John Niemelä received a B.A. (University of Minnesota), and earned the Th.M. and Ph.D. degrees in New Testament Literature and Exegesis from Dallas Theological Seminary. John is Professor of Hebrew and Greek at Chafer Theological Seminary. His email address is languages@chafer.edu.
Introduction
Within Christendom, some think that believers lack eternal security. They observe believers (1) completely departing from their walk with God and (2) imagine them going to the Lake of Fire. By contrast, those with a perseverance view [1] deny both points. They contend that God will neither allow any regenerate person (1) to depart completely from walking with Him nor (2) to end up in the Lake of Fire.
Each theory makes one true assertion: The first correctly asserts that some believers stop walking with the Lord. The second rightly affirms that no believer can end up in the Lake of Fire. As painful as it is to see eternally saved friends depart from the Lord, it does happen. Even so, John 6:47 indicates that they still possess eternal life, Most assuredly, I say to you, the one who believes [2] in Me [Christ] has everlasting life. [3]
1 Corinthians 3:10–15 contrasts best- and worst-case scenarios. In the former case, the believer not only has eternal life, but full reward. In the latter, no believer can lose eternal life, even if he forfeits all eternal reward.
Unfortunately, it has become common for people to claim that 1 Corinthians 4:5 (or some other passage) proves that 1 Corinthians 3:15 does not actually mean that a believer at the Judgment Seat of Christ [4] might forfeit all reward.
The following H. A. Ironside quote does not advocate fruit inspection (examining a person’s works in a vain effort to verify that he has ‘truly’ believed). However, his words lend themselves to that approach.
The apostle goes to the farthest extreme here [portraying a fire consuming all of a believer’s work in 1 Corinthians 3:15], but in the next chapter he shows that there will be no believer of whom this is actually true. Chapter 4 verse 5 reads: “Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God.” He will find something in every believer’s life that he can reward [emphasis mine]….[5]Rather, 1 Corinthians 3:15 says what it means and means what it says. That is, a believer who forfeits all eternal reward, nonetheless has eternal security. This article will consider 1 Corinthians 3:10–15, as well as 1 Corinthians 4:5; James 2:14; and Ephesians 2:10. In context, none of these passages advocate inspecting the quality and quantity of works for determining whether a person has ‘truly’ believed.
1 Corinthians 3:10-15
An Utter Loss for the Believer
Paul pictures a fire at the Bema Seat testing the quality of each believer’s work: the fire will test each one’s work, of what sort it is (1 Corinthians 3:13). The fire distinguishes three excellent materials (gold, silver, and precious stones) from three substandard ones (wood, hay, and straw). The apostle Paul concludes his teaching by juxtaposing two extreme cases to form a doctrinal continuum:
Fully Rewardable Believer
If anyone’s work which he has built on it [Christ, the foundation] endures, he will receive a reward (1 Corinthians 3:14).Unrewardable Believer
If anyone’s work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire (1 Corinthians 3:15).These verses present two distinct scenarios: Over the course of their lives as believers, [6] both do good works, but only one believer builds something acceptable to the Lord. Verse fourteen portrays the Christian whose work consists of gold, silver, and precious stones. Despite the fire, his work remains, resulting in reward. Verse fifteen depicts the believer whose work contains no gold, silver, or precious stones. Fire destroys his work, leaving him without reward. One believer has full reward and another forfeits it entirely. Context does not explicitly depict partially rewarded believers. Of course, Paul does not deny that this may result when believers have a reduced quantity of gold, silver, and precious stones. Even so, he only mentions the two extreme cases: fully rewarded and absolutely unrewarded.
The Yardstick Illustration
Comparing 1 Corinthians 3:14–15 with a yardstick may clarify Paul’s thinking.
The zero-value depicts the believer whose work is entirely burned up, while the thirty-six signifies Paul’s other extreme, a believer with full reward.
The function of a yardstick is to serve as a standard, the basis for measuring each case. For example, a seamstress may measure a remnant of cloth. She places the zero-value on the left side of the cloth and reads the number against its right edge. An eighteen-inch piece is half a yard.
On the other hand, a yardstick that lacks the end points cannot serve as a standard. See below.
The entire range is a standard for measuring rewardability. (Nothing short of an entire range will suffice.) 1 Corinthians 3:14–15 shows that Paul uses the full range of that standard. Specifically, he refers to both the fully rewarded believer and the one forfeiting all reward. Since he applies the full range to two test cases, no expositor can arbitrarily discount the extremities of his yardstick. Although Paul emphasizes the extremes, the following comment is oblivious to the main point, “The workmen will not lose their salvation, but they will lose a portion of any reward they might be expecting [emphasis mine].” [7] The italicized words in this citation are gratuitous and misleading. Paul contrasts the person whose collective work survives (an abundance of gold, silver, and precious stones) with one who lacks these materials. The only basis for rewarding the first believer is gold, silver, and precious stones. On the other hand, the second believer forfeits all basis for reward, so he receives none. Paul does not explicitly mention one with a collective work consisting of a minute quantity of gold, silver, and precious stones. Rather, he illustrates with a believer whose collective work is completely devoid of gold, silver, and precious stones. The man forfeits all reward, yet he is a believer: He is saved, yet so as through fire.
Probably, most believers will probably receive something between no reward and a full reward. 1 Corinthians 3:10–15 allows for this, despite only presenting the extremities. The very nature of rewards suggests intermediate levels between the extremities. This resembles a yardstick, not an on-off switch. [8] Paul does not deny the existence of such a range of rewards. The most reasonable application of his teaching is that all levels of reward will exist. This includes: (1) no reward, (2) full reward, and (3) all intermediate values.
A Theological Dilemma: Perseverance
Quite often those who resist the idea that any believer could forfeit all reward are advocates of Reformed Theology. The idea that a regenerate person could have no reward runs counter to a core Reformed assumption: final or ultimate perseverance. This doctrine underlies efforts to justify inspecting believers’ fruit. Reformed theologians often summarize their five key points under an acronym, TULIP:
- Total Depravity
- Unconditional Election
- Limited Atonement
- Irresistible Grace
- Perseverance of the Saints
It must be remembered that what the Apostle argues to prove is not merely the certainty of the salvation of those that believe; but their certain perseverance in holiness. Salvation in sin, according to Paul’s system, is a contradiction in terms. This perseverance in holiness is secured partly by the inward secret influence of the Spirit, and partly by the means adapted to secure that end—instructions, admonitions, exhortations, warnings, the means of grace, and the dispensation of his providence [emphasis mine]. [9]This doctrine has caused Reformed theologians to see works as a litmus-test of salvation. Therefore, it is necessary to examine some key passages claimed in support of the perseverance theory: James 2; Ephesians 2:10; [10] and 1 Corinthians 4:5.
Three Proof Texts
Proof-Text One: Ephesians 2:10
Structure. Verse ten emphasizes the corporate unity of the body of Christ, not characteristics necessarily shared by each and every believer. The paragraph (2:1–10) contains three sentences: Ephesians 2:1–7, 8–9, and 10. The second and third sentences both start with For (gar). Thus, verses 8–9 explain 1–7, while verse ten clarifies 8–9. The following English diagram represents the Greek grammar for Ephesians 2:5b–6, the heart of the first sentence. [11]
In mathematical terms: a + b + c = d = e.
By grace you have been saved (verse 5) is parenthetic. Its subject is you, whereas God is the subject of the three main verbs: made alive together with [Christ], raised together with [Christ], and seated together with [Christ]. Thus, the passage defines salvation as being: made alive with Christ, raised with Christ, and seated with Christ. In the diagram, sentence d restates propositions a-c, while statement e repeats point d.
The For (gar), which begins verse ten, indicates that this statement is an inference from verses 8–9. Therefore, anything that affects the meaning of propositions (a + b + c) or d (Ephesians 2:5b–6) impacts proposition e (2:8–9) as well as 2:10.
Analysis of verses 5b–6. Paul does not merely say God made us alive, raised us, and made us sit. He says that God made [you and us] alive together with Christ, raised [you and us] together with [Christ], and made [you and us] sit together with [Christ]. This brings verses one and five into focus. Ephesians 2:1 says you (Gentile unbelievers) were dead, while verse five says we (Jewish unbelievers) were dead. [12] God has joined believing Gentiles and believing Jews together with each other and also with Christ. The following chart shows a T-shaped barrier. It divides unbelieving Gentiles and unbelieving Jews from each other (and also divides both from God). On the other hand, no barrier exists between Gentile and Jewish believers or between them and God. The focal point is the Church as the new corporate identity of Gentile and Jewish believers in Christ. With reference to unbelievers, you signifies Gentiles and we means Jews. Once Gentiles or Jews believe, you and we refer to them as part of the Church as a whole.
Following Context. Ephesians 2:11–13 offers a key piece of evidence for identifying you as Gentiles.
Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands—that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.These Gentiles were once far off, but now the cross has brought them near. The fact that Paul calls his readers you … Gentiles clarifies you, but the next paragraph (2:14–22) establishes his meaning for we:
For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one , and has broken down the middle wall of separation, having abolished in His flesh the enmity…, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity. And He came and preached peace to you who were afar off and to (us) those who were near. For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father.Context defines the referent of the words both and two. The only differentiated groups appearing earlier in the book are we and you. [13] Both means both Jews and Gentiles, as does two.
Christ established peace by making both Gentile and Jewish believers into one body. He created the Church (referred to as both we and you) from the two groups, Gentiles (you) and Jews (we). He reconciled both Gentile believers and Jewish believers to God. He preached during His earthly ministry to both Gentiles who were afar off and to Jews who were near. [14] Therefore, both Gentile and Jewish believers have access to the Father.
Analysis of verse 10. Both prior context (Ephesians 2:1–9) and succeeding context (verses 11–22) focus on three distinct corporate entities: Gentile unbelievers, Jewish unbelievers, and the Church (in which Gentiles and Jews, having believed, are joined together). [15] In that light, verse ten focuses not on the individual believer, but upon the corporate body of Christ:
For we (the Church) are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we (the Church) should walk in them (Ephesians 2:10).The purpose for which God formed the Church, His workmanship created in Christ Jesus (2:10), is in order that it would corporately live out the good works which God prepared beforehand for the Church.
This raises a question: Can a corporately-focused passage prove that every member of that entity necessarily fulfills the purpose at an individual level? What applies corporately may not apply to every individual. Consider the following syllogism:
- God decreed for humans to have children.
- Jane Doe died childless.
- Jane Doe did not attain God’s decree and is not human.
Ephesians 2:10 is compatible with the view this article advocates for 1 Corinthians 3:15. Neither verse teaches a doctrine of final perseverance. Although God does accomplish good works in the Church at a corporate level, Ephesians 2:10 does not give a license to fruit inspectors. Undoubtedly, most regenerate people have some good works; nevertheless, this verse does not prove the universality of good works. Those who advocate fruit inspection must prove that all believers must necessarily produce good works. Otherwise, no grounds for fruit inspection remains.
Proof-Text Two: James 2:14
Structure. James 1:19–20 is a thematic statement that gives the outline of the body of that book.
So then, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear,
|
(1:21–2:26)
|
slow to speak,
|
(3:1–18)
|
slow to wrath;
|
(4:1–5:6)
|
for the wrath of man does not produce the righteousness of God.
|
|
The swift to hear section includes both James 1:22 and 2:14–26, leading to the expectation of consistency between these passages. We are to do the truth that we: hear (1:22) or believe (2:14). Hearing and believing are parallel concepts.
James 1:22 exhorts regenerate believers to be doers of the word, not hearers only. It does not critique them for faulty hearing, but for not applying what they hear. The most natural view of 2:14–26 is that it similarly critiques James’ audience as hearers who lack application of God’s Word. Merely believing Bible teaching—even sound doctrine—does not deliver regenerate people from the deadly power of sin in their lives. Deliverance requires applying believed truth.
View 1: Subtraction Model. Reformed interpreters understand the key concept, faith without works (James 2:14, 20), as a subtraction model: If so, the faith of James’ readers would lack or would be minus an essential quality. [16] An incorrect prior assumption often causes interpreters to favor this solution. Specifically, they read the idea of being saved from hell into the passage. They recognize that a person adding works would not qualify him to go to heaven. [17] Thus, they surmise that James 2 critiques an inadequate kind of faith.
The Subtraction Model:
Faith minus works = something less than saving faith.
Analogy: A bike minus a frame = something less than a bike.Clearly a bicycle that lacks a frame cannot go anywhere, so the subtraction model has a semblance of logic. However, it does not fit the overall argument of the swift to hear section (James 1:21–2:26): Hearers of the word need to do the word. James 1:22 exhorts workless, but regenerate, people to add works (application).
View 2: Addition Model. Within the context of James 2:14–26, verse 14 draws upon the addition model of James 1:22: But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves. Regenerate people should apply the truth which they believe.
The Addition Model:
Post-justification faith + no works = post-justification faith. [18]
Analogy: A bicycle + no rider = a bicycle.A bicycle in perfect repair that lacks a rider does not go anywhere. Similarly, believing the Bible does not do any good, apart from applying it to life. For example, someone may believe the biblical truth that stealing is sin. However, deliverance from stealing requires something more than believing the truth: It requires application as well. We must not take what is not ours!
Analysis. Although more could be said, the addition model suits the context, whereas the subtraction model does not. James 2:14 does not teach a doctrine of final perseverance, nor does it preclude 1 Corinthians 3:15 from presenting an eternally-secure, regenerate believer who totally forfeits reward.
Proof-Text Three: 1 Corinthians 4:5
Does 1 Corinthians 4:5 do what neither Ephesians 2:10 nor James 2 accomplish? Does it preclude understanding 1 Corinthians 3:15 as a regenerate believer forfeiting all reward? No, it does not. The NKJV translates the last clause in 1 Corinthians 4:5 as Then each one’s praise will come from God. [19] Many have assumed that this means that God will praise each and every believer who appears at the Bema Seat. This is an unwarranted assumption.
The Referent of Each. To whom does each refer? Many theologians have uncritically applied it to each and every Church Age believer, but that is unlikely. 1 Corinthians 1:10 begins an entire section dealing with party divisions. The parties center around Paul, Peter (Cephas), Apollos and even Christ (1 Corinthians 1:12; 3:4, 22; 4:6, and 9; cf. 11:18–19).
Contextually, this section delineates doctrinally significant distinctions between we and you. For example, verse 4:1 says, Let a man so consider us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God. The referent of us is Paul and Apollos (1 Corinthians 3:22 and 4:6). On the other hand, you addresses the Corinthians throughout the section. Distinguishing we from you is vital for understanding 1 Corinthians 4:6:
Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that you may learn in us not to think beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up on behalf of one against the other.When verse six says that Paul applies these things to himself and Apollos figuratively, the us portions refer to Paul and Apollos, but the you aspect of the passage still applies to the Corinthians.
Let a man (imperatival: you, Corinthians) so consider us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God. Moreover it is required in stewards that one be found faithful. But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by a human court. In fact, I do not even judge myself. For I know nothing against myself, yet I am not justified by this; but He who judges me is the Lord. Therefore (imperatival: you, Corinthians) judge nothing before the time, until the Lord comes, who will both bring to light the hidden things of darkness and reveal the counsels of the hearts. Then each one’s praise (specifically, Paul’s and Apollos’ praise) will come from God (1 Corinthians 4:1–5).Within this passage, the individuals under examination are Paul and Apollos. He does not seek the praise of men, so the Corinthian opinions concerning Paul, Peter (Cephas), or Apollos do not matter to Paul. In that light, it is the Lord who will render praise to each that He may praise (that is, Paul and/or Apollos).
Is it significant that Paul applied the passage figuratively to himself and Apollos? Verses one and nine show that he refers to an evaluation of the apostles, the stewards of God’s mysteries. [20]
Let a man (a Corinthian believer) so consider us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God (1 Corinthians 4:1).
For I think that God has displayed us, the apostles, last, as men condemned to death; for we have been made a spectacle to the world, both to angels and to men (1 Corinthians 4:9).Contextually, Each one speaks only of Paul and Apollos in 1 Corinthians 4:5. Even if the analysis ended right here, verse five does not prove that the Lord will praise all Christians. It does not support the theory of final perseverance in holiness. Each one does not refer to all believers. At most, it applies to the apostles.
Differentiating Chapter 4 from Chapter 3. Does the foregoing analysis preclude the gold, silver, and precious stones passage from being an evaluation of all Church Age believers? No, unlike chapter 4, 1 Corinthians 3 refers to a judgment that extends to all Church Age believers.
For we [Paul and Apollos] are God’s fellow workers; you [Corinthians] are God’s field, you [Corinthians] are God’s building. According to the grace of God which was given to me, as a wise master builder I have laid the foundation, and another builds on it. But let each one [you, Corinthians] take heed how he builds on it (1 Corinthians 3:9–10).The imperatival phrase let each one take heed does not constitute a warning to us (Paul or Apollos), but to the Corinthians. Moreover, Paul addressed this whole section, dealing with divisions, to the Corinthians, not to Apollos and Cephas. In this regard, compare 1 Corinthians 3:16–18, 21 with 4:6:
Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which temple you are. Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you seems to be wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise…. Therefore let no one boast in men. For all things are yours (1 Corinthians 3:16–18 and 21):
Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that you may learn in us not to think beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up on behalf of one against the other (1 Corinthians 4:6).The Corinthians were to uplift the church, rather than tear it down. Boasting in men is destructive. Believers are not (by going beyond scriptural instructions) to become arrogant against God’s servants. Paul directs the warning of verse ten, but let each one take heed how he builds on it, to the Corinthians. He did not write it to Apollos, who was then away from Corinth. [21]
Apollos had built upon Paul’s foundation, but the Corinthians were also to build on it. The warning is appropriate to them. They needed to be careful that their building upon the foundation would be gold, silver, and precious stones, not wood, hay, and straw. While 1 Corinthians 3 speaks of an evaluation that applies to all Christians, 1 Corinthians 4:5–6 speaks of praise in reference only to the apostles: Verse 6 says, Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that you may learn in us not to think beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up on behalf of one against the other.
The Uncertainty of Praise. Was the apostle Paul certain that the Lord would praise him? Does he assert as a foregone conclusion that he and Apollos will receive reward? [22] 1 Corinthians 4:3–4 says:
But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by a human court. In fact, I do not even judge myself. For I know nothing against myself, yet I am not exonerated [23] by this; but He who judges me is the Lord.Paul knows no charge against himself, yet the absence of qualms in his conscience is insufficient to exonerate him before God. So, how could he claim certainty that God will praise him? Moreover, Paul regards it as trivial for the Corinthians or any human court (including himself) to judge him before the time. Instead, he urges that Christians allow God to assign blame or praise of Paul or Apollos. Paul does not want the Corinthians to praise or blame now. Then each one’s [Paul’s or Apollos’] praise will come from God at the Judgment Seat of Christ (1 Corinthians 4:5).
Logically, if Paul claims to know that he will receive praise from God, would this not imply that he can state a final judgment concerning himself? [24] (He would be able to second that the Lord will reward him.) To affirm such a proposition contradicts the very point that Paul makes: Regarding his own praiseworthiness, he does not know whether God will praise him. Given the context, taking each one’s praise will come from God as a prophetic certainty that God will praise Paul is utter nonsense.
Paul does not know whether he will receive praise, because only the Lord will judge that. It follows that he does not know whether God would praise Apollos (or any apostle). He does not prophesy that God will praise each and every believer. The strongest true inference from this verse is: Each one who will have praise at the Judgment Seat of Christ will receive it from God alone. No other evaluation counts. That is the thrust of this passage. Paul says, “Wait and see,” not “Rewards are guaranteed for all.” Thus, TULIP theology’s assumption of guaranteed final perseverance in holiness destroys Paul’s meaning. He does not advocate fruit inspection.
Conclusion
This article has evaluated a trio of passages, Ephesians 2:10, James 2:14, and 1 Corinthians 4:5, which all support the truth of 1 Corinthians 3:10–15. However, the Reformed doctrine of ultimate perseverance in holiness misinterprets them. These passages do not contradict the plain meaning of 1 Corinthians 3:10–15, that full reward and no reward are both possible. Accordingly, a born-again believer may be without any reward at the Bema Seat of Christ. Therefore, no one should count works in a vain attempt to determine whether John Doe will go to heaven. The presence or absence of good works does not establish whether or not anyone is a believer.
An Odd Doctrine
Final or ultimate perseverance in holiness is an odd doctrine riddled with contradictions. According to this doctrine the elect, without exception, will persevere in holiness and ultimately receive praise from God. Unfortunately, this doctrine precludes any believer from possessing absolute certainty of his or her membership in the elect. Perseverance theology takes away with one hand what it grants with the other. It is like the person who, when he had lost his ticket, said, “I know that all winners of last night’s lottery are millionaires, but I will never know if my ticket made me a winner.”
In marked contrast, the Bible teaches that a believer can have absolute certainty that he or she has eternal life. Jesus promises eternal life to everyone who believes that He is the Christ, the Son of God designated by God the Father to give life to those who believe in Him for it (John 5:24). There is one thing that a believer cannot know before the time: Will he hear, Well done, good and faithful servant? Will he hear a lesser commendation? On the other hand, how reassuring to know that all believers are eternally saved, whether or not they have rewardable works. Some believers will receive full reward, others will receive partial reward, while some will be saved so as through fire.
Not a Sunday School Picnic
Assuming a Christian has truly [25] believed, many Reformed theologians and pastors give the impression that the Bema Seat should not cause concern for any true Christian. They expect each believer to receive praise. They acknowledge that some will have a few works burned, but treat this as a time of celebration for all. In addition to the passages discussed in this article, 1 John 2:28 reveals some believers will be ashamed before the Lord at the Bema Seat. For someone to have no reward at all would certainly bring shame. Although Paul teaches eternal security, he does not advocate the Reformed perspective on ultimate perseverance in holiness. Perhaps, it is time to take a more sober approach to understanding the Bema Seat.
Rewards day will not only have promotions, but demotions. There will be both merits and demerits. Likewise, Romans 14:12 is designed to motivate believers not to be slack.
So then each of us shall give account of himself to God.
Giving an account to a judge is not necessarily a pleasant experience. It is not a foregone conclusion that all have done well. Many will receive something less than a full commendation; some will not even have that.
Now he who plants and he who waters are one, and each one will receive his own reward according to his own labor…. each one’s work will become clear; for the Day will declare it, because it will be revealed by fire; and the fire will test each one’s work, of what sort it is (1 Corinthians 3:8 and 13).Paul’s reference to fire is quite consistent with the possibility of a total forfeiture of reward. The Lord will reward believers according to the quality of their labors.
For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad (2 Corinthians 5:10).This is quite explicit. Believers will receive recompense for both good and bad deeds. The reward for something bad is itself a negative. Rather than praise, something bad receives a rebuke and loss of the prize.
And if you call on the Father, who without partiality judges according to each one’s work, conduct yourselves throughout the time of your stay here in fear (1 Peter 1:17).This indicates the need for reverence. Only that which is acceptable to the Lord receives a reward. Necessarily, the Lord only gives positive rewards for that which is done by the power of the Holy Spirit.
The tone of passages dealing with the Judgment Seat of Christ is consistent with regard to the possibility of loss, even a total forfeiture of reward.
Let every believer take on each day remembering:
Whatever you do, do it heartily, as to the Lord and not to men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the reward of the inheritance; for you serve the Lord Christ. But he who does wrong will be repaid for the wrong which he has done, and there is no partiality (Colossians 3:23–25).—End—
Notes
- The Reformed doctrine of final perseverance teaches that every true believer will persevere in holiness until death. Such a view cannot imagine a believer who forfeits all reward. Cf. the text associated with note 9 in this article.
- The phrase he who believes is a present participle, so some want to render it “he who keeps on believing.” Such a treatment suggests that John 6:47 would not grant eternal life to a person who stops believing. However, who would offer “John, the one who keeps on baptizing” as the translation of Mark 6:14? Herod’s use of present participle does not mean that John continued baptizing while chained up in prison. Cf. John Niemelä, “Review of The Basics of New Testament Syntax: An Intermediate Greek Grammar, by Daniel B. Wallace,” CTS Journal 6 (July-September 2000): 74-78.
- Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture is from the New King James Version (Nashville: Nelson, 1982).
- The Judgment Seat of Christ, also known as the Bema Seat, refers to the time when Christ evaluates each believer’s service for the Lord. Rewards recognize faithful and acceptable service.
- H. A. Ironside, Addresses on the First Epistle to the Corinthians (New York: Loizeaux, 1938), 134. The term fruit inspection derives from Matthew 7:16, You will know them [the false prophets, cf. verse 15] by their fruits. The passage does not say that unbelievers’ works prove that they are unbelievers. Rather, a false prophet’s words, his fruit, will betray that he is a false prophet. Matthew 7:16 does not set forth a litmus test for determining if someone is a believer.
- Paul addresses 1 Corinthians to saints (1:2). Even more directly, 1 Corinthians 3, the main chapter in question, addresses brethren (3:1). Paul’s operating definition for brethren is evident in 6:6, But brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers! Paul’s point would lose all its force, if he defined brethren as fellow-Corinthians (including believers and unbelievers). He would then say, “But unbeliever goes to law against unbeliever, and that before unbelievers!” Such an argument would be utter nonsense. In 1 Corinthians brethren equal believers, not a mixed multitude.
- John F. MacArthur, 1 Corinthians, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary (Chicago: Moody, 1984), 85.
- Luke 19 illustrates this. Luke 19:17 and 24 depict a man whose initial reward was to rule over ten cities, but who (apparently) became ruler over an eleventh. Luke 19:19 speaks of one whose reward was to rule over five cities.
- Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, 3 vols. (London: Clarke, n.d.; reprint; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), 3:112–13. Italics added by the present author for emphasis.
- Other articles in CTS Journal have discussed the first two passages. Cf. John Niemelä, “Faith without Works: A Definition,” CTS Journal 6 (April-June 2000): 2-18; idem, “James 2:24: Retranslation Required: Part 1 of 2, ” CTS Journal 7 (January-March 2001): 13-24 and (April-June 2001): 2-15: “James 2:24: Retranslation Required: Part 2 of 2; ” Timothy R. Nichols, “Reverse-Engineered Outlining: A Method for Epistolatory Exegesis,” CTS Journal 7 (April-June 2001): 16-58.
- Verses 5b–6 contain the main verbs (a + b + c) for the sentence (verses 1–7). Both verses 5 and 8 include by grace you have been saved, because this is the central assertion of the passage. Thus, a grammatical diagram of verses 5b–6 and 8a is sufficient here. Cf. the bold and the gray-shaded portions of the diagrams in ibid., 52-55, for details.
- This identification of we and you derives from following context, specifically verses 11ff. See that exposition in this article.
- Ephesians 5–6 differentiates wives from husbands, children from parents, and slaves from masters. Those definitions cannot apply here. In chapters 1–2 Paul only differentiates we and you. Ephesians 2:11 uses you to describe his readers’ former estate as Gentile unbelievers, so the logical referent of we would be Jews. Furthermore, Ephesians 1:12 must refer to Jews when it says, we who first hoped in Christ (corrected translation). In Acts 2–9, the Church consisted of Jews and proselytes only. Gentile inclusion in the Church began in Acts 10. Thus, Jews did hope in Christ before Gentiles did so. Ephesians 2:11–13 explains the transformation of estranged Gentile unbelievers to those made near to God.
- That is the point of Ephesians 2:17. The Gospels mention His ministry to Gentiles (cf. Mark 7:26). Although Jewish unbelievers were nearer to God than the Gentiles (Ephesians 2:12 and 17), this does not mean that they were sufficiently close to God. They also needed to believe the message of life.
- 1 Corinthians 10:32 also distinguishes these same three entities.
- See Niemelä, “Faith without Works,” 13–15.
- The addition view does not say that the addition of works would give anyone eternal life. Reception of eternal life is a gracious gift, not the result of works. The addition view does not perceive James 2 as speaking of salvation from hell. James discusses deliverance from sin’s deadly power over a Christian’s life.
- Even though faith is still faith, unapplied faith does not save (deliver) regenerate Christians from the deadly power of sin in their lives. If someone believes that stealing is sin, but steals anyway, the unapplied faith does not deliver him from that sin. His faith in the precept is genuine, but deliverance also requires application (works).
- The Greek of 1 Corinthians 4:5 can yield two renderings, depending on which Semitic idiom Paul intended. Hebrew, the language underlying this, lacks a verb meaning “to have,” so it uses hāyâ le (“x is to y”) instead. For example, “A wife is to David” is equivalent to “David has a wife.” If that is what Paul means, “a reward will be to each” becomes, “each will have reward.” On the other hand, Hebrew sometimes uses a phrase le (“to”) in the sense of “belonging to.” If this were Paul’s meaning, it would yield, “the praise belonging to each one will be from God.” Although grammar allows either rendering, the second fits the context better.
- Ephesians 2:20 and 3:4–5 place both apostles and New Testament prophets in the foundational role in regard to the mysteries. Thus, Ephesians adds some detail that is not present in 1 Corinthians 4, but no passage justifies applying this to all Christians generally.
- Apollos was absent from Corinth at the time. Now concerning our brother Apollos, I strongly urged him to come to you with the brethren, but he was quite unwilling to come at this time; however, he will come when he has a convenient time (16:12).
- For any who would still attempt to say that the scope of the passage is universal, it is necessary to see that Paul does not even guarantee that he will receive praise from God.
- Contextually, Paul does not wonder whether or not he possesses eternal life. The sense in which he uses justified focuses upon whether God will reward him. Exonerated may be a better rendering than justified.
- For Paul to say, “The fact that I know of no charge against me does not exonerate me, but God will praise me anyway,” encounters serious problems. If Paul knew that God will praise him, would he not know that the Bema Seat would exonerate him?
- Rather than asking whether someone has truly believed in Christ, the issue is whether the person has believed the truth (that gives eternal life). However, the former statement follows typical Reformed wording.
No comments:
Post a Comment