From: Harry W. Jones (email@example.com)
Date: Sun May 27 2001 - 12:38:49 EDT
> The logic of Acts 2:38 can be expressed simply as:
> If A and B, then C and D (if you repent and get baptized, then you will
> have your sins forgiven and you will receive the Holy Spirit).
> This is all it says. It does not say, nor does it imply the following:
> If not (A and B), then not (C and D).
> A conditional does not imply its negation. The negation may or may not
> be true, but it can not be inferred from the conditional. We know it is
> true only if it is affirmed to be so.
> The parallel in Mk 16:16 is illustrative: he who believes and is
> baptized shall be saved.
> The significant difference between Acts 2:38 and Mk 16:16 is simply that
> Mk 16:16b affirms the negation of belief (he who believes not is
> condemned already). It does not, however, affirm the negation of
> Conclusion: Acts 2:38 affirms simply that on the condition of repentance
> and baptism, then forgiveness of sins and reception of the Holy Spirit
> are assured. It does not say, nor can we conclude that if both
> repentance and baptism do not occur, then neither will forgiveness and
> reception of the Holy Spirit occur. From Mk 16:16, however, we can
> conclude that if and only if a man believes, then he will be saved. But,
> it is also true that if a man believes and is baptized, then he will be
> Paul Dixon
I found you post very interesting.But I think you have missed the real
question. The real question is, if(A but not B) then not(C or D)?
Or maybe stated this way, if(A but not B) then (C but not D)?
You see Paul, these are the real questions we are interested in.
Do you think you might be able to help us?
Harry W. Jones
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [firstname.lastname@example.org]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to email@example.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:58 EDT