Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Why transliterate "baptizo"? | Bible general Archive 1 | sniper | 77082 | ||
Why did the KJV translaters transliterate "baptizo"? Was it on purpose? Is so, why? | ||||||
2 | Why transliterate "baptizo"? | Bible general Archive 1 | One | 77083 | ||
In the days of the KJV the Catholic Church practiced sprinkling exclusively. If the translators would have translated it immersion King James would have most likely cut their heads off (Cutting their heads off is a personal opinion). So to keep from getting in trouble with the king and to stay honest with the text they transliterated the word baptizo. | ||||||
3 | Why transliterate "baptizo"? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 77085 | ||
The Catholic church still baptizes by sprinkling. King James was a Protestant, not a Catholic, and held Catholicism in contempt. So attacking a Catholic doctrine would not have been a problem for him. However, a great number of Protestants did (and do to this day) also sprinkle rather than immerse, so the debate over the timing and mode of baptism is not purely a Catholic-Protestant one. --Joe! |
||||||