BY THE REV. JOHN R. MACKAY, M.A., INVERNESS.
Preached on New Year’s Day.
TO pious minds the beginning of another year will bring serious thoughts. The clock of time seems, at such a season, to strike hard and loud, as if calling us to realise that we are one other stage nearer the most solemn appointments of death and of judgment. The greater number of mankind, however, are very deaf to these loud calls. They are like a company of passengers that had set out from one of our ports on a trans-Atlantic liner having, let me say, New York in view as their first destination on the other side, but who, in the course of the voyage, had become so absorbed with the little life of the ship itself—with the little engagements and little movements backwards and forwards on board ship wherewith passengers usually try to beguile time—that they quite forgot for what purpose they were on the Atlantic at all. They will waken up with surprise, and it may be with consternation, when, notwithstanding their thoughtlessness, their ship shall have brought them into port.
But the call of God’s Word is louder and more distinctly intelligible than that of the seasons of the year. Such a call we have in the words of our text. In meditating on it we shall, in reference to the resurrection spoken of, consider—
I.—The Fact
II.—The Reasons Why
III.—The Question Suggested
I.—Our text declares that a general resurrection of the human race is to be certainly looked for.
All mankind are here given us in two classes, the just and the unjust. These classes are exhaustive of the race; every man, woman, and child from Adam downwards will find their place in one or other of these two classes. Now concerning the entire number of individuals both of the one class and of the other, the Apostle Paul declares that, so far as before Christ come again they shall have died, they will also experience a rising again from the dead in a bodily sense.
It is the case, as every careful reader of the Scriptures will have noticed, that much more is said in the Word of God concerning the resurrection of the just than is said concerning the resurrection of the unjust. And for that inequality several reasons may be assigned.
(i) The Bible is mainly the record of a gracious revelation on the part of God.
Now, the resurrection of the just belongs to the sphere of grace. That can scarcely be said of the resurrection of the wicked.
(2) The doctrine of the resurrection from the dead is in more places than one stated in the Scriptures controversially and the recognised rules of controversy are followed.
Christ so states it in Matthew xxii. 23-33 (Mark xii. 18-27; Luke xx. 27-38). Paul so states it in 1 Corinthians xv. Now, in a controversy it is well understood that it is easier to prove a particular proposition than a universal proposition; and that for the purposes of the controversy it may not be always necessary to prove a universal. If any one, e.g., were to say that there was no Roman Catholic in Inverness, one opposing that view, in order to overthrow the assertion, did not need to prove that all the inhabitants of Inverness were Roman Catholics, nor even to prove that one-third of them were Roman Catholics. All that was necessary, in order to completely overthrow the contention of the person who ventured to say that there was no Roman Catholic in Inverness, was that it should be demonstrated that there were some Roman Catholics in Inverness. And we find Christ adopting this, admittedly the wisest and best, method of reasoning with those who opposed themselves against the truth, in His controversy concerning the resurrection—with the Sadducees. The Sadducees denied that any of the dead would rise from the grave. Christ, in order to overthrow their reasonings, showed that some at least must rise from the dead. This He did—one may remark in passing—in a way which showed the profound reverence He had for the Scriptures. His proof rests on the difference between the past and the present tense of the verb “to be.” God, in speaking to Moses at the bush, did not say, “I was the God of Abraham,” but, “I am the God of Abraham”—the Living, Reviving, Covenant God of Abraham—that is, even after Abraham had been some hundreds of years in his grave. Because Jehovah still continues to be the Covenant God of Abraham—of his entire person, soul, and body—Abraham must rise. Such, I take it, is the nature of Christ’s reasonings against the Sadducees. He proves, that is, from the Scriptures, that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—yea, all whose God Jehovah is—must rise; and if some rise from the dead, the Sadducean position is overthrown.
(3) The Apostle Paul follows a similarly wise method in 1 Corinthians xv. in controverting the opinion of those who had been saying (v. 12) that there is no resurrection of the dead.
The Apostle’s counter argument in that chapter bears directly only on those who are Christ’s. But as the argument is handled by the Apostle Paul, one perceives that over and above the fact that he would not prove a universal when less sufficed to overthrow the arguments of his opponents, the Apostle was led to adopt the exact method followed by him in this remarkable chapter because he felt that as the resurrection of believers followed as a matter of necessity the resurrection of Jesus Christ, so for the resurrection of Jesus Christ, in particular, the proof was overwhelming, so overwhelming indeed that a jury who would not on the evidence affirm the resurrection of Jesus Christ, would perjure themselves.
I have been stating reasons why one should not feel surprised if one finds that the Scriptures say much more concerning the resurrection of the just than they do concerning the resurrection of the unjust. (1) The Bible is the record mainly of a gracious revelation of God; (2) God’s witnesses shewed supreme wisdom in their controversial methods; (3) the resurrection of Jesus Christ (which virtually carries with it the resurrection of His people) is capable of the easiest and fullest demonstration. But it were an utterly thoughtless thing from the circumstances now named concerning the greater fulness of testimony to the resurrection of the just, to conclude that the Scriptures leave the subject of the resurrection of the unjust in a measure of dubiety. Not at all.
The doctrine of the resurrection of the wicked is taught, if not so frequently, yet as plainly as that of the resurrection of the just. I am not now dealing with the matter with a view to notice every passage in the Scriptures wherein the doctrine is taught. But I would seek to fix your attention on three passages. The first, which is from the Old Testament, is in Daniel xii. 2: “And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.” The sense in which this passage in Daniel ought to be understood may be gathered from the second passage to which we direct attention, even from the words of our Lord in John v. 28, 29, words in which, beyond doubt, the language of Daniel is re-echoed: “The hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and they shall come forth; they that have done good to the resurrection of life, and they that have done evil unto the resurrection of damnation.” Evidently Christ understood Daniel’s “many” in the sense of “all,” and to His followers it will be an end of controversy, both as to the Divine authorship of Daniel, and as to truth of the doctrine that we are to look forward to a resurrection not of the just only, but of the unjust also—not of those who are Christ’s only, but of those also who are not His—that Christ thus re-echoes Daniel.
The third pivotal passage in our text. “There shall be,” says the Apostle Paul, “a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.” It were easy to show that the doctrine of Daniel on this head was also the doctrine of other Old Testament prophets, and that the doctrine of Paul on this head was also the doctrine of other Apostles, so that one can have no hesitation in saying that we shall not give up the doctrine of a resurrection of the wicked without parting company with Daniel, with Christ Himself, and with the Apostle Paul, or rather with all the prophets of the Old Testament, with Christ Himself the Chief Corner Stone, and with all the Apostles of the New Dispensation.
That is the Fact.
II.—Having said so much with a view to bring home to your minds the Fact, I proceed to treat of the Reasons.
For it is not only that the Scriptures teach us the fact of the resurrection of the unjust as well as the just, but the Spirit of God has been pleased for the establishing of our understanding and conscience to tell us the reasons. I say reasons rather than reason, for it does not seem to me that the reason why the just will have a bodily resurrection is one and the same with the reason why the unjust will have a bodily resurrection. In making this distinction, however, I wish to say that by reason I here intend the reason on the part of the people raised. If one were looking to the reason on the part of God, one might well say that His power and His righteousness was the reason in the case of the one as well as in that of the other. But now we are dealing with the reason on the part of those raised from the dead. For it is not without a reason on the part of those raised that either the just or the unjust will shortly be raised from the dead. Nor is the reason in either case one and the same. If you take the case of the righteous, it is in accordance with Scripture for us to say that righteousness on their part is just the reason of their resurrection. Take the case of Christ Himself first. To Him, as to all, the grave was a prison-house. But He was brought forth out of that prison-house because the debt which brought Him to it was fully paid. His resurrection was God’s recognition not only of the fact that He spake truth when He said, “I am the Son of God,” but also of the further fact that as He gave His life a ransom for many, so that ransom was accepted, and so the debt, for which He had become obliged, was discharged. And in God’s good time they who are Christ’s, and who shall have fallen on sleep ere Christ come again, will also as members of Christ’s mystical body be brought forth out of their prison-house as a public attestation of the fact that to them there has been no condemnation from that hour in which they became through faith united to precious Christ. Their righteousness, in a word, is the cause of their resurrection; of this they have a pledge even in time. For the Spirit of God has come to make His abode in them. The proof of that also is that through this indwelling they mind the things of the Spirit more than they do the things of the flesh, and they have the assurance that as the Spirit of Christ thus manifestly dwells in them, the Spirit of Him who raised Christ from the dead will one day quicken their mortal bodies. Their going forth from the grave will be a matter of righteousness, as truly as the issuing of Paul and Silas from the prison in Philippi (Acts xvi. 35) was a matter of righteousness. The righteousness of the saints, primarily imputed righteousness, but corroboratively also inherent righteousness, is the reason why the just rise and appear before the judgment seat of God.
But the case is otherwise with the unjust. Guilt on their part will be the reason of their rising from their graves. Guilt is a terrible power. Guilt will sometimes among men drag a criminal from across the Atlantic and bring him to appear before a Judge in Britain. Or we may put it for purposes of illustration thus:—Ordinarily with ourselves when a culprit is apprehended by the police, he finds lodgment for the first night or two in the lock-up. He is then dragged before the Sheriff or Judge. What is it that brings the culprit rather than any other person before the Judge? It is simply and only guilt, or at least a presumption that there is guilt. So shall it be with the wicked. The grave is their lock-up from the day of death—I speak of the body only here and now—to the day of the resurrection. They shall then have to leave the lock-up, and guilt, and nothing but guilt, will drag them from out their grave up to the bar of God’s judgment. What a fearful thing guilt must be! We think it terrible when a would-be fugitive from justice is extradited in order that he may be reckoned with in this country for his crimes. But the sight is not so awful as will be the sight of innumerable graves opening in order that the guilty might be handed over to justice; graves in the case of some that were as prison houses unopened for thousands of years. But some may think that we are exaggerating here, and claim that, whilst it is conceivable that those who were guilty of outrageous crimes are burdened with such guilt that not even their grave can hold them always, it cannot be guilt that is the reason why all those who are not Christ’s will have a resurrection. But what saith the Scripture? “He that believeth on him shall not be confounded” (1 Peter ii. 6). If he that believeth shall not be confounded, or shall not be put to shame, but, on the contrary, shall have praise and glory and everlasting honour, that certainly carries with it that everyone that is not a believer will be put to shame. The Scriptures study brevity, and imply more than they directly say. When the Psalmist says (Psalm xcv. 11), “I sware in my wrath that they should not enter into my rest,” an Apostle, under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, understood that to imply that some must enter in (Hebrews iv. 6). Similarly, when Isaiah or Peter says that no one that putteth his trust in the Foundation laid in Sion will be put to shame, we must conclude that everyone who does not put his trust in the Foundation will be put to shame. Nor need we be at a loss to understand what is meant here by shame. It is just the shame which the wicked will realise when they issue from their graves—the shame that is the concomitant of guilt—the shame and everlasting confusion of which Daniel, under the Old Testament, and Christ, under the New, as we have seen, spake. The teaching of the Bible is that the whole world is brought in guilty before God. As our Shorter Catechism puts it: Some sins in themselves, and by reason of several aggravations, are more heinous in the sight of God than others. But every sin deserveth God’s wrath and curse, both in this life and in that which is to come. Nor is there a single soul whose guilt is so light that, if that soul have not the conscience purged through the blood of Christ, its guilt will not bring it out of its grave at the time of the Great Assize. It is beyond question that as the reason of the bodily resurrection of the just is righteousness, the reason of the bodily resurrection of the unjust is guilt—guilt not purged off the conscience. To this there will not be a single exception.
III.—These solemn considerations bring us to ask a Question.
We ought to have no questions, whosoever we be, as to whether we shall rise after our death out of our graves or not. The testimony of Him who cannot lie assures us that both the just and the unjust shall rise. These categories are exhaustive—we must belong to one or to the other—we must rise. About that there is no question. But the question is, “Why shall I rise? Will righteousness or guilt be the cause of my rising?” It must be on account either of righteousness or of guilt we shall rise.
By way of guidance, let it be said that the doctrine which we have been handling under our second head this day, is fitted, if rightly received, to kill self-confidence. We may have been willing to acknowledge in an easy way that we are by nature guilty creatures. But think of what it means, that you are guilty in such a way and to such a degree that if you do not get rid of your guilt in time, that guilt of yours will one day drag you forth out of the lock-up of your grave, and will bring you to the judgment seat of Christ, only to meet there with shame and confusion that will literally be everlasting. Is not this truth, if received as it ought to be, fitted to kill self-confidence in everyone that hears it? For a resurrection on account of the enormity of guilt, a resurrection therefore to everlasting shame, is what everyone without exception deserves. Is not our natural righteousness of little avail seeing that it will not cover our guilt or our shame in that day?
It is not easy to learn the lessons which the law of God is intended and fitted to teach, and it is only in a small measure that we could learn them and live. Nevertheless it is eminently salutary, nay, indispensable, for our salvation that our nakedness should be laid bare. Why? Is it that we should be tormented before our time? Not at all, but in order that sensibly stripped of every confidence in the flesh, we might flee for covering to Him who is ever ready to clothe the naked, clothing them without, if one may say so, with His own righteousness imputed to us, and inwardly with the grace of His blessed Spirit. He is the resurrection and the life. He that believeth upon Him shall never be put to shame; yea, though he were dead yet should he live. If, then, the question be pressed, as it ought to be pressed, what shall be the reason of my rising from the dead? The answer will depend on whether we have laid to heart our nakedness, and fled to Christ to cover us, or whether on the other hand, notwithstanding all we have heard of law and gospel, neither the terror of the one nor the kindness of the other has moved us. And in conclusion I would say, although in a sense I have said the same thing already, that, as regards those who will rise to praise and glory and honour, they in time go forth out of the prison house not only of justice and conscience, but also out of the prison house of the flesh, in which by nature they had been corrupting more and more.
May He bless His word!