Monday, July 22, 2019

Daniel Frayer-Griggs on 1 Corinthians 3:15 and the σωζω + δια + genitive construction being instrumental

In my article 1 Corinthians 3:15: A very un-Protestant Biblical Verse, I discuss the problem this text poses to most Protestant theologies. I have added the following taken from a very interesting work on the imagery of "fire" in eschatological texts in the New Testament:

Commenting on the sense of σωζω + δια + genitive, Daniel Frayer-Griggs (who himself is a Protestant) wrote:


The construction occurs twice in the Septuagint, in eight other instances in the Greek New Testament (not counting 1 Cor 3:15), frequently in the Apostolic Fathers, and sparingly in Philo and Josephus. In the vast majority of these cases, the preposition takes the instrumental sense.

The sense of eight of the ten additional biblical occurrences of the phrase σωζω + δια + genitive is uncontroversial:

1. “ . . . so he [the LORD] saved them [Israel] by the hand [εσωσεν . . . δια χειρος] of Jeroboam son of Joash” (LXX 2 Kgs 14:27)

2. “The Lord has founded Zion, and the humble among the people will be saved through him” (δι’ αυτου σωθησονται) (LXX Isa 14:32b).

3. “Indeed, God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him” (σωθη . . . δι’ αυτου) (John 3:17).

4. “But we believe that we are saved through grace” [δια της χαριτος . . . σωθηναι] of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11).

5. “Much more surely then, now that we have been justified by his blood, will we be saved through him [σωθησομεθα δι’ αυτου] from the wrath of God” (Rom 5:9).

6. “Now I would remind you, brothers and sisters, of the good news that I proclaimed to you . . . through which also you are being saved” (δι’ ου . . .σωζεσθε) (1 Cor 15:1-2).

7. “For by grace you have been saved through faith” (σωσωσμενοι δια πιστεως) (Eph 2:8).

8. “He saved us through the water [εσωσεν . . . δια λουτρου] of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit” (Titus 3:5).

In each of the above passages—two of which are from undisputed Pauline epistles, and two of which are from Deutero-Pauline epistles—the phrase σωζω + δια + genitive unambiguously takes the instrumental sense . . . in each case the object of the preposition belongs to a cluster of theological themes related to the gospel: faith, grace, Jesus, the good news, or the waters of rebirth and the Holy Spirit. Indeed, one gathers the impression that resistance to the instrumental sense of “saved through fire” in 1 Cor 3:15 stems from the apparent inconsistency between being saved by means of fire, on the one hand, and being saved by grace, the gospel of Jesus, or faith in Christ, on the other hand. For this reason, the remaining two biblical occurrences of the phrase σωζω + δια + genitive are of particular significance, despite the difficulties implicit in their own meanings.

According to the Deutero-Pauline 1 Tim 2:15, “she [woman] will be saved through childbearing” (σωθησεται . . . δια της τεκνογονιας). The instrumental sense of this phrase I frequently contested, presumably due to the tension that it creates with the conviction that one is justified by faith, nor works. The local reading of the verse would suggest that the woman’s life will be preserved through the dangerous process of giving birth. Attractive as this reading may be to modern exegetes who find this verse overtly patriarchal, it does not adequately fi the context of 1 Tim 2:15, for in the Pastoral Epistles σωζω is always used soteriologically, and given this context the instrumental sense of the preposition δια is most plausible. The instrumental reading, moreover, coheres with the Jewish view that the travails of childbirth in some way overcome the curse of Eve (see Gen 3:16) and that women attain merit by fulfilling their duties as wives and mothers.

We also have a rough parallel to this construction in 1 Pet 3:20, where we read that in the days of Noah, “eight persons were saved through water” (διεσωθησαν δι’ υδατος). At first glance, this verse appears to support the local reading, and some have taken it in this sense, for Noah and his family were preserved as they physically passed through the waters of the flood. However, as v. 21 explains, “baptism, which this [the flood] prefigured, now saves [σωζει] you.” According to the allegorical logic of these verses, the water of the deluge typologically signifies the water of baptism and the verb διεσωθησαν stands parallel to σωζει. Admittedly, reading the destructive waters of the flood as a type signifying the saving waters of baptism is, as R.T. France puts it, “a little whimsical.” However, as France goes on to observe, it is “certainly to belong the imagination of a keen typologist.” Indeed, if we follow the logic of 1 Peter 3 itself, the sense of the verse seems to be that the flood waters were instrumental in the salvation and cleansing of the believer. Thus, in our consideration of the construction σωζω + δια + genitive in 1 Cor 3:15, it is significant that in every other biblical instance it is used in the instrumental sense. (Daniel Frayer-Griggs, Saved Through Fire: The Fiery Ordeal in New Testament Eschatology [Eugene, Oreg.: Wipf and Stock, 2016], 211-13)

This meaning is also borne out in Greek texts contemporary with First Corinthians (e.g., texts dating to the Apostolic Fathers, such as 1 Clem. 9:4; 12:1; 58:2; 2 Clem. 3:3; Pol. Phil. 1:3; Herm. Vis. 3.3.5; 3.8.3; 4.2.4; Sim. 9.12.3). Such is also buttressed by Philo,

. . . for he too uses the construction σωζω + δια + genitive exclusively in the instrumental sense (Leg. 3.189; Cherub. 130; Agr. 1.13; Abr. 145). The most significant of these is in his discussion of the judgment of Sodom:

Because of the five finest cities in it were about to be destroyed by fire, and one was destined to be left unhurt and save from every evil. For it was necessary that the calamities should be inflicted by the chastising power, and that the one which was to be saved should be saved by the beneficent power” (σωζεσθαι δε δια της ευεργετιδος). (Abr. 145) (Ibid., 214)

In light of the overwhelming evidence that the believer will be purified through the instrumentality of the fire in a posthumous state, Frayer-Griggs writes:

This is not to question Paul’s insistence that believers are justified by faith (see Galatians 2-3 and Romans 3-4) are ultimately saved through Christ (see 1 Cor 15:1-2; Rom 5:9). Indeed, in his building metaphor Paul assumes that the foundation is Christ (v. 12). Yet in Paul’s soteriology, the believer’s justification and future salvation do not preclude the possibility of punishment for sins either in this life or at the last judgment (see Rom 14:10; 1 Cor 4:4-5; 5:5; 11:29-32; 2 Cor 5:10). The verb ζημιωθήσεται in v. 15a may suggest that some of the saved will be “lightly punished at the judgment, depending on their deeds,” and in this instance the builder’s punishment may be the painful purification process of being saved δια πυρος. Perhaps the most relevant Pauline parallel is 1 Cor 5:5: “hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh [εις ολεθρον της σαρχος], so that [ινα] his spirit may be saved [σωθη] in the day [εν τη ημερα] of the Lord.” here the circumstances of exclusion, suffering, and possible death contribute (ινα) to the individual’s salvation on “the day.” Similarly, in 1 Cor 3:15, the ire of divine judgment on “the day” appears to be the circumstance through which the builder is purified of his sins and through which Christ saves.  (Ibid., 216, emphasis added)