"Going"
THE DEAVER-SIMONS DEBATE (PART 4)
Acts 8
A few important issues remain that were discussed in this debate. In speech #12, Wesley Simons put up a True o understunderstand or answer. The reader should answer it first and then read Mac Deaver's reply.
___ 11. Any individual believing and being baptized, as per Mark 16:16, today, as were the Samaritans in Acts 8:12, will be born again.
False. This is false because the Samaritans in Acts 8:12 were not born again. They were born again when their water only baptism was combined in their experience with Holy Spirit baptism (see John 3:3-5).
Truly, this is a head-scratching moment. First, Mac has been saying that water and the Spirit are two different elements of one baptism, but here he clearly affirms two baptisms—one in water only and one in the Holy Spirit, which occurred on separate days. After the Samaritans were baptized in water (v. 12), the apostles in Jerusalem eventually heard about it and sent Peter and John to them (v. 14). The Holy Spirit had not fallen on any of the Samaritans as yet (v. 16) until Peter and John laid their hands on them (v. 17). Clearly, Mac has two different baptisms (although the text does not call their receiving the Holy Spirit baptism).
Second, Jesus says, "He who believes and is baptized will be saved…" (Mark 16:16). Do we not all believe that following the Lord's command results in the new birth? But Mac says that notion is false! He states clearly that the Samaritans were not born again when they were baptized; they had to wait for Peter and John to get there and lay hands on them. Mac, by this argument, denies Mark 16:16. In speech #15, he also adds that after being baptized in water, they had not yet entered the kingdom, either (in contradiction to Acts 2:41, 47). They had to be baptized in the Holy Spirit first.
But we are not done with the Samaritans because Mac also denies the truth of what the inspired writer Luke recorded. In his last speech (#15), Mac made some incredible statements. Below are some of them related to the Samaritans. What was on his chart appears first, followed by his comments:
And remember that when the Spirit came on them, it "fell" on them or came from above (Acts 8:15, 16) (S-102-B).
It did not come through the bodies of Peter and John. It came from above.
Peter and John did not hand out or pass out the Holy Spirit in Acts 8:18 (S-72-A).
The passage says: "Now when Simon saw that through the laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Spirit was given…" (S-72-A).
The passage says, "it [sic] was given." It does not say, "the [sic] apostles gave it." The Holy Spirit did not pass through the bodies of Peter and John and then on to the Samaritans (S-72-A).
It does not say that the apostles gave the Holy Spirit to anyone! It came from above (Acts 8:16)!!! (S-72-A)….
The apostles did not give the Holy Spirit. Simon's view was that they did, but if you'll read the context, you'll see that he got it all wrong. We are not under obligation to take Simon's view on what happened on this occasion.
Wesley dealt with this issue in his last speech. Mac blames Simon for getting it wrong, but in reality he must blame Luke. Notice that it is Luke (not Simon) who says: "Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit" (Acts 8:17). Luke does not say that the Holy Spirit at that point came from above and fell on them. Furthermore, it is Luke—not Simon—who wrote verse 18: "Now when Simon saw that through the laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Spirit was given, he offered them money."
Luke does not write, "When Simon erroneously concluded that the Spirit was given by the laying on of the apostles' hands…." That's what Mac thinks happened, but it does not coincide with what Luke wrote. Just as he denied what Jesus said in Mark 16:16, he also denies what the Holy Spirit inspired Luke to write in Acts 8:18. When someone's position leads him to deny the Scriptures, it should be a wakeup call to him—and to those following him.
Furthermore, we might notice 2 Timothy 1:6, in which Paul wrote: "Therefore I remind you to stir up the gift of God which is in you through the laying on of my hands." Was Paul wrong about how Timothy got this gift? Now Mac can rave all he wants about how the Holy Spirit did not come from Paul's body and that he was not passing out the Holy Spirit and that apostles did not give the Holy Spirit to anyone, but when he gets all done with being offended and stating his objections, the text will still read the same way.
Timothy, the men of Ephesus (Acts 19), and the Samaritans (Acts 8) all received spiritual gifts after an apostle laid hands on them. In none of these cases is it referred to as Holy Spirit baptism. That is an assumption that Mac makes but cannot prove. If there are no measures of the Spirit, then everyone baptized in the Spirit today ought to have a miraculous gift.
The Last Two Speeches
Mac waited until his last speech to throw out as much material as he could (66 charts), knowing that no one could possibly answer everything. Nevertheless, Wesley acquitted himself very well, answering many more of Mac's arguments than Mac ever did his.
One point that came up a few times was the preposition in 1 Corinthians 12:13. Mac insists that for by one spirit should be "in." He called attention to the fact that the Greek word is en, and it is properly translated "in." What Mac neglected to mention is that prepositions often have more than one meaning and that the text usually determines the best translation. Mac prefers it to read: "For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body…." And that is the way the American Standard translates it; so does the English Standard. But the King James, the New King James, the New American Standard, the NIV, and the Revised Standard Version all have "by." Mac is vastly outnumbered by translations using "by." The preposition is used more than 2,700 times in the New Testament and is often translated "by" or "with." Mac has no valid argument on the word en.
The "Righteous" Gentiles Again
So, why didn't Jesus include the phrase, for the forgiveness of sins, in Mark 16:16? Go ahead, take a guess. Most of us would probably say that it is unnecessary, since Peter explained it more fully on Pentecost. But, no, says Mac. He affirms in Chart S-146-C:
Jesus purposefully omitted the expression "for the remission of sins" (cf. Acts 2:38 – when Peter was preaching to sinners) so that the baptism would include all righteous Jews and Gentiles in the first century (who certainly required water for kingdom entry but who did not require water for the remission of sins). This rendering of the commission showed that all men, whether sinners or non-sinners, had to believe and be baptized in order to be either [emph. GWS] saved from their sins or [emph. GWS] saved from a divine arrangement (Judaism or Gentile-ism) which was no longer going to be operative.
Really? Is that what the reader has thought all of his life about Mark 16:16? That one should be baptized to be saved either from sin or else from an operative system no longer valid? Does the word preposterous come to mind? Jesus said that, in order to be saved, one must believe and be baptized. There is no or in the verse. How often have we said the following?
There are two conditions necessary for salvation that Jesus gave in this verse: 1) believing; and 2) being baptized. Jesus is not negating repentance since He mentioned its necessity elsewhere (Luke 13:3). But nowhere is the implication that baptism would not be for salvation—and just kingdom entry. Talk about eisegesis. Mac could have invented it.
Mac thinks that Gentiles like Cornelius were righteous and therefore did not need to be baptized in order to have their sins forgiven. Those who know the Scriptures know better. Paul taught on Mars' Hill that all men everywhere needed to repent (Acts 17:30-31). Mac never dealt with those verses. Also, however, Mac is inconsistent. Wesley gave him the following question:
___ 9. True – False. Every responsible person, who has committed one sin, is either saved or lost; there is no middle ground.
Mac answered (correctly) True. But how can that be? Was Cornelius a man who had committed at least one sin? Yes! Then he needed to be baptized for forgiveness (salvation), which Mac denied. Mac ends up debating himself on this point.
One of Wesley's final charts reiterated what he had presented earlier. It is titled:
Mac Must Prove, But Cannot Prove:
That born of Spirit means Holy Spirit baptism
That the alien sinner can receive Holy Spirit baptism for kingdom entry
That the child of God can receive Holy Spirit baptism for kingdom entry
That there are two baptisms in God's plan of salvation
Not one of these is true.
Jesus and the Spirit (John 3:34).
Mac likes to cite this verse often in the debate to prove that God does not give the Spirit by measure. Let us look at both verses 34-35.
"For He whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God does not give the Spirit by measure. The Father loves the Son, and has given all things into His hand."
The King James translators added in italics the words unto him, referring to Jesus, but they are not in the text, and other translations do not include them. However, it should be obvious that the text is talking about Jesus. However, Mac wants everyone to have the Holy Spirit completely and thoroughly and keeps repeating there are no measures of the Holy Spirit. However, the text is speaking of Jesus and the Words of God He speaks.
Wesley called attention to this in speech #12. If Mac has the Holy Spirit in the same measure as Jesus and the apostles, then why does he make mistakes in teaching the Word? The very text on which Mac relies mentions speaking the "words of God." Jesus always taught the truth in His teaching, and so did the apostles. Then why hasn't Mac—if He has the same measure of the Holy Spirit? He has acknowledged that he was wrong in his teaching in his younger years and that he has over time "evolved." He admitted in this very debate that he made an inaccurate statement. He claims the same measure but has not taught the truth as Jesus did.