-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
3,000 saved
- Thread starter Salty
- Start date
Steven2006
New Member
Act 2:41 So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about three thousand souls.
It doesn't sound like it is limited to only men.
It doesn't sound like it is limited to only men.
Matt 5:21 does state that is was 5,000 not counting women and children.
What I'm suggesting is it possible that in Acts it was assumed that the 3,000 counted were only men?
Mind you I am not trying to make a doctrine out of this, but would you say it is proable, posssible, or remotely that women and children were not counted?
Just something to ponder.
Salty
Pastor of First not counting women and childen Baptist Church
Steven2006
New Member
It doesn't say that. I think his question was since with the feeding of the 5000 they counted only the men, is that some sort of precedent for how they might have counted large groups back then.
I already answered that based on the wording of the passage, I don't believe it indicates it was limited to only men.
Steven2006
New Member
I was typing while you were answering. Sorry, didn't mean to answer for you.
I believe in Matt 5:21 5,000 was mentioned as the number of men fed plus women and children because they only counted the men. They were feeding the flesh and they counted only men.
In Acts 2:41 the 3,000 was men, women and children (if applicable). Here the number of souls were added was about 3,000 and all souls are counted for none is more important than the other.
I am not saying that men are more important in the flesh but that in that day that is the way people counted people.
Last edited by a moderator:
freeatlast
New Member
I see no reason to believe it was just men since it does not make a distinction as it does at the feeding of the 5000.
I can see it being either way. In that culture women and children didn't count, had no rights. So, if it was a count of only people who counted it would have been all men. But it doesn't say and we really do not know for sure.
glfredrick
New Member
Why doesn't someone check the Greek to see if a masculine stem is placed on the terms used to indicate the number saved?
2:41 οἱ μὲν οὖν ἀποδεξάμενοι τὸν λόγον αὐτοῦ ἐβαπτίσθησαν καὶ προσετέθησαν ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ ψυχαὶ ὡσεὶ τρισχίλιαι
In 2:37, Peter addressed the crowd in the masculine, "Men and brethren..."
But in 5:14, it says that "multitudes were added daily, men and women..."
The count was probably in the tradition of the day -- men only -- but the crowd almost certainly contained men and women, plus their children.
2:41 οἱ μὲν οὖν ἀποδεξάμενοι τὸν λόγον αὐτοῦ ἐβαπτίσθησαν καὶ προσετέθησαν ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ ψυχαὶ ὡσεὶ τρισχίλιαι
In 2:37, Peter addressed the crowd in the masculine, "Men and brethren..."
But in 5:14, it says that "multitudes were added daily, men and women..."
The count was probably in the tradition of the day -- men only -- but the crowd almost certainly contained men and women, plus their children.
Last edited by a moderator:
Would you believe Matt 14:21, Mark 6:44, Luke 9:14, John 6:16
Boy that was a whooper-:BangHead: Thanks John:thumbsup:
WOW I just followed your lead. LOL