56 



THE REV. H. J. R. MARSTON, M.A., ON 



" based upon faith in the existence of one Eternal God, who, in His 

 wisdom created all things very good." 



Prof. Langhorne Orchard thought there could be no question 

 as to the truth that " a profound and inviolable association linked 

 the forgiveness of their sins with the shedding of the blood of 

 Jesus " (p. 49). 



The value of the Paper — good as it is — would, however, have 

 been enhanced had the author carefully explained the meaning of 

 "sin " and the meaning of " The Blood of Christ." St. John tells 

 us that "sin is lawlessness." It is insubjectivity of will to the 

 law of God. The proper penalty of sin is forfeiture of life, as 

 stated in the declarations — " The soul that sinneth it shall die," 

 " The wages of sin is death," " Sin, when it is finished, bringeth 

 forth death." By his sin, man has forfeited his life. The penalty 

 must be met, either by the sinner himself, or, if he is to be saved, by 

 another — on his behalf. Thus, salvation involves the vicarious 

 principle, and is impossible otherwise. ... " The Blood of 

 Christ " is His life poured out upon the Cross, that we might live 

 (cf. Lev. xvii, 11, 14, and St. John x, 10). 



The Chairman in closing the meeting said that he thought the 

 Institute owed a debt of gratitude to Mr. Schwartz for he showed 

 the " leanness of the land " possessed by merely negative teaching. 



Mr. Marston had already left, but the meeting indicated very 

 plainly its gratitude for the impressive address he had delivered on a 

 subject of profound importance. 



Subsequent Communications. 



Sir Robert Anderson : To gain clear thoughts on this subject 

 we do well to define the Avord " Atonement." As Archbishop 

 Trench tells us in his Synonyms, " When our translation (of the 

 Bible) was made it signified, as innumerable examples prove, 

 reconciliation, or the making up of a foregoing enmity ; all its uses 

 in our early literature justifying the etymology, now sometimes 

 called in question, that 'atonement ' is at-one-ment." 



No one, indeed, who will study the passages in which the Hebrew 

 word occurs which our translators usually render " to make 

 atonement " can fail to see that under the divine law the at-one-ment 

 was not the sacrifice itself, but a result of sacrifice, depending on the 



