Friday, May 1, 2020

The Nature of the "Justification" in 1 Corinthians 4:4



For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified (δικαιοω): but he that judgeth me is the Lord. (1 Cor 4:4)

Commenting on the meaning of δικαιοω in this verse, James Prothro wrote:

What kind of act is justifying here? Given the context, most understand justifying here as “forensic.” However, one must attend to the nature of the forum in question. Weiss, among others, holds that the language of “justifying” here is an incidental continuation of Paul’s legal metaphor of evaluating apostles as “judging” in 4.3: δεδικαιωμαι is simply chosen to continue describing the Corinthians’ behavior in terms of a quotidian courtroom, having nothing to do with Paul’s theology of “justification” before God. Robertson and Plummer summarize: “The word is used in a general sense, not in its technical theological sense.” But this relies on a faulty misunderstanding of δικαιοω’s usage in contemporary Greek courtroom-language – where its “general sense” would not indicate approval of persons. This passage, no less than Romans 2.13 or 8.33-34, illustrates the oddity of Paul’s justification-language within his contemporary legal contexts and, again, leads one to look for its Pauline sense in his theological language, not in Roman courtrooms.

The context of Paul’s argument points us to the ubiquitous (in Judaism and early Christianity) concept of God’s judgment and, in particular, future-eschatological judgment. Paul’s references to divine judgment in 4.4-5 reaches back to his explanation of the place of apostles as God’s workers, entrusted with carrying out their duties as God has assigned (3.5-17). Paul cases the evaluation of that work against the horizon of God’s eschatological “day” (ημερα, 3.13) on which each person’s behavior and existence will be disclosed and tested by fire (93.13-15; note the generalized language of εκαστος and τις in 3.10b, 12, 13, 14, 15). The language of reward and penalty (μισθος/ζημια, 3.14-15) as well as the contrast between the narrow “salvation” (σωθηεσται, 3.15) of any whose work was shoddy and the “destruction” of any who destroy God’s church (φθερι, 3.16-17) point to traditional conceptualities of the final judgment in Judaism, and in this passage constitute an eschatological warring. Paul suspends the judgment of apostolic work to the common judgment of all Christians at the eschaton and warns the Corinthians that God’s judgment will determine the faithfulness of all and destroy those who have married God’s church – by immortality, divisiveness, or otherwise. From this Paul calls the Corinthians to turn from boasting in and judging by their human wisdom to humbly stand in their God-given existence as those who belong to Christ and thus together with all who belong to Christ (3.18-23; cf. 1.30).

Paul continues the foregoing in 4.1-5. He returns to the specific issue of the Corinthians’ evaluation of apostles and, particularly, of himself (4.1-3). Here again he asserts that apostles are God’s underlings and are subject first and last to God’s judgment, and he draws on his former descriptions of the final judgment to diminish the ultimate value of Corinthian opinion. Their judgment, a mere ανθρωπινη ημερα (4.3), is contrasted with the eschatological “day” (ημερα) that discloses and reveals the character of people’s work. That is the day when the Lord’s judgment of Paul will occur, since it is God and no other who judges Paul (4.4). The future-eschatological character of this judgment is underscored by the explicit temporal markers in the conclusion Paul draws in 4.5: Paul’s lack of ability to determine his own justification by his conscience and its total dependence on God lead him to conclude (ωστε) that none should judge προ καιρου, i.e., before the parousia (εως αν ελθη ο κυριος) at which time (τοτε) all will be revealed, judgment will occur, and each person (εκαστος) will receive commendation (επαινος) accordingly (4.5). Paul has again set apostolic evaluation within the context of the final judgment of all believers, and here with explicitly future-temporal indications. The eschatological character of this judgment and justification is also underscored by the similarities of Paul’s depiction of the judgment scenario to traditional ones in Jewish writings and, moreover, elsewhere in Paul. Compare especially the discourse of future judgment and justification in Romans 2, used to counteract another instance of human “judging” within the church. Paul speaks there of the same day (ημερα, 2.5, 16) of judgment, of rewards and punishments for “each” and “every” person (2.5, 8-10), of the revelation of human secrets (κρυπτα, 2.16), of commendation from God (επαινος, 2.29), and of justification and life for those who endure (2.7, 10, 13). Note also Paul’s similar application of the principle here to all believers in Romans 14.4 that a servant “stands or falls” in relation to his own master (God) and should therefore not be judged by others – again in the context of the final judgment and again with universalizing terms (πας and εκαστος, 14.10-12; cf. too 1 Cor. 2.15).

Though in 1 Corinthians 4.4 Paul only states that his conscience is not a reliable indicator of God’s justification, the “justification” he is talking about here is one rendered at the final judgment. Justification here conceptualizes God’s act legally and in a future-eschatolgoical context. Looking for more precision on the act itself, the context focuses the reference to justification on God’s evaluation of persons and whether they will receive commendation or destruction. Active vindication against foes is not in view. That is, “justifying” here seems to consist in God’s holding Paul (or any other) in the right over against his own standard of judgment – in this case, Paul’s faithfulness as an apostle (4.2). This judgment scenario depicts God as one who stands over all as judge of their behavior, ready to “destroy” anyone in the church who mars or harms his church, his own temple, and to “save” from his own judgment those who have built on the foundation of Christ (cf. 3.10-17), however shoddily . . . many scholars are quick to distance 4.4. from Paul’s justification-theology – especially due to its implied eschatological reserve . . . But, if elsewhere Paul’s δικιαοω indicates God’s approval at the final judgment, that is precisely what 1 Corinthians 4.4. is about. Justification here is the divine judge’s favorable evaluation of a person at the eschatological judgment. (James B. Prothro, Both Judge and Justifier: Biblical Legal Language and the Act of Justifying in Paul [Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament 461; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018], 117-21)

 As 1 Cor 3 is references by Prothro, be sure to check out:


Blog Archive