157
T H E K I N G ’ S B U S I N E S S
April 1925
I
H a b e a s C o r p u s ? Rev. Jo h n G. Reid, P h. D., Spokane, W ashington In this message Dr. Reid confronts the doubts of the Modernists with an unanswer able demand; “You must produce the proof or henceforth abide by the assured answer of the Scriptures—‘the same body!’ ”
th e one sure way of doing so, is it supposable, is it believable, th a t th e ru lers made no effort to discover w hat had become of it. It is absolutely certain, con ceded by friend and foe alike,
¡^LV ^INE of the points a t ’ iSjlKp issue in- th e present controversy between N aturalism and Super naturalism , between Rationalism and Revelation, between “ The
th a t it did no t follow th e ordinary, fam iliar course of deterioration and decomposition for,— “it was n o t th e re !” The ru lers adm itted th a t much. In those days when embalm ing, as we know it, was unknown, or unpracticed, save in the highest circles, and in th e face of John 11:39 how difficult, how practically impossible it would be for th e few thoroughly demoralized disciples to keep it hidden for long. W h at became of it? If it be suggested th a t it “Vanished,” was “ dissipated into gases,” (bones and all! ! ! )— recalling th e cerements as they were found, recalling His own challenge, “Handle me and see: fo r a Spirit h ath not flesh and bones as ye see me have,”— are we not asked to accept a m iracle, biological, physiological, chemical, taxing “ our m odern m inds to accept” as g reat as,— nay, even g reater, th a n th a t of a physical resurrection? W h at became of th e body? Until those who deny a r e a l., physical resu rrection answer th is question satisfactorily we may re st easy. The “ onus probandi” is upon them . Eleven (a t least) men, and several women who had known Him intim ately for th ree years, tell us th a t “He showed himself alive by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days,” etc., upon one occasion by “ five hundred b reth ren a t once,” and th a t, standing w ith H im upon Olivet’s crown, whiles He was speaking and blessing them , th ey “ Beheld Him tak en up from them into Heaven,” in th e same fam il iar body. ' These aver th a t th ey know w hat became of th e body! And we upon the au tho rity of th e ir testimony, which we have no reason to question or to impugn, have no hesita tion in re-affirming th a t “ I t is an essential doctrine of the Word of God, and (th erefo re) of our S tandards, concerning our Lord Jesus Christ, th a t on th e th ird day He rose from the dead w ith the same body w ith which He suffered, w ith which body also He ascended into heaven,” where, in the same body, glorified, “He ever liveth,” on th e rig h t hand of th e majesty on high, “ to make intercession fo r us,” and “whence,” in th e same body, glorified, “He shall come again, to judge the quick (th e living) and th e dead.” Amen! And while “ it is not yet revealed w hat we shall be,” yet we know th a t when it is revealed (or when H e is revealed) “we shall be like H im ,” for He “ shall change th is body of our hum iliation, th a t it may be fashioned like unto the body of H is glory.” Then shall we see as He is Him “whom having no t seen we love, and in whom, though now we see Him not, yet believing, we rejoice w ith joy unspeakable and full of g lo ry !” If He did no t “ rise from the dead w ith th e same body w ith which he suffered,” WHAT BECAME OF THAT BODY? R.S.V.P. (A definite answer is respectfully requ ested ). Habeas Corpus! (“ If you have the body pro duce it in co u rt!” )
wisdom of th is age, which is foolishness w ith God,” and “The foolishness of God which is w iser th a n men,”— one of th e “Five Po in ts,” deemed by the General Assembly of th e P resbyterian Church sufficiently im po rtan t to w arra n t re-affirmation as “An essential doctrine of the Word of God, and (th erefo re) of our S tandards,” is “T hat our Lord Jesus Christ, on the th ird day rose again from th e dead w ith the same body w ith which He suffered; w ith which body also He ascended into Heaven.” There are those, however, even in th e P resbyterian Church, who have taken vehement exception to th is dictum, questioning—some even denying—th e physical resurrec tion of th e body of our Lord Jesus, i.e., of th a t same body which was nailed to the cross; pierced w ith th e Roman spear; taken down by special p erm it of the Roman Governor upon certification by the centurion of His actual d eath ; by loving hands wrapped in fine linen and spices, and tenderly laid in th e new tomb -of Joseph of A rimathea, which his enemies took pains to “make sure, sealing th e stone, and setting a watch.” This raises a fair, square issue. Before we can proceed fu rth e r w ith its discussion, how ever, one question m ust be disposed of, to w it: W hat became of th e body? When in the early dawn of the th ird day Mary Magdalene and the o th er women— and la ter P eter and John, responding to th e astounding news which Mary b rough t—visited th e sepulchre, they “ found not th e body.” W hat had become of it? If it was not raised— if th a t body in which He appeared to His disciples, “being seen of them forty days,” in divers places, under diverse conditions, which was recognized by His most in tim ate fam iliars, for which He challenged all th e ordinary te sts of identification, was no t “The body w ith which He suffered,” which was “ crucified, dead and buried,” as we claim th a t it was, then it is incumbent upon those who deny it to “Produce th e body!” W hat became' of it? I t is not enough to say, “We do not know .” Review briefly the facts of record. The disciples, entering th e tomb which they found opened, “ saw th e Jlinen clothes lying,” as they were, apparently undisturbed. Not till they had made exam ination were they startled by th e discovery th a t the body was no t there. “They found no t th e body.” Realizing (1 ) th a t no resuscitated person could, unaided, have extricated H imself from such w rappings as enswathed Him, and (2 ) th a t any person w ith sin ister in ten t removing the body, eith er (a) would have tak en clothes and all, or (b) could not have extricated th e body from such w rappings w ithout irrem ediable disarrangem ent, they were convinced th a t He had indeed “ risen from th e dead as He had sa id ;” but— w hat became of th e body?' The chief priests and elders claimed th a t “ his disciples came and stole him away by n igh t.” When, to disprove the counter claim of a real, bodily resurrection it was of the last importance to prove this, and when th e production of th e body or the revelation of th e place of concealment was
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker