THE BRIDE OF CHRIST
THE BRIDE OF CHRIST: AN INOUIRY
Dear
Sir,
It
is submitted that the
1.
It is never so designated.
2.
While more than a dozen Scriptures speak of the Church as the Body of Christ,
not one says it is His Bride.
3.
Perhaps the most glorious scene in the whole Bible is that in which the Holy
Spirit describes the marriage of the Lamb, whose bride is the heavenly City;
i.e., those saints, as inhabitants thereof, whose white apparel will represent
their "righteous acts."
But
amongst these will be Abel, Enoch, etc., who are outside the Church.
4.
But if the "Marriage of the Lamb" be so wonderful and august an
event, and the "Bride of the Lamb" so glorious, how can it be
otherwise than an assumption to think that the Church is Christ's bride, when
the Christ - as Christ - is associated with no such glorious event, neither is
a bride assigned Him in the whole of the New Testament?
5.
The Bride of the Lamb reigns
with her Bridegroom, and seen, after the marriage in Rev. 19., as the armies of
heaven clothed in white linen descending with their
Leader and King on the white horse to take the Kingdom by force. But as
many thousands of the Church will be disqualified from reigning with
Christ, then the Church as an entity can be neither the "Bride of the
Lamb." nor a bride of Christ.
6.
It seems that the "wife of the Lamb" is composed of the Martyrs,
Prophets, and Overcomers, of all the Dispensations, and so of course would
include those of the Church, but those only.
7.
If the Church were the bride of Christ, then, if Christ be going to marry it
(or her) pre-millennially, whatever were the spiritual condition of any member
at death - short of excommunication sins - would be immaterial to their
enjoying, in the resurrection, the heavenly felicities and raptures of such an
occasion!
I
append some notes.
The
parables of the Marriage Feast, Wedding Garment, and Ten Virgins have each
their teaching, but do not throw light on the point discussed, I think.
The
great passage Eph. 5: 22-33, to me, shows the great love, and mysterious union,
existing between Christ and His Body, and also what is required by Him to exist
between husband and wife; but where it
nowhere declares that the Church is His bride ; it savs
it is his "Body."
2
Cor. 11: 2, "for I
espoused you, etc."
This
is a personal travail of Paul's in prayer and wrestling of spirit on behalf of
the Corinthians, even as he did for the Colossians and those of
2
Cor. 11: 1. It
was manifestly impossible for Paul or any man to present any Christian or any
Church "a pure virgin to Christ." The Holy Spirit in recording this wonderful
love of Paul's does not say nor teach,
that the Church of God itself is "espoused" to Christ, nor married to
Him. It is the record by the Holy
Ghost of a wonderful, personal, private, and local intercession and travail; it
was mighty and glorious, on the part of a lonely warrior, a giant of faith.
It
seems that the only heavenly bride which the Son of God will have will be
"the Bride of the Lamb." "The Spirit
and the Bride say, come." The bride here I think stands for the
"watchful" in the Church, who long for His coming, and as such will
"qualify " and be of course in the company forming the "Bride of the Lamb." As this bride of Rev. 22: 17 cannot be the
completed company, but only that portion of it in existence at the time, so,
coming immediately after the definition of the Bride of the Lamb, and
description of her as well, the only conclusion possible is that this is the
Bride referred to; and we are confined to applying the term here occurring to those who witness, proclaim, work for, and
obey, Christ, as they wait and watch for the 'coming'
of verse 20.
I
was greatly surprised and pleased to come across a footnote in "The Coming Prince," P.200. Sir
Robert Anderson says:- "In
Scripture the Church of this Dispensation is symbolized as the Body of Christ, never as the Bride. From
the close of John Baptist's ministry the Bride is never mentioned until she appears
in the Apocalypse (John 3: 29; Rev. 21: 2-9). The force of the 'nevertheless' in Eph. 5: 33,
depends on the fact that the Church is the Body, not the
Bride. The earthly relationship is
re-adjusted by a heavenly standard. Man
and wife are not one body, but Christ and His Church are
one body, therefore a man is to love his wife, 'even as himself.’"
I
submit there is only one heavenly Bride, and that "The Bride of the Lamb"; also that the idea the Church is the
bride of Christ is an assumption and a fallacy.
I
am, etc.,
Chas.
S. Utting.
A Reply to C. S. Utting’s Letter
Dear
Sir,
I
have read with interest your correspondent Mr. Utting's
letter on the Bride of Christ, appearing in the October DAWN, and should like a
little space in your magazine by way of reply.
May
I say at the outset that what I believe underlies Mr. Utting's
denial that the
This
is most apparent in his extraordinary statement that it is impossible for Paul
to present any Christian or Church "a pure virgin
to Christ," which is exactly what the apostle says he desired to do
in 2 Cor. 2: 2 (misquoted as 2: 1). The apostle
distinctly states, writing with divine authority, "I espoused you (the Corinthian assembly) to
one Husband," which I think proves to any mind subject to the
authority of Scripture that certain believers at Corinth (who will certainly
not be among those alive when our Lord comes) had been through the apostle's
ministry put into a relationship with Christ which the Spirit of God taught him
to describe as "espousal to one Husband."
No one could suggest that this gave the
Corinthians of that day any privilege that is not common to the people of God
of the present dispensation.
To
suggest, as Mr. Utting does, that the bride, who in concert
with the Spirit cries "Come" in response
to Him Who reveals Himself as the "Root and
offspring of David, the bright and morning star" (Rev. 22: 16, 17),
is confined to that portion of the Church which is (as Mr. Utting
says) "in existence at the time of our Lord's
coming," is to take away the whole value of our Lord's last message
from all the saints throughout the ages who by reason of death will not be on
earth when He comes.
I
do not see how it can be disputed that the writer of the Apocalypse himself
formed part of the bride saying "Come,"
for indeed it is proved by the response of verse 20, which was surely the
writer's own.
These
two passages, the application of which to the Church can hardly be disputed,
make void Sir Robert Anderson's statement quoted by Mr. Utting
that the Church of this dispensation is never symbolized as the bride. Sir Robert's dragging in the symbol of 'the
body’ into Ephesians (5: 33) shows that he likewise does not distinguish
between the reality and the symbol. He
might just as well say that the Church in Ephesians cannot "grow into a holy temple of the Lord" (2:
21) because it is the body of Christ. If
we press the figure in this way we might say that Christ cannot present us to
Himself as a glorious church (verse 27) because we are members of His body
(verse 30).
I
am surprised to see that Sir Robert Anderson states that man and wife are not
one body, when Scripture says the two shall become one flesh (verse 31. See 1 Cor. 6: 16).
A
reference to the context of John 3: 29 will show that the figure of the bride
is used there to justify John's disciples leaving him for Christ by enforcing
the claims of the Bridegroorn - "He that hath the bride is the Bridegroorn." Those who thus attached themselves to Christ
became the nucleus of the Christian church into which the Gentile Corinthians
were afterwards admitted.
As
regards Romans 7: 1-6, Mr. Utting overlooks the fact
that the word "joined" is no more
found in the passage than "married,"
the Greek verb which is thus translated hardly carries this meaning, and the
verb would be better translated as "be - or become " to another
man."
I
quite agree that the saints of the old dispensation will be among those
described as the bride at the marriage of the Lamb (Rev. 7), for through death
they have become heavenly saints, but fail to see why their presence should
exclude us who are equally heavenly saints. On the contrary, I read that "without us they not made perfect" (Heb. 2: 40). It seems to me presumptuous anyone to define
exactly of whom "the wife of the Lamb"
composed, as Mr. Utting does, limiting it to certain
people whom describes as – “martyrs, prophets, and
overcomers." All I would
dare to say is that if a man is not an
overcomer, he has no right to expect to sit down with "the faithful and true Witness” in His throne
(Rev. 3: 14, 21), which is I suppose one of the privileges of the Lamb's wife.
The
importance which I attach to the subject is that I dread weakening in the souls
of believers of those ties of affection for Christ which are, I believe,
intended to be strengthened by the use of the symbol of the bride.
I
am, etc.,
Theadore Roberts.
Mr. Utting’s Reply to Mr. Robert’s
Letter