Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

of death were sown in it, and he became a mortal man he was, moreover, ashamed, fled at the voice of his Maker, and vainly attempted to hide himself from his presence. Besides, sentence of death was pronounced upon him by his offended Sovereign; and he became LEGALLY dead. In this sense, he actually died on the very day of his transgression; and thus Jehovah himself has, by his treatment of the culprit, interpreted the real meaning of his own threatening.

That eternal death was involved in the penalty annexed to the first covenant, and that it is most unequivocally denounced against all impenitent sinners, we assuredly believe. But it is plain the word eternal was not used in the threatening against Adam; and it seems to us, that if it had been as plainly and positively declared that he should surely and personally die eternally, in case of violating the covenant, as it was that he should surely die on the day of his eating the forbidden fruit, his condition would have been hopeless. For we believe that when Jehovah condescends

Q

to speak to us in human language, he is to be understood according to the common use of words, and that he always means what he says. His truth is pledged, not only in his predictions, as has been taught by some, but in his threatenings too. In the latter he as really means what he says, as in the former: and in fact all threatenings have the nature of predictions. Had, therefore, the original commination been expressed in the terms we have adverted to, the case of Adam would have been remediless. But these awful terms were not employed. The threatening was denounced. in such language as to render his salvation consistent with Divine truth; in language corresponding to those schemes. of mercy which were about to open their treasures of grace and love on this fallen world. Eternal death is now denounced against every sinner; but surely the meaning of the threatening is not that every sinner of our race shall certainly die. eternally; for then who could be saved? The import obviously is, that every sinner

deserves this tremendous punishment; and that all who refuse to rely on the satisfaction for sin made by Jesus Christ, shall most certainly endure eternal misery. The true meaning, then, of the original penalty was, that Adam should surely die on the day of his disobedience in the way explained; but not that he should as certainly die eternally. He became indeed subject to eternal death, just as sinners now are; but his salvation was as consistent with the language of the penalty and its real import, as that of any of his posterity who lie under the same dreadful curse.

From the history of Adam no evidence can be derived, to prove that the penalty of the law has failed in its execution, or that the God of truth has ever acted, in a single instance, contrary to the true meaning of his words. Our first parent actually did die, according to the real import of the threatening; and as he from the first expected to be the progenitor of a numerous posterity, and at the time of his fall had no posterity, we have reason to believe that

he did not himself understand by the threatening, that his mortal life was to terminate on the very day of his transgressing the command of his Maker; and both promises and threatenings are obligatory, only in the sense in which they are really understood by the different parties concerned in them, at the time of making them. Jesus Christ, the great Redeemer, did truly, endure, as has been proved, the penalty of the law; and if Adam has been saved, it was through the vicarious sacrifice and satisfaction for sin, made by the promised seed of the woman.

Sincerely yours.

LETTER IX.

The Justice of God.

MY DEAR BROTHER,

WE have seen how much more honour is reflected on the truth of God, by the doctrine we teach, than by that taught by our brethren. Let us proceed to inquire in which of the two schools, the honour of DIVINE JUSTICE is most exhibited.

Contemplating the cross of Christ in the light in which our theory presents it, we immediately see a glorious display of Divine justice. Is an explanation of that awful spectacle required? Is the reason of the sufferings of the immaculate Redeemer demanded? We reply, it was right that he should suffer, because he assumed the place of sinners. Had he not become their substitute, justice could have had no claim on him, for the payment of their debt. But as, in infinite compassion to them in their

« AnteriorContinuar »