Adventures of the Early Church …

THE BAPTISM OF THE HOLY SPIRIT: WHAT IT MEANS

At the heart of the adventures of the early church was the glorious experience of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Above all else that can be said of the early Christians is that they were Spirit-filled. Paul’s pungent question, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” (Acts 19:2), implies that for every Christian the answer must be an emphatic Yes, of course, just as Acts 5:32 assures us that God gives the Holy Spirit to all those who obey Him.

Already I have stated part of my thesis, which is that the baptism of the Holy Spirit was not confined to a special few, such as to the Jews on Pentecost in Acts 2 and the Gentiles in Acts 10, as some believe, or to that distinct group of “Charismatics” today who supposedly have “the Baptism” to the exclusion of other believers. In the early church they were all first-class citizens in that all were recipients of what Christ brought to mankind, the baptism of the Holy Spirit, or they all received “the gift of the Holy Spirit,” which I believe to be the same thing.

In other words I am saying there was (and is) no such thing as the baptism of the Holy Spirit if one means by this a special, unique experience given to some Christians but not to all. The Scriptures may ask “Are all apostles?,” “Are all teachers?,” and even “Do all speak in tongues?,” but never “Have all been baptized of the Holy Spirit?” The Scriptures assume that all believers have received the Holy Spirit, such as in Gal. 3:2: “Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by hearing with faith,” and 1 Jn. 3:24: “And by this we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit which he has given us.”

There is only one literal baptism, which is water baptism (Eph. 4:5). All others, a baptism of suffering or of fire or of the Spirit, are metaphorical. This is evident from the very nature of literal baptism (or immersion). Whatever is immersed (dipped) must be emersed (raised), which could not be the case with symbolic baptisms. One is not buried in a baptism of fire and then out again, and he is not immersed in the Holy Spirit and then emersed out of it. There is no element in Holy Spirit baptism, nothing literal. It is a metaphor denoting the impartation of the Holy Spirit.

There are other metaphors that denote the same experience, such as “drink of one Spirit” (1 Cor. 12:13); “pour out my Spirit” (Acts 2:18, Tit. 3:6), and “the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word” (Acts 10:44). No one of course literally drinks of the Spirit, and the Spirit cannot actually be poured out. Nor does the Holy Spirit fall on anyone in a literal, sense. These are ways of conveying the idea that the believer receives the Spirit and that the Spirit is with him and in him. And so he “walks” and “lives” by the Spirit, still more metaphors. Likewise, no one has ever been baptized in the Holy Spirit except metaphorically. The figure suggests that one is overwhelmed (“poured out richly,” Tit. 3:6) by the Spirit’s presence and influence in his life.

If one can be “full of new wine” (Acts 2:13) without being baptized into wine, he can be “filled with the Spirit” (Eph. 5:18) without being baptized in the Spirit, except in a figurative sense. If “filled” and “baptized” mean the same it must follow that the baptism of the Holy Spirit was for all believers, for Acts makes it clear that they were all filled with the Spirit, as in Acts 4:31, 9:17, 13:9. The first reference reveals that the place was shaken as on Pentecost, and yet the recipients were rank and file disciples. There is no evidence in Scripture that those on Pentecost and at the house of Cornelius received anything different from other Christians.

John the Baptist introduced Jesus as “he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit” (Jn. 13:4), a distinct ministry of the coming Messiah. There is no indication that this spiritual baptism was only for a special few among those who accepted the Messiah. It is strongly implied that all come under the Messiah’s judgment: those who reject him to a baptism of fire and those who accept him to a baptism of the Holy Spirit. It is impressive that the Baptist, who had an exalted view of his mission to baptize, would say, “I baptize with water,” implying only with water, but “he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16).

This shows that the reception of the Holy Spirit was the supreme blessing of the new age, one that only the Messiah could bestow. It abuses the passage to conclude that this paramount blessing was only for a select few among the Messiah’s followers. If the baptism of fire, a metaphor denoting judgment, was for all who rejected him, would not the baptism of the Holy Spirit be for all who accepted him?

This is the verdict of Scripture, such as:

Acts 2:38: “Repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” The gift of the Holy Spirit, which results from believing and obeying the gospel, must be the same thing as the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Acts 5:32: “We are witnesses of these things, and so is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey him.” Only God through the Messiah gives the Holy Spirit, and He gives it to all who obey Him. Is this not the spiritual baptism that the Messiah brought?

1 Cor. 3:16: “Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you.” Even this church with serious deficiencies was baptized with the Holy Spirit. They did not seem to realize this, not sufficiently at least, which shows that one might have the Holy Spirit and not know it. It is a gift that must be appropriated.

2 Cor. 1:22: “He has put his seal upon us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee.” It will not work to make “the given Spirit” in this verse anything different from the baptism of the Holy Spirit that Christ came to bestow. And it was clearly for all Corinthians once they believed and were baptized in water (Acts 18:8). Each one was in fact assured that his body was “a temple of the Holy Spirit” (1 Cor. 6:19), which again depicts the metaphor of Spirit baptism. They were so filled and overwhelmed by God’s presence in their lives that even their bodies were likened to a glorious temple of the Holy Spirit. This is surely the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Eph. 1:13: “In him you also, who have heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and have believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit.” The “promised Holy Spirit” that they received was the baptism of the Holy Spirit, which was the promise of the Messiah’s coming. It is the Spirit that seals us or authenticates us as truly Christ’s, which is the ground of unity —“the unity of the Spirit” as Eph. 4:3 puts it.

Titus 3:4-6: “When the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit, which he poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior.” Here is proof enough the pouring out of the Spirit and the baptism of the Spirit are the same, and that the blessing is for all who obey Christ. The word for “poured out” is the same as in the quotation from Joel in Acts 2, which refers to the baptism of the Spirit on Pentecost.

The baptism (or the giving) of the Holy Spirit was sometimes accompanied by supernatural signs, as with the Ephesians in Acts 19, who “spoke with tongues and prophesied” when they received the Spirit. Usually there was no such manifestation. While tongue-speaking was sometimes a sign of the receiving of the Spirit, as in the case of Cornelius (Acts 10:46), it was not inherent in the experience, for the Spirit was usually given without any such accompaniment. Tongues were sometimes a needed sign, such as authenticating the acceptance of the Gentiles: “For they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter declared, ‘Can anyone forbid water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?’” But we cannot conclude from this that the baptism of the Holy Spirit equals speaking in tongues, for far more often the recipients did not speak in tongues. And so today, a believer may or may not speak in tongues, but that has no necessary relevance to whether he is Spirit-filled. The Spirit-filled life is most clearly evident in “the fruit of the Spirit,” such as joy, love, and peace.

Those who would minimize water baptism have something to learn from Peter in his insistence that those Gentiles in Acts 10 who were baptized in the Holy Spirit should be baptized in water. While the receiving of the Holy Spirit was seen as essential for the Christian, indeed the most important mark, Peter’s response to whether such Spirit-filled believers might skip water baptism makes that ordinance as “essential” as words could make it. Usually Spirit baptism followed water baptism. So the question of whether they might skip water baptism was reasonable, for they already had what really mattered, the Holy Spirit. But the apostle commands them to be baptized in water. How could the case for water baptism be stronger than that?

When Paul urged the Philippians “If there is any fellowship (koinonia) of the Spirit,” he was calling for evidence of the Spirit’s presence. They might have spoken in tongues and still not manifest spiritual fellowship (as in Corinth?). The point of the Spirit overwhelming us is to make us more and more like Christ. If his likeness is not in us even the tongues of angels mean nothing.

Due to such Scripture as “Be filled with the Spirit” (Eph. 5:18), which was addressed to those who had already received the Spirit, we can conclude that there should be a continual infilling and renewal of the Spirit within us. “Having begun with the Spirit” (Gal. 3:3) implies that there is to be continual growth in our walk with the Spirit.

The fallacy to avoid is to make the baptism of the Holy Spirit a kind of “second blessing” or “something more” that lies beyond what is involved in becoming a Christian. Even seasoned believers are urged to “seek the Baptism,” as if they do not already have the Spirit. Those who never have this “come along afterward” experience are often made to feel like “second class citizens,” however much they reflect the likeness of Christ in their lives.

It is always in order of course to urge people to realize and actualize the blessings they already have. This is surely what often happens. Like the poor farmer who had a gold mine under his rocky soil all along but didn’t realize it, some Christians discover the joy and power of the Holy Spirit that has been with them all along and suppose they have received something distinct from other Christians. This confusion is compounded when tongue-speaking is related to this. The Spirit may assign numerous gifts and ministries, including tongues, but these do not depend upon a special Spirit baptism. The believer receives the Holy Spirit when he obeys the gospel. The Spirit ministers to each believer’s life according to his needs and is probably limited only by the person’s willingness to be led by the Spirit.

The early Christians, being Spirit-filled, were emboldened to testify to their faith even unto death. They were empowered to deeds of heroism, acts of moral courage, and a resolute faith that defied human wisdom. Because of the Spirit within them they loved one another and shared a joyous hope. The Spirit illumined their hearts and minds to deeper insights into the will of God. Their adventure was an adventure of the Holy Spirit.

And it was the gift or the baptism of the Holy Spirit that sealed their place in the Body of Christ, as well as the basis of their unity. Paul assumed that the Ephesians in Acts 19 had been water baptized, but he wanted to make sure that they had received the Holy Spirit. He went so far as to say that if one did not have the Holy Spirit he was not a Christian (Ro. 8:9).

Would it not follow that if a church is not Spirit-filled it is not truly a Christian church? —the Editor