The Spirit Baptism

[glad4mercy]

Do you hold to the Spirit Baptism as a second work of Grace, ( subsequent to conversion) or as occurring immedietely at conversion. Please use scriptures to support your position.

[John146]

Do you hold to the Spirit Baptism as a second work of Grace, ( subsequent to conversion) or as occurring immedietely at conversion. Please use scriptures to support your position.

The baptism of the Holy Spirit places us into the body of Christ (the church) so it has to occur at conversion.

1 Cor 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

[glad4mercy]

The baptism of the Holy Spirit places us into the body of Christ (the church) so it has to occur at conversion.

1 Cor 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

Good post.

So when we seek to receive even greater power from God to witness, the power that transforms us from a Spirit filled Christian to an overflowing Christian, from a witness to a powerful witness, would you consider that being "filled with the Spirit".

[Slug1]

This is always a great topic to discuss.

We see in Acts 8 a very specific situation that shows there are multiple times with the Holy Spirit. Upon conversion the Holy Spirit "seals" a person unto salvation. So any who believe in Christ are sealed and will be saved. This ONE baptism (1 Cor 12:13) is all that is needed to BE in Christ and then, will be saved.

Acts 8:12 But when they believed Philip as he preached the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, both men and women were baptized.

Here, all were sealed by the Holy Spirit and are Christians in Christ.

We see this in the scripture that "LATER" both John and Peter visited and all those who were "saved"... were also prayed over that they may ALSO receive the Holy Spirit. This separate event is more commonly known as the "Baptism of the Holy Spirit".

Here is the scripture:

v14 Now when the apostles who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them, 15 who, when they had come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit. 16 For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.

We can't say that they were not "IN CHRIST" until the Apostles came by later on. We know they all were "in Christ" from the MOMENT they accepted Jesus by believing in Him. The same for the eunuch from verses 26-39. That man was "in Christ" and sealed by the Holy Spirit the moment he believed.

So... why the "separate" event later concerning all those in Samaria?

Also... what did Simon "SEE" that enabled him to "witness" the Holy Spirit was being received?

v18 And when Simon saw that through the laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Spirit was given, he offered them money,

[John146]

Good post.

So when we seek to receive even greater power from God to witness, the power that transforms us from a Spirit filled Christian to an overflowing Christian, from a witness to a powerful witness, would you consider that being "filled with the Spirit".

Yes. Being baptized with the Spirit and being filled with the Spirit are two different things. They can occur at the same time upon conversion but a saved, Spirit baptized person can later be filled with the Spirit again multiple times. Here was Paul's message for people who had already been baptized with the Holy Spirit previously:

Eph 5:18 And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;19 Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord; 20 Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ;21 Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.

[Slug1]

Yes. Being baptized with the Spirit and being filled with the Spirit are two different things. They can occur at the same time upon conversion but a saved, Spirit baptized person can later be filled with the Spirit again multiple times.

Eph 5:18 And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;19 Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord; 20 Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ;21 Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.

I agree!!

Even with Jesus this is evident. After His baptism...

Luke 4:1 Then Jesus, being filled with the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit into[a] the wilderness,

v14 Then Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit to Galilee, and news of Him went out through all the surrounding region.

[glad4mercy]

This is always a great topic to discuss.

We see in Acts 8 a very specific situation that shows there are multiple times with the Holy Spirit. Upon conversion the Holy Spirit "seals" a person unto salvation. So any who believe in Christ are sealed and will be saved. This ONE baptism (1 Cor 12:13) is all that is needed to BE in Christ and then, will be saved.

Acts 8:12 But when they believed Philip as he preached the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, both men and women were baptized.

Here, all were sealed by the Holy Spirit and are Christians in Christ.

We see this in the scripture that "LATER" both John and Peter visited and all those who were "saved"... were also prayed over that they may ALSO receive the Holy Spirit. This separate event is more commonly known as the "Baptism of the Holy Spirit".

Here is the scripture:

v14 Now when the apostles who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them, 15 who, when they had come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit. 16 For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.

We can't say that they were not "IN CHRIST" until the Apostles came by later on. We know they all were "in Christ" from the MOMENT they accepted Jesus by believing in Him. The same for the eunuch from verses 26-39. That man was "in Christ" and sealed by the Holy Spirit the moment he believed.

So... why the "separate" event later concerning all those in Samaria?

Also... what did Simon "SEE" that enabled him to "witness" the Holy Spirit was being received?

v18 And when Simon saw that through the laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Spirit was given, he offered them money,

Hi Slug. I am not disagreeing with you, I'm just taking the other side so I can be further instructed. There are some that hold that the reason why the Samaritans did not receive the Baptism at conversion was because the laying on of hands by the apostles was in order to show to show that the Samaritans were the same body as the Jewish believers, kind of an apostolic seal. They would say that just because God did it this way in this instance, doesnt mean that it is necessarily the norm. I'm probably not saying all this precisely correct, but I'm sure you know what position I am referring to. How would you respond to them?

[glad4mercy]

This is always a great topic to discuss.

We see in Acts 8 a very specific situation that shows there are multiple times with the Holy Spirit. Upon conversion the Holy Spirit "seals" a person unto salvation. So any who believe in Christ are sealed and will be saved. This ONE baptism (1 Cor 12:13) is all that is needed to BE in Christ and then, will be saved.

Acts 8:12 But when they believed Philip as he preached the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, both men and women were baptized.

Here, all were sealed by the Holy Spirit and are Christians in Christ.

We see this in the scripture that "LATER" both John and Peter visited and all those who were "saved"... were also prayed over that they may ALSO receive the Holy Spirit. This separate event is more commonly known as the "Baptism of the Holy Spirit".

Here is the scripture:

v14 Now when the apostles who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them, 15 who, when they had come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit. 16 For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.

We can't say that they were not "IN CHRIST" until the Apostles came by later on. We know they all were "in Christ" from the MOMENT they accepted Jesus by believing in Him. The same for the eunuch from verses 26-39. That man was "in Christ" and sealed by the Holy Spirit the moment he believed.

So... why the "separate" event later concerning all those in Samaria?

Also... what did Simon "SEE" that enabled him to "witness" the Holy Spirit was being received?

v18 And when Simon saw that through the laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Spirit was given, he offered them money,

So do you hold a distinction between being baptized by the Holy Spirit and baptized in the Holy Spirit.

We are baptized into the body by the Spirit, and we are baptized in the Spirit by Christ. I know Father, Christ, and Spirit are one God, and I feel the need for caution when trying to distinguish the works of God within the Deity, but some hold that these are two separate events, and some hold that they are one and the same or that they occur similtaneously.

[awestruckchild]

This is paraphrased by me. Please correct if necessary.
If you believe in your heart and profess with your mouth, you will be saved.
The "church" that Paul ran across - he saw they believed and I have to assume they confessed it with their mouths, I mean, they were gathered together.
But he also saw they had not yet received the Holy Spirit.

[glad4mercy]

This is paraphrased by me. Please correct if necessary.
If you believe in your heart and profess with your mouth, you will be saved.
The "church" that Paul ran across - he saw they believed and I have to assume they confessed it with their mouths, I mean, they were gathered together.
But he also saw they had not yet received the Holy Spirit.

Very good point. Yet in Romans Paul said "if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His..." So how can we reconcile the statement that they were saved, but had not yet received the Holy Spirit, unless for some reason it was a special situation. Now, I am not stating this as what I believe, just trying to examine the question from all possible angles.

[Slug1]

Hi Slug. I am not disagreeing with you, I'm just taking the other side so I can be further instructed. There are some that hold that the reason why the Samaritans did not receive the Baptism at conversion was because the laying on of hands by the apostles was in order to show to show that the Samaritans were the same body as the Jewish believers, kind of an apostolic seal.

Based on what?

An "apostolic" seal? See the scripture below... there is no "apostolic" seal.

There is NO difference between Jew and Gentile.

They would say that just because God did it this way in this instance, doesnt mean that it is necessarily the norm.

Seems to me to believe such a thing requires changing the Gospel.

How would you respond to them?

I would ask them what Gospel they believe in... the Word of God, or the needed change of the Word of God to fit such a belief.

I would ask them to justify the eunuch then... was he or was he not "in Christ" (sealed with the Holy Spirit) once he believed? Or did he have to wait for an Apostle to lay hands on him too??

So do you hold a distinction between being baptized by the Holy Spirit and baptized in the Holy Spirit.

We are baptized into the body by the Spirit, and we are baptized in the Spirit by Christ. I know Father, Christ, and Spirit are one God, and I feel the need for caution when trying to distinguish the works of God within the Deity, but some hold that these are two separate events, and some hold that they are one and the same or that they occur similtaneously.

Ephesians 1:13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who[a] is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.

The moment a person receives the Gospel, or in other words, BELIEVES, they are sealed and indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

Romans 8:9 But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.

So this raises the question... concerning the "belief" you raised above, wouldn't this belief mean that a person who believed, accepted Christ was NOT His "UNTIL" after the Apostles happened to drop in later??

To me, that CHANGES everything about the Gospel's message. We are strictly warned against changes to the Gospel.

Galatians 4:6 And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, “Abba, Father!”

God does the work of sending out the Spirit... He don't wait for an Apostle to come days maybe weeks later to layon of hands.

No... what you raised is a belief required by those who refuse to believe that being sealed with the Holy Spirit unto salvation is separate from the Baptism of the Holy Spirit unto power. This belief requires them to also change the Gospel to meet the belief also.

Some of the simplest questions in the Bible have the GREATEST truth in answer... take this one for example:


Acts 16:30 And he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”

31 So they said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

[glad4mercy]

Based on what?

An "apostolic" seal? See the scripture below... there is no "apostolic" seal.

I agree. The problem is I was trying to put something into words that I was not sure how to phrase. In other words, yes there is no difference between Jew, Samaritan, and Gentile, but some of the people in the early church did not realize it, note the reaction to the church when Peter preached to Cornelius. So maybe what I meant to say that what the aforementioned group was saying was that it was done this way in order to prevent division or schism in the body based on racial lines. ( not necessarily my position, and I may not be wording it right, so pardon me.)

I would ask them to justify the eunuch then... was he or was he not "in Christ" (sealed with the Holy Spirit) once he believed? Or did he have to wait for an Apostle to lay hands on him too??

No, but did he have to wait to receive the "baptism of the Spirit". The issue is not when one receives the sealing or indwelling of the Spirit. As far as I know, all orthodox Christians agree that the Spirit seals and indwells us at conversion. The issue is when we receive the Spirit Baptism. This is where some Christians disagree.

The moment a person receives the Gospel, or in other words, BELIEVES, they are sealed and indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

No doubt. I agree with you.

So this raises the question... concerning the "belief" you raised above, wouldn't this belief mean that a person who believed, accepted Christ was NOT His "UNTIL" after the Apostles happened to drop in later??

No my statement was in response to the statement that they had "not received the Spirit" yet. My point was that they must have received the Spirit in the sense of indwelling, or else according to Paul they were not saved, ( for if any man has not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His." ) So the phrase in Acts, where it says that they had not yet received the Spirit, the exact meaning of that phrase is what I am discussing. Believe me. I also hold that we are indwellt and sealed at conversion. My question regards the precise meaning of the following text and the bolded words.

Acts 8: 14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:

15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:
16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

God does the work of sending out the Spirit... He don't wait for an Apostle to come days maybe weeks later to layon of hands.

Agreed. But in this instance he used the laying on of hands to do something that Luke calls "receiving the Holy Spirit". Now does this event always occur in this manner? We know that a person can be saved and indwelt by the Holy Spirit without the laying on of hands. I also believe that if the baptism of the Spirit is a second work of grace, then this can also be received without the laying on of hands, and we can also receive the filling without laying on of hands as well. So you see, we are not in disagreement. I am actually saying the opposite of what you think I am saying.

No... what you raised is a belief required by those who refuse to believe that being sealed by the Holy Spirit unto salvation is separate from the Baptism of the Holy Spirit unto power. This belief requires them to also change the Gospel to meet the belief also.

Yet many Christians do hold this belief. I don't think they are changing the Gospel. I don't think that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit as a second work of Grace is an essential doctrine, ( one that one must hold to be considered orthodox),neither do I hold the alternate view to be essential. There are wonderful Christians who believe both ways.

Acts 16:30 And he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”

31 So they said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

I would never say anything to contradict or oppose this wholesome teaching.

[awestruckchild]

Very thought provoking thread!
I sat here and thought about my own meeting with God and I know this is not what you are looking for - you are looking for specific verses, but I got up off the floor the day I believed, and I blew my nose and washed my face and then realized I was exhausted but so peaceful, like I had never known such peace existed. But, it was some amount of time after until I received my baptism in a way I knew and felt. But there is no such thing as such deep peace and relief as I felt that day unless there is a reason for it. He did not bathe me in peace that day but not save my soul. It is impossible.
Sorry to diverge from the strictly scholarly discussion you want here. Carry on!

[glad4mercy]

Very thought provoking thread!
I sat here and thought about my own meeting with God and I know this is not what you are looking for - you are looking for specific verses, but I got up off the floor the day I believed, and I blew my nose and washed my face and then realized I was exhausted but so peaceful, like I had never known such peace existed. But, it was some amount of time after until I received my baptism in a way I knew and felt. But there is no such thing as such deep peace and relief as I felt that day unless there is a reason for it. He did not bathe me in peace that day but not save my soul. It is impossible.
Sorry to diverge from the strictly scholarly discussion you want here. Carry on!

What you said is exactly what I like to hear. There is nothing more powerful than a personal testimony of what the Lord has done for you. Thank you for sharing.

[Slug1]

Very thought provoking thread!
I sat here and thought about my own meeting with God and I know this is not what you are looking for - you are looking for specific verses, but I got up off the floor the day I believed, and I blew my nose and washed my face and then realized I was exhausted but so peaceful, like I had never known such peace existed. But, it was some amount of time after until I received my baptism in a way I knew and felt. But there is no such thing as such deep peace and relief as I felt that day unless there is a reason for it. He did not bathe me in peace that day but not save my soul. It is impossible.
Sorry to diverge from the strictly scholarly discussion you want here. Carry on!

AMEN!

For me... I prayed while in a latrine, another soldier had been talking with me about my "personal" relationship with Jesus and the lack there of one for some weeks. So while in the latrine to just be away from my squad, I accepted Jesus as Lord and Savior. Then, I went back out and yelled at my troops to hurry up and finish weapon's cleaning. Later, I spoke with that soldier and professed my surrender to Jesus.