The Bridegroom, the Bride, the New Jarusalem, and the 10 Virgins

Home Forums Prophecy Unfulfilled Prophecy The Bridegroom, the Bride, the New Jarusalem, and the 10 Virgins

Viewing 19 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #949
      Anonymous
      Inactive

      God willing, this will become a well studied idea/view/topic that will go beyond what the study of this/these topics have seen for many, many years. An understanding that will help all to see clearly part of the reason for the delay of Jesus return. Matt. 24:14 “And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.” What is not understood about this statement that we have missed, or misunderstood?

      Before I continue I would like those who are interested to read/re-read Sister Whites first vision. As you do ask the question, ‘what has she said/revealed in each sentence. Then read in “the Great Controversy” p. 426-427(it will need to be one that follows the original numbering). As you read consider what she says about the ‘New Jerusalem’, what it is. Also see what she calls the Church, and look for the sentence that has two words that are in italics.

      Let God and the Holy Spirit be your guide as wee contemplate these things

    • #950
      Tammy Roesch
      Keymaster

      Hi Kim!  Glad you have joined us here!

      In case some have trouble accessing Ellen White’s FIRST VISION, here it is:

      Chapter 6—My First Vision

      It was not long after the passing of the time, in 1844, that my first vision was given me. I was visiting Mrs. Haines at Portland, a dear sister in Christ, whose heart was knit with mine; five of us, all women, were kneeling quietly at the family altar. While we were praying, the power of God came upon me as I had never felt it before. { CET 57.1 }

      I seemed to be surrounded with light, and to be rising higher and higher from the earth. I turned to look for the advent people in the world, but could not find them, when a voice said to me, “Look again, and look a little higher.” At this, I raised my eyes, and saw a straight and narrow path, cast up high above the world. On this path the advent people were traveling to the city which was at the farther end of the path. They had a bright light set up behind them at the beginning of the path, which an angel told me was the “midnight cry.” [See Matthew 25:6.] This light shone all along the path, and gave light for their feet, so that they might not stumble. { CET 57.2 }

      If they kept their eyes fixed on Jesus, who was just before them, leading them to the city, they were safe. But soon some grew weary, and said the city was a great way off, and they expected to have entered it before. Then Jesus would encourage them by raising His glorious right arm, and from His arm came a light which waved over the advent band, and they shouted “Alleluia!” Others rashly denied the light behind them, and said that it was not God that had led them out so far. The light behind them went out, leaving their feet in perfect darkness, and they stumbled and lost sight of the mark and of Jesus, and fell off the path down into the dark and wicked world below. { CET 57.3 }

      Soon we heard the voice of God like many waters, which gave us the day and hour of Jesus’ coming. The living saints, 144,000 in number, knew and understood the voice, while the wicked thought it was thunder and an earthquake. When God spoke the time, He poured upon us the Holy Ghost, and our faces began to light up and shine with the glory of God, as Moses’ did when he came down from Mount Sinai. { CET 58.1 }

      The 144,000 were all sealed, and perfectly united. On their foreheads was written, “God, New Jerusalem,” and a glorious star containing Jesus’ new name. At our happy, holy state the wicked were enraged, and would rush violently up to lay hands on us to thrust us into prison, when we would stretch forth the hand in the name of the Lord, and they would fall helpless to the ground. Then it was that the synagogue of Satan knew that God had loved us who could wash one another’s feet, and salute the brethren with a holy kiss, and they worshiped at our feet. { CET 58.2 }

      Soon our eyes were drawn to the east, for a small black cloud had appeared, about half as large as a man’s hand, which we all knew was the sign of   the Son of man. We all in solemn silence gazed on the cloud as it drew nearer, and became lighter, glorious, and still more glorious, till it was a great white cloud. The bottom appeared like fire; a rainbow was over the cloud, while around it were ten thousand angels, singing a most lovely song; and upon it sat the Son of man. His hair was white and curly, and lay on His shoulders; and upon His head were many crowns. His feet had the appearance of fire; in His right hand was a sharp sickle; in His left, a silver trumpet. His eyes were a flame of fire, which searched His children through and through. Then all faces gathered paleness, and those that God had rejected gathered blackness. Then we all cried out: “Who shall be able to stand? Is my robe spotless?” Then the angels ceased to sing, and there was some time of awful silence, when Jesus spoke: “Those who have clean hands and pure hearts shall be able to stand; My grace is sufficient for you.” At this our faces lighted up, and joy filled every heart. And the angels struck a note higher and sung again, while the cloud drew still nearer the earth. { CET 58.3 }

      Then Jesus’ silver trumpet sounded, as He descended on the cloud, wrapped in flames of fire. He gazed on the graves of the sleeping saints, then raised His eyes and hands to heaven, and cried, “Awake! awake! awake! ye that sleep in the dust, and arise.” Then there was a mighty earthquake. The graves opened, and the dead came up clothed with immortality. The 144,000 shouted “Alleluia!” as they recognized their friends who had been torn from them by death, and in the same moment we were changed and caught up together with them to meet the Lord in the air. { CET 59.1 }

      We all entered the cloud together, and were seven days ascending to the sea of glass, when Jesus brought the crowns and with His own right hand placed them on our heads. He gave us harps of gold and palms of victory. Here on the sea of glass the 144,000 stood in a perfect square. Some of them had very bright crowns, others not so bright. Some crowns appeared heavy with stars, while others had but few. All were perfectly satisfied with their crowns. And they were all clothed with a glorious white mantle from their shoulders to their feet. Angels were all about us as we marched over the sea of glass to the gate of the city. Jesus raised His mighty, glorious arm, laid hold of the pearly gate, swung it back on its glittering hinges, and said to us, “You have washed your robes in My blood, stood stiffly for My truth; enter in.” We all marched in and felt that we had a perfect right in the city. { CET 59.2 }

      Here we saw the tree of life and the throne of God. Out of the throne came a pure river of water, and on either side of the river was the tree of life. On one side of the river was a trunk of a tree, and a trunk on the other side of the river, both of pure, transparent gold. At first I thought I saw two trees. I looked again, and saw that they were united at the top in one tree. So it was the tree of life on either side of the river of life. Its branches bowed to the place where we stood, and the fruit was glorious; it looked like gold mixed with silver. { CET 60.1 }

      We all went under the tree, and sat down to look at the glory of the place, when Brethren Fitch and Stockman, who had preached the gospel of the kingdom, and whom God had laid in the grave to save them, came up to us and asked us what we had passed through while they were sleeping. We tried to call up our greatest trials, but they looked so small compared with the far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory that surrounded us, that we could not speak them out, and we all cried out, “Alleluia! heaven is cheap enough!” and we touched our glorious harps and made heaven’s arches ring. { CET 61.1 }

      • This reply was modified 1 year, 8 months ago by Tammy Roesch.
      • #960
        Anonymous
        Inactive

        Tammy, this thought you quoted from CET, is one of the ideas that needs to sink down into our “collective consciousness”, in my opinion. 🙂  — “Soon we heard the voice of God like many waters, which gave us THE DAY AND HOUR OF JESUS’ COMING. The living saints, 144,000 in number, knew and understood the voice, while the wicked thought it was thunder and an earthquake. When God spoke the time, He poured upon us the Holy Ghost, and our faces began to light up and shine with the glory of God, as Moses’ did when he came down from Mount Sinai.” { CET 58.1 }

         

        With regards to the date, October 22, 1844, it is commonly thought that the Adventists must have missed or ignored the Bible text that reads —

        “But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father”. (Mark 13:32.)

        But no, they did not miss it, or ignore it. They explained [correctly, in my view,] that the words, “but of that day and that hour knoweth no man…”, are to be understood in the following sense —

        no man, nor angel, nor even Jesus, MAKES KNOWN the day and the hour. It is the Father alone that will MAKE KNOWN the exact day and hour of the event.

        James White explains more,

        “An old English version of the passage, reads, “But that day and hour no man maketh known, neither the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.”

        “This is the correct reading according to several of the ablest critics of the age. The word “know” is used here, in the same sense as it is by Paul in 1Cor.2:2. Paul well understood many other things, besides Christ and him crucified, but he determined to MAKE KNOWN nothing else among them. So in the passage first quoted, it is declared that none but God the Father, maketh known the day and hour; that is, the definite time of the second coming of his Son. And this necessarily implies that God makes the time known.” (Word to the Little Flock p.5)

        Speaking of Mathew 24:36 (‘no man knows…’), Mrs, White commented that “a clear and harmonious EXPLANATION of this text was given by those who were looking for the Lord, and the wrong use made of it by their opponents was clearly shown.” (GC 370.)

        The Advent people NEVER ignored the ‘no man knows’ texts.

        However, the common understanding that once existed among our people, has, it seems, been lost.

      • #1045
        Anonymous
        Inactive

        Stewart,

        Sorry I got in late on this one but I’ve read the whole sermon by James White on this and I totally agree.  He supports the statement very well.  If at one point in the future we are to know the time and the hour then there must be some other explanation for what was said in the scriptures.  And what James said makes total sense in that the Father will make known…not any man, or any angel but the Father will make known.

        So, the living righteous will know the day and the hour of Christ’s coming as it will be announced by the Father during the 7th plague.

        Notice also that in your quote EGW specifically says 144k in number.  And in vision she was taken into the future to see the memorial of the sanctuary outside the city and the 144k names are inscribed in gold outside of the memorial.

      • #1046
        Anonymous
        Inactive

        Thank you for sharing, Newbie. Good comments.

        I would suggest that the Bible verses (Matthew 24:36 and Mark 13:32) — the common ‘no man knows’ texts — are both mis-translations, and that James White offered an alternative translation to help repair some of the misconceptions. (The translation he cited was an obscure one though, and I have not been able to find it for myself.)

        But the day and the very hour of Jesus’ return WILL be announced prior to the event, and I believe that Matt 24:36 points to THAT announcement.

        However, time-setting was, and still is, a big problem for us, and again I would suggest that it is for this reason that Mrs. White uses the “normal” translation of Matt 24:36, to warn our people off of the “enchanted ground” of setting dates for Jesus’ Second Coming.

        ____

        The companion text to Matthew 23:36 is Mark 13:32 —

        “But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.”

        The fact that “the Son” is included in that verse, should bring some caution, because if the Father is privy to something that the Son is NOT aware of, then their “one-ness” and equality is brought into question. The Son almost becomes subordinate to the Father [in terms of His awareness,] and this is something I cannot accept.

        ___

        Newbie, I also like you reference to the 144k “in number”.

        I hold to the view that the 144k is a literal number, and that this implies that true Christian faith will be very rare in the world.

        “Our Saviour asks the question, “When the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?” ( Luke 18:8), implying that true faith would be almost extinct.” (Heavenly Places p.105.)… Almost extinct.

    • #952
      Tammy Roesch
      Keymaster

      And here is the Great Controversy reference:

      The coming of Christ as our high priest to the most holy place, for the cleansing of the sanctuary, brought to view in Daniel 8:14; the coming of the Son of man to the Ancient of Days, as presented in Daniel 7:13; and the coming of the Lord to His temple, foretold by Malachi, are descriptions of the same event; and this is also represented by the coming of the bridegroom to the marriage, described by Christ in the parable of the ten virgins, of Matthew 25. { GC 426.1}

      In the summer and autumn of 1844 the proclamation, “Behold, the Bridegroom cometh,” was given. The two classes represented by the wise and foolish virgins were then developed—one class who looked with joy to the Lord’s appearing, and who had been diligently preparing to meet Him; another class that, influenced by fear and acting from impulse, had been satisfied with a theory of the truth, but were destitute of the grace of God. In the parable, when the bridegroom came, “they that were ready went in with him to the marriage.” The coming of the bridegroom, here brought to view, takes place before the marriage. The marriage represents the reception by Christ of His kingdom. The Holy City, the New Jerusalem, which is the capital and representative of the kingdom, is called “the bride, the Lamb’s wife.” Said the angel to John: “Come hither, I will show thee the bride, the Lamb’s wife.” “He carried me away in the spirit,” says the prophet, “and showed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God.” Revelation 21:9, 10. Clearly, then, the bride represents the Holy City, and the virgins that go out to meet the bridegroom are a symbol of the church. In the Revelation the people of God are said to be the guests at the marriage supper. Revelation 19:9. If guests, they cannot be represented also as the bride. Christ, as stated by the prophet Daniel, will receive from the Ancient of Days in heaven, “dominion, and glory, and a kingdom;” He will receive the New Jerusalem, the capital of His kingdom, “prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.” Daniel 7:14; Revelation 21:2. Having received the kingdom, He will come in His glory, as King of kings and Lord of lords, for the redemption of His people, who are to “sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob,” at His table in His kingdom ( Matthew 8:11; Luke 22:30), to partake of the marriage supper of the Lamb. { GC 426.2}

      The proclamation, “Behold, the Bridegroom cometh,” in the summer of 1844, led thousands to expect the immediate advent of the Lord. At the appointed time the Bridegroom came, not to the earth, as the people expected, but to the Ancient of Days in heaven, to the marriage, the reception of His kingdom. “They that were ready went in with Him to the marriage: and the door was shut.” They were not to be present in person at the marriage; for it takes place in heaven, while they are upon the earth. The followers of Christ are to “wait for their Lord, when He will return from the wedding.” Luke 12:36. But they are to understand His work, and to follow Him by faith as He goes in before God. It is in this sense that they are said to go in to the marriage. { GC 427.1}

      In the parable it was those that had oil in their vessels with their lamps that went in to the marriage. Those who, with a knowledge of the truth from the Scriptures, had also the Spirit and grace of God, and who, in the night of their bitter trial, had patiently waited, searching the Bible for clearer light—these saw the truth concerning the sanctuary in heaven and the Saviour’s change in ministration, and by faith they followed Him in His work in the sanctuary above. And all who through the testimony of the Scriptures accept the same truths, following Christ by faith as He enters in before God to perform the last work of mediation, and at its close to receive His kingdom—all these are represented as going in to the marriage. { GC 427.2}

    • #953
      Tammy Roesch
      Keymaster

      Here is the sentence with the 2 words in italics ~ “The followers of Christ are to “wait for their Lord, when He will return from the wedding.” Luke 12:36.” GC-427.

      Looking forward Kim, to seeing where you are going with this…. 🙂

    • #958
      Anonymous
      Inactive

      Tammy, thank you for posting both the Early Writings and Great Controversy portions that are important to the beginning of this study, along with the words that are in italics from p.427.2 (the second paragraph)

      Here is the part from the Great Controversy that has the other italics words that are important. p.426.2 (second paragraph) that is continued on p.427 the sentence that is important is right after Revelation 19.9 guest/bride as found in “If guest….as the bride.

      p.427 Clearly, then, the bride represents the Holy City, and the virgins that go out to meet the bridegroom are a symbol of the church. In the Revelation the people of God are said to be the guests at the marriage supper. Revelation 19:9. If guest, they cannot be represented also as the bride. Christ, as stated by the prophet Daniel, will receive from the Ancient of Days in heaven, “dominion, and glory, and a kingdom;” He will receive the New Jerusalem, the capital of His kingdom, “prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.” Daniel 7:14; Revelation 21:2.

      Yes, there is much to ponder in just this little bit; but there is more much more that the Bible and Sister White have tried to reveal to us. But just as the cry ‘behold the Bridegroom cometh’ was misunderstood by those in 1843-44 who gave that cry, there is much more to understand.

      (I could not get the italics to work here)

    • #965
      Anonymous
      Inactive

      So let us begin…

      The coming of Christ as our high priest to the most holy place… Daniel 8:14
      the coming of the Son of man to the Ancient of Days… Daniel 7:13
      the coming of the Lord to His temple… Malachi 3:1
      this is also represented by the coming of the bridegroom to the marriage… Matthew 25:10

      All of these events are the same event. Christ going into the Most Holy having several different purposes. He went in for the marriage, went in as High Priest, went in for the cleansing of the Temple and to receive from His Father a Kingdom. Part of the question is, are all of these events the same thing, or do they each represent a different purpose that occurs simultaneously or follow one after the other?

      It is well understood that all of these events take place in Heaven and involve the Most Holy Place. These events also involve the Holy Place because this is where all of these events have their beginning. The question is, is there any kind of a time laps between certain of these events, and if so do we have any kind of an indication given to us; from the bible or the writings of Sister White?

      What is a metaphor, and how are we to relate that metaphor with the real world?
      METAPHOR, n. [Gr. to transfer, over, to carry.] A short similitude; a similitude reduced to a single word; or a word expressing similitude without the signs of comparison. Thus “that man is a fox,” is a metaphor; but “that man is like a fox,” is a similitude or comparison. So when I say, “the soldiers fought like lions,” I use a similitude. In metaphor, the similitude is contained in the name; a man is a fox, means, a man is as crafty as a fox. So we say, a man bridles his anger, that is, restrains it as a bridle restrains a horse. Beauty awakens love or tender passions; opposition fires courage.

      METAPHORIC, METAPHORICAL, a. Pertaining to metaphor; comprising a metaphor; not literal; as a metaphorical use of words; a metaphorical expression; a metaphorical sense.

      METAPHORICALLY, adv. In a metaphorical manner; not literally.

      The understanding of what a metaphor is relating to, or what the metaphor has taken the place of is of vital importance. Sometimes people have gotten to caught up with the parable, prophecy or vision to realize/understand the true meaning and importance of the metaphor. These are what we will be looking at as we go through all of this study. Examples of metaphors given in the Bible relating to our topic are; Bridegroom/Christ; Bride/New Jerusalem; 10 virgins/church; Marriage/? (what does it really mean?) and guest/church. We have the answers to all of these, but do we? Could there be, is there something that we have missed because of the views/ideas of men? And, where did we get the ideas/understanding of these meanings from? As we saw at the beginning of this portion, there are four events, the first 3 are the reality, the 4th is a metaphor. Does the metaphor encapsulate the other Three?

      Here are the reality’s given in the Great Controversy on pp.426-27 and the metaphors that we associate with them. Next week I will explain what some of the problems are. Because all of what follows comes from just one paragraph found in the Great Controversy it will help keep this simple, kind of. There is more in other places but what follows is a good start.

      Christ receiving the Kingdom from the Father; this is the reality.
      The marriage represents the reception by Christ of His kingdom. Marriage is the metaphor given for this event.

      The Holy City, the New Jerusalem, is the capital and representative of the kingdom; this is the reality. (What Kingdom, might be in question)
      The Holy City, the New Jerusalem is called “the bride, the Lamb’s wife.”; Bride/wife are the metaphors used for The Holy City/New Jerusalem.
      As most will agree, the Lamb is the metaphor used for Christ.

      But they are to understand His work, and to follow Him by faith as He goes in before God.; this is the reality
      the virgins that go out to meet the bridegroom are a symbol of the church; virgins and Bridegroom are the metaphors that represent the church and Christ.

      There are two times that the term guest is used. In one of those the word guest along with another word are in italics. Why?
      In the Revelation the people of God are said to be the guests at the marriage supper. Revelation 19:9; What is the reality, are we sure?
      said to be the guests at the marriage supper.; marriage supper is the metaphor for… ? Again, do we really understand fully what is/will be taking place?

      For the third time in one paragraph we are told…
      He will receive the New Jerusalem, the capital of His kingdom,; the reality
      “prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.” Daniel 7:14; Revelation 21:2. bride/husband are the metaphors and again bride represents the New Jerusalem while husband represents Christ.

      This should give everyone enough to think about and ponder over the weekend and into next week. Read what Sister White wrote on pp.426-27 slowly. Digest each sentence for what it reveals. Ask the Holy Spirit to make things clear and plain. And if you find yourself arguing with the Holy Spirit, don’t be surprised. As we study things and find there is a different reality then what we thought it will happen. Even the Disciples argued with Jesus and questioned what He said, until He left the tomb empty.

    • #966
      Tammy Roesch
      Keymaster

      Kim, I wish you would make a post and lay it out in real simple terms what you are getting at. 🙂  I don’t know how others think, but I don’t like starting on a trip, not knowing where I’m going.  I’d rather be told the destination and then given the map as to how we are getting there.  I don’t like following along closely with someone unless I’m  sure they are on the right path. I did that once, 35 years ago, and it was a very bad mistake…took me quite a while to unlearn the error I picked up on the way.  So please, if you don’t mind, make a post and tell us where you are going…. 🙂

    • #977
      Al Roesch
      Keymaster

      Hi Stewart,
      Maybe I’m misunderstanding you, but you seem to be saying that the Father will make known the day and hour of Christ’s return.

      Of course, Ellen White in that first quote you shared says, “The voice of God…gave us the day and hour of Jesus’ Coming.” But there she’s applying it to the very end of time and Christ’s immediate return.

      Other than that application, do you believe the Father will make known the day and hour of Christ’s return?

      • This reply was modified 1 year, 8 months ago by Al Roesch.
      • #979
        Anonymous
        Inactive

        Al, other than that application — a number of days before the actual return of Christ — I do not believe that there will be any other application.

         

        No man, nor angel, nor even the Son of God Himself, will make known the day and hour of the event. The Father will announce the day and hour to His waiting people, and only they will be able to perceive it.

    • #981
      Al Roesch
      Keymaster

      I’m glad you clarified that. 🙂

    • #1060
      Tammy Roesch
      Keymaster

      Very interesting discussion…..  I don’t know where I stand on the 144,000….as to whether or not it is a literal number.

    • #1065
      Anonymous
      Inactive

      As 7th-Day Adventist who have tried to take the special Truths that we hold, to Family, loved-ones, friends or strangers the difficulty’s, rejections or arguments are well know. Telling someone that they have false understanding of Bible Truths must be done with care. All too often we accept these setbacks or rejections of the Truth we are trying to share as simply being the cost of sharing the truth. The price of being light bearers in a dark world headed to that final day of destruction.

      What if you had been one of those involved with the movement that became the 1844 loud cry; and you knew that they had misunderstood what the Bible was saying was about to happen? What if you had been a part of the Church during the 1888 General Conference and you understood the Truth about Righteousness by Faith; and you knew that the Churches concept of it was wrong? These things were clung to because of man held interpretations of what the Bible so clearly teaches and yet they were wrong in their human understanding.

      Unfortunately we have seen many groups arise with what they claim is new light, greater understanding of previously held truths. Light that only they can understand, truth that only they can interpret for us, in order for us to understand. We have seen groups as the Shepherds Rod and the Branch Dividions make these kinds of claims. We have seen Pastors and Evangelist along with laymen walk away from the teachings of our Church, all of them have claiming that they had some kind of ‘new light’, some kind of ‘new understanding’. And all of them claiming that what they have, this new message comes from the Bible and the Writings of Sister White.

      I have had Family caught up in the Shepherds Rod, I had Family that died in Waco; I was on my way there that first day with other Family members to visit with them. Gods hand kept us from arriving there. I have listened to men claiming to have some ‘new light’ that only they could explain. I have had to explain to others why it was not new light and explain to others what was wrong with these so called new light teachings. I understand very well the dangers of false prophets, false teachers and false interpretations of the Bible and Sister Whites Writings. I understand why Satan is so bent on bringing these false teachers with their false teachings into the Church that is to take the Last warning message to the World. I also understand why Satan is also as determined to keep the Churches human originated views on some very important things. We can not teach to others what we really don’t understand ourselves.

      So I ask…..

      How do you tell someone that you love that what they believe in is not truth? How do you tell a friend that what they have accepted as facts is in reality deception? How do you tell a stranger that what they have been taught and lead to believe as truth and accept as facts are nothing more than very carefully manipulated lies to keep them from finding the real truth?

      This is what I am faced with, this is what I must do in the months and few years that lay ahead. But how do I do this without offending or hurting the ones that I love? How do I speak truth to others that will be hard to understand and accept? Hard to accept only because it is not what they have been told. Hard to understand only because it will change their future, and perhaps will cause others to reject them?

      Telling the truth, helping others see beyond the cloud of confusion, lies and deception’s is one of the most difficult things to try and do. But it must be done because the Judgment Hour has come and soon the words, “It is FINISHED” will be heard. I can no longer speak baby words or have soothing conversations and expect to have an adult conversation that others will listen to AND accept the reality of what is, and what is yet to come.

      Tammy asked me, what is the point of this study? She has asked me to clearly state where I will be going with this study on the Bridegroom, the Bride, the New Jerusalem and the 10 virgins. I just hope that those who have joined in this will stay with me as I go over what I now know; stay at least long enough to see and hear the evidence that is found in the Bible and Sister Whites Writings.

      Of the 4 things that I/we will be looking at of our/the Churches understanding of, 3 of them are dangerously misunderstood. I did not come to these conclusions on my own, that was not my intent; I argued with the Holy Spirit for 6 months, using every argument that I am sure most of you will make/use as to why the Churches present basic understanding is correct: it is incorrect(thats a nice way of saying wrong). And these are….

      The Church is NOT the Bride as presently understood by us.

      The New Jerusalem is not called the Bride because we are in it. At the TIME of the Wedding we are NOT in the New Jerusalem. The City is the Bride for reasons that we have ignored or refused to accept.

      The church is the guest before, during and after the Wedding, to include being the guest even at the Wedding Supper. This understanding is, again, very critical for who we are.

      Understanding what the wedding really represents, what is taking place at the start of the wedding, why the wedding had to be put on hold, and what is really meant by the consummation of the wedding. These things along with the real understanding of what is the metaphor and what is the reality will change important views for us.

      Who the Bridegroom is, we all can agree on that one; the Bridegroom represents Christ.
      Bridegroom is the term used to represent Christ.

      The Lamb is the term/metaphor that we also use to represent Christ. But let me ask you a very important question, “Does Christ represent the Lamb?” The answer should be NO, because Christ is the reality and Lamb is the metaphor. Just as the Lamb is the metaphor for the reality so also the term Bridegroom is the metaphor for Christ who is the reality.

      Likewise, is the Bride the reality or the metaphor as it is used in Revelation and in the Great Controversy? Or is the New Jerusalem the reality, and if it(New Jerusalem) is the reality how does that change what we are being told and understand?(should understand)

      Next: a closer look at GC p.426-427 and what is wrong… or right.

    • #1084
      Tammy Roesch
      Keymaster

      Clearly Kim, this is a case where there are two different things called by the same name.  They are BOTH correct….

      Christ honored the marriage relation by making it also a symbol of the union between Him and His redeemed ones. He Himself is the Bridegroom; the bride is the church, of which, as His chosen one, He says, “Thou art all fair, My love; there is no spot in thee.”4 { AH 26.2}

      In the summer and autumn of 1844 the proclamation, “Behold, the Bridegroom cometh,” was given. The two classes represented by the wise and foolish virgins were then developed—one class who looked with joy to the Lord’s appearing, and who had been diligently preparing to meet Him; another class that, influenced by fear and acting from impulse, had been satisfied with a theory of the truth, but were destitute of the grace of God. In the parable, when the bridegroom came, “they that were ready went in with him to the marriage.” The coming of the bridegroom, here brought to view, takes place before the marriage. The marriage represents the reception by Christ of His kingdom. The Holy City, the New Jerusalem, which is the capital and representative of the kingdom, is called “the bride, the Lamb’s wife.” Said the angel to John: “Come hither, I will show thee the bride, the Lamb’s wife.” “He carried me away in the spirit,” says the prophet, “and showed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God.” Revelation 21:9, 10. Clearly, then, the bride represents the Holy City, and the virgins that go out to meet the bridegroom are a symbol of the church. In the Revelation the people of God are said to be the guests at the marriage supper. Revelation 19:9. If guests, they cannot be represented also as the bride. Christ, as stated by the prophet Daniel, will receive from the Ancient of Days in heaven, “dominion, and glory, and a kingdom;” He will receive the New Jerusalem, the capital of His kingdom, “prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.” Daniel 7:14; Revelation 21:2. Having received the kingdom, He will come in His glory, as King of kings and Lord of lords, for the redemption of His people, who are to “sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob,” at His table in His kingdom ( Matthew 8:11; Luke 22:30), to partake of the marriage supper of the Lamb. { GC 426.2}

       

       

       

    • #1170
      Anonymous
      Inactive

      The Lost Sheep….. and the idea of the Bride?

      When I was a child and I would hear the Parable of the Lost Sheep there was a part of that story that I had trouble with. There was a part of what Jesus said that always puzzled me, and the explanation given to me by adults did not settle the issue in my mind. That is until I read Christ Object Lessons and read what one could say is, the bigger picture. Then what Jesus said in that parable suddenly made perfect sense. Yes, it also started to help me understand what we are looking into concerning the Bride, the New Jerusalem and the 10 virgins.

      So what was the problem with the Lost Sheep Parable and how does that apply to what we are looking into regarding the Bride, the New Jerusalem and the 10 Virgins and what seems to have been or is being missed about what we are looking into. After all everyone knows that the lost sheep represents the lost sinner…

      Jeremiah 50:6 My people hath been lost sheep: their shepherds have caused them to go astray, they have turned them away [on] the mountains: they have gone from mountain to hill, they have forgotten their restingplace.

      Matthew 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into [any] city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
      10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
      10:7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.
      (10:16 Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.)

      15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

      And now to the Parable of the Lost Sheep.
      Luke 15:3 And he spake this parable unto them, saying,
      15:4 What man of you, having an hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it?
      15:5 And when he hath found [it], he layeth [it] on his shoulders, rejoicing.
      15:6 And when he cometh home, he calleth together [his] friends and neighbours, saying unto them, Rejoice with me; for I have found my sheep which was lost.
      15:7 I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance.

      Considering what is said in Jeremiah and Matthew it would seem to be very clear as to who the lost sheep represents; the lost sheep of the House of Israel, and by extension, after Israels rejection, all of Humanity. But Jesus said that He spoke the truth through parables for a reason; to the disciples the Truth was spoken plainly, if/when they asked and were ready to hear the truth. It is what Jesus said that was done to the 99 other sheep, in the parable, that always puzzled me. They were left in the wilderness. While the shepherd went to look for the one lost sheep the 99 were left in the wilderness?

      When I was young, 4-12 years old, and I would hear the story of the Lost Sheep, I would ask, what did he do with the 99 other sheep? Why did he leave them in the wilderness? I can still recall the answer I was given the first time I asked that question. I also realized years later why Jesus said unless we become as little children. Children usually don’t jump to conclusions or make assumptions, they take things as they are said. What the Sabbath School teacher told me when I was 4, what I have heard from most adults ever sense that first time has been close to the same answer. “Well of course the Shepard put them in the sheep pen before he went looking for the lost sheep.” or “He left the other 99 sheep with the other sheep herders that were with him.” But that is not what Jesus said or implied. He clearly stated he left them in the wilderness. So, what was Jesus in a parable, trying to help us understand, that would be a much bigger picture of reality?

      The answer is tucked away in Christ Object Lessons chapter 19, p190-91; The rabbis understood Christ’s parable as applying to the publicans and sinners; but it has also a wider meaning. By the lost sheep Christ represents not only the individual sinner but the one world that has apostatized and has been ruined by sin. This world is but an atom in the vast dominions over which God presides, yet this little fallen world–the one lost sheep–is more precious in His sight than are the ninety and nine that went not astray from the fold. Christ, the loved Commander in the heavenly courts, stooped from His high estate, laid aside the glory that He had with the Father, in order to save the one lost world. For this He left the sinless worlds on high, the ninety and nine that loved Him, and came to this earth, to be “wounded for our transgressions” and “bruised for our iniquities.” (Isaiah 53:5.) God gave Himself in His Son that He might have the joy of receiving back the sheep that was lost.

      “Joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance.” Of course in COL these words follow the above sentence; “You Pharisees, said Christ, regard yourselves as the favorites of heaven. You think yourselves secure in your own righteousness. Know, then, that if you need no repentance, My mission is not to you.”
      {also found in PERIODICALS; GCB – The General Conference Bulletin; December 1, 1895; Seeking the Lost; p638.4: YI – The Youth’s Instructor; October 17th; 1895; Humanity the Lost Pearl (conclusion) 2nd paragraph

      The Pharisees didn’t think that they needed repentance, but we know that all of Earth need to repent, because all humans are by nature sinners and therefore lost. So who else, really, needs no repentance, because they have never sinned? The answer really is a simple one; all of the other worlds that God has created life on(“This world is but an atom in the vast dominions over which God presides,”). And that is the bigger picture that the parable of the Lost Sheep reveals to us. That is what we are told in COL, “this little fallen world–the one lost sheep–”, but why did Jesus say that the, other worlds, were left in the wilderness? It wasn’t the lost sheep, ‘the sinner’ or ‘this lost world’, that had wondered off into the wilderness, it was the 99 (the righteous, or unfallen worlds) that were left in the wilderness. Why would Jesus give that kind of idea/meaning? This is not the only place that the term wilderness is used that should have caused people to pause for at least a moment and puzzle over what was said.

      The great disappointment of 1844 was caused by one simple misunderstanding of what the real meaning of the term, Sanctuary, meant or was referring to. A misunderstanding that was based entirely on mans concept or interpretation of, what was, the Sanctuary. It had nothing to do with what the Bible clearly states regarding the identity of the Sanctuary to be cleansed. Like wise, the Bible is very clear as to who or what the Bride is; likewise so is the Great Controversy. It is man’s insistence to apply a meaning/interpretation to the metaphor Bride that has, like the 1844 misunderstanding, kept us from understanding the true importance of certain events.

      Here now are the terms/ideas used or given regarding the Bride, the New Jerusalem and the 10 Virgins. Here is what both the Bible and the Great Controversy have to say.
      Bride and New Jerusalem go hand in hand, one is the metaphor, the other is the REALITY.

      Revelation 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.
      21:2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
      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 show thee the bride, the Lamb’s wife.
      21:10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
      21:11 Having the glory of God: and her light [was] like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal;
      22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come.

      Great Controversy (1888) p426.2
      The holy city, the New Jerusalem, which is the capital and representative of the kingdom, is called “the bride, the Lamb’s wife.”

      Said the angel to John, “Come hither, I will show thee the bride, the Lamb’s wife.” “He carried me away in the spirit,” says the prophet, “and showed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of Heaven from God.” [Revelation 21:9, 10.] Clearly, then, the bride represents the holy city, and the virgins that go out to meet the bridegroom are a symbol of the church.

      Rev. 3:12 “the name of the city of my God, [which is] new Jerusalem”
      “which cometh down out of heaven”
      “from my God”
      Rev. 21:2 “the holy city, new Jerusalem”
      “coming down from God out of heaven”
      “prepared as a bride adorned”
      :9 “I will show thee the bride”
      “the Lamb’s wife”
      :10 “showed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem”
      “descending out of heaven from God”
      :11 “Having the glory of God”
      “and her light [was] like unto a stone most precious”
      Rev. 22:17 “And the Spirit and the bride say, Come”
      “And let him that heareth say, Come”

      Clearly from all of these verses “Bride” and “Lambs Wife” is the metaphor/symbol used to describe one thing and one thing only: the New Jerusalem. The phrase “prepared as a bride adorned” is a description of how the New Jerusalem LOOKS. The New Jerusalem, the Holy city, has been made ready, adorned, prepared for a special event. The question should be, “what is that special event?”, because we, the faithful virgins are NOWHERE to be seen at the location of and/or at the event that the Holy City has been made ready for. However we are given clear statements by Sister White in the Great Controversy that SHOULD HAVE made things very clear on all of this. And Yes, there is a lot more information elsewhere in the Bible and Sister Whites writings to confirm what I am saying.

      Great Controversy 1888, p426.2
      “The holy city, the New Jerusalem” (the reality)
      “which is the capital and representative of the kingdom” (Capital/reality of the Kingdom in/of Heaven)
      “is called “the bride, the Lamb’s wife.”” (the metaphor/symbol) just as Lamb is a metaphor/symbol

      “Clearly, then, the bride represents the holy city” (bride/metaphor represents the holy city/reality)
      Let me state again, what the Holy Spirit, has revealed to us through Sister White.
      “CLEARLY, then, (in short there can be no mistake or misunderstanding) the bride (which is the metaphor/symbol) REPRESENTS (is the term used to describe or in place of the reality) the HOLY CITY. (CLEARLY the Holy City is the REALITY and has NOTHING to do with the church on Earth)

      But Sister White did not stop “clarifying” things for us at that point.

      “the virgins that go out to meet the bridegroom” (metaphors/symbols used, in place of, their realities)
      “are a symbol of the church” (they are the metaphor/symbol for the reality: church is the reality)

      But Sister White does not stop there, she again states things in a very clear manner.

      “In the Revelation the people of God are said to be the guests at the marriage supper. [Revelation 19:9.]” guest is the metaphor/symbol used for the church which is the reality. ALSO, the term marriage supper is the metaphor/symbol for the reality. So, WHAT IS the real event?

      This next statement should have caused, and should cause every 7th-Day Adventist to ask Sister White just what was it that she was really saying? What were and still is, the main body of 7th-Day Adventist missing or misunderstanding about the whole church/bride, wedding, wedding supper concept that DOES NOT agree with or fit what the Bible and Sister white have set before us?

      “If guests, they cannot be represented also as the bride.” “cannot be represented also as” In other words, if we are one of these two, we CANNOT also be the other. And NO, we do not go from being one to being the other, and then go back to what we were to start with, i.e. the guest. The statement is very clear, ‘if we are represented as the guest, we cannot also be represent later or in between as the bride.” We are and can only be one of these two metaphors/symbols period. If we are the one, we cannot be the other; and the New Jerusalem has clearly been shown, by both the Bible and Sister White, to be what the term, the bride, represents.(it is the metaphor/symbol for)

      If anyone who reads this takes the time to look up p426-427 in the Great controversy you will see that Sister White had both the word guest and the word bride italicized. Why was she trying to draw our attention to those two words? Also I think it important that everyone should notice that 3 times in one paragraph she clearly states that the New Jerusalem, the Capital of Gods Government, that has been prepared, adorned for some very special event is referred to, by metaphor/symbolism, as the bride. The New Jerusalem is the reality, it does not represent the bride or the church. As the Capitol of God’s Government it stands for or represents that Government to all of the Universe

      Next I will be looking at what the Bible and Sister White, both say that the wedding is the metaphor/symbol of; and what the wedding supper really is. And YES, at some point I will come back to the “99 righteous, the unfallen Worlds that were ‘left in the wilderness’”

      The following statements are found in Sister Whites writings.
      The inhabitants of all other worlds are loyal and true to God; but he will not permit this one lost sheep to perish. The God of heaven is not unmindful of the world and its concerns. Jesus in heaven, one with God, the loved Commander in the heavenly courts, had stooped from his high estate, laid aside the glory that he had with the Father, in order to save the one lost world. For this he left the sinless worlds on high, the ninety and nine that loved him, and came to this earth, to be “wounded for our transgressions,” and “bruised, for our iniquities.”

      Christ by His human relationship to men drew them close to God. He clothed His divine nature with the garb of humanity, and demonstrated before the heavenly universe, before the unfallen worlds, how much God loves the children of men.

    • #1172
      Al Roesch
      Keymaster

      Hi Kim,

      Here’s a portion of what you said:

      “If guests, they cannot be represented also as the bride.” “cannot be represented also as” In other words, if we are one of these two, we CANNOT also be the other. And NO, we do not go from being one to being the other, and then go back to what we were to start with, i.e. the guest. The statement is very clear, ‘if we are represented as the guest, we cannot also be represent later or in between as the bride.” We are and can only be one of these two metaphors/symbols period.”

      Am I understanding you correctly: You seem to be saying that since the New Jerusalem is represented as the bride, and the church is represented as guests, then the church can never be represented as the bride anywhere else?

      • This reply was modified 1 year, 7 months ago by Al Roesch.
    • #1175
      Anonymous
      Inactive

      Again, I feel it important to remind people that I am a 7th-Day Adventist. This church is the last church that is to give the warning message to the World, “come out of her My people.” The World is to come out of Babylon and her daughters(apostate Protestantism and spiritualism) into the TRUTH. There must be something, some place for them to come into, a church that keeps the commandments of God and has the Faith of Jesus. Unfortunately we have been told that that church will have a great shaking that will cause many to go out before many will come in.

      As in many things there can be many applications to the same meaning/metaphor. The question is, does our thinking or viewing something as one thing, or viewing words that describe something, as applying to what we have said it is, keep us from seeing the true picture? People have been calling the church the bride of Christ as far back as the 3rd and 4th centuries. But here is the statement I am going to make that will be difficult for most to accept. There is only one at the most two verses in the New Testament that one can possible use to say that the church is the Bride. Yes, I understand the Old Testament concept of Israel being the bride of Christ. Actually it is a metaphor used to describe the relationship between God and Israel; it is important to remember that He called Israel a whore also. There is and are many verses that give a much different view as to who, rather what the church is.(I expect people will be more than willing and perhaps even eager to give me Bible verses from the New Testament that they are sure will disprove what I have said about the church not being the Bride. I look forward to that.)

      Yes, we can think of the church as the bride of Christ, and yes, Sister White refers to the church as the bride, even though she clearly states otherwise.(“Clearly, then, the bride represents the holy city”) Why would she use that kind of language, why would she say ‘clearly, then‘? But in thinking strictly of the church as being the Bride are we holding to the opinions of men, the ideas that have been formulated by humans? Where did the idea that the church is the Bride of Christ originally come from? And why? As I have stated, one would have thought that the church leaders would have asked Sister White just what she meant by the words, “The holy city, the New Jerusalem, which is the capital and representative of the kingdom is called “the bride, the Lamb’s wife.”.” They should also have asked her about her statement, “If guests, they cannot be represented also as the bride.” Because both of these statements reject the idea of the church being the Bride. One would think they would have, but they didn’t, in fact what they did do was ask her to state that the church is the Bride to agree with Uriah Smiths Book on Daniel and Revelation.

      Remember, I am not basing what I am saying on just what is said on 2 pages of the Great Controversy, there is much more elsewhere. Something that seems to be misunderstood by many SDA people today is the fact that Sister White did not influence or dictate the Biblical Doctrines that we hold to today. As the church leaders of her time, would study the Bible, find the new truths and express their new found understanding of those things, Sister White would simply confirm their findings. Often this was done through visions that she had received, sometimes before hand, but always the visions were not understood by her until the truth had been found in the Bible first. At no point in time, regarding any of the points of Doctrine did she ever say, “this is what the Bible says, now go find the prof.” Always her confirmations came after the Elders of the church had found them. What could she do if the Elders where determined to cling to the man induced idea that the church is the Bride? Her statements in the Great Controversy was one way.

      The statements found in Revelation that speaks of the Bride, are the major ones that we use to state that the church is the Bride. But it is, and can only be done by assumption on our part. Sister White very clearly says that the New Jerusalem is called the Bride. She also identified the New Jerusalem as the Capital of God’s Kingdom. What do these two concepts have in common; the Capitol of Gods Kingdom and the wedding?

      Yes, I understand the verses in Ephesians the 5th chapter that are used to say that the church is the Bride. It does not say what we think it does. I will break that one down into what is really said next time. And hopefully I will find listed, the New Testament verses that people think/believe prove that the church is the Bride. People might want to read the first 5 chapters of Ephesians.

    • #1177
      Al Roesch
      Keymaster

      Hi again Kim,
      I don’t know what you’re thinking, but you seem to be ignoring that while Ellen White in the Great Controversy does indeed say, concerning the church, “If guests, they cannot be represented also as the bride,” she at the same time, in numerous other places, also tells us that the church is represented as the bride. (I say “ignoring” because Tammy already shared with you one of the following quotes.)

      “Christ honored the marriage relation by making it also a symbol of the union between Him and His redeemed ones. He Himself is the Bridegroom; THE BRIDE IS THE CHURCH.” {Ministry of Healing 356}

      “Very close and sacred is the relation between Christ and His church—He the bridegroom, and THE CHURCH THE BRIDE.” {Education 268}

      Clearly, though Ellen White in the Great Controversy says the church is not the bride, she in other places says it is the bride. So how do we harmonize the apparent contradiction? Well, one thing that I think sheds some light on this is the following sentence from the Great Controversy, taken from the section where she says the church is not the bride. (I’ll capitalize what I believe are the key words.)

      “IN THE REVELATION the people of God are said to be the guests at the marriage supper. Revelation 19:9. If guests, they cannot be represented also as the bride.” {Great Controversy 427}

      In the light of those two quotes I started out with, it seems pretty simple to me: Just because the church is not represented as the bride “in the revelation” (19:9 & 21:9, 10), that doesn’t mean she can’t be represented as the bride in other places, as those first two quotes clearly show.

      • This reply was modified 1 year, 7 months ago by Al Roesch.
      • This reply was modified 1 year, 7 months ago by Al Roesch.
    • #1190
      Anonymous
      Inactive

      Hi Al and Tammy,
      I have not been ignoring Tammy’s questions or quotes, I have just been busy with life. Also the Wisconsin Campmeeting was this last week. Getting ready for it and then being there while also having to take care of some personal business kept me busy. That and the fact that their WiFi was not the best did not help. Also I was waiting to see if others would have questions or comments to make.

      So, what about the comments that Tammy shared from Adventist Home p26? And those shared by Al Roesch “Christ honored the marriage relation by making it also a symbol of the union between Him and His redeemed ones. He Himself is the Bridegroom; THE BRIDE IS THE CHURCH.” {Ministry of Healing 356} And “Very close and sacred is the relation between Christ and His church—He the bridegroom, and THE CHURCH THE BRIDE.” {Education 268}

      To be honest there are many other places that it would seem that Sister White has confirmed the idea that the Church is the Bride, making the point that I have made mute. One could say, the two sides of the same coin. In fact, depending on how one looks at it, there are over 25+ different places/sources where she makes this connection. Or does she really? That is what I will be looking at here because it is important that we come to this with a clear understanding.

      Can we say that the Church is the bride of Christ? “making it also a symbol of the union between Him and His redeemed ones.” MH p. 356; “Very close and sacred is the relation between Christ and His church…” Ed p. 268; “Christ honored the marriage relation by making it also a symbol of the union between Him and His redeemed ones. He Himself is the Bridegroom; the bride is the church, of which, as His chosen one, He says, “Thou art all fair, My love; there is no spot in thee.” AH p. 26. From just these three it would seem clear, or is it? What do these three statements and the many others that can be found, concerning the church being the bride, have in common?

      The most common thing that they have, is the fact that they are nothing more than quotes from other places. So what was the original quote(s) where were they made, and what may be even more important is, what was the ‘date’ that the statement was made? Also it is important to understand that, yes, something can have dual meaning, but what is the real point, that is trying to be made, by the symbol/metaphor that has been given. Here is one good example, the one that I have stated in an earlier post here. COL p 190-191 “The rabbis understood Christ’s parable as applying to the publicans and sinners; but it has also a wider meaning. By the lost sheep Christ represents not only the individual sinner but the one world that has apostatized and has been ruined by sin. This world is but an atom in the vast dominions over which God presides, yet this little fallen world–the one lost sheep–is more precious in His sight than are the ninety and nine that went not astray from the fold. Christ, the loved Commander in the heavenly courts, stooped from His high estate, laid aside the glory that He had with the Father, in order to save the one lost world. For this He left the sinless worlds on high, the ninety and nine that loved Him, and came to this earth, to be “wounded for our transgressions” and “bruised for our iniquities.” (Isaiah 53:5.) God gave Himself in His Son that He might have the joy of receiving back the sheep that was lost.” The Parable has a wider meaning according to Sister White. What does she mean by a wider meaning? Is the view of the lost sinner the narrow view of this parable, but the wider view being that this world, an atom in the vast dominions of God, is that lost sheep?

      Likewise then, what is the narrow view/meaning about the church being the Bride in contrast to the wider view/meaning that “The Holy City, the New Jerusalem, which is the capital and representative of the kingdom, is called “the bride, the Lamb’s wife.” And just when did(by Date) Sister White start to make the narrower view of the church being the Bride? This understanding is more important than what most will see or understand. For that answer we need only look at the dates of each publication of the idea that the church is the bride. Also it is important to note how many are nothing more than a repeat of a quote from another place.

      (1897) was the first time that she made the statement that, “Very close and sacred is the relation between Christ and His church—He the bridegroom, and THE CHURCH THE BRIDE.” found in Education(1903) which was taken from a manuscript that became part of Education.That would make the manuscript the original source for this quote and every other place nothing more than a copy, a repeat of this 1 statement.

      (1902) in the Ministry of Healing we find, “Christ honored the marriage relation by making it also a symbol of the union between Him and His redeemed ones. He Himself is the Bridegroom; the bride is the church, of which, as His chosen one, He says, “Thou art all fair, My love; there is no spot in thee.” Song of Solomon 4:7. Which has been copied in Adventist Home. These are the only 2 places that this statement can be found in its entirety. It has been chopped down and placed in other books and pamphlets after 1902.

      So in reality there are only two places where these two statements are made. Every other place is a copy of these statements. All of them being made after the Date of 1896, eight years after the Great Controversy was published. And more years than that in regards to all of the many other statements that she made concerning the Bride, the Marriage and the Wedding Supper prior to 1896. The term that is used the most for the connection/relationship between Christ and the Church in both the New Testament and Sister Whites writings is, He is the Head, the church is the Body. The other term used is that we are Orphans waiting for the adoption. Another term used by Sister White is that we are to wait for Christ to return from the Wedding. If we are the Bride and there is a wedding why are we not there? And why are we to wait the return of Christ from the wedding? To which we must ask, “What really is the wedding all about, What is taking place at the wedding?” Remember, Jesus does not come for us until after the wedding is over.

      Also, how do you fit the following statements, found in these following comments, in with the idea that the church is the bride? COL p405-406 Lingering near the bride’s house are ten young women robed in white. Each carries a lighted lamp and a small flagon for oil. All are anxiously watching for the appearance of the bridegroom. But there is a delay. Hour after hour passes; the watchers become weary and fall asleep. At midnight the cry is heard, “Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him.” The sleepers, suddenly awaking, spring to their feet. They see the procession moving on, bright with torches and glad with music. They hear the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride. (RH Oct 31, 1899)… “This parable is not a representation of open sinners, but of those who profess Christ. The bride is the church who is waiting for the second appearing of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. In the proclamation of the first and second angels of Revelation 14, a special message has come to our world.” Who do the 10 Virgins, all 10, hear the voices of? Is this church on Earth the only church in the entire Universe?(Rev. 22:17) Are we the only ones that worship God??

      Most people will quickly turn to Ephesians 5: 23-27, 32 and use these verses to say that Paul is showing that the church is the Bride of Christ. Their evidence and conclusion hanging on verse 32. But is that what Paul is saying or is that what we want to make it say?
      5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
      5:24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so [let] the wives [be] to their own husbands in every thing.
      5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
      5:26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
      5:27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
      5:32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

      V23 the husband is the head of the wife just as Christ is the head of the church. The church being the body of Christ. (Chpt 1-4:32, 5:30)
      V24 as the church is subject to Christ, let wives be to their husbands
      V25 husbands love your wives, even as Christ loved the church and died for it.
      V26 that he might sanctify and cleanse it…
      V27 that he might present it… that it shouldbe holy…
      V32 this is a great mysterybut I speak concerning Christ and the church.

      What mystery is there concerning Christ and the church? What is Paul trying to get across to his readers by his comparison of the husband and wife relationship in comparison to Christ and the church? First off, he tells us that Christ is the head and the members of the church are like the different parts of the body. Each having its own place in the body, having its own special purpose. Likewise each member in the church has their own special place in the church, having their own talents given to them by God for the health and growth of the church(the many different body parts). This is the continuing theme starting in chapter 1 and continues all the way into chapter 5. Then Paul starts to talk about the type of relationship that should be between the husband and wife. A relationship that should mirror the relationship that Jesus had/has with the church. A relationship that is based on Love, respect, caring and the giving of oneself totally for the marriage, just as Christ did for the church. None of these verses say that the church is the bride or the wife of Christ; they demonstrate in words and the actions of Jesus, the type of relationship that God requires between a husband and wife. (See v28-29)

      As for the mystery that Paul speaks of? He speaks of the mystery right after he says, 5:31-32(first part) “For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh“. “This is a great mystery:” How can a man and a woman become one flesh??? That is the mystery that Paul speaks of. But what had Paul been talking about for 4+ chapters before he, sidetracked, himself by talking about husbands and wives? The relationship between Christ the HEAD and the church the BODY, v32(last part) but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Eph. 5:30 “For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones”. Paul is not saying that it is a mystery how the church can be the bride of Christ.

      I will add more later this week, I hope. And yes, there is more, a lot more. A question to ponder, “Why was it that Sister White waited until 1896 before she started making comments about the church being the Bride?

      here are all of the places that reference the church being the bride and some places that reference the ‘Spirit and the Bride’.
      Adventist Home p.26 (1952)
      The Ministry of Healing p.356 (1905)
      Education p.268 (1903)
      Evangelism p.318 (1946)
      A Call to Stand p.65 (2002)
      Christ Triumphant (1999)
      manuscript 115, 1897
      The General Conference Bulletin
      July 1, 1902 p.670 reading for Dec. 27th
      The Gospel Herald May 28 (1902)
      HM-The Home Missionary
      Aug 1 (1896)
      The Faith I Live By
      My Life Today (1952)
      Selected Messages book 1 (1958)
      the Youth’s Instructor August 11, (1898) The Risen Saviour part 2
      7BC S.D.A. Bible Commentary Vol. 7 (1957)
      Letter 123 1/2 (1898)
      Letter 177 (1901)
      Letter 39 (1902)
      Special Testimonies on Education (1897)
      The Review and Herald (originally called ‘The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald’)
      Oct 31, (1899)
      Jan 27, (1891)
      Apr 29, (1909)
      Mar 24, (1910)
      Nov 12, (1914)
      MR16 Manuscript Releases Vol. 16 [Nos. 1186-1235] (1990)
      MR No. 1223
      MR No. 1224 (1898)
      MR No. 1234 (1902)
      Ms 121 p.17 (1899)
      Letter 123a (1898)

    • #1197
      Anonymous
      Inactive

      I had hoped that more would have become interested and involved in this discussion. I had hoped that the few who have would have ask more questions or responded to questions ask. I decided that I should add this before I go on with what appears to be a silent study on some very serious issues.

      Are we doing as GOD has instructed, or are we following in the footsteps of the Pharisees? This is not a simple question, it is a very serious one. Sister White has in many places, given us council, serious council on how we are to treat “new light” that someone may claim to have. She has also made some very serious accusations about tenaciously clinging to ideas that are not really grounded in Scripture but rather have come from the ideas and teachings of men.

      We are to search the Scriptures to see and understand for ourselves where the TRUTH can be found. If God’s people were doing this as we should have been from the start, there would be new increasing truth found, and misconceptions of mans thinking corrected. Sadly, as was proven in 1888, certain men of position having limited understanding that fit the desires of their hearts on the Law and Salvation, Righteousness by Faith was rejected. And this in spite of the council given by Sister White to listen to what Jones and Wagner had to say. These same men who rejected Righteousness by Faith also refused to listen to and understand other truths that Sister White hinted at.

      What follows comes from different places in Sister Whites writings. All of the bold and/or italics were added by me for the purpose of drawing attention to, or to emphasize what has been said by, or written for our instruction.

      Maintaining Truth Not to Preclude New Light.— It is a fact that we have the truth, and we must hold with tenacity to the positions that cannot be shaken; but we must not look with suspicion upon any new light which God may send, and say, Really, we cannot see that we need any more light than the old truth which we have hitherto received, and in which we are settled. While we hold to this position, the testimony of the True Witness applies to our cases its rebuke, “And knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked.” Those who feel rich and increased with goods and in need of nothing, are in a condition of blindness as to their true condition before God, and they know it not.–Review and Herald, August 7, 1894. {CW 33.1}
      Led of God, but Not Infallible.–We must not think, “Well, we have all the truth, we understand the main pillars of our faith, and we may rest on this knowledge.” The truth is an advancing truth, and we must walk in the increasing light. {CW 33.2}
      A brother asked, “Sister White, do you think we must understand the truth for ourselves? Why can we not take the truths that others have gathered together, and believe them because they have
      34
      investigated the subjects, and then we shall be free to go on without the taxing of the powers of the mind in the investigation of all these subjects? Do you not think that these men who have brought out the truth in the past were inspired of God?” {CW 33.3}
      I dare not say they were not led of God, for Christ leads into all truth; but when it comes to inspiration in the fullest sense of the word, I answer, No. I believe that God has given them a work to do, but if they are not fully consecrated to God at all times, they will weave self and their peculiar traits of character into what they are doing, and will put their mold upon the work, and fashion men in religious experience after their own pattern. It is dangerous for us to make flesh our arm. We should lean upon the arm of Infinite Power. God has been revealing this to us for years. We must have living faith in our hearts and reach out for larger knowledge and more advanced light.–Review and Herald, March 25, 1890. {CW 34.1}
      Increased Light to Shine.–A spirit of pharisaism has been coming in upon the people who claim to believe the truth for these last days. They are self-satisfied. They have said, “We have the truth. There is no more light for the people of God.” But we are not safe when we take a position that we will not accept anything else than that upon which we have settled as truth. We should take the Bible, and investigate it closely for ourselves. We should dig in the mine of God’s word for truth. “Light is sown for the righteous, and gladness for the upright in heart.” Some have asked me if I thought there was any more light for the people of God. Our minds
      35
      have become so narrow that we do not seem to understand that the Lord has a mighty work to do for us. Increasing light is to shine upon us; for “the path of the just is as the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day.”–Review and Herald, June 18, 1889. {CW 34.2}
      Many Gems Yet to Be Discovered.–New light will ever be revealed on the word of God to him who is in living connection with the Sun of Righteousness. Let no one come to the conclusion that there is no more truth to be revealed. The diligent, prayerful seeker for truth will find precious rays of light yet to shine forth from the word of God. Many gems are yet scattered that are to be gathered together to become the property of the remnant people of God.–Counsels on Sabbath School Work, p. 34. (1892.) {CW 35.1}
      Investigation of Doctrine.–There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. {CW 35.2}
      We are living in perilous times, and it does not become us to accept everything claimed to be truth without examining it thoroughly; neither can we afford to reject anything that bears the fruits of the Spirit of God; but we should be teachable, meek and lowly of heart. There are those who oppose everything
      36
      that is not in accordance with their own ideas, and by so doing they endanger their eternal interest as verily as did the Jewish nation in their rejection of Christ. {CW 35.3}
      The Lord designs that our opinions shall be put to the test, that we may see the necessity of closely examining the living oracles to see whether or not we are in the faith. Many who claim to believe the truth have settled down at their ease, saying, “I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing.” –Review and Herald, December 20, 1892. {CW 36.1}
      How to Search the Scriptures.–How shall we search the Scriptures? Shall we drive our stakes of doctrine one after another, and then try to make all Scripture meet our established opinions? or shall we take our ideas and views to the Scriptures, and measure our theories on every side by the Scriptures of truth? Many who read and even teach the Bible, do not comprehend the precious truth they are teaching or studying. {CW 36.2}
      Men entertain errors, when the truth is clearly marked out; and if they would but bring their doctrines to the word of God, and not read the word of God in the light of their doctrines, to prove their ideas right, they would not walk in darkness and blindness, or cherish error. Many give the words of Scripture a meaning that suits their own opinions, and they mislead themselves and deceive others by their misinterpretations of God’s word. {CW 36.3}
      As we take up the study of God’s word, we should do so with humble hearts. All selfishness, all love of originality, should be laid aside. Long-cherished
      37
      opinions must not be regarded as infallible. It was the unwillingness of the Jews to give up their long-established traditions that proved their ruin. They were determined not to see any flaw in their own opinions or in their expositions of the Scriptures; but however long men may have entertained certain views, if they are not clearly sustained by the written word, they should be discarded. Those who sincerely desire truth will not be reluctant to lay open their positions for investigation and criticism, and will not be annoyed if their opinions and ideas are crossed. This was the spirit cherished among us forty years ago. . . . {CW 36.4}
      We have many lessons to learn, and many, many to unlearn. God and heaven alone are infallible. Those who think that they will never have to give up a cherished view, never have occasion to change an opinion, will be disappointed. As long as we hold to our own ideas and opinions with determined persistency, we cannot have the unity for which Christ prayed. {CW 37.1}
      Could those who are self-sufficient see how the universe of God regards them, could they see themselves as God sees them, they would behold such weakness, such manifest want of wisdom, that they would cry to the Lord to be their righteousness; they would want to hide from His sight. The apostle says, “Ye are not your own. For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.” When our schemes and our plans have been broken; when men who have depended upon our judgment conclude the Lord would lead them to act and judge for themselves, we should
      38
      not feel like censuring, and like exercising arbitrary authority to compel them to receive our ideas. Those who are placed in authority should constantly cultivate self-control. . . . {CW 37.2}
      Would-be Guardians of the Doctrine.The rebuke of the Lord will be upon those who would be guardians of the doctrine, who would bar the way that greater light shall not come to the people. A great work is to be done, and God sees that our leading men have need of greater light, that they may unite harmoniously, with the messengers whom He shall send to accomplish the work that He designs they should. The Lord has raised up messengers and endued them with His Spirit, and has said, “Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and show My people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins.” {CW 38.1}
      Let no one run the risk of interposing himself between the people and the message of heaven. The message of God will come to the people; and if there were no voice among men to give it, the very stones would cry out. I call upon every minister to seek the Lord, to put away pride, to put away strife after supremacy, and humble the heart before God. It is the coldness of heart, the unbelief of those who ought to have faith, that keeps the churches in feebleness.– Review and Herald, July 26, 1892. {CW 38.2}
      A Sign of Growth.–Whenever the people of God are growing in grace, they will be constantly obtaining a clearer understanding of His word. They will discern new light and beauty in its sacred truths. This has been true in the history of the church in all
      39
      ages, and thus it will continue to the end. But as real spiritual life declines, it has ever been the tendency to cease to advance in the knowledge of the truth. Men rest satisfied with the light already received from God’s word, and discourage any further investigation of the Scriptures. They become conservative, and seek to avoid discussion. {CW 38.3}
      The fact that there is no controversy or agitation among God’s people, should not be regarded as conclusive evidence that they are holding fast to sound doctrine. There is reason to fear that they may not be clearly discriminating between truth and error. When no new questions are started by investigation of the Scriptures, when no difference of opinion arises which will set men to searching the Bible for themselves, to make sure that they have the truth, there will be many now, as in ancient times, who will hold to tradition, and worship they know not what. {CW 39.1}
      I have been shown that many who profess to have a knowledge of present truth, know not what they believe. They do not understand the evidences of their faith. They have no just appreciation of the work for the present time. When the time of trial shall come, there are men now preaching to others, who will find, upon examining the positions they hold, that there are many things for which they can give no satisfactory reason. Until thus tested, they knew not their great ignorance. {CW 39.2}
      And there are many in the church who take it for granted that they understand what they believe, but, until controversy arises, they do not know their own weakness. When separated from those of like faith, and compelled to stand singly and alone to explain
      40
      their belief, they will be surprised to see how confused are their ideas of what they had accepted as truth. Certain it is that there has been among us a departure from the living God, and a turning to men, putting human wisdom in place of divine. {CW 39.3}
      God will arouse His people; if other means fail, heresies will come in among them, which will sift them, separating the chaff from the wheat. The Lord calls upon all who believe His word to awake out of sleep. Precious light has come, appropriate for this time. It is Bible truth, showing the perils that are right upon us. This light should lead us to a diligent study of the Scriptures, and a most critical examination of the positions which we hold. {CW 40.1}
      God would have all the bearings and positions of truth thoroughly and perseveringly searched, with prayer and fasting. Believers are not to rest in suppositions and ill-defined ideas of what constitutes truth. Their faith must be firmly founded upon the word of God, so that when the testing time shall come, and they are brought before councils to answer for their faith, they may be able to give a reason for the hope that is in them, with meekness and fear. {CW 40.2}
      Agitate, agitate, agitate! The subjects which we present to the world must be to us a living reality. It is important that in defending the doctrines which we consider fundamental articles of faith, we should never allow ourselves to employ arguments that are not wholly sound. These may avail to silence an opposer, but they do not honor the truth. We should present sound arguments, that will not only silence our opponents, but will bear the closest and most searching scrutiny. . . .
      41
      {CW 40.3}
      Continual Search for Greater Light.–Whatever may be man’s intellectual advancement, let him not for a moment think that there is no need of thorough and continuous searching of the Scriptures for greater light. As a people, we are called individually to be students of prophecy. We must watch with earnestness that we may discern any ray of light which God shall present to us. We are to catch the first gleamings of truth; and through prayerful study, clearer light may be obtained, which can be brought before others. {CW 41.1}
      When God’s people are at ease, and satisfied with their present enlightenment, we may be sure that He will not favor them. It is His will that they should be ever moving forward, to receive the increased and ever-increasing light which is shining for them. {CW 41.2}
      The present attitude of the church is not pleasing to God. There has come in a self-confidence that has led them to feel no necessity for more truth and greater light. We are living at a time when Satan is at work on the right hand and on the left, before and behind us; and yet as a people we are asleep. God wills that a voice shall be heard arousing His people to action.–Gospel Workers, pp. 297-300. (1915.) {CW 41.3}
      Right Spirit Essential.–Brethren, we must sink the shaft deep in the mine of truth. You may question matters with yourselves and with one another, if you only do it in the right spirit; but too often self is large, and as soon as investigation begins, an unchristian spirit is manifested. This is just what Satan delights in, but we should come with a humble heart to know for ourselves what is truth.
      42
      {CW 41.4}
      The time is coming when we shall be separated and scattered, and each one of us will have to stand without the privilege of communion with those of like precious faith; and how can you stand unless God is by your side, and you know that He is leading and guiding you? Whenever we come to investigate Bible truth, the Master of assemblies is with us. The Lord does not leave the ship one moment to be steered by ignorant pilots. We may receive our orders from the Captain of our salvation.–Review and Herald, March 25, 1890. {CW 42.1}

    • #1209
      Anonymous
      Inactive

      Investigation of Doctrine.–There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. {CW 35.2}

      The Lord designs that our opinions shall be put to the test, that we may see the necessity of closely examining the living oracles to see whether or not we are in the faith. Many who claim to believe the truth have settled down at their ease, saying, “I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing.” –Review and Herald, December 20, 1892. {CW 36.1}

      How to Search the Scriptures.–How shall we search the Scriptures? Shall we drive our stakes of doctrine one after another, and then try to make all Scripture meet our established opinions? or shall we take our ideas and views to the Scriptures, and measure our theories on every side by the Scriptures of truth? Many who read and even teach the Bible, do not comprehend the precious truth they are teaching or studying. {CW 36.2}

      When God’s people are at ease, and satisfied with their present enlightenment, we may be sure that He(GOD) will not favor them. It is His will that they should be ever moving forward, to receive the increased and ever-increasing light which is shining for them. {CW 41.2}

      Those are not my words but the words of a little old woman who talked with Jesus and angels. Those are the words spoken well after the establishment of the church. Words spoken long after the acceptance of and establishment of what we call our fundamental doctrines. But no one seems to question why Sister White would make such profound remarks. No one ask the question, “what ideas of man have we clung to that can not be supported by the Bible that would have caused Sister White to make such statements?” Why have we, why are we so willing to claim that we have made no mistakes in our interpretation of Bible teachings. According to Sister White there is some teaching of man that we have and are determined to cling to that does not agree with the Bible.

      There is an event and a time that we call the great disappointment of 1844. The claims made that Jesus was soon to return to this Earth and cleans it of evil were wrong. The understanding of and teaching of this incorrect doctrinal belief was based on a concept that comes from the very church that is called the beast. Based on a teaching that came out of the whore Babylon, a teaching claimed by every christian church; and still claimed by many. The concept that this earth is the temple to be cleansed. Although now the teaching is that the body is that temple said to be cleansed according to the book of Daniel. The understanding was wrong, the pretext of the message was wrong. Jesus was not coming to this Earth to cleanse it. As 7th-Day Adventist we understand this and are willing to explain what was wrong with the Millerit explanation.

      But it is important to realize that even though their understanding was wrong as to what and were, because of human teachings, the core of the message was correct. Yes, Jesus was coming to the Temple for judgment and to cleanse it. Yes, as part of the cleansing of that Temple of our sins Jesus would bring an end to sin. The location was wrong not the event, even though an understanding of the event was basically wrong. As 7th-Day Adventist we accept the misunderstanding that was made and explain, from the Bible, what the correct understanding is. The reason we are able to do this is because we turned to the Bible, studied its words and listened to the Holy Spirit. We realized that the Earth or our bodies are not the Temple spoken of by Daniel but rather the real Temple in Heaven. Putting away the teachings, concepts of the whore Babylon we found the truth.

      As the movement grew and a deep study of the Bible took place by those who stayed with the truth, more truth was found out, revealed. The truth had been there all along, man simply began to accept what the Bible said over the opinions or teachings of man. The Sabbath, the health message, the state of the dead, true moral conduct and dress just to name a few. It is why the 7th-Day Adventist church has their 28 fundamental beliefs. BUT once again I have to ask the question, “if we had/have the full truth, if we have everything right/correct in our understanding then why would Sister White state otherwise and it is clear that she has.” I must point out that our doctrinal beliefs and understandings have not changed as far back as the 1888 General Conference and farther.

      The great disappointment was caused because men followed the teaching of the antichrist as to, what and where, was/is the Temple. Think about that; protestants had blindly accepted the argument given by the antichrist. They have and still are accepting doctrines and teachings of the whore Babylon, it is why they are called her daughters. Blindly accepting a teaching of the antichrist led to a great disappointment for Gods people until they turned to the Bible with open hearts and minds. But according to Sister White there is more to understand, man has driven stakes into the ground and then tried to make all Scripture meet their established opinions. Instead of that type of attitude and actions we must willingly measure our theories on every side by the Scriptures of truth and see if they hold up.

      What does this have to do with our topic of study?? It has everything to do with the accepted view that the Church, not the New Jerusalem, is the Bride of Revelation. It has everything to do with the fact that just like in 1844, even though man had things wrong the events and purposes of God took place. Likewise, because of our misunderstanding, because we have accepted the teaching of the antichrist as to who the Bride is and why, we have become blind, naked and poor.

      It is the whore Babylon that first claimed that the church was the bride of Christ. In her writings, teachings, doctrinal claims and church functions she declares herself to be the bride of Christ. It is in part because of this claim that the antichrist claims to have the authority of God and the right to change the Law of God. And this concept of the church being the bride has been passed on down from one religious group to the next, regardless of what the New Testament writers and Jesus have said. And for 7th_Day Adventist, regardless of what Sister White expressed on the subject for over 40 years.

      Yes, it is true that in the Old Testament the Children of Israel are referred to as being the bride of God, of being His wife. A child that He picked up out of the gutter, washed clean and gave fine clothes to wear. A young woman that when she came of age He took to Himself as His bride. He also told of her lusting after strange flesh, of going after other gods. God also called her a whore, a woman who had defiled herself with many men. He also declared to her that because of her unfaithfulness, her adulterous ways, He was going to divorce her, cast her aside and find a new pure woman. 7th-Day Adventist teach that this divorce, this rejection of Israel took place at the stoning of Stephen. Jesus spoke of this rejection of Israel by God in his parables. The New Testament writers spoke of that rejection and called it the good news for the gentiles.

      But in not one parable or remark by Jesus did He hint at the idea that the redeemed would be His bride. In fact He called us orphans, servents or guest. Likewise, if looked at with an open and honest mind, it is clear that not one of the New Testament writers openly called the church the bride at the wedding. In fact a term used was that we are waiting for the adoption, and that we are the body of Christ if we live in and through Him. The connection of the church being the bride can only be made if we cling to our ideas on the bride, accept the teaching of the whore of Babylon as to who the bride is, and twist the scriptures to fit the stakes that we have blindly driven into the ground. But to do so requires that we turn our backs(minds) on the many verses in the New Testament, and even in the Old Testament, that reveal a much different picture, a much bigger picture that includes the whole universe. It means that we must reject or explain away statements, very clear statements, about the Bride, the quest and the Holy City that have been made by a person that we say talked with Jesus and angels. It means that we must reject the words written for our understanding and enlightenment by a woman that we say wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

      Yes I realize that I have made some very bold statements here. Yes I understand that I am saying that, Gods final church of hope for this condemned World, has accepted a teaching of the antichrist as being truth instead of carefully studying scripture to understand what the Bible really reveals. Accepted the position that the whore Babylon claims for herself, a position that Sister White tried to open our eyes to. A view that when fully understood will become part of the shaking that she warned us about. But those who seek truth, those who pant after truth as a thirsty man does for water, those who are willing to open their Bible and read what it says will be rewarded.

      Next, 3 statements found in the book Early Writings that do not agree with the idea of the church being the bride.

      It looks like no one is following this any more. Sadly it doesn’t look like many are visiting this site any more.

    • #1211
      Anonymous
      Inactive

      The Bride of Christ is the church refined, and also the New Jerusalem.

Viewing 19 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.