LIBRARY
OF THE
University of California.
GIFT OF
Y. M. C A. OF U. C,
Accession ;K):1699 Class
GEORGE : WELLS : ARMES
MEMORIAL LIBRARY * * +
STiLE5 HALL BERKELEY
&!)CB Mint.
&J)ey $vise.
SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES
CONCERNING THE
Resurrection of the Dead,
AS TAUGHT
IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.
D. A. DRYDEN.
W OF THE
UKlVFfiSITY
CINCINNATI:
HITCHCOCK AND WALDEN,
FOR THE AUTHOR.
1872.
D7
Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1872,
BY D. A. DRYDEN,
In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington.
To
Hon. John T. Wilson,
WHOSE HOME WAS A REFUGE FOR ME IN POVERTY
AND SUFFERING LONG YEARS AGO,
BY WHOSE GENEROSITY THIS LITTLE VOLUME IS
SENT OUT UPON ITS MISSION :
IT IS GRATEFULLY DEDICATED BY
n$ author.
101699
Preface.
THE character and design of this little
treatise are indicated on the title-page.
It is an attempt, at least, at an independent
and candid study, and suggestive statement,
of just what the New Testament does teach
concerning the resurrection of the dead. It is
written neither in the interest of any Church
creed or theological doctrine, nor with the de-
sign to controvert any. The author has en-
deavored, as far as possible, to free his mind
from all prejudice — even from the bias of pre-
conceived opinions and theological teachings —
so as to go to the written Word itself, dili-
gently and prayerfully, seeking to discover
VIII PREFACE.
just what it does teach on this deeply interest-
ing subject. That he has been led to give ex-
j^ression to many expositions and conceptions
which do seemingly come in conflict with the
generally accepted theological doctrines of the
resurrection of the body, there is no doubt.
And to many, probably, the views expressed
on this feature of the subject will be con-
sidered as antagonizing the orthodox faith of
the Church. But the author, could not do
otherwise and give full and free expression to
what has to him all the reality of life-giving
conceptions, and conscious realizations of the
truth of the Divine Word. But if, instead of
antagonizing the faith and subverting the hope
of the resurrection of the body, these sugges-
tive views should but lead to a different per-
ception of the Divine order and manner of that
consummation — bringing it nearer, giving it a
place even in the conscious realizations of the
Divine life of the soul — then let them not be
too hastily condemned or despised. They may
PREFACE. IX
bring light, and comfort, and spiritual life, to
some souls, which they may not find even in
the venerable and authoritative teachings of
orthodoxy. And if even a few souls should
be awakened from a mere formal, lifeless,
churchly belief in a long, future, earthly res-
urrection, to a personal, conscious realization
of the life-giving power of the resurrection and
the life in Jesus, it will be an abundant reward
for all the labor these inquiries have cost,
and, at the same time, reach the end aimed at
in their publication.
D. A. D.
^*^*fc-
Introduction.
REV. D. A. DRYDEN, of the California
Annual Conference, has written a book.
He is not "mine adversary," therefore I did
not wish him to write it. He rejects the
Eyspatq of the body that dies — at least the
common view — and argues with much indus-
try and ingenuity in support of another theory
of interpretation. He seeks to show that the
terms peculiar to the controversy are intended
to convey a meaning different from that which
is usually accepted.
I must dissent alike from his premises, his
processes, and his conclusions. To me there
is nor root, nor. substance, nor strength, nor
xil INTRODUCTION.
beauty in any extant substitute for the old
doctrine of "the hope and resurrection of the
dead." But a thoroughly intimate acquaint-
ance of nineteen years with the author enti-
tles me to say, without apology, that he is
studious, large-natured, genuinely honest, out-
spoken, generous to his opponents, tender as
charity, brave as fidelity, without envy, and
without art. He has helped to fight every
good fight in his day and place, and has
nobly earned the right to be heard. He has
felt the wear of hard service, known the deep-
est discipline of sorrow, and holds the torch
of his cherished belief above three graves
where the joy of his life was buried.
Since controversies must needs arise, is it
not well to read what earnest, truth-loving
men say on that side which to us, mayhap,
is "the other side?" I have tried to under-
stand my excellent brother's views. The fail-
ure, if failure there be, is the fault of the
taught, not of the teacher. To hear them
INTRODUCTION. xiii
repeated and read them in proof has tended
to exalt my appreciation of the venerable
"faith which was once delivered unto the
saints." I shall read the book again — and,
if it be not impertinent, ask all who feel
an interest in the great subject to read it —
not, indeed, without a mixture of regret, but
with the warmest affection for the author and
the frankest concession of his right to think,
preach, and publish as long as he does not
impair the force of Christian motives nor
attempt to clothe his sentiments in mislead-
ing disguises. The sturdier his blows the
better. I should not like to take shelter
under a belief which is safe only while unas-
sailed. If my friend must follow his convic-
tions to such an issue, it affords me genuine
pleasure to commend the ardor and skill
with which he espouses his task. It greatly
pleases me that he has proved able to put
the marrow of the prolonged controversy into
one small volume, which all classes may read
xiv INTRODUCTION.
with sincere respect for the integrity and
' ability of the writer. It is a happy instance
in which we may admire the acumen and
weigh the argument, without deploring the
animus of the book. *
The scheme of this work includes one
thing which demands special consideration.
It has inherent, and historic, and theological
importance. I refer to the interpretation of
£% as meaning "the under world" or place
of departed spirits. There is reason to sus-
pect that the Protestant Church, in her
resentment against the Papistic figment of
purgatory, has taken up a position considera-
bly on the other side of the interlying truth.
It is certainly desirable that the Church
should have a definite statement on so grave
a subject. Whatever intelligent readers may
think of the use which the author makes of
the doctrine of hades, they will find it to
their advantage to review the general sub-
ject with candor and research. Theology
INTRODUCTION. XV
has suffered deeply — I trust not irreparably —
from the inexact use of Scriptural terms.
When -human language is used as a vehicle
for divine thought, every word is entitled to
the meaning with which it pleased the Holy
Spirit to fill it.
I am not unaware of the unusual char-
acter of this introduction, nor insensible to
the probability that strangers may regard it
as needing explanation. But to the gen-
erous and eminently truthful writer of the
work, and to all such as happen to know us
both, an apology would appear superfluous.
I therefore conclude these hasty paragraphs
in full assurance that free discussion will
magnify the truth, and in the cheerful hope
that those who write and those who read
may alike be "raised in glory." "So shall
we ever be with the Lord."
M. C. BRIGGS.
THE
Resurrection of the Dead.
CHAPTER I.
"And have hope toward God, which they themselves also
allow that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of
the just and of the unjust." Acts xxiv, 15.
WHAT do the Scriptures teach concern-
ing the resurrection of the dead ? In-
quiry will be confined almost exclusively to
the New Testament, because the resurrection
is most fully and clearly taught therein, and
because the Old Testament can not be inter-
preted to teach it differently from the New, so
that, given, the resurrection as taught in the
New, and you have it as taught in the Old.
9
IO SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
What is the New Testament meaning of
resurrection ? Perhaps but little can be spe-
cifically determined on this point. In speaking
of the resurrection, New Testament authors
make use of two Greek verbs in their various
modes and tenses, dfcyfcrtyti and lyeipu). The
use is about equally divided between them,
and sometimes interchangeably as to meaning.
But in the main there is to be observed a nice
distinction in the use of these verbs. The
former is used in speaking of the fact of the
resurrection, and the latter in speaking of the
manner of that fact. The general term resur-
rection made from these verbs, has a very con-
siderable latitude of meaning. As applied to
the dead, its general meaning is, that they
rise, or are raised, from the state of death, and
that they have a future immortal existence
after death. Not a mere psychical or spiritual
rising and immortality, but corporeal too — all
that constitutes the complete personality. It
is the complete antithesis of dying and death.
Mark xii, 27 ; Luke xx, 38 ; 1 Cor. xv, 22.
The next point of inquiry may be made
much more specific and decisive. Of whom,
or of what is the resurrection predicated ?
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. I I
Who or ivhat is to rise? The dead, say New
Testament authors uniformly, almost univer-
sally, thus : " As touching the resurrection of
the dead" Matt, xxii, 31; "As touching the
dead, that they rise," Mark xii, 21 ; "As the
Father raiseth up the dead" John v, 21 ; "Why
incredible that God should raise the dead?"
Acts xxvi, 8 ; "If so be the dead rise not," 1
Cor. xv, 15 ; "Resurrection of the dead," Acts
iv, 2 ; " From the dead" Acts xxiv, 15. Thus
uniformly throughout the New Testament it is
the dead of whom the rising is predicated.
And in this inquiry it is of prime importance
that we clearly perceive the true New Testa-
ment meaning of this term dead. It is from
the Greek wpoq (singular), nzpol (plural). Does
this term mean the dead as persons, or does it
mean the bodies of the dead, or dead bodies ?
Is the term vexpdq used in the New Testament
interchangeably with the term ropa, body ? Is
the resurrection predicated of the dead as per-
sons, or is it predicated only of the bodies of
the dead, or of dead bodies ?
Let us first see if the New Testament au-
thors use the terms vtxpoq and <rw;ia inter-
changeably, or whether the common term
12 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
dead, so uniformly used in connection with
the resurrection, can be at all limited to mean
body, or bodies ; and how can we better do
this than by substituting body, or bodies, for
the term dead in the text ? Thus see whether
the obvious meaning will be the same.
The following will serve as examples : " Have
ye not read he is not the God of the bodies,
but of the living ?" Mark xii, 26 ; " Blessed are
the bodies that die in the Lord," Rev. xiv, 13 ;
" This is John the Baptist ; he is risen from
the' bodies" Matt, xiv, 2; "Questioning one
with another what the rising from the bodies
should mean," Mark ix, 10 ; " Nay, but if one
went to them from the bodies" Luke xvi, 30 ;
44 After he arose from the bodies" Acts x, 14 ;
" As those that are alive from the bodies"
Rom. vi, 13 ; "Brought again our Lord Jesus
Christ from the bodies" Heb. xiii, 20. Now,
in these texts is it not manifest that the term
dead can not be used in the sense of body, or
bodies ? To limit the dead to mean body, and
to use vcxpds interchangeably with <rwri.a, does
surely destroy the obvious meaning of these
verses of the Testament. Nor are these par-
ticular texts selected specially ; but the same is
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1 3
true of every text in the New Testament where
the term dead is used in connection with the
rising or resurrection ; not one in which the
dead can be limited to mean the body without
destroying the obvious meaning of the text.
But may it not be that this term dead is used
adjectively, referring to body, or bodies, under-
stood, of which bodies the rising is affirmed ?
To determine this we need but supply in the
texts body or bodies after the word dead, thus :
" Questioning one with another what the rising
from the dead bodies should mean ?" " Brought
again from the dead bodies our Lord Jesus
Christ ;" " Marvel not at this, for the hour is
coming in which all the dead bodies that are in
the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come
forth ; they (dead bodies) that have done good
unto the resurrection of life ; they (dead bodies)
that have done evil unto the resurrection of
damnation," John v, 28, 29 ; "Jesus who is the
first begotten of the dead bodies" Rev. i, 5 ;
"But the rest of the dead bodies lived not
again," Rev. xx, 5 ; " Blessed are the dead
bodies that die in the Lord," Rev. xiv, 13 ;
" What shall they do who are baptized for the
dead bodies if the dead bodies rise not ?" " Why
14 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
are they baptized for the dead bodies?" i Cor.
xv, 27 ; " But some man will say, how are the
dead bodies raised up, and with what body do
they {dead bodies) come?" 1 Cor. xv, 35. Now
is it not plain enough that such use of the
term dead utterly destroys the meaning of the
texts? So then it is manifest that vexpdq can
not be used by New Testament authors inter-
changeably with aw/la, and " the dead" can not
be limited in meaning to the bodies of the
dead, or dead bodies ; then the resurrection
can not be predicated of bodies, or dead bodies.
The rising " of the dead" or "from the dead,"
means something more than the future resur-
rection of bodies. Hence the resurrection of
tlie body, or the corporeal rising of the dead,
must be incidental to the general doctrine of
the rising of the dead, and will be carefully
considered when our inquiry reaches the man-
ner of the rising, " with what body they
come." Let us just here pursue still further
the inquiry, What is the New Testament
meaning of vsxpot, the dead ? As it can not be
limited in meaning to body, or bodies, it must
take in the whole personalty. It must be used
as the antithesis of living, or the living ; thus :
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1$
" That be might be Lord both of the dead and
living" Rom. xiv, 9 ; "Why seek ye the living
among the dead?" Luke xxiv, 5 ; " God is not
the God of the dead, but of the living" Matt.
jorii, 32 ; Mark xii, 27 ; Luke xx, 38. Now
what constitutes a living personality? Not
simply a body. True, in an accommodated or
figurative way, we sometimes speak of the body
as the person ; yet we know that a living body-
is not a living person, and that mere bodies do
not fill the meaning of that phrase, the living;
no more is a dead body a dead person. True,
as in the case of the living, we sometimes speak
of the body or corpse, as the person. This is
sometimes done by New Testament authors,
as in Matt, viii, 22 ; ix, 26 ; John xx, 13. Yet
we know the corpse is not the dead person \ but
only the dissolving earthly casket. Even so
we know that dead bodies do not fill the mean-
ing of that phrase, the dead. Hence, the res-
urrection must be predicated of the dead as
persons, including, of course, their corporeality
or bodies. That such is the New Testament
meaning of " the dead," we may more fully
perceive from Paul's doctrine of the resurrec-
tion. Let us turn first to 1 Cor. xv, which is
l6 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
an epitome of the whole Bible teaching of the
resurrection ; all other teaching is fragmentary
and incidental to this. Take first verses 12-
2 1 : " Now if Christ be preached that he rose
from the dead, how say some among you that
there is no resurrection of the dead ? But if
there be no resurrection of the dead, then is
Christ not risen : and if Christ be not risen,
then is our preaching vain, and your faith is
also vain. Yea, and we are found false wit-
nesses of God ; because we have testified of
God that he raised up Christ : whom he raised
not up, if so be that the dead rise not. For if
the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: and
if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain ; ye
are yet in your sins. Then they also which are
fallen asleep in Christ are perished. If in this
life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all
men most miserable. But now is Christ risen
from the dead, and become the first-fruits of
them that slept. For since by man came
death, by man came also the resurrection of
the dead."
In these verses the apostle teaches both
the resurrection of Christ and of the dead in
Christ. He establishes the fact of the latter
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. \J
by the .established fact of the former. They
stand or fall together. If Christ be not risen,
then are the dead not raised ; and if there be
no resurrection of the dead, if the dead rise
not, then is not Christ raised. But now is
Christ risen from the dead. The fact that
Christ is risen he establishes by the proofs
stated in verses 3-8 : " He arose the third
day, according to the Scriptures, was seen of
Cephas, (Peter,) then of the twelve ; after that
he was seen of more than five hundred breth-
ren at once, of whom the greater part remain
unto this day. After that he was seen of
James ; then of all the apostles ; and last
of all he was seen of vie also." With such
proofs well might Paul say, " Now is Christ
risen from the dead." But the single point
of inquiry is this : What is Paul's meaning of
the dead ? Of ivhat does he predicate the
resurrection ? Of what does he predicate the
resurrection of Christ ? of his body alone ?
Was the material, fleshly body laid in the
tomb Christ ? Would the raising of that
alone have filled the New Testament teach-
ing or Paul's idea of the resurrection of the
Christ ? How would such a resurrection fill
1 8 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
the meaning of such texts as these : " He,
seeing this before, spake of the resurrection
of Christ, that his soul was not left in hades,
neither his flesh did see corruption," Acts ii,
31; " Wherefore he saith when he ascended
up on high he led a multitude of captives and
gave gifts unto men. Now that he ascended,
what is it but that he also descended first
into the lower parts of the earth [under world,
or hades} ? He that descended is the same
also that ascended up far above all heavens,
that he might fill all things." Eph. iv, 8-10.
Now, can these texts by any just interpreta-
tion be limited to mean only the rising of the
body of Christ from the tomb ? Again : "/
am he that liveth and was dead; and behold,
/ am alive for evermore, and have the keys of
hades and of death." Rev. i, 18. Does the
Christ mean, in speaking thus, no more than
that his body was dead and rose again from
the tomb ? Did his body descend into the
lower world, or hades ? did his body triumph
over hades and bear away the key? Cer-
tainly not. The resurrection of Jesus takes
in his whole human personality. It includes
the fact that his soul descended to hades,
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 19
the abode of the dead, as certainly as that
his body was laid lifeless in the tomb. It
includes the glorious fact that his soul, his
real self, rose again from the place of the dead
as certainly as that his body rose again alive
from the tomb, and that he bore off in triumph
the keys of both hades and death. But this
glorious fact will be more fully considered fur-
ther on in our inquiry. Is such Paul's idea of
the resurrection of Christ ? and was this his
idea of the resurrection of the dead ? Does
he mean thereby no more than the future
raising again of dead bodies ? Are the dead
bodies in the graves, or utterly lost in dust,
dead persons ? Would the gathering again of
such matter, even into former shapes, be a res-
urrection of the dead? Is it such a resurrec-
tion which Paul so enthusiastically declares
and so ably proves in this chapter?
On the contrary, the whole scope and design
of his argument, as we will further on more
fully see, seems to be to affirm and establish
the glorious fact of a rising of the dead and a
future anastasis of the dead from death and
after death — an anastasis not merely of the
bodies of the dead, but of the dead themselves
20 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
as persons. His argument is not against those
who denied a bodily resurrection alone, but
who denied that the dead rise or live again at
all. Their philosophy and logic of life was,
They that are fallen asleep in death are per-
ished ; they rise no more. Therefore let us
eat, drink, and be merry, for to-morrow we die.
Let us make the most of this life before we
perish. But Paul's philosophy and logic are,
The dead in Christ are not perished, but they
rise ; they have an anastasis after death. And
if in this life only we have hope, we are of all
men most miserable. Thus the radical, obvi-
ous idea and meaning of Paul's resurrection
of the dead is that they rise to a future life of
complete personal being just as Christ is risen
to a complete personal being such as Paul him-
self saw him. Paul's philosophy of the anas-
tasis of the dead knows nothing about that
psychical, metaphysical immortality of disem-
bodied souls or ghosts of which some of the
heathen philosophers dreamed, and of which
but too many, even in the Christian Church,
are still dreaming. Nor does the New Tes-
tament know any thing about this ghostly
immortality of naked, shapeless souls only as
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 21
it has been foisted into its meaning by those
who have interpreted by the murky lights of
human philosophies at best but semi-heathen.
It knows the dead as real, substantial persons,
angels or men, and in its own language ever
introduces them to us as such, and not as
mere " shades," psychical essences, or bodiless
spirits.
CHAPTER II.
" O death, where is thy sting ? O Hades, where is thy vic-
tory?" i Cor. xv, 55.
"And death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire."
Rkv. xx, 14.
IN these inquiries it is not the intention to
state any thing dogmatically as the teach-
ing of the Word concerning the resurrection.
Yet it may be assumed that the meaning of
New Testament authors will be found within
the circumference of these four hypotheses :
I. That at death both soul and body go
into the grave, and there remain until the
general resurrection, which will consist in sud-
denly raising both soul and body out of the
grave at the last day.
II. At death the dying person is rent in
twain. The soul, or spirit, unclothed of all
corporeality, goes to heaven or hell. The body
decays, corrupts, and mingles again with the
general combinations of matter until the time
TIi£ RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 23
of the resurrection, when the particles will be
gathered again by the miraculous power of
God, or " be re-infused by the returning soul ;"
and the personality thus for years or centuries
severed — part in the dust, part in the spirit-
world — will be again reunited, and raised from
the grave.
III. As the body is sown in death, like the
corn of wheat, it is quickened, or made alive,
and rises a spiritual body, suited to the state
or condition of the soul, forming its corpore-
ality ; so that the dead enter hades — the place
of the dead — real persons. And the resurrec-
tion consists in their rising out of hades to
their ultimate fullness of eternal life in heaven,
or of death in Gehenna.
IV. The soul has its own spiritual body, in-
ter-existent with the material body. At death
the outer material body is dissolved, and the
soul rises in its own spiritual body.
Leaving you to judge which, or whether
either of these hypotheses will agree with the
Word, I pass on to inquire as to the teaching
of the New Testament —
I. Concerning the place or state of the dead
next after leaving this world.
24 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
II. Concerning the personality of the dead.
III. Concerning whence the dead rise, or the
true scene of the resurrection, and in what its
final glorious triumph will consist.
The varied forms of expression used in refer-
ence to the dead may be comprehended in
these terms: Death, grave, hades, hell, and
heaven ; and I think may be all summed up
in the single terms death and hades — the
first expressive of the physical dissolution by
which the dead pass from this world ; the
second indicating the place, or state next after
this world, and from whence they rise in the
resurrection.
Our first inquiry is concerning the place and
state of the dead after leaving this world. This
is a theme of very great interest, and occupies
much of our thought. How often we find our
thoughts seeking to pass the boundaries of the
beyond, and anxiously inquiring what is to be
the state, what the place next after life in this
world? And when friends and loved ones
pass away, and are seen no more in forms of
life in this world, how resist the inquiry,
What is their place and state? The eagerness
with which we seek any thing which promises
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 2$
us information on this subject — that millions
should be so attracted and interested in the
so-called revelations of modern spiritualism —
do but prove how interesting is this theme
to minds generally ; and, at the same time, in-
dicates the importance of a careful and Script-
ural study of the subject. For we may not say
this is a theme with which we are to have noth-
ing to do — so utterly left in the dark that we
may know nothing concerning it. At the same
time it is a subject we need to approach with
great carefulness, much humility, and entire
dependence upon the teaching of the Word —
so easy is it on a subject like this to supple-
ment facts with dreams, and mistake imagin-
ations for Revelation. Hence our inquiry is
strictly confined to this : What does the New
Testament teach concerning the place and
state of life next after this world ? In refer-
ence to this subject its authors use various
terms, which in our translation are heaven,
paradise, Abraham's bosom, eternal or ever-
lasting life, indicating a place or places, and
state of life and happiness. And opposite
these are terms — hell, lake of fire, bottomless
pit, prison, everlasting punishment, second
3
26 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
death, etc. — indicating a place or places, and
state of death and unhappiness. These places
are generally comprehended by the single
terms heaven and hell. And the commonly
received idea, or perception, in the Christian
jnind is, that at the death of the body the soul
at once goes either to heaven or hell ; and, to
such as have neither the means nor inclination
to look beyond this, it may be all sufficient.
But the fact certainly is that this idea does
not comprehend the teaching of the Word,
nor fill the perceptions of thinking, inquiring
minds. There is yet another term used at
least eleven times in the New Testament. It
is in the Greek hades. There is also in the
Old Testament a term which, in the Hebrew,
is sheol. In the Septuagint, or Greek trans-
lation of the Hebrew Bible, this word sheol is
always translated hades — so that the Hebrew
sheol and the Greek hades are equivalent terms,
and must be equivalent in meaning. What is
that meaning? That is, just what did the
New Testament authors mean to teach by the
word hades f We may have to linger about
this single point of inquiry for some time, be-
cause, in our English translation, it certainly
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 2J
does not appear what it does mean, and some-
times means one thing and sometimes a very
different thing. In fact, in our translation, and
modern theology and interpretation, this very
important word has been roughly handled. Its
true meaning has well-nigh been lost, and with
it has been lost to the Christian Church a most
important doctrine — that is, the doctrine of the
spiritual world, or mediate state of the dead
after death. Thus hades is sometimes trans-
lated grave, the place of dead bodies, and
sometimes hell, the place of punishment of lost
souls — a palpable contradiction. Moreover, it
is well known to scholars who have given the
subject a thought, and I think will appear even
to us, that not in a single case can it mean
either grave or hell at all. So the term sheol,
in the Hebrew Scriptures, is translated some-
times grave, sometimes hell. But it is well
known that it means neither — that such was
not its meaning in the Jewish mind — but that
it meant the " unseen world " — the " receptacle
of all spirits departed." And I think we will
p'ainly see that its equivalent term hades, in
the New Testament, means the same, and that
such was the meaning intended to be expressed
28 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
by the New Testament authors. And to their
use of the term let us at once direct our in-
quiries. And first to Acts ii, 27, 31: " Be-
cause thou wilt not leave my soul in hades ;
neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see
corruption. He seeing this before, spake of
the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was
not left in hades, neither his flesh did see cor-
ruption." In both these verses hades, in the
Greek text, is in our English text translated
hell. Now the question is, What was the
meaning of Peter, and of contemporary authors,
in the use of this word ? What place or state
is meant by hades in these texts ? And it
may assist us in this inquiry to give a brief
exegesis of the context, and thus clearly see
of whom Peter is speaking. Verses 27, 28,
are a quotation from David in the sixteenth
Psalm. In verses 29-34, it is shown that
David did not speak of himself. He was
buried, and his sepulcher remained to that
day in Jerusalem. He was not ascended into
the heavens, and his flesh did see corruption.
In verses 30, 31, it is shown that David spake
in the spirit of prophecy concerning Christ —
that his soul was not left in hades, neither
&**/*$•
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 29
did his flesh see corruption. Then manifestly
the doctrine is concerning the resurrection of
Christ that his soul rose from hades and his O
body from the tomb. The second part of this
teaching, in verse 31, we can readily under-
stand. It is that the material, or earthly body
of Jesus did not see corruption — though dead,
it was raised from the tomb before decompo-
sition had commenced. What are we to un-
derstand by his soul ? Manifestly his immortal,
human soul — not in the sense of a breath of "^^A
life, or unorganized psychical essence, but his
real substantial sc/f, or personality — the real
human Christ. ,■: For the body left in the tomb
was not the real, personal Christ, any more
than the shadow is the real substance, or than
k your body is your real, personal self. Yet we
have been so long under the teaching of the
old Platonic, and other metaphysical philos-
ophy, of naked, disembodied, soul-immortality,
of mere shades and ghosts, that it is difficult
for us to perceive that a living soul out of the
earthly body is still a living, real, substantial
person, and that the New Testament knows
the dead as persons, not as breaths, or unor-
ganized shapes. The soul of Christ was the
30 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
real, personal, spiritual Christ, for a time out
of the earthly body, which was in the tomb.
Now, the question is, Where went this soul of
Christ after the death of the body, and where
was it during the days the body remained in
the tomb ? David, in the spirit of prophecy,
declared it would not be left in sheol, or hades.
Peter declares as an actual fact it was not left
in hades. Then is it not manifest that Christ
did descend to sheol, or hades, and that he was
there at least for a time ? Then where was
that hades ? What place or state of the dead
is meant by the use of this word in this
connection ?
In the first place, it was not heaven, as the
place of angels and the ultimate abode of the
redeemed. I. Because this word is nowhere in
the Bible used with such meaning. It has in
no case ever been translated in any language
with such meaning, nor can it be without doing
great violence to the text. 2. Christ himself
said to Mary, after his resurrection, "I have
not yet ascended," and Luke states as an actual
fact that he did not ascend to heaven for forty
days afterward. But he was in hades before his
resurrection ; therefore hades is not heaven.
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 3 1
II. It is certain it does not mean the grave
or the tomb. 1. Because the term hades
never does properly mean the grave — is never
used with such meaning in the New Tes-
tament. True, it is in one place translated
grave, but without regard to the true mean-
ing of the text, as we shall hereafter see ; and
that such is the meaning in these texts surely
no one will for a moment assume. 2. Then
would we be taught that the soul goes into
the grave, or into the dust rather, with the
body; and this would land us at once in bold
Materialism, and blot out all knowledge or re-
liable perception of a spiritual world or place
of existence after leaving this material world.
III. Equally certain is it that hades in
these texts does not mean hell as the place
of demons and the ultimate abode of lost
men. 1. Because the term in the Greek text
never means hell in such sense. In the Greek
text Gehenna is the term to translate hell, for
such is its specific meaning. In our English
hades is sometimes translated hell, but, as we
shall see, with no more reference to its true
meaning than when translated grave. 2. It is
little less than blasphemy to say the soul of
32 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
the blessed Christ went to hell, the place
of the finally lost. Such an idea is repulsive
in the extreme, and without foundation in
good sense or reason. Why should Christ
descend to hell ? Besides, if such is the
meaning of hades, if such was the place to
which Christ went, then is hell abolished, for
he did not remain there. Not only so, but, as
we shall see below, when he arose from hades
he led a multitude of captives and bore off the
keys of hell in triumph. Then has almighty
delivering power visited hell, and hell is in
fact abolished. But such interpretation would
contradict the uniform teaching of the whole
New Testament. Then hades in these texts
does not mean hell. Then, if it means nei-
ther heaven, the grave, nor hell, what does it
mean? If Christ at death went neither to
heaven, the grave, nor hell, where went he ?
Let us for the present assume what may here-
after be fully established, that hades here must
be allowed its own specific, uniform meaning,
the same as its equivalent term sheol in the
Old Testament — that is, the "unseen world"
or " great unseen," the place of the dead, the
" receptacle of all spirits departed," " the under
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 33
world." Now, reduce these all to a specific
meaning and it is the spiritual world or abode
of the dead, the mediate state between heaven
and Geheiina, from whence the dead arise to
fullness of eternal life after tfoe judgment
or sink to eternal death in Gehenna. Now,
allowing that such is the meaning of hades
in these texts, the whole teaching is plain
enough and consistent. It means that Christ
at his death went where all the dead before
him had gone, and where they were. And
how significant the fact that his soul was not
left there ! All the dead going there previ-
ously had been left there. Hence to both
Jews and Gentiles the "under world/' whether
known to them as sheol, hades, or Tartarus,
was the gloomy, dreaded prison of death. As
their departed passed the portals of the grave
they were heard of no more ; no one had ever
returned. And, though the Jews had their
brighter conceptions of Abraham's bosom, or
a paradisiacal state of the pious dead in sheol,
and the Greeks their brighter dreams of elys-
ian fields and apotheosis, yet to all the life
beyond was shadowy and dark, and the place
of the dead the gloomy under world. But
34 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
the Christ remained not there. He arose
from hades as the first-fruits of the dead, and
henceforth, to all who believe in him, it is no
longer the gloomy, dreaded under world, but
paradise, quite on the borders of heaven, to
which they rise as they pass the judgment
and attain to the resurrection. Thus viewing
the resurrection of the Lord from hades, we
see how tremendous a fact it was — no less a
miracle in the spiritual world than in the nat-
ural world. So, too, the glorious doctrine of
the resurrection of the dead, of the resurrec-
tion and the life in Jesus, becomes a fact,
and a truth of tremendous significance as we
come to realize that it means much more than
a mere formal assent to doctrinals about the
gathering again of the dust of dead bodies at
the end of the world.
Our next step, of course, will be to see how
this interpretation of hades will agree with its
obvious meaning in other texts, and with the
general teaching of the New Testament ; for, if
it contradicts the obvious meaning of a single
text or the general teaching of the Word, it must
be mistaken, and we may not safely adopt it.
Let us take next the passage in Rev. i, 17, 18 :
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 35
" I am the first and the last ; I am he that
liveth and was dead, and behold, I am alive
for evermore, Amen ; and have the keys of
hades and of death." In our translation hades
is rendered hell. But cm the supposition that
it means hell, as Gehenna, the place of the
finally lost, it is exceedingly difficult to see just
what is the obvious meaning of the text. What
can be the meaning of the saying, " I have the
keys of hell!' unless it be that Jesus pro-
claims himself as the custodian of hell, receiv-
ing lost spirits and locking them up there ;
or does it mean that he has conquered hell's
kingdom and borne off the key ? Such meaning
is openly repugnant to every idea of this text
and of the general teaching of the Word. Then
if hades here means lull as the place and state
of the finally lost, what is the obvious meaning
and teaching of this text ? Who can tell ?
But allow the term its own true meaning, the
whole teaching of the text is obvious. Thus,
Jesus proclaims himself the first and the last,
the Jehovah of eternity, manifested in human-
ity. He was dead, in that his body was cru-
cified and laid in the tomb, and his soul
descended to the place of the dead. He is
36 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
alive, in that his soul was not left in hades, the
place of the dead, but " ascended," Eph. iv, 7,
10 ; and raised his body from the tomb. He
is alive for evermore, in that death can have
no more power over him, either body or soul.
In rising from hades he bore off the keys and
left its gates open evermore. The idea is that
of a conqueror entering a strong and well-bolted
fortification, its every gate locked ; such was
hades when under the dominion of death, and
to all who entered there before Jesus descended.
But he left its portals ajar and bore off the
keys ; not only so, but he has in like manner
conquered death and hades for all who are in
him. They fear neither the death of the body
nor hades, the abode of the dead in the spirit-
ual world. Thus, not only is the meaning of
this text obvious, beautiful, all-glorious, but also,
how perfectly it harmonizes with the teachings
of David and Pe$er already considered !
Again, we find the term hades in the follow-
ing texts from Rev. xx, 12-15: "And I saw
the dead, small and great, stand before God ;
and the books were opened : and another book
was opened, which is the book of life : and the
dead were judged out of those things which
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 37
were written in the books, according to their
works. And the sea gave up the dead which
were in it ; and death and hell delivered up tfie
dead which were in them : and they were
judged every man according to their works.
And death and hell were cast into the lake of
fire. This is the second death. And whoso-
ever was not found written in the book of life
was cast into the lake of fire."
Now, allowing hades in these verses to mean
hell as the ultimate abode of the lost in the
English translation, the meaning of the. texts
is not obvious at all. It is exceedingly ob-
scure and even contradictory. What can be
meant by the saying, " Death and hell deliv-
ered up the dead which were in them ?" Can
it mean that hell is eventually to be abolished ?
compelled to deliver up the dead lost in its
abodes of despair ? or does it mean that they
are only to be given up for a time to be judged,
and then sent back again ? That is to say, the
lost who have been in hell for centuries and
ages, are to be brought out to judgment ; that
is, to determine whether works during their
life in this world were such as to justly con-
demn them and send them to hell. That is as
38 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
though a civil court should condemn a man to
the penitentiary, and after he had been there
thirty or fifty years, have him brought out for
trial to determine whether he ought justly to
be there at all ! Surely there can be no such
transactions as that in connection with the
final judgment of men. And yet, what else
can be meant by hell delivering up the dead ?
And that other saying, " Death and hell were
cast into , the lake of fire :" what can that
mean f Lake of fire we know very well is
equivalent to Gehenna, the ultimate hell or
place of the finally lost. Now if hades also
means hell in the same sense, then verse 14
must teach that hell is to be cast into hell, the
meaning of which is not very obvious.
Now allow to hades its true meaning, the
place of the dead ; the place and state of all
the dead intermediate between death and the
judgment. Then the meaning is obvious that
all the dead come forth, or are delivered up,
from this hades to be judged according to
their works, that their ultimate state and des-
tiny in heaven or in Gehenna may be justly
determined. The meaning of the fourteenth
verse may be that all in hades who are under
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 39
death or in the lost state, will, after judgment,
be cast into hell, Gehenna, or more likely it
may teach that hades itself, as an intermediate
world, will cease ; and all that pertains to
death or death's dominions, either in this world
or the spiritual, either as affects body or soul,
will be abolished forever. At any rate it must
be obvious to any one that hades in these
verses can not mean hell.
Once more we find the term hades in I Cor.
xv, 55 : " O death, where is thy sting ? O hades,
where is thy victory ?" In this verse the
Greek is translated grave. But as this text
will claim full and careful consideration when
we come to inquire as to the true scene of the
resurrection, or whence the dead rise, we will
pass it here with the statement that the word
in this text can no more mean grave here than
it does hell in the other texts.
There is but one other text in which this
term occurs which demands extended exami-
nation in this general inquiry ; it is in connec-
tion with the parable of the rich man and Laz-
arus. But I wish to make the examination of
this parable the closing feature of this im-
portant part of our inquiry. I will next call
40 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
attention to certain other texts in which oc-
cur terms that in the New Testament are evi-
dently equivalent to or cognates of this word
hades, and obviously with the same meaning.
They are the terms " paradise," " Abraham's
bosom," " lower parts of the earth," " under
the earth," the " prison," and the " deep," or
"abyss." These terms occur in passages
which, according to our English translation
and accepted expositions, are very obscure of
meaning.
Let us look at some of these : Eph. iv, 8-10 :
" Wherefore he saith, when he ascended up on
high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts
unto men. Now that he ascended, what is it
but that he also descended first into the lower
parts of the earth ? He that descended is the
same also that ascended up far above all heav-
ens, that he might fill all things." This, as it
thus stands in our English translation, is con-
fessedly a very difficult passage. Its meaning
is not obvious. Hence the multiplicity of in-
terpretations scholars have given it. But with
these we have nothing to do ; we will simply
assume that the phrase "lower parts of the
earth," is equivalent to hades, and precisely
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 41
the same in meaning ; that is, the " under
world " or " place of the dead." And in this
assumption we are sustained by many of the
best scholars, who admit that in the parallel
texts of the Hebrew in Psalm lxiii, 10, and
Ezek. xxvi, 20, the equivalent term is sheol ; so
of course the equivalent term in the Greek
would be hades. But it is for us to see what
is the obvious meaning of the passage when
we read it thus : Now that he ascended, what
is it but that he descended first into hades ?
Thus understood, it is plain, 1. That Paul cor-
roborates the statement of Peter, Matthew,
Mark, Luke, and John, that Jesus rose from the
dead and ascended into the heavens. 2. Also,
the statement of Peter, Acts ii, 31, that before
he thus ascended he descended into hades ;
also the statement of Peter that his soul was
not left in hades, but the same Christ who
thus descended did also ascend. 3. We have
the additional statement that as Jesus thus
ascended from hades he led a "multitude of
captives," verse 8 — no doubt those of the
Patriarchal and Jewish Church who had re-
mained under the dominion of death in hades
until the descent and resurrection of Christ.
4
42 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
Then in the tenth verse we have the glorious
antithesis of the death and resurrection of
Jesus, in the full depth and hight of their sig-
nificance. He (Jesus) that descended down
to the lower world, or hades, to the dead who
had gone before him-^who was thus for a time
in the depths of death's dominion — is the same
(Jesus) also that ascended up far above all
heavens, that he might be the fullness of all
things. How wonderfully does this harmonize
with that glorious saying of Jesus, " I am the
First and the Last. I am he that liveth and
was dead, and behold, I am alive for evermore,
and have the keys of death and hades !" Now,
thus rendered, is not the meaning of this diffi-
cult passage obvious enough and perfectly in
harmony with the New Testament doctrine of
hades in all the other texts we have examined ?
Next come in order those texts in which oc-
cur the phrase " under the earth :" " Where-
fore God also hath highly exalted him, and
given him a name which is above every name :
that at the name of Jesus every knee should
bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth,
and things under the earth ; and that every
tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 43
Lord, to the glory of God the Father." Phil,
ii, 9-1 1. Now as this passage reads it is not
obvious just what is meant by things " under
the earth," But when we allow " under the
earth " to be the same as " lower parts of the
earth" and equivalent to hades, then the mean-
ing is just the same as the text last considered.
The " highly exalted," the " name that is above
every name," verse 9, is the same as the "as-
cended up far above all heavens" or the " I am
the first and the last." Then verse 10 pro-
claims the absolute and universal sovereignty
of Jesus over all existent things in all the
heavens, in this earth, in hades, or the invisible
world of the dead.
Again, Rev. v, 3 : "And no man in heaven,
nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able
to open the book, neither to look thereon."
And verse 13: "And every creature which is
in heaven and on the earth, and under the
earth, and such as are in the sea, . . .
heard, saying, Blessing, and honor, and glory
. . . unto the Lamb forever and ever."
Allowing " under the earth " the same mean-
ing — hades — and the meaning of these verses
is obvious enough, and entirely harmonious
44 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
with all the texts previously considered. The
third verse teaches that the future history or
development of Christ's kingdom in this world
was a sealed book to all the inhabitants of the
angelic world of this earth, and of the mediate
world of the dead. The thirteenth is a pro-
phetic vision of Phil, ii, 10 — the absolute
sovereignty of Jesus acknowledged by every
living being in heaven, in earth, and in the
mediate world.
One other passage will claim our close and
somewhat extended attention. It is that text
in i Peter iii, 18-20, which has caused com-
mentators so much trouble : " For Christ also
hath once suffered for sins, the just for the
unjust, that he might bring us to God ; being
put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the
Spirit. By which also he went and preached
unto the spirits in prison ; which sometime
were disobedient, when once the long-suffering
of God waited in the days of Noah, while the
ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight
souls, were saved by water." It is no part of
our task to notice, much less controvert, any
interpretations or creeds. But the commonly
received interpretation of these verses, by
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 45
which they are made to teach that Christ —
long before he, as Jehovah, had become the
Christ at all— went and preached to the sin-
ners of the antediluvian world through the
ministry of Noah, is so arbitrary — such a rare
specimen of theological dogmatism — that we
can not afford to pass it unnoticed. It is
simply a complete perversion of the text, which
completely empties the passage of its true
meaning, and fills it with a meaning which is
not expressed in the text at all. Not a word
is said about Noah, Christ, or any body else,
preaching in the days of Noah. It simply
says the spirits to whom Christ preached were
sometime disobedient, when the long-suffering
of God waited in the days of Noah. For a
masterly refutation of this most bungling exe-
gesis see Lange's new Commentary, which
also contains the best exegesis of this difficult
passage to be found in any commentary. Now,
of course the key to this whole passage is the
word prison (<pulaxri). What was the meaning
in the mind of Peter, and to what place, to
what spirits did he refer in the use of the word
here? Let us assume that the word trans-
lated prison is equivalent to hades t or at least
46 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
a region or place of some of the dead in hades.
Then the passage would read thus : Because
Christ also suffered for sins once — a just per-
son on behalf of unjust, in order that he might
present us to God — put to death, indeed, in
the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; in
which, also, he went and preached to the spir-
its in prison, which were disobedient formerly,
when the long-suffering of God was waiting in
the days of. Noah, while the ark was prepar-
ing.* Thus understood, Peter expresses pre-
cisely the same idea, or glorious fact, that he
does in Acts ii, 31 — that is, that immediately
after his crucifixion death in the flesh, Christ,
in soul or spirit, descended into the place of
the dead. There are variations of statement,
it is true, but these only bring out the great
fact with greater clearness. Thus in Acts it
is not explicitly stated that Jesus did descend
into hades, but that his soul was not left there.
But here Peter states explicitly that after his
crucifixion, or when put to death in the flesh,
he was made alive in the spirit, and went
to the souls in prison. And this, too, har-
monizes perfectly with Paul's statement that
*See Lange.
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 47
"he descended into the lower parts of the
earth."
Another variation is in the terms Iiades, in
Acts, and prison in this text. These are not,
of course, equivalent terms. The first is the
place of the dead in general ; the latter is
some particular, or limited locality, or state
of some of the dead in Jiadcs. Thus in Acts
the descent to hades is stated in general. Here
it is said he went to a certain locality, or state
of the dead, to a certain class of the dead —
that is, to the prison, and to the spirits there,
who had been disobedient in the days of Noah.
That is as if you should say of a certain person
at one time that he had gone to England ; and
at another time should say he had gone to
visit the prisoners in the Tower of London.
Thus the prison is not hades, as paradise is
not heaven. Neither is it a place entirely dis-
tinct and other wheres than hades f but a place
or state of certain of the dead in hades. Again,
in Acts, it is not stated for what purpose Jesus
went to the dead, or why he was in hades.
Here it is taught he went and preached, " her-
aided deliverance" to the spirits in prison.
And in this statement is a fact from which we
48 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
shrink, looking at it through the light which
our theologies throw upon the future destiny
of the dead. And here, too, the reason why-
theologians have refused to the word prison its
true meaning and locality, and have insisted
on locating it away over somewhere about the
Ark of Noah, and really make it mean noth-
ing, and nowhere. Of course with this teach-
ing of this portion of this passage we need
have nothing to do. We are not writing a
Commentary, but searching after the New Tes-
tament teaching concerning the place of the
dead. We have to do with the word prison ;
and we see that by allowing it to mean a place,
or state of the dead in hades, the meaning of
this whole passage is obvious enough, and
does truly harmonize with all the other texts
we have gone over. Concerning this state-
ment of Christ's preaching to the spirits in
prison I will make this remark: that Peter
means by it just what he says — that when Jesus
was in hades he did proclaim deliverance to cer-
tain of the dead who were in the place or state
of the prison. And if we can not understand
what this means we would better wait until
we can. And if we can not harmonize it with
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 49
our theological notions about the future destiny
of the dead, let us consider whether the Spirit
of God wants any such harmony, or ever de-
signed it. Any thing is better than to make
God's Word teach nonsense to harmonize it
with our private interpretations and dogmatic
platitudes.
We may next give attention to certain
texts in which terms are used with seeming
contrariety of meaning. Thus, Luke, in his
Gospel, chapter xxiii, 43, states that Jesus said
to one of the malefactors, " To-day shalt thou
be with me in paradise!' Peter says, Acts
ii, 31, that "his soul was not left in hacles, ,,
thus indirectly saying that he went to hades.
Again, in his first epistle, chapter iii, 18, he
says he went to preach " to the spirits in
prison," while Paul says " he descended into
the lower parts of the earth." Now, here are
at least very apparent difficulties, and, as the
texts stand in our English translation, where
hades is made to mean hell there are palpable
contradictions. Thus, it is stated that Jesus,
after his crucifixion, went to paradise, that he
was in hell, that he appeared among spirits in
prison, and that he descended somewhere into
50 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
the bowels of the earth. But these difficulties
vanish when we allow hades and lower parts
of the earth to mean one and the same place,
the place and state of the dead in general.
Then paradise, or Abraham's bosom, its equiv-
alent, stands for the heavenly state in hades,
the place and state of the righteous, the dead
in Christ, those who sleep in Jesus. It is, so
to speak, the heavenward side of hades, and
from whence the redeemed rise to celestial
paradise — 2 Cor. xii, 4; Rev. ii, 7 — after judg-
ment, and as they attain to the fullness of
eternal life. Then the prison, the abyss or
"bottomless pit," and equivalent terms stand
for the opposite place and state, the hellward
side, so to speak, of hades, the abodes and
states of the ungodly, the impenitent, and
from whence they descend after judgment to
Gehenna, the hell or lake of fire, the second
death.
Thus understood, the use of these terms,
even in our English translation, makes no
difficulty in our perception of the New Tes-
tament teaching of Christ's descent into the
place of the dead. We can see how he could
at the same time, the same day, be in hades
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. SI
and with the penitent thief in paradise or with
Lazarus in Abraham's bosom ; and, also, we
can see how, during his abode in the unseen
world, he could go and preach to the spirits
in prison. The only difficulty is the state-
ment of this last fact that he did so preach
to spirits in the other world. That is so
shocking to all our theological ideas of the
future destiny of souls, that we would rather
throw a cloud of obscure, far-fetched, dog-
matic interpretation over all these Scriptures
than admit this fact. But we may yet learn
that there are a great many more blessed
facts in the manifestations of the mercy and
love of Jesus toward a redeemed race than
are dreamed of in all our theologies.
Now, I know not how it appears to the
reader, but to my mind the explicit and har-
monious teaching of the Scriptures we have
considered concerning the place of the dead
is even wonderful. There is no doubt on my
mind. But there is yet one other Scripture
to which I must call your attention. It is the
parable of the rich man and Lazarus, Luke
xvi, 19-31: "There was a certain rich man,
which was clothed in purple and fine linen
52 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
and fared sumptuously every day: and there
was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which
was laid at his gate, full of sores, and desiring
to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the
rich man's table: moreover, the dogs came
and licked his sores. And it came to pass,
that the beggar died, and was carried by
the angels into Abraham's bosom. The rich
man also died, and was buried : and in hell
he lifted up his eyes, being in torments, and
seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his
bosom. And he cried, and said, Father Abra-
ham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus,
that he may dip the tip of his finger in water,
and cool my tongue : for I am tormented in
this flame. But Abraham said, Son, remem-
ber that thou in thy life-time receivedst thy
good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things :
but now he is comforted, and thou art tor-
mented. And besides all this, between us and
you there is a great gulf fixed : so that they
which would pass from hence to you, can not ;
neither can they pass to us, that would come
from thence. Then he said, I pray thee there-
fore, father, that thou wouldest send him to
my father's house : for I have five brethren ;
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 53
that he may testify unto them, lest they also
come into this place of torment. Abraham
saith unto him, They have Moses and the
prophets ; let them hear them. And he said,
Nay, father Abraham : but if one went unto
them from the dead, they will repent. And
he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and
the prophets, neither will they be persuaded,
though one rose from the dead."
In this parable we have the whole doctrine
of the place and states of the dead photo-
graphed in a single picture by the Master
Artist. In the truly wonderful disclosures
of this parable Jesus lifts the curtain which
hides the beyond from the present, and gives
a most comprehensive view of the spiritual
world, the world next to this in which we
now live ; and, from what we have already
learned from other texts, we have the key
to this parable. In Lazarus, the beggar in
Abraham's bosom, we see one of the dead in
Christ in paradise, on the heavenward side of
hades, the heavenly state of the blessed dead.
In the rich man in torments of flame — not
of literal fire flames without him, but of lust
flames within him — we see one of the dead
54 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
out of Christ, one of the lost on the hellward
side of hades, the abyss, quite on the verge
of Gehenna, the second death. And these are
divided by the great gulf or chasm — not a lit-
eral cleft or chasm, but the wide difference
between the moral and spiritual character and
state of the righteous and unrighteous in the
spiritual world. Thus we see the same gen-
eral states of human life in the world beyond
that we see in this ; but on the one side it is
lifted much nearer heaven, and on the other
sunk much nearer hell, so that paradise in
sheol must be a state of blessedness unspeak-
ably more heavenly than any state of life in
this world, and the abyss, or state of flame
torments, unspeakably more wretched than
the lowest abyss to which human life sinks
in this world. Moreover, the moral and spir-
itual separation or gulf is vastly wider, so that
with the good there is less of evil, and with
the evil less of good. So little the affinity
and so wide the moral separation between the
good and the evil that even missions of mercy
that might be done here can not there. But
our task is not an exposition of this para-
ble, but in a suggestive way to call attention
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 55
to the -wonderful light it throws upon the
place and state of the dead.
And just here I will close this directly
Scriptural inquiry. There are a few other
Scriptures which might be considered with
profit in this connection, but they are compar-
atively unimportant. As the results of the
above inquiry, the following truths and facts
are clear to my mind: 1. That heaven, as the
celestial paradise, or final state of blessedness
and eternal life ; or hell, as Gehenna, the state
of the finally lost — is not the place or state of
the dead next after they pass from this world.
2. That the Hebrew sheol and Greek hades,
with their equivalent and cognate terms, do
not, and can not mean anywhere in the Script-
ures either the grave or hell, as the place
of the finally lost, nor heaven. 3. That the
uniform and obvious meaning of hades and its
cognates, as used by New Testament authors,
is the " unseen spiritual world," the place and
state of the dead in general after they leave
this world. 4. That to the dead in Christ
hades is the paradisiacal state, mediate between
life in this world and the judgment and resur-
rection, and from whence they rise to heaven
56 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
as they attain to the resurrection or fullness
of spiritual life in Christ Jesus. 5. That to
the ungodly or impenitent the state in hades
is that indicated by the abyss or prison, and
torments of flame. It is the opposite of para-
dise ; it is the mediate state between the life
of sin and evil in this world and the final Ge-
henna, lake of fire, or second death to which
they sink after the judgment. So that we may
say, in brief, that the place of the dead in gen-
eral next after they leave this world is clearly
and obviously indicated by New Testament
authors, by the word hades and its cognate and
equivalent terms. And this conclusion we
reach, I can safely say, without any arbitrary,
far-fetched, or unnatural interpretation of the
Scriptures. Nay more. I may say we have
taken some passages from the rack of dog-
matic exegesis, where their true meaning has
been wrenched out of them, and have filled
them with their own obvious meaning by sim-
ply allowing the term hades and its cognates
their own true meaning. And this we have
done, not in a dogmatical or theological way,
but simply in the spirit of suggestive inquiry.
And is there any other safe way to expound
the; resurrection of the dead.
57
the Word of God? Ought any one ever to
come to it in any other spirit than in entire
dependence upon the Spirit of God which
wrote the Word, and which alone can interpret
the Word to any mind ?
CHAPTER III.
HADES CONTINUED — TEACHINGS OF SCHOLARS — OF PHILOS-
OPHY AND HISTORY.
AFTER the extended Scriptural inquiry of
the last chapter, we might rest the con-
clusions reached concerning the place of the
dead, on their purely Scriptural basis. But
this is a question of very great interest and
importance to the Christian mind, especially
at this time. And as we make no pretensions
to learning or scholarship whatever, it may be
well to see what scholars say of this matter ;
not that scholars are really any better fitted
simply by their learning to interpret God's
Word. They may even thereby be less so, for
the real spiritual things of the Word are often-
times hid from the wise and prudent and
revealed unto babes. But we know how cus-
tomary it is in all such things to depend upon
58
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 59
and be governed in our opinions by the say-
ings of the learned, so that many might not
listen to the teachings of the New Testament
on this subject as allowed to speak in our hum-
ble inquiries until they hear what the Doctors
say! and possibly, but too many will wait to
inquire what do our Doctors say ?
Mr. Olshausen, in his commentary on the
parable of the rich man and Lazarus, says of
hell or hades, " the dwelling-place of souls
when unclothed from the body, is termed in
the Scriptures hades — sJicol ; n and with special
reference to the sinful individuals who are
found in this place, "abyss, hell, ox prison"
while with reference to the pious it is styled
" Abraham's bosom — paradise." Although
separated from each, yet all souls while waiting
the resurrection, are assembled in this place,
only in a different state of felt joy or suffering
according as they have devoted themselves to
good or evil, and in different gradations of feel-
ing according to the degree of their spiritual
development.
Dr. Trench, in his notes on the same para-
ble (p. 379) says, " in hell*' or in hades rather,
for as Abraham's bosom is not heaven, though
CO SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
it will issue in heaven, so neither is hades hell,
though it will issue in it when death and hades
shall be cast into the lake of fire which is the
second death, or proper hell. Rev. xx, 14.
Dr. Krapp, in his theology (Vol. II, p. 604)
says, " This place was denominated by the He-
brews, sheol — by the Greeks, hades, the word
by which the LXX always translate sheol.
Neither of these is used in the Scripture to sig-
nify exactly the grave, still less, the place of the
damned ; nor are they used in this sense by any
of the Fathers in the first three centuries."
Dr. George Campbell, in his dissertations on
the Gospels, has in Vol. I, (p. 179,) a treatise
on the terms Gehenna and hades, doubtless
the most critical and able in the English lan-
guage. On page 180 he says of hades, " The
corresponding word in the Old Testament is
sheol, which signifies the state of the dead in
general, without regard to the goodness or
badness of the persons, their happiness or
misery. In translating that word the LXX
have almost invariably used hades." Again,
on page 1 87, he says the word grave, or sepul-
cher, never conveys the full import of the He-
brew sheol or the Greek hades. Again, on page
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 6l
191 he says, " So much then for the literal sense
of the word hades, which, as has been observed,
implies neither hell nor grave, but the place or
state of departed souls."
Dr. Lange, in his comment on Luke xvi,
says, " Hades is the general designation of the
abode of departed spirits." And throughout
his truly learned and able Commentary, this
specific, obvious meaning of hades and of its
cognates is uniformly and distinctly observed
and stated.
Dr. Whedon, in his notes on Luke xvi, says,
" In hell, or hades, or the great unseen ; that is,
the invisible place, or region of disembodied
spirits."
This list of names and quotations might be
indefinitely extended. But why do so ? These
are sufficient to show that the New Testament
teaching concerning the place and state of the
dead has not escaped the notice of some of the
most able scholars and Biblical expositors of
the world; and for those who want learned
opinion to lean upon, this is sufficient. If they
will not hear these, neither would they hear
though a thousand more were added to them.
There is a philosophical argument in favor
62 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
of such a place and state of the dead as the
New Testament teaches ; not an argument of
mere speculative philosophy, but of the philos-
ophy of human life, resting upon the well-known
facts of human life and human character in
this world. Human life is a moral compound
not pure ; human character is a mixed char-
acter, neither absolutely good nor bad, but a
blending of the two. In the best and purest
there remain some elements of evil, and in the
worst may be found some remains of good.
An absolutely bad, evil, or pure and good life
and character you may not find in this world.
And this is so until the moment of death.
Then must not the place and state beyond be
such as the moral and spiritual state of human
character is fitted for as it leaves this world ?
These facts would lead us at least to suppose
that the destiny of souls immediately after death
can not be heaven, the celestial paradise, or hell,
as the second death. Of the ultimate heaven
we must suppose a place of absolute good and
purity ; no possible shade or spot of sin or evil
can pertain to life or character there ; a state,
too, of full maturity and development in spirit-
ual divine life. So, too, on the opposite must
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 63
we suppose hell to be a place and state of
absolute evil and badness, where no possible
element of good or purity can enter or remain ;
a state of absolute spiritual death. Now we
may suppose the possibility of some human
souls at death being either so absolutely good
and pure, so fully matured in the fullness of
the divine spiritual life in Christ Jesus, as to be
fitted to pass at once to the ultimate heaven ;
or so absolutely bad and evil, so utterly dead
spiritually, as to pass at once to Gehenna. I
say we can suppose such a fact in human life
and destiny ; it may possibly be so — we do n't
know. But we do know that such can not be
the case with the mass of human character
and life ; therefore the commonly expressed
conception of the theological and Christian
mind that heaven or hell is the immediate des-
tiny of souls at death can not be true, simply
because souls are not fitted for such destiny.
True, we are taught in one of the old cate-
chisms that souls of believers are at death
made perfect in holiness and received to glory.
But where is there authority for such teaching?
Death is no soul-purifying process ; no divine
life-giving or life-developing process, but sim-
64 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
ply a transition. It is absurd to suppose that
the man, a spiritual infant at death, is a full-
grown spiritual man in Christ Jesus imme-
diately after death. The man is doubtless the
same as to his spiritual life and moral charac-
ter after death that he was before. Equally
unfounded and unfortunate is that conception,
the logical sequence of most all our teaching
on this subject, that souls at death go imme-
diately to heaven or hell, but at judgment and
resurrection return again to this earth to re-
ceive their bodies, be judged, and return again
to heaven or hell to realize a greater complete-
ness of bliss or depth of misery. There is so
much that is crude, unphilosophical, and even
absurd about such conception, that it would
be waste of time to consider it. How much
more philosophical and in harmony with com-
mon sense, to suppose that for all human be-
ings as they leave this world there is provided
a world with states and conditions just suited to
the mixed, imperfect, and undeveloped states
of their lives and character, where they will
be judged, where they will be fitted for their
still higher destiny in heaven — and to which
tJicy rise as they attain to the resurrection of
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 65
the dead ; or from whence they will pass to
their deeper death in Gehenna as their evils
become absolute ! That such conception of
the destiny of the dead, and of hades, the place
of the dead, is in harmony with the Scriptures,
is at least clear to my mind.
There is one other consideration on this
subject deserving a moment's thought. It
may be termed the historical argument. It
rests upon the fact that the doctrine of hades
as an intermediate world was held very gener-
ally by the primitive Church succeeding the
days of the Apostles. True, this fact alone
does not prove the doctrine true. At least I
am not one of those who believe that the doc-
trine and faith of the primitive Church were
any more infallible than the Church now. No
doubt the early Fathers held and taught a
great many notions and doctrines as unreason-
able and as absurd as we do now. But this
fact is of great importance, as it shows what
was the understood sense of these terms in
the days next the Apostles. Dr. Knapp, as
we have already seen, says this word hades
was not used in the sense either of hell or
the grave by any of the Fathers during the
66 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
first three centuries. And Dr. Shedd, in his
History of Christian Doctrines, says the doc-
trine of an intermediate state not only main-
tained itself, but gained in authority as late
as the seventh century. After that period,
and during the dark ages, when the whole
Church became apostate, this doctrine was
perverted into the absurd and abominable doc-
trine of the Roman Catholic purgatory, which
transformed the New Testament hades and in-
termediate state into a kind of ecclesiastical
limbo, where souls were exposed to all imagin-
able sufferings, and from which they were to
be delivered by the prayers and money — espe-
cially the money — of their pious friends. So
that buying souls out of purgatory became an
extensive commerce in the fallen Church, and,
to some extent, continues to this day. At the
rise of the Reformation, this doctrine of pur-
gatory, with its absurd and pernicious results,
constituted one of the leading abominations
of the Roman Church ; and, in order to put
this pernicious doctrine out of the Church, no
doubt Luther and his coadjutors allowed their
disgust and zeal to go too far. Hence the
translation -of hades grave and hell. Thus,
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 6j
instead of reforming the abuse of the truth, the
truth itself has well-nigh been lost to the Chris-
tian Church. Other translators have followed,
and even our own English translation has done
the same. True, it has swept all foundation
for a purgatory out of the New Testament, but
at the same time it has well-nigh swept out of
it the most important truth concerning the
place and state of the dead ; so that the
teaching and faith of the Protestant Church
are exceedingly dim and shadowy concerning
the state of the dead after they leave this
world. For some it is a state of unconscious
existence — a sleep of both body and soul until
the resurrection. To others it is an eternal
sleep. Others seem to have the conception of
a shadowy existence of mere ghosts. Many
seem to speak of it as a state in which the
personality of the dead is rent in twain — the
soul somewhere in the skies, and the body, still
an essential part of the personal being, some-
where in the dust. And the fullest realization
reached by any is that immediately after death
the souls go either to heaven or hell, and must
remain there to the last day of this world,
when they will return again to thfe world, to
68 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
receive their bodies again, and then return to
renew their life in heaven or hell.
And not until we return to the true New
Testament teaching of the place and state
of the dead, will we find a rational and satisfy-
ing realization to our faith. Not until then do
we realize by faith that the dead who have left
us are still persons — real, substantial, spiritual
persons — and that they have reached a sub-
stantial spiritual world, with abodes or states
just suited to their conditions of spiritual life,
and with all the conditions of their spiritual
development, until they attain the resurrection,
and rise to the fullness of eternal life in the
heavens, or sink to the abodes of eternal death,
accordingly as they pass the judgment, and as
their life in this world was in Christ, who is
the Life, or was without him. A brief inquiry
concerning the personality of the dead will
close this chapter. Our metaphysico-theolog-
ical teaching on this subject is exceedingly
shadowy. It gives us the idea of a personal
existence, without body or parts — a mere
ghostly existence, in which personality must
consist in little else than certain psychical
proper ties-*-so that it is worth while to look
TH-E RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 69
closely to the Word to see what conception it
helps us to, and in what tangible properties it
clothes the personality of the living dead :
" And as touching the dead, that they rise ;
have ye not read in the book of Moses, how
in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am
the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac,
and the God of Jacob ? He is not the God
of the dead, but the God of the living: ye,
therefore, do greatly err. ,, Mark xii, 26, 27.
"And it came to pass, about an eight days
after these sayings, he took Peter, and John,
and James, and went up into a mountain to
pray. And as he prayed, the fashion of his
countenance was altered, and his raiment was
white and glistering. And behold, there talked
with him two men, which were Moses and
Elias: who appeared in glory, and spake of
his decease which he should accomplish at Je-
rusalem." Luke ix, 28-31.
"And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember
me when thou comest into thy kingdom. And
Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee,
To-day shalt thou be with me in paradise."
Luke xxiii, 42, 43.
"After this I beheld, and lo, a great multi-
70 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
tude, which no man could number, of all na-
tions, and kindreds, and people, and tongues,
stood before the throne, and before the Lamb,
clothed with white robes, and palms in their
hands : and cried with a loud voice, saying,
Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the
throne, and unto the Lamb. And all the angels
stood round about the throne, and about the
elders and the four beasts, and fell before the
throne on their faces, and worshiped God,
saying, Amen : Blessing, and glory, and wis-
dom, and thanksgiving, and honor, and power,
and might, be unto our God for ever and ever.
Amen. And one of the elders answered, say-
ing unto me, What are these which are arrayed
in white robes ? and ^whence came they ? And
I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he
said to me, These are they which came out of
great tribulation, and have washed their robes,
and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.
Therefore are they before the throne of God,
and serve him day and night in his temple :
and he that sitteth on the throne shall dwell
among them. They shall hunger no more,
neither thirst any more ; neither shall the sun
light on them, nor any heat. For the Lamb
TIJE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 71
which is in the midst of the throne shall feed
them, and shall lead them unto living fount-
ains of waters ; and God shall wipe away all
tears from their eyes." Rev.vii,9-i7.
"And after these things I heard a great
voice of much people in heaven, saying, Alle-
luia : Salvation, and glory, and honor, and
power, unto the Lord our God." Rev. xix, i.
"And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are
they which are called unto the marriage-sup-
per of the Lamb. And he saith unto me,
These are the true sayings of God. And I fell
at his feet to worship him. And he said unto
me, See thou do it not : I am thy fellow-
servant, and of thy brethren that have the
testimony of Jesus : worship God : for the tes-
timony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy."
Rev. xix, 9, 10. "And when he had opened
the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls
of them that were slain for the word of God,
and for the testimony which they held : and
they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long,
O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge
and avenge our blood on them that dwell on
the earth ? And white robes were given unto
every one of them ; and it was said unto them,
J2 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
that they should rest yet for a little season,
until their fellow-servants also and their breth-
ren, that should be killed as they were, should
be fulfilled." Rev. vi, 9-1 1.
These passages might be extended. What
is the conception of the personality of the
dead which they obviously suggest ? Thus,
God is the God of the living, not of the dead.
And who are the living dead here mentioned ?
Abraham, Isaac, Jacob — not the ghost or in-
corporeal souls of these patriarchs, but them-
selves. The disciples saw on the Mount two
men. Jesus said to the penitent thief, "Thou
shalt be with me!' The rich man in hades
saw Lazarus in Abraham's bosom, not the
ghost of Lazarus in the bosom of Abraham's
ghost. And of the rich man it is said "he
lifted up his eyes," etc. And John says of the
redeemed, the great multitude, they had palms
in their hands, white robes. He heard their
voices as many waters. They stood on the
Mount Zion before the throne. They follozv
the Lamb. And he fell at the feet of the
Glorious One to worship him. Yet he was
one of the redeemed, one of the prophets.
And even the souls under the altar cried out
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 73
with a loud voice, and robes were given unto
than, etc.
Now, it would be difficult for language to
be used in expressing the idea of personality
more absolutely than in these verses. How
like real, organized, personal beings are the
dead thus introduced to us ! And so mani-
festly is the New Testament idea of the per-
sonality of the dead that of real, substantial,
personal human beings, even in corporeal
form, that even when the more psychical
terms soul or spirit are used it is rather to
distinguish the spirituality of the dead from
the materiality of the living than to convey
the idea of incorporeal, psychical existence.
6
CHAPTER IV.
"O death, where is thy sting? O Hades, where is thy
victory ?"
OUR inquiry will now be concerning the
local scene of the resurrection, or the
place whence the dead rise, and in what will
consist the ultimate glorious and triumphant
victory of the final resurrection. According
to the literal interpretations and theological
teachings generally accepted, that scene is to
be on this earth, the dead are to rise out of
the literal graves, and the ultimate glorious
triumph is to consist in raising the very last
moldering body out of the earth. But is it
certain that such is the teaching of the Word
itself, or is it more the teaching of human
theologies ? Does it rest on the Word, or on
the human interpretation of the Word ? Let
us pursue this inquiry in the light of a few
representative passages of the Word.
74
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 75
" So when this corruptible shall have put
on incorruption, and this mortal shall have
put on immortality, then shall be brought to
pass the saying that is written, Death is swal-
lowed up in victory. O death, where is thy
sting? O grave, where is thy victory?" I
Cor. xv, 54, 55. These verses contain the
whole theme of present inquiry, and just what
they teach is determined by the meaning Paul
expresses by the words death and grave. Are
these terms to be limited to physical death
and to the earthly grave of the body? Was
this Paul's idea? Why, then, did he use the
term hades, and for what reason is that term
here translated grave and nowhere else in the
New Testament ? and why should it be here
turned aside from its uniform meaning wher-
ever used in the New Testament ? Is it not
certain that Paul had the very same idea in
the use of the term here that Matthew, Luke,
Peter, and John had as they use it, and that
he means the same by hades here that he
does by the "lower parts of the earth," and
" under the earth," and the abyss — Romans
x, 7 — that is, the place of the dead previous
to their resurrection, the place whither Christ
?6 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
descended and whence he arose ? Now, what
reason can be given for changing and limiting
the uniform meaning of this word to grave in
this text ? I can think of no reason but to
harmonize this passage with the literal idea
of the resurrection of the dead from the earth.
By what authority is that allowable ? Then
let us give to hades here its own full, uniform
meaning. Then the meaning of this passage
goes far beyond mere physical death and the
grave in the dust ; then this prophetic shout
of triumph means much more than victory
over the sting of bodily death and the dust
grave of the fleshly body. It extends to the
dominion of death in the under world or great
unseen. It locates the scene of the resurrec-
tion there. It proclaims an ultimate triumph
over the last and uttermost power and of
death, that victory which began with Christ,
who first triumphed over death and hades, and
which is to end at his coming by the resurrec-
tion from hades of all the dead " in Christ."
And thus is made plain the teaching of the
context. In verse fifty is taught that " flesh
and blood" — or the earthly body — can not
inherit the kingdom of God, neither comiption
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. JJ
inherit incorruption. Verse fifty-one teaches
that at the consummation, the coming of
the Lord, the dead will be raised " incor-
ruptible" — that is, in spiritual, incorruptible
bodies — and the then living, who will " not
sleep" or attain to spiritual, incorruptible
bodies through death and resurrection, will
be changed, will drop their earthly, corrupti-
ble bodies and be clothed with their spiritual
in a "moment." When this corruptible shall
have " put on incorruption," when we who
are alive at his coming and will not die
have dropped our earthly houses — I Cor. xv —
or bodies and have put on our incorruptible,
heavenly bodies, when all the dead in Christ
are raised out of hades in their incorruptible,
spiritual bodies, then the shout of glorious tri-
umph will rise, " O death, where is thy sting ?
O hades, where is thy victory?" Now, is it
not plain that this means much more than
the calling up of dead bodies from the grave,
and is it not plain that the real scene of the
rising of the dead is located in the spiritual
world ? The dead are tJiere, not in the grave,
and from thence they rise, not from the earth.
The only earthly scene of the final resurrec-
7$ SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
tion is to be the changing of those alive in the
body. And the final consummation and glori-
ous triumph of the resurrection will reach to
the absolute abolishment of death, and of the
dominion of death, not only in body but in
soul, not only on this earth but in hades ; and
in view of such a consummation and of such a
triumph, well may we say with Paul, "Thanks
be to God which giveth us the victory through
our Lord Jesus Christ; ;" especially if we con-
sciously realize that he is now to us the " resur-
rection and the life."
Another passage is identical in meaning with
this. It is Rev. xxi, 13, 14: "And the sea
gave up the dead which were in it ; and death
and hell delivered up the dead which were in
them : and they were judged every man accord-
ing to their works. And death and hell were
cast into the lake of fire. This is the second
death." This, too, is doubtless a prophetic
vision of the final consummation of the resur-
rection of the dead. John discloses the very
same scene that does Paul in the passage con-
sidered above. And where is the scene lo-
cated, and of what does it consist ? According
to our translation it is located in hell. Thus,
'the resurrection of the dead. 79
death and hell gave up the "dead which were
in them." Thus, according to the literal and
commonly received interpretation, Paul is
made to locate the scene of the final glorious
resurrection triumph in the grave, and makes
it consist in the literal rising up of dead bodies
from the dust ; while John is made to locate
the same triumph in Jicll, and makes it consist
in the delivering up of the dead out of hell. It
were difficult to tell which of these is the
widest of the truth, and which it were best to
accept. But, fortunately, we need accept
neither. We have already seen in the pre-
vious consideration of this passage, that hades,
unfortunately translated hell, must be allowed
its own true and uniform meaning, the mediate
place and state of the dead ; then its teaching
in this connection is plain enough. It is that
at the final consummation of the resurrection
all the dead will be raised from the mediate
state ; thus death and hades will deliver up
the dead, and death and hades will be cast
into the lake of fire. That is the complete
and everlasting triumph over death, and
death's dominion will be achieved. And this
is precisely what Paul teaches, and precisely
SO SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
the same victory of immortality over death
over which he utters the prophetic shout of tri-
umph — perfect harmony between them. They
both locate the scene of the resurrection in the
spiritual world, and both make it consist in the
rising of all the dead from hades, and the utter
abolishment of death and death's dominion.
But it may be urged that the saying in verse
13, "the sea gave up the dead which were in
it," teaches that the scene of the resurrection
is located on this earth and is to consist in the
raising of dead bodies from sea and land. But
if we insist on a literal interpretation of sea,
here, and of the term dead as meaning literally
dead bodies in the sea, then the dead must
have the same meaning elsewhere in the pas-
sage, thus : " Death and hell gave up the dead
bodies which were in them : and I saw the dead
bodies, small and great, stand before God : and
the dead bodies were judged," etc. There is
certainly a difficulty here, but I leave it for the
consideration of such as insist on a literal in-
terpretation of such passages in support of a
literal resurrection of dead bodies from the
earth and the sea. There is one other passage
from John which must be considered in this
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 8 1
connection ; it is from his Gospel, ch. v, 28, 29 :
" Marvel not at this : for the hour is coming, in
the which all that are in the graves 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 resurrec-
tion of damnation/' This passage is doubtless
linked in meaning with that of Paul and the
other of John just considered. It predicates
the same general resurrection consummation ;
but at first view it would seem to widely differ
in meaning from either. It seems to predicate
the resurrection of those in the graves, and thus
place or locate the scene of the resurrection
on or in this earth, and limit it to the rising of
the bodies of the dead. This appears from the
fact that the term graves is used in our trans-
lation, and because the term hades is not used
in the Greek, but pvq/ula, which properly means
monuments, or tombs, or sepulchers. This
form of statement would seem to have no ref-
erence whatever to hades, or to the rising of
the dead therefrom. But I think a careful
study of the text will show that its full mean-
ing and spirit can not be reached by a close or
even free literal interpretation thereof. Hence
82 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
our inquiry must be, what is the///// meaning
of this passage taken both in its letter and
spirit? In thus quoting from Jesus, the Great
Teacher, what did John mean to express by
this language? It is pretty safe to assume
that the full meaning of this text will be found
in one of three interpretations : I. That it
predicates the resurrection literally and exclu-
sively of the bodies, the earthly bodies of the
dead from the literal tombs or graves. 2. That
it predicates the resurrection of the dead as
persons, both soul and body, from the literal
earthly tombs or graves. 3. That it predicates
the resurrection of the dead, as persons, from
hades, the place of the dead in general, using
the term graves by metonymy for hades.
The first is compassed about with very great
difficulties, and it seems impossible to limit the
full meaning of the text to such interpretation.
There is a philological difficulty; thus, in the
use of the relative pronoun they. In the Greek
it is 7:d>T£<; 6t } all wJw, evidently agreeing with
vttpoi understood ; and would read, all the dead
who are in the graves. But this can not be
limited in meaning to bodies, for then* the
Greek would have to be ndvra, to agree with
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 83
(Tajiiara ; then is it plain that they, *r4vrt< »f, can
not refer to (rwimza y or bodies, but to vsx/W, the
dead. And we have already seen that the
dead, in its general New Testament use, can
not be limited to mean body, or bodies, but to
the dead as persons ; so then, according to the
plain construction of the Greek text, the resur-
rection is not predicated of all the bodies in the
graves, but of all the dead as persons who arc in
the graves. But again, it said they, JMbrtc •/,
shall "hear his voice" — shall come forth — they
that have done good and tJicy that have done
evil, etc. Now how could hearing the voice of
God be predicated of the dust in the graves ?
Besides, what proportion of the bodies of the
dead are in graves at all ? and how could doing
good or doing evil be predicated of the dust of
dead bodies ? is such dust the subject of moral
accountability ? what good or evil did ever mere
flesh and bones do, even whei! alive ? Then is
it not plain that the whole teaching of these
verses can not be limited to the bodies of the
dead in the graves ? Therefore the strictly lit-
eral interpretation can not be true, because it
does not bring out the full, true meaning of
either the letter or spirit of the text. It really
84 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
empties it of meaning and really makes it teach
absurdities.
Then, is the true meaning to be found in the
second interpretation ? which is, that it predi-
cates the resurrection of the dead as persons
from the literal earthly graves. That it does
predicate the Jiearing and coming forth of the
dead as persons, and not of dead bodies, is no
doubt true ; but are they literally to hear in
the earthly graves and come forth out of the
earth ?
If so, then it must follow that the literal
graves in the earth must be the place and state
of the dead, body and soul ; there must they
abide, body and soul, during the intermediate
state between death and the resurrection, and
not in hades, as elsewhere uniformly taught in
the New Testament. There, in the literal
earthly graves, must be the paradise where
went Lazarus, and Christ, and the penitent
thief; there the hell or place of torment
where went the rich man, and all who have
done evil ; and there now in the earthly graves
must be all the dead ; for it is in the graves
where the voice is to be heard. And how shall
they hear if they be not in the graves ? But
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 85
it is said by one,* " the meaning is not that
the souls of the dead are nozv in the graves,
but that just previous to the resurrection they
will return to re-iufuse the bodies ; and thus be
ready to hear the voice and come forth in en-
tire manhood, men and women !" Indeed !
But is not this downright assumption ? Where
is there a word or verse in the whole New
Testament which even hints at this return of
souls from heaven or hell to re-infuse the dust
in the graves ? Then the idea of " men " and
"women" waiting there under ground to hear
the literal voice of Jesus ! Manifestly the true
meaning of these verses can not be reached in
this ; they do not predicate the resurrection of
the dead in the literal graves, because the dead
are not there. The plain, uniform teaching of
the New Testament is, that the dead are in
the spiritual world, not in the earth, and com-
mon sense teaches the same. Then let the
graves be understood as figurative, as used by
metonymy for the place in general of the dead.
Then the meaning is, the hour is coming in
which all the dead throughout the whole do-
minions of death and hades, shall hear the
*Cal. C. Advocate.
86 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
voice of the Son of God, and shall come forth
in the final resurrection, they that have done
good to the resurrection of life ; they that have
done evil unto the resurrection of damnation.
Thus understood, the teaching is precisely the
same as that of John in Rev. xxi, and the mean-
ing is the same with that of Paul in i Cor. xv,
S4» 55 ; and it perfectly harmonizes with the
preceding context. In verses 21 and 26, Jesus
announces that he is endowed with the life-
giving power; in verses 24, 25, he declares the
hour is now come when all the dead that hear
his voice shall live. By the dead here is meant
those who are alive in the body — alive intellect-
ually but dead spiritually — destitute of divine
life. By their living is meant that they shall,
by spiritual regeneration, be made partakers
of his Divine spiritual life. Then he says,
" Marvel not at this, for the hour is coming
when all the dead in the graves shall hear his
voice ;" that his power over death shall extend
throughout the dominions of death ; and even
they who are in the graves or utmost domin-
ion of death, but have done good while living,
shall have a resurrection unto life. And as
judgment is committed unto the Son, verse 22,
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 8?
he will also bring forth to judgment the dead
who have done evil. Thus the harmony with
the context is complete. Moreover, thus un-
derstood, these texts harmonize with the gen-
eral teaching of the New Testament concerning
the resurrection of the dead.
Thus it would seem that the resurrection of
the dead, as stated in general in the New Tes-
tament, implies, 1st. The real personal exist-
ence of the dead after the dissolution of the
material bodily existence in this world. 2d.
The rising of the dead from hades to judg-
ment, and a subsequent glorious existence in
heaven; or of misery in Gehenna. 3d. To the
dead in Christ, the rising from the dead in
hades implies a deliverance to the uttermost
that death by sin has reigned over them, either
in body or soul, and their attaining ultimately
to the fullness of everlasting life in Jesus.
Hence the general New Testament teaching
of the resurrection and the life is not con-
cerning the future rising of dead bodies from
the earth, though it includes both the idea
and the fact of a bodily resurrection. And to
this particular and interesting feature of the
general subject we next direct inquiry.
CHAPTER V.
"But some man will say, how are the dead (ol veKpoi)
raised up? and with what body do they come?" i Cor.
xv, 35-
WHAT do New Testament authors teach
directly concerning the resurrection
of the bodies of the dead, or concerning a
corporeal resurrection ? Do they teach that
the earthly bodies of the dead will at some
future time be raised out of the earth, and be
changed into the spiritual corporeality of the
risen saints ? For in this part of the subject
inquiry will have no reference to the resurrec-
tion of the wicked whatever. On this subject
New Testament authors are almost silent. I
find but two passages which can be under-
stood as teaching any thing concerning the
resurrection of the wicked — Acts xxiv, 15;
John v, 29. In these it is expressly taught
there will be a resurrection of the "unjust,"
and that they that have done evil shall come
88
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 89
forth to the resurrection of damnation. The
general and almost exclusive teaching on the
resurrection is in connection with Jesus, the
"resurrection and the life," and is predicated
of those " in Christ" Especially is this so in
this fifteenth chapter of Corinthians. The
teaching is exclusively of the dead in Christ.
Hence our inquiry is specifically concerning
the resurrection of the earthly bodies of the
dead in Christ. I shall use the term earthly,
or earthy, exclusively in this connection. The
reason therefor may be found in 2 Cor. v, i, 2,
and 1 Cor. xv, 47-49. Earthly expresses all
that is included in "natural" "mortal" "cor-
ruptible," "weak," "dishonored," and "fleshly."
All these characteristics of the Adam body are
included in its earthiness. Moreover, it is of
the earth, and turns to earth again. Now is
it obviously taught in the New Testament
that these earthly bodies, which turn to dust,
mingle in the ten thousand combinations of
matter, will be at some future time " re-infused
by their returning souls" or by the miraculous
power of God raised again from the earth, and
transformed into the glorified spiritual bodies
of the risen saints of God ? I am not ignorant
7
gO SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
of the import of this inquiry, nor indifferent
as to its possible consequences. To most or-
thodox Christians it may seem nothing less
than "calling in question what the Christian
world regards as a cardinal article of faith,
founded on the Word of God." Not that the
faith of the whole Christian world rests upon
a fleshly resurrection ; but no doubt to the
faith of the great body of Christians the resur-
rection of the dead m.eans little or nothing
more than the future rising of the fleshly
bodies of the dead from the graves. And even
the glorious spiritual doctrine of the "resurrec-
tion and the life" in yesns seems to mean but
little else. Of course inquiry must now be
strictly confined to the Scriptures which ob-
viously and specifically speak of a corporeal
resurrection — for we have already seen that
the general term dead, so uniformly used in
connection with the resurrection, can not be
limited in meaning to body or bodies — so that
the resurrection of the dead does not mean
the same thing as the resurrection of bodies.
From the general use of this term it is not
obviously or specifically taught whether the
dead rise with bodies at all — much less that
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 91
they rise with the same earthly bodies which
returned to dust. The inquiry concerning the
bodily part of the resurrection must be an-
swered by specific, direct teachings of the
Word — especially the inquiry, Do the dead
rise with the same earthly bodies which have
mingled with the earth for centuries? — or
must the dogma of such a resurrection be in-
sisted on as an article of Christian faith, and
a test of theological orthodoxy, whether ob-
viously taught in the Word or not ? That
would be simply clothing the theological sense,
or human interpretation of the Word, with all
the Divine authority of the Word itself; the
which we are but too prone to do. But better
infinitely let our belief rest on the specific
teachings of the Word or have less belief.
Then let us search carefully for the Scripture
teachings concerning the resurrection of the
body. And we will commence with the fifteenth
of Corinthians ; for if anywhere in the New
Testament is taught the resurrection of the
earthly body, it is in this chapter. The cor-
poreal feature of the general question of the
resurrection of the dead is first specifically
mentioned at the thirty-fifth verse. It is in
92 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
the form of an anticipated or already uttered
objection to the general fact of the rising of
the dead: "But some man will say, How are.
the dead (vtxfiofy raised up ? and with what
body (<rd>/j.a) do they come ?"
This objection would very naturally arise
ill the minds both of the materialistic and
the speculatively philosophical. And to those
urging it this was no doubt a very plausible
objection, just as it is .to the same class of
minds now. It rests upon the apparent fact
that death seems to operate the entire destruc-
tion of the body — not only its disorganization,
but its very particles are utterly dissipated,
are lost in other combinations of matter, min-
eral, vegetable, and animal. But recently the
friends of Roger Williams went to remove his
remains from their humble grave, but when
opened it was found that his body had been
actually absorbed by the forked roots of an
apple-tree which had been planted near the
head of his grave, and scarcely a single par-
ticle of his remains could be identified. To
minds not rising above the merely material-
istic view of such facts there is force in the
objection, How are the dead raised up? How
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 93
can they live again after death? What body
will they have ? And if we limit the whole fact
of the resurrection of the dead to the future
raising up of earthly bodies thus absorbed and
utterly lost in the ten thousand combinations
of matter, there are difficulties which can be
met or overcome only by a faith or belief which
takes refuge in a future miracle. But by care-
fully following Paul's philosophy in answer to
this objection we will see not only the force
of it broken, but all the difficulties which it
suggests dispersed, and without waiting for
a future miracle. But before considering his
great argument let us pause here a moment
to consider his use of the terms dead and
body in this verse.
How manifest the distinction with which
he uses the terms, and how marked the dis-
tinction in the meaning as he uses them !
Thus, " How are the dead (of vexpo!) raised up,
and with what body (<rd>/za) do they come ?"
Now, can these two terms, by any possible
rendering or exegesis, be made identical in
meaning? Is it possible to limit the dead
(vexpoi) to mean bodies ? Then the verse
would read, But how are the bodies raised
94 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
up, and with what body do they (the bodies)
come ? which simply makes nonsense. And
equally impossible is it to fill the term <Tw/ia
with the meaning of the dead. It means sim-
ply the corporeal part of the dead, just as it
does when applied to the living. Living men
or persons takes in the whole idea of person-
ality, while the body simply means the corpo-
real part of the personality. Just so the dead
(<n vexpot) takes in the whole idea of personal
being, while aw/ia is limited to the corporeality
of the dead. Can there be any question that
such is Paul's meaning in the use of these
terms ? And in such use he is in harmony
with the uniform and general iisas loquendi of
the New Testament, and this verse is a key to
the whole doctrine of the resurrection so far
as the use of these terms is concerned. And
the twofold teaching of the verse is, I. That
the dead do rise or are raised ; 2. That they
come forth with bodies ; so that the resurrec-
tion is not simply psychical, or the rising of
the soul, nor is it simply corporeal, or the
future rising of the body from the grave. But
we return now to Paul's argument in answer
to this objection.
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 95
I will give the text as translated by Lange :
" Fool, that which thou sovvest is not quick-
ened [made alive] except it die ; and that
which thou so west, thou sowest not that body
which shall be ; but bare grain, it may chance
of wheat or some of the other grains. But
God giveth it a body as he willed, and to
every seed his own body/' Verses 36-38.
Of course, we are to look at this argument
first in the light of the natural facts here
stated. Well for us when we come to realize
more fully that the facts written for us in
God's own book of nature will generally give
us a clearer and more rational commentary of
his written Word than the speculations and
dogmas of men, especially when put forth in
support of some cherished creed. What are
the facts here stated? 1. You sow in the
earth a grain body, perchance of wheat or
other grain. It dies, but as it dies it is
quickened, or comes forth alive in another
form. 2. The body you sow is not the body
that rises, but a new form is born out of
its disorganizing elements ; yet, retaining the
identity of the old, to every seed his own body.
3. Co-etaneous with the death of the old is the
g6 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
birth of the new form ; as the one begins
to die the other begins to be made alive.
4. Death is not the destruction of the life
of the grain body, but the essential condition
of its coming forth in another form. Are not
these natural facts every-where manifested in
the multiform and wonderful transformations
constantly taking place in the bodily forms of
vegetable and insect life ? And do not all
these facts converge in the establishment of
one grand fact, that death is not the destruc-
tion, but the law of transition in the forms
of such, so that the death of the old is the
essential condition of its rising in a new form ?
What does St. Paul teach by these facts ? Did
he simply mean in a figurative way to tell some
man he was a fool for calling in question the
future literal resurrection of flesh and bones
from the earth at the end of the world ?
About that is all he is allowed to teach by
most dogmatic interpreters of his words. But
does he not in reality teach us that these nat-
ural facts have their corresponding, analogical,
spiritual facts in the death and quickening of
the human body, so that the death of the
body is the essential condition of its being
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 97
made alive in another form ; that the body that
dies is not the body that shall be, but a body ;
that as the body dies it is quickened or made
alive in another form ? But, that we may not
seem to overstrain the points of the analogy,
let us get at the one strong, clear point in this
answer to this objection to the resurrection of
the dead. Is it not this — that death is not
the destruction of the body, but the established
law and essential condition of its transition to
a JiigJicr, more heavenly, and spiritual form ?
Except it die it is not quickened. So far,
then, from death being an objection to the
rising of the dead, it is but the essential con-
dition of their being unclothed of their earthly
body, and of being clothed upon of their spir-
itual body, just suited to their begun life in
the spiritual world, and in which they rise to
the higher heavens as they attain to the full-
ness of the resurrection and the life. That
such is the philosophy of Paul's answer to
this objection may be seen still more clearly
at verses 42-44 : " So also is the resurrection
of the dead. It is sown in corruption, it is
raised in incorruption: it is sown in dishonor,
it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness,
98 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
it is raised in power: it is sown a natural
body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is
a natural body, and there is a spiritual body."
The teaching of these verses concerning the
resurrection of the body is very full and ex-
ceedingly suggestive ; more so, perhaps, than
any other passage in the New Testament.
They indicate the time, the order or manner of
the quickening, and the essential difference be-
tween the substantial quality and glory of the
risen body over that of the earthly from which
it is born or quickened ; and if anywhere in
the New Testament the future rising from the
earth of the earthly body is taught, it is in
these verses. And the whole question must be
determined by the obvious, unforced, unwarped
meaning of the antithetical phrases " it is sown"
" it is raised!' That it, throughout these verses,
refers to the earthly body, and is immediately
linked with the a&iLa of verse 35, no one will
question. And that " is sown " and " is raised "
relate directly to the dissolution and quicken-
ing, or " making alive," of the earthly body is
equally certain and unquestionable. What
then is obviously meant by " it is sown" as
predicated of the body? Does it mean its
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 99
burial in the earth, its decomposition, its
mingling again with the dust until the last
day ? Does it take in all this process, reach-
ing through all this long, long lapse of time
between the death of the body and the last
day ? And is this its specific and only mean-
ing, so that no other meaning can be ex-
pressed ? "// is raised!' Does this mean that
in the future, at the last day, the dust particles
of the earthly body will be gathered again and
raised from the grave ? And is this its specific
and only meaning ? Then the inquiry is set-
tled ; the future rising of the earthly body from
the grave is taught in the New Testament, and
must be accepted as an article of faith. But
is this so ? Is such the specific, obvious, and
only meaning of these important phrases, or
do they express any such meaning at all ?
1. The verbal construction of the letter of
the text expresses no such meaning, nor can
such meaning be obtained therefrom without
changing the verbal construction. Thus it is
sown, it is raised ; but to express the meaning
of a future rising long after death, it needs to
read thus : it is sown, it will be raised ; it is
sown a natural body, it will be raised a spir-
OF THc >
UN\\
SJTY
IOO SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
itual body ; there is a natural body, there will
be a spiritual body. But the text is, it is sown,
it is raised ; there is a natural body, there is a
spiritual body, present tense, which obviously
links the fact of the sowing and the rising of
the natural and the spiritual body closely to-
gether in point of time ; for it will not do to
assume that the present tense on the one
side is used figuratively or rhetorically for the
future, because the present tense is uniformly
used by Paul throughout this chapter; thus,
" How say some among you that there is no
resurrection ? But if there be no resurrection."
If this be claimed as subjunctive future, refer-
ring to the resu'rrection as an event of the fut-
ure, then it must be the same in the next verse,
" And if Christ be not risen." The tense is the
same in each. Why should one be claimed as
present and the other future ? Again, " Whom
he raised not up if so be that the dead rise
not." "For if the dead rise not, then is not
Christ raised." " What advantageth it me if
the dead rise not ?" " How are the dead raised
up; with what body do they come?" It is
sown, it is raised ; there is a natural body, there
is a spiritual body. The only exception in this
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. IOI
chapter where the present tense is not used is
verse 52, where he says, "And the dead shall
be raised incorruptible." This refers to the
dead in Christ who still remain in hades at the
coming of Christ, and will attain the resurrec-
tion just before those then living are changed.
And not only in this chapter is this order ob-
served in the letter of the Word. Thus, Mark
says, as touching the dead, that "they rise"
" Now that the dead are raised" Luke xx, 37;
" As the Father raiseth up the dead," John v,
21;" But in God which raiseth the dead," 2
Cor. i, 9.
Now it certainly can not be claimed that in
all these texts the present tense is used rhe-
torically with a future significance. And to
make the New Testament teach that the resur-
rection is to be a fact wholly of the future, it
would be necessary to change the grammatical
construction and sense of a majority of the
texts in which the fact is stated. The key to
this use of the present and future tense, this
referring to the resurrection as a fact of the
present and also of the future, this saying that
the dead rise y are raised, and that the dead
shall be raised at the end of the age or coming
102 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
of Christ, is found in the twenty-third verse
of this fifteenth chapter: "But every man in
his own order!'
Manifestly then these verses do not obvi-
ously teach in their letter that the rising of
the body is to be an event long future, centuries
after the sowing. No such idea is even hinted
at. But they do obviously and explicitly teach
that it is raised. Moreover, such meaning does
violence to the essential idea of Paul's analog-
ical illustration, which is that as the body dies
it is raised or made alive in a new form of cor-
poreal life. Thus, " it is sotvn" is obviously
linked with the sowing of the grain body in
verses 36, 37. As the grain body is sown and
dies, it is quickened, made alive ; so as the
earthly body is sown it is raised. But where
are the obvious points of analogy? and what
are the spiritual facts connected with the resur-
rection of the earthly body, which correspond
with the sowing and quickening of the grain
body ? Must they be looked for in the burial
of the body in the grave, in its decomposition,
and the future gathering again of its dissipated
particles, and their transformation into a spir-
itual body ? But what correspondence can
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 103
there be between the sowing of the grain body
in the earth and the burying of a dead body in
the grave ? The grain body is a living body ;
it contains within its womb the germinal ele-
ments of a new form of corporeal organism and
an operative life principle, ready, of its own
dynamic power, to mold these germinal ele-
ments into a new body as the old dies. How
this is done, or just what that life principle is,
we can not tell. But the fact we do know. It
is taught us by every grain that dies in the
earth and every new form of life which springs
up from its womb. But the human earthly body
is dead ; decomposition has commenced ; not
even a germinal element of life remains, nor a
possible principle of life. Its decomposing
particles are at the mercy of the dynamic forces
of the life principles of other forms of life, and
are soon taken up and appropriated by these
into the corporeal organisms of vegetables, and
animals, and men, unless indeed it be true
that an impalpable germ, or mysterious life
principle, somehow inheres or remains in the
dissipated particles of the disorganized earthly
body through all their changes and transfor-
mations, and will eventually combine them in
104 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
a resurrected body. But such a notion is true
neither according to the teachings of reason,
science, common sense, nor the Word of God.
Then there is no correspondence in fact what-
ever between the sowing in the earth of a liv-
ing grain body, and the burial in the grave of
an earthly body, dead and dissolving before it
is buried. The body, then, can fitly correspond
only with the hulls of the grain body after it
has been quickened.
Again : sowing in the earth pertains to the
grain body, because it is the essential con-
dition of its death and quickening; otherwise
it would remain alone. But can this be true
of the earthly body? Do its organic laws
of death and life require that the decomposing
mass should be planted in the earth, that cen-
turies after it may vegetate into a spiritual
body? Might we not rather expect stalks
of wheat or barley, and full-grown ears, from
the sowing in the earth of the old hulls of
grain bodies after they have died and been
quickened ? But it may be urged that the
future rising of the body from the grave does
not depend upon the conditions or laws of or-
ganic life, but will be accomplished by the
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 105
miraculous power of God. Hath he not power
to do it ?
But where has he ever said he would put
forth such power, or that he would ever per-
form such a miracle as that? And what au-
thority have we for putting the rising of the
body in the category of miracles ? What au-
thority in reason, Revelation, or consciousness,
for teaching that he will thus operate, in dis-
regard of the organic laws of life in the human
body, even in its resurrection, any more than
he does in the resurrection of the grain body ?
Moreover, in the supposed fact of the future
resurrection of the body, centuries after it is
sown, there is no correspondence in fact with
the sowing and making alive of the grain
body. In it these are co-etaneous — the mo-
ment it begins to die the inner life principle
begins to quicken and take hold on the germs
it will use in constructing its new form of cor-
poreal organism. And as the death and dis-
solving of the old body progresses, so does the
making alive in the new form assume organic
shape. And as the old loses its identity, and
disappears, up rises the new, and to each grain
his own body, Now, is it not plain and ob-
8
106 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
vious enough that the essential points of anal-
ogy, or correspondence, in this teaching of
Paul, are to be found between the death and
making alive of the grain body and the death
and rising of the earthly body? Thus it is
sown in death, in corruption or corrupting ; it
is raised or quickened, made alive, incorrupt-
ible ; it dies in dishonor, dishonored by the
dominion and pollutions of sin ; it dies in
weakness, from diseases and sufferings ; it dies
a natural, an animal body of gross matter, flesh
and bones ; it is raised in honor, in power ; it
is raised a spiritual body. Thus there is a
dying animal body : there is a rising, spiritual,
incorruptible, immortal, glorious body. Thus
the distinct, obvious points, brought out by
Paul are these : 1st. As the grain body is sown
and dies, so is the body sown in death. 2d.
As the grain body that dies is quickened or
made alive, so is the body raised. 3d. As
with the grain body, not that body is sown
which shall be; so the body that dies is not
the body that rises, but an immortal, glorious,
spiritual body — ^orn, so to speak, out of the
earthly, deriving its organic elements there-
from, and perfectly preserving its identity.
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 107
But to this view of the text it may be ob-
jected that "sown," derived from the Greek
(Txzifju), is never used in the New Testament in
the sense of death or dying. True ; and neither
is it ever used in the sense of bury or burial.
Hence the question is, which of these mean-
ings is most in harmony with the obvious
sense of the text, and with the corresponding
facts of Paul's analogical argument? To my
mind at least the real analogue is between the
dying and quickening of the grain body and
the dying and raising of the earthly body.
And if any fault there be in this view it is in
limiting the sowing of the body to the hour or
day in which it dies ; for, in fact, the earthly
body is in the correspondent state of the grain
body in the earth, during all the time of the
earthly life. It may be said the body is sown
when it is born into its state of mortal exist-
ence. Like the grain body in the earth it is
really dying during all its earthly existence ;
so that the article of death is but the end
of the mortal state, or dissolution process,
which precedes the rising of the immortal
spiritual body. But let us not forget that our
main inquiry just now is not a question of
108 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
words or interpretation of words. But does
Paul in this chapter explicitly teach the future
resurrection from the grave of the earthly
body ? Is such the teaching of these verses ?
Do they obviously and explicitly teach that
the very earthly body, or its material particles,
are at the last day to be gathered again, and
raised an immortal, glorious spiritual body, or
do they teach any thing whatever concerning
the future resurrection of the earthly body ?
CHAPTER VI.
ST. PAUL'S ARGUMENT— CONTINUED.
"And so it is written, The first man, Adam, became a
living soul — the last Adam a quickening (life-giving) spirit.
Howbeit, that was not first which was spiritual, but that
which is natural (animal), and afterward that which is spirit-
ual. The first man was of the earth, earthy; the second
man is from heaven. As was the earthy, such are they, also,
that are earthy ; and as is the heavenly, such are they, also,
that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the
earthy, we will wear (or let us wear) the image of the heav-
enly. Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood can not
inherit the kingdom of God ; neither doth corruption inherit
incorruption." I Cor. XV, 45-50, Langis text.
TO a superficial view the bearing of this
passage upon the resurrection of the
body may not appear. J3ut a careful study of
it in immediate connection with the passages
already considered, will not fail to discover
that its teaching is very direct and explicit in
that direction. The author first introduces
the two Adams — the original parents of our
twofold humanity — the earthly, natural, and
109
IIO SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
the heavenly, spiritual. The general relation
of these two Adams to our humanity is more
fully indicated by the author in Romans ch. v.
His teaching here is that the first Adam was
made, or became a living soul ; but was of the
earth, earthy, natural, animal. The last Adam
was from heaven, a quickening, or life-giving
spirit. The first Adam became a living soul
only through the reception of the inbreathed
Divine life, Gen. xi, 7. And had he continued
in living, receptive union with God, he and
his race would have attained eventually unto
the fullness of immortality and Divine spir-
itual glorification, soul and body. But this
union being severed, he became the head, or
parent, of a humanity merely natural, animal,
earthly, and subject to sin and death. Such
is our humanity without God. To lift it from
this low plane of earthiness and animality, of
sin and death, up to the actual realization of
spiritual, Divine life, and glorification of both
soul and body, comes the last Adam, the
second man, the Divine human Christ, as the
head or parent of the new humanity. Not as
the first, merely a life-receiving soul, but a
life-giving spirit, the Divine life-giver, having
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. Ill
in himself the perfect and perpetual union of
the Divine and human, and "power continually
to beget this divine, spiritual life, in others ;"
"so that as the second Adam he becomes the
representative and head of a humanity, spirit-
ually and divinely glorified, by virtue of hav-
ing glorified human nature in himself by the
power of the Divine Spirit, in a life of sin-
less purity, and his resurrection triumph over
death." Thus " he became henceforth, in his
newly quickened and glorified corporeity, the
Divine organ for that life renewal, that quick-
ening of the dead, which reaches its ultimate
realization in the quickening or raising of the
body."
Thus, according to Paul's teaching, we are
to accept Christ as the second Adam, as the
divine, life-giving power in our humanity, not
only as having glorified and raised to the
fullness of divine, spiritual life the Adam
humanity as assumed by himself, but as act-
ually imparting to us and exerting in us this
life-giving power. Now, the question is, does
this quickening, divine life-power* extend to
the earthly body? Does the author in this
teaching include the fact of the spiritual
112 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
quickening and glorification of the earthly
body? That he certainly does directly refer
to the body in this connection is manifest.
To what else can he refer by the " image of
the earthly," "corruption," " flesh and blood?"
And by changing the image of the earthly for
the image of the heavenly, and inheriting or
entering the kingdom of God in incorruption,
what can be meant but the spiritual glorifica-
tion of the body ? And by the " image of the
heavenly," " incorruption," what can be meant,
but the glorified spiritual body? To my per-
ception, at least, it is very clear that Paul both
teaches the glorification of the body and that
it is to be quickened and glorified through the
divine, life-giving power of Christ. A most
vital fact is this, underlying the whole ques-
tion of the future life of the body. And this
fact is overlooked by every theory of the res-
urrection of the body which I have ever exam-
ined ; and in this is found the fatal defect in
the two leading theories, the psychical and
the literal, material. The one seems to over-
look entirely the fact of the glorification of
the body, and seems to see only the rising at
death of a body, a psychical or spiritual body
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. II3
which has in some way inter-existed in the
earthly. It allows the natural body no part
in the resurrection at all. But such does not
seem to be Paul's philosophy. His idea seems
to be that it is in some sense the earthly body
that is raised. // is sown, it is raised, so that
the immortal, spiritual body is no more an-
other body, absolutely distinct from the nat-
ural, than is the regenerate, sanctified soul
another soul, absolutely distinct from the nat-
ural soul. Somehow the one is born out of
the other. How this is we can no more tell in
the one than in the other. The fact is all we
have to do with. The other can see a bodily
resurrection in nothing that does not in some
way operate the gathering up of the dust of
dead bodies from the earth. It does allow,
indeed, that Christ may have somewhat to do
with the quickening of the body, but it can
only be by exercising his miraculous power
in gathering up its dust particles at the end
of the world. It denies that he can have
any thing to do with it before death, or at
death, or soon after death. It seems to have
no perception of the fact that the indwelling
divine life-power can or does reach even to the
114 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
mortal body, imparting to it the embryo of its
new, immortal, spiritual form. It denies the
possibility of death being but the birth of a
higher form of corporeal life. It insists on
leaving the body under the absolute dominion
of death for ages before it can have a resur-
rection. But such is not St. Paul's philoso-
phy. His idea is that the divine, life-giving
power of the indwelling Christ does operate
the glorification of our humanity, both soul
and body. This was truly so of the Adam
humanity as personally represented in Christ.
In him that humanity was divinely glorified,
soul and body, and it was only through such
glorification that he became the divine life-
power to raise that humanity in us out of its
fallen state. Now, that Christ as the life-giv-
ing spirit does, through spiritual regeneration,
beget in the natural soul the new, divine life,
called elsewhere by Paul the "new man," the
"inner man," the "spiritual man," is perceived
and believed by the Christian mind generally.
But why is it not perceived that thi§ new man
in Christ Jesus, this new spiritual humanity,
must include both the idea and actuality of a
body? Must not the regenerate spiritual man
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 115
in Christ, the second Adam, have a spiritual
body as truly as that the old, natural man in
Adam has a material, earthly body, so that
spiritual regeneration as truly includes the
fact of a spiritual body as that natural gener-
ation includes the fact of a material, natural
body ? And must it not be true that this spir-
itual body does in some sense find its embryo
within the natural body, so that it is first that
which is natural, afterward that which is spir-
itual ? Then we may safely assume that the
life-giving spirit does extend in its regenerat-
ing power even to the mortal, natural body.
That this is St. Paul's idea seems to be very
clearly indicated at Romans viii, 10, II.
Next we may inquire as to the time and
order of this quickening or making alive of
the mortal body. Is it to be accomplished in
no other way than by the miraculous gather-
ing again of the earthly dust at the end of
time and fashioning of it into a spiritual body
suddenly, without regard to the laws of either
natural, psychical, or spiritual life ? Come
from where it may, sustained by whom it
may be, such a conception of the quickening
and future life of the body can not be found
Il6 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
in the teachings of St. Paul or of the whole
New Testament. Paul's teaching manifestly
is that it is by or because of his Spirit which
dwelleth in you that the mortal body is made
alive. It is by the begetting or implanting
within it the germ principle or embryo of its
new, immortal, heavenly form, so that the
death of the old becomes but the full condi-
tion of the birth of the new.
This conception is thus finely stated by a
modern commentator. Speaking of the death
and corruption of vegetable bodies as the con-
ditions of new forms of life, he says : " Essen-
tially the same process occurs in the resur-
rection of the dead. Corruption is only the
dissolution of that which was the result of a
previous vital development, in order that the
germ of a new body which was included in the
inmost kernel of the old, may break forth and
unfold itself into a new and living organism."
So that the death and dissolution of the earthly
body are but upward steps in the regenerate
order of man's corporeal life. It is being
changed from the image of the earthly natural
into the image of the heavenly spiritual — from
corruption into incorruption. It is a giving
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. II7
back to the kingdom of matter the flesh, bones,
blood, and other elements which evermore be-
long to it, and which can not enter into the
kingdom of God. " Now this I say, brethren,
that flesh and blood can not inherit the king-
dom of God: neither doth corruption inherit
incorruption. Behold I shew you a mystery :
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 incorrupti-
ble, and we shall be changed. For this cor-
ruptible must put on incorruption, and this
mortal must put on immortality. So when
this corruptible shall have put on incorruption,
and this mortal shall have put on immortality,
then shall be brought to pass the saying that
is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
O death, where is thy sting ? O grave, where
is thy victory ?"
Once more. The teaching in these verses
is concerning the bodily state of those who
should be alive on the earth at the end of the
age and full revelation of the Lord, and final
consummation of the rising of the dead in
Christ from hades. They of course would not
Il8 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
attain to the resurrection of the body, because
they would not die. The consummation will
come upon them finding them still in the image
of the earthy — still abiding in the earthly
house. What shall they do ? In verse 50,
Paul teaches very clearly Xh^t flesh and blood
(the earthly body) can not enter the kingdom
of God. That is, the spiritual, heavenly, glo-
rious state on which redeemed humanity is to
fully enter at the coming of the Lord and after
the general resurrection. That is a state for
which the earthly body is wholly unsuited.
Corruption can not inherit incorruption, verse
50 ; that is, a state of incorruptible everlasting
life to which mortal corporeality can not rise.
All who have reached that state are the chil-
dren of the resurrection. They have been
raised from the earthly into the spiritual, have
dropped the image of the earthy and have
risen in the image of the heavenly. Then
what shall we do who are in the earthly ? " Be-
hold, I shew you a mystery ; we shall not all
sleep (or die), but we shall all be changed!'
We who shall be alive will not attain to the
image of the heavenly by having the earthly
put off through death, but we shall be changed
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. I 1 9
suddenly ; this corruptible, this mortal, shall
fitt on incorruption, and this mortal immor-
tality ; so we shall enter the kingdom of God,
the glorified heavenly state, the New Jerusa-
lem, with the dead who shall be raised incor-
ruptible in the spiritual bodies, the heavenly,
with which they were clothed upon at death.
Then, ivJicn this corruptible has put on incor-
ruption, this mortal immortality ; when we
who are alive at his coming have dropped
the image of the earthly and been clothed in
the heavenly ; when the dead are raised in the
same incorruptible bodies from hades, then
shall rise that triumphant shout from the whole
redeemed humanity, O death, where thy sting?
O hades, where thy victory ?
But not losing sight of our main inquiry, let
us consider what these passages last examined
teach concerning the future resurrection of the
flesh. If anywhere in these verses the future
resurrection of the body is taught it must be
in verse 52, "the dead shall be raised incor-
ruptible." For, manifestly the teaching else-
where is concerning those who should be alive
at the trump sounding. And just what is
taught in this verse must depend upon the
120 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
meaning of the dead. Must we allow to ol
vexpot its uniform New Testament meaning, or
must we limit it to mean the bodies of the
dead, so that it would read, " and the bodies, or
dead bodies, shall be raised incorruptible ?"
Inquiry may be assisted here by a parallel
passage in which Paul substantially restates
the very same thing, i Thess. iv, 14, 15 : " For
if we believe that Jesus died and rose again,
even so them which sleep in Jesus will God
bring with liim. For this we say unto you by
the word of the Lord, that we which are alive
and remain at the coming of the Lord shall not
prevent them which are asleep, .... and the
dead in Christ shall rise first." Now of whom
or of what does Paul speak ? Who or what
is meant by them, the dead in Christ ? etc.
Does Paul mean the earthly bodies of the
dead ? Is it as though he should say, " Even
so the dead bodies which sleep in Jesus will
God bring with him ; we which are alive shall
not prevent the dead bodies which sleep in
Jesus ; and the dead bodies in Christ shall rise
first, and the dead bodies shall be raised incor-
ruptible." What can be meant by God bring-
ing dead bodies with him when he comes to
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 121
raise the dead and change the living ? From
whence would he bring them ? Now is it not
manifest that to fill the term dead in these
texts with the meaning of awpa, or body, de-
stroys their meaning? But allow it its true,
full New Testament meaning, and the teach-
ing is plain enough. At the coming of Christ
at the time of the great awakening to life and
immortality, the dead in Christ will be raised
from hades in persona propria, incorruptible in
the spiritual bodies with which they were
clothed at death suited to their individual state
or development in spiritual life as they entered
the place of the dead. And the living (in
Christ) shall be changed, clothed upon with
the same spiritual, incorruptible corporeity
through the sudden operation of the quicken-
ing spirit of Christ ; and together they shall
enter the new order, the heavenly state of the
redeemed humanity.
Now, however it may seem to you — to my
perception there is nothing in the letter or
spirit — in a single verse or the continued con-
nection of this most grand argument, which
teaches the future resurrection of the flesh ;
that is, of any portions or particles of the
9
122 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
earthly body which, after death, enter into the
general circulation of matter. But concerning
the resurrection of the body it teaches me that
in this earthy state is implanted within the
mortal body, by the regenerative operation of
" the life-giving spirit," the germ of its new
immortal, spiritual, and heavenly life and im-
age, so that death is but the condition in the
order of developing life through which the
body rises to its new and higher order of im-
mortal, spiritual life, so that the dying person,
whatever his state of regenerate spiritual life,
is clothed upon at death with a spiritual body,
born out of the earthy, and just suited to the
state of existence on which he enters in hades,
and in which he will rise from the dead when
he attains to the resurrection and the life in
Jesus. And such a view of the resurrection is
to me a very glorious one.
It may be well to consider in this connec-
tion the more detached portions of the Word
in which the <rajf±a, or body, is mentioned —
whether they will harmonize with the teaching
of this chapter. At Romans viii, n, we read:
" But if the Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus
from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 123
Christ from the dead shall also quicken (or
make alive) your mortal bodies by (or because
of) his Spirit, which dwelleth in you." This
passage is generally understood to have direct
reference to the resurrection of the body. But
what manner of bodily resurrection does it
teach ? When and how is the mortal body
to be made alive? Does it teach a long, fut-
ure raising of the same mortal body from
the grave? — that the life-giving. Spirit is to
quicken it by dwelling in the dust, or by com-
ing to the earth to make it alive again at the
end of time ? Surely it teaches nothing of the
kind. But it does teach that the mortal bodies
of believers shall be made alive because of the
life-giving Spirit which dwelleth in than. How
plain is this when we understand it as teach-
ing that the indwelling, regenerating Spirit
extends in its life-giving operation even to the
mortal body, begetting within it the germ of
its immortal, spiritual form! And how per-
fectly it harmonizes with the previous teach-
ings of i Cor. xv ! At verse twenty-three,
in this same chapter, we read : "And not only
tJuy, but ourselves also, which have the first
fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves, groan
124 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
within ourselves, waiting for the adoption (to
wit) the redemption of our body." By the re-
demption of the body does the author mean
its future resurrection from the earth, or does
he mean the same that he does at verse 1 1 ?
That he does mean the latter will be more
fully apparent as we come to consider his teach-
ing at 2 Cor. ch. v. Again: Phil, iii, 20, 21,
" For our conversation is in heaven : from
whence also we look for the Savior, the Lord
Jesus Christ : who shall change our vile body,
that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious
body, according to the working whereby he is
able even to subdue all things unto himself."
This teaching refers directly to those who
should be alive at the coming of the Lord,
alluded to in verse 20. And the change here
spoken of corresponds to that of 1 Cor. xv,
52, 53, and 1 Thess. iv, 14-18. But suppose
the change to be predicated of those who die
in Christ. When and how is the vile body to
be changed ? Can it be possible that Paul
means to teach that Christ at his coming will
gather up the material particles of their dead
bodies, and fashion them into the likeness of
his own glorious body ? Surely not. By the
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 125
working whereby he is able to subdue all
things unto himself, what can be meant but
the operation of the Divine Spirit dwelling in
the natural man, and ultimating in the im-
mortal glorification of even the vile body, fash-
ioning it after his own glorious body ?
Once more : 2 Cor. v, 1-8, " For we know
that if our earthly house of this tabernacle
were dissolved, we have a building of God, an
house not made with hands, eternal in the
heavens. For in this we groan, earnestly de-
siring to be clothed upon with our house which
is from heaven : if so be that being clothed we
shall not be found naked. For we that are in
this tabernacle do groan, being burdened : not
for that we would be unclothed, but clothed
upon, that mortality might be swallowed up
of life. Now he that hath wrought us for the
self-same thing is God, who also hath given
unto us the earnest of the Spirit. Therefore
we are always confident, knowing that, whilst
we are at home in the body, we are absent
from the Lord : (for we walk by faith, not by
sight :) we are confident, I say, and willing
rather to be absent from the body, and to be
present with the Lord."
126 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
To me it does seem that the perfect har-
mony of this most suggestive passage with all
that St. Paul elsewhere teaches must be ap-
parent at a glance. But we will consider it a
moment. The key to the meaning of the
whole passage is found in the specific meaning
of the figurative terms used in the first verse.
And by the earthly house of this tabernacle,
or tent-dwelling, what can be meant but the
earthly body ? By the dissolving of this house,
or taking down this tent, what can be meant
but the death or dissolution of the body ? And
by the building of (or from) God, not made
with hands, eternal in the heavens, what can
be meant but the immortal, heavenly, spiritual
body, set forth in the strongest possible figu-
rative contrast with the earthly mortal body?
In this strong, figurative language, the author,
as saith Neander, " is here speaking of a higher
heavenly organ, to contain the soul, instead of
the earthly body." And what can that organ
be but the new spiritual, immortal, glorious
body, of which the author speaks at I Cor.
ch. xv? Thus understood, the teaching of
this whole passage, otherwise obscure, is plain
enough. It speaks of life in this world in the
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1 27
body as a temporary tent-dwelling in the
" earthly house," " tabernacle," a u being bur-
dened," "groaning," "absent from the Lord."
The idea is that of one staying in temporary
discomfort in a tent, or inferior dwelling, wait-
ing for the completion of a more substantial
and splendid mansion for a permanent abode.
It speaks of death as a "dissolution of the
earthly house," as being unclothed, and clothed
upon, absent from the body, present with the
Lord. It is a passing, or rising out of the
earthly, mortal, corruptible body, and being
clothed upon of the heavenly, immortal, in-
corruptible, spiritual body, mortality (or the
mortal part) swallowed up of life! Is not this
the obvious, unforced meaning of this passage?
And I ask, in all candor, does such teaching
give any foundation whatever for the com-
monly received theological notions that death
is the rending in twain of soul and body — that
the soul must go somewhere, an unclothed,
formless, bodiless ghost — that it must wait for
ages before it can have a body, and must then
return again to this earth to find it? It is
manifestly his teaching that the soul, or
spirit-man, the real man, is not unclothed,
128 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
but clothed upon. He changes one body for
another. The dissolution of his earthly house
is but the condition of his being clothed upon
with his heavenly house — mortality being swal-
lowed up of life. And nowhere does St. Paul,
or any other New Testament author, so much
as hint that between the dissolution of the
earthly, mortal body, and the being clothed
upon with a spiritual body, there must be a
hiatus of centuries and ages, during which the
spirit-man must exist in a state of personal dis-
organization — one part in the skies, or some-
where else, and another part in the dust of the
earth. Nor is there a hint that when the time
does at last come for him to be put together
again, his soul must wander back again to the
grave-yard to look for his heavenly body and
the lost ruins of his old earthly house, which
perished ages before. All such conceptions
of the resurrection are after the traditions of
men, and not of the Word of God.
Now, so far as I know, we have considered
every passage in the New Testament which
speaks of the body in direct or indirect con-
nection with the resurrection, except those
passages which speak of the resurrection of
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1 29
the Lord. These will be a subject for another
chapter. I have aimed simply to ascertain just
what these Scriptures do teach. There are
many other passages in the New Testament
which speak of the resurrection of the dead,
but not of the body. I know of no one that
conflicts with this general teaching of St. Paul.
CHAPTER VII.
THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS.
IN calling your attention to this great cen-
tral fact in the history of our redeemed
humanity, I shall deal in no theory or spec-
ulation, attempt no display of rhetoric or
rhapsody. I shall take the statements of the
New Testament authors just as they are in
our English translation. I will attempt no
criticism, no new translation, no comment, no
interpretation, no exegesis. I will take the
great fact of the resurrection of Jesus just* as
stated, and press inquiry in a single direction,
toward a single point. What do these Script-
ures and this grand fact of the resurrection of
Jesus directly and obviously teach concerning
the future resurrection of the bodies of the dead
from the grave?
This, of course, is a very important inquiry,
important in itself, but doubly so to us in
130
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 131
the course of these suggestive inquiries ; for,
should it appear that these Scriptures and
this great fact do indeed teach that the
earthly bodies of the dead are to be raised
from their graves at some future time, then
must we admit that we have misapprehended
the general teachings of St. Paul and of the
New Testament on this subject. I will espe-
cially endeavor to avoid doing the harm to
these important Scriptures which is usually
done by the advocates of cherished dogmatic
theories of the resurrection. They have usu-
ally pressed them into the service of their
favorite theories, regardless of the twofold
phenomena which they reveal concerning the
resurrection of Jesus. That the statements
of the Gospels, when allowed to speak for
themselves, do reveal a twofold or double
phenomena is evident — namely, the literal,
material, and the spiritual, mysterious — or,
briefly, the objective and the subjective.
The following brief synopsis of the history
of the Lord's resurrection, culled from the dif-
ferent authors, sufficiently indicate the twofold
phenomena attending that glorious event:
" Now, upon the first day of the week,
132 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
very early in the morning, they came unto
the sepulcher, bringing the spices which they
had prepared, and certain others with them.
And they found the stone rolled away from
the sepulcher. And they entered in, and
found not the body of the Lord Jesus."
Luke xxiv, 1-3.
" Mary Magdalene came and told the dis-
ciples that she had seen the Lord, and that
he had spoken these things unto her. Then
the same day at evening, being the first day
of the week, when the doors were shut where
the disciples were assembled for fear of the
Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and
saith unto them, Peace be unto you. And
when he had so said, he shewed unto them
his hands and his side. Then were the dis-
ciples glad when they saw the Lord." John
xx, 18-20.
"And as they thus spake, Jesus himself
stood in the midst of them, and saith unto
them, Peace be unto you. But they were
terrified and affrighted, and supposed that
they had seen a spirit. And he said unto
them, Why are ye troubled? and why do
thoughts arise in your hearts ? Behold my
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1 33
hands and my feet, that it is I myself: han-
dle me, and see ; for a spirit hath not flesh
and bones, as ye see me have. And when he
had thus spoken, he shewed' them his hands
and his feet. And while they yet believed
not for joy, and wondered, he said unto
them, Have ye here any meat ? And they
gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an
honey-comb. And he took it, and did eat
before them. ,, Luke xxiv, 36-43.
"And after eight days again his disciples
were within, and Thomas with them : then
came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood
in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy
finger, and behold my hands ; and reach
hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side ;
and be not faithless, but believing. And
Thomas answered and said unto him, My
Lord and my God." John xx, 26-28.
" But Mary stood without at the sepulcher,
t weeping : and as she wept, she stooped down,
and looked into the sepulcher, and seeth two
angels in white, sitting, the one at the head,
and the other at the feet, where the body
of Jesus had lain : and they say unto her,
134 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
Woman, why weepest thou? She saith unto
them, Because they have taken away my
Lord, and I know not where they have laid
him. And when she had thus said, she
turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing,
and knew not that it was Jesus. Jesus saith
unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom
seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the
gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have
borne him hence, tell me where thou hast
laid him, and I will take him away.* Jesus
saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself,
and saith unto him, Rabboni, which is to say,
Master. Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not :
for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but
go to my brethren, and say unto them, I
ascend unto my Father and your Father, and
to my God and your God." John xx, n-17.
"And behold, two of them went that same
day to a village called Emmaus, which was
from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.
And they talked together of all these things
which had happened. And it came to pass,
that, while they communed together, and rea-
soned, Jesus himself drew near, and went
with them. But their eyes were holden, that
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1 35
they should not know him. And they drew
nigh unto the village whither they went: and
he made as though he would have gone
further. But they constrained him, saying,
Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and
the day is far spent. And he went in to
tarry with them. And it came to pass, as he
sat at meat with them, he took bread, and
blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. And
their eyes were opened, and they knew him :
and he vanished out of their sight." Luke
xxiv, 13-16, 28-31.
"After that, he appeared in another form
unto two of them, as they walked, and went
into the country. And they went and told it
unto the residue: neither believed they them."
Mark xvi, 12, 13.
Thus we see from the objective statement
of the great fact it does not seem to go
beyond the tomb, and is throughout a fact
purely physical and natural. Thus, we see
the body of the Lord laid in the tomb. We
know it is dead. We see it secured and
guarded there against the possibility of being
removed by human agency. We see the tomb
opened on the morning of the third day, and
I36 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
empty. We see the risen Christ again with his
disciples, in the same material body that was in
the tomb. We hear him say to his doubting
and unbelieving friends, Handle me and see,
for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see
me have. Behold my hands and feet, that it
is / myself. We see the wounds of the nails,
and we even see him eat of broiled fish and
of an honey-comb. Thus, looking alone at
the objective statement of the Lord's resur-
rection, the whole fact would seem to be little
else than the revivification of the earthly body.
But when we look also at the subjective we
are led beyond the tomb to the under world.
We hear Jesus say to the penitent thief, To-
day shalt thou be with me in paradise. We
hear it said of him that he descended into
the lower parts of the earth, that he went
and preached to the spirits in prison, that his
soul was not left in hades, that he rose from
the dead, led a multitude of captives, and that
he has the keys of death and of hades, thus
unmistakably connecting the fact of his resur-
rection with the spiritual world, making it as
truly a fact of the spiritual world as of the
natural. Moreover, an hour or so after his
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1 37
resurrection he was seen of Mary Magdalene,
one who knew him most intimately but three
days ago, and, though she conversed with him,
she knew him not. The same day he walked
and conversed with two of his most intimate
disciples for a mile or more, but they knew
him not. His personal appearances to his
disciples were sometimes very sudden, myste-
rious, being at once present in the midst of
them in the room where the doors were shut,
most likely locked. Sometimes his appear-
ance was so unearthly, so awe-inspiring, as to
fill his friends with terror and fright, and at
times he suddenly vanished out of their sight.
Moreover, there is no evidence that Jesus,
during the forty days between his resurrec-
tion and ascension, was a resident of this
world at all. The most obvious inference
from the record is that he was not a resident
of this world, that his appearances to his dis-
ciples were rather visits with them of longer
or shorter continuance, and evidently some-
times very sudden, unexpected, and supernat-
ural ; and there is no evidence that he was
ever seen, in the body or otherwise, by any
persons but those of his own disciples and
I38 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
friends, who were more or less spiritual. That
he was ever seen by any of the world or in
any earthly locality, as he had been previous
to his death, there is no evidence at all, and
the obvious inference is that he was not.
And, finally, after a time — "forty days" — he
disappeared from the sight of his disciples,
and was seen of them no more.
Now, unfortunately, these twofold physical
and spiritual, natural and supernatural phenom-
ena, are lost sight of by theorists and dogma-
tists in their attempts to establish their favorite
doctrines of the resurrection. Thus on one
side, in defending the material idea of the
literal bodily resurrection, the spiritual facts
are lost sight of, or made nothing of; and
theorists seem to see only the material phys-
ical facts of the Lord's resurrection. They
see in the risen body and personal appearings
of the Lord nothing differing from the same
natural body that died ; thus reducing the
whole stupendous fact of the Lord's resurrec-
tion to a reanimation of the fleshly body, and
even allowing the necessity of its going through
some process of change, or spiritualization, be-
fore ascending to the heavenly world. On the
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1 39
other hand others, in maintaining the more
spiritual theories of the resurrection, quite
lose sight of the obvious physical facts, and
seem to see only the spiritual. Some go even
so far as to reduce the whole fact of the resur-
rection to a myth. Others, looking only at the
supernatural, see only the rising of a psychical
body, and not the earthly body at all, and have
to invent some chemical process by which it
was disposed of. Thus we see how these
Scriptures are warped and twisted, now this
way, then that way ; magnified on this side,
then minified on that, until the candid, unbiased
mind, who would see the harmony of both,
give to each its full meaning, and thus arrive
at the twofold sense and teaching of these
Scriptures, and the full significance of that
transcendent fact, the resurrection of the Lord
Jesus, will find it necessary to discard very
much from every existing theory of the resur-
rection. Then taking this , twofold objective
record, just as stated by the different New
Testament authors, what are the actual facts
they state? ist. That Jesus, who was cruci-
fied, whose body was laid in the tomb of Jo-
seph, did actually appear to, and converse with
140 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
his disciples and friends after his death ; so
that he had an actual personal existence after
death. 2d. His resurrection was a fact in the
spiritual world as truly as in the natural world ;
that is, it consisted as truly in the rising of his
soul from hades as in the rising of his body
from the tomb. 3d. After his resurrection he
was no longer a resident of the natural world,
was never seen of any except his own disciples,
and only appeared to these ten times during
forty days ; after which he was seen no more.
4th. At times his appearance was very natural ;
he seemed clothed again with the very material
body that had been on the cross and in the
tomb. At other times his appearance was
spiritual, mysterious — sudden, and he vanished
suddenly out of their sight. 5th. It is mani-
fest from the concurrent statements of the rec-
ord, that his resurrection included the fact of
the spiritual glorification of the body. 6th.
That the glorification of the body was accom-
plished within three days after his death, or, at
most, within forty days ; so that he ceased to
be a resident of Galilee in a natural body of
flesh and bones, and became a resident of
the heavenly world, in a spiritual, immortal,
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. I4I
divinely glorified body. At least to my per-
ception such seem to be the facts established
by the objective and subjective statements of
the record. And beyond these facts can we
go without walking in the light of our own
kindling? How these facts were accomplished
no mortal can tell. That transcendent scene
in the tomb, where a mortal earthly body first
felt the life-giving, divinely transforming power
of the Spirit, was witnessed by no human eye —
perhaps not by angelic eye. Just how that
body was transformed ; just what portions of
its elements entered into the glorified spiritual
form ; just what was the nature of that body,
which could be now most naturally material,
a moment before or a moment afterward be
wholly unrecognizable, or vanish suddenly from
sight, and be wholly invisible to natural sight,
no mortal can tell. And why should mortal
attempt to speculate ? Our task is simply to
inquire, What do these Scriptures and these
facts, concerning the resurrection of Jesus,
positively and explicitly teach concerning the
future resurrection of the dead bodies of men ?
We may know what the advocates of different
theories of the resurrection say they teach ;
142 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
but in these inquiries we have nothing to do
with what men say, but with what the Word
itself teaches.
That these Scriptures are full of Divine
teaching concerning the resurrection of the
dead, and concerning the fact that resurrection
does extend to the earthly body, is as blessedly
true as it is obvious. They establish the fact
that Jesus rose the first from the dead in
hades; and this establishes the fact that all
who die or enter there with even a spark of
his Divine life in their souls, will rise also, but
every man in his own order, i Cor. xv, 23.
And the fact that Jesus' resurrection included
the immortalizing and glorification of his body,
establishes the fact, the resurrection of all
the dead in him does extend to the immor-
talizing and glorification of their bodies, even
like unto his own glorious body. But when?
and how ? In all these Scriptures, which re-
veal the twofold fact of the resurrection of
Jesus, is it so much as hinted in a single text,
or all together, that the resurrection or glorifi-
cation of the body is not to take place until
centuries after death ? And where is it so
much as hinted that the resurrection of the
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. I43
body, when it does take place, is to consist in
the gathering again and glorification of the
dust particles of the earthly body ? so that the
fact of such a future resurrection may be said
to rest on the unmistakable "thus saith the
Lord," and not at all upon human interpre-
tation or dogmatism ? Can you find such text
or texts in the revealed history of the Lord's
resurrection ? Then, if such resurrection be
taught, it must be by the fact of the rising of
the Lord's body itself. But does the fact that
the body of Jesus was raised jn three days
after death, before corruption, explicitly estab-
lish the fact that the dust of disorganized
bodies will be gathered again, centuries or
ages hence?
Just take the fact itself, in all its variety of
statement, but divested of all that poetry, re-
ligious fervor and imagination, Church dog-
matism, and theological inference and inter-
pretation have thrown around it, and added to
it — just the fact, in all its fullness, that the
body of Jesus was raised from the tomb —
what does that obviously and directly estab-
lish concerning the resurrection of dead bodies
in general ? It certainly gives a foundation
144 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
for faith in a resurrection, and glorification of
the bodies of all who believe in him. But
does it obviously settle the fact that that res-
urrection can not be realized until ages after
death, and that it must consist in the gather-
ing again and glorifying of the very earthly
body that mingled with the earth ? It is urged
that it does teach such resurrection because
the resurrection of the body of Christ is the
"pattern" of the resurrection of the human
body ; and as that consisted in the raising of
the very earthly body that was laid in the
tomb, so must the other consist in raising the
very body that is laid in the grave. But who
teaches that the resurrection of Christ is such
pattern? Is it taught in these Scriptures, or
anywhere in the New Testament, or does it
simply rest upon theological authority? How
can any thing be called a pattern of another
thing unless all the essential, and even the
lesser characteristics of the former can be re-
produced in the other? How can the resur-
rection of Jesus be a pattern of the resurrec-
tion of the dead,- unless at least the essential
facts of his rising can be reproduced in the
other? But is this at all possible? Thus, his
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. I45
body was raised in a little less than three days.
The bodies of the dead have been in dust for
centuries; may be for centuries more. His
body saw no corruption. Though truly dead,
yet there was no decomposition, no disorgan-
ization, so that the organism was not even
seriously impaired. But the bodies of the dead
have been utterly disorganized, their identity
even lost, and their very particles all com-
mingled into the ten thousand, thousand com-
binations of matter, and entered into infinite
variations of vegetable and animal life. Now,
will it be pretended that the uncorrupted body
of Jesus in the tomb is a pattern of these
bodies of the dead lost in dust? Can it be
said that the re-inhabiting (so to speak) of
that still organized body, is a pattern of the
gathering up out of the ten thousand forms of
matter and organic life of the dissipated par-
ticles of these bodies ? What single fact of
the order of the resurrection of the body of
Jesus can be reproduced in the future gather-
ing again of an earthly human body ? Not
one. Then it is the pattern of no such res-
urrection, except in assumption ? And this
assumption is contradicted by the direct teach-
I46 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
ing of Paul : " Even so in Christ shall all be
made alive ; but every man in his o%vn order T
Thus the resurrection of Jesus, both in his
rising from hades, as the first from the dead,
and in the rising of his body from the tomb,
was after his own order, according to a pattern
which himself alone could fill. A resurrection
any less natural, literal, and obvious, or any
less spiritual, supernatural, and mysterious,
would not have met the circumstances of that
time, or filled the relations he sustained to the
world of the living and the world of the dead,
or met the conditions of his mission as the
Savior, the Redeemer, the resurrection and
the life. Doubtless he could have attained to
his bodily resurrection without it ever being
perceived in this world, or known by even his
most intimate disciples or friends. But how
would Jesus and the resurrection ever have be-
come the power of the Gospel in the Christian
Church but for the objective physical demon-
stration of the fact in the natural world ? But
to limit the whole stupendous fact to these
material manifestations, and insist that in this
is to be found the pattern of the resurrection
of the dead, is not only a mere dogmatic as-
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. I47
sumption, but also a very stupid and absurd
one.
What, then, does the resurrection of Jesus,
both as a fact and in its inspired history,
establish concerning the resurrection of the
bodies of the dead ? 1. As his resurrection
did ultimate in the spiritual glorification of
his earthly body, is it not a fact that the
resurrection and the life will ultimate in the
same in us? This fact is put beyond suppo-
sition by the teaching of Paul already consid-
ered, that he will quicken our mortal bodies,
and change our vile body, fashioning it like
unto his own glorious body. But as to the
time or the manner in which this is to be
accomplished is there a word of specific,
direct teaching? Certainly there is no hint
that it is to be done not until long after
death. But, on the contrary, the foundation
for inferential theory or dogmatism is all on
the other side. Did not the resurrection and
glorification of the Lord's body begin, at the
furthest, within three days after death ? Was
it not completed, at the furthest, within forty?
Then, taking his resurrection as the pattern,
why may not the same work be accomplished
I48 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
by the same divine power within the same
time ? Nay, we might assume that the divine
life-giving power had extended to the earthly
body of Jesus even before the throes of death
reached it ; that this power ceased not its life-
giving operation for a moment until the body
reached its glorified state ; so that Jesus was
the first in the order of our humanity to whom
death was a transition from the earthly, natu-
ral, to the heavenly, spiritual. But we must
not speculate, and all I will say is that in
the resurrection of Jesus there is nothing to
contradict the view of the spiritual glorifica-
tion of the body we have already considered
in the general teaching of St. Paul and other
New Testament authors. To my perception
there is a beautiful and wonderful harmony.
In connection with this New Testament
history of the resurrection of Jesus is a
remarkable statement by Matthew which re-
quires a passing notice. The passage is
found at Matthew xxvii, 52, 53: "And the
graves were opened ; and many bodies of the
saints which slept arose, and came out of
the graves after his resurrection, and went
into the holy city, and appeared unto many."
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. I49
Now, taking these remarkable verses just as
we find them, the fact just as stated, raising
no question as to the genuineness of the
text; no question as to who is meant by the
saints, whether those who had been a long
time dead or those who but recently had
died ; no question as to whether this is to
be accepted as a physical fact, a literal com-
ing forth of the material bodies of the dead
saints, appearing in the literal streets of the
literal Jerusalem, seen of the disciples with
their natural eyes, or whether it was an
appearing of the spiritual bodies of the saints
in the spiritual Jerusalem or holy city, and
seen of the disciples in vision or by their
spiritual perception: but taking the fact just
as stated, with the single inquiry, What do
the text and the fact obviously, directly teach
concerning the future resurrection of the
flesh? Do they obviously and directly teach
that the earthly bodies of all the dead saints
will in like manner come out of their graves
at the end of the world ? Do you and I find
here an express and direct "thus saith the
Lord" for the doctrine that our dust will be
gathered from the graves, so plainly that our
ISO SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
faith in such a resurrection will rest not at
all upon inference, human interpretation, and
dogmatism? Rather may we not truly say
that concerning the time, the order, or in
what the rising of the body consists, these
verses teach nothing whatever? The fact
of the bodily rising of saints in temporal
connection with the rising of the Lord is
very significant in its testimony to the gen-
eral fact of the resurrection of the dead, and
to the fact that that resurrection extends in
some way to the bodies of the dead. But to
press these verses into the support of any
doctrine or theory of the bodily resurrection
which we would sustain, is simply making
them say by our own inference what they do
not say at all ; and, when we look closely and
impartially, we are astonished to find how
much of our doctrine and theology do thus
rest on mere human interpretation of the
letter of the Word, and especially on this
glorious theme of the rising of the dead.
CHAPTER VIII.
COLLATERAL INQUIRIES — CONFUSION OF DOCTRINAL STATE-
MENT—NO DEFINITE STANDARD OF DOCTRINE.
HAVING now, to some extent, at least,
exhausted the inquiry concerning the
direct teaching of the New Testament in rela-
tion to the future resurrection of the earthly
body, we might here rest this feature of the
subject, and at once proceed with the more
general question. But there are certain col-
lateral arguments which must be noticed in
order to complete this inquiry.
And first of all is the very difficulty which
must environ any doctrine thus resting upon
human dogma and the too literal interpreta-
tion of the Word rather than upon the explicit
teaching of the Word itself. I mean the dif-
ficulty of determining just what is implied in
such resurrection, and of securing an explicit
and uniform statement of it which may be
151
152 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
accepted as an article of faith. We can not
better point out this difficulty than by notic-
ing the teachings of some of the leading
minds and theologians of the Church during
different periods of her history. In the very
numerous creeds and doctrinal symbolisms of
the Churches during the last eighteen hun-
dred years there has been much of unanimity
in putting forth the future resurrection of the
body as an article of faith, and at the pres-
ent time the Church of Rome, the Greek
Church, the Church of England, the Protest-
ant Episcopal, and a few others still retain
the ancient symbolism of the resurrection of
the flesh, while among the many other Prot-
estant Churches there is considerable variety
of statement in creeds ; but in almost all the
future resurrection of the body is in some
degree put forth as an article of faith. But
zvhat is to be believed ? What is implied in
such resurrection of the body? It is vain
to say that the intelligent, thinking mind of
Christendom to-day, in the Church and out of
it, is to be satisfied with the simple formula,
"Credo carnis resurreetionem" The very fact
that the advanced theological minds of the
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 153
Church have ever been laboring to doctrinally
state what is implied in such resurrection is
conclusive that they sought a reason for their
faith, and to lay a foundation for the same faith
in others, and in this earnest and sincere effort
to give doctrinal form and shape to this article
of faith they have but demonstrated the diffi-
culty which environs it During the earlier
centuries of the Church the general and uni-
form teaching was that the resurrection would
consist in the raising again of the very same
fleshly body that lived on earth,* that the
body would rise with all its members. Even
cripples and deformed bodies would be raised
as such, but would be subsequently made per-
fect. Jerome teaches that the identity of the
resurrection body with that laid in the grave
will be maintained even to the hairs and teeth,
for there is to be gnashing of teeth in the
world of woe. Thomas Aquinas insists that
hairs and nails are ornaments of man, and
therefore quite as necessary as blood and
other fluids, but at the same time teaches
that no other matter will rise from the grave
than what exists at death. How, then, with
* Shedd's Christian Doctrine, Vol. II, pages 403-406.
II
154 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
those who happen to be baldheaded and tooth-
less at death, and those who have attained to
even a quarter of a ton and those who have
been reduced to mere skeletons before death?
Among the Jews it was taught that God has
a trumpet a thousand ells long ; at the first
blast on the last day the earth will be shaken ;
at the second the dust of dead bodies will be
separated ; at the third the bones will come
together; at the fourth the members will wax
warm ; at the fifth the heads will be covered
with skin ; at the sixth souls will enter their
bodies ; at the seventh all will come up out
of the earth. It was also taught that all the
bodies of dead Israelites must rise from the
valley of Jehoshaphat, and that all who were
buried in other lands would have to scratch
their way to Palestine through the earth with
their nails before they could rise.* And
among the ancient Rabbins the theory was
maintained that there was somewhere in the
body an indestructible bone called Luz, which
was the seed of the resurrection body. This
seed-bone was supposed to be so indestructible
that, though pounded on anvils with heaviest
*Mattison on the Resurrection, pages 18-20.
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1 55
hammers, though burned for ages in hottest
fires or furnaces, though soaked for centuries
in strongest solvents, yet it remained nothing
affected, and at the last would grow into a per-
fect material body. Tertullian thought that
the teeth were providentially made eternal, so
as to serve as the seeds of the resurrection,
while Augustine held that every man's body,
however dispersed here, shall be restored per-
fect, complete in quantity and quality. The
hairs which have been shaved off, the nails
which have been cut, shall not be restored in
such enormous quantities as to deform their
original places, neither shall they perish, but
shall return into the body into that substance
from which they grew.*
In more modern dogmatism we have about
the same variety and contrariety. By many
it is taught that death results immediately in
entire unconsciousness, the body returning to
dust, while the soul remains in the grave or
elsewhere in a state of unconsciousness until
the last day, when at the sound of the trump
both will rise up together, while others teach
that at death the soul goes immediately to hell
*De Civ. Dei, lib. xxii, chap. 19, 20.
156 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
or heaven in conscious misery or happiness,
while the body tarries in the earth until the
resurrection, when the soul comes back to
earth, re-enters the body, and returns again
to hell or heaven. Dr. Gregory reasons thus :
Man was constituted a being by the union of
two substances essentially different, spirit and
matter, and was destined to continue a mixed
being forever; therefore the resurrection of
the same body is necessary for the existence
of the man beyond the grave. Moreover, he
urges the resurrection of the same body that
it may share the rewards and punishments of
the soul for deeds done in the body, as it is
the man, not a part of him, which shall be
rewarded or punished. Dr. Hody on the res-
urrection says, " To speak properly, the body
is not capable either of sinning or doing well.
It is only the instrument of the soul, and the
arm that stabs sins no more than the sword."
Dr. Burnett teaches it is of no, great conse-
quence to us whether we have the same par-
ticles, or others of equal dignity and value, or
what shall become of our cast-off carcasses,
when "we shall live in light with the angels."
Dr. Hitchcock teaches that " it is not neces-
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1 57
sary that the resurrection body should contain
a single particle of the body laid in the grave,
if it only contains particles of the same kind,
united in the same proportions, and the com-
pound be made to assume the same form and
structure as the natural body."
And the highly metaphysical Drew, some-
what after the philosophy of the ancient Rab-
bins concerning the seed-bone, luz, teaches
that the resurrection does not contemplate the
gathering again of the particles of the old
body, but that there is in connection with the
body a certain genn y or incorruptible particles,
incapable either of increase or diminution from
birth to death, so fine and subtile that no mi-
croscope can detect them, no chemistry de-
compose them, and which, remaining in a state
of incorruptibility, shall put forth a germi-
nating power beyond the grave, and become
the germ of our future bodies, and that no
other particles will ever be raised.
On the other hand, Bishop Hopkins says of
the body: "It shall be raised an entire and
perfect body. Not a dust, not an atom that
is necessary to the integrity of it, shall be lost,
and, though they are scattered up and down
I 58 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
the world, and confusedly mixed with other
beings, yet, by the omnipotence of God, and
the ministry of angels, every dust shall be
picked up again, and set in its own due place
and order."
So also Dr. Spring : "Whether buried in the
earth, or floating in the sea, or consumed by
the flames, or enriching the battle-field, or
evaporated in the atmosphere, all — from Adam
to the latest born — shall wend their way to the
great arena of the judgment. Every perished
bone, and every secret particle of dust, shall
obey the summons, and come forth."
Thomas Aquinas teacheth that no other
substance will rise from the grave except that
which belongs to the individual at death.
Archbishop Tillotson, in answering the com-
mon objection to the resurrection of the body,
based upon the fact of its being devoured by
animals and men, urges that " no one needs be
in want for a body of his own at the resurrec-
tion, as any one of those bodies which he had
ten or twenty years before death, was every
whit as good, and as much his own body as
that which was eaten."
Dr. Mattison supposes that the stomach and
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1 59
the organs of reproduction will be destroyed,
and be unnecessary in the new body.
Dr. Watson also supposes it will be the
same body, but that great changes of a par-
ticular kind will take place. " In the resur-
rection they shall neither marry nor be given
in marriage, but be as the angels of God. This
implies a certain change of structure. And
we may gather from the declaration of the
Apostle, that though the stomach is now
adapted to meats, and meats to the stomach,
God will destroy both it and them ; that the
animal appetite for food will be removed, and
the organ adapted to that appetite have no
place in the resurrection body."
Now it is true these would be considerable
changes. And we can not resist the sugges-
tion that changes could hardly stop with these ;
for, without the stomach, what use would there
be for the intestines, liver, duodenum, or any
part of the digestive apparatus ? And without
these of course there could be no blood.
Then what need to raise up the heart, lungs,
veins, arteries, or any of the organs of circu-
lation or respiration ? And without these how
could there be muscles or bones ; and what use
l6o SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
even for brain or nerves ? And with all these
left in the grave, of what, pray, would the new
body be composed? Yet the Doctor urges
that the human form will be retained in its
perfection, and the substance of the matter of
which it is composed will not be left off; that
" the same body which is laid in the grave
shall be raised out of it"
From among the most modern teachings on
this subject I select the following :
"The prevailing idea, as we understand it,
when expressed in general terms, is that the
same body which is laid in the grave at death
shall hereafter rise out of it, and live again for-
ever ; or, to be still more explicit, that all that
constitutes, and properly belongs to the body
at the hour of death, and is essential to its
corporeal identity and integrity, will be raised
again to life, and will go to constitute the res-
urrection body." (Mattison on Resurrection
of the Body, page 14.)
" In the resurrection it is not a body that
comes forth, but a man. It is not a mere body
that is raised, but the entire manhood. In
all cases where the dead are raised they are
men and women, and not mere bodies." (Dr.
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. l6l
H. C. Benson, in California Christian Advo-
cate, Vol. xii, No. 38.)
These extracts might be extended into a
large volume, and with even increasing con-
trariety, not to say palpable contradictions.
And with such standards of authoritative teach-
ing on this subject, which must one choose in
order to be orthodox in the faith ? Where
Doctors so widely differ, which shall he be-
lieve ? Surely it would require a large bump
of credulity to believe all of them, and not a
small one to believe either of them — so, after
all, it may be most orthodox to believe neither
of them ? Thus we find, even in our standard
theologies concerning the future resurrection
of the flesh, no definite standard of belief.
Many — perhaps most — have given the subject
but little thought, have no defined views or
conceptions concerning it, feel but little or
no interest in it ; while even in the minds of
preachers and theological writers, who essay
to teach, there seem to float in strange con-
fusion and contrary theories, notions, doc-
trines and definitions, from the most crude
and materialistic to the most subtle and be-
wilderingly metaphysical and speculative. We
l62 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
have already quoted some of these teachings
in theological prose. I will add a few in
poetry — mostly quoted from Dr. Mattison's
late standard work — in which they are used
of course as expressive of the orthodox faith
on this subject :
" Now monuments prove faithful to their trust,
And render back their long-committed dust ;
Now charnels rattle ; scattered limbs and all
The various bones, obsequious to the call,
Self-moved, advance ; the neck, perhaps, to meet
The distant head ; the distant legs, the feet :
Dreadful to view, see through the dusky sky
Fragments of bodies in confusion fly,
To distant regions journeying, there to claim
Deserted members, and complete the frame."
" The trumpet's sound each fragrant mote shall hear,
Or fixed in earth, or floating in the air,
Obey the signal wafted in the wind,
And not one sleeping atom left behind." Young.
" No spot on earth but has supplied a grave,
And human skulls the spacious ocean pave —
All 's full of man — and at this dreadful turn, ,
The swarm shall issue, and the hive shall burn."
" Each member jogs the other,
And whispers /ive you^brother ?
"I know these hands shall wrestle with the turf
That time shall heap upon them all in vain ;
Or struggling upward from the stormy surf,
So I be buried in the mighty main.
Yes, 't is not long ere I shall shake the clay
That years have matted on my moldering brow,
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1 63
And tear the cerements of the grave away
With these same muscles that are lusty now."
A. C. Coxe.
u These bones shall startle then,
And feel strange life again,
And these decaying fibers leap to hear.
What though my body run to dust ?
Faith unto it counting every grain,
With an exact and most particular trust,
Reserving all for flesh again." Herbert.
11 Forgotten generations live again,
Assume the bodily shape they owned of old,
Beyond the flood" II. K. White.
" Each particle of dust was claimed ; the turf
For ages trod beneath the careless feet
Of men rose organized in human form."
"Corruption, earth, and worms
Shall but refine this flesh,
Till my triumphant spirit comes
To put it on afresh." Watts.
The doors of death were opened ; and in the dark
And loathsome vault and charnel-house,
Moving, were heard the moldering bones that sought
Their proper place. Instinctive, every soul
Flew to its clayey part : from grass-grown mold
The nameless spirit took its ashes up,
Reanimate !
The time draws on
When not a single spot of burial earth,
W 7 hether on land, or in the spacious sea,
But must give back its long-committed dust
Inviolate ; and faithfully shall these
Make up the full amount ; not the least atom
Embezzled or mislaid, of the whole tale.
CHAPTER IX.
LAWS OF LIFE — TEACHINGS OF NATURE — ANALOGIES IN
LOWER ORDERS OF PHYSICAL OR MATERIAL LIFE.
THE future resurrection of the earthly
body from the grave would be sadly out
of harmony with every known law and proc-
ess of organized life, and finds no analogy or
correspondence in all God's life-creating and
life-developing order in nature and in man
himself. Indeed, it utterly ignores and sets
aside all laws or processes of organic life,
and rests on the basis of miracle. But where
is the evidence or the authority for teaching
that organic human life, either physical, intel-
lectual, or spiritual, ever has been or ever will
be either created or developed by miracle ?
Even the original creation of the body from
dust, are we to teach that this highest order
of organic physical life was suddenly consti-
tuted miraculously, without regard to process,
164 ■
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 165
or is it not much more rational to suppose
that it was by a creative process through pre-
viously constituted laws of organic life? At
least we know that the human body as now
constituted owes its being to no miracle, but
is begotten and developed through established
laws and processes, many of which are dis-
cerned and even understood. And is it not
reasonable and philosophical to suppose that
its resurrection, its spiritualization, which is
but another step in the developing process of
its organic life, is through established laws of
spiritual life ? Certain it is that, put on this
basis, the resurrection of the body is wonder-
fully illustrated by most striking and beautiful
correspondences in the lower orders of organic
life in nature, but on the. other basis there
is not a single analogy in the whole natural
world. True, it is generally claimed by the
advocates of the miraculous resurrection of
the flesh that such analogies are abundant;
and such argument is much made of and
relied upon. It is even assumed and argued
that in the annual palingenesis, or recurrent
life of Spring from the grave of Winter, we
have a manifold analogical illustration of the
1 66 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
resurrection of the flesh from the grave. Very
true, the recurrent resurrection, so to speak,
of vegetable life in Spring from the death and
grave of Winter does teach very much con-
cerning the resurrection of the body. But
how? By gathering up again and putting on
anew the identical sloughs and old, rotten
foliage of last year? Does the tree, in the
new life and beauty of Spring, clothe itself by
gathering again and putting on the identical
leaves and flower-blossoms which faded and
fell as Autumn and Winter approached ? Are
these ever resurrected in any sense whatever?
Does the rose-bush ever clothe itself or bloom
again in the foliage and roses which faded as
Winter approached ? And of all the ten thou-
sand thousand forms of vegetable life which
thus droop and die, what single one ever rises
again ? and where in all the new life of Spring,
in all the transformations of life in the whole
vegetable world, is there a single fact which
at all corresponds to the gathering again of
the dust of dead bodies from the earth ? Not
one ! not one ! But, allowing that the resur-
rection of the body may proceed according to
established laws of organic life, so that even
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 167
out of its old sloughs and cast-off foliage, so
to speak, it rises in newness of spiritual life,
there is in fact correspondence in every single
form of the recurring life of Spring ; and man
may see a beautiful symbol, and even read a
prophecy of his own resurrection in every
shrub, tree, and flower. But the correspond-
ence is still more suggestive in certain phe-
nomena of insect life, in which there is not
simply a renewal of corporeal life, as in the
vegetable life, but an actual rising to higher
and more elaborate forms of life ; for example,
the Libellula or dragon-fly, the silk-worm, cat-
erpillar, etc. The wonderful transformations
through which these insects pass are familiar
to every naturalist ; " how the former, when
yet an unseemly worm in the water, repairs to
the margin of its pond, attaches itself to a
plant or piece of wood ; how the skin grad-
ually becomes dry and brittle, at last splits
open opposite to the upper part of the thorax.
Through this aperture the insect pushes its
way, now winged, and, thus freed from con-
finement, begins to flutter, and soon launches
away into the air with that gracefulness and
ease which are characteristic of this majestic
l68 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
insect." So of the caterpillar, how it passes
through various transformations, and finally,
after sleeping in its little self-wrought coffin,
it comes forth a beautiful winged butterfly of
brightest hues, and basks gayly in air and
sunshine, having attained a development of
corporeal life astonishingly beyond that of its
slug state. Now, to show the difficulty of
using these wonderfully suggestive facts, we
need but quote from the effort of one of the
most acute and able writers. Dr. Gregory, in
speaking of the development of the dragon-fly,
says : " Who that saw the little pendent coffin
in which the inanimate insect lay entombed
would ever predict that in a few weeks, per-
haps hours, it would become one of the most
elegant of winged insects ? And who that
contemplates with the mind of a philosopher
this curious transformation can deny that the
body of a dead man may at some future period
be again invested with vigor and activity, and
soar to regions for which some latent organi-
zation may peculiarly fit it?" But could the
unbiased mind of a philosopher see any anal-
ogy whatever between the little pendent coffin
with a living insect in it and the body of a
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 169
dead man? In the former the laws of organic
life are busy at work in evolving the higher
development of corporeal life ; in the latter
there is no life at all, and the body is aban-
doned to decay and disorganization. How can
a true philosopher fail to see that the analogy
in this case is between the body of the dead
man and the little pendent coffin or slug after
the winged insect has gone out of it? And
will he not inquire, Will this little pendent
coffin itself ever fly away? Will the winged
dragon-fly ever return to enter it again, or will
it or any of its particles ever again form any
part of its body? Where in all the developing
life of nature is there witnessed such a resur-
rection as that? Nor does the butterfly ever
return to put on again the exuvice of the cater-
pillar. No such fact was ever known in the
history of insect life, or in any form of life in
the natural world ; but in all these the law of
organic life is development, not return — ascent,
not descent.
There can be no analogy between a dead
body in its grave, and the insect in its " slug,"
or little pendent coffin, or any of the forms of
vegetable life during their dormant state in
12
I70 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
Winter. In all these life is not only not ex-
tinct, but is ever active in evolving its future
corporeal forms. But can this be so of the
dead body in its coffin ? But if we consider
the present life of the body as its slug state —
that the quickening, Divine life power is at
work evolving the future higher and more
spiritual corporeality, and that death is but
the rising to the realization of that form — then
the correspondence is suggestive enough. And
not an insect that rises from its slug to its
chrysalis state, not a tree, or shrub, or plant,
that rises in the new life of Spring from the
seeming death of Winter, but teaches that the
death of the body may be but the condition of
its rising to a new life. And of such a resur-
rection how beautiful and suggestive are these
correspondencies ! But not one that gives the
least hint that the fleshly exuviae of the earthly
body will ever be raised to life again. Not one.
This is even admitted by some of the most
able advocates of the literal resurrection of the
body. Dr. Hitchcock, in speaking of those
writers on Natural Theology who, like Dr,
Gregory, have used the analogy of Nature in
direct proof of the future resurrection of the
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 171
flesh, says : " But unfortunately there is one
defect in the analogy that seems to have been
overlooked. When man is laid in the grave
we know that no vestige of life remains. We
may inflict whatever injuries we please upon
the dead body, but it will exhibit no signs of
sensibility. Not so with the chrysalis. In its
most torpid state you can always find marks
of vitality. The conclusion, therefore, is that
the curious facts respecting insect metamor-
phosis, although a beautiful emblem of man's
resurrection, are but a poor argument in direct
proof of the doctrine."
Dr. Mattison, in commenting upon this,
says : " Dr. Hitchcock has well observed, Nature
furnishes no instance of life from an actual state
of death, and consequently affords no really ap-
propriate or complete illustration of the res-
urrection of the body. Had we no better light
upon this subject than these 'emblems/ we
should be constrained to exclaim, in the lan-
guage of Beattie's Hermit :
'But when shall Spring visit the moldering urn ?
O when shall day dawn on the night of the grave ?'
There is nothing in Nature alone to assure us
of a future life for the body of man. There is
172 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
no living ovum, or germ, in the dead body, that
retains its vitality through the long night and
cold Winter of the tomb. While, therefore,
Nature may faintly illustrate the glorious res-
urrection, her more legitimate lesson . . .
vvould be that man once dead will live no more
forever."
Now, from the stand-point occupied by these
eminent minds, this is all true. That is, limit-
ing the resurrection to mean only the future
gathering up of the dissipated dust of the
fleshly body, there is a "defect in the anal-
ogy," and a very serious one. To the body
in the grave no vestige of life remains, no
"ovum" or "germ" no lesson in the recur-
rent life of vegetation in Spring, or in the de-
veloping life of insects — no lesson in the whole
teeming volume of Nature which teaches that
man once dead will ever live again. And on
the part of these able and eminent advocates
of such a resurrection this must be a sad yield-
ing up of what has so generally been con-
sidered an important and convincing argument
in its support. But, in actual fact, are these
things which they say, true at all ? Is all Nat-
ure thus dumb and blank in her teaching?
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1 73
In all her myriad voicings has she no lesson
concerning man's rising from the dead, when
properly understood ? When we consider that
the death of the body is but the condition of
its rising to a higher life ; that there is within
it, through the regenerating .operation of the
life-giving Spirit, a germ, or embryo of its
higher spiritual organism — just as in the nat-
ural order there is in the seed, the flower, the
insect, the living principle of its renewed cor-
poreity ; is not Nature every-where most elo-
quent and luminous in her teaching that,
though man may die, yet shall he live again ;
that, so far as his body is concerned, death
is but his rising out of his slug, or chrys-
alis state, into the higher and more beautiful
corporeal life of the full-fledged immortal ?
Then let the advocates of a long future fleshly
resurrection admit, as they must, that God in
Nature nowhere teaches any such resurrec-
tion. But let them not say that Nature is
dumb and voiceless, teaching nothing concern-
ing man's resurrection ; but rather let man
look out every-where in Nature and behold
her suggestive prophecies of his corporeal im-
mortality.
174 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
Moreover, this idea of a bodily resurrection
not until the end of time, seems sadly out of
harmony with our most rational and cherished
conceptions of the future development of hu-
man life. In this world the development at-
tained between birth and death is very limited
at best ; and under the most favored circum-
stances, and with the mass of our humanity,
it can scarcely be called development at all.
With millions it is suddenly arrested, even in
early childhood and infancy; while millions
more, who live to old age, scarcely advance be-
yond the state of soul childhood. Hence the
cherished conception that development will be
realized in the other life. But how can this
be when the whole order of organic life is
broken up by death ? For even the most able
advocates of a long future bodily resurrection
do admit that the state of personal existence
after death — the soul in heaven or hell, and
the body in the dust of the earth — is an ab-
normal state. It is a state of actual disorgan-
ization. And with the body thus dissolved in
dust there surely can be no corporeal develop-
ment after death. And if this same body dis-
solved in dust is still an essential part of the
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1 75
personal organism or being, if it must be the
future organ of the soul, to which it must re-
turn, how can the soul develop in the unfold-
ing of its powers, and yet put on the same
material organism which was even a hinder-
ance to its growth ages ago ? How can a
child, for instance, after centuries, continually
develop in all its soul powers, and then come
down to put on the wee body it left ages be-
fore? or will the same miracle which gathers
up the. dust, suddenly elaborate it into a cor-
poreal organism suited to the developed soul ?
Or will the soul of the child remain a child-
soul for ages, in order that it may thus again
put on its infantile body, and after that com-
mence to expand? How irrational and base-
less such conceptions, and how sadly out of
harmony with every known law and fact in
God's order developing organic life ! The
only logical conclusion is there can be no
normal development of either soul or body
during the long, long period between death
and the resurrection — that the infant mind
must abide in its infant state, the childish
soul of the undeveloped man retain its dwarfed
faculties until the reunion of the long-sun-
iy6 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
dered factors of the organic life. But what an
idea of everlasting life is that? And where in
all the written Word is there a verse or line
which even hints at this future reunion of soul
and body, this putting up again of the organic
being, man, or that can be made to express
such a reunion, even on the rack of the
most ingenious interpretation ? Such a dog-
ma rests entirely upon speculation and infer-
ence, as is even admitted by that most zealous
advocate of such a future coming together of
soul and body. (Dr. Mattison, Resurrection
of the Body, p. 337, sect, xi.)
But we need not pursue inquiry further on
this part of our general subject ; and may dis-
miss it with the following conclusions :
1. That the doctrine of the future resurrec-
tion of the earthly body from the literal grave,
as stated in the general teachings of our ortho-
dox creeds and theologies, does not so much
find its foundation in the obvious and direct
teachings of the written Word as in the theo-
logical and churchly interpretation thereof, and
upon inferences drawn from the too literal and
naturalistic apprehension of the letter of the
Word ; and as a doctrine it gives but an im-
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. I 77
perfect and partial statement of the whole
New Testament teaching concerning the res-
urrection of the dead.
2. That in the Church creeds and theologies
we find such a mass of confused, indefinite,
and even contradictory statement and teaching
that it is quite impossible to determine just
what is the standard of belief in the Churches
on this important subject.
3. That in the Christian Church of our day
the New Testament doctrine of the resurrec-
tion and the life in Jesus has become little
else than a formal, lifeless dogma, nominally
believed by a large majority of Christians, but
seemingly with dim and unsatisfying percep-
tions of what it is, defended and preached by
comparatively few, and in all manifestly lack-
ing that interest and quickening power which
strongly marked the doctrine of Jesus and the
resurrection in the primitive Church.
4. It is very generally rejected by the most
intelligent, thinking, and inquiring minds of
the age, both in the Church and out of it, and
can not be made a doctrine of power and life,
either in the Church or in the world.
Yet it has its uses in the Church, ever has
178 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
had, and ought not hastily to be put aside or
rudely assailed. It is infinitely better than
no doctrine or faith in the resurrection of the
dead. As the merely objective and literal
statement, it presents the only view of the
subject which the perception of multitudes
has been able to reach or is able now to
reach. To their perception a resurrection
that does not in some way take hold on the
particles of this very earthly body long after
death is no resurrection.
How far the continuance of this too mate-
rial perception is owing to the almost exclu-
sively materialistic and naturalistic teaching
and preaching in the Churches I will not now '
pause to inquire, but I suspect this has very
much to do with it. The fact is it exists, and
to such a perception the literal and even mate-
rial resurrection of the body is better than
no resurrection. The glorious spiritual reality
will in no wise be affected or retarded by a
sincere faith in even such a resurrection,, and
to tear down suddenly the foundations of such
faith is like tearing away the trellis from the
ivy or the vine, or knocking the crutches from
under the infirm, who may not be able to
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1 79
stand without them. Hence, to you, Chris-
tian reader, who may hitherto have rested in
the belief that your earthly body will be raised
from the dust, I say my aim is not to tear
down the foundation of your hope in the res-
urrection of your body, but to lead you to
a higher, more spiritual and comprehensive
perception of the resurrection and the life in
Jesus; and if you can not find a more com-
forting, life-giving view in what you may
have read in these inquiries, then abide in
your present belief; only do n't be prejudiced.
Do n't refuse to look beyond the horizon of
your present belief from the consideration that
any thing beyond must be mistaken or false
and dangerous to you.
And "in giving public expression to the
above inquiries concerning the resurrection
of the body which may come in conflict with
the orthodox faith, I only insist that that faith
must not be forced upon Christian men and
ministers whose candid and prayerful study of
the Word of God, whose clearly defined per-
ceptions of the truth, have led them beyond
it. I only insist that they must have the
same liberty to think, investigate, and give
ISO SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
free expression to their perceptions that they
accord to those who are willing and con-
tent to rest in the orthodox faith ; and thus,
instead of Christian minds in the Churches
being shut up to the perceptions of this all-
important subject which are expressed in the
oft-repeated teachings of a single view of it, let
it be opened to them from another view, and
let them candidly study it from different stand-
points, and let their faith take in such percep-
tions as afford most of comfort, life, and light
to their hearts and fill them with the high-
est and fullest realizations of immortality and
eternal life in Christ Jesus.
CHAPTER X.
" I am the resurrection, and the life : he that believeth in
me, though he were dead, yet shall he live : and whosoever
liveth and believeth in me shall never die." John xi, 25, 26.
" Even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every
man in his own order : Christ the first-fruits ; afterward they
that are Christ's at his coining." 1 Cor. xv, 22, 23.
INQUIRY may now return to the more
general question of the rising of the dead.
Already have we seen that this general ques-
tion is not found in our theological teachings
concerning the resurrection of the body from
the grave, but in the teaching of the New
Testament concerning the rising of the dead
from hades. The features of this general fact
next claiming our attention are the time and
order of this rising. So far as the body is
concerned, we have already seen that its res-
urrection begins with the life-giving operation
of the Spirit of Christ in regeneration ; that
the life-giving operation of the Spirit proceeds
1 82 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
from the soul to the body, imparting to it the
germ principle of its spiritual organism ; that
death is but the sowing of the earthly and
the rising of the renewed spiritual body, or
death affords the conditions through which
the earthly body rises to its higher, immortal,
spiritual organism, so that the soul enters the
spiritual world clothed upon with a spiritual
body born, so to speak, out of the earthly
body, and just suited to its begun existence
there, just as it was clothed upon with the
earthly body suited to its begun and contin-
ued existence in this natural world. Thus
the personality is fully preserved, the soul
has its corporeal organ, and all the condi-
tions of continued development according to
established laws of organic life; and in these
incorruptible, spiritual, glorified bodies do the
dead rise from hades as they attain to the
fullness of the resurrection and the life in
Jesus.
This is a most interesting and important
feature of the resurrection. True, it may to
some seem somewhat novel, and out of har-
mony with all accepted orthodox views. But
I would fain hope that it is no newly fledged
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1 83
conception of my imagination, but that it is
old as the inspired Word, and real as the
future world to which death leads us. Have
we not seen that such is the teaching of Paul in
his fifteenth chapter of ist Corinthians? Yet
we may well linger about this point, and still
further consider it in the light of other Script-
ures, especially those wonderful sayings of
Jesus, such as these : " He that believeth on
me hath everlasting life. I am that bread
of life. If any man eat of this bread he shall
live forever. I am the resurrection and the
life. He that believeth in me, though he
were dead, yet shall he live. And he that
liveth and bclicvct/i in me shall never die."
The first manifest truth revealed by these
glorious words is that living union with Jesus
by personal, appropriating faith, raises the soul
from spiritual death, and makes it the recipient
of everlasting life. Thus, he that believeth,
or heareth the voice of the Son, or eateth
the bread of life, though already spiritually
dead, shall live. The second truth is, he that
thus liveth and believeth, or continueth by
living faith to abide in Jesus, hath everlasting
life, and shall never die. Now of course all
I84 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
will admit that this teaching does reveal a
blessed immortality for the soul ; and that this
living union does secure everlasting life to the
soul. But how many will be ready to admit
that it secures the same for the body ? That
this same immortality, everlasting life, ex-
tends even to the body, and that it will never
die? But why not? It was on the occasion
of the resurrection from the grave of the body
of Lazarus that these words were spoken.
They must be understood as teaching some-
thing concerning the future destiny of the
body. They were spoken to Martha, the sister
of Lazarus, whose Jewish faith saw nothing in
the resurrection of the dead but the rising
again of dead bodies from the tomb at the last
day. Are we to understand that Jesus aimed
merely to confirm this view by saying, " I am
the resurrection and the life? He that liveth
in me (and beHeveth, abideth in me) hath ever-
lasting life, shall never die."" Is it putting
more meaning into these wonderful words than
they will bear to say that this resurrection and
life does extend even to the mortal body, and
that living union with him does bring everlast-
ing life, even to the body ; so that to such as
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1 85
truly live in him there is really no death at
all ? What seems to be death is but the dis-
solving of the earthly house — the final process
in the changing and making alive of the vile
mortal body, out of which it rises in the like-
ness of the Lord's spiritual, glorious body?
Indeed, it would seem that nothing less than
this will fill the words, either of these texts or
the parallel ones, which run all through the
teachings of Jesus. Thus can it be truly said
that we have everlasting life, and shall never
die, if death is to reign absolutely over these
bodies for long, long centuries and ages?
What kind of everlastiiig life is that in which
there is to be no corporeal life whatever for
these ages ? What kind of never dying is that
in which death is to hold the body in dust for
ages ? It does not relieve this matter to say,
Be comforted, for death's reign shall not be
everlasting ; the body shall not die forever.
Nay, but the words of Jesus do not say that
death shall not be everlasting, but that life
shall be everlasting — that is, life all the time.
He does not say, ye shall not die forever, but
shall never die — that is, shall not die at all.
And in thus limiting these blessed words to
13
186 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
suit our confirmed conceptions of a future cor-
poreal resurrection, do we not empty them of
half their infinite meaning, and circumscribe
the infinite power of Jesus as the resurrection
and the life ? And in insisting that we must
die, and be under the dominion of death, the
grave, the dust, and the worms, do we not
choose death rather than life? Why thus limit
an Almighty Savior? Why thus obscure and
weaken our faith in him with such clouds and
darkness ? Why cast such a gloom and fear
over our hope of everlasting life in him ? Then
may we not say finally on this point, that in
Jesus, as the resurrection and the life, we are
lifted forever out of death's dominion, so far as
the grave and the dust are concerned ? What
we call death may occur, the earthly house
may dissolve, the flesh and blood, which can
not inherit the kingdom of God, or rise to the
heavenly state, may mingle again with the
combinations of matter, whence they were
taken and to which they belong, but such
death is only the final change in the corporeal
organism. It is but the necessary condition
of its rising to its higher order of existence,
that it may become the immortal, incorrupt-
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1 87
ible, glorious, and spiritual corporeal organ-
ism of the spiritual man, suited to his higher
life in the spiritual world.
We may next consider the revealed order
of the general resurrection of the dead. That
the word does teach a general resurrection
of all the dead in Christ from hades, has, I
think, been clearly indicated. What is to be
the general order of this rising, and when is it
to be consummated ?
The general conception expressed in our
theological teaching is that the resurrection
is to take place at the last day, at the end
of time ; and that it is to occur all at once,
" so to speak," at a given signal. But is this
conception truly in harmony with the teaching
of the Word? Does the Word teach that
none of the dead have yet been raised from
hades, or ever reached the heavenly world ?
Does it teach that all the dead, even from
Adam, must wait in the under world until the
end of time ? Rather is it not true that the
Word places the resurrection of the dead in
Christ, in connection with his coming and the
end of the age, or present dispensation ? And
between this event and the final consum-
1 88 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
mation of all things there is a very marked
difference. And may it not be true that what
is generally termed the general resurrection
of the dead may be the final consummation
of the rising of the dead, which has been in
process ever since Christ, the first-fruits, arose?
So that the final scene of the resurrection, at
the coming of the Lord, will consist rather in
the rising of the multitudes who still remain
in the under world than in the rising of all the
dead who have ever entered there since the
days of Adam. In this direction we begin in-
quiry with the positive teaching of the Word
that all the dead found in hades at the coming
of the Lord will be raised incorruptible, and
the living who are regenerate, that is, who
have individual living union with Jesus, will
be changed. But is it taught that any of the
saints ever will attain to the resurrection, and
reach the higher heaven before that time ? In
this direction we may not be able to go very
far, and may venture nothing beyond sugges-
tion ; yet there are, here and there, portions
of the Word which, when taken together, do
seem to throw their united rays of divine
light in this direction.
CHAPTER XI.
TIME AND ORDER OF THE RESURRECTION IN CHRIST.
" But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the
first-fruits of them that slept For since by man came death,
by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in
Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But
every man in his own order : Christ the first-fruits ; afterward
they that are Christ's at his coming. Then cometh the end,
when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even
the Father; when he shall have put down all rule, and all
authority, and power. For he must reign, till he hath put
all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be
destroyed is death." I Cor. xv, 20-26.
IN this wonderful chapter from which we
have quoted there seems to be nothing
wanting for a complete doctrine of the resur-
rection. The teaching of these verses seems
to be concerning death in Adam and life or
resurrection in Christ. By man — Adam —
came death ; by man — Christ — came also the
resurrection of the dead. As in Adam all
die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive,
189
I9O SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
every man in his own order, or in the order
of his rank: Christ the first-fruits in his
order as the first begotten from the dead ;
then every man in the order of his rank ;
then or afterward they that are Christ's at
his coming — at the end of the age; then or
afterward the end, the final consummation,
when he shall have put down all rule and
power, even the enemy death at last de-
stroyed, and the kingdom of God supreme
in all the redeemed humanity. What is the
meaning of death in Adam, and of resur-
rection, or made alive in Christ? I can not
agree with those expositors who limit death to
physical or corporeal death and "made alive
in Christ" to the future resurrection of the
body, and who teach that in this sense the
whole Adam race are to be made alive. Such
interpretation is utterly out of harmony with
the letter and spirit of this whole chapter,
and with all of St. Paul's teaching concern-
ing the resurrection in Christ. It makes St.
Paul teach that the life-giving operation of
the Spirit of Christ must extend indiscrimi-
nately to all me7iy even to the bodies of the
wicked. This makes him contradict himself,
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 191
for most manifestly in all his teaching the
life-giving operation of Christ is qualified by
the condition in Jiim. Doubtless death is
here used in its general New Testament
sense, spiritual death; for the death which
fell upon Adam, and through him upon our
humanity, was not physical, but spiritual
death. It planted its empire, not in the
body, but in the sou/, extending, of course^
in its life-destroying influences even to the
body, hastening its dissolution. Even so
the life which has been incarnated in our
humanity in Christ is a divine, spiritua/ life,
planting its empire of life in the soul, but
ultimating in the immortal glorification of
the body. Such is the primary and general
New Testament sense of death in Adam and
life in Christ. Hence, of course, the expres-
sions in Adam, in Christ, imply a living,
personal, individual community of nature and
life. Hence a// die in Adam, because all are
actual partakers of his nature, born into his
state of spiritual death ; and in Christ al/ are
made alive who are born of the Spirit into
his divine nature and made actual partakers
of his divine spiritual life by personal union
192 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
with him as the branches in the vine. Is
this true of every member of the race? Cer-
tainly not. The whole plan of redemption
and teachings of the Gospel suppose the fact
that some are not in Christ; that multitudes
even separated themselves, and keep them-
selves aloof, by unbelief and wicked works,
from the fountain of life. Hence this teach-
ing of Paul seems to be that in Adam all die,
because all are actually born into his state of
spiritual death ; and in Christ all are made
alive who are to any extent in actual living
community of nature with him, and my faith
is that all are thus in him who do not actu-
ally and persistently separate themselves from
him by unbelief and evil works. And this
being made alive in Christ Jesus, taken from
its incipiency to its ultimate fullness of im-
mortality and eternal life in both soul and
body, includes all that can be meant by the
resurrection and the life in Jesus, all that can
be meant by the resurrection of the dead.
But the resurrection as distinctively taught
in the New Testament does not, of course,
express or mean all that is comprehended in
this all-comprehending Gospel of the resur-
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1 93
rection and the life in Jesus, but is limited
rather to the gospel of triumph over death
and hades. And this is the grand central
fact and pov^er of the whole Gospel of eternal
life. Lose out of it the fact that Christ as
man did pass through physical death, that he
did descend into the lowest regions of death's
dominions — hades — and did triumphantly rise
again and ascend in glorified human form to
the abodes of immortality and eternal life,
and that all who are in him, who live and die
in him, shall in like manner, in the order of
their rank, triumph over death and hades and
ascend to the heavenly worlds of life, light,
and immortality, and we are left in the noon-
day of the Gospel with the sun eclipsed.
In verses twenty-three and twenty-four is
obviously taught somewhat concerning the
general order of this being made alive in
Christ: First Christ in his own order as the
first-fruits, the " first begotten from the dead ;"
then every man in his own order, or in the
order of his rank; afterward they that are
Christ's at his appearing ; then afterward the
end, the final consummation, when all power
and dominion shall be put down, and even
194 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
the last enemy — death — destroyed, and God
be all in all. Now, are we to understand that
this general order as thus indicated is all to
occur at once in point of time, or that differ-
ent parts or scenes may transpire after even
long periods of time intervening? Christ's
resurrection was not only the first in his own
order, but surely the first also in the general
order of the rising from the dead. As the
risen Lord he is not only the first-fruits of
our humanity risen from the dead, but he is
the beginning of a whole line, a consecutive
order of those in him who are to be made
alive and rise in like manner from the dead,
each in his own order, or according to his
rank. With the conception of an army, the
idea or order is that of coming on in compa-
nies, divisions, or cohorts ; or with the con-
ception of a harvest, as intimated in the text,
the idea is that of different kinds of grain
being gathered in the order of their maturity:
Christ the first-fruits, then each in his own
order, the harvest according as the different
grains are ready to be gathered. Now, that
the underlying klea of this order is that of
degree or gradation in the state and develop-
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 1 95
ment of the divine life must be evident to
every reflecting mind. Some will reach the
state of maturity in the divine life before oth-
ers, and each will find his place in the order
of his rank. But it must also involve the
idea of time. And what is that idea? Is it
that this general order, beginning with the
first-fruits eighteen hundred years ago, is to
be broken by a hiatus reaching from that
period until the end of time? Is it true that
during all this long, long period no one will
reach his maturity of divine life in his order?
Can it be that all in Christ from the begin-
ning of the world are each to attain to the
resurrection from the dead at the same time,
and that not until the judgment at the end
of time ? Is there to be so vast a waiting as
this between the first-fruits and the maturity
of any part of the harvest? Rather may we
not suggest at least that the general resurrec-
tion of the dead in Christ indicated by Paul at
verses fifty-one and fifty-two, and at 1 Thess.
iv, 15-17, will rather consist in the final con-
summation of the rising of the dead, the grand
finale of the harvest, so that the dead in Christ
who' will be raised at the appearing of the
I96 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
Lord at the end of the age are those who will
yet remain, who have not yet attained to the
resurrection, and not all the saints of God
from the days of Adam; so that ever since
Jesus rose as the first-fruits and bore off the
keys of death and hades the door, so to speak,
has been left open, and multitudes have in
their order attained unto the first resurrection,
and have risen to the higher heavens ? This
may seem to be venturing beyond what is
written, and be startling even as a suggestion,
but have we no light from the Word. to shine
on the pathway of such inquiries ? We have
already seen in Eph. iv, 8-12, that when Christ
ascended from hades he led a multitude of
captives, and in Matt, xxvii, 55, we have seen
this fact made manifest even in this natural
world, even as the resurrection of the Lord
was made manifest by the rising of his body
from the tomb. Now, what is the conception
we are to form of these Scriptures ? To my
perception they teach that Christ, during his
mission in hades, did bring to multitudes of
the saints of the older dispensations the full-
ness of the resurrection and the life, deliv-
ered them from the dominion of death, so
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. I97
that when he ascended to the higher heav-
ens they did ascend with him ; and, it may be
but a fancy, tut I have supposed they consti-
tuted the cloud which hid him from the dis-
ciples as they surrounded their ascending and
triumphant Lord. Again: in the Revelation
John makes frequent mention of those who
do not seem to have been residents either of
this world or of hades, and who were evidently
men. Thus, in chapter vii, 9-17, "He beheld
a great multitude, which no man could num-
ber, . . . which stood before the throne
and the Lamb, clothed with white robes and
palms in their hands," verse 13. And when
he was asked, "What are these?" as if to
say, Are they angels or men ? he said, " Sir,
thou knowest." And he was told, " These are
they who have come out of great tribulation,
and have washed their robes, and made them
white in the blood of the Lamb. Therefore
are they before the throne of God, and serve
him day and night. And he that sitteth on
the throne shall dwell among them." And in
chapter xv, 2, 3, he speaks of them that had
gotten the victory over the beast, who stood
on the sea of glass, having the harps of God,
I98 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
and who sang the song of Moses and the
Lamb. And again, in chapter xix, he speaks
of hearing "a great voice of muck people in
heaven, even as the voice of a great multitude."
And as he conversed with one of these heav-
enly ones he even fell at his feet to worship
him. But he said, " Do it not, for I am thy
fellow-servant, of thy brethren the prophets."
And yet again, at chapter xiv, he speaks of the
same great multitude, and says, " These were
redeemed from among men, the first unto God
and the Lamb."
Now what other conception can we form of
these multitudes of glorious ones seen in the
heavenly state than that they are fully re-
deemed ones of our race, who have attained to
the resurrection and the life, and are with
their risen Lord in his heavenly kingdom?
Or are they simply disembodied spirits, who
have reached the heavenly kingdom without a
judgment or resurrection, who must come
back to this earth at the end of time to put on
their bodies, and return again to heaven, to re-
alize the fullness of immortal bliss ?
Again : There are passages of the Word
which seem to me to teach that when Jesus
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. I99
comes again, at the end of this dispensation,
or age, multitudes of the redeemed from this
earth will come with him. This fact seems to
be indicated in the teaching of St. Paul at
1 Thess. iv, 14-18. And again, at chapter iii,
13 : " To the end he may establish your hearts,
unblamable in holiness before God, even our
Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ
with all his saints." And at Jude, verse 14:
"Behold the Lord cometh y with ten thousand
of his saints." Then those symbolical words
of St. John, describing his vision of New
Jerusalem, Rev. xxi, 2-10. Of this " New Je-
rusalem, holy city, coming down from God
out of heaven, adorned as a bride," etc., what
true conception can we form, except that it is
the Church triumphant, the invisible kingdom
of Jesus in the heavens ? And by the descent
of this city, and the marriage of the Lamb,
what can be meant but the glorious manifesta-
tion of this Church of the redeemed at the
coming of the Lord? And is not that holy
city — the glorious spiritual Church in the
heavens — made up of the redeemed ones from
this earth who have gotten the victory? are
they but disembodied, impersonal spirits, who
200 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
must still wait for ages before they receive
their glorified bodies from the earth ? But not
to press this interesting inquiry further, Is
there not some foundation at least for the
soul-enrapturing conception that the risen
Jesus has not remained alone in the heavens
to enjoy his glorious victory over death and
hades ; but that multitudes of his redeemed
ones have in like manner, in their order, at-
tained to the same victory, and stand with him
on Zion's hill? and that multitudes more
will attain unto the resurrection and the life
in their order, pass on and upward from the
opened prison of death before the end of this
dispensation, and will come with their glorious
King, when he comes again to raise those who
still sleep in him, glorify his living saints, and
establish the tabernacle of God with men ? O
what a vision of immortality and eternal life is
thus made possible to faith in Jesus, the resur-
rection and the life ! And is it but a vision ;
an imaginative suggestion of a poor human
brain ? Is there nothing divinely real about it
in the revealed Word ?
There is one other Scripture which seems
to set the resurrection and the life in Jesus
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 201
before us as a realization of faith, and of con-
scious Christian experience. Phil, iii, 9-12.
It is true, as generally expounded, this pas-
sage has no reference to the anastasis, and
expresses nothing more than an advanced, or
high attainment in Christian experience in
this life — so that Paul meant by " knowing
him, and the power of his resurrection, and
the fellowship of his sufferings, being made
conformable unto his death ; if by any means
I might attain unto the resurrection of the
dead," nothing more than what he hoped to
attain in this life. But it does seem to me
that this exposition does not bring out the real
power of meaning contained in these pregnant
words. In them Paul seems to be laboring
and struggling, " so to speak," to give expres-
sion to the glorious realizations of the res-
urrection and the life in Jesus which were
opening to his faith and in his spiritual con-
sciousness. And I do not think it too much
to say that his faith in Jesus as the anastasis
and the life did already consciously realize the
life-giving power of that resurrection already
begun in soul and body, and was on the
stretch to realize and rest in the conscious
14
202 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
assurance that through that power he should
fully attain unto the resurrection of the dead —
that is, should have everlasting life — should
never die; that as Jesus had risen from the
dead even so he might know him in the power
of his resurrection, that he too might attain
unto the resurrection of the dead. And does
not this harmonize with the glorious concep-
tion of his teaching at 2 Cor. v, i-io, where
he considers death simply as the putting off
the earthly house, and being clothed upon with
the heavenly — the mortality swallowed up of
life, present with the Lord? It would seem
that less than this will not fill the meaning
this whole passage so labors to express b/its
know him in the power of his resurrection ;
"fellowship of his sufferings;" "conformable
to his death;" "attain to the resurrection;"
"by any means;* 9 "those things which are be-
fore ;" " the mark for the prize of the high call-
ing," etc. And was it not such a conception
of the resurrection of the dead which gave
such power to the preaching of "Jesus and the
resurrection " in those days ? Not only was it
a power in the Apostle's own soul, as we thus
see by his struggling up into life, but it was
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 203
the power of his preaching ; it was the power
of the preaching of his fellow-apostles ; it was
the power of the faith and Christian conscious-
ness of the Christian Church. ' What made it
so ? Was it simply the resurrection of the flesh
at the end of all time to which Paul was thus
struggling by any means to attain, and which
so quickened his spiritual consciousness ?
What means were necessary but hopefully to
resign his body to the grave, and wait the
slowly on-rolling of the ages, trusting in the
miraculous power of God? And was it the
preaching of such a resurrection, pr the mere
repetitions of the old Jewish notions about the
resurrection of the flesh that so wonderfully
quickened the life, elevated the faith, and re-
joiced the hope of the early Christian Church ?
Nay, verily. It was Jesus already risen from
the under world, ascended above all heavens,
leading a multitude of captives. It was Jesus,
the life-giving power of an everlasting life.
It was to know him as this power, even as
wrought out in his own resurrection, and by
conformity to his death and sufferings, to at-
tain unto like resurrection with him. Thus to
faith and consciousness the resurrection was
204 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
even a begun, present reality; so that it was
not as a simple dogma, addressed to their mere
belief, that the doctrine of the anastasis was
made so great a power in the early Christian
Church, but the resurrection and the life in
Jesus, as a present life-power in soul and body,
through personal, living union with Jesus, the
risen Lord, and consciously realized to faith as
already begun, and joyously reached forward
after, in hope of its sure, and even speedy at-
tainment.
And why has that power been lost in
the Christian Church? Why is that great,
central, soul-quickening truth of the whole
Gospel so little made of in the Churches
now? Why is it that the preaching of the
resurrection of the dead seems to mean so
little? Rather why is it that it is so little
preached as to be scarcely preached at all?
Is it not because the whole glorious doctrine
has been reduced to cold, lifeless, literalistic,
materialistic dogma, addressed merely to our
orthodox belief, and with the long, dark
night of death, and the grave, corruption,
earth, and worms, reaching through the ages
between our souls and its realization? What
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 20$
food for faith or consciousness in such an
everlasting life as that, and what divine life-
power to the soul in such a resurrection as
that ? And how could such a resurrection
ever be made a spiritual life-power in the
Church, even when preached ever so much?
The fact is, but few can get life enough
out of it to preach it, and when they do
it is more a rattling of the sounding brass
and tinkling cymbal of speculative theories
and doctrinal formulas than an imparting of
life to the faith and consciousness of the
Church.
But let Jesus and the resurrection become
the realized power of an everlasting life to
soul and body, a present realization to faith
and consciousness ; let preachers and saints
again struggle in faith, like Paul, to know him
in conformity to his death and in the power
of his resurrection, and seek by any means to
attain unto the resurrection of the dead ; let
the under world of the dead stand open to
faith through the death-conquering power of
the risen, ascended Jesus ; let him be ever
seen by faith, beckoning believers upward to
the heavenly paradise, as he proclaims, He
206 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
that liveth and believeth in me shall never
die, and think you, may not the resurrection
again become a power in the Church ? Yea,
verily !
CHAPTER XII.
PARTING WORDS.
WITH you, reader, who may thus far
have accompanied me in these inqui-
ries, I would have a parting word. Doubt-
less you have seen much of defect, much of
occasion for criticism. But have you read
with candor and without prejudice? If not,
I can in no way concern myself as to what
impressions you may have received, what con-
clusions you may have formed, or what judg-
ments you may mete. You must yourself look
after these. But if so, I would freely speak
with you. Have any of the views presented
seemed to antagonize any of your theological
or doctrinal opinions, or in any way wounded
or shocked your religious sensibilities ? Be-
lieve me sincere when I tell you I certainly
intended neither, but have aimed simply
to express my own perceptions of the truth
207
208 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
plainly but independently and earnestly on
this very important subject. I have done so
in the form of inquiry, from my very strong
convictions on the subject of human fallibility.
Having seen so much of human teaching put
forth in the positive, dogmatic form, declaring
thus and so to be the truth and the whole
truth when woefully otherwise, I have grown
chary of all that style of teaching. Besides,
in coming to the Word of God to learn just
what it does say, is not the spirit of humble
and dependent inquiry most becoming to mor-
tals such as we, and in giving expression to
our perceptions is it not best to remember
that we see through a glass darkly, and that
we may be mistaken? Nor is it best to hold
to our doctrinal opinions with that tenacity
which makes us intolerant of views which
seem to conflict therewith, and which prompts
us to look upon those who express them as
assailants.
We will have no controversy, candid reader.
Let us simply prove all things, and hold fast
to that which is good. If these inquiries lead
you not into the conscious perception of the
truth of the Divine Word, receive them not.
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 209
If they may assail your' cherished beliefs or
pain your religious sensibilities, be assured no
one regrets it more than I.
There are just two considerations of which
I would speak with you in these parting
words : 1. Are these things which you have
read concerning the resurrection of the dead
true ? 2. What would be their probable effect
on your heart and your Christian life should
you believe them ? Of the first I have but
very little to say, and will spend not a word,
not a moment's breath, in trying to prove to
you that they are true. They must stand or
fall by their own internal evidence of their
truthfulness. I care not a straw to gain your
logical or merely intellectual and rational as-
sent, but would speak to your inner conscious-
ness ; and, if these inquiries do not in some
measure bring to your Christian consciousness
the spiritual truth and verities of the revealed
Word, there is an end of the matter.
What their effects upon your heart and
your Christian life ? What of the comfort, the
hope, and joyful anticipation of the resurrec-
tion of the dead will they bring to your heart ?
Is there comfort and joy to your heart in the
210 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
belief that your body will be raised out of the
earth at the end of time, and be changed into
a spiritual body? Is there any less comfort
in the belief that your mortal body has already
implanted within it the germ of its immortal,
spiritual form, through the regenerating, quick-
ening power of the indwelling Spirit of Christ,
and that death will be to you but the condi-
tion through which your body will be raised
to its higher immortal and spiritual form? Is
it a comfort to you to believe that the bodies
of your friends, your loved ones, your own
dear children, will be raised from the dust at
the end of time ? Is it any less comfort to be-
lieve that they are already risen ? — that as their
mortal forms were sown in death they were
quickened into immortality, and raised in spir-
itual forms — as their earthly tabernacles were
dissolved, or put off, they were clothed upon
with their heavenly forms — mortality being
swallowed up of life — so that your loved ones
are really not in the earth at all, but living
and blooming evermore, and waiting to greet
you just beyond the veil ? Is it a comfort to
your heart to believe that your disembodied
soul will return to this natural world at the
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 211
end of time, to be clothed again with your
body, raised out of the dust? Is it any less
comfort to believe that your soul will be
clothed upon with your spiritual body — born,
so to speak, from the womb of your perishing
earthly body — so that, instead of entering the
spiritual world as a naked, incorporeal ghost,
you enter upon your higher life there, clothed
upon with a spiritual body, just suited to the
state of your spiritual life, and to all the con-
ditions of your continued development ? Is it
a comfort to your heart to believe that God
has power miraculously to seek out and gather
up the dissipated particles of your long-lost
body at the last day? Is it any less comfort
to believe that he has the Divine, regenerating
life-power to quicken your mortal body, to
change and fashion it like unto his own glo-
rious body by his Spirit, which dwelleth in
you ? Can you conceive of any joy, of any
comfort, of hope, or blessed anticipation, which
the glorious doctrine of the resurrection is
designed to impart to the children of God that
is in any way lessened as we thus
" Feel the resurrection near,
And antedate that day ?"
212 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
To my heart at least all is enhanced a thou-
sand-fold. But you say, Does that faith which
thus consciously feels the resurrection near
rest upon God's Word, or upon mere human
inferences and sensations? Ah! that is just
the question underlying this whole matter, and
just the question I would have you most care-
fully and candidly consider. And along with
it this other question, Does that faith which
puts the resurrection far away at the end of
time, so that it is scarcely consciously felt at
all, rest upon the Word of God, or upon mere
human theologies and doctrines?
Again. Will ih^fact of the resurrection be
made any the less certain to you ? That is,
supposing the doctrine that your body will not
rise until the end of time should prove true,
will the belief that it will rise at, or soon after
death, change God's order, and prevent its
rising at all ? I trow not. Neither, I sup-
pose, will your belief that it will not rise until
the end of time arrest the life-giving operation
of the indwelling Spirit. In this view of it
the fact of the resurrection depends upon your
livings abiding union with Jesus, as the branch
in the vine. But is it not worth while to have
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 213
a faith that fully gives you the victory over
death; that absolutely lifts you out of the
grave, and blots out that long, dark period,
reaching on through the coming ages, in which
death, corruption, earth, and worms are to hold
high carnival over an essential part of your
personal being?
Finally. What the influence upon your
Christian life ? Not your merely Churchly,
doctrinal, theological, orthodox life, but^ your
Christly, spiritual. May I ask you how much
of real food or inspiration for this life do you
get out of your merely nominal, orthodox be-
lief in the doctrine of the resurrection of your
earthly body at the last day ? Think of it
ever so earnestly, take it in in all its fullness,
and how much does it quicken you in the
Divirue life ? And think you will it be less
quickening to realize by faith that the spiritual
resurrection and future glorification, even of
your earthly body, does begin with the regen-
erating, life-giving operation of the indwelling
Spirit of Christ? — that it depends upon and
progresses with your living, personal union
with Christ, the life-giving Spirit — that just in
proportion as your life is hid with Christ — as
214 SUGGESTIVE INQUIRIES.
you die unto self and live in him — as you
know him in the fellowship of his sufferings,
in conformity to his death, and in the power
of his resurrection, you do attain the resur-
rection of the dead, soul and body — so that
at death you may realize the full magnitude
of that saying, " I am the resurrection and the
life ; he that believeth in me, though he were
. yet shall he live; and he that livcth and
believeth in me shall never die f % Not only so,
but having the hope that even soon after pass-
ing from this world you may, in your order,
rise from the mediate world, and follow your
i Lord to the higher heavens, and join the
great multitude who have gotten the victory?
Can it be possible that such a conception of
the resurrection, and faith in such a resurrec-
tion, can be dangerous to the spiritual life of
any soul ? Can it be possible that such a faith
can be other than a quickening power of the
true spiritual life in the individual soul and in
the Church ? But, again : you say, does such
a faith in the resurrection and the life in Jesus
rest upon the Word of God, or upon mere
human perception? And again I say, dear
reader, that is just the question underlying
THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. 215
the most interesting theme of these inquir-
ies ; just the question I would press upon your
heart in these parting words, and beg you give
it your candid, careful, and prayerful consider-
ation. My aim is not to win your assent to
any views of mine, but to stir you up, and, if
possible, assist you in discovering just what
the written Word does say, and especially^
what it says to you, and for you. To reach
this you must read, compare, pray, and think
for yourself. And may we ever have that
humble, dependent, teachable mind, which will
lead us to the feet of Jesus to learn of him !
May the Spirit of Truth lead us into all truth,
that the truth may make us free! And may
He grant unto us that we may knoiv him, and
the power of his resurrection, and the fellow-
ship of his sufferings, being made conformable
unto his death, if by any means we might
attain unto the resurrection of the dead! Amen.
THE END.
Of THE r ^\
UNIVERSITY )
THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE
STAMPED BELOW
AN INITIAL FINE OF 25 CENTS
WILL BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN
THIS BOOK ON THE DATE DUE. THE PENALTY
WILL INCREASE TO 50 CENTS ON THE FOURTH
DAY AND TO $1.00 ON THE SEVENTH DAY
OVERDUE.
m$>v«
REC'D I n
ii w a^ i_,g y
MAk 1 y 1957
THIS BOOK IS DITE ON THE LAST D
STAMPED BELOW
YB 28090
toi
\ 699
Tffll
$7