The Bride of Christ

[J. Jump]

You preach TWO Gospels and so your doctrine is wrong.

Unless you can show me how the gospel of the kingdom is the same as the gospel of grace through faith apart from works then all you have here is an unsubstantiated statement of opinion.

And it's going to be awfully hard to show the two are the same message as one is by God's grace through a one-time faith apart from any works other than the finished works of Christ on the cross. And the other is a life-long process of faithfulness and obedience. Those two messages simply aren't the same thing.

You keep trying to invent "another gospel".

No I simply know the difference between works and no works, and understand those two things don't compliment each other, but contradict each other.

One where hell is really purgatory for 1000 years for the saints to pay for their own venial sins the go to heaven.

That would be purgatory and that's not what we believe. So this is just more emotionalism.

You keep trying to invent the idea of "saved but not a part of the body of Christ or bride of Christ or saint or ..."

And all you can do is keep trying to put words in my mouth that I've never said. You are very good at that. ALL saved people are a part of the body of Christ. That's what Scripture tells us. However Scripture also tells us that not the entire body is used to make the bride. We have to believe ALL the Bible not just the parts that agree with man-made traditions and teachings!

 

[Cutter]

Sorry Cutter, but nothing in that text says or even implies that the folks that Jesus preached to in the gospels are spiritually dead. Care to try again?

Jump, you can't fix stupid. I'm learning that more and more. If you refuse to accept the obvious there's nothing left for me to say. Sorry.

 

[J. Jump]

Again there was NOTHING obvious in that Scripture you quoted. Nothing that even suggested a spiritually dead condition in Israel. Now you can either come up with a text or some texts that show this to be the case. If not your entire theology crumbles, because your entire theology is built around the "assumption" that Israel was spiritually dead. However that is simply not the case. I have talked to a lot of people and no one to date has been able to show Israel is spiritually dead. They end up running away from the conversation or simply revert to name calling and emotionalism as you and others have in this thread!

Deal with Scripture or just admit error.

 

[Cutter]

I have talked to a lot of people and no one to date has been able to show Israel is spiritually dead.

That's because you refuse to accept the Truth and people are flabbergasted by your refusal to rightly divide the Word of God and accept the Truth. Everytime someone answers your question, they are labeled as teaching error. How does it feel to be the only person who knows all of the answers on the BB, Cutter asked, with tongue firmly placed in cheek.

 

[J. Jump]

That's because you refuse to accept the Truth

No that's because no one has shown any yet. You certainly haven't. You put a verse forward that doesn't even contain the phrase spiritually dead and doesn't even speak of that context and you try and use it as proof.

If you want to prove that Israel was spiritually dead then just come up with a verse that says as much. If your theology is Truth as you claim it is this shouldn't be a very difficult task.

The only thing your verse equated with belief is living water so at best you have the opposite of that to start with and that's dead water, but nothing about being spiritually dead. That is an assumption that you and others make on the gospels and I'm just not willing to build an entire theology on assumption. And just to add even more proof that this verse isn't talking about grace through faith apart from works the "believe" verb is a present active verb. Faith that allows one to receive everlasting life is a one-time faith not a life-long faith. You need just believe one time and the matter is over and done with.

The "believe" discussed in your verse is a life-long faith. So we are talking about apples and oranges.

Now do you care to try again? This really shouldn't be that difficult.

 

[Hope of Glory]

Jump, you can't fix stupid. I'm learning that more and more. If you refuse to accept the obvious there's nothing left for me to say. Sorry.

If it's so obvious, it should be easy to show.

 

[steaver]

(Hope).....If it's so obvious, it should be easy to show.

This is quite hypocritical. I asked over and over and over for you to give me one scripture that types a born of God believer as a goat and never once did you bring it forth, YET you will go on and on preaching that Matt 25's goats are indeed believers.

You guys are all for "types" until it works against your position and then it is "ignore, ignore, ignore" and go on your way UNCHANGED in your view about the issue. Your minds are made up and closed. There is no room for consideration left.

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[steaver]

(Jump)....How far do you want to go back? Jesus preached it. Paul, Peter, John. It was written about in the OT, but I don't think many of them had a very good grasp on the situation. That's why it was called a mystery for so long.

Everybody uses that line brother. How about we go back to any point in history where some brother in Christ wrote about this doctrine you hold OTHER than the Bible itself.

Nee never mentioned any other writings that I am aware of. I wonder if he is the one who began this theology.

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[steaver]

Allow me tp present your double standard brother Jump.

Cutter puts forth scripture to show you that Israel is spiritually dead and your reply is as follows.......

(Jump)...You put a verse forward that doesn't even contain the phrase spiritually dead and doesn't even speak of that context and you try and use it as proof.

If you want to prove that Israel was spiritually dead then just come up with a verse that says as much. If your theology is Truth as you claim it is this shouldn't be a very difficult task.

Then to present your view that not all born again believers will make up the bride of Christ you present the following as "proof" that you are correct....

But let me just give you one bit of detail just so you can't accuse me of anything. And this will be enough to show you that your view is not based in Scripture.

Adam is a type of Christ. Adam is the first man and Christ is the second man. A lot of people don't even know why God has a wife (Israel - although unfaithful at this moment) and why Christ will one day have a wife.

The answer lies in Adam. Mankind was originally created to have dominion over the earth (Genesis 1). And God said let "them" have dominion. It was to be Adam and his wife (helpmate) that ruled over the earth.

That's why Christ has to have a wife, because rulership over the earth from man's perspective has to be in a husband-wife relationship. I don't know why God set it up that way, but that's the way He did.

Now who is going to be Christ's bride. Well we can find at least a portion of that answer again in Adam. Who was Adam's wife? Eve.

Adam was put to sleep (type of death) and Eve was taken from his body. Bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh. So Eve was formed from Adam's body. Now was Eve made up of "all" of Adam's body or just a "portion" of Adam's body? That's right a "portion."

The type is partial and therefore the entire body of Christ can not make up the bride of Christ, because it would destroy the type. Adam's wife was made up of a portion of his body and Christ's wife will be made up of a portion of His body.

Now I know that doesn't give the "whole" picture as type-anti-types aren't designed to do that in one place. That why we are to build line upon line and precept upon precept. Here a little and there a little.

But that is enough to show folks that not every "saved" individual is going to make up the bride of Christ. It's only going to be a portion of His body. And it will be a small portion as the rib is a small porition of the whole. Which this Truth is supported in the NT.

Do you see the phrase "bride of Christ" anywheres in the passage of scripture refered?!

Are you so blind to your double standards brother? These things ought nought to be.

If you want to prove that not all of the born of God will be the bride of Christ then just come up with a verse that says as much. If your theology is Truth as you claim it is this shouldn't be a very difficult task.

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[Hope of Glory]

This is quite hypocritical. I asked over and over and over for you to give me one scripture that types a born of God believer as a goat and never once did you bring it forth, YET you will go on and on preaching that Matt 25's goats are indeed believers.

I posted it.

You didn't like it.

So, you claim I didn't post it.

Just because you don't like it doesn't mean that I didn't post it.

You even discussed it. You said (paraphrase) "Just because Jesus is a lamb, and lambs are clean animals, God didn't really mean that clean animals are clean."

I showed you the passage where goats are called clean by God.

Then, we looked in Matthew 25 which is a judgment of works.

So, unless you think that you can earn or lose your spiritual salvation based on works, goats are a) clean animals and b) saved, but with bad works.

 

[steaver]

(Hope)....I posted it.

You didn't like it.

So, you claim I didn't post it.

Just because you don't like it doesn't mean that I didn't post it.

You even discussed it. You said (paraphrase) "Just because Jesus is a lamb, and lambs are clean animals, God didn't really mean that clean animals are clean."

I showed you the passage where goats are called clean by God.

Then, we looked in Matthew 25 which is a judgment of works.

So, unless you think that you can earn or lose your spiritual salvation based on works, goats are a) clean animals and b) saved, but with bad works.

You posted NO scripture that comes anywhere near to saying that a believer is a goat.

I showed you the passage where goats are called clean by God.

Sure did. That scripture says they are clean fo sacrifice and food. NOTHING about believers!

Then, we looked in Matthew 25 which is a judgment of works.

Sure did, but no bridge was made between goats clean for food and sacrifice and goats are believers.

So, unless you think that you can earn or lose your spiritual salvation based on works, goats are a) clean animals and b) saved, but with bad works

Your "conclusion" has been derived from a non-existent bridge between clean animals for food and sacrifice and believers. It fails everytime you use it, YET you go on and on telling everyone that MAtt 25's goats are saved believers!

Now you can make a "typing" case for sheep in scripture, but your goat theory just has no grounds. Hint (Jesus is the Lamb of God, Lambs give birth to lambs) :thumbs:

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[Hope of Glory]

And Jesus is a type of the Passover lamb.

Guess what else could be used for Passover?

Exodus 12:5: Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year: ye shall take it out from the sheep, or from the goats:

 

[steaver]

And Jesus is a type of the Passover lamb.

Guess what else could be used for Passover?

Exodus 12:5: Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year: ye shall take it out from the sheep, or from the goats:

Actually the lamb is a type of Jesus.

Guess what else could be used for Passover?

But was not used for typing Jesus nor His believers. Jesus is the Lamb of God. If you want to use "typying" as your support then stick to it as scripture does! Scripture types believers as "sheep" over and over. Never goats. Just stick to what scriptures does and you will have no conflicts.

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[J. Jump]

Do you see the phrase "bride of Christ" anywheres in the passage of scripture refered?!

No you don't. However Adam and Eve were husband and wife, so there is no need for the phrase to be there. That's why it's typology. It's a picture of something without direct reference to it.

There's a HUGE difference between what I put forward and what Cutter put forward. The verse that Cutter put forward didn't have anything to do by way of direct reference or even implication to spiritual death.

But since you can't refute the type you make this silly argument that I can't be right because the verse doesn't say "bride of Christ."

The type should be obvious. So if you have a text or texts that prove Israel was spiritually dead then by all means let's examine them. But the text should at least be dealing with what you are trying to prove, which Cutter's was not. :laugh:

 

[J. Jump]

Everybody uses that line brother.

Exactly! But in the final analysis not everyone is using it properly :laugh:.

How about we go back to any point in history where some brother in Christ wrote about this doctrine you hold OTHER than the Bible itself.

Go to the Baptist debate section and there are a couple of threads on there that list some authors.

Nee never mentioned any other writings that I am aware of. I wonder if he is the one who began this theology.

Actually from what I have heard Nee does say a couple of things about at least two writers Penn I think was one of their names, but I can't remember the other one. But no he didn't begin this theology. There are others that wrote of this before he did. I believe that to be a true statement if I remeber when Nee was alive, but I could be mistaken.

Bottom line is though that we do not have to have a paper trail back to the original teacher for something to be true. If the Bible says it's true then it doesn't matter what the rest of history has said on the matter. It's true. Right?

 

[Hope of Glory]

Govett was around about a century before Nee, and Spurgeon had high praises fro him.

Now, if you think works enter into whether you are saved or not, you can ignore the following. If you believe in saved by grace, then this is for you: Revelation 19, the bride of the lamb clothed herself in fine linen. I wonder why she was not clothed in wool? Cotton comes from the earth and it involves toil and labor to produce. The bride has to do stuff; it's not automatic. Many more are simply invited to the marriage supper.

 

[Hope of Glory]

And Jesus is a type of the Passover lamb.

Oops. Types come first. Typing comes fast. Fast brings error.

 

[steaver]

(Hope)...If you believe in saved by grace, then this is for you: Revelation 19, the bride of the lamb clothed herself in fine linen. I wonder why she was not clothed in wool? Cotton comes from the earth and it involves toil and labor to produce. The bride has to do stuff; it's not automatic.

Amen brother. Now you only need to fully apply the scripture to the saved by grace whom it speaks of. If she has already received her fine linen in heaven (this is before Jesus' return to set up His in the flesh kingdom on earth) then her acts of righteousness has been judged. The JSOC has already been done BEFORE the judgment of the sheep and goats of Matt 25.

8. For this glorious occasion the bride of necessity had to make herself ready. The preparation includes: (1) acceptance of the marriage offer of the Lamb, which is regeneration; (2) the desire to be properly clothed for the wedding; (3) a willingness to receive what is given her for the joyous event. When the bride clothes herself, it is with the finest of apparel. Her basic clothing is the garment of salvation, which she received at her acceptance of the Lamb's gracious offer of marriage (cf. Isa 61:10). Now, in addition to the initial clothing, she has granted to her (still all of grace) fine linen, clean and white. It is identified as the righteous acts (Gr is plural, dikaiomata) of the saints. How has she obtained these? It is inescapable that the judgment seat of Christ has already been held in order to grant rewards to the saints for fathful service to Christ (cf. 2Cor 5:10). What a recognition day that will be! (From the OP)

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[BobRyan]

2Cor 5:10 Rom 6:23 the "reward for evil deeds is hell".

WE MUST ALL stand before the judgment seat of Christ -- the issue is whether we will be pleasing to Him or not. In Romans 2 Paul spell out in explicit detail those that WILL be viewed as pleasing and those that don't.

Paul tells us that those who fail in that day do not get "heaven anyway".

Romans 2:11-13 makes it clear that God is not biased or prejudiced in this objective review "it is NOT the hearers of the Law that are just before God but the DOERS of the law will be JUSTIFIED" in that FUTURE judgment.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Lazarus]

J Jump, I'm really intrigued by your theological take on scripture. I've read many great works on theology by many great men. What is the name of the great man of God who teaches this idea of two salvations? Can you give me the name of a book I can read or a web address where I can see this for myself? Surly such a perfect understanding such as you have is the result of years of study at the feet of such a great man. Please tell me.