Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" Then Peter said unto them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God will call "And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, "Save yourselves from this untoward generation." Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in the breaking of bread, and in prayers. (Acts 2:37-42)
Various inaccurate teachings about the Holy Spirit are circulated today because of a misunderstanding about of the Book of Acts. Urgently, I must say, to use the Book of Acts as the main theology source is, to say the least, risky.
First and foremost, Scriptures must be interpreted in the light of Biblical context and in some cases Biblical context must be supported by historical context as well as cultural context.
Some time ago, my wife and I spent a week of vacation on the yacht of Dr. Wyatt Tee Walker and his wife, Ann. This is when I discovered that the New York Harbor has three river currents that clash together at one point, making it a treacherous stretch of water. One day, as we headed into the New York Harbor to work our way up the Atlantic Coast, I was at the helm. I had my cap turned backward and my shirt wide open. I was releasing megatons of "Bayview" tension with each nautical mile. As we approached a certain point in the harbor, Dr. Walker tapped me on the shoulder and said, "Tim, I better take it now."
I replied, "What's going on man? I'm drivin' this thang'."
He said, "No, you better let me have it now." And he pointed forward of the boat and said, "See right there? Three rivers come together causing dangerous turbulence. An inexperienced helmsman can loose his boat if he doesn't know what's going on."
I yielded the helm and Dr. Walker steered us safely through the harbor.
This illustrates the cautious and skilled maneuvering we have to execute when delving into the Book of Acts. Two contextual currents flow into Acts, they are the historical context and the cultural context. In the Books of Acts, the historical context is Jewish history, and the cultural context is Jewish culture. If we are not careful in our maneuvering, we will loose the meaning of its revelation. We must recognize Jewish history and Jewish culture in the background of Acts in order to gain a correct interpretation of its meaning.
The first 10 chapters in Acts are primarily of Jewish emphasis. Peter is the dominant personality in chapters one through 10. However, Paul became the dominant personality from chapter 10 and on to the end of the book. It was the apostle Paul who took the Gospel message beyond the parameters of the Jews to the Gentiles. The separation between Jews and Gentiles was far more drastic than that of African Americans and Europeans in the United States. Jews called Gentiles "dogs."
One occasion that highlights the prejudice of both groups is recorded in John 4:3. This is where Jesus and His disciples had left Judea and were returning to Galilee. When they reached the outskirts of Samaria, Jesus announced to the disciples, "I must go through Samaria." That statement both shocked and surprised His disciples, after all, no respectable Jew ever went through Samarian territory. They would cross over the Jordan River and travel north on the other side until they were well past Samaria, and then they would cross back over again to enter Galilee.
Nevertheless, Jesus intended to go into Samaria. Arriving there, He met a woman who had come to the village well to draw water, He asked her for a drink. Her response marked the prejudice from the Samaritan viewpoint. She questioned, "Don't you know that Jews and Samaritans have no dealings with each other? Why are you asking me for a drink?"
The Greek word meaning "dealings" carries the meaning of social interaction, particularly, eating and drinking. Fortunately, the story ends better than it began. The woman was ultimately saved, but not until the Lord broke through her entrenched prejudice. Notwithstanding, the Jews' prejudice toward Samaritans and other Gentiles was equally as entrenched. Consequently, the historical and cultural contexts in the Book of Acts must not be ignored. We must be careful as we maneuver through it, or we can certainly miss its meaning.
In Japan there is a fish that is considered a delicacy. However, this highly regarded delicacy is very poisonous except one small section that they consider extremely delectable. However, hundreds of people in Japan die every year from eating this fish. In order to enjoy the eatable portion, the butcher must know exactly what he's doing.
Likewise, when we enter into the Book of Acts for doctrine and theology, we must know what we are doing. It can be a disastrous experience if certain precautions are not adhered to. This is why it is dangerous to "pluck out" one verse and use it as a doctrinal source, particularly Acts 2:38. To lift up Acts 2:38 as exclusive Scriptural authority for salvation is to disregard its Jewish context.
In fact, to lift up any single verse from the Bible as exclusive Scriptural authority is dangerous if you disregard the context. Notwithstanding, most Christians have single source verses that comfort us and give us encouragement. I have a whole bunch that blesses me repeatedly. However, whenever we use only one verse we must be sure that it is in context for fear that it would otherwise produce a meaning that is not consistent with its context.
The purpose of this chapter is to address the Holy Spirit as a Gift. This is not to be confused with the Gifts of the Spirit. The Holy Spirit bestows gifts for all believers to enable them for ministry, but this is not the Gift of the Spirit nor should it to be confused with the Fruit (singular) of the Spirit, and certainly not with "speaking in tongues."
The Gift of the Spirit is the person, the presence and the power of the Holy Spirit who is resident in every believer's life. He is the Gift to every Christian or to all believers. The Gift of the Spirit is not available only for a few "privileged" Christians. Every believer possesses the Holy Spirit. I call it, "His partnering ministry."
The Holy Spirit partners with us in ministry. He is the reason why we can be bolder than what we usually are. He is the reason that we can be more aggressive and stronger. We all can live better than we live, and we all can do more than we are presently doing because He partners with us.
There is much confusion of how, when and who can receive the Holy Spirit. Some time ago a young man who was not a member of our Church made an appointment to see me. When he came into my office, he appeared exasperated—confusion written all over his face. He was certainly disturbed about something. I actually thought that he was going to confess some heinous crime, or something worse. He began by telling me that, as a visitor, he was enjoying our Church very much and felt quite comfortable. He related how much he was benefiting from worshipping with us. Then he expressed his quandary. "But, I'm here to ask you why you say 'Hold me up, Holy Ghost' when you're preaching?"
I replied, "Yes, I say that sometimes," wondering what he was getting at.
"But I've always been taught that Baptists don't have the Holy Ghost," he said.
He, obviously, had been exposed to erroneous teaching about the Holy Spirit. From the Scriptures, I explained to him the indwelling, filling and several other functions of the Holy Spirit. The clear meaning of the Scripture settled his doubts and answered his questions. He is now a part of our Church and is a growing disciple.
Then Peter said unto them, "Repent, and be baptized, every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." (Acts 2:38)
In some Christian circles, Acts 2:38 is the bedrock verse for salvation. The viewpoint that Acts 2:38 is the nexus for salvation and the Baptism of the Holy Spirit came primarily from the teaching of two men; Thomas Campbell and his son, Alexander, in the latter part of the nineteenth century. Thomas Campbell, a Presbyterian minister, began to interpret Acts 2:38 as the means and authority of salvation. He was convinced that he had discovered the truth in Acts 2:38. His early followers were called "Campbellites."
Today there are entire denominations that base their salvation premise on Acts 2:38. Nonetheless, with regard for the integrity of the Word of God, I vehemently object with the strongest protest I can muster, that to use the Book of Acts as the main theology source for salvation will result in an untrue doctrinal position.
False information will be contrived from Acts 2:38 if the Jewish history and culture are ignored. The Biblical context for Acts 2:38 starts at verse 14 where the sermon began:
But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lift up his voice and said unto them, "Ye men of Judea and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words." (Acts 2:14)
"Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a Man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by Him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know." (Acts 2:22)
"Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day." (Acts 2:29)
"Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ." (Acts 2:36)
From these verses, it is easy to determine the Biblical context of Peter's sermon. Peter was speaking to Jews. The occasion for the sermon was the Day of Pentecost. Pentecost was a Jewish holiday that occurred 50 days after Passover. The few Gentiles that were there were not present among the assembly of Jews where Peter preached this sermon.
For clarification, the Gentiles attendees at this Jewish celebration were called, "Proselytes." A Proselyte was a Gentile who had converted to Judaism.
Note particularly, that the Gentiles (proselytes) would not have worshipped in the assembly with the Jews. On the contrary, they would have worshiped in the outer court known as "The Court of the Gentiles."
This means, the message that Peter preached did not fall on Gentile ears.
Furthermore, a highlight of Peter's perception of Gentiles will be enlightening. It was a distorted perception, to say the least. In Acts 10, while on the rooftop awaiting dinner, he had a vision from God. A sheet containing a large quantity of nebulous swarming and slithering creatures was let down before him three times from Heaven. The third time Peter heard a voice:
"Rise, Peter; kill, and eat." But Peter said, "Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean." (Acts 10:13, 14)
The purpose of this vision was to prepare him to go preach to a Gentile family. At precisely the time that Peter was objecting to the Lord's command to make his selection for a meal from among the creatures of the sheet, two Gentile messengers knocked at the door inviting him to Cornelius' house to preach the Gospel. Peter reluctantly agreed to go.
In accordance with the Jewish custom of calling Gentiles "dogs," Peter's hesitancy and reluctance were based on his prejudice. It was revealed in his opening comment when he arrived at the house. Instead of the usual cordial greeting of, "Hello, Good morning, Good afternoon or Good evening," Peter made the following statement:
And he said unto them, "Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation." (Acts 10:28)
Lodged deep in the crevasses of Peters heart was the old Jewish prejudice toward Gentiles. It was only eradicated by the direct divine intervention of God. However, he later confessed, "But God has shown (taught) me that I should not call any man common or unclean!'
Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, "Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons." (Acts 10:34)
God had to work Peter over inside and out before he would preach to Gentiles. Notwithstanding, when Peter preached (Acts 2:38), Gentile salvation was not on his mind.
Later on (chapter 15) the leadership of Jerusalem Church had to call a special meeting about the matter of salvation for Gentiles. We must understand that the place that Gentiles had in Jewish culture was somewhat like the place we (African-Americans) have had in the American culture for many years, and still have in some cases. We could eat in a public place, but we couldn't eat in a public place with white people. We had to enter restaurants through the rear door and eat in the kitchen. We could drink in a public place—but we couldn't drink from the same public water fountain white people used. We could all use the toilet facilities—but we couldn't use the same toilet white people used. (I really don't think that the toilet made a distinction.)
The interaction of Jews and Gentiles was much like the Jim Crow days for blacks in America. Peter's response to go to Cornelius' house dramatizes the Jewish historical and cultural context that prevailed during the time of this text.
Consequently, we can see how significant the historical and cultural contexts are in understanding the meaning of Acts 2:38. If we don't recognize it, we'll come away with false information concerning the gift of the Holy Ghost.
For the record, it must be stated that Peter's ministry was primarily to the Jews, and for a time the Jerusalem Church was completely Jewish with a minority of Gentiles who came in later. Today Christianity is predominately Gentile in constituency with a minority of Hebrews or Jews.
The apostle Paul, who became the dominant person from chapter 13 and on, was called to be an apostle to Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel (Acts 9:15). Nevertheless, even though he was commissioned to preach to Gentiles, when he arrived in a city, the first place that he would go was the synagogue—to the Jews first. He had a message for both the Jews and the Gentiles; that is, until the dispensational door closed on the Jews. In Acts 13:46 he declared:
"It was necessary that the Word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles."
He stated again in Acts 18:6:
And when they opposed themselves and blasphemed, he shook his raiment, and said unto them, "Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean: from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles."
Finally, in Acts 28:28 he announced:
"Be it known therefore, unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it."
From that time the door of opportunity for the Jews was closed. Paul never again tried to reach Jews with the Gospel. The dispensational door had closed.
On the other hand, when Peter preached his sermon on the Day of Pentecost, the invitation of the Gospel was still being offered to the Jews. In fact, it was being offered exclusively to them. This is the historical context behind Acts 2:38 that must be recognized in order to arrive at the true meaning of the text.
Another un-Biblical teaching that is falsely interpreted from the Book of Acts is that people must pray to receive the Holy Ghost. This teaching comes from a "hodge-podge" interpretation of Acts 1:4.
And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which saith He, "Ye have heard from me."
The text plainly shows that the Lord certainly did instruct His disciples to wait for the promise. However, historical context is needed to interpret the meaning of His instruction.
The Holy Spirit came on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1). Pentecost comes 50 days after Passover. Jesus died on Passover and remained in the grave for three days and three nights. Furthermore, after His resurrection He continued among His disciples for 40 days (Acts 1:3). That simply means that they had seven days to wait. The Ascension is recorded in Acts 1:9. Following the ascension, they returned to Jerusalem to wait for the Holy Spirit as the Lord had instructed them (Acts 1:12).
The disciples had been instructed to wait for the Holy Spirit, but the Lord did not instruct them to pray for the Holy Spirit to come. They prayed, true enough, but not by direction from the Lord. While they waited, their decision to pray was voluntary.
These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren. (Acts 1:14)
There was no direction from the Lord in the entire chapter—neither in this verse—for them to pray while they waited. Note that, Mary, the mother of Jesus, was praying with them. They prayed with Mary, not to Mary.
Nevertheless, the Holy Spirit was coming on the day of Pentecost whether anyone prayed or not. The arrival of the Holy Spirit was not in answer to their prayers. The Holy Spirit was scheduled to arrive on the Day of Pentecost. This verse does not teach that they prayed for the Holy Spirit to come, and it should not be used as authority for requiring Christians to pray for the Holy Spirit.
Philip's revival among the Samaritans found in the eighth chapter of Acts is used for additional support for the teaching that people must pray to receive the Holy Spirit:
But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. (Acts 8:12)
Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: (for as yet He was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) (Acts 8:14-16)
This is the only case in Scripture where people believed but did not receive the Holy Spirit. Consequently, the apostles were sent there to lay their hands on them. However, this narrative does not produce theology for the Church today that says people are to pray to receive the Holy Spirit, even though that is the clear teaching of some preachers. The Samaritans believed the Word that Philip preached and they were baptized, but did not receive the Holy Spirit. This time the cultural context alone will help to clarify the meaning.
Keep in mind the strain that existed between the Jews and Samaritans (and that's putting it lightly). God apparently used their ethnic separation to assure that the apostles would have to interact with the Samaritans. If they had not come to authenticate Philips ministry, it is likely that they would have remained apart. Let's not forget that the Samaritans already had their own place of worship (John 4:20). Accordingly, the ministry of Peter and John were necessary to heal the split that had been in existence for so many years. Truly, the Church was to be "One Body." Hence, it is not proper to draw from this occasion the conclusion that people must pray and wait for the Holy Spirit, and that an apostle must ultimately lay hands on a person so they can receive the gift of the Spirit. The glaring complexity that this interpretation produces is that there are no apostles in the Church today who can perform the necessary function for a person to receive the Holy Spirit.
Another incident that occurred in Ephesus is also used to support the viewpoint that people must pray and wait to receive the Holy Spirit.
And it came to pass that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts, came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, he said to them, "Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?" And they said unto him, "We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost." (Acts 19:1-2)
Notice the text does not say, "finding certain Christians." It says that Paul found "certain disciples." Paul found certain disciples, not certain Christians or believers. The following verse reveals the identity of these disciples.
And he said to them, "Unto what then were ye baptized?" And they said, "Unto John's baptism." (Acts 19:3)
Then who were these disciples? They were disciples of John the Baptist. You may recall that John the Baptist had a very large following in his day. These people were some of the disciples of John who had heard him say, "One will come after me who is mightier than I." As a result, their exposure and understanding had gone no further than what John had taught them. Essentially, they were still under Judaism. They were not Christians. This is why they did not know anything about the Holy Ghost. Paul gave an explanation of why they were ignorant about the Holy Ghost in the next verse.
Then said Paul, "John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on Him who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus." When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. (Acts 19:4-6)
Superficial observance of this account shows that a group of people (not Christians) had not received the Holy Spirit. They were baptized and Paul laid hands on them. Subsequently, they received the Holy Spirit. Even so, to use this occasion as a theological basis for teaching that Christians must wait to have hands laid on them before they can receive the Holy Spirit is a gross violation of the historical context behind the scene. The main point is that they were not Christians in the first place.
It also mentions "they spoke with tongues." They spoke "with tongues" and not in "unknown tongues."
False information will be extracted from Acts 2:38 if it is not understood that Peter was speaking exclusively to Jews, and that the emphasis of the sermon is on Jesus Christ and not the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is received in consequence of accepting Jesus Christ as Savior. The comparison is like an entree followed by dessert—Jesus being the entree.
After defending himself the other disciples from accusations that they were drunk, Peter continued on to the main point of his message, Jesus Christ.
"Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a Man approved by God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by Him in the midst of you as you, as ye yourselves also know." (Acts 2:22)
"Men and brethren, let me speak freely unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne; he seeing this before, spake of the resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in hell, neither His flesh did see corruption. Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. "Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" Then Peter said unto them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." (Acts 2:29-31, 36, and 38)
The primary emphasis of the message is Jesus Christ, not the Holy Spirit. Moreover, the requirement of repentance was for national repentance, not for individual repentance. What national sin had Israel committed? They had crucified Jesus. (In a spiritual sense we are all responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus, but the Jews are also responsible in a literal sense).
"Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified, and slain." (Acts 2:23)
Critical discernment is necessary to see that individual repentance is not a command for salvation. Repentance is not a condition of salvation. It is the consequence of salvation. Believing in Jesus Christ is the condition. Believing in Jesus Christ produces the repentance for sins. The order is not to first repent of sins, but to recognize the Savior in order to be saved.
Repentance is in the sequence of salvation, but it is not first in the sequence. Believing Christ and recognizing the Savior is first, and then comes the repentance for sin. You cannot repent of sin until you see the Savior and be saved. In view of this, as lost sinners we were dead in trespasses and in sins. Repentance is not possible when a person is dead. It is the Holy Spirit who brings our dead conscience to life. An illustration of recognizing the Savior first is given in Isaiah.
In the year that King Uzziah died I saw also the lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and His train filled the temple. Then said I, "Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King the Lord of hosts" (Isaiah 6:1, 5)
Isaiah most certainly saw the Lord, but he also saw himself. However, the sequence was that he saw the Lord first, and then he saw himself. He didn't say, "Woe is me," until he first saw the Lord. Then he saw his sinful self. It is not sound doctrine to make repentance the perquisite for salvation. When we do, it is like trying to clean fish before we catch them. Another example is when Zacchaeus met Jesus.
And Jesus entered and passed through Jericho. And behold, there was a man named Zacchaeus, which was the chief among the publicans, and he was rich. And he sought to see who Jesus was; and could not for the press, because he was little of stature. And he ran before, and climbed up into a sycamore tree to see Him: for He was to pass that way. And when Jesus came to the place, He looked up, and saw him, and said unto him, "Zacchaeus, make haste, and come down; for today I must abide at thy house. "And he made haste, and came down, and received Him joyfully. And when they saw it, they all murmured, saying That He was gone to be a guest with a man that is a sinner. And Zacchaeus stood and said unto the Lord; "Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, L restore him fourfold. "And Jesus said unto him, "This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham. For the Son of Man is come to seek and to save that which was lost." (Luke 19:1-10)
The same sequence is in Luke 19 as it is in Isaiah 6. Zacchaeus made the repenting offer to restore any ill-gotten wealth after he saw Jesus as Savior. Repentance is not required for salvation. It is the result of being saved.
Nonetheless, our repentance is in such close proximity to the point of salvation that it appears to come before salvation. However, in actuality it comes afterward. Very few Bible scholars make that distinction. In the same sense, water baptism has the same sequence as repentance. It, too, comes after salvation. However, the teaching of water baptism for salvation is also taken from one verse, specifically the emphasis is to be baptized in Jesus name.
Then Peter said unto them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ." (Acts 2:38)
False information will always be the result if we don't distinguish between the literal and symbolic meanings of Scripture. Whenever water baptism appears in Scripture, or is required, it must always be taken symbolically. Literal cleansing from sin can only be through the blood of Jesus. Peter certainly said, "Be baptized everyone of you for the remission of sins," but the only meaning that can be deduced from this statement is symbolical.
Since it is "not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins" (Hebrews. 10:4), then it is also not possible that water can take away sins. In addition to the missed meaning of literal remission of sins and symbolical remission of sins, is the erroneous requirement to be baptized in Jesus' name.
Peter clearly said "and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ." Nevertheless, the command to be baptized in the name of Jesus was to make the name of Jesus inclusive, not to make it exclusive.
To make the name of Jesus exclusive in a baptismal formula for salvation violates the teaching of the context and the teaching of Matthew 28:19 where the Lord says, "... baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
Peter did not undo or reverse what his Lord had previously taught as the appropriate formula for baptism. In this command Peter was simply highlighting the name of Jesus for inclusion. The Jews had excluded the name of Jesus. This is seen in the private deliberation of the rulers, elders, and scribes when the apostles were arrested for preaching and performing miracles in the name of Jesus.
"What shall we do to these men? For that indeed a notable miracle hath been done them is manifest to all them that dwell in Jerusalem; and we cannot deny it. But that it spread no farther among the people, let us straitly threaten them, that they speak henceforth to no man in this name. "And they called them, and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus." (Acts 4:16-18)
This means that the name of Jesus had been excluded in the Jewish community during the brief time that had elapsed since the crucifixion to the events in Acts 4. Even today, among Orthodox Jews, the name of Jesus is never spoken. The roots of exclusion go all the way back to a time period shortly after the crucifixion. Actually, the authorities essentially told Peter and John that they could preach and teach all they wanted, and anywhere they wanted, as long as they didn't preach in "that name."
To them, the name of Jesus is the most reprehensible name among names when, in fact, it is the sweetest name on earth. Here again, the historical and cultural contexts are needed to accurately interpret the meaning of Acts 2:38. This is why the name of Jesus is highlighted and lifted to the forefront by Peter, not for exclusive use, but for inclusive use.
Hence, it becomes apparent from the context that Acts 2:38 is not a Scripture for Gentiles. Unfortunately, some Jews refuse to use the name of Jesus, and some Christians confuse the use of the name of Jesus. Some Christians interpret this verse to mean that you must be baptized in Jesus' name only to be saved and to receive the Holy Spirit. That is false information.
Salvation is not in a baptism formula of the name of Jesus Christ, it is in a bona fide faith in Jesus Christ.
Inclusiveness was the intention of God in His covenant with Abraham. God said to him, "In you shall all the nations of the earth be blessed." The Jews were to be the proponents of the message of the coming Messiah as well as His genetic catalysts, thus giving them the first privilege of the offer of salvation.
"He came unto his own, and his own received him not." (John 1:11)
The early days of the Lord's ministry was exclusively to the Jews. From His own lips the Lord said, in Matthew 15:24: "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel."
However, it must be understood that the offering of salvation first to the Jews was more of priority than exclusion. The order of priority to the "Jews first" carried over into the Apostolic Era.
"For I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek (Gentile)." (Romans 1:16)
When Peter spoke the words recorded in Acts 2:38, the order of priority was "to the Jew first"—strictly Jewish. Some Christian groups, however, have taken Acts 2:38 and made the "Name of Jesus" an essential part of the baptismal formula for salvation. In other words, they teach that people are not saved until a preacher baptizes them in the name of Jesus. The only way to arrive at this interpretation is to ignore the historical and cultural contexts of the Scripture.
You have to ignore the theology from the epistles as well. The baptism in Acts 2:38 is symbolical in the same sense that baptism is symbolic every time that it is mentioned in the Bible.
Similarly, receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit has no literal connection with water baptism. The Holy Spirit does not take up His indwelling presence and minister in us because we have been baptized in Jesus' name. He does not "co-partner" with us because of some formula that a preacher utters when we are dipped under the water. The Holy Spirit is given to indwell us when we believe. This fact is plainly taught by Paul in his letter to the Christians at Ephesus.
That we should be to the praise of His glory, who first trusted in Christ: in whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the Gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of our inheritance, until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of His glory. (Ephesians 1:12-13)
You can see that water baptism is not mentioned in the sequence. We are "sealed" by the Holy Spirit without water baptism. Furthermore, salvation is not possible apart from the indwelling or sealing of the Holy Spirit. He is the "earnest" of our inheritance. Earnest is used in this verse in the same sense of a down payment. The Holy Spirit acts as a security deposit "until the day of redemption." The day of redemption must not be confused with the act of redemption.
The act of redemption was the death of Jesus on the cross. The day of redemption is when we are resurrected or translated at the rapture. We have the earnest of our inheritance in the presence of the Holy Spirit. He holds and secures us, indicating that someone else wants our souls. After all, there would be no need for Him to secure us if our souls were not in jeopardy of being lost to someone else.
The work of the Holy Spirit is precious to every believer. However, we must be careful in attempting to identify His work in the Book of Acts. Without recognition of the historical and cultural contexts, the interpretation of Acts 2:38 will result in false information.
The false information that is extracted from Acts 2:38 comes out of a faulty interpretation and, unfortunately, another unsound teaching that is taken from this verse is that of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. It is a shame that many Christians are unable to answer correctly and confidently when they are asked, "Have you been baptized by the Holy Ghost?"
Again, "the gift of the Spirit" is incorrectly equated with the "baptism of the Holy Spirit." Even though both occur at the same time, they are distinct works of the Holy Spirit. The "filling of the Spirit" and the "indwelling of the Spirit" occur when the Holy Spirit (the gift) is initially received.
Here I appeal to the golden rule of defining theology in the Bible. The surest place to find theology is to turn to the epistles. The epistles are the theology section of the Bible. It is risky to attempt to find or to define theology from the Book of Acts.
The particular Scripture that defines the baptism of the Holy Spirit is:
For as the body is one, and hath many members, but all the members of that one body, being many, are one body; so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. (1 Corinthians 12:12, 13)
The baptism of the Holy Spirit is when a believer is placed into the "Body of Christ." In the context of 1 Corinthians 12, Paul likens the Church to a human body, consequently, the phrase "Body of Christ" refers to the Church; that is, the Church as a spiritual entity.
We are not baptized into a local assembly of believers. An individual congregation may appropriately be called "a Church." However, the analogy of a human body does not apply to a local congregation. It applies to the Church, which is sometimes called the "Universal Church," or the "Spiritual Church."
As water baptism means to be placed into water, the Spirit baptism is to be placed into the Church (the spiritual organism.) You may consider it to be a transplant into the Body of Christ.
Just as an organ is transplanted into a physical body, a new believer is transplanted into the spiritual Body of Christ. When we believe on Jesus Christ as Lord, the sovereignty of the Holy Spirit silently and secretly places us in the Body of Christ. That, my friends, is the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
There is another Scripture that defines the baptism of the Holy Spirit:
"Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into His death." (Romans 6:3)
In this verse, the meaning is to be baptized into Jesus Christ. There is no contradiction. When the interpretation of each verse is coupled together, the meaning is that we are baptized into Christ and into the Church. However, either meaning has spiritual value and makes no sense outside of its spiritual context.
You will have the occasion (if you haven't had it already) to be challenged with the question, "Are you saved?" When you assure the person that you are saved, the follow-up question that will surly be asked is, "Have you been baptized with the Holy Ghost?"
It is shameful that many Christians are stuck on the second question and are vulnerable to an explanation that is based on false information and has been contrived out of the Book of Acts.
It is my desire that every Christian be able to give a Biblical explanation of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. No Christian should be confused or intimidated by questions that inquire, "What did you do when you were baptized by the Holy Spirit?" Or, "What did you feel when you were baptized by the Holy Spirit?"
The correct answer to both of those questions is: "NOTHING."
The baptism of the Holy Spirit is not sensory. You don't feel it. The Neo-Pentecostal movement places heavy emphasis of "experience" and fraudulently attempts to make most of the work of the Holy Spirit something that a person should "feel" or "experience" when, in fact, the opposite is true. We don't feel or experience most of the work of the Holy Spirit.
There are many things that we experience or enjoy that are not sensory, for example, a gorgeous sunrise or a breathtaking sunset. Nevertheless, sunsets and sunrises are not sensory experiences. You can't feel a sunset or a sunrise, but they are real events all the same.
The Bible says that the names of Christians are in The Lamb's Book of Life, and they are placed there when we are saved. If I asked you what you felt when your name was put into The Lamb's Book of Life, your answer should be, "NOTHING."
The same example holds true for the baptism of the Holy Spirit. If we don't know what the baptism of the Holy Spirit is according to the Bible, untruths can be imposed on us, and we won't know the difference. Do not flinch, hesitate or be intimidated when confronted about the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Be aware that theological teaching cannot be taken from Acts 2:38. Actually, another Scripture has the sequential order:
"In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the Gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise." (Ephesians 1:13)
The Holy Spirit sealed us after we believed. The baptism of the Holy Spirit is not a separate act from the sealing of the Holy Spirit. The work of the Holy Spirit in salvation is a complete simultaneous work. His work is not a "piecemeal" nor an assembly line operation. Everything that the Holy Spirit does for us is done "after we believe," especially the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
"The Faithful Importation of the Holy Spirit," refers to receiving the gift of the Spirit. A superficial reading of Acts 2:38 could be misinterpreted to mean that we receive "the gift of the Holy Spirit" when we have been baptized in Jesus name.
Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" Then Peter said unto them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." (Acts 2:37-38)
The unfortunate false conclusion comes from not recognizing the historical and cultural contexts of Peters sermon. The clear teaching from the epistles shows that the Holy Spirit is imported to us when we believe. The context of Peters sermon does not indicate that receiving the Holy Spirit is based on being baptized in Jesus name. Clearer meaning of the baptism comes in Acts 2:41:
Then they that gladly received his word were baptized; and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
The baptism was based on his word (the entire word), not just the isolated word that refers to being baptized in Jesus name. The complete context of Peter's sermon was not baptism in Jesus name; neither was it the Gift of the Holy Spirit, it was Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ was the dominant and prominent theme of the sermon. The sermon covered the Lord's death, burial and resurrection known as the "heart of the Gospel." This was the "word" they received to be saved. No amount of water and no specific words of a baptism formula can result in salvation.
The promise to receive "the gift of the Holy Spirit" was in consequence to believing on Jesus Christ. The shameful and sad fact (actually sinful fact) is that the Gift is being prioritized over the Giver. This is sacrilege by any measure. It is a basic violation of appreciation and common sense, and is inexcusably ridiculous.
In a general sense, we have the propensity to focus more on our gifts from God than on God who gave them to us. And specifically, there is the tendency to promote the Holy Spirit over Jesus, who gives us the Holy Spirit.
Jesus said, "And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Counselor to be with you forever." (John 14:16)
The Lord told His disciples that He was going away and that the Father would send them the Holy Spirit in His place. Specifically, the Holy Spirit was sent in response to Jesus' prayer. In the same discourse with His disciples, Jesus said:
"But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in My name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." (John 14:26)
Meaning, the Holy Spirit did not come on His own accord. He does not act independently of the Father or the Son. Later on Jesus said, "And He will testify of Me."
When Jesus was here, He honored the Father. The Holy Spirit is here now and is honoring the Son. The conclusion is that an improper meaning is being extracted and emphasized from Acts 2:38. The emphasis is on the Gift of the Spirit when in fact Peters sermon was about Jesus as Messiah.
Thank God for the Holy Ghost, He has work to do that is unique to Himself. Thank God for the Holy Ghost, but Jesus is the source of our salvation. The emphasis should not be on the Gift of the Spirit, but on Jesus who gave the Gift of the Spirit.