I still remember the light bulb that went on for me as my eighth grade geometry teacher explained the principle of indirect proof, what I later learned is called a reductio ad absurdum in logic. In all sorts of contexts, one may demonstrate the truth of a statement by showing that its denial leads to a contradiction, an absurdity. The Greeks, like Pythagoras, used such arguments for some classic geometrical proofs, and reductio is used in many kinds of debates, including some ordinary conversation situations.
One says, “If that’s not true, then I’m a monkey’s uncle.” The implication is that, since I am clearly not a monkey’s uncle, then “that,” whatever it is, is true. The trick is to show that the absurdity actually follows from the assumption, i.e., that the falsehood of “that” actually implies that I have a simian niece or nephew or some other absurdity or contradiction.
With groundwork laid in the first eleven verses of I Corinthians 15, Paul begins to directly address the issue of the resurrection of the dead in our text this week, I Corinthians 15:12-20, starting in verse 12, “how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?” followed by a chain of reasoning which teases out the absurd consequences if a Christian were to deny the resurrection of the dead. So verse 13, “If there is no resurrection of the dead, then”
1) Christ has not been raised.
2) Our proclamation has been in vain and your faith has been in vain (verse 14).
3) We are even found to be misrepresenting God (verse 15).
4) Your faith is futile and you are still in your sins (verse 17).
5) Those who have died in Christ have perished (verse 18).
6) We are of all people most to be pitied (verse 19).
Paul’s argument is that 1) – 6) are absurd consequences of the denial of the resurrection of the dead. No Christian would want to assert of those statements. Therefore, there must be a resurrection of the dead after all.
Our text ends in verse 20 with the simpler conclusion, “But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have died.” The implication is that the resurrection of Jesus brings with it and calls forth the resurrection of everyone else, “those who have died.” And Paul has already rehearsed the overwhelming evidence, the eye witnesses, for the resurrection of Jesus in the first part of the chapter. Thus a denial of Jesus’ resurrection which follows from a general denial of the resurrection of the dead is absurd in relation to that preponderance of evidence.
I am intrigued particularly by that last absurdity which Paul teases from the denial of resurrection, that “we are of all people most to be pitied.” Now, there have been those who have argued that Christians are pitiful fools from the beginning, from pagan scoffers and mockers of Christianity to contemporary atheists who wish to pin all the troubles of humanity on religious belief. And, unfortunately there is currently no shortage of pitifully foolish believers to fuel such infernal rhetoric.
But perhaps we can reduce blanket “pity” for the “foolishness” of Christianity to such pity’s own absurdity. Shall one pity Mother Teresa or Dorothy Day? Are Desmond Tutu and Francis Collins merely pathetic victims of delusion? Are we going to smirk in derision at the work of J. R. R. Tolkien or C. S. Lewis? How about Madeleine L’Engle or Marilynne Robinson? No, there are bright, good, successful Christians in all walks of life, maybe especially in less notable and public arenas of life. Their joy, courage, and hope are hardly to be pitied. And neither need we deny the resurrection of the dead, a conviction from which a good deal of that joy, hope and courage derives.