resurrection of the dead by samuel dawson

The Resurrection of the Dead

__________

The Preaching & Writing of the Apostle Paul

from Moses & the Prophets

Samuel G. Dawson

www.gospelthemes.com

Except where otherwise indicated, all Old Testament Scripture quota-tions are taken from the New American Standard Bible, © 1960, 1962,1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977 by The Lockman Founda-tion. Used by permission. Except where otherwise indicated, all NewTestament Scripture quotations are taken from the American StandardVersion New Testament, © 1901, 1929 by Thomas Nelson & Sons.

Published by:Gospel Themes Press2028 S. Austin, Suite 906Amarillo, TX 79109-1960 USA

These electronically transmitted pages are copyrighted © 2008 andbelong to Samuel G. Dawson and Patsy Rae Dawson. All rights re-served. You are free to download this electronic material for personaluse, to make copies to share with others, or to mirror on your local website, with the following restrictions:

The material must remain intact and unmodified from the form suppliedhere, including graphics, copyright notice, the URL and postal ad-dresses.

You may not charge for this material. If you have any questions aboutusing this material, please contact the publisher at:[email protected].

Copyright © 2008 by Samuel G. Dawson and Patsy Rae Dawson

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publications Data.Dawson, Samuel G., 1943-The resurrection of the dead: the preaching & writing of the apostle paul from moses & the prophets124 p. Includes bibliography and indexes.1. resurrection2. eschatology3. prophecy

Version 1.0December 2008

We do not start our Christian lives by working out ourfaith for ourselves; it is mediated to us by Christian tradi-tion, in the form of sermons, books and established patternsof church life and fellowship. We read our Bibles in the lightof what we have learned from these sources; we approachScripture with minds already formed by the mass of ac-cepted opinions and viewpoints with which we have comeinto contact, in both the Church and the world. It is easy tobe unaware that it has happened; it is hard even to begin torealize how profoundly tradition in this sense has mouldedus. But we are forbidden to become enslaved to humantradition, either secular or Christian, whether it be “catho-lic” tradition, or “critical” tradition, or “ecumenical” tradi-tion. We may never assume the complete rightness of ourown established ways of thought and practice and excuseourselves the duty of testing and reforming them by Scrip-tures. (J. I. Packer, “Fundamentalism” and the Word of God[Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.,1958], pp. 69-70.)

The world has always had its men who, too weak todiscuss fairly, have spent their little force in denouncing.This has always been the unfailing source of divisionamong good people; for the reformer, never desiring toleave the church to which he belonged, but to reform it, hasnevertheless been uniformly driven out of the church be-cause of his newly-developed truths. This was the case withLuther, Wesley, Campbell, and all others such as these. Letus, then, never be chargeable with an imbecility that dis-qualifies us for a reinvestigation of any subject that fairlycommands our attention. (Thomas Munnell, Lard’s Quar-terly, II, No. 2, Jan. 1865 [Lexington, KY: Moses Lard], p.155.)

Table of Contents

Chapter 1: Paul’s Preaching on the Resurrection 1

Chapter 2: I Corinthians 15 - Introduction 9Indications of Imminence in I Corinthians 15 10The Major Church Problem of the First Century 17Overall View of I Corinthians 22

Chapter 3: vv1-11: The Unity of the Apostles 27

Chapter 4: vv12-19: Consequences of the Belief of Some Corinthians 33

Chapter 5: vv20-28: Christ’s Resurrection &Kingship 49

Immortality: Innate or Conditional? 52The End of What? The End of Time? 60The End of the Christian Age? 61The End of the Mosaic Age? 62What Death Is This? 68

Chapter 6: vv29-34: Baptism for the Dead 71

Chapter 7: vv35-49: The Resurrection Body 77

Chapter 8: vv 50-58: The Time of the Resurrection 89

Bibliography 103

Scripture Index 105

Topic Index 107

Chapter 1

Paul’s Preaching on the Resurrection

Many who read this short overview of I Corinthians 15 arealready familiar with my work on Matthew 24. When I beganstudying the prophets forty years ago, I saw the Old Testamentbasis for much of the language contained in the Olivet Discourse.All of it was in reference to national judgments God had carriedout on various nations under the Old Covenant, and was neverused of a universal judgment at the end of time. (My essay on theOlivet Discourse, Matthew 24-25: Destruction of Jerusalem vs.Final Judgment is avai lable at www.gospelthe-mes.com/Mt24.htm.)

We’ve seen the same thing in II Peter 3, popularly applied toa planet-burning judgment at the end of time. Once one sees justtwo things about that chapter, we must come to the conclusionthat Peter foretold not the destruction of the planet and stars, butthe destruction of Jerusalem. First, according to Peter, we liveunder a different heavens and earth that Noah did, yet we liveunder the same planet and stars as he did, thus we must realizethat the term “heavens and earth” is not being used of the planetand stars. Second, when we understand “elements” not to meanatoms and molecules, when it means the basics of the MosaicLaw throughout the New Testament. Again, our lack of OldTestament background of Peter’s prophecy and terminology ledus to an improper interpretation. (My essay II Peter 3: Destruc-tion of the Universe or Destruction of Jerusalem? is available atwww.gospelthemes.com/IIPet3.htm.)

Many of us have seen the same thing with our modern viewof Hell as endless torment. In my essay on Jesus’ Teaching onHell (available at www.gospelthemes.com/hell.htm), I demon-

strate that the popular concept is purely Roman Catholic andIslamic doctrine, which is taught neither in the Old or NewTestaments. When we see how many of the terms traditionallyused to describe hell are used in the Old Testament, we realizethat our lack of Old Testament knowledge was the problem.

The same can be said with the subject of marriage, divorce,and remarriage, the sermon on the mount, dispensational premil-lennialism, as well as a great many other New Testament topicswith an Old Testament background.

I realize now that we’ve done the same thing with the resur-rection as taught in I Corinthians 15. William Robert West, who’sdone yeoman work studying, writing, and publishing on thenature of man said:

There were [sic] some light given in the Old Testamenton the afterlife [Daniel 12:2; Micah 4:1] but the doctrineof the resurrection, life, and immortality, which Christtaught, were new. The words, resurrection, immortal,and immortality are not in the Old Testament in the KingJames Version or the American Standard Version. (Wil-liam Robert West, Immortality and the Resurrection,Third Edition, p. 94, 2006: available atwww.robertwr.com/resurrection.pdf.)

I’m certainly not disparaging Robert, as he’s only saying whatmost of us tacitly believe, that the subject of the resurrection ispredominantly (or even exclusively) a New Testament subject. Ibelieved the same thing until 2005 myself. I now realize that wesimply cannot understand Paul’s teaching on the resurrectionwithout understanding Paul’s concept of the hope of Israel fromthe Old Testament.

Some argue, “You’re doing this exactly backwards. We usethe New Testament to interpret the Old Testament, not the OldTestament to interpret the New Testament.”

If we think we can take our modern concept of the resurrectionand read it back into the prophets, if we deal with the prophets atall, consider how the admirable Berean Jews treated Paul’steaching in Ac. 17.11:

2 T h e R e s u r r e c t i o n o f t h e D e a d

Now these were more noble than those in Thessalonica,in that they received the word with all readiness of themind, examining the Scriptures daily, whether thesethings were so.

The “scriptures” the Bereans examined and tested Paul’steaching by were the Old Testament scriptures, were they not?As they compared Paul’s teaching to the Old Testament, theyconcluded that Paul’s teaching was true, not vice versa. They didnot read our modern popular concept of Paul’s teaching on theresurrection back into their Old Testaments. Had they done so,their approach would have been just exactly backward!

Consider a second example. Many passages in Acts tell us thatPaul went into the synagogues every sabbath and persuaded theJews from the scriptures (Ac. 14.19, 17.4, 18.4, 19.26, etc.). Whatwould have happened had they asked, “Paul, how can you givemeanings to Hosea, Daniel, Isaiah, Ezekiel, etc., that they simplydid not give us?” Had Paul responded, “The Holy Spirit gave methis fresher, fuller meaning that isn’t in the prophets!” do youthink his Jewish audience would have accepted Paul’s newteaching? Of course not. They would have sent him down theroad or killed him.

We’ll see momentarily that Paul told the Jews on the resur-rection that he taught nothing but what Moses and the prophetssaid would come to pass. Nothing. How could he have said thatif he was giving newer revelation on the resurrection than wascontained in their Old Testament scriptures?

Until we realize how Paul and the Berean Jews used the OldTestament scriptures, we can’t understand the chapter like Pauldid, and we won’t teach on the subject like Paul did. That’s thepurpose of this essay, to show the Old Testament background ofPaul’s teaching on the hope of Israel and the resurrection.

An initial clue is the fact that Paul quoted Isa. 25.8 and Hos.13.14 in I Cor. 15.54-55. Have you noticed that? I didn’t for mostof my life, even though I’ve taught Corinthians many times, andall the prophets several times. When I first noticed that simplefact, I thought, “Aw aw! Here we go again. I’ve got to go backand see what the Old Testament teaches about the resurrection!”I hope you have the same experience.

P a u l ’ s P r e a c h i n g o n t h e R e s u r r e c t i o n 3

I think West inadvertently gives the Old Testament’s teachingon the subject short shrift. You can be a good guy and do thatbecause I’ve done exactly the same thing—all of us have. We’vedone it prodigiously on all the subjects mentioned at the begin-ning of this chapter. Statements like the one quoted above mayhave contributed to our passing over the resurrection of Israel inthe Old Testament.

I invite you to consider the Bible’s teaching on the resurrec-tion outside of I Corinthians 15, beginning with Paul’s teachingin Acts. I’m sure you recall Paul’s paying for the vows of theJewish Christians in Jerusalem. Afterwards, he was mobbed inAc. 21.27-28:

...the Jews from Asia, when they saw him in the temple,stirred up all the multitude and laid hands upon him,crying out, Men of Israel, help: This is the man thatteacheth all men everywhere against the people, and thelaw, and this place; and moreover he brought Greeks alsointo the temple, and hath defiled this holy place.

Of course, none of these charges was true, as Paul made clearin his defenses before Felix and Agrippa.

To Felix, Paul said, in Ac. 24.14-15:

...after the way which they call a sect, so serve I the Godof our fathers, believing all things which are accordingto the law, and which are written in the prophets; havinghope toward God, which these also themselves look for,that there shall be (lit., about to be) a resurrection bothof the just and unjust.

So the rub with the Jews accusing Paul was his preaching onthe resurrection, not based on I Corinthians 15, but based on thelaw and the prophets, whether they believed in Jesus or not.

To Agrippa, Paul said, in Ac. 26.6-8:

And now I stand here to be judged for the hope of thepromise made of God unto our fathers; unto whichpromise our twelve tribes, earnestly serving God night


and day, hope to attain. And concerning this hope I amaccused by the Jews, O King! Why is it judged incrediblewith you, if God doth raise the dead?

Notice in vv 21-23, he explained further his preaching on theresurrection:

Having therefore obtained the help that is from God, Istand unto this day testifying both to small and great,saying nothing but what the prophets and Moses did sayshould come; how that the Christ must suffer, and howthat he first by the resurrection of the dead should pro-claim light both to the people and to the Gentiles.

Please consider this. Paul said that when he preached thegospel, he taught the hope of Israel on the resurrection, sayingnothing but what Moses and the Prophets taught.

Here’s the problem. When he preached the hope of Israel onthe Old Testament’s teaching on the resurrection, the people tookit as an attack on the Jews, the Law, and the temple.

Why would that be? What’s the connection? I’ve taught andpreached on the resurrection from I Corinthians 15 many times,yet no one has accused me of attacking the Jews, the Law, or thetemple. You may have, too, with no such accusation. Wonderwhy? Could it be it’s because we haven’t preached the hope ofthe resurrection from Moses and the prophets like Paul did? Yet,that’s the gospel he preached! That’s the disconnect between ourteaching and Paul’s on the hope of the resurrection. Paul’sconcept of the resurrection wasn’t that fleshly bodies would comeout of holes in the ground at all, because that’s not what Mosesand the prophets taught.

I’ve never even heard a sermon on the hope of the resurrectionfrom the Old Testament, have you? Ever? Have you everpreached one? Again, permit me to suggest that until we under-stand the Old Testament’s teaching on the resurrection, we’renever going to interpret I Corinthians 15 correctly. Neither arewe going to preach like Paul on the subject, nor are we going toget the reaction from the audience he got.


The Old Testament foretold the resurrection quite a numberof times, not the popular view of fleshly bodies coming out ofholes in the ground, but a lot about the resurrection of Israel: howIsrael would die, be planted like a seed, be resurrected andtransformed, etc. This is why Paul could quote his conclusion inI Corinthians 15 from Isaiah 25 and Hosea 13, which we’ll soonsee, were to be imminently fulfilled when Jersualem and thetemple were destroyed.

It’s truly said that the word “resurrection” is not in the OldTestament, but we may be inadvertently ignoring a lot of plainteaching from the prophets on the very subject. What aboutlanguage like Isaiah saying of God in Isa. 25.6-9 (quoted in I Cor.15.54) that God would “swallow up death for all time,” or Hosea,an eighth-century BC contemporary of Isaiah, in Hos. 6.1-2,saying, “Come, and let us return to the LORD; For He has torn,but He will heal us; He has stricken, but He will bind us up. Aftertwo days He will revive us; On the third day He will raise us up,That we may live in His sight.”

Hosea also has God saying of Israel in Hos. 13.14 (again,quoted in I Cor. 15.55), “Shall I redeem them from death? ODeath, where are your thorns? O Sheol, where is your sting?” I’mafraid there are more parallels between Hosea and I Corinthians15 than you can shake a stick at. The whole context of Hosea isbehind I Corinthians 15. This is made more likely when werealize that many of Paul’s points can be found in Hosea: sowingor planting of Israel (1.4, as Hosea’s first child by his harlot wifewas named Jezreel, “God sows.”) God’s seed in the earth (2.23);Israel died (1.5); harvest appointed for Judah (6.11) at the resur-rection (13.14, quoted as fulfilled in I Cor. 15. 55); David rulingon his throne (3.4-5); Israel the firstfruits (9.10); God becomestheir king (13.10).

Ezekiel 37 also refers to the death of Israel, and God told them,“Behold, I will cause breath to enter you that you may come tolife.” West is absolutely right that the word “resurrection” isn’tthere, but what word should we call the process whereby Israelwas dead, and God’s purpose was to bring them to life?

In Dan. 9.26-27, Daniel was told:


And after the threescore and two weeks shall the anointedone be cut off, and shall have nothing: and the people ofthe prince that shall come shall destroy the city and thesanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, andeven unto the end shall be war; desolations are deter-mined. And he shall make a firm covenant with many forone week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause thesacrifice and the oblation to cease; and upon the wing ofabominations shall come one that maketh desolate; andeven unto the full end, and that determined, shall wrathbe poured out upon the desolate.

Jesus quoted from this passage early in Matthew 24, indicat-ing it would be fulfilled in his generation.

In Dan. 12.2 (Jesus quoted verse 3 in Mt. 13.43), Danielforetold a national resurrection, “And many of those who sleepin the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, butthe others to disgrace and everlasting contempt.” When Danielasked when these things would be fulfilled, God said, “that itwould be for a time, times, and half a time (like the religiouspersecution of the saints in Revelation 11) and as soon as theyfinish shattering the power of the holy people, all these eventswill be completed.”

So Isaiah, Hosea, Ezekiel, and Daniel (and others) spoke of aresurrection and judgment of Israel. Hardly any scholar on earthtakes these words as teaching resurrection of physical bodies, aswe think Paul taught in I Corinthians 15. In context, Israel wasdead, destroyed, and went into captivity because of their sin. IfIsrael were going to be saved, there needed to be a resurrection,which would occur when God destroyed Jerusalem, when heredeemed the righteous from death, and destroyed the impenitentwhen he shattered the power of the holy people.

This essay is intended to be just an introduction to this subject,with the suggestion that we need to review Isaiah, Hosea, Ezekieland Daniel, and try to absorb their teaching on the death, planting,resurrection, and transformation of Israel at the time the powerof the holy people was shattered, and see if we can get togethera sermon on the resurrection like Paul preached.


Having seen Paul’s preaching on the resurrection, we proceedto his written teaching on the same subject in I Corinthians 15.


Chapter 2

I Corinthians 15 Introduction

We established in the previous chapter of this volume that theresurrection Paul spoke of in I Corinthians 15 was not a resurrec-tion of physical bodies out of holes in the ground, but theresurrection of Old Covenant Israel from the death of its fellow-ship with God. Although popular theology divorces I Corinthians15 from its Old Testament roots, we saw there that the prophetsforetold this resurrection and discussed it extensively, so that thesubject of the resurrection is more an Old Covenant concept thana New Covenant one.

In the next several chapters we discuss I Corinthians 15verse-by-verse in connection with its prophetic context, whichwill demonstrate that it cannot refer to the raising of a biologicalbody out of the earth. The author realizes the extreme difficultyof viewing these verses without thinking of the popular view. Ina recent sermon series preached by a long-time friend, he dealtwith this chapter in five minutes by merely cherry-picking verseswith only a few comments. In the minds of most, it’s a veryeffective way of dealing with the chapter, because as I Corin-thians is read, the audience merely fills in the interpretationthey’ve always been taught, and the chapter seems to makeperfect sense with no further consideration required. However,

Author’s Note: Chapters 2-8 reflect substantial influence from JackScott, Don K. Preston, Jim Hopkins, Sam Frost, and William Bell, alongwith many others farther along on this subject than the author. Note alsothat italics for emphasis are mine throughout.

people who just read a passage will often carry with them manyfalse or casual presumptions, which will lead them to little morethan proof-texting. Reading an entire chapter in this fashion isthe same principle on a grander scale.

Such a simplistic approach suffers from these weaknesses: 1. It doesn’t recognize the context of the entire book of I

Corinthians; and thus, treats chapter 15 as a completely inde-pendent subject that just fell by itself from heaven.

2. It overlooks the nature of the first major doctrinal problemin the first-century church.

3. It’s not based on the nature of the problem and the divisionsin the church at Corinth.

4. It doesn’t fit with other passages in the Old and NewTestaments dealing with the resurrection.

5. It also fails to square with Paul’s preaching on the resurrec-tion in Acts, where he said a number of times that on theresurrection, he didn’t preach anything except what Moses andthe prophets said should come to pass.

6. It takes no account of Paul’s quotations of Isaiah and Hoseanear the end of the chapter.

Thus, just reading the chapter ignores the context of thechapter, the book, the history of the first-century church, the OldTestament, Paul’s preaching, and the context of Moses and theprophets.

The subject of the resurrection is another example where ourgeneralized ignorance of the Old Testament, especially theprophets, gets us into trouble in correctly interpreting the NewTestament. We’ve seen this in the Olivet Discourse (Matthew24-25), II Peter 3, hell, marriage and divorce, the Sermon on theMount, dispensational premillennialism, etc. Peter commandedChristians to be thoroughgoing students of the Old Testament (IIPet. 1.19, 3.2), and they knew much more about it than the vastmajority of modern disciples do.

Indications of Imminence in I Corinthians 15

We now want to take note of signs of imminence in nearlyevery chapter of Corinthians, and particularly in I Corinthians 15.

1 0 T h e R e s u r r e c t i o n o f t h e D e a d

Paul lived in the last days of the Mosaic age (ending with thedestruction of Jerusalem) and thought he would see the resurrec-tion. He said to the Corinthians (1.7):

…so that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for therevelation of our Lord Jesus Christ; who shall alsoconfirm you unto the end, that ye be unreproveable in theday of our Lord Jesus Christ.

First, notice in particular that the Corinthians lacked none ofthe miraculous spiritual gifts (which Paul regulated in chapters12-14).

Second, they were [lit., eagerly] awaiting the revelation ofChrist.

Third, they were eagerly awaiting the day of the Lord (whichJohn in Rev. 1.1, 3, 22.6, 10 said was “at hand,” and “shortly tocome to pass”).

Fourth, they knew Jesus’ coming would be at the end, i.e., theend of the Mosaic age, which Jesus said (Mt. 24.3, 6, 13, 14,34—“this generation shall not pass away until all these things beaccomplished”).

Today, many think we possess none of the miraculous gifts,yet we’re not eagerly awaiting the revelation of Christ on the dayof the Lord. Since our thinking on the time element of which Paulspoke is not based on Paul’s teaching, we don’t share the senseof imminence Paul imparted to his readers. The reason is that therevelation is now complete, and we don’t have the sense ofimminent expectation the Corinthians had.

Now, we turn our attention to a brief chronological survey ofverses in I Corinthians to demonstrate that not only are indica-tions of last things imminence throughout the New Testament,but we also find them in the entire book of I Corinthians.

1 Cor. 2.8

Here Paul said:

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 - I n t r o d u c t i o n 1 1

…which none of the rulers of this world [Gr. Aeon, age]hath known: for had they known it, they would not havecrucified the Lord of glory:…

When Paul wrote these words, “this age” was the age in whichJesus lived, which culminated at the destruction of Jerusalem.The rulers of this age would be (to Paul) the high priest and chiefpriests of Judaism who crucified Christ, for Peter so declared inAc. 4.24.

Of course, we can identify the rulers as those complicit inChrist’s death—Herod, Pilate, the High Priest, and the chiefpriests. Moreover, in Ac. 4.26-27, Peter made it clear who theserulers were, identifying them as Herod and Pontius Pilate:

The kings of the earth [Gr. ge, land] set themselves inarray, And the rulers were gathered together, Against theLord, and against his Anointed: for of a truth in this cityagainst thy holy Servant Jesus, whom thou didst anoint,both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and thepeoples of Israel, were gathered together…

In Paul’s view, we have “this age” (the Mosaic age), the dayof the Lord (the last day of the last days of the Mosaic age), then“the age to come,” the Christian age, which even unbelievingJews understood to be the age of the Messiah’s reign. Theirexpectation is another indication of imminence as they wereeagerly awaiting the day of the Lord in 1.7.

I Cor. 3.11-15, 18

In I Cor. 3.11-15, Paul used the figure of a temple the apostleswere building on the foundation of Christ:

For other foundation can no man lay than that which islaid, which is Jesus Christ. But if any man buildeth onthe foundation gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay,stubble; each man’s work shall be made manifest: for theday shall declare it, because it is revealed in fire; and the


fire itself shall prove each man’s work of what sort it is.If any man’s work shall abide which he built thereon, heshall receive a reward. If any man’s work shall be burned,he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet soas through fire.

Paul spoke of a fiery judgment coming on the day of the Lordfor which the Corinthians were eagerly awaiting. Jesus had saidhe would come in judgment in their lifetimes (Mt. 16.27-28) andin their generation (Mt. 24.29, 34).

In verse 18, Paul spoke of the about-to-end Mosaic age againwhen he said:

Let no man deceive himself. If any man thinketh that heis wise among you in this world [lit., age], let him becomea fool, that he may become wise.

Paul’s reference to a soon to occur judgment of each man’swork is another indication of imminence of the last things mattersdealt with in I Corinthians.

I Cor. 4.5-6

Continuing the theme of imminence, in I Cor. 4.5-6, Paul said:

Wherefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lordcome, who will both bring to light the hidden things ofdarkness, and make manifest the counsels of the hearts;and then shall each man have his praise from God. Nowthese things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred tomyself and Apollos for your sakes; that in us ye mightlearn not to go beyond the things which are written; thatno one of you be puffed up for the one against the other.

Notice that this “judging before the time,” [lit., do not con-tinue judging until the appointed time] before the Lord’s coming,which they eagerly awaited, produced the parties wracking theCorinthian church. As we’ll see, they were already judging and


dividing over Jewish-Gentile issues, making judgments abouteach other’s spirituality, discriminating against each other overlaw works vs. grace, etc.

If, as most think, Christ still hasn’t come for two thousandyears, do we still not know what God thinks about law works vs.grace in the Christian age, the age to come? Who can believe it?This is another indication of imminence of the last things mattersspoken of in I Corinthians.

I Cor. 5.5

Notice in the matter of withdrawing fellowship of the impeni-tent fornicator at Corinth, that they were to do this:

…that the spirit may be saved in the day of the LordJesus.

Paul didn’t look for this fellow’s salvation to be thousands ofyears off, but in the day that the Corinthians eagerly awaited,which is another indication of imminence of the matters spokenof in I Corinthians.

I Cor. 7.26-31

Paul’s chapter on marriage, divorce, and remarriage containsanother indication of last things imminence. After advising thosewho were either married or unmarried to remain in their presentstate, he said:

I think therefore that this is good by reason of the distressthat is upon us, namely, that it is good for a man to be ashe is. Art thou bound unto a wife? Seek not to be loosed.Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a wife. Butshouldest thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virginmarry, she hath not sinned. Yet such shall have tribula-tion in the flesh: and I would spare you. But this I say,brethren, the time is shortened, that henceforth boththose that have wives may be as though they had none;


and those that weep, as though they wept not; and thosethat rejoice, as though they rejoiced not; and those thatbuy, as though they possessed not; and those that use theworld [Gk., kosmos] as not using it to the full: for thefashion of this world [Gk., kosmos] passeth away.

In giving these warnings of a present tribulation at the time ofthe eagerly-awaited coming of the Lord, Paul agreed with Jesus,who warned his disciples of coming tribulation, destruction, andjudgment coming on the Jewish world in his generation. In Mt.24.19-22, Jesus said:

But woe unto them that are with child and to them thatgive suck in those days! And pray ye that your flight benot in the winter, neither on a sabbath: for then shall begreat tribulation, such as hath not been from the begin-ning of the world until now, no, nor ever shall be. Andexcept those days had been shortened, no flesh wouldhave been saved: but for the elect’s sake those days shallbe shortened.

Pay particular notice to the word “henceforth” in I Cor. 7.29.“Henceforth” means “from now on.” In view of the fact that mostfolks believe that the Lord hasn’t come yet, though he said hewould come in his generation, do you suppose we should still befollowing Paul’s 2000-year old advice concerning marriage (e.g.,“it’s better to be unmarried”), even though that present distressis no longer bearing down on the Corinthians? Surely, the contextof imminence in these passages deserves more respect than this!

I Cor. 10.5-11

Another passage indicating imminence of coming last daysevents is I Cor. 10.5-11. After rehearsing all the blessings Godhad showered upon the Israelites of the Exodus, then Paul said:

Howbeit with most of them God was not well pleased:for they were overthrown in the wilderness. Now these


things were our examples, to the intent we should not lustafter evil things, as they also lusted. Neither be ye idola-ters, as were some of them; as it is written, The peoplesat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play. Neitherlet us commit fornication, as some of them committed,and fell in one day three and twenty thousand. Neitherlet us make trial of the Lord, as some of them made trial,and perished by the serpents. Neither murmur ye, assome of them murmured, and perished by the destroyer.Now these things happened unto them by way of exam-ple; and they were written for our admonition, uponwhom the ends of the ages are come [lit., has alreadyarrived, and the effects of that arrival are coming uponus].

Remember “these things” Paul mentioned that happened toIsrael in the wilderness: their idolatry, their overthrow in thewilderness, fornication, etc. We will see a similar list shortly aswe discuss the Jerusalem meeting in Acts 15, when the apostlesmet to deal with the major first-century church problem.

Imminence of last things is contained in the realization thatthe ends of the ages have already arrived on the Corinthians.

I Cor. 13.9-10

Another last days passage we want to notice in establishingthe imminence of events in I Corinthians is I Cor. 13.9-10, wherePaul, in speaking of the duration of spiritual gifts, said:

For we know in part, and we prophesy in part; but whenthat which is perfect is come, that which is in part shallbe done away.

Here Paul contrasted the partial quality of the gifts (which theCorinthians came behind in none of—1.7) with the comingperfection or revelation of Jesus Christ, which from 1.7, theCorinthians eagerly awaited in their own time. Thus, the end of


spiritual gifts demonstrates that the “perfect” has already come,since they were to last only until that time.

I Cor. 14.21

Still on the subject of miraculous gifts, Paul said:

In the law it is written, By men of strange tongues andby the lips of strangers will I speak unto this people; andnot even thus will they hear me, saith the Lord.

Paul quoted Isaiah 28.11-12, which alluded to Dt. 28.49. InDeuteronomy 28, one curse listed against rebellious Israel wasspeaking to them with a “foreign tongue.” Thus, “tongues” servedas a prophetic gift rooted in the fact that Israel in Paul’s day livedunder the curse of Deuteronomy 28-30.

All these examples show that we find imminence of last daysevents in nearly every chapter of I Corinthians. We should not besurprised to find them in chapter 15.

The Major Church Problem of the First Century

Jewish-Gentile Relations in the Body of Christ

Just to set the background for I Corinthians, we want to say alittle about the city and church of Corinth.

Corinth was a city on the isthmus between Macedonia andAchaia. It enjoyed access to both the Ionian Sea to the west andthe Aegean Sea to the east. Thus, it survived as a seaport townwilder than most maritime cities in that sailors from both direc-tions congregated there. In Paul’s time, it was a city of about600,000 souls, reputed for its dishonesty, immorality, sexual sins(like the incest of I Corinthians 5), and drunkenness. Gordon Fee,in his New International Commentary on I Corinthians, com-pared Corinth as a center of licentiousness to New York City, LasVegas, and Los Angeles all rolled into one.


Ac. 18.1-11

We read of the beginning of the church in Corinth in Ac.18.1-11. Since Luke gave a brief account in his gospel, we presentit here:

After these things he departed from Athens, and came toCorinth. And he found a certain Jew named Aquila, aman of Pontus by race, lately come from Italy, with hiswife Priscilla, because Claudius had commanded all theJews to depart from Rome: and he came unto them; andbecause he was of the same trade, he abode with them,and they wrought, for by their trade they were tentmak-ers. And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath,and persuaded Jews and Greeks. But when Silas andTimothy came down from Macedonia, Paul was con-strained by the word, testifying to the Jews that Jesus wasthe Christ. And when they opposed themselves and blas-phemed, he shook out his raiment and said unto them,Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean: fromhenceforth I will go unto the Gentiles. And he departedthence, and went into the house of a certain man namedTitus Justus, one that worshipped God, whose housejoined hard to the synagogue. And Crispus, the ruler ofthe synagogue, believed in the Lord with all his house;and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and werebaptized. And the Lord said unto Paul in the night by avision, Be not afraid, but speak and hold not thy peace:for I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to harmthee: for I have much people in this city. And he dweltthere a year and six months, teaching the word of Godamong them.

Luke recorded that the church in Corinth began with Jews,and later incorporated Gentiles. Since Paul’s most critical oppo-sition there came from unbelieving Jews, tension naturally arosebetween Jew and Gentile Christians, which we will see further inI Corinthians, especially including chapter 15. Paul eventuallyceased teaching the Jews in their own synagogue, and the leader


of the synagogue became a Christian. Paul turned his mainconcern to the Gentiles, among whom his mission was successfulas he remained there a year and a half. The tension that existedbetween these two groups contributed to the parties and divisionsin the church there, as it did throughout the first-century churchwhere both groups were present.

As Luke stated, at first the church was made up predominantlyof Jews, who tended to think of themselves as elites and lookeddown at Gentiles, who obeyed the gospel. When Paul turned tothe Gentiles, and they became the overwhelming majority in thechurch, Jewish Christians felt intimidated by their numbers andinfluence, while the Jewish influence waned. The attitudes ofsome Gentile Christians contributed to this anxiety, as some ofthem then thought of themselves as the new elites and frownedon the Jewish Christians. Many of them falsely thought (as manyof us still do) that God had written off the Jews at the cross, andhad nothing more to do with them.

Briefly, tensions between Jewish and Gentile Christianswhich threatened to destroy the infant church arose over circum-cision and the eating of meat offered to idols. Jewish Christiansviewed circumcision as the one act that linked them to Abraham;thus, they found it exceedingly hard to accept Gentile Christianswho hadn’t been circumcised, regarding them as “bastard” chil-dren of Abraham. Indeed, in Paul’s preaching to the Gentiles,Judaizing teachers followed him, teaching his converts that theymust be circumcised in order to be saved. In response, Paul wroteseveral letters against circumcision for salvation, arguing thatAbraham was saved even before he was circumcised.

Likewise, the subject of meat offered to idols presented amajor threat to Jew-Gentile unity. Among Gentiles, idolatroustemple practices thrived universally. Animal sacrifices wereprevalent in heathen worship; and eventually, those meats wereoffered in the public market. As long as those animals had beenkilled in a manner compatible with Mosaic food laws, JewishChristians saw no harm in consuming the meats. To them, offer-ing “kosher” meats to a god who didn’t exist didn’t taint the meat,so what could be the harm?

On the other hand, Gentile Christians, who had just come outof those idolatrous religions into Christ, weren’t comfortable


with such meats. Many of them, shunning all linkage to theirheathen past, refused to have anything to do with such meats. InI Corinthians 8 and 10, Paul taught extensively on the subject,telling Jewish converts to be sensitive to the consciences of theirbrethren with heathen backgrounds while the Gentiles learned thetruth on the subject.

Thus, problems and controversies between Gentile and Jew-ish Christians constituted the foremost church problem of apos-tolic times, particularly before the destruction of Jerusalem bythe Romans in AD 70, as witnessed by nearly all of Paul’sepistles.

The Acts 15 Meeting

Indeed, the meeting of all the apostles (all Jews) in Jerusalem,of which we read in Acts 15, addressed the seriousness of theproblem. After Paul completed his first mission among the Gen-tiles, Jewish teachers (who were Christians) infiltrated his workwith the intent of binding circumcision on his Gentile converts.They made circumcision an issue of salvation, saying, “Exceptye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved.”

Thus, all the apostles met to establish the answers to thequestions troubling the early Christians: Since Gentiles were nowhearing and obeying the gospel, what was their relationship toJewish Christians? How much should they obey Moses? Wassalvation to be denied to Gentiles who didn’t subscribe to the Lawof Moses, i.e., particularly circumcision and eating meats offeredto idols?

This tension between Jewish and Gentile Christians presenteda tremendous problem for the first-century church as witnessedby the fact that Galatians, Philippians, Colossians, Thessaloni-ans, Romans, and Corinthians all teach about it. It was the majordoctrinal question in the entirety of Paul’s ministry.

Peter, James, and John had all remained in Jerusalem; anddoubtlessly, observed the Mosaic Law as much as possible, notfor salvation, but to win Jews. Paul did likewise when he workedamong Jews, that he “might by all means win some” (I Cor. 9.20).


They would have surely been killed early on for not keeping thelaw while living in Jerusalem, as the attempt on Paul’s life in Acts21 made clear.

To settle the question, Peter, Paul and James each advanceda line of argument to demonstrate the Gentiles’ relationship tosalvation and their Jewish brethren.

First, Peter rehearsed how God used him to preach the gospelof salvation by grace through faith in reality to the Gentiles to thehousehold of Cornelius in Acts 10, and he hadn’t preached lawworks to the Gentiles. He concluded with the rather ironic state-ment in Ac. 15.11:

But we believe that we [Jews—SGD] shall be savedthrough the grace of the Lord Jesus, in like manner asthey [Gentiles—SGD].

Thus, Peter affirmed that the Jewish Christians were going tobe saved in the same manner as the Gentile Christians—throughgrace rather than by law works.

Second, Paul argued that Mosaic works shouldn’t be boundon Gentile Christians because God confirmed the apostles’preaching among Gentiles through the miracles they performed.Since they hadn’t preached any such thing, by implication, Godapproved of their Law-free gospel.

Third, James demonstrated from Amos 9.11 that the prophetsforetold the coming of the Gentiles into David’s tabernaclethrough faith in Christ, with no mention of law works. Thus, whenPaul converted Gentiles without works of the Mosaic Law, hefulfilled prophecy.

As a result of this meeting, “the apostles and elders, with thewhole [Jerusalem—SGD] church” sent a letter with messengersto Antioch, and told them (Ac. 15.28):

For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to layupon you no greater burden than these necessary things:that ye abstain from things sacrificed to idols, and fromblood, and from things strangled, and from fornication;from which if ye keep yourselves, it shall be well withyou. Fare ye well.


As a result, Jewish Christians were not to bind upon GentileChristians Mosaic Law works, i.e., circumcision. Rather, bothgroups were to remember the matters of idolatry, partaking ofblood, and sexual sins (all of which were sinful before the MosaicLaw came into effect). Paul addressed these sins again in theCorinthian letter as he exposed sexual sins in chapter 5 and 6, andidolatry in chapters 8 and 10. He dealt with the party spiritbetween Jew and Gentile Christians in chapters 1, 3, and 16 whenhe told Gentile Christians to demonstrate their love for theirJewish brethren in Jerusalem through the collection for the needyJewish saints there.

In conclusion, we need to realize that no legislative confer-ence took place in Jerusalem. The apostles made no decision.Instead, they demonstrated the unity of all the apostles who hadnever preached a different doctrine on Jewish-Gentile relations.We’ll see in our verse-by-verse study that Paul later made thepowerful point to the Corinthians that if the apostles were united,why should divisive parties named after the apostles Peter andPaul exist in the church at Corinth? In chapter 15, he argued thatthe apostles were all united on the resurrection as well, to showhow inappropriate it was for the Corinthians to divide on thesubject.

Overall View of I Corinthians

In this brief section, we want to summarize each chapter of ICorinthians, showing in most cases the relationship of eachchapter to the Jewish-Gentile tension in the first-century churchand to the parties in the church at Corinth.

In Chapter 1, Paul introduced the schisms or parties amongthe Corinthians. We’ll discuss these parties further in the com-mentary section, but for now, we’ll say that brethren callingthemselves after Paul, Apollos, and Peter (all Jews) were basedon the attitudes of superiority that Gentile Christians had towardJewish Christians. Peter was an apostle to the Jews (Gal. 2.7ff),Apollos was an Alexandrian Jew (Ac. 18.24), while Paul was theapostle to the Gentiles. Those calling themselves after thesenames had erroneous views toward the place of Jews and Gentiles


in the body of Christ. We’ll see that Paul’s doctrine of theresurrection related directly to this issue.

In Chapter 2, Paul showed that he was no greater than the otherapostles, especially Peter to temper the enthusiasm of Gentiles inthe “Paul Party,” the very existence of which Paul abhorred, andwhose attitude toward Jewish Christians he deplored. TheseGentiles were denying the resurrection to “some” in I Corinthians15.

In Chapter 3, Paul demonstrated that all the apostles built onthe one foundation, Christ. If they weren’t divided, it was inap-propriate for those claiming to be their followers to be divided.

In Chapter 4, Paul continued to deal with the partyism atCorinth. Some Christians made premature judgments (discrimi-nations) against other Christians that only Christ should make athis own eagerly-awaited coming and judgment.

In Chapter 5, Paul exposed immorality and impenitent sin inthe congregation.

In Chapter 6, Paul addressed judgments between brethren andrelated them to problems between Jews and Gentiles as discussedin Acts 15.

In Chapter 7, Paul taught about marriage, including givinginstruction to refrain from marriage during “the present distress,”and divorce.

In Chapter 8, Paul discussed the issues of meat sacrificed toidols, which fed the Corinthian partyism. We’ll see that theattitude that “some” of the Corinthians had toward Jewish Chris-tians caused them to disregard their Jewish brethren’s attitudeson these topics.

In Chapter 9, Paul used his apostolic authority to again pointat those of the “Paul Party” involved in the Corinthian divisions.In the latter part of the chapter, Paul explained why he behaveddifferently among Jews and Gentiles.

In Chapter 10, Paul gave further instructions regarding idola-try and the Lord’s Supper. Again, the attitude of some of theCorinthians toward their Jewish brethren caused them to actinsensitively toward them.

In Chapter 11, Paul continued his discussion of the Lord’sSupper and the needlessness of observing it if their partyismcontinued.


In Chapters 12-14, Paul decried the indecent and disorderlybehavior at Corinth in their use of miraculous spiritual gifts.

Though the popular view of I Corinthians 15 doesn’t see theconnection between the subject of spiritual gifts and the schismsbetween Jewish and Gentile Christians at Corinth, a definite tieexists. In the valley of dry bones vision of Ezk. 37.11-14, Godsaid:

Then He said to me, “Son of man, these bones are thewhole house of Israel; behold, they say, ‘Our bones aredried up, and our hope has perished. We are completelycut off.’ Therefore prophesy, and say to them, ‘Thus saysthe Lord GOD,’ Behold, I will open your graves andcause you to come up out of your graves, My people; andI will bring you into the land of Israel. Then you willknow that I am the LORD, when I have opened yourgraves and caused you to come up out of your graves,My people. And I will put My Spirit within you, and youwill come to life, and I will place you on your own land.Then you will know that I, the LORD, have spoken anddone it,” declares the LORD.

Thus, in connection with the resurrection of Israel in theMessiah’s time, God said he would put his Spirit within Israel. Asimilar promise of the Spirit given to Israel at the same time wasgiven in Joel 2.28-30, which Peter quoted as fulfilled in Ac.2.15-17:

For these are not drunken, as ye suppose; seeing it is butthe third hour of the day. but this is that which hath beenspoken through the prophet Joel: And it shall be in thelast days, saith God, I will pour forth of my Spirit uponall flesh: And your sons and your daughters shall proph-esy, And your young men shall see visions, And your oldmen shall dream dreams: Yea and on my servants and onmy handmaidens in those days Will I pour forth of mySpirit; and they shall prophesy.


Both Ezekiel and Joel promised to Israel the coming of theSpirit. The gifts of the spirit in Acts 2 and I Corinthians were theresult of those promises to Israel. As we’ll see, Gentile Christians,while exercising these miraculous spiritual gifts, were denyingthe resurrection of some of the Jews who were promised the Spiritbefore them. Hence, even these chapters on spiritual gifts ad-dressed the Jew-Gentile problem in Corinth.

In Chapter 15, Paul detailed the resurrection of the dead anddealt with the denial of it by one of the parties to others outsidetheir party.

In Chapter 16, Paul admonished the Gentiles to make acollection for the needy Jewish saints at Jerusalem. This collec-tion would provide evidence of the healing of their partisandivisions.

Thus, most of the chapters of I Corinthians deal with variousaspects of the same party divisions that Paul tackled in the firstchapter. I Corinthians 15 didn’t just drop out of heaven with nocontext. Yet the popular view of the chapter completely ignoresthe context of the Jew-Gentile conflict of who was pleasing toGod, as we’ll see.


Chapter 3

I Corinthians 15.1-11 Paul United with Other Apostles On

the Resurrection

Paul did not strive in this section to prove that Jesus was raisedfrom the dead, that there was to be a resurrection of the dead, thatthe Corinthians denied the resurrection of the dead, nor that somedenied the resurrection of dead Christians. His goal was to showthat the apostles all preached exactly the same thing on theresurrection. This being true, it wasn’t appropriate for the Corin-thians to be divided, which they were, on the resurrection of thedead.

1 Now I make known unto you brethren, the gospel which Ipreached unto you, which also ye received, wherein also yestand,

First, notice that Paul referred to the Corinthians as “brethrenwho received the gospel.” A moment of thought reveals thatPaul’s calling them brethren wasn’t trivial at all. Though thesebrethren differed among themselves on the resurrection of thedead, we’re going to see none of them expressed a problem withthe resurrection of Christ. Not a single one. In 1.7, Paul said theybelieved in the coming revelation of Christ, and in 4.5 he saidthey believed in Christ’s coming again. Likewise, they did notdoubt their own resurrection. Not a single one. We’ll see momen-tarily what they denied about the resurrection.

While Paul definitely straightened out the contention of“some” in this chapter, he still recognized them all as “brethren.”If the popular view of this chapter is true, that some denied the

resurrection of Christ or that there was a resurrection of anyone,do we suppose that Paul would have referred to them as fellowchildren of God? Would we in our present time? Undoubtedly,not.

One clue that tells us Paul would not think of them as brethrenif they denied the resurrection comes from Luke, in Ac. 17.31-32,where he recorded the reaction to Paul’s sermon on the resurrec-tion at the Areopagus:

…inasmuch as he hath appointed a day in which he will[lit., is about to] judge the world in righteousness by theman whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath givenassurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him fromthe dead. Now when they heard of the resurrection of thedead, some mocked; but others said, We will hear theeconcerning this yet again.

These Greeks didn’t believe in the resurrection of the dead,like most think the Corinthians didn’t in I Corinthians 15. Do yousuppose Paul viewed these Greek mockers as brethren whoreceived his gospel, while they ridiculed him regarding the res-urrection? Would he have referred to them as “being saved,” ashe did the Corinthians (v2)? Surely not, and he soon left Athensand moved on to Corinth. Yet with the Corinthians, he calledthem brethren even though they had a serious problem (so farunidentified) with the resurrection. This presents strong evidencethat they weren’t like the Greeks at all, and we’ll soon learn whatthe difference was. For now, we simply say that they didn’t doubtthe resurrection of Christ, or of themselves, but of someone else.

We saw in Chapter 1, that Paul’s preaching on the resurrectionwas based squarely on nothing but the teaching of Moses and theprophets. Moses and the prophets knew nothing about a resurrec-tion of physical bodies out of holes in the ground, yet Paul saidhe preached just like them, and that the Corinthians received thatsame teaching. If we as teachers don’t teach from Moses and theprophets, those who learn from us aren’t going to profit from thesame background as these Corinthians did. Neither will we asstudents share the Corinthians’ understanding if we don’t studyMoses and the prophets.


We may assume these Corinthians knew little of the OldTestament prophets, but on the resurrection, Paul asserted that hetaught nothing but Moses and the prophets, and that the Corin-thians received, embraced, and stood fast in that teaching. Thus,the issue Paul dealt with in this chapter was not that the Corin-thians, any of them, rejected the resurrection. They embraced it.

Speaking plainly, they knew much more about Moses and theprophets on the resurrection than we generally do. Unless weobtain the same background they had, we cannot possibly graspPaul’s teaching in this chapter.

At the end of I Corthinians 15, Paul appealed for the fulfill-ment of the Old Testament prophets, including Isaiah 25 andHosea 13. Again, no one on earth interprets those Old Testamentprophecies as of a resurrection of physical bodies out of holes inthe ground. I challenge you to find a single serious student orscholar of the prophets who does. If you’re successful, pleasesend it along to me.

Obviously, Paul did not preach another gospel to the Corin-thians, so we shouldn’t expect that he advocated something theprophets never taught. Yet when people today are asked whattheir hope of resurrection is, we hardly ever hear the same answerPaul gave, that his hope of the resurrection was based on nothingbut what Moses and the prophets said should come to pass.

2 by which also ye are saved, if ye hold fast the word which Ipreached unto you, except ye believed in vain.

3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which also Ireceived: that Christ died for our sins according to the scrip-tures;

These “scriptures” would naturally be the Old Testamentscriptures; and of course, we could find a number of passages thatforetold the death of the Messiah, of which Isaiah 53 and Psalms16 should suffice.

4 and that he was buried; and that he hath been raised on thethird day according to the scriptures;

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 1 - 1 1 2 9

Again, “the scriptures” here are the Old Testament scriptures.Most of us understand that Christ’s death was foretold in the OldTestament, as was his burial and resurrection.

Interestingly, the only passage in the Old Testament thatspeaks of the resurrection on the third day is Hos. 6.1-3:

Come, let us return to the LORD. For He has torn us, butHe will heal us; He has wounded us, but He will bandageus. He will revive us after two days; He will raise us upon the third day That we may live before Him. So let usknow, let us press on to know the LORD. His going forthis as certain as the dawn; And He will come to us like therain, Like the spring rain watering the earth.

Also noteworthy, this passage speaks of the resurrection ofOld Covenant Israel, not Christ, on the third day.

Since Paul said Christ’s resurrection happened according tothe scriptures, the Old Testament scriptures, and since Hos. 6.1-3is the only passage in the Old Testament that speaks of theresurrection of anyone on the third day, Hos. 6.1-3 must alsospeak of Christ, although it speaks of the resurrection of Israel.Some in Israel thought that what happened to the Messiah alsohappened to the nation, as he was the representative of the nation.Later chapters of Isaiah confirm it. Hosea predicted the resurrec-tion of Israel on the third day. Paul alluded to this in I Cor. 15.4with a quotation from Hos. 6.1-3.

Much literature, including the Bible, uses a literary devicecalled inclusio, whereby two related references in one textbracket one or more concepts in another text which containsreferences to the first text. In our case, this would mean that Paul’stwo references to Hosea (6.3, 13.14) in I Corinthians 15 wouldinclude the concepts between the two references in Hosea.

In other words, since Paul “bookends” I Corinthians 15 withreferences to the resurrection from (Hos. 6.1-3) at the beginningof this discussion, and at the very end (Hos. 13.14) at vv. 55-56,the entire context of Hosea underlays I Corinthians 15. This ismade more powerful when we realize that many of Paul’s pointscan be found in Hosea: sowing or planting of Israel, God’s seed(in 1.4, Hosea’s first child was named Jezreel, lit, “God sows,”


in the earth (2.23); Israel died (1.5); harvest appointed for Judah(6.11) at the resurrection (13.14, quoted as fulfilled in I Cor.15.55); David ruling on his throne (3.4-5); Adam’s death/trans-gressing the covenant (6.7; 13.1); Israel the firstfruits (9.10); and,God becomes their king (13.10).

5 and that he appeared to Cephas; then to the twelve;

Cephas, the apostle Peter, and in 1.10, as apostle to the Jews,was held up as the leader of the “Peter Party,” though Peterhimself encouraged no such schism. While Peter was the first oneJesus appeared to after his death, he was not the only one, asPaul’s chronological list demonstrated.

6 then he appeared to above five hundred brethren at once,of whom the greater part remain until now, but some arefallen asleep;

These “some” who are fallen asleep fits with Mt. 16.27-28,where Jesus told his disciples some of them would not taste ofdeath before he came in his kingdom and in judgment. Paulaffirmed that most of them were still alive in approximately AD57, 27 years later.

7 then he appeared to James; then to all the apostles;

8 and last of all, as to the child untimely born, he appearedto me also.

9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to becalled an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.

Paul asserted that he was the least of the apostles in this case.On other occasions, when his apostolic authority was attacked,he insisted he wasn’t one whit behind the other apostles (Gal.2.6-14) and even boasted that he corrected Peter. Here, hisapostolic authority was not questioned, so he depreciated himselfas lesser. In other words, he devalued his authority, and therefore

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 1 - 1 1 3 1

that of the Paul Party, surely much to the dismay of those claimingto be “of Paul.”

10 But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his gracewhich was bestowed upon me was not found vain; but Ilabored more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but thegrace of God which was with me.

By the grace of God, Paul served as the apostle to the Gentiles,who were the recipients of his abundant labor. This fact contrib-uted to the party problem at Corinth, as did the fact that Peterpreached to the Jews.

11 Whether then it be I or they, so we preach, and so yebelieved.

With the “then,” which means “consequently” or “therefore,”Paul stated his conclusion to the first section. His argument wasnot that Christ died, was resurrected, or that the Corinthianswould be resurrected, for the Corinthians already believed thosethings. He summarized by stating that all the apostles (“we” is“I” plus “they”) preached the same gospel. They were united ontheir gospel, including its teaching on the resurrection, and theywere all preaching it from Moses and the prophets. Paul and Peterwere not divided, only the Paul Party and Peter Party were! Howmuch sense did it make for the Corinthians to divide over it? Aswe saw in vv1-2, the Corinthians had received the universalteaching of the apostles, embraced it, and stood in it. Whether theCorinthians believed in the resurrection wasn’t the issue, sincePaul said they did. However, “some” denied the resurrection ofsome dead persons, as we’ll see more about later in this study.

Again, Paul preached the hope of Israel from Moses and theprophets, the resurrection of Israel at the coming of Christ injudgment in AD 70. (See Chapter 1, “Paul’s Preaching on theResurrection.”)


Chapter 4

I Corinthians 15.12-19Consequences of the Belief

of Some Corinthians

Before we examine Paul’s argument based on the conse-quences of the belief of some of the Corinthians about theresurrection, we need to understand a Greek verb tense that Paul’sreaders were very familiar with and used in their everydaylanguage. When Paul got into the meat of his argument at verse14, he used this verb tense in nearly every sentence. We cannotgrasp the power of Paul’s argumentation if we fail to consider theimplications of this verse tense.

A Personal Remark

One of the beauties of the Greek language is its precision. Inhigh school, I was given the choice of taking Latin or Spanish.Had I known I would end up studying the Bible seriously, I wouldhave taken Latin, but I took Spanish instead. My grades weregood, but after two years of it, I hated it, and thought I hated allforeign languages. In Spanish, after I learned the rules of gram-mar, I then learned that nearly every verb was irregular and didn’tfollow the rules. I mistakenly surmised that all the other romancelanguages, French, Italian, etc., were about the same.

As I planned for a science degree in college, I knew I wouldface a foreign language requirement again. I put it off until myjunior year, thinking the archaic requirement would be abolished,or that I might die, hoping I wouldn’t have to take another foreignlanguage. By my junior year at college, the requirement hadn’t

been abolished and I hadn’t died, so I reluctantly took two yearsof German, the second year being scientific German. I loved it. Ilearned the rules, then observed that nearly every verb followedall the rules, as you might expect of the orderly German people.I even started thinking and dreaming in German! My dormroommate said that in the middle of the night, I would reach backover my head to get my glasses, put them on, sit up in bed, rattleoff all my concerns in German, lay back down, put my glassesback on the desk, never opening my eyes!

This experience convinced me my problem wasn’t foreignlanguages per se, but the disorderliness of the Spanish language.Thus, when I had opportunities to learn various computer pro-gramming languages (Fortran, Basic, various machine lan-guages, Visual C++, etc.), I found that they, like naturally-spokenlanguages, consisted of grammar, syntax, and vocabulary.

Later, when a chance to study Greek for several years arose,I jumped at it, and thoroughly enjoyed it. While Greek was asorderly as German, it was more efficient than my previouslanguages because it carried more information per word than anylanguage I had encountered yet. Its verbs could portray actionmuch more extensively and compactly. By changing the prefix,suffix, and even the stem of a verb, one can absolutely nail downthe action of verbs, which in English may take a sentence or smallparagraph to portray that same action. I then garnered an appre-ciation for why God might have used the Greek language for theNew Testament. Thus, it turned out that I liked “foreign” lan-guages much more than I thought from my exposure to Spanishin high school.

Importance of the Present Passive Verb Tensein I Corinthians 15

Unfortunately, much of that verb information in the Greekwords is altered, changed, or ignored in I Corinthians 15, particu-larly in the translation of the present passive verb tenses, andfrequently in the case of controversial passages like our presentone.


In most of our translations, the present, past, and perfect tensesare translated well. However, in I Corinthians 15, the presentpassive tense has received ill treatment. The present active tenseshows how the subject of the sentence is acting. An entirelydifferent concept, the present passive tense shows how the sub-ject of the sentence is being acted upon. Yet this present passivetense is often ignored, or completely changed to a future!

On the present passive tense, premier Greek grammarian J.Gresham Machen said:

The present active indicative, luo [to loose—SGD]…canbe translated either I loose or I am loosing…The passiveof I am loosing is I am being loosed. Example: sozomai(from sozo: I save) means I am being saved…the actionas taking place at the present time [emphasis mine—SGD]. (J. Gresham Machen, New Testament Greek forBeginners, Revised Edition [Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice Hall, 1923], p. 59.)

Thus, the present passive tense portrays continuous actionreceived by the subject in present time.

Greek grammarian Ray Summers said the same thing con-cerning the present passive tense:

The significance of the passive voice is the same in Greekas it is in English–the subject is being acted upon by anoutside agent, is receiving the action. Present active luo,“I am loosing”; present passive luomai, “I am beingloosed.” Thus the present passive pictures continuousaction received by the subject in present time [emphasismine—SGD]. (Ray Summers & Thomas Sawyer, Essen-tials of New Testament Greek, Revised Edition [Nash-ville: Broadman & Holman, 1995], p. 35.)

Compared to past and future passives, the present passivetense is used scarcely, which indicates that its use in this chapteris not accidental. Though used relatively rarely, it’s a precise verbform. Paul meant to use it instead of a future, yet in many cases,Paul’s intention has not been honored. He spoke of the subject

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 1 2 - 1 9 3 5

(the dead ones) receiving the action (rising) at his present time,not at some future time at least two thousand years later.

Of course, we all recognize big differences between “I loose”and “I am being loosed,” and “I save” and “I am being saved,”don’t we? Can’t we as well see a big difference between “I ambeing raised” and “I will be raised”? One is obviously takingplace in the present, while the other speaks of a future event.

Machen also said it’s misleading to translate a present passivetense as referring to a past action:

Both I am loosed and I am being loosed might, therefore,have been given in the translation of luomai (passive).But I am loosed is so ambiguous that the student isadvised to adopt the alternative translation [i.e., I ambeing loosed—SGD]…I am loosed…indicates a presentstate resultant upon a past action and would be translated,not by the present tense, but by the perfect tense inGreek.…It will be seen, therefore, that the translation Iam loosed for luomai, though it is not wrong (sinceluomai may sometimes be translated in this way), wouldbe misleading. (Ibid., pp. 59-60.)

Equally as bad an example of translating a present passive asa flagrant future, skip ahead to I Cor. 15.26:

…the last enemy that will be destroyed is death.

We read these translations and think, death hasn’t been de-stroyed yet; but literally, this is present passive, i.e., “the lastenemy that is being destroyed,” occurring as Paul wrote thosewords. We’ll deal presently with what kind of death Paul men-tioned, but whether physical or spiritual, its destruction hadalready started and was underway as Paul wrote. Again, asMachen said, such a translation “would be misleading”!

I Corinthians 15 contains many instances of abuse of thepresent passive tense, where translators ignored, weakened, orchanged the tense. Rather than being due to translational diffi-culties, this indicates translators’ bias. This “rising” was alreadyin progress when Paul wrote these words, which rules out a


resurrection of fleshly bodies out of the dirt sometime in ourfuture.

Let’s notice a few of these misleading mistranslations orpresent passives in I Corinthians 15.

v2 – “By which ye are saved” should be translated, “by whichye are being saved,” depicting an ongoing process when Paulwrote.

v12 –”Now if Christ is preached,” should be, “Now if Christis being preached,” depicting a process in progress when Paulwrote.

v15 – “We are found false witnesses…if the dead do not rise”should be “we are being found false witnesses, if the dead onesare not being raised,” depicting an ongoing process when Paulwrote.

v16 – “If the dead are not raised” should be “if the dead onesare not being raised,” depicting an ongoing process when Paulwrote.

v26 – “The last enemy that will be destroyed” should be “thelast enemy that is being destroyed” [there is simply no excuse forthis, and all the popular translations do it—SGD], depicting anongoing process when Paul wrote, not something way off yonderat the end of time. One has to wonder if Paul wasn’t speaking ofsome death other than physical death, which was not beingdestroyed as Paul spoke, as physical death hasn’t been destroyedeven yet, two thousand years later.

v32 – “If the dead are not raised” should be “if the dead onesare not being raised,” depicting an ongoing process when Paulwrote.

v35 – “How are the dead raised, and with what manner of bodydo they come” should be “how are the dead ones being raised andwith what manner of body are they coming,” depicting an ongo-ing process when Paul wrote. Notice also the singular body (notbodies) that the dead ones are being raised in. Rather thanbiological bodies rising at some future time, as is popularlyviewed, Paul spoke of one body being raised in his present time.What do we do with that? Dislike it? Say it can’t be right? SayPaul misspoke? Deny he said it? Wish he hadn’t said it? Try toget around it? Don’t tell anyone he said it? Apologize for what

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 1 2 - 1 9 3 7

he said and say something else? Perhaps “speaking like the Biblespeaks” would be the appropriate treatment.

v42-44 – “It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption;it is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness;it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body; it is raised aspiritual body,” should be “it is being sown in corruption; it isbeing raised in incorruption; it is being sown in dishonor; it isbeing raised in glory; it is being sown in weakness; it is beingraised in power; it is being sown a natural body; it is being raiseda spiritual body.” Note that both the simultaneous sowing andraising of this singular body are depicted as ongoing processesas Paul wrote. The sowing is going on while the raising isoccurring.

Now that we are aware of present indicative passive verbs, wewant to study Paul’s powerful argumentation that refutes theposition of the some who denied the resurrection. Perhaps itmight even reveal some flaws in our own beliefs.

12 Now if Christ is [being—present indicative passive]preached that he hath been raised from the dead, how saysome among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?

Notice “some among them,” implying not all of the Corin-thians, denied the resurrection of the dead ones. These some,whom Paul had already called “brethren,” denied the resurrectionwhich Paul preached, the resurrection of Old Covenant Israel, asseen in the previous chapter of this volume. Who were these“some”?

To answer that question, notice the “if…then” construction inverses immediately following where Paul gave a list of conse-quences these some would have to accept if they did not acceptthe resurrection of certain dead persons. Paul argued that (A) ifthere’s no coming resurrection of dead persons, then (B) Christwasn’t raised (v13), (C) Paul’s preaching was vain (v14), (D) thefaith of the Corinthians was vain (v14), (E) the apostles were falsewitnesses (v15), (F) the Corinthians were still in their sins (v17),(G) all dead Christians have perished (v18), and (H) Christiansare of all men most pitiable (v19).


Actually, absolutely no Corinthian believed a single one ofthese consequences, even the “some” who denied the resurrectionof others. Had they believed a single consequence, Paul wouldnot have called them “brethren,” would he?

Logically, Paul’s argument is of the form, If A is true, then Bis true, but if B isn’t true, then A isn’t true, either. Here, A is,“there is no resurrection of the dead.” If this is true, then B (thenChrist has not been raised), C (our preaching is vain), D (yourfaith is vain), E (we are false witnesses), and F (you’re still inyour sins), etc., all follow. However, if any one of B, C, D, E, F,G and H is false, then A (the denial of some of the resurrectionof the dead ones) is false. After showing the consequences of thebelief of “some” at Corinth (that there is no resurrection of somedead persons), and knowing that none of the Corinthians (eventhe some denying such a resurrection) denied either B, C, D, E,F, G, or H, Paul will have proven that the contention of the “some”that there is no resurrection of the dead ones is false.

It is important to realize that Paul’s argument was against the“some,” showing that none of his brethren at Corinth wouldaccept a single consequence of the belief of the “some.” Thus, ifthey wouldn’t accept B, C, D, E, F, G, and H, they should notaccept A, that there is no resurrection of the dead ones. Logically,they would then have to agree with Paul and all the apostles, thatthere was a resurrection of certain dead persons, and that there’ssomething wrong with the position of “some.”

Now, to our question: Who were the “some” at Corinth andwhose resurrection were they denying? They certainly didn’tdeny their own resurrection. They didn’t deny the resurrection ofChrist. They didn’t deny the resurrection of Gentile Christians,whom Paul himself converted from paganism. They didn’t denythe resurrection of Jewish Christians, whom Peter and Paul hadconverted from Judaism.

Who was left to be resurrected after they eliminated theresurrection of dead Gentile Christians and dead Jewish Chris-tians? Only Old Covenant saints, particularly those of Israel.Some at Corinth denied the salvation of the Old Testamentfaithful. As the chapter 1 of this book demonstrated, the resurrec-tion of the dead ones served as the basis of Paul’s preaching. Itwas the identical hope of Israel he preached solely from Moses

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 1 2 - 1 9 3 9

and the prophets. Yet some Christians denied the resurrection tothe very ones it was promised to, the faithful of Israel. TheCorinthians most certainly believed in the resurrection of Jewishand Gentile Christians, but not the Old Covenant saints. Paul lateraffirmed they stood or fell together. Even the resurrection ofChrist stood or fell with the resurrection of the Old Testamentsaints. As an Old Testament saint himself, he was part of that verygroup! Further, Paul later showed that if the Old Testament saintswere not raised (as prophesied in the prophets), then New Testa-ment saints wouldn’t be, either. In other words, “If the Jews don’tget theirs, you Gentiles won’t get yours!”

Recall in Mt. 23.35 when Jesus pronounced an upcomingjudgment on Jerusalem to avenge Old Testament saints:

…that upon you may come all the righteous blood shedon the earth, from the blood of Abel the righteous untothe blood of Zachariah, son of Barachiah…

Thus, “some” Corinthians denied the resurrection of thesefamous Old Covenant faithful!

Can you guess who the “some” were who denied the resur-rection of the Old Testament faithful? Were they of the PeterParty, those who claimed their leader as the apostle to the Jews?Or the Apollos Party, who followed the more-educated Alexan-drian Jew? Or the Paul Party, those who followed their leader asthe apostle to the Gentiles? As would be expected, the Paul Party,Gentile Christians, opposed the Peter Party, believing God re-jected the Old Covenant Jews because of the cross. Paul used theentirety of Romans 9-11 to make this argument. Both the Corin-thian and Roman Gentile Christians, thinking they were God’snew elite and looking down on Jewish Christians erroneouslydenied salvation (including the resurrection of the dead) to OldCovenant Israel.

For emphasis, many Gentile Christians of the first century,like many of us today, falsely assumed that God wrote OldCovenant Israel off at the cross and has had nothing to do withthem since that time. In their view, Israel had no future. Of course,if this were true, Paul’s preaching would truly have been vain,for in every city he taught Jews first. As he asserted in Romans,


the whole reason for his ministry was to bring Gentiles to Christin hope that their obedience would produce jealousy among theJews that he might save some of them.

The popular view of this chapter ignores the context of theJewish-Gentile conflict and jealousy and holds that “some” de-nied that absolutely no one was to be raised from the dead. If true,how could Paul call these “brethren”? If they were claimingChristians who had fallen asleep had perished, they would haveagreed with Paul’s list of consequences, and Paul would havemade their argument!

In I Cor. 4.5, Paul spoke to the Corinthians already dividingover Jew-Gentile relations, and some were judging others beforethe time when the Lord would perform judgment at his coming.Those who were “of Paul” were already discriminating againstOld Covenant Israel as cut off from her promises. These divisionswere wreaking havoc in the Corinthian church, which gave riseto Paul’s letter.

13 If the dead [lit., ones], are not [lit., being—present indica-tive active] raised, then Christ is not raised.

Paul began his list of consequences for their thinking bystating that if there were presently no such thing as a resurrection,and especially of Old Testament saints, then, by implication,Christ had not been raised, for he was among the dead ones, asan Old Covenant saint himself! Yet Paul knew his audiencewasn’t denying the resurrection of Christ. If they didn’t believein the resurrection of Christ, Paul’s argument would have beenpowerless. On the other hand, Paul would show that since theybelieved in the resurrection of Christ, they were bound to believein the resurrection of the dead ones, i.e., Old Testament saints.

The verb “rising” is present passive tense, which indicates thatthe subject of the sentence, the dead ones, were being acted on inthe present time that Paul was writing in, not some time in thefuture. The Corinthians weren’t saying there would be no resur-rection at all, but that there was (presently in their time) noresurrection of the dead ones. This is a plain mistranslation, oneof many instances in this chapter, where in strategic verses thepresent passive tense is ignored, weakened, or worse, changed to

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 1 2 - 1 9 4 1

a future tense. This is not due to difficulty of translation, but likelydue to translator bias or prejudice, pure and simple. Once theseverb tenses are correctly translated in I Corinthians 15, difficul-ties in the time and nature of the resurrection disappear.

Someone may ask, “Is there any evidence that early Christiansthought that the coming of the Lord, the judgment, and theresurrection were to occur in the first century?” A great deal,actually. First, in light of all the “imminence passages,” that is,statements of Christ and the apostles that the coming of the Lordwas near, at hand, with the judge standing at the door, etc., noone seriously doubts that there was an abundant expectation thatall those things were going to occur in Jesus’ generation. Becauseof this expectation, atheists, skeptics, modernists, and dispensa-tional premillennialists all deride those early expectations, sayingeven that Jesus was deluded, his apostles were mistaken, God wasforced to change his plan because of the rejection of Christ by theJews, etc. (For extensive documentation of this, please see myonline book Faithless Foundation of Premillennialism, HowMillions of Evangelicals and Fundamentalists Agree with Athe-ists, Skeptics, and Modernists that Jesus Was Mistaken on theLast Days at www.gospelthemes.com/ffpbk.htm.)

Thus, the teaching of imminence and the expectation wasthere before the destruction of Jerusalem. Further, I recommendMisplaced Hope, an excellent book by Sam Frost. Frost makes asubstantial case that realized eschatology was the prevalent viewin the early church until perhaps AD 140. When many Christiansfailed to see the significance of the destruction of Jerusalem, thepassing and judgment of Old Covenant Israel, the destruction ofthe old heavens and earth (II Peter 3), and the Lord’s Coming (inhis generation as he foretold in Matthew 24), many of themwondered where they had missed out. Perhaps, they thought, theyhad misinterpreted, and this continued into the first quarter of thesecond century. Frost makes his case based on quotations fromthe so-called “church fathers,” i.e., men or descendents of menwho had known the apostles themselves.

Decades ago, I concluded that you could prove anything fromthe church fathers, both sides of any controversial issue (includ-ing eschatology). Why not? They were just as susceptible to error


as human beings are today. So quotes from such men cannot beused to substantiate the truth on any subject.

However, if a position was taken by one of them on somedoctrine, it can serve to prove the issue existed at that time, butnot whether it was right or wrong. On some point, one of thefathers was one of Jude’s grandsons, and it was thought thatsurely he would take the same position as his old granddad. Thathas to be right, doesn’t it? I agree with everything my granddadbelieved. What? You say you don’t believe that?

Here’s what Frost did for me:

1. He proved that as early as the AD 70s, Barnabas (notnecessarily Paul’s companion) wrote on realized escha-tology, knew of the destruction of Jerusalem, believedthat the judgment, resurrection, and new heavens andnew earth were to occur at the same time. However,mainly because there was no cosmic conflagration as he(and most of these men) thought from II Peter 3, hefigured there had to be a small delay.

2. The second witness is the Shepherd of Hermas, wholived from AD 85 to 145. Like Barnabas, he knew thebasic facts of what was to happen at the destruction ofJerusalem. But since he hadn’t seen the destruction of theplanet and stars, and he lived somewhat later, he sur-mised the delay had to be somewhat longer.

3. These men weren’t unanimous in their beliefs, by anymeans; but significantly, these two, along with others,understood the basic facts of preterism. Because of theirmisunderstanding of II Peter 3, they kept developing theidea of a delay.

4. The predominant idea went with what came to beRoman Catholicism, although many parts of their viewof the fleshly resurrection and a final judgment at the endof time pretty much reflect the traditional view we seeabout us now.

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 1 2 - 1 9 4 3

5. However, Frost established beyond doubt that thepreterist view was there in many, if not most of its detailsin the first decade or so after AD 70. It just wasn’t theprevailing position.

6. Of course, premillennialists are still playing the “de-lay” game, and now the delay is 2000 years, but it nowhas to be right around the corner.

Conclusion: If Frost is right, and I believe his case is solid,then the “futurist” view of the coming of the Lord, the judgment,and the resurrection is the new doctrine, not the realized escha-tology view.

Let me suggest at this point something we will develop indetail later. Paul depicted the ongoing translation of the body ofdeath headed by Adam (which would, of course, contain OldCovenant Israel) to the body of life headed by Christ. This isPaul’s concept of the resurrection, a process ongoing as Paulwrote. This was the concept of the resurrection in Moses and theprophets, and Paul said he preached nothing but what Moses andthe prophets taught on this subject. Nothing had changed aboutPaul’s physical body, but he himself had been translated fromAdam’s body of death (as per Rom. 7.24, where Paul said,“Wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me out of the bodyof this death?”) into life in the body of Christ. Recall that Paulhad already affirmed in verse 11 that all the apostles taught thesame thing he did on the resurrection, and the Corinthians had allembraced that unified teaching.

So the first consequence is simply stated: If Israel, the rest ofthe firstfruits, was not being raised when Paul wrote these words,then Christ wasn’t raised, for his own resurrection was the firstof the firstfruits. Let that soak in for a moment: If the dead werenot being raised as Paul wrote these words, then these Corin-thians must deny the resurrection of Christ, since Christ was thefirst of those “dead ones” to be raised. This would make Paul’spreaching of Israel’s hope false, since it was based on Moses andthe prophets, and Paul and the Corinthians who believed hispreaching would be false witnesses of God.


If some object to the Greek grammar being bandied about,there’s really nothing more complicated than singular vs. plural(body vs. bodies), and present vs. future (is being raised vs. willbe raised) under consideration.

14 and if Christ hath not been raised, then is our preachingvain, your faith also is vain.

This second consequence would follow because Paul’spreaching—of the hope of the resurrection of Israel based onMoses and the prophets—would also be worthless. This goes tothe concept of firstfruits, which Paul discussed more fully in verse20. Christ was the first of the firstfruits, while the faithful OldCovenant Jews were going to be the rest of the firstfruits, and thedead in Christ were to be the rest of the fruit at the harvest.

The third consequence is that their denial of the resurrectionof Israel would make the faith of Gentile Christians vain orworthless; another outcome Paul’s audience would not be able toaccept. The Gentile Christians thought their gospel was full ofhope and assurance; however, they did not accept that faithfulIsrael had the same hope and assurance. Our preaching on thischapter is usually done without regard to Israel in the entirechapter. This was not the case with Paul’s preaching.

15 Yea, we are [lit., being—present indicative passive] foundfalse witnesses of God; because we witnessed of God that heraised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the deadare not [lit., being—present indicative passive] raised.

Thus, the fourth consequence of the dead not being raised isthat the apostles, who all preached the same thing on the resur-rection from Moses and the prophets, were all false witnesses ofGod.

16 For if the dead are not [lit., being—present indicativepassive] raised, neither hath Christ been raised:

17 and if Christ hath not been raised, your faith is vain; yeare yet in your sins.

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 1 2 - 1 9 4 5

The fifth consequence of there being no present raising of thedead ones is that the Corinthians were still in their sins. Of course,they would not accept this verdict.

18 Then they also that are fallen asleep in Christ have per-ished.

The sixth consequence is that if Paul’s preaching were false,then all those in Christ, including Jewish and Gentile Christianswho had already died had perished, as there’s no resurrectionhope for them. Some said Israel’s last days had come and gone,because God was through with them since the cross. Yet God’spromises to Israel were irrevocable, so that the salvation ofGentile Christians was linked to theirs at the coming of the Lord(which the Corinthians were eagerly awaiting, 1.7). Again, Jesussaid his coming would be in his generation while some of hisdisciples were still alive (Mt. 24.29, 34, Mt. 16.27-28). Thus, ifIsrael has no more hope since the cross, neither do GentileChristians.

Paul elaborated on this concept in Romans 11, a chapterwritten for the benefit of Gentile Christians, who like most of us,thought God had written off the Jews at the cross, and had noplans for them after that event. There he argued that God did notcast off his people (vv1-2). In verse 11, Paul stated that by thefall of the Jews, salvation came to the Gentiles. He had alreadysaid in Rom. 1.11 that “the gospel is the power of God untosalvation, to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.” Recall that Jesussaid in Jn. 4.22 to the Samaritan woman at the well, “Ye worshipthat which ye know not: we worship that which we know, forsalvation is from the Jews.”

Paul’s commission was to first go to the Jews in their syna-gogues with the gospel, then after they rejected him, to take it tothe Gentiles. Thus, the faster the Jews rejected his gospel, themore quickly it and the salvation it contained would go to theGentiles. God desired that the Gentiles’ acceptance of the gospelwould provoke the Jews to jealousy, thereby attracting them tothe gospel. Largely unfulfilled, this desire illustrates God had notabandoned the Jews at the cross.


19 If we have only hoped in Christ in this life, we are of allmen most pitiable.

I strongly suspect the “we” is still the apostles (as in v11), andthat Paul said that if those in Corinth who denied the resurrectionto Old Covenant saints were right, then even the apostles, allIsraelites, wouldn’t get what was promised to Israel. They were,after all their preaching to Jews, working out the Jew-Gentileproblem in Galatians 2, Acts 15, etc., to bring the hope of Israel,which they all preached, indeed of all men most miserable. Theentire careers of all of them as apostles were for naught if theGentile Christians were right about the resurrection!

Concluding this section, we realize that none of the Corin-thians were willing to admit that they were of all men mostpitiable, that dead Christians had perished, that they were still intheir sins, that their faith was vain, nor that Christ hadn’t raised.This being true, the contention of some Corinthians that the deadones were not being raised could not be true!

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 1 2 - 1 9 4 7

Chapter 5

I Corinthians 15.20-28Christ’s Resurrection and Kingship

After showing the Gentile Christians the consequences oftheir rejection of the resurrection of some, Paul turned to positiveteaching about the resurrection and kingship of Jesus.

As we begin this section, it helps to remember that Adam diedtwo deaths, spiritually the day he sinned, and physically hundredsof years later. Christ also died two deaths, physically on the cross,and spiritually when God forsook him on the cross as he bore thesins of all mankind. We’ll have occasion to refer to these two dualconcepts in this chapter.

20 But now hath Christ been raised from the dead [lit., ones],the firstfruits of them that are asleep.

Literally, this “that are asleep” is in the perfect tense, “thefirstfruits of them that had fallen asleep,” that is, the Old Cove-nant faithful who died before Christ. This can be none other thanthe faithful who died before Jesus died, whose resurrection“some” Corinthians denied.

The firstfruits of the harvest depicts another Jewish concept.Leviticus 23 describes two stages of firstfruits: the first of thefirstfruits, then the firstfruits (the sign that the harvest had al-ready begun). Then the general harvest began. Thus, Christ, asthe “firstborn of the dead” (Col. 1.18) is the first of the firstfruits,then came the Old Covenant saints, who were the guarantee ofthe harvest (“at the end of the age,” Jesus said in Mt. 13.39). Itwas only this latter group that some at Corinth didn’t believewould participate in the resurrection.

If the harvest is the resurrection, the resurrection took placein the first century. The firstfruits of a crop are not separated fromthe harvest by 2000 years, as some think. Again, this resurrectionwas from the death of their fellowship with God, the spiritualdeath Adam suffered “the day” he ate of the tree, not his biologi-cal death.

In Mt. 13.39-43, Jesus, in the parable of the tares, taught thatthe harvest was at the end of the Mosaic age:

…and the enemy that sowed them is the devil: and theharvest is the end of the world [age]; and the reapers areangels. As therefore the tares are gathered up and burnedwith fire; so shall it be in the end of the world [age]. TheSon of man shall send forth his angels, and they shallgather out of his kingdom all things that cause stumbling,and them that do iniquity, and shall cast them into thefurnace of fire: there shall be the weeping and the gnash-ing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as thesun in the kingdom of their Father. He that hath ears, lethim hear.

The Jews, including even modern ones, recognized two ages,the Mosaic age, and the age to come, i.e., the age of the Messiah.Jesus even spoke of “this age” and “the age to come.” The end ofthe age here must refer to the end of the Mosaic age, the age inwhich Jesus lived, as the Messiah’s age has no end. We’ll see thisin detail in verse 24. Of course, when asked the time of the endof the age in Mt. 24.3, Jesus replied succinctly in “this genera-tion” (Mt. 24.34).

The “righteous shining forth as the sun” parallels Dan. 12.3-4:

And those who have insight will shine brightly like thebrightness of the expanse of heaven, and those who leadthe many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever.But as for you, Daniel, conceal these words and seal upthe book until the end of time [lit., the time of the end];many will go back and forth, and knowledge will in-crease.


Daniel explained the time of the end in vv6-7:

And one said to the man dressed in linen, who was abovethe waters of the river, How long will it be until the endof these wonders? And I heard the man dressed in linen,who was above the waters of the river, as he raised hisright hand and his left toward heaven, and swore by Himwho lives forever that it would be for a time, times, andhalf a time; and as soon as they finish shattering thepower of the holy people, all these events will be com-pleted.

By the way, Dan. 12.1-2 also connects this shining andshattering to the resurrection of Israel:

Now at that time Michael, the great prince who standsguard over the sons of your people, will arise. And therewill be a time of distress such as never occurred sincethere was a nation until that time; and at that time yourpeople, everyone who is found written in the book, willbe rescued. And many of those who sleep in the dust ofthe ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but theothers to disgrace and everlasting contempt.

Jesus alluded to Dan. 12.1-11 in Mt. 24.21, as to be fulfilledin his generation (Mt. 24.34). Note also that Daniel prophesiedthe resurrection of Israel (and judgment) to be fulfilled at thesame time, at the end of the Mosaic age (Dan. 12.13). This is alsothe time of the harvest (Mt. 13.39).

The popular view is that the resurrection of I Corinthians 15is physical. Many demand a physical resurrection to emulateJesus’ resurrection. Why then isn’t a physical death in the like-ness of his physical death also required? Should the believer becrucified like him; scourged and unjustly condemned like him?If the believer does not die in true likeness of his physical death,does this mean he will not be raised in likeness of Jesus?

21 For since by man came [lit., the] death, by man came alsothe resurrection [lit., is a rising again] of the dead.

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 2 0 - 2 8 5 1

The man who brought “the death” was Adam, but as we’reabout to see, “the death” Adam brought was not physical. Weknow Adam was a physically dying person before he sinnedbecause he was required to eat of the tree of life. If this is true,then physical death couldn’t come “by man.”

Also, Adam didn’t die physically the day he ate of the forbid-den tree, and not for over another nine hundred years. Adam wasnot even the first person to die physically. The death he died inthe day he ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil was thedeath of his fellowship and relationship with God. The very dayhe sinned, he was humiliated, estranged, condemned, and ban-ished.

In Gen. 2.16-17, we know God commanded Adam saying:

From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but fromthe tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall noteat, for in the day that you eat from it you shall surelydie.

Question: Did Adam die that day or not? Satan offered Eve asimple alternative in Gen. 3.4:

You surely shall not die!

Obviously, either God or Satan was mistaken on the comingdeath of Adam. Who should we believe, God (for whom it isimpossible to lie, Heb. 6.18), or Satan (the father of lies Jn. 8.44)?

Immortality: Innate or Conditional?

Is immortality unconditional? We generally hear that Godcreated Adam immortal, not subject to death. Then because ofAdam’s sin, he died physically, as did his descendants.

But was Adam created immortal, not subject to physicaldeath? It appears not. Let’s briefly review the Bible’s teachingconcerning man being a living soul. The word soul in the OldTestament comes from the Hebrew nephesh, which fundamen-


tally refers to man’s animal life, i.e., the life he shares with allanimals. Hence, in Genesis 2.7, we read:

And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground,and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and manbecame a living soul.

Here, Adam consisted of (1) a physical body, composed fromthe earth, which was not living. However, when God gave thisbody (2) the breath of life, Adam was a living soul (Heb.,nephesh). Interestingly, that same creation chapter applies theterm nephesh to animals many times. For example, Gen. 1.20says: “Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures(nephesh).” In Gen, 1.21, the same word is translated livingcreature: “And God created the great sea-monsters, and everyliving creature that moves wherewith the water swarmed.” InGen. 1.24, it’s translated living creatures: “And God said, Let theearth bring forth living creatures after their kind, cattle, andcreeping things, and beasts of the earth.” In Gen. 1.30, it’srendered life: “And to every beast of the earth, and to every birdof the heavens, and to everything that creeps upon the earth,wherein there is life.” Hence, the term a living soul is applied toanimals as well as to man. They are all living souls.

Not only were Adam and all the living creatures living soulsbefore Adam sinned, but they also were all subject to death beforehe sinned. After his creation, God placed Adam in the garden andgave him access to the tree of life to sustain his life. This factalone tells us he wasn’t immortal, but subject to death before hesinned. Some suggest the fact Adam had to eat at all (much lessof the tree of life), showed he was mortal (as are all other livingcreatures who eat to survive). Would he have starved to death ifhe had not eaten, like all the other living creatures? If not, whydid he need a stomach with a complete digestive system? Whenhe sinned, he lost access to the tree of life, “lest he stretch out hishand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”(Gen. 3.22).

God forbade Adam to eat of the tree of the knowledge of goodand evil, saying in Gen 2.16-17:

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 2 0 - 2 8 5 3

From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but fromthe tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall noteat, for in the day that you eat from it you shall surelydie.

We take the phrase “the day” as God had already used it inGenesis, of a 24-hour day. In Gen. 1.14, we read, “…lights toseparate the day from the night,” Gen. 1.16, “the greater light togovern the day,” and Gen. 1.18, “rule over the day and over thenight.” Genesis 2.4 speaks of “the account of the heavens and theearth when they were created, in the day that the LORD Godmade earth and heaven.” After our verse, Gen. 2.17, we have 3.5,where Moses wrote:

For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyeswill be opened, and you will be like God, knowing goodand evil.

Did “the day” refer to a long period of time, say, nine hundredyears until Adam died physically? Was that how long they tookto learn good and evil? I submit they knew good and evil the daythey ate, not an extended time, even years, later. This knowledgeled to their being afraid, ashamed, and needing to hide from God.

In Gen 3:5-7, we learn further what happened that day:

“For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyeswill be opened, and you will be like God, knowing goodand evil.” When the woman saw that the tree was goodfor food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that thetree was desirable to make one wise, she took from itsfruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her,and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened,and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed figleaves together and made themselves loin coverings.

Adam didn’t die physically the day he ate from the tree ofknowledge. Instead, he died in the sense of being separated fromGod by his sin the day he ate, and he knew it. Suddenly, hisrelationship with God changed. He reacted with fear of approach-


ing God, and attempted to hide from him. This was Adam’ssin-death. His relationship with God was broken. This is the deathwe’re concerned with–a death that affects one’s relationship withGod. Physical death does not. We may or may not be in fellow-ship whether we’re physically dead or alive.

Again, we ask: Was Adam immortal? Notice some conclu-sions thus far. First, Adam didn’t die physically because of sin.The physical death of Adam and his descendants was not apunishment for Adam’s sin, any more than the physical death ofany other living creature was punishment for Adam’s sin. Likeall others of Adam’s descendants, you and I will die physically,but not because of Adam’s sin. Our physical death is not a cursefor sin. Surely, the serpent was cursed, as was the ground.Likewise, painful childbirth and toilsome labor resulted fromAdam’s sin, but we die physically for the same reason Adam did.We’re mortal, as was he, and we lack of access to the tree of life,as did he.

Second, Jesus rose from the dead to remedy the effect ofAdam’s sin (Rom. 5.12-21, I Cor. 15.21-22), which was notphysical death. Adam wasn’t immortal, but subject to death, bothbefore and after he sinned. Christ’s resurrection was the sign thathis death remedied Adam’s spiritual death.

In Rom. 5.12, Paul said:

Therefore, as through one man sin entered into the world,and death through sin; and so death passed unto all men,for that all sinned:

This passage doesn’t say death passed to all men because oneman sinned, rather all men die (spiritually) because all men sin.Each of us makes the same choice to sin that Adam did. As we’vejust seen, no one dies physically because of Adam’s sin, either.

In Rom. 6.23, Paul taught that the wages of sin is death. If thisis physical death, and we’re forgiven, why do we still die physi-cally? What more needs to be paid than what Christ paid, ifphysical death is the subject? What did Christ accomplish if hepaid for our sins, yet we still pay our own way? What kind ofsubstitutionary death is that? Why do we still have to pay our ownwages by dying physically if Christ paid for our sins? The answer,

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 2 0 - 2 8 5 5

of course, is that Paul didn’t speak of physical death, but the deathwe suffer like Adam did: spiritual death, the death of his fellow-ship with God the day he ate of the forbidden tree.

Thus, Adam died the day he sinned, as God affirmed and Satandenied. He became separated from God who drove him from thegarden.

Third, Christ was the first to be raised from the dead. In Paul’seschatology, he was. However, Christ wasn’t the first to be raisedfrom biological death. Lazarus (along with others both in the Oldand New Testaments) was raised from the physically dead beforeChrist was, so this isn’t speaking of Christ’s physical resurrec-tion. Someone may say, “Yes, but Jesus was the first one to beraised from the dead never to go back again!” To which we say,“Yes, but is that what Paul said? Or, did he say Christ was thefirstfruits from the dead?” Did Paul say “never to go back again”?Also, Lazarus wasn’t raised from the death of Adam, whichChrist was the first to be raised from.

22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be madealive.

“As” and “so” are important words. They imply that those inChrist shall be made alive “in the same manner” as all those inAdam die.

The death Christ overcame was not physical death becausefirst, Adam didn’t die physically because he sinned. Second,Adam didn’t die physically 900 years later because he sinned.Third, Adam wasn’t the first person to die physically—Abel was,yet Paul didn’t say, “As in Abel all die.” Fourth, Christ was notthe first to be made alive physically, for he raised others physi-cally during his ministry. Fifth, Christ’s death doesn’t redeem usfrom the physical death of Adam, for we still die, and he didn’tdiscuss how Christ redeemed us from the death of Abel.

The death Adam died the day he sinned was not a cataclysmicphysical event. His physical body didn’t go into a hole in theground. No trumpets blew. No one physically descended onclouds. Adam’s spiritual event happened in the twinkling of aneye, as his eyes opened to the fact that his relationship with God


had changed drastically. Adam and Eve realized they were nakedand needed clothing. Fearing God, they hid from him.

Paul’s point was that the resurrection under discussion solvedthe problem Adam brought upon himself. Adam’s biologicaldeath was never the problem, or curse for sin, nor was the problemrestoration from physical death. Adam, not being created immor-tal, was destined to die physically before he was created. The realproblem was Adam’s spiritual death, and being restored from it.

The resurrection of Israel at the destruction of her templeevidently was not a cataclysmic physical event either, but aspiritual event that reversed the spiritual death experienced byAdam. Like Adam’s death was an opening of his eyes to the deathof his fellowship with God, Paul said the resurrection of I Cor.15.51 was similar:

Behold, I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, butwe shall all be changed in a moment, in the twinkling ofan eye, at the last trump.

That is, at the resurrection, the Old Covenant faithful wouldbe taken from the “unseen” Hadean state into the presence ofChrist in the twinkling of an eye. They would, as a body, in thiseye-opening experience, be restored to the relationship Adam hadwith God before his fellowship was broken. They would be in thepresence of Christ himself.

Then after the resurrection of spiritual Israel at the destructionof Jerusalem, Christians who die physically, don’t go to a Hadeanwarehouse to wait for a massive simultaneous judgment, butstraight to their heavenly reward, Rev. 14.13, another spiritualevent. This means you and I, and our loved ones, go straight tobe with Christ when we die if we’ve lived a faithful life—nowarehousing for thousands of years. Truly a message of GoodNews! As John heard:

And I heard the voice from heaven saying, Write, Blessed[lit., happy] are the dead who die in the Lord fromhenceforth: yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest fromtheir labors; for their works follow with them.

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 2 0 - 2 8 5 7

Thus, ever since the resurrection of Israel at the destructionof Jerusalem and its temple, saints are not raised from physicaldeath, but go to be with Christ at death, where they receivehappiness and rest.

In Rom. 5.14, Paul said that death reigned from Adam untilMoses, but Moses didn’t solve the problem of Adam’s death. Hislaw only magnified the problem, and Israel became a subgroupof all those in Adam. As a result, Jesus had to be the solution tospiritual death incurred in Adam.

23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; then theythat are Christ’s, at his coming.

The imminence of Christ’s coming was foretold by Jesushimself, and most of the New Testament authors, to occur inJesus’ own generation. In Mt. 16.27-28, Jesus said it would occurwhile some of his disciples were still alive:

For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Fatherwith his angels; and then shall he render unto every manaccording to his deeds. Verily I say unto you, there aresome of them that stand here, who shall in no wise tasteof death, till they see the Son of man coming in hiskingdom.

Jesus foretold of his coming in glory and a judgment thatwould occur while some of his disciples were still alive.

In Mt. 24.30-34, Jesus said:

…and then shall appear the sign of the Son of man inheaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn,and they shall see the Son of man coming on the cloudsof heaven with power and great glory. And he shall sendforth his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and theyshall gather together his elect from the four winds, fromone end of heaven to the other. Now from the fig treelearn her parable: when her branch is now become ten-der, and putteth forth its leaves, ye know that the summeris nigh; even so ye also, when ye see all these things,


know ye that he is nigh, even at the doors. Verily I sayunto you, This generation shall not pass away, till allthese things be accomplished.

The Olivet Discourse also reveals that Jesus foretold hiscoming in glory and a judgment (Mt. 25.41ff) to occur in hisgeneration.

In I Thes. 4.15-16, Paul spoke of the imminence of Christ’scoming, and included himself among those that would still bealive when it happened:

For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, thatwe that are alive, that are left unto the coming of theLord, shall in no wise precede them that are fallen asleep.For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven, with ashout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpof God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first;…

Thus, Paul also spoke of the Lord’s coming during the lifetimeof some of the disciples.

In Heb. 10.37, the author of Hebrews declared that Christ wascoming in “a very very little while, and shall not tarry.” Do youbelieve what the writer said here? Or was he mistaken, and Christis still tarrying after 2000 years? I know what the atheists, Jewishand Muslim skeptics, modernist theologians, and prophetic pun-dits think. They preach a deluded and mistaken Christ. What doyou think? Shall we speak as the oracles of God, or not?

James, writing to Jewish Christians within the generationJesus promised would see his coming and judgment, said in Jas.5.5-9:

Ye have lived delicately on the earth, and taken yourpleasure; ye have nourished your hearts in a day ofslaughter. Ye have condemned, ye have killed the right-eous one; he doth not resist you. Be patient therefore,brethren, until the coming of the Lord.…Be ye alsopatient; establish your hearts: for the coming of the Lordis at hand. Murmur not, brethren, one against another,

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 2 0 - 2 8 5 9

that ye be not judged: behold, the judge standeth beforethe doors.

James affirmed an imminent return of Christ, an at-handcoming day of slaughter of those who either didn’t accept or liveaccording to the gospel. He regarded the judgment as so immi-nent, that the judge himself was standing at the door. Which ofthose things do you think took place in the first century? Do youbelieve any of them took place in the first century? How shall wethink of these verses? Do we think, “Let God be found true, butevery man be found a liar?” Or, “Let what I’ve always believedbe found true, and let God be found a liar?”

A multitude of other imminence passages exist, but theseshould suffice for now.

24 Then cometh the end, when he shall deliver up the kingdomto God, even the Father; when he shall have abolished all ruleand all authority and power.

The End of What? The End of Time?

What “end” did Paul address? Many think he spoke of the endof time, yet the entire Bible does not contain the phrase “the endof time.” The closest passage might be Dan. 12.4, which theNASV mistakenly translates as “the end of time.” The ASVtranslates it as “the time of the end,” as do the KJV, NIV, and theNKJV, among others. The expressions “time of the end” and “theend of time” reflect two vastly different concepts. One supposesthe end of time itself (on which the popular view of the resurrec-tion is based), and the other speaks of the time of “the end,” theend of the age. In Daniel’s context, the age ends with the destruc-tion of Jerusalem and her temple. As we’ve seen all along, Jesusplainly said the time of the end of the age was in his generation(Mt. 24.3, 6, 13, 14, 34).

Our understanding of Paul’s teaching concerning the endhinges on our ability to distinguish the difference between thesetwo phrases. Indeed, using these two expressions interchange-ably has led many Christians to draw erroneous conclusions.


Certainly, much confusion abounds about the precise meaningsof these two word combinations. So we want to devote a littlespace to answering the question: “The end of what?”

The End of the Christian Age?

Though we many times think “the end” Paul spoke of refersto the end of the Christian age; in reality, the Christian age hasno end. For example, in Isa. 9.6-7, Isaiah prophesied the endless-ness of the Messiah’s rule:

For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us;And the government will rest on His shoulders; And Hisname will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. There will be no end tothe increase of His government or of peace, On the throneof David and over his kingdom, To establish it and touphold it with justice and righteousness From then onand forevermore. The zeal of the LORD of hosts willaccomplish this.

Likewise, in Lk. 1.31-33, Gabriel told Mary of the endlessnessof the Messiah’s reign:

And behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bringforth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. He shall begreat, and shall be called the Son of the Most High: andthe Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his fatherDavid: and he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

Thus, the term “end of the age” in Jesus’ teaching neverreferred to the end of the Christian age, which has no end. Instead,it foretold the end of the Mosaic age. Similarly, the term “lastdays” never refers to the last days of the Christian age; again,because the Christian age has no end, hence no last days. How-ever, the last days of the Mosaic age certainly did exist.

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 2 0 - 2 8 6 1

When asked about the end of the age in Mt. 24.1-3, Jesus saidit would occur in his generation (Mt. 24.34).

The End of the Mosaic Age?

As we investigate the end of the Mosaic Age, we saw inChapter 1, “Paul’s Preaching on the Resurrection,” that Daniel12 dealt with the end of the Mosaic age, when the Romans would“finish shattering the power of the holy people” (Dan. 12.7). Inverse 11, Daniel said it was the time when the “abomination ofdesolation is set up,” in the temple, which Jesus mentioned in Mt.24.15-16:

When therefore ye see the abomination of desolation,which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, stand-ing in the holy place (let him that readeth understand),then let them that are in Judaea flee unto the moun-tains:…

Jesus’ questioners asked for two things: (1) a time, and (2) asign for the end of the age, i.e., the Mosaic age. Jesus gave thesign, the encompassing of Jerusalem by Roman armies, and theirplacement of the abomination of desolation in their temple.Alluding to this very passage in Daniel 12, Jesus said, “Here’syour sign!” Furthermore, he said in verse 34 of the same conver-sation:

Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not passaway, till all these things be accomplished.

In Dan. 9.26-27, Daniel was told:

And after the threescore and two weeks shall the anointedone be cut off, and shall have nothing: and the people ofthe prince that shall come shall destroy the city and thesanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, andeven unto the end shall be war; desolations are deter-mined. And he shall make a firm covenant with many for


one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause thesacrifice and the oblation to cease; and upon the wing ofabominations shall come one that maketh desolate; andeven unto the full end, and that determined, shall wrathbe poured out upon the desolate.

History confirms that the destruction of the temple in Jerusa-lem by Rome, the cessation of the sacrifices of the Mosaic Law,and the desolation of Jerusalem took place in AD 70, in thegeneration in which Jesus lived.

Paul, Jesus, and Daniel All Spoke About the Same End

Understanding the differences in how “time of the end” and“the end of time” are used leads us to conclude that when Paulspoke of “the end,” he spoke of the same event as did Jesus andDaniel, the end of the Mosaic age in his generation.

Furthermore, Daniel also spoke of the resurrection in Dan.12.2 at the time of the end (v4). Jesus quoted verse 3 in Mt. 13.43where Daniel foretold the resurrection of Old Covenant Israel atthat time:

And many of those who sleep in the dust of the groundwill awake, these to everlasting life, but the others todisgrace and everlasting contempt.

Let’s put out all of Daniel 12:1-7 so we can see the parallelsbetween the end spoken of in Daniel 9 and 12, and I Corinthians15:

Now at that time Michael, the great prince who standsguard over the sons of your people, will arise. And therewill be a time of distress such as never occurred sincethere was a nation until that time; and at that time yourpeople, everyone who is found written in the book, willbe rescued. And many of those who sleep in the dust ofthe ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but theothers to disgrace and everlasting contempt. And those

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 2 0 - 2 8 6 3

who have insight will shine brightly like the brightnessof the expanse of heaven, and those who lead the manyto righteousness, like the stars forever and ever. But asfor you, Daniel, conceal these words and seal up the bookuntil the end of time [lit., the time of the end, as per ASV,KJV, NKJV, etc.]; many will go back and forth, andknowledge will increase.

Then I, Daniel, looked and behold, two others werestanding, one on this bank of the river, and the other onthat bank of the river. 6 And one said to the man dressedin linen, who was above the waters of the river, “Howlong will it be until the end of these wonders?” 7 And Iheard the man dressed in linen, who was above the watersof the river, as he raised his right hand and his left towardheaven, and swore by Him who lives forever that it wouldbe for a time, times, and half a time; and as soon as theyfinish shattering the power of the holy people, all theseevents will be completed.

Note three things in this quotation. First, Daniel’s “time ofdistress such as never occurred since there was a nation until thattime” was alluded to by Jesus in Mt. 24.21:

…for then shall be great tribulation, such as hath not beenfrom the beginning of the world until now, no, nor evershall be…

This was going to occur at the destruction of the temple andJerusalem at “the end” (Mt. 24.3, 6, 12, 14) which would occurin his generation (Mt. 24.34).

Second, Daniel spoke of the resurrection from the dead andthe judgment (12.2-3) which was parallel to Mt. 16.27-28 (ful-filled during the lifetime of some of Jesus’ disciples) and Mt.25.41-46, a discourse all of which Jesus said would be fulfilledin his generation (Mt. 24.34).

Third, Daniel said (12.4) these things would occur at the timeof the end, when the temple would be destroyed (9.26) and thepower of the holy people would be completely shattered (12.7).


Thus, Daniel, Jesus, and Paul all spoke of the resurrection andjudgment at the time of the end of Old Covenant Israel whenJerusalem was destroyed in AD 70.

Notice how the expression “the end” is used in the NewTestament:

Mt. 24.3, 6, 34 – The end – to occur in Jesus’ generation.Mt. 10.22 – “He that endureth to the end shall be saved.”Mt. 24.6 – “But the end is not yet.”Mt. 24.13 – “But he that shall endure unto the end, the

same shall be saved.”Mt. 24.14 – “Then shall the end come.”I Cor. 1.8 – “Who shall also confirm you unto the end.”I Cor. 10.11 – “Upon whom the ends of the ages are come.”I Cor. 15.24 – “Then cometh the end.”Heb. 3.6 – “Firm unto the end.”Heb. 3.14 – “Stedfast unto the end.”Heb. 6.11 – “Diligence unto the end.”I Pet. 4.7 – “The end of all things is at hand.”Rev. 2.26 – “He that keepeth my works unto the end.”

(J. Stuart Russell, The Parousia, A Study of the NewTestament Doctrine of Our Lord’s Second Coming[Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983], pp. 247-250.)

Surely, we can see that this end is the termination of OldCovenant Israel and the Mosaic age.

Jesus Delivered Up the Kingdom Unto the Father

Paul continued his argumentation to the Corinthians with:

25 For he must reign, till he hath put all his enemies underhis feet.

It’s popular to take “till” or “until” as implying a change, i.e.,that Christ would not reign after the death of Adam was de-stroyed. However, in the sentence, “A will be true until B,” the

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 2 0 - 2 8 6 5

word “until” never implies at all that a change will or will nottake place after B. When Matthew told us Joseph knew not Maryuntil she had brought forth a son,” does until imply a change tookplace in their conjugal relations after Jesus was born? Not at all.A change did take place, for we see other children coming intothe family. While we don’t learn that from “until,” we understandit from other passages.

Similarly, when Christ is said to rule “until” he puts all hisenemies under his feet, no change in his rule when all his enemiesare subjected is implied. However, we learn from other passages,both in the Old Testament and the New, that Christ’s reign hasno end. A passage does not exist that suggests a surrender ofChrist’s sovereignty. As eschatology scholar William Bell saidof this matter, at the coming of Christ, “he sits, not quits!” Thisis exactly what Mt. 25.31 says:

But when the Son of man shall come in his glory, and allthe angels with him, then shall he sit on the throne of hisglory:…

We should recall that this statement occurs in the OlivetDiscourse, where in Mt. 24.30, Jesus said he would come in glory,and in verse 34, promised, “Verily [truly—SGD] I say unto you,This generation shall not pass away, till all these things beaccomplished.” Jesus said this was true. Was it true and fulfilledin his generation or not? I affirm that it was.

The popular view that “until” implies a change in result, anerroneous view from the outset, ignores all other passages thatplainly teach Christ’s rule was to be unending. Remember, in Lk.1.33, Gabriel told Mary:

…and he [Jesus] shall reign over the house of Jacobforever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

Regardless of your view of the timing of the resurrection, canyou get the consent of your mind to assert that Christ’s rule wasto end at “the end”?

Contrarywise, the revelation that Jesus would “deliver up thekingdom” to his father at the end, leads some to believe that Jesus


would no longer be ruling. Certainly, this belief contradicts theplain passages we’ve just seen of the endlessness of Christ’sreign. Additionally, the term “deliver” doesn’t mean to surrenderor abdicate, any more than the same word meant in verse 3, wherePaul said he “delivered unto you” the gospel. He presented thegospel to the Corinthians.

Likewise, in Mt. 25.31, Jesus said:

But when the Son of man shall come in his glory, and allthe angels with him, then shall he sit on the throne of hisglory:…

He didn’t say he would get off the throne of his glory, did he?Again, in the context of the Olivet discourse, which Jesus saidwould be fulfilled in his generation (Mt. 24.34) and while someof his disciples were still alive (Mt. 16.27-28), he said he wouldbe presenting a fully subdued kingdom before the Father, notquitting his reign and getting off it.

In Rev. 22.3, we see Jesus and the father sitting on the thronesimultaneously:

And there shall be no curse any more: and the throne ofGod and of the Lamb shall be therein: and his servantsshall serve him;…

Obviously, if Jesus wasn’t supposed to be on the throne afterthe end (of the Mosaic age), when death was destroyed, he didn’tknow it!

26 The last enemy that shall be abolished is [lit., the] death.

Literally, this is “the last enemy that is being destroyed.”Notice the present passive tense, depicting an ongoing processoccurring as Paul wrote, was translated as shall be, a future! How“misleading” is that? This is not scholarship, nor is it a transla-tional difficulty. It’s no more difficult than discerning a presenttense from a future tense! It is probably theological bias. As we’llcontinue to see, this ignoring and changing the tense of the verbs

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 2 0 - 2 8 6 7

Paul used has profound implications on the subject of the resur-rection.

What Death Is This?

The death most recently in this context is in vv21-22, the deaththat came from Adam. As we saw there, Adam didn’t die physi-cally because he sinned, and neither do we. Is physical death anenemy to a Christian? It wasn’t even to Adam, who was subjectto death physically before he sinned! Physical death is certainlynot a consequence of Adam’s sin, nor a curse for it. Adam diedin his relationship to God the day he sinned, and that death passesto all who sin. That physical death isn’t an enemy to a Christianis also shown by Paul in Phil. 1.21:

For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.

Likewise, the Psalmist said, in 116.15:

Precious in the sight of the Lord Is the death of His godlyones.

Before Jesus’ generation ended, he had conquered everythingexcept Adam’s death. He had even overcome physical death,hadn’t he? Of course, lying, stealing, and murder still exist, butnot under Christ’s reign. Those over whom he reigns share nopart in those evil deeds. However, at the resurrection Paul spokeof here (the resurrection of Israel from spiritual death, the deathAdam died the day he sinned, the death of his fellowship withGod), death was conquered and abolished. The resurrectionwhich Moses and the prophets taught, all the apostles preached,and Paul taught in I Corinthians 15, is about restoration offellowship with God, not about being raised from biologicaldeath.

Obviously, though Jesus conquered physical death in hisresurrection, physical death was not abolished in Jesus’ genera-tion, nor is it yet. Both wicked and righteous men still diephysically. However, Adam’s sin-death, or the death of his


fellowship with God, was abolished at the resurrection in Jesus’generation. If the popular view is correct that Paul spoke ofvictory over physical death, it’s hard to see how those things havecontinued for over two thousand years now, and the job still isn’tdone!

27 For, He put all things in subjection under his feet. Butwhen he saith, All things are put in subjection, it is evidentthat he is excepted who did subject all things unto him.

Clearly, the father was not put in subjection to the son, but aswe’ve just seen, they share the throne.

28 And when all things have been subjected unto him, thenshall the Son also himself be subjected to him that did subjectall things unto him, that God may be all in all.

I know very little about the relationship between persons ofdeity. My present understanding of God being all in all is simplythat after the resurrection of which Paul spoke, God would be thetotal savior of not just Gentiles (the Paul-Party position) or Jews,but of all men, whether Jew or Gentile.

Welsh scholar Tom Holland referred to this:

As the representative of God amongst men, Christ hassecured for his brothers all that a redeemed in the OldTestament was responsible for ensuring. Christ hasemancipated his people from Sin and its power and,having fulfilled all his various roles as the Redeemer, hecompletes his work by yielding the kingdom up to Godthe Father. From now on, Christ’s position will no longerbe Messiah/Mediator; instead he resumes his eternalposition with the Father, and the mystery of the Godheadis then complete. Beyond the statement of Paul wecannot go, for it would be speculation. (Tom Holland,Contours of Pauline Theology [Rosshire, Scotland:Christian Focus Publications, 2004], p. 108.)

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 2 0 - 2 8 6 9

In the next chapter, we discuss Paul’s remarks on baptism forthe dead.


Chapter 6

I Corinthians 15.29-34Baptism for the Dead

Paul’s teaching on baptism for the dead causes much confu-sion and many controversies. However, we want to make aserious effort to keep the context of this whole chapter along withthe book of Corinthians in mind to avoid erroneous assumptions.Paul began the next phase of his arguments to the Gentile Chris-tians with:

29 Else what shall they do that are baptized for the dead [lit.,ones]? If the dead [lit., ones] are not raised at all, why thenare they baptized for them?

Note that we’ve seen these “dead ones” (plural) before. Theyare not just any dead folks anywhere, at anytime; for in thischapter, they are dead Old Testament saints, the ones whoseresurrection some Corinthian Christians were denying.

First, who were the “they” that were being baptized forsomeone else? Were they some of the Corinthians? Was it somepagan practice? Evidently, the Corinthians knew these persons;else Paul’s statement would have meant nothing. While he didnot explicitly identify the “they,” at the end of this section, I’llgive my opinion on who they were.

Second, it’s important to realize Paul’s purpose was not todiscuss baptism for the dead, rather merely to point out thatwhoever was being baptized vicariously for the dead ones had aserious inconsistency between their actions and the Corinthians’belief. As we’ll soon see, while Paul would not have advocatedbaptism for the dead, he did not oppose it, for that wasn’t his

intent. He briefly focused on the activity to show the inconsis-tency between the beliefs of some Corinthians and the practiceof the “they.”

If the Corinthians weren’t familiar with the “they” who werebaptizing for the dead, it’s difficult to understand Paul’s argu-ment relating to the Corinthians’ beliefs about the resurrectionand the practice of someone else.

In addition, it’s not unknown for someone in the Bible to referto a false practice or doctrine without advocating or condemningit. Jesus did this in Jn. 9.1-3:

And as he passed by, he saw a man blind from his birth.And his disciples asked him, saying, Rabbi, who sinned,this man, or his parents, that he should be born blind?Jesus answered, Neither did this man sin, nor his parents:but that the works of God should be made manifest inhim.

Obviously, Jesus’ disciples subscribed to a popularly heldview among Jews that physical defects at birth, or bad circum-stances (poverty, illness, abuse, tragedy, etc.) indicated sinful-ness on the part of the parents. Job’s three friends interpreted hissuffering as a sign of sinfulness, and urged him to confess his sinsso God would restore his “righteous estate.” Similarly, manyMormons today interpret riches as a symbol of righteousness,while poverty and suffering present a gauge of ungodliness.Contrary to this, the Bible states, “Many are the afflictions of therighteous,” and many heroes of faith suffered greatly in spite oftheir virtues.

Jesus neither advocated nor condemned the disciples’ view,as it wasn’t his subject. Likewise, Paul neither advocated norcondemned anyone’s practice of baptism for the dead for thesame reason.

Next, we consider several popular views of this topic beforepresenting our own.


Baptism for the Dead

Several different positions exist on the evident practice by the“they” in Paul’s day of baptism for the dead (lit., ones). Mormonsthink Paul legitimized their practice of baptizing folks in wateron behalf of people who have already died physically. This iswhere most people today become acquainted with baptism forthe dead. Others assume these people were being baptized inbehalf of the dead Christ, or that Paul spoke of a false practiceprevalent in his time, or a baptism in suffering.

Mormon Position Opposed to the Bible and the Book of Mormon!

This is the only Bible passage Mormons cite, yet Heb. 9.27,“And inasmuch as it is appointed unto men once [lit., once forall] to die, and after this cometh judgment,” makes it clear mendon’t get a second chance after death. Also, the New Testamentalways portrays baptism as for believers, not unbelievers who hadalready died.

Likewise, the Mormon practice of baptism in behalf of deadfolks is not in the Book of Mormon. Worse, it contradicts theBook of Mormon! In Alma 34.35-36 we read: “For behold, if yehave procrastinated the day of your repentance even until death,behold ye have become subjected to the spirit of the devil, andhe does seal you his. Therefore, the spirit of the Lord haswithdrawn from you and hath no place in you; the power of thedevil is over you, and this is the final state of the wicked.”

Baptized for the Dead Christ?

We noticed at the beginning of this section that “the deadones” spoken of here is plural, and refers to a very specific groupof dead ones, Old Testament saints. Thus, Paul didn’t speak ofbaptism in behalf of the dead Christ (singular).

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 2 9 - 3 4 7 3

Referring to a False Practice

Some think Paul’s remarks about baptism for the dead re-ferred to a false religious practice. This position doesn’t holdmuch power for me for this reason. Suppose someone presentedthe teaching of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, that Jesus was a createdbeing. Then I answered it by saying, “Jehovah’s Witnesses’teaching on the subject cannot be right because that would meanthe Roman Catholic Church is wrong!” Would that persuademany people? I doubt it, nor would Paul’s use of a false practiceto make his point on the resurrection of the dead ones.

Baptism in Suffering in View of Spiritual Death

Some believe the baptism for the dead ones is a baptism oroverwhelming in suffering. This makes sense because in verses30-32, Paul delineated the physical suffering first-centurypreachers endured in behalf of those they were teaching. Whatwould they accomplish if those they were suffering for would notbe raised? In addition, Jesus foretold his own baptism in suffering(Lk. 12.50), as well as their suffering in behalf of the gospel (Mt.10.23, 23.34).

Baptism in View of the Dead Ones

The dead ones Paul spoke of were the same dead he hadreferred to throughout, the faithful Old Covenant dead. Those stillliving, including Gentiles who were now hearing the gospel, werebeing baptized for (lit., upon), or in view of, these dead ones. Theimportant point is that, whatever they believed, their actionsmade no sense if they didn’t think the dead ones were going tobe raised, and not believing that, why in the world would they bebaptized?

Summary on Baptism for the Dead

Perhaps both of these last views are true, and included inPaul’s teaching:


30 Why do we also stand in jeopardy every hour?

Clearly, “we” refers to all the apostles, beginning back inverses 10-11. There, Paul compared himself to the other apostles,saying:

I labored more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but thegrace of God which was with me. Whether then it be I orthey, so we preach, and so ye believed.

Recall that in these verses, Paul argued that all the apostlespreached the same doctrine regarding the resurrection, andshowed how inappropriate it was for the Corinthians to divide onthe subject. Obviously, the “I” was Paul, while the “they” wasthe remainder of the apostles, and together, the “we” comprisedall the apostles. In verse 15, this same we, referring to the apostles,were false witnesses if Christ had not been raised, and we, theapostles, were the witnesses of God. In verse 19, we, the apostles,would have been the ones most pitiable or miserable for preach-ing falsely, as they worked so long and ardently to do it. Theylabored totally in vain if the dead ones were not being raised.

Then, Paul spoke of we, all the apostles, as standing injeopardy every hour. Thus, they suffered for their furtherance ofthe gospel, with no evidence that the Corinthians were mistreatedfor the stand they took on the resurrection. The apostles, tovarying degrees, endured hardship from pagans who ridiculed thevery concept of a resurrection, from the Jews, some of whomignored their own scriptures on the subject, and even from someGentile Christians, who denied it to the dead ones, the OldTestament saints. The resurrection was going to be of those forwhom Paul suffered as he preached his (the same as Moses andthe prophets) view of the resurrection among Gentile Christians,some of whom denied it.

Paul continued:

31 I protest by that glorying in you, brethren, which I havein Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily.

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 2 9 - 3 4 7 5

32 If after the manner of men I fought with beasts at Ephesus,what doth it profit me? If the dead [lit., ones] are not [lit.,being—present indicative passive] raised, let us eat anddrink, for tomorrow we die.

Again, the verb tenses indicate the “being raised” was acontinuing process as Paul was writing. Although the translation“are not raised” incorrectly gives no indication of time, Paulplainly said it was ongoing as he wrote.

Thus, the inconsistency lay between the belief of some Corin-thians that the dead ones would not be raised with the sufferingof the unified apostles who preached that the dead ones werealready in the process of being raised. What possible sense wouldit make for the apostles to suffer for preaching on the resurrection,if the belief of some Corinthians was correct? Not a singleCorinthian could argue that point with Paul.

This being true, my opinion is that the “they” in verse 29 isthe rest of the apostles, who were preaching the same doctrine asPaul, suffering in so doing. Likewise, the rest of the apostlescomprised the “they” in verse 11. Paul didn’t refer to a falsepractice, nor to water baptism.

Undoubtedly, Paul’s reference to “eating and drinking”mocked the inconsiderate attitude many Gentile Christians dis-played toward their Jewish brethren. Earlier, Paul had rebukedtheir disregarding the Jewish practice of eating kosher, refrainingfrom meat offered to idols, etc., in I Corinthians 8 and 10. Paulconcluded his contempt for their position with a serious warning:

33 Be not deceived: Evil companionships corrupt good mor-als.

34 Awake to soberness righteously, and sin not; for some haveno knowledge of God: I speak this to move you to shame.

Lest some Corinthians continue to hold that the Old Covenantsaints were not being raised, Paul warned against licentiousnessand immorality. That would have meant they were still in their(renowned Corinthian) sins, and the apostles should just “eat anddrink, for tomorrow we die.”


Chapter 7

I Corinthians 15.35-49The Resurrection Body

After Paul asserted that the apostles had not suffered in vainwhile preaching the resurrection of the dead Old Covenant faith-ful, he turned to two questions a thinking person might ask:

35 But some one will say, How are the dead raised? and withwhat manner of body do they come?

Literally, Paul asked, “How are the dead ones being raised?”and “With what manner of body are they coming?”

First, Paul didn’t deal with the question of how we are raised,but of how they, the dead ones, Old Covenant saints, were to beraised. Let’s suppose that if, as is popularly believed, “some”denied a resurrection of biological bodies to certain dead persons.They wouldn’t even ask this question! If I don’t believe that theUSA will exist fifty years from now, do you suppose I’m goingto be interested in who is going to be its president?

Second, we often read, “And with what kind of body do theycome?” and wonder: Will they have broken bodies, abortedbodies, drowned bodies, mangled bodies, baby bodies, or wrin-kled bodies? Since circumcision was such an important issue inthe New Testament, will they be circumcised or uncircumcisedbodies? Will they be male and female bodies? Will some be thebodies of amputees? Do you notice the shift we make from“body” to “bodies”? Paul said “body,” and we think “bodies.”

Paul never used “bodies” in this chapter. He spoke of theresurrection of one body, the Old Covenant faithful who werebeing transformed into the body of Christ. The question had to

do with how Jewish and Gentile saints were going to be in thatone body, along with Old Covenant saints who didn’t even seeor obey Christ. Paul had already said that those who deny theresurrection of the Old Testament dead ones must also deny theresurrection of Christ. Christ died for them because of promisesmade to the fathers, yet some in the Paul Party denied theresurrection of those for whom Christ died according to promise.

Literally, “the dead ones,” is plural, while “body” is singular.“They” are in a single body. Paul did not speak of “bodies”coming out of holes in the ground, but of “the body” of OldTestament saints.

NOTE: Undoubtedly, Paul’s words were based on a prophecyby Hosea about a coming resurrection of Israel. We’ve alreadyseen Hos. 6.1, where Hosea said:

He has torn but he will heal, After two days He will raiseus [Israel] up; He will raise us up on the third day thatwe may live before Him.

Earlier, in Hos. 1.5, God killed Israel in its apostasy, and inHos. 2.23, Israel was a seed, which God sowed (Hosea’s firstchild was Jezreel, [lit., God sows]) in the earth. Their death tookplace in Babylonian captivity, and their resurrection was therestoration of their fellowship with God. This is also the harvestof Israel. Paul used this same analogy in I Corinthians 15.

Paul Spoke of the Resurrection of a Single Body

The prophets from which Paul preached had foretold theresurrection of a single body. For example, Ezekiel worked withthe Jews in Babylonian captivity because of their sin. Aftershowing Ezekiel the vision of the valley full of dry bones, Godtold Ezekiel to prophesy over them and God would raise them tolife, with skin, and breath. In Ezek. 37.11-14, we find:

Then He said to me, “Son of man, these bones are thewhole house of Israel; behold, they say, ‘Our bones aredried up, and our hope has perished. We are completely

7 8 T h e R e s u r r e c t i o n o f T h e D e a d

cut off.’ “Therefore prophesy, and say to them, ‘Thussays the Lord GOD,” Behold, I will open your graves andcause you to come up out of your graves, My people; andI will bring you into the land of Israel. “Then you willknow that I am the LORD, when I have opened yourgraves and caused you to come up out of your graves,My people. “And I will put My Spirit within you, andyou will come to life, and I will place you on your ownland. Then you will know that I, the LORD, have spokenand done it,” declares the LORD.

Although God spoke of graves and coming up out of thosegraves (which I Corinthians 15 does not do), we recognize thatthis wasn’t a raising of biological bodies, but a national one:“These bones are the whole house of Israel,” spiritually dead andcut off from their own land. This is only one example of theprophets speaking of Israel as “one body” being raised from thedead. In this same chapter, Ezekiel gave a messianic prophecy of“David,” the Messiah coming from the lineage of David, as rulingover Israel.

Paul also spoke of this same resurrection in Rom. 8.23:

And not only so, but ourselves also, who have thefirstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan withinourselves, waiting for our adoption, to wit, the redemp-tion of our body.

In Romans, Paul again spoke of a plurality of saints beingredeemed in one body.

Similarly, in Eph. 1.5-14, Paul said:

5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of childrenby Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleas-ure of his will,… 7 In whom we have redemption throughhis blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the richesof his grace;…13 In whom ye also trusted, after that yeheard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: inwhom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with thatholy Spirit of promise,…14 Which is the earnest of our

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 5 0 - 5 8 7 9

inheritance until the redemption of the purchased pos-session, unto the praise of his glory.

In AD 62, when he wrote Ephesians, Paul spoke of a still-fu-ture redemption of God’s possession, and that this possessionconsisted of the single body of redeemed Christians he hadspoken of just one verse before.

We continue this theme in Eph. 4.4-5, 15-16, 30:

4 There is one body and one Spirit—just as you werecalled to one hope when you were called—5 one Lord,one faith, one baptism;…15 Instead, speaking the truthin love, we will in all things grow up into him who is theHead, that is, Christ. 16 From him the whole body, joinedand held together by every supporting ligament, growsand builds itself up in love, as each part does itswork.…30 And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, withwhom you were sealed for the day of redemption.

This joining and knitting together by every supporting liga-ment sounds like the resurrection in the valley of dry bones visionin Ezekiel 37, doesn’t it?

Consistently, we see one body that is sealed unto the day ofredemption. Jesus revealed when the redemption of this bodywould take place. When was that to occur? In Luke’s account ofthe Olivet Discourse, we read in Lk. 21.20-22, 27-28, 31-32:

20 When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies,you will know that its desolation is near. 21 Then letthose who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those inthe city get out, and let those in the country not enter thecity. 22 For this is the time of punishment in fulfillmentof all that has been written…27 At that time they will seethe Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and greatglory. 28…When these things begin to take place, standup and lift up your heads, because your redemption isdrawing near. 31 Even so, when you see these thingshappening, you know that the kingdom of God is near.


32 I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly notpass away until all these things have happened.

Thus, Paul said that the redemption of Israel, which we firstnoticed in Ezekiel, and the redemption of the single body inRomans, had been foretold by Jesus to occur in his generation.Obviously, Paul spoke only of the resurrection of one body in ICorinthians 15.

Note in particular Lk. 21.22 in connection with the destructionof Jerusalem, which happened in AD 70: “These are days ofvengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.”The “things written” could not be the New Testament scriptureswhen Jesus spoke these words, could they? They had to be basedin the Old Covenant, did they not? Consider that the Old Testa-ment passages we’ve been dealing with concerning the resurrec-tion, and which Paul said his gospel was only based upon, areEzekiel, Daniel, Hosea, and Isaiah; all of whom foretold theresurrection of Israel.

Jesus said that when Jerusalem was destroyed, all thingswritten would be fulfilled. Were Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, andIsaiah fulfilled when Jerusalem was destroyed? Can you believethat they were not, while still maintaining allegiance to Christ? Iconfess that I cannot. In The Faithless Foundation of Dispensa-tionalism: How Millions of Evangelicals and FundamentalistsAgree with Atheists, Skeptics, and Modernists that Jesus WasMistaken on the Last Days (available online for download atwww.gospelthemes.com/ffpbk.htm) we demonstrate conclu-sively that atheists, skeptics (both Jewish and Muslim), modern-ists (who admit they don’t believe in the verbal inspiration of theBible), all believe Jesus was mistaken, even deluded when hemade such statements as Lk. 21.22. Surely, my readers can’t getthe consent of their minds to think these skeptics are right andJesus was wrong, either here, or in Mt. 5.18 when Jesus said thatno jot nor tittle of the Mosaic Law and the prophets would passuntil all of it had been fulfilled.

After asking the two questions to get the Corinthians’ atten-tion, Paul specifically dealt with the nature of the resurrectionbody:

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 5 0 - 5 8 8 1

36 Thou foolish one, that which thou thyself sowest is notquickened except it die:

NOTE: The sequence Paul gave was sowing, dying, and thenrising. This doesn’t fit physical death first, then burial, andresurrection, does it? Is that what we do, sow someone in theground, then he dies, and then he rises? Do we really sowsomeone before he dies? Is that what’s going to happen to you?Paul illustrates sowing a live seed, then a death, and then rising.We’ve read Paul for years and thought death, then burial, andthen rising. Certainly, I’d be nervous if anyone around mecouldn’t see that difference when I’m near death! I want to bedead before I’m buried!

This is like someone preparing to shoot a pistol whose plan is“Ready, fire, aim!” We wouldn’t want to stand close by, wouldwe, if he knew no more about shooting than that! Something isseriously wrong with his concept! How long have we read thisverse without noticing it’s not speaking of physical death, burial,and resurrection? It doesn’t make me proud, either. We’ve beentaught this for so long, our minds just automatically flip the orderto death before burial.

Perhaps we can see it even clearer with baptism. We know thesequence of events in baptism is death (to sin, in repentance),burial, and rising to walk in a new life in Christ. If someone comesalong with those three events out of order, we’re ready to debatehim at the drop of a hat! We wouldn’t wait to get our charts onGOD’S ORDER in baptism together before we challenged him,and give him a shampoo with them, would we? If he puts baptismbefore death to sin, we don’t abide it. If he claims a new life beforehis burial, we oppose him vehemently.

How careful are we on the order Paul gave on the resurrectionas he preached it? He said sowing first, then death, and then rising.Paul’s concept doesn’t match ours at all if we think physical deathfirst, then physical burial, and physical rising, does it? Yet Paul’sorder is exactly like what Hosea said of Israel (as we saw inChapter 1), that it would be planted first, then dead, and thenraised. Do you wonder which order we should go with?

Paul continued:


37 and that which thou sowest, thou sowest not the body thatshall be, but a bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of someother kind;

As Hosea foretold, the body of Old Covenant Israel was sown(buried) in apostasy by God, died in Babylonian captivity, andthen it was being raised by him in a different form, New CovenantIsrael.

38 but God giveth it a body even as it pleased him, and to eachseed a body of its own.

Paul called the question of the nature of the single resurrectionbody a foolish question, as if the Gentile Christians’ under-standing had anything to do with the provision God was makingfor the body. Next, Paul listed examples of the properties of everybody God has ever given:

39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one flesh of men,and another flesh of beasts, and another flesh of birds, andanother of fishes.

40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: butthe glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrialis another.

41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of themoon, and another glory of the stars; for one star differethfrom another star in glory.

Paul assured the Corinthians that God has always known whatkind of body a seed would generate, regardless of whether thebody was of biological flesh (humans, animals, birds, or fish), oreven celestial and terrestrial bodies (sun, moon, and stars), whichare composed of earth, gas, and products of nuclear fusionreactions. While these bodies are as different as can be, God hasalways taken care of the bodies appropriately. The Corinthianscould confidently trust God’s ability to correctly take care ofIsrael’s resurrection body.

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 5 0 - 5 8 8 3

42 So also is the resurrection of the dead [lit., ones]. It is [lit.,being] sown in corruption; it is [lit., being] raised in incor-ruption:

“It” that is sown in corruption was the body of dead ones fromv35, those in Adam, including Old Testament saints.

Literally, this is “it is being sown in corruption…it is beingraised in incorruption.” The New International Version translatesthis present passage as a pure future: “so will be with the resur-rection of the dead,” yet all the verbs are present tense! We getthe future for free!

Paul didn’t use the future—he used the singular natural“body” again. “It is being raised,” not “they are being raised.”The dead ones were all being sown in one body of corruption,dishonor, and weakness, and they were all being raised in onebody of incorruption, glory, and power, as Paul wrote thesewords. Death, Adam’s death, was being destroyed, and the OldTestament saints were now being redeemed, exalted, justified,and glorified.

The problem comes down to whether the resurrection Paulspoke of was of one body in his present time or of billions ofbodies more than two thousand years in the future. What do yousay? It’s really a simple issue: one body in Paul’s time or billionsof bodies thousands of years in the future.

43 it is [lit., being] sown in dishonor; it is [lit., being] raisedin glory: it is [lit., being] sown in weakness; it is [lit., being]raised in power:

Literally, this is, “it is being sown in dishonor, it is being raisedin glory, and it is being sown in weakness, it is being raised inpower.”

I cannot emphasize too much the singular “body.” “It is beingraised,” not “they are.”

44 it is [lit., being] sown a natural body; it is [lit., being] raiseda spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also aspiritual body.


Literally, this is “it is being sown a natural body, it is beingraised a spiritual body.”

NOTE: There is a natural body, there is a spiritual body—these are the two Israels, or the body of Adam (that was out offellowship with God) plus the body of Christ (which was infellowship with God). Old Covenant Israel was on the way toimminent destruction as Jesus said would occur in his generation.We usually read this to say “there is a natural body (the biologicalone we have in this life)” and “there will be a spiritual body (waydown yonder at the end of time).” Yet Paul didn’t use the futuretense. Earlier, we stated his use of the present passive was notaccidental, and to translate it otherwise is misleading. The spiri-tual body he spoke of existed and was being restored to fellowshipwith God at the time he wrote this.

We can easily see that the natural body Paul spoke of was nota biological body. The word for natural (psuchikos, from psuche,soul) occurs only five times in the New Testament, yet never ofa body of biological flesh. See for yourself in all five passages,regardless of how it’s translated into English:

Jas. 3.15–This wisdom descendeth not from above, but isearthly, sensual, devilish.

Jude 19–These be they who separate themselves, sensual,having not the Spirit.

I Cor. 2.14–The natural man receiveth not the things ofthe spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him; and hecannot know them, because they are spiritually judged.

If “natural man” means man in a biological body, then noperson alive (including the reader) can receive the things of theSpirit (I Cor. 2.14).

Obviously, psuchikos never refers to human biological flesh,muscles, and tendons, but to the man in Adam, that’s still underthe death that Adam died the day he sinned. The natural man’sstate is like Adam’s; his fellowship with God doesn’t exist. Onthe other hand, those being raised in Christ’s spiritual body asPaul wrote would avoid the destruction coming on old natural

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 5 0 - 5 8 8 5

Israel. As Jesus instructed them in the Olivet discourse, they fledJerusalem when they saw the signs he gave for the impendingdoom of Jerusalem.

So far, the word psuchikos speaks of corrupt, fleshly mannerof life, not of literal flesh. The last two passages where this wordis used are:

I Cor. 15.44–It is [lit., being] sown a natural body, it is [lit.,being] raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body,there is also a spiritual body.

We’ve already seen that the verbs in I Cor. 15.44 are presentpassives, and that both the natural body was being sown as Paulwrote, and the spiritual body was being raised at the same time,eliminating the possibility of the natural body being a physical,fleshly, biological body.

I Cor. 15.46-48–Howbeit that is not first which is spiritual,but that which is natural; then that which is spiritual. Thefirst man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is ofheaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy:and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.

Thus, the natural, soulish, sensual body of Adam existed first,then the spiritual body of Christ second. The occurrences ofpsuchikos is summarized in the following table:

Natural (psuchikos) Spiritual (penumatikos)I Cor. 2.14 - natural man can’t

grasp thingsI Cor. 2.15 - spiritual judges all

thingsJas. 3.15 - earthy, sensual,

devilishI Cor. 14.37 - thinketh himself to

be spiritualJude 19 - mockers sensual,

having not the spiritI Cor. 15.44f - natural first I Cor. 15.44ff - then spiritual

I Cor. 15.44-48 - not biologicalflesh here

I Cor. 15.44-48 - not biologicalflesh here

Preterist author Tim Martin has well said:


The natural is that which is set against God and thespiritual is that which is governed by God. For example,Adam was “natural” because he was disobedient, notbecause he was “physical.” Jesus was a man just likeAdam, yet he was “spiritual.” If “natural man” meansmerely a “physical man” then Paul’s usage becomesincoherent. (Email from Martin addressed to the author,Question concerning definition of “flesh” 6/9/08.)

All men in Adam, including Old Covenant Israel, the “deadones,” were “the natural man,” as all men in Christ were “thespiritual man.” As Paul wrote, Jews and Gentiles alike were inthe body of Adam, because they died spiritually, and their body(singular) that was rising or made alive was the body of Christ,and still is.

45 So also it is written, The first man Adam became a livingsoul. The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.

The body of Adam had been building since the Garden. Thebody of Christ, the last Adam, has been, as well.

46 Howbeit that is not first which is spiritual, but that whichis natural; then that which is spiritual.

47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is ofheaven.

Note that the second man, is of heaven. This is a present tense,and Paul didn’t say the second man will be of heaven, which isthe popular view.

48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and asis the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.

Pay particular attention to the verb tenses here, all presenttense, as Paul was not talking about the future, neither for theearthy nor the heavenly. Both natural and spiritual were inexistence at the same time, with the Old Covenant faithful, in

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 5 0 - 5 8 8 7

Adam or Christ, transitioning from natural to spiritual as theresult of the gospel.

49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shallalso bear the image of the heavenly.

After discussing the nature of the resurrection body, Paul thenmoves on to the time of the resurrection, which we cover in thenext chapter.


Chapter 8

I Corinthians 15.50-58The Time of the Resurrection of the Dead

After discussing the nature of “the body,” earthy vs. spiritual,Paul turned his attention to the time of the resurrection.

50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannotinherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inheritincorruption.

In other words, “flesh and blood” is not a biological body ofcorruption, dishonor, and weakness, but the natural man “inAdam.” Also, in the context of where the Jews fit into theresurrection, the basis of the problem at Corinth, flesh and blooddidn’t determine who was in the kingdom, as it did in OldCovenant Israel. In Christ, one’s salvation didn’t depend on hisgenealogy, circumcision, or lineage back to Abraham, but on hisperfect faith, a faith wherein one walked with his father Abraham(Rom. 4.12). The resurrection of which Moses and the prophetsspoke, and thence Paul, wasn’t concerned with flesh and blood,a biological body.

51 Behold, I tell you a mystery: We all shall not sleep, but weshall all be changed.

Here’s a time statement. When Paul said, “We shall not allsleep,” he affirmed that not all of those in Corinth were going todie physically before the resurrection happened. Popularly,we’ve assumed all Christians will not die. To do this, we mustcompletely disregard the pronoun “we” and the context Paul used

it in. Consistently, Paul used “we” to speak of the apostles andthe faithful Christians in Corinth, whether Jew or Gentile. Allthese people lived before the destruction of Jerusalem, when theprophets taught that the resurrection of Old Covenant saintswould take place. When we change who the “we” was, we totallymiss the time element in Paul’s teaching.

52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump:for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead (lit., ones] shall beraised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

Who were these “dead ones?” They were the same OldCovenant dead ones Paul discussed throughout the chapter, thevery ones the Gentile Christians in the Paul Party denied theresurrection to.

Paul said this resurrection of the dead ones would occur “inthe twinkling of an eye.” This would be like the spiritual deathof Adam in the Garden on the same day that he sinned, as we’vealready noticed. Adam died spiritually the very day he sinned,not with literal trumpets blaring, heavenly beings coming onclouds, flashing of lightning, etc. How did it happen? Adam’seyes opened, and he realized his life had changed drastically. Nomore walking with God in the cool of the evening; no moreintimate visiting with God; no more confidence in approachingGod for conversation. Suddenly, he became afraid to approachGod and hid. In the same manner, all died in Adam. Now as Paulspoke, all the dead in Christ, including Old Testament saints,were being made alive.

For those of you already convinced of the unity of the OlivetDiscourse (Mt. 24-25, Mk. 13, Lk. 21), please consider thefollowing parallels of it with what we see in I Corinthians 15.(For those not that familiar with Matthew 24, please see a detaileddiscussion in Chapter 10 of the author’s The Teaching of Jesus:From Sinai to Gehenna, A Faithful Rabbi Urgently Warns Re-bellious Israel).


The Olivet Discourse I Corinthians 15The time of the end (Mt. 24.3) Then cometh the end (v24)Trumpet sounds (Mt. 24.31) Trumpet sounds (v52)At the coming of the Lord

(Mt. 24.29-31)Resurrection at the

Lord’s Coming (v23)Gathering of the elect (Mt.

24.31, [dead ones] Isa. 27.13Resurrection of the righteous

throughoutIn Jesus’ generation (Mt. 24.34) Presently “is being raised”

throughout

Apparently, both of these chapters discuss the same events,unless there are several “the ends,” several “the comings of theLord,” at several “soundings of the trumpet.” We had just as wellspeak of “the moons” of the earth or “the bodies” of Christ!

NOTE: Those taking the early date for Revelation (i.e., thatit was written shortly before the destruction of Old CovenantIsrael in AD 70, making Revelation an inspired commentary onMatthew 24), can also draw many parallels between the trumpetin Mt. 24.29 with the seventh trumpet sounding the destructionof the city “where the Lord was crucified” in Rev. 11.8 at theresurrection. Previously, we noticed a number of parallels be-tween the resurrection in Daniel 12 and I Corinthians 15.

This “last trump” refers to an Old Testament usage familiarto Israel. Significantly, the Old Testament writers often referredto a figurative trumpet blast to give a warning or symbol ofcoming judgment. Thus, Paul’s use of it to signal the speed of theresurrection was an appropriate one the Jews would have recog-nized.

53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and thismortal must put on immortality.

We’ve already seen that he referred to the old man Adam, andthat immortality is not an innate property of man given at birth,but is given at the resurrection. The corruptible body (not bodies)Paul spoke of was fleshly, Old Covenant Israel or the old manAdam. At the resurrection of Israel in Jesus’ generation, that bodywould be transformed into the incorruptible body, New CovenantIsrael.

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 5 0 - 5 8 9 1

Notice the time statements Paul made concerning when andthen this resurrection would take place:

54 But when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption,and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall cometo pass the saying that is written, [lit., the] Death is swallowedup in victory.

Paul said this is when death (spiritual death suffered by Adam)was swallowed up in victory, a direct quotation from Isa. 25.8:

He will swallow up death for all time, And the Lord GODwill wipe tears away from all faces, And He will removethe reproach of His people from all the earth; For theLORD has spoken.

Thus, it happened when Isaiah 25.8 was fulfilled, which Paulquoted. No serious student of the prophets believes a physicalresurrection of a physical body is depicted in Isaiah 25. Yet,ignoring the significance of Paul’s quotation of this verse in ICorinthians 15, we think it’s a physical resurrection out of thedirt, although we can’t read that interpretation back into Isaiah.If we do, remember Paul asserted that he didn’t preach anythingexcept what Moses and the prophets taught on the subject; butpopularly, we make him do the very thing he denied. In actuality,Paul gave an inspired interpretation of these prophets on the hopeof Israel.

If we let Isaiah define the death in Isa. 26.19, we’ll know whatdeath Paul taught:

Your dead shall arise. Your dead will live; Their corpseswill rise. You who lie in the dust, awake and shout forjoy, For your dew is as the dew of the dawn, And theearth will give birth to the departed spirits.

The resurrection of those lying in the dust sounds identical toDan. 12.2:


And many of those who sleep in the dust of the groundwill awake, these to everlasting life, but the others todisgrace and everlasting contempt.

In Daniel 12, Daniel was told in v5 that the fulfillment wouldbe when the power of the holy people was completely shattered,and in v12 that it would occur at the time when the abominationof desolation would be set up and the regular sacrifice is abol-ished. Most of us know Jesus referred to this same prophecy inMatthew 24, and said it would occur in his generation. It couldn’tpossibly be any later than that, as there has been no regularsacrifice, no priesthood, nor temple since the Romans destroyedJerusalem! Paul wrote of the present fulfillment of the same inhis lifetime in the Corinthian letter.

While no one takes Daniel 12 as a resurrection of physicalbodies, we often take Paul’s teaching in I Corinthians 15 as abiological resurrection still in our future. We cannot read it backinto the prophets, whose teaching Paul said was the only thing hepreached.

Dispensational premillennialists, who also believe the secondcoming of Christ is still future, at “the end of time” (a phrasenowhere found in the Bible), work feverishly to see the Al AqsaMosque demolished on the temple mount in modern Jerusalem,so they can build the third temple. They also strive to restore theLevitical priesthood (sans genealogies, which the Romans de-stroyed, so that no Jew today knows his lineage). They trainyoung men, they suppose to be Levites, along with craftsmen tobuild the temple utensils and sew Levitical garments. Herdsmengenetically breed red heifers to use in their temple worship asthey prepare to offer animal sacrifices all over again. They do thisall because they don’t believe the resurrection of Israel tookplace when Daniel said it would. (For more detail on these efforts,please see the author’s The Faithless Foundation of Dispensa-tional Premillennialism: How Millions of Evangelicals and Fun-damentalists Agree with Atheists, Skeptics, and Modernists thatJesus Was Mistaken on the Last Days, online at www.gospelthe-mes.com/ffpbk.htm.

Amillennial futurists of the author’s background in churchesof Christ have nothing to do with these activities, which they

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 5 0 - 5 8 9 3

rightly abhor. However, they base their view of I Corinthians 15on the same futurism as dispensationalism. Sam Frost, in Mis-placed Hope, shows conclusively that historically, from justbefore the destruction of Jerusalem until about AD 125, the beliefprevailed that the coming of Christ, the judgment, and the resur-rection, were to occur imminently. The futurist view of all threeof these events began to take hold down through Roman Catholi-cism to our present time.

In verse 21 (of Isaiah 26), Isaiah said:

For behold, the LORD is about to come out from Hisplace to punish the inhabitants of the earth for theiriniquity; And the earth will reveal her bloodshed, Andwill no longer cover her slain.

Did Jesus give us a time when the blood of the martyrs wasgoing to be avenged? In Mt. 23.34-36, he said:

Therefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wisemen, and scribes: some of them shall ye kill and crucify;and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues,and persecute from city to city: that upon you may comeall the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the bloodof Abel the righteous unto the blood of Zachariah son ofBarachiah, whom ye slew between the sanctuary and thealtar. Verily I say unto you, All these things shall comeupon this generation.

“Earth” (ge) is more properly translated “land.” It can easilymean soil, country, region, or a part or whole of the planet. Thecontext usually indicates how it should be translated. When weread of a seed falling into the ge, it denotes soil. When it is usedof the ge of Israel, it’s the land promised to Abraham.

Thus, the time of the avenging of the blood of the martyrs isthe time of the resurrection that Isaiah, Daniel, Ezekiel (chapter37), and Paul all spoke of.

Speaking of the resurrection as the restoration of Israel at thelast trump at the same time in Isa. 27.12-13, Isaiah said:


And it will come about in that day, that the LORD willstart His threshing from the flowing stream of theEuphrates to the brook of Egypt; and you will be gath-ered up one by one, O sons of Israel. It will come aboutalso in that day that a great trumpet will be blown; andthose who were perishing in the land of Assyria and whowere scattered in the land of Egypt will come and wor-ship the LORD in the holy mountain at Jerusalem.

This served as the basis in the prophets for what Jesus said inMt. 24.31 about sending out his angels to gather his elect (faithfulIsrael, including all the Old Testament saints, along with first-century Jewish and Gentile Christians) from the four winds of theearth in his generation. In Paul’s view, Israel was the focus of his(and of Moses and the prophets) concept of the resurrection.

The words “when” and “then” reveal an important time state-ment. They connect with verses 23-24, where Paul spoke of theend at Christ’s coming (in his generation), with verse 52, the timeof the last trump, and with when Isaiah 25 and Hosea 13 were tobe fulfilled. However, neither Isaiah nor Hosea spoke of physicaldeath. Certainly, if Paul taught the resurrection of physical bod-ies, he misused Hosea and Isaiah while he claimed to preach onlywhat Moses and the prophets on the hope of Israel. He didn’tchange the definition of death, nor resurrection, which thoseprophecies focused on. If Paul changed those concepts, we can’tbelieve one syllable of the Bible; and we can make it teachabsolutely anything we want.

Thus, at the last trump, which Jesus said would occur in hisgeneration (Mt. 24.31, 34), death, Adam’s spiritual death, wascompletely defeated by the resurrection.

55 O death, where is thy victory? O death, where is thy sting?

This quotation from Hos. 13.1-24 identifies the death Hoseawas concerned with:

When Ephraim spoke, there was trembling. He exaltedhimself in Israel, But through Baal he did wrong anddied. And now they sin more and more, And make for

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 5 0 - 5 8 9 5

themselves molten images, Idols skillfully made fromtheir silver, All of them the work of craftsmen. They sayof them, “Let the men who sacrifice kiss the calves!”

The death that Israel died couldn’t be biological. She diedspiritually through her idolatry, and continued to sin more andmore. If we read biological death into I Cor. 15.55, then we mustread it into Hosea 13, but we can’t and maintain Paul’s integrity.If Paul spoke of physical resurrection, then he didn’t preach thesame as Hosea, and he didn’t preach the hope of Israel as foundin Moses and the prophets, as he repeatedly assured that he did.

As we’ve already seen, another passage in Hosea dealing withthe resurrection of Israel is Hos. 6.1-2:

Come, let us return to the Lord, For he has torn us, butHe will heal us; He has wounded us, but He will bandageus. He will revive us after two days; He will raise us upon the third day That we may live before him.

In these verses, Hosea promised resurrection to Israel. I’m notaware of a scholar in the world who takes the position that Hoseaspoke of biological death or resurrection. Thus, if Paul used thisbackground of spiritual death and resurrection, due to and fromsin-death, to buttress his case for the resurrection of physicalbodies out of holes in the ground in I Corinthians 15, he fooledus by misappropriating Hosea, did he not?

Furthermore, if the resurrection Paul spoke of in this chapterhas not been fulfilled, yet it was foretold in Isaiah and Hosea,then every jot and tittle of the Old Covenant is still fully in force,is it not? So who do we believe about what kind of resurrectionit was? Paul and Hosea or men who ignore the context of thesepassages?

In Mt. 5.18, Jesus said:

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth passaway, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away fromthe law, till all things be accomplished.


Popularly, we tend to think that at the cross, all of the Law ofMoses and the prophets passed away when only some of it wasaccomplished. The futurist view doesn’t think Isaiah 25 andHosea 13 have been fulfilled yet, which Paul used for his timeelement. However, Jesus did not say all the law would pass whenin reality only some of it was fulfilled, but that none of it wouldpass until all of it was fulfilled. Which do you believe? Shall wespeak as the oracles of God, or not? If Hosea and Isaiah’sprophecies of the resurrection, of which Paul spoke, haven’t beenfulfilled, not one jot nor tittle has passed away from the law, evenin our day!

56 The sting of death is sin; and the power of sin is the law:

Literally, this is “the sting of the death is the sin; and the powerof the sin is the law.” What sin? The sin of the context is the sinof the one man Adam, that got us all into its trap, and that Christby his resurrection has the power to undo. The sin is what canstill condemn man. It was Adam’s attitude of going his own wayand being in charge of his own decisions, regardless of what Godsaid.

“The law” (without any qualifiers such as “of sin and death,”and “of the spirit of life”) in Paul’s writing always referred to theLaw of Moses, not the Law of Christ. We can’t say that the lawof Christ is the power or strength of sin, can we? We can’t saythe law that is the strength of sin is the law of sin and death sincePaul said in Rom. 8.2 that Christians are free from it. If the Lawof Moses was completely fulfilled at the cross and removed fromconsideration, it would have no relevance here, yet it does. When“the law” was fulfilled and removed, “the death,” sin-death, thedeath of fellowship with God and Adam, would be removed, aswell. Stated another way, the resurrection would occur when thestrength of sin would be finally removed, but the law that gavesin its power was the Mosaic covenant. Therefore, the resurrec-tion would occur when the Mosaic covenant would be removed.This is in full accordance with Dan. 12.1-7, where the resurrec-tion of Israel would happen when the temple was destroyed andthe power of the holy people was completely shattered.

Sam Frost expressed Paul’s thought succinctly:

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 5 0 - 5 8 9 7

If the “string of the death is the sin, and the power of thesin is the torah” then what happens when you remove thetorah and its demands? Obviously, the sin loses itspower. What happens when the sin loses its power? Quiteclearly, the death loses its sting. Thus, all that we needto ask is, when did the requirement of the law under theold covenant “vanish” and lose its place? Hebrews 8.13answers this question: “that which is vanishing and beingmade old shall soon disappear.” The destruction of thetemple in that generation marks the “end of the age” andthe dawning of “the age to come.” (Samuel Frost, Exe-getical Essays on the Resurrection (Xenia, OH: TruthVoice Publishing, 2004), p. 86.)

57 but thanks be to God, who [lit., is giving] us the victorythrough our Lord Jesus Christ.

Note the present tense again. Paul affirmed that God wasgiving those in Christ victory over Adam’s death while he wrotethese very words. If this isn’t true, then Christians don’t enjoyvictory over Adam’s death yet!

Was it physical death over which God gave them victory inChrist? We’re still dying physically after 2000 years! So far,nearly every Christian since Paul wrote Corinthians has diedphysically, and not one has been raised physically. What a victoryover physical death!

58 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmove-able, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuchas ye know that your labor is not vain in the Lord.

Paul, once again, admonished the Corinthians that he spokeonly of the resurrection of the righteous. They were the only onesobtaining victory over death through Christ. They were the onlyones promised immortality, not the wicked.

If the Bible doesn’t teach a resurrection from biological death,and there is no biological resurrection for us to look for, whatremains for the righteous after death? The brief answer is foundin Rev. 14.13:


And I heard the voice from heaven saying, Write, Blessed[happy] are the dead who die in the Lord from hence-forth: yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from theirlabors; for their works follow with them.

Thus, ever since the resurrection, when the righteous die, theyreceive rest and happiness without going to a Hadean warehousestate, to await a resurrection of fleshly bodies.

The Resurrection on the Last Day

Review the following passages from John that speak of theresurrection which was to take place on the last day:

John 6.39-40, 44, 54:

And this is the will of him that sent me, that of all thatwhich he hath given me I should lose nothing, but shouldraise it up at the last day. For this is the will of my Father,that every one that beholdeth the Son, and believeth onhim, should have eternal life; and I will raise him up atthe last day…No man can come to me, except the Fatherthat sent me draw him: and I will raise him up in the lastday.…He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloodhath eternal life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

John 11.24:

Martha saith unto him, I know that he [her brotherLazarus] shall rise again in the resurrection at the lastday.

John 12.48:

He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my sayings, hathone that judgeth him: the word that I spake, the same shalljudge him in the last day.

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 5 0 - 5 8 9 9

Notice how these time passages of the resurrection and judg-ment correlate with what we’ve already seen. The Christian agehas no end (Is. 9.6f, Dan. 7.13f, Lk. 1.32). Therefore, the Chris-tian age has no last days, nor does it have a last day. However,the Mosaic age had an end, last days, and a last day. Theresurrection and judgment of which Moses, the prophets, Jesus,and Paul taught occurred on that day, as Daniel taught, when thetemple was destroyed, and the power of the holy people wascompletely shattered (Dan. 12.1ff).

Conclusion

Having completed my part of this study, at least to the present,perhaps the reader is in a better position to understand theweaknesses of the popular position on I Corinthians 15, i.e., thatit sets forth a resurrection of biological bodies sometime in ourfuture. Basically, the modern position suffers from these specificweaknesses:

1. It doesn’t recognize the context of the entire book of ICorinthians, but treats chapter 15 as a completely independentsubject that just fell by itself from heaven.

2. It doesn’t take into account the nature of the first majordoctrinal problem in the first-century church.

3. It’s not based on the nature of the problem and the divisionsin the church at Corinth among the Paul, Peter, and Apollosparties that took differing positions regarding the Jewish-Gentilequarrel.

4. It doesn’t fit with other passages in the Old and NewTestaments dealing with the resurrection.

5. It conflicts with Paul’s preaching on the resurrection inActs, where he said a number of times that concerning theresurrection, he didn’t preach anything except what Moses andthe prophets said should come to pass, yet Moses and the prophetsknew nothing of a biological resurrection.

6. It takes no account of Paul’s quotations of Isaiah and Hoseanear the end of the chapter. However, ignoring these scripturesmakes for much less work (but for a totally unreliable conclu-sion)!

1 0 0 T h e R e s u r r e c t i o n o f t h e D e a d

As I said when I began this verse-by-verse study of I Corin-thians 15, my long-time brother treated this chapter by merelyreading and cherry-picking a few verses with only a few com-ments. In the minds of most, it’s a very effective way of dealingwith the chapter in five minutes, because as the verses are read,the audience merely fills in the interpretation it has always beentaught, and the chapter seems to make perfect sense. I hope thismaterial will help you put this chapter in its proper context.

Some who have been exposed to this concept of the resurrec-tion object to it vehemently, saying it destroys the hope of aChristian. To this we say, the same Apostle Paul who taught“there is one hope” in Eph. 4.4 also said (as we saw in chapter 1of this work) that the hope he preached was the resurrection, andwe’ve seen his doctrine of the resurrection was based on nothingbut Moses and the prophets. The popular concept of the resurrec-tion cannot be found in Moses and the prophets. If our hope isdifferent than the one Paul preached, it needs to be destroyed,doesn’t it? And replaced with the one hope Paul preached, aswe’ve seen in this volume.

The righteous receive their happiness and rest immediatelyafter death (Rev. 14.13) without awaiting a stay in an Hadeanwarehouse for a simultaneous judgment, both of which are popu-larly viewed as being twenty centuries long to date. We all desiregoing to be with Christ when we die. What’s so great about theHadean wait and standing in line for judgment, when we can haveour eternal reward at the point of death?

If you’ve not already reviewed our material on Jesus’ Teach-ing on Hell, it’s available for download at www.gospelthe-mes.com/hell.htm.

You may also download our material on The Rich Man,Lazarus & The Afterlife at www.gospelthemes.com/luke16.htm.

I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5 . 5 0 - 5 8 1 0 1

Bibliography

Dawson, Samuel G. The Faithless Foundation of Dispensational Pre-millennialism. Amarillo, TX: Gospel Themes Press, 2007.

Dawson, Samuel G. The Teaching of Jesus: From Mount Sinai toGehenna, A Faithful Rabbi Urgently Warns Rebellious Israel.Amarillo, TX: Gospel Themes Press, 2004.

Frost, Samuel. Exegetical Essays on the Resurrection. Xenia, OH: TruthVoice Publishing, 2004.

Frost, Samuel. Misplaced Hope: The Origins of First and SecondCentury Eschatology. Colorado Springs, CO: Bimillennial Press,2002.

Holland, Tom. Contours of Pauline Theology. Rosshire, Scotland:Christian Focus Publications, 2004.

Machen, J. Gresham. New Testament Greek for Beginners. Revisededition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1923.

Packer, J. I. “Fundamentalism” and the Word of God. Grand Rapids,MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1958.

Smith, Joseph. Answers to Gospel Questions, IV. Salt Lake City: Book-craft, 1960.

Smith, Joseph. Book of Mormon. Salt Lake City: The Church of JesusChrist of Latter-day Saints, 1981.

Smith, Joseph. Doctrine and Covenants. Salt Lake City: The Church ofJesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1921.

Summers, Ray, and Sawyer, Thomas. Essentials of New TestamentGreek. Revised edition. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1995.

West, William Robert. If the Soul or Spirit Is Immortal, There Can BeNo Resurrection from the Dead. Third edition. Originally publish-ed as The Resurrection and Immortality. Bloomington, IN: AuthorHouse, September 2006.

Genesis

Gen. 1.14 54Gen. 1.18 54Gen. 1.20 53Gen. 1.21 53Gen. 1.24 53Gen. 2.7 52Gen. 2.16-17 52-53Gen. 3.22 53Gen. 3.5-7 54

Deuteronomy

Dt. 28.49 17

Psalms

Ps. 116.15 68

Isaiah

Isa. 9.6-7 61Isa. 25.8 3, 92Isa. 26.19 92Isa. 27.12-13 94Isa. 28.11-12 17

Ezek. 37 6Ezek. 37.11-14 24, 78

Daniel

Dan. 9.26-27 6, 62Dan. 12.1-2 51Dan. 12.2 7, 92Dan. 12.2-3 63Dan. 12.3-4 50Dan. 12.5 93Dan. 12.7 62Dan. 12.11 51

Hosea

Hos. 1.5 78Hos. 2.23 78Hos. 6.1-2 6, 78, 96Hos. 6.1-3 30Hos. 13.1-2 95Hos. 13.14 3, 95

Joel

Joel 2.28-30 24

Amos

Amos 9.11 21

Matthew

Mt. 5.18 97Mt. 13.39-43 50Mt. 13.43 7, 63Mt. 16.27-28 13, 31, 58Mt. 23.34-36 94Mt. 23.35 40Mt. 24.15-16 62Mt. 24.19-22 15Mt. 24.21 51Mt. 24.29, 34 13Mt. 24.30-34 58Mt. 25.31 67, 95Mt. 25.41ff 59

Luke

Lk. 1.31-33 61Lk. 21.20-22 80Lk. 21.27-28 80Lk. 21.31-32 80

John

Jn. 4.22 46

Jn. 6.39-40 99Jn. 6.44 99Jn. 6.54 99Jn. 11.24 99Jn. 12.48 99

Acts

Ac. 2.15-17 24Ac. 4.24 12Ac. 4.26-27 12Ac. 7.31-32 28Ac. 15 20Ac. 15.11 21Ac. 15.28 22Ac. 18.1-11 18Ac. 21.27-28 4Ac. 24.14-15 4Ac. 26.6-8 4Ac. 26.21-23 5

Romans

Rom. 5.12-21 55Rom. 5.14 58Rom. 6.23 55Rom. 8.2 97Rom. 8.23 79Rom. 11 46

I Corinthians

I Cor. 1.7 11I Cor. 2.8 12I Cor. 2.14 85I Cor. 3.11-15 12I Cor. 3.18 13I Cor. 4.5 41I Cor. 4.5-6 13I Cor. 5.5 14I Cor. 7.26-31 14I Cor. 9.20 21

Scripture Index

I Cor. 10.5-11 16I Cor. 13.9-10 16I Cor. 14.21 17I Cor. 15 9I Cor. 15.21-22 55I Cor. 15.44 86I Cor. 15.46-48 86I Cor. 15.51 57

Galatians

Gal. 2.6-14 32Gal. 2.7ff 23

Ephesians

Eph. 1.5-14 79Eph. 4.4-5 80

Eph. 4.15-16 80Eph. 4.30 80

Philippians

Phil. 1.21 68

I Thessalonians

I Thes. 4.15-16 59

Hebrews

Heb. 10.37 59

James

Jas. 3.15 85Jas. 5.5-9 60

Jude

Jude 19 85

Revelation

Rev. 14.13 57, 98Rev. 22.3 67

1 0 6 I C o r i n t h i a n s 1 5

A

Abel, first to die physically 52abomination of desolation 62Adam

created mortal or immortal? 52creation of 53immortal before sinned? 53not the first to die physically

52, 56sin-death of 54subject to death before

sinned 53two deaths of 49

age to come, vs. this age 12animals, souls of 53apostles, united on the

resurrection 27author, foreign languages and the 33

B

baptism for the deada false practice? 74baptism in suffering? 74for the dead Christ 73in suffering? 74in view of the dead ones? 74introduced 71Mormon position on 73opposed to Book of Mormon 73opposed to the Bible 73

bias, theological in translating I Cor. 15 41

biological bodies See also physical bodiesdiscussed 9

body, natural and spiritual 86Book of Mormon, opposed to bap-

tism for the dead 73

C

Christresurrection and kingship 49simultaneous rule with God 67two deaths of 49

Christ’s resurrection, not remedy forAdam’s physical death 55

Christian age, no end to 61church

Corinthian See Corinthianchurch

major problem if first-century17-18

coming, judging before the time 14consequences of no resurrection 38Corinth, background of 17Corinthian church

background of 18Jewish background of 19

Corinthiansdidn’t doubt resurrection 28eagerly awaiting day of the

Lord 11knowledge of the Old

Testament 29not behind in miraculous

gifts 11

D

Dawson, Samuel G., Faithless Foun-dation of Dispensational Premil-lennialism 42, 94

day of the LordCorinthians eagerly awaiting 11spirit saved in the 14

deadSee also baptism for the deadbaptism for 71, 73

deathphysical 53, 56, 68sin- 54spiritual 56

Topic Index

sting of 97dispensational premillennialism 93

E

earth, also land 94end, Christ’s rule has no 61end of time vs. time of the

end 51, 60end, the

of Christian age? 61of Mosaic age? 62of time? 51time of 51, 60use in New Testament 65

Essentials of New Testament Greek,Ray Summers 35

Exegetical Essays on the Resurrec-tion, Samuel Frost 98

F

Faithless Foundation of Dispensa-tional Premillennialism 42, 94

firstfruitsharvest and 50Old Testament concept 49

flesh and blood 89foreign languages, author’s experi-

ence with 33Frost, Samuel, Exegetical Essays on

the Resurrection 98

G

God, simultaneous rule with Christ 67

Greek, author’s exposure to Greek 33

H

hades 57, 99, 101harvest, firstfruits of 50henceforth 15Hosea, similarities with I Cor. 15 31

I

imminenceindications of 11-17indications of in I Cor. 11in I Cor. 7.26-31 14indications of in I Cor. 15 10

immortalAdam before he sinned? 53Adam created? 52

immortalityconditional 52innate 52

Immortality and the Resurrection,William Robert West 2

inclusio, literary device 30Israel, Old Covenant

resurrection of foretold inprophets 9

resurrection of in I Cor. 15 9

J

Jew-Gentile problemin Ac. 15 20miraculous gifts and 24-25three lines of argument in

Ac. 15 21Jew-Gentile relations 17judging before the time 14

K

kingdom, delivered unto the Father 66

kingship of Christ, resurrection and 49

L

last day, resurrection on 99last days, miraculous gifts in 16last trump

discussed 57Old Testament use 91

M

Machen, J. Gresham, New Testa-ment Greek for Beginners 35

1 0 8 T h e R e s u r r e c t i o n o f T h e D e a d

major church problem of first cen-tury 17

Martin, Tim, preterist author 87miraculous gifts

Corinthians not behind in any 11in the last days 16Jews vs. Gentiles and 25relation to Jew-Gentile

problem 24resurrection and 11

Mormon position on baptism for thedead 73

mortalAdam before he sinned? 53Adam created? 52

Mosaic age, end of 62Mosaic Law

See also Old CovenantOld Testament 10

N

natural body 86nephesh, applied to animals 53New Testament Greek for Beginners,

J. Gresham Machen 35

O

Old Covenant See also Old TestamentMosaic Law 10

Old TestamentSee also Old CovenantCorinthians’ knowledge of 29ignorance of undermines under-

standing of resurrection 10Mosaic Law 10

P

parties at Corinth 14, 19, 22-25Paul, preaching on the resurrection 1physical bodies, resurrection of 9physical death

Abel first to experience 56Adam not first to die 52, 56not a consequence of Adam’s

sin 56

not a curse for sin 56premillennialism, dispensational 93present passive tenses

ignored or translated as pure fu-ture in I Cor. 15 41

in I Cor. 15 34, 41misleading translations in

I Cor. 15 36-37prophets, resurrection foretold in 9

R

redemption, of resurrection body 79, 81

resurrectionapostles united on 27body of 77Christ’s 55Christ’s and kingship 49consequences if no 38Corinthians didn’t doubt 28from spiritual death 9ignorance of Old Covenant

dooms understanding 10in Ezek. 37.11-14 24in Hosea 30miraculous gifts and 11, 24more an Old Covenant subject

than New Covenant 9not a cataclysmic physical

event 57Old Testament background of 5on last day 99one body or many? 78only the righteous in

I Cor. 15 98order of events 82overall view of I Corinthians 22Paul’s preaching on 1physical body 9shortcomings of popular posi-

tion 10simplistic view of I Cor. 15 10solution to Adam’s spiritual

death 57time of 89what kind of body 77

T o p i c I n d e x 1 0 9

who were the “some” who de-nied 40

resurrection bodyintroduced 77redemption of 79, 81singular or plural? 77, 84singular, consisting of plural per-

sons 78rule, simultaneous of God and

Christ 67

S

simplistic view of resurrection of ICor. 15 10

simultaneous rule of God and Christ 67

sin death, Adam’s 54soul

applied to animals 53from nephesh 52

spiritual body 86spiritual death

not a cataclysmic physical event 56

resurrection solution to Adam’s 57

spiritual gifts See miraculous giftssting of death 97Summers, Ray, Essentials of New

Testament Greek 35

T

tenses, present passive in I Cor. 15 41

theological bias in I Cor. 15 41till, imply a change? 65time, judging before the 14time of resurrection

See also resurrection, time of discussed 89

time of the end, vs. the end of time51, 60

translator bias in I Cor. 15 41trump, the last 57twinkling of an eye 90

U

until, imply a change? 65

W

West, William Robert, Immortalityand the Resurrection 2

1 1 0 T h e R e s u r r e c t i o n o f T h e D e a d

For Other Materials on Eschatology by Sam Dawson, please see:

The Olivet Discourse: Destruction of Jerusalem vs. Final Judgment

www.gospelthemes.com/Mt24.htm

II Peter 3: Destruction of Jerusalem or Destruction of the Universe?

www.gospelthemes.com/IIPet3.htm

Jesus’ Teaching on Hell

www.gospelthemes.com.hell.htm

The Rich Man, Lazarus, & the Afterlife

www.gospelthemes.com.luke16.htm

Frequently-Asked Questions on Eschatology

www.gospelthemes.com/eschatologyfaq.htm

The Faithless Foundation of Dispensational Premillennialism:How Millions of Evangelicals and Fundamentalists Agree

with Atheists, Skeptics, and Modernists that Jesus Was Mistaken on the Last Days

www.gospelthemes.com/ffpbk.htm

This work begins with a study of covenant concepts inthe Bible, the reign of God prior to the coming of Christ, andthe sophisticated expectations God has always had of non-covenant people. After demonstrating that forgiveness ofsins existed under the Mosaic Law, the author develops thepreaching of John the Baptist and Jesus as an urgent attemptto turn the Jewish nation back to God through faithfulobedience to the Mosaic Law in order to avoid imminentnational destruction.

The Sermon on the Mount is viewed, not as a contrastbetween the Mosaic Law and the teaching of Christ, but asJesus correctly interpreting Moses to the Jews of his day.Thus, every syllable of that sermon is Old Testament teach-ing. That most of that teaching is also contained in the NewCovenant is demonstrated.

The parables of Jesus are then briefly analyzed, showingthat each one of them is first related to the attempted reformof the Jews by Jesus. The theme of the relative importanceof one’s treatment of his fellowman over his formal religiousservice is traced throughout the Old and New Covenants.The study of The Teaching of Jesus concludes as Jesusconcluded it, with a study of his pronouncement of imminentnational destruction in Matthew 24.

The Teaching of JesusFrom Sinai to Gehenna: A Faithful Rabbi Urgently

Warns Rebellious Israel

446 pagesSamuel G. Dawson

This Book Will Change Your View of Jesus’ Teaching and the Entire New Testament as It

Exposes Many of Our False Concepts

An eighteenth century Scottish poet wrote concerning war: “Rash, fruit-less war, from wanton glory waged, is only splendid murder.”

An older preacher used this quotation when he wrote concerning aparticularly brutal doctrinal attack on another elderly preacher by a group ofyounger, treacherous preachers. While many controversies among Christiansand churches aren’t this vicious, many Christians and congregations simplydon’t know how to navigate personal and doctrinal clashes, and thus, do moreharm than good. Such situations expose some noble and naïve souls to somepretty treacherous Christians. Yet, many Christians consent to much worsethan Saul did at Stephen’s stoning while “consenting to his death” by justholding the coats of the stone-throwers. Most members, whose jobs aren’teven on the line, refuse to ratchet up their courage to be bothered bycongregational problems and decisions. They may just want difficultieshandled by the congregational leaders so they can avoid being involved.Consequently, many Christians go blithely on, consenting through ignoranceto mistreatment of others that goes on behind the scenes.

This book is not for you if:

You’re not a serious student of the Bible Your concept of Bible study is listening to your teacher go through

a quarterly class book Your concept of being a Christian consists mainly of “going to

church” If you depend on the preacher to do your studying for you You’re in a denomination where all the thinking is done at the topIf you’re an elder who is afraid for the congregation to study

controversial subjects

Ideal for: Individual Study, Preaching, Elders,Adult Classes, Personal Evangelism, New Converts, Gifts

Christians, Churches, & Controversy:Navigating Doctrinal & Personal Clashes

Samuel G. Dawson

216 pages with comprehensive indexes

Denominational Doctrines:Explained, Examined, Exposed

Samuel G. Dawson

384 pages

This Book Will Help You Explore These Controversial Topics:

Jehovah’s Witnesses—Are They Really? • Was Jesus a Created Be-ing? • Modern-Day Tongue-Speaking—Is It from God? • I Corin-thians 14 & the Charismatic Movement • Matthew 24 & PropheticSpeculation • Revelation 20 & Premillennialism • The Indwellingof the Holy Spirit • Are Babies Born Totally Depraved? • Is Any-one Unconditionally Elected to Be Saved? • May A Christian SoSin As to Be Lost? • Should Christians Keep the Sabbath? • An-

swering Sabbatarian Arguments • Was Joseph Smith a Prophet ofGod? • Theistic Evolution • How To Be Just A Christian • Argu-

ments Against Baptism Answered

Ideal for: Individual Study, Preaching, Elders, Adult Classes, Personal Evangelism, New Converts, Gifts

Fellowship: With God and His PeopleThe Way of Christ Without Denominationalism

Samuel G. Dawson320 pages

This Book Will Significantly Affect Your View of:

Your Own Fellowship with God • Every Single Christian in theWorld • Every Single Congregation in the World • Fellowship

with a Local Church • The Harm of Denominationalism• EveryReligious or Irreligious Person You Meet • Those Deceived byFalse Teachers • Every Controversial Question You Confront •

The Non-Denominational Way of Christ • Squandering Less Timeon Things God Never Intended • Minoring in Majors and Major-ing in Minors • Spending More Time on Things God Really De-sires • Confidence in Christ, Not an Organization • Doctrinal

Disagreements Between Brethren • Non-Denominational PersonalEvangelism • Dealing with Uncommitted Christians • The Devel-opment of the Crossroads Denomination • Practical Applications

in Church Discipline • “Are You the Only Ones Going toHeaven?” • How Public Confession of Sin Should Be

• The Restoration Movement in America

This groundbreaking material differs from others on thesubject in that it proves that Moses, Jesus, and Paul all taughtthe same thing about divorce and remarriage. Most efforts onthis issue don’t deal with Moses’ teaching in the Old Testament;and thus, they take Jesus’ and Paul’s teaching out of the contextof explaining divorce and remarriage to the Jews: “men whounderstood the law” (Rom. 7:1). By studying the consistenciesbetween what Moses, Jesus, and Paul taught, as one preacherexplained, “Sam has finally cracked the nut on MDR.” Un-doubtedly, this work will aid other serious students in their questfor truth and open up new avenues for study.

THIS BOOK DEALS WITH THE ISSUES!

Is sexual intercourse a right or a condition of marriage? • Inthe Bible, betrothal was marriage. • What is civil government’sinterest in marriage? • Common-law marriage in the Bible. • Isfondling sexual intercourse? • Why were most adulterers in OTnot stoned to death? • Was God loose on divorce in OT? • Isthe Sermon on the Mount OT or NT teaching? • Two problemsthat must be worked. • What are the three ways a person cancommit adultery? • Does God hate all divorce? • Every excep-tion clause contains a necessary implication. • Is there a guiltyparty in Mt. 5.32 or Mt. 19.9? • Can an unjustly put-awayperson put away a fornicating spouse? • Four questions thatlead to a solution of every situation. • Church limitations indealing with divorce. • Fellowship.• Can a local church studythese issues for itself? If not, let’s not hear any more about localchurch autonomy.

Marriage, Divorce & Remarriage

The Uniform Teaching of Moses, Jesus & Paul

Samuel G. Dawson350 pages with comprehensive indexes

How to Study the Bible:A Practical Guide to Independent Bible Study

Samuel G. Dawson

446 pages with comprehensive indexes

A tradition-challenging publication without denominational bias!

If you’ve listened to this popular cassette album, you know how valuablethis material is. However, the book contains significant new material not onthe cassettes. It begins with a new chapter on "Jesus’ Call for Disciples" thatdemonstrates what it means to be a true disciple or student of God’s word,rather than just a spectator sitting in a pew. Another chapter explores "TheImportance of the Old Testament to New Testament Christians," while itexposes many of our unfounded prejudices against the Old Covenant. A greathelp is a list of "Old Testament Passages Quoted in the New Testament,"which points us to the inspired commentary on those prophetic verses.

Also, the 42-page "Outline of the Bible" provides a valuable tool forgrasping the overall view and context of the Bible and is a fascinating readin itself. Other items of importance are a strategy for both individuals andchurches to use in teaching and studying all of the books and topics of theBible in a timely fashion and an analysis of how all of us have two reservoirsof Bible knowledge: topical and book-by-book.

You can read a detailed table of contents at www.gospelthe-mes.com/htsbk.htm. You can also read what others say about the material.When one Christian used the material to teach a class, the elders asked himto repeat the class the next year.

Although written by a serious non-denominational Bible student,preacher, and teacher of nearly 40 years, this book is not for the professionalBible scholar or theologian. It is for the independent Bible student who wouldlike to know more of the Bible’s teaching without a denominational slant ordependence on a professional. In recent years, the availability of helpfulreference works has exploded, as have resources on the Internet. As modernBibles and the religious world are becoming more premillennialistic andCalvinistic, the emphasis on online easy-to-use Bible aids helps today’sstudent remain true to God’s word-for-word inspired text. You can takeadvantage of these new opportunities for yourself.

This book brings the Bible to life and makes it relevant for today. Lessonsprogress from examining basic attitudes toward the Bible to choosing adependable translation to rules for interpretation to dealing with difficultiesin the Bible. Not only will you learn how to study the Bible, but you’ll alsocome away with good, basic Bible knowledge from all the examples givenin the book.

Samuel G. Dawson

A physics and mathematics graduate from Texas Tech Univer-sity, Samuel G. Dawson did research in celestial mechanics andintercontinental missile guidance in the aerospace industry beforepreparing to preach the gospel of Christ. In twenty-two years ofpublic teaching, he did extensive live call-in radio work daily foreight years and participated in a number of religious debates. Sam’sscientific background has given him an inquisitive, logical, andthorough approach to the scriptures and a reputation for makingBible students re-think teaching they’ve taken for granted.

Sam drew on decades of experience working with local congre-gations to write Fellowship: With God and His People: The Wayof Christ Without Denominationalism; Denominational Doctrines:Explained, Examined, Exposed; and Christians, Churches, & Con-troversy: Navigating Doctrinal & Personal Clashes.

In Marriage, Divorce, & Remarriage: The Uniform Teachingof Moses, Jesus, & Paul, Sam demonstrates how Moses, Jesus, andPaul all taught the same thing about this controversial subject. Itdeals frankly with issues confronting many Christians today andthe people they are trying to teach.

The Teaching of Jesus: From Sinai to Gehenna: A FaithfulRabbi Urgently Warns Rebellious Israel shows how many peopletake Jesus’ teaching out of the context of the people he preached toand misapply it to our day. His sixth book, How to Study the Bible:A Practical Guide to Independent Bible Study, helps students avoiddepending on professionals for their Bible knowledge.

Sam worked mostly in the western part of the United States andpresently lives in Texas with his wife Patsy, author of the Marriage:A Taste of Heaven series.

resurrection of the dead by samuel dawson

Documents