First, sorry for the long post.
Marc wrote:
Balaam does not apply for that took place before Christ was glorified when the "Spirit had not yet been given" (John 7:39).
The fact that the Holy Spirit indwelt Balaam shows that it is not impossible for the Holy Spirit to indwell an unregenerate man, if such fits God’s purpose.
John 7:37-39 says:
37 On the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried out, saying, “If anyone thirsts, let him come to Me and drink. 38 He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water.” 39 But this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those believing in Him would receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.
This says that those who believed in Jesus (and we see throughout the NT that belief that saves in inseparably tied to good works, but I won’t belabor that point here) would receive the Holy Spirit. This does not exclude the Holy Spirit from indwelling a man that has not been saved, if such were to fit God’s purpose, just as it did with Balaam, and so too it did with Cornelius.
Marc wrote:
Peter did tell Cornelius what he "must do" but that does not necessitate that water baptism was necessary for salvation. And since they asked him to stay on for a few days even after they were water baptized -Acts 10:48- he would have undoubtedly "told them" even more "commands".
Are you suggesting that we are saved separate and apart from doing what God has commanded? Or are you suggesting Peter told him something else not revealed? Do you believe that what Peter told Cornelius he Must Do corresponds to Baptism? If so, then you are saying we can be saved without doing that which we are told we must do. If not, what do you believe Peter did tell Cornelius he must do?
Marc wrote:
The Gentiles did hear the words whereby they would be saved and that before water baptism since they had already received the Holy Spirit.
Precisely which words are you referring to? Which exact words in the context are the words you believe Peter told them whereby they would be saved?
Marc wrote:
1. I noticed you dodged Titus 3:6.
Titus 3:4-7 says:
“4 But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared, 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, 6 whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.”
In this passage there is a contrast given of the days of old before the gospel and the days of the New Covenant when God’s love and kindness appeared.
We are told it is not our own righteous acts that save us. Amen.
We are told it is according to His mercy we are saved. Amen, and hallelujah!
He goes on to say that we are saved through the washing of regeneration. Marc, what do you believe this means? I believe a strong case can be made that this is speaking of baptism, but would first like to hear your thoughts.
He goes on to say it is also by the renewing of the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us. I don’t believe anyone here disputes that. Salvation is certainly by the renewing of the Holy Spirit. The question is, when and how does this happen? It is connected in this passage to the washing of regeneration.
I have no problem with your statement “Having the Spirit "poured out" (ekxeo - Titus 3:6) upon you is the basis of how God "saves" us (Titus 3:5).” That is not the question. The question is, what must we DO to receive this gift of salvation which God offers through Jesus.
Marc wrote:
2. Here's something else. Romans 5:5 further explains what took place in Acts 10:45. The love of God was "poured out" (ekxeo) through the Holy Spirit who was "given" (dido).
Romans 5:5 states:
“Now hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who was given to us.”
Just as in John 7:37-39, this passage teaches that those who had faith received the Holy Spirit. It does not show the impossibility of the Holy Spirit being poured out on any other, if such suited God’s purpose.
Marc wrote:
The Gentiles were "given" (dido) the Holy Spirit before they were water baptized (Acts 11:17) therefore they had the love of God poured out within their hearts before they were water baptized.
Your argument does not follow. The passage teaches that it is impossible for one to be saved without having the Holy Spirit. It does not teach that it is impossible to have the Holy Spirit without being saved.
Marc wrote:
But according to 2 Corinthians 1:22 to have the Spirit within one's heart describes a saved person - such was the case of the Gentiles before they were water baptized.
II Cor.1:22 states:
“21 Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and has anointed us is God, 22 who also has sealed us and given us the Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee.”
This, along with the other passages you have pointed out, shows that the spirit indwells the Christian. It does not negate the possibility of the Holy Spirit indwelling a man who has not yet been saved. What you are doing (or what it seems to me you are doing, and correct me if I am wrong) in each of these cases is assuming that the reason for the Holy Spirit indwelling man is always in the same way and for he same purpose. This is not so. We see all throughout scripture, OT and NT, the Holy Spirit indwelling different men in different spiritual conditions, at different times and for different purposes. More on this later.
Marc wrote:
3. You also dodged "the gift of the Holy Spirit" as used in Acts 10:45.
This is a good passage to look at. As you know, the phrase “Gift of the Holy Spirit” only appears here and in Acts 2:38.
Does this mean the same thing in each passage? If yes, what? If no, what does each refer do, and how to you determine such?
I will be honest in saying that I am not absolutely 100% sure, but I believe it does mean the same thing in both passages. Marc, I assume you will agree with me there. I know many who would disagree. It is obvious that the gift of the holy spirit in Acts 10 refers to the actual indwelling of the Holy Spirit. I have heard it said by many that such is not the case in Acts 2:38, but that there it refers not to the Holy Spirit itself as being the gift, but that it speaks to the gift the Holy Spirit gives. The language could be used this way, such as in Romans 6:23. There the “gift of God” is not God as the gift, but speaks to the gift God gives. I won’t go into detail for all my reasons here, but I believe, as Marc I am sure you will agree, that the “gift of the Holy Spirit” in both places speaks to the receiving of the Holy Spirit.
However, the receiving of the Holy Spirit is not the same in each case. In one instance it is given as a result of obedience rendered to the command to submit to God by repenting and being baptized. In the other it is given before such submission is made, and for an obvious purpose: to remove any objection from the Jews, making it clear that God was now ready to welcome Gentiles into His fold.
I believe J.W. McGarvey made some good comments on this passage. I do not refer to him as any sort of authority, for there is but one authority-the infallible word. But I do find his comments here to be of merit.
This incident in the conversion of Cornelius can not, in any way, be held as a precedent for us; from the fact that it was a miraculous gift, and therefore peculiar to the age of miracles. It may as well be regarded as necessary to see the Lord as Saul did, in order to a genuine conversion, as to be immersed in the Spirit as Cornelius was. It is, therefore, a very gross deception to urge upon the people that they should receive the Spirit, after the precedent of Cornelius, before they are immersed.
The true explanation of this unusual circumstance is given in the following words, together with Peter's own explanation of it in the eleventh chapter:{16} "Then Peter answered, (47) Can any man forbid water, that these should not be immersed, who have received the Holy Spirit as well as we? (48 And he commanded them to be immersed in the name of the Lord. Then they requested him to remain some days." The use that Peter made of it expresses the design of its occurrence. That use was to remove all possible objection to the immersion of the parties. In any other case which had occurred, or which occurred after this, no such objection could have existed. The very fact, therefore, which led to this unusual occurrence, was an exceptional circumstance, which furnishes the strongest proof that this case is not a precedent for imitation in this particular.
Before he was interrupted, Peter had already proceeded so far with his discourse as to reach the subject of faith, and of remission of sins, and immersion must have been the next word upon his lips, if he had proceeded after the model of his sermon on Pentecost. The interruption, therefore, did not break the thread of his discourse, but enabled him to proceed with greater confidence to the very conclusion which he had intended. He first appeals to the brethren, to know if any objection yet lingered in their minds, and finding none, he commanded them to be immersed in the name of the Lord.
Let us now recall the fact that Cornelius had been directed to send for Peter to hear "words by which he and all his family might be saved."
Marc, in the case you present, you are assuming the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is the same in every instance we find in scripture. This is not the case.
Passage Reason for the indwelling
Numbers 24:2 Caused Balaam, who was acting contrary to God’s will, to prophecy and speak the things of God.
Exodus 31:3 Give Bezalel great wisdom and workmanship ability to build the tabernacle.
1 Samuel 10:10 Gave Samuel the ability to prophecy.
1 Samuel 11:6 Here the Spirit of God caused Saul to get angry and cut up a bunch of Oxen.
Ezekiel 11:24 Gave Ezekiel a vision.
Matthew 10:19-20 The Holy Spirit gives the disciples words to say when going out on the limited commission.
Matthew 12:28 The Spirit of God gives Jesus the power to cast out demons.
John 14:26 The Holy Spirit will bring all things to the apostle’s remembrance.
Acts 2:4 Speaking in tongues
Acts 2:38 The gift of the Holy Spirit given to those who repent and are baptized.
Acts 7:55 Stephen able to see into Heaven, seeing Jesus at the right hand of God.
Acts 10:44-45 Show that God was accepting of the Gentiles.
Romans 5:5 The Holy Spirit is given to those who have faith in God.
Romans 8:9 The spirit of God in you is equivalent to living by the spirit as opposed to by the flesh.
1 Corinthians 3:16 The spirit of God dwells in those who make up his temple, that is, those who are saved.
I Corinthians 12-14 Holy Spirit enables the working of miraculous spiritual gifts.
This is obviously just a small sample. There are many other passages that mention God’s spirit indwelling man. What is the reason for the Holy Spirit indwelling man? That is determined by the context. In the OT, it is primarily to prophecy, but not always. In the New Testament, it is primarily to either work spiritual gifts, or to indwell the Christian as a guarantee of salvation, but not always.
You cannot therefore just point to a passage where a man received the Holy Spirit prior to baptism and say he was saved without baptism unless you can first prove that the Holy Spirit cannot indwell in unregenerate man. And given the many reasons for the Spirit indwelling man, and even examples where the Holy Spirit indwelt a man who was acting contrary to His will, this is a task I do not believe can possibly be fulfilled.