OK... I still have these nagging questions:

[av1611jim]

But Jim, are you not one of those who has used the term " aionios life'?

No. I am not, my friend. You are mistaken.

 

[James_Newman]

1. Then if the fire is not figurative in this context, neither are the gold, silver, precious stones or the wood, hay, straw, are figurative.

Then I guess the reward must be figurative also. Hey, so is the judgment seat of Christ!

2. I'm willing to respect the figurative language of Paul.

 

[TCGreek]

I am familiar with Hope of Glory and his work in that area, having read most of his posts on this subject. I assume then when you used the word "you" that it was not a personal reference even though it was directed to me?

Secondly, my post #100 had a point which evidently you missed. How about you take you own advice, brother, and go back to the context of that post and see what was going on when I posted? K?

This carnival ride is making me dizzy!:wavey:

1. I have no problem with using the Greek or any biblical language. I think it helps in interpretation of Scripture.

2. All I'm saying is that you are either contradicting yourself or you are using Greek words conveniently.

3. And your point about "Running off to Greek-Land" as pointless, makes a foundational argument in your camp pointless.

4. Well, Hope of Glory, whose work you are familar with, will have to reply on the pointlessness of his exercise.

 

[av1611jim]

If not, what shall I tell those nations that I go to that don't speak English. If you look in my profile you will see I am a missionary, and I do go to some countries that don't speak English.
Do I need to teach them Shakespearean English before they can get saved?

Now DHK! Shame on you. The personal jab at my trust in the KJV is uncalled for. And being a "missionary" you should know better. Obviously, IF you are a missionary, then you already know that you have a heap of language work to do. Your PRIMARY objective would be to learn THEIR language so you can communicate with them at all!

Let's keep the rabbit trails to a minimum, k?

You and I both speak English. Let's try to establish a little understanding in OUR own language first before you go gallyvanting around the world about this issue. K?

And BTW; you will likely find this doctrine in many nations beside here in the good'ol USofA.

And now back to our program.....please?:BangHead:

 

[TCGreek]

Then I guess the reward must be figurative also. Hey, so is the judgment seat of Christ!

1. So are the gold, silver, etc, literally what we must contribute to the building of Christ structure, who himself is the foundation?

2. BTW, is Christ a literal foundation that we find in constructing a physical structure?

3. Again, I'm willing to respect Paul's figurative language.

 

[Lacy Evans]

1. I'm only revealing the fact that the Greek word behind "destroy" is different than the one used in Matt 10, since you are intent on using Matt 10 to help you will 1 Cor 3.

Kinda like "huge" and "large"!

 

[DHK]

Now DHK! Shame on you. The personal jab at my trust in the KJV is uncalled for. And being a "missionary" you should know better. Obviously, IF you are a missionary, then you already know that you have a heap of language work to do. Your PRIMARY objective would be to learn THEIR language so you can communicate with them at all!

Yes your right. I shouldn't have brought that subject up. And right again we have too many rabbit trails to chase as it is.

And BTW; you will likely find this doctrine in many nations beside here in the good'ol USofA.

Actually no, I have never heard of it except when I came on this board.

And now back to our program.....please?:BangHead:

Yes sir!

 

[av1611jim]

1. I have no problem with using the Greek or any biblical language. I think it helps in interpretation of Scripture.

Good for you. Whatever helps you. Me? Don't really need it.

2. All I'm saying is that you are either contradicting yourself or you are using Greek words conveniently.

Try answer "C", none of the above. It isn't an either-or situation as you would like to box it into.

3. And your point about "Running off to Greek-Land" as pointless, makes a foundational argument in your camp pointless.

My "camp" has many different views as to the particulars. For example, I believe in Exclusion from the Kingdom for unfaithful believers, but WHERE they go is still up for discussion as far as I am concerned. This fact in no way excludes me from believing the major tenets of this doctrine. And we have had sweet fellowship with many men nationwide who also hold varying views as to the particulars. You may think of it in a similar way as they who hold to pre-trib, post-trib or mid-trib. All see the second coming, but slice the pie a little differently.:thumbs:

4. Well, Hope of Glory, whose work you are familar with, will have to reply on the pointlessness of his exercise.

Maybe he will be wise enough to understand the context of my comments too! Ya think?:laugh: Or just maybe he and I can disagree as to the neccessity of 'Greek-land' but still agree on this doctrine. Ya think???

I had to add something here just to get the server to take my reply........:sleeping_2:

 

[Lacy Evans]

Yes your right. I shouldn't have brought that subject up. And right again we have too many rabbit trails to chase as it is.
Actually no, I have never heard of it except when I came on this board.
Yes sir!

Just when i was about to give up on you my brother, you come out with the kindest, most conscientious, and most gracious post I've ever seen you write!

Praise God from whom all blessings flow. Thank you my brother for taking the time to write this post. It is an oasis in the desert.

Lacy

 

[av1611jim]

Yes your right. I shouldn't have brought that subject up. And right again we have too many rabbit trails to chase as it is.
Actually no, I have never heard of it except when I came on this board.
Yes sir!

Thanks bro.

FYI: I know of men in Mexico, Jamaica, and the Dominican Republic, and England who also believe this doctrine and many more are 'coming aboard' everyday. See my comments to TC. We all do not hold to all the details identically, yet we do all accept the major points.

 

[TCGreek]

I had to add something here just to get the server to take my reply........:sleeping_2:

These are your quotes after you went off to Greek Land in post #100:

Seems like there just ain't enough difference between the two to support whatever point you were attempting to make here TC. Yeppers! They sure are different words. But they contextually mean the same thing. So this tidbit and rabbit trail off into Greek-land doesn't help your camp's assertion at all. Matter of fact, it strengthens our position.

1. You clearly went off to Greek Land.

Running to 'Greek-land' is pointless. That is my point.

You can run to 'Greek-land' all the live long day yet you would still solve nothing here. Stick to the English since God has given US that particular language to communicate with each other and in His wisdom has seen fit to cause Scripture to be translated into our mother tongue so we can know what He said. K?

2. You clearly contradicted yourself.

3. You seem to think I took you out of context. Let me know how I did that.

 

[James_Newman]

Thanks bro.

FYI: I know of men in Mexico, Jamaica, and the Dominican Republic, and England who also believe this doctrine and many more are 'coming aboard' everyday. See my comments to TC. We all do not hold to all the details identically, yet we do all accept the major points.

Major point being Jesus is coming back, and He isn't going to be happy.

 

[DHK]

And if what we do now defiles the temple that we are to be building?

There is nothing that we do that defiles the temple (building). You are reading that in there. It says "if any man defile the temple of God." It does not say, "IF WE defile the temple of God." I do not believe that is speaking of WE believers. It is speaking of false teachers. Remeber that if you look in the Greek the words defile and destroy are interchangeable. They are the exact same word. If one defiles the temple that one will be defiled. If one destroys the temple that one will be destroyed. The words mean the same.

Where do you find this in scripture? It seems doesn't carry as much weight as thus sayeth the Lord.

I find it right here in this chapter--in the words, the context, the very picture that Paul is drawing for us.

Or it lends credence to the view that there is a type of destruction that a saved person can experience at the judgment seat of Christ that doesn't involve losing eternal salvation.

That is reading into Scripture something that isn't there, that also contradicts the rest of Scripture. Paul is not teaching that. We "are not appointed unto wrath." That is a clear statement of Scripture. Chastisement ends at death, and does not carry into heaven or past that time. Nowhere does the Scriptures teach that.

If any man among you... wouldn't that be saved folks in the church? The whole reasoning is circular, as AV1611Jim I believe pointed out earlier. 'There can't be destruction because they are saved. They can't be saved because they are destroyed.'

It doesn't say "If any man among you"
It simply says "If any man." That means "any man."

 

[TCGreek]

1. According to post #34, Jim lists 1 Cor 3:15-17 as a support for their ME doctrine. Now, it turns out that 1 Cor 3:15-17 is not working for that ME doctrine.

2. I think it should be removed from the list.

 

[skypair]

Why don't you help us out by explaining what kind of evidence you will accept? We have been doing these threads over and over for what, three years? What about 1Cor 3:17?

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.
What does defiling the temple mean in chapter 3, and what does Paul mean when he says God will destroy any man that defiles the temple? I should point out that Paul calls this stuff the milk of the word, so you ought to be able to discern these things if you are a meat eater.

Jim --- our body is the temple of God.

He means that there is a sin unto death, Jim.

skypair

 

[av1611jim]

TCGreek;
1. You it was who went off into Greek land. You it was who said they are different words and even posted those words immediately before the quote of mine you provide here.

2. To confirm that, I went to my KJVSL to check the veracity of your assertion. I copy and pasted the confirmation.

3. Then I said that running to Greek land is pointless as illustrated by the proof given. I still maintain it is pointless. Your INTIAL sortie into Greek land did nothing to further understanding of the passages whatsoever. MY point was to PROVE it using your own tactic.

4. There is NO contradiction here as concerning my assertion and conviction that wanderings into Greek land help in understanding this doctrine whatsoever. My INITIAL post of Greek in this thread is perhaps the FIRST time I have EVER used that dead language to reply to some silly use of it in a discussion. And I only did THAT because you left those two words out there in la-la land with narry a word of explaination. No contradiction at all, except where you feel compelled to prove one of us wrong no matter where you may find it even if you have to fabricate something. Need a stone for your ax?

 

[TCGreek]

:wavey: :wavey:

What does the man lose? And what does he receive? To find out you must look elsewhere.

You have not answered my #118 post. I wonder why the avoidance?

 

[av1611jim]

1. According to post #34, Jim lists 1 Cor 3:15-17 as a support for their ME doctrine. Now, it turns out that 1 Cor 3:15-17 is not working for that ME doctrine.

2. I think it should be removed from the list.

Only in that steel trap you call a mind.:wavey: (joking)

It has yet to be proven it does NOT apply. It stays until unequivocal proof is given. So far it has not. We have been consigned to prove the whole doctrine using one and only one verse at a time. Yet you IGNORE our plea that you prove the Trinity for example by the same methods you require of us.

Hardly equitable nor is it reasonable.

 

[TCGreek]

1. You it was who went off into Greek land. You it was who said they are different words and even posted those words immediately before the quote of mine you provide here.

2. To confirm that, I went to my KJVSL to check the veracity of your assertion. I copy and pasted the confirmation.

3. Then I said that running to Greek land is pointless as illustrated by the proof given. I still maintain it is pointless. Your INTIAL sortie into Greek land did nothing to further understanding of the passages whatsoever. MY point was to PROVE it using your own tactic.

4. There is NO contradiction here as concerning my assertion and conviction that wanderings into Greek land help in understanding this doctrine whatsoever. My INITIAL post of Greek in this thread is perhaps the FIRST time I have EVER used that dead language to reply to some silly use of it in a discussion. And I only did THAT because you left those two words out there in la-la land with narry a word of explaination. No contradiction at all, except where you feel compelled to prove one of us wrong no matter where you may find it even if you have to fabricate something. Need a stone for your ax?

1. Then you should have stayed away from Greek land. As I said I have no problem in going to Greek land. In fact, I love Greek land. God has given us it to plow and reap the benefits.

2. Furthermore, you went on to comment that the meaning of those words strengthen your point. The only how a person can know that is through some reasoning on both sides of the issue. So you didn't just go to confirm that the words are different.

3. I brought up the two different Greek words because it is common for the ME camp to build doctrine on the differences of words. The mere fact that they were two different Greek words, presented a problem for the ME camp.

4. BTW, you were not obligated to post #100.

 

[av1611jim]

You have not answered my #118 post. I wonder why the avoidance?

Perhaps you missed my comment that this carnival ride was making me dizzy? LOL:1_grouphug: Round-n-round we go!!!!

I'll go look and answer it if it hasn't already been answered by my brethren, k?