he gave himself up to an expectation, which the event contradicted, was a thought which the times would not bear. When it was proposed, (which was certainly very early done), to alter the text, merely to transpose a little word, a negative, and when all this was done, and Paul was made thereby to contradict himself, the words also disagreeing entirely with the context,-these were points which created no trouble for the interpreters of that day. Thus the change became universal. Still, those interpreters possessed the MSS., with the genuine reading; but these remained unconsidered, and the wonder is that the true reading has still come down to us in some of them. Whether the negative retained its original place in the text, we indeed do not certainly know; that it did, is indeed possible; it might have been subjected to various changes, perhaps thrown out, and again inserted ; but in the end, retaining its place improperly. Yet where it stands, it gives the correct sense.2 The change, of which Paul furthermore speaks, refers not only to the living, whom he indicated in verse 52, but also to the dead, who would likewise have a new, spiritual body, instead of that which had decayed in the tomb. And thus лάvτes, as repeated, may be taken in the most general sense, namely, of all those who entertain a hope of the resurrection, that is, believers. The change, indeed, will occur in a moment,' in the twinkling of an eye,' with inconceivable rapidity. The word toμov means indivisible, here an indivisible, minute point of time. For a particular reason, on account of which Paul mentions the great rapidity with which the event would happen, we need not inquire; the less so, as it was manifest, that this was a circumstance embraced in the expectation of the Jews, and Paul here obviously entered somewhat more deeply into the subject than was absolutely demanded. Thus, likewise, he subjoins as a mere accessory circumstance, the words,' in the last trumpet,' and as a matter well known. He then, as it should seem, reflects, that possibly his readers would be less familiar with it, and accordingly he confirms it,

1 Cod. A. furnishes an instance with its text, oi návτes μèv θησόμεθα οὐ πάντες δὲ ἀλλ.

οὐ

κοιμη

2 Thus we may say that the genuine Greek text is this, xoundnoóusda Távτes μèv oй. Plato's writings furnish a multitude of examples of a similar construction. Thus Paul could have used the words π. μ. oυ xoiμŋð, in this sense die we shall indeed not all, but,' etc.

by adding, for it shall sound." The word, sozάin, last,' as Billroth has correctly remarked, does not mean that there are to be several blasts of a trumpet on the final day, and that this was, in that sense, the last which should be blown, but simply that it would be the trumpet of the last day, after which no more would be heard. Then follows the resurrection and the transformation of the living, the certainty of which is again declared by the remark, that it was necessary that the corruptible should put on incorruption, and the mortal, immortality.

6

V. 54-57. Now when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal, immortality, then shall come to pass the saying which is written: Death is swallowed up in victory! Where, O death! is thy victory? Where, O death! thy sting?' The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God who giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

The discussion is concluded. The apostle has arrived at the point, when his spirit, standing at the portals of eternity, can think of nothing more than that for it, finiteness and mortality have ceased. His own soul is now full of the elevation and glory of the object, and as a fine conclusion, there flows from his pen, a brief but striking triumphal song. He seems to delight in these songs at the close of his more important sections.2 The final clause of verse 54, is a repetition of verse 53, in another form, and as pathetic, fitted to affect the heart. In the conclusion of the verse, he adds, then shall come to pass the saying which is written,' or as one might say with truth, 'what is written,'3 namely, 'death is swallowed up in victory.' This is a free translation of Isa. 25: 8, 'He shall swallow up death forever.24 Paul has changed the active voice of the verb in the original,

1 A definite subject of the verb oɑhлiou, Winer, in Gram. p. 471, has not thought to be necessary in this passage, as Billroth seems to imagine, especially because he does not cite the passage itself, but simply wishes to indicate, by the term which he has quoted, ó oaλnıyris, the origin of this impersonal mode of expression.

2 Comp. Rom. 8: 11 seq. 11: 33 seq.

3 A similar expression is found in Plato's Phaedon, p. 72, C. rayé äv tò τοῦ ̓Αναξαγόρου γεγονὸς εἴη, ὁμοῦ πάντα χρήματα.

4

παρ ποπ νές. Sept. κατέπιεν ὁ θάνατος ἰσχύσας.

6

into the passive, and he translates' forever,' by 'in victory," as the Seventy do in other passages. Still, verse 57, doubtless, shows that he viewed vixos as equivalent to vixn. The meaning is clearly, 'that death shall be utterly destroyed and annihilated.' The following words, where, O death! thy sting,' are from Hos. 13: 14.2 The apostle subjoins a brief comment. The sting of death,' says he, 'is sin.' I cannot agree, as Billroth does, with the explanation of Schöttgen, who supposes, that the sting of death, alludes to the goad with which one drives his team, when he cultivates his field; but, with others, I consider the sting as the instrument with which death, here personified, destroys men. This is sin, for were there no sin, then, according to Paul, death would never have any power over mankind; it would be harmless, as an insect without a sting. But if death was to have no more power, then must sin be abolished, and to that, the apostle particularly directs the attention of his readers, in his comment. Further, the strength of sin,' that which gives it its power, 'is the law. The meaning of this may be learned from Rom. 7; 5, 7 seq. But why are these words subjoined? A logical necessity for them does not exist; but they are rather dictated by the personal feelings of the apostle. What difficulty the law had occasioned him during his life! In the first place, in an inward sense, when he was in subjection to it; then, outwardly, when he met with opponents of his free salvation. Hence he cannot think of happiness, without an entire absence of the law, and thus he concludes, if death shall be abolished, then sin must be destroyed; and if sin is to be destroyed, then there can be no more law.' He teaches his readers to recognize, in the passage from Hosea, a prediction of a state of perfect sinlessness and freedom. He then concludes with thanks to God, who giveth the victory through Christ.

V. 58. Wherefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast and immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your labor is not in vain in the Lord.

This verse contains a concluding exhortation, drawn from the certainty which was now secured in respect to the future life of the

Corinthian believers. They should be steadfast1 and immovable in their convictions, or, more generally, in their belief in Christianity. They ought, also, to be perseveringly zealous in the work of the Lord, inasmuch as they knew that their labor would not be fruitless, as it would be, if there were no resurrection. In the Lord,' because they were united with him, and were members of his body.

THE RESURRECTION OF THE BODY.2

BY J. P. LANGE.

In the third Number of the Theological Studies and Criticisms, for the year 1835, Prof. J. Müller has given a very instructive examination of the essays and reviews of Weisse, Göschel and Fichte, which were called forth by Richter's treatise entitled, "The Doctrine of the Last Things.' The criticisms which the respected author has occasionally suggested, in relation to the views of these excellent and estimable thinkers, are important. He has shown, for example, in opposition to Göschel, that the Hegelian philosophy, according to the earlier representations of its adherents, certainly occasions the denial of man's personal, continued existence after death. Contrary to the views of Weisse, he has proved that the Scriptures authorize us to distinguish the doctrine of man's continued, personal existence from the doctrine of future, everlasting happiness. Against Fichte he maintains, that the resurrection of the dead is not connected with the close of life, but with the end of the world. Professor Müller very readily admits, on the other hand, whatever there may be that is new or profound in the contributions, which these distinguished authors have made to the completion of the christian eschatology.3

1 See the word dpañoι, 1 Cor. 7: 37.

2 See Note J, at the close of this Article, which the reader is requested to peruse before examining the remarks of Lange.

3 See Note K, at the close of this Article.

The writer of these pages begs leave to add some remarks on a sentiment which Müller has expressed in connection with the phrase, p. 778, resurrection of the flesh.' Müller advances the sentiment in the observations in which he approves of Fichte's notion of an organic identity in man's corporeal nature. The idea is certainly a beautiful one, and viewed negatively is quite obvious. It may be thus indicated,' The human body cannot be, in its essential features, that mass of matter which is in a constant process of flux and of selfrenovation-which was originally foreign to it, was connected with it only in the way of assimilation, and which was forced to aid in its organization.'

But what opinion must we form of this organic identity in its positive aspect? Besides the materials which compose the body, nothing will remain, except a mere law or power in the human spirit, by means of which it can acquire a definite corporeal organization, fitted to its nature, both in its internal operations and its outward sphere of action. At all events, nothing will remain but the figure, or ideal image of the body, which is contained in the spirit. Müller, in the meanwhile, having adopted this opinion of Fichte, endeavors to point out its agreement with the Bible: "It is not the flesh," says the inspired word, "it is not the mass of earthy materials, but it is the body, it is the organic whole, of which the resurrection is predicated. The organism, or organic structure, viewed as the living form, which appropriates matter to itself, is the real body, which, when glorified, becomes the spiritual body. Paul denies all gross representations of the resurrection and of the human body, when he says, ' flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God."" The author, after quoting another passage in proof of his position, remarks: "It is, therefore, to be regarded as a very erroneous mode of expression, when we inculcate a definite resurrection of the flesh, instead of the resurrection of the body, as is done in the oldest rule of faith-the so-called Apostolic Symbol."

In opposition to these views, we submit the following considerations. By the term, áváσtaois σagxos, we are not, indeed, to understand the existing, earthy substance, the mass of matter belonging to the terrestrial man. We need not do this in order to retain, without variation, the phraseology in the Symbol above quoted. Although we should fully admit the notion of organic identity, we must still 3 See Note L, at the close of this Article.