OK... I still have these nagging questions:

[James_Newman]

Verses 11-15, the JSOC, is a heavenly scene.
Versed 16 and 17 are speaking of the local church (the temple), which is down here on earth. This is an obvious break in the subject.

Funny thing about the JSOC is that we are judged for things we do down here on earth, not the things we do at the JSOC. The break in the subject is only in your imagination.

1. Your conclusion are clouded by your pre-conceived ideas.

ditto

2. The Bible speaks nowhere of chastening after death. Nowhere is that found in Scripture. All chastening of a believer takes place before death. We cannot read our own ideas into the Bible.

Does it speak of destruction after death?

3. This is an earthly scene, not a heavenly one as verses 11-15 depict. Therefore the wood, hay, and stubble are out of the picture and cannot be imposed into this Scripture. They are out of context.

Do you make these rules up as you go? I feel like I am playing Calvin-ball.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Looks like all of 1st Corinthians 3, actually pretty much all of 1st Corinthians up to that point, is dealing with the folks causing division by identifying with Paul, or Peter, or Apollos, or whoever.

So, the people Paul says will be destroyed in 3:17 are obviously the ones destroying the temple (church) by causing the divisions. Those could be either saved or unsaved, or maybe some of both. Paul doesn't go into detail as to what the destruction entails, that isn't the point. The point is to stop damaging the temple with all of their factions and divisions, or suffer the consequences.

Paul doesn't say anything about being chunked into hell for 1000 years at Christ's return. The only way that you can get that out of the text is if you go into it assuming that anytime Paul talks about punishment it demands exclusion from a 1000 year earthly kingdom. Sorry, but it just ain't there.

Les

Since the Bible teaches that Christ is not divided, and the Church is the Body of Christ, then the ones who are trying to divide the Body are not saved, but are 'certain men crept in unawares... ungodly men...'

 

[Accountable]

I apologize brothers for butting in where I said I would keep my nose out, but I simply cannot let this statement go.
.
DHK said, "Furthermore why put restrictions on God. God can choose to punish saved or unsaved in any way he pleases. He is God. Who are you to restrict God in the way that he chooses to punish an individual? "

This is what we have been saying all along!!!!!!!!!!

Brother James noted this in his reply but I feared its significance would get lost.

Note this one single truth please, all of you, my friends; (both KA and non-KA) please.

He is GOD and can "punish" both believers and non-believers anyway He chooses. Believers, because we are His children and He tolerates no disobedience: Unbelievers, because He tolerates no disobedience.

Thanks DHK for this concession.

Next we need to establish what is meant by "punish" within the context of believers since we are all agreed what is meant within the context of unbelievers..

Maybe DHK is seeing something!
DHK, God can and will pubish as He pleases. Forntunately He gave us the Bible and showed us how He chooses to punish both believers and unbelievers. At least you see that He can punish the unfaithful believer.

 

[James_Newman]

Since the Bible teaches that Christ is not divided, and the Church is the Body of Christ, then the ones who are trying to divide the Body are not saved, but are 'certain men crept in unawares... ungodly men...'

So anyone who doesn't agree with you is an unsaved man who crept in unawares?

 

[DHK]

I apologize brothers for butting in where I said I would keep my nose out, but I simply cannot let this statement go.
.
DHK said, "Furthermore why put restrictions on God. God can choose to punish saved or unsaved in any way he pleases. He is God. Who are you to restrict God in the way that he chooses to punish an individual? "

This is what we have been saying all along!!!!!!!!!!

Brother James noted this in his reply but I feared its significance would get lost.

Note this one single truth please, all of you, my friends; (both KA and non-KA) please.

He is GOD and can "punish" both believers and non-believers anyway He chooses. Believers, because we are His children and He tolerates no disobedience: Unbelievers, because He tolerates no disobedience.

Thanks DHK for this concession.

Next we need to establish what is meant by "punish" within the context of believers since we are all agreed what is meant within the context of unbelievers..

It is true that God is not limited, and can punish as he wishes. No one would dispute that. However God is immutable. There are certain things that even the Bible points out that God cannot do.
The Bible declares that God cannot lie. That is an example of God going against his nature--something he cannot do.
He also cannot go against His Word.
ME is a doctrine wihich is contrary to his word. Even though one might conceded it is just another form of punishment, it isn't. It has implications that deny the very sufficiency of the blood of Jesus Christ. Christ will not go against His Word. The doctrines surrounding ME do go against his word, and thus cannot be accepted.

 

[Accountable]

Since the Bible teaches that Christ is not divided, and the Church is the Body of Christ, then the ones who are trying to divide the Body are not saved, but are 'certain men crept in unawares... ungodly men...'

What is this? A new form of equivilant mathematics?

 

[lbaker]

But whatever destruction is, it isn't good.

For sure!

Les

 

[npetreley]

Since the Bible teaches that Christ is not divided, and the Church is the Body of Christ, then the ones who are trying to divide the Body are not saved, but are 'certain men crept in unawares... ungodly men...'

Amen.

...there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.

 

[James_Newman]

Amen.

...there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.

What if you received the wrong gospel to begin with? I guess that would be awkward, huh?

 

[av1611jim]

It is true that God is not limited, and can punish as he wishes. No one would dispute that. However God is immutable. There are certain things that even the Bible points out that God cannot do.
The Bible declares that God cannot lie. That is an example of God going against his nature--something he cannot do.
He also cannot go against His Word.
ME is a doctrine wihich is contrary to his word. Even though one might conceded it is just another form of punishment, it isn't. It has implications that deny the very sufficiency of the blood of Jesus Christ. Christ will not go against His Word. The doctrines surrounding ME do go against his word, and thus cannot be accepted.

Great example of circular reasoning my friend!

ME is wrong therefore it is wrong.:BangHead:

Either you accept that God can and WILL punish whomever is disobedient to Him as He sees fit or you deny it. You cannot excuse your system with the above circular nonsense.

We have shown you time and again that this doctrine upholds the sufficiency of Christ while also defending God's requirement that His children live a holy and obedient life, yet you continue in your circular merry-go-round.:tear:

 

[lbaker]

From 1st Cor. 1:

1Brothers, I could not address you as spiritual but as worldly—mere infants in Christ. 2I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready. 3You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere men? 4For when one says, "I follow Paul," and another, "I follow Apollos," are you not mere men?

Sounds like Paul is definitely addressing saved folks here. He calls these people "brothers" and "infants in Christ", not "infants out of Christ". He then goes on to accuse them of quarreling and claiming to follow different men, the cause of the divisions.

So, at least some of the trouble makers were christians.

But, I still don't see anything that demands exclusion from a 1000 year earthly kingdom.

Les

 

[standingfirminChrist]

So anyone who doesn't agree with you is an unsaved man who crept in unawares?

Anyone who doesn't agree with God and His Word is an unsaved man.

 

[npetreley]

From 1st Cor. 1:

1Brothers, I could not address you as spiritual but as worldly—mere infants in Christ. 2I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready. 3You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere men? 4For when one says, "I follow Paul," and another, "I follow Apollos," are you not mere men?

Sounds like Paul is definitely addressing saved folks here. He calls these people "brothers" and "infants in Christ", not "infants out of Christ". He then goes on to accuse them of quarreling and claiming to follow different men, the cause of the divisions.

So, at least some of the trouble makers were christians.

But, I still don't see anything that demands exclusion from a 1000 year earthly kingdom.

Les

No, there is no mention of any such thing as 1,000 years of hell as punishment in 1 Cor (or any book of the Bible). 1 Cor does mention getting sick and falling asleep as consequences.

 

[DHK]

Great example of circular reasoning my friend!

ME is wrong therefore it is wrong.:BangHead:

Either you accept that God can and WILL punish whomever is disobedient to Him as He sees fit or you deny it. You cannot excuse your system with the above circular nonsense.

We have shown you time and again that this doctrine upholds the sufficiency of Christ while also defending God's requirement that His children live a holy and obedient life, yet you continue in your circular merry-go-round.:tear:

If I accept your reasoning, Jim, then I must also accept the SDA doctrine of "annihilation of the wicked" another form of punishment, and the universalist's doctrine that everyone will be saved (including Satan) and thus there will be "no punishment."
That is not circular reasoning. It is setting up a standard by the Word of God, and using the Word of God as the final authority in all matters of faith and practice. I must be able to "rightly divide the word of truth."

 

[James_Newman]

From 1st Cor. 1:

1Brothers, I could not address you as spiritual but as worldly—mere infants in Christ. 2I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready. 3You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere men? 4For when one says, "I follow Paul," and another, "I follow Apollos," are you not mere men?

Sounds like Paul is definitely addressing saved folks here. He calls these people "brothers" and "infants in Christ", not "infants out of Christ". He then goes on to accuse them of quarreling and claiming to follow different men, the cause of the divisions.

So, at least some of the trouble makers were christians.

But, I still don't see anything that demands exclusion from a 1000 year earthly kingdom.

Les

Why should we not compare spiritual things with spiritual and interpret Paul's warning in light of Christ's in Matthew 10?

Matthew 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

 

[Rufus_1611]

No, there is no mention of any such thing as 1,000 years of hell as punishment in 1 Cor (or any book of the Bible). 1 Cor does mention getting sick and falling asleep as consequences.

"But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." - Matthew 8:12

"Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness, there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." - Matthew 22:13

"And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." - Matthew 25:30​

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Great example of circular reasoning my friend!

ME is wrong therefore it is wrong.:BangHead:

Either you accept that God can and WILL punish whomever is disobedient to Him as He sees fit or you deny it. You cannot excuse your system with the above circular nonsense.

We have shown you time and again that this doctrine upholds the sufficiency of Christ while also defending God's requirement that His children live a holy and obedient life, yet you continue in your circular merry-go-round.:tear:

If God puts the Child of God in hell for 1,000 years to pay for his or her sins after Salvation, then Christ died in vain. His blood was not sufficient to pay for those sins if the Child of God has to appease God by spending even one minute in hell.

God's children have an appointment at the JSOC, yes. But it is not an appointment to wrath.

God's people will suffer loss at the JSOC, but not punishment

 

[TCGreek]

Why should we not compare spiritual things with spiritual and interpret Paul's warning in light of Christ's in Matthew 10?

Matthew 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

1. But what does Jesus' warning in Matt 10 have to do with Paul?

2. Are they the same?

 

[lbaker]

Why should we not compare spiritual things with spiritual and interpret Paul's warning in light of Christ's in Matthew 10?

Matthew 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

I thought we were trying to stick to a discussion of 1st Cor. 3.

(and if you keep on quoting Matt. 10:28 you're going to open up the whole annihilation can of worms)

Les

 

[James_Newman]

I thought we were trying to stick to a discussion of 1st Cor. 3.

(and if you keep on quoting Matt. 10:28 you're going to open up the whole annihilation can of worms)

Les

Does Paul build on the foundation of Christ or not? How can you understand Paul without understanding the underlying teachings that he claims to build upon?