Paul's Theology of Resurrection, Part 1
Paul’s Theology in Context and the God Who Raises the Dead
(avg. read time: 7–14 mins.)
In light of subjects that I have addressed recently, it seems appropriate that my next series should be on Paul’s theology of resurrection. Fortunately, I have previously done a lecture on the subject that I adapt for my purposes here. I will try to make this six-part series relatively succinct, as an entire book could be written about it (and I hope I will get the chance to write one someday). In fact, I have written previously on multiple occasions (particularly in my dissertation) about Paul’s theology of resurrection. But I have not done a proper overview of the subject. Since 1 Cor 15 is, by far, Paul’s most extensive teaching on the subject—even if it does not cover every element of his theology—I will be using this text as the central point of reference for this overview. I will proceed in six parts:
Part 1: Paul’s Theology in Context and the God Who Raises the Dead
Part 2: The Risen Crucified Lord
Part 3: The Spirit Who Gives Resurrection Life
Part 4: Bearing the Resurrected Image
Part 5: Resurrection, Kingdom, and New Creation
Part 6: Resurrection and the Cruciform Life
A couple final notes are necessary before we jump into this subject. First, I am working here to provide a more robust theology of resurrection than one that focuses on the popular scholarly debates. Second, as such, I will not be focusing here on whether Paul expects the resurrection to be “bodily” or “physical.” I have already addressed these subjects elsewhere. Third, since I have addressed the matter in my 2 Cor 5 post, I will not be addressing here questions about how Paul portrays the timing of the resurrection and its relationship to Jesus’s Second Coming (or of its relationship to a popularly supposed intermediate state). With those caveats out of the way, let’s first look at Paul’s theology in context.
Paul’s Theology in Context
Paul was not the first teacher of a theology of resurrection, but he was the first one that we know of who set that theology down in writing. And he had to set it down in writing in a context of contrast with both Greco-Roman beliefs and Jewish beliefs. Recently, I wrote a summary of Greco-Roman (though mostly Greek) afterlife beliefs, and I also wrote an epitome of an article that included references to resurrected and immortalized heroes. I do not want to repeat too much of that information here, but it is notable that some of those who did not have predilections in favor of one philosophical school or another could have accepted Jesus’s resurrection without changing their worldview that much, provided that they could account for the crucifixion. They could have analogized him to the children of the gods in these various stories and, like those heroes, dismissed any connection his fate would have with theirs. Hence, they could accept his resurrection without taking on its eschatological significance in implying their own resurrection as part of the general resurrection. While there was precedent in Greco-Roman mythology for resurrection of those related to and specially favored by the gods, there was no precedent for belief in a general resurrection.
Among the Jews, there was also a variety of beliefs. The Sadducees and Samaritans (at least as far as can be told) denied any afterlife. Some Jews more thoroughly influenced by Greek philosophy—e.g., Philo and seemingly the author of 4 Maccabees (though note here)—expected a disembodied afterlife in which the soul lives on forever. Of course, some, such as Pseudo-Phocylides, thought that an immortal soul was compatible with bodily resurrection. Indeed, where there was a stated belief about post-mortem fate, the most frequent expression of hope in Second Temple texts was the expectation of an eschatological bodily resurrection, whether of the people of Israel, the faithful remnant thereof, or humans in general. I will explore in more depth another time the Second Temple resurrection texts and their various features. Of course, what I have said already about resurrection in the OT applies in these cases as well, in that resurrection was linked to convictions about God’s faithful love, final judgment, fulfillment of Scripture, and the coming of the kingdom of God/new creation. Paul obviously came from a Jewish background and himself would have expected resurrection even before becoming a Christian. But his expectations of resurrection and the larger eschatological picture resurrection was part of became reshaped around the crucial difference he had with other Jews: he proclaimed a resurrected Messiah (indeed, a resurrected Messiah who had been crucified). There were no expectations at the time of a Messiah who would be raised from the dead, much less that he would be the firstfruits of the eschatological resurrection who would rise so far in advance of everyone else.
Paul is thus a demonstration, especially for his Corinthian congregation that had significant problems stemming from attempts to assimilate, of how to maintain one’s beliefs in contradistinction to the surrounding culture. That is, he provides an example of how to think Christianly. On the one hand, his theology of resurrection contrasts with popular Greco-Roman beliefs in that what he attests to is a matter of recent history, so that the shadows of myths have become historical and concrete in Jesus. In the words of J. R. R. Tolkien, “But this story has entered History and the primary world; the desire and aspiration of sub-creation has been raised to the fulfillment of Creation. The Birth of Christ is the eucatastrophe of Man’s history. The Resurrection is the eucatastrophe of the story of the Incarnation. This story begins and ends in joy. It has pre-eminently the ‘inner consistency of reality.’ … For the Art of it has the supremely convincing tone of Primary Art, that is, of Creation.”1 But beyond superseding the myths by making the resurrection of the Son of God a matter of history, Paul also maintains that Christ has provided an accessible eschatology. While the fates of heroes had no bearing on the fates of the average person on the street, Christ’s resurrection opens up the avenue of everlasting life by present union with him that will lead to sharing in his resurrection.
On the other hand, Paul also shows, in this letter and others, what it means to think of an eschaton that envelops the present. Jewish eschatology shaped ethics, especially in view of the coming final judgment, and we see in Qumran a particularly heightened sense of eschatological significance to this movement. But the Jews did not have what Paul had: a belief in an inaugurated eschatology that was inaugurated by an eschatological event. That is, because of the event of Jesus being the firstfruits of the eschatological resurrection, Paul and his Christian movement have this “now and not yet” eschatology in which the last days are already happening, but the promises of the kingdom are not yet consummated. And now the eschatological vision is clarified all the more as the hopes bequeathed by the Scriptures of the OT are now seen more clearly with the Resurrected One at the gravitational center of hope, shaping all else about the future around himself.
With that context set, let us now consider the various elements of Paul’s theology of resurrection, beginning with what he teaches about the God who raises the dead.
The God Who Raises the Dead
I have commented previously on the voice of the resurrection verbs in 1 Cor 15. The many passive uses are illuminated by the two active uses in 1 Cor 15:15. God is said to be the active agent of the resurrection verbs and the passive voice that appears elsewhere in the chapter makes this point implicit (as the passive construction takes this agency for granted and focuses on the subjects affected by the action: Jesus, the dead, and bodies). It is also further indicated by the only use of the resurrection verb in 1 Corinthians outside of ch. 15, namely in 6:14. Likewise, the linkage of resurrection to victory in v. 57 once again has God as the active agent, as he is the one who gives resurrection to everlasting life through Jesus. These teachings are consistent with what we see many other times in Paul’s work (Rom 4:17, 24; 8:11; 10:9; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:20; Col 2:12; 1 Thess 1:10). Indeed, in some of these texts, the description of God as the one who raises and gives life to the dead is a crucial identifier. Romans 4:17 puts this description alongside the identification of God as Creator. Likewise, Paul combines describing God by his traditional descriptor of “the living and true God” in 1 Thess 1:9 with describing him as the one who raised Jesus from the dead in 1:10. In Rom 10:9, one of the fundamental declarations of faith alongside the fact that Jesus is Lord is the fact that God raised him from the dead. Resurrection operates at the implicit level in Galatians, but Paul still opens the letter by describing God as the one who raised Jesus from the dead (Gal 1:1). Paul links being raised with Jesus with the power of the God who raised him from the dead (Col 2:12). When Paul speaks of the Spirit in Rom 8:11, it is as the Spirit of “him who raised Jesus from the dead.” God is also identified as the one in whom we have hope—for resurrection and otherwise—by the description of being the one who raised Jesus from the dead (Rom 4:24; 8:11; 1 Cor 6:14; 2 Cor 4:14; Eph 1:20) or as the God who raises the dead (2 Cor 1:9), though the latter identification is particularized in and founded upon the former. If we were to look even further at these various texts, as I have done with 1 Cor 15 in my dissertation, we could see the crucial function these declarations and implications have in their contexts. After all, this is shown to be God’s climactic self-revelation, and so its importance makes it fitting as a descriptor. 1 Corinthians 15:15 shows this significance in a negative fashion, as if God has not raised Jesus, then he is not the God who raises the dead, and everything else about Christian faith falls apart, as the structure of Paul’s argument in vv. 12–19 shows how everything extends from this central consequence.
As we saw in the OT, and as is demonstrated in various ways in 1 Cor 15 and elsewhere, God’s resurrection of Jesus and the believers demonstrates the inexorability of his faithful love. Of course, this is implied by his action of raising to everlasting life, but it is further clarified when animated by the context of the promises of the OT. I have explored this element of resurrection belief in 1 Cor 15 in quite some detail in my dissertation, as well as in my forthcoming article (the latter focusing on vv. 12–19). We can see it particularly in how Jesus’s resurrection (along with his crucifixion) fulfills God’s promises in Scripture (vv. 3–4). It is because of this inexorability of God’s faithful love that the resurrection of those who are in Christ is presented as an inevitability like the coming of other fruits after the firstfruits, as is the purpose of God becoming all in all as a result of him fulfilling Ps 8 and Ps 110 in the present time through the resurrected Christ (vv. 20–28). Likewise, God’s resurrection of those who are in Christ is presented as the consummation of his victory and fulfillment of Scripture in vv. 54–57. Jesus’s resurrection and the larger gospel complex are also presented as fulfilling God’s promises spoken through the prophets in Scripture in Rom 1:1–4. The resurrection is part of the demonstration of God’s love even in the face of human unfaithfulness and sin in Rom 5:8–10. Jesus’s resurrection is the keystone in God’s plan of reconciliation, hence its function in Col 1:18–20. The resurrection of believers to everlasting life is also key to the execution of God’s plan of new creation, as well as the key demonstration that nothing can separate us from the love of God in the larger argument of Rom 8:18–39.
Resurrection is also crucial to the fulfillment of God’s justice in the final judgment. While the focus of Paul’s teaching is naturally on the resurrection to everlasting life that believers will receive, it is certainly not the only resurrection he expects (nor could it be if he believed Dan 12). God will raise both believers and unbelievers to appear before his judgment seat. The belief in this truth is nowhere explicitly stated in 1 Cor 15, but it is operating in the background at multiple points, not least because the expectation has already been invoked earlier in the letter. It may stand behind vv. 12–19, since the absence of such judgment will render all else vain (and this may also be implied in the legal imagery of the imagined contrary scenario in v. 15), but it is more manifest in the ethical instruction of vv. 29–34. For if there is no resurrection to final judgment, it does not matter how one lives. Such a statement underlines how all of Paul’s extensive ethical instruction in this letter is as empty as his gospel proclamation and the Corinthians’ faith in the same if there is no resurrection to final judgment whereby God condemns wickedness and vindicates faithfulness by enabling the faithful way of life to continue forever in his presence. The final judgment also stands behind an implied courtroom scene in vv. 54–57, wherein “victory” is victory in court in being vindicated over and against sin and death (as I show in more depth in my dissertation). In anticipation of ch. 15, Paul refers at multiple points elsewhere in 1 Corinthians to the coming final judgment. He appeals to the final judgment as the coming Day, when people’s works will be revealed and tested with fire (3:10–15; cf. 4:5; 5:5), but he also warns that those who destroy God’s temple (i.e., God’s people, the body of Christ) will themselves be destroyed on that Day (3:16–17). He also lists people who are characterized by sin who will not inherit the kingdom of God (6:9–10; cf. Gal 5:19–21), which appeals to the final judgment that decides everyone’s ultimate verdict (cf. 5:13), and which appears in proximity to his only other reference to resurrection outside of ch. 15 (6:14). Outside of 1 Corinthians, Paul makes reference to the coming wrath (1 Thess 1:10). The coming day of the Lord is also connected with resurrection—as well as the bifurcated outcomes of salvation and wrath—in 1 Thess 4:13–5:11. Likewise, Paul speaks of the time when God will repay all according to their deeds, giving some immortality/everlasting life and others wrath (Rom 2:6–10), and he more directly links this to his teaching on resurrection in 2 Cor 5:10. In Paul’s climactic eschatological teaching in Philippians in 3:18–21 directly links destruction and resurrection to everlasting life to God’s judgment and kingship (cf. 2 Thess 1:5–10). Paul also uses the prospect of judgment as a basis for ethical instruction in Rom 14:10–12; 2 Cor 5:10; and 2 Tim 4:1.
As indicated previously, God’s resurrecting action is also connected with him being the Creator. The segment of 1 Cor 15:36–41 contributes to the chapter, among other things, the emphasis that, just as the bodies of the present creation are what they are by God’s creative will, wisdom, and power, so shall God give resurrection bodies that will be in accord with God’s will, wisdom, and power for new creation. The principles of teleology and differentiation that are present in creation demonstrate how God can create various bodies for different purposes, and so it shall be with resurrection bodies that will be made fit for the new creation (vv. 42–49). We will return to the links of resurrection with new creation another time, but what is needful to note for now is how the link is founded upon God’s creative will, wisdom, and purpose as the God who is Creator and as the God who raises the dead.
Finally, what the gospel proclamation itself declares is that it is God’s will that Jesus executes in his incarnation, life, death, resurrection, and ascension. This is crucial to remember if our picture of resurrection is to match what Paul gives us in its Trinitarian character. This is why v. 57 rises to a crescendo of a declaration that God gives us the victory in resurrection and transformation, and he does so in Jesus. It is the will of the God who raises the dead that shapes the entire complex of resurrection theology in Paul’s works and in the rest of the biblical declarations of resurrection. We see this particularly in 1 Cor 15:20–28, where Jesus is presented like a general implementing the will of the King and will ultimately submit himself to his Father in the new creation in order that God and his will shall be all in all.
J. R. R. Tolkien, “On Fairy-Stories,” in The Monsters and the Critics, ed. Christopher Tolkien (London: HarperCollins, 2006), 156.