1 Corinthians 15
Note: For those of you following the sexuality debate on my facebook page, there is some material in this related to those arguments.
Daily Bread 1 Corinthians 15
The Resurrection of the Dead
12 But tell me this—since we preach that Christ rose from the dead, why are some of you saying there will be no resurrection of the dead? 13 For if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised either. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, then all our preaching is useless, and your faith is useless. 15 And we apostles would all be lying about God—for we have said that God raised Christ from the grave. But that can’t be true if there is no resurrection of the dead. 16 And if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, then your faith is useless and you are still guilty of your sins. 18 In that case, all who have died believing in Christ are lost! 19 And if our hope in Christ is only for this life, we are more to be pitied than anyone in the world.
Observation:
Paul starts out by saying in verses 3-5, “I passed on what was of most importance to you, that Christ died for our sins, was buried and rose from the dead after three days, just as the Scriptures said.”
After addressing a myriad of issues in the Corinthian church, Paul reminds them of the most important issue, the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. There were some (as there are today) who argued that Jesus’ literal resurrection from the dead was not that important. Paul makes it very clear that if Jesus didn’t literally rise from the dead, then our faith if futile and we might as well pack it in.
Why does he make such an extreme statement? After all that is pretty black and white. If Jesus didn’t literally rise from the dead then our faith is futile and we are still responsible for our sins. For one, I would be out of a job! Paul argues that this is important because number one, Scripture said this would happen. One of the greatest proofs to the integrity of the bible is the fulfillment of prophecy. In this case the Scripture said Jesus would rise after three days. And he did.
Also, Jesus said he would rise after three days. And he did. If he didn’t he would have been a liar not to be trusted and certainly not to be called Lord. So there you have it. Either Jesus rose from the dead or He didn’t? If He did, He is Lord.
Application:
Although there are some parts of the bible we shouldn’t take literally like, “If you hand causes you to sin you should cut it off.” There are others that are clearly meaning to be literal. After all many of Jesus’ followers witnessed him risen from the dead, so we are not talking about an urban legend here. That is why the bible stresses that Jesus literally had a meal with him. He was not a ghost.
As we read the bible it is clear some things are meant to be rhetorical or figurative, and others are meant to be literally true. Much of the struggle in my own denomination right now as we speak, is how to we interpret the bible on the issue of “homosexuality”. My church is divided on this issue, if not 50/50 then 60/40 in favor of allowing persons in same gender, committed, lifelong and monogamous relationships to be pastors in our church. The argument given in favor of this proposal is that the bible does not speak to this issue in today’s culture like it did in biblical times. Today, two persons in a same gender relationship can be committed and monogamous much like a heterosexual couple.
The problem with making this huge interpretive leap is that for one, every mention of homosexual practice is called “sinful” in the bible. And secondly there is no positive proscription for this behavior anywhere in the bible. A pro-homosexual argument would say that the culture back then did not allow for the commitment that gay couples could and would make to each other today if given the chance. But the question remains even if they are committed, is the behavior sinful or not? I can be committed to other types of sinful sexual relationships, but that doesn’t make it right.
Since we have no authoritative way to speak from biblical standpoint on this issue, we can only conclude that we have no way to justify blessing this kind of relationship or behavior. Just because culture is demanding it does not mean the Church should compromise the only basis for its authority on this issue. This is the same authority that claims, “Jesus is Risen from the Dead, He is Risen Indeed!”
Prayer: Oh God in these days help us to be steadfast in Your Word. We have many challenging situations in front of us as the Church. Help us to be wise and gracious in how we handling these matters, doing all things in truth and in love. We need You now. Amen.
Daily Bread 1 Corinthians 15
The Resurrection of the Dead
12 But tell me this—since we preach that Christ rose from the dead, why are some of you saying there will be no resurrection of the dead? 13 For if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised either. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, then all our preaching is useless, and your faith is useless. 15 And we apostles would all be lying about God—for we have said that God raised Christ from the grave. But that can’t be true if there is no resurrection of the dead. 16 And if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, then your faith is useless and you are still guilty of your sins. 18 In that case, all who have died believing in Christ are lost! 19 And if our hope in Christ is only for this life, we are more to be pitied than anyone in the world.
Observation:
Paul starts out by saying in verses 3-5, “I passed on what was of most importance to you, that Christ died for our sins, was buried and rose from the dead after three days, just as the Scriptures said.”
After addressing a myriad of issues in the Corinthian church, Paul reminds them of the most important issue, the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. There were some (as there are today) who argued that Jesus’ literal resurrection from the dead was not that important. Paul makes it very clear that if Jesus didn’t literally rise from the dead, then our faith if futile and we might as well pack it in.
Why does he make such an extreme statement? After all that is pretty black and white. If Jesus didn’t literally rise from the dead then our faith is futile and we are still responsible for our sins. For one, I would be out of a job! Paul argues that this is important because number one, Scripture said this would happen. One of the greatest proofs to the integrity of the bible is the fulfillment of prophecy. In this case the Scripture said Jesus would rise after three days. And he did.
Also, Jesus said he would rise after three days. And he did. If he didn’t he would have been a liar not to be trusted and certainly not to be called Lord. So there you have it. Either Jesus rose from the dead or He didn’t? If He did, He is Lord.
Application:
Although there are some parts of the bible we shouldn’t take literally like, “If you hand causes you to sin you should cut it off.” There are others that are clearly meaning to be literal. After all many of Jesus’ followers witnessed him risen from the dead, so we are not talking about an urban legend here. That is why the bible stresses that Jesus literally had a meal with him. He was not a ghost.
As we read the bible it is clear some things are meant to be rhetorical or figurative, and others are meant to be literally true. Much of the struggle in my own denomination right now as we speak, is how to we interpret the bible on the issue of “homosexuality”. My church is divided on this issue, if not 50/50 then 60/40 in favor of allowing persons in same gender, committed, lifelong and monogamous relationships to be pastors in our church. The argument given in favor of this proposal is that the bible does not speak to this issue in today’s culture like it did in biblical times. Today, two persons in a same gender relationship can be committed and monogamous much like a heterosexual couple.
The problem with making this huge interpretive leap is that for one, every mention of homosexual practice is called “sinful” in the bible. And secondly there is no positive proscription for this behavior anywhere in the bible. A pro-homosexual argument would say that the culture back then did not allow for the commitment that gay couples could and would make to each other today if given the chance. But the question remains even if they are committed, is the behavior sinful or not? I can be committed to other types of sinful sexual relationships, but that doesn’t make it right.
Since we have no authoritative way to speak from biblical standpoint on this issue, we can only conclude that we have no way to justify blessing this kind of relationship or behavior. Just because culture is demanding it does not mean the Church should compromise the only basis for its authority on this issue. This is the same authority that claims, “Jesus is Risen from the Dead, He is Risen Indeed!”
Prayer: Oh God in these days help us to be steadfast in Your Word. We have many challenging situations in front of us as the Church. Help us to be wise and gracious in how we handling these matters, doing all things in truth and in love. We need You now. Amen.
Comments
Post a Comment