TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers 1 Corinthians 15:20–34. His three-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
In this passage the apostle establishes the truth of the resurrection of the dead, the holy dead, the dead in Christ,
I.On the resurrection of Christ.
1.Because he is indeed the first-fruits of those that slept, Co1 15:20. He has truly risen himself, and he has risen in this very quality and character, as the first-fruits of those who sleep in him. As he has assuredly risen, so in his resurrection there is as much an earnest given that the dead in him shall rise as there was that the Jewish harvest in general should be accepted and blessed by the offering and acceptance of the first-fruits. The whole lump was made holy by the consecration of the first-fruits (Rom 11:16), and the whole body of Christ, all that are by faith united to him, are by his resurrection assured of their own. As he has risen, they shall rise; just as the lump is holy because the first fruits are so. He has not risen merely for himself, but as head of the body, the church; and those that sleep in him God will bring with him, Th1 4:14. Note, Christ's resurrection is a pledge and earnest of ours, if we are true believers in him; because he has risen, we shall rise. We are a part of the consecrated lump, and shall partake of the acceptance and favour vouchsafed the first-fruits. This is the first argument used by the apostle in confirmation of the truth; and it is,
2.Illustrated by a parallel between the first and second Adam. For, since by man came death, it was every way proper that by man should come deliverance from it, or, which is all one, a resurrection, Co1 15:21. And so, as in Adam all die, in Christ shall all be made alive; as through the sin of the first Adam all men became mortal, because all derived from him the same sinful nature, so through the merit and resurrection of Christ shall all who are made to partake of the Spirit, and the spiritual nature, revive, and become immortal. All who die die through the sin of Adam; all who are raised, in the sense of the apostle, rise through the merit and power of Christ. But the meaning is not that, as all men died in Adam, so all men, without exception, shall be made alive in Christ; for the scope of the apostle's argument restrains the general meaning. Christ rose as the first-fruits; therefore those that are Christ's (Co1 15:23) shall rise too. Hence it will not follow that all men without exception shall rise too; but it will fitly follow that all who thus rise, rise in virtue of Christ's resurrection, and so that their revival is owing to the man Christ Jesus, as the mortality of all mankind was owing to the first man; and so, as by man came death, by man came deliverance. Thus it seemed fit to the divine wisdom that, as the first Adam ruined his posterity by sin, the second Adam should raise his seed to a glorious immortality.
3.Before he leaves the argument he states that there will be an order observed in their resurrection. What that precisely will be we are nowhere told, but in the general only here that there will be order observed. Possibly those may rise first who have held the highest rank, and done the most eminent service, or suffered the most grievous evils, or cruel deaths, for Christ's sake. It is only here said that the first-fruits are supposed to rise first, and afterwards all who are Christ's, when he shall come again. Not that Christ's resurrection must in fact go before the resurrection of any of his, but it must be laid as the foundation: as it was not necessary that those who lived remote from Jerusalem must go thither and offer the first-fruits before they could account the lump holy, yet they must be set apart for this purpose, till they could be offered, which might be done at any time from pentecost till the feast of dedication. See Bishop Patrick on Num 24:2. The offering of the first-fruits was what made the lump holy; and the lump was made holy by this offering, though it was not made before the harvest was gathered in, so it were set apart for that end, and duly offered afterwards. So Christ's resurrection must, in order of nature, precede that of his saints, though some of these might rise in order of time before him. It is because he has risen that they rise. Note, Those that are Christ's must rise, because of their relation to him.
II.He argues from the continuance of the mediatorial kingdom till all Christ's enemies are destroyed, the last of which is death, Co1 15:24-26.
He has risen, and, upon his resurrection, was invested with sovereign empire, had all power in heaven and earth put into his hands (Mat 28:18), had a name given him above every name, that every knee might bow to him, and every tongue confess him Lord. Phi 2:9-11. And the administration of this kingdom must continue in his hands till all opposing power, and rule, and authority, be put down (Co1 15:24), till all enemies are put under his feet (Co1 15:25), and till the last enemy is destroyed, which is death, Co1 15:26.
1.This argument implies in it all these particulars: - (1.) That our Saviour rose from the dead to have all power put into his hands, and have and administer a kingdom, as Mediator: For this end he died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living, Rom 14:9. (2.) That this mediatorial kingdom is to have an end, at least as far as it is concerned in bringing his people safely to glory, and subduing all his and their enemies: Then cometh the end, Co1 15:24. (3.) That it is not to have an end till all opposing power be put down, and all enemies brought to his feet, Co1 15:24, Co1 15:25. (4.) That, among other enemies, death must be destroyed (Co1 15:26) or abolished; its powers over its members must be disannulled. Thus far the apostle is express; but he leaves us to make the inference that therefore the saints must rise, else death and the grave would have power over them, nor would our Saviour's kingly power prevail against the last enemy of his people and annul its power. When saints shall live again, and die no more, then, and not till then, will death be abolished, which must be brought about before our Saviour's mediatorial kingdom is delivered up, which yet must be in due time. The saints therefore shall live again and die no more. This is the scope of the argument; but,
2.The apostle drops several hints in the course of it which it will be proper to notice: as,
(1.)That our Saviour, as man and mediator between God and man, has a delegated royalty, a kingdom given: All things are put under him, he excepted that did put all things under him, Co1 15:27. As man, all his authority must be delegated. And, though his mediation supposes his divine nature, yet as Mediator he does not so explicitly sustain the character of God, but a middle person between God and man, partaking of both natures, human and divine, as he was to reconcile both parties, God and man, and receiving commission and authority from God the Father to act in this office. The Father appears, in this whole dispensation, in the majesty and with the authority of God: the Son, made man, appears as the minister of the Father, though he is God as well as the Father. Nor is this passage to be understood of the eternal dominion over all his creatures which belongs to him as God, but of a kingdom committed to him as Mediator and God-man, and that chiefly after his resurrection, when, having overcome, he sat down with his Father on his throne, Rev 3:21. Then was the prediction verified, I have set my king upon my holy hill of Zion (Psa 2:6), placed him on his throne. This is meant by the phrase so frequent in the writings of the New Testament, of sitting at the right hand of God (Mar 16:19; Rom 8:34; Col 3:1 etc.), on the right hand of power (Mar 14:62; Luk 22:69), on the right hand of the throne of God (Heb 12:2), on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, Heb 8:1. Sitting down in this seat is taking upon him the exercise of his mediatorial power and royalty, which was done upon his ascension into heaven, Mar 16:19. And it is spoken of in scripture as a recompence made him for his deep humiliation and self-abasement, in becoming man, and dying for man the accursed death of the cross, Phi 2:6-12. Upon his ascension, he was made head over all things to the church, had power given him to govern and protect it against all its enemies, and in the end destroy them and complete the salvation of all that believe in him. This is not a power appertaining to Godhead as such; it is not original and unlimited power, but power given and limited to special purposes. And though he who has it is God, yet, inasmuch as he is somewhat else besides God, and in this whole dispensation acts not as God, but as Mediator, not as the offended Majesty, but as one interposing in favour of his offending creatures, and this by virtue of his consent and commission who acts and appears always in that character, he may properly be said to have this power given him; he may reign as God, with power unlimited, and yet may reign as Mediator, with a power delegated, and limited to these particular purposes.
(2.)That this delegated royalty must at length be delivered up to the Father, from whom it was received (Co1 15:24); for it is a power received for particular ends and purposes, a power to govern and protect his church till all the members of it be gathered in, and the enemies of it for ever subdued and destroyed (Co1 15:25, Co1 15:26), and when these ends shall be obtained the power and authority will not need to be continued. The Redeemer must reign till his enemies be destroyed, and the salvation of his church and people accomplished; and, when this end is attained, then will he deliver up the power which he had only for this purpose, though he may continue to reign over his glorified church and body in heaven; and in this sense it may notwithstanding be said that he shall reign for ever and ever (Rev 11:15), that he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever, and of his kingdom there shall be no end (Luk 1:33), that his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, Dan 7:14. See also Mic 4:7.
(3.)The Redeemer shall certainly reign till the last enemy of his people be destroyed, till death itself be abolished, till his saints revive and recover perfect life, never to be in fear and danger of dying any more. He shall have all power in heaven and earth till then - he who loved us, and gave himself for us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood - he who is so nearly related to us, and so much concerned for us. What support should this be to his saints in every hour of distress and temptation! He is alive who was dead, and liveth for ever, and doth reign, and will continue to reign, till the redemption of his people be completed, and the utter ruin of their enemies effected.
(4.)When this is done, and all things are put under his feet, then shall the Son become subject to him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all, Co1 15:28. The meaning of this I take to be that then the man Christ Jesus, who hath appeared in so much majesty during the whole administration of his kingdom, shall appear upon giving it up to be a subject of the Father. Things are in scripture many times said to be when they are manifested and made to appear; and this delivering up of the kingdom will make it manifest that he who appeared in the majesty of the sovereign king was, during this administration, a subject of God. The glorified humanity of our Lord Jesus Christ, with all the dignity and power conferred on it, was no more than a glorious creature. This will appear when the kingdom shall be delivered up; and it will appear to the divine glory, that God may be all in all, that the accomplishment of our salvation may appear altogether divine, and God alone may have the honour of it. Note, Though the human nature must be employed in the work of our redemption, yet God was all in all in it. It was the Lord's doing and should be marvellous in our eyes.
III.He argues for the resurrection, from the case of those who were baptized for the dead (Co1 15:29):
What shall those do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? Why are they baptized for the dead? What shall they do if the dead rise not? What have they done? How vain a thing hath their baptism been! Must they stand by it, or renounce it? why are they baptized for huper the dead, if the dead rise not? tō nekrōn. But what is this baptism for the dead? It is necessary to be known, that the apostle's argument may be understood; whether it be only argumentum ad hominem, or ad rem; that is, whether it conclude for the thing in dispute universally, or only against the particular persons who were baptized for the dead. But who shall interpret this very obscure passage, which, though it consists of no more than three words, besides the articles, has had more than three times three senses put on it by interpreters? It is not agreed what is meant by baptism, whether it is to be taken in a proper or figurative sense, and, if in a proper sense, whether it is to be understood or Christian baptism properly so called, or some other ablution. And as little is it agreed who are the dead, or in what sense the preposition huper is to be taken. Some understand the dead of our Saviour himself; vide Whitby in loc. Why are persons baptized in the name of a dead Saviour, a Saviour who remains among the dead, if the dead rise not? But it is, I believe, and instance perfectly singular for hoi nekroi to mean no more than one dead person; it is a signification which the words have nowhere else. And the hoi baptizomenoi (the baptized) seem plainly to mean some particular persons, not Christians in general, which yet must be the signification if the hoi nekroi (the dead) be understood of our Saviour. Some understand the passage of the martyrs: Why do they suffer martyrdom for their religion? This is sometimes called the baptism of blood by ancients, and, by our Saviour himself, baptism indefinitely, Mat 20:22; Luk 12:50. But in what sense can those who die martyrs for their religion be said to be baptized (that is, die martyrs) for the dead? Some understand it of a custom that was observed, as some of the ancients tell us, among many who professed the Christian name in the first ages, of baptizing some in the name and stead of catechumens dying without baptism. But this savoured of such superstition that, if the custom had prevailed in the church so soon, the apostle would hardly have mentioned it without signifying a dislike of it. Some understand it of baptizing over the dead, which was a custom, they tell us, that early obtained; and this to testify their hope of the resurrection. This sense is pertinent to the apostle's argument, but it appears not that any such practice was in use in the apostle's time. Others understand it of those who have been baptized for the sake, or on occasion, of the martyrs, that is, the constancy with which they died for their religion. Some were doubtless converted to Christianity by observing this: and it would have been a vain thing for persons to have become Christians upon this motive, if the martyrs, by losing their lives for religion, became utterly extinct, and were to live no more. But the church at Corinth had not, in all probability, suffered much persecution at this time, or seem many instances of martyrdom among them, nor had many converts been made by the constancy and firmness which the martyrs discovered. Not to observe that hoi nekroi seems to be too general an expression to mean only the martyred dead. It is as easy an explication of the phrase as any I have met with, and as pertinent to the argument, to suppose the hoi nekroi to mean some among the Corinthians, who had been taken off by the hand of God. We read that many were sickly among them, and many slept (Co1 11:30), because of their disorderly behaviour at the Lord's table. These executions might terrify some into Christianity; as the miraculous earthquake did the jailer, Act 16:29, Act 16:30, etc. Persons baptized on such an occasion might be properly said to be baptized for the dead, that is, on their account. And the hoi baptizomenoi (the baptized) and the hoi nekroi (the dead) answer to one another; and upon this supposition the Corinthians could not mistake the apostle's meaning. "Now," says he, "what shall they do, and why were they baptized, if the dead rise not? You have a general persuasion that these men have done right, and acted wisely, and as they ought, on this occasion; but why, if the dead rise not, seeing they may perhaps hasten their death, by provoking a jealous God, and have no hopes beyond it?" But whether this be the meaning, or whatever else be, doubtless the apostle's argument was good and intelligible to the Corinthians. And his next is as plain to us.
IV.He argues from the absurdity of his own conduct and that of other Christians upon this supposition,
1.It would be a foolish thing for them to run so many hazards (Co1 15:30): "Why stand we in jeopardy every hour? Why do we expose ourselves to continual peril - we Christians, especially we apostles?" Every one knows that it was dangerous being a Christian, and much more a preacher and an apostle, at that time. "Now," says the apostle, "what fools are we to run these hazards, if we have no better hopes beyond death, if when we die we die wholly, and revive no more!" Note, Christianity were a foolish profession if it proposed no hopes beyond this life, at least in such hazardous times as attended the first profession of it; it required men to risk all the blessings and comforts of this life, and to face and endure all the evils of it, without any future prospects. And is this a character of his religion fit for a Christian to endure? And must he not fix this character on it if he give up his future hopes, and deny the resurrection of the dead? This argument the apostle brings home to himself: "I protest," says he, "by your rejoicing in Jesus Christ, by all the comforts of Christianity, and all the peculiar succours and supports of our holy faith, that I die daily," Co1 15:31. He was in continual danger of death, and carried his life, as we say, in his hand. And why should he thus expose himself, if he had no hopes after life? To live in daily view and expectation of death, and yet have no prospect beyond it, must be very heartless and uncomfortable, and his case, upon this account, a very melancholy one. He had need be very well assured of the resurrection of the dead, or he was guilty of extreme weakness, in hazarding all that was dear to him in this world, and his life into the bargain. He had encountered very great difficulties and fierce enemies; he had fought with beasts at Ephesus (Co1 15:32), and was in danger of being pulled to pieces by an enraged multitude, stirred up by Demetrius and the other craftsmen (Act 19:24, etc.), though some understand this literally of Paul's being exposed to fight with wild beasts in the amphitheatre, at a Roman show in that city. And Nicephorus tells a formal story to this purport, and of the miraculous complaisance of the lions to him when they came near him. But so remarkable a trial and circumstance of his life, methinks, would not have been passed over by Luke, and much less by himself, when he gives us so large and particular a detail of his sufferings, Co2 11:24, ad fin. When he mentioned that he was five times scourged of the Jews, thrice beaten with rods, once stoned, thrice shipwrecked, it is strange that he should not have said that he was once exposed to fight with the beasts. I take it, therefore, that this fighting with beasts is a figurative expression, that the beasts intended were men of a fierce and ferine disposition, and that this refers to the passage above cited. "Now," says he, "what advantage have I from such contests, if the dead rise not? Why should I die daily, expose myself daily to the danger of dying by violent hands, if the dead rise not? And if post mortem nihil - if I am to perish by death, and expect nothing after it, could any thing be more weak?" Was Paul so senseless? Had he given the Corinthians any ground to entertain such a thought of him? If he had not been well assured that death would have been to his advantage, would he, in this stupid manner, have thrown away his life? Could any thing but the sure hopes of a better life after death have extinguished the love of life in him to this degree? "What advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? What can I propose to myself?" Note, It is very lawful and fit for a Christian to propose advantage to himself by his fidelity to God. Thus did Paul. Thus did our blessed Lord himself, Heb 12:2. And thus we are bidden to do after his example, and have our fruit to holiness, that our end may be everlasting life. This is the very end of our faith, even the salvation of our souls (Pe1 1:9), not only what it will issue in, but what we should aim at.
2.It would be a much wiser thing to take the comforts of this life: Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die (Co1 15:32); let us turn epicures. Thus this sentence means in the prophet, Isa 22:13. Let us even live like beasts, if we must die like them. This would be a wiser course, if there were no resurrection, no after-life or state, than to abandon all the pleasures of life, and offer and expose ourselves to all the miseries of life, and live in continual peril of perishing by savage rage and cruelty. This passage also plainly implies, as I have hinted above, that those who denied the resurrection among the Corinthians were perfect Sadducees, of whose principles we have this account in the holy writings, that they say, There is no resurrection, neither angel nor spirit (Act 23:8), that is, "Man is all body, there is nothing in him to survive the body, nor will that, when once he is dead, ever revive again." Such Sadducees were the men against whom the apostle argued; otherwise his arguments had no force in them; for, though the body should never revive, yet, as long as the mind survived it, he might have much advantage from all the hazards he ran for Christ's sake. Nay, it is certain that the mind is to be the principal seat and subject of the heavenly glory and happiness. But, if there were no hopes after death, would not every wise man prefer an easy comfortable life before such a wretched one as the apostle led; nay, and endeavour to enjoy the comforts of life as fast as possible, because the continuance of it is short? Note, Nothing but the hopes of better things hereafter can enable a man to forego all the comforts and pleasures here, and embrace poverty, contempt, misery, and death. Thus did the apostles and primitive Christians; but how wretched was their case, and how foolish their conduct, if they deceived themselves, and abused the world with vain and false hopes!
V.The apostle closes his argument with a caution, exhortation, and reproof.
1.A caution against the dangerous conversation of bad men, men of loose lives and principles: Be not deceived, says he; evil communications corrupt good manners, Co1 15:33. Possibly, some of those who said that there was no resurrection of the dead were men of loose lives, and endeavoured to countenance their vicious practices by so corrupt a principle; and had that speech often in their mouths Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die. Now, the apostle grants that their talk was to the purpose if there was no future state. But, having confuted their principle, he now warns the Corinthians how dangerous such men's conversation must prove. He tells them that they would probably be corrupted by them, and fall in with their course of life, if they gave into their evil principles. Note, Bad company and conversation are likely to make bad men. Those who would keep their innocence must keep good company. Error and vice are infectious: and, if we would avoid the contagion, we must keep clear of those who have taken it. He that walketh with wise men shall be wise; but a companion of fools shall be destroyed, Pro 13:20.
2.Here is an exhortation to break off their sins, and rouse themselves, and lead a more holy and righteous life (Co1 15:34): Awake to righteousness, or awake righteously, eknēpsate dikaiōs, and sin not, or sin no more. "Rouse yourselves, break off your sins by repentance: renounce and forsake every evil way, correct whatever is amiss, and do not, by sloth and stupidity, be led away into such conversation and principles as will sap your Christian hopes, and corrupt your practice." The disbelief of a future state destroys all virtue and piety. But the best improvement to be made of the truth is to cease from sin, and set ourselves to the business of religion, and that in good earnest. If there will be a resurrection and a future life, we should live and act as those who believe it, and should not give into such senseless and sottish notions as will debauch our morals, and render us loose and sensual in our lives.
3.Here is a reproof, and a sharp one, to some at least among them: Some of you have not the knowledge of God; I speak this to your shame. Note, It is a shame in Christians not to have the knowledge of God. The Christian religion gives the best information that can be had about God, his nature, and grace, and government. Those who profess this religion reproach themselves, by remaining without the knowledge of God; for it must be owing to their own sloth, and slight of God, that they are ignorant of him. And is it not a horrid shame for a Christian to slight God, and be so wretchedly ignorant in matters that so nearly and highly concern him? Note, also, It must be ignorance of God that leads men into the disbelief of a resurrection and future life. Those who know God know that he will not abandon his faithful servants, nor leave them exposed to such hardships and sufferings without any recompence or reward. They know he is not unfaithful nor unkind, to forget their labour and patience, their faithful services and cheerful sufferings, or let their labour be in vain. But I am apt to think that the expression has a much stronger meaning; that there were atheistical people among them who hardly owned a God, or one who had any concern with or took cognizance of human affairs. These were indeed a scandal and shame to any Christian church. Note, Real atheism lies at the bottom of men's disbelief of a future state. Those who own a God and a providence, and observe how unequal the distributions of the present life are, and how frequently the best men fare worst, can hardly doubt an after state, where every thing will be set to rights.
Historical interpretation
Thirteen Centuries of Reception
10 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.
Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.
And when the Apostle said, "Else what shall they do who are baptised for the dead?"... For, he says, the angels of whom we are portions were baptised for us. But we are dead, who are deadened by this existence, but the males are alive who did not participate in this existence.
"If the dead rise not why, then, are we baptised?" Therefore we are raised up "equal to angels," and restored to unity with the males, member for member. Now they say "those who are baptised for us, the dead," are the angels who are baptised for us, in order that when we, too, have the Name, we may not be hindered and kept back by the Limit and the Cross from entering the Pleroma. Wherefore, at the laying on of hands they say at the end, "for the angelic redemption" that is, for the one which the angels also have, in order that the person who has received the redemption may, be baptised in the same Name in which his angel had been baptised before him. Now the angels were baptised in the beginning, in the redemption of the Name which descended upon Jesus in the dove and redeemed him. And redemption was necessary even for Jesus, in order that, approaching through Wisdom, he might not be detained by the Notion of the Deficiency in which he was inserted, as Theodotus says.
But we will not be wanting (in some defence of the doctrine) even here, in consideration of such persons as are ignorant of that little treatise. "What," asks he, "shall they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not? " Now, never mind that practice, (whatever it may have been.
Let us now return to the resurrection, to the defense of which against heretics of all sorts we have given indeed sufficient attention in another work of ours. But we will not be wanting (in some defense of the doctrine) even here, in consideration of such persons as are ignorant of that little treatise. "What," asks he, "shall they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not?" [1 Corinthians 15:29] Now, never mind that practice, (whatever it may have been.) The Februarian lustrations will perhaps answer him (quite as well), by praying for the dead. Do not then suppose that the apostle here indicates some new god as the author and advocate of this (baptism for the dead. His only aim in alluding to it was) that he might all the more firmly insist upon the resurrection of the body, in proportion as they who were vainly baptized for the dead resorted to the practice from their belief of such a resurrection. We have the apostle in another passage defining "but one baptism." [Ephesians 4:5] To be "baptized for the dead" therefore means, in fact, to be baptized for the body; for, as we have shown, it is the body which becomes dead. What, then, shall they do who are baptized for the body, [Ephesians 4:5] if the body rises not again? We stand, then, on firm ground (when we say) that the next question which the apostle has discussed equally relates to the body. But "some man will say, 'How are the dead raised up? With what body do they come?'" [1 Corinthians 15:35] Having established the doctrine of the resurrection which was denied, it was natural to discuss what would be the sort of body (in the resurrection), of which no one had an idea.
For if "as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive," [1 Corinthians 15:22] their vivification in Christ must be in the flesh, since it is in the flesh that arises their death in Adam. "But every man in his own order," because of course it will be also every man in his own body. For the order will be arranged severally, on account of the individual merits. Now, as the merits must be ascribed to the body, it must needs follow that the order also should be arranged in respect of the bodies, that it may be in relation to their merits. But inasmuch as "some are also baptized for the dead," [1 Corinthians 15:29] we will see whether there be a good reason for this. Now it is certain that they adopted this (practice) with such a presumption as made them suppose that the vicarious baptism (in question) would be beneficial to the flesh of another in anticipation of the resurrection; for unless it were a bodily resurrection, there would be no pledge secured by this process of a corporeal baptism. "Why are they then baptized for the dead," he asks, unless the bodies rise again which are thus baptized? For it is not the soul which is sanctified by the baptismal bath: its sanctification comes from the "answer." [1 Peter 3:21]
It seems that some people were at that time being baptized for the dead because they were afraid that someone who was not baptized would either not rise at all or else rise merely in order to be condemned.
The Marcionites baptize the living on behalf of dead unbelievers, not knowing that baptism saves only the person who receives it.
In turn this Cerinthus, fool and teacher of fools that he is, ventures to maintain that Christ has suffered and been crucified but has not risen yet, but he will rise when the general resurrection of the dead comes.
Now this position of theirs is untenable, both the words and the ideas. And so, in astonishment at those who did not believe in the coming resurrection of the dead, the apostle said, 'If the dead rise not, then is Christ not raised;' [1 Cor 15:16] 'Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die' [1 Cor 15:32] and, 'Be not deceived; evil communications corrupt good manners.' [1 Cor 15:33]
Again, he likewise gives their refutation to those who say that Christ is not risen yet by saying, 'If Christ be not raised, our preaching is vain and our faith is vain. And we also are found false witnesses against God, because we testified against God that he raised up Christ, if so be that he raised him not up.' [1 Cor 15:14-15] For in Corinth too certain persons arose to say there is no resurrection of the dead, as though it was apostolic preaching that Christ was not risen yet and the dead are not raised (at all).
For their school reached its height in this country, I mean Asia, and in Galatia as well. And in these countries I also heard of a tradition which said that when some of their people died too soon, without baptism, others would be baptized for them in their names, so that they would not be punished for rising unbaptized at the resurrection and become the subjects of the authority that made the world.
And the tradition I heard of says that this is why the same holy apostle said, 'If the dead rise not at all, why are they baptized for them?' [1 Cor 15:29] But others explain the text satisfactorily by saying that, as long as they are catechumens, the dying are allowed baptism before they die because of this hope, showing that the person who has died will also rise, and therefore needs the forgiveness of his sins through baptism.
Some of these people have preached that Christ is not risen yet, but will rise together with everyone; others, that the dead will not rise at all.
Hence the apostle has come forward and given the refutation of both these groups and the rest of the sects at once on the subject of resurrection. And in the testimonies that he gave in full he produced the sure proof of the resurrection, salvation and hope of the dead
6:8 by saying, 'This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality,' [1 Cor 15:33] and again, 'Christ is risen, the first fruits of them that slept.' [1 Cor 15:20] This was to refute both kinds of sects at once and truly impart the unsullied doctrine of his teaching to anyone who wanted to know God's truth and saving doctrine.
He takes in hand again another topic, establishing what he said at one time from what God doeth, and at another from the very things which they practice. And this also is no small plea for the defence of any cause when a man brings forward the gainsayers themselves as witnessing by their own actions what he affirms. What then is that which he means? Or will ye that I should first mention how they who are infected with the Marcionite heresy pervert this expression? And I know indeed that I shall excite much laughter; nevertheless, even on this account most of all I will mention it that you may the more completely avoid this disease: viz., when any Catechumen departs among them, having concealed the living man under the couch of the dead, they approach the corpse and talk with him, and ask him if he wishes to receive baptism; then when he makes no answer, he that is concealed underneath saith in his stead that of course he should wish to be baptized; and so they baptize him instead of the departed, like men jesting upon the stage. So great power hath the devil over the souls of careless sinners. Then being called to account, they allege this expression, saying that even the Apostle hath said, "They who are baptized for the dead." Seest thou their extreme ridiculousness? Is it meet then to answer these things? I trow not; unless it were necessary to discourse with madmen of what they in their frenzy utter. But that none of the more exceedingly simple folk may be led captive, one must needs submit to answer even these men. As thus, if this was Paul's meaning wherefore did God threaten him that is not baptized? For it is impossible that any should not be baptized henceforth, this being once devised: and besides, the fault no longer lies with the dead, but with the living. But to whom spake he, "Unless ye eat My flesh, and drink My Blood, ye have no life in yourselves?" To the living, or to the dead, tell me? And again, "Unless a man be born again of water and of the Spirit, he cannot see the kingdom of God." For if this be permitted, and there be no need of the mind of the receiver nor of his assent while he lives, what hinders both Greeks and Jews thus to become believers, other men after their decease doing these things in their stead?
But not to prolong fruitless toil in cutting asunder their petty spiders' webs, come let us unfold unto you the force of this expression. What then is Paul speaking of?
But first I wish to remind you who are initiated of the response, which on that evening they who introduce you to the mysteries bid you make; and then I will also explain the saying of Paul: so this likewise will be clearer to you; we after all the other things adding this which Paul now saith. And I desire indeed expressly to utter it, but I dare not on account of the uninitiated; for these add a difficulty to our exposition, compelling us either not to speak clearly or to declare unto them the ineffable mysteries. Nevertheless, as I may be able, I will speak as through a veil.
As thus: after the enunciation of those mystical and fearful words, and the awful rules of the doctrines which have come down from heaven, this also we add at the end when we are about to baptize, bidding them say, "I believe in the resurrection of the dead," and upon this faith we are baptized. For after we have confessed this together with the rest, then at last are we let down into the fountain of those sacred streams. This therefore Paul recalling to their minds said, "if there be no resurrection, why art thou then baptized for the dead?" i.e., the dead bodies. For in fact with a view to this art thou baptized, the resurrection of thy dead body, believing that it no longer remains dead. And thou indeed in the words makest mention of a resurrection of the dead; but the priest, as in a kind of image, signifies to thee by very deed the things which thou hast believed and confessed in words. When without a sign thou believest, then he gives thee the sign also; when thou hast done thine own part, then also doth God fully assure thee. How and in what manner? By the water. For the being baptized and immersed and then emerging, is a symbol of the descent into Hades and return thence. Wherefore also Paul calls baptism a burial, saying, "Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death." By this he makes that also which is to come credible, I mean, the resurrection of our bodies. For the blotting out sins is a much greater thing than the raising up of a body. And this Christ declaring, said, "For whether is easier to say, Thy sins are forgiven, or to say, Take up thy bed, and walk?" "The former is the more difficult," saith He, "but since ye disbelieve it as being hidden, and make the easier instead of the more difficult the demonstration of my power, neither will I refuse to afford you this proof." Then saith He to the paralytic, "Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thy house."
"And how is this difficult," saith one, "when it is possible to kings also and rulers? For they too forgive adulterers and homicides." Thou art jesting, O man, who sayest these things. For to forgive sins with God only is possible. But rulers and kings, whether it is adulterers whom they forgive or homicides, release them indeed from the present punishment; but their sin they do not purge out. Though they should advance to offices them that have been forgiven, though they should invest them with the purple itself, though they should set the diadem upon their heads, yet so they would only make them kings, but could not free them from their sin. It being God alone who doeth this; which accordingly in the Layer of Regeneration He will bring to pass. For His grace touches the very soul, and thence plucks up the sin by the root. Here is the reason why he that hath been forgiven by the king may be seen with his soul yet impure, but the soul of the baptized no longer so, but purer than the very sun-beams, and such as it was originally formed, nay rather much better than that. For it is blessed with a Spirit, on every side enkindling it and making its holiness intense. And as when thou art recasting iron or gold thou makest it pure and new once more, just so the Holy Ghost also, recasting the soul in baptism as in a furnace and consuming its sins, causes it to glisten with more purity than all purest gold.
Further, the credibility of the resurrection of our bodies he signifies to thee again from what follows: viz., that since sin brought in death, now that the root is dried up, one must not after that doubt of the destruction of the fruit. Therefore having first mentioned "the forgiveness of sins," thou dost next confess also "the resurrection of the dead;" the one guides thee as by hand on to the other.
Yet again, because the term Resurrection is not sufficient to indicate the whole: for many after rising have again departed, as those in the Old Testament, as Lazarus, as they at the time of the crucifixion: one is bid to say, "and the life everlasting," that none may any longer have a notion of death after that resurrection.
These words therefore Paul recalling to their minds, saith, "What shall they do which are baptized for the dead?" "For if there be no resurrection," saith he, "these words are but scenery. If there be no resurrection, how persuade we them to believe things which we do not bestow?" Just as if a person bidding another to deliver a document to the effect that he had received so much, should never give the sum named therein, yet after the subscription should demand of him the specified monies. What then will remain for the subscriber to do, now that he hath made himself responsible, without having received what he admitted he had received? This then he here saith of those who are baptized also. "What shall they do which are baptized," saith he, "having subscribed to the resurrection of dead bodies, and not receiving it, but suffering fraud? And what need was there at all of this confession, if the fact did not follow?"
...neither the Eucharist nor Baptism should be given to the bodies of the dead. [Greek version adds: "For it is written: 'Take, Eat,' but the bodies of the dead can neither 'tak' nor 'eat'."]
"Else what shall they do" He resumes his enumeration of the absurdities, which follow from the error under which the Corinthians labored. He had set himself in the outset to do this, but he introduced instruction and consolation, by means of which he interrupted in some degree the thread of his discourse. To this he now returns. In the first place he brings forward this objection — that the baptism which those received who are already regarded as dead, will be of no avail if there is no resurrection. Before expounding this passage, it is of importance to set aside the common exposition, which rests upon the authority of the ancients, and is received with almost universal consent. Chrysostom, therefore, and Ambrose, who are followed by others, are of opinion that the Corinthians were accustomed, when any one had been deprived of baptism by sudden death, to substitute some living person in the place of the deceased — to be baptized at his grave. They at the same time do not deny that this custom was corrupt, and full of superstition, but they say that Paul, for the purpose of confuting the Corinthians, was contented with this single fact, that while they denied that there was a resurrection, they in the mean time declared in this way that they believed in it. For my part, however, I cannot by any means be persuaded to believe this, for it is not to be credited, that those who denied that there was a resurrection had, along with others, made use of a custom of this sort. Paul then would have had immediately this reply made to him: “Why do you trouble us with that old wives’ superstition, which you do not yourself approve of?” Farther, if they had made use of it, they might very readily have replied: “If this has been hitherto practiced by us through mistake, rather let the mistake be corrected, than that it should have weight attached to it for proving a point of such importance.”
Granting, however, that the argument was conclusive, can we suppose that, if such a corruption as this had prevailed among the Corinthians, the Apostle, after reproving almost all their faults, would have been silent as to this one? He has censured above some practices that are not of so great moment. He has not scrupled to give directions as to women’s having the head covered, and other things of that nature. Their corrupt administration of the Supper he has not merely reproved, but has inveighed against it with the greatest keenness. Would he in the meantime have uttered not a single word in reference to such a base profanation of baptism, which was a much more grievous fault? He has inveighed with great vehemence against those who, by frequenting the banquets of the Gentiles, silently countenanced their superstitions. Would he have suffered this horrible superstition of the Gentiles to be openly carried on in the Church itself under the name of sacred baptism? But granting that he might have been silent, what shall we say when he expressly makes mention of it? Is it, I pray you, a likely thing that the Apostle would bring forward in the shape of an argument a sacrilege by which baptism was polluted, and converted into a mere magical abuse, and yet not say even one word in condemnation of the fault? When he is treating of matters that are not of the highest importance, he introduces nevertheless this parenthesis, that he "speaks as a man". (Romans 3:5; Romans 6:19; Galatians 3:15.) Would not this have been a more befitting and suitable place for such a parenthesis? Now from his making mention of such a thing without any word of reproof, who would not understand it to be a thing that was allowed? For my part, I assuredly understand him to speak here of the right use of baptism, and not of an abuse of it of that nature.
Let us now inquire as to the meaning. At one time I was of opinion, that Paul here pointed out the universal design of baptism, for the advantage of baptism is not confined to this life; but on considering the words afterwards with greater care, I perceived that Paul here points out something peculiar. For he does not speak of all when he says, "What shall they do, who are baptized?" etc. Besides, I am not fond of interpretations, that are more ingenious than solid. What then? I say, that those are "baptized for dead", who are looked upon as already dead, and who have altogether despaired of life; and in this way the particle ὑπέρ will have the force of the Latin "pro", as when we say, "habere pro derelicto"; — "to reckon as abandoned" This signification is not a forced one. Or if you would prefer another signification, to be "baptized for the dead" will mean — to be baptized so as to profit the dead — not the living, Now it is well known, that from the very commencement of the Church, those who had, while yet catechumens, fallen into disease, if their life was manifestly in danger, were accustomed to ask baptism, that they might not leave this world before they had made a profession of Christianity; and this, in order that they might carry with them the seal of their salvation.
It appears from the writings of the Fathers, that as to this matter, also, there crept in afterwards a superstition, for they inveigh against those who delayed baptism till the time of their death, that, being once for all purged from all their sins, they might in this state meet the judgment of God. A gross error truly, which proceeded partly from great ignorance, and partly from hypocrisy! Paul, however, here simply mentions a custom that was sacred, and in accordance with the Divine institution — that if a catechumen, who had already in his heart embraced the Christian faith, saw that death was impending over him, he asked baptism, partly for his own consolation, and partly with a view to the edification of his brethren. For it is no small consolation to carry the token of his salvation sealed in his body. There is also an edification, not to be lost sight of — that of making a confession of his faith. They were, then, baptized for the dead, inasmuch as it could not be of any service to them in this world, and the very occasion of their asking baptism was that they despaired of life. We now see that it is not without good reason that Paul asks, what they would do if there remained no hope after death? This passage shows us, too, that those impostors who had disturbed the faith of the Corinthians, had contrived a figurative resurrection, making the farthest goal of believers to be in this world, His repeating it a second time, "Why are they also baptized for the dead?" gives it greater emphasis: “Not only are those baptized who think that they are to live longer, but those too who have death before their eyes; and that, in order that they may in death reap the fruit of their baptism.”
Continue studying 1 Corinthians 15:29 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
CNTR CollationThe earliest Greek manuscripts of this verse, collated letter by letter.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
A highly debated verse within Paul's robust defense of the bodily resurrection of believers. In this rhetorical question, Paul challenges those in the Corinthian church who deny the resurrection by pointing to a practice, "baptism for the dead," which he argues would be utterly meaningless if there were no future resurrection. He uses this enigmatic custom, whatever its precise nature, as a logical consequence to underscore the indispensable truth of resurrection for Christian faith and hope.
Context
Literary Context
1 Corinthians 15 is Paul's profound and extensive discourse on the resurrection of the dead, forming the theological climax of his letter to the Corinthian church. He begins by reaffirming the gospel message, centering on Christ's death and resurrection, which he presents as an historical fact attested by many witnesses. Paul then argues that Christ's resurrection is the "firstfruits" of those who have fallen asleep (1 Corinthians 15:20). If Christ has been raised, then the resurrection of believers is a guaranteed reality. The verses immediately preceding 1 Corinthians 15:29 emphasize the logical absurdity of denying the resurrection: if the dead do not rise, then Christ has not risen, preaching is futile, faith is vain, and believers are still in their sins (1 Corinthians 15:13-19). Verse 29 serves as another powerful piece of this reductio ad absurdum argument, highlighting a specific practice that, to Paul, implicitly acknowledges the reality of a future state for the deceased.
Historical & Cultural Context
The Corinthian church, situated in a bustling, cosmopolitan Greco-Roman city, was deeply influenced by its surrounding culture. Many Greeks, steeped in Platonic philosophy, often viewed the body as a prison for the soul, believing true immortality lay in the liberation of the spirit from the physical realm. This philosophical bias made the concept of a bodily resurrection difficult, if not repulsive, to some. Furthermore, Corinth was a hub of various mystery religions and cults, some of which involved ritualistic practices related to the dead or the underworld. While the precise nature of "baptism for the dead" remains debated, it is plausible that it was a local Corinthian custom, perhaps influenced by such cultural currents or even a heterodox Christian practice that Paul references without endorsing. Paul is addressing a community where some members denied the future resurrection, possibly due to these philosophical or cultural influences, or a misunderstanding of Christian eschatology. His argument is tailored to their specific context, using a practice they were familiar with to expose the inconsistency of their denial.
Key Themes
The overarching theme of 1 Corinthians 15, and thus 1 Corinthians 15:29, is the Centrality of the Resurrection to Christian faith. Paul asserts that without the resurrection, the entire Christian message is rendered meaningless and our faith is futile (1 Corinthians 15:14). The resurrection is not merely an abstract doctrine but the foundation of Christian hope, guaranteeing victory over death and the promise of eternal life. Another key theme is Logical Argumentation. Paul employs a powerful form of reductio ad absurdum, demonstrating that denying the resurrection leads to absurd and contradictory conclusions. By highlighting the meaninglessness of "baptism for the dead" if the dead do not rise, Paul forces his audience to confront the logical inconsistencies of their position, thereby reinforcing the indispensable truth of resurrection. The verse also touches on the theme of Christian Hope and Eschatology, emphasizing that our present faith and actions are intrinsically linked to a future reality where death is conquered and believers receive glorified bodies.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
From a derivative of báptō, meaning "to immerse, submerge; to make whelmed (i.e. fully wet)." In the New Testament, it is used only of ceremonial ablution, especially (technically) of the ordinance of Christian baptism. This word emphasizes the ritualistic and symbolic nature of the act Paul refers to.
From an apparently primary root (a corpse); meaning "dead" (literally or figuratively; also as noun). This term clearly refers to those who have physically died, highlighting the direct connection of the practice to deceased individuals.
A primary preposition meaning "over," i.e., (with the genitive case) of place, above, beyond, across, or causal, for the sake of, instead, regarding; with the accusative case superior to, more than. In this context, its meaning "on behalf of," "for the sake of," or "in view of" is crucial to the various interpretations of the verse.
Verse Breakdown
"Else what shall they do"
This rhetorical opening sets up a challenge, implying that if the premise of no resurrection is true, then certain actions become nonsensical. Paul is pressing his opponents to consider the logical consequences of their denial.
"which are baptized for the dead"
This is the most enigmatic phrase in the verse. It refers to a group of people (implied by "they") who are engaging in a practice of baptism, where the preposition "for" (hypér) suggests a connection to "the dead." Interpretations vary widely:
Vicarious Baptism
Some suggest it refers to living individuals being baptized on behalf of deceased persons, perhaps to secure their salvation. While practiced by some later groups (e.g., Mormons), there is no clear evidence of this being a widespread or endorsed practice in the early orthodox church, nor does Paul endorse it here.
Baptism in View of One's Own Death and Resurrection
This interpretation suggests "the dead" refers to the believer's own future resurrection from death. Baptism symbolizes identification with Christ's death and resurrection (Romans 6:3-4).
Baptism to Fill the Ranks of Those Who Have Died
As believers died, new converts were baptized to take their place in the church, demonstrating the ongoing life and hope of the community despite mortality.
A Practice Paul References but Does Not Endorse
Many scholars believe Paul is simply citing a practice (perhaps a local Corinthian custom, or even a heterodox one) that some were engaging in. He mentions it not to approve of it, but to show that even they (whoever "they" are) implicitly believe in the resurrection. If they perform this act, which only makes sense if the dead rise, then how can others deny the resurrection?
"if the dead rise not at all?"
This is the conditional clause, stating the premise of the resurrection deniers. Paul is directly confronting their core theological error. The phrase "not at all" (ou hólōs) emphasizes the absolute nature of their denial.
"why are they then baptized for the dead?"
This is the concluding rhetorical question, a powerful reductio ad absurdum. If there is no resurrection, then the practice of "baptism for the dead" (whatever its specific meaning) is utterly pointless and illogical. Paul's point is that the very existence of such a practice, even if he doesn't endorse it, testifies to an underlying belief in a future for the dead, which is inconsistent with denying the resurrection.
Literary Devices
Paul masterfully employs several literary devices in 1 Corinthians 15:29 to strengthen his argument for the resurrection. The most prominent is the Rhetorical Question, which dominates the verse. Paul asks, "Else what shall they do... if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?" He does not expect a literal answer but uses the question to provoke thought and highlight the absurdity of the opposing viewpoint. This leads directly to the use of Reductio ad Absurdum (reduction to absurdity), a logical technique where one assumes an opponent's premise (no resurrection) and then demonstrates that it leads to a ridiculous or contradictory conclusion (the meaninglessness of "baptism for the dead"). By showing that a practice known to the Corinthians would be senseless without resurrection, Paul indirectly affirms the necessity of resurrection. There is also an element of Irony present; Paul points out that even those engaged in this controversial practice, by their very actions, implicitly acknowledge a future state for the dead, which stands in stark contrast to the explicit denial of resurrection by others in the church.
Theological and Thematic Connections
While the specific practice of "baptism for the dead" remains a scholarly enigma, Paul's overarching point in 1 Corinthians 15:29 is crystal clear: the resurrection of the dead is an indispensable truth of the Christian faith. It undergirds all Christian hope, gives meaning to suffering, and provides the ultimate assurance of God's victory over sin and death. If there is no resurrection, then the very foundation of the gospel crumbles, rendering Christian faith futile and our future without hope. This verse, therefore, serves as a powerful reminder that our present life and practices are profoundly shaped by our eschatological hope in a future bodily resurrection.
Reflection and Application
1 Corinthians 15:29, despite its interpretive challenges, powerfully reinforces the bedrock truth of the resurrection, which holds immense practical significance for believers today. Our hope is not merely in a spiritual afterlife, but in a future bodily resurrection, mirroring Christ's own victory over death. This truth transforms our perspective on suffering, loss, and the temporary nature of this life. It assures us that our labor in the Lord is never in vain (1 Corinthians 15:58), because death is not the final word. The resurrection empowers us to live with courage, perseverance, and unwavering hope, knowing that a glorious future awaits us with Christ, where every tear will be wiped away and sorrow will be no more. It calls us to share this life-giving hope with a world grappling with the reality of death.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
What does "baptized for the dead" mean in 1 Corinthians 15:29?
The precise meaning of "baptized for the dead" (Greek: baptizomenoi hyper tōn nekrōn) is one of the most debated phrases in the New Testament, with no single interpretation universally accepted by scholars. The Greek preposition hypér ("for") can mean "on behalf of," "for the sake of," "in view of," or "over." Some prominent interpretations include:
Does Paul endorse the practice of "baptism for the dead" in this verse?
No, Paul does not endorse or command the practice of "baptism for the dead." His use of the third person plural ("what shall they do," "why are they then baptized") suggests he is referring to a practice engaged in by others, not necessarily by all orthodox Christians, and certainly not by himself or the apostles. He uses it as a rhetorical device, a reductio ad absurdum, to argue against those who deny the resurrection. His point is logical: if this practice exists, and it only makes sense if the dead rise, then the denial of resurrection is inconsistent. He is using their own (or a known) practice to highlight the absurdity of their position, not to validate the practice itself.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
1 Corinthians 15:29, despite its enigmatic nature, powerfully reinforces the Christ-centered hope of the resurrection. While the specific practice of "baptism for the dead" remains a mystery, Paul's argument hinges entirely on the foundational truth of Christ's own resurrection. Jesus is the "firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep" (1 Corinthians 15:20), meaning His resurrection guarantees the future resurrection of all who believe in Him. He is the conqueror of death, holding "the keys of death and of Hades" (Revelation 1:18). Our baptism, as believers, is not "for the dead" in a vicarious sense, but rather a symbolic identification with Christ's death and resurrection, signifying our new life in Him and our future hope of a glorified body (Romans 6:3-5). Jesus Himself declared, "I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live" (John 11:25). Thus, the very concept of resurrection, which Paul defends so vehemently, finds its ultimate meaning, power, and certainty in the person and work of Jesus Christ, who triumphed over the grave and promises the same victory to His followers.