Skip to content
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 8 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Question 8
The author uses “Don’t you know you are the temple of God?” (1 Cor. 3:16) and “partakes of divinity” (2 Pet. 1:4) to say the intimate-with-God person is “already holy” and that sin is “foreign to him”; how does that language compare with typical evangelical self-understanding (“simultaneously saint and sinner”), and what do you find compelling—or dangerous—about it?
Another way to ask: How does the idea that a close-to-God person is “already holy” and that sin is “foreign” compare to the evangelical view of being both saint and sinner? What seems helpful about this—and what seems risky?

Direct Answer The transcript speaks more strongly than the common “saint and sinner” language: it presents the intimate-with-God person as truly holy, God-indwelt, and with sin as something “foreign” to his nature as God’s temple. It is compelling in how seriously it takes holiness, but could be dangerous if someone uses it to deny ongoing temptation or to become proud—though the transcript itself stresses humility and obedience.

Support from Transcript:

  • Paul’s question is central: “Don’t you know that you are the temple of God?” (1 Cor. 3:16).
  • The person “partakes of divinity” (2 Pet. 1:4) and is described as “already holy.”
  • Union language is strong: “He carries God in his body, and God carries him.”
  • Sin is said to be abnormal for such a person: “The Scripture shows that sinning is foreign to him.”
  • The “temple” idea is both corporate and personal: “as great as the whole church…as small as the individual man.”
Discussion Follow-ups How do you talk about holiness without slipping into either despair (“I’ll never change”) or presumption (“I can’t sin”)? What safeguards in the chapter—like training, good conscience, and humility—help keep this from becoming pride?