tribe and tongue and people and nation" (ver. 9). In vii, 14, the glorified multitudes of heaven are described as those who "washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb." In all these allusions, and others like them which appear in later portions of the book, there is unquestionable reference to sacrificial ideas of the blood of atonement.' In this particular the Apocalypse, the epistle, and the gospel of John are seen to be in thorough harmony, and their common doctrine of Jesus offering himself as a sacrificial lamb is witnessed also by the language put in the mouth of John the Baptist in John i, 29, 36: "Behold, the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world." This form of expression obviously contemplates a sacrificial victim, and one without spot or blemish. His removing or bearing away (aipwv) the sin of the world suggests the deepest and most farreaching import of vicarious atonement, and accords with the doctrine of the new song in Rev. v, 9.

7. The Teaching of Peter. The early teaching of Peter, as recorded in the Acts of the apostles, makes prominent the provision for remission of sins in the name of Jesus Christ (Acts ii, 38; iii, 26; iv, 10-12; v, 31; x, 43). The emphasis placed on "the name of Jesus Christ," and on his work as Saviour from sin, can be satisfactorily explained only in the light of his mediatorial office and work as set forth in other scriptures. How else shall one interpret the strong words of Acts iv, 12, "In none other is there salvation: for there is not another name under heaven, that is given among men, wherein we must be saved"? If this teaching of Peter stood alone, unsupported and unexplained by other apostolic preaching, we might not cite these fragments of his sermons as conclusive proof that current ideas of the expiation of sin entered into his conception of the saving work of Christ. Nor are we to suppose that this apostle's doctrinal views of the death of Christ were fully developed at the time he spoke the words recorded in the Acts. We find upon further inquiry that he, as well as the other apostles, recognized from the first that Christ had made an atonement for sin. The preaching of Philip (Acts viii, 35), based upon Isa. liii, 7, 8, set forth Jesus in the figure of a sheep that is led to the slaughter, and would most naturally have explained that same scripture in the light of sacrificial offerings of blood to one who had come from Ethiopia to Jerusalem to worship.

8. Sprinkling of the Blood of Jesus. Passing to the first epistle

1 It is an error, however, of some interpreters to find in the "garment sprinkled with blood' in xix, 13, an allusion to the blood of expiation or atonement. There we have the figure of a conquering hero, drawn from Isa. lxiii, 1-6, and the blood which stains his apparel is not his own blood, but that of his enemies whom he tramples down in the fierceness of his wrath.

of Peter, we observe in the salutation (i, 2) an allusion to the "sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ," and in verses 18 and 19 of the same chapter we read: "Ye were redeemed, not with corruptible things, with silver or gold, from your vain manner of life handed down from your fathers; but with precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot." No faithful exegesis of this scripture can fail to recognize the obvious allusion to such atonement as was wont to be made by the blood of sacrificial lambs. A comparison of the phrase without blemish and without spot with the requirements of sacrificial offerings in the law of Exod. xii, 5; Lev. xxii, 19-21; Deut. xvii, 1, puts this beyond all reasonable question. How could a Jew like Peter or any other of his time conceive redemption from sin by means of blood except in the light of that doctrine of vicarious blood of life enunciated in Lev. xvii, 11, and so familiar in the ritual of Jewish worship? The entire passage is one of the most explicit on record for showing the propitiatory character of the death of Jesus Christ.

9. Bearing our Sins in his Body. In 1 Pet. ii, 21-24, the mediatorial sufferings of Christ are further set forth in language which has obvious allusion to the Servant of Jehovah as described in Isa. liii, 4-9: "Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that ye should follow his steps: who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth: who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously: who his own self bare our sins in his body upon the tree, that we, having died unto sin, might live unto righteousness; by whose stripes ye were healed." The statement that he "carried our sins in his body up to the tree" (ȧvývεуKEV ETTİ Tò šúλov) conveys the idea that somehow our sins were crucified upon his cross. The thought is not that of bearing sins up to an altar and placing them thereon; for the cross was in no true sense an altar, nor can we think of sins as an offering upon an altar; but rather he carried the burden of our sins upon his soul up to the cross and nailed it with himself thereon. His soul was thus made an offering for sin (comp. Isa. liii, 10), and by his personal suffering and sacrifice we obtain remission of guilt and the power of living unto righteousness. But this vicarious suffering was no fictitious quid pro quo, no mechanical or commercial payment of a debt, no infinite equivalent for an inconceivable infinite demerit.' It was rather a mighty mediatorial struggle

The theory that the sins of the world were imputed to Christ, or that the guilt of sin was thus imputed, and that he was punished for the same with an infliction of suffering and death equal in penal value to all the woe that must have come upon the guilty world, and that all this was necessary to satisfy the demands of justice in the nature of God, may now be treated as obsolete. The

even unto death, the death of the cross, whereby we, "having died unto sins," that is, having broken with sin and having become separate from its power by faith in the passion of our Lord, and by an intense sympathetic fellowship in his sufferings, "might live unto righteousness." And so again, to use Isaiah's words (liii, 5), "by his bruise ye were healed." In this respect there is a vicarious element in the sufferings of Christ, and in his bearing our sins up to the cross, which is no example for us, and cannot be.

10. Partaking in Christ's Sufferings. But while some aspects of Christ's sufferings place him apart from other men, and render his the only name under heaven by which we may be saved, there is another point of view from which it appears that all who suffer for Christ's sake are partakers of his sufferings. We are told in 1 Pet. iii, 17, 18, that it is praiseworthy to suffer in the will of God for welldoing, "because Christ also suffered for sins once, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God." In iv, 1, we also read: "Forasmuch then as Christ suffered as to the flesh, arm yourselves with the same mind, for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin." The writer's thought is here turned to the more ordinary sufferings of our fleshly human nature in its struggle with temptations to sin. He who suffers in his struggle to overcome sin, and steadfastly refuses to yield to its power as Jesus did in the days of his flesh, "hath ceased from sin," that is, has utterly broken with it and ceased from its control. The brethren, therefore, who are exposed to fiery trial, are exhorted to rejoice in the thought that they are thus made "partakers of Christ's sufferings" (iv, 13). The writer of this epistle was himself "a witness of the sufferings of Christ" (v, 1), and he had confidence that he and all who followed the divine Master should also be partakers of the heavenly glory that was to be revealed; but Christ alone could be spoken of as "a lamb without blemish," whose precious blood makes expiation for the sins of

men.

theory of full penal satisfaction made by Christ is logically at the basis of the Romish doctrine of indulgences and the later forms of Antinomianism. If Christ has truly paid all the penalty, divine justice can have no further claim on anyone for whom Christ died. A righteous God cannot exact his claims twice over. The theory of penal satisfaction, moreover, logically excludes grace. Where an obligation has been fully discharged, there is nothing left to pardon.

1 Healing is to be taken here in the sense of cure and restoration from sin as a fearful disease. Comp. the figure in Isa. vi, 10; Jer. iii, 22; Hos. xiv, 5.

CHAPTER V

DOCTRINE OF THE PAULINE EPISTLES

1. Christ's Mediation the Substance of Paul's Gospel. In the Pauline epistles we find the mediatorial work of Christ set forth as the very substance of the gospel. The few allusions to the doctrine in Paul's preaching, as recorded in the Acts, accord also with the teaching of the epistles. Thus he proclaims, at Antioch of Pisidia, remission of sins and justification through the crucified and risen Jesus (xiii, 38, 39); at Athens he declares that "it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise again from the dead" (xvii, 3); at Miletus he enjoins the elders of the church "to feed the church of the Lord which he purchased with his own blood" (xx, 28). In 1 Thess. i, 10, Jesus is mentioned as the one "who delivers' us from the wrath to come," and in v, 10, as our Lord "who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him." Such incidental allusions imply a well-defined doctrine of the saving work of Christ.

2. The Corinthian Epistles. The Corinthian epistles contain numerous allusions of a similar character, but do not attempt any elaborate treatment of the doctrine of the cross. In proclaiming at Corinth the mystery or the testimony' of God, Paul made "Jesus and him crucified" his great central theme (1 Cor. ii, 2). He held "the word of the cross" to be "the power of God to them that are saved" (i, 18), and that "Christ Jesus was made unto us wisdom from God, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption" (i, 30). The Christian believer is "bought with a price" no less or other than the death of the Lord Jesus (vi, 20; vii, 23; viii, 11; xv, 3), who "died for our sins according to the scriptures." It was therefore no new or exceptional idea for this apostle to recognize the bread and cup of the Lord's Supper as a symbol of the communion of the body and of the blood of Christ (x, 16; xi, 25-27), and for him to speak of Christ as our immolated paschal lamb (v, 7). In the light of all these statements it seems impossible to read 2 Cor. v, 14-19, without feeling that the writer is intending to give unmistakable expression to the vicarious nature

1 Compare the deliverer, ròv pvóuevov, of this text with the same word in Rom. xi, 26.

? There seems little to choose between the two alternative readings μvorýpov and μaprúpov, both of which are well attested by ancient authorities.

of the death of Jesus: "The love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that one died for all, therefore the all died (ol Távtes ảπévavov); and he died for all, that they who live should no longer live unto themselves, but unto him who died for them and rose again." There is, no doubt, a certain mystical element, peculiar to Paul, in this manner of thinking and speaking (comp. Rom. vi, 5-11; Gal. ii, 20). All who partake of the saving grace of Christ are conceived as crucified and dying along with Christ. In this ideal but spiritually real sense these all die, because in fact and truth he died for the sake of all of them (vπèρ пávтwv). This entire ministry of saving mercy has its source in God (ex Tov vɛov, ver. 18), "who reconciled us unto himself through Christ, and gave unto us the ministry of reconciliation."

3. God in Christ Reconciling the World. According to Paul, all men are, by the depraved tendencies of their nature and by their persistent habits of transgression, at enmity toward God; but from the bosom of God, as from a fountain of infinite love, spring the passion and the purpose of restoring the fallen, of redeeming the captives of sin, and of effecting a state of harmony and holy fellowship between himself and man. "The ministry of reconciliation" is the mediatorial work of Christ, who died for all, and its magnitude and scope are set forth in most impressive words: "God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, not reckoning unto them their trespasses." The object sought in this ministry of reconciliation is the whole world (κóoμov). Nothing less than this could satisfy the yearnings of infinite love, and no more profound or suggestive statement bearing on the doctrine of redemption can be made than finds expression in the words, "God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself." It may well seem strange that any exegete should argue, in the face. of this statement, that we are to think of God as reconciled to the world rather than the world to God. But it has been maintained that, inasmuch as the Scriptures represent God as a righteous judge, indignant every day with the wickedness of the wicked (Psa. vii, 9-11), and as Paul himself speaks of "the wrath of God against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men" (Rom. i, 18; comp. Eph. v, 6; Col. iii, 6), the reconciliation here spoken of must needs have reference mainly to the removal of God's wrath against the sinful world. It may be that the controversy is to some extent a vain wrangle over words, for there can be no question as to the attitude of the Holy One toward human sinfulness: he is "of purer eyes than to behold evil, and cannot look on miserable perverseness" (Hab. i, 13). But the question in 2 Cor. v, 18, 19, is not about the essential antagonism of the holiness of God and