Question #115

Why did Paul exclude the appearances to the women in 1 Corinthians 15?

I Corinthians 15:3-8. I have never heard anyone give a compelling reason for Paul’s exclusion of the appearances to the women. Since he is simply encouraging this group of believers in Corinth to the certainty of the Resurrection it makes little sense that he would purposely exclude them. Since this is not a legal argument presented as such, for certainly in the 500 there were women, this has stumped me for some time. No explanation I have ever heard has the ring of truth to it. Your thoughts. It’s a puzzlement.

The Answer:

You are correct that Paul’s argument is not a legal argument. However, it is addressed to people who lived under a particular legal system and had rules of evidence that pertained to acceptable witnesses. Under their system, women were not qualified to be witnesses. That said, the scripture does not say why Paul omitted the first visitors to the tomb. Any reason suggested is no more than speculation, and such speculation has run rampant. Peter’s name plays a role in 1 Corinthians (1:12, 3:22, and 9:5) and he apparently was of some importance to the church in Corinth. Some believe that Paul’s statement beginning in 15:3 was a statement of faith recited in the early church. Most probably think that it ended with v. 4, but some think it continued through the list of appearances. Roman Catholics think Paul began with Peter because of Peter’s preeminence as first pope (a doctrine the scripture does not teach and which the scripture contradicts). My thoughts (and that is just what they are) are that Paul was making the most persuasive argument that he could to a congregation having members who rejected the doctrine of the literal bodily resurrection of Jesus from the grave. Our opinions concerning why he did it the way that he did really do not matter. The scripture teaches that he did it by inspiration. We should never become so engrossed with the “why” that we fail to appreciate the “what.” While children psychologists have found “Because I said so” an inadequate explanation of why a child is told to do something, practical parents have most likely used that expression more than once. “Because scripture says so” is reason enough. The only thing that we need to understand about “why” scripture says so is that Scripture says what it says because it is our road map to eternal life in the presence of the true and living God. Let us then rejoice that Christ became the first fruits of them that sleep and is the earnest and pledge of their resurrection. Paul’s list of witnesses to that glorious event is more than enough to establish that great truth. That was Paul’s great overriding purpose. He did not need to call all of the available witnesses to the stand. I can tell you from 35 years of trying lawsuits that lawyers seldom, if ever, call all available witnesses to testify; they call those whose testimony will be most persuasive in the minds of the judge or jury, whichever is the fact finder.