västergötland - 03 February 2008 02:29 PM

Oh, but it does look like some peoples fruit will burn up, refering verse 15.

I wouldn’t jump to the conclusion that the “work” referred to in 1 Corinthians 3:15 is fruit from God, since it would make no sense whatsoever for God to burn up a good work He was responsible for beginning (e.g. see Philippians 1:6).

Greg

Vatergotland

I had read ten years ago the book of Bonhoeffer, and I still had the notes. Bonhoeffer endorsed my adventist view of gospel by works which I believed at that moment. I was at that time in the process of obtaining a BA in theology from the adventist seminary and I badly needed the gospel. I had not found it in Boenhoeffer’s book.

Gabriel

Greg - 03 February 2008 02:44 PM

västergötland - 03 February 2008 02:29 PM

Oh, but it does look like some peoples fruit will burn up, refering verse 15.

I wouldn’t jump to the conclusion that the “work” referred to in 1 Corinthians 3:15 is fruit from God, since it would make no sense whatsoever for God to burn up a good work He was responsible for beginning (e.g. see Philippians 1:6).

Greg

It does look quite clear to me when Paul say that some will build with gold and some will build with straw but both will build upon the foundation of Jesus Christ, which means that both are among the saved. It also looks clear that what remains of the buildings after a test in fire will bring rewards, though not a reward consisting in salvation as that is taken care of by the foundation.

I notice you chose to ignore Philippians 1:6. Don’t you think God is able to complete the work He begins?

Greg

GABRIEL PROKSCH - 03 February 2008 02:46 PM

Vatergotland

I had read ten years ago the book of Bonhoeffer, and I still had the notes. Bonhoeffer endorsed my adventist view of gospel by works which I believed at that moment. I was at that time in the process of obtaining a BA in theology from the adventist seminary and I badly needed the gospel. I had not found it in Boenhoeffer’s book.

Gabriel

So you read it once through your then adventist glases, I wonder if you would end up the same if you reread it with your now reformed glases? You know, we relate differently to the same material depending on where we are in our journey.

Greg - 03 February 2008 02:52 PM

I notice you chose to ignore Philippians 1:6. Don’t you think God is able to complete the work He begins?

Greg

I did not realise we were still discussing the foundation but thought we had moved on to the building errected upon it.

OK, perhaps we can clarify a few things here. The foundation is Christ and the foundation is sure. The building is the suprastructure of our understanding of the gospel, our teaching of it, and our works that result. All of these things depend upon the foundation for structural support, but even though we build on the most solid foundation, things can go awry. Notice that in 1 Corinthians 3:15, Paul says that even those whose works are burned up will be “saved, but only as through fire”. This implies again that salvation is not dependent upon our good works (the suprastructure), but upon the sure foundation of Jesus Christ.

It might be helpful to read what John Calvin wrote in his commentary on this passage:

“It is certain that Paul speaks of those who, while always retaining the foundations, mix hay with gold, stubble with silver, and wood with precious stones — that is, those who build upon Christ, but in consequence of the weakness of the flesh, admit something that is man’s, or through ignorance turn aside to some extent from the strict purity of God’s word. Such were many of the saints, Cyprian, Ambrose, Augustine, and the like. Add to these, if you choose, from those of later times, Gregory and Bernard, and others of that stamp, who, while they had it as their object to build upon Christ, did nevertheless often deviate from the right system of building. Such persons, Paul says, could be saved, but on this condition — if the Lord wiped away their ignorance, and purged them from all dross.

This is the meaning of the clause so as by fire. He means, therefore, to intimate, that he does not take away from them the hope of salvation, provided they willingly submit to the loss of their labor, and are purged by the mercy of God, as gold is refined in the furnace. Farther, although God sometimes purges his own people by afflictions, yet here by the name of fire, I understand the touchstone of the Spirit, by which the Lord corrects and removes the ignorance of his people, by which they were for a time held captive.”

västergötland, are we now on the same page?

Greg

Sounds good to me.

The problem is, I’ve seen people use this passage from 1 Corinthians 3 to argue that the gift of salvation can be lost if the works that follow do not measure up to a standard, e.g. the Investigative Judgment.

Greg

I’ll re-read the book, maybe I’ll post a review.

Gabriel

Hi Chiapet,

You made some excellent points on the differences between semipelagianism and arminianism. And I agree arminianism is closer to truth than the pelagian views of those who followed Charles Finney and to some extent John Wesley. But, arminianism is still compromising with the idea that man somehow cooperates with God in his salvation.

I agree with you that Calvinists and arminians shouldn’t throw stones at each other, and I hope we are not doing that. But, I believe the distinctions are very important. Jesus and the apostles thought this topic was very important, since they emphasized these truths so extensively thru scripture.

Bonhoeffer was a mixed bag with regard to theology. He was a great martyr for the faiht, but his theology at times was quite troubling. He had a flawed view of the nature of Christ, and at times appeared to be denying the absolute deity of Christ.

However, it was Bonhoeffer who said of American evangelicalsm to the effect that “American evangelicalism is Roman Catholicism without the priestly robes and sacraments. It is Christianity without the Reformation.”

Stan

Greg - 03 February 2008 03:15 PM

The problem is, I’ve seen people use this passage from 1 Corinthians 3 to argue that the gift of salvation can be lost if the works that follow do not measure up to a standard, e.g. the Investigative Judgment.

Greg

That does sound a bit forced concerning what Paul acctually writes.

It was asked where this meets the gospel. This is my suggestion.

16But the eleven disciples proceeded to Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had designated.
17When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some were doubtful.
18And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.
19”Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,
20teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

25Now large crowds were going along with Him; and He turned and said to them,
26"If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple.
27"Whoever does not carry his own cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple.
28”For which one of you, when he wants to build a tower, does not first sit down and calculate the cost to see if he has enough to complete it?
29”Otherwise, when he has laid a foundation and is not able to finish, all who observe it begin to ridicule him,
30saying, ‘This man began to build and was not able to finish.’
31“Or what king, when he sets out to meet another king in battle, will not first sit down and consider whether he is strong enough with ten thousand men to encounter the one coming against him with twenty thousand?
32“Or else, while the other is still far away, he sends a delegation and asks for terms of peace.
33“So then, none of you can be My disciple who does not give up all his own possessions.
34"Therefore, salt is good; but if even salt has become tasteless, with what will it be seasoned?
35"It is useless either for the soil or for the manure pile; it is thrown out. He who has ears to hear, let him hear.”

Thus that Jesus told His diciples to go out in the world and make more people diciples of Himself. And previously He had warned wouldbe diciples to consider wether they were willing to pay the total cost of their comitment. Wether they were willing to leave their nets like John and Peter or leave their toll booth like Matthew. Since Jesus did not give any teaching for the pleasure of hearing His own voice, we better pay heed to what He is saying. Apparently there is no such thing as an diciple not practically involved in following Jesus. There is it made clear that faith follows obeying just as obeying follows faith.

Hi Chiapet,

You made some excellent points on the differences between semipelagianism and arminianism. And I agree arminianism is closer to truth than the pelagian views of those who followed Charles Finney and to some extent John Wesley. But, arminianism is still compromising with the idea that man somehow cooperates with God in his salvation.

I agree with you that Calvinists and arminians shouldn’t throw stones at each other, and I hope we are not doing that. But, I believe the distinctions are very important. Jesus and the apostles thought this topic was very important, since they emphasized these truths so extensively thru scripture.

I believe the distinctions are very important as well, I wasnt arguing against discussing the finer points, I believe that is important.  I was bassically pointing out that in the past this issue has caused a lot of division and strife, even dividing whole nations.  It is interesting though that if you look at history the Arminian-Calvinist split didnt happen until after the deaths of Jacobus Arminius and John Calvin.  Which led me to the thought process that if the two men didint let their dissagrements cause division why should the groups that spawned from them?