Inter-Denominational Fellowship

[Yeshua1]

I think there was prophecy at the house of Cornelius. Firstly, Acts 10:45-46 and 19:6 are of a piece; they are very similar. Prophecy, as I said before, is not always (or even usually) foretelling, but forthtelling- speaking forth the words of God. Secondly Acts 10:46, 'For they [Peter and his colleagues] heard them speak in tongues and magnify God.' The magnifying of God could certainly be a prophetic word. Thirdly, Acts 11:15, 'And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them, as on us at the beginning.' Consider Acts 2:36, 'Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.' This is a prophetic word, speaking forth publicly the counsel of God. If the Holy Spirit came upon Cornelius & Co the same was he came upon the apostles, they must have prophesied.

It would make as much, if not more sense to divorce verse 3 from verses 1 & 2. Verse three starts with kai just as verse 4 does and deals with the effects of this immersion just as much as verse 4.
I can't believe that you are calling Peter a liar just to support your theory!! The people ask, "Whatever could this mean?' (Acts 2:12); Peter answers, "This is what was spoken by the prophet Joel (v.16). The Holy Spirit came down on that day and He has never withdrawn Himself.

They waited in Jerusalem so that the coming of the Spirit could be witnessed by thousands of people from all over the Roman world at Pentecost and 3,000 could be saved in one day. The Spirit came down in a new, more powerful way and in that same way He has continued ever since.

Luke 3:7. 'Then [John] said to the multitudes that came out to be baptized by him, "Brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?........."' There is no mention that these people were 'a certain group' or that John refused to baptize them. This seems clearly to have been his approach to all who come out to be baptized. He told them they were sinners and told them to 'bear fruits worthy of repentance.' He answered questions as to what this meant (Luke 3:10-14) and then presumably he baptized them if they professed repentance. Nowhere does it say that he refused to baptize anybody. Even the Pharisees seem to have made the decision not to be baptized, rather than being refused by John (Luke 7:29-30). Now bearing in mind that all this was pre-Pentecost and the coming of the Spirit in a fuller way, it is my contention that most of these people were not saved and that most of them turned away from the Lord (John 1:11; Matthew 11:18-20ff; John 6:66; John 8:31ff; Matthew 21:43). I do not believe that John 1:4-5 proves anything. It is my contention in the light of Matthew 3:5-6 that many of those repenting in Acts 2:37 would have previously been baptized by John and were given Trinitarian baptism by the apostles.

On the contrary, I do not see that JTB's words can have any other connotation. John is not saying that water baptism gives eternal life; he is saying the exact opposite. He is warning the Jews that coming out to him to be baptized will do them no good if their repentance is not genuine.

I absolutely deny that these people had eternal life absent repentance and faith in Jesus Christ, which no one without the Spirit can have (1 Corinthians 2:14).

You are opening up a whole new can of worms here. Our definition of 'baptism in the Spirit' is obviously different and I don't have time to pursue it. I have one more of your posts to reply to on another thread and then I shall be taking time out from this forum for a while. I am spending much too much time here.

Th Church came in at Pentacost, s te Holy Spirt came in the new working of now being sealed in ALL of the people of God!

 

[The Biblicist]

Th Church came in at Pentacost, s te Holy Spirt came in the new working of now being sealed in ALL of the people of God!

Pure ignorance! Don't you read anything OR respond to anything that has been said?????

 

[utilyan]

This is nothing but a rabbit trail designed to avoidthe fact that the baptism in the Spirit has NOTHING to do with union in Christ as I have proven that already and you and no one on this forum has been able to disprove and here is the proof again:

1. ALL "in Adam" are "in the flesh" (phsyical union) because they have been "BORN of the flesh" without any kind of baptism or church membeship

ALL "in Christ" are "in the Spirit" (spiritual union) because they have been "BORN of the Spirit" without any kind of baptism or church membership.

2. ALL "in Adam" had been CREATED in Adam, likewise, ALL"in Christ" have been "CREATED in Christ" by new birth (Eph. 2:1-10) not by any kind of baptism or church membership.

3.No baptism in the Spirit (as you define it) preceded Pentecost and so no one could be "in Christ" as you define it previous to Pentecost and there is no salvation OUTSIDE of Christ for anyone at any time thus repudiating your theory altogether as your theory demands ANOTHER WAY of salvation OUTSIDE Christ before Pentecost.

4. The NT church cannot precede its own "foundation" which consists of NT materials (apostles) FIRST being "set in" the church by God not OT people of God thus repudiating your whole theory as you define "in Christ" as synonymous with being in the church body of Christ. Thus again, your theory demands another way of salvation prior to Matthew.


5.ALL "in Adam" have been born into this world in a state of SPIRITUAL SEPARATION from God and that is the how Paul uses the descriptive phrase "in the flesh" in Romans 8:8 and ALL who are "in the flesh" in that spiritual sense are "NONE OF HIS" - Rom. 8:9 - whereas ALL of his are "in the Spirit" which he defines as synonymous with "indwelt by the Spirit" or SPIRITUAL UNION - Rom. 8:9

6. Spiritual SEPARATION which is spiritual DEATH and this is the universal problem and the ONLY possible universal solution to this problem is Spiritual UNION which is spirtual LIFE and that is what BIRTH/quickening NOT any kind of baptism or church membership.

This is not a new can of worms as this part and parcel with any Biblical examination of spiritual union - one must define what they are talking about.

Now, to answer your rabbit trail arguments:



On Pentecost the promise is that those upon the Spirit is poured out shall prophecy in addition to tongues. Peter is the one speaking in this context not Cornelius. No prophetic utterances occurred in this context by Corneilus.

Not only so, but Acts 8 and 19 the gifts were not communicated directly by God as in Acts 2 and 10 but THROUGH THE LAYING ON OF APOSTOLIC HANDS.




Deal with the issue I placed squarely in front of you instead of ignoring it. Baptism is not filling as filling occurs BEFORE pentecost so you are trying to confuse what Scripture separates distinctly from each other. The pouring out followed being "filled" and had to do with SPIRITUAL GIFTS not the baptism in the Spirit. There are multiple facets of the promise of the Spirit that are distinct and seaprate from each other which you are attempting to confuse and fail to distinguish.



The contextual antecedent for "this" is not the baptism in the Spirit as that was neither seen or heard as it occurred in the upper room. It is after the "filled" apostles came down among the crowds where they were seen and heard, and specificall it was tongues they heard which they accused them of being drunk, it was "THIS" that Peter in context is referring to by the prophecy of Joel which also refers to ANOTHER facet of the coming of the Spirit which is SPIRITUAL GIFTS not the baptism in the Spirit.



Context!!!! ONLY the 120 were the objects of this baptism as they ALONE were in that upper room where this baptism occurred. ONLY these "galleans" were objects of the pouring out of the Spirit in SPIRITUAL GIFTS. NTHER BELEIVERS in Israel were the objects of these things and that is why Peter could tell Cornelius that the nearest reference point was "AT the beginning" becuase this was not a REPEATING action upon ANYONE ELSE since Pentecost.



These are rediculous arguments! Matthew 3:6-8 makes it clear there were those john was baptizing and there are those who showed up that he refused to baptize or the words "bring forth fruits of repentance" makes no sense if there were no obstacle to baptizing them.

Where have I ever said water baptism gives eternal life to anyone. Where does the text say that? Where does the text says baptism in the Spirit gives life to anyone? NOWHERE except in your fruitful imagination and theological biased mind.



Readers take note of this denial by Martin as it is what he must deny to be consistent with his position. However, both Jesus and JTB contradict and repudiate Martin's position by using the PRESENT TENSE promise of eternal life upon faith in him (Jn. 3;16; 3:36; 5:24; 6:37-39; 10:27-30) and Jesus tells his water baptized believing disciples their names are aleady written in heaven (Lk. 10:40). He tells them as individuals they already "have" the Spirit with them.

Martin and his allies would have you believe Christ and John are lying when they promise eternal life in present tense to all who belief the gospel.

" the baptism in the Spirit has NOTHING to do with union in Christ"


Romans 6

3Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? 4Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. 5For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection,


Colossians 2

9For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form, 10and in Him you have been made complete, and He is the head over all rule and authority; 11and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; 12having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. 13When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions, 14having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.


"Pure ignorance! Don't you read anything.......blah blah blah blah."


BAM! WHAT!?

 

[Yeshua1]

Pure ignorance! Don't you read anything OR respond to anything that has been said?????

The Bible staes tha the Spirit came to give to Jesus own the Holy Spirit as a fulfillment of Jeremiah and Joel, so was that ignorant?

To do a NEW work here on the Earth, to create the Curch, where Jews/Gentiles both now under Promises of God?

 

[The Biblicist]

The Bible staes tha the Spirit came to give to Jesus own the Holy Spirit as a fulfillment of Jeremiah and Joel, so was that ignorant?

To do a NEW work here on the Earth, to create the Curch, where Jews/Gentiles both now under Promises of God?

The Bible says no such thing. That is pure imagination produced by eisegetical abuse of scripture.

 

[Yeshua1]

The Bible says no such thing. That is pure imagination produced by eisegetical abuse of scripture.

You then deny that Peter himself quoted Joel as being fulfilled in their hearing was false? That when Isaiah was quoted as being fulfilled in their hearing was false?

That God did not fulfill Jeremiah 31 of the New Covenant at Pentacost then?
The Apostles seemed to think that He did and had, were they wrong?

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Six Hour Warning

This thread will be closed sometime after 1am Pacific Time.

 

[Salty]

Six Hour Warning

This thread will be closed sometime after 1am Pacific Time.

Can we vote on it

 

[Squire Robertsson]

This thread is closed.

Six Hour Warning

This thread will be closed sometime after 1am Pacific Time.