But if there be no resurrection of the dead - If the whole subject is held to be impossible and absurd, then it must follow that Christ is not "risen," since there were the same difficulties in the way of raising him up which will exist in any case. He was dead and was buried. He had lain in the grave three days. His human soul had left the body. His frame had become cold and stiff. The blood had ceased to circulate, and the lungs to heave. In his case there was the same difficulty in raising him up to life that there is in any other; and if it is held to be impossible and absurd that the dead should rise, then it must follow that Christ has not been raised. This is the first consequence which Paul states as resulting from the denial of this doctrine, and this is inevitable. Paul thus shows them that the denial of the doctrine, or the maintaining the general proposition "that the dead would not rise," led also to the denial of the fact that the Lord Jesus had risen, and consequently to the denial of Christianity altogether, and the annihilation of all their hopes. There was, moreover, such a close connection between Christ and his people, that the resurrection of the Lord Jesus made their resurrection certain. See 1-Thessalonians 4:14; see the note on John 14:19.

If there be no resurrection of the dead - As Christ was partaker of the same flesh and blood with us, and he promised to raise mankind from the dead through his resurrection, if the dead rise not then Christ has had no resurrection. There seem to have been some at Corinth who, though they denied the resurrection of the dead, admitted that Christ had risen again: the apostle's argument goes therefore to state that, if Christ was raised from the dead, mankind may be raised; if mankind cannot be raised from the dead, then the body of Christ was never raised.

(4) But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:
(4) The second by an absurdity: if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen again.

But if there be no resurrection of the dead,.... If there is no such thing as a resurrection of any, if the thing is not possible, if it never has been, is, or will be true in fact:
then is Christ not risen. The apostle argues from a general, to a particular; from the general resurrection of the dead, to the particular resurrection of Christ; and from a negation of the one, to a negation of the other; for what does not agree with the whole, does not agree with the part; and what is true of the whole, is true of the part; but if the resurrection of Christ is not true, many are the absurdities that must follow upon it, and which the apostle next enumerates.

If there be no general resurrection, which is the consequent, then there can have been no resurrection of Christ, which is the antecedent. The head and the members of the body stand on the same footing: what does not hold good of them, does not hold good of Him either: His resurrection and theirs are inseparably joined (compare 1-Corinthians 15:20-22; John 14:19).

If there be no resurrection - If it be a thing flatly impossible.