If Christ Has Not Been Raised…
Daniel 12:1-4; 1 Corinthians 15:12-34
1 Corinthians 15:12-34
As we come closer to the end of this great letter that has taught us so much about life in the church, the problems churches can face, and patterns to avoid, we come to the great teaching on the resurrection of Christ, and the resurrection of the believer.
Whenever I preach a funeral, I make it a point to highlight the resurrection from the dead, because I find that particular teaching lacking in most modern funerals. In many funerals, people have an idea that humans become angels, which is not true: we do not turn into another specie. Or people merely highlight a disembodied spiritual existence in heaven and all the fun that happens in heaven, as though that were our ultimate hope.
According to Scripture, our ultimate hope is that ONE DAY OUR HIGH PRIEST—JESUS CHRIST—WILL DESCEND FROM HEAVEN, SPEAK TO OUR BODIES IN THE GRAVE, OUR SPIRITS WILL REENTER OUR BODIES, WE WILL RISE—SHATTERING OUR TOMBSTONES—WITH GLORIFIED BODIES, NEVER TO DIE AGAIN. That is the Christian hope. And it’s sad how many times I’ve have people come up after a funeral service and say things like, “I’ve been in church my whole life, and I’ve never heard that before.”
And sadly, here in Corinth, that truth was being challenged. But in Paul’s mind, the resurrection of Christ and the resurrection of believers, is so united that to deny one, is to deny the other. So in this sermon we will first consider the problem in Corinth; second, the arguments from a hypothetical; and finally, argument from positive instruction.
First, the problem in Corinth. You may have noticed: there has been a battle of confessing, a battle of eloquence, a battle of rhetoric throughout this letter. In chapter 1, Paul challenged the Corinthian church’s love for Greek wisdom and Greek rhetoric. Many of them were so enamored by the pagan philosophers and rhetoricians—and they even prized pagan wisdom over God’s wisdom.
This problem was something Paul even had to challenge in 2 Corinthians. There were some in the church who were looking to eloquent Greek philosophers over against the Apostle Paul. And Paul said in 2 Corinthians 11:6, “Even if I am unskilled in speaking, I am not so in knowledge; indeed in every way we have made this plain to you in all things.” In 2 Corinthians 1, Paul said, “We behaved in the world with simplicity and godly sincerity, not by earthly wisdom, but by the grace of God”
This shows that Paul is still having to address some of the same issues that he dealt with in the opening chapters of 1 Corinthians. In the opening chapters of 1 Corinthians, Paul was concerned that their faith was resting on the wisdom of men, and not the power of God. The rhetoric and eloquence of Paul was not like the rhetoric and eloquence of the Greek, pagan philosophers. Paul said, “We preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to the Jew and folly to the Greek.” There is a battle over the preached Word, the confession of the Cross. Rejected by the Greek, but embraced by the Christian.
The Corinthian penchant for natural, Greek eloquence over the Spiritual wisdom of Christ revealed their immaturity. In chapter 3 Paul lamented, “I fed you with milk, not solid food, as infants in Christ, for… you are not ready.” In chapter 12, Paul contrasted those who are devoid of the Spirit and say “Jesus is accursed.” With those of the Spirit who confess “Jesus is Lord,” because apart from the Spirit no one can say “Jesus is Lord.” It’s ironic that the Greek pagans prize an eloquence and rhetoric of the philosophers, but their gods are mute idols. While our Living God is the God of speech—indeed, the God who created language itself—and yet the speech of the Apostle is chided as weak. But God has chosen to shame the world by what the world deems as weak and foolish.”
Our confession of faith might sound weak to the world, but it is the power of God. In fact, in 1 Cor. 12:3, that confession if from the Spirit. As Mark Garcia noted, when the church confesses—whether in the Apostles’ Creed or Nicene Creed—we confess as a church, not just for catechetical reasons to teach, and not as mere historical reasons, as we are connected to the Christian church throughout the ages—all of those reasons are true, but there is more: When we confess as a Church, we confess with the Holy Spirit who confesses. When we recite our confession of our faith together, we do so because the Church’s speech is joined with the Spirit’s speech in confessing Christ. Again, as Garcia pointed out: who confesses or speaks together in Revelation 22? Revelation 22:17, “The Spirit and the Bride say...” The Bride is the Church. The Spirit and the Church say—our confessing of Christ shows that we set apart by the Spirit, as the Spirit give us that proper confession of Christ—namely, that He is Lord and Savior, crucified and raised!
And what was fascinating last week in 1 Corinthians 15:1-11, was that Paul quoted an early creedal statement. Many people think that 1 Corinthians 15:3ff was an early creed that the early church developed to confess Christ. The Christ who was crucified and raised, is the One confessed by the Church through the Spirit. Some people, however, chide reciting Creeds—they say, “No Creed but the Bible.” But it’s the Bible who shows us that the early church is concerned with developing creeds, and the Bible itself quotes 5-7 of those early creedal statements. Moreover, it’s also disengenuine to claim that you have no creed. Everyone has a creed—the only question is if it’s been written down.
The problem in Corinth is that they were deviating from a proper confession—probably due to Greek influence. The proper confession is, 1 Corinthians 15:4, “That he was raised on the third day.” But Paul signals in v.12, “Some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead.”
Kim Riddlebarger said, “Both Greeks and Romans had a serious intellectual problem with the very notion of the resurrection of the body because pagan religion often held that water itself is evil.” So here again, a love for Greek, worldly wisdom is causing some in this church—not all, but some—to have a false confession.
And this is a problem. They are not confessing with the Spirit. They are showing themselves to be of a different spirit, because if they are of the Spirit, they will confess with the Spirit and with the Church that Jesus is Lord and Savior, crucified and raised. Paul warns that they ought even to separate from these false-confessors—if they will not repent. Verse 33 states, “Do not be deceived: “Bad company ruins good morals.” Wake up from your drunken stupor, as is right, and do not go on sinning. For some have no knowledge of God. I say this to your shame.” A false confession—heresy—is not only a sin, but often leads to further sinful actions. Such false confessors—if they refuse to be teachable—will ruin the morality of the church by sewing a nihilistic ethic in the church.. The church much correct the false confessors—and if the they refuse to listen: the bad company should be purged.
And that brings me to my second point, argument from hypothetical As Paul engages these false confessors—those who say that there is not resurrection of the dead—he does so in a type of sandwich structure. Here’s what I mean: from vv.12-19, Paul gives a kind of “What if” argument to show the folly of the false confessors. Paul gives a hypothetical scenario that if Christ did not rise, then other things would not make sense. Then from vv.20-28 Paul argues by positive instruction, telling us the true facts of the resurrection. And then starting in v.29 Paul returns to a kind of “What if” argument, showing that If Christ did not rise,, then other things would not make sense.
So what of Paul’s “What if statements?” You will notice that starting in v.12 Paul gives an argument layer by layer.
If the dead are not raised, why is Christ being confessed as raised?
If the dead are not raised, then Christ did not rise from the dead.
If Christ has not been raised, then our proclamation and even our faith is in vain.
If the dead are not raised, then we misrepresent God when we confess Jesus as raised.
If Christ has not been raised, then our faith is futile and you are still in your sins.
If Christ is not raised then those who have died are just gone and there is not hope whatsoever.
If Christ is not raised, every non-Christian on the planet should pity us because our faith and hope—our very lives!—are futile and in vain.
Paul highlights two significant and substantial problems with rejecting the resurrection of the dead. First, to reject the resurrection of Christ is to reject your own resurrection, and to reject your own resurrection is to reject the resurrection of Christ—they are connected. If you will not be resurrected, then what hope is there? Funerals would be even sadder, because there would be no hope of one day walking and talking—body and soul—with your loved one. Also, you reject the core of the Christian hope about eternal life—if you reject the resurrection of the dead.
Second, to reject the resurrection of Christ is to reject the forgiveness of your sins. When we think of justification and the forgiveness of our sins, we rightly think of the Cross. But Paul says here, if Jesus was not also raised from the dead, then our sins have not been forgiven? Why is this? Well it’s interesting in 1 Timothy 3:16 Paul said that Jesus “was manifested in the flesh, justified by the Spirit.” This is a statement about the resurrection. In that resurrection event Jesus is justified or you could translate: vindicated.
Also, Paul said in Romans 1:4 that Jesus was “declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection form the dead.” In other words, while Jesus was always the Son of God, He climactically was declared Son of God in power by virtue of the resurrection. At the resurrection, Jesus is not only justified (or vidincated) but also adopted as the victorious God-man, the second and last Adam.
But not only did the God-man, Jesus Christ, while remaining completely sinless, receive something analogous to justification and adoption, but also sanctification. Romans 6, Paul tells us that by virtue of Christ’s death and resurrection, death has no dominion over Him. For a time, he was under the law, under darkness, and even under the power of death. But at His resurrection, newness of life abounds as Christ is exulted. Christ is also, in this sense, sanctified—set apart, having moved from darkness into light, from death to life, from humiliation to exultation, from probation to consummation.
And so the resurrection becomes not just important for Christ’s own exultation, but for our salvation. How are your sins forgiven? How are you justified, adopted, and sanctified? Only in union with Christ. Christ is justified, adopted, and sanctified, and in union with Him, you receive justification, adoption, and sanctification. But if Christ has not been raised; if Christ is not justified in the Spirit; if Christ is not declared the Son of God in power; if Christ is not free from death’s dominion, then you cannot be united to this Christ, and you yourself will never be justified, adopted, and sanctified. Without the resurrection, you are still in your sins, separated from God, and completely defiled by sin’s power.
So, Paul’s opening argument has been a series of “if/then” clauses to show us the theological mess we’re in if we reject the resurrection of the dead. And when Paul picks up this style of argument in v.29, he gets more practical. He basically says, “If Christ has not been raised, why in the world do we do the things we do?” Our very lives would not make sense if Christ were not raised.
However, v.29 is one of the most debated verses in 1 Corinthians. In fact, there are said to be over 200 interpretations of this verse. Paul wrote, “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?” That word translated “on behalf of” can be translated “because of,” “with regard to,” “over” something or even “beyond.” In other words, some were getting baptizes concerning the dead, or over the dead, or on behalf of the dead. And the word “the dead” is actually plural. You could say “The dead ones.—or with regard to the dead ones.”
Heretical sects, such as the Marcionites and the Mormons have taken this verse as endorsement for the practice of getting baptized for dead relatives in there family tree. So what are we to make of this verse? Again, there have been many interpretations. Some suggest children were baptized on account of the faith of their dead parents. Others suggest, people were baptized “for the faith in the resurrection of the dead.” Or “on account of a hope concerning the dead.” Others think the dead refers specifically to Jesus Christ, so we’re baptized into His death (although the word “dead” is plural). Another view is that people were baptized who are now dead, but were not when they were baptized. Or perhaps, people were viewed as spiritually dead before their baptism, and afterwards considered alive? For some, the baptistry was overtop graves, so maybe people are baptized literally over the dead (see Luther).
A more persuasive view is one espoused by Charles Hodge and Herman Ridderbos. Paul is likely describing a practice that the Corinthian church was doing with out, at this point, weighing in on whether it was good or bad. For example, Paul described the eating of idol’s meat in chapter 8 of 1 Corinthians, but he didn’t directly condemn the practice until chapter 10. So, Paul does, in places, describe various practices of the Corinthian church, without venturing upon the merits of their actions. And notice Paul distances himself a bit from this practice. He doesn’t say, “What do we mean when we baptize on behalf of the dead.” Instead, Paul uses the third person plural, “They” “What do they mean when they baptize on behalf of the death.” So apparently, on this view, some in Corinth were conducing vicarious baptisms, but Paul seems to distance himself from this practice, and, historically, we know that vicarious baptisms were not practiced in the early church—in fact, the 3rd Council of Carthage banned the practice in AD 397.
For John Calvin, however, this verse refers to those who have death before their eyes—they are about to die and have not yet been baptized, and so they want to get baptized to carry that token and sign of salvation to the grave. Calvin admits that this was perverted and twisted with superstition in the coming years after the apostles. For Calvin, however, it would not make sense for Paul to merely describe a practice—a practice that he rejects—without condemning that practice. And, in context, it seems Paul describes positive examples, not negative examples.
Whether Hodge and Ridderbos are correct, or whether we go with Calvin, Paul’s point is clear: the practice—whatever it was!—would not make sense if the dead are not raised. If Christ is not raised, there is no sense for anyone to get baptized in His name. And that is Pauls’ point. In fact, if Christ has not been raised, you should just eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow you die, and face judgement for your sins, since you would not be forgiven. You wouldn’t risk your life for the faith, you wouldn’t be martyred, and you wouldn’t be courageous—if the dead are not raised, you’d be a mere pleasure hunter.
But Christ has indeed been raised, my finally point: Pauls’ positive argument. v.20, “But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.” The word “firstfruits” is a farming term. It refers to the first buddings you see at the beginning of harvest. The first fruits are the first signs that the harvest has arrived. If you’re a farmer it means you’re about to get to work in harvesting your crop—the first of your crop is appearing, the rest will surely follow.
Paul says Jesus’s resurrection is the first fruits of one resurrection harvest—and we are that harvest. Richard Gaffin helpfully taught, “Christ’s resurrection is not simply a guarantee; it is a pledge in the sense that it is the actual beginning of the general event.” This is why Paul links Christ’s resurrection with our resurrection, because they are part of the same event—the same harvest. The harvest has begun—the harvest will come in full. Christ was raised in power, the beginning of our resurrection harvest. And as the Risen One, all things have been subjected to Him—even though we don’t see it yet (Heb. 2:8)—and all things will climactically be subjected to Him when he returns for the rest of the harvest.
The Apostle Paul has challenged the false confessors—those who refuse to confess with the church by the Spirit that Christ has risen. These false confessors are corrupting the true confession of the church, in denying the resurrection of the dead. In fact, the false confessors are destroying the Christian hope, removing assurance that our sins are forgiven, and they are sewing a “Seize the day” ethic among their Christian brothers. This cannot be.
And so friends, we must guard our hearts—lest we somehow devalue or deemphasize the resurrection of the dead. In fact, when we go to a funeral, the first thing we should imagine is the tomb being shattered when the body is raised by Christ. We are, after all, people of the resurrection, and that resurrection power at work in us even now (Rom. 8:11). And friends, the promises of God are so great: if you repent of your sin and place your faith and trust in Christ, you will live forever, body and soul, on the New Heavens and New Earth in a face-to-face, friend-to-friend fellowship with Jesus, never to die again!
This is our hope. This is the very heartbeat of our lives. Let us never fail to realize that we are people of Christ’s resurrection harvest, true confessors with the Church by the Spirit that Christ is Lord, crucified and raised.
Amen.
