Acts 2:38-41 Bible Teaching

Welcome
We have a prayer
We sing the Word of God set to music
We sit for a few moments of silence.

PRAYER

Acts 2.41
Milk
October 18th 2015
Our worship music today is based on these two passages:

SONG ONE

SONG TWO

Okay, after preaching to this mass of devout men, they looked to Peter and the apostles and said:

“Men and brethren, what shall we do?”

And at verse 38 we read: “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.

We covered the meaning of “repent” to this audience and then to us last week and we also covered the line, be baptized.

Let’s continue on from there with the rest of verse 38.

We have to note that when Peter said “repent and be baptized,” he added, “every one of you.”

I point this out because Peter’s desire was that all would believe. He did not exclude. The invitation was open and to all. This is important.

I believe the call was to all then – as the call is to all people now – as a means to save any and all from destruction and to bring them into life eternal with God.

Peter knew that many in the very group standing in front of Him were going to be slaughtered within forty years time.

He knew that some of their bodies would be tossed into the Valley of Hinnom with the trash.

And he KNEW their saving grace was the very message he was preaching – Christ Jesus: Him crucified, Him resurrected, Him ruling over His Kingdom and judgement coming upon all of those who rejected Him as Messiah.

In addition to saying repent and be baptized every one of you Peter adds . . .

“In the name of Jesus Christ.”

Okay. Big one.

Last week we held some beautiful water baptisms. I baptized Shirley and I did so in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Why did I do that? Tradition. No other reason. Had I adhered to the biblical model of baptism I would have done it in the name of Jesus Christ.

Does it matter? Obviously I don’t think so because baptism is NOT at all about the outward expressions but the inward. And since we are all used to baptisms in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit why rock the boat?

But to prove my point we need to ask ourselves, “Why DOES Peter, the chief apostle, as it were, instruct them to be baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ?”

Better put, why does the New Testament only have apostles baptizing in the Name of Jesus or the name of the Lord alone and NEVER in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit?

There are a couple reasonable answers to this.

Baptizing in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is an idea taken from what we refer to as the Great Commission, found in Matthew 28.

There Jesus is about to ascend into heaven and this is what it has Him say at verse 19-20

“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.”

As a result of this single passage most Christians baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

So what’s up with all of the records of the apostles baptizing only in Jesus name or the name of the Lord?

We don’t have many options on this and so I will tell you what they could be:

The apostles were disobedient to the words of Jesus great commission. Obviously I do NOT believe this is so and since this is not so then we are missing something between the words of Jesus Great Commission and the baptisms found in Acts.
The first thing we could be missing is a proper understanding of what Jesus meant in Matthew 28.

What I mean by this is few of us have the ability to read the Greek and discover that the Main Verb in the Great Commission is not “Go ye,” as it seems but we have two other verbs that are “present participles” instead – “Teaching and baptizing.”

What this means is the teaching, the baptizing and the discipling Jesus commands here are all happening at the same time. In other words the Greek here seems to infer that the teaching and the baptizing are going on over the same amount of time as the “discipling” proving that the baptizing being referred to here is probably referring to the long term process of sanctification of believers rather then a one dunk water event.

Get it?

And if the apostles are going out and teaching people in the Spirit, and baptizing them in the Spirit, and discipling them in the Spirit, and they are all going on simultaneously and for the same length of time, and are being done under the auspices of the “will of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit” then we know Jesus words about baptism are referring to making disciples in the Spirit and have nothing to do with water.

This would make sense of the fact that the water baptisms performed by the apostles were done in Jesus or the Lord’s name alone.

This is a pro view of the passage.

A more cynical view is that the modern translation of Matthew 28:19 is spurious, having been interjected by proponents of the Trinitarian Creed early on in Church history as a later liturgical tradition.

The fact that nowhere else in scripture is the “Father, Son Holy Spirit” laid out so plainly that it appears to be an addition to ratify trinitarianism.

Also (and amazingly enough) the Catholic Church itself, through innumerable scholars over the years, admits to altering the content of the Great Commission! In The Catholic Encyclopedia II, page 263, we read:

“The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words, “Father, Son and Holy Spirit” by the Catholic church in the second century.”

Finally, Eusibius was the Church historian and the Bishop of Caesarea in the year 310 AD.

In his book, Demonstratio Evangelica (on page 152) he copied Matthew 28:19 in the following way (and it is believed he had access to either the original mss or a first generation copy of the text) and this is how Eusibius records Jesus words in the Great Commission:

“With one word and voice he said to his disciples: Go and make disciples of all nations in my name, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.”

Because there is no manuscript of Matthew 28:19 available before the third Century when Creedal Trinitarianism got legs it is believed by some that this lends proof to the idea that the line was changed then (and thereafter in subsequent mss) to support the Trinity.

You have to decide how you will see this. In my estimation both views hold water.

My only problem with the first view (the one that says we simply don’t understand the verbs in the Greek) is that no translators have ever changed the way we read Matthew 28:19 according to this view and so I have to wonder about this justification.

My problem with the imposition of Trinitarian views into the text is it could cause us to question the Bible. I think we ought to question it but I think in doing so we will discover that the manipulation of the text is very very scant, with Matthew 28:19 and 1st John 5:7-8 being the most glaring examples.

In light of all of this I have a hard time believing it matters much because to baptize in “the (singular) name of the Father Son and Holy Spirit” or in “Jesus name or the Lord’s name alone is, to me, one in the same, as scripture says that “the fullness of the Godhead dwelled in Him bodily,” and the fact that the Father Son and Holy Spirit are one God – so let’s not fret.

Okay.

So after Peter says,
“Repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ,”

He adds:

“for the remission of sins” and then adds,
“and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”

We discussed the line, “for the remission of sins,” last week proving that they were being baptized BECAUSE their sins were remitted (resultant preposition eis) not “IN ORDER to have their sins remitted” (causal).

That word in the King James remission means a pardon of sins.

Finally, what does this last part mean, “and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit?”

We have to step back a bit and take a contextual look at this promise of Peter.

Before Jesus was identified as the Messiah by men John the Baptist was preparing the way for His announcement.

According to Jesus, who said that among prophets there were none greater than John the Baptist (but that the least in the Kingdom of Heaven would be) John was the LAST of the great prophets.

As such he prophesied – especially of the promised Messiah being on hand. In Luke 3 we read at verse 15 about John being assumed by the people to be the Messiah and it says:

15 And as the people were in expectation, and all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ, or not;
16 John answered, saying unto them all, “I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire:
17 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and will gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable.”

Here John delineated between his ministry and that of the Messiah. He “indeed baptized with water” but the promised one (whose shoes he was not worthy to even tie) would “baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire.”

Later, when Jesus was teaching his disciples, he says in John 14

“I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever; even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.”

By this time we can see the promise of the Holy Spirit (of comforter) by Jesus to the apostles was fulfilled – right here at this scene.

Jesus said the Word cannot receive the Spirit of Truth or the Comfortor but the apostles – and the others with them – would receive Him internally.

Why did it come upon them? They trusted in Jesus and it was gifted to them, given, bestowed, “dorea” in the Greek.

In the falling of the Holy Spirit we discover another free gift of God to Man. The first was His Son echoing John 3:16:

For God so loved the World he GAVE His only begotten Son . . .

And now we have God, at the request of His Son, “gifting” those who receive His Only Begotten by faith with another gift – the Hagias Pneuma – the Holy breath or the or Holy Spirit.

It is a gift because we do not of our own merits deserve the Holy Spirit nor have we earned the right to have or keep it.

Notice something in Jesus words to His apostles. Speaking of the Holy Spirit He said to them in John:

“but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you (that was present tense) and then He added, “and shall be in you.” (future tense).

I would suggest that at this point, in the lives of those who asked, “What they should do,” the Holy Spirit was dwelling with them, and they, in faith, believed – which is the primary action of all who are His – they first believe.

Did they believe on their own? No, they received the promptings of the Holy Spirit calling to “all there” (as Peter intimated) to believe.

And Peter has told them, when they believed on his words and asked, “What shall we do,” he told them:

“If you (really believe) repent of your former views of the Messiah given you, be baptized as an outward indication that you believe you have received a pardon for your sins through Jesus Christ, and as a result of this you too (like us here who you thought were drunk) will receive the Gift of the Holy Spirit, which is when He moves in your heart.”

Now, from these word, again, there are those religionists who say a person MUST be baptized in water to receive this gift.

Because later the apostles bestowed the gift of the Holy Spirit upon some OTHERS claim that the gift of the Holy Spirit must be bestowed by the laying on of hands.

But these are not consistent actions that bring about consistent results. They are occasional actions that bring about the same things.

For this reason we see in scripture (especially in the Book of Acts)

The Holy Spirit baptizing people BEFORE water baptism is administered and without the laying on of hands.

The Holy Spirit given to people by the laying on of hands.

People baptized but nothing said of the Holy Spirit.

I would suggest that the variable nature of these things happened is a fulfillment of two distinct things introduced by Jesus.

First, the Spirit can no more be tamed or directed by men (even apostles) than the wind. When then Spirit moved the apostles were moved.

This coincides with Jesus saying in John 3:

The wind blows where it wants – so also the Holy Spirit. I also think the lack of UNIFORMITY in practice is another means God employed for our benefit.

In other words He doesn’t seem to want to systematize things like they were under the Law but under Christ, under the influence of the Holy Spirit, we freely move and live.

When I first came out of Mormonism and into Christian ministry I was performing a water baptism in a hotel in a downtown Ogden Jacuzzi.

The man was large and in a wheelchair and had no real ability to get into the water fully.

I was momentarily frantic thinking, “I’ve got to immerse this man” but the Spirit spoke strongly and said, “Cup the water and pour it over him.”

As I did this the man broke out in sobs – heartfelt sobs, grateful to Jesus for saving him in his wretched state.

I’ll never forget the lesson learned.

So Peter is telling them, without doubt, that if they have believed, they need to repent, be baptized, and because they have “a good conscience toward God” (knowing they have been forgiven of their sin by and through the shed blood of Jesus Christ) they would receive the same gift that Peter and the others received – the Gift of the Holy Spirit – in whatever way it would come.

This brings us to verses 39-41. Let’s read them one y one and wrap our time up together today as Peter continues and says to the crowd, relative to them receiving the Holy Spirit:

39 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 shall call.”

Peter had supported the fact that God had long ago promised them His Spirit back in verse 17. Remember?

He quoted Joel who said:

“And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: and on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy.”

God promised His Spirit to descend on Jews and their sons and daughters but also on all flesh.

Why? What does this event amount to, you know, having His Spirit poured out on us?

In a very practical sense, it is one thing to know, by faith, that Jesus paid for our sins.

It’s an entirely different matter to know that God has moved into our hearts as a result of our believing this.

It’s one thing to know that Jesus lived a life where he completely overcame His flesh.

It’s another entirely different matter to begin to overcome your own flesh by the power of Christ in us (which is the power of the Holy Spirit in us).

Scripture tells us that the Holy Spirit teaches us all things. That it reproves us when we are off course, that it offers helps, that it glorifies God, that it intercedes and teaches us how to even pray.

I say it because I am personally convinced that the Holy Spirit is the breath of God Himself, and the gift is actually God with us (in Spirit) just as the gift of His Only begotten was also God with us.

Many of you accept creedal Trinitarianism which states that from eternity the Holy Spirit has a separate consciousness from the Father and the Son, but is one with them as God.

I personally admit you may be correct in this but I personally do not believe it. In any case, whether an individuated person from all eternity or the breath of God that fills the hearts of those baptized by it, the Holy Spirit was promised to these men – and to us – and Peter reminds them of this here in verse 39.

When Peter says to them that the promised are:

“unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off,” it is a reiteration of Joel but it wasn’t only Joel who gave them this promise.

Isaiah said in Isaiah 44:3

“I will pour my Spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon thine offspring.”

These men would have been well aware of these promises to them.

And when Peter says, “And to those who are afar off,” he is probably referring to any Jew who had been scattered in other nations. I say this because I don’t think Peter knew or realized that the Gospel (and the accompanying Holy Spirit for those who receive it) would ever go to anyone but the Jews.

I say this because of Peters “issues” with Gentiles which will come out later in Acts.

Nevertheless, while Peter here may have meant and applied it only to the Jews we know the passage has equal application to us Gentiles and to take it even further, to ALL who were “afar off from God due to sin.”

Now we come to a line that supports the biblical idea that God does the choosing and not man.

It found in Peter’s words:

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 shall call.”

Is this true? The promise is ONLY to as many as the Lord our God shall call?

It is.

The question is does He call to all? I would suggest He does. In other words I see the meaning being a general admission that God does the calling and we do the responding and if God did NOT do the calling we would not do any seeking.

I see it this way rather than any admission that God ONLY calls some. Remember, Peter’s invitation for them to Repent and be baptized was to everyone.

As one chosen mouthpiece of God of twelve at that time I think we can say that God calls to all.

I also think it’s an important admission (to add the caveat “even as many as the Lord our God shall call”) because it eliminates the tendency to boast. Why?
Because if He had not called none would choose Him. Simple as that.

Luke now takes over and says (at verse 40)

40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, “Save yourselves from this untoward generation.”

This passage proves something so very very important to us – this retelling of the Day of Pentecost is an abridged explanation of what actually occurred.

It’s funny because this is one of the longest recitations in the New Testament of an event but it is merely an outline.

There is so much more that has not been included – in fact probably far more was not included than what was.

This tells us plainly that we make a mistake in trying to take the words recorded here and apply them literally and exactly to ourselves in this day and age. If we don’t have the whole picture how could we justify trying to take a partial picture and make it Law?

Let me jump ahead and give you an example of what I mean.

After we read of them being baptized and such next week we are going to read (at verse 44-45):

“And all that believed were together, and had all things common; and sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.”

Let these passages sink in a bit, will you. I mean, Christians and Christian leaders have taken Acts 2 as a total explanation of what is to take place in the churches today.

But they make the mistake in not remembering that this, according to Luke, is a truncated version of all that happened AND that in a very contradictory way reject embracing what is described in verses 44-45 (which, by the way, essentially describe a Marxist way of life).

You get what I’m saying?

We have to read and take and be inspired by the Holy Spirit in the face of these words but they cannot possibly serve as the model on how to do EVERYTHING in the Body – because EVERYTHING isn’t mentioned and some of the things that are we don’t have the backstory on why they did what they did!

Anyway, we’ll cover verses 44-45 next week. In the meanwhile we do know from Luke’s narration that with many other words did Peter testify and exhort, saying, “Save yourselves from this untoward generation.”

We know from this that Peter bore witness to them (testified) and that he exhorted them (engaged with them in their arguments and challenged them to consider his responses).

As a summary of his testifying and exhorting, Luke actually provides us with what looks like a quote from Peter, having him actually say:

“Save yourselves from this untoward generation.”

This, my friends, is the other side of the coin on how we are saved.

On the one side we have “God’s call” which it wasn’t extended none of us would seek Him.

But on the other side we have the very biblical premise of man having the right and yes – free will – to choose to respond.

Peter plainly tells them –

“Preserve yourselves from the influence, opinions, and fate of this generation from which you come.”

There is a direct implication that they were to use diligence and effort to deliver themselves from the traditions, and attitudes, and fleshly ways of the generation from which they came.

God deals with all of us as free agents – I don’t care what the Calvinist claims.

He calls upon us to put forth our own wills on the altar and submit to Him and His. This submission is the result of God first calling, God first giving the humbling effects on the human heart, God pouring out His Spirit but we all have been given the ability to choose to receive it . . . or not.

This ability to freely choose goes all the way back to the first man Adam and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

Now, I want you to look at this word that Peter uses –

“save yourself from this generation.”

I have a question for you? The Greek Word for generation is “genea” and I want you to ask yourself –

Do you think Peter was saying, “Save yourselves from this people group called the Jews” or do you think he was saying, “save yourself from this age of men who have gone so far south that they have killed the Messiah?”

For those of you who have not formed an opinion, let me help manipulate one into your brain.

Peter had respectfully called these men Brethren. He has honored the Jewish history citing it respectfully.

Later, Peter will recoil from God himself telling him to eat what non-Jews eat, and he is so pro-Jew he even refuses to sit with gentiles when his brethren are present (something Paul calls him out on).

Peter was NOT saying, “save yourselves from this generation of people types (Jews) He was saying, “save yourselves from this specific period or age of men.”

Why is this important? Because the word “genea” in every single occurance in the Gospels refers to “that age” and not “the people.”

And when Jesus says a generation will not pass before all the warning signs he had given them in Matthew 24 he was NOT speaking of the people called the Jews but an age – that age – forty years.

Speaking of that generation Peter calls them, (in the King James) “untoward.”

It means a “perverse or not easily guided or taught,” generation.

This is the same characterization Jesus give them in Matthew 11:16-19.

(verse 41)

41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

I think we will cover this verse . . . next week.

Questions or comments