The outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles in Acts 2 is a pivotal moment that sets the stage for our exploration today. We'll dive into the significance of this event and compare it with the occurrences in Acts 10, Acts 19, and Acts 8, shedding light on the necessity for the Apostles to lay hands on new believers. You might find it intriguing that while Acts 2 marks a communal experience for the Jewish audience, the case of Cornelius showcases a remarkable exception to the rule, emphasizing divine approval in the inclusion of Gentiles. As we unpack these scriptures, we'll navigate the nuanced differences in how the Holy Spirit's presence is experienced by various groups, revealing a divine intention that transcends mere ritual. So, buckle up as we embark on this enlightening journey through the Book of Acts, where every passage is a stepping stone to understanding the profound workings of the Holy Spirit among the early disciples.

Takeaways:

• The outpouring of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2 showcased an unprecedented miracle, demonstrating the apostles' ability to speak in various native dialects.
• Acts 8 and Acts 10 reveal the necessity of apostolic intervention for the Holy Spirit's miraculous gifts, highlighting the significance of laying hands on believers.
• The unique case of Cornelius illustrates that God can bestow the Holy Spirit without human mediation, affirming the inclusion of Gentiles into the faith.
• The reception of the Holy Spirit in Acts reflects the early church's understanding of divine authority, emphasizing the apostles' role in imparting spiritual gifts.
• The contrasting experiences of the Samaritans and Cornelius raise questions about the conditions for receiving the Holy Spirit in the early church.
• Understanding the cultural prejudices of the Jewish audience of Acts helps us appreciate the transformative impact of the Holy Spirit's outpouring on the apostles.

And good day to you.

Thanks again for joining us in the study.

We're just going to pick up right where we left off in Acts chapter 2.

Acts 2 is a well known text for tongue speakers, I.e.

those claiming that today.

But to assist us in appreciating the effect this day had on these people who were present, we have to understand the general knowledge of languages and the attitude toward people from Galilee.

Think about this now.

Most Jews would have spoken three languages, especially those of.

Well, after some education, they would have known Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic.

Aramaic was the vernacular of the area.

The Hebrew was the Jewish language of the scribe and the students of the Old Testament scriptures.

Business applied on the wider scale of the Roman Empire was going on constantly and spoken and written in Greek.

So a minimum of three languages would have been expected among the educated.

Secondly, Galileans, they carried now the reputation of being uneducated hicks.

And this prejudice is borne out in this text from the negative comments of Jesus being from Nazareth, a town of Galilee.

We see this in John 1:46, can any good thing come out of that town?

And the Jewish prejudice against Galilee is found in John 7.

But Gamaliel spoke up at the Jewish Sanhedrin with that question, can any good thing come out of Galilee?

And it indicates a prejudice, a stereotype of that day that Galilee couldn't produce any qualified men of training.

Again, that's the cause for amazement.

A third thing I think we might have to add in making this point is that even with the expectation of speaking the language commonly spoken in Jerusalem, no one would have expected the most educated person to know all the unique dialects of the indigenous peoples that were around the Mediterranean world.

And yet these men were speaking in their own dialect.

So these ignorant Galileans, speaking in languages they had never known, never studied, are now speaking it.

As we've already noted, the promise of the Spirit in the last days was a concentrated outpouring that was unprecedented in scope and power.

Envision now for a moment what the people saw and heard on the day when, when the Holy Spirit came as promised.

Imagine the honest Jew witnessing something like fire setting on the heads of these unlearned men of Galilee.

Now it says as fire.

We're not talking about literal fire here, but it was something that sat upon them.

And it looked like that these unlearned men of Galilee, and then they hear them now speak in the native dialect of Jews from all over the Mediterranean world.

They were astounded.

It is likely that because there were 12 porches on the Temple Mount, that the 12 apostles gathered, each one on a porch to preach the message of the Gospel so that all Jerusalem could hear them.

The effect on that crowd is easy to perceive if real languages were spoken.

The miracle was not in the fact that they just spoke in languages, but they spoke in their own native dialect.

Now, whether all the dialects were given to each apostle or only representatively as a whole is not essential here, and I'll argue that point.

No doubt for this reason many believe that the miracle was on the hearer instead of the speaker.

But in any case, they were astounded that these ignorant Galileans were speaking to them in their own native dialect.

To illustrate the effect this would have had, imagine that your American born bred grandfather, who had only a fourth grade education, took you on a trip to Germany and started speaking fluid German in the public courtyard.

How would you have reacted to that?

Well, that alone would be amazing, would it not?

But imagine how you'd feel if he started speaking passionately about the direction of your life and how it should take based upon some irrefutable evidence that you are implicated in some kind of criminal activity that caused the opposite effect than what you had hoped.

We're not surprised to see the effect of the Holy Spirit's outpouring on that day.

They were amazed and marveled.

And as they spoke the Word of God, the Word of God increased and multiplied exceedingly in Jerusalem.

The believers grew from 3,000 in the city of Jerusalem to 5,000 in no time.

Knowing that background causes us to appreciate the amazement experienced on the day of Pentecost when these Galileans began to speak in the dialects of each Jewish district that are mentioned in the text.

Another passage from acts still chapter two.

This time I want us to focus on verse 33.

In verse 33, the mention of the Holy Spirit reads as therefore having been exalted to the right hand of God and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit.

And he has poured forth this which you both see and hear.

And he has poured forth this which you both see and hear.

Now we've already seen in John's prediction of him that he would baptize in the Holy Spirit.

What is said of one person in the Godhead is often said of another.

In John's gospel, Jesus is said, for example, to raise himself, and other texts speak of the Father raising the Son.

Here the connection of Peter's explanation in verse 33 is directly tied to to the 24th chapter of Luke's Gospel.

Perhaps we should turn over there and read that.

In verse 46 beginning he records Jesus saying, thus is passionately written that the Christ should suffer and rise again from the dead the third day, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all the nations beginning from Jerusalem.

You are witnesses of these things.

And behold, I am sending forth the promise of my Father upon you, but you're to stay in the city until you are clothed with power from on high.

Now this explains that both the Father and the Son are involved in the sending.

In these two verses, Jesus is doing the sending, but the Father gave the promise.

It seems as if he executes the order, but since the Father promised the Spirit, he sends out the order that he's to be sent.

And this promise of the Holy spirit in Acts 2:33 we was not the promise the Holy Spirit gave, but the promise that the Holy Spirit would be given from the Father.

So waiting in Jerusalem for that promise, they would know it was fulfilled when they would be clothed with power from on high.

The early part of Acts 2 describes it and it is unmistakably miraculous power.

The third mention the Holy Spirit in chapter 2 is verses 38 and 39.

In the non charismatic world, the general view is that Peter is here speaking of a personal non miraculous indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

If so, no prophet ever mentions this promise of a non miraculous indwelling.

If God chose to make this indwelling available at that time, that would undoubtedly be his prerogative.

But it was never promised.

The promise of the Spirit in the Old Testament was never described as non miraculous either.

Yet he calls it a promise.

Now if it's a promise, we would expect to find some mention of it in the Old Testament scriptures and mention of it in the New Testament in the words of the Lord or one of his apostles, to the effect that it had been fulfilled.

The promised gift of the Holy spirit in Acts 2:38 is well documented by the prophets and by John, the Forerunner and Jesus.

However, it is assumed that if the remission of sins is automatic, then so must the gift of the Spirit be automatic.

The reasoning goes something like First, Luke tells us that the Holy Spirit is given to those who obey him.

Acts 5:32 and this gift of the Holy Spirit is promised to those who repent and are baptized.

Same thing to those who obey him, or to those who repent and are baptized.

Second, we are told that the Christians in Samaria that had not yet received the Holy Spirit, he had not fallen on any of them the text says, therefore the promise of the Holy spirit in Acts 2:38 had to be non miraculous, the argument goes, else the Samaritans would have received the Holy Spirit after they had been baptized.

And Acts 8 is a reference to miraculous indwelling, since it was not automatically given.

Nothing requires that we make the gift of the Holy Spirit automatically given just because the remission of sins is granted upon repentance and baptism.

Luke is recording that remission of sins is conditioned upon repentance and baptism.

Then he adds, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Notice the future tense in the last promise that is not present in the granting of remission of sins.

Both the Jews on Pentecost and the Samaritans were baptized, and we would expect both to have received the Holy Spirit.

I mean, why wouldn't we?

So why would the Samaritans, or why did they not receive him?

And no mention of that problem is found among the obedient Jews on the day of Pentecost.

Why the difference?

The only rational reason is that neither group could receive the miraculous measure of the Holy Spirit automatically.

The promise, you see, friends, required the apostles to lay hands on the new converts.

Christians would have had no problem receiving the miraculous measure of the Spirit in Jerusalem.

Why?

Because all 12 lived there at the time.

And since Samaria had no apostle to lay hands on them.

We have a record of two apostles being sent from Jerusalem, Peter and John by name.

They were called there to impart the miraculous gift of the Holy Spirit.

So I think it's probably time to turn to Acts 8 and look at that occasion.

It is assumed, as I say, that because remission of sins is automatically, then so must the gift of the Holy Spirit be automatic.

The obvious problem is to explain why the Holy Spirit was not given immediately after the Samaritans had obeyed the Lord.

Was there some special circumstance that required special intervention or.

Or was it that they were Samaritans and that for some reason because they were Samaritans, they didn't receive the Spirit?

The best way to explain this is to start with Acts 8 instead of Acts 2 and using Acts 8 as a commentary on Acts 2 to discover how it is that New Testament Christians receive the Holy spirit.

With Acts 8 as our starting point, we discover the necessity of having an apostle and to grant that promise by laying their hands on the new believers.

It is not automatically given in Acts 8, but neither is it automatically given in Acts 2.

Based on putting everything together, it would seem to me that the difference can be explained simply by the fact that Jerusalem was filled with apostles, while Samaria had none.

So there was no reason to mention any need for the apostles to be sent somewhere in Jerusalem.

They were.

They were there already.

There is therefore no specific reference to some apostle being asked to lay hands on saints in Jerusalem because they were already there.

The saints had the empowerment as is evidenced in Acts 5:31.

The Scriptures demonstrate that when an apostle was present, the Holy Spirit was imparted by the laying on of their hands.

It was dependent therefore on an apostle to impart him.

Acts 8 clearly explains this notice in verse 16.

For he had not yet fallen upon any of them.

They had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Now if Jerusalem was like Samaria, where they had no apostle, would the report be sent where one or more apostles would be located to come and lay hands on the new saints?

Before you discount this too quickly, let's return to our text.

In Acts 8 we'll begin looking at verse 15 beginning now.

When the apostles in Jerusalem had heard that Samaria received the word of God, they sent them Peter and John, who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, for he had not yet fallen upon any of them.

They had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Then they began laying their hands on them.

They were receiving the Holy Spirit.

Now watch it carefully please.

Now when Simon saw that the Spirit was bestowed through the laying on of the apostles hands, he offered them money saying, give me this authority as well, so that everyone on whom I lay my hands, they may receive the Holy Spirit.

So both Acts 8 and Acts 2 reference the gift of the Holy Spirit after baptism.

Why is it necessary to give the promise two different meanings, one being a non miraculous and the other being a miraculous.

Well there's a perfect reason why the Samaritans who did the same as the Jews on Pentecost had not received the Holy Spirit as per the promise of Acts 2:38 and 39 and Acts 5:32.

Philip wasn't an apostle.

Philip could not impart the gift of the Holy Spirit like the apostles could do in Jerusalem.

Simon saw.

The Bible says Simon saw that through the laying on of the Let me listen.

It didn't say John and Peter.

It says through the laying on of the apostles hands he saw that.

Another really good example to support what we've proposed here is in Acts 19.

In Acts 19, Luke picks up Paul's stay in Ephesus.

In the first seven verses we have an excellent example that gives further Evidence in support of the conclusion that the gift of the Holy Spirit was the Holy Spirit himself in a miraculous measure, as promised by Joel.

Here Paul meets 12 disciples.

And he asked them if they had received the Holy Spirit when they believed.

Just as in the example, by the way, let it be understood that one can be a disciple and not have been baptized in the name of Christ.

I don't know that one could continue that upon hearing the truth and rejecting it.

But at least the idea is presented that here were disciples.

It's very similar to the commission that Jesus gave his apostles.

When he said, go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.

They were told to make disciples, comma, baptizing them.

Baptizing who?

The disciples.

Baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.

And lo, he says, I'm with you always, even to the end of the age.

Now notice, please, here were disciples.

And he says, you need to make disciples baptizing them.

Well, here are disciples.

They had not known anything but the baptism of John.

And the Bible tells us, as we further read, they had not even heard there be a Holy Spirit.

So that's obvious that they had no knowledge of being baptized in the name of Christ because it is associated with that gift.

And so we're told.

Here Paul meets these 12 disciples.

He asked them if they had received the Holy Spirit when they believed.

And again, just as in the case of the Samaritans, it wasn't automatically given after accepting the truth.

Or Paul would have.

He wouldn't have asked if they had received him.

I mean, if they had received him, there wouldn't have been any question about accepting the gift of the Holy Spirit.

They may have been like the Samaritans or the Ethiopian, who were taught by one who would not be able to impart the gift and had not yet been in the proximity of an apostle of Jesus Christ.

In any event, the text is clear that they had not yet received the Holy Spirit.

Of course, they had not yet been baptized in the name of Jesus, since they only knew the baptism of John.

So Paul, as an apostle with this power, was offering his services if needed.

I'm of the persuasion that wherever Paul went, he asked that question if they had received the Holy Spirit.

Since they believed, if they had been baptized into Jesus Christ, we would expect them to know about the Holy Spirit and how he is promised to the believer.

But under these circumstances, we would also expect an apostle to ask a similar Question.

Wherever they found disciples, they were in the business of imparting the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Wherever they found disciples of Christ.

Paul writes to the Romans, and he speaks of his longing to see them so that he may impart the gift.

Romans 1:9.

Now, a common question that the 12 would ask is, have you received the Holy Spirit since you believed?

See, when we ask the question, these disciples said, when he asked it, they said, no, we haven't even heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.

Now, that was proof that they had not yet been baptized in the name of Jesus, right?

So Paul asked, well, into what name were you baptized?

And they said, john's baptism.

Paul said, john baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in him who was coming after them, that is, in Jesus.

Now, that's a done deal, you see, that's already happened.

And when they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them and they began speaking with tongues and prophesying.

Now, unlike Philip and the Samaritans or Philip and the Ethiopian, Paul, because he was an apostle, could lay hands on them immediately following their baptism into Christ, which would be exactly what we'd expect to have happen to the converts in Acts 2.

And as we will see in the next discussion, some did not have that opportunity.

Now that brings us now then, to the next example we find in Acts 8 where the Ethiopian is spoken of.

He's on his return trip back from.

Back home from Jerusalem.

Philip met this man on the road, taught him about Jesus Christ, and baptized him.

The situation in this case is as follows.

There's no mention of the Holy Spirit, there is no mention of an apostle, and this man is returning home in his chariot.

It wasn't the same situation where an apostle would be called from Jerusalem to Samaria, nor the same situation of Acts 19.

And while he was certainly a candidate for receiving the Holy Spirit, he departed for home without him.

Now, he still had his sins forgiven, and no doubt his response is, he went on his way rejoicing.

And why shouldn't he?

We don't know how long he waited until an apostle imparted the gift.

Perhaps an apostle made a special trip to Ethiopia.

Perhaps he had the opportunity to return again in a visit to Jerusalem on another occasion.

Either way, he could still go on his way rejoicing because he'd had his sins washed away.

Regarding such rejoicing, think on the contrast between miraculous power and remission of sins in Another context showing the priority of one over the other.

In the words of Christ to those disciples who were excited about the power to cast out demons, he said, do not rejoice in this that the spirits are subject to you, but rejoice that your names are recorded in heaven.

That was something that could be said of the Ethiopian, but the other, any power of the Holy Spirit, and being able to cast out demons certainly was not subject to him.

He had not yet had the hands of the apostles laid upon him to receive the gift.

There is another example, however, and we would be remiss without mentioning it, and that's in Acts chapter 10.

I look at this example as an exception to the need of having an apostle lay their hands on new believers to receive the Holy Spirit.

And one of the big differences and reasons is that not even Peter fully understood this concept.

And though he was told he could accept it intellectually.

But Cornelius and his household were the first among the Gentiles to receive the Gospel message and be saved.

There had to be great proof of divine approval that spurred the Jews to action.

For this to be something accepted, they needed a tremendous outpouring as a testimony to Gentile induction.

Jews had gone with Peter from Joppa to this Gentile household.

Peter had already been prepared that God was no respecter of persons.

The vision had convinced him and prepared his heart to preach to this Gentile man.

But even then, this had not yet fully registered.

It had to be very difficult to go against his traditions and require a vision.

It required something special, a command of God to go.

Now, was he going to follow the same example for them as he had done for the Jews in Acts 2?

Was he going to require them to repent and be baptized for the remission of sins?

What would he have done if they had, you know, if they'd asked, what must we do?

You see?

If he had followed the same pattern as Acts 2, would it have appeared to his fellow Jews who were with him that he was acting on his own authority?

We don't know the answers to those questions, because while Peter was still speaking, the Holy Spirit, God, the Holy Spirit, fell on that Gentile household.

The Gospel had to be preached.

Cornelius had not yet heard it.

And when recounting those events to his Jewish brethren, when he got back home In Acts chapter 11, Peter explains this.

As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them.

And so one of the differences in this only case of people receiving the Holy Spirit before their baptism is the fact that God had to confirm the inclusion of Gentiles into the Jewish fellowship.

This wasn't left up to Peter to confirm, wasn't up to Peter to confirm this truth by his own testimony.

Years later, Peter shows that he still doesn't follow through with this truth in Galatians 2.

And beginning in about verse 11 and following, we find that he plays the hypocrite's role and gets up from a table of Gentile saints, brethren, for fear and pressure of the Jews who walked in the door.

Accepting something intellectually does not mean that we'll follow through socially and emotionally that we've really accepted that truth.

When Peter preached to Cornelius and his household, he had six fellow Jews in his company that would bear witness to this momentous occasion.

God didn't leave it in the hands of Peter or the concession of any Jews to make a decision with regard to this.

Taking it out of their hands, the Holy Spirit fell on this household immediately, confirming the truth that even to the Gentiles had God given this precious gift.

From what Follows in chapter 11, Peter needed unmistakable evidence before proceeding too far out on this limb.

Not only did God give the necessary convincing proofs for Peter, but the testimony of six Jewish brethren accompanying Peter supported Peter's actions.

The outpouring of the Holy Spirit on those listening to Peter's message confirmed that God had given his stamp of approval.

The next statement that follows seems to show the intent of the Holy Spirit falling on them.

It reads in verse 45, all the circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles.

Also notice the connection, please, between the gift of the Holy Spirit and what we're witnessing here.

A miraculous event of people receiving, being able to speak in tongues, the Bible says, for they were hearing them speak with tongues, an exalting God.

The Holy Spirit was at work.

First, he was at work to reveal the truth to an apostle of Christ through a vision, with the command to go to Cornelius house.

Then he tells Cornelius to send for Peter.

Once there, he empowered Cornelius and his household with the gift of tongues to confirm their inclusion to Peter and these Jewish brethren.

Peter concludes, surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?

You'll notice that baptism is not excluded in here.

It shows that the gift of the Holy Spirit was not the means nor the condition of salvation.

When Peter is offering this his defense when going and for going unto a Gentile home, and he's gone back to Jerusalem and he explains to his Jewish brethren, he says, this is verse 15 of chapter 11.

As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them just as he did on us at the beginning.

And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he used to say, John baptized with us, or John baptized with water.

And he gave to us also after believing in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I, that I could withstand or stand in the way, in God's way.

Therefore if God gave to them the same gift, you see he's emphasizing the fact that here's the evidence, the proof that God was behind this action.

And notice that Peter relates the promise of Jesus that they, that is the apostles would be baptized with the Holy Spirit.

That's we can look at back in John 14, 15, 16 when he speaks of God giving the Gentiles the same gift he gave to us at the beginning.

He's comparing the outpouring of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost to these outpouring on the Gentiles.

Now this was the confirmation they needed.

This was the proof to accept the Gentiles into the family.

Later on in chapter 15, when Peter speaks at the council in Jerusalem, he says, brethren, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the Gospel and believe.

And God, who knows the heart, testified to them, giving them the Holy Spirit, just as he did to us.

And he made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith.

I would say Therefore that Acts 2, when the Holy Spirit fell upon the apostles to a Jewish audience is much like Acts 10 when Peter goes to a Gentile household to preach the Gospel.

In both instances there is a direct impartation of the Holy Spirit without the apostles hands.

And those would be the two exceptions.

Well, once again our time is up for the day and we thank you for joining us in the study.

We will pick up with these thoughts.

We're going to go back to Acts 4.

Until then, have a good day and a pleasant week ahead.