The Reason for Baptism

2win

Newbie
Dec 11, 2008
134
23
✟64,388.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Amen!

How many time in the Gospels did Jesus say:

"Thy faith has saved thee"?

If baptism was a requirement, how come one of the hardest working evangelists since Jesus, only baptized two people?

God Bless

Till all are one.
Dean, was that the one who said he was not sent to baptize, but to preach the Gospel?
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Dean, was that the one who said he was not sent to baptize, but to preach the Gospel?

Yes. That would be Paul. Writer of 66% of the New Testament.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
For those reading, let me express, rather, let me post what one of the first Southern Baptist Theologians said in 1845:

"ALL WHO REPENT OF SIN OBTAIN FORGIVENESS THROUGH JESUS CHRIST.30

Forgiveness implies deliverance from the penalty due to sin. The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness: and when men become sensible to the danger to which they are exposed, deliverance from the impending wrath becomes an object of intense solicitude. Hence arises an anxious desire to obtain forgiveness. To persons in this state of mind, the doctrine that there is forgiveness with God, is most welcome.

All forgiveness is bestowed through Jesus Christ. It is he who delivers from the wrath to come.31 In him "we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace."32 He had power on earth to forgive sins;33 and he is now exalted a Prince and a Saviour, to give repentance to Israel, and remission of sins.34 That we might be delivered from the penalty due to our sins, it was necessary that Christ should bear it for us. Hence it is true, that without the shedding of blood, there is no remission;35 and hence, in the teachings of Scripture, the forgiveness of sins stands connected with redemption by the blood of Christ. With this agrees the language of the redeemed: "Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins, in his own blood."36

The blessing of forgiveness is bestowed on all who truly repent of their sins. This is taught in various passages of Scripture. "Repent ye, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out."37 "If we confess our sins, God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins."38 Repentance and remission of sins39 were preached in the name of Christ, and are associated blessings, bestowed by "the exalted Prince and Saviour."40 When Jesus said, "Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish,"41 it was implied that, if they repented, they would escape. God, in the gospel, commands all men everywhere to repent, in view of the approaching judgment.42 The hope of escape in that great day, is clearly held out to those who obey the command, and sincerely repent of their sins.

Forgiveness is sometimes represented in the Scriptures, as received by faith in Christ: "To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sin."43 Repentance and faith are twin graces, proceeding from the same Holy Spirit, and wrought in the same heart; and, although they may be contemplated separately, they exist together, and the promise of forgiveness belongs to either of them.

In the New Testament, a connection appears, between the remission of sins and the ordinance of baptism. John preached the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins;44 and Ananias commanded Saul, "Arise, and be baptised, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord."45 In the Old Testament, a similar connection appears, between remission and the sacrifices of that dispensation. "Almost all things were by the law purged with blood, and without the shedding of blood is no remission."46 Yet Paul has taught us that the blood of bulls and goats cannot take away sin;47 that these offerings were only figures of things to come; and that the only effectual removal of sin is by the blood of Christ. Baptism under the gospel, is as truly a figure, as the sacrifices were under the law. In the ceremonies instituted by Moses, the death of Christ was prefigured by the death of the slaughtered victims; and in the gospel ceremony, the burial and resurrection of Christ are figured forth in the ordinance of baptism: and in both cases, the remission connected with the ceremony is merely figurative. Our sins are washed away in baptism, in the same sense in which we eat the body and brink the blood of Christ, in the ordinance of the Lord's supper.48 Baptism and the Lord's supper are duties to be performed under the gospel dispensation; as the various ceremonies instituted by Moses, were duties under the former dispensation; but the figures ought not, in either case, to be confounded with the things which they represent. In a figure, baptism washes away sin: in reality, "The blood of Jesus Christ cleanses from all sin." We must be careful not to rely on the figure, instead of the reality which it represents."

30 Isaiah lv. 7; Jer. iii. 12, 22; Luke xxiv. 46, 47; Acts ii. 38; iii. 19; v. 31.

31 1 Thess. i. 10.

32 Eph. i. 7.

33 Matt. ix. 6.

34 Acts v. 31.

35 Heb. ix. 22.

36 Rev. i. 5.

37 Acts iii. 19.

38 1 John i. 9.

39 Luke xxiv. 47.

40 Acts v. 31.

41 Luke xiii. 3.

42 Acts xvii. 30.

43 Acts x. 43.

44 Mark i. 4.

45 Acts xxii. 16.

46 Heb. ix. 22.

47 Heb. ix. 13.

48 1 Cor. x. 16.

Manual of Theology, John Leland Dagg, 1845, Book Seventh, Doctrine Concerning Divine Grace, Chapter III, Blessings of Grace, Section III, Adoption.

Background:

"John Dagg and His Theology
John Leadley Dagg (1794-1884) was one who inherited and disseminated this body of shared protestant theology, albeit with baptistic distinctives in matters of baptism and church government. His particular distinction comes in being the first Baptist theologian in the south to publish a systematic theology after 1845. In 1857, the Charleston-based Southern Baptist Publication Society (predecessor to the Sunday School Board) published his 379-page Manual of Theology. This was followed the next year by the Society’s publication of his 312-page companion volume Treatise of Church Order, and the next by the publication of his Elements of Moral Science. The first two of these, used as theological textbooks throughout the second half of the nineteenth century, were later republished together as the Manual of Theology and Church Order (Gano Books, 1982). As a tribute to the labors of this influential Southern Baptist theologian, this brief article offers a description of Dagg’s theology and a defense of its lasting value."

Source

Hope this is helpful.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

Doulos 7

Active Member
Jul 10, 2018
74
21
43
Oklahoma
✟11,413.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Why does Jesus command people to be baptized in Matthew 28:19-20?

Jesus also commanded us to be baptized in Mark 16:16. I just don't understand why we can't except what Jesus taught! It would be so much easier than trying to fight against it!
 
Upvote 0

Doulos 7

Active Member
Jul 10, 2018
74
21
43
Oklahoma
✟11,413.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
For those reading, let me express, rather, let me post what one of the first Southern Baptist Theologians said in 1845:

"ALL WHO REPENT OF SIN OBTAIN FORGIVENESS THROUGH JESUS CHRIST.30

Forgiveness implies deliverance from the penalty due to sin. The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness: and when men become sensible to the danger to which they are exposed, deliverance from the impending wrath becomes an object of intense solicitude. Hence arises an anxious desire to obtain forgiveness. To persons in this state of mind, the doctrine that there is forgiveness with God, is most welcome.

All forgiveness is bestowed through Jesus Christ. It is he who delivers from the wrath to come.31 In him "we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace."32 He had power on earth to forgive sins;33 and he is now exalted a Prince and a Saviour, to give repentance to Israel, and remission of sins.34 That we might be delivered from the penalty due to our sins, it was necessary that Christ should bear it for us. Hence it is true, that without the shedding of blood, there is no remission;35 and hence, in the teachings of Scripture, the forgiveness of sins stands connected with redemption by the blood of Christ. With this agrees the language of the redeemed: "Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins, in his own blood."36

The blessing of forgiveness is bestowed on all who truly repent of their sins. This is taught in various passages of Scripture. "Repent ye, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out."37 "If we confess our sins, God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins."38 Repentance and remission of sins39 were preached in the name of Christ, and are associated blessings, bestowed by "the exalted Prince and Saviour."40 When Jesus said, "Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish,"41 it was implied that, if they repented, they would escape. God, in the gospel, commands all men everywhere to repent, in view of the approaching judgment.42 The hope of escape in that great day, is clearly held out to those who obey the command, and sincerely repent of their sins.

Forgiveness is sometimes represented in the Scriptures, as received by faith in Christ: "To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sin."43 Repentance and faith are twin graces, proceeding from the same Holy Spirit, and wrought in the same heart; and, although they may be contemplated separately, they exist together, and the promise of forgiveness belongs to either of them.

In the New Testament, a connection appears, between the remission of sins and the ordinance of baptism. John preached the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins;44 and Ananias commanded Saul, "Arise, and be baptised, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord."45 In the Old Testament, a similar connection appears, between remission and the sacrifices of that dispensation. "Almost all things were by the law purged with blood, and without the shedding of blood is no remission."46 Yet Paul has taught us that the blood of bulls and goats cannot take away sin;47 that these offerings were only figures of things to come; and that the only effectual removal of sin is by the blood of Christ. Baptism under the gospel, is as truly a figure, as the sacrifices were under the law. In the ceremonies instituted by Moses, the death of Christ was prefigured by the death of the slaughtered victims; and in the gospel ceremony, the burial and resurrection of Christ are figured forth in the ordinance of baptism: and in both cases, the remission connected with the ceremony is merely figurative. Our sins are washed away in baptism, in the same sense in which we eat the body and brink the blood of Christ, in the ordinance of the Lord's supper.48 Baptism and the Lord's supper are duties to be performed under the gospel dispensation; as the various ceremonies instituted by Moses, were duties under the former dispensation; but the figures ought not, in either case, to be confounded with the things which they represent. In a figure, baptism washes away sin: in reality, "The blood of Jesus Christ cleanses from all sin." We must be careful not to rely on the figure, instead of the reality which it represents."

30 Isaiah lv. 7; Jer. iii. 12, 22; Luke xxiv. 46, 47; Acts ii. 38; iii. 19; v. 31.

31 1 Thess. i. 10.

32 Eph. i. 7.

33 Matt. ix. 6.

34 Acts v. 31.

35 Heb. ix. 22.

36 Rev. i. 5.

37 Acts iii. 19.

38 1 John i. 9.

39 Luke xxiv. 47.

40 Acts v. 31.

41 Luke xiii. 3.

42 Acts xvii. 30.

43 Acts x. 43.

44 Mark i. 4.

45 Acts xxii. 16.

46 Heb. ix. 22.

47 Heb. ix. 13.

48 1 Cor. x. 16.

Manual of Theology, John Leland Dagg, 1845, Book Seventh, Doctrine Concerning Divine Grace, Chapter III, Blessings of Grace, Section III, Adoption.

Background:

"John Dagg and His Theology
John Leadley Dagg (1794-1884) was one who inherited and disseminated this body of shared protestant theology, albeit with baptistic distinctives in matters of baptism and church government. His particular distinction comes in being the first Baptist theologian in the south to publish a systematic theology after 1845. In 1857, the Charleston-based Southern Baptist Publication Society (predecessor to the Sunday School Board) published his 379-page Manual of Theology. This was followed the next year by the Society’s publication of his 312-page companion volume Treatise of Church Order, and the next by the publication of his Elements of Moral Science. The first two of these, used as theological textbooks throughout the second half of the nineteenth century, were later republished together as the Manual of Theology and Church Order (Gano Books, 1982). As a tribute to the labors of this influential Southern Baptist theologian, this brief article offers a description of Dagg’s theology and a defense of its lasting value."

Source

Hope this is helpful.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Acts 2:38
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Jesus also commanded us to be baptized in Mark 16:16. I just don't understand why we can't except what Jesus taught! It would be so much easier than trying to fight against it!

In the first place, the last nine verses of Mark 16 are questionable. One should never ever preach let alone set doctrines based upon questionable passages.

Here I quote:

"The first thing I have to say on Mark 16:16 is that it is very doubtful whether it is a part of the word of God. Certainly if you were in the Vatican library in Rome, and they were to hand you the old Vatican manuscript of the New Testament and you were to read Mark's Gospel you would not find in it the last twelve verses of chapter 16. And if you had before you the Sinaitic manuscript, discovered by Tischendorf, and which is supposed to be the oldest manuscript, you would find that this last paragraph of twelve verses is not in it. On that account I never preach from any part of those twelve verses. I never preach from a passage where it is really questionable as to whether or not it is a part of God's Word, and especially would I not attempt to build up a doctrine on it."

Source

Acts 2:38

I love it when this passage of scripture is used.

Lets look at it shall we?

"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." -Acts 2:38 (KJV)

In the Greek:

"Πέτρος δὲ πρὸς αὐτούς, Μετανοήσατε, [φησίν,] καὶ βαπτισθήτω ἕκαστος ὑμῶν ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς ἄφεσιν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ὑμῶν, καὶ λήμψεσθε τὴν δωρεὰν τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος:" -Acts 2:38 (GNT)

Now, I have taken the liberty to highlight a key word here.

The KJV renders "εἰς" as "for" as seen in the KJV quoted above.

But its not that simple. "εἰς" is one of those Greek words that carries several meanings.

Now, you want me to believe that "in order to" (εἰς) have my sins removed, obtain remission, washed away, I must be baptized?

If so, to what end did Jesus die? His death, other than to carry my sins upon Himself, accomplished nothing.

Lets look at more scripture.

We are told by the writer of Hebrews that back in the days of sacrificing, all things were purged by the shedding of blood. But also that the blood of bulls and goats could not take away sins. (cf. Heb. 9:13;10:4) With our sins upon Him, and with His shedding of blood on our behalf, we now have remission of sins. (cf. Rom. 3:24-25) And our baptism, is a testimony to the world of our death, burial, and resurrection with Christ. (cf. Rom. 6:3-4)

Now, here's the deal. Lets compare scripture with scripture.

"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." -Acts 2:38 (KJV)

"Πέτρος δὲ πρὸς αὐτούς, Μετανοήσατε, [φησίν,] καὶ βαπτισθήτω ἕκαστος ὑμῶν ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς ἄφεσιν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ὑμῶν, καὶ λήμψεσθε τὴν δωρεὰν τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος:" -Acts 2:38 (GNT)

"The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here." -Mt. 12:41 (KJV)

"ἄνδρες Νινευῖται ἀναστήσονται ἐν τῇ κρίσει μετὰ τῆς γενεᾶς ταύτης καὶ κατακρινοῦσιν αὐτήν: ὅτι μετενόησαν εἰς τὸ κήρυγμα Ἰωνᾶ, καὶ ἰδοὺ πλεῖον Ἰωνᾶ ὧδε." -Mt. 12:41 GNT)

Lo and behold, here is the same Greek word. "εἰς"! Excaept, here in Matthew's Gospel, we have Jesus' own testimony that when Jonah preached, they repented!

Tell me, if "εἰς" in Acts 2:38, is rendered "in order to", (remember, you have to stay consistant in that Acts 2:38 tells us that "in order to" have remission of sins, one must be baptized) why is it not in Mt. 12:41?

Did the people of Nineveh repent "εἰς" (in order to (Acts 2:38)) get Jonah to preach? The scriptures here are quite specific. Not one single act of repentance happened prior to Jonah preaching. Nineveh, in fact, did not "repent" (in order to) get Jonah to preach.

We have a quandary. How can this be explained?

Here I cite:

"To illustrate the power of the general context in determining the meaning of a word in a specific case, we say, scripture must interpret scripture. The trend of the Bible must govern a literal, grammatical construction of a single passage. The passage must harmonize with clear, abundant passages elsewhere. If the book teaches in a thousand passages that only the blood of Christ, apprehended by faith, can take away sin, we are not warranted in attributing to an external rite the same power, merely on the ground or literal, grammatical construction in a few passages. These few detached passages concerning external rites must be interpreted in harmony with the spiritual trend of the entire revelation. That is an unquestioned principle of interpretation.

To illustrate the power of the local context in determining the meaning of the Greek preposition, eis (here we have the preposition with the accusative case after it), we now cite most pertinent New Testament examples: Matthew 12:41: "They repented eis the preaching of Jonah." Because eis ordinarily means in order to, must we so render it here? It is a fact, according to chapter 3 of Jonah, and did our Lord so mean it? If so, they failed in the object of their repentance, because Jonah never preached to them after they repented -- not a word. The only preaching he did preceded the repentance, and was the cause of the repentance. Therefore, Dr. Broadus teaches in his Commentary on Matthew that eis here must have its rare meaning - because of. They repented because of, eis, the preaching of Jonah."

Source

In Acts 2:38, we must conclude that "εἰς" does not have/carry the meaning of "in order to". It would be better rendered as "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ because of the remission of sins".

One other point, this is the Baptist area, and unless you are a Baptist, you must not teach against our beliefs.

A fact that Baptist do believe we are baptized because our sins are forgiven, and not to have our sins forgiven.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

Doulos 7

Active Member
Jul 10, 2018
74
21
43
Oklahoma
✟11,413.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
In the first place, the last nine verses of Mark 16 are questionable. One should never ever preach let alone set doctrines based upon questionable passages.

Here I quote:

"The first thing I have to say on Mark 16:16 is that it is very doubtful whether it is a part of the word of God. Certainly if you were in the Vatican library in Rome, and they were to hand you the old Vatican manuscript of the New Testament and you were to read Mark's Gospel you would not find in it the last twelve verses of chapter 16. And if you had before you the Sinaitic manuscript, discovered by Tischendorf, and which is supposed to be the oldest manuscript, you would find that this last paragraph of twelve verses is not in it. On that account I never preach from any part of those twelve verses. I never preach from a passage where it is really questionable as to whether or not it is a part of God's Word, and especially would I not attempt to build up a doctrine on it."

Source



I love it when this passage of scripture is used.

Lets look at it shall we?

"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." -Acts 2:38 (KJV)

In the Greek:

"Πέτρος δὲ πρὸς αὐτούς, Μετανοήσατε, [φησίν,] καὶ βαπτισθήτω ἕκαστος ὑμῶν ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς ἄφεσιν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ὑμῶν, καὶ λήμψεσθε τὴν δωρεὰν τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος:" -Acts 2:38 (GNT)

Now, I have taken the liberty to highlight a key word here.

The KJV renders "εἰς" as "for" as seen in the KJV quoted above.

But its not that simple. "εἰς" is one of those Greek words that carries several meanings.

Now, you want me to believe that "in order to" (εἰς) have my sins removed, obtain remission, washed away, I must be baptized?

If so, to what end did Jesus die? His death, other than to carry my sins upon Himself, accomplished nothing.

Lets look at more scripture.

We are told by the writer of Hebrews that back in the days of sacrificing, all things were purged by the shedding of blood. But also that the blood of bulls and goats could not take away sins. (cf. Heb. 9:13;10:4) With our sins upon Him, and with His shedding of blood on our behalf, we now have remission of sins. (cf. Rom. 3:24-25) And our baptism, is a testimony to the world of our death, burial, and resurrection with Christ. (cf. Rom. 6:3-4)

Now, here's the deal. Lets compare scripture with scripture.

"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." -Acts 2:38 (KJV)

"Πέτρος δὲ πρὸς αὐτούς, Μετανοήσατε, [φησίν,] καὶ βαπτισθήτω ἕκαστος ὑμῶν ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς ἄφεσιν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ὑμῶν, καὶ λήμψεσθε τὴν δωρεὰν τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος:" -Acts 2:38 (GNT)

"The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here." -Mt. 12:41 (KJV)

"ἄνδρες Νινευῖται ἀναστήσονται ἐν τῇ κρίσει μετὰ τῆς γενεᾶς ταύτης καὶ κατακρινοῦσιν αὐτήν: ὅτι μετενόησαν εἰς τὸ κήρυγμα Ἰωνᾶ, καὶ ἰδοὺ πλεῖον Ἰωνᾶ ὧδε." -Mt. 12:41 GNT)

Lo and behold, here is the same Greek word. "εἰς"! Excaept, here in Matthew's Gospel, we have Jesus' own testimony that when Jonah preached, they repented!

Tell me, if "εἰς" in Acts 2:38, is rendered "in order to", (remember, you have to stay consistant in that Acts 2:38 tells us that "in order to" have remission of sins, one must be baptized) why is it not in Mt. 12:41?

Did the people of Nineveh repent "εἰς" (in order to (Acts 2:38)) get Jonah to preach? The scriptures here are quite specific. Not one single act of repentance happened prior to Jonah preaching. Nineveh, in fact, did not "repent" (in order to) get Jonah to preach.

We have a quandary. How can this be explained?

Here I cite:

"To illustrate the power of the general context in determining the meaning of a word in a specific case, we say, scripture must interpret scripture. The trend of the Bible must govern a literal, grammatical construction of a single passage. The passage must harmonize with clear, abundant passages elsewhere. If the book teaches in a thousand passages that only the blood of Christ, apprehended by faith, can take away sin, we are not warranted in attributing to an external rite the same power, merely on the ground or literal, grammatical construction in a few passages. These few detached passages concerning external rites must be interpreted in harmony with the spiritual trend of the entire revelation. That is an unquestioned principle of interpretation.

To illustrate the power of the local context in determining the meaning of the Greek preposition, eis (here we have the preposition with the accusative case after it), we now cite most pertinent New Testament examples: Matthew 12:41: "They repented eis the preaching of Jonah." Because eis ordinarily means in order to, must we so render it here? It is a fact, according to chapter 3 of Jonah, and did our Lord so mean it? If so, they failed in the object of their repentance, because Jonah never preached to them after they repented -- not a word. The only preaching he did preceded the repentance, and was the cause of the repentance. Therefore, Dr. Broadus teaches in his Commentary on Matthew that eis here must have its rare meaning - because of. They repented because of, eis, the preaching of Jonah."

Source

In Acts 2:38, we must conclude that "εἰς" does not have/carry the meaning of "in order to". It would be better rendered as "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ because of the remission of sins".

One other point, this is the Baptist area, and unless you are a Baptist, you must not teach against our beliefs.

A fact that Baptist do believe we are baptized because our sins are forgiven, and not to have our sins forgiven.

God Bless

Till all are one.

If we were to translate eis as 'because of' then that meaning would apply all the way across the board in every verse that has that Greek word. Matthew 26:28 says, "For this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins."
If eis meant because of then the text would read, "this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many because of the remission sins" I think that you and I would both agree that Jesus did not die because our sins were already removed!
 
Upvote 0

Doulos 7

Active Member
Jul 10, 2018
74
21
43
Oklahoma
✟11,413.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
In the first place, the last nine verses of Mark 16 are questionable. One should never ever preach let alone set doctrines based upon questionable passages.

Here I quote:

"The first thing I have to say on Mark 16:16 is that it is very doubtful whether it is a part of the word of God. Certainly if you were in the Vatican library in Rome, and they were to hand you the old Vatican manuscript of the New Testament and you were to read Mark's Gospel you would not find in it the last twelve verses of chapter 16. And if you had before you the Sinaitic manuscript, discovered by Tischendorf, and which is supposed to be the oldest manuscript, you would find that this last paragraph of twelve verses is not in it. On that account I never preach from any part of those twelve verses. I never preach from a passage where it is really questionable as to whether or not it is a part of God's Word, and especially would I not attempt to build up a doctrine on it."

2 Timothy 3:16 tells us that all scripture is inspired by God.Everything that we have pertains to life and godliness (2 Peter 1:3), God knows that His word will never pass away, and he also knows what we have in the bible, an all loving God who wants us to be saved (2 Peter 3:9) would not allow His word to mislead another! It sounds like you are trying to discredit the word of God (Revelation 22:18,19)! Let's all stop denying what God has told us to do in order to be saved (1 Peter 3:21)!
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
If we were to translate eis as 'because of' then that meaning would apply all the way across the board in every verse that has that Greek word. Matthew 26:28 says, "For this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins."
If eis meant because of then the text would read, "this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many because of the remission sins" I think that you and I would both agree that Jesus did not die because our sins were already removed!

"εἰς" also carries with it, the meaning "with a view to".

Again, I cite B. H. Carroll:

"We will now consider a frequent meaning of eis, also determined by local context, in the following still more pertinent passage, for in it we have the verb, baptizo, as well as the preposition, eis (Matthew 3:11): "I indeed baptize you in water eis repentance." All the context shows that John required repentance, and even its fruits, as a condition precedent to baptism. It would be foolish to render it, "I baptize you in order to repentance." Here the preposition has not its ordinary meaning, in order to, nor its rare meaning, because of, but its frequent meaning, with reference to - a repentance that they had exercised. "Is baptize you with reference to that exercising of it," is what John means. Or, as Tyndale, in his version (it was a very fine version for his time) says, "I baptize you in token of repentance." That makes fine sense.

Matthew 3:11 has a bearing on Acts 2:38. It is the first New Testament use of the verb, baptizo, followed by the preposition, eis, with the accusative case, and is the key passage for unlocking the meaning of Acts 2:38. They stand or fall together, so exact is the parallel. That they do stand or fall together is evident from their exact parallelism. A further evidence that they stand or fall together is found in the fact that both Mark and Luke tie them together: Mark 1:4: "John preached the baptism of repentance" -- eis aphesis halation; Luke 3:3: "He came preaching the baptism of repentance" -- eis aphesin hamartion. Here are two gospels, then, that tie those passages together. And right after them is used Acts 2:38: "Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ" -- eis phesin hamartion. If we then translate Matthew 3:11, "I baptize you with reference to repentance," and "John indeed baptized with the baptism of repentance with reference to the remission of sins," why not here go right on and say, "Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ with reference to the remission of sins?" Remember that in every case we render the preposition in all these conjoined cases (Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3; Acts 2:38) by "unto" in the frequent sense of with reference to. Now that will fit the local context, and it will fit the general context.

To find another instance of eis is nearer to Acts 2:38 we have only to glance back to verse 25, another unmistakable instance of eis in the sense of concerning, and not in order to. Note that it is in the same speech: "For David saith eis (concerning] him," speaking of Christ. What is to hinder us, then, from taking Acts 2:25, where the eis means concerning, or with reference to, and putting that meaning of it in verse 38?

The classics abound with this sense of the preposition, eis. Dr. Broadus quotes three: (1) From Aristophanes: "To jeer at a man eis his rags," i. e., with reference to his rags. Now we would not jeer at a man in order to his rags. (2) From Xenophon: "To reproach eis friendship." We do not reproach a man because of his friendship, and certainly not in order to his friendship. (3) From Plato: "To differ from one eis virtue." We do not differ from a man in order to virtue."

Source

You absolutely cannot take one word, and because it is rendered _______ in one text, and say it should be rendered ________ in every occurance.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
2 Timothy 3:16 tells us that all scripture is inspired by God.Everything that we have pertains to life and godliness (2 Peter 1:3), God knows that His word will never pass away, and he also knows what we have in the bible, an all loving God who wants us to be saved (2 Peter 3:9) would not allow His word to mislead another! It sounds like you are trying to discredit the word of God (Revelation 22:18,19)! Let's all stop denying what God has told us to do in order to be saved (1 Peter 3:21)!

Here again, I'm only going to tell you this one last time and in a Christian manner.

Baptists have not ever, not will they teach that "in order to" have sins remitted, one has to submit to baptism.

"A few things to know about what Baptists believe:
  • The Believers Baptism (credo baptism) - We believe that baptism should be by immersion and that it is an outward symbol of of an inward change that has already occurred."
And:

"In addition, if you are not a member of this faith group, you may not debate issues or teach against it's theology. You may post in fellowship. Active promotion of views contrary to the established teachings of this group will be considered off topic."

Source

So please take your doctrines, teachings elsewhere.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Doulos 7

Active Member
Jul 10, 2018
74
21
43
Oklahoma
✟11,413.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Here again, I'm only going to tell you this one last time and in a Christian manner.

Baptists have not ever, not will they teach that "in order to" have sins remitted, one has to submit to baptism.

"A few things to know about what Baptists believe:
  • The Believers Baptism (credo baptism) - We believe that baptism should be by immersion and that it is an outward symbol of of an inward change that has already occurred."
And:

"In addition, if you are not a member of this faith group, you may not debate issues or teach against it's theology. You may post in fellowship. Active promotion of views contrary to the established teachings of this group will be considered off topic."

Source

So please take your doctrines, teachings elsewhere.

God Bless

Till all are one.

friend, sadly you are the one that is teaching a different gospel (Gal. 1:6-9). please consider this:
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
friend, sadly you are the one that is teaching a different gospel (Gal. 1:6-9). please consider this:

You are indeed funny.

I have been through Baptist Seminary, and I assure you, I teach according to Baptist beliefs.

Also funny is the fact Don Blackwell, also teaches:

“I can't be saved first and baptized later, as is commonly taught by many. ... I can't have my sin remitted until I'm baptized. Therefore I can't be saved until I'm baptized. A man can't be saved until he has applied to himself the cleansing blood of Jesus.”

SOURCE: What Must I Do To Be Saved?, by Church of Christ minister, Don Blackwell

Don Blackwell, is a minister of the Church of Christ. So that right there disqualifies your post, in the Baptist area.

So please take your rhetoric somewhere else.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Doulos 7

Active Member
Jul 10, 2018
74
21
43
Oklahoma
✟11,413.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
You are indeed funny.

I have been through Baptist Seminary, and I assure you, I teach according to Baptist beliefs.

Also funny is the fact Don Blackwell, also teaches:

“I can't be saved first and baptized later, as is commonly taught by many. ... I can't have my sin remitted until I'm baptized. Therefore I can't be saved until I'm baptized. A man can't be saved until he has applied to himself the cleansing blood of Jesus.”

SOURCE: What Must I Do To Be Saved?, by Church of Christ minister, Don Blackwell

Don Blackwell, is a minister of the Church of Christ. So that right there disqualifies your post, in the Baptist area.

So please take your rhetoric somewhere else.

God Bless

Till all are one.
Friend, I am indeed a member of the church of Christ! The very church that Jesus built!
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Friend, I am indeed a member of the church of Christ! The very church that Jesus built!

Last warning.

Church of Christ, Restoration Movement, No Creed but Christ, Campbellite, whatever you choose to call yourself.

"Churches of Christ are autonomous Christian congregations associated with one another through distinct beliefs and practices. Represented chiefly in the United States and one of several branches to develop out of the American Restoration Movement, they claim Biblical precedent for their doctrine and practice and trace their heritage back to the early Christian church as described in the New Testament. More broadly, the Restoration Movement was an evangelistic and Bible-based effort launched in various places as several people sought a return to the original teachings and practices of the New Testament. Christian leaders including Robert Sandeman, James O'Kelly, Abner Jones, Elias Smith, Rice Haggard, Thomas Campbell, Alexander Campbell, Walter Scott, and Barton W. Stone were trailblazers of similar movements that impacted the eventual phenomenon known as the American Restoration Movement."

Source

You are not a Baptist and therefore, you are not entitled to be here debating and/or teaching against what we believe.

Final warning...cease and desist.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0