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
Three Centuries of Reception
11 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.
From Syria even unto Rome I fight with beasts, both by land and sea, both by night and day, being bound to ten leopards, I mean a band of soldiers, who, even when they receive benefits, show themselves all the worse. But I am the more instructed by their injuries [to act as a disciple of Christ]; "yet am I not thereby justified." May I enjoy the wild beasts that are prepared for me; and I pray they may be found eager to rush upon me, which also I will entice to devour me speedily, and not deal with me as with some, whom, out of fear, they have not touched. But if they be unwilling to assail me, I will compel them to do so. Pardon me [in this]: I know what is for my benefit. Now I begin to be a disciple. And let no one, of things visible or invisible, envy me that I should attain to Jesus Christ. Let fire and the cross; let the crowds of wild beasts; let tearings, breakings, and dislocations of bones; let cutting off of members; let shatterings of the whole body; and let all the dreadful torments of the devil come upon me: only let me attain to Jesus Christ.
But not to-morrow in truth, but already, are these dead to God; burying their dead, that is, sinking themselves down to death.
Accordingly to the Corinthians (for this is not the only instance), while discoursing on the resurrection of the dead, he makes use of a tragic Iambic line, when he said, "What advantageth it me if the dead are not raised? Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die. Be not deceived; evil communications corrupt good manners."
But even if the apostle had abruptly thrown out the sentence that flesh and blood must be excluded from the kingdom of God, without any previous intimation, of his meaning, would it not have been equally our duty to interpret these two substances as the old man abandoned to mere flesh and blood-in other words, to eating and drinking, one feature of which would be to speak against the faith of the resurrection: "Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die." Now, when the apostle parenthetically inserted this, he censured flesh and blood because of their enjoyment in eating and drinking.
If the prophets were pleasing to such, my (prophets) they were not. Why, then, do not you constantly preach, "Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we shall die? " just as we do not hesitate manfully to command, "Let us fast, brethren and sisters, lest to-morrow perchance we die.
"Well, who on earth and in the flesh is faultless? "What "martyr" (continues to be) an inhabitant of the world supplicating? pence in hand? subject to physician and usurer? Suppose, now, (your "martyr") beneath the glaive, with head already steadily poised; suppose him on the cross, with body already outstretched; suppose him at the stake, with the lion already let loose; suppose him on the axle, with the fire already heaped; in the very certainty, I say, and possession of martyrdom: who permits man to condone (offences) which are to be reserved for God, by whom those (offences) have been condemned without discharge, which not even apostles (so far as I know)-martyrs withal themselves-have judged condonable? In short, Paul had already "fought with beasts at Ephesus," when he decreed "destruction" to the incestuous person. Let it suffice to the martyr to have purged his own sins: it is the part of ingratitude or of pride to lavish upon others also what one has obtained at a high price.
A third saying let them add, "Let us eat, and drink, and marry, for to-morrow we shall die; " not reflecting that the "woe" (denounced) "on such as are with child, and are giving suck," will fall far more heavily and bitterly in the "universal shaking" of the entire world than it did in the devastation of one fraction of Judaea.
He feeds on cruelties; he is punished by abstinence; he hates fasts, and his ministers preach, to that effect, as he declares them to be superfluous, having no hope of the future, and echoing that sentence of the apostle, in which he says, "Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we shall, die."
For there are some widows which esteem gain their business... heaping up to themselves plenty of money, and lend at bitter usury, and are only solicitous about mammon, whose bag is their god; who prefer eating and drinking before all virtue, saying, "Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die;" [1 Corinthians 15:32] who esteem these things as if they were durable and not perishing things. For she that uses herself to nothing but talking of money, worships mammon instead of God — that is, is a servant to gain, but cannot be pleasing to God, nor resigned to His worship; not being able to intercede with Him continuously on account that her mind and disposition run after money: for "where the treasure is, there will the heart be also." [Matthew 6:21]
If all hope of the resurrection is lost, let us eat and drink and lose not the enjoyment of the things present, for we have none to come.… The Epicureans say they are followers of pleasure because death means nothing to them, because that which is dissolved has no feeling, and that which has no feeling means nothing to us. Thus they show that they are living only carnally, not spiritually. They do not discharge the duty of the soul but only of the flesh. They think that all life’s duty is ended with the separation of the soul and body.
"If after the manner of men I fought with beasts at Ephesus, what doth it profit me?"
What is, "if after the manner of men?" "As far as pertains to men I fought with beasts: for what if God snatched me out of those dangers? So that I am he who ought most to be in care about these things; I, who endure so great dangers and have not yet received any return. For if no time of recompense is at hand, but our reward is shut up in this present world, ours is the greater loss. For ye have believed without jeopardy, but we are slaughtered every day."
But all these things he said, not because he had no advantage even in the very suffering, but on account of the weakness of the many, and to establish them in the doctrine of the resurrection: not because he himself was running for hire; for it was a sufficient recompense to him to do that which was pleasing to God. So that when he adds, "If in this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all men most pitiable," it is there again for their sakes, that he might by the fear of this misery overthrow their unbelief of the resurrection. And in condescension to their weakness, he thus speaks. Since in truth, the great reward is to please Christ at all times: and apart from the recompense, it is a very great requital to be in jeopardy for His sake.
"If the dead are not raised, let us eat and drink for to-morrow we die."
This word, be sure, is spoken in mockery: wherefore neither did he bring it forward of himself, but summoned the prophet of loftiest sound, Isaiah, who discoursing of certain insensible and reprobate persons made use of these words, "Who slay oxen and kill sheep to eat flesh and drink wine; who say, Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die. These things are revealed to the ears of the Lord of Hosts, and this iniquity shall not be forgiven you, till ye die." Now if then they were deprived of pardon who spake thus, much more in the time of Grace.
Continue studying 1 Corinthians 15:32 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
In 1 Corinthians 15:32, the Apostle Paul passionately defends the foundational Christian doctrine of the bodily resurrection of believers. He employs a powerful rhetorical question, drawing upon his own experiences of severe suffering and opposition in Ephesus, to highlight the utter futility and meaninglessness of a life dedicated to Christ if there is no future resurrection. Paul contrasts the purposeful endurance of hardship for the Gospel with a despairing, hedonistic worldview that logically arises from the denial of eternal life, asserting that without resurrection, the only rational response to mortality is immediate gratification.
Context
Literary Context
This verse is a pivotal moment within 1 Corinthians 15, often hailed as the Bible's most extensive discourse on the resurrection. Paul has systematically laid the groundwork, beginning with the historical reality of Christ's resurrection as the "firstfruits" of all who believe (1 Corinthians 15:20). He meticulously argues that if Christ was not raised, then Christian preaching is empty, faith is futile, and believers remain in their sins (1 Corinthians 15:14-17). The immediate context leading up to this verse involves Paul's assertion that if the dead are not raised, then those who have died in Christ have perished (1 Corinthians 15:18). Verse 32 serves as a stark hypothetical, illustrating the logical conclusion of such a denial, moving from theological argument to a deeply personal and practical implication for his own suffering.
Historical & Cultural Context
Ephesus was a prominent Roman city in Asia Minor, a bustling center of commerce, culture, and pagan worship, most notably the cult of Artemis (Diana). Paul spent a significant period there, facing intense opposition and even life-threatening situations, as documented in Acts 19. The phrase "fought with beasts" (Greek: thēriomachéō) could literally refer to gladiatorial combat with wild animals, a common spectacle in Roman amphitheaters. However, it was highly unusual for a Roman citizen like Paul to be subjected to such a humiliating and dangerous public execution. Therefore, it is widely understood as a metaphor for the ferocious, brutal, and life-threatening human opposition he encountered from hostile factions, particularly those incited by Demetrius the silversmith (Acts 19:23-41). The "eat and drink; for to morrow we die" sentiment reflects a common Epicurean philosophy of the day, which emphasized maximizing pleasure in this life since death was considered the ultimate end. This worldview was also echoed in Old Testament passages like Isaiah 22:13.
Key Themes
The central theme is the Absolute Necessity of the Resurrection. Paul argues that without the resurrection, the entire Christian enterprise, including his own immense suffering and sacrifice, is utterly meaningless. His rhetorical question underscores that the hope of resurrection is the sole justification for enduring hardship for the Gospel's sake. This leads to the theme of Purpose in Suffering, where Paul's "fighting with beasts" is not a random act of misfortune but a purposeful endurance, made meaningful by the promise of future resurrection and eternal life. Finally, the verse sharply contrasts Christian Hope with Hedonism and Nihilism. The "eat and drink; for to morrow we die" worldview represents a despairing philosophy where immediate gratification is the only logical pursuit if death is the finality. Paul demonstrates that denying the resurrection inevitably leads to such a godless and self-indulgent outlook, highlighting the profound difference between a life lived with eternal perspective and one confined to the temporal.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
This verb, G2341, literally means "to be a beast-fighter (in the gladiatorial show)." However, as explained in the context, Paul (a Roman citizen) was unlikely to have literally fought wild animals in an arena. Therefore, it is understood figuratively to mean "to encounter (furious men)," signifying the intense, brutal, and life-threatening human opposition he faced in Ephesus. It conveys the extreme peril and ferocity of his adversaries.
This verb means "to waken (transitively or intransitively), i.e. rouse (literally, from sleep, from sitting or lying, from disease, from death; or figuratively, from obscurity, inactivity, ruins, nonexistence)." In this context, it specifically refers to the resurrection from death, emphasizing the miraculous act of being brought back to life from a state of non-existence or death.
Derived from apo (from) and thnēskō (to die), means "to die off (literally or figuratively)." Here, it is used literally to refer to physical death, particularly in the context of the Epicurean sentiment that death is the ultimate end, thus justifying a life of immediate pleasure.
Verse Breakdown
"If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus,"
Paul begins with a hypothetical condition ("If," G1487, ei), presenting a scenario rooted in his real-life experiences. "After the manner of men" (G2596, katá G444, ánthrōpos) suggests a human perspective or a common human experience of struggle, or perhaps even "from a human standpoint" implying that his suffering would be irrational from a purely human, non-resurrection perspective. "Fought with beasts at Ephesus" refers to the severe, life-threatening opposition Paul faced in Ephesus, metaphorically equating his human adversaries to wild animals due to their ferocity and danger. This clause establishes the premise of his profound suffering and sacrifice.
"what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not?"
This is the core rhetorical question. "What advantageth it me" (G5101, tís G3786, óphelos G3427, moí) translates to "what gain is it to me?" or "what profit is there for me?" Paul challenges the Corinthians to consider the logical consequence of denying the resurrection. If death is the end ("if the dead rise not," G1487, ei G3498, nekrós G1453, egeírō G3756, ou), then all his suffering, all his self-sacrifice, all his endurance for the sake of the Gospel, is utterly pointless and without reward. This question highlights the practical and existential implications of the resurrection doctrine.
"let us eat and drink; for to morrow we die."
This is the logical conclusion Paul presents if the resurrection is denied. It's a direct quote or paraphrase of a hedonistic, nihilistic worldview (found in Isaiah 22:13 and Epicurean philosophy). "Let us eat and drink" (G5315, phágō G2532, kaí G4095, pínō) advocates for immediate gratification and pleasure. "For to morrow we die" (G1063, gár G839, aúrion G599, apothnḗskō) provides the cynical justification: if death is the absolute end, with no hope beyond, then the only rational course of action is to indulge in present pleasures before annihilation. Paul uses this stark contrast to underscore the vital importance of the resurrection for Christian hope and purpose.
Literary Devices
Paul masterfully employs several literary devices in this verse to underscore his argument. The most prominent is the Rhetorical Question ("what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not?"), which is not meant to be answered but to provoke deep thought and emphasize the undeniable truth that without resurrection, his suffering is absurd. He uses a Hypothetical Statement ("If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus...") to set up the premise for his rhetorical challenge, inviting the audience to consider the logical outcome of a world without resurrection. The phrase "fought with beasts" is a powerful Metaphor, likely referring to his brutal human adversaries in Ephesus, vividly conveying the intensity and danger of his missionary work. Finally, the verse relies heavily on Contrast, juxtaposing Paul's sacrificial life (fighting beasts) with the Epicurean philosophy of "eat and drink; for to morrow we die." This stark contrast highlights the vast difference between a life lived with eternal hope and one resigned to temporal pleasure and ultimate oblivion.
Theological and Thematic Connections
The denial of the resurrection, as addressed by Paul, strikes at the very heart of Christian theology, rendering the cross meaningless and the hope of salvation illusory. If there is no future resurrection, then Christ's victory over death is incomplete, and humanity remains enslaved to sin and mortality. This doctrine is not merely an abstract theological concept but the bedrock upon which Christian hope, suffering, and ethical living are built. It provides the ultimate motivation for enduring persecution, living righteously, and proclaiming the Gospel, transforming present hardships into purposeful investments in an eternal future. Without it, the Christian life becomes an irrational exercise in self-denial with no ultimate reward, leading logically to a worldview focused solely on temporal gratification.
Reflection and Application
Paul's poignant rhetorical question in 1 Corinthians 15:32 forces us to confront the profound implications of our belief in the resurrection. If we genuinely believe that death is not the end, that Christ has conquered the grave, and that we too will be raised to eternal life, then how does this transformative truth shape our daily decisions, our priorities, and our willingness to endure hardship for the sake of the Gospel? This verse challenges the pervasive "eat, drink, and be merry" mentality prevalent in many contemporary societies, which, whether implicitly or explicitly, denies the eternal significance of life. It calls us to live with an eternal perspective, understanding that our actions, sacrifices, and faithfulness in this life are not in vain but contribute to a greater, everlasting purpose. For those who face opposition, ridicule, or suffering for their faith, Paul's words offer immense encouragement: your struggles are not wasted; they are part of a divine narrative culminating in future glory and vindication.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
What does Paul mean by "fought with beasts at Ephesus"?
While the Greek word thēriomachéō literally refers to fighting wild animals in an arena, it's highly improbable that Paul, a Roman citizen, would have been subjected to such a public spectacle. Therefore, scholars widely interpret this as a powerful metaphor for the intense, brutal, and life-threatening opposition Paul faced from hostile human adversaries in Ephesus. This included significant riots and widespread antagonism, particularly from those whose livelihoods were threatened by the spread of the Gospel, as vividly described in Acts 19:23-41. Paul uses this vivid imagery to convey the extreme danger and ferocity of the opposition he willingly endured for the sake of Christ.
Why does Paul say "let us eat and drink; for to morrow we die"?
This phrase is a rhetorical device Paul uses to illustrate the logical conclusion of denying the resurrection. It reflects a common ancient philosophy, particularly associated with Epicureanism, which asserted that since death is the ultimate end, the only rational response is to maximize pleasure and enjoyment in the present life. This sentiment is also found in Isaiah 22:13, where it describes a people living in heedless indulgence despite impending judgment. Paul is not advocating for this worldview but is showing that if there is no resurrection, then striving for righteousness, enduring suffering, or living a life of self-denial for God's sake would be utterly foolish. The only sensible course would be hedonism.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
While 1 Corinthians 15:32 directly addresses the resurrection of believers, its profound truth is entirely rooted in the person and work of Jesus Christ. Paul's argument for the necessity of our resurrection hinges entirely on the historical reality of Christ's own resurrection, which he has already established as the "firstfruits" of those who have fallen asleep (1 Corinthians 15:20). Jesus' victory over death is the ultimate guarantee and prototype of our future resurrection. Our hope in escaping the "eat and drink; for to morrow we die" mentality is not based on human philosophy or self-effort, but on the living Christ who declared, "I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live" (John 11:25). It is because Christ was raised that our faith is not futile (1 Corinthians 15:17), and it is in Him that our suffering gains eternal significance, transforming earthly trials into a pathway to glory (Romans 8:17-18). Thus, the resurrection of believers, which makes Paul's "fighting with beasts" meaningful, is a direct fulfillment of God's redemptive plan accomplished through Jesus Christ, the conqueror of death and the giver of eternal life.