AV1611 Bible Forum Archive

AV1611 Bible Forum Archive (https://av1611.com/forums/index.php)
-   Doctrine (https://av1611.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   The Body or Bride? (https://av1611.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1072)

chette777 03-07-2009 02:19 AM

The Body or Bride?
 
One of my most favorite doctrines since I was saved, taught that we the body of Christ are the Bride of Christ. During a recent conference the theme being “Preparation of the Bride”. It basically was taught by only a few men all commenting of First book of Thessalonians chapter four and it had nothing what so ever to with the Bride or any event connected to a bride.

During the conference a free for all question and answer time and a question came up that never was answered. It was like an Obama answer, the man went everywhere but directly answering the question. What was the question? Where does the Bible teach that the body of Christ is the Bride of Christ? We all assumed the man wasn’t familiar enough with his Bible to answer.

That night was spent in the dorm with everybody looking for the answer. And the over whelming conclusion was the Bible doesn’t teach that the Body of Christ is the Bride of Christ. Hence one of our most beloved doctrines turns out to be a mixture of verses that aren’t remotely connected to teach a bride but unity to Christ.

The three main verses for this unsound doctrine are:

Joh 3:29 He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled.

2Cor 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.

Eph 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. . . and vs 32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

Re 19:7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready

Re 21:2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.. . . vs 9 And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife.


While a vast number of men teach this doctrine it is not so easy to find it’s origin. I did find this teaching under Easton’s Bible Dictionary which is teaches the following concerning the bride of Christ the church.

I quote:
“The relation between Christ and his church is set forth under the figure of that between a bridegroom and bride (Joh 3:29). The church is called "the bride" (Re 21:9; 22:17). Compare parable of the Ten Virgins (Mt 25:1-13)”

The first verse used is said to establish that the current Body of Christ, the church is the Bride is, John 3:29 He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled.

First, this is John’s reason for Jesus rise in popularity and his decline. That’s the context.. Second, Jesus in context is the bridegroom. So who hath he at the time John was told concerning Jesus? Gentiles? No. The answer is Jews, Israel. It is clear by this verse the Bride of John 3:29 is Israel.

So Easton’s Dictionary has set forth a figure of the church by replacing the church with Israel in order to make the church the figure in John 3:29. For the context and the verse do not support Easton’s Dictionary interpretation.

You will notice he make the same equally erroneous interpretation of Rev 19:9 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. Easton dictionary assumes the wife is the church. But the context of 19 and the previous verse and chapters tells us it is Israel who has made herself ready though the various chastisements of the Lord during the great Tribulation. So again the wife here is Israel.

The problem with the Easton’s dictionary view of the Bride is that he like others assume the Rev 21 and 22 are speaking about the church or the body of Christ. The context speaks of Israel not the Body of Christ

Easton’s Dictionary goes on to wanting us to compare the previous staement to the Parable of the Ten Virgin’s. I am sorry but that Parable does not support the church, the Body of Christ as the Bride. So we wont even comment on the verses mentioned.

After reading Albert Barns and his commentary on Rev 19, 2cor 2:11 and rev 21 & 22 I am sorry to state he espouses the same ideas as found in the Easton Bible Dictionary concerning the Bride. So no need to refer his comments except to say he is a little long winded compared to Easton’s Dictionary.

The other commentaries which are many all taught the same using the same verses in today's lingo we call the dittoheads.

One of her reoccurring theme is the Rev 19:9 that the wedding supper of the Lamb is the church that has made herself ready. Again this is impossible for after the rapture the church is never mentioned again in scripture. This is a theology which goes back to the church around 250AD. But is not supported by Paul in any of His letter tot he churches of individuals.

The Key to establishing a doctrine is for the church is comparing what is being taught in any book of the Bible to the teaching of Paul.

let's look at 2Cor 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. In the context Paul is not teaching about the Body of Christ being a Bride. but that he had given these men the gospel by which they were joined to Christ made clean and whole by their faith. and they were now allowing false teachers in to corrupt them. so clearly Paul Paul is not teaching that the Body is Bride of Christ. it is just a figure of speech meant to get their attention.

Eph 5:32 also does not teach we are the Bride for it merely points out as a husband is the head of the wife, so Christ is the head of the church. A mystery at that time revealed By Paul. In context is speaks of submission and love. But it does not teach we are teh Bride of Christ.

So our first search was for the term “the Lamb”, This is found 37 times in the whole Bible. 11 times I the O.T. with 10 of those meanings of a young sheep only no secondary contextual meaning. But one verse in Isa 61:1 Send ye the lamb to the ruler of the land from Sela to the wilderness, unto the mount of the daughter of Zion. Here the lamb is in reference to a ruler which could be pointing to the Lamb in Revelation. O f the remaining 26 uses I the N.T. 2 are found in John the rest in the Book of Revelation all concerning Jesus as the Lamb
Next we searched for the phrase “the Bride of Christ” but there is no such phrase in the Bible.

Next was the word “The Bride” out of the ten instances in all the Bible 6 were O.T. and had to do with God’s treatment of Israel and the term bridegroom is associated with everyone of them. Four were N.T. John 3:29 as seen above and the rest in Revelation 19, 21, ans 22 as noted above. Not once does Paul use the term The Bride in referring to the Church the Body of Christ.

Then we looked for the term word “the wife” this was found 4 times in scriptures 29 of them were in the O.T. all uses were in reference to the wife as an earthly wife or female married to a man. And the remain 12 found in the New Testament all refer to an earthly wife of a husband. 8 times Paul uses the term “the wife”it but never is reference directly to the church.

Next we searched for the term “a wife” found 44 times in the Bible. 35 of those are found in the O.T. and out of those 35 only three refer to a wife as in reference to the LORD. The rest were just the normal run of the mill a wife referring to a wife of men. In the N.T. there are nine verse used with the term “a wife” 5 found in the gospels, the rest in Paul’s writings and all of them refer to a mans wife none are in reference to the church being a wife to Christ.

Just to be fair I searched for “the Lamb’s wife” the only reference is in Rev 21:9 which we already established was Israel and not the church, the Body of Christ.

Another word was added to our search to show a complete set of terms were indeed used. “ City”
but the return was 783 uses of the word. So I narrowed down the search to just the N.T. that left us with 144 uses so I narrowed in down to Romans through Revelation. The word city was found 35 times from Romans 1 through Revelation 22. All references were concerning cities as in a city. Interesting though that 7 of those all found in Revelation were referring to Babylon. The rest referred to Old Jerusalem (for lack of a better term), and 12 of them refer to the NEW JERUSALEM. Not one time did Paul ever use the term “city” in describing the church, the Body of Christ.

We have for many years heard this said as if it were Biblical fact but no where have we been able to find it to be supported by scriptures. Of course when looking at the verse in context not a one of them teaches the Body of Christ is the Bride of Christ or the Lamb’s wife or Bride in Revelation 19, 21 or 22.

As much as we love the doctrine that the church is the Bride of Christ we will have to say for now it is not Biblical. It does not affect our salvation in the slightest fortunately.

During this search and study I found that the Body of Christ is united to Christ, as a wife is united to her husband. But more importantly the teaching of Paul is numerous in detailing this unity in and of the BODY of Christ. We tend to overlook the obvious and that is we are ONE with Him, we are in essence Him ans his body and as he is the head of the body we are the members of that body respectfully.

1Co 12:12-27 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, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many. If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling? But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him. And if they were all one member, where were the body? But now are they many members, yet but one body. And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary: And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness. For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked: That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another. And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it. Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

I
n closing it is clear that the doctrine that the Body of Christ is the Bride of Christ is taught by men but never taught in scripture by Paul or anyone else. It is a doctrine of men carried over from those that had replace Israel with the church. we need to reexamine all of our doctrines in light of clear Bible teaching. and let the chips or lots fall where they may.

Why should we settle for being something we are not when in fact we are His Very own body. And as nature tells us an Man cannot marry his own body for that goes against nature. If we can see the tremendous position we are in, in Christ, we shall never want anything else that would put into something we are not. The church is not the Bride but the BODY. AMEN.

Kiwi Christian 03-08-2009 03:18 AM

Your team missed an important proof text which is used to teach that the Church is the Bride-to-be of Jesus Christ, that being Romans 7:4. You would have found it had you done a search on the word "married" in the New Testament.

Romans 7:4 "Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God."

I suspect you will interpret it as a "figure of speech" just like you do with 2 Corinthians 11:2 "For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ"

I, and many other Bible believers, DO NOT interpret these verses figuratively as you do. Paul is making a doctrinal statement in both cases, not simply to the audience back in 50 odd AD, but to the whole body of Christ, and it involves being engaged to marry the Lord Jesus Christ.

The fact that Paul never wrote the words "Lamb" or "Bride" in connection with the Church makes no difference whatsoever, because comparing scripture with scripture (the key to Bible study) shows us the truth. What Paul wrote about the church being espoused to marry Jesus Christ is complimented, not contradicted, by what John wrote in his gospel and in the Revelation.

kevinvw 03-08-2009 03:57 AM

One has to go no further than Genesis 2 to get the teaching. Adam is put to sleep and a woman is created out of him and is bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. Jesus died to purchase a group of people that become bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh.

chette777 03-08-2009 04:36 AM

Kevin,

Your statement has nothing to do with this Doctrine and people can justify all they want. It had been a very precious doctrine to me and to have it proven that it is not even supported Biblically was disappointing to say the least.

So if this doctrine is not Biblically sound what other doctrines are we holding that are not supported Biblically?

It is sad but Let God be true and every man a liar. for God's word is true even when men's teachings are not.

it goes back far enough to find its roots in the doctrines that replace Israel with the church. and plenty of groups are holding to a lot of those doctrines today despite the fact they are not supported by the Bible. For Us Baptist it is not so extreme but it is in existence.

Again the basis of our Doctrines no matter how precious they are should not be tradition but the word of God. To not share what I have learned concerning this doctrine would be wrong at least it is out there and you can test it for yourself with a simple Bible search program.

Thanks Kiwi for that verse. But it still does not teach that Paul called the church a Bride or taught it was. The context of Romans seven in those first 4 verses is about the Law and being yolked to it or being united to Christ where there is liberty from the Law.and like the law of marriage when the partner dies you are free from the law that bound the marriage. it that verse Paul is using married as figure of speech not teach any truth that the Body is married to Christ or that it is called a Bride. It actually teaches you are free from the law when you became a Christian.

Kiwi Christian 03-08-2009 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 16471)
Thanks Kiwi for that verse. But it still does not teach that Paul called the church a Bride or taught it was. The context of Romans seven in those first 4 verses is about the Law and being yolked to it or being united to Christ where there is liberty from the Law.and like the law of marriage when the partner dies you are free from the law that bound the marriage. it that verse Paul is using married as figure of speech not teach any truth that the Body is married to Christ or that it is called a Bride. It actually teaches you are free from the law when you became a Christian.

I knew you would make it figurative! See, that's how people in 'your camp' deal with the two greatest verses from the Pauline epistles which 'our camp' uses to support the doctrine of the Church being the Bride of Christ, YOU MAKE THEM FIGURATIVE. That's the oldest trick in the book for explaining away a problem text, do you not see what you are doing?

Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777
You will notice he make the same equally erroneous interpretation of Rev 19:9 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. Easton dictionary assumes the wife is the church. But the context of 19 and the previous verse and chapters tells us it is Israel who has made herself ready though the various chastisements of the Lord during the great Tribulation. So again the wife here is Israel.

You made the statement above in your original post which I also think is wrong, the context of Revelation 19 is not Israel but "Revelation 19:1 And after these things I heard a great voice of much people in heaven, saying, Alleluia; Salvation, and glory, and honour, and power, unto the Lord our God:" The context shifts from being on earth in Rev 18 to being in heaven in Rev 19, and the "much people in heaven" are NOT identified as Israel, but Rev 19:5 calls them "all ye his servants, and ye that fear him, both small and great." Note that the Church will be in heaven at this time, so could easily fit in this passage.

stephanos 03-08-2009 06:07 PM

I don't see how Chette is able to call 2 Corinthians 11:2 or Romans 7:4 figurative.

I hope this one won't be misconstrued as "figurative".

For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. (Ephesians 5:31-32 KJV)

For Jesus' sake,
Stephen

Biblestudent 03-08-2009 06:32 PM

Unique
 
Hello, everybody!
I did struggle with this years before. I used to teach that the "Bride of Christ" is the Body of Christ. I go to Genesis 2 through Revelation 21 to prove that. I have all the commentaries to back me up. But when confronted with Scripture, I don't have a verse for it.
But as with Chette's observation, the words "Bride" and "the Bride of the Lamb" is not found in Paul's epistles (Paul claims to be the revelator of church doctrine.); and the phrase "Bride of Christ" is not found in the Bible either.
Context determines meaning, and the question "who is speaking?" is very important.

Who is speaking?
Romans 7 (Paul) "married"
2 Corinthians 11 (Paul) - "AS a virgin" (simile)
Ephesians 5 (Paul) - "wife" (right NOW, not in the future; "one flesh")

Who is speaking?
John 3 (John) - "bride" (already exists before the cross; the bridegroom is already with the bride in John 3)
Revelation 19 (John) - "wife" (just got ready here; the marriage was postponed when the bridegroom was rejected, but after the tribulation period, she's now ready; her number is "twelve", not "one")
Revelation 21 (John) - "as a bride" (defined in the context as New Jerusalem)

I don't think John saw the church (Body of Christ), a "mystery" revealed to Paul and through Paul); I believe what he wrote was in line with OT prophecy.
If we run all OT passages, the Gospels (before the cross), and the Revelation (after the rapture), references to "bride" as a group of people is associated to Israel.
I believe the Body of Christ will be with Christ at the Second Coming and the Millennium (1 Thessalonians 4:18), but that revelation was given to Paul and it is absent from John's revelation.

One more problem with the interpretation that the "bride" of John 3 and Revelation 19 & 21 is the church is to use TYPOLOGY (Genesis 2) and teach it as DOCTRINE.
I realized it should not be so. It should be DOCTRINE first and TYPOLOGY last.

Ephesians 5 teaches us that right NOW (not in the future), we are the Body of Christ and have relationship with him AS the husband and wife is "one flesh" -- right NOW.
But one day, Paul will "present" us to Christ AS a chaste "virgin" (2 Cor. 11:2). (Note: we are AS a wife NOW, but will be presented to Christ AS a virgin.
Also in Romans 7:4, we "should be married to another" that we should "bring forth fruit unto God". When are we going to bear fruit? During this Church Age, we are to bear fruit; therefore, we are "married" to Christ right NOW so that we can bear fruit right NOW.

Revelation 19 and Revelation 21 should be read in the context of OT prophecies and the Gospels. Israel, the "bride of the Lamb" and the "wife of the Lamb", was not ready in John 3 but will be ready in Revelation 19.

Here's one article I went across that has helped me when I was studying the issue:
http://www.avhughes.com/images/bride.html

So my current position now is this:

1. The "bride" or the "wife" spoken of by the OT prophets and the Twelve is associated with Israel.
2. The "virgin" or the "wife" spoken of by Paul is the Body of Christ.

I believe the key here is to see that Paul is a unique apostle with a unique revelation to a unique body of people in a unique age.

For the love of Christ,
Bible student

Kiwi Christian 03-08-2009 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biblestudent (Post 16501)
Also in Romans 7:4, we "should be married to another" that we should "bring forth fruit unto God". When are we going to bear fruit? During this Church Age, we are to bear fruit; therefore, we are "married" to Christ right NOW so that we can bear fruit right NOW.

Israel, the "bride of the Lamb" and the "wife of the Lamb", was not ready in John 3 but will be ready in Revelation 19.

So my current position now is this:

1. The "bride" or the "wife" spoken of by the OT prophets and the Twelve is associated with Israel.
2. The "virgin" or the "wife" spoken of by Paul is the Body of Christ.

Brother, from where I sit it looks to me like you believe that the Church is married to Jesus Christ now, and Israel will be married to Jesus Christ in the future? Don't you see something seriously wrong with that idea?

stephanos 03-08-2009 08:54 PM

One thing I'm curious about is the relationship the Church has with Israel in the Millenium. The reason I'm curious about this is because at the present, Jews and Gentiles are one IN Christ. In the Tribulation things will be different. I wonder if perhaps things will become one again in the Millenium. Is there anything in Revelation that deals with this? The thing that trips me up about this question is that the Church disappears after Revelation 3. Where did the Church go?

Peace and Love,
Stephen

stephanos 03-08-2009 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kiwi Christian (Post 16502)
Brother, from where I sit it looks to me like you believe that the Church is married to Jesus Christ now, and Israel will be married to Jesus Christ in the future? Don't you see something seriously wrong with that idea?

That's what I'm caught up on as well. That's why I'm thinking things go back to being one IN Christ during the Millenium. But this is merely speculation.

Peace and Love,
Stephen

chette777 03-08-2009 09:18 PM

Stephanos,

there is no mention of the church or a church after Rev. 3. our relationship with Christ or Israel is not mentioned in the Bible because we are no longer part of the 24/7 TQ. we are in eternity with Christ never to be apart from Him.

Kiwi,

try not to lump people into camps. God's word uses the wife in Hosea as a figure why can't he inspire it to be so in the NT? And it is obvious the Rom 7 1-4 is about unity Paul was the greatest teacher of the Bodies unity as well as Eph 5. being united is liken as a marriage in 1 cor. being yolked is a union of marriage. the verses you stuff into your Bride understanding are to those that support Paul's teaching on unity of the Body of which he is the Head, not the church is the Bride of Christ. we must be Biblical over traditional.

So can a body of which the head is part of Marry itself? I think Not.

stephanos 03-08-2009 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 16510)
Stephanos,

there is no mention of the church or a church after Rev. 3. our relationship with Christ or Israel is not mentioned in the Bible because we are no longer part of the 24/7 TQ. we are in eternity with Christ never to be apart from Him.

Yes, but if this is the case, why is there ZERO mention of this after Revelation 3? You'd think that would be something to take note of if that's what John saw. Not that I doubt that we are in eternity with Christ, but what I want to know is what is the relationship the Church has with Israel after Revelation 3. Perhaps there is nothing to indicate there is any relationship. Nevertheless I think it is VERY uncanny that the word "church" disappears after chapter 3.

Peace and Love,
Stephen

kevinvw 03-09-2009 12:56 AM

Joh 3:29 He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled.

John says he is the friend of the bridegroom not part of the bride. I guess he must have lucked out or something.

Psa 45:13 The king's daughter is all glorious within: her clothing is of wrought gold.
Psa 45:14 She shall be brought unto the king in raiment of needlework: the virgins her companions that follow her shall be brought unto thee.

Luk 12:35 Let your loins be girded about, and your lights burning;
Luk 12:36 And ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their lord, when he will return from the wedding; that when he cometh and knocketh, they may open unto him immediately.

Rev 14:4 These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb.

Son 6:8 There are threescore queens, and fourscore concubines, and virgins without number.
Son 6:9 My dove, my undefiled is but one; she is the only one of her mother, she is the choice one of her that bare her. The daughters saw her, and blessed her; yea, the queens and the concubines, and they praised her.

You will notice there are many virgins who will be guests (Matthew 22). In Luke 12, these virgins waiting with their lamps are waiting for the lord to return from the wedding and let them in. You will also notice that the bride is one chaste virgin (2 Cor 11:1-3), not many virgins, so Matthew 25 could not be describing virgins going to get married to the bridegroom, but to meet him.

chette777 03-09-2009 01:56 AM

Kevin quote:
You will also notice that the bride is one chaste virgin (2 Cor 11:1-3)

in this quote you add the word bride and change the word of God and its true Doctrine of Unity to the false Doctrine that the Body of Christ is the Bride. no where in 2 Cor 11 is the word bride. No where within 100 verse either direction is the word Bride.

This is how subtle men can be in trying to establish a doctrine. but when faced with the truth men will cling to tradition rather than to the clear written word of God.

This technique is also used by Calvinist to prove their points of the TULIP. see that thread for more info by George.

Not all virgins are brides. you cannot make the one the other. The rule of thumb, "things that differ are not the same" Doug Stoufer - One Book Rightly Divided

kevinvw 03-09-2009 02:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 16529)
Kevin quote:
You will also notice that the bride is one chaste virgin (2 Cor 11:1-3)

in this quote you add the word bride and change the word of God and its true Doctrine of Unity to the false Doctrine that the Body of Christ is the Bride. no where in 2 Cor 11 is the word bride. No where within 100 verse either direction is the word Bride.

This is how subtle men can be in trying to establish a doctrine. but when faced with the truth men will cling to tradition rather than to the clear written word of God.

This technique is also used by Calvinist to prove their points of the TULIP. see that thread for more info by George.

Not all virgins are brides. you cannot make the one the other. The rule of thumb, "things that differ are not the same" Doug Stoufer - One Book Rightly Divided

I never said the word bride was in the verse. According to the verses that do talk about the bride she is. Notice Son 6:9. You tried making the virgins on Matthew 25 the bride when they clearly aren't.

Kiwi Christian 03-09-2009 02:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 16510)
So can a body of which the head is part of Marry itself?

The answer to this question is paramount to the doctrine being discussed, it is foundational to understanding the Church's relationship with Jesus Christ.

Can a body, of which the head is part of, marry itself? YES. Kevinvw already answered this question when he said "One has to go no further than Genesis 2 to get the teaching. Adam is put to sleep and a woman is created out of him and is bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. Jesus died to purchase a group of people that become bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh."

Eve (a type of the church) was the "body" of Adam (a type of Christ) before she was his "bride", likewise the church bears the same relationship to Jesus Christ. Paul spells this out in Ephesians 5:30-32 when he quotes Genesis 2:23-24.

Ephesians 5:30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. 31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. 32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

Genesis 2:22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. 23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. 24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Eve was taken from Adam's body, she was "bone of his bones, and flesh of his flesh," but she was also his wife! Therein we have a crystal clear type of the church as the bride & wife-to-be of Jesus Christ.

kevinvw 03-09-2009 03:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kiwi Christian (Post 16533)
The answer to this question is paramount to the doctrine being discussed, it is foundational to understanding the Church's relationship with Jesus Christ.

Can a body, of which the head is part of, marry itself? YES. Kevinvw already answered this question when he said "One has to go no further than Genesis 2 to get the teaching. Adam is put to sleep and a woman is created out of him and is bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. Jesus died to purchase a group of people that become bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh."

Eve (a type of the church) was the "body" of Adam (a type of Christ) before she was his "bride", likewise the church bears the same relationship to Jesus Christ. Paul spells this out in Ephesians 5:30-32 when he quotes Genesis 2:23-24.

Ephesians 5:30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. 31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. 32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

Genesis 2:22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. 23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. 24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Eve was taken from Adam's body, she was "bone of his bones, and flesh of his flesh," but she was also his wife! Therein we have a crystal clear type of the church as the bride & wife-to-be of Jesus Christ.

At least somebody gets the typology right. Man, Not only is she Adam's wife when she is made, she's also a virgin and married to him at the same time. An exact picture of the church as told by Paul. You can't forget the typology as presented in the book of Ruth or the Songs of Solomon either along with Psalm 45. The typology is important for wisdom and understanding. Moses messed up the typology and was punished by God.

Kiwi Christian 03-09-2009 03:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevinvw (Post 16527)
You will also notice that the bride is one chaste virgin (2 Cor 11:1-3), not many virgins, so Matthew 25 could not be describing virgins going to get married to the bridegroom, but to meet him.

Good point Kevin. It brings to light another good reason why Israel, the "wife" of Jehovah in the Old Testament, cannot possibly be espoused to marry Jesus Christ in the future, for Christ's wife is to be a VIRGIN. Israel committed adultery against God in the Old Testament, He cast her away and will restore her again, but as His wife, not as a "virgin" bride!

Isaiah 54:5 For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called. 6 For the LORD hath called thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth, when thou wast refused, saith thy God. 7 For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather thee. 8 In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith the LORD thy Redeemer.

Jeremiah 3:1 They say, If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and become another man's, shall he return unto her again? shall not that land be greatly polluted? but thou hast played the harlot with many lovers; yet return again to me, saith the LORD.

Hosea 3:1 Then said the LORD unto me, Go yet, love a woman beloved of her friend, yet an adulteress, according to the love of the LORD toward the children of Israel, who look to other gods, and love flagons of wine. 2 So I bought her to me for fifteen pieces of silver, and for an homer of barley, and an half homer of barley: 3 And I said unto her, Thou shalt abide for me many days; thou shalt not play the harlot, and thou shalt not be for another man: so will I also be for thee. 4 For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim: 5 Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the LORD their God, and David their king; and shall fear the LORD and his goodness in the latter days.

stephanos 03-09-2009 03:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 16529)

This is how subtle men can be in trying to establish a doctrine. but when faced with the truth men will cling to tradition rather than to the clear written word of God.

This technique is also used by Calvinist to prove their points of the TULIP. see that thread for more info by George.

Ok, this sort of comment isn't necessary. I hate to break it to you Chette, but you're not the only one on these forums that is interested in getting to the bottom of this. But you are the only one that frequently condescends into using comments like this. Would you cut it out please?

Stephen

stephanos 03-09-2009 03:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kiwi Christian (Post 16535)
Good point Kevin. It brings to light another good reason why Israel, the "wife" of Jehovah in the Old Testament, cannot possibly be espoused to marry Jesus Christ in the future, for Christ's wife is to be a VIRGIN. Israel committed adultery against God in the Old Testament, He cast her away and will restore her again, but as His wife, not as a "virgin" bride!

Isaiah 54:5 For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called. 6 For the LORD hath called thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth, when thou wast refused, saith thy God. 7 For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather thee. 8 In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith the LORD thy Redeemer.

Jeremiah 3:1 They say, If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and become another man's, shall he return unto her again? shall not that land be greatly polluted? but thou hast played the harlot with many lovers; yet return again to me, saith the LORD.

Hosea 3:1 Then said the LORD unto me, Go yet, love a woman beloved of her friend, yet an adulteress, according to the love of the LORD toward the children of Israel, who look to other gods, and love flagons of wine. 2 So I bought her to me for fifteen pieces of silver, and for an homer of barley, and an half homer of barley: 3 And I said unto her, Thou shalt abide for me many days; thou shalt not play the harlot, and thou shalt not be for another man: so will I also be for thee. 4 For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim: 5 Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the LORD their God, and David their king; and shall fear the LORD and his goodness in the latter days.

You know, I was wondering if someone was going to comment on this. I was thinking just this very thing just a moment ago.

Peace and Love,
Stephen

chette777 03-09-2009 03:43 AM

you guys are stretching. find some clear verse any where in Paul's Writings where Paul refers to the Body of Christ as the Bride of Christ. so we can have a clear doctrine of the Body of Christ as the bride of Christ today. which is not the same as the Lamb's bride either. no Bride in any of Paul's writings, No Lamb in any of his teachings. all wife references in Paul's writings have to do with unity with Christ or submission to Christ. But don't teach that the Body of Christ is the Bride of Christ.

you think you have supporting verses but you have no base verse to put your supporting verses on.

It is like this. First find Paul's teaching then as you read the other books if they agree with Paul then it is a doctrine for the church. you have to have a coat hanger (base doctrine) to hang your coat on (supporting doctrine) it doesn't work any other way.

you guys are forcing your words Bride into Paul's teachings to support the traditional doctrine of men..

Kiwi in the case of Adam marring his body (which is physical) he is the only man to do that. for only Eve was taken from him. concerning Jesus you were not taken from his side you were joined to him, you were baptized into his body no out of his body. so trying to use fuzzy logic wont work to support the doctrine of The Bride of Christ. as far as I know the Bible does not use Eve as a type of church the closest you could get is 2Cor11:3 however it is about unity not the the body of Christ is the Body of Christ.

Stephan,

George uses similar words in his post concerning the subtly of men toward some poster. But you don't call him on it. You read it as condescending because you interpret my confidence as something other than it is.

JOHN G 03-09-2009 08:05 AM

Food for thought...
 
Gen 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and CLOSED UP THE FLESH instead thereof;

Why would God need a rib? Why not create her out of the dust like Adam?
If a rib, why did He need to close the flesh? Why couldn't he get the rib without manipulating the flesh?

Joh 19:34 But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out BLOOD AND WATER.

1Jn 5:8 And there are three that bear WITNESS in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

Act 1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be WITNESSES unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

2Th 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
Pre-trib rapture (the Church leaving = he (Holy Ghost/Comforter) be taken out of the way).

Then:

2Th 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
CF.
Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Good Discussion...
I vote body and bride.
Truth is not by majority vote, but "thy word is truth". (John 17:17).

Biblestudent 03-09-2009 08:40 AM

simile and metaphor
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kiwi Christian (Post 16502)
Brother, from where I sit it looks to me like you believe that the Church is married to Jesus Christ now, and Israel will be married to Jesus Christ in the future? Don't you see something seriously wrong with that idea?

1. I see nothing wrong, for it is what the Bible SAYS.
2. These are figures of speech AS the Bible says it is.

For example, is Christ a way or a door, a shepherd or a lamb? It is literal?
Is the church a temple or a body, espoused or married, a wife or virgin, a building or a people, a husbandry or a flock?

METAPHOR: We are "married" to Christ now.
Romans 7:4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.
"If should be married to another" refers to the marriage in heaven (?), does that mean then that "we should bring bring forth fruit unto God" in heaven?
Or does it mean we are come dead to the law that we should be married to Christ and bring forth fruit to God NOW?

SIMILE: We are AS a "wife" now and Christ is AS a "husband" to us NOW.
Ephesians 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, EVEN AS Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
24 Therefore AS the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
25 Husbands, love your wives, EVEN AS Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, EVEN AS the Lord the church:
30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

1) Are we "one flesh" with Christ now, or not? Are we waiting to be "one flesh" with Him in the future?
2) Are we "His wife" now or not?
3) "EVEN AS" tells us it's figurative right?
The CHURCH is literal and has a literal relationship of oneness with the literal CHRIST. This literal doctrine is illustrated and pictured by the relationship of a wife and husband.
We are not the literal flesh and bones of Christ (unless you believe I am a literal toenail the literal body of Christ), but we have a literal relationship of oneness with Him as His body pictured in the marriage relationship.

SIMILE: Paul (LITERAL) will present (LITERALLY) the church (LITERAL) to Christ (LITERAL) like a jealous someone ("as" a father? FIGURATIVE) presenting a "chaste virgin" (FIGURATIVE) to one "husband" (FIGURATIVE).
2 Corinthians 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.
According to 2 Corinthians 11:2 (We're not talking about Ephesians 5 now.), are we being presented to Christ as a chaste virgin NOW, or are we to be presented to Christ as a chaste virgin in the future?

Again, the problem is trying to fit these passages with the picture rather than the picture to the passages, or trying to make doctrine out of typology rather than getting doctrine first and look for typology that fits.

I know that a woman is a 1) chaste virgin first, then 2) espoused to a husband, then 3) married to the man.

But Paul says, the church is 1) married to Christ in order to bring forth fruit, and 2) is one flesh with Christ as a husband and wife is one body; but he will present it (3) as a chaste virgin to Christ.

Remember, that is what the Bible SAID: the church has a relationship with Christ AS the husband and wife, and the church will meet Christ in such a scenario like a chaste virgin being presented to a husband.

Note: no mention of "bride" whatsoever.

Biblestudent 03-09-2009 09:24 AM

Who is the "bride" according to the prophets and the apostles?
 
John 3:29 He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled.

1. No doubt, the "bride" is present BEFORE the cross. Who is that "bride"?

We know that John is presenting Christ to Israel, AS "the friend of the bridegroom"presents the bridegroom to the bride.

a. Did the bride accept the bridegroom? No.
b. Was the bride "ready" when the bridegroom came? No.
c. Did the "marriage" occur? No.
d. What happened to the "marriage"? Postponed.

2. Who recorded this event and who called Israel the "bride" here? John the Apostle.

3. When will the marriage be?

Revelation 19:7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.

The context of Revelation 19 is the Second Coming, and the "marriage" is at the Second Coming, after the "wife" hath made herself ready.
4. Who is the bride?

Revelation 21:9 And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will SHEW thee the bride, the Lamb's wife.
10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and SHEWED me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,


Revelation 21:11 Having the glory of God: and her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal;
12 And had a wall great and high, and had TWELVE gates, and at the gates
TWELVE angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the TWELVE tribes of the children of Israel:
14 And the wall of the city had
TWELVE foundations, and in them the names of the TWELVE apostles of the Lamb.

4. Who wrote the book of Revelation? The Apostle John, the same John who wrote John 3:29. Question and answer with the Apostle John:
1) Who is the "bride" in the book of John (chap 3)? Israel
2) Who is the "bride" in the book of Revelation (Chaps. 19,21)? Holy Jerusalem
3)When will the marriage be?Second Coming/MillenniumRevelation 19:9 And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.
4)Are you really sure, John? Yes, Jesus said so.
Matthew 22:2 The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son,
5) Are you really sure? Yes, the OT prophets said so.
6) What about the church (the body of Christ), John? Wouldn't it be a problem if Christ has two wives?
I don't know what you're talking about - sounds "mystery" to me. What I wrote is consistent with what Isaiah, Jeremiah, Hosea, and the rest of the OT prophets wrote. You see, I'm writing prophecy. I'm writing about the "bride" that will get write one day and be accepted by the "bridegroom" once again. 7) But, John, haven't you read that Paul mentions something about "wife" and "chaste virgin espoused"? Well, you see Paul said "as", and I also wrote "as". If he compares the church to a wife, well, I compare Israel to a bride, as well as a wife.
8) What is the "marriage" all about? Kindly please ask Matthew; I think he explains what I've said here.Question and answer with Matthew:
1. What is the "marriage" all about?
Well, it's the Millennium, the "kingdom of heaven". During the literal, earthly reign of Christ, Christ will be REMARRIED with Israel after their long divorce. Notice, I said "the kingdom of heaven is LIKE" a "marriage".
Matthew 22:2 The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son,
2. What about those "virgins"?
You mean, the ten virgins? I think John told you that the number "twelve" is associated with Israel. Haven't you noticed in the Bible that "ten" is associated with the Gentiles? Well, look at the context when I wrote Matthew 25. I was writing about the judgment of the "nations" there, don't you see?
Matthew 25:1 Then shall the kingdom of heaven be LIKENED unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.
Matthew 25:31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
32 And before him shall be gathered all nations
: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:

Question and answer with the Apostle Paul:
Who is the "bride"? ------------- (no mention)
I mentioned "wife" and "chaste virgin". "Bride" was used by Brother John when he wrote about Israel, so I did not use that word to describe the unique relationship of God and the Church.

chette777 03-09-2009 08:06 PM

:amen: Brother Sammy:amen:

MC1171611 03-09-2009 08:45 PM

Ok, so simply because it's not expressly mentioned by Paul makes it untrue? Since when did ALL Scripture cease to be profitable for DOCTRINE and everything else?

You are trying to make Jesus a polygamist. That's clear, plain, and simple. That's stupid.

And how do you respond to this accusation? (Yes, it's an accusation that you're teaching that Jesus will be a polygamist by marrying Israel.)

Biblestudent 03-10-2009 03:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MC1171611 (Post 16582)
Ok, so simply because it's not expressly mentioned by Paul makes it untrue? Since when did ALL Scripture cease to be profitable for DOCTRINE and everything else?

You are trying to make Jesus a polygamist. That's clear, plain, and simple. That's stupid.

And how do you respond to this accusation? (Yes, it's an accusation that you're teaching that Jesus will be a polygamist by marrying Israel.)

All Scripture is profitable, rightly divided.
Please, don't put words in our mouth. Nobody teaches that.

Here is the plain Biblical teaching based on what the Bible SAYS.

MARRIAGE: Israel was God's people ("wife").
DIVORCE: They are put away due to disobedience/idolatry ("adultery") and unbelief.
REMARRIAGE: One day, God will regather them to be his people (and be his "bride" once again).

Here is how I would respond to the accusation:
1. God has only one group of people called His "bride" - Israel.
2. The church is the only group of people called His "body", and was never called by anyone in the Bible as the "bride". There is no DIRECT reference anywhere in the Bible that would ever link the "bride" of John 3 and Revelation to the church, the Body of Christ.
3. To those who would accuse us of polygamy, this would hold no water if one believes that:
Christ has only one "bride" - Israel (John 3 and Revelation 19)
He has only one "body" - the Church. (1 Corinthians 12:13)
Where is polygamy there?
The Church is the Body of Christ, and Israel is the Bride of the Lamb.

Brethren, it's FIGURATIVE. The Church and Israel are LITERAL, but the words "body" and "bride" are FIGURATIVE. Are we really a toenail, a nose, a finger, a woman?

I hope no one will go further and say that in the marriage of the Lamb, some would have to be bride's maids, flower girls, etc. If so, I would volunteer to be the pianist in that wedding.

The Bible INTERPRETS ITSELF:
Matthew 22 says THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN (literal) is LIKE (simile) A MARRIAGE (figure).
Revelation 19 and 21 is all about The Kingdom of Heaven, and it's indeed "AS" a marriage.

Biblestudent 03-10-2009 03:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevinvw (Post 16534)
At least somebody gets the typology right. Man, Not only is she Adam's wife when she is made, she's also a virgin and married to him at the same time. An exact picture of the church as told by Paul. You can't forget the typology as presented in the book of Ruth or the Songs of Solomon either along with Psalm 45. The typology is important for wisdom and understanding. Moses messed up the typology and was punished by God.

Brother Kevin, I agree with what you said if it means that the fulfilment is at the present Age of Grace ("now"). I've got some comments concerning typology.

Plain doctrine first, before typology: A seemingly "good" typology is not necessarily sound doctrine.

1. Adam and Eve is a good picture of Christ and the Church, but Adam and Eve never taught anyone that the Church is the "bride" of Revelation 19. I realized from my personal study that I have no support of Scripture anywhere to prove that the "bride" of Revelation 19 is the church. The church is there at the Second Coming and in the Millennium, but John did not mention anything about the "one" body or the "church" in Revelation 19, but he did say that the bride is associated with the "twelve" tribes of "Israel".
So I have to choose: Typology or Scripture? Commentary or Bible?

2. Ruth maybe a good picture of the Church. Because of Israel's backsliding, the Church got the blessings.
But Ruth BETTER pictures the Gentiles in the Millennium. The Gentiles get the blessings when they go with Israel. This typology is backed up by passages all over the whole Bible, and indeed far from being an isolated interpretation.
(Credit to whom credit is due, I just learned it recently from an audio study by Dr. Reese.)

3. Somebody accused us of teaching, I dare not mention, of someone being a "polygamist". Well, Solomon sure was one. If Solomon's marriage is a type of anyone or of any future event, then what's the problem if anyone teaches that some person has two wives and is a "polygamist"? Solomon wasn't contented with two wives.

Biblestudent 03-10-2009 04:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kiwi Christian (Post 16535)
Good point Kevin. It brings to light another good reason why Israel, the "wife" of Jehovah in the Old Testament, cannot possibly be espoused to marry Jesus Christ in the future, for Christ's wife is to be a VIRGIN. Israel committed adultery against God in the Old Testament, He cast her away and will restore her again, but as His wife, not as a "virgin" bride!

Isaiah 54:5 For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called. 6 For the LORD hath called thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth, when thou wast refused, saith thy God. 7 For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather thee. 8 In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith the LORD thy Redeemer.

Jeremiah 3:1 They say, If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and become another man's, shall he return unto her again? shall not that land be greatly polluted? but thou hast played the harlot with many lovers; yet return again to me, saith the LORD.

Hosea 3:1 Then said the LORD unto me, Go yet, love a woman beloved of her friend, yet an adulteress, according to the love of the LORD toward the children of Israel, who look to other gods, and love flagons of wine. 2 So I bought her to me for fifteen pieces of silver, and for an homer of barley, and an half homer of barley: 3 And I said unto her, Thou shalt abide for me many days; thou shalt not play the harlot, and thou shalt not be for another man: so will I also be for thee. 4 For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim: 5 Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the LORD their God, and David their king; and shall fear the LORD and his goodness in the latter days.

Brother Kiwi, everything you quoted only supports the Biblical record in Revelation 19 that indeed Israel is looking for a future REMARRIAGE. They have played the harlot, but they are to return unto their husband.

WHEN WILL ISRAEL (the OT "Bride" and "Wife") RETURN UNTO THE LORD ("husband")?
1. Did they return in John 3?
2. Have they returned in Romans 7, 2 Corinthians 11, or Ephesians 5?
3. Or, will they return in Revelation 19?

When will the prophecies of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Hosea be fulfilled?
There is no prophecy anywhere that the church is going to be "married" with the Lord in the Millennium, but there is a whole lot of prophecy that Israel is looking forward to a "remarriage" in the Millennium.

chette777 03-10-2009 05:12 AM

MC remember the teaching on the word all? All inclusive or all exclusive. Doctrine as a correct Biblical teaching yes. for all that was written before hand is for our learning. As Sound Doctrine it would be exclusive Someone called this Orthodox Doctrines like the tenets of faith not all (inclusive) scriptures teach these. But those sound doctrines are in fact based on a clear scripture not obscure. we have to give way to clear revelation over speculation or unclear.

Sammy,

Dr David Reese has excellent stuff

stephanos 03-10-2009 05:09 PM

I have a theory as to where the Church goes after Revelation 3.

He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. (John 1:11-13 KJV)

Could he be speaking of "sons of God" in the context of:

Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them. (Job 1:6 KJV)

My only hang up is:

But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation? (Hebrews 1:13-14 KJV)

Granted, Hebrews is written to the Jews, but does that not mean we are not heirs of salvation? Could it be that we become ordinary, run of the mill angels when we are raptured? Or are we different then them? If we are transformed into angels at the rapture then we must be them with the Lamb in Revelation 14:10 and perhaps in other passages with "angels".

What say ye?

Peace and Love,
Stephen

Winman 03-10-2009 05:40 PM

I have always heard that Isaac and Rebekah (Rebecca) are a picture of Christ and the Church.

Gen 24:1 And Abraham was old, and well stricken in age: and the LORD had blessed Abraham in all things. 2 And Abraham said unto his eldest servant of his house, that ruled over all that he had, Put, I pray thee, thy hand under my thigh: 3 And I will make thee swear by the LORD, the God of heaven, and the God of the earth, that thou shalt not take a wife unto my son of the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I dwell: 4 But thou shalt go unto my country, and to my kindred, and take a wife unto my son Isaac.

Rebekah was a virgin

Gen 24:16 And the damsel was very fair to look upon, a virgin, neither had any man known her: and she went down to the well, and filled her pitcher, and came up.

Down to the well= dead to sin
and filled her pitcher= the Holy Spirit
and came up= raised up with Christ

Gen 24:27 And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of my master Abraham, who hath not left destitute my master of his mercy and his truth: I being in the way, the LORD led me to the house of my master's brethren.

I think this is more support that the Church is both the body and bride of Christ. Abraham would only accept a blood relative (member of the body) as a bride for his son.

And Eph 5:30-32 seems very clear

Eph 5:30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. 32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

And I am no Bible scholar whatsoever, but I always believed we would be in the Lord's army in Revelation

Rev 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. 12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. 13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. 14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

To me, this army upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean describes the Church, those washed pure by the blood of Christ.

chette777 03-10-2009 08:46 PM

Stephan,

IN Job, the word WAS means this event of the sons of God was in the past not in the future. Are you sure the churches are Christians churches of this current dispensation? remember there is the church in the wilderness which is Israel, the churches f the Heathens (Acts) and the church of God, the body of Christ).

Winman,

you may have supporting verse but you still have no concrete verse form the Apostle to the Gentiles, Paul, for this doctrine to be applied to the church of God the Boy of Christ.

Types are to give way to clear scripture and if there is no clear scripture then they are not sound doctrines but examples of life for our learning. for all that was written beforehand is for our learning i.e. the book of Ruth, Genesis et al Old Testament.

stephanos 03-10-2009 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 16633)
Stephan,

IN Job, the word WAS means this event of the sons of God was in the past not in the future. Are you sure the churches are Christians churches of this current dispensation? remember there is the church in the wilderness which is Israel, the churches f the Heathens (Acts) and the church of God, the body of Christ).

Winman,

you may have supporting verse but you still have no concrete verse form the Apostle to the Gentiles, Paul, for this doctrine to be applied to the church of God the Boy of Christ.

Types are to give way to clear scripture and if there is no clear scripture then they are not sound doctrines but examples of life for our learning. for all that was written beforehand is for our learning i.e. the book of Ruth, Genesis et al Old Testament.

Yes I know that Job is speaking of the past. I was using that verse to shew that "sons of God" is a reference to angels. Jesus also said that we'd be like the angels after the resurrection:

For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. (Matthew 22:30 KJV)

So maybe the reason we're not mentioned as a Church after Revelation 3 is because we've become angels.

Peace and Love,
Stephen

chette777 03-10-2009 10:35 PM

If the Lord comes tomorrow and you are gathered unto him. you will not be resurrected you are translated or taken bodily but most definitely not resurrected.

the resurrection Jesus is talking about if for those of his days who are now dead in Christ or who had died before and wont be resurrected until the second resurrection. again be careful of the AS They will be AS angels not that they will be an angel. you used the word like angels that is good but what is like angels? eternal? Males?(which is why they don't marry in the resurrection), holy?

the church of God is not mentioned as we were not mentioned before the cross we slip into a mystery form (for lack of a better term). we are no longer in the 24/7 TQ so no mention of us in the Bible as in all events that took or will take place out side the 24/7TQ are, except for Gen1:1, 2; Job 1:6; Isa 14:12-14;Rev 21-22 and like verses and those for a reason.

A good study if day one created the 24/7TQ then go through the Scriptures and see if you can place everything inside the 24/7TQ of bible scriptures. Job 1:6 where did it take place in the 24/7 TQ or in eternity? when and where did Lucifer fall inside the 24/7 TQ or in Eternity? Where is the New Jerusalem in the 24/7 TQ or n Eternity? When did the Sons of God shout for at the establishment of the Earth in the 24/7 TQ or eternity?

I found things that happened outside the 24/7TQ that are mentioned in the Bible there is very little detail of the entire event. but all those things that did take place in the 24/7 TQ you can find in detail. the sons of God in Gen 6 (were angels too) and what they were doing is detailed. While how they came about is not in detail i.e. their fall. while God's word tells us the sons of God (angels) came to present themselves before God it doesn't tell us where or why or when. it took place outside the 24/7 TQ. while we are told the New Jerusalem will be on the earth no details as to what goes on inside the city and the lifestyles of the inhabitants because it is not in the 24/7 TQ. however what it does reveal concerns those who are now in a 24/7 TQ and come out of it.

kevinvw 03-10-2009 11:59 PM

Mat 13:45 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man, seeking goodly pearls:
Mat 13:46 Who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had, and bought it.

What is this talking about? It says the kingdom of heaven so it must only be talking about the Millennium?

Biblestudent 03-11-2009 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevinvw (Post 16647)
Mat 13:45 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man, seeking goodly pearls:
Mat 13:46 Who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had, and bought it.

What is this talking about? It says the kingdom of heaven so it must only be talking about the Millennium?

Honestly, I really like the question, brother.

Certainly, it does NOT say "church" anywhere. This is the problem of almost every commentary (and song) I've read (or liked to sing). They would say the "pearl of great price" is the church.

The Bible means what it says: "The KINGDOM of heaven is LIKE ...one pearl of great price." If some suppose it means something else other than what says, then I'd rather believe what I read regardless of what others think it should mean that it does not say.

Many seem to force everything from Genesis to Revelation and make the passages refer to the church; but when they hear the "other side" that applies most passages in Scripture to the millennial kingdom (as demanded by the context), they would have a problem with it. What's wrong?

For example: Eve is the church, Rebekah is the church, Ruth is the church, salt of the earth is the church, light of the world is the church, pearl of great price is the church, etc. etc.

I have no problem with that as long as they are a "TYPE" of the church, but not DOCTRINE FOR or a DIRECT REFERENCE TO the church. CONTEXT determines meaning.

Now, if Ruth is a type of something else other than the church, the salt of the earth a type of someone else other than the church, the light of the world a reference to another group of people other than the church, the pearl of great price is a reference to the KINGDOM and not to the church, why is there a problem?:confused:

Biblestudent 03-11-2009 08:43 AM

Like a Calvinist with a "TULIP fixation" (as Dr. Laurence Vance put it), there are two sides of the coin in the issue of "rightly dividing the word of truth".

The one side has a "CHURCH fixation", and the other side has an "ISRAEL fixation" or a "KINGDOM fixation". The former would accuse the latter as "Hyperdispensationalists", and the latter would accuse the former to be "Wrongly Dividing (or not all dividing) the Word of Truth".

I tested both lenses; but to avoid both extremes, I settled for these:
1. CONTEXT determines meaning.
2. The Bible DEFINES itself.
(I'm not promoting a man "above that which is written", but, as always, if I've given credit to others, these two points I first heard from an old tape by Dr. Reese. These two principles I apply in every Bible study, and they sure work.)

Biblestudent 03-11-2009 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winman (Post 16626)
I have always heard that Isaac and Rebekah (Rebecca) are a picture of Christ and the Church.

No problem with types. Types are simply illustrations, but not all illustrations fit 100%. Not only that, some illustrations are far-fetched.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winman (Post 16626)
I think this is more support that the Church is both the body and bride of Christ. Abraham would only accept a blood relative (member of the body) as a bride for his son.

That's where I think the problem is. Nobody in the Bible anywhere has ever called the church a "bride" (and how can Paul the revelator of the church not mention that word one time).
Fact 1. The Bible compares the church (Body of Christ) to a "wife" as well as to a "virgin".
Fact 2. The Bible compares Israel to a "wife" and to a "BRIDE".
I have no problem the Bible telling me that the "wife" of Ephesians 5 is the church, and I sure believe the Bible (at least now after refusing to believe it a long time ago) when it tells me that the "bride" of John 3:29 is Israel (John 1:31) and the "bride", "the Lamb's wife" in Revelation 21, is the "holy Jerusalem" (21:10), associated with "the twelve tribes of the children of Israel" (21:12).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winman (Post 16626)
And I am no Bible scholar whatsoever, but I always believed we would be in the Lord's army in Revelation

Rev 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. 12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. 13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. 14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

To me, this army upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean describes the Church, those washed pure by the blood of Christ.

1. Angels are clothed in white, and they are armies of heaven. Matthew says they will be with Christ at the Second Coming.
2. Israel (also called "saints") will be clothed in white, and they are also armies of God. The Lord cometh with his saints at the Second Coming.
3. The Church will be clothed in white, and they are also soldiers of the Lord. They shall "ever be with the Lord".

That angels and Israel will be with Christ at His Second Coming has been seen in OT and NT PROPHECY, but that the church (the "Body of Christ") will be with him has been hidden in a MYSTERY and revealed only through Paul. (Stamites have misused this great truth, all for the sake of excluding baptism from, what they say, "Mystery Program".)

Ephesians 3:1 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,
2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,
4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)
5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;
6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:
7 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.
8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;

Ephesians 5:32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

John did not tell me anything about the "church" in Revelation 19 and 21, but Paul did tell me that I'd be there (1 Thessalonians 4:18).

CKG 03-11-2009 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevinvw (Post 16647)
Mat 13:45 It says the kingdom of heaven so it must only be talking about the Millennium?

Why do you think all kingdom of heaven parables are talking about the millennium?

This "who is the bride" thread is certainly challenging to me as I just assumed the church was the bride of Christ, but I had never really studied up on it. If Israel is the bride then the following doesn't sound like a groom coming for His bride.
Zechariah 12
1. The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.

2. Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem.

3. And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.

4. In that day, saith the LORD, I will smite every horse with astonishment, and his rider with madness: and I will open mine eyes upon the house of Judah, and will smite every horse of the people with blindness.

5. And the governors of Judah shall say in their heart, The inhabitants of Jerusalem shall be my strength in the LORD of hosts their God.

6. In that day will I make the governors of Judah like an hearth of fire among the wood, and like a torch of fire in a sheaf; and they shall devour all the people round about, on the right hand and on the left: and Jerusalem shall be inhabited again in her own place, even in Jerusalem.

7. The LORD also shall save the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem do not magnify themselves against Judah.

8. In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them.

9. And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.

10. And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

11. In that day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, as the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon.
Zechariah 14
1. Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.

2. For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.

3. Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.

4. And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.

5. And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.

6. And it shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear, nor dark:

7. But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass, that at evening time it shall be light.

8. And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.

9. And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:56 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

Website AV1611.Com.
Posts represent only the opinions of users of this forum and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the webmaster.

Software for Believing Bible Study