eousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost." (Titus iii. 5.) It is also supposed, that a person is to be saved, not for his good works, but for his bad ones, because they are not worse. Can any man who knows any thing of the Bible, as a revelation of God's will, or any thing of his own deceit ful heart, use this plea? No; he has not so learned Christ; but is deeply conscious that he must be born again of the Spirit, and be made a new creature in Christ, before he can enter the kingdom of heaven.

If this plea be admitted, the necessity of repentance towards God is set aside; faith in Christ is not essential to salvation; nor is uniform obedience, springing from faith and love, required by the blessed God. For the language of such persons is, "If I do nothing worse, I hope I shall go to heaven: " not, If I turn from wickedness of every kind, and return to God by true repentance, and faith in his Son, he will have mercy on me, and forgive all my sins; but, If I do nothing worse! Strange it is, that men who call themselves Christians, should indulge such a thought, or adopt such absurd language; and especially, that they are not ashamed of such an ignorant excuse for their folly and wickedness. Salvation is of infinite importance:

if we lose our soul, we lose our all : if we be not saved into unclouded glory, we must sink into endless misery. Who can think seriously on this subject without feeling an ardent desire to know the truth as it is in Jesus? to be assured of an interest in the Saviour, and to enjoy a lively hope of eternal happiness? The writer of these lines entreats his readers to search the Holy Scriptures with earnest prayer to God for his gracious aid, to study their meaning, to follow the light which they impart, and to seek sincerely the one thing needful. Life is rapidly going, and death is swift in his approaches, and sure in his aim. A moment after death, it will be too late to repent, if repentance might be obtained.

In the strength of divine grace, put away all iniquity: cease from doing evil; learn to do well. Pray for a broken and contrite spirit, that all sin may be truly hateful, and then Christ will appear most desirable. The riches of his grace will attract the soul heavenward; and earth, with all its vanities, will sink in your esteem. You will find, in union with Christ, that peace which passeth all understanding, and that joy which is indeed unspeakably great. May this be your blessed portion, and heaven your everlasting home!

J. W.

The momentous question respecting the possibility of that recovery could never have been determined by the human mind, had it been left to its own unassisted reasonings and speculations; much less could the manner of its accomplishment have ever been satisfactorily ascertained. For whatever hope of salvation from sin, and its fearful consequences, might have been excited by a contemplation of the attribute of divine goodness; (for of

D

that modification of goodness which is called mercy, sinful men could have had no adequate conception without a revelation;) that hope must have been speedily extinguished by serious reflection upon the essential purity and justice of God, which had already declared" death" to be the penalty of transgression. Repentance, however deep and sincere, can give no title to pardon; as it neither alters the nature of the sin which has been committed, nor offers any atonement to the justice of the offended Lawgiver and to expect forgiveness upon repentance, in every instance of transgression, would be, in fact, to assume that the moral government of God was repealed. But it may be asked, Whence is this supposed repentance to originate? A being that is totally depraved is, of himself, incapable of repentance, any farther than he may feel terror and alarm for the consequences of guilt. Sin is the element of fallen man, and holiness is an object of his absolute aversion. He cannot, therefore, of himself, feel ingenuous sorrow for having offended his Creator and Benefactor, by the violation of that law "which is holy, and just, and good ;" any more than he can make an effectual effort to abandon the practice of sin, and to escape out of the snare of the Devil. A distinct revelation of pardoning mercy from God, therefore, was indispensably necessary, in order that fallen man might possess satisfactory information on the subject; and he must be brought under a divine influence, or he can never either repent or be converted. And hence it does not appear, from the inspired narrative, that our first parents, after the fall, had any expectation of pardon, that they offered to God one single petition for that blessing, or even expressed the slightest regret for their sin,-until they had received an intimation of divine mercy through the gracious interference of "the Seed of the woman."

One great object of divine revelation, therefore, is, to assure mankind that there is forgiveness with God, and to point out the particular manner in which it is conveyed. The justice of God required, that, without

the shedding of blood" there should be "no remission.” But it was "not possible that the blood of bulls and goats" should make an adequate atonement for human guilt. There is no equivalence of value between the lives of all the brute animals in the universe, and the intelligent and immortal soul of one human being. And yet here are millions of such beings, "guilty before God," and exposed to "the vengeance of eternal fire." To meet their case, the Divine Son of God assumed the nature of man, and in that nature was "obedient unto death, even the death of the cross." His life-blood, which he voluntarily shed, was designed to atone for the sin of the world; and his Divinity gave a value, a preciousness, to his sacrifice, which exceeds all human thought. By the vicarious sufferings of Jesus Christ a way is opened for the communication of pardon and of every other blessing to mankind, in perfect consistency with the justice and purity of God, and the honour of his government. According to the testimony of Scripture, the design of the Almighty in this procedure was, "to declare his righteousness,-that he might be just," and yet the most merciful "Justifier of him that believeth in Jesus:" (Rom. iii. 25, 26 :) and indeed, considering the infinite dignity and glory of Christ's person, in his sufferings, both in the garden and upon the cross, the essential justice of God is more strikingly declared," than it would have been by the endless perdition of the whole human race. The sacrifice of Jesus Christ, therefore, which forms the basis of his intercession, constitutes a solid ground of confidence towards God; and an inspired Apostle has taught us to conclude, that" He that spared not his own Son," who was essenti ally one with himself, "but delivered him up for us all," will "with him also freely give us all things." (Rom. viii. 32.)

The spirit of Infidelity, however, which prompts some men to reject the Revelation of God altogether, has led others, while they have professed to receive that Revelation with gratitude and humility, to deny and

explain away its peculiar and distinguishing truths. And hence the evangelical doctrine of atonement for sin by the death of Christ, notwithstanding the glory which it reflects upon the divine character and government, and "the great and endless comfort" which it brings to the penitent sinner, has been strenuously opposed; and all the arts of metaphysical reasoning, and verbal criticism, have been resorted to, for the purpose of persuading mankind that there is no more atoning virtue in the blood of Christ, than in their own tears. Errors on this subject are likely to lead to the most serious results. For if the grand condition of our personal justification before God be, faith in the blood of Christ, as the Apostle states, (Rom. iii. 25,) then those who regard that blood as "a common thing," are left in a situation, the peril of which no language can fully describe. Under a deep impression of the immense importance of this subject, Mr. Watson states the scriptural doctrine of atonement, and then adduces, in its support, the evidence which is furnished by the inspired writers, to whose decisions all his reasonings are subordinated. In connexion with these subjects, he discusses at considerable length the principles of God's moral government, and the origin of primitive sacrifices and in reference to the last of these subjects, he controverts the theory of Mr. Davison, who contends that animal sacrifices were not originally either of divine institution, or of an atoning character; but were presented by men to God as the spontaneous result of grateful feeling. In the discussion of this question, that gifted member of the University of Oxford, though treated by Mr. Watson with perfect decorum, appears to little advantage, either as a reasoner or a theologian. On the whole subject of atonement and sacrifice, we have no hesitation in saying, that there exists not in our language a body of scriptural evidence so comprehensive, and yet condensed, as that given in the work before us. The reasoning is remarkably powerful and convincing, and cannot fail to produce the most beneficial effects in

the minds of those who read with a sincere desire to know the truth. In consecutive and lengthened argumentation, it is difficult to select passages for extracts, whatever excellence they may possess, without weakening their effect; some specimens of this part of the work, however, it is requisite that we should lay before our readers. In reply to the Socinian objection, that there is no wrath in God, and that an atonement was therefore unnecesary; Mr. Watson remarks:

"Unable, then, as they, who deny the vicarious nature of the sufferings the above passages which speak of our of Christ are to evade the testimony of Lord as a propitiation, what is their next resource? They deny the existence of wrath in God, in the hope of proving that propitiation, in a proper sense, cannot be the doctrine of Scripture, whatever may be the force of the mere terms which the sacred writers employ. In order to give plausibility to their statement, they pervert and caricature the opinion of the orthodox, and argue as though it formed a part of the doctrine of Christ's propitiation and oblation for sin, that God is naturally an implacable and vengeful being, only made placable and disposed to show mercy by satisfaction being made to his displeasure through our Lord's sufferings and death. This is as contrary all sober persons who hold the doctrine to Scripture as it is to the opinions of of Christ's atonement. God is Love; but it is not necessary, in order to support this truth, to assume that he is nothing else. He has, as we have seen, other attributes, which harmonize with this and with each other, though, assuredly, that harmony cannot be exhibited by any who deny the propitiation for sin made by the death of Christ. deny the existence of some of the atTheir system, therefore, obliges them to tributes of God, or to explain them

away.

"It is sufficient to show that there is not only no implacability in God, but a most tender and placable affection towards the sinning human race itself, that the Son of God, by whom the propitiation was made, was the free gift of the Father to us. This is the most sakes, and that mercy might be exeminent proof of his love, that for our tended to us, he spared not his own Son; but delivered him up freely for us all. Thus he is the fountain and first

moving cause of that scheme of recovery and salvation which the incarnation and death of our Lord brought into full and efficient operation. The question, indeed, is not whether God is love, or whether he is of a placable nature; in that we are agreed; but it is, whether God is holy and just; whether we, his creatures, are under law or not; whether this law has any penalty, and whether God, in his rectoral character, is bound to execute and uphold that law. These are points which have already been established, and as the justice of God is punitive, (for if it is not punitive, his laws are a dead letter,) then is there wrath in God; then is God angry with the wicked; then is man, as a sinner, obnoxious to this anger; and so a propitiation becomes necessary to turn it away from him. Nor are these terms unscriptural; they are used in the New Testament as emphatically as in the Old, though, in a special sense, a revelation of the mercy of God to man. John the Baptist declares that, if any man believeth not on the Son of God, the wrath of God abideth upon him.' St. Paul declares, that the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men.' The day of judgment is, with reference to the ungodly, said to be the day of wrath;' God is called' a consuming fire; and, as such, is the object of reverence and godly fear.' Nor is this his displeasure light, and the consequences of it a trifling and temporary inconvenience. When we only regard the consequences which have followed sin in society, from the earliest ages, and in every part of the world, and add to these the many direct and fearful inflictions of punishment which have proceeded from the Judge of the whole earth,' to use the language of Scripture, our flesh may well tremble because of his judgments.' But when we look at the future state of the wicked, as it is represented in Scripture, though expressed generally, and surrounded as it is with the mystery of a world, and a condition of being, unknown to us in the present state, all evils which history has crowded into the lot of man, appear in significant in comparison of banishment from God, separation from the good, public condemnation, torment of spirit, weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth,' 'everlasting destruction,' 'everlasting fire.' Let men talk ever so much and eloquently of the pure benevolence of God, they caunot abolish the facts recorded ju the

་

history of human suffering in this world as the effect of transgression; nor can they discharge these fearful comminations from the pages of the Book of God. They cannot be criticised away; and if it is " Jesus who saves us from this wrath to come," that is, from those effects of the wrath of God which are to come, then, but for him, we should have been liable to them. That principle in God, from which such effects follow, the Scriptures call wrath; and they who deny the existence of wrath in God, deny, therefore, the Scriptures.

"It by no means follows, however, that those who thus bow to inspired authority, must interpret wrath to be a passion in God; or that, though we conclude the awful attribute of his justice to require satisfaction, in order to the forgiveness of the guilty, we afford reason to any to charge us with attributing vengeful affections to the Divine Being. Our adversaries,' says Bishop Stillingfleet, first make opinions for us, and then show that they are unreasonable. They first suppose that anger in God is to be considered as a passion, and that passion a desire of revenge, and then tell us, that if we do not prove that this desire of revenge can be satisfied by the sufferings of Christ, then we can never prove the doctrine of satisfaction to be true; whereas, we do not mean, by God's anger, any such passion, but the just declaration of God's will to punish, upon our provocation of him by our sins; we do not make the design of the satisfaction to be that God may please himself in revenging the sins of the guilty upon the most innocent person, because we make the design of punishment, not to be the satisfaction of anger as a desire of revenge, but to be the vindication of the honour and rights of the offended person by such a way as he himself shall judge satisfactory to the ends of his government.'" (pp. 297299.)

On the divine nature of Christ, as rendering his sufferings infinitely meritorious, we have the following appropriate observations :

"It has been objected by Socinus and his followers, that the dignity of a person adds nothing to the estimation of his sufferings. The common opinion of mankind, in all ages, is, however, a sufficient refutation of this objection; for in proportion to the excellence of the creatures immolated in sacrifice have the value and efficacy of oblations been estimated by all people; which notion, when perverted, made them resort, in

some instances, to human sacrifices, in cases of great extremity; and, surely, if the principle of substitution existed in the penal law of any human government, it would be universally felt to make a great difference in the character of the law, whether an honourable or a mean substitute were exacted in place of the guilty; and that it would have greatly changed the character of the act of Zaleucus, the Locrian law. giver, before mentioned, and placed the estimation in which he held his own laws, and the degree of strictness with which he was determined to uphold them, in a very different light, if, instead of parting with one of his own eyes, in place of the remaining eye of his son, he had ordered the eye of some base slave or of a malefactor to be plucked out. But without entering into this, the notion will be explicitly refuted, if we turn to the testimony of Holy Writ itself, in which the dignity and Divinity of our Lord is so often emphatically referred to as stamping that value upon his sacrifice, as giving that consideration to his voluntary sufferings on our account, which we usually express by the term of his merits.' Acts xx. 28, as God, he is said to have purchased the church with HIS OWN BLOOD.' In Colossians i. 14, 15, we are said to have redemption through HIS BLOOD,

who is THE IMAGE OF THE INVISIBLE

the

God.' In 1 Corinthians ii. 8, LORD OF GLORY is said to have been CRUCIFIED.' St. Peter emphatically calls the blood of Christ PRECIOUS BLOOD;' and St. Paul dwells particularly upon this peculiarity, when he contrasts the sacrifice of Christ with those of the law, and when he ascribes that purifying efficacy, which he denies to the blood of bulls and of goats, to the blood of Christ. How much more shall the BLOOD OF CHRIST, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?' By the argument of Socinus there could be no difference between the blood of animals, shed under the law, as to value and efficacy, and the blood of Christ, which is directly in the teeth of the declaration and argument of the Apostle, who also asserts that the patterns of things in the heavens were purified by animal sacrifices; but the heavenly things themselves with BETTER SACRIFICES then these,' namely, the oblation of Christ." (pp. 320, 321.)

In the following paragraph, Mr. Watson shows, on the authority of Apostolic testimony, the connexion

which subsists between the death of Christ and the pardon of sin: a subject on which injurious concessions have sometimes been made :

"It has been sometimes said by theologians, sufficiently sound in their general views of the doctrine of the atonement, that we know not the vinculum, or bond of connexion between the sufferings of Christ and the pardon of sin; and this therefore they place among the mysteries of religion. To me this appears rather to arise from obscure views of the atonement, than from the absence of information on this point in the Scriptures themselves. Mysteries of love and incomprehensible facts are found, it is true, in the incarnation, humiliation, and sufferings of our Lord; but the vinculum, or connexion of those sufferings, appears to be matter of express revelation, when it is declared, that the death of Christ was a 'demonstration of the righteousness of God,' of his righteous character and bis just administration, and therefore allowed the honourable exercise of mercy without impeachment of justice, or any repeal or relaxation of his laws. If it be meant, in this allegation of mystery, that it is not discoverable how the death of Christ is as adequate a display of the justice of God, as though offenders had been personally punished, this also is clearly in opposition to what the Apostle has said, in the passage which has been so often referred to, Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness, εις ενδειξιν της δικαιοσυνης avт8, for a demonstration, or MANIFESTATION of his righteousness; nor surely can the particulars before stated, in explanation of this point, be well weighed, without our perceiving how gloriously the holiness and essential rectitude of God, as well as his rectoral justice, were illustrated by this proceeding; this, surely, is manifestation, not mystery." (pp. 330, 331.)

·

Having established the doctrine of atonement for sin, by the death of Christ, Mr. Watson proceeds next to consider the benefits which are derived to man from that gracious procedure. Among these are specified, Justification, and its concomitants, Regeneration, Adoption, and the Witness of the Spirit: all of which are distinctly explained upon scriptural principles. Justification is shown to consist in the forgiveness of sins; and, it is proved, that, in