The LOCALK Body of Christ

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Herb Evans, Nov 2, 2006.

  1. Herb Evans

    Herb Evans
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    502
    Likes Received:
    0
    THE LOCAL BODY OF CHRIST IS TOGETHER​


    For AS the body is ONE, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are ONE BODY: SO ALSO IS CHRIST. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body . . . -- 1 Cor. 12:12,13

    Interdenominationalists have foisted the false notion upon Baptists that the body of Christ is an aggregate of all believers, synonymous with the family of God. This theory has been perpetrated by twisting biblical terminology to make it seem that a person is not saved, unless he is in the body of Christ. While we would readily agree that a saved man is IN CHRIST positionally (despite church affiliation), we do not agree that he is automatically in the church/body of Christ as it is scripturally defined (see churches "IN Christ" -- Gal. 1:22). Consider each word and the context of First Corinthians twelve.

    AS (1 Cor. 12:12)​


    Immediately, with the word “AS,” as we approach 1 Cor. 12:13, we are alerted that there is going to be a comparison here. A comparison of what? A comparison of TWO different bodies.

    FOR ​


    The wise old axiom for Bible study is "And, but, for; see what they are there for!" First Corinthians 12:13 begins with "FOR," because it refers to that which has been said prior verse 13, providing the context for verse 13; "(12.) . . .all the members of that one body, being many are one body: so also is Christ. (13.) FOR by one Spirit . . ." Evidently, we are dealing, here, with a comparison of TWO different bodies (one a metaphor and the other the actual physical body of Christ) and a baptism into ONLY ONE of those TWO bodies, namely, the metaphor for the visible "representative body of Christ" (the local church). Christ’s actual heavenly, physical body is compared with His earthly, representative body. NOTE! So ALSO is Christ!

    BY​


    Interdenominationalists build their doctrine on the preposition BY (much like Campbellites build their doctrine on the word FOR in Acts 2:38). Ignoring the context (1 Cor. 12), they make the Holy Spirit a BAPTIZER by manipulating the word “BY.” We determine what the word “BY” means by examining its context. A man is enabled to call Jesus Lord "BY" the Holy Spirit (vs. 3); one is given the word of wisdom "BY" the Spirit (vs. 7); one is given the word of knowledge "BY" the same Spirit (vs. 7); to another faith "BY" the same Spirit (vs.9); to another gifts of healing "BY" the same Spirit (vs.9). Everything, which is done spiritually, is enabled “BY” the Holy Spirit. He is our ENABLER and NOT our BAPTIZER

    ONE

    There is ONE BODY [local], and ONE Spirit . . . ONE Lord, one faith, ONE BAPTISM [water] . . . -- Eph. 4:5

    We admit that there are other baptisms, bodies, spirits, and even gods mentioned in the Bible; yet, there is only "ONE" exclusive God, Spirit, baptism, and body. ONE exclusive baptism, water baptism! ONE exclusive body, a local, visible, representative body/church! One means one to the exclusion of all others. The "ONE Spirit" and "ONE body" of 1 Corinthians 12: 13 are the same as that of Ephesians 4:4-5. But you say, "Everything, in Ephesians 4:4,5 is spiritual." Do you mean that “WATER" baptism is not spiritual?

    Interdenominationalists and ultra--dispensationalists have never considered "WATER" baptism as being very spiritual, being unable to tell the difference between the "spiritual" and the "mystical." But what about the baptism with the Holy Ghost in the Book of Acts? History! That baptism with the Holy Spirit was the fulfillment of John and Matthew’s prophecy (Matt. 3:11 and John 1:33)! That GROUP baptism with the Holy Spirit was accompanied by a sound of wind and cloven tongues of fire (never again to be repeated supernatural phenomena). And Jesus was the BAPTIZER, and the Holy Spirit was the ELEMENT.

    SPIRIT​


    The Holy Spirit is mentioned eleven times in First Corinthians twelve. We cannot agree with certain overzealous Baptists, who say that the large "S" in Spirit should be changed to a small "s" just this once to mean something other than the Holy Spirit. The same Holy Spirit, who enables saved men to say that "Jesus is the Lord" (vs. 3) is the same Spirit, who enables and leads saved men to be water baptized (vs. 13), a spiritual act, when done scripturally.

    ARE WE ALL​


    Both sides of this issue agree that the “WE ALL” refers to all believers, who are baptized in some way. Still, some imagine mystical baptism, insisting that Paul was not a member of the Corinthian church. Yet, it does not violate either secular or biblical language for Paul to speak in the vein of common experience (whatever local church he belonged). We all can be married to one wife without being married to the same wife! Moreover, Paul could have moved his membership anywhere (from the Damascus church to the Jerusalem church. -- Acts 9:26 to wherever).

    BAPTIZED ​


    The Holy Spirit in the Bible is never the BAPTIZER; He is always the ELEMENT! Jesus is always the BAPTIZER (matt. 3:11). To say that there are TWO different Spirit baptisms (Pentecost and salvation) or that there is now both a Spirit baptism plus a water baptism is a contradiction of the ONE baptism, in Ephesians 4:5. Take one—not two or three! Nevertheless, is there water mentioned in the passage? No, but neither is there any invisible, mystical, nor ethereal phenomena mentioned there either. Why do gainsayers find a mystical Spirit baptism in Gal. 3:27 or Rom. 6:3? Neither the Holy Spirit NOR water is mentioned there! The context of such passages will not allow such an arbitrary, mystical, and allegorical interpretation.

    INTO (and UNTO)​


    The Israelites drank of Christ and were BAPTIZED UNTO MOSES in the cloud and in the sea (1 Cor. 10:1-4), so identifying themselves with Moses, a type of Christ. This Old Testament baptism foreshadowed New Testament baptism. Neither the Old Testament Spirit baptism(s), i.e., tabernacle, temple, on the mount, in the sea, nor the Corinthian 12:13 baptism nor the Acts 2 baptism were mystical or invisible nor secret. Baptisms are always public IDENTIFICATIONS with someone or something. It is also a method of initiation into the LOCAL, visible, New Testament REPRESENTATIVE, BODY/CHURCH as Baptists have practiced for thousands of years. In Acts 19, after learning than certain disciples were not indwelt by the Holy Spirit and didn’t even know about the Holy Spirit, which John preached, Paul asked them a very pointed question. “UNTO what then were you BAPTIZED?” They responded, “UNTO John’s Baptism.” Wrong answer, and Paul informs them that they should have been water baptized UNTO or INTO (Romans 6) Jesus Christ, even in the NAME of Jesus Christ (19:3-5), so identifying themselves with Jesus Christ rather than John the Baptist.

    Paul RE-baptized these disciple in water with the correct identification unto or into Christ. If we were to say that a man was baptized INTO Roman Catholicism or INTO the Catholic church or UNTO Catholicism, no one would misunderstand. No one would ever imagine that he had been mystically baptized into an invisible Catholic cathedral. Still, when we talk about a man being baptized INTO Christ, there is mass mystical confusion. Being baptized INTO Christ in Galatians 3:27 is equated with "putting on" Christ. How does one mystically PUT ON Christ? He doesn't! One PUTS ON Christ or "identifies with" Christ, by water baptism. We are baptized INTO Jesus Christ and INTO His "death" in Romans 6: 3-5, symbolically. If Jesus Christ is the ELEMENT and the Holy Spirit is the mystical BAPTIZER, how is it that Christ’s "DEATH" is also an ELEMENT? Well, it isn’t!

    How do we mystically get baptized "INTO HIS DEATH?" Except symbolically, we don't! We are PLANTED in the LIKENESS of His DEATH (water baptism), identifying ourselves with both our Lord and His death (Rom. 6:5; Gal. 3:27). This identification initiates us into a local, visible, representative church/body.

    THE SO ALSO IS CHRIST ONE BODY ​


    The BODY of Christ, into which believers are water baptized, is a body of fellowship and service. It is scripturally defined as the "CHURCH" (Eph. 1:24; Col. 1:18). This local body/church is contrasted with the body of His flesh (Col. 1:22) and is counted as ONE flesh with Jesus Christ as are the TWO bodies of a husband and a wife counted as ONE FLESH (Eph. 5:31,32).

    The context of First Corinthians 12:13 reveals the kind of body, which is under consideration. It is the kind of body, whose members are able to have the “SAME care one for another" (vs. 25); the kind of body, which is able to avoid "SCHISM" (vs. 25). Difficult? Yes, but try it in an invisible church of all believers. It is the kind of church in which all the members are able to enter into the suffering and rejoicing of fellow members (vs. 26); the kind of body that works together (verses 14-23); the kind of body or earthly church that has earthly teachers set in it by God (vs. 28). The Corinthian body was called "THE" body of Christ (vs. 27) - not "A" body nor “part of the body" (verse 27).

    The WHOLE body is fitly joined TOGETHER without saved Charismatics and infant baptizers (Ephesians 4:16), and it can come TOGETHER as a WHOLE (1 Cor. 14:23), as "ONE BREAD," and as "ONE BODY" (1 Cor. 10:16-17). It is the kind of body that God tempers TOGETHER (1 Cor. 12:24)). It is also KNIT TOGETHER (Col. 2: 19), FITLY FRAMED TOGETHER, and BUILDED TOGETHER (Eph. 2:21-22), and PLANTED TOGETHER (Rom. 6:5). It is a TOGETHER body - not a dismembered body (which is not a body) scattered all over heaven and earth. SO ALSO IS CHRIST TOGETHER! A MYSTICAL, INVISIBLE body does NOT have it TOGETHER!

    -- by Herb Evans
     
  2. Herb Evans

    Herb Evans
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    502
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Local Corinthian Body of Christ

    THE LOCAL CORINTHIAN BODY

    Chapter One - Local Address - 1 Cor. 1:2 "the church of God which is at Corinth"
    Chapter Two - Paul's Local Visit - 1 Cor. 2:1 "I, brethren, when I came unto you"
    Chapter Three - Local Divisions - 1 Cor. 3:3 "there is among you . . . divisions"
    Chapter Four - Paul's Local Messenger - 1 Cor. 4:17 " I sent unto you Timothy"
    Chapter Five - Local Discipline - 1 Cor. 5:4, 5 "gathered together . . . to deliver . . . to Satan"
    Chapter Six - Local Disputes - 1 Cor. 6:4 "set them to judge who are least . . . in the church"
    Chapter Seven - Local Writers - 1 Cor. 7:1 "concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me"
    Chapter Eight - Local Questions - 1 Cor. 8:1 "Now as touching things offered to idols"
    Chapter Nine - Local Missionary Support - 1 Cor 9:11 "we should reap your carnal things"
    Chapter Ten - Local Communion - 1 Cor. 10:21 "ye cannot be partaker of the Lord's table”
    Chapter Eleven - Local Ordinances - 1 Cor. 11:2 "keep the ordinances, as I delivered them."
    Chapter Twelve - Local Body & Functions - 1 Cor 12:27 "ye are the body of Christ"
    Chapter Thirteen - Local Tongues - 1 Cor. 13:5 "he that speaketh with tongues”
    Chapter Fourteen - Local Gifts - 1 Cor. 14:23 "desire spiritual gifts"
    Chapter Fifteen - Local History - 1 Cor. 15:3 "I delivered unto you first of all"
    Chapter Sixteen - Local Collections - 1 Cor. 16:1 "concerning the collection"

    --copied
     
  3. Brandon C. Jones

    Brandon C. Jones
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    Messages:
    598
    Likes Received:
    0
    Fellow BOARDMEMBER Bob Ryan WOULD be PROUD to see SOMEONE else capitalizing words FOR no apparent REASON routinely in one's POSTS.

    Have a great day,
    BJ
     
  4. Herb Evans

    Herb Evans
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    502
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, I used to be a fan of Oliver Green. Emphasis is my excuse; in the day that this was written, there were no colors available. . -- Herb Evans
     
  5. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    That part may be true, as to colors; However I personally am highly irritated when someone mis-spells a name he or she should know (especially when one claims to be "a fan"), and I, frankly, see no excuse for that. The person in question was the late Oliver B. Greene, who usually referred to himself in that manner, although occasionally as Dr. Oliver B. Greene, Brother Greene or 'Evangelist'.

    Ed
     
    #5 EdSutton, Nov 2, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 2, 2006
  6. Herb Evans

    Herb Evans
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    502
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, smell me! I am so sorry that I irritated YOUR HIGHNESS. -- Herb Evans
     
  7. Jim1999

    Jim1999
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/Jim1999.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2002
    Messages:
    15,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, it was a lovely lecture.............:sleep:

    Wake me when it's over, please.

    Cheers,

    Jim:tonofbricks:
     
  8. Herb Evans

    Herb Evans
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    502
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yawn! Burp! -- Herb Evans
     
  9. Tom Butler

    Tom Butler
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2005
    Messages:
    9,031
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dr. Herb,

    Don't be too hard on Ed Sutton. Since you are fairly new to the board, you probably are not aware that Bro. Ed's alter ego is the Language Cop. He is the resident grammarian for the Baptist Board. He is self-appointed, of course, but he speaks with authority nonetheless.

    I held the same job for my many years as a television news anchor and executive. I was the Grammar Phantom, who operated in secret for a while, slipping furtive notes to the young reporters who were either careless with, or ignorant of, the language. My boss finally brought me out of the closet and made me the newsroom authority on the correct use of the language. With Ed Sutton on the job, my services are not required here.

    Most of the time, Bro. Ed applies his corrections with a light touch, with a little sharper edge on other occasions. I have found him to be right on every occasion he has donned his cape and costume and emerged from the phone booth. We would all do well to heed his counsel if we want our posts' credibility not to be diminished
     
  10. Herb Evans

    Herb Evans
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    502
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, I fancy myself as the tact and conduct cop that does not regard correctness to be an excuse for ignorance. Perhaps, he will read this response to his action.

    In reference to your recent injudicious correspondence, such a nugatory obloquy is typical of maladjusted malcontents. Your maladroit and mordacious invectives against ineradicable and indomitable spellers are designed to ingratiate you with your spelling bee contemporaries and counterparts. Your retrograde transmutation is reflective of a long held predisposition and predilection to a perfectionist posture, which lacks experiential redemption. Your discomfort among defective spellers, who are not cognizant of their inadequacy is understandable. Still, your insolent and petulant raillery is no substitute for having polemics and apologetics with substance. Your invisible exegesis and corrections are typical of a pointed headed juvenescence among isagogic perception.

    May I give you an "ad litem" explanation of your problem. Neurasthenia has, no doubt, taken its toll on you. You are to be pitied. Your transparent dissimulation, passing yourself off as a latitudinarian, has proved to be a lubricious perfidy. You have obviously resorted to malfeasance and malversation, subtly undermining your Baptist brethren with meaningless and unnecessary rebuke. Evidently, you had no desire in your correction missives to be either lucid or understood.

    Now, I know that you will continue to impugn and oppugn our grammatical snd spelling errors. This is your imperceptible right as a arrogant Pharisee. You represent those, who are involved in the "hyper-necessitarianism" heresy, who resort to malevolence towards issue oriented, irrefragable, scriptural arguments.

    *Now, here is what I really think of your spelling Bee. It is an immense, incalculable, immaterial IMAGINATION; an inappropriate, indiscrete, imperious INTERPRETATION; an inept, inconceivable, incompatible, incredible INCONSISTENCY; an improper, improbable, impractical IMPOSSIBILITY; an implacable, inexorable, insufficient IMPERCEPTIBILITY; an impoverished, impecunious, insubstantial INNOVATION; an idiotic, imbecilic, intoxicating INEBRIATION; an idyllic, inane, ideological INCREDIBILITY; an inscrutable, incomprehensible, insupportable INFATUATION; an injudicious, injurious, insidious INSANITY; an illegible, illiterate, inexplicable IMPOSTER; an illegitimate, illicit, invalid, INSINUATION; an infectious, incurable, incorrigible INCONGRUITY; an illegal, indictable, impeachable IMITATION; an irremissible, irremediable, irreparable, irresolvable, IRRECONCILABILITY; an inordinate, indefinite, indescribable, inexcusable, INTUITION; an intolerable, impertinent, irrelevant INTIMATION; an impish, incurious, impetuous INCANTATION; an invidious, intrusive, invective INTRIGUE; an inexact, indistinct, indecipherable INVENTION; an infantile, illative, infeasible, INCORPREALITY; an incredulous, irrational, illogical, unpardonable, correctionism, whose arguments spread out into shallowness, enlarge into smallness, and increase into nothingness.

    –by Herb Evans

    P.S. No doubt there are some spelling errors in this missive!
     
    #10 Herb Evans, Nov 2, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 2, 2006
  11. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks for the offer, but no. :rolleyes:

    Ed
     
  12. rbell

    rbell
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Reading some of Mr. Evans' antagonistic posts, I am reminded of the job performance review offered of a fellow years ago...

    "He doesn't have ulcers, but he is a carrier."

    Mr. Evans, It's OK to be nice to folks on the BB. You should try it sometime.
     
  13. Herb Evans

    Herb Evans
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    502
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, I have always found it hard to be nice to such that bite at my ankles and who will only attack me with one liners without substance. I would expect that those who would have me be nice to them would first return the favor by avoiding being rude and ignorant. My motto is "Watch the ricochet, when you shoot. -- Herb Evans
     
  14. Tom Butler

    Tom Butler
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2005
    Messages:
    9,031
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dr. Herb, I don't recall seeing anything remotely malevolent or Pharasaical in Bro. Ed's posts, even in the heat of debate.

    You know, I agree with much of what you wrote on the local church. You're obviously a real student of the scriptures.

    But "Smell Me?" Goodness gracious! That's the kind of response I see on the Fighting Fundamentalist Board, where civility is a rarity. It's a response that flirts with troll-dom, as well.
     
  15. rbell

    rbell
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wouldn't it be better to let a "gentle answer turn away wrath?"

    I'm sure you have very nice ankles, but I'll just snack on something here, thanks.
     
  16. Herb Evans

    Herb Evans
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    502
    Likes Received:
    0
    Tom Butler]Dr. Herb, I don't recall seeing anything remotely malevolent or Pharasaical in Bro. Ed's posts, even in the heat of debate.

    Well, perhaps I was too hard on the fellow in a couple of places. -- Herb Evans

    You know, I agree with much of what you wrote on the local church. You're obviously a real student of the scriptures.

    Well, sir, thank you, I would rather make friends any day than enemies. Unfortunately, disagreement often makes enemies. It is the nature of the beast. -- Herb Evans

    But "Smell Me?" Goodness gracious! That's the kind of response I see on the Fighting Fundamentalist Board, where civility is a rarity. It's a response that flirts with troll-dom, as well.

    This is a Pittsburgh expression that is used to point out an superior, arrogant attitude that looks down upon someone. You will note that it was followed by "your highness." -- Herb Evans
     
  17. Herb Evans

    Herb Evans
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    502
    Likes Received:
    0

    In regular Christian deportment, that is a wise thing to do. On a debate forum, folks interpret it as a sign of weakness in one's arguments. I have been dealing with one liner ankle biters for years, and have found them like triflers to be incorrigible. I also have had to deal with verse flingers, who post 30 passages without any explanation or rationale' and then say see there, how right I am. I like point /counterpoint no nonsense discussions without the pejoratives.
     
    #17 Herb Evans, Nov 2, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 2, 2006
  18. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    FTR, which church did Paul persecute? Since you, Herb Evans, seem to believe each congregation is "the body", and Paul said "I persecuted the church of God", which local body was it? Granted he started in Jerusalem, but Acts 9:31 certainly seems to broaden that some, by speaking of multiple local churches that then had peace, and Paul's own testimony in Acts 26:9-11.

    You would be correct were you to surmise that I don't believe "the church" and/or "the body" is limited solely to "The LOCALK Body of Christ"(sic)?? :rolleyes:, although I think it (The LOCAL Body) is one valid and legitimate reference according to Scripture. And I would agree that the local church is spoken of far more than any 'universal' church. But the attempt to limit the "all" in I Cor. 12:13 certainly seems to be stretching language of Scripture to fit theology. Not to mention, several references in Galatians, Ephesians and Phillipians, to name some.

    Does Scripture speak of a "local church", as a local church body? Absolutely.
    Does Scripture speak of a church in a 'broader' sense than this although still 'limited'? Absolutely.
    Does Scripture speak of "the church" as one body in a singular sense? Absolutely.
    And I would add that the idea, rightly or wrongly of the church as a bride, gives added sense to this. For I think there is absolutley NO speaking of the Lord as a polygamist!! And possessing thousands of bodies, and thousands of Brides at that??? That would contradict all the teaching I've seen in the Gospels, and the 'chaste virgin' analogy, as well!

    Ed
     
    #18 EdSutton, Nov 2, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 2, 2006
  19. Tom Butler

    Tom Butler
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2005
    Messages:
    9,031
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is not only a debate forum, but also a Christian debate forum. Gentle answers are not signs of weakness here.

    Now can we get back to the OP? I'd be interested in hearing more on the subject.
     
  20. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Maybe a "ham hock"?? :applause: :laugh: :laugh:

    Ed
     

Share This Page

Loading...