Dave spoke broadly on this passage, but one small sentence struck me particularly. In Acts 8:14-17 a number of Samaritans had come to faith, but did not receive the Holy Spirit until Peter and John arrived from Jerusalem, placed their hands on them and prayed for them. Dave noted that the New Testament ‘gives no single picture for how people become Christians’, and certainly this is different from Peter’s declaration in Acts 2:38 where the Spirit accompanies repentance and baptism; or from Cornelius’ household (Acts 10:44-48) where the Spirit came before baptism. It is clear that water baptism and the reception of the Spirit are not tied,[1] which certainly is our normative experience in church life, even if it is not our preferred theological idyll.
Why then was the Spirit seemingly withheld in this instance? Some might argue that it promotes a model of confirmation by those with an apostolic ministry.[2] Others argue that the Samaritans repentance was in some way inadequate.[3] However, most convincing is the view that places God outside of the theological constructs that we try to place him in, picturing a God who responds to the needs of his people. There was a long standing schism between Jews and Samaritans. When Samaritans came to faith, the Spirit came on them when their conversion was recognised by the Jewish church, and in this way any ongoing schism was overcome as the Samaritan believers were recognised as equal members of the community of the church.[4] Beautifully, the uniting sign that overcame walls of division was the Spirit of God.
This presents a challenge to us. When we see people coming to faith, particularly from different cultural backgrounds to us, we need to be careful that we do not erect walls of division that place them as second class Christians. Their journey to Jesus might be very, very different to ours, which might not fit our neat theological boxes. We can be sure that God will not allow such walls to stand, and the power to break down such walls comes from the Spirit.
Notes:
[1] I. Howard Marshall, Acts, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Leicester: IVP, 1980), p.157
[2] F.F. Bruce, The Book of the Acts, NICNT (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1988), p.169
[3] Marshall, p.157
[4] John Stott, The Message of Acts, BST (Leicester: IVP, 1990), p.158
Why then was the Spirit seemingly withheld in this instance? Some might argue that it promotes a model of confirmation by those with an apostolic ministry.[2] Others argue that the Samaritans repentance was in some way inadequate.[3] However, most convincing is the view that places God outside of the theological constructs that we try to place him in, picturing a God who responds to the needs of his people. There was a long standing schism between Jews and Samaritans. When Samaritans came to faith, the Spirit came on them when their conversion was recognised by the Jewish church, and in this way any ongoing schism was overcome as the Samaritan believers were recognised as equal members of the community of the church.[4] Beautifully, the uniting sign that overcame walls of division was the Spirit of God.
This presents a challenge to us. When we see people coming to faith, particularly from different cultural backgrounds to us, we need to be careful that we do not erect walls of division that place them as second class Christians. Their journey to Jesus might be very, very different to ours, which might not fit our neat theological boxes. We can be sure that God will not allow such walls to stand, and the power to break down such walls comes from the Spirit.
Notes:
[1] I. Howard Marshall, Acts, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Leicester: IVP, 1980), p.157
[2] F.F. Bruce, The Book of the Acts, NICNT (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1988), p.169
[3] Marshall, p.157
[4] John Stott, The Message of Acts, BST (Leicester: IVP, 1990), p.158
Comments
Post a Comment