Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
Strengthening families through biblical principles.
Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.
Read daily articles from Focus on the Family in the Marriage and Parenting Resources forum.
Was he answering yes or no then to my question based on Paul’s statement in 1 Cor 12 in your opinion?; “Do you believe each one (that is, each individual) member of the church is now (presently) a part of the body of Christ?”
His first paragraph was a quote from Got Questions. His second, a question not an answer. His third, unrelated to my specific question.
You answered a different question from the question I’d asked. I did not ask how One becomes a member of the body of Christ but rather this question:I did answer your question in the second half of the OP where I wrote:
How does one become a member of the body of Christ? 1 Cor 12:12-14 (NIV) states:
“Do you believe each one (that is, each individual) member of the church is now (presently) a part of the body of Christ?”
Okay, I agree. But that’s not my question.This does not refer to all those who are in church buildings on Sunday.
Your answer to your question was clear but it didn’t answer my question. Is my question not clear? I’ll post the verse again and rephrase my question:Isn't that clear? If not, which parts do I need to clarify?
I gave multiple references specifically to avoid isolating my response around a particular verse out of context. I also fully believe the importance of considering the whole of Scripture and not just a single verse, chapter, or book. This is in part why I'm engaging in this discussion so that we (you, me, and anyone else) do consider the whole of Scripture.Again, of course the regenerate are going to repent. The problem I see here is that so many isolate a particular point or verse and forget everything said elsewhere. The Scriptures should be approached with Sola Scriptura and Tota Scriptura or Systematically in mind. Those verses are of course all true, but we must take into account what must occur first in the natural man. This Ordo Salutis (order of salvation) should bring believers to their knees. God loved His elect that much that since before the foundation of the world God foreknew you. God foreknew you in the same way Adam knew Eve, God knew Jeremiah, God knew the family of Amos (intimate). This directly contrasts those that performed works that God never knew in an intimate way "I never knew you". Matthew 7:23 doesn't say that you "can" know Jesus. Of course those people knew about Jesus and were doing works or being obedient to God but the Scriptures clearly state that Jesus never knew them. Of course Jesus knew all about them so lacking knowledge isn't the emphasis but an intimate knowledge of the believer or His elect was missing. That should cause fear and trembling in all believers ~ which is a fruit of regeneration since we have a heart that only adores God but one that wants to please Him.
God must grant a person repentance. He does this by regenerating a man, putting the desire in man for Himself, drawing the man to Himself. In other words, God saves us from Himself, by Himself, for Himself.
Maybe you're just not understanding the answer given then. Otherwise, this isn't a court of law where attorneys are asking questions and the answers are basically required to be yes or no so the witness can be trapped and led where the attorney wants to take him/her.Was he answering yes or no then to my question based on Paul’s statement in 1 Cor 12 in your opinion?; “Do you believe each one (that is, each individual) member of the church is now (presently) a part of the body of Christ?”
His first paragraph was a quote from Got Questions. His second, a question not an answer. His third, unrelated to my specific question.
your exactly correct this is not a court of law .we are not under the mueller questioning . this you didnt answer my question right junk is old. all this is about argument who is right who is wrong . there is no discussionMaybe you're just not understanding the answer given then. Otherwise, this isn't a court of law where attorneys are asking questions and the answers are basically required to be yes or no so the witness can be trapped and led where the attorney wants to take him/her.
Friendly discussion is what we're after. Sharing our viewpoints and then letting the Holy Spirit do the convicting. Too often it seems we get focused on proving others wrong or proving ourselves right and either case is really a case for pride. I like to hear what others have to say and many times it inspires me to dig deeper into the word of God and hopefully grow closer to Him in my life, God willing.your exactly correct this is not a court of .we are not under the mueller questioning . this you didnt answer my question right junk is old. all this is about argument who is right who is wrong . there is no discussion
so do i but lately all i see is politics of religionI like to hear what others have to say and many times it inspires me to dig deeper into the word of God
Maybe so. I think I understood his answer to his question but I don’t understand how it answers my question.Maybe you're just not understanding the answer given then.
It was just a friendly question. Requirements for court of law questions are there to get at the truth, not so attorneys can lead. How is my question considered a leading question?this isn't a court of law where attorneys are asking questions and the answers are basically required to be yes or no so the witness can be trapped and led where the attorney wants to take him/her.
I have a novel idea.Maybe so. I think I understood his answer to his question but I don’t understand how it answers my question.
It was just a friendly question. Requirements for court of law questions are there to get at the truth, not so attorneys can lead. How is my question considered a leading question?
You answered a different question from the question I’d asked. I did not ask how One becomes a member of the body of Christ but rather this question:
Okay, I agree. But that’s not my question.
Your answer to your question was clear but it didn’t answer my question. Is my question not clear? I’ll post the verse again and rephrase my question:
Now you are the body of Christ, and members of it individually,1 Corinthians 12:27 - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=1 Corinthians 12:27&version=LEB
Do you believe each individual member of the church is presently a part of the body of Christ?
Yes, I believe it does communicate Paul’s message clearly, to include the fact that we are presently individual members making up the one body of Christ. Similar to how God (in the present tense of the time of Paul’s letter) is the one who had placed all the individuals that make up the whole body in this body;The LEB provides a good translation (parallel with the ESV): ' Now you are the body of Christ, and members of it individually'. The italics are added words to help to communicate the meaning of the verse.
So, collectively all people who are 'saints' of God form the body of Christ.
If a present member of the whole body were to lose their salvation, wouldn’t the body of Christ be less than whole?
I can't understand why something so easily answered by scripture becomes so difficult for others to understand.
The questioned asked was "Are all church members a part of the body of Christ"
Matthew 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
The church (not four walls) is built on the foundation of Christ being the corner stone, 1 Peter 2:5-9.
What makes us part of the collective body of Christ is through repentance, regeneration and being baptized in the Holy Spirit, John 3:5-7; Romans 10:9,10 as we confess Christ as Lord and Savior. This is only made possible by the grace of God that all who by faith believes Jesus is the Son of God and walk in obedience to His commands and statures are those who are truly His and are sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, Ephesians 2:8; Ephesians 1:13.
The whole body is just that.
If I remove a tick from a cow, it's still a whole cow.
You’ve changed the subject again. (What’s that called again??? Red something). Who said anything about ticks??? A tick is a foreign body, not a part of the body of Christ like His ear or His mouth or His feet. But since you brought ticks up in a discussion about the literal individual body parts of Christ (I’m not sure why you did; Reasoning for your “no” answer, maybe???) I have another question for you:
Why would God want to place a tick on Christ’s body?
I understand how and why you brought up ticks. But I had asked you about a “present member” of the whole body of Christ, not a foreign object. Ticks are foreign bodies, not a part/member of their host’s body.I used an analogy of a tick on a cow to try to demonstrate that if a person chose to commit apostasy, the body of Christ was still fully the body.
It’s okay, I understand. Most people don’t like to be told and shown how they’ve committed a logical fallacy. It’s no big deal. No worries mate [I’ve got to get back under one day and see something other than SA. There’s a chance I’ll have another business trip there coming up.]I hope you understand now that it was NOT a red herring logical fallacy by which I changed the topic.
FHG,
I wish it were that easy. There are church members in my part of the world who object to the need to be born again because they are not born from above.
They admit they are church members who are part of their church/denomination but object strongly to be labelled as evangelical, born again or believing in an inerrant Bible. They object because they tell me they are none of these three and I'm one of those fundamentalists.
Oz