John the Baptist
John is truly an enigmatic figure in the scriptures. Jesus praises him, and he was widely received as a prophet, and yet he did no miracles, and very few of his prophecies are preserved. He prepared the people for the coming of the Messiah by preaching a baptism of repentance into the remission of sins (the Greek is identical to Acts 2:38) —
(Luk 3:3 ESV) And he went into all the region around the Jordan, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.
John insisted that being a Jew was not enough to get one into the Kingdom.
(Mat 3:9 ESV) 9 “And do not presume to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father,’ for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham.”
Rather, repentance is essential. John preached the coming of the Kingdom, anticipating both God’s wrath on the impenitent and God’s blessings on those who repent.
(Psa 51:16-17 ESV) 16 For you will not delight in sacrifice, or I would give it; you will not be pleased with a burnt offering. 17 The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise.
(Isa 1:26-28 ESV) 26 And I will restore your judges as at the first, and your counselors as at the beginning. Afterward you shall be called the city of righteousness, the faithful city.” 27 Zion shall be redeemed by justice, and those in her who repent, by righteousness. 28 But rebels and sinners shall be broken together, and those who forsake the LORD shall be consumed.
(Eze 18:30-32 ESV) 30 “Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, declares the Lord GOD. Repent and turn from all your transgressions, lest iniquity be your ruin. 31 Cast away from you all the transgressions that you have committed, and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! Why will you die, O house of Israel? 32 For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Lord GOD; so turn, and live.”
(Zec 1:6 ESV) 6 But my words and my statutes, which I commanded my servants the prophets, did they not overtake your fathers? So they repented and said, As the LORD of hosts purposed to deal with us for our ways and deeds, so has he dealt with us.”
Before John, repentance was often entirely sufficient to effect forgiveness, and so it seems unlikely that the coming of John meant that those Jews who repented apart from John weren’t forgiven. John did not bring about a new covenant or “dispensation” that revoked the teachings of the Prophets.
Rather, John continued to preach in the tradition of the Prophets of old. He commanded repentance as a condition to entering the Kingdom, because the Kingdom would only be for forgiven people. He also preached that the people should be ready to receive their Messiah, who was soon to come.
(Jer 31:34 ESV) 34 And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.”
(Jer 33:7-8 ESV) 7 I will restore the fortunes of Judah and the fortunes of Israel, and rebuild them as they were at first. 8 I will cleanse them from all the guilt of their sin against me, and I will forgive all the guilt of their sin and rebellion against me.
Forgiveness was part of the promise of the coming Kingdom, and repentance toward God is an essential step toward forgiveness.
So why baptize at all? Why not just preach repentance as so many prophets before him had done?
One thought — and it’s just a thought — is that John baptized in the Jordan River, and the Jordan was the gateway for Israel into the Promised Land. In a sense, their crossing of the Jordan demonstrated their commitment to the mission before them — conquest of Canaan — and God’s approval of his people. God had not let the Israelites enter the land nearly 40 years earlier, because of their lack of faith. Crossing the Jordan was a sign that God had found their faith sufficient to enter into his coming Kingdom.
(Jos 4:23-24 ESV) 23 “For the LORD your God dried up the waters of the Jordan for you until you passed over, as the LORD your God did to the Red Sea, which he dried up for us until we passed over, 24 so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the hand of the LORD is mighty, that you may fear the LORD your God forever.”
The time of wandering was over and the time of turning a pagan land into the Kingdom of God had begun.
The Jews would not have missed the meaning. John could have chosen plenty of other places, and the Jordan is notoriously muddy. It’s hardly the best water to symbolize a cleansing! But it was the best water to symbolize to a Jew the end of Exile and the beginning of the Kingdom.
Now, to understand John, you have to realize that the First Century Jews considered themselves still in the Exile that began when Nebuchadnezzar invaded Judea, ultimately destroying Solomon’s temple. The prophesies of the coming Kingdom, with the Son of David ruling on David’s throne, with peace and prosperity, had not yet come true. The Romans ruled Israel, meaning that the Kingdom had not yet come.
Therefore, when John spoke of the coming Kingdom, no one thought he was speaking of a new religion! No, they heard that God would finally send his Messiah and fulfill the promises of the Prophets to change the world and free God’s people.
(Mat 3:10-11 ESV) 10 “Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees. Every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
11 “I baptize you with water for repentance, but he who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.”
John’s disciples wouldn’t have been surprised at these words at all. The coming of the Kingdom would be a time of judgment and separation between God’s elect and the damned. And the Prophets had clearly taught the Spirit would be poured out on God’s people when the Kingdom comes. Therefore, “baptize you with Spirit and fire” would be heard as referring to the two possibilities — either you are in the Kingdom and receive the Spirit or else you are outside the Kingdom and receive fire.
(Mat 3:12 ESV) 12 “His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and gather his wheat into the barn, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.”
“Unquenchable fire” is surely a reference to —
(Isa 66:24 ESV) 24 “And they shall go out and look on the dead bodies of the men who have rebelled against me. For their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh.”
Whereas “baptize you with Spirit” likely refers to such passages as —
(Isa 44:2-3 ESV) 2 Thus says the LORD who made you, who formed you from the womb and will help you: Fear not, O Jacob my servant, Jeshurun whom I have chosen. 3 For I will pour water on the thirsty land, and streams on the dry ground; I will pour my Spirit upon your offspring, and my blessing on your descendants.
(Eze 39:28-1 ESV) 28 Then they shall know that I am the LORD their God, because I sent them into exile among the nations and then assembled them into their own land. I will leave none of them remaining among the nations anymore. 29 And I will not hide my face anymore from them, when I pour out my Spirit upon the house of Israel, declares the Lord GOD.”
Now, John himself contrasts his own baptism with water with the baptism with the Spirit that the Messiah will provide. And this is an important thought. The Gospels are introduced with the stories of John telling us that his baptism with water will be supplanted with the Messiah’s baptism with the Spirit!
(Mat 3:11 ESV) 11 “I baptize you with water for repentance, but he who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
(Mar 1:8 ESV) 8 I have baptized you with water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.”
(Luk 3:16 ESV) 16 John answered them all, saying, “I baptize you with water, but he who is mightier than I is coming, the strap of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.
(John 1:33 ESV) 33 I myself did not know him, but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’
Now, there are very few things contained in all four Gospels, but among them is the distinction between water baptism (associated with John) and Spirit baptism (associated with Jesus). Plainly, we have to reject the 20th Century Church of Christ notion that Christian baptism is water baptism and not Spirit baptism! We want to argue that baptism with the Spirit is a reference only the Pentecost and Cornelius, but not a single listener of John’s would have heard that. They’d read the Prophets! They heard that the Kingdom was coming with all the promised signs, including the outpouring of the Spirit on the entire Kingdom — and their descendants — not just a few and not just for a few years.
Indeed, John’s contrast in Mark and in John makes no reference to fire at all. In those passages, he simply contrasts water with Spirit, making the point that the Messiah’s baptism would be radically different from his own.
baptism by water and spirit
Act 2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added [unto them] about three thousand souls.
Act 2:47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.
Baptism, as I read it means to immerse, to submerge to fully engulf.
There is nothing said in the bible about water baptism becoming obsolete. As I read it water baptism is the cleansing (of sins) before Jesus adds to the church/kingdom, which is the spiritual baptism.
I fail to see where it is said that the "Holy Spirit" is baptized into us. If that be so, why then do we not drink a glass of water to be baptized by water. (maybe holy water)
"Whereas “baptize you with Spirit” likely refers to such passages as –"
Isa 44:2-3 ESV, Eze 39:28-1 ESV
I don't think so Jay, but I have been wrong before
You are right that John and Peter had the same view of the role of baptism, using the same word translated "into". And the same terminology "for repentance" and "for remission" (or forgiveness) is used by both John and Peter. This truth raises a question.
Were those people John baptized unrepentant until they went under the water? I doubt that anyone thinks that is true. No, those repentant people were publicly declaring their repentance. Baptism was not repentance it only demonstrated it. On what basis then do we suppose Peter's teaching is any different since he used the exact language as John? Added to that is Peter's defense of baptizing Gentiles after they received the Holy Spirit "just like we did when we believed".
I can find no theological, grammatical, or logical reason to give water baptism greater weight in Peter's case than in John's. Yet we teach that a candidate is lost until he is immersed. I can't accept that view unless those John immersesd were unrepentant until they went under the water.
We must let the Scriptures advise us, not the reverse.
Royce
Jay,
I'm glad you bring out that the promise of being baptized in the Spirit is for all who are in the kingdom.
Jerry
Laymond,
You wrote, "I fail to see where it is said that the 'Holy Spirit' is baptized into us. If that be so, why then do we not drink a glass of water to be baptized by water. (maybe holy water)"
No it does not say the Holy Spirit is baptized into us. It does say we are baptized in (Greek en) the Spirit just as we are baptized in water.
If being born of water and Spirit is Christian baptism (and I believe it is), then the Holy Spirit is just as much a part of our baptism as water is. I am sure you would object (as do I) to someone who wanted baptism to be totally without water. I object as strongly to someone who wants it to be without the Spirit. Making a comment such as you made in my quote does nothing to advance understanding. In my judgment, that comment is out of line for a Christian gentleman.
Royce asked the question, "Were those people John baptized unrepentant until they went under the water?"
In my opinion, "no" these people were not unrepentant, but they were unforgiven. baptism is for forgiveness of past sins, not for repentance of the soul. Belief and faith in Jesus Christ,( John preached Jesus) with a willingness to follow him, and the word of God, is the repentance. A repentant soul asked for forgiveness through the act of baptism, "The Spirit" judges the heart to see if one is truly repentant, if so they added to his church/ the kingdom, spiritual baptism. I believe it says "repent and be baptized" not be baptized and repent.
And yes I believe Peter preached this same baptism.
Jay,
Good post… I would like to add some thoughts about Water:
It’s my understanding that the two key differences between John’s baptism and Christian baptism are (1) Kingdom existence and (2) Outpouring of the Holy Spirit, but both involve water. Water baptism has been a practice of the church since Pentecost and specifically mentioned in Acts 8:36; 10:47. Every Christian has also been baptized in the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 12:13), but what of the “one baptism” Eph. 4:5?
Dr. Jack Cottrell concludes that the Holy Spirit baptism promised by John the Baptist and by Jesus is the same as the universal promise of the gift of the indwelling Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38-39). Every Christian has been baptized in water, and has also been baptized in the Holy Spirit. Water baptism and Spirit baptism are not two separate baptisms, but simply two aspects or two sides of a single act. This is consistent with both John 3:5 [born of water and the Spirit] and Heb. 10:22 [hearts sprinkled clean and bodies washed with pure water]. Christian baptism speaks of the one event that combines baptism in water with baptism in the Holy Spirit.
While no definitive chronology is given in Scripture, the chronology of water then Spirit seems to be normative. However, a normative promise/event does not contradict Scripture, or prevent God from giving the Spirit to one before water baptism. All should agree that Spirit and water are closely connected. Dr. Cottrell says in “Power from on High” (pg. 330-331): “We must stop dividing the one baptism into two events; it is one event with two distinct aspects… There is only one Christian baptism. Whenever baptism is mentioned in the NT in the context of the church, it is water baptism; and it is also Spirit baptism.”
Jay,
I would like to add some thoughts about Baptism in Fire:
In Matt. 3:11 &Luke 3:16, “He {Messiah} will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.” Will Jesus give 1 baptism, “in Spirit and fire” or is this 2 baptisms, of Spirit and others in fire? Many believe two groups are in view and reference those who will accept and those who will reject the Christ. I posit that baptism “in the Holy Spirit and fire” is one baptism for the believer. In this view, fire is a purifying agent rather than one of punishment, which are listed numerous times in Scripture .
First, this is supported theologically knowing that all believers [in Scripture] sense Pentecost received Spirit baptism. Second, and perhaps more strongly, there is the grammatical issue. In the grammatical construction of “in the Holy Spirit and fire,” there is only one preposition (en) governing the two objects. This means that the objects are either the same or very closely related. To test, one can also view John 3:5, which has the exact same construction – “unless one is born of [Gk. “ek”] water and Spirit.” Consistency requires us to apply Matt. 3:11, Luke 3:16, and John 3:5 in the way.
HistoryGuy,
The absence of the preposition in Matt and Luke is suggestive but not determinative. Consider —
Theodotus (ECF) takes "fire" as referring to God as a "consuming fire" Deut 4:24, 9:3; Isa 33:14; Lam 2:3.(Excerpts XXV)
"This separating element, then, is the Spirit, and the destroying element is the fire: and material fire is to be understood."
Irenaeus is to the same effect —
"But why do we speak of Jerusalem, since, indeed, the fashion of the whole world must also pass away, when the time of its disappearance has come, in order that the fruit indeed may be gathered into the garner, but the chaff, left behind, may be consumed by fire? "For the day of the Lord cometh as a burning furnace, and all sinners shall be stubble, they who do evil things, and the day shall burn them up." Now, who this Lord is that brings such a day about, John the Baptist points out, when he says of Christ, "He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire, having His fan in His hand to cleanse His floor; and He will gather His fruit into the garner, but the chaff He will burn up with unquenchable fire.""
Against Heresies, Book IV.
Tertullian agrees,
"John himself professes that the celestial things are not his, but Christ’s, by saying, “He who is from the earth speaketh concerning the earth; He who comes from the realms above is above all;” and again, by saying that he “baptized in repentance only, but that One would shortly come who would baptize in the Spirit and fire;” — of course because true and stable faith is baptized with water, unto salvation; pretended and weak faith is baptized with fire, unto judgment."
Ethical: On Baptism
Now, other ECFs reach other conclusions, either the fire is a reference to the tongues of fire on Pentecost (which would hardly be obvious to a reader of Matthew who didn't have a copy of Acts) or the fire of judgment day — meaning (surprisingly enough) that those baptized with water would survive baptism by fire at the end of time.
I can find none of the ECFs who argue either way from the prepositions.
Meanwhile, the modern commentators also split — some agreeing with me (New Int'l) and others disagreeing (Lenski).
Ultimately, the point that matters is to give due emphasis to the Spirit in contrast to water and to avoid the interpretation that only the apostles and Cornelius received baptism in the Spirit.
Jay,
You’re speaking my language, baby! There are a few ECF who believed the Spirit/fire was one baptism, but I agree with you that there was not a consensus (then or now). I waiver between the punishment and purging of sin views… I completely agree that all Christians need to realize they have been baptized with the Holy Spirit.
Pingback: One In Jesus » Acts: Chapter 2:1 (
Jay wrote: Now, there are very few things contained in all four Gospels, but among them is the distinction between water baptism (associated with John) and Spirit baptism (associated with Jesus). Plainly, we have to reject the 20th Century Church of Christ notion that Christian baptism is water baptism and not Spirit baptism! We want to argue that baptism with the Spirit is a reference only the Pentecost and Cornelius, but not a single listener of John’s would have heard that. They’d read the Prophets! They heard that the Kingdom was coming with all the promised signs, including the outpouring of the Spirit on the entire Kingdom — and their descendants — not just a few and not just for a few years. And:
Indeed, John’s contrast in Mark and in John makes no reference to fire at all. In those passages, he simply contrasts water with Spirit, making the point that the Messiah’s baptism would be radically different from his own.
—————————
So we’re to ignore Luke’s record of how the baptism in the Spirit actually occurred. And no doubt we’re to believe that Jesus was mistaken in commissioning His apostles to baptize. Jesus was going to do the baptizing. Or did He command that WE were to baptize? Yes, the great commission is that WE are to baptize. Can we baptize in the Spirit? No way. Jesus baptized in the Spirit. He promised the APOSTLES that He would baptize THEM in the Spirit. He did so.
He equally promises that after the judgment, all who are not His sheep will be thrown into a lake of fire. A baptism? They’ll remain there. But that’s when Jesus will baptize with fire, and those baptized will not like it at all.
Are readers supposed to imagine that Jesus will do the baptizing of new converts even though He told His apostles that they were (and we are) to baptize? It would appear that we are supposed to forget the facts so we will believe the theory that Jesus will baptize every convert in His Spirit. No signs. But the theory is that a baptism in the Spirit has taken place.
Can we count? One plus one equals two. Jesus commanded that His disciples should baptize, as is evident in Luke’s record of early conversions. That’s one baptism. It’s in water. How many baptisms do we get? If Jesus then baptizes each convert, does that make two baptisms?
This entire theory is remarkable and impossible to believe. Christian baptism is in water. That’s the ONE BAPTISM commanded by Jesus. And to suppose that John was inspired to say that Jesus would baptize all converts in His Spirit is a remarkable stretch. It’s not believable. We should go by what is taught rather than what some surmise and imagine.
Ray,
I’ve said many times that I’m not arguing against water baptism. I wrote just a few days ago –
The common argument that only the apostles and Cornelius received baptism of the Spirit is, I think, flawed as overlooking the prophets and what the Gospels actually say. You say,
And just where is this promise found?
Matthew has John saying that to the Pharisees and Saduccees — some of whom accepted Jesus and some of whom were damned. I’m not aware of any of them being apostles.
Luke has John saying this to “the crowds” including tax collectors and soldiers. There’s not the slightest hint that he spoke to only 11 men.
How odd would it be for John to promise the Spirit to 11 men and damnation to the rest?! Or did he fail to mention that those who accepted Jesus would receive the Spirit? Why ignore those who would believe in the Messiah? Why only mention the apostles and the damned? Is the salvation of those who believe in Jesus the central message? Why discuss everyone but them?
No, it makes much more sense to take “baptize with the Spirit” to refer to the outpouring of the Spirit promised by the prophets to all God’s people (as it would have been understood by John’s listeners) and so to refer to the gift of the Spirit all Christians have.
Therefore, when Peter promises the “gift of the Holy Spirit” to his hearers in Acts 2, he promises them the same gift he had obviously received (but not necessarily manifested by the same means). And if you follow the language of chapter 2, that’s exactly what Peter is saying.
Peter describes his own giftedness as fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy. He then says,
(Act 2:33 NAU) 33 “Therefore having been exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured forth this which you both see and hear.
In short, Peter equate the Spirit he has received to the outpouring promised in the OT: the “promise of the Holy Spirit.”
He then promises the “gift of the Holy Spirit,” in very parallel language, meaning the very same thing.
(Act 2:39 NAU) 39 “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.”
“The promise” in v. 39 refers back to v. 33, explicitly tying the gift of the Spirit to the promise of the Spirit. Indeed, the language of 2:39 echoes prophetic promises that the Spirit would be poured out on their descendants in such passages as —
(Isa 44:3 NAU) 3 ‘For I will pour out water on the thirsty land And streams on the dry ground; I will pour out My Spirit on your offspring And My blessing on your descendants;
Therefore, “baptism with the Spirit” is the same gift of the Spirit all Christians receive.
Therefore, the scriptural emphasis re baptism is on the Spirit, not the water. That does not exclude water but it requires us to place the same emphasis on the Spirit in our own teaching. The OT prophets promised an outpouring of the Spirit, not water baptism. Water baptism is when (normally) Spirit baptism is received, resulting in a single baptismal event (one baptism) but it’s the Spirit that sanctifies, not the water.
Wow! Are some who study the subject of baptism and of the Holy Spirit totally unaware of where Jesus promised the apostles only that they would receive baptism in the Spirit?
Acts 1:1-5 (ESV)
In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach, [2] until the day when he was taken up, after he had given commands through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen. [3] To them he presented himself alive after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.
[4] And while staying with them he ordered them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, “you heard from me; [5] for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.”
CAN IT BE that any student of these matters is unfamiliar with Acts 1:1-5 where the specific promise of baptism in the Spirit is given? And John, chapters 14-17 where ONLY the apostles are promised particular things based on their receiving the Spirit?
Why would anyone want to seek in Old Covenant writings information about the work of the Spirit in this time? Prophecies are not always understood until their fulfillment is seen. And in this case, the fulfillment is clear. It was the apostles who received baptism in the Spirit. The baptism in the Spirit was not repeated until God chose to convince a reluctant Peter that Gentiles also should be offered salvation! That was twice, and ONLY twice.
Meanwhile the Spirit was being poured out on all believers who had repented and who had been baptized. But the gift of the Spirit they and we received was not at all the same as the baptism in the Spirit which was given to the apostles.
I think it vital to our understanding of entering the Way that we understand we receive the gift of the Spirit as a result of our conversion to Jesus Christ. Acts 2:38 tells the tale. Each example of conversion retells the same truths. The baptism of each convert was performed by human hands and was an immersion in water. Only the apostles were baptized in the Spirit. Only the apostles performed miracles in early days. Later miracles were also performed by some on whom the apostles had “laid their hands” in an anointing. It’s heretical to claim that there is in fact a second baptism which some Christians receive but don’t know they received it. The baptism commanded by JESUS is in water.
This canard that the baptism of the Spirit and the guidance and revelation of the Spirit were promised only to the Eleven has been debunked thoroughly elsewhere on this board, and is not even consistently held by those who argue it. WHICH apostles were baptized in the Spirit, Ray? Was Barnabus? Or Judas? Paul? Andronicus? Timothy? Matthias? Silas?
Ray, merely repeating a thing does not make it so. Your interpretation reflects the all-too-common error of inferring exclusive language where no reason for such an inference exists. That is, to limit something to the people recorded in scripture when no such limitation is actually in the text or can be reasonably inferred. The scriptures record three of the apostles performing miracles, therefore you infer that the apostles and only the apostles could perform miracles. But there is no biblical reason to infer this. You could just as easily infer that only Jewish men could spread the Gospel, as only Jewish men did so in the scriptures. Such an inference would be unfounded and for the same reason.
For example: one might use your reasoning to argue that the Great Commission was given to 11 men and nobody else, so I need not concern myself with it. That command is not to me. OR… Jesus was speaking to only 11 men when he promised to “prepare a place for you”, so I should not expect a home to be prepared in heaven for my believing mother. OR… Peter told a large group of Jews to repent and be baptized for the remission of your sins, but never made the same specific connection of baptism and “remission of sins” to any gentile, so that X238 connection only applies to Jews.
I could go on. I believe that most of this reasoning is simply a fig leaf for a disconnect between modern experience and biblical record. If we cannot change scripture and will not change ourselves, we need some way to make the discrepancy disappear. The improper inference of exclusive language is an easily applied means of doing this.
Ray,
Yes, indeed, Jesus promised the apostles baptism in the Holy Spirit — and he did just that. But nothing limits this baptism to the apostles. In fact, the most natural reading of the text is that the Spirit fell on all 120 of the disciples.
Now, why did the apostles immediately ask —
(Act 1:6 NAU) 6 So when they had come together, they were asking Him, saying, “Lord, is it at this time You are restoring the kingdom to Israel?”
Well, because they’d read the prophets and knew that the outpouring of the Spirit indicating the coming of the Kingdom. They took John to be referring to the outpouring of the Spirit promised by Joel, Isaiah, etc.
We then see in Peter’s sermon that he makes that connection explicit. This is the long-promised outpouring. But outpouring was promised to all God’s people for all generations. Therefore, we all receive the ourpoured Spirit. (The same water imagery lies behind Jesus’ “living water.”)
Therefore, the “gift of the Spirit” is the outpoured Spirit is the Spirit promised by the prophets is the baptism of the Spirit. We all receive it.
We all receive baptism of the Spirit, but the normal case is to receive it concurrently with water baptism — one baptism in two elements.
Jhn 4:2 (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)
“This canard that the baptism of the Spirit and the guidance and revelation of the Spirit were promised only to the Eleven has been debunked
Charles, I can’t imagine anyone who believes they have healing hands, would believe anything else. Charles when you raise someone from death, please record it.
Pentecostals want baptism in the Spirit to have been given to more than the apostles. Oddly, Luke doesn’t agree with this theory. He points out that miracles did follow the baptism in the Spirit. The miracles were performed by the apostles, with no mention of any miracle at all being performed by non-apostles until after the apostles had anointed seven servants of the church, who then are spoken of as performing miracles as well. If all Christians have been baptized in the Spirit, it’s marvelous to see that most of us cannot perform miracles of healing. Did I say “most”? Do ANY contemporary Christians heal by laying on of hands or by direct speech to drive out a demon?
It’s marvelous to behold the ways in which false teaching is advanced in our generation. ONLY the apostles were promised they would be able to remember what Jesus had taught during the time they were with Him. That promise does not extend to us who were not with Him while He was here. Nor do we have any reason to believe that the many conflicting versions of truth we hear in this day are all inspired by the speakers/writers having been led into all truth. But both these conditions were linked by Jesus with the promised baptism in the Spirit which would come upon the apostles.
Jay, our host, writes: Therefore, the “gift of the Spirit” is the outpoured Spirit is the Spirit promised by the prophets is the baptism of the Spirit. We all receive it. We all receive baptism of the Spirit, but the normal case is to receive it concurrently with water baptism — one baptism in two elements.
RAY REMARKS: That the Spirit is poured out surely is evident. Peter was led to promise that all believers who repented and were baptized in water would receive “the gift of the Spirit.” Every one of us. But he did not say the gift would be a baptism in the Spirit. And of course it is not a second baptism for each of us. The ONE baptism involved in the Way is the baptism commanded by Jesus which we are to perform. It’s baptism in water, from which every convert is raised up into NEW life. At baptism we each do, as promised, receive the GIFT of the Holy Spirit. Those who received baptism in the Spirit were enabled to perform miracles. WE ARE NOT enabled to perform miracles. Nor were most of those early converts.
As Jay notes, the objection to your reasoning is from looking at the scripture, not just from experience. And I have carefully demonstrated the inconsistency and invalidity of your construct by comparing it to the scripture and showing how this manner of interpretation contradicts orthodox belief… even your own. I note that you did not address this.
As to raising the dead, I remember what Abraham told the rich man, and think it probably applies here as well.
Ray, there are literally millions of believers all over the world who claim to have seen miracles performed. Is each and every one of them either deceived or deceiving others with his testimony? I do not doubt that many claims of such working of miracles are either dubious or outright false. But ALL of them?
Deceived or deceiving? I don’t see a third path here, Ray. Can you shed some light on this?
When doctors say someone has a bad ‘whatever” and we pray and pray and later upon examination it is gone or disappeared, why do we say it must of been a missed diagnoses by the doctors? How many times I have seen this and always wondered why we couldn’t and wouldn’t give the credit to our prayer to God being answered.
Debate, debate, debate, but the bottom line is why pray if we do not really believe it can bring change?
It seems more constant if those that believe God will not intercede would just state I do not believe in asking for anything in prayer and refuse to participate except for giving thanks and gratitude for whatever has already happened. Doing so will always have you batting 100%.
Question: Do you ask for anything at all specific in your prayers and if so do you really believe they can be answered and you receive as you asked?
Ray,
You seem to be laboring under the false premise, pushed by Pentecostals, that “baptism with the Spirit,” is a second gift, separate from the ordinary gift of the Spirit as received at water baptism. They’re wrong. The Spirit is received but once — normally at the time of conversion.
Ironically, the Pentecostal view receives support from H. Leo Boles, who taught that baptism of the Spirit and the gift of the Spirit are two different “measures” of the Spirit and two very different things. (People forget that a substantial number from the Churches of Christ joined the Pentecostal movement in the early 70’s and brought some of their theology with them!)
Baptism of the Spirit and the gift of the Spirit and the promise of the Spirit and the outpouring of the Spirit are the same thing. The Spirit gives gifts based on his will, and the Spirit cannot be manipulated into giving a particular gift. It’s up to the Spirit and he blows where he wills.
Ray;
Christ made the statement about the spirit to the 11, but Matthais was selected prior to and received the Spirit also at Pentecost.
I will not post all of the verses that I will refer you to because there are too many, to prove that your statements are not correct.
If you begin reading at Acts 1:12 and read through Acts 2:18 you will find.
1. That Matthais had been selected to replace Judas while they were in the upper room prior to the receiving the Spirit.
(Acts 1:26 KJV) And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.
(Acts 2:1 KJV) And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
(Acts 2:2 KJV) And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
(Acts 2:3 KJV) And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
(Acts 2:4 KJV) And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
2. In the upper room there were about 120 persons, and Acts 2:4 states that all were filled.
3. Then notice that Peter plus the eleven makes 12 apostles.
(Acts 2:14 KJV) But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:
4. Then again notice Peter tells what is happening, from prophesy.
(Acts 2:16 KJV) But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
(Acts 2:17 KJV) And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
(Acts 2:18 KJV) And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:
5. Now go back to and notice the women and his brothers that were among and numbered in the 120. The 120 were not all male, as I had been taught.
(Acts 1:14 KJV) These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.
(Acts 1:15 KJV) And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,)
6. The statement, “I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh” was never limited to the120.
Larry Cheek
Larry, Jay, and Charles comment well to explain their views about the present work of God’s Spirit. The miracles performed by the apostles were without doubt genuine real miracles. I admit that I have no personal knowledge of even one miracle which might have been performed by the Holy Spirit during my lifetime.
Jay suggests I might have formed my opinion about differing works of the Spirit from recent converts who were influenced by Pentecostals. I have to refuse the honor of being so influenced. From my earliest years in the “restoration” unity movement, I’ve known that the Spirit was given in different measures. I learned it from Bible study.
It cannot be denied that the apostles were promised unusual powers, including that THEY would be baptized in the Spirit. Acts 2:4 does not say that 120 were baptized in the Spirit. The pronoun refers to its antecedent, which is the 12. Yes, that included the replacement for Judas. And later, Luke mentions that miracles were performed “at the hands of the apostles.” Not by 120. By 12.
The next mention of miracles performed by non-apostles is at the hand of Philip who prior to the miracles had been anointed by the apostles. I wasn’t taught by Pentecostals that these were differing measures of the Spirit. I learned it from my earliest study in Acts. And the facts haven’t changed in the more than 60 years since then.
Yes, the Spirit enabled differing gifts in the early church. These gifts were striking and undeniable. Paul speaks of the differing gifts in his letter to the Corinthian Christians. If any Christian today has those same gifts, I’ve yet to meet one of the gifted ones. I’ve been blessed to have acquaintance with many who walk closely with Jesus. One of the close ones is Garland Bare, born in Tibet, former missionary in Thailand, and now retired and living here in Joplin. In a meeting recently he spoke of three answers to prayer that had seemed to be impossible and yet were made requests in prayer.
One was of a young man who was dying, had lost most of his blood due to his sickness, and had no hope for continued life. Yet the prayer for this very sick young man saw complete and quick healing. He was restored to life when everyone had given up on him living. But the healing was not by any laying on of hands by a miracle-worker. It was an answer to prayer.
I’m sure that only the apostles were promised they would receive baptism in the Spirit. I observe that only they are reported to have received this baptism, as is evident in the absence of miracles performed by other than the apostles and later, by ones anointed by the apostles. It’s good to reason together on matters of faith. It’s best to believe what the inspired writers wrote and to NOT read into what was written more than was written.
Jay advises that he is not writing against water baptism, then explains that he imagines that Jesus is contrasting water baptism (Jesus speaks of a fleshly birth rather than a “fleshly baptism.) with a baptism in the Spirit.
And thereby contradicts the Master whose “great commission” calls for water baptism for every convert. And Jesus never promises baptism in the Spirit to ANYONE other than the apostles, who indeed received baptism in the Spirit, accompanied by very unusual sounds and sights. Such signs surely are not seen in ordinary baptisms. But those who believe the Bible surely do baptize converts in water and realize that Jesus then GIFTS the new Christians with His Spirit. The gift of the Spirit promised to follow repentance and baptism of believers is never referred to as a baptism in the Spirit by the writers of the Bible books.
The Bible writers make a clear distinction between baptism in water, which is for every new convert to Christianity (a one-time gift which need not ever be repeated) and baptism in the Spirit which was given only to the apostles. Anyone who teaches that baptism in the Spirit is for all Christians is positing a second baptism other than the one commanded by Jesus. Do we want to believe Paul was in error in calling for unity because the ONE Lord has commanded ONE baptism to be performed whenever a new convert is made for Jesus?
Jay and Ray,
I mentioned Dr. Jack Cottrell about a year ago who has some great articles on this topic (1 baptism, 2 aspects [water and spirit]). Ray after reading your comments at the Christian Standard, I realize you are familiar with Dr. Cottrell, but don’t agree with him.
Charles writes, “This canard that the baptism of the Spirit and the guidance and revelation of the Spirit were promised only to the Eleven has been debunked thoroughly…” But Jesus promised it to 12 rather than 11, didn’t He? And it is clearly stated by Luke that it was given to the 12 who are named in chapter 1 of Acts. I’ve never said otherwise. The Bible record is easy to read and understand by anyone who wants to understand it. I’m sorry some want to read into the record things that didn’t happen.
It’s hard to understand why anyone could suppose that all the differing doctrines taught by us who claim to be in Christ are proof of inspiration by the ONE Spirit . But when the writings of apostles and those taught by the apostles and considered by early Christians to be from God are studied, no contradictions appear. If we factor in the writings of early Christian writers, that’s a different story. Apostolic truth unites us. It surely should do so, of course. Jesus wants us who believe in Him to be brothers and sisters in ONE faith. I believe that’s the aim of Jay and likely of each one who studies with him.
So I repeat. The baptism in the Spirit was promised BY JESUS only to His 12 apostles. I’m convinced from Luke’s account of the history of the early church that baptism in the Spirit was given to those apostles and none others. Jesus commanded that we who tell others about Him are to baptize those who believe. We’d surely better believe the Master and obey HIM. On the first day the church existed Peter did believe what Jesus had taught. And 3,000 were that day baptized in water for the remission of their sins and TO RECEIVE THE HOLY SPIRIT as God’s gift. Luke doesn’t call this gift a baptism in the Spirit. Nor should we unless we seek to mislead and divide disciples.
I’m glad we both now realize that the promise of the Lord Jesus was given ONLY to the apostles. Jay writes, “Yes, indeed, Jesus promised the apostles baptism in the Holy Spirit — and he did just that. But nothing limits this baptism to the apostles. In fact, the most natural reading of the text is that the Spirit fell on all 120 of the disciples.”
I don’t know what’s more natural in the ENGLISH language than to believe that a pronoun is commonly (by rule) used in reference the the preceding (the closest preceding) noun. The historian has just spoken of a twelfth apostle being selected to replace Judas Iscariot. Then he records that THEY were together somewhere in Jerusalem when most amazing things happened. The amazing things accompanied THEM being baptized in the Spirit. Sounds and sights confirmed the act. Miracle-working power followed, and Luke mentions who performed the miracles. It was the APOSTLES. It was NOT the 120 who also loved and followed Jesus.
I note that in my haste I wrote “the the” when the intended words were “to the.” Likely every reader will realize the intended words. Blame my computer!
Charles McLean asked on 12/5/2011 and I finally today read the note which reported his comment: Ray, there are literally millions of believers all over the world who claim to have seen miracles performed. Is each and every one of them either deceived or deceiving others with his testimony? I do not doubt that many claims of such working of miracles are either dubious or outright false. But ALL of them? Deceived or deceiving? I don’t see a third path here, Ray. Can you shed some light on this?”
RAY: I have never personally witnessed a miracle, so far as I know. But I surely have read reports from others of ones they HAVE witnessed or experienced. And I surely rejoice with such brothers and sisters! If I have said miracles are impossible, I was wrong. But what IS wrong is for anyone to suppose that Jesus cannot perform things impossible for us humans to perform. And if He chooses to do so in this generation, we should rejoice with those who are helped by the inexplicable event. Surely none of us want to deny that anything is possible with God! But if anyone wants me to say that miracles are PROMISED for today, they are out of bounds.
Jay: Author: Jay Guin
Comment:
Ray, You seem to be laboring under the false premise, pushed by Pentecostals, that “baptism with the Spirit,” is a second gift, separate from the ordinary gift of the Spirit as received at water baptism. They’re wrong. The Spirit is received but once — normally at the time of conversion.
RAY: Now, Jay, we wouldn’t want to fail to believe what the Bible says just because some others may also have read the Bible and believed it. The Bible is not unclear about baptism in the Spirit. It is clearly stated who performs it, and when it WAS once performed by Him. And that baptism in the Spirit is different from the baptism Jesus says we who tell others about Him are to perform cannot be doubted. If some Pentecostals also recognize this doesn’t make it false doctrine!
Perhaps I should explain that I became a Christian and a student of the Bible more than 70 years ago. I was first taught in the First Christian Church in Hutsonville, Illinois by Christian preachers. None of them, including one who commuted to our town while he was a student at Cincinnati Bible Seminary had any different idea and tried to claim that the two vastly different baptisms were in fact one baptism. Then, while I was a student at Ozark Bible College in Joplin, Missouri, and was taught by Christian preacher/teachers, including particular study of Acts, still none tried to convince me that the two vastly different baptisms were really one baptism. That came much later.
And it’s a foolish way to ignore plain truth. JESUS baptizes in the Spirit. JESUS commands that we who tell others about Him should baptize IN WATER. Different baptizers. Different elements. Not at all the same. If Pentecostals promote a baptism in the Spirit, that’s surely not what Jesus or any Christian preacher/teacher teaches. I affirm that the Bible is clear as can be in teaching that WE are to baptize new converts, and that the baptism which brings the convert “into Christ” is performed in water, out of which the new Christian has been raised “into new life.” That’s as per Paul’s explanation of the experience in Romans 6. That’s as Paul mentions in Galatians 3:27. That’s as Peter promises in Acts 2:38. Remission of sins and the GIFT of the Spirit follow the believer repenting and being baptized in water.
History Guy writes correctly: Author: HistoryGuy
Comment: Jay and Ray, I mentioned Dr. Jack Cottrell about a year ago who has some great articles on this topic (1 baptism, 2 aspects [water and spirit]). Ray after reading your comments at the Christian Standard, I realize you are familiar with Dr. Cottrell, but don’t agree with him.
Permalink: /2010/12/baptism-an-exploration-part-3-john-the-baptist/
——————————–
How true it is that I don’t agree with the peculiar teaching of Jack Cottrell about two totally separate baptisms miraculously becoming one baptism. Peter was led to define the new birth of water and spirit as being REPENTING and being baptized. That’s ONE baptism. Anyone who tries to bring in a baptism by the Holy Spirit is indeed disagreeing with what the Spirit caused Peter to teach and Luke to record. The baptism commanded by JESUS is immersion in water. Promised results of the new birth which culminates in water baptism is that the new Christian is both freed from the penalty for sin and the new Christian receives as God’s gift “the Holy Spirit.”
There’s no way this gift is a baptism BY the Holy Spirit as some seek to prove from the mistranslation of 1 Corinthians 12:13. What Paul spoke of was the baptism every believer knew they had received, which was immersion in water by human hands and being raised then into NEW LIFE which included walking with the Spirit of Jesus. Our good brother and many others try to make the apostle disagree with himself when he urged unity based on ONE baptism. They suppose he actually wrote in that verse about a SECOND baptism which every Christian had received without knowing anything about it. But the apostolic appeal is for unity based on what they DID know they had experienced. The baptism of which he spoke was the very same one Jesus commanded was to be given to every convert–immersion in water and being raised from the water into NEW LIFE. Doesn’t Jay also want there to be two baptisms which supposedly become just one? I’m sure Jesus spoke of only one in connection with conversion. The baptism IN the Spirit BY Jesus is reported in Acts 2. That’s a one-time event, therefore not included in Paul’s statement about unity based on ONE baptism in the Christian age. Jesus commanded a baptism. Yes? Was His command directed to the Spirit? Your answer to that question will tell us all whether or not Paul later spoke of a baptism BY the Spirit as something every Christian had experienced.