Quote:
Originally Posted by Adino
Your answer is in verse 16 which says the Spirit had not "fallen" upon them. The Spirit "fell" on these of Samaria in a non-saving way as it "fell" on prophets in the OT (Ezekiel 11:5). The Spirit "fell on," "came on," and "filled" people in the NT as it "fell on," "came on," and "filled" prophets in the OT. The leaders of Jerusalem had to come offer the right hand of fellowship with the half-breed Samarians because the full-blooded Jews would not have accepted them into the body had they not. The bestowal of Spiritual gifts to the saved believers of Samaria only stamped God's approval on them as well. Who then could argue that they were to be allowed into the fold? Much like Cornelius in Acts 10.
Luke was using terms connected to Spirit manifestation in the OT to follow the manifestations of the Spirit as the signs and wonders confirmed the word in the NT (Mark 16:20), very likely because he knew his audience would recognize them as such. He was following the expansion of the Church by pointing out the signs and wonders which expanded with it. These signs and wonders had nothing to do with salvation. They were only indicative of the growing Church of God. |
That is the biggest bunch of garbage I have seen in a while. Don't try confusing this issue by saying some mumbo jumbo about the Holy Ghost falling on them being OT. The Holy Ghost fell on the day of Pentecost. It was a New Birth experience.
The FACTS are as follows:
- Phillip preached on things that pertained to the Kingdom of God.
- He must have mentioned water baptism in Jesus name during his discourse
- The folks must have repented, and submitted to water baptism
- They had not received the Holy Ghost until Peter and John came
Now the facts are that they had NOT RECEIVED the Holy Ghost, though they had repented and been water baptized. Again, they had not received the Promise yet. This answers your initial question.
Threaded Mode
