In conjunction with these doctrines of the Parousia and the Judgment, the doctrine of a Resurrection has an essential place in Christ's eschatological teaching. The doctrine of a resur- rection from the dead is implied in the doctrine of a final universal judgment at the end of things. It lies also in the great principles of OT. "The Psalmists and the Prophets have their visions of a limitation of the power of death, a destruction of death, a deliverance from Sheol, a life superior to death ; and, in the progress of the projjhetic teach- ing, the faith in a resurrection of the dead rises gradually into distinctness. It appears first as a belief in the re-animation of the dead nation, and at last in Isaiah (26'") and Daniel as a belief in the return of deceased individuals to life. In the final utterance of OT on the subject (Dn 12^-') this enlargement of the idea appears to have its occasion in the question regardin;' the fate of departed members of Israel — whether there is reward for the faithful among these, whether there is penalty for the unfaithful. But OT does not seem to go beyond the case of Israel. It tarries with tlie announcement that Israel's dead, true and false, shall come forth from the dust of earth to receive the awards of their truth or falsehood. In the period between this and the Christian era the belief passed through various fortunes. It did not become the universal faith of the Jewish people. In some of the non canonical books the old idea of Sheol con- tinues (Sir IT-''- ^ 41\ Bar 2"). In some the hope ajipears to be that of an incorporeal immortality (W is 2^ 3'-* 4'»- '* 15', 4 Mac 14» 10'- IS-^). But in others the belief in a resurrection is seen in more or less definite form (Enoch gi'" 92', Ps.-Sol 3" 13' etc., most distinctly and most frequently in 2 Mac, e.q. 7»- '*• " ; cf. also Sibyll. Oracles 1"" 2.-74. m 4m 'ia.^ Apoc. Bar 30'-» 5U' 51', 2 Es T*-). Rejected by the Sadducees, it became the belief of the Pharisees and the majority of the Jewish people. It had become, too, a belief in the resurrection of the unjust as well as the just, although in certain cases the limited belief in a rising only of the righteous seems to have per- sisted (Ps.-Sol 3" 14^ etc.). Opinion varied^ to some extent as to the object of the resurrection,
752
ESCHATOLOGY
ESCHATOLOGY
whether it was for judgment or for participation in tlie glories of Messiah's kingdom, and as to its time, whether it was to be immediately before Messiah's era or at its close (cf. on the one hand Enoch 51, on the other Apoc. Bar and 2 Es). The doctrine, then, which had its roots in the great principles of the OT touching life, the nature of man, and his relation to God ; which in the OT had grown gradually in magnitude and in detiniteness ; which also in Judaism had undergone changes in part natural and consistent, in part forced and in- harmonious, forms an inte^al part of Christ's eschatological teaching. It is ^ven in discourses which belong to the triple tradition in the Synop- tic records (Mt 222=i-» Mk 12>»--'', Lk 20='-"). It is implied in utterances reflecting current Jewish opinion (Mt 8", Lk 13^-^). It is presupposed where it is not affirmed in terms {e.g. in Mt 24. 25). It is stated in its essential relations to the great principles of the OT, and is relieved of the extravagances, the crudities, and the literalities with which it had become associated in Jewish speculation and Jewish popular thought. It is the doctrine of a real bodily resurrection, far removed from Hellenic or Essene ideas of a bare immortality of soul, affirming in harmony with the OT view of man's relation to God (Mt 22''-'-, Mk 12=«", Lk 20»'-'») a continuance of life for man in his entire self. In this the Synoptic records and the Fourth Gospel agree. In the latter, it is true, the fact of the resurrection is j)resented mainly in its spiritual aspects and its immediate relations. Some of Christ's largest words on the subject go beyond the idea of the resurrection at the last day (11-'"-'); and others, if they stood alone, might perhaps be taken as strong descriptions of a spiritual renovation only (525. 2«) jjy(; Jq j)jg Johanuiue record there are also words too definite to admit of being limited to the expression of a purely spiritual resurrection (5^' **). Christ's doctrme, further, is the doctrine of a universal resurrection. Certain passages in the Synoptic Gospels (Mt 22»', Mk 13", Lk 20««- ^, Mt 24", Lk 14"), indeed, have been supposed to imply that Christ taught only a resurrection of the righteous. But there are others with a different implication (Mt S-^- «> lO*"). The ' resur- rection of the just' (Lk 14") sui^gests its o\vn antithesis. The Fourth Gospel, too, declares a ' resurrection unto condemnation ' as well as a 'resurrection unto life,' and in speaking of the re-awakening of the dead uses terms too Targe for the limited view. This resuiTection, which e.xtends to just and unjust, is further referred to the last day. In Christ's own words there is no statement of a separation of the resurrection of the unrighteous from tliat of the righteous as if they were events V)elonging to different times.