I don't know of any two Bible-believing Protestants who fundamentally disagree on salvation such as you suggest. On his own, Paul is very clear. He only becomes muddled when his writings must be reconciled with the semi-contradictory holdings of the Apostolic Church.
[On 1 Cor. 3:17] Again, I ask you WHERE in Scriptures does it state that a "destroyed" person enters heaven? That is a fantastical claim if I ever heard one. Moot point??? If you are spiritually dead or destroyed, you think you will enter heaven???
First, we must note our difference on how "temple" is used in this passage. The Bible does use it differently. In some cases it refers to a building, in others it refers to the physical body of a single believer. Here, you appear to take it as the spiritual being of a single believer, and I take it to mean the body of believers in a local church. I can see how it's possible to take verse 16 in the singular and I hope you see how it's possible to take it in the plural.
Of course a spiritually dead person does not enter Heaven, but I think you're trying to have your cake and eat it too. :) On the one hand, you equate "destroy" with death, but OTOH, you must say that "death" is only temporary since one sin may be fixed by absolution from the Church AND that God destroys and then undestroys many times throughout our lives. Christ rose once to conquer death once.
I disagree with Barnes in his explanation, as his attempt to call this verse an "adage" is wishful thinking. Where is his basis for this idea? I think it is an attempt to explain the verse away.
He said adage or proverb. I'm not sure why he said that, but it could be because if it meant what you say it means, then the rest of Paul would not make any sense, since Paul preaches Sola Fide, with assurance. I think he is correctly recognizing an overall theme and then realizing that Paul cannot contradict himself. All sides do this I think.
Paul is attacking Christians in Corith, people who had previously been baptized and "saved", who were causing dissent among the community.
Right, and Barnes is saying that if one tends to hurt a church, then God will punish him. Plus, Paul knew full well that not everyone who walks into a worship service is necessarily saved. Why else would he preach faith to supposedly saved people so often? Paul also knew that baptism didn't save, since many who are baptized are never of the faith. It is EXACTLY the same today.
James 2 denies we are saved by faith alone. The bible NEVER explicitly states we are saved by faith alone. Paul himself says that faith without love is worthless. Where do you come up with this? And how does Sola Fide threaten what Christ established before Paul came on the scene?
James recognizes that many CLAIM faith without really having it at all. This is like the "Lord, Lord" bunch. Apparently, the "Lord, Lord" bunch gave appearances of faith, but never had it. James is saying that we can certainly spot those who don't do any works as also having no faith. He gives us an easy, and valuable, self test.
None of the stuff you mention are devotions, they are intellectual recognitions of what Mary did. This is not honoring Mary in any way. You recognize that the Great Wall of China exists. Big deal. The Bible says ALL generations will honor Mary. Thankfully, the Catholics and the Orthodox are around to do God's Will, as you are not...
So the only way to honor someone is to have devotion to him or her? I've never heard of that before. In that case I would suppose that you do NOT honor Abraham, or Moses, or David, or Paul, or a host of other Bible greats. In fact, the only ones you DO honor would be those you are devoted to, when you should be devoted to God instead. By your definition, who else in the Bible DO you honor?
Please, FK. Not sure where you live and whom you associate with, but clearly, you are not very familiar with alternate Protestant theologies.
For example: Is baptism salvific or not. I am having an ongoing dialogue with someone who has initiated that topic elsewhere. Yep. There are some Protestants who say "No, it is an ordinance" and others who say "Yes, baptism is a sacrament and brings the Holy Spirit, making us children of God". The "certainty" of private interpretation...
Paul is very clear. He only becomes muddled when his writings must be reconciled with the semi-contradictory holdings of the Apostolic Church.
Thank you, I'll follow the Church of the Apostles, you continue to invent it as you go.
We must note our difference on how "temple" is used in this passage. The Bible does use it differently. In some cases it refers to a building, in others it refers to the physical body of a single believer. Here, you appear to take it as the spiritual being of a single believer, and I take it to mean the body of believers in a local church. I can see how it's possible to take verse 16 in the singular and I hope you see how it's possible to take it in the plural.
So Paul is condemning the entire community because there is dissent being caused by some of the community??? Whew! I thought we moved beyond the OT days where God wipes out the next generation for sins of the father or wipes out an entire community based on the sins of the king... How depressing to return to that theological interpretation.
Of course a spiritually dead person does not enter Heaven, but I think you're trying to have your cake and eat it too. :) On the one hand, you equate "destroy" with death, but OTOH, you must say that "death" is only temporary since one sin may be fixed by absolution from the Church AND that God destroys and then undestroys many times throughout our lives. Christ rose once to conquer death once.
We aren't speaking of physical death here, but spiritual death. The sin of Adam leads to physical death. But the sin of an individual's dissent does not lead to physical death. We will die regardless of our religious affiliation or lack thereof. Thus, Paul is refering to spiritual death, a separation from the Spirit (since the Spirit gives life, I presume you know). Thus, a separation from the Spirit is spoken of in the Bible as death. 1 Cor 3 is a further example of how one can separate themselves from this Life, this Spirit of God. The result is destruction. Death. No cake involved, thank you.
Paul preaches Sola Fide, with assurance.
LOL! You have yet to prove that. You merely repeat it over and over as if it were true. IF Paul is so crystal clear on sola fide, as you claim, where is this recognition among the first Christians? Why did it take 1500 years for Christians to recognize the "clear" writings that Paul preached sola fide? I see Paul clearly saying we are not saved by faith alone - and James agrees.
Is James AND Paul the Word of God? They must agree, correct? How can James agree with YOUR interpretation of Paul? James 2 specifically says we are NOT saved by faith alone. And Catholics don't follow the Word of God??? Oy.
James recognizes that many CLAIM faith without really having it at all. This is like the "Lord, Lord" bunch. Apparently, the "Lord, Lord" bunch gave appearances of faith, but never had it. James is saying that we can certainly spot those who don't do any works as also having no faith. He gives us an easy, and valuable, self test.
...and thus, faith without works is not salvific. Very good. Faith alone does not save. You have said it right there.
So the only way to honor someone is to have devotion to him or her? I've never heard of that before. In that case I would suppose that you do NOT honor Abraham, or Moses, or David, or Paul, or a host of other Bible greats.
What do you base that upon? I hadn't realized that I had discussed my private devotional lifestyle to you. The Bible says all generations shall call Mary blessed. They shall venerate her. I was wondering how you do that. Do you emulate her? Or is your idea of considering her as blessed include using demeaning language about her?
Regards