From: James H. Vellenga (
Date: Fri Oct 25 1996 - 15:13:16 EDT

I have forwarded 16 messages from that exchange to Mark.

Jim V.

> From Fri Oct 25 14:46:07 1996
> To:
> From: Carlton Winbery <>
> Subject: Re: "BAPTIZW"
> Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 13:37:05 -0600
> >As a beginning greek student I am coming to the experts for information. Why
> >have the translators not translated the word "BAPTIZW," but transliterated it.
> >I am under the impression that it means "to immerse." Is this not correct?
> >If it is correct than why do most translations say "baptize" instead? Any help
> >you can give would be greatly appreciated. It would seem that it would be of
> >tremendous benefit in our interpretation to translate rather than
> >transliterate.
> If someone kept the string that we did a few weeks back on this, they
> should send it to Mark. I did not have time to say anything then, but my
> reading of the evidence presented and also several histories of baptism has
> convinced me that baptism quickly became a technical term in the church and
> began in the second century to cover different modes (with varying amounts
> of water) of baptism. That being the case a technical translation seems to
> me to be in order, especially since the baptisms among the Christians in
> the apostolic age are all in missionary situations.
> Carlton L. Winbery
> Fogleman Professor of Religion
> Chair, Division of Religious Studies
> voice 318 487-7241
> fax 318 442-4996

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:54 EDT