Doctrinal Question - Someone Please Take a Shot at This.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Aquila

The King James translation of Acts 2:38 '...be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins...' may be inaccurate. The Greek preposition "eis", translated for, is an indefinite preposition of reference. It does not mean "in order to". If Peter had commanded the people to be baptized in order to receive the remission of sins, he would have needed to use the Greek preposition "hina", which means "in order to". But he didn't.

This preposition "eis", used about 1,800 times in the New testament in Greek, is variously translated, "for", "at", "toward", "unto", "into", etc. So it could be translated "for", as here, only in the sense of "on the basis of", or "on the grounds of."

Even in English the preposition "for" does not necessarily always mean "in order to". Often "for" means "on the basis of", or "on the grounds of". Thus one is scolded "for" being late, or arrested "for" stealing, or praised "for" beauty, or rewarded "for" bravery, or paid "for" work. It could very well mean that one is "baptized for the remission of sins," i.e., baptized for remission (aphesis, or "forgiveness") of sins already obtained when one repented.

Therefore an acceptable translation of Acts 2:38 straight out of the Greek could read:

"Peter answered them, 'Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ since your sins are forgiven. Then you will receive the Holy Spirit as a gift." (Acts 2:38, ISV)

The point is that we cannot deny other valid methods of interpretation and the possible implications of those interpretations. You may choose to "believe" that sins are only forgiven at baptism...but you cannot say with absolute authority that they cannot be forgiven when one repents. I believe that the operation of the Holy Ghost strongly testifies to the idea that sins are forgiven at repentance because so many receive the Holy Ghost days, weeks, and often months before they're water baptized. I even received the Holy Ghost before I was baptized. I remember my soul being set free from the burden of sin at that altar. I was lighter than air and speakingin other tongues. I was forgiven at that very moment. When asked if I wanted to be baptized my now cleansed soul desired to obey the Word and be water baptized. Being baptized symbolically represented my being buried with Christ.

Here's the deal...I was forgiven upon repentance or God wouldn't have baptized me with the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost will not dwell in an unclean temple. If sins are strictly forgiven at baptism...nobody could receive the Holy Ghost until after baptism. We know that to be incorrect because God does otherwise.

When traditional interpretations say one thing and God does another....who do you believe?

I posted pages of authorities that stated "Eis" means in order to and not because of. If someone knows how they can repost them. I covered you guys up with authorities and it did not matter one iota.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

I posted pages of authorities that stated "Eis" means in order to and not because of. If someone knows how they can repost them. I covered you guys up with authorities and it did not matter one iota.

"Because of" is used because many of the sacramentalists understand "eis" to be a causal "for" ...

There are many authorities that support that eis is a resultant for ... hence why Aquila is using because of...

The best translation for "eis" ... and supported by most translators is .... "with a view towards" ...

We are baptized with a view towards the work of the Lamb at Calvary that remits our sin.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

"Because of" is used because many of the sacramentalists understand "eis" to be a causal "for" ...

There are many authorities that support that eis is a resultant for ... hence why Aquila is using because of...

The best translation for "eis" ... and supported by most translators is .... "with a view towards" ...

We are baptized with a view towards the work of the Lamb at Calvary that remits our sin.

"for" is a perfectly grammatical translation and that is coming from people that don't believe baptism is essential.

Dan you say most translators support "with a view towards"...can you prove that?

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

"for" is a perfectly grammatical translation and that is coming from people that don't believe baptism is essential.

Dan you say most translators support "with a view towards"...can you prove that?

NOPE he can't but if he could it would NOT prove his Baptist theory. He needs because of but he is too smart to use it because he has been backed down on that absurdity so he has jumped to this that does not help him either.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

NOPE he can't but if he could it would NOT prove his Baptist theory. He needs because of but he is too smart to use it because he has been backed down on that absurdity so he has jumped to this that does not help him either.

17 professors agreed ... you've got us now .... how many are Catholic???? lol.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

17 professors agreed ... you've got us now .... how many are Catholic???? lol.

That's so true...the vast majority of them most likely believe that the doctrine of the Trinity is an essential Christian doctrine. LOL

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Aquila

That's so true...the vast majority of them most likely believe that the doctrine of the Trinity is an essential Christian doctrine. LOL

See it doesn't matter yet YOU invoke Evangelical Christianity???

There is NONE as blind as those who WILL not see!

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Aquila

That's so true...the vast majority of them most likely believe that the doctrine of the Trinity is an essential Christian doctrine. LOL

Does that make their knowledge of the greek somehow wrong? Or are you guys saying they lied? That claim can be made of anyone...under any circumstances

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

I posted pages of authorities that stated "Eis" means in order to and not because of. If someone knows how they can repost them. I covered you guys up with authorities and it did not matter one iota.

Do a search on "read them and weep" !!!!

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

I posted pages of authorities that stated "Eis" means in order to and not because of. If someone knows how they can repost them. I covered you guys up with authorities and it did not matter one iota.

Many authorities state otherwise dear Bro. Epley. All one has to do is survey the vast array of Evangelical Christianity, it's commentaries, it's college material, it's biblical Greek courses, etc. But I think you missed my point. My point is that equally intelligent men who have extensively studied Greek disagree. That means there is room for much misunderstanding of the text. I've studied many of the scholars the UPCI and others refer to. I've also studied those who disagree with them and who explain why with equal vigor. Therefore I believe there may be reason to be flexible here with claiming when and where sins are forgiven. I'm not trying to say that one doesn't need to be baptized. It's a clear command of Scripture.

Here's something interesting...if only those who have been water baptized in Jesus name are saved...don't sing Amazing Grace in church. If you're right, the man who wrote it, John Newton, was never saved and never experienced God's grace. Also...don't use the King James Bible. Clearly none of the translators were saved, therefore they were clearly open to deception and the translation cannot be trusted. Please strictly use an "Apostolic" translation of the Scriptures as we discuss this.

You wouldn't even have a Bible to read if God didn't guide the likes of William Tyndale. But because of your tradition you will condemn him in one breath and quote a translation that was an answer to his very prayers the next.

It's inconsistant at best...