
76 lectures on the ephesians
race to the justice of the evils which the race had
deserved by sin. And if this is true, then, although
no theory of the relations between His death and the
forgiveness of sin may afford us intellectual satis-
faction, and though there are times and moods in the
life of most of us when the greatness and sacredness
of the mystery seem to forbid as irreverent and
profane all attempts to speculate on the manner in
which His death accomplished its great redemptive
purposes, we may still receive with awe and wonder,
with faith and hope and immeasurable joy, the blessed
assurance that He “ suffered for sins once, the
Righteous for the unrighteous, that He might bring
us to God,” and that “we have our redemption
through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses
according to the riches of [God’s] grace.”
NOTE to Page 72.—“Analogies are used in aid of conviction;
metaphors as means of illustration. The language is analogous,
wherever a thing, power, or principle in a higher dignity is ex-
pressed by the same thing, power, or principle in a lower but
more known form. Such, for instance, is the language of
John iii. 6, ‘that which is born of the flesh is flesh; that which
is born of the Spirit is spirit.’ The latter half of the verse
contains the fact asserted; the former half the analogous fact,
by which it is rendered intelligible. If any man choose to call
this metaphorical or figurative, I ask him whether with Hobbes
and Bolingbroke he applies the same rule to the moral attributes
of the Deity? Whether he regards the Divine justice, for
89
instance, as a metaphorical term, a mere figure of speech? If
he disclaims this, then I answer, neither do I regard the words
born again, or spiritual life, as figures or metaphors. I have
only to add that these analogies are the material, or (to speak
chemically) the base, of symbols and symbolical expressions;
the nature of which as always tautegorical (i.e. expressing the
same subject but with a difference) in contradistinction from
metaphors and similitudes, that are always allegorical (i.e. ex-
pressing a different subject but with a resemblance), will be found
explained at large in the ‘Statesman’s Manual,’ p. 35–38.
“Of metaphorical language, on the other hand, let the following
be taken as instance and illustration. I am speaking, we will
suppose, of an act which in its own nature and as a producing
and efficient cause is transcendent, but which produces sundry
effects, each of which is the same in kind with an effect produced
by a cause well known and of ordinary occurrence. Now when
I characterize or designate this transcendent act, in exclusive
reference to these its effects, by a succession of names borrowed
The Epistle to the Ephesians v2_The Epistle to the Ephesians 15 March 2012 13:25 Page 76