Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | why was the thief saved without baptism? | Luke 23:43 | kalos | 132872 | ||
II. Is baptism needed for salvation? "In Acts 2:38, Peter appears to link forgiveness of sins to baptism. But there are at least two plausible interpretations of this verse that do not connect forgiveness of sin with baptism. It is possible to translate the Greek preposition eis "because of," or "on the basis of," instead of "for." It is used in that sense in Matthew 3:11; 12:41; and Luke 11:32. It is also possible to take the clause "and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ" as parenthetical. Support for that interpretation comes from that fact that "repent" and "your" are plural, while "be baptized" is singular, thus setting it off from the rest of the sentence. If that interpretation is correct, the verse would read "Repent (and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ) for the forgiveness of your sins." Forgiveness is thus connected with repentance, not baptism, in keeping with the consistent teaching of the New Testament (cf. Luke 24:47; John 3:18; Acts 5:31; 10:43; 13:38; 26:18; Ephesians 5:26). "Mark 16:16, a verse often quoted to prove baptism is necessary for salvation, is actually a proof of the opposite. Notice that the basis for condemnation in that verse is not the failure to be baptized, but only the failure to believe. Baptism is mentioned in the first part of the verse because it was the outward symbol that always accompanied the inward belief. I might also mention that many textual scholars think it unlikely that vv. 9-20 are an authentic part of Mark's gospel. We can't discuss here all the textual evidence that has caused many New Testament scholars to reject the passage. But you can find a thorough discussion in Bruce Metzger, et al., A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, pp. 122-128, and William Hendriksen, The Gospel of Mark, pp. 682-687. "Water baptism does not seem to be what Peter has in view in 1 Peter 3:21. The English word "baptism" is simply a transliteration of the Greek word baptizo, which means "to immerse." Baptizo does not always refer to water baptism in the New Testament (cf. Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:8; 7:4; 10:38-39; Luke 3:16; 11:38; 12:50; John 1:33; Acts 1:5; 11:16; 1 Corinthians 10:2; 12:13). Peter is not talking about immersion in water, as the phrase "not the removal of dirt from the flesh" indicates. He is referring to immersion in Christ's death and resurrection through "an appeal to God for a good conscience," or repentance. "I also do not believe water baptism is in view in Romans 6 or Galatians 3. I see in those passages a reference to the baptism in the Holy Spirit (cf. 1 Corinthians 12:13). For a detailed exposition of those passages, I refer you to my commentaries on Galatians and Romans, or the tapes of my sermons on Galatians 3 and Romans 6. "In Acts 22:16, Paul recounts the words of Ananias to him following his experience on the Damascus road: "Arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name." It is best to connect the phrase "wash away your sins" with "calling on His name." If we connect it with "be baptized," the Greek participle epikalesamenos ("calling") would have no antecedent. Paul's sins were washed away not by baptism, but by calling on His name. "Baptism is certainly important, and required of every believer. However, the New Testament does not teach that baptism is necessary for salvation." (http://www.gty.org/IssuesandAnswers/archive/baptism.htm) |
||||||
2 | why was the thief saved without baptism? | Luke 23:43 | jelkins | 133351 | ||
Regarding your Note II About the Greek word, EIS. The following information is from a friend and preacher of the gospel. The Greek word, eis, is a preposition indicating motion or direction; such as, to, into, toward, for, among. It is used about 1,500 times, and overwhelmingly, translators have not translated it “because of.” It would seem that if “because of” were an accepted definition, it could be substituted in any one of those places. If, in Acts 2:38, the ‘eis’ could mean “baptized ‘because of’ (instead of ‘for’) remission of sins,” then, it would follow that it must also mean “repent because of remission of sins,” because the verse says “repent and be baptized..,” and that doesn’t quite fit reasoning or logic. If the “because of” argument works for Acts 2:38, why not for Matt 26:28? Or, Romans 10:10, which say: Matt 26:28, “For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for (because of?) the remission of sins.” Rom 10:10. “For with the heart man believeth unto (because of?) righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto (because of?) salvation.” Kalos, in Acts 2:38, you try to link forgiveness of sins to repentance by partitioning off in parentheses the words about baptism. I offer II Cor 7:10 which says “For godly sorrow produces repentance leading to salvation,” showing that at the point of repentance, you haven’t got forgiveness of sins yet. I find it hard to believe that anyone can misunderstand Mark 16:16. The text speaks for itself. However, you make an effort to force it to conform to your interpretations about baptism. I have heard the proposition that Mark 16:9-20 may not be an authentic part of Mark’s writings, but the doctrine of Christ regarding baptism for remission of sins is not dependant on that text. I ask, why couldn’t 1 Peter 3:20-21 be saying, as Noah and family were saved by water, so are we also saved by water? Read it again. If my understanding about the Holy Spirit baptism is correct, as stated in previous notes on this forum, and it is most certainly plausible, then Rom 6 and Gal 3 are most certainly talking about water baptism. Again, in your comments about Paul’s conversion in Acts 22:16, I see you trying to fit this clear text about baptism into your mold. Let it speak for itself. You say, "Baptism is certainly important, and required of every believer. However, the New Testament does not teach that baptism is necessary for salvation." I say, if as you say, baptism is “required of every believer,” then it must be the one baptism in Eph 4. I invite all to do a study of the 8-10 cases of conversion in Acts, keeping in mind the plan of salvation was given first in Acts 2:38. You decide if baptism is necessary for salvation. Suggest you leave the cases of conversion talked about in Matt – John on the other side of the cross. Kalos, I will say to you as I said to Tim. You are preaching two baptisms instead of one. Should I believe you, or God? |
||||||
3 | why was the thief saved without baptism? | Luke 23:43 | Morant61 | 133358 | ||
Greetings Jelkins! You wrote: "The Greek word, eis, is a preposition indicating motion or direction; such as, to, into, toward, for, among. It is used about 1,500 times, and overwhelmingly, translators have not translated it “because of.” It would seem that if “because of” were an accepted definition, it could be substituted in any one of those places." This is not quite accurate. Words can have various meanings depending upon context. For instance, prepostions can be used with other words to produce different meanings. BAG, the definitive lexicon of Greek words lists 9 distinct different meanings with a variety of sub-meanings. 'Eis' can mean 'at' or 'because of'. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
4 | why was the thief saved without baptism? | Luke 23:43 | jelkins | 133703 | ||
Thanks for your response, Tim. I will check more into what you say. In the meantime, for anyone interested, here is a link to The Bible Truths Online Greek Course, Lesson Seven titled the Definite Article and Prepositions. Sublinks to articles about Jesus' Diety, the ceasation of miracles, and the "for" in Acts 2:38. www.bibletruths.net choose "the Bible" "Study Course" "Site Map" "On-line Greek Course" "Lesson Seven" |
||||||