George E. Meisinger is president of Chafer Theological Seminary and teaches in the Theology, Old and New Testament departments. He earned a B.A. from Biola University, a Th.M. in Old Testament Literature and Exegesis from Dallas Theological Seminary, and a D.Min. in Biblical Studies from Western Seminary. Ph.D. studies in Systematic Theology were done at Trinity Theological Seminary. You may reach Dr. Meisinger at president@chafer.edu.
Introduction
This paper presents the position that 1 Corinthians 15, especially verses 1-11, contains an adequate gospel message not only enabling one to be born again, but includes a foundational truth of the Christian way of life. In fact, this important passage reveals the content of the gospel message that all apostles preached for both the new birth and for spiritual growth or progressive/experiential sanctification.
Taking a proper and positive approach to theology, we learn rightly to divide God’s word in grace and truth, and not to be divisive. For the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, willing to yield (James 3:17a). The entire Bible is God-breathed, given that we might see light in His light. It is thus wise to pursue all Scripture has to say on a subject.
Application of systematic biblical theology leads to the conclusion that the saving gospel message is a unit, a single whole. Like a cut diamond, it is an entity possessing multiple facets. One apostle presents certain facets, while another presents other facets. The divine Author superintended every word that flowed from their quills resulting in a harmoniously whole message.
We should not superimpose one apostle’s facet on another’s content. Each apostle may speak for himself. [1] The apostle John gives a clear record of what one may believe resulting in eternal life. In 1 Corinthians 15, the apostle Paul gives a clear record of what one may believe resulting in forgiveness. And, if one is forgiven, he possesses every spiritual blessing that all believers possess, including eternal life, sonship, et al. (cf. Ephesians 1:3). How can this be? The moment a person believes in Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit does a supernatural work, identifying the believer with Christ. Now “in Christ,” he has received all these possessions whether he believed in a context of hearing about Jesus Christ and eternal life, or about divine forgiveness. Only biblical theology enables us to see something of the height, depth, and breadth of our “so great salvation.” This paper will focus on one aspect of the riches of His grace
Before proceeding, let’s define several terms used in this paper. “Phase 1” speaks of that moment one believes on the Lord Jesus Christ and is born again. “Phase 2” speaks of the entirety of a Christian’s life: from the moment of the new birth to physical death or the Rapture. “Phase 3” is heaven. The term “gospel” is synonymous with “good news,” which, depending on context, denotes the basic truth one may believe to be born again, or denotes more advanced truth providing the “spiritual fuel” by which a Christian grows and lives to please the Lord. As we will observe in the following exposition, “preaching” = “delivering,” and “receiving” = “believing.” In addition, “save,” or “salvation,” may denote either Phase 1 salvation—being born again at a moment in past time, or Phase 2 salvation—being delivered from current testing/troubles in one’s life. There is also Phase 3 salvation in the future when God delivers the entire creation from the curse. For the believer this will include “redemption of the body” and deliverance from the presence of sin (Romans 8:23; Hebrews 9:28). Finally, this paper will frequently use the expression “eternal salvation” to clarify that temporal/experiential salvation is not the subject.
Not all facets of a saving gospel message are explicit in every salvific passage. In addition, not every facet of the gospel must be simultaneously believed or even known to receive eternal salvation. [2] Nowhere does Scripture require that one know all of the benefits of faith in the Person and Work of Christ to receive them, e.g., forgiveness, imputed righteousness, eternal life. What one understands at the moment of saving faith about these spiritual benefits will depend on the context in which the gospel was presented to him. What the unbeliever will understand is that faith in Jesus Christ—His Person and death as biblically revealed—is the solution to eternal relationship with God. How much or well he understands and articulates that will be as varied as the body of believers. Without exception all will need to grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Yet, we are to preach the whole counsel of God—preaching that is rooted in healthy theology. In this way, we may derive a well-rounded understanding of a biblical category and then proclaim it, including the work of evangelism. Because many schools neglect biblical theology, sometimes disdain it, we need schools like Chafer Theological Seminary to train men to do biblical theology. Taking a positive approach to theology, students learn rightly to divide God’s word in grace and truth, and not to be schismatic. The entire Bible is God-breathed, given to us that we might see light in His light. It is thus wise to pursue all Scripture has to say on a subject and not put on blinders regarding any subject.
A Problem
Some dismiss 1 Corinthians 15:3b-5 claiming that it does not possess saving content. [3] It is, they claim, an insufficient message to grant one eternal life. For example, one author says,
It’s my contention that is not here explaining the saving message he shared with unbelievers. There’s too much Paul doesn’t say here to make it a statement of his saving message. [4]The same author also says,
If Paul was stating here [1 Corinthians 15] the precise way in which we should share our faith, then surely every word would be important. … If this is precisely how Paul wants us to share our faith, how can we leave anything out? [5]The first quotation illustrates theological eisegesis for it suggests that one must [6] import content from other parts of Scripture into Paul’s writing because he supposedly does not say enough. The quoted author does not permit Paul to speak for himself. He further implies that without adding additional content to what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15, one’s witnessing will fail to lead an unbeliever to saving faith in Christ, leaving him in his sins.
The danger of theological eisegesis is real in that for centuries, especially from Augustine’s time, Reformed, Roman Catholic, and Arminian scholars have superimposed, for example, their understanding of perseverance on all of Scripture. It is a dangerous practice for it skews what a biblical author—and ultimately the divine Author—seeks to communicate. Scholars label this practice importing one’s preunderstanding into a text. Now we see some free grace advocates doing the same—they superimpose on the rest of Scripture their preunderstanding of free grace derived from their exclusive understanding of the Gospel of John. [7]
Particularly misguided is the view that one must believe in eternal life, or the promise of eternal life, to receive eternal life. To do so in effect places the apodosis in the protasis—places the result (receive the gift of eternal life) into the condition (faith alone in Jesus Christ alone). [8] The Gospel of John, which has much to say about eternal life, whether qualitatively or quantitatively, never says to believe in eternal life to get eternal life, but to believe in Jesus Christ Himself resulting in eternal life. John is clear and would not be a little disappointed at how some modern day students disfigure what he wrote.
The second quotation above is amiss because, by the use of “precise” [9] and “every word,” the writer implies that there is an exact way to present a saving gospel message and that elsewhere Scripture reveals “every word” of this precise message. He identifies the Gospel of John as that “elsewhere.” Thus, the assumption is that if Paul does not express precisely what John says, as is the case in 1 Corinthians 15, then Paul has not said enough by which an unbeliever may pass from death to life.
Another contemporary objection to viewing 1 Corinthians 15 as a sufficient gospel message is that in context Paul argues for the historical validity of the resurrection while refuting a heresy that denies the resurrection. [10] Does the fact that Paul disputes bad doctrine imply that he, therefore, does not reveal a saving gospel message? No logic compels us to such a conclusion.
The Importance Of Paul’s Priority Gospel Content (1 Corinthians 15:1-2)
It Is Important To Preach (15:1a)
With “moreover” (de) the apostle leaves his teaching on spiritual gifts (chapters 12-14) and moves to the subject of the gospel’s content focusing particularly on the resurrection—because some now denied Christ rose from the dead. This saving gospel message the Corinthians had “received” = “believed” (15:2, 11, 14, 17). Paul had also “received” it (15:3; in fact, he received it directly from the Lord, Galatians 1:11-12), then “preached” = “delivered” it (15:1, 2, 3, 11, 14; cf. 12), and labored more to spread it (15:10) and “witnessed” to it (15:15).
So, what is his goal in chapter 15? Brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, putting before us the main point of the first 19 verses: a recap of the gospel message (euaggelion). [11] He will answer such questions as “what is the priority content of the gospel? What has and does its content accomplish?” And, “What are the implications if the resurrection is fiction?”
In chapter 15, Paul argues for the resurrection’s historicity and its implications for Phase 2 living (by which you are saved, 15:2; cf. vss. 29-34, 57-58) and Phase 3 future resurrection from death and corruption to immortality (15:50-57). His polemical approach does not, however, reduce the effect of what he reveals as saving content of the gospel. 1 Corinthians 2:2 discloses that during his first contact with Corinth, he was determined not to know anything among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified, revealing that Christ’s death for our sins is top priority gospel information (cf. 1:13, 18, 23; discussion follows under 15:2). Luke reveals that the apostle’s first contact continued 18 months in Corinth (Acts 18:11). When doing front-line evangelism during his first visit, his message was Jesus Christ and Him crucified. For those who became believers his communication progressed to more advanced Christian doctrine (note wisdom, 2:6-7, and the deep things of God, 2:10; cf. solid food, 3:2). Thus, we should distinguish between basic evangelistic content for unbelievers—which is what Paul delivered during first contact—and advanced doctrine for believers, avoiding the confusion that results from using Phase 1 truth for Phase 2 purposes and vice versa. [12] In chapter 15, as Paul recaps the gospel he preached to the Corinthians as unbelievers, he again mentions Christ’s death and includes His resurrection.
It Is Important To Receive (15:1b)
Continuing to emphasize the gospel message Paul says they “received” it, which is tantamount to “believed” it (15:2, 11, 14, 17). This many of them did during the apostle’s first contact with Corinth. It was at this moment of faith in the crucified Christ that each believer was born again—not before, not later. Accordingly, Paul can elsewhere say they are sanctified (1:2), washed and justified (6:11).
It Is Important To Stand In It (15:1c)
These believers/receivers did not believe and then turn away. Instead, he says, “you stand” (hestēkate) in it, i.e., they stand firmly in the priority truths of the gospel, though some do not, which is why we have this chapter in the New Testament (note 15:12). The verb “stand” functions to denote a stand in the past that continues to demonstrate stability in the gospel. [13] To “stand” in the gospel message—in its priority elements about to be revealed—is to embrace its message as true and applicable without wavering. [14]
It Is Important To Ongoing Salvation (15:2)
Receiving the gospel message and thus the gift of salvation is a once-for-all event by grace through faith alone in Jesus Christ resulting in eternal salvation. Being eternal, such salvation is forever—not subject to loss. Eternal salvation became theirs forever at the moment of receiving the gospel message the apostle preached.
Moreover, the gospel message extends beyond providing one with the basic means to Heaven. The gospel’s revelation includes Phase 2 (Christian living) instruction, which the Corinthians are badly in need of as the previous 14 chapters reveal. They need ongoing salvation in the sense of deliverance from:
- Church schisms (chapters 1-4; 11:18-19),
- Incest (5:1-13),
- Litigious spirits (6:1-11),
- Immorality (6:12-20),
- Bad decision making (chapter 7),
- Abuse of liberty and legalistic attitudes (chapters 8-11),
- Mismanagement of spiritual gifts (chapters 12-14),
- Bad doctrine that denies the resurrection (chapter 15).
Paul refers to the gospel’s content [15] with the relative pronoun “which” (hos, three times in 15:1 and once at 15:2a) and with “that word which” (tini logōi, 15:2b). His focus is ongoing salvation/deliverance, which is not a free gift as eternal forgiveness and life are. The apostle hangs Phase 2 salvation on two conditions:
Condition 1: If you hold fast that word which I preached to you. “That word which” functions like a relative [16] clause that strongly calls attention to the larger gospel message that Paul preached, they received, and in which they now stand. When the biblical authors speak of “word,” different possibilities exist depending, of course, on context. The following quotation offers help.
Logos [“word”] often denotes not simply word, message, or act of speaking but also the content or substance of a declaration, assertion, proposition, or other communicative act. The verb euaggelizomai already means to proclaim the gospel; hence, Paul refers to the substance of the gospel that I proclaimed to you. [17]The Corinthians were eternally saved when they received/believed Paul’s initial gospel message. For each believer, heaven at that moment became a done deal. In addition, if they were to experience ongoing salvation or deliverance, they would have to continue to embrace the gospel in its fullness, the whole counsel of God, without departing from its priority content particularly the resurrection. Accordingly, Paul is building up to the content of the larger gospel’s saving message—its importance, substance, and ability to save both temporally and eternally.
Condition 2: (By which also you are saved) unless you believed in vain. [18] The apostle reveals that if one has believed a gospel message—a groundless gospel without Christ’s actual death and resurrection—he is not eternally saved. In addition, if one is not eternally saved, he cannot expect salvation/deliverance from troubles in this life. One must first be born again, and then through sound teaching and application he may experience deliverance throughout his Christian walk. [19]
So, what is it to believe “in vain” (eikēi)? Grammatically, it may mean to believe in a vain way, [20] which is to believe without the result of forgiveness; thus, the individual is still in his sin. [21] It may also mean to believe in a vain object. In light of how the apostle here stresses the importance of embracing priority gospel content, it makes sense to see him saying “unless you believed in a vain object,” i.e., in a gospel message not undergirded by Christ’s real historical death and resurrection. Either way, whether means or object is in view, the individual remains without forgiveness and eternal life. Nevertheless, to be clear, the Corinthians are washed and justified, thus they had a moment of saving faith.
If one has believed a gospel vain/empty of priority content not rooted in the historical facts of Christ’s death and resurrection, he is not born again, forgiven, nor enabled by the Holy Spirit. Accordingly, he does not hold fast to a sufficient gospel message and will not experience on-going Phase 2 deliverance, but defeat by the world, flesh, and devil. [22] A commentator objects to this understanding of 1 Corinthians 15:
Is the mere fact that God’s Son died a horrible death on the cross good news for us? Is the fact that He was raised good news for us? These facts become good news for us for only one reason: They affect the destiny of believers. God uses the crucifixion and resurrection to enable believers to escape the Lake of Fire and to be with Him forever. We cannot limit our definition of the gospel to vv. 3-8, because what precedes these verses is what makes His death and resurrection good news for Christians.
… We must always remember that vv. 1-2 show why this is good news for believers: the gospel … by which also you are saved. Specifically, Paul says that the gospel gives salvation to the believer. In other words, God gives life to everyone who believes in Jesus for that free gift.
… No one would ever accuse Paul of minimizing the cross and resurrection, but the bottom line of his gospel was that Jesus saves from eternal condemnation all who simply believe in Him. John would express the same point in terms of receiving eternal life (John 3:16, 36; 5:24; 6:47; and 20:30-31).” [23]Note four things regarding these comments: (1) The lead question asks whether “the mere fact that God’s Son died a horrible death on the cross [is] good news for us.” I would answer “no,” as he framed the question. Yet, the fact that Jesus’ death was for our sins makes it good news, indeed.
(2) He interprets “you are saved” as Phase 1 salvation (receiving the gift of eternal salvation), which fails to give adequate attention to the present tense and two conditional clauses that place “saved” in a Phase 2 (Christian life) context as discussed above under the two conditions. [24]
(3) The writer quoted above also exclaims, “Paul says that the gospel gives salvation to the believer,” then elucidates as follows: “In other words, God gives life to everyone who believes in Jesus for that free gift.” How did he arrive at this elucidation that one is to believe in Jesus for the gift of eternal life? As we observe throughout this article, one reaches such a conclusion by superimposing John’s Gospel on Paul’s epistle. But remember, John does not say to believe in eternal life to get eternal life. Furthermore, Paul does not interpret his use of “saved” as the impartation of eternal life. Contextually, Christ died “for our sins” (15:3) that clearly reveals the need of forgiveness because of the historical realities of His death and resurrection, believers have “forgiveness” of those sins (15:17). The issue is forgiveness, not life, though neither John nor Paul would object to the other’s gospel emphasis. They are dealing with the same gospel, though different facets.
And (4), the quotation above says that eternal life becomes the possession of “everyone who believes in Jesus for that free gift” (italics added). Contexts where we discover eternal life and faith/belief speak of believing in the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, with eternal life being a result of faith not an aspect of the object of faith. Nowhere does Scripture claim that one must believe in eternal life to get eternal life, or in the eternality of the gift before the Lord gives the gift. Whether at Christmas or one’s birthday, who has to know the contents of a gift before being allowed to receive the gift, though he may have an inkling of what’s under the colorful wrapping and bow? As we examine the preaching of the apostles in Acts (e.g., 26:15-18, esp. 18), or Paul’s gospel content in 1 Corinthians 15, forgiveness is often a focus. [25] On the sinner’s mind is his guilt or unworthiness before God because of his sins. He seeks to be right with God, especially forgiven. Then he hears that Jesus died for his sins on the cross, believes/receives it, and is born again. The notion of eternal life may not yet be even in his peripheral vision, though the fact is that at the moment he was born again he received an eternal gift, including forgiveness (Colossians 2:13-14), life (1 John 5:11-13), imputed righteousness (Philippians 3:8-9), sonship (Galatians 3:27), which will never be taken from him. He did not have to grasp the eternality of the gift to receive the gift; he had to believe in the Giver of the gift.
Identifying The Priority Content Of The Gospel (1 Corinthians 15:3-10)
Paul Delivered What He Himself Had Received (15:3a)
The apostle testifies, I delivered to you first of all that which I also received. “First of all” may have a temporal sense speaking of what he first preached before he preached his second and third points. It may also denote, which is more likely here, what is most important or of top priority. [26] A Greek Lexicon gives its meaning “as of first importance 1 Cor. 15:3.” [27] Since he previously stated that he determined to preach Christ and Him crucified (1 Corinthians 2:2), it would be tiresome repetition to say that the first thing out of his mouth concerned Christ’s death and resurrection. Accordingly, Paul reveals in verses 3b-5 what he considered top priority gospel content. The gospel includes many truths, but 15:3b-5 is the crucial priority of the gospel, which he would preach if he preached nothing else. “The stress is on the centrality of these doctrines to the gospel message.” [28]
Four Aspects Of The Gospel’s Priority Content (15:3-7)
Chapter 15:3b-5 forms a unit that answers the question of what is Paul’s priority gospel content. In spite of dissenters who assert that “Paul is obviously not giving a list of ‘core essentials’ that must be believed in order to be eternally saved,” [29] this is in fact what Paul does with the caveat that we change “must” to “may.” With four “that” (hoti) clauses, [30] the apostle unmistakably puts forth what he preached/delivered and what the Corinthians received/believed for eternal salvation.
First aspect of the priority content: Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures (15:3b). A priority of Paul’s gospel message is that Jesus Christ died—specifically, He died for our sins. [31] The Lord’s crucifixion for our sins denotes that we are sinners in need of forgiveness, and “for” (huper) speaks of how His substitutionary death justly dealt with our sins before a righteous God and His divine tribunal. The following quotation objects.
While Paul does say, “Christ died for our sins,” he fails to specifically mention the cross or the blood of Christ in these verses. Many feel that it is important to point out to people where and how Jesus died. Yet Paul doesn’t do that here.
Again, if it is essential for someone to believe that Jesus died on the cross and that He shed His blood for our sins, then Paul isn’t giving enough information here. [32]Wilkin’s point seems to be that some insist that to be saved you have to know Christ’s death occurred on a cross—this specific location, which Paul does not mention in chapter 15, though earlier he mentioned the cross twice (1:16-18). Wilkin’s point is valid and to contend as the unnamed some do presses the notion of being “literal” too far, for words are vehicles—inerrant vehicles in Scripture—that communicate ideas, thoughts, concepts. Whether an apostle says “died,” “crucified,” “cross,” or “shed blood,” the semantic range of these terms intersect in the Savior on the cross, giving up His life that we might receive life. Whether the words one uses to articulate the fact of Christ’s death for our sins are one or more of these just mentioned, they sufficiently communicate a priority aspect of the gospel—the good news that when believed saves eternally.
A problem with the above quotation in its section, “Things Which Are Typically Added In When Using 1 Corinthians 15:3-11,” is that it apparently wants to sack the idea that believing Jesus died for one’s sins is a sufficient object for saving faith. In this section, the quoted author talks about how Christians may import “justification by faith alone apart from works” into 1 Corinthians 15 when witnessing, thus supplementing what Paul says. He mentions unfavorably as further possible supplementary content topics such as Jesus’ perfect humanity and His virgin birth. Then follows the quotation above implying that because some import additional content into 1 Corinthians 15, it proves Paul does not provide here a sufficient gospel message. It is true that if one has to believe, e.g., in the virgin birth, to be eternally saved, then 1 Corinthians 15 does not reveal salvific gospel content; this article demonstrates, however, that here the apostle gives sufficient gospel content without requiring additional information. [33] We should also note that to grouse about supplementing the gospel in one passage with several biblical sources, suggesting it is an inferior evangelistic methodology of weakened authoritative content, betrays the existence of blinders and is at cross-purposes to sound biblical theology.
Moving on, note the expression “according to the Scripture.” It occurs two times with the apostle’s priority gospel content: once with the first aspect (“died for our sins”) and then with the third aspect (resurrection). Theologically, this phrase affirms that Christ’s death and resurrection are fulfillments of Old Testament prophecy. Stylistically, the two phrases serve to link intimately both the first and second aspects of Paul’s priority content as well as the third and fourth aspects. They additionally serve to defuse the objection of those who want to make too much of the four “that” (hoti) clauses, insisting all four items are components of the gospel and necessary objects of one’s faith that results in eternal salvation.
Second aspect of the priority content: He was buried (15:4a). This could have been included in the Lord’s obituary. Near universal recognition exists that this aspect of Paul’s gospel message is one with the first aspect, which the author designed to provide historical validation of the Lord’s death for our sins. Jesus did not merely swoon in the tomb; He was a corpse. People do not bury the living except, of course, where pagan notions prevail.
Third aspect of the priority content: He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures (15:4b). “He rose” is actually, He was raised (the passive voice signifies raised by a power outside of Himself) and, according to the perfect tense, with continuing effect. [34] It is self-evident that a dead Savior cannot save anyone. Thus, preaching that Christ was raised from the dead is a powerful apologetic designed to encourage faith in the resurrected One resulting in forgiveness.
Both “died” and “buried” denote here past events for our sins (cf. Hebrews 10:8-14, which adds the point that His death was “once-for-all”). [35] “He was raised” here reveals how Christ’s resurrection—a real historical event—has, according to the perfect tense, continuing effect on God’s people. Paul expands this thought in Romans where he reveals that those who consider themselves to be dead to the tyranny of sin but alive to God to walk in newness of life are enabled to live by a resurrection dynamic (cf. Romans 6:4, 11; Philippians 3:10). [36] This dynamic the Corinthians sorely need, as we observed earlier.
Fourth aspect of the priority content: Multiple eyewitnesses saw Christ.
That He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. After that He was seen by James, [37] then by all the apostles. (15:5-7)The fourth aspect is one with the third. [38] Verse 15:6, which begins with no connective, serves “the function of adding corroborative verification in the public domain and providing a Pauline transition to the important v. 8.” [39] Being corroborative in nature, Paul does not put forth this information as precise truth one must believe or else remain unsaved. He puts it forth to convince a sinner that Christ rose from the dead—from a death for our sins—and to believe it!
If we ask further, “Why does Paul provide corroborative verification for the resurrection and not for Christ’s death/burial?”, we find the answer in the theme of the chapter: Paul’s main thrust is to validate the resurrection. The main thrust does not, however, neutralize that the apostle here gives us gospel essentials, which when believed result in the gift of forgiveness and all else a new believer receives “in Christ.”
Some who live by exegetical eisegesis react at the notion one may believe in Jesus Christ—in His death and resurrection—resulting in eternal forgiveness and life. Why?—because their methodology compels them to add to Paul’s priority gospel the imported notion of faith in Christ for eternal life, thus superimposing John on Paul. Their preunderstanding dictates for them how Paul is to be understood.
Sensible biblical exegesis and theology do not superimpose one apostle’s writing over another, or attempt to mitigate apparent differences by dismantling what one apostle teaches to promote what another apostle writes. When biblical theology properly functions, we discover that there is one gospel, like a diamond, that manifests multiple facets. Paul and John each provide different facets. If we witness to an unbeliever using content from the Gospel of John, we encourage the unbeliever to believe in Jesus Christ, the Son of God who died for our sins and rose again, so that he may receive eternal life. If we witness to an unbeliever using Paul’s priority gospel content, we encourage the unbeliever to believe in Jesus Christ—in his death for our sins and resurrection—so that he may receive the gift of forgiveness. Either way, the new believer receives absolutely everything a believer receives “in Christ.”
Paul Personally Testifies To The Resurrected Christ
Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time. For I am the least of the apostles, who am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all, yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. (15:8-10)The apostle labored more than all by the same grace that initially saved him on the Damascus Road and continued to enable his ministry. Labored doing what?—preaching/delivering priority content of the gospel message to unbelievers, along with more advanced gospel truth to save/deliver believers from temptation, sin, and divine discipline.
Of interesting and practical note is the final verse of the chapter: Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your labor is not in vain in the Lord (15:58). As the grace granted to Paul enabled him not to labor in vain, so our labor in the Lord “is not in vain”—there is no futility in our work for Christ’s sake. [40]
When commenting on “I am the least of the apostles,” a writer says,
The closing three verses [15:9-11] are almost never mentioned when people use these verses to share their faith. Why? I believe it is because people believe that Paul is giving information here that isn’t really important today when we share our faith. Yet if these verses aren’t important for us to use when we share our faith, then how can we say this passage is given to us to show us how to share our faith clearly? [41]Is anyone’s experience broad enough to postulate that these verses “are almost never mentioned” when Christians evangelize? However that may be, we have no principle compelling us to conclude that if Paul gives top priority gospel content in 15:3b-5 that he intends for everything in the entire paragraph to be the precise object of saving faith. Such a faulty conclusion ignores the purpose of corroborative evidence, the unifying effect of the two “according to Scripture” phrases, and does not give careful attention to Paul’s contextual flow. Apparently, the methodological error of superimposing John over Paul again rears its head.
Two Effects Of The Gospel’s Priorities (1 Corinthians 15:11)
Therefore, whether it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.It was not Paul only who preached a gospel that elevated to prominence Christ’s death for our sins and resurrection (15:3b-5). He says, “whether it was I or they” (ekeinoi), i.e., the other apostles, and then proceeds with this clause: “so we keep on preaching” (present tense). The first effect, because of the priority of Christ’s death and resurrection, is that all preached accordingly. Paul’s content was not unique to his ministry, but all apostles preached the same priorities.
By God’s grace, their unswerving communication of Christ’s death for our sins and resurrection had results: and so you believed. “So” (houtōs) occurs twice, each time intensifying what precedes. Hence, the apostle first makes a strong point that they preached the gospel so, or preached in this way. [42] In what way?—in the way that prioritized Christ’s death for our sins and His resurrection. In addition, the Corinthians so believed. That is, their faith consciously attached itself to the gospel message prioritizing Christ’s death and resurrection. In this way, they believed. The verse has both manner of preaching and manner of believing in view. The Corinthians, as did audiences to which the other apostles preached, believed/received the gospel in keeping with the priority content identified in 15:3b-5. It is this content the Corinthians believed /received so that Paul may elsewhere say that they are sanctified in Christ Jesus (1:2, 30), washed and justified (6:11), and forgiven (15:17).
In the light of this verse, the same author implausibly says,
While Paul does refer to the fact that his readers believed (vv 2, 11), he doesn’t say what it is that they believed. He doesn’t say that they believed that simply by faith in Jesus they were once and for all justified or given everlasting life that can never be lost. [43]Au contraire! What they believed the apostle clearly identifies in verses 15:3b-5 and concisely summarizes in verse 11 with so they believed: in this way they were persuaded that Christ died for their sins and that He rose from the dead. Consequently, they are not “in their sins” (15:17) because Christ’s death and resurrection are historical realities. Anyone not “in his sins” is eternally forgiven, born-again, and justified. Thank God, for who would want eternal life without eternal forgiveness? Indeed, to whom does God give eternal life, if He has not first deleted by forgiveness the person’s file of sin? To live eternally without forgiveness only a fool would cherish. [44]
How then does one see this context falling short of a saving gospel message? By using bad methodology, i.e., foisting what another apostle says on Paul’s priority gospel content. Such a practice skews doctrine for it does not permit Paul to speak for himself. Paul is capable of saying what his priority gospel message—his adequate, saving gospel—is, which others believed and by which God forgave them. Paul does not need John’s insights anymore than John needs Paul’s insights.
A clarification: What Paul has said is descriptive, not prescriptive. That is, he states what in fact happened during his first contact with the Corinthians—what he (and other apostles) preached and what the Corinthians believed; he does not give a straightforward command such as believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved (Acts 16:31). The message preached and believed was sufficient, resulting in forgiveness (along with all God freely gives to those “in Christ”). The apostle does not say that one must believe every aspect/facet of his gospel message to be saved eternally, though the Corinthians initially did believe the top priority aspects of Paul’s saving gospel message and stand forever saved. Obviously since then, some did an about-face and denied the resurrection, which did not affect their justification but did their progressive sanctification. Yet, in light of how all apostles made preaching the cross and resurrection a priority, it is safe to conclude that if someone believes in Jesus, even in the promise of eternal life, yet knowingly rejects that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, died for his sins and rose again, he is still outside the family of God looking in. He may be close, but not in.
Jesus’ substitutionary death on the cross for the sins of the world concluded all work required for man’s eternal salvation. When on the cross Jesus cried out, “It stands finished,” He uttered a truth that is cause for gratitude and praise particularly from all believers of all time. He finished the work before His burial, resurrection, and appearances, though without the resurrection it would be impossible to apply the benefits of His death to those who believe.
The following quotation is on target, especially by the way it points to one’s “personal trust in the significance of” the priority facts of the gospel message, which all apostles preached.
Certainly the Gospel consists of a set of facts and it is crucial that any presentation of the Gospel relate the correct facts (cf. 1 Cor. 15:1-4). However, the concern of the Free Grace Gospel is not to ask for simple historical affirmation, but to call the individual to personal trust in the significance of these facts for himself. The moment the unbeliever recognizes his own sinfulness and believes that Christ alone has provided complete forgiveness through His death—in other words, at the moment of personal trust in Christ alone for salvation—that person is justified and receives the gift of eternal life. [45]Before continuing with an exposition of the text, let’s stand back a moment and address several issues of importance.
One Gospel, Multiple Content Facets
Neither Paul nor John say that his way is the only way, or best way, to preach and believe the gospel, other ways being inferior. Both presentations of the gospel are saving gospel messages, whether it is believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, so that one may receive eternal life, or believe that Jesus Christ died for our sins and was resurrected so that the believer may receive everlasting forgiveness. Some are drawn to John’s approach when witnessing, others to Paul’s gospel priorities. Still others utilize both approaches depending on to whom they witness. Whether John or Paul’s gospel content, it has the full authority of divine revelation behind it as well as the illuminating and convicting/convincing ministries of the Holy Spirit.
It seems appropriate to state that John and Paul were very clear that the One in whom faith is to be placed is more than a mere, even great, man—they left no question as to His identity. John goes to impressive lengths to demonstrate the deity of Christ. Paul’s references to the resurrected Christ implicitly affirm the deity of Christ (cf. Romans 1:4). To believe in a Jesus who is not the Son of God is, therefore, to believe in “another Jesus”—a Jesus unable to save eternally.
What About People In Other Religions Who Believe?
Someone may object, “Well, the Catholics and Mormons believe that Jesus died for our sins, and they are not eternally saved.” Not necessarily! Any person who has believed that Jesus died for his sins (personalized) and was raised from the dead, without at the same time clinging to a notion of good works, is eternally saved. [46] One either has believed or has not believed; there is no middle ground, i.e., half believe, half not believe. The problem here is not that some people ensnared in false religions believed insufficient gospel content, but that they are in a Church group or cult that immediately begins to stifle growth in the grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ for it turns them away from grace to a works/perseverance oriented religious system.
It is presumptuous to assume that because someone has not believed precisely the way one or another apostle presents the gospel, he is not yet saved thus should be evangelized. If he testifies that at some point in his past he believed in Jesus Christ alone for eternal salvation, he is born again; his need is to grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ. He needs edification, not evangelization. Paul’s approach in his letters was to give them the benefit of the doubt so far as being genuine “brethren.” For him the issue became not to evangelize them, but to teach the God-breathed word that is profitable for doctrine, rebuke, correction, and instruction in righteousness.
What About Jesus Christ, Who Is The Object Of Saving Faith?
What does one need to know and believe about Him who loved us and gave Himself for us? John says that faith in Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God, results in “life in His name” (John 20:31). Thus, to be persuaded that Jesus is the Christ, God’s appointed Savior, and God’s Son or deity, provides a believer with the gift of eternal salvation, i.e., everlasting life. An unbeliever’s awareness of Christ’s deity will be embryonic but not insufficient, if he takes the Gospel of John as a whole, which was John’s intent. The terms “Christ” and “Son of God” occur in John’s total context and may not be isolated and interpreted without that context. An unbeliever or new believer will usually understand at least that “Jesus is the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, lives and is somehow God so able to save me, even though I don’t know much about the true God.”
John Cross, who effectively does the work of evangelism among pagan religious groups, reminded me that
What we must be careful of is people believing Jesus to be a demigod or avatar, or as the Jehovah’s Witnesses would have us believe, a small letter “g” god, or as the Mormons would have us believe that we are all gods, or becoming gods, of some sort. Both the JW’s and Mormons have eastern concepts of the word “god.” In that sense I would avoid using a phrase such as Jesus is “more than a mere man” as it lends itself to eastern concepts of deity. Jesus was full-blown “God” as John wrote in his gospel. [47]Now Paul delivered as top priority content what we learned above in 1 Corinthians 15:3b-5. [48] Thus, what may one know and believe about Jesus Christ to be eternally saved?—that He died for my sins and was raised from the dead, which is explicit. That it was for my forgiveness is contextually implicit: Compare vs. 3b, “for our sins,” which reveals the need for forgiveness, with vs. 17, “still in your sins,” which when stated positively reveals forgiveness of sin because Christ was in fact raised from the dead.
No apostle says, or even hints, that we must do the work of evangelism his precise way or settle for something substandard, or far worse, non-salvific. They showed no egotism in this regard, setting a positive example.
Has There Been A Dispensational Shift?
Initially, Christ’s apostles could not bring themselves to believe that Jesus would be crucified; in fact, Peter on one occasion so resisted the idea that Jesus rebuked him saying, “Get behind Me, Satan” (Matthew 16:23). Yet, just six verses earlier, Peter believed that Jesus was “the Christ, the Son of the living God,” which the Lord said the Father had illumined to his understanding (Matthew 16:16-17). What Peter did believe, not of what he had yet to become persuaded, was sufficient for eternal salvation.
In keeping with the earlier section “One gospel, multiple content facets,” the evidence indicates that during the Lord’s earthly ministry, faith in the Person of Christ as the Messiah was saving faith. From Adam to Christ, revelation was progressive—as the centuries rolled by the prophets made known little by little, and more and more of God’s plan. Thus, is it not clear that at any point in time faith in whatever gospel revelation God had made known was salvific?
That was then, but what about now? In light of the fact that all four authors of the gospels wrote about the cross and resurrection, as Paul and the apostles continued so to preach, it establishes precedent for us. In addition, the Corinthians so believed, thus we should vigorously preach the Cross that unbelievers may receive the good news about Christ’s death for our sins and resurrection resulting in forgiveness and eternal life.
Moreover, Acts 4:12 is quite pointed for our age: There is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved. The Old Testament may use the word “name” to signify the cumulative attributes of God (Exodus 34:5-6; cf. Psalm 8:1; Zechariah 10:12). In the New Testament Jesus said to the Father, “I have manifested Your name” (John 17:6), where “name” signifies the divine nature revealed by Jesus’ incarnation. Jesus’ “name” denotes what He is to men—what men are to believe about Him, i.e., that He is man (Matthew 1:21a), the One sent to save His people from their sins (1:21b), and that He is “God with us” (1:23), thus fully able to make good on His promises to justify, forgive, and grant eternal life (cf. Acts 10:43; 1 Corinthians 6:11). The point is that to believe on the name of Lord Jesus Christ is to acknowledge “the saving and life-giving power in Christ, which is communicated to the believer.” [49] A commentator makes the following observation regarding Jesus’ name and eternal salvation.
In connection with the healing of the lame man, which plainly shows in a sign whence salvation comes, Peter embraces the whole content of the message of salvation in the word: “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name given under heaven for men, whereby (en ōi) we must be saved,” Ac. 4:12. … The name of Jesus is the hope of the world, for it brings salvation to the world. It is also an expression of His sending in judgment. He who does not believe in the name of the only-begotten Son of God, i.e., he who withholds recognition from this name and thus fails to understand His nature and mission, “is judged already,” Jn. 3:18. [50]Jesus Christ—Him crucified for our sins and raised—is undisputed priority subject matter of bona fide evangelistic content throughout the Church dispensation.
The notion of a dispensational change, or revelatory progress, troubles a writer.
[A]ll the people who hold to multiple essentials say that a dispensational change took place after Jesus’ resurrection with the result that the saving message changed. The progress of revelation relegated John 3:16 to a nice verse, but one that is not sufficient by itself to lead anyone to faith in Christ for eternal life. [51]“All the people” makes an invalidated and, most probably, an impossible sweeping assertion. Moreover, it introduces a straw man argument. Why?—because many see dispensational and/or revelatory progress, but not a diminishment of John’s gospel message. There has not come into existence a new gospel message, but a sharper focused or more informed message. Accordingly, John 3:16 should not be classified merely as a “nice verse,” but as evangelistic content sufficient to save eternally those who believe its truth in the total context in which it was intended to be believed. That context is the entire Gospel of John that ends on the high ground of Jesus’ death for the sins of the world and resurrection. Indeed, we should not lose sight of how John begins his book saying Jesus is “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29).
To say John’s “saving message changed” (in such a way that rendered it insufficient) does not equate to saying later revelation revealed additional facets of the gospel. Seeing additionally that one may believe in the resurrected Christ and thus receive imputed righteousness, or to believe that Christ died for my sins results in God’s forgiveness, does not distract from believing that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, resulting in eternal life. The gospel is one diamond with multiple facets.
That Jesus did not teach the Twelve concerning the gospel Paul and the apostles would preach should not surprise us. One writer, however, supposes that since Jesus did not elucidate the gospel as Paul does in 1 Corinthians 15, the salvific message in John’s gospel, in effect, remains the one true or superior gospel message. [52] Jesus Himself said, however, that I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth (John 16:12-13). It does not fly to say that the “many things” yet to be revealed excluded different facets of the saving gospel message. The Spirit of truth worked though Paul to reveal additional saving facets of the gospel that save forever those who believe, i.e., in His death for our sins and resurrection. What clearly remains true today is that neither is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved. Today the gospel message should focus on “no other name”—on the person (Son of God) and work (died for our sins) of Jesus Christ. [53]
What About Filling In Holes?
This question assumes that there are holes in the sense that if an apostle, such as Paul, does not say what John says then Paul has a “hole” in his content that we need to fill in by borrowing from John’s gospel. The presupposition is that John’s gospel is the lone or superior authoritative record of the gospel’s content and, based on that theory, extrapolates that we should superimpose John on Paul. So, here we go again! If we remove the faulty hermeneutic of overlaying Paul, Peter, or Luke with John, the system that depends on such methodology comes down like the house of cards it is.
An imposition on Paul does not permit Paul to speak for himself. Moreover, (1) such methodology is not historical-grammatical exegesis, but rather theological exegesis, in which one interprets all Scripture according to his preexisting theological grid/framework. Again, this is referred to as imposing one’s preunderstanding on the text. “Theological exegesis” is a euphemism for “eisegesis.” (2) This methodology is reminiscent of Luther’s concept of a “canon within the canon,” by which he attempted (before recanting later in life) to elevate the status of John, Romans, and Galatians above that of such “strawy” epistles as James, 1-2 Peter, and Revelation, on the grounds that the latter had nothing in them of the gospel of grace. To insist on elevating the gospel of John above all other Scripture when it comes to the question of soteriology, even when other Scriptures such as Romans and Galatians have much to say on the subject of salvation, lacks persuasive evidence. Moreover, to argue that John’s gospel gives us the right to elevate his message to a dominant position because of his purpose statement (John 20:30-31) is a leap away from sound biblical theology into dogmatic formulation. Nowhere does John say that his gospel message is the only authoritative or superior gospel message; he is clear that it is a sufficient salvific message. (3) Scholarly consensus is that Paul wrote Romans before the Gospel of John. And if Paul’s letters were originally intended for wide circulation throughout all the Christian churches, and gathered together in a Pauline canon relatively early, then the readers of John’s gospel and probably John himself were already familiar with Romans. If it is, therefore, a bona fide hermeneutical principle to superimpose one apostle on another, it makes more sense to interpret John’s gospel in the light of Romans and not vice versa. Of course, the correct methodology is to let each apostle speak for himself.
It is counter-productive to claim that all we need is proper exegetical methodology, and inveigh against eisegesis and theology, then in practice to be theologizers—superimposing one’s preunderstanding regarding the gospel on all of Scripture. We may accurately describe such an approach as “theological or hermeneutical imperialism.” To guard ourselves against such mischievous management of God’s word, we must let each apostle speak for himself.
The concept of “filling in holes” we know formally as bringing one’s preunderstanding drawn from elsewhere into a text currently studied. In keeping with the development of this article, the problem becomes compounded because the preunderstanding is wrongheaded. That is, for some the assumption is that the Gospel of John asserts that its revelation of gospel content is the only authoritative affirmation of true, salvific content. Thus, those so disposed affirm that when another apostle does not speak as John speaks, we must add what John has said or settle for an inferior gospel. There are times in the apostles’ writings that statements are made in passing for which we would amplify, preferably from what he says in immediate context. When that is not possible, we amplify—bring in our preunderstanding—from nearby contexts, or even from our biblical theology. However, when it comes to the gospel message, John is clear and Paul is clear. Either man’s gospel content is salvific giving those doing the work of evangelism confidence when making first contact with unbelievers.
End Results Of A Gospel Ungrounded In The Historic Realities Of Christ’s Death And Resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:12-19)
In the plan of God, how important is the resurrection to man’s eternal destiny and, thus, to gospel preaching? These verses powerfully answer this question. The issue is what is historically true, thus should have a priority in our frame of reference, faith, and preaching.
End Result 1: Without Christ’s Death And Resurrection, The Apostles’ Doctrine Is Vain (15:12-14a)
Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty. [54]The “if” that leads off this section assumes the truthfulness of the statement, i.e., if the apostles are preaching (present tense) Christ’s resurrection (and they do). Several times Paul says he preached/delivered a gospel that included the resurrection (15:1-4, 11; he labored tirelessly at such preaching, 15:10). It is, therefore, incredible that some in Corinth deny the resurrection because if Christ has not been raised, then all the hard work put into preaching a gospel message that makes Christ’s death and resurrection a top priority issue is vain (kenos), denoting what is unsuccessful, ineffectual, or powerless. [55] Paul uses the word in several passages [56] to speak of his or others’ work in the ministry potentially not being successful.
End Result 2: Without Christ’s Death And Resurrection, A Believer’s Faith Is Vain (15:14b)
And your faith is also empty (kenos, again). The emphasis in 15:14 is on a “resultant lack of successful impact” [57] so that regardless of how the Corinthians may strain to believe, or to persuade themselves that the apostles’ preaching is true—if the resurrection has not happened—their faith is utterly ineffectual, powerless to produce forgiveness. The upshot would be that regardless of their sincere attempts to believe, no one would be saved, and if no one is saved, obviously no one will be sanctified.
End Result 3: Without Christ’s Death And Resurrection, The Apostles Are False Witnesses (15:15)
Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up—if in fact the dead do not rise.In this passage, witnessing and testifying are synonymous with preaching and delivering the gospel, with perhaps slightly different nuances. We might use the term “communicate” as a common denominator. Thus, any apostle—any person for that matter—who communicates a message about Christ that includes the resurrection may be rightly and immediately branded by others false witnesses if there is no resurrection.
End Result 4: Without Christ’s Death And Resurrection, Christians Are Still In Their Sins (15:16-17)
For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins!According to 15:14, our faith is “vain” (kenos), denoting that the object of our faith is empty of reality so ineffectual to deliver the gift of eternal salvation, if Christ has not been raised. Now in vs. 17, we see that our faith itself is also “futile” (mataios) speaking of how an act of faith in a non-resurrected Christ accomplishes nothing in terms of forgiveness. [58] A commentator points out that:
Paul uses kenos also—synonymously with → mataios (v 17)—in a … discussion of the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15. If the eschatological salvific event of the resurrection of Jesus Christ is denied, the kergyma [=preaching] and the faith are empty of content (v. 14b, c; cf. Rom. 4:14 and 1 Cor. 1:17 with → kenoō), i.e., unfounded, meaningless, and void. [59]The horror of it all is that without a resurrected Christ, Paul says, you are still in your sins! They are not sanctified (cf. 1:2, 30); they are not “washed” and “justified” (cf. 6:11), thus still unforgiven. By God’s sheer grace, however, the Lord does not impute trespasses to those not born again (2 Corinthians 5:19). This does not mean that the Lord has forgiven them or that they have a ticket through the pearly gates for they will appear unforgiven at the Great White Throne. Nevertheless, their eternal judgment will be on other grounds: according to their works (Revelation 21:12-15). The only place one secures eternal forgiveness before God is “in Christ” (Colossians 2:13-14; cf. Ephesians 1:7). Moreover, the only entrance into Christ is to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved (Acts 16:31). For he who believes in Me, Jesus said, has everlasting life (John 6:47).
Conclusion
A free grace writer tells of a man he talked to who said, “There was no single book in the Bible that includes everything we must believe to be born again.” [60] Not so! There are a number of passages in the Gospel of John that are, properly understood and believed, a sufficient gospel message, resulting in eternal life. Romans 10:9-10 properly understood and believed results in imputed righteousness. [61] Likewise 1 Corinthians 15:3b-5 when received/believed results in forgiveness. In fact, a moment of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ delivers to the believer at least 33 Things [62] in what I like to call the Eternal Salvation Package.
There is no foul, no harm, in using a central passage to witness to an unbeliever and in importing content from other biblical passages to supplement. All Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for doctrine—including doctrine relevant to the work of evangelism. The hue-and-cry of some that non-Johannine gospel content is less authoritative or inferior to John’s gospel content is badly misdirected.
The above quoted writer also says:
It grieves me that some Free Grace people are abandoning the evangelistic purpose of John’s Gospel. When they do so, they no longer know what the saving message is (emphasis added). They pick and choose verses and doctrines here and there and make up what they think a person must believe to be born again. The result is a well-intentioned message. But it is man-made. [63]I have fellowshipped with free grace people since the early 1960s and do not know anyone who has abandoned the evangelistic purpose of John’s gospel. I know scholars and students who see multiple purposes for the writing of the Gospel of John, but one of those purposes remains evangelistic. The author of the above quotation has perhaps been introduced to someone(s) who has abandoned John’s evangelistic purpose, and I would agree that is a mistake.
However, when he says that those who abandon John’s evangelistic purpose “no longer know what the saving message is,” he sorely misses the mark. It is possible that someone would not know John’s evangelistic message, yet still receive a sufficient, saving gospel message from passages such as 1 Corinthians 15, Romans 3 or 10, or Ephesians 2, to name a few. [64] Unless one’s thinking is enslaved to a methodology that insists on overlaying the rest of the apostles’ writings with John’s gospel content, it should be clear that as helpful as John’s gospel is, he is not the only apostle to reveal a sufficient saving gospel message. There is only one gospel, but it has multiple facets. Faith in any facet of the gospel’s priorities, particularly Christ’s death and resurrection, results in all 33 Things of the Eternal Salvation Package of which forgiveness and eternal life are only two.
Paul plainly makes known a sufficient gospel. He received it from Jesus Christ Himself, preached/delivered it as did other apostles, and the Corinthians as thousands of others throughout the Roman Empire received/believed it. What did they preach and receive: Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, was buried, rose the third day according to the Scriptures, and was seen by multiple eyewitnesses.
We do not have to second-guess Paul and conjecture that he preached additional content in Corinth, not recorded in chapter 15, which the Corinthians had to believe to be saved forever. He is straightforward, clear, leaving no question as to what the top priority content of his gospel message was and thus what the Corinthians believed to be forever saved. The great apostle to the Gentiles did not establish belief in a promise of eternal life as a necessary component—an irreducible minimum—in the proposition someone must believe to be saved eternally; neither does he rule out eternal life as a salvific component in a sufficient gospel message.
We do well to resolve as Paul did at his first contact with Corinth to know nothing among unbelievers except Christ and Him crucified/buried, and raised/seen—all “for our sins.” Preach the cross; preach the resurrection; preach forgiveness, righteousness, and eternal life as vigorously and clearly as possible. The Holy Spirit’s ministry will not permit the word to return void. He will make adequate whatever our preaching and witnessing attempts are as we walk in the light and by means of the Spirit.
Postscript
In the conclusion of a paper, [65] Wilkin challenges free grace people to repent, if they do not share his personal convictions regarding the gospel. Obviously, he supposes that truth regarding the gospel will die with his camp. Repentance in this case, he urges, is for all who see the gospel differently than he does. He reminds us of the coming Bema (Judgment) Seat of Christ, and the warning of James 3:1 that teachers will receive the greater judgment. He concludes with a rhetorical question: “Ask yourself, ‘Am I willing to forsake part of my tradition if God’s Word contradicts it?’ If the answer is No, then confess your attitude and ask God to change it.” [66]
I receive this as a sincere admonition that should not fall on deaf ears. May he too take it to heart.
Notes
- Calvin understood the importance of this hermeneutical principle, saying in the preface of his commentary on Romans, “It is the first business of an interpreter to let his author say what he does say, instead of attributing to him what we think he ought to say” (J. Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come [Findley, Ohio: Ohio 1958, 6th printing 1963], 29, who quotes from Calvin’s Preface to Romans).
- For readers not acquainted with the current debate among some free grace proponents, the following comments will provide insight. Bob Wilkin (“Four Free Grace Views Related to Two Issues: Assurance and the Five Essentials,” Grace in Focus (July/August 2009), 2 and also ftnt iv) asserts that Charlie Bing, Dave Anderson, and I hold the view that “the person who believes in Jesus Christ and the five essentials for the gift of salvation … has it even if he does not believe that what he has received is eternal.” After e-mail correspondence with the other two men, I discovered that this assertion misrepresents what each of us holds. It is a principle of debate and fair play that when stating an opponent’s position, we do it so that the opponent would say, “Yes, that is what I believe.” There is room in this ongoing debate for increased integrity. By the way, though this paper takes exception to what it sees as mismanagement of the exegesis of 1 Corinthians 15, I recognize that the free grace men being quoted have made positive contributions to free grace theology. This article is an attempt to let iron sharpen iron, not to stir up discord and vitriolic reaction.
- Wilkin, ibid., 2, asserts that free grace people, e.g., those who embrace Paul’s gospel in 1 Corinthians 15 as a sufficient gospel message, “have rejected the message Jesus gave us to preach and that they are no longer Free Grace.” In other words, they have moved away from a pure gospel. This is an interesting assertion because many outside his camp, who formerly were in, are not the ones who have moved. Indeed, comparing earlier editions of the GES Journal (JOTGES) with more recent editions shows that their journal manifests significant movement; examples will follow in this article. Just as revealing: In 2006 GES made a change to their Affirmation of Faith regarding belief in eternal life for eternal life, revealed in print that they had moved away from their original position.
- Bob Wilkin, “Another Look at 1 Corinthians 15:3-11,” Grace in Focus, January/February 2008 (Irving, Texas: Grace Evangelical Society), 1.
- Ibid. This illustrates that the zeal of some to promote a hobby horse view too easily leads to mischaracterization. I have not read or talked with anyone who says 1 Corinthians 15 is written to tell us how to share our faith. In fact, John’s gospel also is not written to tell us how to share our faith. Both Paul and John reveal saving content; neither gives a methodology for doing so.
- The word must is purposefully chosen. It is one thing to say that a Christian must import content into 1 Corinthians 15 to arrive at a salvific gospel; it is another thing to say that one may import additional content to provide a broader foundation upon which the unbeliever may stand.
- The Grace Evangelical Society strongly advocates such a view. Those interested in seeing what they promote should read a paper, presented by Ken Neff at the GES 2009 National Conference, titled “What is the Free-Grace Gospel?” This delineates the GES revision of free grace, though it is not normal free grace doctrine. Neff is director of LeaderQuest.
- David R. Anderson, “Is Belief in Eternal Security Necessary for Justification?” Chafer Theological Seminary Journal, vol. 13, no. 1 (Spring 2008).
- A quick count noticed that “precise” and “precisely” occur seven times in the article.
- Wilkin, “Another Look,” 2.
- Later in 2 Corintians 9:13, the apostle reveals that his gospel message had Phase 2 implications – i.e., its content brought about not only their new birth but also their obedience to the gospel that challenged believers to give to help others with pressing needs.
- Bob Wilkin, What Was Paul’s Message of Christ and Him Crucified?, unpublished paper given at the Grace Evangelical Society 2009 Annual meeting, 7-8, blurs the distinction between Phase 1 and Phase 2 truth. He further says that, “There are people who are saying that the saving message today is not the message that the Lord Jesus gave us in the Gospel of John, but it is the message that the apostle Paul gave us in his epistles. For them the Lord Jesus never explained to us what a person in this age must believe to be born again. They believe the progress of revelation has revealed a new saving message that supersedes the message that the Lord Jesus Christ gave us.” Wilkin’s assertion widely misses the mark, for Paul’s gospel does not supersede John’s gospel but reveals a different facet of the Bible’s cohesive gospel message. Not only that, but who among classic free grace proponents says that John does not present a saving message? Or that Jesus never explained what a person must do to be born again? Or that there is a “new” saving message. These are unconscionable accusations unless he is able to document such absurd claims, which he does not.
- Anthony C. Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 1184.
- James Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament), electronic ed., DBLG 2705, #13 (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997). Libronix CDROM.
- An inductive study of the term gospel in the New Testament results in this definition: “the gospel is New Testament revelation,” i.e., all of the New Testament is “good news.” In fact, we read in Galatians 3:8, the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, saying, “In you all the nations shall be blessed.” This expands “gospel” to include Old Testament revelation. But the gospel is like a lake into which a stone is cast causing concentric circles to fan out. At the center are the gospel basics that when believed give one the gift of forgiveness and life. As we move from this center, or “milk,” of the gospel to the expanding circles, or “meat,” of the gospel, we are introduced to the greater wisdom the apostles taught to “those who are mature” (1 Corinthians 2:6; cf. Hebrews 5:12-14).
- A.T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, 954 (Logos, 1919; 2006). Libronix CDROM.
- Thiselton, Corinthians, Libronix CDROM.
- Characteristic of Perseverance theologies, which include Reformed, Arminian, and Roman Catholic traditions, is this comment by Harold Mare, “The Resurrection of Christ (15:1-11),” The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, 10:282, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976, Libronix CDROM. “The ‘if’ clause in v. 2 implies that Paul believes they are really holding firmly to the Word of God and are therefore saved. So the sentence ‘Otherwise you have believed in vain’ means that the gospel assures salvation unless the supposed faith they had was actually empty and worthless and therefore unenduring.” In other words, the only saving faith is a faith that perseveres. Such a position enjoys neither exegetical nor biblically based theological support.
- Jeremy D. Myers, “The Gospel is More than ‘Faith Alone in Christ Alone,’” Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society (JOTGES) 19:37 (Autumn 2006), Libronix CDROM, seems to interpret saved in a proper Phase 2 sense, which does not imply that other aspects of his article are on target. There are several good insights in this article, though it falls into the trap of superimposing John’s gospel on Paul’s writings. Remove this misguided principle of interpretation and his conclusion—that Paul gives an insufficient gospel message—fails.
- Thiselton, Corinthians, Libronix CDROM, comments as follows: “eikēi … There is firm lexicographical evidence for the meaning without due consideration, or in a haphazard manner … or thoughtlessly or at random (1 Clement 40:2). Here Paul envisages the possibility of such a superficial or confused appropriation of the gospel in which no coherent grasp of its logical or practical entailments for eschatology or for practical discipleship had been reached.”
- Swanson, Dictionary, Libronix CDROM.
- Thomas L. Stegall, The Gospel of the Christ: A Biblical Response to the Crossless Gospel Regarding the Contents of Saving Faith (Milwaukee, WI: Grace Gospel Press, 2009), chapters 13-14, deals at length with 1 Corinthians 15. His book is recommended reading for those wanting to stay abreast of the “crossless” debate within free grace circles. He comments as follows: “Though the primary point of the term ‘saved’ in verse 2 is the present sanctification-salvation of the Corinthian saints, this of necessity presupposes and assumes their eternal salvation. A person cannot be sanctified as a saint who has never been saved as a sinner. The initial salvation (justification and regeneration) of the Corinthians is clearly inferred in verses 1-2 by the very fact that their initial salvation experience is described with several past tense verbs (‘which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand [lit. ‘have stood’] . . . you believed . . . I delivered to you’). The Corinthians could not be exhorted to ‘hold fast’ to the gospel in order to be presently ‘saved’ (v. 2) from sin’s damaging power in their Christian lives if they had never previously been saved eternally at justification and regeneration. Their need to continue in the truth of the gospel for their sanctification-salvation automatically presupposes that they were saved in the sense of justification-salvation by believing the very same gospel” (p. 528).
- John H. Niemelä, “The Cross in John’s Gospel,” JOTGES 16:1 (Spring 03), Libronix CDROM.
- Stegall, Gospel of the Christ, 512-13, has an interesting comment: “Having now surveyed five major interpretations on the meaning of ‘saved’ in 1 Corinthians 15:2, along with the crossless gospel position on this passage, and having clarified what this passage is not saying, it is time to finally establish what it is saying. The biblical evidence best supports the interpretation that Paul is telling the Corinthians that there is only one gospel, which is necessary to believe initially for eternal life and to continue in, by faith, for practical sanctification and spiritual growth.”
- Peter witnessed to the household of Cornelius, a Roman centurion, saying whoever believes in Him will receive forgiveness of sins (Acts 10:43), and later links it to repentance to life (Acts 11:18). Paul preached in the synagogue of Antioch in Pisidia, saying through this Man is preached to you the forgiveness of sins (Acts 13:38), then without flinching links forgiveness with justification (13:39) and everlasting life (13:46). Paul and Peter were not exclusive regarding what facets of the gospel they preached. They did not regard one facet as superior and others inferior. The full authority of God’s word is behind every facet.
- Thiselton, Corinthians, Libronix CDROM, says, “First and foremost captures the logical rather than temporal force of en prōtois in this context, i.e., of first importance.”
- William Arndt, Frederick W. Danker and Walter Bauer [=BDAG], A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, “Based on Walter Bauer’s Griechisch-deutsches Wr̲terbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der frhchristlichen [sic] Literatur, sixth edition, ed. Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, with Viktor Reichmann and on previous English editions by W.F. Arndt, F.W. Gingrich, and F.W. Danker,” 3rd ed., 893 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000). Libronix CDROM.
- Mare, Expositor’s Bible Commentary, 10:282. Libronix CDROM.
- Zane Hodges, “The Hydra’s Other Head: Theological Legalism,” Grace in Focus (September/October 2008) (Irving, Texas: Grace Evangelical Society), 2-3.
- Thiselton, Corinthians, Libronix CDROM, says, “Murphy-O’Connor rightly appeals to the demonstrable convention of using hoti to denote quotation marks, with kai to add emphasis.”
- Being priority content, Matthew also reveals that Christ’s death was “for the forgiveness of sins” (Matthew 26:28). Many passages promote this biblical priority and point us to Christ’s death for our sins, even the sins of the entire world (Romans 5:6; 8:32; 2 Corinthians 5:14-15, 21; 1 Timothy 2:6; Hebrews 2:9; 1 Peter 3:18; 1 John 2:2; cf. John 11:50-52; 18:14). Accordingly, even if, as some in the GES want to argue that you do not have to know or believe in Christ’s death and resurrection for eternal salvation, to follow the apostles’ examples you have to preach this message. Of course, if we preach it, then unbelievers will not be ignorant of the historical facts on which Christianity stands or falls.
- Wilkin, “Another Look…,” 2.
- A complaint that combining truth from outside the Gospel of John with John’s gospel is positively inappropriate, exposing methodology at cross-purposes to sound biblical theology.
- Robertson, Grammar, Libronix CDROM.
- Mare, Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Libronix CDROM, says “That he was raised forever (the perfect tense is used here) agrees with the Scripture in Psalm 16:10; so also does Paul’s statement about the third day, which may be based on Jesus’ words in Matthew 12:40 that relate his three days in the tomb to Jonah’s three days inside the fish Jonah 1:17). According to Jewish reckoning, ‘three days’ would include parts of Friday afternoon, all of Saturday, and Sunday morning. Compare the parts of two Sundays implied in the phrase ‘after eight days’ (John 20:26).”
- Friedrich Blass, Albert Debrunner and Robert Walter Funk, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), 176, Libronix CDROM.
- Mare, Expositors’ Bible Commentary, concludes that “The James mentioned in v. 7 certainly is not one of the two apostles of that name—James the son of Zebedee and James the son of Alphaeus (Matt 10:2-4), since the whole group of apostles is mentioned next and would include these two. Instead, it must be the Lord’s half-brother (Matt 13:55), who had, with his brothers, joined the apostolic band (Acts 1:14) and had become prominent in the Jerusalem church (Acts 15:13).”
- Charles C. Bing, “How To Share The Gospel Clearly,” JOTGES 7:1 (Spring 94), 58 (The Grace Evangelical Society, 1994; 2002), Libronix CDROM, says, “In vv 4-5 we find two great propositions of the Gospel and their supporting evidence. We could diagram the verses like this (footnote continues at end).*
- Thiselton, Corinthians, Libronix CDROM.
- Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vols. 5-9 edited by Gerhard Friedrich, vol. 10 compiled by Ronald Pitkin., ed. Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey William Bromiley and Gerhard Friedrich, electronic ed., 3:660 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964-c1976), Libronix CDROM. Stegall, Gospel of the Christ, 516, points out that “In verses 30-31, we see the positive effects in the Christian life of holding to the truth of the resurrection. This gospel truth had personally motivated the apostle Paul to be willing to stick his neck on the line for Jesus Christ on a daily basis! And in verse 32, Paul says that if there is no resurrection, instead of being willing to die for Christ, he may as well ‘live it up’ hedonistically in this world. Then in verses 33-34, he admonishes the Corinthian Christians for letting the evil company of resurrection-deniers affect their own knowledge of God and their conduct. For the Corinthians to deny the gospel truth of the resurrection would certainly have had an adverse effect upon their Christian lives and their practical sanctification. This fact, as explained by Paul in vv. 30-34, is also consistent with the one gospel for justification and sanctification view.”
- Wilkin, “Another Look…,” 1.
- Timothy Friberg, Barbara Friberg and Neva F. Miller, vol. 4, Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, Baker’s Greek New Testament library (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2000), 289. Libronix CDROM.
- Wilkin, “Another Look…,” 1. In an earlier edition of JOTGES, however, the editor quotes favorably the following from Harry Ironside: “Look at the result of believing the gospel. Go back to verse two, ‘By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.’ That is, if you believe the gospel, you are saved; if you believe that Christ died for your sins, that He was buried, and that He rose again, God says you are saved. Do you believe it? No man ever believed that except by the Holy Ghost.” (Footnote continues on next page.) Or again, “It is the Spirit of God that overcomes the natural unbelief of the human heart and enables a man to put his trust in that message” (H. A. Ironside, “A Voice from the Past: What Is The Gospel?” Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society, 11:1 [Spring 98], 57 [The Grace Evangelical Society, 1998; 2002]). To be consistent, JOTGES can no longer quote Ironside favorably in this regard for recent editions of JOTGES manifest movement away from statements such as Ironside’s, i.e., from its former normative free grace doctrine.
- Note that it is one thing to say that God no longer imputes sin to man (2 Corinthians 5:19), thus making sin a non-issue relative to eternal judgment, and quite another to say that the world stands forgiven. The only place where one today finds forgiveness is “in Christ” (Colossians 2:13-14).
- J. Kevin Butcher, JOTGES 2:1 (Spring 89), (The Grace Evangelical Society, 1989; 2002), 30. This quotation from an earlier edition of JOTGES reveals how far the leadership of GES has moved. They cannot favorably run this quotation today and remain consistent with their current theological posture.
- In a personal conversation I had with Zane Hodges, he said that the notion of “apart from good works” is not explicit in the Gospel of John and that one must go to a passage such as Ephesians 2:8-9 where it is explicit. Let me add that neither is it explicit in 1 Corinthians 15:1-19. But this is where systematic biblical theology serves us well, comparing Scripture with Scripture, so that by studying the “whole counsel of God” we may derive the most complete understanding of a subject. It may be argued, nevertheless, that “faith alone” is implicit in both John’s Gospel and 1 Corinthians 15 because since faith alone in Jesus Christ eternally saves, then good works are automatically rendered unnecessary or excluded. Galatians 5:2-4 seems clear that “alone” satisfies the spirit of the Word for if someone attempts to add anything to simple faith in the Person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ, he has fallen from grace, i.e., he has missed the solitary means by which to be eternally saved.
- Personal e-mail correspondence, July 2009. John Cross was formerly with New Tribes Missions and is now director of Goodseed Ministries. Click on the following link for the home page of Cross’s ministry with its introduction to many effective evangelistic and discipling resources: http://www.goodseed.com/.
- Though these important verses do not explicitly mention that Jesus is the Son of God, the emphasis on His resurrection implicitly does, which is Paul’s point regarding the resurrection in Romans 1:4.
- Merrill Frederick Unger, R. K. Harrison, Howard Frederic Vos, et al., The New Unger's Bible Dictionary, Revision of: Unger's Bible Dictionary. 3rd ed. c1966., Rev. and updated ed. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1988).
- Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Vols. 5-9 edited by Gerhard Friedrich. Vol. 10 compiled by Ronald Pitkin., ed. Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey William Bromiley and Gerhard Friedrich, electronic ed., 5:272-274 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964-c1976).
- Wilkin, Evaluation, 5. He complains that people who see a dispensational change in gospel content following the resurrection relegate John 3:16 to, in effect, an inferior place “that is not sufficient by itself to lead anyone to faith in Christ for eternal life.” Isn’t that an interesting complaint! Is this not what he does when protesting that 1 Corinthians 15:1-11 is not sufficient by itself to lead anyone to faith in Christ for eternal life? Based on the sufficiency of John 3:16, Wilkin would have to say that a person would not have to believe in the name of Jesus Christ since He is not named in that passage. The context of any verse in John is important and can’t be dismissed as some want to do.
- Wilkin, Evaluation, 7.
- Dr. Jody Dillow, in e-mail correspondence with Fred Lybrand (September 4, 2009), says, “I believe that in order for one to be saved he has to believe that Jesus is the Christ (that is, the Lamb of God who takes away sin and the Messiah), the Son of God (that is, He is God), and in believing one can have eternal life through His name. One must trust in Christ’s forgiveness for sin wrought for him at Calvary as an essential element of saving faith.” Used by permission.
- TDNT, Libronix CDROM, comments that “When Paul says that preaching and faith are kenos if Christ is not risen (1 C. 15:14), the antithesis in v. 20 may be applied both to the divine content and to the divine efficacy in the broadest possible sense, the latter with reference to deliverance from [destruction]. Hence kenos means both without content and also ineffective.”
- Horst Robert Balz and Gerhard Schneider, Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament, Translation of: Exegetisches Worterbuch zum Neuen Testament, 2:281 (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1990-c1993). Libronix CDROM.
- See 1 Thessalonians 2:1; 3:5; 1 Corinthians 15:10; 15:58.
- TDNT, Libronix CDROM.
- Richard Chenevix Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament., 9th ed., improved (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2003), 180. Libronix CDROM, when comparing vain and futile, says, “The first, kenos, is ‘empty’ … the second, mataios, ‘vain’ … (‘idle’)…. In the first is characterized the hollowness, in the second the aimlessness, or, if we may use the word, the resultlessness. … Thus kenai elpides [vain hopes]… are empty hopes, such as are built on no solid foundation.”
- Horst and Schneider, Exegetical Dictionary, Libronix CDROM.
- Wilkin, “Another Look…,” 2.
- George E. Meisinger, “Why Confess with One’s Mouth, Romans 10:9-13,” Chafer Theological Seminary Journal, vol. 12, no. 2 (March 2007).
- Lewis Sperry Chafer, “The Riches of Divine Grace,” Systematic Theology (Dallas: Dallas Seminary, 1962), 3:225-266.
- Wilkin, “Another Look…,” 2.
- Such passages as these that deal with eternal salvation are worthy of exegetical efforts in this on-going discussion/debate. Much more should be said on justification and Paul. Charlie Bing told me that he was reminded of a Jehovah’s Witness student he had at LeTourneau College who, when given an assignment to explain Romans 3, came back to class and reported he got saved doing the homework!
- Wilkin, Evaluation, 10-11.
- Wilkin, Evaluation, 11.
*Bing’s diagram portrays well the apostle’s revelation, though JOTGES, from which this quotation comes, having departed from its traditional free grace roots, now rejects that 1 Corinthians 15:3b-5 expresses sufficient saving gospel content; see quotations at beginning of this article.
Christ died for our sins
|
|
2) Second proposition
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment