Subject: Misquote? |
Bible Note: Greetings Dan! You wrote: " 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." I have addressed this already, several times. The post you were referring to was one in which I listed several interpretative options, each of which did not allow baptism to be necessary for salvation. The 'eis' arguement you mention is one among several that I listed. However, I have stated quite clearly all along which option I believe! :-) If I remember correctly, (it has been awhile since that post), someone previously had stated that 'eis' always meant result and never the basis for an action. So, I had listed several times where this was not true. While it usually indicates result, it can be causual. But, that is not my position on Acts 2:38. I just wanted to clear! ;-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |