1 Corinthians 15 is one of the most pivotal chapters in the entire Bible. It’s the most detailed discussion of our great hope, the resurrection of the dead, as well as the place in the New Testament where the gospel of Christ’s death and resurrection is laid out in its simplest form. If there were only one chapter of the Bible that I could give to someone interested in Christianity, it would be this one. But what does it mean? In this post, I’ll give a detailed exegesis of 1 Cor. 15, with a focus on vv. 3-4 (the good news), vv. 24-28 (the eschaton), and vv. 54-57 (the victory of the resurrection!).
Paul’s argument in 1 Corinthians 15 appears to be a chiasm, centered around his discussion of the final resurrection at the eschaton:
A. Hold fast in the good news that was proclaimed (vv. 1-11)
B. The truth of the resurrection of the dead (vv. 12-17)
C. If there is no resurrection, there is no hope (vv. 18-19)
D. The resurrection at the eschaton (vv. 20-28)
C’. If there is no resurrection, there is no point in living rightly (vv. 29-34)
B’. The details of the resurrection of the dead (vv. 35-57)
A’. Remain steadfast in the work of the Lord (v. 58)
This chiastic pattern puts the emphasis of Paul’s argument on vv. 20-28, which deal with the eschaton and the resurrection of the dead. Whatever point he was trying to get across about the resurrection, vv. 20-28 are an absolutely integral, central part of that message. This should be kept in mind as we go through the chapter.
“The good news that I proclaimed to you”
Now I want you to understand, brothers and sisters, the good news that I proclaimed to you, which you in turn received, in which also you stand, through which also you are being saved, if you hold firmly to the message that I proclaimed to you—unless you have come to believe in vain.
Paul states four things about the good news and the Corinthian believers: (1) he proclaimed it to them, (2) they received it, (3) they stand in it, and (4) they are being saved through it, if they hold onto it. To “receive” (Gk: parelabete) the good news is an active and aorist verb, which refers to the Corinthians’ active acceptance of the gospel message when it was proclaimed to them. They are presently and passively “being saved” (Gk: sōzesthe) through the good news [the implied ‘doer’ of salvation is God], but only if they presently and actively “hold fast” (Gk: katechete), that is, continue to believe it. Otherwise, their initial act of belief in the good news (Gk: episteusate) was for nothing (Gk: eikē).
For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures and that he was buried and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.
The good news that was proclaimed by Paul has two parts: that the Messiah, Jesus, “died for our sins,” and that “he was raised on the third day.” For each part, he presents two pieces of evidence: first, that it is “in accordance with the Scriptures,” as well as tangible evidence — for Christ’s death, that “he was buried,” and for his resurrection, that he was seen by people (Peter, the twelve disciples, five hundred brethren, James, and the apostles) after his death.
The first part of the good news, that the Messiah “died for our sins,” has implications for the scope of the atonement. If Paul was able to tell the Corinthians, when they hadn’t yet believed, that the death of Jesus was “for our sins,” this implies that the effects of his death extend to non-believers (contrary to the Calvinist ‘limited atonement’). This agrees with his statements elsewhere in his letters to the effect that Christ died for those who are now rebellious (Rom. 5:6-10; Eph. 2:3-5; cf. John 12:47; 1 Tim. 1:12-15; 1 Pet. 3:18).
However, Paul’s focus isn’t on the first part of the gospel, but the second part, that “he was raised on the third day,” which has apparently come into question within the Corinthian church (as we’ll see later)! Because of this, he spends much more time on the tangible evidence for Jesus’ resurrection, citing his appearances to Peter, the twelve disciples, five hundred brethren (!), his brother James, and all of the apostles.
Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me has not been in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I but the grace of God that is with me. Whether then it was I or they, so we proclaim and so you believed.
After bringing up Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances to others, Paul talks about his own experience, which was “like an untimely birth” (Gk: ektrōmati), using a word that refers to a miscarriage (cf. Num. 12:12; Job 3:16; Ecc. 6:3 LXX). Paul’s emphasis here is on the abnormality of his conversion; he’s the least of the apostles, because he used to persecute God’s church before Christ appeared to him. He puts God’s grace at the forefront of his salvation, so that even his abundant toiling in his ministry is “not I but the grace of God together with me.” Because of this (Gk: oun), Paul’s proclamation of the good news is just as authoritative as that of the other apostles.
“If Christ has not been raised!”
Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised, and if Christ has not been raised, then our proclamation is in vain and your faith is in vain.
Some of those in the Corinthian church were denying that there is “a resurrection of the dead-ones” (Gk: anastasis nekrōn), and Paul shows them the logical consequence of their view, that Christ himself has not “been raised out of the dead-ones” (Gk: ek nekrōn egēgertai)! This could be understood in one (or both) of two ways. First, the Corinthians may have been denying that resurrection of dead-ones is possible in principle, and therefore denying that Christ could have been raised. On the other hand, Paul may be saying that Christ’s resurrection secured the resurrection of the dead-ones, so that if the dead-ones won’t be raised, nor was Christ raised! In light of what Paul says later (vv. 20-22), the second option is more likely, though it’s also possible that both are true.
We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified of God that he raised Christ—whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised.
Paul’s first argument for the resurrection of the dead-ones was that the apostles’ preaching, and the faith of the Corinthians, would be for nothing (Gk: kenon/kenē) if the Messiah wasn’t raised. This is because a crucial component of the good news is that Christ “was raised on the third day” (v. 4). Now, he brings in a second argument: they themselves have testified that God raised up the Messiah, but if the dead-ones will not be raised, the Messiah hasn’t been raised, and they’ve given false testimony about God himself! This is a very serious charge, so Paul urges them to consider the implications of what they’re claiming.
If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile, and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have died in Christ have perished. If for this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.
Paul’s third argument is an emotive appeal: if the Messiah wasn’t raised out of the dead-ones, then not only is their faith utterly useless (Gk: mataia), but their loved ones who died in Christ have been utterly destroyed (Gk: apōlonto). In another letter, Paul used the resurrection to comfort believers about those who had died (1 Thess. 4:13-18), but the Corinthians who deny the resurrection of the dead-ones have no such hope. They are, therefore, “more pitiful than all other people.” This paints a remarkably bleak picture, in contrast to the great hope that Paul goes on to describe.
“Then comes the end”
But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have died. For since death came through a human, the resurrection of the dead has also come through a human, for as all die in Adam, so all will be made alive in Christ.
Having argued sufficiently that Christ was raised, Paul says that his resurrection was as “the firstfruit [Gk: aparchē] of those who have died.” His resurrection out of the dead-ones secured the future raising of the dead-ones! The scope of this resurrection is described as “those who have died” (Gk: tōn kekoimēmenōn; figuratively referring to death as sleep) and “the dead-ones” (Gk: nekrōn), neither one of which suggests any limitation.
Paul makes a comparison between Adam, “in [whom] all people are dying” (Gk: en... pantes apothnēskousin), and Christ, “in [whom] all people will be made alive” (Gk: en... pantes zōopoiēthēsontai). This strongly indicates that the same number who are dying in Adam will be made alive in Christ; if Paul had intended to limit the number who will be made alive, he would have spoken of “all [of you] in Christ” (Gk: pantes en christō; cf. 1 Cor. 16:24; Gal. 3:26, 28), rather than saying “in Christ, all” (Gk: en christō pantes). To paraphrase a statement from a similar passage in one of Paul’s other letters: if more people are dying in Adam than will be made alive in Christ, then where grace increases, sin super-exceeds, so that sin will ultimately reign in death forever (Rom. 5:18-21).
But each in its own order: Christ the first fruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end...
Paul mentions two different categories of the resurrection: “Christ, the firstfruit” (Gk: aparchē christos) and “those of Christ” (Gk: hoi tou christou). Some see three categories here, including “the end” as a group of people to be resurrected, but this ignores the agricultural metaphor. In the harvest, after the firstfruit was presented to God, the entire crop would be harvested, and all the people (even foreigners) would celebrate (Lev. 23:9-22; Deut. 26:1-15). Jesus is the firstfruit of “those who have died” and “all [who] are dying in Adam” (vv. 20-22), which implies that the second stage of the ‘harvest’ includes every person who has died. They are referred to as “those of Christ” because, as Paul says elsewhere, Jesus is “Lording both dead-ones and living-ones,” that is, every person (Rom. 14:9); if he intended to refer to believers alone, he would have said “those in Christ” (Gk: hoi en christō; cf. v. 18).
If the resurrection of all people is in view here, why does Paul speak of “the end” (Gk: to telos) as a third event? When referring to the succession between resurrections, he uses a different word (Gk: epeita) than when he says “then [Gk: eita] the end.” Epeita indicates temporal succession (cf. Gal. 1:18, 21; 2:1), whereas eita can also refer to merely logical succession without a jump in time. Earlier in the same chapter, Paul used eita and epeita in exactly this sense (1 Cor. 15:5-7), because Jesus appeared to Peter and the other disciples at the same time (cf. Matt. 28:16ff; Lk. 24:33ff; John 20:19ff).
...when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father, after he has destroyed every ruler and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death.
Paul alludes to Psalm 109:1 (LXX), which states that the Messiah will sit at God’s right hand “until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.” Jesus will “abolish” (Gk: katargēsē) every human dominion, authority, and power, and “hand over” (Gk: paradidō) his kingdom to God, thus re-establishing the original hierarchy of God → humanity → creation (cf. Gen. 1:26-28; Ps. 8:5-9). The Hebraist also pointed to this as the ultimate reason for which Jesus died and was exalted (Heb. 2:5-10).
Death itself, called the “last enemy,” will also be “abolished” (Gk: katargeitai), using a verb that means to render absolutely powerless. This counts against the view that God’s enemies will be annihilated for eternity. If no one dies any more, but some people (even the majority of humanity) remain dead forever, death has no more been abolished than slavery would be abolished if no one new was enslaved while most people remained in slavery forever! On its own, this verse isn’t conclusive against annihilationism, because it could simply be a reiteration of the idea that “Death” will give up those in it and be destroyed before the wicked are judged, found in Jewish and Christian apocalyptic literature (Rev. 20:13-14; cf. 1 Enoch 51.1-2; 4 Ezra 7.31-35; 2 Baruch 21.23; LAB 3.10). The surrounding context, however, repudiates an annihilationist interpretation (see below).
For “God has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is plain that this does not include the one who put all things in subjection under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to the one who put all things in subjection under him, so that God may be all in all.
This begins with a paraphrase of Psalm 8:7 (LXX), which speaks of the subjection of all things to humanity, and Paul applies it specifically to Jesus. In another of his letters, he says that Jesus will conform us to the body of his glory “by the working that enables him to subject all things to himself” (Phil. 3:21). In the context of 1 Cor. 15:20-28, this doesn’t refer to impersonal things (even though “all,” panta, is neuter following Ps. 8:7 LXX), but to Christ’s enemies that will be subjected to him (v. 25)! Their subjection won’t be in continuing rebellion, lest the Son’s own subjection to the Father be rebellious. Furthermore, if God’s enemies continued in rebellion to him, then he would never be “in all.”
Thus, for Paul, the telos of history will involve the resurrection of all people, and the subjection of all of Christ’s enemies to himself — not by being tortured or destroyed, but by being conformed to his glory! — so that they are no longer rebellious, but God is all in all. God’s enemies will be reconciled and restored, with the exceptions of (impersonal) human hierarchies and death, which are slated for abolition. Paul isn’t merely speaking loosely here, or accidentally implying the salvation of all; based on the chiastic pattern of the chapter, this is central to his carefully-argued case for the resurrection. For him, the resurrection at the telos of history is inseparable from the subjection in glory of God’s enemies to God himself.
No comments:
Post a Comment