WHO IS THE BRIDE OF CHRIST? ITS NOT YOU OR ME?

[thereselittleflower]

On 11/18/2015, 8:08:08, SINNERSAVED said:

Who is the bride, of Christ Jesus ?

I read that, it is not you or me , or the believers ,for we are the body, and the friends , but we are not the bride.

for many churches I attended they said ,we were the bride of Christ, ?

I am glad I read my bible, to understand  this, did you know this,?, that you are not the bride of Jesus, the bridegroom?

so why do they say this? if it is not true?

and why is it compared to a wedding?

Hi SINNERSAVED.   I guess the question I would ask you would be how is the Bride of Christ not the Church?

 

If we look at the context in Eph 5

Ephesians 5

Wives and Husbands
22 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit fin everything to their husbands.
25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.1 28 In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, 30 because we are members of his body. 31 o“Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. 33 However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

 

The entire context is about wives and husbands and the relationship between them.

The context where it refers to the Church as "her" is set in the husband/wife relationship.
Husbands are to love their wives as their own bodies.  So if the Church is the Bride of Christ, then of course it would also be referred to as Christ's body.    He goes on to say:

"a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.   This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church."

He clearly states he is specifically saying the husband/wife relationship refers to Christ and the Church.   This is unequivocal.  There is no ambiguity here.  It is clearly and explicitly stated.  

This is the context of his words in this passage and so the translators use feminine personal pronoun to refer to the Church correctly in this passage.

The entire context is about the husband and wife relationship and Paul explicitly and clearly states he is referring to Christ and the Church in this relationship.

Then when we look back in Genesis

Genesis 2

The Creation of Woman
…22The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man.23The man 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." 24For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.

and compare that to what Paul asid above, it is pretty obvious Paul was referring directly back to these words of Adam and applying them to the Church and her bridal relationship with Christ.

Paul then draws very strong parallels between the fashioning of Eve as the bride of Adam and the fashioning of the Church as the bride of Christ.

Just as Adam's side was opened and his rib removed so that Eve would be formed, so a spear pierced and opened the side of Christ from which flowed His water and blood so the Church would be formed. 

With all this, I can see no valid reason for disallowing Paul's very clear, unambiguous wording and imagery to say the Church is not the Bride of Christ.

 

The scriptures use different metaphors to describe the relationship of the Church to Christ.  The Bride is one such metaphor.  Friends is another.  The body is another.   But a Bride should be the friend of the Groom, and the Bride is "bone of my bone, flesh of my flesh" in regards to the Groom - her body becomes his and he is to love it as his own.   There is no contradiction between these metaphors.  They are all of the Church.

 

 

 

[SINNERSAVED]

8 hours ago, thereselittleflower said:

Hi SINNERSAVED.   I guess the question I would ask you would be how is the Bride of Christ not the Church?

 

If we look at the context in Eph 5

Ephesians 5

Wives and Husbands
22 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit fin everything to their husbands.
25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.1 28 In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, 30 because we are members of his body. 31 o“Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. 33 However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

 

The entire context is about wives and husbands and the relationship between them.

The context where it refers to the Church as "her" is set in the husband/wife relationship.
Husbands are to love their wives as their own bodies.  So if the Church is the Bride of Christ, then of course it would also be referred to as Christ's body.    He goes on to say:

"a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.   This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church."

He clearly states he is specifically saying the husband/wife relationship refers to Christ and the Church.   This is unequivocal.  There is no ambiguity here.  It is clearly and explicitly stated.  

This is the context of his words in this passage and so the translators use feminine personal pronoun to refer to the Church correctly in this passage.

The entire context is about the husband and wife relationship and Paul explicitly and clearly states he is referring to Christ and the Church in this relationship.

Then when we look back in Genesis

Genesis 2

The Creation of Woman
…22The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man.23The man 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." 24For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.

and compare that to what Paul asid above, it is pretty obvious Paul was referring directly back to these words of Adam and applying them to the Church and her bridal relationship with Christ.

Paul then draws very strong parallels between the fashioning of Eve as the bride of Adam and the fashioning of the Church as the bride of Christ.

Just as Adam's side was opened and his rib removed so that Eve would be formed, so a spear pierced and opened the side of Christ from which flowed His water and blood so the Church would be formed. 

With all this, I can see no valid reason for disallowing Paul's very clear, unambiguous wording and imagery to say the Church is not the Bride of Christ.

 

The scriptures use different metaphors to describe the relationship of the Church to Christ.  The Bride is one such metaphor.  Friends is another.  The body is another.   But a Bride should be the friend of the Groom, and the Bride is "bone of my bone, flesh of my flesh" in regards to the Groom - her body becomes his and he is to love it as his own.   There is no contradiction between these metaphors.  They are all of the Church.

 

 

 

Ephesians 5

Wives and Husbands
22 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit fin everything to their husbands.
25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.1 28 In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, 30 because we are members of his body. 31 o“Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. 33 However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

wives submit to there husbands... ...as..... Christ is the head of the church   as ......

 

we are the people that will fill the kingdom of God,    we are sinful and flesh cannot inherit it, so we must be washed by the word of God , sanctified by God, and cleansed by the blood of Christ, which he gave his life for, so that we may be cleansed clean and ready with out spot or blemish, so we are able to be one with Christ, as a husband and wife join together and become one, so will we be joined  spiritual and as the body to Christ, the mystery of changing from mortal to immortal ,

is the point of the bond between us and Christ 

we become join as one, in all of his glory, but we are not the wife, we are   as   a wife, per example, of purity and and of one together ,but not the way you are stating, 

a husband and wife is the tightest bond there is , to make a point of what we can see is being demonstrated to us, if we understand the marriage and the bond between two people, then we understand what God is telling us, it is used as the strongest example,

for if you read that the servants went out to find people to come to the wedding, feast and many rejected, and so he sent them to the sides of the roads and the streets to get people to put on there white robes and join, that is us, we are invited , to the wedding but not of the wedding, this is very clear, and I will stand on this view.

 unless you have a flat out statement that says we are the bride, not like a bride, not as , but we are the bride,

then I will apologize. but in revelation as the new Jerusalem is coming down from the sky or heavens it is stated as the bride,  we are not the building, we will fill  it and be the people of it, just as a goes to prepare a mansion and comes back, it is all in parallel to a wedding example, so that the people would know and understand, like a parable...

 

 

[thereselittleflower]

On 11/18/2015, 8:08:08, SINNERSAVED said:

Who is the bride, of Christ Jesus ?

I read that, it is not you or me , or the believers ,for we are the body, and the friends , but we are not the bride.

for many churches I attended they said ,we were the bride of Christ, ?

I am glad I read my bible, to understand  this, did you know this,?, that you are not the bride of Jesus, the bridegroom?

so why do they say this? if it is not true?

and why is it compared to a wedding?

 

Thereselittleflower said:

9 hours ago, thereselittleflower said:

Hi SINNERSAVED.   I guess the question I would ask you would be how is the Bride of Christ not the Church?

 

If we look at the context in Eph 5

Ephesians 5

Wives and Husbands
22 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit fin everything to their husbands.
25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.1 28 In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, 30 because we are members of his body. 31 o“Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. 33 However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

 

The entire context is about wives and husbands and the relationship between them.

The context where it refers to the Church as "her" is set in the husband/wife relationship.
Husbands are to love their wives as their own bodies.  So if the Church is the Bride of Christ, then of course it would also be referred to as Christ's body.    He goes on to say:

"a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.   This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church."

He clearly states he is specifically saying the husband/wife relationship refers to Christ and the Church.   This is unequivocal.  There is no ambiguity here.  It is clearly and explicitly stated.  

This is the context of his words in this passage and so the translators use feminine personal pronoun to refer to the Church correctly in this passage.

The entire context is about the husband and wife relationship and Paul explicitly and clearly states he is referring to Christ and the Church in this relationship.

Then when we look back in Genesis

Genesis 2

The Creation of Woman
…22The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man.23The man 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." 24For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.

and compare that to what Paul asid above, it is pretty obvious Paul was referring directly back to these words of Adam and applying them to the Church and her bridal relationship with Christ.

Paul then draws very strong parallels between the fashioning of Eve as the bride of Adam and the fashioning of the Church as the bride of Christ.

Just as Adam's side was opened and his rib removed so that Eve would be formed, so a spear pierced and opened the side of Christ from which flowed His water and blood so the Church would be formed. 

With all this, I can see no valid reason for disallowing Paul's very clear, unambiguous wording and imagery to say the Church is not the Bride of Christ.

 

The scriptures use different metaphors to describe the relationship of the Church to Christ.  The Bride is one such metaphor.  Friends is another.  The body is another.   But a Bride should be the friend of the Groom, and the Bride is "bone of my bone, flesh of my flesh" in regards to the Groom - her body becomes his and he is to love it as his own.   There is no contradiction between these metaphors.  They are all of the Church.

 

 

 

 

22 minutes ago, SINNERSAVED said:

Ephesians 5

Wives and Husbands
22 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit fin everything to their husbands.
25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.1 28 In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, 30 because we are members of his body. 31 o“Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. 33 However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

wives submit to there husbands... ...as..... Christ is the head of the church   as ......

 

we are the people that will fill the kingdom of God,    we are sinful and flesh cannot inherit it, so we must be washed by the word of God , sanctified by God, and cleansed by the blood of Christ, which he gave his life for, so that we may be cleansed clean and ready with out spot or blemish, so we are able to be one with Christ, as a husband and wife join together and become one, so will we be joined  spiritual and as the body to Christ, the mystery of changing from mortal to immortal ,

is the point of the bond between us and Christ 

we become join as one, in all of his glory, but we are not the wife, we are   as   a wife, per example, of purity and and of one together ,but not the way you are stating, 

a husband and wife is the tightest bond there is , to make a point of what we can see is being demonstrated to us, if we understand the marriage and the bond between two people, then we understand what God is telling us, it is used as the strongest example,

for if you read that the servants went out to find people to come to the wedding, feast and many rejected, and so he sent them to the sides of the roads and the streets to get people to put on there white robes and join, that is us, we are invited , to the wedding but not of the wedding, this is very clear, and I will stand on this view.

 unless you have a flat out statement that says we are the bride, not like a bride, not as , but we are the bride,

then I will apologize. but in revelation as the new Jerusalem is coming down from the sky or heavens it is stated as the bride,  we are not the building, we will fill  it and be the people of it, just as a goes to prepare a mansion and comes back, it is all in parallel to a wedding example, so that the people would know and understand, like a parable...

 

 

 

There is a difference between parables and direct teaching, and if one is not aware of these differences, it can be pretty easy to mix parables up with direct teaching.  

Jesus spoke in parables.    Paul wasn't speaking in parables.  Parables are stories and as such were not to be taken so exactly and ultra literally as you are taking them.     In comparison, Paul is teaching plainly.  He is explicit in what he is saying. 

To treat the servants who went out to find people to come to the wedding in a parable Jesus used in the same way we treat words of direct teaching is a mistake in understanding and application of God's word.

Paul's statement is as pretty flat out as you can get -  "and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church"

He didn't say the Church is like the bride, but his words on marriage "refer to Christ and the church."     

That would be like someone talking about two people in a marriage relationship and then explicitly naming the two people they are talking about:

• "a man shall leave his father and mother and the two shall become one flesh, this mystery is profound - and I am saying that it refers to John and Mary."

It is that unambiguous Sinnersaved.

 

 

 

 

[SINNERSAVED]

9 hours ago, thereselittleflower said:

Hi SINNERSAVED.   I guess the question I would ask you would be how is the Bride of Christ not the Church?

 

If we look at the context in Eph 5

Ephesians 5

Wives and Husbands
22 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit fin everything to their husbands.
25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.1 28 In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, 30 because we are members of his body. 31 o“Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. 33 However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

 

The entire context is about wives and husbands and the relationship between them.

The context where it refers to the Church as "her" is set in the husband/wife relationship.
Husbands are to love their wives as their own bodies.  So if the Church is the Bride of Christ, then of course it would also be referred to as Christ's body.    He goes on to say:

"a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.   This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church."

He clearly states he is specifically saying the husband/wife relationship refers to Christ and the Church.   This is unequivocal.  There is no ambiguity here.  It is clearly and explicitly stated.  

This is the context of his words in this passage and so the translators use feminine personal pronoun to refer to the Church correctly in this passage.

The entire context is about the husband and wife relationship and Paul explicitly and clearly states he is referring to Christ and the Church in this relationship.

Then when we look back in Genesis

Genesis 2

The Creation of Woman
…22The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man.23The man 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." 24For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.

and compare that to what Paul asid above, it is pretty obvious Paul was referring directly back to these words of Adam and applying them to the Church and her bridal relationship with Christ.

Paul then draws very strong parallels between the fashioning of Eve as the bride of Adam and the fashioning of the Church as the bride of Christ.

Just as Adam's side was opened and his rib removed so that Eve would be formed, so a spear pierced and opened the side of Christ from which flowed His water and blood so the Church would be formed. 

With all this, I can see no valid reason for disallowing Paul's very clear, unambiguous wording and imagery to say the Church is not the Bride of Christ.

 

The scriptures use different metaphors to describe the relationship of the Church to Christ.  The Bride is one such metaphor.  Friends is another.  The body is another.   But a Bride should be the friend of the Groom, and the Bride is "bone of my bone, flesh of my flesh" in regards to the Groom - her body becomes his and he is to love it as his own.   There is no contradiction between these metaphors.  They are all of the Church.

 

 

 

the scripture and  metaphors, you are trying to break down makes no sense, and is a far stretch to make something that is not,

you have defined two separate scriptures from adam and eve to the church and this is not inline at all,i see what you are trying to make a point of ,and its not at all, there is scripture and stories that if we read into it ,too deep it will convince us it is saying what we want it to say,  we need to read it for what it is saying, and not dissect it to make it read something that is not there, for if you read it in the fashion that you are , and another reads it as  a story of, or as and not is, then you have two different meanings and two different views,

so lets use this example? is the glass half full ? or is the glass half empty ? depending on the side you choose, it will be opposite, what is the right answer, who knows, I don't? lol, we all need a good laugh and enjoy the scriptures and Gods word in harmony and in love,

I can tell you this , that of all the books you read, from all over the world , there is none ,like the bible of Gods word, for so many people and over time it has stand firm in all of its form,  and has shown us , that God almighty is able to bring it to you and me, and see the words come alive , today , and say what God wanted us to know, and how to come to the feet of Jesus for forgiveness and salvation,

we are blessed to have compassion and love from God, but we must be gentle and kind and understanding to others, for not every one is a master at breaking down the scriptures and able to resite it in there sleep, it is given to the humble at heart and to those that are wanting a loving relationship of honest and true devotion to God, we must deny the self and focus on him, blessing  to you....

 

[SINNERSAVED]

14 minutes ago, thereselittleflower said:

 

Thereselittleflower said:

 

 

There is a difference between parables and direct teaching, and if one is not aware of these differences, it can be pretty easy to mix parables up with direct teaching.  

Jesus spoke in parables.    Paul wasn't speaking in parables.  Parables are stories and as such were not to be taken so exactly and ultra literally as you are taking them.     In comparison, Paul is teaching plainly.  He is explicit in what he is saying. 

To treat the servants who went out to find people to come to the wedding in a parable Jesus used in the same way we treat words of direct teaching is a mistake in understanding and application of God's word.

Paul's statement is as pretty flat out as you can get -  "and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church"

He didn't say the Church is like the bride, but his words on marriage "refer to Christ and the church."     

That would be like someone talking about two people in a marriage relationship and then explicitly naming the two people they are talking about:

• "a man shall leave his father and mother and the two shall become one flesh, this mystery is profound - and I am saying that it refers to John and Mary."

It is that unambiguous Sinnersaved.

 

 

 

 

I will  not comment any further for it seems you want to make a point at any means ,so ,I will stand on my view and read the bible my way , and you read it your way , and we can both be happy together, for God has proclaimed his word from the humble and obedient in accordance to his will, those that follow in humility .love and patience, love is not forced , and we all have choice, and I choose to serve yaweh today , tomorrow and  all the days of my life,

for I do know this, reguardless of the technicalities of scripture words and meanings, we are loved , and there is no other love then the one that lays his or her life down for another, God bless you Thereselittleflower, god loves you , and have a blessed day...

[enoob57]

On ‎11‎/‎20‎/‎2015‎ ‎9‎:‎37‎:‎18‎, MorningGlory said:

That's ridiculous; if I am wrong and have misunderstood what God meant, I'm sure He will understand.  It's not a salvational issue.  Now show me the verse, or verses, that state that we, believers, are the Bride of Christ.  Rev. 21 states that the angel showed John Jesus' wife, the New Jerusalem.  So it's your contention that the Bride is somehow then shifted to being the Church?  That makes no sense.  I stand by my belief since I read it in Scripture. 

God does call the Church His Bride several places:
http://www.gotquestions.org/bride-of-Christ.html

Love, Steven

[enoob57]

On ‎11‎/‎18‎/‎2015‎ ‎10‎:‎43‎:‎11‎, MorningGlory said:

I think we will be guests at the Marriage Supper of the Lamb but the Bride of Christ is the New Jerusalem.  There is a lot of bad theology out there but usually because people don't read the Bible for themselves and just repeat what they hear.  Not a good plan.

Revelation Chapter 21 -  KJV

⁹And 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.

¹⁰And 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,

¹¹Having the glory of God: and her light [was] like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal;

MG this is an comparative to the church. Nobody marries a city but rather it is descriptive of God's Church- having the glory of God, her light most precious, no impurity....