Therein lies the problem with relying on the Greek, now slowly read this next word...ALONE.
For therein lies the problem in ANY language.
In ANY language, the scope and context, or overall narrative, OFTEN overrule mood, tense, etc.
ECT IS ACTS 2:38 and verse 39 MISUNDERSTOOD , YES IT IS !!
- Thread starter DAN P
- Start date
Therein lies the problem with relying on the Greek, now slowly read this next word...ALONE.
For therein lies the problem in ANY language.
In ANY language, the scope and context, or overall narrative, OFTEN overrule mood, tense, etc.
Dan
There are instances in textual authority that indicate that the long reading of Mt28:19 is not original. The best instance is simply that the Book of Acts NEVER follows Mt28:19 - but contains the name of Jesus. I am not sure when Acts is dated - nor when Mt was dated - not that anyone really knows - but it seems intuitively obvious that Acts reflects that ACTUAL practice of the 1C church - and we see this as especially attested in light of the REPEATED, clear texts which describe baptism in the name of Jesus.
Best
Aner
There are instances in textual authority that indicate that the long reading of Mt28:19 is not original. The best instance is simply that the Book of Acts NEVER follows Mt28:19 - but contains the name of Jesus. I am not sure when Acts is dated - nor when Mt was dated - not that anyone really knows - but it seems intuitively obvious that Acts reflects that ACTUAL practice of the 1C church - and we see this as especially attested in light of the REPEATED, clear texts which describe baptism in the name of Jesus.
Best
Aner
turbosixx
New member
Amen
Why IN THE NAME OF JESUS is the actual issue.
And that changed as its intent ended up in the sobering truth of Romans 11:25-29 that many still refuse to acknowledge.
This is something "the Church" has long ignored.
It is what Romans 10 is talking about as to Israel and its' reaction in unbelief to said "name of..."
Even today, not many a Jew will submit to the God of their father's " in the name of Jesus."
Even fewer among those few who do; willing to do so among their own "for a testimony unto them."
If all this that I have just posted appears "an enigma" that just goes to show how distorted Romans 9-11 continues to be made due to the continued ignoring of the clear warning of Romans 11:25.
"In the name of Jesus"
Jesus is the name given by Yahweh by which we must be saved - Jesus is the one who comes in the name of Yahweh. These are simply manners of speaking as to representative and authority. Not so common for most of us - very clear if we understand ALL of scripture. Jesus is not Yahweh - he is, as it were, the name of Yahweh or in the name of Yahweh or whatever you want to designate power and authority from Yahweh as Peter clearly states in Acts 2:22ff - cf esp. ver36ff
Amen
Jesus is the name given by Yahweh by which we must be saved - Jesus is the one who comes in the name of Yahweh. These are simply manners of speaking as to representative and authority. Not so common for most of us - very clear if we understand ALL of scripture. Jesus is not Yahweh - he is, as it were, the name of Yahweh or in the name of Yahweh or whatever you want to designate power and authority from Yahweh as Peter clearly states in Acts 2:22ff - cf esp. ver36ff
Amen
No.
Deu 30:2 And shalt return unto the LORD thy God, and shalt obey his voice according to all that I command thee this day, thou and thy children, with all thine heart, and with all thy soul;
Deu 30:3 That then the LORD thy God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will return and gather thee from all the nations, whither the LORD thy God hath scattered thee.
Rev 22:11 He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still. Rev 22:12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.
The fountain was opened up 2000 years ago---
Zec 13:1 In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness.
and this began to occur on the day of Pentecost--
Zec 12:10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.
Zec 12:11 In that day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, as the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon.
Zec 12:12 And the land shall mourn, every family apart; the family of the house of David apart, and their wives apart; the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart;
Zec 12:13 The family of the house of Levi apart, and their wives apart; the family of Shimei apart, and their wives apart;
Zec 12:14 All the families that remain, every family apart, and their wives apart.
as per--
Act 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Act 2:37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
themuzicman
Well-known member
The remainder of Acts makes it clear that what happened at Pentecost is repeated in Samaria and among the Gentiles.
First, the imperfect tense is spoken about a completed action in the past. In this case, it was completed when Peter stopped speaking.
Second, "εφη" just means that Peter said something. It does not speak to the duration of what he spoke.
This is a complete misunderstanding of Greek. You're trying to pour something extraordinary into something ordinary.
Actually, the future tense with an imperative just means that the 2nd verb will result from the first one. We do the same thing in English: "Repent, and you will receive..." The obvious intent is that the future is the result of obeying the command.
Again, complete misunderstanding of Greek (indeed, of language.)
There is nothing here about "Jacob's trouble." Indeed, Peter cites Joel 2:28-32, which gives a sign (tongues, prophecy, dreams, visions by common people, rather than prophets), followed by judgment, which happened in 70AD.
This is just more evidence that dispensationalism is just nonsense.
Hi and dispensationalism is the complete and correct interpretation of the Gospels where Acts 2 BLEND the so-called New Testament ,
So , when did Peter stop speaking wit a verse ?
I say in the MIDDLE of Acts or at the END of Acts 28 ?
Why did PENTECOSTE stop ??
You are not OBEYING the Great Commission of Matt 28:19 and 20 ??
Can you explain Gal 1:14 and explain why Peter practiced Judaism ???????
Let's see you explain Gal 1:14 !!
Acts 2 and PENTECOST during the AGE of Grace is ACCURSED to anyone who says he or she is SAVED by Grace and then ABANDONS it and Practices Mosaic Law !!
dan p
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
:chuckle:
Zec 12:10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced,
Mat 23:39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
It does NOT say blessed is He who comes in His own name.
It says--
Mat 10:40 He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.
The Jews received the saints who were sent into all of the nations, resulting in their obedience to the gospel and they saw Christ.
As I have and thousands of others, but you never have because you follow the contrivings of men and reject Christs message of salvation.
Act 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Act 2:37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
Act 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Act 2:39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
LA
Hi , and just what does the house OF David have to do with the BodY of Christ , since Gal 3:28 says that there CAN NOT be any Jews in the BODY of CHRIST !!
DAN P
Last edited:
themuzicman
Well-known member
If that's the case, then the Church was all wrong for 1800 years, because there was no dispensationalism before the 1800s.
39.
And you missed the close quote at the end of verse 39. Luke is referring to what Peter said there in that moment.
The end of that day, I'd imagine.
Irrelevant to the discussion.
Because Peter was influenced by the Judaizers, and Paul called him on the hypocrisy.
Paul was raised as a Pharisee. So?
You've provided zero basis for this claim.
Danoh is an Acts 2 Dispy
Hi and I meant Gal 2:14 and not Gal 1:14 !!
We see that Peter was still practicing Judaism and never was a PART of the Body of Christ as THERE are nlo Jews in the Body as written in Gal 3:28 and I am RIGHT !!
Pentecosalism and Acts 2 with it's Water Baptism and Tongues and Healing have all been set aside BECAUSE God is not dealing with Israel as Acts 3:47 , the Greek word " ADDED " is in the Greek IMPERFECT TENSE and Jesus is not ADDING to the EKKLLESIA of that day !!
DAN P
themuzicman
Well-known member
If Peter practicing the law and this is what Peter is supposed to be doing, why is Paul calling him out?
notice a couple of things, here:
1) Peter WAS eating with the Gentiles. So, initially he was not living in the law.
2) Only when Judaizers came and pressured Peter did Peter separate himself.
3) Paul (inerrantly, as he is writing Scripture) identifies Peter as "condemned" for practicing the law, and is even called a hypocrite for doing so.
So, what you claim as evidence that Peter continued to practice the law is actually evidence that he was NOT practicing the law UNTIL Judaizers came to pressure him, and Paul calls him CONDEMNED for doing so.
Thus, what Peter was doing was WRONG, and not acceptable.
Paul baptized Gentiles. (1 Cor 1)
Gentiles spoke in tongues in Gentile churches (1 Cor 14)
There is no discontinuity between Jew and Gentile based upon these things.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Hasn't happened yet,
Zech 10
8 In that day shall the Lord defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the Lord before them.
9 And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.
10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.
11 In that day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, as the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon.
12 And the land shall mourn, every family apart; the family of the house of David apart, and their wives apart; the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart;
13 The family of the house of Levi apart, and their wives apart; the family of Shimei apart, and their wives apart;
14 All the families that remain, every family apart, and their wives apart.
themuzicman
Well-known member
What are you talking about? The nations that sent Israel into exile were destroyed, Israel returned to live in the land.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Hasn't happened yet,
Zech 12
12 The burden of the word of the Lord for Israel, saith the Lord, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.
2 Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem.
3 And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.
4 In that day, saith the Lord, I will smite every horse with astonishment, and his rider with madness: and I will open mine eyes upon the house of Judah, and will smite every horse of the people with blindness.
5 And the governors of Judah shall say in their heart, The inhabitants of Jerusalem shall be my strength in the Lord of hosts their God.
6 In that day will I make the governors of Judah like an hearth of fire among the wood, and like a torch of fire in a sheaf; and they shall devour all the people round about, on the right hand and on the left: and Jerusalem shall be inhabited again in her own place, even in Jerusalem.
7 The Lord also shall save the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem do not magnify themselves against Judah.
8 In that day shall the Lord defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the Lord before them.
9 And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.
10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.