The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-01-23

souls reircarnatfon-a view which is now
brought before Us in America by the Theos-
itself is TO be preserved either by human
care or VIII be preserved by divine miracle.
he Egyptians preserved 1t by human care,
embalming it with the utmost caution, and
from them we have inherited a little OF
that fashion, though / hope we have aban-
doned the superstition which led to it, We
seal the bodies of our dead. sometimes in
ieaden caskets. trying to keep the mold ana
the corruption away, in vain; and we know
1t to be In vain. And, in the fourth place,
there was the popular conception of the
Greeks and the Romans that when the soul
left the body IL did not return to God or
the gods, but 1t lived in vague, ShadoWy
underworld. without organization, without
real life. These four conceptions of the
future there were: First absorption into
God; second, TRANSPORTATION of souls or liv-
ing IN another body: third, living in ones
own body, embalmed for the purpose-re-
produced in our own time in the expression
stId current in some circles that this body
VIII be gathered from the four winds of
heaven by a miracle at the resurrection, at
the last, and the soul be put back into it.
and, fourth, the disembodied state in a
shadowy underworld.
Now, when Christ came there came out
or HIS resurrection conception cf q future
life different from all four of these. 1t was
no conception of absorption by God, no con-
ceptlon of transmigration of souls, no con-
ception of the preservation of this particular
body and no conception of the diSembodied
state; but there was a strong. firm belief in
the personal resurrection and the personal
immortal life of the One that had died; and
this belief in the personal resurrection and
the personal immortal life of the One that
was dead was built upon and inspired by
faith in the fact that Jesus Christ had died
and had arisen again from the dead. But
truth never makes its way in an atmosphere
OF error without difficulty; and the truth
Of a personal resurrection came, before
long, to be doubted and dsbelieved in
Corinth. Perhaps it was the more readily
disbelieved in Corinth because Paul had laid
comparatively little stress on the resurrec-
ton and the second coming of the Christ.
AT all events it was disbelieved, and Paul
writes to correct and rectify this error He
argues the personal resurrection and per-
sonal immortality of these considerations:
FIRST, II the soul does not rise from the
dead, If the individual who was buried does
not i've as an individual, then Christ has
not risen. But we have borne our testi-
mony to you that Christ has risen. Then
We are false witnesses and Christianity is a
fraud. If the dead do not rise, if as indi-
Vldcals they do not live personally in an
other life, then your dead are persisted, then
1t is not true that Christ will bring with
y Him His beloved. II the dead do not rise,
II there is no personal resurrection and per-
sonal immortality. then Christ is defeated
and God is defeated; then there is no vic
tory, for the victory of Christ is that which
death shall not prevail against my king
dom. and If they do prevail against this
kingdom; He is defeated and God is defeat
ed. And then, with an argumentum ad
hominem, which Paul is not afraid or UNI
Wiling TO use at times, he refers to Gus
tom, which we know existed later in the
church and which we may fairly presume
mad already begun to exist. When man
d.ed unbaptized his friends feared for him,
Tor ne was not Christs; and so they bap-
tlzed the corpse, or sometimes baptized
vicariously some one for the corpse; and he
says, If there is no resurrection for the
oSao, why do you baptize your dead, and
why do you baptize for your dead? And
then he meets an objection. 1t is an old
one, it is a familiar one-'How shall the
oead rise and with what body shall they
Gomez
NO BODILY RESURRECTION.
And first,1it fills me with amazement that
so many Christians, and so many scholars,
should have read the fifteenth chapter of
the First Corinthians and thought it an ar
gument for the resurrection of the body. 1t
seems to me clearly, explicitly, palpably,
Enthusiastically, evidently a cumulative ar
gument against the resurrection of the
body Against those who thought that God
would absorb individuals, He stands for
personal immortality, against those who
thought the body must be embalmed and
the soul must find its resting place in some
other body the soul must live in a
shadowy under world without body, He
argues in the latter half of this chapter.
With what body shall they come? This is
His reply: You plant a seed in the ground
at dawn. 1t dies. But when something
does come from it, that does not come
winch you set in the ground That same
life that was in the seed comes to the sur
face but clad with a new body. Gods re-
sources are not so few as you imagine if
you think that He who has made this body
cannot make another. There is one flesh of
birds. another of CATTLE another of fishes.
There is one glory of the moon, another
glory OF the sun, another glory of the stars,
and moreover star differeth from star in
glory And SO. shall it be in the resurrec-
ton OF the body; That which thou sowest
glory and of its own. Christ came to
earth. Did He bring body with Him? In
what and how did He live before He came
to earth? Was He then disembodied a
shadowy creature, in under world, la
mentlng His state, as the Greeks and Ro-
mans thought their heroes were? Was He
wandering over the globe, transmigrating
from body to body, the Hindus think
their dead were? Was He waiting for some
body to be prepared for Him. that He might
come into the fullneSS of life out of His
spiritual body returning to His spiritual
body when His mission on earth was ended
II it We're possible for this body of flesh to
rise 1T would do no good. If God were to
bring together from all the quarters Of the
globe all fragments of the body it would do
no good. Flesh and blood can never inherit
the kingdom of God, nor that which is es-
sentially corrupt inherit the incorruptible
nor that which from the moment of it's birth
begins to die inherit the immortal. Even
we that are living when the trump shall
sound cahnot enter the kingdom of God
with our bodies. There must be a new or
ganism and new habitation for a new life.
In this is Christs supreme victory. For
now we see that death is no destruction.
perishing of the seed in the ground. The
end of death is the uprising of a new and
larger life. Death no longer conquers. o
death. where is thy victory? Death no
longer even pricks as the sting of wasp.
O death. where is thy sting? Death is the
advent to a larger life. and God shall clothe
it with glory, as it pleaseth Him.
PAULS WORDS.
''Let me read you Paurs argument in his
own words, and see. you follow. whether
I have misinterpreted it:
''Rut someone will say, How are the dead
raised and with what body do they come? Fool!
That which thou thysef scwest is not made to
live except it die; and that which thou sowest is
not the body which is to be, but mere grain, as,
for example, grain of wheat of some other
kind. But God gives it body it pleases Him;
and to each of the seeds its body. Not all
flesh is the same flesh; but there is one of men,
and another flesh of beasts, and another flesh
of birds, and another of fishes. There are also
glory of the heavenly is one, the glory of the
terrestrial is another. There is one glory of
the sun, another glory of the moon, another glory
Of the stars-for star differeth from star in
glory. So, also, is the resurrection of the dead
Sown in corruption, raised in interruption; sown
in dishonor, raised in glory; sown in weakness,
raised in power; sown natural body, raised a
spiritual body. If there is natural body, there
is also a spiritual body. And so it is written,
the first Adam became a living soul, the last
Adam life-gving spirit. Howbeit that is not
ural; and afterward that which is spiritual The
first man is from the earth, earthly; the second
man is from heaven AS is the earthly such are
they also that earthly and is the heaven