The like figure


dberrie2000
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 Peter3:20-21--"Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

21The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:"

Has anyone ever considered this like figure--eight, and water---as the very practice the LDS church has?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read the "like figure" as not being the number, but the flood itself as a figure of baptism. That being said, I do think the number 8 is a symbollic number associated with baptism. Bullinger relates it to rebirth and resurrection. He even goes so far as to tie it in with the cubic aspects of the holy of holies as a symbol of the abundant life that is associated with its blessings.

It is 7 plus 1. Hence it is the number specially associated with Resurrection and Regeneration, and the beginning of a new era or order.

When the whole earth was covered with the flood, it was Noah "the eighth person" (2 Peter 2:5) who stepped out on to a new earth to commence a new order of things. "Eight souls" (1 Peter 3:20) passed through it with him to the new or regenerated world.

Hence, too, circumcision was to be performed on the eighth day (Gen 17:12), because it was the foreshadowing of the true circumcision of the heart, that which was to be "made without hands," even "the putting off of the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ" (Col 2:11). This is connected with the new creation.

The first-born was to be given to Jehovah on the eighth day (Exo 22:29,30). But

RESURRECTION

is the great truth which is signified. Christ rose from the dead on "the first day of the week," that was of necessity the eighth day.

I have seen some baptismal fonts in the shape of an octagon (both LDS temple, and that of other faiths), and I imagine it was intended to enforce the baptismal symbol of rebirth and resurrection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dberrie---1 Peter3:20-21--"Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

21The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:"

Has anyone ever considered this like figure--eight, and water---as the very practice the LDS church has?

Originally Posted by pam View Post

What practice are you referring to? Baptizing at 8?

dberrie---Water baptism at eight years old.

Well, if we baptized people in groups of eight, then I'd see the relevance. Otherwise, not so much.

Of course, then we could say that it would only have relevance to baptism, if we baptized in and during flood waters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dberrie---Peter3:20-21--"Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

21The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:"

Has anyone ever considered this like figure--eight, and water---as the very practice the LDS church has?

I read the "like figure" as not being the number, but the flood itself as a figure of baptism.

And, to be sure--the number 8 is also a figure, literally. 1 Peter 20 connects the two together, for me--both eight and water.

That being said, I do think the number 8 is a symbollic number associated with baptism. Bullinger relates it to rebirth and resurrection. He even goes so far as to tie it in with the cubic aspects of the holy of holies as a symbol of the abundant life that is associated with its blessings.

I have seen some baptismal fonts in the shape of an octagon (both LDS temple, and that of other faiths), and I imagine it was intended to enforce the baptismal symbol of rebirth and resurrection.

Interesting. I have not ever considered that before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dberrie----1 Peter3:20-21--"Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

21The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:"

Has anyone ever considered this like figure--eight, and water---as the very practice the LDS church has?

Nope. Never linked the 2. I'm not sure it's the intent to link those, although I can't tell you what the intent is.

I'll have to do some pondering.

Thanks for bringing it up.

Hi Justice. Hope you had a merry Christmas.

I read that no telling how many times before I connected it. But that may be just me. I brought that up in Sunday School class, when we reached that scripture this last month--the SS class just stared at me. I dropped it without further comment.

Two people did inquire about it afterwards, though. Allowed me to believe that at least it could be considered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are many people that believe that numbers are used in creative and interesting ways in ancient scriptures. I happen to be one of them. Often numbers given do not make any sense at all and that the scriptures indicate that 8 soles were preserved in the flood is an excellent example.

The ages of Noah’s sons by time the flood took place and that they were married but without any children seem a little strange to me. It is interesting that numbers keep reappearing in scriptures and we find that the number have other significance. For example - that the G-dhead is comprised of 3 individuals and that mankind is divided into 3 parts from the pre-existence to the resurrection. Or that Israel just happened to have 12 sons and that there are a quorum of 12 apostles to govern and judge in G-d’s kingdom.

However, I believe there can be problems with the over use of numbers and speculating the purpose of certain numbers. So - in my mind as important as the meaning of numbers has - I do not think it is wise to speculate (create connections) that G-d may not intend. But I see nothing wrong about pointing out the connection with the age of children at baptism and the number of those saved in the flood.

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone able to go back to the Greek and give an idea on if what was translated as "like figure" can reasonably be considered to be hinting at a number? That us English speakers call a number a figure doesn't necessarily mean that the word translated figure reasonably means such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone able to go back to the Greek and give an idea on if what was translated as "like figure" can reasonably be considered to be hinting at a number? That us English speakers call a number a figure doesn't necessarily mean that the word translated figure reasonably means such.

Here is information from Strong's Concordance and Thayer's Lexicon.

Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon

I don't speak Greek but from the above information I don't really see a link between the term "like figure" and the idea of a number. The term "like figure" has definitions such as: a thing formed after some pattern, a thing resembling another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is information from Strong's Concordance and Thayer's Lexicon.

Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon

I don't speak Greek but from the above information I don't really see a link between the term "like figure" and the idea of a number. The term "like figure" has definitions such as: a thing formed after some pattern, a thing resembling another.

Or, according to Merriam Webster:

fig·ure

noun

\ˈfi-gyər, British & often US ˈfi-gər\

Definition of FIGURE

1

a : a number symbol : numeral, digit b plural : arithmetical calculations <good at figures> c : a written or printed character d : value especially as expressed in numbers : sum, price <sold at a low figure>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or, according to Merriam Webster:

fig·ure

noun

\ˈfi-gyər, British & often US ˈfi-gər\

Definition of FIGURE

1

a : a number symbol : numeral, digit b plural : arithmetical calculations <good at figures> c : a written or printed character d : value especially as expressed in numbers : sum, price <sold at a low figure>

You do realize Merriam-Webster is an English dictionary right? It doesn't particularly shed any light on the Greek.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do realize Merriam-Webster is an English dictionary right? It doesn't particularly shed any light on the Greek.

Well--"figure" is an English word.

In the translation process, the translators, in a translation from Greek to English--usually look for the English word, of that day, that most closely defines the Greek counterpart, if there is one.

One does not have to go back to the Greek to look up the definition of the English word.

Our English translations would not be a very accurate source of truth if it did not reflect the meaning of the Greek texts.

And there would be but a few who could understand it, if the English only reflected only what the Greeks would define it as.:)

Edited by dberrie2000
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the translation process, the translators, in a translation from Greek to English--usually look for the English word, of that day, that most closely defines the Greek counterpart, if there is one.

One does not have to go back to the Greek to look up the definition of the English word.

Yes, and sometimes people draw meanings that aren't in the original text based on secondary meanings of the chosen word. Figure also has meanings that don't have anything to do with numbers. Looking towards the Greek can give a better understanding of just what sense of figure was meant by the KJV translators.

Our English translations would not be a very accurate source of truth if it did not reflect the meaning of the Greek texts.

I'm not questioning the KJV, I'm questioning a translation/interpretation based on, "Oh look, figure in English can mean a number, that must be what the author intended!" Figure can be a very accurate translation and still have nothing to do with the numerical sense of figure in English, this is where looking to the original language can be helpful because it helps figure out what sense was meant, on both denotative and connotative levels.

It's akin to someone reading the word "fear" (in the phrase "fear of the Lord") in the KJV and looking at a modern English dictionary and concluding that God wants us to be scared of him. Looking to the Hebrew (the original language in this particular example) gives a better sense of the authors intent; aspects of devotion, reverence and awe.

Edited by Dravin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, so who were the eight. Noah, his wife, didn't he have four sons, and they had wives, shouldn't there be more than eight?

I have always wondered why the font is an octagon, nothing is an accident in the temple. Everything is so well planned and precise, I don't think it is a coincidence that it is an octagon. This is very very interesting.

But who are the eight?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well--"figure" is an English word.

In the translation process, the translators, in a translation from Greek to English--usually look for the English word, of that day, that most closely defines the Greek counterpart, if there is one.

One does not have to go back to the Greek to look up the definition of the English word.

Our English translations would not be a very accurate source of truth if it did not reflect the meaning of the Greek texts.

And there would be but a few who could understand it, if the English only reflected only what the Greeks would define it as.:)

Here's the thing, though:

As Mormons, we already have D&C 68:28 to give us doctrinal guidance on the question of age of baptism. There's no need to try to latch onto an ambiguous word in one English translation of a text written in Greek by a native Aramaic speaker.

The only context in which your interpretation of Peter might hypothetically be useful, is in apologetic proof-texting exercises with other Christians. And I might even get away with it in some forums. But sooner or later, some knowledgeable person is going to ask me if I really think a fifteenth-century English academic should be given more theological deference than Peter himself. I'd get eaten for lunch if I stuck to that kind of argument.

Moreover, the notion of doggedly sticking with one isolated English translation (especially an ambiguous one) rather than attempting to divine what the original author really meant, is the antithesis of our own eighth article of faith.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the thing, though:

As Mormons, we already have D&C 68:28 to give us doctrinal guidance on the question of age of baptism. There's no need to try to latch onto an ambiguous word in one English translation of a text written in Greek by a native Aramaic speaker.

The only context in which your interpretation of Peter might hypothetically be useful, is in apologetic proof-texting exercises with other Christians.

Well, that might be said of any reference in the Biblical text the LDS point to in order to support their doctrines.

I don't think I have ever used this scripture as proof texting to support baptism at eight years old--only that it is an interesting scripture that contains some relative wording.

And I might even get away with it in some forums. But sooner or later, some knowledgeable person is going to ask me if I really think a fifteenth-century English academic should be given more theological deference than Peter himself. I'd get eaten for lunch if I stuck to that kind of argument.

I find that most LDS get eaten for lunch, when trying to use the Biblical text, no matter what the subject is, or given a knowledgeable person.

The number eight is a figure--no matter how knowledgeable a person is that takes up this argument.

To take it beyond that--one has to enter a world that only a few can understand to begin with. And if we depend on that kind of academic involvement for every point we read within the Biblical text--then the Bible is only meaningful to those few, and reduced to an enigma for the rest.

Moreover, the notion of doggedly sticking with one isolated English translation (especially an ambiguous one) rather than attempting to divine what the original author really meant, is the antithesis of our own eighth article of faith.

That might be a good point--but considering that the BOM prophets knew of baptism at eight--then the LDS could also believe that baptism at eight was known to Peter.

Knowing that--it is not out of the question that the scripture could have been a reference to that very figure.

I am in no way am postulating it as a definitive definition of scripture--only that, as written in the KJV-- it is an interesting thought and possibility--and one connected to LDS beliefs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest gopecon

I have also seen the interpretation of those verses in Peter used as a reference to 8 year old baptism. It's not the strongest link out there, so I've never seen it in anything official. For me it's a fun quirk that seems to indicate our current practice has roots that are much older than the modern Church.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that might be said of any reference in the Biblical text the LDS point to in order to support their doctrines.

Yes, precisely.

The number eight is a figure--no matter how knowledgeable a person is that takes up this argument.

It is a figure, in one sense of that (English) word. But it doesn't seem to fit with the word antitypos.

To take it beyond that--one has to enter a world that only a few can understand to begin with. And if we depend on that kind of academic involvement for every point we read within the Biblical text--then the Bible is only meaningful to those few, and reduced to an enigma for the rest.

I see where you're coming from, and agree with you that most Latter-day Saints find this kind of scrutiny intimidating. But I'm not sure we're well-served by punting the issue of biblical interpretation to a group of largely anonymous translators; especially when there are so many excellent resources available (such as Strong's Concordance, available for free on the web via the Blue Letter Bible website already linked in this thread). Our own doctrine acknowledges that all Bible translations are going to be somewhat problematic; given that situation, I don't think it's wise to revert into Biblical know-nothingism.

That might be a good point--but considering that the BOM prophets knew of baptism at eight--then the LDS could also believe that baptism at eight was known to Peter.

Knowing that--it is not out of the question that the scripture could have been a reference to that very figure.

Certainly we can presume he would have known it with relative safety. But to assert that that's what he meant to convey in this scripture, is a different thing entirely.

I am in no way am postulating it as a definitive definition of scripture--only that, as written in the KJV-- it is an interesting thought and possibility--and one connected to LDS beliefs.

I know; and I really respect your new perspective. I'm just not sure it's the right one, in this case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share