ship, is altogether monstrous and absurd. Besides, in the present case, the supposition is at variance with facts. So far from the Jewish worship being formed on the model of the Egyptian rites, in order to meet the perverted taste which the people had contracted inthe land of their captivity, we know that they were led about in the wilderness forty years, till the generation who came out of Egypt had perished, without being permitted to enter that country where their religious rites could be observed in perfection. The generation who entered Canaan were uncontaminated with the pagan ceremonies of which their fathers were wit nesses; and, lest they should become corrupted with any species of false worship, they were required to extirpate completely the race of idolators who were previously in possession of the land that had been assigned them by God. Nay, in the book of statutes with which they were furnished, express warning was given against imitating the conduct or practising the rites of any heathen nation what. ever, with special reference to Egypt and Canaan. 'Speak unto the children of Israel,' said Jehovah to Moses, and say unto them, I am the Lord your God. AFTER THE DO. INGS OF THE LAND OF EGYPT WHEREIN YE DWELT, SHALL YE NOT DO; and AFTER THE DOINGS OF THE LAND OF CANAAN, whither I bring you, SHALL YE NOT DO; neither shall ye walk in THEIR ORDINANCES. Ye shall do My judg. ments, and keep MINE ordinances, to walk therein; I am the Lord ** God." your How can it be thought, after this, that the Levitical rites were formed on the model of the Egyptian ceremonies? Or what language can more deci. dedly express the marked opposition that existed betwixt the ordinances of the heathen and the Lord's ordinances? In addition to these things it may be observed, that it is more reasonable to suppose the Levitical economy was formed with the view of preserving the Israelites from idolatry, than that it was itself an imitation of an idolatrous system.

6

Others, again, suppose that the sacrifices of the Jews were mere emblems of holiness, or memorials of divine placability, and not types of a better sacrifice at all. That they served these purposes, along with others, might perhaps be safely granted; but that such was their sole use

Lev. xviii. 2-4:

and design cannot be so easily conceded. It must occur to every sober thinker on the subject, that for these purposes they were not indispensably requisite, there being other methods of expressing the same things. Moreover, it must be admitted, that a great deal more was signified by them. Nor is it unworthy of notice, that neither the holiness nor the placability of God, as we have seen in another department of the subject, can be shown to consist with the pardon of sin, on any other principle than that of an atonement. And it is not a little unfortunate for the supporters of this opinion, that the cases in which symbols of the ho liness and placability of God were most necessary, such as murder and adultery, did not admit of sacrifices being offered at all.

It has, also, been maintained, in opposition to the view we have taken of the Levitical economy, that it was not the sacrifices which made atonement, but the appearance of the high priest in the holy of holies. From this it is inferred, that the death of Christ constituted no part of his sacerdotal work, the whole of which, it is alleged, was performed in heaven. It is sufficient, in reply, to remark, that the appearance of the high priest in the inner sanctuary presupposed the offering of a sacrifice. Unless a sa. crifice had been previously offered on the brazen altar, he could not enter within the veil, at least his entering could serve no purpose whatever; the blood of the burnt-offering had to be carried by him into the holy place and sprinkled upon the mercy-seat. The one was as much a part of his priestly functions as the other; and if the latter prefigured Christ in any part of his sacerdotal service, so also did the former; to separate them is to put asunder what God has joined together.

But the view which is most commonly taken by the modern enemies of Christ's atonement, is, that although the sacrifices of the law were real and proper sacrifices, so far from being types of Christ, the sacrificial language used respecting him in the new testament is employed only figuratively, in allusion to the customs and practices of the Jews, with a view to conciliate that people to the Christian religion. It is wonderful that this position should ever have been maintained, considering how contradictory it is to scripture and to reason. The very same terms are so often applied to the sacrifices of the law and to that of

Christ, that, if the latter is not a real and proper sacrifice, the language of scripture seems fitted to mislead rather than instruct. Indeed, the object of the whole epistle to the Hebrews seems to be lost sight of by those who hold the opinion we are now considering. The design of this part of scripture evidently is, to remove the objections of the Jews to the Christian economy, by showing that every thing which was possessed under the law is enjoyed in equal, nay greater, perfection under the gospel ;-that Christianity has its high priest, and its sacrifice, and its sanctuary, as well as Judaism. And are we to suppose that the privileges and blessings of the new dispensation, which the apostle describes by such language, are merely figurative, shadowy emblems and not substantial realities; and that all his powerful reasoning, to secure the attachment of the Jews to the religion of Jesus, is built on a deception, and consists only of a well-managed trick in which a disingenuous use is made of the language of accommodation? Is it not infinitely more worthy of the character of an inspired writer to believe, that he affirms, what undoubtedly his words are calculated and designed to convey, that the import of the legal ceremonies is completely fulfill. ed in the Lord Jesus Christ? The theory in question reverses the scriptural order of relation between the rites of the law and the privileges of the gospel. In innumerable instances are the former spoken of as types, figures, sha. dows, of which the antitype, the reality, the substance is af. firmed to be Christ. But, if the sacrifice of Christ was only figurative, this order is inverted; the sacrifice, sanctuary, and high priest of the new dispensation are the shadows of which those under the law are the substance. Nothing more can require to be said to expose the unsoundness of the view on which we are animadverting. Yet we can. not help remarking, how much more reasonable and natural it is to suppose, as the Jewish religion undoubtedly possesses a less degree of perfection than the Christian, that the language employed under the former should derive its complexion from what was to exist under the latter, than the reverse. It is surely more likely that the less perfect system should look forward to the more perfect, than that the more perfect should go back to the less perfect. It ap. pears a more rational mode of proceeding, to construct a scaffolding with reference to the form and dimensions of

a contemplated building, than to shape the building agree. ably to a scaffolding which happened to exist before. In like manner, it is more reasonable to view the sacrifi cial language in use under the law as taking its rise from the reality of that sacrifice which was afterwards to exist, than to suppose that such language is employed with reference to the latter only in accommodation to the modes of speaking in use under a more imperfect economy. In short, it were much nearer the truth to maintain, that the only real and proper sacrifice is that of Christ, and that all others were only figures of it. This is the substance; the rest were shadows. Which are a SHADOW of things to come,' says Paul when treating of the Levitical rites, but THE BODY IS OF CHRIST.'

6

The futility of all other views of the Jewish economy, thus confirms the sentiment before expressed, of its figura. tive reference to Christ-the only view which satisfactorily explains its usages, or comports with the wisdom of its divine Author; and which infallibly conducts, as we shall see, to an irrefragable argument in favour of the doctrine of atonement.

V. We are now prepared to deduce, from the preceding evidence, an argument in favour of the atoning nature of Christ's death.

The sacrifices of the law, we have seen, were expiatory and vicarious;--these expiatory and vicarious sacrifices were designed prefigurations of the death of the Lord Jesus Christ;--THEREFORE, the death of the Lord Jesus Christ was expiatory and vicarious too. Such is our argument. If the premises are admitted, the inference can. not be refused. The type and the antitype must corres. pond in every essential point. Nothing was so charac teristic of the typical sacrifices as their propitiatory nature : and, if the antitype possess not this quality, the whole typical economy is nullified. In this case the sacrifices of the law were useless, nay, worse than useless; they were positively hurtful; they were fitted to mislead more than to assist the ancient worshipper. They taught him, as plainly as symbolical language could teach, to look forward to a sacrifice which should be a real substitute for the sins of men. If, therefore, we hold that the death and sacrifice of Christ were destitute of every thing atoning in their nature, we must be prepared to admit that the en

tire Levitical economy was a divinely established system of delusion—a grave imposture palmed upon a whole na tion by the express appointment of God. The admission of the doctrine of Christ's atoning sacrifice can alone save

us from this blasphemous assumption. On this principle, the legal dispensation admits of an easy solution; it appears to be not simply harmless but useful, highly useful, and every way worthy of its righteous and beneficent Author.

It is not possible to conclude this section, without recommending to our readers the diligent study of the Levitical institutes, particularly those respecting sacrifice. This we would enjoin, not as matter of vain curiosity, but of profitable and delightful instruction. Without this, the beauty and force of many parts of the new testament scriptures must be lost. An acquaintance with the laws respecting the daily oblations, the paschal lamb, the scape goat, and such like, cannot fail to afford valuable assistance in understanding the most important doctrines of the Christian faith. The spiritual reader, as he peruses the pages of the law, will never be without sufficient matter to remind him of the great High Priest, who is passed into the heavens, the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world, the Lord Jesus Christ by whom we have receiv. ed the atonement. When burdened with sin, he will learn to put his hand by faith on the head of the blessed Surety, by whom all his iniquities may be carried to the land of forgetfulness. From the bleeding victim of Calvary, his thoughts will be conducted to the heavenly sanctuary, where the true Priest appears in the presence of God for us, not without blood.

In connexion with the institutes of the law, let the epis. tle to the Hebrews be made the subject of devout inves. tigation. The latter records the fulfilment of the former. This masterpiece of skilful reasoning is adapted not to Jews only, but to all who need a priest, a sacrifice, a Saviour. Every sinner of the family of man will find here what is suited to his case, if he has only the wisdom to perceive and the grace to improve it. The dignity of the Christian high priest, the worth of his sacritice, the effica cy of his intercessions, are here set forth in the most lucid and impressive style; and nowhere can the sin-burdened