Making God and Man One

Originally posted by sonship

Ephesians 5 can't be used a proof text for the "Body of Christ" to be the "Bride of Christ. Paul here is merely explaining the sanctity of marriage and the interrelationship between husband and wife by making a comparison only. In no way can one make the passage say that the "Body of Christ" is His bride.

I agree that Paul is giving pra .[/b]

Christ marries that which comes OUT of Christ by way of His salvation.

The above statement of your seems to be correct and then we are made ready and adorned as Revelation reveals and then come down out of Heaven as the New city of Jerusalem as the bride of Christ and His wife. And then God will dwell with us and we with Him.

Is this what you are saying?

The Instructor

The

Originally posted by RJHinds
That was really only a minor point as to the greatness of the New Jerusalem. My main point was that any city has a lot of people living in it, and so I believe that it will be populated by us believers as part of the city, great or not.

The Instructor

The city in Revelation 21 and 22 is a sign. The people of the city are actually the city.

Elsewhere in the NT the PEOPLE are the city. IE. the whole city means not buildings and houses but PEOPLE -

English Standard Version (©2001)
And behold, all the city came out to meet Jesus, and when they saw him, they begged him to leave their region.

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
And behold, the whole city came out to meet Jesus; and when they saw Him, they implored Him to leave their region.

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
And, behold, the whole city came out to meet Jesus: and when they saw him, they besought him that he would depart out of their coasts.

The New Jerusalem as a golden mountain 1500 miles high with huge gates of pearl is one of the " SIGNS. " (Rev. 1:1)

It is a symbolic sign signifying the saved, resurrected, glorified, built up, transformed, deified, thoroughly sanctified human beings in Christ's salvation.

Christ marries the church. He would not turn from that marriage to marry instead a physical city. So the marriage of the Lamb to His Bride and Wife New Jerusalem has to depict the bride city in symbolic terms.

Further evidence of the symbolic nature of the sign of New Jerusalem is Revelation 3:12 -

"He who overcomes, him I will make a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall by no means go out anymore, and I will write upon him the name of My God and the name of the city of My God, the New Jerusalem, which decends out of heaven from My God ..."

He cannot mean that the believer becomes a physical pillar in a physical temple. It must mean that he becomes a permanent supporting constituent upon which New Jerusalem is firmly built.

In other words he becomes thoroughly transformed in life. He becomes so saturated with the divine nature and built up with others that he is a "pillar" in the living temple of God - New Jerusalem.

Many of the profound truths in Revelation were made known to John by SIGNS (Rev. 1:1) .

This may be a disappointment to those expecting to see a huge physical golden city with gigantic pearl gates. But they should not be disappointed. For to be transformed to the image of the glorified Christ and built up in love forever with the other saints is more than exciting enough.

Whatever we SEE physically, I am sure, will be splendid.

Originally posted by sonship
The city in Revelation 21 and 22 is a sign. The people of the city are actually the city.

Elsewhere in the NT the PEOPLE are the city. IE. the whole city means not buildings and houses but PEOPLE -

[quote] English Standard Version (©2001)
And behold, all the city came out to meet Jesus, and when they saw him, they begged him to leave their region. ...[text shortened]... s more than exciting enough.

Whatever we SEE physically, I am sure, will be splendid.

Okay, I can go along with that idea.

The Instructor

Originally posted by sonship

Ephesians 5 can't be used a proof text for the "Body of Christ" to be the "Bride of Christ. Paul here is merely explaining the sanctity of marriage and the interrelationship between husband and wife by making a comparison only. In no way can one make the passage say that the "Body of Christ" is His bride.

I agree that Paul is giving pra .[/b]

Very prolific sonship, but you are still mixing the "Kingdom Church" with the "Church which is Christ's Body".

The Kingdom Church, which is Israel, will be the agency through which God reconciles the earth back to Himself.

Whereas The Church which is Christ's Body is the agency through which God reconciles the heavens back to Himself.

The Kingdom saints have as their hope the resurrection into the Kingdom on earth. Our hope is Jesus Christ and His appearing to catch us up to meet Him in the air.

Two distinct entities. One for the earth and one for the heavens. One is prophetic and one is the mystery, or secret that God kept hidden, but was revealed to Paul.

The entire dispensation of the age of grace is unprophesied of; (Eph. 3:9 And to make all [men] see what [is] the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: Col. 1:26 [Even] the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: )and comes to a close at the end of the age of grace where God will then resume the prophetic program with the nation Israel.

Then begins the seventieth week of Daniel.

Originally posted by josephw
Very prolific sonship, but you are still mixing the "Kingdom Church" with the "Church which is Christ's Body".


Whereas The Church which is Christ's Body is the agency through which God reconciles the heavens back to Himself.

The Kingdom saints have as their hope the resurrection into the Kingdom on earth. Our hope is Jesus Christ and His appearing to ...[text shortened]... e prophetic program with the nation Israel.

Then begins the seventieth week of Daniel.

Joseph before I go further remember that I asked you for scriptural proof of this statement:

The Body of Christ though, has as its destiny heaven.

I don't want to just overlook this point. Can you substantiate this from the Bible ?

The Kingdom Church, which is Israel, will be the agency through which God reconciles the earth back to Himself.

God will indeed fulfill certain messianic promises to Israel during the millennial age. But the kingdom of God includes the New Testament churching believers.

Ie. "For the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit" (Romans 14:17)

Paul is speaking of the normal and overcoming church life here. And he writes:

1.) The kingdom of God IS - as meaning NOW and not just in the future.

2.) The kingdom of God IS -

righteous living of the churching people through Christ,
pervading peace among the churching people through Christ,
pervading joy in the Holy Spirit among the churching people through Christ.

The larger context of chapter 14 is receiving of believers into the church life:

Verses 1 through 9 - Receiving one another as God has received us.
Verses 10 and 12 - Receiving one another in light that we all will appear before God's judgment seat to be examined concerning our Christian life.
Verses 13 through 15 - Receiving one another in the principle of love.
Verses 16 through 23 - Receiving one another for a life living in the kingdom of God.

This is all about the new covenant church life in the age of grace.

Living in the kingdom of God in the normal church life today will result in enjoying the reigning in the millennial kingdom for a thousand years after the second coming of Christ.

So churching saints in righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit are exercised in the essence of the kingdom of God today. If they are faithful they will continue to enjoy this kingdom as a reward and reign with Christ over the nations -

Jesus also tells the churching believers in the church in Thyatira " And he who overcomes and he who keeps My works until the end, to him I will give authority over the nations, and he will shepherd them with an iron rod, as vessels of pottery are broken in pieces, as I also have received from My Father." (Rev. 2:26,27)

And what Christ says in chapter 2 and 3 is to be heeded by all the churches. The faithful churching people exercised to live in the kingdom of God today in the age of grace, will be rewarded in the age of the millennial kingdom to reign with Christ over the nations.

You seem to be mistakenly relegating this only to Israel. The church in Thyatira is a representative new covenant local church. Therefore the receivers of the promise are the constituents of the Body of Christ, the one new man.

The nation of Israel at His return will provide priests to help the nations to learn to worship God.

The kingdom of God and the kingdom of the heavens (Matthew's term) is a big subject. We cannot hope to make clear all things related to the kingdom of God in even a few posts like this. But I do hear you.

The promise to reign with Christ is to the overcoming saints from the church age -

"Faithful is the word: For if we died with Him, we will also live with Him.
If we endure, we will also reign with Him." (Second Timothy 2:11,12)

To the churching people the promise to "reign with Him" when He returns depends on our faithfulness and endurance. It is conditional. It is not automatic simply because we have been saved. To reign with Him then is conditioned on the Christian reigning in life with Him in the age of grace.

There are the overcomers and there are the defeated.
The overcomers will be rewarded to reign with Him.
The defeated will suffer loss of this reward. But they are still saved forever.

Notice now what else Paul writes in this passage:

"Faithful is the word: For if we died with Him, we will also live with Him;
If we endure, we will also reign with Him;
If we deny Him, He also will deny us;
IF we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself."

1.) To deny Him risks having Him deny us for the reward of reigning in the coming millennial kingdom.

2.) To deny Him is to become faithless. Yet Jesus remains FAITHFUL in our gift of eternal life because "He cannot deny Himself".

This is how I understand this passage. And that accounts for how the overcoming saints will be rewarded but faithless ones will lose the reward. Yet Christ cannot deny Himself in His eternal redemption. They are still saved.

This is confirmed by First Corinthians three -

"If anyone's work which he has built upon the foundation remains, he will receive a reward.

If anyone's work is consumed, he will suffer loss, but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire." (1 Cor. 3:14,15)

Whereas The Church which is Christ's Body is the agency through which God reconciles the heavens back to Himself.

You have to show me what you mean by reconcile the heavens back to Himself.

Those redeemed by the blood of Christ in the church age, if overcoming, are to reign on earth (Revelation 5:10)

" ... You were slain and have purchased for God by Your blood men out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, and have made them a kingdom and priests to our God; and they will reign on the earth."

Notice it is the people redeemed from every tribe, nation, tongue, ie brought into the one new man - who will reign "on the earth" .

The Kingdom saints have as their hope the resurrection into the Kingdom on earth. Our hope is Jesus Christ and His appearing to catch us up to meet Him in the air.

Two distinct entities. One for the earth and one for the heavens. One is prophetic and one is the mystery, or secret that God kept hidden, but was revealed to Paul.

The rapture to the air is not to heaven but to the air in this passage. And it does not say they remain there.

This is going to take a little more time and space. I understand your view. With patience I think I can help you see things a little more clearly. I need a little more time.

The entire dispensation of the age of grace is unprophesied of; (Eph. 3:9 And to make all [men] see what [is] the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: Col. 1:26 [Even] the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: )and comes to a close at the end of the age of grace where God will then resume the prophetic program with the nation Israel

Comment latter.

The entire dispensation of the age of grace is unprophesied of; (Eph. 3:9 And to make all [men] see what [is] the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: Col. 1:26 [Even] the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: )and comes to a close at the end of the age of grace where God will then resume the prophetic program with the nation Israel

How can you say that the entire church age or age of grace is not related to any prophecy ?

Didn't Peter interpret Joel's prophecy as being at least partially fulfilled in the day of Pentecost ?

See Acts 2:14-21 .

This beginning of the church age Peter says was prophesied by the prophet Joel - "But this is what is spoken through the prophet Joel: And it shall be in the last days, says God, that I will pour out of My Spirit upon all flesh ... etc. etc."

Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit Peter's interpretation of the prophecy of Joel apparently stretches through the entire church age until the beginning of the last days around the time of the opening of the sixth seal of Revelation chapter six.

This kind of belief you submit seems to me the thought of Christians so disappointed with the church that they have decided to throw more of their hope into the future of the nation of Israel. This seems to me a kind of throwing away the hope for the church.

Rather I think a remnant of overcoming believers should seek the kingdom of God in the church age as the New Testament plainly teaches.

Originally posted by sonship
[quote] The entire dispensation of the age of grace is unprophesied of; (Eph. 3:9 And to make all [men] see what [is] the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: Col. 1:26 [Even] the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to hi ...[text shortened]... vers should seek the kingdom of God in the church age as the New Testament plainly teaches.

Luke 13:6-9
He spake also this parable; A certain [man] had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none. Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground?
And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung [it]:
And if it bear fruit, [well]: and if not, [then] after that thou shalt cut it down.

[b]Jesus' earthly ministry=3 years, then Pentecost.

1 year to the stoning of Steven

The setting aside of Israel and the Apostleship of Paul with the Gospel according to the Mystery.

Paul is your Apostle, not Peter.

Jesus preached the Kingdom Gospel. His disciples were commissioned to preach that Gospel to the world, but first in Jerusalem, but the Jews rejected the offer of the Kingdom, signaling to God by the stoning of Steven that; "We will not have this [man] to reign over us." Luke 19:14

Originally posted by josephw

Paul is your Apostle, not Peter.

If Paul is our apostle and not Peter then how do you interpret the passage saying that BOTH Paul and Peter are ours ?

"So then let no one boast in men, for all things are yours. Whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or things present or things to come; all are yours ... " (1 Cor. 3:21,22)

How then do you think about all three apostles - Paul, Apollos, and Cephas (Peter) belonging to the saints in the church ?

Originally posted by sonship

Paul is your Apostle, not Peter.

If Paul is our apostle and not Peter then how do you interpret the passage saying that BOTH Paul and Peter are ours ?

[b]"So then let no one boast in men, for all things are yours. Whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or things present or things to come; all are yours . all three apostles - Paul, Apollos, and Cephas (Peter) belonging to the saints in the church ?

"...how do you interpret the passage...?"

Literally. I do not wrest with the scriptures or spiritualize them to make them conform to my own idea(or someone elses)of what they mean.

2 Peter 3:16
As also in all [his] epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as [they do] also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

That is what is being done everywhere.

You know the scriptures sonship. I can see that. All that you have posted I am aware of. But I am trying to reach you through all the theology and bring to your attention what Paul and Peter both understood.

Look closely at Galatians 2:2, 6-9
And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles,..
But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person: ) for they who seemed [to be somewhat] in conference added nothing to me:
But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as [the gospel] of the circumcision [was] unto Peter;
(For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles: )
And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we [should go] unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

Let verses 6 and 7 say what they say. "...added nothing to me. But contrariwise,.."

Peter understood that God had raised up the Apostle Paul to preach unto the Gentiles the "Gospel according to the mystery" and that the prophetic Kingdom program was set aside temporarily to usher in the unprophesied dispensation of grace.

You're going to have a job of unraveling. Take a fresh look at 2 Tim. 2:15.

Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. italics mine.

"...how do you interpret the passage...?"

Literally. I do not wrest with the scriptures or spiritualize them to make them conform to my own idea(or someone elses) of what they mean.

So though Scripture says literally that Cephas (Peter) as an apostle is ours we should understand that Cephas (Peter) is not ours ?

I understand it as Peter is just as much ours as Paul. But you do not have to share that understanding.

Let me move on then.

2 Peter 3:16
As also in all [his] epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as [they do] also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Peter is recommending Paul to the believers. If Paul was NOT theirs I don't see why Peter would recommend that they pay attention to Paul, even though some things are hard to grasp.

Don't you see that the recommendation of Paul by Peter to the receivers of Peter's epistle suggests that both apostles were equally provided by Christ for the saints ?

But I am trying to reach you through all the theology and bring to your attention what Paul and Peter both understood.

I understand that Peter was mainly ministering to the Jews and Paul to the Gentiles. However we cannot be so absolute as to not recognize overlap.

God did use Peter to open the door of the kingdom to the Gentiles in the house of Cornelius. And Paul probably wrote the book of Hebrews and we see Paul closing the books of Acts with him teaching the Jews.

So absolute segmentation is hard to uphold. Would Paul say to the church in Corinth that Peter was theirs as well as himself and Apollos if he understood absolute partitioning of their two ministries ?

Paul did not encourage the denomination of the church in Corinth into factions based on apostles. He discouraged it. He told them not to boast this man over the other man because ALL the workers of God are theirs.

"For when someone says, I am of Paul, and another, I of Apollos, are you not men [of flesh] ?

What then is Apollos? And what is Paul? Ministers through whom you believed, even as the Lord gave to each one [of them].

I planted, Apollos watered, but God caused the growth."

The emphasis here is that God is the source of divine life and He is the one who causes its growth and development. Whatever and whoever assist in the planting and watering of this living Person within the saints is ours and for our benefit.

This is not a little insignificant side issue. It is crucial to the fundamental problem with divisions in the local church. The church is NOT the property of a certain worker no matter how useful or gifted.

Luther doesn't have a church.
Wesley doesn't have his church.
Calvin doesn't have a church.
Paul doesn't have a church.
Witness Lee doesn't have his church.
Reverend So and So doesn't have "his" church.

The church belongs to the city - "the church of God which is in Corinth"
In all ministries the beneficiaries should be the saints in the boundary of that locality. The same is true for every locality and universally as well.

"So then let us not boast of men, for all things are yours, whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas ... all are yours, But you are Christ's, and Christ is God's." (v.21,22)

I don't count this as little side issue. I count this as crucial, as germane to the unity of the church.

Look closely at Galatians 2:2, 6-9
And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles,..
But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person: ) for they who seemed [to be somewhat] in conference added nothing to me:
But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as [the gospel] of the circumcision [was] unto Peter;
(For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles: )
And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we [should go] unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

Well, I can see Paul saying that they really added nothing to him while stopping short of maintaining that those men were NOT their apostles.

It is one thing to suggest that one worker had more depth of revelation than another. It is another thing to insist that for that reason the lesser does not belong to the saints.

While I fully grasp your insight I think it comes short of dividing the Body along lines of "This apostle is yours but this other one is NOT."

Let verses 6 and 7 say what they say. "...added nothing to me. But contrariwise,.."

I can see Paul putting a damper on the Galatians' expectations that Paul should have been a total sycophant to his older senior apostles. I can see Paul playing down that expectation while not saying for that reason he is their exclusive sent one.

I don't think this cold water Paul is throwing on their sense of hierarchy supports a further concept of apostles being partitioned in exclusive compartments.

Peter understood that God had raised up the Apostle Paul to preach unto the Gentiles the "Gospel according to the mystery" and that the prophetic Kingdom program was set aside temporarily to usher in the unprophesied dispensation of grace.

I can see that. But in the preaching of this mystery he ALSO discourages the saints from pitting one worker against another.

In essence Paul's attitude is "They are ALL yours. They are ALL for your benefit. For God alone is the source the divine life. And God alone causes that life to advance."

He can maintain that there were different levels of grace or revelation WITHOUT further pushing that to divide the church according to workers.

Do you see what I mean ?