The Body of Christ vs. The Bride of Christ (pt. 1)

[Naomi25]

A model does not replicate.

Model: a three-dimensional representation of a person or thing or of a proposed structure, typically on a smaller scale than the original.
"a model of St Paul's Cathedral"
synonyms: replica, copy, representation, mock-up, dummy, imitation, double, duplicate, lookalike, reproduction...

 

[CoreIssue]

I fail to see your point. My point was: there IS no difference between people coming to Christ today, and people coming to Christ 'then'. You yourself have just admitted it. And if there is no difference, then by definition we are all part of the Church, the body of Christ. This distinction Dispensationalists put up between the Church and Israel is nothing more than a doctrinal stance that they must to make a system work.

If only a doctrinal difference how do you explain the return of the Stone Temple in Jerusalem and animal sacrifices during the millennial kingdom?

 

[CoreIssue]

Model: a three-dimensional representation of a person or thing or of a proposed structure, typically on a smaller scale than the original.
"a model of St Paul's Cathedral"
synonyms: replica, copy, representation, mock-up, dummy, imitation, double, duplicate, lookalike, reproduction...

We don't know how everything works in heaven, how things feel in heaven or how they actually looked in heaven.

An Echo is is the repeating of a sound.

So a model of something is not an Echo. It does not walk, talk, think or perform.

That is why the Bible calls such things shadows. A shadow does not truly look like what it is the shadow of. It does not have the substance of the real thing.

You keep portraying heaven and Eternity as nothing more than the extension of this earth. That is wrong.

 

[Naomi25]

Tracing back in Hebrews 11 those who were justified is not the same as claiming that the church began when Old Testament saints were justified, which I do not do. The church is a mystery revealed in the New Testament as a heavenly people, as Ephesians says.

But if the NT tells us that OT people were saved by faith, just as NT people are, in point of fact, then how is it different?
The difference the new covenant makes is that now we know what we have faith in, and those in the OT didn't, but Paul is quite clear...those in the OT were saved by faith, rather than keeping of the law. So, as I said, while the names (elect/children of promise...church/children of promise) may not be exactly the same, the way to God is.

 

[Naomi25]

It has been given but you reject it.

No, your opinion has been given. The biblical backing for said opinion has yet to make an appearance....

 

[CoreIssue]

No, your opinion has been given. The biblical backing for said opinion has yet to make an appearance....

It's appeared but you refuse to accept it.

 

[Naomi25]

Study the Old Testament and you will find out how.

ISRAEL SHALL BE REDEEMED AND RESTORED

But Israel shall be saved in the LORD with an everlasting salvation: ye shall not be ashamed nor confounded world without end. (Isa 45:17)

I bring near my righteousness; it shall not be far off, and my salvation shall not tarry: and I will place salvation in Zion for Israel my glory. (Isa 46:13)

Sing, O ye heavens; for the LORD hath done it: shout, ye lower parts of the earth: break forth into singing, ye mountains, O forest, and every tree therein: for the LORD hath redeemed Jacob, and glorified himself in Israel.(Isa 44:23)

He shall cause them that come of Jacob to take root: Israel shall blossom and bud, and fill the face of the world with fruit. (Isa 27:6)

For the LORD shall comfort Zion: he will comfort all her waste places; and he will make her wilderness like Eden, and her desert like the garden of the LORD; joy and gladness shall be found therein, thanksgiving, and the voice of melody. (Isa 51:3)

And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach. In that day shall the branch of the LORD [CHRIST] be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth shall be excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel. And it shall come to pass, that he that is left in Zion, and he that remaineth in Jerusalem, shall be called holy, even every one that is written among the living in Jerusalem: When the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion, and shall have purged the blood of Jerusalem from the midst thereof by the spirit of judgment, and by the spirit of burning. And the LORD will create upon every dwelling place of mount Zion, and upon her assemblies, a cloud and smoke by day, and the shining of a flaming fire by night: for upon all the glory shall be a defence. And there shall be a tabernacle for a shadow in the daytime from the heat, and for a place of refuge, and for a covert from storm and from rain. (Isa 4:1-6)

Is it not yet a very little while, and Lebanon shall be turned into a fruitful field, and the fruitful field shall be esteemed as a forest? And in that day shall the deaf hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity, and out of darkness. The meek also shall increase their joy in the LORD, and the poor among men shall rejoice in the Holy One of Israel... Therefore thus saith the LORD, who redeemed Abraham, concerning the house of Jacob, Jacob shall not now be ashamed, neither shall his face now wax pale. But when he seeth his children, the work of mine hands, in the midst of him, they shall sanctify my name, and sanctify the Holy One of Jacob, and shall fear the God of Israel. (Isa 29:17-19; 22-23)

Then shall he give the rain of thy seed, that thou shalt sow the ground withal; and bread of the increase of the earth, and it shall be fat and plenteous: in that day shall thy cattle feed in large pastures. The oxen likewise and the young asses that ear the ground shall eat clean provender, which hath been winnowed with the shovel and with the fan. And there shall be upon every high mountain, and upon every high hill, rivers and streams of waters in the day of the great slaughter, when the towers fall. Moreover the light of the moon shall be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall be sevenfold, as the light of seven days, in the day that the LORD bindeth up the breach of his people, and healeth the stroke of their wound. (Isa 30:23-26)

For ye shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace: the mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing, and all the trees of the field shall clap their hands. Instead of the thorn shall come up the fir tree, and instead of the brier shall come up the myrtle tree: and it shall be to the LORD for a name, for an everlasting sign that shall not be cut off. (Isa 55:12,13)

Thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I will lift up mine hand to the Gentiles, and set up my standard to the people: and they shall bring thy sons in their arms, and thy daughters shall be carried upon their shoulders. And kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and their queens thy nursing mothers: they shall bow down to thee with their face toward the earth, and lick up the dust of thy feet; and thou shalt know that I am the LORD: for they shall not be ashamed that wait for me. (Isa 49:22,23)

And the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising… Then thou shalt see, and flow together, and thine heart shall fear, and be enlarged; because the abundance of the sea shall be converted unto thee, the forces of the Gentiles shall come unto thee… And the sons of strangers shall build up thy walls, and their kings shall minister unto thee: for in my wrath I smote thee, but in my favour have I had mercy on thee. Therefore thy gates shall be open continually; they shall not be shut day nor night; that men may bring unto thee the forces of the Gentiles, and that their kings may be brought... Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob... The sun shall be no more thy light by day; neither for brightness shall the moon give light unto thee: but the LORD shall be unto thee an everlasting light, and thy God thy glory. Thy sun shall no more go down; neither shall thy moon withdraw itself: for the LORD shall be thine everlasting light, and the days of thy mourning shall be ended. Thy people also shall be all righteous: they shall inherit the land for ever, the branch of my planting, the work of my hands, that I may be glorified. (Isa 60:3,5,10,11,16, 19-21)

And they shall build the old wastes, they shall raise up the former desolations, and they shall repair the waste cities, the desolations of many generations. And strangers shall stand and feed your flocks, and the sons of the alien shall be your plowmen and your vinedressers. But ye shall be named the Priests of the LORD: men shall call you the Ministers of our God: ye shall eat the riches of the Gentiles, and in their glory shall ye boast yourselves. (Isa 61:4-6)

And the Gentiles shall see thy righteousness, and all kings thy glory: and thou shalt be called by a new name, which the mouth of the LORD shall name. Thou shalt also be a crown of glory in the hand of the LORD, and a royal diadem in the hand of thy God... And they shall call them, The holy people, The redeemed of the LORD: and thou shalt be called, Sought out, A city not forsaken. (Isa 62:2,3,12)

Two problems with these verses: they either talk about the promise of Israel's redemption (and not the particular method), or they talk about the land promise in place of redemption, which the NT resoundingly makes clear is passed on to Christ, and through him, to all 'children of promise' who are in him.

But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. -Romans 9:6–8

Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. -Galatians 3:7

Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ. -Galatians 3:16

And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise. -Galatians 3:29


So...if the land promises...if ALL promises given to Abraham were in fact made to Christ and his 'heirs', then these OT verses come to mean something quite different once we understand the NT.
Which brings me back to my original question: Any Jewish person today...or yesterday, or tomorrow: how are they to come to God?

 

[Naomi25]

We don't know how everything works in heaven, how things feel in heaven or how they actually looked in heaven.

An Echo is is the repeating of a sound.

So a model of something is not an Echo. It does not walk, talk, think or perform.

That is why the Bible calls such things shadows. A shadow does not truly look like what it is the shadow of. It does not have the substance of the real thing.

Really? Don't you think that this is just knit-picking at this point?

An echo is an extention of a real sound. A shadow is an extension of a real shape. Neither can do anything by themselves. And is so very obviously not the point in the conversation.

You keep portraying heaven and Eternity as nothing more than the extension of this earth. That is wrong.

Where have I done that? Yes, eternity will be a physical reality, as we have now. Yes, it shall be as it was, even better than, it was in the beginning...but I do believe I have, over and over, said that this world will be destroyed before it is made new. Does that count as "an extension"? Does having Christ and God dwell among us count as "an extension"? Does having the New Jerusalem and the tree of life here count as "an extension"? Does having zero death and sin count as "an extension"? I think those are all new things, yes?

Besides, didn't you just say: "We don't know how everything works in heaven, how things feel in heaven or how they actually looked in heaven."....above?
It seems strange to me, then, that, having repeated what the bible DOES tell us about heaven, you then tell me that it is "wrong" for me to make such assuptions.

 

[Naomi25]

If only a doctrinal difference how do you explain the return of the Stone Temple in Jerusalem and animal sacrifices during the millennial kingdom?

I don't...I think such a thing is not found in scripture and should not be. The whole idea of reverting to a stone structure and animal sacrifices in the 'millennium' is a slap in the face of Christ's own work on the cross. It makes a mockery of everything he achieved. He himself gave us the way we are to remember and honor his work: the bread and wine. To go back to death and blood, when perfect blood, the perfect sacrifice has already been given, is a joke.
The verses that you point to in order to "prove" such a time do not hold weight in light of NT understanding of OT promises. Sorry. Christ's coming and work changes it all. Paul makes it clear...anyone who wants to go back to that can...but they are expected to live fully under the law for their salvation. And we know how that goes...man cannot. Only in Christ is found salvation. And in Christ, it is done. Full stop, the end.

 

[Enoch111]

Two problems with these verses: they either talk about the promise of Israel's redemption (and not the particular method), or they talk about the land promise in place of redemption, which the NT resoundingly makes clear is passed on to Christ, and through him, to all 'children of promise' who are in him.

That's where your false theology fails. The promises regarding a redeemed ad restored land and people in Israel establishes the fact that the Church is NOT Israel, neither is Israel the Church. I gave you the Scriptures, and you just flipped them off.

 

[Naomi25]

It's appeared but you refuse to accept it.

Really? I can't decide if you really think that or if you're just trying to convince me of it. Sadly, I have to inform you, that you haven't.

 

[Naomi25]

That's where your false theology fails. The promises regarding a redeemed ad restored land and people in Israel establishes the fact that the Church is NOT Israel, neither is Israel the Church. I gave you the Scriptures, and you just flipped them off.

No, I didn't flip them off. You can't just post OT verses that sound great about Israel without taking into consideration what the NT says about Israel, the old covenant and promises.

You objected to my saying this: "Two problems with these verses: they either talk about the promise of Israel's redemption (and not the particular method), or they talk about the land promise in place of redemption, which the NT resoundingly makes clear is passed on to Christ, and through him, to all 'children of promise' who are in him."

But...how is what I said wrong in light of these verses:

But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. -Romans 9:6–8

And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise. -Galatians 3:29

Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. -Galatians 4:28

The bible passages are clear. Christians are "in Christ", and thus, are "children of promise"...recipients of Abrahams promises.
That's not flipping off scriptures or adhering to a false theology. That's looking quite simply at what is there. If you have any logical explination against what Paul plainly states, I invite you to put it forward.

 

[CoreIssue]

Really? Don't you think that this is just knit-picking at this point?

An echo is an extention of a real sound. A shadow is an extension of a real shape. Neither can do anything by themselves. And is so very obviously not the point in the conversation.


Where have I done that? Yes, eternity will be a physical reality, as we have now. Yes, it shall be as it was, even better than, it was in the beginning...but I do believe I have, over and over, said that this world will be destroyed before it is made new. Does that count as "an extension"? Does having Christ and God dwell among us count as "an extension"? Does having the New Jerusalem and the tree of life here count as "an extension"? Does having zero death and sin count as "an extension"? I think those are all new things, yes?

Besides, didn't you just say: "We don't know how everything works in heaven, how things feel in heaven or how they actually looked in heaven."....above?
It seems strange to me, then, that, having repeated what the bible DOES tell us about heaven, you then tell me that it is "wrong" for me to make such assuptions.

It is not nitpicking. The words have definitively different meanings and implications.

 

[CoreIssue]

I don't...I think such a thing is not found in scripture and should not be. The whole idea of reverting to a stone structure and animal sacrifices in the 'millennium' is a slap in the face of Christ's own work on the cross. It makes a mockery of everything he achieved. He himself gave us the way we are to remember and honor his work: the bread and wine. To go back to death and blood, when perfect blood, the perfect sacrifice has already been given, is a joke.
The verses that you point to in order to "prove" such a time do not hold weight in light of NT understanding of OT promises. Sorry. Christ's coming and work changes it all. Paul makes it clear...anyone who wants to go back to that can...but they are expected to live fully under the law for their salvation. And we know how that goes...man cannot. Only in Christ is found salvation. And in Christ, it is done. Full stop, the end.

I guess you never read Ezekiel to make the claim there will not be a return to the Stone Temple. A superior Stone Temple.

Animal-Sacrifices

Notice here is future tense
Ezekiel 43:18-27
18 Then he said to me, “Son of man, this is what the Sovereign Lord says: These will be the regulations for sacrificing burnt offerings and splashing blood against the altar when it is built:

The New Testament does not rewrite the Old Testament. It builds on it.

 

[CoreIssue]

Really? I can't decide if you really think that or if you're just trying to convince me of it. Sadly, I have to inform you, that you haven't.

Sad for you.

 

[Naomi25]

It is not nitpicking. The words have definitively different meanings and implications.

Oh, for the love of...

Post #20: Me:

I suggest it may have been the other way around. We see things here on earth echoing heavenly realitites and truths, not the other way around. Wouldn't you agree?

Post #21: You:

I think echoing is the wrong word. They are models of heavenly realities using earthly concepts, etc., that we can comprehend and absorb.

Post #26: Me:

I'm not sure how it can be wrong, per se, although I dare say it's not a complete description. If something here echos heavenly realities, does that not mean it parallels such things? It is the replicate, the imitation of the original. How is that different than it being a model, which is just a replicate of the original?

Post #32: You:

A model does not replicate.

Post #41: You:

Model: a three-dimensional representation of a person or thing or of a proposed structure, typically on a smaller scale than the original.
"a model of St Paul's Cathedral"
synonyms: replica, copy, representation, mock-up, dummy, imitation, double, duplicate, lookalike, reproduction...

Post #43: You:

An Echo is is the repeating of a sound.
So a model of something is not an Echo. It does not walk, talk, think or perform.
That is why the Bible calls such things shadows. A shadow does not truly look like what it is the shadow of. It does not have the substance of the real thing.

Post# 48: Me:

Really? Don't you think that this is just knit-picking at this point?

An echo is an extention of a real sound. A shadow is an extension of a real shape. Neither can do anything by themselves. And is so very obviously not the point in the conversation.

Looking back over the rather ridiculous conversation, what can I deduce? You started on by making a point of it being a "model", but when I pointed out that model was only a replica anyway, just as an echo was, you ditched that point of attack and tried another. You decided to discredit the idea by arguing that an 'echo' couldn't walk, talk or perform. But...neither could a model or shadow, so, I'm unsure how that helped your point, argument, or the need for "exact wording".

So...my answer? Yes, words have definite meanings, but sometimes, they have synonyms, which are marvelous things we can use to broaden our repertoire in descriptive language!

Can we be done with this now?

 

[CoreIssue]

Oh, for the love of...

Post #20: Me:


Post #21: You:


Post #26: Me:


Post #32: You:


Post #41: You:


Post #43: You:


Post# 48: Me:


Looking back over the rather ridiculous conversation, what can I deduce? You started on by making a point of it being a "model", but when I pointed out that model was only a replica anyway, just as an echo was, you ditched that point of attack and tried another. You decided to discredit the idea by arguing that an 'echo' couldn't walk, talk or perform. But...neither could a model or shadow, so, I'm unsure how that helped your point, argument, or the need for "exact wording".

So...my answer? Yes, words have definite meanings, but sometimes, they have synonyms, which are marvelous things we can use to broaden our repertoire in descriptive language!

Can we be done with this now?

Sorry, but this is proven to be a huge waste of time. We're not going to agree.

 

[Naomi25]

I guess you never read Ezekiel to make the claim there will not be a return to the Stone Temple. A superior Stone Temple.

Animal-Sacrifices

Notice here is future tense
Ezekiel 43:18-27
18 Then he said to me, “Son of man, this is what the Sovereign Lord says: These will be the regulations for sacrificing burnt offerings and splashing blood against the altar when it is built:

The New Testament does not rewrite the Old Testament. It builds on it.

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. -Matthew 5:17

For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. -Romans 10:4

For all the promises of God find their Yes in him. That is why it is through him that we utter our Amen to God for his glory. -2 Corinthians 1:20

Yes, the NT builds on the OT. In light of Christ's coming we view the promises as fulfilled, the law as done. And this includes the NEED for the temple. Consider this excellent and pertinent quote by Jonathan Menn:

"Throughout his vision Ezekiel describes animal sacrifices which are said to have an "atoning" purpose and effect (Ezek 43:13-27; 45:15-25). Such sacrifices could not possibly truly be atoning sacrifices, since that would reverse redemptive history and deny the efficacy and sufficiency of Christ's once-and-for-all sacrifice of himself, contrary to Heb 9:11-10:22. That also would return to the 'shadows' in place of the substance and reality (see Col 2:16-17; Heb 8:1-10:22).
"To take 'literally' (ie physically) Ezekiel's portrait of Jerusalem as the centre of the world's worship (Ezek 44:6-9), likewise completely reverses what Christ has done. Jesus eliminated the requirement that worship be conducted at some special place (John 4:21, 23) and eliminated the distinction between Jews and Gentiles among God's people.
'To say that the sacrifices are simply 'memorials' of Christ's sacrifice means that there is likewise no reason to take the temple itself 'literally' (ie as a physical structure). To view the sacrifices referred to by Ezekiel as 'memorials' also would dishonor Christ since the only memorial that Christ himself gave to 'memorialize'his redemptive work was the Lord's Supper, not a return to OT sacrifices (Luke 22:14-20; 1 Cor:11:23-26)."

There is ample reason to believe that the vision Ezekiel had of the temple was not ever meant to be a literal, physical structure. Indeed, just looking at it's dimensions, almost caricature in nature, especially it's gatehouse! It lacks some essential details required, should it have been full on blueprints for a temple, and then there are other factors, such as the nature of Ezekiels vision, and the nature of the river, for example, which lead us to believe that we are being shown a heavenly future.
Which ever way you look at it, you cannot escape the very real truth of the matter that confronts us when we get to the NT....Christ has indeed changed the playing field. Everything you claim about this 'future' Millennial temple, reverts back to a time that Christ specifically came to see fulfilled and progressed on from. And there is absolutely nothing in scripture that gives us the expectation, or leave, to believe we are going back there.

 

[Naomi25]

Sad for you.

Not really...I'm the one who feels like I've made a decent showing, bible verses and all, for what I believe. If you can honestly feel the same, well....good for you, I suppose. I'd have to disagree with your analysis, but...there you go.

 

[Naomi25]

Sorry, but this is proven to be a huge waste of time. We're not going to agree.

You don't HAVE to agree. The dictonary and thesaurus back me up just fine.