When Cornelius’s household was saved, some have concluded that they was saved when the Holy Spirit fell upon them while others believe that they were saved when they were saved by baptism in Jesus’ name, and still some believe that they were saved when they first believed before receiving the Spirit or baptism in water. Across Christendom, the salvation of Cornelius’ household is a vital discussion between the differing groups of believers from being saved by faith only to being saved via baptism in Jesus’ name to being saved by the baptism of Holy Spirit. Which is it? Some say that it doesn’t matter and that each person is saved by a different spiritual experience including these three.
The Apostle Peter was instructed by God to go with the three men sent to him from the God-fearing and devout Centurion Cornelius, who gave alms and whose prayers were heard by God. Even though Cornelius was a good man, he was not yet saved. Peter’s mission was to tell Cornelius to “tell you words by which you and all your household will be saved” (Acts 11:14). This is what Peter did, and according to Acts 10:44, “While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word.”
When the Spirit fell upon Cornelius’ household, Acts 11:15-16 says that this was the baptism of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit falling on them as a part of the giving of “the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 10:45). In Acts 2:38, the gift of the Holy Spirit was promised after repentance, baptism in Jesus’ name, and the forgiveness of sins. There is a clear disconnect between salvation and receiving the Spirit with His miraculous power in Acts 2:38. Acts 2:38 and other such passages like Titus 3:5-6 show that salvation was not by receiving “the Gift of the Holy Spirit”, but that the Gift followed salvation. This is not to say that the revelation from the Spirit through the Gift is not essential to salvation. The Gift was “poured out” (Acts 10:45) by which these Gentiles spoke in other languages (Acts 10:46). This is in Acts 2 when Peter spoke on how Joel 2 was fulfilled in that the Spirit was “poured out” on them. This is just as Peter revealed to other Jewish believers, “And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them, as upon us at the beginning” (Acts 11:15). Apparently, the miraculous portion of the gift of the Holy Spirit was only directly given to the Apostles in the beginning, and then only unto Cornelius’ family and friends for a specific and unique purpose.
What was the purpose of God giving the miraculous gift to Cornelius’ household before they were saved? This purpose for receiving the Spirit is as Peter said, “In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality. But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him” (Acts 10:34-35). Again the purpose is presented by Peter also in Acts 11:17-18, when he said,
“If therefore God gave them the same gift as He gave us when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could withstand God? When they heard these things they became silent; and they glorified God, saying, ‘Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life.‘”
Add also that Peter said in Acts 15:7-9 that,
“And when there had been much dispute, Peter rose up and said to them: ‘Men and brethren, you know that a good while ago God chose among us, that by my mouth the Nations should hear the word of the gospel and believe. So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.'”
This is why God gave the Spirit and His power to the Gentiles to show that God is not partial.
Therefore, Peter was right to conclude, “Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” (Acts 10:47). Why? One must be born of the water and the Spirit (John 3:5, Titus 3:5-6). Yet, it was not the gift of the Holy Spirit that saved them. It was not the miraculous gifts that saved the Christians in Rome, because the Christians there did not have any gift when Paul wrote them (Rom. 1:11), and yet they did have the Holy Spirit and they were saved (Rom. 8:9-11). These Christians had the Spirit within them. They were saved and did not have the miraculous gifts yet. As Christians at Rome were “freed from sin” (Rom. 6:7) and saved by the power of the Gospel (Rom. 1:16), so was Cornelius’ household saved without miraculous signs from the Spirit. Miraculous gifts does not save one’s soul. Jesus said, “I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!” to those who claimed, “Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?” (Matt. 7:21-23).
To make it even clearer that Cornelius was not saved by the baptism of the Spirit and its miraculous gifts. Acts 11:13-14 makes it clear that the it is by the words of Peter that they were to be saved. Then Acts 15:9 clarifies that Cornelius’ friends and family were saved “by faith“. Their faith was not from the miraculous out pouring of the Spirit, because they believed before receiving the Spirit (Acts 15:7-8). For it is the Truth, the word of God, that sanctifies (John 17:17). The Scriptures teach that one is born of again by the Word, the Truth (1 Peter 1:23).
When were Cornelius’ household saved? Salvation for Cornelius was according to the Word of God spoken by Peter, who said, “To him all the prophets bear witness of the forgiveness of sins to be received through His name for everyone who believes in Him” (Acts 10:43, Verbal Translation). The forgiveness of sins was received through the name of Christ by those who believed. In Acts 10:47-48, there is mention of the salvation in Jesus’ name when Peter said, “‘Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?’ And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.” Here, baptism in Jesus’ name is commanded, which meant baptism in water just as Acts 2:38 says, “Then Peter said to them, ‘Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.'” Here was the forgiveness of sins by baptism in Jesus’ name. In Acts 2 and Acts 10, salvation and forgiveness is through Jesus’ name, but the receiving of the miraculous power of Spirit came at different times.
Looking further into Acts, this is true that baptism in Jesus’ name is apparent to be the moment of salvation apart from spiritual gifts. In Acts 8, Philip preached to those in Samaria. Philip “preached the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, both men and women were baptized” (Acts 8:12). Evidently, preaching “the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ” included baptism. Which baptism? This must be the one baptism of Ephesians 4:4. Even though the Samaritans were baptized, Acts 8:16 says, “For as yet He [the Holy Spirit, v15] had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.” The Holy Spirit falling on believers was not the same as being baptized in Jesus’ name. These were two different things. Regarding Peter and John, Acts 8:17 says, “Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.” It was “through the laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Spirit was given” (Acts 8:18). Clearly, salvation was not by the laying on of the Apostles’ hands either, but by salvation of being immersion in Jesus’ name. This is the same that is seen of the 12 men in Acts 19:1-7. These were baptized in Jesus’ name and then they received the gifts of the Spirit by the laying on of an apostle’s hands. Acts 19:4-5 says,
“Then Paul said, ‘John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on Him who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.’ When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.“
These were baptized again into the baptism in Jesus’ name, and then “And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied” (Acts 19:6). The gifts of the Spirit as the miraculous portion of the Gift of the Holy Spirit are clearly separated from baptism in Jesus’ name. Baptism in Jesus’ name is when one is forgiven, and as Acts 2:41 and 47 show that by baptism in Jesus’ name, these were saved and thus added to the Church.
Seeing God's Breath 
1 John 4:13 teaches that one can know they abide in God and that God abides in them because He has given of His Spirit.
Acts 11:17 and 15:8 teaches that these Gentiles were “given” the Holy Spirit before their water baptism.
Clearly then did they abide “in God” before their water baptism.
If one abides in God that means they are saved.
LikeLike
“The Spirit indwells us after we are sons.
“And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, ‘Abba, Father!’” (Gal. 4:6).
And, we are sons after we are baptized.
“For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ” (Gal. 3:26-27). These two passages are parallel. For “through faith” “in Christ” is just as being “baptized into Christ”.
The baptism of the Spirit is not the same as the indwelling. You know that God’s Spirit can influence people to prophesy against their will. You are very confused and very mistaken.
The Spirit was with Cornelius, and in that since he received the Spirit as Jesus’ disciples did during Jesus’ life (John 7:39). This is as Jesus said in John 14:17, “the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you.”
Romans 8 speaks of the indwelling, which is necessary to be a child and heir of God.”
LikeLike
Consider this friends….God was and is capable of keeping the Bible intact and understandable for all ages to come. Do you really believe that because it was written so long ago that my God who is above all and capable of anything can’t make sure that it is understandable by “regular people”? Your talking about the creator of Heaven and Earth and all things seen and unseen. Just read it for what it says and stop making it more difficult than it has to be. When people argue what it says, they are really saying that “they don’t want to obey it because it’s not understandable”.
Case in point…..The house is on fire…do you need to know what kind of method started the fire in order to decide to get out now? Obey the Gospel and live, or die in your sins!
LikeLike
Cornelius was saved before being baptized. You wish to read your doctrine of water salvation into the text. You now are saying dead men have the Spirit of God, when Peter said it was the same as on them at the beginning, which would mean Peter and the others were lost per your twisted interpretation.
LikeLike
Are you saying that men are saved in different ways or that the baptism in Jesus’ name did not come from Jesus and His Spirit? You’ll have to explain what you mean by dead men.
LikeLike
You conveniently leave out the fact that many books were being read in the first century churches as being Scripture (Shepherd of Hermas, among others). You skipped over the fact that Jude and other New Testament authors actually quote apocryphal books as authoritative and that the author of Hebrews quotes from the Septuagint (which includes the Jewish apocrypha). You ignored the fact that Jesus was either quoting apocrypha or was ignorant of the Scriptures in John 7:38. Finally, if, as you claim, such a list had been decided upon by the Apostles (which is dubious given that the Apostles were sent out from Jerusalem), then why is such a list never inherently given? If it is, how does one come about finding it?
The point of the questioning is not to be answered but to highlight the severe problems that people who accept Sola Scriptura brazenly ignore, despite the warning given that in the Scriptures are “some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction.” The New Testament itself attests to its own ambiguity. As long as the Churches of Christ and all the other denominations insist upon using their own reason on a baseless canon, the Lord’s wish that his Church be one will never be realized.
LikeLike
I don’t know what any “church of Christ” denomination has to do with you not listening to Christ.
If it were for someone indoctrinating man-made teachings as from God, then you would rather prefer to listen to the words of Christ (John 6:63, 12:47-48, 14:23-24, Matt. 24:35), which can only be found in the Bible as you know. If you would read that Christ gave His words to His Apostles and prophets (John 17:8, 1 Cor. 12:13) and read the whole New Testament (in Greek, Latin, or a word-for-word English translation), then you would know that the New Testament “canon” was collected under the oversight of the Apostles and prophets in the 1st century, and that some council did set the canon but affirmed it as the members of the council teach.
https://godsbreath.wordpress.com/2007/05/03/new-testament-collection/
LikeLike
The Church of Christ denomination’s entire foundation is based on conjecture and speculation- trying to read a Bible (the canon of which they have no reason to accept. From the start, the premise is flawed. Where did the canon of the Bible you use come from?) and figure out what God expects. And yet, as the multitude of other denominations, all of which claim to be using the Bible as their only guide, attests- the Bible *isn’t* unequivocal. As long as there will be people believing that they can understand a 1st century anthology written in ancient Greek with their 21st century English translations, there will be confusion.
You’re confusing terminology which is key to any textual study and the Churches of Christ will never accept that they can’t understand what they’re reading. Were it not for someone elucidating the usage of the terminology to you, you would have no idea what Christ was doing when he thrice asked Peter if he loved him.
So, if there’s anyone sowing discord, it is those who treat the Bible as a pill which can be deciphered, especially an English language translation. Puffing yourselves and your reason up instead of allowing the truth of God to be made known. Instead of calling for true Christian unity, members of the Churches of Christ ignorantly claim sole succession to the Church founded by Christ and call for the utter dismantling of the other denominations, whom they oftentimes don’t even consider to be Christians. Such a sad situation to see people who claim to be the “true Christians” not operating on any facet of love.
LikeLike
Being that baptism is for salvation and children do not need to be saved. The Church of Jesus Christ is right to affirm His teaching. Christ’s Church cannot speculate and conjecture about “household” including young children and infants. Children who are adolescent are accountable for their faith.
There is no “age of reason”. There is a time when one is able to believe on his own, confess his faith, repent of his sins, and be immersed into Christ. These must be mature enough that their conscience bears witness and their thoughts accuse or excuse them (Rom. 2:15).
LikeLike
The New Testament gives clear indication that every Jewish and pagan adult must previously come to accept the truth before continuing in it; however, not only does it never preclude the acceptance of children into the Church, but it even implies that children WERE baptized. Why would the New Testament say on several occasions “He and his household were baptized” without qualifying that children were excluded? Moreover, there is not one reference to anything close to an “age of reason” or the fact that parents of the church were waiting for their children to become baptized. Given that this is so crucial for the survival of the Church, one would think that Paul and the apostles would have spent some time on it instead of leaving it to be triangulated later. This is one instance where the Churches of Christ “speak where the Bible is silent.”
LikeLike
Only believers were baptized throughout the Scriptures. Should we speculate otherwise? Just as Jesus said, “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved.” Infants were not baptized. There is not one mention of such that would have contradicted the rest of the Scriptures. They cannot obey the Gospel in dying to their sins nor make this choice since they have none to be accountable (Rom. 6:3-7, Matt. 18:10). Infants cannot confess faith unto salvation either (Rom. 10:9-10), or confess sins if they were saved (1 John 1:9). Should we also assume for your invention that the babes hear spoke in different languages too?
LikeLike
It’s interesting to note how you fail to notice a key word being used, yet you keep throwing it around. His *household.* Households include infants and, at that time, slaves. And somehow you are so adamantly opposed to infant baptism. Hmm.
LikeLike