I don't think the church is going to transform into a temple either, but I wouldn't be dogmatic about it. Whats your point?
So we agree that the elements in verses 11-15 are figurative. Then we can agree that the fire is figurative also. That is the point being made.
Once again there is no paragraph break. If you got hold of a KJV with a paragraph break in verse 16, somebody that knows better than the King James translators is trying to help you out. If you forget about the paragraph break and read the whole chapter out loud, you might find that verses 16 and 17 have more to do with the previous verses than you imagined.
Forget about the paragraph breaks. We don't need them. It is better to go by the context any way. Verses 16 and 17 have little to do with verses 11-15, but they have plenty to do with verses 9 and 10. Verses 11-15 is like an insert, where Paul takes the time to spend explaining one aspect of judgement. The real context here is not judgement but the building of a temple or house. He goes back to verse 9:
1 Corinthians 3:9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.
--This is not what verses 11-15 is talking about, but it is what verse 16 is speaking about. So Paul goes back to verses 9 and 10 and continues the topic of building a temple. "Ye are God's building he says (vs.). Verse 16 he ssys: "Ye are the temple of God." Both are almost the same. This is the context. Verses 11-15 are a separate passage, a separate paragraph, a separate topic, even a separate place--heaven instead of earth. You cannot impose the things taught in verses 11-15 into verses 16 and 17. It just doesn't work.
Every work you do in the church is pictured by one of those elements. What you build in this life is what you will be judged for then. There is no building going on at the judgment seat of Christ, what you have built is being tried by fire. What is God's building if it is not the temple? That is what is being built with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay and stubble.
You have expressed faulty doctrine here.
"What you have built is being tried by fire." That is not true. The JSOC is a future event, and our works
will be not are being, tried by fire.
Again, let me repeat the statement:
We do not build with wood, hay and stubble Those elements are representative of the fruit of our works, not the works themselves. A works is not gold, or a work is not stubble. Those are figurative expressions. If, for example, one teaches for the glory of the Lord he shall receive a reward for that work. If it is done for some other reason--pride and reputation, he may lose a reward or the reward he would have gotten had he done it for the right reason. We need not to be concerned on this earth with figurative expressions, but only what we are doing with our lives right now.
(eg. I am working with gold. He is working with silver. Look at him. Did you see that? He is working with the stubble of the field!). Ours is not to judge.
Furthermore, there is no way to connect verses 16 and 17 to this passage of 11-15.
You still can't get a handle on punishment as a reward for evil. Reward is not automatically good. Destruction is a reward for defiling the temple.
No you are reading into Scripture things that are not there.
There is no chastisement after death. That is what you want to believe, and you will believe it even though you cannot prove it through Scripture. A loss of reward is not chastisement, punishment, etc. I just gave you an example of that in an illustration. In the JSOC there is a judgment of works, not of evil. That is why you cannot connect verses 16 and 17 to 11-15. They are a different topic. The original Greek had not chapter breaks or even verse breaks. The translators could well have made from verse 16 onward a different chapter. It is a different subject. The reason they didn't is that it ties back to verses 9 and 10.
It is directed toward those who do, not those who would.
1 Corinthians 3:17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.
--Verse 17 is directed against those who would destroy the temple (the local church). Your argument is one of semantics.
You are placing a lot of emphasis on this imaginary paragraph break.
That, originally was for your help. I don't need it. The paragraph breaks are obvious simply because of context. The context shows a change in topic. It shows that there are others that agree with me and disagree with you. Again, these verses 16,17 have nothing to do with 11-15. They are speaking of false teachers trying to destroy the temple (local church) that was being built by believers (vs.9,10,16).
The whole context of this chapter is believers being judged for their works. There is no 'satan's emissary' in verse 16. Believers who try to adorn God's temple with their stinking wood hay and stubble are going to be destroyed. When God gives you gold to build with, you better use it.
You are being arrogant and presumptuous here. You are going on simply your own thoughts without doing any research whatsoever. It is as if the interpretation of James stands against the interpretation of all others. Have you even bothered to look into any other commentaries? The whole context is not about believers. There is a break in the context. The emblematic figures of wood hay and stubble are up in heaven. It is a differrent scene. The statement you just made infers that you have the omniscience of God; that you can judge the hearts of men; that you know whose works are wood hay and stubble and whose are not. Are you that omniscient that you know both the mind of God and the hearts of men, James? The only time anyone will know who is "building with wood, etc. is at the JSOC, and not until then. Up until that time we all do our part in working for our Lord. And if someone has a wrong motive in doing so well then he is accountable to God for his own actions; you aren't. For we shall give account of ourselves before God. (not before James).
However those that are destroying God's temple (the local church) are false teachers, and no doubt not even saved individuals. You are reading into this passage things that are not even there.
I hope you have better reason for this than the secret knowledge of where the paragraph markers are supposed to be.
Yes, it is called context. You get it by studying the Bible.
Hebrews 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
There you have it, every man has to die once because it is appointed. But wait, some men died more than once. And some men never die at all... so what? So not appointed to wrath is not a guarantee that you can't change your appointment.
Luke 12
45 But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken;
46 The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.
See, you can get a new appointment.
It is appointed unto man once to die. It sounds like you don't believe that statement. But it is true James, believe it. It is Scripture.
So is the Scripture: that believers are not appointed unto wrath. That is in the Bible also.
1 Thessalonians 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,
Please don't tell me that these verses are supposed to prove to us the doctrine of a "Baptist Purgatory!" What a shame! What a twisting of Scripture!
No, it was discussed, but I'm not going to dig backwards and find the post where you pasted it.
1 Corinthians 3:17
If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.
This was the verse being discussed
at that time and that is all that mattered.
