THE ROCK OF OUR SALVATION
A Treatise Respecting the Nature, Person, Offices,
Work, Sufferings, and Glory of Jesus Christ
By William S. Plumer, 1867
"Come, let us shout joyfully to the Lord, shout
triumphantly to the rock of our salvation!"
THE ATONEMENT
The word Atonement is found but once in the
English New Testament: "We also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by
whom we have now received the atonement." Romans 5:11. Yet the Greek word
here rendered atonement frequently occurs elsewhere. Our word
atonement is compounded of at and one. At-one-ment is
therefore the same thing as a reconciliation. It brings together those who
have been at variance. The words reconcile, reconciled, reconciling,
and reconciliation, in application to the work of Christ, are found
in the New Testament nine or ten times. "The ministry of reconciliation" is
the ministry that makes known the atonement of Christ. "The word of
reconciliation" is the doctrine of atonement.
Here are four striking passages from the New Testament in
which the word occurs: "In all things it behooved him to be made like unto
his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things
pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people." Heb.
2:17. "All things are of God, who has reconciled us to himself by Jesus
Christ." 2 Cor. 5:18. "God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself,
not imputing their trespasses unto them." 2 Cor. 5:19. "It pleased the
Father that in him should all fullness dwell; and having made peace through
the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things to himself." Col.
1:19, 20. In like manner Daniel, 9:24, says: "Seventy weeks are determined
upon your people and upon your holy city, to finish the transgression, and
to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to
bring in everlasting righteousness." Each of these phrases used by Daniel is
explanatory of the others. Each of them points to an atonement; and an
atonement is a reconciliation, a bringing together of those who have been
alienated.
We have forsaken, insulted, and rebelled against God. He
has followed us with mercies, reproofs, and expostulations, and yet we
persist in iniquity. As a moral Governor, he must punish sin in his
dominions. He is holy, and hates iniquity. His nature and his office both
require that transgression be punished. He saw men ruined and lost, yet he
pitied them. He provided a mode of reconciliation by the life and death of
his Son. Jesus Christ is the Reconciler. He is fit for this work. He has the
nature of God, and so can appear with honor before the heavenly Majesty. He
has the nature of man, and is by experience acquainted with all our natural
infirmities. He knows what temptation and sorrow and death are.
In the passage cited from Colossians, God is said "to
reconcile all things to himself" by Jesus Christ. This mode of speaking is
not unusual in the sacred writings. The reason of this seems to be, that God
is the offended party and we are the offenders. As such, we have need
to be reconciled to him. The price of reconciliation was, therefore, paid to
him, not to us. The learned Grotius has very justly remarked that in heathen
authors men's being reconciled to their gods is always understood to
signify appeasing the anger of their gods. When our Savior commanded the
offending one to go and be reconciled to his brother, the plain meaning is,
that he should go and try to appease his brother's anger, obtain his pardon,
and regain his favor by humility, entreaty, and, if required, by reparation
or restitution. This is also the use of the word reconciled, in 1 Samuel
29:4, where the Philistines say of David and his difficulty with Saul.
"Wherewith should he reconcile himself unto his master? Should it not be
with the heads of these men?" They thought David would try to assuage Saul's
anger and regain his favor by destroying his enemies. Indeed, this is the
ordinary sense of the term in Scripture. To make reconciliation, therefore,
is to offer an atonement.
The doctrine of atonement is vital in the Christian
system. It claims our candid and careful study. When we speak of atonement,
we mean that "Christ, by his obedience and death, did fully pay the debt of
all his people, and did make a proper, real, and full satisfaction to his
Father's justice in their behalf." It was a proper satisfaction; that
is, it was not figurative or emblematical. It was real, not
imaginary, not feigned, not fictitious, not theatrical. It was full,
and not partial. It was complete, entire, lacking nothing. The only possible
THEORIES respecting the work and death of Christ are these:
1. That Jesus Christ fully satisfied all the penal claims
of the law for all men, and that all shall therefore infallibly be saved.
This was formerly the doctrine of Universalists. They held that Christ had
paid all the debts of all men, and that God would certainly save all men by
the merits of his Son.
2. Another theory respecting the atonement is, that
Christ did not by his death satisfy Divine justice for any of the sins of
any man; that he died merely as a martyr to the truth; that no man required
any real atonement, and that God required no satisfaction to his justice.
This was the view held by old Socinians of Europe, and embraced by their
modern followers.
3. Another theory of the death of Christ is, that he made
atonement for some of the sins of all men, and left them by their own works
and sufferings to satisfy for their other sins as best they could. This view
presents the work of Christ as partial and incomplete. It is practically
the theory of all who by pains, prayers, penances, and acts of voluntary
humility--propose to make themselves acceptable to God.
4. The last view is, that Jesus Christ made full and
complete satisfaction for all his people; that in him they are complete;
that in him they possess full redemption and perfect righteousness before
God. This is the true, Scriptural doctrine of atonement. It is full of
comfort to all who are so humble as to be willing to be saved by sovereign
grace. It puts the conscience at rest, so that it demands no more atonement.
Indeed, it kindles up untold delights. "We rejoice in God through our Lord
Jesus Christ--by whom we have now received the atonement," says the
Scripture.
As the doctrine of atonement is not of human origin, but
is matter of pure revelation from God, it is evident we must be guided in
the formation of our opinions by the Scriptures alone. If they settle not
the points involved, all our logic and philosophies will be useless. Our
appeal is directly to God's word.
No one will deny that in the sacred writings Christ is
called a Savior, a Redeemer, a Deliverer, a horn of salvation. He is said to
be the Bread of life, the Tree of life, the Water of life. Indeed, he is
said to be the Life itself.
The Scriptures as clearly ascribe our salvation to the
death of Christ. They say he "died for the ungodly;" that "to this end
Christ both died, and rose and revived;" that Christ "died for our sins;"
that saints should live to him who died for them; that he died for us that
we should live with him. Romans 5:6; 14:9; 1 Cor.15:3; 2 Cor. 5:15; 1 Thess.
4:14; 5:10.
The Old and New Testaments wondrously harmonize in their
teachings on this subject. Isaiah says, "Surely he has borne our griefs and
carried our sorrows. . . . He was wounded [margin, tormented] for our
transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our
peace [or, which procured our peace] was upon him; and with his stripes we
are healed. . . . You shall make his soul an offering for sin. . . . For the
transgression of my people was he stricken. . . . The Lord has laid on him
the iniquity of us all. . . . He bore the sin of many."
In sin are two things: one its defilement or pollution;
the other its desert of punishment. To say that God laid on Christ the
pollution of our sins is blasphemous; but to say that Christ "bore our sins
in his own body on the tree," is a heavenly doctrine. When the prophet says,
"You shall make his soul an offering for sin," we know he refers not to any
iniquity in Christ, for he had no sin. Nor did our Lord bear the sin of
fallen angels. He took not on him their nature. Between them and God there
is no mediator. They are reserved in chains under darkness, to the judgment
of the great day. And yet his soul was an offering for sin. What sin can be
meant but ours? One says, "We may, in many cases, say that the innocent
suffers for the guilty, when one is exposed to loss or pain by means of
another's fault, or for his benefit; but can it be said, with propriety,
that the Lord lays upon the innocent sufferer the iniquity of the offender,
or that the former bears the sins of the latter, when no translation or
imputation of guilt is intended and no real atonement made? If so, what
words can convey the ideas of imputation or atonement? What determinate
meaning can there be in language?" [Scott.]
Peter declares that "Christ also has once suffered for
sins, the just for the unjust." 1 Pet. 3:18. If he suffered for sins--whose
sins were they? They were the sins of the unjust, even of those whom
he would rescue from a righteous and eternal destruction. Indeed, almost
every form of language is employed to show that Christ's sufferings were
vicarious, not for himself but for others. Paul says, "God has made him to
be sin [or a sin-offering] for us." 2 Cor. 5:21. In the very same verse it
is declared that Christ knew no sin. Surely he bore the wrath of God, which
was due to us.
When Peter says that he, "his own self, bore our sins in
his own body on the tree," 1 Peter 2:24, what is the meaning of this solemn
language? The expression bearing sin, or bearing iniquity,
occurs more than thirty times in Scripture, and in every instance it means
to bear the sufferings or penalty of sin. Thus in Leviticus 5:1, God ordains
that if a person does not speak up when he hears a public charge to testify
regarding something he has seen or learned about, he will be "bear his
iniquity." This means that guilt shall so rest upon him that he shall be
liable to punishment. So also in Leviticus 22:9, God says "they shall
therefore keep my ordinance, lest they bear sin for it and die." So in
Ezekiel 23:49, God says, "You shall bear the sins of your idols." Clearly,
the meaning is, you shall be held liable to punishment for worshiping your
idols. Again, in Leviticus 24:15, the Lord says, "Whoever curses his God,
shall bear his sin." In Hebrews 9:28, Paul says, "Christ was once offered to
bear the sins of many;" and in Isaiah 53:11, God says, "My righteous servant
. . . shall bear their iniquities." Could words more plainly teach that
Christ endured the wrath of God for us, and bore the penalty of the law in
our room and stead?
In Galatians 3:13, Paul says, "Christ has redeemed us
from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us." This passage seems
specially intended to meet all cavillings. In the language of an Israelite,
the law consisted of a precept, a statute, a rule, or a direction--and of a
curse, or penalty, and of a promise or blessing. The rule or command was for
all. The promise or blessing was for the obedient; the curse or penalty was
for the transgressor. Indeed, our Anglo-saxon word curse has precisely the
same meaning with the Latin word penalty. As we were all
transgressors, we were all under the curse. But Christ has redeemed us by
enduring the penalty or by being made a curse for us. The slight
variations in the sense of the word curse in this passage need mislead no
one. In the latter case, it means a victim, one devoted or accursed for us.
In quite a number of passages is Christ spoken of as a lamb, a Lamb slain, a
Lamb who takes away sin, as a Lamb who is worshiped in heaven, a Lamb slain
from the foundation of the world. Isaiah 53:7; John 1:29; Acts 8:32; 1 Pet.
1:19; Rev. 5:8, 12, and 13:8.
It is admitted that Christ resembled a lamb in his
uncomplaining gentleness. But in what sense did a lamb ever take away sin,
but by dying in the room of the offerer, and how could Christ as a lamb take
away sin, but by the sacrifice of himself? If he were slain, it was not for
himself--but for us. All the lambs offered in sacrifice died the innocent
for the guilty; the spotless for the criminal. Do not these things clearly
teach that Christ endured the penalty of the law, that he died as a
substitute for others?
The same doctrine is variously taught in the Scriptures
in connection with the phrase, the blood of Christ. It is expressly
said that he "made peace through the blood of his cross," Col. 1:20; that
"by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained
eternal redemption for us," Heb. 9:12; that his blood shall purge our
"conscience from dead works to serve the living God," Heb. 9:14; that "the
blood of Jesus Christ . . . cleanses us from all sin," 1 John 1:7; that he
has redeemed us to God by his blood, Rev. 5:9; and that we "are made near by
the blood of Christ." Eph. 2:13. Now the shedding of the blood of Christ by
his enemies was the greatest crime ever committed on this earth. It is
impossible that such wickedness could be pleasing to God. In what sense then
does his blood cleanse us from sin? It cannot be otherwise than as he
offered himself as a Lamb without spot unto God; poured out his soul unto
death--that we might live forever. Blood, innocent blood, calls for
vengeance. The blood of Abel cried from the ground, and the cry went up to
heaven. But the blood of Christ speaks better things than that of Abel. It
calls for salvation to all who believe.
The Scriptures no less clearly declare that Christ
endured his sufferings for the iniquities of his people. Isaiah says, "For
the transgression of my people was he stricken;" 53:8. Paul says that "he
was delivered for our offences," Romans 4:25; that he "died for our sins
according to the Scriptures," 1 Cor.15:3; and that he "gave himself for our
sins," Gal. 1:4. There is no desirable sense in which Christ could have done
and suffered these things for sin, unless it be as an atonement. And it is
very clear from the New Testament that Christ's dying for sin is matter of
exultation to all the pious. Indeed the only feast instituted under the
gospel is a feast expressly ordained to show forth his death until he come.
The Scriptures no less frequently declare that Christ
died for guilty men. "This is my body which is given for you." Luke
22:19. "I lay down my life for the sheep." John 10:15. "In due time Christ
died for the ungodly." Romans 5:6. "While we were yet sinners, Christ died
for us." Romans 5:8. There is danger of weakening the force of such clear
and solemn passages by any explanation. Still it may be asked, In what
conceivable sense could Christ die in our place if it be not as a vicarious,
atoning sacrifice?
The Scriptures also declare that all hope of pardon for
us lost men is centered in Christ. But why in him--if he is not our atoning
priest? Thus says Peter, "Him has God exalted with his right hand to be a
Prince and a Savior, for to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of
sins." Acts 5:31. Paul says as explicitly, "Be it known unto you therefore,
men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness
of sins." Acts 13:38. Again, "In whom we have redemption through his blood,
the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace." Eph. 1:7.
Where is the fitness of connecting the remission of sins in so remarkable a
manner with the person and the blood of Jesus Christ--unless he is indeed
the substitute of his people and their Savior in the highest sense ever
claimed by the Christian world?
These clear, Scriptural proofs and statements receive
confirmation and elucidation from the following CONSIDERATIONS:
1. If we deny that Jesus Christ endured the penalty of
the law, and that his sufferings were vicarious--then we must deny that he
was the substitute of his people, and that their sins are imputed to him. If
this is true, we are of all men most miserable; for we have given up this
world in the hope of attaining a better world, through Christ's substitution
for us. But all our sins still remain, unless we have remission through his
blood. We are eternally disappointed, and our guilt is still upon us. If we
go thus far, we must in consistency maintain that justice is unsatisfied and
must ever remain so, and that if there is any salvation for sinful men, it
must be in derogation of the justice of God; it must be by trampling under
foot the penalty of God's law.
2. Some who deny that Christ's death and sufferings were
vicarious and for us, yet admit that the Scriptures seem to teach
that doctrine. But they warn us against being led astray by figurative
language. To this these answers may be given:
1. If figurative language teaches nothing, then it is
nonsense.
2. In all languages, the very strongest things that are
said are said in metaphor.
3. A great variety of metaphors are employed by the
sacred writers on this subject.
4. Oftentimes the Scriptures speak in language perfectly
plain. "He bore the sin of many." "He was wounded for our transgressions."
"He died for our sins." "He suffered the Just for the unjust." These are
forms of expression as free from figure as language can well be.
3. If the Scriptures which are generally relied on as
teaching the doctrine of a vicarious atonement may be so explained as not to
teach it, then it is useless to attempt to prove anything by the word of
God.
4. Any scheme of doctrine which opposes the retributive
justice of God will, if carried to its legitimate results, subvert also the
doctrine of the Divine holiness. God punishes sin because his nature leads
him to abhor it.
5. If God has set aside the penalty of his law without a
full satisfaction, must it not have been at first too severe? And if the
penalty was at first wrong, may not the precept for the same cause be too
strict? Thus by our speculations, we subvert the whole law.
6. In like manner we shall subvert the gospel. What the
convinced sinner needs and seeks is, not merely that he may escape hell and
reach heaven, but he wishes to do it in a manner that will secure the honor
of God. He wishes to see how God can be just and yet justify the sinner. On
the old Bible doctrine of a vicarious atonement, all is plain; but on any
other scheme there is no way of satisfactorily accounting for the death of
Christ or the offer of salvation. If Jesus Christ bore the penalty--why did
God smite the man that was his fellow?
7. How well does the true doctrine, and how ill does the
opposite doctrine, agree with the types of the Old Testament. Without
referring to the many great offerings in detail, let any one carefully
consider the offering of even the young pigeons or the rite of the scape-goat,
and see what can be the meaning of such services, if Jesus Christ did not
die for us. If Christ bears our sins, well may we be forgiven.
8. How well does the true doctrine, and how ill does the
opposite doctrine, harmonize with the worship of heaven: "The songs of the
redeemed in heaven, even of those 'who had come out of great tribulation,'
and had shed their blood in the cause of Christ, afford an unanswerable
argument in favor of a real atonement and a vicarious sacrifice in the death
of Christ. Without one discordant voice, they ascribe their salvation to
'the Lamb who was slain, and redeemed them unto God by his blood,' who
washed them from their sins in his own blood. But in what sense could the
Lamb who was slain wash them from their sins in his own blood, unless he was
literally an atoning sacrifice?" [Scott.] What is there to make exultant
the worship of sinners saved if, after all, God merely connives at their
transgressions?
9. It cannot be safely denied—indeed it is commonly
admitted—that the early Christian writers, the reformers, and the Christian
world generally, until after the middle of the eighteenth century, held and
taught that Christ bore the curse and endured the wrath of God in the room
and stead of sinners. Is not this fact a strong presumptive proof that the
doctrine is true? Is it possible that God's hidden ones have so generally
mistaken the prophets and apostles, and been left to embrace delusion?
10. It is a great fact confirmatory of the true doctrine,
that it has a mighty power over all right hearts. "O what a melting
consideration is this, that out of Christ's agony comes our victory; out of
his condemnation our justification; out of his pain our ease; out of his
stripes our healing; out of his gall and vinegar our honey; out of his curse
our blessing; out of his crown of thorns our crown of glory; out of his
death our life: if he could not be released, it was that we might be; if
Pilate gave sentence against him, it was that the great God might never give
sentence against us; if he yielded, that it should be with Christ as they
required, it was that it might be with our souls as well as we can desire."
[Hopkins.] Hearts must be harder than the rocks, if the love and death of
Christ do not move them! When he died--the rocks were rent.