Checkbaiter and the New Dispensation

Originally posted by checkbaiter

Checkbaiter,

If I have misread or misinterpreted some of your posts, I am glad to receive correction.

I have been spending time on John 3 for consideration of some points I think you raised which were kind of thoughtful. Maybe I can get to some discussion on Nicodemus, John the Baptist, baptism, resurrection etc in John 3 latter today.

The Apostles got born again on the day of Pentecost.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is no reason for me to think this concerning at least the 12 (Matthias in place of Judas Iscariot).

Rather, the Evangelist John faithfully records the evening of Christ's resurrection in which He told the group "Receive the Holy Spirit" breathing into them in John 20.

This does nothing of harm to Luke's record of the Holy Spirit coming as a mighty rushing wind for the equipping and clothing of the disciples with power to preach. There simply is no conflict.

It is not that I believe something extra. It is that some teachers just don't believe enough. Even in the book of Acts the "filling" of the Holy Spirit is spoken about more than just once.

It should be no problem to Bible students, I think, that the disciples were born again in John 20 and that latter another more dramatic manifestation of the Holy Spirit occurred to them on Pentecost.

EVERYONE who receives Jesus according to Romans 10:9 is born again.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree with this of course.

But before the day of Pentecost to be born again was not yet available.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No. John chapter 20 was deliberately penned by the Apostle John, (Christ's very close disciple) to affirm that the Holy Spirit could be received on the evening of the resurrection day.

I think you need to realize that the Holy Spirit can be spoken of in more than just one function or manifestation. And I think that you do well to consider the deliberateness of the writers inclusion of Christ's discussion of the Holy Spirit in John 14 through 16 [with John's recollection of Jesus breathing into the disciples that all that He spoke in chapters 14 - 16 would be actualized.

Less attractive to me - John is mistaken.
Less attractive to me - John is trying to "correct" the Gospel writer Luke.
Less attractive to me - Luke is telling the truth and John understood less.

More persuasive to me - We just assume that the Holy Spirit could only come on Pentecost.

More persuasive to me - The Spirit first brought new divine life into the inner circle of disciples. And latter after they had some solid dealing with God in prayer and possible confessions, the same Holy Spirit more dramatically came to empower them on Pentecost.

So this is the way I teach. You are welcomed to see it differently if you wish.
But this makes more sense to me.
Luke is more concerned with the power of the Holy Spirit.
John has more of a burden to speak of the new life birth of the Holy Spirit.

I sense you are not reading the commentary I posted or you must be speed reading through it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sometimes I do suspend reading in order to make a comment on something I want to comment on immediately.

I don't mean to purposely annoy you.

I think I may have misunderstood something you wrote about the resurrection.
And I try not to get you confused with divegeester.

I don't want to continue this any longer if your understanding of my post is not there.
It's just a waste of my time.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

That is up to you. Of course I will be seeing if how you wish to be treated, you are also treating me, That is accurately representing what I wrote.

I apologize if there have been some serious misunderstandings of your posts.
They were not deliberate.