K
KingJohn
Guest
I’m Trinitarian
- Status
L
ltwin
Guest
I’m Trinitarian. I’m sure you’d be able to tell a Oneness believer from a Trinitarian easily. (Their apologetic usually calls for bashing the Ecumenical Creeds, which they condemn Pentecostals for adhering too. They also throw jabs about Constantine being a pagan who changed Christianity . . .)
It only gets difficult when you get people like TD Jakes. He was originally a Modalist, but he’s found wild success among Pentecostals generally and this has forced him to become more vague about what he actually believes.
However, Jakes is sort of an anomaly. We don’t generally get along with each other. We seem them as wrong about an important theological point about who God is, they are captive to an ancient heresy. They see us as following “man-made traditions” adopted by the Catholic Church at Nicea.
J
Jon_S_1
Guest
Me too!!! Unfortunately Now i believe it was false/unbiblical to wait like that.I wasn’t baptized until my first year of college, and I’d been going to church my whole life.
K
KingJohn
Guest
Are you serious? Are you trolling me, sir? You must be. I believe that you can slip away into sin and lose salvation!! I’ve said that for 5, 6, 7 posts…
J
Jon_S_1
Guest
I hope you recognize no one on this thread has said that.
L
ltwin
Guest
It’s not you. And its not Jon S. This is a fundamental gap in language. I’ve been on threads before where I stated as clear as I could that I believed you could lose salvation, but it still doesn’t sink in sometimes. There is a real push to interpret everything you say as OSAS. I don’t think that is intentional. I think its just what people have been exposed to and they can’t really parse the language.
J
Jon_S_1
Guest
Ok accepted. I acknowledge too that we have different views if what falling into sin entails so the confusion may be definition based.
I am more interested in learning why the bible is wrong along with a 2000 year old tradition in calling believers in Christ to be baptized.
J
Jon_S_1
Guest
:yup::yup::tiphat:
K
KingJohn
Guest
Answer: Acts 2:38, “And Peter said to them, ‘Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.’” As with any single verse or passage, we discern what it teaches by first filtering it through what we know the Bible teaches on the subject at hand. In the case of baptism and salvation, the Bible is clear that salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, not by works of any kind, including baptism (Ephesians 2:8-9). So, any interpretation which comes to the conclusion that baptism, or any other act, is necessary for salvation, is a faulty interpretation. For more information, please visit our webpage on “Is salvation by faith alone, or by faith plus works?”
Why, then, do some come to the conclusion that we must be baptized in order to be saved? Often, the discussion of whether or not this passage teaches baptism is required for salvation centers around the Greek word eis that is translated “for” in this passage. Those who hold to the belief that baptism is required for salvation are quick to point to this verse and the fact that it says “be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins,” assuming that the word translated “for” in this verse means “in order to get.” However, in both Greek and English, there are many possible usages of the word “for.”
As an example, when one says “Take two aspirin for your headache,” it is obvious to everybody that it does not mean “take two aspirin in order to get your headache,” but instead to “take two aspirin because you already have a headache.” There are three possible meanings of the word “for” that might fit the context of Acts 2:38: 1–“in order to be, become, get, have, keep, etc.,” 2—“because of, as the result of,” or 3—“with regard to.” Since any one of the three meanings could fit the context of this passage, additional study is required in order to determine which one is correct.
We need to start by looking back to the original language and the meaning of the Greek word eis. This is a common Greek word (it is used 1774 times in the New Testament) that is translated many different ways. Like the English word “for” it can have several different meanings. So, again, we see at least two or three possible meanings of the passage, one that would seem to support that baptism is required for salvation and others that would not. While both the meanings of the Greek word eis are seen in different passages of Scripture, such noted Greek scholars as A.T. Robertson and J.R. Mantey have maintained that the Greek preposition eis in Acts 2:38 should be translated “because of” or “in view of,” and not “in order to,” or “for the purpose of.”
Continued…
Why, then, do some come to the conclusion that we must be baptized in order to be saved? Often, the discussion of whether or not this passage teaches baptism is required for salvation centers around the Greek word eis that is translated “for” in this passage. Those who hold to the belief that baptism is required for salvation are quick to point to this verse and the fact that it says “be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins,” assuming that the word translated “for” in this verse means “in order to get.” However, in both Greek and English, there are many possible usages of the word “for.”
As an example, when one says “Take two aspirin for your headache,” it is obvious to everybody that it does not mean “take two aspirin in order to get your headache,” but instead to “take two aspirin because you already have a headache.” There are three possible meanings of the word “for” that might fit the context of Acts 2:38: 1–“in order to be, become, get, have, keep, etc.,” 2—“because of, as the result of,” or 3—“with regard to.” Since any one of the three meanings could fit the context of this passage, additional study is required in order to determine which one is correct.
We need to start by looking back to the original language and the meaning of the Greek word eis. This is a common Greek word (it is used 1774 times in the New Testament) that is translated many different ways. Like the English word “for” it can have several different meanings. So, again, we see at least two or three possible meanings of the passage, one that would seem to support that baptism is required for salvation and others that would not. While both the meanings of the Greek word eis are seen in different passages of Scripture, such noted Greek scholars as A.T. Robertson and J.R. Mantey have maintained that the Greek preposition eis in Acts 2:38 should be translated “because of” or “in view of,” and not “in order to,” or “for the purpose of.”
Continued…
K
KingJohn
Guest
One example of how this preposition is used in other Scriptures is seen in Matthew 12:41 where the word eis communicates the “result” of an action. In this case it is said that the people of Nineveh “repented at the preaching of Jonah” (the word translated “at” is the same Greek word eis). Clearly, the meaning of this passage is that they repented “because of’” or “as the result of” Jonah’s preaching. In the same way, it would be possible that Acts 2:38 is indeed communicating the fact that they were to be baptized “as the result of” or “because” they already had believed and in doing so had already received forgiveness of their sins (John 1:12; John 3:14-18; John 5:24; John 11:25-26; Acts 10:43; Acts 13:39; Acts 16:31; Acts 26:18; Romans 10:9; Ephesians 1:12-14). This interpretation of the passage is also consistent with the message recorded in Peter’s next two sermons to unbelievers where he associates the forgiveness of sins with the act of repentance and faith in Christ without even mentioning baptism (Acts 3:17-26; Acts 4:8-12).
In addition to Acts 2:38, there are three other verses where the Greek word eis is used in conjunction with the word “baptize” or “baptism.” The first of these is Matthew 3:11, “baptize you with water for repentance.” Clearly the Greek word eis cannot mean “in order to get” in this passage. They were not baptized “in order to get repentance,” but were “baptized because they had repented.” The second passage is Romans 6:3 where we have the phrase “baptized into (eis) His death.” This again fits with the meaning “because of” or in “regard to.” The third and final passage is 1 Corinthians 10:2 and the phrase “baptized into (eis) Moses in the cloud and in the sea.” Again, eis cannot mean “in order to get” in this passage because the Israelites were not baptized in order to get Moses to be their leader, but because he was their leader and had led them out of Egypt. If one is consistent with the way the preposition eis is used in conjunction with baptism, we must conclude that Acts 2:38 is indeed referring to their being baptized “because” they had received forgiveness of their sins. Some other verses where the Greek preposition eis does not mean “in order to obtain” are Matthew 28:19; 1 Peter 3:21; Acts 19:3; 1 Corinthians 1:15; and 12:13.
The grammatical evidence surrounding this verse and the preposition eis are clear that while both views on this verse are well within the context and the range of possible meanings of the passage, the majority of the evidence is in favor that the best possible definition of the word “for” in this context is either “because of” or “in regard to” and not “in order to get.” Therefore, Acts 2:38, when interpreted correctly, does not teach that baptism is required for salvation.
I’ve submitted my argument. Your move?
In addition to Acts 2:38, there are three other verses where the Greek word eis is used in conjunction with the word “baptize” or “baptism.” The first of these is Matthew 3:11, “baptize you with water for repentance.” Clearly the Greek word eis cannot mean “in order to get” in this passage. They were not baptized “in order to get repentance,” but were “baptized because they had repented.” The second passage is Romans 6:3 where we have the phrase “baptized into (eis) His death.” This again fits with the meaning “because of” or in “regard to.” The third and final passage is 1 Corinthians 10:2 and the phrase “baptized into (eis) Moses in the cloud and in the sea.” Again, eis cannot mean “in order to get” in this passage because the Israelites were not baptized in order to get Moses to be their leader, but because he was their leader and had led them out of Egypt. If one is consistent with the way the preposition eis is used in conjunction with baptism, we must conclude that Acts 2:38 is indeed referring to their being baptized “because” they had received forgiveness of their sins. Some other verses where the Greek preposition eis does not mean “in order to obtain” are Matthew 28:19; 1 Peter 3:21; Acts 19:3; 1 Corinthians 1:15; and 12:13.
The grammatical evidence surrounding this verse and the preposition eis are clear that while both views on this verse are well within the context and the range of possible meanings of the passage, the majority of the evidence is in favor that the best possible definition of the word “for” in this context is either “because of” or “in regard to” and not “in order to get.” Therefore, Acts 2:38, when interpreted correctly, does not teach that baptism is required for salvation.
I’ve submitted my argument. Your move?
po18guy
Well-known member
Do you know what this really means? Maybe not. Are you baptized in the trinitarian formula? If so, you are a member of the universal Church, but remain in an imperfect communion with her. That is what it means.
Do not make your decision final based on wrong opinions. Seek the truth.
J
Jon_S_1
Guest
]
In regard to this statement you made,
Doing so proves your premise wrong, not to mention you did not address half the scriptures that plainly describe baptism.
At Pentecost where you get your denominational name from it clearly states in Acts 2
37 When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, **what shall we do?”
**
38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”
40 With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.” 41 Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.
How can you deny this?
Did you forget to read the whole section?
Well I was hoping for so much more, preferably not a copy paste argument as well
In regard to this statement you made,
This is called reading into the text. Eisegesis . It is a biblical interpretation fallacy which undermined your entire argument. One should read scripture plainly, snd then analyze its complete context. I also find it quite helpful to look at the early church to understand how they, who spoke Greek and the letter was addressed to, understood it.
Doing so proves your premise wrong, not to mention you did not address half the scriptures that plainly describe baptism.
At Pentecost where you get your denominational name from it clearly states in Acts 2
37 When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, **what shall we do?”
**
38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”
40 With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.” 41 Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.
How can you deny this?
Did you forget to read the whole section?
po18guy
Well-known member
You are not Christian until you are baptized. That has been the Christian Sacrament of initiation since Jesus Himself commanded baptism and had His Apostles baptized.
Peter says it now saves you (1 Peter 3:21). Paul says it regenerates the soul (Titus 3:5). For 2,000 years this has been consistently believed.
If it does not regenerate the soul, it is meaningless. A cheap dare made by a charlatan.
OK, do not believe the Catholic Church. Ask any Orthodox member on these boards about baptism.
Peter says it now saves you (1 Peter 3:21). Paul says it regenerates the soul (Titus 3:5). For 2,000 years this has been consistently believed.
If it does not regenerate the soul, it is meaningless. A cheap dare made by a charlatan.
OK, do not believe the Catholic Church. Ask any Orthodox member on these boards about baptism.
po18guy
Well-known member
Scripture quotes are meaningless, since not even all Pentecostal denominations agree on what they mean.Well I was hoping for so much more, preferably not a copy paste argument as well
J
Jon_S_1
Guest
Apparently so…:banghead::doh2:
K
KingJohn
Guest
Yes, some of it (like scripture tags) are copy and paste.]
Well I was hoping for so much more, preferably not a copy paste argument as well
In regard to this statement you made,
This is called reading into the text. Eisegesis . It is a biblical interpretation fallacy which undermined your entire argument. One should read scripture plainly, snd then analyze its complete context. I also find it quite helpful to look at the early church to understand how they, who spoke Greek and the letter was addressed to, understood it.
Doing so proves your premise wrong, not to mention you did not address half the scriptures that plainly describe baptism.
At Pentecost where you get your denominational name from it clearly states in Acts 2
37 When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, **what shall we do?”
**
38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”
40 With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.” 41 Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.
How can you deny this?
Did you forget to read the whole section?
Most of it, however, I either had on a website I own on wordpress or stored in a word doct.
So, yes, it’s copy and paste, but I wrote it long ago. (;
You point to quotes, I point to translation. Different words had different meanings then. We must observe and interpate things correctly and not to our own means, which is what you do.
po18guy
Well-known member
Sadly, they tend to sub for a substantive argument.
Does anyone, anyone at all, truly think that scripture is perspicacious and self-interpreting? Gotta be kidding me! Look at all those disagreeing denominations all arguing with one another using the exact same verses.
“What is truth” - Pontius Pilate
J
Jon_S_1
Guest
KingJohn,
I would like to say as well that if the Bible is meant to help guide us. It seems contrary that there are dozens of verses that indicate and clearly dictate baptize upon belief in Christ. Wouldn’t there be some verses just as plain indicating otherwise. Maybe a story if someone being baptized years after becoming a Christian? Maybe stories if groups who decided never to be baptized?
Even the reformers, Luther, Calvin, Zuigli, and the Anabaptists acknowledged the necessity of baptism.
It was not really until the big tent revival days in America that baptism fell out if favor. (Too time consuming, too big a commitment)
I would like to say as well that if the Bible is meant to help guide us. It seems contrary that there are dozens of verses that indicate and clearly dictate baptize upon belief in Christ. Wouldn’t there be some verses just as plain indicating otherwise. Maybe a story if someone being baptized years after becoming a Christian? Maybe stories if groups who decided never to be baptized?
Even the reformers, Luther, Calvin, Zuigli, and the Anabaptists acknowledged the necessity of baptism.
It was not really until the big tent revival days in America that baptism fell out if favor. (Too time consuming, too big a commitment)
K
KingJohn
Guest
“In the Bible you’ll never find a witch fighting another witch. You’ll never find a demon fighting against another Demon. Yet, when you look at Church folk, you see Preachers fighting against preachers and Methodists fighting against Baptists, and Baptists fighting against Methodists. We need order! Order in the house, order in the house!” -T.D. Jakes.Sadly, they tend to sub for a substantive argument.
Does anyone, anyone at all, truly think that scripture is perspicacious and self-interpreting? Gotta be kidding me! Look at all those disagreeing denominations all arguing with one another using the exact same verses.
“What is truth” - Pontius Pilate
J
Jon_S_1
Guest
Can you tell me how Acts 2:41 is misinterpreted? How is the Greek misused there?
- Status