The Doctrine of Baptisms.

[Bible Highlighter]

Sorry for missing post 6, I'm more addressing the main points brought up in post 1. I also am not presenting a theological position I'm merely stating the obvious that Acts does not follow the rules that Paul lays out which to me warrants a discussion that seems neglected or at the very least is absent. I'm not trying to influence your conclusion but rather saying without reconciling the differences presented in Acts your study is incomplete.

Again, I am aware of the Book of Acts involving water baptism.
However, I do not see how the Book of Acts involving baptism conflicts with what Paul said (like in 1 Corinthians 1:17).
I know some conclude certain wrong theological things about water baptism involving the Book of Acts (that appears to conflict with what Paul said). But it does not change anything on my list.

Some think Acts 22:16 is a case for water baptism washing away sin when that is not what it is saying.

Acts 22:16
”And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.”

The “calling on the name of the Lord” part of this verse is in reference to washing away thy sins.

In Acts 2:38 says,
“Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”

First, water baptism by John along with confessing sin was a call for Jews to repentance. It was their way to get them back to God. But it was not the baptism aspect that was saving them, but their confessing their sins to the Lord aspect (i.e., repentance) that saved.

Matthew 3:6 (which then lines up with Matthew 3:8). Also, in Mark 1:4-5, it says John preached the "baptism of repentance" for the remission of sins (verse 4), and it then defines this "baptism of repentance" by saying they confessed their sins when they were baptized (verse 5).

Second, 1 Peter 3:21: Peter says baptism saves us not for the putting away of the filth of the flesh (i.e., sin - See the words “filthiness of the flesh” in 2 Corinthians 7:1) but it saves us to giving an answer in having an already good or clean conscience before God (In that we have been forgiven or cleansed by the resurrection of Christ).

Three, when we look at Romans 6:3, and Romans 6:5 together, they teach that baptism is symbolic of Christ’s death.

Romans 6:3
”Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?”

Romans 6:5
”For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death,”

So if baptism is symbolic or in the LIKENESS of Christ’s death, then we must conclude that baptism is also symbolic when it refers to it remitting sin in Acts 2:38 (if one wants to take the word “for” as a causal reason or explanation of Peter’s instruction to the Jews at Pentecost).

But I prefer to see the word “for” in Acts 2:38 as meaning, “because” because that is how it can be defined when look at the Websters 1828 (14th definition).

King James Bible Dictionary - Reference List - For

For, King James Bible Dictionary

kingjamesbibledictionary.com

 

[DamianWarS]

Again, I am aware of the Book of Acts involving water baptism.
However, I do not see how the Book of Acts involving baptism conflicts with what Paul said (like in 1 Corinthians 1:17).
I know some conclude certain wrong theological things about water baptism involving the Book of Acts (that appears to conflict with what Paul said). But it does not change anything on my list.

Some think Acts 22:16 is a case for water baptism washing away sin when that is not what it is saying.

Acts 22:16
”And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.”

The “calling on the name of the Lord” part of this verse is in reference to washing away thy sins.

In Acts 2:38 says,
“Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”

First, water baptism by John along with confessing sin was a call for Jews to repentance. It was their way to get them back to God. But it was not the baptism aspect that was saving them, but their confessing their sins to the Lord aspect (i.e., repentance) that saved.

Matthew 3:6 (which then lines up with Matthew 3:8). Also, in Mark 1:4-5, it says John preached the "baptism of repentance" for the remission of sins (verse 4), and it then defines this "baptism of repentance" by saying they confessed their sins when they were baptized (verse 5).

Second, 1 Peter 3:21: Peter says baptism saves us not for the putting away of the filth of the flesh (i.e., sin - See the words “filthiness of the flesh” in 2 Corinthians 7:1) but it saves us to giving an answer in having an already good or clean conscience before God (In that we have been forgiven or cleansed by the resurrection of Christ).

Three, when we look at Romans 6:3, and Romans 6:5 together, they teach that baptism is symbolic of Christ’s death.

Romans 6:3
”Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?”

Romans 6:5
”For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death,”

So if baptism is symbolic or in the LIKENESS of Christ’s death, then we must conclude that baptism is also symbolic when it refers to it remitting sin in Acts 2:38 (if one wants to take the word “for” as a causal reason or explanation of Peter’s instruction to the Jews at Pentecost).

But I prefer to see the word “for” in Acts 2:38 as meaning, “because” because that is how it can be defined when look at the Websters 1828 (14th definition).

King James Bible Dictionary - Reference List - For

For, King James Bible Dictionary

kingjamesbibledictionary.com

Sorrt for the confusion, I'm speaking of not addressing the baptism of the HS in Acts.

 

[Dan Perez]

But you are saying ”one baptism” is ”one baptizer.” The word “baptism” cannot be defined as “baptizer.” There is no English dictionary that defines it as such. It would be a violation of the meaning of that word
(Unless one believes there are errors in the Bible —— which I do not believe).

In other words, I believe both the English in the KJB and the Greek in the NT (Textus Receptus) say the same thing.

We have to think that the physical water baptism is merely a symbolic ritual that pointed to the greater reality (Which would be the baptisms done upon a believer by God).

Any one can check the Greek text , and I use the KJV and the Greek word BAPTISM can be translated BAPTISMA , 22 times BECAUSE is the KJV GREEK word used in the ORIGNAL TEXT called the TEXTUS RECEPTUS . and also called the MAGORITY TEXT , STEPHEN'S TEXT or called the BYZANTINE TEXT .

The verse in 1 Cor 10:2 can also be translated IDENIFICATION or be translated , SPRINKING in Eze 36:25 is in the Qal stem and in the PERFECT TENSE , and SINGULAR .

The Greek word in Eph 4: 5 reads ONE BAPTISM , but the Greek word is not BAPTISO as it is the Greek word BAPTISMA and Eph 4:5 reads ONE BAPTIZER and that means, that the ONE BAPTISMA is the HOLY SPIRIT and is found in 22 times from Matthew -----1 Peter 3:21 and anyone can check the Greek TEXT and see it .

dan p

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Any one can check the Greek text , and I use the KJV and the Greek word BAPTISM can be translated BAPTISMA , 22 times BECAUSE is the KJV GREEK word used in the ORIGNAL TEXT called the TEXTUS RECEPTUS . and also called the MAGORITY TEXT , STEPHEN'S TEXT or called the BYZANTINE TEXT .

The verse in 1 Cor 10:2 can also be translated IDENIFICATION or be translated , SPRINKING in Eze 36:25 is in the Qal stem and in the PERFECT TENSE , and SINGULAR .

The Greek word in Eph 4: 5 reads ONE BAPTISM , but the Greek word is not BAPTISO as it is the Greek word BAPTISMA and Eph 4:5 reads ONE BAPTIZER and that means, that the ONE BAPTISMA is the HOLY SPIRIT and is found in 22 times from Matthew -----1 Peter 3:21 and anyone can check the Greek TEXT and see it .

dan p

I believe the King James Bible is my final word of authority. It does not say baptizER.
Also, do you speak, write, and read both Modern Greek, and Koine Greek? Would you be considered one of the top experts in the world on Koine Greek? If not, then you are playing games with a language you really do not know intimately. There are grammar rules, and so much more to these languages. It would be like you going to China and trying to correct the Chinese people on one of their favorite literally works written in Chinese using a Chinese to English dictionary and yet you would claim to have the same level of knowledge on that written Chinese work that they had. They would think you are crazy if you tried to do that. This is why I am not a fan of Bible college and its influence to dabble in the original languages upon other Christians (who did not go). Bible colleges have dupe Christians into thinking they can know Greek without actually knowing that language. It’s a money making scheme and they win, and the student loses.

In other words, talk with two or tree of the top foremost Greek experts in Koine Greek (who can speak, read, and write Greek) in the world on this verse and then get back to me in what they say.

 

[ViaCrucis]

One of the hardest parts about understanding what the author of Hebrews means in Hebrews 6:2 is that it is grammatically odd. The statement is βαπτισμῶν διδαχῆς, which based on numerous commentaries I've seen point out is most directly rendered as "about washings of doctrine". That is syntactically weird, which is why it's usually rendered "of doctrine of washings".

So even with this, what precisely is meant here? The author doesn't expound what washings he has in mind.

In modern times many have attempted to create an elaborate system of thought based on this singular statement, trying to enumerate a list of "baptisms". Except that usually requires all manner of strange new doctrines which are entirely unknown in the Bible or the last two thousand years of Christian faith and practice.

Often, in order to get this list of enumerated "baptisms", requires a certain violence to the biblical texts. For example, wholesale ignoring how the Bible uses the expression "baptism with the Holy Spirit" and creating whole theological systems about it that are entirely absent from the Bible (and, again, entirely absent from two thousand years of collective Christian experience and knowledge). Or arbitrarily choosing that when the Bible says "baptism" in one place, means one kind of baptism that is entirely different than the "baptism" in another place--even though in both cases it is simply called "baptism", not "a baptism of this" or "a baptism with that", just "baptism".

I'm not going to attempt to provide a definitive answer to the question of what the author of Hebrews means by βαπτισμῶν διδαχῆς, because frankly I think it's a question that is worth exploring and there doesn't seem to be a very good consensus, meaning it is an example of where we maybe just can't be clear about what it means. Sometimes the Bible throws us a curve ball, and I think it is more respectful to say "I don't know", rather than insist on a dogmatic position that boils down to mere opinion.

So my interest in this post is simply to point out the ambiguity here, and that we should be incredibly skeptical of modern dogmatic interpretations that, really, are just human opinion.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Dan Perez]

I believe the King James Bible is my final word of authority. It does not say baptizER.
Also, do you speak, write, and read both Modern Greek, and Koine Greek? Would you be considered one of the top experts in the world on Koine Greek? If not, then you are playing games with a language you really do not know intimately. There are grammar rules, and so much more to these languages. It would be like you going to China and trying to correct the Chinese people on one of their favorite literally works written in Chinese using a Chinese to English dictionary and yet you would claim to have the same level of knowledge on that written Chinese work that they had. They would think you are crazy if you tried to do that. This is why I am not a fan of Bible college and its influence to dabble in the original languages upon other Christians (who did not go). Bible colleges have dupe Christians into thinking they can know Greek without actually knowing that language. It’s a money making scheme and they win, and the student loses.

In other words, talk with two or tree of the top foremost Greek experts in Koine Greek (who can speak, read, and write Greek) in the world on this verse and then get back to me in what they say.

And I have some books , A MANUEL GRAMMER OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT , by DANA and MANTEY and GREEK for the REST of US by MOUNCE .and all by their study can begin to learn Greek and HEBREW , and no one haves to be ignorant .

Eph 4:5 reads One FAITH , one FAITH , one BAPTISM .

And you believe that the ONE BAPTIZO , does mean one BAPTISM , where BAPTISM / BAPTIZO , really means ONE / HEIS , BAPTISMA ., and of course you checked the Greek in VINE'S DICTIONARY ?

By , chance you did check 2 PETER 3:21 ?

DAN P

 

[Bible Highlighter]

And I have some books , A MANUEL GRAMMER OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT , by DANA and MANTEY and GREEK for the REST of US by MOUNCE .and all by their study can begin to learn Greek and HEBREW , and no one haves to be ignorant .

Eph 4:5 reads One FAITH , one FAITH , one BAPTISM .

And you believe that the ONE BAPTIZO , does mean one BAPTISM , where BAPTISM / BAPTIZO , really means ONE / HEIS , BAPTISMA ., and of course you checked the Greek in VINE'S DICTIONARY ?

By , chance you did check 2 PETER 3:21 ?

DAN P

You are still playing with a language you do not really know. You are only kidding yourself unless you can speak, write, and read Greek. You can trust the work of others, but they can have a bias towards a wrong particular belief they want to be true. I believe God's Word when it talks about preservation.

 

[Dan Perez]

You are still playing with a language you do not really know. You are only kidding yourself unless you can speak, write, and read Greek. You can trust the work of others, but they can have a bias towards a wrong particular belief they want to be true. I believe God's Word when it talks about preservation.

If I am PLAYING With a language , I can step aside and you can educate us as to what EPH 4:5 really means ,is my pleasure 11

dan p

 

[Bible Highlighter]

If I am PLAYING With a language , I can step aside and you can educate us as to what EPH 4:5 really means ,is my pleasure 11

dan p

Again, I think you do not understand. Unless you can speak a language fluently to the point of talking with the locals without any flaws and you can write letters or emails to them and you can teach Grammar school to Greek people, then you are not qualified. You are only playing games like a cat batting at a bird toy. I am also not claiming to know Greek and so your statement that you should step aside so I can play the Greek game is silly. The only way I know what my Bible says is by the English. If a Greek word can align with what the English says, then great. But if it conflicts, and I side with some definition in Greek (A language I do not know), then I am cheating and trying to make the Bible say what I want it to say. So go to Greece and become an expert in Modern Greek and Koine Greek. Until then, you are claiming to know something that you are not qualified to truly know. It would be like a child trying to tackle Calculus when he has not even learned basic math yet.

I don't know where folks get this silly idea that they know Greek by looking at an interlinear, but people thinking they know a language without really living in that country and deeply studying it and knowing it as they do their native tongue are only fooling themselves. It's just plain silly.

 

[Dan Perez]

Again, I think you do not understand. Unless you can speak a language fluently to the point of talking with the locals without any flaws and you can write letters or emails to them and you can teach Grammar school to Greek people, then you are not qualified. You are only playing games like a cat batting at a bird toy. I am also not claiming to know Greek and so your statement that you should step aside so I can play the Greek game is silly. The only way I know what my Bible says is by the English. If a Greek word can align with what the English says, then great. But if it conflicts, and I side with some definition in Greek (A language I do not know), then I am cheating and trying to make the Bible say what I want it to say. So go to Greece and become an expert in Modern Greek and Koine Greek. Until then, you are claiming to know something that you are not qualified to truly know. It would be like a child trying to tackle Calculus when he has not even learned basic math yet.

I don't know where folks get this silly idea that they know Greek by looking at an interlinear, but people thinking they know a language without really living in that country and deeply studying it and knowing it as they do their native tongue are only fooling themselves. It's just plain silly.

I am just asking ,since I did not study Greek in college to help me out and give your thoughts on 1 Cor 10:2 or Eph 4:5 or what about Hebrews 6:10 or Heb 9:10 various washing / BAPTISMOS , and would liken your thoughts .

Sorry that I took so much time to respond ,as much things on my plate ,but seriously like your input .

dan p

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I am just asking ,since I did not study Greek in college

Well, I will help you to understand what the text says in English seeing I speak, read, and write English.

to help me out and give your thoughts on 1 Cor 10:2 or

1 Corinthians 10:2
”And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;”

If we were to apply this to us today, this would be more symbolic. The part about being baptized in the sea is obviously the Israelites going through the Red Sea when it was parted. Moses and the Rock in 1 Corinthians 10 are types of Christ. The Israelites were baptized in the cloud and in the sea. The previous verse says that the Israelites were under the cloud by day. The cloud which covered the Lord protected the Israelites from the Egyptians and it also guided them in the wilderness. This cloud by day and fire by night was a covering for God. The Israelites being under the pillar of cloud by day points ahead to the New Testament.

Matthew 17:5 says,
”While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.”

So who was in this cloud at the Mount of Transfiguration? God the Father.
So I believe it was God the Father who was covered in the cloud by day and the fire by night leading and protecting the Israelites.
But the Angel (Messenger) of the Lord also was there with the Israelites in the crossing of the Red Sea when it was parted (Along with the pillar of cloud by day and fire by night). This angel of the Lord (not an actual created angel), is the eternal second person of the Triune Godhead (which is Jesus Christ). This is the Rock the Israelites drank of. They drank spiritually of Christ when they were obeying Him initially by faith in escaping Egypt. The water of the Red Sea is symbolic of the Spirit.

John 7:38-39 says,
”He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive:…”

This parallels us today.

The Holy Spirit baptizes believers into Jesus Christ and the church at salvation “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body...” (1 Corinthians 12:13). The head of the body is Jesus Christ (Colossians 1:18).

Then Jesus baptizes us into the Holy Ghost, “he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost..” (Matthew 3:11). The Holy Spirit is the downpayment of our inheritance (Ephesians 1:14). Beyond the clouds in our sky today is God the Father in Heaven. So under God the Father we are baptized into both the Spirit (the sea), and under the cloud (which God the Father resides above in Heaven). We drink of that Rock, and that Rock is Christ. We are baptized or immersed in Christ just as we are with the Holy Spirit.

But the lesson that is missed is that the Israelites started out good with God, but they later fell in the wilderness. The same warning applies to us today. Just because we may start off good with God does not guarantee we have any kind of inheritance with God in His Kingdom. We must endure to the end with God to be saved. We must continue to rely on His grace, and sanctification to get us through in this life.

Eph 4:5 or what about Hebrews 6:10 or Heb 9:10 various washing / BAPTISMOS , and would liken your thoughts .

Sorry that I took so much time to respond ,as much things on my plate ,but seriously like your input .

dan p

I will have to get back to you on these other verses.

May the Lord Jesus bless you.

 

[Der Alte]

Again, I think you do not understand. Unless you can speak a language fluently to the point of talking with the locals without any flaws and you can write letters or emails to them and you can teach Grammar school to Greek people, then you are not qualified. You are only playing games like a cat batting at a bird toy. I am also not claiming to know Greek and so your statement that you should step aside so I can play the Greek game is silly. The only way I know what my Bible says is by the English. If a Greek word can align with what the English says, then great. But if it conflicts, and I side with some definition in Greek (A language I do not know), then I am cheating and trying to make the Bible say what I want it to say. So go to Greece and become an expert in Modern Greek and Koine Greek. Until then, you are claiming to know something that you are not qualified to truly know. It would be like a child trying to tackle Calculus when he has not even learned basic math yet.
I don't know where folks get this silly idea that they know Greek by looking at an interlinear, but people thinking they know a language without really living in that country and deeply studying it and knowing it as they do their native tongue are only fooling themselves. It's just plain silly.

I think I meet your "requirement." I learned German when I was 12, later when Elvis and I happened to be stationed in Germany at the same time, not the same unit. I was a cook working in the "mess hall" the place where soldiers eat. There were civilians working there. Civilians, Germany I spoke to them in German. One day one said to me "You speak good German, we not German we Greek." I said "So teach me Greek." He pointed at a table and said "Trapezi" pr. "trahpayzee.". For the next year or so I learned more Greek not knowing then that I would study both Greek and Hebrew at the graduate level about 2 decades later.
First class in Greek 101 had to learn the alphabet and be prepared to read from the Greek NT the next class. At that class I opened my NT and read almost flawlessly. My fellow class mates looked at me like I was an alien from Mars.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I think I meet your "requirement." I learned German when I was 12, later when Elvis and I happened to be stationed in Germany at the same time, not the same unit. I was a cook working in the "mess hall" the place where soldiers eat. There were civilians working there. Civilians, Germany I spoke to them in German. One day one said to me "You speak good German, we not German we Greek." I said "So teach me Greek." He pointed at a table and said "Trapezi" pr. "trahpayzee.". For the next year or so I learned more Greek not knowing then that I would study both Greek and Hebrew at the graduate level about 2 decades later.
First class in Greek 101 had to learn the alphabet and be prepared to read from the Greek NT the next class. At that class I opened my NT and read almost flawlessly. My fellow class mates looked at me like I was an alien from Mars.

Pop quiz. Do you think there is a solecism in the text if 1 John 5:7 is not in the chapter?

 

[Der Alte]

Pop quiz. Do you think there is a solecism in the text if 1 John 5:7 is not in the chapter?

No. I'm not here for 20 questions. Do you have a topic you wish to discuss?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

No. I'm not here for 20 questions. Do you have a topic you wish to discuss?

Well, you boasted of your Greek. I was merely testing your skills based upon another who knows Greek.

 

[Der Alte]

Well, you boasted of your Greek. I was merely testing your skills based upon another who knows Greek.

There is a difference, which you don't seem to be aware of, between "boasting" and "informing" which is what I did. In addition to BDAG Greek lexicon, both hard back and digital, I also happen to have Dr. Daniel Wallace's, Greek Grammar Beyond The Basics, both hard back and digital. I think I can hold my own in any discussion of Greek especially with folks who only have the outdated Strong's and YLT. En Garde.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

There is a difference, which you don't seem to be aware of, between "boasting" and "informing" which is what I did. In addition to BDAG Greek lexicon, both hard back and digital, I also happen to have Dr. Daniel Wallace's, Greek Grammar Beyond The Basics, both hard back and digital. I think I can hold my own in any discussion of Greek especially with folks who only have the outdated Strong's and YLT. En Garde.

Wallace is not from Greece. It's not his native tongue. Sure, I am sure he gets some stuff right, but if you are going to learn Koine Greek, go to the people who at least speak the modern version of Greek before tackling the ancient form of it. It's like trying to go to Ethiopia to try and learn Chinese. Why would you do that?

BDAG was originally created by a liberal German theologian who never lived in Greece. It was never his native tongue. “Bauer–Arndt–Gingrich–Danker” NT Greek Lexicon is the most popular among Modern scholars today. Another big problem is that Walter Bauer did not believe certain books in our Bible are authored by the original authors but by the Roman Catholic church (Which shows he does not believe the Bible is a divinely inspired book). He also pushed the view that there was no true Christianity in the early centuries but many Christianities. Such a man who does not accept the Bible as penned by the original authors means he does not truly believe the Bible correctly.

The best way to learn Koine Greek is to live in Greece and speak, read, and write the Modern version of it so well that the locals think you are one of them. Then one can move to the next step of Koine Greek. My point here is that scholars like Mr. Wallace do not think 1 John 5:7 should be in the Bible. Yet, it is evident he really does not know Greek all that well. One of the top Greek grammarians in the world says there is a solecism in the text if 1 John 5:7 is removed. Search YouTube for "Legendary Greek Grammarian 1 John 5:7."

 

[Der Alte]

Wallace is not from Greece. It's not his native tongue. Sure, I am sure he gets some stuff right, but if you are going to learn Koine Greek, go to the people who at least speak the modern version of Greek before tackling the ancient form of it. It's like trying to go to Ethiopia to try and learn Chinese. Why would you do that?

BDAG was originally created by a liberal German theologian who never lived in Greece. It was never his native tongue. “Bauer–Arndt–Gingrich–Danker” NT Greek Lexicon is the most popular among Modern scholars today. Another big problem is that Walter Bauer did not believe certain books in our Bible are authored by the original authors but by the Roman Catholic church (Which shows he does not believe the Bible is a divinely inspired book). He also pushed the view that there was no true Christianity in the early centuries but many Christianities. Such a man who does not accept the Bible as penned by the original authors means he does not truly believe the Bible correctly.

The best way to learn Koine Greek is to live in Greece and speak, read, and write the Modern version of it so well that the locals think you are one of them. Then one can move to the next step of Koine Greek. My point here is that scholars like Mr. Wallace do not think 1 John 5:7 should be in the Bible. Yet, it is evident he really does not know Greek all that well. One of the top Greek grammarians in the world says there is a solecism in the text if 1 John 5:7 is removed. Search YouTube for "Legendary Greek Grammarian 1 John 5:7."

Sorry amigo I ain't searching anything. I don't see any credible, verifiable evidence for any of the negative accusations you are making. As I said I started learning modern Greek decades before I studied koine. Since you are not native Greek you do not have the knowledge necessary for the arguments you are proposing. Come back when you can match the education I have had. Here is 1 John 5:7-8 from the Eastern Greek Orthodox Bible. Their language has been Greek since their inception 2000 years ago +/-.

7There are three who bear witness <in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. And there are three that testify on earth>: 8the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and the three agree as one.​

The New Testament ( The Eastern-Greek Orthodox Bible) : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

The New Testament (The Eastern-Greek Orthodox Bible)

archive.org

 

[Strong in Him]

Wallace is not from Greece. It's not his native tongue. Sure, I am sure he gets some stuff right, but if you are going to learn Koine Greek, go to the people who at least speak the modern version of Greek before tackling the ancient form of it.

Sorry to butt into this argument - but modern Greek and NT koine Greek are not at all the same.
It is not necessary to learn modern Greek, to the point of being fluent in it, before you tackle koine Greek. There are many books and college classes which teach it. I know the alphabet at least, yet I haven't learnt modern Greek. My nephews, who started learning modern Greek when they were 5, have no idea about - and no interest in - NT Greek.

You might as well tell a Frenchman that if he is going to move to the UK, he will need to learn Welsh first, and only then will he be able to learn English.

 

[Dan Perez]

Well, I will help you to understand what the text says in English seeing I speak, read, and write English.


1 Corinthians 10:2
”And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;”

If we were to apply this to us today, this would be more symbolic. The part about being baptized in the sea is obviously the Israelites going through the Red Sea when it was parted. Moses and the Rock in 1 Corinthians 10 are types of Christ. The Israelites were baptized in the cloud and in the sea. The previous verse says that the Israelites were under the cloud by day. The cloud which covered the Lord protected the Israelites from the Egyptians and it also guided them in the wilderness. This cloud by day and fire by night was a covering for God. The Israelites being under the pillar of cloud by day points ahead to the New Testament.

Matthew 17:5 says,
”While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.”

So who was in this cloud at the Mount of Transfiguration? God the Father.
So I believe it was God the Father who was covered in the cloud by day and the fire by night leading and protecting the Israelites.
But the Angel (Messenger) of the Lord also was there with the Israelites in the crossing of the Red Sea when it was parted (Along with the pillar of cloud by day and fire by night). This angel of the Lord (not an actual created angel), is the eternal second person of the Triune Godhead (which is Jesus Christ). This is the Rock the Israelites drank of. They drank spiritually of Christ when they were obeying Him initially by faith in escaping Egypt. The water of the Red Sea is symbolic of the Spirit.

John 7:38-39 says,
”He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive:…”

This parallels us today.

The Holy Spirit baptizes believers into Jesus Christ and the church at salvation “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body...” (1 Corinthians 12:13). The head of the body is Jesus Christ (Colossians 1:18).

Then Jesus baptizes us into the Holy Ghost, “he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost..” (Matthew 3:11). The Holy Spirit is the downpayment of our inheritance (Ephesians 1:14). Beyond the clouds in our sky today is God the Father in Heaven. So under God the Father we are baptized into both the Spirit (the sea), and under the cloud (which God the Father resides above in Heaven). We drink of that Rock, and that Rock is Christ. We are baptized or immersed in Christ just as we are with the Holy Spirit.

But the lesson that is missed is that the Israelites started out good with God, but they later fell in the wilderness. The same warning applies to us today. Just because we may start off good with God does not guarantee we have any kind of inheritance with God in His Kingdom. We must endure to the end with God to be saved. We must continue to rely on His grace, and sanctification to get us through in this life.


I will have to get back to you on these other verses.

May the Lord Jesus bless you.

Thank you and just ask me about any verse !!

dan p