this fact is so essential, is, that Christ rested the validity of all his claims upon his resurrection. If he did rise, then he is truly the Son of God and Saviour of the world. His sacrifice has been accepted, and God is propitious. K he did not rise, then none of these things is true. He was not what he claimed to be, and his blood is not a ransom for sinners. In Rom. 1, 3, the apostle expresses this truth in another form, by saying that Christ was by his resurrection demonstrated to be the Son of God. It was on account of the fundamental importance of this fact that the apostles were appointed to be the witnesses of Christ's resurrection, Acts 1, 22. Then^ i. e. in case Christ be not risen, our peaching is vain, i. e. empty, void of all truth, reality, and power. And your faith is also vain, i. e. empty, groundless. These consequences are inevita- ble. For, if the apostles preached a risen and living Saviour, and made his power to save depend on the fact of his resur- rection, of course, their whole preaching was false and worth- less, if Christ were still in the grave. The dead cannot save the living. And if the object of the Christian's faith be the Son of God as risen from the dead and seated at the right hand of God in heaven, they believed a falsehood if Christ be not risen.
15. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God ; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ : whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
This is the second consequence. The apostles were false witnesses. They were guilty of deliberate falsehood. They testified that they had seen Christ after his resurrection ; that they had handled him, felt that he had flesh and bones ; that they had put their hands into his wounds, and knew assuredly that it was their Lord. We are found, i. e. we are de- tected or manifested as being false witnesses ; not such as falsely claim to be witnesses; but those who bear witness to what is false. Matt. 26, 60. because we testified of God; literally, against God. We said he did, what in fact he did not do, if so be the dead rise not. Here again it is assumed that to deny that the dead rise is to deny that Christ has risen. But why is this ? Why may not a man admit that Christ, the incarnate Son of God, arose from the dead, and yet consistent- ly deny that there is to be a general resurrection of the dead ?