THE BRIDE OF CHRIST

[homwardbound]

Homwardbound:
If that is your interpretation of those particular verses, you are entitled to it…
Just consider the following:
1. The verses were written to Jewish believers…parenthesis were put to distinguish as to whom it was addressed:
(and the dominion of the Law over a man)
Rom 7:1 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?

2. Law of marriage under Jewish/Mosaic Law (thou shall not commit adultery) is valid and was given as an example, as to the binding power of the Law (Mosaic Law) to THeM that Know the Law…
The woman is not free until the husband is dead…

Rom 7:2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
Rom 7:3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

3. New Covenant with Christ…meaning dead to the Law (Jewish believer are not bound by the power of the Law anymore)
Rom 7:4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.
4. A Confirmation that Paul was talking about the power of the Law, The summary of (1,2 and 3)
Rom 7:5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.
Rom 7:6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

AND AS YOU CONTINUE WITH THE REST OF THE VERSES…YOU WILL SEE IN FACT THAT HE WAS TALKING TO THOSE WHO KNOW THE LAW…AND ABOUT THE POWER OF THE LAW…

Are you a Jewish Believer Homwardbound?

I believe God just loves me, and all peoples.

Unfortunately, we as Gentiles have gone over to Jerusalem and put on the tattered clothes of the first chosen, saying you have not been able to obey Law, but watch us, and through (belief not in God, in self doing it as many have tried this) took off those tattered clothes of the law and put them on over the righteous clothes Jesus puts on us by Faith in him alone, if we ever decided to believe God to begin with

That is what Paul is trying so hard to get across to us those that beleive God. By Faith we are his, made righteous in him and not by trying to obey Law
Colossians 1:22 in the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight:

No flesh works in God's sight is pleasing to God, onloy Christ Jesus's were and are.
By Faith in this we are saved, God the Father gives us new life that can not be taken away. God does not lie. man does

 

[homwardbound]

should I add or rephrase my question...
Who was talking? Who is he, who will write his new name to the overcomer?

Jesus was talking, and what is your point? My God said to his God?
I am married thank God for Son Christ

 

[watcher2013]

I believe God just loves me, and all peoples.

Unfortunately, we as Gentiles have gone over to Jerusalem and put on the tattered clothes of the first chosen, saying you have not been able to obey Law, but watch us, and through (belief not in God, in self doing it as many have tried this) took off those tattered clothes of the law and put them on over the righteous clothes Jesus puts on us by Faith in him alone, if we ever decided to believe God to begin with

That is what Paul is trying so hard to get across to us those that beleive God. By Faith we are his, made righteous in him and not by trying to obey Law
Colossians 1:22 in the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight:

No flesh works in God's sight is pleasing to God, onloy Christ Jesus's were and are.
By Faith in this we are saved, God the Father gives us new life that can not be taken away. God does not lie. man does

I think you should go back to the very basic:
Gentiles do not have the LAW to obey…
Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

The law was given to the children of Israel..Exo 19:3-5 for them to obey:
The Children of Israel were celebrating the feast of trumpets while the Egyptian..the Asian…the Europeans busy doing their own stuff.
They have the Law of the Sabbath…while the Gentiles continue doing work during Sabbath…
Having said that..Gentiles do not just kill people…gentiles do not just steal as a norm…Although these were contain in their law… we on the other hand do this without knowing their law.

You see the difference:
The children of Isreal have the LAW to follow…Gentiles have not the Law to Follow;
The Children of Isreal were under the Law…the Gentiles are not
Those Children of Israel who believed in Christ were freed from the curse of the Law…
Those Gentiles, who believed in Christ, were introduced to the true God and by faith are saved

Are you saying that because gentiles believed in Christ, we have to be under the Law first, then be freed again??? You got in reverse my friend…
By faith in Christ…Gentiles’ believers were made righteous…
Learn from Acts 15:
Act 15:1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.
Act 15:7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
Act 15:8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
Act 15:9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
Act 15:10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
Act 15:11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

 

[watcher2013]

Jesus was talking, and what is your point? My God said to his God?
I am married thank God for Son Christ

The Church vs. the New Jerusalem
Overcomer is not the Price
Rev 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
Here the speaker was talking to the Angel of the Church in Philadelphia which can be found in:
Rev 3:7 And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;
The speaker obviously is He who will come quickly, Holy and True.
Rev 3:11 Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.
Who is the Overcomer?
From the above verses, the overcomer is not the speaker but it is he who was encouraged to overcome. The overcomer relates to the Church in Philadelphia.
The Price:
The price for those who overcome according to revelation 3:12 includes:
1. Become a pillar in the temple of God
2. Shall go no more out
3. The Speaker will write upon him the name of his God
4. The Speaker will write upon him the Name of the City of his God – The New Jerusalem, from God
5. The speaker will write upon him the speaker’s new Name.
Here as one of the price for those who overcomes, the speaker accentuate that the name of the City of His God is the New Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God.
By the way is the same as the Bride of the Lamb:
Rev 21:9 And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife.
Rev 21:10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
Evidently the price is not the same as the overcomer.
Based from this analysis and from revelation 3:12;
The Bride of the Lamb is not the same as the Church, but the Price for the Church.

 

[Fishbait]

Some of you here believe we should follow the laws of the Old Testament. The 'laws' you quoted . The Old Testament law was given to the nation of Israel, not to Christians.

Some of the laws were to reveal to the Israelites how to obey and please God (the Ten Commandments, for example). Some of the laws were to show the Israelites how to worship God and atone for sin (the sacrificial system). Some of the laws were intended to make the Israelites distinct from other nations (the food and clothing rules). None of the Old Testament law is binding on us today. When Jesus died on the cross, He put an end to the Old Testament law (Romans 10:4; Galatians 3:23-25; Ephesians 2:15).

In place of the Old Testament law, we are under the law of Christ (Galatians 6:2), which is to “love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind…and to love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 22:37-39). If we obey those two commands, we will be fulfilling all that Christ requires of us: “All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments” (Matthew 22:40). Now, this does not mean the Old Testament law is irrelevant today. Many of the commands in the Old Testament law fall into the categories of “loving God” and “loving your neighbor.” The Old Testament law can be a good guidepost for knowing how to love God and knowing what goes into loving your neighbor. At the same time, to say that the Old Testament law applies to Christians today is incorrect. The Old Testament law is a unit (James 2:10). Either all of it applies, or none of it applies. If Christ fulfilled some of it, such as the sacrificial system, He fulfilled all of it.

 

[Elin]

Based from this analysis and from revelation 3:12;

Which is your uncertain private interpretation of prophetic riddles,
which can be, and are, validly interpreted by others to mean things entirely different,
and which particular uncertain interpretation contradicts certain NT teaching,

The Bride of the Lamb is not the same as the Church, but the Price for the Church

1) Except for the certain and unequivocal teaching that because
the church is the body of Christ (Eph 1:22-23, 4:12; 1Co 12:7; Col 1:18, 24),
as Eve was the body of Adam (Eph 5:30; Ge 2:23),
the church is, therefore, the wife of Christ
in the two-in-one enfleshment of the marital union (Eph 5:31-32),
as Eve was the wife of Adam in the two-in-one enfleshment of the maritial union (Ge 2:24).

2) And except for the certain and unequivocal NT teaching that Christ is the Lamb (Jn 1:29, 36; 1Pe 1:19).

3) And except that your our own proof text states that the New Jerusalem is the wife of the Lamb
(Rev 21:9-10).

4) And except for certain NT teaching that Christ is the Lamb (Jn 1:29) whose wife is the church
(Eph 5:31-32).

"Other than" those four glaring contradictions of it,
you are in perfect agreement with certain and unequivocal NT teaching.

Try as you might with your theology that divides and separates what God has joined,
you cannot overcome the certain NT teaching that
the New Jerusalem is the wife of Christ the Lamb, whose wife is the church.

And you've presented nothing which overcomes this certain and unequivocal NT teaching.

So it's not for lack of very specific and clear certainNT teaching
that the church is the New Jerusalem, the wife of Christ the Lamb,
it is simply unbelief of that certain and unequivocal NT teaching.

You are simply being obdurate in the face of the unequivocal facts presented in certain NT teaching.

 

[konroh]

9One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb.” 10And he carried me away in the Spirit to a mountain great and high, and showed me the Holy City, Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God.

There is no question that the New Jerusalem is equated with the Bride of the Lamb. The question is what is the meaning of this metaphor? Are we to believe that Christ is married to an inanimate object that is 1500 miles by 1500 miles? Is the description of the city complete figurative language (a possibility that would defy logic and common sense since 12 gates, 1500 miles, and specific gemstones are all very physically descriptive)?

Or is there naturally the option that Christ's bride is representative of all the saints who have been redeemed by the death of Christ? These saints will be living in the descriptive city of New Jerusalem and so it could naturally be referred to as the Bride of Christ. This is a common metaphor, it's called synecdoche, where a part of something is referred to as the whole. In this case, the place where the Bride of Christ will be is referred to as the Bride itself.

Not unequivocal, not a riddle. Beautiful poetic language where God and the Lamb and the Bride reside forever.

 

[watcher2013]

9One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb.” 10And he carried me away in the Spirit to a mountain great and high, and showed me the Holy City, Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God.

There is no question that the New Jerusalem is equated with the Bride of the Lamb. The question is what is the meaning of this metaphor? Are we to believe that Christ is married to an inanimate object that is 1500 miles by 1500 miles? Is the description of the city complete figurative language (a possibility that would defy logic and common sense since 12 gates, 1500 miles, and specific gemstones are all very physically descriptive)?

Or is there naturally the option that Christ's bride is representative of all the saints who have been redeemed by the death of Christ? These saints will be living in the descriptive city of New Jerusalem and so it could naturally be referred to as the Bride of Christ. This is a common metaphor, it's called synecdoche, where a part of something is referred to as the whole. In this case, the place where the Bride of Christ will be is referred to as the Bride itself.

Not unequivocal, not a riddle. Beautiful poetic language where God and the Lamb and the Bride reside forever.

The New Jerusalem a Price for the Patriarchs and prophets
Hebrews 11 summarises the heroes of faith from creation to the prophets: from Abel offering more excellent sacrifice to God to Moses parting of the Red sea, from Subduing kingdoms to prophets’ imprisonment and death…
How did they remain faithful?
Because they have something they hoped for.
Heb 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

And one of the things they hoped for is the City prepared by God.
Heb 11:8 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.
Heb 11:9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise:
Heb 11:10 For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.

Heb 11:13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.
Heb 11:14 For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.
Heb 11:15 And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned.
Heb 11:16 But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.

A promise from the writer of the Hebrew…God hath prepared for them a Heavenly City…

the only heavenly City from God we know of is the New Jerusalem, the wife, the Bride of the lamb.

Rev 21:10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
It can be concluded then that one of the price for the Patriarchs and the prophets for remaining faithful is the New Jerusalem.
Therefore in consideration of Hebrews 11, the Price, the wife, the Bride the New Jerusalem is not only for the Church but also for the Patriarchs and Prophets.

 

[konroh]

Exactly, which is why the names of the twelve tribes are written on the gates, and the names of the 12 apostles are the foundation stones. I do believe it's for saints both before and after Christ.

As far as I know, this is the biblical position. It also just happens to be the dispensational position.

 

[Eldora]

That sound right

 

[Eldora]

The stones found in the new Temple are stones that priest ware on the clothing

 

[dcontroversal]

9One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb.” 10And he carried me away in the Spirit to a mountain great and high, and showed me the Holy City, Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God.

There is no question that the New Jerusalem is equated with the Bride of the Lamb. The question is what is the meaning of this metaphor? Are we to believe that Christ is married to an inanimate object that is 1500 miles by 1500 miles? Is the description of the city complete figurative language (a possibility that would defy logic and common sense since 12 gates, 1500 miles, and specific gemstones are all very physically descriptive)?

Or is there naturally the option that Christ's bride is representative of all the saints who have been redeemed by the death of Christ? These saints will be living in the descriptive city of New Jerusalem and so it could naturally be referred to as the Bride of Christ. This is a common metaphor, it's called synecdoche, where a part of something is referred to as the whole. In this case, the place where the Bride of Christ will be is referred to as the Bride itself.

Not unequivocal, not a riddle. Beautiful poetic language where God and the Lamb and the Bride reside forever.

Good analogy...

 

[dcontroversal]

Exactly, which is why the names of the twelve tribes are written on the gates, and the names of the 12 apostles are the foundation stones. I do believe it's for saints both before and after Christ.

As far as I know, this is the biblical position. It also just happens to be the dispensational position.

I like this one as well....

 

[Elin]

9One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb.” 10And he carried me away in the Spirit to a mountain great and high, and showed me the Holy City, Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God.

There is no question that the New Jerusalem is equated with the Bride of the Lamb.

If there is no question that the new Jerusalem is the bride of the Lamb, why do you seek to overturn it?

Herein is revealed the faulty hermeneutic on which your theology is based.

Your theology should be in agreement with its foundational principle that the new Jerusalem
is the bride of the Lamb.

The question is what is the meaning of this metaphor? Are we to believe that Christ is married to an inanimate object that is 1500 miles by 1500 miles?

First of all, 1500 mi sq makes the New Jerusalem cover more ground than did the whole nation of Israel.
That's bigger than the whole state of Texas, which is a good two days' drive crossing it either direction.
That's a lotta' Jerusalem.

Secondly, the premise (city is inanimate) of your syllogism is based on
the conclusion (city is not the church) of your syllogism,
instead of the other way around.

Thirdly, is Christ married to an inanimate object in his wife, the church (Eph 5:31-32)?
And as the wife of Christ the Lamb (Rev 21:9), that makes the New Jerusalem the church,
and makes it no more inanimate than is the church.

Or is there naturally the option that Christ's bride is
representative of all the saints who have been redeemed by the death of Christ?

The text allows no such option.
It presents the New Jerusalem as the wife of Christ the Lamb.

All those, both OT and NT, who have been redeemed by Christ are the church
(Heb 12:23, "spirits of the righteous").

Nor is the New Jerusalem "representative" of the church, it is the church,
the wife of Christ the Lamb, made up of both OT and NT saints.

These saints will be living in the descriptive city of New Jerusalem

Nope. . .the NT presents these saints as the New Jerusalem, not in the New Jerusalem.

and so it could naturally be referred to as the Bride of Christ.

Maybe naturally, according to you, but not Biblically, according to the text.

This is a common metaphor, it's called synecdoche, where a part of something is referred to as the whole. In this case, the place where the Bride of Christ will be is referred to as the Bride itself.

This is not a synecdoche,
for the text does not present the New Jerusalem as the place of the bride and wife,
it presents the New Jerusalem as the bride and wife of Christ the Lamb
(the whole enchilada, not just part of it),
and that bride and wife of the Lamb is the church (Eph 5:31-32).

Not unequivocal, not a riddle. Beautiful poetic language where God and the Lamb and the Bride reside forever.

God says he gives prophecy in riddles to all but Moses (Nu 12:6-8).
This prophecy is a riddle which you have interpreted to disagree with
the certain and unequivocal NT teaching of Eph 5:31-32; Heb 12:22-23.

 

[Elin]

Exactly, which is why the names of the twelve tribes are written on the gates, and the names of the 12 apostles are the foundation stones. I do believe it's for saints both before and after Christ.

As far as I know, this is the biblical position. It also just happens to be the dispensational position.

So if it's all the people of God, would it not be the church, the true Israel of God, the one olive tree,
composed of believing Jews and engrafted Gentiles, whose roots are the holy patriarchs; i.e., the
true seed of Abraham?

 

[konroh]

I don't have a problem with the New Jerusalem being 1500 miles by 1500 miles. That's what the text says, and I see no reason not to believe in the certain and unequivocal teaching of the NT. Do you?

My premise that the city is inanimate is based on the certain and unequivocal teaching that the city has 12 gates on twelve foundation stones, measures 1500 miles by 1500 miles, and the rest of the unequivocal and certain details of the text: 18The material of the wall was jasper; and the city was pure gold, like clear glass. 19The foundation stones of the city wall were adorned with every kind of precious stone. The first foundation stone was jasper; the second, sapphire; the third, chalcedony; the fourth, emerald; 20the fifth, sardonyx; the sixth, sardius; the seventh, chrysolite; the eighth, beryl; the ninth, topaz; the tenth, chrysoprase; the eleventh, jacinth; the twelfth, amethyst. 21And the twelve gates were twelve pearls; each one of the gates was a single pearl. And the street of the city was pure gold, like transparent glass.

You clearly do not understand synecdoche and poetic and figurative language. You want to understand the one poetic statement that the New Jerusalem is the bride of Christ and throw out the rest of the details given about the New Jerusalem because you think they are irrelevant. Your insistence that prophecy cannot be understood is absolutely ridiculous. God spoke to Moses not in riddles, that verse is relevant to Moses' time. It's not a declarative statement for all prophecy throughout the Bible. I challenge you to find one OT scholar that would make such a foolish statement.

Now I'll say something nice, my Christian sister. While we disagree on the church being the true Israel of God, we would both agree that the bride of Christ does comprise believers from both the Old and New Testament eras, based mainly on this passage, because the place where the Bride lives is the New Jerusalem, which gates have the names of the 12 tribes, and which foundation stones have the names of the 12 apostles.

 

[homwardbound]

I think you should go back to the very basic:
Gentiles do not have the LAW to obey…
Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

The law was given to the children of Israel..Exo 19:3-5 for them to obey:
The Children of Israel were celebrating the feast of trumpets while the Egyptian..the Asian…the Europeans busy doing their own stuff.
They have the Law of the Sabbath…while the Gentiles continue doing work during Sabbath…
Having said that..Gentiles do not just kill people…gentiles do not just steal as a norm…Although these were contain in their law… we on the other hand do this without knowing their law.

You see the difference:
The children of Isreal have the LAW to follow…Gentiles have not the Law to Follow;
The Children of Isreal were under the Law…the Gentiles are not
Those Children of Israel who believed in Christ were freed from the curse of the Law…
Those Gentiles, who believed in Christ, were introduced to the true God and by faith are saved

Are you saying that because gentiles believed in Christ, we have to be under the Law first, then be freed again??? You got in reverse my friend…
By faith in Christ…Gentiles’ believers were made righteous…
Learn from Acts 15:
Act 15:1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.
Act 15:7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
Act 15:8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
Act 15:9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
Act 15:10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
Act 15:11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

I do not know you or if you actually believe or just scooting around here bringing up things straining out a gnat, causing me, or anyone to swallow a camel, or you are swallowing the camel. God knows your heart, your motive and mine as well.
Do not know why you are being strenuous on the Law of Moses and God? It seems you are splitting hairs
I neither take advantage of the grace as an excuse to sin nor am I under the curse of the Law as in the letter of.
I know this:
Hebrews 2:3 how shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;
Hebrews 10:28 He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
Galatians 5:13 For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.

Thanking God in and through Son, Christ I am married today in the Spirit of God loving all as he loved me
1 John 4:19 We love him, because he first loved us.

Romans 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
Luke 6:32 For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them.

I am thankful that by God through Son that we are freed form the curse of the Law that showed us our sinfulnees, trhe Law itself being perfect, yet when it flows through flesh sinfulness of the flesh is revealed, and we see our need for a perfect Savior Christ Jesus
So cutting through all the chase do we agree here or not?

 

[homwardbound]

I think you should go back to the very basic:
Gentiles do not have the LAW to obey…
Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

The law was given to the children of Israel..Exo 19:3-5 for them to obey:
The Children of Israel were celebrating the feast of trumpets while the Egyptian..the Asian…the Europeans busy doing their own stuff.
They have the Law of the Sabbath…while the Gentiles continue doing work during Sabbath…
Having said that..Gentiles do not just kill people…gentiles do not just steal as a norm…Although these were contain in their law… we on the other hand do this without knowing their law.

You see the difference:
The children of Isreal have the LAW to follow…Gentiles have not the Law to Follow;
The Children of Isreal were under the Law…the Gentiles are not
Those Children of Israel who believed in Christ were freed from the curse of the Law…
Those Gentiles, who believed in Christ, were introduced to the true God and by faith are saved

Are you saying that because gentiles believed in Christ, we have to be under the Law first, then be freed again??? You got in reverse my friend…
By faith in Christ…Gentiles’ believers were made righteous…
Learn from Acts 15:
Act 15:1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.
Act 15:7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
Act 15:8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
Act 15:9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
Act 15:10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
Act 15:11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

If one does not know they need Christ, they need to know they need him right? How did God show the First chosen they needed him other than by Law? Otherwise do we or could we get carnal Christians as was the Corinthians whom Paul put back under Law to bring them fully unto Father through Son, Christ

1 Corinthians 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.

 

[watcher2013]

If one does not know they need Christ, they need to know they need him right? How did God show the First chosen they needed him other than by Law? Otherwise do we or could we get carnal Christians as was the Corinthians whom Paul put back under Law to bring them fully unto Father through Son, Christ

1 Corinthians 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.

In Acts 10: Peter introduced to Cornelius Jesus without introducing the whole Law...The Holy Ghost fell on them which hear the word...NOT THE LAW...

I am not against the Law...but against the teaching of those who by their post keep pulling the Gentiles believer into the Law...

 

[homwardbound]

The Church vs. the New Jerusalem
Overcomer is not the Price
Rev 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
Here the speaker was talking to the Angel of the Church in Philadelphia which can be found in:
Rev 3:7 And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;
The speaker obviously is He who will come quickly, Holy and True.
Rev 3:11 Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.
Who is the Overcomer?
From the above verses, the overcomer is not the speaker but it is he who was encouraged to overcome. The overcomer relates to the Church in Philadelphia.
The Price:
The price for those who overcome according to revelation 3:12 includes:
1. Become a pillar in the temple of God
2. Shall go no more out
3. The Speaker will write upon him the name of his God
4. The Speaker will write upon him the Name of the City of his God – The New Jerusalem, from God
5. The speaker will write upon him the speaker’s new Name.
Here as one of the price for those who overcomes, the speaker accentuate that the name of the City of His God is the New Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God.
By the way is the same as the Bride of the Lamb:
Rev 21:9 And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife.
Rev 21:10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
Evidently the price is not the same as the overcomer.
Based from this analysis and from revelation 3:12;
The Bride of the Lamb is not the same as the Church, but the Price for the Church.

are you sure you are not by chance mixing Spirit of God with the flesh, your own as it is you doing the works of God that are already done by God through Son, Christ Jesus? I know I have to check on this daily