an Evangelist, entertaining the opinions which the Unitarians of the present day profess, have opened his Gospel with a series of expressions, so strongly declaratory of the divine nature of Christ, that in order to avoid the force of them, we must call in the aid of allegory of the harshest and most unusual kind? Surely it is not possible to read the first verses of St. John, taking for our guides the acknowledged and usual rules of interpretation, without perceiving the irresistible evidence which they afford to the grand doctrine of our Lord's divinity. Let us now consider the testimony borne by John the Baptist. After having professed himself not worthy to unloose the shoe-latchet of that great Unknown, who, coming after him, was preferred before him; the next day, seeing Jesus coming unto him, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the world. "Afterwards, when Jesus was baptizing the Jews by his disciples, and many resorted to him, the disciples of John, jealous of the honour of their master, complained to him that Jesus drew away the people to himself, and took upon him the office of baptizing them. Upon this John, with great sincerity and modesty, declared how much he was inferior to Christ: He reminded T them how often he had said that he was not the Messias, but his forerunner; he told them that his office would soon expire, and that Christ, who then began to appear, should obscure his glory; which was to him a cause of joy, not of envy; he told them that Christ was the beloved Son of God, sent by him, and received from him the Holy Spirit without measure, to reside upon him at all times, and to direct him in all things; that therefore whosoever believed in him should have everlasting life, and whoever rejected him, should not see life, but the wrath of God should abide upon him."* All this is stated in the latter part of the third chapter; where the Baptist expressly distinguishes between men, who are of the earth, earthly, and Christ, who cometh from heaven, and is above all; as St. Paul afterwards expressed it, the first man is of the earth, earthy, the second man is the Lord from heaven. What interpretation does common sense require us to put upon these words? We have the forerunner of our Lord, and his Apostle, and our Lord himself, in his conference with Nicodemus, concurring in the same plain, intelligible assertion, that the Christ, whether spoken * Jortin on the Christian Religion, p. 182. of as Son of God, or Son of Man, came down from heaven. Yet the Unitarians would persuade us, that "coming from heaven" means nothing more than receiving a divine commission. But how is this interpretation to be reconciled with the 51st verse of the sixth chapter, where our Saviour says, I am the living bread which came down from heaven? The Jews understood those words of a literal descent from heaven:* and when some of his disciples were offended at that notion, he said, Doth this offend you? What and if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up, WHERE HE WAS BEFORE?† . -John the Baptist calls our Saviour, the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. The persons to whom he spoke were Jews in what sense would they naturally understand him? If we can resolve this question, we shall ascertain the real meaning of the Baptist's words. They could hardly have comprehended the appellation of the Lamb of God, except as referring to the lamb, which was sacrificed in the rite of purification, or to that passage of Isaiah, with which the Jews were familiar, in which it is said of the Messiah, the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all he is brought as a lamb to the + See Lect. IV. * John vi. 42. slaughter.* In either case, the comparison involved the idea of a violent death; and that death was connected, by the following words, with a liberation from sin, that is, from the punishment of sin. Some indeed have contended, that the Baptist employed this image, merely to denote the purity of Christ's character; and that' taking away the sin of the world' means simply the reformation of manners which he was to effect. But if we attend to the analogy of scripture, we must explain this passage of a sacrificial atonement for sin, to be made by the death of Christ; for St. Peter tells his readers, that they were redeemed-with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot; an image which is very prominent in the Revelations. We may remark, by the way, that our Saviour is here described as bearing, or taking away the sin of the world. So in his first Epistle, St. John says, that if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: and he is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but for the sins of the whole world: from which passage it is plain, that the plan of divine mercy is not limited to a certain +1 Pet. i. 19. ‡ 1 John ii. 2. *Isaiah liii. 6. number of chosen individuals. Lastly, although John, under the guidance of the Spirit, designated Jesus as one who was to be slain, with the approbation of God; and who was to take upon himself the sin of the world, it does not follow that John himself, much less those who heard him, entertained a just and adequate notion of the manner in which this was to be effected. "Thus then is John the Baptist a witness of Christ, his office and dignity; he calls Christ the Son of God, and the Redeemer of the world; he affirms that he had a being before he appeared on the earth; that he came from God to teach men the way to obtain eternal life; he asserts that he saw the Spirit descend upon him, and heard the voice from heaven which declared him to be the Son of God."* One remarkable circumstance here demands our notice. The Baptist speaks of the Son of God, without giving any explanation of the term. It must then have been familiar to the Jews, as a title of their expected Messiah. In like manner we find the terms Son of Man, and Son of David, used of the Messiah, without explanation, because they were current amongst the Jews, as scriptural designations of the great * Jortin, p. 183. |