Baptism: is it required to be baptized in water?

[Didymous]

You have the original text?

 

[Didymous]

The Bible says the house of Israel is who Peter was talking to, so I could care less how much you think you know Koine Greek grammar, the house of Israel is the house of Israel.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

The Bible says the house of Israel is who Peter was talking to, so I could care less how much you think you know Koine Greek grammar, the house of Israel is the house of Israel.

what does the house of Israel have to do with acts 2: 38?

Salvation is the same in all ages, there are no different gospels.

And the greek never changes. so you better care what the greek says. that is the language God used to write the NT.

 

[DJ2]

the bible is wrong?

How can the bible be wrong?

The english interpretation? There are flaws in it, it is just an interpretation. Thats one of the reasons we need to study,

Peter answered them, "All of you must turn to God and change the way you think and act, and each of you must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins will be forgiven. Then you will receive the Holy Spirit as a gift.

So is this English translation wrong?

If so, which Bible translation is correct?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Ce

Peter answered them, "All of you must turn to God and change the way you think and act, and each of you must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins will be forgiven. Then you will receive the Holy Spirit as a gift.

So is this English translation wrong?

If so, which Bible translation is correct?

learn rules of language, learn about tense, person and what singular and plural means.

onc you have done that, look at the origional text. Open your mind and read, maybe then you will see truth.

 

[DJ2]

Ce
learn rules of language, learn about tense, person and what singular and plural means.

onc you have done that, look at the origional text. Open your mind and read, maybe then you will see truth.

In other words, you don't know. As usual.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

In other words, you don't know. As usual.

Oh. Know, i know what the origional text said, thats all. Need to know. You think i am going to base my eternity on a translation without testing it first? I used to, then again, i used to be like you.

 

[DJ2]

Oh. Know, i know what the origional text said, thats all. Need to know. You think i am going to base my eternity on a translation without testing it first? I used to, then again, i used to be like you.

So answer the question, what are you waiting on? (post# 1264)

You think i am going to base my eternity on a translation without testing it first?​

So is that what our eternity is based on? The proper translation? I thought it was faith alone regeneration theology.

 

[Didymous]

Oh. Know, i know what the origional text said, thats all. Need to know. You think i am going to base my eternity on a translation without testing it first? I used to, then again, i used to be like you.

I honestly don't know why you choose to have issue about it, for John, Jesus, and Peter all had dual ministries, buy I understand you want to dazzle with your knowledge of Koine Greek-still doesn't mean that what I offered isn't true. Whether you want to debate past, present ,future, aorist, pluperfect-or whatever else you want to dredge up from whatever school you learned from. I believe, as do many Christians, that the Bible is all I need to understand what the Bible says. If I needed to understand the original autographs in ancient Hebrew and Koine Greek-then I'm pretty sure God would've made sure the scriptures were never translated. But you go ahead and say what you say. Impress me with your vast knowledge.

 

[DJ2]

I honestly don't know why you choose to have issue about it, for John, Jesus, and Peter all had dual ministries, buy I understand you want to dazzle with your knowledge of Koine Greek-still doesn't mean that what I offered isn't true. Whether you want to debate past, present ,future, aorist, pluperfect-or whatever else you want to dredge up from whatever school you learned from. I believe, as do many Christians, that the Bible is all I need to understand what the Bible says. If I needed to understand the original autographs in ancient Hebrew and Koine Greek-then I'm pretty sure God would've made sure the scriptures were never translated. But you go ahead and say what you say. Impress me with your vast knowledge.

Wait just a minute. Is eternally-grateful claiming to know Koine Greek?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I honestly don't know why you choose to have issue about it, for John, Jesus, and Peter all had dual ministries, buy I understand you want to dazzle with your knowledge of Koine Greek-still doesn't mean that what I offered isn't true. Whether you want to debate past, present ,future, aorist, pluperfect-or whatever else you want to dredge up from whatever school you learned from. I believe, as do many Christians, that the Bible is all I need to understand what the Bible says. If I needed to understand the original autographs in ancient Hebrew and Koine Greek-then I'm pretty sure God would've made sure the scriptures were never translated. But you go ahead and say what you say. Impress me with your vast knowledge.

All i was doing was trying to explain a view of acts 2:38, if you do not like it, say so,

in the mean time can anyone explain why people come into a bible discussion forum who does not have any desire to discuss?

 

[tourist]

Wait just a minute. Is eternally-grateful claiming to know Koine Greek?

That wouldn't surprise me as he's a very smart man.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

So answer the question, what are you waiting on? (post# 1264)

So is that what our eternity is based on? The proper translation? I thought it was faith alone regeneration theology.

There is a reason i have you on ignore, thank you for reminding me what it was

 

[DJ2]

There is a reason i have you on ignore, thank you for reminding me what it was

Why won't you just answer the question?

 

[Didymous]

Why won't you just answer the question?

Ah, so eternallygrateful was talking about the 1611kjv? That explains the misunderstanding.

 

[DJ2]

That wouldn't surprise me as he's a very smart man.

I would be very surprised.

 

[Donmech]

I personally believe that God in all His power is able to preserve His word throughout the ages, and maybe He knew that in the years leading up from 1611 to our modern day, 90% of the world would use the English language. That's not to say that all nations primarily use English, however, a great majority do learn English as a second language. Understanding some Greek may have some useful applications.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Ah, so eternallygrateful was talking about the 1611kjv? That explains the misunderstanding.

Was the 1611written in greek?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I personally believe that God in all His power is able to preserve His word throughout the ages, and maybe He knew that in the years leading up from 1611 to our modern day, 90% of the world would use the English language. That's not to say that all nations primarily use English, however, a great majority do learn English as a second language. Understanding some Greek may have some useful applications.

I personnally believe the English language is one of the worst languages, it is too basic, and not deep enough to really see the detail of the greek language (the greek is much more indepthnand consise. And that the translators, be as they may, not only had an issue trying to interpret a “word for word” translation trying to find words that fit best, but may not be precise (like the word love in Jesus questioning of peter. Where one english word with many meaning replace two different greek words with differnt meanings) and if one interpreted it into an english text where we wanted precise interpretation, at best, the nt would be about twice as long in the english

 

[KelbyofGod]

No.... I don't think it's a "rule" that it happens only/exactly at that time. All that Peter told the 3000 was that when you repent and are baptized you will receive the Spirit. Not really saying that it will definitely, without exception, happen at that moment.

Personally, I think it DOES happen at that moment for many new believers.. but, as you have pointed out, there is one scriptural reference that indicates that at least in THAT instance, it required the laying on of the apostles hands... at least several days after baptism. I don't pretend to know why that is.

I can't really use one scripture as an unflexible pattern... the same way that people shouldn't use the thief on the cross as an example of "you don't have to ever be baptized to be saved" .... that was a "one off" event, at least from all scriptural accounts.

Peter's account of Pentecost does not say definitively that the 3000 all received the Spirit at that moment.... that is simply what Peter promised them... "do this, and this will happen"....

Hornetguy,

Do you know how refreshing it is that you answered the way you did? It's not often that someone acknowledges something that even sounds like it contradicts a doctrinal belief they had been taught to hold. It's like how God felt about Ninevah in the last chapter of Jonah. And it is similar to how the ‘certain disciples’ were willing to be vulnerably honest to Paul when he asked them IF they had received the holy ghost in Acts 19.

BTW, would you like to hear another thing that those biblical play-by-play examples prove? The same way they prove that the Holy Ghost is NOT always given immediately at/upon water baptism...they also prove that the Holy Ghost is NOT always given immediately at/upon the moment of belief.


Play-by-play example #1. Acts 2:1-4 The disciples (including Peter) already believed prior to the day of Pentecost (when they actually were baptized with the Holy Ghost). No statement of them only newly beginning to believe in Jesus. (Independent of time of belief).

NOTE: Even the fact of Jesus stating “It is finished” doesn’t change the fact that the believers still had to wait until the day of Pentecost to receive the baptism of the Holy Ghost. (it didn’t happen at the time of their belief...or at the time of his sacrifice on the cross)

Play-by-play example #2. Acts 8:5-17. In verse 12 they believe and get baptized. Verses 14-16 the apostles hear of this and send Peter and John to pray for them because verse 16 clearly states that they have not yet received the Holy Ghost. Not until verse 17 does the bible state that they actually receive the Holy Ghost (independent of time of belief).

Play-by-play example #3. Acts 10:44-48. Cornelius and his group. In this example the Holy Ghost is poured out upon them (verse 44) while they are hearing. This is one biblical account of someone actually receiving the holy ghost at what can be argued as “at time of belief”...but it is neither first nor last...establishing no standard.

Play-by-play example #4. Acts 19:1-7. Paul talking to disciples at Ephesus. The bible already declares them as disciples in verse 1. Paul suggests they are believers in verse 2.. And if baptism is the first step AFTER belief, then they got baptized between time of belief, and time of receiving the Holy Ghost...because in verse 6, they receive the holy ghost, not stated as “at belief” but in this particular example it was instead stated that “when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them”.

I’m adding this last statement because I got it when praying tonight and felt led to share it as a reminder/warnig to all of us. We are to filter what we are taught in church through the examples given to us by God...not to filter the examples given to us by God through what we are taught in church.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby