Sermon Tone Analysis

By Pastor Glenn Pease

Captain James Saunders of the U. S. Navy taught a graduate class on the principles of agreement.

As a demonstration, he would give each member of the class a piece of white paper, and ask them to chew it.

The paper had been treated with a chemical called phenylthiocarbimide.

Some reported that it tasted bitter; some said it was sweet; others said it had no taste.

A vigorous argument would break out as to who was right.

Each was arguing from personal experience, and so they were positive they were right, and the others wrong.

Then Captain Saunders would explain that this chemical taste different to different people.

So they were all right, even though they had opposite answers.

Life and reality are paradoxical enough so that both sides of an argument can be equally right.

This should be kept in mind in any debate which is based on subjective experience.

On the other hand, when we come to matters of historical fact, it is either so, or not.

An event like the resurrection is a fact, or it is fiction.

Both views can be held, but only one can be correct.

This is true of all of the facts of the Gospel, and, therefore, there can only be one right position when it comes to any revealed fact.

If this was not so, all of Paul's arguments in defense of the faith would be futile.

We do not often realize it, but much of Paul's writing is argument.

He is constantly answering critics, and challenging them, and by skilled logic, refuting their errors.

We can be thankful for the debates of the early church, for without them we would not have much of what we do have in the New Testament.

Controversy handled improperly has caused much harm in the church.

But when it is conducted in the proper spirit it can be a great blessing.

Eliminate debate and open discussion, and you stifle the spirit.

Freedom to question and argue keeps the church fresh and alive.

If the Corinthians had not been allowed to question the resurrection of the dead, we would never have had this enlightening chapter on the subject, and we would have lost one of the most informative chapters in all the Bible.

Lyman Beecher said, "No great advance has ever been made in science, politics or religion, without controversy."

Jesus was in a constant storm of debate, and so were the apostles, and so has every Christian who has been used of God to plow new furrows into the harden ground of man's rebellion.

Robert Hall wrote, "However some may affect to dislike controversy, it can never be of ultimate disadvantage to the interests of truth or the happiness of mankind."

Of course, this does not mean we do anyone a service by being contentious and starting arguments over every issue.

William Penn said, "It were endless

to dispute over everything that is disputable."

Paul warns us not to get into foolish disputes which only promote strife and do not edify.

Paul saves his energy to debate issues vital to the Gospel, and that is what we see him doing in this chapter.

We seldom think about it, but the resurrection of the body is a major issue.

We don't think about it because no one around us challenges it.

The lack of controversy on the issue has made it a non-issue for most modern Christians.

It was a real issue in the Corinthian church, however, for as Paul says in verse 12, some were saying there was no resurrection of the dead.

Some Christians were still hung up on their pagan beliefs about the immortality of the soul.

The Greeks very clearly believed in the immortality of the soul, but the body to them was evil and the source of all sin and weakness.

Therefore, they believed when the soul escaped the body at death it was good riddance forever.

When Paul preached to the Greeks in Athens about the resurrection of the dead, they mocked him.

The idea of the body being raised was folly to the Greeks.

Even after some of them became Christians they could not accept the teaching that the body would be raised.

They thought they were being far more spiritual in rejecting such a materialistic concept of the resurrection.

Paul is here defending the doctrine of the resurrection of the body.

He shows that it is based on the Gospel itself, and to deny it is to tamper with the very foundation of the Gospel.

The Christian belief is that the body is not the source of all evil.

The body can be the temple of the Holy Spirit.

Jesus, in the incarnation, took on a body of flesh, and thereby made the body of eternal and infinite worth and dignity.

The body is not contemptible, but is a part of God's highest creation.

Man will be, for all eternity, as God originally made him: A creature of body and spirit.

Any contempt for the body is a carry over from paganism, and is contrary to the spirit of the New Testament.

A denial of the resurrection of the body can easily lead to a rejection of the resurrection of Christ Himself.

The Corinthians did not realize the serious implications of their position, and so Paul writes to point these out.

Paul does not say excommunicate the heretics who are undermining the foundation of the Gospel, but instead, he takes the cool approach of persuasion.

The way he goes about this is a lesson in Christian love and courtesy in controversy.

He said in chapter 13 that if he had the eloquence of an angel, but did not love, he was but sounding brass and a clanging symbol.

So he argues in love with a cool calmness rather than in anger and with contempt for his opponents.

Paul is not interested in winning a debate, but he is interested in persuading his opponents to return to sound doctrine.

Paul knows that effective persuasion depends upon finding a common ground on which to stand with your opponent.

Any argument in which common ground is not established is worthless, and only the foolish will pursue such a futile debate.

Common ground is essential to gain any value out of controversy.

Paul, therefore, does not launch right out into the sea of controversy, but he first builds a solid dock from which he and his opponents can make a common start, and to which they can return if they are tossed by the waves of contention into confusion.

Paul doesn't even raise the main issue until verse 12.

First things first says Paul.

Let me remind you Corinthians of the fundamental facts on which our faith rests.

Paul had preached the Gospel to them, and they responded, and its power had already been demonstrated.

Now he is going to put in written words exactly what the essence of the Gospel is.

Thanks to Paul we have a concise and clear definition of the Gospel.

Words are constantly changing, and unless you have a clear definition of what a word means, you cannot go far in an argument without confusion.

Words can expand or shrink with time, and mean more or less than they originally did.

For example, the word journey was born in France, and was a word that meant a trip of a single day.

Now the word takes in every kind of traveling.

It is no longer specific, but general.

On the other hand, the word meat began with the Angles Saxons as a broad general word including all that was edible.

Now this word has been slimmed down to mean fleshy foods only.

Paul made sure that the Gospel would not expand or contract by defining it with three never changing historical events.

This would insure that the word would always have a steady and consistent content.

The Gospel which saved the Corinthians, and which is the power of God unto salvation for all who believe, is the good news of three historical facts: The death of Christ for our sins; His burial, and His resurrection.

Paul says this is the ground on which you stand, and in which you are firmly rooted, and by which you are saved, if you hold it fast.

We see Paul's strategy here.

He says we begin on the level of the facts which are vital to our salvation.

Let us be sure of this, anything that would cause us to doubt or deny one of these vital facts endangers the very foundation of Christianity, and are own salvation.

One thing is for sure, on which we all can agree, and that is, there are three facts of the Gospel we must be committed to, and we must hold them fast no matter what.

Let them go, or anyone of them, and your belief has been in vain, for Christianity is no longer true.

The opponents of Paul, you see, agree with this.

The Gospel they have received and believed is what they see eye to eye with Paul.

If Paul can go on to show that their view of the resurrection of the dead destroys one of these three foundation facts, then he has forced them to give up their error, or destroy their own foundation.

The Gospel, therefore, is the foundation.

It is the common ground on which a meaningful debate concerning the resurrection can take place.

Depart from these three facts, however, and all such arguments are as futile as beating the wind.

It is of interest to note how often a great subject divides into three categories, as does the Gospel.

If we were to study nature, we can divide it into three kingdoms: Animal, mineral, and vegetable.

If we want to study matter, we have three forms: Solid, liquid, and gas.

If we study man, we have body, mind, and spirit.

If we study God, we have Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

If we study earth, we have land, air, and water.

If we study our government we have three branches: Executive, legislative, and judicial.

If we study the names of Jesus, we have Jesus, Christ, and Lord.

He fulfills prophecy as Prophet, Priest, and King.

Truth in so many areas seems to rest on a Trinitarian tripod.