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

It is obvious we don't agree and it is just as obvious that you and Martin can't prove my expositions are wrong as you jump and run, pit and run. My frustration is due to these kind of responses.

T

Context! I John is not written about the church but about how one can know they are a true child of God. You are READING INTO the text "church" when it is not found. He is not speaking about church membership but about FAMILY membership as the NEW BIRTH is the continued theme of this book.

You make these unfounded assertions, jerk texts out of context and then proclaim you have defended your point when you have not.

CONTEXT!!!! He is not speaking of the church in verse 19 but of the PHYSICAL BODY of the individual believer. He is addressing them according to their profession. Paul is not omniscient, but simply addressing them in terms that fit their profession, baptism, and membership.

CONTEXT!!! That is simply an impossible interpretation and if you want to challenge me to prove that, then open a thread on it and I will gladly demonstrate it.

More nonsensical assertions that have no basis in Scripture and are easily overturned. The foundation is New Testament in nature, the first materials are apostles "FIRST apostles" the second materials are prophets "SECONDARILY prophets" thus contradicting your whole ecclesiology which should have Adam and Eve first, and the prophet Abel second.

Says who? The church is not the family or kingdom of God as both preceded the church. We have proven that by proper exegesis of the texts above. Water baptism and a profession make you a member of the Lord's "churches" (plural) as God has even set in those lost members for the edification of the church (1 Cor. 11;18-19; Jn. 17).

It most certainly does match and the only reason it does not match in your estimation is due to improper exegesis and understanding and using the historical meaning of the term. It is used in an institutional sense in classical Greek and only by ignoring that usage can you substantiate your invisible church theory.

He is actually repudiating your view. That man turned out to be a brother (2 Cor. 2:6) and Paul was merely admitting his inability to discern hearts and commanding them to treat them as professed brethren until it could be proven they were not. When he speaks of "without" he means those outside the congregational membership at Corinth. He is not talking about a universal invisible church membership. The preceding context proves this as they are commanded to "purge OUT" that leaven from the "whole lump" which when does producing a "new" lump which THEY ARE! This command to "purge OUT" is the metaphorical equivalent to the literal command in verse 5.

 

Just more unfounded assertions. prove it by sound exegesis! Explain how these elders have been made overseers of "the church" in this text that is described as purchased by the blood? If he had said that these elders had been made overseers of their church that would be one thing. But he says they had been made overseers of the church purchased by Christ's blood.

Your dualistic interpretation requires two altogether DIFFERENT KINDS of churches, two DIFFERENT KINDS bodies of Christ two DIFFERENT KINDS of baptism. It is impossible to claim they are ONE in the sense that one is the visible expression of the other as they CONTRADICT each other in all points.

For example, one is local and visible while the other is universal and invisible. One demands salvation before membership while the other salvation is membership. One requires water baptism before membership while the other requires nothing but salvation for membership. One removes erring brethren from its membership while the other cannot do so.

For example, one is baptism in the water of previously saved, while the other is salvation by immersion in the Spirit One begins with John the Baptist while the other begins on Pentecost thus demanding all previous to Pentecost are lost outside of Christ still in spiritual separation/death from God.

For example, one body consists of physical human bodies - 1 Cor. 6:15 while the other consists of spirits. There is no visible unity or expression but complete contradictions to each other.

The modern reformed attempt to conform the visible to the invisible by denying water baptism for membership in the visible overthrows not only all historic Christianity in its unified practice of water baptism as prerequisite for church membership but overthrows the clear precepts and examples of scripture.

 

I have proven that theory by a careful exegesis of the text and the two perfect tense verbs translated "have come." The Jewish ekklesia at the foot of Mount Sinai came into the presence of God, angels and heaven without leaving earth and the very same verb with the very same tense is used of the church with regard to Mount Sion. Their names are the only thing "in heaven" while they are assembling on earth and all heaven is in attendance. Forsaking of that assembly was in all practical terms forsaking of the New Covenant (Heb. 10:25-30). Attending the assembly was a visible embracing of the covenant and all of its promises. If the church was actually in heaven he would not have to say their "names were written in heaven" because they would be in heaven.

Again, you never respond to any exposition of a text I have given, you simply ignore it, assert things you cannot prove and then jump from text to text. How about some direct confrontation of contextual evidences that I have presented or am I going to have to follow you down your rabbit trails jumping from text to text while you keep on making mere assertions without any proper exegetical evidence to support your assertions?????

 

But there are some of you that believe not." For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who believed not and who should betray Him. -Jn. 6:64

Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil? - Jn. 6:70

While I was with them in the world, I kept them in Thy name. Those that Thou gavest Me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition, that the Scripture might be fulfilled. -Jn. 17:12

He knew "from the beginning" he was an unbeliever (Jn. 6:64) but not only had him baptized and received among his congregation (Acts 1:21-22) but installed him into a church office (1 Cor. 12:28) on purpose in order "that scripture might be fulfilled."

Did the omniscient Christ purposely set him in the congregational body as it pleased him to accomplish his purpose or did he not (1 Cor. 12:18) as he explicitly says he chose and set him in his congregation for a precise purpose (Jn. 17)??

For there must be also heresies among you, that those who are approved may be made manifest among you. - 1 Cor. 11:19

Note the word "must be' not "might be". Notice the stated purpose for such heresies among you?

God sets every member in the local visible congregational body, both lost and saved to accomplish his purposes. They are members according to the requirements for membership and they have been set in that membership by God for his express purposes.

 

I make spelling mistakes also, but you have so many it is hard to read. No,there is no bride, church, body in heaven right now. If you think there is find a text to show so! Hebrews 12:22-25 does not prove it so any more than it proves Israel was in heaven in verses 17-120. The only thing in heaven is their names not their persons.

2 Corinthians 11;2 is addressing a local visible congregation. What is true of this local visible congregation is true of the church as an institution. In the future it is the institutional church which is the bride of Christ (Rev. 19:6-7) while other saints are guests who are invited to the wedding (Rev. 19:8-9) and many who will live OUTSIDE the New Jerusalem upon the New earth ("saved nations" - Rev. 21:24).

Take note of what I am going to say next because it is the root problem from which the error of the universal invisible church originates. Your view totally disregards, ignores, denies the institutional use of ekklesia and that is a primary use in Classical Greek literature. If you admitted to the institutional sense (abstract sense) you would have no texts to argue for such a contradiction of terms.

The abstract institutional sense of ekklesia is used for example in 1 Cor. 14:29 where Paul says that "in the church" he would rather speak five words that can be understood. No particular church is identified, he does not say what church he would speak five words in, but it is the kind of church he an speak "in" that hears what he says. That is the institutional abstract use of ekklesia. It is found in a context where the ekklesia at Corinth is being instructed and rebuked concerning their congregational service. Verse 29 refers to all such congregations as verses 33-34 proves ("churches").

1 Cor. 6:15 and 1 Cor. 12:12; 27 prove the only body of Christ is this institutional body that exists on earth and always in a concrete form with regards to its actual existence.

 

Both of your response are proven false above because the "brother" that was excluded was not excluded for faithfulness and he was a "brother" (2 Cor. 2:6). Those whom he rebuked were brethren and they were not rebuked for faithfulness.

This is also false as there is "a sin unto death" when God takes the life of a saint and it is not due to faithfulness.

Context! He is contrasting them to those that believe not (v. 26) and no one denies they are sheep by nature and will remain so, but to assume that sheep do not go astray (unfaithful) is pressing this text way too far.

Wrong! look at the consistent pronoun "we".

1. WE died with him
2. WE shall live with him
3. IF "we" endure "we" shall
4. IF "we" are faithless, He remains faithful (not we remain faithful).

 

I deny it, because Hebrews does not teach that and neither does any other scripture in the bible. I have given you the exegetical evidence it does not teach a universal invisible church both in 1 Cor. 6:15 and in Hebrews 12 and all you do is ignore the evidence and keep repeating assertions that the evidence proves wrong.

 

The universal invisible church doctrine repudiates the fundementals of Biblical salvation and I have addressed this clearly in another post but nobody responds! I wonder why???? So I will post it here again:



1 ¶ And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
4 ¶ But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,
5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved
6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:
7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

Paul explicitly states we are "in Christ" by a creative act. In context that creative act is quickening. Quickening IS being brought into spiritual union with Christ - it means "made alive." This is easy to see if you simply follow Paul's argument in reverse from verse 10.

1. "For" we are his workmanship is stated in contrast to verses 8-9 "and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast "For".

2. "For" by grace are ye saved through faith" is explanatory of verses 5-7. Note the same language ("by grace are ye saved") is first stated in verse 5 as explanatory of being "quickened" that is the means of bringing us into spiritual union "with Christ" (v. 8).

3. Verses 4-5 are contrasted to verses 2-3. Verses 2-3 explain the pre-quickened condition of the Ephesians that is first introduced by the words "who were dead in tresspasses and sins" in verse 1, whereas verses 4-5 continue the quickened description began in verse 1.

4. The term "quickened" means MADE ALIVE and is placed in direct contrast with being SPIRITUALLY DEAD meaning SPIRITUALLY SEPARATED FROM GOD who is life, light, love, and holiness.

CONCLUSION: Ephesians 2:1-10 is a contrast between the previous state of SPIRITUAL SEPARATION and the QUICKENED STATE or state of SPIRITUAL UNION WITH CHRIST. Ephesians 2:5,8,10 define the act of quckening (restoration to spiritual union with Christ) as God's gracious creative act while denying it originates or is a product of works. There is no BAPTISM IN THE SPIRIT even mentioned here, as no baptism LITERALLY places anyone into spiritual union with Christ as that is the creative act of God called QUICKENING. Quickening IS spiritual union with Christ. Whereas, the baptism in the Spirit is time fixed as an ACTION and cannot place anyone into spiritual union with Christ at any time. The fact that it is quickening and not baptism completely repudiates the whole universal invisible church theory as it destroys the very means such a theory claims to bring that idea into existence.

and again:

The universal problem (spiritual death/separation) originates with the fall - "in Adam"
The universal solution must also originate at the same time (Gen.3:15) or else all existing in spiritual death/separation are without the LIFE, LIGHT, LOVE and HOLINESS of God in life and in death and thus remain "in Adam" OUTSIDE of Christ, thus outside of God's eternal plan of redemption (Eph. 1:4; Rom. 8:28-32).

The baptism in the Spirit originates with Pentecost not with the fall. The baptism in the Spirit is one of many facets of establishing the new covenant VISIBLE administration with a VISIBLE ministry and VISIBLE ordinances as God's modus operandi for confirming a VISIBLE public house of worship that worships "in one accord in one place"

and again,

Spiritual union has nothing to do with the church or the baptism in the Spirit as both of those are TIME FIXED (time located and restricted) but the people of God span from Genesis Revelation.


The baptism in the Spirit has no existence prior to Pentecost as every single text previous to Pentecost on this subject uses the future tense. The church is the body of Christ and it has no existence prior to its own foundation which consists of New Testament materials (Eph. 2:20; 1 Cor. 12:28).


So according to your doctrine of the church everyone prior to the "foundation" of the church, prior to Pentecost are OUTSIDE OF CHRIST as you have no mechanism to place them "in Christ" as there was no baptism in the Spirit (as you define it) prior to Pentecost. They have no body of Christ to be placed into as there is no church prior to its own "foundation."


Yet Abraham was "in Christ" (Gal. 3:17) justified by faith and manifesting all the fruits of the Spirit and chosen "in him" before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4) and he is the gold standard for all who are "in Christ" (Rom. 4:11,16; Gal. 3:6-17) as there is NO SALVATION OUTSIDE OF CHRIST for anyone at anytime anywhere. But you doctrine demands by its very TIME FIXED RESTRICTIONS that all prior to Pentecost are OUTSIDE OF CHRIST as your doctrine has no CHURCH BODY OF CHRIST, no BAPTISM IN THE SPIRIT for them. So according to your doctrine you deny spiritual union with God and other saints to over 4000 years of the people of God and we have only lived 2000 since Pentecost.


So you are teaching a false doctrine, which doctrine had no existence prior to Pentecost or prior to the "foundation" of the church, but spiritual union between all who are in the family of God did exist. Spiritual union is simply the reverse of spiritual separation. Spiritual separation placed all mankind in the family of Satan (Jn. 8:44-45) while spiritual union reverses that and places one in the family of God and its is called regeneration not baptism and regeneration did exist prior to both Pentecost and the "foundation" of the church (Jn. 3:3-6; Ezek. 44:7-9; Deut. 5:29; 29:4; etc.).

Oh sure! Just make a generalization. Let's be specific and handle each one in its own context one at a time! Go ahead be my guest but please don't make wild assertions with first demonstrating it by good exposition backed up with good exegetical evidence.

 

You are brought to this conclusion because it is YOU that confuse the church with the family of God. You can't distinguish between salvation (family of God) and service (church) so if I exclude all the rest of the FAMILY from the CHURCH you assume I must believe they are lost because YOU make them synonyms when they are DIFFERENT.

However, when the FAMILY seen as all of the saved in heaven and earth, and when the church is seen only as that portion of the saved on earth who obey the Great Commission then no confusion exists and none of the rest of the FAMILY are denied salvation simply because they don't obey the Great Commission. BTW you can't obey the Great Commission outside of congregation of water immersed believers that deny the ordinances are sacraments and denies infant membership - period!

Martin holds to the ridiculous and unbiblical theory that a group of paedobaptism sprinkled group of people can be recognized as a true NT. Church when such an idea cannot be found in either precepts or examples in Scripture and when precepts condemn such an idea.