Debate--Baptism with the Holy Spirit

[biribiri]

[quote=foudroyant;3467461]C. Galatians 3:27 - For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.

1. This baptism occurs to those who “receive the promise of the Spirit” (Galatians 3:14).

On the gentiles in Christ Jesus, the blessing of Abraham, i.e. the promise of the Holy Spirit, can be bestowed is a possibly viable interpretation. But the promise of the Holy Spirit can be bestowed on/received by the gentiles in Christ Jesus is definite - They are in Christ before the promise is received. The finer points of whether the promise IS the reception of the Holy Spirit or perhaps, is put in place BY the Holy Spirit will take further examination.
(A significant side issue arises ... to whom is authorship of Galatians attributed?)

This “promise” (the Holy Spirit) signifies one is a descendant of Abraham, i.e., a Christian (Galatians 3:29).

Galatians 3:29 does not mention the Holy Spirit. The immediate context does not address the matter of the Holy Spirit. This states that a person who has been baptised into Christ (Last I heard, Christ is not the Holy Spirit) is a Christian.

Since the Gentiles (Acts 10) “received” the promise of the Holy Spirit this proves that they were already descendants of Abraham/Christians before their water baptism (Acts 10:44-47).

No - they received the Holy Spirit. Acts 10:44-47 does not mention the promise of the Holy Spirit. Unless it can be established that the reception of the Holy Spirit is the received promise, the interpretation stated in the cited exposition is incorrect.

Their reception of the Holy Spirit is the same thing as their baptism with the Holy Spirit (Acts 11:16).

Quite so.

[Rushing Jaws]

Not true - It is from the beginning of creation, and is even MORE true now that we have the SEAL of the Holy Spirit... This Seal is the Gift of the Holy Spirit... We receive it in Baptism, just as did the Ethiopian eunich, and Paul, Barnabus, and the rest... The salvation of the Holy Spirit alone, apart from Baptism, exists in the Old Testament, and of it David writes in Psalm 50/1 "Restore unto me the JOY of Thy Salvation, and renew a Right Spirit within me..."

The OT is replete with examples of those saved by the Holy Spirit...

So tell me: What is the difference between Salvation in the OT and that in the New?

Please don't abandon this thread - It is just now finally beginning to come into focus...

It has been hard to see past your methodology of presentation...

So that substantive discussion has been hard to acquire with you...

But we have finally cut through some of the words...

And your idea is coming to light...

Two Baptisms, one for us, and one for the Jews...

Private reception of the Holy Spirit being the Gentile Baptism...

Public baptism in water with the Holy Spirit for the Jews...

Calling private visitation of the Holy Spirit "Baptism"...

Calling Baptism in water a mere TOKEN baptism signifying one's private event...

Dividing the Body of Christ into two camps, the Jews and the Gentiles, each with their own and VERY different baptisms, one with and one without the Holy Spirit in the waters of regeneration...

And on and on... All backed up with scholarly [eg neo-scholastic] quotes from modern scholars who agree with your view...

But Servant of God Marc - And I mean that title of address sincerely - For I think it illumines the intention of your heart - Just not its knowledge, for God gives knowledge, and not 20th century Protestant scholars - But I have this theory of you... I could be wrong, but please tell me - Is the Concordant Bible a central part of your discipleship? The Concordant Text? With the uncila Greek and the super scripting and sub-scripting making three texts in one with word translations subscripted? Used to be out of Florida? NW coastal town? Maybe St. Pete? I sure hope so... Those folks are utterly dear to me...

As are you in your defense of the Gospel as you understand it...

God Bless You, my friend...


Arsenios

## (Interjecting, but definitely O-T): Some people (= Calvinists) say that John 3.5 does not mean baptism with water & with the Holy Spirit (as in the sacramental understanding common to Orthodox, Catholics, & others); but, that "with water and the Holy Spirit" is a hendiadys for "with the water that is the Holy Spirit".

This is certainly an interesting argument against understanding John 3.5 to teach Baptismal regeneration; and far more persuasive than some against. Thoughts ? (The witness of Tradition is impressive, but not water-tight, and would not deal with the text - it would tell us only what people thought; people who might not be as well-equipped as more recent expositors.)

[Rdr. Arsenios]

## (Interjecting, but definitely O-T): Some people (= Calvinists) say that John 3.5 does not mean baptism with water & with the Holy Spirit (as in the sacramental understanding common to Orthodox, Catholics, & others); but, that "with water and the Holy Spirit" is a hendiadys for "with the water that is the Holy Spirit".

This is certainly an interesting argument against understanding John 3.5 to teach Baptismal regeneration; and far more persuasive than some against. Thoughts ? (The witness of Tradition is impressive, but not water-tight, and would not deal with the text - it would tell us only what people thought; people who might not be as well-equipped as more recent expositors.)

Here is the conditional text:

εαν μη τις γεννηθη εξ υδατος και πνευματος

If anyone should not be born
out of water and spirit...

So I would suppose, if this is indeed a hendiadys, that they would then need to show that Greek uses the hendiadys in the Bible elsewhere - I know we find: "I am the shepherd the true..." meaning "the True Shepherd", but this does not qualify for "out of water and Spirit" meaning out of spirit-water, or out of water-spirit... You see, here is the definition:

hendiadys:
A figure of speech in which two words connected by a conjunction
are used to express a single notion that would normally be expressed
by an adjective and a substantive,
such as grace and favor
instead of gracious favor.

I dunno... I mean, it looks like a really SISSY attempt... I would pick them up and put them back into the sand-box from whence they first emerged on hands and knees... Just my personal opinion, mind you...

I mean, it is a stretch to say that we today are going to be in a good position to CORRECT the consistent and undivided understanding of all Christians for 2000 years, except for a few johnny-come-latelies of the post-modern era... I mean, we no even speak-a-da-Greek so good ya-know... Gottum heap big problem with Greek alphabet even...

But past that, one must look to the understanding of the Body of Christ that has been consistently applied for 2000 years now... The practice is to Baptize and then give the Seal of the Holy Spirit... Christians have been doing it since Christ showed it to them by His Baptism in Jordan...

I mean, what is the POINT of changing that understanding? What purpose does it serve? How does it make a difference, and what IS the difference and why should it come NOW? And there are NO good answers to these questions... We are born from water and Spirit, Baptism and Chrismation, as Jesus is talking about with St. Nikodemos here...

I mean, if someone wants to PROVE their UNDERSTANDING, let them prove it in their own flesh in the overcoming of their own sins... Then healing the sick...


Arsenios

[biribiri]

D. Colossians 2:12 - having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.
1. All who have undergone this baptism have at the same time experienced the “circumcision of Christ” (Colossians 2:11).

Baptism in water results in sins being washed away, no problem there.

The “true circumcision” (i.e., Christians) “worship in the Spirit” (Philippians 3:3).

Also true.

Since the Gentiles (Acts 10) possessed the Holy Spirit and were worshiping in the Spirit (Acts 10:46) means they were the “true circumcision”/Christians that Colossians 2:11 speaks of which is based upon their baptism with the Holy Spirit (Acts 11:16).

Being numbered among the true circumcision is an outcome of baptism in water. Those who are of the true circumcision worship in the Spirit. That others also might worship in the Spirit is not precluded - and indeed, the fact that those who received the Holy Spirit here had not been baptised can be regarded as evidence that the Holy Spirit does not invariably restrict his action to those who are of the body of Christ.

2. NIDNTT:When later in Caesarea the first pagans received the Holy Spirit and became members of the church, they also shared in the grace of worshipping and praising God "in other tongues", as again later the disciples of John the Baptist who became believers in Ephesus (Acts 10:46; 19:6) (3:1080, Word, Haarbeck).

The people referred to in Acts 19:6 were not disciples of John. They were disciples of Christ through the teaching of the apostle Apollos of Alexandria, who was not completely schooled in all the matters pertaining to the gospel. - Act 18:25 This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things of the Lord, though he knew only the baptism of John.

3. NIDNTT: The already established link between Pentecost, covenant renewal and the giving of the law probably prompted the first believers to interpret their experience of Spirit as the fulfillment of the promise of a new covenant, as the law written in their hearts (Deut. 30:6; Jer. 31:31-4; Ezek. 36:26 f.; 37:14; cf. Acts 2:38 f.; 3:25; 1 Cor. 11:25; Heb. 10:15 f., 29). But the implications of this insight for continuing faith and conduct were not recognized and elaborated until Paul (Rom. 2:28 f.; 7:6; 2 Cor. 3; Gal. 3:1-4:7; Phil. 3:3; Col. 2:11; 1 Thess. 4:8) (2:786, Pentecost, J.D.G. Dunn).

At this time, I don't see any reason to question this (self acknowledged) opinion.

[biribiri]

E. Ephesians 4:5 - one Lord, one faith, one baptism

"One" can be readily interpreted as "in common" or "the same" rather than as a count. However, that is not empirically demonstrable.

1. In this same book Ephesians 1:13 tells of the Holy Spirit sealing us into the body of Christ - this is the same thing as being baptized with the Holy Spirit.

Subsequent to belief, we are sealed in Christ. No reference is made to the body of Christ, which is the church.

Ephesians 2:18 teaches how all Christians (Gentiles included) have access to the Father because of the Holy Spirit.

No "because" is even hinted at in Eph 2:18. It can be said that we have access to the Father through Christ by means of the Holy Spirit, affirmed here and stated in other passages.

This vital theme of Gentile inclusion because of their reception of the Holy Spirit/baptism with the Holy Spirit is again taught in Ephesians 3:6. Time and again the Holy Spirit's reception (the baptism with the Holy Spirit) by the Christian is emphasized.

No such thing is taught in Ephesians 3:6 - though in other passages it is taught. Paring Ephesians 3:5-6 to the relevant phrases, it is stated that "The Holy Spirit has revealed that the Gentiles are heirs in Christ." "joint heirs in the promise" is in all probability the promise of eternal life etc.

2. It has been clearly demonstrated that the baptism with the Holy Spirit is the “one baptism” (Ephesians 4:5) that places a person into the NT Church.

That claim has been clearly refuted to the point confutation. If "one baptism" is indeed a count, which I doubt thoroughly, it is because neither baptism in water alone, nor baptism in the Holy Spirit alone, counts as a completed baptism.

Some insist that there is “only one baptism” (referring to water) that remains but this is refuted by the fact that all Christians have been baptized with the Holy Spirit (Acts 10:45; 11:16 cf. Titus 3:6)

To claim that any of these verses supports the concept that all Christians receive the Holy Spirit is at best drawing a long bow. That teaching is found in other passages.

and because there still remained a “baptism” (Mark 10:35-39) for the Apostle John to undergo (i.e., his death) years after Ephesians was written.

The baptism of fire is not relevant to the topic of salvific baptism - which brings us to the point - there are at least two baptisms, and I consider the baptism of fire to be inescapable though not part of the baptism of salvation as such, which would make it three. The Bible clearly points to Baptism in Water (and thereby into Christ), and to a second baptism, the Baptism in the Holy Spirit: THERE IS NOT A "ONE BAPTISM" by count - there are two (or perhaps) three - a fact which even the cited reference text acknowledges. Interpreting "one" to be the total number of baptisms is highly questionable: the reading consistent with teaching from whole of Bible would show an interpretation of "one" as "the same." or "common". "catholic (applying to all equally) Lord, catholic baptism, catholic faith."

Having seen the quality of Kittel's, I have to assume that the TDNT cited here is the abridged version.

[Rdr. Arsenios]

The baptism of fire is not relevant to the topic of salvific baptism - which brings us to the point - there are at least two baptisms, and I consider the baptism of fire to be inescapable though not part of the baptism of salvation as such, which would make it three. The Bible clearly points to Baptism in Water (and thereby into Christ), and to a second baptism, the Baptism in the Holy Spirit: THERE IS NOT A "ONE BAPTISM" by count - there are two (or perhaps) three - a fact which even the cited reference text acknowledges. Interpreting "one" to be the total number of baptisms is highly questionable: the reading consistent with teaching from whole of Bible would show an interpretation of "one" as "the same." or "common". "catholic (applying to all equally) Lord, catholic baptism, catholic faith."

There is another very relevant text in this connection: Heb 6:6
(For it is impossible,)
If they shall fall away,
to renew them again unto repentance;
seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh,
and put him to an open shame.


The Church understands this passage to be referring to Baptism, because we only get to be Baptized into Christ and His Death upon the Cross for the remission of sins ONCE... It affirms that we enter into repentance in order that we be baptized for the remission, and that this is a one time event...

In this regard, then, has anyone ever suggested a Biblical passage showing that one can be given remission of sins by Baptism in the Holy Spirit? What HAS been shown, as you repeatedly point out without acknowledgement, is that the ONLY case of Baptism in the Holy Spirit with the Cornelius event was NOT complete UNTIL they were THEN Baptized in WATER...

And it has also been shown that this reversal was specifically designed by the Holy Spirit SO THAT Peter and the Jews would Baptize Gentiles without their being first brought under the Mosaic Law of the Jews... And this also has been ignored...

And it should be noted that the Holy Spirit is God, and is ABLE to baptize whomever and whenever and wherever He may decide to do so, but that the Household of Christ is NORMALLY entered through Christ's Baptism in Jordan, in which we participate when we like Him and following Him are baptized in the Waters of Regeneration given by the Apostolic Church which Baptizes, following the Commandment of Christ, following the discipling of the nations...

Arsenios

[foudroyant]

bibiri,
a. A Christian is sealed WHEN they believe and not subsequent to belief as you falsely claim.
1. Danker: (3) to mark with a seal as a means of identification, mark, seal, so that the mark denoting ownership also carries w. it protection of the owner...This forms a basis for understanding the imagery which speaks of those who enter the Christian community as being sealed with or by the Holy Spirit Eph 1:13; cp. 4:30 (A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, sphragizw, page 980).
2. Vine: In the metaphor of the sealing of believers by the gift of the Holy Spirit, upon believing (i.e., at the time of their regeneration, not after a lapse of time in their spiritual life, "having also believed" - not as A.V., "after that ye believed" - ; the aorist participle marks the definiteness and completeness of the act of faith) (Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, Seal, page 1003).

But let me take a wild guess.....Danker and Vine are wrong and you are right. Right? Sorry. Ain't happening.

[biribiri]

a. A Christian is sealed WHEN they believe and not subsequent to belief as you falsely claim.

But let me take a wild guess.....Danker and Vine are wrong and you are right. Right? Sorry. Ain't happening.

討論中に主張を立証しきれなかった人物は争点の議論を放棄し相手を貶し始めた。
Nothing I have stated can in any wise be validly interpreted as being in contradiction of your posted reference to Danker.
As to Vine - perhaps a little attention to detail - specifically "at the time of their REGENERATION" - is in order. "Regeneration" is an alternative term for "Born Again", and that is achieved through the water and the Spirit.

a. A Christian is sealed WHEN they believe and not subsequent to belief as you falsely claim.
1. Danker: (3) to mark with a seal as a means of identification, mark, seal, so that the mark denoting ownership also carries w. it protection of the owner...This forms a basis for understanding the imagery which speaks of those who enter the Christian community as being sealed with or by the Holy Spirit Eph 1:13; cp. 4:30 (A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, sphragizw, page 980).
2. Vine: In the metaphor of the sealing of believers by the gift of the Holy Spirit, upon believing (i.e., at the time of their regeneration, not after a lapse of time in their spiritual life, "having also believed" - not as A.V., "after that ye believed" - ; the aorist participle marks the definiteness and completeness of the act of faith) (Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, Seal, page 1003).

Is it possible to believe without receiving the Holy Spirit?
Is it belief or the reception of the Holy Spirit which results in being sealed?
Ordinarily, and in circumstances where the gospel has been accurately and fully expounded, yes, the Holy Spirit will be received upon belief - the Biblical record however declares at least one instance in which reception of the Holy Spirit had NOT followed immediately upon belief, and NOT upon baptism into Christ. In short, Baptism in the Holy Spirit is not automatic.

[biribiri]

## (Interjecting, but definitely O-T): Some people (= Calvinists) say that John 3.5 does not mean baptism with water & with the Holy Spirit (as in the sacramental understanding common to Orthodox, Catholics, & others); but, that "with water and the Holy Spirit" is a hendiadys for "with the water that is the Holy Spirit".

This is certainly an interesting argument against understanding John 3.5 to teach Baptismal regeneration; and far more persuasive than some against. Thoughts ? (The witness of Tradition is impressive, but not water-tight, and would not deal with the text - it would tell us only what people thought; people who might not be as well-equipped as more recent expositors.)

The section in red I am having a little difficulty with. Seems that second "against" shouldn't be there though.
I believe that 1 Corinthians 6:11(b) coupled with Titus 3:5 goes some way toward exposition, but it falls short of being airtight.

1Cr 6:11... but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
Tts 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

[foudroyant]

The sealing with the Holy Spirit took place with the Gentiles (Acts 10) before they were water baptized.

[biribiri]

The sealing with the Holy Spirit took place with the Gentiles (Acts 10) before they were water baptized.

　Can you establish that the sealing and reception of the Holy Spirit are one and the same thing?

[foudroyant]

1. Vine on 1 John 3:24: The word rendered "gave" is in the aorist tense, pointing to the definite occasion upon which the Holy Spirit was given. He is received by the believer at the moment when he believes on the Lord Jesus Christ. The Spirit is there and the seal of God's work in the heart of the believer, and the earnest, or pledge, of his future inheritance: "in whom (that is, Christ) having also believed, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, which is an earnest of our inheritance" (Eph. 1:13, 14) (The Epistle of John: Light, Love, Light, W.E. Vine, page 69).
Acts 10:47 teaches that the Holy Spirit was received by the Gentiles.
Acts 11:17 and 15:8 teach that the Holy Spirit was given to the Gentiles.

Vine teaches that receiving the Holy Spirit and being given the Holy Spirit is the same thing as being sealed with the Holy Spirit.
----------------
2. Thayer: respecting God, who by the gift of the Holy Spirit indicates who are his, pass., Eph. 1.13; 4.30 (Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, sphragizw, page 609).

Acts 10:45 teaches the Gentiles had received "the gift of the Holy Spirit".
------------------
3. Murray J. Harris: Against taking pneuma as a reference to a spirit or attitude, Fee argues (convincingly in our view) that the coming between "Jesus" and "gospel," the word pneuma is likely to be related to these two terms, as the "Spirit" is in fact, and so intimately; and that the verb lambanw, which Paul elsewhere uses with reference to the receipt of the Holy Spirit (FOOTNOTE #74), ill accords with any other sense of pneuma.
Jesus-Spirit-gospel is an apt summary of Christianity (cf. Windisch 327), and what Paul himself signified by these key terms is unambiguous. His keerugma centered on Jesus Christ crucified and risen, on the gift of the Spirit of God or of Christ as the fulfillment of promise and the pledge of inheritance (FOOTNOTE #76), and on the good news of forgiveness and reconciliation in Christ as the instrument of God's saving power. He knew that these three elements stood or fell together, for "another Jesus" would inevitably mean both a "different Spirit," since the Spirit is the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Rom. 8:9; Phil. 1:19), and a "different gospel," since the gospel is about Jesus Christ (2 Cor. 2:12; 9:13; 10:14) (The New International Greek Testament Commentary: The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, Murray J. Harris, page 743-744).
Footnote #74: Rom. 8:15; 1 Cor. 2:12; Gal. 3:2; cf. John 20:22; Acts 8:15; 10:47; 19:2.
Footnote #76: E.g., Rom. 8:9; 2 Cor. 1:22; 5:5; Eph. 1:13-14.

To receive the Holy Spirit is to be sealed with the Holy Spirit.
-----------------------
4. Peter T. O'Brien: When the Gentiles believed the gospel, they were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise (FOOTNOTE #124). The aorist participle 'believed' is best interpreted in this context as being coincident with the main verb 'you were sealed'. The participle does not here express antecedent action, as though the Gentiles believed and then subsequently were sealed with the Holy Spirit. Rather, the believing and being sealed were two sides of one event. A similar conjunction with the same verb form is found in Acts 19:2, where Paul asks a group of 'disciples' at Ephesus if they received the Holy Spirit when they believed (FOOTNOTE #126). Here in Ephesians he is called 'the Holy Spirit of promise', which might be a Semitism meaning the Holy Spirit promised in the Old Testament Scriptures and poured out by the (PAGE 120->)exalted Jesus at Pentecost (note Acts 2:33, which speaks of, "the promise of [=which is] the Holy Spirit'). When Gentiles received the Spirit the Old Testament promise was fulfilled, and as in Galatians 3:14 so here the Spirit is to be understood as the content of the promise (The Pillar New Testament Commentary: The Letter to the Ephesians, Peter T. O'Brien, page 119, 120).
Although many have claimed that the imagery of sealing by the Holy Spirit corresponds to the experience of baptism, there is no direct reference to baptism in Ephesians 1:13; 4:30 (or 2 Cor. 1:22) (page 120).
FOOTNOTE #124: J. Adai, Geist, 68, consistent with his presentation, claims that the sealing with the Holy Spirit is the high point of the whole eulogy, not only of v. 13. He adds that receiving the Holy Spirit is not simply an aspect of, but also the goal of becoming a Christian.
FOOTNOTE #126: Again pisteusantes ('having believed') is to be construed as a coincident aorist participle; cf. J.D.G. Dunn, Baptism in the Holy Spirit (London: SCM, 1970), 158-159; Bruce, 265; and Lincoln, 39.

To receive the Holy Spirit is to be sealed with the Holy Spirit.

[Rdr. Arsenios]

a. A Christian is sealed WHEN they believe and not subsequent to belief...

The problem you have using this 'resource' is that the Scripture cited does not procure the conclusions that either you or Vine have drawn... And Danker flat out contradicts you AND Vine in the citation you cite. Here is the relevant quote from Danker:

1. Danker: (3) to mark with a seal as a means of identification, mark, seal, so that the mark denoting ownership also carries w. it protection of the owner...This forms a basis for understanding the imagery which speaks of those who enter the Christian community...

So you can see that he writes of the seal coming to those who ENTER the Christian community, and not of those who first believe when they hear the Gospel and then SEEK entry... But is instead speaking of those who ENTER - ONLY those are then GIVEN the Holy Spirit... ENTRY into the Body of Christ IS WHEN the Holy Spirit is GIVEN, and then only AFTER the completion of the believer's repentance in Baptism, for it is only into this purity of heart that the Holy Spirit enters within and is sealed there forming the New Creature now IN Christ...


Vine is worse, but here is the text to show that he is not drawing his conclusions from the text:

Eph 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:
Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
Eph 1:6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.
Eph 1:7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
Eph 1:8 Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence;
Eph 1:9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
Eph 1:10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
Eph 1:11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:
Eph 1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
Eph 1:13 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,
Eph 1:14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

2. Vine: In the metaphor of the sealing of believers by the gift of the Holy Spirit,

#1 - The Seal of the Holy Spirit is NOT a metaphor, it is a fact, and is given by the laying on of hands in the Anointing that occurs after Baptism which cleanses one of ALL impurity...

upon believing (i.e., at the time of their regeneration, not after a lapse of time in their spiritual life, "having also believed" - not as A.V., "after that ye believed" - ; the aorist participle marks the definiteness and completeness of the act of faith) (Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, Seal, page 1003).

Eph 1:13 lays out the sequence pretty clearly:
1st - They heard the Gospel preached.
2nd - They trusted [Believed] in Christ...
3rd - They were THEN Sealed in the Holy Spirit

the aorist participle marks the definiteness and completeness of the act of faith) (Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, Seal, page 1003)

LIT – In Whom you also,
having heard the word of truth,
the gospel of your salvation
in Whom also (you) having believed,
(you) were sealed in Him
by the Holy Spirit of the Promise,

BYZ – εν ω και υμεις
ακουσαντες τον λογον της αληθειας
το ευαγγελιον της σωτηριας υμων
εν ω και πιστευσαντες
εσφραγισθητε τω
πνευματι της επαγγελιας τω αγιω

Now the aorist participles here simply indicate historical sequence of events... They do not in any way mark the completeness of faith, and indeed but mark their historical ENTRY into the Faith at Baptism, which the Church DOES for those seeking ENTRY... At this point, when they receive the Holy Spirit from Christ at the HANDS of His Servants IN the Church which IS His Own Body, they are but NEWBORN BABES in the Faith, and have a lifetime to "run the race set before them" so as to prove in their flesh the Faith given once for all to the Apostles...

And I might add, NOWHERE here does it say that the Holy Spirit "came upon them" all by Himself, and THEN they were Baptized... He is speaking of the regular and ordinary Baptism for those entering the Body of Christ that it grow and find increase upon the earth, as Christ commanded...

And that is another point: We are Baptized INTO Christ, yes? And to WHOM does Christ GIVE the Commandment to so BAPTIZE?

A. Joe Blow from Kokomo don't ya know?
B. Freddy Kruger and his pals?
C. Satan and his minions?
D. The Holy Spirit?
E. The Apostles?

Answer: Matthew 28:19


Arsenios

[foudroyant]

George,
Way off on your understanding of Danker.

1. Danker: All those who belong to God possess or receive this spirit and hence have a share in God's life. This spirit also serves to distinguish Christians fr. all unbelievers (A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, pneuma, page 834).

Did the Gentles "receive" the Holy Spirit before they were water baptized? Yes (Acts 10:47).

Here's more:
2. Danker: be strengthened in power (i.e. with ability to function) by the Spirit Eph 3:16. Hence the Spirit given the Christian can be called pneuma dunamews, i.e. in contrast to an unenterprising spirit, pneuma deilias, God offers one that functions aggressively, 2 Ti 1:7; cp. 1 Pt 4:14 (A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, dunamis, page 262).

Were the Gentiles "given" the Holy Spirit before they were water baptized? Yes (Acts 11:17; 15:8).

3. Danker: of those who believe in Christ and are accepted by God as God's children with full rights that we might receive the adoption as sons ("that" to "sons" written in Greek) Gal 4:5; cp. Eph 1:5. The Spirit, whom the converts receive, works as pneuma huiothesias Ro 8:15 (opp. pn. douleias = such a spirit as is possessed by a slave, not by the son of a house) (A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, huiothesia, page 1024).

Did the Gentles "receive" the Holy Spirit before they were water baptized? Yes (Acts 10:47).

4. Danker: Since we possess the first fruits of the Spirit, i.e. as much of the Spirit as has been poured out so far and a foretaste of things to come Ro 8:23...birth-certificate also suits the context of Ro 8:23 (A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, aparche, page 98).

Was the Holy Spirit poured out on the Gentiles before they were water baptized? Yes (Acts 10:45).

[biribiri]

[quote=foudroyant;3547431]1. Vine on 1 John 3:24: The word rendered "gave" is in the aorist tense, pointing to the definite occasion upon which the Holy Spirit was given.

He is received by the believer at the moment when he believes on the Lord Jesus Christ.

The Biblical record shows that it can happen in this fashion, denies that it is invariably done in this fashion, and does not show that it is the normal course of action.

The Spirit is there and the seal of God's work in the heart of the believer, and the earnest, or pledge, of his future inheritance: "in whom (that is, Christ) having also believed, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, which is an earnest of our inheritance" (Eph. 1:13, 14) (The Epistle of John: Light, Love, Light, W.E. Vine, page 69).
Acts 10:47 teaches that the Holy Spirit was received by the Gentiles.
Acts 11:17 and 15:8 teach that the Holy Spirit was given to the Gentiles.

Vine teaches that receiving the Holy Spirit and being given the Holy Spirit is the same thing as being sealed with the Holy Spirit.

If Vine so teaches, it is not done in this citation. - in whom having believed, you were sealed - It is evident that "being sealed" is consequent upon belief. The cited text does not address the issue of whether "being sealed" follows belief or is simultaneous with belief, it does not address the issue of whether other conditions must be properly in place before "being sealed" occurs, it does state only that "being sealed" occurs in the presence of belief.

2. Thayer: respecting God, who by the gift of the Holy Spirit indicates who are his, pass., Eph. 1.13; 4.30 (Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, sphragizw, page 609).

Acts 10:45 teaches the Gentiles had received "the gift of the Holy Spirit".

Acts 10:45 states that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the gentiles. Other references show that this event proved the gentiles were accepted by God - nothing links to sealing. Ephesians 1:13 Consequent upon belief, you were sealed with the promised* Holy Spirit. Ephesians 4:30 declares that the current condition of the person is "sealed by the Holy Spirit". It makes no reference to when the sealing occurred. (*provisionally accepting the explanation of the correct interpretation of "the Holy Spirit of Promise" - I see no reason to doubt that explanation.) So far, support for receiving and sealing being the same thing, or even being conducted simultaneously, is not to be found.