Jump to content
Online Baptist

The Beginning of the New Testament Chruch.


Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

The Beginning of the Church

"Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone." Ephesians 2:19 & 20 The foundation, the chief corner stone of the church, is the Lord Jesus. The Lord Jesus founded His church during His earthly ministry. The Lord Jesus started, while He was on the earth, the church. “And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Matthew 16:18

The Lord is the foundation, the corner stone of the church and the prophets and the apostles are stones set above the foundation. The foundation of the church was set at the ministry of the Lord Jesus and the apostles and prophets continued the building of the church.

Concerning the 'head' of the church, Paul the Apostle was given this doctrine, “And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all thins to the church, Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all things.” Ephesians 1:22 & 23 The Lord Jesus is the 'head' of the church.

The Prophet and Messenger of the Messiah

John the Baptist is a messenger from God. Those who reject his message, and his baptism, are not following the messenger of God. “And what went ye out for to see? A prophet? Yea, I say unto you, and much more than a prophet. This is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.” Luke 7:26 & 27

The individuals in the 'Christian' realm who reject the message, and the mode of baptism, is rejecting the words of the messenger and prophet of God to the church.

The Apostle Paul stated, "And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gift of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues. Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?" 1 Corinthians 12:28 & 29

The baptism of John the Baptist, as a messenger and prophet from God, is the baptism for all those who trust in the Lord Jesus and is the only mode of baptism acceptable in the New Testament. The term, 'Baptist,' is a title; it is not the last name of John.

Concerning those who reject the baptism of John

If a person rejects the baptism of John the Baptist, or his followers, than that person is not not scripturally baptized, and, according to the scriptures, he is like the Pharisees and hypocrites. “And all the people that heard him, and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John. But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him.” Luke 7:29 and 30

The different denominations in the 'Christian' realm, sprinkling, pouring, infant baptism, baptism for the dead (Mormons), who reject the immersion method of John the Baptist are in serious error.

The Apostles were baptized by John the Baptist

All of the apostles of the Lord Jesus were baptized by John the Baptist. Whether or not the term, or title, 'Baptist' is after their name, is immaterial an adding of the requirements of a belief in the scriptures, a 'straw man,' and a non-issue. Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.” Acts 1:22 God only has to give the man of God the term, or office, or calling, or title, 'once,' to make that term, title, office, doctrine, mode of service, scriptural and binding to the saints.

The Giving of the Holy Spirit

The Lord Jesus is the giver of the Holy Spirit to those who are saved. The apostles, as part of the foundation of the church, are the examples of the church. “Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.” John 20:21-23

The apostles, as part of the foundation of the church, are an example on how the Lord Jesus is guiding the saints in the New Testament church. For example. As the Lord Jesus sent the apostles around the world as a witness; so is every saint, every church, to be a witness. Matthew 29:1-20 As the Lord Jesus gave the Holy Spirit to the Apostles; so He gives every one who trusts in Him the Holy Spirit at the moment of conversion. Ephesians 4:30 There is is no 'tarrying,' or 'waiting,' for the Holy Spirit,' for any saint in the New Testament Church.

The Baptism at Pentecost

The filling of the Holy Spirit was given at Pentecost for empowerment to witness; not to start the church. The Lord Jesus said, “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.” Acts 1:8

The Lord Jesus had previously, in John 20:21-23, given the apostles the Holy Ghost. Now, the Lord Jesus is stating for them to remain in Jerusalem to tarry for the 'power' of the Holy Ghost for witnesses, soul-winning, the gift of tongues, to preach the gospel to the ends of the earth. The Lord Jesus clearly states they were to receive 'power;' they were not to receive the Holy Spirit, but 'power.'

 

 


 

Edited by Alan
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
53 minutes ago, Alan said:

The filling of the Holy Spirit was given at Pentecost for empowerment to witness; not to start the church. The Lord Jesus said, “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.” Acts 1:8

The Lord Jesus had previously, in John 20:21-23, given the apostles the Holy Ghost. Now, the Lord Jesus is stating for them to remain in Jerusalem to tarry for the 'power' of the Holy Ghost for witnesses, soul-winning, the gift of tongues, to preach the gospel to the ends of the earth. The Lord Jesus clearly states they were to receive 'power;' they were not to receive the Holy Spirit, but 'power.'

This is the only part I have questions on. Perhaps the church started in the ministry of Jesus. Still Acts 7:38 can't be ignored.

I agree the Holy Spirit was not given to start "the church". The Spirit was given to start "the body of Christ". Do you not make this distinction?

In Acts 1:8 from what I see, they received power after the Holy Ghost came upon them (at Pentecost) In Acts 1:5 it says they will be baptized... they weren't when Jesus spoke this.

Acts 1:5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

John 20:22 is a verse I don't entirely understand. I know in the OT the Spirit could come and go (Psalm 51:11 for example). I don't know what happened. But as I read Acts, they were yet to be baptized with the Spirit.

2 more questions would be; how were they disciples baptized into the body of Christ? And when did this first happen?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On 6/5/2017 at 8:29 PM, InSeasonOut said:

This is the only part I have questions on. Perhaps the church started in the ministry of Jesus. Still Acts 7:38 can't be ignored.

I agree the Holy Spirit was not given to start "the church". The Spirit was given to start "the body of Christ". Do you not make this distinction?

In Acts 1:8 from what I see, they received power after the Holy Ghost came upon them (at Pentecost) In Acts 1:5 it says they will be baptized... they weren't when Jesus spoke this.

Acts 1:5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

John 20:22 is a verse I don't entirely understand. I know in the OT the Spirit could come and go (Psalm 51:11 for example). I don't know what happened. But as I read Acts, they were yet to be baptized with the Spirit.

2 more questions would be; how were they disciples baptized into the body of Christ? And when did this first happen?

InSeasonOut,

I will use a numbering system to try and answer (most of) your questions.

1. Acts 7:37 & 38, "This is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear. This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the Mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us."

The Lord Jesus is the prophet that Moses spoke of and the Lord Jesus was to be believed, and followed, as Moses was.

InSeasonOut, after reading your thoughts on this verse I felt that you are symbolizing 'the church in the wilderness' too much. The 'church in the wilderness' in not the church in the New Testament. The 'church in the wilderness' was a called out assembly of Jews from Egypt. To use the 'church in the wilderness' and conclude, "The church started in the wilderness with Israel - The body of Christ started at Pentecost with the apostles (Israelites)," is not correct and is confusing the issue. The usage of Hebrew 4:8 and 2:12 with Exodus 15:1, Joshua 5:13-15 and Psalm 22:22 is further confusing the issue.

One of the reasons why I started the, "The Beginning of the Church,' was due to this confusing of scriptures that tries to take away the beginning of the church in Acts 2 and not with the ministry of Christ.

2. Acts 1:5 & 8 are clearly dealing with the baptism for the power of the Holy Spirit. John baptized with water as a sign of repentance; the baptism that the disciples were tarrying for was for power.

May I bring out a point for all of the brethren as a side issue?

A lot of folks are properly baptized;  but they do not have power to witness. There is a difference. A lot of saints have no power for witnessing, but, they are saved, born again, and attending church regularly. But, do they witness? No. Why? Instead of being filled with the Spirit they are filled with themselves. Maybe if you think about that long enough you may realize what Acts 1:5 and 8 is all about.

InSeasonOut,

The remainder of your questions involve a new thread. We will keep these posting on the beginning of the church and not branch out into other areas.

Alan

 

 

Edited by Alan
grammer
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
1 hour ago, Alan said:

InSeasonOut, after reading your thoughts on this verse I felt that you are symbolizes 'the church in the wilderness' too much. The 'church in the wilderness' in not the church in the New Testament. The 'church in the wilderness' was a called out assembly of Jews from Egypt. To use the 'church in the wilderness' and conclude, "The church started in the wilderness with Israel - The body of Christ started at Pentecost with the apostles (Israelites)," is not correct and is confusing the issue. The usage of Hebrew 4:8 and 2:12 with Exodus 15:1, Joshua 5:13-15 and Psalm 22:22 is further confusing the issue.

So are these 2 different churches? How so? Is Israel a "church" by definition? How is this different than the NT church? When did the church in the wilderness end? It seems to me the church in the wilderness was where they were at, at that time. They weren't the church when they were only in the wilderness and not after that... Israel was always a church after they were called out of Egypt.

These are a lot of questions, but they are honest questions. They are not to cause debate, but to learn.

I simply used Hebrews 4:8 to say Jesus was with Israel. Jesus is the captain of the LORD's host. Joshua took orders from him.

I believe the song mentioned in Hebrews 2:12 was the song of Moses in Ex. 15 - again sung in Rev. 15. (Psalm 22:22 is quotation of Hebrews 2:12)

(side note: You titled this, "The Beginning of the New Testament Church" ; which technically the NT didn't start until after the death of the testator Jesus Christ according to Hebrews 9:15-17. So to say the church started with the ministry of Jesus and the disciples, before the cross, this is still doctrinally old testament. And the disciples were all Jews = Israel. Therefore the church in the gospels is still Israel. Jesus only went to Jews (Matthew 10:5-6)

1 hour ago, Alan said:

The remainder of your questions involve a new thread. We will keep these posting on the beginning of the church and not branch out into other areas

I started this new thread and I would love to see your answers to them. Thanks Alan.

-Jake.

Edited by InSeasonOut
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
1 hour ago, InSeasonOut said:

side note: You titled this, "The Beginning of the New Testament Church" ; which technically the NT didn't start until after the death of the testator Jesus Christ according to Hebrews 9:15-17. So to say the church started with the ministry of Jesus and the disciples, before the cross, this is still doctrinally old testament. And the disciples were all Jews = Israel. Therefore the church in the gospels is still Israel. Jesus only went to Jews (Matthew 10:5-6)

I assumed that all here on OnLine Baptist realized that the Gospel of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were in the New Testament, I was not referring to the 'testament,' or covenants,  in Hebrews 9:15-17. The 'testaments' in Hebrews 9:15-17 are dealing with the two Covenants, the Levitical Law and Grace; not the wording of the Old and New Testament. Hebrews 9:15-17 does not contradict my above lesson.

According to my previous quotations of Paul the Apostle of Ephesians 2:19, Matthew 16:18 and Ephesians 1:22, the Lord Jesus clearly is foundation of the New Testament church. I would also like for all to notice that I clearly used the word, "beginning." The word 'beginning' means the start of something not the end. 

4 hours ago, Alan said:

"Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone." Ephesians 2:19 & 20 The foundation, the chief corner stone of the church, is the Lord Jesus. The Lord Jesus founded His church during His earthly ministry. The Lord Jesus started, while He was on the earth, the church. “And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Matthew 16:18

The Lord is the foundation, the corner stone of the church and the prophets and the apostles are stones set above the foundation. The foundation of the church was set at the ministry of the Lord Jesus and the apostles and prophets continued the building of the church.

Concerning the 'head' of the church, Paul the Apostle was given this doctrine, “And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all thins to the church, Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all things.” Ephesians 1:22 & 23 The Lord Jesus is the 'head' of the church.

The 'beginning,' the foundation, the start, the corner-stone, of the New Testament church is the Lord Jesus.

Oh, by the way, the Lord Jesus is also the 'ending' of the New Testament Church. "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty." Revelation 1:8

May I ask a favor? why not just discuss the passages that I mentioned?

The title of this lesson is, "The Beginning of the New Testament Church." I see no reason to change it.

Alan

Edited by Alan
re-formatted
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
5 hours ago, Alan said:

The Beginning of the Church

"Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone." Ephesians 2:19 & 20 The foundation, the chief corner stone of the church, is the Lord Jesus. The Lord Jesus founded His church during His earthly ministry. The Lord Jesus started, while He was on the earth, the church. “And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Matthew 16:18

The Lord is the foundation, the corner stone of the church and the prophets and the apostles are stones set above the foundation. The foundation of the church was set at the ministry of the Lord Jesus and the apostles and prophets continued the building of the church.

Concerning the 'head' of the church, Paul the Apostle was given this doctrine, “And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all thins to the church, Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all things.” Ephesians 1:22 & 23 The Lord Jesus is the 'head' of the church.

The Prophet and Messenger of the Messiah

John the Baptist is a messenger from God. Those who reject his message, and his baptism, are not following the messenger of God. “And what went ye out for to see? A prophet? Yea, I say unto you, and much more than a prophet. This is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.” Luke 7:26 & 27

The individuals in the 'Christian' realm who reject the message, and the mode of baptism, is rejecting the words of the messenger and prophet of God to the church.

The Apostle Paul stated, "And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gift of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues. Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?" 1 Corinthians 12:28 & 29

The baptism of John the Baptist, as a messenger and prophet from God, is the baptism for all those who trust in the Lord Jesus and is the only mode of baptism acceptable in the New Testament. The term, 'Baptist,' is a title; it is not the last name of John.

Concerning those who reject the baptism of John

If a person rejects the baptism of John the Baptist, or his followers, than that person is not not scripturally baptized, and, according to the scriptures, he is like the Pharisees and hypocrites. “And all the people that heard him, and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John. But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him.” Luke 7:29 and 30

The different denominations in the 'Christian' realm, sprinkling, pouring, infant baptism, baptism for the dead (Mormons), who reject the immersion method of John the Baptist are in serious error.

The Apostles were baptized by John the Baptist

All of the apostles of the Lord Jesus were baptized by John the Baptist. Whether or not the term, or title, 'Baptist' is after their name, is immaterial an adding of the requirements of a belief in the scriptures, a 'straw man,' and a non-issue. Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.” Acts 1:22 God only has to give the man of God the term, or office, or calling, or title, 'once,' to make that term, title, office, doctrine, mode of service, scriptural and binding to the saints.

The Giving of the Holy Spirit

The Lord Jesus is the giver of the Holy Spirit to those who are saved. The apostles, as part of the foundation of the church, are the examples of the church. “Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whoe soever sins ye retain, they are retained.” John 20:21-23

The apostles, as part of the foundation of the church, are an example on how the Lord Jesus is guiding the saints in the New Testament church. For example. As the Lord Jesus sent the apostles around the world as a witness; so is every saint, every church, to be a witness. Matthew 29:1-20 As the Lord Jesus gave the Holy Spirit to the Apostles; so He gives every one who trusts in Him the Holy Spirit at the moment of conversion. Ephesians 4:30 There is is no 'tarrying,' or 'waiting,' for the Holy Spirit,' for any saint in the New Testament Church.

The Baptism at Pentecost

The filling of the Holy Spirit was given at Pentecost for empowerment to witness; not to start the church. The Lord Jesus said, “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.” Acts 1:8

The Lord Jesus had previously, in John 20:21-23, given the apostles the Holy Ghost. Now, the Lord Jesus is stating for them to remain in Jerusalem to tarry for the 'power' of the Holy Ghost for witnesses, soul-winning, the gift of tongues, to preach the gospel to the ends of the earth. The Lord Jesus clearly states they were to receive 'power;' they were not to receive the Holy Spirit, but 'power.'

 

 


 

I had previously written:

The Giving of the Holy Spirit

The Lord Jesus is the giver of the Holy Spirit to those who are saved. The apostles, as part of the foundation of the church, are the examples of the church. “Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whoe soever sins ye retain, they are retained.” John 20:21-23

According to my knowledge of the scriptures this is after the resurrection of the Lord Jesus and clearly with the framework of Hebrews 9:15-17

2 hours ago, InSeasonOut said:

(side note: You titled this, "The Beginning of the New Testament Church" ; which technically the NT didn't start until after the death of the testator Jesus Christ according to Hebrews 9:15-17. So to say the church started with the ministry of Jesus and the disciples, before the cross, this is still doctrinally old testament. And the disciples were all Jews = Israel. Therefore the church in the gospels is still Israel. Jesus only went to Jews (Matthew 10:5-6)

According to any body's reasoning, John 20:21-23, is doctrinally in the New Testament; after the death of the testator, Hebrews 9:16 Also, Matthew 10:5-6 has no bearing on the start of the New Testament church nor on the lesson of this thread.

As I previously stated, the problem with those who do not believe that the Lord Jesus started the church during His earthly ministry (the Lord Jesus was still on the earth in John 20:21-23), is that they have a incorrect interpretation of the Jews, the church, the salvation of the Jews under the Law, the giving and the filling of the Holy Spirit are two different things, a mis-understanding of being born and saved, and the work of the Holy Spirit. Some of the brethren refer to this as 'hyper-dispensation.' I tend to agree with that designation.

Alan

Edited by Alan
added 'again' deleted doubled word
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
12 hours ago, Alan said:

As I previously stated, the problem with those who do not believe that the Lord Jesus started the church during His earthly ministry (the Lord Jesus was still on the earth in John 20:21-23), is that they have a incorrect interpretation of the Jews, the church, the salvation of the Jews under the Law, the giving and the filling of the Holy Spirit are two different things, a mis-understanding of being born and saved, and the work of the Holy Spirit. Some of the brethren refer to this as 'hyper-dispensation.' I tend to agree with that designation.

I hope this is not referring to me, because I have not even discussed all these subjects, in detail at least...

Also Jesus started the church in the wilderness.

14 hours ago, InSeasonOut said:

So are these 2 different churches? How so? Is Israel a "church" by definition? How is this different than the NT church? When did the church in the wilderness end? It seems to me the church in the wilderness was where they were at, at that time. They weren't the church when they were only in the wilderness and not after that... Israel was always a church after they were called out of Egypt.

May I ask you to address these questions?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
4 hours ago, InSeasonOut said:

Also Jesus started the church in the wilderness.

Acts 7:37 and 38 does not say that Jesus started the church in the wilderness. As I said before, you are reading too much, (supposing), things that are not in the scriptures.

20 hours ago, Alan said:

Acts 7:37 & 38, "This is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear. This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the Mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us."

The Lord Jesus is the prophet that Moses spoke of and the Lord Jesus was to be believed, and followed, as Moses was.

InSeasonOut, after reading your thoughts on this verse I felt that you are symbolizes 'the church in the wilderness' too much. The 'church in the wilderness' in not the church in the New Testament. The 'church in the wilderness' was a called out assembly of Jews from Egypt. To use the 'church in the wilderness' and conclude, "The church started in the wilderness with Israel - The body of Christ started at Pentecost with the apostles (Israelites)," is not correct and is confusing the issue. The usage of Hebrew 4:8 and 2:12 with Exodus 15:1, Joshua 5:13-15 and Psalm 22:22 is further confusing the issue.

One of the reasons why I started the, "The Beginning of the Church,' was due to this confusing of scriptures that tries to take away the beginning of the church in Acts 2 and not with the ministry of Christ.

The scriptures clearly say that the Lord, "... that was in the wilderness..."

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

InSeasonOut,

It would help this discussion a whole lot if you addressed, or answered, the passages that I have already dealt with instead of asking new questions. It would help our discussion if I knew that you agreed, or disagreed, with the passages already given. Please let me know which ones you agree with or disagree with. Specifically, my original post, passages and the interpretation, dealing with, "The Beginning of the Church."

I have adequately proven that the Lord Jesus started the New Testament church during His ministry on the earth; including the giving of the Holy Spirit, the Great Commission to the apostles who then taught these doctrines to the church. I have also adequately proved that the Lord Jesus has met the requirements of the testator, Hebrews 9:15-17, and the giving of the Holy Spirit, during His earthy ministry; John 20:21-23

Alan

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
22 hours ago, Alan said:

The Lord Jesus started, while He was on the earth, the church. “And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Matthew 16:18

Ok. I agree with everything on the first section called "The beginning of the church". But with your quote I cited, is the church in effect AT  Mt. 16:18 ? Or PRIOR to 16:18 ? Or is the church yet future... "...I will build..." ? Secondly does the church only consist of Israel (up until the gospel goes to Gentiles with Paul obviously) With this in mind, is it fair to say the church was Israel ?

I would say prior, - Acts 7:38 which I quoted many times.... this is why I asked you " are these 2 DIFFERENT churches?

22 hours ago, Alan said:

The baptism of John the Baptist, as a messenger and prophet from God, is the baptism for all those who trust in the Lord Jesus and is the only mode of baptism acceptable in the New Testament.

I agree with everything in the 2nd section "The Prophet and messenger..."  - On this quote do you mean immersion? John's baptism was different, as it was not the Acts 2:38 baptism or the Matthew 28:19 baptism (correct one) which are all still by immersion.

I agree with everything in the 3rd section... where you mention the error of sprinkling etc. This is why I infer you meant immersion by John's baptism. I agree with the 4th section as well

22 hours ago, Alan said:

The Lord Jesus is the giver of the Holy Spirit to those who are saved. The apostles, as part of the foundation of the church, are the examples of the church. “Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whoe soever sins ye retain, they are retained.” John 20:21-23

I agree with everything on the 5th section "the giving of the Holy Spirit" ... - But a question I have for this section is if you believe John 20:22 is when they "baptized with the Holy Ghost"  (not baptism "of" the Holy Ghost - someone got on my case because I said "of" - just word games I believe were besides the point)

You previously commented on this but again, let me quote Acts 1:5 - "For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence."

Alan, in your response, can you please quote Acts 1:5 also, and then tell me they were already baptized with the Holy Ghost prior to this?

22 hours ago, Alan said:

The filling of the Holy Spirit was given at Pentecost for empowerment to witness; not to start the church. The Lord Jesus said, “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.” Acts 1:8

The Lord Jesus had previously, in John 20:21-23, given the apostles the Holy Ghost. Now, the Lord Jesus is stating for them to remain in Jerusalem to tarry for the 'power' of the Holy Ghost for witnesses, soul-winning, the gift of tongues, to preach the gospel to the ends of the earth. The Lord Jesus clearly states they were to receive 'power;' they were not to receive the Holy Spirit, but 'power.'

Here is the last section quoted above. - Like I said previously, I agree the Spirit was not given to start "the church" like you said. But I do believe the Spirit was given to start the body of Christ -do you not make this distinction? Or were they baptized into the body of Christ at John 20:22 ? Do you believe the body of Christ was in effect prior to Acts 2 or John 20:22 ? - Remember 1 Corinthians 12:13 , no one is in the body until they have the Spirit. Agree?

Acts 1:8 from what I see they receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come ... not before that the Holy Ghost is come.. Again 1:5 says they were not yet baptized with the Holy Ghost.

I hope I cleared things up, I just have questions on those things.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Jake,

Here is the answer to three of your questions:

Question # 1 – The Church in the Wilderness

Ok. I agree with everything on the first section called "The beginning of the church". But with your quote I cited, is the church in effect AT  Mt. 16:18 ? Or PRIOR to 16:18 ? . Or is the church yet future... "...I will build..." ? Secondly does the church only consist of Israel (up until the gospel goes to Gentiles with Paul obviously) With this in mind, is it fair to say the church was Israel ? I never said it was prior, or just after, Matthew 16:18 I said the Lord Jesus began to build His church while He had His ministry on the earth. This is the meaning of Matthew 16:18 The church is made up of Jews and Gentiles.

I would say prior, - Acts 7:38 which I quoted many times.... this is why I asked you " are these 2 DIFFERENT churches? As I stated before, the Lord Jesus did not build the New Testament church in the wilderness wanderings of the nation of Israel. Stephen is clearly using the word church as in a congregation of people; not as a New Testament church.

Question # 2 – Baptism Acts 2:38 & Matthew 28:19
  23 hours ago, Alan said:
The baptism of John the Baptist, as a messenger and prophet from God, is the baptism for all those who trust in the Lord Jesus and is the only mode of baptism acceptable in the New Testament.

I agree with everything in the 2nd section "The Prophet and messenger..."  - On this quote do you mean immersion? John's baptism was different, as it was not the Acts 2:38 baptism or the Matthew 28:19 baptism (correct one) which are all still by immersion. I obviously did mean immersion. Let's worry about Acts 2:38 and Matthew 28:19 in a different thread.

Question # 3

I agree with everything on the 5th section "the giving of the Holy Spirit" ... - But a question I have for this section is if you believe John 20:22 is when they "baptized with the Holy Ghost"  (not baptism "of" the Holy Ghost - someone got on my case because I said "of" - just word games I believe were besides the point) I never said that in John 20:22 that the disciples were, “baptized with the Holy Ghost.”

You previously commented on this but again, let me quote Acts 1:5 - "For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence."  When I referenced Acts 1:5 I clearly stated that Acts 1:5 and 8 was a totally separate issue than the giving of the Holy Spirit for 'power' for witnessing. Here is my full quote:

“May I bring out a point for all of the brethren as a side issue?

A lot of folks are properly baptized;  but they do not have power to witness. There is a difference. A lot of saints have no power for witnessing, but, they are saved, born again, and attending church regularly. But, do they witness? No. Why? Instead of being filled with the Spirit they are filled with themselves. Maybe if you think about that long enough you may realize what Acts 1:5 and 8 is all about.”

Alan, in your response, can you please quote Acts 1:5 also, and then tell me they were already baptized with the Holy Ghost prior to this? I never stated that the disciples were, “baptized with the Holy Ghost' prior to Acts 1:5

Alan

Edited by Alan
deleted a mis-spoken word & deleted harsh statements & title
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Alimantado,

Both InSeasonOut, and I, would like to thank you for your kind words.

"The light of the eyes rejoiceth the heart: and a good report maketh the bones fat." Proverbs 15:30

Thank you.

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
On ‎6‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 11:43 PM, Alan said:

Here is the answer to three of your questions:

Okay, now we're getting somewhere :)

I agree with everything on your post above, except I still think we should discuss Acts 7:38 more, in how they were "the church.."

On ‎6‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 11:43 PM, Alan said:

As I stated before, the Lord Jesus did not build the New Testament church in the wilderness wanderings of the nation of Israel. Stephen is clearly using the word church as in a congregation of people; not as a New Testament church.

I agree, but this is where it gets technical and confusing I the sense that terms need to be defined. I agree Jesus did not build the "NT church in the wilderness" , but I believe he did "call out" (maybe not necessarily "build") the church in the wilderness (Israel - not NT church)

Not to get sidetracked by the Godhead, but "the angel of the Lord" ( Exodus 3:2-6) was said to bring Israel out of Egypt. And the LORD God was also said to bring them out of Egypt. (Exodus 13:21 ; 14:19-24). There's way more to it than this, but to speak plainly, I'm saying I believe Jesus is the angel of the Lord. - So Jesus called out Israel (the church of 7:37-39) from the Egypt, and Jesus called out Christians (the church of 1 Corinth. 12:28 for example) from the world (type of Egypt).

I'm not saying the church in the wilderness was part of the "NT church", in fact I don't make the distinction at all between, OT church and NT church. I'm not sure if that's what you're saying... 7:38 is just a "church" in the sense of a congregation, as you said, or "called out assembly from Egypt". - This "church" , consisting of Israel, has always been a ":church" - by definition - and meaning they were not to go back to Egypt.

So when I say the church began with Israel, im not saying NT church, i mean by the definition above. I believe there is no distinction between OT church and NT church, its just "the church" (by definition). When Jesus began to "build" the church in his ministry, it only consisted of Israel, (Matthew 10:5-6). Then after Jesus died on the cross and rose again, this event made it possible for the church to become "the body" (Ephesians 2:16) at Pentecost - Comparing Acts 1:5 with 1 Corinthians 12:13. Allowing both Jews and Gentiles to be the church.

I will admit, this might be the hardest thing i ever studied, im not trying to complicate it, im just trying to think it thru still as im still figuring it all out. Hopefully i communicated this, in such a way that my understanding is not unfruitful.

Again, i hope this clears things up...

-Jake.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
1 hour ago, InSeasonOut said:

Okay, now we're getting somewhere :)

I agree with everything on your post above, except I still think we should discuss Acts 7:38 more, in how they were "the church.."

I agree, but this is where it gets technical and confusing I the sense that terms need to be defined. I agree Jesus did not build the "NT church in the wilderness" , but I believe he did "call out" (maybe not necessarily "build") the church in the wilderness (Israel - not NT church)

Not to get sidetracked by the Godhead, but "the angel of the Lord" ( Exodus 3:2-6) was said to bring Israel out of Egypt. And the LORD God was also said to bring them out of Egypt. (Exodus 13:21 ; 14:19-24). There's way more to it than this, but to speak plainly, I'm saying I believe Jesus is the angel of the Lord. - So Jesus called out Israel (the church of 7:37-39) from the Egypt, and Jesus called out Christians (the church of 1 Corinth. 12:28 for example) from the world (type of Egypt).

I'm not saying the church in the wilderness was part of the "NT church", in fact I don't make the distinction at all between, OT church and NT church. I'm not sure if that's what you're saying... 7:38 is just a "church" in the sense of a congregation, as you said, or "called out assembly from Egypt". - This "church" , consisting of Israel, has always been a ":church" - by definition - and meaning they were not to go back to Egypt.

So when I say the church began with Israel, im not saying NT church, i mean by the definition above. I believe there is no distinction between OT church and NT church, its just "the church" (by definition). When Jesus began to "build" the church in his ministry, it only consisted of Israel, (Matthew 10:5-6). Then after Jesus died on the cross and rose again, this event made it possible for the church to become "the body" (Ephesians 2:16) at Pentecost - Comparing Acts 1:5 with 1 Corinthians 12:13. Allowing both Jews and Gentiles to be the church.

I will admit, this might be the hardest thing i ever studied, im not trying to complicate it, im just trying to think it thru still as im still figuring it all out. Hopefully i communicated this, in such a way that my understanding is not unfruitful.

Again, i hope this clears things up...

-Jake.

Jake,

In my understanding, you are complicating the issue through a forced interpretation of Acts 7:38 and through a miss-application of 1Corinthians 12:13 with Acts 1:5 and other passages.

1 hour ago, InSeasonOut said:

Stephen is clearly using the word church as in a congregation of people; not as a New Testament church.

Edit Note: Although the wording is the same, I meant to quote the original quote (Alan's quote)

The definition of the 'church is the wilderness' is a congregation of people (the nation of Israel), called out of Egypt. In the sermon in Acts 7:1-53, Stephen is clearly trying to preach to the unbelieving Jews that they, in numerous incidents, rejected God and His will. Stephen gives the story of Abraham leaving Mesopotamia,  the rejection of Joseph (a type of Christ), Moses, and how they  have now rejected Christ. Stephen is not referring to the New Testament church at all. I do think that, through typology, you are reading too much into Stephen's usage of the Lord bringing the congregation out of Egypt. I will give one example in my next paragraph.

You said, "I believe there is no distinction between OT church and NT church, its just "the church" (by definition). When Jesus began to "build" the church in his ministry, it only consisted of Israel, (Matthew 10:5-6). Then after Jesus died on the cross and rose again, this event made it possible for the church to become "the body" (Ephesians 2:16) at Pentecost - Comparing Acts 1:5 with 1 Corinthians 12:13. Allowing both Jews and Gentiles to be the church." This is partially true and partially false. Pentecost was not the time that it was possible to be a part of the body of Christ; at the moment of the death of Christ it was possible. I you read the whole passage of Ephesians 2:1-22 you will discover a great fact: "But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far  off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us." Ephesians 2:13 & 14 When the Lord Jesus shed His blood on Calvary, at that point, the Law, the Old Testament, was abolished. The Law, the Old Testament, was abolished at the ministry of the Lord Jesus at the cross of Calvary and the New Covenant, the New Testament, began.

You referenced Ephesians 2:16 but you did not reference Ephesians 2:20. Ephesians 2:20 is the thrust of this thread. This thread is simply that the Lord Jesus is the 'head,' the 'beginning,' the 'cornerstone,' of the church as Paul said in Ephesians 2:20 Sometimes, I feel, that you are trying to get around, or complicate, this doctrine by miss-using typology, Matthew 10:5& 6Acts 1:5 and 1 Corinthians 12:13 to say something they are not saying. In 1 Corinthians 12:12, (look at the context of 1 Corinthians 12:13), Paul clearly states, "For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body, being many, are one body; so also is Christ." Our salvation is in Christ. When a person received, or trusted in, Christ, in His earthy ministry (before Acts 1:8), they were part of the family of God; a part of Christ. The disciples who received the baptism in Acts 2:1-4 were already, before Acts 1:5-2:4,saved, and a part of the Body of Christ. "He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them he gave power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of man, but of God." John 1:11-13 The Lord Jesus, a Jew, came unto His own people, Israel, and, as a whole, rejected Him. But, salvation is not by the will of man nor of bloodline (nationality). Whether Jew or Gentile, whoever received Christ, or trusted in Christ, is born (born again), into the family of God.

Alan

 

 

 

Edited by Alan
edit (in green coloring) stike-out I deleted the example
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
5 minutes ago, Alan said:

The definition of the 'church is the wilderness' is a congregation of people (the nation of Israel), called out of Egypt. In the sermon in Acts 7:1-53, Stephen is clearly trying to preach to the unbelieving Jews that they, in numerous incidents, rejected God and His will. Stephen gives the story of Abraham leaving Mesopotamia,  the rejection of Joseph (a type of Christ), Moses, and how they  have now rejected Christ. Stephen is not referring to the New Testament church at all.

Yes i already understand this. I did say Stephen was not referring to the NT church

7 minutes ago, Alan said:

You said, "I believe there is no distinction between OT church and NT church, its just "the church" (by definition). When Jesus began to "build" the church in his ministry, it only consisted of Israel, (Matthew 10:5-6). Then after Jesus died on the cross and rose again, this event made it possible for the church to become "the body" (Ephesians 2:16) at Pentecost - Comparing Acts 1:5 with 1 Corinthians 12:13. Allowing both Jews and Gentiles to be the church." This is partially true and partially false. Pentecost was not the time that it was possible to be a part of the body of Christ; at the moment of the death of Christ it was possible

Correct.... you misunderstood me.... Yes "at the moment of the death of Christ it was possible" ; "to be a part of the body of Christ" .... but that did not actually happen UNTIL Pentecost, in other words, AT Penetecost, even though as Eph. 2:16 says it was made possible by the Cross.

10 minutes ago, Alan said:

I you read the whole passage of Ephesians 2:1-22 you will discover a great fact: "But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far  off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us." Ephesians 2:13 & 14 When the Lord Jesus shed His blood on Calvary, at that point, the Law, the Old Testament, was abolished. The Law, the Old Testament, was abolished at the ministry of the Lord Jesus at the cross of Calvary and the New Covenant, the New Testament, began.

Absolutely

13 minutes ago, Alan said:

You referenced Ephesians 2:16 but you did not reference Ephesians 2:20. Ephesians 2:20 is the thrust of this thread. This thread is simply that the Lord Jesus is the 'head,' the 'beginning,' the 'cornerstone,' of the church as Paul said in Ephesians 2:20 Sometimes, I feel, that you are trying to get around, or complicate, this doctrine by miss-using typology, Matthew 10:5& 6Acts 1:5 and 1 Corinthians 12:13 to say something they are not saying

Ephesians 2:16-20, is basically in short summary, saying Jews and Gentiles are now one body, made possible by the cross.

19-20 "Now therefore ye (Gentiles) are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; 20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; "

Let me quote theses scriptures and so, in response you can elaborate...

Matthew 10:5-6 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: 6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

What im saying is Jesus did not go to Samaritans or Gentiles , only to Israel - Just as the text says - but you said this is something they are not saying?

1 Corinthians 12:13  For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

This deals with a question i asked, which you are yet to answer.... 1. How are we baptized into "one body" ? (not the church) 2. When did this first happen?

If someone were to ask me that, i would answer : 1 We are baptized into the one body by the Spirit. 2 This first happened on the day of Pentecost.

And let me remind you, that you have just said :

On ‎6‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 11:43 PM, Alan said:

I never said that in John 20:22 that the disciples were, “baptized with the Holy Ghost.”

and:

On ‎6‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 11:43 PM, Alan said:

I never stated that the disciples were, “baptized with the Holy Ghost' prior to Acts 1:5

Thanks for your patience.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Jake said, "Matthew 10:5-6 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: 6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. What im saying is Jesus did not go to Samaritans or Gentiles , only to Israel - Just as the text says - but you said this is something they are not saying? Here is what I said, "According to any body's reasoning, John 20:21-23, is doctrinally in the New Testament; after the death of the testator, Hebrews 9:16 Also, Matthew 10:5-6 has no bearing on the start of the New Testament church nor on the lesson of this thread." I never said, "... this is something they are not saying?" I would appreciate it you would not miss-quote me, nor add an interpretation to a passage that I did not say, hint, nor imply. I said that the ministry to Israel, the Jews, had no bearing on the issue that the Lord Jesus started the church in the days of His ministry on the earth. Also, the Lord Jesus, on occasion, went to Samaria and had dealings with Gentiles (see when the Lord was in Samaria in John 4:4-42, the Lord and the Roman Centurion in  Luke 7:1-10, the Greeks in John 12:20-23 and the woman of Canaan, Matthew 15:21-28). So, you are mistaken in my words, thoughts, and beliefs of Matthew 10:5-6

Jake,

You seem to ignore the purpose of this thread, continually repeat those passages that are not in direct reference to the subject of this thread (Acts 7:38, etc...), quote me incorrectly, add to my comments, and somewhat ignored my adequate explanation of those passages when I do deal with them in order to find fault with the clear teaching of Paul the Apostle in Ephesians 1:22 & 23 and 2:19 & 20, 1 Corinthians 12:28 & 29 and the words of the Lord Jesus in Matthew 16:18 and John 20:21-23

 Furthermore, I have clearly proved that the Lord Jesus fulfilled the requirements of the death of the testator, Hebrews 9:15-17, while He was fulfilling His ministry on the earth.

The issue, in my estimation, is that you need to stop trying to find fault, nor twist my words, in order to try and convince me of your beliefs. I simply believe the words of the Lord Jesus and Paul the apostle.

Alan

Edited by Alan
spelling & grammer (twice)
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
16 minutes ago, Alan said:

I never said, "... this is something they are not saying?" I would appreciate it you would not miss-quote me nor add and interpretation to a passage that I did not say, hint, nor imply. I said that the ministry to Israel, the Jews, had no bearing on the issue that the Lord Jesus started the church in the days of His ministry on the earth.

ohhkay... sorry about that. Thanks for clarifying. My point in using Matt. 10 was to say the early church consisted only of Jews. This is an easy fact. The 12 disciples were all Jews. This was all I was saying with this scripture. (but you said : "I feel, that you are trying to get around, or complicate, this doctrine by miss-using typology, Matthew 10:5& 6Acts 1:5 and 1 Corinthians 12:13 to say something they are not saying " as if you believe otherwise than what the text plainly said. Obviously Jesus had dealings with the Samaritans, but it does not contradict Matt 10, - but anyway this is besides the point.

24 minutes ago, Alan said:

You seem to ignore the purpose of this thread, continually repeat those passages that are not in direct reference to the subject of this thread

Alan, we were on the same page when you said :

On ‎6‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 11:43 PM, Alan said:

Here is the answer to three of your questions:

Then all I said was...

3 hours ago, InSeasonOut said:

I agree with everything on your post above, except I still think we should discuss Acts 7:38 more, in how they were "the church.."

I then gave a sincere and direct response to you, which I thought was relevant. We even had more agreements, even though you misunderstood me, which I pointed out. I then suggested we discuss 7:38 - Was this not okay? I thought it was relevant. It seemed we were making progress, and then I asked you the questions you were yet to answer, since you only answered 3. May I ask you to answer the other ones or is that not okay? I even made a separate thread but you have not answered them there either.

1 hour ago, InSeasonOut said:

1. How are we baptized into "one body" ? (not the church) 2. When did this first happen?

If someone were to ask me that, i would answer : 1 We are baptized into the one body by the Spirit. 2 This first happened on the day of Pentecost

I;m not saying your avoiding these questions... but these were the easiest ones!    :)

35 minutes ago, Alan said:

The issue, in my estimation, is that you need to stop trying to find fault, nor twist my words, in order to try and convince me of your beliefs. I simply believe the words of the Lord Jesus and Paul the apostle.

      :(           I'm not "trying"... if you think this way, sorry, it was a misunderstanding.... just like you misunderstood me, 2 posts ago. It happens.

I can't help but feel like this becoming contentious, like you said you simply believe the words of the Lord Jesus and Paul the apostle ; implying I don't?  :(

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
2 minutes ago, InSeasonOut said:

May I ask you to answer the other ones or is that not okay? I even made a separate thread but you have not answered them there either.

1 hour ago, InSeasonOut said:

If you will notice my past history of posting on OnLine Baptist I do not involve myself with every thread (for various reasons which change from time to time).

 

5 minutes ago, InSeasonOut said:

I can't help but feel like this becoming contentious, like you said you simply believe the words of the Lord Jesus and Paul the apostle ; implying I don't?  :(

The continuing asking the same questions, in different ways, saying things I did not say (nor hint, nor imply), has not helped my understanding of what you true intentions are at times.  In my thoughts, the bringing up of Acts 7:38, Matthew 10:5 & 6, and the other passages (after the second time they were brought up), indicated to me that you were trying to trap me in my words in order to discredit my belief.

Yes, I do sometimes wonder what you really believe about the original postings concerning the clear teaching of Paul the Apostle in Ephesians 1:22 & 23 and 2:19 & 20, 1 Corinthians 12:28 & 29 and the words of the Lord Jesus in Matthew 16:18 and John 20:21-23  and that the Lord Jesus fulfilled the requirements of the death of the testator, Hebrews 9:15-17, while He was fulfilling His ministry on the earth. These passages are clear in their meaning and interpretation.

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
2 minutes ago, Alan said:

The continuing asking the same questions, in different ways, saying things I did not say (nor hint, nor imply), has not helped my understanding of what you true intentions are at times.  In my thoughts, the bringing up of Acts 7:38, Matthew 10:5 & 6, and the other passages (after the second time they were brought up), indicated to me that you were trying to trap me in my words in order to discredit my belief.

Brother, in no way was this the case. If you look back over the last few posts, you'll see we have a lot of agreements. Sure I ask a lot of questions but I believe they were important to the discussion. Sorry we didn't see that the same way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • Members
On 6/5/2017 at 8:24 PM, Alan said:

The Beginning of the Church

"Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone." Ephesians 2:19 & 20 The foundation, the chief corner stone of the church, is the Lord Jesus. The Lord Jesus founded His church during His earthly ministry. The Lord Jesus started, while He was on the earth, the church. “And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Matthew 16:18

The Lord is the foundation, the corner stone of the church and the prophets and the apostles are stones set above the foundation. The foundation of the church was set at the ministry of the Lord Jesus and the apostles and prophets continued the building of the church.

Concerning the 'head' of the church, Paul the Apostle was given this doctrine, “And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all thins to the church, Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all things.” Ephesians 1:22 & 23 The Lord Jesus is the 'head' of the church.

The Prophet and Messenger of the Messiah

John the Baptist is a messenger from God. Those who reject his message, and his baptism, are not following the messenger of God. “And what went ye out for to see? A prophet? Yea, I say unto you, and much more than a prophet. This is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.” Luke 7:26 & 27

The individuals in the 'Christian' realm who reject the message, and the mode of baptism, is rejecting the words of the messenger and prophet of God to the church.

The Apostle Paul stated, "And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gift of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues. Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?" 1 Corinthians 12:28 & 29

The baptism of John the Baptist, as a messenger and prophet from God, is the baptism for all those who trust in the Lord Jesus and is the only mode of baptism acceptable in the New Testament. The term, 'Baptist,' is a title; it is not the last name of John.

Concerning those who reject the baptism of John

If a person rejects the baptism of John the Baptist, or his followers, than that person is not not scripturally baptized, and, according to the scriptures, he is like the Pharisees and hypocrites. “And all the people that heard him, and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John. But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him.” Luke 7:29 and 30

The different denominations in the 'Christian' realm, sprinkling, pouring, infant baptism, baptism for the dead (Mormons), who reject the immersion method of John the Baptist are in serious error.

The Apostles were baptized by John the Baptist

All of the apostles of the Lord Jesus were baptized by John the Baptist. Whether or not the term, or title, 'Baptist' is after their name, is immaterial an adding of the requirements of a belief in the scriptures, a 'straw man,' and a non-issue. Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.” Acts 1:22 God only has to give the man of God the term, or office, or calling, or title, 'once,' to make that term, title, office, doctrine, mode of service, scriptural and binding to the saints.

The Giving of the Holy Spirit

The Lord Jesus is the giver of the Holy Spirit to those who are saved. The apostles, as part of the foundation of the church, are the examples of the church. “Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whoe soever sins ye retain, they are retained.” John 20:21-23

The apostles, as part of the foundation of the church, are an example on how the Lord Jesus is guiding the saints in the New Testament church. For example. As the Lord Jesus sent the apostles around the world as a witness; so is every saint, every church, to be a witness. Matthew 29:1-20 As the Lord Jesus gave the Holy Spirit to the Apostles; so He gives every one who trusts in Him the Holy Spirit at the moment of conversion. Ephesians 4:30 There is is no 'tarrying,' or 'waiting,' for the Holy Spirit,' for any saint in the New Testament Church.

The Baptism at Pentecost

The filling of the Holy Spirit was given at Pentecost for empowerment to witness; not to start the church. The Lord Jesus said, “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.” Acts 1:8

The Lord Jesus had previously, in John 20:21-23, given the apostles the Holy Ghost. Now, the Lord Jesus is stating for them to remain in Jerusalem to tarry for the 'power' of the Holy Ghost for witnesses, soul-winning, the gift of tongues, to preach the gospel to the ends of the earth. The Lord Jesus clearly states they were to receive 'power;' they were not to receive the Holy Spirit, but 'power.'

 

 


 

Hi Alan. Great post. I do have a question concerning the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. Is this the same baptism that Pentecostals promote which they say speaking in tongues is one evidence of? If this is the very same baptism, then why don't other denominations follow suit? Why do many Protestants not promote the gifts of tongues, etc? Instead they seem to believe that one receives the Holy Spirit at salvation. Did these gifts cease?

I hope I'm not off topic.

Edited by TheSword1227
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Alan changed the title to The Beginning of the New Testament Chruch.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

    • By E Morales
      I posted this on my website many years ago, and do you feel that it still applies to the local church today?
      Karate
      –  On the cover of Bob Jones University‘s Spring 1992 issue of the BJU Review is a picture of black belt karate master and senior at BJU, Jim Pitts, in full karate garb, Bible open, giving the “invitation,” while the rest of the members of BJU’s “Champions for Christ karate team” are kneeling in prayer by their cinder-block bricks. On the inside cover is a picture of Mr. Pitts breaking four bricks with his right arm, while the other team members are watching, with Bibles open. The editor of the Review declares that:
      “Champions for Christ is one of many different extension groups that go out from the University each week, bringing the Gospel to needy people throughout the Southeast. These extension ministries give all students the chance to sharpen their soul winning skills, be an encouragement to others, and use their skills to glorify God.” (Emphasis added.)
      –  Many other so-called youth and evangelism ministries promote the martial arts as a means of motivating youth in evangelism, spiritual warfare, etc. For example, the March 1992 Baptist Bulletin (GARBC) contains an article about a husband-wife ABWE missionary team helping “teenagers understand God’s power in their lives” by exhibiting his (the husband’s) karate skills (“such as breaking boards with his hands and demonstrating samurai swords and nunchakus”) at GARBC youth rallies. The missionary team claims to want “to help the teenagers understand God’s power in their lives … [and] to motivate them to join God in the spiritual battle of the present age.”
      –  Should a Christian’s “soulwinning skills” include karate, and can that “skill” be used “to glorify God?” And what has karate to do with the reality of “God’s power” in a teenager’s life? Even though one might find it difficult to see how the so-called “skill” of karate could or would be used by the Holy Spirit to draw the lost to Christ, the overriding question must be: Is there a philosophy antithetical to Christianity that is at the root of karate exhibitions?
      –  Karate has a unique and unusual history. It was handed down centuries ago from Zen Master to Buddhist monk by word of mouth, and always in strict secrecy. Even today, everything done in karate can be tracked back to some principle of Zen Buddhism. An Indian Buddhist priest named Bodhidharma in the 6th century A.D. in China, synthesized karate techniques and Yoga meditation in order to unite mind, spirit, and body. (Among the Chinese styles are kung fu or gung fu, wu shu, and pa kua. Tai kwan do and hapkido are among the Korean styles.) Karate is clearly a mental and moral exercise, indeed, a spiritual experience. In each practice session there is a concerted effort to unite mind, spirit, and body just as Bodhidharma sought to do with Zen priests.
      Karate is founded on scientific principles of body movements that develop the karate devotee into a healthy, well coordinated person, both physically and mentally. The Chinese karate masters considered karate to be an extension of their religion. The Okinawan karate masters considered it to be a way of life:
      “It is, rather, an expression of life lived 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Indeed, the way of karate is a philosophy of life — a rich, rewarding philosophy if carried through, past the boundaries of obvious self-defense techniques, into the realm of mind-searching discipline. Within karate-do is the potential of a new person: a person huge in all the capabilities that will make him respected and confident” (The Way of Karate).
      –  Karate is Zen –– so says Master Oyama and many other karate masters. Zen is a school of Buddhism that has been called the “Religion of Immediate Reality.” The aim of Zen is to awaken the student to his true self and thus bring about a degree of self-knowledge through inward meditation. Zen students seek peace of mind through an enlightened awakening of an intuitive wisdom, which they feel is dormant now in all people. Zen meditation tries to achieve “no mindedness” which may be acquired by concentration and special breathing exercises. Karate, when combined with Zen meditation, is used to assist the student’s quest for peace of mind and equanimity in the face of conflict and tension.
      –  Although many, especially here in the United States, tend to disregard much of the Zen Buddhist philosophy in their training, some impact of that philosophy is made upon every student of karate. This is because Zen meditation and yoga-like breathing exercises — whether for thirty seconds or for two hours before and after every practice session — are an integral part of any Oriental martial arts program. If one truly aspires to master the art of karate, he cannot ignore the spiritual implications.
      Zen meditation provides a false “inner peace” that is at best a counterfeit of the peace only God can give. There is only one source of inner peace — the Holy Spirit (Galatians 5:22). We can choose between the self-control developed by the Holy Spirit, or the self-control of Zen. And with the self-control of Zen, as with any Eastern meditation technique, one could also be opening himself up to demonic activity.
      While God calls us to humility, the martial arts cater to human pride. For even in gaining mastery over one’s self through Zen, it is still recognized as an accomplishment of self. That self-pride then manifests itself through a desire to prove oneself superior.
      –  Although some proponents for a “Christian” martial arts do concede that karate has roots in occult, pagan, and/or Eastern religious philosophy, they also claim that the primary philosophy behind the martial arts actually originated in Old Testament Biblical times (citing such passages as Gen. 14:13-16; 2 Sam 6:14; Psa. 144:1; Eccl. 9:10 as proof-texts), even going back all the way to the Garden of Eden! (Christian Martial Arts, Tottingham & Tottingham, pp. v & 2). Therefore, according to these advocates, Satan made “inroads” into the true Bible-based martial arts, capturing them for himself, and that all we need to do now is to reclaim them and change them “from an Asiatic philosophy to a truly Bible-centered Christian philosophy” (Christian Martial Arts, pp. ii & 2). Once these “dramatic changes” in “approach” are made, we are told, the “Christian can indeed study the martial arts in total harmony with his walk with the Lord” (Christian Martial Arts, p. v).
      This, of course, is the same logic men use to “Christianize” any worldly, pagan, and/or occult philosophy or practice, whether it be astrology (the “Gospel in the Stars“), psychology, Eastern “medicine,” magic, pyramidology, graphology, numerology, etc., etc., etc. The logic goes something like this:
      “It was originated by God (which requires a few verses out of context to ‘prove’ it), Satan stole it and/or counterfeited it (under the false assumption that ‘Satan can’t create, he just steals from God’), we need to reclaim it and re-Christianize it, and then we can use it ‘to glorify God'” (Christian Martial Arts, pp. 75 & 83).
      –  The violence associated with karate smacks of anything but “Christian.” Legendary karate “masters” were reputed to have superhuman powers, including the ability to kill small birds with a yell (“the shout of doom”), a secret knowledge of how to touch lightly at a spot on the body to cause death (“the touch of death”), and the ability to penetrate an adversary’s body with a bare hand to withdraw his still-beating heart. The very nature of these violent forms of expression runs counter to God’s Word.
      –  How then can any Christian justify his involvement in karate or any of the other martial arts? He can’t. Not even by claiming that such involvement is for self-defense, exercise, to learn discipline, etc. (let alone justifying it for evangelism purposes!). There are other methods by which these results may be obtained — methods not associated with harmful violence and false doctrine.

      * The chief source of our information for this report was a special report written by Albert Dager of Media Spotlight. Other sources used were various encyclopedias and three books on karate/martial arts: The Way of Karate, Karate Within Your Grasp, and Christian Martial Arts.
      I believe that many activities in the local church, should not be.
      E Morales with The Glory Land
    • By PastorMatt
      I would like to hear thoughts on this topic. I understand that the early church meet in houses, is this a principle we should still be following today?

    • By JordanHaskins
      I Timothy 3 states that one of the qualifications of a, "bishop," is to be," the husband of one wife." In 2016, does that relate sole to the pastor of a local church or does that apply to those on the pastoral staff such as, "youth pastors/ directors?"
       
      Second question I would have, as Baptists , what does the Bible have to say on the process of finding a wife. What would you say to a marriage minded young man who believes he's called to ministry on this topic of finding a wife. I also would ask because, as someone who is a first generation Christian, this is not something I have really been able to gain solid Biblical counsel on, so few are willing to touch it as its controversial, dating/ courtship, etc.If you were a youth pastor, college/ singles ministry director working with someone who didn't exactly come up in the Christian school/ Bible college/ Baptist church to pursue what I have heard preached many times as, "the second greatest blessing after salvation?"
      I ask this because, in the evangelical world, such as boundless.org (Focus on the Family) and other sites, men are being shamed for not dating, etc extended adulthood, I believe Cary Schmidt wrote a book on this topic of extended adolescence. And with the trends of co-habitating, homosexual "marriage," fornication, divorce, single parenthood on the rise, etc. Census showed a while back that singles are now a majority of this country, how can we as the church, not only defend the institution of marriage, the family, and the home for those who already have it, but help young people who desire those things to get ready for those thing and provide them opportunities to meet, mingle, and serve and serve others with one another?
       
      Not trying to cause controversy, but these are things that, as a young man having a burden to work with young people, how could I be a help to them in this area, and also some practical principles in godly communication, etc. that would benefit my own life as well. I appreciate all the wisdom I've found on this site, that's why I've been asking these complex questions like I have. Thank you brothers and sisters.
    • By John Young
      Many modern bible versions were made by individuals, foundations, bible societies, para church organizations etc. but how many of these or which ones were directly commissioned and overseen by the authority of an actual "church"?
    • By John Young
      My wife and I are moving to the Northwest in August and I am praying about starting or pastoring a church. Does anyone have any advice or leads that they can give about an area or church? 
      Ideally I'm looking for something within a few hundred miles of Spokane, WA.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 53 Guests (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

  • Tell a friend

    Love Online Baptist? Tell a friend!
  • Members

    No members to show

  • Recent Status Updates

    • Alan

      Happy Birthday John Young! God Bless! 🍰
      · 1 reply
    • KJV ME!

      Now it is time for me to step out of my shell and let go... I AM STRICT KJV!... In scripture God said he would preserve his word... Well did he or didn't he?... If there is every translation under the sun, then he didn't but I KNOW HE DID!... The preserved word of God called the KJV is for the English people has been around for over 400 years and what is interesting to me, is the KJV was translated in 1611 and the Pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock in 1620... Coincidence?... A new book the preserved KJV word of God for the New World... So take that you KJV naysayers... I have been reading, studying and digging through the KJV for over 50 years... My belief is 100% Christ and scripture says so... Glad to be here and its time to take these shackles off!   
      John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
      I am... Brother Ramsey
       
      · 1 reply
    • stan1964stanssb

      Praise God I found such a powerhouse of the outpouring of His Spirit and unapologetic in regards of the defense of the KJV Bible. When I became a Christian back in 1984, I was told to get & read the KJV. It's been my choice all these years.
      · 0 replies
    • 1Timothy115  »  Ukulelemike

      Mike,
      RE: This is why I am here, why are you?
      Also, the land in Egypt wasn't land God gave them it was land Joseph through Pharaoh gave them. God gave them Canaan.
      Dave 
      · 1 reply
    • Alan

      Praise the Lord! Sherry and I, safe, tired, and joyful,  are back in Taiwan.
      · 0 replies
  • Popular Now

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      27,460
    • Total Posts
      279,243
  • Topics

  • Recent Status Updates

    • Alan

      Happy Birthday John Young! God Bless! 🍰
      · 1 reply
    • KJV ME!

      Now it is time for me to step out of my shell and let go... I AM STRICT KJV!... In scripture God said he would preserve his word... Well did he or didn't he?... If there is every translation under the sun, then he didn't but I KNOW HE DID!... The preserved word of God called the KJV is for the English people has been around for over 400 years and what is interesting to me, is the KJV was translated in 1611 and the Pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock in 1620... Coincidence?... A new book the preserved KJV word of God for the New World... So take that you KJV naysayers... I have been reading, studying and digging through the KJV for over 50 years... My belief is 100% Christ and scripture says so... Glad to be here and its time to take these shackles off!   
      John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
      I am... Brother Ramsey
       
      · 1 reply
    • stan1964stanssb

      Praise God I found such a powerhouse of the outpouring of His Spirit and unapologetic in regards of the defense of the KJV Bible. When I became a Christian back in 1984, I was told to get & read the KJV. It's been my choice all these years.
      · 0 replies
    • 1Timothy115  »  Ukulelemike

      Mike,
      RE: This is why I am here, why are you?
      Also, the land in Egypt wasn't land God gave them it was land Joseph through Pharaoh gave them. God gave them Canaan.
      Dave 
      · 1 reply
    • Alan

      Praise the Lord! Sherry and I, safe, tired, and joyful,  are back in Taiwan.
      · 0 replies
×
×
  • Create New...