아이디    ID저장
비밀번호     
  

           0 .  구원의 단계 (보충 설명)
  질문 : 엘리사 ( 2006-06-09 )   
답변에 감사합니다.
그러나 세례가 죄사함의 필수적 조건인지에 대해서 좀더 자세한 설명을 해 주시면 합니다.
또 성령을 받았다는 의미를 성령세례로 이해하는 데에는 무리가 없는지요?
세례를 받기 전에 성령을 받았다는 것은 어떻게 설명할 수 있을까요?
  답변 : 2006-06-09    
성경 속에서 죄인이 하나님의 거룩한 백성으로 거듭남에는 세례 외에 다른 방법을 제시한 곳이 없습니다.

세례가 죄사함의 필수적 조건인지에 대한 기록은 저희 사이트에서 얼마든지 검색해 보실 수 있을 것이고 답변에서도 여러 차례 언급한 것으로 기억합니다.

세례는 주님께서 구속의 역사를 완성하시고 부활 하셔서 40일을 이땅에 제자들에게 나타나시고 승천하시기 전에 주신 명령과 약속의 핵심입니다.(마 28:19~20); (막 16:15~16) 믿음의 순종을 통한 세례에 관한 가장 구체적인 사실을 바울은 로마서 6:1~14에서 논증합니다.

삶 속에서 경험을 고백한 다음 URL의 내용을 참고하십시오.
http://church.bible.or.kr/church/zeroboard/view.php?id=ch_totalbd&page=1&sn1=&divpage=1&sn=off&ss=on&sc=on&select_arrange=headnum&desc=asc&no=1030

하나님은 자신의 약속을 순종하는 자들에게 구원의 인침으로 성령을 약속하셨습니다.

사도행전 가운데 세례를 받기 전에 성령의 부음을 받은 고넬료의 가정을 가리켜 그가 세례를 받기도 전에 선물로 주시는 성령(그리스도인 가운데 내주하시는 성령)을 받았다고 주장하는 사람이 있는데 전혀 그렇지 않습니다.  이 점에 대해서는 아래에서 자세히 설명해 드리겠습니다.   

사도행전에 나타난 "성령의 부어주심"은 우리 죄를 위한 주님의 십자가 사건처럼 한번 일어난 사건이지만 지금도 계속 그 상황이 계속되는 현재완료형으로 이해해야 합니다. 마치 십자가 사건이 일회성 사건이었지만 지금도 이 복음을 믿고 믿고 순종하는 자를 구원하는 현재완료형인 것과 같습니다.  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

아래 부분은 많은 분들이 혼동하는 "성령으로 세례를 받는 것"과 "성령의 부어주심"(사도행전 2장과 고넬료의 가정) 에 대해 성경 말씀을 통해 설명한 영문 원고입니다. 시간이 나는 대로 이를 한글로 번역해서 올릴 예정이니 조금만 더 기다려 주시기 바랍니다.

We can easily see from Acts chapters one and two that the baptizing in the Spirit and the outpouring of the Spirit are just different ways to refer to the same event.

The apostles were to receive from the Father the “baptizing in the Spirit (Acts 1:4-5). The apostles received upon awaiting from the Father the “outpouring of the Spirit” (Acts 2:16ff).

Therefore, the “baptizing in the Spirit” was the “outpouring of the Spirit.”

The promise of the Father was the “baptizing in the Spirit” (Acts 1:4-5).

The promise of the Father was poured forth by Jesus (Acts 2:33).

Therefore the “baptizing in the Spirit” was poured forth.

NOTE: . Pouring is the event from Jesus’ viewpoint.
Baptizing is the event from the recipient’s viewpoint.

(A coin placed in a glass is immersed after water is poured upon it. The pouring is not the immersion. It is the water leaving the source. The immersion is not the pouring. It is the result, the covering of the coin.)

So it is here in this case.
John said, “He will baptize you in the Holy Spirit (Matthew
3:7-12).
Jesus however, " poured the Holy Spirit upon them"
(Acts 2:33).
Therefore, He baptized them when he poured the Spirit upon them. (The baptizing and the outpouring refer to the same event.)

ONE TIME NEVER TO BE REPEATED

It is now an easy task to prove that the “baptizing” or“outpouring” was a one-time, never-to-be-repeated act.

It is used in every case in the New Testament to mean pour forth all of whatever is being poured out.

( on “pour out.”)
For some examples see  W. E. Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, Page 196:

Then the tense of the verb “pour out or forth” indicates that it was to be a one-time-for-all-time operation.

In Acts 2:17, when Peter quotes Joel’s prediction concerning what will happen, the  future tense is used.

However, notice that Peter says what was promised has occurred: “This is that.”    

In verse 33 Peter says, “He (Jesus) has poured out.”

Here Peter used the Aorist tense, which expresses action as a point completed in the past.

So Jesus, according to Peter, had at one point in the past poured out the Spirit.

Then in Acts 10:45, at the house of Cornelius,
Luke, records the attitude of the Jewish Christians who had come
with Peter:
         “And they of the circumcision that believed were
        amazed, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Spirit.”

The words “was poured out” express the perfect tense in the original language.
(The Analytical Greek Lexicon, Page 124.)
The perfect tense indicates an action completed in the past but resulting in a continuing and perfect state of being.

The emphasis is on the completed state of being. (Essentials of New Testament Greek, Ray Summers, Page 103.)

So, the Holy Spirit had in the past been poured out for the Gentiles (Acts 2:17, 39) and was still present and available for them upon obedience (Acts 5:32, Galatians 4:6).

This was proved by the tongue-speaking occurring (v. 46, Cf. 1
Corinthians 14:22).
Notice,
(1) Joel spoke of it as future, but Peter says it happened on Pentecost (Acts 2:17);
(2) Peter spoke of it as  a completed act in one point of time in the past (Acts 2:33);
(3) Luke spoke of it as a completed act in the past but resulting in a continuing state of being (Acts 10:45).  

Really, in the sermon on Pentecost, Peter stressed all three of these points, concluding that the Spirit was henceforth available for all whom God called   (Acts 2:38-39).

From these arguments from plain scripture we can draw only one conclusion:
        The event we call the “baptism of the Spirit” took place in Jerusalem.    It happened once for all time.

In 1 Timothy 2:6 we read that Christ died a ransom for all.
In like manner, in Hebrews 2:9, we find it was the Father’s will that Christ die for all men.
Christ did not die for an elect few but for every man who will ever live.
However, only those who obey Him will benefit from this once-for-all death.
Even so, on the day of Pentecost the Spirit was poured out for all men. However, only those whom the Lord “our God shall call ..." (Acts 21:39) and those who call on God will partake of that once-for-all outpoured Spirit (Acts 2:21).

Some Objections Considered.
Objection: In Acts 1:4-5 and John 14-17 the promise of the
Holy Spirit was given to the apostles and to the apostles alone.
Therefore, we are wrong in enlarging the promise.
It is quite true that the immediate hearers of the above verses
are the apostles, but this does not necessarily limit the promise to
them any more than the books of Corinthians, Thessalonians,
Philippians are limited to those to whom they are addressed. If we
desire to know how an evangelist is to conduct himself today, we
read the letters written to Timothy or Titus.
This objection is successful only if all the other verses on the subject limit it to the twelve, but this is not the case.     (18)
Luke 3:15-17 cannot be so understood as to apply only to the twelve. If only the twelve (eleven at the time of Acts 1:4-5 and John 14-17) were promised the gift, then Matthias, Paul, and the household of Cornelius did not receive it, and Joel did not promise it to all flesh.
Imagine Jesus seeking to limit the promise to twelve when
He had already inspired Joel to promise it to all flesh!

Objection: If all men received the baptism of the Spirit, they
would be able to work miracles and speak by inspiration.

This objection betrays a complete misunderstanding of the
promise. The giving of the Spirit and the imparting of power are
two entirely different actions. The Spirit is given by Jesus, but
gifts and powers are given by the Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:11; John
16:13). To confuse the power given by the Spirit and the Spirit
                himself is to miss the whole point.

But it is objected that the baptism of the Spirit “invariably”
brought power. This is simply begging the question.

The truth of the matter is, Christ poured out the Spirit for all
men and gave the Spirit to all Christians.
The  Spirit, then, gave power to as many of them as he saw fit.

To the apostles He gave so much, to others so much, and to us (not miraculous) so much (Ephesians 3:16).

We, today, do not need miraculous power;
therefore, He does not give it to us. Again let us keep a clear
distinction between the Spirit as a gift and gifts from the Spirit.

Objection: If all Christians receive this baptism of the Holy
Spirit, there are two baptisms, and Paul claimed there was only
one.
The phrase “baptized in the Holy Spirit” spoke of an event
and not a “measure” of the Holy Spirit.
The careful student will have noticed that the expression “baptism of the Holy Spirit” does not occur in the scriptures.

Now, although this does not make it wrong (i.e., because it is not mentioned), its use immediately conveys a “measure” idea.

Notice the different thoughts which creep into their usage:
Ye  shall receive the “baptism of the Holy Spirit.”

Ye shall be baptized in/with  the Holy Spirit.

In the first, they were to receive something to possess it. In the
latter something was to happen to them.

One does not receive a verb; it happens to him. (Think this over again, because it is important and will not register at first.)

What does all of this mean? We ought to avoid these phrases
which confuse and can be easily misunderstood.

John 3:34 is an inspired commentary on “baptized in/with the Holy Spirit.”
It makes it clear that the Spirit is given without measure.
The word “pour” from Joel and from Acts 2:17 has the same idea of super abundance.
Jesus was indicating to what extent the Holy Spirit
would be given when he said “Ye shall be baptized . . . “

To consider this promise (the baptizing) as a mere clothing
with the Holy Spirit is to miss the whole point since many had
before that day of Pentecost been “clothed” with the Holy Spirit.

The emphasis is not on the baptizing but on the Spirit Himself.

When God gave the Spirit, He gave him without
measure, He baptized the recipients with him, He
poured him out for all flesh. This He did once for all
time. Since Pentecost the Spirit has been available for all men.

Whenever a person becomes a Christian he benefits from that
initial outpouring, just as surely as did the apostles.

But more, when Joel spake of God pouring out His Spirit
upon “all flesh,” he did not have reference to “all nations.”

It had its application to his own people, even though Peter at the Spirit’s leading extends the promise to all who obey.

In the Old Testament only a few chosen men and women had any direct dealing with the Holy Spirit. Men like David, Samson, Gideon, etc., had experienced the workings and directing of the Spirit.
But, Joel says, “a day is coming when the Spirit will be poured out upon all flesh, not only certain chosen ones but handmaidens, servants, old men as well as young.”

Read Joel 2, beginning at verse 18 through
the end of the chapter, and you will see that this promise is to the
remnant of his people.

Furthermore, in the era of the Messiah, the Spirit will come and live within the subject of the Christ.

In this we find a second “new” aspect of the working of the Spirit in the Messianic Age.

Also when Paul wrote Ephesians four, the baptism of fire was
still to come upon the Jewish nation and he was to undergo a
baptism of suffering.

Objection: The promise of Joel was not the “baptism” of the
Spirit; this was only something that Christ promised.

Christ said: “Ye shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.” (Acts
1:4-5)
Peter said:  “This is that spoken by the prophet Joel.” (Acts
2:16-17)
Jesus said the promise of the Father was the baptizing in the
Spirit. Peter said that the Father had promised in Joel the
outpouring of the Spirit.

Therefore, the baptizing of the Spirit Jesus promised, is the
outpouring of the Spirit Joel promised.

The activity of the Holy Spirit in the household of Cornelius
presents problems to people who believe the “measure” theory.

An honest and open examination of this incident is absolutely necessary to our study.

Read carefully Acts 10:1-11:18. Before discussing this complex
question  let us establish some things from this section of scripture.

Major premise: Peter was to speak words whereby
Cornelius was to be saved (Acts 11:14).
Minor premise: Peter was to speak all things commanded
by God (Acts 10:33).

Conclusion: The words whereby he must be saved included all things commanded of God.

Major premise: Peter commanded him to be baptized in the name of the Lord (Acts 10:48).
Minor premise: The words whereby he was to be saved included all things commanded of God by Peter.

Conclusion: Baptism in the name of the Lord was included in the words whereby he would be saved.

The relation of Cornelius’ baptism to his salvation can be seen by comparison.

Major premise: Peter preached only one gospel (Acts 15:9, 11).
Minor premise: In preaching the gospel in Acts 2 he
commanded people (Jews) to be baptized (Acts 2:38).
Conclusion: In preaching the gospel to Cornelius
(Gentiles), he would command baptism.

Major premise: Peter commanded people to be baptized
in the name of the Lord “unto the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38).
Minor premise: Peter commanded Cornelius to be baptized in the name of the Lord (Acts 10:48).
Conclusion: Peter commanded Cornelius to be
baptized for the remission of sins.

Whatever the people in Acts 2:38 were baptized “unto,”
Cornelius was baptized “unto.” If they were baptized “unto” or
“because of” the remission of sins, then Cornelius was baptized
“because of” remission of sins.

If they were baptized “unto” or in order to receive the remission of sins, then Cornelius was baptized unto the remission of sins.

Major premise: Whatever Peter told the people in Acts 2
to be baptized “unto” he also told  them to repent “unto.”
Minor premise: Peter did not tell them to repent “unto”
(because of) the remission of sins.
Conclusion: He did not tell them to be baptized “unto”
(because of) the remission of sins.

Major premise: He told them to repent “unto” (in order
to) the remission of their sins.
Minor premise: He told them to be baptized for the same
reason he told them to repent.
Conclusion: He told them to be baptized “unto” (in order to)
the remission of sins.

Major premise: Peter told the people in Acts 2 to be baptized unto the remission of sins.
Minor premise: Peter preached but one gospel (Acts 15:9, 11).
Conclusion: He told Cornelius to be baptized “unto”
(in order to) the remission of sins.

Briefly reconstructing what occurred at the house of Cornelius we have:
        An angel appears to this devout man, tells him   his prayer is heard, to send to Joppa and fetch Peter, who         would tell him words whereby he would be saved.

         Peter comes and as he begins to preach (Acts 11:15), the Spirit falls upon Cornelius and the other Gentiles present.

        Peter then commands them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.
        Peter returns to Jerusalem and rehearses to the brethren the conversion of the Gentiles. The brethren rejoice that God has         granted the Gentiles repentance unto life also (Acts 10:1-        11:18).                             

The problems that normally come to mind in this section are
“When was Cornelius saved?” and “Did he actually receive the
Spirit (to indwell) before he was baptized?”
This second question is sometimes phrased, “Was Cornelius baptized in the Holy Spirit?”

The answer to the first question is simple. Cornelius was
saved when his sins were removed. His sins were removed when
he was baptized (remember our discussion just completed).

So he was saved when he was baptized, not before he was baptized.   This will help us to answer the second question when we come to it.

In preparation of the answer of the second question: “Did
Cornelius receive the Spirit before baptism? Was he baptized in the Holy Spirit?”   we need to consider the purpose of this miracle of the Spirit coming upon him.

The purpose of something can normally be seen in the use
made of it, and this would always be the case with inspired men.

What use or uses did Peter make of the coming of the Spirit upon
Cornelius and the other Gentiles?

Only one use was ever made of this occurrence:
        To break down the prejudice of the Jews, to
        enable them to see that the Gentiles could be baptized         (become Christians) without being circumcised (becoming a         Jew).

In Acts 10:47 Peter asked if the Jews present could forbid the Gentiles from being baptized, seeing they had received the Spirit?

In Acts 11:16-17, when speaking to the brethren in Jerusalem, Peter again mentions the incident and the brethren rejoice in the Gentiles’ salvation.

Then, in Acts 15, when the brethren take the problem
of circumcision to the apostles, Peter refers to this incident for the
third time in an appeal to the Jewish Christians not to bind
circumcision on the Gentile Christians.

Since this is the uniform usage made of the incident, we would have to say, “The Spirit came upon Cornelius before he was baptized to prove once and for all that which Peter had stated in Acts 2:21 and 39-that all, both Jew and Gentile, could be baptized, have their sins remitted, and receive the Holy Spirit.”

Peter did not regard this miracle as an end in itself, but simply used it as a proof that these men could be baptized.

In Acts 11:17 Peter speaks of “withstanding God.”
What Peter mean by these words?

1 . Did he mean he could not withstand God in visiting the
man’s house? No!  He was already in the man’s house when the
Spirit fell.

2. Did he mean it would be withstanding God not to preach
the gospel to the man?  Certainly not!  He had already begun to do
this when the Spirit fell.

3. Was it in acknowledging that all men are acceptable to
God? No! This he had confessed before the Spirit fell.

4. What is the only thing he said after the Spirit fell? “Can
any forbid the water, that these should not be baptized, who have
received the Spirit as well as we? And he commanded them to be
baptized in the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 10:47-48).

From all of this we learn that to have refused to baptize these
Gentiles in the name of the Lord would have been to withstand
God.
But withstand God in what?
What had God in mind for these men?   That they might be saved!

And we have already concluded, from the Scriptures, that the words whereby Cornelius and his house were to be saved included all that God had commanded through Peter.

So Peter, in order not to withstand God, commands
them to be baptized in the name of the Lord in order that God
might have His way in this man’s life.

But God’s purpose in this man’s life was that he might be saved (Acts 11:14).
Therefore, God through Peter commanded them to be baptized.

An objection would understandably be raised right here. “If
Cornelius received the Spirit before baptism, he must have been
saved before baptism!”

Despite the cries of some who believe the “measure” theory, this objection is valid if Cornelius received the Spirit.

It makes no difference why” he received the Spirit. If he
received the Spirit, the following is true:

1. He was sealed unto salvation before he was baptized
        (Ephesians 1:13).
2. He had the earnest (guarantee) of his inheritance before
        baptism (Ephesians 1:14).
3. He was a son before he was baptized (Galatians 4:6).
4. He was in God and God was in him before he was
        baptized (1 John 3:24; 4:13).

5. That these four things were not true can be seen in the
study of the following plain passages-Acts 2:38; Galatians 3:27-
28; Mark 16:15-16; Titus 3:4-6; et al.

The answer to this objection can be easily seen when we
understand Luke’s use of a certain figure of speech.

The words in the Bible are to be understood in their literal meaning unless doing  so would involve an absurdity or a contradiction of other plain passages.

If we understand the words which describe Cornelius
receiving the Spirit before baptism literally, we are left with four
apparent contradictions of other plain passages, as we just noted.

These words, then, must be understood to be some figure
of speech.
The figure of speech Luke used here seems to be his favorite.

A quick count of the book of Acts will reveal over twenty
occasions of its use.
It is called a metonymy. Webster's dictionary  defines a
metonymy: Use of one word for another that it suggests, as the
effect for the cause, the cause for the effect, the sign for the thing
signified, the container for the thing contained, etc.

Let’s notice a few examples of this figure of speech.
In Acts 6:7 we read of the word of God increasing.

This does not mean that they added some to the word of God, but that the effects or results increased.

In Acts 8:28 we find that the eunuch “read the prophet Isaiah.” Here the prophet is named when his writings are meant.

In Acts 8:14 we read that “Samaria had received the word.”
Here the city is named when the people are meant.

In Acts 21:21 Paul is accused of teaching the Jews “to forsake Moses.”   Here Moses is named when the law is meant.

In Acts 27:29 we read “And fearing lest haply we should be cast ashore on rocky ground, they let go four anchors from the stern, and wished for the day.” Here the people are named when the ship is meant.

In Acts 2:33 we find Peter naming the gifts of the Spirit when
he means the Spirit himself: “Being therefore at the right hand of
God exalted, and having received from the Father the promise of
the Holy Spirit, he hath poured forth, this which ye see and hear.”

Everyone knows the Spirit is invisible. What these Jews saw
was the apostles speaking in languages they ought not to have
known.
But what they saw and heard was NOT what Jesus poured
forth. He poured forth the Holy Spirit, the promise of the Father,
and yet
Peter told them Jesus poured forth WHAT THEY SAW AND HEARD!
Here the gifts are named when the Spirit is meant.

In Acts 8:12-20 the Holy Spirit is expressly named four times
when the “gifts” are meant.

Every Bible student is aware that those who obey the gospel, and are thus made sons, automatically receive the Spirit (Acts 2:38-39; 5:32; 2 Corinthians 1:21-22; Galatians 4:6).

These people had heard the gospel (Acts 8:5-6); they had believed the gospel (Acts 8:12); they had obeyed the gospel, being baptized (Acts 8:12).
They had, therefore, received the Holy Spirit. Yet Peter and John came down from Jerusalem that the Samaritans might receive the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:15).

After the apostles had prayed and laid their hands on them, the
record says, “and they received the Holy Spirit” (Acts 8:17).

The key to the whole section is verse 18: “Now when Simon saw that through the laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Spirit was given, he offered them money.”

We can see from this and the former consideration of the Spirit coming to all obedient believers, that this is a metonymy.

The Spirit is stated when the gifts are meant.

In Acts 19:2-6 the Spirit is named when the gifts are meant.

Paul approaches these whom he believes to be Christians
(believers) and asks, “Did ye receive the Holy Spirit when ye
believed?” (Acts 19:2).

A very unusual question to ask of those whom you believe to be Christians!
Unless he meant, “Have you received any gifts of the Spirit since ye believed?”

Verse 6 shows this to really be the question Paul was asking:
“And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came upon them; and they spake with tongues and prophesied.”

The Spirit is named when the gifts are meant. Also when Paul asked this question, they replied,
“Nay, we did not so much as hear whether the Holy Spirit was   given.”

Paul then asked them concerning their baptism, knowing that this was where believers are given the Spirit by God  (Acts 2:38-39).

In Acts 4:8 we read of Peter being “filled with the Holy
Spirit.”
In Acts 4:31 the same thing is said of a whole company of
Christians.
This was a qualification of the first deacons in Acts 6,
and characterized both Paul and those whom he converted to
Christ (Acts 13:9, 52).

On these occasions, and all others where this expression is found, a metonymy is being used.
Here the power or influence is meant and not the Spirit himself.
If a man receives the Spirit he has all that can be received.

BUT THERE IS A WORLD OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OUR HAVING ALL OF THE SPIRIT OR THE SPIRIT HAVING ALL OF US!!!

If a man is not filled by the person of the Spirit which dwells
within when he first believes, he never can be, for the Spirit
Himself does not grow in size or magnitude.

However, his influence and power in our lives and in the lives of the early Christians certainly does and did grow.

So here in Acts 10:47, where it states that Cornelius’
household received the Holy Spirit, it means that they received
from the Spirit a gift, specifically the gift to speak in tongues (Cf.
1 Corinthians 12:11).

This is exactly what Peter referred to in Acts
11:15-16 when he said that the Gentiles received the “like” gift as
the apostles did “at the beginning.”

Those who believe in the “measure” theory must contend with this passage. The word translated “like” means “equal, in quality or quantity.”

It is translated “equal” five times. If the “measure” theory is correct, and Cornelius received the “baptism of the Spirit,” then he became what the apostles were.

The “like” gift (equal in quantity or quality) which Cornelius received was the speaking in tongues (Acts 10:44-46), the exact same gift that the apostles received “at the beginning” (Acts 2:1-4).

So, again, the Holy Spirit is named when the gifts are really meant.

Someone might make one parting objection: “But it says the
'gift of the Spirit’ was poured out upon Cornelius and his whole
household.”

This is made to mean by the objector that these Gentiles received the Spirit as a gift from God before they were baptized.

The difficulty of this verse (Acts 10:45) is removed
immediately by a shallow study of the original language.

The verse reads, “And they of the circumcision that believed were
amazed, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles
also was poured out the gift of the Holy Spirit.”

The verb translated “was poured out” is the perfect tense.

This tense indicates an action that has been completed but which has also resulted in a continuing and perfect state of being.

So this verse really serves as the Spirit’s commentary of Acts 2:17-18, 33, 38-39.

The Spirit on the day of Pentecost had been completely poured
out for the Gentile as well as the Jew.

This had resulted in a state of His being available for all whom God calls (Acts 2:39; 2 Thessalonians 2:14).

The Gentiles this day were to receive what God had poured out for them in the past.
The tongue-speaking was God’s sign to the Jews, who did not believe that the Gentiles could be saved apart from circumcision, that the Gentiles were acceptable to God through obedience to the gospel without any recourse to the Law of Moses, and therefore could receive the Spirit without receiving Moses.

(1 Corinthians 14:22 states that tongues are a sign to those who  believe not, and these Jews did not believe that the Gentiles could be baptized without being circumcised.)

So what happened at the house of Cornelius?

The first uncircumcised Gentiles became Christians through the preaching of the gospel and their obedience to the same.

They received from the Spirit the gift of speaking in tongues, as a sign to the Jews, before they were baptized.

Then, they received from God what he had already provided for them at Pentecost, the Holy Spirit as a gift.

Even Peter himself,  had not understood the full significance of the outpouring at Pentecost until God empowered these Gentiles.

(Acts 11 :15-16 states that this incident “reminded” him of Jesus’
words:  " John baptized with water but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit"


BCC 소개 | 뉴스레터 | 찾아오시는 길 | 개인정보 보호정책 | TOP ▲
BCC | 서울시 강서구 방화1동 180-14 7F | 비영리법인번호:109-82-03052 | Tel (02) 2662-0793, 2662-8081 | Fax (02) 2662-8082
Portions are Copyrighted 1964-2019 BCC. Contact us for more information