Watts - BX5200 .W3 1813 v.4

$44 tilt 5{6BIFICL OF CIIRI57. It must be eönfessed there are some things se described hi scìipture, as makes it necessary to explain them by the help of tropesand figures ; as for instance, there are several expressions which represent Gód to us as seeing with his eyes, as bearing with his ears, as aor*ing with his hands, as rejoicing, as griev- ing, as repenting, he. and these cannot he understood in their literal sense, because it is contrary to the nature of God who is. a Spirit, contraryto our reason in our best apprehensionsof God, and it is also contrary to otherplaces of scripture where God is declared to be a Spirit who hath no bodily parts or passions : And these are sufficient arguments to constrain us to forsake the literal sense, and to construe these expressions in scripture as mere figurés and resemblances of divine things, spoken after the manner of men. So in the Lord's-supper, whenChrist says, this bread is my body, it cannot be understood in the literal sense, because it is contrary to the testimony of our senses, our reason, and the scripture, that the body of Christ should be handled and eaten by the apostles, and yet at the same time be sitting at the table and eating with them, with a hundred other absurdities which attend the popish doctrine of transubstantia- tion ; it must be therefore a figurative expression, and it is hard to conceive how any reasonable and honest mind should mistake the true meaning, viz. this bread is the sign or Aare of my body. But in the plain scriptural doctrines of the atonement of Christ for sin, and the assistances or influencésof theblessed Spirit towards the restoringof our natures to holiness, there is nothing"absurd; nothing inconsistent with reason, or with other scriptures, so as to make it necessary to construe them by tropes and figures. This may be made sufficiently to appear, if we ask but a fewquestions on each of these subjects. And first, of the atonement of Christ- for our sins. Is it not a most reasonable thing that a penalty should be annexed to the transgression of God's holy law, in order to deter men from sinning against God ? Is' not death a proper punishment for sin ? Ilath not the transgressor well deserved it ? Is not the execution of this threatening a proper means to secure the honour of God's authority, his justice, and his government of the world ? but is there no room for mercy to interpose and save hero and therea criminal ? May not di- vinej ustice receivethe same honour, and the authority and govern- ment of Godbe as effectually secured in the world, bymaking it appear that sin is punished, and the penalty executed upon a willing and avowed surety, as if the sinner himself werepunish- ed? Will not the world learn hereby how dangerous a thing it is,to transgress the law of God, when it appears that even mercy itself will not release the sinner without some atoning sacrifice, without some demonstration of the justice of the law of God, and his hatred of sin ? And when so glorious a person, andone su dear to God as his own Son, becomes the surety, Low Both'

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=