The One, True Gospel & God's Saving Grace

[Invicta]

flab·ber·gast

  (flăb′ər-găst′)

tr.v. flab·ber·gast·ed, flab·ber·gast·ing, flab·ber·gasts

To cause to be overcome with astonishment; astound. See Synonyms at surprise.

 

 

[Pastor Scott Markle]

On ‎2‎/‎1‎/‎2016 at 10:29 PM, Critical Mass said:

Please explain Acts 2:38. And please do it without "grasping the true meaning with the original languages".

Indeed, I shall provide an explanation for Acts 2:38 as you have requested; and I shall not (as you have further requested) make even a single reference to the original, Holy Spirit inspired and preserved Greek.  However, I most certainly shall place a significant focus upon the Holy Spirit inspired grammar of the verse.

 

Concerning Acts 2:38

“Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”

First, let us recognize that according to the context of Acts 2 as a whole, the apostle Peter was filled with the Spirit when he made this statement.  Therefore, we should recognize that this statement presents doctrinal truth that is not in any contradiction to the whole of New Testament doctrine concerning the gospel.

Grammatically, Peter’s statement presented a compound sentence of three independent clauses, with each independent clause being joined by the conjunction “and.”  The first two of these three independent clauses presented a two-fold instruction, and the third of these two independent clauses presented a result.  Indeed, the first of clause of instruction is completely bound up in the single word of instruction, “Repent.”  Then the second clause of instruction encompasses the statement, “And be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.”  Finally, the clause of result encompasses the statement, “And ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”

1.  The First Clause of Instruction – “Repent.”

This single verb of instruction provides the first requirement of the gospel that the apostle Peter proclaimed unto his hearers.  Indeed, the ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ’s first coming actually began with the preaching of His forerunner, John the Baptizer; and the message that John preached was a call to repentance. (See Matthew 3:2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3)  Then when our Lord Jesus Christ Himself began His preaching and teaching ministry, He also preached a call to repentance. (See Matthew 4:17; 9:13; 11:20-21; Mark 1:14-15; 2:17; Luke 5:32; 13:2-5)  In addition, during His ministry of preaching and teaching, our Lord Jesus Christ also sent forth His disciples to preach a call to repentance. (See Mark 6:12) 

Furthermore, after the crucifixion and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, but before His ascension into heaven, when He gave His commission unto His disciple to preach the gospel unto the lost world, He instructed them to preach a message of “repentance” and of “remission of sins” as a result of that repentance. (See Luke 24:46-47)  Indeed, He commissioned them to preach that message of “repentance and remission of sins” “in His name,” and to do so “among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.”  Even so, when the apostle Peter preached the message of the gospel, he obeyed the Lord Jesus Christ by preaching a call to repentance. (See Acts 2:38; 3:19)  Even so also, when the apostle Paul preached the message of the gospel, he also obeyed the Lord Jesus Christ by preaching a call to repentance. (See Acts 17:30-31; 20:21; 26:20)

Thus we recognize from this that repentance is a Biblical requirement of the gospel.  Furthermore, we recognize from the whole doctrine of the New Testament that faith in Christ is also a Biblical requirement of the gospel.  So then, we are brought to the question – What is the relationship to each other between this requirement of repentance and this requirement of faith?  Now, the only passages from which we may discern this relationship are those wherein both the requirement of repentance and the requirement of faith are presented.  Two of these are presented in Scripture (see Acts 19:4; 20:21); and in both of these passages, the requirement of repentance is presented as that which precedes the requirement of faith.  Even so, I would contend that this requirement of repentance means a change of heart attitude concerning an individual’s sinfulness before the Lord God which moves that individual to a heart-faith in the Lord Jesus Christ for eternal salvation from that personal sinfulness.

2.  The Second Clause of Instruction – “And be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.” 

Now, it is with this clause of instruction that controversy is developed, primary over the relationship between the instruction to “be baptized” and the prepositional phrasing of result, “for the remission of sins.”  First, this second clause of instruction begins with the instruction of the verb itself, “Be baptized.”  Certainly, in this context this is an instruction to submit unto baptism with water.  Second, this clause grammatically continues with the direct object of the verb, along with its modifying prepositional phrase, “Every one of you.”  This would indicate that every single individual was required to obey the instruction to “be baptized.”  Third, this second clause of instruction then provides the prepositional phrasing, “In the name of Jesus Christ.”  Grammatically, this prepositional phrasing would modify verb the instructional verb, “Be baptized,” and thereby would reveal the specific name in which they were required to be baptized and the specific Person with whom they were to associate themselves through that baptism.  This was not just any baptism.  Rather, it was a baptism specifically “in the name of Jesus Christ,” in order to reveal their association unto Jesus Christ. 

Finally, this clause of instruction concludes with the prepositional phrasing, “for the remission of sins.”  Clearly, this prepositional phrasing reveals a result.  Yet the question may be asked – For what does this phrasing reveal the result?  The answer to this question would be grammatically determined by that in the statement which this prepositional phrasing modifies, and in this statement there are two grammatical possibilities.  On the one hand, the prepositional phrasing, “for the remission of sins,” could grammatically modify the verb of instruction, “be baptized.”  In this case, “the remission of sins” would be the direct result of being baptized.  On the other hand, the prepositional phrasing, “for the remission of sins,” could grammatically modify the immediately previous prepositional phrasing, “in the name of Jesus Christ.”  In this case, “the remission of sins” would be the result of being associated unto “the name of Jesus Christ.” 

So then, which of these two grammatically possibilities is the correct one?  For the answer it would be best to discern which possibility is in unity with the doctrinal teaching of the New Testament.  Are there any other passages that clearly connect the remission (or, forgiveness) of sins to baptism?  I myself am not aware of any.  (Note: Some might present Mark 1:4 & Luke 3:3; however, I would contend that “the remission of sins” is connected to the “repentance” in both of the verses, not to the baptism, which contention would be in doctrinal unity with Luke 24:47 & Acts 5:31.)  On the other hand, are there any passages that connect the remission (or, forgiveness) of sins to the name (or, Person) of Jesus Christ?  Indeed!!!  Acts 10:43 – “To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.”  Acts 13:38-39 – “Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: and by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.”

Even so, I would contend that the phrase, “for the remission of sins,” in Acts 2:38 is intended as a grammatical modifier for the phrase, “in the name of Jesus Christ,” not for the verb of instruction, “be baptized.”  Furthermore, I would contend that is the association through heart-faith in the name and Person of Jesus Christ that results in “the remission of sins.”  Finally, I would contend that the baptism “in the name of Jesus Christ,” which the apostle Peter instructed of them, was intended as the outward act whereby an individual revealed his or her heart-faith “in the name of Jesus Christ.”  Indeed, by this grammatical understanding for Acts 2:38, there is no contradiction whatsoever to the gospel of eternal forgiveness, justification, and salvation by God’s grace alone through repentance and heart-faith alone.

3.  The Clause of Result – “And ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”

This statement presents the result for each individual who would obey the two-fold instruction of the previous two statements.  Such obedient individuals would receive (apparently from the Lord God) “the gift of the Holy Ghost.”  Yet they did have to meet the requirements, which in review were as follows:

          A.    To “repent” (of their sinfulness before God).

          B.    To “be baptized” specifically “in the name of Jesus Christ,” as a public revelation of their association through faith “in the name of Jesus Christ.”

[MountainChristian]

I hope and pray the two gospel theory has been eliminated. I love God's wonderful grace, without it no one would be saved.

Edited February 9, 2016 by MountainChristian
spelling

[Invicta]

One might wish so but it seems not

 

19 hours ago, Critical Mass said:

Five gospels actually. 

 

From the  Ambassadors for Christ thread

Edited February 9, 2016 by Invicta