Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | On what grounds? | Bible general Archive 1 | Searcher56 | 77175 | ||
Two reposts by Morant61 First of all, the verbs are different numbers. a) 'Repent' is an (Aorist, Active, Imperative, 2nd Person, Plural) verb. b) 'Be baptized' is an (Aorist, Passive, Imperative, 3rd Person, Singular) verb. c) The pronoun in the phrase 'for forgiveness of sins' is a Second Person, Plural pronoun. Therefore, the phrase 'for the forgiveness of sins' cannot be associated with the command to 'be baptized'. It is simply not gramatically possible. The best way to view the verse is the view the command to be baptized as a parenthetical statement: "Repent (plural) (and let each one be baptized (singular) in the Name of Jesus Christ) for the forgiveness of your (plural) sins and you (plural) will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" Failure to account for the changes in number in this verses results in bad interpretation. Secondly, there is evidence to indicate that the phrase 'for the forgiveness of your sins' can also be understood as 'because of' or 'as a result' of the forgiveness of your sins. This same construction is used in Mt. 3:11 and 12:41. If you interpret the word 'eis' in Mt. 3:11 in the same way that you do in Acts 2:38, then baptism produces repentance. Therefore, Acts 2:38 should read: "Be baptized, which leads to repentance..." But, it is clear that Mt. 3:11 indicates that baptism is done as a result of or on the basis of a prior repentance. The same thing is clear in Mt 12:41 as well. Jonah did not preach because of the repentance of Niveveh. Rather, Niveveh repented because of the preaching of Jonah. The same 'eis' contruction is used in both of these verses as is used in Acts 2:38. Therefore, there are two very sound grammatical reasons why Acts 2:38 cannot mean that baptism leads to forgiveness of sins. Combined with this are the countless number of verses which specify faith alone as the only condition of salvation. Between the two lines of evidence, it is very clear that baptism is not necessary for salvation, but is something which those who have already been saved are commanded to do. Post 2 1) The rest of Scripture does not make baptism necessary for salvation, including Acts. Consider the following verses from Acts where forgiveness is mentioned and notice that not one of them links forgiveness with baptism. a) Acts 5:31 - b) Acts 10:43 - c) Acts 13:38-39 - d) Acts 26:18 - Notice that none of these other verses in Acts tie baptism in with the forgiveness of sins. If baptism were essential to salvation, you would think that it would be mentioned in these other verses as well. 2) There are reasons to believe that "for the forgiveness of sins" does not express result, but rather expresses the ground or reason for baptism. The preposition translated as ‘for’ in Acts 2:38 is sometimes used in this way. Consider the following examples and notice that two of them involve baptism (additional evidence that Acts 2:38 should be translated as "on the basis or grounds of the forgiveness of your sins): a) Matthew 3:11 - b) Matthew 12:41 - Allow me to address Mt. 12:41 first. The phrase "repented at the preaching of Jonah" uses the same preposition (eis) as does Acts 2:38. Obviously, the preaching of Jonah was the basis of their repentance, not the other way around. The other example illustrates the same thing and it involves baptism. In Mt. 3:11, baptism did not produce repentance. Rather, repentance was the grounds for baptism. 3) Finally, there is evidence in Acts 2:38 that the middle clause (involving baptism) may be a parenthetical statement. The command to repent is plural. The command to be baptized is singular. This would seems to indicate some break in the chain of thought. If this is the case, the phrase "for the remission of sins" may not even belong with the command to be baptized. |
||||||
2 | On what grounds? | Bible general Archive 1 | disciplerami | 77202 | ||
On Acts 2:38 Hello Tim and Search and everybody else, The argument for parsing Acts 2:38 as you have shown is without merit, because: 1] No translation available has ever translated it such? You claim that the grammar rules are violated; if so, then your argument is not with me, but with every translation board known to man. Can you show me a single translation that has dared to translate Acts 2:38 as you have offered here? If you give no answer, we all must assume that the Greek scholarship is against you. 2] This argument you offer is old, and has been refuted many times. The two commands, “repent” and “be baptized,” are joined by the correlating conjunction “and.” It follows that if repentance is essential to salvation, so also is baptism. [I realize that you must conclude that repentence is not essential to salvation either, but we shall get to that]. 3] The sentence in Acts 2:38 is what's referred to as a Complex Compound Sentence, comprised of three sentences joined by the correlating conjunction, AND, a] Repent ye (AND)… b] Be baptized (3rd,singular, individually) each OF YE (humon, genetive 'of', plural) on the name of Jesus Christ UNTO the remission of the sins OF YE (humon, genetive 'of, plural), (AND)… 1) in this second sub-sentence, it says 'let be baptized each individual of YE into the name of Jesus Christ with a view to remission of sins. c] YE shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 4] Here's where you take a twist by turning the preposition, EIS, into a causal meaning (because), you also make repentence unnecessary for the remission of sins. To be consistent then, you must say that repentence follows only as evidence that you are saved. Where you did argue by this novel translation that repentence is connected to forgiveness and baptism is not, you must now conclude that repentence and baptism are no more connected to forgiveness than the other: except now, they both follow. Here is how you really see this verse: a] “Because you have forgiveness of sins, you are commanded to repent (it is an imperative, as you pointed out) and commanded to be baptized (an imperative also) … or b] “Repent BECAUSE you have been forgiven of sins, and then you must go ahead and be baptized too, but NOT BECAUSE of your former forgiveness of sins…. [it is you who disassociated baptism from forgivess of sins, right?]. Now you must tell us why we must be baptized. All along, you've been disassociating baptism from forgiveness of sins, while connecting repentance to forgiveness of sins. Now your argument is that repentence follows too! Your argument has been that baptism follows. Now you must, to be consistent with your causal explanation for the preposition EIS, say that repentance isn't associated with forgiveness, not any more than baptism is! ! ! If you deal with anything in this response, deal with this. Explain how all along you can make the case that number and person only connects repentance and forgiveness, and baptism therefore follows. Then you introduce the causal argument for EIS and make repentance no more necessary for forgiveness than is baptism. |
||||||