1 Cor. 15:1-11

Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. ²By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.

³For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, ⁴that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, ⁵and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. ⁶After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. ⁷Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, ⁸and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

⁹For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. ¹⁰But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his

grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of them—yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me. ¹¹Whether, then, it was I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed.

Every year around Easter, the secular media begins to contribute their annual commentary on Christianity. They could care less about Jesus the rest of the year, but at Easter and Christmas, we are likely to hear what Time and Newsweek suddenly thinks about Jesus. Why? Because Jesus sells magazines, that’s why? But others in the media have more than financial motives. Some are downright angry about Jesus and our celebration of the resurrection.

Last month there was an op-ed piece in the NY Times from someone I would call an angry atheist. He writes, “The truth is, there is not a person on Earth who has a good reason to believe that Jesus rose from the dead or that Muhammad spoke to the angel Gabriel in a cave. And yet billions of people claim to be certain about such things. As a result, Iron Age ideas about everything high and low -- sex, cosmology, gender equality, immortal souls, the end of the world, the validity of prophecy, etc. -- continue to divide our world and subvert our national discourse. Many of these ideas, by their very nature, hobble science, inflame human conflict and squander scarce resources.”[1]

This man’s name is Sam Harris and some call him the most prominent atheist in America. If I called this guy on the phone, do you think he would listen to me? I actually sent him an email, but I did not receive a reply. I can only imagine that he would say that he has heard it all before. Now compare this angry attitude with the honest struggles from another man. I received an email on this past Tuesday from a man I will call Joe, who does not live here.

“I see bad people reep [sic] great rewards from this life and I see good people suffering everywhere. Yea I know, His own son suffered for us, but how evil is that? How irrational is that? If God were a real God then he Himself would have endured the pain rather than put his own son through it. I must be nothing "in his own image" for I would die a thousand deaths before I would allow one single hair on my sons head to harmed without intervention.”[2]

This man is struggling with the age-old problem of evil: “Why does a good God allow bad things to happen?” But I know this man, and I know that he is not struggling with evil in the abstract sense. He and his family really have endured some very difficult things and, like the rest of us, he really has seen evil people prosper. He honestly does feel that his good life has only brought more pain. Moreover, he struggles with understanding the cross and the resurrection.

How would you answer this man’s honest struggles? Do you have any kind of answer for him? If we cannot see the answer to his questions, especially on this special day that we celebrate the resurrection, then we might as well go home, eat our ham dinner and gobble down our chocolate bunnies. If we can’t apply the resurrection to these basic questions, then all we really have is the Easter Bunny. If I didn’t have an answer for this man that was fundamentally rooted in the resurrection and the gospel, then I would literally have to quit my job. I would walk out that door and never return. On this Easter morning, you don’t need to me to tell you that Jesus rose from the dead. You already know that. At least you know it in your head. What you need, what I need, and what this struggling man needs, is to apply the resurrection to these big problems in life. We need to take the resurrection like a hammer and smash the barriers to this man’s faith. We need to use the resurrection as a healing balm to soothe his troubled soul. The truth and power of the resurrection is the answer.

Before I move ahead, let me say one more thing. I don’t pretend for a second that I can wipe away all doubts and hurts in this man’s life—or anyone’s life—in a thirty minute sermon. This man needs a listening, compassionate ear. This man requires a patient “speaking the truth in love” into his life. Oftentimes, God does work his truth in a miraculous and quick way, but generally speaking, it takes some time. Even though the fundamental answer lies in the resurrection, I did not want you to think I was callously offering a speedy solution.

We all need regular reminders of the gospel, which is precisely what the Corinthians needed. Paul wrote, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. Notice how Paul described the gospel. It was the gospel that he preached to the Corinthians, it was the gospel which they received and it was the gospel on which they took their stand. If they were standing firm on the gospel, why did Paul need to remind them? Because some of them were denying the bodily resurrection. The believers in Corinth needed a reminder, just as you and I need reminders. That’s why we observe the Lord’s Supper; we do it in remembrance of Jesus and his gospel.

Paul was crystal clear about what he said next. Most scholars believe that verses 3-5 were an early Christian creed, much like the Apostle’s Creed that came later. Paul recorded this four-part creed:

Interestingly, Paul wrote this about twenty years after Jesus’ resurrection. So less than twenty years after the fact, there was already a well-defined creed floating among the early churches. This offers more proof to those who would claim that our Christian beliefs were devised in the late first century or early second century. On the contrary—the death, burial and resurrection of Christ was established from the very first days of the early church. They passed on their faith with creeds like this one quoted by Paul.

Let’s take this creed one phrase at a time and see how it can answer our friend’s questions.

This is a summary statement of the substitutionary atonement of Christ. When it says that Christ died “for” our sins, it means that he died in our place; on our behalf; instead of us. Christ was our substitute on the cross to make atonement for our sin. Already we have the first answer to our friend’s dilemma: “why do bad things happen to good people?” The obvious answer is because sin has entered and completely penetrated our world. All suffering is due to sin, and sin is no respecter of persons. You can be a relatively upstanding citizen and all-around nice guy, and still be ravaged by cancer. You can be the nicest person in the neighborhood and still get crushed by a semi truck on your way home from work. Christ was under no obligation to die for our sins, but it if he was to pay the price for sin, it was necessary that he be our substitute.

Do you think that Sam Harris, America’s most renowned atheist, believes in the atonement? Obviously, he does not. The sad thing is not just that atheists do not believe in the atonement, but that many Christians don’t believe the atonement! Last year, Katherine Schori became the first female presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church. Unfortunately, like most of the priests that serve under her, she does not believe the basic creed of Christianity. A writer from USA Today interviewed her and described her beliefs. “She sees two strands of faith: One is ‘most concerned with atonement, that Jesus died for our sins and our most important task is to repent.’ But the other is ‘the more gracious strand.’”[3] Do you see the way she divided this issue? She said that there are two groups of Christians. This first set believes that the sinless Son of God died an agonizing death on the bloody cross for our sins. They believe that the spotless Lamb of God willingly laid down his life by an act of love that is dripping with mercy and grace; that this God-man was not willing to see the world perish, so he bridged the unbridgeable gap between God and man by becoming our mediator. This group believes that we have infinitely offended the One who created us, that we are hopelessly lost, and that the sinless Messiah, out of a pure, white-hot act of love, carried on himself every sin, past present and future, and gladly bore the wrath of his father and separation from him, and he did it all on behalf of the most heinous group of traitors the world has ever known. That’s the first group of people, but Schori claims that the second group is “the most gracious strand?” The most powerful person in the U.S. Episcopal Church denies the atonement, the foundational creed of Christianity, and then she has the guts to say that this is most gracious stand?! This is not more grace—this is the absence of grace! Of course what she is ultimately denying is not the atonement per se, but our sin nature. The atonement is only necessary if we are by nature sinful and separated from God. But if you take away our sin nature, the atonement can disappear in a puff smoke. It’s no loner necessary. The cross causes offense for many reasons, but to modern men and women, I think the most offensive thing about the cross is admitting our helpless state of being. You know, I wonder, what do liberal Christians celebrate on Easter anyway??

I am sure you are not surprised that liberal priests such as Schori would deny the atonement, but would you be surprised if I told that you that in growing numbers evangelicals are also denying the atonement? Steve Chalke is a leader in Great Britain of a movement called the Emergent Church. Hundreds of thousands of people who call themselves evangelicals are following men like Chalke and his U.S. counterparts. Here is a quote from his book which has caused a big stir.

The fact is that the cross isn’t a form of cosmic child abuse — a vengeful Father, punishing his son for an offence he has not even committed. Understandably, both people inside and outside the Church have found this twisted version of events morally dubious and a huge barrier to faith. Deeper than that, however, is that such a concept stands in total contradiction to the statement ‘God is love’. If the cross is a personal act of violence perpetrated by God towards humankind but borne by his Son, then it makes a mockery of Jesus’ own teaching to love your enemies and to refuse to pay evil with evil.[4]

I won’t even take the time to comment on this outrageous blasphemy because it would take the rest of my time to rip it to shreds. This man does not understand the atonement. It is clear that our friend also does not understand the atonement. He calls it “evil” and “irrational”. I would agree that the cross is irrational. From a purely rational viewpoint, no man gives up everything to side for his enemies. But the main reason that he does not understand the atonement is because he does not understand that Christ is our divine substitute. He does not believe that Jesus is fully God. Look again at his full statement, especially the third sentence. “If God were a real God then he Himself would have endured the pain rather than put his own son through it.” This is an incredible statement, because at one level, he has figured out the atonement. If sin is real and God is real, then he needs to endure the pain of the cross himself. What would you say to him at this point? You would say, “You’re right—and that is exactly what he did!” Jesus is not merely the Son of God, he is God. God did endure the pain. His statement reminds me of Heb. 12:2, “Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.” In this chapter, Paul did not develop a full teaching on the deity of Christ. We can go to countless other Scriptures to do that. But we must remember that the atonement can only be true if Jesus is fully God. So when Paul repeated this part of the creed, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, he was assuming the full deity of Christ.

We return again to our friend’s question: why do bad things happen to good people? First, I would say that we are not as good as we imagine ourselves to be. We are so bad in fact that we need the atoning blood of Christ to make us better. But even more than that, a better question would be: why did such a bad thing as the cross happen to a perfectly good person? If it seems unjust for so-called “good” people to suffer, how much more true is this for a perfectly good person—a sinless person? The death of Christ is in one sense, the greatest evil in the universe—that a guilt-LESS person would take on all of the guilt of mankind.

We have to move ahead to the other parts of the creed. The next two naturally go together.

The fact that Christ was buried is further evidence that he was actually dead. And then gloriously, we celebrate that he was raised on the third day, according to the Scriptures. Jesus died for our sins and was raised on the third day, all of it according to the Scriptures, meaning the Old Testament. I don’t think Paul had one or two Scriptures in mind when he said this, but the entire witness of the Old Testament. The entire record of the Old Testament testifies to the coming work of Christ. The cross has always been God’s plan. It was never “plan B,” but was always his preordained, sovereign plan, and, as Ephesians says, he worked out all things in conformity with his will.

Several verses later, Paul said that “if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins.” We know that the resurrection gives both the evidence and the power to the atonement. He is risen! He is risen indeed!

Finally, the fourth part of the creed offers ample evidence of his resurrection.

Paul also adds that Jesus appeared to more than 500 believers, most of whom were still living twenty years later when he wrote this letter. In effect Paul said, “If you don’t believe me, I can give you the names of about 450 people who actually saw the risen Christ.” Paul was one of those people who saw the risen Christ, as he described himself in verse eight as, “as to one abnormally born.” His witness of the risen Christ on the road to Damascus was just as real as Thomas’ who put his hands into Jesus side.

Sometimes I have wondered why Jesus only appeared to 500 people. Why not 5,000, or 50,000? If I was writing the story, instead of appearing to the disciples, I would have had him miraculously appear in the middle of the Sanhedrin. I think he should have walked right up to the high priest Caiaphas, knocked his regal hat off his head, and said, “So what do you think now, Mr. High Priest!” Instead of appearing to doubting Thomas, I would have had Jesus appear to Pilate, right in the middle of his speech to the crowd in Jerusalem. “Hey Pilate! Why don’t you put your hands in my side and feel the scars for yourself!” Then he would turn to the assembled crowd of thousands and declare, “I am your risen Messiah!” No, that is Rich Maurer’s Hollywood, sensationalized version of the resurrection, but it is not God’s version, is it? Jesus’ purpose was not to draw a crowd. He could have done that on any day of his life if he had wanted. His purpose was to draw true believers and genuine followers to himself. As Jesus said in Luke 16, “If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.” Jesus has given sufficient proof of his resurrection and we cannot demand more than this.

When you think about it, in the visible realm, the death and resurrection of Jesus was a relatively quiet event. But I can guarantee you that it was not a quiet event in the spiritual realm. I think that the physical manifestations of the earthquake and darkness at the cross were just the tip of the iceberg, if you will. I liken it to the earthquake that occurred off the coast of Indonesia in 2004. Not too many felt the actual earthquake at the bottom of the ocean, but the tsunami that killed over 200,000 people was most tragically felt. In the same way, the earthquake and other physical manifestations at the cross were not felt by most people in the world, but I believe it triggered an invisible, spiritual tsunami that sent shock waves throughout the spiritual universe, flattening the demonic world, devastating their power and defeating their plan. The final battle has not been fought, but the victory has already been won for us by through the atonement and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Our friend has some very important and honest questions—questions that are shared by millions of people. But we do have the answer. The truth of the resurrection can be applied to every tough question. Please pray for this man as I have the opportunity to talk with him next week and to share the glorious truth of the resurrection.

[1] Sam Harris, LA Times, March 15, 2007.

[2] Personal email received on 4-3-07. The author is anonymous in order to protect his identity.

[3] USA Today, The Episcopal Church’s New Dawn, Cathy Lynn Grossman, February 4, 2007.

[4] Steve Chalke, The Lost Message of Jesus, pp. 182-183.