Cornelius" Conversion - Final Thoughts
The idea is in vogue in some quarters that Cornelius was saved when the Holy Spirit fell upon him (Acts 10:44) without any further action on his part. One of the verses used to support this idea is 1 John 4:13, "By this we know that we abide in Him, and He in us, because He has given us of His Spirit." (NKJV) So, it is said that settles it.
I went to take a look at that verse and read it in context. Now understand I believe the Spirit abides in a Christian - that is not the point. The point is whether it necessarily follows that because the Holy Spirit fell on Cornelius that he was saved instantly at that point in time.
But, I read the verse in context. One verse above this one, in verse 12, it is stated, "If we love one another, God abides in us, and His love has been perfected in us." (1 John 4:12 NKJV) Two verses down I read this, "Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God." (1 John 4:15 NKJV) In a broader context, but still in the book of 1 John, it is said if we keep his word he we abide in him and he in us. (1 John 2:5, 1 John 3:24) Thus we have a series of items being listed by which we can measure whether or not we are in a faithful relationship with God.
The passage is not talking about initial obedience to God (the gospel) for there can be no obedience to what is thrust upon you. To say that obedience to the gospel (a command of God - 2 Thess. 1:8, 1 Peter 4:17) equals Holy Spirit baptism and vice versa is to say in reality that there is nothing to obey. Had Cornelius obeyed the gospel?
Paul said, concerning the matter of salvation in Rom. 6:17-18, "But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness." (NKJV) There is then something to obey. What? The command of Peter to Cornelius and those gathered with him, "And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord." (Acts 10:48 NKJV) The reader would do well to read Rom. 6:1-6 where Paul talks about baptism in the same chapter as the verse just quoted above (Rom. 6:17-18).
Let the reader note that obedience from the heart (Rom. 6:17) necessarily implies faith or else how can it be from the heart, thus the obedience being spoken of is in addition to faith and it is something they must do for themselves - not God do for them or to them..
I might talk a little about the conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch as it bears on this topic. I quote the passage at hand.
"Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him. Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, "See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?" Then Philip said, "If you believe with all your heart, you may." And he answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him. Now when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught Philip away, so that the eunuch saw him no more; and he went on his way rejoicing." (Acts 8:35-39 NKJV)
Was this Holy Spirit baptism? I do not want to insult your intelligence. But, I want you to take note of this. When the eunuch left the water he was convinced he was then a saved man. He went "on his way rejoicing." Philip thought he was a saved man for he was willing to let him go, the preaching was ended.
If it is said the baptism was simultaneous, that is that he was both baptized in water and in the Holy Spirit all at one and the same time, I then ask does that not make the going down into the water and being baptized in it a necessity in order to receive Holy Spirit baptism? Would it have come upon him without going down into the water and being baptized? However, it is no where stated he was baptized by the Holy Spirit and to say he was is to say so without evidence.
What we do not have to assume is that he was baptized in water and went away rejoicing. Could it be he went away rejoicing because baptism is for the remission of sins? (Acts 2:38) Could it be because he knew he had been obedient to the teaching of the Great Commission? Let the reader judge for himself.
I do not know of a case in the Bible where it is said or implied that the Holy Spirit was ever said to be given to a man for the purpose of saving him. Do you? Yes, he has the Spirit if he is saved but is that the reason it was given to him - to save him? That is what needs to be shown.
There is an interesting passage in 1 Cor. 14:22 about the very thing Cornelius received. It reads as follows: "Therefore tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers; but prophesying is not for unbelievers but for those who believe." (1 Cor. 14:22 NKJV) It will be said oh, but this is not about the case of Cornelius. No, I do not think it is either but I think it has an application.
When we come to an understanding that without convincing the Jews that God was willing and desirous of saving the Gentiles, as well as themselves, the gospel never would have been preached to the Gentiles nor would they ever have been accepted into Christian fellowship then we will see the application. The Jews were unbelievers that God had anything for the Gentiles. Ten years has gone by since Jesus' ascension back into heaven and still there is no preaching to the Gentiles.
It took a miracle to convince them, the Jews, the unbelievers, that God would or had accepted the Gentiles. "And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also." (Acts 10:45 NKJV) This was the event that convinced the Jews that it was not only okay but the will of God that the Gentiles also have access to eternal life through the gospel. "When they (the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem - DS) heard these things they became silent; and they glorified God, saying, 'Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life.'" (Acts 11:18 NKJV) Tongues served for a sign to the Jewish Christians with regards to the Gentile Cornelius and thus to all Gentiles concerning God's will for them.
This whole episode at the house of Cornelius of being baptized in the Holy Spirit had nothing to do with gospel obedience or conversion. Let us say this had not happened. Let us say the Holy Spirit had not fallen upon Cornelius? Do you think Cornelius would have been disobedient to, and an unbeliever of, the things Peter was teaching him? Do you think Peter would have left Cornelius as an unsaved man? You know better. With or without the baptism of the Holy Spirit Cornelius was going to obey the gospel that day and be saved. Remember his conversion began with an appearance of an angel in a vision telling him to send for Peter. He knew full well what this was about when Peter came to him and who it was from.
It has been said that the word "believe" in Acts 15:7 is proof that Cornelius was saved without water baptism. The authority who was quoted to me in order to prove it said, "'to believe' is used in the sense 'to be converted'". I would say it was synecdoche which is just a different word that means the same thing. It is a figure of speech were the part is put for or stands for the whole thing, the whole conversion process which is faith, repentance, confession of Jesus, and baptism for the remission of sins. Our only difference is how much ground our synecdoche covers or includes. They cut it short, too short to cover the whole ground of conversion.
Titus 3:6 was quoted to me, "whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior," with reference to the Holy Spirit being poured on Christians and then related to Acts 10:45, "And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also." (NKJV) The idea is then that Cornelius was made a Christian without any further acts on his part when the Holy Spirit fell upon him.
What was not mentioned when I was pointed to this verse was the verse just above it, Titus 3:5, "not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit." (Titus 3:5 NKJV) The washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit is a reference to Mark 16:16, the Great Commission, as given by Jesus. The baptism of the Great Commission (Mark 16:16, Matt. 28:18-20) was water baptism and I do not know of anyone who doubts it.
It is the same as Heb. 10:22, "let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water." (NKJV) The Holy Spirit was poured out upon brethren the result of having obeyed the gospel after being saved. I have already stated why Cornelius was an exception to the rule.
One needs to be careful lest he take the exception to the rule and make it the general rule. We do not do that in life and we should not do it in bible study. We do not say that the Lord appeared to Saul on the road to Damascus therefore unless the Lord appears to you personally you cannot be converted. There was a reason Jesus appeared to Saul and that reason is not applicable to either you or me. We understand this. We need to understand the same principle as it relates to the conversion of Cornelius and his household.
I went to take a look at that verse and read it in context. Now understand I believe the Spirit abides in a Christian - that is not the point. The point is whether it necessarily follows that because the Holy Spirit fell on Cornelius that he was saved instantly at that point in time.
But, I read the verse in context. One verse above this one, in verse 12, it is stated, "If we love one another, God abides in us, and His love has been perfected in us." (1 John 4:12 NKJV) Two verses down I read this, "Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God." (1 John 4:15 NKJV) In a broader context, but still in the book of 1 John, it is said if we keep his word he we abide in him and he in us. (1 John 2:5, 1 John 3:24) Thus we have a series of items being listed by which we can measure whether or not we are in a faithful relationship with God.
The passage is not talking about initial obedience to God (the gospel) for there can be no obedience to what is thrust upon you. To say that obedience to the gospel (a command of God - 2 Thess. 1:8, 1 Peter 4:17) equals Holy Spirit baptism and vice versa is to say in reality that there is nothing to obey. Had Cornelius obeyed the gospel?
Paul said, concerning the matter of salvation in Rom. 6:17-18, "But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness." (NKJV) There is then something to obey. What? The command of Peter to Cornelius and those gathered with him, "And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord." (Acts 10:48 NKJV) The reader would do well to read Rom. 6:1-6 where Paul talks about baptism in the same chapter as the verse just quoted above (Rom. 6:17-18).
Let the reader note that obedience from the heart (Rom. 6:17) necessarily implies faith or else how can it be from the heart, thus the obedience being spoken of is in addition to faith and it is something they must do for themselves - not God do for them or to them..
I might talk a little about the conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch as it bears on this topic. I quote the passage at hand.
"Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him. Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, "See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?" Then Philip said, "If you believe with all your heart, you may." And he answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him. Now when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught Philip away, so that the eunuch saw him no more; and he went on his way rejoicing." (Acts 8:35-39 NKJV)
Was this Holy Spirit baptism? I do not want to insult your intelligence. But, I want you to take note of this. When the eunuch left the water he was convinced he was then a saved man. He went "on his way rejoicing." Philip thought he was a saved man for he was willing to let him go, the preaching was ended.
If it is said the baptism was simultaneous, that is that he was both baptized in water and in the Holy Spirit all at one and the same time, I then ask does that not make the going down into the water and being baptized in it a necessity in order to receive Holy Spirit baptism? Would it have come upon him without going down into the water and being baptized? However, it is no where stated he was baptized by the Holy Spirit and to say he was is to say so without evidence.
What we do not have to assume is that he was baptized in water and went away rejoicing. Could it be he went away rejoicing because baptism is for the remission of sins? (Acts 2:38) Could it be because he knew he had been obedient to the teaching of the Great Commission? Let the reader judge for himself.
I do not know of a case in the Bible where it is said or implied that the Holy Spirit was ever said to be given to a man for the purpose of saving him. Do you? Yes, he has the Spirit if he is saved but is that the reason it was given to him - to save him? That is what needs to be shown.
There is an interesting passage in 1 Cor. 14:22 about the very thing Cornelius received. It reads as follows: "Therefore tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers; but prophesying is not for unbelievers but for those who believe." (1 Cor. 14:22 NKJV) It will be said oh, but this is not about the case of Cornelius. No, I do not think it is either but I think it has an application.
When we come to an understanding that without convincing the Jews that God was willing and desirous of saving the Gentiles, as well as themselves, the gospel never would have been preached to the Gentiles nor would they ever have been accepted into Christian fellowship then we will see the application. The Jews were unbelievers that God had anything for the Gentiles. Ten years has gone by since Jesus' ascension back into heaven and still there is no preaching to the Gentiles.
It took a miracle to convince them, the Jews, the unbelievers, that God would or had accepted the Gentiles. "And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also." (Acts 10:45 NKJV) This was the event that convinced the Jews that it was not only okay but the will of God that the Gentiles also have access to eternal life through the gospel. "When they (the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem - DS) heard these things they became silent; and they glorified God, saying, 'Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life.'" (Acts 11:18 NKJV) Tongues served for a sign to the Jewish Christians with regards to the Gentile Cornelius and thus to all Gentiles concerning God's will for them.
This whole episode at the house of Cornelius of being baptized in the Holy Spirit had nothing to do with gospel obedience or conversion. Let us say this had not happened. Let us say the Holy Spirit had not fallen upon Cornelius? Do you think Cornelius would have been disobedient to, and an unbeliever of, the things Peter was teaching him? Do you think Peter would have left Cornelius as an unsaved man? You know better. With or without the baptism of the Holy Spirit Cornelius was going to obey the gospel that day and be saved. Remember his conversion began with an appearance of an angel in a vision telling him to send for Peter. He knew full well what this was about when Peter came to him and who it was from.
It has been said that the word "believe" in Acts 15:7 is proof that Cornelius was saved without water baptism. The authority who was quoted to me in order to prove it said, "'to believe' is used in the sense 'to be converted'". I would say it was synecdoche which is just a different word that means the same thing. It is a figure of speech were the part is put for or stands for the whole thing, the whole conversion process which is faith, repentance, confession of Jesus, and baptism for the remission of sins. Our only difference is how much ground our synecdoche covers or includes. They cut it short, too short to cover the whole ground of conversion.
Titus 3:6 was quoted to me, "whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior," with reference to the Holy Spirit being poured on Christians and then related to Acts 10:45, "And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also." (NKJV) The idea is then that Cornelius was made a Christian without any further acts on his part when the Holy Spirit fell upon him.
What was not mentioned when I was pointed to this verse was the verse just above it, Titus 3:5, "not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit." (Titus 3:5 NKJV) The washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit is a reference to Mark 16:16, the Great Commission, as given by Jesus. The baptism of the Great Commission (Mark 16:16, Matt. 28:18-20) was water baptism and I do not know of anyone who doubts it.
It is the same as Heb. 10:22, "let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water." (NKJV) The Holy Spirit was poured out upon brethren the result of having obeyed the gospel after being saved. I have already stated why Cornelius was an exception to the rule.
One needs to be careful lest he take the exception to the rule and make it the general rule. We do not do that in life and we should not do it in bible study. We do not say that the Lord appeared to Saul on the road to Damascus therefore unless the Lord appears to you personally you cannot be converted. There was a reason Jesus appeared to Saul and that reason is not applicable to either you or me. We understand this. We need to understand the same principle as it relates to the conversion of Cornelius and his household.