are to be understood in their literal and obvious meaning, there can be no doubt. The soldier with a spear pierced his side. The nails by which he was fastened to the cross, pierced his hands and his feet. It was, therefore, Christ as man who was pierced by his enemies. But says our author, "Corporeal sufferance was not the sole price to be paid for our salvation. The iron entered the soul of the victim." Be it so. I do not maintain that the sufferings of Christ were confined to his body. I admit that he suffered in his soul, but this is not admitting that he suffered in his divine nature.

But our author thinks he has found a conclusive argument in support of his theory, in the change of the personal pronoun in this passage. "The speaking God of the prophet is the mighty me of the prediction; They shall look upon me whom they have pierced.' And now mark well the sudden and significant change of the phraseology. And they shall shall mourn for him.' Why this sudden transmutation of the third for the first person? It was no idle play of words. The transition was big with meaning. The speaker was God the Son. He designated by the pronoun me his own ethereal essence. But at the time of the fulfilment of the prophecy, a new nature was to be added, consisting of a perfect man, corporeally and intellectually. To that adjunct nature, the man to be united to the God, the pronoun him was applied. They shall look on me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him. The viewless sword of the Lord of

Hosts was to pervade both natures of the incarnate Deity."

Here it will be perceived that our author again entirely overlooks the fact that the human and divine natures of Christ constitute but one person. According to the above interpretation, Christ as God is one person, denoted by the pronoun me, and Christ as man another person, denoted by the pronoun him. The pronouns me, and him, in this passage, doubtless denote the same person-not different parts of the same person. Consequently the passage is thus quoted in the New Testament; "They shall look on him whom they have pierced."

This is probably a case of enallage, or change of construction. Numerous examples occur, in the poetical and prophetic parts of the Bible, of a change from the second to the third, and from the first to the third person, without a change of subject.

The best commentators agree that in Isa. 1: 29, we have an example of a change from the third to the second person; "For they shall be ashamed of the oaks which ye have desired." So also Micah 7: 18; " Who is a God like unto thee that pardoneth iniquity, and passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage?"

The following is an example of a change from the second to the third person; Gen. 49: 4; "Thou wentest up to thy father's bed-he went up to my couch." From the first person to the third; Isa. 44: 24, 25; "I am Jehovah who maketh all things-He frustra

teth the signs," &c. Prov. 8: 17; "I love them that love me;" literally rendered, it would read, 1 love them that love her; both pronouns doubtless denoting the same subject, viz. wisdom.

They shall look on me, and shall mourn for him, is but another way of saying, they shall look on him, and shall mourn for him.

Το suppose that Christ in this passage speaks of his divine nature in the first person, and of his human nature in the third person, is to suppose that he has adopted a mode of expression which has no parallel in any other passage in the Bible.

CHAPTER V.

Mr. G.'s theory of the atonement, viz. that Christ must have endured an amount of suffering equal to that deserved by all for whom he suffered. This theory shown to be inconsistent with grace in the gift of pardon; to be derogatory to the character of Christ, and subversive of the great object for which the plan of salvation was devised. The true object of the atonement, to render it consistent for God to pardon sin, without giving up his law. That amount of suffering which answers this end, all that is needed. The sufferings of Christ shown to be the sufferings not of a mere man, but of HIM who is both God and man, and to derive infinite atoning value from the dignity and glory of his Person.

a righteous law. Those who have

THE object for which Christ suffered, as is admitted by all evangelical Christians, was, that he might make atonement for sin. But why was an atonement necessary? It was necessary to render pardon consistent with the honor of God, and the claims of his law. The law which God has given, is Its penalty is a righteous penalty. incurred this penalty, are, of course, justly condemned; and if the perfections of God required that such a law should be given to his moral kingdom, they also require that it should be maintained and executed. How then, can transgressors be forgiven? Obviously in no way, unless some expedient be devised, by which God and his law shall be as much honored, while sinners are pardoned, as they would have been by the execution of the penalty upon every transgressor. The ex

THE SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST. 107

pedient which has been devised for this purpose, is the atonement. Christ has consented to become the substitute for sinners, and to suffer in their stead. He is "the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but for the sins of the whole world." He "who knew no sin, became sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." That is, though perfectly innocent, he consented to be treated as a sinner, to suffer in the room of sinners, that we for his sake, might be restored to favor, and be treated as if we were righteous.

The sufferings of Christ were vicarious. He suf fered not for himself, but for men; and in consequence of the atonement which he has made, pardon and eternal life, are now offered to a guilty world.

The object of the atonement, it will be seen, was to manifest to the universe God's abhorrence of sin, and his determination to maintain his law, as much as he would have manifested these things by the eternal punishment of the whole human race, had no atonement been made.

Now what amount of suffering was it necessary for Christ to endure to accomplish this object?

Mr. G.'s views on this point, may be gathered from the following extracts: "All the redeemed of every nation, clime, and age, were destined to the relentless grasp of this undying death. They owed it an amount which human arithmetic has no powers to compute. Payment to the uttermost farthing in the sufferings of the transgressors-sufferings as ceaseless as the flow of