Vain . You accepted our proclamation ( kerugma ) , yet it would be utterly void if its central testimony was false. The word translated "then" has a sort of ironic force—"after all," or "it seems." The whole argument is at once an argumentum ad hominem and a reductio ad absurdum. Your faith is also vain. For it would be faith in a crucified man, not in the risen Christ. read more
And if Christ is not risen, then is our preaching vain - Another consequence which must follow if it be held that there was no resurrection, and consequently that Christ was not risen. it would be vain and useless to preach. The substance of their preaching was that Christ was raised up; and all their preaching was based on that. If that were not true, the whole system was false, and Christianity was an imposition. The word vain here seems to include the idea of useless, idle, false. It would... read more
1 Corinthians 15:14-18. Then is our preaching In consequence of a commission supposed to be given after his resurrection; vain Without any real foundation, and destitute of truth; and your faith In our preaching; is vain Is grounded on falsehood and deception; yea, and we are false witnesses of God Having testified that Jesus of Nazareth is his Son and the Messiah; that he hath atoned for sin; hath risen from the dead and ascended into heaven; hath obtained for his followers the... read more
A guarantee of final victory (15:12-28)To those who claim there will be no bodily resurrection of the dead, Paul replies that if this is true it means that Christ has not been raised. In that case the gospel he preaches is not true and the believer’s faith is without foundation (12-14). Furthermore, it means that the preachers of the gospel have misled their hearers. For if Christ has not been raised from the dead, he is certainly not the victorious Saviour. He has not conquered sin; sin has... read more
be not risen = has not been raised. preaching . App-121 . faith . App-150 . is also = also is . read more
And if Christ hath not been raised, then is our preaching vain, your faith also is vain.The absolutely fundamental nature of the resurrection of Christ and the legitimate corollaries derived from it are affirmed here. So-called "modernists" who pretend to be Christians while denying the resurrection are not Christian at all in any New Testament sense. read more
14. your faith . . . vain— (1 Corinthians 15:11). The Greek for "vain" here is, empty, unreal: in 1 Corinthians 15:11- :, on the other hand, it is, without use, frustrated. The principal argument of the first preachers in support of Christianity was that God had raised Christ from the dead (Acts 1:22; Acts 2:32; Acts 4:10; Acts 4:33; Acts 13:37; Romans 1:4). If this fact were false, the faith built on it must be false too. read more
The negative alternative 15:12-19Paul first appealed to the Corinthians’ logic. In this form of logic, called modus tollens, Paul’s argument was that since Christ was raised there is a resurrection of believers. That Paul had believers in view, rather than all people, seems clear in that he was discussing the hope of believers. Other passages teach the resurrection of other groups of people, even all others (e.g., Daniel 12:2; Revelation 20:4-5; Revelation 20:12; et al.). Here it becomes clear... read more
2. The certainty of resurrection 15:12-34In the preceding paragraph Paul firmly established that the gospel the Corinthians had believed contained the fact that God had raised Jesus Christ bodily, along with other equally crucial facts. Next he proceeded to show the consequences of rejecting belief in the resurrection of the body."Paul uses reductio ad absurdum: if there is no resurrection (i.e., of believers in the future), then Jesus did not rise (1 Corinthians 15:12-13), a point on which he... read more
Get Bible verse every day in your inbox
Read on Mobile
The Pulpit Commentary - 1 Corinthians 15:12-34
Denying the resurrection from the dead, and what the denial involves. Some of these Corinthian Christians denied that there would be a literal resurrection. They understood little or nothing of the idea of the body, of its uses intellectually and morally regarded, and of its partnership with the soul in all that concerned present probation and future reward. What had Grecian philosophy taught them? That the body was the seat of evil. What had Grecian art taught them? To admire the body for... read more