Acts 2:38

Like I said before....its not the point of the Scripture you seeking to use to prove your doctrine.

 

Just a second. You made an absolute statement at the beginning of your OP.

You said Jews recieved Holy Spirit during/after/as the result of(?) water baptism and Gentiles (everyone else) recieved Holy Spirit before water baptism.

And yet, in Acts 8, you have Samaritans (who are not Jews) receiving Holy Spirit after water baptism and by the laying on of hands.

You can't dismiss that by saying "that doesn't happen anymore" without undermining your premise...i.e. that Jews need water baptism to be saved and recieve Holy Spirit...and everyone else receives Holy Spirit before baptism.... because someone could simply say "that doesn't happen that way anymore... now everyone is saved first and baptised second."

Another thing: When Peter reports to the Jerusalem saints that Gentiles are being saved, he says in

Acts 11:15 "And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them, just as he did upon us at the beginning."(emphasis mine)

That indicates an identical outpouring of Holy Spirit.

Acts 11:17 "If God therefore gave to them the same gift as He gave to us also after believing in the Lord Jesus Christ...." and 11:18 "....Well then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life."(emphasis mine)

That clearly states that repentance and belief/faith is the reason for both groups receiving of Holy Spirit...not water baptism.

peace to youraying:

BTW, welcome to the BB:wavey:

 

I looked up Beasley-Murray. Seems my assessment is correct - you are teaching (I assume since you quoted him, following in his footsteps) strange and new doctrine foreign to the SBC today and historically.

Your church's doctrine states:

Now, I have not read Beasley-Murray's work on baptism. But one review of it states:

If this is the case, then Beasley-Murray has crossed from historical baptist teaching (biblical) to the sacramental in viewing baptism as the means of grace rather than faith alone. This is dangerous doctrine and is toward the roots of papal heresy.

 

I echoed TC's request that your interpertation of the Acts verses be squared with the rest of Scripture, which I view as being contradictory to the teaching of Scripture.

So far, you have responded with...Acts.

 

You do realize that your running the same line of argument that the Jesus Only folks run to prove their doctrines....?

 

Which...is...what I have been asking you to do for 3 or 4 posts now. lol

Your assertion is that Jews are saved by faith plus baptism, while Gentiles are saved by faith alone.

So I am asking you to prove that doctrine outside of your interpretation of Acts.

 

So, your absolute statement that Jews must receive Holy Spirit by baptism and everyone else by faith (baptism later) is true.... except for the Samaritians (not Jews) who received Holy Spirit after baptism and by laying on of hands (Acts 8) and those Jews following John's baptism who received Holy Spirit by laying on of hands but after baptism in the name of Jesus?

More exceptions to your absolute statement?

I don't believe you are making a sound biblical case for your position.

And yes, repentance and faith are given as the necessary elements of such outpouring on both groups...not baptism.

peace to youraying:

 

As for my part in this reply that you made, I have to conclude that you can't or just won't, show that there are two types of salvation, one which is faith plus works, and the other which is faith alone, from the whole of Scripture.

 

I already answered your question on Beasley-Murray. Did you see that?

Your right in saying I don't see the doctrine your trying to prove. And that may be because your interpretation doesn't exist in the text, or I am short-sighted. I will let the Lord be judge.

When you write, "there appears to be no doubt as to the intention..." you move from the text to its interpretation. So, you should rather say, "there appears to me..."

Your interpretation is new. I understand you wish to claim antiquity to the teaching because you believe it is the true sense of the text, therefore the very doctrine of the Apostles themselves. Yet, your interpretation is new to the scene. Consider, as a test of your interpretation's antquity, others who have commented on the text:

The Geneva notes:
2:38 8 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.

(8) Repentance and remission of sins in Christ are two principles of the Gospel and therefore of our salvation: and they are obtained by the promises apprehended by faith, and are ratified by us in baptism; and with our salvation comes the power of the Holy Spirit (Ed.).

John Gill
Then Peter said unto them,.... Being the mouth of the apostles, and being ready to give advice, and speak a word of comfort to their distressed minds:

repent: change your minds, entertain other thoughts, and a different opinion of Jesus of Nazareth, than you have done; consider him, and believe in him, as the true Messiah and Saviour of the world; look upon him, not any more as an impostor, and a blasphemer, but as sent of God, and the only Redeemer of Israel; change your voice and way of speaking of him, and your conduct towards his disciples and followers; a change of mind will produce a change of actions in life and conversation: bring forth fruits meet for repentance; and make an open and hearty profession of repentance for this your sin. And this the apostle said, to distinguish between a legal and an evangelical repentance; the former is expressed in their being pricked to the heart, on which they were not to depend; the latter he was desirous they might have, and show forth; which springs from the love of God, is attended with views, or at least hopes of pardoning grace and mercy, and with faith in Christ Jesus: it lies in a true sight and sense of sin, under the illuminations and convictions of the Spirit of God; in a sorrow for it, after a godly sort, and because it is committed against a God of love, grace, and mercy, and it shows itself in loathing sin, and in shame for it, in an ingenuous acknowledgement of it, and in forsaking it: and this is moreover urged, to show the necessity of it, as to salvation, for such that God would not have perish, he will have come to repentance; so to their admission to the ordinance of baptism, to which repentance is a pre-requisite; and to which the apostle next advises:

and be baptized everyone of you; that repents and believes; that is, in water, in which John administered the ordinance of baptism; in which Christ himself was baptized, and in which the apostles of Christ administered it; in this Philip baptized the eunuch; and in this were the persons baptized that were converted in Cornelius's house; and it is distinguished from the baptism of the Spirit, or with fire, the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit mentioned in the last clause of this verse; and which ordinance of water baptism was administered by immersion, as the places, Jordan and Aenon, where John performed it, and the instances of it particularly in Christ, and in the eunuch, and the end of it, which is to represent the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, as well as the primary signification of the word, show. And this is to be done,

in the name of Jesus Christ; not to the exclusion of the Father, and of the Spirit, in whose name also this ordinance is to be administered, Matthew 28:19 but the name of Jesus Christ is particularly mentioned, because of these Jews, who had before rejected and denied him as the Messiah; but now, upon their repentance and faith, they are to be baptized in his name, by his authority, according to his command; professing their faith in him, devoting themselves to him, and calling on his name. The end for which this was to be submitted to, is,

for the remission of sins; not that forgiveness of sin could be procured either by repentance, or by baptism; for this is only obtained by the blood of Christ; but the apostle advises these awakened, sensible, repenting, and believing souls, to submit to baptism, that by it their faith might be led to Christ, who suffered and died for their sins, who left them buried in his grave, and who rose again for their justification from them; all which is, in a most lively manner, represented in the ordinance of baptism by immersion: the encouragement to it follows,

and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost: not the grace of the Spirit, as a regenerator and sanctifier; for that they had already; and is necessary, as previous to baptism; unless it should mean confirmation of that grace, and stability in it, as it appears from Acts 2:42 they afterwards had; but rather the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, particularly the gift of speaking with tongues, which Christ had received from the Father, and had now shed on his apostles; see Acts 19:5

John Wesley
Verse 38. Repent - And hereby return to God: be baptized - Believing in the name of Jesus - And ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost - See the three-one God clearly proved. See chap. xxvi, 20. The gift of the Holy Ghost does not mean in this place the power of speaking with tongues. For the promise of this was not given to all that were afar off, in distant ages and nations. But rather the constant fruits of faith, even righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. Whomsoever the Lord our God shall call - (Whether they are Jews or Gentiles) by his word and by his Spirit: and who are not disobedient to the heavenly calling. But it is observable St. Peter did not yet understand the very words he spoke.

Matthew Henry
"Repent, repent; change your mind, change your way; admit an after-thought." (2.) Be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ; that is, "firmly believe the doctrine of Christ, and submit to his grace and government; and make an open solemn profession of this, and come under an engagement to abide by it, by submitting to the ordinance of baptism; be proselyted to Christ and to his holy religion, and renounce your infidelity." They must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. They did believe in the Father and the Holy Ghost speaking by the prophets; but they must also believe in the name of Jesus, that he is the Christ, the Messias promised to the fathers. "Take Jesus for your king, and by baptism swear allegiance to him; take him for your prophet, and hear him; take him for your priest, to make atonement for you," which seems peculiarly intended here; for they must be baptized in his name for the remission of sins upon the score of his righteousness. (3.) This is pressed upon each particular person: Every one of you. "Even those of you that have been the greatest sinners, if they repent and believe, are welcome to be baptized; and those who think they have been the greatest saints have yet need to repent, and believe, and be baptized. There is grace enough in Christ for every one of you, be you ever so many, and grace suited to the case of every one. Israel of old were baptized unto Moses in the camp, the whole body of the Israelites together, when they passed through the cloud and the sea (1 Co. 10:1, 2), for the covenant of peculiarity was national; but now every one of you distinctly must be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus, and transact for himself in this great affair." See Col. 1:28.

 

Using those few commentators, leaving many others out, it is clear that this doctrine you bring is new to the saints. That alone should give anyone, and especially yourself as a teacher of it, great pause and concern and to seek much counsel.

 

I want to add, that by this new doctrine setting forth a new baptism, one for Jews which saves, and another for Gentiles which is symbolic of salvation that has already taken place by faith alone, it creates a different baptism for each, and as such is contradicted by Ephesians 4:5 "One Lord, one faith, one baptism,"

Like dispensationalism, is separates the Jew from Gentile when in reality and truth the two groups have been made one in Christ.

 

But that's the point Oliv, you claim your interpretation is the right one, yet in light of others who have interpretated the text you stand alone...over hundreds of years. Do you think your the first one to discover the truth? Are you the only one whom the Holy Spirit teaches? I am sure you don't believe that...

This is the issue with false teaching and false teachers. And if we stand up to make ourselves a teacher or reformer of Christianity, we ought to proceed with great fear if we do so contrary to 2000 years of true Christian commentary. Those who spurn such commentary may indeed be showing themselves schismatics in the true sense. I don't say this to accuse you, but to warn you.