DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.9550#0330
a8o THE BRAHMUNICAL MAGAZINE
it, to put an innocent person to a painful death for the
transgressions of others, notwithstanding he, in his
human capacity, manifested very great reluctance to
that death, as is admitted in the account of the life of
Jesus Christ in Matthew Ch. XXVI. 37—39.
Thirdly. Sins are of two kinds, that is, sins against
God merely, and sins against God and man, such as
theft, robbery, deception &c. I therefore wish to know
whether it is not an entire disregard of justice, according
to the human notion, that the sins committed against,
one person should be forgiven by another, without his
consent to such pardons? Whether it is not an
infringement of justice on the part of God the Son,
according to the human notion of justice, to wash away
with his blood the sins of theft, robbery, or murder
commited by one man against others, and to disregard
their individual sufferings? But if Christians really
imagine that true believers in the vicarious sacrifice of
Christ have their past sins as well against God as against
man, washed away by his blood, are they not extremely
presumptuous and culpable in inflicting punishment
upon their fellow Christians for any crime they may have
committed, knowing that atonement has already been
made for it by the blood of their God, which was shed on
the cross ? Yet we every day see Christians inflict on
one another severe punishment, for the sins cbmmitted
by them, notwithstanding the remission of their sins
th rough their faith in the vicarious sacrifice of Christ.
Fourthly. These Gentlemen believe, that the Son
washes away the sins of those who place their faith in
his vicarious sacrifice, and not of men in general. This
shews that the act of pardoning the sins of men by
it, to put an innocent person to a painful death for the
transgressions of others, notwithstanding he, in his
human capacity, manifested very great reluctance to
that death, as is admitted in the account of the life of
Jesus Christ in Matthew Ch. XXVI. 37—39.
Thirdly. Sins are of two kinds, that is, sins against
God merely, and sins against God and man, such as
theft, robbery, deception &c. I therefore wish to know
whether it is not an entire disregard of justice, according
to the human notion, that the sins committed against,
one person should be forgiven by another, without his
consent to such pardons? Whether it is not an
infringement of justice on the part of God the Son,
according to the human notion of justice, to wash away
with his blood the sins of theft, robbery, or murder
commited by one man against others, and to disregard
their individual sufferings? But if Christians really
imagine that true believers in the vicarious sacrifice of
Christ have their past sins as well against God as against
man, washed away by his blood, are they not extremely
presumptuous and culpable in inflicting punishment
upon their fellow Christians for any crime they may have
committed, knowing that atonement has already been
made for it by the blood of their God, which was shed on
the cross ? Yet we every day see Christians inflict on
one another severe punishment, for the sins cbmmitted
by them, notwithstanding the remission of their sins
th rough their faith in the vicarious sacrifice of Christ.
Fourthly. These Gentlemen believe, that the Son
washes away the sins of those who place their faith in
his vicarious sacrifice, and not of men in general. This
shews that the act of pardoning the sins of men by