Transcript
Throughout history, you know
that there have been attacks upon various doctrines of God’s
Word. There have been attacks upon
God Himself, attacks upon the deity of Christ, attacks upon
the nature of God’s Word, the validity or trustworthiness of
it. One of the most recurring areas
of attack is on the resurrection itself, because if the resurrection
is true, it is an overwhelming miracle
to mankind. The world cannot endure the resurrection,
not reasonably. And so, there have been consistent
and regular attacks upon it. The latest installment of these
attacks came fairly recently. Less than, I think, a month ago
is when I first heard of it. And the announcement went simply
like this. The tomb of, pardon me, the lost
tomb of Jesus. The lost tomb of Jesus. And intrigued
by that, I went and began to read the various articles that
touted this recent discovery. And the leading question that
drew me in was this. Has the tomb of Jesus Christ
been found? Now, it will do nothing to my
faith if it had. But I was intrigued nonetheless
by the question. From the official website of
the Discovery Channel, which essentially hosted this attack,
came the following verbiage. Since the 1970s, hundreds of
tombs and thousands of ossuaries, which are essentially boxes, kind of ancient caskets,
if you will, Thousands of ossuaries have been discovered in the Jerusalem
area. These ossuaries served as coffins in first century Jerusalem. One of these tombs was found
to contain ten ossuaries. Six of the ossuaries in this
tomb have inscriptions on them. I think you can probably sense
what direction this is going. As it turns out, every inscription
in this particular tomb relates to the Gospels. In the feature
documentary, The Lost Tomb of Jesus, a case is made that the
2000 year old tomb of the 10 ossuaries belonged to the family
of Jesus. Well, this is all very pleasant
so far, isn’t it? All and which fact I would doubt
from the very beginning, all leading epigraphers agree about
the inscriptions. A statistical study commissioned
by the broadcasters concludes that the probability factor is
in order of 600 to 1, that an equally surprising cluster of
names would arise purely by chance under given assumptions. Their
conclusion is, by virtue of the names in this tomb, it must be
600 to 1 odds that this is Christ’s tomb. They went so far as to secure
DNA evidence and the DNA evidence. Now, I don’t know exactly how
they went about this. You know, there aren’t exactly
a bunch of locks of Jesus hair about there. But what they basically
determined is that two of these main ossuaries contain bones
that are unrelated. which they conclude are husband
and wife. And one of the bones contains DNA evidence which suggests
that these other two people are the parents. And so they’ve concluded
that not only was Jesus buried in there, but so was His wife
and child. Ridiculous. There are other articles. went
in to much greater detail, and I’m going to spare you some of
it. But it said new scientific evidence, including DNA analysis
conducted at one of the world’s foremost molecular genetics labs,
as well as studies by leading scholars, suggests a 2000 year
old tomb could have once held the remains of Jesus of Nazareth
and his family. Now, regardless of what all studies
they did and DNA evidence they were able to acquire, they didn’t
go to the main source itself, because the main source itself
would have clearly told them there are no bones to be found.
There were no bones to be found in the tomb of Jesus. So say
the Scriptures, the names on the ossuaries, They know that they occurred
from 30 B.C. to 70 A.D., which would have
contained these names in great regularity. They already determined.
But the names that they found on these boxes were Jesus, allegedly,
Mary, Matthew, Joseph and Mary Magdalene. And this is the level
of genius and scholarship that has produced this work, one professor
at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, see you young
people, you could change schools today and go to an institute
of higher learning where not only do you get half decent basketball,
but you get scholarship like this. The associate department chair
of religious studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
told Discovery News that based on New Testament writings, Jesus
likely lived in the first century A.D. They go on to point out. that
one of these boxes contained the name of Mary Amney, whose
was given the actual name that was given to Mary Magdalene.
No evidence historical to support that. The conclusions go on to
say that to suggest that she was likely a great teacher. who
even inspired her own sect of followers called Maryamnists. Again, scant evidence to support
that. All this suggests that it’s possible
that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were a couple and had a son named
Judah, whom they indicate may have been their son and may have
been the lad described in the Gospel of John sleeping on Christ’s
lap. I mean, I’m almost embarrassed
to read this stuff. In fact, one, even the opponents
of Christianity, the secular media, one of them observed this
and said James Cameron, the one that directed the famous Titanic
film, he wasn’t content with sinking the ship. Now he’s going
after the sinking of Christianity itself. Even the secular media
sees how crucial the resurrection is to Christianity. One pastor said it this way regarding the denial of the resurrection
of Christ. He said, doctrine is the vital
element in the existence of the church. The church itself is
in a manner only doctrine assimilated. Any grave corruption in teaching
immediately vitiates against the body of Christ. The apostle
opened this letter by laying down as the foundation of his
work, which passage we’ve just read in weeks past, laid down
as the foundation of his work, Christ crucified. He concludes
it by presenting the crown of his work, Christ risen. In these
two facts, applied to the conscience and appropriated by faith, there
is concentrated indeed the whole of Christian salvation.” Do you
hear what he says in so many words? The resurrection is Christianity. And so an attack upon the resurrection
of Christ is an attack not only upon the church. It’s an attack
on Christ. And so for us, What is our response? What is our understanding of
the resurrection? Can we look at a film, even by
one so famous or infamous, depending on your perspective, as James
Cameron and the so-called facts that he lays out on a box containing
bones with no proof at all belonging to Christ? What is our response? Is our faith shaken? Is our understanding
of the resurrection in question? What I’d like to do today, perhaps
unprecedented, is go through 1 Corinthians 15. Now, Trey reminded
me that he’s been with me some three years now, and that in
the three years that he’s been with me, I’ve never gone through
58 verses, even in those entire three years. So this may in and
of itself be a miracle, but we’re going to try. What I want to
look at this morning is five magnificent truths pertaining
to the resurrection of Christ. That once you grasp these truths,
they will give you a perspective of the resurrection that will
never be shaken. That was the purpose for which
Paul wrote these words. You know, many times I will read
the passage in its entirety before we delve into it. I’m going to
ask you to bear with me this morning as I refrain from doing
that. We’ll read the bulk of this passage
as we go through it. And so if you would, I want to
go to the first truth pertaining to the resurrection of Christ. First of all, the resurrection
is inextricably part of the Gospel. It is inextricably part of the
Gospel. The first thing that Paul wants
to do here is lay out for us the facts of the resurrection
of Christ and the persons to whom and the circumstances under
which He appeared. Paul wants to deal with facts. not guesses, not theories, not
so-called DNA evidence on bones of suspect origin. Paul wants
to deal with the eyewitness accounts, the facts of the matter. And
the Apostle’s first duty and first desire is to establish
firmly the fact of the resurrection on which Our own expectation,
even down to this day, of resurrection rests. It is the historical fact
of Christ’s resurrection, which is the substance not only of
this chapter, but Paul says, was the subject matter for the
apostles themselves. In order to set the scene, we
don’t know exactly how, but not only did they have problems of
adultery and problems of all sorts in the Corinthian church,
evidently there were some in the church itself that had a
problem or a denial of the resurrection. And even though Paul saves this
for the last, it is among his most powerful arguments in all
of the book. Some members of the Corinthian
church in some way had denied the resurrection. And that is
what compelled, forced the Apostle Paul to this very clear and even
systematic defense of the foundational Christian doctrine of the resurrection. First of all, look at verse one,
where Paul lays out the core elements of the gospel and their
value. Paul opens chapter 15 by saying,
now, I make known to you, brethren, the gospel. This is the good
news. This is the grand news to humanity
about the salvation secured by Christ. He points out that it
is the gospel which I preach to you. And he reminds them that
it is the gospel which also you received. There was at some point
in your life as Christians where you welcomed and embraced these
gospel truths. Not only did I preach them to
you, which you received, in which you stand. You were meant to
be established, firmly established and steadfast in these truths,
not wavering like the wheat fields. Not blown around by every wind
of doctrine. I preach them to you. You receive them from me. You
stand in them by which you are saved. The gospel and our salvation
is not contentless. There is substance to it. There
is evidence to it. There is proof to it. And it
ultimately leads to our salvation. It’s not just a familiar feeling
with a higher power. It’s not just a good feeling
toward the things of God, whatever there may be. Christ came for
a purpose. No wonder Paul adds this caveat
at the end. If you hold fast, If you hold
fast to the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in
vain. And I think there’s a good reason
that he raises that doubt. Because a faith that doesn’t
include the resurrection of Jesus Christ is no faith at all. It
is certainly not faith in the objective revelation of God’s
word. And Paul goes on to point out
the importance of the gospel elements. What were those things
that were rolled into what he called first importance? What were those crucial elements
of the gospel? Look at verse 3. Paul said, for I delivered to
you as of first importance. Paul started out this epistle
by saying he didn’t come with flowery speech. He didn’t come
with all this other banter that was so much a part of the religious
orators of the day. Paul says, I came with you with
a very explicit, succinct message. I delivered to you as a first
importance what I also received. Paul wasn’t making this up as
he went. Paul wasn’t adding any of his own creativity to it.
I read again this week about a new wrinkle in the church. It’s called Saturday Night Church
for Men. It’s the church for men. Now, don’t get any big ideas,
but one of these things is to come as you are, you know, it’s
casual dress, of course, rock band, of course. And the men
come and there is a clock A time clock on the wall, much like
you would find at a sports arena. So the men can keep track of
how long the pastor has been up there. Paul wasn’t into any
of this creative nonsense. He didn’t need to add anything
because his confidence was in Christ and in the gospel. So
what was the gospel? I delivered to you as a first
importance what I received, that Christ died for our sins according
to the scriptures. This is exactly what the Old
Testament had laid out. This is exactly what the Gospels
contained. And Paul said, I’m not making
this up as I go. I’m not being creative. That
was the first element in what I preached to you. Christ died
for our sins, according to the Scriptures, and not only that,
he was buried. He was truly dead and he was
truly buried. And not only that, But the third
element that Paul said was so crucial to the gospel was that
Christ died, Christ was buried and that he was raised on the
third day, according to the scriptures. Now, there has been debate, you
might even question yourself, what was it exactly that was
according to the scriptures? Was it the whole scheme of the
gospel here laid out? Christ’s death and burial and
resurrection? Or was it the fact that Christ
was raised on the third day? I can tell you it’s both and.
It’s both of those elements that are contained in the Scriptures.
The whole scheme of a suffering saver is presented in such Scriptures
as Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22. Clearly laid out there for us
in Old Testament writings. The third day theme is contained
and alluded to in Jonah and also in Hosea 6, verse 2. that these facts were predicted
in the Old Testament is clearly taught in John 20, verse 9. The passage especially urged,
though, by the apostles as foretelling the resurrection of Christ is
Psalm 16, 10. They knew that it must be understood
only if Christ, who was raised from the dead and saw no corruption,
is the only person in history. Paul says, for those of us that
would so easily allow a James Cameron to make a film or maybe
let somebody else question the doctrine of the resurrection,
not Paul. Paul said that that element, that was one of the
constituent elements of the gospel itself, and he would not easily
allow it to be pried from his fingers. Paul then moves to offer up proof
of the resurrection in six historical appearances. Look at verse five. He appeared to Cephas and then
to the twelve. Luke 24, verses 33 through 36. And after that, he appeared to
more than 500 brethren at one time, most of whom remain until
now, but some have fallen asleep. In other words, what Paul says
to the first century Corinthians is go check it out for yourself.
If you doubt, first go talk to Peter. Go talk to any one of
the twelve that remain. Go talk to these 500 in Jerusalem. And then he appeared to James. This James can only be the one
who played a substantial part in the ministry in Jerusalem.
He was the head of the Council of Elders. He was called the
Lord’s brother. In Galatians 2.9, he was called
one of the pillars of the church. The interesting thing is, with
this particular individual, he was not a believer during the
Lord’s lifetime, remember? But we do find him with the apostles
and the women, the godly women, in the upper chamber immediately
after the ascension in Acts 1.14. It’s quite likely that that appearance
of Christ, about which Paul now here mentions, was the very final
element that brought James to knees of repentance and to faith
in Christ. Then at the end of verse 7, it
says, he appeared to all the apostles and last of all, as
to one untimely born, he appeared to me also. Paul says, let me
testify on behalf of Christ. Let me tell you that I have seen
Him with my own eyes, which were subsequently blinded. For I am
the least of the apostles and not fit to be called an apostle,
because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God,
I am what I am, and His grace toward me did not prove vain.
But I labored even more than all of them, yet not I, but the
grace of God with me.” What is Paul’s conclusion to
this great opening section? that the resurrection is inextricably
linked to the gospel itself. Paul says in verse 11, whether
it was I or they, you get such a humble and selfless attitude
from Paul, don’t you? He says, I don’t care who baptized
you. I don’t care whose club you’re
in. I don’t want to promote any of
that. Whether it was I or they, so we preached and so you believed. You can hear him. You can hear
the tone in his voice. Much like that of the Galatians
in the Galatian letter where he says, who has bewitched you?
He says, don’t let go of this. Don’t give in to this idea, these
criticisms of the resurrection. One pastor said that it may safely
be asserted that the resurrection of Christ is at once the most
important and the best authenticated fact in the history of the world. It was predicted in the Old Testament,
it was foretold by Christ himself, it was a fact of admitting easy
verification, go to the tomb and look. The witnesses to the
fact that Christ was seen as alive after his death were numerous,
competent, and on every account worthy of confidence. Their sincerity
of conviction was proven by the sacrifices, even of life, which
their testimony required of them. How many people would go to their
grave for a lie? Not many. But these did. He goes on and says their testimony
was confirmed by God in signs and wonders, various miracles,
gifts of the Holy Spirit. That testimony of the Spirit
is continued to this present time and granted to all the true
children of God for the Spirit bears witness to the truth in
heart and conscience. The fact of the resurrection
has been commemorated by religious observance on the first day of
the week from from its first occurrence to the present time.
That’s how we came to worship on Sunday, not the Sabbath, the
Saturday. The effects produced by his gospel
and the change which is affected in the state of the world allow
no other rational solution than the truth of his death and subsequent
resurrection. The church is his monument and
all believers are his witnesses, said Hodge. Even though the death of Christ
is what he explicitly and particularly came to accomplish. He could
have done that just simply by dying on the cross, right? That
part of it was finished. But the resurrection itself is
no less important historically as a doctrine for the church. In fact, it is only because of
the resurrection, said one, that the gospel of the cross was ultimately
understood. That it was preserved and transmitted
down through the centuries to us. The resurrection is the historical
base on which all other Christian doctrines are built, said James
Montgomery Boyce. You have In the doctrine of the
resurrection, the very doctrine that draws out the greatest minds
and the theologians and shepherds throughout history to battle,
they are willing to stand on this as being the paramount doctrine
and will allow no one to trample upon it. J.C. Ryle. J.C. Ryle said, We need not wonder
that so much importance is attached to our Lord’s resurrection. It
is the seal and headstone of the great work of redemption,
which he came to do. It is the crowning proof that
as he paid the debt which he undertook to pay on our behalf,
he won the battle which he fought to deliver us from hell and is
accepted as our guarantee and substitute by our father in heaven. J.C. Ryle wouldn’t have any of
this criticism or mitigation against the resurrection. Charles
Spurgeon, the resurrection of our divine Lord from the dead
is the cornerstone of Christian doctrine. Perhaps I might more
accurately call it the keystone of the arch of Christianity.
And if you know how a bridge is built, if you pull the keystone
out, the bridge collapses. Spurgeon concludes if the fact
could be disproved, the whole fabric of the gospel would fall
to the ground. Do you think James Cameron doesn’t
know that? Do you think CNN is oblivious
to that fact? Secondly, the resurrection is,
first of all, inextricably part of the gospel. Secondly, it is
logically necessary. It is logically necessary. Paul
here turns his attention to begin to combat the opinions of those
who maintain that there was no resurrection from the dead. Paul dug in his heels and entrenched
his position, and he begins to go about whittling away and demolishing
these opponents arguments. Christ’s resurrection is that
on which the resurrection of the dead ultimately depends. The denial of the resurrection
draws with it the denial of Christianity itself. And in this section,
beginning in verse 12 through 20, Paul utilizes a simple if-then
line of reasoning. If this is true, then this is
true. It’s axiomatic. And here we find
these nine logical conclusions pertaining to the resurrection
of Christ. It’s simple argumentation that Paul uses. Look at verse
12. Now, if Christ is preached that
He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say there
is no resurrection from the dead? Some of the main objections,
as I said, Cameron’s deal is just the latest installment in
many attacks upon the resurrection. The primary one through the centuries
is one of a scientific approach. That after a dead body disintegrates,
it’s impossible even for God to restore all those atoms and
molecules back into any kind of a form, much less one that
precisely resembles the body from which it came. Those that would advance such
a goofy theory forget that it’s a miracle, just like the establishment
of the world, just like creation. Modern science even now claims
to have the ability to generate life, right? They take just a
little bit of DNA, a little of this, a little of that, and all
of a sudden they can make a chicken or a cow or a duck If they really
want to impress me, start with nothing. That’s what God does. That’s the miracle worker. That’s
the God of creation. He starts with nothing. Can He
not regenerate a little dust? He can. God can and does regenerate
and reconstitute our bodies. It’s exactly what He’s talking
about doing here. But there have been various other
historical attacks of on the resurrection, there was the falsehood
theory that the disciples were so crafty, they came and they
stole Christ’s body away. There was even that theory woven
into Scripture. It obliterates that that argument
does it obliterates the trustworthiness of the writers, if you throw
out the resurrection based on that evidence, throw out the
rest of your New Testament. And if you throw out the New
Testament, you might as well throw out the old as well, because
that attested to it as well. It was unlikely that such faint
hearted followers, the most bold of which was Peter, who denied
Christ three times, are suddenly going to gather up the courage
to go and steal Christ’s body to advance the notion that he
rose again, which knows him. They had not even the faintest
idea was coming. Not to mention the years of perpetuated
suffering for owning the claim of the resurrection would bring
upon them? Are they going to do all this
for a lie? It’s ridiculous. There’s another theory called
the swoon theory that Jesus didn’t really die. He just merely swooned
or fainted. And then was wrapped up and put
in a tomb for three days. I’ll give that the attention
that it deserves. Then there is the vision theory.
that this was just merely a result of subjective visions. That Mary
and James and all the apostles merely had these visions, subjective
visions to a multiplicity of people at a variety of occasions.
Equally ridiculous. Paul continues his line of reasoning.
And he says this, and as I said, there are a series of these if-then. You won’t always find the word
if and you won’t always find the then, but that is the equation
that Paul uses. Listen. Verse 13, But if there
is no resurrection from the dead, then Christ, not even Christ,
has been raised. That’s his point. You can’t claim
that Christ is in heaven with God if you don’t hold to the
resurrection. If you don’t believe that God
can do a miracle there, what makes you think that He can do
a miracle even with Christ? Verse 14, And if Christ has not
been raised, then our preaching is vain. Paul here says, I’m wasting my
time doing all this preaching. And not only that, your faith
is in vain. You really are hopeless without the resurrection. Then
also, verse 15, moreover, we are found even to be false witnesses
of God. Because we’re going around talking
about this message of the resurrection which never really took place.
If Christ wasn’t raised from the dead. Look at the end of
verse 15, if in fact the dead are not raised, for if the dead
are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ
has not been raised, your faith is worthless. You are still in
your sins. This is an all out ultimate attack. This line of reasoning is meant
to dismantle Christianity, not just poke a little fun at it. If that’s true, then verse 18,
then those who have fallen asleep have perished. They’re just like
the tree that died in your front yard. They’re just dead and gone. There are no souls that live
on. There is no perpetuity to life. And if that’s the case,
verse 19, if we have hoped in Christ in this life only, then
we are of all men most to be pitied because we are wasting
our time. Don’t believe for a moment that
that is what Paul believes. Paul is using this line of reason
to say that the resurrection is a logical necessity. That
if this is what you conclude, then it’s foolish. One theologian said it this way,
we cannot deny the physical resurrection of Christ without impugning the
veracity of the writers of Scripture, since they represent it as fact.
This means that it affects our belief in the trustworthiness
of Scripture. Moreover, the resurrection of
Christ is as represented as represented as having evidential value. It
was a culminating proof that Christ was a teacher sent from
God. That he was the very son of God.
It was the supreme attestation of the fact of immortality. And
what is still more important, the resurrection enters as a
constitutive element into the very essence of the work of redemption. And therefore, the gospel, as
we’ve already seen, it was one of the great foundation stones
of the church of God. The atoning work of Christ, if
it was to be effective at all, had to terminate not in death,
but in life. Furthermore, it was the father’s
seal on the completed work of Christ, the public declaration
of its acceptance. Can we let go of the doctrine
of the resurrection? Thirdly, the resurrection is
not only inextricably part of the gospel and secondly, logically
necessary, but thirdly, it is theologically crucial. It is
theologically crucial. Here, Paul goes on to show that
a denial of the resurrection involves a denial of the resurrection
of the dead and a denial of the resurrection of Christ and is
fatal completely to faith in the Gospel. There is a certainty
to the resurrection. It is a theological necessity,
Paul urges. Look at verse 20. But now, Christ
has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who
are asleep. For since by man came death,
by a man also came the resurrection from the dead. The Apostle Paul here proclaims
this idea with great solemnness. There’s no wavering in his voice.
There’s no apology for his position. Death and the resurrection of
Christ are human facts. And I think the writer clarified
it this way, that here, the big difference
here, you find the same thought essentially as what he’s commenting
on in Romans 5.12. In Romans 5.12, you have Adam
causing the demise of humanity and you have Christ entering
in as the restorer of humanity to God. Same argument that Paul
uses here, In Romans, it comes down to the
argument of one man. One man, Adam, caused the demise
of the whole human race. And one man, Christ, is going
to restore it. But here the emphasis is different.
Here the emphasis is on man. One writer said, it is truly
human origin of these two opposite phases in the existence of humanity,
which Paul wishes to set in contrast. By man, subjection to death was
imposed on men. By man, there must come to them
the power of rising again. It is for man to restore the
evil done by man. And that’s why Christ God took
on human flesh. Another clarified this way, he
said, Adam is the cause of death because his sin is the judicial
ground of our condemnation. And because we derive from Him
a corrupt and feeble nature, Christ is the cause of life because
of His righteousness and is the judicial ground of our justification. We stand in Christ forgiven,
right? Christ is risen. Therefore, the
bodies of God’s people, the saints, must rise. Christ’s rising is
our resurrection, a pledge of our resurrection. And just as
the first fruits are a sure evidence that the harvest is coming, so
the resurrection of Christ is a sure evidence of the rising
of our bodies. Look at verse 22, for as in Adam
all die, so in Christ also all will be made alive. But each in his own order, Christ,
the first fruits. After that, those who are with
Christ, it is coming. Then comes the end when he hands
over the kingdom to God, the Father, when he’s abolished all
rule and authority and power. There are many doctrines. There’s
much theology undergirded by the resurrection itself, the
first of which is that there is a God. God is a God of miracles. And there is such a God. He is the God of the Scriptures.
And the only cause that was adequate to explain the resurrection of
Jesus Christ from the dead is God. Almighty God. The resurrection of Jesus Christ
establishes the doctrine also of Christ’s deity. Remember,
Jesus claimed to be God. It got him in hot water a number
of times with the Pharisees. He claimed that God was his father,
that he had come from the father and he was going back to the
father, John 16, that whoever had seen him had seen the father,
John 14. Those claims everybody knew were
either true or false. If they were false, they were
blasphemous. And if they were blasphemous, Christ is the last
one that God would honor. But God did honor Christ by raising
Him from the dead. And that is proof enough that
Christ is uniquely the Son of God. The resurrection of Jesus Christ
not only undergirds the fact that God exists and that Christ
is the Lord, but it establishes the doctrine that everybody who
believes in Christ, has placed their faith in Christ, is justified
from sin. God accepted the penalty. God
accepted, rather, the payment for our penalty in Christ. The resurrection is God’s declaration
paid in full. Paid in full. One said it this way. One Puritan
said the resurrection of Christ constituted a declaration of
the father that the last enemy had been vanquished, the penalty
had been paid and the condition on which life was promised met.
It symbolized what was destined to happen to the members of Christ’s
body and their justification, spiritual birth and resurrection. It’s our down payment. The resurrection
of Christ is our down payment. Fourthly, The resurrection is inextricably
part of the Gospel. It is logically necessary. It
is theologically crucial. And it is illustratively presented
here by Paul. Paul here simply turns to the
illustration of nature to dismantle the common argument against the
resurrection. had already established the truth
of the doctrine and the certainty of the event. And now he proceeds
to set forth, in a sense, the manner or how this is going to
take place. Look at verse 35, here’s the
argument, but some will say, how are the dead raised? With
what kind of body do they come? All simple retort, you fool. The two questions are related
to one another. The first, in essence, looks
at the inner working, how this body is awakened, which has already
been given over to death. How is this possible? The second
question is the result of what takes place afterwards. What
kind of body is it going to be? One said that the great objection
in the minds of the Corinthians to the doctrine of the resurrection
was evidently the same as the Pharisees, right? Both supposed
that our future bodies were going to be just like our present ones.
You know, who’s going to have this wife in eternity? All those
silly questions that the Pharisees kept posing to Christ. But Jesus
says. just like Paul does, that our
bodies are going to be totally and completely different. And
he first uses the illustration of vegetables. I mean, let’s
look at it and call it what it is. Look at the end of verse
36. That which you sow does not come to life unless he dies.
He’s talking about gardening. That which you sow, you do not
sow the body which is to be, but a bare grain. In other words,
if you’re going to go corn, you don’t plant the whole ear of
corn. You plant a seed. If you’re going to grow a mustard
tree, you don’t plant a mustard tree, you plant a seed. That’s
all he’s saying. He says that if a grain of corn
can grow into an ear of corn, can’t God do something unique
and different with a human body? Look at verse 38. God gives it
a body just as He wished. And to each of the seeds, a body
of its own. And then he proceeds to the illustration
of creature bodies. All flesh is not the same flesh.
There’s some of men, some of beasts, some of birds and another
of fish. The illustration proceeds to the illustration of celestial
bodies. Not all of the celestial bodies
are the same. There is heavenly bodies and
earthly bodies. The sun, the moon, the stars,
those are the points that he’s making that not all things are
the same. And he applies it to the resurrection,
to resurrection bodies. Look at verse 42. So also is
the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in a perishable body. One day we will all die. It is
raised in an imperishable body that will never face death. It
is sown in dishonor, in diapers, feeble, weak, sinful. It is raised in glory. Never to sin again. It is sown
in weakness. It is raised in power. It is
sown in a natural body. It is raised in a spiritual body.
Paul says that there’s a difference. You don’t have to succumb to
this argument that there is no resurrection because we’re going
to go to heaven and have bodies if it were just like these. In Christ Jesus, human nature,
body and soul, is restored to its pristine strength and perfection,”
said one. It is raised to even a higher
level while body and soul were reunited in a living organism.
The future body of believers will be incorruptible, incapable
of decay, glorious, resplendent with heavenly brightness and
powerful, full of energy, and perhaps new faculties and spiritual
which does not mean merely immaterial, but adapted to the spirit, a
perfect instrument of the spirit. Can you hardly wait? Fifthly, and in closing. The resurrection is not only
inextricably part of the gospel, logically necessarily, logically
necessary, theologically crucial, illustratively presented, Fifthly,
it is gloriously anticipated. I get the sense that Paul was
wiggling in his chair as he wrote this. Look at verse 50. Now I say this, brethren, that
by that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor
does the perishable inherit the perishable, the imperishable.
Behold, I tell you a mystery. We will not all sleep, but we
will all be changed in a moment, in a twinkling of an eye at the
last trumpet for the trumpet will sound. The dead will be
raised imperishable and we will be changed. Will be changed. The resurrection of Jesus Christ
is proof that death isn’t the end of this life. Death is defeated
for all those who have placed their faith in Christ. And on
the basis of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, you and I can
have confidence, great confidence. The only sure evidence of our
resurrection is the down payment. The resurrection of Jesus Christ
and said himself who said, because I live, you will live also. Isaac Watts urged in these glorious
terms, the anticipation. Of that event, he said, how divinely
full of glory and pleasure shall that hour be when all the millions
of mankind that have been redeemed by the blood of the Lamb shall
meet together and stand around him with every tongue and every
heart full of joy and praise. How astonishing will be the glory
and joy of that day when all the saints shall join together
in one common song of gratitude and love and of everlasting thankfulness
to the Redeemer. With that unknown delight and
inexpressible satisfaction, shall all that are saved from the ruins
of sin and hell address the Lamb that was slain and rejoice in
His presence. I can hardly wait. Let’s pray. Merciful God, we bow before you
and we will not yield in our grasp, our faith in the resurrection
of Christ. We will not allow any so-called
human expert to dismantle in our minds and to snatch from
our hearts of faith the resurrection of Christ. We hold it to be our
very down payment for eternity itself. Lord God, we rejoice
in this chapter of your Word. We rejoice in the depths of it. Lord, we ask your blessing as
we celebrate the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, our
down payment. Grant us your grace this week
as we endeavor by your grace to live for you. May you be glorified
indeed. In Jesus’ name, Amen.