Christian Community Forum
Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate fully in the fellowship here, including adding your own topics and posts, as well as connecting with other members through your own private inbox!
1 Cor. 15:47
- Thread starter Quantrill
- Start date
In this chapter Paul (lead by the Holy Spirit) compares Christ to Adam.
The answer to your question is found in verse 45:
"And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit."
The answer to your question is found in verse 45:
"And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit."
Yes, I agree that Paul is writing under inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
In (1 Cor. 15:45) Adam is called 'the first man Adam'. In the same verse Christ is called the 'last Adam'. This raises the question as to why Christ is called the 'last Adam'? But it doesn't answer why Christ is called the 'Second Man in verse (47).
Consider this. The terms 'first' and 'last' interest me here. Why didn't it say Christ is the Second Adam instead of the Last Adam? Or why doesn't it say Christ is the Last Man instead of the Second Man?
Quantrill
Christ is the last Adam, because we need no other/there will be no other, that we might need.
Second man can be read as mankind. The first was earthly, the second spiritual.
Further read:
Second man can be read as mankind. The first was earthly, the second spiritual.
Further read:
What does it mean that Jesus is the second Adam / last Adam? | GotQuestions.org
What does it mean that Jesus is the second Adam / last Adam? In what ways is Jesus like, and not like, Adam?
www.gotquestions.org
Never heard of this, but wouldn't surprise me. Satan is nothing but a copy cat.
Christ is the last Adam, because we need no other/there will be no other, that we might need.
Second man can be read as mankind. The first was earthly, the second spiritual.
Further read:
What does it mean that Jesus is the second Adam / last Adam? | GotQuestions.org
What does it mean that Jesus is the second Adam / last Adam? In what ways is Jesus like, and not like, Adam?www.gotquestions.org
Yes, I agree that Christ is called the 'Last Adam' because there will never be another 'Adam'. Why? because each is representative of the human race. Which goes to 'Federal Headship'. Adam represents the fallen race. Christ represents the redeemed race. And there will never be another representative of the human race. This is why Christ is not called the 2nd Adam. And many fine Christians often refer to him as the 2nd Adam. But He is not and should never be called that. When you say 2nd, you imply there will be a third, fourth, so on.
As to 2nd Man, mankind is certainly involved but how? In other words, Christ is not called the Last Man. He is called the 2nd Man. But how is He the 2nd man. You can't say because He is the 2nd Adam, because it is clear, He is the Last Adam.
Christ is certainly not the 2nd man in the human race as millions were born before He was. Understand that I am not asking because I have an answer that satisfies. My opinion is still needing work. But I believe this 2nd man has meaning.
Quantrill
I believe the answer is found in the context which is the 23 verses of 1 Corinthians 15:35-57. The discussion is about the nature of the resurrected body. And to explain the nature of the resurrected body, Paul is simply drawing parallels and differences between our fleshly forbear, Adam ... and our spiritual forbear, Jesus.
Your generalization brings us to the titles he uses, 'First Adam'', first Man', 'Last Adam', '2nd Man'.
You say 'simply' yet your reply offers nothing to explain why Christ is called the 2nd Man.
Quantrill
Historically, Cain was the second man. Adam first and then Cain.
I have mentioned before that God's intent at the beginning was to have sons and daughters born of Adam and Eve which are 'of Him'. (Gen. 1:28) "multiply, and replenish the earth," (Luke 3:38) "which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God." Or, 'which was of God'.
I believe that everyone in Christ's genealogy, either in (Matt. 1) or (Luke 4) were of God. Sons of God as Adam was. Which means a whole lot of people are exempt from these genealogies.
Go back to (Gen. 4:25-32) Here we have a genealogy from Adam to the flood, or Noah. All these too are only those who are the 'sons of God' or 'of God' Cain is not mentioned. Cain's genealogy is separate and given in (Gen. 4:16-24). They are not counted in the genealogy of the sons of God. Cain's seed did not call on the name of the LORD. It was only when Seth had sons that men began to call on the name of the LORD. (Gen. 4:26)
My point up to here, is that God counts only those 'of Him'. And all those 'of Him' went down in the Fall of Adam, and were lost. Historically, the 2nd son of God was Abel, making Seth the third. But Abel was killed before having children. And Seth, though a son of God, was now fallen.
Now as Adam was the first son of God, the first man, he must not be removed as the 'first man'. For all the human race is connected to him. Jesus Christ is a descendant of Adam. But Christ, in order to save those that are lost, is 'another Adam', the 'Last Adam'. And those 'sons of God' will be counted in Him.
When Christ is called the 2nd Man, He moves into that position based on His power to redeem. But Adam is not removed as the 1st Man as God always intended those born of Adam would be sons of Him. What is removed is all those born of Adam who are not of God. They are not counted. The count goes only to those under the blood. Starting with Adam the 1st man, then to Christ the 2nd Man, and all others after that.
In other words, the genealogy could read, "And Adam begat Christ in Whom is the redemption'. For Christ is the 2nd Man. Just a thought.
One thing for sure is that Adam was saved and a son of God, else he would not be in the count. I say that because there are those who believe he was/is not.
My opinion.
Quantrill
I have mentioned before that God's intent at the beginning was to have sons and daughters born of Adam and Eve which are 'of Him'. (Gen. 1:28) "multiply, and replenish the earth," (Luke 3:38) "which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God." Or, 'which was of God'.
I believe that everyone in Christ's genealogy, either in (Matt. 1) or (Luke 4) were of God. Sons of God as Adam was. Which means a whole lot of people are exempt from these genealogies.
Go back to (Gen. 4:25-32) Here we have a genealogy from Adam to the flood, or Noah. All these too are only those who are the 'sons of God' or 'of God' Cain is not mentioned. Cain's genealogy is separate and given in (Gen. 4:16-24). They are not counted in the genealogy of the sons of God. Cain's seed did not call on the name of the LORD. It was only when Seth had sons that men began to call on the name of the LORD. (Gen. 4:26)
My point up to here, is that God counts only those 'of Him'. And all those 'of Him' went down in the Fall of Adam, and were lost. Historically, the 2nd son of God was Abel, making Seth the third. But Abel was killed before having children. And Seth, though a son of God, was now fallen.
Now as Adam was the first son of God, the first man, he must not be removed as the 'first man'. For all the human race is connected to him. Jesus Christ is a descendant of Adam. But Christ, in order to save those that are lost, is 'another Adam', the 'Last Adam'. And those 'sons of God' will be counted in Him.
When Christ is called the 2nd Man, He moves into that position based on His power to redeem. But Adam is not removed as the 1st Man as God always intended those born of Adam would be sons of Him. What is removed is all those born of Adam who are not of God. They are not counted. The count goes only to those under the blood. Starting with Adam the 1st man, then to Christ the 2nd Man, and all others after that.
In other words, the genealogy could read, "And Adam begat Christ in Whom is the redemption'. For Christ is the 2nd Man. Just a thought.
One thing for sure is that Adam was saved and a son of God, else he would not be in the count. I say that because there are those who believe he was/is not.
My opinion.
Quantrill
Absolutely not.
You can't discount the Old-Testament saints like this.
Enoch, Noah, Abraham and David, to name a few, were not discarded by God, so we can't either.
Do you believe in Replacement Theology, @Quantrill?
To me it seems so, if you can so easily discard the OT saints.
Do you think no-one was saved then in the OT?
How about Enoch and Elijah, that went to heaven without tasting death?
Were they not saved?
And where do you get the notion, that Adam was saved?
He isn't even mentioned in Hebr. 11.
But all those saints that are mentioned there are: "made perfect through us".
PS: Mind you, I have no opinion on Adam being saved or not, I leave judgment to God.
To me it seems so, if you can so easily discard the OT saints.
Do you think no-one was saved then in the OT?
How about Enoch and Elijah, that went to heaven without tasting death?
Were they not saved?
And where do you get the notion, that Adam was saved?
He isn't even mentioned in Hebr. 11.
But all those saints that are mentioned there are: "made perfect through us".
PS: Mind you, I have no opinion on Adam being saved or not, I leave judgment to God.
I don't understand how you think I discounted any Old Testament saints. Please read the first 5 paragraphs again in my post #(11).
Of course I don't think that.
I don't understand why you would ask me if I believed in Replacement Theology. I have said nothing in any post to suggest that. But, no, I don't believe in Replacement Theology.
Adam was 'of God'. (Luke 3:38) Did he fall? Yes. Would God save him? Of course. When God gave the promise of redemption coming via the woman's seed who would destroy Satan's seed,(Gen. 3:15), Adam believed and declared Eve the mother of all living. (Gen. 3:20) Eve believed as she recognized God gave here another seed instead of Abel who Cain slew. (Gen. 4:25) So yes, both Adam and Eve were saved. There is that word 'living' again, directed toward the 'seed'.
A lot of saints in the Old Testament are not written in (Heb. 11). That is only a select few.
If you reread and still disagree, that is fine. But at this point I don't think you understood what I was saying.
Quantrill
Respectfully, brother, I think you are interpreting the "man", as used in this context, too literally. God is using the word here to represent the two key men in history: Adam was the first man physically, Jesus is the second man spiritually. You in fact answered this when you made reference to federal headship. Adam was the federal head of mankind as created; Jesus is the federal head of mankind as recreated. Does this help?
No, it doesn't help. If you are satisfied with your position, fine. But it is no help.
Is the 'Last Adam' to be taken literally? Did God literally mean 'the Last Adam'? Of course He did.
God's choice of words, 'the Second Man' are equally literal. God called Him the Second Man because God sees Him as the Second Man. A literal truth.
'Federal Headship' does nothing to determine if what is said is literal or spiritual. Federal headship is just as literal a truth as any other doctrine in Scripture.
Your use of 'spiritual' to negate what God has said of Christ as the 'Second Man' is disingenuous. It is on par with those who claim the Church is 'spiritual Israel'. They don't want to believe what God has said, so it is spiritual not literal.
Quantrill
Again you have totally misunderstood what I said. But ignore that for a minute. Let me ask you this: in what way or on what basis does God view Christ as the "second man"?
I have done my best in post #(11) to explain that.
That doesn't mean I am satisfied completely with it. But it is where I am right now.
If you read that, it is the basis. I can't say it any better.
You will disagree with it, but it is my basis.
Quantrill
OK. I reread that post and now I understand your reasoning. I disagree with it, as you suggested I would; but at least I understand.
Andiamo
Hanging on to the Throne
From Guzik’s “Enduring Word commentary:
The first perfect man, Adam, gave us one kind of body. The second perfect man, Jesus the last Adam, can give us another kind of body. He is a life-giving spirit.
b. We have all borne the image of the first Adam, and those who put their trust in the last Adam will also bear His resurrection image. From the first Adam, we all are made of dust, but from the last Adam we can be made heavenly. For believers, the promise is sure: we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man.
https://enduringword.com/bible-commentary/1-corinthians-15/
The first perfect man, Adam, gave us one kind of body. The second perfect man, Jesus the last Adam, can give us another kind of body. He is a life-giving spirit.
b. We have all borne the image of the first Adam, and those who put their trust in the last Adam will also bear His resurrection image. From the first Adam, we all are made of dust, but from the last Adam we can be made heavenly. For believers, the promise is sure: we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man.
https://enduringword.com/bible-commentary/1-corinthians-15/
