1 Corinthians 15:1-11

Butler's Comments

SECTION l

Its Historicity (1 Corinthians 15:1-11)

15 Now I would remind you brethren, in what terms I preached to you the gospel, which you received, in which also you stand, 2by which also you are saved, if you hold it fastunless you believed in vain.

3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, 4that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, 5and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6Then he appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. 9For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me was not in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I, but the grace of God which is with me. 11Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.

1 Corinthians 15:1-2 Existentialism: This chapter clearly shows that some of the Corinthians were dealing with the gospel existentially. Some of them had gotten the idea (perhaps from some Gnostics) that the source of the gospel was in their feelings, opinions and decisions. Paul warned them in 1 Corinthians 14:36, Did the word of God originate with you, or are you the only ones it has reached? They were looking upon the gospel not as a revelation of the truth they had received (1 Corinthians 15:1-2), not as something that had objectivity in itself outside of them, but as something they could invent or decide to suit their own carnal desires. There were some who were teaching (see comments 1 Corinthians 15:33) there was no resurrection of the dead (1 Corinthians 15:12) and that Christianity was for this world only, just like other religions.

Existentialism is a philosophical revolt against objectivity. It is rooted in introspection, subjectivism, and focuses entirely on the experiential. It determines the worth of knowledge not in relation to objective fact and revealed truth, but according to the value determined by the autonomous (self-ruled) consciousness of the individual human being. In other words, everything is valuable only in relation to what each individual feels or decides about it. And the individual's decision is based on that individual's feelings. Feelings are the only criteria for decision. Existentialism is the ultimate relativism. Each individual is his or her own absolute. One individual must never let another individual decide for him, nor must he use another individual's feelings for his choice. Truth, for the existentialist, becomes at any given moment whatever he decides it is to him. It is in this self-sovereign determination of truth that the individual allegedly finds his existence. Existentialism is a philosophy as old as man. Centuries before Christ, Greek philosophers were expounding forms of existentialism. It is also as common as Main Street, America. It is the philosophy of the masses, whether they know it or not, and is expressed in such phrases as, Whatever turns you on! or Everybody ought to do their own thing, or I know what I feel, regardless of what the Bible says. The existential theologian usually approaches Christianity with an orthodox vocabulary, but his terms have meanings different than what would be expected. Since, for the existentialist, nothing can be true unless he has personally felt it, experienced it, and decided it, he says: (a) God could not be God and be human, so God is wholly other and, therefore, a divine-incarnation could not have actually occurred. Since the supernatural cannot be incarnated, wherever the Gospels say Jesus did something miraculous, we must understand it as a Christian accommodation of pagan mythology; (b) there is Christian resurrection, but this is merely a subjective resurrection of the Jesus-faith in my feelings, and only when I decide it has happened; (c) Heaven is something I feel in my personal Christian experience; it is not an objective place.
It will be apparent as we study this chapter that the Corinthians had been taught a somewhat existential approach to the resurrection of the dead. Paul wants them to understand clearly that the Gospel was something which he delivered to them; they did not have it within themselves. The origin of the Gospel had nothing to do with their feelings or autonomous decisions. While they would be responsible to decide for themselves what to do about the logical, spiritual and moral demands of the Gospel, their decisions would not determine whether the events had happened or not. The gospel is a fact whether men decide it is, or not. The gospel originated in a Person (Christ) and in deeds he did which were prophesied long before in the scriptures. There are clues all the way through this epistle to substantiate the proposition that the Corinthians were taking an existential approach to the gospel: (1) their decision to follow certain teachers based on their own feelings, chapter 1; (2) their toying with the idea that the doctrine of the cross was foolishness; (3) their inability to accept the idea of revelation in human words, chapter 2; (4) their constant infatuation with the spectacular, ego-inflating miraculous gifts, Chapter s 12-14; (5) their humanistic skepticism concerning the nature of a resurrected body, chapter 1 Corinthians 15:35 ff.

Paul is going to remind them (in chapter 15) of the gospel which he gospelized (Gr. euangelion ho euengelisamen humin) to them. He is going to remind them with what word (Gr. tini logo), or in what form, or in what terms he had preached the gospel to them. They had received the gospel on the terms (or, in the form) of its historicity. But now they were doubting. Now they were approaching it existentially, subjectively. Their steadfastness in the faith, indeed, their salvation, is conditioned upon their holding fast (Gr. ei katechete, if you hold fast) the gospel in the precise terms it was preached to them. Those terms were its empirical historicity. Paul reflects that the Corinthians might have believed his initial message of the gospel to them in a haphazard way. The Greek word eike is translated in vain; it does not mean without cause but without due consideration, rashly, superficially. Did the Corinthians first believe the gospel by some shallow enthusiasm or through some passing fancy for a new thing? Did they not give serious thought when they embraced the gospel? There are people today whose allegiance to Christ has been made without regard to the terms or the form of the gospel. One's emotional attachment to Jesus must be preceded by and controlled by a constant reception of the gospel, mentally, in both its form and its substance. A hasty experiential and existential attachment to Jesus is vulnerable to the vacillation of feelings and circumstances. Such an attachment cannot produce steadfastness nor can it save. It is important to take note of the word if in 1 Corinthians 15:2. Salvation is freebut salvation is conditioned upon man's holding to the gospel in its apostolic form. The Greek word katechete means, to have and to hold as in marriage, to be affected by, subjected to, to seize, to possess. Man's response to the free gift of salvation demands more than a superficial fancy or whim. It is a life and death commitment; an eternal allegiance.

1 Corinthians 15:3-4 Empirical: Paul delivered to the Corinthians the fundamental essence (Gr. protois, first things) of the gospel. That fundamental essence is the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. He wants the Corinthians to remember he preached, and they believed, that the resurrection of Jesus Christ was a matter of empirical history. At Corinth Paul persuaded and taught the gospel a year and a half (Acts 18:1-11). His proof of the gospel was empirical, logical, and historical. This is where the gospel begins. This is its basis. The death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ happened whether men wish it had or not, whether men decide it has or not. Christ arose whether men love it or despise it, and nothing can ever erase it from history. Men may accept or reject its moral imperatives, but they cannot feel it or decide it out of existence. In the same way, men deliberately ignore the fact of a world-wide flood (2 Peter 3:3-7), but they cannot ignore the fossil evidence out of existence.

Our faith in Jesus Christ rests solely on the historicity of his resurrection, for if that is not an empirical fact, everything else he claimed, and is claimed for him, is open to suspicion of deliberate fraud or ignorant mythology. And, whether he rose from the dead or not rests solely upon the authenticity, credibility, and accuracy of the texts of the Bible. The gospel is not true because it works; it works because it is true!

Simon Greenleaf (1783-1853), one of the greatest legal minds in U.S. history, former head of the Harvard Law School, set forth the following rules of evidence in his book, The Testimony of The Evangelists, pub. Baker Book House, pp. 1-54:

1.

The foundation of Christianity is based on facts. These facts are testified to as having occurred within the personal knowledge of the Gospel writers. Christianity, then, rests upon the credibility of these witnesses.

2.

A proposition of fact is proved, when its truth is established by competent and satisfactory evidence beyond reasonable doubt.

3.

In the absence of circumstances which generate suspicion, every witness is to be presumed to be credible, until the contrary is shown. The burden of impeaching his credibility lies upon the objector.

4.

All witnesses are entitled to the benefit of the axiom that men ordinarily speak the truth (are honest) when they have no prevailing motive or inducement to the contrary.

5.

The ability of a witness to speak the truth depends on the opportunities he has had for observing the facts, the accuracy of his powers of observing and the trustworthiness of his memory. The authors of the Gospels can be granted at least the abilities of most human witnesses until the contrary is shown.

6.

There must be enough disparity in the number and consistency of the witnesses to show there is no room for collusion, yet enough agreement to show they were independent recorders of the same events.

7.

The testimony of the witnesses must conform in general with the experiences of others concerning similar circumstances or subject matter.

The four Gospels are accurate records. Any honest researcher should declare their compliance with the accepted rules of evidence unimpeachable. As authentic, competent, credible works of history, the four Gospels are impeccable.

Paul's reference to Christ's death, burial and resurrection, in accordance with the scriptures is significant. He means that the fundamental facts of the gospel, the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, were predicted in the Old Testament scriptures. That is a presentation of evidence which can be tested scientifically, or legally, at any time, by anyone who is honest enough to forego personal presuppositions. Prophecies made centuries before their fulfillment, the fulfillment of which is documented in minute detail, and in which factors of their fulfillment is beyond the power of human planning or manipulation, are sufficient evidence to prove the proposition that Jesus is the Christ, or no proposition can ever be proved! Blaise Pascal, one of the greatest scientific minds of all time, wrote these meaningful words: The greatest of the proofs of Jesus Christ are the prophecies. They are also what God has most provided for, for the event which has fulfilled them is a miracle of God. The betrayal and trial of Jesus of Nazareth is predicted in Isaiah 53:7; Zechariah 11:12-13; Zechariah 13:7. His death is predicted in Isaiah 53:4-9; Zechariah 12:10; Psalms 22:16). Even his dying words were foretold (Psalms 22:1 ff; Psalms 31:5). His burial in a rich man's tomb was predicted (Isaiah 53:9). His resurrection was predicted (see Isaiah 53:10-12; Psalms 16:10-11; Acts 2:25-32; Acts 13:33-35). There are over 300 prophecies concerning the Messiah, including the exact village of his birth, the exact year of his birth, the miraculous nature of his birth, all the main events of his life and ministry. If these were not fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth, in whom were they fulfilled?Alexander the Great? Julius Caesar? Winston Churchill? Most of these prophecies about the Messiah were not fulfilled by the friends of Jesus, nor even by Jesus himself, but by his enemies or disinterested parties! There was no collusion between Jesus and his friends to fulfill these prophecies. The Old Testament canon of scripture was already set and well known by the Jews hundreds of years before Jesus was born and for any man to have changed them or altered them to fit the life of Jesus, after the fact, would have required so many things out of the ordinary in the way of favorable circumstances, miracles would have been demanded. To fulfill these prophecies without supernatural ability to anticipate human behavior and natural circumstances would be impossible! The apostle Peter declares that the fulfillment of prophecy is a surer proof of the deity of Christ and the infallibility of the scriptures than what he had witnessed with his own eyes! (cf. 2 Peter 1:16-19). This may be why Paul introduced prophetic evidence of Jesus-' resurrection before introducing the evidence of eyewitnesses! Jesus expected prophetic evidence to take precedence over what people saw with their eyes (see Luke 24:25 ff.)!

1 Corinthians 15:5-11 Eyewitnessed: Paul appeals to eyewitnessed testimony to establish the fact of the resurrection of Christ. To establish the historicity of the facts of Christianity, nothing more is demanded than is readily conceded to every branch of human science. Christianity does not profess to convince the perverse and headstrong, to bring irresistible evidence, to vanquish every question. All it professes is to propose such evidence as may satisfy the disciplined, teachable, honest, serious searcher. Simon Greenleaf, op. cit., p. 2. The question, therefore, before the Corinthians was, could they believe the testimony of the eyewitnesses named by the apostle Paul: (1) were those people Paul named competent witnesseswere they capable of having seen Jesus crucified, buried, and risen from the dead? were they in a position to have known the facts? were they so credulous they would have believed anything? Their records (the Gospels) candidly portray one another as incredulous, of little faith, unbelieving, even skeptical; (2) were the eyewitnesses people who would lie? were they honest or dishonest? did they have anything to gain by lying about the events they said they witnessed? did they have anything to gain by fabricating the events recorded in the Gospels? The gospel, in the form they proclaimed it, brought them no power, no riches, no accolades from the mightyonly persecution, slander, poverty and deathyet they went to their death insisting on its historicity; (3) were the eyewitnesses so few as to give reasonable doubt to their testimony? There were the women, the eleven apostles in a group, ten apostles in a group, Peter and James individually, over five hundred brethren at one time, and the guards at the tomb and their superiors (Matthew 28:11-15); (4) was there any empirical, historical, scientific evidence to the contrary? has any evidence come to light for the last two thousand years to contradict the Gospels? did anyone present the dead body of Jesus to prove he had not arisen? did anyone show his dead body in the tomb after the third day of his burial? The surest way for the enemies of Christianity to have destroyed it would have been to present the dead body of Jesus at the time the apostles began to preach his resurrection (Acts 2:1 ff.). The only record we have of the response made to the preaching of the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Acts and Epistles of the New Testament) is that the enemies of Christianity slandered, persecuted and killed its proclaimers. The enemies offered not one iota of scientific, historical evidence to refute the gospel. There have been many theories over the centuries, suggesting alternatives to accepting Christ's resurrection as a fact; but there has been no evidence! The reader is here urged to add to this a thorough study of The Gospel of Luke, by Paul T. Butler, College Press Publishing Company, pp. 476-605.

Finally, Paul lists himself as an eyewitness to the fact of Jesus-' resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:8-11). He was not with the other eleven apostles during the forty days Jesus appeared to them in his resurrected body (Acts 1:3). But Paul saw the Lord (Acts 9:27; Acts 26:16; Acts 26:19; 1 Corinthians 9:1). Jesus appeared to him some years later as he journeyed on the road to Damascus. If ever there was a person set against the proposition that Jesus of Nazareth arose from the dead it would be Paul (formerly called, Saul of Tarsus)! If ever there was a person who would have demanded visible, empirical evidence before becoming a believer in Jesus, it would have been Paul! He was thoroughly convinced to do everything he could to oppose Jesus of Nazareth and Christianity (see Acts 22:3-5; Acts 26:9-11). In all good conscience, he actually believed he was serving God by opposing Christ and executing Christ's followers (see 1 Timothy 1:13). If ever there was a person with the best opportunities and capabilities to prove that Jesus of Nazareth had not arisen from the tomb, it would be Paul! So, how do we account for the greatest enemy Jesus and the Church ever had, becoming the greatest apostle, persuader of others, and missionary the Church ever had? And the list of enemies converted does not stop with Saul of Tarsus (Paul). Three thousand Jews on the Day of Pentecost, some of whom had probably been at Passover, crying, Crucify him, crucify him, were converted (Acts 2:1 ff.). A great company of Hebrew priests became obedient to the faith (Acts 6:7). Some of Caesar's Praetorian Guard probably became Christians (Philippians 1:13) and some of Caesar's own household were converted (Philippians 4:22)! If there had been any good evidence to contradict the resurrection of Jesus Christ, some of these people would have known it and would have brought it forward for the whole world of that day to acknowledge.

Any person today who says Jesus of Nazareth was not raised from the dead is obligated to produce proof. It is the burden of the unbeliever to produce evidence. It must be historical, empirical, scientific evidence. He must produce authentic, accurate, credible eyewitnesses with evidence. Theories will not do! Christians believe on the basis of the written documents of those who saw, heard and touched the resurrected Jesus (1 John 1:1-4). The argument is not whether a resurrection could or could not occur. The case in point is, did a resurrection occur or did it not. The case is not to be resolved philosophically, but historically, legally, on the basis of evidence and testimony. The answer is, YES! beyond any reasonable doubt!

Applebury's Comments

The Gospel Which Paul Preached (1-11)

Text

1 Corinthians 15:1-11. Now I make known unto you, brethren, the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye received, wherein also ye stand, 2 by which also ye are saved, if ye hold fast the word which I preached unto you, except ye believed in vain. 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which also I received: that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 and that he was buried; and that he hath been raised on the third day according to the scriptures; 5 and that he appeared to Cephas; then to the twelve; 6 then he appeared to above five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain until now, but some are fallen asleep; 7 then he appeared to James; then to all the apostles; 8 and last of all, as to the child untimely born, he appeared to me also. 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. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not found vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. 11 Whether then it be I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed.

Commentary

Now I make known unto you, brethren.Paul comes to the last of the long list of problems that had so seriously disturbed the brethren at Corinth. The problem of the resurrection was in all probability the most serious of all for it questioned the basic issue of the gospel which Paul preached. To deny that there is a resurrection of the body is to deny that Christ has been raised.

the gospel which I preached unto you.That gospel was the word of the cross, the message that saved the believer. Paul determined to know nothing among them but Christ and Him crucified. He had reminded them in the beginning of the epistle of his confidence that they would stand unreprovable in the presence of the Lord in the day of his coming. This, of course, implied resurrection. At the very beginning of the discussion of their problem, then, he emphasized the facts of the gospel, the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. To deny the resurrection was to deny the facts of the gospel Paul preached.

which also ye received.They had accepted these facts when they became Christians. To reject them now was to reject the foundation of their faith and hope of salvation. They had taken their stand for Christ because of the gospel that proclaimed Him as the risen Savior.

if ye hold fast.Paul reminded them that that salvation depended on their holding fast and that this was to be done by means of the word which he preached to them. By denying the resurrection they were rejecting the means of holding fast their hope of salvation. Paul emphatically stresses what he had preached: the death, burial and resurrection of Christ.

except ye believed in vain.Was it possible that they had accepted the gospel without carefully considering its very basic issue, the resurrection of Christ? There is a warning implied in these words: they were in grave danger because of the position that some had taken on the subject of the resurrection. The one thing above all others that Christians are required to believe is that God raised Christ from the dead. See Romans 10:9-10. Of course, as Paul argues later, if there is no resurrection, Christ has not been raised and faith is without basis or meaning.

that which also I received.Paul preached the message to the Corinthians which he had accepted when he became a Christian. When he saw the risen Lord on the way to Damascus he gave up his role as persecutor and surrendered to Christ. From that day on, his faith did not waver. As a matter of primary importance, he had delivered this message to them, and they had accepted it. To deny the resurrection was to call in question the Scriptures and the testimony of Paul and all the others who had seen the risen Lord.

Christ died for our sins.Christ's death concerned our sins. He shed His blood to make expiation for our sins (Romans 3:25). John called Him the Lamb of God that takes away our sins (John 1:29).

according to the scriptures.The death, burial and resurrection of Christ was pointed out in the Old Testament. The passover lamb and the other blood offerings looked forward to His death (Hebrews 9:11-14). The fifty-third chapter of Isaiah was about His death (Acts 8:30-35). On Pentecost, Peter quotes the Psalms to prove the resurrection of Christ (Acts 2:25-31). Jesus referred to the experience of Jonah to explain the fact that the Son of man was to be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights (Matthew 12:39-40). To deny the resurrection was to set aside the Old Testament scriptures.

and that he appeared.The proof of the resurrection depends on the testimony of those who saw Him, touched Him, and heard Him speak to them after His death and resurrection. There was a sufficient number of witnesses and the appearances occurred over a long enough period of time for them to be sure that He was alive and that He will come again for those who wait for Him unto salvation (Hebrews 9:27). Each of the four gospels gives detailed information about the appearances of Christ that established the fact of His resurrection. Paul refers to some of them and also to the fact that he had seen the risen Lord (1 Corinthians 9:1).

to Cephas.Paul used Peter's Aramaic name (John 1:41-42). Both Mark and Luke mention the appearance to Peter (Mark 16:7 and Luke 24:34).

then to the twelve.This is the general name for the group of apostles, but it does not indicate that all of the group were present. Not more than eleven and perhaps only ten were present, depending on whether or not Thomas was among them. Judas had gone to his own place (Acts 1:25); Matthias was not yet numbered with them.

then he appeared to above five hundred brethren at once.This was strong evidence that could still be verified for most of them were yet alive. The fact that so many saw Him at one time makes it difficult to reject their testimony. Those who denied the resurrection of the dead were not careful in weighing such evidence.

then he appeared to James.Though Paul does not identify him, James was in all probability the Lord's brother. This again is very strong evidence of the resurrection. The brothers of Jesus did not believe in Him until after the resurrection which forced them to acknowledge Him as Lord (John 7:5; Acts 1:14; James 1:1).

then to all of the apostles.Thomas was absent on one occasion of Jesus-' appearance to the apostles (John 20:19-23). At another time he was with them when Jesus came into their midst. He examined the evidence that satisfied him that Jesus was his Lord and his God (John 20:24-28).

and last of all, he appeared to me also.The Corinthians had heard the gospel from Paul. To deny what he said about the resurrection of Christ was to deny the foundation of their hope in Christ. The appearance of Jesus to Paul was of such importance that it is recorded three times in the book of Actsin Chapter s nine, twenty-two, and twenty-six. Before king Agrippa, Paul quoted the words of Jesus telling why He appeared to Paul: To this end have I appeared unto thee, to appoint thee a minister and a witness both of the things wherein thou hast seen me, and of the things wherein I will appear unto thee; delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom I send thee, to open their eyes, that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive remission of sins and an inheritance among them that are sanctified by faith in me (Acts 26:16-18). All this was lost to the Corinthians who were denying the resurrection, for if there is no resurrection, Christ has not been raised.

child untimely born.This expression which literally means an untimely birth or miscarriage is used by Paul figuratively as a term of contempt. It apparently has nothing to do with the fact that he was the last to be appointed as an apostle of Christ. Untimely birth would suggest the opposite. Dead fetus more correctly fits the context. See Lenski, Interpretation of First Corinthians, p. 638. But who would call him stillborn? It well might have been his former Jewish companions who had, no doubt, looked to him as the one who, one day, was to take the place of their great teacher, Gamaliel at whose feet Saul of Tarsus had been instructed. On the way to Damascus, their hope suddenly died when Saul acknowledged Jesus as Lord and accepted the responsibility of Christ's apostle to the Gentiles. It was not an unusual thing for Jews to look upon a Jewish convert to Christianity as dead.

It seems unlikely that untimely born could refer to the sudden and, as some suggest, violent experience of his conversion and appointment to the apostleship. Others suggest that Paul may be expressing his own feeling toward his former life of persecuting the church of God.

the least of the apostles.Paul was the last to whom Christ appeared. This fact is balanced with the statement that hein his own opinionis the least of the apostles because he had persecuted the church of God. He never got away from the memory of his activity as a persecutor. But in spite of it, God's grace was extended to him in calling him to the work of an apostle. It was not overcompensation for the life of a persecutor but love for Christ that caused him to labor more abundantly than all the apostles (2 Corinthians 5:14).

That this estimate of his apostleship is his own may be seen by the approval he received from Peter and John. See Galatians 2:1-10.

the grace of God which was in me.This is the word of a truly humble Christian. He takes no credit for the great effort he had put forth for the cause of Christ; it was God's graceGod gave him the opportunity to be an apostlethat had accomplished it all. But all the apostles preached the same message, and it was that message that caused the Corinthians to believe. This was the important thing, not who did the preaching.