READINGS ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, CHAPTER 15
READINGS ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, CHAPTER 15
In Timothy, we read of those who said that the resurrection was past; here, some seem to have been denying it.
Yes, they were saying, “The dead rise not” (1 Corinthians 15:16), something of the Sadducean idea. With them it was materialistic.
You said this chapter went back and connected itself with “The wisdom of God” (1 Corinthians 2:7) in chapter 2. Will you tell us something about it?
Three things come out in the chapter. First, the facts announced in the gospels; second, the light of the resurrection day — God’s day — and then the place that Christ has in regard to that day. It is there that the apostle begins to touch the deeper things, in the last Adam and second Man. First, he recapitulates the facts, the basis of faith, the common testimony of all the apostles; then the light of the resurrection day is brought in, but I think the point as to that day is, that it has already come in; that is the import of its application to us: “Thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ”, 1 Corinthians 15:57. God has the victory, and He gives it to us. This is often referred to at an open grave, but it is not spoken of here in that connection, but to be realised day by day. I think you have the victory every day, by being brought into the light of the resurrection day. Although an open grave presents a good opportunity for realising it, yet it is important that we should do so, when everything is prosperous with us.
“By him”, the Lord Jesus Christ. Is not that a point?
[p. 98] Everything is by Him, administratively, in the connection and sphere in which He administers.
What do you mean by ‘God’s day’?
It is the day of God’s victory, the resurrection day, but must not be confounded with Peter’s expression:
“The day of God”, 2 Peter 3:12.
What thought have you when you speak of the application to us, when things are going on prosperously?
We are in the light of that day, and if in the light of that day you would not think much of this world; you would not be affected by it, but would be morally superior to everything down here; you would be in a greater light not bounded by things down here.
Paul desired to know the power of Christ’s resurrection.
Yes, because Christ’s resurrection is the start of it for God. The great point for us is, that we are brought into the light of the resurrection day. The day has begun for us, and it separates from all here and that in the brightest day, not merely in dark days. The greatest artificial light will not shine very brightly in that day; we have a light above the brightness of the sun.
Do you mean by the resurrection day, the day when the saints are raised?
Not exactly — it is the resurrection day now for us, because Christ has risen; though it is not displayed, it is good morally. We can see our way into the resurrection day. The apostle wanted to bring the Corinthians into the true light of the resurrection day. It began in John 20. What we have as light now, will be displayed. It is the unvarying principle throughout the New Testament, that we get the light of what is to come. That is what I meant last night by the faith sphere. Resurrection is the glory of God, His effulgence, the way in which He has come out to vanquish all that is contrary. It is the witness of His triumph over everything that is against Him. The [p. 99] triumph over Satan was complete in death, but death itself had to be annulled, and resurrection annulled it. We read of the saints being sons of God because they are sons of the resurrection, Luke 20:36. They come out in that way as the fruit of God’s power in resurrection.
Is it purpose there: “sons of the resurrection”, Luke 20:36?
Yes, Satan was met in his own domain, and his power destroyed there, but death still remained to be overcome, and that was overcome in resurrection. So that in the very presence of a scene of sin, we have the victory. There is no rapture mentioned here, the great point is the victory.
Do we get anything apart from resurrection?
Yes, many mercies down here, but none of the blessings of God apart from it. Every distinctive blessing of christianity is on the ground of it. The faith of Abraham was in the God of resurrection. The God who quickens the dead. Abraham is the father of all those who believe. The law came in by the way, in connection with the man that was; but there were blessings promised long before that on the ground of resurrection. The law came in to test a wholly right seed, but did not remove death from man; in that sense law came in by the way. In the failure under the law God goes back to the original purpose — to the promise made to Abraham, and so David who lived in the time of the law, comes in on the same line of promise as Abraham. That is the reason he is brought in, in Romans 4. It is the royal line. Abraham believed in the God of resurrection.
What is the force of “a wholly right seed”, Jeremiah 2:21?
They had a good source, were the best sample that could be found, and boasted of it continually, “We have Abraham to our father”, Luke 3:8.
What the apostle is insisting upon in this epistle, is what is here in the power of God; the two great points that come out in the earlier part are God’s temple and Christ’s body, but the entering into that [p. 100] really demanded victory over death in an experimental sense. I mean that if you are not in the light of the resurrection day, you will not attach much force to the temple and Christ’s body. You can only be unto God, in the place where Christ is, through His death. So for us, it must be faith, otherwise you would get the Spirit connected with man in the flesh. We are in the light of what is true for God, and that is true for faith.
You say we do not get the rapture here: what is meant then by, “We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed”, 1 Corinthians 15:51?
The rapture goes beyond change. In Thessalonians, where the rapture is spoken of, you have no mention made of the change, the point there is the rapture. This is the same scene, no doubt, but we have to look at the moral import of what is presented. Any man whose soul is in the light of the victory over death does not fear it. Corinthians does not go outside of earth. It is out of death into life, resurrection merely. It is not so much that we are a risen people, but resurrection is applied to the body, and this does not in itself take us away from earth.
You lose the moral force of things if you materialise, and the tendency in our minds is to do so. I find the tendency to it all around; what often leads to it is a misuse of symbols; you view them in a material way and fail to apprehend the force of them as figures. New birth, for instance, and other things — life again; I think the grossest example is in the way a high churchman looks at spiritual life. Resurrection is material to a large extent, but then there is a moral element in it. In Psalm 16 resurrection comes in. I see there, One on earth so morally excellent, that He must go to the right hand of God, even though it be through death, so that resurrection is involved. In the latter part of our chapter, it is what is sown in weakness that is raised in power; you must have [p. 101] something sown which morally involves resurrection. God has to begin His work with people here, or there would not be anything sown, and resurrection would be a mere act of power on God’s part. There is the sowing of something that must come forth, it is of such a character. “Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone”, John 12:24. In that respect the Lord Jesus must be viewed alone. It is “Thine Holy One”, Psalm 16. There is no idea of our going to the right hand of God. I cannot conceive anything more lovely than Psalm 16, that Man must go to the right hand of God. Death in relation to Him, has only reference to the place into which He came for us. Then the glory of God comes in as requiring resurrection. The expression has been used, The glory claims Him: He was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father Romans 6:4.
It was in view of the “pleasures for evermore” that the Lord lived here, was it not? And is it not the same in principle for us?
Except that we do not go to the right hand of God, but we have the “pleasures for evermore”. Of course Psalm 16 is very personal to Christ. He showed the way, and the whole way was clear before Him. As to what is sown, as a matter of fact, it is what is morally excellent that goes into death.
There is something sown in weakness and sown in dishonour.
As to the idea of sowing, Scripture continually speaks of things according to our experience — that is, of the way in which they present themselves to us; and thus we view the departure of a saint. Scripture does not speak of phenomena in scientific language, but in the language of the experience of men.
Why is the serious doctrinal error left so late in the epistle before it is touched? Paul touches upon immoral things first.
The sting was in the tail, there is a moral reason [p. 102] for it. The apostle takes them up first in regard of the very thing in which they were glorying — the outward effects of the Spirit — but shows them that the temple of God and the body of Christ were much more important than the outward effects of the Spirit’s presence down here. The apostle meets them as to the denial of the resurrection, and shows them the significance of it, that it was connected with most serious error, and he works it out as a kind of climax. The root of all the trouble lay here. The body was used for evil, and they turned the manifestations of the Spirit to the magnifying of themselves, and this would be checked by the knowledge of the resurrection of the body. It was largely the human element displacing God; if they had the knowledge of God, resurrection must come in.
Why does he bring in the gospel first? Is that the first part of the sowing?
I think he does it to show that they were departing from the common basis of christian faith, the common testimony. The first part is dogmatic; he lays down certain statements as the foundation of the christian faith, and if they departed from that they departed from christian faith. He begins with the facts of the gospel. “It behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day”, Luke 24:46. It lays the basis for the next part of the chapter.
The fact is, the knowledge of God is the condition for understanding anything. If we knew God better, we should understand that certain things must be because of what God is. The Corinthians were hindered by the human element, as we see in chapter 1, human wisdom; they were attempting to work christianity in the light of this world. I do not think they were in the light of the resurrection day at all. It was the first beginning of an effort to connect christianity with the course of this world — really Balaam’s doctrine.
[p. 103] We ought to take the second section now, on account of the intrinsic importance of it. Verses 20-28 are the second part. It is a kind of parenthesis, and shows the moral import of resurrection, as the principle on which God will set aside everything that exists; all has to give place to resurrection. That is the thought of the resurrection day, for it goes on to eternity. God will weaken things that exist by providential dealings or by judgment, and the new order of things, brought in by resurrection, will displace all. This new order of things was effected for God when Christ rose. Resurrection, in principle, applies to Israel as well as to the church, it applies all the way through: “Brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant” (Hebrews 13:20) shows the principle. Justification in Romans 4 must necessarily be in view of this order of things. So, too, the blessing of Abraham, only now we have come into the light of it. It dawned when Christ arose, and everything for God is now in the light of that day. Justification has been largely limited to relieving a man in this world, but that is only one side of it; man is not only cleared from the reproach attaching to him in this world, but he is approved for the world to come. Christ is your righteousness in the scene where He is. There would be a lack in the presentation of justification, if one failed to bring in the light of another day. “By him all that believe are justified from all things” (Acts 13:39), but there is another side; Christ has been raised again for our justification, Romans 4:25.
Is “justification of life” the other side?
That, I think, involves the subjective state. We are justified in view of the world to come, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God. You come into a new scene, not into the highest christian privilege, yet a new scene.
Does John 5 bring in resurrection? “My Father worketh hitherto” (John 5:17) shows that the Father’s work is to raise the dead and quicken them.
[p. 104] I think John 5 carries you to the full result, the resurrection of life. “Whom he justified, them he also glorified”, Romans 8:30. I have thought that for the Holy Spirit to be given to a man, is in a sense to glorify him; all is settled morally. The gift of the Holy Spirit to man is most extraordinary. We are Christ’s body and the temple of the Holy Spirit. I do not say that fully explains the verse “Them he also glorified”, but we have a most extraordinary thought in John 7, “He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water”. This is not the feast of tabernacles, but morally greater. “This spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Spirit was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified”, John 7:39. And I say that in this sense, we are glorified.
Does our possession of the Spirit involve resurrection?
It is just on the principle we see in John 6, “I will raise him up at the last day”. When Christ was in death there was nothing of life here before the eye of God. God began in resurrection and that is the display of God’s own triumph. The Lord said, “Father, glorify thy name”, and the answer was, “I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again”, John 12:28.
You see the apostle in this passage opens up the entire vista; he carries the light in which we are on to the subjugation of everything, and even the giving up of the kingdom. That is, all the light of resurrection, the full light of that day coming in, carries us on to the eternal state. We have the putting down of the last enemy. The power of death was annulled when Christ was raised, but death does not actually cease, until it is cast into the lake of fire. But all is on the same line; the resurrection of Christ was the beginning, and the beginning involves the end. We are in the light of the beginning, and it is as good to us as the end.
Is that the “better thing” of Hebrews 11? No, that referred to the accomplishment of redemption. The christian’s title was settled when Christ destroyed death; death only exists now for those who have no part in Christ. Death is destroyed with their being cast into the lake of fire. The Corinthians were living to a large extent in the darkness of this world; this was proved in a variety of ways — corruption in the assembly, confusion when they came together; their souls were not in the light of the resurrection day. This is really the corrective chapter, that which would put all to rights. The apostle had referred to it in chapter 1, “Awaiting the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ”, 1 Corinthians 1:7. It is a blessed thing to have before us the complete solution of the question of good and evil, and the eternal supremacy of God. Nothing is more blessed than to think of what is beyond all, even the kingdom. The kingdom has a great place in Scripture, but the christian goes on to the eternal supremacy of God.
Is that the time when God rests in His love? Well, that is millennial, but Israel’s blessing depends upon resurrection as much as ours; how could they be relieved of death if the power of death had not been broken? When death is swallowed up in victory, then God will rest in His love.
While the authority of the kingdom is being exercised, the question of good and evil is being solved, but we are in the light of its having been done?
The whole question has been solved in Christ.
Would you say at the cross?
Yes, and before; but it has to be carried out in effect and detail, and everything has to find its own habitation, and the wicked are consigned to theirs.
In what sense, before the cross?
Christ was here walking in the midst of evil but always above it in good, so that He could say, “I have glorified thee on the earth” (John 17:4), “I do always those things that please him”, John 8:29. Glory to God in the highest (Luke 2:14), came out in the walk of Christ. There was the revelation of perfect goodness in Christ here. When the Lord enters Jerusalem, the children cry, “Peace in heaven”, Luke 19:38. When man has a place in heaven, Satan is cast out and there is peace. There was peace on earth when Christ was here. Peace was connected with His Person.
The third part is very important. The place Christ has in all this order of things, and the complete setting aside of the first man; when you get to the Man of God’s purpose you have the second Man and the last Adam, you touch chapter 2 again.
How do you get to purpose in 1 Corinthians?
When I speak of purpose, I refer to life and the mystery, and you do not get this properly or fully in the epistle, but you get a hint of it, it is not developed; the nearest approach to it is in what you get here, that is, in the second Man and the last Adam.
What is the difference between the two terms?
I do not know that there is much difference except as to the connection; the last Adam is the Head, and the second Man the pattern. You are identified, not with the last Adam, but with the second Man. While Head He is also the One from whom we all derive. He is a life-giving Spirit, 1 Corinthians 15:45. The Son of God takes that place as last Adam; takes that place because He is the Son of God. He comes out as last Adam in resurrection in John 20.
Was the Lord the second Man and last Adam on earth?
It is rather what He is in the resurrection sphere. He does not take up that place until risen. He could not take the place of being a life-giving Spirit, until He had closed up all connected with the first man. I suppose the last Adam involves the truth as to His Person. He could not be a life-giving Adam except as divine. We have here the setting off of one man against another in an abstract way. First man Adam;
[p. 107] last Adam. In order to understand it you have to supply the truth that He is the Son of God. Other scriptures teach us that He is the Son of God.
He breathed on them the breath of life?
Yes, only He does it administratively. I think it is in connection with: “Glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: as thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him”, John 17:1,2. That is as last Adam, I think. As last Adam He could not be a pattern, it would be an unsuitable connection. He takes the place of last Adam in John 20. He is Head of the race. He is a life-giving Head. Adam had a position no one could share with him.
“As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive”, 1 Corinthians 15:22.
That refers to what is potential, what is in the power of, or in virtue of Christ.
Does that refer to christians only, or to all?
It only refers to those who are identified with Him. The apostle is not thinking of others. It is “they that are Christ’s at his coming”, 1 Corinthians 15:23.
Only the article seems to indicate that it is more general, it is the Adam, the Christ.
But it is only christians who can be spoken of as being “in Christ”.
Is it the second Man because others are to follow? It is that order of man, the second Man is a new order of man, the pattern of the heavenly ones. There cannot be any man after the second Man. He cannot be surpassed, you will not have a third man; the second Man is in contrast with the first. The first man was of the earth, earthy; he did not go beyond earth, nothing connected with him was beyond earth. He was made for the earth, and his relations with God were all of that order. God could come to him and he could enjoy all the beneficence of God, but he could not enter into the mind of God or the holiest, as [p. 108] a christian can now. He was as perfect for his place as God could make him, formed for the earth and earth alone, but such could hardly go to heaven. At the same time he was a very beautiful creature. The image and glory of God, that is what man is, and put into a position in which no angel ever was put. I think Satan coveted the position.
The place of authority and supremacy?
Yes, and he gets it by and by; the extraordinary thing is this, he does not even then come to the front; the beast is put in the front, but Satan is behind, there is a trinity of evil. I believe Satan would have given Christ the glory of the world, if He had worshipped him. I think Satan coveted the position man had. You see the result of the fall is that Satan gets great power through man. It is a very remarkable thing that Satan gets displaced from heaven by a Man. He had ruined man, and God says, man shall come in and you shall go out. The Lord says to the seventy: “rejoice not, that the spirits are subject unto you; but rather rejoice, because your names are written in heaven” (Luke 10:20), and coupled with that is, “I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven”, Luke 10:18. That is the Seed of the woman bruising the serpent’s head.
What about Enoch going to heaven if the first man is of the earth?
You cannot think of Enoch without pleasure. Enoch was a most wonderful man and a type of the church. He walked with God, and was not; for God took him, Genesis 5:24. He had the testimony that he pleased God; “without faith it is impossible to please him”, Hebrews 11:6; to please Him you “must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him”, Hebrews 11:6. There was faith.
Yes, but it is difficult to think of his translation to heaven, apart from his being a heavenly man.
I do not think it is said he went to heaven, but it says so in the case of Elijah. It was all after sin had come in.
[p. 109] Enoch comes in as a type of the church. Abel had already shown the ground of acceptance. You may depend upon it, that all these men partook in anticipation of the character of Christ. Abraham rejoiced to see the day of Christ They all came in a sense, under that headship.
What is, “Abraham rejoiced to see my day”, John 8:56?
I should suppose it referred to the kingdom in some way. God always had Christ in view, and these Old Testament saints were formed upon Christ. Abraham was the model of the perfect pilgrim here. God ever had Christ before Him. Christ, when He came with the promises, took up all the perfection of the Old Testament saints; Romans 15:8. But all that came to a close in His death. Then in resurrection He introduces a new order. Abraham offered up Isaac; he knew God as the God of resurrection, and in principle, Christ risen.
Does “They that are Christ’s, at his coming” (1 Corinthians 15:23) include Old Testament saints?
I think not, for the apostle had christians before him, and he is writing to christians. The gospels generalise more than the epistles. The platform there is much larger. In the gospels we have a going out of God to man in the widest range, but when you come to the epistles, they are written to expound christianity to the christian company; I do not think they generalise; what is properly christianity is before the writers. You have plenty of Scripture to give you instruction as to other points. Paul is not instructing the Corinthians about Old Testament saints. You cannot read Scripture too simply, and it instructs by what it teaches positively.
You may depend upon it, that there was no beautiful moral trait ever found in the Old Testament saints, which you could not find in its perfection in Christ when here as Man.
You do not want an argument to prove that Abraham looked forward to Christ’s day. I think it is perfectly beautiful how the character of Christ came out in him, except his failure: that, of course, you do not get in Christ.
Moses was reproached for Christ.
Well, quite so, it is so construed in Hebrews 11. You would not understand the psalms, except as you saw the righteous man in Christ.
The righteousness of God is vindicated in the righteous One. God has shown forth His righteousness in the righteous Man.
Not by the position in which the righteous One is now?
No, by the judgment having been borne by the righteous One. Christ is spoken of as the righteous One, the obedient One, and grace is by one righteousness, by the obedience of One. He loved righteousness and hated iniquity. In Romans 1 we have, He was “declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness”, Romans 1:4.
We often say our history was ended at the cross; it was ended in the righteous One, so that God has been glorified in Him — that is the point.
At the close of the chapter we get the resurrection of the dead, and the change of the living, and death swallowed up in victory; that brings in the full light of the resurrection day.
Is “Death is swallowed up in victory” (1 Corinthians 15:54) a quotation from Isaiah?
It is literally connected with the millennium. God has removed the reproach from His people, has wiped away all tears from their faces. The argument here is, that that comes to pass after the resurrection and change of the saints for heaven; the application to us is, that being in the light of the resurrection day, God has given us the victory.
Will you say what the victory over death is for us? You are in the light of the resurrection day; death [p. 111] does not stand between God and you. If death is an expression of God’s love, it is a way through for you to God. The enemy’s purpose was defeated because a way was made for Israel through the Red Sea.
Why is God spoken of as “the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus”, Hebrews 13:20?
Because He had destroyed the enemy. He is the God of peace. He does not delight in confusion and disorder.
About the righteous One, does that link itself with Psalm 16?
Yes, Psalm 16 presents the righteous One.
Does the victory over death mean more than a christian not being afraid to die? We have the victory now?
God has made a way through death; it is now the expression of His love, and thus it is the way through to Him. It is miserable to think of christians merely being not afraid to die. God commends His love to us, in that Christ died for us. It is in relation to His love that death is brought in there. You go through it to God, just as the Israelites went through the Red Sea.
The truth of this chapter prepares for the second epistle, that we should come out in the power of life. The, second epistle brings in the light of the glory of the Lord. It is another side. Still it is all the resurrection side. But then you accept it, and you always bear about in your body the dying of Jesus.