Does God Call? Is the Laying on of Hands Necessary?

There is so much misunderstanding of the bible's teachings that you present so clearly. I would be so bold as to suggest that perhaps you might want to rethink one or perhaps two of the notions you have on your belief page.

The newly baptized Christian receives the Holy Spirit through the laying on of hands (Acts 8:12, 8:17) placing him or her into the body of Christ which is the church (Colossians 1:18, 1:24, 2:17).

You site Acts 2.37-39 just before that and I would suggest that this is the rule, and not to put too fine a point on it, the promise. In particular, �for the remission of sins and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit� (italics mine). What is the condition which will result in the fulfillment of the promise? Repentance and baptism. Peter lifts this language, �for the remission of sins� directly from the lips of Jesus as he was explaining the reason for the shedding of his blood but this time he adds something with the conjunction �and� that is the gift of the Holy Spirit. So as it is undisputed that �for� on the lips of Christ indicate a causal relationship between remission of sins and the shedding of his blood, it here indicates a causal relationship between repentance and baptism on the one had and the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit on the other.

If there is truth in my reasoning, then there must be an alternative explanation for the laying on of hands that does not require us to do any violence to the text you site above and does not require us to strain any interpretive principle or reasoning. I suggest that that is easy. Philip who was full of the Holy Spirit but not instructed by Christ himself in the same way Peter had been, simply did not adequately cover this whole area of the roll of repentance with these converts. Repentance was no less important to Jesus then it had been to John and as is clear in Acts 2.38 it was an absolutely necessary part of the transaction.

The text does not tell us everything but we never assume it does. It is perfectly reasonable to assume that Peter in the transaction of laying on of hands also imparted the knowledge of repentance and its requirement. In this way there is no need to modify our understanding of Acts 2.38 or Acts 8.12. Both can be understood quite naturally without one in any way diminishing the authority of the other.

One other exception I would take, that is your use of Romans 11.29 and John 6.65 to suggest that the calling is not universal. That is to say, �not a matter of absolute free choice,� as you put it in your description. To Romans 11.29, �I would answer with the words of Christ, that �if I be lifted up I will draw all men unto me,� (John 12.32 italics mine) so the clear meaning of Romans 11.29 can be understood as a statement of providential fact without any violence to the text or reason. This statement in John 12.32 would also answer John 6.65 but I would add to that John 3: 16 in particular �who-so-ever believes,� could not be modified by John 6.65 without contradiction but the reverse could. So faced with two possible interpretations of these scriptures, one which requires a contradiction and one that does not, the answer is simple. We would adopt the interpretation which can take the plane language as literally as it can be taken without any contradictions.

The fact that we have choice is entirely out of our control, God made that decision on behalf of mankind once for all. Therefore all who answer His call (John 12.32) are doing something that was foreordained, because God was never confused about His will in this regard. But the idea of having a bit of free will is like having a bit of pregnancy, God can do anything, but contradicting himself is not a power, it is a misapprehension of Gods perfection. God could not be self-contradictory any more than he could be sinful, he is perfect. I would say that scripture and reason go hand in hand. God in his providence chose to reveal himself in human language which while not perfect is adequate. We have reason because we are made in the image of God and he has reason (Isa 1.18).

So in the present case I would suggest for your consideration that we are faced with two choices both could be easily defended from the text. We should choose the one that agrees with our understanding of the nature of God and man, that is the calling is in fact an absolute free choice. This alternative does not require is to violate reason which is an attribute of God, and as we know from personal experience is an attribute of each of us too.

--Eric Stroud

In the systematic theology of the early church (the church of the first century) the writer of Hebrews tells us that the elementary teaching about the Christ included instruction about repentance, faith, washings (baptism), laying on of hands, the resurrection, and eternal judgment (Hebrews 6:1-2). The writer distinguished the doctrines of repentance and faith in Jesus Christ from the doctrine of laying on of hands. Acts 19:1-6 shows the necessity of baptism (symbolic of repentance) and belief (faith) in Jesus. This parallels Acts 2:38. 

Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself. (Acts 2:38-39.)

Acts 19:6 provides the additional information that we need to understand Acts 2:38 in context. Notice, "when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking with tongues and prophesying." Compare this with Acts 8:18 which tells us that:

...when Simon saw that the Spirit was bestowed through the laying on of the apostles' hands, he offered them money, saying, "Give this authority to me as well, so that everyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit." (Acts 8:18.)

These examples teach that baptism, following repentance and faith in Jesus Christ, results in forgiveness of sin but the Spirit of God indwells one when the laying on of hands follows. This is the general rule in the New Testament.

So then, just what is the laying on of hands? This physical act is one of ceremonially setting apart an individual for a special blessing or a specific divine purpose. We see this many times in the New Testament. In the examples above people were set apart through the laying on of hands as members of the body of Christ (the Church of God)�true Christians. Jesus also laid his hands on the children as he blessed them (Matthew 19:15, Mark 10:16). He and the apostles at times laid their hands on the sick as they healed them (Matthew 9:18, Mark 6:5, Acts 5:12, 28:8, 9:12, 17). Sometimes the rite simply involved the act of anointing with olive oil (a symbol of God's Holy Spirit). See James 5:14.

In Acts the setting apart of the seven (deacons) for special duties included the rite. We read where "these they brought before the apostles; and after praying, they laid their hands on them" (Acts 6:6). Note the powerful exhortation of the apostle Paul to the young evangelist Timothy, "kindle afresh the gift of God which is in you through the laying on of my hands" (II Timothy 1:6).

You cite John 12:32 to support your contention of a universal calling of "all men" in this present age. In context "all men" does not imply a universal calling. The Expositor's Bible Commentary makes the point that "all men" in context means that "Christ draws men to himself indiscriminately, without regard to nationality, race, or status" (Tenney 1981:131). God the Father, however, ultimately will extend a universal call to salvation to Adam and Eve and all their descendants, but that will not occur until Jesus Christ returns and establishes his 1,000 year rule on earth.

While all are not now called to salvation, God does call for all humanity to repent of sin. God expects obedience from all people. This mankind rejects and will do so even when punished by God with supernatural phenomenon. Note this in Revelation 9:21 where "they did not repent of their murders nor their sorceries nor their immorality nor their thefts."

Notice, I Corinthians 1:24-26 NKJ: "but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. For you see your calling, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called." Notice again, "to those who are called," makes clear that only some are called. All are not called, at this time�during this age of Satan's dominion.  

Today mankind has been spiritually blinded by Satan the devil. Unless God supernaturally removes this blindness through his calling people remain in sin and are perishing. The apostle Paul explained this to the brethren at Corinth.

And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. (II Corinthians 4:3-6.)

Jesus explained to his disciples that the things of the Kingdom of God were not now available to all humans. It is why he spoke in parables. Not to make things clear but to hide the truth to those who were not then called.

And the disciples came and said to Him, "Why do You speak to them in parables?" Jesus answered them, "To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been granted. "For whoever has, to him more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has shall be taken away from him. "Therefore I speak to them in parables; because while seeing they do not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. (Matthew 13:10-13.)

What then does the Bible teach? As Jesus was the first of the firstfruits so Christians of this age are the firstfruits of the early spiritual harvest (I Corinthians 15:20, 15:23, cf. James 1:18, Revelation 14:4). The great harvest of human lives occurs during the Millennium and the time of the Great White Throne Judgment (which involves a resurrection to physical life of all who had not received God's calling in their lifetime) symbolized by the biblical feasts of Tabernacles and the Last Great Day.

Following the Millennium, the one thousand years, comes the general resurrection of the dead for judgment. This Great White Throne Judgment (Revelation 20:11�12), foreshadowed by the great Day of the feast or the Last Great Day of the biblical holydays, includes a massive resurrection of humanity. All of those who died without encountering God through a personal calling in this age will through the resurrection of the dead be returned to physical life and given their first opportunity to encounter God through Jesus Christ. This is to be an ages-encompassing redemption.

The early church believed in global redemption and it rejected the hopeless view of the Sadducees that at death a person "is no more" and "has left us forever." The first Christians held a wider hope for all humanity when after the Millennium salvation would be open to those who died in spiritual ignorance without encountering God in their first lifetime. Only then will John 3:16 be wholly fulfilled. All the descendants of Adam will encounter God at the time of God's choosing and each will either elect salvation through Jesus Christ or complete annihilation in eternal death.

Take a look at http://www.FamilyTreeDNA.com. Bennett Greenspan, President of Family Tree DNA, tells us that "Family Tree DNA has the only online Jewish database set for Ashkenazim and will, by the fall have the complete Sephardic and Mizrachi databases available for blind comparisons. If a sample is found in the Jewish databases only we have a pretty clear picture. If the sample is found in both Jewish and non-Jewish samples we have a possibility, and if the sample isn't found at all within the Jewish databases then we have a clear no as the answer." He further reports that their lab works with with Dr. Hammer who did the initial Cohanim study in 1997 and Dr. Behar who conducted the Ashkenazi female and Levite papers of 2004. In addition Dr. Behar is working with them to create the male and female Sephardic databases mentioned above. Instructions and costs are published on their website.

--Editor