And last of all he
was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. (1 Cor 15:8)
Recently, a Reformed apologist appealed to this text to support sola
scriptura and the cessation of special revelation with the death of the last
apostle. There are many problems with such, including the fact that no biblical
text can be used, exegetically, to support the doctrine of Sola Scriptura; as
James White and other Protestant apologists admit, for sola scriptura to
operate as the sole infallible rule of faith, there must first be tota
scriptura, and as Paul et al were writing during times of special revelation,
he could not be teaching sola scriptura. Indeed, White et al have admitted on
occasion that Jesus, the apostles, and the members of the New Testament Church
did not teach or practice this doctrine! For more, see the section
"Falling at the First Hurdle: Why Sola Scriptura is an exegetical
impossibility" in my book-length work Not
By Scripture Alone: A Latter-day Saint Refutation of Sola Scriptura.
Further, the “last of all” is not a reference to Paul being the last
ever apostle; instead, in light of the context, it means that, of the apostles
who witnessed the resurrected Jesus, he was the last (in a very untimely
manner; he likens it rather graphically to an abortion) in that specific group. As we read in the
preceding verses:
For I delivered unto
you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins
according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the
third day according to the scriptures: And that he was seen of Cephas, then of
the twelve: After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of
whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. After
that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. (1 Cor 15:3-7)
Even those who come from traditions that embrace sola scriptura do not
read into the phrase "last of all" justification for belief in a
cessation of special revelation. Note the following from Lenski (Lutheran):
“And last of all, as
to the dead foetus, he appeared also to me.” This concludes the list of
witnesses who were to attest Christ’s resurrection to the world. Other
appearances such as that to Stephen, Acts 7:55, to Paul, Acts 18:9, etc., had
an entirely different purpose. A tone of deep humility accompanies the words
“also to me”; it is expressive of Paul’s feeling that as a non-believer he had
no right whatever to be thus distinguished by the Lord. (R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul’s First and
Second Epistle to the Corinthians [Minneapolis, Minn.: Augsburg Publishing
House, 1963], 638)
Even John Calvin himself did not view it in such a way! Note the
following from his commentary on First Corinthians:
8. Last of all to me, as to one born prematurely, He now introduces
himself along with the others, for Christ had manifested himself to him as alive,
and invested with glory. As it was no deceptive vision, it was calculated
to be of use. for establishing a belief in the resurrection, as he also makes
use of this argument in Ac 26:8. But as it was of no small
importance that his authority should have the greatest weight and influence
among the Corinthians, he introduces, by the way, a commendation of himself
personally, but at the same time qualified in such a manner that, while he
claims much for himself, he is at the same time exceedingly modest. Lest any
one, therefore, should meet him with the objection: "Who art thou that we
should give credit to thee?" he, of his own accord, confesses his
unworthiness, and, in the first place, indeed he compares himself to one that
is born prematurely, and that, in my opinion, with reference to his
sudden conversion. For as infants do not come forth from the womb, until they
have been there formed and matured during a regular course of time, so the Lord
observed a regular period of time in creating, nourishing, and forming his
Apostles. Paul, on the other hand, had been cast forth from the womb when he
had scarcely received the vital spark. There are some that understand the term
rendered abortive as employed to mean posthumous; but the former term is much more suitable,
inasmuch as he was in one moment begotten, and born, and a man of full age. Now
this premature birth renders the grace of God more illustrious in Paul than if
he had by little and little, and by successive steps, grown up to
maturity in Christ.
Craig Keener, in his commentary on 1-2 Corinthians, refutes such
eisegesis of 1 Cor 15:8 in a footnote which reads thusly:
He does not claim to
be the last apostle (cf. 1 Thess 1:1; 2:7) or to have had the final vision (2
Cor 12:1), but to be the final resurrection witness in the chain of appearances
he lists (cf. 9:1). (Craig S. Keener, 1-2
Corinthians [The New Cambridge Bible Commentary; Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2005], 125 n. 274)
Joseph Fitzmyer also refuted the claim this passage teaches Paul
believed himself to be the final apostle, even citing a parallel with Ignatius’
epistle to the Romans:
Still more important is how Paul
at the beginning of the verse explains his status as the “last” of those to
whom the risen Christ appeared, not that he is “the final apostle” (pace Jones, “1 Corinthians 15:8”). He
makes no distinction between the risen Christ’s appearance to him (after
Pentecost) and the appearances to others between the day of the discovery of
the empty tomb and the Ascension. He is not trying to say that there were no
further appearances of the risen Christ after him, but is only explaining the
sense of the gen. “of all,” as he puts himself at the bottom of the list, even
though he claims to be an “apostle” of equal rank. It is best understood as an
expression of humility, as in Ignatius, Rom.
9.2: “because I am not worthy, being the last of them, and a miscarriage”(so
Spicq, TLNT, 1465; cf. Boman,
“Paulus”; Fridrichsen, “Paulus”; Bjorck, “Nochmals”; Schneider, TDNT, 2:465–67; Hollander and van der
Hout, “Apostle Paul,” 229–32). (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, First Corinthians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary
[AB32; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008], 552)
Such fits well with what two Latter-day Saint scholars wrote about
this phrase:
The phrase εσχατον δε παντων (eschaton de pantōn), "and last of
all," should not be taken to mean that Paul saw himself as the last person
who ever saw the risen Lord. He is rather saying that, on his list, he is the
last witness he will mention. (Richard D. Draper and Michael D. Rhodes, Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians
[Brigham Young University New Testament Commentary; Provo, Utah: BYU Studies,
2015], 684)
Note also the following lengthy but informative commentary from Anthony Thiselton:
8–9 The emphasis lies not simply on Paul’s place among
the witnesses, and it is not primarily, if at all, a defense of his apostleship
as such (against P. von Osten-Sacken; with Murphy-O’Connor and Mitchell). The
emphasis lies in the undeserved grace of
God (explicated further on v. 10), who chooses to give life and new
creation to those reckoned as dead, or, in Paul’s case, both a miscarried, aborted foetus whose stance
had been hostile to Christ and to the
new people of God.
The well-known exegetical crux of v. 8 turns
on our understanding and translation of the phrase ὡσπερεί (NRSV), as
to one untimely born; REB, it was
like a sudden, abnormal birth; NIV, as
to one abnormally born; NJB, as
though I were a child born abnormally; AV/KJV, as of one born out of due time; Barrett, as to one hurried into the world before his time; Moffatt, by this so-called “abortion” of an apostle).
Munck begins his careful and well-argued study of the Greek word in question by
observing that “the term ἔκτρωμα in 1 Cor 15:8 is difficult to interpret. This is
its sole appearance in the NT, and the context gives no clear indication of its
significance.” Earlier interpretations, Munck points out, stressed “the
suddenness and violence of Paul’s call,” but more recently writers have focused
on the Greek word as a term of abuse applied to Paul by his opponents. Munck
argues convincingly for a third option, namely, the meaning “a prematurely born
dead foetus” which reflects a use found in the LXX to denote dire human
wretchedness. Arguably he could and should have gone one step further: grace gives life to the dead.
Broadly we may distinguish between the
following claims: (i) Because Paul’s call came out of the blue when he was set
against the church, ἔκτρωμα denotes the contrast
between this sudden, disruptive, violent experience and the steady nurture of
faith accorded to Peter and the Twelve. Hence it denotes one born abnormally (NIV, REB, NJB; and in effect NRSV, AV/KJV, and
Barrett). Calvin, Grotius, Heinrici, and Schneider understand it as a reference
to sudden birth. (ii) A. Fridrichsen
and G. Björck argue that the Greek word may be used as a term of abuse. Perhaps
the early Christian believers called him a
monster in the days when he persecuted the church. Anticipating v. 9, Paul
states that the resurrected Jesus Christ appeared to him who was a monster.
Björck notes that in modern Greek the word denotes a monster or freak and
traces back its semantic history. (iii) Weiss and Parry take up the use of the
term as one of abuse, but suggest that some at Corinth applied the term to Paul
in contrast to, e.g., Peter and Apollos. Weiss, however, retains the more traditional
meaning miscarriage (Fehlgeburt), even when it is used
as a term of abuse (Schimpfwort, almost swear word). Collins follows Weiss
with miscarriage, after examining its
LXX backgrounds. (iv) Although it is not his first choice, Munck believes that
there could be a play in words between παῦλος, the small
one, and ἔκτρωμα, of short stature. This would then serve as an explication of ἔσχατος (v. 8), last, and especially ὁ ἐλάχιστος, least, in v. 9. He is last and least; the dwarf. This has the merit of
harmonizing with most patristic exegesis in understanding this as a term of
humility. (v) However, many early writers hold that the humility arises from a
comparison, i.e., “as unworthy to be called an apostle as an abortion to be considered
a fully human person.” (vi) The view advocated here coheres with that of Luther
and the Reformers. Luther observes that Paul compared himself with “a dead
child … decayed fruit … until I was reborn by Christ,” while Calvin also notes:
“This abortive birth makes the grace of God all the more evident in Paul’s case
than if he had grown up in Christ little by little, step by step.” Munck has no
difficulty in showing that in the LXX “a man in the depths of misery is
compared to a stillborn child” (cf. Num 12:12; Job 3:16; Ps 57[58]:9; Isa 14:9
[Symmachus]). Munck concedes, however, that he cannot decide between his two
most favored interpretations ([iv] and [vi]) because sometimes the Greek
appears to denote a child born dead, often before its time, but in other
instances it may denote the birth of a deformed child, whether or not this is
also an abortion. Given Paul’s association of his encounter with the
resurrected life as one of new creation (2 Cor 4:6; cf. Gen 1:3–5), it seems
most probable that Paul perceives himself as one who was unable to contribute
anything to an encounter in which God’s sovereign grace was all, even to the
extent of giving life to one who was humanly beyond all hope. This precisely
reflects the theme of resurrection as God’s sovereign gift of life to the dead
(not to those who already possess capacities of self-perpetuating survival)
throughout this chapter. Finally it coheres well with G. W. E. Nickelsburg’s
arguments that Isa 49:1 (as well as Jer 1:5) and Gal 1:15 play an important
part in this “apostolic self-deception.” Paul is appointed before birth by God’s grace.
Although we dissent from those who see
15:8–10 as part of a “defense” of Paul’s apostleship, Peter Jones is correct to
understand Paul’s use of last of all
(especially in relation to all the
apostles of v. 7) as indicating not only that Paul implicitly included
himself within this apostolate but also that “he is conscious of being called
to bring the apostolic gospel to completion.… The closure with Paul of the
apostolic circle” reflects “a solemn claim concerning his apostolic ministry
that is grounded … in revelation.…” On the other hand, as Mitchell points out,
to make Paul’s apostleship, let alone a “defense” of it, part of 1 Corinthians
15 overlooks the very point that Paul is making: “Paul is not the subject of 1
Cor 15”; this “subject” is God; God’s
grace or gift of new creation; and resurrection.
Some translations reduce the theological force of Paul’s
self-effacement and his use of the superlative (not elative) ἐλάχιστος, the very least (v. 9), by proposing a moralizing translation of ἱκανός, I who am not competent to be called an apostle. ἱκανός denotes (with the
negative) insufficiency of human
resources (another key theme of ch. 15 and resurrection as against
“natural” immortality). Hence NIV’s do
not even deserve to be called is misleadingly moralistic, while I am not fit (NJB, REB; NRSV, unfit) risks possible misunderstanding
of Paul’s point (cf. AJ/KJV, am not meet).
Paul genuinely laments that he is least,
in the light of his privilege at being included within the apostolate. This
makes it virtually certain that this is not the context in which a wordplay
with ἔκτρωμα as short of stature would be appropriate.
It would suggest an entirely inappropriate self-parody. ἱκανός suggests Paul’s theological awareness that he
cannot “reach up to” or “aspire to” his calling; he accepts it as a gift of
grace. As Munck and others have shown, Paul’s persecuting the church
underlines the sovereign initiative of God’s grace as intervening gift and
allows no room for so-called psychological explanations concerning supposed
subconscious guilt feelings which “contribute to the experience of sovereign
call.” Paul compares this call to that of Jeremiah “before birth” (cf. Gal
1:13–17 and 1 Cor 9:16–18). The relative pronoun ὅς is not used
as a relative (AV/KJV, that am, i.e.,
who am) but in a causal sense, to
represent ἐπεὶ ἐγώ. (Anthony
C. Thiselton, The First Epistle to the
Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text [New International Greek
Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2000], 1208–1211)
Note the following comments from John Chrysostom, Augustine, and
Ambrosiaster which are representative of how early Christians interpreted this
passage:
(1) John Chrysostom
See how Paul is bursting with words of humility.
For he says, Last of all … he appeared
also to me. For this reason he does not put himself on a par with the
others. And he adds, as to one untimely
born, and that he is the least of
the apostles and did not deserve the title “apostle.” Not content with
this, he gives reasons and proofs in order to make his humility not seem a
matter of words alone: he was as one
untimely born because he was the last to see Jesus; he was unworthy to be
called an apostle because he persecuted the Church. Someone who has ordinary
humility does not do this. A person who provides reasons why he should be
humble speaks entirely from a contrite heart. This is why Paul mentions these
same things in another text, saying, I
thank him who has given me strength for this, Christ … because he judged me
faithful by appointing me to his service, though I formerly blasphemed and
persecuted and insulted him (1 Tim 1:12–13). But why does Paul also speak
highly of himself, when he says, I
worked harder than any of them? He saw that the situation required it. If
he had not said this, but had only disparaged himself, how could he have the
confidence to name himself as witness and count himself with the rest, saying, Whether then it was I or they, so we preach
(1 Cor 15:11)? A witness must be trustworthy and a person of consequence.…
As we hear these words, let us parade our
weaknesses and keep silent about our successes. And if we are forced to mention
our successes, let us do so with humility and attribute everything to the grace of God. This is what Paul does:
he condemns everything about his previous way of life and attributes everything
subsequent to grace so as to use
every means to demonstrate God’s compassion: God saved someone like Paul and, once
he had saved him, made him what he was. So, let no one living a wicked life
despair; let no one living virtuously be overconfident. Let the former be
fearful and the latter zealous. The careless and lethargic will not be able to
maintain a virtuous life, and the zealous will not lack the means to escape
evil. The blessed patriarch David is an example of both of these points. When
he grew a little lethargic, he fell into great sin (2 Sam 11:2, 4). But when
his conscience pricked him, he returned to his former greatness. You see, both
despair and false security are equally bad. For despair quickly pulls a person
down from the heights of heaven, and false security prevents the fallen from
rising.
(2)
Augustine
Now many people are kept from becoming strong because
they believe that they are already strong. Only a person who realizes that he
is weak in himself can derive strength from God.… Paul was weak enough to say, I am unfit to be called an apostle, because
I persecuted the church of God. Then why, Paul, are you an apostle? By the grace of God I am what I am. I
am not worthy, but by the grace of God I
am what I am. Paul was weak; you, Lord, made him perfect. And now since he
is what he is by the grace of God,
see what follows: and his grace toward
me was not in vain, but I worked harder than any of them. Take care, dear
Paul, that you do not lose by arrogance what you earned by weakness. I am unfit to be called an apostle:
well said, well said. By his grace I am
what I am, and his grace toward me was not in vain: all very good. But I worked harder than any of them—this
sounds as if you have begun to attribute to yourself what just now you ascribed
to God. But see what follows: though it
was not I, but the grace of God which is with me. Well done, weak man. You
will be most highly exalted because you are not ungrateful. You are the same
Paul, small in yourself but great in the Lord. You are the one who asked the
Lord three times that the thorn in the
flesh, the messenger of Satan (2
Cor 12:7), by whom you were being buffeted, should be removed from you. What
did God say to you? What did you hear when you asked this? My grace is sufficient for you. For my power is made perfect in
weakness (2 Cor 12:9). Paul was indeed weakened, but you, Lord,
strengthened him. (Robert Louis Wilken and Judith L. Kovacs, eds., 1 Corinthians: Interpreted by Early
Christian Commentators (trans. Judith L. Kovacs; The Church’s Bible; Grand
Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2005), 246–248)
Ambrosiaster:
8Last of all, as to one untimely born, he
appeared also to me.
Jesus appeared to Paul first in the sky, and later
when he was praying in the temple.4 By untimely Paul means that he was born again outside time, because he
received his apostleship from Christ after the latter had ascended into heaven. (Ambrosiaster,
Commentaries on Romans and 1-2
Corinthians [ed. Thomas C. Oden and Gerald L. Bray; trans. Gerald L. Bray;
Ancient Christian Texts; Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic, 2009], 192.
To claim that 1 Cor 15:8 supports the Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura and the theological presuppositions thereof (e.g., cessation of special revelation after the inscripturation of the final book of the New Testament//the death of the last apostle, etc) is eisegesis, not exegesis.
