2 Thessalonians 1:8

[Ernest T. Bass]

Dear friend. I never said you have not been consistent in all that you have posted. Consistency does not equal accuracy.

You stated that the implication of the verse (2 Thessalonians 1:8) is that if one does not want to be lost in flaming fire facing God's vengeance then one must obey the gospel of Christ.

I simply asked you if the implication of that verse was possibly that they shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his power....WHICH IS THE NEXT VERSE, VERSE #9.

Verse #9 clearly IMPLIES what will happen. You couldn't even agree with it. Instead you kept reverting to your bloviating. My point is, Scripture must be taken in context. Not cherry picked.

Mary

Evidently I do not understand the point you are trying to make.

My point from 2 Thess 1:8 is that the verse logically makes "obeying the gospel of Christ" a necessity if one does not want to be lost in flaming fire. Verse 9 therefore implies those who have NOT obeyed the gospel of Christ are the ones who "shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord." Nothing is being 'cherry picked'. If there is any "bloviating" it would be by those denying the necessity of water baptism in how it is the means by which "obeys the gospel of Christ" per 2 Thess 1:8.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

How can sin become righteousness of it's own self when it can do nothing but sin?

Unrighteous men can become righteous men by obeying the will of God as those unrighteous sinners Peter preached to in Acts 2 obeyed Acts 2:38 thereby becoming righteous men. Again, there is no verse in the Bible that gives an example of a sinful unrighteous man becoming righteous without obeying the will of God. Every single person in the Bible seen as righteous by God were those that obeyed God. Were any of those righteous men perfectly obedient to God's will? NO! For God never required sinless perfection on the part of man but a simple faithful obedience and faithful obedience includes repentance of sins for those time when righteous men fail to keep God's will and sins.

Again, look at the order of events of Romans 6:17-18
1) servants of unrighteousness
2) obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine
3) then freed from sin becoming servants of unrighteousness

Paul put (2) obedience to the will of God BEFORE (3) becoming servants of righteousness. Luther and his faith onlyism is wrong.

 

[Dave L]

Unrighteous men can become righteous men by obeying the will of God as those unrighteous sinners Peter preached to in Acts 2 obeyed Acts 2:38 thereby becoming righteous men. Again, there is no verse in the Bible that gives an example of a sinful unrighteous man becoming righteous without obeying the will of God. Every single person in the Bible seen as righteous by God were those that obeyed God. Were any of those righteous men perfectly obedient to God's will? NO! For God never required sinless perfection on the part of man but a simple faithful obedience and faithful obedience includes repentance of sins for those time when righteous men fail to keep God's will and sins.

Again, look at the order of events of Romans 6:17-18
1) servants of unrighteousness
2) obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine
3) then freed from sin becoming servants of unrighteousness

Paul put (2) obedience to the will of God BEFORE (3) becoming servants of righteousness. Luther and his faith onlyism is wrong.

Sinners obey for the wrong reason. You need the new birth for the right reason to prevail.

 

[friend of]

So your saying someone could be baptized in water, have no belief in Christ and still be saved...

Is that correct earnest?

 

[Nancy]

According to your theory...... which is opposite of 2,000 years of Christian teachings and belief.

Sooooo entertain me. What is the water that Jesus is speaking of in John 3:5?

Curious Mary

Born of water simply means born "naturally", mothers womb, coming from a sac of "water" IMHO! I see nothing about "baptism" in that verse. Why do so many automatically think baptism whenever they read water??

 

[ScottA]

John's baptism was replaced by the human administered water baptism of Christ's great commission at Pentecost Acts 2. And Christ's baptism is a form of the gospel (death burial & resurrection of Christ) and this form of the gospel must be obeyed to be saved (avoid flaming fire) 2 Thess 1:8.

Baptism with the Holy Spirit occurs twice in the NT, with the Apostles in Acts 2 and Gentiles in Acts 10. There is no form of the gospel (death burial & resurrection) that takes place when one was baptized with the HS, so baptism with the HS is NOT the way one obeys the gospel of Christ. Also baptism with the HS wa never commanded to anyone so it is not something that can be obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine. But since water baptism had been commanded it can be obeyed.

You're missing the point...

The commandment is not for the salvation of the person being baptized, but for those who look on, that they come to understanding by that which is revealed of God through manifestation in the world. Likewise, we are not saved by Christ's death in the flesh, but by His life in the spirit.

Your presentation is incomplete without carrying it through to include the meaning behind the manifestation as being the end of the matter and the point. The foreshadowing manifestation is not the point. For this reason John said, "He must increase, but I must decrease." "He" being Christ, the Last, the life-giving Spirit. Baptism by water is for the First, but the Holy Spirit is for the Last.

 

[Marymog]

Evidently I do not understand the point you are trying to make.

My point from 2 Thess 1:8 is that the verse logically makes "obeying the gospel of Christ" a necessity if one does not want to be lost in flaming fire. Verse 9 therefore implies those who have NOT obeyed the gospel of Christ are the ones who "shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord." Nothing is being 'cherry picked'. If there is any "bloviating" it would be by those denying the necessity of water baptism in how it is the means by which "obeys the gospel of Christ" per 2 Thess 1:8.

I will try to articulate myself better

You said the implication of verse 8 is "if one does not want to be lost in flaming fire facing God's vengeance then one must obey the gospel of Christ."

I am simply saying the implication of verse 8 is pretty dang clear....It is CLEARLY stated in verse 9: They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the LORD and from the glory of his might.

No need to go to 1 Corinthians or Romans....It's in VERSE 9!!

Does that make sense?

Mary

 

[Marymog]

Born of water simply means born "naturally", mothers womb, coming from a sac of "water" IMHO! I see nothing about "baptism" in that verse. Why do so many automatically think baptism whenever they read water??

Thank you.

Here is how that passage would read using your interpretation: Jesus answered, "Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born from a womb filled with water and the Spirit.

When Jesus prefaces a statement with Truly that means he is drawing our attention to something very important or profound that is the Truth. Do you really think that what Jesus is telling us in that passage (that one must be born from a wet womb not a dry womb) is very important and profound?

Where else in scripture does it even suggest that water from the womb is needed to enter heaven?

When in Christian history did this "sac of water" theory start?

If you can show me that Christians have believed what you are stating since the dawn of Christianity AND water from the womb is mentioned as saving water in Scripture I will leave The Church and join you.

Mary

 

[ScottA]

Here is how that passage would read using your interpretation: Jesus answered, "Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born from a womb filled with water and the Spirit.

No...it would read as follows:

"“Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of the flesh and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." ...Because water in this context means flesh.

Likewise, He did not say "and of God", but that is what "and of the Spirit" means. Both of which are supported and confirmed repeatedly throughout the scriptures. It is only men who would have people believe that water, an element that is to be consumed with fire, is the miracle of spiritual rebirth.

 

[Marymog]

No...it would read as follows:

"“Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of the flesh and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." ...Because water in this context means flesh.

Likewise, He did not say "and of God", but that is what "and of the Spirit" means. Both of which are supported and confirmed repeatedly throughout the scriptures. If is only men who would have people believe that water, an element that is to be consumed with fire, is the miracle of spiritual rebirth.

How else could one be born if they are not born of the flesh or via a wet womb?

Curious Mary

 

[ScottA]

How else could one be born if they are not born of the flesh or via a wet womb?

Curious Mary

Of the spirit of God.

 

[brakelite]

Your "personal testimony" does not fit what the Bible says as to how one is saved. You CLAIM salvation is "not in our obedience". Can you show me from the NT gospel of a person who continued to be impenitently disobedient to the will of God but was saved anyway?

Hey, don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say I was impenitent and disobedient. I did obey... But my obedience is not the means to my justification. That does not mean my continuing obedience has no part to play in my ultimate Salvation. I am justified in the sight of God by the blood of the Lamb. Period. Any obedience on my part subsequent to my faith in the atonement, is a fruit of righteousness accomplished by the work of the holy Spirit abiding within.

 

[Marymog]

Of the spirit of God.

OK smarty pants.

You have replaced the word “water” with flesh. That means born from a human.

According to your theory that makes Jesus statement read like this: Truly, Truly I say to you no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of human and the Spirit

Is that what you are suggesting?

Patient Mary

 

[Helen]

Hey, don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say I was impenitent and disobedient. I did obey... But my obedience is not the means to my justification. That does not mean my continuing obedience has no part to play in my ultimate Salvation. I am justified in the sight of God by the blood of the Lamb. Period. Any obedience on my part subsequent to my faith in the atonement, is a fruit of righteousness accomplished by the work of the holy Spirit abiding within.

I thought that Netchaplain had a a good line today..if he is saying what I think he is saying...
Rebirth

 

[Helen]

Hey, don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say I was impenitent and disobedient. I did obey... But my obedience is not the means to my justification. That does not mean my continuing obedience has no part to play in my ultimate Salvation. I am justified in the sight of God by the blood of the Lamb. Period. Any obedience on my part subsequent to my faith in the atonement, is a fruit of righteousness accomplished by the work of the holy Spirit abiding within.

Amen,
Over and over on this forum site I notice so many people do not se the difference between our spiritual position in Christ...and our spiritual experience while walking the walk.
As I read the word, I see that our position is secure , because of the Price Jesus paid for it...but our spiritual responses during our life settle where we will stand in the kingdom, and rewards Jesus has said He will give to the overcomer.

Half the time when I see posts about losing salvation etc...they are confused and it really should be about losing rewards.

I believe in our security in Christ...but where we will be in the kingdom is what is still 'up for grabs' not our salvation .. ( kingdom position is that which will cause the wailing and gnashing of teeth.. )
I so often fall short and I know I don't press-in to Him enough like I should ..therefore I am not "possessing my possession" ..as God told Israel to do , in claiming their land.

For us too...there is 'still much land to be possessed'... yet how easy to sit down in the sweet meadow and take my ease.

 

[brakelite]

Amen,
Over and over on this forum site I notice so many people do not se the difference between our spiritual position in Christ...and our spiritual experience while walking the walk.
As I read the word, I see that our position is secure , because of the Price Jesus paid for it...but our spiritual responses during our life settle where we will stand in the kingdom, and rewards Jesus has said He will give to the overcomer.

Half the time when I see posts about losing salvation etc...they are confused and it really should be about losing rewards.

I believe in our security in Christ...but where we will be in the kingdom is what is still 'up for grabs' not our salvation .. ( kingdom position is that which will cause the wailing and gnashing of teeth.. )
I so often fall short and I know I don't press-in to Him enough like I should ..therefore I am not "possessing my possession" ..as God told Israel to do , in claiming their land.

For us too...there is 'still much land to be possessed'... yet how easy to sit down in the sweet meadow and take my ease.

I have no fear of falling...so long as I remain faithful and abiding in the Vine. But Hebrews 6:4-6 settles everything for me as far as OSAS goes.
4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; while they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

The above does not discount forgiveness for the penitent sinner. But it does absolutely discount forgiveness for the one who refuses to repent...the one who deliberately continues in sin. Many are the stories of genuine Christians who leave spouse for example, and take up with another. That is adultery. And should they leave this mortal coil whilst still in that bad relationship, they shall die in their sins. Nothing to do with rewards...they are sizzle-fitz. Philip Yancey was once asked by a member of his church...do you think God will forgive me for what I am about to do? This man had shared with Yancey his decision to leave his wife for another woman. What would be your reply?

 

[Helen]

What would be your reply?

My reply would probably be .."You idiot...you , like Esau , are choosing to satisfy your flesh for a moment in time...you will lose your inheritance as Esau did..is it worth it?
Sit down and count the cost."

But obviously you and I will differ on this, and that is fine.
We each are required to walk as we believe the Lord has lead us and shown us , thus far.
Bless you...Helen.

 

[ScottA]

OK smarty pants.

You have replaced the word “water” with flesh. That means born from a human.

According to your theory that makes Jesus statement read like this: Truly, Truly I say to you no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of human and the Spirit

Is that what you are suggesting?

Patient Mary

More or less.

But you should understand that not only did I replace the word water with flesh, but Jesus also did something similar because nothing is actually/literally "born of water"...and so did you just now when you said "That means born of a human." Meaning...that it is okay to explain using other words, it's a common form of communication. But it also means that taking something like "born of water" literally, when nothing is born of water literally...is simply missing the point of the language and example being used to make the greater point, which is about being born of the Spirit.

 

[bbyrd009]

Is that what you are suggesting?

hope so

ah, yup!

 

[bbyrd009]

What would be your reply?

"forgiveness will not save you from the consequences, yes you are forgiven already, but you will still reap what you have sown"

but a better reply is likely

"forgiveness is not even pertinent here; you do not need forgiveness herenow"