[fromtheotherside]

Everyone here knows our intereptation for this verse.  As everyone only says we are wrong no one cares to give an explanation. That's very cowardly, this is a debate, Joshua(not attacking the person but method) likes to say, study it yourself, but that defeats the purpose of debating.  

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Yup. However the NIV bible is not as specific and as detailed as the NKJV one. For example, in Rev22:12 (NIV), "Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me.." the word "me" which talks about Jesus isnt Cap. However in the NKJV bible, the word "Me" is in Caps.

Similarly to the verse, WMSCOG always used. Gen1:26 (NIV), "Then God said, "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness,…"". The word "us" & "our" is not in Caps as well. However in the NKJV bible, both are in Caps.

The thing is this, we must be open to study the bible in various versions. It helps us better understand God's word and to look at The Word in different angles and perspectives. The bible says that God's Word brings forth life, a single verse can mean different things to different people under different circumstances! That is the beauty in His Word. The Spirit will reveal to us when we are hungry to recieve it.

If one just choose to stick and solely believe from one version of the bible than might as well study the hebrew language and real the hebrew bible. Its even more accurate cause the bible is originally written in that language.

[fromtheotherside]

emil wrote:

I'm bumping this up with a scripture verse. I would like to see what FTOS and friends have to say about this one. I am just putting it in here without comment.

Jn 7:37-39 says:

37 On the last and greatest day of the festival, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice, “Let anyone who is thirsty come to me and drink. 38 Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them.” 39 By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified.

Actually this is a very good verse to back up the truth.  Living water can only flow from God, Not a building or even men unless they recieve the Spirit( but the spirit which is God is the source not the man)  Therefore the two sources of the water of LIfe is the Spirit and the Bride!  And as you have proven Emil, the source can only be God. Thanks for this verse! Surprise surprise! lolz, Emil you're a comedian

[fromtheotherside]

jnj723 wrote:

I agree with you that additions to the bible within the amplified version are not part of the original scripture.  It does not mean that we should take it likely either. There has to be sufficient studies and certainty from theologians and bible scholars for them to include this additions to the bible to help us or at least layman like me to understand the bible better.

Capitalization in the NKJV bible has always been consistant through out that it refers to God. In this case, the word "bride" which is a metaphor of a living being or a group of living beings is not Caps, it speaks volume. Btw, the NKJV version is the closest translated english bible to the original hebrew one, if we are talking about accuracy of translation.

So while we should not take it to the extreme of totally reliant on these little details, we should also not totally ignore and say it isnt important. take it with balance.

The NT where the Spirit and the Bride come from is not written in Hebrew buddy, is Greek. The same theologians and "bible scholars" who don't keep Sabbath!  If they knew the Bride was God, then they would have worshipped as we do, just as the Jews didn't accept Christ , being a Scholar or a pharisee or a Sadducee does not make you always correct! Sorry buddy, you better go back to the drawing board. 

[Questioninginla]

fromtheotherside wrote:

The NT where the Spirit and the Bride come from is not written in Hebrew buddy, is Greek. The same theologians and "bible scholars" who don't keep Sabbath!  If they knew the Bride was God, then they would have worshipped as we do, just as the Jews didn't accept Christ , being a Scholar or a pharisee or a Sadducee does not make you always correct! Sorry buddy, you better go back to the drawing board.  

Anyone else notice a pattern where there is always an excuse, everyone else is always wrong, outsiders are bad, blame the victim, and so on, ad nauseam?

Hint:

Moonies

JW

Scientology

[fromtheotherside]

Disturbed wrote:

@jnj723…you bring about a good point mentioning that the "bride" in rev 22:17 isnt capitalized. It's the same in the NIV version, which is most popularly used within WMSCOG. I always noticed that. I questioned it when I was a new member and they blew it off like they do everything.

 The more I read your replies, I just … wow…. just, speechless, can I drop kick your head just once?  Please, just once. I won't kick that hard.

[fromtheotherside]

Questioninginla wrote:

fromtheotherside wrote:

The NT where the Spirit and the Bride come from is not written in Hebrew buddy, is Greek. The same theologians and "bible scholars" who don't keep Sabbath!  If they knew the Bride was God, then they would have worshipped as we do, just as the Jews didn't accept Christ , being a Scholar or a pharisee or a Sadducee does not make you always correct! Sorry buddy, you better go back to the drawing board.  

Anyone else notice a pattern where there is always an excuse, everyone else is always wrong, outsiders are bad, blame the victim, and so on, ad nauseam?

Hint:

Moonies

JW

Scientology

Anyone else notice a pattern explanatory attribution, interpersonal attribution, everyone else is always the bad guy, and they don't see it's their own fault but blame on physical conditions, making perceptual errors that lead to biased interpretations and so on?

Hint:

Victim mentality

Attributional bias

Naive realism

 

[genny]

fromtheotherside wrote:

emil wrote:

I'm bumping this up with a scripture verse. I would like to see what FTOS and friends have to say about this one. I am just putting it in here without comment.

Jn 7:37-39 says:

37 On the last and greatest day of the festival, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice, “Let anyone who is thirsty come to me and drink. 38 Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them.” 39 By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified.

Actually this is a very good verse to back up the truth.  Living water can only flow from God, Not a building or even men unless they recieve the Spirit( but the spirit which is God is the source not the man)  Therefore the two sources of the water of LIfe is the Spirit and the Bride!  And as you have proven Emil, the source can only be God. Thanks for this verse! Surprise surprise! lolz, Emil you're a comedian

Yes, God is the source of the water of life.  Notice in Rev. 22:1 it comes from the throne of God.  Notice also in Rev. 22:17 the Spirit and the bride invite people to "come", but also the one who hears invites people to "come."  If the invitation to "come" indicates the speaker is God, then the ones who hear and say "come" must also be God(s).

Therefore, the invitation to come is not an indication of the God-ness of the speaker.  The one who invites others to "come" is not necessarily the source.

[fromtheotherside]

Get it straight, the first to say come is the Spirit and the bride, they are the initiating party.  No one before them.  Except Jesus and Jehovah, who are God.  That means they are Godly.  the second is those who hear and say come.  They are the ones who hear it from the source the Spirit and the bride, quite simple.

[144000]

Genny,

You know, except for where it explicitely says that the spirit and the bride are the ones who are saying "come".

And except where a few previous posters neglected to mention the vast list of reasons why the bride cannot be a pre-existing church, or church members, in the context of that particular story.

And except where we aren't allowed to believe that she is God but we have to have our biblical "interpretations" dictated by you guys.

[144000]

Well said FTOS. As it is written God will appear when he rebuilds Zion, and he has shown us his bride whom has only now made Herself ready.

[fromtheotherside]

Also emil proved the Spirit is the source with John 7: 37 and you have prove the Bride, Jerusalem is the source,  So yes the sources of the water of life must be God, Amen! 

[fromtheotherside]

Thanks 144000,  I was reading up on Victom Mentality, I think we should start a thread on that.  They fit the Characteristic perfectly, also Attributional bias, like the host of this website and a few, non ex members have on this website.

[genny]

fromtheotherside wrote:

Also emil proved the Spirit is the source with John 7: 37 and you have prove the Bride, Jerusalem is the source,  So yes the sources of the water of life must be God, Amen! 

The throne of God is the source, and the water flows through Jerusalem (Rev. 22:1-2).

144000 wrote:

Genny,

You know, except for where it explicitely says that the spirit and the bride are the ones who are saying "come".

And except where a few previous posters neglected to mention the vast list of reasons why the bride cannot be a pre-existing church, or church members, in the context of that particular story.

Can you please give a summary, of why you think the bride cannot be the church in this particular context?  I know the reasons have come up previously, but a list of points in one place here would be very useful.

[fromtheotherside]

genny wrote:

fromtheotherside wrote:

Also emil proved the Spirit is the source with John 7: 37 and you have prove the Bride, Jerusalem is the source,  So yes the sources of the water of life must be God, Amen! 

The throne of God is the source, and the water flows through Jerusalem (Rev. 22:1-2).

144000 wrote:

Genny,

You know, except for where it explicitely says that the spirit and the bride are the ones who are saying "come".

And except where a few previous posters neglected to mention the vast list of reasons why the bride cannot be a pre-existing church, or church members, in the context of that particular story.

Can you please give a summary, of why you think the bride cannot be the church in this particular context?  I know the reasons have come up previously, but a list of points in one place here would be very useful.

Actualy from within Jerusalem, where the throne of God lies.  The throne of God being in Jerusalem that is where God dwells, So Jerusalem is very important don't you think?

[genny]

FTOS, how about that list of objections to the church being the bride in the context of Revelation?  I think your objections are blocking your even considering the possibility of the bride being the church, so I think we should talk about that.

Here, I'll start the list for you.  You can correct or add to it…

The wmscog says the bride cannot be the church in Revelations because:

1.  In a wedding there are the groom, the bride, and the guests.  The church can't be both the bride and the guests at the wedding in Revelation.  If Christians are the guests, then the church cannot be the bride too.

2.  The bride comes down from heaven.  The church is on earth.  The church cannot come down from heaven if it is still on earth.

3.  The bride gives the water of life.  Since God is the source of the water of life, then the bride must be God.  The church cannot give the water of life, only God.

Are there any more?  Have I represented these objections accurately?

 

[144000]

Genny,

We believe that Zion will be rebuilt in the last days, because the bible excplicitely mentions that part. Thus, it is impossible for any pre-existing church to be true, let alone be the bride, because such a church has not made herself ready yet.

But lets say that a pre-existing church will BECOME ready and transform into the true church.

Well, that doesn't make sense with the parable of the wedding banquet, because the saints are not the bridegroom's wife, they are the attendants of the bridegroom in the context of the wedding parable: "The attendants of the bridegroom cannot mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them"

If the church or the saints were the bride then Christ would have said "The wife of the bridegroom cannot mourn as long as she is with the bridegroom" So we must not confuse the context. The bride is not the saints, and the bride is not a church.

Also Jerusalem descends from heaven to the earth, not the other way around. No, a literal church is not going to crash into earth.

Also It is not a man-made church erected on earth either.

Also if you want to insist the interpretation to be a man made church, you must first see the appearance of God who rebuilds it even then.

Also we believe Daniel testifies about the riegn of the beast up until the french revolution "dethroning" and "arrest" of the Pope. So any church founded before that time is straight out of the question, as are any churches which emulate the changed set times and laws of the beast after this time.

So if you want to tell me, in these last days, that you are in church, and the church is the bride, then your church had better be a new one, God must have appeared to build it, and it cannot follow any of the beast's teachings. If I were to keep an open mind.

But I have seen the prophecy come to pass thanks to the grace of God, and God who is Jesus came with his New Name and did show us his bride. So all the open-minded thinking in the world can't compare to denying the actual fulfillment.

There are more but if this is not enough for you than seek more answers at Zion with group leaders and a Pastor.

[144000]

Also what FTOS said.

[emil]

@FTOS – You either have severely limited comprehension skills or you just want to blind yourself to the fact. Please read the verses I have quoted.

Jesus says rivers of living water will flow from the believers. Scripture goes on to clarify that the living water is the Holy Spirit. Such a simple verse and see what you are making of it. Your attempts at putting words in my mouth are pitiable.

[1004]

Emil, it's rude to attack people personally. Making personal comments, does not help your case.  Fromtheotherside has explained your verse well, and you have not.  He made it plain and simple but you refuse to look at his post.  

Emil says: "Scripture goes on to clarify that the living water is the Holy Spirit"  You keep answer and contradicting your own interpretation and you don't even see it, even though Ftos made it clear to you.  Please go and look it over and try to get away from your own set mind because that is what is blocking you from understanding.

[Simon]

LOL. Oh you’re serious