Page images
PDF
EPUB

ing from punishment, the sins and persons of those, for whom atonement was made by them? especially, if in connexion with the phrase of making atonement by sacrifices, we consider another phrase, which frequently occurs with it, either to explain it, or to point out the effect of the sacrifices: the phrase I refer to is this, and it shall be forgiven him. Thus (that I may be the better understood) to refer to one passage only, instead of many; when it is said, Lev. iv. 31, the priest shall make an atonement for him, (any one of the common people sinning through ignorance, by offering a kid of the goat, ver. 27, 28.) and it (his sin) shall be forgiven him; is not the meaning of the place evidently this, that the priest, by offering the kid as appointed, should procure forgiveness for the offend er, or cover and secure from punishment his sin and person? And do any of the passages you have collected in your fifth chapter, give us a clearer notion of the general import of atonement? I cannot see that they do.

The other observation I would make, is upon what you are pleased to say in your 114th paragraph. The transferring of

[ocr errors]

guilt (you there tell us) doth not belong 'to the sense of atonement. In the great

est part of those texts (quoted in your 'fifth chapter) we have not the least suggestion of a vicarious punishment, of one

man's guilt being laid upon another, and 'that other being punished, or suffering 'for it.' However, you are sensible (to omit taking notice of Prov. xxi. 18, and Isa. xliii. 3,) that from 2 Sam. xxi. 3, David said unto the Gibeonites, What shall I do for you? and wherewith shall I make the atonement, that ye may bless the inheritance of the Lord? From these words, I say, taken together with the history, with which they are connected; you are sensi ble, that it may be objected; that some ' of Saul's posterity suffered in his stead to 'make atonement for his sin. But (to this you answer) Saul's house was concerned in the barbarous usage of the Gibeonites ' as well as himself. ver. 1. It is for Saul, and his bloody house, because he slew the • Gibeonites. And therefore (as you go · on) the execution of seven of his sons,

[ocr errors]

may well be supposed to be an act of 'justice upon those, who, at least, had 'been accessaries to the murder of many

"innocent people.' That some of those, who suffered upon this occasion, had been accessaries to the murder of the innocent Gibeonites, is not unlikely; but that they had all been such, doth not appear: perhaps some of them were too young at the time to be concerned in it. However, should we suppose, that they were all more or less guilty, and that therefore the putting them to death was an act of justice; it may still be said, for ought I can see, that they suffered, if not in Saul's stead (who was now dead) at least, in the stead of some of the remaining branches of his house; if not, indeed, of the people of Israel in general for as it is probable, that some of the surviving branches of Saul's family were equally guilty with some of those who suffered; so, is it not very plain, that the land and people of Israel in general, are considered as concerned in the guilt, so far at least as to suffer in consequence of it? as we may gather from the three years famine, which was brought upon that land and people, as we are told, ver. 1, for Saul, and his bloody house, because he slew the Gibeonites: and yet, we find, that by the death of the seven sons of

Saul the atonement was made for the land and people of Israel in general, so far as that the injured Gibeonites were satisfied with it, and thereupon reconciled to the Israelites; and the anger of God, who had been equally dishonoured by Saul's treachery and cruelty, appeased; for as a mark of his reconciliation likewise, he was pleased to put an end to the famine : see ver. 3, 4, 5, 6, 14. Now what I would observe

here is, first; that the guilt of the Israelites was so far transferred to the seven sons of Saul, that, upon their death, the Gibeonites forgave them, or were reconciled to them, which, it is supposed, would not otherwise have been the case; and that God was pleased to put an end to a calamity (brought upon them in consequence of that guilt) which would not otherwise have been removed: and what less does this imply, than that those sons of Saul suffered in the Israelites' stead? especially, if it be considered, that it is very probable, that not only some of the surviving descendants of Saul, but some also (if not many) of the rest of the Israelites, had been as much accessary to the murder of the Gibeonites, as some (if not any) of

those, who were actually put to death. So that we have here an instance of seven persons (suppose them innocent or guilty, as you please) dying for many others, who are considered as guilty; by their death, making satisfaction to an injured and offended party; and procuring to the offenders the removal of their guilt and sufferings. And from this, is it not easy to observe,

Secondly; that the transferring of guilt does, in the case before us, belong to the sense of atonement ? for when, in consequence of David's desire to satisfy the injured Gibeonites, implied in the words, What shall I do for you? and wherewith shall I make the atonement? that is (supposing him to speak in the name of his people) what would you have us to do, that we may satisfy you for the injury we have 'done you; regain your justly forfeited friendship; and be freed from the calamity, which, for our injustice to you, we have so long laboured under? When, I say, in consequence of this, the Gibeonites agreed to accept of the death of seven of Saul's sons, as what they should be satisfied with, and did afterwards actually accept of it as

« PreviousContinue »