2 Thessalonians 1:8

[CoreIssue]

Quite a lot of arguing going on here

True.

 

[CoreIssue]

True.

I am a very literal Bible pretrib believer. He is a very figurative amillennialist. So we are really far apart.

For different reasons he is far apart with a lot of other posters here as well.

 

[ScottA]

I do not see where you are getting the idea that the command to be baptized is for "those who look on". In Acts 2:38 the command to be baptized is for those who are lost in their sins and therefore the lost are commanded to be baptized "for the remission of sins".

Eph 4:5 today there is just "one baptism" that is in effect, not two. And that one baptism is the baptism of Christ's great commission that is commanded to all men, that saves. NO one today is baptized with the Holy Spirit, no one today was ever promised this baptism and this baptism was a prophecy of Joel that the Lord fulfilled in Acts 2 and Acts 10 whereby this baptism has ceased, ended.

We are suppose to develop an ear for what the Spirit says, not continue lapping at milk.

Indeed, there is only one baptism. John the baptist baptized with water and so did the apostles as a foreshadowing of that one baptism foretold by John, as the baptism of Christ with the Holy Spirit. The continuation of the foreshadowing does not take the place of the one baptism or Christ via the Holy Spirit, but simply allows the foreshadowing to continue for those just coming into the fold during these last times. Otherwise, yes, there is just one baptism, which is the baptism of Christ who baptizes with the Holy Spirit. For which John also said, "I must decrease, but He must increase", meaning his baptism with water (the foreshadowing) must decease, and the baptism of the Holy Spirit must increase.

So, then, the water baptism...is for babes.

 

[Dave L]

Then why the constant posting of acts 2?

Baptism in the name of Jesus Christ runs throughout Acts, not just Acts 2.

 

[CoreIssue]

Baptism in the name of Jesus Christ runs throughout Acts, not just Acts 2.

You have not done a closer examination have you?
If you had you would've seen there are four formulas used in the book of Acts.

Acts 2:28 – be baptized…in the name of Jesus Christ.

Acts 8:16 – baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Acts 10:48 – baptized in the name of the Lord.

Acts 19:5 – baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Second, the difference, evident to the English reader, is clearer in the Greek.

Acts 2:38 – kai baptistheto…epi to onomati Jesou Christou.

Acts 8:16 – bebaptismenoi…eis to onoma tou Kuriou Jesou.

Acts 10:48 – baptisthenai en to onomati tou Kuriou.

Acts 19:5 – epatisthesan eis to onoma tou Kuriou Jesou.

Third, note the lack of uniformity in the name:

Acts 2:38 – Jesus Christ.

Acts 8:16 – The Lord Jesus.

Acts 10:48 – The Lord.

Acts 19:5 – The Lord Jesus.

Fourth, note the variation in the prepositions used to show the relation between the name and the baptismal act:

Acts 2:38 – epi to onomati (literally, upon the name).

Acts 8:16 – eis to onoma (into the name).

Acts 10:48 – en to onomati (in the name).

Acts 19:5 – eis to onoma (into the name).

So what is the correct answer?Do what Jesus said.

Matthew 28:19 New International Version (NIV)
19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

 

[farouk]

I am a very literal Bible pretrib believer.

As it happens, by conviction, so am I.

 

[Dave L]

You have not done a closer examination have you?
If you had you would've seen there are four formulas used in the book of Acts.

Acts 2:28 – be baptized…in the name of Jesus Christ.

Acts 8:16 – baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Acts 10:48 – baptized in the name of the Lord.

Acts 19:5 – baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Second, the difference, evident to the English reader, is clearer in the Greek.

Acts 2:38 – kai baptistheto…epi to onomati Jesou Christou.

Acts 8:16 – bebaptismenoi…eis to onoma tou Kuriou Jesou.

Acts 10:48 – baptisthenai en to onomati tou Kuriou.

Acts 19:5 – epatisthesan eis to onoma tou Kuriou Jesou.

Third, note the lack of uniformity in the name:

Acts 2:38 – Jesus Christ.

Acts 8:16 – The Lord Jesus.

Acts 10:48 – The Lord.

Acts 19:5 – The Lord Jesus.

Fourth, note the variation in the prepositions used to show the relation between the name and the baptismal act:

Acts 2:38 – epi to onomati (literally, upon the name).

Acts 8:16 – eis to onoma (into the name).

Acts 10:48 – en to onomati (in the name).

Acts 19:5 – eis to onoma (into the name).

So what is the correct answer?Do what Jesus said.

Matthew 28:19 New International Version (NIV)
19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

The point is, Jesus Christ is the personal name of the triune God. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

 

[CoreIssue]

The point is, Jesus Christ is the personal name of the triune God. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Jesus Christ is only the name of the flesh the second person of the Trinity is incarnate in.

The Godhead does not have flesh and is not named Jesus Christ.

 

[Dave L]

Jesus Christ is only the name of the flesh the second person of the Trinity is incarnate in.

The Godhead does not have flesh and is not named Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ = YHWH

 

[CoreIssue]

Jesus Christ = YHWH

The flesh of Jesus is human, not God.

His spirit is the second person of the Trinity, but not all of the Trinity.

The Trinity does not have flesh or and is not named Jesus.

 

[Dave L]

Jesus is God, but not the full Trinity, as you claimed.

Jesus Christ = YHWH = personal name of the triune God.

“Now I desire to remind you (even though you have been fully informed of these facts once for all) that Jesus, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, later destroyed those who did not believe.” (Jude 5) (NET)

 

[CoreIssue]

Jesus Christ = YHWH = personal name of the triune God.

“Now I desire to remind you (even though you have been fully informed of these facts once for all) that Jesus, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, later destroyed those who did not believe.” (Jude 5) (NET)

And again, the net is not a translation, it is a paraphrase.

Jude 5 New International Version (NIV)
5 Though you already know all this, I want to remind you that the Lord at one time delivered his people out of Egypt, but later destroyed those who did not believe.

 

[Dave L]

And again, the net is not a translation, it is a paraphrase.

Jude 5 New International Version (NIV)
5 Though you already know all this, I want to remind you that the Lord at one time delivered his people out of Egypt, but later destroyed those who did not believe.

The translation holds up using the LXX name for YHWH = Kurios. The same Kurios = Lord in reference to Jesus in the NT.

 

[CoreIssue]

The translation holds up using the LXX name for YHWH = Kurios. The same Kurios = Lord in reference to Jesus in the NT.

We don't use the LXX. it is now a historical document, just like the KJV.

It is an old testament BC times Hebrew to Greek translation.

Here it is in. Note it includes apocrypha, which Judaism rejected.

Read the Septuagint Bible w/ Apocrypha Free Online

 

[Dave L]

We don't use the LXX. it is now a historical document, just like the KJV.

It is an old testament BC times Hebrew to Greek translation.

Here it is in. Note it includes apocrypha, which Judaism rejected.

Read the Septuagint Bible w/ Apocrypha Free Online

All of the first century Christians used and quoted the LXX. And the NT quotes the LXX many times. Some say over 300 times.

 

[CoreIssue]

The translation holds up using the LXX name for YHWH = Kurios. The same Kurios = Lord in reference to Jesus in the NT.

All of the first century Christians used and quoted the LXX. And the NT quotes the LXX many times. Some say over 300 times.

It does not change the fact we do not use the LXX today.

The KJVO followers are not going to like the facts in this link.

With few exceptions, the books of the New Testament abound in references to the Old Testament and in quotations from it. An exhaustive list of these may be seen at the end of Westcott and Hort's New Testament in Greek

Quotations from the Lxx. In the New Testament.

 

[Dave L]

It does not change the fact we do not use the LXX today.

The KJVO followers are not going to like the facts in this link.

With few exceptions, the books of the New Testament abound in references to the Old Testament and in quotations from it. An exhaustive list of these may be seen at the end of Westcott and Hort's New Testament in Greek

Quotations from the Lxx. In the New Testament.

It still remains, that Jesus is God in trinity, speaking as a perfect man in the second person of the Word/Son. But in him lived the fullness of the Godhead bodily.

“For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.” (Colossians 2:9) (KJV 1900)

 

[CoreIssue]

It still remains, that Jesus is God in trinity, speaking as a perfect man in the second person of the Word/Son. But in him lived the fullness of the Godhead bodily.

“For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.” (Colossians 2:9) (KJV 1900)

Colossians 2:9 New International Version (NIV)
9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,

Yes, the second person of the Trinity is within Christ. But the flesh of Christ is not deity. Nor does the Trinity/Godhead as a whole live in Christ.

The Word is the second person of the Trinity, not Christ, which is the flesh the word was incarnated in.

Word in Greek is Logos, the reason for which all was created. Again, not the Godhead.

You keep trying to redefine what the Bible says.

 

[Dave L]

Colossians 2:9 New International Version (NIV)
9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,

Yes, the second person of the Trinity is within Christ. But the flesh of Christ is not deity. Nor does the Trinity/Godhead as a whole live in Christ.

The Word is the second person of the Trinity, not Christ, which is the flesh the word was incarnated in.

Word in Greek is Logos, the reason for which all was created. Again, not the Godhead.

You keep trying to redefine what the Bible says.

You violate the doctrine of the trinity if you divide God's spiritual essence into three spiritual essences. He is one spiritual essence consisting of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

“For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.” (Colossians 2:9) (KJV 1900)

 

[CoreIssue]

You violate the doctrine of the trinity if you divide God's spiritual essence into three spiritual essences. He is one spiritual essence consisting of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

“For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.” (Colossians 2:9) (KJV 1900)

Your claim is said nowhere in the Bible. What you were saying is motor localism, which is practiced by Jehovah witnesses and Oneness.


Colossians 2:9 New International Version (NIV)
9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,

Colossians 2:9 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
9 For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form,