Acts 8 "[O]nly been baptized."

[MississippiBaptist]

I am currently in a discussion with a 'Second Baptism' brother. He uses Acts 8 as one of the places where a person can be born again but not have the baptism of the Holy Spirit. I agree with JM, and others, who see Acts as a transitional period. Therefore, the Apostles were sent by the Holy Spirit to the Samaritans for the cause of unity. The unification of those who worship at Mount Gerizim with those who worship at Jerusalem. In all honesty, this passage is a little problematic for me. Any insights?

Thanks!

 

[Contra_Mundum]

Act.8:13, "Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done," is qualified by v21-23, "Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God. Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee. For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity." The last is a terribly strong statement, by an apostle, claiming distinct spiritual insight, that Simon is not a Christian.

The language of v17, "Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost," is no incontrovertible sign that Simon either experienced a saving work of grace by the Spirit, or even participated directly in the "common operations" of the Spirit. He is distinguished in the following v18 by his quest to purchase the apostolic authority of imparting the gifts of the Spirit. In other words, he views the divine mysteries as sorcery--not exactly a Christian attitude--and he thinks they are accessible to those who have gained initiation, so as to have power over others.

Simon's "belief" is no better than the "belief" of many of those who followed Christ for a while, and then abandoned him, Jn2:23-24; 8:30ff; 12:42-43. In other words, people are sometimes described in Scripture according to the profession they make, as believers--even if that belief is later demonstrated to be temporary and ultimately false, cf. 1Jn.2:19.

 

[MississippiBaptist]

Simon's "belief" is no better than the "belief" of many of those who followed Christ for a while, and then abandoned him, Jn2:23-24; 8:30ff; 12:42-43. In other words, people are sometimes described in Scripture according to the profession they make, as believers--even if that belief is later demonstrated to be temporary and ultimately false, cf. 1Jn.2:19.

ITA with Simon as a false believer. Is the text saying that all those who were baptized and did not receive the Spirit represent false converts? I'm reading it as differentiating between those like Simon and believers who the Apostles were welcoming into the Faith. Is your argument: No Spirit, no true conversion?

 

[Contra_Mundum]

It occurs to me (now) that perhaps this issue isn't in the forefront of your mind by this question. It would be foolish to take from this moment the view that the giving of the Spirit ordinarily follows, by some lag-time, a conversion. The giving of the Spirit as a distinct blessing, only takes place on four occasions in Acts. When the blessing is poured out on the Jews, Act.2; when he is poured out on the Samaritans, Act.8; and when he is poured out on the Gentiles, Act.10:44-46. Finally, in Act.19:2-6, again upon Gentiles. Ordinarily in Paul's missionary enterprise, and other apostolic mission, there is no such unique note. For example, the conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch has no such notice, though it follows immediately the events in Samaria.

Simon's "belief" is no better than the "belief" of many of those who followed Christ for a while, and then abandoned him, Jn2:23-24; 8:30ff; 12:42-43. In other words, people are sometimes described in Scripture according to the profession they make, as believers--even if that belief is later demonstrated to be temporary and ultimately false, cf. 1Jn.2:19.

ITA with Simon as a false believer. Is the text saying that all those who were baptized and did not receive the Spirit represent false converts? I'm reading it as differentiating between those like Simon and believers who the Apostles were welcoming into the Faith. Is your argument: No Spirit, no true conversion?

I don't know if Simon did experience some "common operations of the Spirit," though clearly unbelievers (or reprobate) have so experienced them, ala Balaam, King Saul, or the like. I would say that an "experience" of spiritual power is no guarantee that a saving work of God has taken place in a man's heart. The proof is in demonstration of perseverance, if we may be allowed to judge it at all. The Day of Judgment will reveal all perfectly.

 

[MississippiBaptist]

Bruce,

Good stuff. Yes, the point my friend was making was that the manifestation of the Spirit (Second Blessing), follows conversion after some lag in time. He, along with most Charismatics, maintain that one can be born again but not given the power of the Holy Spirit. While I counter that one can be filled and conversely 'unfilled' (less than filled) with the Spirit during our walk with Christ but once we come to salvation we are of the same Spirit (I Cor. 12:13). I believe that the Charismatic experience is real, same as ecstatic utterances of the Greek pagans, but just not of the Spirit. Again, it is a very hard passage to wrestle away from the 'Second Blessing' folks because it is describing both conversion and subsequent receiving of the Spirit.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

There is an unfortunate "denseness" that afflicts many who come to Acts expecting to have it give them the "normative" experience for the church in all ages. Most of these people would not take a description of the events of a child's first year or two as establishing "normal" baselines for the rest of human experience. Likewise, they should question the wisdom of reading into a "honeymoon" of a married couple, or even the first year or two of married life (especially in the case of a twenty-something couple), as establishing much in the way of long-term expectations for married life, after the "honeymoon" period.

In both examples, there are some things that set true trajectories, some things that seem quite "normative" after time lends perspective, and there are many things that have place in those days, but never again. How many times do adults take new, "strange" stuff, and test it by jamming it in their mouth? Normal for babies, not normal for a five-year-old (or at least a kid that age who has managed to move on). And we could multiply examples.

The marriage metaphor is actually the better one, because it is a major change, rather than a complete restart. The church is much older than Pentecost. But those days are the "honeymoon" of the Bride of Christ, a thing very much foreshadowed by the Exodus; cf. Jer.2:1-2; Hos.2:14-16.

 

[MississippiBaptist]

You have zeroed in on the guy. He was arguing that Christ breathed the Holy Spirit on the disciples( their conversion experience) and then at Pentecost they received the 'Baptism of the Holy Spirit'. I played the 'normative' card. I really like your two metaphors. in my opinion the child one is more appropriate in this case. Paul accused the Corinthians of being immature (I Cor 14:20). One of the inherent characteristics of 'experiential ism' is I truly believe that this guy is a brother but he is so deeply steeped in Pentecostal doctrine that it is a tough go.

Thanks for the response.

 

[Peairtach]

Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you." And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you withhold forgiveness from any, it is withheld." (John 20:21-23, ESV)

Christ breathed on them in token of giving them power for service. They had been converted long before:

E.g.

Already you are clean because of the word that I have spoken to you.(John 15:3)

This breathing on them by Jesus was a mere token of the wind that would blow and shake the whole building at Pentecost.

The Spirit is called the Breath of God, as Christ is called the Word of God:

By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. (Ps 33:6)

Jesus could not baptise them into Himself with (or by) the Holy Spirit until He ascended to the Father. See the Upper Room discourse in John's Gospel where Jesus talks about going to the Father and giving the Spirit.

It was appropriate that there was a "Samaritan Pentecost" because manifestations of the Spirit like speaking in unknown languages were intended to teach that the New Covenant People of God were not restricted to the Jews or that the Jews were not in a spiritually priviledged position as before, and there had been great hostility and suspicion between the Jews and Samaritans.

Also the Samaritans would have constituted a large part of the remaining descendants of the northern kingdom of Israel, and there is a partial fulfillment at least in this account in Acts along with Christ's work among the Samaritans in the Gospels of passages like Ezekiel 35:15-28 where the Messiah unites and rules over both nations.

Since the Book of Acts Christians are baptised by Christ with the Spirit into Himself at conversion i.e. regeneration. This is why in the Epistles we are never instructed to seek the Baptism with the Spirit.

The inaugural manifestations of the Spirit in the Book of Acts were appropriate to the Apostolic era.

Why do some Christians after conversion not show the power for service and evangelism that the Apostles had, at the time they are converted if we hold that all true converts have been baptised with the Spirit? Sometimes it may be because they have not appropriated enough by faith that they have been baptised with the Spirit by Christ into Himself and what that means(e.g. Romans 6).

 

[MississippiBaptist]

Richard,

I like the 'you are already clean' reference. Good point.

 

[Peairtach]

It's not the only place:

Jesus said to him, "The one who has bathed does not need to wash, except for his feet, but is completely clean. And you are clean, but not every one of you." For he knew who was to betray him; that was why he said, "Not all of you are clean." (John 13:10-11)