article13

§8 Working toward Unity and Edification (1 Cor. 3:1–17)

Paul’s teaching in this part of the letter is vivid and relatively straightforward. He begins by tying together what he has been saying since 1:17. The cardinal idea in these remarks is that the Corinthians are immature. Nevertheless, Paul does at least regard the Corinthians as “infants”; he does not deny they are persons of faith. The statements are insulting, as Paul repeatedly says the Corinthians are worldly (lit. “fleshly”). The Corinthians value wisdom and declare their status as mature believers or “spiritual ones,” but Paul contradicts their assertions.

Having brusquely denied the claims of the Corinthians, Paul takes up a series of metaphors in order to instruct the church. His aim is to correct the Corinthians’ misunderstandings and to move them in the direction of unity and mutual edification. Thus, in 3:5–9 Paul teaches the Corinthians by offering himself and Apollos as examples of proper attitude and behavior. Paul casts himself and Apollos in the role of field servants who serve the higher authority of their Lord. In this picture of divine farming God grows the crop while the field hands, whose assignments are different, simply do God’s will. As God’s servants Paul and Apollos are equal, and they are paid according to their labor. God’s servants do not form competitive groups, for they are united in their efforts under the sole authority of God. Paul recognizes God’s authority over the apostles and over the church in Corinth, which he calls “God’s field.”

At the end of 3:9 Paul shifts metaphors. The Corinthians are “God’s field,” but they are also “God’s building.” Using this new image Paul speaks in the role of a sophisticated master builder and refers to the foundation he laid, which was none other than Jesus Christ. That foundation cannot be changed, although others may erect an edifice on the foundation. Going further with his explanation, Paul informs the Corinthians that when persons build on the foundation of Jesus Christ, not all buildings are equal. To illustrate this point, 1 Corinthians 3:12 catalogues a variety of building materials, and the following discussion promises a testing of the materials. This testing is an eschatological judgment on the future, promised “Day” (of the Lord). Thus, those who build on the foundation of Jesus Christ are to anticipate reward or loss in accordance with the quality and durability of the material they used. Paul’s lesson admonishes the Corinthians to a careful selection of materials, to a way of life as a church that is fitting for the foundation of Jesus Christ. In Paul’s portrayal, Christian works do not bring salvation—God accomplished that in the cross of Christ—but what Christians do with their lives makes a difference in God’s eyes. Paul applies the metaphor of “God’s building” in order to inform the Corinthians of their identity as God’s temple as they experience the indwelling of the Holy Spirit among them. Finally, Paul plainly counsels that God will give a fitting reward to any who destroy God’s temple. Indeed, 3:17 bluntly states that behavior that destroys the church will ultimately be destroyed by God.

3:1 / Paul opens this section of the letter in a fashion similar to that which he employed at 2:1. First, he makes a direct personal reference, “And I myself,” which the NIV leaves untranslated; second, he address the Corinthians directly as a group, brothers. While the form of “brothers” is a masculine plural, in antiquity that manner of address functioned inclusively, so that the Corinthians would have understood that Paul was speaking to all the brothers and sisters in the congregation.

Paul’s rhetoric is deliberate in its form and word selection. Most interpreters understand that Paul is using the Corinthians’ own language against them in his argumentation. He says he was unable to address them as spiritual people (perhaps their self-designation), not because they did not have the Spirit—from 2:10 it is clear that they did, and for Paul there was no Christian life without the Spirit—but because the Corinthians think and behave in such a way as to deny the true experience of the Spirit. Thus, Paul calls them worldly, identifying them as still part of this world. The NIV does not preserve the nuances of Paul’s language at this point. He refers to the Corinthians with the Greek word sarkinoi, which means “made of flesh,” implying that they give the appearance of belonging to this age rather than to the Spirit. In 3:3 Paul alters his language slightly (though the NIV repeats worldly) as he labels the Corinthians with the Greek word sarkikoi, which means “having the character of flesh,” a term with ethical implications. Paul’s language here highlights that the Corinthians were of the world rather than of the Spirit, whereas in 3:3 he indicates that they behave in a worldly fashion that does not conform to the activity of the Spirit. One should note in both instances that Paul has not denied the presence of the Spirit entirely as he had earlier in 2:14, when he wrote of “the man without the Spirit” by using the Greek word psychikos.

Paul describes the situation in Corinth for what he perceived it to be. Having been given the gospel, the Corinthians have not grown up in the gospel. They are mere infants (Gk. nēpioi). He does not merely say they were children (Gk. tekna); they were immature—stuck in infancy, because they have sought human or worldly wisdom rather than focusing on the crucified Christ and the meaning of the message of the cross for their lives. They were in Christ, but they had made no progress in Christian life and thought because they had the wrong focus. They had been given and had received the gospel, but by longing for human wisdom rather than God’s powerful wisdom in Christ, they had stunted their growth in Christ.

3:2a / It is crucial to avoid misreading this statement. In the context of 1 Corinthians and the corpus of Paul’s letters, one sees that Paul did not preach a two-tier message. Rather, different audiences had differing abilities to grasp the significance of the gospel of Christ crucified. Thus, after labeling the Corinthians “worldly” rather than “spiritual,” Paul plays on that contrast with the metaphor of milk versus solid food. Paul’s discussion should be understood in relation to the different comprehensions of his preaching by different hearers of the gospel. Having drunk the milk of the gospel, the Corinthians could not feed on the solid food of the cross of Christ. They could not digest the solid food of the message of the cross because they were looking for a wisdom different from God’s revealed wisdom. Their improper concerns left them immature, unable to be nourished by the bountiful banquet inherent in the gospel; as Paul explains, they were not yet ready for it.

3:2b–3 / Paul strengthens his accusations against the inappropriate thought and life among the Corinthians with the words Indeed, you are still not ready. In all the lines of this section the pronoun “you” is in the plural form, so one should understand that Paul intends to address the entire congregation. It may be that some had perceived the depth of the significance of the gospel, but Paul calls the whole congregation, not simply a faction, to accountability. They, not he, are responsible for their shallow appreciation of the significance of the gospel.

Having confronted them with their immaturity, Paul continues: you are still worldly (see the comment on “worldly” at 3:1). The NIV leaves untranslated the explanatory word “for” (Gk. gar) with which Paul launches his explanation. Paul had already used this word in 3:2a (“for you were not ready for it”), and he will use it again to introduce lines of explanation in 3:3 and in 3:4, so his rhetoric becomes judicial as he explains and calls for the Corinthians to form a proper judgment concerning their situation.

The Corinthian situation is “worldly” (Gk. sarkikoi implies “unethical”), as is clear from the jealousy and quarreling among them. Here Paul reintroduces the language of 1 Corinthians 1:11, which he used in reference to the divisions or factions that existed in the church. Paul’s choice of words suggests that the Corinthian predicament was one of destructive, inappropriate party strife. Thus Paul again accuses them of being worldly (sarkikoi), adding that they were acting like mere men rather than like people whose lives were being shaped and directed by the presence and the power of the Spirit. They live as though they were citizens of the old age prior to the revelation of the powerful wisdom of God in the cross of Christ. The Corinthians had the Spirit, but they acted like those outside the church who had not experienced God’s gracious gift.

3:4 / Paul’s final explanatory line comes in this verse (For). Having moved back to the language of 1:11 in 3:3, Paul now returns explicitly to the problem he began to address in 1:10–12—the competitive appeal to various leaders whereby the Corinthians distinguish one group from another. Paul repeats their slogans, I follow Paul and I follow Apollos, which prove their inappropriate and unethical behavior that demonstrates that they are living like mere men. This mention of the appeals in Corinth to Paul and Apollos rounds out Paul’s case against the inappropriate, Spirit-denying behavior in the life of the church, and it sets up the subsequent segments of Paul’s discussion in 3:1–17 and 3:18–23.

3:5 / This verse follows immediately on the rhetorical question posed in 3:4. From their slogans (quoted in 3:4—“I follow …,” lit. “I am of …”) one sees that the Corinthians misunderstood the nature of Christian leadership, the church, and the character of Christian ministry. The Corinthians seem to assume that the ones who ministered among them had some status and that by being identified with this or that person they gained some status-giving identity. Thus, ministry was taken to be about self and status, not about service.

To counter and correct such thinking Paul engages in sharp rhetoric and sarcasm. What, he asks, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? His questions denigrate both Apollos and himself from the level of obvious status to that of questionable significance. Having called Apollos’s and his standing into question, Paul provides a two-part answer that aims to educate the Corinthians. First, Apollos and Paul are servants, people who perform a service for the sake of others. Paul specifies that the service was bringing the Corinthians to faith (through whom you came to believe). The significance of Apollos and Paul was that they acted for the well-being of others. The service Apollos and Paul performed had two distinct but related dimensions: They served the Lord; and they acted for the sake of the Corinthians who came to believe in the Lord. It was not Paul and Apollos with whom the Corinthians were to identify. Second, they were God’s servants who worked according to God’s will (the Lord has assigned to each his task). Implicit in Paul’s remarks is the recognition that the faithful execution of God’s will meant that he and Apollos performed different but complementary tasks in ministry. They were different in the kind of ministry they did, but they were the same in that they were both servants doing what their Lord assigned them to do: work for the Lord for the sake of others. Paul transfers the focus of the Corinthians’ devotion away from Apollos and himself to the Lord.

3:6 / In order to make his points clear, Paul offers an analogy wherein he casts himself and Apollos as laborers on a farm where God is the owner. The image was a common one in antiquity, for the world was essentially an agrarian economy in which even city dwellers were closely connected with farming. Indeed, in the first-century Mediterranean world, the majority of persons were slaves or servants on large, plantation-style enterprises. The lowest-ranking slave was the field hand who was directly involved with planting, watering, tending, and harvesting the crops. For Paul to apply this image to himself and Apollos is remarkable, for the picture is far from flattering. Lest the Corinthians think that those called to preach and teach the gospel were persons of superior status with whom they could be associated and from whom they could acquire standing, Paul conjures up an image that precludes such misunderstanding. Paul founded the church (I planted) and Apollos ministered to the congregation (Apollos watered), but God was the Lord of the church (God made it grow) and the Corinthians belonged to him, not to his servants. Whatever standing the Corinthians had came from their belonging to God, not from their association with any one of God’s servants.

3:7 / Paul seeks to explain this seemingly clear image. Neither he nor Apollos is important. Only God matters. The Corinthians are so worldly that they cannot see beyond the human ministers, God’s servants, who labor among them in distinct but complementary and equally necessary ways. If there are differences between God’s servants, those differences exist because God has assigned different tasks to his workers. The tasks are important, but there is no reason to esteem one of God’s servants more than another. Rather, God is the one with whom the Corinthians are to be concerned and the one to whom the Corinthians are to give their devotion (only God … makes things grow).

3:8 / This verse reiterates and nuances the point that Paul made and explained in the previous verse. Now, however, Paul emphasizes that the different servants of God share one purpose. Alike, they do their Lord’s will to bring in the Lord’s crop, and, given the metaphor, the bigger the crop the better. Paul writes (lit.), “The one planting and the one watering are one.” Then he adds a cryptic line that the NIV translates correctly, and each will be rewarded according to his own labor. Again, Paul makes the point that the different servants of God have independent responsibilities, although now he registers the additional point that they will be rewarded individually for the quality of their work. Nevertheless, the overriding concern of these lines is to emphasize that the ministers of the gospel—and by implication all Christians—share a common concern with working God’s will. Paul will return to this matter later in this section.

3:9 / Paul’s interest in explaining his concerns is evident as once again he begins with the word For. The NIV translation of this verse is unfortunate, however. That we [Paul, Apollos, the Corinthians?] are God’s fellow workers may be the farthest idea from Paul’s mind. Literally this verse says, “For God’s we are, fellow workers; God’s field, God’s building you are.” There is a shift in or mixture of metaphors, but Paul’s thinking is clear. He recognizes that he and Apollos are fellow workers, and he recognizes that as fellow workers they both belong to God. They do not labor with God; they are God’s servants, and they labor with each other. Paul’s syntax emphasizes God and God’s priority in the tasks and the doing of ministry. The church is God’s field, God’s building, so that to claim allegiance to or status from one or another of God’s servants is nonsense. With the alteration of images—from field to building—Paul sets up the lines that follow.

3:10 / The verse has two parts: first, Paul expands the metaphor about building that he began in 3:9; second, he issues a confident warning to anyone who engages in the development of the church. While the language in this verses and those that follow is metaphorical and cryptic because of the presence of several indefinite pronouns, Paul’s logic is cyclical and progressive. He is concerned that those who are leading the church act in ways that will be consistent with and enhance the basic gospel of Jesus Christ crucified.

Paul’s remarks are aimed at the entire congregation, although those in positions of leadership would have heard themselves addressed in particular. As Paul writes, he assumes his role as the founder of the Corinthian congregation (although from the preceding lines it is clear that Paul knows God to be the owner of the building he “founded”). Paul formed the congregation in Corinth because of the will and work of God in his own life (By the grace God has given me). Paul’s particular gift was the founding of churches (Rom. 15:18–21), and in exercising this endowment he had laid a foundation that required the erection of an edifice consistent with its nature. Moreover, Paul did this work with exceptional ability—he was an expert builder. His words are ironic, for he literally says he was a “wise” (Gk. sophos) “architect.” Thus, as he laid the foundation of Jesus Christ he exercised true wisdom, not the human wisdom that was causing problems in Corinth; and his actions anticipated and even determined how others would work after him (someone else is building on it). When Paul finally issues his warning, But each one should be careful how he builds, he is focusing on the situation in Corinth, not on Apollos and Cephas, who were named as special characters in 1:12. Paul’s complaint is aimed at the current situation in Corinth, not at his fellow workers to whom the Corinthians made their appeals. This interpretation is confirmed by all that follows in chapter 3.

3:11 / Paul makes a curt negative statement that denies the validity of developments inconsistent with the original work he had done in Corinth. Paul names the foundation already laid, which is Jesus Christ, to remind the Corinthians of the groundwork of their faith. The negative form of the statement results from Paul’s perception that the foundation he laid in Corinth was being eroded by an inappropriate concern with “wisdom.”

When Paul declares Jesus Christ to be the foundation of the church in Corinth, he is not attempting to assert all the christological concerns of later periods. But he does establish that Christian faith and practice are intricately bound to the person and work of Jesus Christ, especially Jesus’ crucifixion. Paul located salvation at the cross, and to lose sight of that reality was to pervert the truth of the gospel. The church cannot be refounded on a foundation other than Jesus Christ. Such a renovation is corruption or destruction, not expert building.

3:12–13 / Paul’s concern is that the developments in Corinth be consistent with the foundation of the church—Christ and him crucified. This verse is not an allegory, although it has frequently been interpreted in that way. Paul is not primarily concerned with the building or the materials with which it is built but with the builders themselves and their methods and motives. They must work in a manner and with aims that are consistent with the nature of the church’s one foundation, Jesus Christ. He registers the heart of his concern, mentioning six different materials that may be used in building. Paul’s primary concern regarding building materials is that those who build the church in Corinth use quality materials (3:13).

The first three materials mentioned are valuable and would endure fire, but the next three materials named would be consumed by fire. In the context of Paul’s discussion and concerns in 1 Corinthians, gold, silver, and costly stones are materials fit for construction on the foundation of the gospel of Christ crucified, because they are worthy of that foundation and fit to endure fire; wood, hay, and straw are materials unfit for construction on the foundation Paul laid and are unable to survive the fire. These materials are the perishable stuff of human wisdom that finds the gospel foolish. The builders had to evaluate their materials.

The testing fire in these lines is an eschatological image of judgment, as one sees from the mention of the Day (the OT “Day of the Lord,” a day of final judgment by God). Paul uses this terminology elsewhere in his letters (e.g., Rom. 2:5, 16; 1 Cor. 1:8; 5:5; 2 Cor. 1:14; Phil. 1:6, 10; 2:16; 1 Thess. 5:2), and one also encounters such language in prophetic literature (e.g., Amos 5:18–20; Zeph. 1:7–18; 2:2–3; 3:8). The eschatological fire will reveal the quality of the building materials. There is no thought here of the purifying function of fire. It will “show,” “bring to light,” “reveal,” and test the quality of each person’s work. While the language of these verses seems threatening, one should see that there is an eschatological promise in the idea that each person’s work will be shown for what it is. Early Christians heard this promise of judgment and understood the message to be good news of God’s concern with and authority over what people did in the life of the church. The promise of retribution too often overshadows the equal or more important promise of God’s ultimate vindication of the life of the faithful. Paul will elaborate on both dimensions of God’s eschatological judgment in 3:14–15.

The language of the NIV is artificially and inaccurately restrictive with respect to whose work will be tested. Paul refers to “anyone” building on the foundation of Christ, to that person’s work being exposed and tested. At times it is crucial to notice that Paul is addressing either men or women, not both; but when the original language assumes that the remarks are pertinent to all believers, male and female, the translation and interpretation should not introduce gender-specific or gender-exclusive designations. Paul has been accused of addressing the males in a congregation and rendering the females passive observers. That criticism is unfounded, but unfortunately some translations reinforce that misperception.

3:14–15 / Paul makes a pair of statements in contrast to each other in these verses, both of which begin (lit.), “If what the work” (Gk. ei tinos to ergon). Verse 14 is positive; verse 15 is initially negative, then positive in a qualified way. These verses have produced much debate among interpreters, for they seem to say that God’s saving grace comes with differing scales of pay that are determined by human efforts. At one level this is the plain sense of the text, so that one should recognize that Paul inherited and affirmed Judaism’s contention that God would reward the righteous. At the same time, one should notice that while both appear to be saved, neither the one receiving the reward (3:14) nor the one suffering the loss of efforts (3:15) was saved by works. What both persons did with their lives obviously made a difference in God’s eyes. Only the one whose work built on the foundation of Christ and survived the test of eschatological fire on the day of judgment received a reward. Grace brings salvation for both persons who built on the foundation of Christ, but divine judgment did not find all efforts and accomplishments to be of equal value. As Paul stated in 3:10, “Each one should be careful how he builds”; for in the end, God distinguishes between the quality of human efforts.

Paul’s words are a metaphor, which means that one cannot press the images. In the case of neither reward nor loss does Paul specify how and what is the difference. Rather, his discussion focuses on why there is a difference. The foundation of Jesus Christ sets a standard that determines the appropriateness and worth of all our efforts as Christians. One may derive materials for building on Christ from a variety of resources—philosophy, sociology, science, psychology, business, arts, anthropology, and other areas (some seemingly good, some seemingly bad)—but no matter what the worldly value of such systems, their consistency with Christ and the truth of his gospel ultimately determines their value in relation to the building of the Christian community.

3:16 / Paul extends or expands the metaphor of the Corinthians’ being God’s building. He begins this verse with a rhetorical jab, Don’t you know …? Thus, he implies that they do not know the important matter that he is about to take up with them. Paul refers to the Corinthian congregation as God’s temple and explains that God’s Spirit lives in them. By selecting the particular word for “temple” that he uses here (Gk. naos) and by introducing the issue of the Spirit’s indwelling the Christian community, Paul raises the crucial topic of the nature of the church. Paul’s word “temple” is the word for the inner sanctuary of God’s temple, not merely for the general site of the temple. Inherent in this word are the themes of God’s presence and holiness, as becomes clear through the reference to the Spirit, even to those who might not perceive Paul’s nuance in the Greek.

At issue is the reality of God’s Spirit among them that means that as a church they are the special locus of God’s presence and power at work in Corinth. The character of their community and its presence in the world are to embody God’s will and work. Instead of focusing on themselves and forming destructive factions, they are to live out God’s holiness, which in Christ has been revealed to be a saving presence and power. As they live as God’s people, God’s presence is made a physical reality in Corinth, and God’s will and work come to expression in that city. This verse explicitly reminds the Corinthians of their identity as the corporate people of God, among whom the Spirit lived. At the same time, the statement implies the missional identity of the church as the real presence, power, will, and work of the Spirit.

3:17 / The final line of this section of chapter 3 is a stunning statement that has troubled interpreters as it must have troubled the Corinthians who first heard or read it. Paul has said that those experiencing God’s grace and doing God’s will would be saved and receive their reward, but those who experience grace and build inappropriately on Christ will suffer loss while being saved. Now, however, he writes, If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him. Is Paul inconsistent, or does he mean now to add that some person(s) mangling and distorting the church will suffer the greater loss of full destruction by God?

This verse is the subject of elaborate theological discussions about the eternal quality of salvation and the security of believers. But, since Paul knows nothing of those concerns in this letter, one should not press this statement to form a resolution to those debates. Indeed, one cannot tell whether Paul’s word “if” refers to a reality he knows or to a development he fears and intends to thwart. While the exact nature of Paul’s remark is not self-evident, his reason for issuing the warning comes in the clear clause of 3:17: God’s temple is sacred, and [the members of the Corinthian congregation] are that temple. The security of God’s people is found not so much in their individuality (“if anyone destroys”) as in their membership in the corporate people of God (“you are that temple”). God formed and God guards God’s temple from destruction. Paul tells the Corinthians who they are, calls them to appropriate patterns of life in relationship to God and to one another, and promises that God cares for and guards God’s people. God’s freedom in forming the temple, in caring for it, and in guarding it inform and inspire Paul’s bold word in this declaration.