[chette777]

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]

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]

Originally Posted by Kiwi Christian

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]

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]

Brother Sammy

[MC1171611]

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]

Originally Posted by MC1171611

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]

Originally Posted by kevinvw

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]

Originally Posted by Kiwi Christian

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]

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