Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Matchett-PI
This passage may be dispensed, in my view, without discussion of baptism.

Well, the statement itself is provable(true) from other sources. Matthew directs us to preach the gospel(Mat 28:19). Belief is addressed in Luke 8:12.(though logically it would take more to derive the last statement in Mark 16:16) IOW If A and B then C does not directly implicate if not A then not C nor does If A then C directly implicate if not A then not C. But of course, If C then A does imply if not A then not C since it is the contrapositive.(If you are saved then you believe)

3,577 posted on 06/18/2011 8:46:58 AM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3571 | View Replies ]


To: AndrewC
"Well, the statement itself is provable(true) from other sources. Matthew directs us to preach the gospel(Mat 28:19). Belief is addressed in Luke 8:12.(though logically it would take more to derive the last statement in Mark 16:16)

That's why he wrote this (see my link): "...Overall, the passage has the "distinct flavour of the second century" and appears to be a pastiche of material taken from other Gospels. ..."

3,585 posted on 06/18/2011 10:23:46 AM PDT by Matchett-PI (In the latter times the man [or woman] of virtue appears vile. --Tao Te Ching)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3577 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson