View Single Post
  #8  
Old 05-08-2007, 01:14 PM
Praxeas's Avatar
Praxeas Praxeas is offline
Go Dodgers!


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 45,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron_Bladder View Post
Keith, your simply stating this doesn't constitute any proof, and you need to PROVE your claims from the Bible. Secondly, nowhere anywhere int he book of Acts dowe ever find any baptismal formula referred to with the brief exception of Acts 19:2-3.

Personally, I wouldn't even regard any of these four verses as true baptismal passages, for taking Acts 2:38 by way of example, the actual baptisms took place at Acts 2:41 and not at 2:38 as you’ve claimed, which merely commands baptism. So verse 38 is a ‘dry’ verse without water.

Acts 2:38. In (epi) ..... Jesus Christ
Acts 8. In (eis) .... Lord Jesus
Acts 10:48. In (en) ..... Lord.
Acts 19. In (eis) …. Lord Jesus.

Please do tell me Keith how can this be a fixed baptismal formula, which is so important that our very salvation depends upon it's exact usage, when these passages vary so widely? I believe that the Greek ‘onoma’ translated here as ‘name,’ implies the authority for baptism. We certainly have a precedent, for ‘name’ (onoma) is directly associated with authority / power at Acts 4:7.
ANymore than you simply stating things and not poving them. You think that stating something as a fac makes it a fact and that you don't need to show how your statements are true
Reply With Quote