement really is ; for so many and such various concessions have been made
by its advocates , that if their statements were compared , ! t would be agreed on aM hands that the orthodox doctrine of old days is fairly surrendered . Dr . Murdoch , in hi « Discourse on the Atonement , observes , " The bloody sacrifice of the Mediator was not what the law of God demanded or could accept , as a legal satisfaction for our sins . All it could do
was to display the feelings of God in re * gard to his law ; and to secure , by the impression it made , the public objects which would be gained by the execution
Untitled Article
of the law . " When we find this observation supported by the memorable concession of the Archbishop of Dublin , that suffering , strictly vicarious , is manifestly impossible , since consciousness cannot be transferred , we are tempted to inquire what has become of the doctrine which
it is perdition to fari to recognize ? The usual pleas of the necessity of satisfying the Divine justice and of establishing a perfect analogy between the provisions of the Mosaic and the Christian law , utterly fail ; and nothing remains for the advocates of the doctrine of atonement but to
suppose , that by some means unknown , some peculiar benefits , also unknown , are secured to men by the death of the Saviour ; a supposition held by many of the heterodox . Those who may refer to the chapters of the work before us which set forth the views which Christ and bis apostles entertained respecting his sufferings , cannot fail of being struck by the absence of all intimation that the Saviour of men
was the object of his Father ' s wrath . Even as the lifting up of the brazen serpent was a token of Divine love , so was the elevation of the cross : as the prophets suffered by the hand of men while peculiarly graced by the favour of God , so was the greatest of the prophets oppressed on earth and privileged from heaven . While the apostles preached re * pentance as the sole , indispensable condition of pardon , Paul speaks of himself as
being qff ' ered upon the sacrifice and service of the faith of his converts ; aud as ready to be offered \ whep the time of his departure wa » at hand . The intimations which were given by Jesus of his approaching fate , and the observations of his followers when if preaching Christ and him crucified , " are here brought together in a mode which constitutes a decisive proof to our mind that repentance and not satisfaction for sin was
the doctrine originally preached and desigued to be propagated . After explaining , witb great moderation and truth , the evil effects which may be expected to result from the ascription of different principles of justice and mercy to the Divine and to human beings , our author presents us , in the following passage , with what may be re ^ garded as a summary of his views :
" How exceedingly different , and how much more affecting , is an atoning ^ sacrifice made on the principle of overcoming evil with good , than a sacrifice made by a display of avenging justice on the innocent as a substitute for the guilty I Does not the iatfler theory approach too
Untitled Article
11 a Critical Netwe * . --Theo ! ogicaL
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Feb. 2, 1830, page 118, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2581/page/46/
-