|
(from An Alphabetical Analysis by Charles Welch)
Dr. R. A. Hadden wrote:
"It is assumed almost universally that the Church of the present dispensation is at once the 'Body of Christ' and 'the Bride. . . Traditional theology, unscriptural hymnology, amazing disregard for
|
Click here if you would like to download this article.
|
correct interpretation, intolerant zeal for dogmatic human opinions together with careless, defective instruction, have
united for generations in perpetuating a phase of teaching possessing no foundation in or authority from Holy Scripture and perpetrating a system that plunges multitudes of believers in
dire confusion concerning the plan, purpose and program of God for 'the church which is His Body' as distinct from the Divine purpose concerning another outcalling known as 'the Bride, the Lamb's wife.'"
Sir Robert Anderson wrote:
In the Patmos visions we read of 'The Bride, the Lamb's wife,' but 'the Bride of Christ' is unknown to Scripture . . . With the close of the Baptist's ministry, both the Bride and the
Lamb disappear from the New Testament until we reach the Patmos visions. In Revelation 21, the angel summoning the Seer to behold 'the Bride' the Lamb's wife, and he showed him
'the Holy Jerusalem descending out of heaven from God.' The twelve gates of the city bear the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel, and on the twelve foundations are
'the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb' . . . it is the city for which Abraham looked . . . These apostles of the Bride are not the apostles who were given after the Ascension for
the building up of the Body of Christ--the Apostles of this Christian dispensation, chief among whom was Paul. They are the twelve apostles of the Lord's earthly ministry to Israel
, who shall sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:28)."
These two quotations contain enough to make the present investigation both serious and imperative. We have
already seen, in the article entitled THE BODY, sufficient evidence for believing that the Church thus denominated in
Ephesians 1:22, 23, is unique, is entirely dissassociated from the hope and calling of Israel, and was indeed hidden in
the mind of God, unrevealed even in His Word, until the present dispensation of the Mystery followed the dismissal of Israel in Acts 28.
If we call upon the O.T. to bear a witness to the Church which is His BODY, the answer is silence. Such a
company and such a relationship is unknown. If, however, we call upon the O.T. to bear a witness to a company of
redeemed, that are likened to either wife or bride, the answer is affirmative and very full. When Jeremiah prophesied
of the institution of the New Covenant, he said, "not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day
that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt: which My covenant they brake, although I was an
husband unto them." This supposes that under the terms of the old covenant, Israel were related to the Lord as a
wife to an husband. This is recognized by Ezekiel who wrote, namely in Ezekiel 16:7-14. The figure employed, "I
spread my skirt over thee" when compared with Ruth 3:9 reveals the marriage relationship, which is explained by Ezekiel as entering into a "covenant" and "prospering as a kingdom."
The charge laid against Israel, however, is that they proved unfaithful to their marriage vow, Ezekiel likened
them to "a wife that committeth adultery" (Ezek. 16:32) and says that Israel will be judged "as a woman that breaketh
wedlock" (Ezek. 16:38). The phrase, which has become common in modern matrimonial lawsuits, "breach of promise,"
is used by God of Israel in Numbers 14:34; and divorcement is employed by Jeremiah to set forth this people's unhappy position.
"They say, If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and become another man's, shall he
return unto her again? . . . turn O backsliding children saith the Lord: for I am married unto you" (Jer. 3:1, 14).
Isaiah speaks of divorcement saying:
"Where is the bill of your mother's divorcement, whom I have put away?" (Isa. 50:1).
The same Isaiah has some glowing words to say regarding the ultimate restoration of this wayward people:
"Thou shalt no more be termed Forsaken: neither shall thy land any more be termed Desolate: but thou shalt be called
Hephzibah and thy land Beulah: for the Lord delighteth in thee, and thy land shall be married" (Isa. 62:4).
The prophet Hosea, is the prophet of the interval between the setting aside of Israel and of their restoration. In
Chapter 1, he has three children bearing prophetic names:
Jezreel. "Scattering" and also "Sowing."
Lo-ruhamah. "Not having obtained mercy."
Lo-ammi. "Not My people."
In Chapter 2 the prophet continues, "she is not My wife, neither am I her husband" but at the close, all is reversed, all is restored:
"I will betroth thee unto Me for ever."
"I will sow (Jezreel) her unto Me in the earth, and I will have mercy upon her that had not obtained mercy: and I will
say unto them which were not My people, Thou art My people: and they shall say, Thou art my God" (2:23).
Chapter 3 speaks of the long waiting period of Israel's divorcement: "Thou shalt abide for Me many days . . .
for the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a Prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim."
We have already considered the dispensational boundary of Acts 28 where Israel's hope is suspended,
Israel's long period of blindness and wandering commenced, and where Israel entered into her long period of
divorcement. This later thought is implicit in the word translated "departed" in verse 25 which should be rendered "dismissed" for the word is passive. This word apoluo had a distinct meaning, and one that bears closely upon the
divorcement of Israel in Acts 28. Here are the first occurrences of this Greek word in the N.T.
"He was minded to put her away privily."
"Whosoever shall put away his wife."
"Shall marry her that is divorced" (Matt. 1:19, 5:31,32).
The predicted "lo-ammi" condition of Hosea one commences here, the long night of Israel's exile begins here,
and the new dispensation of the grace of God to the Gentiles begins here. The Bride of the Lamb must be
distinguished from the national restoration of Israel, set forth in the symbol of a wife divorced, then taken back
forgiven and blessed. The Revelation is particularly concerned with a believing, overcoming remnant, and it is this
overcoming remnant out of Israel that is depicted under the figure of a Bride. While this distinction must be observed,
some expositors have attempted to make a distinction between "wife" of Revelation 19 and the "bride" of Revelation 21
and 22. Restored Israel, as the wife once divorced and at last taken back again is not the subject of the book of the
Revelation. Restored Israel as such, has no place in the heavenly city, that is reserved for the heavenly calling of the
kingdom. Abraham had the land as an assured inheritance but as an overcomer, he looked higher, and waited for the
heavenly city. In both Revelation 19 and 21 it is the "Lamb" who is the Bridegroom.
It is assumed, that because Revelation 21:1 opens with a vision of the new heavens and new earth, all that
follows belongs also to that great day, but this cannot be, for it is still possible to be excluded as verses 8 and 27
show. It is a characteristic of these visions of the Apocalypse to lead up to a climax, as in Revelation 6:14-17, and
then to go back in time and approach the same climax by another avenue. The same principle that would make the
wife of Revelation 19 distinct from the bride of Revelation 21, sees two separate creations and two Adams, in the dual
records of Genesis 1 and 2, whereas it is obvious that in the second account fuller details are given. The word "wife"
is not exclusive to the record of Revelation 19, for in 21:9 we read of "The bride, the Lamb's wife." It has been
affirmed that because Revelation 19:7 tells us that "His wife has made herself ready," we are here on legal ground,
and that salvation by works is in view. This is untrue on two counts. First because there will be none saved in that
day, apart from those who are redeemed, their own works having no place therein, and secondly, the idea of the
wife preparing herself or making herself ready, is but the scriptural and natural action, spoken of by Isaiah "as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels" (Isa. 61:10).
In Revelation 19 the marriage supper of the Lamb is inaugurated. A specific period of time was observed for
this ceremony, referred to in Genesis 29:27 as "her week," and it appears from the Revelation that this "week" lasts
throughout the millennium, after which the holy city is seen descending from heaven and the "tabernacle of God" will
be with men. The language of Revelation 21:10 when compared with Revelation 17:1 places these two women, these
two cities, these two systems in direct opposition, a third woman, city or system would be an intruder here.
Before concluding, we must consider the teaching that affirms that the Church of the Mystery, "The Body"
must be at the same time "The Bride" by reason of what is taught in Ephesians 5. First, it is a matter of demonstrable
truth that the Church of the Mystery is called "The Body" of which Christ is the Head. Secondly, the statement made by
Paul as to the exclusive character of this high calling, would not only be nullified, but would prove to be unwarrantable
exaggerations, if after all that is written in Ephesians 1 to 3, this Church should turn out to be a part of the hope of
Israel or the promise made to Abraham. Thirdly, the Apostle (to say nothing of the deeper thought of inspiration) could be accused of badly mixing his metaphors.
We remember once meeting an enthusiast for "The Bride" who contended that the MAN child of Revelation 12
must be the Bride! But this is no more extravagant than maintaining that a company destined to be "the perfect MAN" is
nevertheless "The Bride." It may be objected that the word "man" includes both sexes, but this is not so. Anthropos yes, but Paul does not use the word anthropos in Ephesians 4:13 but aner, a word actually translated in Ephesians 5
by the English word "husband, so that they who insist that the Church of Ephesians 5 is the bride, must insist that Paul taught that the bride will be the perfect husband--which is absurd.
Ephesians 5 and 6 belong to the practical portion of the epistle (see the structure of the epistle in the article
EPHESIANS) and in these chapters human society is divided up into three groups: (1) Wives, Husbands. (2) Children,
Parents. (3) Servants, Masters. Quite irrespective of the dispensation of grace these three divisions of society would
need to be recognized, and wives and husbands are just as surely advised on their relation to the calling that Peter
administered as wives and husbands were advised as to their relation to the calling administered by Paul.
Again, some have pointed out that the Church is feminine, and that the pronouns in Ephesians 5:25-27 should
be translated "her" and "she" instead of "it" thereby making it clear that the Church is "the bride." This, however, is just
sheer ignorance, or trading upon ignorance. Gender in grammar is not the same as sex. Does anyone imagine that because la table in French is "feminine" it has the remotest allusion to sex? We need not, however, go outside the
Greek of Ephesians 5 itself to demonstrate how utterly false the argument is that would speak of the Church as "she." Kephale "Head" is feminine. Is Christ, the Bridegroom, therefore a female? Akatharsia "uncleanness" is feminine.
Do we therefore teach that this is impossible for a man to exhibit or fall into? Basileia "kingdom" is feminine, rutis "wrinkle" is feminine, sarx "flesh" is feminine, and so on. Nothing concerning the calling of the Church can be made
out of the fact that the word ekklesia is in the feminine gender. Does Ephesians 5 say that the Church is the bride,
therefore wives should act in accordance with the fact? The answer is No, it draws its power of appeal from the fact that these "wives" were by grace members of the Body."
"He is the Saviour of the Body" (Eph. 5:23).
"We are members of His Body" (Eph. 5:30).
"No man hateth his own flesh" (Eph. 5:29).
In the new creation, when all the redeemed of all ages are raised, the Church which is the perfect MAN, or
husband, and the Church which is the BRIDE may re-enact in its full spiritual sense, the union of the first man and
woman (Gen. 2:21-24), but that lies beyond the present limits of the ages and dispensations. The Church which is His
Body is one company, with a calling that is unique and distinct. The Church of the Bride is another company with a
calling unique and distinct, and until God joins these two together let no man attempt to do so.
|
The Bride and The Body
