ortal. Whereas the argument really existed in his mind in the
reverse form, thus: The souls of men are immortal and are
hereafter to be raised up: therefore Christ has risen as an
example and illustration thereof. It is singular to notice that he
has himself clearly stated the argument in this form three times
within the space of four consecutive verses, as follows: "If there
be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:" "God
raised Christ not up, if so be that the dead rise not." "For if
the dead rise not, then is Christ not raised." The fact of the
resurrection of Christ, taken in connection with the related
notions previously held in the mind of Paul, formed the complement
of an irresistible argument to prove the impending resurrection of
the dead, But if it be now perceived that those other notions were
Pharisaic errors, the argument, as he employed it, falls to the
ground.

Taken by itself and analyzed by a severe logic, the resurrection
of Christ proves nothing conclusively in regard to our
immortality. If it did of itself prove any thing, the direct
logical inference from it would be that henceforth all men, three
days after death, would rise bodily from the dead, appear for a
season on earth as before, and then ascend visibly into the sky.
If at the present time a man who had been put to death and
entombed three days should openly come forth alive, considered as
an isolated fact, what would it prove? It would merely prove that
a wonderful event had occurred. It would show that either by some
mysterious means he had escaped death, or else that by some
apparently preternatural agency he had been restored to life from
the dead. Taken by itself, it could not prove whether the
occurrence was caused by a demoniacal or by a Divine power, or by
some occult force of nature developed by a peculiar combination of
conditions. The strange event would stand clear to our senses; but
all beyond that would be but an hypothesis of our own, and liable
to mistake. Consequently, we say, the resurrection, taken by
itself, proves no doctrine. But we may so suppose the case that
such an event would, from its relation to something else, acquire
logical meaning. For instance, if Christ had taught that he had
supernatural knowledge of truth, a Divine commission to reveal a
future life, and said that, after he should have been dead and
buried three days, God would restore him to life to authenticate
his words, and if, then,