468 CHRIST THE AUTHOR OF THE NEW CREATION. [SeR. VI.
1 John iii. 2, ' It doth not yet appear what we shall be, but we know that when he shall appear we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.' This for the title of ' First-born from the dead.'
Doct. That Christ's rising from the dead is the evidence and assur- ance of a Christian's happy resm'rection.
1. Let me open the terms.
2. Vindicate the notion.
3. Show you how this is an evidence and assurance to all good Christians of their happy and joyful resurrection.
1. For the terms. He is here called ' The first-born from the dead.' If the grave was as the womb to him, and his resurrection as a birth, then Christ was in a manner born when he rose again. Only he hath the precedency — he is the first-born, he rises first, and surely others will follow after him. So we read. Acts xxvi. 23, ' That he should be the first-born that should rise from the dead ;' as he saith elsewhere, ' First Christ, then they that are Christ's.' Christ hath the primacy of order and the principality of influence. So again he is said to be ' the first- fruits of them that slept,' 1 Cor. xv. 20. As in the consecrating of the first-fruits the whole harvest is also consecrated, so Christ by rising himself raises all others with him to eternal glory and happiness. And so his resurrection is a certain proof that others shall have a resur- rection also.
2. Let us vindicate the notion here used by the apostle. How was he the first-born, the first-fruits, the first raised from the dead ? Two objections lie against it: —
[1.] That many were raised from the dead before Christ.
[2.] Concerning the resurrection of the wicked. They are not parts of his mystical body, and in respect of them how could Christ rise as the first-born and the first-fruits ?
1. For the first objection, how was Christ the first, since many were raised before him ? As the widow of Sarepta's son, who was raised to life by Elijah, 1 Kings xvii.; the Shunammite's son by Elisha,
2 Kings iv. ; a dead man by the touch of Elisha's bones, 2 Kings xiii. 21. Our Saviour in his lifetime raised the widow of Nain's only son, Luke vii. 15 ; Jairus's daughter, Luke viii. 55 ; Lazarus, John xi. 44 ; some others at his death, Mat. xxvii. 52. How was he then the first ? I answer —
[1.] We must distinguish of a proper and an improper resurrection. Christ was the first-born from the dead, because he arose from the dead by a proper resurrection, which is to arise again to a life immortal; others were raised again to a mortal estate, and so the great disease was rather removed than cured. Christ's resurrection is a resurrection to immortality, not to die anymore ; as the apostle saith, ' Death hath no more power over him.' They only returned to their natural life, they were raised from the dead, but still mortal ; but ' he whom God raised again shall see no corruption,' Acts xiii. 34.
[2.J Others are raised by the power and virtue of his resurrection, but he hath risen again by his own power, John x. 18, 'I have power to lay down my life, and power to take it up again.' Eaising the dead is a work of divine power, for it belongs to him to restore life who gave it at first. Therefore Christ is said not only to be raised again,
Col. I. 18.] christ the author of the new creation. 469
but to rise from the dead : Kom. iv. 25, ' He died for our offences, and rose again for our justification,' as the sun sets and rises by his own motion.
[3.] All those that rose again before Christ, arose only by special dispensation, to lay down their bodies once more when God should see fit, and rose only as private and single persons ; but Christ rose as a public person. His resurrection is the cause and pattern of ours, for head and members do not rise by a different power ; he rose again to show the virtue that should quicken our mortal bodies, and raise them at length.
2. The second objection is concerning the raising of the wicked, Christ cannot be the first-born or the first-fruits to them, they belong not to his mystical body. The first-born implieth a relation to the rest of the family ; and offering of the first-fruits did not sanctify the tares, the cockle, or the darnel, or the weeds that grow amongst the corn, but only the corn itself. I answer —
[1.] Certain it is that the wicked shall rise again, there is no ques- tion of that, Acts xxiv. 15. I believe a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and the unjust, all that have lived, whether they have done good or evil : Mat. v. 45, ' He makes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust ; ' and it is said, John v. 28, 29, ' All that are in their graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth, they that have done good to the resur- rection of life, and they that have done evil to the resurrection of damnation.' Both must rise, that both may receive a full recomjDense according to their several ways ; and though it be said, Ps. i. 5, 'The ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congrega- tion of the righteous,' it doth not infringe this truth. The sense is, those unhappy miscreants shall not be able to abide the trial, as being self-condemned. To stand in the judgment is to make a bold de- fence. And whereas it is said, also, they shall not stand in the con- gregation of the righteous, you must know that at the day of doom there is a congregation or a gathering together of all men, then a segregation, a separating the sheep from the goats, then an aggrega- tion— ' He shall set the sheep on his right hand and the goats on his left ' — so that they make up two distinct bodies, one of the good, which is there called the congregation of the righteous, the other of the wicked, who are to be judged by Christ as a just and righteous judge, assisted with his holy angels, and the great assembly and council of saints. Not one of the sinners shall remain in the company of the righteous, nor appear in their society.