What is the work of the builder that will burn?

[JLB]

Yes. He also fled Damascus by way of a basket at night. But that's not the point. Let's take Paul's conversion for example. Who do you think "placed" Paul in the building? God or Ananias? Who get's the reward?

Acts 9:17, 31 So Ananias departed and entered into the house, and placing his hands on him, he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road by which you came, has sent me so that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” ​

...

Then the church throughout all of Judea and Galilee and Samaria had peace, being strengthened. And living in the fear of the Lord and the encouragement of the Holy Spirit, it was increasing in numbers. ​

You forgot to mention this part -

10 Now there was a certain disciple at Damascus named Ananias; and to him the Lord said in a vision, "Ananias." And he said, "Here I am, Lord." 11 So the Lord said to him, "Arise and go to the street called Straight, and inquire at the house of Judas for one called Saul of Tarsus, for behold, he is praying...

13 Then Ananias answered, "Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much harm he has done to Your saints in Jerusalem.14 And here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all who call on Your name." 15 But the Lord said to him, "Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel. 16 For I will show him how many things he must suffer for My name's sake." Acts 9:10-11, 13-16

Ananias chose to obey.

Without Ananias co- operating with The Lord as a co- laborer to do this work, God would have had to use someone else.

The point is, God did not do this work apart from Ananias.

Ananias will receive a reward from all of the fruit of Paul's ministry.


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

What you don't seem to be grasping is that it's God's building (not Paul's building). God owns the building, not Paul or Apollos.

In fact, Paul says God owns him and Apollos. They are God's (possessive) workers. And Paul himself says that it's God causing the increase. Because that's true.

We know God owns the building. That's why it's called God's building. What you have to do is show how it is that when man labors in the building of God, for God, that somehow the work he accomplishes with God's power tools is not God's work.

You yourself agree that the building of God is God's. So how is what we build onto the foundation of God's building, by the grace of God's increase, using his power tools, no longer God's work, his building?

Whether or not that work completed remains in Christ and makes it through the fire is what determines who you think God is and how well God works.

No, actually, for me that doctrine shows how honestly I am willing to read the scriptures for what they plainly say and shows the courage I'm willing to have to put away preconceived doctrines that color what I read in the Bible before I read the Bible.

Stop thinking ahead of time that God can not, and will not reveal by fire what his own building is made of on the Day of Christ and you will see in the Bible that he will indeed reveal what his own building, his own work, often accomplished through his servants, is made of on the Day of Christ.

For the laborer's work that can pass through fire--things revealed to be made of precious metals and stones, etc.--that laborer in the building of God will receive a crown of exultation for his labor. But there will be no reward for the laborer whose work ended up being made of nothing more than wood, hay, straw, and stubble and which did not remain and could not pass through fire to be a reward for the laborer on the other side.

 

[chessman]

You forgot to mention this part -
JLB

No, I didn't forget to mention that part. I quoted a verse demonstrating Ananias’ work, in fact. Indeed Ananias was a co-worker with God. I'm not disputing that. I thought it was an example we could use to compare doctrines.
So here goes:

Ananias chose to obey.
JLB

So far, agreement.

Without Ananias co- operating with The Lord as a co- laborer to do this work, God would have had to use someone else.
JLB

Well, that agreement didn't last long.

10 Now there was a certain disciple in Damascus named Ananias … “Ananias!” And he said, “Behold, here I am, Lord!” 11 And the Lord said to him,…​

Not quite sure why you think God would be forced into using another person. God exclaimed Ananias by name. Plus God just got through blinding Paul without any help from another person, but whatever. It’s just another example of how you and I view God’s sovereignty differently. I suppose, to be consistent, you’d have to say that if Paul didn’t cooperate with God, God would have had to use someone else, right? But up oh for your doctrine:

15 But the Lord said to him [Ananias], “Go, because this man [Paul] is my chosen instrument to carry my name before Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel. ​

Anyway, let’s get back to rewards and/or lose of them:

The point is, God did not do this work apart from Ananias.
JLB

What work? God certainly did the work of blinding Paul, removing the scales and most importantly filling Him with the Holy Spirit all by His lonesome. God no more needed Ananias to save Paul than the He did to save the Corinthians. That’s the point you guys are totally ignoring. And it leads you to say things like; Oh well, God will just pick someone else for the job(s) He assigns:

16 For I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name.” ​

Hmm. God doesn’t say Paul might or might not suffer things. God said Paul MUST suffer those things.

Ananias will receive a reward from all of the fruit of Paul's ministry.
JLB

I have no idea why you’d think Ananias would receive a reward based on Paul’s ministry. (unless you’re just stuck on a pre-conceived notion that reward=people that choose to stay saved, like Paul).
But again, that’s just how our study of Scriptures differ.
Ananias will receive Ananias’ reward (not Paul’s) for choosing to follow God’s command to “get up and Go” to Damascus and find Paul in a particular house on a particular street on a particular day. All in accordance with this same God (not Ananias) that gave Paul’s sight back and filled Paul with the Holy Spirit. Ananias' job was NOT to go save Paul.

Let’s hypothesize that Paul later de-nounced Jesus because He just couldn't suffer (the things God said he MUST suffer) any longer. Your doctrine about 1 Cor 3 insists, Paul thusly becomes de-saved and the Holy Spirit leaves Paul.

So whose reward then is lost”; God’s or Ananias? I say it has to be God’s work and it furthermore means God didn't really mean that Paul "must suffer" but rather that Paul might suffer. For it was God that saved Paul, not Ananias. You and JB would have to say (as JB admitted) that it’s God’s work that is burned up. (without any Scriptures that supported his notion, BTW, although he thinks he posted some that does).

 

[chessman]

Jethro Bodine and JLB ;

I was saved while listening to a sermon from an evangelist at a revival. Am I that evangelists' reward in Heaven if a make it through the fire?

 

[JLB]

No, I didn't forget to mention that part. I quoted a verse demonstrating Ananias’ work, in fact. Indeed Ananias was a co-worker with God. I'm not disputing that. I thought it was an example we could use to compare doctrines.
So here goes:
So far, agreement.
Well, that agreement didn't last long.

10 Now there was a certain disciple in Damascus named Ananias … “Ananias!” And he said, “Behold, here I am, Lord!” 11 And the Lord said to him,…​

Not quite sure why you think God would be forced into using another person. God exclaimed Ananias by name. Plus God just got through blinding Paul without any help from another person, but whatever. It’s just another example of how you and I view God’s sovereignty differently. I suppose, to be consistent, you’d have to say that if Paul didn’t cooperate with God, God would have had to use someone else, right? But up oh for your doctrine:

15 But the Lord said to him [Ananias], “Go, because this man [Paul] is my chosen instrument to carry my name before Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel. ​

Anyway, let’s get back to rewards and/or lose of them:

What work? God certainly did the work of blinding Paul, removing the scales and most importantly filling Him with the Holy Spirit all by His lonesome. God no more needed Ananias to save Paul than the He did to save the Corinthians. That’s the point you guys are totally ignoring. And it leads you to say things like; Oh well, God will just pick someone else for the job(s) He assigns:

16 For I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name.” ​

Hmm. God doesn’t say Paul might or might not suffer things. God said Paul MUST suffer those things.
I have no idea why you’d think Ananias would receive a reward based on Paul’s ministry. (unless you’re just stuck on a pre-conceived notion that reward=people that choose to stay saved, like Paul).
But again, that’s just how our study of Scriptures differ.
Ananias will receive Ananias’ reward (not Paul’s) for choosing to follow God’s command to “get up and Go” to Damascus and find Paul in a particular house on a particular street on a particular day. All in accordance with this same God (not Ananias) that gave Paul’s sight back and filled Paul with the Holy Spirit. Ananias' job was NOT to go save Paul.

Let’s hypothesize that Paul later de-nounced Jesus because He just couldn't suffer (the things God said he MUST suffer) any longer. Your doctrine about 1 Cor 3 insists, Paul thusly becomes de-saved and the Holy Spirit leaves Paul.

So whose reward then is lost”; God’s or Ananias? I say it has to be God’s work and it furthermore means God didn't really mean that Paul "must suffer" but rather that Paul might suffer. For it was God that saved Paul, not Ananias. You and JB would have to say (as JB admitted) that it’s God’s work that is burned up. (without any Scriptures that supported his notion, BTW, although he thinks he posted some that does).

Rather than trying come up with some "scenario" based on your "hypothesizing", and doctrinal mindset, why not just read what Paul writes about those not inheriting the kingdom of God.

I have provided all the scriptures anyone would ever need to come to the knowledge of the truth, if they were so inclined.



Without Ananias co-laboring with God to speak to Paul, then work that Paul needed at that time, does not get accomplished.


JLB

 

[Deborah13]

As a wise master builder - Ὡς σοφος αρχιτεκτων. The design or plan of the building is from God; all things must be done according to the pattern which he has exhibited; but the execution of this plan was entrusted chiefly to St. Paul; he was the wise or experienced architect which God used in order to lay the foundation; to ascertain the essential and immutable doctrines of the Gospel - those alone which came from God, and which alone he would bless to the salvation of mankind.
Let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon - Let him take care that the doctrines which he preaches be answerable to those which I have preached; let him also take heed that he enjoin no other practice than that which is suitable to the doctrine, and in every sense accords with it.
If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss - If he have preached the necessity of incorporating the law with the Gospel, or proclaimed as a doctrine of God any thing which did not proceed from heaven, he shall suffer loss - all his time and labor will be found to be uselessly employed and spent. Some refer the loss to the work, not to the man; and understand the passage thus: If any man's work be burned, It shall suffer loss - much shall be taken away from it; nothing shall he left but the measure of truth and uprightness which it may have contained.
But he himself shall be saved - If he have sincerely and conscientiously believed what he preached, and yet preached what was wrong, not through malice or opposition to the Gospel, but through mere ignorance, he shall be saved; God in his mercy will pass by his errors; and he shall not suffer punishment because he was mistaken. Yet, as in most erroneous teachings there is generally a portion of wilful and obstinate ignorance, the salvation of such erroneous teachers is very rare; and is expressed here, yet so as by fire, i.e. with great difficulty; a mere escape; a hair's breadth deliverance; he shall be like a brand plucked out of the fire.
http://biblehub.com/commentaries/clarke/1_corinthians/3.htm

I agree with Clarke, this scripture is not talking about people being the preachers work. What will be burned are those things that he/she preached/taught of the Gospel message and the doctrines that were incorrect, they are wood, stubble. Only the truth, the gold, silver contained in the message will remain and on this the preacher/teacher will receive his reward.

 

[JLB]

As a wise master builder - Ὡς σοφος αρχιτεκτων. The design or plan of the building is from God; all things must be done according to the pattern which he has exhibited; but the execution of this plan was entrusted chiefly to St. Paul; he was the wise or experienced architect which God used in order to lay the foundation; to ascertain the essential and immutable doctrines of the Gospel - those alone which came from God, and which alone he would bless to the salvation of mankind.
Let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon - Let him take care that the doctrines which he preaches be answerable to those which I have preached; let him also take heed that he enjoin no other practice than that which is suitable to the doctrine, and in every sense accords with it.
If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss - If he have preached the necessity of incorporating the law with the Gospel, or proclaimed as a doctrine of God any thing which did not proceed from heaven, he shall suffer loss - all his time and labor will be found to be uselessly employed and spent. Some refer the loss to the work, not to the man; and understand the passage thus: If any man's work be burned, It shall suffer loss - much shall be taken away from it; nothing shall he left but the measure of truth and uprightness which it may have contained.
But he himself shall be saved - If he have sincerely and conscientiously believed what he preached, and yet preached what was wrong, not through malice or opposition to the Gospel, but through mere ignorance, he shall be saved; God in his mercy will pass by his errors; and he shall not suffer punishment because he was mistaken. Yet, as in most erroneous teachings there is generally a portion of wilful and obstinate ignorance, the salvation of such erroneous teachers is very rare; and is expressed here, yet so as by fire, i.e. with great difficulty; a mere escape; a hair's breadth deliverance; he shall be like a brand plucked out of the fire.
http://biblehub.com/commentaries/clarke/1_corinthians/3.htm

I agree with Clarke, this scripture is not talking about people being the preachers work. What will be burned are those things that he/she preached/taught of the Gospel message and the doctrines that were incorrect, they are wood, stubble. Only the truth, the gold, silver contained in the message will remain and on this the preacher/teacher will receive his reward.

If someone is saved by hearing the Gospel, and attends a church that teaches OSAS and lives their life after the flesh and dies in that condition, what will be the outcome of that person on Judgement Day?


JLB

 

[Deborah13]

If someone is saved by hearing the Gospel, and attends a church that teaches OSAS and lives their life after the flesh and dies in that condition, what will be the outcome of that person on Judgement Day?


JLB

I won't respond to this question in this thread because this thread is not about the salvation of the hearer of the message but about what will be burned up in these particular verses in 1 Corinth. 3.
I agree with Clarke that it is the incorrect portions of a message/teaching given.

 

[chessman]

Without Ananias co-laboring with God to speak to Paul, then work that Paul needed at that time, does not get accomplished.

JLB

Didn't you just say;

Without Ananias co- operating with The Lord as a co- laborer to do this work, God would have had to use someone else.

JLB

How do you reconcile these two seemingly differing statements? Are you making some type of profound distinction between "co-laboring" and "co-operating"? And what's up with God using someone else besides Ananias? I asked hypothetically about Paul de-nouncing Jesus, not Ananias. But you've got the same problem if Ananias doesn't serve God's commands as you do if Paul didn't.

In speaking with Paul, God said it was Paul that "must" do these things. And he did, three days later when God (not Ananias) filled Paul with the Holy Spirit. Could God have used someone else besides Paul? Someone more suited for the task than Saul the persecutor of Christians? I'm sure he could have. But He didn't. He choose Paul for the job for a reason.

5 So he [Saul] said, “Who are you, Lord?” And he said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting! 6 But get up and enter into the city, and it will be told to you what you must do.”​

Rather than trying come up with some "scenario" based on your "hypothesizing", and doctrinal mindset, why

not just post a Scripture that says God burns up His own New Testament people that He (God) caused to be built on top of the foundation of His Son and we'll be done here.

The reason I asked about this hypothetical situation (Paul de-nouncing Christ as a hypothetical example) is that you and JB are hypothesizing that the burned up "works" spoken of 1 Cor 3 are "people you've placed in the building". Thusly, I wondered what your conclusions would be using some actual Biblical examples that we have Scriptures on and about (Ananias bringing the message of God to Saul, for example) versus some generic persons you guys are hypothesize about. And now we know what your conclusion(s) look like. Your conclusion changes from post #181 where you say God would have had to use someone else if Ananias didn't go to Paul as God commanded yet in Post #185 you say it does not get accomplished at that time as God planned it. Very inconsistent and both wrong. Both views are simply ignoring the Scriptures that teach us what Paul (not someone more willing than Paul) "must do" or not what Paul might do and that it occurred within the three days of Saul being blinded by the Lord. Sounds like God had a plan more precise than either of your ideas.

But to switch to your hypothetical example, I guess if Ananias had chickened out at Judas' front door, God's plan for removing Paul's blindness within three days would have had to wait a few days (per your post #185) or just not get accomplished at all (per your post #181).

On the other hand, my view is that Paul and Ananias and Apollos all get their individual rewards for choosing to do the working/laboring/suffering that God commanded that they do (must do, in fact, in the case of Paul). Nice and neat and tidy and consistent. And that neither Paul or Ananias or Apollos placed a single person in the Building of God. That's God's work, not theirs, in the first place.

 

[JLB]

Didn't you just say;



How do you reconcile these two seemingly differing statements? Are you making some type of profound distinction between "co-laboring" and "co-operating"? And what's up with God using someone else besides Ananias? I asked hypothetically about Paul de-nouncing Jesus, not Ananias. But you've got the same problem if Ananias doesn't serve God's commands as you do if Paul didn't.

In speaking with Paul, God said it was Paul that "must" do these things. And he did, three days later when God (not Ananias) filled Paul with the Holy Spirit. Could God have used someone else besides Paul? Someone more suited for the task than Saul the persecutor of Christians? I'm sure he could have. But He didn't. He choose Paul for the job for a reason.

5 So he [Saul] said, “Who are you, Lord?” And he said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting! 6 But get up and enter into the city, and it will be told to you what you must do.”​

not just post a Scripture that says God burns up His own New Testament people that He (God) caused to be built on top of the foundation of His Son and we'll be done here.

The reason I asked about this hypothetical situation (Paul de-nouncing Christ as a hypothetical example) is that you and JB are hypothesizing that the burned up "works" spoken of 1 Cor 3 are "people you've placed in the building". Thusly, I wondered what your conclusions would be using some actual Biblical examples that we have Scriptures on and about (Ananias bringing the message of God to Saul, for example) versus some generic persons you guys are hypothesize about. And now we know what your conclusion(s) look like. Your conclusion changes from post #181 where you say God would have had to use someone else if Ananias didn't go to Paul as God commanded yet in Post #185 you say it does not get accomplished at that time as God planned it. Very inconsistent and both wrong. Both views are simply ignoring the Scriptures that teach us what Paul (not someone more willing than Paul) "must do" or not what Paul might do and that it occurred within the three days of Saul being blinded by the Lord. Sounds like God had a plan more precise than either of your ideas.

But to switch to your hypothetical example, I guess if Ananias had chickened out at Judas' front door, God's plan for removing Paul's blindness within three days would have had to wait a few days (per your post #185) or just not get accomplished at all (per your post #181).

On the other hand, my view is that Paul and Ananias and Apollos all get their individual rewards for choosing to do the working/laboring/suffering that God commanded that they do (must do, in fact, in the case of Paul). Nice and neat and tidy and consistent. And that neither Paul or Ananias or Apollos placed a single person in the Building of God. That's God's work, not theirs, in the first place.

Nice neat and tidy, but not scriptural.

9 For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, you are God's building. 10 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 take heed how he builds on it.
1 Corinthians 3:9-10

If Paul is the master builder and the Corinthians are the building, then your perspective doesn't line up with the truth found in scripture.

Builder builds a building.

JLB

 

[Deborah13]

If someone is saved by hearing the Gospel, and attends a church that teaches OSAS and lives their life after the flesh and dies in that condition, what will be the outcome of that person on Judgement Day?


JLB

JLB, it just occurred to me that you may think that the commentary I quoted from was written by a man, Adam Clarke, who was a Calvinist or believed in OSAS. He was not and did not believe in OSAS.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Jethro Bodine and JLB ;

I was saved while listening to a sermon from an evangelist at a revival. Am I that evangelists' reward in Heaven if a make it through the fire?

"...in the day of Christ I, <insert evangelist name here>, will have reason to glory because I did not run in vain nor toil in vain." (Philippians 2:16 NASB)

"...we, <itinerant evangelistic team>, are your reason to be proud as you also are ours, in the day of our Lord Jesus." (2 Corinthians 1:14 NASB)

 

[chessman]

Nice neat and tidy, but not scriptural.

JLB

Neither you nor JB have posted any Scriptures that show that Paul "places people in the Kingdom of God" yet you claim that I'm wrong when I have pointed out Scripturally that it's God (not Paul) that places people in the Kingdom.

Ridicule is not an argument.
Inconsistency is a sign of error.

Here's my statement you claim is not Scriptural: "Paul and Ananias and Apollos all get their individual rewards for choosing to do the working/laboring/suffering that God commanded that they do (must do, in fact, in the case of Paul).

Scripture 1 that supports my view:

1 Corinthians 3:8 (LEB).. but each one will receive his own reward according to his own labor.
​

Scripture 2 that supports my view:

Acts 9:6 (LEB) But get up and enter into the city, and it will be told to you what you must do.” ​

Scripture 3 that supports my view:

Acts 9:15-16 But the Lord said to him, “Go, because this man is my chosen instrument to carry my name before Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel. For I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name.” ​

I think your just ridiculing me because I pointed out your inconsistency.

If Paul is the master builder and the Corinthians are the building, then your perspective doesn't line up with the truth found in scripture.

Builder builds a building.

JLB

First, Paul says he is like a master builder. But I've never denied Paul's not working on God's building.

Furthermore Paul says it's God's building (not Paul's) and God that is causing it to increase. Yet you and JB say that you "place people in the building" without any Scriptures to substantiate your claims.

There's nothing in 1 Cor 3 that defends your answer to the OP, either. And there's much against it.

1 Corinthians 3:10 (LEB) According to the grace of God given to me, like a skilled master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building upon it.​

1. Paul is "like master builder". However, he's quite literally and repeatedly giving the Master Builder (God) all the credit and Ownership of the building, not himself!

2. Paul like a master builder, is building God's building according to ________? My answer= according to God's grace given to Paul by his Master (not by Paul's work).

Therefore, what is Apollos and what is Paul? ______?. My answer= Nothing (not someone who "placed people in the Kingdom", your un-Scriptural answer)

I planted, Apollos watered, but God was ________? My answer=God was causing the increase, (not that God was pleased that Paul and Apollos were "placing people in the building".)

 

[chessman]

"...in the day of Christ I, <insert evangelist name here>, will have reason to glory because I did not run in vain nor toil in vain." (Philippians 2:16 NASB)

"...we, <itinerant evangelistic team>, are your reason to be proud as you also are ours, in the day of our Lord Jesus." (2 Corinthians 1:14 NASB)

Neither Scripture answers my question about the reward God gives out in Heaven being "people you place in the Kingdom" that don't get burned.

An atheist and Satan feels 'proud' of their work too. Feeling personal pride is not the same thing as a reward given out by God. Plainly and clearly.

I asked you about who/what is the reward that God gives to the evangelist that preached the revival in which I was saved into the building, not how the evangelist thinks pridefully about himself.

Are you now changing your answer, however, to the OP question from "people you place in the building" to a feeling of personal pride (the reward) or a feeling of personal loss. Is what's burned up now a feeling of pride?

I (me, a person) was saved while listening to a sermon from an evangelist at a revival.

With respect to 1 Cor 3; Is it your opinion that Paul is teaching that I (me, the actual person) am that evangelists' "reward" in Heaven if I make it through the fire or I (me, the person) am his loss if I am burned up? Yes or no?

 

[JLB]

Chessman said -

Here's my statement you claim is not Scriptural: "Paul and Ananias and Apollos all get their individual rewards for choosing to do the working/laboring/suffering that God commanded that they do (must do, in fact, in the case of Paul).

If that were the only thing you said, then I probably not have pointed out it was not scriptural.


The following speech where you "hypothesize" about several ephemeral circumstances on and on about if this would have happened and that would happened.... Is what I was referring to as unscriptural.

Mainly because there isn't scripture in it, just your rant.

The reason I asked about this hypothetical situation (Paul de-nouncing Christ as a hypothetical example) is that you and JB are hypothesizing that the burned up "works" spoken of 1 Cor 3 are "people you've placed in the building". Thusly, I wondered what your conclusions would be using some actual Biblical examples that we have Scriptures on and about (Ananias bringing the message of God to Saul, for example) versus some generic persons you guys are hypothesize about. And now we know what your conclusion(s) look like. Your conclusion changes from post #181 where you say Godwould have had to use someone else if Ananias didn't go to Paul as God commanded yet in Post #185 you say it does not get accomplished at that time as God planned it. Very inconsistent and both wrong. Both views are simply ignoring the Scriptures that teach us what Paul (not someone more willing than Paul) "must do" or not what Paul might do and that it occurred within the three days of Saul being blinded by the Lord. Sounds like God had a plan more precise than either of your ideas.

But to switch to your hypothetical example, I guess if Ananias had chickened out at Judas' front door, God's plan for removing Paul's blindness within three days would have had to wait a few days (per your post #185) or just not get accomplished at all (per your post #181).

On the other hand, my view is that Paul and Ananias and Apollos all get their individual rewards for choosing to do the working/laboring/suffering that God commanded that they do (must do, in fact, in the case of Paul). Nice and neat and tidy and consistent. And that neither Paul or Ananias or Apollos placed a single person in the Building of God. That's God's work, not theirs, in the first place.

JLB

 

[JLB]

Chessman said -

1. Paul is "like master builder". However, he's quite literally and repeatedly giving the Master Builder (God) all the credit and Ownership of the building, not himself!

Who ever said Paul owned the building.

Have you resorted to making up things that we have said?

Why would you do this?


JLB

 

[chessman]

Who ever said Paul owned the building.

JLB

nobody. Nor did Paul say "you put people in the building".

Have you resorted to making up things that we have said?
JLB

no. Have you resorted to ranting that what I said about Paul's and Ananias' and Apollos' reward, I didn't quote Scriptures that support my view? I did quote Scripture that supported my view.

Why would you do this?

JLB

Do what? I never said you claimed it was Paul's building.

I have said you're wrong to claim that "you place people in the building". Because you are wrong about that.

And I've said you are wrong that the loss of rewards Paul speaks of in 1 Cor 3 are people that are burned up. Because you are wrong about that too.

Now, I've answered all your questions, how about answering mine. Given your view/vote of the 1 Cor 3 OP question;

I was saved while listening to a sermon from an evangelist at a revival. Am I that evangelists' reward in Heaven if I make it through the fire?

 

[follower]

footnote: (like bibliography) (... "and if he makes it")

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Neither Scripture answers my question about the reward God gives out in Heaven being "people you place in the Kingdom" that don't get burned.
[...]
I (me, a person) was saved while listening to a sermon from an evangelist at a revival.

With respect to 1 Cor 3; Is it your opinion that Paul is teaching that I (me, the actual person) am that evangelists' "reward" in Heaven if I make it through the fire or I (me, the person) am his loss if I am burned up? Yes or no?

'Yes'. I'm pretty sure I've been plainly saying this all along.

1 "Therefore, my beloved brethren whom I long to see, my joy and crown, in this way stand firm in the Lord, my beloved." (Philippians 4:1 NASB)

"19 For who is our hope or joy or crown of exultation? Is it not even you, in the presence of our Lord Jesus at His coming? 20 For you are our glory and joy." (1 Thessalonians 2:19-20 NASB)

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I agree with Clarke, this scripture is not talking about people being the preachers work. What will be burned are those things that he/she preached/taught of the Gospel message and the doctrines that were incorrect, they are wood, stubble. Only the truth, the gold, silver contained in the message will remain and on this the preacher/teacher will receive his reward.

I wonder how Clarke could miss the obvious scriptural metaphor of the Temple of Christ used in scripture.

19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God's household, 20 having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone, 21 in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord, 22 in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit." (Ephesians 2:19-22 NASB)

"5 you also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6 For this is contained in Scripture: "BEHOLD, I LAY IN ZION A CHOICE STONE, A PRECIOUS CORNER stone, AND HE WHO BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED." 7 This precious value, then, is for you who believe" (1 Peter 2:5-7 NASB caps in original)

"14 This is the second death, the lake of fire. 15 And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.
1 Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth passed away, and there is no longer any sea. 2 And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, made ready as a bride adorned for her husband.
10 And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me the holy city,Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, 11 having the glory of God. Her brilliance was like a very costly stone, as a stone of crystal-clear jasper.
(Revelation 20:14-15 NASB Revelation 21:1-2 NASB Revelation 21:10-11 NASB)

"He has clothed me with garments of salvation, He has wrapped me with a robe of righteousness, As a bridegroom decks himself with a garland, And as a bride adorns herself with her jewels. 11 For as the earth brings forth its sprouts, And as a garden causes the things sown in it to spring up, So the Lord GOD will cause righteousness and praise To spring up before all the nations." (Isaiah 61:10-11 NASB)

And how did he miss this reference to the escape of Mount Zion and the burning as of stubble those who don't survive on the Day of the Lord?

"15 "For the day of the LORD draws near on all the nations. As you have done, it will be done to you. Your dealings will return on your own head.
17 "But on Mount Zion there will be those who escape, And it will be holy. And the house of Jacob will possess their possessions. 18 "Then the house of Jacob will be a fire And the house of Joseph a flame; But the house of Esau will be as stubble. And they will set them on fire and consume them, So that there will be no survivor of the house of Esau," For the LORD has spoken."
(Obadiah 1:15,17-18 NASB)

The Bible is it's own best interpreter.