cant: "For even Christ, our passover," i. e. our passoverlamb, "is sacrificed for us,” (1 Cor. 5: 7). Peter shows that the same idea is familiar to him: "Ye were redeemed," says he to the Christians whom he is addressing, "not with corruptible things,.... but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish and without spot;" (1 Pet. 1: 18, 19. Ex. 12: 5). That apostle who leaned on the bosom of Jesus, and who has recorded the words of John the Baptist which constitute our text, seems to have imbibed, in an unusual measure, the spirit which led to the employment of such language as I have repeated. Rapt into celestial vision, he beheld the throne of God, supported by four living creatures, and surrounded by the twenty-four elders. "In the midst of them," i. e. between the circling elders and the throne, "I saw," says he, 66 a LAMB, as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God." That Lamb advances to the throne, and takes the book with seven seals out of the hand of him who sat upon that throne, in order that he might break the seals and disclose the contents of that book. But how are the heavenly spectators affected by this? Every one falls prostrate before the Lamb, and all unite in singing the new song: "Thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy BLOOD, out of every kindred and tongue and people and nation." All heaven respond to this. They shout aloud: "Worthy is the LAMB, that was slain, to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory and blessing." The whole universe reëchoes back this song: "Blessing and honour, and glory and power, be unto him who sitteth on the throne, and to the LAMB forever and ever!" (Rev. 5: 8-14). This settles the question, as to what views were connected with the word lamb, as applied to Christ. It is a lamb which is slain; a lamb whose blood has a redeeming efficacy; even as Paul has often asserted that we "have redemption by the blood of Christ." And although John has elsewhere in the Apocalypse presented the Lamb to our view, as "King of kings and Lord of lords," yet there is nothing in this which is at

all at variance with his other view of the subject. One thing lies upon the face of these passages; which is, that the highest elevation of heavenly rapture and song is always reached, whenever Christ presents himself as a Lamb that had been slain.

May I not safely venture to assert, now, not only that John the Baptist might have meant to call Jesus a Lamb, because he was to be an expiatory victim, but that, according to rhetorical propriety and the Jewish usages of speech, he must have meant to convey such an idea? I do not believe, that we can rationally suppose the Jews, who encircled the herald of Jesus' approach, would ever have thought of any other meaning of John's words than this. And could John fail to know this? And why should we suppose him to have employed mystical or equivocal language, on an occasion so solemn and important?

But if any doubt remains on the mind of any one who hears me, in regard to this point, it will all be removed, as it seems to me, when we advance in the farther explanation of our

text.

Jesus is not only a lamb, but THE LAMB OF GOD. Here is superadded, in the way of explanation, a new relation or quality of the Lamb in question. It is barely possible, that lamb of God may mean most excellent lamb; as mountains of God are said to mean very high mountains, and the child Moses was fair to God is said to mean that he was exceedingly fair. Time has been, when these idioms were thus interpreted; but the idea of making a mere superlative out of the name of God, is now generally abandoned by the best critics, and the words of God are admitted to be indicative of some special relation to God. Accordingly, in the text before us, the Lamb of God must either mean the Lamb which belongs to God, or else the Lamb which God provides. The Lamb which belongs to God would make an inept and frigid meaning, in the case before us. The main design of John the Baptist is to show in what relation Jesus stands to those whom he addresses, not to show to whom the Lamb appertains as prop

erty. It follows, then, that the meaning must be: The Lamb which God has provided, or which he presents as a sin-offering. Every Jew, in his own case and on account of his own sin, was obliged by the Mosaic law to provide, and present as a sacrifice for sin, a lamb without spot or blemish. What each had thus done for himself, God now does for the Jews and for all men. He provides a spotless victim, who through the eternal Spirit was to offer up himself as a sacrifice to God, and thus procure eternal redemption for all.

Mark, my hearers, what expanded views the forerunner of Jesus had, in regard to the nature and extent of Christ's mission. He was first of all a lamb, i. e. a propitiatory or vicarious sacrifice; then, secondly, he was a lamb presented by no mere man who was himself a sinner, but provided by God himself; and of course, thirdly, we may accede to the remaining part of the declaration: Which taketh away the sins of the world. In the language of the apostle John this phraseology imports, that the Lamb of God was to be a propitiatory sacrifice for Gentiles as well as Jews. The atonement of Christ, then, its efficacy, and its universality, are all plainly within the scope of John the Baptist's view.

This brings us to the last declaration of our text: Which taketh away the sin of the world.

What is it to take away sin? The Greek words (aloor zhv άuagríav) are not of the classical idiom, but are simply Hebrew in Greek costume. The Hebrews employed the phrase (N) as meaning either to bear the punishment or consequences of sin, or to expiate sin, or to forgive sin. Either of the two first meanings will answer well for our text, for Christ "bore our sins and carried our sorrows; he bore our sins in his own body on the tree (1 Pet. 2: 24); he was made a curse for us (Gal. 3: 13); he was made sin, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him," (2 Cor. 5: 21). One might vindicate this shade of meaning, also, by appealing to the lamb as a sacrificial victim, which bore suffering in the room of him who presented the offering. Substantially, too, this meaning at

tached to the phrase would communicate to us the idea of Christ as an atoning sacrifice. But I doubt not that the other shade of meaning conveyed by this Hebrew phraseology, is the true idea of the passage before us. The Lamb that takes away the sins of the world, is the Lamb that makes expiation for them, and thus removes their condemning and soul-destroying power. The Greek verb translated taketh away (alow), like the corresponding Hebrew one (N), means, first of all, to lift up, elevate; then to raise up and remove, as one lifts up a burden and then conveys it away. It is exceedingly significant in the passage under consideration. Christ took on him the burden of our sins, and this load he carried away or removed from us. Figurative, indeed, is the whole manner of expression. Figurative was it among the Jews, who spoke familiarly of their sacrificial victims as bearing the sins of the offerer, and taking them away. Over the head of the goat, which on the great day of expiation was sent into the wilderness, confession was made by the high-priest in behalf of all the people, while his hands were laid on the head of the goat, in order thus to signify that the sins of the people were symbolically transferred to the goat; and the same scape-goat is said to "bear all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited" (Lev. 16: 21 seq.), i. e. it took away their sins. The offender who offered a sacrifice in a manner prescribed by law, was ecclesiastically and civilly freed from the penalty of the law. The law adjudged the victim to have suffered in his room or stead.

No other meaning than one drawn from these familiar sources, will answer the demands of our text. All else falls far below it, or widely misses the mark. To say that Christ takes away the sins of the world by virtue of the instruction which he communicated as our great teacher, is true enough to a certain extent; but this idea by no means answers the exigencies of our text. A lamb is not the emblem of an instructor. When the evangelist wishes to convey his views of Christ as our great teacher, he calls him the Light of the world; he says that in him was life, and that life was the

light of men; he says that the Only Begotten of the Father has declared the purposes of God fully to us. Indeed it is quite plain, that entirely another mode of expression than that in our text must be adopted, in order intelligibly to convey the idea in question.

One word as to taking away the sins of the WORLD, and I have done with my main theme. Other conditions besides the expiatory death of Christ are necessary to complete the actual salvation of the sinner-conditions on his part, which are indispensable. He must be a penitent; he must believe and trust in the Lord Jesus Christ as the only and all-sufficient Saviour of sinners. This done, salvation is as wide as the world of men. The proffer of it is universal; the provision for it on the part of God is all-sufficient. But the sinner must become united to Christ by faith, in order actually to avail himself of this provision.

Thus have I endeavoured to explain and vindicate this most important part of all the preaching or declarations of John the Baptist, which is left on sacred record. No one will deny that our subject has an intimate connection with the solemnities in which we are to engage this day; for today, (we may say with the apostle of old), is Christ our passover sacrificed for us. Or we may use the words of the same apostle on another occasion: "Christ Jesus is evidently set forth before us, as crucified among us."

Christians are you prepared for this sacred feast? Do you look by faith to that Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world? I would most affectionately and solemnly warn you, that it is necessary to discern the Lord's body aright, if we would escape condemnation when we come to this table; and surely so, if we would rationally expect to participate in the blessings which it indicates. What then is discerning the Lord's body aright? Would any one ever devise such an expression, in order to inculcate the necessity or the importance of recognizing Christ as our instructor, or as a perfect model of piety and virtue? "Not discerning the Lord's BODY aright!" And is his body our teacher, and his