The Bridal Church

[Netchaplain]

Perhaps no one subject is more replete with blessedness than the glory of the Bride, the Lamb’s wife. Whether we look at the grace that first brought us into it, or whether we look at the unfolding of this love in the glory of the marriage; however we look at it, it is simply beyond description.​

The source of Jewish glory was in time. God made Himself known from time to time to the prophets. When He came to Moses, He spoke thus: “I am the God of thy fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” As this God, He came to send them out of Egypt. He divided the nations among them, and gave them Canaan for their possession. Still, His love to them was altogether in time. They could not go back further than Abraham. The covenant with him was the highest bond of Jewish blessing, and was still in connection with the earth—as it always will be.

Ephesians One shows us that the foundation of our joy and blessing is much deeper (God has more for all in His Son—NC). It takes me up into the bosom of the Father; it shows me that the Church is infinitely beyond anything connected with time. When I trace the line of blessing belonging to the Bride, the Church, I find that it has its rise, not in Abraham, but in God Himself. In Hebrews Two we read, “He that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one” (Heb 2:11). All these riches of grace came out from the Father, When the time of the marriage is come, and for which we are waiting, how wonderful will be our potion! The most glorious thing of all will be the person of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The glory of the Bride is, that she has the person of the Lord Jesus. The joy of the Church, as the Bride, is that she will be like Him, and see Him as He is (1Jo 3:2). There will be no loveliness in the Lord Jesus that she will not have too. She will be no longer in disguise. All the moral glory, and moral beauty of her Beloved, will be hers.

Where do we now read the Father, but in the face of His Beloved? The Father has now given us the light of the knowledge of His glory “in the face of Jesus Christ” (2Co 4:6). But it is when we see Him, that we shall be fully like Him (sinless—NC); not as He was once, His visage marred more than any man’s, and His form more than the sons of men. There will be nothing then to hinder the flowing forth of all the fullness of the Father’s love.

If we can realize the glory of the Bride in connection with our present humiliation, we shall find that it will separate us from everything here. Our glory comes down out of the Father, and has altogether to do with the Person of the Lord Jesus, and this cut us off from everything earthly; this will just lift us up altogether, and give us power over all circumstances.

It is only as we realize the power of the glory, that we shall be able to remedy the things that are wrong; and it is by realizing the power of our union with the Lord Jesus in the glory that we shall separate from the world, and this will unite us to one another (i.e. the saints—NC). If we look at our beloved brothers and sisters as forming part of the glory of the Lord Jesus, we will not suffer anything to come in to separate us from each other.



—John Nelson Darby

MJS daily devotional for Dec 13


“What if there were conscientious objectors in the Lord’s army? Actually, our Lord does not have any noncombatant soldiers whatsoever in His service, since the battle line extends from the front all the way to the rear; to say nothing of the fact that we are all camped in enemy territory.” -MJS

“Luther, speaking to the young preachers of his day, said: ‘I did not learn to preach Christ all at once. The devil has been my best professor of exegetical and experiential theology. Before that great schoolmaster took me in hand, I was an unweaned child, not a grown man. It was my combats with sin and with Satan that made me a true minister of the New Testament. It is always a great grace to me, and to my people, for me to be able to say to them: “I know this text is true! I know it for certain to be true!” Without incessant combat, and pain, and sweat, and blood, no ignorant stripling of a student ever yet became an effective preacher.’“

“Every bit of truth we receive, if we receive it in faith, will take us into conflict and will be established through conflict. It will be worthless until there has been this process. Take any position the Lord calls you to take, and, if you are taking it with Him, you are going through things in it, and there will be an element added by reason of the pressure. You have taken a position, yes; but you have not really received as yet, the true value of it has not yet been established. You have not come into the real significance of the truth until there has been some sore conflict in relation to it.” -T. A-S.

None But The Hungry Heart

 

[Trekson]

Perhaps no one subject is more replete with blessedness than the glory of the Bride, the Lamb’s wife. Whether we look at the grace that first brought us into it, or whether we look at the unfolding of this love in the glory of the marriage; however we look at it, it is simply beyond description.​

The source of Jewish glory was in time. God made Himself known from time to time to the prophets. When He came to Moses, He spoke thus: “I am the God of thy fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” As this God, He came to send them out of Egypt. He divided the nations among them, and gave them Canaan for their possession. Still, His love to them was altogether in time. They could not go back further than Abraham. The covenant with him was the highest bond of Jewish blessing, and was still in connection with the earth—as it always will be.

Ephesians One shows us that the foundation of our joy and blessing is much deeper (God has more for all in His Son—NC). It takes me up into the bosom of the Father; it shows me that the Church is infinitely beyond anything connected with time. When I trace the line of blessing belonging to the Bride, the Church, I find that it has its rise, not in Abraham, but in God Himself. In Hebrews Two we read, “He that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one” (Heb 2:11). All these riches of grace came out from the Father, When the time of the marriage is come, and for which we are waiting, how wonderful will be our potion! The most glorious thing of all will be the person of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The glory of the Bride is, that she has the person of the Lord Jesus. The joy of the Church, as the Bride, is that she will be like Him, and see Him as He is (1Jo 3:2). There will be no loveliness in the Lord Jesus that she will not have too. She will be no longer in disguise. All the moral glory, and moral beauty of her Beloved, will be hers.

Where do we now read the Father, but in the face of His Beloved? The Father has now given us the light of the knowledge of His glory “in the face of Jesus Christ” (2Co 4:6). But it is when we see Him, that we shall be fully like Him (sinless—NC); not as He was once, His visage marred more than any man’s, and His form more than the sons of men. There will be nothing then to hinder the flowing forth of all the fullness of the Father’s love.

If we can realize the glory of the Bride in connection with our present humiliation, we shall find that it will separate us from everything here. Our glory comes down out of the Father, and has altogether to do with the Person of the Lord Jesus, and this cut us off from everything earthly; this will just lift us up altogether, and give us power over all circumstances.

It is only as we realize the power of the glory, that we shall be able to remedy the things that are wrong; and it is by realizing the power of our union with the Lord Jesus in the glory that we shall separate from the world, and this will unite us to one another (i.e. the saints—NC). If we look at our beloved brothers and sisters as forming part of the glory of the Lord Jesus, we will not suffer anything to come in to separate us from each other.



—John Nelson Darby

MJS daily devotional for Dec 13


“What if there were conscientious objectors in the Lord’s army? Actually, our Lord does not have any noncombatant soldiers whatsoever in His service, since the battle line extends from the front all the way to the rear; to say nothing of the fact that we are all camped in enemy territory.” -MJS

“Luther, speaking to the young preachers of his day, said: ‘I did not learn to preach Christ all at once. The devil has been my best professor of exegetical and experiential theology. Before that great schoolmaster took me in hand, I was an unweaned child, not a grown man. It was my combats with sin and with Satan that made me a true minister of the New Testament. It is always a great grace to me, and to my people, for me to be able to say to them: “I know this text is true! I know it for certain to be true!” Without incessant combat, and pain, and sweat, and blood, no ignorant stripling of a student ever yet became an effective preacher.’“

“Every bit of truth we receive, if we receive it in faith, will take us into conflict and will be established through conflict. It will be worthless until there has been this process. Take any position the Lord calls you to take, and, if you are taking it with Him, you are going through things in it, and there will be an element added by reason of the pressure. You have taken a position, yes; but you have not really received as yet, the true value of it has not yet been established. You have not come into the real significance of the truth until there has been some sore conflict in relation to it.” -T. A-S.

None But The Hungry Heart

There's not a single scripture that calls the church the bride. No other doctrine has so little scriptural backing that's based on only a couple of metaphors. The church is not in any of the bridegroom parables.

 

[Aunty Jane]

There's not a single scripture that calls the church the bride. No other doctrine has so little scriptural backing that's based on only a couple of metaphors. The church is not in any of the bridegroom parables.

Don't we need to ask..."who or what" is "the church" in the first place?

Since Jesus and his apostles warned of a great "apostasy" in Christianity, and these "wolves in sheep's covering" were already snapping at the heels of the apostles towards the end of the first century, what makes us think that "the church" is not what resulted from that apostasy? "The church" never was what these men created....and their doctrines were never what Christ taught.

Paul warned that the return of the Lord Jesus would not be without trouble fomented by the devil, the author of the counterfeit "Christianity" that he created....
"Let no one lead you astray in any way, because it will not come [Christ's return] unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness gets revealed, the son of destruction."

Has this "man of lawlessness" been revealed? He has but the majority are so indoctrinated that they would never notice.
True Christians are identified by their "fruits" and by the fact that they "have love among themselves". (John 13:34-35) This hardly describes the bickering sects of Christendom.

Paul also wrote...
"However, the inspired word clearly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired statements and teachings of demons, 2 by means of the hypocrisy of men who speak lies, whose conscience is seared as with a branding iron. 3 They forbid marriage and command people to abstain from foods that God created to be partaken of with thanksgiving by those who have faith and accurately know the truth." (1 Tim 4:1-3)

There's a clue here as to who may have led the masses into a full blown apostasy......who was it that forbade marriage to their priests (and still do) and taught that certain foods that could not be eaten on certain days? Who speak lies about the identity of God and his son....and who have always curried "friendship with the world"? (James 4:4)

This "church" is a mother of many 'daughters' and these sadly took quite a bit of their mother's dirty laundry with them.

What masquerades as "Christianity" today, I don't believe is even close to the one started by Jesus and his apostles.
Members of Christ's bride will not be found in any of these counterfeits. The deceiver has worked hard to gain control of "the whole world". (1 John 5:19)

 

[Trekson]

Don't we need to ask..."who or what" is "the church" in the first place?

Since Jesus and his apostles warned of a great "apostasy" in Christianity, and these "wolves in sheep's covering" were already snapping at the heels of the apostles towards the end of the first century, what makes us think that "the church" is not what resulted from that apostasy? "The church" never was what these men created....and their doctrines were never what Christ taught.

Paul warned that the return of the Lord Jesus would not be without trouble fomented by the devil, the author of the counterfeit "Christianity" that he created....
"Let no one lead you astray in any way, because it will not come [Christ's return] unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness gets revealed, the son of destruction."

Has this "man of lawlessness" been revealed? He has but the majority are so indoctrinated that they would never notice.
True Christians are identified by their "fruits" and by the fact that they "have love among themselves". (John 13:34-35) This hardly describes the bickering sects of Christendom.

Paul also wrote...
"However, the inspired word clearly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired statements and teachings of demons, 2 by means of the hypocrisy of men who speak lies, whose conscience is seared as with a branding iron. 3 They forbid marriage and command people to abstain from foods that God created to be partaken of with thanksgiving by those who have faith and accurately know the truth." (1 Tim 4:1-3)

There's a clue here as to who may have led the masses into a full blown apostasy......who was it that forbade marriage to their priests (and still do) and taught that certain foods that could not be eaten on certain days? Who speak lies about the identity of God and his son....and who have always curried "friendship with the world"? (James 4:4)

This "church" is a mother of many 'daughters' and these sadly took quite a bit of their mother's dirty laundry with them.

What masquerades as "Christianity" today, I don't believe is even close to the one started by Jesus and his apostles.
Members of Christ's bride will not be found in any of these counterfeits. The deceiver has worked hard to gain control of "the whole world". (1 John 5:19)

For the word "apostate" to mean anything, one has to have a sincere belief and faith to begin with and later rejects those beliefs based on fear, anger, etc. The prophecy implies that this will be a significant event in the church that will happen all at once in a short period of time, when the a/c is upon the earth and the church knows it, not something spread out over thousands of years.

 

[Aunty Jane]

For the word "apostate" to mean anything, one has to have a sincere belief and faith to begin with and later rejects those beliefs based on fear, anger, etc.

Apostasy means “a falling away” or a “defection from what is considered correct” or “orthodox”. But orthodoxy has a habit of morphing from one extreme to another. Nowhere is that more obvious than in religion and medicine. It doesn’t happen immediately because it takes time for the devil to do his thing....that is to make what is black, white and vice versa. And he has had thousands of years to perfect his craft.....deception is truth to the one deceived.

The prophecy implies that this will be a significant event in the church that will happen all at once in a short period of time, when the a/c is upon the earth and the church knows it, not something spread out over thousands of years.

The foretold apostasy was a significant event, but it was introduced gradually over time because the devil knows the value of complacency and he counts on fallen human nature in order to gradually introduce his schemes. The “wolves” were already in evidence back in apostolic times.

The apostles, whist they were alive, acted as a restraint against this apostasy until the word of God was complete with John’s Revelation and final writings at the end of the first century. Then, with all the apostles gone, Jesus said, “while men were sleeping” the devil sowed his seeds of counterfeit weeds in the same field that Jesus had sown the wheat.
There are two kinds of “sleeping” that could be involved here.....”sleeping in death” for the apostles, or “sleeping” spiritually for those who allowed the “traditions of men” to overtake true worship, just as it happened in Judaism. (Matthew 15:7-9) Either or both could explain it.

With the restraint now removed, the apostasy gained full control so that by the time of Constantine in the 4th century, Christianity was ripe for the takeover that he performed. This pagan Roman Emperor saw an opportunity to consolidate his divided empire by bringing all his subjects under one religious umbrella....he instituted Roman Catholicism as the mandated state religion.....it was nothing more than renamed Roman paganism with a thin veneer of Christianity. He catered to all by fusing the two. The pagans got to keep their favourite festivals and beliefs under another name, and the Christians were so complacent that they did not protest.
This is what formed the basis for what Christendom accepts as “Christian” truth....but it never was from the outset. Why do you think Jesus says to those “Christians” who offer him their excuses, “I NEVER knew you”.
NEVER means “not ever”. (Matthew 7:21-23)

All of Christendom takes its foundational beliefs from Roman Catholicism, not what Jesus taught in the scriptures. But it’s the only “Christianity” that people know and the masses were kept in ignorance for centuries because it was forbidden to read or possess a Bible unless you were part of the indoctrinated clergy. Any caught doing so were burned at the stake.

The Reformation did not accomplish anything but a fall from the power of the Roman church. The only good thing it accomplished was to put God’s word back into the hands of the people. Yet, human nature being what it is, again with the dismissal of many of the more extreme doctrines of Catholicism, the Protestants retained much of what was taught by her shameless mother. It is as much in error today as it ever was, but centuries old indoctrination is hard to dismiss.

It requires cleaning the slate and starting over, allowing the scriptures themselves to tell the true story.
Unfortunately, pre-conceived notions remain to cloud the truth. This is why it takes God’s spirit to draw people to his truth.....we cannot come to the Son without an invitation from his Father. (John 6:44, 65)

 

[Trekson]

Apostasy means “a falling away” or a “defection from what is considered correct” or “orthodox”. But orthodoxy has a habit of morphing from one extreme to another. Nowhere is that more obvious than in religion and medicine. It doesn’t happen immediately because it takes time for the devil to do his thing....that is to make what is black, white and vice versa. And he has had thousands of years to perfect his craft.....deception is truth to the one deceived.


The foretold apostasy was a significant event, but it was introduced gradually over time because the devil knows the value of complacency and he counts on fallen human nature in order to gradually introduce his schemes. The “wolves” were already in evidence back in apostolic times.

The apostles, whist they were alive, acted as a restraint against this apostasy until the word of God was complete with John’s Revelation and final writings at the end of the first century. Then, with all the apostles gone, Jesus said, “while men were sleeping” the devil sowed his seeds of counterfeit weeds in the same field that Jesus had sown the wheat.
There are two kinds of “sleeping” that could be involved here.....”sleeping in death” for the apostles, or “sleeping” spiritually for those who allowed the “traditions of men” to overtake true worship, just as it happened in Judaism. (Matthew 15:7-9) Either or both could explain it.

With the restraint now removed, the apostasy gained full control so that by the time of Constantine in the 4th century, Christianity was ripe for the takeover that he performed. This pagan Roman Emperor saw an opportunity to consolidate his divided empire by bringing all his subjects under one religious umbrella....he instituted Roman Catholicism as the mandated state religion.....it was nothing more than renamed Roman paganism with a thin veneer of Christianity. He catered to all by fusing the two. The pagans got to keep their favourite festivals and beliefs under another name, and the Christians were so complacent that they did not protest.
This is what formed the basis for what Christendom accepts as “Christian” truth....but it never was from the outset. Why do you think Jesus says to those “Christians” who offer him their excuses, “I NEVER knew you”.
NEVER means “not ever”. (Matthew 7:21-23)

All of Christendom takes its foundational beliefs from Roman Catholicism, not what Jesus taught in the scriptures. But it’s the only “Christianity” that people know and the masses were kept in ignorance for centuries because it was forbidden to read or possess a Bible unless you were part of the indoctrinated clergy. Any caught doing so were burned at the stake.

The Reformation did not accomplish anything but a fall from the power of the Roman church. The only good thing it accomplished was to put God’s word back into the hands of the people. Yet, human nature being what it is, again with the dismissal of many of the more extreme doctrines of Catholicism, the Protestants retained much of what was taught by her shameless mother. It is as much in error today as it ever was, but centuries old indoctrination is hard to dismiss.

It requires cleaning the slate and starting over, allowing the scriptures themselves to tell the true story.
Unfortunately, pre-conceived notions remain to cloud the truth. This is why it takes God’s spirit to draw people to his truth.....we cannot come to the Son without an invitation from his Father. (John 6:44, 65)

No disrespect intended but I reject all types of historicism. Imo, the apostasy will occur while the church is enduring the GT which will be the the greatest time of persecution and martyrdom of the church on a global scale, dwarfing the holocaust. Rev. 12:11c "...and they loved not their lives unto the death." The apostasy will mainly consist of the christians who did love their lives and aren't willing to die for Christ.

 

[Aunty Jane]

No disrespect intended but I reject all types of historicism.

I have to ask then why the Bible is full of it...? Why record history if it is of no benefit to the present and future?

Imo, the apostasy will occur while the church is enduring the GT which will be the the greatest time of persecution and martyrdom of the church on a global scale, dwarfing the holocaust. Rev. 12:11c "...and they loved not their lives unto the death." The apostasy will mainly consist of the christians who did love their lives and aren't willing to die for Christ.

The apostasy is one of the main reasons for the gt tribulation to take place.....it is the reason why Christ needs to separate "the wheat from the weeds"....and "the sheep from the goats".

Those who "endure to the end will be saved" because of the history recorded in the scriptures.....we see in the example of Job what endurance means.....we see in the example of Joseph when his jealous brothers sold him into slavery, that God has things well planned in advance and sent Joseph ahead of his family to preserve the line of Abraham, through whom the Messiah was to come. The injustices and indignities he suffered are also a model for us...not to become bitter over injustices done to us. Jesus and his apostles too set a fine example of how to conduct ourselves when under unjustified persecution....and how to be a bold preacher in the face of stiff opposition.

The greatest tribulation in the history of the world is bearing down on us and the worldly scene is rapidly changing.....who knows when it will break out or what will be the catalyst....? God knows and he tells us that it will come out of the blue.....we have to be ready. Jesus shows us how to be prepared.

Your rejection of historicism IMO, appears to be without foundation....

 

[Trekson]

I have to ask then why the Bible is full of it...? Why record history if it is of no benefit to the present and future?


The apostasy is one of the main reasons for the gt tribulation to take place.....it is the reason why Christ needs to separate "the wheat from the weeds"....and "the sheep from the goats".

Those who "endure to the end will be saved" because of the history recorded in the scriptures.....we see in the example of Job what endurance means.....we see in the example of Joseph when his jealous brothers sold him into slavery, that God has things well planned in advance and sent Joseph ahead of his family to preserve the line of Abraham, through whom the Messiah was to come. The injustices and indignities he suffered are also a model for us...not to become bitter over injustices done to us. Jesus and his apostles too set a fine example of how to conduct ourselves when under unjustified persecution....and how to be a bold preacher in the face of stiff opposition.

The greatest tribulation in the history of the world is bearing down on us and the worldly scene is rapidly changing.....who knows when it will break out or what will be the catalyst....? God knows and he tells us that it will come out of the blue.....we have to be ready. Jesus shows us how to be prepared.

Your rejection of historicism IMO, appears to be without foundation....

Historicism rejects the idea of future fulfillments but before events "became" history they were in the future. The bible has been futurist from the very beginning w/ the first prophecy given (Gen. 3:15) taking 4000 yrs. to be fulfilled. 99% of the NT prophecies are still awaiting fulfillment.

 

[Illuminator]

I have to ask then why the Bible is full of it...? Why record history if it is of no benefit to the present and future?


The apostasy is one of the main reasons for the gt tribulation to take place.....it is the reason why Christ needs to separate "the wheat from the weeds"....and "the sheep from the goats".

Those who "endure to the end will be saved" because of the history recorded in the scriptures.....we see in the example of Job what endurance means.....we see in the example of Joseph when his jealous brothers sold him into slavery, that God has things well planned in advance and sent Joseph ahead of his family to preserve the line of Abraham, through whom the Messiah was to come. The injustices and indignities he suffered are also a model for us...not to become bitter over injustices done to us. Jesus and his apostles too set a fine example of how to conduct ourselves when under unjustified persecution....and how to be a bold preacher in the face of stiff opposition.

The greatest tribulation in the history of the world is bearing down on us and the worldly scene is rapidly changing.....who knows when it will break out or what will be the catalyst....? God knows and he tells us that it will come out of the blue.....we have to be ready. Jesus shows us how to be prepared.

Your rejection of historicism IMO, appears to be without foundation....

You assert about 8 LIES about Catholicism, too many to refute in a single post. I think I'll keep you on ignore until I see signs that you are willing to have a reasonable discussion minus the false histories invented by radical anti-Catholic bigots.

Anti-Catholic Myths and Lies: #1 Emperor Constantine Founded the Catholic Church | Living Bread Radio Network

 

[Illuminator]

Historicism rejects the idea of future fulfillments but before events "became" history they were in the future. The bible has been futurist from the very beginning w/ the first prophecy given (Gen. 3:15) taking 4000 yrs. to be fulfilled. 99% of the NT prophecies are still awaiting fulfillment.

Genesis 3:15 (NKJV)​

15 And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her Seed;
He shall bruise your head, And you shall bruise His heel.”
Read full chapter
Genesis 3:15 in all English translations

Revelation 12:17 (NKJV)​

17 And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus [a]Christ.
Read full chapter
Revelation 12:17 in all English translations

These are the only 2 verses in the Bible where a serpent/dragon are found in the same verse.
"Eve" means "mother of all the living" - Genesis 3:20
" the woman" in Rev. 12:17 is mother of all the living in Christ, her offspring. That's true ecumenism, IMO.

I'm not looking for an argument, I just want you to think for yourself.

 

[Illuminator]

Historicism rejects the idea of future fulfillments but before events "became" history they were in the future. The bible has been futurist from the very beginning w/ the first prophecy given (Gen. 3:15) taking 4000 yrs. to be fulfilled. 99% of the NT prophecies are still awaiting fulfillment.

More fundamentally, the relevant passage in the Olivet Discourse is not talking about something in our future, but about something in our past—about the period leading up to the destruction of the Temple in A.D. 70. Only Matthew’s account sets out to discuss the Second Coming in particular. Mark and Luke may contain material on the Second Coming, but only toward the ends of their accounts. They speak of Jesus coming in clouds (Mark 13:26-37, Luke 21:27), but it is not certain that this is a reference to the Second Coming.

The Bible often speaks of God riding on or coming in clouds, especially in judgment (Ex. 19:9, Ps. 68:4, Isa. 19:1, 30:30, Lam. 2:1, Ezek. 30:3, Nahum 1:3). Jesus specifically stated that “this generation will not pass away before all these things take place” (Mark 13:30; cf. Luke 21:32). It is therefore entirely reasonable to take the prophecy not as a reference to the future Second Coming, but as symbolic and apocalyptic language, modeled on Old Testament parallels, pointing to Christ’s judgment on Jerusalem—which did take place within that generation, when the city was sacked by the Romans.

Even if that is not the case, the material at the beginning of the Olivet Discourse certainly does not apply to the end of time, but to the forty years between Christ’s Ascension and the end of the Jewish War. During that time there were false messiahs and false prophets. The Jewish historian Josephus says that during the siege of Jerusalem there were many false prophets in the city (Wars of the Jews 6:5:2). There were wars and rumors of war. There were famines and plagues.

It was also a time of great persecution for Christians, some of whom fell away and returned to Judaism (a problem the book of Hebrews was written to deal with). Christians were taken before councils (Acts 4-6). Some, such as Paul, stood before governors (Acts 23-24) and kings (Acts 25-26) in testimony to Christ (Acts 23:11), with irrefutable answers given by the Holy Spirit (Acts 4:8-16, 26:19-31). They were thrown into prison (Acts 12:5). Some were executed (Acts 12:2); others were preserved (Acts 12:6-17). In fact, if Luke wrote his gospel shortly before Acts, he would already have witnessed the fulfillment of many of these prophecies in his own day.

One might raise an objection to this interpretation by asking, “What about the signs from heaven that Luke mentions? Did these happen?” Yes. The phrase “signs from heaven” can be taken in two senses.
First, it can mean “signs from God” (“heaven” was often used as a substitute for “God”; thus even in English we have sayings such as “for heaven’s sake”—that is, “for God’s sake”). God certainly performed many miraculous signs during this period (Acts 2:43, 5:12, 6:8, 8:6, 8:13, 14:2, 15:12).
Second, “signs from heaven” could mean signs in the heavens. These also seem to have happened at the time. Josephus records a number of them: “Thus there was a star resembling a sword [or a cross; cf. Matt. 24:30], which stood over the city, and a comet that continued for a whole year. . . . chariots and troops of soldiers in their armor were seen running about among the clouds” (ibid., 6:5:3).

“Granting that there were ‘signs from heaven’ that occurred during the period,” one might ask, “what about the preaching of the gospel to ‘all nations’? That hasn’t happened even in our own time!”
Here is where the global/local problem mentioned earlier comes in.

• To Mediterranean peoples back then, “the world” meant the known world and “the nations” meant those clustered around the Mediterranean.
• In Luke 2:1, the evangelist states that a decree had gone forth from Augustus Caesar that “all the world” should be enrolled.
• In Colossians 1:6, we find Paul saying that the gospel is bearing fruit and growing “in the whole world.”
• In Romans 1:5 he says that God sent him to bring about the obedience of faith “among all the nations.”
• He says in Romans 16:26 that God’s plan is being made known “to all nations” by the prophetic writings.
• In Colossians 1:23 he states that “the gospel . . . has been preached to every creature under heaven.”

All of this applies only to the known world of Paul’s day.

• Augustus Caesar census did not include the Aztecs.
• The gospel was not preached in the Americas in the first century (Mormon claims to the contrary notwithstanding).
• Paul was not an apostle to the Chinese.
• There were no copies of the prophetic writings among the Australian aborigines.
• And Paul did not mean that the gospel had been preached to every individual human, even within the Roman Empire.

The same global/local distinction applies to what Jesus said about earthquakes. He did not say that there will be a rise in earthquake activity all over the planet. He said that during the period he spoke about there would be earthquakes. Needless to say, there were earthquakes around the fall of Jerusalem. In fact, Josephus records that there was an earthquake in the Temple itself during the feast of Pentecost.

In any event, when Jesus’ statements are read from the perspective of those he was addressing in Israel, they are not understood to be global predictions. He was speaking to them about things they would hear about in the period before the destruction of the Temple. We are not the earthquake generation Jesus spoke of. That was the same generation he was addressing, the one he promised would not pass away until his words were fulfilled.

SOURCE

 

[Aunty Jane]

You assert about 8 LIES about Catholicism, too many to refute in a single post. I think I'll keep you on ignore until I see signs that you are willing to have a reasonable discussion minus the false histories invented by radical anti-Catholic bigots.

From your link.....
"Those who posit that Constantine founded the Catholic Church either with the Edict of Milan or by calling together the First Council of Nicaea are unable prove their claim. There is no documentation from that time, either explicit or implicit by historian or theologian that even hints that such an event transpired or was the intention of Constantine or the bishops of the Catholic Church to transpire.
This story, most famously told by Jehovah Witnesses and Fundamentalist Protestants, came out of their necessity to support their lie that there was an apostasy in the early Church. It is their way to explain how their reform and late arrival is justifiable. The myth is that because the Church of the Apostles fell in to apostasy, a remnant of the true and orthodox believers of Jesus remained hidden from and often persecuted by the Catholic Church until THEY brought the reform and true faith back. Prior the rise of Protestantism, no one ever dared to tell this lie. Only in the space of the unintelligent, uncurious, and hostile can such a myth and lie bear fruit."

No one dared to tell the church anything it did not want to hear......under threat of death.
And all of the reasons for rejecting the apostate church of Rome, are solidly biblical.

Idolatry for one....

Nowhere is Mary venerated in scripture as "the Mother of God".

Constantine is among the few men whose name history was embellished with the term “Great.” Like Herod....not "great" to God though.
Christendom has added their descriptions of this man as....“saint,” “thirteenth apostle,” “holy equal of the apostles,” and ‘chosen by God’s Providence to accomplish the greatest turnabout in the whole world.’
Conversely, at the other end of the spectrum, some describe Constantine as “bloodstained, stigmatized by countless enormities and full of deceit, . . . a hideous tyrant, guilty of horrid crimes.” So I guess it depends on who you listen to....and how biased they are.

It is widely held that Constantine was a faithful disciple of Jesus Christ, with a strong desire to advance the Christian cause. The Eastern Orthodox Church and the Coptic Church have declared both Constantine and his mother, Helena, “saints.” Their festival is celebrated on June 3 or according to the church calendar, on May 21. Constantine wasn't even a baptized Christian let alone a "saint".

From my own research, as the son of Emperor Galerius, Constantine returned to his dying father’s side in Britain in the year 306 C.E. and soon after his father’s death, Constantine was raised to the status of an Emperor by the Army. At the time Constantine became sole imperator, it was a time of unremitting civil war. Victory in two sets of campaigns guaranteed Constantine a place in Roman history and made him the sole ruler of the Roman Empire.

It is also held that in a dream, Constantine was told to paint the first two letters of Christ’s name in Greek on the shields of his troops....and so the "Christian" symbol of the cross seen on the robes of Roman Catholic heirarchy, was born.

Can you honestly see Jesus and his apostles dressed like this...?


The early Christians refused to have any images at all because of the OT prohibition on the making of religious images.

However, this story suffers from many anachronisms. The book A History of Christianity states: “There is a conflict of evidence about the exact time, place and details of this vision.” Welcoming Constantine in Rome, a pagan Senate declared him chief Augustus and Pontifex Maximus, that is, high priest of the pagan religion of the empire. So much for his claim to be Christian. If I am not mistaken, the popes have held that title of "Pontiff" ever since....its not a Christian title.

In 325 C.E., as yet unbaptized, he presided over the first great ecumenical council of the “Christian” church, which condemned Arianism and drew up a statement of essential beliefs called the Nicene Creed. He fell terminally ill in the year 337 C.E. and at that late hour of his life, he was baptized, and then he died. After his death the Senate placed him among the Roman gods. This was no Christian....

The book Istoria tou Ellinikou Ethnous (History of the Greek Nation) says: “Even when those who occupied the imperial throne did not have such profoundly religious dispositions, surrendering to the mood of the era, they found it necessary to give religion precedence within the framework of their political schemes, to lend at least a religious flavor to their actions.”

I have seen down through history that the Roman church has always curried favor with the political elements of this world in direct contravention to James 4:4 and Jesus' statements about being "no part of the world" (John 17:16; 18:36).....the church has always supported the world and its national conflicts.....wars could not have been fought without them. But what was to identify Christ's true disciples?
"You heard that it was said: ‘You must love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 However, I say to you: Continue to love your enemies and to pray for those who persecute you,". (Matthew 5:43-44) Did Constantine demonstrate that, or was he moved by his 'vision' to go and fight against his enemies, ignoring Christ's mandate?

The apostle Paul wrote....
"Return evil for evil to no one. Take into consideration what is fine from the viewpoint of all men. 18 If possible, as far as it depends on you, be peaceable with all men. 19 Do not avenge yourselves, beloved, but yield place to the wrath; for it is written: “‘Vengeance is mine; I will repay,’ says Jehovah.” 20 But “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by doing this you will heap fiery coals on his head.” 21 Do not let yourself be conquered by the evil, but keep conquering the evil with the good." ( Romans 12:17-21)

I don't see any "Christian" traits demonstrated by Constantine or the church of the fourth century onward. There was bloodshed, but it was not sanctioned by God. (Isaiah 1:15)

Again, none of which can be proved or supported by the documented facts that the Churches we read about in the Bible started calling themselves Catholics by the early Second Century, and the unique teachings of that Church founded by the Apostles are only present in the Catholic Church today that is in union with See of Rome where the successor of Peter presides.

The Bible does not speak of apostolic succession....nor does it say that Peter was the head of the church. There was no head but Jesus Christ.
He is the rock upon which the true church was built.

 

[Trekson]

More fundamentally, the relevant passage in the Olivet Discourse is not talking about something in our future, but about something in our past—about the period leading up to the destruction of the Temple in A.D. 70. Only Matthew’s account sets out to discuss the Second Coming in particular. Mark and Luke may contain material on the Second Coming, but only toward the ends of their accounts. They speak of Jesus coming in clouds (Mark 13:26-37, Luke 21:27), but it is not certain that this is a reference to the Second Coming.

The Bible often speaks of God riding on or coming in clouds, especially in judgment (Ex. 19:9, Ps. 68:4, Isa. 19:1, 30:30, Lam. 2:1, Ezek. 30:3, Nahum 1:3). Jesus specifically stated that “this generation will not pass away before all these things take place” (Mark 13:30; cf. Luke 21:32). It is therefore entirely reasonable to take the prophecy not as a reference to the future Second Coming, but as symbolic and apocalyptic language, modeled on Old Testament parallels, pointing to Christ’s judgment on Jerusalem—which did take place within that generation, when the city was sacked by the Romans.

Even if that is not the case, the material at the beginning of the Olivet Discourse certainly does not apply to the end of time, but to the forty years between Christ’s Ascension and the end of the Jewish War. During that time there were false messiahs and false prophets. The Jewish historian Josephus says that during the siege of Jerusalem there were many false prophets in the city (Wars of the Jews 6:5:2). There were wars and rumors of war. There were famines and plagues.

It was also a time of great persecution for Christians, some of whom fell away and returned to Judaism (a problem the book of Hebrews was written to deal with). Christians were taken before councils (Acts 4-6). Some, such as Paul, stood before governors (Acts 23-24) and kings (Acts 25-26) in testimony to Christ (Acts 23:11), with irrefutable answers given by the Holy Spirit (Acts 4:8-16, 26:19-31). They were thrown into prison (Acts 12:5). Some were executed (Acts 12:2); others were preserved (Acts 12:6-17). In fact, if Luke wrote his gospel shortly before Acts, he would already have witnessed the fulfillment of many of these prophecies in his own day.

One might raise an objection to this interpretation by asking, “What about the signs from heaven that Luke mentions? Did these happen?” Yes. The phrase “signs from heaven” can be taken in two senses.
First, it can mean “signs from God” (“heaven” was often used as a substitute for “God”; thus even in English we have sayings such as “for heaven’s sake”—that is, “for God’s sake”). God certainly performed many miraculous signs during this period (Acts 2:43, 5:12, 6:8, 8:6, 8:13, 14:2, 15:12).
Second, “signs from heaven” could mean signs in the heavens. These also seem to have happened at the time. Josephus records a number of them: “Thus there was a star resembling a sword [or a cross; cf. Matt. 24:30], which stood over the city, and a comet that continued for a whole year. . . . chariots and troops of soldiers in their armor were seen running about among the clouds” (ibid., 6:5:3).

“Granting that there were ‘signs from heaven’ that occurred during the period,” one might ask, “what about the preaching of the gospel to ‘all nations’? That hasn’t happened even in our own time!”
Here is where the global/local problem mentioned earlier comes in.

• To Mediterranean peoples back then, “the world” meant the known world and “the nations” meant those clustered around the Mediterranean.
• In Luke 2:1, the evangelist states that a decree had gone forth from Augustus Caesar that “all the world” should be enrolled.
• In Colossians 1:6, we find Paul saying that the gospel is bearing fruit and growing “in the whole world.”
• In Romans 1:5 he says that God sent him to bring about the obedience of faith “among all the nations.”
• He says in Romans 16:26 that God’s plan is being made known “to all nations” by the prophetic writings.
• In Colossians 1:23 he states that “the gospel . . . has been preached to every creature under heaven.”

All of this applies only to the known world of Paul’s day.

• Augustus Caesar census did not include the Aztecs.
• The gospel was not preached in the Americas in the first century (Mormon claims to the contrary notwithstanding).
• Paul was not an apostle to the Chinese.
• There were no copies of the prophetic writings among the Australian aborigines.
• And Paul did not mean that the gospel had been preached to every individual human, even within the Roman Empire.

The same global/local distinction applies to what Jesus said about earthquakes. He did not say that there will be a rise in earthquake activity all over the planet. He said that during the period he spoke about there would be earthquakes. Needless to say, there were earthquakes around the fall of Jerusalem. In fact, Josephus records that there was an earthquake in the Temple itself during the feast of Pentecost.

In any event, when Jesus’ statements are read from the perspective of those he was addressing in Israel, they are not understood to be global predictions. He was speaking to them about things they would hear about in the period before the destruction of the Temple. We are not the earthquake generation Jesus spoke of. That was the same generation he was addressing, the one he promised would not pass away until his words were fulfilled.

SOURCE

Typical historicist response that needs to ignore Matt. 24 and that fails to consider that Christ is speaking mostly about the latter questions which is "what are the signs of thy coming and of the end of the world". As with the Matt. 24 account, 'this generation" is dependent on the vs. before that it's the generation "that sees "all" these things" and most of them were not seen. Y'all seem to forget that these accounts were written decades after their actual occurrance and were inspired by the HS and he knows how big the world is. The only passage in the three gospels that deals w/ 70ad is Lk. 21:20-24.

 

[Illuminator]

Typical historicist response that needs to ignore Matt. 24 and that fails to consider that Christ is speaking mostly about the latter questions which is "what are the signs of thy coming and of the end of the world". As with the Matt. 24 account, 'this generation" is dependent on the vs. before that it's the generation "that sees "all" these things" and most of them were not seen. Y'all seem to forget that these accounts were written decades after their actual occurrance and were inspired by the HS and he knows how big the world is. The only passage in the three gospels that deals w/ 70ad is Lk. 21:20-24.

I didn't know what a historicist was until I looked it up. (New World Encyclopedia)Basically, it's a false philosophy of history. The major question to historicism is its relativist implications. If all knowledge is conditioned by history, there is no objectivity or universality in knowledge. It's Enlightenment era mumbo jumbo. I am no "historicist" and I didn't ignore Matthew 24 where the Olivet Discourse is found. It's mentioned in the first line of post #11 that you say I ignored.

Jesus’ discourse on the Mount of Olives about the signs of the end of the world is a fascinating study of the structure of ancient speech making. The people of Jesus’ day are from an oral tradition and they used memory tricks to organize and remember speeches and stories.

The Olivet discourse uses an “Inclusio” to mark the beginning and the end of the discourse. In other words, the first and the last sentence are of the same subject showing that the speech is “included” within these two markers. The discourse actually begins in Matthew 23:26.

The beginning and end of the discourse is marked by the reference to “this generation”. Inside the Inclusio is a “Chiasm”. This is where the ideas (or theme) of the discourse are stated until the climax is reached and then repeated in reverse order. Like this: “Inclusio, A, B, C, … Climax …, C, B, A, Inclusio”. The conclusion is verse 14, “And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.”

The ideas then repeat in reverse order until the second Inclusio marks the end in verse 32-35, “From the fig tree learns its lesson as soon as its branch becomes tender and puts out its leaves, you know that summer is near. 33 So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates. 34 Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away.”

While the discourse is undoubtedly referencing the end of days early Christians understood it in a second way. For them the “abomination of desolation” spoken of in line 15 was a clear reference to the defilement of the Temple in Jerusalem. This happened in A.D. 70 and lead to a Jewish revolt in the city. This brought about “war and rumors of war” by the “vultures”, who are the Romans (because their standard is an eagle) and because the emperor pretended to be a god, “a false messiah”.

Thus, when the city was surrounded by Roman troops the Christians knew it was the end. However, something interesting happened. Power plays were happening in Rome and the leader of one of the factions called back his troops from Jerusalem to assist. This led to a short window of escape so the Christians did what had been instructed by Jesus, they fled the city.

The power struggle in Rome was resolved more quickly and the troops that had left Rome were turned back without having gotten very far. They returned and again sieged Jerusalem, destroying it. They burned the temple, which was a building plated from top to bottom in gold. After the city was taken and the temple burned, the gold that had adorned it had literally melted in between all the stones so the Roman soldiers took the temple apart brick by brick to remove the gold in between the stones. This fulfilled Jesus’ prophecy, “Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down." (Matthew 24:2)

I make a distinction between the local and the global whereas you make a unity.

 

[Behold]

but you have not really received as yet, the true value of it has not yet been established. You have not come into the real significance of the truth until there has been some sore conflict in relation to it.” -T. A-S.

None But The Hungry Heart

The reason we are told to put on the Armor of God, is because we are in spiritual warfare and don't wrestle against flesh and blood.
The Devil's "big gun" is your pride, your fear, your lust, and your need to be accepted. (approval).

See all that?
All that is related to the wrong mind or the carnal mind, or the mind of the flesh.
When you are in that mind, you are dealing with all that, all the time.
This is why Paul tells us to put off that old man of the flesh, and reckon it dead and put on the renewed mint that understands who you have become, as a born again, new creation in Christ.

 

[Netchaplain]

The reason we are told to put on the Armor of God, is because we are in spiritual warfare and don't wrestle against flesh and blood.
The Devil's "big gun" is your pride, your fear, your lust, and your need to be accepted. (approval).

See all that?
All that is related to the wrong mind or the carnal mind, or the mind of the flesh.
When you are in that mind, you are dealing with all that, all the time.
This is why Paul tells us to put off that old man of the flesh, and reckon it dead and put on the renewed mint that understands who you have become, as a born again, new creation in Christ.

Like what you said here! God bless!!

 

[360watt]

Okay... 'The church ' assembles. It's a local and visible entity..

Matthew 16:18.. that's local by context

Matthew 18:20.. that's local.

Acts 2.. is the church at Jerusalem being empowered

The letters Paul writes.. local and visible churches


I could go on and on

 

[Netchaplain]

Okay... 'The church ' assembles. It's a local and visible entity..

Matthew 16:18.. that's local by context

Matthew 18:20.. that's local.

Acts 2.. is the church at Jerusalem being empowered

The letters Paul writes.. local and visible churches


I could go on and on

Thanks for the reply, but not sure what you're trying to say. God bless!

 

[360watt]

Thanks for the reply, but not sure what you're trying to say. God bless!

All redeemed, every believer.. that's not 'the church ' .. not yet.

This entity of every believer won't be one church till we are all assembled in the New Jerusalem as one assembly.

It's extremely popular, but not biblical, to call all redeemed, or every believer 'the church'.

Church.. equals Ecclessia.. which is a called out assembly.. from their homes.. to a gathering.

In the New Testament it's a local and visible assembly of saved, baptized believers, covenanted together to carry out the great commission and commandment.

Most people mix up the church with the Kingdom of God and the Family of God. These three are different entities.

 

[GRACE ambassador]

There's not a single scripture that calls the church the bride. No other doctrine has so little scriptural backing that's based on only a couple of metaphors.

Correct, instead of just 'repeating what we hear,' we could do a simple, small study, eh?:

Are not "The Bride, The Heavenly Jerusalem" (Rev 19:7, 21:2, 9)?

And, we, The Body Of Christ, "The ONE New Man" (Eph 2:15)?

Grace, Peace, And JOY In Christ, And In His Word Of Truth, Rightly
Divided (+ I and II)!