The Sprit and the Bride

In reply to sonship

You are confusing me disagreeing with you, with me disagreeing with the NT. It is you who are wrong and are are trying to defend a doctrine that brings the gospel of Jesus Christ into disrepute. I agree with the Bible but disagree with YOU not IT.

I've not read all your posts here as I'm at work, but initially your were trying to compare the creation of a place of ghastly suffering, the throwing of persons into this place and the watching of the suffering - with Einstein's and Hawking's discovery of black holes and how a parallel between these two completely unrelated phenomena is the humanity of Christ - it's nonsense.

The only reason we are still discussing this topic is that past the "parable" in Matthew and the symbolic stuff in Revelation you don't have anything of Biblical substance to support your adherence to this horrible construct.

It's your problem my friend -not mine.

Originally posted by divegeester
Revelation of Jesus Christ 22: Jesus is speaking from verse 12.

12“Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to each person according to what they have done. 13I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

14“Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of li ...[text shortened]... tc?

Thoughts.

Edit: incidentally the "waters of life" are as symbolic as the tree of life.

I believe the Bride of Christ are those Christians that have overcome sin. The Friends and Guests of the Groom are Christian believers that are only saved by His grace, like me.

Originally posted by divegeester

You are confusing me disagreeing with you, with me disagreeing with the NT. It is you who are wrong and are are trying to defend a doctrine that brings the gospel of Jesus Christ into disrepute. I agree with the Bible but disagree with YOU not IT.

No that is not what is going on.
What is going on is that you want to claim that in all aspects of this matter Jesus agrees with YOU.

I say, Jesus apparently does not agree with you in the existence of an everlasting punishment.

And now I have given you a thread for you to prove your point - there is NO teaching of eternal damnation in the Bible.

This is risky, For the more I point this OUT to you, the more you are likely to assume I am EAGER for sinners to be lost forever. Please do not argue by ad hom, attempting to guilt trip me for wanting to accept what the New Testament teaches.

I've not read all your posts here as I'm at work, but initially your were trying to compare the creation of a place of ghastly suffering, the throwing of persons into this place and the watching of the suffering - with Einstein's and Hawking's discovery of black holes and how a parallel between these two completely unrelated phenomena is the humanity of Christ - it's nonsense.

Not really unrelated. Both are of absolute destruction really.
Both have warnings attached.
Both are according to LAWS.

There can be, by law, no everlasting blessedness in not being extricated from Satan's rebellion. You Lose. If you do not seize the opportunity to be reconciled to God but remain with Satan as your leader, you will Lose.

Not break even.
Not get out of the game.
But Lose.

The only reason we are still discussing this topic is that past the "parable" in Matthew and the symbolic stuff in Revelation you don't have anything of Biblical substance to support your adherence to this horrible construct.

By attempting to make one passage parable you cannot hope to make too many other clear passages go away.

Even as PARABLE, why cannot a PARABLE portray something unimaginably BAD ?

It's your problem my friend -not mine.

You wish.

Originally posted by sonship

You are confusing me disagreeing with you, with me disagreeing with the NT. It is you who are wrong and are are trying to defend a doctrine that brings the gospel of Jesus Christ into disrepute. I agree with the Bible but disagree with YOU not IT.

No that is not what is going on.
What is going on is that you want to claim that in all ...[text shortened]... nimaginably BAD ?

It's your problem my friend -not mine.

You wish.

Anytime you want to equivocally demonstrate using biblical scripture (more that the one piece in Matthew and revelation 22) that your version of your gods eternal punishment exists. Feel free.


Why believe in it so passionately I wonder...

It doesn't matter for salvation

It doesn't matter for faith

It doesn't matter for preaching the gospel

It doesn't matter for healing

But it is horrendous and you are fighting for it with me in the public domain.

Why?

Originally posted by divegeester
Anytime you want to equivocally demonstrate using biblical scripture (more that the one piece in Matthew and revelation 22) that your version of your gods eternal punishment exists. Feel free.


Why believe in it so passionately I wonder...

It doesn't matter for salvation

It doesn't matter for faith

It doesn't matter for preaching the gospe ...[text shortened]... aling

But it is horrendous and you are fighting for it with me in the public domain.

Why?

Anytime you want to equivocally demonstrate using biblical scripture (more that the one piece in Matthew and revelation 22) that your version of your gods eternal punishment exists. Feel free.

And you feel free to put forth the exegetic RULE on something other than your arbitrary qualification, that ONE passage is not sufficient to show Jesus spoke of something.

While you are at it, you can propose your RULE that the number of passages demonstrating Jesus spoke of something is _____ ? (what number),

And WHY it has to be THAT number.

Why believe in it so passionately I wonder...

Why do you believe everyone who takes the words of Christ at face value are gloating over the punishment of the lost ?

Why do you passionately seek to portray them as EAGER to see people damned ?

You need to do that to convince yourself of superiority of your sentimental distrust with God's authority to judge the irreconcilable rebel.

It doesn't matter for salvation

So why do you go out of your way to exalt your displeasure with those who take the NT at face value for what it teaches ?

You make an issue and then claim you have not made an issue.
Months ago, I wrote that in the nine cases the evangelist John wrote of about people being saved, not all of them mention eternal perdition.

I think it is you who drag the subject out, place it on the table, jeer, voice contempt at Christians who believe the New Testament on the matter, and then pretend OTHERS have made a particular issue of the matter.

It doesn't matter for faith

You cannot demonstrate that either Christ or the apostles were ashamed to mention the matter when the need arose.

It doesn't matter for preaching the gospel

There are ways to preach the Gospel without reference to damnation, in favor of focus on other important aspects of God's economy.

And there are way to preach the Gospel with reference to the consequences of open eyed intelligent rejection of Christ's atoning work.

What are you REALLY doing besides what the serpent did in Genesis with Eve - "Yea , Hath God said ...? " ?

"You will not surely go to the lake of fire" - that's what you want to preach, isn't it ?

What does Revelation 20:15 say about those whose names were not recorded in the book of life ?

Sorry. God is not Barny the Dinosaur.

He'll do what He says He will do so that eternally everyone "will know that I am the Lord."

Originally posted by divegeester

You are confusing me disagreeing with you, with me disagreeing with the NT. It is you who are wrong and are are trying to defend a doctrine that brings the gospel of Jesus Christ into disrepute. I agree with the Bible but disagree with YOU not IT.

There is ALWAYS someone somewhere who holds the Gospel in "disrepute".
Some hold it is disrepute for entirely other reasons besides a teaching of eternal damnation.

If the Holy Spirit is telling you to not mention some legitimate aspect of His word for a particular situation, that is one thing.

If you think you can invent a kinder, gentler final judgment of God, that is another.

You are making an idol of your sentimental feelings.

Originally posted by sonship

You are confusing me disagreeing with you, with me disagreeing with the NT. It is you who are wrong and are are trying to defend a doctrine that brings the gospel of Jesus Christ into disrepute. I agree with the Bible but disagree with YOU not IT.

There is ALWAYS someone somewhere who holds the Gospel in "disrepute".
Some hold it is di ...[text shortened]... dgment of God, that is another.

You are making an [b]idol of your sentimental feelings.[/b]

You can of course think and post whatever you like of me; it doesn't change my views on this doctrine.

Originally posted by divegeester
You can of course think and post whatever you like of me; it doesn't change my views on this doctrine.

That is quite alright.

vica versa.

Originally posted by divegeester
You can of course think and post whatever you like of me; it doesn't change my views on this doctrine.

You are free to believe what you wish, but your views can not destroy the word of God, which endures forever.

Originally posted by divegeester

When Jesus says he will reward each according to what they have done, does this mean those to who he is saying come? Can more come to him than are already in the Bride?

"Behold I come quickly, and My reward is with Me to render to each one as his work is." (Revelation 22:12)

This "reward" or literally "wages" is related to each SAVED believer.

Lit., wages. At the Lord's coming, this reward will be rendered to each one of the believers, after their rapture, at the judgment seat of Christ (2 Cor. 5:10; 1 Cor. 4:5; Rom. 14:10; Matt 16:27).

Does this mean that the opposite of the "reward". is eternal torture in flames? [No!] Or is this further revelation that there is:

- the Bride of the groom (the church)
- the friends of the groom (john 3:29) other people who will be with the Bride and the Groom?

Bearing in mind that Christ died once and for ALL, (1 peter 3:18, Romans 6:10, Hebrews 9:28) and that many many times throughout the bible is states "mercy triumphs over judgement" -- does this add anything to your view of the atonement, salvation, judgement, hell etc?

Thoughts.

The phrase "the friend of the bridegroom" was used by John the Baptist in John 3. John the Baptist speaking here:

"You yourselves testify of me that I said, I am not the Christ, but I have been sent before Him.

He who has the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the bridegroom who stands and hears him, rejoices with joy because of the bridegrooms voice. This joy of mine therefore is made full.

He must encrease but I must decrease." (John 3:28-30)

The [singular] friend of the bridegroom was John the Baptist.
The Bridegroom was and is Jesus.
At that time the disciples of John the Baptist had to decrease and the followers of Jesus had to increase. So John was happy that Jesus was gaining MORE followers than himself.

"He [Jesus the Bridegroom] must increase, but I [THE friend of the Bridegroom] must decrease." (v.30)

Of course eventually, in the New Jerusalem John the Baptist himself joins the increase of the Bridegroom by becoming himself a member of His Bride the enlarged church, New Jerusalem.

There are three peoples in the millennium and on into eternity.
But I cannot embark on a real lenghty post to prove this exhaustively.

1.) The New Jerusalem as the sons of God. These are those who enter into the city and EAT the fruit of the symbolic tree of life.

2.) The nations around the New Jerusalem who are not sons of God but have the everlasting life that Adam had restored to them. These are the peoples HEALED by the leaves of the symbolic tree of life.

3.) Those outside the city in the lake of fire.

For immediately after Jesus speaks of those who wash their robes and enter into the city to have right to the tree of life in verse 14, He speaks of those outside the city in the lake of fire.

"Outside are the dogs and the sorcerers and the fornicators and the murderers and the idolaters and everyone who loves and makes a lie." (v.15)

The nations that are walking in the light of the New Jerusalem are not born again people. They are peoples transfered from the great tribulation and from the millennium to be reigned over by the sons of God.

When the Bible says the sons of God shall reign forever and ever, it should not be that they reign over each other. But instead some saved nations are transferred into the new heaven and new earth who are "healed" and restored by the sons of God to become like Adam was before he fell.

Adam had an everlasting life as a creature created very good.
It is over these nations that the sons of God in the New Jerusalem reign over forever and ever, guiding them, healing them, being an example to them. But these healed nations are not people with the divine life of God within. They are healed by the LEAVES of the tree of life. They do not eat the fruit of the tree of life.

Edit: incidentally the "waters of life" are as symbolic as the tree of life.

There are two rivers. Both are symbolic. One is a river of the water of life bringing the sons of God into the city of living water.

The other is the sea of glass which becomes the river of fire and the sea of glass mingled with fire. This river also flows from the throne of God sweeping all of His enemies and all negative things into the final lake of fire.

For length's sake I will not refer to all the passages here. But see Revelation 15:2; Ezek 1:22; Rev. 21:11;22:3 but especially Daniel 7:9 .