It is not clear at all. You just made this up. all in purgatory have stubble
True. That is why they are there.
these are saved despite having had their works burned, not because of them.
That is complete nonsense. Stubble cannot enter heaven; that is why it is burned off.
in 1Cor. 3 all believers would also be awaiting final salvation
The text says "saved" regarding both groups.
It was intentionally written in context so as to define “work” (singular) as that of building the church
The departure form the context of chruch building begind with "But let every man " in verse 10.
If the reward was that of entering Heaven
No, the reward is a reward of greater glory fon the account of their greater virtues on earth. Both kinds enter heaven, but have have different metaphorical crowns.
I am skipping your table, sorry. It may make sense to you, but until you understand these simple points addressed above you are fighting your own imagination.
He does what? Both before the “but let every man” comment and after he is still referencing the building of the church by “God’s husbandry” which would be the pastors and teachers he’s talking to.
1 Corinthians 3:10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
There is no way a logical reader would infer anything else but that he is still talking about the church leadership.
>It is clear that if this was purgatory then all would need to have the dross of venial sins burned off<
It is not clear at all. You just made this up.
Read on
>all in purgatory have stubble<
True. That is why they are there.
You just affirmed that all in purgatory have stubble, and that is why they are there, but deny that it is clear that all in purgatory would need to have the dross of venial sins burned off, which is contrary to your statement i was responding to, that one class survives the fire unscathed, thus having nothing that needed to be burned off.
>these are saved despite having had their works burned, not because of them. <
That is complete nonsense. Stubble cannot enter heaven; that is why it is burned off.
It is nonsense according to your purgatorial presupposition which you force the text to support, and thus you have one class gaining reward for not losing works, which you affirm, while another suffers loss of that which should have remained, but are saved despite (yet, even so, nevertheless) this, not because of it.
>in 1Cor. 3 all believers would also be awaiting final salvation<
The text says "saved" regarding both groups.
That is what i affirmed; the issue is upon what basis, which is not purgatorial cleaning which some would not need if they passed through unscathed, and those who did would be rewarded with gain because they lost what the first class retained, rather than being saved despite of it.
>It was intentionally written in context so as to define “work” (singular) as that of building the church<
The departure form the context of chruch building begind with "But let every man " in verse 10.
That is more wresting, as there is no departure, but it continues if you read on, establishing the foundation in v. 11,. and then “Now if any man build upon this foundation”..”every man's work shall be made manifest.” (vs. 11,12)
>If the reward was that of entering Heaven<
No, the reward is a reward of greater glory fon the account of their greater virtues on earth. Both kinds enter heaven, but have have different metaphorical crowns.
I was arguing against the premise that the fire was in order to purify those in purgatory from the stubble you say they have, and thus the joy would be that of entering Heaven due to their perfection, but as the first class have nothing that need to be torched and lost, it is not purgatory, while again, the contrast between these and the class that did suffer loss shows that being saved is despite the loss of fruit which should have remained. And which suffering, which i believe can indeed be grievous, awaits the day of Christ and resurrection.
I am skipping your table, sorry. It may make sense to you, but until you understand these simple points addressed above you are fighting your own imagination.
Annalex, there is more evidence than that you have skipped, and i will simply submit this all to the reader as to who has the comprehension problem and is defending their own imagination, and that of its source.