This paper analyzes the computational content of Henkin's proof of Gödel's completeness theorem for classical first-order logic. The completeness theorem establishes that any valid formula is provable in classical first-order logic. It is a fundamental result in logic, connecting the notions of validity and provability. The paper surveys standard formulations and proofs of the completeness theorem, focusing on Henkin's proof within intuitionistic second-order arithmetic. Henkin's proof is modified to be interpreted as a program that transforms proofs of validity into proofs of derivability. This approach aligns with the Curry-Howard correspondence, where proofs are seen as programs that can be computed. The paper explores the computational content of Henkin's proof, showing how it can be formalized and analyzed in terms of constructive logic. The paper discusses the distinction between weak and strong completeness. Weak completeness states that any formula valid under a finite theory is provable, while strong completeness extends this to possibly infinite theories. The paper analyzes the computational content of these forms of completeness, particularly focusing on the role of classical and intuitionistic logic in their formulation. The paper also examines the relationship between Tarski semantics and syntax, emphasizing that proofs of validity are syntactic objects that can be manipulated and computed. It explores the computational content of Henkin's proof in the context of intuitionistic logic, showing how it can be used to derive normal forms and computational interpretations. The paper provides a detailed analysis of Henkin's proof, showing how it can be adapted to work with possibly-exploding models. It discusses the implications of this adaptation for the computational content of the proof, particularly in the context of intuitionistic logic and second-order arithmetic. The paper concludes by highlighting the importance of computational content in understanding the logical structure of completeness proofs and their applications in constructive mathematics.This paper analyzes the computational content of Henkin's proof of Gödel's completeness theorem for classical first-order logic. The completeness theorem establishes that any valid formula is provable in classical first-order logic. It is a fundamental result in logic, connecting the notions of validity and provability. The paper surveys standard formulations and proofs of the completeness theorem, focusing on Henkin's proof within intuitionistic second-order arithmetic. Henkin's proof is modified to be interpreted as a program that transforms proofs of validity into proofs of derivability. This approach aligns with the Curry-Howard correspondence, where proofs are seen as programs that can be computed. The paper explores the computational content of Henkin's proof, showing how it can be formalized and analyzed in terms of constructive logic. The paper discusses the distinction between weak and strong completeness. Weak completeness states that any formula valid under a finite theory is provable, while strong completeness extends this to possibly infinite theories. The paper analyzes the computational content of these forms of completeness, particularly focusing on the role of classical and intuitionistic logic in their formulation. The paper also examines the relationship between Tarski semantics and syntax, emphasizing that proofs of validity are syntactic objects that can be manipulated and computed. It explores the computational content of Henkin's proof in the context of intuitionistic logic, showing how it can be used to derive normal forms and computational interpretations. The paper provides a detailed analysis of Henkin's proof, showing how it can be adapted to work with possibly-exploding models. It discusses the implications of this adaptation for the computational content of the proof, particularly in the context of intuitionistic logic and second-order arithmetic. The paper concludes by highlighting the importance of computational content in understanding the logical structure of completeness proofs and their applications in constructive mathematics.