A doctrine according to the flesh, part 3
Now who, beyond Paul…Damascus Road experience…who could arguably claim a greater born again experience? But that’s what he said.
What did the apostle Paul say in support of the Catholic doctrine of salvation by faith plus works? A cursory threshing of the New Testament will reap a few passages which if plucked out individually seem to have Paul unsure of his own eternal destiny and depending on his own righteousness. But cursoriness when dealing with an inspired text which also happens to be ancient in origin is bound to leave important truths passed over.
I have been responding to a “Catholic answer” given by Catholic Answers founder Karl Keating to a question from a caller to Catholic Answers Live about whether one can be assured of salvation. Addressing Keating’s response point by point, I hope to demonstrate that the answers this Catholic and others give regarding their doctrine of salvation, when examined closely, are misleading, mistaken, and sometimes self-contradictory. I continue today with Keating attempting to buttress his argument that even Paul, the great apostle, evangelist, and author of inspired Scripture, did not have that assurance.
In Romans 5:2 Paul said we are confident in the hope of attaining glory as the sons of God. So we’re hoping to go to heaven. And then 1 Corinthians 9:27, he says, “I buffet my body and make it my slave lest I who have preached to others may myself be rejected as worthless.” So what this means is Paul himself could imagine a situation where he would not go to heaven. Now who, beyond Paul, Damascus Road experience, who could arguably claim a greater born again experience? But that’s what he said.
In 1 Corinthians Paul is exhorting his readers to live lives worthy of their calling in Christ, in light of reports of factions and sexual immorality among them. What better analogy to use than the Olympic-like Isthmian Games which were held on the Isthmus of Corinth, and so were very familiar to them. ”Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one receives the prize? So run that you may obtain it,” he says in 9:24. He’s teaching them about discipline with an eye to a holy life, and the rewards that come with it.
Every athlete exercises self-control in all things. They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. So I do not run aimlessly; I do not box as one beating the air. But I discipline my body and keep it under control, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified. (9:25-27)
A runner was disqualified or rejected if he did not meet the qualifications or “had not behaved according to the prescribed regulations.” Paul is not talking about salvation here but instead the self-control a believer needs to develop in aiming towards a life that is pleasing to God. His own potential rejection in view is either that from other people when they observe that his behavior doesn’t line up with his profession, leading to a loss of influence, or from the heavenly rewards God bestows according to a believer’s conformity with Christ and efforts on earth in his service.
Consider how Paul has already addressed in Chapter 3 the Corinthians’ spiritual immaturity and lack of conformity, and the loss they might suffer as a result:
But I, brothers, could not address you as spiritual people, but as people of the flesh, as infants in Christ. I fed you with milk, not solid food, for you were not ready for it. And even now you are not yet ready, for you are still of the flesh. For while there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not of the flesh and behaving only in a human way? For when one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not being merely human? What then is Apollos? What is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, as the Lord assigned to each. I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth. So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth.
He who plants and he who waters are one, and each will receive his wages according to his labor. For we are God’s fellow workers. You are God’s field, God’s building. According to the grace of God given to me, like a skilled master builder I laid a foundation, and someone else is building upon it. Let each one take care how he builds upon it. For no one can lay a foundation other than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw— each one’s work will become manifest, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed by fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. If the work that anyone has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If anyone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire. (3:1-15)
Note that it’s not salvation they lose, but a reward. Consider also how throughout the book he references their joint destiny as among the saved:
so that you are not lacking in any gift, as you wait for the revealing of our Lord Jesus Christ, who will sustain you to the end, guiltless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. – 1:7-8
Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angels? – 6:2-3
As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven. – 15:48-49
Finally, in his subsequent letter to them, he again addresses them as guaranteed a “heavenly dwelling,” along with himself, yet exhorting them to “aim to please” the Lord, for there will be a judgment even for the saved. But it is a judgment unto rewards, not to eternal destiny.
For we know that if the tent that is our earthly home is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this tent we groan, longing to put on our heavenly dwelling, if indeed by putting it on we may not be found naked. For while we are still in this tent, we groan, being burdened—not that we would be unclothed, but that we would be further clothed, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life. He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who has given us the Spirit as a guarantee.
So we are always of good courage. We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord, for we walk by faith, not by sight. Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord. So whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please him. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil. – 2 Corinthians 5:1-10
Well, I expected to have completed my evaluation of Karl Keating’s defense by now, but I’m only half through it. Next week I’ll continue with his interpretation of Philippians 2:12, Matthew 7, Romans 2:6, and Romans 6:23.
Thanks, Caroline, for this thorough examination of an oft-used misinterpretation of 1 Cor:9.
LikeLike
Thank you, Tom. I appreciate that. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Caroline: What “heavenly reward” do you Paul, and Christ, and everyone else in Scripture, is referring to, other than eternal life itself? I’ve heard this argument from Protestants all my life — and no one has a convincing explanation for what exactly that means. With one hand, Protestants deny there will be any distinctions between believers in eternity; with the other, they affirm the possibility of some “reward” we should be striving for above and beyond the promised eternal life. I’ve so often heard that we receive as a reward “a crown”: but these words, in context — “crown,” “reward,” “inheritance” — they all very clearly refer to God’s promise of eternal life, and it’s only by cutting away the context with a very fine, literalistic knife that one can argue otherwise.
(In fact, reading old obituaries, as I do as a genealogist, one of my very favorite turns of phrase for death is to say one has “gone to his reward.” These are good, southern, mostly Baptist people — yet they understood what Scripture was talking about.)
LikeLike
If the reward Paul talks about is eternal life, what did he mean in 1 Corinthians 3 when he contrasts the one whose work earns him a reward and the one whose work is substandard and “is burned up”? Both will be saved.
You are absolutely right. In this passage, the reward is also eternal life. From the very earliest Church Fathers, some have understood this passage to refer to a cleansing fire at the judgment, a burning away of “stubble” — a second chance at eternity for those whose works in life are not “gold.” For example, St. Augustine, in his Enarration on Psalm 37(38) (I’ll give you the whole context):
“O Lord, rebuke me not in Thine indignation; neither chasten me in Thy hot displeasure” (ver. 1). For it will be that some shall be chastened in God’s “hot displeasure,” and rebuked in His “indignation.” And haply not all who are “rebuked” will be “chastened;” yet are there some that are to be saved in the chastening. So it is to be indeed, because it is called “chastening,” but yet it shall be “so as by fire.” But there are to be some who will be “rebuked,” and will not be “corrected.” For he will at all events “rebuke” those to whom He will say, “I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat.” …
“Neither chasten me in Thy hot displeasure;” so that Thou mayest cleanse me in this life, and make me such, that I may after that stand in no need of the cleansing fire, for those “who are to be saved, yet so as by fire.” Why? Why, but because they “build upon the foundation, wood, stubble, and hay.” Now they should build on it, “gold, silver, and precious stones;” and should have nothing to fear from either fire: not only that which is to consume the ungodly for ever, but also that which is to purge those who are to escape through the fire. For it is said, “he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.” And because it is said, “he shall be saved,” that fire is thought lightly of. For all that, though we should be “saved by fire,” yet will that fire be more grievous than anything that man can suffer in this life whatsoever. …
LikeLike
So then, you agree that there are rewards in heaven that not all share in?
LikeLike
No, I wouldn’t agree with that. The “reward” here is eternal life — especially being granted outright it in reward for one’s good works. The man whose works are stubble, if his foundation be Christ, may be saved (to eternal life) anyway, “but only as through fire.”
LikeLike
I don’t understand how you can maintain that the reward is eternal life when Paul makes a clear distinction here between receiving a reward and not, though he who does not “will be saved.” On what are you basing your contention that “there is some question whether he will be ‘saved’”? And why do you believe that those who receive a reward do so “immediately”? I’m well aware that the Catholic Church interprets this passage as referring to Purgatory, and if that’s what you’re aiming at establishing, and are interested in my argument against it, please read here, here, here, here, and/or here.
I don’t know “what sort of ‘reward’” awaits the one whose work on earth is considered valuable. I think of the parable of the talents where the one who produced more was given more responsibility. And I think of those who innocently suffer in this life. If we expect all things…all injustices…to be made right someday, then it seems to follow that these will be compensated in Heaven above and beyond what those of us who had relatively pain-free lives here on earth will.
[Referencing your last comment on my previous post, I don’t expect a reply today.]
LikeLike
I will try to respond to this one quickly but then there are other things I have to do.
First, in 1 Corinthians 3:14-15, Paul says that the one whose work isn’t burned up “will receive a reward.” Now this word “reward” in Greek is μισθός (misthos), and elsewhere in the New Testament it is often translated “wages” (cf. John 4:26, Romans 4:4, 1 Corinthians 3:8): the BDAG (a premier New Testament Greek lexicon) indicates that it means “1. remuneration for work done, pay, wages; 2. recognition (mostly by God) for the moral quality of an action, recompense” — in other words, these people get what they have coming to them, what they’ve worked for, what they deserve. More often than not, as I’ve said, this word seems to refer to eternal life — I could go into a detailed exposition of this but I won’t right now. Paul says here that the one whose works are imperishable will receive his just wages — which I take to mean eternal life. The opposite of eternal life is eternal death, perishing, in other words, not being saved — which seems to be the anticipated contrast in the next verse.
Now Paul curiously sees it fit here to explain that “if a man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.” Usually when someone says in a temporal context, “he was saved, but only…”, or “he survived, but only…”, it implies very strongly that he almost wasn’t — that he survived just barely — that to an observer, he probably shouldn’t have. I don’t know how often I’ve heard the phrase (in a Protestant context), “He was saved, but only by the skin of his teeth!” Paul says here that “he will be saved, but only as through fire” — indicating that it is only on account of passing through this fire, not on account of anything he possessed or had done, that this man will be saved at all. So yes, juxtaposed with the understanding that the “reward” is eternal life, and that the one whose works are gold receives it outright, I think the implication is pretty clear that the one whose works perish is in danger of an even more unquenchable fire.
You raised this passage as an objection to my argument that the heavenly “reward” (or “wages”) generally refers to eternal life. My only claim in response is the “reward” is the same here as elsewhere. I further claim that this isn’t my interpretation at all, but the one every Church Father I’ve read, really every exegete, including Protestant ones, seems to accept.
I found it very unconvincing and inadequate as a Protestant to hear the conclusion, “We don’t know what Scripture is talking about, but it’s definitely not talking about what Catholics claim it is!” You don’t know what the “reward” is? I find that claim disingenuous, given the many Protestant sources I have read who agree with this interpretation, and the common, popular parlance of “going to one’s reward” (as I said, for example, in obituaries). Such a notion that “some believers will be more greatly rewarded than others” stands completely opposed to Paul’s frequent theme of Christian egalitarianism (e.g. Galatians 3:28), to Jesus’s parable of the laborers in the vineyard (the latecomers receiving the same reward as those who worked all day) (Matthew 20), and the one of the Prodigal Son also (Luke 15), as well as many other teachings I could name. “For God shows no partiality” (Romans 2:11). And this argument of egalitarianism — especially of all believers being “saints” and the Catholic idea of “sainthood,” that some believers should be recognized other others, is false — I expect to hear this argument from a Protestant, not anything about special “rewards” for doing good works. Isn’t the very idea of “being saved by the skin of one’s teeth” itself contrary to the idea God treats all the just alike, not observing our sin but only Christ’s righteousness?
Does it not trouble you at all that in contrast to “believe and be saved,” Paul spends so much time talking about good works, and even, by your interpretation of this passage, suggests that Christians can receive extra “rewards” for doing them? This seems to reek just as strongly of “works’ righteousness” as any argument I have ever heard a Protestant make against the Catholic Church!
By another important token: if all one must do to be saved is simply “believe”, then what does this passage imply to you? Why does Paul bring “works” into the final judgment at all? This passage, I point out again, is directed at Christians, whose foundation is Christ; but don’t they already “believe”? Again, I think the implication is strong in this passage — as he indicates elsewhere — that if one’s works are not in accord with the truth, he is in danger of not being “saved” at all (e.g. Romans 2:6-11; 1 Corinthians 6:9; Galatians 5:21). Otherwise, why should he need to point out that “he will be saved, but only…”? Isn’t his salvation already a given?
LikeLike
“in other words, these people get what they have coming to them, what they’ve worked for, what they deserve. More often than not, as I’ve said, this word seems to refer to eternal life…Paul says here that the one whose works are imperishable will receive his just wages.”
For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, – Romans 4:3-5
For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. – Ephesians 2:8-9
he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, – Titus 3:5
“I think the implication is pretty clear that the one whose works perish is in danger of an even more unquenchable fire.” “If anyone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved…”
“the fire will test what sort of work” “If anyone’s work is burned up” Our works…our service to God…are what become subject to the fire. I believe in context the correct understanding is that those are saved with nary but the shirts on their backs, so to speak…as escaping a burning building in which all our possessions are consumed.
Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you. – Matthew 5:12
So whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please him. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil. – 2 Corinthians 5:9-10
I believe these verses also teach rewards FOR the saved and not salvation as a reward. In Matthew 5:12 Jesus seems to be saying that enduring persecution secures special rewards. In 2 Corinthians 5 Paul says that “we…all” will be recompensed in proportion to what we have done on earth, and in the whole of Paul’s teaching as context, in which he teaches that we are saved by faith alone and is confident of his own salvation, I am confident that he is here referencing rewards apart from salvation.
The verses that reference God’s impartiality I believe are obviously talking about his attitude towards all people irrespective of race, upbringing, gender, intelligence, etc. If they disprove a doctrine of heavenly rewards conditioned by our earthly lives, don’t they also disprove the doctrine of salvation by works?
I am not troubled at all by Paul’s many exhortations to his readers to do good works, to be obedient, to be intentional about pleasing God. Being indwelt by his Holy Spirit does not immediately transform us into his likeness. As long as we are in the flesh we will be tempted to live according to our fleshly desires instead of to the Holy Spirit. We need to be taught what God desires so that we can orient our lives to him.
LikeLike
Caroline, I think you are mistaking my argument, and the Catholic argument in general. I will try to make the distinction again, since I think I did so clumsily before: Yes, absolutely, unequivocally, we are saved not because of our works, or our merits, or anything we are, have been, have done, or could ever do. Yes, the gift of God of eternal life is a gift, given by His grace, not because we deserve it. On the other hand, by the repeated testimony of Scripture, God has chosen to give us this gift as a reward for living and working in and with his grace.
With regard to this word μισθός, it is, as I said, a word usually translated “wages” throughout the New Testament. “For the laborer deserves his wages (μισθοῦ)” (Luke 10:7). But this word is also the primary one used when we read “reward” in English. As I pointed out, the editors of the BDAG propose two meanings for the word, and recommend the latter one, recompense or recognition for the moral quality of an action when Scripture refers to God giving reward for our works. I was mistaken to say that God gave us eternal life as “our just wages”: our good works, on their own account, do not deserve eternal life or any reward at all. But, nonetheless, Scripture indicates repeatedly and consistently that our “reward” is in some sense a “recompense” — both by the use of this word and by the context. “But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward (μισθὸς) will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High; for he is kind to the ungrateful and the selfish” (Luke 6:35). We will receive a reward on account of our doing good.
You insist than when Scripture speaks of such “rewards,” it is speaking of “rewards apart from salvation” — yet you are unable to describe what that even means. If I accept such an understanding, I am faced with Jesus speaking throughout the Sermon on the Mount about ambiguous “rewards in heaven.” But in that sermon especially, it is easy to overlook that having rewards in heaven presupposes being in heaven. He does not speak in terms of “eternal life” in the Sermon of the Mount: is he speaking there of “rewards for the saved,” when these people do not yet even know how to be saved? If we read the Gospel of Matthew as a unit, from beginning to end, we must consider how readers would have interpreted these statements on their own. Later in the same Gospel, when the rich young man asks “what good deed must I do, to have eternal life?” (Matthew 19:16), his answer is not “believe and be saved,” but “keep the commandments,” shed his worldliness in exchange for “treasure in heaven,” and “follow Him.” In Chapter 25, He gives three parables — the Wise and Foolish Virgins, the Talents, and the King’s Judgment — as analogies to “the kingdom of heaven.” This introduces, I realize, yet another term for us to dispute about — what does He mean by “the kingdom of heaven”? — but in the first parable He connects receiving it to wise and prudent expectation; in the second, to a reward for wise and prudent use of given resources (a valuable analogy for how should we make use the grace given by God); and in the last parable, very tellingly, He connects judgment to eternal life (and condemnation to a furnace of fire), not to “believing,” but to good works, or their lack.
And yes, the Gospel of John contains many statements along the lines of “whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16). But unless we suppose that the Jesus of John preaches an entirely different gospel than the Jesus of the Synoptics, we must believe that both are true. We must suppose that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John all preach a true gospel, on their own as well as together with the rest of Scripture. If the gospel is salvation to eternal life, then we must suppose that Jesus is speaking of salvation to eternal life in Matthew also.
I haven’t yet addressed these verses, but I will. You must also take into account the whole of Scripture, not just these verses: you must address passages such as Matthew 25:31-46 and Romans 2:6-11, where eternal life is very explicitly given as a reward or recompense for good works (I realize that at least one of these you were planning to address in your next post). Likewise you must address passages like 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, Ephesians 3:3-11ff., and Galatians 5:16-26 in which Paul very states, very explicitly and repeatedly — as a warning to Christians — that “no [unrepentant sinner] will inherit the kingdom of God.”
I agree. But you don’t acknowledge that, by Paul’s implication, there was danger of this man perishing in the burning building?
So whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please him. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil. – 2 Corinthians 5:9-10
You’re right; this verse was perhaps a poor example of “rewards.” Catholics speak, too, of martyrdom being a “crown.” But nonetheless, the statement presupposes that those persecuted for His sake will have a reward in heaven.
Notably, you did not address Romans 2:6-11. Did you include this — which I take to be this passage’s parallel — in “the whole of Paul’s teaching”? By your own statement, you seem to be interpreting “we all” here as speaking only to Christians, such that any “good” given here as recompense must be “apart from salvation.” But if that’s the case, what is the “evil” intended here, to Christians? Do you agree that this passage is in parallel to Romans 2:6-11, where the object is clearly “every man,” the “good” is “eternal life,” and the “evil” is “wrath and fury”?
Yes, you’re absolutely right. Catholics do not believe in “salvation by works.”
Good; I agree. But you don’t acknowledge that Paul’s warnings about the opposite, and about continuing in sin and living according to our fleshly desires, and its eternal consequences, are directed at the same people?
The peace of the Lord be with you.
LikeLike
Yes, the gift of God of eternal life is a gift, given by His grace, not because we deserve it. On the other hand, by the repeated testimony of Scripture, God has chosen to give us this gift as a reward for living and working in and with his grace.
Joseph, you can’t have it both ways. A gift is unmerited and free. A “reward for living and working in and with his grace” is something earned. It does appear that Jesus used “reward” as recompense for obedience and/or enduring trials. Exactly what the rewards are is irrelevant, it seems to me, if he’s not referring specifically to eternal life. And my point is that receiving heaven as a reward for right behavior is equivalent to meriting our own salvation which is antithetical to the gospel.
Likewise you must address passages like 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, Ephesians 3:3-11ff., and Galatians 5:16-26 in which Paul very states, very explicitly and repeatedly — as a warning to Christians
As I stated before, the fact that the new believers were declared righteous and given the Holy Spirit when they believed did not translate into immediate and perfect behavior. Would that that were the case…sure would make things easier. But they needed to be taught and reproved and encouraged, as do we. It’s within this context that Paul says, “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God?” He’s saying, this is what you were saved out of. Now act like it. “And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.” We would have very few epistles in the New Testament if the early church had it all together and didn’t need correction. And those of Paul’s exhortations which have a more ominous tone have as their impetus, I believe, what he says in 2 Corinthians 13:5, “Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you fail to meet the test!”
LikeLike
I would challenge that this is not the contradiction you insist it is — nor did any Christian understand it to be so until the Protestant Reformation. St. Augustine in particular, the principle author of the Western understanding of the doctrine of justification, explores these dual truths without contradiction throughout many of his works, especially in his writings against Pelagianism (I would note especially On Nature and Grace and On Grace and Free Will). The Pelagians argued that we could be righteous by our works alone. In rejecting their thesis, Augustine also insists on the necessity of our good works: not works in our own selves, as the Pelagians would argue, but working with and in His grace. I won’t burden you with quotes, which you have probably seen and which are regularly cited by Catholic apologists.
I would highly recommend Alister McGrath’s Iustitia Dei: A History of the Christian Doctrine. He gives the best summary of Augustine’s immense corpus on justification that I have read, and of the development of the doctrine of justification by Catholic theologians through the Middle Ages. If there were some inherent contradiction in Scripture or in understanding salvation both as a free gift of grace and as a reward for our works done in grace, then certainly none of these men over all these centuries ever realized it — greater and wiser men, more deeply versed in Scripture, than I will ever be.
If you are comfortable with the thesis that no Christian had a correct understanding of Christian salvation until Martin Luther, then I applaud you for your audacity. I, however, cannot share it.
You presume a priori, from your premise of “sola fide,” that by a “reward” He is not referring to eternal life — as many interpreters, both Catholic and Protestant, have understood Him. You are not able to explain what this “reward” is otherwise, but dismiss it as “irrelevant.” This is not valid logic. You have assumed what you were trying to prove. Why should any reader conclude that “He is not referring to eternal life” — since that is the chief promise of the Gospel, and you can’t point out any other “reward” He might be talking about?
You notably only addressed one of the three passages I named (sorry, the Ephesians one is 5:3-11ff., not 3:3-11ff.). Yes, you have described the context of 1 Corinthians 6. The passage in Galatians 5 is not only ominous, but menacing:
Here, he is ostensibly not suggesting that professing Christians may “fail to meet the test”: He is saying that the test has life-or-death consequences, for Christians who have the free will to choose. The people to whom he is speaking (1) are “called to freedom”; (2) have the “freedom” either to live a life of love in the Spirit or “for the flesh”; (3) have the power, by grace, to walk by the Spirit, and in doing that not gratify the desires of the flesh. To these people, Paul writes, I warn you … that those who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
Now, I very much expect that you will seize on the last verse, indicating that “those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh,” and argue that “those who truly belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh and so don’t do these things; the people he is warning are the ones who don’t truly belong to Christ Jesus.” But if that were the case, why is exhorting these people, who don’t belong to Christ Jesus, to “walk by the Spirit”?
Peace be with you.
LikeLike
I would add, too, that it’s clear in this passage that something more is at stake than whether or not someone will receive some “reward” (if it is, as you suppose, something other than eternal life). Those works are gold or silver receive the reward immediately — but Paul’s statement about those works are stubble indicates there is some question whether he will be “saved” at all; there is some threat that he might not be at all, that he might otherwise perish; he “will be saved, but only as through fire.” This sounds, again, as if the “reward” is eternal life itself; and the man who doesn’t get it outright survives only by the mercy of God. This is, Paul clarifies, for those whose foundation is in Christ (v. 10): the concern is for how a man builds on that foundation, with the work he does with the rest of his life.
How would you interpret the passage? What sort of “reward” is Paul talking about? And what is the threat here — what does a man stand to lose?
LikeLike
Amen! Thank you for this.
LikeLike
Thank YOU for your encouragement.
LikeLiked by 1 person