THE
RESURRECTION
'I
., 'l
le must be absolutely clear that the
resurrection of Jesus Christ is at once the
lynch-pin and the Achilles heel of Christianity.
OF JESUS
On the issue of the resurrection, Christianity is
CHRIST: either most invincible or most vulnerable.
AN EASTER . There is a simple point though that is not
SERMON featured much in the writings of conservative
scholars which I ask us to ponder at the very
outset; the New TestaI!lent nowhere provides
by Rev. evidence .of any witness to the resurrection of
Clinton Chisholm Jesus Christ, it simply offers evidence about
witnesses to the resurrection. No one\ saw
Christ being raised from the dead yet the early
Christians believed ancl preached that he waS
raised from the dead, because of the empty
tomb and because of the post-death/burial
appearances of Jesus.
To put the issue in summary form then: the
resurrection of Jesus Christ is a deduction
based on the fundamental data of the empty
tOinb and post-death/burial appearances of
Jesus. Analysts of the documents of the New
Testament and of the related literature of the
first century must decide whether this deduction
is logical or lunatic. .
The burden of this paper is not to take the
reader through the evidence and.the argument in
defenseof the logical nature of the resurrection
deduction because this is very adequately dealt
with elsewhere. 1
Let me mention though a few things that
make the resurrection deduction highly
probable, plausible and credible.
Contrary to some scholars, there was' nothing
in Judaism that could bolster a belief in the
Clinton Chisholm. M.A .• resurrection of Jesus Christ. Any belief in
Ph.D .• (Cand.) is a resurrection, as held by the Pharisees, was
visiting lecturer at the belief in the resurrection of all the devout in
Jamaica Theological the eschaton (beyond time or history).
Seminary and the Something strange but real must have happened
Caribbean Graduate to make these Jews believe, proclaim, suffer
School of Theology. and give their lives for the doctrine ef the
------------------------ 8 ------------------------
resurrection ofJesus Christ!
Thank God for the male chauvinism of Judaism, in this particular
case~ no sensible Jew of the day, writing a mere theological or mythical
interpretation of the passion of Jesus, would have women as the primary
witnesses of the empty tomb! Bear in mind that all four evangelists
mention the fact that it was women who discovered the empty toml? (Mt.
28:1VO; Mk. 16:1-8; Lk. 24:1-12; In. 20:1-10). Since in Ist.,.century
Palestine women qua women were reg~ed as unreliable witnesses,
why give them such prominence in the account? The fact is, that is how
it happened . .
No explanatory theory of the Easter weekend has yet been advanced
that commands more probability, plausibility and credibility than the
doctrine of the resurrection. Reflection comes, in all likelihood, from
one of the earliest New Testament documents and it will lead us to
appreciate the fact that even on such a foundational issue as the
resurrection of Jesus Christ, professing Christians can qualify as
'unbelieving believers', or as people who mouth pious platitudes which
they do not really believe. The testis 1 Corinthians 15: 1-20. In Corinth,
a Greek city, chock hIll of philosophers and philosophies, some of the
Christians were having problems with the idea of a resurrection. It was
not so much thatthey were saying "the dead do not normally rise'
(thereby making allowance for the odd exception). No. According to v.
12 they were denying the very possibility of resurrection. (The
Sadducees had a similar view). .
Mind you, these Corinthians were professing Christians, it was just
that they regarded resurrection as impossible non-sense. Paul seeks
to take their belief a step further to highlight what such a belief entails
and implies. The Corinthian belief was not simply a difference of
opinion that did not matter much. That beliefwas an unwitting attack on
the very cornerstone of the Christian faith they professed. As far as Paul
is concerned if reSUJTeCtion is in fact impossible then such a fact had
revolutionary implications for Christian belief and behaviour and
could not be taken lightly.
Paul appeals to the ability of the Corinthians to reason logically and as
he reasons with them two things surface: Paul's Argument and Paul's
Affirmation.
1. PAUL'S A~GUMENT
1.1 A Reminder (vv. 1-11) .
Whatever the gospel was, Paul reminds the Corinthfans -that it was
preached to them and received by them. He reminds them that they are
saved by the gospel and stand in it [vv. 1-2]. The key components of the
----------------------- 9 ------------~---------
gospel are outlined in vv. 3-10, are three definitive statements.
Gospel Components
a) 'Christ died for our sins according to the scripture' Iv. 3 j.
Easter. or passion week is not a season for dispassionate observers and
celebrants of simply a religious tradition. No. Christ's death was for
our sins, He died in our place, in our stead. He was wounded for our
transgressions ... bruised for our iniquities, the chastisement that
resulted in our peace was upon Him and by His stripes we are healed.
Easter ought to have intensely personal significance for every
worshipper because the gospel, built around the Easter events, declares
that Christ died for our sins.
b) 'Christ was buried and rose again the third day according to the
sCriptures' Iv. 4].
No doubt, Paul had declared to them the doctrine that he articulated in
Romans 4:25 "Christ waS raised for our justification'. He was raised
that we who are "in Him' might be treated just as if we had never sinned.
That is, the savin act of God in Christ would have been incomplete if
Christ had died but was not raised from the dead triumphantly.
Resurrection had to follow death and burial.
c) The resurrected Christ was seen by numerous witnesses. Iv. 5-10}.
The presence of eyewitnesses was important to the early preachers [1
Cor. 15:6], as Peter would argue in 2 Peter 1: 16, 'We have not followed
cunningly devised fables (I.A:uBOLl;) when we made known the pOwer and
coming of our Lord Jesus Christ but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.'
Paul seals the reminder in his argument in v: 11. Irrespective of the
. preacher, the essence of the gospel preached and received was the same.
From reminder, Paul turns to mild rebuke in his argument, v: 12. How
can one claim to believe the gospel and doubt the possibility of a
resurrection? Paul then shows the logical outflow of the belief held by
them that the dead do not rise. -
1.2 A Rebuke (vv:13ft)
- If ~e dead do not rise then Christ is not raised [v: 13].
- If Christ is not raised then both Gospel and Faith are
contentless (KEVOU, KEV'll)[VV: 14].
~ If Christ is·not raised then Paul and his colleagues, as
------------------------10------------------------
preachers of the resurrection, are slanderers of God (perverse
liars) [v. 15].
-If Christ is not raised, Faith is worthless, living Christians are
still 'in their sins' and dead ones 'lost' or 'done for'.
Verse 19 is a profound climax to the rebuke and we should all ponder
it time and time again. Let me paraphrase v. 19 this way, 'If death ends
it all and there is nothing after, then Christians are to be pitied as fools'.
Why so? Think of it, if there is nothing beyond the grave, why live your
life walking a chalk-line of so-called Christian morality? To what
defensible end is that? I have some problems with Andrae Crouch's
song which says, 'If heaven never was promised to me neither God's
promise to live eternally, it would have been worth having the Lord in
my life ... ' How factual· is that really and how much more viable would
that kind of option be than any otherinlfor this life alone? Paul regards
such a notion as a waste of time. Look at v. 32. Paul seems to be saying
in essence, if there is 110 ultimate (that which is beyond death) then be
preoccupied solely with the immediate (that which is before death). If
death is final then the most defensible option i~ not conservatism but
hed()~~m! Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow you die.
Ethics, righteousness and holy living make real sense only ifthere is
an ultimate. So then, if, as some Christians were arguing, death is final,
if, as they were saying, there is only the now, the immediate, then Paul
says, Christians were and are idiots- living in the immediate as if there
is an ultimate, living in the now as if there is a then to come.
2. PAUL'S AFFIRMATION (v.W)
Paul says, Christ has been raised from the dead and he is the
proof-sample of these who are asleep. That's good news and bad
news! Since Christ is risen, resurrection is a fact and the ultimate is real.
We must not miss the hidden point in the words 'first-fruit of those who
are. asleep. Christ's resurrection grounds the notion of a resurrection,
especially for Christians, but as well for all who have died.
Since there is life after death, Christians are not to .be .pitied but
patterned. They stand on a solid foundation for time and for eternity, for
~~~b~~~b~~If~~~~~
Christian is in serious trouble because resurrection will reveal for that
one that the unsurrendered life represents all unwise preoccupation with
the immediate, the now, and we need to remember that whatever is
essentially immediate is also temporary. temporal and transient and can
be removed by death:
----------------------11----------------------
The resurrection of Jesus Christ is a fundamental and logical
deduction and a foundational doctrine in light of which we are
encouraged to live as if there is a then to come because there is. 0
NOTE
1. See the delightful dialogue between Don Cupitt and C. F. D. Moule in Don
Cupitt's Explorations in Theology 6, (London: SCM press), 1979,27-44;
James D. G. Dunn, The Evidence for Jesus, (London: SCM Press Ltd.,
1985),53-78; A. J. Hoover, The Case for Christian Theism, (Grand Rapids:
Baker Book House, 1976), 227-246; John Warwick Montgomery (ed.),
Evidence for Faith, (Probe Books, 1991), 275-302. My oral text (audio
cassette) The Resurrection of Jesus: Saturday or Sunday, Fact or
Fiction?, 1990, also deals with the issues.
-----------------------12-----------------------
