Happy Easter, everyone! He is risen!

The readings for Easter Day are many. Year B’s are here.

Also available are an exegesis for another Epistle, Acts 10:34-43 (Peter’s preaching to Cornelius and his household), and the following Gospel accounts of the Resurrection: John 20:1-18, Luke 24:1-12 and Matthew 28:1-10.

Today’s Epistle for Year B is as follows (emphases mine):

1 Corinthians 15:1-11

15:1 Now I would remind you, brothers and sisters, of the good news that I proclaimed to you, which you in turn received, in which also you stand,

15:2 through which also you are being saved, if you hold firmly to the message that I proclaimed to you–unless you have come to believe in vain.

15:3 For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures,

15:4 and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures,

15:5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.

15:6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died.

15:7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.

15:8 Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.

15:9 For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.

15:10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me has not been in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them–though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me.

15:11 Whether then it was I or they, so we proclaim and so you have come to believe.

Commentary comes from Matthew Henry and John MacArthur.

John MacArthur’s sermons for this reading are from 1977, so I was astonished to read the fifth paragraph below in his first sermon on these verses:

Christians, down through the ages, have banked their destiny, have banked their destiny, have banked their life, have banked their hope on the fact that the shameful death of Jesus Christ was not the last word, but that he arose and triumphed over death, and that when He said, “Because I live, ye shall live also,” He granted to anyone who comes to Him by faith the same resurrection hope.

And it was this belief, and this belief alone, frankly, that turned the heartbroken followers of a crucified rabbi into the courageous martyrs of the early Church. It was the resurrection that gave birth to the fellowship of the saints that became the Church.

And they found, in those early years, that they could imprison them, and they could chastise them, and they could beat them, and they could verbally assault them, and they could invent ways to persecute them, and they could even kill them, but they could never make them deny the reality of the resurrection. It has always been, and will always be the cornerstone of the Christian faith.

And because that is true, the most fierce blows struck at Christianity, in its history, have been struck at the point of the resurrection. Because if you wipe out the resurrection, you get rid of everything: you eliminate salvation; you eliminate the deity of Christ; you eliminate eternal life; you eliminate the consequence of death. You just wipe it all out. And so, the resurrection is always under attack.

Some of you picked up the morning Times on Monday, after hearing our message on the resurrection last Sunday. On the front page you saw that article which stated that all Christian scholars agree that there is no resurrection. L.A. Times. And that this is something that’s just the wishful thinking of a few ancient fundamentalist fuddy-duddies who have long since lost touch with the reality of the truth.

Dear, oh dear. That’s nearly 50 years ago.

Matthew Henry explains concisely the problems that the Corinthians had with a bodily resurrection, which has been assured throughout Scripture, particularly the Old Testament. Incidentally, ancient Jews believed in bodily resurrection:

It is the apostle’s business in this chapter to assert and establish the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, which some of the Corinthians flatly denied, v. 12. Whether they turned this doctrine into allegory, as did Hymeneus and Philetus, by saying it was already past (2 Tim 2 17, 18), and several of the ancient heretics, by making it mean no more than a changing of their course of life; or whether they rejected it as absurd, upon principles of reason and science; it seems they denied it in the proper sense. And they disowned a future state of recompences, by denying the resurrection of the dead. Now that heathens and infidels should deny this truth does not seem so strange; but that Christians, who had their religion by revelation, should deny a truth so plainly discovered is surprising, especially when it is a truth of such importance. It was time for the apostle to confirm them in this truth, when the staggering of their faith in this point was likely to shake their Christianity; and they were yet in great danger of having their faith staggered. He begins with an epitome or summary of the gospel, what he had preached among them, namely, the death and resurrection of Christ. Upon this foundation the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead is built. Note, Divine truths appear with greatest evidence when they are looked upon in their mutual connection. The foundation may be strengthened, that the superstructure may be secured.

Paul refers to the teaching on the Resurrection that he had given to the Corinthians previously, which, he says, they in turn received and in which they stand (verse 1).

In older translations, the word ‘now’, more easily understood as a transition from the Apostle’s previous message from 1 Corinthians 14, says ‘moreover’.

Paul goes on to say that that belief is causing them to be saved, provided that they hold on to it, unless they have believed in vain (verse 2).

Henry explains Paul’s determination to ensure that the Corinthians, influenced by Greek philosophy, believe in bodily resurrection. Just as Christ rose from the dead, so shall we:

1. It was what he constantly preached. His word was not yea and nay: he always preached the same gospel, and taught the same truth. He could appeal to his hearers for this. Truth is in its own nature invariable; and the infallible teachers of divine truth could never be at variance with themselves or one another. The doctrine which Paul had heretofore taught, he still taught. 2. It was what they had received; they had been convinced of the faith, believed it in their hearts, or at least made profession of doing so with their mouths. It was no strange doctrine. It was that very gospel in which, or by which, they had hitherto stood, and must continue to stand. If they gave up this truth, they left themselves no ground to stand upon, no footing in religion. Note, The doctrine of Christ’s death and resurrection is at the foundation of Christianity. Remove this foundation, and the whole fabric falls, all our hopes for eternity sink at once. And it is by holding this truth firmly that Christians are made to stand in a day of trial, and kept faithful to God. 3. It was that alone by which they could hope for salvation (v. 2), for there is no salvation in any other name; no name given under heaven by which we may be saved, but by the name of Christ. And there is no salvation in his name, but upon supposition of his death and resurrection. These are the saving truths of our holy religion. The crucifixion of our Redeemer and his conquest over death are the very source of our spiritual life and hopes. Now concerning these saving truths observe, (1.) They must be retained in mind, they must be held fast (so the word is translated, Heb 10 23): Let us hold fast the profession of our faith. Note, The saving truths of the gospel must be fixed in our mind, revolved much in our thoughts, and maintained and held fast to the end, if we would be saved. They will not save us, if we do not attend to them, and yield to their power, and continue to do so to the end. He only that endureth to the end shall be saved, Matt 10 22. (2.) We believe in vain, unless we continue and persevere in the faith of the gospel. We shall be never the better for a temporary faith; nay, we shall aggravate our guilt by relapsing into infidelity. And in vain is it to profess Christianity, or our faith in Christ, if we deny the resurrection; for this must imply and involve the denial of his resurrection; and, take away this, you make nothing of Christianity, you leave nothing for faith or hope to fix upon.

Paul then recaps what he taught that congregation: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures (verse 3).

There are several prophecies about the Messiah’s death in the Old Testament as well as sacrificial types of Christ. For Good Friday 2024, I have two lengthy exegeses on Isaiah 52 and 53, here and here. Isaiah fully prophesies the Crucifixion and the Resurrection.

Paul says that our Lord was buried and raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures (verse 4).

Henry says:

He died for our sins, according to the scriptures; he was buried, and rose from the dead, according to the scriptures, according to the scripture-prophecies, and scripture-types. Such prophecies as Ps 16 10; Isa 53 4-6; Dan 9 26, 27; Hos 6 2. Such scripture-types as Jonah (Matt 12 4), as Isaac, who is expressly said by the apostle to have been received from the dead in a figure, Heb 11 19. Note, It is a great confirmation of our faith of the gospel to see how it corresponds with ancient types and prophecies.

Paul says that the risen Christ appeared first to Cephas — Peter, Simon Peter — then the Twelve (verse 5).

Henry explains why Paul says ‘Twelve’, even though Judas had committed suicide already:

He was seen of Cephas, or Peter, then of the twelve, called so, though Judas was no longer among them, because this was their usual number …

MacArthur has more:

Verse 5 says, “And He was seen” – literally, He appeared. And we say that because Jesus was never seen by anyone to whom He did not reveal Himself after His resurrection. Mary Magdalene was in the garden. She saw Him. Did she know it was Him? No, she thought it was the gardener, and she didn’t know till He revealed Himself. Two disciples, who had been with Him for three years, walked along on the road to Emmaus. Did they know who He was? They didn’t know who He was until He revealed Himself.

In John 21, He appears on the shore, and they don’t know who He is until He chooses to reveal Himself. Post resurrection, no one saw Jesus as Jesus until He revealed who He was to a select group.

And so, He revealed Himself after His resurrection. And now Paul chronologically lists those revelations. And incidentally, since this is the oldest record of the resurrection, written even before any of the Gospels, this is the first insight into who were the eyewitnesses who saw Him. Number one was Cephas, and that’s Aramaic for rock. Greek for rock is what? Peter. And Luke 24:34 when the road to Emmaus, disciples came along, they reported to everybody else that He was seen by Simon.

MacArthur tells us why Jesus chose Peter, who had denied him three times in the early hours of Good Friday, as Jesus foretold, then wept bitterly afterwards:

Number one, I think God wanted to emphasize what grace is and what love is and what forgiveness is. And aren’t you glad He picks up the unworthy folks? Aren’t you happy about that? I am. Jesus needed Peter for a strategic ministry. You see, He can use crooked sticks as well as He can use straight ones. And He went right to Peter because He needed Peter. And after all, Peter had denied Him, but what had he done immediately after he denied Him? He went out and did what? He wept bitterly. And I think he had a broken heart. And I think the thing that Peter was so left with was that he had denied Jesus, and now Jesus was dead, and he could never make it right. So, Jesus went right to him and met with him.

Now, we don’t know about that meeting, because the Scripture doesn’t tell us about it. It was just a very private meeting. But Peter became eyewitness number one.

You say, “Well, why did they pick Peter out?”

I’ll tell you why. Who was the unquestionable leader among the twelve? Peter. Who had the greatest ministry in the first 12 chapters of the book of Acts? Peter. Who was the guy with the greatest line of credibility, with the greatest believability, with the most clout, with the greatest power, with the greatest impact on the early Church in Jerusalem? Peter. And he picks out the prime witness of the resurrection and says, “Peter believed it; he saw Him.” And they got to say, “Wow, and Peter’s something. What a man.”

Post-resurrection, Peter was indomitable, powerful. Peter believed it.

As for appearing to the Apostles:

You remember that same day it says in John 20:19, “And the same day, it being night, the disciples were in the upper room, the door being shut, and Jesus appeared to them and said, ‘Peace be unto you’”? Immediately, in John 20, after the incident with Peter, and He’s right to the upper room; and He meets the twelve. Now, there’s only 11 now, but “the twelve” became their official title. They were called “the twelve.” Even though there was only 11 because of Judas’ apostasy, they’re called “the twelve.” And so, Jesus went to be with them.

It’s recorded also in Luke 24:33 to 43.

Paul says that Jesus also appeared to 500 people, some of whom were still alive when he wrote to the Corinthians, although some had died (verse 6).

Henry tells us:

… he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once, many of whom were living when the apostle wrote this epistle, though some had fallen asleep. This was in Galilee, Matt 28 10.

MacArthur says:

… he says, “After that, He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once” – at the same time. And he adds this – “of whom the greater part remain to the present time, but some have died.” He says, “Here’s a second line of evidence. Not only” – now watch this – “Not only is the resurrection validated by the character of these witnesses, but by the number of these other witnesses. You’ve not only got the twelve, whose character is impeccable, unquestionable, but you’ve got the mass of 500 people who saw the living Christ.”

So, in one case you have the quality witness; in the other case, you have – what? – quantity witnesses, the great number. Now, where did this occur? Well, some believe it occurred in Jerusalem, because that’s where so many people lived that were associated with the Church. But if you really look at the text in Acts 1, you find there were only 120 disciples in Jerusalem, when the Church was born, gathered in the upper room? There may have been some more, but it seems best to assume that Jesus’ greatest reception was not in Jerusalem, but maybe the greatest crowd of people would have been in Galilee. And in fact, perhaps the sighting of Jesus by the 500 occurred on some hillside in Galilee, when Jesus was in Galilee, as Matthew indicates, in the latter chapters, He would be. So, whatever; but somewhere in Jerusalem perhaps a little less likely, but maybe in Galilee, more likely, Jesus appeared to 500 people at once. That’s a lot of witnesses. You have any case in court that you want to have, and you drag through 500 people who all say the same thing, that’s fairly convincing.

I mean all you needed, according to the Old Testament law, was that something had to be confirmed in the mouth of – what? – two or three. God always goes overboard, everything He does. He just had 497 more than He needed.

And listen to this; this is so great. He says, “The majority of them are still alive. You check it out.” Not only the character of witnesses who would some of them be dead, but the quantity of witnesses, most of whom were still alive. “You can ask them yourself.”

Paul says that Jesus appeared to James, then to all the Apostles (verse 7).

Henry says that the last part of that verse refers to the Ascension:

… he was seen of James singly, and then by all the apostles when he was taken up into heaven. This was on mount Olivet, Luke 24 50. Compare Acts 1 2, 5-7.

MacArthur says that this particular James was His step-brother:

This is James, the brother of our Lord, the one who wrote the epistle of James. The one who became the head of the Jerusalem church in the sense that he was the leader. James, the brother of Jesus – the half-brother – the son of Joseph and Mary.

You say, “Well, what’s so important about this?”

Well, this is a witness of a different kind. Listen to John chapter 7, verse 5, “For neither did His brothers believe in Him.” Now you’ve got the testimony of His own brother who is an unbeliever …

Listen, the importance of this is the fact that here you have a witness right out of His family, who was a skeptic, who has totally been changed, and He is now a believer of the resurrection. Now, James didn’t believe that Jesus was who He claimed. James didn’t believe. John 7:5 says it. Didn’t believe. Maybe when Jesus died, James began to feel a little remorse, and maybe as he knew the circumstances of the death of his half-brother, humanly speaking, maybe he began to feel some admiration for Jesus. And Jesus wanted a witness out of His own family, because, you know, it would be hard. People would say, “Ah, don’t kid us about you resurrecting from the dead. Your own family doesn’t even believe it.”

And so, Jesus sought out James. Jesus appeared to James in resurrection form, and James believed. And James was changed. And James, it says in James 1:1, starts out his letter by saying, “James, a servant of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Well, that’s a big change for an unbeliever.

Now you’ve got not only the testimony of quality men, and of a quantity crowd, but you’ve got the testimony of a skeptic here. And right out of Jesus’ own family, an unbeliever is transformed into one who does believe. The resurrection convinced him when all the rest of the stuff didn’t, apparently. He’d watched Jesus’ life. It didn’t convince him. The resurrection did.

Then, referring to his Damascene conversion, Paul says that Jesus appeared lastly to him — as to one untimely born (verse 8).

Henry’s Bible says:

8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.

Why does Paul refer to himself in such a context? Because he was not one of the Twelve. He came later, yet, having been instructed by Christ during his three-day conversion and later in the desert (see Galatians 1 below).

Henry explains:

It was one of the peculiar offices of an apostle to be a witness of our Saviour’s resurrection (Luke 24 48); and, when Paul was called to the apostolical office, he was made an evidence of this sort; the Lord Jesus appeared to him by the way to Damascus, Acts 9 17. Having mentioned this favour, Paul takes occasion from it to make a humble digression concerning himself. He was highly favoured of God, but he always endeavoured to keep up a mean opinion of himself, and to express it. So he does here, by observing, (1.) That he was one born out of due time (v. 8), an abortive, ektroma, a child dead born, and out of time. Paul resembled such a birth, in the suddenness of his new birth, in that he was not matured for the apostolic function, as the others were, who had personal converse with our Lord. He was called to the office when such conversation was not to be had, he was out of time for it. He had not known nor followed the Lord, nor been formed in his family, as the others were, for this high and honourable function. This was in Paul’s account a very humbling circumstance.

MacArthur says:

Paul says, “I saw Him.” When did you see Him, Paul? You weren’t even around, fella. “I saw Him. I was on my way to Damascus.” Read Acts 9. “And I was just going there, and I was breathing out fire and slaughter, and I was going to do my thing. See? And all of a sudden, I got slammed to the dirt, and there in front of me was the blazing, glorious, resurrected Christ. And I said to Him, ‘Lord, what will You have me to do?’”

Paul saw Him. He saw Him, and He was so brilliant, He blinded him. It wasn’t the blinding of darkness; it was the blinding of light, like gazing at the sun. “I saw Him,” he said. He says, “I saw Him as one born out of due time.” Literally, tō ektrōmati, from the word ektrōma which means a premature birth. Ektrōmati is an aborted fetus. Now, that’s interesting. He says, “I saw Him as an aborted fetus, an abortion, a miscarriage.”

What’s he saying? Well, it seems to suggest, initially the Greek word does, that he was born too soon. But the fact is, in relation to the 12 apostles, he wasn’t born too soon; he was born – what? – too late. Well, how do you explain that? Well, perhaps the Greek word can imply that. Some commentators feel that the Greek word simply means an untimely birth, which means he could have been born too early, like a miscarriage;, or too late, retained too long. And maybe the word can mean that. Maybe he’s simply saying, “I was born at the wrong time.” It’s possible that the Greek word could just be a general word meaning a birth at the wrong time, either early or late.

There were also those who hated Paul’s message:

… some commentators say that there may have been some people who called him “the abortion,” because it was a term of derision and despite and hatred. And the people hated him so much for his gospel of grace which counteracted their systems of law.

This is what Paul wrote the Galatians in the first chapter of his letter:

Paul called by God

¹¹ I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. ¹² I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

¹³ For you have heard of my previous way of life in Judaism, how intensely I persecuted the church of God and tried to destroy it. ¹⁴ I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers. ¹⁵ But when God, who set me apart from my mother’s womb and called me by his grace, was pleased ¹⁶ to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, my immediate response was not to consult any human being. ¹⁷ I did not go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went into Arabia. Later I returned to Damascus.

¹⁸ Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Cephas^[b]and stayed with him fifteen days. ¹⁹ I saw none of the other apostles – only James, the Lord’s brother. ²⁰ I assure you before God that what I am writing to you is no lie.

²¹ Then I went to Syria and Cilicia. ²² I was personally unknown to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. ²³ They only heard the report: ‘The man who formerly persecuted us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy.’ ²⁴ And they praised God because of me.

Based on his ‘untimely birth’ in faith, Paul says that he is the least of the Apostles, unfit because of his active persecution of our Lord’s followers (verse 9), which, by the way, included Stephen the first martyr.

Henry says:

Note, A humble spirit, in the midst of high attainments, is a great ornament to any man; it sets his good qualities off to much greater advantage. What kept Paul low in an especial manner was the remembrance of his former wickedness, his raging and destructive zeal against Christ and his members. Note, How easily God can bring a good out of the greatest evil! When sinners are by divine grace turned into saints, he makes the remembrance of their former sins very serviceable, to make them humble, and diligent, and faithful.

MacArthur posits that Paul’s past life could have haunted him in his ministry:

… he uses the emphatic pronoun in verse 9, “For I, who am the least of the apostles, I’m not fit to be even called an apostle, because I persecuted the Church of God.”

Can’t you imagine that all through the life of that dear man, in his mind he saw the visions coming back of the people he had persecuted because they loved Jesus Christ? They were all his brothers, and he’d killed them once. “I didn’t deserve it,” he said. “The least of all.”

Paul then focuses on the free gift of divine grace that saved him, referring to it three times: by the grace of God he is what he is, His grace not having been in vain; he worked harder as an Apostle than the Twelve (Matthias replaced Judas, Acts 1) but acknowledges that was through God’s grace, not his own efforts (verse 10).

Henry points out the Apostle’s humility:

Note, Those who have the grace of God bestowed on them should take care that it be not in vain. They should cherish, and exercise, and exert, this heavenly principle. So did Paul, and therefore laboured with so much heart and so much success. And yet the more he laboured, and the more good he did, the more humble he was in his opinion of himself, and the more disposed to own and magnify the favour of God towards him, his free and unmerited favour. Note, A humble spirit will be very apt to own and magnify the grace of God. A humble spirit is commonly a gracious one. Where pride is subdued there it is reasonable to believe grace reigns.

MacArthur says that the Resurrection converted Paul:

And so, he says, “It wasn’t in vain either. But I labored more abundantly than the rest of the apostles; yet it wasn’t me, but it was the grace of God was with me.” Kopiaō, “I worked to the point of exhaustion. And God gave more abundant fruit to me than He did to anybody else,” he says. “And it wasn’t me; it was God.” He’s not extolling his hard work. He’s saying, “I worked hard, and there was a more abundant response as God’s grace worked.” It’s the idea of results in the “more abundant” rather “effort.” God’s grace did it.

How do you turn a guy going killing Christians into the greatest apostle who ever lived? How do you take somebody who’s doing everything he can to destroy the Church into the greatest proponent of the Church that ever lived? There’s only one thing that could do it. He saw the living Christ. That did it.

Finally, Paul says that, whether it was one of the Twelve or himself, they all proclaim the same — the Resurrection — and so the Corinthians have come to believe (verse 11).

Henry concludes:

… all the apostles preached the same: Whether it were they or I, so we preached, and so you believed. Whether Peter, or Paul, or any other apostle, had converted them to Christianity, all maintained the same truth, told the same story, preached the same doctrine, and confirmed it by the same evidence. All agreed in this that Jesus Christ, and him crucified and slain, and then rising from the dead, was the very sum and substance of Christianity; and this all true Christians believe. All the apostles agreed in this testimony; all Christians agree in the belief of it. By this faith they live. In this faith they die.

MacArthur points out that the scepticism surrounding the Resurrection is a relatively new ‘thing’, as we would say today:

Listen; one of the greatest testimonies to the resurrection is the unity, the uniformity of the common faith of the early Church. There weren’t a few over here who believed in resurrection, and a little segment over here who didn’t. That’s something new, folks. That’s something new. It’s only been in the age of the skeptic that all of a sudden we’ve got some part of the Church that’s the Church believing in resurrection, and some other so-called Christian church that denies it. That’s new.

Trust Scripture. Trust what you read and hear from the Bible.

Jesus Christ is risen indeed and reigns forever.

Without the Resurrection, our faith is in vain.

May all reading this enjoy a blessed and joyous Easter season. It lasts for six weeks.