OR, THE

MANIFESTATION OF GOD

JESUS CHRIST;
WITH

A SUPPLEMENT, TOUCHING THE THEORIES

OF THE

REV. DR. BUSHNELL.

BY ROBERT TURNBULL.

SECOND EDITION.

HARTFORD:
BROCKETT, FULLER, AND CO.
NEW YORK ;—G P PUTNAM E II. FLETCHER BOSTON GOULD,
KENDALL, AND LINCOLN.

M DCCC XL1X.
 CONTENTS
Page.
Preface. 5

PART FIRST.

THE LIFE OF CHRIST.

CHAPTER I.
State of the World before the Birth of Christ. The Birth of Christ. Its import
and design.9
CHAPTER II.
The Childhood and Youth of Christ. His Baptism. His Temptation. His Teach¬
ing. Peculiarities of his Character and Work.25

CHAPTER III.
Capernaum. Christ’s attendance at the three great Festivals. Assertion and Vin¬
dication of his claims as the Son of God. His rejection by various parties
among the Jews. His anticipated Death. Triumphal entry into the Holy City.
The Last Supper. Gethsemane. Contrasts. The finite and the Infinite. . . 41

CHAPTER IV.
Last Hours of Christ on Earth. Crucifixion. Manifestation of the Godhead in ,
the gloom and agony. Grandeur of the Mystery.53

CHAPTER V.
The Resurrection of Christ. Its Reality and Import.67

CHAPTER VI.
The Ascension of Christ. The relation of his Life on Earth to his higher Life in
Heaven.76

PART SECOND.

THE CHARACTER AND MISSION OF CHRIST.

CHAPTER I.
The Sinlessness or Moral Perfection of Christ.87

CHAPTER II
The Divinity of Christ.112

CHAPTER III.
The Incarnation as a Mystery...• 141

CHAPTER IV.
Theories of the Incarnation.•.170

CHAPTER V.
The Atonement.197

Supplement on the Theories of Dr. Bushnell. Conclusion 197

\
 /

/
 Entered, according.to Act of Congress, in the year 1848,
By Robert Turnbull,
in the Clerk’s Office of the District Court for the District of Connecticut.

STEREOTYPED BY PRINTED BY
RICHARD H. HOBBS, CASE, TIFFANY AND CO.,*
HARTFORD, CONN. HARTFORD, CONN.
 i

TO

THE REV. JOEL HAWES, D. D.f

AND

THE CIRCLE OF CLERGYMEN WITH WHOM

THE AUTHOR

IS ACCUSTOMED, SO PROFITABLY AND PLEASANTLY, TO MEET

IN WEEKLY CONFERENCE,

THIS VOLUME, IN ILLUSTRATION AND DEFENCE OF SOME OF

THE CARDINAL TRUTHS OF OUR COMMON CHRISTIANITY,

IS RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED.
 puOHthTY Qp~

PRIITCETOH
DEC. APR 1831
THEOLOGICAL

PEEFACE.

The object of the following work is not polemical, but practical.

Still, we have endeavored, within the limits assigned us, to make the
discussion as thorough as possible, taking nothing for granted, but
proving our positions step by step, by a reference to the facts and
teachings of God’s Word, or the obvious nature and reason of things.
We have entered somewhat into the consideration of questions
which are occupying the attention of the theological world, but not,
we trust, in a narrow or disputatious spirit.
Our views of the Incarnation and Atonement of Christ, may be
found, in some features, peculiar, though not differing, in any essen¬
tial particular, from those usually styled orthodox. It has been
our aim to clear away from this subject some popular misconcep¬
tions and misstatements, and to place it, if possible, upon a scriptural
and defensible basis. How far we have succeeded in this, others
must decide.
We have intermingled with all our reasonings, practical views and
appeals; for we are anxious not only to convey clear ideas to the in¬
tellect, but to exert a good influence upon the heart. Indeed, our
principal hope is, that the work may prove useful to sincere in¬
quirers after truth, leading them to Him who is the Way, the Truth
and the Life.
The term Tkeophany, ordinarily applied to designate the appear¬
ances or manifestations of God, in human form, under the ancient
dispensations, seemed yet more appropriate to that most perfect and
glorious manifestation of himself in the person of Jesus Christ. It
has, therefore, been adopted as the general title of the book, being ex¬
pressive of the leading idea which it is designed to set forth and
establish.
The first part of the work contains a rapid sketch of the principal
incidents in our Saviour’s life, in order to exhibit the great truth of
“ God manifest in the flesh,” in its historical aspects.
1*
 vi PREFACE.

The Second Part consists of brief disquisitions, on the Sinlessness

or Moral Perfection of Christ, His supreme Divinity, His Incarna¬
tion, and Atonement. We have also said something upon certain
theories touching the person and mission of Christ, and closed
the discussion with a brief practical appeal.
The present is an age of change and revolution, not only in states
and dynasties, but in opinions and beliefs. This has its advantages,
but it has also its disadvantages and dangers. In the hurry and ex-
4 citement of investigation and debate, some good institutions, and
some valuable truths may be abandoned, for no other reason than
that they are common and old. Novelty and originality are not
always the best guides to truth. Instead of advancing to the light,
they often recede from it. Indeed, their charm frequently consists in
their brilliant but delusive falsehood. Yet independent, and even
reckless, thinkers will often say something worth hearing, and their
very errors may turn to the advantage of the truth. Our safety con¬
sists in free and friendly investigation, a patient examination of all
sides, and a common reference to the only and all-sufficient standard
of theological truth, “ the oracles of God.”
The enemies of Christianity begin to boast that the old reverence
for Jesus Christ, and especially the disposition to ascribe to him
Divine attributes, is passing away, with the inarch of revolution and
the progress of society. On this point, we have been exceedingly
struck with the following, from a distinguished literary Jew. “ Other
great revolutions are in progress, quietly, slowly, but securely—the
age of reason and philosophy among Christians. In every direction
there appear evidences of a progressive but mighty change in the
fundamental principles of that faith. * * The result of this manifests
itself in gradually withdrawing from the great Founder of the
Christian faith the Divine attributes conceded to him by his disciples
and followers. Since the Reformation, this change has been grad¬
ually unfolding itself; but professing Christians did not dare to ex¬
press their doubts even to themselves ; they were unbelievers ever,
but only in the deep recesses of the heart; but now, Reformers, Com¬
munists, Philosophers openly express their doubts.”*
That this statement is exaggerated, is quite evident; nevertheless, it

* Address of M. M. Noah at the Hebrew Synagogue, Crosby st., New York, with
reference to the erection of a great Synagogue or Temple for the Jews, in the city of
Jerusalem.
 PREFACE. Vll

indicates the current of feeling among those who hope for the de¬
struction, or, at least, the fundamental modification of the Christian
faith. Its author, indeed, professes to admire the code of Christian
, morals, nay, he affirms that Christ and Christianity have stood
between the doctrine of the true God, as held by the Jews, and its
entire destruction by an idolatrous and infidel world; and in this re¬
spect shows his good sense and liberal feelings; but he rejoices in
the prospective revolution of the whole Christian system, and its
amalgamation with the simple theism of the Jew, the Mohammedan
and the Deist. This great change, according to him, is to be brought
about by the withdrawal of Divine attributes from Jesus Christ.
How clearly, then, does it behoove us to know the exact truth upon
this great question, and defend it from all assaults, whether secret
and insidious, or more open and reckless. Above all, how necessary
to do what we can to enthrone it in the hearts of all Christian people ;
so that in wisdom and love, they “ may contend earnestly for the
faith once delivered to the saints.”
•Note to the Second Edition. This work has been subjected to a careful re¬
vision, and a Supplement added, on the theories of Dr. Bushnell, which are attract¬
ing much attention. As Dr. B. has expressed himself with the utmost freedom on
the opinions of others, aud rather invited discussion, this, it is to be hoped, will be
deemed no breach on our part, of brotherly kindness and courtesy. It has given
us an opportunity of making our view of the atonement more complete and satis¬
factory, and will be read, we hope, as it is written, with entire seriousness and can¬
dor. The laet chapter in the first edition has been cancelled, partly to make roomT
for the additional matter, and partly because it touched upon questions which de¬
mand a more minute and ample discussion. Our views remain the same as they
have been ; but we readily concede that others may differ from us here, and yet
hold the fundamental principles of Christian belief. May the great Head of the
church unite all good men in the belief and defence of these great truths; and may
the time soon come, when there shall be only “ one Lord, one faith,.one baptism’*
in every church and in every land.

Hartford, Conn.

J■
 THEOPHANY.

THE MANIFESTATION OF GOD IN CHRIST.

PART FIRST.
THE LIFE OF CHRIST.

CHAPTER I.
State of the World before the Birth of Christ. The Religions of Greece and Romd
old and ready to perish. Judaism shorn of its power. Its selfish and fanatical char*
acter. Prevalent views of the Messiah. General Expectations. State of things
unfavorable to the reception of a Spiritual Messiah. Birth of Christ. Its pe
culiarities. An Incarnation of Love. The turning point of the World’s History.
The Manifestation of the Godhead.

The Religions of the ancient world, all of which,

except the Jewish, embodied the element of idolatry,
had fallen into a state of dotage. The beautiful visions
of Grecian polytheism grew dim. Olympus was deserted.
Magnificent temples remained; but all heart-felt worship
was lost. Over the political and equally idolatrous faith of
Rome passed a spirit of change and dissolution. Supersti¬
tions enough remained, but all earnest and coherent faith,
even in idolatry, was breaking to pieces and vanishing
away. The awe-struck imagination of the elder pagans,
which prostrated itself in burning adoration before the
starry Host, the sacred Fire, or the Olympian Jove, could
nowhere be found. A new era was opening upon the
world; but what it was to be, whether of darkness and
desolation, or of light and life, could not be foretold by
10 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

reference to the existing state of things. For, idolatry was

replaced by scepticism, and scepticism resulted in anarchy.
Darkness covered the earth, and gross darkness the people.
The great Roman heart, which swayed the world, was
growing languid and powerless under the influence of vice.
The morals of the common people became worse' and worse.
Philosophy was as a bark at sea, amid storm and darkness,
catching occasional glimpses of land, but more frequently
dashed against the rocks, or lost in the roaring surge. At
the best, it never reached the masses, and, at the time of
which we are speaking, was itself becoming sceptical and
vicious. The higher orders of society were distinguished
only by an intenser corruption. The very poets, rising, in
the olden time, to the character of prophets, threw contempt
upon virtue, and laughed to scorn the existence of God and
the immortality of the soul. A very few moralists specu¬
lated, to some purpose, on the subject of virtue, but could
offer no sublime and resistless motives to enforce it. The
tide of popular corruption swept onward, in spite of all
their lofty theories and fine-spun imaginings. Their at- •
tempts at reform were spider-webs to bind Leviathan;
straws, to stem the currents of the ocean. The sophists,
a heartless and infidel race, controlled the popular will, and
gave law to society. In a word, “the foundations were
destroyed.” Old things were passing away. Night and
chaos were enveloping the world.
At this period, a large portion of the earth was occupied
by one vast empire. From beyond the Pillars of Hercules
to the Caspian sea, sweeping through the forests of Ger-
 ’ * LIFE OF CHRIST. 11

many on the one side, and the sands of the African desert

on the other, a hundred and fifty millions of persons, of di¬

versified climate and character, were consolidated into one
great commonwealth. Diverging from the city of Rome,
which might be called the metropolis of the world, magni¬
ficent roads stretched in every direction, connecting, by so¬
cial and commercial ties, distant and flourishing cities.
The old and separate dynasties, which once occupied this
vast area, were broken up, and a political brotherhood es¬
tablished throughout the bounds of the Roman empire.
It was a colossal power, and once awed the world. But
it had passed its meridian. Luxury and vice undermined
its strength, portentous changes threatened its ruin. The
prevalent civilization, unsupported by any true faith, was
gradually working its overthrow. Yet it seemed to
be preparing the nations for some vast and beneficent
change.
Judaism, whose roots penetrated the depths of the na¬
tional heart, had grown cold and lifeless. The Shekinah
had departed from the temple. The voice of its oracles
was dumb. More free from the tendency to idolatry than
in ancient times, it had yet lost all its vitality. The spirit
of prophecy was extinct. No holy seers predicted the glo¬
ries of Messiah’s reign, or denounced the vengeance of
Heaven upon the workers of iniquity. No Deborah sang
under “ the palm tree between Ramah and Bethel,” no
Ezekiel thundered “between the porch and the altar.”
The Word indeed remained; but it was a dead letter to the
great body of the people. The formalism of the Pharisee
J2 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

on the one hand, and the scepticism of the Sadducee on the

other, paralyzed all pure and earnest feeling. The people,
subjected to the galling oppression of a foreign yoke, were
discontented and furious. Unheard of atrocities had been
perpetrated in the family of the elder Herod, whose days
were about to close in horror and blood.
In addition to all this, infidel and pagan notions began
to prevail in Judea, particularly in Caesarea, the Roman
capital of the country; while the mass of the people were
intoxicated with a savage fanaticism. Some holy hearts,
here and there, in the temple, or among the mountains,
brooded over the prophecies, and longed for that blessed era
of purity and repose predicted to the fathers. Indeed the
idea of a Messiah had seized the great body of the nation;
but so mingled with sensual and fanatical views, that it
rather exasperated than soothed their passions.
There prevailed, also, at this time, even in the Roman
world, a wide-spread expectation of a mighty change to be
achieved by the sudden appearance of some august and
mysterious personage. This dim idea floated not only in
Judea, but in Rome, in Egypt and Babylon. So familiar
did it become, that it attracted the attention of the Roman
poets and philosophers. “ Amongf many,” writes Tacitus,
“ there was a persuasion that in the ancient books of the
priesthood, it was written, that at that precise time the East
should become mighty, and that the sovereigns of the
world should issue from Judea.”* “In the east,” says

* Tacitus. History, v. 13.

 LIFE OF CHRIST. 13

Suetonius, “ an ancient and consistent opinion prevailed,

that it was fated there should issue at this time, those who
should obtain universal dominion.”* This general expect¬
ation is to be traced, doubtless, to the predictions of the
Hebrew prophets. Daniel’s u weeks of years” were sup¬
posed to be on the point of expiring. The sceptre, in some
sense, had “departed from Judah,” and therefore, the Shiloh,
or the Peacemaker, was about to come. What he was to
be, few indeed understood. The views of his character and
mission were modified by the dispositions of those who
cherished them. Josephus, a shrewd, worldly man, subse¬
quently recognized him in the person of the Emperor Ves¬
pasian ! Some expected a mighty King, a half divine,
half human conqueror; others, but comparatively a small
number, a great moral Reformer, or spiritual Redeemer;
and others, but fewer still, the Son of God, the Saviour of
the world. But the majority of the nation looked only for
a temporal deliverer, his footsteps tracked with blood, and
his long reign of earthly power and splendor encircling the
globe.
Hence the general state of the Jewish nation was quite
unfavorable to the reception and acknowledgment of a
spiritual Messiah, whose peaceful reign should be that only
of righteousness and love. Carnal and besotted, they were
more likely to crush, than to honor the Son of God.
Indeed, taking the world as a whole, it was a dark and
godless era. The race, as if abandoned by Heaven, stag-

* Suetonius Ves. p. 4.

2
14 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

gered, like a vessel at sea, amid tempest and gloom, and

seemed on the very point of being shipwrecked forever.
At this juncture Jesus Christ was born into the world,—
in an humble town,—of obscure parentage,—in the still
hour of night,—in a condition of lowliness and poverty
peculiarly striking,—and without any general or imposing
demonstrations. And why? Simply, because he was to
be a spiritual Teacher, a divine Redeemer, whose u still
small voice” of love and power was gently, but irresistibly,
to penetrate the human heart, and transform it into the
beauty of holiness. Little is recorded of this unostentatious
but august event. It was proclaimed, as has been often
said, not in the streets of Jerusalem, or the purlieus of the
temple, but in the quiet scenes of the country; not to the
Sanhedrim of the Jewish nation, nor to the priesthood in
solemn conclave, but to a few pious shepherds, as they
watched their flocks by night on the plains of Bethlehem.
In all this, we discern something of divine beauty and
wisdom. God, in creating and blessing, is not so much in
the whirlwind and the storm, as in the soft, still voice.
His mightiest changes are achieved by invisible, and appa¬
rently trivial means. He works not at the surface, but at
the centre. He comes rather in the solitude and silence of
night, like the dew beneath the stars, than in the glare
and tumult of day. In this respect, he reverses all the ex¬
pectations of man. “ Without observation,” like his own
reign of purity and love, he accomplishes the designs of
his providence and grace. Not with the might of kings, or
the tread of armies, but with the quiet majesty, the still,
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 15

but resistless power of supreme and everlasting dominion.

He taketh the weak things of the world to confound the
mighty, and things that are not, to bring to nought things
that are, that no flesh may glory in his presence. Ever¬
more he magnifies purity and love over might and display.
Moreover, the incarnation of Jesus was a veiling rather
than a revealing of absolute power. It was love, rather
than force, which assumed the human form. By a new
and peculiar manifestation, love and suffering were to be
revealed the mightiest powers in the universe. Enthroned,
by the death of the Son of God, they were to be proved
resistless and immortal. It was meet, therefore, that, in
lowliness and poverty, the birth of Jesus should correspond
with his death, the beginning with the end of his mysteri¬
ous career.
“ How might God have appeared,” says Tholuck, “when
he met a finite race ? There rests concealed behind all the
excellence of nature, there rests concealed behind every
spectacle of history, there is ruling concealed in the depth
of the earth, there is ruling concealed in the immensity of
the starry world, the eternal Spirit, which we call God !
There are hours when thou dost imagine thyself to come
near him ; oh ! there are wonderful hours in the life of
man, when it is as if the Great Mystery of all existence
would at once burst asunder its bar, and come forth, un¬
veiled ! Our inmost soul is agitated at such an hour. But
how is it when the bar is actually burst asunder; when
he who dwells in unapproachable light, where no man can
draw near ; when the infinite Spirit, who sustains heaven
 16 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

and earth, assumes a visible form, and appears among his

finite creatures % Who does not now expect, what is writ¬
ten of the day of his second coming, that his heavens,
which are his throne, will tremble; that this small earth,
his footstool, will shake ; that a foreboding sentiment, such
as we have elsewhere discovered at the occurrence of great
natural phenomena, will seize all tribes of the earth, and
cause some to rejoice and others to weep ! * * Yet be¬
hold, as nature is everywhere still when she creates, and
loud only when she destroys, so is she still, indescribably
still, when the greatest of all who are born of women,
comes into the world. The sun did not stand motionless
in the heavens when he came ; it was night. He did not
make his first appearance in the capital city; but in one of
the smallest places of the land. No sleeper waked up at
his coming ; but only they who watched through the night
had intelligence of his advent. The earth that night did
not shake; the heaven that night did not tremble. Only
a few childlike souls, who then kept vigil at his birth,
trembled ; yet their trembling was a trembling for joy.
* * The Lord was not in the tempest, but in the gentle,
soft sound; and the heavenly hosts sung at his birth,
4 Peace on earth, and good will to men.’”*

* German Selections, by Edwards &. Park, pp. 128, 129. The same ideas are finely
expressed in the following extract from Milman’s “Fall of Jerusalem:”

“ Thou wast born of woman, thou didst come,

O Holiest! to this world of sin and gloom,
Not in thy dread omnipotent array;
And not by thunder strewed
Was thy tempestuous road;
Nor indignation burned before thee on thy way.
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 17

There was a special reason why Jesus should be “ born

of a virgin,” for then would it be seen and acknowledged,
that he was “ the holy One of God.” The unstained inno¬
cence of the mother, her serene beauty and gentleness of
character, and the entire separation of Jesus by means of
this circumstance, from the corrupted mass of humanity,
would form a peculiar attraction to all pure minds. It was
meet, also, that the incarnation of Jesus should be a sacred
mystery, around which the affections of his followers should
linger with delight and awe. This feeling indeed has been
exaggerated and vitiated among the Catholics, but it is a
natural feeling, and not only so, but productive of the most
beneficent results. There is something inexpressibly touch-

But thee a soft and naked child,

Thy mother undefiled,
In the rude manger laid to rest,
From off her virgin breast.

“ The heavens were not commanded to prepare

A gorgeous canopy of golden air;
Nor stoop’d their lamps th’ enthroned fires on high ;
A single silent star
Came wandering from afar,
Gliding uncheck’d and calm along the liquid sky;
The Eastern sages leading on
As at a kingly throne,
To lay their gold and odors sweet
Before thy infant feet.

“ The earth and ocean were not hush’d to hear

Bright harmony from every starry sphere ;
Nor at thy presence brake the voice of song
From all the cherub choirs,
And seraph’s burning lyres,
Pour’d through the host of Heaven the charmed clouds along;
One angel troop the strain began,
Of all the race of man,
By simple shepherds heard alone
That soft Hosanna’s tone.”

2*
 r

18 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

ing in the thought, expressed by Wordsworth, that in the

virgin mother were “ blended and reconciled” those singu¬
lar but beautiful contrasts

“ Of mother’s love, and maiden purity,

Of high and low, celestial with terrene.”

Rude minds have wondered that u the Highest” was born

of woman, especially that the Godhead “ vested” itself in
the form of a child. But more thoughtful and spiritual
minds have discerned in this very thing, a meaning and
design which awaken their profoundest reverence. They
cannot see that mechanical greatness, or material expan¬
sion, have aught in them akin to the nature of God, or that
adventitious circumstances, however imposing, can add
any thing to his infinite grandeur. Indeed, they look be¬
yond all the depths of the starry world, and all the immen¬
sities of the creation, to find his indivisible essence, and
boundless majesty. Not physical grandeur, or mechanical
force, but spirituality, love and purity, constitute their idea
of his glory. Hence, they can adore the manifestation of
that glory as well in the person of “ the holy child Jesus,”
as in the magnificence of the universe. God is a Spirit!
God is love ! And since- man in his unstained innocence,
was made in the image of God, no fitter temple of the
Deity can be found than that of a living man. 11 The true
Shekinah,” says John Chrysostom, u is Man !” Even in
ruins, the traces nf his primitive grandeur declare, “ Here
God once dwelt.”* u The highest Being,” says Carlyle,

*See “ Howe’s Living Temple,” where this idea is expanded with great beauty and
depth of meaning.
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 19

u reveals himself in man. This body, these faculties, this

life of ours, is it not all as a vesture for that unnamed ?”
Hence he adds, with something of error and extravagance,
but with a wonderful vein of truth! “ No nobler feeling than
this of admiration for one greater than himself dwells in paan.
It is to this hour, and at all hours, the vivifying influence
of man’s life. Religion, I find, stands upon it; not pagan¬
ism only, but far higher and truer religions, all religion
k* hitherto known. Hero-worship, heart felt, prostrate admi¬
ration, submission, burning, boundless, for a noblest, godlike
Form of Man, is it not the germ of Christianity itself % The
greatest of all heroqs is One whom I do not name here.”*
In the estimation of the world, in the estimation even of
philosophy, the birth of Jesus was a small event.f Yet
it was “ the turning point of the world’s history.” Then
the “ day-star from on high” visited us. Then u the Sun of
Righteousness arose with healing in his wings.” Then
commenced a form of civilization, which was to penetrate
the nations with an invisible but resistless power, and
which at the present hour, is the only thing really alive,
active and diffusive in society. At this point all ancient
prophecy culminated, all modem faith began. New prin¬
ciples of action, new codes of morals, new sources of power,
new modes of enjoyment, strange fears, still stranger hopes,
dawned upon the race. The whole life and energy of

* Hero Worship, p. 13.

f We mean ancient philosophy ; modern philosophy has changed its tone. The
greatest philosopher in Gerrimny, Scbelling, speaks of the birth of Christ as “ the turn¬
ing point of the world’s history.”
 20 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

modern society were here. In this, as in a germ, lay Dante,

Milton and Cowper, nay more, Shakespeare, Schiller and
Goethe, Newton, Pascal and Fenelon, Jeremy Taylor and
John Howard; all, in fact, that we call modern literature
and religion. Thence sprang liberty and law, true freedom
and fraternity, that divine and universal brotherhood yet to
envelope the globe. For it was infinite Love coming into
union and fellowship with man, entering into the heart
and soul of society, incarnating itself in the very depths of
human degradation and wretchedness. In a word, it was
a new moral creation, in which God said, Let there be
light! and there was light! In this, therefore, was fulfilled
the glowing prediction of Isaiah: “Unto us a child is
born, unto us a Son is given ; and the government shall be
upon his shoulders, and he shall be called Wonderful, Coun¬
sellor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, and the
Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and
peace there shall be no end.”*
Thus the birth of Christ, insignificant in its seeming, was
inexpressibly great in its reality. Apparently the advent
of a simple child, it was the incarnation of the Godhead.
A mere incident in an obscure corner of the earth, which
disturbed neither the course of nature, nor the course of
society, it was the origin of untold revolutions, the beginning

* The expression Mighty God, has been translated by the German critics and others,
Mighty Hero, Mighty King, or Conqueror, which gives a very good and expressive
meaning, harmonizing strikingly with the remarks in the text. The following is De
Wette’s translation, which we should willingly accept as a just one : “Denn ein kind
wird uns geboren, undes ruhet die Herrschaft auf einer schulter, und man nennet seinen
namen Wunder, Verather, Starker Held, Frieden’s Furst, etc.”
Heilige Srhrift. De tVette.
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 21

of a new civilization and a new religion, of a new world and

a new heaven! No wonder, then, that it was hymned by
angels, as was the creation of the world at first, when the
morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God
shouted for joy. Not only on the plains of Bethlehem, but
in the Courts of Heaven resounded the glad acclaim. For
as soon as the news was announced to the shepherds,
“ suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the
heavenly host praising God, and saying, Glory to God in the
highest, on earth peace and good will to men!”
“In heaven the rapturous song began,
And sweet seraphic fire
Through all the shining legions ran,
And strung and tuned the lyre.

Swift through the vast expanse it flew,

And loud the echo rolled ;
The theme, the song, the joy was new,
’ Twas more than heaven could hold.”

All this and much more has been styled a myth, or alle¬
gorical fiction, by the sceptics of Germany, and by their imi¬
tators in this country, a supposition as baseless and wild as
the most fanciful and extravagant of all the dreams of
oriental romance. If any fact in ancient history is well es¬
tablished, it is that of the birth of Jesus, and the wonderful
change therein wrought in the history of the world. But
if the birth of Jesus is well established, then the miracu¬
lousness of that birth, the mystery of the incarnation, the
song of the angels,—the visit of the magi,—and the star in
the east, or the luminous appearance which guided their
steps to the place of his nativity, all, in a word, connected
22 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

with this event which is supernatural and divine, is equally

well established.* The same authority which proves the
one proves also the other. If the one is natural, in the cir¬
cumstances supposed, so also are the others. The whole
must stand or fall together, like the branches and leaves
with the trunk of the tree. But no historical facts are
better established, and those, therefore, who doubt them or
resolve them, in any measure, into myths or allegories, will
doubt any historical fact, and make myths of the most
established verities' Thus Weisse, a German theologian
of some repute, makes the elder Herod himself a myth,
speaking of him as the symbol or representation of worldly
power! So we might make Julius Ceesar or Marc Antony
the representatives of Roman ambition, and thus sublimate
them into historical myths ! Who knows but Napoleon,
in some future age, will come to be regarded as a magnifi¬
cent myth ! Perhaps the wise men of a distant day will
gravely assert that the immortal Washington, and the bat¬
tles of Lexington and Bunker hill are ancient American
myths! “ He is not to me a true Christian,” says the
illustrious Niebuhr, who carried his historical doubts and
investigations as far as any man ; so far, indeed, as to make
a complete revolution in the opinions of the learned, relative
to the early history of Rome, and whose keen sagacity
and boundless information have won the admiration of the

* These magi, or Eastern sages, came from Babylon, between which and Jerusalem
existed an intimate intercourse of travel and commerce. There also the Jews long
resided, and maintained their peculiar sentiments and usages. These magi, then, in all
probability, were acquainted with the predictions relative to the Messiah, and knew
that the time was near when his appearance might be expected.
 s

LIFE OF CHRIST. 23

civilized world,—u He is not to me a true Christian who

does not consider the history of Christ’s earthly life in ac¬
cordance with its true literal sense, with all its miracles, as
really a fact as any other thing recorded in history, and is
not as calmly and firmly convinced of it; who has not the
strongest conviction of all points in the Apostle’s creed, in
their literal acceptation ; who does not regard every doc¬
trine and every command of the New Testament as unques¬
tionably of divine revelation.”* A testimony like this is
worth all the assertions and imaginings of men who have
departed alike from the faith and from common sense.
The birth of Christ, as a miracle, was necessary to the
revelation of his Divinity. Here the incarnation or the
manifestation of the Godhead in a living human form, the
most glorious symbol or image of God, and therefore the
fittest for his manifestation, commenced. The Word, the
divine Logos or Revealer, who in the beginning was “ with
God” and “ was God,” u became flesh and dwelt among us,
and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten
of the Father, full of grace and truth.f” It is thence a

* Christian Review, Vol. VI.—p. 109. See also Neander’s Life ofOhrist—Introduction.
To those who wish to investigate the genuineness and authenticity of the Gospels, we
recommend Professor Greenleaf’s work upon this subject. He has applied to the inves¬
tigation the principles of legal evidence. Some excellent observations upon the same
subject may be found in Stnrkie upon Evidence, first volume. Neander’s Life of Christ,
though heavy and somewhat obscure and fanciful upon some points, may also be con¬
sulted with advantage. It is a complete answer to Strauss’s Leben Jesu. “The Genu¬
ineness of the Gospels,” 3 vols., Cambridge ; by Professor Norton, is a learned and elabo¬
rate work, written with much force and beauty, but marred by rationalistic views and
criticisms. Still it may be consulted with great benefit by the critical and well-in¬
formed reader. With the exceptions we have named, it is the most thorough and
scholar-like work upoiVthe subject in the English language.
t 1 John, i. 14.
24 M ANIFES 1' A 1' ION OF GOD.

celestial truth to be received, a sacred mystery to be adored,

an ineffable secret to be cherished, in the profoundest
depths of an humble and contrite heart.
 CHAPTER II.

The Childhood and Youth of Christ. Its import and value. The Condition of Ju¬
dea before the commencement of Christ’s public Ministry. John the Baptist.
His character and mission. Baptism of Christ. Its import. The Temptation. Its
design. The Teaching and Preaching of Jesus. Its peculiarities. The bearing of
his early ministrations upon the great object of his mission. His calmness and
energy. His self-possession. His enthusiasm and self-sacrifice.

One of the old fathers has remarked, that Jesus passed

through all the stages of human life, from infancy to man¬
hood, that he might sanctify them all. The remark is not
only beautiful, but scriptural and just. u It behooved him,
in all things, to be made like unto his brethren.” He was
thus fitted to become the brother and friend of man, in all
possible relations. How profoundly this single circum¬
stance has affected the sympathies of mankind, every
thoughtful person must be aware. Childhood and old age
have felt it alike. All ranks and conditions have acknow¬
ledged its influence. The fact, that Jesus, “ the eternal
Word of God,” was born of woman, that he lived as a
child,—
“ The happiest, the holiest,
That ever blessed the earth

that he acted the part of a grateful and obedient Son,—that

* “ O, is it not a blessed thought,

Children of human birth,
That once the Saviour was a child,
And lived upon the earth,”

3
 26 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

he aided, by manual toil, in providing for his father’s house¬

hold,—that he ate and drank, slept and awaked, smiled
and wept, rejoiced and suffered, loved and prayed, struggled
and died^ like other men, yet all the while possessed of an
infinite and immortal nature, involves the principal secrets
of his amazing power over the heart. Moreover, this has
tended to impart dignity and worth to human nature itself,
and invest our mortal state with a new and sublime inter¬
est. The divine Majesty of our Lord Jesus Christ seems
thereby to be veiled, and this doubtless is the case to some
extent. It was an infinite condescension on his part “ to
take upon him the seed of Abraham,” and appear “ in the
form of man,” glorious and beautiful as that form might
be; but the Divinity of Christ was not thereby degraded,
as some have rashly concluded. The union between the
highest Essence in the universe and the lowliest state of
man, was natural and becoming. There is no shrine of the
Deity so magnificent, as the spotless body of u the holy
child Jesus.” The infinite lies nearer to the soul of a child
than we are aware. Indeed, it is a all about us in our
infancy.”
Let us not, then, be surprised, if we find the Son of God,
who is equally the Son of man, subjected to the will of his
human parents, increasing in years and strength, and in
favor with God and man, performing the accustomed round
of duties, secular and religious, mingling with his neighbors
and kinsfolk in the humble town of Nazareth,—asking and
hearing questions with the doctors in the temple, working
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 2*

at the trade of a carpenter, or celebrating the rites of the

Jewish faith. Let us not be. surprised, if we behold him
weeping with those that weep, and rejoicing with those
that rejoice, toiling through life’s rugged road, and min¬
gling in the temptations and sufferings of our common lot.
Above all, let us not be shocked, if we hear his towns¬
people speak of him contemptuously as “ the carpenter’s
son,” whose kinsfolk they knew, or if we find him u de¬
spised and rejected of men, a man of sorrows and acquainted
with grief.” If the life of man, in any state, is “ a great
and inscrutable mystery”—if the life especially of a good
man, even in the lowest walks of poverty, has in it some¬
thing divine, let us not wonder that the Son of God should
pass through such a life, and thereby make it more “ sub¬
lime” than poets and philosophers have ever dreamed.
Little or nothing is related of the first thirty years of our
Saviour’s course. A single circumstance, however, like an
opening through the clouds into the serene depths beyond,
reveals its celestial quality. “ Wist ye not,” said he to his
astonished parents, touching his interview with the doctors
in the temple, “ Wist ye not that I must be about my Fa¬
ther’s business ?” Here the consciousness of a lofty spirit¬
ual destiny, and an actual preparation for it, are indicated
among the common cares and sympathies of his life. No
wonder the virgin mother “ laid up this saying in her heart.”
It contains the secret of his nature and mission, and proves
the possession, in boyhood, of the same views and feelings
which made it “ a joy” to die for the race.
Some time before the commencement of Christ’s public
 28 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

career, Judea was reduced to the condition of a Roman

province. Archelaus, after a weak and ill-omened reign as
ethnarch for nine years, was banished into Gaul, and the
country subjected to the despotic and capricious control of
Pontius Pilate, the Roman procurator, who took every op¬
portunity of humbling the Jews, and breaking their national
spirit. He introduced, not only into Caesarea, his ordinary
residence, but into Jerusalem, the idolatrous standards of
the Roman army, and attempted to suspend certain buck¬
lers, bearing the image of the Emperor, in the palace of
Herod. The Sanhedrim was still permitted to exercise
some jurisdiction, but was sadly checked and degraded,
in comparison with its former authority and influence.
Throughout the country, publicans or tax-gatherers under
the appointment of Rome, constantly reminded the people
of their subjection to a foreign ruler. Galling burdens
chafed them at every point. Their very religion was sub¬
jected to rude pagan interference. The high-priest was
displaced at the pleasure of the Roman procurator, and
sometimes with insulting levity and violence. Religious
sects were inflamed against each other. The most fierce
and sanguinary fanaticism raged amongst the followers
and imitators of Judas the Gaulonite. Excesses and tu¬
mults were common, though repressed by the iron hand of
Pilate, who more than once mingled the blood of zealots
with their sacrifices. Indeed, the whole country was in a
ferment, resembling a volcano heaving and dashing beneath
the thin surface previous to a violent irruption.
John the Baptist, stern and lofty as a rock of the desert.
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 29

Was commissioned by Heaven as the messenger of the

Lord, who, coming “ in the power and spirit of Elias, was
to introduce him to the world. He made his appearance
in the wilderness of Judea, by the banks of the sacred Jor¬
dan. In awful and thrilling tones, like a voice from eter¬
nity, he proclaimed the speedy advent of the Messiah, and
the establishment of his kingdom on earth. In view of this
august event he baptized, in the Jordan, great multitudes
who repented of their sins, and professed to receive his
teaching respecting the promised Messiah. But few, com¬
paratively, understood the spiritual nature of “ the kingdom
of God,” and all, with scarce an exception, were expecting
in the Christ, a mighty conqueror, a glorious earth-born
king. That the great multitudes who were baptized by
John, in anticipation of the Messiah’s advent, were sincere
in their belief, so far as it went, cannot be doubted. A
great and happy reformation of manners was the result, by
which the way was prepared for the public appearance of
the Messiah. In a word, the dawn of the morning was
visible on the hills. The star which heralded the ap¬
proaching sun, shone bright and clear in the horizon.
So great was the influence and authority of John the
Baptist, that he attracted the attention of the Jewish Coun¬
cil, who sent a deputation to inquire into his claims. He
distinctly acknowledged that he was not the Messiah, nor
Elijah, nor Jeremiah, nor one of the old prophets, who?
according to Jewish tradition, was to precede the coming
of the Messiah, and perform certain wonderful actions in
the temple and elsewhere; but he intimated that he was
3*
30 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

the Herald of the Lord, whose “ baptism of fire and of

the Holy Ghost’* was dimly typified by his inferior baptism
in the waters of the Jordan.
While John was thus engaged attracting the attention
of the nation, and gathering crowds of followers, Jesus
himself appeared on the banks of the river, and requested
baptism at his hands. Struck with his appearance of dig¬
nity, and inwardly convinced that he was the Messiah,
though not officially certified of the fact, John, who freely
acknowledged his immeasurable inferiority to Christ, de¬
clined the service, saying, “ I have need to be baptized of
thee, and comest thou to me?” But yielding to the au¬
thority of Jesus, who replied, K Suffer it to be so now, for
thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness,” he went
down with him into the water and administered the sacred
rite. As Jesus ascended from the water, a luminous ap¬
pearance, in the form, or with the motion of a dove,* (in all
ages the symbol of purity and gentleness, and, in this in¬
stance, of the Holy Ghost,) descended upon the head of Je¬
sus, and a voice was heard from heaven, recognizing him
as the Son of God, well pleasing to the Father, and his
accredited Messenger to the world. It was at this point
that John knew, for certainty, that Jesus was the promised
Messiah, and from that hour he commended him to the
people as “ the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin
of the world.” “ For, although the Baptist had a glimpse
of him,” says Jeremy Taylor, “ by the first irradiations of

* Slaii irepiffTepav, Matt. 3, 16. Ei> aco/zartKco ei6et, Lake 3, 22.

 LIFE OF CHRIST. 31

the Spirit, yet John professed that he therefore came bap¬

tizing with water, that £ Jesus might be manifested to Is¬
rael,’ and it was also a sign given to the Baptist himself,
that ‘ on whomsoever he saw the Spirit descending and
remaining,’ he is the person ‘ that baptizeth with the Holy
Ghost.’ And God chose to actuate the sign at the waters
of Jordan, in great and religious assemblies, convened there
at John’s baptism ; and therefore, Jesus came to be bap¬
tized, and, by this baptism, became known to John, who,
as before he gave to him an indiscriminate testimony, so
now he pointed out the person in his sermons and dis¬
courses, and by calling him £ the Lamb of God,’ prophesied
of his passion, and preached him to be the world’s Re¬
deemer and the sacrifice for mankind."'’*
More than ever did the Baptist feel his own inferiority
to Jesus Christ, and the consequent inferiority of his mis¬
sion, a circumstance which he ever avowed in the most
expressive terms, a proof at once of his humility and his
greatness. The Bridegroom was come, and he was satis¬
fied. He therefore joyfully united with his followers in
the exaltation of Jesus, as the true Messiah, the Bridegroom
of the Church, “ the Redeemer” of the world. “ He must
increase, but I must decrease.” The day breaks—the twi¬
light fades. The sun itself is rising in the heavens, and
the herald star is lost in the deepening radiance.
It may appear a strange thing that Jesus was baptized,
but it was in accordance with his character and mission.

* Works, Vol. II, p. 184, English edition.

32 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

Baptism shadows forth u the remission of sins,” and would

seem suitable only for a guilty penitent. But “ he who
knew no sin was made sin for us, that we might be made
the righteousness of God in him.” Hence it was meet, in
assuming the work of our Redemption, to take upon him
our sin in this emblematic rite. Nothing indeed could be
more appropriate at the commencement of his public career.
In addition to this, baptism, as all admit, is a symbol of
separation, of transition and consecration. Thus it be¬
hooved Christ, in this solemn ordinance, to “fulfill all right¬
eousness.” By this means, he was separated from the
common and inferior life of man to one of a mediatorial and
sacrificial character. He then passed into a new sphere,
and publicly consecrated himself to the great work of our
salvation. This, doubtless, is the reason why the particu¬
lar occasion was selected, to reveal him to John as the
Messiah, and announce his claims to the world, as the be¬
loved Son of God, and the Messenger of his will. u This,”
says the venerable bishop already quoted, “ was the inau¬
guration and proclamation of the Messias, when he began
to be the great prophet of the New Covenant. And this
was the greatest meeting that ever was upon earth, when
the whole cabinet of the mysterious Trinity was opened
and shown, as much as the capacities of our present im¬
perfections will permit; the second person in the veil of
humanity, the third in the shape, or with the motion of a
dove ; but the first kept his primitive state; and as to the
Israelites, he gave notice byway of caution, 1 ye saw no
shape, but ye heard a voice so also now God the Father
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 33

gave testimony to his holy Son, and appeared only in a

voice without any bodily presentment.”*
Furthermore, may not the baptism of Christ be regarded
as an emblem of the great atonement, the principal and
crowning act of our Lord’s mediation on earth 1 Did it not
adumbrate that baptism of blood and agony, that mysterious
passage through “ the Red Sea” of his sufferings, which
closed the drama of his life, and to which, in his conversa¬
tions with his disciples, he so frequently referred? “I
have a baptism to be baptized with, and how am I strait¬
ened till it is accomplished.” So that there is more of
meaning than most persons are aware, in the idea of the
Apostle, when he says that we are “buried with him by
baptism unto death.” “For if we are planted in the like¬
ness of his death”—in that, namely, which is the likeness
or symbol of his death, “ we shall be also in the likeness
of his resurrection.”
For these reasons, the baptism of Christ may be regarded
as a public dedication of Christ to the great work of our
salvation—as an expressive symbol of the manner in
which that work was to be accomplished,—and as a sol¬
emn confirmation of the rite itself for the observance of his
followers.
After his baptism, Jesus was taken into the wilderness
to endure the most terrible temptation which ever assaulted
our race. He must not only be consecrated but tested,—
that, overcoming evil by good, he might teach his followers

* Works, Vol. II, p. 185.

34 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

a lesson of endurance anchself-denial. Whatever was the

nature of this temptation, the alternative was presented to
him of earthly dominion, the applause of men, and the
splendors of state, or a life of sorrow and suffering- with a
kingdom of righteousness and love. Not a moment did he
hesitate between them; but true to his high nature and
mission, rejected all earthly power and influence, even in
the support of religion, and preferred a life of poverty and
shame with moral influence and spiritual dominion.* This
fact, like his birth and his baptism, was descriptive of his
future course, and the nature of that pure and peaceful
reign which he should establish in the minds of men. In
this respect, the views of Christ were original and peculiar.
Rising above his own age, and above all other ages, above
all the speculations of philosophy, and all the usages of
society, he rejected all external aids, all-physical force and
temporal rule, and established a religion purely spiritual,
and thence universal and eternal. u My kingdom,” said
he, explaining this sublime fact, “ is not of this world.”
No, it is a divine kingdom over which he presides—u the
kingdom of God,”—in other words, a kingdom of truth,
righteousness and love. How Godlike this ! How worthy
of the character and claims of a Divine Messenger! Men
have never been able to separate the spiritual from the car¬
nal, the Divine from the earthly. But Jesus did this at the

* It has been strikingly remarked, that what Jesus rejected, the corrupted church of
the sixth century accepted by uniting the power and splendor of earthly rule with the
religion of the Son of God.
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 35

very commencement of his course, and thereby read the

world a lesson, which they are too slow to learn.
True to this grand conception, Jesus went forth a to
teach and to preach,” amid the hills and valleys of Pales*
tine. He addressed himself chiefly to the common people,
in language of great originality, naturalness and force.
He spoke to them respecting God and the soul, duty and
danger, life and immortality, as man had never before
spoken. So simple, so clear, so striking, so authoritative was
it, that they could not but listen, and acknowledge its power.
Attracting to himself a few simple and child-like souls,
he made known to them the principles of his kingdom, in
terms so familiar and striking, so transparent and perfect,
that, while from our familiarity with them, they seem the
merest commonplaces, they are yet the most profound and
thrilling verities. But they never would have become com*
monplaces, even to us, unless they had possessed, at first,
the most perfect originality, as well as the most transparent
simplicity. Meditated deeply, they will appear most won¬
derful in their simple beauty and divine significance. So
natural and yet so pregnant, so clear and yet so striking,
so plain and yet so profound, they resemble the works of
God, which, while they attract a child by their freshness
and beauty, engage a philosopher by their grandeur and
perfection. The language of Christ is not that of the
schools, far less of the rhetoricians. It is scarcely lan¬
guage at all; so transparent is it, you see the things
rather than the words. It is a revelation—a revelation as
varied, as fresh and significant as that of nature itself.
36 MANIFESTATION OF GOD,

How new, yet how easy and familiar—-just like the well-
known face of nature, in which homeliness and beauty,
variety and grandeur, flitting shadows and gleams of sun¬
light, are mingled in singular but harmonious combination.
In a word, it is the language of intuition, of revelation—
that is to say, of God. “ Never man spake like this man !”
Sometimes in the synagogues, but oftener in the open air,
by the way-side, or by the well, on the hill-top, or by the
margin of the lake, in the shadow of the temple, or in the
deep solitude of the wilderness, he uttered his words of wis¬
dom and love. Nothing could be more natural, nothing
more beautiful and impressive. “ In the spring,” says Jor-
tin, “ our Saviour went into the fields, and sat down on a
mountain, and made the discourse which is recorded in St.
Matthew, and which is full of observations arising from
the things which opened themselves to his sight. For
when he exhorted his disciples to trust in God, he bade
them behold the fowls of the air, which were then flying
about them, and were fed by Divine Providence, though
they did not 4 sow nor reap, nor gather into barns.’ He
bade them take notice of the lilies of the field which were
then blown, and were so beautifully clothed by the same
power, and yet 4 toiled not,’ like the husbandmen who
were then at work. Being in a place where they ‘had a
wide prospect of cultivated land, he bade them observe how
God caused the sun to shine, and the rain to descend upon
the fields and gardens, even of the wicked and ungrateful.
And he continued to convey his doctrine to them under
rural images, speaking of good trees, and corrupt trees ; of
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 37

wolves in sheep's clothing1; of grapes not growing upon

thorns, or figs on thistles ; of the folly of casting precious
things to dogs and swineof good measure, pressed down,
and shaken together, and running over. Speaking at the
same time to the people, many of whom were fishermen,
and lived much upon fish, he says: What man of you will
give his son a serpent if he ask a fish ? Therefore, when he
said in the same discourse, Ye are the light of the world; a
city that is set upon a hill cannot he lad, it is probable that
he pointed to a city within their view, situated upon the
brow of a hill. And when he called them the salt of the
earth, he alluded, perhaps, to the husbandmen who were
manuring the ground. And when he compared every per¬
son who. observed his precepts to a man who built a house
upon a rock, which stood firm ; and every one who slighted
his word, to a man who built a house upon the sand,
which was thrown down by the winds and floods—when
he used this comparison, ’tis not improbable that he had
before his eyes, houses standing upon high ground, and
houses standing in the valley in a ruinous condition, which
had been destroyed by inundations.”*
The originality and imaginative beauty of his parables,
in which the highest, most abstract and spiritual truths are
embodied, in familiar forms, must have greatly struck the
minds of the people. And yet how profound they are!
Containing a mine of spiritual truth, they are yet simple
and clear as the sunshine or the dew. God and the soul,

* Discourses by Jortin.
4
38 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

duty and reward, sin and punishment, life and death, time
and eternity, heaven and hell, are incarnated in these won¬
drous revelations. The most delicate and affecting rela¬
tions, the deepest passions, the most amazing facts and
changes in the world of spirit, are pictured forth in shapes
of living beauty and power. What can surpass the story
of “the Prodigal Son.” “ the Rich Man and Lazarus,” “ the
good Shepherd,” the “ Ten Virgins” and “the Marriage
Supper.” What stores of holy wisdom are contained in
these, and similar symbolic revelations!
While the common people heard him gladly, such was
the grossness of the age, such the carnality of its views,
that the great mass understood little of his doctrine. It
was lodged, however, like living seed in the hearts of a few
heaven-born men. Checking their carnal views, correcting
their prejudices and winning their affections, he gradually
led them forth from the gross darkness of a corrupted Juda¬
ism, into the pure light of Christianity. His miracles at
first were few and unimposing, just enough to attract atten¬
tion to the truth, and attest the divinity of his mission.
They wrnre all distinguished by their gentle and benevolent
character, and like his parables, had a profound spiritual
import. The poor, the maimed, the sorrowful, the halt, the
blind, the dumb, the paralytic, the lunatic, followed him,
and he healed them all; but while healing their bodily
maladies he never failed to administer to their spiritual
wants ; thus teaching his disciples, in all ages of the world,
that his religion is intended to benefit and bless at once the
body and the soul, and that it behooves them to “ visit the
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 39

fatherless and widows in their affliction,” while u keeping

themselves unspotted from the world.” u He went about
doing good,” preaching righteousness, charity and peace,
directing the attention of his followers to the paternal
character of God, the universal brotherhood of man, and
that holy love which unites us to God and to one another
by indissoluble and eternal ties ; intimating his own special
and mysterious relation, first to the Father, and secondly to
the race ; announcing in no ambiguous terms, that divine
atonement which he was to accomplish at Jerusalem, by
means of suffering and death ; and a bringing to light” that
“ life hid with God,” and that u glorious immortality,” to be
conferred upon those who believe in his name. But it was
long before he was fully understood, even by his immediate
followers. Many who recognized him as the Messiah for¬
sook him, when they began to perceive his spiritual and
self-denying character. A few only apprehended his mean¬
ing, and clung to his person. And even they long labored
under the influence of national and personal prejudices, and
followed him, so to speak, in the dark, by the force of a
secret and irresistible attraction.
At first our Saviour’s ministrations were somewhat cau¬
tious and private—partly that his true character and claims
might not be mistaken ; partly, too, that his more carnal fol¬
lowers might not force him into a false position, and partly
that the crowning act of his life, that for which chiefly he
had come into the world, might not be precipitated. How
calm he was, how still and deliberate—how free from
aught like false enthusiasm or fanaticism! How divine,
40 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

in this, as in all else of his wonderful career! He appears,

in fact, to have embodied the perfection of reason with the
perfection of love. His feeling was so intense as to carry
him forward with irresistible energy, to the cross and the
crown; and yet so still, (doubtless by reason of the depth
and steadiness of its current,) that its momentum could not
be perceived. In every thing he was calm, patient, deliber¬
ate—and yet how direct, how earnest, how resistless in
his progress to the end! As he approached u his hour,” he
became more and more open, decided and bold, moving
right onward with the majesty of a God, to that cross of
agony and shame which he had deliberately chosen as
the means of a world’s salvation.
 CHAPTER III.
Capernaum the centre of Christ’s operations. The reason of this. His attendance
at the three great festivals. His appearance in the temple. Its import. Miracle at
the second Passover. The assertion and vindication of his claims as the Son of God.
His appearance at the third annual festival or series of festivals. The resurrection of
Lazarus, and the excitement thence produced. The death of Christ resolved by
the Jewish Sanhedrim. The reason of his rejection by the Jews, Sadducees, Phari¬
sees, Herodians, Essenes. Jesus presses steadily to the closing scene. Appearance
at the Passover, and triumphal entry into the Holy City. Institution of the Supper.
His agony in Gethsemane. Contrasts. Humanity and Divinity—suffering and beati¬
tude—degradation and glory. The meaning of the whole. The finite united with
the Infinite, the sinful with the Sinless.

In the commencement, and during a large portion of his

ministry, our Saviour retired into Galilee, making Caper¬

naum, at the north-western extremity of the sea of Galilee,
or lake of Gennesareth, which lies, in solemn beauty, amid
the lofty mountains of northern Palestine, the centre of his
plans and operations.* Here he collected and organized
his first disciples. Here he ordained his twelve apostles, and
here, also, he performed some of his most affecting miracles.
There was peculiar wisdom in this. The metropolis of

* The sea of Galilee, or lake of Gennesareth, is also called the sea of Tiberias, some¬
times the sea of Cinneroth, from the adjacent country, or the principal town upon its
shores. According to Josephus and Pliny, it is sixteen miles in length, and about six in
breadth. It has been compared to the lake of Geneva, though somewhat inferior to the
latter in extent and grandeur. Lying in a deep basin, and surrounded by lofty moun¬
tains, it has an air of peculiar stillness and grandeur. “ Its broad and extended surface,”
says Dr. E. D. Clarke, “covering the bottom of a profound valley, environed by lofty
and precipitous eminences, added to the impression of a certain reverential awe, under
which every Christian pilgrim approaches it, gives it a character of dignity unparalleled
by any similar scenery.— Travels, p. 462.
4*
42 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

the country was proud and vicious. Moreover, it was in a

disturbed and unhappy condition, and therefore little pre¬
pared to receive the teachings or appreciate the character
of a purely spiritual Messiah. But the people were pre¬
pared, in some measure, to listen to the Son of God, in the
quiet rural retreats, under the shadow of the solitary moun-'
tain, on the brink of the river, or of the placid lake. Besides,
the district of Galilee possessed a large and intelligent
population. So populous was it, that according to Josephus,
in a region of between fifty and sixty miles in length, and
between sixty and seventy in breadth, were no less than
two-hundred and four towns and villages, the smallest of
which contained 15,000 souls. This would give to the
whole province something like three to four millions of in¬
habitants. Of these, the great majority were Jews, with a
considerable sprinkling of Syrian Greeks, and of other for¬
eign races. In this region, then governed by Herod
Antipas, who does not appear to have been particularly
hostile to Jesus, the latter was permitted to pursue his mis¬
sion with greater freedom than in Judea. Still, as the time
drew near for the complete development of his plans, he
advanced towards Jerusalem, and proclaimed there, in clear
and decisive tones, his high and mysterious claims as the
true Messiah, the Son of God, the Redeemer of the world.
He made a point of attending the annual festivals, par¬
ticularly that of the Passover, at which times immense
multitudes of pious Jews, from all parts of the world,
crowded the streets and suburbs of Jerusalem, and pressed
with their offerings towards “ the holy place.” According
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 43

to the received opinion, three such festivals mark the prin¬

cipal points in our Saviour’s public career. At the first of
these, he appeared in the temple, as its Lord and Possessor,
and drove out the impious and mercenary traders who
defiled, with their traffic, its outer courts. This would be
understood by the people generally as an assertion of his
Messiahship, and his claim to the homage and service of all.
For it had been distinctly predicted by one of the ancient
prophets: u The Lord whom ye seek will suddenly come
to his temple, even the Messenger of the covenant whom ye
delight in.” Hence they immediately demanded a sign to
justify such a claim. By this they meant not an ordinary
sign or miracle, such as healing the sick, or opening the
eyes of the blind, but a more public and magnificent sign—
“a sign from Heaven,” as they phrased it, that is to say,
such a sign as they deemed peculiar to the mission of the
Messiah. This, according to some, would be the glorious
appearance of Christ in the clouds of heaven, or in the
Holy Place, surrounded by celestial light, and angelic at¬
tendance, or according to others, his standing upon Mount
Olivet, sword in hand, prepared to lead the nation to victory
and renown, or the actual destruction, by his hand, of the
Roman armies. But our Saviour replied to them by a
mysterious symbolic allusion to his own death and resur¬
rection, which they understood with reference to the de¬
struction and rebuilding of the temple. u Destroy this
temple, and in three days I will raise it up again.” This
jarred upon their feelings of reverence for the holy place,
44 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

and shocked all their preconceptions of the Messiah and

his reign.
At the second Passover he performed a marvellous cure
at the pool of Bethesda, claimed to be the Lord of the Sab¬
bath, and asserted his right, in consequence of his oneness
with the Father, to make changes in the institutions of
religion. This disturbed the Pharisees. But so far from
satisfying them, he claimed more than this, and insisted
that, being the Son of God, and his representative on earth,
he had the power of life and death, of sovereignty and
judgment, and that all men were bound to u honor him,
even as they honor the Father.” In proof of this, he
referred to the testimony of John the Baptist, the attesta¬
tion of the Father, and the corroborative testimony of the
old Testament Scriptures.
At the commencement of the third annual festival, or
series of festivals, Jesus conceals himself from observation
near the fountains of the Jordan. He also permits his fol¬
lowers to go up to Jerusalem without him, veiling under
ambiguous language his own intention of going thither, in
order that he may act with greater freedom, and prevent
any indiscreet announcement of his approach to the city.
While many inquiries are made respecting him, and the
minds of the multitude in Jerusalem are agitated with the
discussion of his claims, he suddenly appears in the temple,
and takes his place as a public teacher. At different inter¬
vals he proclaims in the boldest manner his high preroga¬
tives as the messenger of the covenant, asserts more dis¬
tinctly than ever his mysterious relations to the Father,
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 45

cures a man bom blind, and explains himself, in such a way,

as greatly to enrage the Jewish Sanhedrim, and shock the
prejudices of the people. After this he retires for a time,
from Jerusalem; but about the feast of the dedication in
the winter, again makes his appearance in one of the
arcades or porticoes of the temple, which, from its unusual
splendor, was called Solomon’s; and in reply to a question
respecting the reality of his claims, affirms his absolute
oneness with the Father, and explains it in such a way as
to excite the rage of the hearers, who take up stones to
stone him, as one guilty of the most horrible blasphemy.
Escaping out of their hands, he again retires from the city;
and after some time, is found in Bethany, where he raises
Lazarus from the dead, an event which produces in Jerusa¬
lem the greatest excitement. The priests are alarmed, the
Sanhedrim is instantly summoned, and the death of Jesus
is deliberately resolved. But our Saviour again avoids the
gathering storm, and withdraws to the wild and moun¬
tainous district which divides Judea from Samaria.
It was in this gradual way that Jesus made preparation
for the completion of his work. As he approached the
termination of his earthly career, his teachings became
more clear and decisive, his miracles more striking and stu¬
pendous. It is quite obvious, however, that his character
and claims were all fitted to excite the prejudices and hos¬
tility of the more influential classes, and indeed of the
Jewish people generally. Their views of religion were
local and selfish. They expected a conquering Messiah,
and sighed for the deliverance of the nation from the yoke
46 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

of Rome. Venerating the temple and the laws of Moses,

they supposed that the Messiah would restore both to their
pristine supremacy and splendor, that he would make Jeru¬
salem the metropolis of the world, and go forth with their
armies, “ conquering and to conquer.” Hence even those
who were at first attracted to Christ, and longed to enthrone
him in the heart of the nation, were disappointed in his
character, and gradually forsook him. The rulers trembled
for their power. The Rabbis or teachers of the nation
were shocked with his ideas of renovation and reform.
The Sadducees hated him for his purity and spirituality.
The Pharisees for his liberality and gentleness. The
Herodians for his unworldliness and self-sacrifice. The
Essenes for his freedom, his naturalness, his all-compre¬
hending love.* In fact they neither understood his char¬
acter nor his religious system, and all distinctly perceived
that his success must issue in a complete revolution of the
nation. He set aside their authority with a wmrd, poured
contempt upon their subtle distinctions **and learned com¬
ments, upset their traditionary theology, demolished even
their personal claims and official dignities. Making no
account of their sanctity, and stultifying all their pretensions,
he insisted on their being “ born again,” becoming u as little
children,” and commencing a new spiritual life. Thus they
perceived that if Jesus prevailed, the whole fabric of their
power and authority must crumble into ruins. That a
humble Galilean peasant, a Nazarene, a carpenter, should

* For an account of the different Jewish sects, see “ Neander’s Life of Christ.”
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 47

demand all this, and demand it as one having authority,

and not as the Scribes, demand it especially as the Divine
Messiah, the Son of the living God, the Judge of the quick
and the dead, was preposterous, was treasonable and
blasphemous.
On this ground, then, the leaders of the people joined
issue with Jesus, and resolved upon his destruction. In this,
however, they were only fulfilling the decrees of God ; for
it was absolutely necessary that Jesus should die. This,
indeed, was one of the great ends of his mission. Though
the Son of the Highest, the Sovereign of the soul, the
Judge of the world, he “ must needs suffer many things of the
chief-priests, and die at Jerusalem.” Thus, “ we see Jesus,”
says Paul, “ made a little lower than the angels for the
suffering of death, that he, by the grace of God, should taste
death for every man. For it became him, by whom and
for whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory,
to make the Captain of their salvation perfect through
sufferings.”
Jesus therefore steadily presses towards the closing
scene. At the passover, he again appears in Jerusalem,
assumes the port and majesty of the Messiah, rides in
mingled humility and triumph into the Holy City, amid the
hosannas of his followers—meets with his immediate dis¬
ciples in an upper room, plainly intimates to them the ap¬
proaching crisis, and institutes the solemn rite, symbolic of
his “ bloody passion.” He discourses with them freely re¬
specting this and kindred events, gives them such advice
as their circumstances demand, and pours out his whole
48 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

heart of love, in a strain of sacred fervor and eloquence.

This is what Jeremy Taylor calls u his farewell sermon,
rarely mixed of sadness and joys, and studded with myste¬
ries as with emeralds.” Among other things he refers to
his anticipated u glorification”—his entrance into heaven,
u where he was before”—the gift of the Holy Comforter, as
a consequence of his departure—his u second coming”—
and the glorious state of perfection and happiness into
which he would finally bring all his followers. He com¬
mends them and his Church universal to the care of the
Father, and prays for their unity and everlasting felicity.
Soon after this he takes three of his apostles, Peter,
James, and John, who a little while before had seen “ his
majesty” on the Mount of Transfiguration, and visits,
at the hour of night, the lonely shades of Gethsemane, just
under the brow of Olivet, from which he had wept over
Jerusalem, and there seeks to prepare his mind for the ter¬
rible conflict before him, a conflict the most mysterious and
awful the universe has seen. For even the anticipation of
it produces a fearful agony, which causes the blood to stand
in huge drops, upon his prostrate frame. But he grows
calm, and goes forth, in all the majesty of innocence, to the
fearful sacrifice.
But how strange is all this humiliation—all this distress
on the part of one who claims to be the Son of God, the
Light of the world, the Life of men, the Sovereign of
angels, the Judge of the living and the dead! But why
strange, when for this very purpose he came into the world,
not in glory, but in humiliation, to work out the redemption
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 49

of the race, “ suffering to the lowest bent of weakness in

the flesh”—that he might “ triumph to the highest pitch of
glory in the Spirit.”* Let us not forget, that, as in his birth,
so during the whole of his life, the majesty of Jesus was
generally concealed from the eyes of men. It is the sun
behind the clouds. And yet enough of its splendor at in¬
tervals, breaks through the gloom, to indicate the presence
of the luminary beyond. It was God, manifest in the flesh;
and such a manifestation, so far as the mere attributes of
majesty and power are concerned, must, after all, be a veiling
of the Deity. Hence, to carnal minds, the Godhead of Christ
is wonderfully hidden by his lowly birth, his poverty and
self-denial, his agony in the garden, and especially his
“passion” on the cross. Enough, however, both of his
natural and moral grandeur, gleams through the whole,
that even sceptics have been compelled to acknowledge
him in some sense, Divine. His innocence, his perfect self-
forgetfulness, his unparalleled love and charity, his strange
%

superiority to the race, his mysteriousness of character and

conduct, his entire separation from the world, like ‘ a star
dwelling apart,’ even while mingling freely in society; his
authority so lofty and decisive, his natural, yet singular and
all-commanding speech, his mastery over nature, walking
now upon the waves of the sea, now becoming invisible,
now appearing unexpectedly—anon forgiving sin, and at¬
testing his power to do so by miraculous cures—opening
blind eyes, unstopping deaf ears, dissipating the leprous

* Milton. Of Reformation in England, p. 1.

5
50 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

taint, and raising the very dead ; his serenity and elevation,
so unearthly and divine; his visible communion with a
higher world, his sovereignty in the realm of mind ; his
intuitive knowledge of character, his clear insight into
futurity, the homage of his followers, the worship of angels,
his proclaimed unity with God, and the attestations of the
Father, his transfiguration on the Mount, u where his face
did shine like the sun, and his raiment was white and glis¬
tening,” the attendance of Moses and Elias in glory, as if
in expression of their homage for his person, and the won¬
derful revolution from Judaism to Christianity, to be accom¬
plished by “ his decease at Jerusalem his superiority over
death and the grave, to which he voluntarily yielded for a
specific object; his resurrection from the dead, and his as- *
cension “ to the right hand of the Majesty on high,” all
these and similar manifestations of the Divinity, prove,
that even when on earth there dwelt in the man Christ
Jesus, u all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.”
But the natural might and majesty of Jesus, if we may
so express it, were shaded and held in check by the higher
purposes of his mission. On earth he exhibited himself
mainly as an humble and suffering man, u a man of sor¬
rows and acquainted with griefand he did this in order
that truth, purity and love might be enthroned over all ma¬
terial pomp and carnal glory. Indeed the higher and more
spiritual nature of Christ, to the purified vision of saints
and angels, is best revealed through his lowliness; for it is
not so much the might of Jehovah, as his grace; his power
of creation, as his power of redemption, which forms his es-
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 51

sential glory. The Jews, in their deep carnality, would

gladly have received a reigning and a conquering God;
but a God in the form of a suffering Man,—as it were, a
God despised, a God rejected, a God crucified, they could
not endure. So, also, the Greeks, who sought after wis¬
dom, would have received a Jupiter or a Mercury, a God of
power and supremacy, or of wisdom and beauty; but a
God manifest in the flesh of “the Nazarene,”—to their
minds was an infinite folly! And the reason of this is to
be found not in the purity and elevation, but in the nar¬
rowness and selfishness, of their views. Their idea of
of infinite greatness, after all, turns out to be one of infinite
littleness. Their minds were too dark, their natures too
grovelling, to admit the true conception of the Divine per¬
fection, as it shines in the face of Jesus. “ He was in the
world, and the world was made by him, and the world
knew him not.” But to pure and spiritual minds, how clear,
how resplendent the manifestation of his Divinity! How
inexpressibly radiant and beautiful, how glorious and all¬
transforming ! He who caused the light to shine out of
darkness hath shined into the hearts of such, to give them
the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face
of Jesus. In the incarnation and earthly life of Christ,
God condescended to unite what apostate man would ever
sever, the highest Essence with the lowliest form, the
blessedness and glory of Heaven with the degradation and
sorrow of earth. He has bridged the gulf which separates
the finite from the infinite, the sinful from the sinless. He
has married, by holy and indissoluble ties, the immortal and
52 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

ever blessed Life, “ the Bridegroom” of Heaven, to the mor¬

tal and suffering Church of the redeemed on earth. For
that suffering “ Son of Man,” that true Brother and Re¬
deemer of the race, is instinct with love divine. He belongs
to the infinite and the eternal. In his feeble frame shrines
itself all the fullness of the Godhead. From every chink
and fissure of the temple, trembling and falling to ruins on
Calvary, streams the very brightness of the Father’s glory.
The world, in the days of his flesh, saw not this, do not see
it now. But all regenerate spirits see it, and rejoice under
its influence. “ We beheld his glory.” This, then, is the
true and last Theophany, of which all prior manifestations
or outshinings of the Godhead were but the hints and sym¬
bols—“the Mystery of the Father of Christ and of God”—
the incarnation of that divine and Everlasting Life and
Love, which is “ the same yesterday, to-day and forever,”
which, says the apostle, “is Christ in you the hope of
glory.” Herein, then, is fulfilled that wonderful prayer of
Christ, just before his departure to the invisible world:
“ Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which
shall believe in me through their word ; that they all may
be one; as thou, Father, art in me and I in thee, that they
may also be one in us; that the world may believe that
thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me
I have given them; that they may be one even as we are
one; I in them, and Thou in me, that they may be made
perfect in one, and that the world may know that thou hast
sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.”*

* 1 John, xvii. 20, 23.

 CHAPTER IY.

Last Hours of Christ on Earth. Seizure in the garden. Citation before the Sanhedrim.
His innocence proved. His confession. Charged with blasphemy. Taken before
Pilate and Herod. The two Malefactors. Abandoned to the multitude. Crucified
on Calvary. His voluntary death. The manifestation of his Godhead in the gloom
and agony. Grandeur of the mystery. Prayer to Christ crucified.

We approach the closing scene of our Saviour’s life on

earth. It is midnight. The shadows of Olivet rest upon
the green inclosures beneath, in one of which Jesus and
his wearied disciples have spent some dreary hours. Noth¬
ing breaks the silence, save the occasional cry of the
watchman from the walls of Jerusalem, or the howl of a
solitary dog prowling in u the field of blood.” The agony
and prayer of Christ have given place to serenity and sub¬
mission. His disciples are aroused from their heavy torpor,
and all are preparing to leave the garden. Suddenly,
torches flash amid the olive trees, and the place is filled
with armed men. Judas, who heads them, advances to
Jesus, and salutes him with a kiss, the sign of cowardly
betrayal, which our Saviour rebukes with that calm dignity
peculiar to himself. At first the soldiers are overawed, as
if struck by a sudden panic. Perhaps they knew not who
it was they had come to seize, or were so moved by his
majestic bearing, as, for the moment, to lose their self-pos¬
session. a They went backward,” says the Evangelist,

5*
54 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

“and fell to the ground.” Reassured by Jesus himself,

who, in this slight incident, manifests his infinite superiority,
they take possession of his person. Peter had drawn a
sword to defend his Master, and cut off the ear of one of
the party. This act of violence is gently rebuked by Jesus,
who works a miracle to heal the wound, thus proving that
while he yielded to the brute force of his enemies, he yet
possessed all power in heaven and on earth.
He was first led to the house of Annas, probably an ex-
High-Priest, and then to that of Caiaphas, son-in-law to
Annas, and High-Priest for the time being. Here the
Sanhedrim was hastily assembled for the examination of
the prisoner. In reply to the question of the High-Priest
touching his doctrines, Jesus referred to his public career,
and the open manner in which he had promulgated his
tenets. Incensed at his dignified composure, a servant
struck him on the mouth, an act of malignant insult. But
he bore- it with the same divine composure. u If I have
spoken evil, bear witness of the evil, but if well, why
smitest thou me ?” So far from conciliating their regard,
this was the signal to more atrocious acts of violence.
The members of the Sanhedrim appear to have left at the
time, and yielded him up to their attendants. He was
blindfolded, buffeted, and spit upon, by these cowardly
menials, whose minds, like those of their masters, were too
gross to perceive the dignity of the adorable sufferer. Till
morning they subjected him to all sorts of insults, “ speak¬
ing many things blasphemously against him.”
When the day dawned, “ the elders of the people and the
t

LIFE OF CHRIST. 55

chief priests and the scribes came together, and led him
into their council.” All possible charges were brought
against him, but nothing was proved by the false and con¬
tradictory witnesses. His innocence must have been
obvious to all, had they not blinded their minds and
hardened their hearts by prejudice and passion. Despair¬
ing of finding anything against him by an ordinary pro¬
cess, the crafty High-Priest adjures him, in the name of
God, to tell them whether he is the Messiah, the Son of
the Living God. He distinctly admits the claim, and inti¬
mates that notwithstanding their present unbelief, they
would yet see him “ sitting on the right hand of the power
of God,” a claim equal to that of Supreme Divinity. Then
the High-Priest rends his clothes—-in ordinary circumstances,
a most indecorous act, but in the present, an intended expres¬
sion of his abhorrence of what he considers blasphemy.
Thereupon his condemnation is passed by the whole coun¬
cil, who had already resolved upon his death.
As the Jewish Sanhedrim had not, at this time, the power
of inflicting death, or, for sinister motives, desired the con¬
currence of the civil government, they immediately con¬
veyed Jesus to the bar of the Roman governor. Ascer¬
taining that he belonged to Galilee, Pilate, to relieve
himself of further responsibility, sent him to Herod the
Tetrarch, who happened to be in Jerusalem at this time,
doubtless for the purpose of celebrating the Passover.
Herod, who had heard much of the miracles of Christ, and
desired for a long time to see him, was gratified with this
act of attention on the part of Pilate. They had been at
56 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

enmity for some time, and this circumstance, it appears,

was the means of their reconciliation. To the numerous
questions of Herod, dictated, no doubt, more by contemptu¬
ous curiosity, than a desire to know the truth, or to do
justice in the case, Jesus “ answered him nothing.” In¬
censed, Herod and his men of war set him at nought and
mocked him, arrayed him in a gorgeous robe, (in token of
their contempt,,) and sent him again to Pilate. All this,
and much more of like sort, Jesus bore with the calm dig¬
nity and meek submission of a superior nature, bent on
suffering all things for a sublime and beneficent end.
It would seem that only a deputation from the Jewish
council had accompanied Jesus to the presence of Herod
and of Pilate, while the body of the council waited in sus¬
pense, probably in one of the great rooms of the temple,
where they were accustomed to hold their sessions. It was
at this time that Judas, stung by remorse at having betrayed
innocent blood, returned to the council, confessed his guilt,
and threw the money which they had paid him, at their
feet, a striking testimony to the divinity of our Saviour’s
mission. Having done this, Judas went and “ hanged him¬
self,” and “ falling headlong, all his bowels gushed out.”
Peter, under the pressure of severe temptation, had denied
his Master, but catching his eye of purity and love, he in¬
stantly felt the wrong, and went out and wept bitterly.
Thus by remorse and penitence on the part of those two, as
well as by constancy and love on the part of others, did the
immediate disciples of our Lord confirm his claims as the
true Messiah, the Son of the Living God.
 %
LIFE OF CHRIST. 57

So also did Pilate, in his office of magistrate. Ascer¬

taining, to his entire satisfaction, that Jesus had no trea¬
sonable design against the government, and that the aim of
his mission was to establish the truth, and found among
men an empire of righteousness and love, he positively de¬
clared to the Jews that “ he found no fault in him.” But
this selfish and mercenary man could not appreciate the
character of Christ, and probably regarding him as a fanatic
or an impostor, he yielded at last to the importunities and
threats of his enemies. “ If thou let this man go, thou art
not Caesar’s friend.” Every thing, therefore, must be sac¬
rificed for power and place. Yet was he distinctly warned,
and that, too, by his own wife, who seems to have formed
some right apprehensions of the true character of Christ,
and “ suffered many things” respecting him “ in a dream.”
But the tide of faction pressed around him. Hate, bigotry,
passion, intense and overpowering, rushed like a flood,
higher and higher, wilder and wilder ; when, yielding to its
fury, Pilate washed his hands, and gave orders for the
crucifixion of Jesus. It cost him a terrible struggle. To
avoid it, he was willing to scourge the adorable sufferer,
hoping thereby to excite pity in the bosoms of the frantic
mob. But they cried out the more, Crucify him! crucify
him! He proposed to substitute Barabbas, and release
Jesus ; but no ! Barabbas, robber and murderer, was saved,
and Jesus, the Son of God, the friend of man, must die!
But where were his followers at this time ? Where, es¬
pecially, was that portion of the giddy populace, who had
strewn palm branches in his way, and rent the air with
58 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

hosannas, as he rode in triumph into the capital ? Stunned

or frightened, they forsook him and fled, or, it may be, disap¬
pointed in their hopes of a conquering Messiah, actually
joined with his enemies in the cry, now filling the air with
its savage yells,— Crucify him ! crucify him !
Delivered to the will of his enemies, rough soldiers are at
hand to seize the sufferer and conduct him to crucifixion.
But before proceeding to this, they subject him to all kinds
of mockery and insult. Arraying him in the symbols of
mock royalty, they bend in pretended homage before him,
strike him with the palms of their hands, spit upon him,
and then stripping off his magnificent attire, dress him in
his own humble garb, and lead him forth to execution.
Worn out by long fasting, and the insulting cruelties of the
soldiery, Jesus faints under the burden of his cross, or cross¬
beam, which malefactors were accustomed to bear to the
place of crucifixion. A stranger from Cyrene, and it may
be a disciple of Christ, entering the city, is seized and made
to bear the cross after him. A great company of people,
among whom are many females, follow, beating their
bosoms, and giving utterance to their astonishment and
grief, in loud sobs and wailings. Jesus turns round, and
with a look of pity, says to them—“ weep not for me, but
rather weep for yourselves and your children”—and then
predicts the fearful doom yet to come upon Jerusalem.
The mournful procession has passed the city walls, and
arrived at Calvary—not precisely a hill, as we are accus¬
tomed to suppose, but a gentle elevation, called Golgotha,
or the place of a scull, from its being the ordinary scene of
 life of christ. 59

executions, a dismal place, and, in the estimation of the

Jews, accursed. The ogarments of Jesus are stripped
off and parted among the soldiers. Putting his lips to the
potion of wine and myrrh, usually given to criminals pre*
vious to execution, he refuses to drink of it, in order to pre¬
serve his faculties clear and self-possessed. He then per¬
mits himself to be trailed through his hands a»4=£eet, to the
rugged wood, which is elevated, and let down violently into
its socket, racking every joint and muscle of the writhing
frame.
See, then, the Son of God, suspended between heaven
and earth, in company with two malefactors, one on this
side, and another on that, u hanging,” as one of the old
divines expresses it, upon £t four dismal wounds,” and bear*
ing upon his spirit the charge of a world’s redemption ! A
sight, such as earth saw never—-a wonder to men and
angels—a mystery which God only can solve!
Now is u the hour and the power of darkness.” His ene*
mies cast his claims in his teeth, and beseech him to come
down from the cross. Not only the rude populace, but mem¬
bers of the Sanhedrim, the chief-priests and rulers of the peo¬
ple, heap insult and scorn upon the dying Saviour. But his
only reply is, “ Father, forgive them, for they know not
what they do !” One of the malefactors at his side reviles
him, as if he were the cause of his calamities; the other,
who, as Saurin remarks, appears for the time to be the only
believer in the world, craves his help: u Lord, remember me
when thou comest into thy kingdom”—a prayer instantly
answered by Jesus, who, forgetting his own pangs, the
60 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

insults of the rabble, and the maledictions of the other

criminal, replies, with the mingled majesty and mercy of a
God, “ Verily, I say unto thee, this day shalt thou be with
me in Paradise.” Beautiful episode in the fearful drama of
agony and blood—as instructive, too, as it is beautiful.
There hangs the Son of God in his “ passion”—the
centre of hope to the world. On one side is the perishing
scorner,—type of all who reject the Saviour and perish in
their sins ; on the other, the penitent,—symbol of all who
believe in Jesus, and rest with him forever in the Paradise
of God. On the Cross, our Saviour is omnipotent to for¬
give. Even in dying, he saves from death ! When poorest,
he bestows the greatest wealth. When utterly forsaken
on earth, he opens heaven to the dying sinner!
From the same spirit of kindness he provides for his
mother, standing there, in anguish unutterable, under the
shadow of his cross, commending her to the care of “ the
beloved disciple”—one of the most touching instances at
once of maternal and of filial affection.
From the third hour, or nine o’clock in the morning, un¬
til the ninth hour, or three o’clock in the afternoon, hangs
our Saviour, in mysterious anguish, upon the cross. At
noon the sun hides his face. From that time, three whole
hours, enveloped in the darkness of an eclipse, or in that
sullen gloom which usually precedes an earthquake, breath¬
ing heavily, and becoming fainter and fainter, he suffers
unutterable pangs ; when, finally, his earthly nature giving
way, he cries out with a loud voice: u Eloi, Eloi, lama,
 LIFE OF CHRIST, 61

sabacthani'l My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken

me ?” words of profound anguish and ineffable import,
which it were presumption perhaps to interpret.* One
compassionate hand raises a sponge of vinegar, or weak
wine, to cheer the pale sufferer, but it is instantly arrested
by the bystanders, who willingly misunderstanding his
words, command him to wait and see whether “that
great and certain sign of the Messiah, the appearance of
Elijah, would now take place.”
But no! he is manifestly dying. Yet how calm and
self-possessed! While the human nature yields to the
pressure of agony, we see the Divinity which that nature
enshrines, assuming the mastery, and voluntarily resigning
all of perishable in his mysterious person to the stroke of
death. “ When Jesus, therefore, had received the vinegar,
he said, It is finished : and he bowed his head, and gave up
the ghost.” Beholding the scene, the Roman centurion,
as if expressing the testimony of nature, exclaimed : “ This
was a righteous man”—“this was the Son of God!”
Even Rousseau, uttering, so to speak, the extorted convic¬
tion of scepticism, declares, “ that if Socrates died like a
philosopher, Jesus died like a God!” while the greatest

* It may be remarked that this expression, borrowed from the twenty-second Psalm,
had been consecrated for ages, as the utterance of deep anguish. It ought never to be
regarded as a dogmatic formula, having all the precision of a theological proposition ;
and cannot, therefore, with any sort of propriety, be cited against the doctrine of our
Saviour’s Divinity. It is the spontaneous language of a heart oppressed with grief
and despair. Often, however, it has been inadvertently cited, to prove the departure of
the Godhead from the Manhood of Jesus, in the hour of his agony, than which no sup¬
position can be more unscriptural or absurd. Christ suffered as the Son of God. His
whole nature was engaged in the closing act of the world’s redemption.

6
62 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

genius of the nineteenth century speaks of the event as a

mystery, “ in which the Divine depth of sorrow lies hid.,,#
But, O! what a descent is here. The Son of God cru¬
cified like a felon ! The Sovereign of the Seraphim expiring
on the Cross ! The Messiah dead ! Is he not Divine ? Is
he not omnipotent ? Was he not before Abraham ? And
is he not the same yesterday, to-day, and forever ? Dead!
—how is that ?—■why is that ? It cannot be—it must not
be! For then Life itself is dead! Yes,—and that is the
very wonder of the Cross—‘the very mystery of redemption.
“ For while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” “ One
died for all, for that all were dead.” And this was done,
that “ through death he might destroy him that had the
power of death, and deliver them who through fear of
death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.”
But in all this shame, agony and dissolution, accounted
for when we look at the incarnation, and consequent
humanity of Christ, do you not see tokens the most striking,
of Supreme power and changeless Divinity? Whence

* In an interesting fragment of Goethe’s, called Wilhelm Meister's Wanderjahre,

the various religions which have appeared in the world are characterized in a very
striking manner; the Christian Religion being regarded as the last and most perfect.
Jesus Christ is styled “ the Divine Man his life is set up for “ a pattern and an ex¬
ample,” and his death as “ a model of exalted patience.” The Gospel is styled
symbolically, “ the Sanctuary of Sorrow the sufferings of Christ upon the Cross,
which seem to awe the poet’s spirit, are denominated “ mysterious secrets, in which
the divine depth of sorrow lies hid.” Goethe’s Wanderjahre was published in his
seventy-second year, when his mind, having passed through its first agitations of scepti¬
cism and sorrow, had settled into a vague but calm and beautiful faith in “the good
and true.” That much doubt, and many errors yet remained, is quite evident; but he
cherished a profound reverence for “ the Religion of Sorrow,” as he loved to call it,
whose “ divine depth” he had so beautifully characterized.
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 63

that serenity, and even joy, in the holy sufferer ?* Whence

that boundless love—that infinite forgiveness ? Whence
the very power voluntarily to suffer such a death ? Why
did nature sympathize in his agony, as if it were instinct
with life, and felt every pang which pierced his heart 7
Why hid the sun his beams ? Why trembled the earth ?
Why rent the rocks ? Why rose the dead ? Why burst
the veil of the temple from the top to the bottom, revealing
the sacred mysteries, and proclaiming the close of Judaism ?
Ah, were it possible to have looked into heaven, at that
august moment, we should have seen each angel, hanging
over his harp in breathless suspense, and the infinite God
himself absorbed in the mighty event. It was the heart of
the Deity which uttered itself in the sigh of nature, the
gloom of the heavens, the trembling of the earth, the rend¬
ing of the rocks. For nature

“ Is but a name for an effect,

Whose cause is God.”

This, doubtless, is the reason why the Apostle speaks of

redemption as the “ mystery of the Father of Christ and of
God”—that the whole Trinity, Father, Son and Holy
Ghost, are equally revealed in it, and that the hymns of the
glorified rise forever to “ God and the Lamb.”

“ Bound every heart! and every bosom burn !

Oh, what a scale of miracles is here !
Its lowest round, high planted in the skies :
Its towering summit, lost beyond the thought
Of man or angel! Oh, that I could climb

* “ For the joy set before him, he endured the cross.” This, of course, was the joy of
gratified benevolence, which is equally delightful in its anticipation and enjoyment.
64 MANIFESTATION ^ F GOD.

The wonderful ascent with equal praise !

Praise i flow forever, (if astonishment
Will give thee leave ;) my praise ! forever flow ;
Praise, ardent, cordial, constant; to high Heaven
More fragrant than Arabia sacrificed,
And all her spicy mountains in a flame.”

It is evening. The darkness and tumult of the day

have subsided. Nought is heard but the hollow murmur
of the great city. The red rays of the departing sun tinge
the hill-tops around Jerusalem, and linger, in mournful
beauty, upon the dome of the temple and the tower of An¬
tonia. Three crosses, with three melancholy burdens, now
still, are darkly marked against the sky, and cast long
shadows upon the hill of Calvary. As it is the preparation
for the Passover—as, moreover, the crucifixion of Jesus has
excited the populace, vast crowds are clustered here and
there about the temple, on the walls of the city, or on the
neighboring mountains. Men and women are moving to
and fro beyond the city walls, some with downcast or
thoughtful look, others with flushed and angry visage.
Afar off, perhaps on the brow of Olivet, some of the disci¬
ples and friends of Jesus, and all the women that followed
him from Galilee, among whom are Mary Magdalene, and
Mary the mother of James the less, and of Joses, and Sa¬
lome, the mother of Zebedee’s children, and many other
women, stand gazing, with fixed and mournful look, upon
the cross of Christ. “ And all the people that came to¬
gether to that sight, beholding the things which were dene,
smote their breasts and returned.” The beloved disciple,
too, is there, lingering around the cross of his Master; and
he informs us, that when the soldiers came to hasten the
 LIFE OF CHRIST.

death of the malefactors, seeing it was the preparation of

the Passover, after breaking the legs of the two thieves,
approached the body of Jesus, and found him dead.
Whereupon one of the soldiers, permitted by God to commit
the rude act, as if to certify us as to the reality of his death,
11 with a spear pierced his side/5 when “ forthwith came
thereout blood and water.55
Here, then, let us draw near, and look upon Him whom
we, as well as those that crucified him, have pierced; and
as we look, let us offer this prayer :*
“ O, dearest Saviour, I adore thy mercies and thy incom¬
parable love, expressed in thy so voluntary susception and
affectionate suffering such horrid and sad tortures, which
cannot be remembered without a sad compassion; the
waters of bitterness entered into thy soul, and the storms of
death, and thy Father’s anger broke thee all in pieces :
and what shall I do, who by my sins have so tormented
my dearest Lord ? What contrition can be great enough,
what tears sufficiently expressive, what hatred and detesta¬
tion of my crimes, can be equal and commensurate to those
sad accidents which they have produced? Pity me, O,
Lord; pity me, dearest God ; turn thou thy merciful eyes
towards me, O, most merciful Redeemer, for my sins are
great, like unto thy passion ; full of sorrow and shame, and
a burden too great for me to bear. Lord, who hast done so
much for me, now only speak the word, and thy servant
shall be whole. Let thy wounds heal me, thy virtues

* Written by Jeremy Taylor.

6*
66 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

amend me, thy death quicken me; that I, in this life, suf¬
fering the cross of a sad and solitary repentance, in the
union and merits of thy cross and passion, may die with
thee, and rest with thee, and rise again with thee, and live
with thee forever, in the possession of thy glories, O,
dearest Saviour Jesus. Amen.”
 CHAPTER V.

The immediate effect of Christ’s death. His burial. His resurrection. Appearance
to his disciples. Proofs of his resurrection satisfactory. The manner of his resur¬
rection like that of his birth—in harmony with the whole of his life. Reasons of his
appearance only to his followers. God’s method of working.

Christianity was centred in the person of Jesus. When

he therefore was crucified, Christianity appeared to be ex¬
tinguished. This was the feeling of the Jews, particu¬
larly of the Jewish Sanhedrim. This, too, was the feeling
of Christ’s own disciples. With one or two exceptions,
“ they all forsook him and fled.” Stunned by the blow,
they seemed to forget every thing he had said respecting
his resurrection. It was an event of which they had no
expectation. All their hopes of redemption to Israel were
buried in his grave. They abandoned themselves to de¬
spair. Hence it is perfectly clear, that if Jesus had not
risen, his claims would have been forgotten and despised by
friends and foes. His disciples were men of humble station
and narrow views. They possessed no influence in the
community, no confidence even in themselves. Christ was
their only hope. Without him they could do nothing.
But he was dead and buried—and they shrunk away from
observation. They yielded to the terrible conviction that
their faith was a delusion, their hopes a dream.
Joseph of Arimathea, a man of distinction and wealth,
68 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

and u a disciple of Jesus, but secretly, for fear of the Jews,”

begged his body from the Roman procurator, and laid it in
his own new tomb, cut out of the rock, in one of the in¬
closures not far from the place of the crucifixion. Actuated
by natural reverence and affection, but with no definite ex¬
pectation of any thing beyond, Joseph of Arimathea, as¬
sisted by Nicodemus, and others of the more wealthy but
cautious and timid disciples of Jesus, performed the funeral
rites over his body, wrapping it in fine linen, and anointing
it with a mixture of costly spices and myrrh, “ as the man¬
ner of the Jews is to bury”—and then reverently closed
the tomb, and hurried to their homes. This was on the
evening previous to the Sabbath, one of the high festival
days of the Jewish Passover.
On the succeeding day, recollecting some vague rumors
respecting his resurrection, the Jewish Council, afraid that
his disciples might steal the body of Jesus, and pretend that
he was risen from the dead, engaged Pilate to seal the
sepulchre, and set over it a guard of Roman soldiers.
None of his own disciples appear to have approached the
sepulchre all of that day. They would be restrained from
doing so, by the sanctity of the occasion, as that Sabbath
was observed by the Jews with unusual strictness. Their
fear of consequences, however, had induced the Jewish
Council to go so far as to get Pilate to break the Sabbath,
by the sealing of the sepulchre, and the appointment of a
watch, but this was a matter of no consequence to them,
as Pilate and his soldiers were heathen, and would not
hesitate to violate a Jewish institution!
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 69

Among the Hebrews, the rites of embalming lasted forty

days. Early in the morning, therefore, upon the first day
of the week, Mary of Magdala, Mary the mother of
James and Salome, with Joanna the wife of Chuza, Herod’s
« steward, brought sweet spices to the sepulchre, that they
might again embalm the body of Jesus. But who will
remove for them the stone at the entrance of the sepulchre ?
This difficulty, however, does not prevent their approach—
when, lo! they find the stone already removed, and the
body of Jesus gone ! But where was the seal affixed by
the command of Pilate ? Where, too, the guard of Roman
soldiers, whose duty it was, on pain of death, according to
the Roman law, to keep their post, and guard the sepul¬
chre ? They had fled; and the story they told was this,
that the disciples of Jesus came by night and stole him
away.” Stole him! How did they know that? Why
did they not prevent it ? And why, moreover, were they
not punished for deserting their post ? The story is incredi¬
ble and absurd, and the only reason that can be given for
it, is the fact stated by the Evangelist, that they were hired
by the Jewish Council to tell it, and screened from pun¬
ishment by the intervention of the Council. But how pre¬
posterous the idea, that the disciples of Jesus stole his body,
and pretended that he was risen from the dead! It im¬
plies a wonderful change in their feelings, and not only so,
but in their character. For those timid and despairing dis¬
ciples suddenly become bold and resolute, cunning and
wicked. They frighten, by their very presence, a whole
cohort of Roman soldiers, abstract the dead body of
70 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

Jesus—afterwards pretend that it was alive, and under

the influence of this conscious lie, go forth to proclaim
“ peace on earth and good will to men,” and submit to every
form of privation and suffering, nay, to death itself, in attes¬
tation of their testimony!
But why dwell upon this ? No sceptic, even, however
purblind in other respects, can swallow such an absurdity.
And hence we recur to the sacred narrative, so calm and
honest, so simple and clear, for the true solution of the
problem. At break of day, being the third from the time
when our Saviour was buried, according to the Jewish
mode of reckoning, just before the approach of the females
who came to embalm the body, u there was a great earth¬
quake : for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven,
and came and rolled back the stone from the door and sat
upon it. And for fear of him the keepers did shake and
became as dead men.” Jesus had burst the barriers of the
tomb. As he had yielded voluntarily to death, and in yield¬
ing to it, had actually conquered death, so he rose from the
grave, by the might of his indwelling and immutable Spirit.
It was impossible he should be holden of death, for he had
entered its dark domain only to illumine it, and thence bring
with him all his ransomed ones. Thus while the women
were much perplexed by the manifest absence of his body
from the open tomb, into whose dim chamber the light of
a new-born day began to pour its beams, an angel, or angels,
in shining garments, appeared to them, and said—the
women meanwhile bowing themselves in fear and rever¬
ence, to the ground—“ Why seek ye the living among the
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 71

dead 1 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 unto the hands of sinful men,
and be crucified, and the third day rise again. He is not
here, he has risen, as he said ; come see the place where the
Lord lay.” Returning from the sepulchre, such of the dis¬
ciples as were within reach were informed of the resurrec¬
tion, and they came to the sepulchre, and satisfied them¬
selves of its reality. No marks of violence were seen in and
about the sepulchre. The grave clothes were laid care¬
fully aside, and it was clear that the resurrection of Christ
had occurred, like his birth, without noise and tumult. The >
earth, indeed, trembled, but it was a trembling of joy, as if
in sympathy with the gladness and triumph of the occa¬
sion. The keepers became pale with affright, and slunk
away to their homes. But in and about the sepulchre itself,
all was serene and beautiful, like the opening day, begin¬
ning to blush from the portals of the East. Jesus, radian*
with glory, rose from the tomb, silent and majestic, just in
the manner that we should imagine the Sun of Righteous¬
ness would ascend from the darkness of that dismal night
into which he had voluntarily gone down.*
During forty days subsequent to the resurrection, Jesus
appeared to his disciples, at first incredulous of his resur¬
rection, and only to be assured of the fact by the most

* Aurora lucis rutilit

Coelum laudibus intonat,
Mundus exultans jubilat
Gemens infernus ululat.—Hymn—Paschal.
 72 manifestation of god.

clear and decisive proofs, bestowing upon them his bless¬

ings, conversing with them respecting the things of his
kingdom, and giving directions as to their future conduct
and destiny. What was the nature of our Saviour’s body
now, it is not for us to say, and is perhaps a subject of
useless speculation. That it was a spiritual body, to some
extent—a body controlled entirely by the higher nature
within,—a body pure and perfect, vigorous and immortal—
a body akin to that of glorified spirits, and moreover to be
rendered still more radiant and glorious, cannot be doubted.
Yet it was, in some sense, the body that was buried, and
which retained to it some striking resemblance, for there
i

were the marks of the nails, and of the spear, as if left on

purpose to satisfy the sceptical, who, like Thomas, would
not be convinced without such ocular and special demon¬
stration.
Such were the mode and frequency of our Saviour’s com¬
munications with his disciples, as to leave them without
doubt as to the reality of his resurrection. It was not in
visions they saw him. Not in the dim twilight, or the
shadowy night—not in the solemn forest, or the leafy
grove—not in haunted ruins, or whispering aisles, but in
the broad light of day, in the presence of each other, in the
house and by the way, in the place of prayer, and on the
mountain top—not for a few moments, but for hours—not
in seasons of secret devotion or of religious ecstacy, but in
such scenes and circumstances as could not admit of de¬
ception or illusion. Neither was he seen by a few individ¬
uals only, but by the whole body of the disciples ; first by
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 73

Mary Magdalene, then by the assembled eleven, then by

the two disciples on their journey to Emmaus, then again
by the eleven and Thomas; after that at the sea of Tibe¬
rias, by Simon Peter, Thomas called Didymus, Nathanael
of Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two other
disciples: subsequently, by “ all the brethren gathered
together by his own appointment at a mountain in Gali¬
lee,” by 11 five hundred brethren at onceat another time
by James; at another, when the apostles were at dinner,
“ upbraiding them with their unbeliefand finally, at the
end of forty days, when he led them out as far as Bethany,
and ascended in their presence to Heaven.
The manner of our Saviour’s resurrection was, in all
probability, essentially different from that which existed
in the preconceptions of his own disciples, if, indeed, they
had any definite ideas on the subject. The Jews, as a
people, expected a resurrection in connection with the Mes¬
siah’s advent. He was to raise all the dead of Israel, and
reign with them on earth—exalting both the living and the
dead to the highest seats of power and splendor. But our
Saviour ascended from the tomb without any visible dis¬
play, in the hush of the morning, with none but angels to
witness the event, and without the resurrection of a single
individual of the myriads of the departed. The course of
nature moved on as usual. A few humble souls only were
made acquainted with the fact, and the whole world besides
left in profound ignorance of its occurrence. He made his
appearance not in the temple of Jerusalem, not in the syna¬
gogue of the Jews, not in the streets of the city, amid the
7
74 manifestation of god.

assembled multitudes, who kept holy-day during the Pass-

over ; but in the suburbs of the city, in a remote upper room,
by the sea of Tiberias, and on a lone mountain of Galilee.
Why was this ? Why did he not proclaim his resurrection
to the world? Why did he not convince the Sanhedrim and
the people of the Jews, by appearing to them in his majesty,
and flashing the light of Heaven in their eyes ? If he had
done so, it would have been inconsistent with his whole
procedure, from his cradle to his grave. For he came
“ without observation,” veiling his Godhead in forms of
humility and suffering, attracting rather than forcing men
to himself, gradually enlightening and transforming their
minds, not overwhelming them with manifestations of om¬
nipotence. Suppose he had appeared to the Jews after his
resurrection, would they have believed him then ? Would
they have followed him to lowliness, to poverty and death ?
Would they have become his true disciples, taken up their
cross, and borne it after him in humility and love ? In
a word, would they have been converted by such a mani¬
festation of his glory ? We have no reason to believe they
would. Our Saviour knew better what was in man.
Therefore did he appear to his own humble followers,
and instructing them what to do, shed upon them and
upon others his blessed and life-giving spirit, and thou¬
sands, even of his enemies, were born into his kingdom.
God’s method of working is ever silently, slowly, and unos¬
tentatiously. A handful of corn is sown upon the tops of the
mountains, and by and by it shakes like Lebanon. Misty
vapor is drawn from the bosom of the earth, suspended in
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 75

fleecy clouds above us, let down again in showers upon the
ground; the streams run among the hills, gather them¬
selves into rivers, and roll in majesty to the sea, where all
are mingled in the mighty tides which encircle the globe.
So here, Jesus appears to a few of his disciples, instructs
and prepares them by a gentle but irresistible process for
their work, sends them forth into the world, and the world
hears that by his death and resurrection he has brought
life and immortality to light. Hundreds, nay, thousands,
everywhere, believe, repent, obey. Not by observation, not
by pomp and display, above all, not by physical power or
mechanical demonstrations of any kind, “ but by my Spirit,
saith the Lord.” The kingdom comes—comes not as the
kingdoms of earth, for it is invisible and divine. Nor does
it ever pass away. While all earthly rule expires, and
the very stars grow dim, the kingdom of Christ endureth
forever.
 CHAPTER YI.

Christ’s last interview with his Disciples. His Ascension. The completion of his
mission. The relation of his life on earth, to his higher and more enduring life in
Heaven. Jesus Christ, the true God and eternal Life. Prayer to Christ
triumphant.

Forty days from his resurrection, Jesus had assembled

with his disciples in the city of Jerusalem, probably in that
quiet upper room, in a remote and unfrequented part of the
city, where they were accustomed to perform their devo¬
tions. It was on this occasion that he commanded them
not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait there for the
descent of the Holy Ghost, who should endow them with
supernatural power for the discharge of their high functions
as the first promulgators of Christianity. He showed
them, moreover, how all things, which were written concern¬
ing him, in the Old Testament Scriptures, had been ful¬
filled, and what relation his death and resurrection bore to
the redemption of the world. “ Then opened he their under¬
standing to understand the Scriptures, and said unto them,
Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer,
and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repent¬
ance and remission of sins should be preached in his name
among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And ye are
witnesses of these things. And behold, I send the promise
of my Father upon you, but tarry ye in the city of Jerusa¬
lem until ye be endued with power from on high.”
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 77

How long these conversations lasted, we are not in¬

formed, but that they produced a deep impression on the
minds of the Apostles, cannot be doubted.
Early in the morning, even before the break of day, he
set out with them through the yet silent streets of Jerusa¬
lem, into the neighboring country. He took the road to
Bethany and the Mount of’ Olives, which he had so fre¬
quently travelled before, conversing, meanwhile, upon the
things of his kingdom, and preparing their minds for his
departure to Heaven. Bethany lay on the east side of the
city, and just on the further ascent of the Mount of
Olives. Here our Saviour had often lingered, in medita¬
tive mood, or in solemn communion with Heaven. Here,
a few days before, he had gazed upon the devoted city,
and wept over its melancholy doom. Not far from this,
also, he had suffered his mysterious agony in the garden.
And O ! who can tell what were his emotions when he
approached it, and from the brow of Olivet again looked
back upon the scene of his crucifixion! It was during
this walk from the city, and, in all probability, while he was
slowly ascending the hill, and it may be, lingering to gaze
upon Jerusalem, beginning to gleam faintly under the first
rays of the morning, that he replied to that question of his
Apostles, indicating so strikingly their yet imperfect views
of his character and mission : “ Lord, wilt thou at this time
restore the kingdom to Israel ? And he said unto them,
It is not for you to know the times and the seasons which
the Father hath put in his own power. But ye shall
receive power after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you :
7*
78 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

and ye shall be witnesses unto me, both in Jerusalem and

in Judea, and in Samaria, and to the uttermost parts of the
earth.” A few moments after, he added, “ All power is
given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye, therefore,
and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the
Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. And, lo! I
am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” At
this point, we may imagine that they had gained the sum¬
mit of the mountain, and while the soft light of the morn¬
ing was reflected from his serene countenance, upturned, as
we may naturally suppose, towards Heaven, in expecta¬
tion of his ascension, “ even while he was yet speaking,
he was taken up, and a cloud received him out of their
sight.” This was done so suddenly, and yet so naturally
and gently, that the disciples were by no means startled,
but kept gazing upon his changing and ascending form,
glorified, in all probability, as it was on the Mount of Trans¬
figuration, “ when his countenance did shine like the sun,
and his raiment was white and glistering.” He had
ceased speaking while he ascended, and stretching forth
his arms, he blessed them in parting. This was his atti¬
tude and manner of leaving the world. This was his last
earthly look and aspect towards his disciples. “ And he led
them out,” says Luke, “as far as Bethany; and he lifted
up his hands and blessed them. And it came to pass
while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and car¬
ried up into Heaven.” “A cloud,” doubtless a radiant
cloud, “ received him out of their sight.” They were trans¬
fixed with astonishment and delight. For their eyes were
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 79

opened to behold his glory. They understood the purport

of his words, the design of his ascension. His spirit drop¬
ped upon them with his parting blessing. Hence, it is said,
“ they worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with
great joy.” How evident from all this that our Saviour
ascended slowly, through the still air, and that his disci¬
ples had a clear, unobstructed vision of his glory. As he
parted from them, with his hands outstretched to bless
them, they fell prostrate on the ground, in adoring wonder,
and gazed upon his ascending form till it was received by
a luminous cloud. Nay, sometime after the blessed vision
was gone, they continued to gaze in the direction which it
had taken, entranced with delight and awe, and, as it were,
riveted to the spot.
“ And while they looked steadfastly toward Heaven, as
he went up, behold two men (angels in the form of men,)
stood by them, in white apparel, which also said, Ye
men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into Heaven?
This same Jesus which is taken up from you into Heaven,
shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into
Heaven.”
Such were the circumstances attending Christ’s ascent
to glory. Such the manner in which he left his disciples
on Olivet. How touching and beautiful! How much in
harmony with the genius of the Gospel, and with the whole
course of our Saviour’s life on earth !

A.nd when thou didst depart, no car of flame,

To bear thee hence in lambent radiance came,

»-»
80 MANIFESTATI ON OF GOD.

No visible angels mourned with drooping plumes ;

Nor dids’t thou mount on high
From fatal Calvary,
With all thine own redeemed outbursting from the tombs ;
But thou dids’t haste to meet
Thy mother’s coming feet,
And bear the w’ords of peace unto the faithful few :
Then calmly, slowdy didst thou rise
Into thy native skies,
Thy human form dissolved on high,
In its own radiancy.

“ You all know,” says Tholuck, catching the spirit of

this occasion, “of what inconceivable worth is the last look
of a friend. As his countenance then appeared, that is the
image which imprints itself most deeply on the soul. How
delightful now it is to see the manner in which the last
glance of Jesus fell upon his chosen. The earliest rays of
the opening day shone through the clouds, and then, says
the history, he lifted up his hands and blessed them, and a
cloud received him out of their sight. Amid the shades of
night he came, in the redness of the morning dawn he
went away; ever, ever shalt thou stand before our souls,
thou glorified Saviour, in the same attitude in which thou
didst leave the world, with thy hands extended over thy
chosen to bless them.”
It is on this account, as well as on others of a still more
impressive kind, that the disciples returned to Jerusalem
with great joy, and were continually in the temple blessing
and praising God. “ Wherever they stood, and wherever
they went, those blessing hands were before their eyes.
And do not we, beloved brethren, exclaim : O, that we had
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 81

oeen there! O, that we had been there, to see those blessing

*

. hands !”
Thus was our Saviour’s mission on earth completed. It
was meet, therefore, that he should ascend to heaven,
where he was before ; in other words, that he should pass
from the outward and perishable, to the inward and immor¬
tal, and carry on, by higher and more spiritual means, the
great work which he had only commenced. This was his
coronation as King in Zion. Now he was invested with
the dominion of the church. And now began that peace¬
ful and triumphant reign which is yet to fill the whole
earth with its glory. This was fully understood by his dis¬
ciples, who were inspired with a new life. A few days after,
the Spirit descended upon them, and endued them with
divine power, so that they went forth, testifying every
where, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Bold, resolute, commanding, they proclaimed, even in the
scene of his crucifixion and shame, the thrilling fact of his
glorification at the right-hand of the Father. Nay, more,
they charged the guilt of his execution on the Council
and people of the Jews, and affirmed, in the very halls
of Justice, that Jesus of Nazareth was exalted a prince
and a Saviour, to give redemption unto Israel, and the re¬
mission of sins. “ These submissive, timid, and scattered
followers of Jesus,” says Milman, “ thus burst upon the
public attention, suddenly invested with courage, endowed
with commanding eloquence, in the very scene of their
Master’s cruel apprehension and execution, asserting his
Messiahship in a form as irreconcilable with their own pre-
82 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

conceived notions as with those of the rest of the people;

arraigning the rulers, and by implication, if not as yet in
distinct words, the whole nation, of the most heinous act
of impiety as well as barbarity, the rejection of the Mes¬
siah; proclaiming the resurrection, and defyinginvestigation.
The whole speech of Peter clashed with the strongest pre¬
judices of those who had so short a time before given such
fearful evidence of their animosity and remorselessness. It
proclaimed that “ the last days,” the days of the Messiah,
the days of prophecy and wonder, had already begun. It
placed the Being whom but forty days before they had seen
helplessly expiring upon the cross, far above the pride,
almost the idol of the nation, King David. The ashes of
the king had long reposed in the tomb which was before
their eyes; but the tomb could not confine Jesus; death had
no power over his remains. Nor was his resurrection all:
the crucified Jesus was now c on the right-hand of God
he had assumed that last, that highest distinction of the
Messiah—the superhuman majesty; that intimate relation
with the Deity, which, however vaguely and indistinctly
shadowed out in the Jewish notion of the Messiah, was,
as it were, the crowning glory, the ultimate height to which
the devout hopes of the most strongly excited of the Jews
followed up the promised Redeemer: c Therefore let all
the house of Israel know assuredly that God hath made that
same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and
Christ!”’*

* History of Christianity, p. 150.

 LIFE OF CHRIST. 83

At this point we discover the relation of our Saviour’s

life on earth, to his higher and more enduring life in
heaven. His descent to the world, and his life of sorrow
here, was but an episode in his existence, which is com¬
mensurate with eternity. Before Abraham, nay, more,
before all time, he existed as “ The Word of God,” who
was “ in the beginning with God.” He is u before all
things, and by him all things consist,” the Alpha and the
Omega, the first and the last, the same yesterday, to-day,
and forever. Hence, when he ascended up on high, he as¬
cended u where he was before.” He took possession of
“ the glory which he had before the world was.” And so
he lives for evermore. u His dominion is an everlasting do¬
minion, and of his kingdom there shall be no end.” His
life, then, is that of God—a life original, uncreated, inde¬
structible and eternal. In a word, he is Life itself, and his
human form but a means of manifesting, to our imperfect
conceptions, his indwelling and everlasting Godhead.
u What think ye of Christ ? whose son. is He ? They
say unto him, the Son of David. Why, then, doth David
in spirit call him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto
my Lord, sit thou on my right-hand until I make thine
enemies thy footstool.” “ And thou, Lord, in the begin¬
ning has laid the foundations of the earth, and the heav¬
ens are the work of thy hands. They shall perish, but
thou endurest. Yea, ail of them shall wax old as doth
a garment. But thou art the same, and thy years shall
not fail.” “ Unto Him that loved us, and washed us from
our sins in his own blood, and hath made us kings and
84 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

priests unto God and his Father ; to Him be glory and do¬
minion forever and ever ! Amen. Behold! He cometh with
clouds; and every eye shall see Him, and they also
which pierced Him. Even so, Amen! I am Alpha and
Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord,
which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Al¬
mighty.”
Adorable and ever blessed Saviour! Lamb of God that
takest away the sins of the world, have mercy upon
us! By thine agony and death, by thy resurrection and
ascension to the right-hand of the Majesty on high ; by
thine infinite love and pity, by thine eternal majesty and
perfection, have mercy upon us! Reveal to us thy glory,
and make us partakers of thy fullness. Shine, thou Sun of
Righteousness into the darkness of our souls, and trans¬
form us into thine image. Thou art the Light and Life
of the world ! Thou art love eternal! All angels adore
thee! The spirits of just men made perfect praise thee !
All saints bless thee! Heaven and earth are full of thy
glory. Thou art all our salvation and all our desire!
Whom have we in heaven but thee, and there is none on
earth we desire beside thee ! Our heart and our flesh faint-
eth and faileth ; but thou art the strength of our heart and
our portion forever, Amen !

“ O, thou who art our life,

Be with us through the strife,
Thy own meek head with rudest storms was bowed;
Raise thou our eyes above,
To see a Father’s love,
Beam like a bow of promise through the cloud.
 LIFE OF CHRIST. 85
Even through the awful gloom,
Which hovers o’er the tomb,
That light of love our guiding star shall be
Our spirits shall not dread
The shadowy way to tread,
Friend, guardian, Saviour, which doth lead to thee.”

8
 THE MANIFESTATION OF GOD IN CHRIST.

PART SECOND.
THE CHARACTER AND MISSION OF CHRIST.

CHAPTER I.

SINLESSNESS OR MORAL PERFECTION OF CHRIST.

We have briefly glanced at the salient points in our

Saviour’s Life, considering it chiefly in its historical connec¬
tion. A full and accurate portrait we could not draw.
Indeed, such a thing were impossible. One might as well
attempt, as a thoughtful German suggests, to paint the
sun with charcoal! All that we intended was a brief out¬
line, which might furnish a basis for a fuller and more pre¬
cise discussion of those great doctrines touching the Char¬
acter and Work of Christ, which lie at the foundation of
the Christian system, and constitute the life of every believ¬
ing soul.
In the first place, we propose to inquire whether, even as
a man, Jesus Christ was not absolutely sinless, or perfect,
using the term in its widest signification ; and whether his
character, in this respect, was not entirely diverse from any
that ever existed among men. The character of Christ,
indeed, is eminently natural; that is, it is simple, spontane¬
ous and consistent, such as becomes a true and perfect man.
Yet it is wholly supernatural, on account of its entire free-
88 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

dom from sin, from positive transgression, imperfection and

inadequacy of every sort, and in being ennobled and beau¬
tified by the loftiest virtues.
Sin, in its essential character, to use the definition of
Gregory of Nyssa, the best we have seen, is “ estrangement
from God, who is the true and only Life,”—a definition
well agreeing with the striking words of Chrysostom, who
says, u He that sins is far from God, not in place, but in
disposition.”* It throws little light upon the absolute na¬
ture of sin to say, that it is “ a transgression of the law,”
“ a violation of the principles of our moral being,” or that
it is “ inadequacy, perversion or disorder of the soul, in re¬
lation to the great standard of righteousness.” For these
definitions, or rather descriptions, good enough so far as
they go, are not intended to exhaust the subject, and have
reference only to the results of sin, which is a cause, as
well as an effect, a state as well as an action. Sin, as an
expression of character, or as an overt act, is doubtless Ct a
transgression of the lawbut as a state or disposition of
the soul, an element or principle of the life, it is more than
this. It lies in the very centre of our being, which is
tainted or perverted in some way before it can transgress
the law. The author of the definition in the Assembly’s
Shorter Catechism nearly touched the real essence of the
thing, when he said “ sin is any want of conformity unto,
or transgression of the law of God;” but this is too vague
and inadequate. Ullmann goes no farther, when affirming

* Quoted in Suicer’s Thesaurus, and re-quoted by Ullmann.

 SINLESSNESS OF CHRIST. 89

sin to be “ the deviation of a free nature from the moral

law of God; the disagreement of the moral life, that is,
the intentions, the general aim of the will, or a single act
of the will, and the outward deeds with the divine law.”*
Such descriptions, accurate enough as descriptions, touch
only the surface of the subject, and leave its real nature or
essence in profound obscurity.
The soul sustains its highest and most intimate relations
to God. So long as it abides in him, it cannot sin. Love
and purity are the necessary elements of its being. It
goes, therefore, into the very essence of the matter, to say
that sin is the estrangement or deviation, in act or disposi¬
tion, of a free moral nature from God,—estrangement, more
or less complete, from the Being, who is himself the law
of the moral universe, and the very foundation of the soul’s
life ; in a word, the alienation of a free and deathless spirit
from its centre and its end. God is the root of being and
of well-being. He is the law of laws, the sum and centre
of all spiritual life. To know and love God supremely, in
other words, to be united to God, as heart to heart, and
spirit to spirit, and thence to live in him, and by him, and
for him, constantly and forever, is to be sinless and perfect.
Then the finite blends with the infinite, and all error, in¬
completeness and imperfection are excluded. The soul,
escaping “ the pollution that is in the world through lust,”
is a partaker of the Divine nature, and lives in conscious
and everlasting harmony with the good and the true. So

* “Sinlessness of Christ,” by Dr. Ullmann of Heidelberg. See “German Selec¬

tions,” by Edwards and Park.
8*
90 MANIFESTATION OF GOD,

long, however, as the union is not complete, so long as it is

disturbed by estrangement or deviation of any kind, whether
occasional or permanent, there is imperfection and sin.
Hence, at present, good, yet imperfect, men are only rising
towards it. Their union to God, as a permanent thing, is
not in all respects complete. But they will finally reach it.
Even now, they may be said, for the moment, to be sinless
or perfect, at least in a partial sense, whenever they truly
live in God, and do his will. But with defective natures,
they are liable to fall from this elevation, losing even the
sense of the infinite, and consequently falling into sin, to
the sad injury of their regenerated souls. But returning to
God, as the magnetic needle to the pole, tending evermore
towards infinite love and purity, they are destined at last
to the attainment of a complete harmony with God. Then
will their love, purity and happiness be spontaneous and
immutable.
Now, it is in this high sense that we maintain the abso¬
lute sinlessness, or perfection, of Jesus Christ; and that,
too, in the merely human aspect of his character. As a
man, as a teacher, as a prophet, as a friend, brother, and
citizen of the world—above all, as a redeemer and a guide,
he lived in God. The human blended with the Divine—
was guided and controlled by the Divine. Exposed to the
most terrible tests, there was no disturbance here; no aliena¬
tion or estrangement. The harmony was complete, change¬
less, and eternal. Jesus was holy as God is holy. His
whole being and life—thought, feeling, purpose, and action
—were one with God. He never thought wrong, never
 SINLESSNESS OF CHRIST. 91

felt wrong, never did wrong. Not only so, but he possessed
all positive virtue, being “ full of grace and truth.” Love?
purity, and devotion, constituted his life; in other words,
were as inseparably blended in his life, as the colors are
blended in the rainbow. As God is love, so was he love.
As God is justice, so was he justice. As God lives to do
good, so he lived to do good. Goodness, absolute and
changeless, was his being’s end and aim. His inward and
outward life were equal and harmonious. The word cor¬
responded to the idea, the action to the feeling, the end to
the purpose, and all were holy.
This is the uniform testimony of his followers; this is
the actual fact in his history. It is proved by innumerable
confluent evidences. His character was perfect as a whole
—perfect in all its details. It was based in God, began
in God, and ended in God: so that his whole existence
was the mirror of the Divine. There we behold, as in a glass,
the glory of God.
A character like this is a great moral miracle; such as
earth, since the fall, saw never; such as the Deity alone
could produce. It transcends, as a miracle, the creation of
the world, or the resurrection of the dead. The very idea
of such a character, is the most august and thrilling
that has dawned upon the world. u It is an idea for
which,” as a devout and learned theologian has remarked,
“ one might consent to be branded and broken on the
wheel.” Jesus Christ, even as a man, stands at the head
of a new moral creation. He is the model and repre¬
sentative of a glorified race. For, as “ we have borne the
92 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

image of the earthly, we shall also bear the image of the

heavenly.”
But to the proof. What, in the first place, is the testi¬
mony of his followers; of those, especially, who drew his
portrait from the life ? They ascribe to him the highest
attributes of character—and that, too, in the most perfect
combination—dignity, piety, purity, self-sacrifice ; the most
amazing grandeur and comprehensiveness of view, with the
greatest tenderness, delicacy, and generosity of impulse.
Severe and lofty, yet serene and self-possessed; full of
intensest zeal and strongest energy, yet kind, forbearing,
and merciful; they represent him going forth to do the will
of God, with all the vigor of an angel, with all the gen¬
tleness of a child. He speaks, and it is done; yet he will
not break the bruised reed, nor quench the smoking flax.
He acts from the purest, most disinterested love; he lives
for the noblest, most generous ends. Rooted in God, living
in God, he labors, he suffers, he dies for man. In vastness
of thought, in originality and beauty of conception, in purity
of feeling and grandeur of aim, in his aspirations after an
infinite and unknown good, especially in disinterestedness,
and enlightened devotion, the character of Christ transcends
all human excellence. There is a depth and vastness in his
love, which may be strictly styled unfathomable. He
shows a severity and loftiness of principle, which all the
powers of earth and hell cannot over-master. There seems
a might within him, which more than counter-balances all
external pressure and trial. He cherishes a piety which
swells into a transport, calm as heaven, yet boundless as
 SINLESSNESS OF CHRIST. 93

eternity. In a word, he lives in the infinite, and spreads

around him the influence of an unlimited good, an im¬
measurable joy.

“ From heaven he came, of heaven he spoke,

To heaven he led his followers’ way;
Dark, gloomy clouds of night he broke,
Unveiling an immortal day.”

This is the testimony, this is the portrait left us by his dis¬

ciples. They do not, in so many words, call him perfect;
but they certainly mean it, when they speak of his glory.
The influence of his character upon their minds was over¬
powering. It enveloped them like an atmosphere of light.
They see nothing else, feel nothing else; and hence, in due
time, they reflect his image, not only in their writings, but
in their lives and actions. They conform their dispositions
and aims entirely to his ; so that the term, Christ-like, de¬
scribes, with the utmost precision, their character and life.
Not only do they yield to his moral influence, but they
live and die to vindicate his innocence, to proclaim his
glory. One of them, indeed, betrays him; but this is the
obvious result of long-cherished and overpowering selfish¬
ness, grown malignant in the presence of contrasted purity
and love. Nor has Judas any secrets to tell, any charges
to prefer, any complaints to make. He can say nothing, in
the slightest degree, derogatory to the greatness or good¬
ness of Jesus. He confesses that he has “ betrayed inno¬
cent blood,” and goaded by infinite remorse, he commits
suicide, in proof and illustration of what our Saviour had
said, that “it were better for that man if he had never been
94 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

bom.” Pilate, also, confesses that he “finds no fault in

him;” the wife of Pilate, haunted by horrible dreams on
his account, vindicates his innocence; and the Jews are
compelled to seek his death by false charges and illegal
proceedings.
John the Baptist, confessedly one of the greatest of the
prophets, speaks of himself as unworthy to stoop down and
unloose the sandals of Jesus. “We believe,” says one of
them, speaking the sentiments of all the rest, “ that thou
art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” “Did not our
hearts burn within us,” exclaim the two disciples who had
walked with him to Emmaus, “ did not our hearts burn
within us while he talked with us by the way, and while
he opened unto us the Scriptures ?” “ Lord, if thou hadst
been here,” is the touching remark of Martha and her sister
Mary, expressing their confidence in the goodness as well
as the power of Jesus, “ Lord, if thou hadst been here, my
brother had not died.” “ Rabbi,” says Nathanael, when
Christ has given a proof of his wondrous knowledge, “ thou
art the Son of God, thou art the King of Israel.” “ Depart
from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord!” exclaimed Simon
Peter, when he had witnessed a manifestation of his all¬
controlling power. “ And ye know,” says the beloved dis¬
ciple, “ that he was manifested to take away our sins, and
in him is no sin.” “This was a righteous man”—“this
was the Son of God”—is the testimony of the Roman
centurion, as he gazes upon the cross; and Thomas, in
rapt admiration and adoring reverence, cries out, “ My Lord,
and my God !” “ We beheld his glory,” say they all, “the
 SINLESSNESS OF CHRIST. 95

glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace

and truth!”
So far as we are capable of judging, the influence which
our Saviour exerted over his early followers, was of the
purest and most ennobling kind. It inspired them with a
new life. It gave them other views, affections, and hopes.
It brought them into the sphere of the infinite. It made
their hearts, their lives “ sublime.” Quickening and ex¬
panding their intellects, it supplied them with boundless
energy and zeal, impelling them to the moral conquest of
the world. It was as if the voice of the Almighty had
caused streams to break out in the wilderness, and floods in
the desert, spreading everywhere, amid sands and rocks,
verdure and flowers. Most of the Apostles and early dis¬
ciples of Christ were illiterate men, with narrow views,
selfish purposes, undisciplined minds. They belonged to
a dark, fanatical age, and were themselves dark and
fanatical. Jews in creed, feeling and aim, they possessed
none of that enlargement, serenity, purity and benevolence,
which shone so conspicuous in Christ. Occupied with
their daily toils, as fishermen, tax-gatherers, or tent makers,
they had little time, and probably less inclination for pro¬
found thought and far-reaching benevolence. The idea of
God as the universal Father, and of a religion wide as
the world, all-transforming and all-embracing, had never
dawned upon their minds. They knew little of man, little
of God, and still less of themselves. In a word, they were
Jews, good enough in their way, with some religion, some
superstition and much bigotry, but as incapable of origi-
96 M ANIFESTATION OF GOD.

nating and sustaining a system of faith and morals, com¬

prehensive and beautiful, like that of Christianity, as a
company of Hottentots to sculpture the Apollo, or con¬
struct the Parthenon. Those of them who possessed a
more active temperament, or a little more learning than
the others, as for example, Saul of Tarsus, were yet Jews,
in creed and in feeling, bitterly hostile to the cause of the
humble Nazarene, and little prepared for the sacrifices and
toils of a divine and self-denying faith. The Gospels and
the Acts of the Apostles, supply us with conclusive evi¬
dence that they were as little fit, originally, as men ever
were, for the conception of a lofty and benevolent enter¬
prise. That they did not understand even the spirit and
purport of the Old Testament, we have conclusive proof.
We have equal evidence that they long resisted the pecu¬
liar views of Jesus. The idea, then, of Strauss and others,
that they spontaneously originated a religious system so
pure, so powerful as that of Christianity, is utterly prepos¬
terous.* Admitting, even, for the sake of argument, that

* To state Strauss’ Views of the Life of Christ, and the Establishment of Chris¬
tianity, is to refute them. The following is a brief but fair synopsis of his work enti¬
tled, Leben Jesu : “ Jesus was a native of Nazareth, the son of Joseph and Mary ; the
entire account of his birth in Bethlehem, with all its circumstances of danger and of
miracle, belongs to that class of myths which proceed from the popular desire of glori¬
fying the early life of distinguished men. Some exhibition of uncommon intelligence
in childhood may have given rise to the story of his sojourn in the temple, when twelve
years old, though this is doubtful. He probably had some instructions from the Es-
senes, or from the Rabbins, and intelligent persons whom he met at the feasts at Jeru¬
salem. At about thirty years of age, he became a follower of John the Baptist, who
appears to have belonged to the ascetic sect of the Essenes, and to have proclaimed the
popular idea, very natural among an oppressed people, that the great national deliverer
was at hand. Jesus probably remained a follower of John much longer than the par¬
tiality of tradition would allow us to believe. At length he began to preach—at first
the same doctrine with the Baptist, that the Messiah was soon to appear. Gradually,
 SINLESSNESS OP CHRIST. 97

it was baseless, its conception must have been one of the

last efforts of piety, genius and virtue. Adopted through¬
out the world, simply in its essential principles, it would
work the transformation of the race. It would extinguish
all selfishness, all oppression and war. Enthroning God,
the infinite and the immortal in every soul, in every
State, it would form the whole world into one holy, happy
brotherhood.
But these feeble, illiterate, narrow-minded Jews, were
transformed into lofty, noble-hearted men, whose love and
charity filled the earth with the fragrance of Heaven, and
caused the wilderness and the solitary place to bud and
blossom as the rose. Missionaries and martyrs, they lived
and died in holy love and triumph ; and have left behind
them, to say the least, the purest, strongest, divinest faith
that ever blessed the race. All will admit that they pos¬
sessed an energy, a wisdom, and a zeal, the most wonder¬
ful, and that they succeeded in planting “ the Religion of
love and sorrow ” upon the ruins of heathenism.
But all their excellence and all their success, they
ascribe to Christ. They glory only in his cross. How

as he became conscious of his own extraordinary powers, the idea occurred to him that
he was destined to fill that office. His conception of the Messiahship, which, at first,
may have been similar to that entertained by the people at large, rose with his increas¬
ing experience, until, applying to himself the prophecies of the Old Testament, which
speaks of the Son of God as suffering, he was convinced that a violent death, which the
malice and power of his enemies rendered probable, was a part of his great mission.
Having exercised the office of a teacher of virtue and the reprover of hypocrisy, he was
at length put to death. He did not rise again, but the excited imaginations of his fol¬
lowers presented his form in visions; a report spread of his resurrection, which was
believed among his followers, and contributed chiefly to the success of his religion.”
To believe such a theory requires an amount of credulity which rarely falls to the lot
of man. Poor Strauss!
G
98 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

august, how beautiful and commanding must that charac¬

ter have been which produced an effect so vast, so glorious
and permanent.
Moreover, Jesus was surrounded by keen-sighted and
powerful enemies, who watched his words with zealous
and eager animosity. These, again, were succeeded by
others of a similar disposition, who turned the weight of
their resources against the infant cause of Christianity.
What charges then do they bring against the moral char¬
acter of Christ ? Do they find fault with his conduct and
spirit simply as a man ? Do they charge him with any
crimes, nay, with the slightest immoralities ? Do they
furnish documents and facts to prove that he was revenge¬
ful, proud, worldly, ambitious, licentious, or even, in the
slightest degree, selfish ? They say much of his being an
impostor, an enthusiast, a madman. They tell us of his
heresies, his blasphemies, his innovations. But it was by
these he purified and enlarged the system of morals,
revealed the paternal character of God, shed new light
upon the immortality of the soul, extinguished the supersti¬
tion and hypocrisy of his age, extended faith to the Gen¬
tiles, and inspired millions of idolaters with the fear and
love of the true and living God.
We have four independent narratives of the life of Christ,
so plain, so simple, so artless, so unimpassioned and honest,
that no one can doubt their authenticity. From this source
we learn how purely he lived, how gloriously he died; what
lofty and comprehensive truths he taught, what divine pre¬
cepts he enjoined, and what beneficial changes he effected.
 SINLESSNESS OF CHRIST. 99

When we turn, therefore, to the testimony of his adver¬

saries. we find that it only corroborates the evangelical nar¬
rative, and proves the purity and elevation of our Saviour’s
character.
Many sceptics have themselves been struck with the
moral grandeur of the character of^Christ. While oppo¬
sing his claims, as “ a teacher sent from God,” they have
been compelled to do him honor as a model of perfection.
There is no passage in all the writings of Rousseau more
striking and beautiful than that in which he admits the
infinite superiority of Jesus to Socrates, and expresses the
conviction that Jesus Christ cannot be an impostor; and that,
supposing his life to be a fabrication, which he thinks im¬
possible, the inventor must be deemed a greater man than
the hero. u The Gospel,” says Bolingbroke, “ as it came
from the hands of its author, is one continued lesson of the
strictest morality, of justice, of benevolence, and charity.”
The philosophical sceptics of France and Germany are
making the life and character of Christ the subject of their
profoundest study. The wisest and most far-sighted politi¬
cians, as well as the most learned historians and critics,
admit that his religion is the most powerful instrument of
civilization, as well as the most perfect rule of conduct.*
It easily blends with all improvements in science and
morals. It advances with the age—nay, more, it ever
transcends the age, going before it like the pillar of cloud

* See Stowe’s Report on Common Schools in Germany. Cousin’s Report on the

same subject. See also Coleridge’s “ Confessions of an Inquiring Spirit.”
100 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

by day, and the pillar of fire by night, before Israel in the

wilderness. “ The character of Christ,” says Channing,
a though delineated in an age of great moral darkness, has
stood the scrutiny of ages; and in proportion as men’s
moral sentiments have been refined, its beauty has been
more seen and felt.” “ Since the introduction of Christianity,”
he adds, “ human nature has made great progress, and
society experienced great changes; and in this advanced
condition of the world, instead of losing its application and
importance, it is found to be more and more congenial, and
adapted to man’s nature and wants. Men have outgrown
the other institutions of that period when Christianity ap¬
peared, its philosophy, its modes of warfare, its policy, its
public and private economy; but Christianity has never
shrunk as intellect has opened, but has always kept in
advance of men’s faculties, and unfolded nobler views in
proportion as they have ascended. The highest powers
and affections which our nature has developed, find more
than adequate objects in this religion. Christianity, indeed,
is peculiarly fitted to the more improved stages of society,
to the more delicate sensibilities of refined minds, and espe¬
cially to that dissatisfaction with the present state, which
always grows with the growth of our moral powers and
affections. * * This fitness of our religion to more ad¬
vanced stages of society than that in which it was intro¬
duced, to wants of human nature not then developed, seems
to me very striking. The religion bears the mark of having
come from a being who perfectly understood the human
mind, and had power to provide-for its progress. This
 SINLESSNESS OF CHRIST. 101

feature of Christianity is of the nature of prophecy. It was

an anticipation of future and distant ages.”* But the re¬
ligion of Christ is only a development of his character. It
is his heart embodied in doctrines and forms. How trans¬
cendent that excellence which has gained such universal
homage, secured such beneficent and comprehensive results!
Whatever were the claims of his higher nature, all will
admit that Jesus Christ was a true representative of man.
His humanity, apart from all other considerations, was as
perfect as can be conceived. How pure and beautiful his
affection for his mother and his friends ! What endearing
ties bound him to his disciples, especially to il the beloved
disciple,” the spiritual, ethereal, contemplative John ! How
intensely he felt for man, not simply for his countrymen—
and certainly he loved them well—but for man! In this
respect, he is the most perfect type of what man ought to
be; for his love was individual and patriotic, yet all-perva¬
ding and universal, like the fountains of the primeval Eden,
which blessed the fair landscape with their beauty and
freshness, yet broke into mighty rivers which enriched the
entire “ orient,” and rolled, in gladness and fruitfulness, to
distant seas. How superior to all external circumstances,
to all selfish, all worldly considerations! How serene in
his lofty simplicity!—how tender and attractive in his all-
conquering love! How profoundly interested in humanity,
as a living, suffering, hoping, immortal existence! How
completely identified with all its permanent interests ! How

* Channing’s Works, Fourth Edition, Vol. I., p. 356-7.

9*
 102 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

deeply engaged for the poor, the outcast and sorrowful!

Instead of courting the favor of the rich, and attempting
to reform the higher walks of life—ever a vain endeavor, so
long as the heaving masses below are putrefying with
spiritual disease—he went down into the very depths of ig¬
norance and vice, entering the lanes, the highways and
hedges of our common misery, to gather the outcasts of
Israel, and raise them to glory.
The perfection of Christ’s humanity was evinced in his
temperate use of earthly enjoyments. Thus, while far re¬
moved from the luxuries of the world, and living a spiritual,
self-sacrificing life, he was no ascetic. Nothing rough and
sour attached to his self-denial, nothing sensual or grovel¬
ing to his enjoyment. He mingled with ease and grace¬
fulness among his fellow-men ; he ate and drank, he talked
and acted, he slept and awaked, just like other men; and
yet he appeared as a pure spirit, living alone in the world—
a being rather of the past and the future, than of the
present—one that belonged more to heaven than to earth,
to eternity than to time—one that was in the world, and
3ret out of it—one that was finite, and yet infinite—one that
was human, and yet divine;—like a star in the depths of
ether, far off and mysterious, yet blessing the earth with its
, gentle, never-failing radiance. How frequent, how earnest
, and long-protracted his devout communings in the grand
and solitary haunts of nature! How utterly absorbed, and,
so to speak, lost in God—in the infinite and eternal! Yet
he loved the face of nature, and the face of man. His
wanderings by the sea of Galilee, in the garden of Olivet,
 SIN LESS NESS OE CHRIST. 103

and in the deep, old wilderness, prove that he held fellow¬

ship with nature. It seemed, indeed, a part of himself.
The beauty and serenity of his character are never so beau¬
tiful or serene, as when seen embosomed in the country.
There, like Fenelon, he found “God’s peace,” blending, as
it were, with the boundless and beautiful. His metaphors
and apologues, his allusions and illustrations, drawn from
the natural aspects of creation, all corroborate this view.
How much, also, he seemed interested in little children; as
if, somehow, they seemed to belong to heaven. Types of
innocence and purity, he loved to look upon the little prat¬
tlers, to take them in his arms and bless them. “ Suffer the
little children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for of
such is the kingdom of heaven.” Yet he had a vast and
painful work before him, for the redemption of the world—
a work, upon which he was accustomed to dwell with
intense, all-consuming interest; as if a man, wandering
through some fair landscape, with the music of birds and
falling fountains in his ears, should yet behold in the dis¬
tance, darkly marked against the clear sky, the scaffold
and the block prepared for his execution. “ I have a bap¬
tism, (a baptism of blood and agony,) to be baptized with,
and how am I straightened till it is accomplished!”
Our Saviour was sometimes stern, but he was mainly
gentle. Had he lacked the first of these qualities, he
would have wanted an essential element of true greatness.
That feeble sentimentalism, the product of sickly romance
or of morbid enthusiasm, which extinguishes the sterner
virtues, and forbids us to rebuke all meanness and wrong-
104 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

doing, which breaks down all decision of character, and

makes endurance the only virtue worthy of cultivation, is
opposed to the spirit of a pure and elevated religion. Thus,
while our Saviour was meek and lowlv of heart, while he
would not break the bruised reed, nor quench the smoking
flax, he denounced, in language of fire, the pride, the
hypocrisy, and the rapacity of the Pharisees, and with
stem rebuke drove out the impious wretches who profaned
his Father’s house. We are not, indeed, to suppose, as some
have erroneously done, that he applied the scourge of small
cords to the mercenary dealers. That were an act incon¬
sistent with his majestic bearing as the Son of God. He
merely assumed this instrument of punishment as a sym¬
bol of authority, and had only to appear as the representa¬
tive of the Father, among the multitude who thronged the
temple with their vile traffic, and in that awful tone, which
reminded the people of the voice of God, to command their
departure. Terror-stricken with his majestic presence, and
impelled by sudden and deeply startled feeling, they would
give way before him, as the waves yield to the might of
the storm. It would then be natural and proper for him to
cause the tables of the money-changers to be overturned,
and explain the whole by saying, 11 My house shall be
called a house of prayer, but ye have made it a den of
thieves.” It is on this principle, also, we are to explain his
conduct with reference to the destruction of the herds of
swine, in the country of the Gadarenes. If the owners
were Jews, they were guilty of a breach of the law; if
Qentiles, of tempting the Jews to sin; and it was there-
 SINLESSNESS OP CHRIST. 105

fore meet to punish their avarice, and to do so in such a

manner as to produce a deep moral impression.
It has been thought by some persons incapable of think¬
ing justly, far less profoundly, upon the subject, that our
Saviour evinced some degree of anger, if not of petulance,
when he cursed the barren fig-tree Never was a greater
mistake. That was obviously a symbolical action, intended
to teach a most impressive lesson, a lesson which it has
taught for eighteen centuries, and which it will continue to
teach till the end of time. Never was an action more
calmly or more deliberately done, and none was better
fitted to impress upon the minds of all, the overcoming
power of faith, and the momentous distinction between the
form of godliness and the power thereof.
But the gentleness and self-sacrificing generosity of
Christ are obviously the most distinguishing traits in his
character; and these have impressed themselves the most
strongly upon thoughtful and pure minded men. Though
he was rich, yet for our sakes he became poor. Indeed, he
never acted on his own behalf. He lived for others, not for
himself. Property he had none, fame none, rest none, joy
none, except the sublime one of doing good. He gave
himself a sacrifice for the world. Nay, he died for the re¬
demption of those who cried out, Crucify him ! crucify
him ! In a word, he laid himself a victim on the altar of
benevolence, and was consumed in the flames of his own
love.
The striking contrasts in our Saviour’s character, some
of which we have noticed, are among the most convincing
106 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

proofs of its perfection. It was a combination of qualities

not easily reconciled, which are rarely, if ever found in the
same person ; which seem, in fact, incongruous, being made
up of opposites, but so blended and adjusted, like the differ¬
ent colors which compose the sunlight, as to constitute
perfect moral beauty. Here we discover an unparalleled
dignity and sense of greatness, with a humility and con¬
descension transcending any thing found among mortals ;
a complete superiority to the world and its pleasures, with
the most perfect sympathy in man, and in all pertaining to
man ; an intense indignation against sin, with compassion
for the sinner ; the widest philanthropy with the tenderest
friendship; the gratitude and submission of a son, with the
power and authority of a king ; the patience and forgive¬
ness of a martyr, with the grandeur and supremacy of a
God. Never man lived,—never man died like this man!
But we are to prove that Jesus was absolutely sinless.
By this we do not mean to affirm that he was free from all
temptation to sin, or that he was destitute of those natural
susceptibilities, which, if not controlled by a higher nature,
ever lead to sin; for we are expressly informed in the
Scripture, that he u was made in all things like as we are,”
nay, that he was “ tempted in all points like as we are,
yet without sin.” His nature was human, even if united
with the Divine, in the proper sense of the term, and thence
he possessed all those susceptibilities which, when unduly
excited, ever lead to sin. Thus he was capable of temp¬
tation, at least from without. But he never sinned ; that is
to say, he uniformly overcame temptation. He was sinless
 SINLESSNESS OF CHRIST, 107

in the sense of being free from all transgression, either in

thought, feeling and action, and in having all his powers
and susceptibilities in due proportion and harmony ; the su*
perior having a complete and constant mastery, the inferior
being kept in due and permanent subjection.
Further, he was not only sinless in the sense of being
free from all transgression, internal or external, but in pos¬
sessing all positive goodness and virtue. “ It pleased the
Father that inhim should all fullness. (n-Aepw/ia, completeness,
perfection,) dwell.” His nature was embodied wisdom,
purity and love. Heaven lay mirrored in his soul.
Upon this point we have the express testimony of the
Apostles. They speak of him in a special and most sig¬
nificant sense, as, the Holy One of God, as that just One: as
righteous, nay as righteousness itself, as the very source of
righteousness, as the High Priest offering sacrifice for others,
but not for himself; as the spotless Lamb of God ; as made
sin. but not sinful; as having no guile ; as a perfect exam¬
ple to be followed; as holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate
from sinners ; as the light of the world; as the way, the
truth, and the life ; as the divine Word; as made unto us
wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption ; as en¬
dued with the spirit above measure; as possessed of all the
fullness of God; as the image of the invisible God; as the
brightness of the Father's glory and the express (exact)
image of his person, (nature.)*

* Acts, iii. 14—1 Pet. iii. 18—1 John, ii. 1—Heb. vii. 27—1 Pet. i. 19—2 Cor. v. 21—
1 Pet. ii. 22, v. 21—Heb. vii. 26—Luke, ii. 32—John, i. 9—John, xiv. 6—John, i. 1—
1 Cor. i. 30—John, iii. 34—Col. ii. 9—2 Cor. iv. 4—Heb. i. 3
108 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

If Christ had not been sinless, as a High-Priest it would

have been necessary for him to offer sacrifice, and make
atonement for himself; in which case he would have pos¬
sessed no official superiority to the priests of the Old Tes¬
tament dispensation. On this supposition, also, u his death
is vain, we are yet in our sins.” This is the reasoning of
St. Paul in his Epistle to the Hebrews. “For such an
High-Priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled,
separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens,
who needeth not daily, as those High-Priests, to offer up
sacrifice; for this he did once when he offered up himself.
For the law maketh men High-Priests which have infir¬
mity ; but the word of the oath, which was since the law,
maketh the Son (without infirmity,) who is consecrated for
evermore.”*
But it was not, as Ullmann has well remarked, merely
from the dogmatical point of view, that the Apostles as¬
serted the sinlessness of Christ. They did not deduce this
as an inference from his official relations as the Messiah.
u Their conviction rested upon a thorough knowledge of his
life. They did not model the life of Jesus according to
their own ideas, but their own ideas were by degrees modeled
according to the instructions and life of Jesus.”
The Gospel narrative is an artless copy of a divine model,
upon whose glorious features its authors had gazed with
such intense and devout admiration, as to be capable of de¬
lineating it with perfect accuracy. On this account the

* Heb. vii. 26, 27, 28.

 SIN LESS NESS OF CHRIST. 109

Gospel narrative cannot be an ideal fiction. It were an

absurdity in the nature of things to suppose it such; for
in this case we should have an effect without a cause, a
copy without an original.
The religion of Christ, to quote the words of a great
actor, if not of a great thinker, u is a self-existent mys¬
tery.”* There is in it a deep peculiarity of character pro¬
ceeding from a source not human. Jesus borrowed nothing
from philosophy. His system is entirely original. Indeed
it can scarcely be called a system. It is a life, an act, or
series of acts—a drama, divine and wonderful. Only in
himself is it completely revealed. Here, rather than in his
words, is it perfectly taught. Pythagoras, Plato and Aris¬
totle founded systems, very splendid and imposing, but un¬
substantial, which have passed away. Indeed, all human
speculations are fated to destruction. All human knowl¬
edge will vanish. But Jesus created a life, and that, too, by
means of death—a life serene, beautiful and godlike, a
life indestructible and omnipotent, and which is just begin¬
ning to develop its heaven-born energies. Philosophy has
attempted to found an empire by syllogisms; politics by
means of force; but such empires are ever crumbling and
passing awajc Jesus has founded an empire of love, an
empire of purity and virtue, righteousness and peace. That
empire is gaining ground. It counts its subjects by mil¬
lions. It will yet envelope the globe.
Jesus Christ is himself a religion. His life illustrates his

* Napoleon.

10

*
110 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

ethics, his ethics illustrate his life. His law is perfect, so

is his example. They are one. And as this is the only
perfect system of morals, Jesus is the only perfect man.
All feel that Jesus was humble, pre-eminently so. His
disciples tell us that “ he made himself of no reputation,”
that he was “ meek and lowly in heart,” and we find his
entire conduct corresponding with this idea. But he claims
a perfect oneness with God. He tells us that, u he that
hath seen him hath seen the father that “ he was in the
Father and the Father in him;” expressions indicating, at
least, a profound consciousness, on his part, of complete
moral harmony with God. He claims a purity, a perfec¬
tion, an authority which can belong only to a sinless being ;
and Jehovah authenticates the claim by stupendous mira¬
cles. u This is my beloved Son,” is the testimony of the
Father, u in whom I am well pleased I”
Could our Saviour assume what did not clearly belong
to him ; or could he imagine himself in the possession of a
purity to which he had no claim?* His meekness, his
humility, his perfect mastery of himself, his intimate
knowledge of man, his clear comprehension of all moral
truth, his intimate fellowship with his Father, his disinter¬
estedness, and self-sacrifice, utterly forbid the supposition.
Thus, then, we have his own express affirmation, the testi¬
mony of his followers, the testimony even of his enemies,
the witness of the Word, and the witness of the Spirit, that
he was absolutely sinless and perfect.

* “Which of you convinceth me of sin 1” is his own sublime appeal to the Jews.
 SINLESSNESS OF CHRIST. Ill

But we ought to look chiefly at the essential elements of

our Saviour’s character, which lie in the depths of the soul,
in the thoughts, volitions, impulses and aims of his spirit¬
ual and immortal nature. What do we see there? Only
the pure, the disinterested, the self-sacrificing, the infinite;
in other words, perfect holiness, perfect devotion, perfect
love. Hence, “ for the joy set before Him,” the joy of
gratified benevolence, he conquered all evil, conquered all
death. His whole nature is love, infinite as God, bound¬
less as eternity. His whole heart is love, free, spontaneous
and universal. His whole life is love, active, measureless,
immortal. In a word, Christ is love, as God is love. God
is perfect,—-Christ is perfect. God and Christ are one.

✓
 CHAPTER II.

THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST.

In our discussion of the sinlessness of Christ, we have

considered him chiefly as a man, as the representative and
model of a new spiritual race. Christ, indeed, may be
regarded as the Divine idea of a man. But so great, so
absolute is his sinlessness or perfection, that it seems to
border on that of Divinity itself, nay, imperceptibly to pass
into it, as the early dawn passes into the radiance of ad¬
vancing day. Nor is this unnatural. For as the good
man lives in God. and thence derives his virtue, so God
may live in the good man, and produce the same result.
Perfect holiness would be the necessary effect of a Divine
incarnation. To say the least, the character of Christ,
even in its human aspect, suggests that of the Divine, and
might, therefore, be made the vehicle of a peculiarly direct
and vivid manifestation of the Godhead. It would surprise
no thoughtful person, we think, if the Deity should, by a
closer tie than exists between himself and all the works or
creatures of his hand, unite his glory with this high form,
and through the man Jesus Christ, reveal to the world his
boundless love and power. Here, then, we ascend to a
higher point of view, and maintain that Jesus Christ, while
a man, possesses another nature, a higher and more perfect
 DIVINITY OF CHRIST. 113

life, a more august and wonderful perfection. He is not

only the Son of Man, but he is also the Son of God, and
that, too, in the loftiest sense of the expression.* So that
we recognize him by “ a name which is above every name,
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, and
every tongue confess. He is not only the representative of
humanity, but the representative also of Divinity; and in
this relation, exhibits not only all the attributes of perfect
manhood, but those also of perfect Godhead. Spiritually
and morally,” to quote the felicitous language of Ullmann,
“Jesus is an image of God, the resplendence of the Majesty
on high, the expression of the Divine nature within the
restrictions of a human life.”f He is such in a higher
sense than any man or angel, however exalted ; for he is
“above all”—“before all”—and by him “all things con¬
sist;” he is not simply “the Word” the Revealer of God,
but God himself. “ In the beginning was the Word, and
the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”J

* The mere application to Christ of the term “Son of God,” would not of itself
prove his divinity. But the New Testament in many places represents him as the
only Son of God, and in a sense so high and exclusive, as to involve the possession of a
divine nature. As the Son, he participates in the essence and attributes of the Father,
and receives the same homage and worship. Even Dr. Channing (Life, Vol. i. p. 298,)
says, “ Jesus Christ is the Son of God, in a peculiar sense—the temple of the Divinity—
the brightest image of his glory. In seeing him we see the Father.”
t “German Selections,” p. 413.
J John, i. 1. For the import of the term Logos, Word or Reason, in its application to
Christ, see Knapp’s Theology, p. 136. In Plato the term signifies the reason of a thing,
in distinction from its essence, that indeed by which its essence reveals itself. He ap¬
plies it to the J\Tous or Understanding, which may be called the self-revelation of
God, the second person in the Platonic Trinity, whom Plato represents as begotten of
God, and as the Creator of the worlds. See Dr. Lewis’ “ Platonic Theology,” p. 195.
Cudworth’s “ Intellectual System,” Vol. i. pp. 535 and 769. The term was in use,
particularly among the Hellenic Jews, and is frequently employed by Philo and others,
as a designation of the Messiah, the great Revealer of God. As many false views pre-

10*
 114 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

Thus the design of his mission is complex; first, to show,

by a manifestation the most peculiar and overpowering,
what God is; and secondly, what wan ought to be; and
having done this, to make “ an atonement for sin,” and
thus unite God and man, the finite with the infinite, the
sinful with the sinless. “ God is in Christ, reconciling the
world unto himself.” “We joy in God through our Lord
Jesus Christ, by whom we have received the atonement.”
Christ, then, is the central point of union with God. We
find God here, are united to God here. In this centre all
extremes meet; earth and heaven, sin and holiness, man and
God. Jesus is the Mediator, the Reconciler, linked to
God by his Divinity on the one side, linked to man by his
humanity on the other, as much God as man, as much
man as God, the God-man, as the old fathers loved to call
him. In this consists that “mystery,” or secret of the
Divine “ will, according to his good pleasure which he
hath purposed in himself, that in the dispensation of the
fullness of time, he might gather together in one, all things
in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on
earth, even in him.”# Christ, then, is the keystone of the
spiritual arch, the “ Head over all things to the Church,”
“ the fullness of him that filleth all in allin other words,
“ the true God and eternal life.”f
This great fact is surely intimated by Christ himself, when,
in answer to the request of Philip, “ Lord, show us the Fa-

vailed respecting the import of the term, the Apostle John undertakes to correct
them, and applies it to Christ, in its loftiest sense, showing that he is not merely the
Revealer of God, but really and truly God.
* 2 Cor. v. 19. Ephes. i. 10. f Coloss. i. passim—1 John, iv. 20.
 DIVINITY OF CHRIST. 115

ther and it sufficeth us/’ he replied in those profoundly mys¬

terious but significant words. “ He that hath seen me hath
seen the Father, and how sayest thou, then, Show us the
Father1? Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and
the Father in me ? The words that I speak unto you, I
speak not of myself, (having no mind, no will, separate
from the Divine,) but the Father that dwelleth in me, he
doeth the works.” Now if Christ was not the proper
representative of the Father, an incarnate exhibition or
manifestation of the Godhead ; if, in other words, all the
fullness of the Godhead did not dwell in him bodily, what
force or propriety could attach to his words ?
Moreover, did not Jesus claim this high dignity when he
presented himself to the world as an object of veneration
and love, of homage and trust, as “ the way, the truth and
the life as the Saviour of sinners, as the Redeemer at
once of the body and the soul, as the Sovereign in Zion,
as the Judge of the quick and the dead ? Did not all the
Apostles and early Christians accept the claim, by placing
him at the head of the Church, enthroning him in their
heart of hearts, claiming for him the homage of the world,
and adoring his glory as that of the only-begotten Son
of the Father ? u He who commanded the light to shine
out of darkness, hath shined into our hearts, to give us the
light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face
of Jesus.” Beholding that glory through the opening
heavens, Stephen, in his dying pangs, exclaimed, “ Lord
Jesus, receive my spirit.” The apostle Paul, after speak¬
ing of him as the Creator and Lord of u all things, visible
116 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

and invisible, whether they be thrones or dominions, princi¬

palities or powers,” adds, “ And he is the head of the body,
the Church, who is the beginning, the first-born from the
dead, that, in all things, he might have the pre-eminence.”*
Possessing “ all power in heaven and in earth,” and
“ seated at the right hand of the Majesty of High,” it was
but the natural impulse of the whole primitive Church to
adore him as Lord of all.
Did not the angels accept the claim, when they fell at
his feet in adoring worship? Did not the infinite Father
himself accept it, when he commanded them to do so?
“And again, when he bringeth in the first-begotten into
the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship
him !”f
Was it not attested by the whole intelligent universe, at
the moment when he “ took the book and opened the seals,
as described in the Apocalypse? Falling at his feet, the
whole celestial hierarchy are represented as singing a new
song, saying, “ Thou art worthy to take the book and open
the seals thereof; for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed
us to God by thy blood. * * * And I beheld and heard
the voice of many angels round about the throne, and the
living creatures, and the elders; and the number of them
was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of
thousands ; saying, with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb
that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom,
and strength, and honor, and glory, and blessing. And

* Col. i. 15,18. t Heb. i. 6.

4
 DIVINITY OF CHRIST. 117

every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under

the earth, heard I saying, Blessing, and honor, and glory,
and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and
unto the Lamb, forever and ever.”*
This great truth is discovered in all those passages of
Scripture which ascribe to Christ the peculiar names and
attributes of God, especially his life-giving, all-quickening,
all-judging powers ; and also in all those which associate
his name or his works with those of the Father and the
Holy Spirit. In the formula of baptism, and in the Apos¬
tolic benediction, those hallowed names are woven together
into an imperishable union, like that of the natures they
represent—an argument for the supreme Divinity of Christ,
so strong and striking, that it is a matter of amazement
that any one should be found sufficiently reckless to doubt it.
The glory of Christ breaks upon our vision at intervals,
in the history of his life, and is seen, in its full-orbed
splendor, at its close. While on earth it was somewhat
veiled, and he might sefcm, at times, especially to a car¬
nal eye, to be an imperfect manifestation of God. But it
appeared in the imposing circumstances which preceded
and accompanied his birth, in his intuitive knowledge of
the human heart, in the authoritative character of his teach¬
ing, in his immaculate purity and elevation of character,
in his boundless benevolence and self-sacrifice, in his per¬
fect control, not only of himself, but of all the powers of
nature around him, and especially in his absolute command

* Rev. v. 8—14.
 118 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

of the invisible world. He had u the keys of hell and of

death.” It shone out upon Mount Tabor, to the wondering
gaze of his disciples, Peter, James, and John, when they
beheld “ his majesty;” to the whole Apostles, when he
walked upon the waves of the sea, and hushed the tempest
with a word; when he gave sight to the blind, hearing to
the deaf, speech to the dumb, soundness to the lame, life
to the dead! It gleamed out, with a resplendent lustre,
when he conquered the agony of the cross, broke the bar¬
riers of the grave, and, seizing the gates of death, bore
them triumphant to the skies. For it was at this moment
that he completed the work of redemption, took his station
at the head of the Church, and sat down upon the throne
of the universe, the object of love and admiration to the
universal Church. It was at this point in his history that
he u rose up far above all principality, and power, and might,
and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in
this world, but also in that which is to come,” and that he
received the homage and praise of all the heavenly host.
True, he made himself, for a season, u a little lower than
the angels”—he u took upon him the form of a servant,”
and “ was found in the likeness of man.” To secure the
y salvation of men, he consented to this humiliation. De-
\ spised, rejected, and even crucified, like a slave, he stooped
' to the deepest abyss of human wretchedness, that he might
rescue the lost, and lift them up to God In this consists
j

the amazing character of his love, so frequently referred to

by the Apostles. For he submitted to the whole volun¬
tarily, as “ a sacrifice for sin.” He did so, when he had
 DIVINITY OF CHRIST. 119

all nature, and man, and spirits, under his control; when he
was “ ministered unto” by angels ; when he was recognized
as “the Son of God, with power,” as “the Maker of all f
worlds,” the “ heir of all things,” “ the judge of the quick }
and the dead.” “ The word was made flesh and dwelt
among us.” It “behooved him, in all things, to be made
like unto his brethren.” He was “ wounded for our trails- /
gressions; he was bruised for our iniquities ; the chastise- /
ment of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we
are healed.”*
But the instant he had endured all this, and his work on
earth was completed, he stood before-the universe in all the
might and splendor of uncreated Divinity. “ In these last
days God hath spoken unto us bj^ his Son, whom he hath
appointed heir of all things ; by whom, also, he made the
worlds; who, being the brightness of the Father’s glory,
and the express image of his person, and upholding all
things by the word of his power, when he had by himself”
—the sacrifice of himself—“ purged our sins, sat down on
the right-hand of the majesty on high.”f
Jesus was the representative of man, and therefore he
lived as a. man, felt as a man, wept as a man, died as a
man; but he was, also, the representative of God, and
therefore he lived, and acted, reigned, and conquered, as a
God. As the representative of man, he submitted to the
law, and yielded homage to the Father; as the representa¬
tive of God, he asserted his dominion over law, and claimed

* Isaiah, liii. 5. t Heb. i. 1—3.

 120 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

a right to universal supremacy. As the representative of

man, he was depressed and exalted, guided and controlled;
as the representative of God, he was revered and trusted,
exalted and glorified. As the representative of man, he
yielded to poverty and toil, to contempt and crucifixion; as
the representative of God, he conquered death and the
grave, and took his place “ at the right-hand of the majesty
on high.”
Who can deny that, while Jesus acted as if he were
man, he also acted as if he were God ? He spake, and it
was done. He said, Let there be light!—let there be
life!—and there was light—there was life! All spirits
obeyed him—all the elements of nature submitted to his
control. He yielded to death, so far, at least, as his human
constitution was concerned; but he could not see corrup¬
tion ; and, therefore, he rose again, in fulfillment of his own
prediction, “ Destroy this temple, and in three days 1 will
raise it up again” By this, he proved himself, what he
claimed to be, the resurrection and the life, and was declared
to “ be the Son of God, with power”—a fact illustrated and
enforced in the book of Revelation, where Christ is repre¬
sented as affirming, u I am Alpha and Omega, the first and
the last,” as if he comprehended all existence within him¬
self ; as if he were, at once, space and infinitude, time and
eternity! “ I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and
the ending, saith the Lord; which is, and which was, and
which is to come !”*

* Rev. i. 8.
 DIVINITY OF CHRIST. 121

As the representative of God, Christ is the centre of his

own religious system. To him, give all the prophets wit¬
ness. To him, all the Apostles point. In him, all Christians
believe. For him, all martyrs bleed. The primitive disci¬
ples were known as those “ who called upon the name of
the Lord.” “ They sang hymns to him,” Pliny tells us,
“ as a God.” They recognized him as their Lord and
King. The dying, in all ages, hail him as the portion of
their souls. He is the great object of love and adoration
to the universal Church. He presides over it as his king¬
dom. He acts as its living soul. He forms its strength,
vitality, and joy. To “ win Christ, and be found in him
in other words, to live “in Christ,” and to die “in Christ,”
is the great aim of the Apostles and primitive disciples. In
comparison with this, they count every thing but loss. For
this they labor, and suffer, and die. This fills all their
vision when they gaze into the future, and long for the
world beyond the grave. On earth they “ behold his glory,”
and “are changed into his image;” but in.heaven they
hope to se6 him, “ face to face.” “ To live, is Christ; to
die, is gain.” To be “ absent from the body, is to be present
with the Lord.” “ For it doth not yet appear,” says St.
John, with wondrous depth of meaning, “ what we shall
be; but when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for
we shall see him as he is.” A sinner, to be saved, must
“ believe in Christa saint, to be glorified, must “ die in
Christ.” Thus, “blessed are the dead which die in the
Lord.” Heaven itself is attractive, because Christ is there,
“The Lord God and the Lamb are the light thereof.”
1 i
 122 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.
v

Hence all, who are recognized as the disciples of Christ,

hail him as their Redeemer, their Saviour, and Sovereign.
They love him with “ a boundless, burning adoration,” and
rejoice in him, “ with joy unspeakable and full of glory.”*
As the representative of the Father, the image of the in¬
visible God, he is the sun of their heaven, the centre of their
felicity.
But Christ is not only the centre of his own religious
system, but he occupies the same place in relation to the
universe. The Bible represents him as constituting the
centre of all minds, as sustaining and governing all worlds.
By him all things are created and upheld. They reflect
his glory; they advance his plans.f “ His dominion is an
everlasting dominion, and his kingdom ruleth over all.” So
that in heaven, and on earth, in the Church, and in the
world, “in all things/’ in all places, he has “the preemi¬
nence.” In a word, he occupies the sphere of supreme
Divinity—“ manifesting,” through all ranks of being, and in
all places of his dominion, that “ eternal life, which was
with the Father,” the seat and essence of infinite love and
power. The prophet, then, indulges in no hyperbole, when,
regarding him as the representative of the Godhead, he de¬
scribes him as the Wonderful; and Robert Hall only ex¬
presses the obvious doctrine of Revelation, when he says:
“ the mysterious constitution of the person of Christ, is the
stupendous link which unites God and man, <and heaven
- and earth ; the mystic ladder, on which the angels of God

* 1 John, iii. 2. t John, i. 3. 1 Coloss. i. 16. Heb. i. 2.

 DIVINITY OF CHRIST. 123

ascend and descend; whose foot is on a level with the

dust, and whose summit penetrates the inmost recesses of
an unapproachable splendor !”*
Here, then, we remark that, if Jesus Christ, in order to
be a proper representative of man, must himself be a man,
it follows that, in order to be a proper representative of God,
he must also be God. The man, however, is not the God;
nor the God the man. But God is in the man, by an in¬
effable union, with all his fullness of majesty and power, as
in a sacred temple, through which is shining all the light
and glory of heaven. We do not worship the temple, mag¬
nificent as it is, but the Divinity within the temple—“ God
over all, blessed forever.” The nature of the union; in
other words, the mystery of the incarnation, we cannot
explain ; but the union itself we assert and maintain. For,
to occupy the centre of truth, to be the great object of in¬
terest, of affection, veneration, and confidence to the univer¬
sal Church ; to sit on the throne of the universe; to govern
in the kingdom of grace ; to possess the “ keys of hell and
of deathto create and to control the visible and invisible
worlds; to receive the homage of angels and men ; and,
finally, to judge the quick and the dead, is the prerogative
only of the Supreme God. There is a sense, then, pro¬
found, mysterious, inexplicable, in which God. is in Christ,
and in which Christ is God. u And, without controversy,
great is the mystery of godliness—God was manifested in
the flesh !”f

* Works, Vol. I., p. 265.

t The word mystery, here used, designates, it is said, by Neander and others, the

4
124 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

To the view thus presented, it has been earnestly ob¬

jected by Channing and others, that it is totally inconsis¬
tent with the doctrine of the Divine Unity. But how can
that be, for the same Bible, which reveals the one, reveals
also the other? Those, therefore, who, from this source, de¬
rive the Divinity of Christ, believe also in the unity of God.
To us, as well as to the Unitarian, there is only one God.
No one, who is baptized in the name of the sacred Trinity,
the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, supposes that
he is baptized in the name of three Gods. Nor can an in¬
telligent believer in Christ be found, who, in worshipping
Christ, does not worship the one true and living God. In
that celebrated passage, where the Divine Unity is ex¬
pressly taught, the Godhead of Christ is tacitly implied; and
yet the passage is often quoted to disprove this very doc¬
trine. “But to us there is but one God, the Father, of
whom are all things, and we in him ; and one Lord Jesus
Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.”* Here
the unity of God, as well as the unity of Christ, in oppo¬
sition to polytheism, is distinctly taught. But the same
things are predicated of both. Thus: u One God, by whom
are all things.” “ One Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all
things.” “ One God, and we in him.” “ One Lord Jesus
Christ, and we by him.” We admit, indeed, that there is
a slight variation in the expressions, indicating the relations

Gospel, rather than the person or character of Christ. But what is the Gospel without
Christ! If the Gospel, or Christianity, is a mystery, we are sure Christ is. After all,
we hold to the natural application of the term.
* 1 Cor. viii. 6.
 DIVINTTY OP CHRIST. 125

between the Father and Son—the one being God absolute,

the other “God manifest in the flesh.” But they are rep¬
resented, in their sphere, that is to say, in the specific rela¬
tions which they sustain to the universe, and especially to
the Church, as possessing the same attributes, and accom¬
plishing the same results. All things are of the Father, as
the supreme and absolute God; all things are of the Son,
or by the Son, as the Logos, or medium of the Divine energy
and love ; first, as the Creator of all things ; and, secondly,
as the Redeemer of all things ; or, first, as the Maker of the
world; and, secondly, as the Saviour of the world;—the
same idea, precisely, which is expressed in St. John, i. 1—4,
where the Word, made flesh, is represented as Creator and
Redeemer:—“ All things were made by him, and without
him was not any thing made that was made. In him was
life, and the life was the light of men.” How beautifully
and strikingly, then, is it said, that we are of him, and by
him, and to him, as we are of and 6y, and to th*#ne eternal
God. There is one God, according to this passage, and
one Lord Jesus Christ, God manifest in the flesh, who are
essentially and morally one; and, therefore, receive the
same undivided and everlasting worship. For all men are
commanded “ to honor the Son, even as they honor the
Father.”
To us, then, there is only one God; but the Saviour,
whom we revere and love, as “ the way, the truth, and the
life,” is that one God in human form. Let it never, how¬
ever, be forgotten, that this is not a question to be settled
by metaphysical distinctions, or arithmetical figures; ancl
11#
• 126 MANIFESTATION of god.

hence we are far from saying, that one is three, or three

one, in any ordinary sense of these expressions, especially
in any numerical or mathematical sense, as some absurdly *
charge upon us ; yet we do say that the Father is God, the
Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God ; and that, in some
sense, mysterious, or not explained, these three are one. A
fact remains—a fact, whether we can explain its relations
to other facts or not. So here, the unity of God and the
Divinity of Christ are asserted as facts ; but whether we
can explain the exact relation between them, and so make
them identical, or harmonious, in the eyes of human reason,
is another question. Could the matter be determined by a
mathematical computation, or an algebraic process, it would
have been settled long ago ; and it seems to us high time
that the Divinity of Christ were attacked, if attacked at
all, on other grounds than those which every sensible per¬
son must admit have nothing to do with the subject. That
three subsistences here are one, or one three in every sense,
especially in a common, obvious, and, above all, arithmetical
or mathematical sense, no man, who reveres the word of God,
can admit. Nor can any one be found obtuse enough to
maintain so gross an absurdity. It is only in some sense—
some sense consistent with the nature and essence of God
—some sense recondite, or unrevealed, in which the Father,
the Son, and the Holy Ghost, arc three, and yet one. But
of this we shall have something more to say in the suc¬
ceeding chapter. At present, all that we affirm is, that our
views of the mystery are such as to be entirely consistent
with the fundamental doctrine of the Divine Unity. None
 DIVINITY OF CHRIST. 127

of us, with imperfect knowledge and limited capacity, may

so far comprehend the absolute essence and infinite nature
of God, as to be capable of showing, by a logical process,
how Jesus Christ can be God, and yet there be only one
supreme Divinity; that is to say, we may not understand
the metaphysics or ^ontology of. the case. Probably we
have not arrived at the ultimate facts or principles involved
in it; just as we have not yet arrived at the ultimate facts
or principles involved in the law of gravitation ; and, while
admitting it as a scientific fact, cannot tell what it really
is—cannot tell whether it may not be a modification of
magnetism, or of some other power, known or unknown.
Hence, both on scriptural and philosophical grounds, it is
our safer course simply to maintain the facts, as revealed
or proved, by adequate evidence, and wait for a higher con¬
dition of being, or of knowledge, to elucidate the whole.
We would not, indeed, discourage investigation; but how
can we investigate without means or data? The subject
may transcend our powers ; and all our speculations, there¬
fore, may be only “plunges in the dark.” Yet the subject
is not so difficult as has been imagined; it seems to us the
mind may rest in the simple fact of Christ’s Divinity, as
proved—feeling assured that there is some sense unknown
and mysterious, in which a Trinity is consistent with Unity
—in which Jesus Christ is truly and properly a man, and
yet “ God manifest in the flesh.” All truth is made up of
contrasts. Every fact has two sides—the one dark, and
the other luminous. Nay, more ; it requires two opposites,
philosophers tell us, to make a truth. If you have only
128 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

one, you have only a half truth; and a half truth is an

error. It is the union of the two which makes the truth ;
just as in chemistry, it is the union of opposites, acids and
alkalies, for example; or as in electricity, of negatives and
positives, which forms perfect combinations. In dynamics,
we have action and re-action—centripetal and centrifugal
forces, the result of which is “the music of the spheres.”
Man is mortal and immortal. He is form and spirit; body
and mind. Man, too, is free and dependent; a part and a
whole; an animal and a spirit.* The universe itself is
spirit and form, substance and phenomena, absolute being
and relative qualities ; infinite essence and finite forms ; in
other words, God and his creation. The union of these two
gives us realities, or truths. Why, then, should it be
deemed strange, if we should find contrasts in the very
nature of God, especially of God manifest in the flesh?
Divinity—humanity; God—man ; spirit—flesh, are oppo¬
sites ; but they unite somewhere. The Father, God; the
Son, God ; the Holy Ghost, God ; seem to contradict each
other, especially the two former; for here is God, as an in¬
finite spirit; and here, also, is God incarnate; God in human
form—as it were, a God degraded, or rather, veiled and ob¬
scured ; but all these opposites harmonize, and form the
eternal verity respecting the nature and manifestation of
God.
We call this the doctrine of the Trinity—understanding,

* Freedom and dependence, liberty and limitation, or, as theologians say, free grace
and free will, are but the opposite sides of a great truth. < 1.
 MVINtTY OF CHRIST. 129

by that term, simply a Unity in Trinity. It is not, prop¬

erly speaking, a scriptural term. It may be liable, also, to
misconception and abuse. Moreover, it “ sounds oddly,” as
Luther affirms ; and, in the hands of those who reject the
proper Deity of Christ, may be perverted into a kind of ar¬
gument against the doctrine. But it is to be regarded as a
simple theological formula, expressive of a great fact, not
entirely elucidated—lying, in part, to say the least, within
the boundaries of the unknown ; but a fact, clearly revealed
in the Holy Scriptures, namely, that the Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost, constitute the one true and living God. But
we are interested here more about things than forms, reali¬
ties than words ; and, while we make this explanation, we
cannot withhold our contempt from that rash and irreligious
temerity which sweeps away, sometimes, with a single
stroke of a pen, the entire mystery of this awful subject,
and maintains that there is nothing wonderful or inexpli¬
cable in the person and constitution of the Son of God.
Sceptics, themselves, admit this ; and, as philosophy be¬
comes more liberal and spiritual in its character, they will
admit it more and more. We have been surprised and de¬
lighted to find, among the speculative minds of France and
Germany, those even whom we are accustomed, perhaps
too hastily, to term infidels, so profound a sense of this
divine mystery, and so much readiness to allow that the
Scriptures, in their literal and obvious sense, teach the su¬
preme Divinity of Christ. As a single specimen of this, we
quote the following passage from Goethe’s Wanderjahre.
Speaking of Jesus Christ, and in reference to some contrasts
130 MANIFESTATION OF G0 D .

in his history, he says : “ In life he appears a true philoso¬

pher—let not the expression stagger you—as a wise man,
in the highest sense. He stands firm to this point; he goes
on his way inflexibly, and while he exalts the lower to him¬
self—while he makes the ignorant, the poor, the sick, par¬
takers of his wisdom, of his riches, of his strength, he, on
the other hand, in nowise conceals his divine origin; he
dares to equal himself with God; nay, to declare that he
himself is God.”*
Indeed, thoughtful men are beginning to see that the
idea of an incarnation is one of the most natural that can
be formed, that Jesus Christ is proved, by his life alone, to
be the good, in its loftiest and widest sense ; and that he
is the most appropriate temple, the brightest and most per¬
fect manifestation of the indwelling God, who also is the
good. They are coming, therefore, to the conclusion, that
the finite must find the infinite, the sinful the sinless, by
faith ; in other words, by union with the Son of God. This
great fact, according to Schleiermacher, is the basis of all
religion.! Jesus the Mediator must be human and yet

* Quoted by Carlyle in his elaborate and beautiful article on Goethe,

j “But the question now comes, how are we to realize our oneness with the absolute;
how can we rise to this high and holy religious consciousness 1 This is the point illus¬
trated by Schleiermacher, in his Weihnachtsfeier, (Christmas Festival,) in which Christ
is represented as the perfect union of the human consciousness with the Divine; and
man exhorted, by a living union with him, tc realize his own union with God.”
Morell’s History of Modern Philosophy, p. 618.
In a work just published in Paris, by Athanase Coquerel, the celebrated French pulpit
orator, generally considered a Rationalist, and even a Unitarian, under the title of
“ Christianisme,” or Christianity—in its perfect adaptation to the Mental, Moral and
Spiritual Mature of Man, we find the following passage: “ To fulfill the office of a Sav¬
iour in a department of creation, that is, to effect a charge of direction in an activity,
which has wandered from its faith, and to lead it towards God, is to touch upon the work
 DIVINITY Of CHkisT. 131

infinite, in order to restore the soul to God. A God abstract,

a God absolute, we cannot reach. We yearn for it, but we
cannot reach it, cannot blend with it. A Mediator, a
Reconciler is needed. God himself must come to us—
come to us in an aspect and form which we can under¬
stand. In fact, he must link himself to us, by an incarna¬
tion, in order to make us partakers of his nature, and heirs
of his immortality. He has done so in the person and
work of Jesus Christ. So that believing in him, we find
God,—become one with God. “ Our life” the soul’s life in
the infinite and unending, “ is hid with Christ in God, and
when Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then we also
shall appear with him in glory.”*

of God, to interfere with his government, to draw upon the infinite in order to render as¬
sistance to the finite. Whence three consequences result: First, a redemption would be
impossible without the full authorization and continuous participation of the Infinite
Being. Secondly, the office of a Saviour could not be filled, except by God himself, or by
a being who was his representative, the depository of his powers, the alter ego of the In¬
finite Being, the ideal realized and manifested. Thirdly, the existence of a Redeemer
lies without the limits of time; or to speak more precisely, it is in no respects subject to
that form of knowledge, to that law of succession. In order to draw freely upon the
resources, and to act upon the responsibility of the infinite, there cannot exist between
the Redeemer and the Infinite that barrier which we call time.
“ Besides, to fill the office of a Saviour in a manner subjective or inward as to its
results, and objective or outward as to its means, in a manner at once individual and
collective, could not be done by a theory, there must also be a practice.
“Finally, the fall and sin were those of human activity, and human agency also was
necessary for restoration. A man alone could effect and offer a human salvation. * *
“Thus a Redeemer must exhibit a double character ; he must be equally in his nat¬
ural place, one while in the bosom of God, at another in the midst of his redeemed,
whomsoever they may be.” Hence he adds.: “ This double character of a Redeemer in¬
volves an impenetrable mystery.”
“Christ the God-man,” says Schelling, “represented the complete reunion of mnn
to God, the return of the finite revolted will to the infinite—a return which is shadowed
forth by his perfect obedience.” Morell’s “ History of Philosophy,” p. 451.
* It is on the views just stated that we are to explain the words, “ There is one
God, and one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus.” Here, so to
speak, are two extremes, God and man. How are they to be united 1 By him, who, as
Mediator, is at once divine and human, or the God-man.
132 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

Thus while we may not understand the mystery of the

incarnation in its ontological or essential relations, we can
understand it in those which are religious or practical.
From this source we form the clearest and loftiest concep¬
tions of the Divine goodness and love. In this living and
breathing incarnation of the Godhead, we see, we feel the
love, the purity, the pity of the Father! An abstract and
incorporeal Deity, a spirit, all power, all purity, all perfection,
a spirit absolute, infinite, immortal, is a grand conception,
well fitted to expand the mind; but to see that spirit em¬
bodied in human form, to hear him speak in tones of com¬
passion, to behold him wandering among men, as their
brother and friend, to look upon him as he dies for the guilty,
to see him u face to face,” and feel the warm breath of his
boundless love stirring the responding affection of our hearts,
is to form an idea of God which subdues and blesses the
soul. God in Christ! It amazes—it thrills and transforms
us ! The material creation, with its mountains and seas,
its woods and streams, its azure sky and sparkling stars,
exhibits the glory of God, and constitutes a silent but ex¬
pressive revelation of the truth—

“ The Gospel of the stars, great nature’s Holy Writ.”

But in the natural and moral grandeur of the Son of

God, in the entrancing beauty of his perfection, in the im¬
measurable compass of his love, we behold a revelation of
the Divine glory, brighter and more touching by far. As
beneath the vesture of the material creation the hand of
God is seen to move, so here beneath the bosom of Jesus
 DIVINITY OF CHRIST. 133

Christ, the very heart of God is seen to palpitate and burn.

It is love, boundless and everlasting, leaping out from the
absolute and infinite, to seek and to save the lost!

“ Here love immortal leaves the sky,

To wipe the weeping mourner’s eye,
And give the weary rest!”

But it is further objected to the Divinity of Christ, that he

himself disavows this high claim. “ The Father is greater
than I”—is cited as a proof of this; and yet the passage
rather seems to assert, than disavow his Divinity. That
the Father, in some sense, is greater than the Son, our
Saviour here teaches ; but what does this imply, if not, that
in other senses the Son is equal with the Father? We
need not to be informed that a man or an angel is inferior to
God ; but we do need to be informed that “ the Son of God,”
“ whose name is above every name,” and who counts it
“no robbery to be equal with God,” is, in some aspects of
his character, subordinate to the Father. As Messiah, as
Mediator, the man Jesus Christ yields submission and
homage to the Father; but his indwelling Divinity is one
with the Father. As the Mediator, “ the Head of Christ
is God,” just as Christ, God manifest in the flesh, is 11 the
Head of every man.” Here, then, in this very passage,
quoted to prove the contrary, we find a beautiful and con¬
vincing evidence of our Saviour’s Divinity, veiled, indeed, by
his humanity, and stooping, for a season, to seek and to
save the lost.
Another passage, (St. John, x. 24, 29,) frequently quoted
to disprove the Divinity of Christ, will be found to teach
12
134 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

the same great doctrine. In this passage our Saviour fur¬

nishes an explanation, touching his relation to the Father,
to rebut the accusation of the Jews, who charged him with
a blasphemous assumption of the Divine prerogatives.
“How long,” said they, “dost thou make us to doubt? if
thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.” In reply, he refers
them to what he had already said upon the subject, and
to “ the works” which he had performed in attestation
of his claims. But he knew well that the difficulty lay
not in any thing without them, that is to say, not in the
state of their understanding, but of their affections. They
were not “ of his sheep,” and “ could not hear his voice.”
Hence he adds: “ My sheep hear my voice, and I know
them, and they follow me : and I give unto them eternal
life ; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man
pluck them out of my hand. My Father which gave them
me is greater than all ; and no man is able to pluck them
out of my Father’s hand.” Here, it will be perceived,
Jesus affirms of himself what he also affirms of the Fa¬
ther,—bringing out the grand truth of his identity with
the Father; and thus claiming to be the Messiah—
the Son and representative of the Father, in the very high¬
est sense of the words. “ I and my Father are one!” is
his brief and pregnant method of expressing it. “ Then the
Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered
them, Many good works have I shown you from my
Father; for which of these works do ye stone me ? The
Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone
thee not, but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a
 DIVINITY OF CHRIST. 135

man, makest thyself God. Jesus answered them, Is it not

written in your law, I said ye are gods ? If ye call them
gods unto whom the word of God came, and the Scriptures
cannot be broken ; say ye of him whom the Father hath
sent into the world, thou blasphemest, because I said, I am
the Son of God? If I do not the works of my Father,
believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe me not,
believe the works : that ye may know and believe that the
Father is in me, and 1 in Him”
Now, what is it that our Saviour disclaims in this pas¬
sage ? Is it that he was not entitled to be denominated
the Son of God?—that he was not one with the Father?—
that the Jews were mistaken as to the nature of his claim,
and that he was not therefore Gocl manifest in the flesh ?
No ! he rather vindicates his title to these high distinctions.
It is true, he refers to a case in which judges or princes were
called gods, (Elohim.) in an inferior sense, as representatives
of God in matters of civil government and justice. But he
most clearly intimates that he bore the title in a higher sense.
If they were called gods to whom the word of God came,
why say ye of him, who is the anointed Messiah, the sancti¬
fied or consecrated of the Father, the Messenger of the cove¬
nant, the eternal Word, Thou blasphemest, because I said, I
am the Son of God, and therefore one with God ? Look at
my works; do they not prove the propriety of my claim ?
Do they not evince that “the Father is in me, and I in
Him?” Is not this the meaning of our Saviour, fully
brought out ? Could it with any propriety be said of the
136 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

ancient judges and princes of Israel that they were one

with God ? No, the word of God merely came to them.
Theirs was an inferior and delegated authority. But Jesus
was the Word itself,—the very brightness of the Father’s
glory, and the express image of his person ; and if judges
and princes bore the title of Elohim, (God,) with how much
greater propriety might Jesus bear it ? Thus, it must be
obvious that he disavows nothing, but rather vindicates the
propriety of his exalted claims. The Jews understood it
so; and hence is it added, with peculiar significance,
“ Therefore they sought again to take him, but he escaped
out of their hands.” With their views, that is, deeming
him a mere man, it is not surprising that they believed him
guilty of blasphemy, in claiming to be one with God, and
thence, notwithstanding his explanation, they were ready
to stone him to death.
On another occasion Jesus vindicated the propriety of his
working on the Sabbath day, on the ground that the Ah
mighty, in the control and management of the universe, does
the same. u My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.”
This was esteemed by the Jews as equivalent to the claim
of supreme Divinity. u Therefore the Jews sought the
more to kill him, because he not only had broken the Sab¬
bath, but said also that God was his Father, making him¬
self equal with God. Then answered Jesus and said unto
them : The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he
seeth the Father do. For the Father loveth the Son and
showeth him all things that himself doeth, and he will
 DIVINITY OF CHRIST. 137

show him greater things than these, (the works he had

just performed,) that ye may marvel.”*
It is maintained, that here again Jesus disclaims supreme
Divinity. But we submit whether this is not an obvious
mistake ; for he seems to us rather to affirm his Divinity.
What he disclaims, is not identity with God, equality
with the Father, but independence of God, separate exis¬
tence and authority. The Son can do nothing of himself,\
that is, independently of the Father, or differently from
the Father. They are one,—the Son feels as the Father
feels, acts as the Father acts. The Jews charged Jesus
with setting up a separate and exclusive authority ; and
had he not been the Son of God, and therefore one with
God, this charge would have been just. He takes pains,
therefore, to show that he acted in connection with the Fa¬
ther, and that he did neither more nor less than what the
Father did. “ For whatsoever things he doeth, these doeth
the Son likewise.” Then borrowing an illustration from
what ordinarily occurs between a father and a son, he
says:—“ For the Father loveth the Son, and showeth him
all things that himself doeth, and he will show him greater
things than these, that ye may marvel.”
Hence, the most stupendous works of the Deity, such
as quickening the dead, renovating the heart, and judg¬
ing the world, are those also which are performed by the
Son. “For as the Father raiseth up the dead and quick-
eneth them, even so the Son quickeneth whom he will.

* John, v. 17, 20.

12*
138 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all

judgment to the Son, that all men should honor the So?i:
even as they honor the Father. * * * * Verily, verily
I say unto you, the hour is coming, yea now is, when the
dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they that
hear shall live. For as the Father hath life in himself so
hath he given to the Son to have life in himself.” How
could this be done, except by uniting the Godhead with the
humanity of Jesus ? Independent life, and the power of
communicating life, is the highest and most essential pre¬
rogative of God.
Thus, then, it pleased the Father that in the man Jesus
should all fullness dwell:—“ in him dwelleth all ihe fullness
of the Godhead bodily;” whence he is the head over all
things to the church. “For as the Father hath life in
himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in
himself; and hath given him authority to execute judg¬
ment also, because he is the Son of man,”—because he is
the Messiah. “ Marvel not at this,” he adds, “ for the hour
is coming when all that are in their graves shall hear
the voice of the Son of man, and shall come forth;
they that have done good, to the resurrection of life,
they that have done evil, to the resurrection of damna¬
tion.” But, in conclusion, he shows that all this would
take place in harmony with the mind of the Father, that
the Son could do nothing of himself, that he must ever
maintain the single and supreme authority of the Father,
and act in harmony with the counsels of his will. “ I can
of mine own self do nothing ; as I hear, I judge ; and my
 DIVINITY OF CHRIST. 139

judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but

the will of him that sent me," No,—Jesus has no independ¬
ent and exclusive will, no separate and divided interests.
He is one with the Father, one in nature, one in purpose,
one in action. And therefore, all men should honor the Son,
even as they honor the Father.
But how frequently has the very fact of our Saviour’s
condescension, his voluntary “ susception of our nature,”
and his obedience unto death, been cited against the doc¬
trine of his proper Divinity; when all that the Scriptures,
and all that orthodox believers affirm, is the fact of a vol¬
untary incarnation, or the assumption by the Godhead of
an inferior and suffering nature, with a view to the redemp¬
tion of the world. It is the Word, not the flesh, the God¬
head, not the manhood, of which we predicate Divinity.
The Word essentially and immutably Divine, “was made
flesh and dwelt among us ; and we beheld his glory, the
glory as of the only-begotten of the Father, full of grace
and truth.” This, then, is “ God in the flesh,”—“ all the
fullness of the Godhead,” dwelling bodily in the man Jesus
Christ, and constituting the one great and all-commanding
fact, taught by Apostles and apostolic men. “ That which
was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we
have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and
our hands have handled of the Word of Life. For the
Life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness,
and show unto you that eternal Life, which was with the
Father, and was manifested unto us. That which we
have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may
140 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

have fellowship with us ; and truly our fellowship is with

the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ. And we know
that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an under¬
standing, that we may know him that is true; and we
are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This
is the true God and eternal Life.”*

* 1 John, i. 1—3; v. 20.

 CHAPTER III.

THE INCARNATION AS A MYSTERY.

We have more than once remarked that the manifesta¬

tion of God, in the person of Christ, is a mystery; and
intelligent readers, perhaps, have attached to that expres¬
sion a just and scriptural idea. But the whole subject of
mystery, and consequently the mystery of the Incarna¬
tion, is involved in unnecessary difficulty, by the prevalence
of inadequate and erroneous views. The matter, therefore,
requires elucidation, as it is essential to a proper and con¬
sistent idea of the nature and mission of Christ. What,
then, is a mystery ; and in what sense; and to what extent
does the manifestation of the Godhead, in the person of
Christ, bear this character?
A mystery, in the most natural and obvious signification
of the term, is something secret or hidden, something into
which it is necessary to be initiated. Many things, there¬
fore, which have been mysteries, may cease to bear this
character. The veil may be lifted, and the secrets or
mysteries revealed.* Others, again, may be only partially
concealed, and thus lie partly in the known, and partly in

* In this sense, the Gospel itself is called a mystery, particularly in its application to
the heathen ; the Divine intention, in this respect, having been obscurely revealed, or, at
least entirely misunderstood, previous to the advent of Christ.
142 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

the unknown. Thus the sphericity of the earth, and

the antipodes, though known to some extent in the
middle ages, were mysteries to those who lived at that
time• are mysteries now to those upon whom the light of
science has but partially dawned. The same remark
might be made respecting the electric telegraph, which is
yet a profound mystery to many persons. This arises from
no inherent difficulty in the subjects themselves, but from
the partial knowledge of those who are compelled to regard
them as mysteries. They know something about them from
report or otherwise ; believe their existence, perhaps, on the
testimony of others, but they know them only as myste¬
ries. It is with difficulty, sometimes, as in the case of the
sphericity of the earth, and its revolution around the sun,
that they admit their existence at all; for they appear
contradictory to their most cherished judgments, nay, to
the testimony of their senses.
A mystery is not an absolute enigma, far less an ab¬
surdity, or a contradiction. It is, simply, something more
or less difficult or obscure. In theological phrase, it is
applied to those great truths or facts, which lie, to some
extent, in the region of the unknown, and which cannot,
therefore, be fully understood. Something is known about
them, but not enough to remove all difficulty and obscurity.
They are apprehended, but not comprehended. One or
more of their aspects, one or more of their relations lie in
shadow. They are known, but only “ in part.”
A mystery, then, does not contradict our reason. It only
transcends it. It is a matter of difficulty and obscurity,
 INCARNATION AS A MYSTERY. 143

only because our knowledge is partial and one-sided ; or

because our mind is not infinite and omniscient. Itv belongs
to a region, the greater part of which has not been discoy-
ered, far less explored, and upon which, therefore, it is use¬
less to speculate.
Hence, we remark, that a mystery, while obscure and
difficult in some of its relations, is not, as sceptics frequently
claim, a matter upon which we are incapable of forming
just and definite opinions. For the very idea of a mystery,
implies a knowledge of the existence of that respecting
which it is affirmed. Its reality may be certified by evi¬
dence, and its nature and bearings partly explained. In
some way, however, it transcends our faculties. Clear
enough in part, it is obscure as a whole. In the origin, or
mode of its existence, in its relations to the infinite and the
absolute, it is more or less above us, or beyond us, like a
star, clear and beautiful in one of its phases, but otherwise
hidden in the depths of immeasurable space.
A mystery is the limit of our present powers, the goal of
our investigations and discoveries, the point at which our
positive knowledge ceases, and where commences for us
the unknown, the inexplicable, the infinite. “ It is not the
radiant day, in which everything appears in a clear light;
nor is it that profound darkness in which we see nothing;
it is the twilight of reason and faith, in which the objects
are real and active, but at a distance, seen in a confused and
gloomy shade, so that the sharpness of the outline is effaced,
the colors are confounded, and the objects themselves com¬
mingle : the characters, like an inscription, are read in
144 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

broken words, by the feeble glimmering of a sepulchral

lamp, alid the only word which is distinctly legible is,
mystery !”*
Christianity recognizes mysteries of this description,
truths partly discovered and partly unknown, truths, espe¬
cially, which pertain to the absolute and the eternal, which
lie like islands in that great ocean of mystery, the self-
existent and eternal One. Some of these truths are in
themselves inscrutable, and could never be known, even
partially, except by a Divine revelation. Of this descrip¬
tion is the mystery of the Incarnation—the mystery of the
Godhead, as revealed in the Father, the Son, and the Holy
Spirit. “For I would,” says Paul, “that ye knew what
great conflict I have for you and for them at Laodicea, and
for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh ; that
their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in
love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of under¬
standing, to the acknowledgment of the mystery of God,
and of the Father, and of Christ, in whom are hid all the
treasures of wisdom and knowledge.” “ And without con¬
troversy, great is the mystery of godliness : God was mani¬
fest in the flesh.”f
As a manifestation of the Godhead, as a Being at once
human and Divine, as the connecting link between Heaven
and earth, the nature and mission of Jesus would naturally
be a subject of difficulty to the reason and philosophy of
this world. On this ground, adds the Apostle, “ Beware

* “Christianismepar Athanase Coquerel. f Col. ii. 1—3; 1 Tim. iii. 16.

 INCARNATION AS A MYSTERY. 145

lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit,
after the tradition (teaching) of men, and not after Christ.
For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.
Atid ye are complete in him, who is the head of all princi¬
pality and power.”*
In these expressions is discovered to us the grand pecu¬
liarity of the Christian Faith. It proposes to unite the soul
to God, the great end of all religion, by uniting it to Christ.
For this purpose it presents Christ to us, as the sum and
essence of all goodness, the source and fountain of all wis¬
dom and grace, and thence made unto those who believe,
wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption ; as
a Being, therefore, to be loved, revered and adored. This
we call a mystery ; but not a mystery entirely unknown
or unnatural in any way. Nay, it is precisely what we
might expect. It is, certainly, what we need. For re¬
ligion, in its true sense, is not so much a doctrine as a life.f
Moreover, it is a life in the infinite and eternal; in other
words, a life in God. Hence we cannot be saved by bare
beliefs, traditions, or externalities of any kind. No system,
however perfect and magnificent, can save us. We are
estranged from God, and must return to God, in order to
live, j But how shall the finite, above all, how shall the

* Coloss. ii. 8.
t Doubtless it is both. The doctrine or the truth, apprehended by the mind, and
received by the heart, produces the life, and the life sustains the doctrine. They act
and react upon each other. The doctrine, indeed, may exist without the life, but not
the life without the doctrine. To have light and heat, you need the sun. To have
spiritual life, which is holy love, you must have the truth, which is the knowledge of
God in Jesus Christ. “ Fnitli worketh by love.”
$ “Life only can produce life.”—Vinet. To which we add, God only can repro¬
duce his own image. Union with God is the soul’s life.
13
146 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

fallen and the lost, reach God, but by the intervention of

God himself? How shall we become one with him,
unless, somehow, he make himself one with us ? But tl^|
Gospel invites us to Christ. One with him, we are (5ne
with God. “ No man,’’ says he, “ cometh unto the Father
but by me.” u He that believeth in me shall never die.”
It is only in this way that, practically and experimentally,
we come to the knowledge of God. “ This is life eternal
to know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom
thou hast sent.”
But how shall God become incarnate ? How unite
himself with a finite form ? Above all, how shall he suf¬
fer in that finite form? How shall the just be as the
unjust—the sinless, as the sinful—the ever-blessed and
eternal, as the crucified and slain ? Ah! these are the secrets,
the mysteries which baffle the profoundest intellects, and
leave the mission of Jesus in a sacred obscurity. Yet,
light is gleaming through the cloud; and philosophy
itself can discern its beauty and glory. If ever God mani¬
fested himself in all the splendor of his infinite perfection,
it was in the life and character of Christ. Long were the
heavens covered with shadows ; but they opened at last,
and, through the rent, the Sun of Righteousness poured
his radiance upon the world. But that Sun is too bright,
and stretches too far into the depths above us, to be nar¬
rowly scanned by human eyes. It involves a dread and
fathomless mystery.
We say, then, in the first place, that the doctrine of the
incarnation, or of the Godhead of Christ, cannot be fully
 INCARNATION AS A MYSTERY. 147

comprehended; nor is it meant to be comprehended, except

by the affections. If the intellect does not quite understand
it, we are sure the heart does—clinging to Christ, as brother,
Saviour, friend—and not only so, but as Master and Sove¬
reign. If reason has a limit and a difficulty here, the heart
has none. Nay, this great mystery has solved all other
difficulties with which the heart has long struggled in
darkness and sorrow, opening up for it a luminous and
blessed pathway to God and glory. Here it has found—
what it long sought in vain—the infinite, the perfect and
immortal.
Certainly a great mystery attaches to the incarnation
of Christ—using the word in its ordinary signification—and
the nature of that intimate and glorious union, subsisting
between him and a believing soul. For, to be a believer, a
man must not simply admit the teaching of Christ, or the
morality of Christ; he must not only believe Christianity
as a fact, and Jesus Christ as a man, as a teacher, or re¬
former, or even as the God-man; but he must believe in
Christ, that is to say, his heart and soul must be so united,
so wedded and assimilated to Christ, that it may be truly
said, that he is in Christ, and Christ in him. It is only
thus that he can be transformed into the same image, from
glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord ; only thus
that he can comprehend “ the riches of the glory of this
mystery, which,” says the Apostle, “ is Christ in you the
hope of glory.”*

* Colos6. i. 27.
148 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

But the difficulty to the intellect is not greater than is

found in a thousand things beside—things, too, which all
men instantly admit. Indeed, there are no subjects, whether
in the science of matter or of mind, which are not environed
with difficulties. Inquiries can be started upon all matters
of abstract and philosophical speculation, beyond the grasp
of the finite intellect; nay, more, a child can ask questions
about himself, or about the world around him, which baffle
the profoundest thinkers. “ A grain of sand,” says the
philosophical Vinet, “is an abyss.” Every thing, indeed,
in the whole range of animate and inanimate nature, is as¬
sociated directly or indirectly with mysteries ; every ques¬
tion in philosophy and morals can be run up to some insu¬
perable difficulty, where the intellect must stop and confess
its ignorance. Light and darkness, knowledge and mys¬
tery are associated in all the speculations of the finite
mind. The day rests in the bosom of night. The stars
are set in a firmament of gloom.
Our knowledge, so far as it goes, may be definite, and
the language in which it is expressed, clear and intel¬
ligible ; yet that knowledge, like the segment of an infinite
circle, links itself, at all points, to mysteries. Facts may
be ascertained, and constantly recognized, in the ordinary
avocations of life; but, as to their origin and mode of ex¬
istence, we may be plunged in the deepest ignorance. Fur¬
thermore, some of these facts may appear to involve contra¬
dictions, and give rise to inquiries, before which the mightiest
intellects fall prostrate. The science of mathematics, even,
involves the infinite, and, in some cases, the impossible ! It
 INCARNATION AS A MYSTERY. 149

recognizes this sublime contradiction, that there may be two

lines which ever approach, but never meet, and, finally,
loses itself in the boundless depths of the “infinitesimal
calculus.” If chemistry does not involve, it certainly sug¬
gests the infinite. It has its agents imponderable and uni¬
versal ; its permanent basis, or substance, (id quod stat per
se,) in which all physical qualities adhere; its infinite
divisibility of body, with its definite and immutable atoms.
What is matter?—what its essence and mode of existence?
—what its origin and its end ? How does it link itself to
spirit, and how can it give and receive impressions and mo¬
tions ? It seems essentially diverse from spirit, and yet
they act and re-act upon each other. Matter, as it exists
in space and time, the product of an infinite mind, “ from
whom are all things,” is one of the profoundest mysteries
that has ever engaged the attention of thoughtful men.
What, moreover, is mind—spirit, especially as uncreated and
eternal ? What is our own mind, that mysterious some¬
thing, which thinks, and feels, and wills, and suffers, and
rejoices ? What are its nature and essence, its mode of ex¬
istence, its ineffable relation to God, and the creation around
it ? What, even, is the union of body and soul ? How are
they linked, and what strange power causes them to act in
harmony ? “ Whence,” to use the language of Chateau¬
briand, “ that flash of lightning which we call existence,
and in what night is it to be extinguished ? The Almighty
has placed birth and death, under the form of veiled phan¬
toms, at the two extremities of our career—the one pro-
13*
150 MANIFESTATION "OF GOD.

duces the incomprehensible moment of life, which the other

hastens to devour.”*
So far, indeed, has speculation upon these high themes
led philosophers, that they have found themselves com¬
pelled to deny the relation of cause and effect; nay, the
very existence of matter, as an objective reality, maintain¬
ing there can be nothing in the universe but mind or
spirit, and that all material substances, and the changes
of which they are susceptible, are only forms and phantoms
of the all-embracing mind. Others, again, pressed with a
similar difficulty, but starting from different premises, and
especially from the position that all our ideas are either de¬
rived from external objects, or greatly modified by them,
have denied the existence of mind or spirit, and have re¬
ferred all the modifications of thought and feeling to the
organization and action of material forms. This class of
philosophers have imagined the possibility of elucidating
and harmonizing all subjects of human inquiry. Sitting,
so to speak, at the centre of the universe, and with minds
of infinite grasp and range, they feel that the whole thing,
past, present, and to come, is under their immediate eye.
Mystery, in their creed, is an exploded idea. They must
never take any thing for granted—must never confess their
ignorance—never own the existence of a mystery. So,
plunging into the boundless ocean of thought, without
chart or compass, and swept onward and afar by the resist¬
less force of invisible currents, they soon lose themselves

* Oeuvres Completes. Genie Du Christianisme. Tome III., p. 6.

 INCARNATION AS A MYSTERY. 151

amid tempest and darkness, and sink, at last, in the fathom¬

less abyss.
Thus, by the rejection of all mystery, and speculating
beyond the range of the human mind, multitudes, even of
acute and learned men, have succeeded in denying the ex¬
istence both of matter and of mind, the being and person¬
ality of God, the reality of the soul, and the reality of the
body; so that the perfection and end of all philosophy has
been their arrival, according to some of the philosophers of
the Hegelian school, at absolute nothing!
Such are the boasted achievements of a philosophy which
begins by rejecting all mysteries, and ends by making every
thing a mystery, absolute and fathomless—a mystery darker
than the grave, and boundless as eternity.
But if these things occur in human science, what may
we not expect in divine ? If man is a mystery, what is
God ? If the life that now is presents enigmas and secrets
the most profound and awful, what shall we find in u the
life to come ?” If with propriety we can say, Great is the
mystery of nature, mind is manifest in matter, may we not,
with still greater propriety exclaim, Great is the mystery of
godliness, God was manifest in the flesh?
Relations and modes of existence lie concealed in the
immeasurable depths of nature, never dreamt of in our insu¬
lated and short-lived philosophy. V ast fields of thought
stretch into infinitude and eternity, beyond the ken of man,
or of angel. The universe, even, as an outward thing,
a matter of space and time, of limited forms and temporary
duration, has itself been termed “ an infinite mystery.”
152 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

And if this be true of the creature, what shall we say of

the Creator1? a Canst thou, by searching, find out God?
Canst thou find out the Almighty to perfection ? It is high
as heaven ; what canst thou do ? Deeper than hell; what
canst thou know ? The measure thereof is longer than the
earth, and broader than the sea.” The visible and mate¬
rial around us, boundless as it seems, is but the shadow of
God. u Lo, these are a part of his ways ; but the thunder
(the secret) of his power, who can understand ?” An old
divine looking into this subject, and catching but a dim
outline of the Divine glory, could only exclaim, in adoring
rapture, u O, the depths ! O, the depths !”
We have some experience of the nature and constitu¬
tion of man; what have we of the nature and constitution
of God? We have some imperfect acquaintance with
modes of existence in time; what have we of modes of
existence in eternity ? Can we reason from the one to the
other dogmatically ? Can we find adequate analogies be¬
tween them ? Man is the creature, God is the Creator.
Man is dependent and changeable, God is independent and
changeless. Man is finite, God is infinite. Man is con¬
fined to a particular sphere, God inhabits eternity. Man
looks out upon all things, and receives constantly accre¬
tions of thought and feeling; God holds all things in him¬
self, and sheds upon them beauty and glory. u In him we
live, and move, and have our being.” True, indeed, man
was created in the image of God, but this has reference to
his intellectual and moral nature, his power of self-con¬
sciousness and self-control, his sense of right and wrong,
 INCARNATION AS A MYSTERY. 153

with his susceptibility of pure and spiritual joy; but not

to his essence or the mode of his existence. For, while
man is a moral and responsible agent, he is neither God
nor a part of God. He is a creature formed by God, and
therefore altogether distinct from God. Man has the
sense of the infinite, but he is not himself infinite. He can
blend with the infinite, but can never fully comprehend
it—never fully embrace it. His joy, therefore, may increase
forever, but it is derived and dependent. Pure and spiritual,
ever-blessed and immortal he may become; but he owes
the whole to “ the Father of spirits,” u who only hath
immortality.” Poetry, indeed, has sometimes taught a
different lesson, and a transcendental, imaginative philoso¬
phy has endorsed it. But reason does not; the Bible does
not. Common sense does not. The thing, in fact, in¬
volves a contradiction. Man can neither be God nor part
of God ; for God is not made up of parts. Division, multi¬
plication, or abstraction, cannot be predicated of his es¬
sence. Infinite being can neither be increased nor dimin¬
ished, multiplied nor divided. His essence and mode of
existence must be peculiar and exclusive. Nothing in the
universe can bear to it any just analogy. Man is the
image of his intelligent and moral nature ; an image, when
perfect, clearer and more beautiful than all the stars of
light; but he is not an image of the Divine essence and
mode of existence. This may be known as a fact, vast
and unutterable, but it transcends all our reason and un¬
derstanding. It is high as heaven—what can we do?
Deeper than hell ; what can ice knoic ? On this subject
154 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

we have neither data, means of comparison and judgment,

nor appropriate powers of investigation. Logic and calcu¬
lation equally fail us ; science pauses in reverence and
godly fear. Philosophy cannot aid us in a case like this;
for her range is limited by the capacities of the finite mind.
She may discover and recognize the infinite, but she can¬
not fathom it. She can neither analyse its nature, nor
solve its mystery. Natural science cannot aid us, for
her true province is confined to the outward and the phe¬
nomenal. She tells us of relations and changes, of quan¬
tities and forms, of attributes and affections, and intimates,
as her last result, that these belong to beings, or substances,
or what she chooses to denominate such ; but she does not
even pretend to enter the infinite, and explain the natures
and essences of things. Upon their absolute constitution,
and essential mode of existence, she is dumb as the grave.
Nor can the spiritual or transcendental philosophy aid us;
for while she professes to construct a bridge from the phe¬
nomenal to the actual, the relative to the absolute, the
finite to the infinite, she cannot tell what the actual, the
absolute, the infinite, really is. To her, it is nothing more
than a grand ineffable reality, perhaps possibility, accord¬
ing to Kant, with august and overwhelming attributes of
power, intelligence, and will, and it may be of purity and
love ; but further than this she cannot tell what it is, or
how it is. Here we find the limits of our power, and like
that old and reverent Divine, can only cry out, “ O, the
depths ! O, the depths !”*

* In an address to the Deity, whom he denominates “ the Exalted and Living Will, the
 INCARNATION AS A MYSTERY. 155

We are so constituted as to believe that every event

must have a cause—that every quality must have a basis,
that over against phenomena, there must be substance—
over against relations, absolute existence—over against the
finite, the infinite—over against multiplicity and change)
absolute unity and permanent being ; in other words, an
infinite, self-existing God, the cause of all things, the
Creator of the Heavens and Earth. From the very consti¬
tution of our minds, we must maintain the unity, the per*
feet, absolute, unalterable unity of such a being. To us,
in this respect, there can be only “one God.” But what
distinctions and peculiarities exist in that unity, or in the
manifestation of that unity, are questions utterly beyond
us. Whether there is not in the very nature of God him¬
self, some basis for a manifestation of himself as the
Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, we cannot tell
The Scriptures may indicate such a basis, but we cannot
explain it. The subject is one upon which reason is in¬
competent to say a word. Here it has approached the
region of mystery, and must pause until God reveal
himself.
Whatever, then, ha§ been revealed upon this subject in a
well authenticated Revelation, must be received with im-

Incomprehensible and everlasting One,’* the philosopher Fichte uses this remarkable
language: “ What I understand, is from my very understanding it, finite, and by no
progression, can ever be transformed into the infinite. Thou differest from the finite,
not in degree, but in kind. I will not attempt that which my finite nature forbids. I
will not seek to know the nature and essence of thy being. But thy relations to my¬
self and to all that is finite, lie open before my eyes. Thou createdst in me the con¬
sciousness of my duty—of my destination in the series of rational beings ; how, I know
not, nor need I know.”—Bestimmung dcs Menschen.
156 MANIFESTATION OF GOD,

plicit submission, however difficult or mysterious, however

contrary to our preconceived opinions, however repulsive to
our ordinary habits of thinking and reasoning. A contra¬
diction, of course, we cannot receive; but a mystery we
can and must. I may know in general that Jesus Christ
is God incarnate, but how he is such may baffle all my in¬
quiries. My heart seizes the ineffable idea, and exults
under its influence; but my intellect cannot penetrate it,
far less explain it. All that can be said upon the subject
is, And without controversy great is the mystery of god¬
liness, God was manifest in the flesh.”
But it has been complacently said, that “ religion ends
where mystery begins.” The antithesis is striking, but the
sentiment is false. For as has been justly remarked, you
might as well say that traveling ends where the sea begins.
Nay, we go further, and maintain that religion cannot exist
without mystery. A religion without a mystery is a reli¬
gion without a soul, a religion without an hereafter, a reli¬
gion without a God ! When we have discarded the Divinity
and incarnation of Christ, the expiation on the cross, and
the resurrection of the dead, we have not rid the subject
of mysteries, mysteries as profoemd and inscrutable as
those we have rejected. Nay, let a man become an utter
atheist, and he surrounds himself with a darkness more
deep and terrible, a darkness illumined by no stars, followed
by no dawn. He multiplies the secrets of nature a thou¬
sand fold, and loses himself in the abyss of a horrible and
everlasting mystery.
Had Christianity been a system without a mystery, no
 [NCA11NATI0W AS A MYSTERY. 157

thoughtful man could believe it. Every such man, hun¬

gering after the perfect and the eternal, must rejoice that
faith and adoration can advance, where science and philoso¬
phy are compelled to pause. Sometimes, nay, during his
whole life, he may walk in darkness, but the stars are over¬
head, and the dawn of everlasting day is yet to break upon
his vision. In the Gospel there are mysteries; but how
magnificent and thrilling ! Shadows, but shadows from the
infinite, shadows gloriously penetrated with light supernal.
How profound the secret of the Godhead, especially of the
Godhead incarnate ; but how august, how beautiful! Dark,
indeed, but dark from excess of light; and it is only in low
liness and adoration we can see it, or feel it, in its all-trans-
forming power. The highest intellects have adored it!
Millions upon millions have trembled with joy, under its in¬
fluence. In the night of time, these voyagers, storm-driven
upon the ocean of life, have looked up into the infinite
depths above them, and beheld “that glory-beaming star,”
radiant as at the first, when it was hymned by the angels
on the plains of Bethlehem, and under its guidance have
passed on, through tempest and darkness, to the haven of
everlasting rest. Here, as in the case of Francis Junius,
mentioned by Scaliger as one of the greatest scholars of
his age, who was recovered from absolute atheism by a
clear and sudden view of the glory of Christ, for the first
time have they found the Light and the Life of the world,
and under its influence, have been changed into the same
image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the
14
158 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

Lord. “ Thou, Lord my God,” exclaims Junius, u didst

remember me, and receive me, a lost sheep, into thy fold!”
Merle D’ Aubigne, when a young man, a student in Ger¬
many, was much perplexed by scriptural doubts and diffi¬
culties. To have them removed, he applied to the venerable
and learned Kleuker of Kiel. But the old doctor would not
enter into any detailed solution of these difficulties. “ Were
I to succeed in ridding you of them,” said he to me, “ others
would soon arise. There is a shorter, deeper, more com¬
plete way of annihilating them. Let Christ be really to
you the Son of God, the Saviour, the Author of eternal life.
Only be firmly settled in his grace, and then these difficul¬
ties of detail will never stop you: the light which pro¬
ceeds from Christ will disperse your darkness.” “ The old
Divine,” says D’Aubigne, “had shown me the way: I
saw it was the right one, but to follow it, was a hard task.
God, who had already revealed to me the glory of his well-
beloved Son, did not forsake me; but he used another
agency to bring me to the work which had been pointed
out.”
Studying the Epistle to the Ephesians, with two of his
young companions, one of whom possessed a peculiarly
lofty, pure and devotional spirit, and died in early life, he
came to that passage : “ Now unto him who is able to do
exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, accord¬
ing to the power that worketh in us, unto him be glory,”
&c. The expression in italics fell upon his spirit like a
new revelation. They all knelt in prayer; and their
supplication, deep and thrilling, penetrated the heavens.
 INCARNATION AS A MYSTERY. 159

K When I arose in that room at Kiel,” says D’Aubigne, “ I

felt as if my wings were renewed as the wings of eagles.
From that time forward I comprehended that my own syllo¬
gisms and efforts were of no avail, that Christ was able to
do all “ by his power that worketh in us ; and the habitual
attitude of my soul was to lie at the foot of the cross.”
Soon, all his doubts were dispelled; he was not only deliv¬
ered from anguish, but the Lord extended to him “ peace
like a river.” Then he could “ comprehend with all saints,
what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and heighth, and
know the love of God which passeth knowledge.” Then
was he able to say, “ Return unto thy rest, O, my soul, for
the Lord hath dealt bountifully with thee.”*
If an inquirer could only get out of himself, out of his
own narrowness and littleness, and gain one clear, steady
view of the glory of God in the face of Jesus, he would no
longer doubt the mystery of the incarnation. It would
justify itself, not only to his affections, but to his highest
reason. His whole nature, heart and intellect, would re¬
joice in it with joy unspeakable and full of glory. “ Let a
man,” says Cecil, u read Maclaurin’s sermon on the Cross
of Christ, and enter into the subject with taste and relish,
what beggary is the world to him. The subject is so high
and so glorious, that a man must go out of himself, as it
were, to apprehend it. The Apostle had such a view,
when he said, 11 count all things but loss for the excellency
of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord.’ I remem-

* “ Germany, England and Scotland,” pp. 19, 20.

160 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

ber the time, even after I became really serious in religion,

when I could not understand what St. Paul meant—not by
setting forth the glory of Christ, but by talking of it in
such hyperbolical terms, and always dwelling upon the
subject: whatever topic he began on, I saw that he could
not but glide into the same subject. But I now understand
why he did so, and wonder no more; for there is no other
subject comparatively worthy of our thoughts, and there¬
fore it is that advanced Christians dwell on little else. I
am persuaded that the whole world becomes vain and
empty to a man in proportion as he enters into living views
of Jesus Christ.”* And what is this but saying precisely
what all the primitive disciples said again and again:
u Whom having not seen we love, in whom, though now
we see him not, yet believing in him, we rejoice with joy
unspeakable and full of glory?”
But we believe that the mystery of the incarnation, or
the manifestation of God in the person of Christ, can be
justified not only to the affections, but to the intellect. Al¬
lowing, in the first instance, that there is a difficulty here,
as there is in innumerable truths of a similar kind, it will
require no effort to receive it either as a fact or as a
doctrine.
In the first place, it meets a certain inherent want, not
merely of our moral, but of our mental constitution. The
mind can never be satisfied with abstractions ; it demands
living realities. To understand such abstractions it must

* Cecil’s Works, Vol. I, p. 50,—It. Carter’s Edition

 INCARNATION AS A MYSTERY. 161

see them in their concrete form. What we call the con-

ceptive or imaginative part of our nature, blends in all the
workings of the intellect. The perfect union of the two
gives us the highest mental power. We require not merely
to know the truth, but to conceive it, to represent it to our
minds, and thus make it our own. This process enters into
faith, often described as the eye of the soul, which discerns
the invisible. But faith is much more than an eye; it is a
power, to some extent creative; being “ the evidence of
things not seen, the substance of things hoped for.” The
things believed have a reality without us, but can have no
reality within us, until believed, or so strongly conceived,
as to become substance, not only without but within. But
abstractions, which are often little more than logical or
mathematical forms, can never possess this substantial or
living character. They cannot fill and satisfy the mind.
To be really conceived and loved, the truth must be em¬
bodied. Beauty, goodness, truth, love, have scarce an ex¬
istence for us until they are incarnated in forms that breathe
and burn. Figures and symbols of every description, es¬
pecially those which may be said to be alive, are connatu¬
ral to the human mind. It must have them or perish.
Language itself is but the embodiment of truth by means
of inanimate signs or sjunbols. We require, however, more
than words adequately to express great principles. We
wish to see them alive and active. Idolatry, so universal,
is but the abuse of this principle. It substitutes mean and
degrading symbols of the Divinity for those which are true
and elevating. It also confounds the symbol with the thing
14*
162 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

symbolized, and thus adores the creature more than the

Creator.
The whole material universe, in its unity, harmony and
grandeur, is but a symbol or embodiment of God. Form
and movement everywhere indicate spirit and power. Here
the thoughts of God assume a concrete shape. We see
them in the heavens above, and in the earth beneath. The
material creation is thence a striking manifestation of the
infinite Mind. But it is inanimate—it cannot feel; it can¬
not speak. It makes no response to our inquiries, yields no
sympathy to our emotions. In a word, it has neither intel¬
lect nor heart. Some living form, then, is needed to give
full expression or embodiment to the Divine character. It
may be said, perhaps, that this want is supplied in man,
the noblest image or symbol of the Almighty. Yes, but
man has fallen; man everywhere is imperfect; “ there is
none that doeth good, no, not one.” The temple is beauti¬
ful, but, alas! it is in ruins. The indwelling Divinity is
gone ! All is silence and desolation. The very ruins, in¬
deed, give indication of the greatness and majesty of the
Being they once enshrined. But this is all; the ideas
they suggest are one-sided and imperfect. Man is not an
adequate image of God. We need one purer, more august
and impressive. Indeed, God must actually imbody him¬
self in some perfect godlike form of man, for that, of all
the forms in the universe, we can best understand. In no
other way can he furnish that vivid and overpowering ex¬
hibition of his glory, fitted to subdue and transform our
hearts.
 INCARNATION AS A MYSTERY. 163

Now this is precisely what God has done in the person

of Christ. By a close and mysterious union with this “ no¬
blest form of man,” he draws near to us, and discovers to
our whole interior nature, all the fullness or perfection of
the Godhead. Our Saviour is thence described as the Im¬
age of the Invisible God, or, which is the same thing, God
made visible, God manifested in the flesh* This is the true
and proper Theophany. The entire Godhead is here, not
only revealed, but incarnated. We see his glory as in a
mirror, whence it is reflected back again into our souls ; as
if the soul itself were another mirror to receive the Divine
image in the face of Jesus.
Let an individual try to form an abstract idea of God,
and the more he withdraws his mind from sensible objects,
from air, and earth, and sky, the more bewildered does
he find himself. What seemed distinct and vivid, fades
into dim shadow. His thoughts, incapable of fixing them¬
selves upon definite points, roam at random through infinite
space. If the boundless immensity and terrible majesty of
God are in any measure realized, it will be found, after all,
that these conceptions are but the extension, and what we
venture to call, the shadowy refinement of material objects,
of suns, centres and systems, or the imaginary area of space,
encircling, perhaps, in the centre, a magnificent throne, oc¬
cupied by a majestic, bodily form. When all this is re¬
jected as visionary and absurd, and the wayward mind is
recalled to the reality of things, to the spirituality, infinity
and eternity of God, it will turn out that while the intellect
attaches definite ideas to these expressions, they are yet
164 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

cold and formal, and exert but little influence upon the
soul.
But let God reveal himself in a nature like our own,
and in that nature go forth to control all worlds, to quicken
the dead, to regenerate the soul, and instantly we gain a
conception of his majesty which overwhelms us. Let us
behold him in the face of Jesus, radiant with the light of
a boundless, unutterable love, and both our intellect and
our heart humble themselves before the adorable mystery.
Here is a Being we can understand and appreciate, moving
and acting among ourselves, full of majesty and power,
controlling the winds and the waves, healing the sick, rais¬
ing the dead, regulating the world of spirits, overmastering
the powers of evil, conquering death and the grave, and
finally assuming the place of universal and eternal domin¬
ion. And yet, with all this power and supremacy, full of
mercy and good fruits, infinite in love and compassion,
blessing all, saving all; a man, with the heart and soul of
a man, yet a God confessed, with all the might and majesty
of a God ; so that in gazing upon his glorified face, through
which the whole Deity is shining, we exclaim, with an
ancient prophet, u This God is my God, I have waited for
him; this God is my God, I will be glad and rejoice in his
salvation.’1
This manifestation of the Godhead in Jesus Christ has
no tendency whatever to destroy the Divine unity and su¬
premacy. Indeed, it is the only thing which has main¬
tained it in the world. It is only where the Godhead of
Christ is proclaimed that the Divine Unity is known.
 INCARNATION AS A MYSTERY. 165

Abandon the Divinity of Christ, and you will soon find

yourselves without a God. Nor has this view any tendency
to materialize our conceptions of the Divine essence and
character, as Dr. Channing and others claim. It is impos¬
sible that it should thus degrade the idea of an infinite and
eternal Being. So far from this, it is the only means of
bringing the idea of God within the range and scope of
our thoughts, by imparting to it a luminousness and power
fitted to seize our mind and affect our heart. Where is
the spirituality of God maintained so tenaciously and suc¬
cessfully as among the most rigid Trinitarians ? Both by
experience and observation, Jesus Christ, as human and
yet Divine, is proved to be u the brightness of the Fa¬
ther’s glory, and the express image of his person.” Even
those who deny the Divinity of Christ, sometimes inadver¬
tently, or without a due appreciation of the real force and
application of their words, use language respecting Christ
which fully justifies the highest view which can be taken
of his Godhead. Thus Dr. Channing, in an Appendix to
the fourth edition of his works, p. 527, says, “We believe
that God dwelt in him, manifested himself through him,
taught men by him, and communicated to him his Spirit
without measure. We believe that Jesus Christ was the
most glorious display, expression and representation of God
to mankind, so that in seeing and knowing him, we see
and know the invisible Father; so that when Christ came,
God visited the world, and dwelt with men more conspicu¬
ously than at any former period. In Christ’s words we
hear God speaking ; in his miracles we behold God acting ;
166 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

in his character and life we see an unsullied image of God’s

purity and love.”*
Besides, it may be asked, how could God manifest the
peculiarities of his moral character, except by an incarna¬
tion ? The works of nature alone are inadequate to this.
While these exhibit his infinite power and wisdom, they
cannot reveal his justice, his purity and compassion. Such
attributes can only adequately discover themselves in moral
action. Of course they are embodied, to some extent, in
the course of human affairs, in the history of the race.
But the lessons there are not always clear. They demand

* The following extract from Dr. Channing’s Life, Vol. I, p. 388, will throw further
light upon this point. But how singularly inconsistent the position of this able and
eloquent writer, in admitting the divinity of Christ, and yet denying him to be God
incarnate ; as if to be divine were something different from being God. “ We agreed,”
says he, “in our late conference, that a majority of our brethren held that Jesus Christ
is more than a man, that he existed before the world, that he literally came from heaven
to save our race, that he sustains other oriices than those of a teacher and witness to
the truth, and that he still acts for our benefit, and is our intercessor with the Father.
This we agreed to be the prevalent sentiment of our brethren.” In the Appendix
to the fourth edition of his works, a portion of which we have quoted in the text, he
says : “We believe, then, in the Divinity of Christ as this term is often and properly
used.” p. 572. If Jesus Christ is, in any just sense of that term, divine, he is so far
God, and thence worthy of all homage and worship. It is true, we often use the term,
divine, in a loose and figurative sense; but the Scriptures never so use it. The dis¬
tinction there, between the creature and the Creator, is marked and decisive. Man is
only man; angel is only angel however exalted—never divine, never God, and conse¬
quently never worshipped as such. Any approach to such worship is rejected with
horror. “ See thou do it not,” said the angel to St. John, when the latter fell at his
feet, “ for I am thy fellow-servant and one of the prophets.” Worship God! is the
uniform sentiment of Holy Writ. What, then, shall we think of the following, from
Dr. Channing’s address at Lenox, a few days before his death, in 1842: “The doctrine
of the Word made flesh, shows us God uniting himself most intimately with our nature,
manifesting himself in human form, for the very end of making us partakers of his
own perfection. The doctrine of grace, as it is termed, reveals the infinite Father, im¬
parting his Holy Spirit, the best gift he can impart to the humblest being who implores
it.” At the close he addresses a solemn prayer to Jesus Christ, as the Lord and Saviour
of the race, which, under the circumstances, one can scarcely regard as a figure of
speech, or a mere rhetorical flourish: “ Come, friend and Saviour of the race, who
didst shed thy blood upon the cross to reconcile man to man, and earth to Heaven!”
 incarnation as a mystery. 167

an interpretation from a higher source. Some Gospel must

shed its light upon them. An abstract revelation upon the
subject would not meet the case. Probably it would not
be well understood. Certainly it would fail to make a
deep moral impression. But look upon the life of Jesus ;
it is the life of God himself. Here he not only speaks, but
acts; “glorious in holiness,” “abundant in goodness,”
“ forgiving iniquity, transgression and sin.”
Finally, a great problem has to be solved. “ How shall
man be just with God?” Nature, society, philosophy, give
no information here. A real difficulty has occurred. Man
is a sinner—condemned, and in himself helpless. His
natural moral instincts suggest the necessity of an atone¬
ment, a mediation, an intercession, on the ground of which
God may be recognized as just, even while forgiving the
sinner. But man cannot expiate his own guilt. One man
cannot do so for another. An angel from heaven cannot give
a ransom for the soul. The reparation to be made must
bear some proportion to the magnitude of the offence and
the grandeur of the Being against whom it has been com¬
mitted. If it would be altogether unsuitable for a little
German principality, or an insignificant village to offer its
mediation between two great nations like France and Eng¬
land, how could man or angel sustain the responsibility of
mediating between God and an apostate race ? The Medi¬
ator in such a case must be equal to the occasion, and bear
some relation to both parties. In the first place, he must
be absolutely sinless, without the slightest imputation of
participating in the guilt of man, “holy, harmless, unde-
168 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

filed, separate from sinners,” and therefore infinitely more

than a man, u higher than the heavens.” He must also
possess a special interest and connection with the Godhead,
so as to maintain the rights of Jehovah, and give worth
and efficacy to the atonement. To meet such an exigency,
so peculiar and extraordinary, a peculiar and extraordinary
nature is needed; a being, in fact, at once human and Di¬
vine, one who is the Son of man, and yet the Son of God.
If this supposition involves something inexplicable, or mys¬
terious, then we reply that the reality must involve some¬
thing inexplicable and mysterious. Thus Jesus Christ, our
Mediator, our High-Priest and Reconciler, is more than a
man, more than all men and angels combined. As a Prince
and a Saviour he has power with God, and prevails. He
is one with God, he is one also wTith man; truly God, and
truly man, a complete, all-sufficient Saviour. Though he
was “ in the form of God, and thought it no robbery to be
equal with God yet he “ made himself of no reputation,
and took upon him the form of a servant; and being found
in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and became obe¬
dient unto death, even the death of the cross.” These are
the things into which the angels desire to look. They
turn away from the glorious fields of light, from suns and
stars revolving in majesty and beauty, in the bosom of in¬
finite space, to ponder these mysterious but sublime and
cheering truths. a Unto the intent that now unto princi¬
palities and powers in heavenly places might be known
(made known) by the church the manifold wisdom of
God.”
 INCARNATION AS A MYSTERY. 169

But if angels take such an interest in the mystery of re¬

demption, what shall a sinner, burdened with guilt, and
ready to perish, feel, when gazing upon the Lamb of God
which taketh away the sin of the world ? He turns away
from all the glories of the starry heavens, from the verdure
and beauty of the boundless regions of the earth, from all
the discoveries of science, and all the splendors of poetry
and art, to the one ineffable manifestation which God has
made of himself in the person of Jesus Christ.
Sinner, weary and worn, toiling in the night of time, and
ready to perish ; sinner, hungering and thirsting after right¬
eousness, yet failing to reach it; sinner, all fevered with
anguish, and plunging fruitlessly to quench thy death-thirst
in the boundless depths of human speculation ; sinner, con¬
scious of thine emptiness and poverty, and longing to re¬
attach thy being to the infinite and immortal,—look and
live! Behold thy Saviour—God, infinite in power, infinite
in love and compassion! He dies for thee; he lives and
reigns for thee! Sinner, believe in the Lord Jesus Christ,
and thou shalt be saved.

“ O, the sweet wonders of that cross,

Where God the Saviour lived and died ;
Her noblest life my spirit draws
From thy dear wounds and bleeding side.”

15
 CHAPTER IY.

THEORIES OF THE INCARNATION.

It will naturally be inferred, from the positions already

established, that we should strongly object to any theories,
however plausible and splendid, proposing to explain the
mystery of the incarnation, or of the sacred Trinity. We
can form the idea of an infinite God, and can appreciate, in
some slight degree, the sublime and affecting relations in
which he stands to finite natures, finding thus a basis for a
clear and well-defined system of religion. So, also, we can
appreciate, yet more fully and distinctly, the relations in
which Jesus Christ, as God manifest in the flesh, stands to
our individual souls, and thence learn at once our duty and
our destiny. Relying upon him as our Redeemer, the
soul’s true and everlasting Life, we can feel secure and
happy in the prospect of eternity. But we cannot safely
speculate upon his essential nature, and especially upon
his relations to the Godhead. There we find the limits of
our powers. Our curiosity, indeed, intense and insatiable
as that of others, may long to pass the limits of our being,
into the region of the unknown and ineffable. But we are
satisfied that the thing is impossible, perhaps undesirable;
and therefore we content ourselves with what slight dis¬
coveries we can make on the shores of the mighty abyss.
 THEORIES OF THE INCARNATION. 171

Indeed, we are fully persuaded that it is one of the highest

attainments of wisdom to feel and confess its ignorance.
We are strongly inclined, therefore, with one or two slight
modifications, to adopt the sentiments of Pascal, who says,
“ The sciences have two extremities, which touch each
other. The one is that pure natural ignorance in which
we are born ; the other is that point to which great minds
attain, who, having gone the whole round of possible knowl¬
edge, find that they know nothing, (comparatively,) and
that they end in (much) the same ignorance in which they
began. But it is an intelligent ignorance which knows
itself. Those who have come forth from their native igno¬
rance, and have not reached this other extreme, are tinged
with scientific conceit, and claim to be learned and intelli¬
gent. These are the men that disturb the world, and that
judge more falsely of every thing than others.”* Hence,
he says, in another place, u The highest attainment of rea¬
son is to know that there is an infinity of knowledge
beyond its reach.”f Every one has heard of the saying of
Newton, in reference to his vast attainments,—that he felt
as a child gathering pebbles on the shores of the vast
ocean of human knowledge stretching beyond him. “ What
we know is little,” says the profound La Place; “ what
we are ignorant of is immense.”^ This, spoken of human
science, is especially applicable to Theology. The higher
our discoveries, the more profound and awful appears that

* Thoughts, p. 107. English translation. t Thoughts, p. 255.

t Hist. Nat. Philosophy, 378.
172 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

boundless ocean of being and thought by which we are

encircled.
We know from Revelation that Jesus Christ is Divine ;
we know, too, that there is some distinction, essential or
relative, in the nature of the Deity, for the manifestation of
him as the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, or what
we denominate, for the want of a better term, the Sacred
Trinity; we know, moreover, that this Trinity is perfectly
consistent with unity; but we know nothing of the Divine
essence, or manner of existence, and cannot therefore define
the nature of this Trinity in Unity, or Tri-unity, as we
sometimes phrase it. The whole question transcends us.
It stands alone, without analogies or illustrations, in nature
and science, a glorious but unfathomable mystery. Here
we cannot reason, either from finite matter, or finite spirit,
from the nature of the universe, or the nature of man.
Consequently no formula in human language can ade¬
quately express the mystery. Our being and mode of
existence may be, indeed must be, essentially different from
the Divine ; for by no approximation can the finite be made
identical with the infinite. Even if it were maintained
that the human soul is an emanation of the Divine—a
vague and unsatisfactory mode of expression—it could not
be proved to be Divine, in any strict or adequate sense of the
word. There can be only one infinite, uncreated Being.
All others are finite, created, dependent and changeable.
In other words, they are the production of the Almighty,
and entirely dependent upon his support. Doubtless in the
possession of intellect and will, of consciousness and moral
 THEORIES OP THE INCARNATION. 173

feeling, they may resemble God ; but it is absolutely im¬

possible they should, in essential constitution and mode of
being. All our ideas, however, of personality, of individual
consciousness and will, of separate and single existence,
are derived from the finite nature of man ; and of course,
we cannot well conceive of the union and identity in one
man, of three distinct yet harmonious personalities. For
that is simply to say, that in one person there are three
persons, which is a contradiction. We can conceive of
two or more elements in his constitution, the union, for ex¬
ample, of the physical and spiritual elements ; but we have
no ground for saying that this bears any close or adequate
resemblance to the union of three spiritual natures in one
infinite essence, or even of the union of the human with
the Divine, in the person of Jesus Christ. This latter,
however, is conceivable enough ; for here are two natures
in one person. It involves no contradiction, no absurdity.
Ascending to the absolute nature of God, we lose the very
idea of personality, except as given us by God himself.
Still his personality is conceivable enough ; God must ever
reveal himself to us in the form of a person, with attributes
corresponding to those of a human being, that is, with a
distinct consciousness, intelligence and will. But when
we come to speak of three persons, or three hypostases in
God, we are beyond our depth, and attach either a false or
an indefinite idea to the expression. We are applying to
God, finite ideas, and finite forms of speech. Change their
import, if you can, give them an infinite character, if possi¬
ble, and what have you ? Three persons ? No ! Three
15*
174 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

beings ? No. One only remains—the one infinite, everlast¬

ing God. Indeed, words applied in this connection have no
meaning at all. For, to use or apply a word correctly or
adequately, we must understand the thing, the fact, princi¬
ple or idea which it represents. But here we know noth¬
ing. Of personality among men, we know something;
perhaps, however, less than we suppose; and may express
the idea in appropriate forms of speech. But of personality
in God, we are altogether ignorant. It may differ essen¬
tially from all our preconceptions, and involve relations and
ideas beyond the grasp of created intelligence. Even in
regard to the thoughts and ways of God, we see through
a glass darkly, and know only in part; how much more in
regard to his boundless essence, his indivisible eternal
Being!
All reasoning, then, about personal distinctions, hypos¬
tases, or hypostatical unions, and above all, about the pos¬
sibility of an infinite or eternal emanation from the Being
of God, or an eternal generation of the Son from the Fa¬
ther, as light from the sun, water from the fountain, or
thought from the mind, appears to us the gravest trifling,
the most absurd logomachy. Among human beings, three
persons or hypostases are three distinct and independent
individuals with three minds, three wills, and three con¬
sciousnesses, which cannot, by any possibility, be made one,
except in design and action. W e can conceive of no mode
of extinguishing orblending these separate personal identi¬
ties. But what may take place in an infinite essence,
what grounds of distinction may exist in the first great
 THEORIES OF THE INCARNATION. 175

Cause of all things, or what modes of manifestation may

best correspond to his real nature and being, we know
nothing. That there is one God, the Father of spirits, holy
and ever-blessed, unchangeable and immortal, we know.
That Jesus Christ, described as his only-begotten Son, is
God manifest in the flesh, we know. That these two, the
Father and the Son, God invisible, and God manifest in
the flesh, are one, we know. That the Father sends the
Son, loves the Son, and co-operates with him in the work
of redemption ; in a word, that there is a sufficient basis of
some kind, in the nature of the Godhead, to admit of the
distinction expressed by the terms I, Thou, He, in applica¬
tion to the one and the other, we also know. But the I,
Thou and He, so far as they indicate what we call dis¬
tinct personalities, seem to be lost in the indivisible essence
of the eternal God. The one is equal with the other; in
this respect, the Godhead of the Son is the Godhead of the
Father ; and the only distinction that is really palpable to
us, really comprehensible by us, is that the one is God in
the Spirit, or God the Father, the other God in the flesh, or
God the Son. None, even of those who are hyper-orthodox,
deny that the union between them, and therefore the essential
identity, is complete. For these two, or if including the Holy
Spirit, “ these three are one”—one living and true God. Here,
then, is a visible distinction, which we can understand and
express in words ; but it would be presumption in us to deny
that, corresponding to this visible and comprehensible dis¬
tinction, there is another invisible and incomprehensible, in
the very nature of the Divine essence and mode of existence,
%

176 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

which forms an unchangeable basis for the revelation of

God, as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.
This is certainly conceivable. It seems to be plainly
taught in the Word of God. With inconsiderable excep¬
tions, it is held by the Church universal. It is maintained
by some of the ablest men that ever lived, and cannot very
well be supposed to involve any thing contradictory and
absurd. It has greatly assisted to form a clear and lofty
conception of the Divine glory. Indeed, some have thought
that it is only by ascending to God through Jesus Christ, as
Revealer and Mediator, that we can form any just con¬
ceptions of his greatness, and, above all, of his grace. u In

the person of the Mediator,” says Lord Bacon, who thinks

that God must ever manifest himself to all created beings
by a Mediator, “ the true ladder is fixed whereby God may
descend to his creatures, and his creatures may ascend to
God; so that God, by the reconcilement of the Mediator,
turning his countenance towards his creatures, (though not
in equal light and degree,) made way unto the dispensation
of his holy and most sacred will; whereby some of his
creatures might stand, and keep their state ; others might
possibly fall and be restored; and others might fall and not
be restored to their state, but yet remain in being under
wrath and corruption: all, with respect to the Mediator,
which is the great mystery and perfect centre of all God’s
ways with his creatures, and to which all his other works
and wonders do but serve and infer.”* The distinction here

* This passage occurs in a solemn confession of faith, the whole of which deserves
an attentive perusal. Bacon's Works, Vol. II., p. 407.
 THEORIES OP THE INCARNATION. 177

referred to by Bacon, is that which exists between a God

absolute and a God manifested, whether in the creation of
the world, or in the incarnation of Christ. But how far
beyond our powers !—how impalpable to our reason !—how
impossible to be grasped, or explained, is a distinction like
that! “ Such knowledge is wonderful—it is high—we
cannot attain unto it.”
Enough, we think, has been said, to show that the posi¬
tion with which we set out is a just one, namely, that we
are incompetent to speculate upon this subject; and that
no theory, proposing its elucidation, can possess the slight¬
est claim to our respect. As we are not omniscient, we
must bear our ignorance as best we can.
But in all times, ingenious men, dissatisfied with the ne¬
cessary limits of human knowledge, have imagined the
possibility of elucidating this mystery, and, in some in¬
stances, have projected plausible but utterly opposing
theories to account for it. “ These over-bold and adven¬
turous intruders,” as John Howe aptly styles them, “ into
the deep and most profound arcana of the Divine nature,”
have either torn away the mystery entirely, or covered it
with a deeper and more impenetrable shadow—some boldly
denying the Tri-unity of God, and others involving that
truth in a labyrinth of dazzling and unmeaning subtleties.
“ But it would be an over-officious and too meanly servile reli¬
giousness,” as Howe admirably remarks, “ to be awed by
the sophistry of scholastic wits, into a subscription to their
confident determinations concerning the being of God, that
such and such things are necessary or impossible thereto
178 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

beyond what the plain, undisguised reason of things, or his

own express Word, do evince; to imagine a sacredness in
their rash conclusions, so as to be afraid of searching into
them; or of examining whether they have any firm and
solid ground or bottom; to allow the schools the making
of our Bible or the forming of our Creed, who license (and
even sport) themselves to philosophize upon the nature of
God, with as petulant and irreverent a liberty as they would
upon a worm, or any of the meanest insect, while yet they
can pronounce little with certainty, even concerning that,
hath nothing in it, either of the Christian or the man. It
well becomes us, as well as concerns us, to disencumber our
minds, and release them from the entanglements of their
unproved dictates. * * * The more reverence we have
of God, the less we are to have for such men as have them¬
selves expressed little.”*
Perhaps it is inevitable that the prevalent philosophy, or
the prevalent opinions of the age, should modify our views
of theological truth. This, however, has been the great
snare of speculative minds, and the chief source of their
one-sided and erroneous views. An anxiety to justify the
peculiarities of the Christian system, has tempted its friends,
those especially of a literary or philosophical turn, to bring
these into harmony with the prevalent form of literature
and philosophy. In the early ages of the Church, we see
little or nothing of this. The first Christians took only a
practical view of religion, and devoutly adored Jesus Christ

Howe’s Works, p. 137.

 THEORIES OF TIIE INCARNATION. 179

as God incarnate. The ancient Church hymns, and the

writings of the Apostolic Fathers, which come down to the
middle, or perhaps to the latter part of the second century,
recognize this great truth, but only in a devout or practical
way. Justin Martyr, who was a converted Greek phi¬
losopher, is the first in whom we discover any philosophical
or speculative tendency, or any labored attempt to justify
the doctrines of Christianity in the eyes of Grecian poetry
or metaphysics.* We have been looking over his writings,
and have been struck with the evidence of this in almost
every page. He attempts to justify Christianity, not only
to the philosophy of Plato and others, but to the poetry and
mythology of Greece—making long extracts from the wri¬
tings of the dramatists and other poets, in corroboration of
its claims. Of course he shows the infinite superiority of
the Christian religion, but rejoices to discover any resem¬
blance or analogy between the two. It is well known that
Plato, in his lofty speculations, taught a sort of Trinity, but
one different, in some respects, from any thing revealed in
the sacred Scriptures. He had first the uncreated and ab¬
solute God, then his understanding, self-consciousness, or
self-reflection, the Logos or Reason ; and thirdly, the Creator
or animal soul of the world; so that in Plato’s Triad it was
easy to see some correspondence with the Christian doctrine
of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.f Justin Martyr seizes

* Justin belonged to the second century.

t We have not space to enter into the discussion of this point. But those who wish
to see the whole subject discussed, with great learning and ability, may consult Cud-
worth’s “ Intellectual System particularly the latter part of the first volume. Cud-
180 manifestation o f god .
upon this, and declares, in several places, “ that the Son is
in God, what the understanding (vod?) is in man, and that
the Holy Spirit is that Divine power to act and execute,
which Plato calls apero” He makes a similar application
of Plato’s Logos to Jesus Christ, as the Son of God. But
as Plato’s Logos and his Soul of the World were created
beings, Justin seems to hold a similar view with reference
to the dependence and creation of Jesus Christ and the
Holy Spirit. He maintains their Divinity : but it is evi¬
dently a created or derived Divinity, which is a contradic¬
tion in terms.* *
This philosophising tendency is yet more strikingly de¬
veloped in Tertullian, who was well versed in Greek and
Roman learning, and possessed an imaginative, earnest
and powerful mind. In his Apology, he uses the following
illustration and appeal: “ God created the world by his
Word, his reason and his power. You philosophers your¬
selves admit that the Logos, the Word and reason, is the

worth, who was an enthusiastic admirer of Plato, points out, in several particulars, the
difference between the Platonic Trinity, particularly as held by the Neo Platonists, and
the Christian Trinity, (pp. 735, 740, 774-5.) The points of coincidence between the
various Trinities, as taught by Pythagoras, Zeno, Plato and others, are sufficiently
curious and striking, and deserve an attentive study. Some interesting quotations upon
this subject may be found in Dacier’s Oeuvres de Platon, and in the first part of
Cheateaubriand’s “ Genie Du Christianisme.” “ In the Epinomis, and elsewhere,” says
Dacier, “Plato lays down as principles, the first Good ; the Word or the Understand¬
ing, and the Soul. The first Good is God; the Word or the Understanding is the Son
of this First Good, by whom he was begotten, co-equal with himself; and the Soul,
which is the middle term between the Father and the Son, is the Holy Ghost.”
Oeuvres de Platon Traduits par Dacier.
* See Justin Martyr’s Aoyos irpog E\\rjra(, Oratio ad Grajccos. Works, Otto’s
Ed., Vol. I., p. 10. Also, Cohortatio, pp. 20, 68, 106. Apologia, Vol. I., pp. 160,
164. Especially pp. 180, 184, 208, 252. Consult, also, Neander’s Church History, Vol.
I., p. 585 ; and Knapp’s Theology, p. 150.
 THEORIES OF THE INCARNATION. 181

Creator of the universe. The Christians merely add that

the proper substance of the Word and of reason, that sub¬
stance by which God produced all things, is the Spirit; that
this word must have been pronounced by God; that being
pronounced, it was generated by him ; that consequently it
is the Son of God, and God by reason of the unity of the
substance. If the sun shoots forth a ray, his substance is
not separated, but extended. Thus the Word is Spirit of a
Spirit, and God of God, like a light kindled at another light.
Thus whatever proceeds from God is God, and the two,
with their spirit, form but one, differing in properties, not m
number; in order, not in nature. The Son sprang from his
principle without being separated from it. Now the ray of
the Divinity descended into the womb of the virgin, in¬
vested itself with flesh, and became man, united with God.
This flesh, supported by the Spirit, was nourished, grew,
spake, taught., acted: it was Christ.”*
This is ingenious and striking, and, withal, remarkably

* The above quotation may be found in Tertullian’s “ Jlpologeticus Jldvcrsus

Gentes, etc : (21.) Gersdorf’s Bibliotheca Patrurn, Lut. Vol. iv. p. 87. It is as fol¬
lows : “ Jam ediximus Deum universitatem banc mundi verbo, et ratione et virtute
molitum. Apud vestros quoque sapientes A6yov id est sermonem, atque rationem,
constat artificem videri universitatis. * * * * Et nos etiam sermoni atque rationi,
per quse omnia molitum Deum ediximus, propriam substantiam spiritum inscribimus,
cui et sermo insit pronuntianti, et ratio adsit disponenti, et virtus prassit perficienti.
Hunc ex Deo prolatum didicimus, et prolatione generatum, et idcirco filium Dei et Deum
dictum ex unitate substantiae. Nam et Deus spiritus. Et cum ex sole porrigitur,
portio ex summa; sed solerit in radio, quia solis est radius, nec separatur substantia,
sed extenditur. Ita de spiritu spiritus, et de Deo, Deus, ut lumen de lumine accensum.
Manet integra et indefecta materiae matrix, etsi plures inde traduces qualitatum mutue-
ris : ita, et quod de Deo profectum est Deus est, et Dei filius, et unus ambo. Ita et de
spiritu spiritus, et de Deo Deus modulo alterum, non numero, gradu, non statu fecit, eta
matrice non recessit, sed excessit. Iste igitur Dei radius, ut retro semper predicabntur
delapsus in virginem quandam, et in utero ejus caro figuratus, nasciturhomo Dei rnistus.
Caro spiritu instructa nutritur, adolescit, affatur, docet, operatur et Christus est.”

16
182 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

well expressed. Moreover it contains a vein of truth ; but

it is too theoretical and fanciful to be received as a whole.
It appeals more to the imagination than the reason, and is
destitute of plain scriptural proof. It acknowledges the
Divinity of Christ, for this is a truth which Tertullian most
strenuously taught; but it makes Christ more of an attri¬
bute than an essence, a creature than a Creator. It acknowl¬
edges, indeed, his substance, and speaks of him as “ Spirit
of Spirit, God of God,” and so far conforms to the teachings
of the Scriptures ; but plunges into hypothesis and fancy,
when it represents Christ as “ a ray from the Divinity, in¬
carnating itself in the flesh of Jesus Christ.” Indeed, Ter¬
tullian, like most of the philosophers of his age, was mys¬
tified by the theory of emanation, as if God, like the sun,
or like a fountain, continually throws out from himself both
matter and spirit, and that these consequently partake of
the nature of God. This was the great error of the
Gnostics, and of the Neo Platonists, of Clement, Origen, and
Arius, all of whom, while acknowledging the Divinity of
Christ, made him an emanation or a creation of God—light of
light—spirit of spirit, as they would say, flowing eternally
from God, or separated from him by the act of incarnation.
Athanasius himself, who cherished the clearest ideas of
the absolute and supreme Divinity of Jesus Christ, did not
rid his mind of the prevalent notions, and hence speculates
with astonishing boldness and ingenuity upon the subject
of an eternal generation—a constant and changeless birth
or emanation of God from God, of Spirit from Spirit, as
thought from the mind, or light from the sun. He sees
 THEORIES OF THE INCARNATION. 183

and acknowledges the profound and inscrutable mystery;

but somehow wishes to place it in some natural or plausi¬
ble light, and so bewilders himself with an intricate and
splendid theory, which, after all, turns upon a mere figure
of speech, or a play upon words.
For centuries the whole Christian world was agitated
with this discussion between the theories of Arius and
Athanasius ; all, however, with slight exceptions, as in the
case of Paul of Samosota, acknowledging the real Godhead
and Supremacy of Christ, Arians and Athanasians alike
uniting in his worship. The Arians, however, insisted upon
an actual creation of Jesus Christ, by the eternal God, and
his consequent inferiority to the Father. They acknowl¬
edged him to be the first and greatest of all creatures, nay,
Divine and worthy of all trust and homage ; but still a crea¬
ture, with a nature resembling that of God, but not actu¬
ally identical with it. In a word, they held the gross
absurdity, of a created, limited and subaltern God. But
believing the theory of emanation, or, as they called it,
spiritual generation, they saw no inconsistency in the idea
of God producing God, or of a creature occupying the
place, and performing the functions of Jehovah. Many of
them were certainly pious, and worshipped Jesus Christ as
the true God and eternal life.
The followers of Athanasius became the dominant party;
and his Creed, adopted by the Council of Nice, was finally
acknowledged as the belief of the Catholic Church. It has
been adopted, with slight modifications, into all the Creeds
of Christendom, and may be regarded as the formal belief.
184 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

both of the ancient and of the modern Church.* In its

main features it is undoubtedly scriptural, and might, with
a slight mental reserve, be adopted by every candid believer
in the supreme Divinity and incarnation of Christ. As de¬
fended, however, by Athanasius, especially as understood
by himself, it involves a theory of the Trinity and Incar¬
nation, which, simply because it is a theory, ought to be
rejected. Its form of expression is figurative and theoretical,
and may be understood in different senses ; but those who
have studied it the most carefully, will allow that it in¬
volves a speculation on the nature of God, of the Divine
procession of the Son from the Father, and of the Holy
Ghost, from the Father and the Son, which mayor may
not be true. In our judgment, however, it is too vague to
be true; for what do we know of u eternal generation,” of
Divine procession; and what definite idea do the ex¬
pressions, God of God, Light of Light, Spirit of Spirit, con¬
vey to our minds'? Athanasius was undoubtedly a great
man—one of the greatest, indeed, that the Church can
boast. He had astonishing vigor, penetration and grasp of

* The following is the Nicene Creed :

“ I believe in God Almighty, the Maker of all things visible and invisible ; and in one
Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only begotten of the Father, that is of the sub¬
stance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not
made, of the same substance with the Father, by whom all things were made that are
in heaven and that are in earth ; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down
from heaven, became incarnate, was made man, suffered, rose again the third day, and
ascended into heaven, from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
And I believe in the Holy Ghost, (the Lord, the quickener,—to Kvpiov, to Zwonoiov,—
who c.ometh forth from the Father:) who with the Father and the Son is worshipped
and glorified ; who spake by the prophets,” etc.
The above is a literal rendering of the Nicene Creed. The original may be seen in
Knapp’s Theology, p. 154, or in the second volume of Neander’s Church History.
What is strictly called “ The Athanasian Creed,” differs from the Nicene, and was
not written by Athanasius. It belongs to a later age.
 THEORIES OF THE INCARNATION. 185

mind ; a clear, nervous style ; an earnest and overpowering

eloquence. Moreover, he was thoroughly honest, fully
persuaded of the truth himself, and deeply penetrated with
its life-giving power. “His deep mind, his noble heart, his
invincible courage, his living faith, his unbounded benev¬
olence, sincere humility, lofty eloquence, and strictly vir¬
tuous life, gained the honor and love of all.”* He cherished,
also, the highest reverence for the Word of God, and based
his doctrines on the express teachings of Inspiration; but
he was a keen controversialist, as well as a bold and subtle
theorist. With immense dialectical force, and great subtlety
of conception, he felt that no subject was beyond his grasp,
and played with the most awful mysteries, as a child with
beautiful but dangerous toys. Reverent, indeed, always se¬
rious, always devout, but bold, hazardous and keen, dashing
into the very depths of nature and God, and overwhelming his
opponents with argument and eloquence. His imagination
got the better of his judgment, and he discerned, or imagined
he discerned, the logical necessity for an eternal generation
or procession of the Son from the Father. “Begotten, not
made “ generated not fashioned,” he saw, as it were, the
everlasting procession of the Divine from the Divine—an
ever-streaming radiance—an ever-burning glory, flowing
forth like light from the stars, or rays from the sun!
We all allow, of course, that Jesus Christ is the Son of
God, in a higher relation than pertains to his merely human
generation, or earthly life ; for this the Scriptures expressly

* Conversations Lexicon—Article, Athnnntsius.

16*
186 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

teach; and it was this fact which gave force and plausi¬
bility to the theory of Athanasius; but the name, Son of
God, though higher than any other in the universe, ex¬
presses simply the fact of his peculiar relation to the God¬
head ; in other words, the fact of his supreme Divinity; but
it gives no light as to the mode of that relation, and teaches
nothing about an eternal generation or procession. In this
very point lies that fathomless mystery, of which we have
so frequently spoken, and into which it is worse than folly
to try to penetrate. The theory, then, of Athanasius, asso¬
ciated, as it is, with the creed of Christendom, and ven¬
erable for its age and apparently scriptural basis, must be
abandoned with other fancies of good men, which obscure
rather than illuminate the truth. His belief, touching the
supreme Godhead of Jesus Christ and the Hoty Spirit, we
admit as our own ; and venerate, from our inmost heart, his
noble and successful efforts in defence of the truth. But
his theorizing upon this great mystery, we renounce as mist
amid the sunlight, or clouds upon the face of the sky.
“ Who can, by searching, find out God ?” Who can dis¬
cover the union of the Father with the Son, or reveal the
secret of his uncreated being, his everlasting essence ? Not
Arius; not Athanasius; not even Paul. Moreover, the
great Apostle was too wise to make the attempt. He but
announces the fact, and adores the mystery.
Sabellius, a bold and reckless thinker, cut the knot of
the difficulty, and maintained that the Trinity had no foun¬
dation in the Divine Essence, and that it derived its import
simply from its relations to our minds, or rather to the dif-
 THEORIES OF THE INCARNATION. 187

ferent parts or offices in the work of human redemption. In

his view, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, are the
same eternal God, only in different aspects and offices. Of
course, he maintained the absolute Divinity of Jesus Christ,
and of the Holy Ghost, and so far, was abundantly or¬
thodox ; but he discarded all mystery in the doctrine of the
Trinity, and of the incarnation of Christ. This, then, as
all will see, is a mere theory, which contradicts some of the
plainest teachings of God’s Word, and is made “ for the
nonce,” as the old writers say ; in other words, to get rid of
a difficulty. Better far confess our ignorance, and adore
the infinite depths of the Divine essence and glory. “ The
Word was with God”—and not only so, but “was God.”
How? We know not; and that is all we can say. No
theory will meet the case. Athanasius and Sabellius, are
equally at fault here.
The Nicene, or Athanasian creed, has been generally
held both in ancient and modern times. It is thoroughly
incorporated into the popular theology, and forms an ele¬
ment in the belief of almost every Christian sect. Modi¬
fied, in slight particulars, arrd with a liberal construction,
it may be said to be the belief of Christendom. Individuals,
however, even among those who have professed to hold it
as the creed of the church, have occasionally departed from
its spirit, and indulged in theories of their own. The prev¬
alent philosophy, in this respect, has greatly affected their
minds. Thus the great Bossuet, who was an enthusi¬
astic admirer of Plato and of the Cartesian philosophy, has
given us a theory, or an explanation of the Trinity, more
188 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

akin to the fancies of Tertullian and Justin Martyr, than

the plain teachings of the Scriptures. a If we impose
silence on our senses,” says he, “ and retire for a short
time into the recesses of our soul, that is to say, to that
part where the voice of truth is heard, we shall there per¬
ceive a sort of image of the Trinity whom we adore.
Thought, which we feel produced as the offspring of our
mind, as the son of our understanding, gives us some idea
of the Son of God, conceived from all eternity in the intel¬
ligence of the celestial Father. For this reason, the Son
of God assumes the name of the Word, to intimate that he
is produced in the bosom of the Father, not as bodies are
generated, but as the inward voice that is heard within our
souls, and arises there when we contemplate the truth.
“ But the fertility of the mind does not stop at this in¬
ward voice, at this intellectual thought, at this image of
the truth that is formed within us. We love both this in¬
ward voice and the intelligence which gives it birth ; and
while we love them, we feel within us something that is
not less precious to us than intelligence and thought, that
is the fruit of both, that unites them and unites with them,
and composes with them one and the same existence.
“ Thus, as far as there can be any resemblance between
God and man, is produced in God the eternal love which
springs from the Father who thinks, and the Son who is
his thought, to compose with him and his thought one and
the same nature, equally happy and equally perfect.”*

* Ilistoire Universelle, I. p. 248.

 THEORIES OF THE INCARNATION. 189

Here we see a lively reproduction of the Platonic Trinity,

the Essential God—his intelligence (nous,) or understand¬
ing, begotten of him, and uniting in the production of the
soul of the world. Thus speculations circulate through
the ages, and the thoughts of great men become incor¬
porated with the universe of mind. It was well, however,
that Bossuet remarked that, in his beautiful representation
of the human mind, with its diverse elements and inward
harmony, is seen only u a sort of image of the Trinity ”
With this concession, we may accept it as ingenious and
agreeable.
The prevalent and fashionable philosophy of the nine¬
teenth century, particularly in Germany and France, and,
to some extent, in England and in this country, is a
modified spiritualism, which finds its most rational and
agreeable exposition in the eclecticism of Victor Cousin.
It has been adopted, with more or less modification, by
nearly all the German theologians. Schleiermacher, who
translated Plato, and formed his whole system of theology
on a philosophical basis, gave rise to a theory of the
Trinity which is quite prevalent among modern theo¬
logians. He finds Religion to consist in the union of the
finite with the infinite, doubtless a great truth, properly
explained and understood. On this ground, we must find
the infinite in Christ. He therefore insists strongly on
his proper Divinity or Godhead. But he first recognizes
the absolute God, to us the impersonal, the unknown, and
the inaccessible. This absolute God must manifest him¬
self; and thence he passes over from the absolute into the
190 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

relative, from the infinite into the finite. God reproduces

himself, so to speak, in a new and visible form, and be¬
comes, in some sense, a new Being. This is the Logos,
the Christ, the Son of God; in other words, God himself,
who created the universe, and became incarnate in order to
bring man into union and fellowship with the infinite, and
thus redeem him from the bondage of sin. A theory, beau¬
tiful in itself, and doubtless with some elements of truth,
but still a theory, which leaves the great mystery just
where it was before, and mystifies us with words which
have no definite import.*
But this furnishes a fair specimen of the manner in
which the doctrine of the Trinity is regarded by the phi¬
losophers and theologians of Germany. The Hegelians,
even, have a Trinity: the Me and not the Me, and the re¬
lation between them ; in other words, Absolute Being, and
Relative Being, and the union of the two, or the middle
term which unites them. So they talk very profoundly of
absolute Being, or the absolute God, who is entirely inac¬
cessible to our minds, as without thought, without feeling,
without action: in a word, without anything which is tangi¬
ble to our minds; of the absolute Being u struggling to reveal
himself,” passing over into the finite, reproducing himself
in the universe of matter and of mind, first representing
himself to himself, coming into self-consciousness, creating
his own image, and then going forth, to embody his glory

* These views are developed in his “ Weihnachtsfeier,” and “Glnubenslehre.”

See Morell’s History of Philosophy, pp. GIB, 619.
 THEORIES OF THE INCARNATION. 191

in the world, in man, in Christ, manifesting himself espe¬

cially in Christ.
But what pure hypothesis is this! What bewildering
verbiage ! Absolute Being ! Absolute God ! God without
thought, without feeling, without design, without action!
There is no such God. There never was such a God.*
He is the same yesterday, to-day, and forever—evermore
the holy, evermore the good, the wise, the blessed. He
speaks, and it is done ; he says, Let their be light! and
there is light. Earth and sky, the sun, moon, and stars—
this great and beautiful universe starts into being at his
bidding, and reflects his glory. But God is evermore above
it, and bejmnd it, the same, yesterday, to-day, and forever.
But this idea of absolute Being passing over into the
finite and formal, reproducing himself in the universe, has a
peculiar charm to imaginative minds, and has greatly mod¬
ified the theological teaching of Germany. It affected the
mind of Coleridge, who thinks, (see “ Aids to Reflection,’7)
that there is a natural or philosophical necessity for a Trinity,
or at least for the incarnation of Jesus Christ in human
form. Some even among ourselves have talked learnedly
about the absolute God,—his self-consciousness—self-reflec¬
tion, or self-imagination, as if the latter were the Logos,
the Son of God,—of God struggling to reveal himself in
the finite,—of his being first inworlded and then incarnated ;
as if expressions and speculations of this sort could throw
the slightest light on the great mystery of the Godhead,

* “ Before the mountains were brought forth, ere ever Thou hadst formed the earth
and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, Thou art God !” Ps. xc. 1, 2,
192 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

in human flesh. Doubtless much truth may mingle with

speculations of this kind, striking views, interesting argu¬
ments, and spirit-stirring pictures ; but, alas ! we are just
where we were years ago, and where we must ever remain,
at least as long as we are in the flesh, on the brink of a
vast abyss, a mystery of Godliness, into which the angels
desire to look.*
It must not be inferred from what we have said, that
among the German theologians, or those who sympathise
with them in this country, there are no just and scriptural
views of the incarnation and Godhead of Christ. Indeed,
many of them hold these truths very intelligently, and even
in their speculations, some of which are fanciful enough,
have shed upon them an interesting light. Schleiermacher
has done much to uproot the cold rationalism which pre¬
vailed in his day; while Neander and Tholuck have car¬
ried forward the reform which he commenced. The state¬
ment of this doctrine by Neander is striking and instruc¬
tive, although it involves too much of merely speculative
theory. “ It is this doctrine,” he says, “ by which God
becomes known as the original fountain of all existence;
as He by whom the rational creation, that had become es-

* The following, from Lord Bacon, deserves the consideration of all theorists: “ As
for perfection or completeness in Divinity, it is not to be sought. For he that will re¬
duce a science, a knowledge into an art, will make it round and uniform ; but in Di¬
vinity, many things must be left abrupt, and concluded with, thus: ‘ O the depth of the
riches, both of the wisdom and knowledge of God ! How unsearchable are his judg¬
ments, and his ways past finding out!’ So, again, the Apostle saith ; ‘ We know in
part;’ and to have the form of a total where there is matter but for a part, cannot be
without supplies by supposition and presumption.”—Works, Vol. i. p. 241.
“ The contemplation of God’s creatures and works produceth (having regard to the
works and creatures themselves,) knowledge ; but having regard to God, no perfect
knowledge, hut wovrlrr, which is broken knowledge.”—p. 163.
 THEORIES OF THE INCARNATION. 193

tranged from him, is brought back to fellowship with him;

and as He in the fellowship with whom it from thenceforth
subsists :—the threefold relation in which God stands to
mankind, as primal ground, mediator and end, Creator, Re¬
deemer and Sanctifier, in which threefold relation the
whole Christian knowledge of God is completely an¬
nounced. Accordingly, all is herein embraced by the Apos¬
tle Paul, when he names the one God and Father of all,
who is above all, and works through all, and in all; (Ephes.
iv: 6 ;) or Him from whom are all things ;—when, in pro¬
nouncing the benediction, he sums up all in the formula :
the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and
the communion of the Holy Spirit. God as the living God,
the God of mankind, and the God of the Church, can be
known truly only in this way. This shape of Theism
presents the perfect mean between the wholly extra-mun¬
dane God of Deism, and the God brought down to, and
confounded with, the world of Pantheism.”*

* History, Vol. I. p. 572. Dr. Sartorius, in his little work on the Person and
Work of Christ, defends the common view, but not without a tincture of philosophical
speculation. Nor is his discussion as thorough and discriminating as, from its reputa¬
tion, we were led to expect. He defends the unity, and identity of the sacred Trinity,
and adds :—“ The difference is only this, that there is attributed to the Father an abso¬
lute self-existence by himself alone; to the Son the same, with an eternal communica¬
tion with the Father ; and to the Holy Spirit, the same, by an eternal communication
with the Father and the Son ; as when a light, when it is doubled or trebled, shines in
the first place by itself, and in the second place reflects contemporaneously with it out
of a mirror, and thirdly, with the reflection shines also again upon another mirror, and
yet it is only one light. There is afforded to us, also, the simplest explanation, under the
figure of a triangle, since these three angles, in various ways, make up one and the same
space.” This will do to put along with Martin Farquhar Tupper’s string of natural
triads, among which are the triangle and the trefoil, as symbols of the Trinity. Strange,
that even minds of ordinary sagacity can beguile themselves or their readers with such
absurdity!

17
194 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

Neander, however, makes a just distinction between the on¬

tological or speculative view of the Trinity, and the one which
he calls economic or practical; the former, as he says, being
an intellectual process of development, passing through vari¬
ous changes, and in the history of theological investigation
gradually absorbing the practical. On this ground we
conclude that the ontological view is a matter of entire un¬
certainty ; while the practical one is the true and scriptu¬
ral view, which ought to lie at the basis of all our faith.
“ This,” adds Neander, li constituted from the beginning,
the fundamental consciousness of the Catholic church,
while forming itself in its conflict with the opposite theories
of the heretical sects. It is that which forms the basis of
the true unity of the church, and the identity of the Chris¬
tian consciousness in all ages.”*
We turn, then, with infinite relish to this economic, or
practical view, which, without speculation or theory of any
kind, finds and adores God in Jesus Christ, and thence
derives the soul’s true and everlasting life. This is the

* Church History, Vol. I. p. 573.

At the close of the second century, Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, in his work, Ad-
versus Haeres., says, u The church, although scattered throughout the world, has
received from the Apostles and their disciples, the faith in one God, the Father Al¬
mighty, etc.; and in one Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who became incarnate foi
our salvation, and in the Holy Spirit, who by the prophets revealed the dispensa¬
tions—and the advent, the generation from a virgin, the suffering and the raising
from the dead, and the bodily ascension unto heaven, of the beloved Jesus Christ
our Lord ; and his coming from heaven in the glory of the Father, to renew all
things, and raise up again to life every human being ;—that to Christ Jesus our
Lord and God, our Saviour and King, according to the good pleasure of the Father
invisible, every knee may bow, and every tongue confess.” Adver. Haeres. Lib. 1.
Cap. 2.
So long as this practical view continued, the church was spiritual and prosper¬
ous ; but as soon as it was superseded by the speculative or philosophical view of
the Doctors, the church grew languid and worldly,
 THEORIES OF THE INCARNATION. 195

Pauline view, as Neander would say, the view also of Peter

and John, of all the Apostles and primitive disciples. It
must, then, be the true view; the view, especially, which
gives peace, and hope, and joy to a penitent sinner. u God

is in Christ reconciling the world unto himself.” This is

the hope, this the repose of the spirit, sin-burdened and
sorrowful. In this connection, how full of meaning the
words of our Saviour,—■“ Come unto me all ye that labor
and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest!” How
natural and becoming, also, that fine old prayer, of mingled
thanksgiving and supplication, addressed to the Father, the
Son and the Holy Ghost, the Te Deum, Laudamus, as it is
called:
“We praise thee, O God ; we acknowledge thee to be the
Lord. All the earth doth worship thee, the Father everlast¬
ing. To thee all Angels cry aloud ; the Heavens and all
the Powers therein. To thee, Cherubim and Seraphim con¬
tinually do cry, Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God of Sabaoth;
Heaven and Earth are full of the Majesty of thy Glory.
The glorious company of the Apostles praise thee. The
goodly fellowship of the Prophets praise thee. The noble
army of Martyrs praise thee. The holy Church, through¬
out all the world, doth acknowledge thee, the Father of
an infinite Majesty; Thine adorable, true, and only Son ;
also the Holy Ghost, the Comforter. Thou art the King
of Glory, O Christ. Thou art the everlasting Son of the
Father. When thou tookest upon thee to deliver man,
thou didst humble thyself to be born of a Virgin. When
thou hadst, overcome the sharpness of death, thou didst
196 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

open the Kingdom of Heaven to all believers. Thou sit-

test on the right hand of God, in the Glorj of the Father.
We believe that thou shalt come to be our Judge. We
therefore pray thee, help thy servants, whom thou hast
redeemed with thy precious blood. Make them to be num¬
bered with thy Saints, in glory everlasting. O Lord, save
thy people, and bless thine heritage. Govern them, and
lift them up forever. Day by day we magnify thee ; and
we worship thy Name ever, world without end.”* *
Ji
* Book of Common Prayer.
 CHAPTER V.

THE ATONEMENT.

Sin is the separation of a soul from God. Whatever,

then, be our views as to its origin, its action, or its mode
of transmission in the world, we must allow that it is the
negative of all goodness—the antagonism, so to speak, of
all that is perfect and divine. Sin, therefore, necessarily
severs the soul from its centre and its end, which is the
same thing as to say, that it is the soul’s everlasting death.
u The wages of sin is death.” This is not simply a matter
of revelation, but of actual observation and experience.
Man has sinned—sinned deeply and grievously. Nor does
it affect the state of the case, whether he has sinned as an
individual, or as a race. The mournful fact remains the
same. u By one man,” says the Apostle Paul, u sin entered

into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon
all men, for that all have sinned.”* Everywhere, in all
times, and among all nations, this fact strikes us. Without
a revelation—in other words, without a Gospel, man is an
idolater or an atheist. The race is unregenerate. In this
respect, they form a whole. The stream rushes in one
direction. In a word, man is apostate—in a state of apos-

* Epis. Rom. v. 12.

17*
198 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

tasis, or voluntary removal from God. The ship has

broken from its moorings, and is adrift upon the wide ocean,
without helm or compass, tossed by wind and wave, and
without the power of reaching

“ That peaceful shore,

Where tempests never beat, nor billows roar.”

“ The whole world,” says the Apostle Paul, “ lieth in

wickedness”—(original, u lieth in the wicked one”)—like an
oarless, sailless vessel in the eddying current, which sweeps
it onward and afar. Man, indeed, has noble traits, and
many longings after the good and true, but he cannot reach
it. His disappointment, in this respect, is proverbial. Poets,
orators, philosophers, as well as theologians, all allow it.
He is not as bad as he might be; but he has left God, and
whither and how far he may wander, who can tell ? Most
clear it is, that he is “ without God and without hope in
the world;” and what final doom of despair or destruction
that involves, all can imagine. In the first place, he is
guilty, and therefore condemned; secondly, he is disordered
and wayward, and therefore helpless. The Bible describes
him as “ dead in trespasses and sins”—far from God, and
w nigh unto perishing.”
What, then, is demanded for the salvation of man?
Obviously two things ; first, a pardon, full and free; sec-
ondly, regeneration, vital and permanent; in other words, a
restoration of his soul to the lost image of God. But how
can man secure all this ? Can you bring a clean thing out
of an unclean ? Can the helpless, death-struck spirit, rise
 THE ATONEMENT. i99

from the abyss, and unite itself to God ? No: God him*
self must interpose. The Divinity must cross the mighty
chasm, and unite himself with man ; and by such union,
bring him back to holiness and heaven. Man is condemned.
God, then, must forgive him, by a free act of sovereign
clemency. Man is apostate. God must restore him by a
new moral power. Man is dead. God must give him life.
But how can God accomplish this, except by communicating
himself, as the Life of the universe, to the poor, suffering,
dying race of man ? If a sacrifice is to be made to justice,
he must make it. If an incarnation is indispensable, in
order to such a sacrifice, he must u manifest himself in the
flesh”—descending to the depths of human wretchedness,
he must himself achieve the work of our redemption. The
law, glorious and perfect as it is, cannot do this; for it is
“ weak through the flesh.” No man or angel can do it;
for every man is a sinner, and each angel depends upon
God for his life, and has none to communicate. The case
is peculiar, and demands an interference and a process on
the part of God, the most peculiar and amazing. In a word,
he must provide an atonement — accomplish a reconciliation
—meet at once the claims of justice and of mercy—forgive
the sinner, and, in that very act, secure his transformation.
Both of these, the justice and the mercy, the pardon and
the grace, are found in God himself. He only can satisfy
justice and mercy—He only can satisfy himself. What¬
ever is necessary to this issue, he must do, and do alone.
i: Herein is love !” God became incarnate. God made the
reconciliation. Self-moved, self-sustained, he achieved a
200 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

work, by which he can be just, and yet justify the ungodly.

He gave his Son, which is the same thing as to say, that
he gave himself to be “ the propitiation for our sins, and not
for ours only, but for the sins of the whole world.” Thus
he takes us to his bosom—thus he pardons us, fully, freely
and forever. “We love him, because he first loved us.”
“We joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ”—God
being the primal source, Jesus Christ, incarnate love
and purity, the agent—“ by whom we have received the
atonement.”*
W ithout entering into any critical discussion of the term,
we here gain a true and comprehensive view of the atone¬
ment. It may be considered as a means or as an end, as
a sacrifice or atonement proper, or as the result of that sac¬
rifice which is reconciliation, at-one-ment—as some, with
more regard, perhaps, to sound than sense, have expressed
it—the state of being at one, that is, united and peaceful.
By not adverting to this simple but important distinction,
inquirers have fallen into great and opposing errors—one
class denying the true idea of sacrifice and atonement, and
another, while retaining that idea, failing to connect it
adequately with its obvious end and aim. The question
ought not to be, whether it is a reconciliation, but whether
it is a reconciliation by means of sacrifice. “Without the
shedding of blood,” says Paul, “ there is no remission,”
consequently no reconciliation. Well, then, did our Saviour

* See the fifth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, where this idea is strikingly
exhibited.
 THE ATONEMENT. 201

shed his blood for the remission of sins ? Did he die as a

sacrifice for human guilt? In a word, did he suffer for us,
not by force of circumstances, or the compulsion of his ene¬
mies, but by his own voluntary choice, and in view of the
necessities of the case? For if such an interposition was
necessary, the result must be reconciliation, or the re-union
of God and man. An atonement being secured, an offer of
mercy follows, which, accepted, issues in remission, restora¬
tion and eternal life. In which case the word atonement
(KaTaWayfj) might describe either the cause or the effect, the
means or the end, or, with still greater propriety, both to¬
gether. In the Old Testament, all reconciliations between
God and his people were made by sacrifice, or shedding of
blood ; so that, in Hebrew phraseology, the term atonement,
or reconciliation, ever involves both ideas. If, then, the
same use of language occurs in the New Testament, how
natural to say, both with reference to the work of Christ
and the result of that work, a We joy in our Lord Jesus
Christ, by whom we have received the atonement.”
The whole subject resolves itself into this question, What
relation does the sacrifice of Christ hold to the character
and government of God? Was it a simple manifestation
of the Divine clemency, a formal or merely liturgical ex¬
pression of his gracious intentions; or was it a real atone¬
ment, and, therefore, a necessary condition of reconciliation
and remission ? Was it, in any sense, a satisfaction to
justice, or, if you please, to justice and mercy combined j
for the grand problem to be solved, is the union of these
two qualities in the salvation of the guilty ?
202 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

The truth is, there are only two views of the sacrifice of
Christ which can be held, with any degree of consistency;
the one, that it was an absolute necessity, the other, an
incidental expedient, Those who take the former, main¬
tain that it sustained a most important relation to the Divine
government, and involved the idea of a proper expiation, or
satisfaction in law ; that it could not be dispensed with,
and thence, that the death of Christ was an absolute pre¬
requisite to the remission of sins. Those who assume the
second view, regard it as a simple, but affecting mode of
revealing the mercy of God, without any inherent or legal
necessity, and without any idea of expiation or satisfaction
to justice, having no special relation to the Divine govern¬
ment, nor, in any way, procuring the remission of sins,
except by producing contrition and penitence in those who
receive it. In the one case, the atonement is regarded as
a necessary act, a Divine sacrifice, in which the claims of
justice and love are fully met and vindicated, with a view
to the salvation of the guilty. In the other, it is a mere
dramatic or liturgic exhibition, in which the love and pity
of God are revealed, in striking, but not necessary forms.
Go behind the scenes, the advocates of this latter view
might say; go behind the scenes, and there is nothing.
The entire import and necessity of the thing lie in the
expression. It is the love of God written in characters of
blood. The sufferings of Christ are the sufferings only
of a man, or at least of a God-inspired, or a God-inhabited
man. Of mystery and sacrifice, in their ordinary sense,
there is here absolutely nothing. Justice has nothing to
 THE ATONEMENT. 203

do with it; nor mercy, except in the expression. The

whole is nothing more than a magnificent and affecting
show.
We hold, however, that the death of Christ had a
special and most extraordinary character, that it was a
death for sin, a death for atonement, a sacrifice, infinite
and amazing, a mystery, the most transcendant and
affecting, of which the shame, anguish, and blood, were
but the outward symbols and expressions. The incarnation
of Christ was a wonderful and overwhelming fact, but
how much more his agony in the garden and on the cross!

“ The Son of God in tear‘s,

Angels with wonder see.”

But the cross, the cross, all purple with his blood, this
“ passeth understanding !” As a cause, then, or a means to
an end, the atonement is a Divine expiation. Jesus Christ,
the Son of God, voluntarily places himself under the action
of human laws. He becomes one of us, puts himself at the
head of the race, and assumes our interests. As “ the
second Adam,” “ the Lord from Heaven,” he consents to
act as our Mediator and representative, and in this capacity,
achieves the great work of our redemption. In order to
this, he takes part in our shame and degradation, suffering
death itself as the necessary result. Though guiltless
himself, he suffers under the conditions of human guilt.
Assuming our nature, and standing by our side, he permits
to come upon him, in their most appalling forms, those ter¬
rible evils which are the necessary consequence, not of
204 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

his, but of our sins. He who knew no sin, is thus made

sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God.
But, secondly, the atonement may be viewed as an end
or a result, as a subjective, as well as an objective reality.
Out of us, it is the sacrifice of Christ, by means of suf¬
fering and death. But in us, and as a result of this great
fact, it is reconciliation with God. Received or realized by
a penitent, it forms the means of his re-union with God, or,
as it is sometimes expressed, at-one-ment, between God and
man. “ Justified by faith, we have peace with God through
our Lord Jesus Christ.” Out of us, as an object of faith,
we have Christ crucified, or the great doctrine of atonement
and sacrifice; in us, we have Christ the hope of glory, that
is, righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.
In this way, we are saved by “ the Christ without us,”
and by the u Christ within us.” The atonement is ob¬
jective and subjective ; objective as a sacrifice for sin, sub¬
jective as a means of restoration to the Divine image;
objective as a fact or a truth, subjective as a principle or a
life.
In correspondence with this distinction, two things are
accomplished for man by the mediation and atonement of
Christ. In the first place, all the legal obstructions which
prevented the exercise of the Divine clemency towards the
guilty and fallen, are forever removed. “ Mercy and truth
meet together, righteousness and peace kiss each other”—
all unite and blend in this Divine method. The “ day of
vengeance from our God,” is yet 11 the acceptable year of
the Lord.” The justice is clemency, the clemency is jus-
 THE ATONEMENT. 205

tice. The claims of the Divine government are fully met,

the law is “ magnified and made honorable,” as the old
divines express it, and by that very means, mercy is ex¬
tended to the l£ vilest of the vile.” “ To declare his right¬
eousness for the remission of sins that are passed, through
the forbearance (clemency) of God ; to declare, I say, at
this time, his righteousness, that he might be just, and the
justifier of him who believeth in Jesus.”*
This we denominate a sacrifice for sin; an expiation, in
the proper sense of the term, the essence of which is, the
just suffering for the unjust. Such a sacrifice was de¬
manded at once by justice and love, that is, by the very
nature of God. It is of the essence both of righteousness
and grace. Hence its endurance cannot be regarded,
properly speaking, as a positive infliction, or as an actual
punishment; but simply as an expiation, through voluntary
suffering, by which justice is vindicated, while mercy is se¬
cured. It satisfies at once the claims of law and of grace.
Neither the one nor the other can demand more. It is
what God himself demands from himself, in extending
salvation to the guilty. He cannot act capriciously and ille¬
gally—without a reason, and without an end. He is himself
law, and must enthrone justice even in the administration
of mercy. u For what the law could not do, in that it was
weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the
likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, (sin offering) con¬
demned sin in the flesh ; that the righteousness of the law

* Rom. iii. 25, 26.

18
206 MANIFESTATION OF G O I).

might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but
after the Spirit.”*
How evident from this, that the sufferings of Christ were
vicarious or substitutionary. Not that Christ actually suf¬
fered, as some affirm, what all the redeemed, but for him,
would have suffered, u pang for pang, spasm for spasm,”
to “ all eternity” ; not that his sufferings are a literal, me¬
chanical or commercial equivalent for ours, as others believe,
but that they are a substitute for such,—a moral equivalent,
an equivalent in law and justice, which makes our pardon
and salvation consistent with the highest claims of right¬
eousness. In this sense, u he was wounded for our trans¬
gressions, he was bruised for our iniquities ; the chastise¬
ment of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we
are healed.” Our guilt, indeed, was not literally transferred
to him. Guilt is personal, is of the essence of sin, is in¬
separable from a vicious state or a vicious act, and there¬
fore is not, strictly speaking, transferable. But the conse¬
quences of guilt are transferable. The innocent may suffer
for the guilty, suffer that which the guilty alone ought to
bear, but from which the latter is delivered by such
gracious interposition. The innocent, in such a case,
comes in between the guilty, and his deserved punishment.
Whatever, then, the innocent may suffer with such an end
in view, is a substitution for the punishment of the guilty.
It may not itself be punishment; for an innocent man
cannot, properly speaking, be punished. He may suffer as

* Romans, viii. 3.
 THE ATONEMENT. 207

an evil-doer, but he is not an evil-doer; and his sufferings

on account of sin, however intense and overwhelming, are
not absolute punishment. He cannot feel them as such—-
he is innocent, and suffers with the consciousness not of a
guilty, but of a guiltless man. There is an immense dif¬
ference between suffering for ourselves and suffering for
others. The one, may be a punishment justly merited ;
the other may be an atonement, voluntarily chosen, and
patiently endured. By connecting himself with an evil¬
doer, assuming his interests and destiny, with a view to his
rescue and reform, a good man may subject himself to
painful trials, which but for him, would come upon the evil¬
doer alone, and which the latter justly deserves. But the
good man is upheld by conscious rectitude, and for the joy
set before him, endures the cross and despises the shame.
In the same way Christ suffers for us. For his sake,
we are forgiven and saved. His death upon the cross has
averted our death in hell. Justice is satisfied that we
should be “ saved from wrath through him.” Had he not
suffered, we must have perished. Becoming man, and as¬
suming our position as a condemned race, he endured what
we alone ought to endure, pain, anguish and death, as the
necessary results of sin. His sufferings, therefore, are in
the stead of ours. They bring us pardon and everlasting
life. “ When we were without strength, in due time Christ
died for the ungodly.”
The sufferings of Christ, then, were not in all respects
the same as ours would have been, had he not interfered on
our behalf; for the innocent cannot suffer, in every particu-
 208 MANIFESTATION OF GOD,

lar, as those must who are personally guilty. But as far

as an innocent being can suffer for the guilty, Christ suf¬
fered for us. His agonies were immense and overwhelming;
so that in the end, the transference or exchange of suffer¬
ing Gomes to the same thing as the transference or ex¬
change of guilt.* Even if there be some difference in the
kind of endurance, the one stands in the stead of the other.
Christ did not sin for us; he suffered for our sins.
(Here we discover the relation of the sufferings of Christ
to the love of God. “For a righteous man will one die,
peradventure for a good man, some would even dare to die;
j but God commendeth his love towards us, in that while we
were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” The necessity for
the sufferings of Christ grows out not only of the justice
of God, and his consequent abhorrence of sin, but of his
love and compassion for the sinner. But he could not con-
fer grace in an absolute way ; this were to defeat its pur¬
pose. He must confer it in harmony with law. The
administration of justice must have its legitimate course.
Sin must be punished. Hence, if grace cannot be conferred
without a sacrifice, that sacrifice must be provided, in con-
I nection with grace. Indeed, it must form a part of grace ;
so that the atonement,is an act at once of judgment and
of mercy. “ God so loved the world that he gave his only
begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him might not
perish, but have everlasting life.”

\ ' “ ~

* It >s in this sense that guilt may be said to be imputed, though not transferred.
Charged to Christ by his voluntary adoption of our interests, as a condemned race, he
suffered its consequences, but suffered them as a being perfectly innocent.
 THE ATONEMENT. 209

What an interesting light this sheds upon the perfection

of the Divine administration, the harmony of the Divine
attributes ! “ God is love.” Hence, he is immutably gra¬
cious and merciful, “ slow to anger, abundant in goodness,
forgiving iniquity, transgression and sin.” His mercy,
therefore, is not purchased, as some hyper-orthodox teachers
affirm, by the atonement of Christ. For, how could that
be purchased by the atonement, which provided the atone¬
ment, and through that stupendous sacrifice, goes forth to
redeem a guilty race ? The atonement purchased us ; but
mercy gave the price. In this act, God and Christ are one.
But God even in his mercy must be just. His love is a
holy love, and ever supports the right. But his mercy
is unbought and everlasting. Nay, it is his very nature,
and not only prompted, but completed the whole work of
our redemption. It embodied itself in the life and death
of Christ. Herein is^love! Herein is God!
Not only are all legal obstructions thus removed to the
salvation of man, but, secondly, a sufficient moral power is
brought to bear upon the soul, to effect its renovation. As
we have said, God is here, brought home to the heart by a
new and peculiar manifestation, which none who receive it
can resist. This convinces us of sin. This quells our
pride. This humbles and exalts us. This inspires us at
once with penitence and gratitude, with adoration and joy.
u The love of Christ constraineth us, because we thus judge,
that if one died for all, then were all dead, that we who
live should not henceforth live unto ourselves but unto him
who died and rose again.” Beautiful is earth, in the smile
18*
210 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

of God—-beautiful the face of man, or angel, glowing with

the love and purity of the skies. But they grow dim in
the presence of the dying Son of God, through whose pale
but majestic countenance streams all the glory of uncreated
love ! I see it—I feel it—through all my soul I feel it; and
from that dark chaos within, comes forth a new creation of
order and beauty; while the morning stars sing together,
and all the sons of God shout for joy.
This, then, is the doctrine of the atonement as held by
the universal church, reconciliation between God and man,
restoration and reunion, by virtue of the expiatory sacrifice,
or substitutionary sufferings of Jesus Christ. Not reconcil¬
iation, simply, or the reunion of two parties at variance, by
the reparation or the reformation of the offender, but recon¬
ciliation through a proper expiation. The eyes of a guilty
sinner are, therefore, first of all, directed to Jesus Christ,
who is “raised up a Prince and a<£aviour, to give repent¬
ance to Israel, and the remission of sins.” The blood, the
death of Christ, “ cleanseth from all sin.” Atonement or
expiation first, then remission, penitence and hope, trans¬
formation and eternal joy.
This view of the atonement, which we deem fundamen¬
tal, has been denied by the Unitarians and others, who hold
that we are reconciled to God, not by means of a substitu¬
tionary sacrifice on the part of Christ, but by the moral
influence of his character and teachings over our hearts
and lives. On this ground they maintain that we are for¬
given, not in consideration of what Christ has done, but in
consideration of our own penitence and reformation; that
 THE ATONEMENT. 211

the law demanded no satisfaction, and that none was given

in the death of Christ, and thence that atonement consists
in our returning to God, with penitent and believing hearts !
This they say is produced by the life and teachings of
Jesus, whose death was not an expiation, or sacrifice to
justice, but an attestation to the truth, an example of endu¬
rance and self-denial, or, at best, a demonstration of the
Divine purity and love. Others, again, admit that the suf¬
ferings of Christ are vicarious and substitutionary, but
only in appearance and form ; that the atonement is a man¬
ifestation of the Divine love issuing in the transformation
of the sinner, but not, as we contend, a sacrifice for sin.*
They find, indeed, a sacrificial or expiatory character in the
mere outward form, or what has been called the liturgical
aspect of the doctrine : but what is this, when separated
from its reality or essence ? The atonement is either an
expiation or not. If an expiation or a sacrifice for sin, it is
such in its very nature and essence, not simply in its out¬
ward form or figurative representation. The form or liturgy,
that is, the ritual and outward representation of a doc¬
trine, to be good for anything, must correspond with its in¬
ward spirit. Otherwise the form deceives us! If the
atonement or expiation is only in the words, or in the ritual,
figurative aspect of the doctrine, not in the doctrine itself,
it is nothing—at least nothing tangible. The whole thing
is a play upon words, and leaves the matter precisely
where it was. The true idea of a sacrifice for sin, of vica-

* This is the view of Schleiermacher and some of the German theologians. It is

also the view of Coleridge and his followers
212 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

rious atonement by the death of Christ, is denied ; and we

are compelled to place this view in the same category with
that of the Unitarian divines, who deny in every sense
the doctrine of a true expiation or atonement for sin, and
the propriety of relying upon the sufferings or merits of
Christ, as a ground of justification before God.#
As an exposition of this view, let us quote a few passages
from Dr. Gannet’s Tract on the Atonement, published by
the Unitarian Association. “Reconciliation,” says he, p. 1,
“is the heart of the doctrine. Its whole vitality, meaning
and value reside here.” “ Upon the sinner’s return to God,”
p. 5, “ God ceases to impute his sins unto him, or to con¬
sider him any longer as a guilty person. * * * And
since he is led to this change of habits, inward and out¬
ward, by the instructions of Christ, expressed both by his

* This, perhaps, is a little too strongly stated. It applies, indeed, to the great majority
of Unitarian teachers ; but there are exceptions to the rule. Dr. Channing, and a few
others, never fully abandoned some of the higher elements of orthodox belief, and held
to a view of the death of Christ, in one feature, at least, akin to that which makes it an
atonement or expiation proper. “Many of us,” says he, Works, 4th Ed. p. 318, “are
dissatisfied with this explanation,” namely, that ‘the mediation of Christ procures for¬
giveness by leading to that repentance and virtue, which is the great and only condition
upon which forgiveness is bestowed,’ “ and think that the Scriptures ascribe the re¬
mission of sins to Christ’s death, with an emphasis so peculiar, that we ought to con¬
sider this event as having a special influence, in removing punishment, though the
Scriptures may not reveal the way in which it contributes to this end.” This is a most
important admission; but fatal to the Unitarian view of the atonement, as generally
held. For we have, in the work of Christ, a real mediation or none. If Jesus did not
make a proper expiation for siny he was nothing more than a teacher, a revealer, or at
best a manifestation of the Divine character. If his death was not a real propitiation
for sin, it was a simple attestation to the truth. In which case we are saved, not by
faith, but by works, not by the sacrifice of the Son of God, but by the penitence and purity
of our own hearts; and Mr. Parker, Mr. Emerson and others, who have renounced the
Unitarian theolgy as shallow and powerless, are justified in rejecting the very idea of
mediation, and representing man as his own Saviour, and redemption as the result of
his own individual action. In this view, what are we to think, not of a real, but of a
liturgical atonement ?
 THE ATONEMENT. 213

words and his life—in what he said, did and was, through
the various course of his ministry, from the baptism of the
Jordan, by which he was introduced to the mediatorial
work, to the baptism of the cross, by which he was intro¬
duced to the glory of its accomplishment—therefore the
sinner is justified, sanctified and saved through Jesus Christ
—through him man receives the atonement, and the world
is reconciled to God.” He goes on to say that this is not
the current doctrine of the church, and that repentance is
all that is necessary to the Divine favor, and consequently
that the death of Christ becomes available for our redemp¬
tion, simply from the moral influence which it exerts over
us. He insists strongly that it had no effect whatever
upon God or his government; but that its effect terminates
upon us, in reconciling us to God, by producing our repent¬
ance and reformation; and adds, p. 10, “I consider the
popular doctrine of the atonement, under whatever modifica¬
tion it may be held, as false and injurious.”* His position,
therefore, is that the death or atonement of Christ, in itself,
has no efficacy to procure the pardon of the guilty, and that
the only efficacy in the case is to be ascribed to penitence
and reformation ; so that it is only in a general and figura¬
tive, perhaps liturgical sense, that we are said to be saved
by the blood of Christ. Literally and properly, we are saved
by penitence and reformation, the result of the death and

* Properly speaking, the death of Christ did not reconcile God to us. But it justified
him, on the fundamental principles of righteousness, in reconciling us to himself. It
entered into the very essence of his government, and proved him just while justifying
the ungodly.
214 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

teachings of Christ, in their influence upon our moral na¬

ture. On this theory all ideas of expiation, atonement, sac¬
rifice and substitutionary suffering, taken in their ordinary
sense, are false and pernicious. Jesus is not a priest—he
offers no sacrifice, makes no expiation, except by a figure
or a form of speech ! W e are forgiven and accepted for
Christ’s sake, or in the name of Christ, not because Christ
has died and satisfied the claims of justice as well as love
on the behalf of the penitent, but because we ourselves, en¬
lightened by his teaching and example, repent and reform.
“ Repentance f he says, p. 14, “ secures the Divine favor by
a necessary action. Repentance cancels the past, satisfies
justice, saves the sinner.” “ The supposition that the death
of Christ was necessary,” (in government and law,) “to
procure the pardon of the guilty, is therefore gratuitous, and
founded upon a misapprehension of the nature of forgive¬
ness.” It follows from this, that if repentance occur from
any other cause than the death of Christ, or without the
slightest reference to that event, it will secure pardon and
everlasting life ; whence we may be justified, not by “faith
in Christ,” but by “ the deeds of the law.” “ The doctrine,”
says he, p. 19, “ which ascribes to the death of Christ an
efficacy, whether vicarious, meritorious or mysterious, in
procuring the pardon of the penitent, is irrational.” All
such notions, according to the author, “ dissolve at the touch
of reason.” “ It is a false interpretation,” says he, “ which
sees, in the language of the New Testament concerning
the death of Christ, an assertion of any other than a moral
influence issuing from the cross.” (p. 23.) Hence,- (p. 28,)
 THE ATONEMENT. 215

he condemns and repudiates u the conduct of the conscience-

stricken sinner, who,” under the influence of the popular
views of the atonement, “ makes Christ his refuge, as if,”
he adds, “ the mercy of God were not large enough to over¬
shadow him. The djung believer leans on the merits of
Christ, as he has been taught to style services which are
sadly misrepresented by such a term, and when pointed to
the mercy of God, feebly reiterates that he trusts in his
Saviour.” “ To me,” says Dr. Gannet, with startling con¬
sistency, “language of this kind is indescribably painful.
It robs the death-bed of the sincere Christian of half the
influence which I wish it to exert over me.”
The writer of this tract on the atonement is an amiable
and learned man, the successor of the eloquent and gifted
Channing; but we are compelled, in opposition to its entire
spirit and purport, to say, that we have not “ so learned
Christ.” It seems, as Robert Hall pointedly remarks, with
reference to similar views, “ not so much to mistake as to
contradict the Word of God.” There can be but little
question, we think, as Channing himself is compelled to
allow, that the Scriptures ascribe to the death of Christ a
special efficacy in procuring the pardon of the guilty; that
Christ died for us, as one would die in the stead of a dear
friend whom he washed to save; that the death of Christ
is a proper sacrifice for sin; and although repentance and
reformation are necessary to the enjoyment of the Divine
favor, and the restoration of the soul to his image, yet we
are forgiven, not for our penitence and good works, but for
Christ’s sake. On which ground we affirm that it is scrip-
216 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

tural and proper to trust in Christ—to make him the rest

and refuge of our soul—to plead his merits, which are the
expression of the Divine mercy, and the medium of the Di¬
vine forgiveness; “ for we have redemption through his
blood, even the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches
of his grace.” To us, Christ and God are one, and he
that commits his spirit to Christ, commits it, by that very
act, to God; and hence it is a glorious thing, in the hour
of death, to reiterate, not feebly but triumphantly, that we
“ trust in our Saviour.”

“Jesus can make a dying bed

Feel soft as downy pillows are,
While on his breast I lean my head,
And breathe my life out sweetly there.”

Nay, more; we feel that it will*be yet more glorious and

delightful, amid the splendors of heaven, to unite with those
“ who have washed their robes and made them white in
the blood of the Lamb,” in ascriptions of praise and adora¬
tion to “ Him that sitteth upon the throne, and to the Lamb
forever and ever!”
Those who deny the vicarious or substitutionary nature
of the atonement, it appears to us, utterly misconceive its
nature and design, and find difficulties where there are
none. Why should it be thought an incredible or an un¬
reasonable thing, that the innocent should suffer for the
guilty, with a view to their salvation ? If this cannot be
established as a general rule; if it cannot be vindicated, in
all cases, under human governments and laws, why object
to it in a case so special and extraordinary as the one under
 THE ATONEMENT. 217

consideration? Why, especially, object to it, if God him¬

self, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, the Saviour
and the saved, enter into it, as the one method which sus¬
tains the majesty of justice, and the tenderness of love? It
is a special and extraordinary interposition. There is nothing
in the universe like it. It stands alone, a solitary monu¬
ment of the wisdom and goodness of the Almighty, a
method of pardon and salvation which He approves, which
is the expression at once of his justice and his grace, which
meets all the exigencies of the case, sustains the Divine
government, and restores the sinner to purity and heaven.
All errors upon this subject arise from separating the
being and work of Christ from the being and work of God,
as if they had diverse interests and diverse designs in the
matter of human redemption. Let them be united, and all
is plain. The sacrifice of Christ is, then, the sacrifice of
God, and is made only to justice and love, which are thus
*

enthroned over all the powers and influences of the uni¬

verse. Then, to believe in Christ, to trust in Christ, or in his
merits or his righteousness, is to trust in God, and in God
alone.
On this ground the efficacy of the atonement is ascribed
to the infinite worth and dignity of our Saviour’s person, and
in connection with this, to the fact that by his incarnation
he became our representative, by taking to himself, not the
nature of angels, but the seed of Abraham. “ His assump¬
tion of human nature,”'says Robert Hall, in his sermon on
‘ The Substitution of the Innocent for the Guilty,’ “ made
his oblation of himself possible; his possession of the Db
19
218 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

vine rendered it efficient; and thus weakness and power, the

imperfections incident to a frail and mortal creature, and
the exemption from these, the attributes of time and of eter¬
nity, the elements of being most opposite, and deduced from
opposite worlds, equally combined to give efficacy to his
character as the Redeemer, and validity to his sacrifice.”
Here let it be especially remarked, that on the principles
we have laid down, the atonement could make no change
in the attributes and government of God; none in his sen¬
timents and feelings towards man; for he was ever the God
of purity and love, and the atonement was the provision and
expression of that love. Whatever is in the effect, is also
in the cause; and all, therefore, which was accomplished
by that atonement, existed, as a thought or a sentiment, a
quality or an attribute, in the heart of God. It could not,
therefore, change his character or his dispositions towards
men; it merely changed his relations, or the relations of
his government to the guilty, by making it right and be¬
coming in God, as a moral governor, to propose terms of re¬
conciliation, and receive the penitent to the bosom of his
love. To whom, then, or to what was the atonement
made? To God himself, or rather to justice and love.
These demanded the sacrifice; and to magnify these, to
give them scope and lustre in the salvation of the world,
the eternal Father himself made the sacrifice. It was a
work of principle—a work of righteousness and love—the
most stupendous and thrilling that ever has been made, or
ever can be made. God so loved the world that he gave
his only begotten Son ; sparing him not, but giving him up
 THE ATONEMENT. 219

to the death for us all; that whosoever believeth in him

might not perish, but have everlasting life!
This view saves us from the objections of those who rep¬
resent a vicarious atonement as injurious to the character
of God, making it, so to speak, less amiable than that of
Christ, and consequently attracting men rather to Christ
than to God. Occasionally, indeed, orthodox writers and
preachers have done the cause of truth a serious injury, by
inconsiderate and declamatory appeals, in which, with sin¬
gular inconsistency, they have represented God the Father
as demanding justice without mercy; and the thunders of
his vengeance hurled against a guilty race, as intercepted
by Jesus Christ, and quenched in his atoning blood! Like
Jupiter on Olympus, his red right arm bared for destruction,
God has been described rather as a tyrant and a fiend, than
as a Governor and a Father; while Jesus Christ, in his
gentleness and self-sacrifice, has been contrasted with the
stern severity and furious vengeance of the Almighty, just
as if he were not God manifest in the flesh, but a being,
with a different character and separate interests. God and
Christ are one; one in nature, one in aim The humanity
of Christ is but the form or medium of the indwelling
Deity. Even when on the cross, it might have been said
of him, “ This is the true God and eternal Life.” The
sacrifice was made to justice, and not only to justice, but to
mercy, made by the Father, made by the Son, as the outgoing
and expression of that everlasting Love which is exhaust¬
less as the nature, and unchangeable as the existence of
God.
220 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

We maintain, therefore, that vicarious or substitutionary

suffering, is of the very essence of the atonement, and such
suffering, moreover, as to give it infinite worth and efficacy.
In numberless forms is this great fact taught in the Holy
Scriptures. Indeed, it pervades them, as light pervades the
heavens, giving tone and color to the whole. It is the fun¬
damental truth of the remedial system ; it is the only one
which gives us the true idea of God, of redemption, regenera¬
tion and everlasting life. It is taught, for example, in those
passages which represent the work of Christ as a sin-offering,
or as a propitiation for sin,—as a death of the innocent for the
guilty, of the just for the unjust—as a suffering for sin, for re-
mission, for reconciliation, for the ungodly, for sinners ;—in all
those which represent Christ as the substance or antitype
of the Jewish priesthood and atonements, as the One High
Priest, who offers the one sacrifice for the remission of the
sins of many, who makes an oblation of himself, and enters
once for all, and for the benefit of all, into the Holy Place,
with his own blood, as the Son of God who through the
eternal Spirit offered himself without spot unto God, as the
Lamb of God who taketh, (beareth) away the sins of the
world—as our paschal Lamb sacrificed for us ; in all those
passages, which represent his blood, as cleansing from sin,
as shed for remission of sin, as washing away sin; all
those which describe him as made sin, made a curse for us,
as giving himself for us, giving his life a ransom for many,
as wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities,
suffering the chastisement of our peace, and working out an
everlasting righteousness which might be unto all and
 THE ATONEMENT. 221

upon all them that believe; in a word, as sinless, yet suffer¬

ing like a sinner, voluntarily bearing our sins in his own
body on the tree, and thus offering to justice an adequate
expiation for the guilt of the world.*
The whole system of the Jewish ritual was formed on
the principle of sacrifice and atonement. All the shedding
of blood, without which there could be no remission, fore¬
shadowed the substitution and sacrifice of Christ, and de¬
rived its significance and moral influence from this fact.
Sin, confessed and abjured by the congregation, was put
upon the head of the victim, as on the great day of atone¬
ment, signifying the pardon of sin, by the sacrifice of an¬
other, slain in the sinner’s stead. If this was not its signi¬
fication and design, it was the merest superstition, a
superstition utterly unworthy of a Divine appointment and
sanction. But these ritual observances, and especially
these sacrifices of atonement, St. Paul informs us, were
shadows of good things to come. The body, he tells us, was
Christ. His death and atonement cast these shadows,
gave them import and value. In him they had their ful¬
fillment and explanation. Upon this subject the Apostle
reasons very strikingly in his Epistle to the Hebrews.
For as the ancient High-Priest entered into the Holy of
Holies, once a year, with the sacrifice of atonement, so
Christ entered with his own blood into the Holy Place,
having obtained eternal redemption for us. “ For Christ,”

* See Romans, v. 6—8. 2 Cor. v. 14, 15. Heb. ii. 9. 1 Thess. v. 10. Ephes. v. 2.
1 John, x. 15. Gal. i. 3, 4. 1 Peter, iii. 18. Rom. vi. 10. 1 Cor. xv. 3. Matt. xxvi. 28.
Ephes. i. 7. Heb. i. 3. 1 John, i. 7. Isaiah, liii. 3, 6. Gal. iii. 13. Heb. vii. 26, 27.
Heb. ix. 15. Rev. iv. 8, 9 ; v. 13,14.
19*
222 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

says he, Heb. ix. 24, u is not entered into the Holy Places,
made with hands which are the figures of the true ; but
into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for
us. Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the High-
Priest entereth into the Holy Place, every year with the
blood of others :—but now once in the end of the world
hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of him¬
self, and unto them that look for him, shall he appear the
second time without sin (a sin offering) unto salvation.”
All this, says the objector, is mere metaphor, eastern hy¬
perbole and figure of speech, or perhaps ritual exhibition and
liturgical form. If so, what a singular confusion in the
language of the Scriptures, and in the minds of its writers.
Here is, first, the typical or figurative, or, if you please, litur¬
gical language of the Old Testament; here, also, is the
typical or figurative atonement of the Jewish ritual. And
“ the body of it,” the substance, the reality, which is Christ,
is figurative or symbolic too ! First, the shadows of the
Old Testament, and secondly, the shadows of the New, all
shadows, mere figures and metaphors, or at the best, liturgic
forms and symbols. A figurative priest—a figurative sac¬
rifice—a figurative atonement—a metaphoric or liturgical
redemption. So that the death of Christ, mysterious,
awful, thrilling as it is, is no sacrifice after all, and atone¬
ment has yet to be made for sin, by our penitence and good
works! According to this view, the blood of atonement,,
shed for the remission of the sins of many, is but an in¬
teresting and striking fact, well fitted to make upon us a
deep moral impression, but avails nothing to satisfy justice
 Til£: ATONEMENT. 223

on our behalf, or procure for us the pardon of our guilt, the

salvation of our souls!
But, no! we will not accept this sophistry for reasoning ;
this evasion for proof. The body, the reality is Christ, not
the figure or the shadow, the liturgic form, or ritual sym¬
bol, but the thing itself. So that while the priesthood and
sacrifices of the old Dispensation were temporary shadows^
beautiful but perishable symbols and adumbrations of good
things to come, the priesthood and sacrifice of Christ are
sublime and permanent realities, to us the most glorious
and blissful of all realities ; for “ we are washed, we are
sanctified, we are justified, in the name of the Lord Jesus,
and by the Spirit of our God.” From this source we de¬
rive pardon and peace; and not only so, but holiness and
eternal life. This is our only hope. Here will we rest
forever. Therefore, with angels in glory, and the spirits
of just men made perfect, we unite in adoring u Him that
hath loved us and washed from our sins in his own blood.”
If any one raise the objection here, that Jesus Christ as
God is impassive, and can never himself atone for sin, by
means of suffering and sacrifice, we beg to tell him that
the word impassive, in this connection, conveys a false or
inadequate conception; besides no one has a right to
measure the capacities of the Godhead, especially as incar¬
nate, and not only so,but that this is a practical denial of the
plain teaching of the Scripture, which first represents Jesus
Christ as Divine, and then speaks of him, not as a divided,
but as a single personality, bearing our sins in his own
body on the tree, and thus offering a rich and immaculate
221 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

oblation for the ransom of the world, “ who through the

eternal Spirit offered himself without spot unto God.” If you
say the subject involves a mystery, on any supposition
which can be made respecting it, be it so ; for this is all we
claim. Wonder, transcendent, boundless, is our most
appropriate feeling before the agony of the garden and of
the tree.
But, replies the unsatisfied caviller, if Jesus Christ as
divine, suffered for sin, then God punished himself, which
surely is an absurdity not to be received in the nineteenth
century. To this we reply that the sufferings of Christ
were not a punishment, but an expiation; not the natural
and necessary consequence of personal corruption and guilt,
but a voluntary sacrifice for the salvation of the world.
But allowing your irreverent expression to have some jus¬
tification in fact, let me ask, does the father punish him¬
self when he voluntarily assumes the debt of his erring
child, the payment of which strips him of all he has, and
reduces him to want? Does the friend punish himself
when he consents to die for his friend ? Does the patriot
punish himself, when he plunges, like an ancient king, into
the abyss, to save his suffering country ? What if God
had spared his own Son,—his other self, and not given him
up to the death for us all ? What if he had refused this
infinite sacrifice for our redemption, as much the sacrifice
of the Father as the sacrifice of the Son ? “For a rio-ht-
O

eous man will one die? Peradventure for a good man,

some would even dare to die. But God commendeth his
love towards us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ
 THE ATONEMENT. 225

died for us.” Hence, he made, if you will have it so, the
nearest possible approach to self-punishment; for it was
self-sacrifice, the deepest, the most amazing that men or
angels have ever known. How hast thou loved us, good
Father, who sparedst not thine only Son, but deliveredst
him up for us ungodly! How hast thou loved us, for
whom he that thought it no robbery to be equal with thee,
was made subject to the death of the cross ! He alone free
among the dead, having power to lay down his life, and
power to take it again? for as to thee, both Victor and
Victim, and therefore Victor because the Victim? for as to
thee, Priest and Sacrifice, and therefore Priest because the
Sacrifice ? making us to thee, of servants, sons, by being
born of thee, and serving us.”#
But Christ is a Mediator. His sufferings are intended at
once to satisfy justice and grace. In dignity and magni¬
tude, therefore, they must bear some relation to this end.
To say the least, they must be such as to u magnify the
law,” and enthrone it, as immutable and divine, in the
heart of men and angels. Such a work demanded a spe¬
cial atonement, a rich and immaculate sacrifice. This, no
mere man or angel could supply. The sufferings of such
an one could have no conceivable relation to the govern¬
ment of God, in the way of reparation or atonement. They
might be affecting enough, like the death of Socrates, or of
Paul; but could contribute nothing to the vindication of vi¬
olated law, or the salvation of a lost soul. To achieve this,

’Confessiones Augustini, Lib. x. c. 43.

226 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

a higher victim, a more glorious death, was necessary.

Whence we conclude that Jesus delivered up “ Himself,”
not his body merely, not his human nature merely, but
Himself—a Sacrifice for the sins of the world ! It was the
fact of our Lord’s Divinity, which made his atonement
complete. This met the case. This satisfied eternal justice,
as well as eternal love; so that “ we have redemption
through his blood, even the forgiveness of our sins, accord¬
ing to the riches of his grace.” “We love Him because he
first loved us.”
This, like the Trinity or the Incarnation, is a great mys¬
tery ; but how deeply, how powerfully does it affect the
heart. What grace is here ! What justice ! What amaz¬
ing pity and love ! How the poor sin-stricken heart trem¬
bles under its influence! How it exults in the thought
that such a ransom has been paid for its redemption. In
the light of such an event, how vile, how horrible is sin ;
how beautiful, how attractive is holiness ! How fearful the
second death ! How entrancing and ineffable the second,
the everlasting life !
Suffering for the benefit of the lost and the miserable, has
introduced into the universe a new kind of experience. It
has given rise to a new order of feelings, feelings the high¬
est and holiest that can be conceived, whether they thrill
the heart of man, of angel or of God. The “ great sal¬
vation” has enhanced the blessedness of “ the glorified,” on
high. It has multiplied a thousand fold, the felicity of all
pure intelligences. It is the source of infinite satisfaction to
God himself. Within its depths are enfolded “ the mani-
 THE INCARNATION. 221

fold -wisdom of God,” into which “ the angels desire to

look and through all eternity will it constitute a source
of admiration, love and joy to the whole universe of sanc¬
tified mind-. Indeed, this fact, suffering for the benefit of
the lost, is the very mystery of redemption, “ the mystery
of the Father of Christ and of God,” in which are “hid
all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge,” the one glo¬
rious thing which forms the wonder of angels, and the
song of the redeemed. It begins a new era, not only on
earth, but in heaven ; a new joy, not only in man, but in
God, a joy foreseen, indeed, from all eternity, but realized
only at the death of Christ; a joy deep as the heart of
infinite love, and measureless as the ages of eternity*
“ Behold what manner of love the Father hath bestowed
upon us, that we should be called the sons of God*
Beloved, now are we the sons of God, but it doth not yet
appear what we shall be ; but when He shall appear, we
shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.”
Before we close this part of our subject, we must be
permitted a word upon a point not yet touched—-but one
which probably has often been in the mind of the intelli¬
gent reader. It will be observed that thus far, we have
endeavored to establish a fact, without discussing the mode
of it. We have affirmed the proposition that Christ suf¬
fered in his whole nature, but we have not ventured to
affirm in a dogmatic way, what it was, or how it was he
suffered. The external aspects of his suffering—the mar¬
red visage—the failing eye—the flowing blood—the con¬
torted limbs—the agonizing cry—the drooping head—and
228 MANIFESTATION OF GOD.

the ghastly paleness of death, are obvious to all. But

these, it seems to us, are merely images and expressions of
deeper sufferings within. “ His soul was exceeding sor¬
rowful even unto death.” “ His soul was made an offering
forsin.” What, then, was his agony ? How,especially, did
his pure and infinite spirit endure such suffering? To this,
we frankly reply, we cannot tell. The subject transcends
our reasoning. We cannot speculate upon it. Better far
kneel down in Gethsemane, with the suppliant sufferer, or,
placing ourselves, in humble contrition, beneath his cross,
exclaim with St. Thomas, “my Lord, and my God !”#
Here, then, we may enumerate the following points as
settled: firstly, that man is a sinner, justly condemned by
eternal justice, and exposed to everlasting destruction, from
the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
secondly, that God, “ out of his mere mercy,” became in¬
carnate, in the person of Jesus Christ, who is thus il God,
manifest in the flesh,” that, in the same nature which had sin¬
ned, and under the law which was violated, he might achieve
the redemption of the lost; thirdly, that in pursuance of
this end, he made an atonement for sin, by the sacrifice of
himself, whereby justice was satisfied, and the way opened
for the pardon, and restoration, of the guilty ; fourthly, that
God not merely manifested his justice, in this extraordinary
interposition, which transcends, as a mystery, all thought and

* “ If the Scripture,” says Bishop Butler, with admirable wisdom, “has, as surely
it has, left this matter of the satisfaction of Christ somewhat mysterious, left some¬
what in it unrevealed, all conjectures about it must be, if not evidently absurd, yet
at least uncertain. Nor has any one reason to complain for want of farther infor¬
mation, unless he can show his claim to it.”—Works, Eng. ed. p. 179.
 THE INCARNATION. 229

expression, but gave scope and lustre to that eternal princi¬

ple of his government, in the salvation of the fallen, and
thus established and perpetuated righteousness as well as
grace, not as an expedient to be modified and allowed, but as
a law to be venerated and loved: fifthly, that thus Jesus
Christ was a true substitute for the guilty, and that those
who believe, owe to him their entire salvation, from its first
conception in the bosom of God, to its final consummation in
eternal glory; on which ground, our sins were laid upon
him, or as some express it, imputed to him, not indeed as
transferred to his personal character, but as expiated by
his voluntary sufferings and death, and which, as they re¬
sult in our redemption, and are appropriated by faith alone,
are made over for the benefit of all who believe; or as the
old divines express it, are £< imputed to us for righteous¬
ness.”
So that, sixthly, we are justified, that is, forgiven and ac¬
cepted, brought into new and endearing relations to God
as his children, u freely by his grace through the redemption
that is in Christ Jesus,” and thus ascribe all the glory of
our redemption to the “ free and sovereign grace of a cove¬
nant keeping God.” Finally, it is thus receiving Christ, as
our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption,”
in other words, making him our own by faith, relying upon
his merits, and clinging to his cross, that we are transformed
into the same image, from glory to glory, even as by the
spirit of the Lord.
In a word, summing up the whole, we believe that the
20
230 T HEO 11 Y OF

sufferings and death of the Son of God are a real expiation

for the sins of the world, which, received by a truly penitent
soul, unites him to Christ, lifts him up into the bosom of God,
transforms him into the divine image, makes him a partaker
of eternal glory.
 CONCLUSION.

What think ye of Christ ? What of his glory—what

of his work ? He died to unite us to God. Are we united
to God ? Are we partakers of the Divine nature ? Is our
life hid with Christ, in God ? Are we “ rooted and
grounded in love ?” Comprehending with all saints “ what
is the heighth and the depth, the length and the breadth,
and knowing the love of God, which passeth knowledge,”
are we “ filled with all the fullness of God ?” Is Christ
formed “ in us the hope of gloryand under this influence,
is our life becoming radiant and beautiful ? As we have
borne “ the image of the earthy,” do we now bear, do we
hope yet more fully to bear, “ the image of the heavenly ?”
In a word, are we washed, are we justified, are we sanctified,
in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God,
and thus pure, peaceful, active, loving, hopeful, full of good
fruits, without partiality and without hypocrisy ? If so, let
us rejoice yet more and more in the God of our salvation ;
and let our whole life be a closer and yet closer imitation
of Christ. Let us ever drink at this fountain, and then go
forth into the world to bless it with our fruitfulness and
joy! In our whole deportment let us express the holy,
sweet, and purifying influence of a life hid with Christ in
God; and, if possible, repay to the Saviour of sinners,
232 CONCLUSION.

even if in the most imperfect degree, something of his love

and pity for us. u He that gives alms to the poor, takes
Jesus by the hand ; he that patiently endures injuries and
affronts, helps him to bear his cross; he that comforts his
brother in affliction, gives an amiable kiss of peace to Jesus ;
he that bathes his own and his neighbor’s sins in tears of
penitence and compassion, washes his Master's feet; we
lead Jesus into the recesses of our heart by holy medita¬
tions, and we enter into his heart when we express him in
our-actions ; for so the Apostle says, 4 He that is in Christ,
walks as he also walked.’ ”*
Thus let us be “ followers of God, as dear children”—
walk in “the light as he is in the light”—live in Christ,
and die in Christ, and finally reign with him forever.
With this view, let us join in the following prayer.
“ O eternal, holy, and most glorious Jesu, who hast
united two natures of distance infinite, descending to the
lowness of human nature, that thou mightest exalt human
nature to a participation of the Divinity; we, thy people
that sat in darkness and in the shadows of death, have
seen great light to entertain our understandings, and en¬
lighten our souls with its excellent influences ; for the
excellence of thy sanctity shining gloriously in every part
of thy life, is like thy angel, the pillar of fire, which called
thy children from the darkness of Egypt. Lord, open
mine eyes, and give me power to behold thy righteous
glories ; and let my soul be so entertained with affections

* Jeremy Tuylor, Works, Vol. 2, p. 71.

 CONCLUSION. 233

and holy ardors, that I may never look back upon the
flames of Sodom, but may follow thy light, which recreates
and enlightens, and guides us to the mountains of safety,
and sanctuaries of holiness. Holy Jesu, since thy image
is imprinted on our nature by creation, let me also express
thy image by all the parts of a holy life, conforming my
will and affections to thy holy precepts ; submitting my
understanding to thy dictates, and lessons of perfection;
imitating thy sweetnesses and excellencies of society, thy
devotion in prayer, thy conformity to God, thy zeal tem¬
pered with meekness, thy patience heightened with charity ;
that heart and hands and eyes, and all my faculties, may
grow up with the increase of God, till I come to the full
measure of the stature of Christ, even to be a perfect man
in Christ Jesus; that at last, in thy light, I may see light,
and reap the fruits of glory from the seeds of sanctity in
the imitation of thy holy life, O blessed and holy Saviour
Jesus! Amen.”*

* Prayer prefixed to “ the Life of Christ,” by Jeremy Taylor.—Works, Vol. II, p. 72.

20*
 SUPPLEMENT.

REVIEW OF DR. BUSHNELL’s THEORIES OF THE INCARNATION AND

ATONEMENT.

In order to complete our view of the Incarnation and

Atonement, it seems necessary to take some notice of
the theories of Dr. Bushnell, whose work, entitled “ God

in Christ,” has made its appearance since the publication

of the first edition of this volume. Perhaps he himself
would object to the word theories, as applied to his views;
but we know not how else to characterize them. He has
certainly presented his opinions upon these subjects, in a
form as strikingly theoretical, or speculative, as any that
ever fell under our observation. Nevertheless, his book is
filled with earnest protests against all dogma and theory
in the matter of religion ; and, if one might believe the
author, is intended to bring men back to the simplicity of
a reverent and confiding faith. That this is the sincere
aim of Dr. B. we have no serious doubt. All our acquaint¬
ance with him goes to satisfy us that he is an honest,
earnest man; and his book, however it may seem to others,
strengthens this conviction. But his mind is naturally
speculative, and even dogmatic ; and perhaps no theologi¬
cal work, in modern times, could be named, so fitted to pro¬
mote a speculative and even disputatious turn of mind.
2 THEORY OF

That this will be its result, time will abundantly prove.

While demolishing, and that with no gentle blows, the
dogmas of others, he sets up his own in their stead—dog¬
mas as purely theoretical as those of his neighbors. His
keen Damascus blade sweeps the whole field of theologi¬
cal controversy, and all for the purpose of putting down
polemics ! By means of words he throws contempt upon
words. He hurls opinions against opinions, dogmas against
dogmas; and cuts to pieces reason and logic by the keen
edge of intuition and argument. It is just as if a man
had entered upon a crusade to put down fighting, by
knocking every bully in the head, and then setting him¬
self up as the champion of universal peace !
But we must be permitted, in all honesty, to say, that
for ourselves personally, we owe Dr. B. a debt of gratitude
for his book. It is no holiday affair. It is a work to be
read,—read with the profoundest interest. With all its
faults, springing, perhaps, from the very power and exuber¬
ance of the author’s mind, not, we trust, from the weak¬
ness or waywardness of his heart, it contains much that
is true, much that is beautiful and good. It will quicken
thought. It may assist in clearing away rubbish from the
great truths of Christianity. Its very errors may stimulate
inquiry, and give occasion for broader, juster, and more
scriptural views.
Still, truth compels us to characterize his work as pre¬
eminently speculative and fanciful. With the exceptions
we have named, this, we think, will be acknowledged its
predominant quality. A production of genius and power,
 THE INCARNATION. 3

it is too paradoxical and extravagant, in its spirit and style,

to secure any thing like a favorable reception among sober
theologians or humble Christians. Dr. B., however, ought
to have the credit of being even more than orthodox on
the subject of our Saviour’s Divinity, which he defends
with earnestness. He exaggerates what may be termed
the Divine aspect of Christ’s character, making him, if
possible, more Divine than is done by many orthodox
teachers, who in assigning different parts in the work of
redemption to the two natures of Christ, and especially in
separating the Divinity from the humanity in the closing
act of the great drama, yield, in Dr. B.’s opinion, the
whole argument to the Unitarians. “The Scripture,”
says he, p. 153, “does not say that a certain human sold
called Jesus, born as such of Mary, obeyed and suffered;
but it says, in the boldest manner, that he who was in the
form of God humbled himself and became obedient unto
death, even the death of the cross. A declaration, the
very point of which is, not that the man Jesus was a being
under human limitations, but that he who was in the
Form of God, came into the finite, and was subject to
human conditions. Then, again, Christ himself declared,
not that a human soul, hid in his person, was placed un¬
der limitations, but more—that the Son, that is, the Divine
person—for the word Son is used as a relation to the Fa¬
ther—the Son can do nothing of himself but what he
seeth the Father do ; for the Father loveth the Son, and
sheweth him all things that himself doeth. He also prajTs
—‘ Glorify me with thine own self, with the glory that
4 THEORY" OF

I had with thee before the world was ’—a prayer which
cannot be referred to the human soul, even if there was a
human soul hid in his person; for that soul could speak
of no glory it once had with the Father. Hence, the sup¬
position of a human soul existing distinctly, and acting by
itself, clears no difficulty ; for the Son, the divine part, or
I should rather say, the whole Christ, is still represented
as humbled, as weak, as divested of glory, and existing
under limitations or conditions that do not belong to Deity.”
Dr. B., therefore, maintains not a virtual or occasional
union, but a real and substantial union between the human
and the divine in the person of Christ. The former he re¬
jects as mere copartnership and collocation ; and shows
that upon such a theory, u the whole work of Christ, as a
subject, suffering Redeemer, is thrown upon the human
side of his nature, and the divine side standing thus
aloof, incommunicably distant, has nothing in fact to
do with the transaction, other than to be a spectator
of it.” Hence he denies the common Trinitarian
theory of “ two distinct or distinctly active subsist¬
ences in the person of Christ.” But checking himself,
wisely, in our estimation, he intimates that the whole sub¬
ject is enveloped in mystery, and insisfs that we have no
right to speculate upon it ! Some will think he has him¬
self overstepped the limits of human knowledge here, and
indulged in a hazardous and somewhat intangible specu¬
lation; but he very justly and strikingly remarks (p. 151)
that u to insist upon going beyond the expression, investi¬
gating the mystery of the person of Jesus, when it is
 THE INCARNATION. 5

given us only to communicate God and His love, is in fact

to puzzle ourselves with the vehicle, and rob ourselves of
the grace it brings.”
Whether there were two natures in one person, as is
generally believed, or two persons in one nature, as some
appear to teach, or one person in one nature, as Dr. B.
seems to hold, within the restrictions of a htiman body, we
give him credit for shrewdness and consistency when he
says “ that the subject is not psychologically or physio¬
logically investigable, because it does not lie within the
categories of ordinary natural humanity.” It certainly
involves difficulties which baffle the finite intellect, and
admits of no adequate solution. Even if the impassibility
of God could be proved with the precision of a mathemat¬
ical theorem, the mystery would remain that Jesus Christ,
the Son of the Eternal, suffered and died for the redemption
of the lost. O ! it would indeed be well if all of us had our
minds “ moderated,” not merely by “philosophy” or “rea¬
son,” but by religion, as to “set boundaries to our questions”
upon these high themes ; and that instead of speculating,
we were more inclined to reverence and worship. There¬
fore we cheerfully indorse the following statement by Dr.
B., the spirit of which, it seems to us, carried out, would
make sad havoc of all our speculations, and his among
the rest:—“ The mystery of the divine human must re¬
main a mystery. I cannot fathom it. Reason wil] justify''
me in no such attempt. And when we come to speak of
the sufferings and death, I would withhold myself in like
manner, and require myself to look only at what the suf-
*1
6 THEORY OF

ferings and death express. It is commonly held that God

is impassible, though we never hesitate to affirm that He
is displeased thus and thus, and this displeased state is,
so far, of course, an un-pleased or painful state. But, even
if it were otherwise, if God, in His own nature, were as
unsusceptible as a rock, that fact would justify no infer¬
ence concerning the person of Christ. The only question
is, whether God, by a mysterious union with the human,
can so far employ the element of suffering, as to make it
a vehicle for the expression of His own Grace and Ten¬
derness ; whether, indeed, God can be allowed, in any way,
to exhibit those Passive Virtues, which are really the
most active and sublimest of all virtues, because they are
most irresistible, and require the truest greatness of spirit.
Therefore, when we come to the agony of the garden, and
the passion of the cross, we are not, with the speculative
Unitarian, to set up as a dogma, beforehand, and as some¬
thing that we perfectly know, that God can set himself in
no possible terms of connection with suffering; nor believ¬
ing, with the common Trinitarian, that there are two distinct
natures in Christ, are we to conclude that no sort of pang
can touch the divine nature, and that only his human part
can suffer. We cannot thus intrude into the interior of
God’s mysteries. We are only to see the Eternal Life ap¬
proach our race—Divine Love manifested and sealed ; the
Law sanctified by obedience unto death; pardon certified
by the ‘ Father forgive peace established and testified by
the resurrection from the dead.”—p. 163.
Not only does Dr. B. concede the utter impossibility of
 THE INCARNATION. 7

speculating satisfactorily on “the contents’5 of Christ’s

nature, beyond what is plainly revealed in the Scriptures,
but he admits also the profound and inscrutable mystery
of the Godhead, whether in its relations to the nature of
the Son, or to the nature of the Father. After all that he
himself has adventured upon this subject, touching the
modes of the Divine revelation, the nature of the Trinity,
and especially the nature of the Divine Logos, or Jesus
Christ as pre-existing in the Form of God, or as constitu¬
ting the Form of God, he maintains, in no ambiguous
terms, the absolute impossibility of knowing any thing
about it! It is not to be held, he says, in the modes or
measures either of logic or language, thus vindicating the
fundamental principle which we have endeavored, in the
whole compass of this volume, to set forth and establish.
Even as revealed, he admits that God will not be cleared
of obscurity and mystery. “ A vast circle of mystery will
be the back ground of all other representations, on which
they will play and glitter in living threads of motion, as
lightning on a cloud, and what they themselves do not re¬
veal of God, the mystery will—a Being infinite, undiscover¬
ed, undiscoverable, therefore true” (p. 145.) On this ground
he will not venture, even after his grand argument, proving
that the Trinity is “a device of revelation,” or a simple
mode of the Divine manifestation, to say (p. 175) that “the
Trinity is “ modal only,” and finds a necessity of answer¬
ing the question touching this point “ obscurely.’’'’ He ven¬
tures, indeed, but with some hesitation, to call the Trinity
an Instrumental Trinity, and the Persons Instrumental
8 THEORY OF

Persons, and instantly protests against all speculations on

the subject, rejects every thing like the Triad of Plato,

to which his own theory, as we shall presently show, bears
a wonderful resemblance, and adds, (p. 179,) “Let us
rather baptize our over-curious spirit into the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and
teach it quietly to rest in what of God’s infinite nature
it may there receive.”
In this way Dr. B. acknowledges some of the highest
truths of our holy faith, and proves that he is in little
danger, as some have feared, of lapsing into the shallow
system of Socinian belief, or ceasing to adore Jesus Christ
as God over all, blessed forever.
Perhaps it may be proper, before proceeding further, to
say something respecting Dr. B.’s theory of language, as he
sets forth that as the basis of all his other theories, making
the Trinity and Incarnation modes or vehicles of the Di¬
vine expression, as language is the mode and vehicle of
human expression. So that the Incarnation is a sort of
language, the principal “ moment” of which is, its ca¬
pacity to reveal the absolute God. Dr. B. maintains that
there is a sort of Logos in language, a secret or mystic form
of expression, derived from the harmony which exists be¬
tween the world of matter and the world of spirit, the one
supplying types or images of the other, inadequate, indeed,
and partaking somewhat of their terrestrial origin ; but
setting forth, in a reflective way, the spiritual facts, truths,
or emotions which they represent. And hence he reasons,
by a sort of remote and fanciful analogy, that there is in
 THE INCARNATION, 9

God, as an Absolute Being, a Logos, or power of self-ex¬

pression, which, in finite and imperfect forms, reveals to
our minds and hearts the true God and Eternal Life. This,
he says, is the Logos of St. John, the Word made flesh,
who dwelt among us, and whose glory we beheld, the
glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace
and truth. So that the Incarnation is the finite imperson¬
ation of God in this manner; the Logos, or capacity for
self-embodiment or self-expression, taking the form of
a finite person, and going forth, like a living speech,
(logos,) to make known and communicate the Di¬
vine. The atonement, of course, falls under the same
category, being only a further expression of the love and
pity of God, in striking, but not necessary forms.
As to Dr. B.’s speculation touching the origin and history
of language, we have nothing to say. Upon this point,
we could admit some of his positions, and yet not accept
his theory. So, also, in reference to the imperfect, half¬
terrestrial character of language, and its inadequacy fully
to set forth all spiritual realities, upon which he insists so
much, few persons who have indulged in any reflection,
will have much difficulty. But we maintain, in opposition,
to Dr. B., that there are cases in which language entirely
loses this earthly figurative character, and becomes a
pure, and, in one sense, literal type of spiritual realities.
Take, for example, the word spirit, originally signifying
breath, or wind, and in the form of the all-embracing air,
symbolizing God, the universal, all-pervading presence.
This term, so terrestrial in its origin, gradually casts off its
10 THEORY OF

earthly, and even symbolic character, and finally becomes

a literal name, representing the infinite, immaterial Spirit.
So that, for the very purpose of excluding all materiality,
all ideas of space, form, figure, and extension, we say with
emphasis, God is a Spirit! The word here, though in¬
adequate and earth-born, sets forth a spiritual (not eerial or
breathly) idea.
Take, also, the word right, one of the most abstract and
comprehensive terms in the language. Originally it signi¬
fies straightness, or a straight line, then conformity to a rule,
measure or standard, then by an easy transition, the rule
or standard of right itself, the great and all-comprehending
law of the spiritual world—Divine law, the principal foun¬
tain of right, the law of laws, in other words, the absolute
and essential principle of right, which governs all things,
governs even God. For it is impossible—we reason from the
very conception—that the absolutely perfect Being should
think any wrong, intend any wrong, do any wrong. Here,
then, the word right loses all its material quality, and rep¬
resents literally the most absolutely spiritual and com¬
prehensive principle in the universe.*
Language, as a whole, is indeed inadequate, but not so
inadequate as to be incapable of marking ofif, or de-jining,
and that with considerable pre-cision, the domain of truth
from the domain of error; so that even a dogma or a creed,
provided it be a scriptural dogma or creed, and not a mere
speculative or wooden55 one, may yet be true, true in the

The same remarks apply to the words abstraction, mind, heart, beauty, under¬
standing, substance, essence, reason, truth, holiness, (wholeness,) virtue, and
many others. Moreover, they are literal, not figurative terms. They are, in
reality, names of spiritual things.
 THE INCARNATION. 11

highest and most perfect sense of the term. Were it oth¬

erwise, it would be impossible to separate, cut off, and pro¬
tect truth from error, or feel any degree of confidence that
what we believed might not after all be grievous false¬
hood. Poison would commingle with the food of the soul;
and we should find, after all our care in the study of the
Scripture, that we had received our death from what we
deemed the means of nourishment and life ! What is true
in theology, is certainly a possible question ; otherwise all
our beliefs are uncertain and vain. Moreover the life or the
feeling cannot be sustained without a basis, or means of
sustenance. All feeling or sentiment is suspended on
thought, and all thought hangs upon fact or truth. The
one is essential to the other, as essential as fuel to fire, or
cause to effect. You may call it dogma, or doctrine, or
creed, it comes to the same thing; no practical religion can
live without it; and just in proportion to the fullness, clear¬
ness and comprehensiveness of our doctrinal views, will be
the strength, symmetry and fruitfulness of our piety,
It is true, that, back of all our words, and all our creeds,
and all our knowledge, lies a vast and undiscovered
region of mystery; still, relatively to our moral exigencies
and duties, we can know enough of God, enough of Jesus
Christ, and the way of life, to be certain that we are in
possession of the truth, in distinction from error and false¬
hood. So that there is a divine creed; and not only so,
but a true and legitimate logic, or mode of argument for
its defence. Of course we abandon, as readily as Dr. B.,
the mere logic of words, and epecially that species of dry
12 THEORY OF

and ridiculous argumentation which reasons from a single

expression, and by a system of false or assumed premises
or inferences,j runs into all sorts of absurdities. But an
appeal to the testimony of the Scripture, to ascertained
fact and principle, to “thus saith the Lord,” as well as to
the very nature and reason of things, is always legitimate
and proper. As to insight or intuition being opposed to
fact or argument, or, if you please, to a legitimate logic, it
is pure nonsense. For what is reasoning from insight or
intuition, but an appeal to the facts of consciousness, or the
native convictions of the soul, in which all men are agreed,
or to the facts and principles of nature as revealed to the
all-penetrating mind ?
Hence, words or expressions are to be estimated according
to circumstances, being more or less perfect, more or less
spiritual, as the case may be; yet, upon the whole, capable
of expressing the full extent of the Divine revelation, and
of our knowledge respecting it.
The fact is, when our knowledge is clear and definite,
then our words are clear and definite,—when obscure and
general, then our words are limited and dark. Dr. B. him¬
self admits that words can be used with the utmost pre¬
cision, as in the case of mathematical truths, and even
of some metaphysical truths, such as space, time, cause,
right, truth, and so forth. Whence we conclude, that
whenever, in theology or morals, our ideas are clear and
adequate, then also is our language clear and adequate.
Spiritual truths take a dress or an image, or rather a repre¬
sentation, in language, which conforms to their nature.
 THE INCARNATION. iS

And just as our knowledge becomes more elevated and

expansive, our language becomes more pregnant and ex¬
pressive. The difficulty in theology lies not so much in
language, as in the mysterious nature of some of the sub¬
jects about which it is employed. Doubtless the Word of
God is perfect, that is, it is as perfect as language can be
made; but no language can adequately set forth the inte¬
rior nature of God, or the great Mystery of the Trinity, the
Incarnation and the Atonement. But so far as they can be
set forth, this is done by the language of Revelation. Of
course it must be interpreted by reference to the principles
of language in general, and in a liberal and generous spirit;
but the great aim must ever be to find out the mind of God.
Reference must be had to the genius and scope of the
whole ; no words must be wrested from their natural signi¬
fication ; and the resultant force or import of the whole
must be accepted as the true signification. But we cannot
come to the interpretation of the Scripture, as to that of the
writings of Wordsworth or Goethe; though Dr. B. seems
to intimate that both ought to be interpreted on the
same principles ; for these great poets, after all, are falli¬
ble, both as to thought and expression. Their inspira¬
tions, even if genuine, nay more, even if of the same na¬
ture as those of the Scripture, which we deny, are only oc¬
casional and limited, not universal and absolute. But God
speaks in the Scripture. He uses holy men as his vehicles ;
and hence their style borrows something from their indi¬
vidual character ; but God speaks in them and by them.
His, then, are the thoughts, and his also are the words. A
2
14 THEORY OF

great writer, Dante or Shakspeare, for example, embodies

his thoughts in words; hence their surpassing freshness
and power. The very diction of such an one is a sort of
incarnation of its author. Hence we call anything resem¬
bling it Dantesque or Shakspearean. So the diction of
the Bible is divine. If it consists of words, they are divine
words; of forms, they are divine forms. This, if we mis¬
take not, Dr. B. admits. For example, the atonement is not
only a fact, but a ivord or a form. As a fact, its nature
must be ascertained by the history and teachings of the
New Testament. In this sense, it is a Divine fact. But
the word or form represents it; and to represent it properly
must be a perfect word or form. Other words or forms may
be used to express it; as, sacrifice, propitiation, expiation,
ransom, and so forth ; and they, too, are divine. They have
a common origin, and a common import. Indeed, they
express precisely the same thing; so that under them, we
see the one fact, and the one form. This, Dr. B. admits is
of sacred origin. It was prepared by God himself, in the
old Jewish ritual, and is really, as he expresses it, a divine
form. It is, then, a true and an adequate form. What then
is its import ? Does it involve the idea of substitution—of
life for life, and consequent satisfaction in law, for that is
the ordinary meaning of the word atonement or propitia¬
tion? So also as to the Trinity and Incarnation. The
Father is God; the Son is God; and the Holy Ghost is
God. These, says Dr. B., are revealed to us in finite forms.
What, then, do they teach ? That God is somehow Three
in One, and One in Three. But how can that be ? It is
 THE INCARNATION. 15

a mystery, we reply, and that is all that can be said. If,

however, you proceed to say they are mere names, or modes
of revelation, given us for expression only, in other words,
finite manifestations of the absolute God, you assume more
than the Scripture authorizes. What saith the Word of
God here? What is its plain and obvious teaching?
Something, we conceive, like this; that God the Father,
God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are one, one in na¬
ture, in design and in action. But how? It is silent.
There commences the region of mystery, where investiga¬
tion must pause, and reason grow calm and reverent.
This, then, so far as it lies within the scope of our facul¬
ties, is a question not so much of language or of logic, as of
fact. The Trinity is granted by Dr. B. So also is the
Incarnation. But in what sense? We reply, only as
modes of the Divine manifestation. In his view they
belong to the sphere of language or expression, on which
ground he is compelled to deny their actual subsistence in
the nature of God. He may hesitate—indeed, he does
hesitate to avow this; yet, it is the argument of his whole
book. He makes the Trinity a series of impersonations.
Hence, the incarnation or embodiment of God, in his view,
amounts to little more, in the end, than the incarnation or
embodiment of a divine capacity in a human form, just as
the universe is the embodiment of a divine capacity in a
material form. The whole belongs to “the sphere of lan¬
guage or expression.” God is thus personified—personified
not as the absolute God, but as Father, Son, and Holy
16 THEORY OP

Ghost. We have the Logos in language; the Logos in

the universe ; the Logos in Christ!
Yet, Dr. B. objects to all theory and speculation upon
this great subject, and represents the Trinity as an inscru¬
table mystery, transcending not only all the measures of
logic and language, but of conception and thought!
In what, then, does his error upon this fundamental sub¬
ject consist ? We reply unhesitatingly, in violating his
own conceded principles, and lapsing, inconsciously to him¬
self, into one of the boldest and wildest speculations touch¬
ing the subsistence of Jesus Christ in the bosom of the
Father. “In the beginning was the Word, (Logos, Word,
or Reason, the Revealer, as we understand it, or more sim¬
ply, the Son and Image of God,) and the Word was with
God, and the Word was God. The Word was made flesh
and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as
of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and
truth.” This is the language of St. John, and expresses,
in a very simple and striking way, the supreme Divinity
and Incarnation of Jesus Christ. We found fault even with
Athanasius, the father of the Nicene Creed, and the great
champion of orthodoxy in the early church, for speculating
on the eternal Sonship of Christ; and, especially, for de¬
scribing the “ everlasting procession of God from God,” or
of the Son from the Father, as heat from fire, or light from
the sun. Will it be believed, after our quotations from Dr.
B., that he falls into a speculation still mom fanciful and
hazardous, and makes the Divine Logos, or Word, which
became incarnate in the man Jesus Christ, to consist in the
 THE INCARNATION.

Divine Capacity for self expression, the Form or Image

(Imago, Eikon) of God, or his power to mirror, represent or
embody himself, as in the material universe, or in man;
thus making the Trinity (his cavils to the contrary not¬
withstanding) a mere Trinity of manifestation ox expression t
In defending the doctrine of Christ’s divinity or incarna¬
tion against what he deems the false views of the Ortho¬
dox on the one hand, and the heresy of the Unitarians on
the other, and anxious, as it seems to us, to set the matter
in harmony with his own philosophical, or religious pre¬
conceptions, he makes the term Son a mere relative to
that of Father, and finds the connection of the Incarnate
Word with the Divine Unity, in the power of self express
sion, self imagination, or, as we should say, self embodiment)
possessed by the absolute God, a speculation as bold and
intangible as that of Plato, Origen, or Schelling. For what
is the Logos of Plato, particularly as developed by the
Neo-Platonists, but the self consciousness (Nous) or self
imagination of God, whom that old but lofty pagan actu¬
ally denominates the Son of God, by whom he made the
worlds ? So, also, according to Dr. B., the Holy Spirit is
God in action, God as a presence; the very idea of Plato’s
Arete, or God of the world; that is, God actually working
in the universe. These, then, says Plato, are one, but not
self-subsistent; first, the absolute God; secondly, God
expressed or revealed ; and, thirdly, God in action—the two
latter being merely embodied attributes, or embodied imper¬
sonations !
Thus, too, according to Dr. B., the whole Trinity per-
2*
 THEORY OF

tains to revelation, and depends on words or forms. It is

modal, or, at best, instrumental; and, therefore, has no
basis in t.he very nature of the absolute God.
That we are not misrepresenting Dr. B. here, the reader
will be satisfied by turning to pp. 139, 140—445 of his
book, where he speaks of the Logos as the self-imagination
of God, and the Trinity and Incarnation as “ devices of
revelation,” and thus accounts for, or rather justifies, the
Incarnation on natural grounds; leaving this irresistible
conclusion, that the whole matter pertains to the mode of
revelation, or to the vehicle and instrument of the Divine
manifestation.
Should Dr. B. reply that he has himself protested against
such a construction, or such an inference, then we must be
permitted to say that he has protested against himself, and
proved, by such admission, that his favorite theory does not
entirely satisfy his own mind. Indeed, the very point we
are now aiming to prove is that Dr. B. violates his own
conceded principles, and speculates beyond his data or pow¬
ers of investigation. He is himself, to some extent, con¬
scious of this, and therefore throws in a caveat at the close
of his discourse, which, in its broadest and most liberal sig¬
nification, nullifies all he has said.
But we will develop his argument a little, and let our
readers judge for themselves.
Dr. B. first takes us to the Absolute God, and gives us a
representation of his essential nature as unrevealed; a rep¬
resentation which may or may not be true, as it is under¬
stood by himself and others. He gives us the conception
 THE INCARNATION. 19

of a God, who is nothing but Being, absolute Essence or

Existence, without consciousness, or conscious reflection, a
being without thought, without affection, without person¬
ality, that is without any thing which is tangible to our
minds, the absolute God of Kant, Fichte, Hegel and
Schelling, who is so absolute that he is not even conscious
of himself, has neither intellect nor will, freedom nor voli¬
tion, but is simply Being, impersonal, unreflective, infinite,
everlasting.
That God has no thought, no action and reaction, no re¬
flection and deliberation such as we finite creatures have,
is certainly true. But is there no thought but what is finite ?
Is there nothing in God corresponding to what we call in¬
tuition, or insight, that is, the vision or consciousness of
universal ideas, like those of space, time, cause, truth, right,
unity, infinity, eternity, and so forth ; no sense-or conscious¬
ness of beauty, love, perfection, no self-knowledge, and self¬
blessedness ? Does the mere infinitude of God destroy his
conscious and moral nature, his personality and will, his
self-intuition and self-enjoyment ? But all that Dr. B.
means to affirm is, that without a revelation we can know
him only as Being, not that he is not infinitely more than
this, but that without some manifestation of himself in
finite forms, we can know him only as absolute and imper¬
sonal existence.* We say, that without a revelation we

* “ Nature,” says Ilegel, “ is God coming to self-consciousness. God reveals

himself in creation, or in the universe, by a series of eternal unfoldings, some in
matter and some in mind.” “The Divine Being,” says Schelling, “once hidden,
has a perpetual tendency to self-revelation. The Absolute reproduces himself in
nature, in man, and in Jesus Christ.” This is Pantheism.
20 THEORY OF

cannot know him at all, either as Being or as any thing

else. And therefore it is of no use to speculate how he
may reveal himself. A priori, we can say nothing upon the
subject. He has revealed himself, in nature, in man and
in Jesus Christ; and we can reason about God only as thus
revealed. We cannot go back of the revelation and say,
God, as a possible being, must reveal himself so and so.
The Incarnation can be justified a posteriori, that is, as a
matter of fact. It has revealed God—it has brought him
home to our heart. It has made him real and warm to our
spiritual and immortal nature. Above all, it has given him
to us as a Saviour and a friend, who reconciles us to himself,
and makes us partakers of his glory. But this is all we
can say of him in such connection. Beyond this simple,
practical statement of the matter, all is useless hypothesis
and conjecture.
We are aware that Dr. B. has given us his bald rep¬
resentation” of the unrevealed or absolute God, not as the
reality of the case, but as a basis for his argument touch¬
ing the Trinity and Incarnation as the necessary instru-
ments or vehicles of his self-manifestation. He must give
himself to us, he says, through finite forms and processes,
by actions and reactions, by contrasts and contradictions.
So that our minds, using these as a sort of ladder, must la¬
boriously struggle upward to the conception of his Essence
and glory. That this is a false representation, we will
not affirm dogmatically; but it deserves inquiry, whether,
as spiritual beings ourselves, having original powers,
and the capacity of forming universal ideas, we do not
 THE INCARNATION. 21

possess, or at least gain, instinctively, the idea of the in¬

finite, the perfect and eternal, by an intuition; whether,
from the multiform, the relative, the conditioned, the finite,
the formal, we do not, by the necessary action of our own
minds, rise to the conception of the One, the Absolute, the
Unconditioned, the Infinite and the Spiritual, that is, of the
Eternal God. Moreover, being moral beings, having native
conceptions of the true, the right, the beautiful, the good,
• do we not transfer these ideas or conceptions to the idea or
conception of God ; so that, from our very nature—without
sounds, colors, changes, actions and reactions, and above
all, contradictions—we gain the conception of the one great,
all-perfect, all-glorious God, in whom we live and move and
have our being?
This, we think, is the philosophical as well as scriptural
view of the matter; but according to Dr. B., God first
struggles to reveal himself by contrasts and contradictions,
and then we struggle to discover him, by the same con-
i

trasts and contradictions! He has first to dramatize or

distribute himself, like Brama on the stars, while we, spec¬
tators of the drama, have to interpret it as best we can!
But the difficulty in our present state does not seem to
be in gaining the idea of an infinite God, as in completely
realizing it, especially in reaching the conviction that He
loves us, notwithstanding our guilt, and will pardon our in¬
iquity. The great problem to be solved is, “ How shall man
be just with God?” For this an Incarnation seems abso¬
lutely necessary. Had we never sinned, the Incarnation,
for aught that we know, might never have taken place. Man
22 THEORY OF

as innocent knew God, and knew Him perfectly. Formed

in His image, the idea, the love, the presence of God were
familiar to his mind. Indeed, he lived in God as his natu¬
ral element. Love divine bathed his spirit, and kept it ra¬
diant and beautiful. His whole nature mirrored the infinite,
as the ocean mirrors the heights of the starry heavens.
It is the fall, so far as we can see, that necessitates the
incarnation. Man had forgotten God. Wandering from
his centre and his end, he became debased and wretched,
u without God and without hope in the world.” On
which account, God interposed by an incarnation and
atonement to bring him back to himself. “ God is in
Christ reconciling the world un!o himself.” Hence, we
conclude that to be incarnated, is a very different thing
from being inworlded. A descent to earth in human form,
for the salvation of the lost by means of suffering and
death, bears, to say the least, a very different aspect from
creating the worlds by his all-commanding fiat. In the
one case God spake and it was done; he commanded, and
it stood fast. And thus, while the Creator of the earth
and skies, he is ever above them and beyond them. In
no proper sense are they God, or a part of God ; and if God
is in them, by a manifestation, or a presence, it is simply
as a power or an agency. But in the case of the Incar¬
nation, he took upon him the form of a man, veiled his
Deity in flesh, and went forth in the man Jesus Christ,
in toil and sorrow and death, to work out the salvation
of the lost.
The Incarnation, therefore, while in beautiful harmony
 TH E INCARNATION. 23

with the ordinary methods of the Divine manifestation,

seems to possess a character of its own, which cannot be
explained, by reference to the creation of the world, or
other methods in which God has made himself known to
his creatures. Nature, indeed, as a product of God, or a
revelation of his glory is a great mystery How the di¬
vine is inworlded we cannot tell; so that in this particular
sense, there exists some analogy between the creation and
the Incarnation. But no one is authorized to affirm that
these facts are identical in their nature, or that the Incar¬
nation does not involve a mystery, over and above that of the
creation of the world. “And without controversy, great is
the mystery of godliness; God was manifest in the flesh,
justified in the spirit, seen of angels, believed on in the
world, received up into glory.’7 Here, evidently, is some¬
thing far transcending any mere manifestation of Divine
power, wisdom, and love, in the natural creation, or in the
frame-work and constitution of the human mind. God,
though inworlded, or embodied in the world, is yet not
identical with the world, otherwise pantheism is true, and
the world ought to be worshipped ! But he is identical
with Jesus Christ. They are one. The union here is ab¬
solute and peculiar, and far transcending anything existing
in nature. God is not only in Christ, but in Christ in such
a way, that the latter is truly God, and therefore an object
of trust, adoration and worship. So that, we naturally
infer that die Trinity and Incarnation are not merely “ de¬
vices” or, if you please, vehicles and instruments by which
the “Absolute God” reveals himself to man, but some-
24 THEORY OP

thing far beyond this, something pertaining to the very

nature of God himself.
Of course we will not enter the arcana of the Divine
essence, or speculate upon what Dr. B. calls “the contents”
of this great mystery, whether in the nature of the abso¬
lute God, or of Jesus Christ, “ God manifest in the flesh,”
for this would be going beyond our depth; but we do say,
that there is something here far beyond all expression,
which we can neither fathom nor comprehend. What we
object to is, that Dr. B. should confine this mystery to the
mere revelation or expression of the Divine nature, and
make the incarnation of Christ identical, in some degree,
with the creation of the Universe; in other words, represent
it as a mere finite impersonation or one of a series of imper- .
sonations of the one Absolute God. Of the mode of
existence or action here, we say nothing ; for both in phi¬
losophy and in religion, we are often competent to say what is,
but not, how it is. That Jesus Christ is God incarnate,—
that he existed from eternity in God, or “ with God,” to
use the expression of St. John; nay, that from all eternity
he u was God,” the true and everlasting Life, we affirm in
the most unequivocal terms; for this is but to repeat the
plain letter of the Scripture itself. But there we leave the
high mystery, without a single word of explanation.
Dr. B., however, interposes just at this point, and affirms
that the Logos, the Word, which in time was u made
flesh,” as St. John affirms, in the person of Jesus Christ,
the a only begotten Son of God,” was “ the capacity in
God for self-expression, or self embodiment, such as we see
 THE INCARNATION. 25

in the creation of the natural universe. Speaking of the

absolute God, as utterly unknown and unapproachable
without a revelation, he proposes to consider (p. 145) “ by
what process he will be revealed,” and adds as follows :
11 There is in God, taken as the Absolute Being, a ca¬
pacity of self-expression, so to speak, which is peculiar—a
generative power of form, a creative imagination, in
which and by aid of which, He can produce Himself out¬
wardly or represent Himself in the unite. In this respect
God is wholly unlike us. Our imagination is passive,
stored with forms, colors, and types of words from without,
borrowed from the world we live in. But all such forms,
God has in Himself, and this is the Logos, the Word,
elsewhere called the Form of God. Now this Word, this
Form of God in which he sees himself, is with God, as
John says, from the beginning. It is God mirrored before
his own understanding, and to be mirrored, as in frag¬
ments of the mirror before us. Conceive him now as crea¬
ting the worlds, or creating worlds, if you please, from
eternity. In so doing he only represents, expresses, or out¬
wardly produces Himself. He bodies out his own
thoughts. What we call the creation, is, in another view,
a revelation only of God, His first revelation.
“ And it is in this view that the Word, or Logos, else¬
where called Christ, or the Son of God, is represented as
the Creator of the worlds. Or it is said, which is only
another form of the same truth, that the worlds were
made by or through him, and the Apostle John adds, that
3
26 THEORY OP

without Him is not any thing made that was made.”—

(pp. 145-6.)
So, also, (p. 168,) he says : “ Thus the Divine Word or
Logos, who is from eternity the Form or in the Form of
God, after having first bodied him forth in the creation and
government of the world, now makes another outgoing
from the Absolute into the human, to reside in the human,
as a being of it; thus, to communicate God to the world,
and thus to ingenerate in the world goodness and life,
as from Him.”
The Incarnation, then, is an impersonation of the Logos,
or the capacity of God for self-expression, such as exists
in the material creation. But we need to see and to feel
God acting in us, as well as set before us; hence, accord¬
ing to Dr. B., follows another impersonation of God, that,
namely, of the Holy Spirit. And “ as action of any kind
is representable to us only under the conditions of move¬
ment in time and space, which, as we have seen, is not
predicable of the Absolute Being.” * * “ God, in act,
will be given us by another finite, relative impersonation.”
(p. 17.)
Without noticing the circumstance that Jesus Christ is
nowhere in the Scripture called the Form of God, but is
simply stated to be in the Form, image, or likeness of God,
and thence “ equal with Godwithout dwelling upon
the consideration that the Word or Logos of St. John, is
represented not as a capacity or an attribute of God, but as
& person ox an agent, nay, as absolutely God himself, and that
 THE INCARNATION. 27

not within the conditions or restrictions of time ; for “ the

Word was not only “ with God,” but “ was God,” from the
beginning, nay, “ was made flesh and dwelt among us, and
we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of
the Father”—without dwelling upon either of these consid¬
erations, we here call attention to the clear and well de¬
fined theory of Dr. B., upon which his whole system of
belief pertaining to the Trinity and Incarnation is made
to hinge. It is simply this. There is one Absolute God
who personifies himself in three finite forms, the Father,
the Son, and the Holy Ghost. These personifications
grow out of the necessities of revelation, and are relative
only to our minds. In a word, the Trinity is a mere “ de¬
vice” of revelation, is modal or instrumental, and serves this
grand purpose, and this only, namely, to give us the one
true and absolute God. Jesus Christ is the Logos incar¬
nate, in other words, an impersonation of the Form or
self-imagination of God ; while the Holy Spirit is an im¬
personation of the Divine energy, or God as acting in us
and through us. “Thus,” he says, (p. 173,) “we have
three persons or impersonations, all existing under finite
conditions or conceptions. They are relatives, and in that
view are not infinites, for relative infinites are impossible.
And yet, taken representatively, they are each and all in¬
finites, because they stand for and express the Infinite,
Absolute Jehovah.”
The object, then, of the Trinity is, simply, to reveal, to
“ dramatize” God, “ to bring forth into life about us that
28 THEORY OF

Infinite One, who, to our mere thought, were no better than

Brama sleeping on eternity and the stars.” #
Doubtless, the Incarnation and the Trinity serve to re-

* We can see no difference between the theory of Dr. Bushnell and that of
Sabellius, as developed so learnedly and acutely from the fragments, which are
all that remain to us of his extensive writings, by Schleiermacher and Neander,
unless it be in this particular, that Sabellius is supposed sometimes to apply the
name of Father to the absolute God, while Dr. B. uses it as a relative to that of
Son, revealed in time, and representing not the absolute God, but that imperson¬
ation of him which is made by the inebriation. With this slight exception their
theories are precisely alike. Sabellius first finds the absolute God, or what he
terms the original Monas, or One, and makes the names Father. Logos, and Holy
Ghost, designations of three different phases, under which the Divine Essence re¬
veals itself. “ How the one Divine Essence comes to be called by various names,
according to the different relations, or modes of activity into which it enters, he
sought to illustrate by various comparisons. What the Apostle Paul says about
the relations of the multifarious modes of activity and gifts of one Spirit, who,
persisting in his Oneness, exhibits himself, notwithstanding, in these manifold
forms,—this, Sabellius transferred to the self-evolution of the Monad into the
Triad. That which is in itself, and continues to be, one, presents itself, in its
manifestation, as three-fold. He is said, also, to have made use of the following
comparison, drawn from the sun. ‘As in the sun we may distinguish its proper
substance, its round shape, and its power of communicating warmth and light,
so may we distinguish in God his proper self-subsistent essence, the illuminating
power of the Logos, and the power of the Holy Spirit, in diffusing the warmth
and glow of life through the hearts of believers.’ He did not scruple to make
use of the Church phrase, “ three persons, tres persona}, but he took it in another
sense, (Dr. Bushnell’s) as denoting different parts, or personifications, which the
one Divine Essence assumed according to varying circumstances and occasions.
According as it behooved that God should be represented acting in this or that
particular way, so would the same one subject be introduced in the Sacred Scrip¬
tures, under different personifications, as Father, Son, and Spirit. According to
this theory, the self-development of the Divine Essence, proceeding forth from
the unity of its solitary, absolute being, is the ground and presupposition of the
whole creation.’ The sef-exjnession” (Dr. B.’s self-expression, self-imagination
or Logos) of the Supreme Being, the, ON, becoming the Logos, is the ground of all
existence. Hence, says Sabellius, ‘ God silent, is inactive ; but speaking, is active.
* * * ‘To the end,’ says Sabellius, ‘that, we might be created, the Logos came
forth from God.’ So, also, mankind sinning, it became necessary for that Arche¬
typal Logos himself to descend into human nature, in order that he might per¬
fectly realize the image of God in humanity, and redeem the souls which are
akin to him.”
“ According to this system,” says Neandpr, from whom we give it in a con¬
densed form, “ the personality of Christ has no eternal subsistence—it is a mere
finite impersonation, and when the work of redemption is concluded, returns
into the unity of God.” How strikingly all this coincides with Dr. Bushnell’s
views, the most casual reader must acknowledge.
 THE INCARNATION. 29

veal God to our minds; nay, more, to bring him home to

our hearts. But is this all ? Are we to affirm that these
distinctions are resolvable into modes and conditions of rev¬
elation? Are we to assume that we so thoroughly under¬
stand God, as an absolute eternal Being, existing in modes,
and possessing aftributes, infinitely transcending all our
capacities of thought and reason, as to say that he must
so reveal himself; or that he is so absolutely one, as to
possess in himself no basis for the revelation or manifesta¬
tion of himself as the Father, the Son, and the Holy
Ghost ? Of course we affirm nothing here, for we confess
our profound ignorance of the interior nature of God. But
we cannot allow Dr. B., or any one else, however acu'e,
to assume more than we ourselves are authorized to assume
upon this subject, or to affirm that the Trinity or Incarna¬
tion is a “device,” mode, vehicle, or “instrument ” of revela¬
tion, and nothing more. Indeed, Dr. B. is not satisfied with
his own explanations ; and, after all his speculations, rejects
the term modal in application to the Trinity, and leaves
himself and his heamrs in a mystery as profound and in¬
scrutable as ever. He prefers the word instrumental Trin¬
ity, and speaks hesitatingly of the persons in that Trinity
as instrumental persons; and adds, that he will not specu¬
late upon “ the Contents of the Divine Nature,” and prefers
to be left “ in a maze ” upon the subject. He then con¬
tends for the Divine Unity^ which no Trinitarian has ever
denied, and, renouncing speculation, comes round to the
simple conclusion, where we shall certainly meet him, that
it is better far “ to baptize our over curious spirits into the
3*
/
30 THEORY OF

name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and
teach it quietly to rest in what of God’s infinite nature it
may there receive.” He then speaks tenderly of the u im¬
mense outlay which God has made to communicate Him¬
self to our raceand remarks, with a feeling of devo¬
tion to which all Christian hearts must respond, “ it is in
this view that the Blessed Three come to me with a sound
so dear, and a burden of love so rich.”
Thus, by a happy inconsistency, Dr. B. vindicates the
ineffable mystery of the Sacred Trinity; so that at the
close of his elaborate, but unsatisfactory discourse, we find
ourselves standing with him, before the throne of God and
of the Lamb, protesting against his errors, and j^et adoring
together the one, true, and eternal God, Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost; One in Three, and Three in One. Here,
then, in this single practical view, we give him the right-
hand of fellowship. Casting away all intangible specula¬
tions and theories as useless and worse than useless, and
recognizing one God and one Saviour, who is above all,
through all, and in all, let us go forth to enthrone Jesus
Christ, in the hearts of our fellow men, as the Way, the
Truth, and the Life.

We now proceed to consider Dr. B.’s views on the sub¬

ject of the Atonement, which may be regarded as the
central truth of the gospel, forming, as it does, the
basis of our hope for eternity, and the means of our resto¬
ration to the Divine image.
 THE ATONEMENT. 31
Before entering into any specific discussion of his main
argument, we beg to note some things of a general kind
pertaining to his discourse, which we think deserve atten¬
tion.
1. In the first place, it was delivered before the Divinity
School at Cambridge, to which place Dr. B. was invited
under the supposition that his theological peculiarities had
a strong bent towards the Unitarian system. Of course
there could be no great harm in this; but it created a pe¬
culiar expectation on the part of his auditors, and im¬
posed upon him a most delicate and weighty responsi¬
bility. It is well known that in that school, the plenary
inspiration of the Scriptures, the supreme Divinity of Christ,
the doctrine of an expiatory atonement, and truths of a
kindred character, are most earnestly combated. It is also
well known that the students are of all shades of opinion,
some of them going as far as Theodore Parker himself,
and rejecting some of those truths of the Christian faith, to
which the great body of Unitarians yet profess to cling.
It was only a few years before, that Ralph Waldo Emer¬
son, who denies the personality of God, and speaks of his¬
torical Christianity with contempt, as something entirely
behind the age, had been invited, by the same school, to
address them on a like occasion.* Such was the effect of

* It was in this address, delivered at the request of the senior class in the Di¬
vinity School, that Mr. Emerson spoke of the religious sentiment “ as mountain
air”—“ the embalmer of the world”—as “ myrrh, storax, and chlorine and rose¬
mary and affirmed that the time is coming when we shall be taught to believe
“ in the identity of the law of gravitation, with purity of heart,” “ that the age of
inspiration is not passed,” that “ a miracle is one with the blowing clover and
the falling rain.” and that “ a true Christ is now, as always, to be made by the re?
32 THEORY OF

his address that Dr. Andrews Norton, and the late Dr.
Ware, Jun., felt themselves called upon to protest against
this u latest form of infidelity,” and even to defend the
personality of God. One of the Professors of said Di¬
vinity School, now a distinguished politician, it is said, jus¬
tified himself in abandoning his office, by remarking, that
he could do no good there, for all the students were either
mystics, sceptics, or dyspeptics ! That such young gentle¬
men needed any special caution against the errors of the
orthodox, may be safely denied. Possibly, also, it may be
conceded, that they would be quite willing to take some
severe hits themselves, provided they could only have the
pleasure of seeing orthodoxy fairly demolished.
All this, however, we acknowledge would be of little
account, were it not for another fact, with which the pub¬
lic are familiar. It is well known that Dr. B. has con¬
ceived the idea of a deeper and more comprehensive sys¬
tem of theological belief, under the broad banner of which
the most discordant and even contradictory opinions may
range themselves in perfect harmony. A bold idea—per¬
haps a generous one ; yet, in view of all the possibilities
in the case, an extremely difficult and even hazardous one.
Eclectic philosophies, and even eclectic religions are

ception of beautiful sentiments.” In a word, he intimated that Christianity is a

simple mythos, like the creeds of ancient Greece and Rome, a little more ele¬
vated and beautiful, to be sure, but, like them, historically past—in form and fact,
imperfect and evanescent, and leaving behind it only a few elements of pure and
permanent truth.
When these sentiments were denounced by some of the older professors, an
“ Alumnus” of the Divinity School, and at that time a pastor of one of the Uni¬
tarian churches in Boston, (Mr. Ripley,) undertook their defence, and on the
grounds generally assumed by his brethren, made out a very plausible case.
 THE ATONEMENT. 33

somewhat the order of the day. They are especially pop¬

ular with the subtle and daring metaphysicians and theo¬
logians of France and Germany. Conciliation or at-one-
ment is the grand aim ; but whether it can be accom¬
plished, except by an extensive compromise on the part of
the friends of truth, is a question yet in debate.
That such conciliation between Unitarians and Trinita¬
rians, or between rationalists and orthodox, is utterly hope¬
less, we will not venture to affirm, and yet, at first blush, it
would seem an impossibility to bring together those who
love and adore Jesus Christ as the true God and eternal
Life, and those who brand such love and worship as irra¬
tional and idolatrous. We cherish a high respect for some
of the more devout Unitarians, who seem to be rising into
a purer theological and religious atmosphere, but their only
hope of rescue from the paralysing influence of their sys¬
tem, lies, we humbly conceive, in its utter abandonment.
There are few men, moreover, to whose talents we pay a
more cheerful homage than to those of our friend and
brother, upon whose discourse we take the liberty of com¬
menting, but we do not believe that they are equal to such a
Herculean task.
But it will easily be seen that Dr. B. was bound, if pos¬
sible, to construct his discourse in such a way, that it
might help, not only “ to reduce the theological antipa¬
thies” which exist between the orthodox and the Unita¬
rians, u but lead to a reconstruction of their present theologi¬
cal affinities.” He had it for an object, which he deemed
inexpressibly desirable, to bring together, under some com-
34 THEORY OF

mon theory, free from the difficulties which, in his view,

embarrass both sides of the controversy, certain views of
theological truth hitherto considered diametrically opposite.
If, then, we find some apparently heterogeneous elements
and arguments brought together in this elaborate and com¬
prehensive discourse, it need occasion no surprise. The key
to the solution of such a phenomenon may be found in its
peculiar psychological and theological history.
We do not, of course, mean to convey the idea, that Dr.
B. would knowingly yield any thing which he deemed true,
to please the Unitarians or even the orthodox; but taking
human nature as it is, and taking into account, also, his
peculiar pre-conceptions and wishes, it would not be deemed
strange, if, in his endeavor to conciliate opposite doctrines,
he might himself fall into some serious errors, and only
add one more to the various speculations which perplex
the theological world.
2. Another thing worth noticing is the fact mentioned
by Dr. B. himself, that he prepared his discourse, after
having just “ emerged from a state of protracted suspense,
or mental conflict, in reference to what is called, theologi¬
cally, the doctrine of the Atonement.” The practical im¬
port or value (moment he calls it) of the doctrine had
been sufficiently plain ; but the difficulty had been to bring
its elements into “ one theologic view.” Hence he tells
us that the subject had been ‘-hung up before him” for
experiment and inquiry ; and that now the needed “ solu¬
tion ” had seemed to reveal itself to his mind.
Dr. B., it seems, understood the Atonement as a practi-
 THE ATONEMENT. 35

cal thing; but its relation to theology had puzzled him.

He had relied on Jesus Christ as his hope, but he could
not bring the fact into coherence or unity with his system
of theological, or perhaps philosophical, belief.
His discourse, then, is proposed as a u true solution” of
the doctrine of the Atonement, just as his first discourse
was proposed as a u true solution” of the doctrine of the
Trinity. Now every solution of this kind must come to
us in the form of a speculation or a dogma, of which, in
other parts of his volume, Dr. B. has discovered such in¬
tense horror.* Does it not, then, deserve inquiry, whether
a solution of this kind, based, as it must be, on speculative
grounds, is possible or even desirable in regard to either of
these sacred mysteries, at least in our present, finite
and imperfect condition of being. As in the case of the
Incarnation, is there not, in this great fact of Atonement,
both as to its methods and ends, something, at least, ab¬
solutely insoluble or mysterious? Will any philosophical
dogma or speculation comprehend it ? Will it be possible
to make our argumentations upon such a subject cohere at
all points, so that there shall not be left some apparent
difficulty or even contradiction ? If the thoughts of God
are past finding out, may not his ways also be somewhat
obscure ? And if so, would it not be well to allow such
high themes to continue to hang up before us as means of
life, rather than of speculation? What, if we cannot

* That Dr. B. himself regards it in this light is evident from the close of his dis¬
course, where he speaks of the view he has given, as a “ speculative,” “ philo¬
sophical,” or “ scholastic” view, and not, therefore, to be preached.
36 THEORY OF

make our notions respecting them quite coalesce ? What

if our reasonings fail at particular points, and must give
way to worship and wonder? Will the truth perish on
that account? Above all, will the great fact of atone¬
ment fail to justify and save the soul ? Nay, will it not
be an infinite benefit to confess our ignorance, and prostrate
ourselves in adoration before the mystery ?
We must confess that we are peculiarly jealous of all
such speculative solutions, and especially of that philo¬
sophical eclecticism which embraces the most heteroge¬
neous and even contradictory views. But it is easy to see
the mote in our brother’s eye, when we cannot perceive the
beam that is in our own. It is one thing to oppose the
dogmas of others, another to abandon our own. One bene¬
fit, however, we anticipate from Dr. B.’s discourses, and
that is, a distrust of all philosophizing, and especially of
all dogmatizing in religion; but he may depend upon it,
thoughtful men will not reject dogmas in general, and re¬
tain his in particular. Upon this subject Dr. B. is by no
means blind. He sees clearly enough that both the
Trinity and Incarnation embrace the profoundest mysteries,
which neither logic nor reason can solve; and every now
and then he betrays a decided distrust of his own solutions.
u We cannot set forth,” he says, (p. 204,) “ as a real and
proper equivalent, any theoretic matter of ours concerning
the life and death of Jesus Christ, which is the highest
and most moving tragedy ever acted in this mortal sphere,
a tragedy distinguished in the fact that God is the Chief
Character, and the divine feeling moved in tragic earnest—
 THE ATONEMENT. 37

Goodness Infinite manifested through Sorrow—the passion

represented.” Speaking of Christ as “ the identification
of the divine and the human, the Word become flesh,” he
adds, (p.243,) “ Unquestionably the whole matter of the
transaction is mysterious, and will be.” Yet he adds, in¬
consistently enough, “ Unquestionably the whole matter
is what it expresses.” (Aye! but what is that? for it is
*

not so much the expression we are concerned about, as the

thing expressed.) “ And in order to the fullest and most
vivid power of the expression made, we want no mock so¬
lutions interposed”’ (sure enough!) “but we want rather
to behold the Divine brought into our human conditions of
sorrow and pain—to accept the Incarnate Word thus, in
simplicity, as a brother, looking never beyond what ap¬
pears.” “How does our poor human understanding labor
and reel,” he exclaims, in conclusion, “ before this great
mystery of godliness—height, depth, length, breadth,
greater all than we can measure ! God’s loftiest work, in
fact, that in which he most transcends our human concep¬
tions, is the work in which he is engaged to save us.
Creation is a mystery, the universe is a great deep; but,
O! the deepest deep in all the abysses of God’s majesty is
here—in the work he does to unite us to Himself.” (p. 274.)
To all this, Dr. B. will reply that his great object has
been to rescue the doctrine of the Atonement from the re¬
gion of dogmatics, and place it in that of expression and
language to which it naturally belongs, and hence that
*

the charge preferred against him, of speculating upon the

subject like other dogmatizers, does not hold. But we
4
88 THEORY OF

think it does hold ; for no man can take the ground that
the ideas of sacrifice, expiation, and atonement, in connec¬
tion with the work of Christ, belong simply to the sphere
of language or expression, and not to that of fact, doctrine,
or reality, without some speculative or philosophical rea¬
soning touching the very nature of that work. He must
affirm, somewhat in a positive or dogmatic way, respecting
the death of Christ, its nature and design, before he can
sustain such a position. Language or expression may be
figurative, and in itself inadequate ; nevertheless, it stands
for the reality, it expresses the reality; nay, more, it em¬
bodies the reality ; and the instant a theologian says, the
language, form, or expression of a fact means so and so,
and for such and such reasons, he indulges himself in
some kind of speculation, false or true, as the case may be.
This very position of Dr. B.’s, that the ideas of sacrifice,
substitution, expiation, and atonement, belong to the sphere
of language or expression, is, like that on the Trinity, one
of the boldest speculations of the times. It is based on
the idea that the atonement is wholly subjective, or if ob¬
jective at all, is objective only as a matter of form. The
fact is, Dr. B. denies the substitutionary character of our
Saviour’s sufferings, and gives his reasons for such denial;
and if that be not a dogma or speculation, we know not
what is. But suppose, after all, it should turn out to be the
true view ; what then ? Why, nothing ; all we ask is, let it
be fairly and honestly shown to be the true view. That, re¬
plies Dr. B., is what I have done. Very good ; but on
what grounds ? The nature of the case and the reason
 THE ATONEMENT. 39

of things ; in other words, by an appeal to our moral in¬

stincts and to common sense. So, then, you have been
doing just what all theologizers claim to do, and you must
take your chance with the rest. The question yet re¬
mains, what do the terms sacrifice, propitiation, atone¬
ment, express, in reference to the work of Christ ? Or, if
it suit you better, what does that work itself express ? Is
the atonement simply subjective—that is, a result produced
in the experience of believers by the life and death of Je¬
sus Christ, or is it not also objective, that is, a real expia¬
tion or sacrifice, on the ground of which God can be just,
and yet justify him that believeth in Jesus ? You say it
is objective or sacrificial, as a matter of form or expression,
but not as a literal reality. It has no relation, then, to the di¬
vine government, or the principles of eternal justice, and
in no proper sense, forms a basis on the ground on which
God can offer pardon to the guilty. Hence the words
sacrifice, offering, ransom, propitiation, atonement, derived
from ancient rites and usages, are figures of speech, the
ordinary import of which evaporates the instant a man un¬
derstands the philosophical, speculative or subjective view
of your system of theology!
Of course we know perfectly well that Dr. B. admits
the literality of the events which form the basis or means
of the Atonement, that is, the sufferings and death of
Christ; for he maintains very positively, that u the life and
death of Christ become most thoroughly real, most truly
powerful, only when they are offered in this objective
formnay, that in this respect “ he is a more real sacri-
40 THEORY OF

fice than the sacrifice, a more real lamb than the lamb3’
of the ancient dispensation. But observe, while he admits
the literalitj of the death of Christ, as a simple event, he
makes the sacrificial or expiatory character of that event
a mere form, projected by the mind, a mere ideal, so to
speak, of the all-embracing imagination. The form, in¬
deed, was prepared of old, but the mind takes that form,
and throws it around the tragic events of our Saviour’s
career, and thus transforms them, by association of ideas,
into a sacrifice or atonement proper. Thus his dogma, or
opinion is, that Jesus Christ, or the atonement of Jesus
Christ, is subjectively u a truth and a power” for the
renovation of character, but not objectively a propitiatory
sacrifice for the expiation of guilt. .
But after all, even if we concede to Dr. B. that the im¬
port of the Atonement lies in the expression or form, it
would yet remain for inquiry what that expression or form
really signifies. Does it signify the substitution of the
innocent for the guilty^; or does it, in any proper sense,
signify the offering of a sacrifice to justice, or, if you
please, to love and justice combined, for the redemption of
the world? Were the sufferings of Christ merely inci¬
dental, or were they vicarious? Was the agony of the
garden or of the cross a common agony, the agony, for
example, of a martyr ? Or was there something myste¬
rious here, something pertaining to the nature of a sacri¬
fice ? We do not, of course, inquire whether the sacrifice
was literal or physical, in the same sense that the ancient
 THE ATONEMENT. 4i

sacrifices were literal or physical; this no one affirms

any more than Dr. B.; but the question is, was it a proper
sacrifice—was it, in any true sense of the terms, an expia¬
tion or atonement for the sins of the world, such as the
universal instincts of mankind demand, and such as all
ancient sacrifices seem to portend ? No, says Dr. B., if
we understand him aright, for there was no altar, no priest,
no victim. The death of Christ was a simple incident which
occurred to him in the prosecution of his great work—the res¬
toration of man to the lost image of God; nay, in one sense
it was “ a mere murder” by wicked men, without the form
or import of a sacrifice, except in this, that it proved the
love and benevolence of him who would not turn aside
from his great work, even if death stood in the way. But
that it had any effect in procuring pardon, except by pro¬
ducing penitence, or that it had any bearing, in the way
of reparation and atonement, upon the Divine government
or administration, is inconsistent with common sense and
tho, moral instincts of our nature. This is the opinion or
dogma of Dr B.—in fact the leading doctrine and specula¬
tion of his entire discourse; and it was to bring the ideas
of sacrifice, atonement, expiation, and so forth, into har¬
mony with this view, that he projected his theory of lan¬
guage or expression; so that while rejecting the old sacri¬
ficial and expiatory view of Christ’s death, he might yet
seem to retain it, and thus be heterodox and orthodox at
the same time.
But in opposition to this, we maintain that while not a
literal or physical sacrifice, in the sense attached to these
4*

■»
42 THEORY OF

expressions by Dr. B., Jesus Christ was a true and proper

sacrifice, and his death a true and proper expiation for the
sins of the world. Here are both the priest and the vic¬
tim, the altar and the offering-. For while, in its outward
and historical aspect, the death of Christ was a grievous
outrage, a terrible crime, in its interior and spiritual aspect,
it was an august sacrifice, an all-sufficient Atonement for
the redemption of the world. “ For such an High Priest
became us,” says St. Paul, “ who is holy, harmless, unde¬
filed, separate from sinners, and made higher than the
heavens ; who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to
offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the
people’s : for this he did once when he offered up himself. * *
For if the blood of bulls and of goats and the ashes of an
heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of
the flesh, how much more shall the blood of Christ, who
through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to
God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the
living God?”—Heb. vu. 26, 27; ix. 13, 14.
3. Another fact worth noting is, that Dr. B. acknowl¬
edges that the common theological or orthodox view of
the atonement, namely, that it was a proper sacrifice or ex¬
piation for sin, the substitution of the innocent for the
guilty, has, in all ages, engaged the affections of the
pious, and exerted over them a transforming, life-giving
influence. So, (p. 203) he says, making an admission
which is fatal to his whole theory, u if the older and
more venerable doctrine is repugnant, when speculatively
regarded, to the most sacred instincts or sentiments of our
 THE ATONEMENT. 43

moral nature, and dissolves itself at the first approach of

rational inquiry, is it nothing remarkable, is it not even
more remarkable, that it should have supported the spirit
of so many believers and martyrs, in so many trials and
deaths, continued through so many centuries? Refuted
again and again, cast away, trampled upon by irreverent
mockeries, it has never yet been able to die—-wherefore, un¬
less there be some power of divine life in it ?” True to
the letter; and Dr. B. is never so eloquent as when
making such admissions. Trampled upon, and apparently
refuted again and again, and by himself among the rest,
it is vital, and can never perish. It meets the wants of
the sin-burdened spirit, and that will keep it fresh and
vigorous till the end of time. Besides, it is plainly taught
in the Scriptures, as Dr. B. over and over again admits.
“I observe,” says he, (p. 245,) “in the Scriptures, a large
class of representations, such as speak of the atonement
received, (achieved?) by Christ, his sacrifice, his offering,
his bearing the sins of many, the holiest opened by his
blood, the curse he became, the wrath he suffered, the right¬
eousness he provided, which do not seem to have their natu¬
ral proper place in the view here presented.” (Dr. B.’s sub¬
jective view of the Atonement.) “ I recollect, also, that
around these terms of grace, the whole church of God,
with but a few limited exceptions, have hung their ten-
derest emotions, and shed their freest tears of repentance;
that by these the righteous good, the saints and martyrs
of the past ages have supported the trial of their faith ;
that before these they have stood, as their altar of peace,
44 THEORY OF

and sung their hymn of praise to the Lamb that was

slain.”
It is bold, it is even generous in Dr. R. thus frankly to
admit, in the main, the practical power of the common or¬
thodox view of the Atonement; even if he himself re¬
solves it into a mere objective or liturgical form. He
claims, indeed, that he has found a place for it in his sub¬
jective view. It belongs, he says, to the form of concep¬
tion ; in other words, to the imagination of the believer,
transferring his own conceptions to the death and suffer¬
ings of Jesus Christ, and thus making the reality within
him, a reality without him. It dissolves at the touch of
reason, but springs up again, at the touch of imagination!
As a fact or a doctrine it is null, as a figure or a form it is
all in all! Or, to develop Dr. BJs idea a little further, it
belongs not to the* sphere of theology, as a system or
speculation, but to the sphere of esthetics and language.
It is rather the rhetoric than the reality of the Gospel—
the garb and form of faith, rather than its substance
and soul! Hence he shows, in his introduction, (p. 103)
that the rites and shadows of the Old Testament dispensa¬
tion were intended u to prepare a language or a form,” in
which to embody the truths of Christianity; and therefore
all those terms, sacrifice, offering, blood, expiation, propitia¬
tion, and atonement, belong not so much to the substance
as to the form and vehicle of Christianity.
On this ground the types and “ shadows of good things
to come,” remain shadows even after their fulfillment in
Christ! They linger around the fact or substance which
 THE ATONEMENT. 45

they prefigured; nay, more, impress upon it their own liturgi¬

cal image! The night, or perhaps we ought to say, the
shadowy twilight, passes into the day, and hangs around it
something of its own sombre drapery! The death of
Christ is no sacrificial atonement, in itself considered, but
it takes this character as a matter of form ; so that the
atonement and the form of the atonement are two different
things, which must be duly distinguished! In a word, we
are taken behind the scenes, and made to discover that
what we had clung to as a fact, is but the shadow of a
fact! *
That the soul, oppressed and sorrowful by reason of
guilt, demands an atonement, has been universally con¬
ceded. The idea, in fact, is written in the whole history
of the man. Everywhere blood flows for sin. Every¬
where conscience, sin-stricken, cries for a reparation, and
attempts to offer it. This, indeed, is the main fact of the
Jewish ritual. The whole system of the Mosaic faith
turns upon the principle stated by St. Paul, that “ with¬
out the shedding of blood, there is no remission.” Sin
must be “ condemned” somehow. Suffering, agony, death,
must expiate the dreadful evil. u Think intently,” says
the profound and penetrating Foster, expressing his own
resistless conviction upon the subject, “ Think intently on
the malignant nature of sin ; and if there be truth in God,
it is inexpressibly odious to him. Then if, nevertheless,
such sinners are to be pardoned, does it not eminently
comport with the Divine holiness, is it not due to it, that
in the very medium of their pardon, there should be some
46 THEORY OF

signal and awful act of a judicial and penal kind, to re¬

cord and render memorable forever a righteous God’s
judgment—estimate of that which he pardons ?” In a
word, the whole heart of humanity yearns for an expia¬
tion. But how does Dr. B. account for this fact ? By re¬
plying that the soul of man, the soul even of the philosopher,
demands an “ Altar Form!” The u philosophic or subjective
view,” says he, (p. 271,) u must never exclude and displace
the sacrificial and ritual view; for even the Christian philoso¬
pher himself will need often to go back to this holy altar
of feeling, and hang there trusting in Christ’s offering.”
An Altar Form ! It sounds jejune enough, to say the
least of it. And as to the idea of first philosophizing
away the fact of sacrifice or atonement, and then going
back to hang upon the Form, seems to us even ridiculous !
Ah me! we want more than a form upon which to hang
the weary spirit, wounded by sin. The heart, bleeding
under a sense of guilt, refuses to be comforted, till it hang
its hopes upon Christ himself, the great atoning sacrifice
for the sins of the world. That brings peace—perfect and
eternal; and not only peace, but holiness and everlasting
love. “ The blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin.”
4. It is unfortunate that Dr. B. has made such singular
use of the philosophical terms, introduced into use by the
German transcendentalists, subjective and objective, and es¬
pecially that he should have played, perhaps inconsciously
to himself, with the variant meanings of the latter term.
It tends greatly to perplex his arguments, and must, neces¬
sarily, puzzle the minds of persons not conversant with
 THE ATONEMENT. 47

nice distinctions in language and metaphysics. The word

subjective, as any one sees, has reference to a subject, and
describes any thing, whether real or imaginary, as existing
passively or subjectively, in the mind,—all, for example,
pertaining to thought, feeling, form, and so forth, mirrored
in the individual consciousness. The word objective has
reference to an object, and describes any thing existing by
itself, irrespective of the mind of the individual or subject,
not simply as a matter, of form created or recognized by
the mind, but as a matter of fact or palpable reality. For
example, the conception of a tree, in my mind, is subjective,
subjective, I mean, as a conception. It thus exists, as in a
mirror, in the individual consciousness. But corresponding
to this, it exists also as an object, separate from the mind,
or, as the Germans say, has a separate objective reality.
Thus the subject is the being thinking—the object, the
being or thing thought of. But many of the German
transcendentalists or spiritualists, as they call themselves,
believe there is no real distinction between subject and object,
the Me and the not Me, in other words, between spirit and
form, soul and body, and thus run into a species of pantheism.
The objective, in their view, is but the reflection or shadow
of the subjective. God and the universe, nature and the
soul, are one. In this way, has arisen among them a pe¬
culiar use of the term objective, as distinguishing the form
of a thought, a feeling, or an idea, from the thought, feel¬
ing, or idea itself, but having no real, palpable, independent
existence after all. In other words, they apply the term
48 THEORY OF

objective to the forms or images projected or originated by

the force of the all-embracing mind.
Now, it is in the latter sense that Dr. B. occasionally
uses the word objective. Sometimes, indeed, he seems to
mean by it the reality of Christ’s death, or the reality of
the atonement, as a matter of fact; but most frequently
he means by it, the form of that fact, the u ritual,” u sacri¬
ficial,” u altar form,” as he names it, projected by the mind
of the Christian. As a fact, the death of Christ is real,
but as an atonement or propitiatory, a form. This he styles
his objective view of the atonement. The form, indeed,
according to Dr. B., is first prepared for the mind, by the
ritual usages of the old dispensation, but it never becomes
a fact, except in the mind of the individual, or of the
church. We must have our Altar Form in which to invest
the death of Christ, and thus represent it, esthetically or
imaginatively, before our mind’s eye. So that the death of
Christ is sacrificial or expiatory, not as a matter of fact,
but as a matter of form; not as an objective reality, but as
a subjective ritual.
In this way, it is perfectly clear -to our minds that Dr.
B.’s subjective and objective atonements are one and the
same thing. The means are confounded with the end, the
substance with the shadow, the thing with the result.
The subjective, which exists in the mind or experience of the
individual, projects the objective, gives it reality and force;
in other words, by association of ideas, we ascribe to Christ
the result which takes place in our own experience. At-
one-ment becomes atonement,—reconciliation becomes sac-
 THE ATONEMENT. 49

rifice. As we are brought into one with God, by means of

the life and death of Jesus Christ, so we say, by a figure
ofi speech, borrowed from the ritual of the Old Testament
dispensation, Christ is our atonement, our sacrifice, and
expiation. The atonement proper, in distinction from the
at-one-ment, is a mere ritual apparatus ; or, to take Dr. B.’s
favorite and poetical expression, a mere ‘Altar Form’ for the
soul’s beliefs and emotions in reference to Christ.
Thus, Dr. B.’s roundabout and elaborate method of reach¬
ing this simple conclusion is, after all, equivalent to the
shorter cut of the Unitarian, who says, the whole matter
is figurative and hyperbolical; and, consequently, the
main thing, nay, the only thing real and practical here, is
at-one-ment or reconciliation, produced in us, not by any
sacrifice or atonement proper, but by the life and teachings
of Jesus Christ, as the Messenger of God.
5. But we must be permitted to remark further, that Dr.
B.’s view of the atonement saves us from no difficulties,
logical, theological, or moral. It is as much exposed to
speculative objections as the old orthodox view ; indeed, it is
vastly more so. For, while the old view supposes only one
grand difficulty or mystery, namely, the substitution of the
innocent for the guilty, under the perfect administration of
God, Dr. B.’s view, while seeming to relieve us from this
difficulty, actually involves it, and many other difficulties
besides. For upon his system, God becomes man ; the Di¬
vine not only unites himself with the human, but becomes
“identical” (Dr. B.’s own expression) with the human.
The u curse of the law ” yet comes upon him; if not as a
5
50 THEORY OP

matter of justice, at least of accident. The shame, the

horror and agony, yet fall upon his soul, in their most mys¬
terious and appalling forms. Sin is yet “ condemned ” in
the flesh of the Son of God. He yet passes through the
ineffable anguish of the garden and of the cross. Supreme
and eternal, the Sovereign of the seraphim, God manifest
in the flesh, he yet submits to the Law, and yields it obe¬
dience even unto death! If he does not endure the “pen¬
alty of sin,” he endures that which is its necessary
effect: and it makes little difference, in this mystic drama,
in which, as Goethe says,” the divine depth of sorrow
lies hid,” whether you call it punishment or suffering.
Sinless and perfect, he yet voluntarily submits to be treated
as a sinner, and yields to death, in a form the most fearful
and overwhelming, “that through death he might destroy
him that had the power of death, that is, the devil, and
deliver them, who through fear of death, were all their
life-time subject to bondage.” The Infinite, as it were, be¬
comes the finite; the changeless and impassive, the weak,
the suffering, the dying. The Divine is here, Dr. B. affirms
in the most plain and unequivocal terms ; for, in his view,
the Divine and the human, in the person of Christ, are
“identical.” The Son of God plunges, of his own free
will, into the deepest abyss of woe; goes down, to use the
language of Dr, B. himself, “ below our malignity, that it
may break itself against his Divine Patience,” and all to
rescue the guilty and the lost.
Absurd, impossible, contradictory! cries the philosoph¬
ical sceptic, or the infidel worldling. To which Dr. B.,
 THE ATONEMENT. 51

like the rest of us, has only to reply that the “ folly of God
is wiser than man, and the weakness of God, stronger than
man.” And when his own spirit of doubt or unbelief rises
up, can only save himself, like the weakest of his brethren,
by prostrating his soul before the Cross of Christ, as an
adorable mystery, transcending all the measures of science
and reasoning, and to be understood, in its transforming
power, only by the humble and contrite heart.
That God should become incarnate, is a wonder the most
transcendent and amazing. But that God incarnate should
descend into the abyss of our sin and shame, nay, should
go down beneath the deepest deep of our malignity and
wretchedness, to magnify his own law, vindicate his own
justice and grace, and, above all, to rescue rebels from
eternal death, is a wonder, if possible, yet more transcend¬
ent and amazing. If he did not endure penal distribu¬
tions,” he did what was equivalent to it; at least, he did
what was equally mysterious, equally wonderful. And,
perhaps, this is all that we can, or ought to say of it.. God
grant that, at least, we may feel what can never be spoken,
what, perhaps, can never be adequately understood even in
eternity.
6. Finally, while Dr. B., in the outset, seems to reject
the common orthodox view of the atonement, in the sub¬
sequent portions of his discourse, he makes the most des¬
perate efforts to reclaim it. Indeed, he seems to be reject¬
ing and reclaiming it all the while; as if, somehow, he
could not abandon it; and yef, like a dear child that a
mother must either give up, or from her poverty, fail to
52 THEORY OF

nourish, he does not know what to make of it. At last,

he seems to find a place for it, as we have seen, in his
double subjective—objective view; and, after distrusting that
also, he takes it once more to his heart, casting away his
“ philosophical,” “ speculative,” “ subjective” theory, as unfit
for practical life, and rejoicing in the atonement as an “ Al¬
tar Form” for his weary spirit! “If the soul, then, “he
says, “ is ever to get her health in freedom and goodness,
she must have the Gospel, not as a doctrine only, but as a
rite before her, a righteousness, a ransom, a sacrifice, a
lamb slain, a blood offered for her cleansing before Jeho¬
vah’s altar. Then reclining her broken heart on this,”
(on Christ, we hope he means, not on the imaginary form,)
“ calling it her religion—hers by faith—she receives a grace
broader than consciousness, loses herself in a love that is
not imparted in the modes of mere self-culture, and, with¬
out making folly of Christ by her own vain self-applica¬
tions, he is made unto her, wisdom, righteousness, sanctifi¬
cation and redemption!”
We have now finished our general observations upon
this discourse, and are prepared to look at its more inte¬
rior and specific argument on the subject of the atonement.
After stating, in a brief and general way, his view touch¬
ing the great end for which Christ came into the world,
namely, “ to renovate character, to quicken by the infusion
of the Divine lifein other words, “ to be a Saviour, as
saving his people from their sins,” which Dr. B. calls his
subjective view of the atonement, he intimates that there
is a view wholly different from this, “ an objective ritual-
 THE ATONEMENT. 53

istic view, one that sets him forth to faith, instead of phi¬
losophy, without which, as an Altar Form for the soul,
Christ could not be the power intended, or work the ends
appointed.” These points he lays down for discussion, but
previously, he proposes “to look at some of the opinions
that have been held and advanced at different times, con¬
cerning1 the nature of the atonement.” Under this head
it would be supposed that Dr. B. would endeavor to give a
fair and candid view of what may be termed the general
belief of the Church, or, what is considered the scriptural,
evangelical doctrine of the atonement. So far from this,
he offers one of the most meagre, one-sided statements
which we have ever seen, at least in the pages of one
claiming to have the slightest respect for evangelical reli¬
gion, and that not so much respecting the prevalent ortho¬
dox belief, as the various speculations which have been in¬
dulged respecting it, or the illustrations used to explain
and enforce it. He mentions, for example, the apocryphal
opinion of Irenaeus, for which he gives no authority, and
which we do not hesitate to pronounce a misrepresentation,
that Jesus Christ u suffered death as a ransom paid to the
devil, to buy us off from the claims he had upon us.”
Now such a notion is at utter variance with the spirit and
purport of the writings of Irenseus, which are remarkably
unspeculative, sober, and dignified, conforming, with slight
exceptions, in a striking manner, to the simple teachings
of the Holy Scripture.*

* Since writing the above, we have taken some pains to ascertain the real opin¬
ions of Irenseus, by a personal examination of his writings ; and we do not hes*
5*
54 T-HEpllY U F

Dr. B. also refers to what he terms “ the truly horrible

doctrine of Calvin,” that “ Jesus Christ descended into hell,”

hate to affirm that he nowhere teaches the gross absurdity ascribed to him by
Dr. B. He everywhere represents the advent of Christ as a means of destroying
the works of the devil, “ overturning Satan”—“ overcoming the devil,” and, in one
place, “ destroying (destruens nostrum adversarium) our adversary, the devil.”
He figuratively speaks of Jesus Christ as God incarnate, “ who redeemed us by his
blood,” who gave himself a ransom “ for the captives,” and rescued us “from the
dominion of Satan,” not by “ force,” but by “justice,” speaking of this subject in
a most edifying and scriptural manner.
In justice, however, to Dr. B., to whose charge we are unwilling to lay more
than is necessary, it ought to be stated here that he was probably led astray, with
reference to the opinions of IrenEeus, by Muenscher, a German writer on “ Dog¬
matics,” translated some years ago by Dr. Murdock. But the passages relied upon
by Muenscher to sustain his affirmation, though slightly ambiguous, contain no
such idea. Nay, they seem to us to teach the very reverse. Whether he had
personally examined these passages we know not; for, in the translation at least,
nothing but the references are given. The principal of these occurs in Adver:
Hceres: Lib. V. Cap. 1.—Irenaeus here teaches, in opposition to the Valentinians
and Ebionites, that. Jesus Christ, God incarnate can alone instruct us in divine
things, and redeem us from the power of sin. He shows, therefore, that the Di¬
vine Word, “perfect in all things,” being not only “ almighty,” but, also, “truly
man,” (verus homo) redeemed us by his own blood, in other words, “ gave him¬
self a ransom for those who were led into captivity” by sin, (redemptionem
semetipsum dedit pro his qui in captivatatem ducti sunt.) He then adds: “ Et
quorum injuste dominabatur nobis Apostasia,” (he here uses the abstract for the
concrete, meaning by Apostasia, or Apostacy, Apostatus, or the Apostate, that is,
as he explains it in another place, Satan the great apostate,) “ et cum natura esse-
mus Dei omnipotentis, alienavit nos contra naturam, suos proprios nos faciens
discipulos, potens in omnibus Dei Verbum, et non deficiens in sua justitia, juste
etiam adversus ipsam conversus est apostasiam, ea quae sunt sua redimus ab ea (v.
r. eo) non cum vi, quemadmodum ilia initio dominabatur nostri, ea qua? non erant
sua insatiabiliter rapiens; sed secundum suadelam, quemadmodum decebat
Deum suadentem, et non vim inferentem, accipere quae vellet, ut neque quod est
justum confringeretur, neque antiqua plasmatio Dei depiriret.” Now, in this
passage, Irenaeus simply teaches that Jesus Christ redeemed us from the unjust
bondage of Satan, or of the great apostasia, apostacy, by which men fell under the
dominion of the evil principle, not by absolute force or violence, but by moral
means, thus vindicating justice, by the shedding of his blood, not as a ransom to
the devil, but as a ransom to justice. The word suadela, used patristically, means
moral argument or influence, rather than persuasion or eloquence, and covers the
whole ground of what Christ did and suffered to redeem us from the bondage of
sin. For Irenams immediately adds, as if to put the whole matter beyond a doubt,
“ Suo igitur sanguine redimente nos Domino, et dante animam suam pro nostra
anima, et carnem suam pro nostris carnibus, et effundente spiritum, &c. In this
way, he shows that man, redeemed by the blood of Christ, and united to God in¬
carnate, is restored to life and immortality; not by force or violence, but by a di-
 THE ATONEMENT. 55

immediately after death on the cross, and there “ endured,

for three days, the agonies of the lost,” as a part of the

vine and moral influence, flowing to the soul through the sufferings and death of
Jesus Christ. So far, then, from teaching the gross absurdity ascribed to him by
Dr. B.. he vindicates the essential truth of the Gospel, that in the very means to res¬
cue man from sin, law and justice are maintained and established. Satan is van¬
quished, not by force, but by justice. His chains are loosened by the blood of the
Son of God.
Another passage referred to by Muenscher occurs, Adver : Hares ; Lib. V.
Cap. 21 ; but so far from proving his point, proves the very reverse ; for, there,
Christ is represented as fulfilling that ancient prophecy that “ the seed of the wo¬
man shall bruise the serpent’s head,” and thus vanquishing forever our spiritual
adversary. How clear and pointed, for example, the following : “ Dominus fac-
tus ex muliere, et destruens adversarium nostrum, et perficiens hominem secun¬
dum imaginem et similitudinem Dei.”
We are happy to find our views of the teaching of Irenajus confirmed to the
letter, by so competent an authority as Neander, who, speaking of a certain pecul¬
iarity in the mode of teaching respecting the redemption of Christ, in a Marcion,
an Irenceus, and an Origen, says, (Church History, I. 641.) “ It is this idea : Satan
hitherto ruled mankind, over whom he had acquired a certain bight, because the
first man fell under the temptation to sin, and was thereby brought under servi¬
tude to the evil one. God did not deprive him of this right by force, but caused
him to lose it in a way strictly conformable to law. By him, (Christ) the repre¬
sentative of human nature, the latter has been delivered, on grounds of reason and
justice, from the dominion of Satan.”
Thus Neander shows, according to this view, that redemption from the power
of evil, is “ a legal process in the history of the world, corresponding to the requi¬
sitions of the moral order of the universe,” an idea at once philosophical and
scriptural. He then gives the following, as a condensed expression of the views
oflrenaeus: “Only the Word of the Father himself could declare to us the Fa¬
ther ; and we could not learn from him, unless the teacher himself had appeared
among us. Man must become used to receive God into himself, God must become
used to dwell in humanity. The Mediator, betwixt both, must, once more, re¬
store the union between both, by his relationship to both. In a human
nature which was like to that burdened with sin, he condemned sin, and then
banished it as a thing condemned out of human nature, Rom. 8:3; but he re¬
quired men to become like him. Men were the prisoners of the evil one, (the
italics are ours,) of Satan; Christ gave himself a ransom for the prisoners^
Sin reigned over us who belonged to God; God delivered us not by force, but in a
way of justice, inasmuch as he redeemed those who were his own. If he had not,
as man, overcome the adversary of man; if the enemy had not been overcome in
the way of justice ; and, on the other hand, if he had not as God, bestowed the gift
of salvation, we should not have that gift in a way which is secure. And if man
did not become united with God, he could have no share in an imperishable life.
It was through the obedience of one man that many must become justified.I, and ob¬
tain salvation ; for eternal life is the fruit of justice.”
56 THEORY OF

penalty of transgression, and quotes some American divine,

who, thirty years ago, represented Christ as receiving the
stroke of vengeance from his Father’s hand, and thus dying,
not “by consent,” but by “ authority.”* * * §

* We are sorry once more to be under the necessity of charging Dr. B. with
misrepresentation. It is not, however, to be supposed, from his theological pre¬
ferences, that he is in the habit of conning, very carefully, the pages of Calvin ;
and, it was doubtless from recollection, or from hearsay, that he fell into the mis¬
take of ascribing to that eminent and learned divine 11 the truly horrible doctrine ”
that “ Christ descended into hell, when crucified, and suffered the pains of the
damned for three days.” (p. 194.) It is not, indeed, improbable that he may have
relied too implicitly on Muenscher, whose “ Dogmatik ” reminds us very much of
Bossuet’s celebrated “ Variations of Protestantism,” and is about as fair a represent¬
ation of the doctrinal theology of the Church. Of late years, Calvin has been bet¬
ter appreciated in Germany than he was in the days of Muenscher, be ng diligently
studied and greatly admired by such men as Tholuck, Hengstenberg, and Ullmann.
His views, indeed, on the subject of the atonement, are somewhat high; buthe
certainly nowhere falls into the gross absurdity of making Christ suffer the pangs
of the lost for three days in hell. He is commenting (Institutes, Book, II. C. XVI,)
on that expression in the Apostle’s Creed, so called, “ he descended into hell,” and
shows tliat. this may be regarded as figurative, having reference not to the burial
of Christ, but to what preceded his burial; not to a descent into Hades or Hell, but
to the endurance of terrible conflicts with the powers of darkness on the cross ;
in a word, to the profound and mysterious agonies of his “passion.” As it was
necessary, according to Calvin, that Christ should suffer for us, the penalty of vio¬
lated law, he shows that it behooved him “ to contend with the powers of hell, and
the horror of eternal death.” In other words, he shows, by citations from the
Scriptures, that he suffered not only “ corporeally, but spiritually,” not in the
body only, but in the soul, that Ids pangs were peculiar and awful, and equivalent,
therefore, to the pangs of the lost, though with this difference, as he states, that he
could not be “holden of the pains of death.” He then positively denies what
some of the old Catholic writers held, that Christ actually descended into hell af¬
ter the crucifixion, and gives a view of Christ’s sufferings similar to that held by
the old school divines. He shows, too, in a very striking manner, (Lib II, Cap. 16,
§ 12,) that, to all this, Christ “ was not compelled by violence or necessity, but in¬
duced merely by his mercy and love for us.” In a word, his doctrine is that of
an expiation or satisfaction made by Christ’s enduring the penalty of the law ;
and, hence, that the expression “ descended into hell,” may be regarded as a strong
and figurative mode of describing his sufferings.
Calvin is by no means infallible. Some of his ideas and expressions may be ex¬
travagant ; but, as a whole, he is one of the ablest and soundest theologians. His
mind was at once clear and penetrating, and, what is better, remarkably reverent
and devout. At all events, he deserves fair and honorable treatment from us all.
“ You have caught me,” said the sceptical but able Bolingbroke to Church,” a loose
minister ot the English Church, “reading John Calvin. He was, indeed, a man
 THE ATONEMENT. 57

He says that there is a general concurrence in the words

vicarious, expiation, offering, substitute, and the like, but no
agreement as to the manner in which they are to get their
meaning.
He also refers, in the briefest and most unsatisfactory
manner, to the opinions advocated by Beman, Jenkyn, and
others, that the atonement is to be regarded as a govern¬
mental expedient, securing equally the great ends of justice
and mercy, and that its value is to be measured, chiefly, by
its expression,—the dignity of our Saviour’s person giving
import and value to his voluntary sufferings in our behalf.
We have no confidence ourselves, in the superficial philos¬
ophy upon which this view is ordinarily based, a view
which seems to make justice a temporary expedient, and
not an eternal principle, and lowers our estimation of the
sufferings of Christ as little better than those of a martyr;
but it demanded a more respectful notice, and a more ex¬
tended examination at the hands of Dr. B.
“ On the whole,” he adds, summing up the matter in his
comprehensive way, “ I know of no definite and fixed point,
on which the orthodox view, so called, may be said to hang,
unless it be this, that Christ suffers evil as evil, or in direct
and simple substitution for evil that was to be suffered by

of great parts, profound sense, and vast learning. He handles the doctrines of
grace in a masterly manner.” “Doctrines of grace!” exclaimed Church: “the
doctrines of grace have set all mankind by the ears.” “I am surprised,” replied
Bolingbroke, “ to hear you say so ; you, who profess to believe and preach Chris¬
tianity. These doctrines are, certainly, the doctrines of the Bible; and, if I be¬
lieved the Bible, I must believe them ; and, let me tell you seriously, that the
greatest miracle in the world, is the existence of Christianity, and its preservation
as a religion, when the preaching of it is committed to the care of such unchris¬
tian wretches as you are.”
58 THEORY OF

us; so that God accepts one evil in place of the other, and
being satisfied in this manner, is able to justify or pardon.”
Now, will any man, at all acquainted with theological
literature, undertake to say that such is a fair and sober es¬
timate of the doctrine of the Church, or of the great body
of evangelical Christians, on the subject of the Atonement,
the doctrine which, by his own confession, has formed the
basis of hope and the source of joy to saints and martyrs,
from the earliest period of the Christian era? Would any
one maintain that such is the view in which Irenseus and
Augustine, Luther, Zuinglius and Melancthon, Taylor and
Hooker, Baxter and Howe, John Wesley and Robert Hall
united as the power of God and the wisdom of God for the
salvation of the world ?
In the first place, we might well inquire what is meant
by the expression that Christ “suffers evil for evil,” or that
“he suffers” evil as evil?” Then, again, we might ask,
Can “ evil” ever be suffered except as “ evil ?” Nay, we
might still further inquire whether Dr. B. himself, in the
subsequent parts of his discourse, does not make Christ, in¬
nocent and divine though he be, suffer the most terrible
“evil?” For our part, we know of no theologian, of any
repute, who maintains that Christ suffered “ evil as evil,”
that is, as we understand Dr. B., evil for its own sake.
We know of none, moreover, who represents Christ as suf¬
fering, involuntarily, either evil or the results of evil. Cal¬
vin himself does not so represent the case. That eminent
divine speaks of his agonies, terrible as he deemed them, as
an atonement or expiation, voluntarily endured, for the ben-
 THE ATONEMENT. 59

efit of the world. If Christ endured “ evil as evil,” then

he himself chose that evil, and he alone is responsible. But
where is the theologian who maintains that Christ “ sinned
for us ?” He only suffered for our sins,” a fact which Dr.
B. himself admits.
Dr. B.’s arguments may be good against extreme views
of the atonement, or improper declamatory modes of repre¬
senting it, but they are of no force whatever against the
scriptural fact, in which all evangelical Christians unite,
that “ He who knew no sin was made sin for us”—
that “the just suffered for the unjust”—in a word, that
Christ suffered and died “ under the curse of the law,” and
thus “ made an atonement for us.”
Then, again, it deserves Dr. B.’s attention, that a doc¬
trine or fact like that of the atonement, is one thing, and
particular theories or speculations to account for it, as also
particular illustrations to elucidate it, are quite another
thing. The orthodox may be agreed in the doctrine, but
not in their modes of defending or explaining it. Their
creed may be good, but their philosophy may be imperfect;
or their doctrine may be true, but their mode of expression
defective and variant. But it would be most unfair and
ungenerous to take some imperfect, ill-expressed theory of
an individual, or the infelicitous, perhaps erroneous expla¬
nation of an individual, as a type and specimen of the
whole. Dr. B. himself claims to be orthodox, or as good as
orthodox, but who would take his objective altar theory, and
adduce that as a fair specimen of the orthodox doctrine?
But such a procedure would be as fair as to take the ex-
00 THEORY OF

travagant expression of Ireneeus, supposing it to be really

his, which it is not,) or the extravagant theory ascribed to
Calvin, as the doctrine of the Church !
It would be equally unfair and ungenerous to take any
number of such instances, and from such narrow general¬
ization, come to the sweeping conclusion that those who
maintain the orthodox view, agree in representing Jesus
Christ as suffering u evil as evil,” or in “ direct and simple
substitution for evil.”
As we have intimated, Dr. B. himself assumes that Jesus
Christ, with a view to the redemption of the lost, volunta¬
rily suffered evil, and his theory on this ground is just as
difficult of explanation as any view taken by the orthodox.
If he says no—for Christ suffered evil on his way to the
accomplishment of a great good—we reply that it makes
no difference; for the case he cites of a man passing over
desolate rocks, in a snow storm, not for the sake of the ex¬
posure, but to carry food to a starving family, is not analo¬
gous to the case in hand ! If the man had a choice of two
roads, or if he had power to make his own road, without
the necessity of exposure, it would have been analogous^
though only in a single particular. For our Saviour’s ob¬
ject was not simply to bring us relief, but to bring it in such
a way as to vindicate eternal justice, and save the sinner
from the consequences of his sin. Possessing all power in
heaven and on earth, he deliberately, and on purpose, chose
the rond of suffering. He chose it, that thus both justice
and love might be vindicated, while the rebel was redeemed.
Thus he came into the world to suffer and die. He lived

K
 THE ATONEMENT. 61

for that specific purpose, made all his arrangements with a

view to that result. Doubtless he had an ultimate end in
view; but the other, as a means, became necessary to the
accomplishment of that end; so that it, too, became an
end, equally necessary and equally important. Thus he
suffered evil “ not as evil,” but as a means to an end. He
died, not “in direct and simple substitution of “evil for
evil,” but to vindicate the government of God, and yet se¬
cure the salvation of the lost.
But we will proceed to state what we conceive to be the
orthodox or evangelical belief upon this subject, and then
point out the difference between this and the theory of
Dr. B.
A subject of belief may be stated as a fact—or as a doc¬
trine—or as a speculation.
Touching the Atonement as a fact, the general evan¬
gelical belief, so far as we understand it, is this, that to
save men from their sins, first to secure their forgiveness,
and, secondly, renovation, Jesus Christ, the true God and
eternal Life, became incarnate, that is, became man, and in
that nature endured shame, agony and death, sometimes
called the “ curse of the law,” and is therefore “ set forth”
as “a propitiation,” or propitiatory “sacrifice” for the sins
of the whole world,” on which ground “ repentance and re¬
mission” have been “ proclaimed unto all nations, beginning
at Jerusalem.” This is the simple historical fact, a fact
new, and in a high degree mysterious and affecting, and
bringing home to our hearts, in a manner ttm most over*
whelming, the love, the justice and the pity of God.
62 THEORY OF

As a doctrine, the suffering's and death of Christ are a

proper expiation for sin, in some way, perhaps not wholly
explained, satisfying the claims of justice, while securing
pardon and eternal life to the guilty penitent. In other
words, the atonement or sacrifice of., Christ, involved, in
some important sense, the substitution of the innocent for the
guilty. We deserved to die, but Christ “ died for us not
simply for our benefit, for that is not the meaning of the
expression here, but in our stead, not suffering u evil as
evil,” but suffering evil, to vindicate the love and justice of
Jehovah in the redemption of the lost. In becoming man
he C£ took on him” not only our nature, but our £i infirmities
and sins,” and though innocent and even perfect, bore in
their most appalling forms, all the consequences of such in¬
firmities and sins—pain—anguish—amazement—horror—
death—a strange mystery of love and sorrow, such as earth
saw never, such as God only can solve. “ The just suf¬
fered for (in the stead of) the unjust”—qhe sinless (“ he
who knew no sin”) for the sinful. In other words, the in¬
nocent—nay, more, the Divine, suffered under the conditions
of human guilt, permitted to come upon him the consequen¬
ces of our apostasy, in order that he might discover to men
the amazing, all conquering love of God, and not only so,
but vindicate the integrity of the law, the great law of the
moral universe, which must have its course, and which will
not spare even “ the immaculate One,” assuming the nature,
and standing ih the place of the guilty; and since by this
means, and by this alone, penitent sinners are saved from
sin and all the consequences of sin, his sufferings and death
 THE ATONEMENT. 63

upon earth are literally and truly, instead of their sufferings

and death in hell.
In speaking of such a doctrine, orthodox divines, of course,
use every variety of language, the language of Scripture,
and the language of common life. Sometimes they speak
of God u smiting the Shepherd/’ u delivering up his Son to
the death for us all,” abandoning him in the garden and
on the tree ; nay, as bringing upon him, by deliberate choice,
all the shame, anguish and despair cf crucifixion. But this
language, though coincident with that of the Scripture, and
of Hebrew phraseology in general, is neither precise nor
philosophical, but general and popular. Sometimes they go
farther, and may even misrepresent the transaction; but
whenever they speak seriously and deliberately regarding
it, they mean that God was present in the whole transac¬
tion, and that the sacrifice of the Son was equally the sac¬
rifice of the Father.
Some of them, nay, quite a number, speak of Christ, in
this transaction, as having endured the penalty of the law ;
and certainly such language is not stronger than that of
the Scripture, which represents him as enduring “ the curse”
of the law, as “made sin,” as “bearing our sins,” bearing
our iniquities, and so forth. Still, they evidently use the
word penalty in some loose and popular sense. For if the
inquiry were made, do you mean to affirm that Christ suf¬
fered eternal death,” which is the penalty of the law, or the
punitive result of sin,' and they would instantly answer, No.
But. if all or any of the consequences of sin are a part of
its penalty: if. in a word, the law is of such a nature as to
64 THEORY OF

vindicate itself, not by a direct punitive infliction from with¬

out, but by a necessary action and result, which is suffer¬
ing* and death; then as Christ suffered under the conditions
of human guilt, his sufferings and death may be spoken of
as the penalty of the law. There is a sense in which all
things whatever are done by God; but the perfection
of his laws are such that they work themselves clear, that
is, by a necessary action in the very nature of things, re¬
warding the good and punishing the bad. Thus if I vio¬
late the law of gravitation, I may be thrown from a preci¬
pice, and the result is temporal death ; so if I violate the
law of purity and of love which binds me to God, I fall from
God, and the result is spiritual death. Sin, not God, brought
death into the world, and all our woe. But tha.t death and
that woe, though not inflicted by an absolute intervention
on the part of God, but by the necessary action of law, may
yet be said to come from God, the great fountain of all law.
Thus, then, if Jesus Christ suffered under the conditions of
human guilt, he did not suffer by an absolute infliction or
punishment, but from the necessary action of the laws un¬
der which he voluntarily placed himself. The result—an¬
guish, horror, death—flow from our sins, for which he suf¬
fered—come upon him by a necessary action. As we said
before, the law must have its course, even if the immaculate
Son of God should suffer and die. This, then, being the
result of law, and law deriving all its power and sanction
from the absolute God, it might be appropriately spoken of
as the penalty of sin. And indeed this is no more than
what the prophet means when he says “the chastisement
 THE ATONEMENT. 65

(penalty or punishment) of our peace was upon him, and

with his stripes we are healed.’*
But the majority of theologians would say, that Christ
endured the penalty of the law only in this sense, that his
agonies, whatever they were, came from our sins ; not
that he suffered the pangs of hell, or the horror of the
second death ; but an anguish, which, considering the dig*
nity of his person, and the tenderness of his heart, might
be taken as an equivalent; so that all the penalty which
ever comes from sin, as far as believers are concerned, was
visited upon him. ' His death upon the cross has averted
our death in hell.*

* It is but an act of justice to give the view of the old school divines, so called,
upon this subject, in their own carefully selected words. The following, from a
very able review of “ Beman on the Atonement,” in the first series of the
“ Princeton Theological Essays,” is about as fair and satisfactory as any thing we
have seen.
“ A third method by which the Scriptures teach us the nature of the atonement,
is by express declarations concerning the nature of his sufferings, or the immedi¬
ate design of his death. It is expressly taught that his sufferings were penal, that
he endured the penalty of the law, and that he thus suffered, not for himself, but
for us. This is a point about which there is so much strange misconception, that
it is necessary to explain the meaning of the terms here used. The sufferings of
rational beings are either calamities, having no reference to sin, or chastisement
designed for the improvement of the sufferer, or penal when designed for the
satisfaction of justice. Now, what is meant by the language above used is, that
the sufferings of Christ were not mere calamities; neither were they chastise¬
ments (in the sense just stated,) nor were they simply exemplary, nor merely
symbolical, designed to teach this or that truth, but that they were penal, i. e.,
designed to satisfy divine justice. This is the distinctive character assigned to
them in Scripture. Again: by the penalty of the law is meant that suffering
which the law demands as a satisfaction to justice. It is not any specific kind
or degree of suffering, for it varies both as to degree and kind, in every suppos-
able case of its infliction. The sufferings of no two men that ever lived, are
precisely alike, in this world or the next, unless their constitution, temperament,
sins, feelings, and circumstances were precisely alike, which is absolutely incred¬
ible. The objection, therefore, started by Socinus, that Christ did not suffer the
penalty of the law, because he did not suffer remorse, despair, or eternal banish¬
ment from God, was answered, by cotemporary theologians, by denying that
those things entered essentially into the penalty of the law. That penalty is in
6*
66 THEORY Of

Human governments cannot remit deserved penalties.

They may assume the right, but it cannot hold, except in
those cases where such penalties are not fairly incurred.
So that penitence—reformation even—is of no avail: the
guilty must suffer. But it may not be so in the government of
God, Jehovah, who is himself law, may remit a penalty,
if he so pleases. Christ suffered for us, and in consequence
we repent. God, then, for Christ’s sake, remits the penalty
which we had incurred, and which we must have suffered,
if Christ had not died. But that Jesus Christ was pun¬
ished by an absolute infliction, and punished in the same
sense that we should have been punished, that is, “ with
everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and
from the glory of his power,” few, very few sober ortho¬
dox divines would maintain.
Such, then, is the doctrine—the substitution of the in¬
nocent for the guilty, and the forgiveness, justification, and

Scripture called death, which includes every kind of evil inflicted by divine jus¬
tice in punishment of sin ; and inasmuch as Christ suffered such evil, and to such
a degree as fully satisfied divine mstiee, he suffered what the Scriptures call the
penalty of the law. It is not the nature, but the relation of sufferings to the law,
which gives them their distinctive character. What degree of suffering the law
demands, as it varies in every specific case, God only can determine. The suf¬
ferings of Christ were unutterably great ; still, with one voice, Papists, Lutherans,
and Reformed, rebutted the objection of Socinus, that the transient sufferings of
one man could not be equivalent to the sufferings to the sins of men, by referring,
not to the degree of the Saviour’s anguish, as equal to the misery due to all for
whom he died, but to the infinite dignity of his person. It was the Lord of glory
who was crucified. As the bodily sufferings of a man are referred to his whole
person, so the Scriptures refer the sufferings of Christ’s human nature to his
whole person. And he was a divine, and not a human person ; but a divine per¬
son with a human nature. This is an awful subject, on which all irreverent spec¬
ulation must be very offensive to God. Let it be enough to say with the Scrip¬
tures that Christ suffered the penalty of the law in our stead, and that the pen¬
alty of the law was that kind and amount of suffering, which, from such a Per¬
son, was a full satisfaction to the divine justice.”
 TH E A T O N E M ENT. 6?

salvation of the guilty, by virtue of the expiatory sacrifice

and atonement of Jesus Christ. Its effect upon us is, first, to
convince of sin, to produce repentance and change; secondly,
to justify and redeem, in other words, to save first from the
condemnation, and secondly, from the domination of sin.
But we have said, that a subject of belief may be re¬
garded as a speculation ; in other words, as a theory or phi¬
losophy. And it is just here that the greatest variety of
opinion prevails among those who, in a general sense, are
styled the orthodox. Their modes of justifying the
Atonement are various, and perhaps somewhat unsatisfac¬
tory ; just as Dr. B.’s philosophy upon the subject is un¬
satisfactory. “ Sometimes,” as Dr. B. states, “ the anal¬
ogy of criminal law is taken ; and then our sins are spoken
of as being transferred to Christ, or he as having ac¬
cepted them to bear their penalty. Sometimes the civil or
commercial law furnishes the analogy; and then our sins,
being: taken as a debt, Christ offers himself as a ransom
for us.” The whole, however, resolves itself under this
head, into a theory or speculation on government ; but all
analogies from human governments are imperfect, and if
pushed too far, create false and injurious impressions. The
case of Zaleucus and his son, for example, though affect¬
ing enough, and in one or two points, good for an illustra¬
tion, after all, has no just analogy here, and we dismiss it
as willingly as Dr. B. Civil and commercial transactions
cannot certainly form any just and adequate parallel in
such a case, and so we abandon them also. The atone¬
ment of Christ assuredly has nothing in it akin to com-
68 THEORY OF

merce or trade. But the ritual law of the ancient dispen¬

sation—which Dr. B. couples with these cases of false
analogy—the offering of sacrifice, and the shedding of
blood, do supply some just analogies in the case, for they
were selected by God for this express purpose. But their
import certainly is neither difficult nor recondite. Nor is it
the philosophy of the transaction, but rather its moral im¬
port which they indicate. They discover not the philoso¬
phy, but the fact of propitiation in its relations to the pur¬
pose of God and to the conscience of the sinner. The
true meaning of sacrifice we must get in Christ himself.
One thing, however, is certain, God has a government
over man. The Law is sacred. It cannot be violated
with impunity. And if Christ himself comes under it, he
must suffer. What he suffered no tongue can express.
But he suffered as the innocent for the guilty, the just for
the unjust; and in our view the whole subject, in its in¬
terior depths, and especially in its divine and governmental
relations, is a profound mystery. Speculation and philos¬
ophy are at utter fault here. The case is peculiar. There
is nothing in the universe like it. It cannot, it must not
be judged by human analogies. And it is just on this
ground that we find fault with some of Dr. B.’s specula¬
tions. Because human, that is, limited and imperfect gov¬
ernments, which owe allegiance to a higher Power, and
have no right, therefore, to make any change or modifica¬
tion in their administration, to save the condemned criminal
from the punishment which he has justly merited, and
cannot, therefore, accept of any substitute, he infers, rea-
 THE ATONEMENT. 69

soning from an analogy which he himself confesses im¬

perfect, that the government of God cannot do so Because
man cannot, or must not, (that is the premise.) therefore (such
is the conclusion.) Jehovah cannot! If that is not a spe¬
cimen of false logic we know not what is. May we not
venture, even, to call it a “ wooden dogma?”
We ourselves take the ground, and take it cheerfully,
that human governments transcend their powefs when
they remit punishment where it is deserved, or in any case
whatever, accept of a substitution, as, for example, the father
for the child, or the child for the father; and for this simple
reason, that they are amenable to a higher Power, that is,
to God, the final, absolute authority in the universe. But
to assume that in no case, of which He alone is the compe¬
tent judge, the infinite God himself can remit punish¬
ment, or accept a substitute provided and approved by him¬
self. is unfounded and presumptuous. It is going beyond
the record. It is even going bejmnd common sense.
But God himself, says Dr. B., (p.226) is “obedient to
law.” Yes, and that admission is of immense importance;
for it is on that ground that he cannot and will not remit the
penalty of transgression, except by some new and unheard
of method, by which eternal justice may be maintained,
while pardon and salvation are conferred upon the peni¬
tent. “ For what the law could not do in that, it was
weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son, in the
likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin condemned sin in the
fleshy that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in
us. who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit.
70 THEORY OF

This, however, is a question of fact. God has remitted

the penalty on the behalf of all believing penitents, and re¬
mitted it,, because u Christ died for our sins according to
the Scriptures.”
If, therefore, any one shall say that the transaction
takes hold of the great principles of the Divine government,
and upholds eternal justice as well as eternal love, what has
Dr. B., or any other man, who reveres the Bible, to object ?
But we will not permit ourselves to speculate upon the
subject. Enough for us to know that God himself has
found an atonement, on the ground of which he can be
just, and yet justify the ungodly; yes, “set him right be¬
fore the government of God” on his simple faith, and be¬
fore he has done a single thing to merit the Divine favor!
But we return to Dr. B.’s theory, and will endeavor to
show wherein it differs from the common orthodox view,
and wherein it differs from the Word of God. He as¬
sumes that Christ did not suffer in any proper sense, as a
substitute for the guilty ; that his death had no special re¬
lation to the divine government, in satisfying the justice of
God, that it had no effect in itself, and irrespective of its
subjective influence upon the sinner, in procuring the re¬
mission of sins; that it was not a proper atonement or ex¬
piation, and possessed no sacrificial character, except as a
matter of form ; and that consequently the atonement is,
strictly speaking, subjective, and consists in the reconcili¬
ation of the sinner to God, and his restoration to purity
and happiness.
In opposition to which, the Word of God plainly teaches
 THE ATONEMENT. 71

and all evangelical Christians believe, that Christ is a true

propitiation for our sins, that he suffered, the just for the
unjust, that he endured the curse that we might be,deliv¬
ered from its influence; in other words, that in some im¬
portant sense, not, perhaps, fully explained, he suffered
as our substitute, and that on this ground, the government
of God is vindicated, and a basis laid for extending pardon,
justification, and eternal life to all who believe. His death,
therefore, did possess a sacrificial or expiatory character,
and the atonement is not only subjective in its ends, but
objective in its very nature and essence, and it is for this
reason, and not simply from association of ideas, that we
trust in Christ, confide in his merits, and plead his blood.
If Dr. B. replies that the idea of such substitution in¬
volves an act of injustice—that it is the endurance of
u evil as evil,” or “ the direct and simple substitution of
evil for evil,” we reply, be it so. For afier all, the suffer¬
ings and death of Christ look amazingly like the endur¬
ance of u evil for evil,” or rather the endurance “of evil”
for good ; so that the a evil” which ought to have come
upon us, came upon him; and we run no risk of error, in
speaking of Christ, or relying upon Christ, as the soul’s
“ expiation,” not simply as a figure or a form, but as a re¬
ality and a fact. But what are we saying or admitting?
An act of injustice! The atoning sacrifice of Christ an
act of injustice ? The substitution of the Lamb of God
instead of the guilty and the perishing an act of injustice?
To whom ? To what ? To God ? Was he not in it ?
To man? Is he not saved by it? To the law? Is
72 THEORY OF

it not magnified and made honorable by means of it? In¬

justice ! No! no ! There is no injustice here ; but the
highest justice, the most amazing goodness, the most
transcendent grace.
But we will prove that it is no injustice by Dr. B.’s own
wmrds, who, forgetting his theories and objections, speaks
thus of the death and passion of him whom he had proved
not only innocent, but even Divine ! “ Come,’1 says he,
(p. 215) ‘:to the spectacle of Christ’s suffering life and
death, as to a mystery wholly transcendent, save in what
it expresses of divine feeling. Call what of this feeling
you receive the reality—all else the Machina Dei for the
expression of this. With deepest reverence of soul, ap¬
proach that most mysterious sacrament of love, the agony
of Jesus; note the patience of his trial, the meekness of
his submission to injustice, and the malignant passions
of his enemies ; behold the creation itself darkening and
shuddering with a horror of sensibility at the scene trans¬
piring in his death; hear the cry of the crucified: ‘Fa¬
ther, forgive them, for they know not what they do
then regard the Life that was manifested dropping into
cessation, and thereby signifying the deposit of itself in
the bosom of that malign world, to whose enmity it was
yielded.”
Nay, more than this, Dr. B. represents Christ as actually
“ interrupting the flow of justice by delivering men, or as¬
sisting them to deliver themselves from the penal conse¬
quences of transgression ”—■“ coming under the desecrated
law of God”—doing and suffering this as God—“God
 THE ATONEMENT. 73

manifest in the flesh,” and thus “signifying to mankind

the self-renouncing and sublime obedience of the divine na¬
ture”—enduring unutterable agony, to vindicate his law,
and reach the hearts of his creatures—“yielding his Life,
as a contribution from God to the pacification and recon¬
struction of his realm; and, finally, taking the attitude of
submission to evil.”
“May I,” says he, p. 241, and here is his grand admis¬
sion, and our principal proof of most of the positions we have
taken, “ May I, without defect of reverence, express the
deeper truth, that which is the appalling mystery of
God in Jesus Christ—mystery, yet philosophy, of the di-
vinest work of God, called redemption, the King Himself
here takes the attitude of submission to evil.* Requiring
of us to vanquish wrong by a patient submission thereto,
he does it, not as duty or'wisdom only for us, but because
it is a first law of power that a malignant, or bad spirit,
will soonest yield to endurance, and is least of all able to
endure the meekness of love. Observing this just truth
himself, the divine Word is incarnated in the form of a ser¬
vant, moving here upon the heart of evil from a point be¬
low it, attacking sin, not by penalties only, but by submis¬
sion rather. The malign spirit rises, bursting forth in a
storm of deadly violence against his person. The only per¬
fect being that ever lived in the flesh, he became the most
insulted and abused being. But, loaded as he is with insult,
and dragged out to die, he bears the concentrated venom

* The italics are ours.

7
74 THEORY OF

of his persecutors with a lamb’s patience, makes no an¬

swer, replies no taunt, complains of no severity. We see
him, in fact, descending below oar malignity, that it may
break itself against his divine patience. He outreaches, by
his love, the measure of our animosities—the wrong will in
us, all the malignities of our devilish passion, feel them¬
selves outdone. The submission of the Word fairly broke
its spirit, and ever since that day has it been falling visibly
as Lucifer from heaven.”
That there is nothing in the atonement of the nature of
“ vindictive punishment,” as it is sometimes called, or, that
Jesus Christ did not, so far as we can see, suffer, in the
proper and absolute sense of that expression, the penalty of
the law, which is death eternal, we have already admitted ;
but that his sufferings, awful, mysterious, transcendent,
are a substitution for ours, an equivalent for the absolute
punishment of sin, and, therefore, a real satisfaction in
law, who, after reading Dr. B.’s admissions, first, as to
the teachings of the Scripture in regard to what he calls
11 the Altar Form” of the doctrine, and then as to the ac¬
tual sufferings of Christ, whom he describes as even more
divine than human, can hesitate to admit? Ah! it is in
perusing the plain, artless descriptions of Holy Writ, or, in
gazing, in mute adoration, upon the suffering Saviour in
Gethsemane, or upon the cross, that we lose sight of our
philosophical speculations, and feel through all our souls,
that he suffered as a sacrifice for sin.
After what we have said, it seems quite unnecessary
further to take up Dr. B.’s objective, ritualistic, or Altar
 THE ATONEMENT. 75

Form of the atonement; for that falls to the ground as a

matter of course, and, indeed, it is a speculation so com¬
pletely intangible and extravagant, as scarcely to deserve
attention. Indeed, it amounts, as we have seen, to a de¬
nial of the doctrine of atonement.
But Dr. B. admits that sacrifices were of divine origin,
and that they prefigured the atonement. He admits, also,
that the apostles, even when rejecting the ritual of the Old
Testament Scripture, as done away, or, rather, as fulfilled
in Christ, yet persisted in describing the atonement as a
sacrifice, or a propitiation. He mistakes, however, in af¬
firming that those ancient sacrifices prefigured life, rather
than death; that the blood being sacred, and regarded as
the life of the animal, was shed, to adumbrate, in a mystic
way, the communication of life, by means of the atone¬
ment, rather than the atonement itself. Such an expla¬
nation is exceedingly far-fetched, and unsatisfactory. That
a bloody sacrifice, or a whole burnt-offering should prefig¬
ure the infusion, or the communication, from God, of life to
the soul of man, is preposterous. The simple fact is, these
ancient sacrifices were sacrifices of expiation, sacrifices for
sin; in other words, sacrifices for atonement and reconcili¬
ation. The death of the animal, and the sprinkling of its
blood, not upon the individual offering it, but upon the mercy
seat, shadowed forth the fact, that by virtue of the divine
appointment, sacrifice or expiation availed for the pacification
of justice, and the pardon of the offender. Hence, the sins
of the people were confessed upon the head of the victim;
or when two victims were used, as on the great day of
76 THEORY OF

atonement, the sins of the people were put upon the head
of the one which was carried far into the wilderness, while
the other was slain, and its blood sprinkled, by the High
Priest, upon the mercy seat; thus signifying the great
fact or principle, that in consequence of the death of Christ,
sin is forgiven or borne away, never again to be charged,
never again to be remembered. Referring to this very fact,
in his Epistle to the Hebrews, the apostle adds: “ So once
in the end of the world hath Christ appeared to put away
(bear away) sin, by the sacrifice of himself, and unto them
that look for him, shall he appear the second time without
sin unto salvation and, on the same principle, John the
Baptist points to Jesus Christ as “ the Lamb of God which
taketh (beareth away) the sin of the world.”
This, then, is the mysterious, but all-glorious, all-trans¬
forming fact of the Gospel; that by his obedience unto
death, Jesus Christ has “ brought in everlasting righteous¬
ness,” which is uunto all and upon all them that believe.”
Here the weary, trembling spirit finds rest. Here come the
penitent of all ages, prophets, apostles, martyrs, kings,
priests, peasants, philosophers—all come here, not to some
sacrificial form, but to Jesus Christ himself, whose blood
cleanseth from all sin. Around this true and living sacri¬
fice cluster the universal church, the redeemed on earth,
and the redeemed in heaven, evermore singing the new
song of Moses and the Lamb.
Here, then, we cry out with Dr. B., meeting him once
more on practical ground, and bending in reverence before
the Cross of Christ, “What infinite pains does he take
 THE ATONEMENT. 77

to bring down His love to us !” Here, O sacred mystery!

he opens to us the depths of his heart, penetrated with the
love and sorrow of the one great sacrifice for sin. Here he
unites himself to our wretchedness, and takes us to his bo¬
som. O that we understood it as we ought, and felt its
transforming power! In order to which, let us pray with
the Apostle Paul, that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ,
the Father of Glory, may give unto us the spirit of wisdom
and revelation in the knowledge of him; the eyes of our
understanding being enlightened, that we may know what
is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory
of his inheritance in the saints, and what is the exceeding
greatness of his power to us ward who believe, according
to the working of his mighty power which he wrought in
Christ when he raised him from the dead, and set him at
his own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all
principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every
other name that is named, not only in this world, but also
in that which is to come, and hath put all things under
his feet, and given him to be the head over all things to the
Church, which is his body, the fullness of him that filleth
all in all.
And now to the only wise God our Saviour, be glory
and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever.
Amen.
%
 Date Due

{? 2 iri
5., /

Mr

nr:

Ifth

f
BT201.T94
Theophany;
Princeton Theological Seminary-Speer Library

1 1012 00028 8896