On the Atonement and Intercession of Jesus Christ. By Rev. William Symington [pp. 201-233]

S.ymington on the.tlloneme?t.
own law. Vengeance belongeth unto him, he will repay.
No creature, therefore, can be compared with God in irelation to this matter. Again, when men receive injury or
offence from their fellow creatures, it is reasonable that they
should not undertake to avenge themselves, because this is
going beyond their proper sphere, and encroaching on the
prerogative of God, who takes cognizance of all offences, and
knows their exact demerit. Besides, as we are all offenders
against God, and can only be saved from wrath by his mercy,
it is reasonable that we should not be rigid in executing punishment on those who trespass against us.
But it may be objected that according to this view of the
divine character and government, he has the attribute of
justice but not of mercy, whereas all men who entertain correct opinions of the divine attributes believe that mercy is
the most amiable perfection of his character. To which we
reply, that it is even so, that reason knows nothing of the
attribute of mercy. Reason clearly indicates that God is
good to the obedient, but it cannot inform us that he will remit
the punishment of any sin. Indeed it is by reason that we
conclude that God will render to every man according to his
deeds, and it never can teach, therefore, that in some instances he will not render to every one his due. The idea
of divine mercy so prevalent among men is derived-from
revelation, and is intimately connected with tihe atonement.
The very design of the atonement is to enable the righteous
Governor of the universe to exercise mercy, not at the expense of justice, which is impossible, but by a complete satisfaction to justice, "that God might be just and the justifier
of him who believeth in Jesus." It is a radical mistake in
theology to suppose that mercy is exercised irrespective of
the demands of justice. God cannot divest himself of his
justice any more than of his being; and if his retributive
justice have claims on any one on account of sin, these claims
can never be set aside. Erroneous ideas on this point have
been the source of many errors; the ramifications from this
root are very extensive; but we cannot trace them now
through all their windings.
It may be again objected, that on these principles mercy
is not an essential attribute of God. If by essential be meant
that which belongs to his nature, mercy is essential; all divine
attributes are essential. But we admit that there was no necessity for the exercise of mercy. To suppose that there
was, is to destroy its very nature. Mercy must depend on
1836.]
215