[chette777]

KIWI QUOTE "It's apparent to me that you can't get your head around the typology of New Jerusalem being the bride of Christ in Revelation 21" the typology is the Bride of a literal city. and no where in Rev 21 does it say the bride of Christ. is is the lamb's bride. you are making the typology of the NEW J to be the body of Christ. you make the city a typology for the Bride but it is the other way around.

[Luke]

Is the New Jerusalem a sphere, cube or pyramid. All fit the equal width height and depth scenario, depending on where the measurements are taken from. Most depict it as a cube.

[Kiwi Christian]

Originally Posted by chette777

Second, Paul is talking about his espousal of the Corinthians (at that time) NOT you and I...He was in no way teaching the body of Christ is the bride of the lamb.

It's sad that you miss the application to the entire body of Christ in 2 Corinthians 11:2, and try to make it only apply to those Corinthians in Paul's day, how much more of 1&2 Corinthians do you think only applied to them and not us?

Do you also believe that Paul was only speaking to those Romans when he said "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" in Romans 7:14?

If you are going to dismiss verses that support certain doctrinal truths, claiming that they are taken out of context and that they only apply to the audience of Paul's day, eg. only the Corinthians (at that time), and only the Romans (at that time), then I'd rather not read your replies.

All scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, and the Pauline epistles contain the DOCTRINE for the body of Christ during the Church Age. When Paul, through inspiration of the Holy Ghost, said he espoused those Corinthians to one husband, that he may present them as a chaste virgin to Christ, he wasn't only speaking to them, he was speaking to us, you and I, we are engaged to be married to the Lord Jesus Christ and that makes us a bride to be.

Originally Posted by chette777

Eph 5:25 again is he (Jesus) is the head of the church (not the groom of the church). . . like a husband is a head of his wife (not the churchis the Bride of the Lamb, again you used the scripture out of context). He was wanting them to see that they were under authority and that wives needed to submit to it. the point of the teaching is that we are joined to Christ as one as a husband and wife are one and therefore submission to authority was needful. but it is out of context for trying to prove the church is the BRIDE of Rev 22.

I beleive these are known as Hyperbolic Expressions or even other form of figures of speech. Now he is a litereal head as a husband is a literal head. but the context does not speak of the church as a BRIDE.

Ephesians 5 speaks of one of the mysteries that a steward of God should know (1 Corinthians 4:1), and it's all about this subject of Christ and the church getting married:

Ephesians 5:31 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.

Originally Posted by chette777

Rev 22 the Bride is a city beckoning those from the 1000 year kingdom to come and enter. You and I might be in that city when it comes but we are not the city. for the City is the Lamb's bride.

If the city is the Lamb's bride, how does it manage to speak in Rev 22:17 "And the Spirit and the bride say, Come."?

As covered already, the New Jerusalem is a TYPE of the Lamb's bride. It is also called "the mother of us all" by Paul in Galatians 4:26, and he wasn't only talking to Galatians (at that time).

Originally Posted by chette777

But most important. I never said I abandoned any DOCTRINE of the church. I just raised questions to look at the words, and cross referenced them and discovered that Paul never once called the church a bride, and that the Bride of REV 22 is not the body of Christ as taught by many today. those my friend are pure facts not presumptions. not only that you can join all sorts of scriptures out of context to make it teach anything you want, the JW's and other cults do that. and Kiwi your jumbling of scriptures out of context is just that a creation of the doctrine that the body of Christ is the bride of Rev 22....

...if it can not be reconciled with scripture to scripture then we need to make changes if necessary

"Jumbling of scriptures out of context" is a crude way of putting it, but it looks that way to you because you interpret the passages differently, such as I have pointed out with 2 Cori 11:2 and Ephesians 5. I believe I have given you enough scriptural evidence to prove that the church will marry Jesus Christ and become His wife. Based on that evidence, scripture with scripture, jumbled or unjumbled, I must conclude that the bride/wife of the Lamb in Revelation is the body of Christ. Who else could it be? <--- no-one!

[chette777]

KIWI I did not say there was no application to the church today there is. But as far as those in Rome, Corinth, Ephesians the context is to whom and when and why it was spoken at that time. but in your context of making it the Bride of Rev 21 you can't use that to prove a doctrine of the Bride.

I haven't dismissed any verses for doctrinal truth I have only remarked on the doctrine of the Bride of Rev 22 not being the body of Christ.

In Ephesians, Paul speaks of a mystery of being one in Christ not of a marriage or a Bride Church that is your preconceived notion. the context is of submission as a husband and wife, as you are to be submitted to him as it's head. No elaboration of that mystery is taught in Eph 5. you were joined with Christ the moment you believed and that is as far as Paul goes with it.

As far as the bride says come? who is it speaking too? why is it speaking? for what reason or occasion does it have to speak? Where are you when the bride speaks?

Rev 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. and verse 9 Re 21:9, 10And 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. nd 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... shows the TYPE is the BRIDE not the CITY the context shows that clearly the city is being typified as a bride, not the bride is typified by the city.

No where does Paul teach that the church of God will marry the Lamb. You are already joined to him as one who is married to a wife, you and him are already one body, not something that will take place in the future. how about the city is the body of Christ nor is it Israel or any people at all. But it is just a city just like it says. that is the literal interpretation of Rev. 21. I have found that if it does not agree with Paul's teaching it is not a doctrine for today but will have application for today.

Now if you have something of value to add to our observations fine but to keep arguing as if I am trying to get you to change (which I am not). I only call you to rightly divide the Church of God and the Bride of the Lamb. you are free to stop responding anytime you wish and you are free to contribute. but don't put things into this that are not there.

I am in service for my bridegroom does not make me the Bride it makes me a servant of the bridegroom.

[chette777]

Luke, You are correct in that sphere, square or pyramidal all fit the scenario. what a wonder a cubit is and it is by the cubit of the angel which must be bigger than the cubit of a man. and because it is cubit most do see it as a cube shape.

thanks for breaking the monotony of the post with your insight.

[stephanos]

Originally Posted by chette777

KIWI I did not say there was no application to the church today there is. But as far as those in Rome, Corinth, Ephesians the context is to whom and when and why it was spoken at that time. but in your context of making it the Bride of Rev 21 you can't use that to prove a doctrine of the Bride.

I haven't dismissed any verses for doctrinal truth I have only remarked on the doctrine of the Bride of Rev 22 not being the body of Christ.

In Ephesians, Paul speaks of a mystery of being one in Christ not of a marriage or a Bride Church that is your preconceived notion. the context is of submission as a husband and wife, as you are to be submitted to him as it's head. No elaboration of that mystery is taught in Eph 5. you were joined with Christ the moment you believed and that is as far as Paul goes with it.

This just doesn't make a bit of sense. First of all, we can be one/joined with our wife before we're married (which is the case with the Church).

But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die: But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter: For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her. If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days. A man shall not take his father's wife, nor discover his father's skirt. (Deuteronomy 22:25-30 KJV)

You see, many of us before recieving Christ Jesus and becoming one in Him were betrothed to another, namely Satan and his devils. But when we were born again we were made one in Christ and became Christ's. So you see, we've been "known" by Christ (compared to those in Matthew 7:23) and shall be His wife when we've been prepared or made ourselves ready.

As far as the bride says come? who is it speaking too? why is it speaking? for what reason or occasion does it have to speak? Where are you when the bride speaks?

Rev 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. and verse 9 Re 21:9, 10And 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. nd 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... shows the TYPE is the BRIDE not the CITY the context shows that clearly the city is being typified as a bride, not the bride is typified by the city.

No where does Paul teach that the church of God will marry the Lamb. You are already joined to him as one who is married to a wife, you and him are already one body, not something that will take place in the future.

Please see my above comment.

how about the city is the body of Christ nor is it Israel or any people at all. But it is just a city just like it says. that is the literal interpretation of Rev. 21. I have found that if it does not agree with Paul's teaching it is not a doctrine for today but will have application for today.

Actually the doctrines expressed in the Scriptures Kiwi posted are all for us today (and to say they aren't is something even a Hyper wouldn't say), and they expressely point out that we are betrothed to Christ. I'm not sure how I could make those verses clearer than they already are. Also, I refuse to entertain any arguements where the culture card is played.

Now if you have something of value to add to our observations fine but to keep arguing as if I am trying to get you to change (which I am not). I only call you to rightly divide the Church of God and the Bride of the Lamb. you are free to stop responding anytime you wish and you are free to contribute. but don't put things into this that are not there.

I am in service for my bridegroom does not make me the Bride it makes me a servant of the bridegroom.

First of all Kiwi is a right divider, and the only reason he or I are "arguing" (as you call it) is because we're concerned to see you depart from the position you appeared to take before you ran into the wacked teachings of that Knox character. Truth be told, the ideas you've shared in this thread make me very uncomfortable. My spirit just doesn't seem to sit right with the idea that I am not the bride of my Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore I refuse to entertain it any longer.

For Jesus' sake,
Stephen

[chette777]

I haven't departed from any Salvation doctrinal position. I only raised points for discussion as to rightly dividing the body of Christ from the Lamb's bride in Rev 21 as taught by many scholarly persons today. We have been taught that the Bride of Rev21 is the church but with no clearly taught scriptures from Paul on this subject. the verses used are the standard one KIWI used. the problem is the context does not speak of the church being a bride. the context being of do good works instead of sinning 2 Cor, being joined into one body, submission and respect Eph 5 the mystery Paul mentions there is the Joining into one, not a bride. If joined the marriage is already consummated. we are one body with Christ by faith, our embracing relationship was consummated by his cross upon belief in his blood's propitiation, then we were renewed and regenerated, reconciled to God and fully redeemed from the price of sin, and declared just and imputed his righteousness in which we are clothed spiritually.

search for the words Lamb, Bride, City or Betrothed and see if Paul teaches any where using those words concerning the body of Christ being any of those things.

The word espoused has the meanings as follows from the Webster's 1828 Dictionary ESPOUS'ED, pp. Betrothed; affianced; promised in marriage by contract; married; united intimately; embraced. you see it has the meaning of also already being married and united intimately of which we are in Christ.

Peter tells us the importance of words 2Peter 3:2 That ye may be mindful of the WORDS which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour: words play a very important roll in rightly dividing.

The city by context of Rev 21:2 is that it is a literal city, and Vs 9 that it is a restored or renewed Jerusalem (the old one was burned away.

As far as your Knox comments. I don't agree with very much of Knox teaching. But he holds that it is a literal city and then out his other side comes the fact that it is the church. his claims is that a city can not exist without it's inhabitants, but city do exist without inhabitants and Archeologist have found plenty of these them. it is said in Rev the Bride, the Lamb's wife, wife in Hosea is reference to Israel. so it could be a reference to Israel being repositioned upon the new eternal earth for ever. after all they would of had to be removed when the old one fled away.

[Kiwi Christian]

Originally Posted by Luke

Is the New Jerusalem a sphere, cube or pyramid. All fit the equal width height and depth scenario, depending on where the measurements are taken from. Most depict it as a cube.

What I found fascinating is what Dr Ruckman says in his Revelation commentary, page 752:

"Revelation 21:16 And the city lieth foursquare, and the length is as large as the breadth: and he measured the city with the reed, twelve thousand furlongs. The length and the breadth and the height of it are equal.

Now this city is pure gold and it is shaped like a double pyramid. If you want to see what this city is shaped like, draw a pyramid, then draw another pyramid upside down at the bottom of the first pyramid. Put the two bases together. Here you have a figure that points up and points down. It is not a square, but it is "foursquare." It is "squared" four times. In plainer words, it is not just a cube, but a double cube, each cube having five sides. The thing is so set up that when you put it together, it has eight sides, with the two bases together (which makes ten sides in all). It makes a "city" with a foundation that points down underneath it, and it balances like a gyroscope on whatever it sits on."

Food for thought!

[chette777]

I took a look at "Ruckman's Apocalypse" a pictorial commentary on the Book of Revelation. His Drawings of the city is quite unique. thanks for that input.

[chette777]

KIWI,

Dr Peter Ruckman, Pastor David Cloud, Pastor David Walker, myself and many others do not believe the Lamb's Bride in Revelation 21 is the church. but an actual city and none of us have left of any sound Doctrine in saying so. For we interpret the Book Literally, as you should.

you can download Pastor David Cloud's MP3 the New Jerusalem. and hear it for yourself.