Page images

Caracalla (211 A.D.) is said to have buen sucklod by a Jowish nurse. And the beastly Heliogabalus (219 A.D.) hated pork, and had “reccived the sign of circumcision.” 48.

Many such conrerts in low places as in high, followed the recruiting drums of the baser scrjeants of the Jew, affected somo of his obscrvances, and mobbed to his standard when pitched, as often it was by his fanatics, as tho naked syınbol of an unfruitful monotlicisın. For so, it was but riddance froin fear of the gods, and incant atheism and looseness of liso.

But when, not as soothsayer, imposter, exorcist, 49 but apostle, himself csemplificd his idea of the Godhead by its attend. ant moralitics, fail ho inight to persuado prosclytos to the scet of his Supreme, but fiil : could not to persuade sincero mon to respect, if only from a distance, a faith whoso Divino, ho roflected in his huinan, righicousness.

No conrert to Judaisin surely was Julius Cæsar. But ho lad tested, what Tacitus at his bitterest, concedes, tho“ faith inviolably obserred” by the Jew.50 And despite grudge of Greek and Roman priesthood, Cæsar insisted that in Roino itself thero should bc cqual security for the worship of the Jew as for that of Greece and Italy.51

Such was bis admiration of true Judaism, that in his prirate chapel, among images of other benefactors of mankind, the good Alexander Severus (222 A.D.-235) reared ono to Abraham, and so protected the privileges of his descendants that their effusiveness blessed hiin as Father of the Synagogue.

Adulation this ? No. The natural exaggeration of gratitude.

For, except gleams of grace to them as parasites at the Pal. ace, since the ruin of their Capital by Titus, the degradation of more than a hundred and fifty years had been grinding despair into the souls of the children of Abraham, when suddenly an Einperor of Rome consecrates the majesty of their

45 This, possibly, however, as priest of the Syrian sun god, Holiogabalus, whose namo be assumed. Milman's History of the Jews, ii. 483, 484.

42 of the low Jews of Rome savs Juvenal," for the minutest corn Jews will soll you any dream you please.” Satire vi. p. 60, Bohin. At Rome“ the Jews became the princival exorcists.” Lecky, European Morals, i. 404. 5) Merivales Rome, vi. 204.

51 Milmau's llistory of tiie Jows, ii. 484.

great forefather and throws the ægis of Rome in front of their religion.

True that in the imperial oratory, on par with Abraham stood Appolonius of Tyana, Pythagorean heathen, and the Jew's arch heretic, Jesus Christ. True, again, that, confirming the religious privileges of the Jew, the impartial Emperor confirmed also those of the heathen, and worse, the Christian. And still farther true was it, that like his circumcised predecessor, Severus had been priest of the Syrian sun god Heliogabalus, nor ever ostensibly was other than heathen.

But under his sigh of relief from oppression sank out of sight for a while the bitterest antipathies of the Jew. And unless against his slumbering arersion to the Gentile, heathen, or specially Christian, rubbed too roughly, he, once vaunting himself the spiritual paragon of mankind, was content to cower in equality of clientship with those hitherto under soot of his haughtiness.

A. G. Laurie.


The Resurrection of the Dead; or an Exegesis of Portions of

the 15th of 1. Corrinthians

PART II. From the point in this chapter to which we arrived, in our former article, verse 28 to verse 35, nothing is said by the au. thor that can be of any service to us in our inquiry concerning the resurrection, as presented in this part of Paul's writings. We will, therefore, pass over this portion of the chapter without remark.

Having given a clear and distinct statement of the doctrine of the resurrection, the apostle puts the rest of what he has to say into an answer to a question or questions, which he supposes some one to ask.

But some one will say, How are the dead raised ? and with what manner of body do they come? 35.

I. It is generally thought that this passage contains essentially but one question, as if the two clauses related to one and the same process. With this view, to be raised and to come are the same idea. This opinion we do not accept. To one in this world, the resurrection is not coming, but going. Had the author been in the resurrection state, and been writing for the inhabitants of that world, the questions would have been proper ones.

How are the dead raised up ? and with what manner of body do they come ? But as the author resided on the eartii, and was writing for the benefit of his earthly brethren, he must have intended by being raised an action in one direction, and by coming, an action in the oppo. site direction It is not difficult, we think, to ascertain what two actions or processes are here meant.

Jesus said to his apostles, that he was going away to prepare a place for them, and would come again to receive them to himself; that where he was there they might be also. In this very chapter Paul had referred to this coming of Christ. “ They that are Christ's,” he says, “ shall be made alive,” or raised from the dead, " at his coming." This coming is at the hour of their death ; and that, therefore, is the time of their resurrection. Paul believed and taught that Jesus would not be alone when he came for his disciples; that his saints would be with him, 1 Thess. iii. 13. In another place he says that the dead, God will bring with Jesus, 1 Thess. iv. 14. This may be only an inference of Paul from the words of Jesus, relating to another subject, namely, that he would come in the glory of his Father, with his angels ; or it may be that he had received direct instructions on this subject. If the saints are to come with Christ, the interrogator in the passage before 118 would like to ask, With what manner of body do they come? He assumes that they will have entered the body which they are to occupy forever, and will come with it. It is easy to see that this implies a previous resurrection, which could only be coincident with the coming of Christ for his disciples, namely, at death.

This view is confirmed by the teaching of this samo apostlo in 2 Cor. v. 1–8, where lic says, the carthly tabernacle is dissolred and the liousc that is of hicaren assumed at the sainc moment, that is, at death. He says, too, that in the carthly body we are absent from the Lord ; but that being absent froin the body we are present with the Lord ; and this last inplics that we are clotlıcd upon with the imınortal robcs. Our being with the Lord is the promise of Jesus that he will take us to himseif, that whicre lic is, there we may be also.

We conclude that the verse we are considering relates to two processes, first, the resurrection, and second, what is suipposed to take place with some, after they laro cutcred on tho resurrection state. “How are thic dcad raised ?” What is the nature of thic change which they experience in going froin this world to the next? And wlien Jesus and his saints come, according to his promisc, to take his disciples to the place prepared for thcin, “ with what manner of body do tlicy come?” This mcaning is consistent in itself, and the interprctation agrees perfectly with what the samo author teaches in other places.

II. If we follow Paul in our notice of this language, wo shall take up the last question before we do the first, namely, with what manner of body do they come? This slows us plainly that the character of the resurrection body was a matter of deep interest then, as it has bcen ever since. Then, from the way the author takes the subject up, it is plain that some thought the luturo or resurrection body would be the same which we now have. He certainly discards this idea, which he would not have done if nobody liad held it. This theory is inconsistent with the doctrine of a continuous resurrection, and makes it altogether a future event. We are very confident Paul's doctrine is the continuous or progressive resurrection. Such, too, is the teaching of Jesus to the Sadducees. He says that the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, were raised before the time of Moses. We can think of no point of tiine so suitable as the moment of their death. That was wcing “ gathered to their fathers.”

No one seems to have held to a future life without a future body. No question is asked involving that idea. The point at issue seems to have been, whether the future body would be physical or spiritual.

Thou foolish one, that which thou thyself sowest, is not quickened, except it die ; and that which thou sowest, thou sowest not the body that shall be, but a bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other kind ; but God giveth it a body, even as it pleased him, and to each seed a body of its own, 36–38.

The epithet, “ thou foolish one,” (aphron aqoov.) which Paul applies to his supposed interrogator, looks to us uncivil, not to say abusive. At the same time, if there is any thing reproachful or discourteous in it, there was no one to take offence. The words are those of Paul ; and if any one of them is not the best that could have been employed, he is alone to blame. The literal sense of aphron is unwise, from a negative, and phrén the mind. Jesus had used the word and applied it to the learned Pharisees ; and Paul had applied it to himsell, and claimed the indulgence of his brethren in boasting a little, as he calls it, on that ground. See Luke xi. 40; 2 Cor. xi. 16, 19.

III. The comprehensive character of the question, How are the dead raised ? is an important point in this discussion. It is a common practice of a certain class of interpreters to assume that all the apostle says about the resurrection in this chapter applies to the righteous. It is very plain that those who take this ground, look upon the apostle's description of the resurrection state as indicative of an cxalted condition of glory and felicity that can belong to none but the righteous. That this condition belongs only to the righteous we gladly admit. And hence, when we find conclusive proof that it is a condition designed for all men, we are driven irresistibly to the conclusion that all men will be righteous in the immortal world. We use the word irresistibly, because we doubt not that some do, as we once did, resist this conclusion with all their might, instead of accepting it joyfully, as we might expect.



« PreviousContinue »