66

In the parable of the vineyard, the Savior foretold, in a very intelligible manner, that his death would be effected by persecutors. The prophets that had been sent to the Jews, he denominated "servants," while he took to himself the rank and title of an only Son. Though the Jews had persecuted the prophets, "beating some and killing some; "—yet having one Son, God sent him, saying, they will reverence my Son." But " they took him, and killed him, and cast him out of the vineyard." Mark xii. 1-9. How could Christ have more clearly represented that his sufferings would be of a nature similar to the sufferings of the prophets that had been persecuted even unto death. Besides, Jesus was so far from representing that his sufferings would be a substitute for the sufferings of his enemies, that he forewarned them that God would destroy the murderers of his Son.

There is still further evidence that Christ foretold his sufferings, not as effects of God's avenging justice, but as the effects of persecuting malignity. A little before the account of the transfiguration, Matthew says,-" From that time forth Jesus began to show unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day." Matt. xvi. 21.

From this passage, it would seem that Matthew here meant to give the substance of what Jesus "from that time forth" communicated to his Apostles respecting the sufferings that he was to endure, and what would be the nature and causes of his death. Mark and Luke both mention this instance of Christ's foretelling his death. Besides this, Luke mentions what the angels said on this subject to the women at the sepulchre of Jesus, after his resurrec

tion. Perceiving that the object of the women was to see the body of Jesus, the angels said to them,-"He is not here, but is risen. Remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee, saying,-The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again." Luke xxiv. 6, 7.

Such were the predictions of the Messiah respecting his own sufferings, without any intimation that to the "many things" which he should suffer from "the elders and chief priests," would be superadded infinitely greater sufferings from the avenging justice of God.

3. With respect to the private interview of Christ with his disciples a little before his death, it may be observed, that it appears to have been his desire not only to instruct them, but to comfort them, and to suggest considerations adapted to fortify their minds, and to prepare them for the awful event which was then at hand. If then he had understood that his sufferings were to be a substitute for the punishment due to the Apostles and all other sinners, that this was the only ground on which any sinner could be forgiven, and that this doctrine was to be the theme of Apostolic preaching; how natural it must have been for him in that interview to disclose the all-important facts! Surely nothing could have been more natural or more interesting; yet we look in vain to find one idea of this kind, in any part of the interview. I can account for this silence on no other ground, than that Jesus had no such ideas to communicate,-in other words, that he did not understand that his sufferings were to be a substitute for the punishment due to sinners.

4. If the sufferings of Christ were known to him as a substitute for the punishment due to sinners, and the only

ground on which God pardons the penitent, it would be natural to expect to find these essential ideas clearly communicated in what he said of the day of judgment and future retribution. But in all he said on these subjects, I have not found the least allusion to such a doctrine, or such a mode of divine forgiveness. On the contrary, the Messiah, in unequivocal language, represented that men will be rewarded or punished according to their own characters or works. The faithful servant is to be rewarded according to his improvement of the talents committed to his trust. The slothful servant is to be punished for hiding his talent in the earth, or neglecting to improve it. To one class of people, the King or Judge will say,"Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you." But why this mark of approbation and acceptance? Does the Judge say,- For I suffered an equivalent for all the miseries which justice could have inflicted on you, and ye are justified by the imputation of my righteousness? Not a word of all this is to be found as uttered by the Judge. But in assigning the reasons for his approbation, he says:-" For I was hungry, and ye gave me food; I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink; I was a stranger, and ye lodged me; I was naked, and ye clothed me; I was sick, and ye assisted me; I was in prison, and ye visited me. Then the righteous will answer him,-Lord, when did we see thee hungry, and fed thee; or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When did we see thee a stranger, and lodged thee; or naked, and clothed thee? When did we see thee sick or in prison, and visited thee?

'

The King will reply to them, inasmuch as ye have done

-Verily I say unto you, that this to any the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me." Matth. xxv. 35-40. Campbell's translation.

Is it then to be believed, that the Savior himself would have given such an account of the ground or reasons of our acceptance with God, had he supposed that the penitent can be justified or pardoned only on the ground of substituted sufferings, or the imputation of his righteousness? The followers of Christ are by him encouraged to expect that all their benevolent works will be remembered at the great day, and rewarded by grace. Instead of teaching them that they are to be rewarded only on the ground of what He has done and suffered for them, he taught that they are to be rewarded according to what they shall have done and suffered for HIM. What they do for his disciples, he accounts as done to himself, and not even the giving a cup of water to a disciple in the name of a disciple, is to fail of a gracious reward. He also pronounces them blessed, who suffer for righteousness' sake, and assures them that great shall be their reward in heaven. Is not this a perfect contrast to much of the preaching of the present day?

CHAPTER XIX.

Apostolic Views of Christ's Sufferings.

If the Apostles had understood the sufferings of Christ as a substitute for the future punishment of those who obey the gospel, it is reasonable to suppose, that this doctrine would have been clearly stated and urged on the day of pentecost, after they had been so wonderfully filled with

the Spirit of God. The death of Christ was then a recent event; it was the great topic of conversation and inquiry; and it was distinctly brought to view in the first sermon of Peter on that occasion, and in the subsequent sermons recorded in the Acts of the Apostles. The preachers were very careful to show that Jesus was the Christ, and that his death and resurrection accorded with the ancient predictions respecting the Messiah, and were therefore proofs that Jesus was the person whose coming had been foretold by Moses and other prophets. Had these preachers supposed also that the sufferings of Jesus were a substitute for their own future punishment,—the future punishment of all who should believe on him, and that this was the only ground on which God could pardon any sinner; is it possible that they should have omitted to say a single word on this doctrine, in all their sermons which were put on record?

The first sermon of Peter had a powerful effect. The hearers were "pricked in their hearts,"-filled with concern, and exclaimed," Men and brethren, what shall we do?" Peter answered,-" Repent and be baptized every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. Then they that gladly received his word were baptized; and the same day there were added unto them about 3000 souls." We have, therefore, strong evidence that such views of the atonement as have long been prevalent, were not entertained by the Apostles, and were not necessary to the most salutary effects in preaching the gospel.

We have in the Acts, sketches of a number of Paul's sermons, as well as of Peter's; and it appears that Paul