sin. Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity-The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity-Oh, do not this abominable thing that I hate.-Relative to the awful demerit of sin. • The wages of sin is death-Knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death-It is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you.' Relative to the purpose of God, with regard to its punishment. I will by no means clear the guilty-Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them-Upon the wicked he shall rain snares, fire and brimstone, and an horrible tempest: this shall be the portion of their cup The wrath of God is revealed against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men-The wicked shall be turned into hell.' These declarations, dreadful to the guilty as each of them is, respect that punishment which is called, the vengeance of eternal fire;

-a punishment, however, which, in the impartial estimation of our Divine Legislator and Supreme Judge, is nothing more than the WAGES due to sin, or a just recompence of reward for disobedience; and is, by himself, so denominated in the Records of his revealed will.

Such being the true sayings of God, concerning these momentous particulars; and the punishment of sin being represented as resulting from, its contrariety to Eternal Purity-its own abominable nature-its being the object of Jehovah's unchangeable hatred, and its intrinsic desert; we may safely conclude, that penal suffering for sin, should not

be considered as an expression of mere Sovereign Will; but as a demonstration, that Justice is essential to the Character of God.

That this is a fact will further appear by remarking, that though the Most Holy, when promising and bestowing blessings upon sinners, frequently represents them as proceeding from his own sovereign pleasure, without the least regard to any degree of moral fitness in the objects of his favour; yet never does he represent his opposition to sin, or his punishing of sinners, as the fruit of his mere will. Are some of the human race denominated vessels of wrath? they are expressly described as FITTED for destruction;-fitted, by their apostasy, depravity, and guilt, as dry stubble for the devouring flame. Had the Divine Oracles represented the bestowment of spiritual blessings, and condemnation to penal fire, as equally proceeding from the will of God, without any essential property of his nature requiring the punishment of sin, any more than the pardon of it; all our notions of the wisdom and rectitude of his government must have been subverted. But while, as a Benefactor, he cautiously guards his professing people against imagining, that the bestowment of signal favours upon them, is to distinguish superior virtue, or to reward merit; he ascribes the beneficent procedure to his own sovereign pleasure;* he as constantly, when denouncing judgments, or inflicting punishments, plainly indicates, that it is for the evil of sin committed. Whence, then, this difference, in the language of Inspiration, respecting the two cases, except from an essential difference in the

Deut. ix, 4, 5, 6, Rom, ix. 15. xi, 6. 2 Tim, i, 9..

cases themselves? We cannot conceive, without confounding things of the most opposite natures, that the conferring of undeserved blessings, and the execution of deserved threatenings, should equally proceed from the sovereign pleasure of God. Such is the sentiment here opposed, that supposing its truth, the Most Holy, under the character of Universal Governor, is equally free, either severely to punish rebellion against his dominion, or to let it escape with absolute impunity; as he was, under the character of Universal Creator, either to give existence, or to withhold it, from worms and insects: the former, as well as the latter, having no necessary connection with his essential attributes, but depending entirely on his mere will.

That justice is essential to the Divine Character, and that it must be displayed in the punishment of sin; will yet more strongly appear, if the doctrine of Redemption by Jesus Christ be duly regarded, We will therefore now consider a few particulars contained in the Sacred Oracles, relative to that comprehensive and most important subject.

Thus, then, the Apostle; Being justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: whom God hath set forth, or exhibited to us in the gospel, as a propitiation, to be received by faith in his blood. And this is appointed for a demonstration of his righteousness in the remission of sins, which now appears to be accomplished without any reflection upon that awful attribute which might seem to have a claim so directly contrary to it. This remission extends not only to the present, but former age, and to all the offences which are long since past, according to the forbearance of God,

who, out of his high regard to that atonement which was in due time to be made by his own incarnate Son, forbore to execute judgment upon sinners for their multiplied provocations. Yes, he has exhibited Jesus Christ for a demonstration of his righteousness, which now, in this present ever-memorable and signal time, is so wonderfully illustrated in the great transactions of our own age, intended for this purpose, that he might be, and appear just, and yet at the same time, without impeaching in any degree the rights of his government, the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.*

Here it is manifest, that Paul not only considers the punishing justice of God as demonstrated in the death of Christ; but also represents that demonstration of the sin-avenging attribute, as intended to maintain the rights of Divine government, and the honours of Deity, in the exercise of pardoning mercy on those that were justly condemned. Yes, he studiously and emphatically represents the demonstration of Eternal Justice, in the substitutionary sufferings of Messiah, as absolutely necessary to vindicate the conduct of God from all suspicion of unrighteousness, in graciously justifying the ungodly who believe in Jesus. But how could the justice of God be demonstrated by a procedure which it did not in the least require?— a procedure entirely independent, on which, according to the sentiment opposed, all our offences might have been pardoned, and all our persons justified, without any infringement on the rights of divine justice, or any dishonour to the divine cha

Rom. iii. 24, 25, 26. See Dr. Doddridge in loc. whose Trans lation and Paraphrase are here almost literally adopted.

racter. Was it ever known that the administration of a civil ruler became illustrious for wisdom, rectitude, and humanity, by frequently inflicting severe punishments upon his offending subjects; when, without any injustice, injury to the public, or dishonour to his own character, he might, by the exercise of his just prerogative, have suffered their various délinquencies to escape the sentence of the law? If, in this remarkable passage, the Apostle did not intend to represent the punishing justice of God as displayed in the death of Jesus; and if he did not mean to assert the necessity of that vicarious death, in order to render the forgiveness. of our sins and the justification of our persons consistent with the claims of Divine law, and the rights of Divine government; there is reason to suspect that he wanted either ability or inclination to write intelligibly. Because it is hard to conceive of any other language that could have been employed, being better adapted to express the sentiment for which we contend, than that which is actually used.

If the Most Holy, in perfect consistency with the absolute purity of his nature, and the unchangeable rig ts his throne, might pardon and accept his rebellious creatures, without punishing sin by inflicting the deserved curse; it is reasonable to suppose, that, in the system of ritual worship established among the ancient Hebrews at Mount Horeb, his condescending care to inform them of this momentous particular must have appeared, if it had not made a conspicuous figure. For, by the supposition, such a revelation of his royal prerogative must have entered into his character, as their