132. (vii) IT IS A FUNDAMENTAL ERROR ON THE PART OF THE CHURCH TO BELIEVE THAT THE PASSION ON THE CROSS WAS THE REAL ACT OF REDEMPTION. THAT ERROR, TOGETHER WITH THE ERRONEOUS BELIEF IN THREE DIVINE PERSONS EXISTING FROM ETERNITY, HAS SO PERVERTED THE WHOLE CHURCH THAT THERE IS NO REMAINDER OF SPIRITUALITY LEFT IN IT.

Is there any subject which does more to fill and pack the books of orthodox theology to-day, or any that is taught and driven home more zealously in colleges, and is more often preached and ranted about in pulpits, than the belief that God the Father in His anger with the human race not only drove it away from Him, but actually placed it under the ban of universal damnation, thus excommunicating it; but because He is gracious, He persuaded or impelled His own Son to come down and take upon Himself the sentence of damnation, so as to appease His Father's anger; and it is only in this way that He is able to look upon man with any favour? They add that this too was accomplished by means of the Son, for instance, in order to take upon Himself the damnation of the human race, by allowing Himself to be flogged by the Jews, have His face spat upon, and then be crucified as accursed in the sight of God (Deuteronomy 21:23). The Father was propitiated when this had been done, and through His love for His Son revoked the damnation, but only for those for whom the Son interceded, so that He became in perpetuity a Mediator with His Father.

[2] These and similar phrases ring through our churches to-day, re-echoing from the walls like the echoes in woodlands and filling the ears of all listeners. But is there anyone, whose reasoning faculty is enlightened and made whole by the reading of the Word, who cannot see that God ¹ is mercy and clemency itself, since He is love itself and good itself, and these qualities are His essence? And that it is therefore a contradiction to say that mercy itself or good itself could look upon man in anger, and pass sentence of damnation on him, and still remain what He is in His Divine essence? Such actions can hardly be attributed to an upright person, but rather to a wicked one; nor to an angel of heaven, but rather to a spirit from hell. So it is an unspeakable crime to attribute such acts to God.

[3] But if one enquires the reason, it is this: people have taken the passion on the cross to be the real act of redemption. From that source these errors have flowed, just as one mistake produces a whole series, or as a jar of vinegar can only yield vinegar, or a disordered mind nothing but madness. The one deduction leads to other theories of the same type, for they lie hidden in the deduction, and come forth one after another. From the belief that the passion on the cross was the redeeming act, yet more scandalous and ignoble ideas about God can emerge and be extracted, until, as Isaiah says:

The priest and the prophet go astray through strong drink. They stumble in judgment, all the tables are covered with vomit brought up, Isaiah 28:7-8.

Footnotes:

297. THE SECOND COMMANDMENT

You are not to take the name of Jehovah your God in vain, for Jehovah will not hold anyone guiltless, who takes His name in vain.

Taking the name of Jehovah God in vain means in the natural or literal sense the misuse of the name itself in all sorts of conversation, especially false statements or lies, and in swearing without good cause, or in order to avoid being blamed, in evil intentions, which are curses, and in witchcraft and spells. On the other hand, swearing by God and His holiness, the Word and the Gospel, at coronations, ordination into the priesthood, or inauguration into offices of trust, is not taking the name of God in vain, unless the one who takes the oath subsequently rejects his promises as worthless. The name of God, being holiness itself, is to be constantly employed in the sacred business of the church, as in prayers, hymns and all forms of worship, as well as in sermons and writings on religious subjects. This is because God is present in everything to do with religion, and when He is duly invoked, His presence is summoned by His name, and He listens. In these ways the name of God is hallowed.

[2] The sanctity of the name of Jehovah God can be established from the name of Jehovah, which the Jews after their earliest period did not, and still do not, dare to utter; and on their account no more were the Evangelists and Apostles willing to use it. Therefore in place of Jehovah they said 'the Lord'. This is evident from a number of passages of the Old Testament quoted in the New, where 'the Lord' is substituted for Jehovah; e.g, Matthew 22:37; Luke 10:27 compared with Deuteronomy 6:5, and elsewhere. It is well known that the name of Jesus is likewise holy, from the Apostle's saying that at that name every knee does and should bow in the heavens and on earth; and moreover that it cannot be uttered by any devil in hell. There are many names of God which are not to be taken in vain, such as Jehovah, Jehovah God, Jehovah Zebaoth, the Holy One of Israel, Jesus and Christ, and the Holy Spirit.