Chapter XX

If the Gospel of John ended with the previous chapter, with the account of the burial of the Crucified One, we would have no Gospel of salvation at all, no assurance and no hope. That most subtle and dangerous infidelity, which is known as “Modernism,” denies the physical resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. It leaves Him in the grave. The tomb was never opened and the body of our holy Lord became the prey of corruption. According to Modernism, He did not rise from the dead, nor did He ascend into heaven, nor is He in heaven as the glorified Man, nor is He ever coming again. Yet this monstrosity claims the name of ‘“‘Christianity’! The two great pillars upon which Christianity rests are the Virgin birth, and the physical resurrection of Christ after He had expired on the cross, as the substitute of sinners, and was buried. If either one of these pillars is demolished the whole Gospel scheme collapses. It has pleased the Spirit of God to give us His logic on this point. In the First Epistle to the Corinthians there is a divine definition of the Gospel, by which sinners are saved. “For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures.”” Then after marshalling the mighty witnesses of His physical resurrection, we find that magnificent argument as to the immense importance of His bodily resurrection. If Christ be not risen — then what? “And if Christ be not risen then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.” There is nothing left to preach about, and any faith in Christ is a vain and a foolish thing. “Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.” Cephas and the twelve, the five hundred brethren, James and all the Apostles, as well as the women who claimed to have seen Him, conversed with Him, seen Him alive, in whose presence He ate, were all miserable deceivers, and bore a false witness, when they said He was risen from the dead, if He had never left the grave. And the Apostle Paul also was a false witness, when he declared he had seen Him in the glory light on the road to Damascus.

“And if Christ be not raised, your faith is in vain; ye are yet in your sins.” For a dead Christ has no power to save. If His body was never raised from the dead, His death and His precious blood has no more power to do anything for man than the death of any other human being. “Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.” They died trusting in a false hope of resurrection; if He was not raised then nobody will be raised from the dead. “If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.” For one who hopes in Christ, suffers on account of his faith, has hardship, denies himself, is most miserable inasmuch as he hopes in one who is dead, who cannot do anything for him. Such is the divine logic, showing the great importance of the physical resurrection of Him who died on the cross.

Therefore His bodily resurrection is an event upon which the whole redemption plan rests; it is one of the cardinal doctrines of Christianity. The evidences of His literal and physical resurrection are of such a nature that they are conclusive. It rests on fuller evidence and surer and better grounds than any event in history.

He was seen eleven times after His death and burial, and appeared at different times of the day, to different persons in different ways. He was seen by women and by men, at the sea-shore, in rooms when doors were closed, on a country road and on a mountain. At one time five hundred saw Him. It is impossible that so large a number of brethren could be self-deceived, or concocted a falsehood. And those who saw Him, to whom He appeared, talked with Him, walked with Him, sat at the table with Him, they saw Him eat and touched His body. It must also be remembered that many of these witnesses were reluctant to believe the report, that He was alive. Thomas would only accept the report of His resurrection by seeing Him, and putting his hand into His side. And the little band of His followers, who had nearly all deserted Him, who were cowards in spirit, a short time after became courageous witnesses to the fact of His resurrection. All apostolic preaching centers in the resurrection of Christ. Peter in his inspired testimony on the day of Pentecost preached the fact of His resurrection, and ever after, as well as the other witnesses, including the Apostle Paul. Something happened or they could not have given such a bold and unflinching testimony; even the rationalist, Strauss, who, like the present day Modernist, denied the resurrection, said “something extraordinary must have occurred,”

The destructive critics, as they are now generally called, Modernists, like other infidels have charged the divine records concerning the resurrection of our Lord with being contradictory. They claim that there are discrepancies which cannot be reconciled. While there are difficulties they are not contradictions, such as the Modernist claims them to be. Furthermore, the different accounts can be satisfactorily harmonized. Instead of being the marks of errors, or deception, these different records bear witness to their genuineness and trustworthiness.:

Verses 1-10. The first day of the week was soon to dawn. It was early and still dark, though the sun was about to rise (Mark xvi:2) when Mary Magdalene came to the sepulchre. Here we face the first difficulty. Was she alone or did other women accompany her? Mark in his record says that the first appearance of our risen Lord was to Mary Magdalene (Mark xvi:9), but he does not describe the manner of that appearance. The Apostle John tells us how He appeared to her (verses 11-13). According to John she came alone to the sepulchre; but Matthew, Mark and Luke tell us that other women were in her company. ‘There can be no question that Mary Magdalene was not alone when she went to the sepulchre. It would have been unnatural, not woman-like, for her to venture out alone when it was still night, especially in view of the fact that a large number of strangers were encamped outside of the walls of Jerusalem, on account of the Passover feast. There is a hint that others were with her in the second verse. When she met Simon Peter and the other disciples she said, ‘““They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid Him.” Had she been alone she would have said, “I know not where they laid Him”; but she said “we know not” evidently speaking for the other women who were with her. The Holy Spirit makes her prominent in this account as given by John, because his inspired pen was to give the details of the first appearance of the risen Christ. He singled her out, out of whom He had cast seven demons (Mark xvi:9), to be the first witness of His triumphant resurrection. The loving gratitude she felt for Him prompted her to be probably the leader of the company of women, who went out so very early to the sepulchre.

When Mary Magdalene and her companions arrived at the sepulchre, they found the stone taken away from the sepulchre. Mary Magdalene observed this before the others noticed it. Perhaps in her eagerness to get to the sepulchre she walked faster than the other women and therefore noticed first that the stone was rolled away. The resurrection had already taken place. No human eye had witnessed the great act when God raised Him from the dead, as no created eye had witnessed the mystery of His sufferings on the cross, when darkness for three hours enshrouded the divine sufferer. i

Matthew tells us that there was a great earthquake, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. And for fear of him the Roman soldiers trembled and became as dead. But before the stone had been rolled away He had arisen. Mary Magdalene and her companions came after all this had transpired. They probably knew nothing of the guard which had been placed before the sepulchre, or they would not have gone so early to the place. The soldiers had fled. None of the women saw anything of them. And Mary Magdalene, the moment she saw that the stone was taken away ran off, without a further investigation of the empty tomb. She ran to tell Peter and the other disciple whom Jesus loved, which is John. Where she met them we do not know, but it may be surmised that their dwelling place was not at a very great distance from the garden where He had been buried. And while she ran the rest of the women drew nearer to the sepulchre. Peter and John evidently dwelt together, and let us not forget, that Mary, the mother of Jesus was there also. How fast the feet of loving, grateful Mary Magdalene must have run to convey the good news, that the stone was rolled away, to the two disciples and to the mother of the Lord! And yet she did not know the full truth. She was still ignorant of the good tidings ‘“‘He is risen.” All she knew was ‘““They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid Him.”’ She did not even imagine that He was alive, but thought somebody had taken the lifeless body of her Lord and put Him somewhere. Then there was some more running. Both Peter and John ran a race to reach the garden where the sepulchre was as quickly as possible. John beat Peter in this race and came first to the sepulchre. How often Peter and John are seen together. They were fishermen together. ‘They were present with James on the

Mount of Transfiguration, at the house of Jairus and in Gethsemane. John was a witness of Peter’s shameful denial also. Perhaps during the two nights after Peter’s denial there was but little sleep for either one. Peter was overcome with grief and we suppose loving John tried to comfort him and cheer his heart, when suddenly Mary appeared, with her astonishing news. No wonder that both ran as quickly as they could. What thoughts of wonder and amazement must have filled their minds as they ran thus together!

While John reached the place first, because he was the younger, and saw the linen burial clothes lying, he did not enter in. Peter, who followed him closely, went into the sepulchre, saw the linen clothes ‘‘and the napkin, that was about His head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.””. Then John also went in and saw and believed.

Here, then, was a conclusive and perfect proof that the body of the Lord had not been hastily removed by thieves, whether friends or foes. Like one who had slept, and who disposes in an orderly way of his garments, the Lord in arising from the sleep of death, had folded the linen clothes and the napkin. There was no haste displayed, but all had been done calmly and deliberately. When Lazarus came forth from his grave, at the command of the Lord, the grave clothes were about him, and they had to loose him. Not so with the Lord. He needed no one to loosen the bands and the napkin. He did it Himself.

“The linen clothes lying were a sign of the resurrection. For neither if any person had removed the body, would they, before doing so, have stripped it; nor if any had stolen it, would they have taken the trouble to remove the napkin, and roll it up and lay it in a place by itself. They would have taken the body as it was. On this account, John tells us, by anticipation, that the body was buried with much myrrh, which glues linen to the body not less firmly than lead, in order that when thou hearest that the napkin lay apart, thou mayest not endure those who say the body was stolen. A thief would not have been so foolish as to spend so much time on superfluous matter. Why should he undo the clothes? How could he have escaped detection if he had done so? But why did the clothes lie apart while the napkin was wrapped together by itself? That thou mayest know that it was not the action of men in confusion or in haste.”*

It seems up to this moment neither John nor Peter had understood the meaning of the Scriptures, that Christ should rise after His passion, nor His own words in which He had predicted this momentous event. But now they saw and believed, though the full meaning, as revealed in the Scriptures, was not known to them, just as Cleopas and his companion on the road to Emaus were ignorant of it. Peter and John returned to their dwelling.

Verses 11-18. Peter and John had returned to their own home, probably to eat their breakfast. It shows a strange indifference, the result of not knowing the Scriptures. The sight of the empty tomb had convinced them that the body was not there. If they had known the Scriptures they would have remained, constrained by love and hope, to see Him who was risen from the dead. It was different with Mary. She remained at the sepulchre. She had not entered, as Peter had done. Standing without she wept. She too was ignorant of the Word of God concerning His resurrection. But what she lacked in knowledge was made up by her deep love for Him who had delivered her, by His divine power, from the dominion of demons. She tarried at the hallowed spot, with tears streaming down her face, hoping that in some way her question, where they had put the body of the Lord, might be answered. An old commentator says: ‘“The going away of Peter and John commends Mary’s staying behind. To the grave she came before them, from the grave she went telling them, to the grave she returned with them, at the grave she remained behind them.”

Then weeping still she stooped down, and ventured a look into the sepulchre. She had not done this before. When she saw the stone taken away, and the Roman soldiers gone, she surmised that the grave was empty. Then Peter

*Chrysostom.

and John had convinced themselves that the body was gone. Mary now wanted to see with her own eyes, and as she looked into the sepulchre, she saw what the two disciples had not seen. She beheld two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain. There can be no question that they had been there when Peter and John had examined the sepulchre, but they were invisible to them, while they became visible to Mary. Modernists use this fact as an alleged evidence of the untrustworthiness of this record. They claim here is an irreconcilable contradiction. Like the Sadducees, Modernists do not believe in angels. If they believed in these supernatural beings, of whom the Bible has so much to say, they would also believe the record. The Angels of God appear and disappear, become visible and invisible, instantaneously and supernaturally, according to God’s command. Elisha saw the heavenly hosts, while his servant did not see them; but in answer to the prophet’s prayer the servant beheld them likewise.

Were these angels sent in connection with His triumphant resurrection, or were they present at the moment when the lifeless body of our Lord was deposited in the sepulchre? While Scripture does not answer this question, we believe they were sent by God the moment the body was laid in the grave to keep guard over His holy body, as it is written in the ninety-first psalm ‘He shall give His angels charge over Thee.”

And Mary was not startled by beholding these tenants of the heavens. There is no outcry of fear, no alarm, as is generally the case when angels suddenly appear. Her heart was so fully occupied with the Lord, and the absence of His holy body, that she was delivered from all fear. And we too, if our Lord is the absorbing object of our heart, shall fear nothing.

The angels then spoke to her. ‘Woman, why weepest thou?” What tender sympathy this question reveals! They knew, of course, why she wept. Here is an evidence that the holy angels of God enter with sympathy into human affairs, the sorrows of His people, as they also rejoice when a sinner repents, and are the unseen witnesses of Christian worship.* But the question carried with it assurance, which weeping Mary was not able to grasp. Why weepest thou? Was there any reason for this prolonged lamentation? Their presence should have convinced her that all was well. With such a guard no enemy would have taken away His blessed body. Why weepest thou? There is no place for tears here. Instead of weeping eyes there should have been lips of holy laughter, shouts of joy and shouts of praise. But she knew not this. She answered the angelic question. She takes it for granted that the angels knew whom she meant and of whom she spoke as “my Lord.” Yet not the faintest thought that He might be risen and alive enters her mind. As another says: “All was in error; tears of grief, — -but false grief, imagining that to be which was not, and Him to be dead, who was alive. She weeps, because she finds the grave empty, which, God forbid, she should have found full, for the Christ must have been dead still, and there would be no resurrection. And this case of Mary Magdalene is our case oftentimes. It is the error of our conceit to weep when we have no cause, and to joy when we have as little. False joys and false sorrows, false hopes and false fears, this life of ours is full of them.”

And now suddenly something happens. The all-important statement, which burdened her heart, had been made to the heavenly visitors and watchers in the tomb. Naturally she expected an answer. Her eyes must have eagerly watched the faces and the lips of the angels. Instead, when she had said this, she turned backward. She turned around and away from the angels. What produced this changed attitude? Something must have occurred which made her turn away so abruptly from the empty tomb, without waiting for an answer from the angels. She may have heard approaching footsteps; or she may have felt instinctively that some one stood behind her. Perhaps the angels were responsible for directing her attention away from themselves to the person which had appeared. They knew the Lord. They may have arisen in holy awe and worship,

* Our volume, “The Angels of God,” covers this interesting truth more fully.

and riveting their eye upon Him, Mary too turned around to see who the Person was.

She sees Him, but does not know that it is Jesus. Not her tear-dimmed eyes prevented her recognition of the Lord, whom she knew so well, but, as it was with the two on the road to Emmaus, her eyes were supernaturally holden. And perhaps the element of glory which enshrouded now the risen body of His humiliation also contributed to the failure to know that it was Jesus. And now He speaks. “Woman, why weepest thou? Whom seekest thou?” Just as the angels knew, why she was weeping, so He knew all about her tears and whom she was seeking. Like the angels, He questioned her thus to show His loving sympathy, only His is greater than the sympathy of angels. Whom seekest thou? was a searching question. She had believed on Him as the Christ, the Son of the living God. She had witnessed His miracles. She herself had been miraculously delivered by Him and His Word of power. Art thou seeking such a One, who came to seek and save you? Seeking Him among the dead who is the Prince of life, the Lord of glory! The question has in it a gentle rebuke to her anxious weeping.

And Mary thought she was speaking to the gardener. She comes with the same burden she had stated twice before. “Sir, if thou hast borne Him hence, tell me where thou hast laid Him, and I will take Him away.” She manifests again her fullest occupation with Him only. She takes it for granted that the gardener must know whom she means; and though the person before her appears as a stranger, she is not a bit more alarmed, than when she faced the angels. And in her impulsive, passionate speaking, she declared her willingness to take His body away, if she only could discover where the body is. Then He speaks. “Mary!” This one word was enough to open her eyes. She turned again, probably to fall at His feet, and cried out “Rabboni.” What joy must have filled her heart at the great discovery, that He who died is risen from among the dead and stood now before her in His resurrection glory. She had sown in tears and reaps now in joy. “It was the Good Shepherd calling His own sheep by name. She was the same to Him as ever.

SEE RR A Na He stood in resurrection power; but His love was-the same to her, certainly not less than when He had cast seven demons out of her. Doubtless there was a sameness in the expression of her name, which went straight home to her heart, and recalled her from her dream about His person, once dead, but now in truth alive forever more.”

We see her at His feet, and then He spoke: ‘Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father, but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father, and to my God and to your God.” From this we surmise that she was about to lay hold of His feet and cover them now with her tears of joy and gratitude. If we turn to Matthew xxviii:9 we read that the women “came and held Him by the feet, and worshipped Him.” Needless to say that this also has been pointed out as a discrepancy. It is not, but a mark of the divine authorship of the Gospel records.

Conservative exegetes have tried to explain the Lord’s words to Mary in different ways. Some have thought that our Lord knew that she might have been carried too far in her loving demonstration, under momentary excitement, and that the Lord forbade her to touch Him, to repress these feelings. We do not think this explanation is worthy of consideration.

The better explanation is on the dispensational aspect of the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of John.

In spite of much scribbling against the teaching that the Gospel of Matthew is the Kingdom Gospel, with a striking dispensational aspect and message, all painstaking students of this Gospel maintain this still and find in it the great wisdom of inspiration. We see in this first Gospel the Lord Jesus Christ, as the Son of David, coming to His own as the promised King. He preached the Kingdom and that was rejected. ‘Then He died and rose from among the dead. One characteristic feature of the Gospel of Matthew is that nothing is said of the ascension. If we had only the Gospel of Matthew we would have to believe that the risen Christ never left the earth, but is still herein person. The evident purpose of this is to show that the Son of David will some day be the King on earth, as it is so abundantly predicted in the prophetic Word. At the close of the Gospel of Matthew the Lord is seen resuming His relation with the Jewish remnant. The women who held Him by the feet and worshipped Him represented typically that remnant, who will, after His return, enjoy His kingly presence on earth.

But this is not the viewpoint in the Gospel of John. Here we are outside the kingdom aspect; a new order of things is to be introduced and a new relationship is to be established. As the risen Christ He ascended on high to take His place at the right hand of God. He is now to be regarded not in His bodily presence here on earth, but as the object of faith, received up in glory. To exemplify this the Lord Jesus Christ told Mary not to touch Him, for He was not yet ascended to His Father. After His ascension believers are brought into a spiritual union with Him, and know Him no longer after the flesh, but know Him as glorified in heaven; and through Him know His Father, as their Father, and His God, as their God, The command to Mary ‘“‘Touch Me not” has therefore an interesting and deep symbolical meaning. The earthly relationship with the Jews ceases and a new relationship, the heavenly, is to be introduced. In the earthly relationship with the Jewish remnant, resumed at our Lord’s return, He will be bodily present in the kingdom; but in the heavenly relationship He is bodily absent and believers are in a heavenly union with the risen Christ. Chrysostom’s comment is helpful and interesting.

“Methinks Mary wished still to converse with Jesus as before, and in her joy perceived nothing great in Him, although He had become far more excellent in the flesh. To lead her therefore from this idea, and that she might speak to Him with awe (for neither with the disciples doth He henceforth appear so familiar as before), He raiseth her thoughts, that she should give more reverent heed to Him. To have said, ‘Approach Me not as you did before, for matters are not in the same state; nor shall I henceforth be with you in the same way,’ would have been harsh and high-sounding. But the saying, ‘I am not yet ascended to my Father,’ though not painful to hear, was the same thing. For by saying, ‘I am not yet ascended,’ He showeth that He ee ts: hasteth and passeth thither, and that it was not meet that one about to depart thither, and no longer to converse with men, should be looked on with the same feelings as before.”

Then He sent her with a message, ‘‘Go tell my brethren.” It is the message of this new relationship, It had been indicated by Him at the close of Matthew xii, when Israel had rejected the kingdom message (Matthew xii:50). In the twenty-second Psalm, after the suffering is over, we read, “I will declare Thy Name unto My brethren.” This relationship is brought about by His death, His resurrection and His ascension. As His brethren believers are put through grace into the same place as Himself. And how glad Mary Magdalene must have been for the commission! And what a messenger of good tidings she must have made!

Verses 19-23. The great day, which we might well call one of the most eventful in human history, had a wonderful ending. He had appeared four times in His risen glory. First Mary Magdalene had seen Him; then the women as they returned from the grave met Him (Matt. xxviii:9); then He appeared to Peter and also to the two who were on the road to Emmaus.

And now the evening of this first Lord’s Day (Rev. i:10) had come. The disciples had gathered together in a room, perhaps the same room where He had instituted the memorial feast, which we call the Lord’s Supper, and where He had uttered His last words to them, and prayed His great prayer. It is hard to imagine in what state of mind they were. They were reluctant to believe the good news of the empty tomb. Their hope had died, when He had been nailed to the cross, and when He had been buried. And when finally they believed, it was like being begotten anew, as Peter expresses it, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a living hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead” (1 Pet. i:3).

The doors were tightly closed for fear of the Jews. Their fears were not unfounded, for the report had been circulated on the self-same day, by the lies and the bribery of the Jewish elders, that the disciples had stolen the body while the Roman guard slept (Matt. xxviii:13), They feared arrest.

But that arrest on the false charge that they were thieves never came. The soldiers did not dare press the false charge, for if they did they took their lives into their hands; it was a crime for a guard to sleep, punishable by death.

Suddenly, with the doors securely fastened, He came and stood in their midst. Did the doors open by themselves in a miraculous way, or did they remain closed, and He enter in through the closed doors? We know when Peter was delivered out of prison by the ministry of an angel, the doors were caused to open by supernatural power; it was a miracle. The same had happened before (Acts v and xii). But here no such miracle took place, but we have a startling manifestation of the power of the risen body of our Lord. The doors needed not to be unbolted to let Him in. The text makes it clear that the doors remained closed, especially when He appeared again, “‘the doors being shut, He stood in the midst.” The risen body of our Lord was not bound or controlled by the laws which bind and control the natural body of man. He could enter in, without an angel coming and opening the doors for Him. The risen body is a miracle in itself. That body is supernatural. While it was a real human body, a material body, a body which could be touched and handled, which had bones and flesh, yet it was a spiritual body, endowed with powers which are above our understanding. In that body He appeared and disappeared, was visible and invisible, entered through a closed door and departed through a closed door, and it could finally be lifted up, no law of gravitation putting a check upon it, and carried in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, through the heavens into heaven itself. The resurrection body is a great mystery and will remain a mystery till we look no longer into a glass darkly. When that blessed day comes, we shall have the redemption of our body, and that future body, in which we shall spend eternity, will be like unto His own glorious body (Phil. ii:21). Then we shall know. Then we shall live as He lives, in a resurrection body of glory.

Modernism ridicules such a faith. They talk of philosophical and scientific impossibilities, which is so “high sounding.” We believe the Word of God, what God has been pleased to reveal. True faith bows in humility acknowledging on the one hand the limitation of the finite mind, and on the other, an omnipotent God who can do all things. Modernism is the pride of the natural man gone to seed, and unbelief in the power of God.

““Peace be unto you” was the first word He uttered in the presence of the disciples. This is still the greeting among orthodox Jews, as it was the mode of salutation among the Jewish people in those days He walked on earth. But it is more than the formal, every-day greeting. One of the last words He had uttered before the cross was that word “Peace” (xvi:33). The first word He speaks here is the same. And what had happened? He had died the sacrificial death as the Lamb of God. Peace was made in the blood of the Cross. The great work had been finished. What had happened? Peter had denied His Lord; they all had forsaken Him, had acted like cowards; they had been unbelieving. But as He appears no word of reproof or accusation came from His lips. Instead of reminding them of their shameful failure, He said, ‘“‘Peace be unto you.” His greeting told them that all was forgiven and forgotten; that there was nothing between Him and them. What cheer it must have brought to their accusing consciences, and what comfort to their hearts!

But was He really “the same Jesus”? Was He the One who hung on the cross, or was it some kind of an apparition, a ghost or an illusion? It is all settled by Himself. “He showed unto them His hands and His side. Then were the disciples glad when they saw the Lord.” It seems up to the moment He showed them His hands and His side, they were not quite convinced that it was really their risen Lord. But now as they beheld the pierced hands, which a short time before had been nailed to the cross, and when they beheld the place where the spear had pierced His blessed side all doubts vanished, joy and gladness filled their hearts. One look at the marks of His passion was sufficient to give them assuring joy. There faith looks still, realizing that peace with God is not what we have done, but what He has done. But what will be our joy when we see Him as He is in His second coming! It is strange that John Calvin should have taught that the nail-prints, and the spear wound, were only seen for a short time, till the Apostles were fully convinced; afterwards they disappeared. These marks of His passion and love are still seen in heaven, in His glorified body. Revelation v:6 tells us so. All the redeemed in glory shall see them, and when He comes to earth again the pierced hands, feet and side will be the marks of identification for the Jew. (See Chapter xix:37.)

Once more He said “Peace be unto you.” This second announcement of peace must be linked with the commission He gives to them. They are to carry the Gospel of peace to others, peace to him that is far off (the Gentile) and to him that is near (the Jew) (Isaiah Ivii:19). He was the sent One of the Father, and so they, and all believers after them, are sent forth by the Lord. He was the representative of the Father, and we are His representatives. What an honor and dignity! And what responsibility also! How little God’s children think of all this. We are no longer of the world, but He has sent us to it to bear witness of Him and of His peace. What He had prayed before the cross (xvii:18), He now does.

Then follows a significant act. ‘He breathed into them and said unto them, Receive ye the Holy Spirit.” The term “breathed into”’ (them, is not in the Greek) is mentioned only here in the New Testament. The Greek word used is the same with which the translators of the Septuagint translate Gen. ii:7, when the Lord breathed into man the breath of life. This gives the real, symbolical meaning of this action of our Lord. In creation the same Lord, who is now in the midst of His own, in resurrection glory, had breathed into Adam the breath of life. Here by this breathing He indicates the communication of another life. The One by whom and for whom all things were created, in whose image the first man was created, and into whom He breathed, as quoted above, became Man Himself. He is the last Adam. He is now, after His work as the other Adam had been accomplished, the communicator, the giver of a better life, of eternal life. “The last Adam is made a quickening Spirit” (1 Cor, xv:45). He is the beginning of the new creation, as the first Adam was the beginning of the old creation, The inbreathing therefore stands for the communication of eternal life, which He bestows upon those who believe on Him. But those disciples were already in possession of eternal life, for they had believed on Him. It could therefore not mean that He gave them the life, which they already had. For this reason we say, it is a symbolical action. He manifests Himself now openly, as risen from the dead, as the Last Adam.

But what does it mean when He said, ‘“‘Receive ye the Holy Spirit”? Many explanations have been given. Some think He revived by it the life which they already had; others say that He bestowed energy to wait patiently for the coming of the Holy Spirit, or that they became filled with better knowledge and understanding. That it was not the coming of the Paraclete, the other comforter He had promised, is obvious. The third person of the Trinity did not come till the Lord Jesus was glorified, and that glorification demanded His return to the Father. The Holy Spirit was given on the day of Pentecost, and not here in the upper room on the first Lord’s day. In saying these words He shows that He is not only the communicator of life, but also the giver of the Spirit; the Holy Spirit not only proceeds from the Father, but from the Son as well. He showed beforehand by these words they would receive the Holy Spirit personally, as the power and energy of His own risen life in them. The reception of the Spirit was accomplished on Pentecost.

The final words, spoken by Him at this occasion, have often puzzled Christians, mostly on account of the claims made by an unscriptural priesthood in the professing church. ‘‘Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto the whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.”

We state briefly some of the leading interpretations of this verse. (1) Some explain that the Lord gave power to the Aposties to absolve men from sin, and also to retain sin. But this power was purely personal power, belonging only to the Apostolic Age, ceasing with the sign gifts, such as the gift of tongues and the gift of healing. (2) The Romish view is that the Apostles received this power of infallibly absolving and anathematizing, and that this same power was conferred by the Apostles to their successors, thus constituting a self-perpetuating hierarchy. It is found in a modified form in different ritualistic denominations of Protestantism. It is an unscriptural view from start to finish. There is no hint anywhere in Scripture that the Apostles appointed successors and therefore apostolic succession is an invention. (3) A third view is that the power promised and authority given is in connection with the preaching of the Gospel, announcing on what terms sins would be forgiven, and if these terms are not accepted sins would be retained. (4) Still another view is that the Lord gives in these words a warning as well as a promise. Some teach that Christians remit sins when, by their influence, their testimony and their example, they induce sinners to repent and accept Christ; that they retain sins when, by their negligence, they keep sinners back from accepting Christ. This is a far-fetched interpretation. But there are other views.

The power to forgive sins is God’s prerogative. The Jews said when the Lord Jesus told the paralytic, “Man, thy sins are forgiven thee,” “Who is this which speaketh blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God alone?” (Luke v:21). They were right. If the Lord Jesus Christ is not God then He uttered a blasphemy. And so it is a blasphemy for man to claim power to forgive the sins of another man, This is what Romanism teaches by claiming the power to absolve sinners, and also to shut heaven against persons not absolved. It is a monstrous teaching.

But what did our Lord mean when He spoke these words?

He conferred upon them undoubtedly the power of declaring through the preaching of the Gospel, in the power of the Holy Spirit, whose sins are forgiven, and whose sins are not forgiven. Their preaching in the Book of Acts gives us examples of this declaration. Peter said in the house of Cornelius, “Whosoever believeth on Him shall receive remission of sins.” When Paul preached the Gospel in Antioch of Pisidia, he said, “Through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins,” and later he said to the jailor in the Macedonian city, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved.” They declared that those who believe have their sins remitted, and, naturally, those who do not believe their sins are retained.

But this is not all. As a result of the gift of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost the assembly, that is, the Church, was formed. The assembly, the gathering of those who have believed and are saved, has power and authority in discipline. ‘Those who believe are accepted into fellowship, their sins are remitted. The wicked person, of whom we read in the Corinthian assembly, was ordered to be put away by the assembly, but after his repentance, his self-judgment and deep sorrow, was received back. And Paul wrote, ‘“To whom ye (the assembly) forgive anything, I also; for also what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything (it is) for your sakes in the person of Christ” (2 Cor. ii:10). Thus the assembly by receiving, pronounce the remission of sins, and by putting away out of fellowship, the retaining of sins.

Verses 24-31. The final portion of this chapter brings before us a second manifestation of the risen Christ, probably in the same place, a week after the first manifestation. Thomas, one of the twelve, who was called Didymus, had been absent at the first appearance of Christ. Why he had not gathered with the others is not stated. Twice before we have met his name in this Gospel, and apart from these passages we know nothing else. He has been called a rationalist with a warm heart. His devotion to the Lord we have pointed out before. (See Chapter xi:1-4.)

When the other disciples gave to him the blessed information ‘We have seen the Lord,” he refused to believe what these reliable witnesses told him. They were his friends and his fellow disciples. What could be their motive in telling him an untruth? His absence from the gathering and his unbelief in the Lord’s resurrection may have been permitted by the Lord, so as to furnish one of the most conclusive evidences of His physical resurrection. And so he declared in the presence of the ten trustworthy witnesses, emphatically and passionately, that he would not believe that the crucified One is alive, unless he himself would see and touch His body.

But what must have been the state of mind of the doubting disciple during the week which followed? While his companions enjoyed the blessed assurance that their Lord and Master is alive, and were filled with great joy and peace, Thomas was in darkness, and must have wandered about with a heavy heart, produced by the uncertainty which laid heavy upon him.

After eight days had passed all was changed. “And after eight days again His disciples were within, and Thomas with them. Then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace unto you.” A full week had gone by. The memorable day, the first day of the week, on which He arose from among the dead, found them again gathered in the place “within” where they had been the week before. There can be no question that this is the beginning of the keeping of the first day of the week, as the day of rest and worship. From the earliest times the day after the Jewish Sabbath was called “The Lord’s Day” (Rev. i:10*).

What led Thomas to be present at that time we can only surmise. Perhaps it was his uncertainty, the thought that the disciples were truthful in their witness, which induced him to seek their fellowship at this occasion. Perhaps during the week the Spirit of God may have brought to his remembrance some of the words which the Lord had spoken about His death and resurrection on the third day.

Then suddenly the same happened which happened a week before. The doors were shut as they were at the first visit. All at once He stood in the midst. And as it was before, He utters His blessed ‘‘Peace unto you.”

From the words which follow it is evident that this second appearing of the risen Christ was exclusively for the sake of Thomas. Thomas had been unbelieving, yet the Lord in His great kindness, knowing his whole story, does not rebuke him directly for his unbelief, though the words addressed to the unbelieving disciple contain a gracious and loving reminder of his weakness and failure. ‘Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side, and be not faithless, but believing.” In speaking these words to Thomas, He showed

*Not “The Day of the Lord” as Bullingerism teaches. This strained exposition, besides other errors of the late Dr. B., are now being taught by certain Bible teachers, that He had heard every word which Thomas had spoken when first told by the disciples that the Lord had appeared unto them. The words He spoke to him reveal His great condescension.

“To come into the world at all, and take on the human body, then to allow that body to be scourged, crowned with thorns, nailed to the cross, and laid in a grave — all this, beyond doubt, was astonishing condescension. But when the victory over sin and death was won, and He had taken on Him His resurrection body, to come to a doubting, sceptical disciple, and bid him touch Him, put his finger into the nail prints on His hands, and put his hand into His side — all this was condescension which we can never sufficiently admire and adore.” Thus He treated in marvelous kindness a disciple, who believed in Him, yet was weak in faith. And in this He has left us also an example, how to deal with brethren who are weak in faith. But it is a different matter with the outspoken rationalist, who does not believe, not because he cannot, but because he will not.

But did Thomas do what the Lord bade him to do? Did he put his hand into His side, or did his fingers touch the nail prints in His hands? It seems that he did not. He is taken completely by surprise and bursts out in one great ejaculatory sentence, ‘My Lord and My God.” These five words contain the expressions of astonishment, delight, repentance, grief, faith, confession and adoration. ‘This confession of Thomas, that Christ is God, is the last witness to His Deity in this Gospel. We remind the reader that the first testimony to the Deity of Christ in this Gospel was uttered by Nathanael. The dispensational-prophetic meaning we shall point out directly.

Thomas had seen and therefore believed. Unitarians have twisted this testimony in such a way so as to suit their denials of the Godhead of our Lord. The late Dr. Lyman Abbott in his commentary on this Gospel, written when he believed in the Deity of Christ, which was over fifty years ago, made the following remarks on the Unitarian attempts to break the forceful meaning of the believing outburst of Thomas: ‘To interpret this utterance as a mere expletory outcry is the shallowest of criticism. It reduces a sublime and exalted confession of faith to an irrelevant and semiprofane exclamation. It is grammatically, psychologically, and spiritually untenable; grammatically, ‘because it is expressly said that Thomas addressed the words directly to Jesus; psychologically, because it is equally irrational to suppose that Thomas, just convinced of the resurrection of his Lord, should break out into a meaningless exclamation, or that John should have reported it if it had been uttered; spiritually, because Christ on the strength of this confession of Thomas recognizes his faith.”

“Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen Me, thou hast believed. Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.”” These were His words to adoring Thomas. Here we must consider, in explanation of these words, the dispensational aspect of the occurrence. Thomas is a type of the Jews, not the grossly materialistic portion, sO prominent in our days, who have cast off every bit of the faith of their fathers, but of that remnant which is coming to the foreground during the last years of the present age. Like Thomas, they are still unbelieving; they know Him not who is risen from among the dead and who is the King of Israel. They, too, like Thomas, want to see first, before believing. It is constitutional with the Jew that he asks for a sign, and does not want to believe till he sees. As it was with Thomas, the Lord appeared the second time, so will He appear the second time unto them that look for Him (this expecting Jewish remnant) unto salvation. When He comes again, He will, as it was with Thomas, display the nail prints in His hands and feet and His pierced side, so that it might be fulfilled “They shall look upon Me whom they pierced, and they shall mourn for Him,” for they learn then that He was wounded in the house of His friends, wounded for their transgressions and bruised for their iniquities. And, like Thomas, they will cry out “My Lord and My God.” Thus they will confess Him, when He comes for their final deliverance, their restoration and spiritual blessing.

“Lo, this is our God, we have waited for Him, and He will save us. This is Jehovah, we have waited for Him, we will be glad, and rejoice in His salvation” (Is. xxv:9).

When our Lord said “Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed,” He did not mean the Old Testament Saints, but He meant the believers from among the Gentiles, gathered into the Body of Christ during this age. This is the age of faith and not of sight. We, who love Him, though we have never seen Him, and rejoice in Him with joy unspeakable and full of glory, have a greater blessedness, than the Jew who will see Him in the day of His visible coming, and then believe.

Bishop Ryle remarks on the sentence “‘Blessed are they who believe, and yet have not seen”: “The principle contained in the sentence before us, is one of vast importance in every age, and specially in our own. In a day of scepticism, free inquiry and rationalism, so-called, when hundreds are continually railing against creeds, and dogmatism, the sentence deserves close attention and consideration. Nothing is more common now-a-days than to hear people say that they ‘decline to believe things above their reason, that they cannot believe what they cannot entirely understand in religion, that they must see everything clearly before they can believe.’ Such talk as this sounds very fine, and is very taking with young persons and superficially educated people, because it supplies a convenient reason for neglecting vital religion altogether. But it is a style of talking which shows a mind either proud, or foolish, or inconsistent.”

We must point out in conclusion the correspondence of Thomas with Nathanael, in the first chapter of this Gospel. The reader remembers that the day in which the Lord Jesus received His first disciples, who followed Him and spent the night with Him, is typical of this age in which He gathers His Church. To this corresponds the first appearing of the risen Christ, recorded in the present chapter. Then in the first chapter, on the day following, the second day, Philip is called and Nathanael, doubting first, is convinced of the Deity and Messiahship of the Lord. We pointed out the same lesson we have found here in the case of Thomas; both represent the future remnant of Israel.

The writer of the Gospel, the beloved disciple, speaks of many other things which Jesus did, but which are unrecorded in this Gospel. Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit he had written what this Gospel contains, to show that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing we might have life through His Name. And this is the double purpose of this blessed fourth Gospel, as we have learned in our exposition chapter after chapter.