Paul tells Timothy: "The things thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men who shall be able to teach others also." Was that not an impertinence in Paul if Timothy had the same divine leading as he? Was it not impertinence in Jude to say that the faith was "once for all delivered to the saints," if there were deliverances being constantly made? What need to preach the gospel to the heathen world if God is directly leading men into the truth? What need for a New Testament if all men possess this Paraclete? How can one man deny the claims of another whom he admits to be divinely guided into all truth? Some have thought that Christ bestowed the Paraclete upon the apostles when he breathed upon them and said: "Receive ye the Holy Spirit." At best that was a prophetic and not an actual bestowal, for after that onbreathing we find Peter (Acts I) calling upon the assembly of brethren to _take a vote_ as to who should succeed Judas in the apostolic college. If he had possessed the Paraclete at that time, he would not have been compelled to resort to the judgment of his brethren to determine such a question. Moreover, Christ indicated when the Paraclete would come, by stating the work that would follow his coming: "_When he is come_ he shall convict the world [age] of sin, of righteousness and of judgment." How did he do this? 1. His first act at his coming was to baptize the apostles in the Spirit and endow them with the Paraclete. "Ye shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit not many days hence" (Acts 1:5). 2. When the Spirit baptized these apostles with divine guidance he began his work of convicting the world through them.