<p><span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_41" id="Page_41">[41]</SPAN></span></p>
<h2>LESSON VIII</h2>
<h3>THE CROSS AND THE RESURRECTION THE FOUNDATION OF APOSTOLIC PREACHING</h3>
<h4>1. THE RESURRECTION A FACT OF HISTORY</h4>
<p>Which of the books of the New Testament contain the evidence
for the resurrection of Jesus? That question will serve to begin
the teaching of the lesson. In answer to it, the students will
probably mention the four Gospels. To the Gospels, however,
should be added especially the First Epistle to the Corinthians.</p>
<p>The passage in First Corinthians is deserving of very careful
attention. For, unlike the Gospels, that epistle can be dated to
within a year or so. It was written only about twenty-five years
after the crucifixion. Even though possibly some of the Gospels
were written still earlier, the precision with which the epistle can
be dated makes its witness particularly valuable. Furthermore,
the author of the epistle is well known. No one doubts that
First Corinthians was written by Paul, and Paul is the best-known
man of apostolic times. Evidently his witness to the facts is of
the utmost value.</p>
<p>Paul himself was a direct witness of the resurrection. He saw
the risen Lord. I Cor. 9:1; 15:8. In I Cor. 15:1-8, however,
he does not content himself with his own witness, but reproduces
the testimony of others in an extended list. That testimony had
come to Paul by ordinary word of mouth. "I delivered unto you
first of all," says Paul, "that which also I received." In what
follows there is a list of the appearances of the risen Christ. "He
appeared to Cephas; then to the twelve; then he appeared to
above five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part
remain until now, but some are fallen asleep; then he appeared to
James; then to all the apostles; and last of all, as to the child
untimely born, he appeared to me also." Evidently these appearances
are not conceived of merely as "visions," but as events in the
external world. The mention of the burial, v. 4, is a plain hint
that what Peter and the rest saw was the body of Jesus raised
from the tomb.</p>
<p><span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_42" id="Page_42">[42]</SPAN></span></p>
<p>That view of the matter is amply confirmed in the Gospels and
in the book of The Acts. In the Gospels, we are told that the tomb
was found empty on the morning of the third day after the crucifixion.
It was found empty by some women and by Peter and John.
Since the tomb was empty, the body which appeared to the disciples
had some connection with the body which had been taken
down from the cross. Furthermore, the Gospels and The Acts
make the bodily character of the appearances abundantly plain.
Jesus did not merely appear to the disciples at a distance. He
walked with them on the road to Emmaus. He broke bread with
them. He came into the very midst of them when they were
assembled in a room. Thomas could even touch his hands and
his side. These are merely examples. Clearly the testimony of
the disciples is testimony not to mere spiritual experiences, but to
the bodily presence of the Lord. It may be admitted that the body
was a glorified body. After his resurrection Jesus was freed from
the limitations of his earthly life. Nevertheless, he was not
merely a "spirit." Luke 24:39. There was some real, though
mysterious, connection between the glorified body and the body
that had been laid in the tomb. The New Testament attests
not merely the immortality of Jesus, but his resurrection.</p>
<p>The resurrection, in these days, is hard to accept. For it is a
miracle. Against any miracle there is a tremendous presumption.
In this case, however, the presumption has been overcome. It has
been overcome by the character of Jesus. It is in the highest
degree unlikely that an ordinary man should rise from the dead;
but it is not unlikely that Jesus should have risen. The resurrection
is unique. But so is the life of Jesus of Nazareth. The two wonders
support one another. Explain away the testimony to the resurrection,
and your task is not done. You must also explain away that
sinless life. If Jesus rose from the dead he had a unique experience.
But that is to be expected. For Jesus himself was unlike any other
of the children of men. There are mysteries in his life that have
never been explained.</p>
<p>The resurrection of Jesus is a well-attested fact of history. The
proof of it is cumulative. Any one of the proofs might be regarded
as insufficient when taken alone, but when taken together they are
overpowering. The sinless, unearthly character of Jesus separates
him from the rest of men, so that probabilities which apply to
others do not apply to him. His mysterious self-consciousness
involves so lofty a claim, that if he was not divine he was a megalomaniac—he<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_43" id="Page_43">[43]</SPAN></span>
whose calmness and strength have left an impression
which the centuries have done nothing to efface! The specific
testimonies to the empty tomb and to the plain bodily appearances
of the risen Lord are independent and varied. Finally, unless the
resurrection be a fact, the very origin of the Christian Church
becomes an insoluble mystery. The resurrection alone can explain
the sudden transformation of a company of weak, discouraged men
into the conquerors of the world.</p>
<p>The resurrection of Jesus is a fact of history. It is not an
aspiration of the heart. It comes ultimately through the testimony
of the senses. The apostles came forward with a piece of plain
information. They were witnesses to a fact in the external world.
That fact has put a new face upon life. It is good news of salvation.</p>
<h4>2. THE RESURRECTION CONFIRMED BY EXPERIENCE</h4>
<p>The resurrection is a fact of history. Accept it as true, and
you can have hope for time and for eternity. At this point, however,
some men experience a difficulty. How can the acceptance
of a historical fact satisfy the longing of our souls? Must we stake
our salvation upon the intricacies of historical research? Surely
some more immediate certitude is required.</p>
<p>The objection would be valid if history stood alone. But
history does not stand alone. It has suffered from a false isolation.
A Christian certitude that is founded solely upon history is insufficient.
History is necessary, but not sufficient. We need
history, but we need something else as well.</p>
<p>A historical conviction of the resurrection of Jesus is not the end
of faith, but only the beginning. If faith stops there, it will never
stand the fires of criticism. We are told that Jesus lives. So
much is a matter of testimony, a matter of history. If we believe
the witness, then we can have hope. But the religious problem
of our lives has not yet been solved. Jesus lives. But what good is
it to us? If he lives, we need to find him. We need to find him,
and we can find him. We accept the message of the resurrection
enough to make trial of it. And making trial of it, we find that it
is true. Jesus is found to be alive, for he makes answer to our
prayer, and heals us. We never could have come to him unless
we had accepted the historical evidence for the resurrection. But
starting with that historical belief we went on to the blessed experience
of salvation. Christian experience cannot do without<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_44" id="Page_44">[44]</SPAN></span>
history. But it adds to history that directness, that immediateness,
that simplicity of conviction, which delivers us from fear.
We began with history. But we went on to experience. "Now
we believe, not because of thy speaking: for we have heard for
ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Saviour of the world."</p>
<h4>3. THE DEATH</h4>
<p>Jesus is alive. If we find him, he will heal us. But how shall
we find him? In the New Testament we receive instruction.</p>
<p>In the New Testament a strange fact stares us in the face. The
New Testament seems far more concerned with the death of Jesus
than with the details of his life. Learned men have tried in vain
to explain that curious fact. In elaborate treatises they have
sought the explanation. But it is really very simple. The New
Testament emphasizes the death of Jesus because that is what
Jesus did for us—or rather, coming after his perfect obedience to
the law, it is the culmination of what he did for us. In the account
of Jesus' life we are told what Jesus did for others. That account
is absolutely necessary. Without it we should never have been interested
in Jesus at all. But it is to us a means to an end, not an
end in itself. We read in the Gospel what Jesus did for others.
For one he placed his fingers in the ears and said, "Be opened";
to another he said, "Arise, take up thy bed, and walk"; to another,
"Thy sins are forgiven." These things are what Jesus did for
others. But what has he done for us? The answer of the
New Testament is plain. For us he does not say, "Arise and
walk." For us—he died. That mysterious thing which was
wrought on Calvary—that was his work for us. The cross of
Christ is a mystery. In the presence of it theology walks after
all with but trembling, halting footsteps. Learning will never
unlock its meaning. But to the penitent sinner, though mysterious,
though full of baffling riddles, it is plain enough. On the cross
Jesus dealt with our sin. Our dreadful guilt, the condemnation
of God's law—it is wiped out by an act of grace. It seemed inseparable
from us. It was a burden no earthly friend could bear.
But Christ is Master of the innermost secrets of the moral world.
He has accomplished the impossible, he has borne our sins.</p>
<p>By the cross he has healed us. But through whom does he apply
the healing touch? Through no one, save his Spirit. For he is
here himself. If we are seekers for him, then this day our search
is over.</p>
<p><span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_45" id="Page_45">[45]</SPAN></span></p>
<p>The death of Christ, in the modern Church, is often subordinated.
Exclusive emphasis is laid upon the holy example and teaching
of the Galilean prophet. The modern theologians would be right if
there were no such thing as sin. If there were no such thing as
guilt, and if there were no such thing as a dreadful enslaving power
of evil, then a noble ideal might be sufficient. But to talk about
an ideal to a man under the thralldom of sin is a cruel mockery.</p>
<p>Sin may indeed be glossed over. Let us make the best of our
condition, we are told, let us do the best we can, let us simply
trust in the all-conquering love of God. Dangerous advice! By
it a certain superficial joy of life may be induced. But the joy
rests upon an insecure foundation. It is dangerous to be happy
on the brink of the abyss. Permanent joy can come only when
sin has been faced honestly, and destroyed. It has been destroyed
by the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.</p>
<p>It is true that God is loving. He has manifested his love, however,
better than by complacency toward sin. He has manifested
it by the gracious gift of a Saviour.</p>
<hr class="tb" />
<p><span class="smcap">In the Library.</span>—Denney, "The Death of Christ." Orr, "The
Resurrection of Jesus." Crawford, "The Doctrine of Holy Scripture
Respecting the Atonement."</p>
<hr class="chap" />
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />