jlay wrote:I would look at it from works. Obviously the emphasis of this section of 1 Cor 3 is to emphasize rewards. The quality of work. The foundation that it is built upon.
Nowhere did I disagree with this.
jlay wrote:To take this verse and build a doctrine of purgatory is spurious at best.
First of all, in this entire thread I was not defending purgatory per se, I was merely showing the similarities between it and the Bema seat judgment based on 1 Cor. 3:13-15 alone, there are of course others. So to state that the doctrine is based on one verse is to show ignorance of the discussion at hand and of the doctrine itself.
jlay wrote:Let's take chrarity for example.
On one hand you have someone, compelled by the spirit to meet the needs of the less fortunate. The work is genuinely sourced by God, and the person is walking in the good works prepared beforehand. And thus, they are building on the foundation of Christ.
On the other you have someone under compulsion of guilt, who gives out a motive not genuinely sourced. The world has no way to distinquish the motive. God still works the good in and through it, but there is nothing built on the foundation of Christ.
Anything that is not built on Chirst J, what is it built on? Greed, self promotion and self aggrandizement, boasting of one's abilities, etc, etc. I don't know about you but I would think almost everyone else sees those as sins. And of course God uses such for good, He's been know to use even evil acts for the greater good. But what does that have to do with anything? The intention of the act is still what it is and it is NOT built on Christ, therefore it is a sin. I really don't know how many ways you can spin out of that one.
jlay wrote:Those things will be burned up in a sense, and what is left will be the genuine.
Now who's adding things scripture doesn't say? Nowhere does 1 Cor 3 say that there would be something genuine left out of anything burnt up.
jlay wrote: Does fire in this case refer to a punative time and place?
That is exactly the understanding of not only the loss suffered due to works that are burnt up, but also that the person is still saved but only as though escaping through fire. The imagery Paul is painting is unmistakable.
jlay wrote:Again, seems like a spurious place to attempt to build or support such a doctrine.
Not spurious at all when taken into consideration with other scripture, but yet again, I'm not here to defend purgatory. You asked a question and I answered it.
jlay wrote:FWIW, I have no problem calling the latter sin. Of course the bible doesn't say faith without workd is sin, but dead. But I think we can both agree that the sin of this is different than the sin of say adultery or murder. In fact the corinthians are told not to even associate with a believer than engages in such things. I think you would have a hard time reconciling within the RCC doctrine that there is no distinction in such things. Paul gave warnings of zeal without right knowledge. (Rom. 10:3) He speaks of maturity versus infancy. Spirit versus flesh, in terms of which resource the believer is operating out of.
Oh I agree totally, I hope I didn't give you the impression otherwise. Those are certainly not what we call mortal sins such as the ones you listed above. They are venial sins for which a temporal punishment would have been just before death and is still just to purify the soul before entering heaven, no more and no less.
jlay wrote:Fundementally, we can infer that there were some problems with the Corinthian church. And, that some were related to the church genuinely walking versus things being done out of self-sourcing. In fact, do as you say, and look at 1 Cor 3. Paul says, And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to infants in Christ. 2 I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able, 3 for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking [a]like mere men? 4 For when one says, “I am of Paul,” and another, “I am of Apollos,” are you not mere men?
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 [c]field, God’s building.
Ok, so what is the distinction of spiritual and fleshly. Is it committing agregious sins? No, maturity versus immaturity.
Note the word I bolded and underlined. Nowhere did I say those were egregious sins. But I would certainly consider Immaturity (not maturing in Christ) for a Christian as a sin.
jlay wrote:We could add, what then is Peter? God is building the church, and growing it, and as we see here, there is nothing to do with Peter being a pope or some other central legislative authority. In fact, we know scripturally that Peter went to the Jews and Paul went to the gentiles. Paul was called by Christ himself to be the apostle to the gentiles.
This came out of left field and I certainly disagree with it but I will leave that for a different thread.
jlay wrote:The people are God's building.
Yes, and some have a good foundation in Christ for which they will receive a just reward, and some have a weak foundation not in Christ for which they will suffer loss but still be saved as though through fire.