virtue have been wrought, must in justice be raised to participate with the soul in the consequences of its acts, is of any value, then the resurrection of all that has been put off will be necessary, and, if so, we shall have men forty or fifty feet high, with proportionate breadth; for that, under such circumstances, will be the bulk of one who has lived to the age of promise. All this is sufficiently perplexing, the reason is because the premises, out of which it arises, are not true.
It may be said, "With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible."[1] This indeed is true; but when it is said with God all things are possible, the meaning is, all those things which are consistent with His Wisdom and His Love. If it could be shown that He has taught the doctrine of a physical resurrection, that would be a sufficient inducement for us to accept it. But this we have not seen, and certainly we cannot find it in the Scriptures. The revival of the dead man who was brought into contact with the bones of Elisha,[2] the raising of Lazarus[3] and the restoration of the widow's son,[4] do not bear upon the subject; they were miraculous events for special ends; and though the bodies of the parties were returned to life they were not decomposed, and they died again.
But it will be proper to advert to some of the leading passages in which this doctrine is supposed to be taught.[5]
- ↑ Matt. xix. 26.
- ↑ 2 Kings xiii. 21.
- ↑ John xi.
- ↑ Luke vii. 12—15.
- ↑ It is not intended to notice all the passages which are usually forced into the service of this doctrine; nor is it purposed to enter into a long discussion or an elaborate criticism of those which we think it useful to examine. Our main design is only to touch upon leading passages and salient points. The readers who are wishful for a more extensive exposition, are referred to "Anastasis," by Professor Bush: to the section on the Resurrection, in the Rev. S. Noble's "Appeal on Behalf of the
