Chapter 15 (continued, part 2)
There is another orthodox interpretation of this passage. It is assumed to treat of the final result of the work of redemption. God will reign supreme in all. But the all is restricted to the subjects of redemption. The whole chapter treats of those who are in Christ. It is of their resurrection, and of the effect of redemption in their case, the apostle is assumed to speak. 'All who are in Christ shall be made alive, v. 22, and God shall reign in them all.' The sense is good, but this interpretation overlooks what intervenes between vs. 22 and 28 concerning the kingdom of Christ and its being given up.
29. Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?
The apostle, after the preceding digression, returns to his argument for the resurrection. 'The dead are certainly to be raised, otherwise (ἐπεί) what shall they do who are baptized for the dead?' This practice (whatever it was) of baptizing for the dead, takes for granted that the dead are to rise. What shall they do, i. e. What account will they give of themselves? what explanation of their conduct can they make? The most important of the numerous interpretations of this verse admit of being reduced to the following classes: 1. Those which turn on the sense given to the word baptize. 2. Those which depend
on the explanation of the preposition ὑπέρ for. 3. Those which assume an ellipsis in the verse. 4. Those which turn on the explanation of τῶν νεκρῶν, the dead. 1. The simplest and most natural interpretation takes the word baptize in its ordinary sense. 'What do they do who allow themselves to be baptized in the place of the dead?' This supposes that the custom of vicarious baptism, as afterwards practised by the Cerinthians and Marcionites, had already been introduced into Corinth. Among those heretical sects, if a catechumen died before baptism, some one was baptized in his name, in order that he might be enrolled among Christians and receive the benefit of the ordinance. The objections to this interpretation are, that the practice was superstitious, founded on wrong views of the nature and efficacy of baptism. 2. That there are no traces elsewhere of the prevalence of vicarious baptism before the second century. 3. That it was universally condemned by the churches as heretical. 4. That it cannot be supposed that the apostle would refer to such a superstitious custom without condemning it. These objections are in a measure met by the following considerations: 1. Paul, so far from intimating any approbation of the custom, distinctly separates himself from its abettors. He does not say, 'What shall we do'—'What shall they do.' It was something with which he had no fellowship. 2. That this method of arguing against others from their own concessions, is one which the apostle frequently employs. 3. That when his mind is full of a particular subject he does not leave it, to pronounce judgment on things incidentally introduced. Thus, in chap. 11:5, when treating of women speaking in the church unveiled, he expresses no disapprobation of their speaking in public, although he afterwards condemned it. A still more striking example of the same thing is to be found 10:8, where he speaks of the Corinthians "sitting at meat in an idol's temple," without any disapprobation of the thing itself, but only of its influence on the weaker brethren. Yet, in 10:14–22, he proves that the thing itself was an act of idolatry. 4. That the entire disappearance of this custom in the orthodox church, although other superstitious observances not less objectionable soon prevailed, is probably to be referred to the practice having been forbidden by the
apostle as soon as he reached Corinth. This may have been one of the things which he left "to be set in order when he came," 11:34. 5. The state of the church in Corinth, as disclosed by this epistle, was not such as to render the adoption of such a custom by a portion of the people, incredible. Baptizing for the dead was not so bad as sitting at the table of devils, 10:12. A second interpretation under this head gives the word baptize the figurative sense which it has in Matt. 20:22; Luke 12:50, "I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened until it be accomplished!" According to this view, Paul here refers to the baptism of afflictions. 'Why do men suffer so for the hopelessly dead? if the dead are not to rise, what is the use of suffering so much for them? i. e. of labouring so much, and enduring so much for men who, when dead, are never to live again.' This, however, evidently puts a sense on the word dead, which it will not bear. It is assumed to designate not those actually dead, but men who when dead are not to rise again.
Of the second class of interpretations some propose to render ὑπέρ by over. 'Why do they baptize over the dead? i. e. over their graves.' Sometimes, for the sake of expressing their faith in the resurrection, Christians are said to have been baptized over the graves of the martyrs. Others say that ὑπέρ means in the place of. 'Why should men be baptized in place of the dead? i. e. to supply their places in the church, and thus keep up the ranks of believers.' A third class propose to take νεκρῶν for the singular, and to read, 'Why are they baptized for one dead?' Others say the meaning is, for the dead, i e. for bodies. What is the use of being baptized for a dead body? a body which is never to live again. He that is baptized receives the ordinance believing that his body is not to remain dead. Calvin and others understand the dead to mean here, those about to die. 'Why should baptism be administered for those on the verge of the grave— if there be no resurrection?' Finally, some suppose the passage is elliptical. Fully expressed it would be, 'What do they do who are baptized for the resurrection of the dead?' i. e. in hope of the resurrection which was professed by all who receive baptism. The darkness which rests on this passage can never be entirely cleared
away, because the reference is to a custom of which no account is extant. If the dead rise not at all belongs to the latter member of the verse. 'If the dead rise not at all, why are they baptized for them?' Instead of τῶν νεκρῶν, the dead, modern editors read αὐτῶν, them.
30. And why stand we in jeopardy every hour?
Here Paul speaks for himself. With baptizing for the dead, he had nothing to do. 'Why do they allow themselves,' he asks, 'to be baptized for the dead?' That, as would appear, is what his opponents did. As an additional argument for the doctrine which he is defending, he urges, that its denial destroys at least one of the great motives to self-denial. 'If there be no resurrection, on which all our hopes as Christians depend, why should we voluntarily encounter perpetual danger?' It is to be remembered that, according to Paul's doctrine and previous argument, if there be no resurrection, then Christ is not risen, and if Christ be not risen, there is no atonement, no reconciliation with God. We are in a state of final and hopeless condemnation. What is the use of labouring to save men, if there be no salvation?
31. I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily.
Paul solemnly assures his readers that he was constantly in jeopardy, for, says he, I die daily, i. e. I am constantly exposed to death, 2 Cor. 4:10. By your boasting which I have. This is not the meaning, but, 'By my boasting concerning you.' That is, 'as surely as I boast of you, and rejoice over you.' The pronoun ὑμετέραν, your, is to be taken objectively (as in Rom. 11:31; comp. also 1 Cor. 9:12) the boasting of which you are the object. Which I have in Christ Jesus, i. e. which I have in communion with Christ. It was a rejoicing which he, as a Christian minister, had over them as the seals of his ministry.
32. If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? let us eat and drink;
for to-morrow we die.
The apostle refers to one, and probably a recent instance of his exposure to death. If after the manner of men, i. e. with those views and interests which determine the conduct of ordinary men, i. e. without hope in the resurrection. I have fought with beasts at Ephesus. This may be understood either literally or figuratively. Against the literal interpretation is urged, 1. The improbability that, as a Roman citizen, he should have been subjected to that punishment. But his being a Roman citizen did not prevent his being thrice beaten with rods, by Roman magistrates, or at least, by others than Jews, and contrary to law, 2 Cor. 11:25. 2. The silence of The Acts on the subject. But we learn from 2 Cor. 11:23–29, that scarcely a tithe of what Paul did and suffered is recorded in The Acts. 3. The omission of any reference to his exposure to wild beasts in the long enumeration of his sufferings in 2 Cor. 11:23–29. This is a more serious objection. Considering, moreover, that Paul was at Ephesus exposed to the violent tumult of the people, and that this expression is often used by the ancients figuratively for contests with enraged men, the probability is, that it is to be so understood here. What to me is the advantage? 'If I have no other views or hopes than ordinary men, whose expectations are confined to this world, what is the use of incurring so many dangers?' If the dead rise not. This clause does not belong to the one preceding, as it is pointed in our version, but to what follows. 'If the dead rise not, let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die.' The natural consequence of denying the doctrine of the resurrection, involving as it does the denial of the gospel, and the consequent rejection of all hope of salvation, is to make men reckless, and to lead them to abandon themselves to mere sensual enjoyments. If man has no glorious hereafter, he naturally sinks towards the level of the brutes, whose destiny he is to share.
33. Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners.
This warning flows naturally from what had been said. If the tendency of the denial of the resurrection be to render men reckless
and sensual, then the Corinthians should not be deceived by the plausible arguments or specious conduct of the errorists among them. They should avoid them, under the conviction that all evil is contagious. Evil communications. The word properly means a being together, companionship. It is contact, association with evil, that is declared to be corrupting. This is a fact of common experience, and therefore the apostle expresses it in a verse borrowed from the Greek poet, Menander, which had probably become a proverb. It is only when men associate with the wicked with the desire and purpose to do them good, that they can rely on the protection of God to preserve them from contamination.
34. Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak (this) to your shame.
Surrounded by evil teachers, the Corinthians had need not only of being on their guard against deception, but also of vigilance. Awake. The word properly means, to become sober, to arouse from a state of drunkenness or torpor. The call is to prompt exertion to shake off the delusion under which they were lying as to their security. To righteousness, literally, righteously, i. e. in a proper manner. 'Awake rightly,' or, as Luther renders it, Wake right up. And sin not, i. e. do not allow yourselves to be carried away into sin. This was the end to be answered by their vigilance. There was need of this exhortation, for some have not the knowledge of God; literally, have ignorance of God. They are ignorant of God; and therefore they deny the resurrection. Comp. Matt. 22:29, where our Lord says to the Sadducees who denied the resurrection, "Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God." I speak this to your shame. It should make you ashamed that there are men among you capable of calling in question one of the great essential facts of the gospel—the resurrection of the dead.
Nature of the resurrection body, vs. 35–58
Having proved the feet of the resurrection, the apostle comes to illustrate its nature, or to teach with what kind of bodies the dead are to rise. It seems that the great objection against the doctrine in the minds of his readers rested on the assumption that our future bodies are to be of the same nature with those which we now have; that is, natural bodies consisting of flesh and blood, and sustained by air, food and sleep. Paul says this is a foolish assumption. Our future bodies may be material and identical with our present bodies, and yet organized in a very different way. You plant a seed, it does not come up a seed; but a flower. Why then may not the future be to the present body what the flower is to the seed? vs. 35–37. Matter admits of indefinite varieties in organization. There is not only immense diversity in the vegetable productions of the earth, but even flesh is variously modified in the different orders of animals, vs. 38, 39. This is true not only as to the earth, for there are heavenly as well as earthly bodies. And even the sun, moon and stars differ from each other in glory; why then may not our future differ from our present bodies in glory? vs. 40, 41. Such not only may be, but will be the case. The body deposited in the grave is corruptible, mean, weak, and, in a word, natural; as raised from the grave, it will be incorruptible, glorious, powerful, and spiritual, vs. 42–44. This is according to Scripture. Adam was created with a natural body, adapted to an earthly state of existence; Christ, as a life-giving spirit, has a spiritual body. As Adam was before Christ, so our earthly tabernacles are before our heavenly ones. As we have borne the image of the earthly, we shall bear the image of the heavenly, vs. 45–49. It is freely admitted that flesh and blood, i. e. bodies organized as ours now are, are unfit for heaven. Corruption cannot inherit incorruption, v. 50. But our bodies are to be changed. This change shall be instantaneous and at the last day. It shall embrace both the living and the dead. Corruption shall put on incorruption, mortality shall put on immortality, vs. 51–53. When this is done, the original promise that death shall be swallowed up in victory, will be fully accomplished, v. 54. Death, therefore, to the believer, has lost its sting, and the grave is conquered. Death has no sting but sin; sin has no strength but from the law; the law has no power over those who are in Christ
Jesus, therefore thanks be to God, who giveth us the victory through Christ Jesus our Lord! vs. 55–57. Seeing then that we have such a glorious hereafter, we should be steadfast, unmoveable, always abounding it in the work of the Lord, v. 58.
35. But some (man) will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?
The discussion of the fact of the resurrection being ended, the apostle comes to consider the manner of it. He supposes some objector to ask, How are the dead raised up? This may mean, How can a corrupted and disorganized body be restored to life? And the next question, With what body do they come? may refer to the result of the process. What is to be the nature of our future bodies? Or the latter question may be merely explanatory of the former, so that only one point is presented. How, i. e. with what kind of body are the dead raised? There are, however, two distinct questions, for although the two are not connected by καί, and, but by the particle δέ, which might be merely explanatory, yet the apostle really answers, in what follows, both questions, viz., How it is possible for life to come out of death, and, What is to be the nature of the body after the resurrection. The latter difficulty was the main one, and therefore to that the most of what follows refers. The great objection in the minds of the Corinthians to the doctrine of the resurrection was evidently the same as that of the Sadducees. Both supposed our future bodies are to be like our present ones. Our Lord's answer to the Sadducees, therefore, is the same as that which Paul gives to the Corinthian objectors. The future body is not to be like the present. To reject a plainly-revealed and most important doctrine on such grounds as these is wicked as well as foolish, and therefore the apostle says in the next verse—
36. (Thou) fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die.
It is not, Thou fool, but simply, Fool! an exclamation both of disapprobation and contempt. Luke 12:20; Rom. 1:22; Eph. 5:15. It does not, however, necessarily express any bitterness of feeling; for our blessed Lord said to his doubting disciples, "O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken!" Luke 24:25. It was the senselessness of the objection that roused the apostle's indignation. The body cannot live again because it dies. Fool! says Paul, a seed cannot live unless it does die. Disorganization is the necessary condition of reorganization. If the seed remain a seed there is an end of it. But if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit, John 12:24. The seed is as much disorganized, it as really ceases to be a seed when sown in the ground, as the body when laid in the grave. If the one dies, the other dies. Death is not annihilation, but disorganization; the passing from one form or mode of existence to another. How then can the disorganization of the body in the grave be an objection to the doctrine of a resurrection? It may be said that the apostle does not pursue the objection; that the body is not only disorganized but dispersed; its elements scattered over the earth, and embraced in new combinations; whereas in the seed the germ remains, so that there is no interruption of the organic life of the plant. To those who make this objection our Saviour's answer is, that they err, "not knowing the power of God." Who knows where the principle of the organic life of the body is? It may be in the soul, which when the time comes may unfold itself into a new body, gathering or regathering its materials according to its own law; just as the principle of vegetable life in the seed unfolds itself into some gorgeous flower, gathering from surrounding nature the materials for its new organization. The identity between the present and future body is implied in the apostle's illustration. But it is his object neither to assert that identity, nor to explain its nature. The latter is a very subordinate point. The Bible clearly teaches that our bodies hereafter are to be the same as those which we now have; but it nowhere teaches us wherein that sameness consists. In what sense is a sprouting acorn the same with the full-grown oak? Not in substance, not in form, not in appearance. It is, however, the same individual organism. The same is true of the human body. It is the
same in old age that it was in infancy. But in what sense? The materials of which the body is composed change many times in the course of an ordinary life, yet the body remains the same. We may rest assured that our future bodies will be the same with those which we now have in a high and satisfying sense, though until the time comes we may be as little able to explain the nature of that identity as we are to tell what constitutes the identity of the body in this life. The same body which is sown in tears, shall be reaped in joy. To doubt the fact of the resurrection, because we cannot understand the process, is, as the apostle says, a proof of folly.
37. And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other (grain):
The first clause of this verse stands, as it were, absolutely. And as to that which thou sowest—thou sowest not the body that shall be. That is, you do not sow the plant, but the bare grain, i. e. the simple, naked grain—it may be of wheat, or of some other grain. The point of the illustration is, that what comes up is very different from that which is deposited in the ground. You sow a seed, a plant appears. You sow a natural, corruptible body; a spiritual, incorruptible body appears. Nature itself therefore teaches that the objection that the future body must be like the present, is of no force.
38. But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.
What is deposited in the earth is very different from that which springs from it. Every seed produces its own plant. The product depends on the will of God. It was determined at the creation, and therefore the apostle says that God, in the continual agency of his providence, gives to each seed its own appropriate product, as he willed, i. e. he originally purposed. The point of this is, if God thus gives to all the products of the earth each its own form, why may he not determine the form in which the body is to appear at the
resurrection? You cannot infer from looking at a seed what the plant is to be; it is very foolish, therefore, to attempt to determine from our present bodies what is to be the nature of our bodies hereafter.
39. All flesh (is) not the same flesh: but (there is) one (kind of) flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, (and) another of birds.
If even here, where the general conditions of life are the same, we see such diversity in animal organizations, flesh and blood appearing in so many forms, why should it be assumed that the body hereafter must be the same cumbrous vehicle of the soul that it is now?
40. (There are) also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial (is) one, and the (glory) of the terrestrial (is) another.
There is no limit to be set to the possible or actual modifications of matter. We not only see it in all the diversified forms of animal and vegetable life, but in the still greater diversities of heavenly and earthly bodies. What Paul here means by bodies celestial, is doubtful. 1. Many suppose the reference is to angels, either on the assumption that they too have bodies, or that the apostle refers to the forms in which they appear to men. When they become visible they must assume some material vehicle, which was always luminous or glorious. Of the angel who appeared at the sepulchre of Christ it is said, "His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow," Matt. 28:3. There is a great contrast between the bodies of these celestial beings and those of men. 2. Others suppose that the reference is to the bodies of the saints in heaven. There are many kinds of bodies here on earth, and there are also celestial as well as terrestrial bodies. The one differing from the other in glory. 3. The common opinion is that the apostle means what is now generally meant by "the heavenly bodies," viz., the sun, moon and stars. To this it is objected that it is to make the apostle use the language of modern astronomy. This, however, has little force; for whatever the
ancients conceived the sun, moon and stars to be, they regarded them as bodies, and used the word σῶμα in reference to them or to the universe. Galen, who was born not more than sixty or seventy years after the date of this epistle, uses nearly the same language as the apostle does. He too contrasts τὰ ἄνω σώματα (meaning the sun, moon and stars,) with τὰ γήϊνα σώματα. See Wetstein. The common interpretation is also sustained by the context, for the sun, moon and stars mentioned in the next verse are evidently included in the heavenly bodies here intended.
41. (There is) one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for (one) star differeth from (another) star in glory.
Not only do the heavenly bodies differ from the earthly bodies in glory, but there is great diversity among the heavenly bodies themselves. How different is the sun from the moon, the moon from the stars, and even one star from another. Standing, therefore, as we do in the midst of this wonderful universe, in which we see matter in every conceivable modification, from a clod of earth to a sunbeam, from dust to the lustre of the human eye, how unutterably absurd is it to say that if we are to have bodies hereafter, they must be as gross, and heavy, and as corruptible as those which we have now.
42. So also (is) the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption:
So also is the resurrection of the dead. That is, as the heavenly bodies differ from the earthly bodies, and as one star differs from another star, so the resurrection body will differ from our present body. The apostle does not mean that as one star differs from another star in glory, so one risen believer will differ from another. This, no doubt, is true; but it is not what Paul here says or intimates. His object is simply to show the absurdity of the objection founded on the assumption that the body hereafter must be what it is here. He shows that it may be a body and yet differ as much from what it is now as
the light of the sun differs from a piece of clay. He therefore proceeds to show wherein this difference consists. The body is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption. The figure of the seed is again introduced. The bodies of the saints are as seed sown in the ground, not there to be lost or to remain; but at the appointed time, to rise in a state the very reverse of that in which they were committed to the dust. It is sown in corruption, i. e. it is now a corruptible body, constantly tending to decay, subject to disease and death, and destined to entire dissolution. It is raised in incorruption. Hereafter it will be imperishable; free from all impurity, and incapable of decay.
43, 44. It is sown in dishonour, it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power: it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
The apostle contemplates the body as at the moment of interment, and therefore these predicates are to be understood with special reference to its condition at that time. It is the dead body that is sown in dishonour, despoiled of the short-lived attractiveness which it had while living. It is raised in glory, i. e. in that resplendent brightness which diffuses light and awakens admiration. It is to be fashioned like unto the glorious body of the Son of God, Phil. 3:21. It is sown in weakness. Nothing is more absolutely powerless than a corpse—it can do nothing and it can resist nothing. The weakness which belonged to it in life, is perfected in death. It is raised in power. The future body will be instinct with energy, endowed, it may be, with faculties of which we have now no conception. It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. This comprehends all that has been said. A natural body, σῶμα ψυχικόν, is a body of which the ψυχή, or animal life, is the animating principle; and a spiritual body, σῶμα πνευματικόν, is a body adapted to the πνεῦμα, the rational, immortal principle of our nature. We know from experience what a natural body is. It is a body which has essentially the same properties as these of brutes. A natural body consists of flesh and blood; is
susceptible of pain and decay; and needs air, food, and rest. It is a mere animal body, adapted to the conditions of an earthly existence. What a spiritual body is, we know only from Paul's description, and from the manifestation of Christ in his glorified body. We know that it is incorruptible, glorious, and powerful, adapted to the higher state of existence in heaven, and therefore not adapted to an earthly condition. Spiritual, in this connection, does not mean ethereal, refined, much less made of spirit, which would be a contradiction. Nor does it mean animated by the Holy Spirit. But as σῶμα ψυχικόν is a body adapted to the ψυχή or principle of animal life, the σῶμα πνευματικόν is a body adapted to the πνεῦμα or principle of rational life. The Bible uses these terms just as we do, without intending to teach that the ψυχή or life, is a distinct substance or subject from the πνεῦμα or rational spirit, but only that as we have certain attributes, considered as living creatures, in common with irrational animals, so we have now a body suited to those attributes; and, on the other hand, as we have attributes unspeakably higher than those which belong to brutes, we shall hereafter possess bodies adapted to those higher attributes. The Bible recognizes in man only two subjects or distinct separable substances, the soul and body. And this has ever been a fundamental principle of Christian anthropology.
There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. This is a vindication of the apparently contradictory expression, spiritual body, which, according to the letter, is tantamount to immaterial matter. If, however, it is proper to speak of σῶμα ψυχικόν, a natural body, i. e. a body adapted to the principle of animal life; it is right to speak of σῶμα πνευματικόν, a spiritual body, i. e. a body adapted to the spirit. Lachmann, Rückert, and Tischendorf, after the ancient MSS. and versions, adopt the reading εἰ ἔστι, κ.τ.λ. If there is a natural body, there is a spiritual body. Just as certainly as we have a body adapted to our lower nature, we shall have one adapted to our higher nature. If the one exists, so does the other.
45. And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam (was made) a quickening spirit.
So it is written, i. e. the Scriptures are in accordance with the preceding representation. They represent Adam as having been created with an animal nature, and therefore as having an animal body. Whereas, the second Adam is a person of a far higher order. The proof with regard to the nature of Adam does not rest exclusively on the words quoted, but on the whole account of his creation, of which those words form a part. It is evident from the entire history, that Adam was formed for an existence on this earth, and therefore with a body adapted to the present state of being; in its essential attributes not differing from those which we have inherited from him. He was indeed created immortal. Had he not sinned, he would not have been subject to death. For death is the wages of sin. And as Paul elsewhere teaches, death is by sin. From what the apostle, however, here says of the contrast between Adam and Christ; of the earthly and perishable nature of the former as opposed to the immortal, spiritual nature of the latter, it is plain that Adam as originally created was not, as to his body, in that state which would fit him for his immortal existence. After his period of probation was passed, it is to be inferred, that a change in him would have taken place, analogous to that which is to take place in those believers who shall be alive when Christ comes. They shall not die, but they shall be changed. Of this change in the constitution of his body, the tree of life was probably constituted the sacrament. For when he sinned, he was excluded from the garden of Eden, "lest he put forth his hand and take of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever," Gen. 3:22. Some change, therefore, was to take place in his body, to adapt it to live for ever. He was made a living soul, ψυχὴν ζῶσαν. He had a ψυχή, and therefore a body adapted to it. Both the Greek word ψυχή and the corresponding Hebrew term are frequently used for the immortal principle of our nature—the rational soul—but they also, and perhaps most frequently, mean life in that form which we have in common with other animals. This idea is included in the passage quoted from Genesis. It is to be remembered that the quotations given in the New Testament from the Old Testament are not mere quotations, but authoritative expositions. Paul tells us what the Spirit of God meant, when he called Adam a living soul.
The last Adam, i. e. Christ. This was not an unusual designation for the Messiah among the Jews, though not found in Scripture elsewhere than here. The appropriateness of the designation is evident. Christ is the second great head and representative man, of whom Adam is declared to have been the type, Rom. 5:14. Was made a quickening spirit. Adam was in his distinctive character, that is, as distinguished from Christ, an animal—a creature endowed with animal life, whereas Christ has life in himself, and can give life to as many as he will, John 5:21, 26. This does not of course mean that Adam had nothing more than animal life. It does not deny that he had a rational and immortal soul. Neither does it imply that our Lord had not, while on earth, a ψυχή or principle of life in common with us. The apostle simply contrasts the first and second Adam as to their distinguishing characteristics. The one was a man; the other infinitely more.
There are two questions suggested by this passage. The first is, on what ground does the apostle assert that Christ was made a quickening spirit? When he says, at the beginning of the verse, "So it is written," does he intend to appeal to the support of Scripture not only for what he says of the nature of Adam, but also for what he says of the person of Christ? If so, the proof cannot rest on the passage quoted, for that relates exclusively to Adam. If the apostle intended to cite the Scriptures for both parts of the declaration in the preceding verse, "there is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body," he must mean the Scriptures in express terms declare Adam to have had a living soul, and they set forth Christ as a life-giving Spirit. It is more commonly assumed, however, that the quotation is limited to the first clause. 'The Scriptures say that the first Adam "was made a living soul;" the last Adam (we know) was made a lifegiving Spirit.'
The second question is, When was Christ made a quickening spirit? The apostle does not refer to what Christ was before his incarnation, but to what he became. The subject of discourse is, the last Adam. When did he become a quickening spirit? Some say at his
incarnation. This is undoubtedly true. As the incarnate Son of God he was life-giving. "It pleased the Father that he should have life in himself," John 5:26. That is, that the divine and human nature should be united in his person. And in this constitution of his person it was already determined that, although while on earth he should have a body like our own, yet his whole person, including 'his true body and reasonable soul,' should be adapted to sit at the right hand of God. Adam was first formed for this earth, and had an earthly body; the person of Christ was constituted in reference to his reigning in heaven, and therefore he has a spiritual body. The apostle argues from the nature of Adam to the nature of his body; and from the nature of Christ to the nature of his body. This argument does not involve the assumption that the body of Christ was here a spiritual one—for we know that it was flesh and blood; but that such was the state to which, from the very constitution of his person, he was destined, a spiritual body alone could be suited to him. The last Adam, therefore, was made a quickening spirit, by the union of the divine with the human in the constitution of his person. Others say that it was at his resurrection; and others, at his ascension. As to the former opinion, it is enough to say, that no change took place at his resurrection in the nature of Christ's body. It was necessary in order to its satisfactory identification that it should remain the same that it was before. He therefore not only called upon his disciples to handle his risen body and to satisfy themselves of its identity by probing the wounds in his hands and feet, but he also repeatedly ate before them. He did not assume his permanent pneumatic state until his ascension. But this did not make him a quickening spirit. It only affected his body, which then assumed the state adapted to its condition in heaven.
46. Howbeit that (was) not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
This does not mean simply that the natural body precedes the spiritual body. But it announces, as it were, a general law. The lower precedes the higher; the imperfect the perfect. This is true in all the
works of God, in which there is a development. Adam's earthly state was to be preparatory to a heavenly one. The present life is like a seed time, the harvest is hereafter. The natural comes before the spiritual; as Calvin says, we are born before we are regenerated, we live before we rise.
47. The first man (is) of the earth, earthy: the second man (is) the Lord from heaven.
The general principle stated in the preceding verse, that the natural precedes the spiritual, is here illustrated by the fact that Adam came before Christ. The first man was of the earth, i. e. formed out of the earth, and therefore earthy. The second man is the Lord from heaven. Here the text is doubtful. The authorities are about equally divided for and against the reading ὁ κύριος, the Lord. The sentence is more simple if that word be omitted. 'The first man was from the earth; the second man was from heaven.' If the common text be retained, the word Lord is in apposition with the words the second man. 'The second man, the Lord, was from heaven.' This passage was used by the early heretics of the Gnostic school to sustain their doctrine that our Lord was not really born of the Virgin Mary, but was clothed in a body derived from heaven, in opposition to whom the early creeds declare that he was as to his human nature consubstantial with man, and as to his divine nature consubstantial with God. The text, however, simply asserts the heavenly origin of Christ. Adam was of the earth; Christ was from heaven; comp. John 3:13. Adam, therefore, had a body suited to the earth; Christ has a body suited to heaven.
48. As (is) the earthy, such (are) they also that are earthy; and as (is) the heavenly, such (are) they also that are heavenly.
The earthy is of course Adam; they that are earthy are his descendants. The heavenly is Christ; they that are heavenly are his risen people. The descendants of Adam derive from him an earthly
body like his. Those who are Christ's are to have a body fashioned like unto his glorious body, Phil. 3:21.
49. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
In this passage, instead of the future φορέσομεν, we shall bear, the great majority of the oldest MSS. read the conjunctive φορέσωμεν, let us bear. The context, however, so evidently demands the future, that the common reading is preferred by almost all editors. An exhortation here would be entirely out of place. The apostle is evidently proceeding with his discussion. He is obviating the objection to the doctrine of the resurrection founded on the assumption that our bodies hereafter are to be of the same kind as those which we have here. This is not so. They are to be like the body of Christ. As we have borne the image of Adam as to his body, we shall bear the image of Christ as to his body. The idea that as we have derived a corrupt nature from Adam, we derive a holy nature from Christ, though true in itself, is altogether foreign to the connection.
50. Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
This I say. These words admit of three interpretations. 1. They may be understood concessively. 'This I concede, brethren. I admit that flesh and blood, our bodies as now organized, cannot inherit the kingdom of God. But that is not what I teach when I preach the doctrine of the resurrection. Our bodies are to be changed.' 2. The sense may be, 'This is what I say, the sum of what I have said is that flesh and blood,' &c. 3. The words may mean, 'This I assert, brethren. I assure you of this fact, that flesh and blood,' &c. In 7:29 the expression is used in this sense. Comp. also Rom. 3:8 and 1 Cor. 10:19.
Flesh and blood means our body as now constituted, not sinful human nature. The phrase never has this latter sense. In Heb. 2:14, t
is said, "Inasmuch as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he (Christ) also himself likewise took part of the same," Matt. 16:17; Gal. 1:16; Eph. 6:12. It is Indeed true, that our unsanctified nature, or unrenewed man, cannot inherit the kingdom of God. But that is not what the apostle is speaking about. He is speaking of the body and of its state after the resurrection. It is of the body as now constituted that he says, it cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven, i e. the kingdom of Christ as it is to exist after the resurrection, Matt. 8:11; Luke 13:28; 1 Cor. 6:9; Gal. 5:21; 2 Tim. 4:18. The same idea is repeated in abstract terms and as a general proposition in the next clause, neither can corruption inherit incorruption. The mortal cannot be immortal; the perishable imperishable. Incorruption cannot be an attribute of corruption. Our bodies, therefore, if they are to be immortal and imperishable must be changed. And this the apostle in the next verse announces on the authority of a direct revelation, is actually to occur.
51. Behold, I show you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed.
A mystery; something revealed, and which could not otherwise be known, Matt. 13:11; 1 Cor. 4:1, and often elsewhere. What is here expressed by saying, I show you a mystery, is in 1 Thess. 4:15 expressed by saying, 'This I say unto you by the word of the Lord,' i. e. by divine revelation. The revelation which Paul now declares, and to which he calls special attention by the word, Behold! is, that all are not to die, but all are to be changed, i. e. so changed that their corruptible body shall be rendered incorruptible. The common text is, πάντες μὲν οὐ κοιμηθησόμεθα, the negative being connected with the verb, so that the literal sense would be, all are not to die. This is said of all whom Paul addressed. The apostle tells them all that they are not to die. To avoid this impossible sense, for Paul certainly did not mean to assure the Corinthians that it had been revealed to him that none of them should die, most of the older commentators assume in common with our translators a not unusual trajection of the negative particle, πάντες οὐ standing for οὐ πάντες. Others
explain the verse thus: 'We all—shall indeed not die (before the resurrection)—but we shall all be changed.' It is said this is contrary to the context, inasmuch as being changed is something peculiar to those who should be alive at the coming of Christ, and is not affirmed of the dead. This, however, is contrary to the fact. Paul had said, v. 50, that flesh and blood could not inherit the kingdom of God. All, therefore, who enter that kingdom, whether they die before the second advent or survive the coming of Christ, must be changed. And that is the fact which Paul says had been revealed to him. Those who died before the advent would not fail of the blessings of Christ's kingdom, and those who should be alive when he came, would not be left in their corruptible bodies. Both should be changed, and thus prepared for the heavenly state.* Comp. 1 Thess. 4:15–17. The modern commentators, both German and English, understand the apostle as expressing the confident expectation that he and others of that generation should survive the coming of Christ. 'Though we (who are now alive) shall not all die, we shall all be changed.' But 1. This is altogether unnecessary. The we all includes all believers who had lived, were living, or ever should live. There is nothing either in the form of expression or in the context to limit it to the men of that generation. In the same way Paul says in 1 Thess. 4:15, "We that are alive at the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them that are asleep." This does not imply that he expected to be alive, when Christ came. In his second Epistle to the Thessalonians he warns them against the expectation of the speedy advent of Christ, telling them that a great apostasy and the revelation of the Man of Sin were to occur before that event. 2. The plenary inspiration of the sacred writers rendered them infallible in all they taught; but it did not render them omniscient. They could not err in what they communicated, but they might err, and doubtless did err, as to things not included in the communications of the Spirit. The time of the second advent was not revealed to them. They profess their ignorance on that point. They were, therefore, as to that matter, on a level with other men, and may have differed in regard to their private conjectures on the subject just as others differ. It would not, in the least, therefore, encroach on their authority as infallible teach, era, if
it should be apparent that they cherished erroneous expectations with regard to that about which they professed to know nothing. Knowing that Christ was to come, and not knowing when he was to come, it was perfectly natural that they should look on his advent as constantly imminent, until it was revealed that certain events not yet accomplished, were to occur before Christ came. But all this is very different from any didactic statement that he was to come within a certain period. Paul might exhort Christians to wait and long for the coming of the Lord; but he could not tell them by the word of the Lord that he and others then living would be alive when he came. This would not only be teaching error, but it would be claiming divine authority, or a special revelation, for that error. It is, therefore, only at the expense of all confidence in the inspiration of the apostle that the exposition above mentioned can be adopted.
52. In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
The change in question is to be instantaneous; in a moment, literally, an atom, i. e. in a portion of time so short as to be incapable of further division. It is to take place at the last trump, i. e. on the last day. As the trumpet was used for assembling the people or marshalling a host, it became the symbol for expressing the idea of the gathering of a multitude. So, in Matt. 24:31, Christ says, "He will send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet; and they shall gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to another." Comp. Is. 27:13; 1 Thess. 4:16. This trumpet is called the last, not because several trumpets (the Jews say seven) are to sound in succession, but because it is the last that ever is to sound. In other words, the resurrection is to take place on the last day. For the trumpet shall sound. This is a confirmation of the preceding. That day shall surely come—the voice of the archangel, the trump of God, shall certainly resound as it did from Sinai, Ex. 19:16. And, i. e. and then, in consequence of the summons of God, the dead shall be raised in the manner described in vs. 42, 43, incorruptible, glorious
and powerful. And we shall be changed. This is in exact accordance with 1 Thess. 4:15. Those who are alive when Christ comes "shall not prevent them which are asleep." The dead in Christ shall rise first, and then the living shall undergo their instantaneous change. As remarked on the preceding verse, it is not necessary to understand the apostle as including himself and fellow believers in Corinth, when he says We shall be changed. The connection indeed is different here from what it is there. There he says, "We shall not all die." If that means that the men of that generation should not all die, it is a positive assertion of what the event has proved to be false. But here he simply says, all who are alive when Christ comes shall be changed, If he hoped that he might be of the number there would be nothing in that expectation inconsistent with his inspiration. Calvin, therefore, so understands the passage.* Considering, however, his express teaching in 2 Thess. 2:2–12 on the subject, it is far more natural to understand him as contemplating the vast company of believers as a whole, and saying 'Those of us who are dead shall rise, and all who are alive shall be changed.'
53. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal (must) put on immortality.
This is the reason why we must be changed. 'We must, all be changed, for this corruptible must put on incorruption.' It is impossible that corruption should inherit incorruption. This reason applies equally to the quick and to the dead. With regard to both classes it is true that these vile bodies must be fashioned like unto Christ's glorious body.
54. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
When the change above described has been accomplished, when once the resurrection has taken place, then, according to the language of Scripture, death shall be completely conquered. Not only
shall those over whom he bad triumphed, and whom he had so long detained in the prison of the grave, be delivered from his power, but there shall be no more death. The passage quoted is Isaiah 25:8, "He will swallow up death in victory." In Hebrew the last words mean literally for ever. They are, however, frequently translated by the LXX. as they are here rendered by the apostle. The sense is the same. The victory over death is to be complete and final.
55. O death, where (is) thy sting? O grave, where (is) thy victory?
The apostle places himself and his readers in presence of the Saviour and of the risen dead arrayed in immortality; and in view of that majestic scene he breaks out in these words of triumph: 'Christ has conquered. His people are redeemed. Death is disarmed. Hades is no more.' Death is Addressed under the figure of an animal armed with a poisonous sting which pierces even to the soul; for that sting is sin. The grave, or the Greek word Hades, means, what is unseen, the invisible world, the abode of the dead in the widest sense. It depends on the context whether the immediate reference be to the grave, the place of departed spirits, or hell, in the modern sense of that word. Here where the special reference is to the bodies of men and to the delivery of them from the power of death, it is properly rendered the grave. The only sense in which the body can be in Hades is that it is in the grave. The apostle is not speaking of the delivery of the souls of men from any intermediate state, but of the redemption of the body. In Hosea 13:14 God says, "O death, I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction." This is a literal version of the Hebrew. The Vulgate comes near to it, Ero mors tua, O mors! Morsus tuus ero, inferne! The LXX. depart from the figure, "Where is thy judgment (or vengeance), O death? where is thy sting, O grave?" These are all different forms of expressing the idea that death and the grave are completely conquered. The apostle does not quote the prophet. He expresses an analogous idea in analogous terms. In speaking of death as furnished with a sting, the most natural figure is that of a scorpion. Others say that κέντρον here means a goad, and that death is compared to a man driving animals before him with such an
instrument. The power of a goad is as nothing to that of the sting of a scorpion, Rev. 9:5, 6, 10, and the figure is therefore far more forcible as commonly understood.*
56. The sting of death (is) sin; and the strength of sin (is) the law.
The sting of death is sin; that is, death would have no power to injure us if it were not for sin. This is true for two reasons. 1. Because if there were no sin there would be no death. Death is by sin, Rom. 5:12. 2. Because sin gives death, when it has been introduced, all its terrors. If sin be pardoned, death is harmless. It can inflict no evil. It becomes a mere transition from a lower to a higher state. The strength of sin is the law. This must be the law of God in its widest sense; not the Mosaic law, which would make the declaration amount to nothing. The law is the strength of sin for two reasons. 1. Because without law there would be no sin, Rom. 4:15. The very idea of sin is want of conformity on the part of moral creatures to the law of God. If there be no standard to which we are bound to be conformed, there can be no such thing as want of conformity. Sin is the correlative, not of reason, nor of expediency, but of law. It you take away law, men may act unreasonably, or in a way injurious to themselves or others, but they cannot sin. 2. Because if there be no law there can be no condemnation. Sin is not imputed where there is no law, Rom. 5:13. There is still another reason, which, though presented elsewhere by the apostle, is foreign to this connection, and that is, that the law not only reveals and condemns sin, but it exasperates and excites it, and thus gives it strength, Rom. 7:8–12.
57. But thanks (be) to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
The victory here meant is, of course, the victory over death and the grave. Thanks be to God, who delivers us from the power of death, redeeming even our bodies from the grave, and making us partakers of everlasting life. This is done through Jesus Christ our Lord, i. e. our divine possessor and absolute ruler. It is through him, and
through him alone. 1. Because he has satisfied the demands of the law. It has no power to condemn those who are clothed in his righteousness. There is no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, Rom. 8:1. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth, who is he that condemneth? Rom. 8:33, 34. Christ by his death hath destroyed him that had the power of death, that is, the devil, and delivered them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage, Heb. 2:14, 15. That is, in virtue of the death of Christ, by which the demands of justice are satisfied, Satan, the great executioner of divine justice, has no longer the right or power to detain the people of Christ under the power of death. If, therefore, it be the law which gives sin its reality and strength, and if sin gives death its sting, he who satisfies the law destroys the strength of sin, and consequently the sting of death. It is thus that Christ deprives death of all power to injure his people. It is for them disarmed and rendered as harmless as an infant. 2. But Christ not only gives us this victory through his justifying righteousness, but by his almighty power, he new creates the soul after the image of God, and, what is here principally intended, he repairs all the evils which death had inflicted. He restores us to that state, and even to more than that state, from which sin had cast us down. He rescues our bodies from the grave, and fashions them like unto his glorious body, even by that power whereby he is able to subdue all things unto himself, Phil. 3:21. Had it not been for Christ, death would have reigned for ever over our fallen race; but thanks be to God, Christ hath given us the victory; so that the believer may even now say, O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?
58. Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord.
Such being the truth and importance of the doctrine of the resurrection, Christians should be firm in their adherence to it, not suffering themselves to be moved by the specious objections of philosophy falsely so called. They should remember that if the dead
rise not, then is Christ not risen; and if Christ be not risen, their faith is vain, and they are yet in the power of sin. But as Christ has risen, and as his resurrection illustrates and renders certain that of his people, what more natural and proper than that they should abound in the work of the Lord. The work of the Lord is either that work in which the Lord is engaged, the destruction of death by destroying sin; or, it is the work which the Lord has given us to do, as parents and children, as husbands and wives, as ministers and Christians. In this work we should abound, i. e. be abundant. As Paul says, 2 Cor. 11:23, "In labours more abundant." Forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord. This with Paul was more than faith; it was knowledge. He knew that labour in the work of the Lord would not be in vain. The reward secured for it by the grace of God and merit of Christ is participation of the glories of a blessed resurrection.