We conclude, therefore, that there is no scriptural, consistent, or intelligible view except the one common- ly entertained by Christians on this subject, viz. that the pure and immaterial soul alone survives the dissolution of the body, and that at the last day almighty power will clothe this afresh with a corporeal frame suitable to its enlarged and completely developed faculties, and that the identity of the latter will consist, not so much, if at all, in the reassemblage of the individual particles of which its old partner was composed, much less of some subtle and continuous tertium quid that emerged from the decaying substance and reconstructs a new physical home for itself, but in the similar combination of similar matter, similarly united with the same im- mortal spirit, and with it glorified by some such in- scrutable change as took place in our Saviour's body at the transfiguration, and as still characterized it when preternaturally beheld by Saul on his way to Damascus.
IV. Literature. — This is very copious (see a list of works on the subject in the appendix to Alger's Doctrine of a Future. Life, Nos. 2929-3181). We here mention only a few of the most important: Knapp. Christian Theology, translated by Leonard Woods, D.D., § 151-153; Hody, On the Resurrection ; Drew, Essay on the Resur- rection of the Human Body; Burnet, State of the Dead; Schott, Dissert, de Resurrect. Corporis, adv. <S'. Burnetum (1763) ; Teller, Fides Dogmat. de Resurr. Camis (1766) ; Mosheim, De Christ. Resurr. Mort., etc., in Dissertatt. ii, 52(5 sq. ; Dassov, Diatr. qua Judceor. de Resurr. Mart. Sentent. ex Plur. Rabbinis (1675); Neander, All. Ge- schichle, etc., I,iii, 1088, 1096; II, iii, 1404-1410; Zehrt, Ueber d. Avferstehung d. Todten (1835); Hodgson, Res. of Hum. Body (Lond. 1853). See Resurrection of Christ.
RESURRECTION of Christ. This great fact, by which " he was declared to be the Son of God with pow- er," stands out everywhere prominently on the pages of the New Test, as the foundation of the Christian faith (Rom. i, 2 ; Acts xiii. 32, 33 ; 1 Cor. xv, 3-15). Accord- ing to the Scriptures the disciples were assured, by the testimony of their senses, that the body of Christ, after his resurrection, was the same identical body of human flesh and bones which had been crucified ami laid in the sepulchre (Matt, xvi, 21 ; xxvii, 63; xxviii, 5-18 ; Mark xvi, 6-19; Luke xxiv, 5-51; John xx, 9-26; Acts i, 1-11). Our Lord himself took special pains to make the impression upon the minds of his disciples that in his crucified body he was actually raised to life. He ap- pealed to the testimony of their own senses: "Behold," says he, "my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me here." He showed them his hands and his feet, which the nail-prints attested to be the same which had hung upon the cross. Our Lord also invited Thomas to thrust his hand into his wounded side ; and, to remove the last remaining shadow of doubt from the minds of his disciples that it was he himself in the same human body, " lie called lor food, and he took and did eat before them" (Luke xxiv, 39-43; John xx, 27). The fact also that our Lord continued forty days upon earth after his resurrection, in the same human body in which he was crucified, shows plainly that he did not rise from the tomb in a glorified body. And the evidence is equally strong that he now dwells in heaven in a glorified body (Phil, iii, 21 ; Col. iii, 4).
Since this event, however, independently of its im- portance in respect to the internal connection of the Christian doctrine, w.as manifestly a miraculous occur- rence, the credibility of the narrative has from the ear- liest times been brought into question (Celsus, apud Origen. cont. Cels. i, 2 ; Woolston, Discourses on tin Mir- acles, disc, vi ; Chubb, Posth. Works, i, 330 ; Morgan, The Resurrection Considered [1744]). Others who have admitted the facts as recorded to be beyond dispute, yet have attempted to show that Christ was not really dead, but that, being stunned and palsied, he wore for a time the appearance of death, and was afterwards restored to
RESURRECTION
1056
RETRIBUTION
consciousness by the cool grave and the spices. The rd'ni at inn of these views may be Been in detail in such works as Less, Ueber du Religion, ii. ■ >'-; id. Auferste- hungsgesckichte, nebst Anhang (1799); Doderlein, Frag- ment* und Antifragmente (1782). The chief advocates of these views are Paulus | Hist. Resurrect. Jes. [ 1795]), and, more recently, Henneberg (PhUoL-histor.-krit. Commentar iib. d. Gesch. d. Begrabn,, d. Avferstehung u. 526 j I. "If the body of Jesus Christ," -a\ s Saurin, " were nol raised from the dead, it must have been stolen away. Bui tins theft is incredi- ble. Who committed it ? The enemies of Jesus < !hrisl ? Would they have contributed to his glory by counte- nancing a report of his resurrection ? Would his disci- ple8? It is probable they would not, and it is next to certain they could not. How could they have under- taken to remove the body — frail and timorous creat- ures, people who fled as soon as they saw him taken into custody ? Even Peter, the most courageous, trembled at the voice of a servant-girl, and three times denied that he knew him. Would people of this character have dared to resist the authority of the governor? Would they have undertaken to oppose the determination of the Sanhedrim, to force a guard, and to elude, or over- come soldiers armed and aware of danger? If Jesus Christ was not. risen again (I speak the language of un- believer.- ). he hail deceived his disciples with vain hopes of his resurrection. How came the disciples not to dis- cover the imposture? Would they have hazarded them- selves by undertaking an enterprise so perilous in favor of a man who had so cruelly imposed on their credulity? 15ut were we to grant that they formed the design of removing the body, how could they have executed it? How could soldiers, armed and on guard, suffer them- Belves to be overreached by a few timorous people? Either (says St. Augustine) they were asleep or awake ; if they were awake, why should they suffer the body to be taken away? If asleep, how could they know that the disciples took it away ? How dare they then de- pose that it was stolen?"