Baptism, the simple version.

[DJT_47]

I don’t understand how that can be. Acts 2:14-21 says this:

“But Peter, standing with the eleven, lifted up his voice and addressed them: “Men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and give ear to my words. For these people are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day. But this is what was uttered through the prophet Joel: “‘And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; even on my male servants and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit, and they shall prophesy. And I will show wonders in the heavens above and signs on the earth below, blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke; the sun shall be turned to darkness and the moon to blood, before the day of the Lord comes, the great and magnificent day. And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.’”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭2‬:‭14‬-‭21‬ ‭ESV‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/59/act.2.14-21.ESV

If Acts 2 is correct the receiving of the Holy Spirit was meant for more than just the Apostles and the house of Cornelius.

“The apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider this matter. And after there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us, and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭15‬:‭6‬-‭9‬ ‭ESV‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/59/act.15.6-9.ESV

Doesn’t this passage show that the elders present here received the Holy Spirit in the same manner as the Apostles and the house of Cornelius? No distinction. There are similar statements in Acts 10 and 11.

You have to trace it back to it's origin. The Joel prophesy, John the Baptist's words in Luke 3, Jesus words o his APOSTLES in Luke 24:49, then following it through to Acts 1 and 2. Below is something previously written and posted that should address this for you. Also, the words "i will pour out my Spirit on all flesh" in the scripture you cited infers not just to the Jews but also the Gentiles, which did occur commencing with Cornelius (the Gentiles) in Acts 10.

REPOST

Start with Luke 3:16 and Luke 24:47-49 both restated in Acts 1:4-5. What's it say? One will come that will baptize with the Holy Ghost and with fire, in Luke 3:16, and in Luke 24:47-49, it says repentance and remission of sins should be preached starting at Jerusalem and to tarry there until they (the apostle) received power from on high. And what's Acts 1:4-5, say? It restates both of these.4And, 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. 5For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. And in Luke 24:47-49, who was this addressed to? Starting in verse 36 of Luke 24, Jesus appears to the APOSTLES and verses 47-49 is his instructions to them, the apostles.

47And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48And ye are witnesses of these things. 49And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.

Then Acts 1:8 says the following

8But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth

It's clear that the falling of the Holy Ghost with fire was meant for THE APOSTLE'S as well as the power from on high, and that this occurred as recorded in Acts 2; read it all carefully.

Futher, Acts 10 was also a unique demonstration of the Holy Ghost and unilaterally by the Holy Ghost falling on the Gentiles first and unlike Acts 2 where it fell on the apostles, but also as a sign and validation from on high which there validated it was God's plan to bring the Gentiles into the body of Christ. In that case, it was validation to Peter and company. It fell on the Gentiles prior to baptism but they were then immediately baptized. Why? Because that's how you become part of the Lord's body; you're baptized into Christ as noted in scripture such as Acts 2:38-47 and elsewhere.

The power from on high and the miraculous manifestation of the gifts of the Spirit, not the Spirit itself, but it's gifts as noted in 1 Cor 12:8-10, are manifested by the laying on of the APOSTLE'S hands as noted in Acts 6:6, Acts 8:18, Acts 19:6, and 2 Tim 1:6, and it was the apostles who performed the miraculous gifts of the Spirit as noted in Acts 5:12 and those that they laid their hands on such as Stephen as recoreded in Acts 6:6.

The scriptures prove themselves.

 

[Wansvic]

You have to trace it back to it's origin. The Joel prophesy, John the Baptist's words in Luke 3, Jesus words o his APOSTLES in Luke 24:49, then following it through to Acts 1 and 2. Below is something previously written and posted that should address this for you. Also, the words "i will pour out my Spirit on all flesh" in the scripture you cited infers not just to the Jews but also the Gentiles, which did occur commencing with Cornelius (the Gentiles) in Acts 10.

REPOST

Start with Luke 3:16 and Luke 24:47-49 both restated in Acts 1:4-5. What's it say? One will come that will baptize with the Holy Ghost and with fire, in Luke 3:16, and in Luke 24:47-49, it says repentance and remission of sins should be preached starting at Jerusalem and to tarry there until they (the apostle) received power from on high. And what's Acts 1:4-5, say? It restates both of these.4And, 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. 5For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. And in Luke 24:47-49, who was this addressed to? Starting in verse 36 of Luke 24, Jesus appears to the APOSTLES and verses 47-49 is his instructions to them, the apostles.

47And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48And ye are witnesses of these things. 49And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.

Then Acts 1:8 says the following

8But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth

It's clear that the falling of the Holy Ghost with fire was meant for THE APOSTLE'S as well as the power from on high, and that this occurred as recorded in Acts 2; read it all carefully.

Futher, Acts 10 was also a unique demonstration of the Holy Ghost and unilaterally by the Holy Ghost falling on the Gentiles first and unlike Acts 2 where it fell on the apostles, but also as a sign and validation from on high which there validated it was God's plan to bring the Gentiles into the body of Christ. In that case, it was validation to Peter and company. It fell on the Gentiles prior to baptism but they were then immediately baptized. Why? Because that's how you become part of the Lord's body; you're baptized into Christ as noted in scripture such as Acts 2:38-47 and elsewhere.

The power from on high and the miraculous manifestation of the gifts of the Spirit, not the Spirit itself, but it's gifts as noted in 1 Cor 12:8-10, are manifested by the laying on of the APOSTLE'S hands as noted in Acts 6:6, Acts 8:18, Acts 19:6, and 2 Tim 1:6, and it was the apostles who performed the miraculous gifts of the Spirit as noted in Acts 5:12 and those that they laid their hands on such as Stephen as recoreded in Acts 6:6.

The scriptures prove themselves.

Keep in mind that Paul declared that anyone without the Holy Spirit is not a born again Christian. (Rom 8:9)
Scripture reveals receiving the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit does not follow any set pattern. He came into believers before baptism (Acts 2:4, 10:44), at the time of or after baptism (8:12-16; 19:6), and by the laying on of apostolic hands (8:17; 19:6).

In the Acts 19 account, Paul's question "Have you received the Holy Ghost SINCE you believed?" reveals that believing does not automatically, in of of itself, assure that a person has been indwelt. Nor does obedience to water baptism automatically result in one receiving the Holy Ghost as the record reflects. The account does, however, provide further evidence that all components are essential to the NT rebirth and are required of all individuals. It also addresses the fact that speaking in an unknown tongue is the evidence of having been indwelt by the Holy Ghost. If it were not for Acts 19, the other accounts in Acts 2, 8 and 10 could possibly be explained away as unusual events.

 

[DJT_47]

Keep in mind that Paul declared that anyone without the Holy Spirit is not a born again Christian. (Rom 8:9)
Scripture reveals receiving the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit does not follow any set pattern. He came into believers before baptism (Acts 2:4, 10:44), at the time of or after baptism (8:12-16; 19:6), and by the laying on of apostolic hands (8:17; 19:6).

In the Acts 19 account, Paul's question "Have you received the Holy Ghost SINCE you believed?" reveals that believing does not automatically, in of of itself, assure that a person has been indwelt. Nor does obedience to water baptism automatically result in one receiving the Holy Ghost as the record reflects. The account does, however, provide further evidence that all components are essential to the NT rebirth and are required of all individuals. It also addresses the fact that speaking in an unknown tongue is the evidence of having been indwelt by the Holy Ghost. If it were not for Acts 19, the other accounts in Acts 2, 8 and 10 could possibly be explained away as unusual events.

The indwelling of the Holy Spirit DOES follow a pattern set by Acts 2:38. Everyone baptized into Christ receives the gift of the Holy Ghost, not gifts (manifestations of the Spirit) but the Spirit itself.

In Acts 2:4 that you referred to, who is "they"? "They" are the apostles. You must go back to the end of chapter 1 to see that. "They" is not the 120. This is further confirmed by the instructions to the apostles in Luke 24:49 which is also consistent with John's words in Luke 3:16.

Acts 2 and 10 were not the norm fir the FALLING of the Spirit. It fell on the apostles in Acts 2 as just mentioned, as a sign and heavenly validation, and it fell on the Gentiles in Acts 10 also as a sign of heavenly validation, in both cases to start the church.

In Acts 19, the Ephesians had only been baptized unto John's baptism as had been Apollos as well who re-instructed by Aquila and Priscilla, and were re-baptized into Christ, so at the point of re-baptism, they too would have received the indwelling of the Spirit, the gift (singular) but not gifts which they then received after Paul laid his hands on them to impart the manifestation of the Spirit.

Don't confuse receiving the gift (singular) of the Holy Ghost pwr Acts 2:38, with receiving gifts (plural) of the Holy Ghost/Spirit, those listed in 1Cor 12:8-10. Two different things and an important distinction so as not to become confused as most unfortunately are.

 

[Wansvic]

The indwelling of the Holy Spirit DOES follow a pattern set by Acts 2:38. Everyone baptized into Christ receives the gift of the Holy Ghost, not gifts (manifestations of the Spirit) but the Spirit itself.

In Acts 2:4 that you referred to, who is "they"? "They" are the apostles. You must go back to the end of chapter 1 to see that. "They" is not the 120. This is further confirmed by the instructions to the apostles in Luke 24:49 which is also consistent with John's words in Luke 3:16.

Acts 2 and 10 were not the norm fir the FALLING of the Spirit. It fell on the apostles in Acts 2 as just mentioned, as a sign and heavenly validation, and it fell on the Gentiles in Acts 10 also as a sign of heavenly validation, in both cases to start the church.

In Acts 19, the Ephesians had only been baptized unto John's baptism as had been Apollos as well who re-instructed by Aquila and Priscilla, and were re-baptized into Christ, so at the point of re-baptism, they too would have received the indwelling of the Spirit, the gift (singular) but not gifts which they then received after Paul laid his hands on them to impart the manifestation of the Spirit.

Don't confuse receiving the gift (singular) of the Holy Ghost pwr Acts 2:38, with receiving gifts (plural) of the Holy Ghost/Spirit, those listed in 1Cor 12:8-10. Two different things and an important distinction so as not to become confused as most unfortunately are.

Scripture reveals that the indwelling of the Holy Ghost does not automatically occur upon being water baptized in the name of Jesus:

"Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:

(For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost." Acts 8:15-17

 

[Evmur]

Unfortunately, there are a great many so-called Christians that either don't understand the simple principles of baptism and/or just flat out reject baptism as a requirement of salvation. They don't accept the very simple language of the bible that very clearly indicates that baptism, immersion in water, is absolutely necessary to be saved.

multitudes have been baptised but not saved, again multitudes have been saved but not baptised. You haves to get over it.

... I think everyone oughta get baptised.

If someone has been accepted by the Lord we are obliged to accept them. This is an even greater requirement than baptism.

 

[DJT_47]

Scripture reveals that the indwelling of the Holy Ghost does not automatically occur upon being water baptized in the name of Jesus:

"Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:

(For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost." Acts 8:15-17

???? What do you think Acts 2:38 means, to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost? That's receivied upon baptism, no laying of the apostles hands, and same as we today? When you receive the gift of the Holy Ghost upon baptism, what does that mean? It doesn't say gifts of the Holy Ghost, or one of the gifts, but simply "the gift".

And why does it say that the apostles had to lay their hands on them to enable the falling of the Holy Ghost in Acts 8:15-17. And why was Simon following to behold the miracles he witnessed by the laying on of the apostle's hands? And note too, the scripture says prior to that, they believed and were baptized Acts8:12-13. So, did they not receive the gift of the Holy Ghost per Acts 2:38? What did they receive then if not that? And why then did the apostles pray and then laid their hands on them which was after baptism.? What was that for if they already had received "the gift"?

Once again, you, like most everyone, don't understand the difference between receiving the Spirit, the indwelling of it, and manifestations of the Spirit, those gifts listed in 1 Cor 12:8-10. Two different things entirely. Read 8 again and start back farther and read further beyond verse 17. ALSO, read the passages that clearly say the manifestation of the Spirit required the laying on of the apostle's hands as Acts 8:18 says: Acts 5:12, Acts 6:6-8, Acts 8:9-19, Acts 19:6, 2 Tim 1:6

 

[Wansvic]

???? What do you think Acts 2:38 means, to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost? That's receivied upon baptism, no laying of the apostles hands, and same as we today? When you receive the gift of the Holy Ghost upon baptism, what does that mean? It doesn't say gifts of the Holy Ghost, or one of the gifts, but simply "the gift".

And why does it say that the apostles had to lay their hands on them to enable the falling of the Holy Ghost in Acts 8:15-17. And why was Simon following to behold the miracles he witnessed by the laying on of the apostle's hands? And note too, the scripture says prior to that, they believed and were baptized Acts8:12-13. So, did they not receive the gift of the Holy Ghost per Acts 2:38? What did they receive then if not that? And why then did the apostles pray and then laid their hands on them which was after baptism.? What was that for if they already had received "the gift"?

Once again, you, like most everyone, don't understand the difference between receiving the Spirit, the indwelling of it, and manifestations of the Spirit, those gifts listed in 1 Cor 12:8-10. Two different things entirely. Read 8 again and start back farther and read further beyond verse 17. ALSO, read the passages that clearly say the manifestation of the Spirit required the laying on of the apostle's hands as Acts 8:18 says: Acts 5:12, Acts 6:6-8, Acts 8:9-19, Acts 19:6, 2 Tim 1:6

In Acts 2:38-39 Peter states that those who repent and submit to baptism in Jesus' name SHALL receive the Holy Ghost. As reflected in actual baptism records SHALL did not mean at the exact moment of water baptism. But rather those who believed and obeyed the commands were guaranteed to be indwelt by the Holy Ghost at some point as well.

Again, notice that the Acts 8 account specifically states that the group had not received the Holy Ghost until days after they had been baptized in the name of the Jesus:

"And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money," Acts 8:18

Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost." Acts 8:19

 

[awelight]

I did not respond to specifics of this post as what you stated so obviously goes against the word. But since you brought it up, here goes:




Lastly, the Holy Ghost is not given twice as some suggest. The Holy Ghost was the GIFT that was initially sent to dwell in people on the Day of Pentecost. The experience had nothing to do with the bestowal of spiritual gifts. The evidence of the indwelling of the Holy Ghost resulted in their speaking in an unknown tongue, a separate experience from the spiritual gift of tongues that requires interpretation. (1 Cor. 12)

"Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear." Acts 2:33


God provided evidence of the arrival of the Holy Ghost through speaking in tongues as revealed in the conversion records of each group of humanity:

And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. (Acts 2:4)

The lack of tongues can be contributed to how the Samaritans knew they had not received the Holy Ghost. (Acts 8:12-16, 17)

Have you received the Holy Ghost since you believed? Paul asked. (Acts 19:1-6)

Peter knew the Gentiles had received the Holy Ghost the evidence was speaking in tongues. (Acts 10:43-48)

I post the following, in hopes that it fall not on an undiscerning mind. I do this not to be critical but in the true hope that it might help. There is much here that is misunderstood.

You said:
The idea that God creates people destined to an eternity of hell fire is ludicrous. Paul made it clear that the gospel is hid from people whose minds are blinded by the god of this world, not our Heavenly Father.

"But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:
In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." 2 Cor 4:3-4

First, I am not sure where this idea comes from - about God creating people for hell. It is indeed ludicrous. God created Adam and Eve "Upright", meaning with an inherit righteousness. ONLY after the "FALL", did they lose this uprightness. Adams fall, cursed all of mankind and threw us into a state by which we are at enmity with God. The FALL is clearly stated in Scripture: Rom 5:12 Therefore, as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin; and so death passed unto all men, for that all sinned: -- Rom 5:18a So then as through one trespass the judgment came unto all men to condemnation... -- Rom 5:19a For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners... Therefore, man brought this upon himself. God has the remedy for His people, who were/are now lost because of the FALL.

Secondly, Scripture teaches there are only two classifications of humankind. Those who belong to God and those who belong to the Devil. No middle ground. No fence sitting. Therefore, Scripture teaches a threefold type of "blindness". 1.) A self blindness. 2.) The Devil blinding and removing the Truth from the hearts and minds of his own. (Luke 8:12) 3.) Forms of God blinding that many should not see. (Rom. 11:8)

Next, you said:
And as stated in John 1:11-13, those who received/believed in Jesus were given power TO BECOME the sons of God. This indicates they were not immediately sons of God upon believing. They were granted the right to become sons through repentance, baptism, and being indwelt with the Holy Spirit. And this, by God's design as witnessed from scripture. (Mark 16:15-16)

This must be understood in the overall context. What came before?

John 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, and the world knew him not. (The world did not know Him.)
John 1:11 He came unto his own, and they that were his own received him not. (The Jews did not know Him.)

Then these two verses are stated and MUST be taken together:

John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he the right to become children of God, even to them that believe on his name:
John 1:13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

Your understanding of verse 12 starts out okay but then drifts off. Only some of them received or believed the Truth, which is in Jesus Christ and: ...to them gave He the right to become children of God.. (Where the KJV translates the word "power", it is better translated "authority" or "right" to become children of God. Thus, agreeing with Romans 8:14-17. So if one is Led by the Spirit, there is no mention of Repentance or water Baptism - Although, one would suspect that these will occur or have occurred. However, the timing of these cannot be ascertained from these verses.

Verse 13, then explains to us, that as many as received/believed Christ were born of God. Not out of blood(s), which speaks to Genealogy, nor out of one's own will, nor out of the power or authority of another man. This proves, that they had experienced the birth of John 3:6-8. because: .. who were born... is an Aorist Tense Verb - that is past tense and again, is in the Passive Voice.

Here are some comments by John Gill on verse 13:
Which were born not of blood,.... Or bloods, in the plural number. The birth, here spoken of, is regeneration, expressed by a being born again, or from above; by a being quickened by the Spirit and grace of God; by Christ being formed in men; and by a partaking of the divine nature; and by being made new creatures, as all that believe in the name of Christ are; and which is the evidence of their being the sons of God: and now this is owing not to blood, or bloods; not to the blood of circumcision; or of the passover, which the Jews had an high opinion of, and ascribe life and salvation to, and to which notion this may be opposed: so their commentators (f) on Eze_16:6 where the word "live" is twice used, observe on the first "live", by the blood of the passover, on the second "live", by the blood of circumcision; but, alas! these contribute nothing to the life of the new creature: nor is regeneration owing to the blood of ancestors, to natural descent, as from Abraham, which the Jews valued themselves upon; for sin, and not grace, is conveyed by natural generation: all men are of one blood, and that is tainted with sin, and therefore can never have any influence on regeneration; no blood is to be valued, or any one upon it, but the blood of Christ, which cleanses from all sin,
Nor of the will of the flesh; man's free will, which is carnal and corrupt, is enmity to God, and impotent to every thing that is spiritually good: regeneration is ascribed to another will and power, even to the will and power of God, and denied of this:

Likewise by Albert Barnes:
Which were born - This doubtless refers to the “new birth,” or to the great change in the sinner’s mind called regeneration.... It means that they did not become the children of God in virtue of their natural birth, or because they were the children of “Jews,” or because they were descended from pious parents. The term “to be born” is often used to denote this change. Compare Joh_3:3-8; 1Jn_2:29. It illustrates clearly and beautifully this great change. The natural birth introduces us to life. The new birth is the beginning of spiritual life. Before, the sinner is “dead” in sins Eph_2:1; now he begins truly to live. And as the natural birth is the beginning of life, so to be born of God is to be introduced to real life, to light, to happiness, and to the favor of God. The term expresses at once the “greatness” and the “nature” of the change.

Then you stated:
Many still refuse to accept they must be baptized in water in the name of Jesus for remission of sin. Accepting rather that their sins are not actually dealt with at that time. And secondly, they submit to being baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost; a practice instituted years after the apostolic era. One inconsistent with the witness of the apostles in the biblical record. Jesus was the one crucified for all mankind. And it is baptism in His name that is necessary in order to be buried with Him into His death wherein one's sin is destroyed according to the Apostle Paul. (Rom. 6:3-6)

Baptism, is not FOR remission of sin. Baptism is done because one believes and has repented. Note what John said to the religionist who came as he was baptizing:
Mat 3:7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said unto them, Ye offspring of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
Mat 3:8 Bring forth therefore fruit worthy of repentance:

John clearly says to them, show me something that is worthy fruit - that is, will clearly demonstrate - you have the spirit of repentance. Baptism does not cause this, it is executed on the basis of it.

Jesus Christ took upon Himself our sins - legally - and payed the price of the Law and killed them upon the cross. Therefore, there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. (Rom. 8:1) Believers still sin daily and have to be continually washed in the blood of Christ. Baptism does not eliminate our sinning because believers are still in their sinful and corrupt bodies of flesh. While being born again gives one a "new nature", that new nature still has to contend with the old principles that reside within the flesh.

I will stop here because the subjects are becoming to varied to give proper response to.

 

[DJT_47]

In Acts 2:38-39 Peter states that those who repent and submit to baptism in Jesus' name SHALL receive the Holy Ghost. As reflected in actual baptism records SHALL did not mean at the exact moment of water baptism. But rather those who believed and obeyed the commands were guaranteed to be indwelt by the Holy Ghost at some point as well.

Again, notice that the Acts 8 account specifically states that the group had not received the Holy Ghost until days after they had been baptized in the name of the Jesus:

"And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money," Acts 8:18

Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost." Acts 8:19

Once again, you are not making the clear distinction between the GIFT of the Spirit vs. manifestations of, or GIFTS of the Spirit which is causing you to misinterpret all the scriptures pertaining to this subject. Goodbye. I won't waste any more time with you. Believe what you like.

 

[Wansvic]

Once again, you are not making the clear distinction between the GIFT of the Spirit vs. manifestations of, or GIFTS of the Spirit which is causing you to misinterpret all the scriptures pertaining to this subject. Goodbye. I won't waste any more time with you. Believe what you like.

Please be so kind as to clarify what I don't understand. In the account, the Samaritans believed the gospel, submitted to water baptism in Jesus' name BUT did not receive the Holy Ghost at that point. (parallels sequence of Acts 19) Days later Peter and John came to assist the group in receiving the Holy Ghost. Not spiritual gifts, but the actual Holy Ghost as the scripture reveals:

Verse 12 They believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, (in water)
Verse 13 Simon himself believed also: and he was baptized, (in water)

Verse 14 Peter and John were sent
Verse 15 Who prayed THAT THE GROUP MIGHT RECEIVE THE HOLY GHOST:
Verse 16 FOR HE WAS FALLEN UPON NONE: they were only baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. (water baptism AS previously stated in verse 12)

Verse 17 Then laid they their hands on them, and THEY RECEIVED THE HOLY GH0ST. (This, again, clarifies they did not receive the Holy Ghost when they got baptized in water in the name of Jesus.

Verse 18 Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,
Verse 19 Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost. (Acts 8:12-19)

 

[DJT_47]

Please be so kind as to clarify what I don't understand. In the account, the Samaritans believed the gospel, submitted to water baptism in Jesus' name BUT did not receive the Holy Ghost at that point. (parallels sequence of Acts 19) Days later Peter and John came to assist the group in receiving the Holy Ghost. Not spiritual gifts, but the actual Holy Ghost as the scripture reveals:

Verse 12 They believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, (in water)
Verse 13 Simon himself believed also: and he was baptized, (in water)

Verse 14 Peter and John were sent
Verse 15 Who prayed THAT THE GROUP MIGHT RECEIVE THE HOLY GHOST:
Verse 16 FOR HE WAS FALLEN UPON NONE: they were only baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. (water baptism AS previously stated in verse 12)

Verse 17 Then laid they their hands on them, and THEY RECEIVED THE HOLY GH0ST. (This, again, clarifies they did not receive the Holy Ghost when they got baptized in water in the name of Jesus.

Verse 18 Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,
Verse 19 Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost. (Acts 8:12-19)

I vowed to myself I would no longer waste time with you, but once more, I will.

To your point previously, you mentioned the word "shall" in Acts 2:38, inferring it was in the future and therefore nebulous. The whole of Acts 2:38 when it was spoken had not yet happened and was in the future! "REPENT and BE baptized------ and ye SHALL------

They had yet to repent, as well as be baptized, no different than receiving the promise of the Holy Ghost as the word SHALL implies.

With your logic, what does the word "shall" mean in Mark 16:16? Does this mean that upon belief and baptism you may really not be saved from your past sins and that you will be saved at some future point from past sins? Makes no sense.

15And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16He that believeth and is baptized SHALL be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

To your first paragraph regarding the Samaritans: look at the wording of Verse 16 that you have in bold, cap, letters. The key, differentiating word there is FALLEN which explains the overall text.

Does the "falling" of the Holy Ghost in a miraculous fashion as recorded in Acts 2:1-4 and Acts 10:44 where it says "fell", both seemingly as a real falling upon the people by the Spirit causing miraculous manifestations of itself upon and through them, mean the same thing as receiving the indwelling of the Spirit as inferred by Acts 2:38 and noted elsewhere as being the Spirit of God living within us (ref. 1 Cor 3:16?

I'll leave my part of this discussion with you. Goodbye

 

[Wansvic]

I vowed to myself I would no longer waste time with you, but once more, I will.

To your point previously, you mentioned the word "shall" in Acts 2:38, inferring it was in the future and therefore nebulous. The whole of Acts 2:38 when it was spoken had not yet happened and was in the future! "REPENT and BE baptized------ and ye SHALL------

They had yet to repent, as well as be baptized, no different than receiving the promise of the Holy Ghost as the word SHALL implies.

With your logic, what does the word "shall" mean in Mark 16:16? Does this mean that upon belief and baptism you may really not be saved from your past sins and that you will be saved at some future point from past sins? Makes no sense.

15And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16He that believeth and is baptized SHALL be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

To your first paragraph regarding the Samaritans: look at the wording of Verse 16 that you have in bold, cap, letters. The key, differentiating word there is FALLEN which explains the overall text.

Does the "falling" of the Holy Ghost in a miraculous fashion as recorded in Acts 2:1-4 and Acts 10:44 where it says "fell", both seemingly as a real falling upon the people by the Spirit causing miraculous manifestations of itself upon and through them, mean the same thing as receiving the indwelling of the Spirit as inferred by Acts 2:38 and noted elsewhere as being the Spirit of God living within us (ref. 1 Cor 3:16?

I'll leave my part of this discussion with you. Goodbye

Thanks for the reply. But what you state doesn't address my point that scripture reveals that being baptized in water does not automatically, in and of itself, bring about the indwelling of the Holy Ghost.

Acts 2:38 belief and obedience will bring about receiving the Holy Ghost. This is the case with Mark 16:16.

 

[Wansvic]

I vowed to myself I would no longer waste time with you, but once more, I will.

To your point previously, you mentioned the word "shall" in Acts 2:38, inferring it was in the future and therefore nebulous. The whole of Acts 2:38 when it was spoken had not yet happened and was in the future! "REPENT and BE baptized------ and ye SHALL------

They had yet to repent, as well as be baptized, no different than receiving the promise of the Holy Ghost as the word SHALL implies.

With your logic, what does the word "shall" mean in Mark 16:16? Does this mean that upon belief and baptism you may really not be saved from your past sins and that you will be saved at some future point from past sins? Makes no sense.

15And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16He that believeth and is baptized SHALL be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

To your first paragraph regarding the Samaritans: look at the wording of Verse 16 that you have in bold, cap, letters. The key, differentiating word there is FALLEN which explains the overall text.

Does the "falling" of the Holy Ghost in a miraculous fashion as recorded in Acts 2:1-4 and Acts 10:44 where it says "fell", both seemingly as a real falling upon the people by the Spirit causing miraculous manifestations of itself upon and through them, mean the same thing as receiving the indwelling of the Spirit as inferred by Acts 2:38 and noted elsewhere as being the Spirit of God living within us (ref. 1 Cor 3:16?

I'll leave my part of this discussion with you. Goodbye

Timed out...
Acts 2:38 belief and obedience will bring about receiving the Holy Ghost. This is the case with Mark 16:16. As with other scripture it is not necessary that the indwelling experience be recorded as the truth is clearly revealed elsewhere in scripture. Those who repent, and submit to water baptism will at some point receive the Holy Ghost as promised.