The Laying on of Hands and the Baptism of the Holy Spirit?

[feedm3]

In order to properly understand the baptism of the Holy Spirit, we must first understand the difference between it and the laying on of the Apostles hands to impart the Holy Spirit.

THE LAYING ON OF HANDS:​

Act 8:5 Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them.
Act 8:6 And the people with one accord gave heed unto those things which Philip spake, hearing and seeing the miracles which he did.
Act 8:7 For unclean spirits, crying with loud voice, came out of many that were possessed with them: and many taken with palsies, and that were lame, were healed.
Things to Note:
• Philip was NOT an apostle; only a deacon – see Acts 6:5
• Philip was able to perform miracles – Acts 8:6,7


Act 8:12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
Act 8:13 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.
Things to Note:
• The people; including Simon the Sorcerer believed Philip and was baptized.
• Upon this baptism there is no mention of the Holy Spirit,


Act 8:14 Now when THE APOSTLES which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:
Act 8:15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:
Act 8:16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
Act 8:17 Then LAID THEY THEIR HANDS ON THEM, AND THEY RECEIVED THE HOLY GHOST.
Act 8:18 And when Simon saw that through laying on OF THE APOSTLES' HANDS THE HOLY GHOST WAS GIVEN, he offered them money,
Act 8:19 Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.
Things to Note:
• vs 14 – Peter and John were both Apostles, sent for a purpose.
• Vs 15 – 16 – The people of Samara were already baptized but did not receive the Holy Spirit.
◦ They were only baptized in the name of Christ.
• Vs 17 – The Holy Spirit was given ONLY by the laying on of THE APOSTELS hands.
◦ Philip was able to perform miracles yet he could not lay his hands on the people to give the Holy Spirit, He needed the Apostles for that purpose.
• Vs 18 – Even Simon recognized this.

Questions based upon these passages:
[FONT=&quot]1. [/FONT]Are there any Apostles alive today to pass on the Holy Spirit? Answer: No
[FONT=&quot]2. [/FONT]What happen when the last Apostle died? - Answer: Miracles began to cease – I Cor 13.

THE BAPTISM OF THE HOLY SPIRIT​

Mar_1:8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.
Joh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
Act 1:2 Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had GIVEN COMMANDMENTS UNTO THE APOSTLES WHOM HE HAD CHOSEN:
Act 1:3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:
Act 1:4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.
Act 1:5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.
Things to Note:
• The Baptism of the Holy Spirit was commanded to THE APOSTLES – Acts 1:2, 4.
• Jesus chose the Apostles himself.

Act 2:1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
Act 2:2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
Act 2:3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
Act 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
Things to Note:
• “They” in text is still only referring to the Apostles – continued from Acts 1:2.
▪ Some may attempt to argue that it fell on the 120 disciples, but this is proven wrong simply by tracing back the pronoun “they”, it leads right to the Apostles.
• The Apostles received the Holy Spirit WITHOUT the laying on of hands.
◦ Because Jesus had personally chosen them and promised the baptism of the Spirit on them.
• This baptism of the Holy Spirit only occurs two times in the Bible.
◦ Here in Acts 2 on the Apostles (the Jews) and in Acts 10; Cornelius (the Gentiles).


Act 10:1 There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of the band called the Italian band,
Act 10:2 A devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway.
Act 10:3 He saw in a vision evidently about the ninth hour of the day an angel of God coming in to him, and saying unto him, Cornelius.
Act 10:4 And when he looked on him, he was afraid, and said, What is it, Lord? And he said unto him, Thy prayers and thine alms are come up for a memorial before God.
Act 10:5 And now send men to Joppa, and call for one Simon, whose surname is Peter:
Things to Note:
• Cornelius was a devout man.
• His prayers came up as “a memorial” before God.
◦ The Greek word for “memorial” is [FONT=&quot]μνημόσυνον[/FONT]
▪ [FONT=&quot]This word means “a reminder”[/FONT]
▪ Cornelius' prayer reminded God that he would bring salvation to the Gentiles as well.
• See – Jn 10:16; 11:52, Gen 49:10.
• This does not mean Cornelius was saved at this point.

Act 10:44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
Act 10:45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Act 10:46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
Act 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, WHICH HAVE RECEIVED THE HOLY GHOST AS WELL AS WE?
Act 10:48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
Things to Note:
The Holy Spirit fell upon the gentiles just as it did the Apostles – WITHOUT THE LAYING ON OF HANDS
This astonished the Jews – 45.
It showed Peter and the rest of the Jews that God has chosen the Gentiles worthy of salvation.
It was not a decision made by the Apostles, but the pouring out of the Spirit showed it was from God Himself.
Yet Cornelius and the rest still had to obey like us all – Mrk 16:16.
They were COMMANDED to be baptized – Vs 48.

Act 11:12 And the Spirit bade me go with them, nothing doubting. Moreover these six brethren accompanied me, and we entered into the man's house:
Act 11:13 And he shewed us how he had seen an angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter;
Act 11:14 Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.
Act 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, AS ON US AT THE BEGINNING.
Act 11:16 Then REMEMBERED I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.
Act 11:17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?
Things to Note:
• 14 – Peter was going to tell Cornelius how to be saved.
• 15 - “As on us at the beginning” shows the uniqueness of the Spirit falling upon them.
◦ It showed it was a decision made by God to save the Gentiles.
• 16 – The purpose was to show Peter and the Jews God deemed the Gentiles worthy of salvation.

Eph 4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith,

There is only one baptism today.
Is it the baptism of the Holy Sprit or baptism in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ​​?

Act 8:12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.

Only the Apostles could give the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Those teaching today that the Holy Spirit falls directly upon individuals are teaching error.
Just as Philip could not give the Spirit without the laying on of hands by the Apostles neither can we.

The baptism of the Holy Spirit was a sign that God had chosen the Apostles, and later the Gentiles.

 

[AnandaHya]

Only the Apostles could give the gift of the Holy Spirit.

that's a lie. Only JESUS can give the gift of the Holy Spirit. It does not matter if they are apostles or not.

who gave Paul/Saul the Holy Spirit?

Acts 9:16-18
New King James Version (NKJV)
16 For I will show him how many things he must suffer for My name’s sake.”
17 And Ananias went his way and entered the house; and laying his hands on him he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus,[a] who appeared to you on the road as you came, has sent me that you may receive your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” 18 Immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he received his sight at once; and he arose and was baptized.

Ananias was not an apostle. It was not by the hand of any man, be he apostle or not that people are baptized by the Holy Spirit. You have quoted a passage where the Gentiles were baptized when no one laid hands on them at all. If that is not enough there are other passages.

Apostles are not needed to give the Holy Spirit, only GOD.

To teach otherwise is error.

 

[Laodicea]

Mar_1:8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.

Only the Apostles could give the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Those teaching today that the Holy Spirit falls directly upon individuals are teaching error.
Just as Philip could not give the Spirit without the laying on of hands by the Apostles neither can we.

The baptism of the Holy Spirit was a sign that God had chosen the Apostles, and later the Gentiles.

You have quoted alot of texts but, did you read Mark 1:8 that you quoted? It says that Christ shall baptize with the Holy Ghost.

 

[feedm3]

QUOTE: that's a lie. Only JESUS can give the gift of the Holy Spirit. It does not matter if they are apostles or not.

Of course Christ is the ultimate source of who gave the Holy Spirit, but he did leave the power to the Apostles - often we read they prayed before they layed hands on them (showing who the true source is) if not explain these passages:

Act_8:17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost

Act_8:17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

2Ti_1:6 Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands.

QUOTE:who gave Paul/Saul the Holy Spirit?
]Acts 9:16-18
New King James Version (NKJV)
16 For I will show him how many things he must suffer for My name’s sake.”
17 And Ananias went his way and entered the house; and laying his hands on him he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus,[a] who appeared to you on the road as you came, has sent me that you may receive your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” 18 Immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he received his sight at once; and he arose and was baptized.

QUOTE: Ananias was not an apostle. It was not by the hand of any man, be he apostle or not that people are baptized by the Holy Spirit. You have quoted a passage where the Gentiles were baptized when no one laid hands on them at all. If that is not enough there are other passages.
Apostles are not needed to give the Holy Spirit, only GOD.


Ok, why did the Holy Spirit NOT fall on the Samaritans until the Apostles came and laid hands on them?

And if you would read the post more careful you would read why no one layed there hands on the Gentiles, im not going to explain it all again - just scroll up and read, and let me know what you don't agree with.

Ananias was not an Apostle in the sense he was not one of the chosen 12, but what is the meaning of the name "Apostle" her is the definition -

G652
ἀπόστολος
apostolos
ap-os'-tol-os
From G649; a delegate; specifically an ambassador of the Gospel; officially a commissioner of Christ (“apostle”), (with miraculous powers): - apostle, messenger, he that is sent.

Who sent Ananias? Christ Himself.

 

[feedm3]

You have quoted alot of texts but, did you read Mark 1:8 that you quoted? It says that Christ shall baptize with the Holy Ghost.

Yes and he did baptize with the Holy Spirit , He promised it to the Apostles (Jn 14,16) and they received it in Acts 2, then the Gentiles in Acts 10.

 

[notIbutChrist]

Originally Posted by feedm3

Only the Apostles could give the gift of the Holy Spirit.

that's a lie. Only JESUS can give the gift of the Holy Spirit. It does not matter if they are apostles or not.

who gave Paul/Saul the Holy Spirit?

Acts 9:16-18
New King James Version (NKJV)
16 For I will show him how many things he must suffer for My name’s sake.”
17 And Ananias went his way and entered the house; and laying his hands on him he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus,[a] who appeared to you on the road as you came, has sent me that you may receive your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” 18 Immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he received his sight at once; and he arose and was baptized.

Ananias was not an apostle. It was not by the hand of any man, be he apostle or not that people are baptized by the Holy Spirit. You have quoted a passage where the Gentiles were baptized when no one laid hands on them at all. If that is not enough there are other passages.

Apostles are not needed to give the Holy Spirit, only GOD.

To teach otherwise is error.

Excellent response AnandaHya

 

[tribesman]

• Vs 17 – The Holy Spirit was given ONLY by the laying on of THE APOSTELS hands.
◦ Philip was able to perform miracles yet he could not lay his hands on the people to give the Holy Spirit, He needed the Apostles for that purpose.

Questions based upon these passages:
[FONT=&quot]1. [/FONT]Are there any Apostles alive today to pass on the Holy Spirit? Answer: No
[FONT=&quot]2. [/FONT]What happen when the last Apostle died? - Answer: Miracles began to cease – I Cor 13.

Things to Note:
• The Baptism of the Holy Spirit was commanded to THE APOSTLES – Acts 1:2, 4.
• Jesus chose the Apostles himself.

Things to Note:
The Holy Spirit fell upon the gentiles just as it did the Apostles – WITHOUT THE LAYING ON OF HANDS
This astonished the Jews – 45.
It showed Peter and the rest of the Jews that God has chosen the Gentiles worthy of salvation.
It was not a decision made by the Apostles, but the pouring out of the Spirit showed it was from God Himself.
Yet Cornelius and the rest still had to obey like us all – Mrk 16:16.
They were COMMANDED to be baptized – Vs 48.

Eph 4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith,

There is only one baptism today.
Is it the baptism of the Holy Sprit or baptism in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ​​?

The baptism of the Holy Spirit was a sign that God had chosen the Apostles, and later the Gentiles.

I think one cannot so easily make all of these conclusions as you have done above. Let me show some of the problems incurred, and how tradition has dealt with some of the issues involved.

1. As AnandaHya already has shown, the gift of the Holy Spirit could be given by other means than by the laying on of hands of an apostle.

2. The traditional church families refer to these events as either something that has occured once and for all in and for the church, and that it does not need to repeat itself again. Or, that this is continued through apostolic succession, which means an unbroken chain of ordination, through the laying on of hands, dating back from the apostles until today.

3. Every regenerated christian has the Holy Spirit, however not all show the same signs or have the same particular spiritual gifts.

4. Even if there's a big difference in the functions of the gifts of the Spirit today than in the days of the apostles, it does not mean that spiritual gifts has ceased completely.

 

[feedm3]

I think one cannot so easily make all of these conclusions as you have done above. Let me show some of the problems incurred, and how tradition has dealt with some of the issues involved.

1. As AnandaHya already has shown, the gift of the Holy Spirit could be given by other means than by the laying on of hands of an apostle.

2. The traditional church families refer to these events as either something that has occured once and for all in and for the church, and that it does not need to repeat itself again. Or, that this is continued through apostolic succession, which means an unbroken chain of ordination, through the laying on of hands, dating back from the apostles until today.

3. Every regenerated christian has the Holy Spirit, however not all show the same signs or have the same particular spiritual gifts.

4. Even if there's a big difference in the functions of the gifts of the Spirit today than in the days of the apostles, it does not mean that spiritual gifts has ceased completely.

I guess I need to be more clear on the gifts im speaking of. I do believe there are many spiritual gifts from God, but I also believe the miraculous gifts have ceased.

Ananias was personally commissioned by Christ, not by an apostle or any other means, I think that is a major part of Paul receiving the Holy Spirit.
I do not believe that anyone is personally commissioned to do anything by Christ (outside of what we read in the Bible).

Speaking in tongues, raising the dead, drinking poison etc. I think were all miraculous gifts that have ceased.
We no longer need them to "confirm the word."

But I still like to hear what others think on the matter, could be something I am missing.
I appreciate your comment.

 

[notIbutChrist]

I guess I need to be more clear on the gifts im speaking of. I do believe there are many spiritual gifts from God, but I also believe the miraculous gifts have ceased.

Ananias was personally commissioned by Christ, not by an apostle or any other means, I think that is a major part of Paul receiving the Holy Spirit.
I do not believe that anyone is personally commissioned to do anything by Christ (outside of what we read in the Bible).

Speaking in tongues, raising the dead, drinking poison etc. I think were all miraculous gifts that have ceased.
We no longer need them to "confirm the word."

But I still like to hear what others think on the matter, could be something I am missing.
I appreciate your comment.

But we are comissioned in the bible to speak in other tongues, heal the sick, and raise the dead. How would you explain that?

 

[feedm3]

But we are comissioned in the bible to speak in other tongues, heal the sick, and raise the dead. How would you explain that?

Everything the Bible speaks is not bound on all Christians.
Who and when things are spoken are very important in understanding God's word.
For example:
1Co 11:5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.

I know some still practice this today, but I think that the majority understand that this was pertaining to that time and culture. Most do not bind this on women today.

Jesus did command the Apostles to heal the sick, raise the dead, etc. But that does not mean we all are commanded to do the same.

We have an inspired account of the Power of God, as in the miracles that were done, and how they played a role in the edifying of the early church - just as John tell us:
Joh 20:30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
Joh 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

And Paul in 1Co 13:8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
1Co 13:9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
1Co 13:10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

As Ive said in other posts, "that which is perfect" is not pertaing to Chirst, but the completed revelation of God able to make perfect in Chirst - Perfect meaning complete, mature, full of age - Col 1:28, II Tim 3:16, Jms 1:25.

 

[Bloodwashed]

Grow up, get over your self and your unbelieve! God bless you, in His love Mark!!!

 

[feedm3]

Grow up, get over your self and your unbelieve! God bless you, in His love Mark!!!

OK! Thank you for opening my eyes, I liked all the scriptures you used in making your point. Oh wait you didnt have any, just a one weird outburst. Oh well thanks anyway.

 

[tribesman]

I guess I need to be more clear on the gifts im speaking of. I do believe there are many spiritual gifts from God, but I also believe the miraculous gifts have ceased.

Ananias was personally commissioned by Christ, not by an apostle or any other means, I think that is a major part of Paul receiving the Holy Spirit. I do not believe that anyone is personally commissioned to do anything by Christ (outside of what we read in the Bible).

Speaking in tongues, raising the dead, drinking poison etc. I think were all miraculous gifts that have ceased. We no longer need them to "confirm the word."

But I still like to hear what others think on the matter, could be something I am missing.
I appreciate your comment.

First off, the initial infilling of the Holy Spirit at the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21) was not accompanied by the laying on of hands. Secondly, it seems as unclear hermeneutics to first insist that a person's infilling of the Holy Spirit must occur only after the laying on of hands of an apostle and then admit that someone who is not an apostle may, indeed, be "commissioned by Christ" with equal authority to confer same.

Where do you find a scripture that says that Ananias had been commissioned for that task? Or was Ananias an apostle? If there's no scriptural warrant for that then how can one argue that such commissioning must only be found in scripture ( I do not believe that anyone is personally commissioned to do anything by Christ (outside of what we read in the Bible). even if it's not clearly scriptural? Where should one draw a line here?

Thirdly, I see no limit in that only some gifts would have ceased, while others are still at work. I see only a big difference in function for the gifts of would be miraculous nature. None of the gifts are there anymore to confirm the word, neither to necessarily "prove" anything about either a person or his doctrine. They are there to primarily serve the body of Christ.

Tongues (or languages) was indeed a sign for non-believing jews and do not fill that purpose anymore, however it could fill the purpose of someone being supernaturally able to speak the language of some unreached tribe in some remote area in order to preach the gospel.

Drinking deadly poison (without knowing it) and survive wouldn't "prove" anyone as a disciple of Christ today, but sure God is not unable to save his people if threatened to life, even today. Raising the dead even today? Why not? God is able indeed. But for believers and nonbelievers it does not necessarily fill the same function today as in the apostles' days. Prophesying? Why not? But not with the function of adding to scripture or giving it any status that would threaten the efficacy of Scripture. See the point?

 

[feedm3]

QUOTE: First off, the initial infilling of the Holy Spirit at the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21) was not accompanied by the laying on of hands.
-Yes this would be the “baptism of the Holy Spirit” as promised to them. The fact that is was not accompanied by the Laying of of hands is why it is the “baptism” and not imparted by the laying on of hands.

QUOTE: Secondly, it seems as unclear hermeneutics to first insist that a person's infilling of the Holy Spirit must occur only after the laying on of hands of an apostle and then admit that someone who is not an apostle may, indeed, be "commissioned by Christ" with equal authority to confer same.
-How many people to read about other than the Apostles being personally assigned a task by CHirst.
This is definitely unique.

QUOTE: Where do you find a scripture that says that Ananias had been commissioned for that task? Or was Ananias an apostle? If there's no scriptural warrant for that then how can one argue that such commissioning must only be found in scripture ( I do not believe that anyone is personally commissioned to do anything by Christ (outside of what we read in the Bible). even if it's not clearly scriptural? Where should one draw a line here?

The reason I do not believe anyone is personally commissioned outside of scripture is because I believe that God only speaks to us through his word. Not in visions and feelings but through His inspired word.

Here is the scripture that shows me Ananias was sent for that task:
Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.
Why he was sent is clear, so Saul would “ receive thy sight and filled with the Holy Ghost”
Was he an Apostle – according to the condition of his mission (being personally sent by Christ) yes according to the definition of the word; he was.

If read of anybody in the Bible Apostle or not being sent by Christ for the purpose of filling someone with the Holy Spirit, who am I to argue that?
But this is the only instance I see in scripture of this happening.


QUOTE: Thirdly, I see no limit in that only some gifts would have ceased, while others are still at work. I see only a big difference in function for the gifts of would be miraculous nature. None of the gifts are there anymore to confirm the word, neither to necessarily "prove" anything about either a person or his doctrine. They are there to primarily serve the body of Christ.

Tongues (or languages) was indeed a sign for non-believing jews and do not fill that purpose anymore, however it could fill the purpose of someone being supernaturally able to speak the language of some unreached tribe in some remote area in order to preach the gospel.

Drinking deadly poison (without knowing it) and survive wouldn't "prove" anyone as a disciple of Christ today, but sure God is not unable to save his people if threatened to life, even today. Raising the dead even today? Why not? God is able indeed. But for believers and nonbelievers it does not necessarily fill the same function today as in the apostles' days. Prophesying? Why not? But not with the function of adding to scripture or giving it any status that would threaten the efficacy of Scripture. See the point?

Well I do believe in the providence of God, If not why pray for the sick? As far as the healing we see in the Bible, a word spoken and some immediately made whole, again I believe it was to confirm the word and is not something that God allows us to do today. There is no question as to what God is able to do. Of course God can raise the dead, the question is does he still do so today through men as in the early church? Yes in a spiritual sense, I am dead before I hear the word and obey gospel and made spiritually alive. Yes in that He spiritually opens the eyes of the blind.

I cannot ignore passages that show why we had miracles, and others that show they were not permanent. Today if I want to speak to a remote tribe, I will try my hardest to study their language. If I cannot then I trust God will deal fairly with those people.
For now Im going to bed but if you have more I catch up with you tomorrow.

 

[tribesman]

The reason I do not believe anyone is personally commissioned outside of scripture is because I believe that God only speaks to us through his word. Not in visions and feelings but through His inspired word.

Would you believe that visions and feelings (depening upon what you put in the two terms) is a problem even if they fully line up with God's word? Personally I see no problem with such. However, the final authority is of course always scripture.

Was he [Ananias, my note] an Apostle – according to the condition of his mission (being personally sent by Christ) yes according to the definition of the word; he was. If read of anybody in the Bible Apostle or not being sent by Christ for the purpose of filling someone with the Holy Spirit, who am I to argue that? But this is the only instance I see in scripture of this happening.

I would see sometimes a differance between "being sent" and being ordained an apostle, although I know that there were more than twelve apostles. In orthodox tradition Ananias is actually said to have been an apostle. Personally I am not 100% sure. If he was, it would clarify a few questions here. If he wasn't then we have an argument against the Holy Ghost having to be conferred through the laying of the hands of the apostles.

We have also this scripture were Cornelius receives the Holy Spirit.

Acts.10

[44] While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
[45] And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
[46] For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
[47] Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
[48] And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

Clearly apostles were present here, but there's no mentioning of laying on of hands. However, we can of course not outrule that such occured.

Well I do believe in the providence of God, If not why pray for the sick? As far as the healing we see in the Bible, a word spoken and some immediately made whole, again I believe it was to confirm the word and is not something that God allows us to do today. There is no question as to what God is able to do. Of course God can raise the dead, the question is does he still do so today through men as in the early church? Yes in a spiritual sense, I am dead before I hear the word and obey gospel and made spiritually alive. Yes in that He spiritually opens the eyes of the blind.

Spiritually? If the question is not what God is able to do and if we believe that people can get healed by the power of God today then why set up like a prohibition that such an experience may never manifest itself again as it did in Acts, as that would be to reject the efficacy of Scripture or to indirectly claim new apostles? I cannot see how that the fact that people lay hands on the sick and they recover is by necessity something that would be some claim of verifying anyone's office or doctrine, since their teaching must be proven for what it is anyway. It's also one thing to just pray for the sick and another thing to call upon the elders to pray for (and even anoint with oil) the sick. I guess it comes down to a faith issue at the bottom.

Anyway, here is where things get uneven. Again I think it's clear that a conclusion in the form of a general statement saying that spiritual gifts have ceased, while yet holding to that some of these gifts are still valid whereas others are not, is inconsistent. Obviously you understand that spiritual gifts are not limited to those mentioned in 1Cor.12 and 14, but are also exemplified in for instance Rom.12. How many today are saying that teaching sound doctrine is a gift (rather than a learned skill) that exhortation is a gift, that showing mercy is a gift? Can we say that these gifts have ceased? But in the same context prophesying is also mentioned.

I cannot ignore passages that show why we had miracles, and others that show they were not permanent. Today if I want to speak to a remote tribe, I will try my hardest to study their language. If I cannot then I trust God will deal fairly with those people.

One should of course learn the language of the people one is addressing. However, there are situations where this can be very hard to achieve, and where there's no way, God can make a way. The question is if we believe, if we have the faith, that any such or similar things can indeed happen even today, or if we can expect anything such to occur at any degree at all today, or if we don't believe that.

 

[zone]

As Ive said in other posts, "that which is perfect" is not pertaing to Chirst, but the completed revelation of God able to make perfect in Chirst - Perfect meaning complete, mature, full of age - Col 1:28, II Tim 3:16, Jms 1:25.

amen.
but we are few these days.

Acts 2:8
Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language?

snip



Latter Rain Movement may refer to:

• "Latter Rain" is a term used in Holiness and Pentecostal movements.
• Latter Rain (1880s movement) was a precursor to modern Pentecostalism.
• Latter Rain (post–World War II movement) originated within Pentecostalism during the late 1940s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latter_Rain_Movement

 

[feedm3]

Would you believe that visions and feelings (depening upon what you put in the two terms) is a problem even if they fully line up with God's word? Personally I see no problem with such. However, the final authority is of course always scripture.

Well I don’t see how they would line up with God’s word. When I read passages like Col 1:28 and II Tim 3:16 I don’t see the need for anything outside of His word.
The problem I have with miraculous gifts is that they were to confirm the word (Mrk 16:20; Heb 2:3-4; Acts 2:22).
If man is still able to do this, then the Bible is not the only authority and final word, because whatever the person is teaching it is confirmed by the signs he is manifesting that his words are the word of God.
So in that sense we should all be listening to every word that is spoken because it is the word of God.
Of course I do not believe this to be the case, God has given us his word that is able to make us complete.

QUOTE: I would see sometimes a difference between "being sent" and being ordained an apostle, although I know that there were more than twelve apostles. In orthodox tradition Ananias is actually said to have been an apostle. Personally I am not 100% sure. If he was, it would clarify a few questions here. If he wasn't then we have an argument against the Holy Ghost having to be conferred through the laying of the hands of the apostles.

Jesus Himself was is called an Apostle in Heb 3:1 - "Apostle and High priest".
This being due to him being sent by God for a purpose.
As I said Ananias was sent personally by Christ I don’t know if he was ordained and one of the 12, it is possible that he was one of the 70 disciples Christ sent out. The use of the word in the Bible does not always refer to the 12.

QUOTE: We have also this scripture were Cornelius receives the Holy Spirit.
Clearly apostles were present here, but there's no mentioning of laying on of hands. However, we can of course not out rule that such occurred

There is no mention of it because the laying on of Hands did not occur - this is what shocked Peter:


[FONT=Georgia, serif]Act 10:47 Can any man forbid the water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the [/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif]Holy Spirit as well as we[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif]? - Just as they did in Acts 2 – without the laying on of hands.[/FONT]


Listen to what Peter says as he recounts these events to the rest of the Apostles:


[FONT=Georgia, serif]Act 11:15 And as I began to speak, the[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif] Holy Spirit fell on them, even as on us[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif] at the beginning. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, serif]Act 11:16 And I[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif] remembered the word of the Lord[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif], how he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be [/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif]baptized in the Holy Spirit[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif].[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif] [/FONT]

The Holy Spirit fell on the Gentiles just as it did on the Apostles in Acts 2, without the laying on of hands, making this the "baptism of the Holy Spirit"
This is what Christ promised to the Apostles and they now see it also being poured out on the Gentiles.


[FONT=Georgia, serif]Act 11:17 If then God gave unto them the[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif] like gift as [/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif]he did[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif] also unto us,[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif] when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, who [/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif]was I, that I could withstand God[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif]? [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, serif]Act 11:18 And when they heard these things, [/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif]they held their peac[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif]e, and glorified God,[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif] saying, Then to the Gentiles also hath God granted repentance unto life. [/FONT]


This was a sign to Peter and the rest that the salvation of the Gentiles was God's working, and it was shown through the vision to Peter (Acts 10:9-17) and the Baptism of the Holy Spirit.


[FONT=Georgia, serif]Act 10:13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill and eat. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, serif]Act 10:14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common and unclean. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, serif]Act 10:15 And a voice [/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif]came[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif] unto him again the second time, [/FONT][FONT=Georgia, serif]What God hath cleansed, make not thou common. [/FONT]

 

[AnandaHya]

I guess I need to be more clear on the gifts im speaking of. I do believe there are many spiritual gifts from God, but I also believe the miraculous gifts have ceased.

Ananias was personally commissioned by Christ, not by an apostle or any other means, I think that is a major part of Paul receiving the Holy Spirit.
I do not believe that anyone is personally commissioned to do anything by Christ (outside of what we read in the Bible).

Speaking in tongues, raising the dead, drinking poison etc. I think were all miraculous gifts that have ceased.
We no longer need them to "confirm the word."

But I still like to hear what others think on the matter, could be something I am missing.
I appreciate your comment.

That explains it. You're a cessationist.

you shouldn't let people dictate your use of vocabulary.

the Holy Spirit is still present and active just like it was during the Apostlic age.However the foundation need only be laid once by the apostles and prophets but the spiritual gifts continue to help build up the Church walls.

the difference between then and now is Power.

Example:
Luke 8
46 But Jesus said, “Somebody touched Me, for I perceived power going out from Me.”

Does God's Church still have His unction? can we tell the difference between lies and truth?

1 John 2:19-21
King James Version (KJV)
19They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

20But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.

21I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth.

I believe all should seek to speak as oracles of God.

Hebrews 5:11-15
King James Version (KJV)
11Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing.

12For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.

13For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.

14But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

1 Peter 4:11
If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

 

[AnandaHya]

I believe all should seek to speak as oracles of God, yet so often people are careless with their words or allow others to redefine terms and misuse them to advocate their position. the difference is not the Holy Spirit but the POWER God has given to various people throughout the ages. Power corrupts if misused and tempts the weak to betray God and fulfill their own lust. That is why a humble and contrite heart is so important.


(reread it and realized I forgot to type those sentences....)

a little seed in a greenhouse can grow strong but if placed in the freezing cold it will die. However a strong oak will live despite the harsh conditions. maturity is valued but does not happen over night but by a day by day watering and care in the presence of the Son.

 

[feedm3]

QUOTE:That explains it. You're a cessationist.


Wow you have a name for someone who doesnt agree with you – now prove your point.

QUOTE: you shouldn't let people dictate your use of vocabulary.


And you should not ignore definitions of words and passages of the Bible.

QUOTE: the Holy Spirit is still present and active just like it was during the Apostlic age.However the foundation need only be laid once by the apostles and prophets but the spiritual gifts continue to help build up the Church walls.


OK PROVE IT

QUOTE: the difference between then and now is Power.


Please futher explain the meaning of what you are saying here.
The Example below still does not clarify what you are meaning.

Example:
Luke 8
46 But Jesus said, “Somebody touched Me, for I perceived power going out from Me.”

QUOTE: Does God's Church still have His unction? can we tell the difference between lies and truth?


-Sure we can by studying God's word and understanding what truth is.
Lk 8:46?
I guess if Christ is walking near us sure we can touch him and be made whole.
Just as well when we obey the gospel and are placed in Christ – we are made whole spiritually.
So yes the “power” still proceeds forth from Christ.
Since we cannot literally reach out and touch Him, we must be made whole by the power of God according to how the Bible tells us to do so:


Rom 1:16 - “for I am not ashamed of the gospel it is THE POWER OF GOD UNTO SALVATION...”

QUOTE: 1 John 2:19-21
King James Version (KJV)
19They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

20But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.

21I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth.


Not sure how these passages prove anything concerning the subject we are speaking.




I believe all should seek to speak as oracles of God.

Hebrews 5:11-15
King James Version (KJV)
11Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing.

12For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.

13For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.

14But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

1 Peter 4:11
If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.[/quote]


Great passages, this shows the need to study and understand the Bible. Still not clear how this pertains to what you should be proving (“the Holy Spirit is still present and active just like it was during the Apostlic age. However the foundation need only be laid once by the apostles and prophets but the spiritual gifts continue to help build up the Church walls.&#8221


I see what you believe but not why, you have shown nothing from the Bible to support what your saying, just calling names and using passages that really are not proving your point.
I have gave you passages to everything I have stated, so you can see why I believe what I do, please do the same.
Or show me what passages and explanations you do not agree with. Otherwise I can just write random passages implying you do not know what your talking about, but what is the point of that?