INTRODUCTION

The quest for the historical Jesus is quite the endeavor. Historians have produced volumes of literature throughout the centuries devoted to discovering who Jesus was (or if he even existed.) Many desire security camera footage of Jesus leaving the tomb. Obviously, this is not possible, but every person who has lived since the time of Jesus is tasked with deciding if they believe in Jesus as the Christ. Many turn to the four canonical Gospels to discover Jesus. While these inspired masterpieces are gifts, they are not the only, earliest, or most helpful tools in helping those decide what they believe about Jesus.

This brief paper aims to look at the kerygma (that is, early Christian preaching or proclamation) in 1 Corinthians 15:3b-5. Kelly (2006, 13) clarifies that what we have preserved is not a creed “in the true meaning of the word.” In this time of the very early church, the apostles and teachers were in the process of solidifying core truths. Later in church history, these “creed-like slogans,” formulas, traditions, confessions, and “conventional summaries” would be turned into creeds in the fullest sense. This is a minor point, but it is worth making to understand the culture of the early church in comparison to several centuries later. Several aspects of this passage will be discussed. My own research will be presented, and then the research of two modern scholars will be compared.

MY OWN PRESUPPOSITIONS

Following Powell’s example (1998, 8-9), “I do not wish to feign objectivity, to pretend that I myself am somehow free of that element of personal investment that affects those I describe.” Examining one’s own beliefs helps prevent “recreating Jesus” in one’s own image (Strauss 2020, 418), as Schweitzer is well known for pointing out as a fault in others who have sought after the historical Jesus. With this in mind, I am a self-professed Christian. I believe in the possibility of miracles. In addition to Jesus’ actions, the New Testament captures the words of Jesus but mostly his voice. I believe that Jesus was a real person who was fully God and fully man. He designated apostles to carry on his message. When the New Testament writers were inspired to write, they used the tools, language, and literary genres available to them. These words are sacred and have been preserved faithfully for thousands of years. In particular, the Apostle Paul wrote epistles to the first followers of Jesus in the 1st century (Richards 2023, 640). Most importantly, he wrote about a Jewish man from Nazareth who died and was physically resurrected. With his new resurrection body, he appeared to hundreds of his followers. I believe this is all part of God’s plan in order to save all those who believe (Romans 10:11-15). When a person places their faith in Jesus, the Holy Spirit indwells and empowers them to spread this good news to the ends of the earth (Acts 1:8). Belief in Jesus is not just a cognitive exercise but also a spiritual encounter with the Lord Jesus as enabled by the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:3; Grenz 2000, 250-51).

THE TEXT OF 1 CORINTHIANS 15:3B-5

The exact passage covered is displayed below in four lines, following the parallelism and use of the word “that.” Lines 1 and 3 represent the core message of the Gospel of Jesus, and they are connected through the phrase “according to the Scriptures.” Line 2 gives evidence for Line 1. Line 4 gives evidence for Line 3. (Fee 1987, 722-9)

(1)   that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures

(2) that he was buried,

(3) that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures

(4) and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve.

Pauline vs. Pre-Pauline

While some scholars see verses 6 and 7 as part of the same confessional pre-Pauline formula (Moffitt 2008, 50), the text of 1 Corinthians 15:3b-5 will be focused on for this paper. This is for several reasons. Pragmatically, this is a short research paper. Limiting the scope will be beneficial. For the sake of argument, verses 3b-5 are “almost universally acknowledged” as pre-Pauline (Kloppenborg 1978, 351). Even if verses 6-7 are original to Paul, the previous verses contain a wealth of information concerning the historical Jesus (Wright 2003, 319). (Interestingly enough, Wright does not care much for the lengthy debate of the origins of the creedal formula. The fact that both Paul and the Corinthians know the kerygma is the focus.) Also, Kloppenborg (1978, 358) has a high value for verses 6-7. (That is to say, they are still original to the letter). However, he states it is “questionable” as to whether or not they are from the same kerygmatic pre-Pauline tradition. Fee (1987, 729-31) notes the change from non-Pauline language to language that ‘is so thoroughly Pauline that it seems probable that these items have been added by Paul himself, probably from a different ‘tradition.’” Conzelmann (1975, 257-8) notes how Paul’s repeating use of the word “that” changes. In verses 3b-5 Paul uses the word “that” several times to mark the parallelism found in the kerygma. He shifts his repetition to use the word “then.” Lastly, to quote Jeremias (1966, 101) “For it can be established on linguistic grounds that the kerygma here quoted (which runs from 1 Cor. 15:3b ‘Christ’ to v. 5 ‘twelve’ as is shown, e.g., by the syntactical break between vv. 5 and 6) was not formulated by Paul.”

Expanding on the unique vocabulary, there are “at least seven unique phrases and/or words within just a few verses” (Bass 2020, 78). “Died for our sins” stands out because Paul usually uses the singular word “sin” without combining it with other phrases in the original Greek. (That is to say, he usually does not use the genitive case, which he does in 1 Cor 15:3.) “He was raised” is unique because of the tense that is used in the original language. Paul only uses this exact phrase when he is quoting this kerygma (1 Cor. 15:4, 12–14, 16, 20, and 2 Tim. 2:8). Similarly, Paul only uses the phrase “he appeared” when quoting other creedal formulas. “According to the scriptures,” “he was buried,” “on the third day,” and “the Twelve” stand out because Paul only uses these phases once in all of his letters (Bass 2020, 78; Jeremias 1966, 102). In addition to these seven, Ciampa and Rosner (2010, 746f42) note how the whole “syntactical sequence” is unique among Paul’s letters. In total, we have eight unique linguistic elements found in two verses.

Lastly and most explicitly, the words “received” and “passed on” clearly point to a tradition that Paul inherited. Several scholars take note of this. Fee (1987, 722) states “that this is technical vocabulary from Paul’s Jewish heritage for the transmission of religious instruction.” Keener (2014, 491), speaking of Paul’s culture and these phrases, believes Paul’s use of these phrases

is the language of what scholars call “traditioning”: Jewish teachers would pass on their teachings to their students, who would in turn pass them on to their own students. The students could take notes, but they delighted especially in oral memorization and became quite skilled at it; memorization was a central feature of ancient education. In the first generation, the tradition would be very accurate; some even believe that this tradition in 15:3–5 or 15:3–7 may be a verbatim citation.

Authenticity & Date

The authenticity and dating of this confession are also well agreed upon in scholarship. Briefly zooming out to the whole letter of 1 Cor., “The authenticity of the epistle is universally recognized” (Conzelmann 1975, 2-4). The same is true for the dating of the whole letter, “The date of Paul’s missionary stay in the city of Corinth is one of the most certain in NT chronology. In fact, scholars studying Pauline chronology usually move forward and backward from that point” (Verbrugge 2008, 247-8).

Zooming back in, Bass (2020, 78-83) has a powerful and enormously helpful summary of scholarly opinion concerning the dating of 1 Cor 15:3b-5. After citing sixteen scholars, he places the receiving of “this Credo formula sometime in the early 30s AD.” He notes only a few (three) scholars have a later dating of this passage. These scholars call into question the date of this passage as well as its authenticity. Price (a self-professed mythicist – that is, a person who believes that Jesus is simply a myth) is one of these scholars and will be addressed in a later section. Bass (2020, 82) has the same viewpoint as Dunn in that this verbal tradition began to form a few months after Jesus’s death and resurrection. Paul was catechized (received direct and personal instruction) when he met with Peter and James, as recorded in Gal. 1:18-19. This dates Paul’s receiving of 1 Cor. 15:3b-5 to AD 37. Bass links vv. 5-7 in the kerygma (Jesus appearing to Peter and James) to his time as outlined in Galatians 1:18-19, “Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days. I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother.” All of these aspects considered together, it is powerful evidence that Paul received these ideas from an earlier source within years of the death and resurrection of Jesus.

Meaning & Implications

Moving from the historical aspects of the kerygma to the theological meaning, I am now concerned with why Paul wrote vv 3b-5. Why was this tradition passed on to him at the very beginning of his conversion? Also, why did Paul pass this on to his audience in Corinth? The answer is relatively simple. The Apostles and Paul place primacy in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. As mentioned earlier, scholars take care as to what to call this tradition in Paul’s letter. Throughout this paper, terms like kerygma and pre-creedal formula have been used. However, Paul calls it his gospel (1 Cor 3:1-2; Kelly 2006, 16). Fee (1987, 722) supplies the meaning of “first importance” as found in 1 Cor 15:3a: essentially, Paul says, “Here is the ‘bare bones’ content of the gospel that saves.” The core message is about Jesus’s physical death for our sins and resurrection as a foretaste of heaven. All of this aligns with the Jewish Scriptures and the arrival of the Messiah. To believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus is to be saved (1 Cor 15:2). This message is at the heart of his letter to the Corinthian church (Ciampa & Rosner 2010, 737). The gospel provides cohesion and uniformity. In this particular section, Paul asserts his apostleship (Fee 1987, 713-9) and corrects confusion about the resurrection of the dead. Resurrection is not “an improvement in one’s spiritual status either in this life or in a disembodied postmortem existence” (Ciampa & Rosner 2010, 754-5). Jesus was physically resurrected, and we will have the same experience at the end of this age. Until then, believers must balance the already-not-yet tension of the Kingdom of God (Ciampa & Rosner 2010, 736).

Even though Paul’s gospel is short, it is still comprehensive. It contains the bare essentials. This, combined with the amazing historical provenance, provides a very useful tool for discerning a person’s worldview. Ask a person what they believe about these four lines from Paul, and it will reveal much about their preconceptions. Also, it will reveal if they have a saving faith. Considering the “bedrock facts” contained in this kerygma, a person has to decide what they believe about Jesus and also the first Jews. These followers of Jesus all suddenly believed that their messiah died an embarrassing death and (surprisingly) reported that he was resurrected (Bass 2020, 200-1).

While we cannot ask these scholars face-to-face, their writings will be examined as to how they interpret Paul’s gospel. Due to the length provided, only two modern scholars will be presented.

ROBERT M. PRICE

Price is a self-professed mythicist who believes “it is quite likely there never was any historical Jesus” (Price 2009, 55). After consulting several of his works, he readily admits he is in the minority and holds a controversial view. In summary of his view, he upholds the principle of analogy as the most important tool in researching the historical Jesus. Looking back through history, it is impossible to really know if a miracle occurred. When looking at ancient writings, he first considers if we can have the same experience as the ancient writers did. If we cannot have the same experience, the story most likely will “match the analogy of legend or myth” (Price 2009, 56-57). Overall, he sees non-Christian writings about Jesus and biblical writing as inspired by other cultures and myths or corrupted centuries after the original writings. “The Epistles, earlier than the Gospels, do not evidence a recent historical Jesus” (Price 2009, 63-64). The eucharistic words of Jesus as preserved by Paul in 1 Cor. 11:23-26 are a result of interpolation.

The kerygma in 1 Cor 15:3b-5 is not directly addressed in some of his works consulted for this paper, but he addresses this topic head-on in his article Apocryphal Apparitions: 1 Corinthians 15:3-11 As a Post-Pauline Interpolation. This article was published in The Journal of Higher Criticism, a journal created by Price. He makes several points, but in summary. he sees Paul’s words in Gal. 1:1, 11-12 and 1 Cor. 15:3b-5 as contradictory. Did Paul receive the truth about Jesus from God directly or from Peter and James? “The stubborn fact remains: in Galatians Paul tells his readers that what he preached to them when he founded their church was not taught him by human predecessors. In 1 Cor. 15 he is depicted as telling his readers that what he preached to them when he founded their church was taught him by human predecessors” (Price 1997). He also sees 1 Cor. 15:3-11 as added later by scribes to bolster belief in the resurrection. This passage also addresses the conflict between apostles and factions forming around them. He also sees the alignment of 1 Cor. 15 with other writings (including Luke-Acts) as a sign of interpolation as the scribes were concerned with “later polemics and tradition” (Price 1997). Overall, he sees the early Christian movement as a drawn-out messy collection of stories. The writers were so far removed from a historical Jesus “it is utterly pointless even to ask whether there was sufficient time for legends to grow up around Jesus. Sufficient time—from when?” (Price 2009, 81).

In response to Price, he appears to avoid or discard very strong evidence that challenges his claims. From his entry found in The Historical Jesus: Five Views, he receives sharp critique from other scholars. Crossan (2009, 86) comments on Price’s “leapfrogging” of other historical accounts of Jesus and James. This “is not an acceptable scholarly comment as far as I am concerned.” Criticism continues from Dunn (2009, 96):

Where I begin to become irritated by Price’s thesis, as with those of his predecessors, is his ignoring what everyone else in the business regards as primary data and his readiness to offer less plausible hypotheses to explain other data that inconveniences his thesis. Why no mention of 1 Corinthians 15:3—generally reckoned to be an account of the faith that Paul received when he was converted, that is, within two or three years of the putative events—“that Christ died.…”

Responding to his article on 1 Cor 15:3-11, I see no contradiction between Gal. 1:1, 11-12 and 1 Cor. 15:3b-5. In fact, I see the most likely hypothesis is that Paul genuinely encountered Jesus. Then, the truth of Jesus’s divinity, atoning death, and resurrection was confirmed when he met with Peter and James. Paul was aware of Jesus’ apostle’s claims before his conversion. Why else would he be prosecuting the church? This meeting with Jesus in Gal. 1:1, 11-12 “‘altered at a stroke his whole attitude to what he already knew of Jesus.’ What he earlier regarded as a ‘lying message became the message of salvation, and Paul’s task was now to pass it on.’” (Fung 1988, 53). Despite being a sudden change in topic in 1 Cor. 15., Fee takes no issue with it (1987, 713-4). Conzelmann interacts more with the abrupt change in topics and literary criticism. He sees the abrupt changes in topic as Paul addressing different topics. Even if the composition of 1 Corinthians is in doubt, “The authenticity of the epistle is universally recognized” (Conzelmann 1975, 2-3 & 249). For the sake of argument in this paper, the authenticity is of primary concern. Worse case, a change in composition in Paul’s letter does not warrant the kerygma to be thrown out. As will also apply in the next response, the work of Gathercole (2022, 500-501) provides a better hypothesis of the similarity of the kerygma to other writings in the early church. “The first and early second centuries were not a theologically innocent melting pot of gospels that only later were subject to prejudicial evaluation. Criteria of true and false teaching were already embedded in the kerygma and developing in the writings of the New Testament.” Instead of later scribes inserting what they believed to be true into 1 Cor. 15, the hypothesis that fits best is that Jesus appeared to his apostles, and they successfully passed on the truth of his resurrection.

JOHN DOMINIC CROSSAN

In the brief space remaining, Crossan’s viewpoint on the kerygma will be examined. The two main issues that affect his interpretation of 1 Cor 15: (1) his concept of how Jesus’s followers viewed resurrection and (2) the importance of the Cross Gospel. Instead of actual history, Crossan believes that the early Jesus followers were crafting stories that fit the “dyad of persecution-vindication” (Crossan 1998, 548). The true meaning of “according the scriptures” is linked with the concept of the third day. “The third day is about communal resurrection ‘according to the scriptures’” (Crossan 1998, 548). In other words, Jesus did not physically resurrect, but the pattern of storytelling is “more about establishing an authority than about receiving an apparition” (Crossan 1998, Prologue). His method is six-fold and takes a very early reading of The Cross Gospel, which is part of the Gospel of Peter that covers the death and resurrection of Jesus. His view is controversial, but he believes that the Cross Gospel is very early and influences all other apocryphal sources and it influences his view on the belief of Jesus’ resurrection (Crossan 1998, 119-120).

In response to Crossan, he is respected by other scholars, but his view on the Cross Gospel is not widely accepted (Powell 1998, 86). Green (1997, 928-929) is one scholar who is unconvinced of the dating of the Cross Gospel and its influence. Gathercole states his conclusions about the Gospel of Peter are "necessarily provisional” (2022, 327). Mirecki (1992, Vol. 4 Pg. 80) is more sympathetic and states the Gospel of Peter is “an earlier form of the gospel probably served as one of the major sources for the canonical gospels.” While I respect Crossan, and the Gospel of Peter deserves more research, the implications that the early Christians did not see Jesus’s resurrection as physical is too high a mountain me for me to climb. Conversely, the clarity over the physicality of the resurrection in 1 Cor. 15 and the solid evidence of a very early dating of Paul’s kerygma keep me holding to a traditional faith in the bodily resurrection of Jesus. In all fairness, Crossan has a different take on the resurrection than Paul. However, confusions like these seem to be very similar to what Paul was correcting in his letter to the Corinthians. Paul is concerned with the details of the resurrection. If Paul were alive today, I believe he would say to Crossan, “How can [you] say that there is no resurrection of the dead?” (1 Cor. 15:12).

CONCLUSION

While I do not think historical evidence is enough to impart a saving faith, a genuine Christian can stand on solid historical ground. Anecdotally speaking, I have encountered many non-Christians who either believe Jesus never existed or that spirituality is all that matters. I am grateful for the simple yet comprehensive gospel contained in the kerygma in 1 Cor 15:3b-5. From a theological perspective, flowing from Paul's explicit teaching and 1st Corinthians, I would emphatically (and gently) encourage everyone to believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus. Without a physical resurrection, our belief in Jesus is “in vain” (1 Cor. 15:2).

REFERENCES

Arndt, William, Frederick W. Danker, Walter Bauer, and F. Wilbur Gingrich. 2000. In A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed., 271. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Barton, Stephen C. 2003. “1 Corinthians.” In Eerdmans Commentary on the Bible, edited by James D. G. Dunn and John W. Rogerson, 1347. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Bass, Justin. 2020. The Bedrock of Christianity: The Unalterable Facts of Jesus' Death and Resurrection. United States: Lexham Press.

Blomberg, Craig. 1994. 1 Corinthians. The NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

Ciampa, Roy E., and Brian S. Rosner. 2010. The First Letter to the Corinthians. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Conzelmann, Hans. 1966. “On the Analysis of the Confessional Formula in I Corinthians 15:3–5.” Interpretation (Richmond) 20, no. 1: 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/002096436602000102.

—. 1975. 1 Corinthians: A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians. Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Crossan, John Dominic. 1998. The Birth of Christianity : Discovering What Happened in the Years Immediately after the Execution of Jesus. 1st ed. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco.

Dunn, James D. G. 2009. “Response to Robert M. Price.” In The Historical Jesus: Five Views, edited by James K. Beilby and Paul Rhodes Eddy, 96. Spectrum Multiview Books. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.

Fee, Gordon D. 1987. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

Fung, Ronald Y. K. 1988. The Epistle to the Galatians. The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

Green, Joel B. 1997. “Peter, Gospel Of.” In Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments, edited by Ralph P. Martin and Peter H. Davids, electronic ed., 928–29. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

Grenz, Stanley J. 2000. Theology for the Community of God. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Jeremias, Joachim. 1966. The Eucharistic Words of Jesus. Translated by Norman Perrin. London; Philadelphia, PA: SCM Press; Trinity Press International.

Keener, Craig S. 2014. The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament. Second Edition. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic: An Imprint of InterVarsity Press.

Kelly, J. N. D. 2006. Early Christian Creeds. Third Edition. London; New York: Continuum.

Kloppenborg, John. 1978. “An Analysis of the Pre-Pauline Formula 1 Cor 15: 3b-5 In Light of Some Recent Literature.” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 40, no. 3: 351–67.

McArthur, Harvey K. 1971. “On the Third Day.” New Testament Studies 18, no. 1: 81–86. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002868850002350X.

Mirecki, Paul Allan. 1992. “Peter, Gospel of.” In The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary, edited by David Noel Freedman, 5:280. New York: Doubleday.

Moffitt, David M. 2008. “Affirming the ‘Creed’: The Extent of Paul’s Citation of an Early Christian Formula in 1 Cor 15,3b–7.” Zeitschrift Für Die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft Und Die Kunde Der Älteren Kirche 99, no. 1: 49–73. https://doi.org/10.1515/ZNTW.2008.004.

Price, Robert M.. 1997. “Apocryphal Apparitions: 1 Corinthians 15:3-11 As a Post-Pauline Interpolation” Accessed December 7, 2023. https://infidels.org/library/modern/robert-price-apocrypha/.

—.. 2000. Deconstructing Jesus. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.

—. 2009. “Jesus at The Vanishing Point.” In The Historical Jesus: Five Views, edited by James K. Beilby and Paul Rhodes Eddy, 63. Spectrum Multiview Books. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.

Richards, E. Randolph. 2023. “Letters, Letter Forms.” In Dictionary of Paul and His Letters: A Compendium of Contemporary Biblical Scholarship, edited by Scot McKnight, Second Edition, 640. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic: An Imprint of InterVarsity Press.

Taylor, Mark. 2014. 1 Corinthians. Edited by E. Ray Clendenen. Vol. 28. The New American Commentary. Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group.

Verbrugge, Verlyn D. 2008. “1 Corinthians.” In The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Romans–Galatians (Revised Edition), edited by Tremper Longman III & Garland, David E., 11:247–48. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

 Wright, N. T. (Nicholas Thomas). 2003. The Resurrection of the Son of God. First North American edition. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.