Paul's Gospel

[Hiddenthings]

Debatable.

2 Corinthians 11:2 N/A-W/H
2 ζηλω γαρ υμας θεου ζηλω ηρμοσαμην γαρ υμας ενι ανδρι παρθενον αγνην παραστησαι τω χριστω

The primary meaning of ἁρμόζω (ηρμοσαμην in the above) is to join, to fit together.

Thayer
ἁρμόζω, Attic ἁρμόττω: 1 aorist middle ἡρμοσάμην; (ἁρμός, which see);
1. to join, to fit together; so in Homer of carpenters, fastening together beams and planks to build houses, ships, etc.

When someone turns to Thayer, it's often an attempt to ignore the context and force a different meaning onto the verse. Was this your motive?

Ironically you proved Genesis principles in being joined.

Moreover ανδρι (a form of ανηρ) also primarily means a man, but can also mean a husband. Moreover the text does not say "to one man", so to is merely inserted to help the reader understand the interpretation of the translator.

Come on dak you can do better than that!

"I might present"...Paul takes the role of the Angel of Yahweh who presented to Adam his newly-created bride (Gen 2:22)

I don't need to convince you as you already know this to be true.

It may just as well be read in the following manner:

2 Corinthians 11:2 N/A-W/H
2 ζηλω γαρ υμας θεου ζηλω ηρμοσαμην γαρ υμας ενι ανδρι παρθενον αγνην παραστησαι τω χριστω
2 For I am zealous for you with an Elohim zeal: for I joined you as one man, a pure virgin, to commend unto Meshiah.

Precisely the same meaning!

This is closer to what is actually in the text. One must be extremely diligent concerning the writings of Paul, (and he is surely not going to contradict his own Gospel account, Luke), for Paul is like the Road Runner in a way: for he will speed along right up to the edge of a precipice and suddenly stop on a dime, going no further, leading you right up to the edge and then stopping, and if the reader is merely a casual reader he or she will likely run right on by and end up like Wile E. Coyote at the bottom of a canyon, (or in the ditch).

Do you know how many commentaries I could provide you to show this is translated perfectly? If you want let me know!

Yes, there is that union with and in Meshiah, but not in the sense of a bride, rather, in the sense of being members of his body.

Ah so the word Bride is your issue - not sure why as its a vast subject one we could be dealing with for a very long time!

The comparison to the Genesis passage is to support the similar analogy of we being members of his body. When is the last time you heard of a man marrying his body?

Adam & Eve is the antitype of Christ and his Bride.

Yes, brethren as in the sense of a scroll of the Word where each panel is sewn and stitched together like brethren whose hearts are stitched together as one, (like David and Yonathan). The Torah scroll itself is surely personified in certain Psalms, (ex. Psa 40), and in that sense the brethren also pertain to the body of the Son, the Word of Elohim.

The relationship between Christ and his bride or Christ and his friends or Christ and the Children God has given him is no different the relationships spoken of between Yahweh and Israel. I'm shocked you don't know this.

Papal Rome? Where is that written?

It's not - it's interpreting the symbol.

I appreciate your interpretation but have already shown why I disagree.

Your premise doesn't hold any weight at the moment - but I'm not quick to judge.

 

[Hiddenthings]

@dak

How do you know for certain Paul's mind was on the First Eve when exhorting the Second Eve?

 

[Hiddenthings]

@Truly

As a side - why would 2 Corinthians 11 be the perfect passage to discuss the fallen angel (satan and devil)?

 

[dak]

Precisely the same meaning!

No, it isn't the same meaning: try reading it again for better comprehension.

Moreover the place where Paul joined them as one man was in the previous letter to them, in 1Cor 12, where he again speaks of a body temple analogy pertaining to spiritual gifts. Moreover he teaches the same body temple analogy in Romans 12:1-8. Moreover again he says the same to the Galatians and in that passage the ASV inserts the word man in italics to have it say "ye are all one man". Why would they do this? Because apparently they understood Paul's doctrine better than most.

Galatians 3:28 ASV
28 There can be neither Jew nor Greek, there can be neither bond nor free, there can be no male and female; for ye all are one man in Christ Jesus.

Moreover if your interpretation were true then why is virgin, (parthenos), in a singular form in the passage in question? It should be in a plural form if Paul means what you say it means.

Example:

Rev 14:4a ASV
4a These are they that were not defiled with women; for they are virgins [παρθενοι].

 

[Hiddenthings]

No, it isn't the same meaning: try reading it again for better comprehension.

Moreover the place where Paul joined them as one man was in the previous letter to them, in 1Cor 12,

You haven't explained the motivation for your dislike of bride?

I also asked you a question - best you attempt to answer it before I do on your behalf ;)

Goes to credibility!

How do you know for certain Paul's mind was on the First Eve when exhorting to the Second Eve?

 

[dak]

When someone turns to Thayer, it's often an attempt to ignore the context and force a different meaning onto the verse. Was this your motive?

You haven't explained the motivation for your dislike of bride?
I also asked you a question - best you attempt to answer it before I do on your behalf ;)

No doubt you would surely put words in my mouth seeing that you've already done so multiple times. I didn't answer it the first time above so as to try to maintain some civility in this thread. However, since you demand an answer, my motive on a daily basis is to walk with the Father in His Son in Spirit and in truth, which is even always included in my daily prayer routine. This walk with the Master includes NOT denying his holy Testimony in the Gospel accounts like you continually do, just as you have also done herein even after it was bought up twice from the Luke 12 passage.

Again, a third time:

Luke 12:35-36 KJV
35 Let your loins be girded about, and your lights burning;
36 And ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their lord, when he will return from the wedding; that when he cometh and knocketh, they may open unto him immediately.

MEN who await their Master's RETURN from the WEDDING.

You can believe what you will, but the above makes me a friend of the Groom: not his bride.
When common sense goes out the window a paradigm king has taken over the mind.

You are denying and contradicting what the Master has said and taught in the Luke 12 passage I quoted: and more specifically you are openly denying the Testimony of the Master in Luke 12:36 so that you may uphold your paradigm king who rules your house and rejects any scripture testimony that refutes him, including the Testimony of the Master, so that he may maintain power and control over you and your house which is supposed to belong to Elohim if indeed you are "in Meshiah", (1Cor 6:19-20).

1 Corinthians 6:19-20 ASV
19 Or know ye not that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you, which ye have from God? and ye are not your own;
20 for ye were bought with a price: glorify God therefore in your body.

Romans 6:16 ASV
16 Know ye not, that to whom ye present yourselves as servants unto obedience, his servants ye are whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

John 12:47-50
47 And if anyone hears my words, (rhema), and believes not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save-deliver the world.
48 The one rejecting me, and receiving not my words, (rhema), has One that judges him: the Logos that I have spoken, that one shall judge him in the last day.
49 For I have not spoken of myself: but the Father who sent me, He gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
50 And I know that His commandment is life eternal: whatsoever therefore I speak, even as the Father has said unto me, so I speak.

 

[Hiddenthings]

No doubt you would surely put words in my mouth seeing that you've already done so multiple times. I didn't answer it the first time above so as to try to maintain some civility in this thread. However, since you demand an answer, my motive on a daily basis is to walk with the Father in His Son in Spirit and in truth, which is even always included in my daily prayer routine. This walk with the Master includes NOT denying his holy Testimony in the Gospel accounts like you continually do, just as you have also done herein even after it was bought up twice from the Luke 12 passage.

Again, a third time:



You are denying and contradicting what the Master has said and taught in the Luke 12 passage I quoted: and more specifically you are openly denying the Testimony of the Master in Luke 12:36 so that you may uphold your paradigm king who rules your house and rejects any scripture testimony that refutes him, including the Testimony of the Master, so that he may maintain power and control over you and your house which is supposed to belong to Elohim if indeed you are "in Meshiah", (1Cor 6:19-20).

1 Corinthians 6:19-20 ASV
19 Or know ye not that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you, which ye have from God? and ye are not your own;
20 for ye were bought with a price: glorify God therefore in your body.

Romans 6:16 ASV
16 Know ye not, that to whom ye present yourselves as servants unto obedience, his servants ye are whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

dak, surely you knew you were not going to get away with this!

As I said it goes to credibility!

How do you know for certain Paul's mind was on the First Eve when exhorting the Second Eve?

Context is king

This call to purity and separation which Paul has in his mind is also reflected in 2 Corinth 6:14–7:1. The ecclesia is the “pure bride” of Christ, meant to be unsullied by false teaching and practice. The background for this imagery is Gen 3 which is why Paul's desire is to espouse the body as a pure bride to Christ, he then states this:

But I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, your thoughts will be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ. 2 Co 11:2–3.

You see dak, the second Adam has a second Eve

Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last (second) Adam became a life-giving spirit. 1 Corinthians 15:45

Who did this last Adam give life to dak?

 

[Muna]

@Truly

As a side - why would 2 Corinthians 11 be the perfect passage to discuss the fallen angel (satan and devil)?

You certainly love the doctrine of devils

 

[Hiddenthings]

You certainly love the doctrine of devils

Notice how Paul spoke to the Serpents cunning?

 

[Hiddenthings]

In Genesis 2:21–22

So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. 22 And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man.

The purpose being to secure his appraisal and approval. In like manner, the Elohim have been supervising the development of the Bride of Christ throughout the ages (Heb 1:14), and in the time appointed will present the Bride to the second Adam for his appraisal and approval.

The marriage in Eden foreshadows the marriage of the Lamb referred to in Revelation 19:7-8 and described in the Song of Solomon. Both marriages are unique, for both parties owe their existence to a common parent, and in each case, the formation of the Bride is out of her husband. On the eve of his death (his deep sleep), Christ prayed to the Father on behalf of His multitudinous Bride:

John 17:20–21 “I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, 21 that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me.”

There was a unity in the marriage in Eden, and there will be a unity in the marriage of Christ and his Bride, quite unlike any other. Adam submitted to the "deep sleep" and the surgical operation in order that his wife might be formed; and Christ willingly submitted to a sacrificial death and rose for the same reason. Each could describe his Bride as could no other husband:

Ephesians 5:25–27 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

John actually pins points precisely when the second Eve with given life with careful reading!

But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already (deep sleep), they brake not his legs: Jn 19:33.

34 But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water. Jn 19:34.

All can see where John's mind was when recording this event.

 

[dak]

You see dak, the second Adam has a second Eve

Lemme guess, that's supposed to be you and your Christadelphian brethren, eh? You are the bride? Lol.

 

[Muna]

Notice how Paul spoke to the Serpents cunning?

Right, which is why I am not going to get into the doctrines of devils with you.

 

[Hiddenthings]

Lemme guess, that's supposed to be you and your Christadelphian brethren, eh? You are the bride? Lol.

No, I don't hold that belief at all dak...I like to believe we both are!

 

[Hiddenthings]

Right, which is why I am not going to get into the doctrines of devils with you.

I understand, but the obvious question, one you’ve likely already considered is why Paul would refer to the cunning of the serpent, which God clearly gave it, rather than to a fallen angel. This would only be a concern if I subscribed to such a doctrine of demons.

 

[Hiddenthings]

Lemme guess, that's supposed to be you and your Christadelphian brethren, eh? You are the bride? Lol.

Dak, when I was about 22 years old (quite a while ago now), I did a study on the Bride of Christ. I still have it, and rereading it has reminded me of the beautiful truths in that metaphor. It’s undoubtedly a literal event yet to take place.

That said, I’d like to return to your Luke 12 reference, I have a feeling there’s more there for us to uncover. Are you interested?

 

[Muna]

I understand, but the obvious question, one you’ve likely already considered is why Paul would refer to the cunning of the serpent, which God clearly gave it, rather than to a fallen angel. This would only be a concern if I subscribed to such a doctrine of demons.

The LORD tells us of the feathers He gave the ostrich and of the wisdom He also decided to deprive her of

Job 39:13 Gavest thou the goodly wings unto the peacocks? or wings and feathers unto the ostrich?
Job 39:14 Which leaveth her eggs in the earth, and warmeth them in dust,
Job 39:15 And forgetteth that the foot may crush them, or that the wild beast may break them.
Job 39:16 She is hardened against her young ones, as though they were not hers: her labour is in vain without fear;
Job 39:17 Because God hath deprived her of wisdom, neither hath he imparted to her understanding.

So you could also say, God clearly deprived her of it.

It does tell us that the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world can be seen, being understood by the things that are made ( Rom 1:20 Col 1:16).

I believe you center too much of your conversations around the devil, and that starts to become a little off putting (maybe not to you). I can agree with you where I might as I have in a couple of posts but I am not interested in going down this long rabbit hole while you lead with questions to pull others into it.

 

[Hiddenthings]

I believe you center too much of your conversations around the devil, and that starts to become a little off putting (maybe not to you). I can agree with you where I might as I have in a couple of posts but I am not interested in going down this long rabbit hole while you lead with questions to pull others into it.

I've gone hard at that topic Truly because of the damage it does in the minds of innocent believers. It's a blight on the one true faith.

 

[Muna]

I've gone hard at that topic Truly because of the damage it does in the minds of innocent believers. It's a blight on the one true faith.

But I don't see it as that at all, you do, and I know you press hard on this but it seems counter productive (at least to me). I think you would have found a little bit more of an open mind to some of the things you share (on a certain level) if you didn't push things as hard as you do. Why not just shared what things you have found and leave it at that (hands off). Post and let it alone, and let others examine what you feel you have found without trying to drag them into a thousand questions you need to ask them in order to corner them. I wouldn't reccomend doing that, that seems like almost a sure fire way to shut down the conversation. That's just my take, you do you as unto the LORD .

 

[Hiddenthings]

But I don't see it as that at all, you do, and I know you press hard on this but it seems counter productive (at least to me). I think you would have found a little bit more of an open mind to some of the things you share (on a certain level) if you didn't push things as hard as you do. Why not just shared what things you have found and leave it at that (hands off). Post and let it alone, and let others examine what you feel you have found without trying to drag them into a thousand questions you need to ask them in order to corner them. I wouldn't reccomend doing that, that seems like almost a sure fire way to shut down the conversation. That's just my take, you do you as unto the LORD .

Many people have never deeply examined this topic and therefore cannot defend it, having accepted it unquestioningly as truth. It is the intensity of the questions asked, and the answers given that can make the difference for someone who is uncertain, prompting them to open the Word and explore it for themselves. A good example is Dak’s position on the Bride. Although I knew his view was incorrect, I still considered it carefully to better understand his reasoning. While I remain unsure why he opposes the concept of being the Bride of Christ, this teaching is clearly found in the Bible. This kind of growth can only happen when we ask questions and allow the Word to guide and teach us. Now you might not like the approach, and I get that but, in the end, if truth is gain through the process how can it be wrong?

Apostle said "prove all things"...and this is what we must do! Dak is doing it, I am doing it and so are you.

 

[dak]

A good example is Dak’s position on the Bride. Although I knew his view was incorrect, I still considered it carefully to better understand his reasoning.

One must ignore the Testimony of the Master in Luke 12 to believe what you have chosen to believe: and yet you still choose to ignore the plain clear statement when it has been posted, quoted, and shown to you three times now.

While I remain unsure why he opposes the concept of being the Bride of Christ, this teaching is clearly found in the Bible.

No it isn't: it is found in carnal misrepresentations of Paul's writings in your favorite Bible translations so that you need not study the original languages for yourself.

This kind of growth can only happen when we ask questions and allow the Word to guide and teach us.

But somehow the Word in Luke 12 does not apply to your dogma?
That's forked-tongue theology-speak: two horns like a lamb but speaks like a dragon.

Now you might not like the approach, and I get that but, in the end, if truth is gain through the process how can it be wrong?

Truth is gained through a process of sidelining and ignoring the Testimony of the Son of Elohim? Pitting scripture against scripture to justify your beliefs? No, reconciling what appear on the surface to be contradictions is how we find out why we are wrong in any given situation, and again, Paul is not contradicting the Testimony of the Master: it is your understanding of certain Pauline statements that cause the contradiction(s).