Okay, Marine, you have my utmost respect and gratitude for your service to our nation.
And if called upon, I will defend your body to the death, as you were willing to defend mine.
May God bless you richly.
But you're a lot of heat and little light.
Your Biblical understanding needs some work, for it has been hi-jacked by a false theology.
We do know "the mysteries of the kingdom," they are revealed in the epistles,
and prophetic riddles are not one of them. They are
the incarnation (1Ti 3:16),
the death of Christ (1Co 2:1),
God's purpose to sum up all things in Christ (Eph 1:9),
inclusion of both Jews and Gentiles in the church (Eph 3:3-6),
the marital union of Christ and the church (Eph 5:32),
the change that takes place at the resurrection (Col 1:15:51),
Christ in you, the hope of glory (Col 1:27),
Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Col 2:2-3),
Christ (Col 4:3).
The NT use of "mystery" does not mean riddle, secret knowledge known only to a few,
or unintelligible.
It simply means something never before revealed until now.
Prophetic riddles are not "mystery" in the NT sense of the word.
The use of non-NT meanings (riddles) in NT terminology (mystery) allows your theology to divide
and separate what God has joined (riddles are of uncertain meaning to us, Nu 12:6-8).
That is simply your notion of God's purpose in prophecy, which I have addressed,
and to which you have made no demonstration otherwise.
However, God's notion is that he gives prophecy in riddles (Nu 12:6-8).
How much more testimony do you need than the dismal track record of God's people
since before Christ in interpreting prophetic riddles correctly.
Your notion is merely an assertion without demonstration which, therefore, is without merit.
Sounds like sour grapes to me.
Did you fail to note that I used Rev to demonstrate your own theology's incorrect interpretation of it?
That is called "demonstration."
Your theology maintains that the church is the wife and not the bride, because the word "bride" is
found only in Revelation, and not in the epistles (more dividing, separating of what God has joined).
So why do you object to my pointing out that in Rev itself, the new Jerusalem is both the bride and
the wife of the Lamb?
And since the Lamb is Christ (Jn 1;29, 36; 1Pe 1:19), and the wife of Christ is the church (Eph 5:31-32),
that makes the church the New Jerusalem, the bride and wife of Christ the Lamb in Rev.
And that is based on certain and unequivocal NT teaching, not on uncertain interpretation of
prophetic riddles.
I can understand your "objection" to my "quoting Revelation" when it clearly disproves
your theology that the church is not the New Jerusalem, the bride and wife of the Lamb.
That's called demonstration, and you're "not happy" that it was made from your own proof text.
A little less heat and a little more light is called for.
And it's self-evident why whatever statement to which you are referring is really giving you the heartburn.
Assertion without demonstration is without merit.
And if called upon, I will defend your body to the death, as you were willing to defend mine.
May God bless you richly.
But you're a lot of heat and little light.
Your Biblical understanding needs some work, for it has been hi-jacked by a false theology.
We do know "the mysteries of the kingdom," they are revealed in the epistles,
and prophetic riddles are not one of them. They are
the incarnation (1Ti 3:16),
the death of Christ (1Co 2:1),
God's purpose to sum up all things in Christ (Eph 1:9),
inclusion of both Jews and Gentiles in the church (Eph 3:3-6),
the marital union of Christ and the church (Eph 5:32),
the change that takes place at the resurrection (Col 1:15:51),
Christ in you, the hope of glory (Col 1:27),
Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Col 2:2-3),
Christ (Col 4:3).
The NT use of "mystery" does not mean riddle, secret knowledge known only to a few,
or unintelligible.
It simply means something never before revealed until now.
Prophetic riddles are not "mystery" in the NT sense of the word.
The use of non-NT meanings (riddles) in NT terminology (mystery) allows your theology to divide
and separate what God has joined (riddles are of uncertain meaning to us, Nu 12:6-8).
That is simply your notion of God's purpose in prophecy, which I have addressed,
and to which you have made no demonstration otherwise.
However, God's notion is that he gives prophecy in riddles (Nu 12:6-8).
How much more testimony do you need than the dismal track record of God's people
since before Christ in interpreting prophetic riddles correctly.
Your notion is merely an assertion without demonstration which, therefore, is without merit.
Sounds like sour grapes to me.
Did you fail to note that I used Rev to demonstrate your own theology's incorrect interpretation of it?
That is called "demonstration."
Your theology maintains that the church is the wife and not the bride, because the word "bride" is
found only in Revelation, and not in the epistles (more dividing, separating of what God has joined).
So why do you object to my pointing out that in Rev itself, the new Jerusalem is both the bride and
the wife of the Lamb?
And since the Lamb is Christ (Jn 1;29, 36; 1Pe 1:19), and the wife of Christ is the church (Eph 5:31-32),
that makes the church the New Jerusalem, the bride and wife of Christ the Lamb in Rev.
And that is based on certain and unequivocal NT teaching, not on uncertain interpretation of
prophetic riddles.
I can understand your "objection" to my "quoting Revelation" when it clearly disproves
your theology that the church is not the New Jerusalem, the bride and wife of the Lamb.
That's called demonstration, and you're "not happy" that it was made from your own proof text.
A little less heat and a little more light is called for.
And it's self-evident why whatever statement to which you are referring is really giving you the heartburn.
Assertion without demonstration is without merit.
Last edited:
