[Transcript]
Paul’s emphasis on the resurrection throughout this chapter suggests that some in Corinth were doubting or denying it. In fact, his statement in verse thirty-three seems to be a direct response to that problem. Don’t tolerate those who deny the resurrection, because their influence will corrupt the church.
There were likely eloquent heretics among the Corinthians who argued against the resurrection. As noted at the beginning of this letter, the Corinthians valued eloquence, so these heretics were able to attract listeners. Reconstructing the scenario from Paul’s response, it seems they embraced Christ’s resurrection, but denied the promise of our resurrection. In this passage, Paul examines the implications of these heretical claims, explains why they are wrong, and offers practical arguments for the resurrection.
What If…
“But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.” – 1 Corinthians 15:13-14
The way Paul began this segment of his defense is noteworthy. His belief in Christ’s resurrection rests on a pre-existing belief. In other words, Paul believed in the resurrection of the dead before he believed in Christ. Look at how he structured his statement: “But if there is no resurrection of the dead,” – the pre-existing belief – “then not even Christ has been raised,” – the belief built on the pre-existing one.
The belief in the resurrection of the dead predates Christ’s birth by many centuries. The Old Testament contains several references, the earliest of which is attributed to the book of Job.
“But I myself know that my redeemer is alive, and at the last he will stand up upon ⌊the earth⌋. And after my skin has been thus destroyed, but from my flesh I will see God,” – Job 19:25-26 (LEB)
Job’s belief was that after his death and his body was destroyed, he would once again see the Lord in his flesh. While this is a somewhat veiled reference to resurrection, it’s notable that what is believed to be the oldest book in the Bible contains this belief. The next clearest references to resurrection come from the Psalms.
“for you will not abandon my soul to Sheol; you will not give your faithful one to see the grave.” Psalm 16:10 (LEB)
“Surely God will ransom my life from the ⌊power⌋ of Sheol, because he will receive me. Selah” Psalm 49:15 (LEB)
However, the most unambiguous references to the resurrection of the dead in the Old Testament come from the Prophets.
“Your dead shall live; ⌊their corpses⌋ shall rise. Wake up and sing for joy, dwellers of the dust, for your dew is ⌊celestial dew⌋, and the earth will give birth to dead spirits.” Isaiah 26:19 (LEB)
“And many from those sleeping ⌊in the dusty ground⌋ will awake, some to ⌊everlasting life⌋ and some to disgrace and ⌊everlasting contempt⌋.” Daniel 12:2 (LEB)
Paul viewed Christ’s resurrection as the first evidence of the Old Testament’s promises of resurrection. In verse twenty, he called Christ the “firstfruits” of those who have fallen asleep. So, Paul’s argument against those who don’t believe in the resurrection of the dead rightly points out that if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ did not rise from the dead.
Whoever these heretics were, Paul didn’t get specific, though I think it might’ve been one or more of the “super apostles” that he mentions in 2 Corinthians. Regardless of who they were, Paul cut right through their false teachings straight to the direct implications. If Christ is not raised, then we who believe are still in our sins, and our faith is in vain. The resurrection of the dead is such a far more integral belief in our faith than one might think from listening to our pulpits. I’ve been to so many Christian funerals over the course of my life where there was zero mention of the resurrection. It drives me bananas because the resurrection is why we don’t fear death. It is the evidence that death was defeated in Christ.
Consequently, Paul rightly pointed out that if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ did not rise from the dead, everyone who has died in Christ has perished, and those who are still living in Christ are fools, misrepresenting the Lord, and are to be pitied more than anyone else.
The First to Rise
“For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead.” – 1 Corinthians 15:21
In verse twenty, Paul’s confidence in Christ’s resurrection is tied directly to how he opened this stream of thought. There were over five hundred witnesses to Him after His resurrection. His resurrection remained highly attested by eyewitnesses. He is risen! Therefore, because He is risen, those who belong to Him will also rise as He did. His resurrection, then, becomes the prototype of what we who believe will receive at His coming.
Paul’s logical argument parallels what he taught in Romans chapter five.
“For if by the one man’s offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.” – Romans 5:17 (NKJV)
Whoever is found in Adam will inherit what he has to offer – death. Whoever is found in Christ will inherit what He has to offer – life. Hence, the resurrection of the body is part of the inheritance we receive from Jesus.
I’ve found this theme to be immensely helpful. Theologians often refer to Adam and Christ as governors. Adam is the governor of humanity 1.0, and Christ is the governor of humanity 2.0. Under Adam, you are subject to what he has wrought for the human race: sin and death. Under Christ, you likewise are subject to what He has wrought: righteousness and resurrection. It can be compared to different jurisdictions, and it fits well with the idea of competing governors. So, whether you speak of Adam and Christ in the language of governors, or heads, or whatever, the bottom line is that you always inherit from your head. Who is your head? What does he offer as an inheritance? These are the kinds of questions that can help us wrap our minds around the why of our resurrection. Simply put, we resurrect because Christ, our head, resurrected first. Now, that’s not everything to be said about the resurrection. The wicked will resurrect as well, but not as Christ did. Christ resurrected to a new body and new life, and so shall we who believe in Him. The wicked resurrect to face judgment, and there is no promise of anything new for them.
Concerning our future resurrection, what will we inherit? Paul hints at the answer in Romans 8.
“And, if children, then heirs—heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him, that we may also be glorified together.” – Romans 8:17 (NKJV)
While this doesn’t tell us specifics, as joint heirs with Christ, we can expect to share in whatever He inherits. In the following lesson, we will dive into the most detailed discussion in the whole New Testament concerning our resurrection bodies. But for this passage, understanding who inherits from whom is critical.
The Order of Things
“But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power.” – 1 Corinthians 15:23-24
There is a divine order at work. The sequence is important: Christ, the firstfruits; then we who belong to Him at His coming; then the end will unfold. This sequence helped Paul explain to the Corinthians that Christ’s second coming is heralded by the resurrection of His people. At the time, false teachings circulated that those who had already died in Christ would miss out on His second coming. This was a particular concern in Thessalonica, which Paul addressed in his first letter to them.
“For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who sleep in Jesus.” – 1 Thessalonians 4:14 (NKJV)
Christ’s second advent will be preceded by the gathering of all His saints, both dead and alive, unto Himself. The timing of this event has been the subject of much discussion in the Church, leading to differing views on Christ’s return. Our study won’t delve into those differences, but every end-times point of view agrees that the bodily resurrection of dead believers will occur just prior to or simultaneously with His return. “How much prior?” is the source of much discussion.
But the order of things isn’t just a matter of chronology. Paul broached a subject here that sparked significant controversy in the early church. Verse twenty-eight states that once all His enemies are defeated, the Son will subject Himself to the Father so that God may be all in all. This led to great debate over whether the Son is equal to the Father if He subjects Himself in this way. However, the matter is resolved easily if you understand the distinction between role and relationship.
I hope I explain this well… I have roles I am responsible for. I’m a husband, a father, and a pastor. Those roles are fulfilled within a hierarchical structure. They give me a sphere of influence and authority where I am responsible for fulfilling the function of those roles in a healthy way for both others and myself. But, at the same time, I have relationships to everyone within my sphere. Those relationships put me on a level field with everyone else. I’m equal to everyone else relationally. I’m just as broken, just as prone to sin, and just as loved by the Father as everyone else in my life. I need shepherding just as much as the people I’ve been tasked to shepherd. The roles I have aren’t equal to those of everyone else, but the relationships I have with those I lead are absolutely founded in equality.
Christ’s role in redemption is indeed subordinate to the Father’s, but His relationship to the Father is not. In other words, the plan to redeem all things requires each member of the Godhead to assume roles within a hierarchy. Yet in their relationship with one another, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are completely equal in all things. They willingly assumed this hierarchy of roles to accomplish the one thing they all wanted: the redemption of all things.
Ongoing Discussion
“Otherwise, what do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf?” – 1 Corinthians 15:29
This verse has confounded scholars. There are currently at least forty distinct interpretations of this verse.[1]What seems consistently agreed upon is that Paul wasn’t condoning this practice but was instead using it to bolster his argument. The statement seems to plainly indicate that at least some in Corinth were practicing baptism for the dead. This could mean one of two things. It was either a washing of the dead bodies of believers prior to their burial or a proxy baptism of believing family members on behalf of the one who died. There is insufficient evidence either way to tell us which is true.
Paul’s point seems to be that their practice of this erroneous thing contradicts their stated disbelief in the resurrection. If the dead are not raised, why bother? Over time, the difficulty has been that some church sects have treated this as a stamp of approval for the practice. Mormons (in addition to many other heresies) have fully embraced baptism for the dead as a way to bring their departed, unconverted family members into the kingdom.
Baptism for the dead poses a major problem. It is completely inconsistent with all other teachings on baptism. Neither Jesus nor any of the apostles taught this. Its singular mention here is not embedded in a discussion of baptism but is instead part of a defense of the resurrection. It is neither commended, condoned, nor condemned, but simply used to highlight an inconsistency in their beliefs about the resurrection. Therefore, the most likely and broadly accepted understanding here is that Paul wasn’t prescribing or approving this practice but simply pointing out more of the confusion at work within the Corinthian church.
[1] Brown, D. R., & Twist, E. T. (2013). 1 Corinthians (J. D. Barry & D. Mangum, Eds.; 1 Co 15:29). Lexham Press.
