Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

if the two covenants were the covenants of Jehovah, as the Scriptures every where state them to be, and the term covenant means a last will and testament, then must not HE have been the testator? which would involve in it the monstrous idea, that the death of Jehovah himself was necessary for the confirmation of each, for without IT, as the apostle reasons, "they would have been of no strength at all."

Secondly, we remark, that Jesus Christ is here styled the mediator of the new covenant, as Moses is said to be the mediator of the old covenant; Moses was the medium through which it was communicated to the people of Israel. "It was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator." Jesus Christ is the messenger of the new covenant, by whom that new and gracious dispensation was brought from heaven and communicated to the children of men. "The law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ."+ We may here remark, that the term mediator is applied to Jesus Christ, exclusively in relation to the covenant which he was commissioned to reveal and to ratify with his own blood. We are accustomed to hear a great deal said about the mediation of Christ, his mediatorial person, as God-man, his mediatorial work, his mediatorial of fices, his mediatorial righteousness, his mediatorial reward, his mediatorial kingdom and glory; modes of expression adopted, in order to support an hypothesis, without the least countenance or warrant from any thing contained in the Sacred Scriptures, where the term is solely applied to him with respect to his connexion with the new covenant.

Thirdly, we observe that Christ's being the mediator of the new covenant, rendered it necessary that he should die in order to confirm and give validity to that covenant. "For this cause he is the mediator of the new covenant, that by means of death for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant." This writer adds, "For where a covenant is, there is a necessity for the death of that which es

* Gal. iii, 19. + John i. 17.

tablisheth the covenant," that is of the victim by which the covenant is ratified. (See Wakefield and Doddridge.) For a covenant is firm over the dead, whereas it is of no force while that which establisheth it liveth. So that the death of Christ was rendered necessary, in order to give validity and effect to that covenant of which he was the mediator,

Fourthly, we observe that the reason why Christ was made the mediator of the new covenant was, that he might redeem the past offences that were committed under the Jewish or Sinai covenant; "For this cause he is the Mediator of the new covenant, that by means of death for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant." It is worthy of observation that the author of this epistle when treating of the deliverance of those who were under the law, (and consequently under the eurse and condemnation,) from their former sins under that covenant, makes use of the term redemption, for where law is transgressed, sin is imputed, which renders the redemption of them necessary; whereas the Apostle Paul, treating of the same subject in relation to the Gentiles who were not under the law, but, as he says, without law, does not speak of their past sins as redeemed, but as passed over, as not reckoned, not imputed to them, "for sin is not imputed when there is no law." In the former case, the sacred writers consider those who were under the law as bond-slaves and captives under a sentence of death, for the law gendereth to bondage; so the apostle speaking of the freedom of the gospel in opposition to the bondage of the law, as allegorized in the persons of Sarah and Agar says, "These are the two covenants; the one from Mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar; for this Agar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children." From this captivity and slavery it was necessary that they should be redeemed; and for this very purpose was Jesus Christ the Mediator of the new covenant, that he might redeem the transgressions that were under the first covenant. How then were they to be redeemed from this

captivity? Clearly by the death of the tyrant by whom they were enslaved. That, says Paul, being dead in which we were held.*

This leads us to inquire, fifthly, what it was in the death of Christ that made it effectual for the accomplishment of this great and important purpose. Or whence was it that the sacrifice of himself was available to put away sin? This did not arise from his being a vicarious sacrifice, the substitute of sinners, having their offences charged to his account, and suffering, in their stead, the full punishment which was due to them; nor did it arise from his sacrifice appeasing the wrath of Almighty God, satisfying the demands of law and justice, and thereby making a complete atonement to God for all their transgressions; nor did the efficacy of his death consist in this, that by it he reconciled God to his offending creatures and purchased his favour and mercy towards them; nor was the death of Christ designed to exhibit to mankind God's abhorrence and detestation of sin, by the punishment of it in the person of his innocent and wellbeloved Son in the stead of punishing the guilty. Nothing of this sort is attributed to the death of Christ in the Holy Scriptures: they represent the efficacy of it as consisting in this, that the blood which he shed, as the mediator of the new covenant, was the blood of the covenant by which it was sealed, ratified and established, as an everlasting covenant, by which he superseded, annulled and did away the old covenant with all its obligations and penalties, depriving it of its commanding and condemning power, and thus redeeming the transgressions that were under it. For this cause he was the mediator of the new covenant, that by shedding his blood, as the blood of the covenant, he might accomplish the redemption of transgressions, and thereby open a new and living way for those who were called into the gracious dispensation of the gospel, that they might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. The writer of this epistle, having quoted from Jeremiah the promise of God that he would make a new covenant,

[blocks in formation]

observes upon it, " In that he saith a new covenant, he hath declared the former void. Now that which is declared void and groweth old, is ready to disappear."*

The Apostle Paul, in order to prove the total abolition of the law, compares its dominion over those who are under it, to that of a husband over his wife, which entirely ceases when he is dead. "The woman," he says, "that hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband as long as he liveth, but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband." "Wherefore," he adds,

[ocr errors]

my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; for," says he, "when we were in the flesh," (i. e. under the carnal dispensation of the law,) "the motions of sin, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death; but now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held, that we should serve in newness of spirit and not in the oldness of the letter."+

Thus it appears that the death of Christ put away sin by abolishing the law, which gave to sin its life and power, for without the law, sin is dead. But as the subject is of great importance, and largely insisted on in the New Testament, we shall proceed to a further consideration of it, as stated and illustrated in various other passages of Scripture. In those Scriptures, then, we are informed, that "sin is the transgression of the law," and that "where there is no law, there is no transgression;" that "the strength of sin is the law," and that "without the law, sin is dead." Paul, in his own person, describing the state of a Jew under the dominion of the law, says,' 66 I was alive without the law once; but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died; for sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me." And again, "sin is not imputed when there is no law." If then the law be abolished, the power and the very existence of sin is done away.

The apostle enters at large into

* Heb. viii. 13. Imp. Ver. 1st edit. + Rom. vii, 1-6.

this subject, in his Epistle to the Ephesians, and proves, that the abolition of the law, by the death of Christ, was the means by which he made peace, and by which he reconciled both Jews and Gentiles to each other and unto God. He first reminds them of their former state, as being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called uncircumcision, by that which is called the circumcision in the flesh, made by hands; that at that time they were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world. He then lays before them the means by which this state was reversed. "But now," says he, "in Christ Jesus, ye who sometimes were far off, are made nigh" by the blood of Christ," that is, by that blood by which the new covenant, embracing in its promises the Gentiles as well as the Jews, and by which the first covenant (which kept them at a distance from God, and precluded them from all access to him, or knowledge of him) was done away. "For," he adds, "he is our peace, who hath made both," i. e. Jews and Gentiles, “one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us, having abolished in his flesh the enmity, the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; and that he might reconcile both (Jews and Gentiles) unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby." ""#

Under the old covenant, the way into the holiest of all was not made manifest. None were permitted to enter into it but the high priest only, and he not without blood; but now, that covenant being abolished, that wall of partition being broken down, and the veil of the temple rent in twain, the way into it is opened, and both Jews and Gentiles have boldness, free liberty, to enter into the holiest of all by the blood of Jesus, the blood of the new covenant, by which the former covenant was entirely set aside. So the apostle says here, having made peace by his cross, and

Ephes. ii. 11-16.

having slain the enmity thereby, "he came," (that is, by his ambassadors the apostles,) "preaching peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh; for through him we both have access, by one spirit, unto the Father."*

The enmity between the Jews and the Gentiles was abolished by removing the cause of it, the separating wall, which not only prevented any friendly intercourse between them, but was also the cause of the greatest enmity to each other. The enmity said to be slain by his cross, appears to refer to the enmity of both Jews and Gentiles unto God by their wicked works, because it is said to be done away by reconciling both unto God. This enmity with respect to the Gentiles, was slain by God's passing over, and not imputing their former trespasses unto them; for which purpose Jesus Christ was set forth as a mercyseat in his own blood, as the seat or throne where the grace and mercy of God in the new covenant, which he ratified with his own blood, as it were, took their stand. With respect to the Jews, the enmity was slain by the non-imputation of their transgression under the first covenant, Christ having by his death abolished that covenant, which was the only ground upon which the transgressions under it could be imputed; for, as we have before seen, sin is not imputed when there is no law. Thus then did Jesus Christ make peace, reconciling both Jews and Gentiles unto God in one body by the cross.

The same apostle, in another place,t speaking of this reconciliation by the death of Christ, says, that the word, (the doctrine,) the ministry of it, was committed to them, (the apostles). What was this doctrine of reconciliation? He tells us, it was this, "to wit, that God was in Christ," i. e. by his death "reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them." That is, passing over and not reckoning to them their former transgressions in their Jewish or Heathen state, but freely forgiving and blotting them out. And this he did by abolishing the law, the minis

[ocr errors]

Ephes. v. 17, 18.

+ 2 Cor. v. 18, 19.

try of condemnation, by the death of his Son; so the apostle says, "when we were enemies we were reconciled unto God by the death of his Son."

[ocr errors]

In like manner in the Epistle to the Colossians, the apostle says, "and you being dead in your sins, and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he (God) quickened together with him, (i. e. Christ,) having forgiven you all trespasses, blotting out the hand-writing of ordinances which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross." It was the law that stood in the way of the access of the Gentiles into the kingdom of God: this he took out of the way, cancelled and blotted out, nailing it to his cross, representing it figuratively as put to death by being as it were crucified with him hence the apostle says, we are become dead to the law by the body of Christ, that being dead in which we were held," as in a state of captivity and slavery.

:

[To be concluded in the next Number.]

Paris Protestant Bible Society.

HE Bible Society of Paris, es

amongst the Protes

tants, will it may be hoped arouse this languid body, and produce a revival of the dormant spirit of reforma tion in their churches. The English have been the means of originating, and are perhaps the instruments in upholding, this institution. How long such an association will be permitted to exist under the Bourbon government is questionable. A hint from the Thuilleries would dissolve the whole fabric and cause the most active agents of the Society to be dumb and motionless. But whilst it lasts, the Society will we are persuaded do some good, though it is not the fault of the anglicized members if it is not productive of some evil.

The last Report of the Society is lying before us, an 8vo. volume of 240 pages. (Société Biblique Protestante de Paris. IV. Rupport Annuel. 1823.") The Rules state the object of the Society to be to distribute the Holy Scriptures amongst Protestant Christians, in the autho

Col. ii. 13, 14.

rized versions, without Note or Comment. The Marquis de Jaucourt, Peer of France, is the President: amongst the Vice-Presidents are Le Comte Boissy-d'Anglas, Peer of France; Le Baron Cuvier, Counsellor of State; Le Baron De Lessert, Member of the Chamber of Deputies; Le Comte Maurice Mathieu de la Redorte, Peer of France; Le Comte de Reinhard, Counsellor of State; Le Comte Ver Huell, Peer of France, &c. One of the Secretaries is Le Baron de Staël-Holstein.-A full account is given in this Report of the last Annual Meeting, held at Paris the 16th of April. It bore a great likeness to the similar meetings of England; the same long speeches, all containing nearly the same matter; the same bandying of compliments from speaker to speaker; and the same ardent expressions of loyalty and assurances of the increase of loyalty from the circulation of the Scriptures. This said loyalty obliges object to be to circulate the Bible the French Society to profess their amongst Protestants only; but it appears from some passages of the Report that a Roman Catholic who

a Bible is

conquest. In one respect, the French Society goes beyond the English. With the same avowal of no Notes or Comments, the object is evident of making the Society an Orthodoxy, at least in those points engine of on which Lutherans and Calvinists are agreed. Though the several received versions are pretended to be adopted, the last Geneva Version, the best of all the French translations, which is in use amongst a large proportion of the Swiss and French Protestants, is not even alluded to. It is implied in the language of the speakers that the Protestants, speaking the French tongue, are Trinitarians; and Messrs. Marron and Monod allow the language to pass uncontradicted. The English Missionaries must smile at their silence. A barefaced violation of the fundamental rule of the Society is confessed in the Report. A Committee was appointed to prepare a new edition of Ostervald's French Bible. The editions of this work in general use are that of Basle in 1820, and that of

Neuchâtel in 1744. These the Report says were collated in forming the new edition. But it is admitted that the text has been changed and the translation of Martin foisted into Ostervald, in 2 Cor. v. 19, "in order to express more decisively the Divinity of Jesus Christ!" (Le texte même n'a subi aucun changement quelconque, à l'exception d'un seul passage. Au verset 19, chapitre v. de la 2, aux Corinthiens, la traduction de Martin, conservée sur ce point dans l'édition d'Osterwald de 1724, l'a été égaleinent dans la nôtre, comme plus fidèle et exprimant plûs formelle ment la divinité de Jésus-Christ.") After this we cannot wonder at seeing

in the Report a profession of unity

with Roman Catholics on the subject of the Trinity (p. 121), or at finding one of the orators describing Christ as the "Saviour-God, who perished on the Cross;" but we confess ourselves a little surprised at some semipapistical language with regard to the Virgin Mary (p. 131). This comes from the Lutherans, and the Reform ed suffer it no doubt as tending to conciliate their Roman Catholic neigh

bours.

With the Report we have received Bulletins 15 and 16 of the Society, subsequently published. The former of these gives an account, which is truly French, of the distribution of Bibles in a country-school, as "Wisdom-prizes." On this occasion, the President addressed the successful candidates, and one sentence of his speech is a curious specimen of Bible - Protestantism: "On this subject (of the Bible) flee all discussion; your piety would be destroyed by it and toleration would be injured." The words must surely be stolen from some Romish Priest's charge to his flock against the use of the Bible. In these Bulletins and in the Report itself much is said of M. Stapfer's visit to the last Annual Meeting of the Bible Society in London. His Speech on this occasion is translated, and all the compliments to him and praises of him are carefully preserved. He makes a special report of his mission, the accuracy of which may be judged of from his describing the friends of the Bible Society under the general term of "Worshipers of

Christ," and from his representing it as common for the English Dissenters to express their wish of seeing the National Church maintain its authority untouched. These publications are full of eulogiums on the late Mr. Owen, one of the Secretaries of the Bible Society. The Report contains an Eloge" upon him of thirty pages. His merits were doubtless great in relation to the Bible Society; but it is a real injury to his memory to speak of his learning, talents and virtues as if they were never equalled and the loss of them can never be supplied.

66

SIR,

Nov. 1823. attention of your readers to ILL you allow me to call the what appears to me a striking proof of the progress of those liberal opinions which it is the main object of your Repository to advocate and diffuse? In the Quarterly Review for last September is an article intitled "Buckland's Reliquiae Diluvianæ,” in which I found, not without surprise and I may say delight, some observations so congenial to the opinions which I have always been taught to entertain, that I could not help giving way to a sort of triumphant feeling. It is true I am about as much entitled to triumph as the private who wears a Waterloo medal for having during the battle been somewhere within sound of the cannonading; but one cannot help sympathizing in the triumph of one's party or principles, and we by-standers are apt to forget that we have no right to appropriate to ourselves any part of the glory.

You, Sir, have always advocated the principle that a liberal interpretation of the Scriptures was most conducive to the interests of religion. Point after point has been contended, and though the opponents have struggled desperately and refused to own their defeat, we have seen them gradually abandoning the object of contention, and cautiously avoiding to excite fresh discussion; but I am not aware that so bold an avowal of this fact has ever been made as is contained in the following extracts from the Quarterly Review.

P. 162. "Others object to it,"

« AnteriorContinua »