THE CHRISTIAN OBSERVER. No. 205.] JANUARY, 1819. [No. 1. Vol. XVIII. ! RELIGIOUS COMMUNICATIONS. For the Christian Observer. INQUIRY RESPECTING THE JUSTIFYING FAITH OF BELIEV With regard to the subject which I am about to consider, it must be confessed to be attended with considerable difficulties, and therefore ERS, PRIOR TO THE COMING requires every attention and dili OF CHRIST. Tis difficult, in examining a sub long since decided, to become so free from all sort of bias, and to be so delivered from the influence of preconceptions, as to give a fair hearing and full weight to the arguments produced. Opinions, like streams of water, if long continued in the same direction, form, as it were, a deep channel, from which it is no easy task to turn their course. One very important step, however, towards remedying this evil, is to be fully aware of its existence, and to be at all times on our guard against its injurious effects. As truth, and truth only, is what we ought to have in view, nothing should be suffered to deter or impede our course in the search after it; and we should never receive any doctrine or subject as true, except it be supported and confirmed by substantial proofs, however favourably we may feel towards it, however long we have cherished it, and however important we may consider it to be to a system which we are anxious to maintain. The lawful supports of truth are proofs and facts, and not the favourable impressions and feel. ings of our minds, or the mere antiquity of an opinion, or the grandeur and majesty of names, by which it has been held and defended. CHRIST. OBSERV, No. 205. gence of search that we are capable of exerting. In discussing the point, I am anxious neither to violate the feelings of any humble Christian who may not be prepared to view this particular point in the same light with myself. The remarks of any of your candid and learned correspondents on the subject of my paper will be weighed with impartiality; and I should add, that a principal object which I propose to myself in drawing up these remarks is to remove, or rather to account for, an objection made by Socinians to the doctrine of the atonement, arising from the circumstance of its not being mentioned in the prayers and praises of believers under the Old-Testament dispensation. Before we proceed to the intended examination, two or three things must be first premised. The field in which we are to make and pursue our inquiry, is principally the Old Testament; for it is the faith of those under that dispensation that we are engaged to ascertain. I do not mean to intimate that such information as may be fairly drawn from the New, is not to be received; but I simply wish, at present, to point the attention of my readers to that spot whither it ought, in an especial manrer, to be directed, in order, if possible, to bring the mind back to the Old Testament age, that we B may be able to form an unbiassed judgment on the information which the believers under that dispensation are known to have possessed. This I consider important in our inquiry: for too often, when we examine their creed and knowledge of Divine truth, we bring their means of information to the light of the Gospel; aud because they then appear in a very clear view, we often suppose that there are but few degrees of difference between their knowledge and ours. Indeed, it is almost impossible for us to conduct this inquiry impartially: for we are so much accustomed to consider the Divine communications and institutions in the Old Testament, in connexion with their explications in the New, that we are scarcely able to separate them, so as to judge correctly what degree of light the former were of themselves capable of imparting. In making use of the New Testament, we must be careful to preserve this distinction in our mind. We must not take what is there said by way of explanation of the promises, prophecies, and institutions of former dispensations, as what the ancient people of God actually knew of them. Wherever we find any thing in the New Testament mentioned which has reference to things under former dispensations, it ought to be our care to examine whether what is stated refer to the actual knowledge, under the old economy, of the meaning of what is thus mentioned, or only to its full meaning, as developed and explained by the Gospel. There is arther remark which ought to be made before we enter on the subject; and this respects the real state of the question. The inquiry is not, whether God's plan of justifying a sinner is the same every age; for the Gospel leaves us in no doubt whatever respect ing this; but whether the plan itself was in any and in what degree understood by the Old-Testament in saints. Every person who believes the Gospel must allow, and I trust no reader will mistake my meaning on this important subject, that "it is through the atoning sacrifice of Christ alone, that forgiveness of sins and acceptance with God are to be obtained;" but whether this way of forgiveness and acceptance was known and understood prior to the coming of Christ, is the present point of inquiry. That they looked forward to some illustrious Personage, who should bring with him great blessings both of a temporal and spiritual nature, cannot for a moment be questioned: but whether they considered him as a Mediator, as a Sacrifice for sin, as one in whom they were to receive forgiveness and acceptance in the sight of God, is less apparent; and this is the point which we are at present engaged to ascertain. No other view of "Him that should come" could lead them to consider him, or justify them in making him, the object of a saving faith. In the examination of this subject, I shall first consider some of the clearest and most important promises and prophecies that are to be found in the Old Testament, and then possibly refer to some of the more particular institutions recorded in that Sacred Volume, The first promise is that given. by Jehovah, when he pronounced the curse upon the serpent, and which mentions that "the Seed, of the woman should bruise the serpent's head." The language in which this promise was conveyed is figurative and mysterious. Whether this Seed was to be a single person or the whole future race of those to whom the promise was given, whether the victory was to be obtained by an extraordinary character or otherwise, and by what means it was to be acquired, are points that could not be learned from this promise. All that our first parents could understand by it was, that there would, be a conflict between the two offsprings; and that the woman's race, though injured in the combat, should yet become victorious. That this promise conveyed to them an idea of a Mediator, of one who was to reconcile them to God -indeed, of any particular individual-is what the passage, I conceive, will not allow us to suppose. But be the exact meaning what it might, that it administered comfort to our first parents may be easily conceived. It was undoubtedly, under any view, a valuable pro mise. It gave them to understand and to hope that a victory should be obtained by their offspring over their enemy and insidious deceiver. The way in which they may be conceived to have been saved, may be considered, I imagine, to have been of this nature: they believed generally the promise of God as to the victory, without knowing the means by which that victory was to be obtained, relying merely on God's power and faithfulness for its accomplishment. Their faith, therefore, had respect only to a merciful God, made known to them as such in this promise. To attribute any other object to their faith, is to maintain what the information which they possessed will not, I conceive, justify: for of the Seed promised they knew nothing that could have induced them to fix upon it as the object of their hope and trust; it being merely said, that their seed should have the victory, without notifying in any degree the means by which that victory was to be obtained. The next promise that we have upon record is that made to Abraham when he was called out of his own land, and from his own kindred. This promise embraces several particulars: he was to possess the land of Canaan-he was to be blessed-to be a great nation-and to be a blessing to all the families of the earth. This promise was often renewed, but with very little variation. In chapter xv. we have an account of God's appearing to him, and addressing him in these words; "Fear not, Abraham; I am thy shield, thy exceeding great reward." Abraham replied, that he had ho child. God answered him, and again promised him a seed, and that a very numerous one. It is added, that "Abraham believed in the Lord," and that "he counted it to him for righteousness." This is the only place in the Old Testament where this expression respecting Abraham occurs. A similar one is to be found in the Psalms, where the act of Phineas respecting the transgressors in the camp of Israel is mentioned. Indeed, the expression in the Psalms corresponds exactly with the words of this passage as quoted by St. Paul. (Ps. cvi. 31; Rom. iv. 3.) What we are to understand by what is here said of Abraham's faith does not seem to me very clear. That his faith had regard merely to a numerous seed, is all, I imagine, that the passage will allow it contains no reference whatever to Christ. deed, this is the view given of it by St. Paul himself; for he mentions only the promise of a numerous seed as its object. Why a belief in a promise of this kind should be counted to him for righteousness is not very easy to be conceived; except we consider that the principle of faith, as it regards the faithfulness of God, is all that is to be taken into the account; which, perhaps, is the only view that can be fairly proved and established. In In chapter xvii. God appears again to Abram, and says to him, "I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect." And then he repeats in part the former promises, and enlarges on them. He makes him a Father of many nations, and on this account changes his name into Abraham-He promises to be a God to him, and to his seed for ever; and he not only gives him the land of Canaan, but gives it" for an everlasting possession." To ensure the accomplish ment of these promises, and to afford a visible proof that he would fulfil them, he instituted the rite of circumcision. In all these additions to the former promises, there was nothing necessarily to lead Abraham's mind to Christ. God had appeared to him at subsequent periods; but there were no additions made to the promises-they were, in substance, the same, and nearly in the same words. promises made to Abraham and his faith, are referred to: but as the Apostle does not speak so much of the actual knowledge of Abraham, as of the meaning of the promises made to him, it is not necessary to dwell particularly on his evidence. There is, however, one passage which must be noticed. In speaking of the promises, he says, "that they were not made to seeds, but to seed;" (Gal. iii. 16);—but we may consider this "seed" to be the mystical Christ, the whole church, including its Head and members, (see 1 Cor. xii. 12); that is, to a particular individual, which he explains to be Christ. That God in making the promise had Christ in view is plain; but that Abraham understood this is not so plain, nor does the Apostle affirm it to have been so. Indeed, how could he understand it, without a further revelation? The word "seed "is of an ambiguous nature: it may mean a whole progeny; it may mean a single individual. The general tenor of the promises is in favour of the first sense; and in some parts of them the other sense cannot be attached to it. But that it has the other sense is now plain; because an inspired Apostle has told us so; and, having this clue, we can readily explore the latent meaning of those promises, which, though doubtless known, generally speaking, to be of a cheering aspect, could not be fully or correctly understood even by the individual himself to whom they were immediately given. There are in the New Testament several passages which refer to Abraham, and to the promises, made to him. Christ himself says, that "Abraham desired to see his day, and that he saw it, and was glad." The day of Christ certainly means the day of the Gospel; and what view he had of the day of the Gospel, is to be ascertained best by examining the promises with which he was favoured. He was to have a seed- -a numerous seed. He was to have great blessings for this seed, and his seed was to convey blessings to all the families of the earth. All these things he believed; he saw with the eye of faith, and the view was fully calculated to fill his heart with joy. That he saw the means by which these blessings were to be procured, that he saw the channel through which they were to flow, is what the promises, abstractedly considered, will not lead us to believe; nor do the words of our Saviour require that we should attribute to him such a view as this. That Abraham beheld Christ typified in his son when he was commanded to offer him, is a very generally received opinion; but it is what we have no evidence to prove: we cannot collect any thing of the kind from the history of the transaction, or from any part of the Old or the New Testament. Indeed, we are told precisely why he was com- We come next to the prophecy manded to perform this severe task of Jacob on his death-bed. He of self-denial. To assign any other speaks of some extraordinary perreason for it, is to be "wise above son that should proceed from Juwhat is written." dah: "The sceptre shall not deIn the writings of St. Paul, the part from Judah, nor a law-giver The promises made to Isaac and Jacob do not appear to throw any new light on the question, containing nothing that is more explicit or particular, being for the most part in substance and words the same with those made to Abraham. from between his feet, until Shiloh come: and unto him shall the gathering of the people be." (Gen. xlix. 10.) In this prophecy there is no idea conveyed, but that of a King, whose dominion should be very extensive, and whose name should be "peace," which is generally considered as the meaning of the word Shiloh. There is no decisive information as to the point in hand from this prophecy, and therefore it requires no remark. After this we meet with no particular promise or prophecy till we come to the time of Moses; who speaks of a Prophet that God should raise from his brethren like unto himself. But as this does not present to us any thing particular, I shall pass it over without any ob servation. David is the next person to whom we may look for information. What was said to him respecting the continuance and extent of his kingdom did, no doubt, centre in Christ: but that he understood it so, or that there was any thing in the promise or the prophecy respecting his seed, which might fairly and clearly lead him to consider the person promised any thing more than an earthly sovereign, is what cannot, I think, be easily substantiated. Before we proceed farther, let us endeavour to ascertain in what light the promises and prophecies that have been mentioned were considered by the ancient Church. With respect to the first promise, we find no allusion whatever to it in the Old Testament, it being never brought forward to exhibit the ground of their expectation as to the Messiah that was to come. But with regard to the promises made to Abraham, there are several allusions to them; which are to be found, among other places, in the following: Gen. xxvii. 29; xxviii. 4; Ex. xxxii. 13; Neh. ix. 7, 8; Psal. cv. 8-11. 42. In all these passages, the promises are spoken of as having regard only to temporal blessings, in conjunction with the spiritual privileges that were to be enjoyed in the possession of the land of Canaan. They are not alluded to in any way that may lead us to conclude that the ancient believers considered them in the least degree as having respect to any particular person. The promises made to David are often referred to in the Psalms. But upon examination, they will be found, I think, in no measure more explicit, or to contain any direct allusions to the Messiah. Indeed, there is nothing in the promises themselves, or in the references made to them, that leads the mind at all to any single person or individual of the stock of David, but simply to his offspring in general. To confine the promises to a particular person of his lineage was reserved for a future revelation. The Book of Psalms is of peculiar use in this inquiry; for we have in it the experience and the views of "the people of God" at that time of the Church. It contains materials of various kinds : prayers, praises, confessions of sin, expressions of hope and confidence, descriptions of character, with blessings and curses, lessons of instruction, and prophecies. Now, if the Church at that time understood the former promises and prophecies, as we generally ima gine they did, how is it that we find no traces of them in their religious exercises, in their petitions for forgiveness, and in their protestations of hope and assurance in God? They appear to me to have approached God; not through a Mediator, or through an atonement, or in the name of another"; The following text seems to oppose this view: "To him give all the Prophets witness, that through his Name, whosoever believeth in Him, shall reBut if we refer to the Prophets, we ceive remission of sins." (Acts x. 43). shall find that it is through Jehovah's name that forgiveness is invariably held out and promised. The Apostle supplies |