1 Corinthians 15:12–15

1 CORINTHIANS CHAPTER 15

Of the Resurrection of the Dead. 1 Cor. 15, 1-58.

TThe resurrection of Christ basic for the Christian's faith: V. 12. Now if Christ be preached that He rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? V. 13. But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen; v. 14. and if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. V. 15. 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.

All the Corinthians had to admit that in the doctrine of the resurrection of Christ (as in all other doctrines of the Christian faith) the apostles taught in perfect harmony. Christ was preached as having been raised from the dead, and that historical fact they accepted as the truth.

At the same time, however, there were some in their midst that held there was no such thing as a resurrection of dead men. It was a most peculiar contradiction, but one which had not entered their consciousness as such. Such a sweeping denial by the side of the calm acceptance of the great historical fact of Christ's resurrection was so strange as to cause an outcry of displeased surprise on the part of the apostle.

Forthwith he proceeds to enlighten them by a double argument, showing that, if their position was right, Christian doctrine must be false, and faith must be useless.

What follows from the position which these brethren in Corinth took? If the bodily resurrection of the dead is an impossibility, neither is Christ risen; the idea of a risen, living Christ is then absurd, for the denial of a bodily resurrection must strike Christ as well as all the other dead, since He died as a true man.

Another result: If Christ, however, be not raised, vain then is also our proclamation, vain also your faith. This would be the second consequence of the denial: If the fact of Christ's resurrection would be given up, in line with the first argument, then the testimony of the resurrection must be discredited as well; and the message being untrue, it follows that faith which is based upon a false representation has no basis, it is hollow, ineffectual, useless.

Did any of the Corinthians care to maintain that the Gospel with all its glorious effects was a delusion? And what would be the result so far as the character, the veracity, of the apostles was concerned? But we should be found, discovered, set forth in shame, as lying witnesses of God, because we testified against God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up, if the contention as to the absurdity of bodily resurrection will hold good.

If any person says of God that He has done something which, as a matter of fact, He did not do, although able to do so, then he gives false testimony against God. It would follow that the apostles were not only deluded fools, but tricksters and impostors as well. That is the one result if one will insist upon denying the resurrection of the body.