Now I would remind you, brothers and sisters,
of the good news that I proclaimed to you, which you in turn received, in which
also you stand, through which also you are being saved, if you hold firmly to
the message that I proclaimed to you--unless you have come to believe in vain.
For I handed on to you as of first importance which I turn had received: that
Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, and that he was
buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the
scriptures. (1 Cor 15:1-4 NRSV)
Some critics
of the Church, in an attempt to claim LDS theology on baptism, theosis, and
other doctrines are antithetical to the true gospel as they are not explicitly
mentioned in the above text. Indeed, some critics believe that this text
presents, albeit simply, the one true gospel. As one such critic, Matthew
Paulson, wrote after quoting this pericope:
This gospel is what saved the Corinthians and
it is what saves people today. If people truly believe gospel they will be
saved. However, if they believe something different then the Apostle Paul says
they have believed in vain. (Matthew A. Paulson, Breaking the Mormon Code: A Critique of Mormon Scholarship Regarding
Classic Christian Theology and the Book of Mormon [Livermore, Calif.:
WingSpan Press, 2006, 2009], 37)
Elsewhere,
Paulson wrote:
In Christianity, the saving knowledge is the
simple gospel message (1 Cor. 15:1-4). (Ibid., 79)
Notice that
a number of things are not mentioned
by Paul in this pericope, such as the virginal conception and birth of Jesus;
the two natures of Jesus; the personal pre-existence of Jesus, the deity and
personality of the Holy Spirit, and other core doctrines, all of which Paulson and
others would claim are central to the Gospel and that one knowingly rejecting
such doctrines puts one outside the realm of salvation, which should caution
even those who agree with Paulson and his Protestant theology from absolutizing
this pericope.
Furthermore,
note that Paul is addressing those who already had been baptised. Why is this
significant? Some use this passage against baptismal regeneration, notwithstanding
this being explicitly taught by Paul in 1 Cor 6:9-11 and 12:13. As three New
Testament scholars noted about Paul’s theology of baptism and its relationship
to justification wrote:
Paul himself ties
justification to baptism. This is evident, for example, in 1 Corinthians:
You were washed,
you were sanctified, you were justified in the
name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God. (1 Cor 6:11)
In this verse, Paul
makes a direct connection between being “washed” [apolouō] and being
“justified” [dikaioō]” (1 Cor 6:11). Some commentators dispute a
baptismal reading, insisting that the language is simply intended as a metaphor
rather than an allusion to ritual immersion. This is unlikely. First, not only
does the New Testament indicate that baptism was widely practiced in the early
church, we know that the ritual had an important place in the communal life at
Corinth. Its significance was apparently so well established that it became the
basis of quarrels that Paul felt forced to address at the very outset of this
epistle (cf. 1 Cor 1;11-17). Second, the language of 1 Corinthians 6:11 uses
terminology employed in other Pauline texts where baptism is in view. Believers
are said to be “washed . . . in the name of the Lord Jesus
Christ,” language which envokes the baptism controversy Paul addressed in 1
Corinthians 1, which specifically swirls around the “name” into which believers
have been “baptized” (1 Cor 1:13-14). In addition, the washing described in 1
Corinthians 6:11 is also associated with the “Spirit,” who is identified with
baptism later in the same epistle: “For in the one Spirit we
were all baptized into one body” (1 Cor 12:13). As other
interpreters recognize, 1 Corinthians 6 even goes on to use the language of
“members” (1 Cor 6:15), anticipating the discussion of Christians as “members”
of Christ’s body later in the letter (cf. 1 Cor 12:14-27). Given these
connections to baptismal passages, to insist that the language of washing
involves a mere metaphor seems like special pleading. Finally, physical baptism
is linked to spiritual washing in other texts (cf. Acts 22:16; Eph 5:26; Titus
3:5; Heb 10:22). First Corinthians 6 is thus best read as an early Pauline expression
of this theology.
Paul also talks about
baptism in other places where justification is in view . . .we noted Paul’s
teaching that “whoever has died is justified [dedikaiōtai]
from sin” (Rom 6:7 NRSV, slightly adapted . . . this “justifying death” appears
related to baptism:
What then are we to
say? Should we continue in sin in order that grace may abound? By no means! How
can we who died to sin go on living in it? Do you not know that all of us who
have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his
death? Therefore we have been buried with him by baptism into
death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the
Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.
For if we have
been united with him in a death like this, we will certainly be
united with him in a resurrection like his. We know that our old self
was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be destroyed, and
we might no longer be enslaved to sin. For whoever has died is
justified from sin. (Rom 6:1-7 NRSV, slightly adapted)
This is an extremely
significant passage, for it shows that baptism not only causes one to be “in
Christ” but that Paul also views the sacrament in terms of co-crucifixion and
justification. For Paul, baptism justifies because it is a real
participation in the crucifixion, death, burial, and resurrection of Christ.
(Brant
Pitre, Michael P. Barber, and John A. Kincaid, Paul A New Covenant Jew: Rethinking Pauline Theology [Grand Rapids,
Mich.: Eerdmans, 2019], 202-3, emphasis in bold added)
For a
discussion of 1 Cor 1:17, a commonly used proof-text against baptismal
regeneration, as well as Acts 2:38 and 1 Pet 3:19-21, two of the strongest
texts in favour of baptismal regeneration, see:
Paulson and
other Protestants tend to misread Paul’s comment as being exhaustive of what
one must believe to be saved and be a true Christian as they believe it must be
explicitly taught in the Bible for it to be true, informed by the false
doctrine of Sola Scriptura. On this, see:
It should be
noted that Joseph Smith himself said something similar. In the Elders Journal, July
1838, p. 44, we read:
Question 20th. What are the fundamental
principles of your religion.
Answer. The fundamental principles of our
religion is the testimony of the apostles and prophets concerning Jesus Christ,
“that he died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended up into
heaven;” and all other things are only appendages to these, which pertain to
our religion.
Such should
be compared to 3 Nephi 27:13-21, wherein Christ gives a narrow definition of “gospel”
as one that means the teachings relating to the life, mission, atoning death,
and resurrection of Jesus. Latter-day Saints have no issue with the term ”gospel”
being narrowly defined, but would take exception with Paulson et al., absolutizing
the text to the exclusion of salvific ordinances and even core doctrines such
as Jesus’ personal pre-existence.
As we can
see, 1 Cor 15:1-4 should not be absolutised as Paulson and others wish to do as
if such is an exhaustive presentation of the Gospel; indeed, as noted above, if
it is to be read in that way, many Christological and other core issues
doctrines are peripheral at best, not central as Paulson himself would argue!
For more responses to Paulson's book, see:
Listing of articles responding to "Breaking the Mormon Code"
