Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Christ Plainly Testifies to the Resurrection of the Entire Man. Not in His Soul Only, Without the Body.
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Chapter
XXXIV.—Christ Plainly Testifies to the Resurrection of the Entire
Man. Not in His Soul Only, Without the Body.
To begin with the passage where He says that He is
come to “to seek and to save that which is
lost.”7506
What do you suppose
that to be which is lost? Man, undoubtedly. The entire man, or only a
part of him? The whole man, of course. In fact, since the transgression
which caused man’s ruin was committed quite as much by the
instigation of the soul from concupiscence as by the action of the
flesh from actual fruition, it has marked the entire man with the
sentence of transgression, and has therefore made him deservedly
amenable to perdition. So that he will be wholly saved, since he has by
sinning been wholly lost. Unless it be true that the sheep (of the
parable) is a “lost” one, irrespective of its body; then
its recovery may be effected without the body. Since, however, it is
the bodily substance as well as the soul, making up the entire animal,
which was carried on the shoulders of the Good Shepherd, we have here
unquestionably an example how man is restored in both his natures. Else
how unworthy it were of God to bring only a moiety of man to
salvation—and almost less than that; whereas the munificence of
princes of this world always claims for itself the merit of a plenary
grace! Then must the devil be understood to be stronger for injuring
man, ruining him wholly? and must God have the character of comparative
weakness, since He does not relieve and help man in his entire state?
The apostle, however, suggests that “where sin abounded, there
has grace much more abounded.”7507
How, in fact,
can he be regarded as saved, who can at the same time be said to be
lost—lost, that is, in the flesh, but saved as to his soul?
Unless, indeed, their argument now makes it necessary that the
soul should be placed in a “lost” condition, that it may be
susceptible of salvation, on the ground that is properly saved which
has been lost. We, however, so understand the soul’s immortality
as to believe it “lost,” not in the sense of destruction,
but of punishment, that is, in hell. And if this is the case, then it
is not the soul which salvation will affect, since it is
“safe” already in its own nature by reason of its
immortality, but rather the flesh, which, as all readily allow, is
subject to destruction. Else, if the soul is also perishable (in this
sense), in other words, not immortal—the condition of the
flesh—then this same condition ought in all fairness to benefit
the flesh also, as being similarly mortal and perishable, since that
which perishes the Lord purposes to save. I do not care now to follow
the clue of our discussion, so far as to consider whether it is in one
of his natures or in the other that perdition puts in its claim on man,
provided that salvation is equally distributed over the two substances,
and makes him its aim in respect of them both. For observe, in which
substance so-ever you assume man to have perished, in the other he does
not perish. He will therefore be saved in the substance in which
he does not perish, and yet
obtain salvation in that in which he does perish. You have (then) the
restoration of the entire man, inasmuch as the Lord purposes to save
that part of him which perishes, whilst he will not of course lose that
portion which cannot be lost. Who will any longer doubt of the safety
of both natures, when one of them is to obtain salvation, and the other
is not to lose it? And, still further, the Lord explains to us
the meaning of the thing when He says: “I came not to do my own
will, but the Father’s, who hath sent me.”7508
What, I ask, is that will? “That of
all which He hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it
up again at the last day.”7509
Now, what had
Christ received of the Father but that which He had Himself put
on? Man, of course, in his texture of flesh and soul. Neither,
therefore, of those parts which He has received will He allow to
perish; nay, no considerable portion—nay, not the least fraction,
of either. If the flesh be, as our opponents slightingly think,
but a poor fraction, then the flesh is safe, because not a fraction
of man is to perish; and no larger portion is in danger, because
every portion of man is in equally safe keeping with Him. If, however,
He will not raise the flesh also up at the last day, then He will
permit not only a fraction of man to perish, but (as I will venture to
say, in consideration of so important a part) almost the whole of him.
But when He repeats His words with increased emphasis, “And this
is the Father’s will, that every one which seeth the Son, and
believeth on Him, may have eternal life: and I will raise him up at the
last day,”7510
—He asserts
the full extent of the resurrection. For He assigns to each
several nature that reward which is suited to its services: both to the
flesh, for by it the Son was “seen;” and to the soul, for
by it He was “believed on.” Then, you will say, to them was
this promise given by whom Christ was “seen.” Well, be it
so; only let the same hope flow on from them to us! For if to them who
saw, and therefore believed, such fruit then accrued to the operations
of the flesh and the soul, how much more to us! For more
“blessed,” says Christ, “are they who have not seen,
and yet have believed;”7511
since, even if the
resurrection of the flesh must be denied to them, it must at any
rate be a fitting boon to us, who are the more blessed. For how
could we be blessed, if we were to perish in any part of
us?E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
