They rec^arded Him as made a curse for them ; as bearing their punishment, or "the chastisement of their peace." They received tlie " sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ," as the only mean? of being cleansed from the guilt of their sins, and of restoration t" the favour of God and holiness of heart and life. This was vm- doubtedly their experience as it is recorded in the Bible. (2.) In the second place, from the times of the Apostle to the present day, the people of God have had the same inward convictions and feel- ings. This is clear from their confessions of faith, from their litur gies and prayers, from their hymns, and from all the records of their inward religious life. Let any one look over the hymns of the Latin Church, of the Moravians, the Lutherans, the Reformed, of Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, Independents, and Congregationalists, and see what truths on this subject consti- tuted and now constitute the food and atmosphere of their religious life : -
"Jesus, my God, Thj' blood alone hath power sufficient to atone."
"To the dear fountain of Thy blood, incarnate God, I fly."
" Mj' soul looks back to see the burdens Thou didst bear, When hanging on the cursed tree, and hopes her sins were there."
" Ein Lfimmlein geht und tragt die Schuld, Der Welt and ihren Kinder."
"Geh hin, nimm dich der Sunder an, Die auch kein Engel retten kann
Von meines Zornes Kuthen! Die Straf ' ist schwer, der Zorn ist gross; Du kannst und sollst sie nwichen los
Durch Sterben und durch Bluten."
Does any Christian object to such hynms? Do they not express his inmost religious convictions ? If they do not agree with the speculations of his understanding, do they not express tlie feelings of his heart and the necessities of his fallen nature ? The speculations of the understanding are vi-^hat man teaches ; the truths which call forth these feelings of the heart are what the Holy Ghost teaches.
This argument may be presented in another light. It may be shown that no other theory of the work of Christ does correspond with the inward experience of God's people. The theory that the work of Christ was didactic ; that it was exemplary ; that its prox- imate design was to produce a subjective change in the sinner or a moral impression on the minds of all intelligent creatures ; these and other theories, contrary to the common Church doctrine, fail especially in two points. First, they do not account for the inti-
526 PART rrr. Ch. vn. — satisfaction of christ.
mate personal relation between Christ and the believer which is everywhere recognized in Scripture, and which is so precious in the view of all true Christians. Secondly, they make no provision for the expiation of sin, or for satisfying the demands of a guilty con- science, which mere pardon never can appease.
Throughout the New Testament, Christ is represented not only as the object of worship and of supreme love and devotion, but also as being to his people the immediate and constant source of life and of all good. Not Christ as God, but Christ as our Saviour. He is the head, we are his members. He is the vine, we are the branches. It is not we that live, but Christ that livetli in us. He is made unto us wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemp- tion. His blood cleanses us from all sins. He redeemed us from the curse of the law by being made a curse for us. He bore our sins in his own body on the tree. He is our great High Priest who ever lives to make intercession for us. It would be easy to show from the records of the religious life of the Ciiurch that believers have ever regarded Christ in the light in which He is here pre- sented. The argument is that these representations are not con- sistent with any moral or governmental theory of the atonement.
There are two hymns which, perhaps, beyond all otiiers, are dear to the hearts of all Christians who speak the Engli.sli language. The one written by Charles Wesley, an Arminian ; the other by Toplady, a Calvinist. It is hard to see what meaning can be attached to these hymns by those who hold that Christ died simply to teach us something, or to make a moral impression on us or others. How can they say, —
" Jesus, lover of my soul, Let me to Thy bosom fly " ?
Why should they fly to Him if He be only a teacher or moral reformer ? What do they mean when they say, —
" Hide me, 0 my Saviour hide " ?
Hide from what? Not from the vindicatory justice of God, for they admit no such attribute.
" Other refuge have I none; "
refuge from what ?
" All my trust on Thee is laid."
For what do we trust Him ? According to their theory He is not the ground of our confidence. It is not for his righteousness, but for our own that we are to be accepted by God. It would seem that those only who hold the common Church doctrine can say, —
" Thou, 0 Christ, art all I need."