Factotum said:

I disagree.
I feel that the Trump DOJ made clever, intelligent move in this scenario

Click to expand...

Your choice. But reality proves otherwise.

iluvatar5150 said:

If this is how you read between the lines, you might want visit the optometrist. If I'd wanted to say that they don't deserve peace, I would have.

Actually, I'll put a finer point on it - I think they all deserve peace and to be spared from harassment. The Springfield Haitians, unfortunately, didn't get that. Not because of Charlie's views, but partly because of his actions. He made his wealth (and thus, Erika's, too) by peddling fear, lies, and outrage. As far as I'm aware, his widow has done nothing to disavow that part of his business - certainly nothing on the TPUSA website (that she now runs) gives that impression. But why would she? That's what paid for her mansion(s).

Again, I don't think she ought to be harassed like this, but if that's the life she chooses to lead...


View attachment 374378

Click to expand...

Charlie Kirk and Turning Point USA did NOT peddle fears and lies. It's disgusting that you believe that they did.

Oompa Loompa said:

Users can get treatment behind bars. But it would be better if they were unable to have contact with the substance in the first place, even if that mean the smugglers and the vessel blew up into fish chum in the ocean.

Click to expand...

except that you can get drugs in prison A and B without treatment they just re-offend you end up spending 1000s and 1000,s sometimes 10,000s to incarcerate someone while they still have access to the drugs and still are not picking up the skills they need to be successful in the real world to stay off drugs and otherwise. Option B is to have labor intensive ( for members of the community judges ECT programs treatment courts that are cheaper, keep non-violent offenders working and out in the community and having a better chance of them staying clean upon release. Now, there are some treatment programs behind bars but the average ones behind bars are not NEARLY as effective ( unless they have other skills with them ( which usually means the program is either out of general population OR in certain secure treatment rehab centers that are part treatment, part minimum security prison in some cases towards the end part half way house. My cousin got out of one of those treatment places in June still on probation been in and out of traditional jail for 20 years.

The other benefit with them being in the community is not only does it allow them to be out with their family, BUT also if their crime was something with a victim say theft to support their drug habit part of their sentence can be paying that back without the person having to wait years for them to get out to get really any serious amount of money back.

Servus said:

I often recommend this video when this kind of topic comes up. Steve Gregg has been an expository Bible teacher for decades. ..

Click to expand...

I love Steve Gregg, he is a great teacher, there is a forum debate where I debated Conditionalism, and other forms of eschatology with him on his forum for over a year:

NewLifeInChristJesus said:

I was just thinking about Romans 8:1. It comes right after chapter 7's discusion of the conflicts inside a person who serves God with his mind but serves sin with the flesh (Ro 7:25 b) and it expounds upon the victory Christ gives us over the wretchedness we feel for being so close to sin (Ro 7:24-25a).

The point is that God corrects us whenever we go astray (Heb 12). His correction does not come with condemnation.

Click to expand...

I know we're never judged by God but "chastened" (Heb 12:6, 7), unless you can judge the Lord Jesus! I don't know why I didn't understand what you meant by "the lack of condemnation for those who are in Christ." Of course it means absence of judgement to believers.

I'm trying to let others know that believers are always forgiven, it's not like we go in and out of His forgiveness. He knows we want to please Him as much as possible, because He always "works" (causes) this in us (Phl 2:13). I thank God for His forgiveness all the time.

Under the Law, Christ gave the Jews a model prayer that involved asking for forgiveness when they pray, because "It is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins" (Heb 10:4). They still had to offer up sin sacrifices because the sin was still present, since the blood of animals could not "take away sin"; but "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness" (1John 1:9).

Forgiving all unrighteousness means permanent forgiveness, so we don't need to continue asking (unless we don't understand permanent forgiveness), but thanking Him. God can do this because the Lord Jesus' expiation for our sin permanently "took away" all our sin, past, present and future. Taking away "all unrighteousness" is the same as saying all our sin!

Though we ignorantly sin (Num 15:24-29), God does not see us as after the old man or sin nature, because "You are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit" (Rom 8:9). To be in the flesh (sin nature) means your sin is yet with you! The word "flesh" in the NT almost always refers to the sin nature of man's spirit:

1. the flesh, denotes mere human nature, the earthly nature of man apart from divine influence, and therefore prone to sin and opposed to God. -Strong's G4561 - sarx. G4561 - sarx - Strong's Greek Lexicon (kjv)

Hans Blaster said:

what?

It is nonsense.

Click to expand...

I already provided evidence supporting my claims, by The Council of Europe, Research Gate, and the British Educational Research Journal. Here they are again:

Rose_bud said:

Maybe we don't do more acts of justice because we've started to see them as separate from sharing the gospel.

Click to expand...

Yet the Gospel of the Kingdom, Jesus' only gospel, was in following the Father's Kingdom/will was to act in servitude to both God and each other. It is the gospel.

The Western Journal seems to have a bunch of rage bait stories. That story quoted the daily mail and twitters dom_lucre who is problematic by himself and all over the place when it comes to narratives as he is mostly commenting for click bait.

The Western Journal is rated as having a hyper-partisan right bias and is considered unreliable due to its tendency to publish sensationalized or misleading stories. It aims to promote conservative values but has faced criticism for its lack of factual accuracy.

DamianWarS said:

except he doesn't say this. Paul doesn't say it either. there is an elephant in the room you're refusing to admit is there. Hebrews tells us the old covenant is obsolete, the 10 are the covenant document and seal of the old covenant so they are obsolete. so how can both Jesus and Paul point to a system under the 10 while at the same time it is made obsolete?

Click to expand...

Because they both understood that, while the law was incapable of actually producing holinesss in us, it was nonetheless holy, right, spiritual and good as per Rom 7, testifying to another righteousness that could actually accomplish what the law could not. So the OC was made obsolete only because the NC could actually produce the authentic obedience that the old could not. Basil of Caesarea, a 4th century bishop, sheds some light here:
“If we turn away from evil out of fear of punishment, we are in the position of slaves. If we pursue the enticement of wages, . . . we resemble mercenaries. Finally if we obey for the sake of the good itself and out of love for him who commands . . . we are in the position of children.”

As a missionary in ongoing training and outreach, I can assure you that what occurred would not in any way correspond with being a real, actual missionary in practice.

We Listen first and then befriend, because shaming someone publicly like this is NOT love and hurts people instead, more likely driving them away.

Giving a blessing would plant seeds!

rjs330 said:

I dont know if you are or aren't. I just want you not to twist scripture into some sort of political document for your personal political cause. Its a violation of scripture to do so.

Click to expand...

How so? Or is that a right you reserve to yourself?

Old Covenant (Mosaic Covenant)
Nature: External laws (stone tablets), sacrificial system, ritualistic.
Goal: To reveal sin, expose human inability, and act as a "schoolmaster" leading to Christ (Galatians 3:24).
Focus: Righteousness by works; people promising to obey (Exodus 19:8).
Outcome: Ministry of death, condemnation, and imperfection (2 Corinthians 3:7-9).

New Covenant (Covenant of Grace)
Nature: Internalized law (heart), spiritual regeneration, Holy Spirit's work.
Goal: To provide true cleansing and life through Christ's perfect sacrifice.
Focus: Righteousness by faith and grace, accepting Christ's imputed righteousness.
Outcome: Life, perfection, covering of sin, freedom (Hebrews 8:10-13, Romans 4:1-8).

I admit, this is not my favorite subject to write about, for it can be a confusing subject, for certain. So, I will try to make it simple to understand for all of us. The Jews of old were under the Old Covenant (The Law), and it was filled with all kinds of liturgical, ceremonial, sacrificial, purification, circumcision, dietary, and Sabbath laws that God’s people, the Jews, had to obey. But we who believe in Jesus Christ are not under that covenant.


This is speaking of Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, who is God, and who is our creator God (see John 1:1-36). He left his throne in heaven, came to the earth, and was born as a baby to a virgin woman, but conceived of the Holy Spirit and not of man, so he was not born with a sin nature as we are, and he never sinned. When he lived on the earth he was fully God and fully human. And at the age of 30 he began his earthly ministry, the primary part of which was sharing the message of the gospel of Christ.

For Jesus Christ taught that to come to him we must deny self, take up our cross daily (die daily to sin), and follow (obey) him. For if we hold on to living in sin and for self, we will lose our lives for eternity. But if we deny self, die daily to sin, by the Spirit, and we walk in obedience to our Lord and to his commands, in his power, then we have eternal life with God. For not everyone who calls him “Lord” will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one DOING (obeying) the will of God (see Luke 9:23-26; Matthew 7:21-23).

And so it is essential that we understand the message of the gospel taught by Jesus so that we comprehend this whole matter of The Law. For The Law is generally a reference to the Old Covenant God had with his people Israel, Jews only. But once Jesus was crucified on that cross to deliver us out of our slavery to sin, the Old Covenant was done away with, and the New Covenant came into being. But the New Covenant is not lawless, for under the New Covenant we still have to obey our Lord and his commandments.


So, there is The Law, which was the Old Covenant, which had all those liturgical and ceremonial laws the Jews had to follow. And there is the New Covenant God has with his people Israel (Jew and Gentile by faith in Jesus Christ) which did away with all the liturgical and ceremonial laws, but which still requires that we obey our Lord and his commands under the New Covenant. And what God requires of us under the New Covenant is mainly that we die with Christ to sin and we walk in obedience to his commands.

And his laws under the New Covenant have mainly to do with love, grace, morality, faithfulness, honesty, and doing what pleases God and what is righteous in the eyes of the Lord, and that which submits to Christ as Lord and surrenders to his will and purpose for our lives. It is more, perhaps, about our relationship with Christ as our husband, and our desire to love him by doing what he calls us to do as his followers. And it is not about religious practices which do nothing to change the human heart, mind, and soul.

But the situation the believers in Christ of that time period were being faced with was the Judaizers who were trying to convince the Christians that they had to be circumcised and that they had to hold to some of those ceremonial laws of the Old Covenant. And so Paul let them know plainly that the Israel of God is not those who are merely of Jewish descent, but they are those who are followers of Jesus Christ. And all who do not believe in Christ are not the children of God, so we don’t have to listen to what they say.


And what this is telling us (in vv. 21-31) is that physical Jerusalem is of Hagar, the slave woman, for she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem from above is our mother (allegorically speaking) who bears the children of promise, who are all who believe in Jesus Christ. So we are not to let ourselves be influenced by any Jew who is trying to push us to become more like Jews and to follow the Old Covenant liturgical laws. For all who do not believe in Jesus Christ are not the children of God; not his holy nation.

[Genesis 17:7-9; Genesis 18:19; John 8:18-19,38-47; Romans 2:28-29; Romans 6:1-23; Romans 8:1-14; Romans 9:4-8,25-28; Romans 11:1-36; 1 Corinthians 10:1-22; Galatians 3:16,26-29; Galatians 4:22-31; Ephesians 2:11-22; Ephesians 3:1-6; Hebrews 3:1-19; Hebrews 4:1-16; Hebrews 8:6-13;1 Peter 2:24; 1 John 2:22; Jude 1:5; Revelation 2:9; Revelation 3:9]

As the Deer

By Martin J. Nystrom
Based off Psalm 42:1

As the deer panteth for the water
So my soul longeth after You
You alone are my heart's desire
And I long to worship You

You alone are my strength, my shield
To You alone may my spirit yield
You alone are my heart's desire
And I long to worship You

Login to view embedded media
Caution: This link may contain ads

The Law vs The Law
An Original Work / December 12, 2025
Christ’s Free Servant, Sue J Love

Christsfreeservant said:

I admit, this is not my favorite subject to write about, for it can be a confusing subject, for certain. So, I will try to make it simple to understand for all of us. The Jews of old were under the Old Covenant (The Law), and it was filled with all kinds of liturgical, ceremonial, sacrificial, purification, circumcision, dietary, and Sabbath laws that God’s people, the Jews, had to obey. But we who believe in Jesus Christ are not under that covenant.

“But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, so that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.” (Galatians 4:4-5 NASB1995)​

This is speaking of Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, who is God, and who is our creator God (see John 1:1-36). He left his throne in heaven, came to the earth, and was born as a baby to a virgin woman, but conceived of the Holy Spirit and not of man, so he was not born with a sin nature as we are, and he never sinned. When he lived on the earth he was fully God and fully human. And at the age of 30 he began his earthly ministry, the primary part of which was sharing the message of the gospel of Christ.

For Jesus Christ taught that to come to him we must deny self, take up our cross daily (die daily to sin), and follow (obey) him. For if we hold on to living in sin and for self, we will lose our lives for eternity. But if we deny self, die daily to sin, by the Spirit, and we walk in obedience to our Lord and to his commands, in his power, then we have eternal life with God. For not everyone who calls him “Lord” will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one DOING (obeying) the will of God (see Luke 9:23-26; Matthew 7:21-23).

And so it is essential that we understand the message of the gospel taught by Jesus so that we comprehend this whole matter of The Law. For The Law is generally a reference to the Old Covenant God had with his people Israel, Jews only. But once Jesus was crucified on that cross to deliver us out of our slavery to sin, the Old Covenant was done away with, and the New Covenant came into being. But the New Covenant is not lawless, for under the New Covenant we still have to obey our Lord and his commandments.

“For you were called to freedom, brethren; only do not turn your freedom into an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another. For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself’” (Galatians 5:13-14 NASB1995).​

​

“Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God” (Galatians 5:19-21 NASB1995).​

So, there is The Law, which was the Old Covenant, which had all those liturgical and ceremonial laws the Jews had to follow. And there is the New Covenant God has with his people Israel (Jew and Gentile by faith in Jesus Christ) which did away with all the liturgical and ceremonial laws, but which still requires that we obey our Lord and his commands under the New Covenant. And what God requires of us under the New Covenant is mainly that we die with Christ to sin and we walk in obedience to his commands.

And his laws under the New Covenant have mainly to do with love, grace, morality, faithfulness, honesty, and doing what pleases God and what is righteous in the eyes of the Lord, and that which submits to Christ as Lord and surrenders to his will and purpose for our lives. It is more, perhaps, about our relationship with Christ as our husband, and our desire to love him by doing what he calls us to do as his followers. And it is not about religious practices which do nothing to change the human heart, mind, and soul.

But the situation the believers in Christ of that time period were being faced with was the Judaizers who were trying to convince the Christians that they had to be circumcised and that they had to hold to some of those ceremonial laws of the Old Covenant. And so Paul let them know plainly that the Israel of God is not those who are merely of Jewish descent, but they are those who are followers of Jesus Christ. And all who do not believe in Christ are not the children of God, so we don’t have to listen to what they say.

“And you brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise. But as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so it is now also. But what does the Scripture say? ‘Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be an heir with the son of the free woman.’ So then, brethren, we are not children of a bondwoman, but of the free woman.” (Galatians 4:28-31 NASB1995)​

And what this is telling us (in vv. 21-31) is that physical Jerusalem is of Hagar, the slave woman, for she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem from above is our mother (allegorically speaking) who bears the children of promise, who are all who believe in Jesus Christ. So we are not to let ourselves be influenced by any Jew who is trying to push us to become more like Jews and to follow the Old Covenant liturgical laws. For all who do not believe in Jesus Christ are not the children of God; not his holy nation.

[Genesis 17:7-9; Genesis 18:19; John 8:18-19,38-47; Romans 2:28-29; Romans 6:1-23; Romans 8:1-14; Romans 9:4-8,25-28; Romans 11:1-36; 1 Corinthians 10:1-22; Galatians 3:16,26-29; Galatians 4:22-31; Ephesians 2:11-22; Ephesians 3:1-6; Hebrews 3:1-19; Hebrews 4:1-16; Hebrews 8:6-13;1 Peter 2:24; 1 John 2:22; Jude 1:5; Revelation 2:9; Revelation 3:9]

As the Deer

By Martin J. Nystrom
Based off Psalm 42:1

As the deer panteth for the water
So my soul longeth after You
You alone are my heart's desire
And I long to worship You

You alone are my strength, my shield
To You alone may my spirit yield
You alone are my heart's desire
And I long to worship You

Login to view embedded media
Caution: This link may contain ads

The Law vs The Law
An Original Work / December 12, 2025
Christ’s Free Servant, Sue J Love

Click to expand...

Old Covenant (Mosaic Covenant)
Nature: External laws (stone tablets), sacrificial system, ritualistic.
Goal: To reveal sin, expose human inability, and act as a "schoolmaster" leading to Christ (Galatians 3:24).
Focus: Righteousness by works; people promising to obey (Exodus 19:8).
Outcome: Ministry of death, condemnation, and imperfection (2 Corinthians 3:7-9).

New Covenant (Covenant of Grace)
Nature: Internalized law (heart), spiritual regeneration, Holy Spirit's work.
Goal: To provide true cleansing and life through Christ's perfect sacrifice.
Focus: Righteousness by faith and grace, accepting Christ's imputed righteousness.
Outcome: Life, perfection, covering of sin, freedom (Hebrews 8:10-13, Romans 4:1-8).

fhansen said:

The only thing I'd add is that, in order to really get the things done that justice and love demand, people with those personal objectives must often join together, in a social context and united effort IOW. And with no grandstanding required or desired.

Click to expand...

Yes, a community as the original Way following a principle, not a human authority/government. The people supported each other, not some self declared HOA.

Always in His Presence said:

All of which directly speak of Salvation - not one mentions Baptism. Which is what I was addressing

Click to expand...

Of course they don't mention baptism. Baptists always love to go to all passages of Scripture that don't teach anything about baptism and children whatsoever and try to prove who should or should not be baptized. Strange way of doing exegesis. Kinda like going to passages of Scripture that only teach end time theology and say....we should not pray because all these passages of Scripture don't mention prayer. Strange.

Our main rule for interpreting Scripture is: CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT. We only use passages of Scripture that teach something about baptism and children mentioned contextually together. Are there passages of Scripture in the NT that mention children and baptism contextually together? Of course there are.

Baptists use strange hermenuetics in order to explain away baptism including infants altogether.

Strong in Him said:

People who went to the moon, you mean.

Click to expand...

Of course.

CLEEB said:

The

The root of the tree are the saints before Christ, this would be all the people of GOD. THIS is similar to the building Paul described, the foundation comparable to the root and what is built on the foundation to the tree and branches. The entire structure is the church. Jesus was the stone the builders rejected that became the chief cornerstone. These two analogies are not exactly the same but the idea is there were saints before Christ, Christians before Christ. GOD worked in times past by the prophets but now only through Christ. It was in these past times that GOD did call and choose certain people and gave them HIS spirit. The people in Hebrews 11 are those people in times past, the root of the olive tree.

Click to expand...

Other views:

AI summary:
In the biblical context, particularly in Romans 11, the root of the olive tree is understood to be the Abrahamic covenant and its foundational promises, which are intrinsically linked to God's faithfulness and the patriarch Abraham. The root symbolizes the source of spiritual blessing and holiness, from which the branches—both natural (ethnic Israel) and grafted-in (Gentile believers)—derive their nourishment and spiritual life. Some interpretations identify the root as God Himself, with Christ as the trunk, and the branches representing those who follow God through Christ, emphasizing that the holiness of the root ensures the holiness of the branches. The root is described as holy, and because of this, the branches partake in its sanctity and fruitfulness. This imagery underscores the continuity of God's covenantal plan, where the spiritual blessings flow from the original promises made to Abraham and are ultimately fulfilled in Christ.

David Lamb said:

So as a member of a church, one is part of the church. And Christians take par in church services to worship God and study His word.

Click to expand...

You mean not school or an authoritative institution/government?

peter2 said:

Actually, i understand what you say, and would fully agree, had you tell this about one of his male disciples.
But Mary is a female person, with a female sensitivity, then.
i mean : she knows how men pretend to feel no pain at the very moment of their sufferings. It's their conception of virility.
Indeed, it sounds like Jesus' sorrows on the cross also was an expression of all the pains men hide to look virile. About the meditative Mary, i doubt a little she was duped by these pretendings of men.

What's more, she also was a mother : i assume she had good reasons to worry for the 12 year old Jesus' sake when they looked for him. She knew danger does exist ; Didn't they have to flee to Egypt to escape massacre ? If non vulnerable, would they have had to ?

As believer of Gabriel' speech, finally though, she believed his reign was supposed to happen for ever. This is more where i suppose lies a paradox

Indeed,
She could have wondered of what need is death (or suffering, yes..) for an everlasting reign ?

Click to expand...

Jesus told his disciples multiple times that he would be crucified and resurrected, explicitly stating he would suffer, be killed, and rise again on the third day,

he disciples did not fully believe or understand Jesus' predictions of his crucifixion and resurrection; they were confused, fearful, in denial, and slow to grasp the concept, often forgetting or misinterpreting his clear statements until after the events happened, even struggling to recognize the risen Jesus at first.

jonojim1337 said:

Weren’t Pharisees the ones accusing him of working on the Sabbath.

Click to expand...

Not only that, but Jesus healed the man with the withered hand on the Sabbath, in addition to His disciples reaping grain on the Sabbath. Moreover, Jesus forgave the paralytic man of sin. What kind of example did Jesus set for Sabbath activities?

samaus123456789 said:

The man of sin had to happen before 70 AD. He was going to sit in the physical temple of God which stopped existing 70 AD. If a replica OT temple was built the God of Abrahams spirit would not be in it so it can not be a temple of God. It was likely one of the zealots that put a statue of himself in it by the sound of it. I made a post on Daniel 9 how it ended 70 AD Daniel 9 ended 70 AD . Rev 1-12 happened 70 AD so the two witnesses happened 70 AD. Yes according to Gospel of Nicodemus, History of Joseph the Carpenter, and Apocalypse of Peter the two witnesses were going to be Enoch, and Eiljah. All 3 texts are internally written pre 70 AD, and have a prophecy of those 2 witnesses looking forward not written past tense. All 3 texts are apocrypha inspired for the wise only. Gospel of Nic, and History of Joseph are the most important two out of them. Josephus described this guy
Jesus ben Ananias - Wikipedia

which is interesting although it does not match Rev 11. So that is not one of the two witnesses but it gives an idea of what they might of looked like to outsiders- crazy people.

Click to expand...

These extrabiblical narratives are not actually Scripture; otherwise, they would have been included in the canons. The early church fathers, with the help of the Holy Spirit, determined which of the many early church writings were Scripture and which were not.

If the preterist view is the correct view:

If this man of sin lived in the first century AD., he was most likely John of Gischala.

AI summary: The "man of sin" mentioned in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 is a figure associated with the events leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, according to preterist interpretations. One prominent candidate is John of Gischala, a Jewish Zealot leader who rose to power during the Great Revolt against Rome. He is believed to have fulfilled the prophecy by throwing off the Mosaic Law, inciting civil war, famine, and crime in Jerusalem, and positioning himself as a despotic ruler who symbolically and literally "took his seat in the Temple of God," exalting himself over the Temple’s objects of worship. His actions are seen as aligning with the description of the man of sin who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God.

It seems to me that these Thessalonians and the other first-century Christians could have been the intended audience for the actual fulfillment of the following:

2 Thessalonians 2:3-12
Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our assembling to meet him, we beg you, brethren, 2 not to be quickly shaken in mind or excited, either by spirit or by word, or by letter purporting to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 3 Let no one deceive you in any way; for that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God. 5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you this? 6 And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, and the Lord Jesus will slay him with the breath of his mouth and destroy him by his appearing and his coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one by the activity of Satan will be with all power and with pretended signs and wonders, 10 and with all wicked deception for those who are to perish, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 11 Therefore God sends upon them a strong delusion, to make them believe what is false, 12 so that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Is the breath of his mouth actually the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ? Does his appearing and his coming mean the appearance and the power of the Roman armies? Luke 21:20

It seems to me that it is St. Michael, the archangel, who will bind the final antichrist and false prophet and cast them into the lake of fire. St. Michael is of the same angelic hierarchy as Satan, and so he will defeat Satan at the sound of the last trumpet.

So much fun to speculate!

What is important, though, is to ask ourselves, "Am I ready to meet the Lord right now?" If our answer is "no," then we need to repent and confess our sins so that Jesus will forgive us and we will become God's friend once again.

The bible talks about 'heavenly gift', christians can experience things from heaven/God.

Also says we will have affliction.

Because they want American citizenship and not the citizenship of the Roman Empire.

bling said:

Acts 8: 14 When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to Samaria. 15 When they arrived, they prayed for the new believers there that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 because the Holy Spirit had not yet come on any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit. 18 When Simon saw that the Spirit was given at the laying on of the apostles’ hands, he offered them money 19 and said, “Give me also this ability so that everyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit.”

Acts 8 seems to be saying the Samaritans were immersed water baptized, but had not received the outwardly visible miraculous powers of the Spirit until the Apostles laid hands on them, so water baptism was around separate from Holy Spirit baptism. This is also seen in Acts 19: 4 Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” 5 On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6 When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. 7 There were about twelve men in all.

Acts 19:6 is not a continuation of Acts 19:5 with some translators putting an period or a conjunction between them showing separation. Acts 19:6 is no a description of the baptism, but you might want further study on this.

Acts 10: 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God. Then Peter said, 47 “Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.” 48 So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days.

Acts 11: 15 “As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them as he had come on us at the beginning. 16 Then I remembered what the Lord had said: ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ 17 So if God gave them the same gift he gave us who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to think that I could stand in God’s way?”

Peter is water Baptizing and the Spirit seems to be Spiritually baptizing these gentiles first. Notice Peter has to go back to Pentecost to get a similar “Baptism of the Spirit” example so it was not regularly happening.

A book could be written on Christian water baptism and the Holy Spirit baptism, which seem to be two different actions.

Click to expand...

I'll Quote Macarthur for context. on these passages in Acts. If you can give me your thoughts on this.


" the believers in Samaria who were converted under the ministry of Philip had to wait a short while to receive the baptism with the Holy Spirit, until Peter and John came up to Samaria and laid hands on the converts (Acts 8:17). In that unique transitional situation as the Church was beginning, those particular believers had to wait for the Holy Spirit, but they were not told to seek Him. The purpose for that exception was to demonstrate to the apostles, and to bring word back to the Jewish believers in general, that the same Holy Spirit baptized and filled Samaritan believers as baptized and filled Jewish believers--just a short while later Peter and a few other Jewish Christians were sent to witness to Cornelius and his household in order to be convinced that the gospel was for all men and to see that "the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also"(Acts 10:44-45). Those special transitional events did not represent the norm, as our present text makes clear, but were given to indicate to all that the body was one"....

"Why did the Samaritans (and later the Gentiles) have to wait for the apostles before receiving the Spirit? For centuries, the Samaritans and the Jews had been bitter rivals. If the Samaritans had received the Spirit independent of the Jerusalem, that rift would have been perpetuated. There could well have been two separate churches, a Jewish church and a Samaritan church. But God had designed one church, in which "there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female," but "all are one in Christ Jesus" (Gal. 3:2.)...

By delaying the Spirit's coming until Peter and John arrived, God preserved the unity of the church. The apostles needed to see for themselves, and give firsthand testimony to the Jerusalem church, that the Spirit came upon the Samaritans. The Samaritans also needed to learn that they were subject to apostolic authority. The Jewish believers and Samaritans were thus linked together in one body....

Today, believers receive the Spirit at salvation (cf.1 Cor. 12:13). There was no need for delay after Jews, Gentiles, Samaritans, and Old Testament saints were already included in the church. (Macarthur)


Today...

"Being filled with the spirit must be distinguished from being baptized with the spirit. The apostle Paul carefully defines the baptism with the spirit as that act of Christ by which He places believers into His body (Romans 6:4-6; 1 Corinthians 12:13; Galatians 3:27). In contrast to much errant teaching today, the New Testament nowhere commands believers to seek the baptism with the Holy Spirit. It is a sovereign, single, unrepeatable act on Gods part, and is no more an experience than are its companions justification and adoption. Although some wrongly view the baptism with the Spirit as the initiation into the ranks of the spiritual elite, nothing could be further from the truth. The purpose of the baptism with the spirit is not to divide the body of Christ, but to unify it. As Paul wrote to the Corinthians, through the baptism with the Spirit "we were all baptized into one body" (1 Corinthians 12:13; cf. Galatians 3:26-27; Ephesians 4:4-6)

Unlike the baptism with the Spirit, being filled with the Spirit is an experience and should be continuous. Although filled initially on the day of Pentecost, Peter was filled again in Acts 4:8. Many of the same people filled with the Spirit in Acts 2 were filled again in Acts 4:31. Acts 6:5 describes Stephen as a man "full of faith and the Holy Spirit," yet Acts 7:55 records his being filled again. Paul was filled with the Spirit in Acts 9:17 and again in Acts 13:9.

While there is no command in scripture to be baptized with the Spirit, believers are commanded to be filled with the Spirit (Ephesians 5:18 ). The grammatical construction of that passage indicates believers are to be continuously being filled with the Spirit. Those who would be filled with the Spirit must first empty themselves. That involves confession of sin and dying to selfishness and self will. To be filled with the Holy Spirit is to consciously practice the presence of the Lord Jesus Christ and to have a mind saturated with the Word of God. Colossians 3:16-25 delineates the results of "letting the word of Christ richly dwell" in us. They are the same ones that result from the filling of the Spirit (Ephesians 5:19-33). As believers yield the moment by moment decisions of life to His control, they "walk by the Spirit" (Galatians 5:16). The baptism of the Spirit grants the power that the filling with the Spirit unleashes." (Macarthur)

I wish this part of the forum was more active.

How is everyone doing? Has anyone read anything or heard anything good lately?

There's a couple of new blog post on Sheila Gregoire. I'll post them below: