PHYSICAL RESURRECTION.

Evening Star, Issue 14413, 8 July 1910, Page 3

PHYSICAL RESURRECTION.

Preaching at the Church of Christ, Stuart street, on Sunday evening, Mr Harold Tidman based his sermon on the wellworn text “Now is Christ raised from the dead.” For some eight years, he said, it had been his privilege and honor to devote a considerable portion of Ins life to the proclamation of the old, old story of Joans and His love. His father had preached it, and his father’s father had done likewise, and away back up the river of years men of every nation and tribe had’ rejoiced in tho same blessed service. There was only one adequate explanation of it. That explanation was that Jesus the Christ, the only begotten Son of'tho overliving God, rose victorious o’er tho tomb.

They were frequently being told, however, that it could be proved by scientific discoveries that physical resurrection was an impossibility and an absurdity; that preaching along the lines of the Gospel story was vain, and that if Christianity was* to remain a power, it must toe the line of modem rationalism. The enemies of Christ and the detractors of His work and word had realised that if they could only disprove the laet of tho resurrection if "Jesus Cficist, they would thereby destroy tho greatest pillar that supported the structure of Christianity. Tho Christian Church was an historical act. It had existed as a visible institution for over nineteen centuries, and could ob traced up to the date which its rnemers assigned for its historic origin. Tho existence of the Church had to lie accounted for. The account given was that the cause of the marvellous impulse given to the movement after the death ol 'its Fournier was th-; unanimous and unwavering conviction that Jesus rose again from the dead. They considered this to be a re wimble-and adequate explanation of the origin of the Christian economy. It would probably be s.id, however, that no explan tion could be s tisfacUny which postulated a miracle —which d-manded a belief iii the possibility of an exception to the observed law’s of Nature, He had pointed out two or three weeks ago how unreasonable it w s, apart altogether from a belief in God, to assume the impossibility of the suspension or variation of observed ...ws oi Nature, as they were termed. Jut more than this, if men set out to deny a long-accredited fact, they could only give such a denial any semblance of force jy piojxiunding some reasonable and-ade-piiate explanation of its invention. In this ase it had not been done. Instead, they , aad been offered three alternatives, all ol vhich were utterly unworthy of seekers (or truth.

It was suggested that the disciples were :he victims of mental hallucination, or that .hrist did not die {mediately following th; rucifixion, but merely swooned, and re overed in the tomb. Then (here was the .ceil'd, suggestion of Keim in ‘ Jesus of w.anr’ that the- living spirit of Jcs-s ,nt telegrams to ihc disciples, winch gave ■.hem a vision healing the likeness ol th Iwdy laid in the grave. Such suggestion.' cere but more excuses lor rank atheism.

The disciples did not ospecl, or even tare to hop", thjit their Master was coming back to them. They were ovenvlielmet! in gloom and despair, and their whole stale of mind, innl-cad of being favorable, to the reception of the report of Christ's resurrection, was so thoroughly sceptical | wait it was only after a sharp rebuke from | the Lord that’they recovered the norma! ; balance of their reason and senses. _ .there [ was no doubt, also, that the supposition of the disciples that they had seen a sprat vas only a supposition, and that the dis•iplos took full advantage of the invitation to handle their Master and see that Ho 'ad the flesh and hones of a physical body. They could not account for the unswerving conviction and the renewed zeal and enthusiasm ol the apostles by the suggestion that they had had a vision of a spirit. Robortson-Nicoll says, in regard to the swoon theory ; “ Such a .losco could not be the author ’of the resurrection, joy, and triumph.” It was not one last fond leavefaking with a weak, wounded, dying leader that made the little band of apostles the pioneers of the greatest movement that over thrilled and" swayed mankind. It ‘ook something more than tint to give IVter the courage to say ‘‘Let all the house of Israel know this assuredly, that Cod hath made that same Jesus whom yc have crucified both Lord anti Christ.” The suggestion of Keim was too grotesquely absurd to spend time in answering. The critics then sought to establish the tint rufetworthiness of the Word of Cod. A “student” had recently written to the ‘Evening Star’ declaring that the resurrection of Jesus was the only cose on reco’-d of resurrection from the dead ; that the , Gospel accounts of the rrcsuirectinn d:s- 1 agreed in all the details. Both statements were contrary to fact, as ho had taken the liberty to point out at the time. ‘What he asked them especially to notice was thattire Gospel narratives struck no uncertain note about the fact of the resurrection itself. He did not think this was sufficiently appreciated. So long as they could feel quite sure of the evidence thatJesus Christ rose from the dead they would not be greatly perturbed by the further fact’ that Matthew and Mark' only mentioned ons angel hem” at the sepulchre, while Luke said that there were two, standing, and John, that there were two, sitting. The men and women who could not reconcile such variations in four reports of an historical event of such outstanding importance, with the inspiration and reliability of Scripture, were strangely lucking in wbat was called the .sense of humor. To the sincere, thoughtful, and reverent . student such variations presented no difficulty. Ho would in the Word itself find a complete , answer to every apparent contradiction, j Mr Tidman emphasised the “unbelief” of i the disciples when the Resurrection was 1 first reported to them, ako the faithfulness of the apostles in recording their own lack of faith. “ Something happened ” which not only broke down that unbelief: “something happened” which not only turned them into believers, but which made them so sure and positive in that belief that they- were ready to die rathe:' than give it up or stop telling others the precious' news. That “ something,” according tn the apostles, was the resurrection o! Jesus ; and .that was the only explanati m that mot the circumstances of the case. “Pentecost” could only be explained by the Resurrection. They now '.imc to the most important witness of all. In the seventh chapter of Acts they were introduced to a young man who was aiding and abetting tho death of the first (.hristiaii martyr’, a young man who, at the time ef writing, was the cTcsc personal friend of Luke. Luke, however, again snows Ids

aithhrhicss to the facts as be knew them by tilling men of the vicious persecution th-' Clmrch suffered at tho bauds of hi friend in his early days. After making hi oc o the Church in Jerusalem, Said sought to extend his operations, and set out for Damascus with that intention “ Something happened ” on the way, hov ever. Something happened that had changed the history of continents. Something happened that turned a vicious persecutor of the Church into Llto most faithful servant that ever entered tho ministry. Paul says that ho saw the Pisan, Living Christ, 'and one can conceive of nothing short of that sufficient to amount for a conversion so marvellous. Whenever or wherever Paul preached ho always l ad the same, message of faith and life in a Living Lord.

'J licbs who denied the Resurrection, however, had not only to a icoant- for the existence of the Church ; had not only to show that the Gospels were unreliable," but they had got to deal with a p "ogrc-reiye line of prophecies relating to ibis particular event. If the .Resurrection were indeed true then it should have some pres mu ireauni to them. If Jesus was a Living Rtalii men should, be alive to thair relntic-nsl.-i to Him. If Jesus lived, uio t>m‘d wdy L uuiy exprcjEseu in Him. ‘ [B,