Featured Honest Question for KJO

False doctrine on display, Acts 2:38 refers to our spiritual baptism into Christ.

 

Jewish audience would have picked up peter referencing water baptism!

 

No one can read Acts 2:38 as referencing water baptism unless water baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sins. That is the view you are presenting.

 

No, representing what peter meant by that phrase!

 

Once again you claim to be able to read Peter's mind. It is a feeble minded argument. No one can read Acts 2:38 as referencing water baptism unless water baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sins.

 

The Jews understood his reference!

 

As I see it, that generally happens when someone who hates the AV as much as some here appear to, cannot stand its continued usage, I imagine.
Whether or not I take ridicule for it, I will continue to use it;
If anything, just to prove that I completely trust it as God's word.



To answer your OP:

-Acts of the Apostles 2:38:

1) = No.
2) = No.
The Greek here states, " and be baptized each of you on the name of Jesus Christ into pardon sins"...
While the English of 1607-1611 is rendered as, "and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins."

My understanding of the passage is that a person is being baptized into Jesus Christ for ( in remembrance of ) their remission of sins.
That understanding is not without context, however.

We know that Christ's blood in God's eyes is what satisfies His justice ( Hebrews 9:22 ).
We know that we are justified by His blood ( Romans 5:9 ).
We know that it is God who "begets" us through the word ( James 1:18 ).

We know that the Ethiopian eunuch believed on and confessed Christ before he was baptized ( Acts of the Apostles 8:36-38, AV ).
But for those of you that do not have a TR-based Bible, you will never see this in your reading and make the connection because Acts 8:37 is missing...
That contextually, no "correction" is needed to show anyone how water baptism does not actually result in a person being born again, but only follows the new birth and belief on Christ.

However, you might in other passages, because the the story of Cornelius does the same, as does the story of the Philippian jailer.


-Acts of the Apostles 22:16:

Same as above
The Greek here states, "rising be-you baptized and be-you bathed off the sins of you"...
While the English of 1607-1611 states, " arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins,".

If anyone understands the reason behind baptism, they should have no trouble understanding that these passages are referring to having had their sins washed away by the blood of Christ and is a symbol of something He did for us.

Here are some passages for consideration:

" Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life." ( Romans 6:4 )

" Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with [him] through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead." ( Colossians 2:12 ).

Baptism symbolizes His death, burial and resurrection.
Those who hold to "baptismal regeneration" completely miss the significance of these passages and several others, I'm sorry to say.
I don't think it likely that trying to convince them will make any difference, but one never knows whether God will grant them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth or not.

In the end, changing the words on the page isn't going to do it...
I understand it myself just from reading it, so there's something more to it.
They have to not only believe the words on the page, but understand them as well.


In other words, they have to see the context for themselves, or it just won't work.

 

Go back into the Creek text, as it seems to indicate that Peter is saying that we are water baptized into Jesus Christ, as He is the very source of our sins now being remitted!

And those of us here who are NOT KJVO still like and respect the kjv, just prefer modern translations!

 

Mind reading is one of Y1's amazing skills.

 

Because I don't see the words in the Greek supporting the use of "because of".
Perhaps loosely, but not strictly...
and I don't believe in using "loosely" ( Dynamic Equivalency ) over strictly ( Formal Equivalency ).
The reason I say, "loosely" is because of the context, not the actual word in the Greek.

For example, in Acts of the Apostles 2:38, we see this:
" 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."

In the Spanish Reina Valera 1602, we see this:
" Y Pedro les dice: Arrepentíos, y bautícese cada uno de vosotros en el nombre de Jesucristo para perdón de los pecados; y recibiréis el don del Espíritu Santo."

"Para" = "for".

In the Greek ( Stephanus' 1550 ), I see this:
" πετρος δε εφη προς αυτους μετανοησατε και βαπτισθητω εκαστος υμων επι τω ονοματι ιησου χριστου εις αφεσιν αμαρτιων και ληψεσθε την δωρεαν του αγιου πνευματος"

The word bolded is "eis", or "into".
Strictly speaking, I think it should read more like the Wycliffe Bible ( translated from Jerome's Latin, not the "Old Latin" ) has it:

" And Peter said to them, Do ye penance [Penance, he said, do ye], and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, into remission of your sins; and ye shall take the gift of the Holy Ghost. "

But, based on the verses I've laid out in my first post, plus the fact that the KJV translators were fluent in many languages, I think they made an able choice.

Yes, it was.

Why did they use "for"...
Was it because they believe that baptism was required for salvation?

I answered, "No".
The reason is ( which I did not elaborate on in my first post ) because many of the translators of the Authorized were "Calvinists" and would not have supported the idea of baptismal regeneration.

Source: The King James Version of the Bible

 

It is true that the majority of the KJV translators were Calvinists, but you may be trying to ignore the fact that they were also all members of the Church of England, which taught baptismal regeneration. Perhaps you have not carefully studied about the doctrines of the Church of England in that day. By Church of England canons in 1604, the KJV translators were required to accept what is taught in the Church of England's Prayer Book.

In the article on Anglicanism in The Encyclopedia of Religion, it is noted that in this church "the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Supper are considered generally necessary to salvation" (pp. 287, 289). Edward Hiscox quoted Karl Hagenbach as saying the following: "The Church of England taught the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, yet with cautions" (Principles and Practices for Baptist Churches, pp. 482-483). D. B. Ray pointed out that the Church of England "inherited from her mother the doctrine of baptismal salvation" (Baptist Succession, p. 364). He also observed that "Baptists regard baptismal salvation as one of the main pillars of popery" (p. 223). In the book entitled Heresies Exposed complied by William Irvine, it is stated: "Baptismal Regeneration belongs to Rome and unfortunately found its way into the Church of England Prayer Book" (p. 32). In his fundamentalist Way of Life Encyclopedia, David Cloud noted: "The Anglican Church practices infant baptism, teaching that infants receive the Holy Spirit and are regenerated through baptism" (p. 25). In his pamphlet "Baptismal Regeneration and Bible Salvation," Dennis Costella also acknowledged that the Church of England holds "the false doctrine of baptismal regeneration" (p. 3).

In one sermon in 1615, KJV translator Lancelot Andrewes referred to Christ’s baptism as “Christ’s christening” (Chapman, Before the King’s, p. 53). Dorman commented: “For Andrewes, the only way to become a Christian is through the sacrament of Baptism” (Andrewes, p. 127). In a sermon, Lancelot Andrewes noted: “By Him we are regenerate at the first in our baptism” (Ninety-Six Sermons, III, p. 191). Robert Ottley noted that Andrewes considered the Eucharist "both as a sacrament and as a sacrifice" (Lancelot Andrewes, p. 204). The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Reformation observed that Andrewes taught that "the means of grace are the sacraments" (I, p. 42). Raymond Chapman referred to the “sacramentalism” of Andrewes (Before, p. 11). The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church pointed out that Andrewes "held a high doctrine of the Eucharist, emphasizing that in the sacrament we receive the true body and blood of Christ and constantly using sacrificial language of the rite" (p. 61). Dorman maintained that “for Andrewes, to receive Christ’s body at the Eucharist is the most wonderful and important thing that we do during our earthly pilgrimage” (Andrewes, p. 2). Trevor Owen also noted that Andrewes in his book Responsio declared that his church regarded the Eucharist as a sacrifice (Lancelot Andrewes, p. 35). MacCulloch described Andrewes as a ceremonialist and sacramentalist (Boy King, p. 213).

 

Do you see it as being the perfect english translation?

 

This should deal with the concept of them being inspired to do a perfect translation, as they were in the end still forced to take some renderings that were not based upon scriptures but their own theology of their church!

 

NKJV Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized ( God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Rom 6:2;3 KJV) in the name of Jesus Christ for (to or unto would have been better IMHO) the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

One thing for sure. I can not find g1519 translated, "because of," anywhere.

BTW after reading post 29 baptism appears to me to be more baptismal death rather than baptismal regeneration.

 

Many of them were Anglicans, who did bring over to their translation infant regeneration views though!

 

Seems to me the problem here is the fact no one participating has noticed a very important point:

To whom was this written. I don't see the Church there. If you can please point it out in Scripture.

These were all Jews practicing Judaism, not Christians. Peter says it over and over, i.e, "Oh you men of Israel", etc.

Acts 2:38 and Acts 22:16 say what they mean and mean exactly what they say. They were not written to you! This was preached to those under the law at that time and it was water baptism. We Baptists are totally wrong when we change the translation to "because of". Where in Scripture can we find that?

The Jews continued practicing Judaism for years after that. It was a different dispensation, "The Gospel of the Kingdom" was the Gospel of that dispensation not "The Gospel That Saves You", "The Gospel of Grace, "Paul's Gospel (My Gospel)" written to Christians by Paul in 1 Cor 15: 1-4. Now brothers, I want to clarify for you the gospel I proclaimed to you; you received it and have taken your stand on it. 2 You are also saved by it, if you hold to the message I proclaimed to you—unless you believed for no purpose. 3 For I passed on to you as most important what I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that He was buried, that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,

All Scripture is written FOR you but very little is written TO you.

Our mail, to the Church, is all found in the epistles that all begin with "I Paul". How much is all?

Don't put yourself back under the law. It's not nice to be cursed.

Gal 3:10 For all who rely on the works of the law (water baptism anyone) are under a curse, because it is written: Everyone who does not continue doing everything written in the book of the law is cursed.

 

I see the Church there, as "the church" is composed of anyone who is saved...
whether Jew or Gentile ( Galatians 3:24-29, Ephesians 2:11-22 ).

The Gospel was first preached by Jews ( the apostles were all Jews ) to the Jews at Jerusalem.
We can see this in Acts of the Apostles 2:14-40.

After Peter and the rest were finished preaching, I see this:

" Now when they heard [this], they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men [and] brethren, what shall we do?
38 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.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, [even] as many as the Lord our God shall call.
40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation." ( Acts of the Apostles 2:37-40 ).

The preaching of the Gospel, what is contained in 1 Corinthians 15:1-7, was preached on the Day of Pentecost at Jerusalem.
The Gospel went forth, or had its beginnings, in that city.

Further down, I see this important statement:

" And all that believed were together, and had all things common;
45 and sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all [men], as every man had need.
46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,
47 praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved." ( Acts of the Apostles 2:44-47 ).

Again, "the church" began at Jerusalem.

 

The translators were under orders to not change some of the words, & "baptize" was among them, but at the time, they believed that proper water baptism was by immersion.