Some shall depart from the faith.

Just because John or Luke says that some beleived does not mean they are true believers as that depends on the context. For example, Luke says that Simon Magnus "believed" but the context goes on to demonstrate he simply made a profession of faith and was not truly born again as Peter by the Spirit reveals his true inward unregnerate state:

13 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.
18 And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,
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.22 Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.
23 For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity.

Furthermore, he asked the apostles to pray to God for him indicating he had no personal relationship with God or indwelling Spirit that would lead him to pray "abba Father."

I understand your argument but it is not confirmed by the precise grammar of the text as the pronouns would argue against that interpretation. You may be right but you may be wrong.

 

You've never had anyone ask you to pray for them? That's a pretty ridiculous claim that someone who would ask someone to pray for them is an unregenerate.

When the bible speaks of a believer, I see no indication it doesn't mean what it says. What is a believer? One who believes. It's pretty obvious. The bible never speaks of true and false believers, only believers. Any other category is man-made. The bible also says that one who believes is born again, is a regenerate person. When you find a believer, you've found someone who is born again.

Again, they had already begun in His word, for He tells them to continue in it. They were believers that He talked to in verses 31 and 32.

 

I did not make this assessment on that characteristic alone. Note the other underlined portions. Taken together it is clear he is a false professor. He is still in "the bond of inquity" and he was directly told that he has "no part" in this matter and he will "perish."

 

And those things do not prove he was an unregenerate person.

Again, how do you decide who is and who is not a "true" believer?

 

No true believer is in "the bond of inquity"! No true believer will "perish" along with their money! No true beleiver is in "the gall of bitterness." No true believer when counseled to repent will ask someone else to do the praying for them.

You find me anywhere such language is used of true believers?

 

What is a false believer?

You keep speaking of true believers, so I want to know what a false believer is.

 

Also, what is the bond of iniquity? The gall of bitterness?

If your position is the perishing under consideration is eternal, such as Paul spoke of in 1 Corinthians 1:18, then apparently his money was going to hell with him.

Also, concerning the part and lot, Jesus said that those that didn't wash feet had no part with Him. Is this meaning that those that don't take part in feet washing are lost and hellbound?

 

That didn't say they were false believers, it said they were false brethren.

You really need to reconsider the notion that noone was regenerated prior to the cross. Here's one text of many that shows that it was already a current thing before the cross: Jesus, in John 3:8, said, "so is everyone that is born of the Spirit." He didn't say will be, He said is. He also gets on Nicodemus for not knowing about the new birth. If it was something that wasn't yet in practice, why would He have gotten onto him like that?

 

Surely you must recognize that there is a difference between the work of the Holy Spirit in regeneration and the gifts of the Holy Spirit which were peculiar to the time after the ascension of Jesus into heaven.

 

Look at what He asked Nicodemus. "Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?" In other words, aren't you a great teacher of the Jews? Don't you claim to have deep knowledge of spiritual things, of the scriptures? How is it then that you don't know this? Jesus was getting on Nicodemus based on his office.

 

Well, conversion and regeneration aren't the same thing. One is a one time instantaneous event, the other is a process.

Peter was converted in one sense. He believes Jesus was the Christ. He, however, needed to be converted in another sense. That sense is from the fickle state he was in. He denied Jesus to sake his own skin. Later on we see him converted from this state because he is willing to suffer and die if needs be for the cause of Christ.

 

The new birth was a common Old Testament pre-Pentecost experience that was repeatedly referred to as circumcision of the heart.

Many of the scriptures you are quoting refer to the baptism in the Spirit rather than regeneration. I believe the baptism in the Spirit has nothing to do with the individual believer per se. It too, is an Old Testament phenomena that occurred ONCE in relationship to the building of God's house. It was the expression of divine accreditation and taking up residence in a newly built "house fo God." It has to do with the institutional house of God - the church as a coporate institutional body.

The promise of the Spirit includes the baptism of the new house of God in the Spirit but it includes much more. It includes salvation application to the "world" or gentiles. It includes empowerment of the Apostolic office to confirm by supernatural signs and wonders the Word of God finished under their personal supervision (Isa. 8:16-20; Jn. 14-16).

Some of the scriptures refer to the empowerment of the Spirit to take the gospel witness to all the world.