This isn't false doctrine, only the perversion of it is. Just because the men who sinned believed this teaching doesn't make the doctrine false. That is to say that those who believe in salvation through faith and go back into sin make the doctrine false. God is truth and men are sinners. Perverted people don't make God's word in error.
| 2007/2/16 13:09||Profile|
While there is much emotionalism and mysticism in contemporary Christendom today, we cannot deny the reality that the church is the Bride of Christ, He is the Bridegroom, and we are awaiting the Marriage supper of the Lamb (Rev 19:9). Throughout the prophetic books God calls Israel His bride and compares His relationship to her as that of a marriage.
I dont disagree with what you've said. I think if you re-read my post you'll see that.
Did you guys not read this? :-? Who is saying that it is wrong to believe the church is the bride? It's not the doctrine itself, it's the way it's applied.
| 2007/2/16 13:22||Profile|
Amen, to so much that was spoken.
Isn't it a sad thing that someone would use such a wonderful picture as this to explain the acts of men fallen into sin?
Although there are very many twisted scriptures and beliefs in this present age, it still does not explain the acts of sinful humanity. There is "nothing new under the sun", and the same self abosorbed love that men have had since before the flood is still the same, the intensity of certain sins may vary from time to time, but the sad, sad fruit of it remains the same.
The "catholic" theologies are so askew it seems entirely redundant to consider them as the orinigators..... but the sinful soul which combines an incorrect perspective regarding humanity (such as their perspective of Mary) and fleshly motives can come up with about anything strange.....
"Unto the pure all things are pure, but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure, but even their mind and conscience is defiled." Titus 1:15
Yet, it is not a doctrine or a teaching which leads men to sin.... as someone has prior mentioned... it is their own lusts which give birth to sin which leads to death...
But Oh, that we as the church may have a mind that is pure and see clearly that which God would desire for us to pursue in this life!!!!
Thank you for all the wonderful discussion though!
The Church's One foundation is Jesus Christ her Lord, she is His new creation by water and the Word; from heaven He came and sought her to be His holy Bride; with His own blood He bought her, and for her life He died.
Elect from every nation, yet one o'er all the earth her charter of salvation One Lord, one faith, one birth; One holy name she blesses, partakes one holy food and to one hope she presses, with every grace endued.
Mid toil and tribulation, and tumult of her war, she waits the consummation of peace forevermore; till with the vision glorious Her longing eyes are blest, and teh gret Church victorious, shall be the Church at rest" Samuel Stone
| 2007/2/16 16:11||Profile|
There are no males or females in Christ. Galatians 3:26-28 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
No male in Christ? No female in Christ?
That leaves out the devilish thought that homosexuality has anything to do with the Marriage supper of the Lamb.
Baptized into Christ. Christ-ones. Christ in you the Hope of Glory. Leave it to man to take the greatest thing God has ever done for the human race, that is putting His Only Begotten Son in the believer, and make it a terrible thing God Hates.
Something God hates is a whole lot worse that just being lost and going to hell.
In Christ: Phillip
| 2007/2/16 22:53||Profile|
Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; [u]that ye should be married to another,[/u] even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.[/b]
The Bible does teach that we will be married to Christ, and it doesn't only come from SOS.
As others have said though, it is not marriage like between a man and a woman, it is spiritual marriage.
This teaching is common amongst the train of prodigies of Norman Grubb (eg, Dan Stone, Brian Coatney, Silvia Pearce, etc), although the emphasis that has been implied here, of sexual union, in the sense of eroticism, is not what is emphasised, but that of procreation. In Romans, there is a series of comparisons of "God, man, works", with physical unions. Example, "master, slave, obedient service", "vine, branch, fruit", and "husband, wife, offspring".
One problem can arise, by mixing up the context (eg, master marries the branch, and has offspring). The other is when emphasis is given in areas that are not mentioned in Scripture. The issue is one of "Initiator, expressor, and product". The question that is being asked, is "Who is the 'Initiator', God or Satan (Law, Sin Nature, Death)?" We are the 'expressor', and we can only 'produce' what the 'Initiator' expresses through us.
So, the idea of "Mystical Union" is one where the union between God and man, produces the "good works prepared in advance" for us to do. It is the expression of Gal 2:20, which Grubb often referred to as "Living with a wink", in other words, "It looks like me, and it sounds like me, but it is really Christ living through me" (Dan Stone).
This also reveals the true nature of sin, because if we are now dead, and made alive, thereby annulling our former marriage (to Satan, Law, Sin Nature, Death) and making it possible for a new union with Christ, if our "offspring" has the resemblance of our former "husband", then that is the result of "spiritual adultery" (see Hosea, for a thorough handling of this analogy), which gives God the right to choose between demanding that His "adulterous wife" (ie, us when we sin) be "stoned to death", or granted mercy.
However, when we produce "obedient deeds", then then that is merely the result of the seed of Christ within us, and although just as a child looks to his pregnant mother and thinks that it all happened by her labourers, until he becomes aware of the "mystery of the union", onlookers are unaware that our deeds are the result of grace, and not of works, "lest any man should boast", they think that we did it, and come out with comments like, "Don't sell yourself short. You did this. You shouldn't say, 'In me and my flesh is no good thing'." because they don't understand the mystery of mystical union.
This is the tragedy that has come from the Reformation that did everything but reform, and highlighted the likes of Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli (who did much good for the Body of Christ, in their day) but ignored the likes of Jacob Boehme, who taught much on union with Christ, which must be the logical outcome of justification by faith, or else we will simply replace one vain imagining for another.
For a much better handling of this theme, than I will ever be able to give, please read Norman Grubb's work on [url=http://www.normangrubb.com/Paul's%20Key%20to%20the%20Liberated%20Life.htm]Romans 6 to 8[/url].
| 2007/2/17 0:36||Profile|
AAron, Are you saying you agree with Norman Grubb, or you don't agree with Him. I guess in relating his work on ROM 6-8. Christ in us the Hope of Glory is the great mystery that was hidden from all time. Then it was revealed to Paul and we now know by Gal 2:20 that we died to sin on the Cross with Christ, our old self is dead and our new birth is that mystery, "Christ in you the Hope of Glory", Col 1:27.
If you like Norman, seek Warren Litzman, he builds upon Normans Gift. He has two great books, Christ lost in the Church and The Apostle Paul. http://www.christ-life.org/
In Christ: Phillip
| 2007/2/17 3:22||Profile|
| Re: Bridal Mysticism|
PaulWest on p1 said
... by breathings of holiness and moral purity as Watson teaches the truth of the genuine marital union between Christ and his beloved church.
I haven't finished reading Watson's exposition, but it really is exceptional. Thank you for finding it. It's definitely the most appropriate countersubversive interpretation of the issues which I've seen (not that I go looking for them), since this subject began to be discussed on SI.
| 2007/2/17 15:54|
Thank you, sister.
I was wondering when someone would pick up on it! It seems the Puritans had an outstanding teaching on just about every imaginable facet of Christianity. I'm glad you are blessed by it.
Paul Frederick West
| 2007/2/17 16:53||Profile|