Yet why not, if the same charge is to be fastened upon him from the language employed in speaking of his body after the resurrection? Thus, again we read that "Enoch walked with God, and was not, for God took him." Enoch was not." Does this mean that he ceased to exist, or simply that he disappeared from human view? "The Word was made flesh." Does this mean that the Word was converted into flesh, or simply that it became united with flesh? "He hath made him, who knew no sin, to be sin for us." Was Christ literally made sin? So with a multitude of other texts, where no one can hesitate for a moment to admit that some qualification of the literal reading is indispensably necessary.

In the present case it will be seen that the real point at issue is the nature and mode of the manifestation-or in other words, whether our Lord entered by the door, or suddenly appeared, without entering. If the latter be the fact, then doubtless the body which was handled was the body which thus appeared, and we leave it to the reflecting to judge whether this was likely to have been a material body of flesh and bones. Is not a supernatural handling, we would ask, just as conceivable as a supernatural seeing?

The same train of remark will apply also to his eating in their presence. There is no more difficulty in conceiving this, than in conceiving of their satisfying themselves by handling his body. It was part and parcel of the same process of identification, We hold that no one can seriously believe that our Lord subsisted by meat and drink during the forty days of his occasional sojourn among his disciples previous to the ascension from Bethany. Whatever, therefore, was the nature of the evidence afforded by his han

dled body, such also was that afforded by his eating before them.

And in connexion with what is here said of our Lord's eating with his disciples, I beg leave to submit another passage which, taken in its several relations, seems to afford a still further proof of the correctness of the sentiment which I am here advocating. At the last supper with the disciples, our Lord remarked that "he would no more drink of the fruit of the vine till he drank it new with them in the kingdom of God." Luke, however, has it a little different-"Till the kingdom of God be come." Now the kingdom of God came, or was established, when Christ rose from the dead and ascended to heaven, and the evidence is to me conclusive that both these events-the resurrection and first ascensiontook place on the same day, a point largely considered in my work on the Resurrection. Now it is expressly asserted by Peter that Christ both ate and drank with his disciples after his resurrection, and during the forty days. This I regard as the fulfilment of the promise here recorded. And if the idea be well founded, it is a proof that the kingdom of God was already established. But Christ is the King of this kingdom, and his glorification consists mainly in his investiture with the kingly dignity. Consequently if he ate and drank with the disciples in his kingdom, it must have been subsequent to his glorification. But he was not glorified in his material, but in his spiritual body. It follows, therefore, that he had a spiritual body when this eating and drinking took place.

As to what the disciples supposed was the nature of the substance submitted to their senses, this is entirely another question. The true inquiry has respect to what it was; and this must be determined by an impartial esti

mate of all the circumstances which enter into the relation. The evidence is to our minds conclusive, that the predicates are such as can apply only to a spiritual and celestial body. And if this be not the true view of the subject, to what extremities are we driven! If the resurrection of the Lord was simply the reanimation of his fleshly body, like that of Lazarus, what should have prevented his dying again? We may say, indeed, that God had appointed that he should no more see death, but the apostle's language undoubtedly is, that he had by his resurrection passed beyond the region where the law of death had any power: Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. For in that he died, he died unto sin once; but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God." The entire context from which this is taken, is so germane to our present scope, and contains such a striking confirmation of the soundness of our general view, that we cannot forbear to advert to it at some greater length. Rom. 6. 4-7: "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death; that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin." It is evident that he is running a parallel between the death and resurrection of Christ, and the death to sin and the spiritual resurrection of believers. The Scriptures teem with intimations that the resurrection of the saints is but the completed issue of their regener

"That

tion, and that this is linked by indissoluble bonds to the resurrection of Christ. When men are born again, they begin to live again, their old body of sin being put off as was Christ's fleshly body at his crucifixion. like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father (dià tñs dóšns toũ Пaτgós)." Here, then, is a plain intimation that there was something glorious in the resurrection of Christ, and some commentators render the phrase in paterna gloria resurrexit, he rose in his Father's glory, and if so, then certainly in a glorified body. However we may interpret it, there is clearly some intimation of a peculiar glory connected with his resurrection from the dead, and we see not why it does not respond to our Lord's own words before his resurrection, "Glorify thou me with the glory which I had with thee before the world was."

Upon this glory we conceive him to have entered at his resurrection. But we rest not upon this alone. The apostle proceeds, Rom. 6. 8-11: "Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: knowing that Christ, being raised from the dead, dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord." Now we would ask if any thing can be more obvious than that by the parallel here run, the apostle designs to imply that this spiritual and eternal life of Jesus Christ commenced at his resurrection-that he then entered upon that peculiarly spiritual condition which was the pledge of the spiritual and eternal resurrection life of his people. "If we have been planted," &c. Tholuck's remark upon this is as follows: 3

"The sense is this: By conquering death, Christ completed his terrestrial task, i. e. his existence in fellowship with humanity, burdened with the consequences of sin. As a risen Christ, he had already entered upon his exaltation, as he indeed appears not to have lived habitually upon the earth. In like manner we, so soon as we have in baptism acknowledged our sins and received pardon, are bound to arise to a new existence founded on heavenly-mindedness." And why should not our Saviour's spiritual life be manifested in a spiritual body? If we understand by it merely the reanimation of his material body, the force of the parallelism is entirely destroyed, and what Paul says of the resurrection of our Lord ought to be applied to his ascension; for on the opposite view it was at his ascension that this glory took its commencement.

The same inferences force themselves upon us from the tenor of the apostle's reasoning in the 15th of 1st Corinthians, vs. 42-50: "So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption it is sown in dishonour, it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power: it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul, the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit, that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood