What Sins Are Christians Capable Of?

That is because the entire bride is raptured.

Where is your evidence that it doesn't? He is coming for His bride.

Do you create your doctrine from OT allegories or from the truth of the statements of the NT. There are plenty of stories to allegorize in the Old Testament. I read about a couple that got married because of a preachers allegorization of walking around the walls of Jericho seven times. He walked around his girl friend seven times; then they decided to marry. You can make the Bible say anything you want through allegorization. Make up your own doctrine.

The doctrine that you quoted, about Eve being the bride, comes straight from Roman Catholicism.

What Catholic commentaries have you been reading recently? Are you implying that Christ was married, or that you have been paying too much attention to movies such as Da'Vinci's Inquest which denies the deity of Christ and also seeks to put Christ as a married man. Either way you seem to be very confused on this point.

The OT saints will stand by and be a friend of the bride. Eve was a believer. She lived in the OT. In that respect she was no different than any one else. You are stuck on RCC theology and too much allegorization. Just accept the Bible as it is--literal-historical interpretation.

Why not try proving this fanciful story through the Scripture instead of just posting it as a fairytale.

I am clothed in the righteousness of Jesus Christ, not because of any works that I have done, but because I am saved. I have been covered with the righteousness of Jesus Christ who shed His blood on my behalf. My sins have been put under his blood, never to be remembered again. They are buried in the depths of the deepest sea, cast behind the Lord's back, never again to be remembered. He again says: As far as the east is from the west, so far have I removed your sin from you.
There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus.
I am clothed with the righteousness of Jesus Christ. I don't need any other kind of righteousness.
DHK

 

J Jump quote
----------------------------------------
Christians over the last I don't know how many years have gotten away from the idea that we will be given our due, whether good or bad at the judgment seat of Christ. The 21st century Christian views "reward" as something that is only positive, and the only negative thing a Christian can face is a loss of a positive reward.

However that is far from the Biblical concept. We will get exactly what we are due according to the works we have performed during this lifetime whether good or bad.
---------------------------------------

Speaking of saved

1Co 4:5 Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God.

When all the wood, hay, and stubble, are burnt we will still have praise of God.
not because we deserve it but because of his mercy.

 

It amazes me that you see this, that the oil is representative of the Holy Spirit, yet you make the following quote:

They all 10 had had lamps with oil in them, but 5 of them were wise and took additional oil in their vessels.

They all slumbered and slept, and when the bridegroom appeared, they were called to go out and meet him.

Then, all the virgins arose and trimmed their lamps.

Then, the foolish virgins said, "Give us some of your oil! Our lamps are going out!"

If they had no oil, their lamps could not have been lit in the first place in order to be going out!

Scriptures mean exactly what they say. They don't mean, "Well, the foolish virgins really didn't have any oil, although it says here they have some."

 

Let's see, Adam's bride was taken out of his body. It was not all of his body, just part of it.

Jesus is the second Adam. We are all part of the body of Christ. So, it seems obvious to some that his bride won't be taken out of his body, but it will be all of his body.

Apparently, the Holy Spirit didn't know how to make accurate pictures and types, according to some.

Personally, I think the Holy Spirit used exactly the words he meant to use, and I think those words are accurate.

 

A good analogy you make as we do not fully understand, but are to take the wisdom given to Paul by Christ Jesus, as he shows by scripture understanding (within our understanding) of marriage and the Holy Trinity.

Agree when taking the "whole" approach appears disingenuous with thought of portions. We agree from where we may be standing. As Christ looks down He sees Satan kicked out of the third heaven to the second heaven, being the "prince of the air". He'll be thrown from that position, hopefully very soon. Satan is a Prince and does not own the estate he is now in or that which waits.

Agree with your position here, other than the "man and the woman to rule together". As we reason we approach semasiology unintentionally for what I see expressed is equal power. The man and the woman are glued together, but only the "head" can control. She exists for he exists, just as we cannot exist without Christ. The woman is to help rule under the direction of the man, never being above him, but to work in concert with him.

Good insight, and perhaps you see as I see that God is a God of division. He is "upfront" with us for in the first verse, at the beginning, He divides. We see it in the third verse as well, and on it goes, but He will bring all together in One again.

We agree except for the object of His affection. It is His Church, and not His Bride. The Bride is of the earth, and the Church of the heavenly. We must go to the beginning to see the marriage Paul speaks of. It is "created", just as was Adam and Eve to begin with….At the beginning, "This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him",Genesis 5:1. Then to verse 2, "Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created." The man first, and then His woman. Christ first and then His Church.

But of importance too we must know when the "Church" started. As for the "mysteries" we turn to Paul. In Ephesians we find the "Church" (the Body of Christ) was chosen in Christ before Adam was created, and before a foundation of the world was formed (Eph.1:4). It is at the Cross the marriage of His Son to His Church. In Genesis, Adam without Eve, and then "their name is Adam. Alone He came to the Cross, and "their name is the Body of Jesus Christ Church. No, the Bride of prophecy is Israel of the Earth. We are the "children of the Church of God.
God speaks of The Body of Christ we meet at the Cross. Genesis above is Adam without Eve, and then "their" name is Adam. Jesus was alone when He came to the Cross With Out the church, and there emerged as the One Body Church of Jesus Christ (the only name under heaven whereby man can be saved).

The more familiar we get with Paul, the more intimate we get with Christ. Paul doesn't equate Bride and Church, but Body and Church. Jesus loved the Church enough to give Himself for it. He went to sleep and broke forth this most "beautiful" thing we call the Body of Christ Church .

 

To J. Jump
There is no such phrase in the Bible as the "bride of Christ", except in the minds of man with their great wisdom. Who is telling you the "bride of Christ" is in scripture. They are wrong, unless you can show that scripture.

Well the word Trinity isn't in the Bible either and neither is rapture, but you believe in both of those right? Now maybe the bride of Christ is not word for word mentioned, but the concept is definitely there, and I would argue that it is mentioned although it is said to be the bride of the Lamb, but Who is the Lamb-Christ. So the bride of Christ is an okay term to use.

ituttut: But we have scripture that describes the Trinity, and we have scripture that describe the rapture, but you have no scripture that describes the "bride of Christ". Now is the time for you show your scripture. Mere words do not suffice.

Yes it is I that brings you proof of truth by scripture that you cannot see. I think you are the one that speaks very highly of "types". Any ideas on Hosea? Your argument is without knowledge of the nation Israel. Did you know the custom of Israel considered a betrothed woman to be married and the wife of the man before consummation?

 

We have just proved the "Bride" to be Israel, and He will dwell with Her in His Holy City.

I like that which you say applies to we in the Body of Christ Church, we that joined His Church at the Cross. We will be like Him, not yet knowing what we will be or do.

 

We in the Body of Christ are held in earnest while we live, and those before weren't. They were saved under a different gospel, than the gospel of Paul. It is just so simple if we can only believe Paul's gospel. I find help

There has never been a different salvation for the OT and then in the NT under Paul. God has never accepted man's works as their way to Him. He ALWAYS rejects man's works when it comes to eternal salvation. So that would be another contradiction to say the OT folks were saved by their works and then NT folks are not.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you are trying to communicate, but that's what it seems to me.
[/quote]You are correct for that is not what I'm saying, works saved them. I don't say, but scripture says works were demand bv God from Adam until He no longer demanded works by the hand of man. Do you find scripture says anything else? If so, then we can be saved by someone else other than our Lord Jesus Christ. Where is this God man that preceded and spilled His blood on the Cross, reconciling the world unto Himself. Is there another Damascus Road we have all missed to activate this salvation through faith understanding?
I know people get tired of seeing scripture from the Apostle to the Gentile, without trying to mix in scripture addressed to Israel, mixing the two gospels. We are warned in the OT not to mix Old cloth (church) with the New (church) cloth; or new wine (gospel)into old bottles (churches): else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish: but they put new wine (gospel)into new bottles (churches), and both are preserved.

 

But what are they told to believe. It wasn't in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ? God the Word told Jacob to mind his own business, for no man knows my name, and will not until I shed my blood for you. Until that time I'll bless you, and that will be sufficient as you continue to believe in me and make your blood sacrifices. We have to know what we are to believe as we live.

Amen, but He never explained to them this information we now know. Romans 5:9, "Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him." No works Now for we know we are justified by His blood, and we in His Body will not go through the great tribulation. There are just so many things we would have never known had Christ not love His Church so much.

I agree enthusiastically in full faith, for there is no other way today. Amen, Christian friend.

 

Are you serious? Are you saying nothing was hidden at all by God?

You can say with a straight face you found the "rapture", the "Body Church", our "sleep", our "one spiritual baptism and circumcision" without hands, and other untold things? Are we reading the same Bible that contains the Word of God?

You just contradicted above. Please show scripture from the OT (which you rarely do) showing the Jew can now come as the Gentile. From the OT find where the Gentile can now be in the "inner court" of the Temple.

Need to have your eyes checked J.J. My post says WE, and not I.

Peter was preaching to a group of people that were already eternally saved. That wasn't a messge of eternal salvation, it was a message of the kingdom, which was being reoffered to the nation of Israel at that time.
[/quote]You contradict at almost every turn. Why did they ask the question. They didn't know what to do until Peter told them what to do. Show the scripture were they were eternally saved when they asked the question. All Israel was not then, and is not now saved.

Another contradiction. Show scripture before Damascus Road that this knowledge was shown.

I've never said I don't believe in types. We just can't make everything in sight a type.

Again it is Jesus that overcame, and not us. Why don't you believe this truth.

But you speak of "prophecy", of which we today in our salvation are not.

It is by that history that we know they will be in the future. I believe many of the types and shadows, but we can't find one around every corner we look. The Bridegroom is coming back for His Bride, His Wife.

More amazing is the "secret" we are told, for I a Gentile through the stumble of His people, will now be made to be "like" Him.

 

SFIC that is an assumption you are placing on the text. It doesn't seem very foolish to me that they wouldn't take any oil if they didn't have any oil. That's not foolishness that's just bad circumstances.

Now the text could have told us they didn't have any oil and therefore they were foolish becuase they didn't buy some before they left, but that's not what the text says.

The text says they are foolish becuase they took off with no oil not because they didn't have any, but because they were foolish thinking that wouldn't need any more than what was in their lamps to begin with.

 

No it is not allegorization that is not supported by Scripture. The story of Adam and Eve supports it. Revelation 3 supports it and there are others. But if you don't believe those two Scriptures what's going to make you believe if I show you 15 other Scriptures that back it up?

This is what you and people like you say, because what it foreshadows makes you uncomfortable or you just plain don't like it. The plain simple truth is we have to accept all the Bible whether it makes us uncomfortable or whether we like what it says or not.

Yes there is. It's called being a type. A type is a physical reality that points to something else.

And that's your opinion. So I'm just supposed to stop believing this because Marcia says so? Sorry doesn't work that way. So who gets to decide what is a type and what isn't a type? The Bible says Adam is a type of Christ.

How much more clear can this teaching be? It's all over the Bible.

Adam is the type and Christ is the anti-type.

If Adam is a type then all the things about Adam that correspond to Christ are type-antitype.

Here's more evidence that what I am saying is true. Eve was already in Adam when God created Adam, so it's impossible to talk about one without the other in the first place.

So how did Eve get out of Adam? Well Adam was put into a deep sleep (which is a picture of Christ's death). Christ had to die so that His bride could be brought forth.

Marcia I didn't say perfect I said faithful. There is a difference. Faithful means that you are dying to self and walking in the Spirit and when you mess up you are confessing your sin as per I John 1:9.

Paul said as to the Law he was blameless. Do you think that means Paul was saying he was sinless? Of course not, but he kept the law as best he could and when he messed up he made the appropriate sacrifice. He was blameless, not perfect.

We are to be faithful, and that doesn't mean perfect.

No we can be transformed into the image of Christ by the Holy Spirit if we will let Him. But we can quench the Spirit and we can grieve the Spirit. If a person is unwilling the Holy Spirit will not force Himself upon that person. It is a cooperation and that takes two. And the only person that can hinder that process is us.

 

Yes the entire bride is raptured, because the bride is contained within the body.

Go back and read my posts regarding Adam/Eve - Christ/bride, Isaac-Rebekah, Revelation 3 and you see the Bible's evidence, not mine.

He's coming for the church, and the bride is contained within the church.

All doctrine found in the NT can be found in type or shadow in the OT. The OT contains the starting of the teaching and the NT gives further explanation to the teaching. You can not take one without the other, becuase they are one revelation.

Certainly you can as it sounds like this couple did. But the NT doesn't support what that couple did. If you find something in the OT and can not support it with the NT then it is false and vice versa. The bride only being part of the body is supported in both the Old and the New, making it valid.

I'm not sure what they believe, but even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then :applause:

None, which ones have you been reading? I don't read many commentaries per se. I do have a number of pastor/teachers that I read through their material, so I guess you could call that commentary material.

Your joking right? No Christ was never married, but one day He will be. I will not respond to the other nonsense.

Again I'm not familiar with RCC teaching, so I can't respond to what you say. As to the literal-historical interpretation I have never once denied that. There is a literal-historical interpretation, but there are also spiritual truths to be gained in all of the OT. Christ said so Himself. He said if you would have believed Moses you would believe Me, because Moses wrote about Me.

So if Moses wrote about Christ, and Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible, then we can see Christ in all the first five books of the Bible. That means we have to search for the types and the anti-types if we are going to see Christ, because Christ is not in the literal-historical interpretation, with a couple of exceptions.

When God killed the animal and clothed Adam and Eve with the skins, you're going to tell me you don't see Christ is that type? Death and shed blood to take care of sin.

I could go on and on.

Do you not call Genesis Scripture? Go back and re-read some of my previous posts where I have laid it out in Scripture. Do you not call Revelation Scripture?

That is absolutely correct for eternal salvation. On this point we agree completely. Eternal salvation has nothing to do with our works!!!

Again for eternal purposes that is absolutely correct.

You have a number of things that are unBiblical in this statement. First not ALL your sins were dealt with at the cross. I John 1:9 says we have to continue to confess our sins. Now if you don't you don't lose your eternal salvation, because that is an impossibility. If you don't confess your sins you loose your opportunity to become part of the bride, because you would be unfaithful.

You didn't finish the Scripture when you said now therefore there is no condemnation for them that are in Christ Jesus. The last part of that says who are walking in the Spirit. So guess what....if you are not walking in the Spirit then condemnation is headed your direction and my direction if I fail to walk in the Spirit as a continual practice.

Not all Christians walk in the Spirit.

As far as not needing any other righteousness that is just not what the Bible teaches. Revelation three says we do. Revelation 19 says the garment that Revelation three speaks of comes from the righteous acts of the saints.

 

The Bible does not say the wise virgins took additional oil, only that 'but the wise virgins took oil in their lamps'.

They all trimmed their lamps in preparation to light them.

The KJV explains that the foolish virgins cried out, 'Give us of your oil, for our lamps are gone out.' They had to have been out already in order to trim the wick.

The Bible does not say the lamps were lit in the first place. They all awoke and trimmed their lamps. A wise person tries not to waste oil, but rather only burns the oil when needed. Again, one trims a wick when the wick is not burning.

Nowhere does it say the foolish virgins had oil. It says the wise took oil in their vessels, and their lamps. The wise took lamps, and they took oil. Trimming a lamp not only consists of making the wick a proper length, but can also apply to filling the lamp with the oil to burn.

Since it was night time and the virgins were sleeping, they had no need for the lamps to be lit. But, they were called out by the Bridegroom. They had to light the lamps and go out to meet Him.

 

Well this thread has taken off into this topic, so just follow along with what is being said and you'll see Scripture evidence. However, you might have to go back a page from where you find your posts.

We starting to get all of the place in here

Not at all. Israel is the wife of the Father and therefore can not be the bride of Christ. You can see this in the story of Ruth were the near kinsman redeemer and Boaz are at the city gate talking about redeeming the land and Ruth (which typifies the bride of Christ).

The nearer kinsman redeemer (Father) couldn't redeem it because he was already married (to Israel).

Scripture does not support Israel as the bride of Christ, because Israel is already married.

Nope...everyone is saved by grace through faith apart from works. It's just the faith part is different for different dispensations. God told Israel that the blood of animals would suffice. But God tells us that the Blood of Christ is the only thing that will suffice now.

It's still grace through faith for Israel of old.

Yeah I have never claimed that salvation is of works for anyone. It's all grace through faith.

Right...I think you are misreading what I have been typing. Abraham was saved because he believed God in regard to the promise of a seed. That was his grace through faith.

 

There are a number of things that God has chosen not to reveal to us. But everything that has been revealed in His Words to us are no longer a mystery. Everything is open to be seen and understood. We have the Spirit that will lead us into ALL truth if we will allow Him

If you can't find it in the OT it won't be in the NT and vice versa.

Ituttut I don't have the time to lay out every single truth. If you would like me to point you to some resource material where people have already done that I would be more than happy to.

I/We it doesn't matter. There question was not the same question that was asked in Acts 16:30. They weren't asking about eternal salvation.

The question they asked was how do they right the wrong of killing their King. How do they get their King back to set up the kingdom.

So tell me when did God stop looking at these people through the blood of the animals. Because we both agreed that's what "saved" Israel, but now you are saying that it didn't.

These were people that were already covered under the blood of the animals, so they did not have to come through the actual blood of Christ, because their salvation event had already occurred. God never brings that message back to the forefront once it is settled.

These were saved people.

That exact language was not used, but just becuase that exact langauge is not used doesn't mean that's not what happened. If you are saying that anyone is saved outside of God's grace you are terribly mistaken.

The faith is what differed not God's grace.

And I never said everything in sight is a type.

Jesus did overcome and we are to overcome just like He did. Revelation 2-3. Why don't you believe this truth?

Huh? I'm not even sure what you are talking about now

Again I have never said anything to the contrary. However you say that Israel is the bride of Christ, but it isn't Israel that will be raptured it is the church. It isn't Israel that will stand at the JSOC during the tribulation it is the church. So it is the faithful of the church that will make up the bride of Christ, not Israel. Israel is Christ's brother, not His wife.

 

Your interpretation does not override a clear statement by the Lord Jesus. When He sends those on His left to everlasting punishment they go to everlasting punishment. Period. That is what is clearly said in MA 25. Are you defining everlasting punishment as heaven? I believe I'll choose God's Heaven over yours.

 

StraightandNarrow I don't think you even read my post. Do a word study on aionios. In this context it means age-lasting not forever. Those that are found to be unfaithful Christians will receive punishment for the coming age (loss of their soul). And that is in perfect keeping with the statement that Christ makes here in this passage.

Everlasting punishment as heaven is an oxymoron and is something that I have never stated. You continue to put words in my mouth. I never even hinted at that.

By the way if you'll choose God's heaven can you show me Scripture that says that's where you will reside for eternity?

 

Even the KJV says they did: Matthew 25:4: But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.

They took oil in their vessels along with their lamps. This is the only place in the NT that this word is used, but there's a similar word in Matthew 13:48, which says, "Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away." They took an extra supply in these vessels besides the oil in the dish on top of the staff.

These are two separate prepositional phrases. "In their vessels" and "with their lamps".

Well, you are correct that the KJV says "they are gone out", but it's a present, passive, indicative. It's currently happening. "Are going out." It's linear action, not punctiliar. This is action that is in progress as they see the flame flickering just as the bridegroom arrived.

How is a flame going to be going out if it's not lit?

You are quite correct when you say the wise took oil in their vessels as well as in their lamps. You are also correct about what trimming a wick means.

But, you seem to be missing the concept in order for a lamp to be going out (or even to have gone out), there had to have been oil in them in the first place, or they could neither be going out, nor could they have gone out.

Yes. And the lamps of the foolish virgins were going out. They had not properly prepared.

But, they had oil.