Chapter 2. Now, we’re going to have wade through here slow and steady, and try to stay on the track if you can. This is the worst place in the New Testament. Acts chapter 2. And there are probably more people going to Hell in Acts chapter 2 than any other passage in the Bible outside of the Sermon on the Mount.

2:1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.

2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.

3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.

4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?

8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?

9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,

10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,

11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

12 And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this?

13 Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.

All right, Acts chapter 2, verse 1: “And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.” Now, the most important thing to notice about that is the “they” does not refer to the 120 disciples. The “they” is a reference to verse 26 in the last chapter. The “they,” then, is a reference to the 12 Apostles. It’s not a reference to the 120 disciples.

Now, the reason why that’s so important is because there isn’t any Pentecostal in town that can read. And they all think that 120 people spoke in tongues at Pentecost, and that’s nonsense. Look at 2:14: “But Peter, standing up with the eleven.” One:26: “He was numbered with the eleven.” These are apostolic signs, so they are given to apostles. There are no disciples talking in tongues in that chapter.

All right, with the day of Pentecost. Now the word “Pentecost” means “fifty.” And it’s from “pente,” which of course means “five,” the decimal termination “Pentecost,” “fifty.”

Now, our word “fifty” looks like “five,” but you change a little, see, so a “penta” is “five,” and a “pentecost” is “fifty.” Like we say “five,” and then we put F-I-F the next time, instead of “F-I-V.” We’d have “fivety” if we spelled the thing right.

Now, come back to Leviticus 23 and see what Pentecost is. Now, the contemporary Charismatic bunk is that Pentecost is not a denomination, it is an experience. How many of you have ever heard that? Can I see your hands? That’s about as big a lie as anybody ever hatched out of hell. Pentecost is not an experience; Pentecost is a Jewish feast.

Now, Leviticus 23. All right, Leviticus 23, look at verse 15: “And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath,...” the morrow after the sabbath would be Sunday, you see. The sabbath would be Saturday; the morrow after would be Sunday “...from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering; seven sabbaths shall be complete.” That’s 49 days. “Even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall ye number fifty days.” That’s what Pentecost is.

And then verses 17 and 18 and 19 and 20 describe the feast, and it’s called the feast of the firstfruits, verse 20: “...wave them with the bread of the firstfruits for a wave offering.” And it’s a holy convocation and a sabbath.

So the Feast of Firstfruits is called the Feast of Pentecost. Turn to Deuteronomy 16, verse 16. And it is not an experience; it is a Jewish feast. Deuteronomy 16:16. Whoever has appropriated it has not only lied, they’ve stolen. All right, now, look in Deuteronomy 16, verse 16, look at what it’s called here: “Three times in a year shall all thy males appear before the LORD thy God in the place which he shall choose.” One: “In the feast of unleavened bread.” What’s the other name for that? The Passover. All right, then, fifty days later, “...the feast of weeks.” That’s seven weeks. That’s Pentecost. “And...the feast of tabernacles.” So, the Feast of Weeks or Feast of Firstfruits is the Feast of Pentecost, and it’s a Jewish feast.

Now, the way we know that Pentecost is not an experience is because since 33 a.d. there have been 1943 Pentecosts with nothing happening. Now, you tell that to Pentecostals sometimes. Ask him how come last year at Pentecost nothing happened.

He’ll say, “Well it did!”

You say, “Well, what? Did it just happen on Pentecost?”

He’ll probably say, “No.”

You say, “Well, this happened on Pentecost.”

You understand what I’m saying?

All right, in Pentecost of 33 the Holy Spirit came down, and somebody spoke in tongues, right? What happened in Pentecost 34? What happened in 35? What happened in 36? 37? 38? 39? 40?

Well, if Pentecost is an experience, it’s a pretty crummy experience! It happened one time out of 1943 tries!

Which ain’t much!

So Pentecost is not an experience. Pentecost is a Jewish feast, and on one of these Jewish feasts, the Holy Spirit came down. The rest of them, He didn’t fool with.

So, if you’re a Pentecostal and you weren’t there on that Pentecost, you missed it. Because it never happened again once.

All right, now come across a little bit later in the Book of Acts, and notice here’s a Pentecost listed in the Book of Acts, and when this Pentecost is listed in the Book of Acts, nothing takes place. We’ll get Acts chapter 18, and look at verse 21. Acts 18, and 18:21: “But bade them farewell, saying, I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem: but I will return again unto you, if God will. And he sailed from Ephesus.” Here’s a feast coming up here, and it’s Acts chapter 21. Acts chapter 21, and in Acts chapter 21 — where’s that verse that says... 21:26. Yeah, that’s the feast going on there. The feast day. But I wanted a verse there that said that was Pentecost. What is it? There you go, that would be it. Twenty what? All right, there you go. Twenty:16: “He hasted, if it were possible for him, to be at Jerusalem the day of Pentecost.” He’s there!

And look in chapter 21, verse 26. What happens? Nothing happens! Nobody talks in tongues at Pentecost. Just one Pentecost, and they talk in tongues. They never talk in tongues again at Pentecost.

QUESTION: What were the references again?

ANSWER: Acts chapter 21, verse 26, and Acts chapter 20, verse 26.

So he’s getting there to get there to Pentecost, and he gets there at Pentecost, and what happens? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

QUESTION: If the Passover was when Jesus Christ went to Heaven and took the Old Testament saints up, and the Feast of Tabernacles was when the second Rapture of those who go through the Tribulation happens, then the Rapture of the Church must be the Feast of Weeks.

ANSWER: Yes, it is! It must be the date of the Rapture of the Church. Don’t tell anybody I told you that!

By all odds, if the Old Testament saints went up there, first arrow, on that third chart, and the Tribulation saints come up here, second to the end, the only other feast day open is Pentecost. Which indicates Old Testament saints, unleavened bread; Tribulation saints, Feast of Tabernacles; church saints, Pentecost.

Which will be fifty days after Easter.

But don’t tell anybody I told you that!

I mean, you’re not supposed to set dates for the Rapture, you know. Now, I don’t know enough about that for sure, you know, to fix it. But, boy, it’s strong! It’s strong.

All right, Acts chapter 2, verse 1. Why wouldn’t He go up the same day He came down? Acts chapter 2, verse 1: “And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind.” Now, how many of you have heard Pentecostals say, “The initial evidence of the baptism of the Holy Ghost is speaking in other tongues.” Let me see your hands?

All right, the initial evidence is not speaking with tongues. It’s a wind! The first evidence of anybody being filled with the Spirit is a wind. Not tongues.

“And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it —” wind “ — filled all the house where they were...” underline it: doing what? “Sitting.”

Are they praying? There’s nobody praying. Are they kneeling? Nobody’s kneeling. Why does the guy come down to the altar and kneel and pray for the gift? They didn’t pray here, and they didn’t kneel. They were sitting.

And when you keep bringing these Scripture references to people’s minds and the heretics begin to shift their position to try to act like they’re Scriptural — and the last thing they had going in this town, was y’all get into a room and sit, and chairs in a circle. And then y’all hold hands. And then you breathe deeply. And you concentrate on the pit of your stomach, as a good Kung Fu man would, or an Obrith, a witch. And then you concentrate on the pit of the stomach, and then you lean back and close your eyes until you lose control of your nervous system, and then—

“HABLABLABLABLABLABLABLABLABLABLABLA” — sold American! You got the gift!

But there’s never any wind — unless it’s just hot air!

All right, and folks say, “Well, don’t you feel kind of, you know, irreverent, talking about it?” No, no! Not a bit! My conscience doesn’t bother me a bit! With all the damage those people have done to Christians, all the insults they’ve done to the word of God, and blasphemed the Holy Spirit, I have no conscience about it at all! They can go take a flying bite at Mars.

Three: “And there appeared unto them cloven tongues—” underline it: “of fire,” right? No! “...like as of fire.” So this is not the baptism of fire! These tongues are like as of fire.

QUESTION: What’s a cloven tongue?

ANSWER: Split, like a snake’s tongue. Yeah, split, cloven like this. You want to see it? Go by the United Methodist church, and you’ll see that little red flame, sitting up, split down the middle. That’s called a queer!

Yes, yes. Let me tell you something, brother. The United Methodist Church out in San Francisco is the Glide Memorial Methodist Church, and that guy’s a queer, and marries queers in that church, and has stuff going there with dope in the Sunday school rooms! United Methodist.

QUESTION: Why is the “like as” in there?

ANSWER: Oh, he could have said “like fire.” But it won’t match “of.” He put down “as” because if he said “like of fire,” it wouldn’t have made good English. And that fire’s is down in the genitive, and requires “of.” So he said “cloven tongues like as of.”

QUESTION: Is it an overemphasis?

ANSWER: Well, it sure drives it home! If you don’t get the first one, you’d get the second one. Unless you’re a Pentecostal!

QUESTION: That praying, going into the upper room praying, do they get that from Mary?

ANSWER: Yeah, they get that from back from chapter 1, verse 14: “These all continued with one accord in prayer.” Two:1: “They were all with one accord in one place.”

QUESTION: How many days difference would you say there is?

ANSWER: Well, it would have to be fifty. Now, it’s ten days, because Christ was there forty days, chapter 1, verse 3, and then He went up, and He told them to wait, and Pentecost was fifty days after the Resurrection, so it’s ten days. There’s ten days between 1:14 and 2:1.

QUESTION: What were they praying about in Acts 2:1?

ANSWER: What were they praying about? I don’t know. Probably praying for each other, to pay the bills. Food and clothing.

All right, they weren’t praying for the Holy Spirit to come; the promise was already given. He would have come, whether they prayed or not.

QUESTION: What do you do when they take you to Acts chapter 10, where Cornelius is converted, and they speak in tongues after he is converted? And they justify the “initial” sign using Acts 10?

ANSWER: Well them correct them by saying, ‘In the first place, then the “initial”’” — you know what “initial” means, don’t you? The first is Acts 2, not Acts 10.

Answer a fool according to his folly. If they’re going to say “initial,” “initial” means first. The first is Acts 2.

All right, Acts chapter 2, verse 4. I know, you’re right. They’ll run. They’ll run. You can’t pin them. You pin a heretic down, and he’ll run. That Campbellite will go Matthew 28:19,20 — PLUCK! — Mark 16 — PLUCK! — Acts 2 — PLUCK! — Acts 22 — PLUCK! — Romans 6:1-3 — PLUCK! — Galatians 3:26 — PLUCK! — 1 Peter 3:21. You sack ‘em, and he’s back in Matthew chapter 28, verses 19 and 20.

Now, you know they call that in the, you know, in the funny farm? They call that “circular reasoning.” See? And the mind moves in a circle. And it just goes round and round, you know. Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo!

Four: “And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost.” Notice this is not only a baptism but a filling. Now, the reason why you want to mark that is because, a little bit they are filled with the Holy Ghost and don’t talk in tongues.

QUESTION: That ten days between between when the Lord ascends and the Holy Ghost comes upon them, is there any relation between that and Revelation chapter 2, where there are ten days of tribulation?

ANSWER: I don’t know, brother. There probably is, because right here you’re preparing, for all practical purposes, you’re preparing for Daniel’s seventieth week. There may be some connection; I don’t know what it is.

All right, verse 4: “And began to speak —” now, underline it: “with unknown tongues,” right? Right? No! No! That’s where the Pentecostals real it. It’s “other tongues.”

Isn’t it amazing, when you get all screwed up, and you figure it all wrong, how you can’t read fourth-grade English? I mean, you’re like that guy who had to put his glasses on, with the print in the glasses, instead of the book he’s looking at! You ever try to show these people something out of the word of God? And you know, “Well, yeah, yeah, but, but, blee, bleww, blaaap,” those demons going “bleblebleblebleblebleblebleble,” and all, and they can’t even see the print!

Bob Gray talking to a lady one time down in Jacksonville, who kept on talking about losing her salvation. And got on through there, and this and that. And then he gave her a promise on eternal security you just couldn’t miss, something like the last two verses in Romans 8.

And she said, “Oh, I wish he hadn’t said that!”

Now, see what she meant? She wanted the Bible to back up what she believed, and when she finally saw a verse that didn’t back it up, she actually wished God had said you could lose it so she’d be right!

People are weird, man!

“Oh, I wish he hadn’t said that!”

A promise on being eternally secure!

Some folks would rather go to Hell, you know, on Acts 2:38, than go to Heaven on Romans 10.

There was a big sign over in Milton about three years ago, and it said, “When I got saved, I spoke in tongues. What happened to YOU?”

And one of our fellows went over there with a felt pen, and wrote across the bottom of that thing, he crossed out and it read — no, the original sign said, “When I received Jesus Christ, I spoke with tongues. What happened to YOU?”

And he crossed out and wrote, “When I received Jesus Christ, I got saved. What happened to YOU?”

All right, now, “other tongues.” Now, these tongues are all listed. Every one of them is a foreign language. Look at verse 8: “How hear we every man in our own tongue,...?” Verse 11: “...speak in our tongues.” There are no “unknown tongues” in Acts chapter 2. And, there are no “unknown tongues” in Acts 10.

For just a moment, let’s go over to Acts 10 and look at these tongues. And Acts chapter 10, verse 46, look what it says. Acts 10:46: “For they heard them speak with tongues,...” not unknown tongues “...and magnify God.” How did they know they were magnifying God if they didn’t understand the tongue? There are no unknown tongues in Acts 10:46.

All right, back to Acts chapter 2. Acts chapter 2, verse 5: “And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.” Now, there are some verses here you need to mark down and stick them in your craw and don’t ever forget them, because these verses show you the nature of Acts chapter 2. A text without a context is a pretext. And to get the context of Acts 2, we should always ask ourselves about a context, one, who is speaking? Number two, to whom is he speaking?

Now, we know who’s speaking. Peter’s getting ready to speak. To whom is he speaking? All right, verse 5, underline it: “Jews.” All right, come on down, verse 14: “Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem.” Coming on down, verse 22: “Ye men of Israel, hear these words.” Coming on down, verse 36: “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly.”

Now, brethren, what could be plainer than that?

It’s aimed at Jews, Judeans, Jerusalem Jews, and the house of Israel. There isn’t any doubt about it at all. The Bible says, “Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”

Now, the word of truth has three divisions. Take your Bible and turn to 1 Corinthians, chapter 10. The word of truth has three divisions. Everything in that Bible is aimed at somebody in 1 Corinthians 10:32. Everything in that Bible is aimed at one of three classes of people. First Corinthians 10:32: “Give none offence, neither to the Jews,...” first class! “...nor to the Gentiles,...” second class! ...”nor to the church of God.” In the Body of Christ, the Church, there’s neither Jew nor Gentile.

So, everything in the Bible is to a Christian, or to a Jew, or to a Gentile. Everything there.

Now, in Acts chapter 2, would any of you say that Acts chapter 2 is for a Christian? Why, the word Christian doesn’t even occur till where? Acts what? Acts 11. So, you’re not going to say Acts 2 is aimed at a Christian. Now, you might be able to find Christian teaching in there, or something to edify a Christian. When Simon Peter stands up, there are no Christians there! So why in the world would somebody be trying to get a Christian to get a baptism of the Holy Ghost and talking in tongues with Acts when there are no Christians there?

All right, Acts chapter 2, verse 6. Acts chapter 2, verse 6. “Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because...” underline it! “...that every man heard them speak in his own language.” So those tongues are not “unknown tongues”! They’re in their language, and they understood them.

“And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?” Showing you again, they have to be the twelve Apostles. Now, not all 120 of those disciples were from Galilee, but every one of those Apostles was. When Christ picked those Apostles, He was in north Palestine, in Galilee.

Come to Matthew 10. Those Apostles were not chosen from south Palestine; they were from Galilee. All right, Matthew chapter 10. Matthew chapter 10, verse 1: “And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power.” Now, where is He when He does that? All right, look at chapter 9, verse 1; He’s up there in the Sea of Galilee. Nine:1. Chapter, oh, anywhere in there; it’s the Galilean ministry. Chapter 11, verse 1: “...to teach and to preach in their cities.” Verse 23: “Capernaum.” Verse 21: “Chorazin.” “Bethesda.” He’s up in Galilee.

All right, back to Acts chapter 2, verse 7: “And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes.” Now, look at this. “Strangers of Rome.” Implying some Gentiles there. And that’s defined: “Jews and proselytes.” So, in Acts chapter 2 you have Gentiles present! And those Gentiles present are proselytes to Judaism.

And that means, that if, when the Holy Spirit came down there, that He initiated the Body of Christ, if He did, that Body of Christ in Acts 2 had Jew and Gentile in it, because the middle wall of partition was broken down when Christ died on the cross. Which means that if the Church had been raptured in Acts 7, before Paul was saved, even if nobody ever found out that it was one body composed of Jew and Gentile, it still would have been one body composed of Jew and Gentile.

QUESTION: But you said there were no Christians there. Meaning Peter was not preaching to Christians.

ANSWER: Right. Nobody in his audience was a Christian.

All right, verse 11: “Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God. And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this? Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.” Now, strangely enough, that’s one of the greatest passages used by drunkards to prove that “new wine” is fermented, because they say, “Well, they accused them of being full of new wine, being drunk at Pentecost, so it must have been fermented liquor!” But that’s failure to read. “Others mocking.” See that thing right there? They’re making fun of them! They’re saying, “These fellows are drunk on grape juice!” That’s what it is; they’re mocking them.

“These men are full of new wine.”

2:14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:

15 For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.

16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;

17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:

19 And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke:

20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:

21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:

23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:

24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.

25 For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved:

26 Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope:

27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

28 Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance.

29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.

30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.

34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,

35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool.

36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

“But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words: For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.” Now, he didn’t have to say that! He didn’t have to explain that. But he is taking them at their word. They’re saying, “You’re drunk!” And he’s offering, he’s getting there and, “Oh, they couldn’t be drunk! It’s too early!” And starts in, see?

No need for saying that, but they’ll do that all the time. They’ll take the guy at his word to mean what he says.

For example, a fellow comes to Christ one time and he says, “I know thee that thou art an hard and austere man, and reaping where you didn’t sow, and sowing where you didn’t reap. So I hid your thing.”

You know what the Lord says to that fellow? He said, “You knew I was a hard and austere man? Then how come you didn’t do this?” He never denied what the fellow said. He took him at his word.

So Peter takes them at their word, and he says, “OK, if you really think we’re drunk — which you don’t believe for a minute — then I’ll get rid of that, it’s too early in the day to get drunk.” And then start.

“For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.” That’s nine o’clock in the morning. “But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel.”

And there the fur hits the fan!

“This is that.”

QUESTION: What about verse 8, there, “the wonderful works of God,” and then God talking through the language barrier spoken, why couldn’t He do it written?

ANSWER: Yeah, He could. Could.

QUESTION: Now, what happens to these people after they hear this? Do they go back to their own people?

ANSWER: Yes sir. When they go back to their people, they’re preaching that Christ is the Messiah, and that the Jew needs to believe on Him as the Messiah, and the Lord’s going to come back, and you need to repent and get baptized. It’s all over Europe, Asia, and Africa in the next five years.

QUESTION: Now, in 2:15 it says the third hour.

ANSWER: Yes, the third hour, that would be nine o’clock in the morning.

QUESTION: But, from 2:1 to 2:15, it’s still the Day of Pentecost? Correct?

ANSWER: Yeah, when He says “fully come,” obviously the first day begins the night before. So Pentecost begins 6 o’clock the night before. That’s right. That’s right.

I’ll tell you a real one that will mess ‘em up. Now, if you really want to just mess ‘em up good, give them verse 44, and ask them why they don’t split the property down at the church? I mean, there’s nothing like, you know, just messing your Bible up.

Isn’t it wild, man? I mean, here’s a bunch of people saying, “New Testament church.” “New Testament church — Acts 2.” There’s no New Testament church in Acts chapter 2. You don’t know of a church in this town where everybody sells their property and splits it up evenly. Acts 2.

All right, now, let’s get Acts 2:16. Now when he says, “This is that,” all the expositors, except Stam — and this is one place where Stam has a point, and Bullinger; this is one place where they’re right, and they’re right in a few places, and they’re right in this one — when they say, “This is that,” all the expositors except Stam and Bullinger say, “These tongues are the fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy.” “This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel.”

Now, it sounds good, doesn’t it? It sounds like it must be what he’s saying. But he’s not saying that! Now, how do we know that? Let’s go back to Joel 2, and let’s see what Joel said. Any commentary you fellows buy will say “This is that” means the tongues are a fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy.

Now, let’s go to Joel chapter 2, and let’s just see what it was. And we’ll take the quotation Peter quotes. Joel chapter 2, verse 28: “And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit.” Joel chapter 2:28. See it?

Now, if you’re a Pentecostal, you know what you’ll do? You’ll give me verse 23. Joel 2:23: “Be glad then, ye children of Zion, and rejoice in the LORD your God: for he hath given you the former rain moderately, and he will cause to come down for you the rain, the former rain, and the latter rain.” Now, how many of you have heard them say the former rain was Pentecost, and the latter rain was now? Let me see your hands.

All right, now, I want to show you something. And you talk about a screwed up exegesis, man! You couldn’t get this fouled up in a Chinese fire drill! A fellow said, “This looks like a goose in a greyhound race.”

Now, here’s what these nuts are saying. I mean they’re nuts, too! They’re telling you that Acts chapter 2 was the former rain, and then 1901 at the Azusa Street Mission in Los Angeles, with an integrated congregation, and 1920 with Amy Semple McPherson and the Foursquare Gospel Tabernacle out in Los Angeles, and then in 1940 with the Full Gospel Hubbledy-Gubbledy Hostalashandi Businessmen, and then 1970 with Kuhlman and Mrs. George Wallace, I see, from the papers, and all this and that — that this here is the latter rain coming down.

Now, look at your Bible for a minute. Verse 23: “Be glad then, ye children of Zion.” Is that YOU? “And rejoice in the LORD your God: for he hath given you the former rain moderately, and he will cause to come down for you the rain, the former rain, and the latter rain in the...” what month? “First month.” Why, Pentecost isn’t the first month; it’s the second month. And that says both of them will come down in one month! That says the former rain and the latter rain will both come in the first month! Why, that’s got nothing to do with Pentecost. Pentecost is in the second month. The first month for a Jew is March-April, and that’s called “Abib.” And the second month is April-May, and you were just told that Pentecost was fifty days after the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which is in the month Abib. The Passover is here. Well, fifty days later, man, slams you clear up into May-June on the calendar. Even our calendar. When’s Easter in our calendar; what day? April 11? All right, then, thirty days later would be May the 11th, and 20 more than that would be the first of June. See?

Well, the guy is saying “the former and the latter rain” — well, it’s madness, man! He said, “Here you had one bunch of rain, and the next time I’m going to give you more rain in one month than you had in both months.” The former and latter rain are going to come down in the same month, and what will happen? Verse 24: “And the floors shall be full of wheat, and the vats shall overflow with wine and oil.” He’s talking about water on somebody’s land. Twenty-seven: “And ye shall know that I am in the midst of Israel, and that I am the LORD your God, and none else: and my people shall never be ashamed.” What’s that a reference to? That’s a reference to that big rainstorm over there at the end of the Tribulation, beginning in the Millennium. Literal rain on literal ground, a literal restoration of a literal Israel. There is nothing there about the Holy Spirit coming on anybody.

Now, paragraph mark, 28: “And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh.” Did that happen at Pentecost? How many say “Yes”? Let me see your hands. How many say “No”? Why, of course not! When was the Spirit poured out on anybody’s flesh? Why, when you get saved, the Holy Spirit is not poured out on your flesh. Your flesh is so rotten when God saves you, He has to come inside and circumcise your soul from your flesh. The Holy Spirit doesn’t come on flesh. He doesn’t touch anybody’s flesh.

Now, you see how wild that thing is? Somebody got off into a prayer meeting someplace, and got goosepimples, and felt something, you know, and they figured it was “the Holy Spirit coming on my flesh.” Listen, if you’re saved, your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost, and the Holy Ghost is in you and He fills you! Now, I grant you, you might feel something outside, you know. I grant you, you might feel that. I mean, I’ve been in those kind of things.

You ought to have been up here Sunday morning where I am, in front of that singing, man! That gets, you know, that gets shifty after awhile, boy! You begin to lose contact, man! But I’m not declaring “I got the baptism of the Holy Ghost!”

Now, you are liable to see me someday run out that door and run out of the building, you know, one or two times, and come back in — if I can contain myself! Now, I’ve had those experiences, you know, where you feel something. But that’s flesh! That’s the flesh reacting to the emotion, and the emotion comes from the Holy Spirit.

Follow what I’m saying? It’s the Holy Spirit that makes you feel something, and that feeling produces the physical reaction. It isn’t the Holy Spirit, you know, you know, like a fellow said, “Touch me!” you know, “Touch me!” you know, creeping all over him.

QUESTION: Well, when it says He’ll come upon all flesh, is it talking about the Millennium?

ANSWER: Have to be. Have to be. In the Millennium, the Holy Spirit will come on all flesh. It’ll have to be. And the reason He can in the Millennium is because in the Millennium there’s no devil and no demons and no unclean spirits; they are all shut up. That’s the only thing in the world you can do with that verse.

All right, 28: “And it shall come to pass afterward.” After the Tribulation. “I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy.” Did anybody prophesy at Pentecost? Nobody. “Your old men shall dream dreams.” Anybody dream a dream at Pentecost? Nobody. “Your young men shall see visions.” Nobody saw any vision at Pentecost.

QUESTION: In the prophecy of verse 21 of Acts 2...

ANSWER: What does that say?

QUESTION: It says, “And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

ANSWER: Yeah, but that’s Peter preaching. This says here that the old men will dream dreams, and the young men — plural — shall see visions. That’s just Simon Peter preaching in Acts chapter 2, all by himself.

QUESTION: But that’s a prophecy, right?

ANSWER: Yeah, it’s a prophecy, and that’s a prophecy of Joel. He’s quoting what you’re reading. But what you’re reading didn’t come to pass at Pentecost.

Now, you’re right. At Pentecost, he is quoting this passage. But that’s just what I’m driving at, and I’ll land on in a minute. When Peter says, “This is that which was spoken of by Joel,” he’s not saying, “These tongues are the fulfillment of Joel.” He’s saying, “OK, folks, this is what Joel said...quote...” and it had nothing to do with tongues!

You see, the “this,” Peter says, is getting ready to quote Joel. “This is that which Joel said...quote...” here it comes. Not one word about tongues.

Let me ask you, so far in the Book of Joel, have you seen the word “tongues” anywhere? Look at verse 23, 24, and 25. Look at verse 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 and 31. Do you see any “tongues” in there? Well, then, when Peter says “This,” it can’t be a reference to the tongues.

QUESTION: Since it’s not tongues, why does Peter even mention Joel through it all?

ANSWER: Because they’ve got to get ready for the Second Advent of Jesus Christ. And Peter is telling them these signs — and tongues are for a sign to Israel — are a warning to you that the Lord is about to come back, and this is what Joel said about — and — WHACK — in it comes!

It’s like saying, “THIS is what the fellow said” — and then quoting what the fellow said.

QUESTION: In other words, he’s still preaching the Kingdom?

ANSWER: Yes, he is. And the Second Advent. The Kingdom and the Second Advent.

All right, let’s go to Joel 2 and come on down through here, and then we’ll go back to Acts. “And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke.” Was that fulfilled at Pentecost? Was that fulfilled at Pentecost? No.

“The sun shall be turned into darkness,...” did that come to pass at Pentecost? “...and the moon { turn} into blood,...”? No. “...before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come.” Now, watch it: “And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall” not be saved, but “...be delivered.” “For in Mount Calvary shall be deliverance.

NO SIR!

“In Jerusalem.”

Was Christ crucified in Jerusalem? Wasn’t He cast outside the city? Then how can you take Acts chapter 2 and preach that as the plan of salvation? The passage he’s quoting from Joel had nothing to do with Christ dying on the cross at Calvary; it had to do with God saving a remnant in Jerusalem at the Second Advent. And, before the Second Advent, you know what Jerusalem is called? It’s called “Sodom and Egypt” — Revelation chapter 11.

So, that has to be the restoration of Jerusalem at the Advent. “As the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call.” Context? Three:1: “For, behold, in those days,...I shall bring again the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem.” It’s a Second Advent passage.

All right, let’s go back to Acts 2. We’ll get in it a little ways, then I’ll have to stop for tonight. I’ll run overtime here. But in Acts chapter 2, now, look at verse 16. I’m going to try to say this four or five times, so you can get it. “This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;...” And then 17, 18, 19, and 20, and 21, are a quotation of Joel. And where he says “saved” in verse 21, the context of that quotation is “saved from the Antichrist by the Second Advent of Jesus Christ.” Not saved from Hell.

Notice again from the same passage, look at, oh, look at verse 40: “And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying,...” Save yourself from Hell? No sir! “Save yourselves from this untoward generation.” “Save” — see how that’s used? “Save yourself—”

You can’t save yourself!

Not from HELL!

So “saved” in 40 is “save yourself” by absolving yourself of the guilt of the generation that killed Christ, and “save” in 21 is getting saved in the sense of being delivered at the Second Advent.

All right, back to Acts chapter 2:16: “But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;...” quote: “And it shall come to pass in the last days.”

All right, I’ll see if I can make it as plain as I can. You see, when he said, “This is that,” that’s confusing English to some of you. But if you said in American, it would be like if it was a big wildcat strike or something going on, and the superintendent, or straw boss, got up on a frame up someplace above the shop, and said, “OK, OK, now, you’re ready for it, I’m going to give it to you. Now, here’s what the president says...quote...” See? You’d say, “Here is what he says...quote...”

Peter says, “THIS is what Joel says.” Peter says, “THIS is that which Joel says.”

Now, is that clear?

“THIS...” what I got in my hand. I’m getting ready to preach, and I say, “All right, now, Christ coming back, now, THIS is what Joel says about it...quote...”

There’s no reference to the tongues at all!

QUESTION: He thought that this was what was getting ready to happen, though, right?

ANSWER: Yes sir. He’s got every right to believe it’ll happen. The Lord said, “You wouldn’t have gone over the cities of Israel till the Son of man be come.”

QUESTION: And that’s why he quotes it?

ANSWER: Sure! Sure! Everything’s ready for the Second Coming. Haven’t I taught you everything’s ready for the Second Coming all through Matthew, Mark, Luke and John? Sure! “The kingdom of heaven’s at hand. The kingdom of God’s at hand.”

Now, if you want to know where the thing is on the tongues, look at Acts chapter 2 further on down. And in Acts chapter 2 further on down, verse 33 is a reference to the tongues: “Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this,...” THERE’S the reference “...which ye now see and hear.” It had nothing to do with Joel at all. The tongues is in verse 33.

QUESTION: The Kingdom is in verse 30.

ANSWER: Yes. “Sit on the throne.”

QUESTION: There’s another reference, verses 25 and 26, there’s one reference on tongues in 26 where it says, “And my tongue was glad.”

ANSWER: Oh, yeah, but good night, that’s no reference to speaking in tongues! That’s a quotation from the Psalms, where David is talking about he’s going to be happy because he’s going to come up from the dead. They might use that, I mean, you know, grab anything.

QUESTION: Could you repeat that thing about the “former” and “latter rain”?

ANSWER: All right, in Israel the “former rain” comes in March and April. The “latter rain” comes in September and October. There are two rainy seasons in Palestine. The “former rain” and the “latter rain.” The “former rain” is the spring, March and April. The “latter rain” is September and October.

Now, the Lord said, “I’ve sent you the former rain — March and April. Now,” he said, “I’m going to give you twice as much water as you had before.” He said, “The next time the first month comes around, March and April, I’m going to give you the former rain and the latter rain in one month. I’m going to give you the rain of March-April and September-October in one month, and it’s the first month.” And it’s a literal water rain! So it cannot be Pentecost. It’s no reference to Pentecost at all.

Something over here:

QUESTION: So when Peter was quoting Joel, he believed that Christ was coming again right soon?

ANSWER: Yes sir. Yes sir. Yes sir. He believed Tribulation was on the way. Even though it didn’t happen. It could have. Don’t ever forget that! That’s the key to it. It could have!

Yeah, give me just a minute. As a matter of fact, Peter says it another time when he’s talking somewhere, and I’ve got that thing marked in one of my Bibles. Peter has a way of — Yankees talk that way! They say — what is that expression they use all the time, referring to something? When you’re talking about something, they refer to it in the present as a real thing, even though it’s not there? Uhh...yeah, that’s that! Now what is that thing? Yeah, that’s the thing; that’s the thing right there. “This is true.” That’s what they say. Yankees are always saying, “This is true,” you know.

What? What? you know. Now, some of them say, “Well, that’s so,” see? “That’s true.” “That’s so.” Meaning, what the guy said. If the guy says something, the guy says, “Yeah, that’s true.” What he said. But a Yankee will say, “This is true.” You know? Like the guy said something, and it came up in front of you and, you know, this. And they say, “This.” And you look around trying to find out what the thing is the guy said? That’s the use of that thing. It’s saying, “This thing” — like the thing was a real thing — and that’s why those folks think “this” refers to tongues. But Peter’s not referring to a real thing! He’s saying, “This is what Joel said” — CLAP! — in comes the Scripture. There’s no reference to tongues.

QUESTION: Is that akin to what Paul said somewhere, “Beware of that which was spoken of by the prophet...”

ANSWER: Well, that’s a common — what do you call it? — indirect — what do you call it? — indirect statement. But that isn’t quite like saying “This” with it, and then applying it to something else.

I’ve got a cross reference somewhere, but I’ve done lost the thing; it’s in another Bible. And another place somewhere in the Bible where Simon Peter himself used that same expression. Paul says, “Beware lest that come upon you which is spoken.” Well, that isn’t quite like this. Peter is saying, “This is that which Joel said.” Peter is not saying, “This” — the tongues — “is that which Joel prophesied about.” Now, you know that because when you check Joel, there’s no prophecy on it. Have you got it? Have you got that thing? Have you figured that thing out? Why don’t you go and pray about it now, if you haven’t got it figured out?

Exodus — yeah, that sounds like it, right there. Exodus 16:23; yeah, that’s it. There it is, right there! “And he said unto them, This is that which the LORD hath said, Tomorrow...” so forth and so on. Now, look how that compares to 16:22: “And it came to pass, that on the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread, two omers for one man: and all the rulers of the congregation came and told Moses. And he said...This is that...” Well, he didn’t explain to them why they gathered the stuff, or all this and that; he said, “THIS is that which the Lord hath said,” and then he quotes what the Lord said. That’s the passage.

All right, take a break.

Acts chapter 2. We’ve been through this thing four or five times now, and I hope by now you have it, because you’re going to run into it every time you get out in the ministry, and all the time you get out in the ministry. And there won’t be any place you’ll minister that you won’t hear Acts 2 from morning till night. All over this country on radio programs, they’re quoting it. Everybody’s quoting it now twenty-four hours a day.

And the things you want to get out of here are this. The main thing is this: That what Joel prophesied did not take place at Pentecost. That’s the first thing you want to know. And, when Peter says, “This is that,” in verse 16, he is making no reference to tongues. And you can prove it. You can prove it by going back to Joel 2 and quoting him the passage.

That’s the main to learn out of that thing right there, is Peter doesn’t say, “This is the fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy”; he says, “This is that which is spoken by the prophet Joel,” and then quotes the passage — which has nothing to do with Pentecost, per se.

QUESTION: Why did he quote it then?

ANSWER: Because the Second Advent is about to take place in the passage, and the coming of tongues is a sign to a Jew who doesn’t believe to warn him that the Second Coming is almost on the way. And what Joel says will accompany the Second Advent.

All right, now, Acts chapter 2, verse 22: “Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth.” You see the healers’ term? You see the healers keep saying that? “Jesus of Nazareth.” “Jesus of Nazareth.” It’s a famous healers’ term. They very seldom say, “Lord Jesus,” and “Lord Jesus Christ.” They say, “Jesus of Nazareth.”

“A man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs.” Signs are for a Jew. The Jew seeks for a sign.

“Which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain.” Now, the verse is a Calvinistic verse. And the Calvinists love it because it puts the determination before the foreknowledge.

“Being delivered by the determinate counsel...” decided to do it “...and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken.” So the verse is a favorite among Calvinists who try to make predestination precede foreknowledge.

Now, the answer to this thing here is, the Bible is so written to damn almost anybody who wants to fool with it. And turn to Romans chapter 8. And if a fellow is going to pick between the order of foreknowledge and predestination, would any man of a sound mind pick Acts chapter 2 before Romans chapter 8? Turn to Romans chapter 8 and look at verse 29. Notice in Romans chapter 8 and verse 29, the orders are given in a doctrinal discertation on the order of election. Simon Peter is just preaching; and he’s preaching without a New Testament at that.

Now, in Romans chapter 8, verse 29, here’s the order: “For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate.” Foreknowledge precedes predestination. Notice the order: “foreknow,” “predestinate,” “call,” “justify,” “glorify.”

Now, that’s a theological discertation on the “ordero salutus” — what we call the “order of salvation.” And, if a man had to pick between that doctrinal statement in a Book dealing with the doctrine of salvation, and a statement in Acts 2 dealing with a Pentecostal message of a preacher to Israel, which one would he naturally choose? Would he choose Acts 2 or Romans 8?

Romans! Sure! If he had any sense, he’d choose Romans.

That’s why a Calvinist will choose Acts chapter 2; he has a mental problem.

QUESTION: Would you say then that Peter was wrong?

ANSWER: No. Peter is just preaching. He isn’t regarding the order.

QUESTION: But if we talk to a Calvinist, that’s what he’s going to say to us.

ANSWER: That’s right, he’s going to use that as a doctrinal statement.

QUESTION: Yeah, but he’s going to ask us, “Would you say then that Peter was wrong?”

ANSWER: No, then, you wouldn’t say that Peter was wrong. He was saying it was by the determinate counsel and the foreknowledge. The only question is which comes first. And he’ll say, “Peter said that the counsel came first.” And you say, “Paul said the foreknowledge came first. So who are you going to follow? Peter or Paul?” If you’re Catholic, you’ll follow Peter.

Amen, brother! That’s a way around it.

QUESTION: I had some hyper-Calvinist tell me that he thought of the foreknowledge of God as like in the terms of, “And Adam knew his wife Eve.” What are they talking about is going on there?

ANSWER: What he’s trying to say is, that he thinks of foreknowledge in the terms of actual fixing a thing to take place. That is, some take place in history. And you fellows who get into advanced Greek in the third year, you’ll be given little books by Kenneth Wuest, the Greek professor at Moody Bible Institute, and then you’ll study predestination and foreknowledge in the Greek text. And Kenneth Wuest, like all Presbyterians, make the word “foreknowledge” mean “predestination.” Which it doesn’t mean. They’ll make it mean that.

In Calvin’s system, God can only foreknow what He has determined to take place. In Calvin’s system, God fixes it, and then says, “Ahaa! That’s what’s going to take place. See?

And that’s what he’s telling you about Adam and Eve, see, “all know.” He’s saying God couldn’t know about it unless it had been actually there. Therefore, it’s fixed to be there, and God says, “Now I know what’s going on.”

But that isn’t it in the Bible. God looks down there and says, “Well, I know what’s going to happen. And, in view of the fact that I know what’s going to happen, I’m going to fix this to happen over here.” That’s how it works. Predestination is based on foreknowdge.

All right, verse 23: “Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God.” Now, if he’s going to really argue with you about, then make him finish the verse: “ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain.” Now, that’s the Arminian part of the verse. There is God sovereign in the first half, and the next half is free will. You have taken.

What does he call those men? Does he say “wicked”? “Wicked hands?” In plainer words, God’s determinate counsel and foreknowledge doesn’t absolve anybody of wicked deeds, or he wouldn’t have said wicked hands.

That isn’t all. Come over here to Acts chapter 5, and in Acts chapter 5, look at verse — Peter blamed them for hanging Christ. Now look at Acts chapter 7; Stephen calls them murderers. Acts 7:52. Acts 7:52: “They have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers.” Acts 7:52.

So, the sovereignty of God has nothing to do with absolving you of personal guilt. You’re guilty whatever you do, whether it was determined to happen by God or not. Otherwise, you couldn’t be accused of having wicked hands and being a murderer.

Now, a good verse to write down here is Luke 17:1, which I may have given you before. But Luke 17:1 says, “Woe be to the world because of offenses! It must needs be that offenses come, but woe be to the man by whom they come!” Now, that verse says, “Woe be to the world because of the things that are wrong” — sin. Sin has to come. Things that are wrong must take place. BUT ... “woe be to the man by whom it comes.” Somebody has to betray Christ. But it doesn’t have to be you. Somebody has to go to Hell. It doesn’t have to be you. Somebody has to shoot Kennedy. But it doesn’t have to be you. Somebody has to break the commandments. It doesn’t have to be you. See? Offenses must come, BUT woe be to the man by whom they come.

The Bible never absolves a man of free will and individual choice — never! Not even when God has fixed it. Because it could have been somebody else.

All right, 24: “Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death.” That is, all the things that accompany death — the sorrow and loneliness and fear. In this case, torture.

“Loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.” Holden of death. Old English. Death couldn’t hold him. The devil has the power of death. We sing, “Death could not keep its prey. Jesus my Saviour, He tore all the bars away, Jesus my Lord.”

“For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved: Therefore” — quoting David — “did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.” Now, watch him apply this:

“Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of” not himself. He spoke of the resurrection of “Christ, that his” —Christ’s— “soul was not left in hell, neither his” Christ’s— “flesh did see corruption.”

Now, back to verse 27: “Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell.” Christ’s soul. “Neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One.” Capital “H”. Capital “O.” Christ. “...to see corruption.” So, Christ’s body didn’t rot in the grave. His flesh didn’t see corruption, and His soul was not left in Hell. Therefore, if His soul wasn’t left in Hell, His soul certainly went down there. In the margin write down Ephesians chapter 4, verses 8-10, where it said He went down and came back up. And I drew you a picture on it last time.

And write down Matthew chapter 12 verse 40, where Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, and the Son of man three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

His soul was not left in Hell; neither did His flesh see corruption. That shows the soul and the body are separate. The body stays in the grave, and the soul went down.

“Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried,...” which implies he wasn’t one of the bodies that came up on Saturday night when Christ came up. Which you don’t know. You don’t know who saw him and who didn’t; you don’t know if he identified Himself, or didn’t.

“He is both death and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.” Although he didn’t say “body.” He just said “sepulchre.”

QUESTION: I was trying this to somebody the other day about Christ’s soul going down, and he was a Christian, and he couldn’t believe that his soul added to his suffering the pain of burning.

ANSWER: Well, that isn’t necessary. Because, when Christ was on the cross, He suffered that. When He said, “I thirst,” He’s suffering the torments of Hell on the cross. So Christ doesn’t go to Hell to suffer. His suffering is done before He goes.

Turn to Hebrews chapter 9. He goes there to get rid of your sins. Hebrews chapter 9, verse 26. Nine:26. Hebrews 9:26: “For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time...” underline it: “without sin.” “Without sin unto salvation.”

Now, come back to Isaiah 53.

QUESTION: I was just wondering, do they know where David’s sepulchre is now?

ANSWER: I don’t know. Anybody here been over to the Holy Land? One of those tours or anything? I never have. I’m sure if they knew where it was, they’d show it, you know. That’d be one of those sightseeing things.

All right, Isaiah 53. Isaiah 53:10, on the soul. Blood atonement. Isaiah 53:10: “Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin.” The soul is an offering.

Verse 12: “Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many.” Bore them. So, when Christ is dying on the cross, He bears the sins, takes the punishment, the body goes in the grave, the soul bearing those sins goes down into Hell, dumps ‘em off and goes through — His soul was not left in Hell.

QUESTION: The Old Testament lamb was made a sin offering for us. It was made a peace offering and a burnt offering. Was Christ all of those three too?

ANSWER: Yes sir.

QUESTION: Well, then, how was He the burnt offering, when He went — His soul — into Hell?

ANSWER: The burnt offering? Well, He’s suffering the torments of Hell on the cross when He says, He says what a man says in Hell; He says, “I thirst.” He says, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”

QUESTION: So He was like an Old Testament lamb for us?

ANSWER: Yeah, that’s right. Yes sir. That’s it.

All right, Acts chapter 2 verse 30. “Therefore being a prophet,...” David was a prophet; he was also a king and a priest “...and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne.” Whose throne? Whose? { Audience responds, “David.”} Say it again. Loud, man! Every Campbellite and Catholic in this country says it’s God’s throne. Every Church of Christ preacher in this country makes “his throne” God’s throne. And has Christ sitting on the throne now reigning. And it’s not God’s throne; it’s David’s throne.

All right, let’s come back to Luke chapter 1. That’s how the Campbellite gets a spiritual kingdom beginning in Acts chapter 2. And all the Presbyterians believe that, and all the Methodists believe that, and all the Lutherans believe that, and all the Catholics believe that, so you better know what you’re doing on the verse. Luke chapter 1, verse 32: “He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David.”

All right, Acts chapter 2, verse 30. Now, did Christ get David’s throne in Acts 2? No. Well, don’t you see how that, in Acts chapter 2, everything that Peter’s saying has nothing to do with tongues? Nothing about the tongues has to do with anything. The tongues was just to get their attention. It’s a sign to an unbelieving Jew. What He’s preaching about is the Second Coming. Second Coming. Second Coming. Second Coming. Second Coming.

Verse 31: “He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.”

Now, here he goes: “This Jesus” the one spoken of by David — “hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.” They don’t believe it? OK. “Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this,...” the TONGUES! “...which ye now see...” flames, people running around in the streets standing and preaching, “and hear.” There are the tongues.

The tongues are proof that the disciples have seen the One spoken of by David. That’s what they are a proof of.

And they have nothing to do with anything Joel said! Absolutely nothing!

The tongues are a proof that the One that David spoke about is arisen from the dead, and some day will come back and sit down on the throne. Joel is not involved, even indirectly.

QUESTION: Then back over here where it said, “the wonderful works of God,” they were testifying of the Resurrection?

ANSWER: Yes. Probably are.

Let me show you why they probably are, and when I say “probably,” it’s almost for sure. Look at chapter 4, and look at chapter 4:33: “And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all.” Now, that isn’t all. Again, look at chapter 5, and in chapter 5, look at verse 28: “Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man’s blood upon us.” They were preaching about the Resurrection.

Look what happens to Paul when he gets saved and begins to preach. Pick up the Book of Acts, and get Acts chapter 23. Acts chapter 23, verse 6. End of the verse. Twenty-three:6. Twenty-three:6: “Of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.” Look at chapter 24, verse 15. Twenty-four:15: “And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.” Acts chapter 26, verse 8. That’s what the Book of Acts is about. Acts 26:8: “Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead?” Acts 26, verse 23. Acts 26:23: “That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead.”

That’s the theme of that Book, is the resurrection of Christ.

Now, you know, that seems to have tamed us, sitting up here now. We’re in the last end of the Church Age. We can’t imagine the power that accompanied the preaching of the resurrected Christ. I mean, you all preach the resurrection of Christ, don’t you? You preach a living Christ. You preach He died and was buried and rose from the dead, don’t you? And what results do you get? A lot of times? You get a perfect blank. And, you come down toward the end of the age, the Laodicean age, it doesn’t carry what it carried back in those days. In those days, the corpse had just walked out of the graveyard! And, when you get up there and preach the resurrection of that thing, you’re condemning the world in which you live in, because they had Him crucified. You’re condemning the Senate, the politicians, the Roman government, and the nation of Israel — every time you get up and say, “He’s alive!”

And, boy, that thing had power back in those days! Sometimes, we should preach back in there somewhere. How would you like to preach fifty days after the resurrection from the dead? And seen the dead man? Now, man, you talk about preaching with conviction, brother! What if you sat down and ate with a guy and slept with Him and talked with Him for fifty days — and then were called upon to preach that He rose from the dead!

Boy, I’m telling you, man! There’d be no doubt about it.

We get to preaching about it now, but you see, it isn’t as real to us. We get, “Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more” after the flesh. We’re dealing with the risen Saviour and the Holy Spirit in us. Which is great, and actually is supposed to be superior to the other. But, boy, you can’t beat that thing for contact, man! An eyewitness! Boy!

QUESTION: In Acts 2:32 it says that God raised Him from the dead. But the Jehovah Witness will use that to prove that Jesus was only a man, and God left Him at the cross, and God came back to Him at the resurrection of the dead. What do you think?

ANSWER: Well, you can say the resurrection of a man. But Christ is not a Son of man, He’s the Son of God. Other passages say, “Christ died for our sins, and was buried, and the third day he rose.” Nobody raised Him.

He’s right. They’ll do that. They’ll do that.

You know, any more you deal with folks like that, don’t you realize how this Book is written? That Book is written so a fellow can just break his neck on it, and make the biggest mess you ever saw.

Well, you get that one that says, “After three days He’ll come up from the dead,” and then a verse said, “On the third day He rose from the dead.” Get ‘em all messed up.

All right, chapter 2, verse 34: “For David is not ascended into the heavens.” Used by some to prove the Old Testament saints didn’t go up, but it wouldn’t have proved anything, because the word here is “ascended.” Now, “no man hath ascended.” Write down John 3:13. “No man hath ascended.” But there are some people who went up. Elijah was taken up in a whirlwind. Enoch was translated, that he should not see death. And Moses was taken up after he was dead. So the word “ascended” doesn’t necessarily mean just to go up. To “ascend” means to go up under one’s own power. Write down John 3:13, “no man hath ascended.” And write down Isaiah 14, verses 12-14, where the Devil said, “I will ascend and put my throne above the stars of God.” To “ascend” means to go up in your own power. Elijah was taken up; Enoch was caught up; Moses was taken up after death. But none of them ascended! Jesus Christ ascended.

You know what they’re doing now at Houston Space Center? They’re trying to ascend. They’re trying to get up in their own power.

“But he saith himself, The Lord” — God the Father — “said unto my Lord” — God the Son. There’s a good Jehovah Witness passage. Capital L—Capital O—Capital R—Capital D — JEHOVAH — “said unto my Lord” —ADONAI — “Sit thou on my right hand.”

And they start you along in there, and then run back to Zechariah 12:10, where the capital L—capital O—capital R—capital D had holes in His hands!

“The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, Until I make thy foes thy footstool. Therefore...” End of the message: “...let all the house of Israel” — no Gentiles — “know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord” — He’s divine — “and Christ” — He’s the Messiah. He is the divine Messiah. He’s the Son of David.

2:37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?

38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.

“Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart,...” like a pin sticking you “...and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles,... “What must I do to be saved?” Right?

No, that isn’t right! That’s what the Campbellites and the Pentecostals say. Nobody’s asking what to do to get saved.

“Men and brethren, what shall I do?” Is that right? That isn’t right!

It’s, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?”

Now, there are three questions in the Book of Acts, and the answer to two of them is water baptism, and the answer to one of them is not. And if you go to either of the two with water baptism without getting saved, you go to Hell, whether you do ‘em right or not.

Now, here’s the first one. The first one is Acts 2:37: “What shall we do?”

All right, the next one is Acts 16:30. Acts 16:30: “What must I do to be saved?”

The next one is Acts 9, verse 6: “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?”

Now, those are the three questions. The first question is asked by a nation. The answer is, “Repent, and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, for the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.”

The answer to the second one is, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.”

The answer to the third one is, “Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told what thou shalt do.”

Now, in those three verses right there, you have the Jew, and the Church, and the Gentile. Put a dash after Acts 2 — the first one — and write down, “Jew.” Put a dash after the second one and write down, “Gentile.” That’s a Philippian jailer. It’s an unsaved Gentile. After the third one, put a dash and write down, “Church.” Paul had just got saved when he asked that question.

Now, those are the three branches. And the question of an unsaved Gentile is, “What must I do to be saved?” and the answer is not Acts 2:38.

So, if it’s, “What must I do to be saved?” “Repent, and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” — YOU’LL GO TO HELL! That’s the answer to that one.

The nation of Israel that crucified Christ has got to get baptized. Paul, after he gets saved, asks, “What will I do.” He’s to go up into the city and he’ll be told what he’s going to do. When he goes to the city, the fellow baptizes him.

Acts chapter 16, “What must I do to be saved?” The fellow says, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.”

Now, that’s one of the greatest things in the Book of Acts, are those three questions with three different answers. And the man who rightly divides the word of truth has to get the distinction between those three questions and those three answers.

QUESTION: I’d like to ask you a question about this verse right here. Do you put the Body in here? Are the faithful in Acts chapter 2 getting put into the Body?

ANSWER: Yes.

QUESTION: And they’re getting put in by a water baptism?

ANSWER: No. But when they’re getting baptized, they’re getting put in.

QUESTION: I don’t get that. Explain it to me.

ANSWER: Well, these people are receiving the Holy Spirit when they get baptized in water.

QUESTION: Well, then they’re trusting in a water baptism, correct?

ANSWER: Well, one might say in the early part of the Book of Acts, they might be. They’re not later in the Book of Acts. In Acts chapter 10, they get the Holy Spirit before they’re baptized in water.

QUESTION: I realize that. But I’m looking at the water baptism part, because there’s supposed to be one way to get into the Body, right?

ANSWER: Well, now, where’d you get that?

QUESTION: It says over in Ephesians it’s talking about one body.

ANSWER: He didn’t say one way to get into one Body. Where’d you get that?

QUESTION: One Spirit.

ANSWER: Well, it’s the Holy Spirit that put you in. Where’d it tell you that there was only one way to get the Holy Spirit. They got the Holy Spirit by laying on of hands in Acts 8. And no laying on of hands in Acts 2. And no laying on of hands in Acts 10. And laying on of hands in Acts 19. And no water in Acts 10. And water in Acts 2. How could a person say there’s only one way to get the Holy Spirit, when there are obviously six different ways?

QUESTION: Well, there’s one way. Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life.”

ANSWER: Yeah, but that doesn’t say there’s only one way to receive Him. See? That’s where Stam and Bullinger get all their problems. They keep thinking because now we know there’s only one way, by grace through faith, that that’s the only way there ever has been for the Body, because God wouldn’t use a different system. But the Lord uses all kinds of systems. Now, that’s what makes Acts such a difficult Book.

Let me show you what I can do right now, according to this mess you’re reading about now. I’ll teach you six different ways to get saved. All right, here’s the first way. Acts chapter 2, get baptized, but no laying on of hands. Get baptized in water. And no laying on of hands. But you’ve got to believe, and then repent. All right, now I’m ready for Acts chapter 8. In Acts chapter 8, if you want to get saved, you got to believe, and repent, and get baptized, and then have hands laid on you.

Now, I’m ready for Acts chapter 10. You’ve got to believe and repent, but no laying on of hands, and no baptism.

Now, I’m ready for Acts chapter 19. You’ve got to get baptized, and have hands laid on you, and believe, and repent. But the Holy Spirit comes when the hands are laid on, not when you’re baptized!

And now we’ll take Acts 16, where you get saved by believing and repentance — and hands and baptism aren’t mentioned.

Now there are five beautiful ways to get into the Body of Christ. And there aren’t any two of them that are the same.

No, actually that’s just done to bring out in the open something that’s there, or latent, or is going to be there. You don’t really know. You don’t know what the person believes, really. The man might have got saved when he came in the building, and then come forward later; he might get saved listening to the message and come forward later; he might get saved during the message and not come forward; he might come forward and be saved on the way down; he might come forward and be saved after he got there. And there probably have been cases where he got there and then prayed, and didn’t know what he was doing, and then got saved on the way home!

I mean, when you pick the exact point when the Holy Spirit enters a man and regenerates him and gives him a new birth, you cannot do it. Now, by your own experience, you can know where you felt something, or where you did something. Or you can put your hand where “I really believe, I really accepted.” But that can’t pin the thing right now. That new nature is implanted: “Thou knowest not the way of the Spirit.”

I mean, you can only know one thing. You have received Him, or you have not. And if you have, you’re saved, and if you haven’t, you ain’t. That’s all there is.

QUESTION: Those guys who got the baptism of John and he asked them, “Have you received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?” Were those guys saved before they got the Holy Ghost?

ANSWER: They were saved like Peter was saved in Matthew chapter 26. They were saved like Peter, James and John were in Matthew 10. They weren’t born again or in the Body of Christ.

It’s a rough Book! It’s a rough Book!

Can you imagine an uneducated — and I’m not making fun of lack of education — but can you imagine a Holiness preacher who didn’t believe in studying for the ministry, and didn’t study his Bible, and believed in opening his mouth and letting God fill it, getting into that mess and trying to preach it?

Imagine that, man!

Boy, you talk about making a mess of things! They’ll get up like ol’ Swaggart, and, “You got it!” and “You lost it! But I don’t say you could lose it, but...but...but you might, but bless God, oh God is so good, and so wonderful — oh, I just feel the Holy Spirit!”

And then look out!

See what I mean? You know what that is? It’s a maniac, man, trying to get in there and straighten that mess out. You can’t straighten that mess out. That Book of Acts is a transitional Book. It’s a transitional Book, and you’re moving from one period to another. As you move from one period to another, the thing changes right on through.

Now, you get the Pauline epistles and look back, and it’s all clear: one faith — they all received Christ. Amen? One Spirit — they all received the Holy Spirit, right? One baptism — the same Holy Spirit that put you in, and me in, put them in. See? It has nothing to do with the number of baptisms, and all that baloney.

QUESTION: When you mentioned Christ making a soul an offering for sin, and it says “He poured out his soul unto death” in Isaiah 53, and the Jehovah Witness believes that the blood is the soul and the soul is the blood. How do you explain that, when they say, “Well, that was His blood, and that was His soul?”

ANSWER: Well, give them the passage over there that said, “His soul was not left in Hell.” If His soul was His blood poured out on the ground, how did it get down into Hell for three days?

QUESTION: What do you mean by “transitional”?

ANSWER: Well, “transitional” means to move from one thing to another. “Trans” means to go across. “Trans-city” goes across the city; “transatlantic,” across the Atlantic; “translated,” one language to another; “transpose”. “Trans” means to pick it up here and put it down here.

QUESTION: Well, what does it mean “transitional book”?

ANSWER: Well, “transitional” means that when the Book of Acts started, you have only the Old Testament, and nobody knows about salvation by grace through faith in the finished atonement. A little bit further, then the Holy Spirit comes. A little bit further, then a man is saved by believing on Christ. A little bit further, and the blood atonement completes. A little further, then a man receives the Spirit by faith. And when you get to Acts chapter 15, they settle doctrinal matters in the Council in Jerusalem. When you get to Acts 15, it’s fixed, that a man is saved by grace through faith in the finished atonement, and received the Holy Spirit by faith without water baptism.

QUESTION: But it’s being done by faith wherever it happens?

ANSWER: Well, yeah, that’s true, yes.

QUESTION: The disciples were saved in Matthew 10 back there? Had they died, they would have been in Paradise. And when they got the Spirit, they were born into the Body then?

ANSWER: Um-hmm. I don’t know if they would have been in Paradise or not.

QUESTION: I mean, they were just like Old Testament saints, back there before the cross...

ANSWER: Well, I’m not too sure about all that. Because all the Old Testament saints got out.

All right, 38. And here’s the classic verse: “Then Peter said unto them —” who’s “them”? Verse 36: “the house of Israel.” “Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” Now, Baptists try all kinds of ways to get out of it. But there is no way you can get out of it. You’ll have to admit that receiving the Holy Spirit in this passage is conditioned upon water baptism. It says, “Be baptized, and you shall receive.” I mean, there it is! So, we’re going to have to deal with the text as it is.

Now, the question is, Does this mean “be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, because you had your sins forgiven,” or, “in order to get your sins forgiven”? “For the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”

Every major denomination, in their catechism or their doctrinal statement, they teach that Acts 2:38 is the plan of salvation. You’ll find it in John Wesley’s Methodist Handbook. You’ll find it in the 39 or 40 Articles of the Church of English. You’ll find it in Roman Catholic catechisms, and in Lutheran catechisms. Larger catechism, smaller catechism. In the Presbyterian Church, it’s in the Heidelberg Catechism and the Westminster Catechism.

All denominations — except Baptists — teach that a man is born again by Acts 2:38. It’s in their standard preaching.

And, of course, in the Presbyterian, Lutheran, Catholic, and Episcopalian, they make it sprinkling on top of that.

Then, what they’re saying is, baptized for the remission means “be baptized in order to get your sins remitted.” That’s what they’re teaching. And, they’ll run to the Greek word “eis” to prove that it means “unto the remission,” or “in order to.”

Now, if you had a Greek lexicon, you could look it up and get you a good doctrine. I mean, the word “eis” in Greek has 17 different translations.

So, here’s a case where the King James text is far superior to any Greek text. And look there in the verse that says “for remission,” and notice how the King James Bible clears up all the obscurities in all Greek texts.

All right, the first of these — we’ll go back here in the Book of Matthew, and take the first occurrence in the English text. Matthew chapter 3; let’s see if I can get it exactly. Make it Mark chapter 1. It has it in there, but I want it exactly. One:4. Mark 1:4: “John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.” All right, John the Baptist is preaching a baptism for the remission of sins.

Next case: Matthew chapter 26. Matthew chapter 26, the Last Supper. Matthew 26, verse 28: “This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” So, at the Lord’s Supper, we have Him saying His blood is shed “for the remission of sins.”

All right, the next one will be Romans chapter 3. Romans chapter 3. Here’s a case where your King James text solves problems that you couldn’t solve in any Greek text, and gives advanced revelation that no fundamental scholar is even aware of. Romans chapter 3, verse 25. Romans 3:25: “To declare, I say, Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins.” “For the remission of sins.” That are what? That are what? “Past.”

Now, the question comes out, Does this mean “in order to,” or does it mean “because of”?

It can only mean “because of” in every passage wherever it occurs in the word of God!

Now, the way these fellows get messed up is this. Come to the Book of Hebrews. Good preaching can mess up a lot of doctrine. Come to the Book of Hebrews, and notice how many times somebody’s been quoting “without the shedding of blood there is no remission.” Hebrews 9:22. And by quoting, “without the shedding of blood there is no remission,” Hebrews 9:22, by quoting “without the shedding blood there is no remission,” people say, “Well, then, if you have to have blood shed to get your sins forgiven, then you’ve got to be baptized in water to get your sins forgiven.” But that entirely overlooks the fact that Hebrews chapter 9 verse 22 had nothing to do with Christ’s blood. It had to do with the blood of bulls and goats. Look at Hebrews chapter 9:22: “And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.” Verse 21: “blood.” Verse 20: “blood.” Verse 19: “blood.” Verse 18: “blood.” Blood of what? The Old Testament.

The error of these fellows, and the terrible mistake they make — they had thought that there couldn’t be any remission of sins till Christ showed up. And Christ is saying, “I’m shedding my blood so you can get your sins remitted, because ‘without the shedding of blood there’s no remission.’”

See how that thing’s done? That’s putting Hebrews 9:22 in there, and the Lord suffering there, and Christ saying, “I’m shedding my blood so you can get your sins forgiven; without the shedding of blood there’s no remission.”

That’s the very worst type of perversion.

God said back there in the Old Testament, “Without the shedding of blood there’s no remission of sins” — which means God forgave all through there. They were remitted all through the Old Testament.

Psalm 51. David’s down. As he’s praying, does God forgive him? Did God forgive Moses for killing someone? Sure He did. Did God forgive Israel for sinning? Sure He did. Turn to Exodus chapter 34. God forgave sins all through the Old Testament. That’s nonsense about, “Without the shedding of blood there’s no remission.” That has nothing to do with Christ’s blood at all. Exodus chapter 34, verse 5. It had to do with the shedding of blood in the Old Testament. Exodus chapter 34, verse 6: “And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth.” NOW! Exodus 34:7. Exodus 34:7: “Keeping mercy for thousands,...” watch it carefully! “...forgiving...” there’s your remission! “...forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin,...” WATCH IT! “...that will by no means clear the guilty.” Now, you see what God did in the Old Testament? He forgave them, but He couldn’t clear them. You understand that? They were remitted but not cleared. “Forgiving iniquity and transgresson...will by no means clear the guilty.”

Then, when an Old Testament saint died, he had to go to an intermediate state. Because, although he was forgiven, he was not redeemed.

Now, let’s come back to Hebrews 9 and see the difference between redemption and remission. When we get this down, then we’ll know why all the new bibles are Roman Catholic blasphemies, including the best of them. Hebrews chapter 9. Whoever wrote those new bibles was inspired by Satan. If they were all saved, then they’re satanic Christians.

QUESTION: Yeah, but what about Psalm 103 verse 12, where it says, “I’ll cast your sins as far as the east is from the west.” Remember? Was that as far as the Old Testament was concerned, when they shed the blood, or is that something else?

ANSWER: No, it’s a future prophecy.

QUESTION: Jesus Christ?

ANSWER: Fulfilled in Jesus Christ.

QUESTION: What does the word “remission” really mean?

ANSWER: “Forgive.” You can forgive a guy a debt without collecting it.

QUESTION: Why didn’t it say “forgive” instead of “remission”? I don’t understand that.

ANSWER: Well, I don’t know, just two different words.

QUESTION: But the only thing, I see over here in Romans and in Matthew it’s the blood of Christ, and then over here in 26, it says “Romans 3:25,” and it’s saying over here, it says, “remission of sins that are past, through the bears of Christ.” So that’s what I’m getting at. It was the animals’ blood shed back there, but God forgave them, but they were not removed.

ANSWER: Right. Christ shed His blood here, because in the past God had been remitting sins. God had forgiven them. God has to have a basis on which to forgive them. The blood of bulls and of goats is temporary. It has to be finished there.

QUESTION: Was Satan afraid that Christ would remain in Paradise? Did Satan have knowledge of the Resurrection?

ANSWER: I never thought about that. No, I’m sure the Devil must have read the Old Testament, and he must have known about the resurrection of Christ. Of course, he may have figured he could keep him down. Yeah, that’s something I don’t understand about the Devil. I don’t understand how the Devil thinks — if he knows the Scriptures as well as he does.

QUESTION: Well he knew the Old Testament saints were in prison.

ANSWER: Yes. Sure he knew that. He had ‘em captive.

QUESTION: I always thought he did so that Christ would remain there too.

ANSWER: Well, maybe he did. Maybe he did. I never thought about that, but I can’t think like the Devil thinks along those lines. If you follow the Devil and read the Bible, I would take off to Alpha Draconis someplace, and bury myself in a volcanic lava someplace, and wouldn’t stick my head out for 30,000 years. But evidently he can’t do it. I believe the Devil figures he can overthrow the word of God. I guess he does! He keeps trying! So maybe you’re right. Maybe he figured he could keep Christ down, I don’t know.

QUESTION: Job 41 says he’s made without fear. Could he be crazy?

ANSWER: Well, if you don’t fear God, you are crazy!

QUESTION: Well, then, he must be nuts, man. He must be crazy.

ANSWER: Yeah, that’s true. I can’t imagine anybody thinking like that. I can’t imagine that.

Now, we’ve got to wind up here. Hebrews 9, verse 15. Watch every word carefully: “And for this cause he { Christ} is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions” — not remission — for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.” All right, when Christ died on the cross, it’s to redeem the transgressions committed back here. They were forgiven, but they weren’t redeemed. They were remitted, but they weren’t cleared. And when Christ died here, He cleared the guilty and redeemed them. Although God had already forgiven them.

So, when John the Baptist shows up he’s saying, “God has forgiven you for your sins as a nation. Do you believe it?”

“Yes.”

“OK, repent and come down here and get baptized.”

When Christ shows up, sitting there at the table, “For 4,000 years God has been forgiving sins without a proper basis for doing it. I am the proper basis. My blood is shed because God has been forgiven sins.” There goes the blood.

When Paul shows up, he says, “This blood is shed to take care of these sins that are committed in the past,” Romans 3.

And when Peter shows up, he says, “Do you believe Christ is the Messiah?”

“Yes.”

“Well, God has forgiven you.”

How do you know He’s forgiven them? Because Christ said on the cross, He said, “Father, forgive them; they know not what they do.”

So he said, “If God has forgiven you like John said, I’m continuing John’s baptism, and I’m saying if you believe God has forgiven you, come on down here and get baptized, and this time you’ll get the Holy Ghost when you get baptized.”

So, “baptized for the remission of sins” can only mean “be baptized because your sins have been forgiven.”

It couldn’t possibly mean anything else!

And if 150,000 Greek scholars all got their lexicons, it would come to absolutely nothing. The Bible has already determined what it means.

Now, do you that saying in Colossians 1:14, of saying, “Of whom we have redemption, even the forgiveness of sins”? If you say, “In whom we have redemption, even the forgiveness of sins,” you are equating this with this. You’re putting the believer back before Calvary.

So, you’ve got to say, “In whom we have redemption through his blood,” see? The redemption is through his blood, even the” remission of sins.

I mean, that thing there will take care of that thing there, but they’re not the same! And once you take out “through his blood,” you have said that remission and redemption are the same — and they’re not! Remission is through the blood of bulls and goats; redemption is through the blood of Jesus Christ.

Which means that every bible on the market since 1800 is a devil’s bible. And I don’t care if the fellow who recommends it is winning 20,000 souls to Christ a year and supports 500 missionaries; he’s led by the Devil in recommending it!

Amen, amen, and amen!

QUESTION: That’s where that graduate from Bob Jones University, he told us that the new way seemeth right in view of that, and everybody in the Old Testament is saved like us and has eternal security.

ANSWER: That’s right, he’s just as nutty as a fruitcake.

QUESTION: And that there’s no dispensations at all.

ANSWER: If you believe like him, you’re just bananas! And you’re not a student. You’re not a student. You’re not a student. There isn’t one man in the Old Testament who is in Christ. And there isn’t one man in the Old Testament who is born again, and there isn’t one man in the Old Testament who’s spiritually circumcized, and there isn’t one man in the Old Testament who has the image of God.

All right, Acts chapter 2, verse 38. The great place. Thank you. Now, Father, we ask your blessing upon the class, upon the reading of your word, and the teaching of your word. I ask for wisdom and understanding in all that we are about to undertake. And we ask it in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

All right, we’re in Acts chapter 2, verse 38, the famous passage. And by now you should know that, “Be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” means “because you’ve had your sins forgiven.” Now, in that sense a Baptist can use the verse. That is, a Baptist can say, “You’re not to be baptized till you’ve had your sins forgiven.” He can do that. So you can appropriate that verse.

But the trouble comes from the rest of the verse. And when a Baptist tries to appropriate Acts 2:38 and wastes all his time arguing with a Campbellite about “for,” what “for” means, he defeats his own purpose. Because the verse goes on and messes up the Baptist good; it says, “You shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”

Now, there’s no promise in the New Testament that if you’re baptized, you’ll receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. So you’re wasting your time arguing with a Campbellite. A Campbellite is trying to prove “for the remission of sins,” because, once you prove that, you’re still messing yourself up.

The whole thing is, Acts 2:38 simply doesn’t have anything to do with salvation by grace for a Gentile. That’s all there is to it.

Now, when you try to appropriate that verse, you get into further trouble with the next verse: “For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.” Now, once you appropriated that verse for a Christian in this age, a Gentile believer, then you’ve got to say that the gift of the Holy Ghost, the promise — “for the promise” — and in Acts chapter 1, it was the baptism of the Holy Ghost — then you’ve got to say the baptism of the Holy Ghost is for all Christians. So, if you’re a Holiness or a Pentecostal, you walk right into the net. And R.A. Torrey and John R. Rice all teach it that way, and claim that the promise is not for the baptism of the Holy Ghost, but for the anointing of power, “for an enduement of power,” quoting Luke 24, “You shall receive power after the Holy Ghost come upon you.” So they walk into the net too.

In plainer words, if you give one inch of ground on Acts 2:38, then you’ve had it doctrinally, and you’re over the hill. And Acts chapter 2:39 has nothing to do with the Gentile.

Now, the trouble is, it says, “To all that are afar off.” Now, all the people that apply this to a Christian take this verse and run it to Ephesians. And when they run it to Ephesians, they have it dealing with a Gentile who is “afar off.” And when they run it to Ephesians, they give you this thing here. They give you Ephesians chapter 2, verse 17. They’re going to try to prove the baptism of the Holy Spirit is a promise for every Gentile believer, because Ephesians 2:17 says, “And came and preached peace to you which were afar off.” And Acts 2:39 says, “To all that are afar off.”

QUESTION: I’ve heard someone who said that means “afar off” not in the sense of distance but in the sense of time. In other words, when he was quoting Acts 2:39 he was saying “afar off,” he was talking about distance, like in Daniel, and he took that thing to Ephesians and ran with it.

ANSWER: Well, I’m surprised at that. How are you going to do that, because if you make it Ephesians chapter 2, verse 17, then every Christian has to get baptized of the Holy Spirit by water baptism. Which is wild!

All right, now look at Acts 2:39 and notice the wording here.

QUESTION: Could you go back to 2:38 for a minute. When it says “receive the gift of the Holy Ghost,” is that receiving the Holy Ghost, or a special gift?

ANSWER: No, it’s receiving the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost given to receive. But it’s conditioned on water baptism.

All right, now notice in verse 39, the end of the verse, “even as many as the Lord our God.” See that thing? Now, that expression there is specifically the expression used for Israel. “The Lord our God,” “our God,” “our God.”

Now, I know the Christian can say that. When Billy bowed his head, he said, “Our God, our Lord and our God, our Father” — which is OK.

But, where Peter used that, it couldn’t possibly be a reference to a Gentile. No way in the world! When he says, “For the promise is unto you and to” what? To what? “Your children.” Verse 36. “The house of Israel.” Verse 39: “Your children.” “And to all that are afar off.” To all what? “All your children that are afar off.”

Now, come to Daniel 9, and see what Peter is quoting. And Peter is not quoting Ephesians. Why couldn’t he be quoting Ephesians? It wasn’t written. And the man who wrote it wasn’t even saved yet. So, it would be foolishness to think he’s quoting Ephesians.

Daniel 9:7; here he’s quoting Daniel. And, quite naturally, because Daniel is speaking about the restoration of Israel. All right, Daniel chapter 9, verse 7: “O Lord, righteousness belongeth unto thee, but unto us confusion of faces, as at this day; to the men of Judah,...” there’s Pentecost “...and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem,...” there’s Pentecost “...and unto all Israel,...” there’s Pentecost “...that are near, and that are far off, through all the countries whither thou hast driven them.” There’s the passage.

All right, back to Acts chapter 2, and notice how this matches the material in Acts 2. Here are the countries: Acts 2:9, Acts 2:10, Acts 2:11 — there are the countries.

So the context of Acts 2 is getting ready for the Second Coming of Christ, and the context of Daniel 9 is getting ready for the Second Coming of Christ, and the people addressed in Acts 2 are the children of Israel, and the ones Daniel is praying for are the children of Israel.

And all Peter has is an Old Testament.

So the promise is to “you” — Israel — “and to your children” — the Jewish children — “and to all that are afar off” — the scattered Jews in the dispersion — “even as many as the Lord our God shall call.”

“And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save” yourself from hell! Right? No. Nobody’s getting saved from hell there as far as he knows. As far as Simon Peter knows, they are to save themselves “from this untoward generation.” “Untoward” is Old English; it means “twisted” or “crooked.” A perverse or crooked generation.

“Save yourselves from this untoward generation.” Save yourself from the generation that crucified Christ.

QUESTION: Is the generation there that he mentions all Gentiles, or are Jews included in that?

ANSWER: No, he’s saying, “Save yourselves from the generation that crucified Christ.” The Jewish generation.

QUESTIONS: Would the Romans be included in that at all?

ANSWER: Yeah, they would, if you make it the whole generation. But the trouble is, when Christ says, “O generation of vipers,” and “this generation shall not pass away,” the reference is nearly always Jewish.

“Save yourselves from this untoward generation.”

2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

43 And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles.

44 And all that believed were together, and had all things common;

45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.

46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,

47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

“Then they that gladly received his word were baptized.” Now, you can make spiritual application. You can say “a man shouldn’t be baptized until he gladly receives the word.” See? You can make spiritual application. But, boy, the doctrinal application is rough!

“Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine.” Not the apostles’ “creed.” The apostles doctrine — what the apostles taught.

“And fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.” And, notice, the “breaking of bread” is eating together.

Verse 46: “And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart.” Now the Campbellite churches are like the Catholic churches. I call a Campbellite a Southern Catholic. And a Campbellite believes in High Mass every Sunday morning at 11 o’clock. And he gets this from chapter 20, verse 7. And your Campbellite church has the Lord’s Supper every Sunday morning. And the verse is supposedly Acts 20, verse 7: “And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread,...” So they make that “breaking of bread” the Lord’s Supper on the first day of the week.

Now, strangely enough, they forgot all about Acts 2:38. Go back to Acts chapter 2, and look at verse 46. And notice the “breaking of bread” is not just the first day of the week, and it’s not just in the Temple.

Forty-six: “And they, continuing daily” — DAILY! — “with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house.” That’s Christians eating together — in the Temple and in the house. It’s not the Mass, it’s not the Eucharist. It’s not the Lord’s Supper.

All right, 42: “And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles.” Apostolic signs, 2 Corinthians 12:12.

“And all that believed were together, and had all things common.” From this: “communism.” And Karl Marx used this verse to prove communism was Christian. Acts 2:44: “had all things common.” And, hence, “commune,” and “communal,” and “condominium,” and so forth and so on. All get together and come out gray.

“And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple.” Notice they’re still worshipping in the Temple. No church houses or church buildings.

“And breaking bread from house to house,...” no church building “...did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.” And the word “should” is used as it is in John 3:16. In the future sense; “such as were getting saved.” Not, “The Lord added unto the church daily such as should be saved,” but, “The Lord added unto the church such as should be saved.”

QUESTION: That thing about communism; is that what Karl Marx had in mind when he wrote his work?

ANSWER: Yeah.

QUESTION: OK. Is that New Testament church pastored?

ANSWER: Well, that’s a good question, you see. Now, if you want to mess up a Pentecostal or a Church of Christ or a Baptist Brider, get him to Acts 2.

You know, the Bible is so written that every time there’s a verse that a guy gets screwed up on, within five verses of that verse there’s a verse that he’ll cut his throat on, if he gets screwed up on the first one? I mean, the Bible is so written that, every time a heretic picks up a verse to teach something wrong, there’s something within four verses of where he picks that verse that will mess him.

Here’s a good one. Matthew 16: “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Five verses later: “Get thee behind me, Satan!”

See that thing? That Book is the most beautiful worded Book you ever saw in your life.

Comes down there and says, “What then? I will speak with the understanding, and I will speak with the spirit.” Talking about tongues. Right on down there: “Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not.”

Now, the Lord has got that Book so written that if you get messed up on one verse, five verses later something will tear you all to pieces.

Now, every Campbellite church in this town and every Pentecostal church in this town swears by Acts 2:38. Right? Now, that’s the verse. If you’re Charismatic, Acts 2:38. Church of God? Acts 2:38. Pentecostal? Acts 2:38. Church of Christ? Acts 2:38. Assembly of God? Acts 2:38. Nazarene? Acts 2:38.

All right, right within the context of that verse coming down here about five verses later, it says in verses 44 and 45, they all sold their property and split it even. Now, when you talk to a Church of Christ, give him that. And put it on him hard. Don’t talk reasonably with him. Laugh at him! And say, “Awww, you Church of Christ, aww you don’t believe that! Ahahaha! Go on, you’ve got to be kidding! Ahahahah!”

You know. Take them back there. “Ohhooohohooho, you’re not a New Testament church!” “Hohoho! You don’t know what a New Testament church is!” “Ohohoho, go on, don’t bother me.”

And get him upset. “Well, what do you mean, what do you mean?”

Then open it to him and say, “Look, son, you see that? That’s a New Testament church. Now, don’t give me this gaff. Run on and play with your kitties.” See? Make ‘em sweat blood, boy! Make him stumble around.

“We speak where the Scriptures speak; we’re silent where the Scriptures are silent.”

The reason why they’re all communists is because they’re Jews waiting for the Second Advent of Jesus Christ.

QUESTION: I believe that Campbellite church out on Highway 29, I believe they get down on Baptists whereas we get down on them. So if we told them that, then they’ll just say that, “Well, you Baptists don’t do it!”

ANSWER: You say, “Yeah, that’s absolutely right! You’ll no more find our church practice and church doctrines in Acts chapter 2 than you’ll find a mouse inside of a deep freeze.”

QUESTION: OK, so you think that is New Testament doctrine, or...?

ANSWER: No! That’s not New Testament doctrine for a Christian. That’s — now, there’s spiritual application and practice. For example, we ought to believe what the Apostles believe, verse 42. We ought to stay in fellowship, verse 42. We ought to eat together, verse 42. We ought to pray together, verse 42. We ought to share things, verses 44 and 45. We ought to be glad, verse 46. We ought to praise God, verse 47. And the Lord will add to the church, verse 47.

But that ain’t the doctrine! That’s a spiritual application.

QUESTION: But they’re preaching communism nowadays.

ANSWER: Right. That’s an attempt to get back to this.

QUESTION: Communist teaching?

ANSWER: Yes. It’s always wrong to go backwards! Back to Acts 2:38 is back to Hell! Because nobody in Acts 2:38 knows how to be saved.

I’ll tell you what you do for a minute. Look at your Book there awhile in Acts 2, and find me anywhere in Acts 2 where anybody is told how to get saved. Let’s see if you can find the blood atonement anywhere in that chapter. Let’s see if you can find Christ dying for sins. Isn’t the gospel that Christ died for sins? Look at verse 23; anything about Christ dying for sins? Look at verse 31; anything about Christ dying for sins?

QUESTION: Well, there’s a future rain in 21, but that doesn’t contain the gospel.

ANSWER: That’s right! And the word “save” has all kinds of meanings. A woman will be saved in child-bearing. A man can save himself in his ministry if he continues in sound doctrine. You cannot find the blood atonement for sins in Acts 2; therefore, if you get back to Acts chapter 2, you go back to Hell; that’s where you go. You better keep on going to Acts 10 and Acts 15.

Any more questions on it? I want to satisfy you on it. Something else?

QUESTION: Well, it says here, with you talking about it as far as the salvation thing, when you get remission of sin, you’re saved.

ANSWER: Yes. You can read a lot back into it. But that bunch didn’t get remission of sins; they don’t get remission of sins by believing on a crucified Saviour dying for their sins; they have their sins remitted as a nation, because Christ said, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”

QUESTION: But that’s not saving the individual. That’s a nation.

ANSWER: That’s right. You can’t put that on an individual. You know perfectly well what you’re doing.

QUESTION: There’s a couple of things that I don’t understand since we’ve gone over it.

ANSWER: It wouldn’t surprise me a bit.

QUESTION: Sir?

ANSWER: It wouldn’t surprise me a bit. { Laughter.}

QUESTION: Well, I was witnessing to a couple of Church of Christ people up in Tennessee, and I put Acts 2 and 2:38 to them like this. And one of those people right now has left the Church of Christ, and he’s witnessing to his family and everything, and trying to get them to go Baptist and everything.

ANSWER: Good.

QUESTION: And, but when I was talking to him about Acts 2:38, when I quoted Romans 10 to him about the resurrection of Jesus Christ and believing in that to get saved, he came back to Acts 2, and verse 32: “This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.” Then went to 2:38 and told him that when you were going through that 2:38, he was telling them to be baptized in the name of Jesus for the remission of sins to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. And I asked him; I said, “Listen.” I said, “When you pray, who are you told to pray in the name of?” He said, “Jesus.” I said, “All right, now, when you receive the baptism of the Holy Ghost, is that physical, or is it spiritual?” He said, “It’s spiritual.” I said, “All right, now, if you’re praying, you’re receiving a baptism of the Holy Ghost, and you’ve prayed, then that baptism is in the name of Jesus Christ, and that is a spiritual baptism. “In the name of Jesus Christ” — that saves you, and you receive the gift of the Holy Ghost through the baptism of the Holy Ghost from Jesus Christ, Matthew chapter...

ANSWER: Well, that’s true. But what you did was spiritualize Acts 2:38. Which is OK. But, of course, doctrinally, it won’t work.

QUESTION: And the question I was going to ask, and everything, was the thing, you were talking about water baptism, and getting in here and everything. And, man, I have gone over this thing, and have gone over it completely, and I can’t see how in the world you get water in it besides bringing John’s baptism into it. And John’s baptism, John — every time he spoke about it, and comparing it to baptism, he says, “But one comes after me.” “But one comes after me.” It looks to me like he’s putting a time limit on his own baptism, and it starts and ends with him. And I don’t see any Scripture that says Peter will carry on his baptism.

ANSWER: No, but that’s what he’s doing.

QUESTION: Yeah, but where did the Lord tell him to do it?

ANSWER: Oh, evidently in the forty days He was on earth talking to him, explaining the Kingdom of God to him.

QUESTION: Well, by that same token, when, over in Acts 2:40 where it says, “And with many other words did he testify and exhort,” and he mentions the word salvation and this salvation means being saved, because the Lord in Acts 2:47 —

ANSWER: I’ll show you why it couldn’t have. Look at 3:19. Peter hadn’t got it right yet. In 3:19: “Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out,” — NOT when you receive Christ; NOT when you’re born again, but “...when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.” Simon Peter doesn’t know that Calvary’s cross blocks out sins. He thinks that comes with the Second Advent.

QUESTION: Well, when Peter was over in Acts chapter 4, and he was preaching there, he says, “Neither is there salvation in any other, for there is none other name under heaven, given among men, whereby we must be saved.”

ANSWER: Yeah, that’s true.

QUESTION: And that was Peter talking there. The same man.

ANSWER: Yeah, but notice in 4:10: not one mention of dying for sins. Look at 4:10. He’s still talking to the nation of Israel, and talking about the rejected Messiah.

Now, notice, “we must be saved” in 4:12 and come back to Luke for a minute, and let me show you what that means to a Jew. Luke chapter 1. And, no, make it Luke — well, I’ve got a sermon pasted over it so I can’t read it. Somebody read me Luke 1:70 real loud: { somebody reading} “As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began: That we should be saved from our enemies,...” AHHHHH, YES! “...and from the hand of all that hate us.” See that thing right there? For the Jew, that salvation there is not just spiritual; it refers to being saved from Roman dominion, and becoming chief of the nations.

QUESTION: I don’t understand this. With all that suffering, and the Lord shedding His blood and all that, why in the world is He having this take place? If the Jews did receive Him, who’s going to benefit from the blood atonement?

ANSWER: Well, the answer is, they are benefitting from the blood atonement without knowing it. The answer is, when the Holy Spirit comes in their body, He is applying the finished work of Jesus Christ. And there isn’t anybody there that knows it.

He could have told them or not told them. You got this sheet here? You got that? How many of you got that sheet? Look at the top lefthand corner. “Ordinances on meat and drink done away with here.” See it? “But...” look down the line ... nobody knew it till here, chapter 10. Look over at 2, arrow: the Body of Christ is formed here, but nobody knew it till here, go over to chapter 9. Look at chapter 8 where the arrow is. Salvation was by a finished, substitutionary blood atonement — but nobody preached it till here, 8.

Now, that’s what makes the Book of Acts such a tough Book. You see, it’s progressive revelation. You’re talking about John’s baptism, and take a look at this thing here. Daniel. The King’s going to come and set up the Kingdom of Heaven; the nations will be given to the Jews. John the Baptist: “Repent!” The Kingdom of Heaven’s here. God’s going to take away from the Gentiles and give it to the Jews.

BAM! Crucified the Messiah.

“Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”

Up from the dead.

OK, “Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is coming.” God’s going to given the Kingdom to the Jews.

Goes right on in Acts.

What goes on in the early part of Acts is John the Baptist, going right on through, just like there wasn’t any crucifixion. He says, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” “Forgive them.” Here’s your chance: Acts 2.

Here’s your chance: Acts 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 —

BAM!

The thing changes!

What’s your question over here?

QUESTION: Umm, I was going to say something now. There is a group in the United States called “Shiloh.” And does follow Acts 2 and Mark 16:16, but doesn’t preach salvation for Jesus Christ. My brother’s in it, and they prophesy visions, dreams, living together and selling everything you have —

ANSWER: And I suppose drinking deadly things?

QUESTION: No, they teach separation without preaching Christ. Just some weirdos.

ANSWER: And no handling serpents? Just half of Mark 16. { Smiling.}

QUESTION: So in Acts 6, when Stephen was preaching, that was it, when they rejected his preaching —

ANSWER: When they rejected Acts 7, that’s when something in the Book of Acts shifts all around. On this thing here — I don’t see anything there on the main chapters, but I’ll point it out to you as we come.

QUESTION: Is there a place in the Book of Acts where there is no mention of water baptism?

ANSWER: No mention of water baptism? Yeah. Acts chapter 17, there’s a case of some of the converts from Athens, and there’s one other place; I can’t think of it right now.

QUESTION: When Paul gives his testimony before Agrippa, he doesn’t mention baptism.

ANSWER: Nope. Nope, he doesn’t.

The Bible doesn’t make the issue of baptism that Baptists make of it. And it doesn’t make the issue of it that Campbellites make of it, God knows! But, by the same token, it doesn’t ignore it like the dispensationalists do. They ignore it, and you cannot ignore it. I mean, all those people were baptized.

Yes, we’re gettin’ bogged down now. Yes?

QUESTION: You mentioned that the Body started right at the cross, and you have one picture here in Acts 2 after He already went up.

ANSWER: No, I didn’t say it started. I said the Body of Christ was formed. I didn’t “start” in that chart; it says “formed.” Why, sure, a thing can start without being formed. I’m saying in Matthew 26, it’s opened. And in Acts 2, it’s being put together. It’s formed.

Let me ask you something. Is there any amount of time between your conception and your birth? Well, that’s the difference.

QUESTION: I was talking to a Campbellite, and he said that believing includes, that all believing is is doing the commandment of God; it’s not works. Believing is just obeying, and that’s how you can get baptism into believing, because you’re obeying what He said to do.

ANSWER: So he’s trying to do what?

QUESTION: He’s saying that believing — they were right on the radio, and somebody was talking to him about baptism. And they said something about the verses that said “just believe,” and no baptism, and he says that believing — the guy was trying to tell him that baptism was works — and he says that baptism is not works, because believing includes baptism.

ANSWER: { Laughing.} Oh ho ho, oh yeah. Ah ha ha! Yeah, obey means running, and running means falling, and fallings means dropping, and dropping means stewed prunes! I mean, what he means is, it just doesn’t mean what it means! Yeah, I get it. It just means what you want it to mean.

You’re missing 35 points right now. Quickly, two more, and then we have to get back on the text.

QUESTION: Is the church of God and the Body of Christ the same in the Bible?

ANSWER: Yes.

QUESTION: I keep getting publications from the Church of Christ from a guy who used to deliver it for me. And I always got into arguments with him, you know, on, “Can you tell me how a man is saved in this day and age?” And they always referred to Acts 22:16 for salvation.

ANSWER: Repent, and “Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” The way you handle that is say, “You wash away your sins calling upon the name of the Lord.” See? You put it in the active voice. It says, “And now why tarriest thou?” Active. “Arise.” Active. “And be baptized.” PASSIVE! “And wash away thy sins.” Active. “Calling on the name of the Lord.” Active. The only one that doesn’t fit is the baptism.

QUESTION: The Greek takes care of it?

ANSWER: The English takes care of it. “Be baptized” is passive, right? “Arise, call, wash” is active.

All right, let’s go back to Acts chapter 2 now for a minute. Now, because we’ve discussed these things, you see how complicated it is. And the two extremes you get to is, first, the Campbellite coming down to Acts 2 and saying, “We’re a New Testament church, because we go by Acts 2:38; we’re Apostolic; Acts 2:30 to Acts 2:38.” You know he’s crazy because he doesn’t practice verses 42-47. So, he’s a liar.

And tell him so!

And tell him, “Your church is not the church of Acts 2:38; you have no business claiming Acts 2:38, because you’re hypocrites; you don’t practice what you preach. None of you believe in Acts 2:44 or Acts 2:45, and none of you practice, and when you do, come around and talk to me. In the meantime, don’t waste my time. There are enough hypocrites in this world without a hypocrite pretending to be preacher.”

And them that kindly, and if he doesn’t listen to it, then get harsh with him. And then get rid of him!

Now, the other extreme is this. A fellow comes there and says, “OK, Acts 2:38 is not the plan of salvation.” And it’s not. “And New Testament church doctrine is not found in Acts 2.” And it’s not. “Therefore, the Church couldn’t have begun in Acts 2.” That’s the other one. And that’s the position of the Hypers. The Hypers — Stam, Bullinger, and O’Hair — say, “OK, if you can’t teach New Testament doctrine for the Church in Acts chapter 2, it’s because the Church isn’t there! Now, that’s the other one. And, according to that system, you can’t say the Church exists until New Testament church doctrine begins to be written. And the man writes New Testament church doctrine is who? Paul. All right, then they say the Church began with Paul, see?

Now, that’s busting over and breaking your head the other way!

And the answer to that thing is found in that top chart there in that top line, which shows you that the Church can be there; a lot of things can be there — but not revealed! And, if you ever run into a hardshell Hyper-Dispensationalist, ask him when the disciples could eat lobster and pork. Just ask him that. Could they have eaten lobster and pork the day Christ arose from the dead? How many say yes? Let me see your hands. Why, sure! Then ask him why nobody knew about it in Acts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9. Nobody did.

QUESTION: Is that a local church begin started in Acts 2?

ANSWER: You could make it a local church right there, but you’re going to have a little bit of trouble with Dr. Luke, because a little bit later, Luke says “believers were added to the Lord.” Acts chapter what? Five? I have my sermon Bible with me tonight, not my notebook Bible, so I have none of my notes here; I’m going ad-lib without notes. Five what? Five:14. There it is. Now, 5:14 doesn’t say “believers were the more added to the church.” It says, “believers were the more added to the Lord.” And that shows you the Lord’s Body is being built up long before Paul ever gets saved. “Added to the Lord,” not to the church. Compare that to “added to the church” in chapter 2:47, and you could see the church in Acts 2:47 could be the Body of Christ. He uses the terms interchangeably. “Added to the church” and “added to the Lord.”

All right, now let’s continue on here now. Now, practically, practically, you can find Christian practice in embryo. That is, before the revelation of the New Testament salvation before the salvation of Paul, you find New Testament theory being practiced.

For example, look in 42: “And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine.” Nobody before Acts chapter 2:42 continued in the Apostles’ doctrine. They continued in the Old Testament, not the Apostles’ doctrine. The Old Testament.

So there’s a change.

Now, notice something else about it. In verse 46: They continued “daily with one accord in the temple.” Every day. Most Jews didn’t go down there every day. That shows there was a difference in worship. Worship was getting to be a thing where it’s a twenty-four-hour-a-day thing in the life of the believer. “And breaking bread from house to house.” That didn’t go on. Those Old Testament Jews didn’t eat all their meals together, going from house to house with their own bunch. So, that’s a change.

And then it says, “And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.” You don’t find that anywhere in the Old Testament. Nowhere in the Old Testament does it say that the Lord added to Israel or added to the Temple “such as should be saved” — nowhere found in the Old Testament. So there’s a change.

Now, it’s not in the New Testament doctrine completely, but there is a change; there’s a transition. And the Book of Acts is a transitional Book.