ONE BAPTISM - Ephesians 4:5
- Thread starter SeaBass
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Mailmandan writes:
“In Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical. This is exactly what Acts 3:19 teaches except that Peter omits the parenthesis. Also compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 - the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:47).” Thread-One Baptism, Post #147
Response:
Daniel B Wallace comments on this very argument in Greek Grammar Beyond Basics, Pgs. 370. According to this view “the text should be repunctuated in light of the shift from second person pleural to third person singular back to second person pleural.---- If so , it should read as follows: “Repent, for/ with reference to your sins, and let each of you be baptized-----. “ Dr. Wallace commented. “Such a view is an acceptable way of handling eis, but its subtlety and awkwardness are against it.” Dr. Wallace is a Baptist and sympathetic to the faith alone position but apparently places little stock in this argument. Instead he offers another point of view, the idea of baptism might incorporate the spiritual reality and the physical symbol. We will have more to say about this view.
There is of course additional evidence from other passages that associate baptism with forgiveness of sin.
(1) John the Baptist , in preparation for Jesus, associated baptism with forgiveness. (Mark 1: 4)
(2) Jesus affirmed that John’s message was from heaven and not from man and that it supported the purpose or counsel of God. (Luke 7: 30; Luke 20: 4)
(3) Jesus said he who has been believed and has been baptized shall be saved. (Mark 16: 16)
(4) Acts 22: 16 connects baptism with the washing away of sin.
(5) All spiritual blessings, including redemption (the forgiveness of sin) and salvation are in Christ and we are baptized into Christ. (Eph. 1: 3, 7; Col. 1: 14; Rom.6: 3; Gal. 3 26, 27)
(6) We are freed from sin when we die to the old self in baptism. (Rom. 6: 3- 7)
(7) We are freed from sin when we obey that form of teaching—death, burial and resurrection—in baptism. (Rom. 6: 17, 18)
Happily, the translators of NASB and most other English translations, were aware of this additional evidence and rendered the passage as they did.
All of us who have traveled by air have heard the airline people announce, “All passengers will board flight 37 to Tulsa at gate 3; each person (singular) must present a boarding pass.” They make this announcement with different verbal numbers not to disassociate having a boarding pass from the flight to Tulsa, but to emphasize the necessity of each person having a boarding pass. Similarly Peter’s statement in Acts 2: 38 is not to disassociate baptism from forgiveness of sin but to emphasize the necessity of baptism for each person. A few verses later. Luke wrote, “So then, those who had received the word were baptized; and there was added that day about three thousand souls.” (v. 41)
Mailmandan states that baptism is parenthetical yet the Scriptures state that the one baptism is one of the seven pillars of the unity of Spirit. (Eph. 4: 3-6)
The order of events in the conversion of Cornelius was an exceptional, one-time happening; the order of salvation events for all, Jew and Gentile, all that God shall call to Himself is found in Acts 2: 38, 39.
God bless.
“In Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical. This is exactly what Acts 3:19 teaches except that Peter omits the parenthesis. Also compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 - the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:47).” Thread-One Baptism, Post #147
Response:
Daniel B Wallace comments on this very argument in Greek Grammar Beyond Basics, Pgs. 370. According to this view “the text should be repunctuated in light of the shift from second person pleural to third person singular back to second person pleural.---- If so , it should read as follows: “Repent, for/ with reference to your sins, and let each of you be baptized-----. “ Dr. Wallace commented. “Such a view is an acceptable way of handling eis, but its subtlety and awkwardness are against it.” Dr. Wallace is a Baptist and sympathetic to the faith alone position but apparently places little stock in this argument. Instead he offers another point of view, the idea of baptism might incorporate the spiritual reality and the physical symbol. We will have more to say about this view.
There is of course additional evidence from other passages that associate baptism with forgiveness of sin.
(1) John the Baptist , in preparation for Jesus, associated baptism with forgiveness. (Mark 1: 4)
(2) Jesus affirmed that John’s message was from heaven and not from man and that it supported the purpose or counsel of God. (Luke 7: 30; Luke 20: 4)
(3) Jesus said he who has been believed and has been baptized shall be saved. (Mark 16: 16)
(4) Acts 22: 16 connects baptism with the washing away of sin.
(5) All spiritual blessings, including redemption (the forgiveness of sin) and salvation are in Christ and we are baptized into Christ. (Eph. 1: 3, 7; Col. 1: 14; Rom.6: 3; Gal. 3 26, 27)
(6) We are freed from sin when we die to the old self in baptism. (Rom. 6: 3- 7)
(7) We are freed from sin when we obey that form of teaching—death, burial and resurrection—in baptism. (Rom. 6: 17, 18)
Happily, the translators of NASB and most other English translations, were aware of this additional evidence and rendered the passage as they did.
All of us who have traveled by air have heard the airline people announce, “All passengers will board flight 37 to Tulsa at gate 3; each person (singular) must present a boarding pass.” They make this announcement with different verbal numbers not to disassociate having a boarding pass from the flight to Tulsa, but to emphasize the necessity of each person having a boarding pass. Similarly Peter’s statement in Acts 2: 38 is not to disassociate baptism from forgiveness of sin but to emphasize the necessity of baptism for each person. A few verses later. Luke wrote, “So then, those who had received the word were baptized; and there was added that day about three thousand souls.” (v. 41)
Mailmandan states that baptism is parenthetical yet the Scriptures state that the one baptism is one of the seven pillars of the unity of Spirit. (Eph. 4: 3-6)
The order of events in the conversion of Cornelius was an exceptional, one-time happening; the order of salvation events for all, Jew and Gentile, all that God shall call to Himself is found in Acts 2: 38, 39.
God bless.
-
1
- Show all
In Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical. This is exactly what Acts 3:19 teaches except that Peter omits the parenthesis.
Compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 - the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:47).
*In Acts 10:43 we read ..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. Again, these Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Spirit when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ - Acts 11:17 - (compare with Acts 16:31 - Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved) BEFORE water baptism - Acts 10:47 - this is referred to as repentance unto life - Acts 11:18.
*So the only logical conclusion when properly harmonizing Scripture with Scripture is that faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*
Your false teachings on baptism have already been refuted numerous times throughout this thread and other threads.
BTY: Daniel Wallace explains in Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: It is possible that to a first-century Jewish audience (as well as to Peter), the idea of baptism might incorporate both the spiritual reality and the physical symbol (although only the reality remits sins). In other words, when one spoke of baptism, he usually meant both ideas—the reality and the ritual. Peter is shown to make the strong connection between these two in chapters 10 and 11. In 11:15-16 he recounts the conversion of Cornelius and friends, pointing out that at the point of their conversion they were baptized by the Holy Spirit. After he had seen this, he declared, “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit…” (10:47). The point seems to be that if they have had the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit via spiritual baptism, there ought to be a public testimony/acknowledgment via water baptism as well. This may not only explain Acts 2:38 (viz., that Peter spoke of both reality and picture, though only the reality removes sins), but also why the NT speaks of only baptized believers (as far as we can tell): *Water baptism is not a cause of salvation, but a picture; and as such it serves both as a public acknowledgment (by those present) and a public confession (by the convert) that one has been Spirit baptized.
Compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 - the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:47).
*In Acts 10:43 we read ..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. Again, these Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Spirit when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ - Acts 11:17 - (compare with Acts 16:31 - Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved) BEFORE water baptism - Acts 10:47 - this is referred to as repentance unto life - Acts 11:18.
*So the only logical conclusion when properly harmonizing Scripture with Scripture is that faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*
Your false teachings on baptism have already been refuted numerous times throughout this thread and other threads.
BTY: Daniel Wallace explains in Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: It is possible that to a first-century Jewish audience (as well as to Peter), the idea of baptism might incorporate both the spiritual reality and the physical symbol (although only the reality remits sins). In other words, when one spoke of baptism, he usually meant both ideas—the reality and the ritual. Peter is shown to make the strong connection between these two in chapters 10 and 11. In 11:15-16 he recounts the conversion of Cornelius and friends, pointing out that at the point of their conversion they were baptized by the Holy Spirit. After he had seen this, he declared, “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit…” (10:47). The point seems to be that if they have had the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit via spiritual baptism, there ought to be a public testimony/acknowledgment via water baptism as well. This may not only explain Acts 2:38 (viz., that Peter spoke of both reality and picture, though only the reality removes sins), but also why the NT speaks of only baptized believers (as far as we can tell): *Water baptism is not a cause of salvation, but a picture; and as such it serves both as a public acknowledgment (by those present) and a public confession (by the convert) that one has been Spirit baptized.
Mailmandan writes: Thread- one baptism. Post # 323
“Daniel Wallace explains in Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: It is possible that to a first-century Jewish audience (as well as to Peter), the idea of baptism might incorporate both the spiritual reality and the physical symbol (although only the reality remits sins). In other words, when one spoke of baptism, he usually meant both ideas—the reality and the ritual. Peter is shown to make the strong connection between these two in chapters 10 and 11. In 11:15-16 he recounts the conversion of Cornelius and friends, pointing out that at the point of their conversion they were baptized by the Holy Spirit. After he had seen this, he declared, “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit…” (10:47). The point seems to be that if they have had the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit via spiritual baptism, there ought to be a public testimony/acknowledgment via water baptism as well. This may not only explain Acts 2:38 (viz., that Peter spoke of both reality and picture, though only the reality removes sins), but also why the NT speaks of only baptized believers (as far as we can tell): *Water baptism is not a cause of salvation, but a picture; and as such it serves both as a public acknowledgment (by those present) and a public confession (by the convert) that one has been Spirit baptized.”
Response:
IMO when one spoke of the one baptism (Eph. 4: 5) in the first century, he was speaking of one baptism with two elements, water and Spirit. The baptism in water, in the name of Jesus, for the forgiveness if sin, was ordained by Jesus was for all the nations, as many as God would call to Himself until the end. It, among other things, was a symbol but not a symbol of the baptism with the Spirit. Is was a washing with water and was a symbol of the washing with the blood of Christ. When it was obeyed the heart and conscience of the individual was sprinkled clean with the blood of Christ. (1 Peter 1: 2; Heb. 10: 22; 9: 14) The baptism in the name of Christ also has to do with the making of disciples, baptism into Jesus, uniting with Jesus in His death, burial and resurrection, being clothed with Jesus, dying to the old self, obeying the gospel and receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit. Thus it is far more than a ritual or a picture; it is one of the seven realities upon which the unity of the Spirit rests. Jesus is the propitiation for sin, not the Holy Spirit. The Spirit did not take on the form of man and die for our sin.
The conversion of Cornelius and his household shows us that both the baptism with the Spirit and the baptism in water, in the name of Christ are necessary as Peter ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. The speaking in tongues was the public acknowledgement of having received the Spirit. Today, the fruit of the Spirit in our lives is the testimony of having received the Spirit.
Faith, not repentance, is our introduction into the grace of God, but it is not the end- all; faith works together with and through hope and love to receive a place in the grace of God; love being the greatest of the three virtues. (Ro. 5: 2; 1 Cor. 13: 2, 13)
God bless.
“Daniel Wallace explains in Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: It is possible that to a first-century Jewish audience (as well as to Peter), the idea of baptism might incorporate both the spiritual reality and the physical symbol (although only the reality remits sins). In other words, when one spoke of baptism, he usually meant both ideas—the reality and the ritual. Peter is shown to make the strong connection between these two in chapters 10 and 11. In 11:15-16 he recounts the conversion of Cornelius and friends, pointing out that at the point of their conversion they were baptized by the Holy Spirit. After he had seen this, he declared, “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit…” (10:47). The point seems to be that if they have had the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit via spiritual baptism, there ought to be a public testimony/acknowledgment via water baptism as well. This may not only explain Acts 2:38 (viz., that Peter spoke of both reality and picture, though only the reality removes sins), but also why the NT speaks of only baptized believers (as far as we can tell): *Water baptism is not a cause of salvation, but a picture; and as such it serves both as a public acknowledgment (by those present) and a public confession (by the convert) that one has been Spirit baptized.”
Response:
IMO when one spoke of the one baptism (Eph. 4: 5) in the first century, he was speaking of one baptism with two elements, water and Spirit. The baptism in water, in the name of Jesus, for the forgiveness if sin, was ordained by Jesus was for all the nations, as many as God would call to Himself until the end. It, among other things, was a symbol but not a symbol of the baptism with the Spirit. Is was a washing with water and was a symbol of the washing with the blood of Christ. When it was obeyed the heart and conscience of the individual was sprinkled clean with the blood of Christ. (1 Peter 1: 2; Heb. 10: 22; 9: 14) The baptism in the name of Christ also has to do with the making of disciples, baptism into Jesus, uniting with Jesus in His death, burial and resurrection, being clothed with Jesus, dying to the old self, obeying the gospel and receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit. Thus it is far more than a ritual or a picture; it is one of the seven realities upon which the unity of the Spirit rests. Jesus is the propitiation for sin, not the Holy Spirit. The Spirit did not take on the form of man and die for our sin.
The conversion of Cornelius and his household shows us that both the baptism with the Spirit and the baptism in water, in the name of Christ are necessary as Peter ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. The speaking in tongues was the public acknowledgement of having received the Spirit. Today, the fruit of the Spirit in our lives is the testimony of having received the Spirit.
Faith, not repentance, is our introduction into the grace of God, but it is not the end- all; faith works together with and through hope and love to receive a place in the grace of God; love being the greatest of the three virtues. (Ro. 5: 2; 1 Cor. 13: 2, 13)
God bless.
-
1
- Show all
Living water and Spirit (John 3:5; 4:10,14; 7:37-39).
Ephesians 4:5 - one Lord, one faith, one baptism.
1 Corinthians 12:13 - For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.
Water baptism is for "in regards to" the forgiveness of sin, not in order to obtain the forgiveness of sin. *As Greek scholar AT Robertson points out: "A symbol is not the reality, but the picture of the reality." *Also, as Greek scholar Daniel Wallace points out: "Water baptism is not a cause of salvation, but a picture; and as such it serves both as a public acknowledgment (by those present) and a public confession (by the convert) that one has been Spirit baptized."
Hebrews 10:22 in the NASB reads - let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. *Notice the order. Reference to this verse as proving regeneration, or the new birth, by water baptism ignores the point of the contrasting of that sprinkling which affects the heart, removing from it an evil conscience, and that washing of the body with pure water. It is the sprinkling (with the Blood of Christ- Hebrews 9:14; I Peter 1:2) which touches the heart. The washing of pure water affects the body. Paul was careful to distinguish between an outward circumcision, which was of the flesh (Romans 2:28-29) and an inward circumcision, which was of the heart. The true Jew, the true child of Abraham (and therefore the true Christian) has the inward circumcision of the heart, not only the outward, and this is accomplished by the "sprinkling of the blood of Christ" (I Peter 1:2), not by a washing in water in the ordinance of water baptism. Even Peter said - "not the removal of the dirt from the flesh" but the answer of a good conscience toward God. Through the resurrection of Jesus Christ (1 Peter 3:21).
The writer of Hebrews shows us that no outward ceremony affects the heart (Hebrews 9:13ff.). He would not, and does not contradict himself here by teaching that the washing of the body in water accomplishes an inward cleansing. The former is inward and spiritual, "of the heart" (Romans 2:28-29), and the latter is outward and physical, or "of the flesh" (Romans 2:28-29). The washing of the body in pure water does not present baptism as the means of the cleansing or purifying of the heart. The sprinkling with the Blood of Christ is, and washing our bodies with water is expressly distinguished from sprinkling with the Blood of Christ. Since water baptism is not the means of purifying the heart from sin, it is not the means of regeneration, and it is not absolutely necessary for salvation. I already explained this to you in post #268.
In Matthew 28:19-20, we have here a command of Christ that we should make disciples of all nations, and baptize converts. However, it does not say here that baptism is necessary for salvation. The same command also includes the clause "teaching them to observe all things" that Christ has commanded them. Getting water baptized does not magically make you become a disciple. Becoming a disciple of Christ is a heart decision that is made prior to receiving water baptism. You remain completely confused.
False. Cornelius and his household had already believed, received the gift of the Holy Spirit and were saved BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:43-47; 11:17,18).
They clearly received the Holy Spirit (which is a gift of the Spirit that is only for the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12) BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:43-47).
Repentance and faith are inseparable (two sides to the same coin) in receiving salvation. We have access by faith into grace (Romans 5:2) not by water and works. Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seem (Hebrews 11:1). If we have faith then we have this hope. Love is the greater quality of the three because God is love and it outlasts them all. Long after faith and hope are no longer necessary, love will still be the governing principle that controls all that God and his redeemed people are and do. We love Him because He first loved us (1 John 4:19). Let me know when you are ready to repent and believe the gospel.
Ephesians 4:5 - one Lord, one faith, one baptism.
1 Corinthians 12:13 - For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.
Water baptism is for "in regards to" the forgiveness of sin, not in order to obtain the forgiveness of sin. *As Greek scholar AT Robertson points out: "A symbol is not the reality, but the picture of the reality." *Also, as Greek scholar Daniel Wallace points out: "Water baptism is not a cause of salvation, but a picture; and as such it serves both as a public acknowledgment (by those present) and a public confession (by the convert) that one has been Spirit baptized."
Hebrews 10:22 in the NASB reads - let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. *Notice the order. Reference to this verse as proving regeneration, or the new birth, by water baptism ignores the point of the contrasting of that sprinkling which affects the heart, removing from it an evil conscience, and that washing of the body with pure water. It is the sprinkling (with the Blood of Christ- Hebrews 9:14; I Peter 1:2) which touches the heart. The washing of pure water affects the body. Paul was careful to distinguish between an outward circumcision, which was of the flesh (Romans 2:28-29) and an inward circumcision, which was of the heart. The true Jew, the true child of Abraham (and therefore the true Christian) has the inward circumcision of the heart, not only the outward, and this is accomplished by the "sprinkling of the blood of Christ" (I Peter 1:2), not by a washing in water in the ordinance of water baptism. Even Peter said - "not the removal of the dirt from the flesh" but the answer of a good conscience toward God. Through the resurrection of Jesus Christ (1 Peter 3:21).
The writer of Hebrews shows us that no outward ceremony affects the heart (Hebrews 9:13ff.). He would not, and does not contradict himself here by teaching that the washing of the body in water accomplishes an inward cleansing. The former is inward and spiritual, "of the heart" (Romans 2:28-29), and the latter is outward and physical, or "of the flesh" (Romans 2:28-29). The washing of the body in pure water does not present baptism as the means of the cleansing or purifying of the heart. The sprinkling with the Blood of Christ is, and washing our bodies with water is expressly distinguished from sprinkling with the Blood of Christ. Since water baptism is not the means of purifying the heart from sin, it is not the means of regeneration, and it is not absolutely necessary for salvation. I already explained this to you in post #268.
In Matthew 28:19-20, we have here a command of Christ that we should make disciples of all nations, and baptize converts. However, it does not say here that baptism is necessary for salvation. The same command also includes the clause "teaching them to observe all things" that Christ has commanded them. Getting water baptized does not magically make you become a disciple. Becoming a disciple of Christ is a heart decision that is made prior to receiving water baptism. You remain completely confused.
False. Cornelius and his household had already believed, received the gift of the Holy Spirit and were saved BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:43-47; 11:17,18).
They clearly received the Holy Spirit (which is a gift of the Spirit that is only for the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12) BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:43-47).
Repentance and faith are inseparable (two sides to the same coin) in receiving salvation. We have access by faith into grace (Romans 5:2) not by water and works. Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seem (Hebrews 11:1). If we have faith then we have this hope. Love is the greater quality of the three because God is love and it outlasts them all. Long after faith and hope are no longer necessary, love will still be the governing principle that controls all that God and his redeemed people are and do. We love Him because He first loved us (1 John 4:19). Let me know when you are ready to repent and believe the gospel.
I'm not entirely sure. I had never heard the term before I saw it here in CC so it was a new one for me too.
It looks like they believe you need to be water baptized before you are really saved. The biblical record shows people getting water baptized because they are saved. Big difference.
Basically if this is true what they believe - it's another form of "works-based" thinking that basically violates the gospel of the grace of Christ. As all works-based thinking produces - it gets the gospel backwards.
It looks like they believe you need to be water baptized before you are really saved. The biblical record shows people getting water baptized because they are saved. Big difference.
Basically if this is true what they believe - it's another form of "works-based" thinking that basically violates the gospel of the grace of Christ. As all works-based thinking produces - it gets the gospel backwards.
Because human pride will not allow Campbellites to come to Christ. Their hands are full of their works (with a heavy emphasis on water baptism) and they will not let in order to take hold of Christ through faith. The Bible teaches that man is BORN OF God. It is therefore essential that the Holy Spirit work in conjunction with the Gospel, or the Word, as ADDITIONAL to the preaching. Campbellites deny such a work of the Holy Spirit, holding that there is nothing more than the Word in bringing about the new birth.
In effect, they deny the very essence of regeneration, which is to be "born from above" (John 3:3). This error leads to their denial of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, as taught by evangelical Christianity, and the denial of the security of the believer. They postulate everything upon man’s "obedience" to the letter of the Word, denying an accompanying work of the Holy Spirit. They teach that the work of the Holy Spirit is "separate from" and “apart from” the Word, when in reality we teach the position as set forth by Paul:
"For our gospel came not unto you IN WORD ONLY, but also in power, and in THE HOLY GHOST" - I Thess. 1:5.
"Lydia . . . whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul" - Acts 16:14.
If there is no additional work, or influence, of the Holy Spirit, then this last verse, which says the Lord "opened her heart," is superfluous. Obviously, while the WORD is the means of communicating that which is to be believed, the additional unseen work of the Holy Spirit is necessary for being "born from above."
Paul referred to his preaching as being "in the demonstration of the Spirit and of power" (I Cor. 2:4). Is this not why, as so many have observed, Campbellite preaching is so dead and relies so heavily upon faulty human "logic" and "legalism? The only explanation of this barren spirituality is the absence of the Holy Spirit. This likewise explains their lack of a proper understanding of the Word of God (I Cor. 2:14).
Their theology has originated with uninspired men, namely THOMAS CAMPBELL, ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, WALTER SCOTT, and BARTON W. STONE. The various roles of the Campbells along with Walter Scott and Barton W. Stone are clearly detailed from "Campbellian" writings and biographies. Did these men actually "restore" the Gospel, the Church, and true New Testament worship, as they claim, or did they simply create another sect bent on a more dogmatic sectarianism than others they renounced?
In effect, they deny the very essence of regeneration, which is to be "born from above" (John 3:3). This error leads to their denial of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, as taught by evangelical Christianity, and the denial of the security of the believer. They postulate everything upon man’s "obedience" to the letter of the Word, denying an accompanying work of the Holy Spirit. They teach that the work of the Holy Spirit is "separate from" and “apart from” the Word, when in reality we teach the position as set forth by Paul:
"For our gospel came not unto you IN WORD ONLY, but also in power, and in THE HOLY GHOST" - I Thess. 1:5.
"Lydia . . . whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul" - Acts 16:14.
If there is no additional work, or influence, of the Holy Spirit, then this last verse, which says the Lord "opened her heart," is superfluous. Obviously, while the WORD is the means of communicating that which is to be believed, the additional unseen work of the Holy Spirit is necessary for being "born from above."
Paul referred to his preaching as being "in the demonstration of the Spirit and of power" (I Cor. 2:4). Is this not why, as so many have observed, Campbellite preaching is so dead and relies so heavily upon faulty human "logic" and "legalism? The only explanation of this barren spirituality is the absence of the Holy Spirit. This likewise explains their lack of a proper understanding of the Word of God (I Cor. 2:14).
Their theology has originated with uninspired men, namely THOMAS CAMPBELL, ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, WALTER SCOTT, and BARTON W. STONE. The various roles of the Campbells along with Walter Scott and Barton W. Stone are clearly detailed from "Campbellian" writings and biographies. Did these men actually "restore" the Gospel, the Church, and true New Testament worship, as they claim, or did they simply create another sect bent on a more dogmatic sectarianism than others they renounced?
Thanks mailmandan - so basically another works-based doctrine that tries to get people to achieve what Christ has already done for them and in fact deny that we receive Christ and all that He has already done for us by grace through faith.
IMO - This is the hall-mark feature of all works-based doctrines - trying to achieve by "what they do or don't do" what Christ has already done instead of believing in Christ's work and receiving all that He has done by grace through faith.
IMO - This is the hall-mark feature of all works-based doctrines - trying to achieve by "what they do or don't do" what Christ has already done instead of believing in Christ's work and receiving all that He has done by grace through faith.
Thread- one baptism
Mark 1: 4- John the Baptist preached a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sin in preparation for the coming of Jesus.
Mark 1: 9- Jesus was baptized by John to fulfill all righteousness.
Mark 1: 10- Jesus received the Spirit immediately following the baptism by John
John 4: 1-2- Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John, disciples are made through baptism apparently.
Matt. 28: 18- 20- Shortly before his ascension Jesus instructed his apostles to make disciples of all nations by baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and teaching them to observe all things He had commanded.
Mark 16: 16- Jesus said that he who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved.
Lk. 24: 47- shortly before His ascension He said that repentance for the forgiveness of sins shall be proclaimed in His name to all the nations beginning at Jerusalem.
Acts 2: 38- A few days later, Jesus told the 3,000 at Jerusalem, to repent (pleural) and let each of you (singular) be baptized for the forgiveness of sin (to emphasize that each person must be baptized) and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Acts 2: 39- the 3,000 was promised that they and their children, and all far off (the Gentiles), and all that God would called, would receive the Spirit when they repented and were baptized.
Acts 2: 21- those that called on the name of the Lord (by repentance and baptism) shall be saved.
Acts 2: 37- IMO the 3,000 believed when they had been “pierced to the heart,” but they were not forgiven and not saved until they had repented and were baptized.
Acts 22: 16- Baptism in the name of Christ is for the forgiveness of sin. Those who have been baptized in the name of Christ have called upon His name.
Acts 4: 12- Salvation is only in the name of Christ.
The baptism of John has always been a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sin, forgiveness is associated with both repentance and baptism.
Jesus received the Spirit immediately following His baptism by John. We all are promised the gift of the Spirit following repentance and baptism in the name of Christ, the one notable exception is Cornelius who received the Spirit upon believing, this was to accomplish God’s purpose to show the Gentiles were included. This order was first prophesied by Ez. 36: 25-27 ---first water, then the Spirit.
God bless.
Mark 1: 4- John the Baptist preached a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sin in preparation for the coming of Jesus.
Mark 1: 9- Jesus was baptized by John to fulfill all righteousness.
Mark 1: 10- Jesus received the Spirit immediately following the baptism by John
John 4: 1-2- Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John, disciples are made through baptism apparently.
Matt. 28: 18- 20- Shortly before his ascension Jesus instructed his apostles to make disciples of all nations by baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and teaching them to observe all things He had commanded.
Mark 16: 16- Jesus said that he who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved.
Lk. 24: 47- shortly before His ascension He said that repentance for the forgiveness of sins shall be proclaimed in His name to all the nations beginning at Jerusalem.
Acts 2: 38- A few days later, Jesus told the 3,000 at Jerusalem, to repent (pleural) and let each of you (singular) be baptized for the forgiveness of sin (to emphasize that each person must be baptized) and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Acts 2: 39- the 3,000 was promised that they and their children, and all far off (the Gentiles), and all that God would called, would receive the Spirit when they repented and were baptized.
Acts 2: 21- those that called on the name of the Lord (by repentance and baptism) shall be saved.
Acts 2: 37- IMO the 3,000 believed when they had been “pierced to the heart,” but they were not forgiven and not saved until they had repented and were baptized.
Acts 22: 16- Baptism in the name of Christ is for the forgiveness of sin. Those who have been baptized in the name of Christ have called upon His name.
Acts 4: 12- Salvation is only in the name of Christ.
The baptism of John has always been a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sin, forgiveness is associated with both repentance and baptism.
Jesus received the Spirit immediately following His baptism by John. We all are promised the gift of the Spirit following repentance and baptism in the name of Christ, the one notable exception is Cornelius who received the Spirit upon believing, this was to accomplish God’s purpose to show the Gentiles were included. This order was first prophesied by Ez. 36: 25-27 ---first water, then the Spirit.
God bless.
-
1
- Show all
Make all those verses align with Tit 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
Water can only wash the outside. Salvation is inside and done by the Holy Spirit the moment a sinner believes and receives Christ as their Savior.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
Water can only wash the outside. Salvation is inside and done by the Holy Spirit the moment a sinner believes and receives Christ as their Savior.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
John's baptism was for "in regards to/in reference to" the forgiveness of sins and not in order to obtain the forgiveness of sins. In Matthew 3:11, we read - "I baptize you with water "for" repentance.. Now was this baptism "for" in order to obtain repentance or "for" in regards to/in reference to/on the basis of repentance? You don't baptize believers in order for them to obtain repentance, but because they already repented.
Baptism is a work of righteousness and we are not saved by works of righteousness which we have done (Titus 3:5).
Jesus' situation was unique. Mark 1:10 And immediately, coming up from the water, He saw the heavens parting and the Spirit descending upon Him like a dove. 11 Then a voice came from heaven, "You are My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased."Did that happen at your baptism? I didn't think so. Water baptism FOLLOWED the receiving of the Holy Spirit for Cornelius and his household (Acts 10:43-47; 11:17).
John 4:1 Therefore, when the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John 2 (though Jesus Himself did not baptize, but His disciples). You left that out.
In Matthew 28:18-20, we have here a command of Jesus to go and make disciples of all nations, and baptize converts. However, it does not say here that baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation. The same command also includes the clause "teaching them to observe all things" that Jesus has commanded. Water baptism does not make you become a disciple. Becoming a disciple is a heart decision made prior to receiving water baptism.
He who believes and is baptized will be saved (general cases without making a qualification for the unusual case of someone who believes but is not baptized) but he who does not believe will be condemned. The omission of baptized with "does not believe" shows that Jesus does not make baptism absolutely essential to salvation. Condemnation rests on unbelief, not on a lack of baptism. So salvation rests on belief. NOWHERE does the Bible say "baptized or condemned." If water baptism is absolutely required for salvation, then why did Jesus not mention it in the following verses? (3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26). What is the ONE requirement that Jesus mentions 9 different times in each of these complete statements? BELIEVES. *What happened to baptism? *Hermeneutics. John 3:18 - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who (is not water baptized? - NO) does not believe is condemned already, because he has not (been water baptized? - NO) because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
*What happened to baptism? As I said before, faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*
Greek scholar AT Robertson - Change of number from plural to singular and of person from second to third. This change marks a break in the thought here that the English translation does not preserve. The first thing to do is make a radical and complete change of heart and life. Then let each one be baptized after this change has taken place, and the act of baptism be performed “in the name of Jesus Christ” (εν τωι ονοματι Ιησου Χριστου — en tōi onomati Iēsou Christou).
"One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. So I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received." The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the Koin, generally (Robertson, Grammar, page 592).
These Gentiles received the Holy Spirit when they repented and believed BEFORE they were water baptized (Acts 10:43-47; 11:17,18).
You mean by repentance and faith. Water baptism FOLLOWS.
False. In Acts 2:37, their "belief" at that point was only "mental assent" that Jesus was the Messiah and that they were guilty of crucifying Him. That is not saving belief yet. They still lacked "trust and reliance in Christ alone for salvation." In verse 40, they heard more from Peter and in verse 41, when they gladly received his word (through repentance/faith), the change of mind was complete and the end result was saving faith in Christ.
The Greek aorist participle, epikalesamenos, translated "calling on His name" refers either to action that is simultaneous with or before that of the main verb, "be baptized." Here Paul’s calling on Christ’s name for salvation preceded his water baptism. The participle may be translated "having called on His name" which makes more sense, as it would clearly indicate the order of the events.
Jamison, Fausset, and Brown Commentary makes not of the importance of the Greek in Ananias' statement. When Ananias tells Paul to "arise, be baptized, wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord," the tense of the last command is literally "having called" (aorist middle participle). "Calling on [epikalesamenos] --- 'having (that is, after having) called on,' referring the confession of Christ which preceded baptism." [Jamison, Fausset, and Brown Commentary, vol. 3 pg. 160].
Kenneth Wuest picks up on this Greek nuance and translates the verse as follows: "And now, why are you delaying? Having arisen, be baptized and wash away your sins, having previously called upon His Name." (Acts 22:16, Wuest's Expanded NT).
Acts 4:12 - Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.
Forgiveness is SIGNIFIED, yet not procured in water baptism, but through repentance/faith. Water baptism is regularly associated with conversion and salvation (sign, symbol), rather than absolutely required for salvation. Big difference!
Cornelius receiving the Holy Spirit upon believing yet prior to receiving water baptism was no exception.
Acts 15:8 - So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, 9 and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
Ephesians 1:13 - In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation - having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise.
This prophesy is not about salvation by water baptism. Such sprinkling or cleansing was symbolized in the Mosaic rites of purification in regards to ceremonial washing (Numbers 19:17-19; Psalm 119:9).
In the John 3:25, we read - An argument developed between some of John’s disciples and a certain Jew over the matter of ceremonial washing. 26 They came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, that man who was with you on the other side of the Jordan—the one you testified about—look, he is baptizing, and everyone is going to him.” You continue to confuse the symbol with the reality. Now read on in Ezekiel 36 - I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws.
Baptism is a work of righteousness and we are not saved by works of righteousness which we have done (Titus 3:5).
Jesus' situation was unique. Mark 1:10 And immediately, coming up from the water, He saw the heavens parting and the Spirit descending upon Him like a dove. 11 Then a voice came from heaven, "You are My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased."Did that happen at your baptism? I didn't think so. Water baptism FOLLOWED the receiving of the Holy Spirit for Cornelius and his household (Acts 10:43-47; 11:17).
John 4:1 Therefore, when the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John 2 (though Jesus Himself did not baptize, but His disciples). You left that out.
In Matthew 28:18-20, we have here a command of Jesus to go and make disciples of all nations, and baptize converts. However, it does not say here that baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation. The same command also includes the clause "teaching them to observe all things" that Jesus has commanded. Water baptism does not make you become a disciple. Becoming a disciple is a heart decision made prior to receiving water baptism.
He who believes and is baptized will be saved (general cases without making a qualification for the unusual case of someone who believes but is not baptized) but he who does not believe will be condemned. The omission of baptized with "does not believe" shows that Jesus does not make baptism absolutely essential to salvation. Condemnation rests on unbelief, not on a lack of baptism. So salvation rests on belief. NOWHERE does the Bible say "baptized or condemned." If water baptism is absolutely required for salvation, then why did Jesus not mention it in the following verses? (3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26). What is the ONE requirement that Jesus mentions 9 different times in each of these complete statements? BELIEVES. *What happened to baptism? *Hermeneutics. John 3:18 - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who (is not water baptized? - NO) does not believe is condemned already, because he has not (been water baptized? - NO) because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
*What happened to baptism? As I said before, faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*
Greek scholar AT Robertson - Change of number from plural to singular and of person from second to third. This change marks a break in the thought here that the English translation does not preserve. The first thing to do is make a radical and complete change of heart and life. Then let each one be baptized after this change has taken place, and the act of baptism be performed “in the name of Jesus Christ” (εν τωι ονοματι Ιησου Χριστου — en tōi onomati Iēsou Christou).
"One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. So I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received." The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the Koin, generally (Robertson, Grammar, page 592).
These Gentiles received the Holy Spirit when they repented and believed BEFORE they were water baptized (Acts 10:43-47; 11:17,18).
You mean by repentance and faith. Water baptism FOLLOWS.
False. In Acts 2:37, their "belief" at that point was only "mental assent" that Jesus was the Messiah and that they were guilty of crucifying Him. That is not saving belief yet. They still lacked "trust and reliance in Christ alone for salvation." In verse 40, they heard more from Peter and in verse 41, when they gladly received his word (through repentance/faith), the change of mind was complete and the end result was saving faith in Christ.
The Greek aorist participle, epikalesamenos, translated "calling on His name" refers either to action that is simultaneous with or before that of the main verb, "be baptized." Here Paul’s calling on Christ’s name for salvation preceded his water baptism. The participle may be translated "having called on His name" which makes more sense, as it would clearly indicate the order of the events.
Jamison, Fausset, and Brown Commentary makes not of the importance of the Greek in Ananias' statement. When Ananias tells Paul to "arise, be baptized, wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord," the tense of the last command is literally "having called" (aorist middle participle). "Calling on [epikalesamenos] --- 'having (that is, after having) called on,' referring the confession of Christ which preceded baptism." [Jamison, Fausset, and Brown Commentary, vol. 3 pg. 160].
Kenneth Wuest picks up on this Greek nuance and translates the verse as follows: "And now, why are you delaying? Having arisen, be baptized and wash away your sins, having previously called upon His Name." (Acts 22:16, Wuest's Expanded NT).
Acts 4:12 - Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.
Forgiveness is SIGNIFIED, yet not procured in water baptism, but through repentance/faith. Water baptism is regularly associated with conversion and salvation (sign, symbol), rather than absolutely required for salvation. Big difference!
Cornelius receiving the Holy Spirit upon believing yet prior to receiving water baptism was no exception.
Acts 15:8 - So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, 9 and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
Ephesians 1:13 - In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation - having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise.
This prophesy is not about salvation by water baptism. Such sprinkling or cleansing was symbolized in the Mosaic rites of purification in regards to ceremonial washing (Numbers 19:17-19; Psalm 119:9).
In the John 3:25, we read - An argument developed between some of John’s disciples and a certain Jew over the matter of ceremonial washing. 26 They came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, that man who was with you on the other side of the Jordan—the one you testified about—look, he is baptizing, and everyone is going to him.” You continue to confuse the symbol with the reality. Now read on in Ezekiel 36 - I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws.
Mailmandan writes:
“This prophesy (Ez.36: 25-27) is not about salvation by water baptism. Such sprinkling or cleansing was symbolized in the Mosaic rites of purification in regards to ceremonial washing (Numbers 19:17-19; Psalm 119:9).
In the John 3:25, we read - An argument developed between some of John’s disciples and a certain Jew over the matter of ceremonial washing. 26 They came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, that man who was with you on the other side of the Jordan—the one you testified about—look, he is baptizing, and everyone is going to him.” You continue to confuse the symbol with the reality. Now read on in Ezekiel 36 - I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws.” Thread- one baptism, post #339
Response:
The point I was attempting to make was that cleansing with water precedes the reception of the Spirit. “You will be cleaned” and “I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and all your idols: (v. 25) precedes the reception of the Spirit. (v. 27)
In Exodus 29, the consecration of priests to God service, the washing with water (v. 4), precedes the anointing with the oil of gladness which represents the anointing with the Holy Spirit. (v. 7, 8)
The baptism of Jesus by John (Mark 1:9) preceded the reception of the Spirit. (Mark 1: 10) Jesus was anointed with the Holy Spirit and power (Acts 10: 38), the oil of gladness. (Heb. 1: 9) Jesus was careful to fulfill all righteousness, to follow this pattern,
As we are all priests to God, we are all consecrated in the same way. We are all cleansed at the washing with water when we repent and are baptized in the name of Christ for the forgiveness of sin (Acts 2: 38, 39; 22: 16), then the Holy Spirit is poured out upon us and we are anointed with the Spirit, consecrated for service to our Lord. (1 John 2: 27; 2 Cor. 1: 21) This promise of receiving the Holy Spirit is universal, for the Jews and their children, for those who are far off (Gentiles, excepting Cornelius and his household) and for all that God will call to Himself.
Cornelius and his household were saved as we all are, only the order of events were changed to accommodate God’s purpose in revealing the inclusion of the Gentiles. IMO the faith of Cornelius and his household was not complete until authenticated by their obedience of faith. God bless.
“This prophesy (Ez.36: 25-27) is not about salvation by water baptism. Such sprinkling or cleansing was symbolized in the Mosaic rites of purification in regards to ceremonial washing (Numbers 19:17-19; Psalm 119:9).
In the John 3:25, we read - An argument developed between some of John’s disciples and a certain Jew over the matter of ceremonial washing. 26 They came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, that man who was with you on the other side of the Jordan—the one you testified about—look, he is baptizing, and everyone is going to him.” You continue to confuse the symbol with the reality. Now read on in Ezekiel 36 - I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws.” Thread- one baptism, post #339
Response:
The point I was attempting to make was that cleansing with water precedes the reception of the Spirit. “You will be cleaned” and “I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and all your idols: (v. 25) precedes the reception of the Spirit. (v. 27)
In Exodus 29, the consecration of priests to God service, the washing with water (v. 4), precedes the anointing with the oil of gladness which represents the anointing with the Holy Spirit. (v. 7, 8)
The baptism of Jesus by John (Mark 1:9) preceded the reception of the Spirit. (Mark 1: 10) Jesus was anointed with the Holy Spirit and power (Acts 10: 38), the oil of gladness. (Heb. 1: 9) Jesus was careful to fulfill all righteousness, to follow this pattern,
As we are all priests to God, we are all consecrated in the same way. We are all cleansed at the washing with water when we repent and are baptized in the name of Christ for the forgiveness of sin (Acts 2: 38, 39; 22: 16), then the Holy Spirit is poured out upon us and we are anointed with the Spirit, consecrated for service to our Lord. (1 John 2: 27; 2 Cor. 1: 21) This promise of receiving the Holy Spirit is universal, for the Jews and their children, for those who are far off (Gentiles, excepting Cornelius and his household) and for all that God will call to Himself.
Cornelius and his household were saved as we all are, only the order of events were changed to accommodate God’s purpose in revealing the inclusion of the Gentiles. IMO the faith of Cornelius and his household was not complete until authenticated by their obedience of faith. God bless.
-
1
- Show all