Introduction
The “preaching of the cross” was the distinctive message of the Apostle Paul. It was the gospel he preached, that Christ died for our sins and rose from the dead for our salvation (1 Corinthians 15.1-4). Paul’s gospel was faith + 0. Neither the Twelve nor the other writers of the New Testament preached this gospel until they learned about it from Paul. And, as a result, Paul’s gospel, his “preaching of the cross,” precipitated a great crisis among the Jewish leadership in Jerusalem that resulted in the Council of Jerusalem (c. 51 A.D.)1 The goal of this study is to examine Paul’s message and how it was unique to his ministry as the “apostle to the Gentiles.”
Usage of “Cross” σταυρός in the New Testament
The table below gives Pauline and non-Pauline use of the word “cross” σταυρός. More important to recognize than use of the word σταυρός by writers other than Paul is their lack of understanding of its conceptual significance. They had no understanding that Christ’s death on the cross was the means by which God had solved the problem of sin. The the significance of the cross, that Christ’s death on the cross solved the problem of sin, was revealed through the Apostle Paul alone.
| Usage of “Cross” σταυρός | |
| Non-Pauline Usage (17x) | Matthew 10.38, 16.24, 27.32, 27.40, 27.42; Mark 8.34, 10.21, 15.21, 15.30, 15.32; Luke 9.23, 14.27, 23.26; John 19.17, 19.19, 19.25, 19.31. |
| Pauline Usage (11x) | 1 Corinthians 1.17, 18; Galatians 5.11, 6.12, 6.14; Ephesians 2.16; Philippians 2.8; Philemon 3.18; Colossians 1.20, 2.14; Hebrews 12.2. |
Paul’s Use of “Cross” σταυρός
Paul used the term “cross” (σταυρός) 10 times, (11x, counting Hebrews).2 In context, the σταυρός was the instrument of torture and death the Romans invented and employed to execute criminals or those who threatened Rome. The Gospel writers employed the word in their accounts of Christ’s crucifixion. But as seen from the table above, no writer used the word outside of the Gospels, except Paul. Put another way, “the apostolic preaching of the cross” is a wholly Pauline phrase.3
| Cross (σταυρός) | Passage |
| 1 Corinthians 1.17 | For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void. |
| Comment: | Paul’s statement demonstrated how different his ministry was from John the Baptist and the Twelve (cf. Matthew 3.11, 28.19; Mark 1.4; Luke 3.3; John 3.22, 4.1-2). Paul lent little importance to water baptism by the time he wrote the Corinthians (about 57 A.D.) By the time he wrote the Ephesians (about 62 A.D.) he had abandoned water baptism entirely (Ephesians 4.5; 1 Corinthians 12.13). |
| 1 Corinthians 1.18 | For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. |
| Comment: | Paul taught that God’s power was ὁ λόγος γὰρ ὁ τοῦ σταυροῦ, “the word [or doctrine] of the cross.” To the world, the cross is foolishness. To those who believe God it is eternal life. The “word of the cross” is that Christ died for our sins and has solved the sin problem. |
| Galatians 5.11 | But I, brethren, if I still preach circumcision, why am I still persecuted? Then the stumbling block of the cross has been abolished. |
| Comment: | The “cross” was Paul’s gospel of faith + 0. This message was a “stumbling block” σκάνδαλον for the Jews of the Jerusalem church who preached circumcision and keeping the Mosaic Law for salvation (Acts 15.1, 5). Paul declared that to require circumcision for salvation “abolished” καταργέω the message of the cross. Those who continued to preach circumcision and keeping the Mosaic Law violated the preaching of the cross and what Peter had declared in Acts 15.11. |
| Galatians 6.12 | Those who desire to make a good showing in the flesh try to compel you to be circumcised, simply so that they will not be persecuted for the cross of Christ. |
| Comment: | The Jews who opposed Paul in Acts 15 taught that Gentiles who responded to Paul’s gospel of grace had to be circumcised and obey the Law of Moses to be saved. They wished to avoid the humiliation and persecution of Christ’s cross which was Paul’s boast (Galatians 6.14 cf. Acts 15.1, 5, 7-11). |
| Galatians 6.14 | But may it never be that I would boast, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. |
| Comment: | God allows no boasting in His presence (1 Corinthians 1.29). The only boasting God permits is in what He has done (1 Corinthians 1.30-31). The cross was Paul’s boast. The one who believes Paul’s gospel of faith + 0 gives all glory to God. |
| Ephesians 2.16 | and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, by it having put to death the enmity. |
| Comment: | Jew and Gentile equality in Christ (Galatians 3.26-28; Ephesians 3.3-7) was a “secret” (μυστήριον) Paul revealed. Paul disclosed that Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection solved the problem of sin and made possible equality of Jew and Gentile. The Twelve knew nothing of this until they learned it from Paul. |
| Philippians 2.8 | Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. |
| Comment: | The Lord Jesus Christ knew the suffering the cross entailed. He prayed to the Father, if possible, to be spared it (Matthew 26.39). His physical suffering was intense but His suffering for the sins of the world was unimaginable. He, the Lord God Almighty, suffered as no one ever suffered to give those who will trust Him life. |
| Philippians 3.18 | For many walk, of whom I often told you, and now tell you even weeping, that they are enemies of the cross of Christ, |
| Comment: | The enemies of the cross of Christ are those who oppose Paul’s gospel of faith + 0, that Christ died for our sins and rose from the dead (1 Corinthians 15.1-4). |
| Colossians 1.20 | and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven. |
| Comment | God reconciled man to God by the “blood of His cross.” The cross was quite literally, the crux of all history, the event to which all history was working. |
| Colossians 2.14 | having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. |
| Comment: | Christ’s work on the cross canceled the “debt consisting of decrees against us.” This was the accounting of sins by the Mosaic Law and moral law. Christ’s last word on the cross was τετέλεσται (it has been finished!) This was His declaration of victory over sin and death. |
| Hebrews 12.2 | fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. |
| Comment: | No one but Paul used the word σταυρός after the Gospels. This lends further evidence of Paul’s authorship of Hebrews. Jesus endured the cross, its shame and suffering, because He loved us. As a result of His sacrifice and victory God has exalted Him to His right hand. |
Use of “Cross” ξύλον
Peter used the word “cross” in 1 Peter 2.24 but instead of σταυρός used ξύλον, which means “club,” “tree,” “cross,” “stocks,” “wood.” The following are the usages of the word in the New Testament with their translations (NASB): Matthew 26.47, 55; Mark 14.43, 48; Luke 22.52, 23.31; Acts 5.30, 10.39, 13.29, Acts 16.24; 1 Corinthians 3.12; Galatians 3.13; 1 Peter 2.24; Revelation 2.7, 18.12, 22.2, 22.14, 19. Of the five verses in Revelation which use the term, four refer to the tree of life.
The Blood of Christ
Closely associated with the cross of Christ is the “blood of Christ” and again it is with Paul that we find the greatest emphasis. The following verses refer to the blood of Christ: Romans 3.25, 5.9; Ephesians 1.7, 2.13; Colossians 1.20; Hebrews 9.12, 14, 22, 10.19, 29, 13.12, 20; 1 Peter 1.2, 19; 1 John 1.7; Revelation 1.5, 5.9, 7.14, 12.11. We do not discover the significance of the “blood of Christ” until after Paul’s salvation and after he wrote about it.4
Conclusion
Paul, the apostle of grace, the apostle of the Gentiles, revealed the significance of Christ’s crucifixion. His message and understanding of Christ’s crucifixion was in stark contrast to that of Peter. For Peter, Christ’s crucifixion was a message of accusation and condemnation–an act that required Jewish repentance before God could establish His earthly kingdom (Acts 2.36, 4.10). But for Paul, Christ’s crucifixion was the message of salvation. It was not an event to be repented of but what he boasted (1 Corinthians 1.23, 2.2, 8; 2 Corinthians 13.4; Galatians 2.20, 3.1, 6.14). For Paul, Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection were Christ’s victory over sin and death.
How did Paul learn the significance of Christ’s work on the cross? He learned it by direct revelation from the risen, glorified Christ. Paul is the one who taught redemption, propitiation, reconciliation, justification, the blood of Christ, etc. Paul’s gospel, that Christ died for our sins and rose from the dead was a “secret” (Romans 16.25) God had kept. Paul declared that the gospel he preached was his gospel (Romans 2.16; 16.25; 2 Timothy 2.8; Galatians 2.2, 7; Galatians 1.11-12). Only much later, through Paul’s teaching, did Peter apprehend and write of the significance of Christ’s death on the cross (1 Peter 1.18-19; cf. 2 Peter 3.15-16).
1 See the author’s article on the Council of Jerusalem: The Great Hinge.
2 Use of the word “cross” (σταυρός) in Hebrews lends linguistic weight to Pauline authorship.
3 Leon Morris’ excellent work, The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross, considers various aspects of the atonement, e.g., redemption, blood, propitiation, reconciliation, etc. When one reads the text and examines its scriptural index one is struck by the abundance of Pauline references and paucity of non-Pauline references to Christ’s work on the cross. The obvious conclusion is that the revelation and explanation of the significance of Christ’s work for salvation came from Paul.
4 The Lord taught the significance of His blood (cf. Matthew 26.28; Mark 14.24; Luke 22.20) but the Twelve clearly did not understand it for they did not preach it. Only after Paul’s teaching did they mention it.
©2013 Don Samdahl. Anyone is free to reproduce this material and distribute it, but it may not be sold.
The context of I Cor. 15:1-4 if about those denying the resurrection. Many teach the ‘death, burial and resurrection’ as Paul expounds here. Does this save a person? Do they believe/teach the all sufficiency of this work at the Cross using this verses? Past, present and future sin being covered? II Cor. 15:18-21 is were we should go to explain Paul’s Gospel. God has reconciled the whole world through the work of Christ at Calvary, he has taken on all the sins of all man kind once. In other words the sins are not keeping us out Heaven but lack on of receiving this truth as ours is. Verse 19 ‘reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them’.
Shawn,
1 Corinthians 15.1-4 is the gospel. Trusting that Christ has died for one’s sins and risen from the grave is what saves a person. Paul reiterated this time and again through his letters. 2 Corinthians 5 is but another expression of this which deals with the scope of Christ’s work. It is our “great commission.”
Totally awesome totally simple! Easily missed by our pride nature.
I am building a library,can you please suggest all the books that I will need to build a library on Paul the apostle for both me and my kids. A Preacher Libary of Paul.
Pete,
Start with works by Cornelius Stam. I’ll have to think about other books that deal specifically with Paul.
hello brother, when Paul uses Abraham and David as examples as imputed righteousness of God just like our salvation today, James says Abraham was justified by works, while Paul says Abraham was not justified by works but soley by grace because he believrd God. A total contradiction. if grace is conditional on works does it remain grace? , Paul says if it be of grace then works has no part in eternal life, but this is not the case in ot or trib where grace must be accompanied by works in order to receive salvation when Jesus comes back or someone enduring to the end, please shed some light on this dynamic if you can.
George,
Please see my article, Faith vs. Works in James: Resolving the Problem.
This article and this on Pauline theology accompanied by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit brings all who are stumbling to a knowledge that only comes by grace. I’ve studied and hold undergrad and m.div yet I applaud you for bringing more truth to my confusion.
Judith,
Thank you. I’m glad the article was helpful. May the Lord continue to enlighten and strengthen you.
Don,
Many thanks for this amazing article. I find every detail understandable, straightforward and scripturally perfect.
May God bless you abundantly.
Bahati
It’s very sad that people like John MacArthur, Hank Hanegraaff, etc, deny the literal shed blood of Christ as necessary for our salvation. Instead, they’ll often simply substitute Christ’s blood with His ‘death.’ I’ve noticed that many ‘revered experts’ in Christendom do this.
Don, Paul said in Eph. 5:18 that a believer is to be continually filled with the Holy Spirit. What does this mean?
Craig,
It means controlled by. The illustration is between being drunk with wine, controlled by alcohol, or being controlled by the Spirit.
Long time. Love your book, have passed out a few.
Your site doesn’t seem to have a link to order your new book, as was previous.
I finally connected with Blurb. Went through all the directions to manufacture a book.
Was presented with a bill for $124.
Haven’t been able to get info on this payment.
Am I ordering ONE book? Or am I giving them carte Blanche to publish and distribute?
‘preciate your input as much as your site.
If there is a special link to order your “Paul” let me know, or I’ll go to Blurb.
Thanks again
Yours in Christ
Jerry,
Thanks. Both books are on Amazon and a link is in the write up on the Paul book. See https://doctrine.org/books. Or, go to Amazon and type my name. The Paul book is not on Blurb. I don’t have any idea what the $124 is. The softcover on Blurb for God’s Programs is $9.67. If you have a problem, I’ll send you a copy of God’s Programs.
Thanks. Ordered Paul.
How did you arrive on Amazon?
I went to Blurb at your suggestion I am not apparently computer literate enough to complete that task.
A little encouragement would be welcome.
Sadly to say, the folks I have passed ‘Programs’ along to rolled their eyes. This includes my Pastor, who accused me of being a “Dispensationalist”. Imagine that. LOL
If it wasn’t for you and Les and recently Jim Devney, I’d just stop trying to get the “Paul” message to those that will listen.
Bless you my son
God bless America
Jerry
Jerry,
Thanks for your order. Hope the Paul book will be a blessing. Most denominations and mainline churches are anti-Dispensationlial and, to a large degree, anti-Paul. Paul is not understood and rarely taught. Your report is not surprising—it only confirms what I have learned from others.
Received “Paul” this morning. Like Deja vu all over again! Your organization skills are legendary.
Mr. Stam is smiling down on you.
Only wish it was online somehow 12 font is tough on these old eyes.
My little tome will be (obviously) similar to yours. But I do include some of Paul R. Van Gorder, with permission.
Congrats on your book. Hope you sell millions.
Jerry
Jerry,
Thanks for your kind and encouraging words. Hope you enjoy Paul. All the best with your work.
Any plans for ebook versions? I keep my library on a tablet.
Thanks for all you do.
Cpb,
The problem with my books as ebooks is the charts. They do not render well in an ebook due to the variable formatting.
Good day everybody.
There is a movie called “Peter and Paul” which in my opinion clearly show through the scriptures the fallout or dispute between Paul and the Jerusalem church regarding the Law (works) and Grace. There is one part that is not biblically accurate regarding Galieo when he tells Paul to leave them the alone. Stephen and the rest. When God made the covenant with Abram, God knocked Abram out (deep sleep) signifying one sided covenant (Gods kind act toward us without any input from Abram). So is the covenant, it is Gods gift imparted to us. This is why the Pharisees hated Paul so much as they hated Christ, they both came to undo the works of the law that could not save but only showed us our deep need for a Savior-Thus the Cross of Calvary whee Christ fulfilled the Holy requirement of the Father.
Why does Paul preach the “Gospel of the Cross”? Peter, James and John never do ? Peter only uses ‘Tree”. God does not lightly throw words around. There must be a reason for the difference. Any thoughts?
Russ,
Peter, James, and John were saved by believing the gospel of the kingdom, which was that Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God. They did not understand the larger significance of Christ’s death and resurrection until the learned about it from Paul. For them, Christ’s death was a crime for which Israel had to repent and His resurrection meant that He was alive and could return as their King. This continued to be their focus for they thought that the Lord would return in their lifetime.
Don
What a blessing you are to me through your website. Thank you for the time and effort you take to encourage believers. I’m unlearning, and relearning, and pressing toward the goal of right division of the Word. You are greatly instrumental in my understanding. Again, thank you.
David,
Thank you!
1 Peter 2:24: 24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.
Peter seems to understand the power of forgiveness & salvation was in the blood.
1. Is the Apostles understanding of the blood the same as the Paul’s understanding of the cross?
2. Did Peter learn, or more importantly, accept Paul’s Gospel?
3. Is Peter understanding faith + 0 as evidenced by “whose stripes you were healed”?
4. Did the Apostles letters get superseded by Paul’s letter and are they canonical because the early church fathers did not see the dichotomy or because God wanted the letters to be included for the Jews during Revelation?
Cig,
See my article, The Great Hinge. It should answer 1-3. Paul’s letters were to the Church. The letters of James, Peter, John, Jude, and Paul’s letter of Hebrews were to Jews who believed the gospel of the kingdom. These are two separate programs. The theme of the latter letters is endurance. Jesus told the Jews who had believed the gospel of the kingdom and who would go through the Tribulation that they had to endure to the end to be saved—not take the mark of the Beast, the unforgivable sin, the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.
Hello,
I just saw this article today. What a clear explanation. I am trying to explain to my grandson, who has been following the Christian Jewish way how there is no way for a Jew to go to heaven except believing on Jesus who died on the cross. He is sidetracked with this by the distorted way the christian Jews are teaching who he follows. I have been listening to the SBN station often since the pandemic and what you have written is explained often on their programs. Thank you.
Betty,
Thank you. I’m glad the article was helpful. Another article, cited in the one you read, The Great Hinge, might also be helpful.
Would Paul abandon the command of Jesus in Matthew 28:18-20 to teach all nations and baptize them in the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit? How can the writer assert that he had abandoned baptism by the time he wrote Ephesians?
Dan,
The Twelve apostles never went to the nations. They confined their ministry to Israel. Paul went to Gentiles. Paul received his instructions from the risen, ascended Christ, not from Christ in His earthly ministry. Paul was God’s unique apostle who began the Church. All Church doctrine comes from Paul’s letters.
Paul did not abandon baptism by the time he wrote Ephesians. Baptism perfectly pictures the death, burial and resurrection as he outlines in Romans 6. How would he dare forsake his own teachings and writings which were considered scripture? I consider this remark at the beginning of the article a very irresponsible assertion and false.
Would Paul abandon the command of Jesus, whom he loved and would die for, to teach all nations and baptize them in the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit? How could anyone suggerst that he had abandoned baptism by the time he wrote Ephesians?
Dan,
There is not water in Romans 6. Romans 6 portrays our identification in Christ’s death and resurrection. This identification comes through the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Why would Paul write in Ephesian 4.5 there was one baptism if he was still practicing it? Which is greater, water or the Spirit?
Dan Babcock, where in the bible do we ever see baptism as a symbol of death or burial? When John the Baptist was baptizing it was for repentance. In Acts 2 when Peter told the Jews they had killed the Christ, they asked what should they do to be forgiven. Peter said: repent and be baptized for the remission of sins. It has nothing to do with the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. Water baptism was required in Judaism. It is not for the Church.
I have a question that is something I believe and yet have arguments about. I have all your books, have studied your works and backed it up with Les. yet I am amiss in finding the verses I need. Help!
Christ on the cross paid our debt for sin. all sins were forgiven at that point. This is my understanding. maybe I have drifted into another theology . Others say one is not forgiven until they believe the gospel. My stand is Blood shed on the cross settled the forgiveness issue. Believing the gospel brings you into the Body. Am I confused? throw me a few verses, I know you have them at the tip of your tongue.
Appreciate all your studies.
Jerry
Jerry,
There are two sides of salvation, the divine and the human. Jesus paid the sins for every person on the cross and His resurrection proved it (2 Corinthians 5.18-19). That is the divine side. That salvation must be appropriated by faith to become effective. One must believe the gospel (1 Corinthians 15.1-4). That is the human side. God provided a way of escape for the Jews fleeing the Egyptians. What did they have to do to be saved? Walk across the parted sea. Divine side, human side. Never changes.
Don, does this apply to Jerry’s question?
Romans 5
10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. 11
Don, does being reconciled mean my/our sins are forgiven? (Both saved and unsaved?) If so, then we need to believe in his life–his resurrection.—–Is this what this passage means?——-
At the end of time when all the unsaved are judged in Rev. 20:12 the bible tells me the lost are judged for their ‘works’. The word ‘sin/sins’ is not mentioned. Again, is what it means or am I reading too much into this single word (works)? Thank you.
Joe,
Yes. Reconciliation means all barriers between God and man have been removed. While we cannot know the particulars of the final judgment, the “works” judgment seems to be to determine degrees of punishment, i.e., more tolerable for Sodom, etc. Thus, “works” equals “good works.”
Don
I have a question, and not sure which topic to ask it under but shouldn’t our Christian Faith have been directed toward rightly dividing the Scriptures by the so called “reformers”. What God “formed” with our apostle Paul is sufficient.
So it seems that God’s purpose was derailed by them missing God’s intent and so the faith practiced by “denominations” since then was “flipped” back to a covenant concept. This fact is very concerning and seemingly impossible to reverse.
After over 70 years of denominational teachings of confusion my wife and I finally “get it” by a few years of reading your work as well as others who have made an honest effort to obey 2 Timothy 2:15.
Our appeal to those we used to fellowship with is to ” study to show “THYSELF” approved before God”. Sadly though almost all that we try to reach are so disinterested and the only scripture we can offer is 2 Corinthians 4:3-4. How tragic!!!
Thanks for all your faithfulness and efforts towards right division, only God can rescue the situation.
Donc,
The “reformers” great work was restoring the truth to the masses that salvation is by grace and faith alone and all theological authority rests in the Bible. This was a huge accomplishment. Unfortunately, these truths were not built upon and they did not grasp that salvation by faith alone is not taught until Paul. Had they understood this, it could have led to recognizing Paul’s apostleship was unique, he was not an appendage to the Twelve, that everything he wrote was new theology. Sadly, after 500 years, Christendom for the most part has not advanced beyond what the reformers taught. Most continue to the teach that Peter and Paul taught the same things, proclaimed the same message of salvation, etc. I find it interesting that the letters of James, Peter, John, and Jude never mention the new covenant, the Lord’s supper, the operational work of the Spirit in the believer’s life. Only Paul mentions these things. This should give one pause and cause one to ask, “What is going one here?” “Why is this?” God must open the eyes. Thank God He opened mine and yours. Satan’s theater of deceit has many acts and scenes.
2 Corinthians 13:5 Paul tells us to examine ourselves to see if we are in the faith. Is this why in 1corinthians 15 -1:4 he tells us its possible we might believe in vain? Am I understanding this correctly? Bren
Brenda,
Paul gave a warning in 1 Corinthians 15.1-4 which he expressed in two phrases. The first was, “if you possess that message I proclaimed to you.” The second is “unless you believed in vain.” Basically, he told the Corinthians they were saved unless they really had not believed the gospel he gave them. If we have believed it, we have forgiveness of sins, eternal life, and are secure.
Don, the two scriptures that have really helped me with this are Ephesians 1:13 and 1 Thessalonians 4:14. Blessed assurance X infinity! I have NO doubts as to my eternal salvation now.
Don
Over time I became to believe that all sin was forgiven at the cross for both believers and non-believers and unsaved missed heaven because they failed to believe in Christ’s work at the resurrection, 1 Cor. 15:1-4. I recently learned a Berean pastor that I follow teaches, ‘man is still in his sin until he believes the glorious gospel of the grace of God.” I know chapter 20 of Rev. teaches the unsaved are judged for their ‘works’. Does unforgiven sin follow the unbeliever into Hell?.
Joe,
Christ has paid for everyone’s sins but one must appropriate it by faith. I think the “works” in Revelation 20 are primarily those acts by which one seeks to be approved by God. They are examined and then the book of life is opened to see if the individual’s name has the righteousness of Christ appropriated by faith.
“ ‘man is still in his sin until he believes the glorious gospel of the grace of God.”
Nathaniel Hawthorne wrote the Scarlett Letter to address this fallacy. The Puritan pastor, had faith, was already visible elect, but then committed adultery. Now what? How is that reconciled?
DJ,
A believer has his sins forgiven. It does not mean he cannot sin.