FW: baptism

From: Cepuch, Pete (AZ15) (Pete.Cepuch@iac.honeywell.com)
Date: Tue Jun 04 1996 - 20:39:39 EDT

Thanks for the kind reply. I realize that I was close to theological
meanderings in the original post. I agree with your analysis, below.
 It is very difficult to study N.T. without trying to understand what it
all means, or trying to put it all together into
some kind of doctrinal sense-as is evidenced by the many denominational or
non-denominational groups in "Christiantity".And as
you state baptism is certainly one of the big items of which many have
different views. I've really enjoyed the discussions that have been
posted and will try to restrain myself, in the future from contributing to
theological debates. But it is tempting, sometimes!:)

pete cepuch
From: cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu
To: Cepuch, Pete (AZ15)
Cc: b-greek@virginia.edu
Subject: Re: baptism
Date: Tuesday, June 04, 1996 6:26AM

At 12:40 AM -0500 6/4/96, Cepuch, Pete (AZ15) wrote:
>Question: with all baptisms mentioned in Christian Theology i.e.
>baptism of Holy Spirit, baptism in water, baptism in Christ and
>any other baptisms either scriptural or made up by theologic design,
>to which baptism is Paul referring to that we should be diligent
>to keep?
>I realize that I'm treading very close to a theologic post, here,
>please excuse...but the whole point of this is to point out that
>in studying the N.T. one needs to realize who is writing to whom.

Thanks for a very interesting post and for making a point that I think is
well-taken here. The entire issue of baptism appears to be one that
universally fascinates. Unfortunately, it is also one that appears among
the most volatile of those setting believers apart from each other in
sects: the Consultation on Church Union has had a very difficult time with
it for years, much more so, I think, than with common understandings of the
Eucharist, and I suspect that the reason is that deep theological
convictions (what is a conviction to its holder is, of course, an
inexplicable bias to one who doesn't hold it) lie at the base of the issue.
We don't seem able to handle this on B-Greek at all in a way that keeps the
focus on what the Greek text legitimately may mean; rather the volatile
issue itself seems to fan the flames. I think it's an issue we ought to
leave alone unless there is something in the Greek text concerning it that
raises questions worthy of discussion.

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
(314) 935-4018
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cwc@oui.com
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:44 EDT