Ciampa, Roy and Brian Rosner, The First Letter to the Corinthians. Eerdmans, 2010.

V. The Resurrection and Consummation 15:1-58

Did Paul believe that Jesus was literally, bodily raised from the dead and that his follows will be as well? Absolutely. Theres no question about that. None. Do Ciampa and Rosner? Youll search in vain for either a no or a yes in this chapter of their contribution to Corinthian Correspondence study. They tell readers what Paul thought but there isnt so much as a hint as to what they think. This is, in some respects, proper for a commentary. Commentaries are expositions rather than impositions. Still, its very helpful to know where authors are coming from. Knowing their presuppositions helps readers understand aright. In their view, chapter 15 looks forward to and relates all of that earlier material about what it means to be Gods holy people in this present age to Gods ultimate plans for the complete transformation of our bodies (p. 737). Their exposition of this theme continues through the entire chapter. In particular, in connection with 15:12-19, R. and C. suggest Pauls enumeration of such drastic consequences is intended to show the untenability of the negative position [i.e., of those who deny the bodily resurrection] (p. 754). And then a series of citations of the work of N.T. Wright begins, and continues throughout the rest of the section. Wrights views are inserted at nearly every turn as though the authors were simply concerned to support their position by means of Wright. Wright draws (p. 756). Wright points out (p. 760). As Wright puts it (p. 763). As Wright points out (p. 768). Wright notes (p. 771). Wright sees clearly (p. 775). And etc. One is almost led to the opinion that C. and R. think readers should put down the present volume and go buy Wrights book. But that would be a mistake, especially in light of their excellent exposition of the entire baptism for the dead problem (of 15:29). After examining the various theories as to what this bizarre passage means, C. and R. offer their own sage reading: We think that the best approach is to understand the reference to the dead in light of the usage of the word throughout this chapter

[so that] the reader should expect that a reference to the dead would be a reference to the dead who will be raised in the resurrection (p. 783). So We would paraphrase the verse as follows: Now, if there is no resurrection, what will be accomplished by those who get baptized because of what they have heard about how our dead will be raised? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people undergoing baptism on account of them (p. 784-5). As is their custom, R. and C. offer quality exposition in the entire chapter. Next, the conclusion.

Jim West Quartz Hill School of Theology