whis question has been much discussed among theo- logians, and different answers have been given by differ- ent classes of them, in correspondence with the funda- mental principles of their respective systems. The Socinians hold that the work of Christ, as a whole, was one of doubtless many plans subject to God’s selection, by which he could soften the hearts of men and bring
CHAPTER , XVI.
———
Different opinions as to the ground of the neces- sity of the. Atone- ment.
CHAPTER XVI.
Necessity of the Atone- ment—its bearing on the question as to its nature.
218 THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT,
them to repentance. The advocates of the Governmen- tal Theory hold that his sufferings and death were necessary in order to make a moral impression on the subjects of God’s moral government generally, so that the honour of the law may be upheld, and its subjects duly impressed with the evil of sin and the certainty of its punishment, notwithstanding the special instance of impunity allowed in the case of sinners among mankind. Dr. Twisse and others held it to be necessary simply because God had determined that he would forgive sin on no other condition. Thomas Aquinas* held that it was impossible that the punishment of sin could be remitted absolutely—that is, inflicted neither upon the sinner nor upon his substitute—if justice be taken into the account. Yet he maintained that because of God’s absolute sovereignty, it would not have been unjust in — God, if he had so willed it, to ignore the claims of justice, and to remit sin by simple prerogative, without any satisfaction at all) The great body of the Church, on the other hand, have uniformly held that it is essential to the very nature of justice (a) that it should be volun- tary—that is, spontaneous and free in the divine nature; — but (6) that its exercise should not be optional. Hence the Church doctrine has always been, that if the sinner is to be forgiven, an adequate satisfaction to divine justice, in the real expiation of the sin, is absolutely necessary to that end.
It is obvious that this question is identical with one discussed under a former head, viz., What is the reason why God punishes sin? Is that reason to be found in the bare fact of his own will; or in the moral state of the individual sinner; or in the moral impression it is desirable to make on the general community subject to the divine government; or does it lie in the immutable
* Shedd’s Hist. Doct., pp. 805-807.
NECESSITY OF THE ATONEMENT. 219
nature of God himself? It is evident that, if it depends cmarrer upon the bare will of God, the necessity for its provision =~ is purely contingent upon his will. If the reason for it results from the obduracy of sinners otherwise irremedi- able, or in the exigencies of the divine government, or in conditions of the public mind of the subjects of that government in general, then the necessity alleged is still contingent on the will of God, because these grounds or occasions for the Atonement might, of course, one and all, be removed by the gracious power of the Holy Ghost acting directly upon the hearts of his creatures, and inducing whatever moral state he desired, if he had so willed. But, on the other hand, if the necessity in question results from the immutable demands of the divine nature, it is obviously absolute in order to the forgiveness of the sinner, and contingent neither upon the divine will nor upon the moral condition of the creature. Hence, conversely, if the necessity for the Atonement be absolute, it follows that it must have its ground in the divine nature, and not in the exigencies of government or the condition of the creatures. ‘The argument in both directions is conclusive, alike when it proceeds from the nature of the Atonement to its neces- sity, and when it proceeds from its necessity to its nature. I have in a previous chapter proved the neces- sity of the Atonement, and consequently its nature, from the holiness of the divine nature, and from the immuta- bility of the divine law. At present, I propose to pre- sent those Biblical statements which directly establish the fact that the necessity for the Atonement of Christ to. the end of the remission of sins is absolute, and which, by immediate and unavoidable inference, establish the conclusion that the ground of that necessity must le in the divine nature, and neither in the obduracy of the sinner nor in the exigencies of the divine government.
CHAPTER XVI.
The true ground of the neces- sity of the Atone- ment statedand proved.
220 THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT.
The fact that the necessity for the Atonement, in order to the salvation of sinners, is absolute, is to be certainly inferred from the following Scriptural data :—-