Mexico weekly ledger., 1879-12-04

wfath OF God a6ideth on SUCH
Now, when such turn from their un-
belief to Christ, God pardons-i. e.,
justifies them. Through this man is
preached unto you the forgiveness Of
sins, and by Him all that believe are
justified from all things, from which
they could not be justified by the law
of Moses" Acts, 13:28,29 Thus it
is seen how squarely DR.. Hodge dares
to hurl his theory against the Word.
The question, however, is not what
DR.. Hodge may say, but what does
the Bible say? We acknowledge no
other rule of faith! He further says:
''For the same reason justification
cannot be mere pardon. Pardon does
not proceed on the ground of salts
faction. A prisoner delivered by
is not pardoned. A debtor
whose obligations have been cancel
ed by friend, becomes entitled to
freedom from the claims of his friend.
When a sovereign pardons criminal
it is not an act of justice 1t is not on
the ground of satisfaction to law. The
Bible, therefore, in teaching that JUS
tiication is on the ground of atone
ment or sanctification, and the sin
ner's guilt is expiated, that he is
redeemed by the precious blood of
Christ, and that judgement is pro-
nounced upon him as righteous, does
thereby teach that justification is
neither pardon or infusion of right
eousness." Let us look at these
statements one by one.
l. 4 person deIioered by ransom is
not pardoned. This may or may not
be true among men, but when
made in reference to the ransom
OF the sinner by the blood
of Christ, it is utterly untrue, for
Paul, in Rom. 3:24-25, attributes
remission of sins positively to ere
demption.'' Also Eph. 1:7: "In
whom we have redemption, through
HIS blood, the forgiveness of sins. -
The same is taught again in Col.
I:14. In this DIR. Hodge joins hands
with the Secinians. They object to
the vicarious sacrifice Of Christ on
the ground that it conflicts with the
offer of pardon through mercy. DR..
Hodge objects to the idea Of pardon
beng the result of our ransom by
Christ's death!
2. He contends that debtor whose
obligations have been Cancelled by a
friend, becomes entitled to freedom
from the claims of his creditor. The
plain English of this is, that the ac-
tive righteousness of Christ is imput-
ed to us, and thus cancels our obli-
cations to law. But the notion OF
the active righteousness OF Christ
canceling our obligations to law is
wholly lacking in scripture teaching.
3. When sovereign pardons 6
criminal it is not an act Of justice.
We answer it may or may not be
but in the case of the Almighty pard'
oning penitent believer, it is botl
merciful and just.
/. 1t is an act of mercy because
the pardon is unmerited.
2. 1t is an act of justice because
the peritent sinner. having been ran,
sOmed by Christ's blood, and having
rcpented and believed in Christ, in
compliance with the terms of pardon
1t is just that God should pardon
him.
). Judgment is pronounced upor
lin as righteous. If this meant II
consideration of his compliance with
the law of pardon, then it would
be simply scriptural justification; but
it does not, for he says: 1.-The doc,
trine that justification consists sim.
ply IN pardon and consequent restor,
alton, assumes that the law is imper.
feet and mutable." This is the great
point. This law argument is the one
offered with such confidence against
a possible, now, freedom from sin
Paul knocks every prop from under
this assumption when he uses the
proof texts already quoted. 'Ye
are not under the law, but under
grace!" But let us see which of the
two views best sustains the majesty
of the law. God, under the law o.
atonement, requires hearty and
thorough repentance of all sin. lie
also requires perfect faith i'll the
atoning blood. To all who are thus
exercised, God says: Thy sins be
forgiven thee" This, you observe
is Gods way of sustaining the majes
ty of the law: Does the other plar
sustain the majesty of the law better
Is the sanctity of the law requiring
perfect truthfulness sustained by the
lalsity of attributing to the sinner q
righteousness which he never had
The doctrine of imputation, in the
sense here opposed, regards Christ
death as substituted penalty. L
this be true, then the race stood theil
probation in Adam his sin is theil
sin, and his guilt their guilt. L
Christ suffered the penalty due the
sins of the elect, if their sins were
his sins, and his death their punish
ment, then, as consistent as this may
be said, it may also be said, thai
Christ's Righteousness was the righte,
BUSINESS of his people. This may be
consistent; to me, however, it is
grace" What then, shall we sin be.
cause we are not under the law, but
under grace' God forbid. V. 16;
''know we not that to whom ye yiel6
yourselves to obey, his servants ye
are to whom ye obey" Now, ts
talk about necessitated sin( } is &c
talk like child. Paul shows that vol.
untary trs.nsgression alone makes us
guilty; hence, all persons who have
been justified and regenerated are
free from the guilt of sin. DIR. Hodge
says, "Christ taught His disciples to
pray for the forgiveness of their sins
as often as they prayed for bread
which last, the believer must do every
day unto the end of hfe." But per-
haps no writer in modern times as,
sumes as much and proves as little as
DR.. Hodge. When christians pray
''forgive us our trespasses," what dc
they mean! If they mean the sins
that God hath. forgiven and separated
from them "as tar as the east is from
the west," then the prayer is in.
appropriate and damaging 10 an es-