irrepressible longing in our hearts for immortality if it were not to be gratified. These passionate yearnings for life and love again, after the body is laid low, are presumptive evidence. The thought of the utter extinction of life is a tremendous thought, too horrible for the mind to dwell on. It shrinks from the idea as terrible. It feels that annihilation is a thought which it recoils from contemplating as a reality. Can it be true, then, that death is annihilation? It is not likely. But can we say more from the existence of this wish for immortality? Can the desire or the feeling which has prevailed through mankind be considered a proof of a future life? makes it likely; it is ground for hope; but it never did produce, it never would have produced, the firm faith which the believer in the resurrection of Christ now has.

It

2. An argument for the life again after the life here has ended, is derived from the fresh bursting into life and the beautiful green of spring, after the deathlike appearances of winter. Spring-time is Nature's resurrection. Trees and plants and flowers seem to revive after being dead. They rise to a new and beautiful life after their dead look in winter. And why, it is asked, should it not be so with man? Why should not he live again? There is nothing more marvellous in the one case than in the other. As one has been, the other may be. After the winter-time of death with him, why should there not be the spring-time of life too? Does not nature thus point to another life after death? It is very suggestive; but what proof is here, my brethren? What is the resemblance? The leaves that fall become not green again, the flowers that fade take not again their lost and lovely hues ; but other leaves and flowers come. Nor had the trees and plants lost their vitality. Had that been so, and had there been no life in the seed placed in the ground in spring, no leaves or flowers would come. What, then, is there to rest upon in these analogies between the death of man and nature's

wintry aspect followed by a new life? The principle of life is gone from the body; not so in the other case; vitality remains; for if the tree were really dead there would be no fresh budding.

There is that in winter followed by spring that can produce hope. Man may live again notwithstanding the appearances; but there is not that in this point to satisfy the aching and longing heart, to produce conviction. What is its force without the resurrection of Christ? How unsatisfying such a sign as this from nature of man's immortality, were there nothing more ! After the proof from Christ's resurrection, we can receive these as interesting and beautiful natural illustrations of immortality; but how faint their power without that blessed light shining upon the darkness of the grave!

3. The chrysalis has often been referred to as a kind of proof. And the butterfly was frequently used as an emblem of immortality. In the transformation that took place, in this emerging from a state of torpor into a fresh life, it was felt that something was added to the hopes of a future life. When caterpillars have passed into the chrysalis state, there is no appearance of life. There is the perfect stillness of death. Yet what a change takes place! After life appears gone and the coffin closed, there bursts forth a new and more beautiful and active life. After being entombed, the insect rises from its case, and the butterfly passes from flower to flower, luxuriating in its bright existence. It rises from its little house. Why may not man rise? Does not this insect, once entombed and rising into life, point to immortality? It is very suggestive; it is an interesting illustration after the fact is proved. It might lead us to hope, but would be a poor support to the mind longing for some certain sign. Besides, what is the resemblance? Were that butterfly crushed and lying lifeless, would it rise again in some other season? No,—no more

than the tree struck with lightning, and torn up with the hurricane, and its life dried out of it, would ever again send forth buds, and be clothed in its former green. Such arguments, then, from analogies do not satisfy the intellect. They are no true resting-places for the yearning soul.

4. The mind's progress in knowledge and the heart's strong affections make it probable that death does not put an end to all progress and love for ever. This is another argument. Yet it is only a probability, not a decided proof; and I need not, I think, dwell longer on this part of my subject. When looking at the lifeless body and the narrow house, the intellect and the heart seek for some plain sign from Heaven. And, blessed be God, the sign has been given in the teachings of Christ about the future life, and in the divine sanction and confirmation of his teachings by his own resurrection. And after looking at the appearances presented at death, and thinking of all the facts connected therewith with which we are acquainted, and the various natural phenomena and feelings and desires which are considered indicative of a renewed life, as intimating eternity to man, we turn with thankfulness and a blessed feeling of peace and rest to the authoritative teachings of Revelation, to the glad tidings of the gospel, in which the future life is announced by a Messenger from Heaven, who died, and rose again, and ascended to the other world. From him we know that it is the will of God that man shall live again after death, and in confirmation of these glad tidings he was raised from the grave.

If this fact of Christ's resurrection from the dead be admitted, a fact resting on evidence so various and satisfactory, it follows with indubitable certainty that the dead rise. Jesus "hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light;" for if "Jesus died and rose again, even so them also that sleep in Jesus will God bring with him" to the same

state of immortal life and happiness. Because he lives, we shall live also. But if Christ is not raised, "then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain." Christianity is not true, and every high aspiration which its promises encouraged or excited is thrown back on the disappointed heart.

Let us examine the evidence on which the resurrection of Christ is supported, that fact which lies at the foundation of the Christian church, and is the basis of every Christian's loftiest hopes, on which the apostles dwelt in their preaching, and which brings the full assurance of complete conviction on the great question of immortality. The mind needs more to lean upon than doubtful speculations and poetical analogies, and this it finds in the doctrine of the future life so clearly and authoritatively taught in the Christian Scriptures. Christ has "the words of eternal life;" and these words were confirmed by the Father who sent him, by the signs wrought to attest the divinity of his mission, and by his own resurrection and exaltation to the right hand of the Majesty on high.

Let us then, in the second place, consider the evidence for the great fact of Christianity, that Jesus was alive after his crucifixion, as we find it in the evangelical narrative where the text is. John testifies what he had seen; and it is a striking account which he gives. All the apostles except Thomas had seen the risen Lord a week before the time to which this part of the record relates. They had seen, believed, and were glad. Thomas had heard their accounts with distrust. He thought it a most improbable thing to have happened; and he declared before them all that he would not be persuaded that Jesus had risen from the dead, unless certain demonstrative proofs were afforded which he required. It was a thing opposed to natural expectations, contrary to all experience. It was a thing marvellous in itself, momentous in its consequences.

He wanted the most positive evidence,

such as they themselves had, and even more; as such an occurrence, if true, would give a new direction to the whole of his future life. He required not only to see the risen Jesus, but also to put his fingers into the print of the nails, and thrust his hand into the wounded side. Christ appeared in their midst, condescended to the incredulity of Thomas, asked him to satisfy himself by doing as he wished, and by sight and touch to receive the evidence he had demanded. It was a case for the most positive proofs: they were before him : let him come, and look, and touch; believe and rejoice.

All doubt was removed. Unbelief was turned into faith. He was astonished at what he saw and felt, and uttered an exclamation of grateful and joyful surprise. John had himself believed before he saw, and the other apostles saw, that Thomas was satisfied, and he has given a record of what must have deeply impressed him. It was not what he had heard from others that he related, but he bore his testimony to what he had himself seen and heard on a most interesting and exciting occasion.

Now Thomas is a witness whose evidence comes with peculiar weight after his hardness of belief. He was not ready to believe a new story. He was a man that would thoroughly examine, and would not receive a statement as a fact without scrutiny. He dreaded the possibility of delusion on a question so momentous as that, If a man die, shall he live again? In this case he must have perfect demonstration. His companions might have fancied they saw him whom they had so much loved, whose death they so greatly lamented. What they described might have been a vision. He felt that before he could believe anything so wonderful and out of the ordinary experience of life, he must be quite satisfied that it was a reality and not a vision. He must feel as well as see. He had indeed the testimony of his ten most intimate companions,