Puslapio vaizdai
PDF
„ePub“

logic give to it only a clear, cold, icy lustre. This sanction which lends such a religious authority to truths, which quickens and impels the conscience to fulfil the moral obligations which they imply, Natural Religion cannot be expected ever to acquire. The halo which encircles the head of Jesus will never radiate, in the imagination of the world, from the sharp outlines of a metaphysician's face. The force, too, which the life of Christ has exercised over men as a revelation of duty, and of the beauty of a Christian life, must forever remain a distinct peculiarity of the Gospel. And thus, in many ways, the revelation in Christianity, from its peculiar nature and evidence, is placed above and beyond the reach of Natural Religion. Received in faith it is the key, published with authority, containing the answers to the problems of creation, duty and destiny. And though science and philosophy may go on, furnishing their demonstrations and their solutions. on natural grounds, it cannot fail to give their answers additional weight, when we may look into the key, and find that they coincide with the the solutions offered there.

T. S. K.

ART. XVII.

The Resurrection.

Anastasis or the doctrine of the Resurrection of the Body, rationally and Scripturally considered. By George Bush: Prof. of Hebrew, New York City University.

Its

THIS work has now been before the public for some two years. Its general sentiments are not new. learned and able author, though in advance of most of his theological associates, has but developed truths, many of which are very common among the expounders of liberal and rational Christianity. With the exception of a few particulars, in which he has evidently labored to make his views more palatable to his Orthodox friends,

As a

his work is executed in a very respectable manner. philological criticism, it is doubtless valuable. An an offshoot from the old evangelical tree, indicating its vitality and possible growth, it is still more valuable.

The two great leading points it establishes are, First: Men are to be invested hereafter with spiritual bodies, instead of the corporeal ones they now inhabit; and, Secondly: The judgment of Christ began when he set up his kingdom, and was parallel with it.

It should be observed, however, in relation to the first particular, that he makes some little distinction between what are termed the righteous and the wicked. The nature and effects of the resurrection upon the latter, he leaves little clearer than a fog,bank. His views, here, are extremely misty. Contrasted with their clearness on other points, the impression can hardly be resisted, that he was either blinded, to some little extent, by the film of former errors; or, what is worse, would conceal his fullest convictions from fear of imparing his standing and influence. From his displays of moral courage, in other respects, I am inclined to the former opinion. It is difficult to rend, at one effort, all the ties that bind us to long-cherished opinions; and he whose eyes are but just opened to the light, must be expected, for a time, to "see men as trees walking."

Ever since the allusion to Prof. Bush's work, that appeared in the Quarterly for Jan. 1845, I have waited in the hope of seeing from the Editor, or some competent person, a more thorough review of it. I do not propose to attempt it myself, but have placed its title at the head of this paper, chiefly for the purpose of offering a few suggestions on the general subject of a resurrection from the dead, as Christianity, rationally interpreted, would seem to represent it.

Perhaps there are few religious topics concerning which more crude notions are cherished in the popular mind, than concerning this. It is not often a matter of serious and labored investigation with the mass of men. A mere nominal assent to the general fact of a resurrection seems to content them. The common impression is, that it is a process which, in some way, effects some kind of change in its subjects: that as a consequence of it all men will

live again after death, and exist either in a state of happiness or misery to all eternity: and with an admission, of this simple character, it would almost seem that all clear and definite ideas upon the subject, terminate with most people. Much, therefore, as I think it needs discussion, there are still several considerations that have made me hesitate in approaching it. First: the New Testament gives us no minutely detailed account of the matter. With the best lights we can get from it, much is left to inference; something to conjecture. With a few great leading facts it furnishes, we are thrown back upon the efforts of reason, and the teachings of science and philosophy. Any discussion of it, therefore, that goes beyond the naked facts revealed, must be somewhat speculative. I do not think, however, that this should deter any one from its investigation. Absolute knowledge cannot be affirmed, of a finite mind, in reference to anything. All we term matter-of-fact is open to cavil. Belief, however well-founded, is but an estimate of probabilities. And if we cannot have that evidence upon a subject, which we think amounts to certainty, it is at best but a poor reason for rejecting the kind and degree that is attainable. I would much rather gratefully accept the light God has seen fit to give us, and wait reverently and patiently the hour that shall bring a more full and perfect revelation. Secondly: The treatment of the subject becomes somewhat difficult, on account of its intimate connection with other topics, from which it cannot well be separated. Our views of it must be modified, more or less, by the peculiar opinions we may entertain in regard to other great cardinal features of moral and religious truth, with which it is interwoven. The immortality of the soul; the nature and duration of rewards and punishments; the philosophy of a future state; and the analogy between that and the present; all bear directly upon it; and our views of these, as of some other topics, must give a tone and complexion to our interpretation of the Christian doctrine of a resurrection. While I shall endeavor, therefore, to embrace such particular features of these as are deemed essential to its true conception, I will also strive to avoid so wide a range as to lose either myself or my readers in the dim regions of uncertainty.

--

The end proposed in this brief inquiry is, the Rationale of the Christian resurrection. What is the nature, and what are the effects, of the process thus denominated?

The principal word used in setting forth this doctrine, by the writers of the New Testament, is anastasis; which denotes, primarily, the action of standing or rising up.1 Doubtless this is the literal import of the term; and whatever the resurrection of the dead may really consist in, its principal feature must correspond to this idea. It must be truly a rising up of something. But of what? Is its principal feature the resuscitation of the dead animal body? Or the revivification of the soul which has perished? Or the transfer of one or both to an immortal state? Or is it a process by which an imperfect soul, freed from the mortal body, at death, becomes invested with a spiritual body suited to its new sphere, and attains to complete moral perfection; the "perfect stature of a man in Christ," its true and only destiny? The latter is my own opinion; but to make it appear more truly, I will consider, briefly, the former questions.

I. Is the Resurrection physical?

In the popular view, or in the notion most current in the church, this is its principal element. The soul, it is supposed, being of itself undying, immortal, is not properly the subject of an anastasis, but the body only. The soul passes unchanged into the immortal state, and essentially remains so. The resurrection, therefore, chiefly consists in bringing together the parts of our decayed earthly bodies and reclothing the souls of men with essentially the same garments they wore while upon the earth. The only change which the soul experiences, by this whole process, is simply that of place and external condition. No change is admitted to be wrought in its character. This is most strenuously insisted on. "He that is holy," they tell us, "will be holy still," and "he that is filthy, filthy still." Or, as it is sometimes expressed in Scripture, a little more apochryphal, "as the tree falls so it lies, and as death leaves us so judgment will find us!" The physical is the chief element in this notion. merely contemplates the rising up of the old mortal bodies

1 Anastasis: Page 144.

It

from the grave, -the reinvesting of the souls of men with them, and, by the same strange and unexplored process, rendering them incorruptible and immortal.'

I cannot assent to this notion. I do not believe that it

is true. It seems to me that no unprejudiced mind can believe it, after examining the clear argument of Prof. Bush. There are a very few passages that seem rather to convey this idea, but, when interpreted carefully, I am confident they do not: while there are others that, I think, expressly contradict it, and that never can be rationally explained in harmony with it. This view will also appear utterly inconsistent with certain facts, the reality of which no one probably will deny.

2

I have intimated that there are a very few passages which might seem to favor this physical theory; such, for example, as the following: "This mortal must put on immortality," "this corruptible put on incorruption," &c. It is asked, with some apparent degree of force, if the idea is not clearly conveyed here, that that which is made incorruptible and immortal was not previously corruptible and mortal; and, therefore, to be affirmed only of the body? However plausible this question may seem, it is not unanswerable. A review of the preceding context will discover that the apostle was contrasting the present and the future state of men. He designates the two by these great leading characteristics: The one was mortal, the other immortal; the one corruptible, the other incorruptible. His meaning evidently is, therefore, not that these mortal bodies shall be made immortal, or that souls are now mortal, and shall become immortal; but that the race of beings, whose present state is designated by this prominent feature, mortal, corruptible, shall exist in a future state, which, in contradistinction to this, is also designated by its principal feature,-immortal, incorruptible. The terms mortal, corruption, immortal, incorruption, simply distinguish the present and the future state. Fuller proof of this, however, will appear in the sequel. Other passages of similar import might be noticed, which may be thought, perhaps, to indicate a physical resurrection, but my limits are too brief to admit of their exposition. I

21 Cor. xv. 54.

« AnkstesnisTęsti »