LrrERATlTRB. — On the Resurrection-Body see E. M. Goulburn, The Resurrection of the Bod ii(BL), London, 1850; J. H. Skrine, CR Ixxxvi. [1904] 860-871; 'The Resurrection-Body: a Study in the History ot Doctrine,' CQR Ixviii. [1909] 138 ft. ; R. H. Charles, Eschalology, Helrrew, Jevnsh and Chrintian, London, 1899 ; R. C. Moberly, Frublemit and Principles, do., 1904 ; C. Gore. The Body of Christ, do., J901 ; C. H. Robinson, Shidieg in the Ranirrectioii of Christ, do., 1909, ch. ii. ; W. J. Sparrow Simpson, The Resurrection and Modem Thotight, do., 1911, cha. xxiv.-xxix.
IV. The significance of the resurrec- tion OF Christ for Apostolic Christianity. — The significance of the Resurrection for the Apostolic Church may be represented under a two- fold aspect, (i.) as evidential, (ii.) as essential or constitutive.
i. Evidential significance. — In the older mode of treatment of the Resurrection, in English theology especially, main stress was laid upon its evidential value as the confirmation or proof of the truth of Christ's claims as to His person and work. To place the chief emphasis on this aspect of its significance is to give tne Resurrection too abstract
and external a character, and is the correlative of that view of the miriiclcs of .Jesus natural to 18tli cent, theology, which lays stress on their value as credential ai)pendages rather than as an essential part of Jesu.s' redemptive revelation. According to the invariable apostolic representation, however, the resurrection of Christ is not merely something consequent u|)on the redemptive revelation of His life and work on earth, something added on to it as the reward and guarantee of its ellicacy ; it is itself an essential and constitutive part of the revelation necessary to its culmination or comple- tion. While this is so, the importance of the evi- dential as[)ect of the Resurrection is not to be minimized. This is, indeed, where we must bejLfin in our study of the apostolic representation. For the apostles the first and primary significance of the Resurrection lay undoubtedly in the fact that it was the Divine confirmation of Jesus' entire claim as to His person and work. Thus it is — and the importance of the fact has to be noted, as it is often overlooked — that it is always God to whom the apostles impute the raising of Christ. His resurrection was the immediate act of God the Father, who by this gave His verdict concerning Jesus, thus once for all reversing Israel's act of rejection, and refuting the Jews' charge of blas- phemy. ' Whom they slew, hanging him on a tree, him God raised up' (AclO"'"-). This is the uniform apostolic representation common to St. Paul and the earlier apostles (cf. Ac 2='^ ^^- ^ 3'' 4'» 5"' 13™-^' 17'', 1 Th 1'", Ro I* 6', 1 Co 15'^ Gal 1\ Eph !»>, Ph 2^ 1 P 1=', He IS-*). So that St. Paul says, ' If Christ did not rise ... we are detected bear- ing false witness to God {KarhroO deoO) by atiirmingof him that he raised Christ' (1 Co 15"- '= [Moffatt]). And if this affirmation or witness is false, then their whole view of the worth of Christ's person and work is without validity. Their preaching of Christ is ' empty' (v.''') and faith in Him is ' vain ' (v. "). To develop this evidential significance of the Resurrection into its details :
1. Evidential with regard to His Person.— (a) Through the Resurrection conclusive proof «as afforded of the Mcssiahship of Jesus. This aspect of its significance was that which was primarily emphasized in the earliest apostolic teaching as represented by the sermons of St. Peter recorded in the early chapters of Acts. That Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, the Divinely sent One in whom all the hopes of Israel were to be realized, cannot be seriously doubted. In calling Himself ' the Son of man ' He adopted a title which, it is now gener- ally recognized, involved Messianic pretensions (see Sanday, The Life of Christ in Recent Re- search, Oxford, 1907, p. 123 ff.). This claim He had already supported by His life and work. His miracles — works of God wrought through Him (cf. Jn 14'") — were proofs of His mission as God's accredited messenger to Israel (Ac 2-^, 'a man accredited to you by God through miracles, wonders, and signs which God performed by him among you'; cf. Ac 10^', 'anointed of the Holy Ghost and with power he went about doing good, for God was with him'). This claim, however, was apparently contradicted and denied by His death on the Cross, which to the Jew was the symbol of Divine rejection (5"° 10'"). Through the Death on the Cross, therefore, the Jews' verdict on Jesus seemed Divinely supported. But through the Resurrection as not merely His being raised on the third day (Ac lO") but His being exalted to the right hand of God in power and glory, Israel's act of rejection was Divinely re- versed, and the claim or Jesus to be the Christ was for ever vindicated. ' This Jesus has God raised up' (Ac 2'=). 'The God of our fathers has glorified Jesus his servant ' (3« ; cf. 2"' 5" 7").
RESUKKECTION OF CHRIST
RESURRECTION OF CHRIST 349
'God has made liini !)otli Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom ye criiciiiod ' (Ac. 2^; cf. 9--). 'Up- lifted then by' God's ri^'ht liand, and receiving' from the Father the lonii-proniised holy Spirit, he has jioured on us what you now see and liear ' (2^ [Molf'att]). There conld be but one conclusion— eartli's rejected was God's accepted.