Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

those things which are above.' Yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead.' 13

"Says the blessed Saviour, In the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.' The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage; but they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage; neither can they die any more; for they are equal unto the angels, and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.' 14

[ocr errors]

"What can be clearer, hence, than that marriage is contrary to Christianity,-is inadmissible to christian men and women,-is incompatible with a true christian life?-and this the more, seeing that the Scripture verily exhorts, Be not conformed to this world; yea, it in truth declares, Now are we the sons of God,'-and, The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God.'":

15

6

The above reasoning in regard to marriage is openly fallacious-so we think-but whence the fallacy? Manifestly, for the most part, from the assumption that in the texts quoted from the gospels, just as in those brought from the epistles, the resurrection described belongs certainly to the earthly state. Apropos to the above, suppose the passage mentioning "the resurrection of damnation," be quoted as referring to the immortal state, or that this, that, or the other text which teaches the rising of all the dead, be quoted as proving, per se, the final holiness and happiness of all.

The scripture terms and phrases expressive of a resurrection, are applied, in the Scriptures, to several somewhat different operations, over and above that of a literal, mechanical rising, such as was meant when the Saviour said to Saul of Tarsus, "Arise," &c., as already quoted. But these different resurrections are quite distinguishable from one another can be sorted out rather easily. The several varieties may be stated thus:

1. A simple revivification of the earthly body to mere

13 1 John iii. 14; Eph. ii. 4-6; Coll. ii. 12; iii. 1; Rom. vi. 13. 14 Matt. xxii. 30; Luke xx. 34-36.

15 Rom. xii. 2; 1 John iii. 2; Rom. viii. 16.

mortal life, as in the case of those raised from the dead in the early times.

2. The taking of a purely spiritual organism by Christ, immediately upon the event of his bodily death, (“ being in flesh put to death, indeed, but in the spirit quickened, in which also he went " &c.,16) and his subsequent rising from the dead, by the act of putting on his earthly organism over the spiritual one, so that he could truly and properly say, "Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me, and see." 17

3. A sort of transmigrational rising—a supposed passing of the soul into an earthly body; as when Herod, on hearing of the Saviour's works, concluded that the Baptist had arisen; or as when, at about the same period, "the people" said that Christ was Elias, or that at least some one of the old prophets had "risen again.)" 18

4. A moral or religious change for the better, as in several of the texts already cited, (at 13,) and in many others, particularly the following: "Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light." 19

5. A figurative getting up and standing for judicial purposes, as of a witness to testify against a prisoner, or of a prisoner to hear the verdict of the Judge, whether of acquittal or condemnation: "The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it." "They that have done good, to the resurrection of damnation."-(Properly, " of condemnation.") 20

are

6. The after-death life, or existence in a spiritual organization: "Now that the dead are raised, [that is, caused to have another life,'] even Moses showed." "How say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?" (That there is no living again of those having died?) "God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us." (Will also give to us another life.) "Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you that God should raise the dead?" (Rightly, "that God raises the dead?"-which is to say, That God gives to the dead another life?) 21 And so of the rest.

It may now be said, If there are so many kinds of risings, 17 Luke xxiv. 39.

16 Literal rendering of 1 Peter iii. 18. 18 Luke ix. 7, 8, 18, 19.

[blocks in formation]

20 Matt. xii. 41;

19 Eph. v. 14. 21 Luke xx. 37; 1 Cor. xv. 12; vi. 14; Acts xxvi. 8.

how are we to determine in a given passage what particular kind of rising is taught? I answer, There are no great difficulties here. We must first note correctly what the topic of discourse is-the rest is easy.

In the historic accounts of one and another's having been raised by miracle, the rising of the earthly body is, of course, taught; and the same may be said in regard to that text of somewhat doubtful authenticity which sets forth that at Jesus's death, in full view of the soldiers who crucified him, and yet not till "after his resurrection," "many bodies of the saints which slept, arose, and came out of the graves." 22

The resurrection of Christ being in several respects unique, is not likely to be confounded with any other.

The supposed rising of John the Baptist and others, as thought to be exemplified in the person of Jesus, was of a character not easily mistaken. And it can scarcely be doubted that the resurrection held by the Pharisees was of a character precisely similar.

In that large class of texts wherein the resurrection is connected with christian experience,-with the faith, feelings, conduct and character of the early Christians, the rising meant is clearly a religious or morally elevating process, or sometimes the religious or morally elevated state to which they had attained, or after which they were striving. See several texts already cited, (at 13,) as also various others, especially the following: "If by any means I might attain to the resurrection [literally, 'to the out-rising'] of the dead." 23

In those three or four texts where rewards and punishments are set forth in connection with a rising, the rising is, of course, to be taken as part of a judicial formula, but not to be taken as part of a literal proceeding. For in like manner as it is not to be supposed that Christ's judgmentseat is a literal piece of cabinet work, so neither can it be reasonably supposed that in his judging of mankind, the forms and processes of ordinary tribunals are at all observed. Nor is there any necessity of supposing that the judgment can take place only in the invisible world. Paul, at Cesarea, properly said, "I stand at Cesar's judgment-seat," although the Emperor was probably at Rome; (certainly not at 22 Matt. xxvii. 50-54.

23 Phill. iii. 11.

Cesarea;) so wherever Christianity is, men may truly, "stand before the judgment-seat of Christ," although Christ, personally, is in heaven.24

In our Lord's conversation with the Sadducee doctors "touching the resurrection of the dead," the matter in debate was a question-neither of judicature nor of morals, but-of life and being. It had direct relation to the mode or manner of after-death existence, as also to the preeminently important point whether such an existence is. Accordingly, when he averred that the subjects of the resurrection are as the angels, he could scarcely have had reference to the moral character of the angels, but only to their mode of existence, particularly as not being liable to die, and so not needing to have their numbers replenished by offspring. As to a judgment, he is entirely silent.

A similar strain of remark is applicable to the most of Paul's language in the xvth of 1 Corinthians: thus,

He argues pointedly against those who said that "there is no resurrection of the dead;" but not particularly against those having merely wrong views of it.

He teaches "with what body" the dead come, instead of with what grade of moral character.

He speaks of that which is raised as being "raised in glory;" yet he makes glory to be an attribute of also the sun, moon, and stars, yea, even of "bodies terrestrial.”

Though he makes use of the word "spiritual," he employs it not in a religious, but-in a mere generic sense, applying it exclusively to the resurrection organism, which he twice denominates "a spiritual body."

Concerning the dead being brought together for judgment, he says not a word.

He treats somewhat upon purely moral and religious topics, adverting to the influence which the doctrine of the resurrection had and ought to have upon the minds and conduct of believers, in advance of their actual experience of the process; he announces a perfect triumph of Christ, previous to "the end," in the putting down of all rule, and all authority and power, and the bringing of all human beings to be joyfully subject to his sway; yet he does not teach that all this is to be effected by the power of the resurrection as a direct means to the result; on the contrary,

[ocr errors]

24 Acts xxv. 10; Rom. xiv. 10.

his position is that it is to be brought about by the continued. reign of Christ in his kingdom "till" the desired result shall be fully accomplished. "For he must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet."

From the foregoing and other considerations, the writer of this is morally certain that by the resurrection, in the after-death sense, both the Saviour and Paul, his inspired apostle, intended simply the investing of human beings with the after-death organism celestially quickened, by virtue of which operation, we, who have borne the image of the earthly One, Adam in the flesh, shall thereafter bear the image of the heavenly One, Christ, in the spirit.

The impression is well-nigh universal among Christians, that the resurrection is exclusively a future event,—that it is future as well to those who died long ago, as it is to us who are still in the flesh,-is future as truly to Adam and Abraham and Washington, and each other of the dead, as it is to the dead in whole, including all that have died and all that are to die. Yet how this idea first gained credence, is a question not easy of solution. The Scriptures certainly favor a very different view.

The present tense of verbs is scripturally applied to the resurrection process much oftener than is the future-more than twice as often. And whenever the future tense is thus applied, one of two circumstances is always-or nearly always-present:-either living mortals are addressed; or else the dead in general are spoken of, many of whom have not yet lived, much less died, not to say been raised; and in either of these circumstances, the future tense-and only this tense is clearly the proper verb-form to be used, seeing that the rising of the now alive, and of the human family as a whole, is manifestly future, if ever. The following is a sample of the texts alluded to-they are the principal ones, indeed, concerning which it can not be readily shown that they relate to something in this world: "Because I live, ye shall live also." "God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us." "As we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly." 25

"There shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the

25 John xiv. 19; 1 Cor. vi. 14: xv. 49.

« PreviousContinue »