170. III. Oneness Of The Resurrection.
III. Oneness Of The Resurrection.
1. Theories of Distinct Resurrections.—There is a premillennial theory, which holds that the martyrs, if not all the shall rise at the inception of the millennium and reign with Christ a thousand years. The ground of the theory lies chiefly in a single text (Revelation 20:4-6). The souls of certain martyrs appeared in the vision of John, and he said these things: “And they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.” There is not in the text one definite word about a literal resurrection. The “first resurrection” means the “living and reigning” of the martyrs. But they were souls in a disembodied state; therefore their living and reigning could not mean a literal resurrection. Further, such a meaning requires the premillennial advent and the personal reign of Christ; but, as we have seen, neither is a truth; therefore there is here no literal resurrection of the martyrs at the inception of the millennium. The text is most easily interpreted on the theory of a figurative rising and reigning. The martyrs lived and reigned in the triumph of the cause for which they died. The idea of a resurrection often appears in the Scriptures in a figurative sense, and seems very natural in the intense and bold symbolism of this book. In the hour of his martyrdom John Huss proclaimed the triumph of his cause, and said: “And I, waking from among the dead, and rising, so to speak, from my grave, shall leap with great joy.” It was in the same manner of speech that Leo X. said: “The heretics, Huss and Jerome, are now alive again in the person of Martin Luther.” In glowing vision John saw the triumph of the cause for which these martyrs died, and summoned them into the triumph. This is their living and reigning; and this is their resurrection.[851] [851]
Another theory holds distinct resurrections of the righteous and the wicked, though narrowly separated in time. This theory is probably quite common in popular Christian thought. It has no support in the texts upon which it mainly rests. We have first this text: “But every man in his own order: Christ the first-fruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming” (1 Corinthians 15:23). There is here no direct reference to the wicked, and hence no distinction between their resurrection and that of the righteous. The only distinction in relation to the resurrection is between Christ and his disciples. Another text is in these words: “And the dead in Christ shall rise first” (1 Thessalonians 4:16). But neither in these words nor in the context is there any reference to the resurrection of the wicked; hence there is no time-distinction between it and that of the righteous. The context makes obvious the real point of distinction. It is between the resurrection of the dead and the ascension of the living to meet the coming Lord. The former shall be first in the order of time, and then all shall ascend together to meet the Lord in the air. There is no proof in the text that the righteous shall rise before the wicked.
2. Proof of the Oneness.—It was before shown that the resurrection and the judgment shall be concomitant with the second advent. This means that all shall rise at the same time, as all shall be judged at the same time. Both shall directly follow the coming of our Lord (Matthew 25:31-46; John 5:28-29; Revelation 20:11-15).
Hanna: The Resurrection of the Dead; Wescott: The Gospel of the Resurrection; Mattison: The Resurrection of the Dead; Landis: The Resurrection of the Body; Brown: The Resurrection of Life; Cook:Doctrine of the Resurrection; Kingsley: The Resurrection of the Dead; Gollum: Resurrection of the Body; Cochran: The Resurrection of the Dead; Drew: Identity and General Resurrection of the Human Body; Bush: Anastasis: or the Resurrection of the Body.