[B-Greek] RE: Act 2:38 EIS
Charles Rempel
CharlesR at mygalaxyexpress.com
Wed Jan 12 09:57:06 EST 2005
> CDR: I have identified eleven distinctive baptisms in the NT. When the
> correct one is identifed the grammar and the theology merge nicely.
>
> VN: Distinct indeed. The distinction of the "baptism" here in Acts 2:38 is
> that it has nothing to do with water....please tell everyone what else may
> be indicated when one undergoes the result of the imperative BAPTISQHTW !
> Or..like you say, they will be talking theology until the cows come home.
ESW: I would argue that the baptism referred to in Acts 2:38 is likely the
same type of
baptism referred to in Acts 10:47-48, since Peter explicitly compares the
Acts 10
event to the events of Acts 2. I don't think that 10:48's use of EN TWi
ONOMATI
IHSOU CRISTOU would radically distinguish it from 2:38's use of EPI TWi
ONOMATI IHSOU CRISTOU (some mss. have EN instead of EPI). If the discussion
of the 11 types of baptism is outside the B-Greek parameters (i.e., it
doesn't discuss
Greek wording), I welcome an off-list e-mail from you explaining your
understanding
of the kind of baptism in Acts 2:38.
Charles
I believe the 11 types of baptism are within the B-Greek parameters because
they are defined by adjuncts within the grammatical structure. However my
reply to your assertion on 10:48 does delve into the theological so I will
leave that to an off-list response.
I believe that the hermeneutic for Acts 2:38 needs to be established from
two types of baptism refered to Acts 1:5. I believe we can discuss the two
types as determined by the grammatical structure. I would suspect that the
hermeneutic and its application can easily stray into the theological and
would need to be approached very carefully on the part of all.
Charles
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list