Page images
PDF
EPUB

The argument attempted to be deduced from this, may be stated thus:

"How could the Apostle desire to attain unto the resurrection from the dead, or have any doubts of his doing so, if the ungodly are raised at the same time as the godly; because, in this case, he must know that he would attain unto the resurrection of the dead?"

The passage evidently implies, when viewed in con nexion with the preceding verses, an earnest desire in the Apostle's mind to attain to this resurrection of the dead; and (if we suppose that the word πws, translated if, implies this) doubt in his mind, as to whether he should attain thereto; though I am myself convinced that it does not imply any such doubt [Note AA]. We may, therefore, conclude, that the resurrection which the Apostle so earnestly desired, is that of the saints. And now let me ask, how does the Apostle's earnest desire to attain unto the resurrection of the saints, and his doubt as to whether he should do so, in the least imply that the ungodly will not be raised at the same time? If indeed, whenever the ungodly are raised, they were to enjoy the same blessedness as the godly, then there would be some weight in the argument; be cause upon this supposition there could be no other peculiarity or distinction between the resurrection of the godly and that of the ungodly, except that of priority in order of time. But as there is to be an unspeakably glorious distinction in the method, nature, and issue of the resurrection of the saints from that of the ungodly, though they take place at one and the same time, and indeed, in some measure, in consequence thereof, at least as far as the manifestation of it is concerned, we may see at once the ground of the Apostle's

[AA] I make this observation, (1) because I am convinced from numerous passages that Paul had, in reality, no doubt upon the subject of his own attaining the resurrection of the saints; (2) because EITWS, translated if, appears to me rather to denote earnest desire, than doubt in the mind, both in this passage, and in the only three others in which, as I can find, it occurs in the New Testament; namely, Acts xxvii. 12; Rom. i. 10, and xi. 14; in each of which it might, perhaps, be rendered that, as is in Acts xxvi. 8, 23. Indeed and our English word if, are continually used without any doubt being implied of the reality of the thing mentioned, as 1 Cor. xv. 12, &c.; Eph. iii. 2; Phil. ii. 1, and iv. 8; 1 Thess. iv. 14, &c.

earnest desire to partake of the former. Consequently, this passage does not, I conceive, afford any the least support to the idea that the ungodly dead will not be raised at the same time with the saints. On the one hand, the Apostle would not the less earnestly desire to attain unto the resurrection of the saints to everlasting life, because the ungodly are to be raised at the same time to everlasting punishment. On the other hand, if the ungodly are raised at the same time as the righteous, the Apostle certainly could have felt no doubt that he would partake of a resurrection, either among the righteous or among the ungodly. But the certainty of the one or the other, could not in the least tend to remove his doubt as to whether he should attain unto the resurrection of the righteous. It is to me perfectly evident, that the resurrection of the ungodly to everlasting shame taking place at the same time with that of the righteous unto everlasting glory, could not, in the least degree, diminish either the Apostle's earnest desire, or doubt of escaping the one, and attaining the other.

Fourth. The last passage is Heb. xi.35: "Others (women) were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection.' A better resurrection seems to mean a resurrection better than that of merely, as it were, rising alive from the torture to which they were exposed for the truth and conscience sake. They would not accept deliverance on the sinful terms of renouncing the truth and their conscience; and therefore persisted unto death, that they might obtain a better resurrection. This better resurrection, the hope of which enabled these women to meet the torture, and to persevere unto death, must, therefore, signify the resurrection unto eternal life. But I would ask, Will the resurrection of the saints unto eternal life be one whit the less a better resurrection; will it at all the less cheer and animate the followers of Jesus in enduring suffering for his name sake, because the resurrection of the ungodly unto everlasting punishment takes place at the same time? It is evident to me that this, like the other passages, does not afford the least solid argument in favour of the idea of the resurrection of the ungodly not taking place at the same time as that of the godly; unless the mind has been

brought to believe that there will be no other distinction between the resurrection of the saints and that of the ungodly, except that of priority of time; and that this conceived reign of a thousand years, is the only consideration which can make their resurrection desirable.

V. Another argument adduced to prove that the resurrection of the ungodly will not take place at the same time as that of the saints, is, that some passages in the New Testament speak of the resurrection of the saints without noticing that of the ungodly; whence it is alleged that we may infer that the latter cannot take place at the same time with the former.

Upon this I would remark, that it is undoubtedly true that there are passages, such as 1 Cor. xv.; 1 Thess. iv. &c., which treat at large of the resurrection of the saints, without noticing that of the ungodly. Two considerations, however, convince me that this affords no ground for inferring that the resurrection of the ungodly will not take place at the same time.-First, It was not the object of these passages to treat of the resurrection of the ungodly; and therefore it would be not only unnecessary, but contrary to the simplicity and brevity of the Scriptures to introduce any thing upon this subject. Thus the object of 1 Cor. xv. appears to be to stop the progress of the error into which some members of the church at Corinth had fallen, by which they were led to say, that there would be no resurrection of the dead (ver. 12); that is, I conceive, of the dead who are Christ's (vers. 18, 20, 23, 29). The whole line of argument in the chapter goes to combat this error. 1. The Apostle shews the inseparable connexion between the resurrection of Christ the first-fruits, and that of those who are his at his coming (vers. 20-34). 2. He answers the objection (ver. 35) which carnal reasoning, especially in such a place as the city of Corinth, which abounded in the pride of worldly wisdom, suggested to the idea of a body dead and corrupt being raised in glory (vers. 36-49). This difficulty with regard to the wonderful, the inconceivable difference there must be between the natural body of the believer when sown in corruption, and the same body when raised in

glory and changed into a spiritual body (vers. 42, 43), is answered by the analogy of various things in nature (vers.36-44). 3. The Apostle dwells upon the analogy there is between the order of time of the first or natural Adam, and Christ the second or spiritual Adam (vers. 45, 46); and between the order of time in which the believer bears the image of the earthly Adam in his present body, and will bear the image of the Lord from heaven in his heavenly body (vers. 47-49). 4. He shews the order of time in which the resurrection of the saints who have fallen asleep, and the changing of the living saints will take place (vers. 51, 52); and the whole concludes with the glorious victory obtained over death and hades [the grave, or separate state] by the resurrection of the saints (vers.54-57), and an exhortation grounded thereupon. Now, as the object throughout the passage appears to be to establish the certainty of the resurrection of believers, it would have been not only needless, but altogether foreign to the object in view to notice the resurrection of the ungodly. Instead of throwing light upon the subject in hand, it would rather have tended to introduce confusion; and therefore, I conceive, is omitted, as would indeed be the case in a well-written work of mere man.

The same observation may be made respecting 1 Thess. iv.: "13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. 15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 17 then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air and so shall we ever be with the Lord. 18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words." We collect from ver. 13, that a somewhat similar error to that just noticed, had crept into the church at Thessalonica, so that many amongst them were led to doubt whether

the saints, who had fallen asleep, would be raised; and to conceive that only those who should remain alive unto the coming of the Lord, would partake of the blessedness which would attend and follow his coming. To remove this error, the Apostle (1) assures them that, as certainly as Jesus died and rose again, so would God bring with Jesus those who sleep in him (ver. 14). (2) That instead of the living saints alone enjoying the blessedness of his coming, they would not even prevent (that is, precede, Gr.) in this respect those who had fallen asleep (ver. 15), but the reverse. For (3) when Christ shall come, the living saints will not be changed before the dead saints are raised, but the dead saints would be raised first (ver. 16), and the living saints changed after, in point of order of time (ver. 17). [Note BB.] (4) The saints who have been changed, will be caught up together with the raised saints, to meet the Lord in the air, and so will ever be with him (ver. 17). (5) He charges them to comfort one another with these words, which would assure them of the resurrection of their brethren who had fallen asleep in Christ. From this consideration of the passage, we should, I conceive, not expect that any notice would be taken in it of the resurrection of the ungodly, although taking place at the same time as that of those who sleep in Jesus.-The error which had crept into the Thessalonian church was respecting the resur rection of the saints, not respecting the resurrection of the ungodly; and therefore, to have introduced any thing upon the latter subject could have no tendency either to remove the error of the Thessalonian believers, or to give them the least comfort concerning their departed brethren; while, on the other hand, it would tend to introduce confusion into the whole subject. Thus, therefore, the consideration of the OBJECT of both these passages convinces me, that

[BB] The reader should carefully attend to this. The dead in Christ rising first, does not refer to their rising before the ungodly dead are raised, but before the living saints are changed. The word first, only points out, as in 1 Cor. xv. 51-53, the order of time in which the two events, the resurrection of the dead and the changing of the living saints, will take place; which order will be, first, the resurrection of those who have died; next, the change of those who are alive. There does not appear to be the least allusion to the resurrection of the ungodly in any part of the passage.

K

« PreviousContinue »