The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1893-10-26
SUNDAY MEDITATION
A Study of the International Sunday
School Lesson Appointed for Nov.
5. 1893.


Subject: The Resurrection of Christ the Guar
| antee of the General Resurrectton.-1 Cor,
| 15:12-26.
| lone reading these notes should first carefully
study the paragraph from the Holy Scriptures As
| indicated sbove.l
| INTRODUCTION.
In the first IL verses of the 18th chapter Of
| I Cor, ST. Paul gives the historical evidence
| that the doctrine of the resurrection OF the
| dead is a truth to be accepted on testimony.
| The chapter, from which selected the
verses to be now studied, is the one used in the
| famous Episcopal Church Burial Service
We are mortal, and as such are amazingly
| interested in the doctrine set forth by st. Paul
in this chapter. Shall we live again2 Is death
the end2 Is the grave the ultima thule Of
| human life?
On this chapter hinges the validity of Chris
| tisnity. If the doctrine Of the resurrection
| he true, then tho whole system taught by
| Christ has foundation. IF the doctrine of the
| resurrection be erroneous then the foundation
| is jostled about and the structure tumbIes.
| TO visiting the cemetery, or busy in
meditations about his deceased friends. this
| chapter is full of interest, and having, as We
hold, truth at its base it is also full of comfort.
If the resurrection be untrue, then all OF
| Christ's doctrines are without support and IN
| worthy of credence. Christ Taught the doc
! trine Of forgiveness of sins, or what we style
| salvation; but all is of no avail-there is no
| Observation-Disclosures ia a characterization is
myth-our hopes are blasted-the cross
means nothing sut deception and deusion-
all this If Christ did not die and then riss
| again.
| We may divide the chapter thus:
| Verses to "a. Is there to be resurrection
| Verses IS to 81. The resurrection body.
| Verses SO to "a. What of those alive at
| resurrection7
| Verses 55 to So. Ethical effects of the doc
| trine. Practical deductions.
| Notes.
| 1. H. V. IL. It was so preached. Whyf
| Because il was fact. The preceding IL verses
prove the fact. Believed, it must be preached.
| No men able to speak could refrain from declar-
| ing doctrine so necessary and comforting as
| is the doctrine of the resurrection, providing
| they were convinced it rested on indisputsble
| evidence. There was no way to account for
| the preaching of such 3 doctrine unless it
| were truth. ALI Of the Apostles preached the
| doctrine.
| 2. Rose from the dead. IL. The reference is
| first to the resurrection Of Christ. Before
| dying he said he would rise again. Did He
| so issue from the grave? That was matter Of
| fact. Witnesses both of his death and of his
having been seen after his death were numer-
| Gus and reliable. This fact is shown in verses
| l to IL. Then, the doctrine of the resurrec-
! ton as applied to- all mortals is implied. The
| Apostles Creed, the Nicene, and many other
Christian symbols teach the fact Christ rose and
| that the dead in general shall rise from their
| graves.
As to the exegess of the doctrine of the res
direction we must keep clear on the one hand
| of too gross maierialistic conceptions, and on
the other of too ETHEREAL, too transcendental
ideas Rightly explained and pretended,
there is not so much difficulty in holding to
| the doctrine of the resurrection. The Rev. B.
| F. Wescott. d. d.. has ths following words,
| which may aid US somewhat in our study. He
| says using the word " flesh" in the sense Of
| the dead human body:
AZ believe in the resurrection of the flesh.
But in shaping for ourselves this belief we need
to use more than common care lest We allow
gross, earthly thoughts to intrude into realm
where they have no place. The flesh Of
which we speak as destined to a resurrection is
not that substance which we can and
handle, measure by properties of sense. It
representa-, as far as We now see, ourselves
in our actual weakness but essentially our
selves. We in our whole being. this is our
belief, shall rise again. And we are not these
changing bodies which we bear They alter,
as we know, with every step we take and every
breath we draw. We make them, if / may so
speak, make them naturally, necessarily, under
the laws of our present existence. They are
to ourselves to use bold figure. as the spoken
word to the thought, the expression of the
invisible"
g. Some. V. l. It is clear that while the
doctrine of the resurrection was held by many,
(the word "some," V. !, may imply that most
held the doctrine) there were persons who de-
MED it. They could not have accepted of the
doctrine even as it is applied to Christ. for to
admit simple case of actual resurrection meant
universal resurrection by implication and pos
sibility. Who denied it? None who had best
chance TO know all the facts in the case. The
Sadducees were averse to accepting the doc
trine, since it went counter to their creed. When
St. Paul declared the doctrine at Athens the
Greeks, including probably some eminent
philosophers of the Greek type, heard him
quite respectfully as to certain teachings but
when he referred favorably to the doctrine of
the resurrection some Knocked him, sported
themselves at the expense of the doctrine. IL:
80. Notice V. Is states that among his hearers
were some Epicuresn and some Stole philoso-
pliers, neither of whom looked graciously on a
doctrine so strange to them. By referring to
2 Tim, 9: IL, we find this doctrine was quite in
dispute and dsrepute. Two are mentioned by
name as opponents, Hymenaeus and Philetus.
1t is certain these were those who opposed or
who, at least, would not recognize this great
doctrine. There have always been some ever
since who see no basis for the doctrine. So there
was occasion for ST. Paul to write plain decls-
ration on this subject. If the opposition only
produced the grand defense-the 18th Chapter
of / Corinthians-we can see great good grow
ing out from evil.
A. What argument is there against the doe
trinef 1. What reasons can we advance against
it2 st. Paul argues for it: l. The fact of
Christ's resurrection is q proof. e. A single
resurrection positively proved carries the rest.
3. A special argument in this particular in
stance is the identity of interest between Christ
and his people, and the inference that the same
power which enabled Christ to rise from the
dead will be also at the service of all His
friends. a. No one prove the impossibility
of the resurrection of the dead. We get little
from the habit of measuring Heavenly dynam-
les by human standards.
We may put syllOgism and test st. PauPs
argument
Who (or what can resurrect one can all.
God did resurrect Christ.
Therefore be can raise to life all the dead.
We cannot suppose God exhausts his power
in any given act, and hence repetition is forever
possible. The fact of Christ's resurrection was
supported as well as any fact in history can be
sustained. God Tor whatever did it) can do
again an act practically identical.
We say God can repeat the resurrection.
Someone asks, "Will hep" Surely, it is reason
able to reply, viii He not? If not why not ?
Conclusion.
These notes do not cover infinitely the entire
paragraph. The verses are too rich in sug-
gestion to allow of full explanation. What has
been said above is applicable to the entire series
of verses.