Results 181 - 200 of 567
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: disciplerami Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
181 | To be saved must we be baptised? | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78064 | ||
Dear Tim, I don't think I'm missing the point, instead it may be you who are. The point is that the appositional phrase (parenthetical phrase, as you call it), refers to the same group mentioned in the previous or following phrase (in our case, the previous one). In Acts 2:38, you can't just 'take out' the command to be baptized (and still have the same meaning), because being baptized isn't the same thing as repenting. "Take out this parenthetical statement and the verse is perfectly clear." Yes, in Acts 2:8 the appositional phrase indicates that each individual was hearing. This is supremely important to our Acts 2:38 passage that commands two things: repentance and baptism. Those who were being commanded to repent were also (same PLURAL number of people, even with the singular verb for baptism) being commanded to be baptized. The conjunction KAI ties the two phrases together and forms the required action (of faith, mind you)for receiving forgiveness. You point out that in Acts 2:8 that there are no singular verbs connected to "each", but that doesn't matter. There is a singular verb connected in verse 3 of the same chapter! So your point is moot. 1 Corinthians 16:1,2 is another example. In verse 1, the church is commanded 'do ye also' (2 person plural), followed by 'let each of you [hekastos] 'lay aside' [titheito, 3rd singular). Point? The same plural number commanded to do ye also, are individually commanded to 'lay aside' (singular verb). In Acts 2:38, the argument that you have advanced is that the change in person breaks the connection (conjunction AND) between repentance and baptism: 'repent for the forgiveness of sins and be baptized later for a reason disassociated from salvation.' But this is not allowed. In 1 Cor 16:1,2 you can't disassociate 'each one of you lay aside' from the first plural command to 'do ye also'. Baptism's water has no saving power, but it is the place where God's grace saves. We've already concluded the causal relationship between repentance and forgiveness; it's not much of a leap to command someone to get in the water and 'wash away thy sins.' Have a good day. By the way, how was the group study? I had one too with some of the youth. My dining room table was lined with teens studying the Bible. Disciplerami |
||||||
182 | To be saved must we be baptised? | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78075 | ||
Dear Tim, You statement "Most translations, and rightfully so, try to be as literal as possible" is not addressing the issue. Your job is to show me any translation that depicts the passage as you render it. You can't do it: literal or non-literal translation. Second, the 'baptism clause' in its completeness does not end with '...', but includes 'for the remission of sins.' I asked about the entire verse, is it translated correctly? Repentance is not a work? Really? To 'turn from sin' is not a work. If you want to take that path, then let me do so as well and say that 'baptism is not a work' and salvation follows. Since no one here has suggested that anything is done to "earn salvation", I think it shows a personal bias and is unfair to the other person. Neither I, nor anyone else on this forum, has ever suggested that repentance or baptism is about 'earning salvation', so why even bring it up? We will both attack that straw man. :) "Acceptance of a gift is not a work". Call if what you want, but it's what you must do. "After we RECEIVE" Here's one of my problems with such arguments. The Bible doesn't just tell us to 'receive' Christ, it tells us HOW to receive Christ. You and others can talk about the necessity of ACCEPTING CHRIST into your hearts, but you don't tell me how that is done. Excuse me, but you do. When pressed for an answer, we are told to pray and ask Jesus into our hearts. Give me Scripture and then tell me that the necessity to pray isn't a work. Put your hand on the radio or computer monitor and pray with me... I understand your desire to credit God completely for your salvation; I have the same desire. My forgiveness is not by works of righteousness, but by faith in Christ. But without the works, there is NO FAITH. Good day to you, Disciplerami |
||||||
183 | To be saved must we be baptised? | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78081 | ||
Dear Tim, You misrepresent and cheat the thief of his full response to Christ. He rebuked another. He uttered words of faith. It is not fair or right for you to limit his response to "simply believing" that you might strengthen your argument. The thief did all that was required on that side of the cross. On this side of the cross, we are commanded to repent and be baptized. I'm not about to tell someone all he has to do it believe 'like the thief on the cross.' If someone asks, I don't recommend that you give the advice "do what the thief did." Tell them what Peter said, "Repent and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Chrsit for the remission of your sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." I'm not a Judaizer. Straw man argument again. I'll go after anyone who trust in baptism to save. A Judaizer equaled circumcision to salvation; and being a descendant of Abraham with salvation. That is false. So don't bring that straw man up. I'm no Judaizer. It's sad that the only way you can make your argument is by implying I am. There is a vast difference between "baptism is equal to salvation" and saying, "baptism is the place where God saves." Vast difference. Romans 4, 'credited' to Abraham? That's right, but only when he had a working faith. It is amazing that you can't harmonize Romans 4 and James 2. Abraham DID God's will, first by leaving his home. He SHOWED himself to be a person of faith. But Abraham did not trust that his works were what justified; he understood it was of God. God saw His faith. It is just plain false to suggest that Abraham's faith, credited as righteous, was a NON-WORKING faith. Wrong. Good day Tim, Disciplerami |
||||||
184 | To be saved must we be baptised? | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78090 | ||
Dear Tim, If I show you my faith by my works (baptism), how is that incongruous to salvation by faith? It's not! Judaizers had no faith but in themselves. Isn't that the point in Matthew 6 as they prayed and gave with self-righteousness? Of course it is. Carnal men are impressed by religious piety exercised by Pharisees. But what man is impressed by my being baptized? Baptism is a work of faith, same as belief, confession, and repentance. I believe that faith must be demonstrated in baptism: not faith and be baptized. Faith is at work in the baptism, that is, according to Paul in Colossians 2:12. I didn't say it, Paul did. "buried with Christ in baptism, in which you were also raised by your faith in the working of God..." It is a straw man to suggest that my position is akin to Pharisees and circumcision. I hope you understand my point. Good day. |
||||||
185 | To be saved must we be baptised? | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78092 | ||
The comparison between Acts 2:38 and 1 Corinthians 16:1,2: Acts 2:38 1 Cor 16:1,2 Repent ye (plural) "do you also" (plural) each one (singular) each one (singular) of you (humon,plural) of you (humon, plural) be baptized (3rd,single) lay aside (3rd,singular) Same construction in both. The same ones being told to 'do ye also' and individually be told to 'lay aside'. That is the entire point being made by Thayer when hekastos (each, every one) is used. It relates back to the plural used in the appositional phrase. You write: and it rested (singular) upon each (singular) of them." The only plural in this clause is the pronoun 'of them'. Exactly, just as in the subsentence of Acts 2:38, the only plural in it is the pronoun humon. Just as in Acts 2:3, The verb "sit/be baptized" and noun "each/each" are singular: but the pronouns in both are plural (humon). I have to run. Have a good day. Disciplerami |
||||||
186 | Whose works are required for faith? | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78196 | ||
Greetings, John 6:27 "Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you, for on Him the Father, God, has set His seal." John 6:28 Therefore they said to Him, "What shall we do, so that we may work the works of God?" John 6:29 Jesus answered and said to them, "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent." Good day, Disciplerami |
||||||
187 | To be saved must we be baptised? | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78199 | ||
Tim, You keep trying but you aren't making your case. When comparing 1 Corinthians 16:1,2, you carefully show that the verbs and pronouns are all singular, but why do you fail to mention the genetive plural pronoun, humon? Because you don't fail to mention that the same identical genetive plural pronoun exist in Acts 2:38. You carefully point it out in Acts 2:38, but you omit it from the list of verbs and pronouns in 1 Corinthians 16:2. Why is that? Does it not help your case? Next, you have stated an error in saying: "If Acts 2:38 followed the pattern of Acts 2:3, all of the above plural verbs and pronouns would have been singular!" Acts 2:3 has plural pronoun (autois) following the singular verb and HEKASTOS (each one). Perhaps you just missed that one. So all of the pronouns in Acts 2:38 DON'T have to be singular! to follow the construction of Acts 2:3. Secondly, the plural pronoun in Acts 2:38 in "the sins of YE" matches the plural pronoun in the phrase "be baptized each one of YE". The inspired writer makes the connection between baptism and forgiveness and every Bible translation accurately renders it so. You have made it very clear that Acts 2:38 should be understood to say "repent for the remission of sins" while disassociating baptism from the process. If you say that is the accurate grammatical rendering, then why isn't their one verse to back you up? Repentance and Baptism are necessary for receiving the promises stated at the end of the verse. Disciplerami |
||||||
188 | To be saved must we be baptised? | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78200 | ||
The definition of arrogance: "Since God resist arrogance they probably never will come to the knowledge of the truth because they are still depending on their doing something no matter how much they use the name of Jesus and falsely claim they are trusting in him." Tim, Does reading CDBJ affirmation make you feel better? CDBJ, you err by blaming God for such things: "Until the Father reveals truth to them we are like beating our heads on a brick wall." Do you really mean to suggest that a loving God would willfully withhold the saving truth from someone? CDBJ says that salvation is 100 percent a work of God. But he then contradicts himself by saying man's part: "you must believe, you must exercise faith in Christ for salvation." By the sound of this, I think CDBJ has to take some of the credit for his salvation! Don't you? He obviously is not a purist of the second paradigm. CDBJ has left out the third and correct pardigm: Grace through obedient faith (Romans 1:5:16:26; 1 Thess 1:3). Good day, Disciplerami |
||||||
189 | To be saved must we be baptised? | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78201 | ||
I have to agree with you. I pray that He knows me. | ||||||
190 | To be saved must we be baptised? | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78202 | ||
Straw man alert: "A man isn’t a new creature because of his works, he is a new creature because of his position in Christ." - CDBJ No one has said different. :) Disciplerami |
||||||
191 | To be saved must we be baptised? | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78203 | ||
Dear Sniper, CDBJ has warned you not to be fooled by James when all you did was QUOTE it. You offered no commentary, but only allowed the inspired writer to speak. Also, may I add to something you posted? This passage: "Rom 10:16 However, they did not all heed the good news; for Isaiah says, "LORD, WHO HAS BELIEVED OUR REPORT?" Literally says, "who has OBEYED the GOSPEL...?" Very good post. I agree with you and since you only quote Scripture, God is in agreement with us. Why would anyone warn you of being fooled by James when you were quoting James? Amazing testimony! I choose to obey the Gospel. Jesus says if you love Him you will obey His commands. Well, I obey His commands so I must love Him. And He knows it and He loves Me too. They can set up their straw men all day long and they can knock them down, but they can't touch you when you only speak the truth. Disciplerami God bless you, Disciplerami |
||||||
192 | To be saved must we be baptised? | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78204 | ||
I mean exactly what you have said. I agree with what you have said here and I thank you for standing up for the truth. May God bless you, Disciplerami |
||||||
193 | To be saved must we be baptised? | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78240 | ||
Good point. Works are not a bad word. It only becomes bad when someone is doing them with the Pharisaical attitude in mind, 'what a good boy am I.' Those who are on the other side of this debate will reply that the good 'works' you are describing are done by God. It sounds a little strange when the Bible tells us to 'WORK OUT YOUR SALVATION WITH FEAR AND TREMBLING.' They always quote the next verse but their interpretation of it negates this verse. Nice hearing from you. God bless, Disciplerami |
||||||
194 | To be saved must we be baptised? | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78260 | ||
Tim, Let me see if I understand what you are saying, You write, "To grammatically match the subject (if indeed 'each' were the subject of this clause, which is what I have been denying) the pronoun 'of you' would have to be singular." If I understand your point, you are denying is that the pronoun, humon, which follows the adjective, hekastos, has to be singular if it is the subject of the clause 'let each be baptized'? Is that what you are saying? If I understand your point, then you are wrong. Thayer says, and I quote him again, "when it[HEKASTOS] denotes, 'individually, every one of many,' is often added appositively to nouns and pronouns and verbs in the plural number,' Commenting on 1 Cor 16:2, you say, "Same thing again, 'each' is the subject and all of the pronouns which have 'each' as their antecedent are singular, not plural." Wrong, the very next word following 'each' is a plural pronoun: HUMON. I don't know what you might come back with now, but I know you can't say "each" is not the antecedent of pronoun directly following it. That's just not allowable. I know you aren't going to tell how the rules of grammar don't allow the singular subject and plural pronoun to be connected because they don't agree. You aren't going to say that, are you? You can't because Thayer says it is used appositively with PLURAL nouns, PRONOUNS and verbs. In the Acts 2:38, to follow what you've suggested here would be to splice and splinter that second clause so as to make it unreadable: "baptisthetw hekastos humon." How does anyone follow Greek grammar by saying that the subject 'each/hekastos' is not the antecedent of the plural pronoun 'of YE/humon'? But you say it can't be because it isn't singular. In Acts 2:38 and 1 Cor.16:2, you cannot disassociate that plural pronoun from the antecedent subject "each." It really does seem to me that your theology is guiding your grammar. I have every reason to believe that you are a honest man, but you simply aren't being consistent. You deny the rule that Thayer lays out: singular subject 'each' is used along side plural pronouns (of YE/humon). Saved by Grace, 100 percent Disciplerami p.s. Iron sharpens iron, I'm grateful we could talk. |
||||||
195 | Rejection of the work of God? | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78261 | ||
Greetings, Yes, I would say that if someone doesn't 'accept' the work of God, that person is spiritually dead. No one is going to heaven accept through the righteousness of Christ, credited to him through faith. Faith that pleases God, does not merely hear, does not merely acknowledge, but it does the will of God. Because this DOING is by faith, not by merit, God credits it as righteousness. "But to the one who does not work [does not work to merit eternal life, ME], but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness." - Rom. 4:5 Without faith, works that would be pleasing to God, would be rubbish. Out of faith, I try to let my "light shine before men in such a way THAT THEY MAY SEE [MY] GOOD WORKS and glorify God who is in heaven." - Matthew 5 Thanks and nice communicating with you, Disciplerami |
||||||
196 | Those who call shall be saved | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78262 | ||
Greetings, 1Peter 3:21 tells us that baptism saves because through this act of faith we APPEAL TO GOD FOR A CLEAN CONSCIENCE. This is very similar to what Ananias said to Saul in Acts 22:16, "arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins, CALLING ON HIS NAME.' Romans 10:14 also cites the infamous Joel passage, "Whoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved." As Sniper points out, Acts 2:37 says that the people were pierced to the heart and asked for a remedy. Peter didn't say, "I already answered you, weren't you hearing? Just 'call on the name of the Lord.'" No, instead, Peter replied to them, "Repent all of you, and let each and every one of you submit to an immersion in the name of Jesus Christ with a view to remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." Acts 2:38; 22;16; 1 Peter 3:21 all talk about Baptism, and they all tell us how to CALL on God for salvation. Good day to you, Disciplerami |
||||||
197 | To be saved must we be baptised? | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78285 | ||
Very well said. Disciplerami | ||||||
198 | To be saved must we be baptised? | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78296 | ||
Repost, 2nd paragraph made no sense. Sorry. Tim, Let me try again.:) Let me see if I understand what you are saying, You write, "To grammatically match the subject (if indeed 'each' were the subject of this clause, which is what I have been denying) the pronoun 'of you' would have to be singular." If I understand your point, you are saying that the pronoun, humon, which follows hekastos, has to be singular if it is 'defining' the subject of the clause 'let EACH be baptized'? Is that what you are saying? If I understand your point, then you are wrong. Thayer says, and I quote him again, "when it[HEKASTOS] denotes, 'individually, every one of many,' is often added appositively to nouns and pronouns and verbs in the plural number,' Commenting on 1 Cor 16:2, you say, "Same thing again, 'each' is the subject and all of the pronouns which have 'each' as their antecedent are singular, not plural." Wrong, the very next word following 'each' is a plural pronoun: HUMON. I don't know what you might come back with now, but I know you can't say "each" is not the antecedent of pronoun directly following it. That's just not allowable. I know you aren't going to tell how the rules of grammar don't allow the singular subject and plural pronoun to be connected because they don't agree. You aren't going to say that, are you? You can't because Thayer says it is used appositively with PLURAL nouns, PRONOUNS and verbs. In the Acts 2:38, to follow what you've suggested here would be to splice and splinter that second clause so as to make it unreadable: "baptisthetw hekastos humon." How does anyone follow Greek grammar by saying that the subject 'each/hekastos' is not the antecedent of the plural pronoun 'of YE/humon'? But you say it can't be because it isn't singular. In Acts 2:38 and 1 Cor.16:2, you cannot disassociate that plural pronoun from the antecedent subject "each." It really does seem to me that your theology is guiding your grammar. I have every reason to believe that you are a honest man, but you simply aren't being consistent. You deny the rule that Thayer lays out: singular subject 'each' is used along side plural pronouns (of YE/humon). Saved by Grace, 100 percent Disciplerami p.s. Iron sharpens iron, I'm grateful we could talk. |
||||||
199 | To be saved must we be baptised? | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78380 | ||
Dear Tim, Your example doesn't compare to Acts 2:38 The singular verb and the singular subject and the plural pronoun of "let be baptized individually each of YE" is set appositively next to a plural verb. The appositive phrases match, even though the verb and subject in the second is in the singular. Your example has a singular subject 'team'. Your example does not set HEKASTOS appositively with plural nouns, pronouns, or verbs. Yes, you are right in your example: any proceeding pronouns must be singular because they point back to a singular subject 'team'. However, your use of the HEKASTOS 'each of the many' doesn't fit here because Thayer says the rules has to do with appositive phrases, that it is used alongside plural nouns, pronouns, and verbs. Your appositive phrase about the "Colt's football team" is not plural. Because 'team' is singular, in your sample sentence, the pronouns that relate to it will have to be singular. Your example also doesn't fit because HEKASTOS, each of many FOOTBALL TEAMS [plural] doesn't refer back to the appositive 'Colt's football team.' In Acts 2:38, The first phrase begins with the plural verb "repent YE", and the appositive sentence speaks individually to each of YE--not another group as your example does. Tim: "The same thing is true in Acts 2:38." Nope, unlike your example of the subject being the singular 'team', our example in Acts 2:38 points back to the YE, that were commanded to repent and be baptized. In Acts 2:38, all of the proceeding pronouns must be plural because they point back to the plural, "Repent YE" and back to the appositive phrase "let be baptized each of YE (plural)." But because of the construction of your sample, the pronouns must be singular: apples to oranges :) I understand what you are saying, but you are not being consistent. Your sample sentence is not comparative to the Acts 2:38 passage. The rule that you state only applies to your example. Thanks, Disciplerami p.s. what are your thoughts on the discussion Searcher56 and I are having over the pronoun/water vs. ark debate in 1 Peter 3:20,21? Good day to you. |
||||||
200 | To be saved must we be baptised? | Acts 2:38 | disciplerami | 78385 | ||
Greetings Colin, Mind if I comment briefly? The Bible gives a specific time when the sinner is transferred into the kingdom, just as their is a specific moment in time when you are married. You may, in your example, already be married in your mind, but you are not married to God until you follow the requirement of God (includes following the laws of the land). Likewise, you aren't born again and united with Christ until baptized. May God bless you, Disciplerami |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ] Next > Last [29] >> |