The phrase "Baptism in the Holy Spirit" is often bandied around in Christian circles, particularly amoung those who go to a Pentecostal or Charismatic church. But what does this actually mean?
The Pentecostal View
Those advocating a Pentecostal view of Baptism in the Spirit argue that:
- Jesus' disciples were born-again believers long before the day of Pentecost, but he still commanded them to wait for the baptism of the Spirit (Acts 1:4-8).
- Pentecost came a few weeks later as described in Acts 2:1-4. This is specifically referred to as baptism in the Spirit in both Acts 1:5 and 11:6.
- This indicates a pattern of first belief, and then subsequent baptism in the Spirit, resulting in much more power for ministry, and according to some, speaking in tongues as well.
- This is further supported by the believers in Samaria (in Acts 8:9-17 they were converted by Phillip, and subsequently baptised in the Spirit by Peter and John), and the Ephesians (in Acts 19:1-6 they were not baptised in the Spirit until Paul came to them).
Consequently those advocating a Pentecostal view claim that baptism in the Spirit is an event subsequent to conversion, where the Holy Spirit further empowers a believer for ministry.
The Conversvative View
But is this the biblical view?
There are only 7 passages in the Bible that use the phrase "Baptism in the Spirit". The first four are all said by John the Baptist.
All these passages tell us is that there will be baptism in the Spirit at some stage in the future, and Jesus is the one who will baptise people in the Spirit.
The next two passages are spoken by Jesus himself (or rather one of them is Peter quoting Jesus) and refer to the events of Pentecost:
So now we have established that whatever baptism in the Spirit is, it happened at Pentecost.
The last passage is slightly different and is found in 1 Co 12:13. For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.
It is important to note that the Greek for baptism in the Spirit is almost exactly the same as that in all the other passages (the difference is that this one literally says "in one Spirit"). It implies that Christians were baptised in the Holy Spirit when they became members of the body of Christ - that is, when they became Christians.
Baptism in the Holy Spirit occurs at the time of conversion.
So then, how do we explain the instances of baptism in the Holy Spirit mentioned in the New Testament, where these seemed to occur subsequent to conversion. In particular these instances are: Pentecost itself, the baptism in the Spirit of the Samaritans; the Holy Spirit coming on Cornelius and his family; and the Ephesians. Let's examine each in turn.
First of all, Pentecost was a special, one-off event. It marked the transition between the Old and New Covenants. Prior to Pentecost, the Holy Spirit was not available to all believers as he is now. Pentecost was a unique point in salvation history. The disciples could not have been baptised in the Spirit prior to this, as Pentecost was the transition point. Consequently it is not a pattern for us to follow as we do not live at that transition point.
Samaria was also a special case. It was the first time that non-Jews received the Holy Spirit. In the Old Covenant, Samaritans were second-class citizens. By receiving the Holy Spirit from the top-ranked apostles, God made it clear to the new church that the Samaritans were full members of the church – not second class citizens.
Cornelius' situation was special for two reaons. Firstly, it was the first time the Holy Spirit that come upon the Gentiles, and so, as with the Samaritans, it was important that one of the top apostles was present. However, and more importantly, it appears as though Cornelius was not a Christian. He was a God-fearing man, but not yet a Christian, and so obviously had not yet received the Holy Spirit. He was baptised in the Spirit at that point because that was then he became a Christian.
The Ephesians were similar. They had only received John's baptism and had never even heard of the Holy Spirit. Paul clearly did not yet think that they were Christians (although they were obviously very open), as he baptised them into the name of Jesus.
So all the instances where it appears that baptism in the Holy Spirit was a separate event subsequent to creation, it can be explained easily as either a special case, or those being baptised into the Spirit had only just at that moment become Christians. Baptism in the Spirit occurs at the point of conversion.
Being filled with the Spirit
However, it is fairly clear from the Bible that you can be filled with the Holy Spirit separately from being baptised in the Spirit. In Acts 4:8 Peter is filled with the Spirit, but that is subsequent to his baptism in the Spirit at Pentecost. In Acts 4:31, the disciples were re-filled with the Spirit. Acts 13:52 talks of the disciples being filled with the Spirit again.
Most importantly, Paul's command in Eph 5:18 tells us to be filled with the Spirit. My Greek is not good enough to determine this myself, but I have been told that here it is in the continuous present tense, and so literally means "go on being filled with the Spirit" - i.e. do so repeatedly.
So, while Baptism in the Spirit is a one-off event at conversion, it seems very clear that we are to continue being filled with the Spirit on an on-going basis.
Conclusion
Baptism in the Spirit is a one-off event that occurs at conversion, and I think that there is a danger of stating that it is a second experience, after conversion, in that it creates two classes of Christians (spirit-filled and non-spirit filled). The Bible never makes this distinction, so I do not think we should do either.
However, at the same time we must not right-off the experiences of Pentecostal Christians who claim to have been baptised in the Spirit. Their theology may not be correct, but those experiences are still real and powerful experiences of God. It's just that that those experiences are more accurately them being filled with Spirit.
Consequently, we are not limited to one such experience. We can be filled with the Spirit any number of times.
Right now in fact.
Comments
i don't anderstand in pentecostal church said we put hand on you to have the holy spirit or speaking in tongues all ready man has no spirit in him.
thank you i hope you will reiply,
hey mate. i have been struggling with these points for a while now. growing up a pastors son in a pentacostal church, baptism in the spirit as seperate to salvation became second nature. god is challenging my wife and i with this belief and i appreciate you filling in some gaps. the bible does not distinguish between filled and unfilled christians and from now on i hope neither will i. thankyou for your words.
I think that you are wrong on several accounts. First there is a distinction between those believers who have the baptism in the spirit and those who don't clearly in the scriptures. Acts one- Jesus tells teh disciples to wait until they have received power from on high before they go out to minister. Acts nineteen the ephesian disciples/beleivers are found to be deficient in faith because they have not recieved the spirit. Some say these were disciples of J/B but Luke never uses the term disciples for anyone but a follower of Jesus.
Are you saying that of all the multitudes of ethnic groups who heard the gospel in their own language on the day of Pentecost, none of them were among the 3000 who were baptised on that day?
Also, just as a separate baptism would create two classes of Christians, wouldn't the practice of some continually asking to be filled and others not create even more classes?
I'm not saying I disagree with you, but it does seem there may be a case that being born OF the Spirit is to be born of LOVE, whereas to be baptised IN the Spirit is the impartation of POWER. Hence Christ referring to it as power from on high, and the evidence that was signs and wonders following, and boldness in preaching the gospel.
Note that if you read a translation that hasn't (for whatever reason) filtered it out, the believers were praying "in one accord" (Acts 1:14) before the day of Pentecost. This suggests they were already born of the Spirit a la 1 Co 12:13.
Interesting post. Sorry I'm so late in finding it. The original post makes the argument that there is a distinction between being "baptized" in the Holy Spirit and being "filled" with the Holy Spirit. If this is not the case, then most of the argument crumbles. The Bible gives ample evidence that these experiences are indeed one and the same. Luke uses many phrases to describe the same experience. It is described as being "baptized" in the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:5). Three verses later Jesus referred to this exact same experience by saying the Spirit would "come on" you (Acts 1:8). When this experience indeed happened, Luke records that they were "filled" with the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:4).
A casual review of these texts reveals that different phraseology is used for the exact same experience.
Other phrases used to describe being baptized in the Holy Spirit include: "poured out" (Acts 2:17,33) and "received" (Acts 8:15). Interestingly, all of these phrases are used in Acts 10:44-46 to describe the exact same experience. Scripture uses diverse language.
The original post is correct in his assessment of being filled with the Holy Spirit. But scripture teaches that this is the same as being baptized in the Holy Spirit. It is available for all believers (Acts 2:17, 39).
No where does scripture indicate "special circumstances" surrounding the baptism in the Holy Spirit mentioned in Acts. Of course if you start with a bias against Spirit-baptism, then you must spin these as "special cases" in order to make scripture fit your theology. The Bible doesn't do this. The experienced was established on the day of Pentecost and the pattern is repeated throughout the Book of Acts (2:4, 8:16, 10:46, 19:6) and is still being repeated today.
The question of there being "filled" Christians and non-filled is answered in Acts 8:12-16. Verses 12 and 14 clearly indicate these Samaritans were believing Christians. Yet the Bible emphatically states that "the Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them (v. 16). Christian believers who were "non-filled" had to be prayed for by believers who WERE filled. We must lay aside our biases and preconceptions to see what scripture is teaching here. There WERE two classes of Christians. What is clear is that God did not want it to remain that way. All believers should be baptized in (filled with) the Holy Spirit.
Blessings,
Brent
Brent, I'm not entirely clear what you are trying to say here. You seem to be saying both that there are two classes of Christians (Spirit baptized and non-Spirit baptized), and that baptism in the Spirit and being filled with the Spirit is the same thing.
Does that mean that you believe that you can be baptized in the Spirit multiple times?
If not, how do you explain verses like Eph 5:18 where Paul instructs us to continue being filled with the Spirit? If baptism in the Spirit and being filled with the Spirit are the same thing, this would definitely imply that baptism in the Spirit occurs multiple times.
On the other hand, a claim that baptism in the Spirit occurs multiple times appears to be directly contradictory to 1 Co 12:13, where it says we were baptized by the Spirit into the body of Christ - i.e. when we became Christians.
So I'm afraid I find your view (as I have understood it) contradictory. Baptism in the Spirit is an event that occurs at conversion, whereas we are encouraged to continue being filled with Spirit on an ongoing basis.
I guess that some people would think that I am criticising the Pentecostal movement for their focus on the Holy Spirit. That is not what I am trying to do at all. I have a great respect for the focus on the Holy Spirit in many Pentecostal churches (I am a member of a Pentecostal church myself), and think it is great that they encourage people to be filled with the Spirit.
It's just that I think that sometimes the theology is a little wrong. A principle of biblical interpretation is that the didactic (teaching) passages of scripture should be used to interpret the narrative passages. When you have 1 Co 12:13 clearly stating (at least in the Greek) that baptism in the Holy Spirit occurs at conversion, and can see alternative explanations for the events described in the narratives, I think we have to stand by what is taught.
You said that we need to lay aside preconceptions to see what the bible is teaching - that's what lead me to this view.
Dave (and all others for that matter),
I appreciate the post here. Very interesting. I come from a Pentecostal background (both sets of grandparents and my parents are in full-time ministry), and received the Baptism in the Holy Spirit at age 8 (by my definition the Baptism would be subsequent to my salvation, which occured at age 6). I am 22 now. However, my girlfriend comes from a Baptist background, and has recently begun seeking this experience for herself.
I've noticed some unfortunate things that have come up as she seeks:
1) Many Pentecostals tend to hold the Baptism in the Holy Spirit over the heads of those who have not had the experience. I find myself frustrated oftentimes over what seems to be a lack of faith, or unwillingness to "see the light", as it were.
2) Often I will pray throughout the day. Much, though not all, of my prayers consist of speaking in tongues, just as the Scripture says, "he who speaks in tongues edifies himself". However, I find it somewhat awkward to do so around her, simply because she has not had the experience. Not like I'm some crazy tongues-talker who yells in people's faces, I'm just saying I like to utter prayers sporadically throughout the day.
From our experience, there is a definite distinction between one who has experienced the Baptism and one who has not. It shouldn't be something that separates, though. I don't know how to make everything perfect, in fact I'm pretty sure I can't.
All I know is that an attitude of exclusivity creates pressure, and usually leads to division. So, to all who are seeking, and to all who have the experience, please, be gracious and patient. The Holy Spirit is, among other things the "Comforter", not the opposite.
Like Derek's wife. I too am searching and seeking the experience for myself if God is willing. Yes I am Baptist also. My question is the reason why some people have this experience and some don't based on belief or lack of? Or does it have to do with upbringing and what you are exposed to. Which does not make sense to me if God makes the decision on what gifts he gives his children. I am wondering if Derek's wife ever found what she was seeking.
I have only been a christian for about 16 years or so. I was raised Catholic. I am now penticostal, carasmatic, or what ever label you to put on me. I am not a theologin (hope I spelled it right) I do know my experience. I received salvation from Jesus in 1991... He forgave me of my sins. I received the "baptism of the Holy Spirit".... Invited the Holy Spirit to fill me and to use me. It has been a long walk of purification. I could not have done it without being continually filled with the Holy Spirit. I could not have been and impactful Christian with out Him. Being filled with the Holy Spirit has made a huge difference in my life and others. So what does it matter if it is two seperate events... or one continual event if 1) we grow closer to God 2) We start to look more like Jesus 3) We start to act more like Jesus 4) and the Holy Spirit purifies our lives continually? If we do anything without doing it in Love.... is it worth doing? I pray every day the God would fill me continually with Holy Spirit.
Drawing me closer to Him. Using me to further His gospel. Showing and sharing His love with everyone I meet.
MY HOME IS IN HEAVEN!
I think this is a hub for believers in Jesus Christ. May our Amighty God keep you and bless all of you.
But there seems to be a massive division among our christian brothers - all of which are their point of views, in every denominations, even within a single denomination/church itself. It is an endless struggle in us - making ourselves right and them wrong. How can we be called believers in Jesus Christ if all of us claim that "I/We" are right. Christians should be one as Christ has only one body and not divided in our own rightful ways. We do not need those "I am" or "we are" the true believers. We are being controlled by ungodly forces. Instead pray and rebuke the enemy in the NAME OF JESUS! God bless you all
First of all, we need to call it what the bible calls it; all of the gospel writers--Peter, Paul, and our Lord, Jesus himself refer to this as the baptism of the Holy Spirit. There are two baptisms in scripture--water and spirit. The water identifies you with Jesus and the Spirit identifies you and empowers you with the church. Much of the confusion comes from the word "filled." The word filled used in Acts is never used in any of the epistles. The word filled in the epistles is translated more often times than others fulfilled. Eph 5:18 lends confusion to many believers. The word holy does not preceed the word spirit. This passage is not teaching that we have to be continually filled with the Holy Spirit but instead it implies that we should be made complete or fulfilled in the Spirit.
First of all, we need to call it what the bible calls it; all of the gospel writers--Peter, Paul, and our Lord, Jesus himself refer to this as the baptism of the Holy Spirit. There are two baptisms in scripture--water and spirit. The water identifies you with Jesus and the Spirit identifies you and empowers you with the church. Much of the confusion comes from the word "filled." The word filled used in Acts is never used in any of the epistles. The word filled in the epistles is translated more often times than others fulfilled. Eph 5:18 lends confusion to many believers. The word holy does not preceed the word spirit. This passage is not teaching that we have to be continually filled with the Holy Spirit but instead it implies that we should be made complete or fulfilled in the Spirit.