A short time since we saw the absurd and ridiculous views of A. Wheelock of New York city, paraded in the Banner and Pioneer, as something suited to the wishes of the New School Baptists of the west. Wheelock denies that Christ affected or made atonement by being delivered up for our offenses, and raised again for our justification." He holds that the incarnation, life, death, and resurrection of our Lord., only procured the materials out of which Christ can now make an atonement for such as apply to him for atonement -"That Christ has died for all sinners," (not even exempting devils as we can see,) "but atones for none until they repent." That as "soon as our great High Priest atones for a sinner he is forgiven." Upon this perversion of the scriptures,
Mr. Wheelock and his New School brethren are enabled to shoot ahead of Arminius, Wesley, Clarke, and Fletcher, and leave them far in the distance. With these views of the atonement, he says to the dead sinner, "If unconverted, reader, go to Christ, your great High Priest. - Tell him you are a wretch undone and ask him to atone for your sins that you may be forgiven. Go in confidence, he says that "Him that comes I will in no wise cast out;" &c. See how deceitfully he handles the scriptures Why did joint the text? Christ says all the Father has given him power over all flesh, and that he should give eternal life to as many as the Father has given him. But, Wheelock continues, "He (Christ) "has been waiting and ready to atone for your sins ever since your first transgression. When you have been asleep and when awake; when rejoicing in health and when terrified of sickness; when careless in sin, and when thoughtful in awakenings; and at all times, by day and night, at every hour and every moment, he has been ready and waiting to present this blood in your behalf, the instant you repent and believe, to obtain your pardon and procure your salvation."
What delightful stuff this for a Baptist paper, to go out as Baptist doctrine, to claim its emanation from a man professing to be a Baptist minister! O Shame! where is thy blush? But another writer over the anonymous signature "Alpha" in the "Cross and Journal" denies the atonement of Christ takes away the guilt of those for whom it was made; and makes no distinction, as we can perceive, between atonement and pardon. He labors long and hard to establish the position that the sins of the people of God could not be transferred to Christ, as that would make Christ a depraved and sinful being, and according to our understanding of his arguments, they go to establish the point, that the saints in glory are as guilty as though they had not been represented in the death of Christ.
It is not very surprising to us, that the New School Baptists should thus unequivocally renounce and discard the distinguishing doctrine of the Baptists of all former times, and step forth in a garment cut and made to fit deformities. The Old Bible doctrine of salvation by grace, through the redemption of our Lord Jesus Christ, has always pinched them under and about the arms, they could not work well in such a mess; it has been to them like a straight jacket to a maniac, so that when they have had occasion to work, in getting up revivals, &c., they have uniformly been compelled to put off their coat of old fashioned doctrine before they could much. And those who now contend that the blood of Christ cleanses us from all sin, removes and forever puts away all guilt from those for whom it was shed, are pointed at by the New School as being too tight-laced, only because their loins girt about with truth.
Forgiveness is simply considered only exempt from consequences and does not remove guilty, hence the necessity of blood. If a man is convicted of murder, and condemned to die, should receive pardon, he would still be a murderer, and as guilty as though he were hanged, but Christ has borne the sins of his people in his own body on the cross, and has put away sin by the sacrifice of himself, and brought everlasting righteousness for his people; but his stripes they are healed. He has justified many, for he has borne their iniquities. He has himself for us, says the Apostle, that he might redeem us from all iniquity and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. Therefore to purify, as well as to free from penalty, was included in the sacrifice of Christ, or else, thought by his suffering for us we might be saved from the penalty of the law, yet it would not prepare us for heaven or the enjoyment of spiritual things.
This article in the Cross and Journal concludes the fifth number thus:
The atonement then was a scheme devised by infinite wisdom, by which the ends of punishment can be completely answered, and yet the sinner spared. The great end of punishment was to manifest God's hatred against sin. If any expedient could be found out which would answer that end, as well as the actual infliction of the threatened penalty upon transgressors, then that penalty could be dispensed with, and mercy might be exercised in the pardon of sinners.
Now such an expedient infinite wisdom has been devised. The Lord Jesus Christ has laid down his life for the just for the unjust. By his death, the evil of sin has been made to appear in the condemnation of the world. By doing this he has magnified the law and made it honorable, although its threatened execution of death to the sinner is dispensed with. By Christ's death, public justice is satisfied. The evils of which would have followed from the pardon of the sinner will out and an atonement ar3e guarded against. And now God can be just - just to himself - just to his own character, as the governor of the Universe, and yet forgive sinners for Christ's sake. Alpha
According to this doctrine, there is nothing cleansing in the blood of Christ, it was an expedient resorted to in the extremity of the case - to make known how much God hates sin; and this being manifest, his own veracity can be dispensed with. He has said, "the soul that sins shall die;" but this sentence was only to show how much God hates sin, and by the death of Christ, although the sins of his people were not laid upon him, Alpha says there was no transfer, and his brother Welsley says there is no imputation; the penalty of the law is dispensed with. But how did God's hatred to sin appear in bruising his Son, if Christ did not bear the sins of this people, or in other words, if they were not transferred or imputed to him?
Well, now suppose we drive this argument, if argument it is, a little further in its legitimate course. According to Wheelock and Alpha, some sinners will not be benefited from the death of Christ - they will obstinately refuse, reject, sin away their day of grace, &c., and what is to become of them? These gentlemen have consigned them to hell! But what for? Certainly not to show God's hatred to sin, for this was fully demonstrated in the sufferings of Christ; not to punish them; for the only object of punishment contemplated in the law was merely to show that God hates sin and that the object is secured without punishing sinners at all.
Again; if the only object of punishment is as stated by Alpha, might not we expect, that on the last day, it would be sufficient to exhibit God's hatred to sin, to simply uncover the burning lake, or might we not look for some other expedient to secure this object, without the actual infliction of the sentence of divine Justice upon the guilty?
Would not the Baptists of former ages be startled at the blasphemy of such doctrines, bandied about as Baptist doctrine? It seems to be the design of these gentlemen, to make it appear that the salvation of men depends alone upon themselves; that they have all the power for if the death of Christ is effectual in the salvation of sinners, it must affect the salvation of all for whom he died. And if he has died for any who are not saved, it follows that his death was not that which saves sinners and that salvation of all for whom he died. And if he has died for any who are not saved, it follows that his death was not that which saves sinners, and the salvation of those who are saved must depend on something else and that something else must be far superior to the blood of Christ, as to effect what the blood has failed to effect.
Well, do they hold that something else to be? Mr. Wheelock, in the extract we have given, says Christ has been ready and waiting ever since the first transgression. And again, he says that Christ "has given himself in death as a propitiatory sacrifice for all sinners, in order that as many of them as repent and believe may be saved; and that God may be just in pardoning them." Then all depends upon their repenting and believing; not on the blood of Christ or the atonement; for Wheelock says they must repent and believe before Christ will make an atonement for them.
Repentance is not held by him as it was taught by the Apostles,. as a gift of God, for which Christ is exalted a Prince & Savior, to give to Israel with remission of sins; nor does he hold, that faith is the fruit of the Spirit; but that both are works of the dead sinner,, and conditions on which Christ proffers to save all mankind. the sinner must do something before he does anything; he must have a life before he begins to live; and doing so much before anything is done, is that on which he must depend for salvation. We might pursue the subject and expose many of the absurdities of this new divinity scheme; but perhaps, our readers would be more edified and better satisfied with something else.
Signs of the Times Vol. XIII 5; Editorial 3/1/1845
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for commenting. If an answer is needed, we will respond.