Why Did Jesus Say He was the Temple?

Originally posted by @sonship
Do you know that the New Testament says that we know Jesus in the flesh no longer?

[b] " ... even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him so no longer." (2 Cor. 5:16)

So you are right and the Apostle Paul is incorrect?[/b]

Did you know that Jesus would have a second coming?



Do I lie?

Originally posted by @sonship
You're wasting our time.
Goodnight.

No jaywill

I know who I am and I am a lot of things but being a time waster is not one of them

Good day

No man can say Jesus is Lord, except in the Holy Spirit.

First Corinthians 12:3

Berean Literal Bible
Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking in the Spirit of God says, "Jesus is accursed," and no one is able to say, "Jesus is Lord," if not in the Holy Spirit.

New American Standard Bible
Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God says, "Jesus is accursed"; and no one can say, "Jesus is Lord," except by the Holy Spirit.

He's a real Zen master

Originally posted by @karoly-aczel
Did you know that Jesus would have a second coming?



Do I lie?

The issue is not about the second coming but about our knowing Jesus.

And as demonstrated - no one can say Jesus is Lord except in the Holy Spirit.

That is why you deflected into side issues rather than confess Jesus as your Lord.

Originally posted by @karoly-aczel
He's a real Zen master

If I DID seriously want to know something about Zen Buddhism, I would not come to you.

Originally posted by @sonship
The issue is not about the second coming but about our knowing Jesus.

And as demonstrated - no one can say Jesus is Lord except in the Holy Spirit.

That is why you deflected into side issues rather than confess Jesus as your Lord.

I have been taught directly

My life has radically changed for the better. None of your rhetoric has done that

Now I do bid you a good day, I fear I've said too much in public again

Have last the last word by all means

Originally posted by @rajk999
Scholars? You listen to scholars.
You are one of those.
You hold fallible men up on a pedestal.
You are a brown noser.

Cant you read? Paul was crystal clear.

Here is one of the words with the same original Greek word: REJECTED = CASTAWAY

[i]For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were ...[text shortened]...
Hope you have your asbestos suit ready pal because you sure talk nonsense and believe nonsense.

Food for thought...

From gotquestions.org:

“Question: "Does Hebrews 6:4-6 mean we can lose our salvation?"

Answer: Hebrews 6:4-6 states, “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame.” This is one of the Bible’s most difficult passages to interpret, but one thing is clear—it does not teach that we can lose our salvation. There are two valid ways of looking at these verses:

One interpretation holds that this passage is written not about Christians but about unbelievers who are convinced of the basic truths of the gospel but who have not placed their faith in Jesus Christ as Savior. They are intellectually persuaded but spiritually uncommitted.

According to this interpretation, the phrase “once enlightened” (verse 4) refers to some level of instruction in biblical truth. However, understanding the words of scripture is not the same as being regenerated by the Holy Spirit. For example, John 1:9 describes Jesus, the “true Light,” giving light “to every man”; but this cannot mean the light of salvation, because not every man is saved. Through God’s sovereign power, every man has enough light to be held responsible. This light either leads to the complete acceptance of Jesus Christ or produces condemnation in those who reject such light. The people described in Hebrews 6:4-6 are of the latter group—unbelievers who have been exposed to God’s redemptive truth and perhaps have made a profession of faith, but have not exercised genuine saving faith.

This interpretation also sees the phrase “tasted the heavenly gift” (Hebrews 6:9) as referring to a momentary experience, akin to Jesus’ “tasting” death (Hebrews 2:9). This brief experience with the heavenly gift is not seen as equivalent to salvation; rather, it is likened to the second and third soils in Jesus’ parable (Matthew 13:3-23), which describes people who receive the truth of the gospel but are not truly saved.

Finally, this interpretation sees the “falling away” (Hebrews 6:6) as a reference to those who have tasted the truth but, not having come all the way to faith, fall away from even the revelation they have been given. The tasting of truth is not enough to keep them from falling away from it. They must come all the way to Christ in complete repentance and faith; otherwise, they in effect re-crucify Christ and treat Him contemptuously. Those who sin against Christ in such a way have no hope of restoration or forgiveness because they reject Him with full knowledge and conscious experience. They have concluded that Jesus should have been crucified, and they stand with His enemies. It is impossible to renew such to repentance.

The other interpretation holds that this passage is written about Christians, and that the phrases “partakers of the Holy Ghost,” “enlightened,” and “tasted of the heavenly gift” are all descriptions of true believers.

According to this interpretation, the key word in the passage is if (verse 6). The writer of Hebrews is setting up a hypothetical statement: “IF a Christian were to fall away . . .” The point being made is that it would be impossible (IF a Christian falls away) to renew salvation. That’s because Christ died once for sin (Hebrews 9:28), and if His sacrifice is insufficient, then there’s no hope at all.

The passage, therefore, presents an argument based on a false premise (that a true Christian can fall away) and follows it to its senseless conclusion (that Jesus would have to be sacrificed again and again). The absurdity of the conclusion points up the impossibility of the original assumption. This reasoning is called reductio ad absurdum, in which a premise is disproved by showing that it logically leads to an absurdity.

Both of these interpretations support the security of the believer in Christ. The first interpretation presents unbelievers rejecting Christ and thereby losing their chance of salvation; the second interpretation presents the very idea of believers losing salvation as impossible. Many scriptures make it abundantly clear that salvation is eternal (John 10:27-29; Romans 8:35, 38-39; Philippians 1:6; 1 Peter 1:4-5), and Hebrews 6:4-6 confirms that doctrine.”

Originally posted by @romans1009
Food for thought...

From gotquestions.org:

“Question: "Does Hebrews 6:4-6 mean we can lose our salvation?"

Answer: Hebrews 6:4-6 states, “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come ...[text shortened]... Romans 8:35, 38-39; Philippians 1:6; 1 Peter 1:4-5), and Hebrews 6:4-6 confirms that doctrine.”

That kind of argument is what you call comfort to a fool.

According to the Apostles, born-again Christian Saints who live a life of sin will

BE DESTROYED, BE REJECTED, BE BURNED, BE A CASTAWAY

Only those who live righteously and are obedient to the commandments of Christ will get eternal life.

Right now all people await the judgment of Christ.

Jesus likes those that do good for others

At the pearly gates all your actions will be weighed up

This thread was not intended to be about the assurance of salvation debate.

Nearly every discussion Rajk999 posts in he attempts to morph into an argument about the absence of assurance of salvation.

I appreciated Roman1009's comments. But I think the Hebrews 6:6-8 passage more likely refers to those who are actually eternally saved.

What is burned is the vegetation or the fruits produced by the ground.

"For the earth, which drinks the rain which often comes upon it and produces vegetation suitable to those who whose sake also it is cultivated, partakes of blessing from God. (v.7)

But if it brings forth thorns and thistles, it is disapproved and near a curse, whose end is to be burned." (v.8)

It says the ground is "near a curse" not "cursed".
What is burned up is the unworthy vegetation. This is consistent with the Christian whose works under Christ's examination, may be burned up if they are the inferior building materials - "wood, grass, stubble" in First Corinthians 3.

" If anyone's work which he has built upon the foundation remains, he will receive a reward,

If anyone's work is consumed, he will suffer loss, but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire." (1 Cor. 3:14,15)

The severely backslidden Hebrew Christians in Hebrews 6, tempted to return to Judiasm from the church life were those in danger of suffering loss and having their works burned up. Yet they themselves would be saved yet so as through fire.

Near a curse is NEAR a curse and not CURSED.
What is burnt up is the worthless vegetation they (as God's cultivated land) have produced.

Of course the warning is serious. But it is not a threat to the loss of eternal life. It is the loss of reward and suffering that.

Originally posted by @sonship
This thread was not intended to be about the assurance of salvation debate.

Nearly every discussion Rajk999 posts in he attempts to morph into an argument about the absence of assurance of salvation.

I appreciated Roman1009's comments. But I think the [b]Hebrews 6:6-8 passage more likely refers to those who are actually eternally saved.

What ...[text shortened]... But it is not a threat to the loss of eternal life. It is the loss of reward and suffering that.[/b]

The delusion and indoctrination continues. You crookedly omit the parts of that passage which contradicts your nonsense doctrine. here is the whole thing:

If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon,
he shall receive a reward.
If any man's work shall be burned,
he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; . (1 Corinthians 3:14-17 KJV)

There are three groups of Christians here.
These are all born again Christian Saints in Christ:
1. Those who do good works and are rewarded
2. Those who do nothing of substance, and these will not be rewarded but still saved
3. Those who do evil and these are destroyed.

The truth will stand. You will be destroyed with your lies.

Originally posted by @rajk999

You will be destroyed with your lies
--------------------------------------------------------

What lies?

This so-called "lie" ?

"If anyone's work is consumed, he will suffer loss, but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire." (1 Cor. 3:15)

That's the Apostle of Christ writing the oracles of God under divine inspiration. I am just repeating him.

What lies?

Do you mean the interpretation I gave to Hebrews 6:6,7? That's, at worst, just a matter of you differing in interpretation of the passage. No lie there either.

The author of the exposition of the passage that Romans1009 quoted disagreed with what I explained. I don't say the author is lying because s/he feels to expound it as false Christians there.

So what LIE I wrote are you referring to?
Name one. And I don't mean a difference in interpretation to a difficult passage.

The "destroy" in verse 17 is related to the phrase "suffer loss" in the previous verse 15..

As I said, the warning is serious. But the warning is not that the Christian is not saved. It is that he will

" ... suffer loss, but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire." (v.15b)

"If anyone destroys to the temple of God, God will destroy him; for the temple of God is holy, and such are you." (v.17)

He is not talking about opposers trying to destroy the church through persecution. He is talking about those who ARE the temple of God and who have the Holy Spirit (v.16), yet because of their immaturity are attempting to build the church with the unholy things of the fallen nature. This attempt to build with "wood, grass, stubble" (v.12) represents attempting to build the church of Christ with the old man.

To do this is the mar, defile, corrupt the temple of God.
Those who do so run the risk of being "destroyed" in a discipline in which they "suffer loss".

Yet they themselves remain eternally saved, yet so as through disciplinary fire.

Between the "suffer loss" and "God will destroy" is the exhortation that the HEARERS of the warning are the temple of God with the Holy Spirit.

"Do you not know that you are the temple of God , and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?" (v.16)

Does the Holy Spirit indwell the disciples temporarily or forever?

The Holy Spirit indwells the followers of Jesus FOREVER.

"And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Comforter, that He may be with you forever,

Even the Spirit of reality ... " (John 14:16,17a)

Since the temple of God, the church, is to be holy, those who possess the Holy Spirit should learn to LIVE holy, building the church with the things which can survive any fire of judgment by God - symbolized by "gold, silver, precious stones." (1 Cor. 3:12)

Inferior living to holy living will not last forever. And the retarded Christian will suffer loss, be destroyed in dispensational discipline, in that sense, though he is saved, yet so as through fire.

Originally posted by @sonship
The [b] "destroy" in verse 17 is related to the phrase "suffer loss" in the previous verse 15..

As I said, the warning is serious. But the warning is not that the Christian is not saved. It is that he will

" ... suffer loss, but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire." (v.15b)

[quote] ...[text shortened]... stroyed in dispensational discipline, in that sense, though he is saved, yet so as through fire.[/b]

'Destroyed'

Check out the meaning instead of making a fool of yourself.