I at one time had attended the so called "church of Christ" so I understand all about your Campbellism theories.
My beliefs on salvation through faith (rightly understood) in Christ alone are based on scripture (Ephesians 2:8,9). These men may further validate what I believe, yet I became a believer in Christ before I even knew who these men were. The Bible is your guide (only as it's filtered through the biased teachings of the so called church of Christ).
There is not a version of the Bible that translates Acts 2:38, "Repent, and be baptized...in order to obtain the remission of sins." Greek scholar A.T. Robertson manifests the position that the preposition "eis" has no uniform usage so as to set it's definition in such concrete form which would make it possible to construct a doctrine upon its meaning. J.H. Thayer devotes several columns in his Lexicon to the preposition "eis," and among his listings he has the following: "of reference or relation; with respect to, in reference to, as regards." As an illustration, he cites Matthew 12:41, "they repented AT (eis) the preaching of Jonah." Thayer says this means "out of regard to the substance of his preaching." Here it would be ridiculous to follow your idea and say they repented AT "in order to obtain" the preaching of Jonah.
The popular text, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, by H.E. Dana and J.R. Mantey, classifies "eis" in five of eight categories in a chart entitled, "Prepositional Meanings Classied." Here are the categories and meanings as pertaining to "eis."
Direction: into, unto, to
Position: in, among, upon
Relation: as, for, against, in respect to
Cause: because of
Purpose: for the purpose of
*Among the Liddell and Scott Lexicon is "in regards to." It is not necessary to multiply quotations from scholarship to establish the fact that "eis" has "different shades of meaning." An examination of the more than seventeen hundred times the word is used in the New Testament will convince any careful student of this fact. That "eis" has different meanings simply establishes the fact that your church cannot be so dogmatic as to build a theological structure upon one of the word's possible meanings. A doctrine, such as baptismal remission, necessitating that a person be immersed or perish in eternal destruction, should certainly have more confirmation than the fact that one of the possible meanings of "eis" is "in order to."
In Liddell & Scott, Greek-English Lexicon, the standard lexicon for classical Greek, we find the following uses of the word:
Of place ("into," "to," less commonly "before," "upon," "for")
Of time ("up to," "until," "near," "for," "with")
To express measure or limit ("as far as," "as much as," "so far as," "about," "by")
To express relation ("towards," "in regard to")
Of an end or limit, including the idea of purpose or object ("in," "into," "for," "to the purpose")
In Bauer, Arndt and Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, the standard lexicon for Biblical Greek and early Christian writings, we find the following meanings of the word:
Of place ("into," "in," "toward," "to," "among," "near," "to," "on," "toward")
Of time ("to," "until," "for," "on," "in," "for," "throughout")
To indicate degree ("to," "completely," "fully")
To indicate the goal, including to show the result or purpose ("unto," "to," "against," "in," "for," "into," "to," "so that," "in order to," "for")
To denote reference to a person or thing ("for," "to," "with respect" or "reference to")
Some more minor uses.
In Abbott-Smith, A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament; Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament, and Dana & Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, we find very similar meanings.
*Greek scholar A. T. Robertson, was probably the greatest Greek scholar of his day. He authored a large Greek Grammar, as well as a six volume series entitled, Word Pictures in the New Testament. In his comments on Acts 2:38 he shows how the grammar of this verse can be used to support more than one interpretation of this text. He then reaches this conclusion: “One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not.
"My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. So I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received.” The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the Koin, generally (Robertson, Grammar, page 592). Amen!
Many modern translaters have interpreted the Greek word EIS as meaning that repentance was the basis for their baptism.
Amplified - "because of" repentance
Renaissance - "because of" repentance
Phillips - "as a sign of" your repentance
Goodspeed - "as a token of" your repentance
Williams - "to picture" your repentance
Twentieth Century - "to teach" repentance
Living Bible - "baptize those who repent of their sins"
Your theology has originated with uninspired men, namely THOMAS CAMPBELL, ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, WALTER SCOTT, and BARTON W. STONE. The various roles of the Campbells along with Walter Scott and Barton W. Stone are clearly detailed from "Campbellian" writings and biographies. Did these men actually "restore" the Gospel, the Church, and true New Testament worship, as they claim, or did they simply create another sect bent on a more dogmatic sectarianism than others they renounced? You can believe the truth or the sales pitch of your church.
Stand aside? LOL! It's obvious you are a Campbellite. Roman Catholics quote John 6:54 "as it is written" and come up with the
false doctrine of "transubstantiation." Do you believe that false doctrine as well or do you understand that Jesus was speaking SYMBOLICALLY? Eating and drinking is not with the mouth and the digestive organs of our bodies, but the reception of God’s grace by believing in Christ, as He makes abundantly clear by repeating the same truths both in metaphoric and plain language. Compare the following two verses:
"Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life" (vs. 47).
"He who eats this bread will live forever" (vs. 58).
"He who believes" in Christ is equivalent to "he who eats this bread" because the result is the same, eternal life. The parallel is even also seen in verses 40 and 54:
"Everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day" (vs. 40).
"Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day" (vs. 54).
John chapter 6 does not afford any support to the false Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation. On the contrary, it is an emphatic statement on the primacy of faith as the means by which we receive the grace of God. Jesus is the Bread of Life; we eat of Him and are satisfied when we believe in Him.
The first question that must be answered in regards to Acts 22:16 is "when was Paul saved?" Paul tells that he did not receive or hear the Gospel from Ananias, but rather he heard it directly from Christ. Galatians 1:11-12 says, "For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man.
For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ."
Paul had repented (Acts 9:6). "Lord, what will you have me to do?" Repentance means a "change of mind," and is wrought by the grace of God. Paul once persecuted the Lord (Acts 9:5), but is now ready to serve Him. Paul had believed. He had Christ as his Lord (Acts 9:6). The Bible tells us that "no man can say that Jesus is Lord except "by" the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:3). Paul had, by the work of the Holy Spirit, submitted to Christ as Lord. Paul prayed (Acts 9:11). "Behold, he is praying," the Lord said to Ananias. This indicates that Paul's praying was pleasing to God. People in the church of Christ teach that God does not hear an unsaved man's prayer, quoting in this regard John 9:31 - "We know that God does not listen to sinners. He listens to the godly man who does his will." Well, Paul was a worshipper of God, calling Christ "Lord" and ready to serve Him. All of these things characterized Paul BEFORE he was water baptized. So, Paul heard and believed in Christ prior to getting water baptized.
Paul had already believed in Christ when Ananias came to pray for him to receive his sight (Acts 9:17). It also should be noted that Paul at the time when Ananias prayed for him to receive his sight, he was
filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17)--this was
before he was water baptized (Acts 9:18). Verse 17 connects his being filled with the Spirit with the receiving of his sight. We know that he received his sight prior to his water baptism.
It's also interesting that when Paul recounted this event again later in Acts (Acts 26:12-18), he did not mention Ananias or what Ananias said to him at all. Verse 18 again would confirm the idea that Paul received Christ as Savior on the road to Damascus since here Christ is telling Paul he will be a messenger for Him concerning forgiveness of sins for Gentiles as they have faith in Him. It would seem unlikely that Christ would commission Paul if Paul had not yet believed in Him and was not yet saved.
1
