Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
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 | Emmaus | 77101 | ||
The early Churh obviously felt that pouring or sprinkling fit with the meaning of the word. See the Didache. See also the link below for a more detailed discussion. http://www.catholic.com/library/Baptism_Immersion_Only.asp Emmaus |
||||||
2 | Why transliterate "baptizo"? | Bible general Archive 1 | sniper | 77102 | ||
Could the early church have been wrong? The meaning of the word is immerse. What do you think? | ||||||
3 | Why transliterate "baptizo"? | Bible general Archive 1 | Searcher56 | 77110 | ||
It may have not been the early church ... but, it now tradition that baptism is by immersion, by most Protestant chruches. I have a paper on this, using what experts have said, as well as my input. Ask and you shall receive. |
||||||
4 | Why transliterate "baptizo"? | Bible general Archive 1 | sniper | 77118 | ||
Bible teaching, patterns, and examples are of immersion. A New Testament church must adhere to these guidelines. It appears to me that some adhere to a tradition of pouring/sprinkling. It may be that Protestant churches immerse merely out of tradition, but as I have stated a New Testament church must follow the Bible. I am curious to see your paper. |
||||||
5 | Why transliterate "baptizo"? | Bible general Archive 1 | Searcher56 | 77151 | ||
Then write me ... sbuttle@qwest.com is better. | ||||||