Although there can not be in the Christian church any class of priests standing between their brethren and Christ, yet in con- sequence of the union, both federal and vital, which every Chris- tian sustains to Christ, which involves fellowship with him in all of his human graces, and in all of his mediatorial functions and prerogatives, every believer has part in the priesthood of his head in such a sense that he has immediate access to God through Christ, even into the holiest of all, Heb. x., 19-22 ; and that being sanctified and spiritually qualified, he may there offer up, as a " holy priest," a " royal priest," spiritual sacrifices, not ex- piatory, but the oblation of praise, supplication and thanksgiving, through Jesus Christ, and intercession for living friends, Heb. xiii., 15 ; 1 Tim. ii., 1, 2 ; 1 Pet. ii., 5, 9.
They are by equal reason also prophets and kings in fellow- ship with Christ, 1 John ii., 20 ; John xvi., 13 ; Kev. i., 6, and v., 10.
CHAPTER XXII.
THE ATONEMENT : ITS NATURE, NECESSITY, PERFECTION, AND EXTENT.
I. The Nature of the Atonement.
1. What is the meaning of the word atonement, as used in Scripture ?
The word atonement occurs but once in the English transla- tion of the New Testament, Eom. v., 11. But the Greek word, of which in that case it is a translation, KaraXXayrj, and the verb of the same origin and meaning, KaraXXdaao), (to change, ex- change, to reconcile,) occur together ten times in the New Testa- ment, viz., Eom. v., 10, twice ; v., 11 ; xi., 15 ; 1 Cor. vii., 11 ; 2 Cor. v., 18, twice, verse 19, twice, and verse 20. In every case the verb is translated to reconcile, and except in Rom. v., 11, the noun is rendered, reconciliation. The mode of this reconciliation being clearly indicated, (Rom. v., 10,) viz., " by the death of his Son."
Throughout the Old Testament the word atonement is con- stantly used to signify the reconciliation of God, by means of bloody sacrifices, to men alienated from him by the guilt of sin. The priest made atonement for the transgressors of the law, by sacrifices, and it was forgiven them, Lev. iv., 20 ; v., 6 ; vi., 7 ; xii., 8 ; xiv., 18 ; Num. xv., 25. On the great " day of atone- ment" the high priest made atonement, first, for his own sin, by the sacrifice of a bullock, and then for the sins of all the people, by the sacrifice of a goat ; and then the sins thus atoned for were confessed and laid upon the head of the live goat, and carried away by him into oblivion. — Lev. xvi., 6-22.
2. How do the words atonement and satisfaction differ ? Satisfaction is the more specific term ; atonement is the re-
300 CHKIST MEDIATORIAL PRIEST.
conciliation of God to man by the death of his Son. Satisfaction expresses the relation which the work of Christ sustains to the demands of God's law and justice.
3. Wherein does the satisfaction rendered by Christ consist ?
By the conditions of the covenant of grace, Christ assumes precisely the place and all the obligations of his people, under the broken and unsatisfied covenant of works. These obligations were evidently, 1st, perfect obedience as the condition of reward ; and, 2d, the penalty of death incurred by the failure of obedience both in their representative Adam and in their own persons.
4. How may it be proved that the " active obedience" of Christ to the precepts of the law enters into his satisfaction ?
1st. The necessity of the case. The position of Christ was that of second Adam, 1 Cor. xv., 22, 45. He came to fulfill the law in our behalf. But the law demands obedience as its con- dition of life, Rom. x., 5. Here the first Adam had failed.
2d. The fixed meaning of the word dcKaioavvr), righteousness, in the New Testament, is perfect conformity to the whole law, Rom. vi., 13, 16 ; viii., 4 ; x., 4 ; Phil, iii., 6 ; Tit. iii., 5 ; 1 John ii., 29. Yet Christ is said to be for us, " the end of the law for righteousness/' Rom. x., 4, and we are said to be made, " the righteousness of God in him," 2 Cor. v., 21.
3d. It is expressly asserted in Rom. v., 19, where Adam's dis- obedience, which subjected us to guilt, is contrasted with the obedience of Christ, whereby we are made righteous.
5. What is the Socinian view as to the nature of the atone- ment ?
They deny, 1st, of sin, that it inherently, for its own sake, deserves punishment, and, 2d, of God, that his infinitely perfect righteousness determines him to demand the punishment of all sin. On the other hand they hold that God may, in perfect con- sistency with his benevolent care for the best interests of his gen- eral moral government, forgive sin at any time, upon the repent- ance of the sinner. The death of Christ, therefore, was designed simply to soften the heart, and to encourage the confidence of the
NATURE OF HIS ATONEMENT. 301
sinner in God, and so dispose him to repentance, by that eminent exhibition of divine love. — Cat. Kacov., pp. 261-268.
6. What is the Governmental theory as to the nature of the atonement 1