Theology Club: CAN CHRIST REMARRY ??

[DAN P]

Hi to all , and there are many that believe that the Body of Christ " is the Bride of Christ !!

How can Christ who was Married to Israel , Divorce Israel ( Jer 3:8 ) !!

How then can , Christ then Remarry the Body of Christ , IF He is Divorced ??

Can a Divorced MAN Remarry ??

What were the Irreconcilable Differences ??

Can you reconcile these ??

Was John the Baptist sent , for that reason ??

What about Acts 3:19 and 20 ??

It looks like Baptism was for Israel , ONLY ??

dan p

 

[DAN P]

Hi to all , and there are many that believe that the Body of Christ " is the Bride of Christ !!

How can Christ who was Married to Israel , Divorce Israel ( Jer 3:8 ) !!

How then can , Christ then Remarry the Body of Christ , IF He is Divorced ??

Can a Divorced MAN Remarry ??

What were the Irreconcilable Differences ??

Can you reconcile these ??

Was John the Baptist sent , for that reason ??

What about Acts 3:19 and 20 ??

It looks like Baptism was for Israel , ONLY ??

dan p

Hi to all , and just one reason that Christ NOT MARRY the Body of Christ , is because in the Body , there is NEITHER , MALE nor FEMALE , Gal 3:28 !!

I just love this verse , what about you ??

I just wonder how the RCC and Acts 2 people fit in here ??

dan p

 

[Tambora]

I can appreciate your efforts, Dan P.
But I believe you are grasping here.

For Israel was also called a son.
Can you marry your son?

And Israel was also called a servant.
Would you call your wife or son a servant?

To try and reduce the idioms that are used to describe the relationship between God and Israel to just one of a wife/bride is going to cause some confusion.

Each of the idioms used of Israel are to express a relationship, not that Israel actually was a son, a wife, or a servant to God.

 

[Nang]

Hi to all , and there are many that believe that the Body of Christ " is the Bride of Christ !!

How can Christ who was Married to Israel , Divorce Israel ( Jer 3:8 ) !!

How then can , Christ then Remarry the Body of Christ , IF He is Divorced ??

Can a Divorced MAN Remarry ??

What were the Irreconcilable Differences ??

Can you reconcile these ??

Was John the Baptist sent , for that reason ??

What about Acts 3:19 and 20 ??

It looks like Baptism was for Israel , ONLY ??

dan p

The Jewish nation was only betrothed to God, but the marriage was never consummated, due to Israel's being found unfaithful and divorced prior to any actual and binding wedding.

God, according to His own holy Laws, had the right to divorce his betrothed, due to her unfaithfulness, and wed another. . . His faithful Church. Revelation 19:7-9

 

[OMEGA]

Re 19:7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him:

for the marriage of the Lamb is come,

and his wife hath made herself ready.

 

[DAN P]

I can appreciate your efforts, Dan P.
But I believe you are grasping here.

For Israel was also called a son.
Can you marry your son?

And Israel was also called a servant.
Would you call your wife or son a servant?

To try and reduce the idioms that are used to describe the relationship between God and Israel to just one of a wife/bride is going to cause some confusion.

Each of the idioms used of Israel are to express a relationship, not that Israel actually was a son, a wife, or a servant to God.

Hi , and Israel was called many NASTY names , even by Jesus .

Please remember that Israel will become a Kingdom of Priests and Kings , in the Millennium , Rev 1:6 and only those that do not accept the #666 will enter the Kingdom !!

The only confusion will be with the " low information bible student ".

dan p

 

[DAN P]

The Jewish nation was only betrothed to God, but the marriage was never consummated, due to Israel's being found unfaithful and divorced prior to any actual and binding wedding.

God, according to His own holy Laws, had the right to divorce his betrothed, due to her unfaithfulness, and wed another. . . His faithful Church. Revelation 19:7-9

Hi , and Christ will marry Israel , as John 3:29 , says !!

Christ will NEVER marry the Body of Christ as we are part of His Body !!

dan p

 

[Nang]

Hi , and Christ will marry Israel , as John 3:29 , says !!

Christ will NEVER marry the Body of Christ as we are part of His Body !!

dan p

Amusing . . . :dunce:


Married people become one flesh.

A saved remnant out of all the nations, will become the bride of Christ. Revelation 21:1-3

 

[DAN P]

Amusing . . . :dunce:


Married people become one flesh.

A saved remnant out of all the nations, will become the bride of Christ. Revelation 21:1-3

Hi , and I know that some will come up with verses in 2 Cor 11:2 , but this verse does mean that we are married to Christ as the Greek refutes it .

Do you have verses that we are Married to Christ ??

Gal 3:28 is just one of many verses rebutting a Wedding Ceremony !!

dan p

 

[godrulz]

Terrible interpretations, as usual.

Bride is an apt metaphor used of the people of God (Israel and the Church). It is not meant to be a wooden literalism and is analogous to, not identical with, human marriage.

Pressing a metaphor or parable on the details vs main principle leads to nonsense.

The problem is with MAD, not with other views.

 

[DAN P]

Terrible interpretations, as usual.

Bride is an apt metaphor used of the people of God (Israel and the Church). It is not meant to be a wooden literalism and is analogous to, not identical with, human marriage.

Pressing a metaphor or parable on the details vs main principle leads to nonsense.

The problem is with MAD, not with other views.

Hi , and it is not , I believe a human type marriage , as Jews who enter and serve God in the Millennium will Immortal !!

Parables are real !!

As usual , you are wrong !!

dan p

 

[godrulz]

Hi , and it is not , I believe a human type marriage , as Jews who enter and serve God in the Millennium will Immortal !!

Parables are real !!

As usual , you are wrong !!

dan p

Parables contain one main truth. Every detail is not meant to convey spiritual truth (leads to fanciful, nonsensical interpretations). This is a basic hermeneutical principle. If you would follow sound exegesis, you would not believe half of what you do.

I am dispensationalist (just not hyper-disp like you), so I recognize distinction between Israel/Church (unlike covenantal or replacement ideas). I know Israel will have unconditional convenants fulfilled in the future, including the Millennium. This does not mean similar principles/metaphors do not apply to both groups in context.

Body metaphor is used by Paul in the context of illustrating unity/diversity of spiritual gifts (I Cor. 12). MAD makes a big doctrine out of it that was not intended by Paul.

 

[DAN P]

Hi , and will tell you again , I IMITATE Paul as he also Imitates Christ !!

I am NOT Hyper-dispendationalist , which are Acts 28 , believers !!

It seems that you also do not read well OR Listen well !!

It obviously that you do not understand the DIFFERENCE BETWEEN Hyper and Acts 9 , dispensationalist .

I am on another site , dialoguing with Acts 28 er , and they are LOST just like you !!

They can not tell where Grace began , just like you , and you ought to be ASHAMED !!

dan p

 

[godrulz]

Your views are considered hyper/ultra disp compared to biblical Acts 2 disp. You have the same roots as Acts 28 (same assumptions/Bullinger).

Those who are wrong don't think they are. Cults also think they are Christians, but they are not.

Dispensational views agree on grace in this age. You are turning MAD into a sect/cult by excluding Acts 12, 12, 28, 2, etc. when disp views are not germane to the gospel (that we all agree on=grace/faith apart from works). We are saved by Christ and His finished work, not because we have a write or wrong disp or covenantal view. Many believers in the world are not even aware of these debates. You are the one with a wrong understanding of the gospel, not me.

GRACE BEGAN WITH CHRIST on the cross (death/resurrection), NOT with Paul's conversion! In fact, Jn. 1 says Jesus is full of grace and truth and Rom. 4-5 (Pauline) roots in right back to YHWH in Genesis. Grace has ALWAYS been the issue, never works (MAD is wrong).

 

[not4sure]

Terrible interpretations, as usual.

Bride is an apt metaphor used of the people of God (Israel and the Church). It is not meant to be a wooden literalism and is analogous to, not identical with, human marriage.

Pressing a metaphor or parable on the details vs main principle leads to nonsense.

As I was taught in seminary, "Don't make a parable walk on all fours." Do not stretch it beyond the author's intent.

Extrapolation = Exploitation

 

[DAN P]

Your views are considered hyper/ultra disp compared to biblical Acts 2 disp. You have the same roots as Acts 28 (same assumptions/Bullinger).
/QUOTE]


Hi , and I will let you clear the Air , by your so-called knowledge of the HYPER and the Acts 9 , by your CRYSTAL CLEAR knowledge of what each position Believes !!

Do not be SHY , EXPLAIN each ??

bet you can not !!

dan p

 

[godrulz]

As I was taught in seminary, "Don't make a parable walk on all fours." Do not stretch it beyond the author's intent.

Extrapolation = Exploitation

Correct. It generally has one main truth with the details being incidental and not to be spiritualized.

 

[godrulz]

Your views are considered hyper/ultra disp compared to biblical Acts 2 disp. You have the same roots as Acts 28 (same assumptions/Bullinger).
/QUOTE]


Hi , and I will let you clear the Air , by your so-called knowledge of the HYPER and the Acts 9 , by your CRYSTAL CLEAR knowledge of what each position Believes !!

Do not be SHY , EXPLAIN each ??

bet you can not !!

dan p

There are so many nuanced views held by any given person within these camps. This shows that the view is not infallible and not even self-evident in Scripture.

 

[DAN P]

There are so many nuanced views held by any given person within these camps. This shows that the view is not infallible and not even self-evident in Scripture.

Hi , and I knew the ODDS that you would not know were in my Favor !!

Are you a teapot , WITHOUT WATER ??

The Acts 28 er's that I am dealing on and other site , are like you !!

Gal 3:28 , you can not DEAL with what it says there , " they are Neither MALE nor FEMALE as your mind will not grip on , and understand what it means !!

That is just one reason , there is no Wedding Ceremony !!

dan p

 

[godrulz]

Hi , and I knew the ODDS that you would not know were in my Favor !!

Are you a teapot , WITHOUT WATER ??

The Acts 28 er's that I am dealing on and other site , are like you !!

Gal 3:28 , you can not DEAL with what it says there , " they are Neither MALE nor FEMALE as your mind will not grip on , and understand what it means !!

That is just one reason , there is no Wedding Ceremony !!

dan p

Gal. 3 is talking about being one in Christ vs cultural subordination and despising of women. We are equal in Christ and our common humanity, contrary to the oppression and wrong views of fallen men/societies.

It has nothing to do with your bride/body theories...again, your propensity to proof text out of context is flimsy and lame evidence for a flawed view.