Shared altar / pulpit

[John t]

What is achieved thru Holy Baptism is the forgiveness of sins. THAT is the work of God, not of man. Pouring water and saying the Baptismal words are not work. The forgiveness of sins IS, but THAT is the work of God. And it is God's work that saves us.

I am seeking understanding of your position, not debating, but I truly see the possibility of your position that baptism is a rite through divine grace is conferred. Is that correct in describing your position?

If that correctly describe the LCMS position, then it is logical to ask whether water in the rite of baptism is a necessary component whereby forgiveness of sins is granted. More to the point, according to Missouri Synod theology can there be a "dry cleaning" without any water whereby sins are forgiven?

If you choose to not answer that due to my unintentional breaking the rules of CARM, your silence will be sufficient

 

[Bonnie]

I am seeking understanding of your position, not debating, but I truly see the possibility of your position that baptism is a rite through divine grace is conferred. Is that correct in describing your position?

Pretty much. We see it as a means of grace, by which our sins are forgiven. We believe it saves, but is not absolutely essential for salvation, if a person who comes to faith cannot get baptized, for whatever reason.

If that correctly describe the LCMS position, then it is logical to ask whether water in the rite of baptism is a necessary component whereby forgiveness of sins is granted. More to the point, according to Missouri Synod theology can there be a "dry cleaning" without any water whereby sins are forgiven?

In Holy Baptism, water is a necessary component. But yes, our sins can be forgiven when we pray to Jesus to forgive our sins. They are also forgiven through the Lord's Supper.

If you choose to not answer that due to my unintentional breaking the rules of CARM, your silence will be sufficient

No problem. This is the Lutheran board and you are asking me about Lutheran beliefs. How could that be breaking the rules?

 

[John t]

John t said:

If that correctly describe the LCMS position, then it is logical to ask whether water in the rite of baptism is a necessary component whereby forgiveness of sins is granted. More to the point, according to Missouri Synod theology can there be a "dry cleaning" without any water whereby sins are forgiven?

In Holy Baptism, water is a necessary component. But yes, our sins can be forgiven when we pray to Jesus to forgive our sins. They are also forgiven through the Lord's Supper.

That seems to lead one to believe that water is a medium whereby quantifiable grace is released through the repetition of words, and the doing of certain acts. That seems to be a Romansh-leaning theology whereby the actions of a "priestly caste of pastors" gain influence and eventually arrogate unto themselves certain prerogatives, namely forgiveness of sins which are correctly the property of Jesus Christ alone.

 

[BJ Bear]

Let's start with Acts 2:38. Then, we can talk about Matthew 28:19.

Finshing up with 1 Peter 3:21-22, which was begun here: https://forums.carm.org/threads/shared-altar-pulpit.2029/post-297063, before moving on to the other passages:

Since baptism does now save you by (or through the means of) the ressurrection of Christ then it is in no way set in opposition to the resurrection of Christ or presented as an alternative to the resurrection Christ.

Scripture presents how baptism does now save us through the resurrection of Christ in multiple ways. Here are two examples from Paul. 1) Baptism unites the baptized to the incarnate, crucified and risen Lord in His death and resuurrection.

"Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? 4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

5 For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, 6 knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin." Romans 6:3-6 -NKJV

20 In baptism the baptized are clothed with Christ rather than the filthy rags of their own work. Please note that in assigning cause for our justication through faith in Christ the Apostle assigns baptism, the work of God as demonstrated through 1 Peter 3:21 and elsewhere, as the ultimate cause.

"23 But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. 24 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.

26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise." Galatians 3:23-29 -NKJV

 

[Mike McK]

it is holy Baptism and though it uses water, it also uses the word of God. And Eph. 5 is most certainly about holy Baptism: "having cleansed her by WATER WITH THE WORD." That is Holy Baptism.

And I have already explained to you from the scriptures why it's not referring to baptism.

i wasn't quoting the text but summarizing what the Bible teaches.

Thanks, but I think I'll trust the text over your opinion.

Except Peter says that "baptism NOW saves you....through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." I will believe Peter over you.

And I will believe the text over your opinion.

I noticed that you didn't deal with my correction of what YOU wrote--Nowhere does the Bible say women should be silent everywhere--only in church. You neglected to qualify your statement. So, if you were inaccurate there, then your accuracy in the rest of your posts is called into question.

Wow. You snowflakes can't take a joke, can you?

Incidentally, I've backed up everything I've said with scripture and have even gone into deep dives, showing you the grammatical and historical evidence to back up what I've said.

If you still don't believe it, not my problem.

Acts 2--"38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ FOR the forgiveness of your sins."

Yes, and I've already explained to you that the word "eis" is a preposition that refers to something that has already taken place.

And from Acts 22:--"16 And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name."

Yes, and I've already explained to you that "epikalesamenos", is an aorist participle that refers either to action that is simultaneous with or before that of the main verb, "be baptized."

Incidentally, I noticed you're ignoring my questions about Cornelius and Paul. Are they difficult for you to answer?

And Romans 6:

Nowhere does it say we are saved by being baptized.

Yes, it does, as I showed you.

No, you showed me an out of context verse that I easily refuted.

Who says my posts aren't an accurate representation of what I believe?

Because when you say something and I repeat it back to you and you say that's not what you believe, you sound confused.

I said that you don't really seem to know what we believe about the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

And, you don't believe your posts are an accurate representation of what you believe about the Gospel of Jesus Christ?

 

[Bonnie]

And I have already explained to you from the scriptures why it's not referring to baptism.

and I have already explained that I will believe the Bible over you.

Thanks, but I think I'll trust the text over your opinion.

I do trust the texts and they plainly say in 1 Peter 3 and Acts that baptism saves us and is for the forgiveness of sins. And that the "washing of water WITH THE WORD" can only refer to Holy Baptism.

And I will believe the text over your opinion.

But you are rejecting what the texts plainly say. Why? Because they don't jibe with your a priori assumption of what they actually mean?

Wow. You snowflakes can't take a joke, can you?

Sure I can--when it's a joke. Why can't you just gird your loins and admit you were incorrect there?

Incidentally, I've backed up everything I've said with scripture and have even gone into deep dives, showing you the grammatical and historical evidence to back up what I've said.

I have just gone by what Scripture actually says. And believed it. Try it sometime.

If you still don't believe it, not my problem.

Yes, I do believe what the Bible says.

Yes, and I've already explained to you that the word "eis" is a preposition that refers to something that has already taken place.

Yes, and I've already explained to you that "epikalesamenos", is an aorist participle that refers either to action that is simultaneous with or before that of the main verb, "be baptized."

So? But the various texts still say that A. Baptism now does save us, and B. Is for the forgiveness of sins and C. Jesus cleansed the church by the washing OF WATER WITH THE WORD.

Incidentally, I noticed you're ignoring my questions about Cornelius and Paul. Are they difficult for you to answer?

I didn't see anything about Cornelius and Paul. What post are those in?

Nowhere does it say we are saved by being baptized.

Sure it does, in 1 Peter 3. But you ignore what he plainly wrote.

No, you showed me an out of context verse that I easily refuted.

No, I didn't. I later put 1 Peter 3 into full context. He still says that baptism does now save us...by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Because when you say something and I repeat it back to you and you say that's not what you believe, you sound confused.

I am not confused in the least. I just won't believe your misinterpretation of Scripture. That does not mean I am confused.

And, you don't believe your posts are an accurate representation of what you believe about the Gospel of Jesus Christ?

Sure I do. But let me make this clear: though we believe that Baptism does NOW save us, it is not absolutely essential for salvation, if, for some reason, a person is unable to be baptized before death, or prevented from doing so, if he or she has faith in Jesus Christ. But if a person can be baptized, he should, since Jesus commands it and it is a means of grace.

 

[Mike McK]

and I have already explained that I will believe the Bible over you.

And I've shown you that Acts 2:38 uses the word "eis", which indicates that baptism follows the forgiveness of sins, and Acts 22:16 uses the word "epikalesamenos", which indicates something that forgiveness of sins has already happened.

As long as you deny what the text says, you don't believe the Bible.

I do trust the texts and they plainly say in 1 Peter 3 and Acts that baptism saves us and is for the forgiveness of sins.

But you've repeatedly quoted just a portion of one verse out of an entire passage. When the passage is read as a whole, it is not talking about salvation by baptism. I've shown you this many times.

If you really "trusted the texts", you would be honest and quote the whole passage. But you never do.

And that the "washing of water WITH THE WORD" can only refer to Holy Baptism.

And I've shown you several times now why the "water" is not baptism but the preaching of the Gospel.

But you are rejecting what the texts plainly say. Why? Because they don't jive with your a priori assumption of what they actually mean?

First, if you don't even know the difference between "jive" and "jibe", then you're clearly in over your head.

Second, I've shown you from the Greek, from corroborating verses, and from historical sources. It's you who ignore all three.

I've shown evidence. All you've shown is your ignorant opinion.

Sure I can--when it's a joke. Why can't you just gird your loins and admit you were incorrect there?

You're right. I was incorrect to assume you were worth trying to talk to.

I have just gone by what Scripture actually says. And believed it. Try it sometime.

No, you haven't. You take verses out of context, you quote only snippets of verses, you ignore the grammar, the analogy of scripture, etc.

Yes, I do believe what the Bible says.

Good. Then you believe that "eis" and "epikalesamenos" show baptism follows salvation

So? But the various texts still say that A. Baptism now does save us, and B. Is for the forgiveness of sins and C. Jesus cleansed the church by the washing OF WATER WITH THE WORD.

Yeah, and I've explained to you numerous times now why this is not true.

I keep showing evidence, you just keep repeating your opinion.

I didn't see anything about Cornelius and Paul. What post are those in?

Sure you did. I asked how they were saved before they were baptized, and why Paul, an evangelist, would say he didn't come to baptize, but to preach the Gospel, if baptism saves.

Sure it does, in 1 Peter 3. But you ignore what he plainly wrote.

Not true. Between the two of us, I'm the only one who has quoted it in context. You just keep quoting a snippet out of context.

No, I didn't. I later put 1 Peter 3 into full context. He still says that baptism does now save us...by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

And I've shown you, using the full context of the passage, why this is not true.

I am not confused in the least. I just won't believe your misinterpretation of Scripture.

Sorry you feel that way.

Sure I do. But let me make this clear: though we believe that Baptism does NOW save us, it is not absolutely essential for salvation, if, for some reason, a person is unable to be baptized before death, or prevented from doing so. But if a person can be baptized, he should, since Jesus commands it and it is a means of grace.

Yeah, that's heresy, Patrick.

And now, since I've shown you from the Greek, from grammatical, historical sources, corroborating verses, etc. I think it's time to declare this the Proverbs 26:4 portion of our conversation.

You're dismissed.

 

[BJ Bear]

That seems to lead one to believe that water is a medium whereby quantifiable grace is released through the repetition of words, and the doing of certain acts. That seems to be a Romansh-leaning theology whereby the actions of a "priestly caste of pastors" gain influence and eventually arrogate unto themselves certain prerogatives, namely forgiveness of sins which are correctly the property of Jesus Christ alone.

A dissenting non LCMS view is there is no, "dry cleaning," on the same level of assurance as that of he who believes and is baptized shall be saved. In other words, it is possible for someone to someone to be saved without being baptized if that person does not despise or deny that baptism into Christ saves through ythe resurrection of Christ. A hypothetical modern example of this would be the guy that gets hit by the proverbial bus on the way to his baptism.

There isn't a priestly cast in our churches. Pastors are called to preach the word and administer the sacraments, in other words, to shepherd the sheep.

What is natively or naturally the property of Jesus, the forgiveness or retention of sins, He has bestowed upon the church.

"So Jesus said to them again, “Peace to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you.” 22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” John 20:21-23 -NKJV
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John 19&version=NKJV

 

[Bonnie]

And I've shown you that Acts 2:38 uses the word "eis", which indicates that baptism follows the forgiveness of sins, and Acts 22:16 uses the word "epikalesamenos", which indicates something that forgiveness of sins has already happened.

As long as you deny what the text says, you don't believe the Bible.

I am denying nothing. Acts 2 says Baptism is for the forgiveness of sins. IF their sins were already forgiven, then Peter would have told everyone to be baptized to show obedience to Jesus Christ a d as an outward sign of something the Lord had already done. But Peter didn't say that. He said, "Repent and BE baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ FOR the forgiveness of sins..." So, first they repented, then were baptized for the forgiveness of their sins. The text does not say what you claim it does.

But you've repeatedly quoted just a portion of one verse out of an entire passage. When the passage is read as a whole, it is not talking about salvation by baptism. I've shown you this many times.

You mean, I should quote in context the way YOU did, when you wrote Paul says women should be silent in church? Do more in context, as you did then? Just like that?

You can point out your a priori mistake interpretation all you want to, but that won't change what Peter actually said.

If you really "trusted the texts", you would be honest and quote the whole passage. But you never do.

That is incorrect. But often I am on my tablet, amd it is difficult for me to cut and paste entire passages from Bible Gateway without getting all the stuff to the right of tne passages. But 8n or out of context, the meaning g is tne szme--baptism is for the forgiveness of sins, since our sins are buried with Jesus at Baptism, and then we are raised to new life in Him. That is the forgiveness of sins. Read Rom. 6.

And I've shown you several times now why the "water" is not baptism but the preaching of the Gospel.

baloney. There are two different words for Gospel and water in Greek. IF Paul had meant the Gospel in Eph. 5, he would have said Jesus cleansed His church by the washing of the Gospel with the word. But he wrote WATER. Why do you change the clear words of Scripture?

First, if you don't even know the difference between "jive" and "jibe", then you're clearly in over your head.

And if you do not know what a typo is, then perhaps you are in over YOURS. See where v and b are on the keyboard?

Second, I've shown you from the Greek, from corroborating verses, and from historical sources. It's you who ignore all three.

Are you a Greek scholar? And I know what the corroborating verses are--and they say baptism is for the forgiveness of sins.

I've shown evidence. All you've shown is your ignorant opinion.

I believe it is more like the other way around. I take the Bible as it is written and in its God-given immediate context. It is "washing of WATER" with the word." NOT "washing of the Gospel with the word.

You're right. I was incorrect to assume you were worth trying to talk to.

So only those who agree with you are worthy of your attention? Is that it?

No, you haven't. You take verses out of context, you quote only snippets of verses, you ignore the grammar, the analogy of scripture, etc. [/ quote]

I can quote whole chapters if you wish--but that still won't make the verses say what you want them to say.

[ quote]Good. Then you believe that "eis" and "epikalesamenos" show baptism follows salvation

It can. But it can also be done to infants,for it is pure grace from Jesus Christ. In baptism, we "put on Christ".

Yeah, and I've explained to you numerous times now why this is not true.

And I have explained why I disagree with you.

I keep showing evidence, you just keep repeating your opinion.

I have been showing you just the Bible. Isn't that evidence? And believing what it actually says. That Baptism now does save us; it is for the forgiveness of sins; Christ cleansed His church by the washing of WATER WITH the word, that Baptism washes away our sins.

Sure you did. I asked how they were saved before they were baptized, and why Paul, an evangelist, would say he didn't come to baptize, but to preach the Gospel, if baptism saves.

How was who saved prior to baptism?

All Paul meant was that his main ministry wasn't about baptism but preaching tne Gospel, though he did baptize a few people. You would know this had you read more IN CONTEXT instead of just quoting a snippet. Another instance where YOU did NOT quote in context!

Not true. Between the two of us, I'm the only one who has quoted it in context. You just keep quoting a snippet out of context.

Well, you quoted 2 snippets of Paul totally out of context...but I guess YOU can do it, eh?

I did put 1 Peter 3:21 in more context, earlier, with the Ark, etc. And explained the meaning, but you just scoffed.

But again, I am on my tablet, and sometimes on my phone, and it can be difficult to cut and paste large swaths of passages from Gateway, without getting lots of extraneous stuff at the same time.

And I've shown you, using the full context of the passage, why this is not true.

Sorry you feel that way.

You mean, in context as you did, with 2 snippets from Paul about women being silent, and Paul not coming to baptize? In context, like that?

And I can show you why it IS that way. And sorry YOU feel the way you do.

Yeah, that's heresy, Patrick.

Baptism for the forgiveness of sins is heresy, even though the Bible says so?

No, it is what the Bible says.

It is for the forgiveness of sins, to unite us to Christ, so our sins die with Him, and we are raised to new life in Him.

And now, since I've shown you from the Greek, from grammatical, historical sources, corroborating verses, etc. I think it's time to declare this the Proverbs 26:4 portion of our conversation.

All I saw was a smattering of Greek. No in-depth analysis. I don't remember your showing any historical sources.

You're dismissed.

You do not get to tell me what to do. But if you want to see the verses I quoted in more context, I will be happy to give you whole chapters when I am on my laptop, where it is much easier to cut and paste. But I will leave you with 1 Cor. 8:1-2. And James 3:17.

 

[Bonnie]

That seems to lead one to believe that water is a medium whereby quantifiable grace is released through the repetition of words, and the doing of certain acts. That seems to be a Romansh-leaning theology whereby the actions of a "priestly caste of pastors" gain influence and eventually arrogate unto themselves certain prerogatives, namely forgiveness of sins which are correctly the property of Jesus Christ alone.

No, we believe firmly that we receive the forgiveness of sins through water WITH the word of God. God effects the forgiveness of sins through this means. It is a mystery, but one we joyfully accept.

There is no priestly class in our churches. We are the royal priesthood of all believers. But our ministers are called and ordained servants of the word, come to serve their parishioners as undershepherds to the Great Shepherd, Jesus Christ. They come to serve, not to be served. A few may get arrogant in their role, but none of the ones I have known have ever become so. Most are dearly loved by their parishioners. I know my husband was and is, by both congregations he has served.

 

[BJ Bear]

The Bible says it's a work we do.

Nonsense. God does not lie so if He says the one being baptized is the passive object in baptism then that is the way it is. The one who speaks contrarily to that clear word of God denies the truth.

 

[BJ Bear]

No, we believe firmly that we receive the forgiveness of sins through water WITH the word of God. God effects the forgiveness of sins through this means. It is a mystery, but one we joyfully accept.

There is no priestly class in our churches. We are all the royal priesthood of all believers. But our ministers are called and ordained servants of the word, come to serve their parishioners as undershepherds to the Great Shepherd, Jesus Christ. They come to serve, not to be served. A few may get arrogant in their role, but none of the ones I have known have ever become so. Most are dearly loved by their parishioners. I know my husband was and is, by both congregations he has served.

That won't happen for long, if at all, in a healthy congregation.

 

[John t]

And I've shown you that Acts 2:38 uses the word "eis", which indicates that baptism follows the forgiveness of sins, and Acts 22:16 uses the word "epikalesamenos", which indicates something that forgiveness of sins has already happened.

Utter nonsense!

You are focusing on a mere preposition, a word that describes relationships in grammatical structure. As such it is irrelevant, because your "translation" has Peter commanding the listeners to "into"

38 Πέτρος δὲ ⸂πρὸς αὐτούς· Μετανοήσατε⸃, καὶ βαπτισθήτω ἕκαστος ὑμῶν ⸀ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς ἄφεσιν ⸀τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ⸀ὑμῶν, καὶ λήμψεσθε τὴν δωρεὰν τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος·
GNT

Baptism was performed in the name of Jesus, a phrase which may represent a commercial usage, ‘to the account of Jesus’, or a Jewish idiom, ‘with reference to Jesus’. However precisely the phrase be understood, it conveys the thought that the person being baptized enters into allegiance to Jesus, and this would tie in with the evidence that at baptism it was customary to make a confession of Jesus as Lord (Rom 10:9; 1 Cor. 12:3). Thus Christian baptism was an expression of faith and commitment to Jesus as Lord. Just as John’s baptism had mediated the divine gift of forgiveness, symbolized in the act of washing, so too Christian baptism was regarded as a sign of forgiveness (5:31; 10:43; 13:38; 26:18; cf. 3:19). But Christian baptism conveyed an additional blessing. John had said that he baptized (only) with water but the Messiah would baptize with the Holy Spirit, and this gift accompanied water-baptism performed by the church in the name of Jesus. The two gifts are closely linked, since it is the Spirit who accomplishes the inner cleansing of which baptism is the outward symbol.​

Marshall, I. H. (1980). Acts: an introduction and commentary (Vol. 5, pp. 86–87). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.


μετανίσομαι or μετανίσσομαι [ῑ], change position, cross over, Ἠέλιος μετενίσετο βουλυτόνδε Il.16.779, Od.9.58, of the polar axis, οὐδʼ ὀλίλον μετανίσεται Arat.21: c. acc., pass into, enter, Καρκίνον ἠέλιος μ. AP9.384.13.
2. of a river, flow into another, A.R.4.628.
II. c. acc., pursue, E.Tr.131 (anap.); win, get possession of, [πλοῦτον] Pi.P.5.8; go in quest of, A.R.1.1245, cf. E.Hyps.Fr.(3)1 iii 37 (lyr., -νεισεται Pap.).

μετανίστημι, remove from his or their country, Plb.3.5.5; εἰς ἄλλας πόλεις Id.9.26.7.
2. generally, remove, i.e. avert, τὰ χείριστα Phld.D.1.19.
II. Pass., c. aor. 2 et pf. Act., remove, migrate, Th.1.12, 3.114, S.OC175 (anap.), Ph.1.514, POxy.44.9 (i A.D.); ἐς χῶρον Hdt.9.51, cf. D.S.4.85; ἐκ τῶν ἄνω τόπων Id.1.37; πρός τινας Ph.2.25; μ. Πελοποννήσου emigrate from .., Conon47.1.

μετανοέω, perceive afterwards or too late, opp. προνοέω, Epich. [280]; opp. προβουλεύομαι, Democr.66; concur subsequently, τισι BGU747i11 (ii A.D.).
2. change one’s mind or purpose, Pl.Euthd.279c, Men.Epit.72; μ. μὴ οὔτε .. τῶν χαλεπῶν ἔργων ᾖ τὸ .. ἄρχειν change one’s opinion and think that it is not .., X.Cyr.1.1.3.
3. repent, Antipho 2.4.12; ἐν τοῖς ἀνηκέστοις Id.5.91: freq. in LXX and NT, Si.48.15, al.; ἀπὸ τῆς κακίας Act.Ap.8.22; ἐκ τῶν ἔργων Apoc.9.20; ἐπὶ τῇ ἀκαθαρσίᾳ 2Ep.Cor.12.21, cf. OGI751.9 (Amblada, ii B.C.); ἐπί τινι Luc.Salt.84, etc.; περί τινων Plu.Galb.6; τοῖς πεπραγμένοις Id.Agis19: c. part., μ. γενόμενος Ἕλλην Luc.Am.36.


Liddell, H. G., Scott, R., Jones, H. S., & McKenzie, R. (1996). A Greek-English lexicon (p. 1115). Oxford: Clarendon Press.


It is the VERBALS (forms of verbs) that are vitally important in translation. The verb translated is parsed as
AORIST meaning that it is in the past tense
ACTIVE as opposed to passive. In the ACTIVE voice, the subject noun does the action and in the passive voice, the subject is acted upon
IMPERATIVE is the mood of command: The subject MUST do as the Apostle Peter commands
SECOND PERSON PLURAL Peter is command ALL of them to repent.

edit

 

[John t]

What is natively or naturally the property of Jesus, the forgiveness or retention of sins, He has bestowed upon the church.

I am posting as if I was a non believer, and attempting to draw out both you and Bonnie into expressing the process of LCMS baptism in a less liturgical manner. As she first wrote it, it seemed to me that the actions in the ritual were paramount, therefore, baptism, especially on an infant, was an action that conferred grace.

Neither of you mentioned the important prepositional phrase "in the name of Jesus Christ" and the purpose that Peter stated 38 And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized, each 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. "

No, I am not attempting to be pedantic or play the (Mormon-inspired) game of "Say the magic words.", because that is very rude, and I would ask similarly pointed questions if Bonnie's hubby was a CARM poster.

Therefore I am asking questions for understanding, and not attacking anything.

 

[BJ Bear]

Let's start with Acts 2:38. Then, we can talk about Matthew 28:19.

Since you continue to post false claims regarding what we believe and Scripture here is some helpful background information before directly addressing the passages above.

From the beginning we have been opposed to the ex opere operato (on account of the work worked) and other errors which came to encrust and obscure the right doctrine of Baptism in the Papal Church. The following is from the Augsburg Confession, Article XIII, regarding the right use of the Sacraments of Holy Baptism, Holy Communion, and Confession and Absolution.

"1] Of the Use of the Sacraments they teach that the Sacraments were ordained, not only to be marks of profession among men, but rather to be signs and testimonies of the will of God

2] toward us, instituted to awaken and confirm faith in those who use them. Wherefore we must so use the Sacraments that faith be added to believe the promises which are offered and set forth through the Sacraments.

3] They therefore condemn those who teach that the Sacraments justify by the outward act, and who do not teach that, in the use of the Sacraments, faith which believes that sins are forgiven, is required." https://bookofconcord.org/augsburg-confession/article-xiii/

At the council of Trent In the Seventh Session, Section II, there are canons which anathematize our teaching regarding Baptism. Here are two:

"Canon III
If anyone says that in the Roman Church, which is the mother and teacher of all churches, there is not the true doctrine concerning the sacrament of baptism, let him be anathema."

"Canon VI
If anyone says that a baptized person cannot, even if he wanted to, lose grace, no matter how much he sins, unless he refuses to believe, let him be anathema."

So now it should be evident to all from our confession and their council that there is disagreement at a fundamental level regarding baptism.

Re: Acts 2:38-39
"Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins [or depending on the text being translated, your sins]; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call.”" -NKJV (The note in verse 38 is mine.)

Focusing on the verbs, "repent," and, "baptized," the first is active and the second is passive. In other words, in the first instance the listener repents and the second baptism is done to him. The other thing to note is that although repentance and baptism go together there is no temporal order stated or implied in passage. The same is true of Matthew 28:19-20 in which the word order is reversed.

The bottom line is that since baptism is from God and works what only God can do, that is, the forgiveness of sins and the bestowal of the gift of the Holy Spirit then it not the work of man, neither the work of the person administering the baptism nor a work of the passive person being baptized.

You have repeatedly offered the same Baptist interpretation of Acts 2:38 of Mantey that admittedly rests upon eisegesis. His eisegesis is a reaction to the eisegesis of the Papal Church, the ex opere operato. Read his explanation.

The best course of action and the only way to reach a right interpretation of that passage is to stick with what Scripture says and ignore the eisegesis of the Papal church and the consequent eisegetic reaction to that of the Baptists and other like minded folks.

 

[Mike McK]

edit

You wouldn't have lasted five minutes in my seminary classes.

You can insult me all you want, edit, but what I said is both true and grammatically correct.

 

[Bonnie]

That won't happen for long, if at all, in a healthy congregation.

True. There are elders there that can help keep the pastor in line. I actually know of only one such case, when we lived near Philadelphia. There was an elderly retired pastor and his wife who were members of our church. The wife told me that her husband was once an interim pastor for a church in the east. The pastor that had been there had left to become a military chaplain, but she told me that he nearly ruined the congregation before he left. She said he was childish and excommunicated people from the congregation for trivial reasons and had a bad temper. HOW someone like that became a minister is beyond me. I don't know if he was young or what, but I think he was. Anyway, from what I remember, his elders tried to keep him in line, but eventually, he left and the lady's husband became interim pastor for a couple of years. When this church got a nice new young pastor, whom we know and were friends with, he had his work cut out for him, trying to heal the membership. He visited all of the excommunicated members to hear their story and managed to convince some of them to return. The church gradually returned to normal.

But this is rare, in my opinion.

 

[Bonnie]

Utter nonsense!

You are focusing on a mere preposition, a word that describes relationships in grammatical structure. As such it is irrelevant, because your "translation" has Peter commanding the listeners to "into"

38 Πέτρος δὲ ⸂πρὸς αὐτούς· Μετανοήσατε⸃, καὶ βαπτισθήτω ἕκαστος ὑμῶν ⸀ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς ἄφεσιν ⸀τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ⸀ὑμῶν, καὶ λήμψεσθε τὴν δωρεὰν τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος·
GNT

Baptism was performed in the name of Jesus, a phrase which may represent a commercial usage, ‘to the account of Jesus’, or a Jewish idiom, ‘with reference to Jesus’. However precisely the phrase be understood, it conveys the thought that the person being baptized enters into allegiance to Jesus, and this would tie in with the evidence that at baptism it was customary to make a confession of Jesus as Lord (Rom 10:9; 1 Cor. 12:3). Thus Christian baptism was an expression of faith and commitment to Jesus as Lord. Just as John’s baptism had mediated the divine gift of forgiveness, symbolized in the act of washing, so too Christian baptism was regarded as a sign of forgiveness (5:31; 10:43; 13:38; 26:18; cf. 3:19). But Christian baptism conveyed an additional blessing. John had said that he baptized (only) with water but the Messiah would baptize with the Holy Spirit, and this gift accompanied water-baptism performed by the church in the name of Jesus. The two gifts are closely linked, since it is the Spirit who accomplishes the inner cleansing of which baptism is the outward symbol.​

Marshall, I. H. (1980). Acts: an introduction and commentary (Vol. 5, pp. 86–87). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.


μετανίσομαι or μετανίσσομαι [ῑ], change position, cross over, Ἠέλιος μετενίσετο βουλυτόνδε Il.16.779, Od.9.58, of the polar axis, οὐδʼ ὀλίλον μετανίσεται Arat.21: c. acc., pass into, enter, Καρκίνον ἠέλιος μ. AP9.384.13.
2. of a river, flow into another, A.R.4.628.
II. c. acc., pursue, E.Tr.131 (anap.); win, get possession of, [πλοῦτον] Pi.P.5.8; go in quest of, A.R.1.1245, cf. E.Hyps.Fr.(3)1 iii 37 (lyr., -νεισεται Pap.).

μετανίστημι, remove from his or their country, Plb.3.5.5; εἰς ἄλλας πόλεις Id.9.26.7.
2. generally, remove, i.e. avert, τὰ χείριστα Phld.D.1.19.
II. Pass., c. aor. 2 et pf. Act., remove, migrate, Th.1.12, 3.114, S.OC175 (anap.), Ph.1.514, POxy.44.9 (i A.D.); ἐς χῶρον Hdt.9.51, cf. D.S.4.85; ἐκ τῶν ἄνω τόπων Id.1.37; πρός τινας Ph.2.25; μ. Πελοποννήσου emigrate from .., Conon47.1.

μετανοέω, perceive afterwards or too late, opp. προνοέω, Epich. [280]; opp. προβουλεύομαι, Democr.66; concur subsequently, τισι BGU747i11 (ii A.D.).
2. change one’s mind or purpose, Pl.Euthd.279c, Men.Epit.72; μ. μὴ οὔτε .. τῶν χαλεπῶν ἔργων ᾖ τὸ .. ἄρχειν change one’s opinion and think that it is not .., X.Cyr.1.1.3.
3. repent, Antipho 2.4.12; ἐν τοῖς ἀνηκέστοις Id.5.91: freq. in LXX and NT, Si.48.15, al.; ἀπὸ τῆς κακίας Act.Ap.8.22; ἐκ τῶν ἔργων Apoc.9.20; ἐπὶ τῇ ἀκαθαρσίᾳ 2Ep.Cor.12.21, cf. OGI751.9 (Amblada, ii B.C.); ἐπί τινι Luc.Salt.84, etc.; περί τινων Plu.Galb.6; τοῖς πεπραγμένοις Id.Agis19: c. part., μ. γενόμενος Ἕλλην Luc.Am.36.


Liddell, H. G., Scott, R., Jones, H. S., & McKenzie, R. (1996). A Greek-English lexicon (p. 1115). Oxford: Clarendon Press.


It is the VERBALS (forms of verbs) that are vitally important in translation. The verb translated is parsed as
AORIST meaning that it is in the past tense
ACTIVE as opposed to passive. In the ACTIVE voice, the subject noun does the action and in the passive voice, the subject is acted upon
IMPERATIVE is the mood of command: The subject MUST do as the Apostle Peter commands
SECOND PERSON PLURAL Peter is command ALL of them to repent.

edit

Thanks, John. I forgot that you know Biblical Greek.

 

[Bonnie]

For Mike: first, Acts 2:

Peter’s Sermon​

14 But Peter, [o]taking his stand with the eleven, raised his voice and declared to them: “Men of Judea and all you who live in Jerusalem, let this be known to you and give heed to my words. 15 For these men are not drunk, as you suppose, for it is only the third hour of the day; 16 but this is what was spoken of through the prophet Joel:

17 ‘And it shall be in the last days,’ God says,
‘That I will pour forth of My Spirit on all mankind;
And your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
And your young men shall see visions,
And your old men shall dream dreams;
18 Even on My bondslaves, both men and women,
I will in those days pour forth of My Spirit
And they shall prophesy.
19 ‘And I will grant wonders in the sky above
And signs on the earth below,
Blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke.
20 ‘The sun will be turned into darkness
And the moon into blood,
Before the great and glorious day of the Lord shall come.
21 ‘And it shall be that everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.’

22 “Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man [r]attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and [t]signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know— 23 this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death. 24 [v]But God raised Him up again, putting an end to the [w]agony of death, since it was impossible for Him to be held [x]in its power. 25 For David says of Him,

‘I saw the Lord always in my presence;
For He is at my right hand, so that I will not be shaken.
26 ‘Therefore my heart was glad and my tongue exulted;
Moreover my flesh also will live in hope;
27 Because You will not abandon my soul to Hades,
Nor [y]allow Your [z]Holy One to [aa]undergo decay.
28 ‘You have made known to me the ways of life;
You will make me full of gladness with Your presence.’

29 “[ab]Brethren, I may confidently say to you regarding the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is [ac]with us to this day. 30 And so, because he was a prophet and knew that God had sworn to him with an oath to seat one [ad]of his descendants on his throne, 31 he looked ahead and spoke of the resurrection of [ae]the Christ, that He was neither abandoned to Hades, nor did His flesh [af]suffer decay. 32 This Jesus God raised up again, to which we are all witnesses. 33 Therefore having been exalted [ag]to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured forth this which you both see and hear.

34 For it was not David who ascended into [ah]heaven, but he himself says:

‘The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at My right hand,
35 Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet.”’

36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and [ai]Christ—this Jesus whom you crucified.”

The Ingathering​

37 Now when they heard this, they were [aj]pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “[ak]Brethren, [al]what shall we do?” 38 Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ FOR the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself.” 40 And with many other words he solemnly testified and kept on exhorting them, saying, “[am]Be saved from this perverse generation!” 41 So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about three thousand [an]souls. 42 They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.

"Be baptized"--passive tense--"in the Name of Jesus Christ FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." Sorry, but even putting it in far more context doesn't change the meaning--baptism is for the forgiveness of sins. Peter called them to repent, and then be baptized in Jesus' name FOR the forgiveness of sins.

Is this enough context for you? I will post the others in more context later. Gotta go.

 

[Nic]

You wouldn't have lasted five minutes in my seminary classes.

You can insult me all you want, edit, but what I said is both true and grammatically correct.

To quote Mr. Spock, "FascInating."
Okay, I'll bite, where did you go to seminary? Thanks in advance.