The Timing of Cornelius’ Baptism of the Holy Ghost

[TK Burk]

Did Cornelius receiving the Holy Ghost before being baptized in Jesus name prove water baptism is not necessary for salvation? THIS STUDY by DD Benincasa answers this often asked question.

[diakonos]

What does the second D stand for?

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by diakonos

What does the second D stand for?

The second is Dominic. The first is Doctor.

[hometown guy]

Originally Posted by TK Burk

Did Cornelius receiving the Holy Ghost before being baptized in Jesus name prove water baptism is not necessary for salvation? THIS STUDY by DD Benincasa answers this often asked question.

Nope it proved you need both no matter what.

[Costeon]

Originally Posted by TK Burk

Did Cornelius receiving the Holy Ghost before being baptized in Jesus name prove water baptism is not necessary for salvation? THIS STUDY by DD Benincasa answers this often asked question.

What it shows is that God apparently will forgive someone's sins prior to water baptism if they have come to faith but are in a situation where believers will not lead them to baptism first, as was most likely Cornelius's situation. Of course the normal place for the faith and repentance that bring the remission of sins to be expressed is water baptism, but God's actions in Acts 10 show He is not bound by that if a someone is in a situation like Cornelius's. The only thing that brings the forgiveness of sins at baptism is true faith and repentance, not the ceremonial act itself. If someone thinks that Cornelius's sins were still not remitted yet even at the point when he received the Spirit, then he or she has to believe what I find impossible to believe that Cornelius was still lost till he got in the water since his sins were still against him

Cornelius's situation was unusual and called for an unusual experience. He was a Gentile. Gentiles had not come into the church yet. The conference in Acts 15 had not occurred yet and the gathered leaders had not concluded that Gentiles did not have to become Jews first and embrace the Torah before becoming followers of Christ. Most Jewish Christians would not have baptized Cornelius and his household without a revelational action from God authorizing it, so God gave the Spirit to them immediately upon them coming to faith and forgave their sins before being baptized ultimately to show that Gentiles who came to faith in Christ were accepted as they were without having to embrace the Torah first. After the Gentiles received the Spirit, no Jewish Christian could deny that they should be baptized. Cornelius's situation did not devalue baptism or show that baptism is not the normal place for saving faith to be expressed and the remission of sins to occur.

Cornelius's experience was not intended to be paradigmatic--we do not see it happen again in Acts, and we do not see it preached that the order of baptism to Spirit baptism doesn't matter, though Pentecostals generally seem to think the order doesn't matter and, in my experience, seem to prefer the experience of Cornelius to the order of Acts 2:38. Countless times I've seen people try to get people to repent apart from baptism and to seek to receive the Spirit, and if that doesn't quite work out, then urge them to go ahead and be baptized.

The normal pattern is to repent and be baptized and then seek the baptism of the Spirit. This avoids the theological conundrum of standard Oneness Pentecostalism's soteriology of having people filled with the Spirit but still apparently lost since their sins are still against them till they get in the water to be baptized for the remission of sins. I, for example, received that Spirit during a revival service I was invited to, but nobody got around to telling me about the necessity of baptism in Jesus' name for many months after that. I had been baptized in a Baptist church years before this, and I was obviously growing in my faith and loved my experience in the Spirit, so I didn't think I needed to be rebaptized. As it turned out I immediately said yes when I was finally taught about Jesus's name baptism and was asked if I wanted to be baptized to obey Scripture. I cannot believe I was lost for those many months simply because I was in a situation where believers failed to lead me to baptism sooner. What seems apparent is that God forgave me of my sins the night I repented and was filled with the Spirit.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Costeon

... and forgave their sins before being baptized...

...the theological conundrum of standard Oneness Pentecostalism's soteriology of having people filled with the Spirit but still apparently lost since their sins are still against them till they get in the water to be baptized for the remission of sins.

If someone thinks that Cornelius's sins were still not remitted yet even at the point when he received the Spirit, then he or she has to believe what I find impossible to believe that Cornelius was still lost till he got in the water since his sins were still against him.

Jesus said many would be lost who nevertheless cast out demons in Jesus' name, etc. These were people who professed that Jesus was Lord.

So apparently one can not only "have the Holy Ghost" and be lost, but even be baptized and functioning within the visible church, professing Jesus is Lord, and be lost. Jesus did not revoke their salvation, He said He would say to them "I never knew you." Meaning, they were never saved to begin with. (Matt 7:23)

Paul taught likewise that one can operate in all the gifts and still be lost (1 Cor 13).

Cornelius' experience was indeed a departure from the norm. But it was not for the purpose of showing that forgiveness operates independently from baptism.

The unproven assumption is that one must be forgiven before receiving the Spirit. I find a total of 0 verses which say that. What is stated is that the world cannot receive the Spirit, thus it seems that being called is the prerequisite. Yet, many are called, but few are chosen. And, the calling must be made sure (established, made certain and effectual).

Being called occurs prior to being forgiven. It is thus possible to receive the Spirit prior to bring forgiven.

But perhaps more importantly we should consider why the Bible does not view salvation as a series of steps, like we often do. So that we see "problems and conundrums" where the Bible does not. Biblically, salvation is more holistic. "What if X but not Y?" is more along the lines of "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"

[Ehud]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Jesus said many would be lost who nevertheless cast out demons in Jesus' name, etc. These were people who professed that Jesus was Lord.

So apparently one can not only "have the Holy Ghost" and be lost, but even be baptized and functioning within the visible church, professing Jesus is Lord, and be lost. Jesus did not revoke their salvation, He said He would say to them "I never knew you." Meaning, they were never saved to begin with. (Matt 7:23)

Paul taught likewise that one can operate in all the gifts and still be lost (1 Cor 13).

Good afternoon, Bro. Esaias!

I have always been puzzled by these passages. How can one profess Christ and be used mightily yet still be lost? I have wondered if such folks are those who did all of these things, but then decided to just wait it out until the end. For instance, I've heard stories of revivals with repentance, baptism, miracles, etc, but whose participants, years later, are on spiritual life support. They still profess Jesus as Lord, but all they can do is bark about rules and "the good old days." If we are to be epistles read of all men, these folks read more like Stephen King novels than the Gospel of Jesus.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Ehud

Good afternoon, Bro. Esaias!

I have always been puzzled by these passages. How can one profess Christ and be used mightily yet still be lost? I have wondered if such folks are those who did all of these things, but then decided to just wait it out until the end. For instance, I've heard stories of revivals with repentance, baptism, miracles, etc, but whose participants, years later, are on spiritual life support. They still profess Jesus as Lord, but all they can do is bark about rules and "the good old days." If we are to be epistles read of all men, these folks read more like Stephen King novels than the Gospel of Jesus.

Jesus identified those people as "workers of iniquity", or "workers of lawlessness". He prefaced His statements with "Not everyone who says to me 'Lord, Lord' shall enter the kingdom, but (rather) those who do the will of my Father." So these are folks who are not living obediently to the will of God, they practice lawlessness (sin, transgression of the law). Lawlessness means without law and is a Biblical term for those who transgress the commandments of God with impunity, presumptuously, as if they were under no authority but their own devising. Autonomy, instead of theonomy. Rule or law of self instead of rule by God.

The new covenant work of the Spirit includes writing the laws of God in the minds and hearts, that is it produces obedience to God from the heart. If that does not occur, then one is not "saved", although such a one may have all the outward appearances (spiritual effects, part of the church, professing to know the Lord, etc).

The false believers in Jude's epistle were able to mingle seemingly undetected amongst first century apostolic believers. So they looked the part, but their heart and lifestyle wasn't reflecting God's revealed will for people.

[Ehud]

Originally Posted by Esaias

...that is it produces obedience to God from the heart. If that does not occur, then one is not "saved"...

I think this is a much better way of saying what I intended. The folks I have in mind seem to have let real faith deteriorate into mere mental ascent. I'm not sure how people can profess to have the love of Christ while berating others over every misstep made. I certainly don't mean turn a blind eye or condone the misbehavior, but if someone is living to shout "gotcha!" they probably aren't doing that heart thing very well.

Sorry, I probably wandered off into left field with that, but I'm grouchy today. Ha!

Thank you as always for the response, my friend!

[Costeon]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Jesus said many would be lost who nevertheless cast out demons in Jesus' name, etc. These were people who professed that Jesus was Lord.

So apparently one can not only "have the Holy Ghost" and be lost, but even be baptized and functioning within the visible church, professing Jesus is Lord, and be lost. Jesus did not revoke their salvation, He said He would say to them "I never knew you." Meaning, they were never saved to begin with. (Matt 7:23)

Paul taught likewise that one can operate in all the gifts and still be lost (1 Cor 13).

These texts do not involve people, like Cornelius, with true faith turning to Christ, and so I don't think they really speak to the issue of when someone is first saved.

Cornelius' experience was indeed a departure from the norm. But it was not for the purpose of showing that forgiveness operates independently from baptism.

Yes, that was not the purpose of God baptizing them with the Spirit before baptism; he was making a point to the Jewish Christians about Gentiles turning to him without needing to become Jews first, but it does imply that God can forgive sins apart from baptism if he chooses.

The unproven assumption is that one must be forgiven before receiving the Spirit. I find a total of 0 verses which say that. What is stated is that the world cannot receive the Spirit, thus it seems that being called is the prerequisite. Yet, many are called, but few are chosen. And, the calling must be made sure (established, made certain and effectual).

Being called occurs prior to being forgiven. It is thus possible to receive the Spirit prior to bring forgiven.

It's no assumption. The order of Acts 2:38 is not haphazard as if Peter just happened to mention repentance first and receiving the gift of the Spirit last. No, there is a a logical flow to the order he gives. The order is significant and shows that the prerequisite to receiving the baptism of the Spirit is forgiveness of sins. It's not surprising, then, that we never see people being filled with the Spirit prior to repentance/baptism in the rest of Acts, with the exception of Cornelius. The Scriptural norm is established by Acts 2:38 and the rest of the conversion accounts in Acts. We should follow this norm. The normal place that God has established for expressing saving faith and repentance and receiving the forgiveness of sins is water baptism. Cornelius's experience shows that God can and will grant forgiveness before baptism under certain extenuating circumstances, such as what Cornelius faced. I am not, however, authorized to preach exceptions to the rule. I am to preach as Peter did in Acts 2:38.

But perhaps more importantly we should consider why the Bible does not view salvation as a series of steps, like we often do. So that we see "problems and conundrums" where the Bible does not. Biblically, salvation is more holistic. "What if X but not Y?" is more along the lines of "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"

I don't think trying to determine the moment someone is redeemed is the equivalent of asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. There is a specific moment when we die to sin and are raised again. There is a specific moment we are circumcised in the Spirit. There is a specific moment when the Father transfers a person into the kingdom of the Son of his love. It is not gradual, as if someone eases into it. There is a moment, and I want to know what this is.

The Bible never says that you can be forgiven of your sins and at that moment still be lost. The Bible never says you can receive the Spirit and at that moment still be lost. So any teaching that leads to or suggests the possibility of these things happening cannot be true.

As it is, that's what the standard Oneness view of conversion leads to. Someone can repent and be baptized and be forgiven, but still be lost till they are baptized in the Spirit and speak in tongues. Conversely, someone can be baptized in the Spirit and have experienced the fullness of the Spirit in conversion, but still be lost till they are baptized in water. There is no way of getting around these conclusions.

I'm not aware of any other teaching on the conversion experience (Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant) that leads to these possibilities.