Philosophy of the Plan of Salvation: A Book for the TimesWalker, James B. (James Barr)
Religion
Philosophy of the Plan of Salvation: A Book for the Times
Walker, James B. (James Barr)
Salvation
regard for the law, his interest in the well-being of his obedient
children, and the opposition of his nature to disobedience, would be
graduated in every child's mind by the penalty which he inflicted for
the transgression of his commands.
So in the case of an absolute lawgiver: his hostility to crime could
be known only by the penalty which he inflicted upon the criminal. If,
for the crime of theft, he were to punish the offender only by the
imposition of a trifling fine, the impression would be made upon every
mind that he did not, at heart, feel much hostility to the crime of
larceny. If he had the power, and did not punish crime at all, he
would thus reveal to the whole nation that he was in league with
criminals, and himself a criminal at heart.
So in relation to murder, if he were to let the culprit go free, or
inflict upon him but a slight penalty, he would thus show that his
heart was tainted with guilt, and that there was no safety for good
men under his government. But should he fix a penalty to
transgression, declare it to all his subjects, and visit every
criminal with punishment in proportion to his guilt, he would show to
the world that he regarded the law, and was opposed directly and for
ever to its transgression.
In like manner, and in no other way, could God manifest to men his
infinite justice and his regard for the laws of his kingdom. Did he
punish for sin with but a slight penalty, the whole universe of mind
would have good reason to believe that the God of heaven was but
little opposed to sin. Did he punish it with the highest degree of
penalty, it would be evidence to the universe that his nature was in
the highest degree opposed to sin and attached to holiness.
Now, whatever may be said in relation to the application of these
principles to future rewards and punishments, one thing will be
apparent to all, which is all that the present argument requires to be
admitted, that is--the mind of man would receive an idea of the amount
of God's opposition to sin, only by the amount of penalty which he
inflicted upon the sinner.
Having ascertained these premises, we return to the inquiry, _How
could the demerit of sin in the sight of God, or the idea of God's
attribute of justice, be conveyed to the minds of the Jews?_
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account