I continue to study through 1 Cor 15 as I am teaching it at our church. Paul is explaining how the fact of the resurrection as a historical event is critical to the Gospel. Verses 30-32a comprise another argument for the resurrection, the evidence of Paul’s life! Why would he put himself at risk, denying himself, and engage in battle for Christ, if there were no resurrection from the dead? This is not direct evidence that there is a resurrection. Someone could believe there is a resurrection, and act on that belief, but there not truly be one. This is evidence that Paul believes there is a resurrection. The implication of this is that since Paul brought the Corinthians the gospel and is a respected apostle, belief in the resurrection must be consistent with Christianity. The weight of this evidence depends on Paul’s credibility and authority. This is a powerful and legitimate form of persuasion. If people we respect believe something, we are certainly prone to believe as well.
The application is obvious: can I point to my own life as evidence of hope in the resurrection? Would such evidence matter to anyone?