A Discussion on The Baptism of The Holy Spirit

Our discussion on the topic of tongues led into the area of the “Baptism of the Holy Spirit” or as more commonly referred to as “The Second Blessing” (Acts 2:1-4). Is this a common everyday occurence or a one time event? These questions come to mind; 

1). Why do we need this “Baptism” if we are indwelt with the Holy Spirit at the time of Salvation? 

2). How do we as believers know we have received this “Baptism”? 

3). Can a believer be effective without receiving the “Baptism of the Holy Spirit”? 

4). How does one receive this “Baptism”? 

This should get us started! I look forward to a highly enriching discussion!  

 

Advertisements

17 thoughts on “A Discussion on The Baptism of The Holy Spirit

  1. 1. We Don’t we are all “baptized into the Spirit” as Paul articulates in 1 Corinthians 12

    2. We know objectively (Ephesians 4, 1 Corinthians 12, and 2 Corinthians 1) and we know subjectively as our lives are brought under the Lordship of Christ (the entire book of 1 John) in progressive sanctification. We also know that being baptized with the Spirit is the Baptism of Jesus which is used synonymously with being Born Again (John 3-4)

    3. Nope nor can they enter the kingdom of God.

    4. Faith in Jesus Christ. The Spirit baptizes all of God’s children. As Paul states in Galatians “And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, “Abba! Father”

    This should get the ball rolling.

  2. 1. We do to show our obedience to the Scriptures.
    The indwelling at the time of salvation is, simply put not the same thing as being filled with the Spirit as to note the Acts 2 experience. I prayed today over my meal. I believe I’ll pray tonight before bed over different issues. Both times I’ll pray yet in different ways and in different directives. Please understand Acts 2 is rather exclusive (my pentecostal friends don’t like this speak) to a specific result. Yes they spoke with other tongues but it was for the hearing of the people from all the regions around them. Later though in Acts they were again filled and refilled on several occasions and the basic result was speaking in other tongues and recieving power. There was no account after Acts 2 about people hearing their native tongue and giving glory to God yet people got filled and spoke in other tongues as I have. Paul teaches in I Cor. that we pray and speak unto God and we speak out mysteries. The carnal mind doesn’t recieve from this yet we still edify ourselves by this prayer language.
    2. The baptism is noted by other tongues spoken and power and boldness given.
    3. yes. most without it are more effective than me and my Spirit filled friends.
    4. read the red and pray for the power. We ask and we recieve like any other thing we recieve from heaven. Also the laying on of hands by those that are filled already.
    hope this helps.
    Pastor Mark

  3. Hey Pastor Mark,

    I then must ask the infamous question in response to your number 2. Paul states this in 1 Corinthians 12

    27 Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. 28 And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, helping, administrating, and various kinds of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30 Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? 31 But earnestly desire the higher gifts.

    Pastor Mark in love, I think this is a very dangerous position to take. Even if you go with the second baptism deal, Paul makes it clear that everyone will not speak in tongues or heal, or work miracles. Paul also says it is the Holy Spirit who gives these gifts “as He pleases”. Can you provide us with a follow up please?

  4. Hey Pastor Mark,

    Would you like to take this to a phone conference where we can discuss this a bit more clearly. I have a couple people I would invite and you can invite whom you would like. Thanks.

  5. Hi Mark!!

    I have to take issue with a few of your postulates. Maybe we can hash this out together.

    Firstly, what is your basis for the statement that the infilling of the believer at regeneration is different from the “second blessing”?? Since the New Testament NEVER articulates this in the didactic sections, do you form this conclusion based solely upon the narratives in Acts??

    Can you give us other examples where narratives alone are the basis for formulating doctrine??

    A narrative tells us what happened to THOSE who were integral to the account.If a doctrine is to be gleaned from a narrative it is ALWAYS articulated in didactic (teaching) form elsewhere in the Bible. What you have proposed is not addressed anywhere.

    Part of the Wisdom of God articulated in the Word is in the fact that doctrines are not isolated to one place in the Book. In other words, we don’t have a book in the Bible where all the teaching on Righteousness is found. If Romans was cut out of the Bible completely, the doctrine of Righteousness would still be perfectly intact, because the Bible’s teaching on Righteousness is diffused throughout Scripture.

    This is a reflection on the genius of God. It renders it impossible to lose ANY doctrinal Truth simply because one may not have access to any certain part of the Bible where (for example) Righteousness is covered. There are believers now and throughout history who have never had a complete Bible. Yet they always had access to all the vital doctrines because no doctrine is confined to one Book or area in the Bible.

    This is actually a method used in cryptography to prevent the loss of information based upon damage or loss of particular documents. The vital information is spread throughout the documents so that the loss of some of the documents does not result in the complete loss of vital information. God did it first, and did it better. This is specifically addressed by God as the structural form He uses with doctrine:

    Isa 28:10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

    However, if we lose the Book of Acts…….or even a PORTION of the Book of Acts…….it is impossible to make your case.The doctrine you are attempting to formulate does NOT follow this pattern. It is not “here a little, there a little”. It is all condensed in one small section of Scripture, and that is never the case with any other doctrine.

    So we see the problematic nature of your assertion is twofold. One, narrative is NEVER the sole basis for doctrine in the Bible. If doctrine is to be gleaned from narrative it is always addressed in the didactic portions of Scripture as well. Without exception.

    Two, the assumption that the “second blessing” is separate from the initial indwelling is an impossible conclusion to reach if the Book of Acts is not available. You cannot come to that conclusion by reading ANYWHERE else in the Bible, and that simply is completely inconsistent with the way the REST of the Bible is constructed.

    If this is the tact you implement to determine doctrine, should we then expect anyone who misrepresents their giving to fall down dead like Ananias and Sapphira?? After all, that’s narrative as well, it is completely unsupported by the didactic sections of Scripture, and we should therefore create doctrine from it to be consistent with your methodology.

    There are others I’d like to address, but we can start here. I look forward to your response

  6. I never knew I had so many friends out there is cyber land. I need to put my dictionary back on the self and begin to assemble a coherent cogent thought or two. All of you are fine folks and full of grace and the word of God.
    #2. Lionel, would then be answered by “ye shall recieve the gift of the Holy Ghost. for this promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call”. Acts 2:38-39
    Notice now that we are talking about an Acts 2 experience and Paul who was no where near Acts 2 yet shows up speaking in tounges and teaching those who believed in Christ should be too.
    Not everyone will. Not everyone has to. Yet it is for every believer.
    It seems that salvation and being born-again go hand and hand with the tongues experience. I like the Acts 10:43-46 text.
    GaryV – that is just plain interesting. I’ve never heard things put the way you put them. This type of forum indeed lends to some persiflage like no other. Yet I don’t know the good it really offers but here we go. I never have looked at God’s Word as narrative or didactic. To me it’s all Scripture given for reproof and doctrine…If God is talking then I am all ears. Fortunately for us GaryV we do have the book of Acts to bring to light the provision of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and tongues. And the A&S comment is a bit glib. That was a very, very specific encounter and move of God at the time. If we were to get that specific leading of the Lord to replicate that happening – I believe the same would happen today to all that would not obey.
    Keep up the good Gospel work everyone!
    You all can post your phone numbers if you like.
    We all need to hear from God not each other though. Until then I’ll be praying in tongues.
    Pastor Mark

  7. Hi again Mark!!

    Nothing really unusual about what I wrote brother…..standard fare. It is bad hermeneutics to form doctrine solely from narratives. And since your contention that the “second blessing” is addressed NOWHERE else in Scripture………..narrative OR didactic…….it’s bad hermeneutics to form your doctrine from it.

    Don’t you find it odd that your interpretation cannot be supported by the writings of ANY of the NT writers outside of the narrative?? I mean,can you point us for example to anything in Paul (who wrote about tongues voluminously but NEVER uttered a syllable in support of your view)?? Peter?? James?? John??

    If the “second blessing” gives us a prayer language that gives a direct access to God and builds us up, why isn’t it for everyone if it’s necessary and part of the baptism in the Spirit we all need??

    In fact, you accidentally misrepresented something about the issue in your response. I’ll quote you here:

    “Paul who was no where near Acts 2 yet shows up speaking in tounges and teaching those who believed in Christ should be too.”

    No he didn’t. Paul never even INTIMATED that all who believe in Christ should speak in tongues. Quite the opposite.

    1Cr 12:4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
    1Cr 12:5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.
    1Cr 12:6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
    1Cr 12:7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.
    1Cr 12:8 For to ONE is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to ANOTHER the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
    1Cr 12:9 To ANOTHER faith by the same Spirit; to ANOTHER the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
    1Cr 12:10 To ANOTHERthe working of miracles; to another prophecy; to ANOTHER discerning of spirits; to ANOTHER [divers] kinds of tongues; to ANOTHER the interpretation of tongues:

    Paul makes it clear here that only SOME have the gift of tongues just like only SOME have the gift of prophecy or healing. NOT ALL who believe in Christ have the gift of tongues unless ALL have the gift of prophecy and healing and interpretation and miracles, etc etc etc. Context brother. You can’t rip the gift of tongues out of the context of all the other gifts being mentioned here and say tongues is for everyone but the others aren’t.

    In fact, just to make it crystal clear, Paul reiterates it in no uncertain terms:

    1Cr 12:28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.
    1Cr 12:29 Are all apostles? (Of course not) are all prophets? (nope) are all teachers? (no) are all workers of miracles? (no)
    1Cr 12:30 Have all the gifts of healing? (nope) do all speak with tongues? (NO) do all interpret? (no).

    Yet you claim that tongues from the Acts 2 narrative is for every believer. In fact, you say, “It seems that salvation and being born-again go hand and hand with the tongues experience.”

    Also, let’s not read into verses more than is there. There are only two instances outside Acts 2 where tongues are explicitly mentioned as accompanying salvation.

    Act 10:46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
    Act 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

    Act 19:6 And when Paul had laid [his] hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

    However, there are many other instances of salvation with NO mention of tongues. It’s not reasonable to extrapolate 2 experiences in a narrative into a universal application.

    If this was the COMMON experience, why then did Paul never mention it as such the MANY times he spoke of salvation in the Epistles?? Not once did he breathe a word about salvation and tongues going hand-in-hand. What he actually said is that NOT everyone who is saved WILL speak in tongues.

    As for A&S being glib, that may be so. But it is also a perfect corollary to the narratives in Acts,and perfectly consistent with the method of interpretation you used to formulate your doctrine.

  8. GaryV I guess I’m just one of the “gifted ones” along with millions of others. See you in the “rapture” if there really is one. The Scriptures don’t speak of it as such but yet we believe…
    Pastor Mark
    Thanks Lionel – the invitation is noted and we’ll talk soon.
    Pastor Mark

  9. GaryV I was intrigued by the second to last paragraph of yours. You no doubt are well over my head in your depth and knowledge of God’s Word. My thought is to respond that they all spoke in tongues. Salvation is spoken of more as a fact of their condition or position throughout the epistles. He greets them as saints all throught his letters. I would have you to be reminded of Acts 19:1-6. There Paul places a great premium on salvation and tongues going together. Oh yes and the “secong blessing” term was not mine. I recieved Jesus as Lord was water baptized- weeks later-(head first, one time as the minister said in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit- this will cause a whole group to come out of the wood work I gather) then attended prayer meetings and church and was gloriously baptized in the Holy Spirit and spoke with outher tongues.
    I never sought the second blessing thing. I sought God and recieved a prayer language that I use daily. It’s simple just keep on following after Him and you will taste and see that the Lord is good.
    Pastor Mark

  10. Hi Mark!! Thanks for your gracious responses brother. My question would be “All WHO spoke in tongues??” I don’t see “all” speaking in tongues in Acts, just the initial Acts 2 and the two other Scriptures I cited.

    What I find extremely confusing is why this is never referred to by any of the Apostles?? They all spoke concerning gifts, they all spoke concerning Salvation, they all spoke concerning prayer,they all spoke about the Holy Spirit……… but nary a peep about tongues as evidence of the Holy Spirit in every believer, nor the gift being for everyone,nor about a secret language.

    And if this is a secret language which allows greater access or wisdom or whatever, wouldn’t such a critically important thing be mentioned repeatedly and expounded upon?? But there is a deafening silence in this regard.

    You said you never sought the Baptism with tongues, but I suggest that you did in a sense. You stated that you simply went to church and Bible studies and was Baptized. Did this church believe and preach and teach the Baptism in the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in other tongues??

    Did the Bible study teach this as well?? Were there prayers offered on your behalf to receive it?? Had you been hearing these other believers doing it in church, in Bible study, and elsewhere for some time??

    Were these people ones to whom you had become emotionally attached??

    Of course……….and whether you recognize the social dynamics of situations like that or not, there is no contesting the powerful factors of peer pressure, a powerful desire to “fit in” with this new group, a palpable sense that theses folks with whom you had thrown in your lot “knew” more than you, and the subtle play of authority figures telling you that this was essential for every believer (with the attendant pressure that comes with the obvious conclusion for you and they if you did NOT speak in tongues).

    While these factors didn’t consciously weigh on your mind, they are powerful psychological factors that affect every human being in a precise and measurable way. There is no lack of research in this area of social dynamics. The dynamics of a group,especially a closed group that sees itself as “unique”, cannot be ignored.

    Tongues were used by God for the specific purposes illustrated in Acts 2 and laid out by Paul (who never mentions a “private prayer language” but a gift rather to speak human language).

    God also used tongues to reveal to the Apostles that Gentiles were included into the New Covenant in Christ without having to be circumcised and obey Torah as was the case under the Old Covenant.

    Read Acts 15 and the account of the Council at Jerusalem and you will see how God used the identical experience of tongues given to the Apostles as evidence that Salvation of the Gentiles was part of God’s plan and did not require going through Judaism.

    This was a RADICAL concept to these good Jewish boys,and the controversy it stirred up went on to be dealt with by Paul some 30 years later in his Epistles (Judaisers).

    Again, if what you say is true, then I cannot reconcile the complete dearth of teaching in the New Testament to support it by the Apostles, especially as related to something as critical as Salvation itself and the role of the Holy Spirit in our lives (which they wrote on voluminously).

    What are your thoughts??

  11. Hi Pastor Mark and GV (wuz up dawg!)

    There is something that specifically needs to be pointed out. I do not see anywhere in scripture that says tongues are a private prayer language. What I do see is that tongues are for edification:

    1 Cor 14:5 I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater [is] he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.

    Anytime Paul spoke in tongues, there was an interpretation. That interpretation gave intellectual edification:

    1 Cor 14:13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue pray that he may interpret.

    1 cor 14: 9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.

    1 Cor 14:6 Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?

    The end point to tongues is edification. That comes through (if speaking in tongues) interpretation. In Acts 19:6 it says that they spoke in tongues and that they prophesied. That prophesying (or in other words teaching, praising God, encouragement through the Lord) was the interpretation that provided the edifying.

    So again, tongues must come with interpretation or they are done in vain.

  12. JulianofGod,

    You are voicing exactly what I brought forth in my last post under the topic of tongues. Check it out and let me what you think. 🙂

    Dorothy

  13. I would ask you to chat with me on gmail/MSN.

    But here are some criteria:

    (1) Scripture ONLY as the manual

    (2) No calling each other being of the devil

    (3) Open to the Scriptures with absolute transparency

    If you can do this, we can discuss on this issue. I have spoken to countless Christians about this issue and when we opened ourselves to what the Word had to say, we were blessed.

    Let me introduce myself, I come from the hindu faith and I was healed miraculously of cancer at the age of 9. This is what led me to Jesus Christ. I am strictly non-denominational and fully for the Word.

    Sidharth

  14. Sidharth,

    Thanks for the invitation, but I live in Greece which makes these things difficult.I already know where I stand on this. Why don’t you just put your work up here. No one will call you the devil.

    I read somewhere that you have “thorough knowledge” on this subject. Please enlighten us Sidharth.

    You still haven’t answered my question from the other thread.

Comments are closed.