2 Spirit Baptisms?

[Randy Kluth]

My own thought is that there are 3 different levels of obedience in the world, to God.
1) Doing Good Works, which comes when God's Word speaks to the consciences of men, whether or not they know it is God.
2) Letting Christ reside in our heart and rule there, resulting in God creating a New Nature in us, giving us New Birth.
3) Accepting the call to minister for Christ, thus receiving the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, an anointing for ministry.

My questions are:
1) Is the above list correct?
2) Are there 2 separate instances of Spirit empowerment?

John 20.22 And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit.
Acts 1.5 For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.”

3) If these 2 instances are 2 separate occasions for the Spirit empowerment, what makes them different?

The 1st instance seems to be simply a "breathing of the Spirit" on the apostles, to send them forth to bring the message of grace to Israel. The 2nd instance seems to be the actual immersion in the Holy Spirit, to preach the Gospel to the world, and to equip all the saints for ministry. How do you see it?

 

[justbyfaith]

@CharismaticLady

 

[Mungo]

My own thought is that there are 3 different levels of obedience in the world, to God.
1) Doing Good Works, which comes when God's Word speaks to the consciences of men, whether or not they know it is God.
2) Letting Christ reside in our heart and rule there, resulting in God creating a New Nature in us, giving us New Birth.
3) Accepting the call to minister for Christ, thus receiving the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, an anointing for ministry.

My questions are:
1) Is the above list correct?
2) Are there 2 separate instances of Spirit empowerment?

John 20.22 And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit.
Acts 1.5 For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.”

3) If these 2 instances are 2 separate occasions for the Spirit empowerment, what makes them different?

The 1st instance seems to be simply a "breathing of the Spirit" on the apostles, to send them forth to bring the message of grace to Israel. The 2nd instance seems to be the actual immersion in the Holy Spirit, to preach the Gospel to the world, and to equip all the saints for ministry. How do you see it?

There are not two "spirit baptisms" but two distinct ways that the Holy Spirit acts, and correspondingly two ways of receiving the Holy Spirit and two ways of being filled with the Holy Spirit.

I did a whole thread on this here: The Work of The Holy Spirit

You might find it interesting.

 

[Randy Kluth]

There are not two "spirit baptisms" but two distinct ways that the Holy Spirit acts, and correspondingly two ways of receiving the Holy Spirit and two ways of being filled with the Holy Spirit.

I did a whole thread on this here: The Work of The Holy Spirit

You might find it interesting.

Thanks--I'll check it out. I agree--there are not 2 Baptisms of the Spirit. But it was the same Holy Spirit, and in both cases Jesus was giving the Spirit to his representatives.

I find it interesting that even after that the 1st incident, in which Jesus breathed the Spirit on his disciples, he told the same disciples later to wait for the "promise of the Father," which singles out the "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" as something unique--something that goes beyond a simple anointing for a specific task. Thanks again! :)

 

[DaChaser]

My own thought is that there are 3 different levels of obedience in the world, to God.
1) Doing Good Works, which comes when God's Word speaks to the consciences of men, whether or not they know it is God.
2) Letting Christ reside in our heart and rule there, resulting in God creating a New Nature in us, giving us New Birth.
3) Accepting the call to minister for Christ, thus receiving the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, an anointing for ministry.

My questions are:
1) Is the above list correct?
2) Are there 2 separate instances of Spirit empowerment?

John 20.22 And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit.
Acts 1.5 For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.”

3) If these 2 instances are 2 separate occasions for the Spirit empowerment, what makes them different?

The 1st instance seems to be simply a "breathing of the Spirit" on the apostles, to send them forth to bring the message of grace to Israel. The 2nd instance seems to be the actual immersion in the Holy Spirit, to preach the Gospel to the world, and to equip all the saints for ministry. How do you see it?

There is NO second act of Grace, Baptism in the Holy Spirit with evidence of speaking in tongues , as all saved have the indwelling of the Spirit, but we are commanded to be also infilled daily basis!

 

[marks]

Thanks--I'll check it out. I agree--there are not 2 Baptisms of the Spirit. But it was the same Holy Spirit, and in both cases Jesus was giving the Spirit to his representatives.

I find it interesting that even after that the 1st incident, in which Jesus breathed the Spirit on his disciples, he told the same disciples later to wait for the "promise of the Father," which singles out the "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" as something unique--something that goes beyond a simple anointing for a specific task. Thanks again! :)

I think what happened with the disciples was a one-time thing, that Jesus personally breathed the Holy Spirit into these men.

I understand there to be a single baptism, that being our being immersed into Christ, and that this is the thing as the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

If pressed for an answer beyond what I understand, I would say that when Jesus breathed on the disciples to receive the Holy Spirit, that they were born again, but were not in "the body of Christ" which began on Pentacost. So I see that as a unique time.

We are baptised in the Holy Spirit being reborn, but then can be filled with the Holy Spirit in later instances, something different.

I think the call to ministry is given to all children of God, some in this way, some in that way. But we all serve in the power of the Holy Spirit, including our preparation for service.

Much love!

 

[Hidden In Him]

2) Are there 2 separate instances of Spirit empowerment?

John 20.22 And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit.
Acts 1.5 For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.”

There were in the lives of the apostles, yes. It testifies to the fact that the empowerment is not a permanent thing, no more than the analogy of being "clothed" in the Lord is. A coat can be put on, and it can be taken off. Hence the command to born again saved people to "put on the Lord, and the power of His might."

3) If these 2 instances are 2 separate occasions for the Spirit empowerment, what makes them different?

The 1st instance seems to be simply a "breathing of the Spirit" on the apostles, to send them forth to bring the message of grace to Israel. The 2nd instance seems to be the actual immersion in the Holy Spirit, to preach the Gospel to the world, and to equip all the saints for ministry. How do you see it?

Merely a matter of extent/ intensity, as far as I'm concerned. When they received the empowerment the first time, they went forth performing healings, and were amazed that even demons obeyed them. With Pentecost, they again moved in supernatural power beginning with speaking in tongues and prophesying, but they went on to do signs and wonders as well, as the Acts account suggests.

But again, these were separate instances in the life of the apostles, given at two different times; one before the crucifixion and one after. The one after more characterizes all the outpourings/ empowerments we would receive, and they are all for ministering to the church through the gifts, and also evangelizing to the world to bring them to Christ thru supernatural confirmations.

Essentially two empowerments, differing only in intensity and the timing and context in which they were given.

 

[Randy Kluth]

There were in the lives of the apostles, yes. It testifies to the fact that the empowerment is not a permanent thing, no more than the analogy of being "clothed" in the Lord is. A coat can be put on, and it can be taken off. Hence the command to born again saved people to "put on the Lord, and the power of His might."


Merely a matter of extent/ intensity, as far as I'm concerned. When they received the empowerment the first time, they went forth performing healings, and were amazed that even demons obeyed them. With Pentecost, they again moved in supernatural power beginning with speaking in tongues and prophesying, but they went on to do signs and wonders as well, as the Acts account suggests.

But again, these were separate instances in the life of the apostles, given at two different times; one before the crucifixion and one after. The one after more characterizes all the outpourings/ empowerments we would receive, and they are all for ministering to the church through the gifts, and also evangelizing to the world to bring them to Christ thru supernatural confirmations.

Essentially two empowerments, differing only in intensity and the timing and context in which they were given.

To be clear, the John 20 episode was after the resurrection, and not before. But clearly, the disciples of Jesus operated in the power of the Spirit even before the crucifixion, as did the OT Prophets.

It seems to me that an episode of being anointed for a specific mission is different than a life-time appointment, and may be what's indicated here? I'm not sure one issuing of the Spirit can be characterized as "internal" and another "external," though I find it fascinating to emphasize the need for both internal change and external demonstrations of power. That's a good point all by itself. This point is made in Mungo's thread.

I think the main focus of all these Scriptures is on the fact we need the Holy Spirit for every mission, as well as for salvation itself, which is an indwelling of the Holy Spirit. The outpourings, like breathing the Holy Spirit on someone, or the baptism/immersion of the Holy Spirit, suggest a particular anointing for power. In the case of the "promise of the Spirit," it seems to be a lifetime calling, as well as a lifetime anointing to fulfill this calling. But I'm still studying it...

 

[ChristisGod]

I think what happened with the disciples was a one-time thing, that Jesus personally breathed the Holy Spirit into these men.

I understand there to be a single baptism, that being our being immersed into Christ, and that this is the thing as the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

If pressed for an answer beyond what I understand, I would say that when Jesus breathed on the disciples to receive the Holy Spirit, that they were born again, but were not in "the body of Christ" which began on Pentacost. So I see that as a unique time.

We are baptised in the Holy Spirit being reborn, but then can be filled with the Holy Spirit in later instances, something different.

I think the call to ministry is given to all children of God, some in this way, some in that way. But we all serve in the power of the Holy Spirit, including our preparation for service.

Much love!

Winner !

 

[Hidden In Him]

To be clear, the John 20 episode was after the resurrection, and not before. But clearly, the disciples of Jesus operated in the power of the Spirit even before the crucifixion, as did the OT Prophets.

Ah! My bad, I assumed you were talking about Luke 10:1-20. But maybe an error in our favor, so to speak, as it illustrates yet again that dispensations of the Spirit were occurring both after and before Pentecost.

It seems to me that an episode of being anointed for a specific mission is different than a life-time appointment, and may be what's indicated here? I'm not sure one issuing of the Spirit can be characterized as "internal" and another "external,"

I could agree with this, yes. The analogy of receiving the breath of God is internal, as is the analogy of being "filled" with the Spirit. I recall someone presenting a good work on how the argument that the Spirit never dwelt within the Old Testament saints is entirely fraudulent. I wish I had saved it. It was good work. Can't even remember who posted it, or maybe I could find it again. Possibly Bersek, but I would have to ask him.

The outpourings, like breathing the Holy Spirit on someone, or the baptism/immersion of the Holy Spirit, suggest a particular anointing for power. In the case of the "promise of the Spirit," it seems to be a lifetime calling, as well as a lifetime anointing to fulfill this calling. But I'm still studying it...

Hmmm... callings (rather than salvation) would be a different argument, IMO. I think callings often involve an outpouring and a gifting.

 

[CharismaticLady]

@CharismaticLady

What?

 

[justbyfaith]

What?

Don't you have an excellent answer to the OP?

 

[101G]

Addressing the OP only, after just glancing over a few of the replies. not saying that any are right or wrong, but consider this.

there are two baptism that the Holy Spirit do.

a. the baptism "OF" the Holy Spirit which places new believers into the body of Christ. better known as, "being Born again, or from above.

b. the baptism "WITH" the Holy Spirit which empower the believer, with Gifts.

Hope that helps,

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[CharismaticLady]

Don't you have an excellent answer to the OP?

Of course.

First baptism for power over sin and to receive the gifts of Mark 16:16-18:
Apostles: John 20:21-23
First followers: Acts 2

Second baptism for power of boldness to minister and gifts of 1 Corinthians 12:
Apostles: Acts 2
First followers: Acts 4:29-31

 

[Randy Kluth]

Addressing the OP only, after just glancing over a few of the replies. not saying that any are right or wrong, but consider this.

there are two baptism that the Holy Spirit do.

a. the baptism "OF" the Holy Spirit which places new believers into the body of Christ. better known as, "being Born again, or from above.

b. the baptism "WITH" the Holy Spirit which empower the believer, with Gifts.

Hope that helps,

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

Thank you. The truths here are important and true. I'm just trying to work out the language. Thanks much!

 

[Randy Kluth]

Ah! My bad, I assumed you were talking about Luke 10:1-20. But maybe an error in our favor, so to speak, as it illustrates yet again that dispensations of the Spirit were occurring both after and before Pentecost.

I could agree with this, yes. The analogy of receiving the breath of God is internal, as is the analogy of being "filled" with the Spirit. I recall someone presenting a good work on how the argument that the Spirit never dwelt within the Old Testament saints is entirely fraudulent. I wish I had saved it. It was good work. Can't even remember who posted it, or maybe I could find it again. Possibly Bersek, but I would have to ask him.

Hmmm... callings (rather than salvation) would be a different argument, IMO. I think callings often involve an outpouring and a gifting.

I've been one of those who have resisted the idea that God did not indwell believers in the OT era. I don't see how in any era God would not in some way indwell His people? To not have Him there, when He is necessary for our righteousness, would be to commit believers to an inability to do anything righteous!

Biblically, God said to Israel that He was "near" to them such that they were enabled to obey His word. It was God's word that entered into the consciences of men so that they could hear and do what God desired. In OT times, Israel had the Law not only written externally on stone tablets, but also spoken within the conscience through the living word of God.

I do believe that the NT terminology describes this in the NT sense, as an *eternal indwelling,* as opposed to God being within us only temporarily. The picture, under the Old Covenant, is one of God indwelling the temple temporarily until Israel committed apostasy. And then God left His temple and His people. It certainly wasn't necessarily a complete and final departure, but it does show the difference between how God indwelt people under the Old Covenant and how He indwells people under the New Covenant.

Since God is vital to our production of good works, we must have the Holy Spirit to inspire us and to enable us to produce virtuous works. After Christ's death, the Holy Spirit was given to produce good works in the name of Christ. After Pentecost, the Holy Spirit was given to testify in the name of Christ. I'm not sure what the difference is, unless it is more than simple salvation, and perhaps an anointing for ministry? Again, I'm wide open on the subject.

 

[Hidden In Him]

I've been one of those who have resisted the idea that God did not indwell believers in the OT era. I don't see how in any era God would not in some way indwell His people? To not have Him there, when He is necessary for our righteousness, would be to commit believers to an inability to do anything righteous!

Not only is this an excellent point, but in reading it the verse came to mind that says, "Every scripture is God-breathed." Now if every scripture is God-breathed, much of the OT scripture was written by the prophets, others by the psalmists. How can it be God-breathed if the Spirit was not within them? Doesn't make much sense really. Crazy how theological assumptions can lead to incredibly bad interpretation.

Again, I'm wide open on the subject.

To me, the only real distinction I can count on is that His presence dwelt predominantly in a temple made by hands, as opposed to upon all "Israel," since many were sinners in the flesh upon whom His Spirit could not dwell. But in the NT era, His body alone became the true temple, and those who attempted to destroy the true temple were themselves destroyed (1 Corinthians 3:17; 1 Corinthians 11:29-31).

 

[Randy Kluth]

Not only is this an excellent point, but in reading it the verse came to mind that says, "Every scripture is God-breathed." Now if every scripture is God-breathed, much of the OT scripture was written by the prophets, others by the psalmists. How can it be God-breathed if the Spirit was not within them? Doesn't make much sense really. Crazy how theological assumptions can lead to incredibly bad interpretation.


To me, the only real distinction I can count on is that His presence dwelt predominantly in a temple made by hands, as opposed to upon all "Israel," since many were sinners in the flesh upon whom His Spirit could not dwell. But in the NT era, His body alone became the true temple, and those who attempted to destroy the true temple were themselves destroyed (1 Corinthians 3:17; 1 Corinthians 11:29-31).

Amen! :)

 

[DaChaser]

I think what happened with the disciples was a one-time thing, that Jesus personally breathed the Holy Spirit into these men.

I understand there to be a single baptism, that being our being immersed into Christ, and that this is the thing as the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

If pressed for an answer beyond what I understand, I would say that when Jesus breathed on the disciples to receive the Holy Spirit, that they were born again, but were not in "the body of Christ" which began on Pentacost. So I see that as a unique time.

We are baptised in the Holy Spirit being reborn, but then can be filled with the Holy Spirit in later instances, something different.

I think the call to ministry is given to all children of God, some in this way, some in that way. But we all serve in the power of the Holy Spirit, including our preparation for service.

Much love!

Pretty much the same way that I see what the scriptures are teaching to us...

 

[DaChaser]

I've been one of those who have resisted the idea that God did not indwell believers in the OT era. I don't see how in any era God would not in some way indwell His people? To not have Him there, when He is necessary for our righteousness, would be to commit believers to an inability to do anything righteous!

Biblically, God said to Israel that He was "near" to them such that they were enabled to obey His word. It was God's word that entered into the consciences of men so that they could hear and do what God desired. In OT times, Israel had the Law not only written externally on stone tablets, but also spoken within the conscience through the living word of God.

I do believe that the NT terminology describes this in the NT sense, as an *eternal indwelling,* as opposed to God being within us only temporarily. The picture, under the Old Covenant, is one of God indwelling the temple temporarily until Israel committed apostasy. And then God left His temple and His people. It certainly wasn't necessarily a complete and final departure, but it does show the difference between how God indwelt people under the Old Covenant and how He indwells people under the New Covenant.

Since God is vital to our production of good works, we must have the Holy Spirit to inspire us and to enable us to produce virtuous works. After Christ's death, the Holy Spirit was given to produce good works in the name of Christ. After Pentecost, the Holy Spirit was given to testify in the name of Christ. I'm not sure what the difference is, unless it is more than simple salvation, and perhaps an anointing for ministry? Again, I'm wide open on the subject.

The Lord did not hold the OT saints sins against them, but the Spirit only seemed to indwell those such as Prophets and Kings, and those with specific tasks assigned them by God!