Acts 10: The Smoking Gun?

[Sam]

I realize this thread has been dormant for a while but I saw something earlier this evening I would like to include.

This is a paragraph from an article titled "True and False Holiness" by Andrew Urshan. This article appeared on pages 3, 20 and 21 of the March 1962 Pentecostal Herald. Bro. Andrew Urshan was a respected pioneer in the Pentecostal movement but he saw things differently than some. I have bolded the words I want to point out.

Cornelius was a devout man, a man of prayer and fasting, giving alms, very sincere, fearing God. I suppose in these days some people would call him a perfect man of God, but the answer of God to this man's righteousness or holiness was that he should send to Peter, and that he would come and teach him the words by which he might be saved. And we read that while Peter was speaking to him, he believed the gospel. By that faith his heart was cleansed, and that is why the Holy Spirit fell on him.

[bkstokes]

Originally Posted by Sam

I realize this thread has been dormant for a while but I saw something earlier this evening I would like to include.

This is a paragraph from an article titled "True and False Holiness" by Andrew Urshan. This article appeared on pages 3, 20 and 21 of the March 1962 Pentecostal Herald. Bro. Andrew Urshan was a respected pioneer in the Pentecostal movement but he saw things differently than some. I have bolded the words I want to point out.

Cornelius was a devout man, a man of prayer and fasting, giving alms, very sincere, fearing God. I suppose in these days some people would call him a perfect man of God, but the answer of God to this man's righteousness or holiness was that he should send to Peter, and that he would come and teach him the words by which he might be saved. And we read that while Peter was speaking to him, he believed the gospel. By that faith his heart was cleansed, and that is why the Holy Spirit fell on him.

Thanks Sam for posting this.

[Brother Price]

Great post, Sam! Love ya man!

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Sam

I realize this thread has been dormant for a while but I saw something earlier this evening I would like to include.

This is a paragraph from an article titled "True and False Holiness" by Andrew Urshan. This article appeared on pages 3, 20 and 21 of the March 1962 Pentecostal Herald. Bro. Andrew Urshan was a respected pioneer in the Pentecostal movement but he saw things differently than some. I have bolded the words I want to point out.

Cornelius was a devout man, a man of prayer and fasting, giving alms, very sincere, fearing God. I suppose in these days some people would call him a perfect man of God, but the answer of God to this man's righteousness or holiness was that he should send to Peter, and that he would come and teach him the words by which he might be saved. And we read that while Peter was speaking to him, he believed the gospel. By that faith his heart was cleansed, and that is why the Holy Spirit fell on him.

It was not only Andrew Urshan who said they were cleansed by faith before they received the Holy Ghost Baptism and were subsequently baptized in water.

As Peter was preaching, he proclaimed Jesus and His death burial, and resurrection. He then said, "To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission/forgiveness/cleansing of sins" (Acts 10:43). Evidently Cornelius and those with him believed and as they rejoiced in their new found faith and new found life, "the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word" (Acts 10:44). So they were all not only justified/saved/regenerated, they also received the Holy Ghost Baptism right there as Peter preached. How did Peter and the rest of them know that these uncircumcised Gentiles had been baptized in the Spirit? Verses 45 and 46 say that they heard these Gentiles speaking with tongues. Peter then commanded water baptism since that was the custom among the Jews and later among the followers of Jesus as a sign of conversion.

Afterward, Peter when Peter came to Jerusalem he was condemned by some of the brethren for going into the home of an "uncircumcised" person and eating there. Peter explained about the vision and so forth. Peter stated that he he had barely begun to speak when the Spirit fell upon the Gentiles just as He had fallen upon the Jews back in Jerusalem on that original Pentecost as recorded in Acts chapter 2 (Acts 11:1-18) and the Jewish believers rejoiced that Gentiles had received eternal life by repenting and turning to God. About 11 years later when Peter recounted this experience in the Jerusalem Council described in Acts chapter 15, he stated that God had poured out His Spirit on those Gentiles because their hearts had been cleansed by faith (verse 9).

There may be differences in understanding among us but it is my opinion that the hearts of Cornelius and the others there were cleansed by faith, i.e. they were justified because they believed Peter's message, and because their sins were cleansed or forgiven or washed away, God poured out His Spirit upon them. This happened prior to their water baptism. This is not to minimize water baptism. It is mentioned several times in the Book of Acts that water baptism followed the conversion/salvation experience and that it was done right away.

[Neubill]

Shalom alecheim b’shem Yeshua Mishikheinu!
Peace be unto you my friends, in the Name of Yeshua, Our Messiah!

This is quite an interesting thread. Lots and lots of iron getting sharpened…

From some of the responses, I perceive that some feel baptism is unnecessary if an individual receives the Holy Spirit first.

I would like to offer something about baptism from a Jewish perspective, but the question I have for this post is this:

Do we agree that one must belong to Messiah in order to have eternal life?

To begin, most know this already but some here may be surprised to find out that baptism is not a New Testament concept. It’s found in the Torah. Whenever an individual required ritual cleansing (i.e. someone who was unclean until evening), that person would immerse in a mikvah. A mikvah was an immersion pool, and archeologists always knew they had uncovered evidence of a Jewish community when mikvahs were found. Bathsheba finished her niddah (menses in Hebrew) and was required to ritually immerse for purification purposes. She was using a mikvah when King David was acting like a Peeping Tom. Ritual immersion is found often in the Torah.

What most people don’t know about is another aspect of immersion, specifically beginning about 2 generations before time of The Master, Yeshua. The Bible College system in the days of the Pharisees was like this:

A rabbi (let's call him Rabbi Alicea) has a school of disciples, let’s say 8. These 8 disciples (talmidim in Hebrew), from the age of 13 to about 20 are committed to studying and learning everything Rb. Alicea knows about The Traditions of the Fathers (Oral Law) and the Torah (Written Law) until they can emulate his master in everything, from thought to action. If Rb. Alicea brushes his teeth left handed, so will the disciples. If Rb. Alicea looks at his right hand when he blesses the bread, so will the disciples. The disciple (talmid in Hebrew) imitates his master until…

“A disciple is not above his teacher, but every one perfected shall be as his teacher.” (Luke 6:40 YLT)

…the student becomes equal to the teacher in knowledge and understanding.

Now we can get down to brass tacks (and thank you for your patience). Once a disciple has become “…as his teacher,” the disciple is no longer a disciple; he is a Master, a Rabbi who is empowered to teach from the authority of Rb. Alicea (a graduate of Rb. Alicea’s Bible College, if you will). The act which seals the deal is when the former disciple is literally immersed in Rb. Alicea’s name. The disciple is no longer a talmid, but is now a Rabbi in his own right, empowered to speak, preach, and teach “in Rabbi Alicea’s name.” He can speak in Rb. Alicea’s name until the passing of Rb. Alicea, and then he can speak in his own name. The fact is that people were immersed in the names of the ones who taught them.

I want to add this before continuing. One of the greatest Rabbis before the birth of Yeshua was Rb. Hillel. Two generations after his passing, his school was led by the great Rb. Gamliel, and both rabbis have teachings which are in the Talmud, the codified written work of the Oral Law and its commentary. Rb. Gamliel is identified in Acts 5:34 as Gamaliel the Pharisee, and he taught Rb. Sha’ul of Tarsus, who we know better as The Apostle Paul. Paul knows all about people being baptized in the name of people.

and I say this, that each one of you saith, `I, indeed, am of Paul' -- `and I of Apollos,' -- `and I of Cephas,' -- `and I of Christ.'
Hath the Christ been divided? was Paul crucified for you? or to the name of Paul were ye baptized;
I give thanks to God that no one of you did I baptize, except Crispus and Gaius --
that no one may say that to my own name I did baptize; (1 Cor 1:12-15 YLT)

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

The issue I'd like to address is whether or not this "burial" indeed partially regenerates us ... and is efficacious in quickening us by His Spirit into new birth, albeit partial.

Do we agree that one must belong to Messiah in order to have eternal life?

If we keep in mind the fact that people were immersed in the name of the one who taught them, you can probably see where I’m going with this already, but let’s plug this into some cornerstone verses of our faith.

Yeshua and His 11 remaining disciples had counted the first 5-6 weeks of the seven week countdown to Pentecost, and before His Ascension, Yeshua

“opened he up their understanding to understand the Writings,” (Luke 24:45 YLT)

and gave them their primary directive,

“having gone, then, disciple all the nations, (baptizing them -- to the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all, whatever I did command you,) and lo, I am with you all the days -- till the full end of the age.” (Mat. 28:19-20 YLT)

We see this command to make disciples put into practice, as it was done in the 1st Century culture:

“…and Peter said unto them, 'Reform, and be baptized each of you on the name of Jesus Christ, to remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit,” (Acts 2:38 YLT)

Disciples are immersed in the name of their Rabbi.
Are we disciples? If so, then whose?
My Rabbi is Yeshua ADONAI, and I was immersed in His Name 12 years ago, for the remission of sins. I emerged from the baptistery with stammering lips. Tens of thousands of people have experienced this phenomenon unique to the Body of Messiah.

“…he who hath believed, and hath been baptized, shall be saved; and he who hath not believed, shall be condemned.” (Mark 16:16 YLT)

Do we agree that one must belong to Messiah in order to have eternal life?

I pray that our answer will always be “Yes and Amen!”

I’m not a scholar, just a crazy Jewish Believer who wants to see no one deceived and everyone saved.

Shalom uv’racha b’shem Yeshua Mishikheinu!
Peace and blessings unto you in the Name of Yeshua, Our Messiah!

[SDG]

BUMP.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Acts 10 indeed proves many people incorrect. But it also validates the NEED for baptism, though not in the way many think.

Peter had a vision of unclean animals whom he must "slay and eat". Peter refuses in the vision, and God rebukes him, telling him to not call "unclean" what God cleansed. Peter has no clue what God is trying to say.

So he goes with Cornelius' servants to the house and realizes THEN what the vision meant. GENTILES were considered unclean in the O.T., and God was changing all that and bringing them into the church.

Now, what would SLAY AND EAT represent, if the unclean animals represented gentiles?

Slaying is obviously a connotation of death with Christ. EATING, I think, refers to receiving the GENTILES into the BODY.

Now, God KNEW Peter would hesitate to deal with the gentiles properly. Hence, the need for the vision. Think about it. Would Peter have baptized these gentiles without the vision?

Baptism is sort of like a covenant contract. Two signatures OR SEALS are required on every contract. There is the SEAL of the Holy Ghost and the SEAL of baptism. God's signature and our own. Yes, they would have been Spirit-filled, but somehow BAPTISM is part of putting one into the BODY of the Church.

Peter had to both slay AND EAT.

...Some ramblings of my own.

I am in disbelief....

Brother Blume please show me in the text

1) where God say eat unclean?
2) show me where it says all animals in his vision are ALL unclean
3) show me where in the text God says call not unclean what God has cleansed.

Act 10:11 and saw the heavens opened and something like a great sheet descending, being let down by its four corners upon the earth.
Act 10:12 In it were all kinds of animals and reptiles and birds of the air.
Act 10:13 And there came a voice to him: "Rise, Peter; kill and eat."
Act 10:14 But Peter said, "By no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean."
Act 10:15 And the voice came to him again a second time, "What God has made clean, do not call common."


I am a three stepper by the way!

[LUKE2447]

The answer to the above is.

1) He did not. He said kill and eat!
2) There where ALL kinds of animals which where CLEAN and UNCLEAN.
3) God said call not COMMON what God has made clean.

Now to undertand this you have to understand this from a Rabbinic(oral teaching and misguided) and OT view. Anything that was clean could not be togethor which something that was unclean or it would be called "common" or RITUALLY unclean. God never told Peter to break his laws. Nor did Peter understand it that way see following vs of that chapter. The point was Peter should not judge with guilt by association andshould not be considered common or one who's heart was not right before God by simply being a Gentile.

What is unclean is still unclean. Grace may change yoru relationship to the law but it does not change the truth of the law.

[LUKE2447]

My simple question is why cannot the Spirit of the living God move on a repentant person who stands with pureness of heart forsaking his past with proper response(faith.) THEN receive remission of sins in baptism? Why does one have to have remission BEFORE baptism for God to move upon them?