I am sorry to break it to some of you but the church did not start on the day of Pentecost. Scofield was wrong in his view. First of all, the Bible says that 3,000 souls were ADDED to the church. How can you add to something that didn't exist??? The church started when Jesus called out his deciples. Ihave many more scriptural proofs that the church started before the day of Pentecost.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The church didn't NOT start on Pentecost
- Thread starter Bro Ben
- Start date
I always reluctant to point out the obvious but the 3,000 were added to the 120 waiting in the upper room. Acts 2:1ff were also on the Day of Pentecost.
Reading the text before deciding what it says does marvelous things for theology.
Reading the text before deciding what it says does marvelous things for theology.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by preacher:
Well I see you waste no time
Lets see....Christ said " upon this Rock I will build my church". If the church began with the calling of the disciples, the why did'nt he say I am building, or some form of present tense wording, instead of I will,
implying future tense?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Is God still building your church? At what point in the "building process" would you consider the organization a church?
Well I see you waste no time
Lets see....Christ said " upon this Rock I will build my church". If the church began with the calling of the disciples, the why did'nt he say I am building, or some form of present tense wording, instead of I will,
implying future tense?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Is God still building your church? At what point in the "building process" would you consider the organization a church?
At Hanukkah, Jesus met with His disciples and shared with them His position: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep . . . I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Word "shepherd" here is "poimen" and translated PASTOR elsewhere. Jesus was saying the December BEFORE His crucifixion that "I am the Good Pastor who gives his life for his sheep."
So 180 days BEFORE Pentecost we have a Pastor and Sheep. Hmmmm. Whaddya think?
So 180 days BEFORE Pentecost we have a Pastor and Sheep. Hmmmm. Whaddya think?
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>So 180 days BEFORE Pentecost we have a Pastor and Sheep. Hmmmm. Whaddya think?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I think it might be akin to Carson's "Verbal parallelomania" (Exegetical Fallacies, p. 43), where people "adduce 'parallels' of questionalbe worth." Perhaps also akin to "Unwarranted adoption of an expanded semantic field," also called "illegitimate totality transfer" (ibid, p. 60).
In short, the fact that the same word occurs in two different contexts does not guarantee that they mean the same thing. In the context of John 10, Christ is not talking about the church specifically. He is using a familir analogy to discuss the facts of salvation. It is a good verse for soteriology but not for ecclesiology. While what he is saying is true about the church, it is also true about OT Israel.
I think it might be akin to Carson's "Verbal parallelomania" (Exegetical Fallacies, p. 43), where people "adduce 'parallels' of questionalbe worth." Perhaps also akin to "Unwarranted adoption of an expanded semantic field," also called "illegitimate totality transfer" (ibid, p. 60).
In short, the fact that the same word occurs in two different contexts does not guarantee that they mean the same thing. In the context of John 10, Christ is not talking about the church specifically. He is using a familir analogy to discuss the facts of salvation. It is a good verse for soteriology but not for ecclesiology. While what he is saying is true about the church, it is also true about OT Israel.
I would tend to disagree. The church full of Spirit filled believers could not begin before the day of Pentecost. Not only did the Spirit not indwell believers until the day of Pentecost. It was hard for believers to do this until after the fact.
Romans 10:9 "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."
All things had to come to pass before salvation by grace could be offered and until His Spirit was sent that day, no one was able to have the Spirit indwell them. Without the Spirit we are not saved.
Romans 8:9 "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his"
Just my thoughts on the matter
~Lorelei
Romans 10:9 "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."
All things had to come to pass before salvation by grace could be offered and until His Spirit was sent that day, no one was able to have the Spirit indwell them. Without the Spirit we are not saved.
Romans 8:9 "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his"
Just my thoughts on the matter
~Lorelei
DocCas
New Member
What do I think? I think the bible is clear. Christ built His church, just as He said He would. After His resurrection, He sent the Holy Spirit to be the "guide into all truth" which He had formerly done.
Why is the "Pentecost Birthday" theory wrong and dangerous:
It denies the Lord did what He said He would do. Matt 16;18. According to the Pentecostal birthday theory the Holy Spirit is building the church and the HS began doing that after Christ's ascension.
It deprives the church of the 4 gospels. (Someone on this board even said recently that the gospels should be read as being OT!) But Mark 1:1-4 says NT gospel preaching began with John the Baptist!
The Pentecostal theory humanizes the church as an institution. If the church began at Pentecost, it began with the Apostles and not with Christ and thus it is a man-made institution!
But, PRAISE THE LORD, the Pentecostal birthday theory is unscriptural and thus untrue.
As already noted, the gospel era began before pentecost. Mark 1:1-4.
The Apostles and many others were truly saved NT Christians. Acts 1:22 tells us that they were saved and Baptized under the preaching of John the Baptist! Now, if John was an OT prophet, then the NT Apostles were never saved and never received NT baptism!
The Pre-Pentecostal church was organized.
1. It had a Head. Matthew 23:8
2. It had a Pastor. John 10:11, 14
3. It had church discipline. Matt 18:15-20
4. It conducted business meetings Acts 1:15-26
5. It even had a treasurer! John 13:29
6. It was a missionary church.
<UL TYPE=SQUARE><LI>Commissioned: Matt 28:18-20<LI>It did missionary work. Matt 10:1-11:1<LI>It had the keys to the Kindom. Matt 16;19<LI>It baptized those who believed. John 4:1,2<LI>It had a membership roll. Acts 1:13-15[/list]
7. It observed the Lord's Supper. Matt 26:26-28
8. It had singing. cf Matt 26:30 with Hebrews 2:12
9. It met for prayer. Luke 11:1-9; Acts 1:14
10. It was "added unto" Acts 2:41
11. It was called a "flock." cf Matt 26:31 and Luke 12:32 with Acts 20:28, 29 and 1 Peter 5:2,3
Yes, the bible makes it clear, the NT church was alive and healthy prior to the day of Pentecost! In fact, the church received no new commands, no new marching orders, no new commission, no new nothing. All that happened was that the Second Person of the Godhead's Personal presence was replaced by the Third Person of the Godhead's Personal presence. The Power that Christ manifested was now manifested by the Holy Spirit.
Why is the "Pentecost Birthday" theory wrong and dangerous:
It denies the Lord did what He said He would do. Matt 16;18. According to the Pentecostal birthday theory the Holy Spirit is building the church and the HS began doing that after Christ's ascension.
It deprives the church of the 4 gospels. (Someone on this board even said recently that the gospels should be read as being OT!) But Mark 1:1-4 says NT gospel preaching began with John the Baptist!
The Pentecostal theory humanizes the church as an institution. If the church began at Pentecost, it began with the Apostles and not with Christ and thus it is a man-made institution!
But, PRAISE THE LORD, the Pentecostal birthday theory is unscriptural and thus untrue.
As already noted, the gospel era began before pentecost. Mark 1:1-4.
The Apostles and many others were truly saved NT Christians. Acts 1:22 tells us that they were saved and Baptized under the preaching of John the Baptist! Now, if John was an OT prophet, then the NT Apostles were never saved and never received NT baptism!
The Pre-Pentecostal church was organized.
1. It had a Head. Matthew 23:8
2. It had a Pastor. John 10:11, 14
3. It had church discipline. Matt 18:15-20
4. It conducted business meetings Acts 1:15-26
5. It even had a treasurer! John 13:29
6. It was a missionary church.
<UL TYPE=SQUARE><LI>Commissioned: Matt 28:18-20<LI>It did missionary work. Matt 10:1-11:1<LI>It had the keys to the Kindom. Matt 16;19<LI>It baptized those who believed. John 4:1,2<LI>It had a membership roll. Acts 1:13-15[/list]
7. It observed the Lord's Supper. Matt 26:26-28
8. It had singing. cf Matt 26:30 with Hebrews 2:12
9. It met for prayer. Luke 11:1-9; Acts 1:14
10. It was "added unto" Acts 2:41
11. It was called a "flock." cf Matt 26:31 and Luke 12:32 with Acts 20:28, 29 and 1 Peter 5:2,3
Yes, the bible makes it clear, the NT church was alive and healthy prior to the day of Pentecost! In fact, the church received no new commands, no new marching orders, no new commission, no new nothing. All that happened was that the Second Person of the Godhead's Personal presence was replaced by the Third Person of the Godhead's Personal presence. The Power that Christ manifested was now manifested by the Holy Spirit.
DocCas
New Member
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lorelei:
I would tend to disagree. The church full of Spirit filled believers could not begin before the day of Pentecost. Not only did the Spirit not indwell believers until the day of Pentecost. It was hard for believers to do this until after the fact.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Lorelei, are you suggesting the Personal Presence of the Third Person of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit is somehow superior and more powerful than the Personal Presence of the Second Person of the Godhead, the Lord Jesus Christ?
I would tend to disagree. The church full of Spirit filled believers could not begin before the day of Pentecost. Not only did the Spirit not indwell believers until the day of Pentecost. It was hard for believers to do this until after the fact.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Lorelei, are you suggesting the Personal Presence of the Third Person of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit is somehow superior and more powerful than the Personal Presence of the Second Person of the Godhead, the Lord Jesus Christ?
Ok, this is again one of those topics I never really thought about before. I love this board for that, it makes me really read and study His Word for more understanding!
Now, with that said, I am still not sure what you mean. I do beleive that the church was built upon Jesus! I was just saying, that the NT body of believers were still under the OT covenant until the day of Pentecost. So I guess I may mean that though the building of the NT church began during Jesus' ministry, it was not complete until the day of Pentecost.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Thomas Cassidy:
Why is the "Pentecost Birthday" theory wrong and dangerous:
It denies the Lord did what He said He would do. Matt 16;18. According to the Pentecostal birthday theory the Holy Spirit is building the church and the HS began doing that after Christ's ascension.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
IMO (Hey, I am still studying this) the foundation was laid, but it was not complete. No, the Holy Spirit is not "building" the church. Matthew 16 also explains that the HS will glorify Jesus, not himself. However, it would not come until Jesus went away. (Matt 16:7-15)
It deprives the church of the 4 gospels. (Someone on this board even said recently that the gospels should be read as being OT!) But Mark 1:1-4 says NT gospel preaching began with John the Baptist!
Since I haven't done my research, I might ask rather then using this verse, are there other verses in the New Testament that calls his followers "believers"? It seems to appear to me (I will do some searching later) that after the day of Pentecost is when they are referred to less as "followers" and more as "believers". It would say they were "added" rather then they just "followed" Him. Not meaning they did not believe, but just that the New Covenant was not yet complete. Just a thought, don't jump me here, I am curious! If I find it's not scriptural I will come back and say so! I am admitting I am not sure on this one.
The Pentecostal theory humanizes the church as an institution. If the church began at Pentecost, it began with the Apostles and not with Christ and thus it is a man-made institution!
I don't mean it sound like I am saying that the church is man-made. Certainly it is not! The church is human though, for it is not a building of brick and stone, it IS the body of believers who are human. Thankfully on the day of Pentecost, they are filled with the Holy Spirit and have his wisdom upon which to follow Christ. Before that point it "was" more human then it is now, because they did not have His Spirit guiding them.
As already noted, the gospel era began before pentecost. Mark 1:1-4. The gospel era, but what about the fullness of God's plan? It was not finished.
The Apostles and many others were truly saved NT Christians. Acts 1:22 tells us that they were saved and Baptized under the preaching of John the Baptist! Now, if John was an OT prophet, then the NT Apostles were never saved and never received NT baptism!
Acts 1:22 "Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection."
I think it is saying for one to replace Judas, he had to be with them from the beginning. Not that the entire church had to be.
If John's baptism was sufficient for salvation, could you please explain to me Acts 19:1-7?
Yes, the bible makes it clear, the NT church was alive and healthy prior to the day of Pentecost! In fact, the church received no new commands, no new marching orders, no new commission, no new nothing. All that happened was that the Second Person of the Godhead's Personal presence was replaced by the Third Person of the Godhead's Personal presence. The Power that Christ manifested was now manifested by the Holy Spirit.
You say they received nothing new? Then what exactly WAS Pentecost about? No one was fully Baptized with the HS until this day!
If you hold this true, do you also believe as the charasmatics do that the HS baptism comes AFTER salvation? You basically used their arguments to state that those who were baptized with it in Acts were already saved.
~Lorelei
Now, with that said, I am still not sure what you mean. I do beleive that the church was built upon Jesus! I was just saying, that the NT body of believers were still under the OT covenant until the day of Pentecost. So I guess I may mean that though the building of the NT church began during Jesus' ministry, it was not complete until the day of Pentecost.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Thomas Cassidy:
Why is the "Pentecost Birthday" theory wrong and dangerous:
It denies the Lord did what He said He would do. Matt 16;18. According to the Pentecostal birthday theory the Holy Spirit is building the church and the HS began doing that after Christ's ascension.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
IMO (Hey, I am still studying this) the foundation was laid, but it was not complete. No, the Holy Spirit is not "building" the church. Matthew 16 also explains that the HS will glorify Jesus, not himself. However, it would not come until Jesus went away. (Matt 16:7-15)
It deprives the church of the 4 gospels. (Someone on this board even said recently that the gospels should be read as being OT!) But Mark 1:1-4 says NT gospel preaching began with John the Baptist!
Since I haven't done my research, I might ask rather then using this verse, are there other verses in the New Testament that calls his followers "believers"? It seems to appear to me (I will do some searching later) that after the day of Pentecost is when they are referred to less as "followers" and more as "believers". It would say they were "added" rather then they just "followed" Him. Not meaning they did not believe, but just that the New Covenant was not yet complete. Just a thought, don't jump me here, I am curious! If I find it's not scriptural I will come back and say so! I am admitting I am not sure on this one.
The Pentecostal theory humanizes the church as an institution. If the church began at Pentecost, it began with the Apostles and not with Christ and thus it is a man-made institution!
I don't mean it sound like I am saying that the church is man-made. Certainly it is not! The church is human though, for it is not a building of brick and stone, it IS the body of believers who are human. Thankfully on the day of Pentecost, they are filled with the Holy Spirit and have his wisdom upon which to follow Christ. Before that point it "was" more human then it is now, because they did not have His Spirit guiding them.
As already noted, the gospel era began before pentecost. Mark 1:1-4. The gospel era, but what about the fullness of God's plan? It was not finished.
The Apostles and many others were truly saved NT Christians. Acts 1:22 tells us that they were saved and Baptized under the preaching of John the Baptist! Now, if John was an OT prophet, then the NT Apostles were never saved and never received NT baptism!
Acts 1:22 "Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection."
I think it is saying for one to replace Judas, he had to be with them from the beginning. Not that the entire church had to be.
If John's baptism was sufficient for salvation, could you please explain to me Acts 19:1-7?
Yes, the bible makes it clear, the NT church was alive and healthy prior to the day of Pentecost! In fact, the church received no new commands, no new marching orders, no new commission, no new nothing. All that happened was that the Second Person of the Godhead's Personal presence was replaced by the Third Person of the Godhead's Personal presence. The Power that Christ manifested was now manifested by the Holy Spirit.
You say they received nothing new? Then what exactly WAS Pentecost about? No one was fully Baptized with the HS until this day!
If you hold this true, do you also believe as the charasmatics do that the HS baptism comes AFTER salvation? You basically used their arguments to state that those who were baptized with it in Acts were already saved.
~Lorelei
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Thomas Cassidy:
Lorelei, are you suggesting the Personal Presence of the Third Person of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit is somehow superior and more powerful than the Personal Presence of the Second Person of the Godhead, the Lord Jesus Christ?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
No not at all, but according to these verses I feel that until the Holy Spirit indwelt believers then the salvation plan was not complete. I am not saying the HS is more powerful, just that the HS plays just as much a part of the New Covenant as the other two persons of the Godhead. The argument you gave made it sound like the other two were more powerful then the HS. I am saying you can't have only two parts of the three to receive salvation.
John 3:6 "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit"
John 4:24 "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth"
Romans 8:1 "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."
Romans 8:9 "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his"
Until the day of Pentecost, how was this done?
~Lorelei
[ August 29, 2001: Message edited by: Lorelei ]
Lorelei, are you suggesting the Personal Presence of the Third Person of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit is somehow superior and more powerful than the Personal Presence of the Second Person of the Godhead, the Lord Jesus Christ?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>No not at all, but according to these verses I feel that until the Holy Spirit indwelt believers then the salvation plan was not complete. I am not saying the HS is more powerful, just that the HS plays just as much a part of the New Covenant as the other two persons of the Godhead. The argument you gave made it sound like the other two were more powerful then the HS. I am saying you can't have only two parts of the three to receive salvation.
John 3:6 "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit"
John 4:24 "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth"
Romans 8:1 "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."
Romans 8:9 "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his"
Until the day of Pentecost, how was this done?
~Lorelei
[ August 29, 2001: Message edited by: Lorelei ]
Thomas,
A couple of problems (among others to be addressed later) with your theory of a “pre-pentecostal church.”
1. Since Spirit baptism is the building block of the church (1 Cor 12:13) and since in the gospels it is still future (Matt 3:11, Mark 1:8, Luke 3:16, John 1:33), the church cannot start until after that time (when it was said). Furthermore, in Matt 16, the church is still future so it can’t start until after that time (probably some six months prior to his death).
2. You suggest that the Spirit baptism places the building of the church as by the Spirit rather than by Christ. Yet that fails to recognize that the Gospels teach that Christ is the one who does the baptizing by the Spirit as the above verses show us. So Christ is building his church through the baptism and work of the Spirit.
3. You say it deprives us of the four gospels. Only inasmuch as it deprives us of the OT. It does not do either.
Admittedly the Gospels were a transitional time. Yet what you have done is taken things that a group of believers did and called them the Church. That does not fully account for the scriptural teaching on the matter.
Loralei, The OT believers were indwelt and regenerated by the Spirit. There is no other way to account for salvation and godly living. The major NT difference in the work of the Spirit is Spirit baptism which is non-experiential.
A couple of problems (among others to be addressed later) with your theory of a “pre-pentecostal church.”
1. Since Spirit baptism is the building block of the church (1 Cor 12:13) and since in the gospels it is still future (Matt 3:11, Mark 1:8, Luke 3:16, John 1:33), the church cannot start until after that time (when it was said). Furthermore, in Matt 16, the church is still future so it can’t start until after that time (probably some six months prior to his death).
2. You suggest that the Spirit baptism places the building of the church as by the Spirit rather than by Christ. Yet that fails to recognize that the Gospels teach that Christ is the one who does the baptizing by the Spirit as the above verses show us. So Christ is building his church through the baptism and work of the Spirit.
3. You say it deprives us of the four gospels. Only inasmuch as it deprives us of the OT. It does not do either.
Admittedly the Gospels were a transitional time. Yet what you have done is taken things that a group of believers did and called them the Church. That does not fully account for the scriptural teaching on the matter.
Loralei, The OT believers were indwelt and regenerated by the Spirit. There is no other way to account for salvation and godly living. The major NT difference in the work of the Spirit is Spirit baptism which is non-experiential.
What about
John 20:21-22
Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: (Almost fifty days before Pentecost)
Hebrews 9:14-17
How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
????
If the church/NT was before the cross, we have to answer questions about Jesus telling a man to offer a sacrifice.
Mark 1:44
And saith unto him, See thou say nothing to any man: but go thy way, shew thyself to the priest, and offer for thy cleansing those things which Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them.
And we have to answer questions about the Church being shut up to the Genitals
Matthew 10:5
These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
[ August 29, 2001: Message edited by: Larry ]
John 20:21-22
Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: (Almost fifty days before Pentecost)
Hebrews 9:14-17
How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
????
If the church/NT was before the cross, we have to answer questions about Jesus telling a man to offer a sacrifice.
Mark 1:44
And saith unto him, See thou say nothing to any man: but go thy way, shew thyself to the priest, and offer for thy cleansing those things which Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them.
And we have to answer questions about the Church being shut up to the Genitals
Matthew 10:5
These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
[ August 29, 2001: Message edited by: Larry ]
DocCas
New Member
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
1. Since Spirit baptism is the building block of the church . . .
2. You suggest that the Spirit baptism places the building of the church as by the Spirit rather than by Christ.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>False foundational assumption. There is no such thing, today, as "spirit baptism." It was a one time event, on the day of Pentecost, when Christ immersed the church at Jerusalem into the Holy Spirit, never to be repeated.
1. Since Spirit baptism is the building block of the church . . .
2. You suggest that the Spirit baptism places the building of the church as by the Spirit rather than by Christ.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>False foundational assumption. There is no such thing, today, as "spirit baptism." It was a one time event, on the day of Pentecost, when Christ immersed the church at Jerusalem into the Holy Spirit, never to be repeated.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Thomas Cassidy:
False foundational assumption. There is no such thing, today, as "spirit baptism." It was a one time event, on the day of Pentecost, when Christ immersed the church at Jerusalem into the Holy Spirit, never to be repeated.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
So what do you think 1 Cor 12:13 means when it says "For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit"?
It seems pretty clear that Paul was talking to a group of people saved after Pentecost and appears to include himself who we know was saved after Pentecost.
If Spirit baptism was a one time event that happened only at Pentecost, this verse seems to make no sense. Out of all the various opinions on Spirit baptism this is a new one to me. Can you direct me to a source that supports it? I would like to see someone make some arguments for it.
[ August 29, 2001: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]
False foundational assumption. There is no such thing, today, as "spirit baptism." It was a one time event, on the day of Pentecost, when Christ immersed the church at Jerusalem into the Holy Spirit, never to be repeated.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
So what do you think 1 Cor 12:13 means when it says "For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit"?
It seems pretty clear that Paul was talking to a group of people saved after Pentecost and appears to include himself who we know was saved after Pentecost.
If Spirit baptism was a one time event that happened only at Pentecost, this verse seems to make no sense. Out of all the various opinions on Spirit baptism this is a new one to me. Can you direct me to a source that supports it? I would like to see someone make some arguments for it.
[ August 29, 2001: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]
DocCas
New Member
In 1 Cor 12:13 Paul, in context, is talking to the church at Corinth, and is talking about water baptism. The entire point of 1 Corinthians is "unity" in the local church. Paul is pointing out that our baptism indicates we all are "in Christ" and "one" with Him. We are all saved by "one" (I.E., the same) grace, gospel, and regenerating of the Holy Spirit. Our water baptism was a picture of our unity one with the other in all those things. For by ONE spirit (by the leading of the SAME Holy Spirit) we are all baptized (in water) into ONE body (the local church at Corinth), whether Jews or Gentiles (racial equality) bond or free (social equality) and all made to drink into ONE spirit. The context of 1 Corinthians is UNITY in the local assembly. Paul is saying our water baptism is a symbol of that unity so why are so divided? He then talks about the local body and the individual members, all of which are important to the health and productivity of all the other members.
Paul says that every member of the Corinthian church was led by the holy spirit to be baptized as a symbol of our unity in Christ, and unity in the local assembly. Why were they not acting in unity.
Paul says that every member of the Corinthian church was led by the holy spirit to be baptized as a symbol of our unity in Christ, and unity in the local assembly. Why were they not acting in unity.
What makes you say that 1 Cor 12 is talking about water baptism? I have never seen anyone argue for this position. In fact, it seems contrary to everything chs 12-14 are saying. Do you have an author who does? I do not see anything in the text that intimates that Paul is saying that “our baptism indicates we are all ‘in Christ’ and ‘one’ with Him.” He seems to say that the baptism (whatever it is) actually makes us one. You are right that Paul is talking about unity. But it seems contrary to the text that he is talking about water baptism for a number of reasons.
1. The issue is spiritual gifts and the division caused by some who were bragging about theirs. Paul is saying that no spiritual gift is greater than another because we were all baptized by the same Spirit. Water baptism never gave spiritual gifts to anyone.
2. Paul uses the phrase “en eni pneumati,” elsewhere used of the work of the Spirit, not water baptism (Eph 2:18). Water baptism never gave anyone “access to God” as this baptism Paul is talking about does.
3. Spirit baptism is contrasted with water baptism in the gospels passages cited above. In essence, John baptized with water, Christ will baptize with the Spirit. In 1 Cor 12:13, Paul specifically uses very similar language to what was used in the gospels in this contrast (en + pneuma).
4. Water baptism is not accomplished by the Spirit. Water baptism is symbolic of Spirit baptism. Just as Spirit baptism is the introductory “rite” into the invisible body of Christ, so water baptism is the introductory “rite” into the visible body of Christ, the local church. Water baptism is carried out by the pastor or whomever the church body designates for such duty, not by the Spirit.
5. Water baptism does not bring us into “one body” in the sense of the invisible church. Many people have been baptized by water who have never been baptized by the Spirit and therefore are not included in what Paul is discussing, namely, the use of gifts in the body.
1. The issue is spiritual gifts and the division caused by some who were bragging about theirs. Paul is saying that no spiritual gift is greater than another because we were all baptized by the same Spirit. Water baptism never gave spiritual gifts to anyone.
2. Paul uses the phrase “en eni pneumati,” elsewhere used of the work of the Spirit, not water baptism (Eph 2:18). Water baptism never gave anyone “access to God” as this baptism Paul is talking about does.
3. Spirit baptism is contrasted with water baptism in the gospels passages cited above. In essence, John baptized with water, Christ will baptize with the Spirit. In 1 Cor 12:13, Paul specifically uses very similar language to what was used in the gospels in this contrast (en + pneuma).
4. Water baptism is not accomplished by the Spirit. Water baptism is symbolic of Spirit baptism. Just as Spirit baptism is the introductory “rite” into the invisible body of Christ, so water baptism is the introductory “rite” into the visible body of Christ, the local church. Water baptism is carried out by the pastor or whomever the church body designates for such duty, not by the Spirit.
5. Water baptism does not bring us into “one body” in the sense of the invisible church. Many people have been baptized by water who have never been baptized by the Spirit and therefore are not included in what Paul is discussing, namely, the use of gifts in the body.