The Case of Cornelius and the Holy Spirit

There are many who believe beyond doubt that Cornelius was saved at the time the Holy
Spirit came upon him and his household. It is a topic that ought to be discussed. While I
have written once before on this subject more needs to be said as there has been some
objection to what was written.

I know of no person who claims to be a Christian who would deny the fact that the very
first gospel sermon ever preached after Christ's death, burial, and resurrection was in the
city of Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost as recorded in Acts chapter two. Neither do I
know a man who would deny but what the words spoken by Peter were directed by the
Holy Spirit.

The reader ought to note and carefully digest what the Holy Spirit speaking through Peter
said on that occasion in response to those who asked "Men and brethren, what shall we
do?" (Acts 2:37 NKJV) They had heard the sermon Peter preached, believed it, and now
these men who were "cut to the heart" find themselves in need of forgiveness. What is
Peter's reply speaking by the Holy Spirit? It is "Repent and let every one of you be
baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the
gift of the Holy Spirit." (Acts 2:38 NKJV)

Now note, when does the Holy Spirit promise these believers they will receive the gift of
the Holy Spirit? Is it before repentance and baptism for the remission of sins or after?
The answer is evident. This raises a question. Is there one gospel in one location and
another in a different location so that we can never really know what the gospel is? Does
the Holy Spirit preach one message concerning salvation in one location but a different
one elsewhere? Does God show partiality toward some? Are some saved one way and
others in a different way? The Bible says, "there is no partiality with God" (Rom 2:11
NKJV) and Paul says there is but "one faith" (Eph. 4:4) while saying also of one who
preaches another gospel "let him be accursed." (Gal. 1:8).

All of this being the case then how does one account for the fact that in the account of
Cornelius' conversion we have the Holy Spirit arriving before, rather than after, baptism?
Has the Holy Spirit suddenly changed his mind on repentance and baptism being for the
forgiveness of sins as He formerly taught? And, if He has changed His mind this one
time is it possible He may change His mind again? Has He changed His mind on there
even being but one gospel?

The answer is obviously no. What the Holy Spirit taught on the day of Pentecost he also
taught approximately, from what I have read, 10 years later at the household of Cornelius.
Repentance and baptism still retain the same position in God's plan of salvation for man
that they always had from the beginning of the gospel dispensation on the day of
Pentecost in Acts 2.

How then does one account for the Spirit arriving before baptism in the case of
Cornelius? If one reads carefully all of Acts 10 and 11 he will see God's reason. The
gospel was meant to be preached to all men, all races and nationalities. And, yet, quite a
number of years have gone by since Pentecost and where are we at? We are still at the
point where the vast majority of Jewish Christians cannot believe the gospel is for
Gentiles as well as Jews.

Even Peter, an apostle, though inspired so he could teach and preach without possibility
of error, does not fully comprehend the meaning of the message Christ taught in Matt.
28:18-19 - the Great Commission. This was nothing new for prophets often did not know
the full import of the inspired words they spoke. (1 Peter 1:10-12)

In reading Acts 10 one learns by seeing Peter's initial reaction to the vision he had that
Peter was still observing as law the dietary restrictions found under the law of Moses all
the while living under the law of Christ. Then in verse 28 of chapter 10 he says "You
know how unlawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another
nation. But God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean."

Note the word "unlawful" in that verse. Up till the time of this vision Peter was lacking a
full understanding of how the Law of Moses had now been completely done away with.
He was still, up to this time, concerned about dietary commands and keeping a distance
from Gentiles. It took the vision of the sheet let down from heaven and the Spirit
speaking to him directly (Acts 10:19-20) to convince Peter it was God's will to go to the
Gentiles and preach.

Why did the Holy Spirit fall upon Cornelius and his household before baptism for the
remission of sins? Was it because that was the means of salvation or because Cornelius
was already a saved man without repentance and baptism? No. It was because it was
going to take a miracle, not now so much for Peter because he seems to be getting the
idea, but in order for the whole Jewish Christian body to come to an understanding that
the gospel was for all and not just for Gentiles and to get them out preaching and teaching
the Gentiles. In fact, when the Holy Spirit fell upon Cornelius and his household the
Bible says of those Jews who had traveled with Peter that they were "astonished" that this
had happened, that God would grant this to Gentiles. (Acts 10:45)

When Peter went back to Jerusalem, to show how great the prejudice was against the
Gentiles, the Bible says, and it is speaking of Jewish Christians (read the context), that
"those of the circumcision contended with him." (Acts 11:2 NKJV) In fact, Peter had to
rehearse the whole account of what had happened to silence his critics but having done so
they realize for the first time that "God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to
life." (Acts 11:18) The world has now changed in that henceforth the gospel will be
preached to all men everywhere as God intended but it took a miracle to get the job done.
They, the Jewish Christians, would never have been convinced without it. They now
confess, "Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life." (Acts 11:18
NKJV)

Thus we have the real reason the Holy Spirit feel upon Cornelius and his household prior
to baptism. It was not for the forgiveness of sins for the gospel had not changed. Peter
still needed to "command them to be baptized." (Acts 10:48) But, I want to ask a
question just here. Who really commanded them to be baptized? Was it Peter the man or
the Holy Spirit? If the Holy Spirit why?

I know one who argues that Cornelius and his household were already saved having
received the Holy Spirit. Yet, the Holy Spirit commands them to be baptized. Is this
baptism to be for some other reason than what the Holy Spirit first said in Peter's inspired
sermon in Acts 2:38? Is baptism for one reason or purpose at one time and place but then
for another in another time and place?

God granted, in the case of Cornelius and his household, the Spirit prior to baptism
(baptism for the remission of sins which the Spirit taught in Acts 2:38) for a special
reason but the reader must bear in mind that God knows our hearts and what we will do
before we do it. God knew Cornelius would obey the command and be baptized for the
very reason those on the day of Pentecost were - because they believed every word Peter
spoke and part of that word was baptism for the remission of sins just as it was on the day
of Pentecost for the message never changed. What was preached in one place was
preached in every place.

They were the things the angel said Peter would tell them - "tell you words by which you
and all your household will be saved." (Acts 11:14 NKJV) An essential part of that word
that we know Peter spoke was baptism for the text says "he commanded them to be
baptized." (Acts 10:48 NKJV) Without preaching on that topic Cornelius and his
household would have no idea of what, why, or how.

Yes, some say baptism is just a symbol or a picture and is meaningless other than as a
symbol. Tell Peter that. Better yet tell the Holy Spirit He did not know what he was
talking about in Acts 2:38 on the day of Pentecost. If those in the audience on the day of
Pentecost were saved without baptism they did not know it for they are asking what they
must do. Furthermore, Peter did not know it for he told them what to do. That is pretty
much the end of the story.

Yes, the case of Cornelius was unique and an exception to the rule but it is not the only
such case for when God has seen a need he has acted for the specific purpose he had in
mind. Saul was converted and became the apostle Paul not because he heard the gospel
in the normal way and responded. We doubt that would ever have happened left to his
own devices with the attitude he had. But, God acted directly and the Lord appeared to
Saul on the road to Damascus. Why? Because he had a special reason for doing so. The
case of Cornelius is similar.

I close with this. One who has objected to my position has said that 1 John 4:13 means
Cornelius was saved before baptism. I deny that. 1 John 4:13 is the word of God and
truth. But, the case of Cornelius and his household, like the case of Saul in his
conversion, was a special act of God for a specific purpose God had in mind but neither
set aside the laws God himself had given. Cornelius still had to be baptized for the
remission of sins and Saul still had to do the same (Acts 22:16). God is not in a battle
with God's own laws.