1 Corinthians 15:1–15:58

1 Corinthians 15:1-10 1. Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 1. Notum autem vobis facio, fratres, evangelium quod evangelizavi vobis, quod et recepistis, in quo etiam stetistis. 2. By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain: 2. Per quod etiam salutem habetis: quo pacto annuntiarim vobis, si tenetis, nisi frustra credidistis. 3. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 3. Tradidi enim vobis imprimis quod et acceperam, quod Christus mortuus fuerit, pro peccatis nostris secundum Scripturas, 4. And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 4. Et quod sepultus sit, et quod resurrexit tertio die, secundum Scripturas. 5. And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: 5. Et quod visus fait Cephae, deinde ipsis duodecim: 6. After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. 6. Postea visus fait plus quam qaingentis fratribus simul, ex quibus plures manent [1] adhuc ad hunc usque diem: qaidam autem obdormierunt. 7. After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. 7. Deinde visus fait Iacobo: post apostolis omnibus: 8. And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. 8. Postremo vero onmium, velut abortivo, visus fait et mihi. 9. For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 9. Ego enim sum minimus apostolorum, qui non sum idoneus ut dicar apostolus: quandoquidem persequutus sum ecclesiam Dei. 10. But by the grace of God I am what I:am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. 10. Sed gratia Dei sum id quod sum: et gratia ejus, quae mihi collata est, non fuit inanis, sed copiosius quam illi omnes laboravi: non ego tamen, sed gratia Dei quae mihi aderat. 1. Now I make known to you. He now enters on another subject -- the resurrection -- the belief of which among the Corinthians had been shaken by some wicked persons. It is uncertain, however, whether they doubted merely as to the ultimate resurrection of the body, or as to the immortality of the soul also. It is abundantly well known, that there were a variety of errors as to this point. Some philosophers contended that souls are immortal. As to the resurrection of the body, it never entered into the mind of any one of them. The Sadducees, however, had grosser views; for they thought of nothing but the present life; nay more, they thought that the soul of man was a breath of wind without substance. It is not, therefore, altogether certain (as I have already said) whether the Corinthians had at this time gone to such a height of madness, as to cast off all expectation of a future life, or whether they merely denied the resurrection of the body; for the arguments which Paul makes use of seem to imply, that they were altogether bewitched with the mad dream of the Sadducees. For example, when he says, Of what advantage is it to be baptized for the dead? ( 1 Corinthians 15:29 .) Were it not better to eat and to drink? ( 1 Corinthians 15:32 .) Why are we in peril every hour? ( 1 Corinthians 15:30 ,) and the like, it might very readily be replied, in accordance with the views of the philosophers, "Because after death the soul survives the body." Hence some apply the whole of Paul's reasoning contained in this chapter to the immortality of the soul. For my part, while I leave undetermined what the error of the Corinthians was, yet I cannot bring myself to view Paul's words as referring to anything else than the resurrection of the body. Let it, therefore be regarded as a settled point, that it is of this exclusively that he treats in this chapter. And what if the impiety of Hymeneus and Philetus had extended thus far, [2] who said that the resurrection was already past, ( 2 Timothy 2:18 ,) and that there would be nothing more of it? Similar to these, there are at the present day some madmen, or rather devils, [3] who call themselves Libertines. [4] To me, however, the following conjecture appears more probable -- that they were carried away by some delusion, [5] which took away from them the hope of a future resurrection, just as those in the present day, by imagining an allegorical resurrection, [6] take away from us the true resurrection that is promised to us. However this may be, it is truly a dreadful case, and next to a prodigy, that those who had been instructed by so distinguished a master, should have been capable of falling so quickly [7] into errors of so gross a nature. But what is there that is surprising in this, when in the Israelitish Church the Sadducees had the audacity to declare openly that man differs nothing from a brute, in so far as concerns the essence of the soul, and has no enjoyment but what is common to him with the beasts? Let us observe, however, that blindness of this kind is a just judgment from God, so that those who do not rest satisfied with the truth of God, are tossed hither and thither by the delusions of Satan. It is asked, however, why it is that he has left off or deferred to the close of the Epistle, what should properly have had the precedence of everything else? Some reply, that this was done for the purpose of impressing it more deeply upon the memory. I am rather of opinion that Paul did not wish to introduce a subject of such importance, until he had asserted his authority, which had been considerably lessened among the Corinthians, and until he had, by repressing their pride, prepared them for listening to him with docility. I make known to you. To make known here does not mean to teach what was previously unknown to them, but to recall to their recollection what they had heard previously. "Call to your recollection, along with me, that gospel which you had learned, before you were led aside from the right course." He calls the doctrine of the resurrection the gospel, that they may not imagine that any one is at liberty to form any opinion that he chooses on this point, as on other questions, which bring with them no injury to salvation. When he adds, which I preached to you, he amplifies what he had said: "If you acknowledge me as an apostle, I have assuredly taught you so." There is another amplification in the words -- which also ye have received, for if they now allow themselves to be persuaded of the contrary, they will be chargeable with fickleness. A third amplification is to this effect, that they had hitherto continued in that belief with a firm and steady resolution, which is somewhat more than that they had once believed. But the most important thing of all is, that he declares that their salvation is involved in this, for it follows from this, that, if the resurrection is taken away, they have no religion left them, no assurance of faith, and in short, have no faith remaining. Others understand in another sense the word stand, as meaning that they are upheld; but the interpretation that I have given is a more correct one. [8] 2. If you keep in memory -- unless in vain [9] These two expressions are very cutting. In the first, he reproves their carelessness or fickleness, because such a sudden fall was an evidence that they had never understood what had been delivered to them, or that their knowledge of it had been loose and floating, inasmuch as it had so quickly vanished. By the second, he warns them that they had needlessly and uselessly professed allegiance to Christ, if they did not hold fast this main doctrine. [10] 3. For I delivered to you first of all He now confirms what he had previously stated, by explaining that the resurrection had been preached by him, and that too as a fundamental doctrine of the gospel. First of all, says he, as it is wont to be with a foundation in the erecting of a house. At the same time he adds to the authority of his preaching, when he subjoins, that he delivered nothing but what he had received, for he does not simply mean that he related what he had from the report of others, but that it was what had been enjoined upon him by the Lord. [11] For the word [12] must be explained in accordance with the connection of the passage. Now it is the duty of an apostle to bring forward nothing but what he has received from the Lord, so as from hand to hand [13] (as they say) to administer to the Church the pure word of God. That Christ died, etc. See now more clearly whence he received it, for he quotes the Scriptures in proof. In the first place, he makes mention of the death of Christ, nay also of his burial, that we may infer, that, as he was like us in these things, he is so also in his resurrection. He has, therefore, died with us that we may rise with him. In his burial, too, the reality of the death in which he has taken part with us, is made more clearly apparent. Now there are many passages of Scripture in which Christ's death and resurrection are predicted, but nowhere more plainly [14] than in Isaiah 53 , in Daniel 9:26 , and in Psalm 22 For our sins That is, that by taking our curse upon him he might redeem us from it. For what else was Christ's death, but a sacrifice for expiating our sins -- what but a satisfactory penalty, by which we might be reconciled to God -- what but the condemnation of one, for the purpose of obtaining forgiveness for us? He speaks also in the same manner in Romans 4:25 , but in that passage, on the other hand, he ascribes it also to the resurrection as its effect -- that it confers righteousness upon us; for as sin was done away through the death of Christ, so righteousness is procured through his resurrection. This distinction must be carefully observed, that we may know what we must look for from the death of Christ, and what from his resurrection. When, however, the Scripture in other places makes mention only of his death, let us understand that in those cases his resurrection is included in his death, but when they are mentioned separately, the commencement of our salvation is (as we see) in the one, and the consummation of it in the other. 5. That he was seen by Cephas He now brings forward eye witnesses, (autoptas) as they are called by Luke, ( Luke 1:2 ,) who saw the accomplishment of what the Scriptures had foretold would take place. He does not, however, adduce them all, for he makes no mention of women. When, therefore, he says that he appeared first to Peter, you are to understand by this that he is put before all the men, so that there is nothing inconsistent with this in the statement of Mark ( Mark 16:9 ) that he appeared to Mary. But how is it that he says, that he appeared to the twelve, when, after the death of Judas, there were only eleven remaining? Chrysostom is of opinion that this took place after Matthias had been chosen in his room. Others have chosen rather to correct the expression, looking upon it as a mistake [15] But as we know, that there were twelve in number that were set apart by Christ's appointment, though one of them had been expunged from the roll, there is no absurdity in supposing that the name was retained. On this principle, there was a body of men at Rome that were called Centumviri, [16] while they were in number 102. [17] By the twelve, therefore, you are simply to understand the chosen Apostles. It does not quite appear when it was that this appearing to more than five hundred took place. Only it is possible that this large multitude assembled at Jerusalem, when he manifested himself to them. For Luke ( Luke 24:33 ) makes mention in a general way of the disciples who had assembled with the eleven; but how many there were he does not say. Chrysostom refers it to the ascension, and explains the word epano to mean, from on high. [18] Unquestionably, as to what he says in reference to his having appeared to James apart, this may have been subsequently to the ascension. By all the Apostles I understand not merely the twelve, but also those disciples to whom Christ had assigned the office of preaching the gospel. [19] In proportion as our Lord was desirous that there should be many witnesses of his resurrection, and that it should be frequently testified of, let us know that it should be so much the more surely believed among us. ( Luke 1:1 .) Farther, inasmuch as the Apostle proves the resurrection of Christ from the fact that he appeared to many, he intimates by this, that it was not figurative but true and natural, for the eyes of the body cannot be witnesses of a spiritual resurrection. 8. Last of all to me, as to one born prematurely, He now introduces himself along with the others, for Christ had manifested himself to him as alive, and invested with glory. [20] As it was no deceptive vision, it was calculated to be of use [21] for establishing a belief in the resurrection, as he also makes use of this argument in Acts 26:8 . But as it was of no small importance that his authority should have the greatest weight and influence among the Corinthians, he introduces, by the way, a commendation of himself personally, but at the same time qualified in such a manner that, while he claims much for himself, he is at the same time exceedingly modest. Lest any one, therefore, should meet him with the objection: "Who art thou that we should give credit to thee?" he, of his own accord, confesses his unworthiness, and, in the first place, indeed he compares himself to one that is born prematurely, and that, in my opinion, with reference to his sudden conversion. For as infants do not come forth from the womb, until they have been there formed and matured during a regular course of time, so the Lord observed a regular period of time in creating, nourishing, and forming his Apostles. Paul, on the other hand, had been cast forth from the womb when he had scarcely received the vital spark. [22] There are some that understand the term rendered abortive as employed to mean posthumous; [23] but the former term is much more suitable, inasmuch as he was in one moment begotten, and born, and a man of full age. Now this premature birth renders the grace of God more illustrious in Paul than if he had by little and little, and by successive steps, grown up to maturity in Christ. 9. For I am the least It is not certain whether his enemies threw out this for the purpose of detracting from his credit, or whether it was entirely of his own accord, that he made the acknowledgment. For my part, while I have no doubt that, he was at all times voluntarily, and even cheerfully, disposed to abase himself, that he might magnify the grace of God, yet I suspect that in this instance he wished to obviate calumnies. For that there were some at Corinth that made it their aim to detract from his dignity by malicious slander, may be inferred not only from many foregoing passages, but also from his adding a little afterwards a comparison, which he would assuredly never have touched upon, if he had not been constrained to it by the wickedness of some, "Detract from me as much as you please -- I shall suffer myself to be cast down below the ground -- I shall suffer myself to be of no account whatever, [24] that the goodness of God towards me may shine forth the more. Let me, therefore, be reckoned the least of the Apostles: nay more, I acknowledge myself to be unworthy of this distinction. For by what merits could I have attained to that honor? When I persecuted the Church of God, what did I merit? But there is no reason why you should judge of me according to my own worth, [25] for the Lord did not look to what I was, but made me by his grace quite another man." The sum is this, that Paul does not refuse to be the most worthless of all, and next to nothing, provided this contempt does not impede him in any degree in his ministry, and does not at all detract from his doctrine. He is contented that, as to himself, he shall be reckoned unworthy of any honor, provided only he commends his apostleship in respect of the grace conferred upon him. And assuredly God had not adorned him with such distinguished endowments in order that his grace might lie buried or neglected, but he had designed thereby to render his apostleship illustrious and distinguished. 10. And his grace was not vain. Those that set free-will in opposition to the grace of God, that whatever good we do may not be ascribed wholly to Him, wrest these words to suit their own interpretation -- as if Paul boasted, that he had by his own industry taken care that God's grace toward him had not been misdirected. Hence they infer, that God, indeed, offers his grace, but that the right use of it is in man's own power, and that it is in his own power to prevent its being ineffectual. I maintain, however, that these words of Paul give no support to their error, for he does not here claim anything as his own, as if he had himself, independently of God, done anything praiseworthy. What then? That he might not seem to glory to no purpose in mere words, while devoid of reality, he says, that he affirms nothing that is not openly apparent. Farther, even admitting that these words intimate, that Paul did not abuse the grace of God, and did not render it ineffectual by his negligence, I maintain, nevertheless, that there is no reason on that account, why we should divide between him and God the praise, that ought to be ascribed wholly to God, inasmuch as he confers upon us not merely the power of doing well, but also the inclination and the accomplishment. But more abundantly Some refer this to vain-glorious boasters, [26] who, by detracting from Paul, endeavored to set off themselves and their goods to advantage, as, in their opinion at least, it is not likely that he wished to enter upon a contest with the Apostles. When he compares himself, however, with the Apostles, he does so merely for the sake of those wicked persons, who were accustomed to bring them forward for the purpose of detracting from his reputation, as we see in the Epistle to the Galatians ( Galatians 1:11 .) Hence the probability is, that it is of the Apostles that he speaks, when he represents his own labors as superior to theirs, and it is quite true, that he was superior to others, not merely in respect of his enduring many hardships, encountering many dangers, abstaining from things lawful, and perseveringly despising all perils; ( 2 Corinthians 11:26 ;) but also because the Lord gave to his labors a much larger measure of success. [27] For I take labor here to mean the fruit of his labor that appeared. Not I, but the grace The old translator, by leaving out the article, has given occasion of mistake to those that are not acquainted with the Greek language, for in consequence of his having rendered the words thus -- not I, but the grace of God with me, [28] they thought that only the half of the praise is ascribed to God, and that the other half is reserved for man. They, accordingly, understand the meaning to be that Paul labored not alone, inasmuch as he could do nothing without co-operating grace, [29] but at the same time it was under the influence of his own free-will, and by means of his own strength. His words, however, have quite a different meaning, for what he had said was his own, he afterwards, correcting himself, ascribes wholly to the grace of God -- wholly, I say, not in part, for whatever he might have seemed to do, was wholly, he declares, the work of grace. A remarkable passage certainly, both for laying low the pride of man, and for magnifying the operation of Divine grace in us. For Paul, as though he had improperly made himself the author of anything good, corrects what he had said, and declares the grace of God to have been the efficient cause of the whole. Let us not think that there is here a mere pretense of humility [30] It is in good earnest that he speaks thus, and from knowing that it is so in truth. Let us learn, therefore, that we have nothing that is good, but what the Lord has graciously given us, that we do nothing good but what he worketh in us, ( Philippians 2:13 ) -- not that we do nothing ourselves, but that we do nothing without being influenced -- that is, under the guidance and impulse of the Holy Spirit. Footnotes: [1] "Sont viuans;" -- "Are alive." [2] "Iusques a Corinthe;" -- "As far as Corinth." [3] "Possedez d'autres diables;" -- "Possessed by other devils." [4] "The Libertines of Geneva were rather a cabal of rakes than a set of fanatics; for they made no pretense to any religious system, but only pleaded for the liberty of leading voluptuous and immoral lives. This cabal was composed of a certain number of licentious citizens, who could not bear the severe discipline of Calvin, who punished with rigour, not only dissolute manners, but Also whatever carried the aspect of irreligion and impiety." -- Paterson's History of the Church, volume 2.--- Ed. [5] "Par quelque opinion fantastique;" -- "By some fantastic notion." [6] "Vne ie ne scay quelle resurrection allegorique;" -- "An allegorical resurrection, I know not of what sort." [7] "Si soudainement seduits;" -- "So suddenly seduced." [8] It is remarked by Bloomfield, that "in estekate (which means ye have persevered, and do persevere,') there is an agonistic metaphor, (as in Ephesians 6:13 ,) or an architectural one, like hedraioi ginesthe, (be steadfast,) in 1 Corinthians 15:58 ." -- Ed. [9] "Our version does not express intelligibly the sense of ektos ei me eiko episteusate by rendering it so literally -- unless ye have believed in vain. To believe in vain, according to the use of ancient languages, is to believe without just reason and authority, giving credit to idle reports as true and authentic. Thus Plutarch, speaking of some story which passed current, says, touto hemeis e'ipomen en ti ton eiko pepisteumenon -- "this I said was one of those tales which are believed without any good authority." (Sympos. lib. 1, quaest. 6.) The Latins used credere frustra -- to believe in vain, or temere -- (rashly.) Kypke takes notice that ektos ei me, for except or unless, which has long been a suspected phrase, is used more than ten times by Lucian. It is also used by Plutarch in the Life of Demosthenes, volume 4." -- Alexander's Paraphrase on 1 Corinthians 15 . (London, 1766,) -- Ed. [10] "Ce principal poinct de la foy;" -- "This main article of faith." [11] "Que le Seigneur mesme luy auoit enseignee et commandee;" -- "What the Lord himself had taught and commanded him.': [12] "Le mot de receuoir;" -- "The word receive." [13] The Reader will find our Author making use of the same proverbial expression when commenting on 1 Corinthians 4:1 , and 1 Corinthians 11:23 . See volume 1, pages [1]150, [2]373. -- Ed. [14] "Il n'y en a point de plus expres, et ou il en soit traitte plus apertement;" -- "There are none of them that are more explicit, or where it is treated of more plainly" [15] Granville Penn supposes that the common reading eita tois dodeka then to the twelve, is a corruption for eita tois de deka -- and then to the ten, understanding the Apostle as meaning, that Christ appeared first to Cephas, and then to the other ten. Dr. Adam Clarke, after stating that "instead of dodeka, twelve, hendeka, eleven is the reading of D* E F G, Syriac in the margin, some of the Slavonic, Armenian, Vulgate, Itala, and several of the Fathers," and that "this reading is supported by Mark 16:14 ," remarks: "Perhaps the term twelve is used here merely to point out the society of the Apostles. who, though at this time they were only eleven, were still called the twelve, because this was their original number, and a number which was afterwards filled up." "The twelve was a name not of number, but of office. -- McKnight. -- Ed. [16] "C'est a dire, les Cents;" -- "That is to say, the Hundred." [17] The reader will find the same term referred to by Calvin when commenting on 1 Corinthians 10:8 . (See Calvin on the Corinthians, [3]vol. 1, p. 324, n. 3.) -- Ed. [18] "This peculiar use of epano for ploion, (which seems to have been popular or provincial, not being found in the Classical writers,) occurs also in Mark 14:5 , but with a genitive. Perhaps, however, it has properly no regimen, but is used parenthetically, like the Latin plus trecentos, 300 and more." -- Bloomfield. The word opano is used in a similar way in the Septuagint. Thus in Exodus 30:14 apo eikosaetous kai epano -- from twenty years old and above, and in Leviticus 27:7 , apo hexekontaeton kai epano -- from sixty years old and above. -- Ed. [19] Calvin's view accords with that of Chrysostom, who says, esan gar kai alloi apostoloi hos hoi heibdomekonta -- "for there were also other Apostles, such as the seventy." -- Ed. [20] "En sa vie et gloire immortelle;" -- "In his life and immortal glory." [21] "Elle estoit suffisante et receuable;" -- "It was sufficient and admissible." [22] In accordance with the view taken by Calvin, Bloomfield considers the original term. ektroma to mean, a child born before the due time, (in which sense the term abortivus, is employed by Horace, Sat. 1:3.46,) the Apostle "calling himself so as being an Apostle not formed and matured by previous preparation and instruction." Penn, after quoting the definition given by Eustathius of the term ektroma -- to mepo tetupomenon -- an unformed foetus, remarks: "To all the other Apostles our Lord appeared after his resurrection, when they had attained their adult form in his ministry; but to St. Paul he appeared at the first moment of his spiritual conception, and before he was formed or moulded." The same view, in substance, is given by McKnight. "Although he" (Paul) "calls himself an abortive Apostle, it was not on account of his being sensible of any imperfection in his commission, or of any weakness in his qualifications as an Apostle; for he affirms, 2 Corinthians 11:5 , that he was in nothing behind the very greatest of the Apostles; but he called himself an abortive Apostle, because, as he tells us ( 1 Corinthians 15:9 ,) he had persecuted the Church of God, and because he was made an Apostle without that previous course of instruction and preparation, which the other Apostles enjoyed who had attended Jesus Christ during his ministry on earth; so that, in the proper sense of the word, he was ektroma -- born before he was brought to maturity. That want, however, was abundantly supplied by the many revelations which his master gave him after he made him an Apostle." -- Ed. [23] "C'est a dire qui est nay apres la mort de son pete;" -- "That is to say, one that is born after the death of his father." [24] "Estre estime moins que rien;" -- "To be esteemed less than nothing." [25] "Par ma petite et basse condition;" -- "By my little and low condition." [26] "Thrasones." See Calvin on the Corinthians, [4]vol. 1, p. 98, n. 1. [27] "Dieu donnoit plus heureuse issue a ses labeurs, et les faisoit prou-fiter plus amplement;" -- "God gave to his labors a more prosperous issue, and made them much more successful." [28] In the Alexandrine MS. the reading is: But not I, but the grace of God with me. -- Corresponding to this is the rendering of Wiclif, (1380,) -- But not I, but the grace of God with me. -- Ed. [29] See Institutes, volume 1. [30] Heideggerus seems to have had Calvin's exposition here in his view in the following observations on the expression made use of by the Apostle: "Non Gratia Dei meoum, uti vetus Itala vertit, quasi effectus inter Gra-tiam Dei, et Pauli arbitrium distribueretur; nihil enim habuit ipse, quod non acceperit; sed Ouk ego de, alla he charis tou Theou sun emoi mecum, ut totum et in solidum omne gratiae soli acceptum feratur. Neque ita loquitur solius humilitatis et modestiae explieandae ergo, quanquam et hanc testari voluit; sed quia po-tens illa gratia demonstratio et testimonium irrefragabile erat resurrectionis Domini." -- "Not the grace of God with me, as the old Italic version renders it, as though the effect were divided between God's grace and Paul's free-will; for he has nothing that he has not received, but he sun emoi, which with me, that every thing may be wholly and entirely ascribed to grace alone. Nor does he speak thus, merely for the purpose of showing humility and modesty, though he had it also in view to testify this, but because that grace was a powerful demonstration and irrefragable testimony of our Lord's resurrection." -- Heideggeri Labores Exegetici in Cor. (Tiguri. 1700). -- Ed.

Moreover, {1} brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye {a} stand; (1) The sixth treatise of this epistle, concerning the resurrection: and he uses a transition, or passing over from one matter to another, showing first that he brings no new thing, to the end that the Corinthians might understand that they had begun to swerve from the right course. And next that he does not go about to entreat of a trifling matter, but of another chief point of the Gospel, which if it is taken away, their faith will necessarily come to nothing. And so at the length he begins this treatise at Christ's resurrection, which is the ground and foundation of ours, and confirms it first by the testimony of the scriptures and by the witness of the apostles, and of more than five hundred brethren, and last of all by his own. (a) In the profession of which you still continue.

Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; And wherein ye stand — εστηκατε , a military term, as Martyr noteth. Satan overthroweth the faith of some, 2 Timothy 2:18 , and by this very engine wherewith he assaulted these Corinthians, ibid. So that the apostle was fain to make apology, 1 Corinthians 15:19 , to make a barricado.

Moreover brethren, I declare unto you the Gospel,.... The apostle here passes on, and proceeds to a new subject, the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, which some in this church denied; and which he undertakes to prove, establish, and defend; and in order to lead on to it, observes, that what he was about to declare, make known, or put them in mind of, was no other than the Gospel he had formerly preached to them, they had received, professed to stand in, and were saved by, unless their faith was in vain. The doctrine of the resurrection of the dead he calls "the Gospel", that being a most important doctrine, and a fundamental article of it. The resurrection of Christ from the dead made a considerable part in the ministry of the apostles, to the grief of the Sadducees among the Jews, to the scorn of the Gentile philosophers, and to the faith, hope, and comfort of Christians: this is the sum and substance of the word of faith, or doctrine of the Gospel, upon which the whole depends; see Romans 10:8 and the resurrection of the saints is connected with it, and assured by it. This indeed is the Gospel, good news, glad tidings that the bodies of the saints shall be raised again, and made like to the glorious body of Christ; and being reunited to their souls, shall live with him to all eternity; and were this out of the Gospel, it would not be Gospel, or good news; it would be an idle story, faith would be a vain thing, and hoping and believing Christians of all the most miserable. Moreover, says the apostle, the Gospel I declare, is which I preached unto you; meaning, when he first came among them, and which had been so very useful to them for conversion and consolation; and therefore if he himself, or an angel from heaven, was to preach any other doctrine, it was to be rejected; and hence, much less should the false teachers be regarded: yea, adds he, it is the doctrine which also you have received; when first enlightened and converted, with all gladness and joyfulness, with all readiness and cheerfulness, in the love of it, and by a full assent to it; and therefore having had such an experience of it, should not now depart from it: nay, he further says, and wherein ye stand; as he hoped they did, at least it was what they ought to have done, and doubtless was the case of the majority of them, and whose example it became the rest to follow.

The word resurrection, usually points out our existence beyond the grave. Of the apostle's doctrine not a trace can be found in all the teaching of philosophers. The doctrine of Christ's death and resurrection, is the foundation of Christianity. Remove this, and all our hopes for eternity sink at once. And it is by holding this truth firm, that Christians stand in the day of trial, and are kept faithful to God. We believe in vain, unless we keep in the faith of the gospel. This truth is confirmed by Old Testament prophecies; and many saw Christ after he was risen. This apostle was highly favoured, but he always had a low opinion of himself, and expressed it. When sinners are, by Divine grace, turned into saints, God causes the remembrance of former sins to make them humble, diligent, and faithful. He ascribes to Divine grace all that was valuable in him. True believers, though not ignorant of what the Lord has done for, in, and by them, yet when they look at their whole conduct and their obligations, they are led to feel that none are so worthless as they are. All true Christians believe that Jesus Christ, and him crucified, and then risen from the dead, is the sun and substance of Christianity. All the apostles agreed in this testimony; by this faith they lived, and in this faith they died.

CHAPTER 15 1Co 15:1-58. The Resurrection Proved against the Deniers of It at Corinth. Christ's resurrection rests on the evidence of many eye-witnesses, including Paul himself, and is the great fact preached as the groundwork of the Gospel: they who deny the resurrection in general, must deny that of Christ, and the consequence of the latter will be, that Christian preaching and faith are vain. 1. Moreover—"Now" [Alford and Ellicott]. I declare—literally, "I make known": it implies some degree of reproach that it should be now necessary to make it known to them afresh, owing to some of them "not having the knowledge of God" (1Co 15:34). Compare Ga 1:11. wherein ye stand—wherein ye now take your stand. This is your present actual privilege, if ye suffer not yourselves to fall from your high standing. 1 Corinthians 15:1-19 From the truth of Christ’s resurrection Paul inferreth the necessity of our own. 1 Corinthians 15:20-23 Christ the first-fruits, being raised, shall be followed in due order by those that are his, 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 till having subdued all enemies he shall give up the kingdom to God the Father. 1 Corinthians 15:29-34 If there be no resurrection of the dead, in vain is it for any one to risk his life, as the apostle did continually. 1 Corinthians 15:35-50 The manner of the resurrection. 1 Corinthians 15:51-57 The change which shall be wrought at the last day in the bodies both of the dead and the living. 1 Corinthians 15:58 An exhortation to stedfast faith and perseverance in our duty. The apostle, towards the conclusion of his Epistle, comes to reprove the Corinthians for an error in the doctrine of the resurrection from the dead; an error, though last mentioned, yet of all the most momentous. The resurrection of the body in the last day is an article of faith, to the firm belief of which reason speaketh not sufficiently, and therefore it was denied by many philosophers and worldly wise men, Acts 17:18 . It should seem, that some in the church of Corinth had sucked in some of their notions; the apostle, therefore, in this chapter setteth himself to confirm that article of the Christian faith. To this purpose he begins, telling them, that that which he declared unto them was the gospel, that is, that doctrine of the gospel which he had before preached to them, and which they had heard, and believed, and embraced as the truth of God, and wherein the greatest part yet stood firm to their former profession, though some of them had been seduced and warped.

Moreover - But (δὲ de). In addition to what I have said, or in that which I am now about to say, I make known the main and leading truth of the gospel. The particle δὲ de is "strictly adversative, but more frequently denotes transition and conversion, and serves to introduce something else, whether opposite to what precedes, or simply continuative or explanatory" - Robinson. Here it serves to introduce another topic that was not properly a continuation of what he had said, but which pertained to the same general subject, and which was deemed of great importance. I declare unto you - (Γνωρίζω Gnōrizō). This word properly means to make known, to declare, to reveal Luke 2:15 ; Romans 9:22-23 ; then to tell, narrate, inform Ephesians 6:21 ; Colossians 4:7 , Colossians 4:9 ; and also to put in mind of, to impress, to confirm; see the note at 1 Corinthians 12:3 . Here it does not mean that he was communicating to them any new truth, but he wished to remind them of it; to state the arguments for it, and to impress it deeply on their memories. There is an abruptness in our translation which does not exist in the original. Bloomfield. The gospel - See the note at Mark 1:1 . The word here means the "glad announcement," or the "good news" about the coming of the Messiah, his life, and sufferings, and death, and especially his resurrection. The main subject to which Paul refers in this chapter is the resurrection, but he includes in the word gospel. Here, the doctrine that he died for sins, and was buried, as well as the doctrine of his resurrection; see 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 . Which I preached unto you - Paul founded the church at Corinth; Acts 18:1 ff. It was proper that he should remind them of what he had taught them at first; of the great elementary truths on which the church had been established, but from which their minds had been diverted by the other subjects that had been introduced as matters of debate and strife. It was fair to presume that they would regard with respect the doctrines which the founder of their church had first proclaimed, if they were reminded of them; and Paul, therefore, calls their attention to the great and vital truths by which they had been converted, and by which the church had thus far prospered. It is well, often, to remind Christians of the truths which were preached to them when they were converted, and which were instrumental in their conversion. When they have gone off from these doctrines, when they had given their minds to speculation and philosophy, it has a good effect to "remind" them that they were converted by the simple truths, that Christ died, and was buried, and rose again from the dead. The argument of Paul here is, that they owed all the piety and comfort which they had to these doctrines; and that, therefore, they should still adhere to them as the foundation of all their hopes. Which also ye have received - Which you embraced; which you all admitted as true; which were the means of your conversion. I would remind you, that, however that truth may now be denied by you, it was once received by you, and you professed to believe in the fact that Christ rose from the dead, and that the saints would rise. And wherein ye stand - By which your church was founded, and by which all your piety and hope has been produced, and which is at the foundation of all your religion. You were built up by this, and by this only can you stand as a Christian church. This doctrine was vital and fundamental. This demonstrates that the doctrines that Christ died "for sins," and rose from the dead, are fundamental truths of Christianity. They enter into its very nature; and without them there can be no true religion.

In treating this subject the apostle first proves the fact of Christ’s resurrection, 1 Corinthians 15:1-11 . He thence deduces, first, the possibility, and then the certainty of the resurrection of his people, vv. 12-34. He afterwards teaches the nature of the resurrection, so far as to show that the doctrine is not liable to the objections which had been brought against it, vv. 35-58. The Resurrection of Christ as Securing the Resurrection of His People — 1 Corinthians 15:1-34 That certain false teachers in Corinth denied the resurrection of the dead is plain, not only from the course of argument here adopted but from the explicit statement in 1 Corinthians 15:12 . Who these persons were, and what were the grounds of their objections, can only be conjectured from the nature of the apostolic argument. The most common opinion is that the objectors were converted Sadducees. The only reason for this opinion is that the Sadducees denied the doctrine of the resurrection, and that Paul, as appears from Acts 24:6-9 and Acts 26:6-8 , had been before brought into collision with them on this subject. The objections to this view are of no great weight. It is said that such was the hostility of the Sadducees to the gospel that it is not probable any of their number were among the converts to Christianity. The case of Paul himself proves that the bitterest enemies could, by the grace of God, be converted into friends. It is further objected that Paul could not, in argument with Sadducees, make the resurrection of Christ the basis of his proof. But he does not assume that fact as conceded, but proves it by an array of the testimony by which it was supported. Others suppose that the opponents of the doctrine were Epicureans. There is, however, no indication of their peculiar opinions in the chapter. In 1 Corinthians 15:32 Epicurean carelessness and indulgence are represented as the consequence, not the cause, of the denial of the resurrection. Nothing more definite can be arrived at on this point than the conjecture that the false teachers in question were men of Grecian culture. In Acts 17:32 it is said of the Athenians that “some mocked” when they heard Paul preach the doctrine of the resurrection. From the character of the objections answered in the latter part of the chapter, vv. 35-58, it is probable that the objections urged against the doctrine were founded on the assumption that a material organization was unsuited to the future state. It is not unlikely that oriental philosophy, which assumed that matter was the source and seat of evil, had produced an effect on the minds of these Corinthian skeptics as well as on the Christians of Colosse. The decision of the question as to what particular class of persons the opponents of the doctrine of the resurrection belonged, happily is of no importance in the interpretation of the apostle’s argument. As in 2 Timothy 2:17 , 2 Timothy 2:18 he speaks of Hymeneus and Philetus as teaching that the resurrection was passed already, it is probable that these errorists in Corinth also refused to acknowledge any other than a spiritual resurrection. After reminding the Corinthians that the doctrine of the resurrection was a primary principle of the gospel, which he had preached to them, and on which their salvation depended, 1 Corinthians 15:1-3 , he proceeds to assert and prove the fact that Christ rose from the dead on the third day. This event had been predicted in the Old Testament. Its actual occurrence is proved, 1. By Christ appearing after his resurrection, first to Peter and then to the twelve. 2. By his appearing to upward of five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom were still alive. 3. By a separate appearance to James. 4. And then again to all the apostles. 5. Finally by his appearance to Paul himself. There never was a historical event established on surer evidence than that of the resurrection of Christ, 1 Corinthians 15:4-8 This fact, therefore, was included in the preaching of all the apostles, and in the faith of all Christians, 1 Corinthians 15:11 . But if this be so, how can the doctrine of the resurrection be denied by any who pretend to be Christians? To deny the resurrection of the dead is to deny the resurrection of Christ; and to deny the resurrection of Christ, is to subvert the gospel, 1 Corinthians 15:12-14 ; and also to make the apostles false witnesses, 1 Corinthians 15:15 . If Christ be not risen, our faith is vain, we are yet in our sins, those dead in Christ are perished, and all the hopes of Christians are destroyed, 1 Corinthians 15:16-19 . But if Christ be risen, then his people will also rise, because he rose as a pledge of their resurrection. As Adam was the cause of death, so Christ is the cause of life; Adam secured the death of all who are in him, and Christ secures the life of all who are in him, 1 Corinthians 15:20-22 . Although the resurrection of Christ secures the resurrection of his people, the two events are not contemporaneous. Christ rose first, his people are to rise when he comes the second time. Then is to be the final consummation, when Christ shall deliver up his providential kingdom as mediator to the Father, after all his enemies are subdued, 1 Corinthians 15:23 , 1 Corinthians 15:24 . It is necessary that Christ’s dominion over the universe, to which he was exalted after his resurrection, should continue until his great work of subduing or restraining evil was accomplished. When that is done, then the Son (the Theantropos, the Incarnate Logos), will be subject to the Father, and God as God, and not as Mediator, reign supreme, 25-28. Besides the arguments already urged, there are two other considerations which prove the truth or importance of the doctrine of the resurrection. The first is, “the baptism for the dead” (whatever that means) prevailing in Corinth, assumes the truth of the doctrine, 1 Corinthians 15:29 . The other is, the intimate connection between this doctrine and that of a future state is such, that if the one be denied, the other cannot, in a Christian sense, be maintained. If there be no resurrection, there is for Christians no hereafter, and they may act on the principle, “Let us eat and drink for to-morrow we die,” 1 Corinthians 15:30-32 . The apostle concludes this part of the subject by warning his readers against the corrupting influence of evil associations. Whence it is probable that the denial of the doctrine had already produced the evil effects, referred to among those who rejected it, 1 Corinthians 15:33 , 1 Corinthians 15:34 . Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; by which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I have preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. There is no connection between this and the preceding chapter. The particle δέ , rendered moreover , indicates the introduction of a new subject. I declare unto ( γνωρίζω ), literally, I make known to you , as though they had never heard it before. ‘Moreover, brethren, I proclaim to you the gospel.’ This interpretation is more consistent with the signification of the word, and more impressive than the rendering adopted by many, ‘I remind you.’ Comp. however, 1 Corinthians 12:3 ; 2 Corinthians 8:1 . Of this gospel Paul says, 1. That he had preached it. 2. They had received it, i.e. embraced it as true. 3. That they then professed it. They still stood firm in their adherence to the truth. It was not the Corinthians as a body, but only “some among them,” 1 Corinthians 15:12 , who denied the doctrine of the resurrection. 4. That by it they are saved. The present tense is used to express either the certainty of the event, or the idea that believers are in this life partakers of salvation. They are already saved. There is to them no condemnation. They are renewed and made partakers of spiritual life. Their salvation, however, is conditioned on their perseverance. If they do not persevere, they will not only fail of the consummation of the work of salvation, but it becomes manifest that they never were justified or renewed. ‘Ye are saved ( εἰ κατέχετε ) if ye hold fast .’ The word does not mean, if ye keep in memory . It simply means, if ye hold fast; whether that be by a physical holding fast with the hand, or a retaining in the memory, or a retaining in faith, depends on the connection. Here it is evident that the condition of salvation is not retaining in the memory, but persevering in the faith. ‘The gospel saves you,’ says the apostle, ‘if you hold fast the gospel which I preached unto you.’ The only difficulty in the passage relates to the words τίνι λόγῳ , literally, with what discourse; which in our version is expressed by the word what . This may express the true sense. The idea is, ‘If you hold fast to the gospel as I preached it to you.’ The principal objection to this interpretation is the position of the words. The order in which they stand is, ‘With what discourse I preached unto you if ye hold fast.’ The interpretation just mentioned reverses this order. This clause is therefore by many connected with the first words of the chapter. ‘I bring to your knowledge, brethren, the gospel which I preached unto you, which ye received, wherein ye stand, by which ye are saved, (I bring to your knowledge, I say,) how, qua ratione , I preached, if ye hold fast.’ This, however, breaks the connection. It is, therefore, better to consider the words τίνι λόγῳ as placed first for the sake of emphasis. ‘You are saved if you hold fast (the gospel) as I preached it to you.’ Unless ye have believed in vain . The word εἰκῆ , in vain , may mean either without cause, Galatians 2:18 , or without effect , i.e. to no purpose, Galatians 3:4 ; Galatians 4:11 ; If the former, then Paul means to say, ‘Unless ye believed without evidence, i.e. had no ground for your faith.’ If the latter, the meaning is, ‘Unless your faith is worthless.’ The clause may be connected with the preceding words, ‘If ye hold fast, which ye do, or will do, unless ye believed without cause.’ The better connection is with the words ye are saved , etc. ‘Ye are saved, if ye persevere, unless indeed faith is worthless.’ If, as the errorists in Corinth taught, there is no resurrection, Paul says, 1 Corinthians 15:14 , our faith is vain; it is an empty, worthless thing. So here he says, the gospel secures salvation, unless faith be of no account.