Featured 1 Cor. 6:15 defines the nature of the TRUE body of Christ

Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. - 1 Cor. 6:15

For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. - 1 Cor. 12:12

Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular. - 1 Cor. 12:27

In our first text above, Paul declares that their PHYSICAL HUMAN BODIES are "members of Christ". The fact that the physical bodies are "members of Christ" demands that Paul is speaking "of Christ" metaphorically rather than literally as no literal plurality of physical human bodies could be literal physical members of the literal physical body of Christ - besides, his literal physical body is located in heaven not on earth.

So he is speaking of the metaphorical "body of Christ." The only possible kind of metaphorical body of Christ that has PHYSICAL BODIES as members is the kind that requires visiblity, because physical bodies are visible, and requires located space because physical bodies require actual geographical space. The kind that actually visibly assembles "in one place" because physical bodies can only be found "in one place." The only kind of baptism that can bring members into this metaphorical relationship as "the body of Christ" is water baptism as that is the only kind of baptism that the physical body can be subjected to (1 Cor. 3:5-16; 12:13).

The metaphorical body described in the book of Corinthians is not a universal invisible entity but a located assembly of human bodies consisting of those who had been saved and baptized and formed (1 Cor. 3:5-9) into a metaphorical "temple of the Holy Spirit" at Corinth (1 Cor. 3:10-16).

As I previously demonstrated in another thread, the unleavened bread used in the Lord's Supper represented THIS KIND of metaphorical body of Christ, that could have members removed from the "whole lump" so that it became a "new" lump.

This metaphorical body of Christ located at Corinth ("the whole lump") consisted of "ye" but not "we" and therefore did not include all true Christians on earth. Only as an institutional body does "we" come into this picture.

Now Gentleman, you must demonstrate how physical human bodies can be part of your universal invisible Reformed Catholic invented doctrine of the church. Good luck!

 

Most of the New Testament was written to such congregations or members in such congregations. So the historic contextual "we...us...ye...you" are members of congregations of like faith and order and NOT to Christians divided into denominations with opposing faith and order.

However, the Bible distinguishes between salvation and service. Baptism and congregational membership are restricted to the area of service, while salvation is one of two prerequisites for membership.

So scripture dealing with the area of salvation is applicable to all who are saved, while the scripture dealing with the NT congregational body of Christ is applicable to all who are members of such.

 

The thread was designed to demonstrate there is no such thing as a universal invisible body of Christ consisting of all the elect. The Reformed Roman Catholic doctrine of the universal invisible church theory was concocted to escape church discipline and by confusing the Kingdom and family of God with the church of God. All of God's children are indeed in one family - the family of God. All of God's children presently existing on planet earth at any given time are indeed in the spiritual and professing kingdom of God on earth. However, the congregation (ekklesia) is the visible representative administration within the family and kingdom of God on earth, where the visible rule of God can be seen and manifested in the public house of worship.

 

You are quite welcome! Anytime!

 

Never denied it and I was quite aware of the context but did not feel the need to spend time on it.

Never would deny as these are by their very profession baptized born again believers. However, this is not an assembly of "spirits" but an assembly of physical bodies and spirits - hence no universal invisible body of Christ here.

First, the body in this context "of Christ" cannot be universal or invisible as this kind of body is inclusive of PHYSICAL bodies of believers and not merely their spirits. The only possible "members of Christ" is the local assembly of physical bodies (with spirits).

This is a horrible false doctrine that perverts the very nature of true salvation. It is inexcusable error. Spiritual union is simply the reverse of spiritual separation which has nothing to do with any kind of baptism whatsoever, but with a CREATIVE act of God ("Created IN Christ") which the preceding context demand is the act of quickening (Eph. 2:1,5,8,10) and not any kind of baptism.

This is pure ASSUMPTION based on absolute silence. Paul does not say "ye are PART of the body of Christ and members in particular". He NEVER says this ANYWHERE. This presumption is demanded only by your ecclesiology.

Another statement that has nothing to do with the text or can be proved by any other text.

The bodies are members of this "metaphorical body" regardless if they are genuinely saved or not as he is speaking from the perspective of PHYSICAL BODY membership based upon their profession as taken for granted as true as there was no reason to dispute it.

The "in one place" is holy (1 Cor. 11:20-22) because the PHYSICAL ASSEMBLY cannot be an assembly apart from time and place and therefore it is the PHYSICAL ASSEMBLY that occupies "in one place".

It already has said that from 1 Cor. 1:15-3:16 as the problem was about baptismal administration of water baptism and that is the only baptism in the preceding context that the physical body is said to partake of.

To use your own words "No, it does not say that" only your ecclesiology demands that.

But in this context there is no reality of it apart from the physical, as it is the physical that is explicitly said to be "members of Christ." The emphasis here is on the physical while you are trying to change the emphasis because your ecclesiology demands it.

 

You know better than this! 1 Corinthians 3:17 is describing an assembly physical bodies WITH their spirits and that cannot possible fit your universal invisible assembly of spirit ecclesiology so why even say this? Ok, prove your point from THIS text! You can't and you know you can't as your mythical church CAN"T include physical bodies in its assembly but his contextual body of Christ INCLUDES the physical bodies in its assembly.

So very sad! You can't see past the end of your nose because of your perverted ecclesiology. First, neither the words "universal" or "invisible" are ever once found in Scripture to describe the ekklesia of Christ. Second, there is not a single metaphor used in Scripture used for the ekklesia of Christ that conveys either "universal" or "invisible." Third, you must confuse the "kingdom" of God with the ekklesia of God to support your false doctrine when the kingdom of God cannot possibly be a synonym for the ekklesia of Christ:

Some Apparent Differences


Eph. 3:15 Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named,

1 Cor. 1:13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

1 Cor. 1:2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth,

Furthermore, the following lessons will sustain these are to be distinguished from one another rather than interpreted as synonyms.


1. The difference of terminology and meaning:

a. "Family" - Greek "patria" - those fathered – lineage

b. "Kingdom" - Greek "basilea" - the rule and realm and Person of a king

c. "Church" - Greek "ekklesia" - congregation, assembly


2. The different applications

a. The Bible speaks of the “gospel of the kingdom” but never uses such language for the

family or church.


b. The Bible speaks of the “keys of the kingdom” but never uses such language for the church

or family of God.


c. The term “member” is never used in scripture to describe those in God’s kingdom or family

but only those in churches.


d. The church is called a “body” and “building” but the kingdom and family are never thus

called.


e. Jesus says “tell it to the church” but never says tell it to the kingdom or family.


f. The terms “kingdom” and “family” are only found in the singular but the term “church” is

found in the plural (36 times) and in the singular (79 times).


g. A “brother” can be placed outside the church membership by other brethren exercising

church discipline, but no human disciplinary action can remove any “brother” outside the

kingdom and family of God. – 1 Cor. 5:11; 2 Thes. 3:6,14.


h. The professing kingdom contains “tares” (Mt. 13:41) and the church contains persons like

Judas, but the family of God only contains true born again believers.


i. The Kingdom and family contain persons without water baptism (all pre-New Testament

believers and unbaptized believers in this age), but church membership is for only water

baptized professed believers – Acts 2:41-42


j. We read of ‘elders” and “apostles” in the church but no such officers are ever used to

describe those in the kingdom and family.


k. Geographical names are given to the church – “the church of God at Corinth” but no such

geographical language is ever used for the kingdom and family of God.


l. The church is described as being “built” and “fitly framed” but the kingdom is announced as

“near at hand.” Neither the kingdom or family are said to be “built” or “fitly framed.”


3. The Difference in Nature

a. The church conveys an autonomous democratic body

b. The kingdom conveys a sovereign rule by a king

c. The family conveys a paternal relationship between a father and his children


4. The difference in relationship to God

a. "Family" - relationship is defined as "children"

b. "Kingdom" relationship is defined as "citizens"

c. "Church" - relationship is defined as "members"


5. The difference in size

a. "Family" includes all saints in heaven and presently on earth - Eph. 3:15

b. "Kingdom" –Is God’s rule over the entire universe but in regard to his spiritual kingdom

on earth it includes only “the seed” presently on earth at any given time - Mt. 13

c. "Church" – includes baptized believers gathered out of God's kingdom and family on earth

who actually assemble together - Acts 2:41


6. The difference in entrance

a. "Family" is by birth "born" a child of God - I Jn. 3:18

b. “Kingdom" is by translation/birth - Col. 1:13/Jn. 3:3-6

c. "Church" is by water baptism - Acts 2:41



7. The difference in origin


a. “Kingdom” began with creation of this universe (Psa. 103:19) while the spiritual kingdom

on earth began with the first person saved from the fall (Adam) in Genesis thus born into

the kingdom of his dear son (Col. 1:13; Gen. 3:15; Acts 10:43). The professing kingdom

consists of the professed saved (true seed and tares) – Mt. 13


b. “Family” began with new birth of first child of God – Gen. 3:15 (new birth prior to

Pentecost – Jn. 3:3-11; Ezek. 44:7)


c. “Church” began with Christ’s First Advent and with the materials prepared by John the

Baptist – Acts 1:21-22; Lk. 1:17; – and first gifted officers set in the church – 1 Cor. 12:28.

First members and Foundation of church are found in the New Testament, not the Old

Testament (Eph. 2:20.


8. The difference in internal relationships


a. "Family" persons can exist outside of the church - 1 Cor. 5:11; 2 Thes. 3:6; Acts10:43


b. "Kingdom" persons can exist outside of the church - Acts 10:43; 2 Thes. 3:6


c. "Church" persons can be removed from the church but not from the family or kingdom by

discipline - 1 Cor. 5:11; 2 Thes. 3:6



9. The difference in location


a. "Family" persons are located in heaven and on earth - Eph.3:15


b. "Kingdom" persons are located throughout the world - Mt. 13:38 - "the field is the world"


c. "Church" located in one geographical spot - 1 Cor. 1:2 "The church of God WHICH IS AT

Corinth"

10. The difference in what unites


a. “Family” unity is by common birth, common Spirit, and common Father. – Rom. 8:9; Jn.

3:3-6


b. “Kingdom” unity is by common rule and professed allegiance to the same King. – Mt. 13


c. “Church” unity is by common doctrine, profession and baptism. – Acts 2:41-42



11. The difference in relationship to the gospel and salvation


a. "Family" All who are genuinely saved by the same gospel, same way, same savior in

connection with new birth


b. "Kingdom" All the saved and professed saved by the same gospel, way, Savior – Mt. 13:38


c. "Church" All who publicly profess to be already in God’s family and Kingdom BEFORE

they can be received into church membership by water baptism - Acts 2:41-42



12. There is a contrasting kingdom, family and church


a. Kingdom of darkness – Col. 1:13 – “the world” system – Jn. 17:9


b. Family of Satan – Jn. 8:44; Gen. 3:15 “seed” “tares” etc.


c. Church of Satan – Rev. 17:5; 18:4 – “synagogue of Satan” – Rev. 2:9; “corrupted” virgins

(2 Cor. 11:3-4)



13. There is a difference in the New Creation


a. "Family" many “saved” will live outside the New Jerusalem on new earth - Rev. 21:24 and

be guests at wedding - Rev. 19:8-9 and have the “leaves” of the tree of life – Rev. 22:2


b. "Kingdom" many “saved” will live outside of New Jerusalem on new earth - Rev. 21:24

and be guest at wedding - Rev. 19:8-9 and will have the “leaves” of the tree of life – Rev.

22:2


c. "Church" is the bride dressed in white (Rev. 19:6-7) and will eat of the tree of life (Rev.

2:7) and live inside the city (Rev. 22:1-3)


.

 

I have already completely repudiated this faulty interpretation of hebrews 12:18-25. The very same perfect tense verb used for the ekklesia of firstborn ones is used for the Jewish ekklesia at Mount Sinai. The ekklesia of Christ came into the presence of heaven exactly as did the jewish ekklesia at Mount Sinai - same tense - same way. Neither left earth for heaven, but both ekklesias were brought into the presence of heaven while still on earth. Only their names were recorded in heaven but they still resided in their bodies on earth. This is true of every ekklesia in the New Testament. For example, Paul tells the Corinthian ekklesia that angels are present when they assemble. Paul tells the Ephesian Ekklesia that angels are present when they assemble as God uses the ekklesia to instruct the angels. The Corinthians ekklesia is called the "temple of God" because God is present when the ekklesia assembles.


.

Are you seriously that blind? Ephesians 2:10 states in explicit language we are "CREATED in Christ" not baptized into Christ. In context this creative work is called "quickened" (Eph. 2:1,5) and verse 8 is repetition of verse 5 as anyone with eyes can clearly see, so that "saved" refers to being quickened in verse 5 and that is the creative work of God in verse 10 as the contextual antecedents clearly and easily demonstrate. There is no mental gymnastics involved in being able to see that spiritual union is the opposite to spiritual separation - only common sense joined with a multitude of Scriptures that demonstrate clearly to be separated from God spiritual IS to be separated from the LIFE, LIGHT, LOVE, and HOLINESS of God. We call it total depravity or are you familiar with that Biblical doctrine?????

You talk about mental gymnastics, your position requires you to take an ACTION that the Bible is FIXED in time as a completed action on Penteost and yet make it a reoccurring ACTION with each individual elect BEFORE Pentecost - now that is mental gymnastics to the hilt. You are forced to do this kind of irrational mental gynastic or your WHOLE ECCLIESIOLOGY vanishes into thin air. It is irrational to state that a FINISHED HISTORICAL ACTION is at one and the same time a repetitious action but that is the irrationality of your position. Don't say the cross is a repeititious ACTION as that very doctrine is precisely the basis for transubstantiation, whereas the Scripture completely repudiates that error demanding the cross was a ONCE FOR ALL action never to be repeated again as an ACTION. But your doctrine as an ACTION (not merely as an application but as an ACTION) must be repeated over and over and over again with every single elect as every single elect is OUTSIDE of Christ and it is the ACTION of being immersed into Christ (when the true doctrine is being immersed in the Spirit NOT CHRIST) that is necessary with each individual. Your doctrine is wholly based on irrational mental gymnastics when the Bible teaches it is REGENERATION not baptism that places one into spiritual union with Christ whereas the Biblical doctrine of the baptism IN THE SPIRIT is not being placed into Christ but being immersed in the Spirit.

You say this, but you can't demonstrate it. However, I can say this and I have demonstrated it both with scripture (Ephesians 2:1-10; 4:18-19) and with plain common sense.

Jerked out of context. You deny Paul's own application of this abstract teaching as he applies it not to "PART" of the body of Christ at Corinth but "YE ARE THE BODY OF CHRIST"(1 Cor. 12:27).

Jerked out of Context. You ignore that 1 Corinthians 1-6 provides the historical backdrop for this text, as water baptism is indeed administered directly under the leadership of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 1:14-16 with 3:5-9) in building the congregation as the "temple of the Holy Spirit" which "YE ARE" (not we are).

Jerked out of context. You ignore that 1 Corinthians 6:15 has already defined this metaphorical body of Christ as consisting of PHYSICAL HUMAN BODIES joined with their spirits rather than a bodiless assembly of spirits as your false doctrine teaches.

Jerked out of context. You ignore that 1 Cor. 12-14 is about spiritual gifts rather than salvation and that being brought into the membership of the local visible assembly of bodies which are individually gifted for ONE ANOTHER'S EDIFICATION makes each member "drink" (metaphor for partake) of all the benefits of such a gifted assembly as concretely applied in chapters 13-14. The context is not partaking of the Spirit in salvation but partaking of the Spirit in the sense of spiritual gifts for mutual edification.

Jerked out of context. you completely omit the repeated "likeness" as that completely destroys your interpretation as your baptism is no LIKENESS but it is the actual literal partaking of His death and resurrection or actual union with Christ's death and resurrection.

However, water baptism is an obvious "likeness" of Christ death, burial and resurrection publicly identifying not merely with Christ's death for our justification ("Freed" translates the very same term previously and consistently translated "justified" - v. 7) but identifies us in likeness with his "resurrection" life" thus in baptism the doctrine of justification is joined with the doctrine of regenerative life in LIKENESS not in actual partaking of it, so don't falsely accuse me of claiming water baptism as interpreted by me in this passage obtains actual regenerative life when I am clearly saying, and paul is clearly saying it only obtains it in "LIKENESS."

The term "baptize" is not found in Ephesians 2:1-10 except in your vivid imagination that needs it to make sense of your false doctrine. Try valid exegesis of this passage which will demand it is quickening rather than baptism that is the creative work that places one "in Christ" literally.


we have seen you do this...it is a matter of perspective.

Why be dishonest? You are being dishonest as you know very well the word "part" is not found in this text at all. He did not say ye are PART of the body but "Ye ARE THE BODY" while individually they were metaphorical members of a body that included their PHYSICAL BODIES (1 Cor. 6:17).

In context, the metaphorical body in 1 Cor. 12-26 is a complete body with head (other than Christ) as verses 20-22 describe members who function as "the head" proving that Christ is not the head in the sense of spiritual union but in the sense of final authority only. Just as the wife is a complete body with a physical head, proving the husband is not her head in the sense of union but in the sense of authority.

 

You should be sorry, because you are trying to defend your position by your position which is circular reasoning and because you are jerking texts out of context to defend your sorry doctrine.

You are defending your position by your position in that you are demanding the obvious description of a metaphorical body of Christ consisting of PHYSICAL BODIES joined with spirits is based upon Paul's supernatural knowledge that every physical body in that metaphorical body is actually born again, when he is merely speaking according to the nature of their profession. It is your doctrine that requires that every member in this metaphorical body must be regenerated to fit YOUR DOCTRINE when in fact Paul is simply describing them according to their profession rather than according to any supernatural insight into their actual spiritual condition. You have a dichotomy that says a local assembly cannot be a TRUE assembly unless every profession is absolutely true, as the TRUE assembly consists of only born spirits - circular reasoning to defend your false doctrine.

Second, you are jerking texts out of context because you can't prove that every PHYSICAL BODY that Paul refers to in the context of 1 Cor. 6:15 actually contains a regenerated spirit, as the context implies the very opposite may be true as they were indulging in things that paul just said may demonstrate such PHYSICAL BODIES which were part of that metaphorical body of Christ may actually be unregenerated.

9 ¶ Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

However, in verse 11 he choose to believe they are not such in keeping with their profession and it is according to their profession that verse 15 is stated rather than according to any supernatural insight into their actual spiritual condition. The metaphorical body of Christ these physical bodies are members of demands it is a local visible assembly which may in reality contain lost professors. Only your mental gymnastics and circular reasoning can avoid that contextual reality.





I

The place is inseparable from the assembly as it is impossible to assemble apart from "one place" as the physical bodies requires a "place" and so the assembly IS the place and the assembly is HOLY and thus so IS the place as the assembly is the place.

 

Iconoclast has simply tried to cause confusion rather than providing any valid exegetical commentary. The exegetical fact that he has been unable to answer is that the kind of metaphorical body of Christ Paul has in view in 1 Corl 6:15 is INSEPARABLE from their sin indwelt physical bodies as it is their sin indwelt physical bodies that are as much members of this kind of body of Christ as is their spirits. Such "members" (their bodies) are sin indwelt as the very context is dealing with the SINFUL use of these metaphorical "members of Christ." This completely repudiates the invisible body of Christ theory which is defined by the REGENERATE SPIRITUAL STATE or CONDITION IN CHRIST and which cannot include any kind of sinful PHYSICAL condition. Yet, Paul's concept of the body of Christ does include the sin indwelt physical condition of the human body as "members of Christ" and the immediate context of 1 Cor. 6:15 demonstrates this clearly. Hence, this sin indwelt physical body characterization by Paul of the "members of Christ" completely repudiates and exposes the invisible body of Christ as pure myth.

In addition, the fact that the body of Christ includes PHYSICAL BODIES demands it is a VISIBLE and LOCATED body of Christ as at Corinth (1 Cor. 12:27). This forces UIC advocates into another duplicity of TWO different kinds of metaphorical bodies of Christ instead of "one body" in kind, just as they are forced into the duplicity of TWO different kinds of baptism in reference with the church rather than "one baptism" in kind. So why not TWO different Spirits with reference with the church rather than "one Spirit" in kind? Why not TWO different hopes rather than "one hope" and two different Lord's rather than "one Lord" and TWO different faith's rather than "one faith" or two different God's and Father's rather than "one God and Father"?????? This kind of duplicit response is the common cultic response when scripture restricts a truth to "one" thing which contradicts the definition of that "one" thing by a cult. They escape by claiming TWO are really ONE. Who taught them math????

 

Please point out to us the word "church" or "churches" or "body of Christ" or "house of God" in Romans 11 in order to back up your view.