The Bride of Christ


Most churches in Christendom teach the Church is the “bride of Christ.” But the phrase “bride of Christ” does not occur in the Bible. Furthermore, the imagery of the Church as bride is thin at best. The goal of this study is to examine whether the teaching that the Church, the body of Christ, is the bride of Christ has Biblical merit.

The Bride in the Old Testament

In the Old Testament, the idea of Israel as the “wife” of God is developed. Though Israel was “married” to God she proved an unfaithful spouse. The nation’s unfaithfulness was expressed as spiritual adultery: it deserted Him for false gods, e.g., Baal, Asherah, Molech, Dagon, etc. Despite these failures, God declared the nation would return to Him, that they would become what He had purposed for them, and that He would fulfill His covenant promises to them. According to God’s promise, the entire nation would become priests (Exodus 19.6) and a faithful wife. With this in mind, Isaiah wrote:

“Fear not, for you will not be put to shame; and do not feel humiliated, for you will not be disgraced; but you will forget the shame of your youth, and the reproach of your widowhood you will remember no more. “For your husband is your Maker, whose name is the LORD of hosts; and your Redeemer is the Holy One of Israel, who is called the God of all the earth. “For the LORD has called you, like a wife forsaken and grieved in spirit, even like a wife of one’s youth when she is rejected,” says your God. “For a brief moment I forsook you, but with great compassion I will gather you. “In an outburst of anger I hid My face from you for a moment, but with everlasting lovingkindness I will have compassion on you,” says the LORD your Redeemer (Isaiah 54.4-8).

1 For Zion’s sake I will not keep silent, and for Jerusalem’s sake I will not keep quiet, until her righteousness goes forth like brightness, and her salvation like a torch that is burning. 2 The nations will see your righteousness, and all kings your glory; and you will be called by a new name which the mouth of the Lord will designate. 3 You will also be a crown of beauty in the hand of the Lord, and a royal diadem in the hand of your God. 4 It will no longer be said to you, “Forsaken,” nor to your land will it any longer be said, “Desolate”; but you will be called, “My delight is in her,” and your land, “Married”; for the Lord delights in you, and to Him your land will be married. 5 For as a young man marries a virgin, so your sons will marry you; and as the bridegroom rejoices over the bride, so your God will rejoice over you (Isaiah 62.1-5).

Jeremiah wrote:

“Return, faithless people,” declares the LORD, “for I am your husband. I will choose you—one from a town and two from a clan—and bring you to Zion (Jeremiah 3.14).

31 “Behold, days are coming,” declares the LORD, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them,” declares the LORD. 33 “But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,” declares the LORD, “I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people (Jeremiah 31.31-33).

God used the prophet Hosea’s personal life as an object lesson to instruct idolatrous Israel. To present His case, God told Hosea to marry an idolatrous woman,1 to represent Israel’s faithlessness in serving other gods. Hosea had three children by his wife, Gomer. Their names depicted God’s judgment of the nation. The first child, a son, was named Jezreel (God scatters). God judged (scattered) the northern kingdom with the Assyrian invasion (722 B.C.). The second child was a daughter named Lo-ruhama (not pitied) and the third child, a son, was named Lo-ammi (not my people). But God’s disfavor would be temporary. He promised that the nation would repent of its unfaithfulness and return to Him. Hosea wrote:

14 “Therefore, behold, I will allure her, bring her into the wilderness and speak kindly to her. 15 “Then I will give her her vineyards from there, and the valley of Achor as a door of hope. And she will sing there as in the days of her youth, as in the day when she came up from the land of Egypt. 16 “It will come about in that day,” declares the LORD, “That you will call Me Ishi and will no longer call Me Baali. 17 “For I will remove the names of the Baals from her mouth, so that they will be mentioned by their names no more. 18 “In that day I will also make a covenant for them with the beasts of the field, the birds of the sky and the creeping things of the ground. And I will abolish the bow, the sword and war from the land, and will make them lie down in safety. 19 “I will betroth you to Me forever; Yes, I will betroth you to Me in righteousness and in justice, in lovingkindness and in compassion, 20 And I will betroth you to Me in faithfulness. Then you will know the LORD (Hosea 2.14-20).

In this tender passage, God is seen as a courting lover. He “allures” the object of His love and speaks kindly to her. The passage speaks of a refreshed relationship in which His wife (Israel) will call Him  אִישִׁי “my husband,” “my man” (Ishi) instead of בַּעְלִי “my Lord.” Baal (בַּעַל) was one of the false gods Israel discovered when they came into the land of Canaan (Numbers 22.41; Judges 2.13). In the prophecy of this restored relationship, in which God will put His Spirit into the nation (Jeremiah 31.31-40), the animal kingdom will also be at peace (Isaiah 11.6-9) and war will be no more (Isaiah 2.1-4). This renewed betrothal will be eternal and Israel will know the Lord–the One True God.2

The Bride in Revelation

The book of Revelation reads like an Old Testament book. And for good reason. Most of its symbols and imagery are found in the prophets. To a discerning reader, it should be clear that Jesus’ messages to the assemblies (ἐκκλησία) in Revelation 2-3 were not Christian, i.e., Pauline churches. The language the Lord used towards them has no correspondence to the language or the concepts Paul had received and communicated to Christian churches. John wrote to these seven Jewish assemblies to encourage them in the tribulation they were experiencing (cf. Revelation 1.9). Of the seven cities Jesus mentioned, only three are found elsewhere in the Bible: Ephesus (Acts 18.19, 21, 24, 19.1, 17, 26, 35, 20.16, 17; 1 Corinthians 15.32, 16.8, Ephesians 1.1, 1 Timothy 1.3; 2 Timothy 1.18, 4.12), Thyatira (Acts 16.14), and Laodicea (Colossians 2.1, 4.13, 15-16; 1 Timothy 6.21). We have no information about Smyrna, Pergamon, Sardis, or Philadelphia. The events of Revelation remain future. Those who have attempted to make church history correspond with the messages to these churches (historicists–see below example) or worse, have tried to fit the events into a pre-70 A.D. timeframe (preterists), have replaced sound exegesis with fantasy.

The character of these assemblies is Jewish. No Church, i.e., body of Christ, doctrine is present in them. The Lord’s message to them is wholly different from the language He gave to Paul for the body of Christ. No hint of the gospel or the doctrines of grace may be found in Jesus’ words to these assemblies. Jesus’ refrain is “he who has an ear, let him hear” and His command is to persevere and endure. None of this is present in Paul. The warnings Jesus gave the assemblies echo His warnings to the Twelve on the Mount of Olives. In that address, He warned them not to be deceived and to endure to the end (Matthew 24.4, 11, 24, 13). The great temptation that will confront Israel, as well as the world, during the period of time foretold by Revelation, will be to accept a false Messiah. This will involve the worship of Satan, the beast (Satan’s man, the Antichrist), the Antichrist’s image, and the taking of his mark (Revelation 13.4, 8, 15, 16-17). Jesus’ refrain to the seven assemblies is repeated in Revelation 13.9. In Revelation 14.9-11, God’s angel warned of the consequences of submitting to the temptation. Revelation 14.12 describes the “patience,” “perseverance,” or “endurance” (ὑπομονή) Jesus described in the Jewish assemblies in Revelation 2.3, 19, 3.10. During this period of time salvation is possible only through endurance (Matthew 24.13). Jesus’ words about salvation during this period are as straightforward as words can be: only by enduring to the end, i.e., the end of one’s life (martyrdom) or until He returns is salvation possible.

Since the book is primarily about Israel and reads like the Old Testament, one conclusion remains: that is what it is. The bride of Revelation 19 is Israel, not the Church, the body of Christ, since the Church is nowhere in the book. John wrote:

Let us rejoice and be glad and give the glory to Him, for the marriage of the Lamb has come and His bride has made herself ready.” It was given to her to clothe herself in fine linen, bright and clean; for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints. then he *said to me, “Write, ‘Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb’” (Revelation 19.7-9).

In the marriage of the Lamb, we read that the bride has made herself ready. Does this sound like the Church, the body of Christ? Paul declared members of the body of Christ have been made complete in Christ (ἐστὲ ἐν αὐτῷ πεπληρωμένοι, Colossians 2.10). The Church needs no “preparation.” We are complete in Him! No, the bride here is Israel and the “marriage of the Lamb” is the reconciliation of Israel with God which the prophets foretold.

In Revelation 21, John described a new heaven and new earth (Revelation 21.1) to replace the old heaven and earth which had departed (ἀπέρχομαι). Along with the new heaven and earth is the new Jerusalem. It comes down from heaven onto the new earth (Revelation 21.2). John described the city as a bride adorned for her husband. In Revelation 21.9, one of the seven angels of the seven bowls showed John the bride, called the wife of the Lamb. This was the new Jerusalem. Again, everything is Jewish. The city has twelve gates with the names of the twelve tribes of Israel written on them (Revelation 21.12). The twelve foundation stones have the names of the twelve apostles (Revelation 21.14; cf. Matthew 19.28). Nothing of the Church is here.

Israel had both an earthly and a heavenly calling. They were called out from among the nations of the earth and given earthly promises, e.g., a kingdom and preeminence among the nations (Deuteronomy 28.1, 13). But they had a heavenly calling also, described in Hebrews 3.1 that began with Abraham, cf. Hebrews 11.8-10. Abraham anticipated (ἐκδέχομαι) a heavenly city. How much he knew of it is unknown. But he looked for a heavenly city. The new Jerusalem of Revelation 21 was that city.

The first two callings pertain to Israel. The third calling is for the Church, the body of Christ (Ephesians 1.18; 2 Timothy 1.9). God’s promises to the Church are wholly heavenly, not earthly (Ephesians 1.3, 2.6; Philippians 3.20).

Paul and the Bride of Christ?

Paul taught that the Church was the body of Christ (Ephesians 1.22-23; Colossians 1.18, 24) and that believers become members of His body through the baptism of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12.13). This revelation was one of the “secrets” (μυστήριον) the glorified Lord revealed to Paul alone. Paul was the only writer of Scripture who taught that the Church was the body of Christ. He declared that before him this truth was not known (Ephesians 3.3-7).

We have established that the Scriptures teach that the Church is the body of Christ. How is it most of Christendom teaches the Church is the bride of Christ? Two passages have been used to make this argument. They are the following:

2 Corinthians 11.2

For I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy; for I betrothed you to one husband, so that to Christ I might present you as a pure virgin.

Read out of context, this passage may appear to support the idea that the Church is the bride of Christ. But the verses that follow correct such wandering. Paul continued,

But I am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ. For if one comes and preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted, you bear this beautifully. For I consider myself not in the least inferior to the most eminent apostles. But even if I am unskilled in speech, yet I am not so in knowledge; in fact, in every way we have made this evident to you in all things (2 Corinthians 11.3-6).

Paul’s point was to encourage the Corinthians to remain faithful to Christ and his gospel (1 Corinthians 15.1-4). Paul constantly had to defend his ministry–from both unbelievers and believers. From his words in this passage, he recognized he was not the most polished speaker. But in terms of knowledge, he was far ahead of anyone else: he was God’s apostle to the Gentiles (Romans 11.13). The risen Lord had commissioned him and revealed to him secrets no one else knew.3 Paul’s choice of words to the Corinthians, “present you as a pure virgin” was to illustrate his desire for holy living for these believers, not to teach that the Church is the bride of Christ–any more than Paul taught that he was their mother (Galatians 4.19) or their father (1 Corinthians 4.15).

Ephesians 5.22-33

22 Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24 But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything. 25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, 26 so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless. 28 So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; 29 for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, 30 because we are members of His body. 31 FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND SHALL BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH. 32 This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church. 33 Nevertheless, each individual among you also is to love his own wife even as himself, and the wife must see to it that she respects her husband.

In the passage above, Paul argued that as a husband is the head of a wife, Christ is the head of the Church. This fit with Paul’s teaching that the Church is the body of Christ with Christ Himself as the Head (Ephesians 1.22; Colossians 1.18). Paul noted that husbands should love their wives as their own bodies (v. 28) because no one ever hated his own flesh (v.29). One nourishes his body and cherishes it (v.29). It is this nourishing and care of a husband for his own body that Paul used to make the analogy regarding Christ’s care for His Church, i.e., His body (v. 29-30). Paul quoted Genesis 2.24, not to make a point about the husband/wife relationship or that the Church is the bride of Christ but to emphasize the unity and care for the body. Paul declared this was a great “secret” (μυστήριον) but that he spoke with reference to Christ and His Church (v. 32).

Since the Church is the body of Christ it means that if Christ is the bridegroom we are part of His groomsmanship. Thus, we are of the bridegroom, not the bride!


Wife and bride are titles that belong to Israel, not the Church. Our title is “the body of Christ.” As the body, we are of the bridegroom, not the bride. If you cannot tell the bridegroom from the bride at a marriage it is going to be a confusing wedding. But God is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14.33). He wishes believers to understand who they are, where they fit in His plan, and what promises belong to them. When we do, we can rejoice in the grace God has given to us and serve and honor Him effectively.

1 Hosea’s wife אֵשֶׁת זְנוּנִים (Hosea 1.2) was most likely an idolater, not a physical prostitute. This is what seems to be indicated in Hosea 2.8, 13, 3.1, 4.12-19, etc. God used Hosea’s personal life to address the spiritual adultery of the nation, their unfaithfulness to God as Israel’s husband.
2 See the author’s study, The One True God.
See the author’s study, Paul’s “Mystery”.

©2012 Don Samdahl. Anyone is free to reproduce this material and distribute it, but it may not be sold.

Updated January 4, 2014

Save pagePDF pageEmail pagePrint page

521 thoughts on “The Bride of Christ

  1. beth lowe

    I can not express the depth of gratitude I feel upon reading this. I knew it !! I knew that we the church was not the bride but I could not explain it. I didn’t have the knowledge to do so. maybe not fully understanding it fully myself , but I knew with just common sense of how some scripture read that it could not be true. So again I say Thank you!

      1. Enoch

        Obviously I am seeing this a long time after its published but permit me to ask this question. From revelaions 19:9 if the church is the bride of Christ the who are those blessed ones invited to the wedding feast of the Lamb? Maybe this might help to clarify things more. Thanks again.

          1. Kristin

            I’ve read this and agreed. Then I think and pray about it. Then I think why can’t we be both the bride and body of Christ. Paul goes to lengths to explain that husbands and wives are one body. Maybe Isreal is the wife of our Father and we are the bride of Christ. Won’t we be part of the wedding feast that takes place before the Second Coming? I’m not disputing you, I just keep thinking MAYBE we are the body and the bride.

            1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

              Paul declared the Church was the body of Christ. Paul used allusions of marriage to support the idea of unity, love, and faithfulness in the body. Paul was explicit in his doctrines. If he regarded the Church as the Bride he would have stated it explicitly. The marriage supper of the Lamb concerns Israel. It is a restoration. See Isaiah 54.5-8, 62.4-5; Hosea 2.16; Jeremiah 3.14.

            2. Cheryl

              “The church is the bride” …. I have always just assumed this was true.This revelation about Israel is all new to me. I just ran into this searching another topic. Very interesting!!! Kristin, my first thought to your question was: If Israel is the bride and we are IN CHRIST, I’m sure the son is invited to his fathers “wedding feast”. We are in Christ, we are “the body of Christ” so yes we will be there!

          2. Christina

            so none of us are invited to the wedding supper? how can you say that? there are many people who have had dreams and confirmations of it its not just regarding Israel its both jews and gentiles. if it was just for Israel it would of all been in one chapter Isaiah but the fact it appears everywhere it refers to us as his bride as well as Israel, please get rid of this false teaching your leading many astray there are many who have paid the price to be his bride don’t underestimate the postion of the body of believers only God sits that high to appoint not you it wasn’t just appointed to Israel, Christ died for everyone, the high calling comes with the anointing if the Lord anoints you to be his bride nothing will hinder it. both jews gentiles male and female are one in the Lord. please reread the bible I will pray the Lord lightens you to guidance and truth. WE ARE HIS BRIDE :)
            husbands love your wives as Christ loves the church and gave himself up for her. ;) theres that scripture you missed pleased don’t call yourself sound doctrine God bless

            1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

              Apparently, you did not read the article carefully because I dealt with the Ephesians 5 passage in the article. Paul’s subject in Ephesians 5 was marriage. He stated Christ was the Head of the body, the Church. His encouragement was for wives to obey their husbands as the body obeys the head and for husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the Church. The passage speaks of the Church being Christ’s body, not His bride. Paul stated that because of the relationship of Christ the Head to His body, husband and wife are joined as one flesh. There’s nothing in the passage about the Church being the bride. The Church is the body of Christ and Israel is His wife/bride. Israel and the Church are two separate programs and each has its own glory.

              1. Ms, M

                Is Jesus referring to the physical nation of Israel? It is interesting that I found your site today because I wrote down this very question? How can the Church be the bocy and the bride or are they one and the same? On another note, how do you explain Revelation 2:9 and 3:9?

                1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                  Ms, M,
                  Jesus came to fulfill the promises made to the fathers (Romans 15.8). The greatest promise was establishment of the kingdom of God on earth in which the nation of Israel would be preeminent among nations of the world (Matthew 6.10; Deuteronomy 28.1, 13). The Church is the body of Christ, not the bride. Israel is the bride/wife of God. In Revelation 2.9 and 3.9, Jesus addresses Jewish assemblies. Some in the assemblies are believers (a true Jew), some are not. A true Jew is one who is of the physical stock of Jacob and believes in the God of the Bible, i.e., the Lord Jesus Christ (Romans 9.6). Jesus the Christ is the God of Israel as is evident from Revelation 1-3 and many other passages.

              2. David

                Just for your consideration Christina, Jesus when he met Saul on his way to persecute the followers of Jesus,He asked Saul: “Why persecutest thou ME?
                identified Christians as himself? not “bride”.
                2nd witness: in another epistle in. Eph..scripture says: 4V12 ” For trhe perfecting of the saints,for the work of the ministry,for the edifying of the BODY of Christ: 13 Till we ALL
                come in the unity of the faith,and of the knowledge of the Son of God,unto a perfect
                MAN ( not bride?)…”

          3. Robin

            I appreciate that you appear to “rightly divide the Word” when it comes to distinguishing between Israel and the Church with regards to the Gospels and Paul. However, in the Bride discussion may I point out a few things. First, note the many “types” of Gentile brides throughout the Old Testament (Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses and David -each in their own way are types of Christ-and all had Gentile brides). And let us not forget Ruth (who comes to a knowledge of the God of Israel from Naomi (a type of Israel-husbandless, living in exile and sorrowful) is redeemed by the kinsman redeemer, Boaz (a type of Christ), thus saving Naomi in the process.

            The most clear symbolic picture of the body and bride being one in the same is in Eve herself. In the first Adam, when asleep, out of his side comes a new body that is later presented to him as his bride; the second Adam (Christ) when asleep (dead on the cross), out of his side comes a new body (the Body of Christ begins) which will be presented back to Him as the Bride.

            Just because Revelations is a Jewish epistle, doesn’t mean the predominantly Gentile Body of Christ (Bride) are not present in this revelation of the future!

            Perhaps Israel is God the Father’s (spiritually) adulterous wife, while we are the virgin Bride of Christ (all dressed in white)! Something I hope you will prayerfully consider. :)

            1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

              All you say is true. BUT if the Church was the Bride, why does the Scripture never say this! It repeatedly states it is the Body. But never the Bride. We are on safe ground when we stay with what the Scriptures state.

              1. reagen

                Yes, we are the body of Christ. One in the same with Jesus. This is why Paul always refers to us as “in Christ”. Jesus Christ will first come for the church (rapture) and Jacob’s trouble will come to be on earth. The signs will happen for Israel to encourage them to hold fast to their faith until the end of the seven years. The tribulation will end with Jesus (and his body- as where he goes, we go-like a head mounted to a body) will come for the bride- Israel and meet in the land.

      2. Jane njambi njoka

        Am glad i read this and got an opportunity to correct the author. Everything uyou wrote is okey but you missed something that distorted the whole truth. Ephesians says when we were not saved we were without God, we were hopeless, strangers and foreigners to the promises of God but after receiving Christ we are no longer strangers but have become members of the household of God( read members of israel or israelites….so we are sons of Abraham or israelites by faith in Jesus Christ.) That automatically qualifies us to possess ALL ABRAHAMIC PROMISES including being the bride of Christ.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          A careful reading of the passage does not mean members of the body of Christ become Israel. We become children of Abraham. As believers, we are “children of Abraham” but this is different from Israel. Abraham was to have two sets of offspring–earthly–sand of the sea–and heavenly–stars in the heavens. The Church is the latter offspring, saved by faith alone, as was Abraham. Israel is the former offspring. Israel and Church remain separate throughout eternity, even as heaven and earth. But we are both “in Christ.” The promises God made to the Church are heavenly, revealed by Paul.

    1. hugandkisses

      I have had two powerful dreams about the rapture but I somehow was drawn to this site…..Everything makes sense and all ties together. I am anxiously look forward to your other teachings…I have been in a dry place .

      1. christina

        hugs and kisses I have had many powerful dreams regarding the rapture and the bride, the bride is the church as well as Israel. gentile jewish we are but one in Christ. Isaiah 54:5, song of Solomon refers to us as well as Israel. God bless.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          Doctrine must be based upon the Scriptures, not dreams. The canon of Scripture is closed so there is no longer a need for dreams or visions. God has given all we need in terms of revelation.

          1. Vanessa

            I had a dream about the rapture. It was so real and powerful but it was just a dream. Of late my Husband and I have needed much comforting and this dream hit the spot. I agree with Don when he says we must stick to Canon and not use dreams as a means by saying God is still speaking to us. Sadly people wont and dont listen and they will suffer loss and maybe even fall into apostasy. Take care all my loving Brethren with whom we love so dearly.

          2. Edwinda Smith

            Well that is not true. What Bible you reading there are need for dream and visions. God never came to do away with the law but to fulfilled it, can’t instances to new without the old and we are the Bride of Christ.. warrior Bride

            1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

              Hebrew 1.1-2 declared God spoke to the prophets in the past but now he has spoken through His Son. We now have the completed canon and have no need for dreams and visions. God has spoken and revealed His will and plan. It is finished. Christ fulfilled the Law. Paul wrote that Christ is the end of the Law to everyone who believes (Romans 10.4) and that believers are not under Law but under grace (Romans 6.14). Paul wrote the entire book of Galatians to teach the Galatians they were not under Law. See my article, Paul and the Law. Read Galatians 5.1-6. Peter declared this in Acts 15.10.

          3. Carol

            I think you are mistaken here. In Acts 2:17 we read ‘And in the last days; God says, I shall pour out some of my spirit upon every sort of flesh, and your sons and your daughters will prophecy and your young men will see visions and your old men will dream dreams’. This prophecy relates to the time of the end which we are now living in.

            We all should call on the name of our Lord and repent and confess our sins. We need to acknowledge Him as our personal saviour and give thanks to God the Father.

            1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

              This prophecy related to Israel. This was the day of Pentecost. Peter addressed only Jews, not Gentiles. Peter quoted Joel, and his prophecy related to Israel. The Church, the body of Christ, did not exist. Salvation today is not by repentance and confession of sin. It is not be acknowledging Him as our personal Savior. Salvation comes by believing Paul’s gospel, that Christ died for our sins and rose from the dead (1 Corinthians 15.1-4). Read the passage: “by which you are saved.” Do you believe this? If so, you are saved. Grace and peace.

              1. RG


                The scriptures say “In those dayS”, plural, not ONE day…

                Please elaborate…

                I do not agree that God has stopped speaking to His children in Dreams and Visions. Do you also ascribe to the notion that the miracles of Christ such as healing and raising people from the dead are in fact DEAD?

                1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                  God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds (Hebrews 1.1-2). God speaks today through the completed Word of God, not dreams. See my article, Sign Gifts: Valid Today? “Day” is a period of time. The day of the Lord goes from the beginning of the Tribulation until the creation of the new heavens and earth.

          4. Norma Newell

            How can you say that there is no place for dreams and visions? God has given me dreams as answers to peoples prayers. He has also give me open vision of peoples faces for direction. All prophetic! You doubt The Most High God!!

            1. Vanessa

              Norma I doubt man. Romans 3 verse 4.God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. Because of what Hebrews 1 1-3 says I have to believe God. I know its a shocker when one discovers the truth of the Gospel because very often people dont want to hear how wrong they have been by following another Gospel. It is crucial that you go and search the scriptures for yourself. In fact above everything else in your life you need to do this and dont put it off as the end is now upon us. Take care.

  2. Matt Taylor

    Trying to wrap my head around this and have more questions:

    Isn’t Paul referring to the church in this part of Ephesians 5?

    “also loved the CHURCH and gave Himself up for HER, 26so that He might sanctify HER, having cleansed HER by the washing of water with the word, 27that He might present to Himself the CHURCH in all HER glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that SHE would be holy and blameless.”

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Good observations and questions. In Ephesians 5.25, Paul used αὐτῆς, genitive feminine singular of αὐτός so, “her.” In v. 26 and 27, he used αὐτήν, the accusative feminine singular, “her.” Why did Paul use the feminine pronoun? Wouldn’t it have made more sense for him to use the neuter pronoun, especially since the noun for body, σῶμα, is neuter? Normally, yes. But if we consider the context, Paul’s subject is marriage, especially the relation of husbands and wives. The wife’s position is one of subjection, just as the body is subject to the head (vv. 22-24). The role of husbands is to love their wives as Christ loved the Church, vv. 25, 28. The conclusion is that both, men and women, husbands and wives, are members of His body (v. 30). In the context of Ephesians 5, Paul was making an illustration, not establishing a doctrine. Paul quoted Genesis 2.24 (v. 31), for the integrity of the marriage relationship is like that of the Head and body. Paul explicitly stated the Church was the body of Christ. He never stated the Church was the bride of Christ. One was illustrative, the other doctrinal.

      1. Rich Prickitt

        In Matthew 16:18 (KJV), Jesus says, “. . . I will build my Church . . . and the gates of hell shall not prevail against IT.” (In the Greek,
        αὐτῆς (autes). αὐτῆς (autes) = “it.”
        In Ephesians 5:25-27, the NIV; the NKJV; the ESV; the HCSB; the NASB; the Ampl; and several others change the impersonal third person pronoun “it” to “her.” But in order to be consistent, Matthew 16:18 should then read, “. . . and the gates of hell shall not prevail against “HER.” Therefore, stick with the KJV.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          How one translates αὐτός is determined by context. Since ἐκκλησία is a feminine noun, it requires a feminine form of αὐτός which is αὐτῆς.

      2. stacey

        i know you will bring this up further on you say that Jesus would not marry himself but did not adam do this as we read Gen 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
        Gen 2:22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          I don’t quite follow your thought here. They only think I am really saying is that the Church is the body of Christ, not the Bride. No Scripture states the Church is the bride and the phrase doesn’t even exist. The preponderance of Scripture is that believing Israel occupies the wife/bride relationship with Christ, not the Church.

          1. Carol N

            Yes the church is the Body of Christ! but she is also His bride….when a man and woman marry they do not work independently of one another, though they may not necessary be present with one another while engaged in the work. Matthew 25: Jesus talks about the “Parable of the Ten Virgins, and the Bridegroom, and Jesus makes it pretty plain that He ( is the Bridegroom)! I dont claim to be a Bible scholar , but I ‘m a born again Christian, therefore the Holy Spirit lives within me, and it is He who teaches me and reveals the things of God..and I have the confirmation in my spirit…that the church is the Bride of Jesus Christ…your teaching is Old Testament covenant, because the Israelite’s failed to keep them God did away them. Jeremiah 31: 31-34…Hebrews 9: the New Covenant is Jesus Christ…therefore as part of the body and bride of Jesus Christ,I am looking ahead to the glorious day when my Bridegroom and I will be together…may God give you the peace in your heart, mind and soul to accept that Jesus and the Church are joined together for eternity. Even so come Lord Jesus come. Amen

            1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

              Everything in the Gospels relates to Israel, not the Church. The Church, the body of Christ, did not exist until the apostle Paul. It is Paul who revealed the Church is the body of Christ and that Jews and Gentiles are equal in Him. This was a “secret” (Ephesians 3.1-7). No one knew this before God revealed it to Paul. The New Covenant was made with Israel, not the Church. The Church partakes in the blessings of the New Covenant because they are spiritual, i.e., the indwelling Holy Spirit. The Church does not have a “covenant” relationship with God; it has a “grace” relationship with Him. The fulfillment of the New Covenant will take place when God establishes His kingdom on earth and the Jews become the preeminent nation (Deuteronomy 28.1, 13; Matthew 6.10). Read Ezekiel 36.22-32 and Jeremiah 31.31-34. God is not addressing the Church; God is addressing Israel–Jews. God has not “done away” with Israel as many teach. Such men have rejected the Scriptures and have called God a liar. They are false teachers. The God of the Bible keeps His promises. Paul wrote, “all Israel will be saved” (Romans 11.26). And so they shall because God is faithful. See my article, The Olive Tree (Romans 11).

              1. Theresa

                the church is the body of Christ and Bride of Christ , can you say the Church is body of Christ but not Bride? please make clear!!!!

                1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                  If you read the article, it should be clear the Scriptures do not support the idea the Church is the bride of Christ. The Church is the body of Christ.

            2. Vanessa

              Hello Carol, the issue of the body being the bride use to be my belief and I held onto it through tradition. May I encourgae you to study (Matthew 9:15)Mat 9:14 Then came to him the disciples of John, saying, Why do we and the Pharisees fast oft, but thy disciples fast not?
              Mat 9:15 And Jesus said unto them, Can the children of the bridechamber mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them? but the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast.

              Christ was taken from them through the death on the cross.

              Who was Jesus speaking to. No Gentiles were present when Jesus said this as the Body Of Christ was a mystery. No Gentiles were allowed to be in the presence of Jews, so Jesus must have been speaking to Jews, referring to Jews.

              Many well meaning Christians have more faith in their traditions than letting go of what they have been taught and just simply allowing the Holy spirit to teach them by studying to show themselves approved. May you become a Brethren to show yourself approved by God. (2 Tim 2:15) calls us to do this. Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. Take care.

        2. Enoch

          If it is appropriate to bring that scripture in this context, I would say although Eve was made by God taking a rib from Adam, they were both two separate and distinct persons. So Eve could not be mistaken for Adam and vice versa. Rather what I believe God was trying to show there was the mutual relationship between the man and the woman. So we read in 1 Corinthians 11:9 that the woman was made for the man and not the other way round.

      3. "Dale Little

        Very convenient. Any scripture that doesn’t fit your idea, you just explain it away basically with something like, “Paul really didn’t mean everything he said and he used that analogy because he just wasn’t thinking clearly enough to say, ‘Christ died for Israel and gave himself for her.'” But wait, are you saying when you say that Israel is required to endure to the end that Christ did not die for them, that they are saved by works?

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          I would say I have explained the passage, not explained it away. Christ died for the sins of the entire world. Today, Jew and Gentile are saved the same–trusting in the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ (1 Corinthians 15.1-4). The “endure to the end” is addressed to Jews who will undergo the Tribulation, not to the Church. Read Revelation 2-3. Enduring to the end means not accepting the Antichrist, which in most cases will result in death. If a Jew does survive, he will be saved when the Lord returns. That is what Paul meant in Romans 11.26, that all Israel will be saved.

          1. Ronél

            Thank you for info on bride. I am studying Revolution. Most of what I get is that most of it has already been forfilled. Am I on the right track.

              1. Mike

                Events in revelation are not future. The book of revelation all have been fulfilled. And no where in scripture does it mention the word rapture.

                1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                  The Rapture is taught in many passages. The “word” Rapture comes from 1 Thessalonians 4.17, ἁρπάζω, which Jerome translated into Latin, “rapiemur.” See my articles, The Rapture, The Day of Christ, How “Near” is the Day of the Lord. To believe the events in Revelation have been fulfilled means one believes that 99% of humanity has died, Christ has returned, Christ is reigning in Jerusalem, the judgment of humanity has occurred, and God has created a new heavens and new earth. Anyone who believes this is no different from one who believes he is Napoleon or a poached egg. Preterism is theological insanity. It belongs in the asylum.

  3. Dymesha

    So with your evidence, can you expound on how Israel is related to the bride in Revelation based on Revelation 21:2, 9-10; 22:17, which point to the holy city, New Jerusalem? Something isn’t quite adding up on my end. Also, doesn’t Paul say in Galatians 3:28-29 that “there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs, according to the promise?” How can there then be a distinction made between Israel and the Church when Paul states, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, that we are all one?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      John wrote that the New Jerusalem was “as a bride,” ὡς νύμφην, not that it was the bride. During the Church Age, in which God is forming the “body of Christ” there is no “Jew or Gentile” just as Paul wrote. But God works one plan at a time. When the body of Christ came into existence, Israel was set aside (see Romans 11). When the body of Christ is complete, God will remove it from the earth and finish his dealings with Israel (Romans 11.25-27). During that period, God will fulfill His promises to the nation which culminate in the kingdom of God on earth. In the kingdom, the New Covenant will be enacted and God will fulfill His promises to Israel, such as Exodus 19.4-6, Deuteronomy 28.1, 13, etc.

      1. Dymesha

        So why do you suppose that when the angel said to John “Come, I will show you the bride, the Lamb’s wife” does John get “carried…away…and showed…the great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God” and then goes on to describe this city in great detail? I understand that there are metaphors and symbolic meanings in scripture but this seems to be literal concerning the city. What do you suppose Revelation 22:17 means by “And the Spirit and the bride say, Come?”

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          Consider: Revelation is wholly Jewish. Jesus addressed Jewish assemblies in Rev. 2-3. The New Jerusalem on the New Earth will be the eternal abode of saved Israel (cf. Revelation 3.12, 21.2, 22.14, Hebrews 12.22). Saved Israel is the bride/wife of Christ and by metonomy the New Jerusalem is described as the bride, since it is the residence of the bride/wife. We have no information about the relationship of the body of Christ, the Church, to the New Jerusalem. God has chosen to keep that secret. The most we have is what Paul wrote in Romans 8, that we are heirs of God and joint-heirs of Christ. Since the Church is a heavenly people we can speculate that our destiny is involved in the New Heavens rather than the New Earth.

          1. Rosemarie C.

            Thank you for this study about the bride of Christ. I just want to add something to your comments above on the New Jerusalem…

            In Galatians 4:22-31, Paul says we are the children of promise and that New Jerusalem is the Mother of us all.

            I understand this to mean all of us; both saved Israel and the Body of Christ.

            1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

              Yes, the heavenly Jerusalem, the greater reality of the earthly Jerusalem, is the mother of all believers, Israel and Church. This heavenly city is the meeting of heaven and earth for while it is currently in heaven, John saw it descend upon the earth in the new heavens and new earth of eternity.

              1. kevin quillen

                doctrine; do you really believe that the New Jerusalem is a REAL CITY in Heaven now that will someday come down to earth? And do you believe that there will be a LITERAL New Heaven and New Earth?

                1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                  New Jerusalem is as real as NYC. The New Heaven and New Earth are future realities. This new universe will have an entirely new nature and physics. There will be no entropy. Do you believe Jesus literally rose from the dead? If so, the New Jerusalem, New Heavens, Hew Earth are child’s play compared to that.

                  1. kevin quillen

                    doctrine; New Jerusalem is us, Christians. Jesus is the capstone, we are living stones (1 Pet 2:5), pillars (Rev 3:12) and together the Holy Temple (Eph 2:15-22). Also we are bride (2 Cor 11:2), and we are the tabernacle which the Lord erected and not man (Heb 8:2) Eph 3:6 says the gentiles are fellow heirs of the same body(Jew and Gentile), Eph 2:14, made one man from two. Please consider this last point carefully. Rev 22:17. The Spirit and the bride say “Come”! And let him who thirsts come. Whoever desires, let him take of the water of life freely. Is this “bride” just the Jews?

                    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                      The verses you quote from Peter and Revelation refer to Jewish believers, not members of the body of Christ. We are the Body, not the Bride. Peter wrote to Jews (1 Peter 1.1).

                    2. Ron

                      There are many mansions in heaven, Jesus goes to prepare a place( new Jerusalem) for us. It is a literal city spoke about, in Rev 21 and 22. The city is called her and her is the Bride of Jesus, we are her clothing, and she is our Mother, Gal. 4:26.

                    3. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                      Jesus’ audience was the Twelve, Jews, not the Church. Interpretation must be done according to context. Jesus has not yet revealed the Church and His statement has nothing to do with the Church, the body of Christ.

          2. Mark

            “But there shall by no means enter it anything that defiles, or causes an abomination or a lie, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s Book of Life.” ~ Rev 21:27 Looks to me like the New Jerusalem is for EVERYONE who is written in the Lamb’s Book of Life.

            1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

              I can think of no Biblical reason to disagree. But also remember, John’s audience was Jewish, not the Church, the body of Christ. We have little information about the eternal state or our activities therein.

                1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                  Jesus’ audience in Revelation 2-3 were Jewish assemblies, not churches, members of the body of Christ. The language is wholly Jewish in these chapters. The language is that of the prophets and the language Jesus used in His earthly ministry to Israel. Is is not Church language.

                  1. Ron

                    You say that Revelation was written before the gentiles knew of the Gospel, but that is incorrect. Revelation was written long after Paul’s death.

                    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                      Paul completed the Scriptures. See Colossians 1.25. 2 Timothy was the last book written. John wrote Revelation probably written between 50-60 A.D. See my article, Understanding the Book of Revelation.

          3. Dk

            Thank you for your post. Some good information, but I do have a concern. You state that Jesus was addressing Jewish assemblies in Revelation 2-3. He was addressing the seven churches, which were comprised of both Jews and Gentiles and some (please forgive my assumption) may have been entirely Gentile except for the overseers. Please reconcile. By the way, I tend to agree the bride is not the church.

                1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                  Read the text. It is all OT language. Jesus’ earthly ministry was to Jews (Romans 15.8). Revelation concerns Israel and the nations. The Church is not present.

                  1. Ron

                    Yes It is the language of the prophets, but the Prophet Prophesied about the last days, a time that you and I live in, not just for the Jews. You te twisted doctrine has you blind to the fact that the Prophets was with us included in the end of days. Roman 1:2-5. Romans 3:21.
                    Rom_16:26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:
                    Eph_2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

                    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                      The Church is not part of God’s prophetic plan. The Church is a completely new, entity the risen Lord revealed to Paul. Not a word of it was hinted at in the OT or gospels. Peter knew nothing of it at Pentecost for he addressed only Jews. And Peter never wrote to anyone but believing Jews. Read 1 Peter 1.1. Read James 1.1. These men ministered to Israel, not the Church. If you will take the time to read the Scriptures, these things will become clear.

          4. doctrinedoctrine Post author

            If you will read Revelation you will see that all the allusions, all the content is Jewish. If you read Revelation 2-3, in which the Lord addresses the “churches” that His language is wholly different from Paul’s language. Salvation is based on remaining faithful. Paul’s gospel is to believe Christ died for one’s sins and rose from the dead. The Lord made no mention of this to the 7 assemblies. It is again the gospel of the kingdom which He proclaimed in His earthly ministry. No where in Revelation is the Church, the body of Christ, found. God keeps His programs (Israel and the Church) separate. Unless one understands this, one has massive theological confusion: the current state of Christendom.

            1. Ron

              So you think because Paul did not write Revelation it’s not for the Gentiles? Funny.
              Do you expect John to sound like Paul? Funny. And all this just because someone claimed to be a Jew but was lying, about it
              The fact is Jews are just Jews, unless they become the body of Christ. The same is for Gentiles.
              “Rom 1:1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,
              Rom 1:2 (Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,)
              Rom 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;
              Rom 1:4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:
              Rom 1:5 By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:
              Rom 1:6 Among whom are ye also the called of Jesus Christ:”
              What is it you are not getting from these Scriptures. Paul himself declared obedience to Jesus Christ to all brethren, be it Jew or Gentile, or would you also, say this is to the Jew only?

              1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                All Scripture is FOR us but not all Scripture is TO us (Romans 15.4; 1 Corinthians 10.11). Paul is the apostle of the Gentiles, the founder of the Church, and all Church doctrine comes from Paul. Paul explicitly wrote the Church does not participate in the Tribulation (1 Thessalonians 1.10, 5.9).

                1. Ron

                  Paul is not the founder of the Church, Jesus Christ is the Chief Corner Stone. The Prophets and the Apostles were the Founders, Eph. 2:20.

                  1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                    1 Corinthians 3.10 reads, “According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.” Paul says, “I laid the foundation.” He wrote he was the architech, the master-builder. Christ is the foundation but Paul laid the foundation based upon the revelation Christ gave him. Why would you think Peter and the 12 were founders when they never mentioned the body of Christ, never had a ministry to Gentiles, and only wrote to Jews? The apostles and prophets Paul mentioned in Ephesians 2.20 were most likely those associated with his ministry: Barnabas, Timothy, etc. Paul also wrote he was “first” (1 Timothy 1.15-15). See my article, Paul: Chief of Sinners? I am afraid you have based your theology on tradition, not the Scriptures. If you will read them, you will find they say what I have written. All Church theology comes from Paul. Peter and the Twelve ministered only to Jews.

                    1. Ron

                      Yes, as I said Paul helped lay the foundation. But if I fly to Hong Kong, doesn’t mean others did not fly with me. You clearly can’t discern scripture correctly, Dr. I’ll leave you be, I have lost nothing here, nor will I find anything here.

                    2. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                      That is not what the text says. Paul did not write he “helped” lay the foundation. He wrote he laid it. Your responses reveal you love tradition above revelation. You have said it yourself–you will find nothing here. You wish to remain ignorant, and you will have your wish.

  4. Darlene Leistner

    Thank you for your article. I also have raised my eyebrows when it is mentioned that the church is the Bride of Christ. Nowhere in scripture does it say that; but it says that we are the body of Christ, which is a doctrine of the church. I think that sometimes the church forgets that God is not through with His people; we have been the ones grafted in by the grace and mercy of God. I would like to point out, however, that Paul taught that the Jews and Gentiles have been united to God as one new body through the cross (Eph. 2:16). The separation is not with the spiritual Jews and Gentiles in Christ, but with the earthly Israel, the nation of Israel, who will one day see their Messiah and will mourn for their unbelief.

  5. De doven

    Well well cried when I read this as I knew in my heart that we as a church were trying to rob Israel of her inheritance as the bride.yes we are the body of Yashua and should be very honoured to have this privilege, thank you so much for saying what I could not explain, thank you again.

  6. true doctrine

    when Paul tells the church, “for I betrothed you to one husband” (2 Cor 11:2), [husband being Christ] doesn’t that make them the bride?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      No, I answer that question in the article. If God is the husband of the Church does God have two wives? If the Church is the body of Christ how can it be the bride? Bride and groom are different.

      1. Becky

        Hi Don,
        Could it be that God the Father is married to Israel and out of this union came Jesus the Son? Then this verse in Corinthians can be taken simply and literally, that the Church is betrothed to Christ. Actually this seems to be played out/portrayed often throughout Scripture.

        This verse just came to mind:
        Isa 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

        Who is “us”? In my mind, i thought of “us” as the world. But Jesus wasn’t born unto the world. A child is born unto his parents. Also, I’ve always thought about God giving His only begotten Son without thinking about the fact that Jesus is the son of a Jewish woman also. Israel, God’s wife. The Son of that union, Jesus. And Jesus’ betrothed, the Church.

          1. becky

            Hi Don, Wondering if you got my last reply, which i sent on the 12th. My point is that the “us” in Isaiah is as you say the nation of Israel. That Jesus was born unto Israel; as the Scriptures say, salvation is of the Jews. Thus with Israel being “married” to God the Father, they as a nation could not be the “bride” of Christ. But as Paul said, he has betrothed the Church to Christ. Do you catch what I’m saying?

            1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

              I think I covered this in the article. Please see the passages in Isaiah and Hosea where Israel is spoken of as a bride. The Church is the body of Christ, not the bride.

              1. becky

                Thanks for the Psalm 45 reply. (the reply button was not under that reply for some reason). That is truly amazing, don’t know that i’ve ever “seen” that before.

              2. Becky

                Don, is Israel ever scripturally brought out from being under the law? The Law or law are not mentioned in Revelation. The other thing i see is that in 2 cor 11:2 the words “you as” are italicized. Without them it reads “For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present a chaste virgin to Christ.”

                Also, it appears to me that those under the law are represented as Hagar the bondwoman. Again, at what point does Israel become free from the law in order to become Christ’s bride? I am being sincere, not contentious.

      2. Franz

        doctrine, I think it is possible to have both distinct images “wife of Yahweh” and “bride of Christ” because they explain the two distinct relationships of God with his people Israel and with the church. God is big enough to be faithful in both these relationships.

        If you don’t accept that then indeed you run into a problem with “for I betrothed you to one husband” (2 Cor 11:2) which is clearly written to the church.

        Regarding body of Christ / bride of Christ, again I wouldn’t see a contradiction but rather 2 different images illustrating 2 aspects of our relationship as church with Christ. I would even go as far as saying that Ephesians 5.22-33 is Paul’s way to bring both images together: the wife of the husband is set equal to the body of the husband when Paul says: ‘For the husband is the head of the wife’.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          I think there is one important point in this. Paul explicitly stated the Church was the body of Christ. He did not state the Church was the bride of Christ. Regarding the notion of the Church being the “bride of Christ” Paul used the marriage relationship to illustrate our relationship with Christ. He never stated the Church was the bride. I cannot understand why so many try to make the Church to be the bride since such a view has so little Scriptural support. The Scriptures are explicit that Israel is the wife/bride of YHVH, i.e., Christ.

          1. Franz

            I guess the relevance of this question is connected to Jesus declaring himself to be the bridegroom and how this shines through in his teachings (e.g. John 14:2-3). If we – the Church – are not the bride, is this then not meant for us?

            Of course, this also depends on the question if Jesus addressed his disciples as representatives of Israel or as pioneers of the Church (which he certainly intended them to be, see Matthew 28:18-20)

            1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

              The Church, the body of Christ, is not revealed until Paul. It was a secret truth God kept hidden until then. No Church language exists in the Gospels. Matthew 28 speaks of the OT program of Israel blessing the nations, not the Church.

          2. Philip John Arpin, Th.D.

            Jesus’ saying ‘be it to you according to your faith’, our beliefs being based upon false or true interpretations of The Word. Matt. 9:29, which may be stretching our application. Titus 1:1. Some have been taught Bride, some now of the real truth, Body. Abraham’s children were to be of sand and Stars as may be numbered. The Body of Christ being of the stars…Gen. 22:17, Heb. 11:12. Tradition of men is not the ideal… Mark 7:8, Col.2:8. Good work. Your Doctrine is sound. Be encouraged. HIS is of Omniscience having prepared by foreknowledge for all who would be saved.

      3. toddott

        Eve was taken out of Adam, but she remained bone of his bone, flesh of his flesh… his body. The two become ONE. Very simple. We are both the Bride and the Body.

        In the same way, in Christ, Gentiles become part of the Commonwealth of Israel, ONE NEW MAN, and sharers in the Promise. Very simple.

        The eternal purpose of God, from the foundation of the world, was to bring all things together in Christ.

        We are called saints, the elect, kings, priests, servants, a holy nation, Israel, the Church, the Bride, the Body, and more.
        It doesn’t mean the Church will literally be married to Christ, or that will are literally His body. The natural is given in order to teach us something about the spiritual.
        Just as a husband places his seed into his bride, and she bears natural fruit, so Christ places His Seed into His Bride, and she bears spiritual fruit. The Bride is anyone to whom the Spirit is given.

        John tells us that the Bride is the Holy City, the New Jerusalem. Paul tells us that Hagar represents the Old Covenant, and Jerusalem below, that is, earthly Jerusalem, and that her children, earthly Israel, are in bondage. Sarah represents the New Covenant, Jerusalem above, and that her children, spiritual Israel, are free. The writer of Hebrews tells us that we have come to Mount Zion, to the City of the Living God, to the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels, to the general assembly and the Church of the Firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, to God, the judge of all, and to the spirits of men made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood which speaks better than the blood of Abel.
        The Bride is Israel, but Paul states that “not all who are descended from Israel are Israel, nor are they Abraham’s children. It is not the natural seed, but rather those who believe in the Promise. True Israel is made up of the believing remnant of Jews, and grafted in believing Gentiles.

        As for the Church not being in the book of Revelation, that is nonsense. Those who have the testimony of Jesus and obey His commands are defined in John’s first letter.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          No Biblical support exits for the idea that the Church becomes part of the Commonwealth of Israel. Israel and the Church are separate programs created by God. Mixing these programs has led to gross error and great confusion in Christendom. The Scripture declares believing Israel will be priests (Exodus 19.4-6; 1 Peter 2.9), not members of the body of Christ. John, Peter, James, Jude wrote to Jews, not to the Church. That was Paul’s domain (Galatians 2.7-9). Paul’s language is wholly different. It is easy to write it is nonsense that the Church is not in Revelation but it is not possible to prove it with the Scriptures. The language of Revelation is not Church language. Compare it with Paul and this will become abundantly clear. Revelation describes God’s judgment upon unrepentant Israel and the Christ rejecting nations. The Church is absent. It does not receive God’s judgment (1 Thessalonians 1.10, 5.9).

          1. toddott

            No, the Church doesn’t become PART of the commonwealth of Israel. The Church IS the Commonwealth of Israel WITH Gentiles grafted in.
            Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, to God’s holy people in Ephesus, the faithful IN CHRIST JESUS…
            Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing IN…
            (Recall the promise given to Abraham…”in your Seed all nations will be blessed.”)
            …I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which He has called you, the riches of His glorious inheritance in His holy people….
            …God placed ALL things under His feet and appointed Him to be Head over everything for the Church, which is His Body, the fullness of Him who fills EVERYTHING in EVERY WAY…
            As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins…
            Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth…remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in ISRAEL and foreigners to the COVENANTS OF THE PROMISE (which were given to Abraham)…now in Christ Jesus you who were once far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
            HIS PURPOSE was to created in Himself ONE NEW HUMANITY (a NEW CREATION in Christ)out of the two…
            CONSEQUENTLY, you are no longer foreigners or aliens, but FELLOW CITIZENS with God’s people and members of His household, built of the foundations of the apostles and prophets…”

            1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

              Israel and the Church are entirely different, separate programs. Each has its own promises and character. See my article, The Olive Tree.

  7. Alan Raine

    Thanks so much for your clarification. Ever since immersing myself in Darby, and the Berean Fellowship writers ( Stam, Brock, Sadler et al) and now Feldick I’ve been able to see clearly the role of restored Israel including the fact that the Body of Christ is not in Revelation. However I’m really surprised that Darby, Stam and Feldick all refer to the Body of Christ as the Bride of Christ. At least Sadler takes issue with Stam over the concept. I keep wondering how they can make that mistake since they are so advanced in their understanding of Scripture. How do you integrate their mistake with their otherwise ultimate interpretations of Scripture? Thank you.

      1. Judith Benson

        I have heard Feldick say the Body of Christ is not the Bride of Christ. That is what started my investigation of this. I have never liked the term Bride of Christ for the Body of Christ. I thank you, Doctrine, as well for the clarification. I read the article through tears of understanding as well.

  8. Taylor

    Thank you for the article. I have a question, reason with me. Everyone born in the Israelite family in this day in time has to believe and receive Christ as their Saviour, and the Holy Spirit just as everybody else to be saved right? In this light, wouldn’t that make them part of the “body of Christ”? That being said, with them being of the Israel nation, they are also the “bride of Christ” are they not? That being said referencing Eph. 2:16, if the Jews can now grab hold of being the “body of Christ”, they can now hold both titles. Therefore, would not the Church be able to hold both titles also? Just reasoning thought, please give feedback.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Thank you. Interesting thought but it doesn’t work that way. It doesn’t matter if one is a Jew or a Gentile at present since Paul taught that in the “body of Christ” no distinction exists between Jew and Gentile (Galatians 3.28). All who are saved today have believed Paul’s gospel, 1 Corinthians 15.1-4, which makes them a member of the body of Christ.

      1. Lloyd

        He makes a good point. And you only addressed it by saying “it doesn’t work that way”. Can you elaborate on how it doesn’t work that way? I found your entire article to rely on assumptions to reach conclusions. Particularly that Revelation is for Jews only. Your interpretation of Ephesians chapter 6 is less than compelling. Yes there is talk about the husband loving his wife as his own body, but just before Paul mentions the “mystery” he quotes Genesis 2:24, so the immediate context is actual marriage of a man and woman. I believe that the church, and true Israel, are the Bride of Christ and the Body. I believe that this was why God created humankind, to be married to him. In Isaiah 62:2 the prophet says that God will give Zion (historically Israel) a “new name” which the Lord will designate.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          My point was that at the present time, God makes no distinction between Jew and Gentile when one believes Paul’s gospel and becomes a member of the Church, the body of Christ. So one doesn’t hold dual “citizenship” as it were because it doesn’t exist. We know Revelation was written primarily for Jews for the churches John writes were all Jewish. No Church, i.e., Pauline language exists in Jesus’ words to them. Furthermore, salvation is not based upon faith the the death and resurrection of Christ but upon “overcoming.” See my article Understanding the Book of Revelation for more information.

          1. Lloyd

            Sorry, this is really long. I understand how you see the Church and Israel and how Jewish people who accept Christ will be in the Church. But that seems so messy. What happened to Israel when the Church came? Did they cease to be the bride? Is their status on hold until the Church age was finished?
            Your argument that Revelation has no Church or Pauline language means it’s a Jewish book for Jews, well why does the type of language dictate the audience. This is the only New Testament book that is apocalyptic. So we don’t have any “gentile” apocalyptic books to compare it to. Might it be that it isn’t Jewish in character, but how God chooses to reveal the future no matter the audience. I found this argument that Revelation is not primarily for Jews, but the Church as a whole and am curious how you respond to it.

            “Revelation certainly has many Old Testament themes and allusions, which might make it appear very Jewish. It was also written by a Jew, which also gives it a Jewish flavor. Further, it is really the only prophetic/apocalyptic book in the New Testament — all the other books that closely resemble it are in the Old Testament, which may also make it appear Jewish.

            On the other hand, most of the books of the New Testament were written by Jews (some argue that even Luke and Mark were Jewish), which should not be surprising since all the apostles were Jewish. But this leaves us with a distinct lack of Gentile Christian apocalyptic/prophetic literature for purposes of comparison. In other words, there is really no good way to tell if Revelation is distinctly Jewish in style, or if it is simply Christian in style (with Jewish and Gentile Christians sharing the same style). Several facts imply that the original audience of Revelation was not distinctly Jewish: 1) Revelation does not distinguish between Jews and Gentiles in the church, implying that such a distinction is not very relevant to how its message is received; 2) Revelation was written in Greek (not Aramaic or Hebrew), indicating that any Jews in the original audience were at least somewhat Hellenized; 3) the original audience dwelled in Asia Minor, which was a predominantly Gentile area; 4) the biblical information regarding other churches in Asia Minor, such as that contained in Acts and the Pauline epistles, indicates that they contained both Jews and Gentiles — this is explicitly the case with Paul’s letter to the Ephesians, and Ephesus was part of the original audience of Revelation.”

            Regarding the salvation by “overcoming” comment. You mention the future active tense of “grant salvation” as the reason these congregations have not been saved by faith. But then mention that the congregations are going to be present during the Tribulation. It makes sense that Jesus would extend a future salvation to a future people. Their faith is also future when they will exist on the earth. The degree to which everyone’s salvation is by faith, is so completely expounded throughout the Old and New Testament that I can’t imagine why you draw up this distinction other than to support the “Revelation is for Jews” line of reasoning.
            I have to ask, what is your training? How did you formulate your doctrine? On your own, did you go to a school, study under someone? I ask because you have such unorthodox teaching. (I’ll be the first to admit that is not always bad) After a second reading of your definition of “overcoming”, one can say that this is really just the definition of “having faith”. So I am not as alarmed as I was when I read your response, though still very concerned. Saying that under any circumstances salvation for anyone is not by faith alone in the Sacrifice and Resurrection of Christ is rightly considered heresy.

            1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

              You’ve posed many questions. As to what happened to Israel, I recommend my article, The Olive Tree. With regard to Revelation in general, we simply do not find Pauline language there. We have no mention of the cross of Christ or by believing in the death and resurrection of Christ for salvation. The reason is that God has removed the Church and these final seven years involve God again dealing with Israel according to His revelation in the Old Testament–again, see The Olive Tree. I think I’ve answered most of your questions in my articles. If you persevere you will find the answers. As to my background, see the Contact page.

            2. Isobelle

              I agree with you totally and would like to add this… The word, Church or Churches, mysteriously disappears from the Revelation after 3:22 and is not mentioned again until Rev 22:16 and then, it only references back to what the Angel was going to tell John in the first 3 chapters concerning “these things in the Churches”. Too many people are trying to put the Church into all of Revelations when the fact is the Church is NOT mentioned or seen on earth during the Seven Seals of Judgment.

              1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                Please see my article, Understanding the Book of Revelation. The “churches” Jesus addressed in Revelation 2-3 were Jewish assemblies, not Body of Christ churches. Paul divided the human race into three categories: Jews, Gentiles, and Church. Revelation primarily concerns Israel (Jeremiah 30.7) as well as Gentiles (nations). The Church, the body of Christ is not addressed or present. The language Jesus used in His address to those assemblies was wholly Jewish. We find no Pauline language there.

              2. Sky Cade

                Sorry but if you look at the first chapters of revaluation 1-4 it’s the opening for the church’s…. He explains to each church what they are doing good and bad… After that he goes on to tell them what he saw… So if you take a letter you have the heading which was the churchea then you have the opening which were him telling them what they were doing good and bad then you have the body or the purpose of the letter and that was him telling what he saw…. Also everyone has to get saved to get to heaven, even the Jews if they don’t then they will go to hell…. But once you are saved you become the seed of Abraham father of all nations… So if take the meaning of the bride of the lamb as it really means, it means the holy Jerusalem the city…. because why would John go to so much detail of the city if was referring to the Jews? Even the first 12 Christians are written on the city and the 12 tribes….

                1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                  The word “church” is ἐκκλησία which means an assembly of people. Jesus is speaking to Jewish congregations in Revelation 2-3. The language He uses is that of the Old Testament. These addresses contain language that is wholly different from the language Paul used to the Church, the body of Christ. The Twelve were not Christians. No one was called a Christian until Acts 11.26 and Paul was the first Christian according to 1 Timothy 1.15-16 and 1 Corinthians 3.10 (see my article, Paul: Chief of Sinners?).

                  1. Gary

                    Acts 2:47
                    praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved.

                    Clearly Paul was not the first christian, Saul (Paul) was not even converted at this time. Many people were saved and added by the Lord before Paul, they were simply 1st called Christians at Antioch

                    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                      The Church, the body of Christ, began with Paul. It was not until after Paul was saved that people began to be called Christians. Before this, Jews who believed Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God, were known as followers of “the Way.” See my article, The Church (the Body of Christ).

              3. Sky Cade

                so if what you are saying is that we are gone way before chapter of Revaluations???.. Which doesn’t make sense… And if you look at the churches he writing to they were real churches. So he was speaking to Christians not Jews…

                1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                  One of the foundational truths of Christianity is that the Church, the body of Christ, will not be present during the Tribulation. This is basic Christianity. Paul taught this to the Thessalonians immediately after they believed the gospel (1 Thessalonians 1.10, 5.1-11; 2 Thessalonians 2.1-3). Revelation concerns the Jews and the nations. The Church is not present. It is the time of Jacob’s trouble (Jeremiah 30.7). Jesus addressed Jewish assemblies in Revelation 2-3 as a continuation of his warning in Matthew 24. He cannot return until they repent (Matthew 23.37-39).

          2. Lloyd

            One last comment. It seems unlikely that the Church at Pergamum was only Jewish if they had those who were of the Nicolaitans in their number. For those who don’t know, this was a corrupt sect of early Christianity that allowed adultery/polygamy and the eating of food sacrificed to idols. Unimaginable acts for Jews.

            1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

              Perhaps. But in the OT Jews did unimaginable things. Can you imagine making a golden calf to worship immediately after God had delivered them from the slavery of Egypt? We really don’t know what was going on with these assemblies. What we can know is that the language the Lord used to address them was all Jewish, i.e., OT language. Not one hint of Paul’s gospel, grace, etc. is there.

        2. Brian Dougan

          Brothers and sisters in the Lord….Why are so many of you “wedded” (pun intended; or shall I say “welded”) to the biblically unsupported idea that Church age believers are the “Bride of Christ?” The Bride has always been, and will always be; Israel. We are a new creation; with a different future.

          Let Israel be Israel. They are the Lord’s beloved wife.

          doctrine has done a thorough exegesis of this topic. Really think about what he has written. Isn’t it time to uproot your deeply entrenched emotional attachment to this specious; unhelpful doctrine?

          I too once held to this wildly popular; but wrong; teaching. It’s not a “growing in the Lord” issue; but isn’t it much better to be found on the side of truth?

          God cannot contradict himself. He plainly addresses Israel as his wife, and he as her husband….Numerous times throughout Scripture. The one or two verses that seem to say otherwise need to be interpreted according to those clear, plentiful verses. The “Law of First Mention.”

          I can hear it now: “Yeah; but…He took Israel as his wife. We are his bride.” Not so fast. He divorced her because of her constant infidelity. (Idolatry, rebellion, unbelief.) He will “re-marry” her as his Bride–without spot or wrinkle. They will be purified by going through the Time of Jacob’s Trouble; or Great Tribulation. Only one third of the Jews will survive; be reconciled with him, and enter the Millennium. The other believing Jews will be slain, and return to the earth with their bridegroom. Then the Marriage will take place; followed by the Supper.

  9. Taylor

    In addition to my prior post, what about Romans 7:4? Paul is speaking to believers (body of Chris). He specifically states that they are to be “married to another”, i.e. Christ.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Consider the entire passage. Paul’s point was to define the believer’s relationship to the Mosaic Law. To illustrate, he used an example of a woman whose husband had died. His death freed her. Christ has freed us from the the Mosaic Law.

  10. Hova

    To me, Revelations clearly states that Jerusalem is the bride of Christ. To many, “the church” is clearly the bride. Israel, now to me, seems to make more sense than either of the before mentioned, however Jerusalem is in Israel. So I guess what is unclear to me is, is the people of Israel his bride, or the actual land? Because if it is the land, then Jerusalem (the place) is also to considered Israel, which would then also be considered the bride? What does not make sense to me is how confusing Revelations seems to be on that point, and that God knew before hand how confusing it would be. What was God’s thoughts on this (no i don’t expect you to know this answer but I’m gonna pose it anyways). God’s thinking is as follows?: I am going to have this angel tell John exactly this, knowing that most my people will read it “, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb’s wife. And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,” and then go on for the whole chapter to describe that city, BUT, its not actually the bride, nor will I have John ever explain any of it. At least if that part was left out of Revelations, it would be SOOOOO much more clearer to SOOOO many more people, that Israel is the bride. Furthermore, what about polygamy? Wasn’t that acceptable in the Old Testament for Gods people? Would Jesus not be able to take more than one wife? Please don’t confuse my search for answers, for anything, but that. The more I think about some of this stuff the more confused I get. The only thought about all this that does give me peace is that, I don’t feel that if I am wrong about who the bride is, it will cost me my salvation. As a friend just reminded me earlier, God judges the heart right?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Revelation 21.2 states the new Jerusalem was prepared as a bride. This is a figure of speech for its beautiful appearance. In verses 9-10 it seems the figure is continued for the new Jerusalem seems to be Israel residence. God allowed polygamy but this was not God’s express will. Usually, polygamy did not work out well. It just caused problems. God created Adam and gave him one wife. That was the divine design.

  11. linda c

    Great article. I saw that you mentioned that in revelation the church is no longer around. Are you referring to the rapture and if so do you have a link to a study of yours for that? Also, I had read a few days ago on a forum where someone was stating that daniel 9:27 is about Jesus and not the antichrist and that it wasn’t about His crucifixion either. They were saying that it is still a future fulfillment of the new covenant that He has with Israel during that time. That there is no such 7 year tribulation etc Super interesting and I kind of see now with your article how it all is coming together like a puzzle. Would you agree with that statement? Have you ever heard of that and do you think that it makes sense?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Please see my articles, The Rapture, The Day of Christ, and Understanding the Book of Revelation. Someone else just wrote me about the Daniel 9.27 passage. This passage clearly refers to the Antichrist as well as the Lord’s crucifixion. There’s a lot of deception right now regarding the Rapture and end-time events.

  12. b wellskopf

    One of arguments that the proponents for the Bride of Christ being the Body of Christ is based on the strict chronology of Revelation 19. We have a celebration in heaven (Rev 19:1 -6) and announcement of for “the wedding of the Lamb” (Rev 19:7- 9) and then Jesus coming back to earth to judge. (Rev 19:11- 21). Therefore, they say, the Wedding of the Lamb is in heaven where the Body of Christ will be during the Tribulation. Could you please explain?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Throughout the Scriptures, Israel is named as the wife of YHVH. Nothing in Revelation involves the Church, the body of Christ. John was one of the Twelve who were apostles to Israel, not the the Church. The marriage of the Lamb is the marriage between the God of Israel, the Lord Jesus Christ, YHVH, and redeemed Israel. Jesus told the Jews in Matthew 23.29 they would not see Him until they said, “Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord.” For Him to return means they have said this, i.e., repented which Paul declared would occur (Romans 11.26). The marriage of the Lamb is between the God of Israel and faithful Israel. It is the day they once again become “Ammi” rather than “Lo-ammi” (Hosea 1.10 cf. Hosea 2.14-20).

      1. b wellskopf

        Thank you for your quick response, and I agree but I am still curious as to why Rev 19 was written in this sequence. You can’t have a wedding without a bride present. So it appears that either John did not write this chronologically or the announcement was written in the future tense. What do you think?

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          According to Revelation 19.7 the bride has made herself ready and the time for the marriage has come. How has the bride made herself ready? By repenting according to what Jesus spoke in Matthew 23. This is all anticipatory and prepatory. When Jesus comes on His white horse he comes for His bride to receive repentant Israel. In Revelation 19.15 it says the Lord will rule with a rod of iron. This was first stated in Psalm 2. This is the kingdom and anticipates his victory His enemies.

  13. mo praker

    pertaining to the difference between the body of Christ and Israel: the first group raptured out of the earth and the second group to endure the tribulations and form the kingdom of god on earth.
    What happened to the analogy that Jesus used to describe how Christian groups could be grafted into the olive tree and therefore enjoy all the blessings with Israel. Aren’t we as believers one with the Jewish people and can enjoy the same rewards as them?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The Church, the body of Christ, and Israel are different programs. At the present time, in the body of Christ, God has removed these distinctions. Thus, there is no Jew or Gentile in terms of equality in Christ. When the body of Christ is completed, God will remove it (the Rapture). God will reestablish His program with Israel (Daniel’s 70th week). When that has ended He will establish His kingdom on earth. The Bible provides no information as to where the Church will be or what it will do during that 1,000 year period. See my article, The Olive Tree, for more information on that subject.

      1. hugandkisses

        I knew that Eph 5:25-32 is the key to understanding body/bride concept..after reading what doctrine instructed I compared the different bible versions using the key word her and it and the KJV uses it referring to the church and reading this way the mystery is revealed…most modern bible versions causes confusion using ..her…so the correct meaning is the church is the body of Christ for He careth for it.

  14. Tom lewis

    Thank you for you insight on this teaching. This had bothered me for a long time that people were teaching the church bride thing for many years. I first saw Fred Price’s son first teach about the truth of this matter about 10 years ago and it rang to the Spirit. I have reposted this to face book and I hope it will help those who have been mislead

  15. Tom

    Covenant theology has a real problem with what you are sharing, as far as the body or bride of Christ you make a good argument. I would say that the 10 virgins would give some weight to the body being the bride? When the world was more moral a bride was a virgin. Matthew 25 “At midnight the cry rang out: ‘Here’s the bridegroom! Come out to meet him!’ “Then all the virgins woke up and trimmed their lamps. The foolish ones said to the wise, ‘Give us some of your oil; our lamps are going out.’ No,’ they replied, ‘there may not be enough for both us and you. Instead, go to those who sell oil and buy some for yourselves.’ But while they were on their way to buy the oil, the bridegroom arrived. The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut. Later the others also came. ‘Lord, Lord,’ they said, open the door for us!’ But he replied, Truly I tell you, I don’t know you.’ Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour.” Shalom!

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Yes, as does most of Christendom. The problem with the 10 virgins passage is that Jesus spoke it to Jews, not Gentiles, not the Church. His ministry did not include Gentiles (Matthew 10.5-6; John 1.11; Romans 15.8).

  16. Ben Miday

    Your doctrine divides the kingdom. All have been reconciled into one body both Jew and Gentile. The body is Christ. There is no second visitation to separate the body again. And the body of Christ is made of Jews and Gentiles mentioned in Revelations. 144,000 from every tribe and the multitude that no man could number from every nation kindred and tongue. The 144,000 were the first, not the last, Rev 14, then the Gentiles are brought in from the gospel being preached. Revelation 14, is an outline of the Church age, beginning with the tribes of Israel and ending with world judgement and wrath. Our God is one.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      God’s kingdom is composed of believing Israel and the Church, the body of Christ. Only Paul taught the body of Christ. Peter, James, John, Jude never mention it. They never had a ministry to Gentiles. God’s kingdom is composed of all who have put their trust in יְהֹוָה, the Lord Jesus Christ. Within that kingdom are two major programs: Israel and the Church. Mix the two and you have contradiction and confusion. In the Church, the body of Christ, there is no Jew or Gentile. God will complete the body of Christ and remove it (Romans 11.25; 1 Thessalonians 4.16-17). The body of Christ does not exist in Revelation. Read Revelation 7.4. The 144,000 are all Jews.

      1. ron

        The never had a ministry to Israel you wrote . I believe you ment Gentiles when replying to Ben on July29 2014 @ 7:50 am guess you were just up. Thanks again for your teaching,time and patience Ron Carney.

      2. Bob

        You say the 144,000 are all Jews, the Jews represent only 12,000 as the tribe of Judah, included along with the other tribes, the Nation of Israel..

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          Read Revelation 7. The 144,000 are from all the tribes of Israel. The tribes of Israel are Jews. The word יְהוּדִי originally meant a member of the tribe of Judah. By the time of the fall of the southern kingdom it referred to all Israel. Even a cursory examination of how the word “Jew” is used in the NT reveals it meant all Israel. Do you think when Pilate wrote Jesus was the King of the Jews He meant only Judah? Several people have written me this and I have to wonder how anyone could be so ignorant. No one who says Jew means only member of the tribe of Judah is qualified to teach the Bible. Such individuals are false teachers and their teaching is poison.

  17. victor

    you made a statement and i quote, “Since the Church is the body of Christ it means that if Christ is the bridegroom we are part of His groomsmanship. Thus, we are of the bridegroom, not the bride!” . this statement goes against pauls analogy in Eph 5, and doesnt create a good picture, because if you say this, then i can also say, “since Christ is the head, we are also the head and part of the head”.
    I think the whole idea, of Father-Son, Bride-Bridegroom, Husband-wife, Friend-friend, Brother-brother, ‘Joined to God=one Spirit’, is to show us that all the relationships known to man is not enough to explain the kind of union and oneness we have come into with God (Father, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit).
    Because how can you physically or anatomically explain that Someone is the Head and another person is the body (this is equal to chaos in a lame man’s mind).
    I believe the Holy Spirit knows what He’s doing and he made paul make that analogy in Eph 5, because that may just be what a Christian somewhere needed to begin to grasp the kind of union he/she has come into with Christ. Thank you for the article.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Paul’s point in Ephesians 5 was to declare Christ’s love for the Church and that we are members of His body. And in terms of marriage, husbands are to love wives as Christ loved the Church. Paul declared the Church is the body of Christ. We do not find this declaration regarding Church as bride of Christ. We must be careful students and understand what the text says and what the text does not say.

      1. victor

        i am not saying you are right or wrong, i am saying its all an analogy, its not literal, moreover Jesus never said we are part of His body. My point is, the whole idea is to understand your connection, relationship and union with the Godhead, because Christ is not literally a head and we a body as in anatomy. And Paul using this analogy of body and head to explain husband and wife and Christ and the church shows that there is direct correlation with the responsibility and place of the wife and the church and also of the Christ and the husband. which brings me back to my point, it not whether or not the word bride was directly used for the church, but the fact that Paul could directly proportion or estimate the role and place of the church to a wife and vis-a-vis.
        Another thing is you separate the the church from Israel, you say the new Jerusalem is about jews, but Heb 12vs 22-24 actually describes what is in the heavenly Jerusalem and the mount zion and its not just a jewish thing there. And think about it israel will have their own special jerusalem with their bride and the rest of the “gentiles””christians” what happens to us we stay in the other heaven or another Jerusalem, or since we are the body, then we are also the husbands of Israel. Israel as a land or israel as a country like today, or israel in terms of genes. So can i for example go and nationalise to be an israeli and then qualify to be a bride. You and i know that isael as been conquered different times and there are many mixed jewish blood out there, and many living outside Israel intermarrying, so how to determine exactly.
        Finally Jesus didn’t separate us so why should we, in John 17 when Jesus prayed his final prayer, in verse 20, he included those that will believe in him in the future also with his then present ‘Jewish’ disciples in that prayers.
        So i am not denying that there is no place explicitly written in the bible that the church is the bride of Christ, but Paul implied it and several other places in the bible implied it, which you can easily refute by saying he meant just israel and not the church, and that will mean you believe the doctrine that Israel is more special or superior to other Christians. However its unfair to israel if they are just a wife and we are actually the real body of Christ.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          Jesus revealed nothing about the Church, the body of Christ in His earthly ministry. That revelation was held as a secret until the ascended Lord gave it to Paul. I recommend Paul Sadler’s article on the bride of Christ: Hebrews was written to Jews. The content is Jewish and was meaningless to Gentiles. It was written to convince the Jews that going forward in Christ was the only choice. Judaism and the Levitical sacrifices was over.

  18. James Querry

    I am amazed how inspired you are all in commenting on the Church as Bride of Christ. Let us not forget the mystery behind. Whether written or not, through the working of the HOly SPirit, the unveiling of the truth continues. Si comprehendis, non est Deus. No one can say this or that is the right interpretation as long as they remain sound with our moral and spiritual life. Your (all) discussions are helpful. May others find them inspiring to live a Christian moral life and praise God for His goodness and greatness. May this bring unity rather than assertion of ones claim to be true and the other as false. For that, the Lord does not intend.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Thank you. But I disagree with Augustine. God has revealed so that we can understand. Paul wrote the Ephesians:

      15 For this reason I too, having heard of the faith in the Lord Jesus which exists among you and your love for all the saints, 16 do not cease giving thanks for you, while making mention of you in my prayers; 17 that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of Him. 18 I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened, so that you will know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, 19 and what is the surpassing greatness of His power toward us who believe (Ephesians 1.15-19).

  19. Steve H

    Thanks for this chain of comment!

    It was around a year or so ago that the Pastor of our church threw out the comment ‘ The church is not the bride of Christ – it is Israel.’

    And I confess, the theological hairs on the back of my neck began to bristle.

    One of the things I have learned over the past 40 years of wilderness wandering, is that I haven’t got the answers – but God is really interested in hearing what my questions are. Asking questions is the way we keep the conversation concerning Him flowing.

    After my Pastors comment, I decided to check it out & approached it with as open a mind as possible. I know we all bring our presuppositions etc to these things but I do believe if we are honestly seeking truth, God will reveal it.

    God’s interaction with the world has always been through Israel [we can argue about Abraham, as he wasn’t in fact Jewish].

    Israel has been the vehicle that God has presented His message to the world.

    When Jesus came, He came to Israel & presented His credentials to Israel that He was the long awaited Messiah. His whole earthly ministry was to Israel.

    They rejected Him as Messiah & we then see the next phase of God’s plan – the church age as revealed to Paul.

    But the call and destiny of Israel is not over with – one day, they will again be used as God’s vehicle to the world.

    If we work on the basis that Jesus’ ministry was to the Jews, then we see in His accounts & teaching that often He uses marriage language [ie bride/bridegroom stuff] – this is the stuff of Jewish relationship.

    And when the physical, worldly destiny of Israel has been outworked, He returns for His bride [Israel].

    I still struggle with Revelation being solely Jewish Don [as we have already discussed] but believe the understanding of Bride v’s Body are extremely important to grasp & the string of comments to your writing have been evidence of this.

    Thanks for generating such good questions.

    1. No`e

      Sreve, beautifully said (the tone in your writing)! Thanks for sharing.
      Too, as you mentioned, I appreciate the string of comments regarding this subject.
      Don, thank you. You seem earnest and eager to help, without defense, which is so refreshing for Bible seeking-students. Many thanks!
      Good article. I very much appreciate your dedication for letting Scripture interpret Scripture, and for holding the measure of proof text as standard, which lessens opinions.

  20. J dixon

    Your explanation is confusing. It seems you’ve studied a great deal, but your explanation is more complicated than what you’re trying to explain.
    The reason you don’t see the bride of Christ in revelation until rev 19 is because she is in heaven during the tribulation. Raptured away before the tribulation starts, “so shall we ever be with the Lord”
    The nation Israel will sleep in the wilderness in tents in the mellinial reign, with King David as her ruler, and King, but also a co regent prince under King Jesus, (ez 34) whose throne will be in the heavenlies with his Bride in the bridal chamber, US, from the heavenlies. The Bride of Christ IS his body, and will come out of the body of Christ, the church, (kingdom and grace saints, think Rachel and Leah), but not all of the church is the Bride (naomi, Ruth, Boaz). In revelation 21, you see the tabernacle “New Jerusalem”with men” Israel, and those born in the mellinial reign, and then you see the Holy of Holies, “HOLY Jeruselam” the holiest part of the tabernacle, which is where Christ will dwell with his Bride, the saints of the grace dispensation, and enjoy an intimacy with Christ as his queen. Those twelve gates are for his family, king David, and the Apostles, and kings of the earth (grace saints), and the kingdom saints, who will also have access to the “Holy Jerusalem” inside the “New Jerusalem”, but as a family member “children of the Bride chamber”, oart of the body, but not the Bride.
    All the Godly men in scripture from Adam to Jacob, to Joseph, to Boaz, to King David, EVERY ONE of them had GENTILE BRIDES, including Moses and Jacob. as will Jesus. Boaz, the picture of Christ in the OT married a Gentile bride, but she was a Jew by ADOPTION, as we are adopted by “the mother of us all” and the story of Boaz and Ruth is the perfect explanation of the relationship Jesus has with his church, the body, and his Bride, which comes from his body as Adams rib to make Eve. Its plain as day. Jesus Bride is a Gentile, but a Jew by adoption, specifically the Grace dispensation saints, which will come out of the body of Christ, his church. I pray this helps your understanding.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      J Dixon,
      The explanation is simple: Israel is the bride/wife of YHVH. The Church is His body. Paul alone revealed the Church was the body of Christ. He did not state it was the bride of Christ.

      1. Tim

        I take a slightly different take on this…and go strictly w/ the biblical text.

        The Bride of Christ is the city… New Jerusalem ( And there came unto me one of the seven angels, who 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.”
        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,

        Israel is the the friends of the Bride Groom (or wedding guests), like John the Baptist… Jesus says so (Luke 5:34 – “Can you make the friends of the bridegroom fast while the bridegroom is with them?”

        The church is the body of Christ

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          We must compare Scripture with Scripture. Throughout the Scriptures, Israel is the wife/bride of Christ. John wrote that the New Jerusalem was prepared as a bride, not that it was the bride (Revelation 22.2). This verse governs what comes later, Revelation 21.9-10.

  21. Sue

    Why is everyone determined to make the body of Christ ‘ the Bride ‘.

    Ephesians shows that the Mystery Church will be ‘His Glory’ manifested because of what He did on the cross.

    If anything the church is ‘in’ the bridegroom ready to receive the bride (Israel) then all the fullness will be summed up in Him.

  22. Dennis

    Thank you for the article. My wife and I had often wondered if calling the church the “Bride of Christ” was doctrinally correct! What you have said makes sense to us.

    I was wondering if you could expound upon your statement, “Jesus’ words about salvation during this period are as straightforward as words can be: only by enduring to the end, i.e. the end of one’s life (martyrdom) or until He returns, is salvation possible.”

    This is probably a very simple concept, but I have yet to wrap my brain around it. Can you explain this, or point me to another article of yours that talks about this?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      During the Tribulation, people will be saved by believing the gospel of the kingdom, not Paul’s gospel. The gospel of the kingdom is believing who Christ is–the Messiah, the Son of God. Opposed to this will be Antichrist’s claim that he is God. Most who believe the gospel will be martyred. Some will survive. The Bible teaches that 2/3 of the the Jews will survive and will initiate the Lord’s return (Matthew 23.37-39). So the salvation Jesus spoke of can be taken in a dual sense–eternal salvation–by believing the gospel and physical salvation–by fleeing to the mountains (Matthew 24.15-20).

      1. Sue

        Hi Don,

        Your articles have been a wonderful forum whereby we can fellowship over the Word. I have been greatly blessed. Thank You.

        You said you attend an Anglican Church. Can I ask how you reconcile some of the error the AC teach and hold to, such as infant baptism, a strong hierarchy, confirmation etc. with your pursuit of the rightly dividing the Word of God.

        I am in agreement that we need to fellowship with one another and personally continue to seek to do this. However, I have experienced many leaders who imply they are not comfortable with questions asked or incorrect doctrine being challenged. Has this been your experience or have you a different reason for attending an Anglican Church.

        Sorry if this is too personal and not in keeping with the aim of this web site.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          Thank you. I have found no church true to the Scriptures in all areas where I live. As long as I can teach without interference I do. So far, that has been the case. I do not mind challenges as long as the Scriptures are the supreme authority. I am not bound by the teachings of any denomination or church.

  23. Katlego

    Hi doctrine, firstly thank you for your writings, very insightful and helpful. When I read your article contrasting between Peter and Paul’s gospels and how at the Council of Jerusalem it was concluded that the only way to be saved is through Paul’s gospel which says that salvation comes only by faith in the risen Jesus, which is totally true. That even in Galatians Paul wrote that if anyone preached any other gospel he should be accursed. How then is Israel in the Book of Revelations going to be saved through perseverance? That is those who perseve until the end will be saved. Isn’t that another gospel? Another way of being saved?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Paul’s gospel is operational as long as the Church is here. At the time of Revelation it is gone (1 Corinthians 15.51). Read Jesus’ words to the 7 assemblies. They contain information of how people will be saved. The gospel of the kingdom will be back–as Jesus declared in Matthew 24.14. That gospel focuses upon the identity of Christ. Paul’s gospel focuses upon the work of Christ. The great question during the Tribulation will be who is God–Jesus the Messiah or the Beast, the Antichrist. Those who believe Jesus is the Messiah will be saved. Those who worship the Beast and take his mark are lost. So yes, it is a different gospel.

  24. Thomas Kole

    Thank you for helping me to unpack this theology. I have been chasing this rabbit down its hole for several months and with your help have grabbed it by the leg. I am of the same opinion you are, that the church is not the bride of Christ. How about Mat 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. Mat 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
    God asks Ezekiel, (ch. 16 all) to give Jerusalem a message, in vs. 8 God gave marriage vows to Jerusalem, and declared a covenant with her.
    The prophet Isaiah says 62:4 God will claim Jerusalem as his bride.
    I do not yet have it skinned.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Thank you. Throughout the Scriptures Israel is referred to as the wife/bride of God. The Church is the body of Christ with Christ as its Head. God has kept these two programs separate and distinct as heaven and earth.

  25. Joe

    Doctrine, I am impressed with your patience. You answer the same question over and over.
    A couple of questions…If the marriage to the Bride is in heaven why does Christ return ‘for’ his bride. And if the marriage is in heaven what about the saved Kingdom believers still alive on earth at the end of the seven years? I assume these believer who make it through the tribulation live on into the Kingdom and don’t attend the wedding? Maybe I’m wrong about the marriage in Heaven….

    Thank you so much, ……Joe

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The description is anticipatory: 7 Let us rejoice and be glad and give the glory to Him, for the marriage of the Lamb has come and His bride has made herself ready.” 8 It was given to her to clothe herself in fine linen, bright and clean; for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints. 9 Then he *said to me, “Write, ‘Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb.’” And he *said to me, “These are true words of God.” Those speaking are Jews who witness Israel repentance. Christ can return and marry repentant Israel according to His words in Matthew 23.37-39.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The Church is under grace; Israel was under Law. The Church has heavenly promises; Israel, earthly promises. No prophecy attends the Church; Israel is replete with prophecy. Christ meets the Church in the air; Christ meets Israel on the earth. Just a few.

  26. Innocent

    I find this article to be technical and seemingly authoritative. However the author never questions his basic suppositions. There is no reason why the Bride of Christ cannot be both the people of Israel and the Holy Church ( his body). Perhaps at different times. These revelations from scripture are to help us apprehend deep mysteries of the Godhead and are not to be defined as doctrine per se. The author relies wholly on modern scripture ( Sola Scriptura) and never appeals to the writings of the “Church Fathers” who by the guidance of the Holy Spirit were guided in to all truth and helped to articulate the faith and teaching of the apostles and who gave us the basic doctrines of the Church in the 7 ecumenical councils including the canon of scripture and the earliest creed of the One holy catholic ( not roman) and Apostolic church. The article further offers no help in applying his notions to the life of a Christian and how our conceptions about the church and the bride and the body of Christ help us to know Him.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      You are correct in that I appeal to the Scriptures alone. Some of what the Church Fathers wrote was good. Some was not. Their writings were not “God-breathed” (θεόπνευστος) as the Scriptures. The Bible makes a clear distinction between Israel and the Church and God’s program for each. Other articles deal with the Christian life and provide more information about God’s plan, His Church, etc. Keep reading!

  27. Marinara

    Revelation 21:9-10 clearly says “….Come here, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb. And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me the holy city, Jerusalem, coming down out of the heaven from God,” John proceeds to describe this city in detail. To me this is clear. Why does it have to be so complicated? Why can’t we just go back to fundamentals and take the Bible at it’s word?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      What could be simpler than that Israel is the wife/bride of Christ? Jerusalem is associated with only one group of people: Israel.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          All 12 tribes were present in Jesus’ day and all were known as Jews. This nomenclature began after the captivity of the 10 tribes by the Assyrians.

  28. Marianne

    Doctrine, I came across this post while researching about the Gospel Of Jesus’ Wife. I was just watching something on tv about it, but I had to shut it off, because the scholars seemed much too immature to continue watching. They have this tiny fragment which reads at the end of the fragment, “…Jesus said to his disciples, “My wife…” and that’s where it ends. So from this they are radically assuming that he had a human wife.

    But I immediately thought, what if the word could have meant ‘bride’ or ‘wife’ in the sense of ‘the bride of Christ’ (of course I always correlated that to the church but I can see from your post that it is Israel). And I, too, have read in scripture in the Old Testament prophets where Israel is referenced metaphorically as a wife to God. And I see you have mentioned that Revelation 21:9 which mentions the ‘wife of Christ’. So if I could ‘see’ that, or think of that first, why can’t these people with all of their scholarly knowledge consider it?

    My point is that I’m glad I came across your post because it verifies that my thought of the verse in this fragment could be correct, and I just wish scholars weren’t so quick to get Jesus married off. I have many legitimate reasons to believe that Jesus was not married, but whether he was or not would not change who he was. But I also think if He was married, there would be some mention of that. I’m just suspicious of most secular scholars’ push for Him to be so. Thank you for the insights.


  29. Leeann Stone

    I clearly see from his teaching that the Bride of Christ is Israel. Scripture refers to the wedding guests! Who might the guests be? Old Testament saints?
    Thank you in advance?

  30. Becky

    Regarding those who are confused by Eph 5, Paul does not use the word “bride.” He uses a different word, “wives;” something to ponder because even without the Greek or hebrew, we all must admit that “bride” and “wife” bring two different pictures to mind.

    Also, a key verse in this passage is Eph 5:29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church….. This moves away from the “spiritual” to the “physical,” speaking specifically about a man’s own body, having nothing to do with his wife, but rather how a man takes care of himself, eating, keeping himself clean, etc. And in this context, Paul compares it to the Lord, who would be the man, taking care of the Church, His own body. Paul then goes on in verses 30-32 still speaking about a man’s own body/flesh. These four verses seem to me to be a side note or veering off, because in verse 33 he gets back on track with the word, “Nevertheless.”
    So this entire passage cannot be used to prove that the Church is the Bride because of verse 29. Paul is simply trying to teach men how to love their wives: by the spiritual where a man and woman become one “flesh,” and by the physical where a man takes care of his own physical body.

  31. Vini Vinc

    If Jesus is the church and Israel is the bride then who are ( blessed are those who are invited the the marriage supper of the lamb?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      We’re not told specifically. Bullinger’s comment is probably as good as any: And he saith to me, Write, “Blessed are they that are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb.” ] Thus we not only have the Wife; but as in Ps. xlv. 14, “the virgins, her companions”; and also those who are the invited guests. As “star differeth from another star in glory” (1 Cor. xv. 41), so the people in glory differ in ranks and orders and degrees; but all, all-glorious, in the “many mansions.” Just as in an earthly family there are the Husband, the Wife, the Children, the Relatives, the Friends, the Visitors, and the Servants, yet all in the same mansion and all one household; so in the glory there will be the Christ and the Church which is His Body; the Lamb and the Lamb’s wife; the “friends of the Bridegroom” (John iii. 29); the “virgins” that be the Bride’s “companions” (Ps. xlv. 14); those who are “called” to the marriage supper; the “servants”; the great multitude of Rev. vii.; the 144,000 of sealed ones; and of all, it is true, that they are “blessed.” For the angel goes on at once to announce this in the most solemn and formal manner, which calls forth the adoration of John.

  32. Dale Poteet

    2 Questions:

    1: Where did Abel fit into all this? Was he in the Bride, or The Body, or neither, or both?

    2: When did the Church start?

    I have never heard or read so much confusion since the last time I listened to a TV preacher trying to explain tything!

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Where Adam to Abraham fit is unknown. The Church, the body of Christ, began with Paul. See my articles, Paul: Chief of Sinners? and The Church: The Body of Christ.

      1. Bobbi

        Romans 4:17-22 Abraham was saved by grace through faith. Is the father of all who are saved by grace through faith, isn’t he?

          1. Bobbi

            I’m stuck. Where does the ‘Goel’ fit in(kinsman redeemer? Boaz =Goel, Ruth = gentile bride, Naomi= redemption of the land. Do you picture any prophetic “types” in the following marriages? Isaac and Rebecca(gentile), Joseph and Asenath(gentile), Moses and Ziporah(gentile), Salmon and Rahab(gentile) ? Boaz and Ruth being important as according to a study the same field that was theirs was maybe where Jesus was born. Thank you brother for any assistance. I value your study skills.

            1. Bobbi

              Sorry doctrine, I forgot to add that we also have Romans 7:4. Thank you again. Grace and peace to you. :) The word for joined is “married” in kjv. (Ginoma)

              1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                Thank you. The word γίνομαι is one of the most frequently used words in the NT. It usually means “become.” Paul’s use of it in Romans 7.3, 4 is interesting. It carries the sense of “becoming one” or “joining” which was God’s purpose between man and woman. Literally, verse 4 reads, “Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; [in order for you to become to another], even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

              1. Bobbi

                It is interesting. The most beautiful of all to me is the book of Ruth, for many reasons. Mainly it typifies the royal of the kinsman redeemed which was prevalent in those times. The interesting thing is Boaz did it all, redeemed both Ruth (gentile) and also Naomi was delivered back her land. He did it all . Which Christ did for us perfectly and will do till He comes! Philippians 1:6. Absolutely beautiful story.

  33. Sarah

    Hi, I’d be interested in hearing your interpretation of 1 Cor 11 where it speaks of the wife or woman covering her head in prayer. One of my relatives was Old Order Mennonite and they make a good case for wearing a veil or headcovering always, since we are supposed to be praying without ceasing. What do you say? Do I have to cover my head?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The head covering is larely cultural. Paul’s point is to teach headship (v.4). Man is the head of woman and God of Christ. Nature provides a natural sign of headship: long hair for woman. Culture provides a sign: head covering. Maintaining this truth is important for angels, who observe and enforce God’s natural order. I do not think a head covering in today’s society indicates headship but would argue long hair does (v. 6, 14-15).

  34. Joe

    Rev 19 vs 8 mentions fine linen and relates that to righteousness of the saints.
    In vs 11 the Lamb comes to make war.
    In vs 14 the armies are clothed in fine linen.

    questions…Who are the saints? Kingdom gospel believers? The saints wear fine linen and come for battle wearing fine linen. Kingdom gospel believers in battle? This event appears to be at the end of the tribulation. “Heaven opened” ..”and the armies which were in Heaven followed him”. Kingdom gospel believer in Heaven?

    I always thought the Kingdome gospel believers were resurrected at the end of the trib and the church was in Heaven during the trib. Please explain if you will. thank you very much.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      I don’t know. Since Revelation concerns Israel and the nations and John wrote to Jews we cannot know for certain if the Church is included. I would say the saints include OT believers (they don’t necessarily need resurrection bodies to appear clothed–cf. Matthew 17–did Moses and Elijah appear clothed?) and possibly (probably?) the Church as well.

  35. Susan

    Thank you for your website, it has been interesting.

    After reading this article, I wanted to ask you what you think about the scripture which says the heavenly Jerusalem City will descend to earth as the bride? If the church is raptured to heaven before the tribulation, could this be understood that the church as “the body of Christ” will inhabit the new Jerusalem city in heaven and come with Christ as mentioned in Revelation’s?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Note carefully the language, “as a bride.” That is, it will be beautiful and pure. We have nothing specific about our dwellings. All members of the Church, the body of Christ, have heavenly citizenship and are joint-heirs with Christ. In the new heavens and new earth, heaven will come upon the earth. The city will be enormous so this would seem to indicate a much larger earth. I see no reason the Church will not have dwellings there but the Bible does not reveal this.

  36. Susan

    I have noted well the phrase, which can be understood just as it is stated, ” As a bride”. The wedding has taken place at the rapture, see scripture verse, Luke 12:36. Do you think the wedding supper will be at Christ’s return after the tribulation?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Why do you think the wedding (I assume you mean the marriage supper of the Lamb?) takes place at the Rapture?

  37. Susan

    No, I was trying to ask you about the wedding supper of the Lamb, as a seperate event. The wedding ceremony will take place as the Bride is made ready (Rev. 19:7-8) at the Rapture. Before the Second Coming, The Bride (Body of Christ) will have gone thru the Bema Seat Judgement.
    Now we read:
    Rev. 19:9, “Write, blessed are those who are called to the marriage supper of the Lamb!” Do you think this could be a future event, at the Second Coming?
    Today we celebrate the wedding ceremony followed by the marriage supper (reception) sometimes at different locations (seperated by a time peiod.)
    Biblical times, we find references of the marriage supper lasting a week.
    Remember when the Body of Christ is raptured, time will be different in heaven, we will be living in eternity, so time is beyond our understanding.
    I tried to condense paragraphs into a few sentences, so I hope my question is explained?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The Church is the body of Christ, not the bride of Christ. The Church is complete in Him and needs no preparation. The Church is not found in the book of Revelation. Revelation deals with Israel and the nations, not the Church. The marriage supper seems to take place right before the 2nd coming.

  38. Kevin Rence

    I read in the KJV of the Word in acts 15 : 11 where Peter says we believe that we shall be saved by Grace // it sounds to me that the we is the household of Israel ( I like to call that nation ( IS REAL ) but what is Peter saying about being saved in the future ( shall be ) are they not saved at that time , or is it what like most so called pillars of the church tell me that its no big deal cause other versions say that Peter says we are saved even like the Gentiles // seems to me that shall be and are is a big difference what do you say cause it might be a hinge pin on this Bride of Christ discussion PTL

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      I’m not sure I follow your comment. Peter stated in Acts 15.11 that Israel had now to be saved like Gentiles, that is, according to Paul’s gospel, not the gospel of the kingdom. Salvation was always by faith but not by faith alone until Paul. This is what the controversy in Acts 15 was about. The Jerusalem church was maintaining that Paul’s Gentiles could not be saved by faith alone. They also had to be circumcised and keep the Law. We know from the Gospels that water baptism was also required (Mark 16.16; Acts 2.36-38). Paul argued that the gospel he had received from the ascended Lord required faith alone. Peter came to Paul’s aid for he remembered that when he went to Cornelius’ house, Cornelius and his family had been saved by faith alone, being baptized afterwards. Then Peter stated that they were also to be saved according to Paul’s gospel. In other words, from this time forward, the gospel of the kingdom was set aside. See my article, The Great Hinge, for more information on this subject.

  39. Ron

    Wow, this has really made my head spin. I confess that I have been one of the ones who have taken for granted that the Bride of the Lamb is the church but I do think I follow your line of reasoning. Taking the bride of the Lamb as redeemed Israel does seem to sew up a lot of questions. I still wonder in reference to the church being removed. If I follow the line of thought, after the church has been raptured or removed, then are we saying that no Gentile believers will be coming to a knowledge of Jesus Christ as Saviour during the Tribulation period? There still will be recordings, written materials outlining Paul’s means of Salvation for the church. Is it not possible that the church’s number will still be added to during the tribulation period? Or are you saying regarding the different programs, that once the church is gone those left behind will have to “overcome” in other words adhere again to the basis of law? Or is only apostate Israel going to come to back to God by accepting and acknowledging Jesus as Messiah during the tribulation period prior? We have said that believing Jews currently can also be part of the body of Christ but if I’m understanding you, the body ends or is complete at the rapture and no more will be added to it but apostate Israel will be able to come back to God but only by acknowledging Jesus as the suffering servant and Messiah prior to his second coming and setting up the millennial kingdom? I’m not trying to trip you up in your words or score points, I truly am trying to understand this. After the article and all the posts, I freely admit that I’m probably getting confused on a few points. I do appreciate your willingness to dialogue as this concept you present is huge regarding the understanding of the book of Revelation. Sorry for so many questions but I look forward to your response.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      After God removes the Church at the Rapture, He will seal 144,000 Jews (Revelation 7) who will become evangelists. They will not proclaim Paul’s gospel but the gospel of the kingdom as Jesus declared (Matthew 24.14). The focus of gospel of the kingdom is the identity, rather than the work, of Christ. Many Gentiles (probably millions) will be saved during this ministry. The meaning of “overcome” is rejecting the Antichrist and holding to the truth that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God (cf. Matthew 16.16, i.e. the gospel of the kingdom), not the Antichrist. The Antichrist will declare he is the Messiah and God Himself (Revelation 13). When God removes the Church, He returns to the prophetic program He began with Abraham. According to Daniel, one week of years (7 years–the length of the Tribulation) remains on Israel’s prophetic clock. During the Tribulation God will deal with Israel and the nations, not the Church (see 1 Corinthians 10.32). My articles, The Kingdom of God and The Purpose of the Book of Revelation may provide additional insight into these matters.

  40. Kim N.

    In John chapter 3, John the Baptist mentions the “friend of the bridegroom”, who is the friend of the bridegroom, in your opinion? Thank you.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      John spoke of himself. He was the friend of the bridegroom according to John’s words (John 3.28-30).

  41. leon everett

    Doctrine could you help me please. As beth lowe commented I am like minded.
    I didn’t understand your conclusion as to who is the bride of Christ ? If Christ is the second Adam and God took the bride for the first Adam out of his body will the bride for the second Adam come out of his body ( the church )?
    May God bless

      1. becky

        Hi Leon, I am new (since January) to understanding rightly dividing the Scriptures regarding the fact that all of the Scriptures are profitable for us, but not everything is written to us or about us. If you have this understanding, it clears up so many doctrines taught incorrectly by modern-day “Judeo-Christianity”

  42. Bob

    This is completely wrong and false. I will not go into all the details but the major error is Revelation is written to Jewish Israel. This is book is written to Christians, to the church. Rev1:1, 4, 5,. Rev1:9 John says he is your brother, means Christian. Now where does John say he is writing to Israel or Jews

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Revelation was written to Israel. Nothing in it is Christian. The “churches” of Revelation 2-3 are Jewish assemblies–believing Jews. The language in these chapters is wholly different from the language used of the Church, the body of Christ. John was an apostle of Israel. Neither he, nor any of the Twelve, ever had a ministry to Gentiles. It is not in the Bible. The ascended Lord commissioned Paul to be the apostle of the Gentiles. The Twelve were apostles of Israel. These were two completely separate programs. For more on Revelation, see my article, Understanding the Book of Revelation.

  43. james maycock

    I understand the Bible teaches we who believe in Christ in this dispensation are the Body of Christ and where He is we shall be also. Ruling and reigning with Him over the new heavens and the new earth? Eternally? Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles and presented the ‘mystery’ of I Corinthians 15. How does this fit in with the Return of Christ for His Body, the Ekklesia? And I Thessalonians 1: 7-9?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      When Christ returns for His Church (Rapture), members of the body of Christ will receive resurrection bodies. When our responsibilities officially begin is unknown. I do not understand your question regarding 1 Thessalonians 1.7-9.

  44. Lorilyn Roberts

    I have read through all the comments above and have learned a lot. Thanks for your individual responses to so many questions. I have this one.

    Where do Messianic Jews fit in this? Are they the bride or the body of Christ? To be specific, throughout history, there has always been a remnant of Jewish believers. If they have accepted Yeshua as their Savior during the church age, are they considered the bride or the body of Christ?

    Thanks for the clarification.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      All who believe Paul’s gospel (1 Corinthians 15.1-4) are members of the body of Christ (Galatians 3.26-29).

  45. David

    Is Abraham, isaac ,Jacob,……David…..job…in body of Christ. If not what their position in heaven. In new testament we are beliver and we are in body of Christ. What about old testament peoples. Kindly advise with biblical reference.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      None of these OT believers are members of the body of Christ. They are in heaven awaiting their earthly kingdom. See Matthew 19.28, 6.10; Genesis 15.7-21. The Jew’s inheritance is earthly, not heavenly. The body of Christ was a Pauline revelation. No other writer mentions it.

  46. Vanessa

    Thank you for a well explained article. The fact that John the Baptist (Jewish) is the Bridegrooms friend it tells me that the bride has to be Jewish. Thank you for a lovely lovely article.

  47. Stephanie

    I won’t quote scriptures because you are familiar with them; however if in Revelations the churches are made of Jews why would Christ refer to them as churches? Jews went to temples and synagogues. The term church only came into existence under what you call Pauline doctrine.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Words have meaning in context. The Lord did not call them “churches.” The word is ekklesia. It basically means a group of people. So, the context has to determine what kind of a group He addressed. In this case, they were Jewish believers. Take a look at the link and see how the word is used. In Acts 19, I think, it is used of a mob. When Paul used the term, he meant the body of Christ.

      1. AJ

        doctrine, It seems that ekklesia is just a contextual word and not a label of one specific group. When you said that when Paul uses the term Paul means the Body of Christ. When I went down the list of the different uses of ekklesia in the link you left for Stephanie. I saw that the term was used for the church of God. Is the “church of God” specific to gentiles Body of Christ or to believing Jews of the Messiah? I ask because through the link that you gave for the word “ekklesia” 1Cor1:2 “To the church G1577 of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling, with all who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours:” I see this contextually used for gentiles, which would be the Body of Christ. Then, 1Co 15:9
        “For I am the least of the apostles, and not fit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church G1577 of God.” This I understand to mean believing Jews of Jesus being the Messiah. Will you help clear up this confusion? I know that I’m missing something.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          What ἐκκλησία means depends upon context. In its most basic sense it means a group of people, an assembly. It can mean the Church, the body of Christ (Romans 16.1; 1 Corinthians 12.28). It can mean a group of Jewish believers (Matthew 16.18, 18.17; Acts 8.3). It can also mean a mob (Acts 19.32).

          1. AJ

            So the “Church of God” is both Jewish believers of the Messiah Jesus and the Body of Christ? Two different gospels under one title Church of God as per the two scripture examples from my previous comment? If you would address that. It would better help me make my distinctions during discussions.

            1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

              During the ministry of John the Baptist, Jesus, and the Twelve until Paul there was one gospel, the gospel of the kingdom (Matthew 3.1-2). The focus of the faith portion of that gospel was upon the identity of Jesus, that He was the Messiah, the Son of God (Matthew 16, John 11). The works portion was baptism, keeping the Law, etc. (Mark 1.4, 16.16; Acts 2.36-38). After Paul was saved, most likely while he was in Arabia, God gave him the gospel of the grace of God (Acts 20.24). From this time until the Council of Jerusalem, both gospels were valid. But at the end of the Council, only Paul’s gospel was valid (Acts 15.11; Galatians 1.6-9). Paul’s gospel was/is faith + 0, no works. It’s focus is not upon the identity of Christ, but upon the work of Christ, that He died for our sins and rose from the dead (1 Corinthians 15.1-4). The Twelve did not know this gospel until they learned it from Paul who received it directly from the risen Lord (Galatians 1.11-12). So today, both Jew and Gentile are saved by believing Paul’s gospel, that Christ died for our sins, was buried, and rose from the dead (1 Corinthians 15.1-4). It is now faith + nothing. My articles, The Gospel, and The Gospel of the Kingdom, may be helpful.

  48. Gee

    I Revelation 22 it says, “The Spirit and the Bride say come.” Where else in scripture does Israel, the Bride, gives this inventation to come? Also who is the woman of Revelation chapter 17? Thanks

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Revelation 22 anticipates Israel’s (the Bride) repentance and salvation (Matthew 23.37-39 cf. Romans 11.26). The woman is the false religious system of the world that Satan uses to blind the world to the gospel. Satan uses religion as his vehicle of deceit. The beast is Satan in the persona of the Antichrist. Ultimately, all religion will be centered upon the Antichrist himself and he will demand that the world worship him.

  49. Jennifer

    I have to agree with Bob. This article is completely wrong and false. “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. Eph. 25-26 The Church, the Bride, will be presented to Christ. Jesus said he would go away to make a place for us… just as in the Jewish wedding ceremony. Israel is married to the Father and has played the harlot, but God will remain faithful to his covenant and she will return to Him. “Return, O backsliding children,” says the Lord; “for I am married to you. I will take you, one from a city and two from a family, and I will bring you to Zion.” (Jer. Jer. 3:14) The Church is a virgin (unmarried) – “I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy. I promised you to one husband, to Christ, so that I might present you as a pure virgin to him.” 2 Cor. 11:2 But, in contrast, Israel has already been married to God. -Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah-not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the Lord. But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. (Jer. Jer. 31:31-33)

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Read the Scripture again. Paul did not write that the Church was the bride of Christ. He told husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the Church to present her as a radiant Church. The word ἐκκλησίαν is a feminine noun–that is why we have the “her” language. Paul is using a simile. The Church is the Body of Christ, not the Bride of Christ. We are part of the bridegroom. We are not the bride. The Scriptures do not state the Church is the Bride; they state we are the Body.

  50. Patience

    Hie Don
    I’m humbled by your deep and intense understanding of Scripture.I love this,the Church is His Body while Believing Israel is His Bride! May the good Lord increase You!

  51. Vanessa

    Hi Don, For those who think the church is the bride I wish to remind the readers of this passage. At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. Matthew 22 v 30. This passage and your above article sealed it for me. I think that we can become puffed up with Spritual proudness when we assume we are the bride. I once thought the church was the bride so yes I too had spiritual proudness. I love God and I so enjoy it when he shows me my error in a kind and loving way. Thank you.

  52. Jen Kelly

    I don’t know why this is a sticking point for me? God keeps bringing back up. I agree. The church is not the bride, Israel is. So how do we see the marriage supper of the lamb? I can see us as the guests (body of Christ?), but then when does this happen? And is this with the martyred Israelites (which I believe is the 144,000) as the bride? I can’t seem to sort this in my head. Thanks for responding to these articles, even years after being written.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      I gave the following reply to this question asked earlier: We’re not told specifically. Bullinger’s comment is probably as good as any: And he saith to me, Write, “Blessed are they that are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb.” ] Thus we not only have the Wife; but as in Ps. xlv. 14, “the virgins, her companions”; and also those who are the invited guests. As “star differeth from another star in glory” (1 Cor. xv. 41), so the people in glory differ in ranks and orders and degrees; but all, all-glorious, in the “many mansions.” Just as in an earthly family there are the Husband, the Wife, the Children, the Relatives, the Friends, the Visitors, and the Servants, yet all in the same mansion and all one household; so in the glory there will be the Christ and the Church which is His Body; the Lamb and the Lamb’s wife; the “friends of the Bridegroom” (John iii. 29); the “virgins” that be the Bride’s “companions” (Ps. xlv. 14); those who are “called” to the marriage supper; the “servants”; the great multitude of Rev. vii.; the 144,000 of sealed ones; and of all, it is true, that they are “blessed.” For the angel goes on at once to announce this in the most solemn and formal manner, which calls forth the adoration of John.

  53. Joe

    There is something in my spirit that tells me there is more to marriage than what we normally think. I’m willing the accept that marriage between a man and a woman is a divine institution.I know there is/will be the marriage in heaven. I believe there is more to the Adam and Eve story than I know. Eve was taken out of man. I can understand that mandates there remain a single creation for humanity(both genders) with the requirement of a single sacrifice. Angels are different with each angel a single creation…..millions of angels equal millions of creations. It’s like Eve was a graft taken from Adam but an original graft/sion from where? Originally all the other animals had mates. Adam didn’t. Eve came from a ‘compartment’ in Adam’s side? Is there more of a significance to this arrangement of man/woman or husband/wife or am I making more of this than necessary?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      You are right. Mankind is composed of man/woman. We are a unity which in a unique way mirrors God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. God is One but said, “Let US make man in OUR image. We were created in the image of God. It is a great, wonderful mystery.

  54. Dawn

    You and your site have been a confirmation for me. I can not sleep at night so I listen to scripture. I have been doing this for about a year. I am a “mature” woman. A believer for over 30 years.
    One can not listen to certain passages over and over again with out questioning the common “teachings” out there.
    I couldn’t buy into the Bride of Christ teachings. It was clearly Israel as far as I read. So I went online to see who else might understand it this way and I found your site.
    Thank you for all your writings. I have just about read it all your work now. I have such a peace over the scripture I read . And a new appreciation for Paul’s writings. The whole end time scenario has become clearer. And what is glaring to me now is how dangerous the Jewish roots movement is. All this September doom stuff too is now very suspect to me. Including the Blood Moon teachings. Something might be there but surely, if it is, not for the church.
    The church is so deceived with the misunderstandings of Kingdom vs the Gospel teachings of Paul. I now look at all the men I use to hold up as knowledgeable and wonder how “they don’t know better”. They are leading many astray.
    I tried to share my thoughts with a very good friend of 30 + years. A wonderful Christian friend and she was horrified I did not think the church was the “bride”. I can see I have an up hill journey with my new understanding of Bride VS Body of Christ.
    I’m wondering if the whole “Body of Christ” is a far more literal process than we think. For lack of a better term on my part…..more spiritually accurate….more mystical.
    Why would Jesus put His own body through Judgment? Right? So easy to see the Pretrib rapture once this is understood.
    Any other thoughts you have on how this whole “Body of Christ” actually works?
    God Bless You…..Dawn

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Thank you for your kind words and comment. I’m afraid Christendom is like Judaism of our Lord’s day. It follows tradition. Many things are learned in seminary and taught without a sound Scriptural basis. Men repeat things they have heard but have little Biblical knowledge about what the Scriptures actually say. Once people have tradition locked in their minds, it’s very difficult to wrest out error. The body of Christ is an intimate relationship. It is an organism, a living thing. The fact that God has designed us to love our own bodies speaks to the physical/spiritual relationship we have with Christ.

      1. Dawn

        Would I be correct that this passage: ” And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.” Often quoted as a sign for the Rapture is really for the Jews that will see the second coming of Jesus?
        Thank you

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          Yes. It cannot be the Rapture for the Rapture was a secret (1 Corinthians 15.51). The risen Lord revealed this truth to Paul alone.

          1. Dawn

            wow…….just as I now suspected so many rapture teachings fall to the way side. Such as the rapture will /could happen on feast of trumpets. The analogy of the Jewish Wedding to the “Bride” and ” no one knows the day or hour”
            Thank you again! And I hope you won’t mind, as I continue to really grasp the truth of scripture, and ask more questions?
            Is this Apostate Israel? : “Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and has become a dwelling place of demons, a prison for every foul spirit, and a cage for every unclean and hated bird! 3 For all the nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth have become rich through the abundance of her luxury.”

            Have they become rich through the process of rebuilding the Temple?

            1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

              Babylon is the world’s religious system. God destroyed false religion in the Flood but it was reborn at the Tower of Babel. The woman who rides the beast in Revelation 17 is the culmination of all false religion which will be used by the Beast and False Prophet to deceive the world during the Tribulation. She is called the great whore because Revelation is essentially an Old Testament book and in the OT false religion was described as spiritual adultery. Two characteristics of the system is its bloodthirstiness and wealth.

  55. Kilonzo

    How do you explain this with your argument?

    Revelation 21:9King James Version (KJV) And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb’s wife.

    Revelation 19:7King James Version (KJV) Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.

  56. Thomas

    Your error in dividing up the people of God into multiple spiritual groups is caused by your error of dividing up the Bible and failing to accept that every verse of Scripture is to the church (2 Tim 3:16).

    Much of the modern church has latched on to ignorant views of the relationship between Israel and the church. This is partly due to the confusion of terms when we discuss Israel and the church. Therefore, it must be understood that there is an outward Israel and there is an outward church; likewise there is a spiritual Israel and a spiritual church. In order to avoid any confusion, in this submission, I will only be discussing spiritual Israel and the spiritual church; So when I use the term Israel here, I mean a body of people who are truly saved having believed upon the Lord, and when I use the term church here, I mean the body of people who are truly saved and not just anyone who professes to be a Christian. The question we must look to answer is, “What is the relationship between Israel and the Church?”

    Scripture tells us that Gentiles (non-Jews) are grafted into the same body as Israel, for it was God’s design that “the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, of the same body” (Ephesians 3:6) In Romans 11, the apostle Paul uses the image of an olive tree which represents the spiritual body made up of God’s people. Notice that the tree never changed, but Gentiles were grafted into that same tree:
    “And if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them, and with them became a partaker of the root and fatness of the olive tree, do not boast against the branches. But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the root, but the root supports you. You will say then, ‘Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in.’ Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith.” (Romans 11:17-20)
    The Scripture is very clear that there is only one spiritual body of people belonging to God. The only distinction is that some were natural branches while others were grafted in. Another way to view this truth is by observing the Scriptures which relate to the bride of Christ (God’s people); the Bible never gives any indication that there is more than one bride.
    “Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone, in whom the whole building, being fitted together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.” (Ephesians 2:19-22)
    In this text, Paul is describing one spiritual body which clearly consists of both Jews and Gentiles. The fact that prophets are mentioned shows that the Old Testament saints are part of this body, and the fact that the Ephesians (whom Paul is writing to) are referred to as former strangers and foreigners shows us that the Gentiles have been brought in to this body. Again, we see a demonstration of how people who are not blood-line Jews are “grafted in” to a spiritual body of God. Many would claim that the spiritual body described here is not spiritual Israel.

    It is interesting to note that Abraham is called the “father of all those who believe” (Romans 4:11). This is significant due to the fact that Abraham is both the physical and spiritual father of the nation of Israel. Could this mean that Christians are part of spiritual Israel? Some would argue that us being spiritual sons of Abraham does not necessarily imply that we have been brought into spiritual Israel. Once again, if we insist that spiritual Israel is separate from the spiritual church, we then have to face the problem of the existence of two separate spiritual bodies which Scripture (read Ephesians) clearly rejects.

    There can be no denying that Jesus was both a blood-line and true spiritual Israelite. With that in mind, we can draw a very simple conclusion from our spiritual union with Him. The Scripture tells us that we are “married…to Him who was raised from the dead” (Romans 7:4) —Jesus Christ. Also, it is written that “he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him.” (1 Corinthians 6:17) If we are one spirit with a true spiritual Israelite, how can we conclude that we are not part of spiritual Israel? If we are not spiritual Israel, then that would mean that Jesus could not be either, for the Scripture clearly states that we are one with Him. Furthermore, If God told Israel “I am married to you” (Jeremiah 3:14), how could we also be “married…to Him” unless we were grafted in as part of that same bride? Surely, God would not have more than one bride. There have been people who claim that because the church is called the body of Christ, it cannot also be the bride. This seems sound at first, but falls apart when we observe that modern Jews who must accept Christ would be both the wife (Israel) and the body of Christ (the church). We must therefore either acknowledge the church as having been grafted into spiritual Israel or tell believing Jews that God has divorced them (which He would never do).

    To avoid any confusion, we must look at the nation of Israel and the church on two separate plains (physical and spiritual). On the first plain, we have the physical nation of Israel and the physical church. Here, God has temporarily turned from the nation of Israel to the church (Matthew 21:43). It is certain that there will be a restoration of the physical nation of Israel (Matthew 19:28). On the second plain, we have the spiritual Israel and the spiritual church. Here, we must agree with the Scripture that both are one spiritual body. All of the Scriptures establish that all members of the church are “brought in”. This type of language would be unnecessary if there was a separation on this plain.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The human race is divided into believers and unbelievers. That’s as basic as it gets. All Scripture is FOR us but not all Scripture is TO us (Romans 15.4). For example, the Law was given to Israel, not to the Church. Paul taught the Church, the body of Christ, is not under Law but under grace (Romans 6.14). The olive tree does not represent a body of people who are saved but the place of privilege, the place of God’s blessing (See my article, The Olive Tree). Israel stood in that place for 2,000 years. But because of unbelief, God temporarily broke them off and placed Gentiles into the place of blessing. That is the meaning of Romans 11. If you do not understand God’s program for Israel and His program for the Church are entirely different programs–different rules, destinies, ways of approaching Him–you cannot understand the Bible. This has nothing to do with a dichotomy of physical Israel/spiritual Israel and physical Church/spiritual Church. What must be understood is that God has initiated two separate programs. The Church and Israel are completely, totally separate–united only by the fact that believing Israel and the Church have the same God. Paul received secrets from the risen Christ that He did not reveal in His earthly ministry. The Twelve knew nothing of them. They knew nothing of the gospel of the grace of God, the Church, the body of Christ, salvation by faith alone, the Rapture, the blindness of Israel, not being under Law, etc. These were new revelations God gave to Paul alone. Without such awareness, without right division and interpretation of the Scriptures, the result is error and confusion.

      1. Thomas

        I think by “privileged position”, you mean to show that prior to before, Israel was in the primary position through which God revealed Himself and now, this position belongs to the church. In this way, God turned from the Jews to Gentiles that they might bear the fruits of the kingdom which Israel did not. If this is the interpretation of Paul’s illustration, why did he not have all of Israel’s branches cut off as opposed to some of them? There are of course Jews in the church, but that means they are part of the “church branch” and not the “Israel branch”. Jesus said to the Jews, “the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it.” The tree appears to be the kingdom of God. The King of Kings who rules this kingdom was the King of Israel. Now, after being rejected and crucified by His own people, He became the King of as many as would receive Him. He currently does not reside on the throne in the nation of Israel, but on the throne in the hearts of every Jewish and Gentile believer-hence some of branches of Israel remained. In your understanding, unbelieving Gentiles are part of this tree. Paul’s phrase “you stand by faith” must then be a continual ringing in your ears. Do people stand in a “privileged position” by faith? Since when do the “rules” change from Israel to the church. Was not everyone from Abraham to John the Baptist justified by faith (Rom 4), Sanctified by God (Exodus 31:13). Granted, the Holy Spirit wasn’t yet given, but that only serves to further prove that everything depended upon Christ. The law they were given was given to point them to what we have (salvation by grace through faith). Its the same program, the same kingdom, the same King, the same salvation, the same bride of Christ comprised of all faith filled people.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          Read Romans 11 again. It’s not just the Church which occupies the place of blessing, though we are the primary beneficiaries, but Gentiles. For 2,000 years Israel, believing and unbelieving Jews, had that place of privilege. Believing Jews were the primary beneficiaries but both believers and unbelievers occupied the place of privilege . God did break off all Israel in the illustration. National Israel does not presently occupy a place of privilege. That is held by Gentiles. Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 10.32 that there are three categories of people: Jews, Gentiles, and the Church. God sees believing Jews as “Church” just as He sees believing Gentiles as “Church.” Jesus was not speaking of the Church in his declaration of “a nation bearing the fruits of it” for the Church was a secret according to what Paul wrote in Ephesians 3. A secret is that which is unrevealed. Rather, He spoke of a future generation of Jews who would believe, i.e., the “all Israel will be saved” of Romans 11.26 cf. Matthew 23.37-39. The answer to your question, “Was not everyone from Abraham to John the Baptist justified by faith (Rom 4)” is “No.” Men have always been justified by faith but not by faith alone. Salvation by faith alone was a Pauline doctrine not taught by anyone else until after Acts 15 (see my article, The Great Hinge). Justification by faith alone was a doctrine not known before Paul. Before Paul, men and women were justified by faith and works (Abraham being an exception) as evidenced by Matthew 6.14-15, 19.16-17; Mark 1.4, 16.16; Luke 10.15-28; Acts 2.38, 15.1, 5 (as well as the whole OT).

          1. Thomas

            Justification by grace through faith is the cornerstone doctrine of Christianity (Ephesians 2:8-9). No soul can be saved by any mixture of works and faith, but only by the grace of God giving them the faith to believe, that being the means through which they are justified. Anyone with true faith who has been justified will produce the good works which we were created for (James 2:14-26). The works can only be a byproduct of salvation and never a prerequisite (Rom 11:6). You seriously believe that God who designed salvation so that boasting is excluded (Rom 3:27) would have Old Testament saints marching into eternal life with a salvation partly merited by their own works? I see that your failure to accept very basic truths of Scripture have done damage to much of your understanding of the Bible. Hebrews makes it clear that the entirety of the old covenant system was a shadow of the new covenant. shadows couldn’t save anyone. The reality saves and He is Jesus-not Jesus and some good works I did. Old Testament saints looked forward in faith and we look back in faith, but all look to Christ to save them apart from works. Why do you think God gave Israel the Sabbath. Doesn’t Colossians 2:16-17 tell us that Christ is the substance of those shadows. Doesn’t Hebrews 4 tell us that whoever believes has entered into that Sabbath rest. Wasn’t the Sabbath given as a sign to Israel that it was God who would sanctify them? (Ezekiel 20) God wanted Israel to know that it was Him who would make them Holy-not Him and some works they did. Why do you think God made sure the guy picking up sticks on the Sabbath was executed (Numbers 15). God doesn’t care if people pick up sticks! The Sabbath symbolizes our rest in faith in Him for salvation, and the man who violated the symbol serves as an example to those who violate the reality. Why do you think Old Testament saints and New Testament apostles were at the transfiguration? Its almost as if they were all part of the same program for salvation.

            1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

              You are correct. Justification by faith alone is the cornerstone of Christianity. But justification by faith alone is not taught by anyone until Paul. Study the Scriptures. Try and find any Scripture that teaches justification by faith alone before Paul. John did not proclaim it. Jesus did not proclaim it. Peter and the Twelve did not proclaim it. Only Paul. Peter, at Pentecost did not tell the Jews to believe Christ died for their sins, arose from the dead, and that by faith alone they could be saved. What did he tell them? He told them to repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2.36-38). Baptism is a work. If Peter had known salvation by faith alone do you not think he would have proclaimed it? Why didn’t he? He did not know it. For three years they had proclaimed salvation by faith and baptism (e.g., Mark 1.4, 16.16).

              1. Thomas

                Found 1. Luke 18 – “He spoke this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous” (Sounds like pride in works). “And the tax collector, standing afar off, would not so much as raise his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me a sinner!’ 14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other;” (seems as if this man didn’t work for his salvation). This is clearly in reference to salvation, for Jesus mentions how the Pharisee thought he was righteous. He thought he could do it on his own merit. He did not understand that it is God who makes one righteous (those with a broken and contrite heart). That is justification by grace through faith.

                1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                  Such a response is not useful. The problem of maintaining that men have always been saved by faith alone is that too many verses are against it. The entire OT stands against it as does Jesus’ earthly ministry and the teachings of the Twelve. I gave you several verses which demonstrate this. Apparently you have not examined them. Your position is like that of the Pharisees whose tradition was dearer than the Scriptures. Salvation by faith alone began with Paul. Unless you understand that Paul is THE apostle of the Gentiles you cannot understand Christianity and the Church. I would encourage you to study the Scriptures for yourself and not rely upon tradition for it is wrong and has led to all the confusion we see among denominations.

          2. Dino J Zito

            The Jew and the Gentile referenced in first Corinthians 10:32 exist as a single component under the constraints of unbelief and the Church mentioned in that same verse are believers (being either Jew or Gentile) who clearly are a separate unit unto themselves. So if we add these categories together the result is unmistakably a sum of two and not three as is commonly taught using first Corinthians 10:32.

            1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

              Jew and Gentile are eternal, God-ordained distinctions. The creation of the Church, the body of Christ, was a new creation. Thus, there are three categories of men: Jew, Gentile, Church. The last is composed of either Jew or Gentile who have believed Paul’s gospel.

  57. Joe

    I had a forehead slapping experience recently. After reading the story about Peter going to the house of Cornelius (which I’ve read many times over the years) he returns home and gets jumped on by the local Jews for preaching to a gentile. This incident happened a long time after Acts 2:28. How can it be taught that Peter’s sermon early in Acts 2 was to and for anyone but fellow Jews?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Yes. If passages like this will not convince one that it is impossible the Church began at Pentecost nothing will (Luke 24.25).

  58. G Teo

    Thank you for your insight about the Bride as reference to Israel only. Paul wrote in his letter to the Romans in chapter 11:13-25 , addressing the Gentiles. He gave the illustration of the wild olive (the Gentiles) being graffed into Israel. So would not then the Gentile believers having been graffed into Israel the is One with Israel as the Bride in Revelation?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      G Teo,
      Thank you. The wild olive branches are not grafted into Israel but into the olive tree, the place of blessing. Please see my article, The Olive Tree.

  59. Joe

    There was the first Adam (Adam)and the last Adam, the Lord. Originally it appears that both Adam and Eve were one. Out of the first Adam’s body came Eve. Can it be said that Eve became Adam’s wife?

    The Church is Christ’s body. Does the Church in some way parallel Eve in that Christ’s body is both Himself (the Head)and the church?….but instead of being taken out we are being put in….This next comment is totally w/o foundation but I think in ages past there was a dispute of some kind and now in time a bride, marriage, union, man/woman….something associated with the divine institution of marriage resolves that dispute.

    Without evidence I have come to think of marriage as a metaphor that speaks to a higher spiritual level or to the resolution to a mystery. I’ve never been able to find it and it may be because I’m way off base. Is marriage a type for something? Is marriage a ‘prop’ or a teaching/learning device to help mankind comprehend a proper relationship w/ God? Maybe marriage is just the best way to hold society together until the Lord comes.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      God established marriage as a divine institution to prevent immorality. But an earlier, deeper, spiritual dimension exists to marriage. God made man male and female as the image of God. The woman came from the man to be his companion and a communicator with him. In marriage, they reconnect “one flesh” into the unified image of God. Paul provided spiritual insight into the relationship of Christ and His Church with marriage (Ephesians 6).

  60. GraceReceiver

    Joe, I do believe that you are on to something, so keep digging!
    Richard Jordan of Shorewood Bible Church has alluded to this several times in his sermons. Unfortunately, I cannot recall which ones. Guess you’ll just have to listen to random sermons to find it, LOL.
    Even if you don’t find the sermon you’re looking for, you’ll be blessed along the way, as he’s a good teacher.
    Really, really great article, Don.

  61. willardd

    This is a very good article you have written. I am one who hungers deeply for knowledge. I want to know what any great teacher thinks about a biblical doctrine, even if I come away disagreeing sometimes. You, I agree with on this issue.
    My question is in regards to the elect, and the resurrections. Who is the elect in your understanding? I have understood the elect, the overcomers, and the firstfruits to God to be the same thing. The elect resurrect in the 1st resurrection.
    Paul teaches heavy on the elect. Is the elect composed of only the church body or is the elect the 144,000 Jewish priests? Can it be composed of members of the body and the bride? Is the elect, the bride, and the body three separate groups? Is it anything similar to the barley, wheat, and grape harvest?
    Sorry so many questions. I need to know these things. Thank you.

  62. willardd

    Thanks. I read The Resurrection article. I’m fine with that. Very similar to my own beliefs. However the article did not really express anything about the elect, overcomers. It did mention very briefly the firstfruits which I believe are the same thing.
    I’m sorry to be persistent about this, but I’ll try to condense my question. Paul speaks of the elect. I’m assuming from the body. Expressly is the elect composed of the body, the bride, or portions of both groups. And I’m believing that the body, the bride, and the elect are three distinct groups in the resurrection also.
    Once again I appreciate it. Thank you.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Paul spoke of the elect as being members of the body of Christ but also of all who are faithful to Him, even angels (1 Timothy 5.21). In the gospels the elect are believing Israel as well as believing Gentiles (Matthew 24.22). Thus, the elect is a general term that refers to all believers of all ages and all who have remained faithful to God. The firstfruits composed those who were resurrected with Christ immediately after His resurrection.

  63. Carlos Ilustre

    Thank you so much for the invaluable work you are sharing to us. I praise the Lord for this wonderful work you are doing in the service of the Body of Christ. Shalom.

  64. Joe

    Here’s a thought. L. S. Chafer quotes C. I. Scofield….Hosea 2:2 “That Israel is the wife of Jehovah (16-23), now disowned but yet to be restored, is the clear teaching of the passages. This relationship is not to be confounded with that of the Church to Christ. In the mystery of the Divine tri-unity both are true. The New Testament speaks of the Church as a virgin espoused to one husband (2 Cor 11:1-2); which could never be said of an adulterous wife, restored in grace. Israel is, then, to be resorted and forgiven wife of Jehovah, the Church the virgin wife of the Lamb..Israel Jehovah’s earthly wife; the Church the Lamb’s heavenly bride.”

    Psalm 45:8-15. In this picture the King appears with the queen upon His right hand in gold of Ophir. she is addressed as daughter and as the king’s daughter. The virgins who attend her are not the queen but are brought to her with joy and gladness. Of them it is said “they shall enter into the King’s palace” Thus the virgins of Matthew 25: 1-13 are identified in the relation to the bride. Why should not Israel pay tribute of honor to the queen the bride of their King? The virgins are the queens companions and those among them who are ready to enter with her into the “ivory palaces: which is the Kings palace (15)

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      This is an area I disagree with Chafer and Scofield. I do not think a sound Biblical case can be made that the Church is the bride of Christ.

  65. Joe

    Not arguing just thinking out loud.

    Why the various ‘types’ in the OT of gentile brides? Adam/Eve, Isaac/Rebekah,Joseph/Asenath,Moses/Zipporah,Boaz/Ruth,David/Abigail,Solomon and his true love Canticles. (I found this list in Chafer’s works)

    Was Eve Adam’s bride at his/their creation and before the ‘rib’ episode?

    John the B, a Jew, was only a ‘friend’ of the Groom.

    The wedding must take place with ‘physical’ entities because it takes place before the Kingdom. I’m assuming the Lord at this very moment is in a physical state. What is the only physical group of beings in existence at the time of the wedding?

    Have i made any major errors?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      These are figures of Gentile salvation. Paul stated humanity is composed of Jews, Gentiles, and the Church (1 Corinthians 10.32). God’s relationship to the Church is that of being His body.

  66. Joshua deville

    You are missing key aspects of the scriptures you used especial Ephesians 5:25-27

    1st To you separating Jews, Gentiles and Christians.

    “There is no longer Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male and female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus.” – Galatians 3:28

    “He did this by ending the system of law with its commandments and regulations. He made peace between Jews and Gentiles by creating in himself one new people from the two groups.” -Ephesians 2:15

    “25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her, 26 that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, 27 that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish.” – Ephesians 5:25-27

    He refers to the Church and a Wife in the same sentence making it plain as day “Gave Himself for her” after just mentioning a Wife in a Marriage.

    Israel is the Place Christ will rule from not the Bride itself.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      No Jew or Gentile exists in Christ but functionally Jews and Gentiles exist. Paul categorized humanity into three groups: Jews, Gentiles, and the Church (1 Corinthians 10.32). Paul used marriage as an illustration of relationship of the Church with Christ but did not teach the Church was the bride of Christ. Christ will rule on earth as Israel’s King (Zechariah 14.9). The Church, the body of Christ, are joint-heirs with Christ, not subjects. No where does the Bible teach Christ is the King of the Church. He is the Lord and Head, not King.

  67. Eric

    Matthew 22
    “Go ye therefore into the highways and as many as you shall find, bid to the marriage.”

    (This was said after those who were originally bidden made light of the marriage not once but twice and then slew the son.)

    I personally tend to believe that the Highways refer to the Gentiles in this instance as in most instances in scripture.

    Are there Jews that make up the bride of Christ? Absolutely! However, they should no longer be referred to as Jews, just as Gentiles should no longer be referred to as Gentiles, but as a new man “In Christ.”

    I believe that the Body of Christ is a separate body like Eve was a separate body however the two looked upon as one flesh! Eph 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the savior of the body. (Which body? Christ’s or the church? Both! Twain looked upon as one flesh!)

    Also, Eph 5:30 check the Greek. Bear in mind I don’t know Greek but I believe the word “out” has been removed from this verse not once but three times!

    It probably should read like so: “For we are members out of his body, out of his flesh, and out of his bones.”

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Paul stated the Church was the body of Christ. The Scriptures speak of Israel as the wife/bride of God. The Greek of Ephesians 5.30 literally, reads, “For we are members of His body, out of His flesh and out of his bones.” This speaks of Christ’s resurrection body composed of flesh and bone, not flesh and blood. It is a subtle reference to resurrection. Our resurrection bodies will be composed of flesh and bone–no blood.

  68. Eric

    Paul did state that the body of Christ was the church. However their are two ways of viewing this:

    1. The church makes up the actual literal body of Christ and NOT the body of the bride (Eve). Now if we follow this type all the way through it would mean that the bride would come out of the body. (In the original type-the church would represent the rib which was taken out of Adam) Some swear that this is the correct way the type should be looked upon. (I believed this for a long time, but I see problems with it)

    2. Or option two would be to look upon it as stated in Eph 5:23. Christ and the church two separate bodies but looked upon as ONE! With of course Christ the Head of the church as the Husband is the head of the wife. This way seems to make more sense.

    (Either way Israel (As a Nation) is out of the picture as concerning the bride of Christ)

    In the book of Ruth the nearer kinsman (God the father) was ready to redeem the inheritance (Ruth 4:4 “I will redeem it.”) However, when he found out that in the day he was to redeem the inheritance he would also have to take Ruth as his wife he backed out, he could not redeem it “lest it would marmine his own inheritance.” (Ruth 4:5-6)

    God has 3 first born sons, Christ, Israel, and the church. (The church of course awaiting the adoption) How can this be? Weird right? Could God also have two wives? “Israel” the adulterous wife of God the Father (to be restored yet future), and “The Church” the spotless virgin bride to be of God the son.

    Man in general would look at this as weird. However, bear in mind even Jesus’s disciples thought it weird when they were told they would have to eat his body and drink his blood.

    Or you could just say I don’t know and why bother trying to understand it, which would be the position of most Christendom today.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Paul only taught one body of Christ, not two. The reference to marriage in Ephesians 5 is illustrative. It does not mean the Church is the bride of Christ. That is reserved for Israel.

      1. Eric Streff

        Thought you might wanna consider another scripture in regards to the Church BEING the “bride of Christ.” The Apostle Paul being the apostle to the Gentiles is surely speaking to the new man In-Christ as he parallels death in regards to the law to death in regards to marriage. Romans 7:2-4 (How the law has dominion over a man as long as he lives; just as a woman is bound to her husband for as long as he lives. But if the husband die she is no longer bound.)

        Note v4 “Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be MARRIED to another,

        “Even to HIM who is raised from the dead,”

        that we should bring forth the fruit unto God.

        Get your wedding garment ready DOCTRINE the invite is to you too my friend!

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          Paul’s point here was to illustrate our relationship to Law as opposed to Christ. It has nothing to do with the Church being the “bride of Christ.” As members of His body we do not need an invitation. We are part and parcel of the groom.

        2. Vanessa

          Hello, May I also give you another scripture. Eph 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; As you know we are the Body of Christ…(One New Man) and the body is masculine as you can see from the above verse. I dont see us being the bride at all. Hope that may help.

  69. Eric Streff

    Bear in mind always ICor 10:11 “all these things happened unto them for our ensamples (types). A majority of the old testament is typology. When Jesus talked with the two disciples on the Emmaus Road he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. Taking scriptures such as Ro 5:14 “who is a figure of him to come” and I Cor 15:45 “the first Adam….last Adam” and as I quoted before Eph 5:30,31 it would be unwise to ignore the correlation of Adam and Eve to Christ and his bride. Most scholars of the word believe that when the mold (or type) has been set it cannot be broken. And it’s been said that scripture gives it’s own interpretation. Nothing outside of this book is needed.

    Ok so lets think about this for a minute. Eve was created in Adam at Adams creation and was brought out and formed into a bride at a later time. (Gen 1:27 male and female created he them) Eph. 1:4 tells us that “we” were “in him” since before the foundation of the world. The bride of the first Adam was not brought out and formed into a bride until Adam was put to sleep and his side opened. Now correlating that with Christ, his bride could not be brought out and formed until he was put to sleep and his side opened. This was done at calvary! But pay close attention because many miss this. There was a soldier who pierced the side of Christ making sure that he was dead. Now when he pierced him something very important happened, so important that lead John to dedicate an extra verse baring testimony of what he saw. (John 20:34,35) The rib taken out of Adam was used to form Adam’s bride and the blood and water are used to form the bride of Christ. (Blood at the brazen altar, water at the brazen laver) Therefore just as in the original type in Adam and Eve the bride “comes out” of the body.

    So if your right about the church making up the actual literal body of Christ and not Eve, then we must continue on with that original type set in the account of Adam and Eve. Which of course would mean that the bride is taken out of the body! (The bride taken out of the church)

    Perfectly in-line with the 3 groups of people mentioned in ICor 3:11-15
    1.) Those who have no foundation. (Don’t believe in the one and only true God Jesus Christ)
    2.) Those who have a foundation but built upon it works of wood, hay, and stubble which will be burned. ( They shall suffer loss but they themselves shall be saved yet as through fire.)
    3.) And those who have a foundation and upon it built works of gold, silver, and precious stones. (This appears to be the bride)

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      I think you’re going beyond the text in these comments. Look at it simply. Paul was the apostle of the Gentiles, the founder of Christianity, and the founder of the Church. Through him we learn all Church doctrine. Paul declared the Church was the body of Christ. He did not state it was the Bride. If the Church was the bride of Christ and and an important doctrine for the Church Paul would have stated it. He did not. Paul was explicit about important doctrines and repeated them often.

  70. Greyfoxx

    For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.
    Hebrews 4:2 KJV

    Salvation has always been through faith to all since the beginning. The gospel has always been the same since the beginning from the first sin. And the promises of that faith has always been the same either jew or gentile. From the gospel of the coming kingdom or the coming messiah salvation is received through faith in God that promises those aswell as now the promise of Gods return. We as gentiles are co heirs to those promises through faith. Jews being under the law only, really? Thats only to those that didnt have faith and soley tried to obey the law for salvation. You seem to be missing the point as the jews so often did.

    Also. I see your point on the bride. But i think we all who have been saved through faith in the Lord is the bride with some reservation it is infact the kingdom to come.

    Read somewhere that kingdom you must have certain attributes. Must have a king. Must have land. Must have citizens. Must have laws. Well then who is the king? Jesus. What has been deemed him? The new city of God the bride. The citizens being the saved. The laws being under his rule for eternity.

    Now on to the rapture idea i pray that you look harder into that premise. Im seeing more and more church teachings in this and the seperating us and jews that just isnt scripture. Doctrine you show 1 corinthians 15:51 i think for us not being here. Im sorry but there isnt anyrhing there rhat gives a time frame when that happens unless you use at the last trumpet in the verses. If so then that says we re not taken til id say at the sounding of the 7th trumpet. Which would tell all of us to endure.

    Sorry for so long. Ive read alot some very insightful but some more yoke of men than of the Lord. I pray all keep searching the words of God always.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The Scriptures explicitly teach that faith has always been required for salvation. But the Scriptures also explicitly teach that salvation by faith alone was not know until Paul with the exception of Abraham. Hebrews 4.2, the passage you quoted proves this. Notice it reads, “not mixed with faith.” What was not mixed? Works. They had works but had no faith. Read Matthew 19.16-22. What did Jesus tell the rich young ruler he had to do for eternal life? Read Mark 1.4. What was required for the remission of sins? Water baptism. Water baptism is a work. My article, Faith vs. Works: Resolving the Problem may be helpful. As for the Rapture, God has many trumpets. To associate it with those in Revelation is unwarranted because the Church is not in Revelation. There is no hint of Church language in the book. John wrote Revelation to Jews and the language is Jewish. They are the central players in the book along with the nations. The Church is absent.

      1. Eric Streff

        Regarding Hebrews 4:12

        Faith is simply believing in God’s word. Abraham traveled to an unknown land because he believed God. You see his works justified his faith. Now using this same example; suppose Abraham would have stayed put! This is what would have emanated out of being mixed with faith. The best example however is the one given in the context leading into Hebrews 4:2. (the experience of the children of Israel at Kardesh-barnea)

        Faith being mixed with works is not the context of this verse. You know if Paul would have written this it probably would have been clearer.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          Read Acts 13. Paul spoke much differently to Jews than Gentiles. The accounts in Acts have a much different flavor (for Acts was written to explain Israel’s fall) than his epistles. So too Hebrews.

          1. Eric Streff

            Men of Israel and “you who fear God.”

            Brethren, sons of Abraham’s family, and “those among you who fear God.”

            First of all Paul was not speaking to Jews only in these discourses, majority Jews….Probably!

            Bear in mind what Paul stated in ICor 9:19-23
            To the Jew, I became as one, to being under the law, I became as under the law, to the weak I became weak, he became all things to all men.

            Take notice of his language in regards to himself. Paul being a Jew (by flesh) no longer associated himself as one. Look at his statement in (v20) “To the Jews, I became as a Jew.” Paul considered himself no longer a Jew, to the point that he had to emulate himself as if he were. Now if he no longer considers himself a Jew, what then is he? OK so we get this, or do we? Is Pauls writings profitable only to the Gentiles? What about a Jew today who is told they missed the boat, so to speak? Would not Paul’s writings be profitable in understanding how the Gentiles were grafted in and how a Jews can be grafted back in?

            The book of Acts is different than Hebrews, Romans different than Corinthians, the epistles of Peter different than those of John. Bear in mind though IICor 3:16 “All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for the teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness.

            There is a promise for Jacob and there is a promise for Esau and there even is a promise for those who deny the one and only true God, Jesus The Christ. These are the divisions!

            1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

              The point is Paul addressed Jews primarily in Acts 13 as he did in Hebrews. It is possible a Gentile was present in the synagogue but the subject matter was wholly Jewish. Hebrews was written to Jews, hence its name, and wa written to explain to Jews that it was now Christ or nothing. Judaism was over. Paul divided the world into three divisions (1 Corinthians 10.32): Jews, Gentiles, and Church. In the last, there is no Jew or Gentile. These three divisions continue today.

  71. Bradley Keefer

    Doctrine, great article, you are the first person that I have found that has given an excellent article on Israel being the Bride. I have personally, been studying this for about 6-8 months now on my own and finding this out. I have many questions though on a few things you discussed, is it possible to be able to speak privately somehow?

  72. Brad Nitzsche

    Greetings, Thank you for your teachings. I have been trying to clear out the “chaff” of false teachings and misinterpretations for over 40 years. Your site has been a literal godsend to me in this struggle. I have read about 80% of your articles so far and am nearly blinded by the number of lightbulbs going, I do have a question about Pauls church being heavenly and the Israel church being earthly. In John 14:3 and17:23 it talks about where Christ is, there we will be. Is the “we” the Israel church, the “Pauline” church or both, and if Christ is on earth and in the New Jerusalem, will the Pauline church be on earth with him, or remain in heaven. Possibly we could move back and forth at will like the angels? I have seen teachings that the church will be on earth reigning with Christ. Just wanted to get your take on this. Thank you again for your great work bringing light to the body of Christ. Blessings, Brad

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Thank you. In John 14.3 Jesus addressed the disciples so the context is Israel. Jesus’ prayer in John 17.23 seems to include all believers. We have too little information to know what the Church will be doing during the Messianic age. About all that is revealed is we are joint-heirs with Christ (Romans 8.17) and that we will rule angels (1 Corinthians 6.3). Details of our inheritance are unspecified. Whatever they are, they will be glorious.

  73. Brad Nitzsche

    Very true. We are not only with Christ, but IN Christ, and whatever He has for us will be glorious. Thank you for responding so quickly.

  74. Moe Zura must stand for “doctrine of men” or “doctrine of demons”… it is obvious to any Christian that the bride of Christ is the church (Spiritual Israel)… the angel told John “come and I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb”… last anyone checked Jesus Christ is the Lamb…

    God the Father was married to earthly Israel (Jerusalem), which was destroyed in AD70 (and most significantly the temple was destroyed), when the sacrifice and oblation ceased and “that determined was poured upon the desolate” (Daniel 9:27)… Jesus Christ told the Pharisees that Jerusalem was desolate (Matthew 23:38)… Judgment came upon her in AD70 at the hands of the Roman legions on the Day of the Lord when the vials of God’s wrath were poured out upon her (the desolate)…

    God warned Israel that she was receiving a decree of divorcement for her constant harlotry (Jeremiah 3)… this is why Jesus talked so much about marriage… He wasn’t talking about men and women, He was referring to the covenant that His Father had with Israel, wherein they had constantly shown themselves to be the harlot (the Whore of Babylon)… now, in the New Covenant, Spiritual Israel (the Church aka New Jerusalem) is married to the Son… in a marriage the two become one, that is how we can be BOTH body and bride of Christ… I mean this is Christianity 101 here!

    this article is a perfect example of why the Church is so weak nowadays and can’t operate in the power of the Holy Spirit… Christians don’t even know their identity… it’s sickening really… and it’s shameful that a website calling itself can be so wrong… this article is completely devoid of any inspiration from Holy Spirit…

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Statements such as yours illustrate the spiritual darkness and ignorance of the Scriptures in Christendom and you err because you elevate tradition above the Scriptures. Not one verse in Scripture supports the notion the Church is spiritual Israel. Israel is Israel. The Church is the Church. The bride/wife of God always refers to Israel. The Church is the body of Christ, not the Bride of Christ. The Church has a heavenly destiny. Israel has an earthly destiny. They are totally different programs. God set Israel aside because of unbelief. God will restore the nation to its former position of blessing and the Twelve will rule the 12 tribes (Matthew 19.28) on earth (Matthew 6.10). This has nothing to do with the Church. Almost all Old Testament prophecy is devoted to revealing Israel’s failure and restoration. This is the subject of Paul’s three chapters in Romans 9-11.

  75. Fred

    The Bride of the Messiah is the Church – this is made very clear throughout the Bible.

    This is a tragically flawed understanding of scripture. The story of the bride of the Messiah is ubiquitous throughout the Bible. Yes all who receive His invitation to Life with Him is/are His Bride. Gentiles have been grafted in, adopted. We are ONE new man – both Israel and gentile.

    How this could be missed is a significant misunderstanding.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Only Paul revealed the body of Christ in which Jew and Gentile are equal in Christ. This teaching is not taught by anyone but Paul. The Church is not even hinted in the OT much less mentioned. Unless we keep God’s distinct programs of Church and Israel separate great confusion is the result. This is the current state of Christendom. Throughout the Scriptures, OT and NT, Israel is the wife/bride of Israel. The Church is the body of Christ, not the Bride. We are of the bridegroom, not the bride!

  76. Joe


    I’ll confess I didn’t read all the comments so the answer may be there. Here’s my question. The book or Ruth. Ruth a gentile marries the Kinsman Redeemer. Is the book of Ruth a figurative reference to the Church marrying our Lord? If not what is the story all about?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The Church was unknown in the OT. What was known was Gentiles would be blessed through Israel. Ruth is that story. It illustrates how Gentiles are blessed through Israel. Israel failed in this at Christ’s first advent but will succeed in the Millennium. Paul proxied Israel in this work as he referred to himself as one “untimely born” (1 Corinthians 15.8).

  77. Joe


    This may sound like a silly question but it may be profound. During the 33 years of Jesus’ life on earth (humiliation) he was a Jew/Hebrew/Israelite. When he taught the 12 He was teaching Jewish/old testament/Kingdom doctrine. After the Crucifixion when the ascended Lord was teaching Paul was Christ still a Jew? If not, wouldn’t it be clear to all Christians that Paul’s doctrine and the doctrine of the 12 is/are different? Why have I never read comments anywhere on this obvious point? Thank you for your time and efforts. I know from you essays that you have spent a live time in study. I appreciate you sharing your hard earned education…..for free (earthly speaking).

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Jesus in His incarnation was born a Jew. He retains this identity. Remember, beginning with Abraham, all blessings to Gentiles were to come from Jews. The Abrahamic covenant remains in effect. Jesus, as a Jew, is the epitome of those blessings. Paul (a Jew) is proxy Israel for God’s blessings to the Church.

  78. Allen


    Ephesians 5:30 says for we are members of his body. For this reason
    A man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife.
    For this is a profound mystery- but I am talking about Christ and
    The church. Isn’t Christ the man and the church the wife in this

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Paul’s subject in Ephesians 5 was marriage. He stated Christ was the Head of the body, the Church. His encouragement was for wives to obey their husbands as the body obeys the head and for husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the Church. Everything in the passage speaks of the Church being Christ’s body, not His bride. Paul stated that because of the relationship of Christ the Head to His body husband and wife are joined as one flesh. There’s nothing in the passage about the Church being the bride.

  79. Washedbytheblood

    I’ve read in a couple of places here where someone states Paul’s message was given to him personally by God. Separate from the gospel he has given the church in Israel. Can anyone explain how and where this happens in the scriptures?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Probably the clearest Scripture is Galatians 1.11-12 where Paul wrote that he received the gospel he proclaimed directly from the Lord. Notice Paul declared it was not from men. Furthermore, the most logical action would have been for Paul to go directly to the Twelve had his gospel and commission been the same as the Twelve’s. Instead, God kept him separate. Paul went to Arabia, probably to Mt. Sinai, to receive further instruction (Galatians 1.15-17). Not until three years later did he meet with Peter, and then only for 2 weeks (Galatians 1.18-20). In Ephesians 3.3, Paul wrote he received the secret of the Church, the body of Christ, that Jew and Gentile are equal in Christ, by revelation, i.e., directly from the Lord. And of course, Paul’s salvation and his commission as the apostle of the Gentiles came from his direct contact and revelation of the risen Christ (Acts 9, 22, 26).

  80. Washedbytheblood

    I’m sorry…I just finished reading all of your post. You don’t need to answer any of my questions. I’ve learned enough. You and whoever else reads this…may God be with you. I can’t be taught by any man except he be sent. Unless you’re a true new testament Baptist church member, your teachings are false and God is not in that. All I can hope for you is I’ll see you in heaven…and this is how you get there. Read Romans 10:8-11. Read KJV… all others are false doctrine of the devil. Peace be to you all and may our Lord lead your path closer to him. Love you guys and can’t wait til we meet in heaven.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      I do not know what a NT Baptist church member is. The important issue is whether one believes Paul’s gospel (1 Corinthians 15.1-4). Apart from it, one is without Christ, without hope, and without eternal life. The KJV is a fine translation but not God-breathed. It is a translation. Only the autographs are God-breathed (2 Timothy 3.16-17).

      1. Washedbytheblood

        KJV is the closest translation we have to the original tongues. Which is breathed straight from Gods mouth. If you don’t believe that, then you are totally being fooled by Satan. Christ established his church while he was here. I’d you are really interested. ..I can copy and paste you the scriptures. You can talk your way around them if you’d like?

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          The KJV only position is not Biblical. On what authority is this position based? Who told you it was the closest translation to the original languages? What is the definition of the Church?

  81. Washedbytheblood

    What I have gotten from Acts 9 is Ananias and the church at Damascus taught Paul the church doctrine that our Lord wanted him to know. I’m sure by revelations God revealed certain details to Paul, but as far as the church in to be ran…Paul was taught that by God through handed down doctrine.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Read Acts 9 again. The Lord told Ananias that He the Lord would teach Paul. Paul wrote the Galatians that the Lord Himself taught him, not men (Galatians 1.11-12). Ananias did not teach Paul anything. Why do you find this difficult to understand?

  82. Washedbytheblood

    Ever since Jesus’s death, burial, and the resurrection and then with the great Comforter. He established his church as the only authority to teach and preach the gospel. It’s not one individual person. All authority is given to the church and through the church only. And just like me, you or anyone else…Paul had to get this handed down to him through the teachings and then ordained by the elders of the church. With the authority from the congregation only agreeing as one. How can you not see that?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The Scriptures do not support this. Paul had almost no contact with Peter or the Twelve. He received his doctrine directly from the risen Lord. That is the account Luke gave in Acts also. You can believe the Scriptures or reject them but they are clear. Paul had a ministry to Gentiles, the Twelve had a ministry to Israel. These were two separate, distinct programs (Galatians 2.7-9).

      1. Washedbytheblood

        I copied and pasted from the bible…How doesn’t scripture support scripture? Peter to the circumcised and Paul to the uncircumcised.
        Two different missions but the same gospel. You need to thoroughly read Galation 2:9..Galatians 2:9 KJV
        And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision. The pillars of the church which Jesus appointed and taught himself, where he established the first church and gave them authority to continue in doing so, laid hands on Barnabas and Paul only after Paul’s testimony to them proving to the church in Jerusalem that God has forgiven him (Paul) of his sins and he trust in the shed blood of our Lord Jesus.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          The text does not read they “laid hands” on them. It reads they gave them the “right hand of fellowship.” Paul argued with the Council at Jerusalem and won. They were teaching Paul’s Gentile converts were not be saved apart from circumcision and keeping the Mosaic Law. They were undermining his ministry. Eventually, Peter came to Paul’s defense after God brought to his mind his going to Cornelius’ house and how he had been saved apart from circumcision and keeping the Law. He declared Paul was right and they were wrong. He further stated that from now on, Jews had to be saved the same way as Paul’s Gentiles (Acts 15.11). Paul declared his apostleship came directly from Christ (Galatians 1.1). He declared he went to Jerusalem by direct command of the Lord to declare his gospel to the Twelve (Galatians 2.2). Why? Because they did not know or understand Paul’s gospel. Why? Because he received it directly from the risen Lord. The Lord had not revealed Paul’s gospel to the Twelve. The gospel the Twelve knew was the gospel of the kingdom received from the earthly Lord. The gospel of grace, which Paul preached came from the risen Lord. God opened Peter’s eyes to this fact and he declared Paul was right and they were wrong. Please see my article, The Great Hinge, to understand this better.

  83. Washedbytheblood

    I don’t read man’s books, but thanks anyhow. I think that might be why you’re confused on this matter. There is not a different gospel being preached to Jews and gentiles. Same gospel…different people….pretty simple. Just like today…the same gospel is here in the U.S. just like it’s in every other country and language there is known to man. The same gospel that is preached to me which in turn led me to call on our Lord Jesus….was preached to you to do the same. Peter and Paul were just doing what our Lord appointed then to do…through the church.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Your statement is not supported by the Scriptures. The gospel of the kingdom, the gospel declared by Jesus and the Twelve required water baptism for salvation I (Mark 1.4, 16.16; Acts 2.36-38), and keeping the Law (Luke 10.25-28; Acts 15.1, 5). One became a believer by believing who Jesus was–the Messiah, the Son of God (Matthew 16.16; John 11.25-27). Paul’s gospel is one is saved by faith alone in the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ (Romans 3.22, 26, 28, 4.5). No water baptism, no keeping the Law. The content of faith is in the work of Christ (1 Corinthians 15.1-4), not His identity. Two separate gospels for two separate programs.

  84. Washedbytheblood

    Jesus didn’t teach the apostles that baptism saves you. They knew that as well.
    That’s totally false doctrine. Just like Paul’s conversion, one must believe in Christ for who he is either by revelation from God himself or taught the passed down doctrine and then be baptized into a founded new testament church. Founded from christ, the apostles handed down from generation to generation. Be warned brother…God is listening to your words you are claiming in his name. Hope you understand that. Peace.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Your response indicates you do not believe Mark 1.4, 16.16, Acts 2.36-38. These passages state water baptism was required for salvation. This is what Jesus taught in His earthly ministry. If you will not accept what the text states, what I write will not be helpful.

  85. Washedbytheblood

    I believe on baptism into the church whole heartedly. But not into heaven. How do you explain the thief then or John the Baptist? Romans 10:9-10 explains Salvation to a T! Baptism is works…not faith in our Lord. That’s what saves you. Ephesians 2:8-9 tells you that clearly as well.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      You have proved my point. The thief was an obvious exception–no possibility of baptism. But Paul taught water baptism was not required for salvation. The passages you have cited are Paul. Passages in the gospels and in early Acts indicate the necessity of water baptism for salvation. Contradiction? No, two different programs.

      1. Roger Spielmann

        You guys seem to be in complete agreement, but somehow you seem to be talking past each other. Washedbytheblood, why not read Doctrine’s article The Great Hinge? It’s not a book, just an article. It could save both you guys and interested readers a lot of time if you did. At this point in the discussion, confusion reigns.

  86. Washedbytheblood

    Baptism into the church…not salvation.
    Why would Jesus teach one thing and then teach someone else a totally different gospel…that’s confusion on your part.
    The thief is just one example…the woman kissing Jesus’s feet Luke7:50, the adulterous woman John 8:11 , and Acts 2:21 says whosoever will…no mention of anyone race creed or position in this world at all. What about Moses and Isaiah, theyre in heaven. Were they baptised with water…no? Its always been about faith in God…all the way back to Adam. No baptism in any of these examples. That’s what Jesus was teaching, believing and trusting in him alone. While the apostles were right there with him, so how was he teaching them anything else besides faith in his shed blood?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      God keeps secrets (Deuteronomy 29.29). He does not reveal everything at once. God created a new plan with the call of Abraham. God created a new plan with the call of Paul. God can do whatever He wants. Our responsibility is to believe and obey what He has revealed when. Jesus ministered only to Jews in His earthly ministry with the exception of the Canaanite women and Romans soldier (see my article, Two Remarkable Healings). He commanded His disciples not to go to Gentiles (Matthew 10.5-6). After the Jews rejected Him he commissioned Paul as the apostle of the Gentiles (Romans 11.13). He taught Paul new, previously unrevealed doctrines to accord with his mission. So, the bottom line is, don’t try to tell God what He can or cannot do. He does as He pleases.

  87. Joe

    Luke 9: 6—-The Apostles preached the gospel
    Luke18:34—The Apostles knew nothing of the approaching death of Christ
    John 20:9–“For as yet they knew not the scripture that he must rise again from the dead.”
    I Corinthians 15 vs 1-4—The (not ‘a’) gospel is :”how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; and that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures..”.

    How did the 12 teach the Gospel of Grace when they knew nothing of the cross?
    What is the warning in Galatians 1 if we teach ‘another’ gospel?
    When and where are we supposed to ‘rightly divide’? Obviously there are places where we are to ‘divide’. One place to divide is at the Resurrection. The 12 knew something was different when they looked into the empty tomb. Peter knew something was different at Cornelius’ house. Peter himself said in II Peter 3:16 referring to Paul’s message, ” some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. ”

    Paul is the minister to the Gentiles Romans 15:16

    Thank you Doctrine for making things easier to understand.

  88. ExpatsRock

    Don, greetings from Madrid, Spain

    Re your last response to Washedbytheblood, fourth line down, I believe you meant to say “Jesus ministered only to the Jews…”

    Thank you Don for all your hard work. You cannot imagine what a blessing finding your site has been to me. A total life changer!


  89. Joe

    What if the Father has a bride and the Son has a bride?? Not saying it is so – because Rev 19 is too much of Israel and Jerusalem—which has nothing to do with the Body of Christ which is neither Jew nor Gentile. But in OT God the Father divorced Israel and then will take her again. (Hosea, prophets etc).
    This is just MUSING-NO BIBLE FACTS—What if Paul’s Ephesian reference to God the Son’s “bride” does go further than man/woman illustration to Christ-Church relationship-“one flesh”? And, what if God the Father has Israel as Bride in Rev 19?
    God is Three DISTINCT PERSONS but One God in the Godhead.
    Could not—in that case—God the Father have a “bride” or “wife” and God the Son have a “bride” or “wife”??
    Under OT doctrine there are quite some differences between marriage rules or laws from those in this age of grace, eh?
    one Example—God “gave” David many wives —and he messed up when he took Uriah’s wife—adultery—. God told David that if all the wives he had were not enough, He would have given him more!!

    Of course—in this present age—one husband, one wife is ideal—the doctrine of Christ and Believer, one flesh, one Body follows that principle..

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      No, I don’t think so. What fascinates me is the seeming obsession for the Church being the bride of Christ. I don’t think there is evidence for it and at the very least the evidence is extremely scant. We are His body. He is our head. Isn’t that enough?

  90. Pastor Anil Mendis from Sri Lanka

    Galatians 3 : 28 – ” There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”
    Then what separation you are trying to figure out ” Doctrine ” through this explanation ?
    ” Bride Of Christ ” denotes when it is referred to the Second Coming of our Lord
    ” Body of Christ ” is the the whole body redeemed by the Blood Of our Lord Jesus Christ.
    After Jesus Christ scarifies on the cross, there is no any distinguish between any man kind kind under nation, race, ethnic, etc.
    All have been given open invitation to be perfect to the Bride Of Christ
    Who ever believed Jesus Christ as their personal savior, they become part of the Body Of Christ.
    Please do not complicated the simple gospel truth in the New Testament.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Galatians 3.28 is true for all who have believed Paul’s gospel (1 Corinthians 15.1-4). No distinctions exist in Jew, Gentile, etc. The Bible does not call the Church the Bride of Christ. It calls us His body. When men add to or change the Scriptures, confusion results.

      1. Pastor Anil Mendis from Sri Lanka

        Doctrine, Thanks for the answer.
        Please refer following verse where it stated of the Bride of Christ :
        Rev 21:9 ” And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb’s wife.”
        And please see where the bride’s description ends :
        Rev 21:27 And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb’s book of life.
        Where the wife’s name written ?
        answer is : in the ” Lamb’s Book of Life ”
        Now please study whose names are written in the ” Book of Life ”
        Is it only Jews names ? or Gentiles or any human ( who ever ) transformed into the image of Jesus Christ ?
        Please refer in scripture where written on ” Book of Life ” whether it is meant to whole man kind of world or only to Jews
        ( Philippians 4 : 3 ; Revelations 13 : 8 ; 17 : 8 ; 20 : 12; 20 : 15
        Philippians 4 : 3 ; 21 : 27 )
        Now please refer :
        Rev_22:17 ” And the Spirit and the Bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely ” .
        is this bride referring only to a Jew ? OR people on whole earth.
        Now please explain after 22 chapter verses 18th & 19 th
        when means in ” every man ” and ” any ” any man “. ??
        Is it referring only to Jews ?? or human on earth ??
        Rev 22:18 ” For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
        Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
        Conclusion :
        1. People’s names written on the ” Book of Life ” = Bride of Christ
        2. People’s whose names are written on the ” Book Of Life ” = people who transformed them selves in to image of Christ ( perfected ) = Bride Of Christ.

        Trust, now you believe Bride of Christ not meant only for Jews.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          Pastor Anil Mendis,
          John wrote Revelation to Jews (please see my article, Understanding the Book of Revelation). The OT reveals Israel is the Wife/Bride of God. The Church is not present in Revelation. The Church has been removed and God is dealing with Jews and Gentiles in the book (cf. 1 Corinthians 10.32). Paul is the only writer that writes of and to the Church. The Church is the body of Christ and hence of the bridegroom. It is not the bride. The bride is Israel.

    2. Vanessa

      Dear Pastor Anil Mendis, You quote…..Who ever believed Jesus Christ as their personal savior, they become part of the Body Of Christ. I cannot find the scriptures for this. Please show me where I may find this. Thank you. Then you quote….All have been given open invitation to be perfect to the Bride Of Christ. Scripture and verse please. We must be true to the truth and I only want the truth so I asked my husband who is the head of my family where in the bible may i find what you quoted and he said there is no scripture supporting what you said. Please only keep to the truth and dont read into the scriptures as this is called being deceived and you may make a young Christian stumble. lets see what Gods word says about this. Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly. James 3 verse 1.

  91. lee

    I believe this is all kind of splitting hairs. There are several verses referring to the church as the body, but also compare as a bride. Then there is Revelations, where Israel is the bride. The only benefit we get out of this discussion is learning that Israel is the bride in Revelations, not that the church cannot also be explained in metaphor as a bride. Marriage is unification of the body. Abiding in the vine is unification of the body. Both are useful metaphors to describe how we relate to Christ. Nothing more.

    In both instances, the words are there just to convey the meaning of the event, not the actual event itself. The meaning of the church as the bride of Christ is describing how the church is the body of Christ. The meaning of Israel as the bride of Christ is the redemption of Israel in the end times. Israel is given one last chance to join up with Christ, and it does.

    To argue over which is the bride of Christ is to get lost in metaphor. The titles and metaphors are just that, titles and metaphors. Both the church and Christ are redeemed, just at different times.

    This is a tangential discussion.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The purpose of the article is to reveal what the Bible says. Almost all of Christedom teaches the Church is the bride of Christ. The Scriptures do not state this and what evidence there is (allusion, metaphor) is weak. So why has the vast majority made this a major doctrine and teaching? It is unwarranted. My desire is to major on the majors and not the minors. The Scriptures reveal the Church is the body of Christ. This, is stated explicitly. This is just one more area where the majority in Christendom are confused because they do not study and know the text.

  92. Johnson Mathai

    A metaphor should not be stretched out more than it should be. Body and Bride are just metaphors used to present spiritual truths. Both metaphors talk about the inseparable union between Christ and church. But ‘Body’ metaphor focuses on the life aspect and the ‘Bride’ metaphor focuses on the love aspect. Old Testament pictures YHWH as the husband and Israel as the wife. But she was unfaithful to her husband. In future the wife will repent during tribulation and she will be a faithful wife forever. Revelation 19 mainly focuses on that. Israel will be faithful during the Millennial period. But New Testament also pictures Church as the bride of Christ. Christ in His first coming betrothed to her. Now He is preparing a place for the church. Then He will come again to take the bride for Himself (rapture). Church will be with Christ during the tribulation period. The marriage supper will take place during the Millennial period. Israel and church are two different programs of the Lord. Wife, Bride metaphors are used to explain certain spiritual truths. Both Israel and Church will be with Christ during the kingdom period.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The “body of Christ” is a Scriptural phrase and Paul taught this. The “bride of Christ” is not and Paul did not teach the Church is the “bride of Christ.” We must know not only what the Scriptures teach but what they do not teach. Israel is the wife/bride of Christ. The Church is His body.

    2. Grace Receiver

      Says the late Byron Richardson:
      “It would be paradoxical to maintain that the Body and the Bride are one and the same. They will, however, coexist finally as two entities in their respective domains. Paul never once mentioned either the Bride nor the bridegroom. He referred to the Husband and Wife relationship as an example of the union, which exists between the Body and the Head.

      The Bride and Bridegroom are mentioned in other portions of Scripture, Isa. 54:5, 8; Jer. 3:8,14,20, 31:32; Hos. 1:2-6; Matt. 9:15; 25:1, 6, 10; Jno 3:29; Rev. 21:2,9. The fact that all of these references occur before and after the Pauline writing is, in itself, most revealing.

      The passage most frequently quoted to support the Church-Bride theory is Eph 5:22-32. It does not seem to occur to the advocates of that position that such an application ignores the obvious fact that neither the Bride nor the Bridegroom is found once in the entire passage.

      It is stated definitely that the question under discussion is a Mystery. Eph. 5:32. Since the Bride and the Bridegroom were subjects of prophecy they could not be classified as a mystery. This bars their being considered at all in this connection, without wresting the Scriptures, for which some seem to have no compunction.

      Paul resorted the only precedent at his disposal to prove the relationship between the Body and the Head. He wisely referred to Adam and Eve, since they were initially husband and wife, not bride and groom. Eve was never a bride, since she was created a wife.

      The Body analogy continues, since members of Christ’s Body are His spiritual flesh and bone. Likewise, Eve was physically a part of Adam’s body, vs. 30. When the Body and Bride are combined an anomaly presents itself. It raises the moot question as to how a person could marry himself.

      The husband and wife status is a settled fact, whereas the bride and bridegroom relationship is problematical, that is, it is contingent upon future developments. The instant that one is baptized spiritually into the Body of Christ, an indissoluble union is effected. That is not the case with the bride and bridegroom status, which may be broken at the whim of either party Rev. 19:7.”

  93. Curtis Larson

    I am taught the way you have described above. One thing I didn’t see, that I am taught, is any reference to the City of New Jerusalem being “the Lamb’s wife,

    Rev 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.

    Rev. 21:9-10.
    9 And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb’s wife.
    10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,

    I am taught that Christ and His body, the true Church, indeed have the City of New Jerusalem as bride, to occur some 1007+ years from now. How that would look or be described, we, as earthbound, heavier-that-air men, could not begin to imagine.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The New Jerusalem is all about Israel. All its descriptions fit this, i.e., foundations, gates, etc. Since Israel is the bride/wife of Christ, the New Jerusalem is described as a bride. The New Jerusalem is not the bride, it is only described as looking like one, i.e., radiant, beautiful.

  94. Joe

    Doctrine, you’ll have to paint me a picture………..

    The earthly Kingdom is the time/place looked for throughout the OT and NT gospels. It is Israel’s heaven on earth. I’m learning that the New Jerusalem is also for Israel….a huge 4 sided edifice 1500 miles square on the earth. Is the NJ like the fancy hotels across the street from Central Park (NY/earth)? Where is the Body of Christ going to be and some thoughts on what the BOC will be doing during the 1000 yr kingdom and beyond?…………….or direct me to a site

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The fancy NYC hotels will seem like ghettos compared to the New Jerusalem. What the body of Christ will do during the Messianic kingdom is unrevealed. Paul wrote we have heavenly citizenship (Philippians 3.20), are joint-heirs of Christ (Romans 8.17), and will rule angels (1 Corinthians 6.3). God has chosen not to reveal the details. God likes surprises. Paul wrote the things God has prepared have never been seen and are beyond comprehension (1 Corinthians 2.9). It will be glorious!

  95. Joe

    I believe there is an innate human appreciation for the beauty in God’s creation. Even though we know today that this world is under the curse we still stand in awe of the grandeur of the Tetons or the delicate structure of a cactus flower. I think that what we posses today is just a peek behind the curtain compared to what we will see and do someday across the universe when we are with Christ. Maybe part of Hell is knowing what was missed…forever.

  96. Ian Neilson

    Thank you so much for your article & also the comments of Bullinger who has some excellent thoughts on the book of Revelation. Reading through all the questions and answers I am amazed at not only your patience but also the lack of understanding of the scriptures and God’s program.
    One of the things that stood out to me was “Eve is a TYPE of the Church, the Body of Christ as the Bride of Christ (horrible unscriptural expression) My question to them is how can you have a type in the Old Testament of something that was hidden in the heart of God until revealed to Paul as he said in Ephesians 3? Who said that she was a type.
    My second question is, why would the Scriptures speak of the ‘Gospel of the Kingdom’ & the ‘Gospel of the grace of God’ if they are the same? The Lord preached the gospel of the Kingdom BEFORE He went to the cross, Israel rejected Him as their King, they reject Him in Acts so Paul “turns to the gentiles”.
    I have been greatly helped in studying the Ephesian letter looking at four topics. The Divine Purpose, (the council of His own will) 2. The Divine Provision, v13 & 14( sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise ) 3. The Divine Power v19 (the exceeding greatness of His power toward us who believe) 4. The Divine Person v20-23 Christ raised—seated—and Head over all things to the Church which is His Body. It has been a real joy to me to follow these four topics through the letter.
    I only came across your website because I typed a question into google “why would Bible teachers teach that the church is the Bride of Christ and link it with 2nd Corinthians “that I might present you as a chaste virgin to Christ” when what Paul was stating that he wanted to be able to present the Church at Corinth to Christ in its purity? Your site came up and I have spent 3-4 hours reading what you have written with great interest and appreciation of the truth you have presented.
    I am an old man now and it is 2:30am but I didn’t feel like going to sleep until I written to you. I don’t know if I’ve sent this the right way or if I should have done it another way, if this is the wrong way to do it I apologize, this is more personal to you rather than wanting to go into the discussion. I’m looking forward now to reading more of what you have written.
    May the Lord richly bless you and keep you as you continue to serve Him.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Thank you. Excellent questions and comments. That was quite a Google search! Glad you hit upon my article. Even at 2.30 a.m. you’re sharp as a tack! Grace and peace and may the Lord continue to enrich and enlighten you in His grace.

  97. Vanessa

    Dear Ian, Your Q and A was a blessing to both my husband and I. Now more so than ever I see we cannot be the bride. Your letter blessed us and thank you. Your Sister In christ.

  98. uzziel

    I believe that the wife is Israel but I am kinda confused that those invited are redeemed Israel. If the Church is not the bride and the Church is not also the invited then, what`s our role in that wedding since we are His body?

    And, if it is so that the Church is the bridegroom as you stated in your article, do you mean Israel and Church are meant to be one?

    If the Church is the bridegroom and Israel is the bride, are you saying that the Church are going to make abode both new earth and new heaven? or in the new Jerusalem?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      God has revealed almost nothing about the nature of the new heavens and new earth except the New Jerusalem will be immense and glorious. Exactly where we will be, what we will do, is unknown. What we do know is we will be joint-heirs with Christ (Romans 8.17) and will rule/judge angels (1 Corinthians 6.3). Since the Gospels and Revelation do not deal with the Church (they deal with Israel and Gentiles), we cannot know what our status will be at the marriage supper of the Lamb. The Bible provides no information one way or another.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author


          Yes. In the words of the great Tyndale, “God is a Spirit, and all His words are spiritual. His literal sense is spiritual, and all His words are spiritual.” “Scripture has but one sense, which is the literal sense. And that literal sense is the root and ground of all, and the anchor that never fails, whereto if you cleave, you can never err or go out of the way. And if you leave the literal sense: you cannot but go out of the way.”

      1. Becky

        A thought occurred to me when reading Romans 8:18-25 about the marriage of the Lamb. Words like first-fruit, expectation, groan, travail and delivered drew a picture of pregnancy and childbirth. Romans 8:21 drew a picture of bondage (perhaps the flesh or a womb or tomb or curse). Since the Church hasn’t been glorified yet, based on Romans 8:24-25, “For we are saved by hope: . . . we with patience wait for ‘it’.”, I speculated what if “it” refers to the manifestation of the sons of God which might be the spiritual birth of the Church. Is the ‘creature’ waiting to be “born” into the spiritual realm? If so, when would that birth take place? It makes sense for it to be after the marriage, but I struggle with this idea because from our perspective a family is started after the marriage; there would be a consummation, conception, pregnancy, then the birth but is it likewise in the spirit? If so, can it be that the Church’s status at the marriage would be “IN” Christ. This would clear up many questions for me but is this just heretical thinking? Should I abandon this notion since scripture provides no information beyond the marriage?

        Your articles are a breath of fresh air and I look forward to reading them all. May the Lord bless you always. Thank you.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          Thank you. Paul was writing about the curse and our hope in it being lifted. For us, the curse began with Adam and Eve’s disobedience in eating the forbidden fruit. The result was death. Also, a change occurred in the environment. Everything began to corrupt, become difficult, and fall apart. Why do we die? Because of sin. Why is life so hard? Because of the curse (Genesis 3.17-19). One day, when the Lord returns for His Church, we will be given immortal bodies. When the Lord returns for Israel and the nations, He will begin to roll back the curse in the Messianic reign. The curse will be removed finally with the creation of new heaven and new earth because the whole universe has been corrupted by sin that began with Lucifer’s rebellion. That is the glorious future Paul wrote about in Romans 8. And we will be joint-heirs of all this with Christ (Romans 8.17; 1 Corinthians 2.9; 2 Corinthians 4.17). Grace and peace.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The problem with the article is it confuses Israel with the Church. In Romans 7, Paul’s case is that the Law is the “husband” who died (Colossians 2.14; 2 Corinthians 3.11). As such, believers are not under its authorit. Paul continued also stated the believer has died to the Law (Romans 7.6, 6.3-4). The Mosaic Law has been abrogated as a system at the present time and Jews come to know the Lord through Paul’s gospel, just as Gentiles do. In the future, God will restore Israel and the Law through the new covenant (which is essentially the old covenant empowered by the Holy Spirit, Ezekiel 36, Jeremiah 31).

  99. Joe

    Hi, I didnt read ALL the many responses, so Im just going to respond to the authors remarks.
    he makes a few broad statements that are totally untrue and draw conclusions based on that. Just two examples, the churches mentioned in the Book of Revelation,
    1. these churches are “jewish in character” – Not true
    2. No mention of grace in the language to these churches – not true
    just based on these two statements alone, the whole article is based on false assumptions and therefore totally untrustworthy. Im not trying to be unkind at all. dont have the time for details. Peace

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      There’s little one can say to one who will not recognize the Jewish nature of the addresses to the 7 assemblies of Revelation. The language the Lord used constantly draws from the Old Testament and He repeated words He used to the Jews in His earthly ministry. If you find the word “grace” in the addresses in chapters 2-3, please tell me where. Before writing something is false, it’s good to have facts.

  100. Tom Haas

    Hello: You mention that the phase “Bride of Christ” does not occur in the Bible. Neither do occur the words, “Trinity” or “Rapture”. No need to expound here.

    You also mention that 1 Co 11.2 “For I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy; for I betrothed you to one husband, so that to Christ I might present you as a pure virgin”,
    is taken out of context regarding the Church as the Bride of Christ, by stating, “Paul’s point was to encourage the Corinthians to remain faithful to Christ and his gospel”. I agree- the point of being faithful is not to miss out on being part of the Bride of Christ. To say this is about Paul is to completely miss the point of Paul’s warning.

    Other statements such as Israel, [not the Church] is the Bride of Christ by presenting Old Testament passages such as Hosea, etc., reminds me of how the cultists emphasize O.T. passages to prove their false doctrines.

    The New Testament is an fuller revelation of God’s plan for man. Jesus gives several examples such as, “Mat 5:43 “You have heard that it was said, ….
    Mat 5:44 “But I say to you”.

    I truly believe your teaching on the “Bride of Christ” as heretical, and encourage you reconsider this article.

    Best regards.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      I mentioned the phrase “bride of Christ” does not occur simply to reveal something most people do not know. As often as it is taught, most people think it is a Biblical phrase. The word “Rapture” is in the Bible, it’s just in the Vulgate. It’s a translation issue. See my article, The Rapture. Paul’s point in 2 Corinthians 11 was not to miss out on being part of the Bride of Christ. Read the passage. It was to exhort the Corinthians to remain faithful to the doctrines he had taught them and not be deceived by false teaching. The challenge for you is to prove the many passages that state Israel is the wife/bride of Christ is not true. That requires one to demonstrate God does not mean what He said to the Jews. To take Jesus’ statement in Matthew 5.43-44 to mean He did away with the OT promises and prophecies is error. See Matthew 5.18; Romans 11.29, 15.8.

      1. Tom Haas

        Thank you for your reply.
        I agree that God has great intentions for Israel. Rom 11:23 states, “And they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.” Any believing Jew has the opportunity to be part of the Church and the Bride of Christ. Those Jews that reject Christ will perish. As Jesus said to the Jews of His day in John 8:44 “Ye are of the devil, as your father, and ye desire to do the lusts of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has not stood in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks falsehood, he speaks of what is his own; for he is a liar and its father”.

        However, your article statement, ” The bride of Revelation 19 is Israel, not the Church, the body of Christ, since the Church is nowhere in the book”, is not correct regarding the Church. Rev 1:4 states, “John to the seven churches that are in Asia: Grace to you and peace, from Him who is and who was and who is to come, and from the seven Spirits who are before His throne.” This is the same Greek word [church] Jesus uses in Mat 16:18, “I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.”
        Jesus didn’t say “I will build My Synagogue”.
        In addition, not all were Jews in the 7 churches [incl. Ephesus] of Revelation. As stated in, Act 19:17 And this became known to all, both Jews and Greeks, who inhabited Ephesus, and fear fell upon all of them, and the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified.

        No offense, but these concepts are basics of the Christian faith. To publish such nonsense in this article is to mislead God’s flock.

        When Jesus died on the cross, everything was accomplished for believers to co-reign with Christ on His throne, and to have the closest relationship with Him as spiritually possibly and intended. As stated by P.E. Billheimer in the Introduction of “Destined for the Throne”, “the one purpose of the universe from all eternity is the production and preparation of the Eternal Companion for the Son, called the Bride, the Lamb’s Wife. Because the crown is only for the conqueror [Rev 3:21], the Church [later to become the Bride] must learn the art of spiritual warfare, of overcoming evil forces in preparation for their assumption of the throne following the Marriage Supper of the Lamb.”
        Best regards.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          The grafting back into the olive tree is not a Jew believing in Christ today and becoming part of the body of Christ. It is their future hope of being regrafted after the nation repents (Matthew 23.37-39. Paul stated ALL Israel will be saved. It is a racial, national promise. Please read my article, Understanding the Book of Revelation. The Church, the body of Christ, is not present, in Revelation. The 7 “churches” are 7 Jewish assemblies. John, had no ministry to Gentiles. None of the 12 had a ministry to Gentiles. Jesus had no ministry to Gentiles. This is basic. Unless you understand this you cannot even begin to understand Christianity and the Church. The language Jesus used to address the 7 assemblies was OT language, not Church language. Paul taught believers have salvation. It is a present possession based upon believing Paul’s gospel. Paul’s gospel is not present in Revelation. In Revelation 2-3, salvation is conditional upon “overcoming.” What you have written is based upon the traditions of men, not Scripture. The Bible does not support these ideas. I don’t know who Billheimer is, but he doesn’t know his Bible. Revelation concerns Israel and the nations, not the Church. The Church is absent for God has removed it with the Rapture. The Church is the Body of Christ, not the Bride. The Bride position has already been occupied: Israel is God’s wife/bride.

  101. Becky

    Finally! Someone who knows how to interpret scripture! I’ve often wondered if the Christians were actually the bride. Mainstream church teach this as fact but I wasn’t convinced based on scripture and I’m one of those tenacious Christians who has to understand it from reading the WORD. Now I can stop wondering and move on. Thank you so much Don/Doc. I look forward to reading the rest of your articles and to pose questions regarding other passages that don’t seem to support what the pulpit teaches.

  102. JCD

    I only had a few thoughts that came to mind….Jesus no longer called us His Servants but His friends. And John the Baptist was His friend, so I think i understand how the Kingdom of God is different than the Kingdom of the Grace of God, although in the end we all serve in the New Jerusalem in some capacity; as you stated each differing in Glory it is all part of the same Glory, His Glory.

    The article and discussion has helped clarify so many Scriptures, even on different topics, that I wanted to say thank you. Although no man is given the full interpretation of Scripture, I am thankful the Holy Spirit can move freely here in this place. The ‘come, let us reason together’ scripture is surely fulfilled by your diligence in keeping the ‘reasonable’ comments and removing those of division.

    We are One Body with Jesus Christ as the Head. Although we have a need to reason, which means differing views or disagreements, all being done in His Love remains the focus.

    I do have one statement……the end of Rev 22………the Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all……….if it is only to Israel and not the Church…..why mention Grace? Does that not tie in the Gospel of Grace by Paul? Thank you and God Bless you.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Paul was the preeminent apostle of grace and used the term far more than anyone else, but Peter and John used it also. See 1 Peter 1.2; 2 Peter 1.2, 3.18; 2 John 1.3; Revelation 1.4, 22.21. Perhaps they picked this up from Paul. According to Paul, we are joint-heirs with Christ (Romans 8.17). Everything His is ours.

  103. Pete

    Don, just so that there is some positive vibe between us, I agree with most of what you say here. The church is the BODY of Christ, not His bride. The 7 churches of Revelation are not church ages. Amen to all of that. And thanks for writing this.

  104. Becky

    Hi Don,

    If Adam is a type of Christ, does Adam’s (anesthetized) rib removal reflect the piercing of Jesus’ side? In other words, might this be when the spiritual bride was formed (pending her adornment/preparation)? If not, what was the significance of the piercing just to prove/document that Jesus was actually dead?


    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Well, I’ve never thought about this in this way. The word “rib” is צֵלָע and I think is better understood as “side chamber.” Adam was created “male and female.” He had the woman in him and God pulled her out, fashioned her from the genetic material. The woman did Adam no good inside himself. When God fashioned, the Hebrew reads, “built” her she could communicate with the man and be his companion. The two rejoin in sex. Pretty incredible. I think the piercing of Jesus’ side was a proof He was truly dead. God anticipated the skeptics and scoffers of the resurrection.

  105. Becky

    Thanks Don,

    It seemed plausible, so I thought I’d ask since Jesus is the second Adam. I thought it might be a type and shadow scenario when I came across the following during a study: Greek G4125 πλευρά pleurá, plyoo-rah’; of uncertain affinity; a rib, i.e. (by extension) side:—side.


  106. Lorna Davis

    Good afternoon Doctrine. I read your article on the subject of the the church being the body of Christ and the jews being the true bride of Christ. I have questioned both of these two concepts for years and this is the first time, I have come across an article that address the subject. If you article is indeed correct then I have believed a lie with many of the Christian churches for centuries. Due to this when you hear something different or even the truth, your mind is flooded with questions because you then enter into a spiritual and mental warfare with the enemy who wants you to reject with I am now hearing and try to justify what I held on before even thought it was not right. It is not always easy to believe the truth, as it appears too good to be true or so different to what I heared before. You want to believe it but lo there are many giants in the way. I have never believed in the concept of replacement theology after studying theology at a prestigious and well known theological instituation in the UK that Christ had rejected the Jews and replaced them with a gentile church. I had however believed that the mariage of the lamb would indeed take place between Christ and the Jews but would also include the gentile church also – so a more inclusive theology, not exclusive nor replacement but inclusive.
    A further point that I would like to raise is that in recent days, I have come across many articles, writings, stories as well as encounters with others of my race who proport that many many black people including those experiening persecution in America and other parts of the world are due primarily not to the colour of the skins only but due to their Jewish spiritual heritage which many if not all of them have lost sight of. Many proport that many of the jews who currently live in Israel does not originate from Jerusalem nor Abraham, Isaac and Jacob but were engrafted via religion and many came from Eastern Europe and other parts of Europe. As you also mentioned in your article many many jews became emerged in the ASSryian, Babylonian, Mede and Persian, and Roman Empire and lost sight of their spiritual heritage. I had an encounter in a supermarket when I was told by a couple that they were directed to shop at that particular store at a particular time. They instructed me to read deutronomy 28. I have always read Deutronomy 28 but discounted the fact that this may possibly refer to me as a black west indian who was taken as a prisoner of war by white slaveowners in the 18th century. I really dont know your own background or whether you are objective enough to consider this possibility where I am concerned and i appreciate you may not be in a position to fully address this particular point with me but the question that I am posing is what if due to the fact that I had lost my true identity as a jew and obsorb a christian position as a supposed gentile, where would I then feature in your thesis – part of the body of Christ or part of the bride?. I would be fasinated to hear your reply. There are numerous so called Christian in this position. Its almost like who we really are does not equate with Christianity as we’ve been taught. Sometimes doesnt make sense at all. I am posing these questions not because I particularly want to overidentity with a Jewish perspective because I believe this is more beneficial but simply because I am on a question to discover my true identity spiritually, psychologically, and socially.
    Thank you for your time.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Christ died for every human being. See my article, For Whom Did Christ Die? God loves everyone equally and have given every person an opportunity to know Him (John 1.9; Titus 2.11). God is no respecter of persons. But God has created programs through which He has revealed Himself. For 2,000 He revealed Himself to all mankind. In 2,000 B.C., He called Abraham to establish the Jewish race. He made a covenant (Genesis 12.1-3) in which all blessings to Gentiles would come through Israel. The foundation of these blessing were centered in the Messiah. But Israel rejected their Messiah. God had not revealed way to bless Gentiles apart from Israel. So, what did He do? In grace, He saved Paul to be the apostle of the Gentiles (Romans 11.13). Through Paul, He created the Church. Through Paul, He revealed all Church doctrine. Paul stands in the place of Abraham with regard to Gentile/Church privilege. When God completes the Church, God will resume His program with Israel and fulfill His promises. See my article, Summary of the Plan of God and The Olive Tree (Romans 11). Grace and peace.

  107. Vickie

    Up until a year ago I was living life for myself. My husband spoke of God and scripture often which only embarrassed me tremendously when we were around other people. I couldn’t stand hearing it. At the time I was writing smut filled novels and striving for a kingdom of fame and money and approval by the world. It was a very dark time. I was self-consumed and blind. I viewed God through the lens of my childhood which included a male chauvinist step-father who was a heavy alcoholic while he went around slurring old gospel hymns. I said up until a year ago…when God reached into my life and profoundly disrupted the groove I had going on. Since then the Spirit has slowly revealed sin in my life. It has always bothered me how women are oppressed and told they shouldn’t speak or teach or lead. Scripture says I am the weaker vessel and that I should glorify my husband. That my husband is over me and head of our household. That my husband’s head shouldn’t be covered, but mine should be covered. It was those verses in the bible that cut me profoundly. I couldn’t stand to read them and if I had it my way, I would not have read them. All I could hear was Jesus being disrespectful when He spoke to His mother calling her “woman”. Because of this rebellion I lashed out constantly at my husband in a battle for control. Submission is impossible for me…or it was until the spirit started to reveal Christ through marriage. I am a little discouraged by your article. I won’t argue who the bride is. All I can share is what has transformed my view as a woman and a wife. Every word of the bible reveals Christ. Every single word. Do we really think that the only reason women are instructed to be submissive to a man is because Eve was the first to bite into the forbidden fruit? Just like man’s fall was preordained by God to reveal Christ and the cross, the woman falling for Satan’s temptation was preordained to reveal Christ and the Cross. We think everything is about us. The union of marriage was only created by God so we wouldn’t be lonely. “And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.” About us only right? All scripture points to Christ. All scripture reveals Christ. Out of Love the Father created a Bride for His Son. Marriage displays this gift openly. Even pagans practice the sanctity of marriage which baffles me. Why would they practice something they don’t trust or believe in? Marriage is about Christ. Marriage reveals Christ’s relationship to his Bride…All scripture reveals Christ from the creation to the church age. The union of marriage is all about Him. Not us. I believe the bride is ALL believers in Christ. It may be revealed through scripture that I am wrong, but for now seeing the beauty of Christ’s relationship to His Bride gives me a whole new perspective on what it truly means to be a woman and a wife. It’s no longer ugly and solely a punishment that I should obey. I no longer view scripture as degrading but instructing me, as woman, how I can display Christ by glorifying my earthy husband. Every time I want to explode or lash out in rebellion against my husband, I think of Christ.

    For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. Nevertheless, neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God. (1 Corinthians 11:7-12)

    You said that Paul used marriage to make a point but was not implying the church was the bride because Paul clearly states the church is the body. I loved the argument in one of the comments that: when two become one in marriage, are they not then of the same body? I have found that nothing is said in scripture because there is a lack of a better way to get the point across without causing confusion. One portion of the scripture above has never made sense to me: For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.

    Searching for the revelation of Christ in scripture I perceive it this way: For Christ indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God; but the church is the glory of Christ. For Christ is not of the church; but the church of Christ. Neither was Christ created for the church; but the church for Christ. For this cause ought the church to have power on her head because of the angels. Nevertheless, neither is Christ without the church, neither is the church without Christ. For as the church is of Christ, even so Christ also by the church; but all things of God.

    I am sorry if you disagree but I see and hear Christ in every Word. I hear instruction for the church as being submissive to Christ in all that they do because Christ is the head and that by living out this relationship with my husband daily, I honor Christ through openly displaying obedience. I no longer see scripture about marrige as oppressive or degrading, but beautiful and complicated…with the complexity and depth that reveals Him.

    Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, … (Ephesians)

    …Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, 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. (Ephesians 5: 25-27)

    The washing of the word: What Christ does for the church. What man is instructed to do for his wife…wash her with the word. If I am not “the bride” of Christ but “the body”, I am more then okay with that. I still think the union of marriage is beautiful and that there is instruction there in His word for me as a wife.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Thanks for sharing your wonderful testimony. Is anything too hard for the Lord? Paul’s argument of “submissive” is that we are the body and He is the Head. The body is under the control of the head. What I have tried to show in the article, is that while Paul made allusions to marriage, in terms of doctrine, the Church is the body of Christ, not the bride. The wife/bride of Christ is Israel. It is critical to interpretation to keep things ordered. God has given certain things to Israel and certain to the Church. These must be understood. If not, confusion results.

  108. Henry Butler

    Whew! Today I heard a song titled “The Spirit and the Bride” by Matt Maher which immediately struck a wrong chord with my spirit. It took me back decades in my mind’s search for Biblical truths that would clarify what seemed like countless contradictory Christian Biblical teachings. Little did I know it would lead me to this site and the myriad of questions/thoughts Christians have about what is and isn’t true in Christian teachings. We firstly have to believe Satan is the author of lies and, just as he did with Adam and Eve, he whispers to believers saying; “Did God REALLY say that? Did He REALLY mean it or are you misunderstanding that? Isn’t that a misinterpretation?” On and on with the mind jumbling questions. The chief cause for the confusion seems to come from thinking that the Bible, from beginning to end, is one big instruction manual for Christians and presents some long drawn out plan for how to live a good life and how to receive God’s blessings, salvation and eternal life. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is like putting everyone’s mail in a big pile, pulling one letter out and then doing whatever the letter dictates, no matter who it was written to or how crazy or pointless following it’s instructions would be. As soon as one realizes there were two ministries offered in what’s commonly called the “New” Testament, one for a Messianic Kingdom for the Jews and then a following dispensation of Grace for everyone, the fog begins to lift. Things that seemed confusing suddenly begin to clear up. Seemingly contradictory statements in the Bible now make sense. Questions like this body and/or bride of Christ puzzle have an answer that makes sense. Thanks to teachers like Doctrine expounding the fact that those saved by grace didn’t have their beginning in Matthew, but rather when Saul (Paul), on the road to Damascus, saw the light (literally). Hopefully our Lord won’t hold our misunderstandings or lack of intelligence against us since we’re all studying and diligently trying to understand things that confuse us. Thanks Doctrine for your efforts to make that easier for those who are seeking the truth. God bless you.

  109. Jimbob Furley

    Is this simply a semantics issue? Whether it’s Israel, or the Church isn’t it true that the chosen people of God, have a relationship that is throughout scripture (Prophets, Gospels, Epistles, Revelation) well represented by the relationship between a husband and bride? Is it not at least safe to say that the metaphor of Christ responding to His people, as a Bridegroom responds to his bride is consistent and helpful for us to understand how He loves us?

    Admittedly this may have been answered above, there are far too many comments for me to process here, but I DID rifle through a bunch of them. If you’ve had to answer this a dozen times already, my apologies, just reference the date, or person to whom you were responding, and I’ll dig it up.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      What I am trying to do in the article is reveal that the term “bride of Christ” does not exist and that Paul wrote we are the “body of Christ” not the Bride. There are allusions and figures of marriage regarding our relationship with Christ but one cannot build a doctrine of the Church being the “bride of Christ” with this. The OT, however, teaches Israel is the wife/bride of Christ. If we are good students of the Scriptures we must recognize this and keep things that pertain to God’s covenant people, Israel, separate from the Church. These are two separate programs, each with its own promises, operations, and blessings.

      1. Jimbob Furley

        Helpful! Can you briefly explain the consequences to this confusion? If we go on applying the imagery of the Church being the Bride of Christ, how does this confusion impact us?

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          We must be careful to understand exactly what the Scriptures teach. Reading into them things that are not there is a constant occupational hazard for exegetes. It is easy to get carried away by an idea. It is far better to build doctrine on what the text explicitly states. Paul wrote Timothy, “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2.15). That is the standard.

  110. Mike D.

    Occupational hazard is correct. Just want to point out that the Christian “religion” has spent millions of dollars creating educational institutions and kingdoms of men (many are named after a particular person) using 2 Tim 2:15 as their justification for doing so. Unfortunately the KJV translation of the word “study” is a very weak interpretation (more of a paraphrasing) to build such institutions and kingdoms on. In fact “spoudazo” (Strong’s 4704), out of the 11 times used, was translated “study” only in 2 Tim 2:15. A better, more accurate translation, would be “Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth” (NASB). I’m sure that every one of today’s Christian institutions would claim that they have “studied”. There seems to be something missing that after all the “studying” there is SO MUCH confusion. Thank you “doctrine” for being a place that much of the confusion stops.

  111. Stew Sutton

    This is an informative article that causes us to go back into God’s word and to pray for perspective. The core premise is that the Church is the BODY of Christ (and NOT the Bride of Christ) while the nation of Israel is the BRIDE of Christ. I have been looking at the comment thread and have not yet discovered the reference to the Jewish wedding feast that will occur in Heaven in celebration with Christ as the Bridegroom and the parallels with all of the protocols of “snatching” the bride (parallel to the Rapture of the Church) and the parallel to the timescale (7 days in Heaven to 7 years on earth – coinciding with the timespan of the Great Tribulation). So if this has been addressed, please just point me to the reference, but if not, maybe it is a good topic to explore together here in the comment thread or perhaps in a separate and distinct post.

    1. Bobbi

      The Jewish wedding is interesting to me as well but it is Jewish.
      1. The groom purchases the bride for a price.
      2. The groom gives gifts to the bride.
      3. The groom goes away to his father’s house to prepare a place for her.(Is usually a year or more)
      4. His return for her could be at any time, and is a surprise.

      As it the analogy in Ruth. The1350. gaal ►
      Strong’s Concordance
      gaal: to redeem, act as kinsman
      Original Word: גָּאַל
      Part of Speech: Verb
      Transliteration: gaal
      Phonetic Spelling: (gaw-al’)
      Short Definition: redeemed
      NAS Exhaustive Concordance
      Word Origin
      a prim. root
      to redeem, act as kinsman
      NASB Translation
      avenger (13), bought back (1), buy back (1), claim (1), close relative (3), closest relative (3), closest relatives (1), ever wish to redeem (2), kinsman (2), redeem (22), redeemed (25), redeemer (1), Redeemer (18), redeems (1), relative (2), relatives (1), rescue (1), wishes to redeem (1).
      These are both Jewish, as is our Lord Jesus.
      However, We are definitely the Body of Christ. This we are sure of.

      1. Bobbi

        In the commentary of Revelation by EW Bullinger, after studying out the scriptures on this subject it is clear.
        There are 3 callings.
        1. Genesis 13:16 the wife being an earthly calling, “as the sand…”
        2. Genesis 15:5 the elect remnant of Israel
        3. The Mystery Body of Christ. Ephesians 3:3-6.
        The language of Revelation 19:7-9 is not the same given to the wife.
        1. “She hath made herself ready”, is not our righteousness in the Body. Ours is given or imputed to us by God.
        The word in Revelation 19:8 for righteousness is G1345 – δικαίωμα
        G1346 ››
        ‹‹ G1344
        Transliteration: dikaiōma
        Pronunciation: dē-kī’-ō-mä
        Part of Speech: neuter noun
        Root Word (Etymology): From δικαιόω (G1344)
        Outline of Biblical Usage:
        that which has been deemed right so as to have force of law
        what has been established, and ordained by law, an ordinance
        a judicial decision, sentence
        of God
        either the favourable judgment by which he acquits man and declares them acceptable to Him
        unfavourable: sentence of condemnation
        a righteous act or deed
        The word for our righteousness in Romans 8:10 is
        G1343 – δικαιοσύνη
        G1344 ››
        ‹‹ G1342
        Transliteration: dikaiosynē
        Pronunciation: dē-kī-o-sü’-nā
        Part of Speech: feminine noun
        Root Word (Etymology): From δίκαιος (G1342)
        Outline of Biblical Usage:
        in a broad sense: state of him who is as he ought to be, righteousness, the condition acceptable to God
        the doctrine concerning the way in which man may attain a state approved of God
        integrity, virtue, purity of life, rightness, correctness of thinking feeling, and acting
        in a narrower sense, justice or the virtue which gives each his due

        The Body as I understand it is of Christ. We are part of Christ Jesus himself. We can’t be both because the wife would be separate from the husband. All our godliness is given us by God.

        1. Vanessa

          Good Morning Bobbi, I so enjoyed your reply on the Bride. I see you have been studying. What I did derive from Bullingers book is that the New Jerusalem is the Bride which makes no sense as how can a city be a Bride but there are many things we dont understand and won’t till it all comes together in the end. Does it mean that the body and the old Testament saints live in the New Jerusalem with Christ who is the body. I dont know but its exciting. Take care.

          1. Bobbi

            Hi Vanessa:-)
            Bollinger says, “Christians, in their selfishness, intrude themselves into the place of others as the Bride, and thus lose the blessed enjoyment of their own place which is theirs as part of the Bridegroom! The Bride and the Bridegroom, though in a sense one, are yet distinct. And it is clear from all the scriptures relating to the Mystery, that the members of Christ’s Body are part of the Bridegroom Himself. Whereas the elect Old Testament saints will form the Bride. See Isaiah xii. 6: “Cry out and shout, thou Inhabitress (marg.) of Zion: For great is the Holy One of Israel in the midst of thee.” In Rev. xxii. 3, we read “The throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it.” Of the glory of this Holy City other scriptures speak. See Is. lx. 3, 14, 19, 20. Rev. xxi. 23, 24, 27. Is. liv. 11, 12.”
            The city foundations are even made of the names of the 12 apostles. This must be the city in Hebrews 10:8-16. This heavenly calling of the elect remnant seems to be whom the Lord promised in Matthew 19:27-30.
            God keeps His promises.
            We don’t even see Paul in the foundation. But we too have a special place, as is well documented above. His blessings are richly given even that He alone is the one who prepares us through the mighty work of the Holy Ghost. It is exciting to wonder over isn’t it!
            Have a Blessed day!

          2. Karen Manna

            Hello Vanessa, you pose a thoughtful question. I could suggest that I think we have at least one clear example of a city also being a “person,” as in Babylon, a “harlot.”

  112. Randall M.

    What about Jewish people who receive the Lord Jesus Christ but in fact by birth are Jews/nation of Israel where do they stand as the Body or the Bride?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Both Jews and Gentiles become “Church” in the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12.13; Galatians 3.27-28 cf. 1 Corinthians 10.32).

  113. Karen Manna

    Excellent. Thank you for your thorough and articulate exegesis. I appreciate your faithfulness in allowing scripture to interpret scripture. I urge readers and fellow Bereans to go a step further. Study the Book of Ruth, which of course employs typology, where we see Christ as Redeemer and Ruth as redeemed Israel, and therefore the Bride (and not the Church) particularly since the redemption includes the inheritance of the land. We Christians can claim no such inheritance, as it pertains to Zion and Israel. I was taught for years Eph 5 as a text proof for the Church as Bride of Christ, but in looking into this further, it became clear that it is an analogy that Paul is using, but as Dr. Randy White of Katy, Texas teaches, “an analogy is not an identity.” Those of us who hold this view concerning the Bride of Christ are certainly unpopular in mainstream Christendom. Blessings to you for your faithfulness and diligence in contending for the Faith; for showing yourself to be “…a worker rightly dividing the Word of Truth!”

    1. Bobbi

      I love the book of Ruth! Excellent mention.
      One thing though is Ruth was a Moabite… and Naomi the Israelite.
      By typology wouldn’t Ruth represent Gentiles and Naomi Israel? And Boaz as The Lord Jesus who did it all for us completely to our salvation. Such an excellent love story all the way around!

  114. Donna

    Thank you for writing this teaching. It is very clear and scriptural. The Holy Spirit has delivered me out of the confusion of mixing the kingdom gospel with the grace gospel and the confusion that comes from mixing Israel with the body of Christ. Today, I am struggling with understanding the purpose and plan for the body of Christ on earth as we near the end of the age of grace. Can you provide some answers on what we as members of Christ’s body are to be focused on as we proclaim the gospel of grace (1 Corinthians 15:1-4) and the message of reconcilliation found in 2 Corinthians 5:18-21.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The gospel and Church doctrine (the writings of Paul) are our focus. The gospel is the power of God (Romans 1.16-17). It is the wonderful news that can set men and women free from sin and death. What can be greater news than that God has reconciled the world to Himself by Christ’s death and resurrection that believing this (faith + 0) one can have forgiveness of sins and eternal life? God has called us to faithfulness as He has called men and women in all ages. We are nearing the end. May this hope encourage us, even when we see the world getting worse each day. Finish strong!

  115. Bruce Schank


    I’m back after a long while checking out once again your wonderful resource site.

    I read that Berean article you linked to awhile ago and I agree with both it and you.

    When I tried to tell friends what the Berean article mentioned they went ballistic on me. I was lambasted as basically being willfully ignorant yet we both know Christendom as a whole follows a false Jewish kingdom gospel message. Because of that fact, I think it’s easy to take everything else meant for the Jews and apply it wrongly to the church.

    Now, my question to you is why does the text say over and over again to the seven churches? To the church of ? etc? A Jewish congregation is Not a church. Christ even talks about the synagogue of Satan in Rev 3:9 which should be a major tipoff what you’re teaching is correct.

    Maybe if the text used a different term then church it would be more evident and self explanatory to those looking to read something into it to begin with. I’m Not a biblical scholar by any means but what is the actual Hebrew terminology used in those passages?

    God Bless You,

    I will be digging into more articles as time permits.


    Bruce W.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The reaction is predictable. Christendom is like Judaism in Jesus’ day. It is governed by tradition, not the Scriptures. The word ἐκκλησία, translated “church” only occurs 2x in the gospels, in Matthew 16 and 18. The word means a group of people and context determines the nature of the group. I have stopped using the word “church” except when it refers to the body of Christ due to confusion. In a Jewish context, the word ἐκκλησία is very close to the word synagogue. It’s a synonym.

  116. Tom

    Galatians 3:29 “If you belong to Christ, then you are Abrahams seed and heirs to the promise.”
    Earlier in the Galatians 3 he made the point that it was seed singular not seeds plural; the seed was Jesus. If we are clothed with Jesus we are part of that seed. Part of bridegroom, got that part. But the “promise” probably should be “promises” plural. In verse 16 he said promises. Then he starts saying promise singular seemingly to say all those promises are really one promise. So if we also inherit the promises, that includes the land of Israel. And by being heirs to the nation of Israel, then how are we not also the bride?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The context Galatians 3.29 is the promise of salvation by faith alone, not the covenant promises of Israel. The Church is in a different program from Israel. Ponder Galatians Galatians 3.25, “before faith came.” This is actually an incorrect translation. It should read, “before the faith came.” What faith was that? It was Paul’s gospel of salvation by faith alone in the finished work of Christ. This was unknown before Paul.

  117. Tom

    I agree that salvation by faith alone is the overall aim of Paul. But sometimes side points are used to achieve the overall aim. Just like Paul defends his apostleship in this epistle. His apostleship was not his chief aim but it was a supporting what he said. Similarly if he was fighting Judaizers, he could be basically saying faith is all you need and you still get the promises to Israel without having to follow the Law. Otherwise, why mention that they are Abrahams seed and “heir” to the promise. To your point he says “promise of the Spirit” in verse 14. I admit I don’t know why a promise of a spirit is associated with Abraham in that verse. I can’t find where Abraham was promised the Spirit.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      We are Abraham’s seed in the sense of salvation by faith alone. That was the promise Paul was writing about. Nothing in Paul’s writings indicates the Church has anything to do with Israel’s covenant promises. Our blessings are spiritual and heavenly, not earthly.

  118. Tom Rice

    The Greek Word for church is Strong’s number 1577 ἐκκλησία. It means an Assembly or Congregation or group of people. At Pentecost Jesus used Peter to established the Jewish Kingdom church based on the Gospel of the Kingdom. There were no gentiles in it. Much later Paul created the Gentile church which he refers to as “The Church which is the body”. They are two different churches. The gentile one would be part of the bridegroom at the wedding. The Kingdom one would be the bride. At least that is how I see it. Our understanding of the word church as used in the bible is not very accurate.

  119. joe


    I watch a weekly TV show that discusses biblical topics. One show was about the Bride of Christ. I wrote to them about this and they replied. Please respond to this argument presented by the spokesman for the TV program. It is as follows:

    Joe, greetings in the name of Jesus our blessed hope!
    Ephesians 5:22-33 is the main teaching concerning the Church being the Bride of Christ.
    In contrast, the eternal city – the New Jerusalem – is not Christ’s bride, but instead the inhabitants of the city are. That the city is called “the bride, the wife of the Lamb” in Revelation 21:9 is metaphorical language – the use of an object for what it contains (the Church in the city). Revelation 21:2 says the city is “made ready as a bride adorned for her husband,” a clear use of simile, a literary device that makes a comparison between two separate things. Moreover, in Revelation 22:3 the church (“the bond-servants of the Lamb”) is clearly separate from the city (in which they serve), so it cannot be a symbol of them. The city qualifies in every sense as a physical reality with measurable architectural structures.
    In Revelation 21:9, the angel takes John (who is part of the Church) to see the Bride (the Church) inhabiting the New Jerusalem city.
    God Bless!

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The problem with such arguments is that the Scriptures never state the Church is the bride of Christ. What they state is that the Church is the body of Christ. Ephesians 5 does nothing to advance such an argument. It states Christ is the head of the Church. What Paul meant is clear from Colossian 1.18, 2.19. In these passages, he wrote Christ was the Head of the body. There is no problem in seeing metaphorical language regarding the New Jerusalem described as a bride. The problem lies in seeing Jerusalem having anything to do with Gentiles or the Church. Revelation 21.9 states the bride is the Lamb’s wife. Israel was always described as God’s wife. Israel is the bride. The Church is never called the bride or the wife of Christ. John was one of the Twelve, not of the Church. Paul explicitly stated the Church began with him. It was a revelation the risen Lord gave to him. The Twelve knew nothing of the Church and Jesus told them they would rule Israel (Matthew 19.28). Mixing these two programs results in confusion, evident in the answer you received.

  120. George

    Hi bro Don Great article, my only a question to you concerning it is :
    In the law, a divorced person was not to remarry that same spouse again, why does God remarry his bride Israel after giving her a bill of divorcement ?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Thank you. I don’t know. What is clear is that God’s promises to Israel were sovereign and will be fulfilled.

  121. joe

    I was recently in communicationswith a fellow from a TV ministry. I was asking about the Bride of Christ. I suggested Israel was the Bride…he wrote back and listed all his seminary schooling and said he’d never heard such a thing. Doctrine, I think we’re in the minority. …..but then that’s probably a good thing….

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Well, I know we’re in the minority. And it is a good thing. In spiritual matters, the majority is always wrong.

  122. Samuel

    Hi Doc,

    Enjoying your writings. Question, isn’t a husband the head of the wife? If husband and wife become one flesh then wouldn’t the church become one “flesh” with Christ (his body)? As far as I know only the bride becomes the wife of the Lamb. Interesting perspective though. Definitely something to think about. Although, who can claim to completely understand the mind of God? We’ll know clearly soon enough. “For now we see through a glass darkly”….

    Grace be with you.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Yes, a husband is head of his wife. Paul made these points in his dissertation on the marriage relationship respecting Christ: Christ is the Head of the Church, Christ loved the Church and gave Himself for it that He might sanctify and cleanse it. Paul then went on to state we (Church) are members of His body. Paul never stated the Church is the “bride” of Christ and if it were, this would have been the appropriate time to do so. Paul only states one thing: the Church is the body of Christ. Not the bride. Stay with what the Scripture states, not tradition.

      1. Micah

        Verses 22-23 make a comparison between the husband’s headship over the wife and Christ’s headship over the church through a ὡς clause that has an adjunctive καὶ, which emphasizes the relationship. In verse 24, the wife’s submission to her husband is established via another ὡς clause that also has an adjunctive καὶ in the independent clause, as well as having a compartive οὕτως to stress the similarity. Verse 25 has a command to men to love their wives just as Christ loved the church, established by a comparative καθὼς and another adjunctive καὶ. Verses 26-27 talk about his washing and preparing the church. Verses 28-29 connect to the previous verses through a compartive οὕτως. The end of 29 and beginning of 30 makes the comparison of Christ loving his own body, just as the husband loves his own body. Paul then continues to quote Gen 2:24. Now, it seems to me that your argument with regards to Ephesians 5 rests on how exactly Paul means to establish the relationships between the quote and the rest of the section. If the quote means to only establish the relationship between the man and wife, then your argument stands. We must look at two things: how does the quote relate to verse 30 and how does quote relate to verse 32.

        As for how the quote relates to the verses before it, it appears hard to understand it as anything other than an explanation of verse 30. Paul seems to answer the question, “How are we members of his body?” and then answers with a quote about marriage. You could argue that he means to draw a mere analogy, but noticeably he does not provide a comparative word to introduce the quote. A comparative word’s presence can make the argument that one is truly like the other, but the absence of one makes it hard to argue that he merely means comparison (though, admittedly, not impossible). However, the ancient scribes seem to think that Paul was making an argument for Christ and the Church being of one body just like marriage is, adding Gen 2:23 right after verse 30 (just making this note to show how people back then were reading it, not to say that their addition was inspired or anything like that).

        However, once we look at verse 32, it seems to me that Paul is dismissing any doubts. The τοῦτο describing τὸ μυστήριον must make reference to something, connecting τὸ μυστήριον with another point in the passage. It seems to be natural to take the τοῦτο as referring to the quote, which means that the quote of the two becoming one is the mystery. To try to make the τοῦτο look afterward to the next clause seems doubtful since the following clause lacks a declarative ὅτι and begins with a disjunctive δὲ. He then clarifies with the next clause with a disjunctive δὲ (translated “but” in every major translation that I saw) that he is speaking about Christ and the Church. Why a disjunctive δὲ? I think Paul expects his readers to know the background and to think that he is talking about the nature of marriage, so he clarifies saying, “I know you’re thinking I’m talking about marriage, but I’m really talking about Christ and the Church.” Also, he uses an uncommon way to talk about speech, using εἰς to introduce his subject of reference. Although that is not completely unheard of in Greek, it is not the normal way of speaking in the New Testament. So why does Paul use it? I think he might be using a bit of a pun because that is the exact word used to describe the two becoming “into” (or εἰς) one. In light of these reasons, it seems hard to argue that he means anything other than Christ and the Church with his marriage quote.

        So Paul is basically saying that we become a part of his body in a way akin to marriage. It seems to me that to say that it is inaccurate to maintain a body of Christ/bride of Christ distinction. A man is one with his wife because the two become one flesh, mimicking what happens between Christ and the Church. In answering the question, “How are we the body of Christ?” Paul answers, “Because we are, in a way, married to him.”

        Your arguments seem to come from the desire to keep the Jew/Gentile distinction in the plan of God. Although I applaud that in one sense, I think it is hard to make the case that Gentiles will not enjoy the same eschatological promises as the Jews. Since Jesus and the NT writers seem to emphasize Gentiles being brought into the people of God (see for example John 10:16; Rom 11:24; Eph 2:11-22). The argument that the holy city of Jerusalem only includes Jews would be a weird ending for a book written to seven churches that were in Greek lands and had mainly Gentile problems (such as eating meat sacrificed to idols and believing the Nicolaitans). Even if you argue that the book was not written to those churches, it again seems weird that John would not write to his own church in Ephesus, which would be mainly Gentile. The argument that we could not be bride since we are guests eating is honestly hardly tenable since Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are also eating in the coming of the kingdom (Matt 8:11; Luke 13:28-29). Furthermore, the people to whom Jesus was telling the parables of the 10 virgins and others similar were Jewish. So was Jesus telling Jews about the coming of the kingdom only to really be talking about how the Gentiles will perceive it?

        OT prophets seem to argue for Gentiles being included in the people of God, even relating them to coming to Jerusalem in some cases, (to name a few: Isa 2:2; 42:4; 49:6; 56:3-7; 60:1-3; Mic 4:2; Zech 2:11). This is referenced by John in Rev 21:24. The promise of the New Covenant in Joel 2 surely includes Gentiles, noting that God will pour out his spirit on all people, which John ties together the Spirit and the Bride in Rev 22:17 with one voice. Acts 10 and 11 seem to make it clear that salvation is the same for Jews and Gentiles (compare the receiving of the Spirit in chapter 2). Gal 3:28 talks about being one in Christ, which surely must include the end of the age. I do not dispute that there is a distinction between Jew and Gentile, but I do dispute that there is separation. Being the bride of Christ is about being the people of God. If Gentiles and Jews are one as said Ephesians 2, we must grapple with exactly how they are one. I think the basic unity in Christ means inclusion into the people of God, which also means being the bride of YHWH.

        Let me know what you think, especially in regards to how you see the unity between Gentiles and Jews. What exactly do we share? When we receive the promises and are no longer aliens to the covenant, what exactly does that mean? Thanks for your article.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          Paul’s main point in Ephesians 5 is to teach about marriage. What Paul states with reference to Christ and the Church is He is its Head, even as a husband is the head of the wife and that as Christ loved the Church, so husbands are to love their wives. The μυστήριον Paul speaks of is being united with Christ in a similar way as husband and wife become “one body.” This hearkens back to the original creation. Both man and woman were Adam. They constituted the image of God. God brought the woman out of the man so they could communicate with one another and enjoy each other’s company. The Scriptures keep God’s program with Israel and the Church separate even as God keeps heaven and earth separate throughout eternity. In no case are Gentiles or the Church ever part of Israel. Israel is a technical term that only refers to Jews. The “seed of Abraham” is not synonymous with Israel. God told Abraham he would have an earthly progeny and a heavenly progeny. The earthly progeny is believing Jews (not in the Church). The heavenly progeny is Gentiles (and some Jews) in the Church who are saved by faith alone, like Abraham. Everything that Israel receives is through promise (covenants). Everything the Church receives is through grace. The “other sheep” of John 10 are Jews. Sheep always are used of Jews, not Gentiles. The other fold is Jews who will accept Jesus as the Messiah in the future. In other words, this was a proleptic statement–Christ knew He would be rejected. Paul’s dissertation of the olive tree in Romans 11 does not state Gentiles become part of Israel. The olive tree is not Israel, but God’s place of blessing, i.e., the Abrahamic Covenant. Gentiles have been grafted into that place of blessing due to Israel’s unbelief. You may wish to read my article, The Olive Tree. According to the Abrahamic Covenant and the prophetic plan, Gentiles would be blessed through Israel. We’re given almost no information about the future of the Church except we are joint-heirs with Christ and will rule angels. The Church is noticeably absent in John’s description of the new heavens and new earth and the new Jerusalem. As to your last question about what Israel and the Church share, we share the same Lord, the indwelling Holy Spirit, and eternal life.

  123. Bobbi

    Scripture does not call us the bride. Nonetheless, it does say that we are all “one in Christ.” Gal. 3:28, Rom. 12:5. I think this denotes the intimacy and oneness that we have in the fellowship of the mystery.
    Ephesians. 3:9. It is kind of a hard thing for us but this fellowship entails us being filled with all the fullness of God. Ephesians. 3:1-21

    Col. 1:9 And 2:9 say that in Christ Jesus dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. This is very deep and intimate , for we are all one “in Christ”.

    I believe it is God, reconciling the heavenly places thus with the “Body of Christ” which is discussed in the above scripture in Ephesians and other Pauline epistles. and if you read Is. 62:1-12 ..this is God reconciling the earth. In Luke 12:32 the Lord Jesus says it’s the little flock to inherit the kingdom.

    Then in Ephesians. 1:10 in the fullness of times all things in Christ will be gathered… reconciled.
    That’s a short view of the little understanding I have right now.
    Grace and peace to all in Christ.

  124. Ron

    No, you missinterpret the text of Colossians 1:25. Paul was speaking to a new breed of God seekers and that was from the time of John the Baptist to pauls message and on. Paul was speaking that his commission was to fulfill the Gospel as his part was concerned , for we teach today, it is not fulfilled until all have entered the fold. The next verse down covers who was to receive the Gospel From God to his saints and Paul was a part of that, only not the fulfilling of it.

    1. Ron

      Col 1:25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;

      The fulfillment of God’s word is not what Paul is doing as in a sense of his Gospel, but rather that Paul is teaching the gentiles in which fulfills prophecy which is the word of God. That it was sent to the saints by Jesus and taught by Paul to fulfill the prophecy give by the prophets. You thinking Paul was sent to fulfill the Gospel is hilarious.

      Col 1:26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, *but now is made manifest to his saints:*

      1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

        Paul disclosed the secret of the Church, the body of Christ, and this disclosure completed the Scriptures. No one knew about the Church before Paul and Paul wrote he was its founder. All Church doctrine comes from Paul. Paul’s wrote about “secrets” μυστήριον which were unknown until the risen Lord revealed them to him. Unless one understands this, one cannot understand ecclesiology. Not one Scripture supports the idea that anyone knew of the Church before Paul or the gospel of grace before Paul. See my article, Paul’s “Mystery”.

    2. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The Greek text is clear. Paul always used πληρόω in the sense of “filling up” or “completing.” The text reads Paul was God’s minister to complete the Word of God.

  125. Joe

    I need to see the phrase…’the…bride…of …Christ…in the bible.
    In Rev. 19 the marriage of the Lamb is with the holy city Jerusalem.
    (Jerusalem has to get herself ‘ready’.)….Isn’t the Church already ready? What did/does the Church do to get ready? Would that be considered a ‘work’?
    In Jeremiah Israel is the wife of God.
    The Bride of Christ Doctrine is a Catholic thing where priests supposedly marry the Church.

    Revelation 19:7

    Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.

  126. James

    In Romans 1:13 Paul lets us know he was talking to the Gentiles, “Now I would not have you ignorant, brethren, that oftentimes I purposed to come unto you, (but was let hitherto,) that I might have some fruit among you also, even as among other Gentiles.” And Paul went on to say in Romans 7:4 ” Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.”

  127. Felipe Rios

    You are RIGHT to say that the church is the Bride of Christ. But the relationship that God has with Israel as a husband is also a metaphor to show the relationship they have with God. Revelation 21 is very clear who the Bride of Christ is. The city/land New Jerusalem is the Bride of Christ. The Church and/or Israel are NOT the Bride. We are the guests to this wedding. The children of God are the friends of the bridegroom and guests to the wedding of the Lamb. Jesus will marry the city to show the relationship he has with our eternal abode.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Everything associated with the New Jerusalem concerns Israel. Revelation 21.2 states New Jerusalem is “prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.” This is a figure and governs the later reference of Revelation 21.9-10. The “bride” is Israel, believing Jews who looked for “heavenly” Jerusalem (Hebrews 11.16; 12.22). The “wife” is associated with the Millennium; the “bride” with eternity.

      1. Felipe Rios

        I would I agree with you but the problem is that the angel associates the bride/wife of the Lamb with the New Jerusalem. Are you going to tell me the New Jerusalem is a metaphor for Israel? If that is the case then everything in Rev.21 would have to be a metaphor of something else; such as : the measurements, the foundations, the street, the tree of life, the river, etc. Those things mentioned in Rev.21 are LITERAl. If they are literal the New Jerusalem is an ACTUAL golden city and the angel identifies the city ALONE as the bride. True Israel and true New Testament believers are guests to wedding according to Matt.9:15 and Matt.22:1-14 and Matt.25:1-13.
        Those passages clearly teach that we are guests/friends to the wedding of the Lamb. None of us are the bride. The bride of Christ is not really identified until we get to Revelation 21.
        Yes, there are many passages in the OT that referred to Israel as a bride, wife or married to God. Those passages are simply METAPHORS showing the relationship they have we God, just like we can say that we are spiritually and metaphorically married to Christ (Rom.7:4, 2 Cor.11:2). But those are only metaphors and illustrations showing our relationship with Christ and how we are supposed to behave before God. But none of those make us an ACTUAL bride. His actual/literal bride the city/land New Jerusalem.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          Jerusalem is always associated with Israel. You are correct these are all metaphors. But they are metaphors which express a personal relationship. One cannot have a personal relationship with a city. John wrote in Revelation 21.2 that the new Jerusalem was prepared “as a bride.” In Revelation 21.9, the bride is identified as the Lamb’s wife. The Lamb’s wife is always Israel. John wrote only to Israel and about Israel (and its relations with the nations). Everything in Revelation 21-22 concerns Israel. The New Jerusalem has 12 gates associated with the 12 tribes, 12 foundations associated with Christ’s apostles to Israel. The new heavens and new earth with the new Jerusalem is a new reality which extends the 1,000 year earthly kingdom.

  128. Rosheeka

    Thanks for posting this article. I agree that the church is the body and that Israel is the bride.

    However, I disagree with the doing away of the law. Paul speaks of legalism as a means to salvation NOT as something to be done away with. No one was ever saved by the law (Hebrews 11) and grace and mercy was always there as evidenced in the OT with the many law breakers and non partakers that were chosen by God.
    Scriptures that back this up:
    Romans 6:1-2
    What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
    1 John 2:4
    He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
    Jesus’ words also tell us to keep the commandments
    Matthew 19:16-17
    16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
    17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
    John 14:15
    If ye love me, keep my commandments.

    Revelations says to keep the commandments
    “So the dragon was enraged with the woman, and went off to make war with the rest of her children, who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus.” (Revelation 12:17)

    “Here is the perseverance of the saints who keep the commandments of God and their faith in Jesus. ” (Revelation 14:12)

    To sum up Paul tells us
    By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God. (Romans 5:2)
    We also know that faith without works is dead
    4 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? 17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. James 2: 14-17

    The work is the righteousness through our FAITH in Christ to DO as he did and keep the commandments as it is God’s standard of righteousness.

    We know that it was Jesus who gave Moshe the commandments as The Scriptures tells us that no one has ever seen the father. We know that Jesus declares the father to his people.

    With that all said. We know in the OT/ Original covenant that Israel was the bride and was given a divorce decree. The law of divorce states in Deuteronomy 24:1-4
    When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.

    2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man’s wife.

    3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife;

    4 Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the Lord: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

    So Israel could NOT return to God given his law. The second writings is his reconciliation with Israel as his bride through Jesus Christ. In harmony with the idea that Jesus is the God of Israel, or I believe that Jesus was a manifestation of the father.
    Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

    9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?
    1 Tim 3:16
    And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

    So the question I have is.. How does the coming of Christ make God a new groom to be married to Israel reconciling them to God if Jesus is a manifestation of God himself. Was it through his birth (the man portion he joined with being fully God in spirit fully man in his tabernacle/flesh), his baptism, his death, his resurrection, his second coming, or all of the above?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Please see my article, Paul and the Law. Paul did far more than state the Law was not a means of salvation. He said it was not a means of sanctification. The Law was a system of administration which governed Israel’s moral, civil, and ceremonial life. Paul stated that believers of his gospel are under new administration: grace. The Christian life is to be lived by faith through the power of the Holy Spirit, not by the Mosaic Law. The Mosaic Law has no place in the Church. The Mosaic Law was a covenant given to Israel. The Church has no covenants. It operates solely by grace. Paul told the Galatians to cast aside the Mosaic Law even as Sarah cast out Hagar (Galatians 4.21-31).

  129. Vicki

    It seems that perhapss the 144,000 might be the bride? They are called virgins and follow the Lamb wherever He goes? They sign a song no one else can learn, etc.? I have always been taught that the Church is the Bride but realize that may not be correct as you have done a great job explaining. You also made me realize that Jesus was speaking to the Jews and such. I have a ? however. In Rev 2 and 3 they are called churches-not synagogues. When has a synagogue ever been called a church? I realize the language seems to not contain the same language Paul uses as you point out. Just asking a ?. If He is indeed speaking to synagogues it makes sense due to the language. I see that this does not upset anything else such as pretrib rapture as the baby caught up is the body/church and Christ is the body so He rescues us from the tribulation period.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The 144,000 are certainly part of the bride. The word for “church” is ἐκκλησία. It means a group of people. The specific meaning depends upon context. For example, look at Acts 19.32, 39, 41. Each of these verses has ἐκκλησία translated “assembly.” A more accurate translation would be “mob,” “court,” and “crowd.” Revelation 2-3 uses the word ἐκκλησία but the meaning here is an assembly of Jews. All the Lord’s language to these assemblies is Jewish. He is warning them about overcoming during the Tribulation. If they do, they will obtain eternal life.

      1. Josh

        The seven assemblies in the Revelation include the ones at Ephesus and Laodicea. Paul’s epistle to the Ephesians is chock-a-block full of doctrine for the church (the body). How is the group at Ephesus a Jewish assembly?

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          Examine the language to the assembly at Ephesus in Revelation and Paul’s letter to the Ephesians. It is totally different. The language in Revelation is all Jewish. We have a different group of believers.

        2. Vanessa

          Hi Don, Please correct me if I am wrong but isn’t the Body of Christ in the male form and the 7 churches female. Vernon said I will need to do a Greek study on it.

          1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

            The word “body” is a neuter noun, “Christ” is a masculine noun. The word “church” is a feminine noun.

  130. Brian Nguyen

    The Church is the Bride of Christ as it is indicated in Catechism of the Catholic Church #796. The theme of Christ as Bridegroom of the Church was prepared for by the prophets and announced by John the Baptist – John 3:29. The Apostle speaks of the whole Church and of each of the faithful, as a bride “betrothed” to Christ the Lord so as to become but one spirit with him Mt 22:1-14, Cor 11:2, Cor 6:15-17. The Church is the spotless bride of the spotless Lamb Rev 22:17, Eph 1:4; 5:27.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The gospels contain nothing regarding the Church, the body of Christ. The gospels concern Israel. The error of the Roman Catholic Church is its failure to understand this and that the Church did not exist until Paul. Paul declared it was a “secret.” If a secret, it certainly did not exist in Matthew-John. Paul declared he founded the Church. See my article, Paul: Chief of Sinners? Paul taught the Church was the body of Christ, not the Bride of Christ. Believers are of the bridegroom, not the bride.

  131. Shalom

    Hello, can i ask since scripture says Jesus came for only for the lost sheep of Israel (matt15:24), we gentiles are grafted into the olive tree and what you say about Israel being the bride is true, then isn’t it also true that we are also His bride since we are part of Israel? Additionally the gates in the new City are for the 12 tribes so which gate should we enter through?
    And do you agree that the gentile Church is Israel in exile, waiting to return to Jerusalem?

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The olive tree is not Israel but God’s place of favor. It is essentially the Abrahamic covenant. Never are members of the Church, the body of Christ, called Israel. Israel is a program God began with Abraham and the Church is a program God began with Paul. Jesus’ words in Matthew 15 regard His earthly ministry. This is what Paul referred to in Romans 15.8. But the Church is a creation of Christ’s heavenly ministry. All Church doctrine was revealed to Paul from the ascended, glorified Christ. As believers, we are “children of Abraham” but this is different from Israel. Abraham was to have two sets of offspring–earthly–sand of the sea–and heavenly–stars in the heavens. The Church is the latter offspring, saved by faith alone, as was Abraham. Israel is the former offspring. Israel and Church remain separate throughout eternity, even as heaven and earth. But we are both “in Christ.”

      1. Shalom

        Can I say our Messiah came in the flesh looking for the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel? We have been scattered throughout the earth after the exile in 722 BC. But He came to redeem us, the Lost Sheep, so that we could be His people again. And that was so that He would be able to remarry us and forgive our sins. It was the only way to reunite Israel with our husband and sister Judah. So yes i understand that the proper term isn’t ‘church’ but it’s ‘house of Israel’.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          Yes, this is true. But Gentiles and Israel are two separate entities. They remain separate throughout eternity. The Abrahamic Covenant established this and Gentiles were to be blessed through Israel. But this blessing presumed an obedient Israel. But Israel disobeyed and crucified her Messiah. There was no revealed way God could bless Gentiles apart from Israel. But God in His great mercy saved Paul to become the apostle of the Gentiles. Through Paul, God created the Church, the body of Christ, in which there is no longer Jew and Gentile. When one believes Paul’s gospel (1 Corinthians 15.1-4) one no longer is Jew or Gentile but Church—a new creation. This was all new. The Church is a new program even as Israel became a new program with Abraham. Church and Israel are separate programs and remain separate throughout eternity.

  132. kingdomseek

    Eph 2:11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands—
    12 that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.
    13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
    14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation,
    15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace,
    16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity.
    We the church are not a part of Israel. He made us both one. Galatians tells us that in Christ there is no longer Jew or Gentile (Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. Gal 6:15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but a new creation. 2Co 5:17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.)
    Can you show me where Israel and the Church remain separate throughout eternity since all that are in Christ are one? (Eph 4:13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ;). There is only one Head and there is only one body. Who is the bride of Christ? I do not know. I would suggest that you read someone like Robert Govett, G.H. Lang, Pember, D.M. Panton, etc. Robert Govett read the New Testament once a week for over 50 years before he started writing. Just a suggestion. I think we should be humble enough to say about ourselves when we think we know something, If a man thinks he knows anything, he knows nothing as he ought (1Co 8:2 And if anyone thinks that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know.)

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Abraham had two lines of offspring, stars (heaven) and sand (earth). The sand spoke of Israel, the stars of Gentiles who come to God by faith. Paul connected this in Romans 4 and called believers of his gospel “children of Abraham.” Paul wrote that both are gathered in Christ (Ephesians 1.9-10) but this does not mean that both are the same. Israel is Israel and the Church is the Church. Never are Gentiles or the Church called Israel. Israel is a technical term that always refers to Jews. The Church is composed only of those who have believed Paul’s gospel.

  133. Joe

    Are the ‘Israel of God’ in Galatians Jews saved by the Kingdom Gospel? Related question: How will the residence in eternity differ between those saved under the Kingdom Gospel differ from those save under the Gospel of Grace?

    Thanks doctrine for putting up with us knuckleheads.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The “Israel of God” were Jews saved under the gospel of the kingdom. We don’t know much about eternity. The language John used in Revelation 21-22 only related to Israel. The Church is not present in Revelation 21-22 as it is not present in the rest of the book. The Church in eternity is largely a secret. We only know we are joint-heirs with Christ, will govern angels, and we have heavenly citizenship.

  134. Joe

    Thank you,

    Follow up questions if I may,

    What/where is the New Jerusalem now?

    Do you think it’s completed? (I think it could be completed in a split second with a spoken word but I still wonder)

    Will it eventually settle onto the New Earth? “I will prepare a place for you”….are these preparations spoken of related to the NJ?

    Who will live/utilize the NJ?

    Is the NJ the Bride often spoken of and sometimes associated with the Church? (both are mentioned in the same verse) (Revelation 21:9-10)

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      I take it New Jerusalem is in heaven and Jesus’ statement of preparation probably refers to it. Everything about the NJ is Jewish as indicated by Revelation 21-22. It is spoken of as the Bride because it is associated with the Bride, Israel. We do not know what relationship the Church will have with the NJ. It is a heavenly city which comes to earth.

  135. David Dean

    Hi Doctrine,
    In regards to the church saints having a heavenly position and reading 1 Thessalonian 4:17

    “Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord”.

    What is your interpretation of “ever with the Lord” if Christ returns to earth to conquer and to reign for a thousand years and the body of Christ is still in heaven? Are you saying they are separated? I understand the body of Christ is “one” with Him therefore wherever Christ (the head) is so will be the body also.
    Thanks David Dean.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      We have to define what constitutes being “with the Lord.” Does it mean we are next to Him, a mile away, 100 miles away, 1000 miles, etc.? What does “far” mean in the future? How “far” is heaven and earth from the redeemed with resurrection bodies? So can the Church be in heaven and still be with the Lord who is on earth?

  136. Joe

    2 Tim 2:12 says we’ll ‘reign with him’. Is the reign spoken of here the 1000 year reign? Why wouldn’t it be?….so maybe the question is what the definition of ‘with’ is.? Maybe during the 1000 year reign Christ is in charge, strictly ruling those (flesh and blood) who have entered into the Kingdom, and we are ruling with Christ not only performing assigned tasks here on terra firma but also tasks throughout the Universe with a body not unlike that of Christ’s on earth after the Crucifixion. Comments please Doctrine.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Christ will rule all things in heaven and earth and we know we will judge/rule angels (1 Corinthians 6.3). Angels are in heaven. We’re not told if we will also rule on earth.

  137. Cliff

    I appreciate your diligence in studying the word. I also understand that you are following a very traditional dispensational interpretation of scripture. I don’t fault you in that, only recognize that it is one of many philosophical approaches to interpreting scripture that definitely brings its own set of presuppositions.
    My only comment to make with regards to all the discussion here about the bride and the church is regarding your continual reference to the church being a new concept with Paul and that it was the mystery which was hidden. I would disagree with that. The mystery that was hidden was Christ in you and this was already in seminal form in Jesus’ words in John 17 vv. 23 and 26 – “I in them.”
    I think the bigger problem comes in when we start trying to understand/interpret scripture from the wrong starting place. God’s dealing with man are not defined in His dealings with Israel, nor do His dealings with Israel stand independent or outside of His original or ultimate intention. We must go back to “before the foundation of the world” to discover this and when we follow that trajectory all the way through then we will stay on the correct path and all these other things, i.e., Israel, the church, the bride, etc., play their intended role in an otherwise much great scheme that exists in God’s heart and is fulfilled only in Christ.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      What was known was the Holy Spirit indwelling believers. This was part of the prophetic program and the New Covenant. But nothing in prophecy even hinted at the Church, in which Jew and Gentile would be equal in Christ. The prophets never mentioned it, Jesus did not disclose it in His earthly ministry, and Peter and the rest of the Twelve had no knowledge of it. We only find the Church, the body of Christ, revealed by Paul and Paul declared it was a secret. If you will do a study on μυστήριον you will see that pretty much everything Paul wrote was a secret. It was new theology. No one knew anything about the Church, the Rapture, the blinding Israel, salvation by faith alone, the significance of Christ’s death and resurrection in terms of salvation before Paul. Failure to understand Paul’s secrets means a failure to understand Church theology. This is the great error of Christendom and it is a 1,900 year problem.

      1. Cliff

        Thanks for the reply. I think we are on a whole different plane from one another. The is a great purpose in God than Israel, the Church, etc. These are all means by which God the Father will have His desire. His desire is a family and the Son’s desire is a body and the Spirit’s desire is a temple. This is the trajectory that I alluded to. I have done plenty study on “mysterion.” I have a PhD in New Testament. The mystery was not the church. And the mystery did not belong to Paul. The mystery was hidden by God in Christ and has now been revealed. The mystery is the reality of what God desired from the very beginning, that Adam and Eve would eat from the tree of Life and experience the indwelling, abiding, reality of divine life.

        1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

          The word μυστήριον does not mean “mystery.” “Mystery” is a transliteration, not a translation. The word means “secret.” Paul clearly stated the Church was a secret, the Rapture was a secret, his gospel was a secret, the blinding of Israel was a secret, etc. This is not controversial if words have any meaning. No one knew these things until Paul revealed them. Paul wrote that he began the Church, even as Abraham began Israel. As such, all Church doctrine comes from Paul and is found in his letters from Romans through Philemon. Unless one understands these things one cannot understand Church theology.

          1. Cliff

            I agree with you on nearly every point. I know the word means a secret though semantically there’s really no difference. AGAIN, and you haven’t responded to this, the secret did not originate with Paul. The fact that it was a secret directly infers it existed before him. It was hidden from ages past. So the only one that could do such a thing is God. Since the fall God kept His ultimate intention as a secret. He then revealed the secret through Paul. But the point is that God did/does not have two minds and two economies. That’s where church theology goes off the tracks. God is unified perfectly in His dealings with man.
            In addition, I am completely confident that God is not concerned with our church theology! He is only concerned with what He has always been concerned with-Christ in ALL! Obviously there is much to say with regards to that but I will leave it.
            All the secrets that you refer to in Paul are simply the many realities contained in Christ and they have always existed in Him.

            1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

              “Mystery” and “secret” connote different things. A secret is something hidden, unrevealed. A mystery is that which is strange or weird. What Paul called “secrets” were things previously hidden, unknown before him. No one before Paul taught the Church, the body of Christ, the Rapture, the gospel he proclaimed, or Israel’s judicial blinding. Paul received these secrets directly from the risen Christ. As such, Paul is to the Church what Abraham, Moses, and the prophets were to Israel. Paul founded the Church and is the source of all its doctrine. No Church doctrine exists outside his letters. Paul’s secrets are to the Church what God’s covenants were to Israel. They were the vehicles through which God revealed truths to the Church (secrets) and to Israel (covenants). Beginning with the Abrahamic covenant, God revealed His plan concerning Israel. They were His mediators. God would no longer deal directly with the human race. All His revelation to mankind would be mediated through a covenant people, the Jews. And they would be the source of all God’s blessing to Gentiles. God revealed no plan to bless Gentiles if Israel rejected Him. His plan of blessing assumed Israel’s obedience. But the nation rejected Christ. The next thing on the prophetic timeline was the Day of the Lord, God’s judgment. However, in His mercy, God saved Paul to be the apostle of the Gentiles. Paul became proxy Israel, i.e., believing Israel, whereby God could bless Gentiles apart from disobedient, national Israel. The great error of Christendom for over 1,900 years is seeing Paul as simply a 13th apostle, an add-on to the Twelve. But Paul was an apostle of a whole new order—a new creation—the Church, the body of Christ. Everything Paul wrote was new theology. No one had every heard any of it before Paul. This is why Peter, even at the end of his life, wrote that Paul’s theology was difficult to comprehend (2 Peter 3.15-16). Perhaps some of my other articles would make this more clear to you: Paul: Chief of Sinners?, Paul’s “Mystery”, The Great Hinge, The Church (the Body of Christ), A Conversation with Paul, A Conversation with Peter.

              1. Cliff

                Thanks. I totally get you. I simply think you are completely on the natural level with all this and therefore you can only interpret things along the natural line. Your interpretation of things is not bad. You are just missing a huge revelation that Christ has been the entire point from before the foundation of the world. Your failing to see all the natural things in their proper place. It’s just a bit forced which is what theology always ends up doing. God can’t be packaged into tidy teachings. everything is not about Israel and the church. Everything is ONLY about Christ. It was from the beginning and always will be. God has never adjusted His purpose. He simply accommodates man’s fallenness. His purpose has never changed. It is just easy to see it that way when we operate solely on the natural level.

                1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

                  All Scripture is God-breathed. Understanding the details of how God has laid out His purposes is not “on the natural level.” I understand God is bringing together all things in Christ. That’s the macro picture. But we are commanded to understand how God is doing this (2 Timothy 2.15). And how do we know God is gathering everything in Christ? From Paul. No other writer revealed this. Paul wrote of τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (Galatians 4.4). This related to His purpose for Israel. But he also wrote of τοῦ πληρώματος τῶν καιρῶν (Ephesians 1.10). This was a totally new revelation in which God would gather both Israel and the Church in Christ. God is interested in details and we should be too. Time and times are different and serious students of the Scriptures must get into the details. While not everything is about Israel and the Church, everything since Genesis 12 is about Israel and the Church. These two programs constitute the bulk of God’s purposes. I encourage you to become a serious exegete of the Scriptures and understand the details, the meat of God’s word, and not just focus on the big picture. There’s more to the Scriptures than you seem to think. You will not be disappointed.

  138. Cliff

    Thanks again for your delegent response. I would encourage you to perhaps be a little more tolerant (loving) in your judgement of my ability to exegete scripture. It is no small thing for me to be examined by you or anyone else. I will reserve my judgement until Christ returns and rewards each according to the intentions of the heart.
    I think the fundamental difference between us is that you are quite happy to create theology and to allow it to define your understanding of God. I’ve been down that road and found out there’s no life. But that is just my experience.
    I wouldn’t say my focus is only on the big picture. I would say it is the only picture that matters to the Father. I just don’t think you have enough of a Chrstological emphasis in your interpretation of all the scripture.
    I leave you with one provoking question -Is it possible to know God and to have a personal salvation experience with Jesus and live a fruitful life unto God without having access to a bible?
    Enjoy the journey. I am confident we will meet one day. Then we will know as we have been fully known.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      I am discovering theology, not creating it. I have little tolerance when I look around Christendom and see the ignorance, error, and dearth of knowledge of God. Those whom God have blessed with theological training should be teaching people the details and richness of God’s glory and purposes. You seem to have little interest in these specifics and to be blunt, it appears you are just lazy. God has given us the Bible to know Him. If all God wanted us to know was that everything would be summed up in Christ God would have given us a Bible with a single page. We are commanded to study the Scriptures. Not to do so is to disobey God. Have you forgotten Jesus replied to Satan, “Man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God?” Paul declared the Scriptures are God-breathed. They give spiritual life even as God breathed life into Adam. Again, I would encourage you to be an obedient believer and teach the details. They all concern Christ.

  139. Cliff

    Again I agree. I have given my life to do just that. I have really not shared any of my beliefs about issues that I have studied in depth over the years. I am quite “confident” in what the Lord has shown me about many things in His word. I just find your strong dispensational framework a bit hard to swallow. I just don’t see the lines drawn the same way you do. I am sure your theological training at DTS has somethibg to do with this. I much rather prefer a more progressive interpretation of scripture as I have been trying to share with you. I believe God has been very intentional and many times accommodating with men throughout history. But His intention and plan from since the foundation of the world (Eph 1) has always been the same. The way you talk and interpret scripture it seems very clear that you see some type of gear change or split in the road and I just don’t see it that way. I believe in progressive fulfillment and that has been accomplished in Christ. I also don’t believe Romans 11:25-26 is futuristic.
    I also believe more important than understanding all the details of so many theological issues we need to be doing all we do to present men complete in Christ. If that was enough for Paul then it’s enough for me. What that looks like is a much more productive conversation.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      Here’s the problem: When Paul wrote his gospel was a secret, the blinding of Israel was a secret, the Rapture was a secret, the Church was a secret, do you believe him? That these things were secrets is not debatable, the text is clear. The only question is whether what Paul wrote is true or false. I’ve received many comments from people who adamantly declare Paul was a false teacher. They don’t believe a word he wrote. So there we have it. If Paul was God’s man we have him revealing new theology—things God had kept hidden. And that is exactly what he claimed. He wrote he began the Church, the body of Christ. I discuss this in Paul: Chief of Sinners? The same is true for Paul’s gospel. He called it “my gospel.” He declared in Ephesians 6.19 “the secret of the gospel.” The gospel of the kingdom was not a secret. But Christ’s dying for our sins and rising from the dead—believing this for salvation was a secret. No one proclaimed this before Paul. Not one verse of Scripture will support a contrary view. I really do not care one whit for dispensationsationalism or any other theological system and I did not learn any of this at DTS. What I care about is what the Scriptures state. And my fight is against 1,900 years of bad theology. Paul wrote in his last letter that all Asia had departed from him. Do you understand what this means? It means all the churches—Colossae, Ephesus, Galatia, Psidia Antioch, Lystra, Derbe, Iconium, Laodicea, etc. abandoned Paul’s teachings. What replaced it? Paul’s letter to the Galatians describes it. He also has passages in his other letters (2 Corinthians, Colossians, etc.) which decribe what happened. If you have read the Didache you can see this. Not one word of Paul is in it. It was written about 100 A.D. and is an excellent example of early church heresy. And this poison has infected Christendom for the past 1,900 years. Christianity today is what Judaism had become in the Lord’s day: tradition has replaced the Scriptures. But if one will actually read the Scriptures, one will find they tell a wholly different story than tradition. Paul’s secrets are the key to Christian theology. They are for the Church what Israel’s covenants were to Jewish theology. And who exalts Christ more than Paul?

  140. Chad

    Hi Cliff,

    I just have a simple question and I don’t want to sound diligent in asking it…would you respond with a sentence or two stating the gospel that you trust for your salvation? I really think this will cut right to the point of interest.

    Thank you and doctrine for the mind engaging discussion.

    1. Cliff

      Hi Chad.
      The gospel that I trust for my
      salvation is faith in Jesus Christ that He is the Son of God, that He lived as a man, that He died on the cross for my sins, that He was buried and raised and ascended to heaven, that He was the last Adam putting to death the Adamic race and was the second man, a life-giving spirit, heavenly and that through this faith I am incorporated into His body. Because of this I share in His cricifixion experiencing the death of my old man in Adam, death to the law and a complete rectification of my disposition to live a self-centered, selfish life to living a self-giving, others centered life of love which reflects the character and nature of Jesus Christ and the Father. This is only possible because I have been placed in Christ by God and Christ has become for me wisdom from God, righteousness, sanctification and redemption and the life that I live I only live by faith in Him who gave Himself life for me.
      Maybe that’s more than you wanted but it is a start. I would say for sure it is a Pauline gospel at the core. But what I struggle with is to say that no other NT writers had any of this same revelation. I totally believe Paul is the man. :) But not at the expense that Peter or John had any revelation into the same matters.

  141. Matthew

    Hello all!
    As I read the comments above i think that there is possibly some over or misguided thinking. I’m not saying I agree or disagree with any post, but my comment is to offer a view that I don’t think has been mentioned. It’s plain in the scriptures that Christ said He came for the “lost sheep of the house of Israel” as well as forbidding Peter, John, ect. from going to the gentiles. So, we then must ask ourselves when did the gospel go to the gentiles and who was the messenger that brought it? Once those questions are answered this debate is complete…In Christ!! Peace and blessing to all!!

  142. courtney king

    This is a great article and as a former “baptist” for 60 years, the “baptist briders” will have trouble with this article. Keep up the good work and thank you. Peace and grace

  143. Chad

    Cliff and Matthew, I like those words and agree that under this dispensation we are saved by the gospel of His grace by faith alone, and this gospel was given directly to Paul by our savior Yahshua. Paul argued and faught against the 12 “pillars/apostles” to defend the major differences in his gospel versus the NT gospel Yahshua gave to the 12. If it wasn’t for Peter’s support, who knows what James (Yahshua’s brother, not the Apostle) would have done with Paul’s gospel.

    And I don’t want to argue, but I want to submit the idea that Paul was THE apostle (one sent out) to share a message/gospel that “was apart from the covenants of Israel”, so Paul is not a “NT writer” or a NT apostle. Paul was not instructed to share Yahshua’s “New Testament/Covenant” gospel that He offered to Israel — Yahshua already did that and commission the 12 to continue to share it. It was rejected, but Yahshua will fulfill this NT/Covenant in the future just like He fulfilled the Law Covenant.

    But until He returns to do this, we are not under a New Testament and Paul is not a NT writer/apostle. In fact in this dispensation, there is no jew or gentile (there is no Israel) so by definition there can be no covenant. We are A NEW secret CREATURE — The Body of Christ. Paul is the apostle of this secret gospel kept from the beginning so that Lucifer would not be able to intercept it.

    Blessings brothers. I’ll see you in the clouds…quickly!

  144. JaredMithrandir

    I am not a Dispensation in the strictest sense, this complete separation of Church and Israel I find offensive, Paul’s point in Romans 11 and Galatians is we are all Grafted into the Tree of Israel and made Abraham’s Seed.

    But there is some distinction. New Jerusalem is made up entirely of Church Imagery, quoting Paul’s teaching of the 12 Disciples as 12 Pillars. But in Ezekiel 40-48 New Jerusalem is not all of Israel.

    You say the Bride is Israel not the Church, but don’t say where The Church is in this spiritual Family. Well Psalm 45 depicts the Messiah having both a Bride and Children. Isaiah 53 also says the Suffering Servant will have Seed. John 1 teaches Jesus came to give us the ability to become Sons of God. I have argued on my Blog that the Man Child of Revelation 12 is The Church not Jesus.

    You act like being the Body of Christ contradicts being the Bride. But Jesus taught that Husband and Wife are made one Flesh. Eve was made form a piece of Adam’s Flesh.

    The Body of Christ is even more synonymous with The Temple of God however, as in John 2 Jesus called his Body the Temple. Is in the Temple/Body that I believe the Bride and the Children are together.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The olive tree of Romans 11 is not Israel but the Abrahamic covenant, God’s place of favor. See my article, The Olive Tree. The Church is the Church and Israel is Israel. The Church is never called Israel. Israel is a technical term which only refers to the offspring of Jacob. Members of the Church, the body of Christ, are called children of Abraham, because Abraham was saved by faith alone. That is different from Israel. The New Jerusalem has no Church imagery. The 12 foundations, gates, etc. is imagery of Israel. The Twelve were apostles of Israel, not apostles of the Church. They had no ministry to Gentiles. That was Paul’s domain (Romans 11.13; Galatians 2.7-9). The Church is nowhere present in Revelation. Revelation depicts the Day of the Lord. Paul explicitly taught that the Church is not present in the Day of the Lord (1 Thessalonians 1.10; 5.9; 2 Thessalonians 2.2-3; Romans 5.9). Sound theology must be based upon what the Bible says, not upon what it does not say.

      1. Steven Hill

        Abraham was justified by faith, but it was not “faith alone” James uses Abraham as an example of being justified by God in James 2:21-23 and then comes to the logical conclusion in v. 24, “You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.”

  145. Joshua

    Great article! This has really helped me out and makes so much sense.
    It’s great to see things from a different/new perspective.
    Thanks for your insights!
    Be Blessed.

  146. Steven Hill

    The church is spoken of in several different metaphorical terms. One would not say we are the flock of God with Christ as our chief Shepherd but not also the body of the Shepherd. This sounds confusing if you don’t realize that multiple metaphors can be used to illustrate various aspects of the same people. Based on your argument we could easily say, well then how could the sheep be also the body of the Shepherd? Revelation was written in code language (apocalyptic literature). The Christians of the 1st century were able to decode it because the code was terminology from the Old Testament. For instance, when Babylon is used, it is not about Babylon, it is a reference to Rome. And when Israel is mentioned, it is a reference to Christians. Most false doctrine is established when someone decides to misuse figurative literature.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      The Church is the body of Christ. The Church is not spoken of as “sheep.” That is a designation that applies to Israel. Revelation is written in figurative language but behind all figures is a literal sense. Without such discipline any interpretation is possible. That is why there is so much confusion regarding understanding Revelation. Depart from a literal hermeneutic and you have chaos. Most of the commentaries on Revelation are worthless in terms of understanding what the book means for most of the writers have abandoned the literal sense. Tyndale, the greatest of the Reformers, wrote, “God’s literal sense is spiritual.” See my article, Hermeneutics. Babylon is Babylon, not Rome. I agree, most false doctrine comes from the misuse of figurative literature. The misuse is to not understand that behind the figures is literal reality.

  147. Anna

    The wedding motif is about God reuniting with mankind via the spirit. Adam separated us and Jesus came to reconcile us again so that we could commune directly with our Father without the need of Mediators, Prophets, Priests, Teachers, etc. Matt 23:8-10. The kingdom came in the first century. ‘My kingdom does not come with your observance; it is WITHIN YOU.’ Luke 17:20-24. There is only ONE FAMILY of God and only ONE TEACHER, the Lord Jesus, who is the spirit. 2 Cor 3:17. If you have been reconciled and have his spirit then the marriage has taken place. The old has passed; the new has come.
    The old was seen, temporary,external, of the flesh, earthly.
    The new is unseen, eternal, internal, of the spirit.

    His kingdom has come. It is spiritual. Adam separated us from our Father and we were DEAD spiritually. Jesus came to give us life and give it more abundantly by destroying death (spiritual separation) and bringing light and immortality to us.

    The 144,000 Firstfruits sat as a Queen sits, ‘at the right hand of power’ (positionally) and reigned with Christ judging the 12 tribes of Israel. There are no more tribes of Israel. For one to own land in Judea one had to have written proof of ancestrial birthright and all those records were kept in the temple and burned with HER judgment, 70 AD. Israel sat as a Queen, at the right hand of power, (she mediated betweeen God and mankind) until her unfaithfulnness (harlotry) caused her expulsion and death. Jesus sat in that position until all his enemies were put under his feet. Is 66:6. Then the 144,000 firstfruits sat in that position with him judging the 12 tribes. There are no more tribes of Israel. No land was ever ‘Israel’ until the zionist state of ’48. Originally it was Canaan, then Judea, then Palestine and in 48 people claiming to be ‘Jews’ wanted it to be their homeland. There was never any ethnic ‘Jew.’ One became a ‘Jew’ by conversion and observing the laws of Moses. Many peoples became ‘Jews.’ The Persians during Queen Esther’s rule; the King Izates and his mother; the Edomites, Esau’s descendants, the Herodian Dynasty and people from all nationalities became ‘Jews.’
    “Isreal is my firstborn SON.’ Isreal has always been a people. Abel was not a ‘Jew’ nor ‘Israelite,’ and netiher was Noah, Seth or Abraham. Both Esau and Jacob were ‘goyim’ and had the same parents and ancestry. All Noah’s sons had the same parents and ancestry. God is not partial to race, gender or ancestrial birthright. We receive our inheritance by Faith, as Abraham did. The eternal covenant was the promised SEED in the Garden of Eden and ratified with Abraham and his SEED. One SEED, the Messiah. Paul addresses this issue in Gal chapters 3 and 4. The law came 400+ years after God ratified the covenant seed with Abraham. The covenant at Mt Sinai was conditional. The new covenant is not conditional but made and kept by God himself and all who have faith are Abraham’s offspring. Abraham was looking for a city not built by human hands. That city came down from heaven in the first century as a spiritual city, the kingdom of God residing in us. Lk 17:20-24

    If we had done what Jesus said in Matt 23:8-10 we would not have been deceived by religious indoctrination.

    1. doctrinedoctrine Post author

      If you really believe this, throw away your Bible. Nothing you have written is in the Bible. Peter addressed Israel at Pentecost and James wrote to the twelve tribes (James 1.1). Beginning with Abraham, God promised Israel a land and gave the boundaries as the Nile, the Mediterranean, and the Euphrates. If the Jews do no inherit this land God is a liar and will cease being God. Jesus’ ministry was to Jews and he was recognized as the King of the Jews. God has promised that Israel, the Jews, will last forever (Jeremiah 31.35-37). The kingdom of God is a physical, political kingdom. This is what hundreds of passages in the OT declare. The text about observation and “within you” is a terrible translation and misses the point Jesus was making. What Jesus said was, “the kingdom of God does not require you to strain your eyes. It is in your midst.” That is, the King, Jesus the Christ, stood before them. See my article, The Kingdom of God.

  148. George

    Hello Bro Don, di you know of any good rightly divided commentaries of the song of Solomon, all denominations seem to see this book as the body of Christ beingvtye bride of Christ, which is false, i think it is the jewish remnant, what is your summary of the song of solomon, i can’t wait for you to right a paper on the song of solomon, if someone is capable i am sure you are :)

  149. Majo

    Jacob loved Rachel and served seven years for her. I understand that to represent Christ having Israel in mind as his bride of choice. However, in the ways of God, Rachel was withheld and he was given the less attractive Leah; afterwards he got Rachel as well. I understand Leah to represent Christ’s gentile wife until he gets his first love Rachel or Israel. Joseph is similar; while rejected by his brethren (Israel) he is given Asnath as wife. So you can understand why the Church, His companion during His rejection is assumed to be his bride. But I can’t think that Christ has two wives as Paul says three times ‘husband of one wife’. So I’m trying to understand how an old testament type of a gentile wife becomes His body, and He has one bride, Israel

Leave a Reply to doctrine Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *