Why the Baptism with the Holy Spirit is not for Today
- Thread starter Dave-L
- 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.
This is bad hermenuetics. I could use the same reasoning and say that only Jesus and the apostles ate fish. I can show a passage from john that shows them eating fish, and then say that proves that no one else in the world ate fish and that you never ate fish either. I could ignore any other references to fish in the Bible or the fact that Jews could eat some of them, the feeding of the 4000 and 5000, and the fact that some of the disciples made a living as fishermen. That frozen fish I had last night must have been fake.
But this is illogical and irrational, as is your line of reasoning, which I addressed in another thread.
Who did John the Baptist speak preach to about being baptized with the Holy Spirit?
Matthew 3
5 Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan,
6 And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.
And later in the same passage:
11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance. but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.
This preaching was not limited to the twelve apostles, and many of them might not have been there when John spoke these words. John was speaking to large numbers of Jewish people.
Here are the words of Christ in reference to this in Acts 1,
5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.
Then in Acts 2, after the disciples were filled with the Spirit and spoke in tongues.
15 For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.
16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
Here we see the outpouring of the Spirit in the last days is for 'all flesh', and 'your' young men, daughters, young men, and old men. So it is for all flesh with some particular promises for the Israelites.
But Peter further clarifies that the Holy Spirit is for all who are 'afar off' also.
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
Whether Peter realized the implications of this before the events of Acts 10, Paul would later describe Gentiles as 'afar off'. We see the outpouring on Gentiles in Acts 10 also, and Peter quoting the Lord's words about John the Baptist and baptism with the Holy Ghost in reference to the Gentiles. He said to the circumcision group to whom he was talking that the Holy Spirit fell upon them as upon 'us a the beginning'.
But this is illogical and irrational, as is your line of reasoning, which I addressed in another thread.
Who did John the Baptist speak preach to about being baptized with the Holy Spirit?
Matthew 3
5 Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan,
6 And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.
And later in the same passage:
11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance. but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.
This preaching was not limited to the twelve apostles, and many of them might not have been there when John spoke these words. John was speaking to large numbers of Jewish people.
Here are the words of Christ in reference to this in Acts 1,
5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.
Then in Acts 2, after the disciples were filled with the Spirit and spoke in tongues.
15 For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.
16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
Here we see the outpouring of the Spirit in the last days is for 'all flesh', and 'your' young men, daughters, young men, and old men. So it is for all flesh with some particular promises for the Israelites.
But Peter further clarifies that the Holy Spirit is for all who are 'afar off' also.
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
Whether Peter realized the implications of this before the events of Acts 10, Paul would later describe Gentiles as 'afar off'. We see the outpouring on Gentiles in Acts 10 also, and Peter quoting the Lord's words about John the Baptist and baptism with the Holy Ghost in reference to the Gentiles. He said to the circumcision group to whom he was talking that the Holy Spirit fell upon them as upon 'us a the beginning'.
-
1
- Show all
Matthew 3
11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
Who was speaking here: John the baptist
Was he speaking to the disciples/apostles: NO
Who was he speaking to specifically: The Pharisees and Sadduccees
Who was he REALLY speaking to: Israel and all who would believe in Christ Jesus
Who does the baptising: Jesus
Luke 3
15 Now as the people were in expectation, and all reasoned in their hearts about John, whether he was the Christ or not, 16 John answered, saying to all, “I indeed baptize you with water; but One mightier than I is coming, whose sandal strap I am not worthy to loose. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. 17 His winnowing fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clean out His threshing floor, and gather the wheat into His barn; but the chaff He will burn with unquenchable fire.”
Enough evidence?
11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
Who was speaking here: John the baptist
Was he speaking to the disciples/apostles: NO
Who was he speaking to specifically: The Pharisees and Sadduccees
Who was he REALLY speaking to: Israel and all who would believe in Christ Jesus
Who does the baptising: Jesus
Luke 3
15 Now as the people were in expectation, and all reasoned in their hearts about John, whether he was the Christ or not, 16 John answered, saying to all, “I indeed baptize you with water; but One mightier than I is coming, whose sandal strap I am not worthy to loose. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. 17 His winnowing fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clean out His threshing floor, and gather the wheat into His barn; but the chaff He will burn with unquenchable fire.”
Enough evidence?
Samaria was a unique case and it was important for the apostles to accept them. The verse you cite in no way supports your conclusion, and does not even mention imparting gifts through the laying on of hands.
In Acts, Peter tells Simon why he could have no part in laying hands on people and their receiving the Holy Ghost.
19 Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.
20 But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.
21 Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God.
Peter's answer was that it was because his heart was not right in the sight of God. It was NOT because Simon was not an apostle.
Was Ananias one of the twelve. This man is referred to is referred to as a 'disciple.'
Acts 9
17 And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, 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.
18 And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.
And this was apparently done without Peter laying hands on them. They heard his message and believed.
This is speculation. It could also be an area of ministry that Philip, an evangelist, did not minister in. The Old Testament already established long ago that one could be empowered by the Spirit to prophesy without the laying on of hands of the 12 apostles, who weren't even born yet. Zecharias was filled with the Spirit and prophesied.
You have no authority to bind the Spirit only to work in some of the ways mentioned in scripture, but not in others. Elders can lay hands on people, and gifts can be imparted through prophecy.
I Timothy 4
14 Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.
Paul received the Spirit, apparently without the help of the 12 apostles. That shows that God can fill someone with the Holy Spirit, someone who lays hands on others who are then filled with the Spirit, without going through the 12 apostles... if He so chooses. I make my assertion based on the fact that Paul says of his visit to meet certain apostles in Jerusalem that they that seemed to be somewhat added nothing to him, and the statement of Ananias about his being sent that Paul might receive his sight and be filled with the Holy Ghost.
Your method of considering verses that disprove our theory as exceptions, and thereby assuming the Spirit of God must bow and submit to your theories is flawed. God is sovereign, and He is not bound to follow the conclusions you draw from, or read into, the scriptures you cherry-pick as relevant.
That's a convoluted concept. Tongues and prophecy were evident in scripture at some cases of people being baptized with the Holy Spirit. Baptism with the Holy Spirit is more than that. It describes individuals being immersed in the Holy Spirit. The Spirit being poured out is a picture of the Spirit being poured out on people.
Why would you think the Lord would want to be stingy with the Holy Spirit when it comes to His people after Christ sent the comforter?
Luke 11
9 And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
10 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
11 If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent?
12 Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?
Again, the scriptures you refer to do not support your conclusion. The fact that you may go to a church that misuses II Timothy 3:17 that way does not mean that is the appropriate interpretation. You are trying to make it mean something that it clearly did not to either Paul or Timothy. They did not have a completed canon. Paul was reminding Timothy of the scriptures he grew up with, which would likely have been the Old Testament, unless his mother or grandmother had access to some early epistles like James or a written gospel. So Paul was not talking about the complete New Testament canon, which Timothy did not even have access to, replacing the spiritual gifts.
If Paul were issuing a cessationist decree and saying Timothy had all he needed in the scripture he had, then scripture written later, like II Timothy 4 and the book of Revelation would not be inspired. The gift of prophecy would have ceased so those books could not be inspired. Revelation predicted future prophets and miracles, by the way.
Let's look at the verses in question
II Timothy 3:16-17
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.
(NKJV)
'Man of God' is used as the near equivalent of 'prophet' in the Old Testament. Timothy already has a gift he received through prophecy with the laying on of hands of the elders. He already has a gift in him through the laying on of Paul's hands.
Paul does not say 'Scripture is all that is given...that the man of God may be...thoroughly equipped." The verse says "All Scripture is given..." Some cessationists appear to have dyslexia.
Give a soldier a rifle so that he may be thoroughly equipped. That makes sense. But that statement doesn't prove the rifle is all he needs. He's not thoroughly equipped without the rifle. But he may also have a uniform, a helmet, and some tools and provisions. the rifle is necessary for him to be fully equipped.
Similarly, this passage tells us that scripture is given that the man of God might be fully equipped, but not that it is all he needs.
The foolish thing about arguing for cessationism based on this is that the scriptures indicate that we need gifted members of the body of Christ. Cessationists wouldn't say that we don't need faith, hope, love, water baptism or holiness because we have the Bible. These are things the Bible teaches we need. So it doesn't make sense to say that we don't need spiritual gifts because the Bible teaches that we do need these.
And Timothy received a gift through prophecy with the laying on of hands of the elders, mentioned earlier. One can also pray to receive a spiritual gift like interpretation of tongues (I Corinthians 14:13.) The doctrinal teaching of scripture is that gifts are given as the Spirit wills. (I Corinthians 12:11.) Examples and teaching of scripture show the Spirit being received and gifts and manifestations of the Spirit being given spontaneously as the Spirit fell (Acts 2), through the laying on of the apostles hands (Acts 10, II Timothy 2), through prophecy accompanied by the laying on of the apostles hands (II Timothy 4), and in response to prayer (I Corinthian 14:13.)
We should take all scripture into account, not just look at one and create a doctrine that contradicts the others.
In Acts, Peter tells Simon why he could have no part in laying hands on people and their receiving the Holy Ghost.
19 Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.
20 But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.
21 Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God.
Peter's answer was that it was because his heart was not right in the sight of God. It was NOT because Simon was not an apostle.
Was Ananias one of the twelve. This man is referred to is referred to as a 'disciple.'
Acts 9
17 And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, 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.
18 And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.
And this was apparently done without Peter laying hands on them. They heard his message and believed.
This is speculation. It could also be an area of ministry that Philip, an evangelist, did not minister in. The Old Testament already established long ago that one could be empowered by the Spirit to prophesy without the laying on of hands of the 12 apostles, who weren't even born yet. Zecharias was filled with the Spirit and prophesied.
You have no authority to bind the Spirit only to work in some of the ways mentioned in scripture, but not in others. Elders can lay hands on people, and gifts can be imparted through prophecy.
I Timothy 4
14 Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.
Paul received the Spirit, apparently without the help of the 12 apostles. That shows that God can fill someone with the Holy Spirit, someone who lays hands on others who are then filled with the Spirit, without going through the 12 apostles... if He so chooses. I make my assertion based on the fact that Paul says of his visit to meet certain apostles in Jerusalem that they that seemed to be somewhat added nothing to him, and the statement of Ananias about his being sent that Paul might receive his sight and be filled with the Holy Ghost.
Your method of considering verses that disprove our theory as exceptions, and thereby assuming the Spirit of God must bow and submit to your theories is flawed. God is sovereign, and He is not bound to follow the conclusions you draw from, or read into, the scriptures you cherry-pick as relevant.
That's a convoluted concept. Tongues and prophecy were evident in scripture at some cases of people being baptized with the Holy Spirit. Baptism with the Holy Spirit is more than that. It describes individuals being immersed in the Holy Spirit. The Spirit being poured out is a picture of the Spirit being poured out on people.
Why would you think the Lord would want to be stingy with the Holy Spirit when it comes to His people after Christ sent the comforter?
Luke 11
9 And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
10 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
11 If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent?
12 Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?
Again, the scriptures you refer to do not support your conclusion. The fact that you may go to a church that misuses II Timothy 3:17 that way does not mean that is the appropriate interpretation. You are trying to make it mean something that it clearly did not to either Paul or Timothy. They did not have a completed canon. Paul was reminding Timothy of the scriptures he grew up with, which would likely have been the Old Testament, unless his mother or grandmother had access to some early epistles like James or a written gospel. So Paul was not talking about the complete New Testament canon, which Timothy did not even have access to, replacing the spiritual gifts.
If Paul were issuing a cessationist decree and saying Timothy had all he needed in the scripture he had, then scripture written later, like II Timothy 4 and the book of Revelation would not be inspired. The gift of prophecy would have ceased so those books could not be inspired. Revelation predicted future prophets and miracles, by the way.
Let's look at the verses in question
II Timothy 3:16-17
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.
(NKJV)
'Man of God' is used as the near equivalent of 'prophet' in the Old Testament. Timothy already has a gift he received through prophecy with the laying on of hands of the elders. He already has a gift in him through the laying on of Paul's hands.
Paul does not say 'Scripture is all that is given...that the man of God may be...thoroughly equipped." The verse says "All Scripture is given..." Some cessationists appear to have dyslexia.
Give a soldier a rifle so that he may be thoroughly equipped. That makes sense. But that statement doesn't prove the rifle is all he needs. He's not thoroughly equipped without the rifle. But he may also have a uniform, a helmet, and some tools and provisions. the rifle is necessary for him to be fully equipped.
Similarly, this passage tells us that scripture is given that the man of God might be fully equipped, but not that it is all he needs.
The foolish thing about arguing for cessationism based on this is that the scriptures indicate that we need gifted members of the body of Christ. Cessationists wouldn't say that we don't need faith, hope, love, water baptism or holiness because we have the Bible. These are things the Bible teaches we need. So it doesn't make sense to say that we don't need spiritual gifts because the Bible teaches that we do need these.
And Timothy received a gift through prophecy with the laying on of hands of the elders, mentioned earlier. One can also pray to receive a spiritual gift like interpretation of tongues (I Corinthians 14:13.) The doctrinal teaching of scripture is that gifts are given as the Spirit wills. (I Corinthians 12:11.) Examples and teaching of scripture show the Spirit being received and gifts and manifestations of the Spirit being given spontaneously as the Spirit fell (Acts 2), through the laying on of the apostles hands (Acts 10, II Timothy 2), through prophecy accompanied by the laying on of the apostles hands (II Timothy 4), and in response to prayer (I Corinthian 14:13.)
We should take all scripture into account, not just look at one and create a doctrine that contradicts the others.
-
1
- Show all
Your own position is not that the Spirit was given using scripture alone, but rather through the laying on of hands of the apostles.
The burden of proof is on you to show how God has decreed or determined to limit how the Spirit may operate. You have not done so. You have shown an example and ignored other scripture that disproves your assertions. Please see my recent post on this, the one right before this post.
The idea that God can only work exactly the way he worked in X number of cases in the Bible is flawed reasoning. But I showed counterexamples that outright disprove your theories above.
The burden of proof is on you to show how God has decreed or determined to limit how the Spirit may operate. You have not done so. You have shown an example and ignored other scripture that disproves your assertions. Please see my recent post on this, the one right before this post.
The idea that God can only work exactly the way he worked in X number of cases in the Bible is flawed reasoning. But I showed counterexamples that outright disprove your theories above.
Historically, these spiritual gifts continued past the apostolic age. Warfield grasped at straws to develop some of the theories you are repeating, but some later cessationists did not bother, like Warfield did, to do enough research to see that Irenaeus wrote of brethren prophesying, speaking in tongues, having foreknowledge, raising the dead, etc. in his own day. Warfield tried to dismiss this as Irenaeus assuming this stuff was still going on. But in another of his writings, he expressed his desire that other churches be able to raise the dead as had happened in his own church.
Also, Eusebius treatment of Montanism contains quotes that make it clear that churchmen who rejected Montanism were not rejecting the continuation of the gift of prophecy. They affirmed prophets and prophecy, but did not think Montanus was genuine. He records that in a debate between a Christian and a Montanist after Montanus died, the Montanist argued that the gift of prophecy ceased with Montanus, Maximilla, and Priscilla, but the Christian said that the gift continued because the apostle wrote that the gift would continue until the Lord returned. This might have been commentary on I Corinthians 13, possibly combined with I Corinthians 1:7.
It has been speculated that the Montanists might have been the first I Corinthians 13 cessationists, believing that Montanist was or received 'that which is perfect.' That is according to Jerome, or this site's verse citation on his commentary. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10521a.htm, which seems reasonable. Notice the reference to I Corinthians 13:9.
There is also the fact that the Shepherd of Hermas, which might have been written by the bishop of Rome's brother, describes prophesying in church meetings. You could also look at The Spirit and the Church: Antiquity by Burgess for ante-Nicene examples of prophecy. Michael Green's 'Evangelism in the Early Church' deals with this topic to some extent.
John Calvin calls your interpretation of I Corinthians 13 stupid or foolish, depending on the translation. Look up his commentary for the passage and those who say the perfect comes before the resurrection or death.
Here I am quoting from Grudem's systematic theology from this blog, https://www.puritanboard.com/thread...ationist-argument-in-1-corinthinans-13.75499/
Also, Eusebius treatment of Montanism contains quotes that make it clear that churchmen who rejected Montanism were not rejecting the continuation of the gift of prophecy. They affirmed prophets and prophecy, but did not think Montanus was genuine. He records that in a debate between a Christian and a Montanist after Montanus died, the Montanist argued that the gift of prophecy ceased with Montanus, Maximilla, and Priscilla, but the Christian said that the gift continued because the apostle wrote that the gift would continue until the Lord returned. This might have been commentary on I Corinthians 13, possibly combined with I Corinthians 1:7.
It has been speculated that the Montanists might have been the first I Corinthians 13 cessationists, believing that Montanist was or received 'that which is perfect.' That is according to Jerome, or this site's verse citation on his commentary. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10521a.htm, which seems reasonable. Notice the reference to I Corinthians 13:9.
There is also the fact that the Shepherd of Hermas, which might have been written by the bishop of Rome's brother, describes prophesying in church meetings. You could also look at The Spirit and the Church: Antiquity by Burgess for ante-Nicene examples of prophecy. Michael Green's 'Evangelism in the Early Church' deals with this topic to some extent.
John Calvin calls your interpretation of I Corinthians 13 stupid or foolish, depending on the translation. Look up his commentary for the passage and those who say the perfect comes before the resurrection or death.
Here I am quoting from Grudem's systematic theology from this blog, https://www.puritanboard.com/thread...ationist-argument-in-1-corinthinans-13.75499/
Contemplate how signs and wonders are performed. Luke gives us the answer in Acts 4:29-30.
And now, Lord, look upon their threats and grant to your servants to continue to speak your word with all boldness, while you stretch out your hand to heal, and signs and wonders are performed through the name of your holy servant Jesus.
Does the Lord no longer stretch out His hand to heal? Are signs and wonders no longer performed through the name of His holy servant Jesus?
And now, Lord, look upon their threats and grant to your servants to continue to speak your word with all boldness, while you stretch out your hand to heal, and signs and wonders are performed through the name of your holy servant Jesus.
Does the Lord no longer stretch out His hand to heal? Are signs and wonders no longer performed through the name of His holy servant Jesus?
To all of the above; No matter who you quote or how much you say, you and they need to prove the Baptism of the Holy Spirit came in another way than in the two outpourings, or through an Apostle's hands. The gift of the Holy Spirit comes through believing.
“Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” Acts 2:38 (KJV 1900)
“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.” Acts 8:12 (KJV 1900)
“And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles’ hands the [Baptism] Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,” Acts 8:18 (KJV 1900)
“When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.” Acts 19:5–6 (KJV 1900)
“Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” Acts 2:38 (KJV 1900)
“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.” Acts 8:12 (KJV 1900)
“And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles’ hands the [Baptism] Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,” Acts 8:18 (KJV 1900)
“When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.” Acts 19:5–6 (KJV 1900)
The event at Pentecost was not a baptism of the Holy Spirit. This is a common convenient error. The event at Pentecost was a filling of the Holy Spirit with power. Those in the upper room were filled having been baptized by Jesus prior to the events recorded in Acts 2. John 20 shows Jesus breathing onto the apostles the Holy Spirit and from that moment forward they were born again as Christians.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
For the cause of Christ
Roger
The book of prophecy or called the book of law is complete. The last book is still Revelation .It is sealed up with sevens seal till the end of time. Not one jot or title will be removed. Until the last day .Then the letter of the law death or book of prophecy will be cast a judgement fire never to rise and condemn through corruption and entire creation.
All of the doctrines of God had been revealed. The Holy Spirit actively works through the perfect.
All of the doctrines of God had been revealed. The Holy Spirit actively works through the perfect.
Anyone who does not have the Holy Spirit does not have Salvation..
1 Corinthians 12: KJV
3 "Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost."
Say it with me Sisters and Brothers in Christ... JESUS IS LORD
1 Corinthians 12: KJV
3 "Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost."
Say it with me Sisters and Brothers in Christ... JESUS IS LORD