But I make known to you, brethren, the glad tidings which I announced to you, which also ye received, in which also ye stand,
Paul has spent this letter correcting a divided church. Now he turns to something more basic: he preaches them the gospel again. Why announce good news to people who already believe it? And what does it mean that they stand in it?
The opening words look strange, and one writer says so plainly before answering.
THE OPENING WORDS of chapter 15 appear at first sight rather extraordinary. Why, we may ask, should the Apostle declare the Gospel to people who had already received it?
The answer is that basic truth is not a stage a believer passes through and leaves behind.
we do well to remember that the Church of God always needs its basic teaching given again and again. It is not safe to treat God's first truths the way we treat the first principles of natural science. Gospel truth is the soul's necessary food. We gain and keep true spiritual strength only by constant meditation on what, as believers, we already know. So the enemy aims his hostility at this truth without ceasing, for he knows well how strong a support of faith it is. He never works more successfully against Christ's unwary sheep than when he tricks them into a flattering idea about themselves. They come to think that knowing such doctrine is only the needed first step towards a higher quality of knowledge. They think a truth simple enough to be food for babies can safely be ignored by those further on.
One writer counts what Paul presses on them, item by item.
It was humbling, but healthy, for these believers to hear the gospel made known to them again. They ought to have been sharing in its work instead. The apostle presses it on them (1) as what he first declared to them, (2) as what they had received, (3) as that in which they had their standing, and (4) as the means of their salvation. In this letter, as in many others, Paul speaks of salvation as still going on.
Paul preached this gospel, but he was not its source.
He says, "I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received." It did not begin in the mind of the preacher who declared it to them. As he states elsewhere, "the gospel that was preached by me is not man's gospel. For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ" (Gal. 1:11-12). So here he says he had received it, and he had announced it to them.
The word translated stand carries the sense of a fixed position rather than a shifting one.
The standing. — "Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand" (Rom. 5:2). The wording about our access implies permanence, and so does the wording about our standing. We stand steadily, without a break, in the favour of God. Scripture uses the same word for God's unchangeable foundation, set against the shifting character of what God has entrusted to man's responsibility — "God's firm foundation stands" (2 Tim. 2:19)… In every case the word implies an unvarying steadfastness. What a comfort to learn that we have entry into such a place of choice privilege! And we stand there on an unalterable basis and in an unchanging acceptance.
One writer sets a condition beside that standing.
The Gospel saves us if we hold fast its message. Some people do not like the "if," but it is there all the same. The real believer always holds fast; the unreal does not. With that proviso we can say to all who take the place of Christians, "The Gospel has saved you, and in it you stand." So anyone who tampers with the truth of the Gospel, and unsettles it, is cutting away the ground from under his own feet.
Some at Corinth were denying that the dead rise. Paul answers by going back to the gospel.
Since this denial of resurrection undermines the gospel, the Apostle first reminds these believers of the gospel which he had preached…
Deny the one and the other collapses with it.
This gospel, which the apostle had received, had three parts: Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, He was buried, and He was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures. If this gospel was true, the resurrection was true as well. To deny the resurrection, Paul goes on to state, was to deny that Christ had risen. It was to say that the apostles' preaching was in vain, and their own faith with it.
- Received — Paul passes on what he was given. The gospel did not start in the preacher's mind, so no preacher may change it.
- Preached — believers need the first message preached to them again. Basic truth is food, not a beginner's stage to outgrow.
- Standing — the word means a fixed place, not a shifting one. Believers stand on an unalterable basis and in an unchanging acceptance.
- Saved — Kelly notes that Paul speaks of salvation as still going on. Hold the message fast, and the gospel saves you.
- At stake — pull out the resurrection and the whole gospel falls. Whoever unsettles it cuts the ground from under his own feet.
by which also ye are saved, (if ye hold fast the word which I announced to you as the glad tidings,) unless indeed ye have believed in vain.
Paul is about to defend the resurrection of the dead. He starts by taking the Corinthians back to the message that first saved them. Everything turns on two short clauses: "if you hold fast" and "unless you believed in vain." Both have troubled readers ever since.
Paul lists what this good news has already been to them before he adds any condition:
It was humbling, but healthy, for saints to have the gospel made known to them again — saints who ought instead to have been sharing in its activities. The apostle presses it on them in four ways. It is what he first declared to them. It is what they received. It is where they stand. It is the means of their salvation. Salvation in this letter, as in many others, is viewed as going on.
One writer breaks the verse down, and shows what a hollow faith looks like:
Salvation here depends on three things: the word preached, the sincerity of the believer's faith, and holding fast what he has received. The word preached is the message of pure and sovereign grace... But a person can accept the message and still not believe on the Saviour in his heart. That is to believe, as he says here, in vain, with no serious acceptance of the teaching as the word of God. The gospel is preached to people for the obedience of faith. It does not come merely to win a lazy nod that it is believable, or a mental agreement with its teachings.
One writer refuses to soften the word, and lets time settle the question:
The gospel saves us if we "hold fast" its message. If we do not hold fast the word it does not save. Some people do not like the "If," but it is there all the same. It is easy to say, "I believe," and so be counted among the believers. Yet time tests us. The real believer always holds fast; the unreal does not.
Commentators differ on what the empty believing means. One takes it as the way a person believes — a careless reception that lets go as easily as it took hold:
He had told them before that there is salvation by the gospel for those who held fast the truth preached. The exception is anyone who believed carelessly, or at random. Such a person would be as ready to give up as to receive.
The other takes it as the thing believed. On this reading, the strength of the faith is not the issue:
The "believing in vain" at the end of the verse does not mean faith of a weak or faulty kind. It means faith — however strong — that rests on an unworthy or false object.
The denial in Corinth was not a side issue. It struck at the gospel they had believed:
This denial of resurrection undermines the gospel. So the apostle adds the words, "unless you believed in vain" — for if there is no resurrection, they had believed a myth. He also shows, in a remark set in along the way, that holding fast the word he announced to them as the glad tidings would prove their faith real.
This "if" answers the loose talk in Corinth. It does not touch the standing of those who have believed:
Some of these Corinthian saints were claiming there is no resurrection of the dead. Paul writes to them earnestly about it. He points out that if there is no resurrection, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, they were still in their sins. The very gospel of the grace of God was at stake. So here was a challenge to keep in mind the gospel they had received. The apostle timed this "if" well. Yet he did not write these words to throw doubt on the salvation of those who had believed on Christ. They were saved once and for ever.
- Received — one gospel: Paul declared it, they took it in, they stand in it, and it is saving them still.
- Held — the message saves those who keep hold of it. The "if" stands in the text, and time shows who is real.
- Hollow — a person can accept the message and still not trust the Saviour. Agreement of the mind is not the obedience of faith.
- Empty — writers differ on "in vain." It may mean careless believing, or firm faith in something untrue. Deny the resurrection, and Corinth had believed a myth.
- Secure — the "if" answers loose talk in Corinth. It does not cast doubt on those who have believed on Christ.
For I delivered to you, in the first place, what also I had received, that Christ died for our sins, according to the scriptures;
Some at Corinth were denying the resurrection. Paul answers by taking them back to the message he first preached there — a message he did not invent, but received and passed on. Three things carry the verse: where the gospel came from, what Christ's death was for, and why the Old Testament stands behind it.
When Paul defines the good news, he begins with an event.
What, then, is the gospel? In presenting it the Apostle Paul wrote, "I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ DIED for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures" (1 Cor. 15:3). It is the meaning and the results of the death of Christ that constitute the gospel.
Where did this message come from? Not from Paul.
He says, "I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received." It did not start in the mind of the preacher who had declared it to them. As he states in another place, "The gospel that was preached by me is not man's gospel. For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ" (Gal. 1:11-12). So here he says he had received it, and he had announced it to them.
That origin decides how much is at stake in refusing it.
The Apostle is careful to note that the gospel he preached, he had "received". Another letter tells us how: "through a revelation of Jesus Christ" (Galatians 1:12). So to reject his gospel is to question the revelation of Jesus Christ and the authority of Scripture.
Notice what Christ's death is connected to.
And what is the foundation laid? "That Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures" (v. 3). Not for ourselves only. Not at all for our good ways, but for our bad — "for our sins." Who could have said or thought it but God? … Without the death of Christ for our sins, the gospel has no foundation. And the Old Testament has no adequate meaning or worthy end.
So what became of those sins?
He died for our sins. He suffered the judgment due to them. Then He gave up the life in which He bore them, and with that life given up, the sins of all who believe the gospel are gone out of existence. Our sins would have come up against us in the day of judgment. They are gone as completely as the life of flesh and blood in which Christ bore them.
The Old Testament does not just leave room for this death. Each of its parts points to it.
First, "Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures". This brings before us the great work of propitiation that Christ did for the whole world, foretold in all the Scriptures. The law sets it forth in figure, the Psalms present it in experience, and the prophets announce it as prophecy.
Propitiation is the word for a sacrifice that answers sin before God. Two passages show how exactly this death was foretold:
In the twenty-second Psalm we hear Him saying, "they have pierced my hands and feet." And the prophet Zechariah declares that the Jews will yet look on Him whom they pierced. They shall mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son.
Commentators differ over how far to press the word "our" with someone who does not yet believe. Some say it is right to announce to anyone:
Paul told them "that Christ died for our sins" before they were saved: in fact this was the means of their salvation. It is therefore right to tell the whole world, "Christ died for our sins."
Others say we may preach it to all, but only faith makes it personal:
Now this is a great truth to lay before an anxious or truly enquiring soul. But you cannot apply it to an unbeliever except in a vague, general way… It is when the soul believes God about how effective Christ's death is that the burden of guilt is taken away. This has God's surest guarantee to everyone who believes.
- Received — Paul's gospel came to him by revelation of Jesus Christ, not from any man. To reject it is to question that revelation and the authority of Scripture.
- Delivered — he passed on what he received, and put it first. It is the foundation the gospel rests on.
- Died — the gospel is an event, not advice: the meaning and results of Christ's death are the good news itself.
- For our sins — not for our good ways but for our bad ones. Christ bore the judgment they deserved, and for believers they are gone out of existence.
- In accordance with the Scriptures — the law showed it in figure, the Psalms in experience, the prophets in prediction. Without this death the Old Testament has no worthy end.
and that he was buried; and that he was raised the third day, according to the scriptures;
Paul defends the resurrection by repeating the gospel he preached at Corinth. He boils it down to a few plain facts. Two of them sit in this verse: a grave, and a rising on the third day. Only the rising carries the words "in accordance with the Scriptures," and that difference matters.
Commentators read verses 3 and 4 as a compact summary with three parts, each doing its own work.
He at once sums up the glad tidings under three headings. First, "Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures." This brings before us the great work of propitiation by Christ for all the world, foretold in all the Scriptures. The law sets it out in picture form, the Psalms present it as experience, and the prophets announce it as prophecy. Second, Christ was buried. That is the full evidence of His death, and the solemn fact that every tie He had with man on natural ground is cut. Third, "He was raised the third day, according to the Scriptures." That is the everlasting witness that death has lost its power, the devil is defeated, and God is glorified.
The burial is not padding. It settles whether He truly died. It also exposes what His followers expected.
"He was buried" — a fact that shows how real His death was. It also shows how little His disciples expected the very resurrection they so needed. "We had hoped," as one of them said, "that he was the one to redeem Israel." It is as if that hope was bound to be buried in the tomb where they had laid Him. His burial also has a spiritual meaning for us, as we know. The letters to the Romans and to the Galatians make it known.
Notice what Paul does not say about the burial. Where that missing phrase lands instead shows where the weight of the gospel rests.
So it is added to Christ's death (v. 4), "and that he was buried." Only here there is no mention of the Scriptures. Paul keeps that phrase for the immense fact of the resurrection: "and that he was raised the third day according to the Scriptures." The repeated appearances follow, and of course they carry no such backing from Scripture. It is not merely a side fact or a confirmation of Christ's death. His resurrection is the grand pivot of the chapter, the display of God's glory as regards man, the fullest answer to all unbelief, and the death-knell of Satan's power.
Paul had living eyewitnesses he could point to. Yet he anchors the facts in the older Scriptures first.
Even apostolic teaching was not to be taken for granted apart from an earnest search of the Scriptures… The many living witnesses, one would say, were enough to establish the truth. But he will not separate it from the testimony God had given through all the previous ages — testimony that makes that wonderful death the centre of history.
Where do the older Scriptures name the third day? The answers come from earlier pictures and prophecies, and one writer weighs each one honestly.
Abraham saw from far off the place where he would sacrifice Isaac, and this was on the third day (Gen. 22:4). That makes it more than likely that Isaac was set free from the altar on the third day. But this is not clear enough to be relied on as positive evidence on the point. Our Lord Himself pointed to Jonah as a picture of Himself when He said, "For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (Matt. 12:40)… The third day is also stamped with the divine mark of resurrection by the prophet Hosea — "After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will raise us up, that we may live before him" (Hosea 6:2).
The resurrection does not only concern Him. It settles where you stand.
Scripture assures me that Jesus was nailed to the cross under the weight of my sins; but the same Scriptures assure me that He rose from the grave without one of those sins upon Him. Nor is this all. The same Scriptures assure me that all who put their trust in Jesus are as free from all charge of guilt as He is; that there is no more wrath or condemnation for them than for Him.
- Died — the cross was the great work of propitiation for the whole world, set out in the law, the Psalms and the prophets.
- Buried — the grave proves the death was real, and shows how little His followers were expecting Him back.
- Raised — Paul makes no appeal to Scripture for the burial. He saves it for the resurrection, the pivot of the whole chapter.
- According to the Scriptures — Paul had living eyewitnesses, yet he tied the facts to what God had said through all the previous ages. Jonah and Hosea 6:2 mark the third day with resurrection.
- No condemnation — He rose with none of our sins on Him. All who trust Him are as free from every charge of guilt as He is.
and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.
Paul has just set out the gospel he preached: Christ died, was buried, and rose again. Now he calls his witnesses, and the names he picks — along with the ones he leaves out — carry meaning beyond proof.
Verse 5 opens a list. It is a selection, not a full record, and one writer counts what the chapter gives:
In the early verses of 1 Corinthians 15, Paul names six witnesses, or groups of witnesses. All of them testify that they saw Christ risen from the dead: Peter; the Twelve; five hundred brothers at once; James; all the Apostles; Paul himself. The list is not complete... But the six cases he does give are witness enough: three people, and three groups.
Another writer notices who is left off the list:
He leaves out Mary Magdalene and the other women, however important both may be for the aims the Gospel writers had in view. Neither the Gospels nor the Letters pile up proofs. Each writer makes a selection that suits God's design for him. The apostle gives only men whose weight, number, or other circumstances made their evidence unanswerable to every fair mind.
The Gospels give the women a large place in the resurrection story, so their absence here surprises many readers. One writer links it to a charge unbelievers later made:
Unbelievers have often tried to trace the belief in our Lord's resurrection back to the women. Cephas is named first. On the resurrection morning the angel had said, "But go, tell His disciples and Peter." And Peter, who had denied Him so shamefully, had seen the risen One.
Cephas is Simon Peter. Of all the witnesses, the Lord went first to the man who had denied Him.
First, He appeared to Cephas. To us this is the sweet witness of a love that does not forget. That love could lift out of the deepest gloom the soul of a man who had dishonoured Him by his denial. Peter had to see Him first. Then, when he saw Him among the twelve straight afterwards, he would not be ashamed or afraid, or held at the distance that his denial seemed to put him in.
The disciples' own report that evening had two halves, and each says something different about Him:
"The Lord has risen" — that revealed His glory. "And has appeared to Simon" — that revealed His grace. His grace is as great as His glory.
Every other appearance that day comes with words attached. This one does not, and the silence is not an accident.
But where the Lord met Peter, and what He said to him, are hidden from us... The silence fits God's ways exactly. This is how He restores a person who has failed to the sense of communion with Himself. Peter had a question to settle about communion with the Lord. Could he enjoy it again? That visit settled it, and settled it for ever. We say visit, because it was clearly the Lord who sought him out... It was, and always is, a private matter between God and the person. The question of service after such a failure is another matter altogether.
By then the group was one short. Paul still calls them "the twelve."
He was then seen by the twelve. They are called that, although the number was in fact short at the time — sadly short. But God's grace was not going to accept that gap. The twelve were to stand again as the witness of a grace that could not lack the full and competent witness to itself.
Peter comes first for grace; the group comes next for weight. No one person could carry the weight of the whole company that knew Him best. And that company was not easily fooled:
Could they be deceived, when they knew Him so well? They clearly did not expect to see Him. When He appeared among them they were troubled and terrified, and thought they had seen a spirit. But His well-known voice drove their fear away. When He showed them His hands and feet and side they were glad, for they knew and recognised their Lord.
- Evidence. Paul answers doubt with named, living witnesses: three people and three groups. He chose them for their unanswerable weight, not to give a full record.
- Grace. The first name on that list is the man who denied Him; His appearing to Cephas showed love that had not forgotten.
- Glory. "The Lord has risen" revealed His glory; "has appeared to Simon" revealed His grace. His grace is as great as His glory.
- Privacy. Scripture hides what passed between them. Restoration to communion is a private matter between God and the person; restoration to service is another question.
- Completeness. Paul still calls them "the twelve" though the group was one short — grace refused to leave its own witness incomplete.
Then he appeared to above five hundred brethren at once, of whom the most remain until now, but some also have fallen asleep.
Paul is listing the people who saw Jesus alive after His death, and here he reaches the largest group — more than five hundred at once. Where did this happen, and why does he tell us how many of them are still alive?
A single witness can always be explained away. A crowd cannot, and one writer sets out the difference plainly.
Someone might claim that a single person was impressionable by nature, a bit of a dreamer. No one could say that about the twelve apostles, nor about all the apostles. A claimed appearance to one person might have been something very secret, a private affair in a corner. But it would be impossible to say that about the time He appeared to five hundred brothers at once. No fact of history is better attested than the resurrection of the Lord Jesus.
The clause "most of whom are still alive" is not filler. It is an open invitation to go and check.
Most of these five hundred united witnesses were still alive if anyone doubted. Even if a person were prejudiced enough to accuse the twelve apostles of a plot, how unreasonable it would be to think that of so large a group of simple disciples, who were beyond any suspicion of having a motive or a position to gain... Paul gives us this great body of witnesses, most of them alive at the time, if anyone chose to examine or cross-examine them.
A lie needs a small circle that can keep its story straight. Five hundred people cannot.
There was clearly no chance here for a conspiracy. The number was far too large for fraud of any kind. Five hundred false witnesses would soon quarrel among themselves and bring the truth to light, but there was never a hint of this. The resurrection, on the other hand, rallied every faint-hearted disciple to the side of Christ. It filled them with a boldness that no trouble and no persecution could check.
Scripture does not say where this happened, and commentators differ on how confident we can be. Several link it to the appointed meeting on a mountain in Galilee, and one points to an odd detail in Matthew's account as the clue — that when they saw Him, some doubted.
What makes us think this was probably the occasion Paul refers to, when he writes of our Lord being seen by "more than five hundred brothers at one time," is how Matthew ends this "proof": "And when they saw Him they worshiped Him, but some doubted." Those last three words could hardly apply to people who had already seen Him more than once, and who knew on those earlier occasions that it was the Lord... We can more easily account for "some doubting," or being at a loss what to think, if these words apply to "some" of that "five hundred," many of whom had not seen Him since He was risen from among the dead.
Another writer explains how so large a crowd came to be there.
We have no account of this anywhere else, but no doubt it was in Galilee, where the Lord had made a special appointment to meet His disciples. On the mere hint of that, there would naturally be a gathering of as many as could possibly be present.
Set beside a courtroom, five hundred is overwhelming. Set beside the ministry of Christ Himself, it is sobering.
How far had people gained from His ministry? Five hundred brothers could be gathered together after His resurrection as the fruit of His labours — a mere handful when we think of the Teacher.
after fix: DELETE
Paul does not say that some of them died. He says they have fallen asleep, and one writer explains what sleeps and what does not.
You never find the soul sleeping in Scripture. The man sleeps, but always as identified with the body... In 1 Corinthians 15:6, "some have fallen asleep" — fallen out of the rank of witnesses.
The same writer draws out why Scripture keeps two different words for the two events.
"Jesus died;" His saints only "fall asleep." For Him it was death in all its reality and severity, as the judgment on sin. It was the sign and picture of a deeper judgment. For them it is only "sleep" — rest and refreshment, from which they rise to a day that knows no ending and never fades.
- Seen. More than five hundred saw Him at once — not one impressionable individual in secret, but a crowd in the open.
- Checkable. Most were still alive as Paul wrote, and he says so on purpose: anyone who doubted could examine and cross-examine them.
- Unfakeable. Five hundred false witnesses would soon have quarrelled and let the truth out. Instead the resurrection made faint-hearted disciples bold.
- Located. Scripture does not name the place. Writers point to Galilee, where the Lord had arranged to meet His disciples, and where Matthew says some doubted.
- Asleep. Paul does not say the ones who had gone died. They fell out of the rank of witnesses into sleep, waiting for a day that never ends.
Then he appeared to James; then to all the apostles;
This verse lists two more appearances of the risen Christ. The first name is a surprise: James, a member of Jesus' own family who had not believed in Him. Why name one man between a crowd of five hundred and the whole group of apostles? And what does "all the apostles" mean?
Each name in Paul's list carries its own weight. Christ appeared to James alone on that occasion, and Paul records it.
James held a place of unique honour, both in the church at Jerusalem and as an inspired writer. He alone was the object of that appearance of Christ, so Paul mentions it, just as he mentions the later appearing to all the apostles. Everything was in place, and each appearance had its own importance. These appearances were spread over forty days, in many different settings. They mark the care with which divine wisdom and grace made the resurrection known. The quiet statement of the fact stands in striking contrast with a story Jerome quotes from a false gospel. In it, James vows neither to eat nor drink till he sees the Lord risen again. Man spoils everything he touches in divine things; he cannot even fill a gap with a trustworthy tradition.
Scripture records that the meeting happened, and stops there.
"Then He appeared to James" (1 Cor. 15:7) is the brief and only account we have of this appearance. God has drawn a veil over what took place at this appearance and at the one before it. James held a notable place in the Church later on. That has led some to think the Lord may have given him instructions at this moment, useful to His saints afterwards.
Commentators mostly identify this James as the Lord's brother. He came from the family who did not believe in Him while He walked among them.
James, the brother of the Lord, belongs to those mentioned in John 7:5: "For not even His brothers believed in Him." James and his brothers did not believe that Jesus, the virgin-born Son of God, was the Messiah. But the first chapter of Acts lists those who waited in Jerusalem for the promise of the Father. Among them are "Mary the mother of Jesus, and His brothers." They had been converted and were now believers. How were they convinced that Jesus was the Christ? James saw the Lord risen from the dead. Christ had appeared to him. That became the great turning point in his life, and he and his brothers believed.
The appearance did more than change James's mind. It dealt with his unbelief as sin, and it left him with a name he was glad to use.
"Then He appeared to James." James was one of the Lord's brothers, and he did not believe in Him in the days before Calvary. But the Lord's death atoned for that sinful unbelief, and His appearance in resurrection swept it away. So James delighted to call himself the servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ.
One writer sees a wider pattern in him:
So he has, we may believe, a representative place here. He is one of a class of people whom the resurrection itself brought to faith, or at least to full faith.
This last appearance is most likely the day the Lord left the earth:
Fifth, all the apostles saw Him, when at the end of forty days He was taken up into heaven.
Commentators differ, however, on how wide the word "all" reaches, and on which James is in view.
It is also a question which of the two men who bore that name the apostle means here. The later appearance to all the apostles most probably refers to the parting meeting recorded in Acts 1. As for the word "all," it may point back only to that single appearance, and so mean the eleven. Or it may stretch the word "apostle" to cover everyone the Lord had owned as His messenger while He lived on earth.
James and the apostles are two links in a chain of named witnesses.
In the early verses of 1 Corinthians 15, Paul cites six witnesses, or groups of witnesses. All of them testify that they really saw Christ risen from the dead — Peter; the Twelve; five hundred brothers at once; James; all the apostles; Paul himself. The list is by no means complete... The six cases he does cite were quite enough witness: three people, and three groups.
- Seen — by an unbeliever. James belonged to the family who did not believe in Him. The risen Christ came to him in person.
- Seen — as grace. The Lord's death atoned for that unbelief, and His appearance in resurrection swept it away. The man who once refused Him became His willing servant.
- Seen — and silent. Scripture records the fact and no more. God has drawn a veil over the meeting, and invented traditions only spoil it.
- Seen — by all. The last appearance is most likely the parting scene, when the Lord was taken up to heaven. Commentators differ on how far "all" reaches.
- Seen — therefore sure. Six witnesses in all: three people and three groups. The resurrection is a fact anyone could check, not a private claim.
and last of all, as to an abortion, he appeared to *me* also.
Paul ends the list of resurrection witnesses by adding himself, and the word he picks for himself is one of self-contempt. Why did the risen Christ appear last of all to His fiercest enemy, and what does Paul mean by calling himself "untimely born"?
Just before this verse, Paul lists witness after witness who saw the risen Lord. Then he adds himself, and his evidence stands apart from the rest.
He has lined up all this earlier testimony to the fact of the Lord's resurrection. Now he offers himself as a new and decisive witness. What he had seen of the Saviour with his own eyes was of a completely different sort. To the former witnesses He had shown Himself on earth... But to Paul He had revealed Himself from heaven.
The other appearances came to believers. This one came to a man who hated Him.
One more remained, the most extraordinary of all, and long after the others: "Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me." It was from heaven, in broad daylight, as he drew near to Damascus. He was not only an unbeliever, but the hottest of enemies, and he was surrounded by a band of companions who thought as he did. All were struck down, all saw the light and heard the sound, but he alone saw Jesus, he alone heard the words of His mouth.
The word Paul chooses means a birth that goes wrong. It is not the normal arrival of a child, but a birth forced out ahead of its hour. Commentators read the force of it in two directions. One takes it of timing:
He was raised up, however, as he himself tells us, before the time... Things were not yet ripe for the unfolding of the new revelation he was given to preach as its special minister. So he calls himself one born before the time, for that is the real force of the original word. And how was he before the time? Because Israel was not yet finally set aside.
Another notes that the apostolic circle was already closed when he was added:
But his apostleship was out of due time, as well as out of due place. It not only did not come from Jerusalem, but it arose after the apostleship there had been completed. Judas' forfeited place had been filled by Matthias, and so the body of twelve, as ordered by the Lord at the beginning, was complete again; and Paul's apostleship is therefore a thing born "out of due time."
(The older translation reads "born out of due time"; the ESV has "as to one untimely born.")
One writer presses the picture further and says why Paul was no ordinary birth:
Comparing the group of apostles to a family, he declares himself the last, and a miscarriage rather than a true birth. He had not, like the rest, acknowledged Jesus of Nazareth as the hope of Israel... He was called to the work out of the very depth of spiritual darkness.
Paul's name for himself is not false modesty. No one had less claim on the risen Lord than he did.
"The least of the apostles," as he calls himself, not fit even to be called an apostle, because he persecuted the assembly of God. Yet here grace gained its fullest expression, and Christ His sweetest victory. "By the grace of God," he says, "I am what I am, and His grace toward me was not in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them." Still, that was grace. He claims nothing for it.
Paul rests his own standing as an apostle on this single fact — that he saw the risen Lord. That test shuts the door behind him.
The mark of an apostle was that he could bear witness to Christ's resurrection... Paul had never seen Jesus during His life on earth, or in the forty days before He was taken up to heaven. Yet he rests his apostleship on the same ground. "Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?"... Since this was a condition of apostleship, no one who has not seen Christ risen could be an apostle. In other words, apostles were only temporary gifts.
Paul's odd position in time turns out to be the position every later believer shares.
Paul speaks of being "born out of due time"; that is, he was too late for the Gospel and too soon for the day of manifested glory. It is the same with each of us. Like Paul, we begin with a glorified Christ. We are so favoured to be called into blessing in the most important day of all God's dealings with man on earth.
- Last — Paul closes the chain of witnesses, but what he saw was different. Not the risen Christ on earth, but the Lord revealed from heaven.
- Least — the man who saw Him was His fiercest enemy. He was struck down in daylight near Damascus, and his companions saw only the light.
- Untimely — the word means a birth forced ahead of its hour. Commentators differ: some point to Israel, not yet set aside; others to the twelve, already complete.
- Grace — the least qualified apostle laboured more than all the rest, and claimed none of it for himself.
- Ours — seeing the risen Lord was what made an apostle, so that office ended with them. But Paul's starting point, a Christ already in glory, is where every believer since begins.
For *I* am the least of the apostles, who am not fit to be called apostle, because I have persecuted the assembly of God.
In a list of witnesses to the risen Christ, Paul turns to himself — and what he says is not a credential but a confession. Why does he rank himself last, and how can a man call himself unfit for the office he holds?
Paul measures himself against the men who had been with Jesus. The comparison goes against him.
"For I am the least of the apostles," etc. This low estimate of himself is both natural and sincere. He could not help rating himself far below those who had been with Jesus in His trials. The thrones of Israel's kingdom are reserved for them. In their presence he would not call himself their equal. What they had preached and suffered for, he had persecuted to the death. He could not, and ought not, to forget this.
He does not say he persecuted saints or believers. He picks the name that makes his act as heavy as it can be. (In the quote below, "assembly" translates the word the ESV gives as "church.")
Paul has left on record, in the first letter to the Corinthians, what it meant to him. Writing of his grievous sin before his conversion, he states that he persecuted the assembly of God. They were saints. They had shown themselves to be believers on the Lord Jesus. Yet he does not call them saints or believers. He writes of the assembly of God, exposing his former open and unrelieved hostility to the company gathered to God. Could he have expressed more strongly what he did in mistaken zeal for God?
The persecution was not a slip. It came out of his religion, and that is what makes it so serious.
"Concerning zeal, persecuting the Church," was Paul's own account afterwards of the state in which divine grace found him (Phil. 3:6). It did not change his conviction that he was the chief of sinners... A man's religion may be the worst thing about him. His sincerity in it will not stop its effect on him. Sincerity makes that effect more certain.
Later he saw what the church is. The memory grew sharper, not softer.
There was a special sorrow in Paul's feeling when he said, "Unworthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God." He was behind no one in service or in suffering for Christ. But he could not forgive himself that, before grace came, he had persecuted the church. Then he learned to see God's wonderful and wise thought about the church, the heavenly bride. He saw its beauty as the expression of God's thought. After that, how could he forgive himself? How could he ever get rid of the memory that he had been a persecutor of it?
Thinking little of himself never made Paul timid. The same man who called himself unworthy still knew how to stand up for his office.
Humility in the apostle did not mean weakness. When the occasion called for it, he knew how to magnify his office. He could write to another and say, "Let no one despise you for your youth." But of himself as a worker he could say, "To me, though I am the very least of all the saints, this grace was given." On another occasion he said, "I am the least of the apostles, unworthy to be called an apostle... But by the grace of God I am what I am."
Christ appeared to Paul last of all, and out of the ranks of His enemies. So the confession does not end in shame.
Paul stood apart from all the rest in time and in character. He came "last of all," "as to one untimely born," as he says, when the number of the apostles might have seemed closed. Out of the middle of men filled full of Jewish hostility, Paul himself saw Him — a notable witness of divine grace, the grace that he was to be, above all, the witness of. "The least of the apostles," as he calls himself, not fit even to be called an apostle, because he persecuted the assembly of God. Still, grace here gained its fullest expression, Christ His sweetest victory.
- Crime. He names his past by its worst title — he attacked not just believers, but the church of God.
- Cause. His religious zeal drove it; sincerity did not soften the damage but made it more certain.
- Conscience. The memory stayed with him for life; the more he saw the church's beauty, the less he could forgive himself.
- Confidence. Low thoughts of himself never made him weak. He still knew how to stand up for his office.
- Conclusion. Grace found its fullest expression in the man least fit for the place.
But by God's grace I am what I am; and his grace, which [was] towards me, has not been vain; but I have laboured more abundantly than they all, but not *I*, but the grace of God which [was] with me.
Paul has just called himself the least of the apostles, a man not fit for the name because he had hunted down the church. This verse answers the question that follows: how did such a man outwork everyone else — and who gets the credit?
Paul's change was not the slow improvement of a good man. One writer says nothing else can explain it.
Those who attacked his apostleship were just as hostile to his full preaching of grace. His apostleship received real confirmation. The pride of human nature, in its merits or its wisdom, was put down. God was in every way exalted. Paul's own testimony also accounted for a revolution never surpassed, if even equalled, in any man's history since the world began. Nothing else can explain a man trained in the strictest traditions and ways of the Pharisees, who was now the boldest minister of the gospel... Truly it was the grace of God that was with him, and he loved to acknowledge it, while he humbled himself.
We tend to hear "by the grace of God I am what I am" as a statement about being forgiven. One writer says that is only half of it.
Our thoughts tend to dwell so much, and only, on acceptance. So we often take this passage, "By the grace of God I am what I am," as having to do with acceptance alone. But the Lord wants us to serve Him abundantly in Satan's world. That may mean fighting evil not only in ourselves but in others, and nothing but His grace can enable us to do this. The same "grace of God" that saved us at the beginning has also given us to serve and strengthens us for service.
Paul's correction — "not I, but the grace of God" — has two parts. One writer shows what each part does, and why Paul could speak of his own record freely.
It might look as though he were boasting in the number of his own activities here and elsewhere, but no. He took no praise to himself — "not I," in that he refused any glory; "but the grace of God," in that he gave all the glory to God. He boasted in grace and not in himself. This explains why he could speak of his experiences and his service freely and easily. He spoke for the glory of the grace he was the happy subject of, not for self-exaltation.
Paul says the grace given to him was not wasted. One writer weighs what it produced, and finds more than extra work.
There is a deep emphasis in these words. He was conscious of his former dishonour as the "chief of sinners," and just as conscious of his special distinction as the outstanding "minister of the Church." He was not one of the twelve apostles. Yet sovereign grace entrusted him with a work that in its nature and effects would exceed what God had done through them. His labours were not only more abundant, but of more lasting value... His divinely guided hand gave most of the great doctrines of the faith their fullest and clearest statement.
The same verse exposes a danger. Even a gift of grace can feed pride.
Here we see again the sin of our hearts: using the very grace God has given us for the purpose of self-exaltation... The flesh would use the very grace of God, the light of God, the truth of God, the power of God, to exalt ourselves.
It is easy to file this verse under "apostles only." One writer blocks that escape with Paul's own words about himself.
Let us not excuse ourselves by saying Paul was an apostle. He tells us that he was "less than the least of all saints" and that he was "nothing" — and when we get down there we will understand things better. Yet he says, "By the grace of God I am what I am… not I, but the grace of God that is with me." And that grace does not fail. Its supplies are as full as ever — as full for us as they were for Paul.
- Grace explains. Nothing in Paul's training or character explains how the persecutor became a preacher. Grace alone does.
- Grace equips. Grace does not stop at acceptance. The same grace that saved us also gives us work and strength for it.
- Grace works. The grace was not wasted. It produced work beyond all the rest and left the church its clearest teaching.
- Grace deflects. "Not I" refuses the glory; "but the grace of God" hands it over — which is why Paul can name his own record without pride.
- Grace endures. The flesh will try to turn the gift into self-exaltation; yet the supply itself is as full for us as it ever was for Paul.
Whether, therefore, I or they, thus we preach, and thus ye have believed.
Paul has just named the witnesses who saw the risen Christ, and he ends the list by pointing away from himself. Whoever the messenger was, the Corinthians heard one message — and everything after this turns on that.
The messengers were not alike. So what did they all say?
Returning now to his main subject, he confirms that all true apostolic preaching agrees on the things that make up saving faith. The death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord of glory are the prime essentials of God's gospel. His witnesses might differ in their gifts and in the way God called them, but their testimony is the same.
Some at Corinth set one preacher against another. But the men they compared preached the same foundation. So where did the new opinion come from?
Those labours were so abundant and fruitful. But what truth was their foundation, and what drove them? The resurrection of Christ with Paul, as with the apostles whom some set against him. "Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed." There was no change in the preaching: how then such a departure in some of the Corinthians? It was not so when they believed. Could it be of God?
Another writer puts a name to "they": the twelve apostles.
Whether the twelve or himself, they had all preached the Gospel of the risen Christ. The Corinthians had heard no other Gospel from their lips than this. Upon the risen Christ they had believed.
The word "so" points back to Paul's summary of the gospel. One fact in it holds up all the rest.
So, whether Paul preached it or the great company who had seen the risen Christ, the gospel these Corinthians believed had its keystone in the resurrection of Christ.
The second half of the verse turns the argument on the readers. They had already believed this preaching. What happens if they now change their minds?
If any at Corinth were in danger of letting slip what they had once received, God's apostles judged them with one voice. They were also witnesses against themselves, since their new opinions would contradict their former faith.
The stakes were not small. If Christ did not rise, the preacher and the believer both lose everything.
In 1 Corinthians 15 he gives an account of the gospel he preached to them. It is the same as ever: "Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that He was buried, that He was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures." Others besides himself had also seen Him after His resurrection: "So we preach and so you believed." If Christ was not risen, then he was a false witness, and they had believed in vain, and were still in their sins.
Verse 11 closes the evidence and opens the argument. Everything that follows rests on the agreement Paul has just shown.
The testimony of every divine witness was the same. Everything declared that Christ was risen; everything depended on the fact that He was so. This was his starting-point.
That agreement did not happen by chance.
God had provided witnesses to the resurrection of Christ with immense care. The apostles preached it, and all Christians believed it. Having shown this, he now reasons from it to the resurrection of the dead. He also reasons from their denial of the resurrection to its effect on Christ and the gospel.
- One message. Witnesses differ in gifts and calling. The testimony does not: Christ's death, burial and resurrection are the essentials of God's gospel.
- One foundation. Paul and the apostles some set against him preached the same risen Christ. The new opinion at Corinth had no apostolic backing.
- One keystone. Whoever preached it, the gospel the Corinthians believed stood on the resurrection of Christ.
- One faith. "So you believed" makes them witnesses against themselves. To deny the resurrection now would contradict their former faith.
- One starting point. God provided the witnesses with care. Everything Paul argues next stands on the one fact they all declared.