v^i*ii'S>".-,>-,-,>.;xxs,'y2K-: 
 
 
 ^i. 
 
 5.__,,iC-'\_-<_^'X^'^/t,- 
 
 >S$^.SSSSSSS$SS$ 
 
 
 I 
 
 ■I 
 
 I 
 
 ffiE ATONEMENT 
 
 AND 
 
 MODERN LIBERALISM. 
 
 BY THE 
 
 ■I 
 
 
 REV. STEPHEN CARD, 
 
 Protestant Chaplain Reformatory for Boys^ Penetanguishene. 
 
 
 ''C^S,,. 
 
 y 
 
 TORONTO: 
 WILLIAM BRIGGS, 
 
 __WESLEY BUILUrnGS. 
 
 Montreal : C. W. CoATES. Halifax : S. F. Huestis. 
 
 1892. 
 
% 
 
THE ATONEMENT 
 
 / 
 
 AND 
 
 MODERN LIBERALISM. 
 
 BY THE 
 
 REV. STEPHEN CARD, 
 
 Protestant Chaplain Reformatory for Boys^ Penetanguishene. 
 
 TORONTO : 
 WILLIAM BRIGGS, 
 
 WESLEY BUILDINGS. 
 
 Montreal : C. W. Coaxes. Halifax ; S, F, Huestis, 
 
 1892. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 This work, on the vicarious nature of Christ's Atone- 
 ment, has at least one merit — it is short. I trust, 
 however, the reader will find that the argument is not 
 weakened by its brevity. I have been induced to 
 publish it because I believe that a plain, concise state- 
 ment of this important doctrine, together with the 
 Scriptural basis upon which it rests, is needed. The 
 author believes that the argument contained in the 
 following pages is conclusive. My earnest prayer is 
 that the publication of this modest booklet may do 
 good ; that it may bring glory and honor and praise 
 to Him, whose precious blood constitutes the only 
 basis of a penitent sinner's faith, or of a 'believer's 
 hope. 
 
 S. C. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Preliminary Considerations - - - - 7 
 
 The Nature of Christ's Atonement - - - S 
 
 What did Christ Jesus Come to this World For ? 1 1 
 
 A Few Errors Considered - - - - 14 
 
 The Vicarious Nature of the Atonement - - 20 
 
THE ATONEMENT, AND MODERN 
 
 LIBERALISM. 
 
 Preliminary Considerations. 
 
 There are certain doctrines of Scripture that are 
 considered fundamental by the principal denomina- 
 tions of Christendom. That these denominations, 
 without previous understanding, and without com- 
 promise, should all reach the same conclusions, and 
 should all find the same great truths taught in the 
 Bible ; that all these years of research, of Biblical criti- 
 cism, of Biblical revision, have not eliminated or re- 
 vised a single one of these essential truths, establishes 
 conclusively two great facts. First, it proves that the 
 doctrines thus held are Scriptural ; and secondly, it 
 proves that the Bible is a reliable basis for our religious 
 belief ; that as a book of instruction, as a revelation 
 from God to mankind, it fully and triumphantly meets 
 the case. To the scholar, and to the unsophisticated, 
 the Bible reveals the same great truths, and teaches 
 the same great doctrines. 
 
 In regard to truths of minor importance, there should 
 be, as there is, liberty. But in essentials there must be, 
 in each denomination, unity. If some ministers, how- 
 ever unquestionable their sincerity or their piety, were 
 
allowed vigorously to oppose what other ministers of 
 the same body as vigorously preached as truth, the 
 Church would soon be plunged into a condition of 
 uncertainty, confusion and strife, that would seriously 
 imperil, if not ultimately destroy it. There must be a 
 standard of doctrine to appeal to ; there must be 
 authority to deal with this so-called " Liberal Preach- 
 ing," or the Church permitting such irregularities 
 would soon become but a rope of sand. 
 
 Every man certainly has a right to whatever opin- 
 ions he may choose to hold in regard to Scripture, so 
 long as in the practical working out of his opinions he 
 does not interfere with the rights of others. But if 
 these opinions are out of harmony with the well-known 
 views held by his denomination — and if a minister, out 
 of harmony with the views he himself once held, and 
 that in his ordination vows he promised to preach and 
 to defend — then honor demands, not that he should 
 renounce his opinions, but that he should step out of 
 the Church, with whose doctrinal standards he no 
 longer agrees, and go where he may hold his opinions 
 to his heart's content. 
 
 One fundamental doctrine that Liberalism has most 
 vigorously assailed is that of Christ's Vicarious Atone- 
 ment. 
 
 I— The Nature of Christ's Atonement. 
 
 Two theories embrace substantially the theological 
 formations of the centuries, in regard to the nature of 
 the Atonement, viz., the theory of Liberalism, and the 
 Vicarious theory. 
 
9 
 
 As nearly as we are able to learn, the follow- 
 ing is the theory of Liberalism : God wao never 
 offended at men for their sins ; He never intended to 
 punish the sinner with eternal death ; Christ did not 
 die for the sins of the world ; the principle of substitu- 
 tion is erroneous ; Christ came to bring comfort to the 
 race, and by example and precept, to build up a purer 
 manhood. He came to teach men, and to show them 
 that God loves them ; no man will go to hell forever ; 
 those who go there will be liberated in good time 
 through the infinite mercy of God. 
 
 The vicarious theory of the Atonement. Man has 
 violated the divine law and is an offender ; God in His 
 judicial character is offended ; God's law says, sin 
 must be punished ; sin cut men off from God, and left 
 the race without hope ; Jesus Christ, moved by infinite 
 love, comes forward and offers Himself as a Substitute 
 for all men, as a sacrifice for sin ; not to pay a debt, 
 but to vindicate a principle ; not to satisfy an angry 
 passion in Deity — as some imagine — but to maintain 
 the majesty, the supremacy, the authority of God's law 
 throughout the universe, so that God can he just wherF 
 He pardons the sinner. 
 
 We cannot do better than to present an extract from 
 the " Prayer of Consecration," as contained in the ritual 
 of the Methodist Church in the service for the celebra- 
 tion of the Lord's Supper. It is precisely after the 
 form for the same service in the Church of England : 
 
 " Almighty God our heavenly Father, who of Thy 
 tender mercy didst give Thine only Son Jesus Christ 
 to suffer death upon the cross for oyr redemption ; 
 
10 
 
 who made there by His oblation of Himself once 
 offered, a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, 
 and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world." 
 
 Here the nature, purpose and extent of the atone- 
 ment of Christ, is expressed with unparalleled clearness 
 and accuracy. 
 
 In the Articles of Religion of the Methodist Church 
 is the following : 
 
 No. 21. — "The offering of Christ once made, is that 
 perfect redemption, propitiation and satisfaction for all 
 the sins of the whole world, both original and actual ; 
 and *here is none other satisfaction for sin but that 
 (doner 
 
 God's love to the race is not the fruit of the Atone- 
 ment ; the Atonement is the fruit of His love that ante- 
 dated it. 
 
 By this universal atonement every human being of 
 the race is placed upon savable ground. No man will 
 ever be damned for rejecting an atonement that 
 was not made for him ; or for refusing a salvation that 
 was never within his reach. Life is an opportunity to 
 accept Christ and be saved. In Him there is a salva,- 
 tion needed by all, a salvation provided for all, and a 
 salvation offered to all. Men who reject Christ enter 
 at death into a state of endless punishment. Those 
 who die in Christ enter at once into a state of endless 
 happiness. There is grand inspiration and soul in- 
 vigoration in the character, and ministry, and miracles 
 of Christ ; but salvation, salvation from sin, comes 
 alone through faith in the precious blood of Jesus. 
 His atonement is the life-boat, plunging through the 
 
11 
 
 roaring breakers and the angry storm, to rescue the 
 poor souls that are clinging to >on sinking wreck. 
 Heaven pity the man that would try to scuttle that 
 life-boat 
 
 II. — What did Christ Jesus Come to this 
 
 World for ? 
 
 The living vital question is, For what purpose did 
 Jesus Christ come to this world ? There are serious 
 and insuperable objections that lie against the theory 
 of Liberalism. The most serious objection is, that it 
 is in direct conflict with the plain and oft-repeated 
 declarations of Scripture. As St. Augustine remarks, 
 " It avails not what I say, what you say, what he says, 
 but what saith the Lord ?" 
 
 Paul in his Epistle to the Romans says : " God 
 commendeth His love toward us, in that while we 
 were yet sinners Christ died for us." The very thing 
 that Liberalism denies is here affirmed to be the 
 highest proof of God's love to us. 
 
 The fifteenth chapter of First Corinthians furnishes 
 us with a most clear and decisive statement of this 
 subject as Paul understood it. Let me quote : " More- 
 over, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I 
 preached unto you, which also ye have received, and 
 wherein ye stand. 
 
 " By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory 
 what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in 
 vain. For i delivered unto yoUy first of all that which 
 I also received, how that Christ died for our sins, 
 according to the Scriptures. 
 
" And that He was buried, and that He rose again 
 ♦.he third day according to the Scriptures." Now 
 there are several things affirmed here, and a few other 
 things taught. He says that there were two important 
 doctrines that he preached to the Corinthians ; that 
 the Corinthians received these doctrines ; that they 
 were saved by believing them ; that they were en- 
 abled to stand by the support these doctrines fur- 
 nished ; that the first of these doctrines was the more 
 important ; yet as two chosen out of many they were 
 both exceedingly important doctrines. The direct 
 effect of the belief of these doctrines upon the religious 
 life and character and comfort of these Corintnians 
 was of the highest importance to them, and its con- 
 sideration is certainly of the highest importance to us. 
 Now, what were these two doctrines ? " First of all how 
 that Christ died for our sins" and the second was, His 
 burial and His resurrection. This, Paul says, is THE 
 Gospel. The first, and the greater, of these two doc- 
 trines. Liberalism and Socinians generally, for three 
 hundred years, have denied. 
 
 This gospel that he preached to the Corinthians, 
 that saved the Corinthians, he preached also to the 
 Galatians, so he informs us. In his Epistle to them 
 he writes : " Grace to you and peace from God the 
 Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ, Who gave 
 Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us from 
 this present evil w rid, according to the will of God 
 our Father, to whom be glory forever and ever. 
 Amen !" 
 
 Furthermore : " And I certify you, brethren, that 
 
the gospel which was preached of me is not after 
 man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of 
 Jesus Christ." 
 
 We thank God, Paul, for your grand testimony 
 that Jesus Christ died for our sins. We are fully 
 satisfied that Christ revealed this glorious doctrine to 
 you ; but who revealed to these doubters and ob- 
 jectors that Christ did not die for our sins ? He 
 certainly never has. 
 
 Isaiah tells us, that the Lord hath laid on Him tke 
 iniquity of us all. This is too serious a matter, and 
 the eternal interests of humanity are of too much im- 
 portance, to justify the employment of such language 
 as the inspired prophet here uses, and repeats else- 
 where, if the doctrine of vicarious atonement is not 
 true. 
 
 This burden, " the iniquity of us all," Jesus was 
 bearing when John met Him, for he said, " Behold the 
 Lamb of Gody which taketh away the sin of the worlds 
 He bore this heavy burden to Calvary, for Paul says 
 that by the grace of God He tasted death for every 
 man. 
 
 These are sufficient for our present purpose. No- 
 thing can be plainer than that Christ Jesus, in addition 
 to the benefits conferred upon men by His matchless 
 character. His luminous teaching, and His marvellous 
 miracles — actually died for their sins. It is not a 
 matter of inference, it is a matter of record. The 
 gospel that saves men has for its first and greatest truth 
 that " Christ died for our sins." Paul says the Corin- 
 thians believed this, and it saved them. If it is not 
 
14 
 
 ■* 
 
 true, if it is erroneous, then the Corinthians were saved 
 by believing a falsehood, and Paul by his testimony 
 confirms the fraud, thereby becoming an accessory 
 after the act 
 
 III.— A Few Errors Considered. 
 
 After the system of exclusion in the diagnosis of 
 disease, and following somewhat also the rules of 
 a debate, we shall briefly introduce in the midst of our 
 discussion of this subject the consideration of some 
 errors rather than leave them to be considered at the 
 close. Such an examination of some mistaken views 
 is necessary to a clear understanding of the great doc- 
 trine of the Atonement. 
 
 ERROR NUMBER ONE. 
 
 That there was a literal and in some way a decisive 
 atonement made for some that assures them eternal 
 life, while for the rest of the world there was an 
 ineffectual atonement or no atonement at all made, 
 is a view that antagonizes the plainest statements 
 of Scripture, and, therefore, cannot be true. An 
 ineffectual atonement, an atonement only in name 
 and not in reality, is equivalent to no atonement 
 at all. John said, " Behold the Lamb of God, which 
 taketh away the sin of the world!' This testimony 
 of John is packed with meaning. Here is the Old 
 Testament doctrine of sacrifice, of substitution. But 
 this time the offering is not an animal, the offering 
 is " the Lamb of God!' Furthermore, the offering of 
 this Lamb is not merely for the Jews. All distinctions 
 
16 
 
 of condition, nation, clime or color vanish. " Behold 
 the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the 
 worlds 
 
 " God so loved the world that He gave His only be- 
 [,otten Son, that whosoever believGth. on Him should not 
 perish, but have everlasting life." That God LOVED the 
 world, the whole world, a world of sinners, no reasonable 
 person will question : and just as many as He loved 
 He sent His Son to die for. If His love included the 
 world, then the atonement of His Son included the 
 world. The prophet comes to our assistance, and says 
 Why, " the Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us 
 ALL." 
 
 The fact is, there has been but one atonement 
 made for sin, and that was for all; "that He 
 by the grace of God should taste death for every 
 man." There was just as good an atonement made 
 for one man as another. Men will not be lost be- 
 cause no atonement was made for them, but because 
 they reject the one that was made. A salvation 
 needed by all, a salvation provided for all, a salvation 
 offered to all, and a salvation adapted to all, is the sal- 
 vation of the gospel. 
 
 ERROR NUMBER TWO. 
 
 That the atonement of Christ in some mysterious 
 manner renders repentance unnecessary, and emascu- 
 lates justifying faith, until nothing is left but the name, 
 is a damnable heresy. No matter what the Bible 
 teaches about the atonement, there are two things, 
 among others, that God demands in His Word and that 
 
16 
 
 He has never ceased to demand. In the most explicit 
 language He has attached a finality to these two 
 demands. In words plain enough for all to under- 
 stand, He has said : " Except ye repent, ye shall all 
 likewise perish." Again, " But now commandeth ALL 
 MEN EVERYWHERE TO REPENT." To the penitent 
 jailer, Paul said : " Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ 
 and thou shalt be saved ; " " He that believeth not shall 
 be damned." He did believe, and he was saved that 
 very night. The apostles everywhere preached, " Re- 
 pentance towards God and faith towards our Lord Jesus 
 Christ." Repentance may be defined (See Watson) 
 as " a godly sorrow wrought in the heart of a sinful 
 person by the Word and Spirit of God, whereby from 
 a sense of sin as offensive to God, and endangering 
 to his own soul, and from a sense of the mercy of God 
 in Christ, he with a true sorrow turns from his sins to 
 God as his only Saviour." Justifying faith, to quote 
 the same author, may be stated to be, " Assent, with 
 reliance ; belief, with trust" This is not to merit sal- 
 vation, but to meet God's demands, and to comply 
 with His requirements by repenting of our sins and by 
 the exercise of faith, which is the condition of salvation. 
 These are the two things that God demands, and He 
 will give us the new heart. To teach men tha^ they 
 have no conditions to meet in order to be saved, that 
 Christ has done it all, is to present a view of the 
 atonement utterly unwarranted by Scripture and that 
 imperils the interests of immortal souls. 
 
17 
 
 ERROR NUMBER THREE. 
 
 That the atonement is so effectual in the case of be 
 lievers as to render it impossible for them to fall away 
 and miss their heavenly reward will not bear the test 
 of Scripture. 
 
 We have already shown, what is now generally 
 believed, that the atonement is universal. If all men 
 have been redeemed, then all men are free moral 
 agents. " He is not willing that any should perish, 
 but that all should come to repentance." He will not 
 be likely to exclude any for whom He has made an 
 atonement. If men are lost, they are lost because 
 they reject salvation. They are free to choose it, or 
 refuse it ; are therefore responsible, are therefore free. 
 Now, one question : Does a change of heart destroy 
 human freedom? "No!" you say. "No," all will 
 say. Then are believers, while living, exposed to the 
 possibility of falling, and missing heaven, and there- 
 fore is there the utmost need that they " watch and 
 pray, lest they enter into temptation." " The right- 
 eousness of the righteous shall not deliver him in the 
 day of his transgression"; " neither shall the righteous 
 be able to live for his righteousness in the day that he 
 sinneth." 
 
 " When I shall say to the righteous that he shall 
 surely live: if he. trust to his own righteousness and 
 commit iniquity, all his righteousness shall not be 
 remembered ; but for his iniquity that he hath com- 
 mitted he shall die." 
 
 So says Ezekiel. This Scripture plainly proves 
 that religion does not destroy man's freedom, and 
 
18 
 
 ff 
 
 maintains the position taken above. By the grace of 
 God, however, the weakest believer may triumph over 
 all his enemies, and win the crown of life. 
 
 ** For Satan trembles when he sees 
 The weakest saint upon his knees." 
 
 ERROR NUMBER FOUR. 
 
 That Christ died for all men, and that, therefore, all 
 men will be saved, is the last error we shall examine. 
 This is a very easy and expeditious method of dispos- 
 ing of the question of human destiny — " the why, and 
 the whither." Without repentance, without justifying 
 faith, without the new birth, into the kingdom of God, 
 all men are going to heaven. If this is true, then 
 some of us have gone to a great deal of unnecessary 
 trouble. A few roughs and scoundrels r^re to be de- 
 tained in a place where the climate is admitted to be 
 uncomfortably warm. They will be held on a sort of 
 indeterminate sentence, but will soon merit promotion, 
 and will get there all right. If it were not for the 
 Bible, this theory might be popular ; but unfortunately 
 for it, the Scriptures have a very short and decisive 
 way of dealing with these imaginary schemes. The 
 Bible says, " Repent, or perish ! Believe, or be 
 damned ! Be converted, or you shall not see the 
 kingdom of God." For a long time there was a 
 dispute over the words " everlasting " and " eternal," 
 in the twenty-fifth chapter of Matthew. But the new 
 version comes along and ends the dispute by making 
 both heaven and hell, in that twenty-sixth verse, 
 " eternal " ; which harmonizes it with the testimony of 
 the rest of the Scriptures. 
 
19 
 
 Of course every intelligent student of the Bible 
 knew, before the revised version was thought of, that 
 the words " everlasting " and " eternal " in that twenty- 
 sixth verse were from the same word in the original. 
 
 There is as much said in the . ible about eternal 
 punishment as there is about eternal happiness ; and 
 if God's threatenings are not reliable, His promises 
 cannot be. There is no reasoning under the heavens 
 that can destroy the one doctrine without destroying 
 the other. All this rubbish about what " an earthly 
 father would not do to his child," is supremely absurd. 
 That poor child must be tired. Why, Jesus is the 
 embodiment of kindness. His very name is a 
 synonym of all that is tender, and humane, and 
 loving. And yet His lips supply us with the strong- 
 est proofs, the most thrilling descriptions, of eternal 
 punishment. He furnishes the information that be- 
 tween heaven and hell " there is a great gulf fixed," so 
 deep and wide and terrible that no soul can ever get 
 to heaven that is sent to hell. It is He that consigns 
 the wicked to a punishment that is endless. The 
 torrent of denunciation that He poured upon that 
 gang of hypocritical Pharisees was the ^ost terrific 
 that ever fell upon mortal ears. It was full of the 
 most fiery suggestions that eternal damnation was 
 not very far off from them. As we heard Bishop 
 Bowman once say, " The question is «<?/, ' What d o 
 people like to hear ?' but, ' What is true ?' " 
 
20 
 
 IV. — The Vicarious Nature of the 
 Atonement. 
 
 I. The Case of Infants and Heathen. — To show more 
 fully the necessity of the vicarious sacrifice of Christ, 
 take the case of infants dying in infancy. How are 
 they to be saved ? They know nothing of Christ's 
 character or teaching ; and if He did not die for them, 
 how, and on what principle are they taken to heaven? 
 They are saved unconditionally through the atone- 
 ment, as adults are saved conditionally. If not, how 
 are they saved ? Surely no one doubts their salvation. 
 Here, then, are millions of Adam's race without a 
 Christ, without a Saviour. They must be saved then, 
 outside the scheme of redemption entirely. But if 
 God can save so many millions of the race without 
 any atonement, why not extend the principle of pre- 
 rogative, and save all ? 
 
 Then there are the heathen. Whatever Christ came 
 to this world to do, they are in ^Mssful ignorance of it ; 
 and if He has made no atonement for the world, here 
 are millions, yes, half the race, that are not touched by 
 Jesus Chrift in the remotest manner. For all the 
 benefit He is to them, they might as well have been 
 born in Jupiter. According to the vicarious, the sub- 
 stitution theory of the Atonement, Christ died for the 
 heathen ; and while they are accountable, yet all that 
 God will hold them responsible for, is, that they do the 
 best they can with the limited light they have. The 
 atonement covers all the rest. The many and decisive 
 passages of Scripture we have already quoted to prove 
 
21 
 
 a universal atonement, fully support this view. Ac- 
 cording to Liberalism, what reason will the millions of 
 infants and the millions of heathen ever have to praise 
 the Lord Jesus ? The reasons that angels have, and 
 no more. But, they belong to " the Worldl' that God 
 so loved, and that His son died to save, and their 
 voices will swell the mighty chorus of salvation through 
 the blood of the Lamb. 
 
 2. The Principle of Substitution in the Old Testa- 
 ment. — The word " atonement ' occurs a great many 
 times in the Old Testament, especially in the history 
 of the sacrifices and offerings of the J ewi.sh Church, 
 during the fifteen hundred years from Moses to Christ. 
 To make reconciliation, or to reconcile, in the Hebrew, 
 is the same as to make atonement, or to atone. In the 
 New Testament (Old Version), the word atonement 
 occurs but once. But the same word that is translated 
 atonement in this one place, is translated reconcilia- 
 don, or to reconcile, in many other places. The word 
 tenement, according to Webster, means, " To make 
 
 oaration or satisfaction for an offence or a crime, by 
 V ich reconciliation is procured between the offended 
 and the offending parties." He quotes Shakespeare, 
 " He seeks to make atonement between the Duke of 
 Gloucester and your brothers." In the Bible, where 
 the word is used in a strictly religious sense, this is also 
 the precise meaning of the word atonement. In 
 Scripture the word atonement represents the means 
 used whereby a reconciliation was effected between 
 the offending sinner and his offended God. 
 
 " And Moses said unto Aaron, go to the altar, and 
 
22 
 
 offer thy sin offering, and make an atonement for thy- 
 self and for the people." 
 
 3. A glance at the nature and design of the sacri- 
 fices of the Jewish Church, and their interpretation 
 according to the New Testament, will give us much 
 light upon this important doctrine of substitution. 
 
 The animal sacrifices of the law were divided into 
 three kinds : Sin offerings, burnt offerings, and peace 
 offerings. In all these offerings, the presentation of 
 the offering, the imposition of the offerer's hands, and 
 the act of slaughter were the same. But in all these 
 sacrifices, the blood was offered on the altar, as an ex- 
 piation for sin. In all these sacrifices, the doctrine of 
 atonement was distinctly present. In fact they had 
 no other purpose to serve. In Leviticus i. 4 we read, 
 " He shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt 
 offering " (which was offered twice a day), and it shall 
 be accepted for him to make an atonement for him." 
 Both in this and in the trespass offering, persons com- 
 mitting sin, and refusing to offer these sacrifices, had 
 to bear their iniquity. Of the great day of atonement 
 it was said, " This shall be an everlasting statute unto 
 you, to make an atonement for the children of Israel, 
 for all their sins, once a year." Lev. xvii. 1 1 defines 
 the meaning of every bleeding sacrifice : " For the life 
 of the flesh is in the blood ; and I have given it to you, 
 upon the altar, to make an atonement for your souls ; 
 for it is the blood thatmaketh an atonement for the soul!' 
 
 Here is substitution, a divinely established system of 
 substitution, that maintained its place and power for 
 four thousand years. The animal suffers death as a 
 
23 
 
 substitute for the offerer, and Jehovah, who gave the 
 blood as the means of atonement, recognizes and ac- 
 cepts the substitution. And in this manner " the 
 priest shall make an atonement for him, for his sin 
 which he hath sinned, and it sliall be forgiven him." 
 
 Two great principles are distinctly exhibited in all 
 these sacrifices. In the first place, there was some- 
 thing in the character and government of God, which 
 presented a hindrance to the obtaining of pardon by 
 the sinner ; a hindrance that he could not remove, and 
 that therefore had to be removed for him. In the 
 second place, there was for the removal of the said 
 hindrance, the sacrificial substitution of an animal's 
 life for the forfeited life of the sinner. A substitution, 
 appointed by God^ and presented by the sinner who 
 sought forgiveness of God. Such is the plain import 
 of Old Testament teaching, upon the doctrine of 
 atonement for sin. 
 
 But surely, no man in his senses will suppose that 
 the blood of an ox, or of an heifer, or of a goat, of 
 itself, possessed one particle of virtue towards atoning 
 for sin. Now, what is the obvious fact ? Why, this. 
 These sacrifices were all provisional ; " the means of 
 atonement, in the blood of slain animals, was given by 
 God for the time then present ;" but the clear light of 
 the New Testament proves conclusively that all the 
 sacrifices of the Jewish Church, yea, all the sacrifices 
 offered for four thousand years, derived their atoning 
 value, and all their value^ from Christ's sacrifice of Him- 
 self upon the cross for the sins of the world. The o?tly 
 valid atonement ever offered was that that Christ Him- 
 
24 
 
 self made, when, as Paul says, " He died for our sins, 
 according to the Scriptures." 
 
 4. The New lestament Interpretation of the Sacri- 
 fices of the Law. — In the ninth and tenth chapters of 
 his Epistle to the Hebrews, Paul discusses this very 
 doctrine of substitution, and by inspired and most 
 decisive statements, shows its absolute necessity. The 
 word substitution is not in Paul's text, it is true, but 
 the doctrine is. It is the doctrine that concerns us. 
 Such words are used because they are expressive. A 
 play upon words shows the weakness of an argument. 
 The words, depravity, divinity of Christ, Trinity, and 
 others often used, are not in the Bible. Are the doc- 
 trines there that they represent ? Yes, and common 
 consent justifies the use of the word that most accu- 
 rately expresses the thought that it is intended to 
 convey. After speaking of the services and sacrifices 
 of the priests, the sacrifices offered for sin, as having 
 been imposed upon them, " for the time then present," 
 he proceeds as follows : 
 
 " But Christ being come, an High Priest of good 
 things to come, by a greater and more perfect taber- 
 nacle not made with hands, that is to say, not of this 
 building ; neither by the blood of goats and of calves, 
 but by His own blood, He entered in once into the 
 holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us." 
 
 The high priest, once a year, on the great day of 
 atonement, took the blood of goats and calves, and 
 entered into the holy of holies, and sprinkled that 
 blood in solemn silence before the Lord, to make an 
 atonement for the people. Read Heb. ix. 13, 14. 
 
25 
 
 Paul, in the passage quoted, refers to the great day 
 of atonement, and he says that Jesus is our great 
 High Priest, and that He has made an atonement for 
 us, not by offering the blood of calves and goats, but 
 by " His own blood " ; that His one offering is suffi- 
 cient, for by it He obtained " eternal redemption for 
 us." He came for the purpose, Paul says, of being our 
 High Priest, to offer such a sacrifice and make such 
 an atonement for us. His sacrifice, Paiil says, avails 
 ''for the transgressions under the first Testament'^ (that 
 is, from Adam to Christ), and so he proves our posi- 
 tion, that the sacrifices of the law obtained all their 
 value from the one sacrifice that He offered. 
 
 He then proceeds : " Where a Testament is, there 
 must also, of necessity^ be the death of the testator ; for 
 a Testament is of force after 7nen are dead ; it is of 
 no strength at all while the testator liveth!' Now, this 
 was written express!}^ to prove that Christ's death 
 was an absolute necessity, in order that the world 
 might have access to the " good things " that our 
 great High Priest came to secure for them. A will is 
 of no use to the heirs while the owner of the property 
 willed is alive. So, Paul reasons, Christ's death is 
 everything to the world. 
 
 Furthermore, "Almost all things are by the law 
 purged with blood ; and without shedding of blood is 
 no remission." Without the blood of Christ no salva- 
 tion. Words cannot be plainer, arguments cannot be 
 stronger, than the words and the arguments Paul here 
 uses to prove the vicarious theory of Christ's atone- 
 ment for sin. He carries the argument still further in 
 
26 
 
 the tenth chapter. " // ts not possible that the blood of 
 bulls and of goats should take away sin." Well, what 
 blood is able to do it ? " By His own blood He hath 
 obtained eternal redemption for us." "This man, 
 after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat 
 down on the right hand of God." 
 
 5. The hymns of the Wesleys are saturated with 
 the doctrine of vicarious atonement, and constitute an 
 important link in the chain of evidence thereof The 
 hymns that follow are fair examples : 
 
 O Thou, whose offering on the tree 
 
 The legal offerings all foreshowed, 
 Borrowed their whole effect from Thee, 
 
 And drew their virtue from Thy blood : 
 
 The blood of goats, and bullocko slain, 
 
 Could never for one sin atone ; 
 To purge the guilty offerer's stain. 
 
 Thine was the work, and Thine alone. 
 
 Vain in themselves their duties were ; 
 
 Their services could never please, 
 Till joined with Thine, and made to share 
 
 The merits of Thy righteousness. 
 
 Forward they cast a faithful look 
 
 On Thy approaching sacrifice ; 
 And thence their pleasing savour took. 
 
 And rose accepted to the skies. 
 
 Those feeble types, and shadows old, 
 
 Are all in Thee, the Truth, fulfilled ; 
 We in Thy sacrifice behold 
 
 The substance of those rights revealed. 
 
27 
 
 Thy meritorious sufferings past, 
 We see by faith to us brought back 
 
 And on Thy grand oblation cast, 
 Its saving benefits partake. 
 
 — Charles Wesley. 
 
 O Thou eternal Victim, slain 
 
 A sacrifice for guilty man, 
 
 By the eternal Spirit made 
 
 An offering in the sinner's stead ; 
 
 Our everlasting Priest art Thou, 
 
 And plead'st Thy death for sinners now. 
 
 Thy offering still continues new ; 
 Thy vesture keeps its crimson hue ; 
 Thou stand'st the ever-slaughtered Lamb ; 
 Thy priesthood still remains the same ; 
 Thy years, O God, can never fail, 
 < Thy goodness is unchangeable. 
 
 O that our faith may never move. 
 But stand unshaken as Thy love ! 
 1 Sure evidence of things unseen. 
 Now let it pass the years between. 
 And view Thee bleeding on the tree. 
 My God, who dies for me, for me. 
 
 — Charles Wesley. 
 
 6. Sonte Additional Considerations. — And yet some 
 man will say, " The substitution theory is dead, and 
 almost buried ; and it were well for our theological 
 atmosphere if it were buried." Nay, verily ! It is far 
 from dead. It is alive i r evermore ! The Socinianism 
 of the sixteenth century, that some have tried, but in 
 vain, to galvanize into life, lies dead and buried under 
 the ninth and tenth chapters of Paul's Epistle to the 
 
28 
 
 Hebrews : yea, it lies entombed under the cumulative 
 force and weight of the entire Scriptures. In the 
 name of candor, in the name of our common Chris- 
 tianity, in the name of the twelve hundred millions 
 of the world's inhabitants that need an atonement for 
 sin, what do all the sacrifices of the Jewish nation, and 
 all the sacrificial blood shed from Abel to Christ, 
 mean ? What do the numberless passages of the 
 New Testament, that declare that Christ died for our 
 sins, that salvation is through the blood of Christ : 
 what do all these Scriptures mean ? What mean all 
 those statements of the Old Testament which declare 
 that " He was wounded for our transgressions ; He 
 was bruised for our iniquities ; the chastisement of our 
 peace was upon Him, and with His stripes are we 
 healed." " The Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of 
 us all." 
 
 Webster defines the word " vicarious " to mean 
 "substituted in the place of another; as, a vicarious 
 sacrifice." Was not the animal's life sacrificed, and its 
 blood shed, under the law, as we have shown, as a 
 substitute for the offerer, and did not God order and 
 accept that substitution, and pardon the sins of the 
 offerer ? Most emphatically, yes ! And, on the same 
 principle, was not Christ's life sacrificed, and His blood 
 shed, by divine appointment, for the sins of the world, 
 and did not God accept that offering, and does He 
 not offer pardon to every offender ? We answer, yes, 
 to each of these questions. Was it not the command 
 of God, under the law, that he who refused to offer for 
 his sins such an offering as He required, had to bear 
 
29 
 
 his iniquity ? It was. And if men to-day refuse to 
 bring to God, for the pardon of their sins, the offering 
 that He demands, even the precious blood of the 
 Lamb of God, will they not have to bear their iniquity ? 
 Yes. Jesus could not come to this world and die every 
 time a sinner wanted pardon ; nor once a year, as on 
 the great day of atonement. If he could have done 
 so, we presume the principle of substitution would 
 never have been questioned. " But now, once, in the 
 end of the world, hath He appeared (hath He come to 
 this world), to put away sin, by the sacrifice of Him- 
 self" Because His once offering Himself is sufficient to 
 make an atonement for all men, under both dispensa- 
 tions, and for all time, so that the sinner that seeks 
 pardon may now come, bringing the blood of Jesus as 
 his plea, and receive forgiveness, does this in any 
 degree alter the great fact of substitution ? Certainly 
 not. It maintains it. How could the principle of sub- 
 stitution, of vicarious sacrifice, be ignored, . or how 
 carried further, in redeeming and placing within reach 
 of salvation and heaven, a race of intelligent, free^ 
 responsible beings ? 
 
 It will take something more than learned phrases 
 and profound paragraphs to shake the faith of the 
 Christian world in the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ, 
 and in the plain statements of the Word of God by 
 which that faith is supported. 
 
 7. Chris fs death the great 'reconciling power, — In the 
 New Testament, the death of Christ for our sins is 
 plainly said to be the great reconciler of men to God. 
 " We are reconciled to God by the death of His Son." 
 
30 
 
 " When we were enemies " — a time when men are hard 
 to be moved — " we were reconciled to God by the death 
 of His Son." " All things are of God, who hath recon- 
 ciled us to Himself by Jesus Christ." " I beseech you," 
 says the apostle, " in Christ's stead be ye reconciled to 
 God." " The mightiest name in India to-day," says a 
 late eminent writer, " is the name of Jesus." The simple 
 story of the cross, " Jesus died for you," is doing more 
 than any other truth to lift the world up to God. It has 
 melted the hardest hearts on this planet when all other 
 means failed. It goes for the saying that these passages 
 of Scripture, that hang like jewels upon His cross, 
 ministers everywhere quote the oftenest and depend 
 upon the most in their appeals to sinners, and their 
 instructions to penitent souls. Rob the pulpit oiPauts 
 ^^ first of ally how that Christ died for our sins," and 
 you may close your churches and call home your mis- 
 sionaries. The gospel that saved the Corinthians, and 
 the Galatians, and the Hebrew Christians, and nearly 
 the whole eastern world, is the gospel that must save 
 the whole worlds and it is going to do it. If Christ 
 Jesus did not come to this world to die for sinners, 
 and so to save sinners, what necessity was there of 
 any divine Christ at all ? The prophets and apostles 
 were as grand men as ever walked this earth of God's. 
 They taught the grandest of truths, and died martyrs 
 thereto. If this were all, what better is Christ than 
 they ? One might as well believe in Isaiah, or Jere- 
 miah, or John, or Paul. We have never been fortunate 
 enough to meet a man or to find an author who denied 
 
31 
 
 the vicarious atonement of Jesus Christ, who could 
 give an intelligent reason why the world needs a 
 Divine Christ, or who could state, in language that 
 ordinary mortals could understand, what He came to 
 this world lor. Socinus, who founded the sect of the 
 Socinians, in the sixteenth century, was at least con- 
 sistent. In rejecting; the doctrine of Christ's atone- 
 ment, he saw no need of any Divine Christ, so he 
 rejected His divinity. 
 
 But Paul's " First of all" is to-day the rallying cry, 
 the watchword, of all the principal denominations of 
 Christendom — both Protestant and Roman Catholic. 
 It was never so well understood, never so universally 
 believed. Ministers are preaching it. Sabbath-schools 
 are teaching it, and the millions of Christ's followers 
 are singing it, the wide world over. Said the dying 
 Father Basford, of Ingersoll, to his physician, " Doctor, 
 I want you to tell everybody you see that the blood 
 of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin." 
 
 Kennedy, the world-renowned singer of Scottish 
 songs, closed his mortal career in one of our Canadian 
 towns. After arranging his earthly affairs, just before 
 he expired, he exiled his family around him and re- 
 quested them to sing. He was asked what he would 
 like to have them sing. " Sing," said the dying Scotch- 
 man, " Sing, ' Rock of Ages.* " He who had thrilled 
 audiences on both continents, with his magnificent 
 rendering of such Scotch songs as " The March o' the 
 Cameron Men," now grasped with undying faith the 
 Christ of Calvary ; and while his weeping family sang 
 
32 
 
 for him, " Rock of Ages, Cleft for Me," his glad soul 
 went up to heaven to swell the chorus of redemption 
 through the blood of Jesus Christ 
 
 Rock of Ages, cleft for me, 
 
 Let me hide myself in Thee ; 
 
 Let the water and the blood, 
 
 From Thy wounded side which flowed, 
 
 Be of sin the double cure. 
 
 Save from wrath and make me pure. * 
 
 Not the labor of my hands. 
 Can fulfil Thy law's demands ; 
 Could my zeal no respite know, 
 Could my tears forever flow, 
 All for sin could not atone,* 
 Thou must save, and Thou alone. 
 
 Nothing in my hand I bring. 
 Simply to Thy cross I cling ; 
 Naked, come to Thee for dress. 
 Helpless, look to Thee for grace. 
 Foul, I to the Fountain fly. 
 Wash me, Saviour, or I die. 
 
 While I draw this fleeting breath. 
 When m;ne eyes shall close in death. 
 When I soar to worlds unknown. 
 See Thee on Thy judgment throne, 
 Rock of Ages, cleft for me. 
 Let me hide myself in Thee."