When does the rapture occur?

[SolidGround]

I like all of the interpretations presented here. They each have strengths and weaknesses,
but as long as the Believer understands that God has a plan, and Jesus wins,
and we are supposed to be ready for His coming (spiritually, not physically),
then they are on a good track.

What I see is
1. A 3.5 year tribulation, where the saints are persecuted by the man of sin and his apostate church and a Neo Babylonian/Roman government.
2. The return of Christ and a gathering/transforming of the saints, both dead and alive, both OT and NT.
3. A 3.5 year period of wrath upon the wicked. (too late for salvation).
4. A physical conquest of the world and a 1k year reign where things are put back in order.

I think this is called midtrib. I also lean posttrib, but either way I think it fits the Scripture very well.

Amillenialism is very good, but I find it may be overly spiritualized. It is near impossible to study the book if none of it is literal.

Postmillenialism is FAR too worldly and culturally minded for what Jesus says in the Gospels. If our purpose is to create a global Christian utopia before the end will come, then why does the Word say it gets worse before it ends?

God bless you all in your studies!

 

[Hoffco]

To Solidground , I am with your 4 points. It makes the best out of a very difficult study. Love to all, Hoffco

 

[Elin]

Hey, Doug,

"In the time of those kings (kings of Da 2:37-43, Babylonia, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome),
the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed,
nor will it be left to another people. It will crush all those kingdoms
and bring them to an end, but it itself will endure forever." (Da 2:44)

That is the kingdom of God set up by Christ Jesus at his first coming,
during the previous Roman empire.
It is a kingdom that endures forever, allowing for no other temporal kingdom to follow.
It is the only kingdom of God and his Christ.

No WAY! Christ's kingdom will replace the physical kingdom of Rome, It will be a physical kingdom for 1,000 yrs.
You are destroying the literalness of the prophecies of the end times of Daniel and Revelation. It is clearly a Physical kingdom, where the apostles will rule over the nation of Israel. Love to all, Hoffco

Daniel's interpretation from God (Da 2:37-45) of the prophetic riddle (Da 2:31-34) is very clear and certain.

God's kingdom was set up during the time of the those kings of Da 2:37-43,
which were from 626 BC - 426 AD.
And the kingdom God set up then endures forever, never to be destroyed.

Your interpretation of prophetic riddles does not agree with Daniel's interpretation of prophetic riddle.

You have some reckoning to do.

 

[Elin]

I like all of the interpretations presented here. They each have strengths and weaknesses,
but as long as the Believer understands that God has a plan, and Jesus wins,
and we are supposed to be ready for His coming (spiritually, not physically),
then they are on a good track.

What I see is
1. A 3.5 year tribulation, where the saints are persecuted by the man of sin and his apostate church and a Neo Babylonian/Roman government.
2. The return of Christ and a gathering/transforming of the saints, both dead and alive, both OT and NT.
3. A 3.5 year period of wrath upon the wicked. (too late for salvation).
4. A physical conquest of the world and a 1k year reign where things are put back in order.

I think this is called midtrib. I also lean posttrib, but either way I think it fits the Scripture very well.

Amillenialism is very good, but I find it may be overly spiritualized. It is near impossible to study the book if none of it is literal.

Keeping in mind that NT writers often "spiritualize" the text, as in:

Ro 9:25-26; 1Pe 2:10 - both spiritualize the text of Hos 2:23.

Heb 8:6-13, 10:15-18 - spiritualize Jer 31:31-34; Ge 17:8 to Israel, as to the Church.

Ac 15:13-18 - spiritualizes Am 9:11-12 to Israel, as to the Gentiles.

1Co 10:1-4 - spiritualizes the OT texts of Ex 14:22, 16:4, 17:6.

Dt 10:16, 30:6; Jer 4:4, 9:25-26; Ro 2:26-29 - God spiritualizes the circumcision of Ge 17:10-14.

Gal 3:16, 29 - spiritualizes Abraham's seed who receive the promise.

Gal 4:27 - spiritualizes Isa 54:1 to Israel, as to the Church.

1Co 9:8-10; 1Tim 5:17-18 - spiritualizes Dt 25:4 regarding oxen,
as to the preachers of the gospel (1Co 9:14).

In fact, to the NT writers, a correct understanding of the OT often required "spiritualizing" the text.

Are we wiser than they that we should not allow "spiritual" interpretation of the OT?

"Spiritual" understanding of a text is often the only way it can be brought into agreement
with certain and unequivocal NT teaching, which always governs the meaning of Scripture.
(Heb 1:1-2)

 

[PlainWord]

Hey Elin,

The ELECT are ALL the SAINTS.

Do you have a passage that proves this? Have you ever considered that there are two groups of believers? Who is invited to the Marriage Supper of the Lamb and who isn't??

"Him" is Jesus.

It is???? That's a funny way of reading. God will bring with Jesus?? Shouldn't it read, "God will send with Jesus?" I will bring with me. Elin will bring with you. God will bring with him. You don't bring something with someone else, you send it with them.

In order for your theology to work with the NT, there must be
two second comings, one of Jesus, and another manufactured one of the Father who is invisible,
two first resurrections,
two last trumpets,
two bodies of Christ,
two temporal Messianic kingdoms,
two final world battles,
two final judgments.

Is your understanding of the NT so paltry as to allow such contra-NT notions?

So in your mind Christ returns but the Father never does? The Father will just destroy the earth and heaven then float around in the universe? That isn't what is taught. You should take a look at these passages again. We have a merge of all three parts of the trinity at the end.

9 And the Lord shall be King over all the earth. In that day it shall be-- "The Lord is one," And His name one.

28 Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.

One in one, all in all.

As for the battles, yes there will be a big one when Christ returns then another big one at the end of the Millennium which of course you disagree with.

 

[Elin]

Hey Elin,

Do you have a passage that proves this?

There is only one body of Christ. . .one faith, one hope, one baptism.

The NT does not present two different plans for the one body of Christ.

Have you ever considered that there are two groups of believers? Who is invited to the Marriage Supper of the Lamb and who isn't??

The NT neither presents, nor allows, for two different plans for the one body of Christ.

The one body of Christ has one and the same hope, common to all.

It is???? That's a funny way of reading. God will bring with Jesus?? Shouldn't it read, "God will send with Jesus?" I will bring with me. Elin will bring with you. God will bring with him. You don't bring something with someone else, you send it with them.

Where there is one, there is all three of the Trinity.

In order for your theology to work with the NT, there must be
two second comings, one of Jesus, and another manufactured one of the Father who is invisible,
two first resurrections,
two last trumpets,
two bodies of Christ,
two temporal Messianic kingdoms,
two final world battles,
two final judgments.

Is your understanding of the NT so paltry as to allow such contra-NT notions?

So in your mind Christ returns but the Father never does? The Father will just destroy the earth and heaven then float around in the universe? That isn't what is taught. You should take a look at these passages again. We have a merge of all three parts of the trinity at the end.

The Trinity is one being, one God, three persons who are never separated.

Two different plans for the one body of Christ is another example of your theology multiplying things which are the same.

 

[Hoffco]

PlainWord, You basic problem, just keeps mutating. Now you have a problem relating to the Godhood. are you believe in the trinity? You sound like you merge the three persons into ONE at the end. God has always been ONE(in plurality,ACHAD)Or three in unity, ACHAD. Love Hoffco

 

[SolidGround]

In fact, to the NT writers, a correct understanding of the OT often required "spiritualizing" the text.

Are we wiser than they that we should not allow "spiritual" interpretation of the OT?

"Spiritual" understanding of a text is often the only way it can be brought into agreement
with certain and unequivocal NT teaching, which always governs the meaning of Scripture.
(Heb 1:1-2)

I fully agree with you. I was just saying that it is nearly impossible to study, because everything can be taken in different ways, leaving the reader/interpreter staring at a page of endless possibilities for each passage.

I'm definitely not saying it's wrong.
It's just that I've heard too many different sermons on the same passages with even contradicting applications. Not that the applications would be unBiblical for either, just contradictions as coming from the same passage.


I try to not tie myself down to any of them,
because I don't want to be like the Pharisees,
and miss what's really going on
because I already had my mind made up on how things are gonna go down.

 

[PlainWord]

PlainWord, You basic problem, just keeps mutating. Now you have a problem relating to the Godhood. are you believe in the trinity? You sound like you merge the three persons into ONE at the end. God has always been ONE(in plurality,ACHAD)Or three in unity, ACHAD. Love Hoffco

I absolutely believe in the Trinity. I also believe each part has a function and purpose. It is a tough concept; 3 equal parts but all ONE GOD. However, I do not teach that the three parts become one at the end, the BIBLE teaches it and I quoted two passages that unequivocally state this. We also have passage that show separation such as when Christ died on the cross and when Jesus had to leave so that the Spirit could come. The Spirit is here now.

We are also taught in many places:

[h=4]Matthew 22:44 NKJV[/h] 'The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool" '?

Where is Christ now?

John 14 teaches:

3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also.

So clearly Christ and the Father are in heaven, we see this all through Revelation. The Holy Spirit is here on earth. At the end, all parts will be all in all, one in one, all together.

Christ returns to reign. After He reigns, he turns the kingdom over to the Father.

This is the teaching. I'm sorry if it doesn't fit your view. I didn't invent it, I just repeated what is written.

24 Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power.

28 Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.

So I suggest Brother Hoffco that you take this matter up with Paul since he wrote the above when you see him or perhaps ask for understanding now if you cannot comprehend this. GOD is all Three Now and always has been. He is also in three parts and each part has roles and responsibilities. You seem to want to deny that each part has a distinct purpose and function. All three did not die together on the cross.


[h=4]Mark 15:34 NKJV[/h] And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?" which is translated, "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?"

Was God the Father on the Cross with Jesus? Did the Father die there with Jesus? If so, how do you explain the above?

 

[PlainWord]

There is only one body of Christ. . .one faith, one hope, one baptism.

The NT does not present two different plans for the one body of Christ.

Elin,

I totally agree that we are ONE BODY of CHRIST. But as we are ONE, we are all different parts. We all have different functions, different strengths and different purposes.

1 Cor 12 teaches:

27 Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually. 28 And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, varieties of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?

So, since we are individual parts of the body and serve different purposes, why would you deny the purpose and reward given those who are called to die for Christ?? You deny Rev 20:1-6 because it doesn't fit your view. You spiritualize it away.

they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.

What is a priest? Is it not a teacher? Do you not see that a "Teacher" is a specific part of the Body that Paul teaches? Is Christ not our HIGH PRIEST?

[h=4]Hebrews 4:14 NKJV[/h] Seeing then that we have a great High Priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession.

Is Christ not our teacher?

[h=4]Matthew 23:10 NKJV[/h] And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ.

So if Christ is both teacher and high priest and there will be those who live and reign with Him as priests, a specific part of the body is reigning. Paul made clear - we are NOT ALL PRIESTS. Some of us are prophets, healers, helps, administrators, etc. You want to make everyone priests!! Actually you want to deny that there is even a 1,000 year reign of Christ so I don't know why I'm even trying to explain this.

 

[Elin]

I fully agree with you. I was just saying that it is nearly impossible to study, because everything can be taken in different ways, leaving the reader/interpreter staring at a page of endless possibilities for each passage.

A thorough knowledge of NT details narrows it down to only one possibility.

For example, in answer to Plainword's question above:

Have you ever considered that there are two groups of believers? Who is invited to the Marriage Supper of the Lamb and who isn't??

Eph 5:30-32; Rev 21:9 reveal that the church is the wife of Christ, the Lamb (Jn 1:29).

The NT does not present the wife of the Lamb as excluded from the Marriage Supper of the Lamb.

Two wives, one invited to the Marriage Supper and one excluded, is a duplication of wives
required by Plainword's unBiblical theology.

His theology drives his hermeneutic, rather than hermeneutic driving his theology.

I'm definitely not saying it's wrong.
It's just that I've heard too many different sermons on the same passages with even contradicting applications. Not that the applications would be unBiblical for either, just contradictions as coming from the same passage.

I try to not tie myself down to any of them,
because I don't want to be like the Pharisees,
and miss what's really going on
because I already had my mind made up on how things are gonna go down.

A thorough knowledge of the NT before one considers any theology enables one to flag their errors.

 

[Elin]

Elin,

I totally agree that we are ONE BODY of CHRIST. But as we are ONE, we are all different parts. We all have different functions, different strengths and different purposes.

1 Cor 12 teaches:

27 Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually. 28 And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, varieties of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?

So, since we are individual parts of the body and serve different purposes, why would you deny the purpose and reward given those who are called to die for Christ?? You deny Rev 20:1-6 because it doesn't fit your view. You spiritualize it away.

they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.

What is a priest? Is it not a teacher? Do you not see that a "Teacher" is a specific part of the Body that Paul teaches? Is Christ not our HIGH PRIEST?

Hebrews 4:14 NKJV

Seeing then that we have a great High Priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession.

Is Christ not our teacher?

Matthew 23:10 NKJV

And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ.

So if Christ is both teacher and high priest and there will be those who live and reign with Him as priests, a specific part of the body is reigning. Paul made clear - we are NOT ALL PRIESTS. Some of us are prophets, healers, helps, administrators, etc. You want to make everyone priests!! Actually you want to deny that there is even a 1,000 year reign of Christ so I don't know why I'm even trying to explain this.

Yes, and Eph 5:30-32; Rev 21:9 reveal that the body of Christ with all its parts
is the church, who is the wife of Christ, the Lamb (Jn 1:29).

The NT does not present the wife of the Lamb as excluded from the Marriage Supper of the Lamb.

Two wives, one invited to the Marriage Supper and one excluded, is a duplication of wives
required by your unBiblical theology.

You are misapplying the analogies of the NT.

 

[Elin]

Elin,

I totally agree that we are ONE BODY of CHRIST. But as we are ONE, we are all different parts. We all have different functions, different strengths and different purposes.

1 Cor 12 teaches:

27 Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually. 28 And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, varieties of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?

So, since we are individual parts of the body and serve different purposes, why would you deny the purpose and reward given those who are called to die for Christ?? You deny Rev 20:1-6 because it doesn't fit your view. You spiritualize it away.

they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.

What is a priest? Is it not a teacher? Do you not see that a "Teacher" is a specific part of the Body that Paul teaches? Is Christ not our HIGH PRIEST?

Hebrews 4:14 NKJV

Seeing then that we have a great High Priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession.

Is Christ not our teacher?

Matthew 23:10 NKJV

And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ.

So if Christ is both teacher and high priest and there will be those who live and reign with Him as priests, a specific part of the body is reigning. Paul made clear - we are NOT ALL PRIESTS. Some of us are prophets, healers, helps, administrators, etc. You want to make everyone priests!! Actually you want to deny that there is even a 1,000 year reign of Christ so I don't know why I'm even trying to explain this.

Yes, and Eph 5:30-32; Rev 21:9 reveal that the body of Christ with all its parts
is the church (Eph 1:22-23 , who is the wife of Christ, the Lamb (Jn 1:29).

The NT does not present the wife of the Lamb as excluded from the Marriage Supper of the Lamb.
That is a human notion, not a Biblical notion.

Two wives, one invited to the Marriage Supper and one excluded, is a duplication of wives
required by your unBiblical theology.

You are misapplying the analogies of the NT.

 

[john832]

I like all of the interpretations presented here. They each have strengths and weaknesses,
but as long as the Believer understands that God has a plan, and Jesus wins,
and we are supposed to be ready for His coming (spiritually, not physically),
then they are on a good track.

What I see is
1. A 3.5 year tribulation, where the saints are persecuted by the man of sin and his apostate church and a Neo Babylonian/Roman government.
2. The return of Christ and a gathering/transforming of the saints, both dead and alive, both OT and NT.
3. A 3.5 year period of wrath upon the wicked. (too late for salvation).
4. A physical conquest of the world and a 1k year reign where things are put back in order.

I think this is called midtrib. I also lean posttrib, but either way I think it fits the Scripture very well.

Amillenialism is very good, but I find it may be overly spiritualized. It is near impossible to study the book if none of it is literal.

Postmillenialism is FAR too worldly and culturally minded for what Jesus says in the Gospels. If our purpose is to create a global Christian utopia before the end will come, then why does the Word say it gets worse before it ends?

God bless you all in your studies!

What I see is...

1. A 2.5 year tribulation, where the saints are persecuted by the man of sin and his apostate church and a Neo Babylonian/Roman government.

2. A 1 year period of God's wrath.

3. Return of Christ and the resurrection of the dead saints (both O.T. and N.T.) and the change of the living saints at His return.

4. A physical conquest of the world and a 1k year reign where things are put back in order. The restitution (restoration - NKJV) of all things.

 

[Elin]

What I see is...

1. A 2.5 year tribulation, where the saints are persecuted by the man of sin and his apostate church and a Neo Babylonian/Roman government.

2. A 1 year period of God's wrath.

3. Return of Christ and the resurrection of the dead saints (both O.T. and N.T.) and the change of the living saints at His return.

4. A physical conquest of the world and a 1k year reign where things are put back in order. The restitution (restoration - NKJV) of all things.

The certain and unequivocal Biblical interpretation (Da 2:44) of the prophetic riddle (Da 2:37-45)
does not allow for another temporal Messianic kingdom.

According to the certain interpretation of Da 2:44, the Messianic kingdom was set up at the first coming of Christ during the previous Roman empire, and it will never be destroyed, it lasts forever.

According to God's interpretation (Da 2:44) of his prophetic riddle (Da 2:37-45),
there can be no other future temporal Messianic kingdom, unless there are two of them.

And that brings you to multiplying things which are the same, as does PlainWord with
the wife of the Lamb, who both attends, and does not attend, her own marriage supper,
contrary to Eph 1:22-23, 5:30-32; Rev 2:19.

Your private and uncertain interpretation of prophetic riddles does not agree
with the Biblical and certain interpretation of them.

And likewise, PlainWord's private and uncertain interpretation of prophetic riddles
does not agree with certain NT teaching.

The private and uncertain interpretations of prophetic riddles by both of you are in error.

 

[PlainWord]

Yes, and Eph 5:30-32; Rev 21:9 reveal that the body of Christ with all its parts
is the church (Eph 1:22-23 , who is the wife of Christ, the Lamb (Jn 1:29).

The NT does not present the wife of the Lamb as excluded from the Marriage Supper of the Lamb.
That is a human notion, not a Biblical notion.

Two wives, one invited to the Marriage Supper and one excluded, is a duplication of wives
required by your unBiblical theology.

You are misapplying the analogies of the NT.

Which event happens first, the Marriage Supper of the Lamb or the Marriage of the Lamb???

The Marriage Supper of the Lamb appears in just one place in the whole Bible, Rev 19.

9 Then he said to me, "Write: 'Blessed are those who are called to the marriage supper of the Lamb!' " And he said to me, "These are the true sayings of God."

John is still in spirit in heaven when he hears this. Notice that the Supper as an event isn't told to have happened here, we are only told that those who are called to it are blessed. It is critically important that you get this point.

So when does the actual marriage take place? Get the context. It is AFTER the new heavens and earth and Not when Christ returns!!!

Rev 21:

1 Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. Also there was no more sea. 2 Then I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 9 Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls filled with the seven last plagues came to me and talked with me, saying, "Come, I will show you the bride, the Lamb's wife." 10 And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me the great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,

The Church is the Body of Christ - It is not the Bride of Christ per se. If the church was the Bride of Christ and the Body of Christ it would be like marrying yourself. The Bride is "Heaven" the New Jerusalem. Thus the wedding is when we all get to go into the new heaven. Then comes the wedding feast, after the wedding - not before.

 

[Elin]

Yes, and Eph 5:30-32; Rev 21:9 reveal that the body of Christ with all its parts
is the church (Eph 1:22-23 , who is the wife of Christ, the Lamb (Jn 1:29).

The NT does not present the wife of the Lamb as excluded from the Marriage Supper of the Lamb.
That is a human notion, not a Biblical notion.

Two wives, one invited to the Marriage Supper and one excluded, is a duplication of wives
required by your unBiblical theology.

You are misapplying the analogies of the NT.

Which event happens first, the Marriage Supper of the Lamb or the Marriage of the Lamb???

Multiplying things which are the same again.

The Marriage Supper of the Lamb appears in just one place in the whole Bible, Rev 19.

9 Then he said to me, "Write: 'Blessed are those who are called to the marriage supper of the Lamb!' " And he said to me, "These are the true sayings of God."

John is still in spirit in heaven when he hears this. Notice that the Supper as an event isn't told to have happened here, we are only told that those who are called to it are blessed.
It is critically important that you get this point.

It is more critically important that your private and uncertain interpretation
of prophetic riddles be in agreement with certain and unequivocal NT teaching.

Rev 21:

1 Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. Also there was no more sea. 2 Then I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 9 Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls filled with the seven last plagues came to me and talked with me, saying, "Come, I will show you the bride, the Lamb's wife." 10 And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me the great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,

The Church is the Body of Christ - It is not the Bride of Christ per se. If the church was the Bride of Christ and the Body of Christ it would be like marrying yourself.

Wrong. . .on three counts.

1) Read Eph 5:30-32 again.

2) Marriage makes two in one flesh (Eph 5:31), the wife is the body of the husband (Eph 5:28-29).
That is why the Church is Christ's body, because it is his wife (Eph 5:31-32; Rev 21:9).

3) The Church is the Temple of God (Eph 2:19-21; 2Co 6:16), the New Jerusalem (Gal 4:26; Heb 12:18, 22)

Too much human reasoning and not enough Biblical knowledge.

 

[Elin]

P.S.:

Rev 21:

1 Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. Also there was no more sea. 2 Then I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 9 Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls filled with the seven last plagues came to me and talked with me, saying, "Come, I will show you the bride, the Lamb's wife." 10 And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me the great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,

The New Jerusalem = bride and wife of the Lamb (Rev 21:1-2, 9-10).

The Church = body of Christ (Eph 1:22-23), the Lamb (Jn 1:29), his wife
(Eph 5:30-32) in the two-in-one enfleshment of the marital union.

The Church is the New Jerusalem, the Bride of the Lamb.

 

[PlainWord]

Multiplying things which are the same again.

I guess you haven't been married then because the wedding supper always comes after the wedding.

It is more critically important that your private and uncertain interpretation
of prophetic riddles be in agreement with certain and unequivocal NT teaching.

There is nothing uncertain or private about agreeing with what the Word actually says. It names the Bride of Christ as the new Jerusalem and states when the wedding occurs. Any contrary teaching is actually a private interpretation.

Wrong. . .on three counts.

1) Read Eph 5:30-32 again.

2) Marriage makes two in one flesh (Eph 5:31), the wife is the body of the husband (Eph 5:28-29).
That is why the Church is Christ's body, because it is his wife (Eph 5:31-32; Rev 21:9).

3) The Church is the Temple of God (Eph 2:19-21; 2Co 6:16), the New Jerusalem (Gal 4:26; Heb 12:18, 22)

Too much human reasoning and not enough Biblical knowledge.

If you had bothered to read what I said, you will notice that I said, "per se." Here is the quote from me again.

The Church is the Body of Christ - It is not the Bride of Christ per se.

The Church is part of the Bride of Christ. In reality the Bride is the New Jerusalem/New Heaven which contains ALL BELIEVERS and ALL SAVED to include the OT Saints. The OT Saints ARE NOT part of the CHURCH.

We are arguing semantics. The important thing is the timing. The timing of the Wedding and Supper happen after we are all in the new heaven after the Old earth passed away. It is not when Christ returns. I have shown that as ABSOLUTE BIBLICAL TRUTH, Like it or not.

 

[PlainWord]

P.S.:


The New Jerusalem = bride and wife of the Lamb (Rev 21:1-2, 9-10).

The Church = body of Christ (Eph 1:22-23), the Lamb (Jn 1:29), his wife
(Eph 5:30-32) in the two-in-one enfleshment of the marital union.

The Church is the New Jerusalem, the Bride of the Lamb.

So I guess you kicked Moses, Abraham and all the OT prophets to the curb - kicked them right out of heaven then???