familiarly with his difciples, frequently foretels his own death. And when one of his apoftles endeavours to diffuade him from going up to Jerufalem there to fuffer, he fharply rebukes him for it of fuch importance was it, in his esteem, to the falvation of man and the glory of God. And when he was expiring on the cross he cried, with his last breath, "IT IS FINISHED; plainly implying, that his death is of the laft importance; that his death comprehends all.

The propitiatory death of our great Highprieft was foretold in the earlieft promifes, and prefigured in the ancient types. The dying Jefus was reprefented by the pafchal-lamb which was facrificed in Egypt, instead of the firft-born of the Ifraelites; the blood of which, being sprinkled on the door-pofts of their houses, fecured them from the fword of the deftroying angel. For, as the pafchal-lamb ranfomed the firft-born, being facrificed for them; fo Jefus delivers believers from the fword of Divine juftice, by dying in their ftead. It is neceffary, however, to be obferved, that as thofe things which were but imperfectly reprefented under the law, are fully accomplished under the gofpel; there is this difference between the type and the antitype: The former, though not an equivalent for the life of a man, was accepted of God; because the defign then was, not to make fatisfaction to God's juftice; but only to prefigure that facrifice which was to make a full fatisfaction. But Chrift is a worthy ranfom; a fubftitute, whom we need not fear being rejected, as inferior to thofe for whom he dies. He is, therefore, called, "The Lamb.

of God." He is THE LAMB, by way of excellence; the only lamb that can atone for our fins and ranfom our fouls. Such is the import of the phrase, according to the ftyle of infpira

tion; in which it is common to add the Divine name to any thing that is peculiarly excellent, great, or remarkable, As, for inftance; "The

mountains of God; the cedars of God; the "garden of God;" and here, "The Lamb of "God."—Our dying Surety was reprefented by the fcape-goat, on the great day of expiation. To fulfil this type, therefore, he must bear our fins; he must be anathema; he must be made a curfe for us. For if not, why was he reprefented by this goat? What was there, in any other view, common between them? I might, on this occafion, multiply particulars out of the Jewish ritual, but thefe may fuffice.

That the application we make of thefe ancient types is not fanciful and forced, the facred penmen of the New Teftament abundantly fhew. They unite in affuring us, That "Chrift our "paffover is facrificed for us-That he is the "Lamb of God, which taketh away the fin of "the world-That he himself bare our fins in "his own body on the tree-That he was made "fin for us-That he was made a curfe for

us-That he gave his life a ranfom for many -That he was delivered for our offences "That he hath reconciled and redeemed us to "God by his blood-That his blood purges the "confcience from dead works, and cleanfeth "from all fin."-Thefe declarations are perfectly conformable to the language of prophecy, in which it is faid; "The Lord hath laid on "him the iniquity of us all-He fhall make his "foul an offering for fin-The Meffiah fhall be 66 cut off, but not for himfelf-For the tranf "greffion of my people was he ftricken-He

was wounded for our tranfgreffions, he was "bruifed for our iniquities, the chastisement of

66

our peace was upon him, and with his ftripes. 66 we are healed."-What, now, can we infer from these, and a multitude of fimilar paffages in the Book of God, but that the death of Chrift was vicarious; that he died, not only for our good, but in our ftead; and that his death has procured for us, not fome trifling benefit only, but remiffion of fins and eternal life? being a full fatisfaction to the demands of a violated law, and the claims of eternal juftice.

But, notwithstanding all this, if Jesus be a mere creature, the doctrine of the fatisfaction cannot be defended. Of this the Socinians are aware, and therefore they renounce it; even though it is an article in the Chriftian faith of the greatest importance; an article, so often repeated, fo variously and fo emphatically expreffed in Scripture, that we might, with equal reason, renounce Revelation itself, as call it in queftion. But let us now inquire, what advantage we have by the death of Chrift, according to our op ponents.

They tell us, That the blood of Chrift confirms the new covenant, which God makes with mankind through him.'-But if his death ferve only to confirm the covenant, in their fenfe of the expreffions, there is little reason to confider it as the principal object of our believing regards. For of all the events relating to Jefus Chrift, this is the leaft adapted to confirm the Covenant. If we confider him as dying in our ftead, and as fuftaining the punishment deferved by our fins; there can be no doubt but his death affures us of the love of God, and ratifies his covenant of grace: but, on their hypothefis, it is not fitted to answer any fuch defign; his life, at leaft, is much better adapted to that purpose.

purpose. For those multiplied and shining miracles which he wrought, encourage our faith in him, much more than the forrows and pangs of his death. But though his miracles are better calculated to affure us of his power; yet his death is the greateft evidence of his love, and beft fitted to perfuade us of it.' To perfuade us of his love! But how fhould an unprofitable death be fo well adapted to perfuade us of his love? Was it ever known that a wife man laid down his life for no other end, but to convince another how much he loved him? Befides, on the principles of our adverfaries, the death of Chrift is more beneficial to himfelf than it is to us, as we have before proved.

But in what refpect does the death of Jefus confirm the covenant? Is it on the part of man, or on the part of God? Not the former, I prefume; it muft, therefore, be the latter; but then it is on our principles, not on theirs. That is, the death of Chrift gives us the highest affurance that God will perform his gracious promifes to the utmoft. This we allow; in this we rejoice, as a most comfortable and certain truth; because we confider the death of the incarnate Son, as the greatest poffible evidence of the Father's love to our fouls. Hence we conclude, that as God has done us this wonderful kindness, he will do us every other that he has promised; this being fuch a favour, as is greater than any, greater than all the reft. If it were not fo, it would by no means follow, that because he has delivered up Jefus to death, he will give us eternal life. For though it is highly probable, that he who does a greater kindness will do a lefs; yet it is far from being certain, that he who does a lefs will alfo do a greater. If Jefus be a mere man, and if his death be not a fatisfaction to Divine juftice;

his life cannot be fo valuable as the eternal hap→ piness of those he redeems; and, confequently, the gift of the former cannot affure us that we fhall have the latter.

The death of Chrift is alfo of ufe to confirm his doctrine.Suppofe it be, yet it cannot be the grand use of it; because the Scriptures never mention it as fuch, where the benefits resulting from it are enumerated. Befides, if this were its principal ufe, it would be of much less advantage to us than his life; the latter being abundantly better adapted to confirm his doctrine. His life is all glorious with great, beneficent, aftonishing works, which prove that the doctrine he teaches is truly Divine; because Heaven, by a thousand miraculous facts, gives him an unfufpected teftimony. But though his death plainly fhews, that he fincerely believes his doctrine to be Divine; yet, feparately confidered, it does not prove that it is fo in reality. Nor is he the only person who confirmed the truths which he taught, by fuffering a violent death. In this refpect there was nothing in his death but what was common to prophets, apoftles, and martyrs.-Again; To whom should the death of Chrift confirm the truth of his doctrine? to his enemies or his friends? Not his enemies; for the greatest and moft dreadful part of his fufferings was unobferved by them. They neither beheld his bloody agony in the garden, nor knew the cause of his bitter cry on the crofs. And as to those sufferings which did come under their notice, they looked upon them as the juft reward of his fuppofed blafphemy. Not his friends; for his death was confidered by them in a very different point of light. So far from confirming, that it flaggered their faith in his doctrine; and they cried out, "We trufted that it had been he which should