1 Corinthians

15:20-28

7. The resurrection, 15:1-58

iii] Christ's rule

In Chapter 15:12-34, Paul deals with the issue of the resurrection of the dead. His argument is simple enough. If Christ is risen, then the dead in Christ will rise also. In v.12-19 he outlines the consequence of denying the resurrection of Jesus. In v.20-28 he outlines the consequence of accepting the resurrection of Jesus. Then in v.29-34, he argues for a belief in the resurrection from his own experience. "In 15:20-28 Paul indicates that the final stage of the plan of redemption and the end of the present world order have already commenced: just as Christ was raised by God, so the church (believers together in Christ) will be raised", Naylor.

It seems that the Corinthian church had some problems concerning the resurrection of the dead, and so Paul writes to dispel their doubts. The central problem is most likely the question of a bodily, individual, resurrection of a person. The Corinthians were most likely influenced by Platonic thought and so accepted the existence of the soul beyond death, but were very sceptical of something that looked like "resuscitation".

In interpreting this passage it is possible to argue that Paul intends us to see an ongoing reign of Christ post the resurrection of the dead, an eternal battle in the heavenlies against the evil "powers and authorities." During this period, Christ leads resurrected believers in an assault against the powers of darkness. In this sense, we rise to reign with Christ. The sample sermon takes this line, although the reader will understand that such a view is anything but proved.

A more conservative interpretation has wider appeal. The "enemy" is sin and death and once this enemy is put away, Satan's power is destroyed. The resurrection of the dead heralds the end of sin and death and thus, the end of Satan and his minions.

A widely accepted, although less than satisfactory interpretation of the passage, is the dispensationalist approach. This view was popularized some years ago in Hal Lindsay's, "The Late Great Planet Earth". In this view there is an immanent "coming [of Christ] for his saints" when believers are raptured. Jesus comes secretly and raises the dead and transfigures the living to himself in the air. This is the resurrection at the first coming of Christ. Then follows seven years when the world is evangelized, Israel converted, the great tribulation occurs and the Antichrist is revealed. After this, Jesus returns with his saints to judge the world and then usher in his millennial kingdom. For some, this kingdom is an eternal one, reigning over new heavens and new earth. For others it lasts for a thousand years. Those who believe in the millennial kingdom lasting a literal thousand years, fall into two groups:

i] Premillennial. This view maintains the sequence of events above with the millennial kingdom centered in Jerusalem and a new temple, a kingdom ruled by Christ and his saints with great power and glory. The reign of the earthly kingdom ends when Satan is loosed for a time. He attacks the holy city, but is ultimately defeated and judged. This ushers in the new heavens and new earth.

ii] Postmillennial. This view sometimes holds to a literal thousand years. "A period in the later days of the church militant, when, under the special influence of the Holy Spirit, the spirit of the martyrs shall appear again, true religion is greatly quickened and revived, and the members of Christ's churches become so conscious of their strength in Christ that they shall, to an extent unknown before, triumph over the power of evil both within and without". So says Strong. The return of Christ comes at the conclusion of this millennial kingdom.

The dispensational approach tends to proof-text scripture and so is more imposed than derived.

"Christ's resurrection anticipates and exemplifies that of all believers", Naylor.

nuni de "but ..... indeed" - now but. Arndt and Gingrich "indeed". An adversative sense in response to v19, "but in point of fact ....", Barclay. The NRSV has "but in fact." A temporal sense is carried in this construction, explaining the way things are at the moment, namely, Christ has risen and therefore, we have life now.

aparch (h) "firstfruits" - Used in an illustrative sense, the first of a great number. The first grains of the harvest represent the first of a great number and Jesus' bodily/individual/personal resurrection represents the first rising to life of the resurrection of all believers. Jesus is "the first cab off the rank" as it were.

twn kekoimhmenwn (koimaw) pas. part. "those who have fallen asleep" - the ones having fallen asleep. The participle functions as a substantive. A Pauline description of the state of believers who have died. Those who have died "in" Christ are asleep in his arms and will awake in the last day, although, in eternal terms, we are already awake and sitting with Christ at the heavenly banquet. The idea of "sleeping in Jesus" counters our rather platonic view of the soul leaving the body and going to be with Jesus when we die. The scriptures clearly state that the dead in Christ rise on the day of his return, so sleeping in Jesus serves as a comforting descriptive of our waiting for that coming day, although like the thief on the cross, the wait is not something we will experience for we will meet Jesus "this evening."

Paul now explains how it is that Christ's resurrection anticipates and exemplifies the resurrection of believers by drawing "an analogy between two uniquely representative men", Bruce, v21-22.

gar "for" - Introducing an explanation.

epeidh "since" - because. Establishing a comparative causal clause; "insomuch as ..... then ....." "For this is how the matter stands. It was through a man that death was brought to us, and so it was a man who brought resurrection of the dead", Cassirer.

dia + gen. "[came] through" - by means of. "Came" is added for meaning; "entered the world by means of Adam's sin."

anqrwpou (oV) "a man" - Referring to Adam and his sin.

gar "for" - Introducing an explanation, here of the statement made in v21, "explaining how so", Fee.

w{sper ........ ou{twV kai "as ......, so ...." - A comparative construction; "just as ....., so also / even so too ......" A causal sense may be carried by the comparison; "for just as because of their relation to Adam all die, so because of their relation to Christ they will all be brought to life again", Goodspeed.

en "in [Adam / Christ]" - A local sense expressing association; "in union with Adam / in union with Christ", TEV.

panteV "all" - all those who believe, all those who are in an association with Christ. All those associated with Adam die = the whole human race. All those associated with Christ live = believers. The "all" certainly does not imply all people whether believers or not.

zw/opoihqhsontai (zwopoiew) fut. pas. "will be made alive" - Paul has chosen this word to emphasize the quality of life found in Christ's resurrection, as opposed to the resuscitation of a dead corps.

Paul now explains the sequential movement of the created order from Christ's resurrection to the divine settlement of all dominion, authority and power in the kingdom. In this sequential movement the resurrection of those in Christ follows his return, v23-24.

de "but" - but, and. Adversative. The main verb is carried in v22, "in Christ all will be made alive BUT each [will be brought to life] in his own order."

tagmati (a, atoV) "turn" - proper order, orderly. The word has a military origin meaning "rank / division", but also came to mean "each in its place / sequence." "But each in the proper arranged order", Thiselton.

epeita "then" - afterward, later, then. Although the passage doesn't rule out a time interval between the rising of the dead and the gathering up of the living, it does seem to imply the two events are related. This is confirmed in Paul's first letter to the Thessalonians, 4:13-18. The ordering of the rising serves to underline the fact that those who have already died do not miss out, or end up last in line. It is clear though, that there is a time interval between the resurrection of Christ and the resurrection of believers, so "then, next in sequence, ..."

oiJ tou Cristou "those who belong to him" - the ones of Christ. The non genitive article followed by the articular genitive "Christ" indicates relationship, belonging to.

en th/ parousia/ autou "when he comes" - in the coming / presence / appearing of him. Possibly a causal sense, ie. the parousia is the instrument by which the dead in Christ rise, although more likely temporal indicating when the dead in Christ rise, namely, at his coming. Of course, the major problem we face is where will Christ appear? His appearing / coming is in the clouds in glory, but where? We automatically opt for a coming to earth, but if the perspective is that of Daniel then Christ's coming is to heaven, to the Ancient of Days, and this with the resurrected saints. "At his arrival", Naylor.

ei\ta "then" - then, afterwards. Probably again, "the next in sequence", although the word does not define whether or not the sequential events coincide.

to teloV (ouV to) "the end will come" - end, conclusion, goal. Paul does not explain what this is, but possibly he is speaking about the end of human history, or in a wider sense the end of God's redemptive plan in Christ, the submission of all powers under Christ's reign, cf. Naylor, R&P, Garland. Yet, Paul may just be using the word in the sense of "climax", or "goal", a climax/goal which entails the handing over of the kingdom to the Father, so Fee. Following the resurrection of believers and the consequential end of human history, the sequence of events moves to the ultimate goal when Christ hands over the kingdom to the Father. It is possible, although unlikely, that teloV here means "rest / remainder", so the resurrection sequence is: first Christ; then believers; and "then the rest."

oJtan + subj. "when" - when, whenever. This construction forms a temporal clause expressing a future reality of indeterminate time. As already noted, there remains the possibility that between th parousia "the coming / appearing" of Christ, entailing the resurrection of believers and the end of human history, there is an indeterminate period of time during which Christ establishes his eternal reign, along with the resurrected community of believers / saints, over all spiritual powers, prior to handing the kingdom to the Father. The more conservative position is to tie Christ's "coming / appearing" to his handing over of the kingdom to the Father. A heavenly struggle post resurrection remains speculative. The two temporal clauses are obviously temporally linked, although the "second is subordinate to the first", Conzelmann, so "after Christ has destroyed every rule and authority and power in the spirit-world, he will hand over the kingdom to God the Father", Barclay.

paradidw/ (paradidwmi) pres. subj. "he hands over" - he gives over. Variant aor. Christ's handing over of authority to the Father (not "God", Conzelmann), after the annihilation of all hostile powers, is a rather strange idea, given that a division of authority in the godhead is anything but doctrinally sound (cf. trinity). It is likely that Paul is simply describing an eternal settlement of divine authority, the full realization of the kingdom of God, the final hoped-for setting of all things right, rather than all authority being vested in the Father. In Jewish thought the rule/reign of God entails the realization of the kingdom of God, of new heavens and new earth. For this we are to pray, "thy kingdom come"; for this we wait expectantly, the spirit-filled church being but a foretaste. So, Paul is simply describing the realization of the kingdom of God after Christ's triumph over all the powers of darkness, as compared to its inauguration in the resurrection of Christ, cf. Ruef.

katarghsh/ (katargew) pres. subj. "he has destroyed" - he may nullify, make of no effect, abolish. It is likely that the destruction of the evil powers of the universe is not just limited to the power structures of this world. These powers primarily reside in "heavenly places" and thus, the battle will be in the cosmos. As noted above, such is a matter of conjecture.

Explaining "why the Son continues to hold the basileia kingdom", R&P, and the last great enemy, v25-26.

gar "for" - Explanatory.

dei "must" - it is necessary. Bound by God's divine will. The divine will is that all enemies, earthly and cosmic, be destroyed and thus, Christ must reign until they are destroyed. Paul draws on the language of Psalm 8:6, 110:1 where the Lord invites David to sit at his right hand in which position of authority all his enemies will become his footstool. Paul applies this messianic promise to Christ.

basileuein (basileuw) pres. inf. "reign" - The infinitive functions as the subject of the verb "is necessary"; "to reign is necessary."

acri + subj. "until" - until [he may put]. Forming an indefinite temporal clause referring to a future time in relation to the main verb. "Until he has reduced all his enemies to complete subjection", Barclay.

katargeitai (katargew) pres. pas. "to be destroyed" - being abolished. Most translations understand the present tense as expressing "what is certain", R&P, so NIV. Yet, giving weight to the durative aspect of the present tense in the Gk. we have the sense "the last enemy is being destroyed / annihilated", expressing the thought that the process is underway now through Christ's reign, ie. "death is being led inexorably to its final doom", Naylor, cf. Barrett. The duration of Christ's sovereign reign began at the point of time when the Father handed over the authority of the universe to his Son and concludes when all that is opposed to the living God is no more. The final enemy is death itself, ie. when the enemies of God are no more, there will be no more death, Rev.20:14. The quote from Psalm 8:4-7, makes the point that Adam was given authority over the world, but lost this authority in rebellion. In Christ this authority is restored to mankind.

qanatoV (oV) nom. "death" - This noun is obviously appositional, "the last enemy is being destroyed, namely death", Thiselton.

These final two verses serve as a qualification where Paul makes the point that "everything" is not God himself, v27-28.

gar "for" - This conjunction here serves to introduce an explanation which qualifies the extent of the "all things" (panta, emphatic position) that are "under his feet", ie. it doesn't include God / the Father himself. Best not translated since "If" gar is translated it implies that the verse is explaining v26. "Scripture says that God has subjected all things to him (Christ)", Barclay.

de "now" - but, and. Adversative; "but when it said ...", Cassirer.

o{tan + subj. "when it says" - when it / he (God the Father / Christ??) says. Forming an indefinite future temporal clause; "when God shall have said", R&P, ie. when God ultimately proclaims the final victory of Christ over all his enemies.

oJti "that" - that. Introducing a direct quote: "when it/he says 'all things have been subjected'".

oJti "[it is clear] that" - Here introducing an object clause / dependent statement of perception expressing what is clear/evident; "it is clear that 'all things' excludes the one who did the subjecting to him", Fee.

ektoV + gen. "this does not include God himself" - free from, apart from, independent of. "It is plain enough that that excludes the one who subjected all things to him", Cassirer.

tou uJpotaxantoV (upotassw) aor. part. "who put [everything under Christ]" - the one having subjected [to him all things]. The participle functions as a substantive.

de "-" - but, and. Here connective.

oJtan + subj. "when [he has done this]" - when [all things are subjected to him]. The "all things" now subjected to Christ are the powers and authorities in the heavenly realms. Once subjected, Christ hands over his authority to the Father. As noted above, the more conservative interpretation would have the "all things" as sin and death.

iJna + subj. "so that" - that [God may be all things in all]. Forming a purpose / hypothetical result clause. As noted above, the handing over of authority from the Son to the Father is a difficult notion to grasp for Gentiles who are not grounded in the Old Testament. Here though, Paul's qualification brings clarity where sin and its consequences, now having been dealt with by Christ, give way to unity/completeness in the godhead, producing an absolutely comprehensive and unified divine reign. This is not some metaphysical absorption (cf. Barrett, Fee), but a declaration that "God is over all", Garland. "Thus, in the end, shall God be wholly and absolutely God", Moffatt; "that there may continue to be, after all, in every sense, but One God", Junkins.

1 Corinthians Introduction

lectionarystudies.com