baptism..believers baptism??

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
phil36

phil36

Senior Member
#1
Feb 12, 2009
8,260
2,111
113
51
#1
Baptism.. we have had many debates about it on here.. and some evry good points raised.

38And Peter said to them, "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself."

The main section I have underlined. Now, it would seem at first glance that this bolsters the idea of believers baptism.. but does it?

In the spread of the gospel, it was being given to Jews and non jews alike, these non jews (gentiles/greeks) were not original to any covenant with God. So now those who recieved the word where now covenant people.. it is here that we see that believers Baptism may not be infact any more above infant baptism.

Abraham was given the sign of covenant promises.. this showed he was in covenant a sign, he ws aman of Faith. he believed in God. Now when Isaac was born and was circumcised did he have Faith at that age, or was it a sign he was born into the covenant people? for the promise was for Abraham and his children.

Just thought I would ask.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#2
#2
phil36 said:
Baptism.. we have had many debates about it on here.. and some evry good points raised.

38And Peter said to them, "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself."

The main section I have underlined. Now, it would seem at first glance that this bolsters the idea of believers baptism.. but does it?

In the spread of the gospel, it was being given to Jews and non jews alike, these non jews (gentiles/greeks) were not original to any covenant with God. So now those who recieved the word where now covenant people.. it is here that we see that believers Baptism may not be infact any more above infant baptism.

Abraham was given the sign of covenant promises.. this showed he was in covenant a sign, he ws aman of Faith. he believed in God. Now when Isaac was born and was circumcised did he have Faith at that age, or was it a sign he was born into the covenant people? for the promise was for Abraham and his children.

Just thought I would ask.
Click to expand...

Actually, If one does a study of the origional text. you would find this is a very poor translation of this verse. if nothing else the wording arrangement is off.

in the greek we have.

Repent which is a second person plural imperative verb or command

Shall receive is second person indicative plural accusative..

Gift of the holy spirit is also second person singular.

All these are second person, meaning Peter is giving this command to everyone he is talking to. It is imperative you do this. If you do this you will receive the gift of the HS which is the object of the verb repent. The indicative verb means that the object of the verb is real, If you do this (repent) you will get this)
'
however, when we look at baptism, we see the verb has changed. It is not second person.

baptized 3rd person imperative verb singular

remmision of sin. 3rd person singular object of the verb.

Here Peter is no longer just talking to everyone. Like he did when he told them to repent. He is speaking to induviduals. The modifying phrase For, or unto, connects this verb and noun pair. Many people want to make this mean remission of sin is caused by the baptism. but this is not always the case.

I went to the doctor for (In order to get) medicine
I went to the doctor for (in behalf of) my child
I went to the doctor for (on account of) my sickness

as we can see. For has many meanings. Not on to get something, But because I already had something.

Since Peter is only talking to induviduals when me mentions baptism. It is logical and actually demands we interpret Peter to be talking to those who had repented and already recieved the HS, thus, he is telling them. Since you have remmision of sin. I now command you to be baptized.

This is supported further in the next verse. when it Says "and all those who RECIEVED THE WORD (BELIEVED OR REPENTED) Were baptized.

So what Peter actually says, is he is commanding everyone to repent and if they do they will get the gift of the HS. And for those who recieve remission of sin. Be baptized in the name of Jesus.

This would negate any reall arguments on this verse (which troubled me for years i might add) because the greek does not allow us to interpret it the way it appears to be written.
 
phil36

phil36

Senior Member
#3
Feb 12, 2009
8,260
2,111
113
51
#3
eternally-gratefull said:
Actually, If one does a study of the origional text. you would find this is a very poor translation of this verse. if nothing else the wording arrangement is off.

in the greek we have.

Repent which is a second person plural imperative verb or command

Shall receive is second person indicative plural accusative..

Gift of the holy spirit is also second person singular.

All these are second person, meaning Peter is giving this command to everyone he is talking to. It is imperative you do this. If you do this you will receive the gift of the HS which is the object of the verb repent. The indicative verb means that the object of the verb is real, If you do this (repent) you will get this)
'
however, when we look at baptism, we see the verb has changed. It is not second person.

baptized 3rd person imperative verb singular

remmision of sin. 3rd person singular object of the verb.

Here Peter is no longer just talking to everyone. Like he did when he told them to repent. He is speaking to induviduals. The modifying phrase For, or unto, connects this verb and noun pair. Many people want to make this mean remission of sin is caused by the baptism. but this is not always the case.

I went to the doctor for (In order to get) medicine
I went to the doctor for (in behalf of) my child
I went to the doctor for (on account of) my sickness

as we can see. For has many meanings. Not on to get something, But because I already had something.

Since Peter is only talking to induviduals when me mentions baptism. It is logical and actually demands we interpret Peter to be talking to those who had repented and already recieved the HS, thus, he is telling them. Since you have remmision of sin. I now command you to be baptized.

This is supported further in the next verse. when it Says "and all those who RECIEVED THE WORD (BELIEVED OR REPENTED) Were baptized.

So what Peter actually says, is he is commanding everyone to repent and if they do they will get the gift of the HS. And for those who recieve remission of sin. Be baptized in the name of Jesus.

This would negate any reall arguments on this verse (which troubled me for years i might add) because the greek does not allow us to interpret it the way it appears to be written.
Click to expand...

Hi ET,

Very good. and a very good polemic for believers baptism :)

But how do you resolve the the promise for you and your children? remember baptism is a sign of being in the New Covenant. what was the sign o the promise.. did Isaac have Faith, before recieving the sign of covenant?
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#4
#4
phil36 said:
Hi ET,

Very good. and a very good polemic for believers baptism :)

But how do you resolve the the promise for you and your children? remember baptism is a sign of being in the New Covenant. what was the sign o the promise.. did Isaac have Faith, before recieving the sign of covenant?
Click to expand...
There really is no problem. The imparative verb is a command given to us today, As also is the promise of the Holy Spirit. This promise was not just made to them but for everyone.

As for isaac. Remember that covenant mostly concerned God and Isaacs blood children (Israel) and not salvation., God made a new covenant with man and how he would deal with them and communicate to them and bless them. Baptism is the sign of the covenant. Gods covenant with Abraham, which Isaac became a part of is the promise of the redeemer. But also specific promises made to national Israel. Which assured there children certain promises. But had nothing to do with salvation. I hope this makes sense.
 
S

SantoSubito

Guest
#5
#5
I wasn't aware that too many Reformed Christians are in favor of infant baptism. I thought most of them had dropped it in favor of credo-baptism.
 
S

Scotth1960

Guest
#6
#6
[quote=phil36;482990]Baptism.. we have had many debates about it on

here.. and some evry good points raised.

38And Peter said to them, "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the

name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the

gift of the Holy Spirit. 39For the promise is for you and for your children and

for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself."

The main section I have underlined. Now, it would seem at first glance that

this bolsters the idea of believers baptism.. but does it?

In the spread of the gospel, it was being given to Jews and non jews alike,

these non jews (gentiles/greeks) were not original to any covenant with God.

So now those who recieved the word where now covenant people.. it is here

that we see that believers Baptism may not be infact any more above infant

baptism.

Abraham was given the sign of covenant promises.. this showed he was in

covenant a sign, he ws aman of Faith. he believed in God. Now when Isaac was

born and was circumcised did he have Faith at that age, or was it a sign he

was born into the covenant people? for the promise was for Abraham and his

children.

Just thought I would ask.

Dear Phil 36, If you want the correct

doctrine of Baptism in the NT, see the Orthodox Study Bible (OSB) and also

from the Didache in the Apostolic Fathers translation by Jack N. Sparks, Ph.D.

See also the section on trine immersion baptism of Saint Martin of Braga,

Spain in the Fathers of the Church series volume of the Catholic University of

America Press, I believe it's from the Iberian Father's volume and it may be

either volume 62 or 64, I forget exactly which volume number. It's available

at any Catholic university library or public or private college library that has

these Roman Catholic Father's of the Church series. Roman Catholicism and

Eastern Orthodoxy were the same Church until 1054 AD, when Roman

Catholicism became officially heretical and schismatic, and asserted its papal

rights (allegedly) against Orthodoxy. But Catholicism retains a measure of

Catholicity and Orthodoxy, and was good for many years until its

heretical Augustinianism got the best of it. Take care. God bless you. In Erie

PA Scott R. Harrington July 3, 2011 AD

 
A

authorgracebook

Guest
#7
#7
We are baptized in Jesus' name because we are baptized in the name of the Father, Son Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. We have to take the whole Bible together. Can't just take one verse and let it be the end all, so shouldn't baptize in ONLY the name of Jesus. It's a Family and we're being immersed into the Family of God, one God in three Persons but we are sons of the Father.
 
N

newbirth

Banned
#8
Mar 28, 2014
4,300
31
0
#8
eternally-gratefull said:

Actually, If one does a study of the origional text. you would find this is a very poor translation of this verse. if nothing else the wording arrangement is off.

in the greek we have.

Repent which is a second person plural imperative verb or command

Shall receive is second person indicative plural accusative..

Gift of the holy spirit is also second person singular.

All these are second person, meaning Peter is giving this command to everyone he is talking to. It is imperative you do this. If you do this you will receive the gift of the HS which is the object of the verb repent. The indicative verb means that the object of the verb is real, If you do this (repent) you will get this)
'
however, when we look at baptism, we see the verb has changed. It is not second person.

baptized 3rd person imperative verb singular

remmision of sin. 3rd person singular object of the verb.

Here Peter is no longer just talking to everyone. Like he did when he told them to repent. He is speaking to induviduals. The modifying phrase For, or unto, connects this verb and noun pair. Many people want to make this mean remission of sin is caused by the baptism. but this is not always the case.

I went to the doctor for (In order to get) medicine
I went to the doctor for (in behalf of) my child
I went to the doctor for (on account of) my sickness

as we can see. For has many meanings. Not on to get something, But because I already had something.

Since Peter is only talking to induviduals when me mentions baptism. It is logical and actually demands we interpret Peter to be talking to those who had repented and already recieved the HS, thus, he is telling them. Since you have remmision of sin. I now command you to be baptized.

This is supported further in the next verse. when it Says "and all those who RECIEVED THE WORD (BELIEVED OR REPENTED) Were baptized.

So what Peter actually says, is he is commanding everyone to repent and if they do they will get the gift of the HS. And for those who recieve remission of sin. Be baptized in the name of Jesus.

This would negate any reall arguments on this verse (which troubled me for years i might add) because the greek does not allow us to interpret it the way it appears to be written.
Click to expand...
Mark 1:4
John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

Luke 3:3
And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins;

The account with John's disciples proves you wrong....else Paul would not have asked ...
Unto what then were ye baptised?... so believes Christ repents and is baptised unto/for the remission of sins...to receive the HS

Acts 19:2-4King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]2 [/SUP]He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
[SUP]3 [/SUP]And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.

[SUP]4 [/SUP]Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.



Jesus did not change the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins...He added the gift of the HS to it.....
you change the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.... to the baptism of nothing....
 
SeaBass

SeaBass

Banned
#9
Mar 12, 2014
6,433
29
0
#9
phil36 said:
Baptism.. we have had many debates about it on here.. and some evry good points raised.

38And Peter said to them, "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself."

The main section I have underlined. Now, it would seem at first glance that this bolsters the idea of believers baptism.. but does it?

In the spread of the gospel, it was being given to Jews and non jews alike, these non jews (gentiles/greeks) were not original to any covenant with God. So now those who recieved the word where now covenant people.. it is here that we see that believers Baptism may not be infact any more above infant baptism.

Abraham was given the sign of covenant promises.. this showed he was in covenant a sign, he ws aman of Faith. he believed in God. Now when Isaac was born and was circumcised did he have Faith at that age, or was it a sign he was born into the covenant people? for the promise was for Abraham and his children.

Just thought I would ask.
Click to expand...
Under the OT Jews were born into a covenant but Christ did away with the OT (Col 2:14; Eph 2:15; Heb 10:9) therefore one's physical birth/physical descendancy has nothing to do with his salvation as Paul shows in Rom 2:28,29; Rom 9:6-13. For one to be in a NT covenant relationship with God he must become a "spiritual Jew">a Christian and he does this by obeying in repenting and being baptized as commanded in Acts 2:38.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.