Featured Where is Spirit Baptism in the Bible?

Biblicist does not believe in a direct succession or apostolic succession such as is described here. You have unfairly accused him of "going over the line."
Read the conclusion of the article that you posted:

That is the only "succession" that I would believe. Dr. Weeks called it "the spiritual kinship theory," that in every age since the apostle one could find believers holding to Baptist beliefs though they be called by different names other than Baptist. I believe that Biblicist believes close to the same thing.
If you don't know what he believes find out before misrepresenting his position and then falsely accusing him.

 

If you actually believe the work of the cross occurred prior to creation, then it must be equally true that the work of Creation actually occurred before creation as well because it too was according to God's purpose before the world began. If we were actually already born again, justified, sanctified and glorified and existing in a new creation before this creation began, then what is the point of repeating it in time and space??????

If this is what you really believe, there is really no point in continuing this discussion as you don't live or think in reality.

 

The Biblicist

Did I say that?

If you cannot handle it that is okay...just say so.

I will stand by what I posted....you can twist it like others do when they have no answer.

 

Let's see if I twisted your words. Did you not say that "Creation itself could not have taken place BEFORE the Lord Jesus Christ began his work as mediator"??? Are you not clearly saying that the mediatorial work of Jesus Christ as described in Revelation 13:8 ACTUALLY and LITERALLY occurred BEFORE actual and literal creation occurred? Is not that precisely what you said? Are you not interpreting the following words found in Revelation 13:8:

the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

to mean that Christ was LITERALLY and ACTUALLY "slain" prior to the world began????

If that is what you said, and I think any sane person reading your words would have to admit that is precisely what you said, knows you are living in la la land.

First, the text does not say 'before the foundation of the world" it says "FROM the foundation of the world" and it refers to His death SYMBOLIZED in the offering of Abel.

Second, if the words in the other texts that says "according to His purpose before the world began" means that Christ was LITERALLY and ACTUALLY slain on a cross prior to, before the world began, then EVERYTHING ELSE must have also LITERALLY and ACTUALLY occurred prior to the foudation of the world because He purpose all things according to his eternal counsel.

Thus, according to your logic based on faulty interpretation, then creation itself ACTUALLY and LITERALLY occurred prior to creation. According to your logic based on faulty intepretation we also ACTUALLY and LITERALLY not only existed prior to being created, but were already ACTUALLY and LITERALLY saved, born again, completely sanctified, justified, glorified and existing in a new heaven and new earth because it was "according to His eternal counsel" as well.

I have not "twisted" your position at all, because that is precisely what your logic and method of interpetation REQUIRES if you consistently apply it to ALL that is "according to His eternal counsel." Your position is not only foolish but a complete perversion of Scripture.

 

What I said above is absolutely true and there is no sound exegetical way to overthrow what I said. Isaiah 46:10-11 explicitly is applied to God's purpose of salvation. He clearly states that what has been purposed IS NOT FULFILLED prior to TIME and SPACE. We were not in ACTUALLY and LITERALLY spiritual union with Christ before the world began any more than we are ACTUALLY and LITERALLY glorified and existing in a new heaven and new earth before the world began and ALL OF THESE THINGS are part of His purpose before the world began.

Moreover, to

 

where did I say it actually and literally occurred?

.

that is not what I said.

.

Where do you get this idea?It has nothing to do with Abel...Mt 23 cannot be stretched that far.

It does not mean that at all.....looks like you need to change your name from Biblicist....to philosocist.

This is so idiotic I will not waste a response on this. You have no concept of Christs mediatorial work, His work as Surety, No concept of the covenant salvation of God......your posts on romans 7 were ludicrous....saying Paul was a schizophrenic.....that all flows from your error downplaying the work of the Spirit and exalting water baptism like Church of Christ light.

I should have known when you bad mouthed the reformers were this was going. Now I see what you are about.

 

For others who might like to understand...

 

II. Presently upon this the gospel was first revealed on earth, in these words, Gen. iii. 15. “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” We must suppose, that God’s intention of redeeming fallen man was first signified in heaven, before it was signified on earth, because the business of the angels as ministering spirits of the Mediator required it; for as soon as ever Christ had taken on him the work of a mediator, it was requisite that the angels should be ready immediately to be subservient to him in that office: so that the light first dawned in heaven; but very soon after the same was signified on earth. In those words of God there was an intimation of another surety to be appointed for man, after the first surety had failed. This was the first revelation of the covenant of grace; the first dawning of the light of the gospel on earth.

 

B....Creation itself could not have taken place before the Lord Jesus Christ began His work as mediator...rev 13:8...and that work was before creation.

Here is your words again! Look at the word "before" that I have made bold and underlined. Anyone that can read English can easily see that you are claiming Christ was "slain" before the world began in some sense. There are only two possible choices (1) literally or (2) Non-literal.

Since my position is "non-literal" and set forth explicitly in Isaiah 46:10-11 as purposefully designed "I have purposed it" but not fulfilled "I will also do it" and you have rediculed and rejected that option, then the only other possible option is LITERAL and ACTUAL.
.

Can't admit it does not say "before" but says "from" (Gr. apo)? It is a fact that "from" the foundation of the world Christ has been slain in type as the same apostle John records the Baptists words in John 1:29,36 as the "lamb of God" that takes away the sin of the world and has been "slain from the foundation of the world" under that same type beginning at least with Abel, if not in Gen. 3:15 by God Himself.

However, your objection begs the question. You are arguing that this text means he was slain BEFORE the world began and the text DOES NOT SAY THAT.

I whole heartedly agree with you, but that is the logical outcome of your position. We were no more baptized in the Spirit before the world began than we were glorified before the world began or justified, or regenerated or sanctified, as all of these things prior to the world were but PURPOSED but NOT PERFORMED. However, if you disagree with that then you are forced to take the position they were actually performed are you not????

So set the record straight, was God's purpose of grace prior to creation literally existent or only existent by divine intent and purpose? Which is it?

 

No one is arguing that the meditorial APPLICATION occurred in time and space prior to the cross because it was based upon God's promise and purpose of the cross in time and space. That is my position. What I am denying is that Christ was "slain" in any literal sense before the world began. That we were saved, regenerated, justified or glorified in any literal sense before creation. That we were only so, by DIVINE INTENT/DESIGN before the world began which had to be fulfilled in time and space just as Isaiah 46:10-11 explicitly and clearly states.

You need to hang up your favorite theologians and provide BIBLE scriptures rather than sophistry.

I purposed before today, to get up today and mow the law. That was my purpose yesterday. It had no reality but in my mind, and there it was but an unfulfilled but purposed intent/design. Nothing more, nothing less. The difference between my purpose and God's is that he is able to carry his out, and nothing can prevent it. Therefore, his purpose is sure. It is based upon this sure purpose, that God promised the coming of Christ and applied salvation secured by Christ in the future by faith to those living prior to the cross (Rom. 3:26). So yes, Christ entered into the APPLICATION of the pre-creation purposed mediatorial office, but only IN TIME AND SPACE "after the fall" and did so based solely upon the certainty of his coming that actually obtained our redemption. This is why it was received "by faith" before the cross based on His "promise" yet to be fulfilled by Christ.

 

The Mediatorial office of Christ as well as the offices of the Father and Son according to the Eternal Covenant were determined prior to the world began, but there was no functional application until AFTER creation as Edwards admits ("after the fall"). The same is true with all other aspects of covenant salvation. Purposed/determined before the world began but no application until time and space. That is precisely what Isaiah 46:10-11 says and it says it in direct connection with "salvation."

 

Here is where Reformed Calvinism goes to seed and departs from the Word of God because it follows flawed human logic over the scriptures. Isaiah 46:10-11 spells the truth out for any honest objective Bible student to see and grasp easily.

God purposed to create, but until he actually did create, there was NOTHING created at all, but still only purposed intent. This is so simple, so basic, and yet the intellectual Reformed Calvinists can't grasp it.

 

The Biblicist

.

I tried to explain that to you a few days ago....but you decided I did not know what I was talking about, now it is your position

 

Wow! I have consistently objected to just one thing and one thing only and each time I quoted Isaiah 46:10-11 to back it up. That one thing is what God purposed before time had no reality until performed in time. So yes, God's covenant purpose is carried out in time based upon the promise of Christ obtaining redemption in time and space.


So, now applying this to our original argument about the baptism in the Spirit.

1. We were not baptized in the Spirit before the world began in any literal sense whatsoever.

2. No one was baptized in the Spirit prior to Pentecost BECAUSE all gospel accounts are still yet predictive and thus still unfulfilled IN TIME prior to Penteocost. Hence, you cannot apply it BEFORE Pentecost when its purposed application is not UNTIL Pentecost.

3. Spiritual union is merely the reverse of spiritual separation and neither has anything to do with the baptism in the Spirit before the world began, before Penteocst or after Pentecost.

4. The baptism in the Spirit cannot be applied before Pentecost because its purposed application in time was not until Pentecost.

 

We are told about individual's prior to Pentecost:

1. They believed and walked by faith - progressive sanctification - Heb. 11
2. They were born again - Jn. 3:3-11
3. They were indwelt by the Spirit (Caleb, Joshua, Moses, Daniel, etc.)
4. Their sins remitted (Acts 10:43)
5. They gospel was preached unto them (Heb. 4:2)
6. They were justified (Rom. 4)
7. The Spirit came upon them to empower them
8. That sin separates them from God (Gen. 2:17; Isa. 59:2)

A. However, we are never told prior to Pentecost that any individual was ever "baptized in the Spirit."

B. We are only told that the institutional house of God was baptized in the Spirit prior to Pentecost but NO INDIVIDUALS.

C. We are told that the baptism in the Spirit is a future reality for only those already WATER BAPTIZED believers (Mt. 3:11; Acts 1:4-5; 2:38). Hence, it cannot be part of personal salvation as these were already saved and water baptized.

D. We are told that by all gospel accounts that baptism in the Spirit is a historical event yet future from the ministry of Christ - Mt. 3:11; Acts 1:4-5 - whereas all aspects of personal salvation had been applied to individuals prior to the ministry of Christ.

E. After Pentecost, and after the house of Cornelius we are told there is but "one baptism" - Eph. 4:6 - and the only baptism promised to the end of the world is water baptism - Mt. 28:19-20

F. However, alienation/separation from God spiritually is the unregenerated state - spiritual death (Eph. 2:1,5; 4:18; Isa. 59:2) which is remedied by spiritual union with God/quickening as a creative act by God (Eph. 2:10) not by any baptism of any kind before or after Pentecost.

G. Furthermore, those who confuse quickening with the baptism in the Spirit, make a complete confusion of the promises found in Matthew 3:11; acts 1:4-5; 11:15-16 as the Administrator of this baptism is Christ not the Spirit, the element is the Spirit not Christ and the subjects are a plurality of water baptized believers told to assemble at a specific geographical location (Acts 1:5) not the unregenerated wherever they might be located.

H. The Baptism in the Spirit has ALWAYS been the initial accreditation of the institutional house of God with a qualified ministry and qualified ordinances as the COVENANT ADMINISTRATOR on earth exercising the "keys of the kingdom" (Mt. 18:15-18) within the professed kingdom of God (Heb. 9:1 "also") and NEVER descriptive of an individual aspect of salvation before or after Pentecost. The expression "house of God" is found only 88 times in Scripture and prior to its 85th occurrence in 1 Timothy 3;15 and in its 84 previous occurrences in Scripture, it is NEVER found outside the context of the public institutional house of worship where a qualified public ministry administering qualified public ordinances characterizes it and that is the exact precise same context of 1 Tim. 3:1-13 where it is found the 85th time in scripture.

I. In Acts 10-11 it is provided to justify the WATER BAPTISM of Gentiles into the membership of the institutional house of God, thus as an accrediting act of God and the nearest reference point Peter can point to for anything similiar is "AT the beginning" in regard to the apostles on Pentecost - which proves it was NEVER individually applied to the thousands saved SINCE Pentecost as Protestants and Pentecostals claim.

J. Paul makes a distinction between the a plural "you" (not "we") as a singular "temple" of the Holy Spirit made up of baptized believers (1 Cor. 3;16 not "we") and a singular "you" as a singular "temple" of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 6:19). The former is the institutional house of God (1 Cor. 3:9) geographically located at Corinth (1 Cor. 12:27 not "we"), while the latter is the individual believer.

K. The baptism in the Spirit publicly identifies and accredits the institutional house of God as "the pillar and ground of truth" (1 Tim. 3:16) where the truth of the gospel (1 Tim. 3:16-17) is publicly administered by a qualified ministry (1 Tim. 3:1-13) in its preaching/teaching and administration of the ordinances until the end of the age (Mt. 28:19-20; Acts 2:40-41).

L. The promised baptism in the Spirit "not many days hence" geographically restricted to Jerusalem ("depart not from Jerusalem") restricted to 120 water baptized believers identified as "the church" at Jerusalem did not occur upon any other believers, although there were over 500 "brethren" that actually saw Christ ascend 40 days before Pentecost. Hence, on Penteocost this was not a universal baptism of ALL BELIEVERS as your theory demands. However, there is no salvation OUTSIDE of Christ or outside spiritual union with God. This was an institutional House of God public accredition which had NOTHING to do with individual salvation as it was restricted on Penteocst to 120 water baptized believers who were told not to leave Jerusalem as it is was restricted event in Jerusalem only.

 

I do not believe this. I don't think a particular title makes you a true church any more than a label on a can determines the content of the can. The Lord's churches have been called by a variety of names throughout history and "Baptist" is but one of many names and not all "Baptists" are New Testament churches.

There are essential Biblical characteristics for one to be recognized to be a "christian" and there are essential Biblical characteristics for a group of Christians to be recognized as a New Testament congregation.

this is absolutely correct, as there is no other kind of church in the New Testament. The family, kingdom and church ARE NOT THE SAME! Protestants and the universal visible and universal invisible Roman Catholic doctrines confuse them with each other.

 

I do not believe this. I don't think a particular title makes you a true church any more than a label on a can determines the content of the can. The Lord's churches have been called by a variety of names throughout history and "Baptist" is but one of many names and not all "Baptists" are New Testament churches.

There are essential Biblical characteristics for one to be recognized to be a "christian" and there are essential Biblical characteristics for a group of Christians to be recognized as a New Testament congregation.

this is absolutely correct, as there is no other kind of church in the New Testament. The family, kingdom and church ARE NOT THE SAME! Protestants and the universal visible and universal invisible Roman Catholic doctrines confuse them with each other.

Quite rightly so! The founder, foundation and first members set in the church are all New Testament in origin and have no relationship with the Old Testament saints at all (Eph. 2:20; 1 Cor. 12:28; Mt. 16:18; 18:15-18).

I do not believe this. The family, kingdom and church are not synonyms at all. What Protestants call the church invisible is the kingdom of God not the New Testament church of God.


I do not believe everything that goes under the Label of "Landmarkism" as you can plainly see from my responses above. However, I do believe in the historic definition of "Landmarkism" to be perfectly scriptural and that definition was provided by Dr. James Pendleton and then placed by William Cathcart in his Baptist Enclyclopedia which defines Landmarkism as follows:

The doctrine of Landmarkism is that baptism and church membership precede the preaching of the gospel, even as they precede communion at the Lord’s Table. The argument is that Scriptural authority to preach emanates, under God, from a gospel church; that as “a visible church is a congregation of baptized believers,” etc., it follows that no Pedobaptist organization is a church in the Scriptural sense of the term, and that therefore Scriptural authority to preach cannot proceed from such an organization. Hence the non- recognition of Pedobaptist ministers, who are not interfered with, but simply let alone – William Cathcart, Baptist Encyclopedia (Landmarkism) 1881


This definition is based upon a proper exegetical understanding of Matthew 28:19-20. There are three categories of people described in Matthew 28:19-20 - (1) The authorized "ye"; (2) The nations of unbelievers; (3) Those who respond out of the nations "them."

This commission is given only to the first group ("ye"). This first group "ye" already "have" been through this process and are therefore recognized as "disicples" (Mt. 28:16). This commission is authority to make "disciples" and a "disicple" is a follower, or one who adopts Christ's doctrine and practice. This commission is restricted to the SAME gospel Jesus preached; the SAME baptism Jesus submitted unto and administered through his disciples; and the SAME faith and order "commanded." Any who go with "another gospel" are "accursed" (Gal. 1:8-9). Any who administer another baptism are rejecting the counsel of God against themselves (Lk. 7:29-30). Any who teach another faith and order are to be withdrawn from and considered heretics (Rom. 16:17; 2 Thes. 3:6; 1 Tim. 4:1). In other words, this is a commission to reproduce after your own kind ("disciples" making "disciples" within the boundaries of what is here "commanded."). This commission was never given to anyone but "disciples" in the Biblical sense of the term. The Biblical sense of the term is defined by the Great Commission as those already water baptized believer assembling to observe all things Christ commanded (Acts 1:21-22; 2:40-41).

The administration of this commission is clearly seen throughout the New Testament whereby it reproduces congregations of like faith and order which are commanded to withdraw themselves from "every brother" that departs from "the faith" once delivered (Rom. 16:17; 2 Thes. 3:6; 1 Tim. 4:1; etc.) practicing church discipline on those who stray from this PATTERN set forth in the Great Commission.

 

How is it that baptized believers living directly under the ministry of Christ were told they were not yet baptized in the Spirit, but that it would occur later (Mt. 3:11; Acts 1:4-5). Since there can be no salvation for anyone at anytime OUTSIDE OF Christ, how do you explain that these BELIEVERS IN CHRIST were still without spiritual union with Christ as that is exactly how you define the baptism in the Spirit - to be spiritually united with Christ. They were born again (Jn. 3:3-6) water baptized believers in Christ and yet without spiritual union with Christ?????? If they were already in Spirit union with Christ then how is it they must wait in a certain geographical area to be baptized in the Spirit - if that is equal to spiritual union with Christ??? Were they DOUBLE baptized in the Spirit?? Once when they were born again/saved and then again at Pentecost???. If they were already baptized in the Spirit was (already applied to them) as well as to all pre-Pentecost saints, then why "wait" and why in "Jerusalem" and why later "not many days hence"???

Furthermore, why is it that the baptism in the Spirit is not only a predicted point in time "not many days hence" but in an restricted geographical location "depart not from Jerusalem" when there were at minimum 500 "brethren" at his ascension but only 120 were baptized in the Spirit? Hence, it was not UNIVERSAL in its application even on Pentecost but restricted in time and in place?

 

The Biblicist

[/QUOTE]


All believers from all time were Spirit baptized at one point in time as Jesus has formed the ONE Eternal Church that will assemble on the last day.

just as the cross was a once for all time event...so was Spirit baptism.

Ot saints we are told looked forward to it, Nt saints look back to it.

39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:

40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect
You do not like this idea that OT saints are partakers of this.That is one of many problems your view has.