1 Corinthians 3:9 ?

[bridgeforsale]

5 What then is Apollos? And what is Paul? Servants through whom
you believed, even as the Lord gave opportunity to each one.
6 I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the growth.
7 So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is
anything, but God who causes the growth.
8 Now he who plants and he who waters are one; but each will
receive his own reward according to his own labor.

9 For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's building.

10 According to the grace of God which was given to me, like a wise
master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building on it. But
each man must be careful how he builds on it.
11 For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid,
which is Jesus Christ.

I ran across a Roman Catholic who authored a site dealing with soteriology & he used this verse to show that man must cooperate with grace & that merit does indeed play a role in the economy of salvation.

I couldn't help but to note the obvious .... this verse can be effectively used by either Arminians or Calvinists; however, it does seem to bolster the position of writers like N.T. Wright who commonly point to the fact that we are called for good works (and we are to play a transformative role in this world).

Unfortunately the author of the site I visited he (like apparently many Catholics) erroneously believes that reformed protestants teach sin and salvation have no relation to one another. In other words we are saved by faith alone (sola fide) and therefore whether we live a life of utter sin or holiness is of no consequence.

However, did Calvin ever teach it's OK to sin? Did he ever advocate Christians remain idol and not play a transformative role in this world? Or did he simply say God is the cause of everything and therefore everything that happens aligns with His will?

Do we cooperate with grace? When scripture states murder or adultery is sinful do we obey these commands or ignore them? When scripture exhorts us to love our neighbor and give to the poor do we do these things or ignore what God wants and go our own way? Of course we do these things and we understand that we are doing them with full assent and consciousness. However, we also understand that God is both the initiator and perfecter of our faith, as scripture teaches, and we simply don't go beyond scripture and try to explain God's reasoning (as Paul and Job before him tells us we cannot do).

So I guess I'm curious to hear views regarding this verse & whether anyone thinks it could be viewed as supporting Catholic or Arminian soteriology (and of course why)?

[TyRockwell]

It seems unlikely that Catholics believe that protestants justify sin because we are saved by faith alone. In my youth I was told that Catholics justify sin, because they'll be forgiven at their next confession.
Thoughts?

[RBerman]

This passage can be used for all sorts of things. However, it's best used as a description of the consequences of the work of Christians. It's not about how we get saved; that's not really a focus of Corinthians like it is in Romans or Galatians. 1 Corinthians is about moral behavior. The church there was a moral quagmire, and Paul wants to motivate the Christians to act like Christians. "OK, you're saved; you're right with God; you're looking forward to eternity in heaven. Now what?"

When you're feeling safe from God's wrath, there's the danger of becoming complacent, of forgetting that you weren't just saved from something, but were also saved for something: the good works God has prepared in advance for you (Ephesians 2:10). Paul wants the Corinthians to catch a vision for what it means to be on "God's team." He wants them to work, but he also wants them to remember that only God can make their work bear spiritual fruit. It's one of those balances in the Christian life.

So your Catholic buddy is wrong in making this passage about soteriology. It's not. It's about Christian living. Faith is never alone.

[bridgeforsale]

It seems unlikely that Catholics believe that protestants justify sin because we are saved by faith alone. In my youth I was told that Catholics justify sin, because they'll be forgiven at their next confession.
Thoughts?

I'm not really speaking to popular opinion among Catholics ... but it is a common charge leveled by Catholic apologists. They believe that we are not only justified by faith but also by works. Consequently they mistakenly view the Protestant doctrine of sola fide as a doctrine that preaches works or obedience is not necessary (when of course our view is that these things are "marks of faith" rather than things which can in themselves save us).

In essence reformed Christians believe God saves us through a unilateral act of providence, whereas Catholics (and Arminians) believe in a prevenient grace, which enables all people to make a free choice.

Obviously all people are not equally equipped to accept the Gospel. For one thing millions maybe billions of people have never heard of Jesus Christ or God. Either you believe God is omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient or you don't. For those who do accept these as attributes of God it's simply illogical to say that those denied exposure to the Gospel message are given an equal measure of grace sufficient to freely choose a Christ they never heard of. If we are saved "by grace" (see Ephesians 2:8), and exposure to the Gospel is an absolute precondition to our salvation (see Romans 10:14), then it's reasonable to conclude that exposure to the Gospel is an aspect of grace. Since God has the power to ensure all receive the gift of Gospel exposure .... and yet all do not receive this benefit, we must attribute this to providence. Therefore, the only logical conclusion is all people are not exposed to saving grace (whether you want to view grace as irresistible or not is a separate issue ... but no one can tell me that everyone who has or will ever live on the face of this earth since the time of Christ has been given an equal opportunity to accept Christ).

I wonder how many Arminians or Catholics really believe that if they never heard the name Jesus Christ they would still somehow believe in Him? As if God whispered the contents of scripture into the ears of most believers and we don't need to be evangelized to or exposed to the bible.

[lee_merrill]

Catholic apologists ... believe that we are not only justified by faith but also by works. Consequently they mistakenly view the Protestant doctrine of sola fide as a doctrine that preaches works or obedience is not necessary ...

Paul however says this:

Romans 2:13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous.

And then there's James! Martin Luther was not fond of this verse:

James 2:24 You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.

I believe justification has multiple senses, we are justified when we come to faith in Christ, and then there is further justification when the imputed righteousness becomes substantial in our character (what I believe was meant in James).

But no, there cannot be salvation while the life doesn't change from a life of sin, we must have repentance.

Mark 1:15 "The time has come," he said. "The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!"

Blessings,
Lee

[bridgeforsale]

Paul however says this:

Romans 2:13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous.

And then there's James! Martin Luther was not fond of this verse:

James 2:24 You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.

I believe justification has multiple senses, we are justified when we come to faith in Christ, and then there is further justification when the imputed righteousness becomes substantial in our character (what I believe was meant in James).

But no, there cannot be salvation while the life doesn't change from a life of sin, we must have repentance.

Mark 1:15 "The time has come," he said. "The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!"

Blessings,
Lee

You're offering a pretty common objection to sola fide .... but these verses cannot abrogate the very clear words of Paul.

For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law (Romans 3:28).

IMO James does not abrogate this. He states:

But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works (James 2:18).

All James does is affirm witness of faith, he's not saying works in themselves justify.

[lee_merrill]

You're offering a pretty common objection to sola fide .... but these verses cannot abrogate the very clear words of Paul.

For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law (Romans 3:28).

Right, justified in the initial, "imputed righteousness" sense.

IMO James does not abrogate this. He states:

But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works (James 2:18).

All James does is affirm witness of faith, he's not saying works in themselves justify.

He does use the same exact word as Paul: "is justified by what he does, and not by faith alone."

However, I propose here that James is speaking of a different form of justification, that of righteousness that is no longer just imputed, that is now substantially real:

James 2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness," and he was called God's friend.

I don't see a way to say "faith alone" in James, and so I would point to an apparently different use of "justified."

Blessings,
Lee

[RBerman]

James is speaking to a completely different context than Paul. Paul is asked, "How do you come to be saved?" and answers, "Faith alone." James is asked, "How do you know if you have been saved?" and he answers, "Your alleged faith is not alone." So you're right that they are using the word "justification" differently. Paul's using it to refer to the forgiveness of sins, and James uses it to refer to proving your claim to be saved-- justifying the idea that you are saved.

[bridgeforsale]

Right, justified in the initial, "imputed righteousness" sense.


He does use the same exact word as Paul: "is justified by what he does, and not by faith alone."

However, I propose here that James is speaking of a different form of justification, that of righteousness that is no longer just imputed, that is now substantially real:

James 2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness," and he was called God's friend.

I don't see a way to say "faith alone" in James, and so I would point to an apparently different use of "justified."

Blessings,
Lee

I've always taken it to mean something like .... what one believes modifies their actions & true faith in God results in a desire to obey His commands and love one another? He states things like I will show you my faith by what I do (or by my deeds); which seems to align with what I'm saying (but you might have a point)?

I think James is dealing with professing Christians who weren't evidencing their faith by their actions and behavior.

I also think it's important to look at the examples of works provided by both James and Paul. James offers examples of charity (providing clothing and food for people in need), whereas in Galatians Paul seems to target circumcision (or the ritualistic elements of the Levitical code). Therefore, I think it's fairly clear that when these two men use the term "works" they use it differently (rather than using the term justification differently).

That's my take on it anyway?

[lee_merrill]

I also think it's important to look at the examples of works provided by both James and Paul. James offers examples of charity (providing clothing and food for people in need), whereas in Galatians Paul seems to target circumcision (or the ritualistic elements of the Levitical code). Therefore, I think it's fairly clear that when these two men use the term "works" they use it differently ...

Agreed.

Paul's using it to refer to the forgiveness of sins, and James uses it to refer to proving your claim to be saved-- justifying the idea that you are saved.

But the person is being justified, and thus I would say this is a further justification. As there is apparently a third level!

Galatians 5:5 But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope.

When we are perfected in the Lord's presence, we will then be fully "justified", called righteous.

Blessings,
Lee

[RBerman]

But the person is being justified, and thus I would say this is a further justification. As there is apparently a third level!

Galatians 5:5

But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope.

When we are perfected in the Lord's presence, we will then be fully "justified", called righteous.

Agreed. Many things related to salvation of are spoken of in several tenses. Thus we have been saved, we are being saved, we will be saved. Same thing with whether or not the Kingdom of God exists now, and whether Christians are in it now. Now and not yet, in different senses.

[bridgeforsale]

Agreed.


But the person is being justified, and thus I would say this is a further justification. As there is apparently a third level!

Galatians 5:5 But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope.

When we are perfected in the Lord's presence, we will then be fully "justified", called righteous.

Blessings,
Lee

I think Paul's point is we cannot acquire faith, which = justification (imputed righteousness) through works, desire, or effort (which is an all encompassing statement, to include trying to acquire saving faith through charitable works). Faith is acquired by grace (and nothing else).

It's really back to the same point I made earlier ... there is witness of faith. Anyone who truly has faith will naturally want to obey God. This is IMO what James is pointing to (and at this point all Christians, including Catholics, agree with this premise). James states I will show you my faith by my deeds (which I think is a very clear statement).

Paul's statements regarding faith based justification were never meant to abrogate the volume of passages that tell us to love one another, help those in need, worship God, learn His word, and behave decently (in fact Paul himself harped on these points as much as any other NT author). These are the marks of faith (not rituals like circumcision). In fact circumcision was never a real mark of faith. It can hardly be said that the Jewish people of the Old Testament were faithful (even though they were uniformly circumcised). Circumcision was a seal of covenant membership (like baptism, a rite that is no longer specific to one ethnicity or one gender), but not salvific grace.

An indication of grace is faith, however, false professions of faith aren't uncommon. Obedience, love, charity, and humility are witness of faith. The divinely inspired words of James are instructions by God for the people of God. Grace isn't solely spiritual and intangible, it is also embodied in God's words to us, His Gospel. His sheep will listen, learn, and obey those words. However, we still need to be taught; and that teaching occurs primarily through scripture (with the indwelling Holy Spirit softening our heart and opening our eyes and ears to the truth).

[Obsidian]

1 Corinthians 3:8 has absolutely nothing to do with salvation. It's talking about God rewarding both Apollos and Paul for their respective missionary efforts. It's about heavenly rewards, not their relationship to God.

[Rdr. Arsenios]

You're offering a pretty common objection to sola fide .... but these verses cannot abrogate the very clear words of Paul.

For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law (Romans 3:28).

The works OF THE LAW do not include ALL works - Merely the works of the Law of Moses as it evolved in the Old Testament covenant among the Jewish faithful...

To emphasize this really elementary point, ALL WORKS do not equal SOME WORKS...

So to argue that justification is not by ALL WORKS, because Paul here states that justification is not by SOME WORKS [eg the works of the Jewish Law], is fallacious on its face...

IMO James does not abrogate this. He states:

But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works (James 2:18).

All James does is affirm witness of faith, he's not saying works in themselves justify.

He is clearly saying that faith without works is the faith of demons, and that apart from works there is no faith, that faith apart from works is dead... And the Church from the beginnings has understood this to mean what it means in simple common sense, and that is that faith spawns works, and that the doing of the works perfects the faith that spawned them, and that the doing of the works of the Faith is voluntary, depending upon the free will of the person doing them.

The caveat here, of course, is that there is nothing that we can DO that EARNS the Grace of God, yet this Grace is attained through faith, and faith is increased by works...

Justification, btw, is not some imputed righteousness that exists apart from virtue... It is the works of virtue that bring us the Grace of God that cannot be earned... Our only power is to desire to turn away from evil, and to take steps to do so... Salvation is dependent upon us doing so, yet earns us nothing, and simply places us in a real - eg sincere - supplication to God for His Mercy... iow God alone saves, and gives man the grace to repent from his sins, IF man is willing and desires to do so... This is known in Church talk as discipleship.

Arsenios

[Heterodoxus]

[1 COR 3:]9 For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's building.
.....
I'm curious to hear views regarding this verse & whether anyone thinks it could be viewed as supporting Catholic or Arminian soteriology (and of course why)?

Before I can develop a response to your post, it would be helpful to me for you to please explain your understanding of the following words and terms in 1 COR 3:9 --

• we;
• fellow workers;
• you;
• field, and
• building.