Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquila
Your being sidetracked. The issue is baptism, is it a command and therefore necessary or was it an optional suggestion from Jesus.
|
I've often been met with this response so I would welcome any opportunity to improve my articulation.
One of the key points of disagreement about baptism is often summed up in the debate about how "eis" (translated as "for" in KJV) is to be understood in
Acts 2:38. Do we "obey the command" to be baptized in order that our sins may be remitted, or do we "follow the instructions because our sins have already been remitted" and thus we are baptized (in a manner of speaking) as Jesus was: "to fulfill all righteousness?"
My working hypothesis is "yes" to both. And I'm not just trying to get two sides to agree either. But underlying this debate is a fundamental paradox that our human abilities will always struggle to grasp. I feel that both sides are correct. but also that both sides are wrong when they leave out "the other side of the coin."
Threaded Mode
