The Baptism With the Holy Ghost

[Darrell C]

This, of course, is a terse and basic outline and not at all exhaustive, and it doesn't deal with every nuance and facet of meaning.

It is appreciated nonetheless.

The Spirit is a Person, and a Person who is given to us, and Who is present and active in the life of a believer.

Agreed.

And we can see from Christ's teachings, as well as in the First Principles of the Oracles of God...it was only promise in the Old Testament, and received in reality at Pentecost.

Just as the Father and the Son are manifest is various ways, so is the Spirit, and the believer's experiences with and in Him.

Best to first define the Baptism with the Holy Ghost, and then distinguish the gifts associated with the eternal indwelling of God. Unfortunately, many have come to view them as one and the same.

And nullify that salvation in Christ demands the eternal indwelling of God, by which we are made new creatures. While they are distinct, they are...one and the same, in my view, because I see that it is the promise of God that we would receive the Spirit Christ foretells coming after He is returned to Heaven:




John 16:7-9

King James Version (KJV)


7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;


The Ministry of the Comforter, Who Christ states will be with us forever, and Paul states as the guarantee of our redemption, came on the Day of Pentecost, just shortly after Christ fulfills what He states here was expedient for us. When the Baptism with the Holy Spirit is taught as an empowering only, or a second blessing, or a subsequent act following salvation that some receive, then it becomes something altogether different from that which is taught in Scripture.

We receive the Spirit of God in this Baptism:


Acts 19

King James Version (KJV)


1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,

2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.

3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.

4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

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



We cannot receive the Spirit and not be understood as being placed into Christ.


Romans 6:3

Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?


Galatians 3:27
For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.


(disregard emphasis, part of search)

Does the above speak of an external baptism, or the Baptism with the Holy Ghost? Does external baptism correlate to the teaching of the coming of the Spirit of God in that unique New Covenant Ministry?

Now I would you, and all here, when we receive the Spirit of God...are we immersed into God at that time?

Thanks again for the response, sorry for the short response, but out of time this morning.


God bless.

 

[agedman]

The Jews were always considering and looking for some sign as a mark of authority, because (imo) that was the instruction given in the OT concerning the authority of a prophet. So, it follows that some "sign" had to be given in the NT to the Jews and believers.

Signs of the Spirit of God can be seen at:

The baptism of Christ - the spirit as a dove, the voice as thunder
The first Pentecost - home languages spoken.
What I sometimes call the gentile Pentecost - a remarkable sign showing the gentiles were also part of the redeemed.
The Revelation.​

What is important to remember is that the signs were not FOR the person who had the sign, but for those who DID NOT have the sign. And more specifically, it was for the Jews and gentiles who had/have the mindset that "signs and wonders" accompanied one who was a true messenger from God.

John records that, "while I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day" in the opening of the Revelation. Did that mean he was without the Spirit on some other day? Or was it that some special filling or anointing happened on that day? Or is John (who was of the Jewish mindset) needing to include that the signs and wonders to which he was about to attest were from God and included "in the Spirit?"

Too often the topic of the "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" is considered as a gift to a person, rather than a sign of God's authority upon the message that person is to give.

When David prayed that God not withdraw the Spirit from him, he was ultimately concerned with being capable of teaching transgressors.

Is not the life that flows with living water a life lived for others? Do the living waters, thirst? Or do they flow that the thirsty may drink?

The same is true of the water Baptism. It is a sign, not for the one baptized but for the public, that one is a changed person.

One other point:
I have not found a time in Scripture in which either the water baptism or that of the Holy Spirit is a point of boasting.

Consistently, if I hear of one boasting about their baptism - either that of water or of Spirit - that person has demonstrated a life lived as a faker.

 

[Aaron]

As shown in the previous post, in Acts 11:12-18 Peter correlates the receiving of the Spirit (the Spirit fell on them) with salvation, quoting Christ Who quoted John. The contrast is between the baptism John effected, in which men professing repentance came to publicly assert that repentance had taken place (which was not the case of those refuse baptism because their lives did not evidence repentance), and the Baptism Christ would perform.

I think you're reading Baptism = eternal indwelling, receiving, second birth, etc. into the narrative. I think those who repented at the preaching of John were in Christ by the same Spirit by which we enter. Taking the narratives at face value, what the Apostles witnessed on the Day of Pentecost and in the account you cite here are different manifestations.

No, I am not Pentecostal, and I categorically deny what they call the Second Blessing.

While because we know the Spirit is God Himself, we would be correct to say the "Spirit baptizes men into Christ," the terminology is specific, that Christ is the Baptizer. What we can say is that when men are saved, they are eternally indwelt by God, and thus are placed into God. We do not differentiate an extreme concerning the Persons of God, because we see that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost all reside within us:

That's right, but entering into Christ is an operation of the Spirit, and the Baptism with the Spirit is a work of Christ.

However, we have to maintain what Scripture teaches, thus we see that the Baptism with (and you rightly point out with) the Holy Ghost is Christ immersing men into Himself.

Which is basically saying that Christ is baptizing with Christ, which is not the testimony of the Scriptures.

While I agree the eternal indwelling can be viewed as distinct from our regeneration, what I would suggest is that the eternal indwelling is the reason for our regeneration.

And distinct from the Baptism with the Holy Spirit.

Best to first define the Baptism with the Holy Ghost, and then distinguish the gifts associated with the eternal indwelling of God. Unfortunately, many have come to view them as one and the same.

The ecstatic manifestations are not the norm, though the testimonies of real missionaries in places God has turned over almost completely to the Devil lead me to believe they accompany the preaching of the Gospel where the Scriptures have yet to be fully delivered.

But the Baptism of the Spirit, as far as I see in the Scriptures, is not a one time experience and overlaps many other operations. And though it may seem that I am lending credence to Baptist Pentecostalism/Charismania by saying that the Baptism of the Holy Ghost is separate and distinct from one's baptism into Christ, I am not. The Scriptures at face value present it as such. The apostles of Azusa Street have taken a truth and applied a carnal understanding, if not a wholly charlatan perversion, thereto.

I have in my personal library 36 books on Pneumatology, including Frederick Dale Bruner’s 1970 monograph, A Theology of the Holy Spirit: The Pentecostal Experience and the New Testament Witness. The bibliography in this 390-page monograph is 31 pages long—very well attesting to the thoroughness of Brunner’s research, and the finding of the research is that the subject is highly complex and subject to interpretation. The other 35 books on Pneumatology in my personal library also attest to complexity of the subject.

Which is why I said what I said about the Person of the Spirit and His relationship with the believer.

 

[Van]

Hi Darrel C, I have not read all the posts so pardon me if this post is redundant.

In reading Matthew 3:11 in the NASB, this footnote appears: The Gr here can be translated in, with or by.

So our first question, is the idea Christ immerses believers into the Holy Spirit, the third person of the trinity? Is this the idea using "in" or "with?" What about "by" which could mean the Holy Spirit baptizes believers into the Spirit of Christ.

Since the second idea (by) is consistent with several of Paul's writings, I think that is the idea.

BTW, since this fact (Christ will baptize - in, with or by - the Holy Spirit in all four gospels, it is very important.

 

[agedman]

For those who question the idea of filling different than that of the giving, perhaps John 20 is used by some to show there is a difference.

Jesus after raising from the tomb appeared in the upper chamber where the last supper was eaten and said:

“Peace be with you.” And when He had said this, He showed them both His hands and His side. The disciples then rejoiced when they saw the Lord. So Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you.” And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. “If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained.”​

Yet we see a period of time between this and Pentecost.

Does not Acts 2 states that there was a filling that occurred at a different time, long after the ascension:

When the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. And suddenly there came from heaven a noise like a violent rushing wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. And there appeared to them tongues as of fire distributing themselves, and they rested on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance.​

The filling is also seen even in Christ (always wondered how God could be filled with more God) as recorded by Luke 4 immediately following the baptism by John the Baptizer:

Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led around by the Spirit in the wilderness for forty days, being tempted by the devil.​

Was not the John who baptized Jesus filled with the Spirit from before his birth as it says in Luke 1?

“For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother’s womb."​

Does not the Lord warn that the only sin that will not be forgiven is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit by unbelievers in Mark 3:

“Truly I say to you, all sins shall be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they utter; but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin” — because they were saying, “He has an unclean spirit.”​

So there must be Scripture to support some indication of a difference between having and being completely filled to overflowing with the Holy Spirit.

Personally, I think that there is a passage that shows the two as separate. It is part of Acts 19. Here the folks have been taught the baptism of repentance - that which John the baptizer taught, and Apollos had brought to these gentiles. Paul shows up later, and brings them the completed information:

Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in Him who was coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking with tongues and prophesying.
​

Please note the time span statements:

1) Paul giving the complete message.
2) invitation is given
3) the people responded and were baptized
4) after the baptism, Paul laid his hands on them (not sure if it was one at a time, or he went from person to person touching each head, there is a lack of complete information)
5) the Holy Spirit came on them
​

Some will point that when the Holy Spirit came on them, at that point they were saved. I do not. I suggest that the ability for them to respond positively to the message Paul brought was an indication that they were in fact already "in Christ" as it pertains to salvation, and needed the intellectual information in order to receive that which God was about to do in and through them - the filling of the Holy Spirit.

I am sure there will be some that disagree, but if one is of Baptist belief, then there can be no water baptism before conversion. Therefore, there must be a Holy Spirit conversion and then times when one may be "filled" with the Holy Spirit - exampled by John the Baptizer, Jesus, the apostles, and now these Gentiles.

Unbelievers who would mock the filling, and demean the work of the Holy Spirit bring upon themselves the eternal condemnation of God.

 

[Van]

Yes, there is a difference from being influenced by the Holy Spirit, as the OT inspired writers were, and being sealed in Christ with the Holy Spirit forever. Temporary filling is not the same as being sealed in Christ forever.

Referring to post 24, the problem with "by" (instrumentality - the agent performing the baptism) is in the same verse John is said to baptize (in, with or by) water. Thus, if the construction is parallel, then the meaning is "in" or "with." So this verse seems (in my mind at least) to conflict with 1 Cor. 12:13 (for by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body.) Galatians 3:27 says we were baptized into Christ.

To reconcile this apparent difficulty, perhaps we were baptized into Christ by the Holy Spirit, and then after undergoing the washing of regeneration, we were sealed in Christ "with" the Holy Spirit. Thus we are in Christ and Christ is in us. And this whole sequence was in view when John the Baptist used the phrase, He shall baptize you "with" the Holy Spirit.

Sorry for floundering around...

 

[Darrell C]

As shown in the previous post, in Acts 11:12-18 Peter correlates the receiving of the Spirit (the Spirit fell on them) with salvation, quoting Christ Who quoted John. The contrast is between the baptism John effected, in which men professing repentance came to publicly assert that repentance had taken place (which was not the case of those refuse baptism because their lives did not evidence repentance), and the Baptism Christ would perform.

I think you're reading Baptism = eternal indwelling, receiving, second birth, etc. into the narrative.

Whereas I view it as simply drawing out of Scripture that which it states. I have given several passages to validate that the receiving of the Spirit promised by God in the Old Testament is the Baptism with the Holy Ghost. Yet you have not quoted a single passage and shown how I have erred in context.

This...


John 14:16-18

King James Version (KJV)


16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.



23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.


25 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you.

26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.


...was re-quoted to you, which makes this three times in this thread it has been posted.

Within this passage we see that Christ foretells of eternal indwelling, which will occur at a future date. It shows that He, the Comforter, is with them, but will be in them. It shows the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost...

...making their abode in them.

At a future date. And that is precisely when the Spirit, said in John 7:38-39 not to have been given yet (because Christ was not yet glorified), came on the Day of Pentecost.

And every reference we see confirms that this was a prophetic event fulfilled when they received the Holy Ghost.

I think those who repented at the preaching of John were in Christ by the same Spirit by which we enter.

And we know this is not the case:



Acts 19

King James Version (KJV)

1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,

2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.

3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.

4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

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



Paul makes it clear John's baptism was not the same event as believing on Christ. Men repented, but they did not receive the Holy Ghost by being baptized of John.

And we see John quoted to distinguish the Baptism with the Holy Ghost from John's baptism. See that here too...



Acts 1

King James Version (KJV)


4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.

5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.


Acts 11:13-18

King James Version (KJV)


13 And he shewed us how he had seen an angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter;

14 Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.

15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.

16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.

17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?

18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.


Cornelius and his family were not saved according to New Covenant standard. They had not received the Holy Ghost, even as John's disciples had not.

Now the big one, which causes many to rebel against this understanding...

...neither had the Disciples of Christ just days prior to Pentecost.

So I would ask you to consider the Scripture presented, and consider your position...

I think those who repented at the preaching of John were in Christ by the same Spirit by which we enter.

Taking the narratives at face value, what the Apostles witnessed on the Day of Pentecost and in the account you cite here are different manifestations.

Not at all. The disciples receive the Holy Ghost as Christ said they would, and they immediately preach the Gospel of Christ, which was a Mystery to them prior to receiving the Holy Ghost. And this correlates precisely to Christ's teaching in John 16:7-9. The Comforter at that time began enlightening men to the Gospel, including the disciples, and men began receiving the Spirit according to the context of John 7:38-39.

No, I am not Pentecostal, and I categorically deny what they call the Second Blessing.

So you have scratched off one of the options of the poll, which options that remain do you see as viable. Several have posted "None of the above," but, they have yet to show another option which is viable.

Could you at this time tell me what the option should be, in the poll, if none that are given are correct?


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

While I agree the eternal indwelling can be viewed as distinct from our regeneration, what I would suggest is that the eternal indwelling is the reason for our regeneration.

And distinct from the Baptism with the Holy Spirit.

On the contrary, we see specifically that Peter gives Cornelius, for example, the "words by which he is saved (the Gospel of Christ)." We see that Peter contrasts John's baptism with the Baptism with the Holy Ghost, which distinguishes...

...that is what takes place.

We see that this is called the gift of God and it is said to make them...alive.


Acts 11:13-18

King James Version (KJV)


13 And he shewed us how he had seen an angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter;

14 Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.

15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.

16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.

17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?

18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.


You have said you believe John's baptism held the same saving grace as the Baptism with the Holy Ghost...

I think those who repented at the preaching of John were in Christ by the same Spirit by which we enter.

...which cannot be validated by any passage, and is invalidated by Paul in Acts 19:1-6.

Now consider, Aaron, that what you say here is that men were immersed into Christ by John's baptism. Secondly, if they were in Christ, then they were...in God. So all I can ask is, doesn't that correlate to Option One of the Poll?

Will you maintain you believe men were placed in Christ through John's baptism?


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

Sorry, missed some of the last so the next few will be out of order.

While because we know the Spirit is God Himself, we would be correct to say the "Spirit baptizes men into Christ," the terminology is specific, that Christ is the Baptizer. What we can say is that when men are saved, they are eternally indwelt by God, and thus are placed into God. We do not differentiate an extreme concerning the Persons of God, because we see that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost all reside within us:

That's right, but entering into Christ is an operation of the Spirit, and the Baptism with the Spirit is a work of Christ.

So you do not see God working in concert...with Himself?

We distinguish between God the Spirit and God the Son, and God the Father to the point where the Father and Son are not God the Spirit?

I know you don't believe that. At least I want to believe you don't believe that.

However, we have to maintain what Scripture teaches, thus we see that the Baptism with (and you rightly point out with) the Holy Ghost is Christ immersing men into Himself.

Which is basically saying that Christ is baptizing with Christ, which is not the testimony of the Scriptures.

In point of fact this is the testimony of Christ Himself:



John 14:16-18

King James Version (KJV)


16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.


And lest someone think this only refers to the Lord returning to take the disciples where He is...



John 14:22-23

King James Version (KJV)


22 Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?

23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.



This is why Paul can equate the indwelling of "the Spirit of God" and the Spirit of Christ:


Romans 8:9-10

King James Version (KJV)


9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.


We see that God is One, so when we are placed into Christ, Christ, the Father, and the Spirit of God indwell us. This is the concept Christ teaches concerning Himself being in the Father, and we in Him:



John 14:10-11 & 20

King James Version (KJV)


10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.


20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.


We cannot make the distinction you are making and maintain the unity of God, Who is One. We don't say we have the Spirit of God, but not the Son, not the Father. Christ makes it clear that the future event He teaches about here (Acts 1:4) will result in the believer being placed into God, and God being in the believer.

That is the Baptism with the Holy Ghost.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

Best to first define the Baptism with the Holy Ghost, and then distinguish the gifts associated with the eternal indwelling of God. Unfortunately, many have come to view them as one and the same.

The ecstatic manifestations are not the norm, though the testimonies of real missionaries in places God has turned over almost completely to the Devil lead me to believe they accompany the preaching of the Gospel where the Scriptures have yet to be fully delivered.

Could you show me the Biblical support for "ecstatic manifestations" so we could define their relevance to the topic at hand?

But the Baptism of the Spirit, as far as I see in the Scriptures, is not a one time experience and overlaps many other operations.

And that is the teaching of Pentecostals and Charismatics, who not only defy Scripture's teaching in their practice of what they call the gifts of God (ecstatic speech being one such error), but have clouded the minds of many individuals to the siomple truths I am showing you in regards to the Baptism with the Holy Ghost.

This teaching throws the magnitude of salvation in Christ into a muddy pool of salvation which is identical throughout Scripture. You yourself have said...

I think those who repented at the preaching of John were in Christ by the same Spirit by which we enter.

...which is in fact...Baptismal Regeneration, another error not only embraced by certain Pentecostal and Charismatic brethren, but Catholic and Protestant believers as well.

The Baptism with the Holy Ghost is the one-time event in which men are immersed into God. That is why it is called...

...Baptism.

And though it may seem that I am lending credence to Baptist Pentecostalism/Charismania by saying that the Baptism of the Holy Ghost is separate and distinct from one's baptism into Christ, I am not.

You know in your heart the similarity of what you are teaching here, which is why you present this disclaimer.

The Scriptures at face value present it as such.

Not at all, but in fact the very opposite.

The apostles of Azusa Street have taken a truth and applied a carnal understanding, if not a wholly charlatan perversion, thereto.

Many have, and the fault cannot be laid at their feet alone. It is because nobody is teaching the truths of the Baptism with the Holy Ghost that such teachers...

...thrive.

I have in my personal library 36 books on Pneumatology, including Frederick Dale Bruner’s 1970 monograph, A Theology of the Holy Spirit: The Pentecostal Experience and the New Testament Witness. The bibliography in this 390-page monograph is 31 pages long—very well attesting to the thoroughness of Brunner’s research, and the finding of the research is that the subject is highly complex and subject to interpretation. The other 35 books on Pneumatology in my personal library also attest to complexity of the subject.

Which is why I said what I said about the Person of the Spirit and His relationship with the believer.

Yet you separate the Persons of the Father and Son from the Baptism with the Holy Ghost, which is something Christ nor any Apostle does. They present the unity of God, and while we see Them presented as working from different perspectives, we have to keep in mind the significance of the Incarnation in relationship to the Work of God.

Now I will just ask you this, Aaron...

...when a believer is saved, are they immersed into God? And when this takes place, are they indwelt only by the Spirit of God, and not the Father, and not Christ?


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

The Jews were always considering and looking for some sign as a mark of authority, because (imo) that was the instruction given in the OT concerning the authority of a prophet. So, it follows that some "sign" had to be given in the NT to the Jews and believers.

Signs of the Spirit of God can be seen at:

The baptism of Christ - the spirit as a dove, the voice as thunder
The first Pentecost - home languages spoken.
What I sometimes call the gentile Pentecost - a remarkable sign showing the gentiles were also part of the redeemed.
The Revelation.​

What is important to remember is that the signs were not FOR the person who had the sign, but for those who DID NOT have the sign. And more specifically, it was for the Jews and gentiles who had/have the mindset that "signs and wonders" accompanied one who was a true messenger from God.

John records that, "while I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day" in the opening of the Revelation. Did that mean he was without the Spirit on some other day? Or was it that some special filling or anointing happened on that day? Or is John (who was of the Jewish mindset) needing to include that the signs and wonders to which he was about to attest were from God and included "in the Spirit?"

Too often the topic of the "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" is considered as a gift to a person, rather than a sign of God's authority upon the message that person is to give.

When David prayed that God not withdraw the Spirit from him, he was ultimately concerned with being capable of teaching transgressors.

Is not the life that flows with living water a life lived for others? Do the living waters, thirst? Or do they flow that the thirsty may drink?

The same is true of the water Baptism. It is a sign, not for the one baptized but for the public, that one is a changed person.

One other point:
I have not found a time in Scripture in which either the water baptism or that of the Holy Spirit is a point of boasting.

Consistently, if I hear of one boasting about their baptism - either that of water or of Spirit - that person has demonstrated a life lived as a faker.

The OP hopes to focus on defining the Baptism with the Holy Ghost itself, rather than the controversy concerning signs associated with this Baptism.

I will just make a few comments on what you say here, as I am out of time (sorry for the short response, AM):

1. The Baptism with the Holy Ghost is, in my view, being born of God. We know that being born of God (also identical to being born of the Spirit) cannot be witnessed by the human eye, but is like the wind.

2. We have to distinguish between the Holy Ghost coming upon people, and coming within them in eternal indwelling. We do not imply that the Holy Ghost was not in the world prior to Pentecost, but that the Ministry of the Holy Ghost, as the Comforter sent by Christ when He returned to Heaven...was not being performed in the world prior to Pentecost.

3. The Baptism with the Holy Ghost is in fact a gift, and in fact...the Gift (Acts 11:17-18).

4. Unlike David, we do not have to pray to God that He "take not His Spirit from us," for we are told numerous times that His indwelling under the New Covenant is eternal, and the guarantee of our redemption. David, on the other hand, understood that God had empowered him for his ministry (as God's chosen, the King of Israel), and knew that God had removed His Spirit from Saul/

5. "Living waters" is euphemistic of eternal life, and we can see here...


John 7:38-39

King James Version (KJV)


38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)



That Christ foretells men believing on Him (and this is specific to His death, burial, and resurrection, which is the Gospel of Jesus Christ), and that when they do, they will receive the Holy Ghost, which, John clarifies, will not happen until Christ is glorified, which shows it was not happening then.

And it is this receiving of the Holy Spirit which is in view. My assertion is that this is the Baptism with the Holy Ghost foretold of Christ and the Prophets, which had not happened on the very day of the Ascension (Acts 1:4-9). This correlates to John 16:7 and the above quotation from John 14.

Water baptism and tongues are not really relevant to the discussion, but, I do appreciate your participation, so thanks for the post.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Hi Darrel C, I have not read all the posts so pardon me if this post is redundant.

While the point may be, lol, the post is not. Thanks for participating, Van.

In reading Matthew 3:11 in the NASB, this footnote appears: The Gr here can be translated in, with or by.

Which is, when we are Trinitarian, irrelevant.

Because God is One, when we are immersed into God we understand that God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are all involved.

Yes, we are Baptized into Christ by Christ, which is identical to saying we are baptized into Christ by the Spirit of God.

So our first question, is the idea Christ immerses believers into the Holy Spirit, the third person of the trinity? Is this the idea using "in" or "with?" What about "by" which could mean the Holy Spirit baptizes believers into the Spirit of Christ.

If we try to make such a distinction in the Persons of God...we create three Gods, rather than the One God we worship.

Consider this in that context:


Colossians 1:12-13

King James Version (KJV)


12 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:

13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:


Is this speaking about the same thing Christ teaches in John 3, in regards to being born of God and entering the Kingdom of God?

How about this...


1 Peter 1

King James Version (KJV)


1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,

2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,

4 To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you,

5 Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.


As mentioned in a previous post, I think one thing we have to distinguish is how the Incarnation itself relates to statements which seem to at one point have the Father effecting something, and in another the Son, and in another the Spirit.

The simple truth is that all speak of God.

We see reference to God the Spirit in the Old Testament which we could also ascribe to the Son and the Father. For example:


Acts 7:51-52

King James Version (KJV)


51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.

52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:




Hebrews 3:7-11

King James Version (KJV)


7 Wherefore (as the Holy Ghost saith, To day if ye will hear his voice,

8 Harden not your hearts, as in the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness:

9 When your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my works forty years.

10 Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said, They do alway err in their heart; and they have not known my ways.

11 So I sware in my wrath, They shall not enter into my rest.)



Now I ask you...Who spoke to the Children of Israel in the Wilderness? Answer that question and I think (hope) you will see the point I am trying to make.

Since the second idea (by) is consistent with several of Paul's writings, I think that is the idea.

I would agree, but, it is equally true that Christ Baptizes with the Holy Ghost. That is why it is reiterated in Scripture numerous times.

It is the simple concept of the believer being...

...immersed into God Himself.

That is the "renewing of the Holy Ghost" Paul speaks about, in my view. We are made alive through being in union with God. It is the remedy for the condition of being without life and separated from God, which is the condition we are born into.

BTW, since this fact (Christ will baptize - in, with or by - the Holy Spirit in all four gospels, it is very important.

Agreed, brother. And this is what amazes me...nobody teaches about it.

And I think, if given the chance, it is fairly clear to correlate the Baptism with the Holy Ghost to the Promise of God to Israel in the Old Testament (which also extends to Gentiles in Prophecy, beginning with God's promise to Abraham (in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed)).

The disciples are told in Acts 1:4-5 to await the promise of the Father which they had heard from Him, which is obviously His teaching in regards to the unity that will arise between God and man when the Comforter comes. And to clarify, I do not mean men become gods, but the unity He taught that the Comforter would be in them/us forever (contrasted with Christ's departure which caused them sorrow), whereby He would come to us, the Father would come to us, They would make their abode within us, and we would be in Him and He in us.

Thus does He say...I will come to you.

Thanks for the post, Van. Out of time so I will skip your second post, as it is basically the same concept spoken of here.



God bless.

 

[Van]

Hi Darrel C, I pretty much agree except I think if possible we should have in view which person of the trinity is acting. For example to understand the baptism with the Holy Spirit to be the Spirit of Christ baptizing us into the Spirit of Christ is less likely than the Third Person of the Trinity baptizing believers into the Second Person of the Trinity, followed by being indwelt with the Third Person of the Trinity.

But you identify an important point, when we have the Son, we also have the Father. So your view is certainly one that is consistent with all scripture. I will have to study it more, because my gut reaction is that it seems a tad like cheating.

BTW, I do believe the voice from the burning bush was the Second Person of the Trinity, and the "Angel of the Lord" is the Second Person of the Trinity. But as you indicated, the God of the OT always refers to our Triune God.

I think the "saints in Light" refers to individuals who have been transferred into Christ (immersed inside and out with the Spirit of Christ.)

I like the NET translation of 1 Peter 1:2, which says in part, " by being set apart by the Spirit for obedience and for sprinkling with Jesus Christ’s blood." To restate the problem, the natural way to understand this is we are set apart by the Third Person of the Trinity into the Second Person, but it is certainly possible the Spirit of Christ is meant by "Spirit."

I agree, when anyone "enters" God's "rest" they do it by being baptized into Christ, where they are reborn and forgiven and made at peace with God. No one comes to the Father except through Me.

You view of renewing = rebirth (Romans 12:2, Titus 3:5) again seems a viable alternative to my view that the maturing as we are led by the Spirit is in view. Again more study needed.

 

[Aaron]

And yet after Pentecost one criterion for the new office of Deacon was that the candidate was to be "full of the Holy Ghost." According to Darrell, that's any believer.

And now you're going to say there's a difference between filling and baptizing, blah, blah, blah . . . I've heard it all before.

Acts 19 . . . had those disciples been baptized by John, they would have heard the preaching about the Spirit. So they weren't saying John baptized them. The were baptized unto John's baptism as presented by, most likely, some zealous and doctrinally deficient neophyte.

Your endless cascade of Scriptures don't prove your point, because you bring a fallacious premise to them . . . the primary fallacy of thinking that men can know the things of God and exercise faith without the Spirit of God.

So if you want to argue about the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, we need to argue Election first. Once we're agreed on Election, then the rest of the debate is academic.

 

[TCassidy]

And now you're going to say there's a difference between filling and baptizing, blah, blah, blah . . . I've heard it all before.

Uh, you mean there isn't? Let's see.

Filling. The water in you.
Baptizing (immersing). You in the water.

Filling. The Spirit in you.
Baptizing. You in the Spirit.

I was baptized in water. I was not filled with the water.

I have been filled with the Spirit. When I am filled it is not me getting more of the Spirit, it is the Spirit getting more of me.

Carry on.

 

[Aaron]

And is Christ in me or am I in Christ?

We can go on ad infinitum. Here's the long and the short of the matter. The Baptism of the Holy Ghost is an operation of Christ. (And, yes, there are three distinct Persons in our One God. It is not one Person acting in different roles . . . ) He baptizes. And He does so according to His will and His grace, not according to any work or state of holiness (rolls eyes).

This and any gift of the Holy Ghost can be asked for. If ye then being evil . . . how much more will your Father in Heaven give the Holy Spirit to them that ask Him?

 

[Darrell C]

Hi Darrel C, I pretty much agree except I think if possible we should have in view which person of the trinity is acting. For example to understand the baptism with the Holy Spirit to be the Spirit of Christ baptizing us into the Spirit of Christ is less likely than the Third Person of the Trinity baptizing believers into the Second Person of the Trinity, followed by being indwelt with the Third Person of the Trinity.

Ultimately it is, in my view, as simple as the first option of the poll: we are immersed into God.

The quote from Hebrews above ascribes the Holy Ghost with speaking, so let's see the original statement quoted:


Psalm 95:5-11

King James Version (KJV)


5 The sea is his, and he made it: and his hands formed the dry land.

6 O come, let us worship and bow down: let us kneel before the Lord our maker.

7 For he is our God; and we are the people of his pasture, and the sheep of his hand. To day if ye will hear his voice,

8 Harden not your heart, as in the provocation, and as in the day of temptation in the wilderness:

9 When your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my work.

10 Forty years long was I grieved with this generation, and said, It is a people that do err in their heart, and they have not known my ways:

11 Unto whom I sware in my wrath that they should not enter into my rest.


We could say the writer of Hebrews is speaking of the Holy Ghost inspiring the Psalmist, but I view it as the same principle. Here we are told God is the Savior (v.1), the King above all gods (v.3), the Creator (v.6), and the Shepherd (v.7).

And when we look at the event in view, that is, God speaking to the children of Israel in the wilderness, we usually just consider the same thing...it is God in view. Yet the Writer ascribing the speaking to the Holy Ghost in Hebrews, as does Stephen in Acts 7. And all of this just to again reiterate that while we do distinguish the Persons of the Trinity, we should also keep that unity that Scripture provides. Philip asks to see the Father, and Christ states, "Have I been so long time with you, Philip...and you still do not know me?"

Again, though, the incarnation takes special consideration, because as I see it, rather than the Son "emptying Himself" of Deity, what we see is that He veils His glory in that flesh He took upon Himself.

But you identify an important point, when we have the Son, we also have the Father. So your view is certainly one that is consistent with all scripture. I will have to study it more, because my gut reaction is that it seems a tad like cheating.

We have the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. No cheating, lol.

BTW, I do believe the voice from the burning bush was the Second Person of the Trinity, and the "Angel of the Lord" is the Second Person of the Trinity. But as you indicated, the God of the OT always refers to our Triune God.

I would agree in large part, again based on the fact that God is One, though understood in three Persons.

I take the view that all direct interaction with man on God's part reveals the Son. When God manifested in physical form on the Plains of Mamre (Genesis 18), for example, this was the Son of God. So too when God walked with Adam, this was the Son.

But it was the Father as well, just as the Father was in Christ. And Christ makes it clear He is in the Father.

Yet He is the Spirit as well. I think Father and Son distinguish primarily God in His Eternal Glory as contrasted with God interacting with man in this physical realm. That distinction becomes prominent in regards to the Incarnation, when God took upon human flesh which differs somewhat from that flesh He took on when being served by Abraham in Mamre. That flesh was most likely shed, whereas the body prepared for His death has not. Not at this time, anyway. An intriguing verse would be...



1 Corinthians 15:28

King James Version (KJV)

28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

I think the "saints in Light" refers to individuals who have been transferred into Christ (immersed inside and out with the Spirit of Christ.)

I would agree, "light" being a reference, basically, to that which is godly, or "good," contrasted with darkness, which conveys the picture of evil and separation from God.

Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

I like the NET translation of 1 Peter 1:2, which says in part, " by being set apart by the Spirit for obedience and for sprinkling with Jesus Christ’s blood." To restate the problem, the natural way to understand this is we are set apart by the Third Person of the Trinity into the Second Person, but it is certainly possible the Spirit of Christ is meant by "Spirit."

And I would view that as correlating to the Ministry of the Comforter, Who convicts unbelievers of sin, righteousness, and judgment. So we do see the Spirit effecting sanctification. This would extend to that promised by God, "I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in my statutes, and keep my judgments."

But here is the thing: we are told specifically that it is Christ that will Baptize with the Holy Ghost, which makes Christ the Baptizer. I think there is a general overview in regards to this Baptism that pertains to his Work, for it is based upon His death, burial, and resurrection that being reconciled to God was made possible. The Spirit of God works in the lives of men enlightening them to what was Mystery prior to His "being sent" by Christ. That is, the Gospel of Christ.

Consider:


Romans 16:24-26

King James Version (KJV)


24 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:


Yet we do not separate Christ from the Spirit of God to the point of exclusion:


Revelation 3:20-22

King James Version (KJV)


20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

22 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.


And again, consider what Christ tells His disciples:


John 14:16-18

King James Version (KJV)

16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.


Consider that the Lord states He will send "another" Comforter. Now Who is the Comforter "another" Comforter replaces (so to speak)?

Christ.

And sorry, Van, didn't mean to ramble on so long, but this came to mind:


Luke 2:25

King James Version (KJV)

25 And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him.


The comfort they awaited had it's hope in the Messiah. And this was more true than they imagined, for as God had said, "Eye hath not seen, ear hath not heard, nor has it entered into the hearts of men the things prepared for them that love God."

I agree, when anyone "enters" God's "rest" they do it by being baptized into Christ, where they are reborn and forgiven and made at peace with God. No one comes to the Father except through Me.

Agreed.

You view of renewing = rebirth (Romans 12:2, Titus 3:5) again seems a viable alternative to my view that the maturing as we are led by the Spirit is in view. Again more study needed.

I think most would draw a correlation between this renewing and the "renewing of the mind," and it is true that the indwelling of God is, in my view, the very reason why we can "walk in His statutes and keep His judgments."

But, I have for some time now been convinced that salvation in Christ brings about one fundamental change in man's condition, which is he is brought back into union with God, which was lost in Adam. That we are born separated from God, and the crucial remedy for our condition is for that separation to be mended through our immersion into God. Thus I view regeneration, which has as a basis the concept of being made alive, as primarily effected through the eternal indwelling of God. We have a new heart and new spirit because of that, and we are cleansed in the process (hence the "washing of regeneration").

But consider, and you can tell me if you think the reasoning unsound, Paul writes "God saved us...by." The progressive sanctification we go through as we grow in Christ is an ongoing process, but...salvation is a completed action. We may await the redemption of our bodies, but nevertheless...we are saved at salvation in the eternal perspective, which is positional and permanent. Thus I would suggest that Paul's statement in Titus 3:4-5 has in view the means of salvation itself, which would lend this being a reference to the "reunion" of God and man a stronger position.

Thanks for the response, and again...sorry for rambling on, lol. It is an important issue, though, as you say.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

And yet after Pentecost one criterion for the new office of Deacon was that the candidate was to be "full of the Holy Ghost." According to Darrell, that's any believer.

On the contrary, the filling with the Spirit is an Old Testament Ministry as well. The eternal indwelling is the distinctive event not found in the Old Testament.

Christ speaks of that here:


John 14:16-18

King James Version (KJV)


16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.


When the disciples preached the Kingdom Gospel, healed, and cast out demons, they did so through the filling of the Spirit. This was the Spirit of God coming upon men for the purpose of empowerment for ministries God meant them to perform, which would include ministries of Prophet, Priest, and King.

This same "coming upon" can be seen throughout the Old Testament, as well as in the New. And it is the failure of the Student to properly distinguish between these two that the Baptism with the Holy Ghost has basically fallen through the cracks of understanding, which in large part has to do with the increasing popularity of Charismania and their teachings.

I think TCassidy summed it very well, illustrating the difference between being filled, and being indwelt.

And now you're going to say there's a difference between filling and baptizing, blah, blah, blah . . . I've heard it all before.

Which is why, more than likely, you miss the magnitude of the Work of Christ. Because you equate the filling with the Holy Ghost with being Baptized into Christ, immersed into God Himself, you mistake the very event by which we are eternally saved with God's empowering ministry in the lives of men.

Consider:


Acts 1:4-8

King James Version (KJV)


4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.

5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.


The "Promise of the Father" taught by Christ is the Baptism with the Holy Ghost. It is not until after they receive Him that they are empowered to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

This is substantiated by the very actions of the disciples themselves. They did not continue in the ministry they once performed under Christ, but went back to business as usual ("I go a-fishing").

If we understand what it means to be "filled" with the Holy Ghost, we would not be subject to the wresting of Charismatic teachings and over-emphasize the association of gifts with the Baptism with the Holy Ghost.

And I can understand, when you read my words, that you see "blah blah blah," lol, but...

...when you read the Word of God presented to you, there is no reason not to give it due consideration.

You cannot change Christ's statement in Acts 1:4-5, He is clear: the Promise of the Father He taught them is the Baptism with the Holy Ghost. This was prophesied by John and fulfilled "not many days hence" from Christ's statement here.

Acts 19 . . . had those disciples been baptized by John, they would have heard the preaching about the Spirit. So they weren't saying John baptized them. The were baptized unto John's baptism as presented by, most likely, some zealous and doctrinally deficient neophyte.

Aaron, the text states the exact opposite of what you assert here:


Acts 19

King James Version (KJV)

2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.


Yet you say they had heard "preaching about the Holy Spirit?"

Paul goes on to correlate the Baptism with the Holy Ghost with believing on Christ:


4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.


These were John's disciples, not Christ's. They are here saved, and they are Baptized with the Holy Ghost. They are told they are to receive Him, and we see He "came on them."


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

Your endless cascade of Scriptures don't prove your point, because you bring a fallacious premise to them . . . the primary fallacy of thinking that men can know the things of God and exercise faith without the Spirit of God.

On the contrary, nowhere in anything I teach on any forum...have I ever suggested such a thing, lol.

However, what I will say is that you are likely embracing an equally erroneous position that men must be regenerated in order to know the truth.

And that misses entirely everything Christ teaches here:



John 16:7-9

King James Version (KJV)


7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;


What the Lord is teaching here, Aaron, is that in the coming Age (after the Age of Law ends with the establishing of the New Covenant), the Spirit He taught that would come, the Comforter, would convict men of sin (of their condition, that they are sinners, and how that correlates to Christ), righteousness (that they are not, Christ is, and the correlation to their own condition), and of judgment (that they are, like Satan, destined for Hell).

Note that He say "Of sin, because they believe not on me." Now correlate that to what the Comforter is doing in the lives of those Christ makes clear are not regenerate, but unbelievers. That is the Ministry Christ states the Comforter will perform...

...when He comes.

Now, to further show that unbelievers can know the truth, we simply view Peter's teaching concerning false teachers:


2 Peter 2:20-22

King James Version (KJV)


20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.

21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.

22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.


These men had been made to understand the truth through the Ministry of the Spirit, but had turned from it, and we see in v.22 that there was no change in their condition.

Another indication of those who reject this Ministry can be seen here:


Hebrews 10:26-29

King James Version (KJV)


26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,

27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.

28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:

29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?


"Doing despite unto the Spirit of Grace" is resisting the Spirit's Ministry in this Age, which is contrasted with the Covenant of Law, and those who rejected God's will in that Age. As Stephen said before being put to death...


Acts 7:51-53

King James Version (KJV)


51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.

52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:

53 Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.


I am sorry that you do not see validation of my points in the "cascade" of the Scriptures presented to you, but, that is why we are here, after all, is it not? To challenge our views? And how then can our views be validated or invalidated apart from the Word of God?

So if you want to argue about the Baptism of the Holy Spirit,

No, I would actually like to have a good conversation about the Baptism with the Holy Ghost, rather than argue.

we need to argue Election first. Once we're agreed on Election, then the rest of the debate is academic.

Sorry, no. Election is an important issue, but the focus is the Baptism with the Holy Ghost. All who will be Baptized into Christ are among the Elect, that is not even open for debate. It is simply a basic principle we acknowledge.

But, the Baptism with the Holy Ghost is a much debated and controversial subject, having views in all groups which differ substantially one from the other. The Poll gives four views (two of which might be considered similar) from which we can enter into discussion about it, and that is where our focus should lie. If you have not chosen an option yet, that would suggest...

...you simply don't have an answer. If you feel that the proper option was not included in the Poll, then please offer up what option you would have placed in the poll that you might then be able to cast a vote.

Either way, thanks for the post, all participation is appreciated. I hope you don't think I am being harsh, that is not my intent, but only to discuss the topic. Sometimes, because disagreement is a given in Doctrinal Debate, it can come across negatively, and that is not meant if it does.


God bless.