Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Settling this once and for all!
#1
Hi everyone. As some of you know, Acts 2:38 is a controversial verse in Christianity (Not a theological discussion!) Baptists, Catholics, CoC, etc are divided on this verse.
I want to know if the Aramaic solves this division amongst the brethren. (Note: the color coding brings out the discrepancy amongst translations of the Greek. It seems like the Greek is vague.)

Paul Younan derivative Wrote:Shimon said to them, Repent and be baptized each of you in the name of the LORD Yeshu' for the forgiveness of sins that you may receive the gift of the Spirit of Holiness

NKJV Wrote:Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. (NKJV)

NASB Wrote:Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.(NASB)

NIV Wrote:Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. (NIV)

My questions are:

(1) How does one properly translate the Aramaic into english?

(2) Does the Aramaic text go in favor of 'baptismal forgiveness' / 'baptismal salvation'?

(3) Which of the [listed] Greek translations (NASB, NKJV, NIV) correctly translate this verse?
Reply
#2
Hi, I am not sure that there are any explicit differences in either of these translations, they all pretty much convey the same message.

1. Repent
2. Be Baptised
3. Receive the Holy Spirit.
Reply
#3
To be forgiven of sins is to say that salvation has been offered to you, there is no salvation without the remission of sins and you cannot receive remission of sins and not receive salvation.
Reply
#4
To be forgiven of sins is to say that salvation has been offered to you, there is no salvation without the remission of sins and you cannot receive remission of sins and not receive salvation.
Reply
#5
Hi

There is a difference among the verses. The NIV reading say that one has to "repent and be baptized" to receive the forgiveness of sins.

The NASB and NKJV meanings have a slight difference showing that baptism is a sign of forgiveness, not a requirement to be forgiven.

The reason this is so divisive is that some churches teach that one is forgiven when they do the "sinner's prayer" (faith + repentance), and that other churches teach that forgiveness comes from baptism itself (faith + repentance + immersion in water).

So, what is the correct rendering of the Aramaic?

Can someone who knows Peshitta, without bias, show what the Aramaic reads?

Shlama,
~DC
Reply
#6
DrawCloser Wrote:The NIV reading say that one has to "repent and be baptized" to receive the forgiveness of sins.
Yeah, but the NIV is a dynamic (or as I like to say, interpretative) translation (thought for thought) so I would not trust it if you want to know what the text actually says. Don't get caught being NIV-positive!

Ethridge and Murdock both translate according to the comma placement of the NKJV and NASB (with the comma coming after "repent" and before "be baptized") but the "each of you" comes following "be baptized" as we read in the NIV.

Quote:Acts 2:38 - Shemun saith to them, Repent, and be baptized, every man of you, in the name of the Lord Jeshu, for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. (Ethridge)
Acts 2:38 - Simon said to them: Repent, and be baptized every one of you, in the name of the Lord Jesus, for the remission of sins; so that ye may receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. (Murdock)


Comma placement is up to the translator though because they don't exist in Semitic languages, but as far as word order goes, looking at the Aramaic itself I would agree plainly with Ethridge, Murdock and Younan. Repent/return and be immersed/baptized, man-man (each) etc.

But I don't think we can settle this issue from looking at the text alone because different levels of interpretation can be made on each text to support either position. So cultural context would have to be investigated (i.e. what did Jews believe regarding the immersion/tevilla of a mikvah, what we now call baptism, in the 1st century at that time, and did our Lord come and teach anything differently?) and then contrast that with, say, Christ's words at the end of Mark and Paul's words at the beginning of Romans 6, and then get all of our interpretations in order. But that would exceed the scope of this forum.
Reply
#7
This is odd, but not too long after posting, I realized too that there are many ways to interpret the text.

So, to understand this better, is the Aramaic no better than the Greek for this verse?

(Mods or Paul erase this if it breaks the rulesSmile

So my questions to anyone CoE knowledgeable (especially Paul):

(1) Did the CoE preserve the specific baptismal teaching(s) from the apostles?

(2) And does CoE have a "Faith Statement" book where I can find those teachings?
Reply
#8
DrawCloser Wrote:This is odd, but not too long after posting, I realized too that there are many ways to interpret the text.

So, to understand this better, is the Aramaic no better than the Greek for this verse?

(Mods or Paul erase this if it breaks the rulesSmile

So my questions to anyone CoE knowledgeable (especially Paul):

(1) Did the CoE preserve the specific baptismal teaching(s) from the apostles?

(2) And does CoE have a "Faith Statement" book where I can find those teachings?

Hi DC

In the CoE, like in all the ancient apostolic churches, baptism is a raza (mystery/sacrament) and is essential for salvation. For a very detailed exposition of the faith of the CoE regarding the sacraments, you can read The Mysteries of the Kingdom by His Grace Mar Awa. It is available from amazon here:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.amazon.com/MYSTERIES-KINGDOM-Sacraments-Assyrian-Church/dp/0983754306">http://www.amazon.com/MYSTERIES-KINGDOM ... 0983754306</a><!-- m -->

+Shamasha
Reply
#9
Thank you Paul for the link, perhaps I will be able to get that book later.
(I right now I am pressed with finances, so even getting this book is...ehh...)

Paul, this sacramental teaching -- is it apostolic according to CoE or was it initiated by the clergy a little later than the apostles?

And about the CoE teaching on baptism, did it have any Western "changes" creep in? (I read about the CoE from "Was the New Testament Really Written in Greek?" and it leaves the impression that the CoE was corrupted. I don't believe that book completely so I ask you for clarifications.)
Reply
#10
DrawCloser Wrote:Thank you Paul for the link, perhaps I will be able to get that book later.
(I right now I am pressed with finances, so even getting this book is...ehh...)

Paul, this sacramental teaching -- is it apostolic according to CoE or was it initiated by the clergy a little later than the apostles?

And about the CoE teaching on baptism, did it have any Western "changes" creep in? (I read about the CoE from "Was the New Testament Really Written in Greek?" and it leaves the impression that the CoE was corrupted. I don't believe that book completely so I ask you for clarifications.)

Hi DC,

Nothing in the CoE was initiated later on by clergy, the clergy inherited the Apostolic teaching and faith from the Apostles themselves. The Apostles didn't drop off a copy of the New Testament and wish us all luck. <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

Be careful of Raphael Latester's "book" - he is now, unfortunately, an atheist. He never really understood why he believed what he did, which is what makes the Mysteries book by Mar Awa so important. You have to know what it is you believe in, and most importantly why. His Grace masterfully weaves the story from scripture and history, and explains the "why", and puts to shame anyone who (in their ignorance) claims otherwise. It truly is an awe-inspiring treatise on the topic, and it goes into far more detail than I could here.

I hear you on the finances, but definitely put this one on your wish list for the future. Everyone who is serious about Christianity in general, and the Church of the East in particular, needs to have a copy of this book.

+Shamasha
Reply
#11
Hi Paul, may you please clarify these things about the CoE, Raphael's book is very uncertain.

His book says (paraphrase):

"CoE conceded to the RCC"

"CoE doesn't care about the Sabbath (even though alot of CoE members observe the Sabbath)"

"CoE requires celibacy of the higher clergy (a concession to the RCC)"

"CoE practices infant baptism"


Also, back to the original part of this topic -- what do you as a translator have to say on [Aramaic] Acts 2:38?
Reply
#12
Hi, a group of detractors fled from the Orthodox faith in the 1500's, now known as Chaldean catholics.

No Orthodox church observes the sabbath and nor should they.

I am certain that Orthodox bishops are not permitted to marry, nothing to do with the RCC.

Of course we practice infant baptism, why wouldn't we?
Reply
#13
Well, I was wondering if what in Lataster's book was true or not (no hard feelings towards CoE ).

Alan G77 Wrote:No Orthodox church observes the sabbath and nor should they.
While reading about CoE on this forum, I found out that they had Messianic origin, hence the change about Sabbath observance perks curiosity.

So to sum it up, anybody tell me, did the CoE "give-in" to the West?
Reply
#14
I'm a Oneness Pentecostal and we must believe similar to the Church of the East in this respect. Very interesting! Thanks for the information, Paul.
Reply
#15
ScorpioSniper2 Wrote:I'm a Oneness Pentecostal and we must believe similar to the Church of the East in this respect. Very interesting! Thanks for the information, Paul.

Hi Sniper,

You're welcome, but..

I'm not sure I gave any info here to suggest that the CoE doctrine on the Trinity is anywhere near what the Oneness Pentecostals believe, though.

To be clear, the CoE believes in the Trinity. The terminology we employ may be different, but the belief is the same as all of the other ancient apostolic churches.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)