GO 



ATONEMENT. 



Atonement, cannot be two different substances in existence, each 

 of them eternal, self-existent, independent, and un- 

 changeable. Whether then shall we acknowledge as 

 the eternal principle, matter, which is motionless, in- 

 ert, and incapable of acting with intelligence, or that 

 spirit which we denominate God, and which can be 

 demonstrated to be possessed of power, intelligence, 

 and goodness ? The question scarcely requires an 

 answer. There can be only one eternal Being, and 

 that Being is God, from whom matter receives its 

 existence, motions, forms, and modifications. For a 

 fuller demonstration of this subject, see Cudworth's 

 Intellect. Si/st. and the articles Matter, Meta- 

 I'HYMCs Motion - . (#) 



ATONEMENT, in theology, means that sacri- 

 fice which Christ offered in his own person for the 

 sins of men. This doctrine supposes the human race 

 to be in a fallen state, and incapable of effecting its 

 deliverance. There is evidently the strongest founda- 

 tion in reason for this representation. It is perfectly 

 obvious that all have sinned; and, if we may judge 

 from the infinitely varied and inconsistent attempts of 

 men, it appears no less certain that they were alto- 

 gether incapable of devising any effectual method of 

 expiating their sins. The austerities of the bigot, 

 however, the self-inflicted torments of the enthusiast, 

 and the sacrificial rites of all nations, show the gene- 

 ral impression on the human mind, that some expia- 

 tion was necessary. The whole tenor of the sacred 

 scriptures leads to the same conclusion. The Su- 

 preme Lawgiver could not but exact perfect obe- 

 dience to his laws, and denounce punishment against 

 those who transgressed them : for laws cannot be en- 

 forced but by penal sanctions, and these sanctions can 

 have no effect unless they are carried into execution. 

 According to this view of the case, then, the whole 

 human rate must stand condemned by the pure and 

 holy law of God, which they have so often violated. 

 It is absurd to talk of the mercy of God interposing 

 to save us from punishment, without any satisfaction 

 to his justice : it would be the same as if a king were 

 to enact wholesome laws for the security of his peo- 

 ple, which his clemency prevented him from ever car- 

 rying into execution. Thus, then, the justice and 

 holiness of God stood in the way of an unconditional 

 pardon, and demanded that the purity of his nature 

 should be vindicated, and the honour of his law as- 

 serted ; he could not however have inflicted on man the 

 punishment which his sins deserved, without involving 

 the whole human race in one common ruin, as he 

 formerly did with the generation before the flood. 

 In order, then, that the sinner might be justified, and 

 the honour of the divine law preserved inviolate, God 

 sent his Son into the world, with his own free consent, 

 that he might take away sin by the sacrifice of him- 

 self. For this purpose he assumed the human na- 

 ture, that he might exhibit a perfect example of 

 righteousness, and accommodate his instructions to 

 our capacities ; but chiefly that he might suffer and 

 die for our oflences. 



The adversaries of this doctrine have endeavoured 

 to bring it into discredit, by representing it as a-kin 

 to the notions of the heathens, who conceived their 

 gods to be cruel, and vindictive, and only to be ap- 

 peased by the blood of innocent victims. No repre- 



sentation can be more contrary to the spirit of Scrip- Atonement, 

 ture, which uniformly represents the Almighty as ac- 

 tuated by love, and not by vengeance, when be plan- 

 ned the great scheme of redemption. God so lo- 

 ved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, 

 that whosoever believcth on him might not perish, but 

 have everlasting life :" and to show that his displea- 

 sure was directed against the offence, rather than the 

 offenders, he punished sin in the person of his own 

 Son, " making him to be sin for us, though he knew 

 no sin, that we might be the righteousness of God in 

 him." 



It has been disputed whether the divinity ofChrLt 

 be essentially connected with the doctrine of his atone- 

 ment. All the Arians maintain the negative side oi 

 the question : they admit the efficacy of the atone- 

 ment, but deny the proper divinity of Christ. Some 

 Trinitarians are of the same opinion, maintaining that 

 the efficacy of the atonement arises from its being ap- 

 pointed by God, and not from the dignity of the suf- 

 ferer. But if this were the case, we do not see why 

 the blood of bulls and of rams might not have been 

 equally meritorious, for they certainly were offered by 

 divine appointment. Besides, there is an axiom equal- 

 ly applicable to physics, to morals, and to theology y 

 Frustrafit per plura, quod fieri potest per pandora. 

 This axiom has been formed, from contemplating the 

 works and dispensations of God ; in which, whilst 

 there is nothing defective, we never discover any 

 thing superfluous, or redundant. Admitting, then, 

 the divinity of Christ, we cannot well see how toy 

 one can deny it to be essentially connected with the 

 efficacy of his atonement : for if a divine person has 

 suffered, and that by God's appointment, we may 

 conclude, from the general analogy of nature, that it 

 is, not only proper it should be so, but that nothing 

 less could have sufficed. This conclusion is also in 

 perfect consistence with the usual sentiments of man- 

 kind on this subject, who have uniformly believed that 

 sacrifices were efficacious, in proportion to their va- 

 lue. This sentiment, with certain qualifications, is 

 strictly true ; and we would therefore naturally con- 

 clude, that the sacrifice of the Son of God, as being 

 most valuable in its nature, was, on that account, most 

 effectual in its consequences for expiating the sins of 

 men. The apostle, indeed, seems to decide this ques- 

 tion, and to show that the prevailing efficacy of our 

 High Priest depends on his supreme dignity ; and 

 that nothing less could have suited the wants of men. 

 " Such a High Priest became us, who is holy, harm- 

 less, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made liigh- 

 er than the heavens." Heb. vii. 26. 



The further exposition of the doctrine of atone- 

 ment, with the various opinions entertained respecting 

 it, belongs more properly to the article Theology : 

 we shall therefore content ourselves at present, with 

 obviating some of the principal objections which have 

 been urged against the general doctrine. 



Deists, who reject the whole of revelation, reject of 

 course the doctrine of atonement. In. this they 

 are at least consistent, which is more than can be 

 said for the Socinians, who join them in this re- 

 spect, whilst they pretend to reverence the scriptures 

 as a revelation from heaven : their objections arc the 

 same, in so far as they pretend to draw them from 



