ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spirit
 

Tertullian and Post Conversion Reception of the Holy Spirit
Terullian, in his treatise On Baptism, states quite clearly that "in the water, under (the witness of) the angel, we are cleansed and prepared for the Holy Spirit" (chaps. 5 and 6). "Thus, too, does the angel, the witness of baptism, 'make the paths straight' for the Holy Spirit, who IS ABOUT TO COME UPON US..." (chap. 6). He makes it very clear that the reception of the Gift of the Holy Spirit is post conversion (and water baptism). He further clarifies this when he says "Not that in the waters we obtain the Holy Spirit" (chap 5), but that "we are cleansed and prepared for the Holy Spirit" (op cit).


Hippolytus and Post Conversion Reception of the Holy Spirit

Immediately after water baptism, Hippolytus says in "The Apostolic Tradition" “the Bishop shall lay his hand upon them invoking and saying: ‘0 Lord God, who didst count these [thy servants] worthy of deserving the forgiveness of sins by the laver of regeneration, make them worthy to be filled with thy Holy Spirit and send upon them Thy grace, that they may serve Thee according to Thy will’” (22).


Cyprian and the Post Coversion Reception of the Holy Spirit

Only brief reference need be made to Cyprian since he says essentially the same thing as Tertullian in reference to baptism and the reception of the Holy Spirit. Cyprian writes in his Epistles about the situation of the Samaritans (Acts 8) who had “believed with a true faith” and had been baptized, and afterwards “prayer being made for them and hands being imposed, the Holy Spirit was poured out.” He adds that the same thing “now too is done among us, so that they who are baptized in the Church are brought to the prelates of the Church, and by our prayers and by the imposition of hands obtain the Holy Spirit, and are perfected with the Lord's seal” (72, 9). [http://www.renewaltheology.net/]




Cyprian said:

“…that those who have been dipped abroad outside the Church, and have been stained among heretics and schismatics with the taint of profane water, when they come to us and to the Church which is one, ought to be baptized, for the reason that it is a small matter to "lay hands on them that they may receive the Holy Ghost," unless they receive also the baptism of the Church. For then finally can they be fully sanctified, and be the sons of God, if they be born of each sacrament; since it is written, "Except a man be born again of water, and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." For we find also, in the Acts of the Apostles, that this is maintained by the apostles, and kept in the truth of the saving faith, so that when, in the house of Cornelius the centurion, the Holy Ghost had descended upon the Gentiles who were there, fervent in the warmth of their faith, and believing in the Lord with their whole heart; and when, filled with the Spirit, they blessed God in divers tongues, still none the less the blessed Apostle Peter, mindful of the divine precept and the Gospel, commanded that those same men should be baptized who had already been filled with the Holy Spirit, that nothing might seem to be neglected to the observance by the apostolic instruction in all things of the law of the divine precept and Gospel” (Epistle LXXI- To Stephen [Bishop of Rome] )

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

I'm fairly certain that Catholics believe that the Holy Ghost is received at Baptism or immediately thereafter. The quote on tertullian can be read as him believing the Holy Ghost comes immediately after baptism. There is nothing problematic with him saying this. Note that even if he meant long after baptism it does not show he felt speaking in tongues or any other sign would accompany the reception of the Holy Ghost. So this quote does not support your view of reception of the Holy Ghost.

In the Apostolic Tradition Hippolytus cites a number of practices regarding baptism that you do not agree with. One of the passages that stood out the most to me was: "2When they come to the water, the water shall be pure and flowing, that is, the water of a spring or a flowing body of water. 3Then they shall take off all their clothes." (21) http://www.bombaxo.com/hippolytus.html

Of course, other than all the other doctrines and practices he cites that you don't agree with, he does cite the one that does prove that he prayed over people to recieve the Holy Ghost long after they were baptized. Of course the whole account is rather detailed and he never mentions that the convert will speak in tongues in that process. All he says the convert will say is: "And the one who has been baptized shall say, "And with your spirit."" (21). So while Hippolytus at first appears to support your position, after reading his rather detailed account, tongues are still absent... I guess he doesn't support your view so much after all...

I'll get to the third one later.

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

ECF? Is that some sort of traded fund or commodity?

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

ECF = Early Church Fathers

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

Oh....(sheepish grin)

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

These quotes are from believers who lived BEFORE the Roman Catholic Church took control. So your reference to Catholics doesn't really apply.

The point these quotes make is that some folks in the early days of the church (200's AD), believed and taught that reception of the Spirit comes sometime AFTER faith/conversion. Similar to Acts 8 and different from the "one-stepper" view.

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

Then there was Cornelius (Acts 10). The thorn in baptismal regenerationist theology.

Good to see Mizzy quoting her BR brethren and "the father of the Trinitarian doctrine.

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

What Mizpeh cleverly distorts in her thread title is that both Tertullian and Cyprian quotes believe this not uniquely post-conversion but both believe the seal comes after the laying of hands after baptism.

No evidence of tongues and most likely baptisms with the "wrong" salvific formula.

More deceitful semantics.

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

What Mizpeh cleverly distorts in her thread title is that both Tertullian and Cyprian quotes state/believe this is not uniquely post-conversion but both believe the seal comes after the laying of hands after baptism.

No evidence of tongues and most likely baptisms with the "wrong" salvific formula.

More deceitful semantics from a deceived believer with a radical 20th century theology.

Not sure how or why the need to try to conveniently quote the "patristic" writers a la carte when you believe them to be eternally damned for their very doctrines.

Very, very, very STRANGE

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

I might be all wrong here,but I thought was is considered as The ECF were really w early catholics,and not really first century Christians,I have heard they were in the second century and laid the foundations for the RCC.

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

I haven't distorted anything, Dan. This thread is not about the evidence of tongues. Nor is it about a formula for baptism.

I'm not being deceitful in quoting them either. I quoted them without any distortion whatsoever.

The point according to these "early church fathers" is that believers don't automatically receive the Spirit at faith or repentance. And it really doesn't matter what I believe since my only reason for starting this thread was to show that many of the early believers (circa 200ad) didn't believe the way "one-steppers" do today when it comes to WHEN a person receives the Spirit of Christ!

Dan, if the seal comes AFTER the laying on of hands at water baptism (according to Tertullian and Cyprian) then what do you consider "conversion" to entail? Surely they considered the laying on of hands at water baptism to be something done AFTER faith and repentance. Lastly, who are you going to quote to verify your doctrine, Dan? I have a radical 20th century theology? You're funny! I'm bringing it all the way back to the 200's!!! You might make it back to the Reformation at the earliest. :)

I could also take you on a little history trip back to the same era and what they believed the new birth entailed. Oh, wait...I already did that and you never responded!

NOW, this is one reason why many folks don't like discussing theology with Dan. He is unfairly quick to accuse people of "distortion", "deceitfulness", and other unsavory, unChristian things. It's not like we don't have an answer, a very plausible, scriptural answer, but Dan can't seem to discuss theology in a kind, irenic fashion. And if he continues to call me a deceiver and a distortioner, there is no way I'll continue to discuss this subject with him. It wouldn't be worth my time.

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

Acts 10 has to mesh with Acts 8 and Acts 19, and Acts 9, and John 1:12.

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

Exactly! The last time he spoke to me here, he called me a heretic. LOL! Where do you go from there in a conversation?

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

You go far away.:toofunny

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

Yep, sounds like a great idea! :thumbsup :toofunny

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

And the point of my quote was to make it clear that some folks believed baptism had to be performed naked. "2When they come to the water, the water shall be pure and flowing, that is, the water of a spring or a flowing body of water. 3Then they shall take off all their clothes." (21) http://www.bombaxo.com/hippolytus.html

In other words... so what if the ECF's believed something? All it does is show that something was believed early in church history. It doesn't show that such a doctrine it is right or wrong.

Of course it is nice to have some support from the ECF's if for nothing else to show that your ideas, thoughts and doctrines aren't totally new or in a vaccum. That being said, your quotes do offer evidence that your thoughts of the Holy Ghost being received at or after baptism are not totally new. Of course I don't know anyone that has ever seriously entertained the idea that such thoughts on the reception of the Holy Ghost were totally new. What has been questioned is the origin of the no tongues no Holy Ghost doctrine. It is clear the ECF's did not believe tongues accompanied the reception of the Holy Ghost or else they would have written about it.

So in conclusion, the ECF's clearly do not support your doctrines about the Holy Ghost anymore than they support one-steppers doctrines about the Holy Ghost.

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

It doesn't matter to me what the ECF's wrote either because:

1) I don't think they spoke for the whole church back then.
2) It's obvious they believe some things that aren't taught in scripture.

The main reason I post threads like this is because some folks think that the three step view is relatively "new" and that the one step view has been around longer. The early church views on salvational issues are generally more like a three stepper (not in totality) than a one stepper. I'm not appealing to the ECF's in attempt to verify what I believe, but I'm only trying to show that what three stepper's believe on the new birth and specifically in this thread about the timing of Spirit baptism is not some "new-fangled" doctrine thought up in the early 1900's.

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

Dan has forgotten how to play nice.

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

I wouldn't call Mizzie "deceitful" over this. It's more like "quote mining," which while not always an out-and-out deception, is still a bit misleading at best.

The quote from Hippolytus clearly describes the rite of "Confirmation" within the Roman Catholic Church. And, though this seems to be an attempt to "quote" the "ECFs" that are named, the bulk of the post consists of the words and analysis of J. Rodman Williams. Williams himself goes on to say:

"In three Persons—Christian faith holds equally fast to the conviction that "there are three persons in the Godhead: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost." This belief in the Trinity is expressed devotionally in the words of the hymn:

Holy, holy, holy! Merciful and mighty!

God in three persons, blessed Trinity!"

We can pretty much get whatever we want from this source. The title of this thread should read: "J. Rodman Williams On the ECFs"

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

Pel, it would be nice if you would address the topic of the post which is "post conversion reception of the Spirit" instead of bringing in red herrings. :)

All the quotes I listed in the opening post come from threads at CARM that were started by someone who is ecclectic in his theology. He's not a Oneness Pentecostal as far as I can tell from the other things he has written. I should have verified the quotes first. Here are the threads if you are interested:

http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthrea...he-Holy-Spirit

http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthrea...he-Holy-Spirit

http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthrea...he-Holy-Spirit

But thanks for checking them out more closely, Pel. I'll be more careful who I quote next time. Nevertheless, are you saying that these early church fathers believed that reception of the Spirit happens the moment someone believes the gospel? When exactly did the Roman Catholic Church begin? Was there such a thing as the Roman Catholic Church in the early 200 ad? Just because something sounds "Catholic" doesn't necessary mean that the doctrine started with the Roman Catholic Church.

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

Hello,

Just a quick note for informational purposes only. I think JFrog or someone mentioned that Catholics believe Spirit Baptism is at water baptism. From my studies, I believe that RCC practices Confirmation and this is where the Priest is "Confirring the Spirit upon you." This is by no means an authoritive source, but I copied this from Wikipedia.

"Confirmation is a rite of initiation in Christian churches, normally carried out through the laying on of hands and prayer, and possibly also anointing, for the purpose of bestowing the Gifts of the Holy Spirit."

Blessings,
DKG

Re: ECF's and Post Conversion Reception of the Spi
 

:thumbsup Thanks for the added insight. I wasn't sure if they believed it was at baptism or after and I couldn't find much about it.