Jump to content
IGNORED

the bride of Christ


ayin jade

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  16
  • Topic Count:  134
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  8,142
  • Content Per Day:  2.34
  • Reputation:   6,612
  • Days Won:  20
  • Joined:  11/02/2014
  • Status:  Offline

The bride of Christ, according to scripture, is the city New Jerusalem.

 

There is such a thing as personification, and we find it in Scripture also. It would be incongruous if heavenly gold and jewels (just like earthly bricks and mortar) would constitute the bride of Christ.  They have neither soul nor spirit.  Therefore when the New Jerusalem is called "the bride of Christ" it represents those who have their mansions and their eternal inheritance in that city, i.e. the saints themselves.  Once again, we need to go back to Rev 19:7-9 and consider the Wife of the Lamb as further revealed in Rev 21:2-4, 9,10 -- COME HITHER, I WILL SHEW THEE THE BRIDE, THE LAMB'S WIFE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  55
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  4,568
  • Content Per Day:  0.68
  • Reputation:   770
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/18/2006
  • Status:  Offline

There is NOTHING in the New Testament that identifies the New Jerusalem as the Church.

 

Then you don't understand what a theocratic government is, God is moving his government from Heaven to earth. In Israel will be a new city established which is to be the CAPITAL of God not for the entire globe but the CAPITAL of entire universe ruled from Israel. 

 

New Jerusalem by definition is a church as God will be the head and a system of government ruled by priests. In such a case there will be no separation from State and church

I agree

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest shiloh357

No one has provided ONE Scripture that identifies the New Jerusalem as a people group called the Church.   The argument that Israel is the Church is rooted in ancient anti-Semitism and not sound doctrine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  55
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  4,568
  • Content Per Day:  0.68
  • Reputation:   770
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/18/2006
  • Status:  Offline

The argument that Israel is the Church is rooted in ancient anti-Semitism and not sound doctrine.

I do not argue that the "nation" of Israel is the Church. Israel is just a nation in the earth like any other nation. It was God however that brought the nation of Israel into existence through Jacob's 12 sons.

The Church is not a kingdom of this world but one that shall come down from heaven. Every person who is born again spiritually has become a citizen of this heavenly kingdom and shall live in God's eternal kingdom forever. It is another nation and land that the Church makes up and it is "one" kingdom for all who are born again whether they are Jew, Gentile, male, female etc., will dwell as Christ sit's on the throne.

To equate the natural nation of the Jews to being the Church is in correct. But there is a heavenly kingdom in which is the Church the heavenly New Jerusalem and that spritual kingdom will be manifested in this earth at the end of the seven year tribulation period and will be in the earth for a 1000 years as Christ's government will rule and reign in the earth.

Those who are born again understand their citizenship isn't in this world but we declare that we are stranges and pilgrims in this world who look for a city who's builder and maker is God. Some call it spiritual Israel. But when they do so they are not speaking about the nation of Israel or being a Jewish descent, in the natural but are speaking in the spiritual sense or heavenly sense in God's kingdom.

There is alot of confusion for sure on the use of terminology and understanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest shiloh357

The view that the New Jerusalem is the Church is rooted in teaching that the Church is Israel or the New Israel.   This is a residue of the old view that the New Heavens and New Earth are symbolic of the Church age and thus the Church is the New Jerusalem that replaces the "old Jerusalem" that was destroyed in 70 AD. 

 

 

That's where this teaching comes from.   It comes from Preterism which predates modern dispensationalism and perhaps Amillenialism (not sure on that one)   But it has been taught for so long, that we accept it has fact without actually thinking critically about what we are saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  55
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  4,568
  • Content Per Day:  0.68
  • Reputation:   770
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/18/2006
  • Status:  Offline

The view that the New Jerusalem is the Church is rooted in teaching that the Church is Israel or the New Israel.   This is a residue of the old view that the New Heavens and New Earth are symbolic of the Church age and thus the Church is the New Jerusalem that replaces the "old Jerusalem" that was destroyed in 70 AD. 

 

 

That's where this teaching comes from.   It comes from Preterism which predates modern dispensationalism and perhaps Amillenialism (not sure on that one)   But it has been taught for so long, that we accept it has fact without actually thinking critically about what we are saying.

I deinitely do not agree with the views found witin Preterism especially on how they view predestination nor am I a Amillenialist.

I prefer to be rooted in the bible.

New Jerusalem is a city to which the church is a part of, the heavenly kingdom of God a city who's builder and maker is God. The saints citizenship is in heaven. Buelah land we long for which is our eternal dwelling place. I'm looking forward to the wedding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  1
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  1,185
  • Content Per Day:  0.27
  • Reputation:   667
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  03/28/2012
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  02/19/1971

Shiloh, it doesn't seem like you are too sure on your own stance on this matter. Hebrews clearly states that the Church is apart of the New Jerusalem. You have already conceded on some most important truths on this matter. None of us believe the Church is replacing Israel, none of us believe we are spiritual Jews. We can rightly divide scripture with the help of the Holy Spirit just like you and Marilyn. So far the evidence against the Church being the bride of the Lamb is lacking. You simply dismiss every scripture given to you, and back up nothing with scripture to the contrary. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest shiloh357

Saved,

 

I have conceded ONE point.  I conceded that I had made a mistake that the New Jersualem is the Bride of Christ.   Hebrews 12 does NOT say that the church is part of the New Jerusalem.   That is a value you have assigned to the text.  It is not talking about the New Jerusalem. The text places the location at Mt. Zion, not in the new heavens and new earth. 

 

So to rightly divide the word of God, we need to pay attention to the details.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  1
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  1,185
  • Content Per Day:  0.27
  • Reputation:   667
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  03/28/2012
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  02/19/1971

Shiloh, are you really going to sit here and deny that this "heavenly" as opposed to earthly Jerusalem is not the New Jerusalem? Yes we are come to Mount Zion as opposed to Sinai where the Law was given. Brother, you cannot deny this basic truth. Myriads of angels are apart of this city. Vs, 23 clearly says the Church of the firstborn. All these biblical words that we know connect to Rev. and the Holy city that God has prepared for us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...