WE have had occasion to notice already (p. 6) the extraordinary passage in Mr. Grant's tract, in which forgiveness is linked with propitiation and separated from substitution, which latter as thus looked at, presents, in Mr. G.'s thoughts, a deeper aspect of Christ's work.
The passage runs thus:
"Forgiveness is, in a certain sense, the very opposite of justification. Forgiveness is goodness and mercy acting; justification, righteousness. Forgiveness only preached, implies the work of Christ not yet in its full character revealed,—propitiation perhaps, but not substitution, thus not the depths into which Christ descended. Thus man's full need is not met, the question of nature is unsettled, dead with Christ, quickened with Christ, are things unknown. The doctrine of the two Adams and the place in Christ are all unknown" (page 50).
The former part of this paragraph which sets aside the distinct statement of the apostle in Rom. 4:6,7, serves to bring into relief the subordinate place which propitiation has in this system as compared with substitution. Mr. Grant has MAN in his mind all through, the sinner in his need; and pre-occupied with this he leaves GOD out of the question, except as meeting man's full need. Propitiation, he would have us believe, is merely God's acceptance of the sinner, and hence may be simply governmental, like forgiveness I suppose, but in any case does not set forth the depths into which Christ descended for us, nor does it touch man's ruined state and nature, like substitution.
This "new doctrine" is set forth much more explicitly in an article in "Help and Food," 1884, pp. 241-255, which develops at length Lev. 16 I quote a few passages from it, which bear upon the subject before us:
"The cross.... is the expression also of demands of righteousness which required satisfaction in order to its [love's] showing forth: and this is what we mean by propitiation: it is the propitiation of otherwise withstanding righteousness, which now is turned to be on our side fully as God's love is. Propitiation is thus really the divine side of atonement; and he who accepts truly the one can make no difficulty as to the other: the expiation is the propitiation." (Ibid. pp. 248, 249.)
"The goat which is the Lord's lot, moreover, as explicitly speaks of substitution as it does of propitiation. The goat (the type of the sinner), is the very thing which does speak of that: no figure could more precisely convey the thought. Propitiation it proclaims to be by substitution; and for the people therefore for whom the substitution is, and for no other" (p. 249).
"Propitiation, I repeat, then, is by substitution and in no other way, and for the people alone for whom the substitution is" (p. 251).
The above passages speak for themselves, and show the nature of the doctrine, and I may add that the article is thoroughly misleading as to the way in which "the church" is spoken of,* and is characterized by the fanciful reasoning which this system in general exhibits.
(“This results from confounding Lev. 4:13-21 with Lev. 16 In Lev. 4, it is the "elders of the congregation" that represent the whole people, and lay their hands on the head of the bullock (ver. 15), whereas in Lev. 16, it is Aaron who represents the people, and lays his bands on the head of the goat when he confesses the sins of the people (ver. 20)—an important distinction which, as usual, Mr. G. ignores.)
I would call the reader's attention to the statements I have quoted. Does the scripture speak of righteousness withstanding the manifestation of love but for the cross, and being now turned to be on our side? For it is God's "righteousness" we are speaking of, and not merely "justice," as Kelly's hymn says. Certainly Rom. 1:16,17 knows no such idea, nor does Isaiah; and it would be hard to get it out of Rom. 2:5; for "righteous judgment" is another thing altogether. We read that God's wrath from heaven is revealed now (chap. 1:18), but that is rather in contrast with the revelation of His righteousness, in the previous verse. This theological reasoning really falsifies the truth as to God's righteousness revealed in the gospel, which the apostle describes as "the power of God unto salvation to every one that believes." It is of a piece with the explanation of forgiveness above, and comes from ignoring the way in which God has glorified Himself in the sacrifice of Christ, and founded upon it a scene of absolute perfection, the now heavens and new earth in which righteousness will dwell. All this side of the truth, Mr. Grant's system leaves out.
And what is the meaning of the goat being the type of the sinner? Is it then the sinner's blood that is taken into the holiest of all and sprinkled upon the mercy-seat I Are these the precise forms of truth found in God's holy word? Propitiation, we are told, is for the people alone for whom the substitution is. But the difficulty of meeting 1 John 2, which explicitly states the contrary, is sorely felt by Mr. Grant, who labors hard in two and a half pages of rationalistic inference to meet the insuperable difficulty in which his own system has plunged him. In doing so, he cuts at the root of the doctrine of election as set forth in Rom. 9, severing it from its divine source, and beclouds more than ever the doctrine of justification by faith. The conclusion is so bold and bad, that it is difficult to believe a Christian could so fritter away the plain force of scripture words: he says,
"Christ is not a substitute for the world, for substitution implies the actual bearing and bearing away of the sins of those who are represented in the Substitute, and the sins of the world are not BE borne away. He is the Substitute of His people, but a people not numerically limited to just so many, but embracing all who respond to the invitations of His grace, though it were indeed the world for multitude" (Ibid. p. 254).
By this rationalistic "though it were," the direct teaching of the scripture as to propitiation is cast to the winds. Mr. Grant's system knows nothing of it; reducing it to the Godward side of atonement, that is, God's acceptation of o, sinner. It has only man in view, ignoring that in the Gospel of John we do not find remission of sins, except as committed to the disciples administratively; but we do find propitiation in its full meaning, in the very first chapter, in the "Lamb of God who taketh away the sin of the world.”
Remark, it is "sin" here, root and branch, not sins merely. And to this, chapter 17:4 answers, where the Lord says to the Father, I have glorified Thee on the earth. Substitution has to do with sins.
The fact is, that propitiation, as we find it in the scripture, is ignored, and substitution is forced to do duty for a part of it, eked out by an imaginary division of the subject, to one portion of which the term "propitiation" is applied. For scripture puts forgiveness with substitution. When it is speaking of propitiation, we read that Christ "tasted death for every man." When substitution is the matter treated of, it is said, "He bare the sins of many." Each has its proper place.
To set forth the truth on this matter, I cannot do better (I think) than subjoin almost entire, a letter which appeared in "Words of Faith" for 1884, pp. 223-4. .... I object altogether to the question, What benefit does the world get from propitiation? It puts everything on a false and low ground, as if the end and only object of God's ways-leaving out the claims of His glory and nature in that which angels desire to look into. I agree in general with what you say; but "the Lord's lot" was not for the sins of the people as guilt, though God's holy and righteous nature was met in respect of their sin. The blood was sprinkled first on and before the mercy-seat—God's throne, in the most holy place, where God dwelt—and the altar of incense. The atonement was for the "holy place.... that remaineth among them." "That is for the people" (ver. 15), is in contrast with Aaron and his house. But what was cleansed and hallowed was the holy place, and the altar no doubt, because of the tabernacle being among them. As meeting God's nature and character, it was the basis of all. (Compare Heb. 9:23, 26, 27, 28.)
The taking away the sin of the world was to have a new heaven and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness, as the fruit of the sacrifice of the Lamb of God. Thank God, our sins are taken away too, but that is a different thing from putting away sin. It is deplorable to make putting away our sins, true and blessed as it is, the end of all. God has been glorified in Him (John 13) in such sort that man is in the glory of God.
In the scapegoat God's people were represented in their head—the high priest—and those only who as such were identified with him. In the other there was no such representation—a most important principle. Though the people's uncleanness were the occasion of it, it was the Lord's lot, His dwelling-place which was in question, and transgressions not in question save as the means of its defilement, and the blood was under God's eye as the ground of all God's dealings till, and making the security of, the new heavens and the new earth. (See John 13:31, 32.)
Through the cross God Himself has been fully glorified, and in virtue of it Christ Himself has entered into the glory of God as man, though He had it before the world was. (See Phil. Man's sin was absolute, Satan's power over all the world, man's perfection absolute in Christ when absolutely tested, God's righteous judgment against sin displayed as nowhere else, and perfect love to the sinner, His majesty made good. "It became him." (Heb. 2.) No doubt our sins were borne too, thank God, that we might have part in the results; but blessed as this is for us, it was really a secondary thing to the basis of the glory of God in the universe, and the bringing all into order according to what He is, fully displayed. So John 17:4, 5. But in John's Gospel there is not a word of the forgiveness of our sins, save as administered by the apostles.
Finally, the people were not represented in the blood on the mercy-seat and holy place; their sins gave occasion to its being done, but the cleansing was of God's dwelling-place, that that should be fit for Him, and what He was, perfectly glorified by Christ's death—to be ever before him as eternal redemption.
The two goats made but one Christ, in different aspects. But propitiation alters the whole ground of God's dealings with man.
It is the display of God's mercy maintaining God's righteousness, but opening the door to the sinner, the ground on which I preach the gospel, and can say to every sinner, The blood is on the mercy-seat, return to God and it will be His joy to receive you.
It is not necessary for him to judge you if you so come, for His righteousness is fully glorified, and His love free. This may bring out the evil will in man, but it is then "ye will not come to me that ye might have life." There is death in substitution— "He bore our sins in His own body on the tree"—died for our sins according to the scriptures: as I have said, the two goats are one Christ ... —J. N. D.