Earlier text: General ArticlesExpecting the Saviour,
By Dr. M'Caul
AN ESSENTIAL FEATURE IN TRUE CHRISTIAN CHARACTER.
WE now proceed to consider, particularly, what this "waiting" is, as expressed in the text by the words, "looking for that blessed hope;" and to show, from the nature of the duty, that the practice of waiting for the second advent is an essential feature in the character of a true Christian. The glorious coming of the Lord is represented in Scripture as the promised return of a kind Master to his faithful servants. To wait for that which is promised is an exercise of faith. It is likened to the sudden coming of a thief, against which we have been warned. To take heed to the warnings of God is an effect of holy fear. It is compared to the return of the beloved Bridegroom; that the bride should wait with earnest desires for his return, is an evidence of love. It is set forth as the return of the Lord to his disciples, for which he commandeth them to watch; to wait for it, then, is an act of obedience. But in whichever of these four points of view we consider the practice of waiting for the second advent, whether as an exercise of faith, an effect of holy fear, an evidence of love, or an act of obedience, it is equally an essential feature in the character of a true Christian. Faith is an essential feature of a true Christian, "for without faith it is impossible to please God." The promises of God are the object of faith; the promise of the Lord's return is one of those most frequently repeated. Where then is faith in this promise, if the practice of waiting for it is wanting? Remember, brethren, that faith is an operative principle, and, whatever be its object, it produces certain effects. When faith fixes upon the promise of forgiveness of sins, it drives to prayer and confession. When it lays hold upon the promise of the Holy Spirit for sanctification, it produces earnest supplication that will not be silenced until the promise is fulfilled. When it looks to the often repeated promise of the Lord's return, it generates a habit of waiting for it with patience. The servants who believe that their Lord will return according to his promise, gird their loins, put on their best apparel, and hold all things in readiness; and though the shades of evening should set in, they despair not; and though the darkness of midnight should begin to pass, they slumber not; but keep their lights burning, and hearken in watchful silence to every distant sound that may perhaps give notice of their Lord's approach. And, if they speak, if the silence of expectation be broken, it is to rouse the slumbering, or to ask, "Watchman, what of the night?" or to discourse about the happy meeting; for their Lord has promised to return, and they believe his promise. Faith in the promise necessarily produces these effects. When, then, the effects follow not, where is the faith? And where there is no practice of waiting, what evidence is there of faith in the Lord's promise? Some may perhaps say that it is not yet time to expect the Lord's advent; it would therefore be folly to wait for it; when it is near, it will be time enough to look for it. If there be in this congregation any in this faithless state of mind, let me remind them that this is exactly the excuse of the unprofitable servant whose portion is appointed with the unbelievers. Mark these words, "with the unbelievers." He says, "My Lord delayeth his coming." It is not so near—no need of watching yet! You will perhaps answer, We are watching for death, for death will certainly arrest us before the Lord come again. I ask in reply, Where has the Lord commanded you to watch for death, instead of watching for his second coming? Tell me the chapter and the verse. I ask you in the second place, What reason have you for thinking that death will surprise you sooner than the second advent? Who revealed to you the day and hour of which no man knoweth? You will reply, No man hath revealed it to me; my belief that death will precede the second advent is founded on no declaration of Scripture; my own reason tells me of it. So many generations have already passed away without the Lord's coming that it is now most probable that the present will pass away in like manner. If this, be your mode of argument, then beyond all doubt you believe more firmly in the probable conclusions of your own reason than in the words of your Lord and Master. Where then is your faith? And is your likeness to those disciples of whom our Lord says, "Blessed are those servants whom the Lord when he cometh shall find watching." But, whatever you may think of your state, you cannot possibly deny that steadfastly to trust in Christ's promise, confidently to expect its fulfillment, and humbly to obey his commands, is an indispensable evidence of the reality of that faith, without which no man has a right to esteem himself as one of Christ's true disciples. This practice of waiting is also compared to the state of a householder, who expects his house to be attacked, but knows not the hour when the thief may come. He therefore remains in a state of suspense and fear, and consequently of active vigilance. He knows that his property, and perhaps his life, are at stake; he therefore takes heed that his heart be not overcharged with surfeiting and drunkenness, or with the cares of this life, and so the thief come unawares. This represents the habit of holy fear in which the true Christian lives; contemplating the awful transactions of the great day of Christ's appearing, and remembering that it will come as a snare upon all them that dwell upon the earth; such a state of mind as the apostle describes, when he says, "We must all appear before the judgment-seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether he be good or bad; knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men." 2 Cor. 5:10, 11. Need I stop, my brethren, to prove that this is an essential feature in the character of a true Christian? No; your consciences assure you that no man is a true Christian without it. The coming of the Lord is likened also to the return of the Bridegroom long delayed but surely promised. And the Bridegroom is chief among ten thousand. To him the church owes life and liberty. He delivered her from death, and ransomed her from captivity. For he left his Father's house, forsook his Father's throne, and took upon himself the form of a servant, endured countless hardships, and suffered countless wrongs. And the church is not insensible to his love, nor indifferent to the promise of his coming. The days of his absence are days of mourning. "She seeketh him whom her soul loveth; she seeketh, and findeth him not." Songs 3:1. She counteth the days "until the winter be past, and the rain over and gone; until the fig-tree putteth forth her green figs," Songs 2:11-13; for that is the promised sign of his approach. She crieth, "Make haste my beloved." "The Spirit and the bride say, Come." And were it otherwise, were the church happy and content without her Saviour, careless and indifferent to his coming, where were her love? And when persons calling themselves Christians are perfectly satisfied with the present state of things, and utterly indifferent to the Lord's return, where is their love? Does that man really love the Lord Jesus Christ who almost never meditates upon his union with him? who never prays for his coming? who never looks at the signs of the times to see whether it be near? I speak not now of those who have never fled for refuge to the Saviour, and who have therefore no experience of his forgiving love (for them to pray for the Saviour's return would be presumption), but of those who profess to have found forgiveness of sins, and justification by faith. Have you no desire to behold him who purchased for you these blessings with his precious blood? to see him as he is, and be like him? to fall down before his throne, with a heart overflowing with gratitude? and to join in the glorious song of the redeemed, "Worthy is the Lamb that was slain"? But, whatever be your state, acknowledge that to wait in humble and earnest expectation for the Lord's return, as the bride waits for the bridegroom, is an evidence of love; and that love is an essential feature in the character of a true Christian. Lastly, to wait for the Lord's coming is an act of obedience, and without obedience to talk of faith, hope, love, or any other Christian grace, is nothing short of madness.
"Ye are my friends," saith our Lord, "if ye do whatsoever I command you." If, therefore, the Lord had but once given a command to watch for his second advent, it would have been sufficient to bind us to obedience; but I know of no command more frequently repeated in the New Testament than this. I have already, in this discourse, remarked how often it is insisted on. I will now only notice how often it occurs as a command. It occurs as an express and positive command at least eight times in the gospels (Matt. 24:42, 44; 15:13; Mark 13:33, 35, 37; Luke 12:35-40; 21:36), five times in the epistles (1 Thess. 5:1-6; Titus 2:12, 13; James 5:7, 8; 1 Pet. 4:7; 2 Pet. 3:14), and twice in the Revelation of St. John (Rev. 3:3; 16:15); altogether fifteen times. It is a command given in the most solemn manner, with a blessing attached to those who obey it ("Blessed are those servants whom the Lord, when he cometh, shall find watching"), and a curse pronounced upon them who disobey it ("They shall be cut asunder, and have their portion appointed with the unbelievers"). It is a command accompanied by a declaration that is applicable to all, so that no one can hold himself excepted. "What I say unto you I say unto all, Watch." It is a command so clearly expressed, and so exactly limited by the context, that it cannot be interpreted figuratively, nor wrested to apply to anything but the coming of the Lord in glory. For in the gospels it is preceded by an account of the judgment; and in the epistles, connected with the resurrection of the dead, or the conflagration of the world. What, then, is the state of a man who deliberately disobeys such a command as this? If obedience be at all times necessary, is it not in such a case indispensable? Will any man dare, under any pretext whatsoever, to dispense himself or others from such a command as this? Or can any man so grossly deceive himself as to imagine that he is a true Christian when he is living in willful disobedience to his Lord's plainly revealed will? There is but one infallible mark of a true Christian,—obedience to his Lord's commands; and he that waiteth not for the Lord's coming, hath it not. He may possess great knowledge of the mysteries of the gospel, but he is "a child of disobedience." You see, then, brethren, that whether we look at the express testimonies of Scripture, or consider the nature of waiting for the second advent, as it is set forth in Scripture, as an exercise of faith, a state of holy fear, an effect of love, or an act of obedience, my assertion is true; the practice of waiting for the second advent of the Lord, is an essential feature in the character of a true Christian—Dr. M'Caul. Keeping the Eye on Jesus.
By Dr. Cuyler
ONE of the peculiar glories of Christianity is that it presents to us—what no other religion furnishes—a perfect model for our daily conduct. No other religion can produce a Lord Jesus Christ. And Christ is Christianity. It is not the gospel system that saves us. It is the gospel's Redeemer. That preaching is the most effective which most clearly and persuasively presents Jesus as the divine Saviour, Substitute, and Surety; that life is the most symmetrical and holy which is the most closely copied after him as the divine model.149 There is not a more beautiful episode in the life of our Lord than that one which occurred at the beginning of his last supper with his disciples. Jesus, "knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, that he was come from God and was going to God," rose from the table and laid off his upper garment. Girding himself with a towel, he takes a copper basin, and does what none but a slave was accustomed to do—he washes his disciples' feet! Having performed this wonderful act of humility and unselfishness, he says to them: "I have given you an example that ye should do as I have done to you." Again, the enthusiastic Peter, in his first epistle, tells us that "Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example that ye should follow his steps." The Greek word signifies a writing-copy, such as is set for children in a school and to be closely imitated in every stroke of the pen. Paul has the same idea in his mind when he bids us to "look at Jesus, the author and the perfecter of our faith." And, if I were asked to give a simple golden counsel to a young convert, which could be easily remembered and which would be available for every emergency in life, it would be this: Keep your eye on Jesus. The godly Charles Simeon, of Cambridge, kept a portrait of the heroic missionary, Henry Martyn, hanging on the wall of his room. Looking up toward it he would often say: "There! See that blessed man! What an expression of countenance! No one looks at me as he does. He seems always to be saying to me: 'Be serious; be in earnest; don't trifle.'" Then, bowing towards the benign, thoughtful face of Martyn, Simeon would add: "No, I won't, I won't trifle." If there were an inspiration to earnestness always to be caught from looking at a noble and Christ-like man, how much more from looking at Christ himself. The divine Spirit has presented in the New Testament a matchless picture, and has hung it up, as it were, before our eyes. It is the infinitely beautiful countenance of my Lord and Master. It is "marred more than any other of the sons of men" by the traces of the struggle in Gethsemane and the agony on the cross. The most serene patience sits on that countenance, as when he "answered not a word" to Pilate, and as when he prayed "Father, forgive them. They know not what they do." Every lineament of that face is love. Holiness spreads an ineffable grandeur over it, which no Raffaelle or Da Vinci can reproduce. Even at this moment a large painting of the majestic face of my Saviour hangs before me on my study-wall. But that is a mere pigment. Ten thousand fold more real, more inspiring, more soul-rousing is the image to my eye of him who ever says: "Look at me; learn of ME." Yes, and how earnestly he says to all of us: Live for me! That face meets all of us who profess to be his followers, in all the multiplied places, scenes, and emergencies of our brief lives. Sometimes we recoil from a disagreeable duty or a painful load. How promptly those lips of our Lord seem to be speaking to us: "Whosoever will not take up his cross and come after me is not worthy of me." At another time we are cast down with disappointment; perhaps a chill of despair is settling over our hearts. Just then the dear divine face draws very close to us, and we hear the warm words: "Let not your heart be troubled; neither let it be afraid. Lo! I am with you always. My grace is sufficient for thee." When we are tempted to a resentful word or a dishonest deed, the countenance rebukes us with the admonition: "Wound me not in the house of my friends." As Peter's tears were started by a single look of his grieved Master, so ours may well be stirred by every act of disloyalty to him. And when we have come back, ashamed and disgraced, from a cowardly desertion of the right in an hour of sharp trial, oh! how that face upbraids us, as Jesus seems to say: "Could ye not watch with me one hour?" Evermore is that divine Monitor and Model before our eyes teaching, rebuking, inspiring, encouraging, comforting, and guiding us. Let me fasten my gaze on him! Let me open my ears to him! Let me be ever clinging to his garments and treading in his footsteps, that wherever he is I may be also! Certain choice spirits of the human race have shone in some peculiar virtue, as Joseph in chastity, Daniel in integrity, Luther in courage, Wilberforce and Elizabeth Fry in philanthropy. But these were only imperfect copies of the divine ideal of life set before them. Let us keep our eyes steadfastly upon One who embraced in himself all virtues and excellences in full perfection, and who in every possible point is an example for us. Our daily and hourly conflict is with sin. But Jesus did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth. Temptations came to him as really as they come to us, for he was a man tempted just as we are. His conflicts on the mountain, in the temple, and in the garden were no sham encounters or mere symbolic exhibitions. Jesus conquered temptations by never presumptuously running into danger; by resisting first suggestions to evil and by using that sword of the Spirit which is the word of God. On the mountain he met Satan with the weapon of Holy Writ. Christ is our model too in consecration to the Father's will. His meat was to perform that will. His untiring motto was: "My Father worketh hitherto, and I work." Between the activities of the Father in Heaven and of the incarnate Son there was no discord and no jar. When I can lay down my daily plans of life upon God's revealed Word and find them fit, then what satisfaction does the humblest act bring to me! Ever, too, let us observe how utterly unselfish Jesus was; what journeyings, to reach single cases of suffering; what braving of popular scorn, to befriend the publican and the outcast; what endless expenditure of sympathy; what tireless going about doing good! When that gentle spirit of his was aroused by the sight of hypocrisy and falsehood, how he could scathe and scorch the Pharisee with his righteous indignation! Those overflowings of indignation were the surcharge of his holiness. When I behold my Master anathematizing the "whited sepulchers" of sin, and yet pronouncing pardon on a penitent harlot, I learn just how I should keep in proper poise my hatred for iniquity, and yet my pitying love for those who "are overtaken in a fault." And so let every day of my life be spent before my great Teacher's face and my eyes never wander from that wonderful form! As soon let the drowning man forget the plank which sustains him in the sea as for me to forget the Saviour who upholds me with his omnipotent arm. As soon let the home-bound mariner lose sight of the light-house which guides him to his haven as for you and me to lose sight of Him who is the way, the truth, and the life. Reynolds used to say: "I only look at the best pictures. A bad one spoils my eye." In like manner shall we find that the study of our King in his beauty shall purify our vision; and the more we look at Jesus the more shall we look like Jesus.—Dr. Cuyler. Early Life of St. Paul.
By Conybeare; Howson
Of the exact period of his birth we possess no authentic information. From a passage in a sermon attributed to Chrysostom it has been inferred that he was born in the year 2 of our era. The date is not improbable, but the genuineness of the sermon is suspected; and if it was the undoubted work of the eloquent Father, we have no reason to believe that he possessed any certain means of ascertaining the fact. Nor need we be anxious to possess the information. We have a better chronology than that which reckons by years and months. We know that he was a young man at the time of Stephen's martyrdom (Acts 7: 58), and therefore we know what were the features of the period and what the circumstances of the world at the beginning of his eventful life. He must have been born in the later years of Herod or the earlier of his son Archelaus. It was the strongest and most flourishing time of the reign of Augustus. The world was peace, the pirates of the Levant were dispersed, and Cilicia was lying at rest or in stupor, with other provinces, under the wide shadow of the Roman power. Many governors had ruled there since the days of Cicero. Athenodorus, the emperor's tutor, had been one of them. It was about the time when Horace and Mæcenas died, with others whose names will never be forgotten; and it was about the time when Caligula was born, with others who were destined to make the world miserable. Thus is the epoch fixed in the manner in which the imagination most easily apprehends it. During this pause in the world's history Paul was born. It was a pause, too, in the history of the sufferings of the Jews. That lenient treatment which had been begun by Julius Cæsar was continued by Augustus, and the days of severity were not yet come, when Tiberius and Claudius drove them into banishment and Caligula oppressed them with every mark of contumely and scorn. We have good reason to believe that at the period of the apostle's birth the Jews were unmolested at Tarsus, where his father lived and enjoyed the rights of a Roman citizen. It is a mistake to suppose that this citizenship was a privilege which belonged to the members of the family as being natives of this city. Tarsus was not a municipium, nor was it a colonia, like Philippi in Macedonia (Acts 16: 12) or Antioch in Pisidia, but it was a "free city" (urbs libera), like the Syrian Antioch and its neighbor city, Seleucia on the sea. Such a city had the privilege of being governed by its own magistrates, and was exempted from the occupation of a Roman garrison, but its citizens did not necessarily possess the civitas of Rome. Tarsus had received great benefits both from Julius Cæsar and Augustus, but the father of Paul was not on that account a Roman citizen. This privilege had been granted to him or had descended to him as an individual right; he might have purchased it for a "large sum" of money; but it is more probable that it came to him as the reward of services rendered during the civil wars to some influential Roman. That Jews were not unfrequently Roman citizens we learn from Josephus, who mentions in the Antiquities some even of the equestrian order who were illegally scourged and crucified by Florus at Jerusalem, and (what is more to our present point) enumerates certain of his countrymen who possessed the Roman franchise at Ephesus in that important series of decrees relating to the Jews which were issued in the time of Julius Cæsar and are preserved in the second book of the Jewish War. The family of Paul were in the same position at Tarsus as those who were Jews of Asia Minor and yet citizens of Rome at Ephesus; and thus it came to pass that while many of his contemporaries were willing to expend "a large sum" in the purchase of "this freedom" the apostle himself was "free-born." The question of the double name of "Saul" and "Paul" will require our attention hereafter, when we come in the course of our narrative to that interview with Sergius Paulus in Cyprus coincidently with which the appellation in the Acts of the Apostles is suddenly changed. Many opinions have been held on this subject, both by ancient and modern theologians. At present it will be enough to say that we cannot overlook the coincidence, or believe it accidental, yet it is most probable that both names were borne by him in his childhood—that "Saul" was the name of his Hebrew home, and "Paul" that by which he was known among the Gentiles. It will be observed that Paulus, the name by which he is always mentioned after his departure from Cyprus, and by which he always designates himself in his epistles, is a Roman not a Greek word. And it will be remembered that among those whom he calls his "kinsmen" in the epistle to the Romans, two of the number, Junia and Lucius, have Roman names, while the others are Greek (Rom. 16: 7, 11, 21). All this may point to a strong Roman connection. These names may have something to do with that honorable citizenship which was an heirloom in the household; and the appellation "Paulus" may be due to some such feelings as those which induced the historian Josephus to call himself "Flavius," in honor of Vespasian and the Flavian family. If we turn now to consider the social position of the apostle's father and family, we cannot on the one hand confidently argue, from the possession of the citizenship, that they were in the enjoyment of affluence and outward distinction. The civitas of Rome, though at that time it could not be purchased without heavy expense, did not depend upon any conditions of wealth where it was bestowed by authority. On the other hand, it is certain that the manual trade which we know that Paul exercised cannot be adduced as an argument to prove that his circumstances were narrow and mean; still less, as some have imagined, that he lived in absolute poverty. It was a custom among the Jews that all boys should learn a trade. "What is commanded of a father towards his son?" asks a Talmudic writer. "To circumcise him, to teach him the law, to teach him a trade." Rabbi Judah saith, "He that teacheth not his son a trade does the same as if he taught him to be a thief;" and Rabban Gamaliel saith, "He that hath a trade in his hand, to what is he like? he is like a vineyard that is fenced." And if in compliance with this good and useful custom of the Jews, the father of the young Cilician sought to make choice of a trade which might fortify his son against idleness or against adversity, none would occur to him more naturally than the profitable occupation of the making of tents, the material of which was hair-cloth, supplied by the goats of his native province and sold in the markets of the Levant by the well-known name of cilicium. The most reasonable conjecture is that his father's business was concerned with these markets, and that, like many of his dispersed countrymen, he was actively occupied in the traffic of the Mediterranean Coasts; and the remote dispersion of those relations whom he mentions in his letter from Corinth to Rome is favorable to this opinion. But whatever might be the station and employment of his father or his kinsmen, whether they were elevated by wealth above, or depressed by poverty below, the average of the Jews of Asia Minor and Italy, we are disposed to believe that this family were possessed of that highest respectability which is worthy of deliberate esteem. The strict piety of Paul's ancestors has already been remarked; some of his kinsmen embraced Christianity before the apostle himself, and the excellent discretion of his nephew will be the subject of our admiration when we come to consider the dangerous circumstances which led to the nocturnal journey from Jerusalem to Cæsarea (Acts 23). —Conybeare & Howson, Life and Epistles of St. Paul. SOME have thought, and Luther was among them, that there is a conflict between Paul and James on the subject of justification. But that is not the case. It is true that Paul says, in Rom. 3:28, that we are justified by faith without the deeds of the law, that is, without works. But that is altogether "for the remission of sins that are past;" see verses 23-26. Over the past, or for remission of past sins, our actions or obedience can have no influence whatever. Justification for sins past leaves the individual passively just before God; as Adam was just before God at his creation. He had not sinned; neither had he done any good. He had yet to form a character for himself. The God of love had created him with capacities, and given him opportunities; for the formation of a character. The past was all of the free act and gift of God. The future rested with himself. James (chap. 2,) is not speaking of the past—of that over which our actions have no control. He is speaking of the formation of character by our own actions. This is all accomplished after we are justified by faith. And when Paul speaks of the future—of the formation of character—he exalts works as highly as James does. Thus in Phil. 2:12, he writes:— "My beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." And this, again, shows the distinction between justification for past offenses, and salvation. Paul would never write: Work out your own justification,—using the term as it is used in Rom. 3, for it is impossible to do it. Such justification is by faith alone. But salvation is not by faith alone; it is by patient continuance in well-doing, seeking for glory, honor, and immortality, that we obtain eternal life. That this plan is perfectly consistent with free grace will be shown hereafter. But we must notice more fully the question, What does, and what does not save us? And, 1. We have seen that justification will not save us. By this we mean justification without any further work. He that is justified will be saved only if he endures to the end; if he patiently continues in well-doing; if he works out his own salvation with fear and trembling; if he adds to his faith, virtue, and all the Christian graces. Therefore the fact that he is or has been justified by faith is not a sufficient ground of assurance that he will be finally saved. Paul took this same view. Of his being, or having been, justified by faith no one could have a better assurance; yet he said: "But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection; lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway." 1 Cor. 9:27. The Revised Version of this text reads: "But I buffet [Gr. bruise] my body, and bring it into bondage; lest by any means, after that I have preached to others, I myself should be rejected." 2. The death of Christ does not save us. Let not the reader think that we undervalue the death of Christ; we fully believe that there is no remission without the shedding of blood, and that the precious blood of Christ alone cleanses from all unrighteousness. But we wish to correct an error into which very many have fallen; an error, which, we doubt not, has proved fatal to thousands. We say on this point as we said of justification, the fact that Christ died for man is no ground for assurance that he will be saved. If it is, then it gives assurance that all will be saved, for he died for all. "How can I be lost," inquires one, "since Christ has died to redeem my soul?" But he surely "tasted death for every man." Heb. 2:9. How, then, can any man be lost? That position is the very corner-stone of Universalism; an error full of deadly evils. Peter says of some that they deny the Lord who bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. 2 Pet. 2:1. No, we do not undervalue the death of Christ. But we would prevent or correct a perversion of an important truth by which the truth is made the ground of a false hope. But the hymn is triumphantly quoted: "Jesus paid it all." And then again the question is asked: "How can I be condemned, or lost, if Jesus paid all my debt? I must be free, for God is not so unjust as to demand a second payment of the same debt." We are not surprised when a Universalist asks this question, and makes this statement. It is quite appropriate to his position, and very necessary to his conclusion. And we must add, that, if the premise be correct, then his conclusion is unavoidable. But neither premise nor conclusion is correct. The error of that position lies in the fact that it makes no distinction between debt and crime. One may be compared to the other; and a case of debt may be used to illustrate (in part) criminal relations. But they are not the same. A crime is not of the nature of a debt; a debt is no evidence of the existence of a crime. It is true that a debt cannot be justly collected a second time. And it matters not whether it be paid by the debtor himself or by his friend; the principle holds good in either case. When the debt is paid he is no longer a debtor; no claim stands against him. But when a man commits a crime—a murder, for instance—and another volunteers to suffer the penalty, and lays down his life for that crime, the perpetrator of the crime is no less a criminal than he was before. His guilt remains; and if the declaration be strictly carried out: "He will by no means clear the guilty," Ex. 34:8, such an one would surely fall in the Judgment. If a debt be paid the debtor must go clear. But Christ did not die for man so that all must be saved for whom he died; but that they may be saved. The error which we would expose and correct really leaves no room for pardon. If my friend pays my debt, then my creditor does not give or forgive me the debt. Now if, in like manner, Christ pays our debt; if our sins are simply debts which may be and are paid by our substitute, then there can be no forgiveness. But the death of Christ answered no such purpose. As before said, his death makes our salvation possible but not necessary. Because he died for us God can forgive us without infringing on his infinite justice. It must appear evident to every one that if we are pardoned without a substitute, without any infliction of the penalty of our past sins, then justice is robbed of its due; for sin ought to be punished. That there is forgiveness in the gospel cannot be denied; and that the death of Christ was to answer the demand of infinite justice is plainly stated: "Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; to declare I say, at this time his righteousness, that he might be just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus." Roman 3:24-26. It is in this manner that the justice of God is vindicated, and we may be pardoned for the sake of our Surety. It is by such means that "Mercy and truth are met together; righteousness [justice] and peace have kissed each other." Ps. 85:10. But, while the apostle states very emphatically that it is through faith in his blood that remission is given, he, with equal clearness shows that the death of Christ does not save the sinner. In Rom. 5:10, in this same argument on justification, he says: "For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life." As we said before, the fact that Christ died for man does not at all insure his salvation. He must be reconciled to God by the death of his Son, and if thus reconciled (which is a voluntary work), and not otherwise, he may be saved by his life; that is, by the intercession of Christ as a priest. The main ground of this error, that the debt is so paid that the work of salvation is already completed, lies in the statement, so now so generally believed, that the atonement was made on the cross of Christ. The proof in the Scriptures is abundant that the slaying of the offering, or sacrifice, did not make atonement. It was preparatory to making the atonement. After the offering was slain the priest took the blood into the sanctuary, and made the atonement. See Lev. 4, and others, for special atonements, and Lev. 16 for the general atonement, on "the day of atonement" for all the people. It may indeed be affirmed that Christ is both the sacrifice and the priest. We may admit that; but he is not both at the same time. That is, he was not acting as a priest when he died on the cross. We have not space here to enlarge on this subject but will notice a few points in Paul's masterly argument to the Hebrews. 1. The sanctuary of the new covenant is in Heaven. 2. The priesthood of Christ is in Heaven—not on the earth. Please read Heb. 8:1-5. 3. Christ entered into Heaven by his own blood to appear before God for us. Heb. 9:24, 25. We remark that the atonement was always made in the sanctuary; the offering was never slain in the sanctuary. 4. The offering of Christ conformed strictly to the types in this respect. "For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp. Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate." Heb. 13:11, 12. He shed his blood without the gate, but as a priest he is set down on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the Heavens; a minister of the sanctuary and true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man. It is the blood that atones; the blood cleanses: but it is the priest who presents that blood before the shekinah who makes the atonement. In this is seen the harmony of the divine plan according to Paul's words in Rom. 5:10; reconciled to God by the death of his Son, which death makes salvation possible to the applicant; saved by his life, or priesthood, whereby the atonement is made, by which salvation is positive, fixed, certain. Not all for whom Christ died will be saved; but all for whom atonement is made, whose sins are blotted out, will be saved. There are so many errors extant on this subject that we need to guard against misapprehension on every point. It may be supposed that, in distinguishing between justification and salvation, we hold that even though a man be justified, if he dies in that state he may not be saved. But we hold to no such thing. A state of justification is a state of salvation, as far as present salvation is concerned, of which we have spoken. And if this justification be retained to the end of one's probation, it results in his final salvation. But "patient continuance in well-doing" is necessary to retain it. Of this, however, we shall speak more at length.