Ask the Professor, Dr. Jack Cottrell<\/p>\n\n\n\n
About Acts 2:38<\/p>\n\n\n\n
QUESTION #1:<\/strong> I have seen the view that Acts 2:38 does not connect forgiveness of sins with baptism, but only with repentance. The argument was based on the difference between the forms of the imperatives. Can you explain this? Is there any validity to the argument?<\/p>\n\n\n\n ANSWER: I have seen this argument several times. It is an example of how a blind commitment to the Zwinglian \u201cfaith only\u201d doctrine can lead to a completely irrational distortion of New Testament texts that relate baptism to salvation. In this case the argument attempts to separate baptism from forgiveness through a blatantly faulty analysis of the Greek forms in this verse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The first time I saw this argument was in a little booklet by Cal Beisner titled \u201cIs Baptism Necessary for Salvation.\u201d Here he gives this interlinear translation of the Greek:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Metanoesate kai baptistheto hekastos humon You (plural) repent and be baptized each one of you e p i t o o n o m a t i I e s o u C h r i s t o u i n t h e n a m e o f J e s u s C h r i s t eis aphesin ton hamartion humon. for (the) remission (of the) sins of you (plural).<\/p>\n\n\n\n The argument begins with Beisner noting that the verb \u201crepent\u201d is plural, and that the word \u201cyour\u201d (humon, \u201cof you\u201d) in \u201cfor the remission of your sins\u201d is also plural. (Beisner inserts \u201cplural\u201d at these points.) But, he says, the verb \u201cbe baptized\u201d is singular: \u201cLet each one [hekastos] be baptized.\u201d Beisner concludes, \u201cThis makes it clear that \u2018remission of your (plural) sins\u2019 is the result of \u2018you (plural) repenting,\u2019 not of \u201ceach one (singular) being baptized.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n John MacArthur agrees that this is a proper interpretation. \u201cSupport for that interpretation comes from the fact that \u2018repent\u2019 and \u2018your\u2019 are plural, while \u2018be baptized\u2019 is singular, thus setting it off from the rest of the sentence [as parenthetical]. If that interpretation is correct, the verse would read \u2018Repent (and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ) for the forgiveness of your sins.\u2019 Forgiveness is thus connected with repentance, not baptism.\u201d (This is from a letter from MacArthur shared with me by Don Wallace, spring 2001.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n I am amazed that this argument is taken seriously by intelligent people, who seem to deliberately ignore the fact that the singular verb \u201cbe baptized\u201d is emphatically pluralized by the words that immediately follow: hekastos humon, \u201ceach one OF YOU\u201d (plural). True, the verb \u201cbe baptized\u201d is grammatically singular because its immediate subject is \u201ceach one\u201d (hekastos), but the addition of the plural \u201cof you\u201d (humon) clearly shows that the application of this verb is intended to be plural. It is the exact same plural word (humon) used in the phrase \u201cremission of your (plural) sins.\u201d Beisner, of course, chooses not to insert his explanatory \u201c(plural)\u201d after the first humon, because this would just call attention to the weakness of this argument. (See John 7:53 for a similar combination of a plural verb with a singular hekastos.) The only reason for ignoring the obvious is a blind commitment to the \u201cfaith only\u201d paradigm.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ask the Professor, Dr. Jack Cottrell Ask the Professor, Dr. Jack Cottrell<\/p>\n\n\n\n See also “Answering a false interpretation of Acts 2:38: https:\/\/jackcottrell.com\/answering-a-false-interpretation-of-acts-238\/<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n QUESTION #2:<\/strong> Someone told me that the NIV translation of Acts 2:38 clearly shows a connection between baptism and the forgiveness of sins, but my copy does not seem to do that. What\u2019s the deal here?<\/p>\n\n\n\n ANSWER: In the original version of the NIV (1973), Acts 2:38a was translated thus: \u201cPeter replied, \u2018Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ so that [eis] your sins may be forgiven.\u2019\u201d Here the Greek word eis is given its natural meaning, \u201cso that, in order that, for the purpose of.\u201d This does indeed connect baptism with the forgiveness of sins.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, in the next edition of the NIV (1978) this was changed to the following: \u201cPeter replied, \u2018Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for [eis] the forgiveness of your sins.\u2019\u201d Here eis is translated with the more neutral word, \u201cfor.\u201d This has caused me two-fold wonder. I have wondered (been amazed, marveled) that the original translators had the courage to do it right to begin with! Then I have often wondered (in the sense of \u201cI wish I knew\u201d) how many calls and letters the translators and publisher received from the \u201cfaith only\u201d folks complaining about the original version and demanding a change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n David Willis tells the story of his meeting the NIV editor Kenneth Barker and asking him about this change. Dr. Barker conceded that the original language clearly indicates a causative relationship between baptism and remission of sins, but they changed the wording in the verse (in subsequent editions) because, \u201cmy theology won\u2019t allow that interpretation.\u201d To which Willis replied: \u201cI always thought the Bible was supposed to determine one\u2019s theology, rather than one\u2019s theology determining the Bible.\u201d (I am not sure whether this was spoken directly to Barker or was just a later reflection. In any case, I do not have a rejoinder from Barker.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Willis offers this reflection upon the episode: \u201cIt was pretty funny because Barker knew the late Lewis Foster [CCU professor and one of the NIV translators] and spoke well of him. He also asked if I was from the church of Christ! It was pretty funny because I was still wet behind the ears and yet this scholar conceded openly as to why they changed Acts 2:38 in the NIV revision. I love to point this out and still keep a copy around of the first NIV<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ask the Professor, Dr. Jack Cottrell See also “Acts 2:38 in the NIV; https:\/\/jackcottrell.com\/acts-238-in-the-niv\/<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Ask the Professor, Dr. Jack Cottrell About Acts 2:38 QUESTION #1: I have seen the view that Acts 2:38 does not connect forgiveness of sins with baptism, but only with repentance. The argument was based on the difference between the …<\/span> Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-952","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/rom120.com\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/952","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/rom120.com\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/rom120.com\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rom120.com\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rom120.com\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=952"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/rom120.com\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/952\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":959,"href":"https:\/\/rom120.com\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/952\/revisions\/959"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/rom120.com\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=952"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rom120.com\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=952"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rom120.com\/blog1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=952"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
Dr. Cottrell is a professor of Theology at Cincinnati Bible Seminary and has served there since 1967.
Restoration Herald; April 2013<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Dr. Cottrell is a professor of Theology at Cincinnati Bible Seminary and has served there since 1967.
Restoration Herald; April 2013<\/p>\n\n\n\n