« PreviousContinue »
ing offered to the LORD1? Jefus fanctified himfelf, for the fake of his people, in his one offering m. Were the hands of the priests, in name of all the congregation of Ifrael, laid on the victim? The hands of the priests were indeed upon him, whom God had delivered up as our Surety. They confpired with the rulers against him. He was taken by their officers, and crucified at their inftigation, the multitude affenting to his death. Was it requifite that not a bone of the pafchal lamb fhould be broken. In him this type was ftrictly fulfilled, although in this inftance there was a deviation from the common mode of treating those who were crucified. Could there be no typical remiffion" without the shedding of "blood?" From the accidental conduct of one of the heathen foldiers, no lefs uncommon than the circumstance juft now mentioned, the blood of the great Sacrifice was actually fhed. The action of the foldier was accidental as to him, as proceeding from the mere wantonnefs of barbarity; though immutably determined in the counfel of God, and neceffary in order to the completion of the prophecies and figures. Was the victim under the law ceremonially accurfed? Jefus fuftained the curfe, bearing the wrath of a holy and fin-avenging God, in our stead. Was the facrifice, after the blood was fhed, to be confumed with that facred fire which came down from heaven, and burned on the altar? The facrifice of Chrift's human nature, as prefented on
the altar of the divine, was fired by that holy flame of love, kindled by the Spirit in the heart of our adorable Surety. Was it neceffary that incenfe fhould be offered with the blood of the victim? Chrift not only entered into the holy place not made with hands, with his own blood; but even in the very act of offering, he " made interceffion for "the tranfgreffors." Was the preservation of the life of the high-prieft, after he had offered and entered into the prefence of God, a token of the legal acceptableness of the facrifice? The refurrection, afcenfion, and eternal life of Jefus, as our interceding High-prieft, afford the most full and fatisfactory evidence of the perfection of his oblation.
From the history of atonement, it is clear that God will not pardon fin without a fatisfaction to his juftice. From the beginning he would not be worshipped without blood, that he might demonftrate to the Church the indifpenfable neceffity of expiation. As all her facrifices were unacceptable without faith, she was taught that they had no worth in themselves for taking away fin. As the faith required, was that which looked forward to the facrifice of "the Prince of life;" she was alfo inftructed in the neceffity of an atonement of infinite value.
We have at the fame time a wonderful difplay of the grace of God. This might be illuftrated in a variety of refpects. Let one fuffice at prefent. He often informed his worshippers, that he
he had no delight in the facrifices of flain beafts. When his defign in appointing them was overlooked, he expreffed his deteftation at these very facrifices which he had himself required. Yet, for about four thousand years, he accepted these, granting pardon and eternal life to all who offered them in faith. He beftowed all new-covenant bleffings on his people, according to the nature of the difpenfation, on the credit of that real atonement which was to be made in the end of ages. The facrifice of Chrift, as it was neceffary for the actual purchase of redemption, was alfo neceffary for the vindication of the effential justice of God. Hence it is faid, that God hath fet forth his Son "to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to "declare his righteousness for the remiffion of fins "that are past through the forbearance of God; "to declare at this time his righteousness, that he might be just" to the claims of his own adorable perfections, and yet "the juftifier of him that be"lieveth in Jefus "."
n Rom. iii. 25, 26.
The Doctrine of Imputation illuftrated,—from the Raiment provided for our First Parents, after the Fall-from the Guilty being legally accounted Innocent, in confequence of ceremonial Atonement; -from the ancient Custom of Feasting on the Sacrifice-from the manner in which Salvation was conferred on Believers under the Old Tefta
WITH the doctrines of Subftitution and Atonement, which we have already confidered, that of Imputation is moft intimately connected. All the three, indeed, are just links of one precious chain. Guilt is imputed to a fubfiitute, that atonement may be made; atonement is made, that the righteoufnefs procured by it may be imputed to him for whom the punishment was fuftained. Thus the guilt of all the elect was imputed to Chrift as their Surety. In this character he paid their debt, that his righteoufnefs might be legally accounted theirs. Of this important article of our faith, we have not only a doctrinal, but an hiftorical and fymbolical, exhibition.
1. This was taught by the raiment which God provided for our firft parents, after they had finned.
"Unto Adam alfo, and to his wife, did the "LORD God make coats of fkins, and clothed "them." Here feveral things deferve our at
This raiment was made of kins. It has been generally fuppofed, that the skins referred to were thofe of the beafts which our common parents offered in facrifice, after the revelation of mercy. The paffage indeed has been viewed as a proof of the divine inftitution of facrifices, immediately after the fall. There is every reafon for viewing it in this light, when we confider the character of Chrift as "the Lamb flain from the foundation "of the world ;" and what has been formeny obferved concerning Abel's acceptable facrifice. He could not have" offered of the firftlings "of the flock-by faith," without a divine warrant; and it is totally improbable that Abel fhould have been the firft who prefented an offering of this kind.
The circumftance of God's making thefe garments for them, is very remarkable. This is the only raiment that God himself ever made. But he never works in vain. It was not neceffary, that He should deign to perform this work, as if it had been too difficult for them. Although they had needed direction, he could eafily have given it. But they had already manifefted their ingenuity in "fewing fig-leaves together," for a covering P. We must conclude, therefore, that this act of divine condefcenfion was meant to con
A a 2