FlyingLionWithABook
Has a C. S. Lewis quote for that.
No bio...
User ID: 1739
FlyingLionWithABook
Has a C. S. Lewis quote for that.
9hr ago
It's important to put that verse in context. Paul is saying that if Christ was not raised from the dead, then we will not be either. So when he refers to misery he means that if we are toiling in the hope that we have been saved from our signs and reconciled with God and will be resurrected to eternal life, and that's not true, then we would be the most "miserable".
But Paul doesn't mean "miserable" as in "feeling the emotion of sadness or depression". The Greek word that the KJV translates as "miserable" is "eleeinoteroi". It is used one other place in the Bible: Revelation 3:17: "Because you say, ‘I am rich and have prospered; I need nothing,’ but do not realize that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind and naked,". Now isn't it a bit odd to say that someone believes they are prosperous and need nothing but in fact are miserable in the sense of being sad or depressed? In both cases the word would be better translated as "pitiable". Their condition is miserable, not their emotions: they are in a position worthy of the pity of others. Which is how other translations, like the NIV, translate the word. And certainly it is the case that it is a pitiable position to be in if you believe that your sins are wiped clean and you will be resurrected and that's not actually true.
"If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied."
We also have to keep in mind Paul's audience: Christians were a persecuted minority in the Roman Empire at the time. Unlike modern Mormons, Paul and his audience were daily in danger of beatings, execution, and being thrown to the lions. As he writes a few verses later:
"And as for us, why do we endanger ourselves every hour? I face death every day—yes, just as surely as I boast about you in Christ Jesus our Lord. If I fought wild beasts in Ephesus with no more than human hopes, what have I gained? If the dead are not raised,
“'Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.'"
Which is probably why most of the Christians here don’t like it. It’s pretty heretical! Mostly the Jesus parts. When you downgrade Jesus from “God incarnate” to “guy who did the best at being good” then it’s going to be more palatable to atheists (since it keeps God in the mysterious “ground if all being” box where he’s not likely to do anything to offend*) and less palatable to Christian’s (the guys whose hope is salvation through the intercession of Christ).
*Lewis wrote on this in his autobiography (emphasis mine):
"The Absolute Mind—better still, the Absolute—was impersonal, or it knew itself (but not us?) only in us, and it was so absolute that it wasn’t really much more like a mind than anything else. And anyway, the more muddled one got about it and the more contradictions one committed, the more this proved that our discursive thought moved only on the level of 'Appearance', and 'Reality' must be somewhere else. And where else but, of course, in the Absolute? There, not here, was 'the fuller splendour' behind the 'sensuous curtain'. The emotion that went with all this was certainly religious. But this was a religion that cost nothing. We could talk religiously about the Absolute: but there was no danger of Its doing anything about us. It was “there”; safely and immovably “there”. It would never come “here”, never (to be blunt) make a nuisance of Itself. This quasi-religion was all a one-way street; all eros (as Dr. Nygren would say) steaming up, but no agape darting down. There was nothing to fear; better still, nothing to obey."
C. S. Lewis wrote a bit in a letter about the appeal of fantasy over real sex which seems appropriate:
Pornography asks far less of us than sex with another person does. If it displeases us we can skip to another bit of porn. We never have to think about pleasing another person, or do something that brings us little pleasure because it brings our partner great pleasure, or think of any needs but our own. Very tempting!
More options
Context Copy link