As many of you know, I once wrote an article titled “He was buried,” in order to demonstrate why belief in the immortality of the soul means someone can’t be said to be a member of the body of Christ, since it would mean one doesn’t believe a specific (and crucial) element of Paul’s Gospel (please go read that article if you aren’t familiar with why I say this).
I’ve also maintained for years that the “Christ died for our sins”element of Paul’s Gospel means that someone who believes in Infernalism (meaning the doctrine of never-ending torment), or even Annihilationism, also can’t actually be a member of the body of Christ, because they don’t believe that sin has been dealt with, once and for all, through Christ’s death for our sins (if anyone believes that a person can be punished without end because of their sins, they haven’t understood what it means that “Christ died for our sins,” and you can’t truly believe something if you don’t actually understand its meaning). Not only that, though, it also means that someone who believes a person can only be saved by choosing to believe something specific (be it a supposedly “free will” choice, or even a predestined choice) aren’t in the body of Christ either, because it isn’t our belief that saves us, but rather it’s Christ’s death for our sins, along with His subsequent burial and resurrection on the third day, that saves us (this means that even some who call themselves “Christian Universalists” aren’t in the body of Christ, because many of them also believe that salvation only comes through a choice to believe something specific; and please keep in mind that I’m referring specifically to the general salvation that everyone experiences when I discuss verses 3 and 4 of 1 Corinthians 15, of course, and not the special “eternal”/age-pertaining life type of salvation referred to in verses 1 and 2 — it’s important to keep in mind that both types of salvation are being discussed in the first four verses of 1 Corinthians 15, and if you aren’t familiar with the different types of salvation, please read this). To believe that one has to choose to believe something specific in order to be saved is putting the cart before the horse, since faith, or belief, in what Christ accomplished is the cart bringing us into the form of salvation known as membership in the body of Christ (also known as salvation from a relative perspective), while the general salvation (from an absolute perspective) because of Christ’s death for our sins, burial, and resurrection on the third day, is the horse.
I should say, while “the salvation of all humanity” isn’t, strictly speaking, Paul’s Gospel itself — since Paul’s Gospel is technically just those combined elements that he said he taught the Corinthians (Christ’s death for our sins, His burial, and His resurrection on the third day) — because the general salvation of all humanity is the end result of Christ’s death for our sins, His burial, and His resurrection on the third day, it means that the salvation of all humanity because of what Christ accomplished is this Gospel’s main point. And so, while there are other details about his Gospel which also need to be understood in order to be considered a member of the body of Christ (such as what it means that “He was buried,” as we already discussed in that previous article), it can legitimately be said that “the eventual salvation of all humanity because of what Christ accomplished” is essentially Paul’s Gospel, even if it’s not technically Paul’s Gospel (again, of course, referring to the general salvation that everyone eventually experiences, meaning being made immortal and sinless, and not the special “eternal” life sort of salvation which only the body of Christ will get to enjoy in heaven, or even the other “eternal” life sort of salvation, which the Israel of God will enjoy in the kingdom of heaven for 1,000 years because they obeyed their own Gospel, although they too will all eventually enjoy the general salvation connected with Paul’s Gospel).
Despite this fact, most people who call themselves Bible believers (including even a few people I consider to be legitimate members of the body of Christ) insist, for various reasons, that the phrase “Christ died for our sins” can’t be referring to the eventual salvation of all humanity, but that it must mean something else instead. Well, one thing we do all agree on is that the five words “Christ died for our sins” have to mean something. The question, then, is, “What is it that those five words mean?”
There are various different answers I’ve heard different people who disagree with me on this point provide, but I’m not going to go into all of them because one example should suffice to show you why none of them can possibly make sense (after you read my refutation, you can just apply said refutation to any other answer as well). The example I’m going to use is the idea that the words somehow mean “justification by faith,” as I’ve heard some people claim Paul meant when he said “Christ died for our sins.” Well, if that’s the case, let’s break down the passage. Paul said in verses 1 and 2 that those who believe his Gospel will be saved, and then gave the first five words of his Gospel in verse 3 — “Christ died for our sins” — so if “justification by faith” somehow is what those five words mean, the Gospel Paul taught people that they needed to believe in order to be considered saved and in the body of Christ would then be, “justification by faith, and also that Christ was buried and rose again the third day,” which really makes no sense at all, since it would then mean that we’re justified by having faith that justification by faith is true, presuming we have the faith that Christ was buried and resurrected on the third day too, of course, even though we’ve now lost any information about Christ dying for our sins in the first place in this explanation (and yes, I realize that, from an absolute perspective, it was Christ’s faith in going to the cross, along with His subsequent burial and resurrection, that ultimately saves and justifies us, but from a relative perspective it’s our faith in Christ — specifically in what Christ did and accomplished [by dying for our sins] — that justifies us, meaning it’s our faith that Paul’s Gospel is true that justifies us, at least from a relative perspective; besides, justification by the faith that Christ demonstrated by going to the cross and dying for our sins ultimately results in the salvation of all anyway, so that would still support exactly what I’m saying as well, presuming that’s what they actually mean by “justification by faith”).
The real problem, however, is that “justification by faith” just isn’t found anywhere in verse 3, which means that this idea is nothing more than reading one’s assumption into the verse (verses 1 and 2 could be said to be connected to the concept of justification by faith, since those two verses are about our belief, or faith, but verses 3 and 4 are about what Christ and God did, not what we do). The truth is, “Christ died for our sins” could really mean anything we want it to mean at all if it can mean something that isn’t included in, or at least implied by, those specific five words (or at least explained as the meaning somewhere else in the passage, which it isn’t either). For example, it could mean “Alexander the coppersmith did Paul much evil” — or anything else Paul wrote about, for that matter — if we’re picking random things from his epistles that have no connection with the words “Christ died for our sins” on their own. So at the end of the day, it must have something to do with the result of Christ’s death for our sins. And since I can’t think of anything else that the words “Christ died for our sins” might mean in that verse, at least not without reading one’s assumption into the text, not to mention without contradicting verses 1 and 2 (along with other parts of Scripture as well), I’d argue that the salvation of all humanity is logically the onlyresult that Paul could have possibly been referring to there.
It’s really all about the process of elimination. Once you’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable one considers it to be, must be the truth. As I said, “Christ died for our sins” has to mean something, and I really can’t think of anything else it could mean (and I haven’t heard a convincing argument from anyone else that their assumption about what it means has to be what it means either, especially since I’ve never seen any of them demonstrate from Scripture just how those five words can mean what they’re claiming they do). However, if you still do disagree that it’s referring to the salvation of all, please let me know exactly where your interpretation of “Christ died for our sins” is located (whether that interpretation is “justification by faith” or something else entirely) — or at least implied by, or the end result of, what’s stated — in verse 3, all without contradicting verses 1 and 2 (or any other part of the Bible for that matter).
Still, despite all of those facts, it’s also been stated by many people that Paul was only talking about those in the Corinthian church who believed his Gospel when he wrote 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 (or at least only about people who believed his Gospel in general), and that it didn’t include the rest of humanity anywhere in its words, and, as such, the “for our sins” part of this Gospel was only referring to the sins of those specific Corinthians he was writing to who believed that the words in his Gospel are true (or at least only referring to the sins of those who believe his Gospel in general). And yes, it’s true that this part of the chapter technically was specifically about what the Corinthian believers believed, but the important detail most people seem to miss here is that Paul wasn’t telling the Corinthian believers his Gospel for the first time in this epistle; he was simply repeating what he’d previously told them in person — back when they were still unbelievers — which was the Good News that “Christ died for our sins” (and that He was buried and rose again the third day, of course), and not something else.
Another detail that people seem to miss is the fact that this statement was unlikely to have meant anything to the Corinthians on its own when they heard these words, so they would have then asked him what that meant, and Paul would have, of course, explained that it means all sin has now been dealt with because of Christ’s death (and burial and resurrection), and because of this, each of them was guaranteed eventual general salvation (immortality and sinlessness) whether they believed it or not. And unless the Corinthians listening to him speak were severely mentally impaired, they would have understood that this means all humanity must be guaranteed general salvation too, whether they (meaning the rest of humanity) believe it or not as well (since the Corinthians hearing him proclaim his Gospel to them for the first time would have had no reason to believe that this only applied to Paul himself and the people living in Corinth who heard him speak at that particular moment, but excluded everyone else in the world — remember, Paul wrote in this passage that he said “Christ died for our sins” to them when he was with them in person, and not “Christ died for your sins,” as many seem to mistakenly think he said). So yes, it seems clear to me that the only way to understand those specific words in verse 3 of 1 Corinthians 15 is to understand that all sin is dealt with through Christ’s death, and hence all humanity is guaranteed eventual general salvation (which, again, simply refers to being made immortal and sinless and, yes, being justified, whether they had faith while it was still possible to have faith or not — which I say because, when one is standing before Christ at the Great White Throne, things won’t be based on faith anymore, but will rather be based on sight at that time). And verses 1 and 2 tell us that only those who believe the Good News that Christ’s death dealt with all sin (and hence guarantees the eventual general salvation of all humanity) are saved now, at least as far as being guaranteed the special salvation goes (presuming they also understood the rest of the passage, of course, including what it means that “He was buried”).
What he definitely wouldn’t have done when the Corinthians asked him what “Christ died for our sins” means was say, “It means you can now be justified by faith,” because they then would have asked him, “Faith in what?”, and if he then turned around and said, “In Christ’s death for our sins,” that would have been an entirely circular answer (basically meaning that “one can be justified by believing that one can be justified by having faith in the fact that one can justified by faith,” as I was getting at earlier), and they would have walked away completely confused and still unsaved, not knowing what he was talking about. So at the end of the day, if it isn’t the salvation of all, you’re going to need to come up with a good explanation as to what “Christ died for our sins” is telling us without giving a circular answer, and, again, without contradicting verses 1 and 2 (or any of the rest of the Bible).
Now, all of this is where the Calvinists are at least partly correct (or at least those Calvinists who don’t say unscriptural and illogical things such as, “Christ’s death for our sins was sufficient to save all, but efficient to save only the elect,” because if something must be added to His sacrifice in order for someone to be saved — even something as simple as having to choose to believe the right thing — then His death for our sins was, by definition, INsufficient on its own to save anyone, at least as far as the general salvation connected with Paul’s Gospel goes). The consistent Calvinists at least understand that it can only be Christ’s death for our sins (along with His subsequent burial and resurrection) that guarantees the salvation of those who get saved as far as the general salvation in connection with Paul’s Gospel goes, which means that anyone whose sins Christ died for has to be considered to be saved from at least some perspective (at the very least, from a proleptic perspective), because otherwise His death for the sins of those He died for (be it the sins of just the elect or the sins of all humanity) accomplished absolutely nothing for anyone prior to someone hearing about His death for our sins and then choosing to believe that His death for our sins accomplished something for them too, thus making them their own (at least partial) saviours by turning Christ’s ineffectual action (which, by definition, is what His death for our sins would be if it didn’t have any effect on anyone on its own prior to their hearing about it) into an action which — only after one’s contribution (such as the act of choosing to believe the right thing) — actually had an effect on them after all.
Where these Calvinists go wrong is in forgetting that the good news Paul specifically said he preached to the Corinthians when he evangelized to them in person were “Christ died for our sins,” and not “Christ died for your sins,” or “Christ died for the sins of the elect,” or even “Christ died for the sins of believers,” and he certainly didn’t tell them something along the lines of, “Christ can have died for the sins of only you Corinthians who are listening to me right now, but only if you happen to believe that He died for your sins, making it so that He did die for your sins, even though He didn’t actually die for your sins at all if you don’t believe He did” (which is what he would have actually had to have said to them in person if this passage was only about the sins of the Corinthians who believed his Gospel rather than the sins of all humanity). Simply put, the Good News Paul actually preached — that “Christ died for our sins” — would have to already be true for every single person that Paul told this fact to before he spoke the words to them, and not just news which can be true, but only if they happened to hear it and then also believe it’s true, thus somehow turning a lie (which is what “Christ died for our sins” would have been if He hadn’t already died for their sins when Paul preached those specific five words to the Corinthians) into truth (meaning Christ had now died only for their sins specifically, although really only after they’d believed that “Christ died for our sins”). This means that any time Paul preached the Good News that Christ died for our sins (and that He was buried and rose again the third day, of course) to a group of people, or even just to an individual person, it had to already be true that Christ had died for the sins of whichever people or person he was speaking to, because every single person he preached the words “Christ died for our sins” to had to already be included in that word “our,” which means that before Paul even walked up to them, Christ had to have already died for their sins in the past. And the only way that could be the case is if the Good News that “Christ died for our sins” includes at least every single person who was alive at the time, unless it was possible for Paul to walk up to someone and preach his Gospel to them by saying, “Christ died for our sins,” and it somehow turned out that Christ actually hadn’t already died for that person’s sins after all, thus making Paul a liar when he said “Christ died for our sins” to them. And if it was true for every single person alive at the time, there’s no reason it wouldn’t be true for every single person who will have ever lived as well.
Besides, if he only meant that Christ died for the sins of his Corinthian readers specifically (and also for the sins of himself as well, of course, as would have to be the case for the phrase “Christ died for our sins” to make sense when he said it), we’d have to conclude that He didn’t actually die for the sins of anyone else, including the people that Paul wrote to in Rome or Galatia or anywhere else for that matter, and that He didn’t die for your sins either (although, if you do happen to believe that Christ died for everyone’s sins, including your own, yet also believe that 1 Corinthians 15:3 is only referring to the sins of Paul and his Corinthian readers, I have to ask you what the scriptural basis for your belief that He did die for everyone’s sins as well is, and why it isn’t what he wrote in 1 Corinthians 15:3, especially in light of everything you’ve just read about it).
Also, unless every single Corinthian Paul preached to during his visit to that city actually believed his words (which seems extremely statistically unlikely), if Christ’s death for our sins (along with His burial and resurrection, of course) is the only thing that saves us as far as general salvation goes (which it is, since anything we had to add to that type of salvation in order to be saved would mean we helped save ourselves, and would also mean that our general salvation was through works), it would again mean that Paul was lying to anyone who didn’t believe that Christ died for our sins when he spoke those words to them, because that statement would have to include everyone hearing him say those words rather than just the listeners who also believed those words were true (since it would mean that Christ didn’t actually die for their sins after all, considering the fact that anyone whose sins Christ died for has to be saved at least proleptically, as we’ve already discussed). Not only that, it would mean we were also lying anytime we explained that Paul’s Gospel includes the fact that Christ died for our sins, at least if anyone who heard us didn’t believe it either (unless, perhaps, what the Gospel that one actually has to believe in order to be saved is that Jesus died only for the sins of Paul and the Corinthians he spoke to — and that everyone in Corinth he preached his Gospel to got saved — and not that he actually died for you or for anyone else, but then I’d have to again ask you what the basis of our own general salvation really was in the first place if it wasn’t Christ’s death for our sins — along with His burial and resurrection — too).
So yes, Christ’s death for our sins actually had to apply to all humanity (and hence guarantee the general salvation of all humanity), and if someone doesn’t understand that this assertion by Paul means everyone has been saved from at least a proleptic perspective, they can’t be said to be in the body of Christ yet, because Paul said in this passage that his readers were saved when they believed this Gospel/Good News (or, at the very least, they have to believe the truths that are contained within verses 3 and 4 in order to be in the body of Christ, which yes, I’ll acknowledge does mean that someone who doesn’t necessarily understand the truths about what those two verses mean as I just laid them out, but who does still believe the truths themselves — meaning they believe in the salvation of all humanity based solely upon what Christ accomplished — because they understand that truth from other passages of Scripture, technically would still be a true believer and a member of the body of Christ, even if they were confused about the meaning of this passage), and since general salvation is based on Christ’s death for our sins rather than on our faith, the type of salvation he wrote about in the first two verses of the chapter can only be the special salvation — meaning membership in the body of Christ — that they were brought into at the time they truly believed that Christ died for our sins (meaning when they actually understood that all humanity will be saved because of what Christ accomplished). I can’t think of any other alternative interpretations that don’t contradict Scripture. As I already pointed out, verses 1 and 2 say that one is saved if they believe the Gospel he taught them in person, the Gospel which he then repeated in writing in verses 3 and 4. And we know that belief in anything doesn’t save anyone as far as general salvation goes (since adding a requirement for that type of salvation would be teaching salvation by works), so verses 3 and 4 have to be about a different form of salvation from the one referred to in verses 1 and 2. And you just won’t find anything about “justification by faith” — or any other possible interpretation I’ve ever heard either — in verses 3 and 4, so there’s just no room for it to mean anything other than the salvation of all.
If it helps, another way of looking at all this is to recognize that verses 1 and 2 are referring to salvation from a relative perspective, because they’re talking about something that relatively few people will get to enjoy, which is an early experience of the salvation that everyone is eventually going to enjoy (that salvation consisting of being made immortal and sinless and being justified, as we’ve already learned), along with the additional benefits that salvation from a relative perspective also brings (such as membership in the body of Christ, and all that this membership entails as well). Salvation from a relative perspective does require a certain criteria to be met in order to get to enjoy this early experience of salvation, however, even if meeting that criteria (which consists of believing, or having faith, that Paul’s Gospel is true, as Paul explained in those first two verses of the chapter that we’re talking about) is technically a gift from God rather than being generated by ourselves. Verses 3 and 4, on the other hand, are referring to the same salvation, but from an absolute perspective (so the same immortality, sinlessness, and justification, in other words, even if not necessarily the membership in the body of Christ that a relatively small number of people will also get to enjoy), because these two verses are about the reason why everyone eventually gets to enjoy this salvation, with that reason for why everyone will eventually enjoy this salvation being Christ’s death for our sins, along with His burial and resurrection on the third day (and this reason being referred to as Paul’s Gospel). Basically, it’s only salvation from a relative perspective that has a criteria which must be met — which is believing the truths taught in Paul’s Gospel — but everyone gets to enjoy the salvation from an absolute perspective at some point (both those who experience its early form, also known as relative salvation, and those who experience it later) because of what it is that Paul laid out in his Gospel (Christ’s death for our sins, His burial, and His resurrection on the third day), whether they believed his Gospel or not. But if what “Christ died for our sins” means also had a criteria that has to be met in order to experience its end result, then salvation from an absolute perspective would require something from us (even if just faith) in order to make Christ’s death for our sins actually accomplish anything. So once again, verses 3 and 4 can’t be about anything we have to do — not even having faith and being justified by it — but can only be about what God and Christ did, namely guaranteeing the eventual salvation of all humanity because of Christ’s death for our sins, burial, and resurrection on the third day (especially since there isn’t anything mentioned for us to do in that proclamation of Good News Paul listed in verses 3 and 4 anyway; those two verses are all about what God and Christ did, as I just said).
And yes, the statement that “Christ died for your sins” is technically true, no matter who we say it to, because that person would still be included in the “all humanity” that will eventually get to enjoy salvation because of Christ’s death for our sins, which means the statement that “Christ died for the sins of the elect,” or even the statement that “Christ died for the sins of the Corinthian believers,” is also technically true. But regardless of how true any of these statements are, they’re only true because Christ died for everyone’s sins, and none of them are the Gospel message that Paul referred to as “my Gospel” (since the first five words of Paul’s Gospel were “Christ died for our sins”). So if you’re evangelizing, please be careful to share the actual Gospel message that one has to believe in order to be able to be said to have joined the body of Christ, which includes the good news that Christ died for our (all humanity’s) sins, or else you might find yourself to be in trouble for preaching a false “gospel” instead.