The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1895-11-09
DIR. SHUTTER ON THE RESURREO-
TION,
Second Article.


teaching concerning the resurrection
OF Jesus, by showing that his conclu-
sion that all the appearances of Jesus
were alike or of the same kind is not
sound, for it has no warrant in the
words of Paul which are his sole au
thority. And yet this is fundamen-
tai position in the Doctors argument
and is made to sustain the whole
weight of the contention. The reason
is obvious. All these appearances
being alike, if we know how Jesus
appeared to Paul, we know how he
appeared to all the rest. AS the
Doctor says, "What Christ's manifes-
tation to Paul was, that he assures
us was the manifestation of Christ to
all the rest. He links them together.
One occasion furnishes the key to all
the rest"
How, then, did Jesus manifest him
self to Paul2 Following the record
of his conversion we are told, in
vision" That is, Paul had vision
of Jesus. Leaving out the lowest,
that is the physical vision, this may
mean one of three things. 1t may
mean, Q, that Paul saw with his
spiritual eye the spiritual form of
Jesus. That he so impressed him
self on the mind of Paul, that he saw,
felt or realized his presence and
knew that it was he; or, (2), that
Paul saw only the great truth that
Jesus had arisen and was alive in the
spirit world and was active in estab-
fishing his kingdom; or, (3), it may
mean that Paul didn't see anything
but only imagined that he saw some
thing. If we can interpret correctly
the rhetoric of our author the second
is the meaning he attaches to the
word vision" Paul didn't see any
thing really but he had an experience
which assured him that Jesus was
alive and doing his will. Thus the
Doctor says: "The appearance of
Jesus to Paul was an experience in
which without catching glimpse
even of his form or features he was
made to feel the presence and un-
derstand the will of Jesus" And as
all these appearances were of the
same kind, all who saw Jesus saw
him only in vision, or had just such
an experience as Paul had.
The next question is-How did it
happen that all these persons had
just precisely this experience? The
gist of the answer is in the following
words: ut still remains for us to try
to account for these inward manifes
tations, these revelations of Christ's
exaltation and glory to the souls of
his disciples. We must remember,
first of all, that belief in continued ex
istence was no new thing to those
disciples. 1t was no new thing to
Paul. While there were some who
denied it among the Jews, notably
the Sadducees-it was cardinal
point of belief with the Pharisees.
1.-THE faith in Immortality did not
originate at the sepulchre of Jesus;the
sepulchre of Jesus was unsealed by
faith in Immortality. The conviction
that we shall live again was not born
of the resurrection of the Master.
The resurrection of the Master was
born of that high conviction. Thus
it lay in the mind of Paul. If the
dead are not raised, if there be no
general ascending into higher condi-
tions at death, neither hath Christ
been raised. Out of an atmosphere
surcharged with the belief in immor-
tally, flashed the particular faith
that Jesus lived"
Verify this is revolutionary 1t
turns our thought the other end to.
Instead of reading that Christ
brought life and Immortality to light"
we must read that life and immor-
tality" brought Christ to light! In
Paul's argument the general resur-
rection is not based on Christ's resur-
rection, but Christ's resurrection is
based on the general resurrection.
He argues that because all men are
raised therefore Christ is raised. This
completely reverses PauPs argument.
If anything is certain his argument
runs the other way. He argues the
rising of all men from the fact that
Christ is risen. "Now is Christ risen
from the dead" and become a speci-
men of the harvest; hence the har-
vest in due time. Again, the atmos-
phere outside of Christian circles
"was not surcharged with any such
belief in immortality" as the Doctor
imagines. There was the Greek doc
trine of Immortality, it is true, but
what was it? Was it Paul's doctrine