1 Corinthians 15:1-4 and unlimited atonement

[Jimmy the Greek]

I came across a blog argument for unlimited atonement derived from 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 specifically verse 3:
"For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures."

It went something like this: Premise 1: When Paul first presented his readers with the gospel described here, they were unbelievers. Premise 2: This verse indicates that, even as unbelievers, Paul told them "Christ died for your sins." Conclusion: This statement could only have been made on the basis of a universal atonement.

I would first note that Paul is speaking after the fact and is not quoting his message. The inference of the second premise therefore seems to be a stretch at best. But I can't recall reading anything on this perspective. have you guys??

 

[reformedman]

This does not mean that Paul proclaims the gospel in the form of, "Christ died for you". He is not giving the gospel in verses 1-4, but explaining about the gospel.

My proof:
Paul never heard this gospel, Jesus was his direct call and conversion.
Therefore, when he said, 'I recieved this as first importance' He is not quoting sentence by sentence what he heard some evangelist give to him, instead, verses 1-4 are an explanation of the gospel.

Added Note:
You can find the gospel defined in many different ways in various parts of the bible, places that say things like, 'this is the gospel of Christ...." or "this is the gospel of salvation....." or "this is the gospel by which you are saved...." and after these words, it then explains the gospel.

 

[larryjf]

I came across a blog argument for unlimited atonement derived from 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 specifically verse 3:
"For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures."

It went something like this: Premise 1: When Paul first presented his readers with the gospel described here, they were unbelievers. Premise 2: This verse indicates that, even as unbelievers, Paul told them "Christ died for your sins." Conclusion: This statement could only have been made on the basis of a universal atonement.

I think Paul can rightly say "Christ died for our sins" when recounting the preaching to the Corinthians because he now believes them to be elect. The fact that he uses these words in recounting the preaching does not mean that he used them in the actual preaching.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

And what if he did? It does not follow that Paul was making an "inclusive" statement regarding all the listeners. Had he indeed spoken thus, he could just as easily have meant "the group to which I belong," implying: "and which you may join, in which case it what I said about US would be true for you as well, once you belong to US." But, as already pointed out, there is actually no indication here of the precise terminology used by Paul in an initial gospel encounter with a group exclusively made up of unbelievers. That is back-reading into this text, written to a group of professing Christians.

Be that as it may, the whole argument is predicated upon the notion that the gospel is something ONCE proclaimed, and which is upon reception relegated to the past. But the very language of the passage militates against this reading. The gospel which Paul "preached" was preached to many of these readers for 1.5 years at the very least. And they *presently* stand in it (perfect active indicative), they "are being saved" by IT, and they "are holding fast" to IT.

When Paul writes that he delivered to them "First", en protois, it does not necessarily mean "the initial word" but rather that which is "of first importance." They certainly would have heard the gospel early and often. And those who were believing in it, and also were reading this letter, would certainly acknowledge themselves among those of "us" whose sins were died for.