1 Corinthians 15

Intro

Declaring Again (v. 1-11)

So we run after teachers that are clever and funny, charismatic and articulate, creative and fresh in their perspective...

—but what we need most is not a new and fresh perspective. We don’t need new truths that the best teachers can reveal to us! We need instead to be reminded, and reminded over and over of old truths! Of truths eternal and immutable. Of truth that itself does not change, but is instead, soul changing!

And so the worst charge against a teacher of the Word is that he should be creative, imaginitive or innovative.

First things…last?!

It seems odd that Paul addresses the issue which he calls that “of first importance” last in this book.

When you write a position paper, what are some tips to help drive your point across? What are people most likely to remember (intro/conclusion)

this has been a letter jam-packed with application heavy instruction, exhortation and rebuke

What are some of the big topics covered in this letter?

Yet in the midst of all that practical, and necessary application, we cannot lose the central truth—the gospel must remain front and center now and always

indeed, when we look upon Christ and His gospel, and that gospel takes root in our lives, the application will flow out o that reality

We must call to remembrance those things of first importance principally because we are prone to forget those things of first importance!

So we run after teachers that are clever and funny, charismatic and articulate, creative and fresh in their perspective...

—but what we need most is not a new and fresh perspective. We don’t need new truths that the best teachers can reveal to us! We need instead to be reminded, and reminded over and over of old truths! Of truths eternal and immutable. Of truth that itself does not change, but is instead, soul changing!

And so the worst charge against a teacher of the Word is that he should be creative, imaginative or innovative.

The centrality of this gospel, of Christ death and resurrection cannot be overstated

Paul takes pains to remind his readers that the risen Christ was seen by a number of eye witness, physically and bodily, after his glorious resurrection.

Life in Light of the Empty Tomb

The Apostles Creed states of Christ:

So we run after teachers that are clever and funny, charismatic and articulate, creative and fresh in their perspective...

“He suffered under Pontius Pilate,       was crucified, died, and was buried;       he descended to hell.       The third day he rose again from the dead.”

—but what we need most is not a new and fresh perspective. We don’t need new truths that the best teachers can reveal to us! We need instead to be reminded, and reminded over and over of old truths! Of truths eternal and immutable. Of truth that itself does not change, but is instead, soul changing!

There are many today who would dispute and disparage the idea of a literal and bodily resurrection of Christ…some, even, who claim to be “Christians.”

And so the worst charge against a teacher of the Word is that he should be creative, imaginitive or innovative.

The miraculous nature of Christ’s resurrection is too much to believe for a society immersed in naturalism, that worships scientific laws without recognition of the law giver.

Frank Morrison, English journalist published a book in 1881 entitled, Who Moved the Stone, since become a classic of Christian apologetics on the reality of the resurrection

But Morrison started his book as an unbeliever, intent on disproving the resurrection through historical and literary criticism…but through his research, the Holy Spirit convicted Him of the truth of the gospel, and He was saved.

The book ends “There may be, and as the writer thinks, there certainly is, a deep and profoundly historical basis for that much disputed sentence in the Apostle’s Creed— ‘The third day he rose again from the dead.”

—> Yet, even in Paul’s day, with witnesses to the risen Christ still living, doubts about the resurrection persisted.

Not even doubts about Christ’s resurrection, but about any resurrection at all!

The groups involved in the controversy over the resurrection:

Greek gentile believers

many were influenced by the philosophy of “dualism”

the flesh was evil and distasteful, the spirit is eternal and pure

therefore, a bodily resurrection would be distasteful—they had in view a spiritual resurrection

Jewish believers influenced by Sadducees

did not believe in any kind of resurrection

Question: What biblical basis exists, if any, for a real, physical resurrection of Christ?

but if resurrection itself is impossible, then Christ is not resurrected!

The Significance of Christ’s Resurrection (v. 12-19)

What is the significance of Christ’s resurrection? In what way is it necessary distinct from the cross?

Changed everything fro the disciples...

we see them selfish, quarrelsome, slow to understand, even fearful and disloyal in the hours of Christ’s passion and aftermath of his death (even huddled in hiding when Christ is buried)

Yet in Acts we find these same men proclaiming the gospel in clarity and power, unafraid of power of men. What changed?

In the gospels leading up to his passion, Christ speaks as one meekly anticipating his offering as the suffering servant, yet before his ascension he triumphantly proclaims that “all authority has been given to me on earth and in heaven.” What changed?

—> The resurrection changes everything!

It is therefore heretical behavior in the first degree to deny the resurrection of life.

Yet what is likely happening is that some are not denying the resurrection of Christ (Paul does call them brothers and speaks throughout this chapter to them as “those who believed), but who disbelieve in our resurrection

Paul immediately reveals the logical inadequacy of such a view—either God is capable of our resurrection in Christ, or resurrection itself is something God is not capable or willing to do, including of Christ himself.

And this resurrection must be physical—the curse lies over God’s created, physical world. To defeat the curse and sin and death, the resurrection must be a physical one.

Paul points out the incoherence of this mix-match theology.

Theology is like architecture…you can not build upon a hodge-podge foundation.

Example: Salisbury Cathedral

-English Gothic cathedral built in 1200’s in an astonishing 38 years (no mechanized machinery)

-70,000 tons of stone

-3,000 tons of timber

-450 tons of lead

Then they decided to add a spire—the tallest in all of England

The spire rises a towering 404’, nearly half the length of the Titanic, into the sky

The weight of the spire is 6,500 tons of stone and timber framing

That is equal to 950 adult elephants, or 3,500 cars, nearly a full 3/5ths as heavy as the Eiffel tower

And the spire was not an original part of the design! The Cathedral began to collapse!

That is what having mixed-matched theology does!

> OT examples of belief in hope of eternal life

Abraham and the city

2 Samuel 12:22–23 ESV

He said, “While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept, for I said, ‘Who knows whether the Lord will be gracious to me, that the child may live?’ But now he is dead. Why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me.”

Job 19:26 ESV

And after my skin has been thus destroyed, yet in my flesh I shall see God,

How are we living, in light of the resurrection?