Chapter XXVIII: Part VIII: Eschatology, or the Doctrine of Final Things (4)

_1 Cor. 15:44, 50_—“_it is sown a natural body; it is raised a
spiritual body.... Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood
cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit
incorruption._” These passages are inconsistent with the view that
the resurrection is a physical resurrection at the beginning of
the thousand years—a resurrection to be followed by a second life
of the saints in bodies of flesh and blood. They are not, however,
inconsistent with the true view, soon to be mentioned, that “_the
first resurrection_” is simply the raising of the church to a new
life and zeal. Westcott, Bib. Com. on _John 14:18, 19_—“_I will
not leave you desolate_ [marg.: ‘_orphans_’]: _I come unto you.
Yet a little while, and the world beholdeth me no more; but ye
behold me_”:—“The words exclude the error of those who suppose
that Christ will ‘come’ under the same conditions of earthly
existence as those to which he submitted at his first coming.” See
Hovey, Bib. Eschatology, 66‐78.

(_d_) That the literal interpretation is generally and naturally connected with the expectation of a gradual and necessary decline of Christ’s kingdom upon earth, until Christ comes to bind Satan and to introduce the millennium. This view not only contradicts such passages as Dan. 2:34, 35, and Mat. 13:31, 32, but it begets a passive and hopeless endurance of evil, whereas the Scriptures enjoin a constant and aggressive warfare against it, upon the very ground that God’s power shall assure to the church a gradual but constant progress in the face of it, even to the time of the end.

_Dan. 2:34, 35_—“_Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out
without hands, which smote the image upon its feet that were of
iron and clay, and brake them in pieces. Then was the iron, the
clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken in pieces
together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing‐
floors; and the wind carried them away, so that no place was found
for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great
mountain, and filled the whole earth_”; _Mat. 13:31, 32_—“_The
kingdom of heaven is like unto a grain of mustard seed, which a
man took, and sowed in his field: which indeed is less than all
seeds; but when it is grown, it is greater than the herbs, and
becometh a tree, so that the birds of the heaven come and lodge in
the branches thereof._” In both these figures there is no sign of
cessation or of backward movement, but rather every indication of
continuous advance to complete victory and dominion. The
premillennial theory supposes that for the principle of
development under the dispensation of the Holy Spirit, God will
substitute a reign of mere power and violence. J. B. Thomas: “The
kingdom of heaven is like a grain of mustard seed, not like a can
of nitro‐glycerine.” Leighton Williams: “The kingdom of God is to
be realized on earth, not by a cataclysm, apart from effort and
will, but through the universal dissemination of the gospel all
but lost to the world.” E. G. Robinson: “Second Adventism
stultifies the system and scheme of Christianity.” Dr. A. J.
Gordon could not deny that the early disciples were mistaken in
expecting the end of the world in their day. So we may be.
Scripture does not declare that the end should come in the
lifetime of the apostles, and no definite date is set. “_After a
long time_” (_Mat. 25:19_) and “_the falling away come first_” (_2
Thess. 2:3_) are expressions which postpone indefinitely. Yet a
just view of Christ’s coming as ever possible in the immediate
future may make us as faithful as were the original disciples.

The theory also divests Christ of all kingly power until the
millennium, or, rather, maintains that the kingdom has not yet
been given to him; see Elliott, Horæ Apocalypticæ, 1:94—where
_Luke 19:12_—“_A certain nobleman went into a far country, to
receive for himself a kingdom, and to return_”—is interpreted as
follows: “Subordinate kings went to Rome to receive the
investiture to their kingdoms from the Roman Emperor, and then
returned to occupy them and reign. So Christ received from his
Father, after his ascension, the investiture to his kingdom; but
with the intention not to occupy it, till his return at his second
coming. In token of this investiture he takes his seat as the Lamb
on the divine throne” (_Rev. 5:6‐8_). But this interpretation
contradicts _Mat. 28:18, 20_—“_All authority hath been given unto
me in heaven and on earth ... lo, I am with you always, even unto
the end of the world._” See Presb. Rev., 1882:228. On the effects
of the premillennial view in weakening Christian endeavor, see J.
H. Seelye, Christian Missions, 94‐127; _per contra_, see A. J.
Gordon, in Independent, Feb. 1886.

(_e_) We may therefore best interpret Rev. 20:4‐10 as teaching in highly figurative language, not a preliminary resurrection of the body, in the case of departed saints, but a period in the later days of the church militant when, under special influence of the Holy Ghost, the spirit of the martyrs shall appear again, true religion be greatly quickened and revived, and the members of Christ’s churches become so conscious of their strength in Christ that they shall, to an extent unknown before, triumph over the powers of evil both within and without. So the spirit of Elijah appeared again in John the Baptist (Mal. 4:5; _cf._ Mat. 11:13, 14). The fact that only the spirit of sacrifice and faith is to be revived is figuratively indicated in the phrase: “The rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years should be finished” = the spirit of persecution and unbelief shall be, as it were, laid to sleep. Since resurrection, like the coming of Christ and the judgment, is twofold, first, spiritual (the raising of the soul to spiritual life), and secondly, physical (the raising of the body from the grave), the words in Rev. 20:5—“this is the first resurrection”—seem intended distinctly to preclude the literal interpretation we are combating. In short, we hold that Rev. 20:4‐10 does not describe the events commonly called the second advent and resurrection, but rather describes great spiritual changes in the later history of the church, which are typical of, and preliminary to, the second advent and resurrection, and therefore, after the prophetic method, are foretold in language literally applicable only to those final events themselves (_cf._ Ez. 37:1‐14; Luke 15:32).

_Mal. 4:5_—“_Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the
great and terrible day of Jehovah come_”; _cf._ _Mat. 11:13,
14_—“_For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. And
if ye are willing to receive it, this is Elijah, that is to
come_”; _Ez. 37:1‐14_—the vision of the valley of dry bones =
either the political or the religious resuscitation of the Jews;
_Luke 15:32_—“_this thy brother was dead, and is alive again_”—of
the prodigal son. It will help us in our interpretation of _Rev.
20:4‐10_ to notice that death, judgment, the coming of Christ, and
the resurrection, are all of two kinds, the first spiritual, and
the second literal:

(1) First, a spiritual death (_Eph. 2:1_—“_dead through your
trespasses and sins_”); and secondly, a physical and literal
death, whose culmination is found in the second death (_Rev.
20:14_—“_And death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This
is the second death, even the lake of fire_”).

(2) First, a spiritual judgment (_Is. 26:9_—“_when thy judgments
are in the earth_”; _John 12:31_—“_Now is the judgment of this
world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out_”;
_3:18_—“_he that believeth not hath been judged already_”); and
secondly, an outward and literal judgment (_Acts 17:31_—“_hath
appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness
by the man whom he hath ordained_”).

(3) First, the spiritual and invisible coming of Christ (_Mat.
16:28_—“_shall in no wise taste of death, till they see the Son of
man coming in his kingdom_”—at the destruction of Jerusalem; _John
14:16, 18_—“_another Comforter ... I come unto you_”—at Pentecost;
_14:3_—“_And if I go and prepare a place for you, I come again,
and will receive you unto myself_”—at death); and secondly, a
visible literal coming (_Mat. 25:31_—“_the Son of man shall come
in his glory, and all the angels with him_”).

(4) First, a spiritual resurrection (_John 5:25_—“_The hour
cometh, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son
of God; and they that hear shall live_”); and secondly, a physical
and literal resurrection (_John 5:28, 29_—“_the hour cometh, in
which all that are in the tombs shall hear his voice, and shall
come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of
life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of
judgment_”). The spiritual resurrection foreshadows the bodily
resurrection.

This twofoldness of each of the four terms, death, judgment,
coming of Christ, resurrection, is so obvious a teaching of
Scripture, that the apostle’s remark in _Rev. 20:5_—“_This is the
first resurrection_”—seems distinctly intended to warn the reader
against drawing the premillenarian inference, and to make clear
the fact that the resurrection spoken of is the first or spiritual
resurrection,—an interpretation which is made indubitable by his
proceeding, further on, to describe the outward and literal
resurrection in _verse 13_—“_And the sea gave up the dead that
were in it: and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in
them._” This physical resurrection takes place when “_the thousand
years_” are “_finished_” (_verse 5_).

This interpretation suggests a possible way of reconciling the
premillenarian and postmillenarian theories, without sacrificing
any of the truth in either of them. Christ may come again, at the
beginning of the millennium, in a spiritual way, and his saints
may reign with him spiritually, in the wonderful advances of his
kingdom; while the visible, literal coming may take place at the
end of the thousand years. Dorner’s view is postmillennial, in
this sense, that the visible coming of Christ will be after the
thousand years. Hengstenberg curiously regards the millennium as
having begun in the Middle Ages (800‐1800 A. D.). This strange
view of an able interpreter, as well as the extraordinary
diversity of explanations given by others, convinces us that no
exegete has yet found the key to the mysteries of the Apocalypse.
Until we know whether the preaching of the gospel in the whole
world (_Mat. 24:14_) is to be a preaching to nations as a whole,
or to each individual in each nation, we cannot determine whether
the millennium has already begun, or whether it is yet far in the
future.

The millennium then is to be the culmination of the work of the
Holy Spirit, a universal revival of religion, a nation born in a
day, the kings of the earth bringing their glory and honor into
the city of God. A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 211—“After
the present elective work of the Spirit has been completed, there
will come a time of universal blessing, when the Spirit shall
literally be poured out upon all flesh, when that which is perfect
shall come and that which is in part shall be done away.... The
early rain of the Spirit was at Pentecost; the latter rain will be
at the Parousia.”

A. H. Strong, Sermon before the Baptist World Congress, London,
July 12, 1905—“Let us expect the speedy spiritual coming of the
Lord. I believe in an ultimate literal and visible coming of
Christ in the clouds of heaven to raise the dead, to summon all
men to the judgment, and to wind up the present dispensation. But
I believe that this visible and literal coming of Christ must be
preceded, and prepared for, by his invisible and spiritual coming
and by a resurrection of faith and love in the hearts of his
people. ‘_This is the first resurrection_’ (_Rev. 20:5_). I read
in Scripture of a spiritual second coming that precedes the
literal, an inward revelation of Christ to his people, a
restraining of the powers of darkness, a mighty augmentation of
the forces of righteousness, a turning to the Lord of men and
nations, such as the world has not yet seen. I believe in a long
reign of Christ on earth, in which his saints shall in spirit be
caught up with him, and shall sit with him upon his throne, even
though this muddy vesture of decay compasses them about, and the
time of their complete glorification has not yet come. Let us
hasten the coming of the day of God by our faith and prayer.
‘_When the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?_’
(_Luke 18:8_). Let him find faith, at least in us. Our faith can
certainly secure the coming of the Lord into our hearts. Let us
expect that Christ will be revealed in us, as of old he was
revealed in the Apostle Paul.”

Our own interpretation of _Rev. 20:1‐10_, was first given, for
substance, by Whitby. He was followed by Vitringa and Faber. For a
fuller elaboration of it, see Brown, Second Advent, 206‐259;
Hodge, Outlines of Theology, 447‐453. For the postmillennial view
generally, see Kendrick, in Bap. Quar., Jan. 1870; New Englander,
1874:356; 1879:47‐49, 114‐147; Pepper, in Bap. Rev., 1880:15;
Princeton Review, March, 1879:415‐434; Presb. Rev., 1883:221‐252;
Bib. Sac., 15:381, 625; 17:111; Harris, Kingdom of Christ,
220‐237; Waldegrave, Bampton Lectures for 1854, on the Millennium;
Neander, Planting and Training, 526, 527; Cowles, Dissertation on
Premillennial Advent, in Com. on Jeremiah and Ezekiel; Weiss,
Premillennial Advent; Crosby, Second Advent; Fairbairn on
Prophecy, 432‐480; Woods, Works, 3:267; Abp. Whately, Essays on
Future State. For the premillennial view, see Elliott, Horæ
Apocalypticæ, 4:140‐196; William Kelly, Advent of Christ
Premillennial; Taylor, Voice of the Church on the Coming and
Kingdom of the Redeemer; Litch, Christ Yet to Come.

IV. The Resurrection.

While the Scriptures describe the impartation of new life to the soul in regeneration as a spiritual resurrection, they also declare that, at the second coming of Christ, there shall be a resurrection of the body, and a reunion of the body to the soul from which, during the intermediate state, it has been separated. Both the just and the unjust shall have part in the resurrection. To the just, it shall be a resurrection unto life; and the body shall be a body like Christ’s—a body fitted for the uses of the sanctified spirit. To the unjust, it shall be a resurrection unto condemnation; and analogy would seem to indicate that, here also, the outward form will fitly represent the inward state of the soul—being corrupt and deformed as is the soul which inhabits it. Those who are living at Christ’s coming shall receive spiritual bodies without passing through death. As the body after corruption and dissolution, so the outward world after destruction by fire, shall be rehabilitated and fitted for the abode of the saints.

Passages describing a spiritual resurrection are: _John 5:24‐27_,
especially _25_—“_The hour cometh, and now is, when the dead shall
hear the voice of the Son of God; and they that hear shall live_”;
_Rom. 6:4, 5_—“_as Christ was raised from the dead through the
glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life. For
if we have become united with him by the likeness of his death, we
shall be also by the likeness of his resurrection_”; _Eph. 2:1, 5,
6_—“_And you did he make alive, when ye were dead through your
trespasses and sins ... even when we were dead through our
trespasses, made us alive together with Christ ... and raised us
up with him, and made us to sit with him in the heavenly places,
in Christ Jesus_”; _5:14_—“_Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise
from the dead, and Christ shall shine upon thee._” _Phil.
3:10_—“_that I may know him, and the power of his resurrection_”;
_Col. 2:12, 13_—“_having been buried with him in baptism, wherein
ye were also raised with him through faith in the working of God,
who raised him from the dead. And you, being dead through your
trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, you, I say, did
he make alive together with him_”; _cf._ _Is. 26:19_—“_Thy dead
shall live; my dead bodies shall arise. Awake and sing, ye that
dwell in the dust; for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the
earth shall cast forth the dead_”; _Ez. 37:1‐14_—the valley of dry
bones: “_I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of
your graves, O my people; and I will bring you into the land of
Israel._”

Passages describing a literal and physical resurrection are: _Job
14:12‐15_—“_So man lieth down and riseth not: Till the heavens be
no more, they shall not awake, Nor be raised out of their sleep.
Oh that thou wouldest hide me in Sheol, That thou wouldest keep me
secret, until thy wrath be past, That thou wouldest appoint me a
set time, and remember me! If a man die, shall he live again? All
the days of my warfare would I wait, Till my release should come.
Thou wouldest call, and I would answer thee: Thou wouldest have a
desire to the work of thy hands_”; _John 5:28, 29_—“_the hour
cometh, in which all that are in the tombs shall hear his voice,
and shalt come forth: they that have done good, unto the
resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the
resurrection of judgment._”

_Acts 24:15_—“_having hope toward God ... that there shall be a
resurrection both of the just and unjust_”; _1 Cor. 15:13, 17, 22,
42, 51, 52_—“_if there is no resurrection of the dead, neither
hath Christ been raised ... and if Christ hath not been raised,
your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins ... as in Adam all
die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive ... it is sown in
corruption: it is raised in incorruption.... We shall not all
sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling
of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the
dead shall be raised incorruptible_”; _Phil. 3:21_—“_who shall
fashion anew the body of our humiliation, that it may be conformed
to the body of his glory, according to the working whereby he is
able even to subject all things unto himself_”; _1 Thess.
4:14‐16_—“_For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even
so them also that are fallen asleep in Jesus will God bring with
him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we
that are alive, that are left unto the coming of the Lord, shall
in no wise precede them that are fallen asleep. For the Lord
himself shall descend from heaven, with a shout, with the voice of
the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ
shall rise first._”

_2 Pet. 3:7, 10, 13_—“_the heavens that now are, and the earth, by
the same word have been stored up for fire, being reserved against
the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.... But the day
of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, which the heavens
shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall be
dissolved with fervent heat, and the earth and the works that are
therein shall be burned up.... But, according to his promise, we
look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth
righteousness_”; _Rev. 20:13_—“_And the sea gave up the dead that
were __ in it; and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in
them_”; _21:1, 5_—“_And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for
the first heaven and the first earth are passed away; and the sea
is no more.... And he that sitteth on the throne said, Behold, I
make all things new._”

The smooth face of death with the lost youth restored, and the
pure white glow of the marble statue with all passion gone and the
lofty and heroic only visible, are indications of what is to be.
Art, in its representations alike of the human form, and of an
ideal earth and society in landscape and poem, is prophetic of the
future,—it suggests the glorious possibilities of the
resurrection‐morning. Nicoll, Life of Christ: “The river runs
through the lake and pursues its way beyond. So the life of faith
passes through death and is only purified thereby. As to the body,
all that is worth saving will be saved. Other resurrections [such
as that of Lazarus] were resurrections to the old conditions of
earthly life; the resurrection of Christ was the revelation of new
life.”

Stevens, Pauline Theology, 357 note—“If we could assume with
confidence that the report of Paul’s speech before Felix
accurately reproduced his language in detail, the apostle’s belief
in a ‘_resurrection both of the just and of the unjust_’ (_Acts
24:15_) would be securely established: but, in view of the silence
of his epistles, this assumption becomes a precarious one. Paul
speaks afterwards of ‘_attaining to the resurrection from the
dead_’ (_Phil. 3:11_), as if this did not belong to all.” The
scepticism of Prof. Stevens seems to us entirely needless and
unjustified. It is the blessed resurrection to which Paul would
“attain,” and which he has in mind in Philippians, as in _1 Cor.
15_—a fact perfectly consistent with a resurrection of the wicked
to “_shame and everlasting contempt_” (_Daniel 12:2; John 5:29_).

A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 205, 206—“The rapture of the
saints (_1 Thess. 4:17_) is the earthly Christ rising to meet the
heavenly Christ; the elect church, gathered in the Spirit and
named ὁ Χριστός (_1 Cor. 12:12_), taken up to be united in glory
with Christ the head of the church, ‘_himself the Savior of the
body_’ (_Eph. 5:23_). It is not by acting upon the body of Christ
from without, but by energizing it from within, that the Holy
Ghost will effect its glorification. In a word, the Comforter, who
on the day of Pentecost came down to form a body out of flesh,
will at the Parousia return to heaven in that body, having
fashioned it like unto the body of Christ (_Phil. 3:31_).... Here
then is where the lines of Christ’s ministry terminate,—in
sanctification, the perfection of the spirit’s holiness; and in
resurrection, the perfection of the body’s health.”

E. G. Robinson: “Personality is the indestructible principle—not
intelligence, else deny that infants have souls. Personality takes
to itself a material organization. It is a divinely empowered
second cause. This refutes materialism and annihilationism. No one
pretends that the individual elements of the body will be raised.
The individuality only, the personal identity, will be preserved.
The soul is the organific power. Medical practice teaches that
merely animal life is a mechanical process, but this is used by a
personal power. Materialism, on the contrary, would make the soul
the product of the body. Every man, in becoming a Christian,
begins the process of resurrection. We do not know _but_
resurrection begins at the moment of dissolution, yet we do not
know _that_ it does. But if Christ arose with identically the same
body unchanged, how can his resurrection be a type of ours?
Answer: The nature of Christ’s resurrection body is an open
question.”

Upon the subject of the resurrection, our positive information is derived wholly from the word of God. Further discussion of it may be most naturally arranged in a series of answers to objections. The objections commonly urged against the doctrine, as above propounded, may be reduced to two:

1. The exegetical objection.

_The exegetical objection_,—that it rests upon a literalizing of metaphorical language, and has no sufficient support in Scripture. To this we answer:

(_a_) That, though the phrase “resurrection of the body” does not occur in the New Testament, the passages which describe the event indicate a physical, as distinguished from a spiritual, change (John 5:28, 29; Phil. 3:21; 1 Thess. 4:13‐17). The phrase “spiritual body” (1 Cor. 15:44) is a contradiction in terms, if it be understood as signifying “a body which is simple spirit.” It can only be interpreted as meaning a material organism, perfectly adapted to be the outward expression and vehicle of the purified soul. The purely spiritual interpretation is, moreover, expressly excluded by the apostolic denial that “the resurrection is past already” (2 Tim. 2:18), and by the fact that there is a resurrection of the unjust, as well as of the just (Acts 24:15).

_John 5:28, 29_—“_all that are in the tombs shall hear his voice,
and shall come forth_”; _Phil. 3:21_—“_who shall fashion anew the
body of our humiliation_”; _1 Thess. 4:16, 17_—“_For the Lord
himself shall descend from heaven, with a shout, with the voice of
the archangel, and with the trump of God; and the dead in Christ
shall rise first_”; _1 Cor. 15:44_—“_it is sown a natural_ [marg.:
‘_psychical_’] _body; it is raised a spiritual body_”; _2 Tim.
2:17, 18_—“_Hymenæus and Philetus; men who concerning the truth
have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already, and
overthrow the faith of some_”; _Acts 24:15_—“_Having hope toward
God ... that there shall be a resurrection both of the just and
the unjust._”

In _1 Cor. 15:44_, the word ψυχικόν, translated “_natural_” or
“_psychical_,” is derived from the Greek word ψυχή, soul, just as
the word πνευματικόν, translated “_spiritual_,” is derived from
the Greek word πνεῦμα, spirit. And as Paul could not mean to say
that this earthly body is composed of soul, neither does he say
that the resurrection body is composed of _spirit_. In other
words, these adjectives “_psychical_” and “_spiritual_” do not
define the _material_ of the respective bodies, but describe those
bodies in their relations and adaptations, in their powers and
uses. The present body is adapted and designed for the use of the
soul; the resurrection body will be adapted and designed for the
use of the spirit.

_2 Tim. 2:18_—“_saying that the resurrection is past already_” =
undue contempt for the body came to regard the resurrection as a
purely spiritual thing (Ellicott). Dr. A. J. Gordon said that the
“_spiritual body_” means “the body spiritualized.” E. H. Johnson:
“The phrase ‘_spiritual body_’ describes not so much the nature of
the body itself, as its relations to the spirit.” Savage, Life
after Death, 80—“Resurrection does not mean the raising up of the
body, and it does not mean the mere rising of the soul in the
moment of death, but a rising again from the prison house of the
dead, after going down at the moment of death.” D. R. Goodwin,
Journ. Soc. Bib. Exegesis, 1881:84—“The spiritual body is _body_,
and not _spirit_, and therefore must come under the definition of
_body_. If it were to be mere spirit, then every man in the future
state would have two spirits—the spirit that he has here and
another spirit received at the resurrection.”

(_b_) That the redemption of Christ is declared to include the body as well as the soul (Rom. 8:23; 1 Cor. 6:13‐20). The indwelling of the Holy Spirit has put such honor upon the frail mortal tenement which he has made his temple, that God would not permit even this wholly to perish (Rom. 8:11—διὰ τὸ ἐνοικοῦν αὐτοῦ πνεῦμα ἐν ὑμῖν, _i. e._, because of his indwelling Spirit, God will raise up the mortal body). It is this belief which forms the basis of Christian care for the dead (Phil. 3:21; _cf._ Mat. 22:32).

_Rom. 8:23_—“_waiting for our adoption, to wit, the redemption of
our body_”; _1 Cor. 6:13‐20_—“_Meats for the belly and the belly
for meats: but God shall bring to nought both it and them. But the
body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for
the body: and God both raised the Lord, and will raise up us
through his power.... But he that is joined unto the Lord is one
spirit.... Or know ye not that your body is a temple of the Holy
Spirit which is in you, which ye have from God?... glorify God
therefore in your body_”; _Rom. 8:11_—“_But if the Spirit of him
that raised up Jesus from the dead dwelleth in you, he that raised
up Christ Jesus from the dead shall give life also to your mortal
bodies through his Spirit that dwelleth in you_”—here the Revised
Version follows Tisch., 8th ed., and Westcott and Hort’s reading
of διὰ τοῦ ἐνοικοῦντος αὐτοῦ πνεύματος. Tregelles, Tisch., 7th
ed., and Meyer, have διὰ τὸ ἐνοικοῦν αὐτοῦ πνεῦμα, and this
reading we regard as, on the whole, the best supported. _Phil.
3:21_—“_shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation._”

Dr. R. D. Hitchcock, in South Church Lectures, 338, says that
“there is no Scripture declaration of the resurrection of the
flesh, nor even of the resurrection of the body.” While this is
literally true, it conveys a false idea. The passages just cited
foretell a quickening of our mortal bodies, a raising of them up,
a changing of them into the likeness of Christ’s body. Dorner,
Eschatology: “The New Testament is not contented with a bodiless
immortality. It is opposed to a naked spiritualism, and accords
completely with a deeper philosophy which discerns in the body,
not merely the sheath or garment of the soul, but a side of the
person belonging to his full idea, his mirror and organ, of the
greatest importance for his activity and history.”

Christ’s proof of the resurrection in _Mat. 22:32_—“_God is not
the God of the dead, but of the living_”—has for its basis this
very assumption that soul and body belong normally together, and
that, since they are temporally separated in the case of the
saints who live with God, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob shall rise
again. The idealistic philosophy of thirty years ago led to a
contempt of the body; the recent materialism has done at least
this service, that it has reasserted the claims of the body to be
a proper part of man.

(_c_) That the nature of Christ’s resurrection, as literal and physical, determines the nature of the resurrection in the case of believers (Luke 24:36; John 20:27). As, in the case of Christ, the same body that was laid in the tomb was raised again, although possessed of new and surprising powers, so the Scriptures intimate, not simply that the saints shall have bodies, but that these bodies shall be in some proper sense an outgrowth or transformation of the very bodies that slept in the dust (Dan. 12:2; 1 Cor. 15:53, 54). The denial of the resurrection of the body, in the case of believers, leads naturally to a denial of the reality of Christ’s resurrection (1 Cor. 15:13).

_Luke 24:39_—“_See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself:
handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye
behold me having_”; _John 20:27_—“_Then saith he to Thomas, Reach
hither thy finger, and see my hands; and reach hither thy hand,
and put it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing_”;
_Dan. 12:2_—“_And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth
shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and
everlasting contempt_”; _1 Cor. 15:53, 54_—“_For this corruptible
must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
But when this corruption shall have put on incorruption, and this
mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall come to pass the
saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory_”;
_13_—“_But if there is no resurrection of the dead, neither hath
Christ been raised._”

Sadducean materialism and Gnostic dualism, which last held matter
to be evil, both denied the resurrection. Paul shows that to deny
it is to deny that Christ rose; since, if it were impossible in
the case of his followers, it must have been impossible in his own
case. As believers, we are vitally connected with him; and his
resurrection could not have taken place without drawing in its
train the resurrection of all of us. Having denied that Christ
rose, where is the proof that he is not still under the bond and
curse of death? Surely then our preaching is vain. Paul’s epistle
to the Corinthians was written before the Gospels; and is
therefore, as Hanna says, the earliest written account of the
resurrection. Christ’s transfiguration was a prophecy of his
resurrection.

S. S. Times, March 22, 1902:161—“The resurrection of Jesus was not
a mere rising again, like that of Lazarus and the son of the widow
of Nain. He came forth from the tomb so changed that he was not at
once or easily recognized, and was possessed of such new and
surprising powers that he seemed to be pure spirit, no longer
subject to the conditions of his natural body. So he was the
‘_first‐fruits_’ of the resurrection‐harvest (_1 Cor. 15:20_). Our
resurrection, in like manner, is to involve a change from a
corruptible body to an incorruptible, from a psychical to a
spiritual.”

(_d_) That the accompanying events, as the second coming and the judgment, since they are themselves literal, imply that the resurrection is also literal.

_Rom. 8:19‐23_—“_For the earnest expectation of the creation
waiteth for the revealing of the sons of God ... the whole
creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now ...
even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for our
adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body_”—here man’s body is
regarded as a part of nature, or the “_creation_,” and as
partaking in Christ of its deliverance from the curse; _Rev. 21:4,
5_—“_he shall wipe away every tear from their eyes; and death
shall be no more.... And he that sitteth on the throne said,
Behold, I make all things new_”—a declaration applicable to the
body, the seat of pain and the avenue of temptation, as well as to
outward nature. See Hanna, The Resurrection, 28; Fuller, Works,
3:291; Boston, Fourfold State, in Works, 8:271‐289. On Olshausen’s
view of immortality as inseparable from body, see Aids to the
Study of German Theology, 63. On resurrection of the flesh, see
Jahrbuch f. d. Theol., 1:289‐317.

2. The scientific object.

This is threefold:

(_a_) That a resurrection of the particles which compose the body at death is impossible, since they enter into new combinations, and not unfrequently become parts of other bodies which the doctrine holds to be raised at the same time.

We reply that the Scripture not only does not compel us to hold, but it distinctly denies, that all the particles which exist in the body at death are present in the resurrection‐body (1 Cor. 15:37—οὐ τὸ σῶμα τὸ γενησόμενον; 50). The Scripture seems only to indicate a certain physical connection between the new and the old, although the nature of this connection is not revealed. So long as the physical connection is maintained, it is not necessary to suppose that even a germ or particle that belonged to the old body exists in the new.

_1 Cor. 15:37, 38_—“_that which thou sowest, thou sowest not the
body that shall be, but a bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or
of some other kind; but God giveth it a body even as it pleased
him, and to each seed a body of its own._” Jerome tells us that
the risen saints “habent dentes, ventrem, genitalia, et tamen nec
cibis nec uxoribus indigent.” This view of the resurrection is
exposed to the objection mentioned above. Pollok’s Course of Time
represented the day of resurrection as a day on which the limbs
that had been torn asunder on earth hurtled through the air to
join one another once more. The amputated arm that has been buried
in China must traverse thousands of miles to meet the body of its
former owner, as it rose from the place of its burial in England.

There are serious difficulties attending this view. The bodies of
the dead fertilized the field of Waterloo. The wheat grown there
has been ground and made into bread, and eaten by thousands of
living men. Particles of one human body have become incorporated
with the bodies of many others. “The Avon to the Severn runs, The
Severn to the sea, And Wycliffe’s dust shall spread abroad, Wide
as the waters be.” Through the clouds and the rain, particles of
Wycliffe’s body may have entered into the water which other men
have drunk from their wells and fountains. There is a propagation
of disease by contagion, or the transmission of infinitesimal
germs from one body to another, sometimes by infection of the
living from contact with the body of a friend just dead. In these
various ways, the same particle might, in the course of history,
enter into the constitution of a hundred living men. How can this
one particle, at the resurrection, be in a hundred places at the
same time? “Like the woman who had seven husbands, the same matter
may belong in succession to many bodies, for ‘they all had it’ ”
(Smyth). The cannibal and his victim cannot both possess the same
body at the resurrection. The Providence Journal had an article
entitled: “Who ate Roger Williams?” When his remains were exhumed,
it was found that one large root of an apple tree followed the
spine, divided at the thighs, and turned up at the toes of Roger
Williams. More than one person had eaten its apples. This root may
be seen to‐day in the cabinet of Brown University.

These considerations have led some, like Origen, to call the
doctrine of a literal resurrection of the flesh “the foolishness
of beggarly minds,” and to say that resurrection may be only “the
gathering round the spirit of new materials, and the vitalizing
them into a new body by the spirit’s God‐given power”; see Newman
Smyth, Old Faiths in a New Light, 349‐391; Porter, Human
Intellect, 39. But this view seems as great an extreme as that
from which it was a reaction. It gives up all idea of unity
between the new and the old. If my body were this instant
annihilated, and if then, an hour hence, God should create a
second body, precisely like the present, I could not call it the
same with the present body, even though it were animated by the
same informing soul, and that soul had maintained an uninterrupted
existence between the time of the annihilation of the first body
and the creation of the second. So, if the body laid in the tomb
were wholly dissipated among the elements, and God created at the
end of the world a wholly new body, it would be impossible for
Paul to say: “_this corruptible must put on incorruption_” (_1
Cor. 15:53_), or: “_it is sown in dishonor; it it raised in
glory_” (_verse 43_). In short, there is a physical connection
between the old and the new, which is intimated by Scripture, but
which this theory denies.

Paul himself gives us an illustration which shows that his view
was midway between the two extremes: “_that which thou sowest,
thou sowest not the body that shall be_” (_1 Cor. 15:37_). On the
one hand, the wheat that springs up does not contain the precise
particles, perhaps does not contain any particles, that were in
the seed. On the other hand, there has been a continuous physical
connection between the seed sown and the ripened grain at the
harvest. If the seed had been annihilated, and then ripe grain
created, we could not speak of identity between the one and the
other. But, because there has been a constant flux, the old
particles pressed out by new, and these new in their turn
succeeded by others that take their places, we can say: “the wheat
has come up.” We bury grain in order to increase it. The
resurrection‐body will be the same with the body laid away in the
earth, in the same sense as the living stalk of grain is identical
with the seed from which it germinated. “_This mortal must put on
immortality_”—not the immortal spirit put on an immortal body, but
the mortal body put on immortality, the corruptible body put on
incorruption (_1 Cor. 15:53_). “_Ye know not the Scriptures, nor
the power of God_” (_Mark 12:24_), says our Lord; and Paul asks:
“_Why is it judged incredible with you, if God doth raise the
dead?_” (_Acts 26:8_).

Or, to use another illustration nearer to the thing we desire to
illustrate: My body is the same that it was ten years ago,
although physiologists declare that every particle of the body is
changed, not simply once in seven years, but once in a single
year. Life is preserved only by the constant throwing off of dead
matter and the introduction of new. There is indeed a unity of
consciousness and personality, without which I should not be able
to say at intervals of years: “this body is the same; this body is
mine.” But a physical connection between the old and the new is
necessary in addition.

The nails of the hands are renewed in less than four months, or
about twenty‐one times in seven years. They grow to full length,
an average of seven twelfths of an inch, in from 121 to 138 days.
Young people grow them more rapidly, old people more slowly. In a
man of 21, it took 126 days; in a man of 67, it took 244; but the
average was a third of a year. A Baptist pastor attempted to prove
that he was a native of South Carolina though born in another
state, upon the ground that the body he brought with him from
Tennessee had exchanged its physical particles for matter taken
from South Carolina. Two dentists, however, maintained that he
still had the same teeth which he owned in Tennessee seven years
before, there being no circulation in the enamel. Should we then
say: Every particle of the body has changed, except the enamel of
the teeth?

Pope’s Martinus Scriblerus: “Sir John Cutler had a pair of black
worsted stockings which his maid darned so often with silk that
they became at last a pair of silk stockings.” Adeney, in
Christianity and Evolution, 122, 123—“Herod’s temple was treated
as identical with the temple that Haggai knew, because the
rebuilding was gradual, and was carried on side by side with the
demolition of the several parts of the old structure.” The ocean
wave travels around the world and is the same wave; but it is
never in two consecutive seconds composed of the same particles of
water.

The North River is the same to‐day that it was when Hendrick
Hudson first discovered it; yet not a particle of its current, nor
the surface of the banks which that current touches now, is the
same that it was then. Two things make the present river identical
with the river of the past. The first is, that the same formative
principle is at work,—the trend of the banks is the same, and
there is the same general effect in the flow and direction of the
waters drained from a large area of country. The second is, the
fact that, ever since Hendrick Hudson’s time, there has been a
physical connection, old particles in continuous succession having
been replaced by new.

So there are two things requisite to make our future bodies one
with the bodies we now inhabit: first, that the same formative
principle be at work in them; and secondly, that there be some
sort of physical connection between the body that now is and the
body that shall be. What that physical connection is, it is vain
to speculate. We only teach that, though there may not be a single
material particle in the new that was present in the old, there
yet will be such a physical connection that it can be said: “the
new has grown out of the old”; “that which was in the grave has
come forth”; “this mortal has put on immortality.”

(_b_) That a resurrection‐body, having such a remote physical connection with the present body, cannot be recognized by the inhabiting soul or by other witnessing spirits as the same with that which was laid in the grave.

To this we reply that bodily identity does not consist in absolute sameness of particles during the whole history of the body, but in the organizing force, which, even in the flux and displacement of physical particles, makes the old the basis of the new, and binds both together in the unity of a single consciousness. In our recognition of friends, moreover, we are not wholly dependent, even in this world, upon our perception of bodily form; and we have reason to believe that in the future state there may be methods of communication far more direct and intuitive than those with which we are familiar here.

_Cf._ _Mat. 17:3, 4_—“_And behold, there appeared unto them Moses
and Elijah talking with him. And Peter answered, and said unto
Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, I will
make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and
one for Elijah_”—here there is no mention of information given to
Peter as to the names of the celestial visitants; it would seem
that, in his state of exalted sensibility, he at once knew them.
The recent proceedings of the English Society for Psychical
Research seem to indicate the possibility of communication between
two minds without physical intermediaries. Hudson, Scientific
Demonstration of a Future Life, 294, 295, holds that telepathy is
the means of communication in the future state.

G. S. Fullerton, Sameness and Identity, 6, 32, 67—“Heracleitus of
Ephesus declared it impossible to enter the same river twice.
Cratylus replied that the same river could not be entered once....
The kinds of sameness are: 1. Thing same _with itself_ at any one
instant; 2. Same pain to‐day I felt yesterday = a _like_ pain; 3.
I See the same tree at different times = two or more percepts
represent the same object; 4. Two plants belonging to the same
_class_ are called the same; 5. Memory gives us the same object
that we formerly perceived; but the object is not the past, it is
the _memory‐image_ which represents it; 6. Two men perceive the
same object = they have like percepts, while both percepts are
only representative of the same object; 7. External thing same
with its representative in consciousness, or with the substance or
noumenon supposed to underlie it.”

Ladd, Philosophy of Mind, 153, 255—“What is called ‘remaining the
same,’ in the case of all organic beings is just this,—remaining
faithful to some immanent idea, while undergoing a great variety
of changes in the pursuit, as it were, of the idea.... Self‐
consciousness and memory are themselves processes of becoming. The
mind that does not change, in the way of growth, has no claim to
be called mind. One cannot be conscious of changes without also
being conscious of being the very being that is changed. When he
loses this consciousness, we say that ‘he has lost his mind.’ Amid
changes of its ideas the ego remains permanent because it is held
within limits by the power of some immanent idea.... Our bodies as
such have only a formal existence. They are a stream in constant
flow and are ever changing. My body is only a temporary loan from
Nature, to be repaid at death.”

With regard to the meaning of the term “identity,” as applied to
material things, see Porter, Human Intellect, 631—“Here the
substance is called the same, by a loose analogy taken from living
agents and their gradual accretion and growth.” The Euphrates is
the same stream that flowed, “When high in Paradise By the four
rivers the first roses blew,” even though after that time the
flood, or deluge, stopped its flow and obliterated all the natural
features of the landscape. So this flowing organism which we call
the body may be the same, after the deluge of death has passed
away.

A different and less satisfactory view is presented in Dorner’s
Eschatology: “Identity involves: 1. Plastic form, which for the
earthly body had its moulding principle in the soul. That
principle could effect nothing permanent in the intermediate
state; but with the spiritual consummation of the soul, it attains
the full power which can appropriate to itself the heavenly body,
accompanied by a cosmical process, made like Christ. 2.
Appropriation, from the world of elements, of what it needs. The
elements into which everything bodily of earth is dissolved, are
an essentially uniform mass, like an ocean; and it is indifferent
what parts of this are assigned to each individual man. The whole
world of substance, which makes the constant change of substance
possible, is made over to humanity as a common possession (_Acts
4:32_—‘_not one of them said that aught of the things which he
possessed was his own; but they had all things common_’).”

(_c_) That a material organism can only be regarded as a hindrance to the free activity of the spirit, and that the assumption of such an organism by the soul, which, during the intermediate state, had been separated from the body, would indicate a decline in dignity and power rather than a progress.

We reply that we cannot estimate the powers and capacities of matter, when brought by God into complete subjection to the spirit. The bodies of the saints may be more ethereal than the air, and capable of swifter motion than the light, and yet be material in their substance. That the soul, clothed with its spiritual body, will have more exalted powers and enjoy a more complete felicity than would be possible while it maintained a purely spiritual existence, is evident from the fact that Paul represents the culmination of the soul’s blessedness as occurring, not at death, but at the resurrection of the body.

_Rom. 8:23_—“_waiting for our adoption, to wit, the redemption of
our body_”; _2 Cor. 5:4_—“_not for that we would be unclothed; but
that we would be clothed upon, that what is mortal may be
swallowed up of life_”; _Phil. 3:11_—“_if by any means I may
attain unto the resurrection from the dead._” Even _Ps.
86:11_—“_Unite my heart to fear thy name_”—may mean the collecting
of all the powers of the body as well as soul. In this respect for
the body, as a normal part of man’s being, Scripture is based upon
the truest philosophy. Plotinus gave thanks that he was not tied
to an immortal body, and refused to have his portrait taken,
because the body was too contemptible a thing to have its image
perpetuated. But this is not natural, nor is it probably anything
more than a whim or affectation. _Eph. 5:29_—“_no man ever hated
his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it._” What we desire
is not the annihilation of the body, but its perfection.

Renouf, Hibbert Lectures, 188—“In the Egyptian Book of the Dead,
the soul reunites itself to the body, with the assurance that they
shall never again be separated.” McCosh, Intuitions, 213—“The
essential thing about the resurrection is the development, out of
the dead body, of an organ for the communion and activity of the
spiritual life.” Ebrard, Dogmatik, 2:226‐234, has interesting
remarks upon the relation of the resurrection‐body to the present
body. The essential difference he considers to be this, that
whereas, in the present body, matter is master of the spirit, in
the resurrection‐body spirit will be the master of matter, needing
no reparation by food, and having control of material laws. Ebrard
adds striking speculations with regard to the glorified body of
Christ.

A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 126—“_Now_ the body bears
the spirit, a slow chariot whose wheels are often disabled, and
whose swiftest motion is but labored and tardy. _Then_ the spirit
will bear the body, carrying it as on wings of thought
whithersoever it will. The Holy Ghost, by his divine inworking
will, has completed in us the divine likeness, and perfected over
us the divine dominion. The human body will now be in sovereign
subjection to the human spirit, and the human spirit to the divine
Spirit, and God will be all in all.” Newman Smyth, Place of Death
in Evolution, 112—“Weismann maintains that the living germ not
only persists and is potentially immortal, but also that under
favorable conditions it seems capable of surrounding itself with a
new body. If a vital germ can do this, why not a spiritual germ?”
Two martyrs were led to the stake. One was blind, the other lame.
As the fires kindled, the latter exclaimed: “Courage, brother!
this fire will cure us both!”

We may sum up our answers to objections, and may at the same time throw light upon the doctrine of the resurrection, by suggesting four principles which should govern our thinking with regard to the subject,—these namely: 1. Body is in continual flux; 2. Since matter is but the manifestation of God’s mind and will, body is plastic in God’s hands; 3. The soul in complete union with God may be endowed with the power of God; 4. Soul determines body, and not body soul, as the materialist imagines.