By Tim Borys
I heard that John Chambers, Irish 2×2 Worker and now the Overseer of the 2×2 church in Romania, recently cracked open that old chestnut of the Holy Spirit in a Christian context coming only via the Worker Ministry. Yes, that one — the Ministry that started in 1897 in Ireland, by William Irvine. According to Chambers, the account in Acts 8 is his proof of this being so. But I contest that the Workers’ claim of exclusive control over the Holy Spirit is contradicted by Scripture, Christian theology, and the entire witness of the New Testament.
Of course, to make his argument, you’d also have to somehow accept the notion that the 2×2 Ministry is a continuation or revival of the original twelve apostles. (For anyone reading this who doesn’t have history in this church: I am not making this up. This is what the 2×2 Ministry believes and preaches.)
Since I don’t want to give too much attention to the idea that a ministry founded in 1897 is the “apostolic successor” to the Twelve or to “the Seventy,” I’m going to move on to the more important and broader question in Christian theology: Does the arrival of the Holy Spirit depend on human control, whether from the Twelve, the Seventy, a priesthood, a seminary, or a pair of Workers traveling 2×2 in one accord? (or in one Camry for that matter)
Chambers bases his argument on the details in Acts 8:14–17:
14 When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to Samaria. 15 When they arrived, they prayed for the new believers there that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 because the Holy Spirit had not yet come on any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.
The backdrop is a time when the first Jesus-followers were facing aggressive persecution in Jerusalem. Stephen had been killed. Saul was still rampaging. It was time to “get out of Dodge” for these early believers. Most of the Jesus-followers left Jerusalem and scattered throughout Judea and Samaria. The Twelve, however, remained in Jerusalem.
It’s important to note that the ones who scattered from Jerusalem and preached everywhere were not the original apostles and were most likely not the Seventy sent by Jesus in Luke 10. This is yet another important point that undercuts the idea that apostolic succession controls the Holy Spirit — or matters at all in the spread of the gospel.
Chambers’ argument is that Philip’s preaching to the Samaritans was incomplete until Peter and John arrived to “certify” the whole event. This is convenient — even essential — for men like Chambers. If Philip’s preaching is valid, it undermines the entire premise that “not just anyone” can tell the gospel story. The reality, of course, is that Acts shows exactly the opposite.
And on the surface, we do need to acknowledge how Chambers and others arrive at their belief, eisegetical and convenient though it may be (by “eisegetical,” I mean imposing one’s own beliefs onto Scripture rather than drawing meaning from it). On a surface-level reading of Acts 8, it does appear that Peter and John confirmed the conversion of the new Samaritan believers. But to leap from that to the idea that Christian belief is incomplete without certification by official clergy is a leap too far.
If we accept that leap, then we must accept all of the literal details of the passage — including the laying on of hands. And that immediately contradicts most New Testament examples of the Holy Spirit arriving without the laying on of hands. (Not to mention the fact that the 2×2 Ministry does not actually believe in the laying on of hands, but John Chambers conveniently ignores that in claiming this passage as his proof text.)
In fact, there are only two examples where laying on of hands is linked to receiving the Holy Spirit: Acts 8 and Acts 19. And Acts 19 is a significantly different scenario. Those individuals had never even heard of the Holy Spirit and had only received John’s baptism. Paul baptized them in Jesus’ name for the first time, and that account includes the laying on of hands. In every other instance in the New Testament, the Holy Spirit arrives without any such ritual. So we can reasonably conclude that laying on of hands is not a required or magical mechanism for the Holy Spirit.
All that to say: if Chambers is going to build a doctrine in which the Holy Spirit arrives only through a certified minister, then he must respect the whole story — including the laying on of hands. And since we know for certain that laying on of hands is not the New Testament pattern for receiving the Holy Spirit, his entire premise collapses.
More importantly, this account of Peter and John coming to Samaria is far less about how the Holy Spirit arrives and far more about the historical and theological significance of what was happening. This is the watershed moment in which Samaritans and Jews are united in Christ. It is also the first recorded instance of non-Jewish converts to Christianity.
Christian theologians and New Testament scholars are unanimous: the purpose of Peter and John’s presence was to affirm the significance of the gospel going beyond Israel. Christian scholar F. F. Bruce summarizes the moment perfectly:
“The delay in the Spirit was a deliberate act of God to ensure the unity of the church, not a normative pattern for Christian experience.”
The Jewish-centric nature of early Christianity meant that the Samaritan conversion could easily have been viewed as a rogue, competing movement — a separate “church” altogether. It is impossible to overstate how profound it was for Samaritans and Jews to be united in anything, let alone in Christ. This moment is the beginning of the fulfillment of Jesus’ words in Acts 1: the gospel would go to Jerusalem, then Judea and Samaria, and finally to the ends of the earth. That is why Peter and John went. It was not to set a pattern for how the Holy Spirit is distributed. To claim otherwise is to force the text to say something it does not say.
This account in Acts 8 is a massive historical and theological event, and it is no accident that representatives of the apostles were present. This was a key event in the launching of the post-resurrection gospel. Prior to the cross, the disciples were explicitly instructed to go only to Israel. But after the resurrection, Jesus broadened the mission to “all nations” (Matt 28). The presence of the apostles at this event emphasizes the importance of that transition.
If, as Chambers suggests, the Holy Spirit is “activated” only by official apostles or ministers, then we have to ignore many New Testament examples where that is not the case. Here is a quick list of people who preached the gospel or were instrumental in conversion, and who definitely were not part of the Twelve or the Seventy:
- Philip (Acts 8): Preached in Samaria and baptized the Ethiopian eunuch.
- Those who were scattered (Acts 8:1–4): Ordinary believers “preached the word wherever they went.”
- Ananias (Acts 9): A “disciple in Damascus,” instrumental in Saul’s conversion.
- Men from Cyprus and Cyrene (Acts 11:20–21): Preached successfully in Antioch; started what became Paul’s home church.
- Barnabas (Acts 4, 9, 11, 13): A key teacher and missionary, yet not one of the Twelve or the Seventy.
- Priscilla and Aquila (Acts 18): A married couple who taught Apollos and strengthened the early church.
- Apollos (Acts 18): A powerful preacher not tied to the apostolic circle.
- The Samaritan woman (John 4): One of the earliest proclaimers of Jesus; certainly not part of any recognized ministry structure.
If Chambers insists that the Holy Spirit comes only through a certified apostle, minister, or clergy member, then we also have to ignore the direct words of Jesus and Paul. In Luke 11, Jesus says, “How much more will your Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him!” And in Galatians 3, Paul strongly reminds believers that the Spirit is given by faith, and specifically warns against thinking it comes through any human mechanism or “works of the flesh.”
For the past 2,000 years, people have been talking about Jesus. Many were priests and pastors, but countless others were simply ordinary people telling the story. Christian theology holds that inherent to accepting the good news of Jesus, the Holy Spirit becomes part of the believer’s life. Scripture consistently teaches that the gospel is spread to — and by — all nations and all people. The Holy Spirit is a gift from God, not a gift from the Workers, nor from any human gatekeeper.
There may be no tenet more central to Christian theology than the promise that the Holy Spirit is granted directly from God. Anyone who claims control over the distribution of the Holy Spirit stands uncomfortably close to Simon in Acts 8 — longing to control what belongs only to God. That is not merely a doctrinal mistake. It conflicts with Scripture, contradicts the entire Jesus story, and distorts the nature of God’s gift.
The Holy Spirit has never been a franchise. It is the free gift of God, not the property of any ministry, past or present.
By Tim Borys
Dec 7, 2025
Originally posted at: https://connected-and-concerned-friends.mn.co/posts/acts-8-and-the-myth-of-spiritual-gatekeeping?