What comes before the Giving? James White and John 6:37

What comes before the giving in John 6:37? Nothing according to Dr. James White on his October 23, 2017 podcast of the Dividing Line Program (segment starts at 1 hr 2 min 30 second mark).

John 6:37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me

John 6:37 (NASB) “ All that the Father gives Me will come to Me…

Ephesians 5:18-33

Sections: cross_references, debate_points, exegesis, greek_analysis

1 Corinthians 11:2-9

Sections: cross_references, debate_points, exegesis, greek_analysis

Genesis 2:21-23

Sections: debate_points, exegesis, greek_analysis

John 6:37

Sections: cross_references, debate_points, exegesis, greek_analysis

John 6:43-45

Sections: cross_references, debate_points, exegesis

Colossians 1:15-18

Sections: cross_references, exegesis, greek_analysis

Colossians 2:16-19

Sections: cross_references, exegesis, greek_analysis

1 Timothy 5:21

Sections: exegesis

John 5:18-23

Sections: cross_references, debate_points, exegesis, greek_analysis

μὴ κωλύετε (me koluete)

do not forbid, stop forbidding

ἀρχή (archē)

beginning, origin, source; rule, authority, first cause

Cornelius counter-example: would be an overseer before being a Christian

Mike continues listing absurd implications of the host-as-leader theory.

Jew/Gentile distinctions continued after conversion: Jews kept the law, Gentiles did not

Mike demonstrates that the Jew/Gentile pair retained functional differences in the early church.

Series structure announced: Matthew teachings today, then Acts, then Epistles

Winger lays out his multi-part teaching plan

Preview: Book of Acts will be examined next to show how the Apostles actually applied Jesus's commands regarding the Law

Transition to future installments of the series

Closing: Next week will cover the Hebrew Roots interpretation of Acts, especially Acts 10 and Acts 15

Series summary and next steps

Acts 10: Cornelius is introduced -- the first non-proselyte Gentile to receive the gospel. He is a God-fearer but not circumcised and not under the law.

Survey of Acts chapter 10, Cornelius

Peter's vision of the sheet with unclean animals (Acts 10:9-16): God tells him to eat all types of animals, both unholy and unclean

Peter's rooftop vision in Acts 10

Acts 10:28 gives the authoritative interpretation of the vision: 'God has shown me that I should not call any man unholy or unclean' -- the vision is about Gentile inclusion, not food

Peter's own interpretation of his vision

Neither extreme interpretation of Acts 10 is correct: neither 'all food is now clean for everyone' nor 'all food is still unclean' -- the vision primarily establishes Gentile access to the gospel

Balanced interpretation of Acts 10 vision

Hebrew Roots major argument on Acts 10: the vision was about people (Gentiles), not food -- Winger agrees but argues they miss the connection and the implication for dietary laws

Critique of Hebrew Roots interpretation of Acts 10

The gospel alone makes Gentiles clean -- the law was not a prerequisite for salvation, and Acts 10-11 establishes this clearly

Summary argument from Acts 10-11

Critique of the alternative view: using the idea that all foods are clean to communicate a message while insisting all foods are not actually clean is logically incoherent

Logical critique of Hebrew Roots reading of Acts 10

Acts 11:20 -- some men of Cyprus and Cyrene begin speaking to Greeks (Gentiles) in Antioch, preaching the Lord Jesus. Luke narrates this only after establishing how Gentiles can be saved.

Survey of Acts 11:20, first Gentile outreach from scattered believers

Acts 10-11: Cornelius's household — all feared God, heard, received the Spirit, and spoke in tongues, excluding infants

Detailed exegesis of the Cornelius household baptism narrative.

Acts 10 — Cornelius and the Gentiles speak in tongues

Second Acts passage cited by tongues-required proponents

Acts 2 purpose: inauguration of the new covenant Spirit; Acts 10 purpose: extending that work to Gentiles

Mike's theological interpretation of the Acts tongues episodes

Summary: the three Acts tongues episodes demonstrate the Spirit's work in different stages, not universal salvation proof

Summation of the main argument against tongues-required-for-salvation

Q: What does "born of water" mean in John 3:5? Two interpretations: (1) physical birth (water/amniotic fluid) vs. spiritual birth — two births, not three; (2) "water and spirit" as one birth in Greek, referring to the spiritual reality baptism represents, not literal water baptism. Cornelius (Acts 10) proves baptism isn't required for salvation.

Q&A — born of water (John 3:5)

Q: Baptism in Acts 2:38 — is it required for salvation? No. Acts 10 (Cornelius) shows people receiving the Holy Spirit BEFORE baptism. The gift of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:38 comes after repentance; baptism is commanded but not essential to receiving salvation. Cornelius was saved, Spirit-filled, and speaking in tongues before water baptism.

Q&A — baptism and salvation (Acts 2:38 vs Acts 10)

Dietary Laws: Fulfilled?: How did Jesus fulfill the dietary laws? I’m considering Jesus grafting in Gentiles into the faith to be the fulfillment of that (Matthew 5: 17, Acts 10:9-15).

Q&A question: Dietary Laws: Fulfilled?

Is Cornelius in Acts 10

Women in Ministry - Prof Craig Keener

Paul's letters stand at the centre of the dispute over women's role in church ministry, with each side of the dispute championing texts from the Apostle. How do we understand the text in 1 Corinthians 14 where Paul instructs women to be silent, or the 1 Timothy 2 passage where women are forbidden to teach or exercise authority over men? Are these texts addressing a specific cultural situation or should they be treated as universal prohibitions? Craig Keener delved deeply into the world of Paul and wrestled with these thorny texts in his book [*Paul, Women and Wives: Marriage and Women's Ministry in the Letters of Paul*](/library/25) (Hendrikson, 1992). In a public lecture at Laidlaw's Henderson campus in September 2019, Professor Keener looked at the arguments for both sides of the question: 'are women allowed to be in ministry?', and the approaches various theologians and church traditions have taken throughout the centuries. He gave insights into the culture at the time Paul wrote his letters, and of the way false teachers were targeting women. He notes the importance of considering the original situation of Paul's letters, and that Paul does affirm women's ministry which helps us to see that Paul himself did not prohibit women from teaching the Bible always.