(rf) On the one haml, the Resurrection of Christ was the pledge anil earnest of physical resurrec- tion and the life beyond the grave. St. I'aul founds upon it the hope of immortality (1 Th 4", Ko 8«, 1 Co (j» lo'-"'-, 2 Co 4" etc.).
(e) But he equally founds upon it the most earnest exhortations to holiness of life. It is not only that this follows for the Christian as a duty : if his relation to Christ is a right relation, it is iiicludi^<l in it as a necessity (Ko ii^o). St. I'aul can hardly think of the physical Resurrection apart from the spiritual. And there is a very similar vein in the teaching of St. John (Jn 5-*, 1 .Jn :!"). Tlie Resurrection is the corner-stone of Christian mysticism.
(f) In anotlicr a,spect, as a divine act, the crowning mark of divine approval, it is a necessary complement of the Crucifixion. It supplies the proof, which the world might desiderate, that the Sacrifice of the Cross was accepted. If the death of the Cross was a dying for humai sin, the rising again from the tomb was the seal of forgiveness and justification (Ro 4'-'^, cf. 0'). St. Paul saw in it an assurance that the doors of the divine mercy were thrown open wide ; and to St. Peter in like manner it was through it that mankind was be- gotten again to a ■ lively hope' (1 P 1'').
All this mass of biblical teai^hing hangs together. If the Resurrection was a reality it has a solid nucleus, which would be wanting even to the theory of objective visions. The economy which begins with a physical Incarnation, naturally and appropriately ends with a physical Resurrection. Thus much we can see, though we may feel that this is not all.
LiTKKATiTKR. — Besidcs the recent literature mentioned above (ainon<; wliicli the mper by Dr. Loofs deserves ratlier special attentlot)). and besides tlie "treatment of tiie subject in numer- ous works on the Gospel History and on Apologetics, it is well to remeinlier two monographs in Eiijrlish — Dr. Westrott's GoHpel nf the ReKurrtction idrstpub. in ISW>. and the late Dr. MiUi<;an*s The Jlefiurrectioit of our Lortf Uirst pub. in Ivsl).
vi. The Ascension. — The Resurrection in itself
was incomplete. It was not the goal, but the way to the goal. The goal was the return of the Son to the Father, with His mission accomplished, His work done.
(1) The apostolic writers luianimously represent this return as a triumph. Tlie keynote is struck in the speech which is put into the mouth of St. Peter on the day of Pentecost* (Ac 2^^;. It would seem that the form of expression which the conception .a.ssumed was iiifiuenced largely by I's 110', a passage to which altention had been drawn by our Lord Himself shortly before His departure, and which .spontaneously recurred to the mind as soon as the nature of His return to the Father had declared itself. Along with this would be recalled the .saving with which our Lord had answered the challenge of the high priest (.Mk \i"-l\). Psalm and saying alike represented the Messiah as seated ' at the right hand ' of the Most High. This phrase appears to have at once (in the forms ix deiiuiv and dy Seii^) established itself in the language of the priniilive Church : it oceure rejieatedly, not only in the Acts ("•"'•) and in the Pauline Fjip., but in He, 1 P, and Rev; and, like the detail of the 'third day,' it occupies a fixed place in the Apostio' Creed.
The speech of St. Peter culminates in the de- claration, ' Let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made him, whom ye crucified, both Lord and Christ' (Ac '2^'); and it is substantially a paraplira.se of this when in a famous passage St. Paul, after speaking of the humiliation of the Christ, adds, ' Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and gave unto him the name which is above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow,' etc. (Pli 2^). The return of the Son to the Father W'as not merely the resumption of a previous slate of glory (.In IV- 17'' etc.), it was the resumption of it with the added approval and recognition which His obedience unto death had called forth. We .speak of tlie.se tilings Kara &vdpunrov ; or rather, we are content to echo in regard to them the language of the apostles and of the first Christians, wlio themselves spoke Kara S.v9punrov. The reality lies behind tlie veil.
(2) How did our Lord .lesus Clirist enter upon this st,ate of exaltation ? Now that we have before us corrected texts of the Gospels, it would seem to be probable that they did not give an answer to this question. The answer was reserved for the second volume which St. Luke addressed to Tlieo- pliilus ; it forms the opening section of the Acts of the Apostles.
Mk ITii^ behinps to the Appendix to the Gospel, which we have seen (p. *i;i^ f. mt/t.} to have been probably composed, not by St. Mark himself, but by the presbyter .Vrlstiou in th© early years of the 'lw\ cent. The reading of Lk 24^* stands thus —
Kai accifrc'peTO etc Jov oiipuvov, Nc AliCLXAAII, etc., c f q Vulg. Syrr. (Pesh.-llarcl.-llier.) veil., t'yr-Ale.\. Aug. 1/2.