Baptism in water vs Baptism in Holy Spirit

[Shy]

A question should be answered, not debated. Is this not Bible Study section? Perhaps I have chosen the wrong one.

Besides, not once I blamed you for expressing your faith.

 

[HammerStone]

Shy, do you recall the account of the baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist?

John 1:32-33

And John testified, “I watched the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and He rested on Him. I didn’t know Him, but He who sent me to baptize with water told me, ‘The One you see the Spirit descending and resting on—He is the One who baptizes withe the Holy Spirit.’

Elsewhere, it says that Jesus submitted to baptism to fulfill all righteousness. Water baptism is an outward sign of the interior, yes. Many from the Pentecostal tradition, and even the precursor Wesleyan tradition (John Wesley remains one of my top extra-Biblical reading choices for his passion) will say that Spirit baptism is something special that you have to work towards. They base it on passages like the one from Acts 8:14-17.

I think there is a mistaken assumption that it takes the right person to lay hands on someone to baptize in the Spirit. This passage was less of a reference to a required act so much as it was a response to the command that Jesus issued - that which we call the Great Commission. In the case of Jesus, the Holy Spirit descended at his baptism.

In Acts 10:44-48, the Holy Spirit baptism occurred when the people first heard the Word of God preached by Peter.

So, we have multiple accounts of it happening at differing times. Also note that there is no specific pattern, other than it occurs for believers. It may occur when they first hear the gospel proclaimed, but then it may take some time and may precede or follow water baptism.

I think the message in all of this is that it's not in response to our own works - be it sanctification or a certain "Holy mind" for lack of a better term. It occurs as God determines it should occur. I do not see a pattern of preparing ourselves for anything.

 

[Rex]

A question should be answered, not debated. Is this not Bible Study section? Perhaps I have chosen the wrong one.

Besides, not once I blamed you for expressing your faith.

That's quite alright next time I'll let the must speak in tongues and water baptism saves crew bum rush you, instead of defending your case, unless of course you believe such things?

 

[mjrhealth]

Act_11:16 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.

You receive the Holy Ghost when you truly come to Jesus. How do you know you have the Holy Spirit, you hear His voice. He becomes your teacher.

Joh_14:26 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.

Act 10:44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
Act 10:45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

It does not require the laying on of hands. And any pastor who tells you to say silly words to get you to speak in tongues is speaking from the depth of hell and I would run as far from him as I could. I have seeing it done and it is not God..

So again how do you know you have received the Holy Spirit.

Joh_10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

In all His Love

 

[Shy]

That's quite alright next time I'll let the must speak in tongues and water baptism saves crew bum rush you, instead of defending your case, unless of course you believe such things?

No, I don't.

Act_11:16 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.

You receive the Holy Ghost when you truly come to Jesus. How do you know you have the Holy Spirit, you hear His voice. He becomes your teacher.

Joh_14:26 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.

Act 10:44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
Act 10:45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

It does not require the laying on of hands. And any pastor who tells you to say silly words to get you to speak in tongues is speaking from the depth of hell and I would run as far from him as I could. I have seeing it done and it is not God..

So again how do you know you have received the Holy Spirit.

Joh_10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

In all His Love

So, from what I get, patience and resting in the Lord gives baptism?

 

[dragonfly]

Hi Shy,

I'd like to chip in some additional thoughts. Hammerstone has made an excellent point in his last sentence, except for one thing which can be somewhat neglected when thinking about water baptism - that when John Baptist began it, and Jesus carried it on, it was about repentance.

Nevertheless, to be baptised in the name of Jesus, was different to being baptised by John, because of what John had added, namely, that Jesus would baptise with the Holy Spirit and/or fire. (The and/or is because there are different ways to interpret the meaning of 'fire', but generally it is about chaff being burned up, or death.) To see how important Paul thought the water baptism in the name of Jesus, read the beginning of Acts 19.

Alanforchrist stated:

Every recording of people being baptised in the Holy Ghost in the Bible, They spoke in tongues.

Apart from the when Ananias laid hands on Saul of Tarsus, in the street named Straight, in Acts 9. Clearly, Paul received the gift of tongues later.

Hi Rex,

I was once corrected by a much more learned brother, on the same point you made here:

And speaking in tongues is speaking in another language and people hearing and preconceive in their own tongue, Acts 2

Apparently the Greek is absolutely clear that what was coming out of the disciples' mouths, was the languages of those present. It was not that each person present (who had not yet either repented or believed in Jesus Christ) was somehow operating the gift of interpretation.

However, let me add a true testimony from a German girl with whom I used to attend church. She came to the UK to learn English by training as a nurse. A Christian nurse invited her to church on her first Sunday (a charismatic Baptist church) and she had no idea what it would be like, as she'd been brought up as a Catholic, and had lapsed from that in a big way. It was something to do that day off. While at church, the gifts of the Spirit were given room, and someone spoke out in tongues, a language she did not understand, but, she did know what the Holy Spirit was saying to her, and she received it. (Now this is the kind of experience which Rex described in an earlier post, so it can happen, but it was not what happened in Acts 2.) To finish the story about the German girl. After she got back to her room, she lay on her bed, shaking, and she knew she was delivered from a lot of demons, and very soon she became a Christian. (I'm not sure what her testimony was about when she received the Holy Spirit.)


To soupy,

I'd like to see an answer to this, as this is my understanding of speaking in tongues, it is to be understood by someone hearing.

This is not at all the case. Someone speaking in tongues - if it is a language of men, and there are people present who understand that language - may be understood by the human ear, but for the most part, the gift of interpretation is required to be present. Paul teaches on this in 1 Cor 14.

There are also 'tongues of angels' (1 Cor 13:1) of which there is no earthly hope a human will have understanding - apart from the gift of interpretation.

Rex said,

It has little to do with a mans desire or want, it's a gift, subject to the Lord not the desires of men.

I do believe there needs to be an element of desire on the part of the man/woman who has heard of the gift of the Holy Spirit, but has not received it yet, and say this because there are plenty of 'Christians' who don't want to go the whole distance for the Lord, or to obey His will, or to even know what His will for their life is; so if they can avoid receiving the baptism in the Spirit, they are home and dry with the religion for which they want to settle.

Men boosting that they have this gift is troubling enough

I have great sympathy with this statement. In fact, it doesn't matter what gift a person has, the idea that it becomes theirs to operate at their own will, rather than according to the Lord's will in the intimacy of the moment when it is required by Him, is just as troubling.

I define it as being a false prophet.

That's food for thought. I think there's a great deal of misinformation about how to deal with the gifts, floating around in Christendom, which is entirely man-made and not according to the New Testament, and people (sheeple) say what they hear others saying, because they think that's what a Christian does. (Yep. More Bible study in Ephesians and 1 Corinthians would alert them to their error.)


To Shy,

Rex is correct that there is nothing we can 'do' to receive baptism in the Spirit, apart from asking Him, and seeking to grow in the knowledge of God through reading His word.

I hope you see that back in the day of John the Baptist, there was no 'baptism in the Spirit'. He was inviting people to be baptised in water for the remission of sins. Perhaps you don't know that up until that time, only Gentiles who were becoming proselytes, would be baptised. (Such Gentiles also had to be circumcised (the man of the family) and bring a certain sacrifice.) So, John was inviting the sacrifice of a broken and a contrite heart over sin to a nation of people who were already circumcised in flesh. He was telling them their sins made them as unclean as uncircumcised Gentiles. (With this in mind, re-read Paul's discussion at the end of Romans 2.) Therefore, it took a degree of humility for proud Israelites to submit to baptism in water. John's point to them as the herald of the Messiah, Jesus, was that He would baptise them in the Holy Ghost and with fire. In other words, he was warning them that water baptism for the remission of sins was not the end of God's dealings with them. There was more to come for those who followed John's teaching. This is where we find Andrew and John in John 1:35 - 38 - leaving John to follow Jesus. Read their conversation. It is instructive. We have to have the same desire to know where Jesus 'lives', and to be willing to travel from where we are now, to where He 'is'.

John 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

The reference to 'water' was well understood by Israelites, as a reference to the word of God. There can be other meanings when 'water' or 'waters' is used in the Bible, but the best one that fits here, is 'the word'. John 15:3.

Ephesians 5:26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word.

John 1: 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.


There is plenty of sprinkling/sprinkle, in the Old Testament, particulary in the law but also in the prophets. A well-known one was when Moses sprinkled both the book and the people. Sprinkling has the significance of joining the ones who are sprinkled, with the Lord in agreement.

Here is another famous reference to sprinkling:

Jeremiah 36:25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

If there are any idols in a person's life, God will want them to be abandoned. This is something you can seek to do without any special additional direction from the Lord. He calls Himself 'Jealous', very early in the Old Testament, and Jesus taught that we should be single minded and single hearted for God.

Here are two from the New Testament:

1 Peter 1:2 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.

Hebrews 10:19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, 20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; 21 And having an high priest over the house of God; 22 Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.


The written word of God can act like a mirror. In it we see where we fall short. The good news is that as we look steadily to the Lord Jesus Christ, He changes us into His own image.

2 Corinthians 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. 18 But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.

It is necessary to see that baptism in water was a stage which Israelites had to go through, which because Jesus and His apostles taught that we also should be baptised, we should do. I am not going to enter the dispute about whether having been baptised 'saves' a person, but certainly it is true that a person who is not 'believing' for salvation in the name of Jesus Christ, is unlikely to seek water baptism, even if they attend church, have a good grasp of the Bible, and can explain the way of salvation through faith in the resurrection of Christ.

Baptism is, in fact, a picture. Jesus prefigured His own death for us, when He went under the water. We identify with His death for us, when we go under the water. This is what Romans 6 is about.


Baptism in the Holy Spirit signifies God sending His power into you life. That is not only power to live free from sin, but power to obey Him in a very detailed way, which has the potential to make you unpopular with the world, and even with your family and other Christians.


You might enjoy listening to Carter Conlon's testimony, as he also became a Christian in a Baptist church setting; He lives in me

 

[Raeneske]

So my assumption is slightly right. Unless you speak in tongues, you are not baptized in Holy Spirit, correct?

You don't have to speak in tongues. Ever.

You are baptized with the Holy Ghost, when Christ sends the Holy Ghost to you, which helps work in your heart to bring about the neccessary inward change for salvation.

 

[Angelina]

You do not need to speak in tongues as a indication of Holy Spirit's presence dwelling in your life. It was the first sign at Pentecost for a witness but not the only sign for us who believe and have received the Holy Spirit today... :)

 

[Alanforchrist]

Are you or anyone else able to stand before any people of the world and speak in tongues and they understand? as was done in Acts chapter 2?


If not then, then your mouth has spoken of something your faith can't support or produce.

Yes of cause I am, If and when God needed to use that gift, For instance, If I was in a place where God wanted to speak to a foreigner, He could and would give me the tongues that are from the same country as the person comes from, To get the message to him/her.
There are about eight operations of tongues, And God can use anyone of them through anyone of His people at any time.
As long as the people have been baptised in the Holy Ghost.

You don't have to speak in tongues. Ever.

You are baptized with the Holy Ghost, when Christ sends the Holy Ghost to you, which helps work in your heart to bring about the neccessary inward change for salvation.

Jesus gives the Holy Spirit when we ask. Lk 11: 11--13..
.And when we believe, Acts 11: 15--17,... Not when Jesus want's to give it us.

You do not need to speak in tongues as a indication of Holy Spirit's presence dwelling in your life. It was the first sign at Pentecost for a witness but not the only sign for us who believe and have received the Holy Spirit today... :)

You don't need to speak in tongues to be born again, That's when the Spirit comes to live in you,
But the Biblical evidence of the baptism in the Holy Ghost, Is speaking in tongues...See my posts on the subject.

God has given tongues to His Church for a reason..To bless it and for it to be a blessing.
Jesus and Paul, Who was inspired by God, Said the believers will speak in tongues, And that's good enough for me.

 

[Mungo]

Do you see the big letters above, that's what makes it a hypothetical question, you know the answer, or have your response already formulated.

And I wasn't speaking to other protestant denominations I was speaking to you, so why would I be talking to some other denomination besides yours?
There is plenty of fruit cake being served every where.

A hypothetical question is one that does not expect an answer.

I expected an answer. But I see there is not one forthcoming.

It would appear that the belief has no biblical support and is a mere "tradition of men".

 

[logabe]

I know I will not be accepted very well after commenting on the subject
of water baptism. But to the ones that would like to know why I believe
water baptism is very important, bear with me for a few minutes. I will
start @ John 3:3-5.

3 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be
born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
5 Jesus answered , Verily, verily, I say unto thee,
Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit,
he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

My question to the statement of being born of the water is, what does it
actually mean? I have heard different replies about this meaning such as,
when a woman's water breaks when she has a child. I don't think Jesus
was referring to that, but that's a good try.

Also, I hear that it means Jesus was telling us to be washed by the Word.
I believe we should be washed, but I really don't think that is what God
was saying and I will tell you why.

Scripture must line up with scripture, so let's see what the New Testament
Church taught, and why they did what they did. Acts 2:37-38 says,

37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in
their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the
apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent , and be
baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ
for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift
of the Holy Ghost.

What shall we do? Peter said, be water baptised. What for Peter? For the
remission or forgiveness of sins. We have to repent and be baptised in the
name of Jesus in order to receive forgiveness of sin according to Peter's
statement.

Sounds like he understood what Jesus was saying in John 3. Be born of the
water for forgiveness of sin, and be born of the Spirit by asking God to give
you the gift of the Holy Ghost. Peter done the same thing in Acts 10. After
speaking to Cornelius and his house, the Holy Ghost fell on the house, and
he spoke these words in Acts 10:47-48.

47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not
be baptized , which have received the Holy Ghost as
well as we?
48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the
name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry
certain days.

After Cornelius and his house were born of the Spirit, immediately Peter ask,
can any man forbid water, and he didn't ask them to be baptised, but he
commanded that they be born of the water.

Jesus said in John 3:3, unless you are born again you can't see the Kingdom
of God. In other words, you want understand what Jesus is telling you. Jesus
was referring to being born of the Spirit. In John 3:5, he get's specific on how
we are born or begotten of God by saying, no exceptions, a man must be born
of water for the forgiveness of sin and be born of the Spirit so he can enter the
Kingdom of God.

In Acts 4:12, Peter said there is no other name given among men whereby we
must be saved. God chose water baptism to apply his name for the remission of
sins. That statement should get a few people's feathers ruffled that don't believe
being baptised is necessary to be born of the water. However, let's read what
Peter had to say about the Name. Acts 10:42 says,

42 To him give all the prophets witness , that through his
name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission
of sins.

Did you see that? We receive remission of sin through "His Name", and Peter said in
Acts 2:38, repent (change your mind) and be baptised in "His Name". What for? The
forgiveness of sin. Faith in His Name, removes your sin in water baptism not according
to me, but according to Peter and the scriptures. When Peter commanded Cornelius to
be baptised, he knew the purpose of the baptism, that is why he commanded it. It was
important.

As a Christian, we are to be obedient to God's command, and be baptised for the remission
of sin, knowing that it comes through His Name in repentance and water baptism. It is
how you wash away your sin. Not the water, but the obedience of doing what the scriptures
command you to do.

Paul went and baptised some converts @ 1:00 in the morning. He seen the importance of
putting on the Name in water baptism. He knew what it meant and he didn't want to waste
any time. Let's look @ it in Acts 16:25,

25 And at midnight Paul and Silas prayed , and sang praises
unto God: and the prisoners heard them.
33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed
their stripes ; and was baptized , he and all his, straightway.

Come on Paul... you can't wait until in the morning? You're getting a little to radical, and
we can wait and get baptised a few months from now, or at least wait until the morning.
Nope, Paul said let's go now. Why? So they can have the opportunity to be born of the
water and of the Spirit as soon as possible. Let's make it legal in the heavenly court. In
closing, Acts 22:16 gives us the reason to be baptised in His Name. Remember, scripture
must build upon scripture to establish Truth.

22 And now why tarriest thou ? arise , and be baptized , and
wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

What a God? What a Plan!

Logabe

 

[Rex]

Yes of cause I am, If and when God needed to use that gift, For instance, If I was in a place where God wanted to speak to a foreigner, He could and would give me the tongues that are from the same country as the person comes from, To get the message to him/her.
There are about eight operations of tongues, And God can use anyone of them through anyone of His people at any time.
As long as the people have been baptised in the Holy Ghost.

So you have never spoken in tongues to people that do not speak your language yet you profess to speak in tongues.

I can only presume it has something to do with your understanding of the definition of tongues, by my count I see two types.
I would be interested in a detailed description of the 8 types of tongues you see in the biblical account.

I do agree that the gift described in Acts 2 is possible but I have never seen it nor have I seen it demonstrated in a pentecostal service, yet thousands in the USA claim to posses the gift, and point to a less than "Acts 2" type of demonstration to validate being born of the Spirit.


Or should I say an unknown tongue is spoken that is not interpreted nor understood by those that witness it.
To which Paul speaks about as being useless to the body of Christ

 

[dragonfly]

Hi Rex,

Alanforchrist gave his list of eight in post #15 of this thread.

If I were you, I wouldn't worry about not speaking in tongues. The doctrine which is prevalent which states it is the only sign of baptism in the Spirit, was based on Biblical researched which actually acknowledged that although most people receiving the Holy Spirit seem to have spoken in tongues at least once, not everyone manifested tongues. This is stated clearly by Paul in his first Corinthian letter, as you know, and although he himself obviously received the gift at some point, (as he refers to himself speaking in tongues in 1 Cor 14), it is not mentioned at any place in Acts 9.

The gift of interpretation can be given to the person who gave the tongue, as much as to another who then becomes used to bringing interpretations to the church. The gifts are for the body, as well as for the edification of the person with the gift. In many ways, tongues is an odd-man-out of the gifts, because those who have received it can pray in tongues when on their own, as well as when they are 'at church' (quietly). There is a difference between praying in tongues, and prophesying in tongues, in that the prayer is not necessarily heard by the whole assembly, while a prophecy should be. The whole gathering should wait for the interpretation, even if it means several minutes of quietness, because no-one can be sure to whom will be given the interpretation. It might be given to someone who had never been given an interpretation, previously - even if there is someone there who does have the gift of interpretation, usually.

I have heard, occasionally, of the Holy Spirit giving a known language to evangelists and preachers, but the way tongues are exercised within the church by those who have received that gift, is usually in prayer, or, to give a prophecy. If there is an interpretation of a prayer, that becomes clear. It is also clear if the apparent interpretation is actually a prophecy not in tongues, in which case, an elder will usually ask everyone to keep waiting for the interpretation, and to give it out if they have received it.

The beauty of the gift of tongues, is that the mind of both the person giving the tongue, and the person giving the interpretation, cannot interfere with what God is saying. You might think it would be possible for a person to change an interpretation, but in the heat of the moment, that is very difficult to do, and anyway, anyone who tries it, will give themself a bad reputation with those present who are also hearing from the Spirit as to whether the word given was true or not. The prophets are there to judge prophecy, and everyone else who has the gift of the Holy Spirit, and a knowledge of scripture, is also listening through those filters.

The question which follows any manifestation of these kinds of gift, is, for whom was the word given? Is it for only certain people present, or is it for every single one? In an ideal open church meeting, there will be space given for prayer, so that those for whom the word came - including the people who spoke it out - may pray into it there and then, to make an immediate response to God.

 

[Rex]

I know I will not be accepted very well after commenting on the subject
of water baptism. But to the ones that would like to know why I believe
water baptism is very important, bear with me for a few minutes. I will
start @ John 3:3-5.

3 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be
born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
5 Jesus answered , Verily, verily, I say unto thee,
Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit,
he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

My question to the statement of being born of the water is, what does it
actually mean? I have heard different replies about this meaning such as,
when a woman's water breaks when she has a child. I don't think Jesus
was referring to that, but that's a good try.

Also, I hear that it means Jesus was telling us to be washed by the Word.
I believe we should be washed, but I really don't think that is what God
was saying and I will tell you why.

Scripture must line up with scripture, so let's see what the New Testament
Church taught, and why they did what they did. Acts 2:37-38 says,

37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in
their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the
apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent , and be
baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ
for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift
of the Holy Ghost.

What shall we do? Peter said, be water baptised. What for Peter? For the
remission or forgiveness of sins. We have to repent and be baptised in the
name of Jesus in order to receive forgiveness of sin according to Peter's
statement.

Sounds like he understood what Jesus was saying in John 3. Be born of the
water for forgiveness of sin, and be born of the Spirit by asking God to give
you the gift of the Holy Ghost. Peter done the same thing in Acts 10. After
speaking to Cornelius and his house, the Holy Ghost fell on the house, and
he spoke these words in Acts 10:47-48.

47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not
be baptized , which have received the Holy Ghost as
well as we?
48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the
name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry
certain days.

After Cornelius and his house were born of the Spirit, immediately Peter ask,
can any man forbid water, and he didn't ask them to be baptised, but he
commanded that they be born of the water.

Jesus said in John 3:3, unless you are born again you can't see the Kingdom
of God. In other words, you want understand what Jesus is telling you. Jesus
was referring to being born of the Spirit. In John 3:5, he get's specific on how
we are born or begotten of God by saying, no exceptions, a man must be born
of water for the forgiveness of sin and be born of the Spirit so he can enter the
Kingdom of God.

In Acts 4:12, Peter said there is no other name given among whereby we must
be saved. God chose water baptism to apply his name for the remission of sins.
That statement should get a few people's feathers ruffled that don't believe being
baptised is necessary to be born of the water. However, let's read what Peter had
to say about the Name. Acts 10:42 says,

42 To him give all the prophets witness , that through his
name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission
of sins.

Did you see that? We receive remission of sin through "His Name", and Peter said in
Acts 2:38, repent (change your mind) and be baptised in "His Name". What for? The
forgiveness of sin. Faith in His Name, removes your sin in water baptism not according
to me, but according to Peter and the scriptures. When Peter commanded Cornelius to
be baptised, he knew the purpose of the baptism, that is why he commanded it. It was
important.

As a Christian, we are to be obedient to God's command, and be baptised for the remission
of sin, knowing that it comes through His Name in repentance and water baptism. It is
how you wash away your sin. Not the water, but the obedience of doing what the scriptures
command you to do.

Paul went and baptised some converts @ 1:00 in the morning. He seen the importance of
putting on the Name in water baptism. He knew what it meant and he didn't want to waste
any time. Let's look @ it in Acts 16:25,

25 And at midnight Paul and Silas prayed , and sang praises
unto God: and the prisoners heard them.
33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed
their stripes ; and was baptized , he and all his, straightway.

Come on Paul... you can't wait until in the morning? Your're getting a little to radical, and
we can wait and get baptised a few months from now, or at least wait until the morning.
Nope, Paul said let's go now. Why? So they can have the opportunity to be born of the
water and of the Spirit as soon as possible. Let's make it legal in the heavenly court. In
closing, Acts 22:16 gives us the reason to be baptised in His Name. Remember, scripture
must build upon scripture to establish Truth.

22 And now why tarriest thou ? arise , and be baptized , and
wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

What a God? What a Plan!

Logabe

I agree with a lot of what you are saying here, I think many run the old covenant to gather with the new, as well as confusing the time of the Jews with the poring out of the HS to the Gentiles together.

The Old covenant didn't end until the temple veil was torn at the time of Jesus Christ bodily death on the cross. So baptism was founded under the law before the new covenant was fully launched, Jesus also taught under the old Cov. We also see salvation only being offered to the house of Israel until Acts chapter 10.

I gave a detailed account of the old testament, Moses striking the rock "twice" in the wilderness. Moses was told to speak to the rock the second time and water "the HS" would be given.

Here is a couple post I made on the subject, I really don't want to C/P them here.
The second one is a detailed account of the Moses rock in the wilderness, one accounts for the Jews the other the Gentiles receiving the HS

http://www.christianityboard.com/topic/17260-proof-being-born-again-is-different-than-being-%E2%80%9Cbaptized-with-the-holy-spirit%E2%80%9D/#entry177851
http://www.christianityboard.com/topic/17260-proof-being-born-again-is-different-than-being-%E2%80%9Cbaptized-with-the-holy-spirit%E2%80%9D/#entry177976

I would hope Shy takes the time to look at what is said.

Hi Rex,



If I were you, I wouldn't worry about not speaking in tongues.

I'm not worried and I do pray in tongues in private. The mater seems to be of great importance to others, I was just pointing out that that speaking in tongues as found in Acts 2 is not manifest in the must speak in tongues crew. Like I said I see two types, one for private praise and worship and one for communication threw the HS to those that language is a barrier. The first is very common and I do speak but never in the presents of others, its a private matter between me and the Lord. The second is quite a different demonstration, it is the fullness of the meaning of the word "tongues" to be used to edify and communicate to others threw the HS. Which I say no one on this forum has experianced but claims to posses, because they praise and worship in an unknown tongue.

When I see people referencing Acts 2 as proof of tongues I simply have to ask where is the evidence.
If you don't speak as described in Acts 2 then don't use it as a point to support your evidence, simple enough isn't it.


In closing IMO If you don't speak tongues in the power of the HS, and others not of your native tongue understand and praise God you are not en-powered with the full definition of speaking in tongues. I can understand how this gift was used by God to spread the gospel threw out the world.

 

[Alanforchrist]

Hi Shy,

I'd like to chip in some additional thoughts. Hammerstone has made an excellent point in his last sentence, except for one thing which can be somewhat neglected when thinking about water baptism - that when John Baptist began it, and Jesus carried it on, it was about repentance.

Nevertheless, to be baptised in the name of Jesus, was different to being baptised by John, because of what John had added, namely, that Jesus would baptise with the Holy Spirit and/or fire. (The and/or is because there are different ways to interpret the meaning of 'fire', but generally it is about chaff being burned up, or death.) To see how important Paul thought the water baptism in the name of Jesus, read the beginning of Acts 19.

Alanforchrist stated:

Apart from the when Ananias laid hands on Saul of Tarsus, in the street named Straight, in Acts 9. Clearly, Paul received the gift of tongues later.

Hi Rex,

I was once corrected by a much more learned brother, on the same point you made here:

Apparently the Greek is absolutely clear that what was coming out of the disciples' mouths, was the languages of those present. It was not that each person present (who had not yet either repented or believed in Jesus Christ) was somehow operating the gift of interpretation.

However, let me add a true testimony from a German girl with whom I used to attend church. She came to the UK to learn English by training as a nurse. A Christian nurse invited her to church on her first Sunday (a charismatic Baptist church) and she had no idea what it would be like, as she'd been brought up as a Catholic, and had lapsed from that in a big way. It was something to do that day off. While at church, the gifts of the Spirit were given room, and someone spoke out in tongues, a language she did not understand, but, she did know what the Holy Spirit was saying to her, and she received it. (Now this is the kind of experience which Rex described in an earlier post, so it can happen, but it was not what happened in Acts 2.) To finish the story about the German girl. After she got back to her room, she lay on her bed, shaking, and she knew she was delivered from a lot of demons, and very soon she became a Christian. (I'm not sure what her testimony was about when she received the Holy Spirit.)


To soupy,

This is not at all the case. Someone speaking in tongues - if it is a language of men, and there are people present who understand that language - may be understood by the human ear, but for the most part, the gift of interpretation is required to be present. Paul teaches on this in 1 Cor 14.

There are also 'tongues of angels' (1 Cor 13:1) of which there is no earthly hope a human will have understanding - apart from the gift of interpretation.

Rex said,

I do believe there needs to be an element of desire on the part of the man/woman who has heard of the gift of the Holy Spirit, but has not received it yet, and say this because there are plenty of 'Christians' who don't want to go the whole distance for the Lord, or to obey His will, or to even know what His will for their life is; so if they can avoid receiving the baptism in the Spirit, they are home and dry with the religion for which they want to settle.


I have great sympathy with this statement. In fact, it doesn't matter what gift a person has, the idea that it becomes theirs to operate at their own will, rather than according to the Lord's will in the intimacy of the moment when it is required by Him, is just as troubling.


That's food for thought. I think there's a great deal of misinformation about how to deal with the gifts, floating around in Christendom, which is entirely man-made and not according to the New Testament, and people (sheeple) say what they hear others saying, because they think that's what a Christian does. (Yep. More Bible study in Ephesians and 1 Corinthians would alert them to their error.)


To Shy,

Rex is correct that there is nothing we can 'do' to receive baptism in the Spirit, apart from asking Him, and seeking to grow in the knowledge of God through reading His word.

I hope you see that back in the day of John the Baptist, there was no 'baptism in the Spirit'. He was inviting people to be baptised in water for the remission of sins. Perhaps you don't know that up until that time, only Gentiles who were becoming proselytes, would be baptised. (Such Gentiles also had to be circumcised (the man of the family) and bring a certain sacrifice.) So, John was inviting the sacrifice of a broken and a contrite heart over sin to a nation of people who were already circumcised in flesh. He was telling them their sins made them as unclean as uncircumcised Gentiles. (With this in mind, re-read Paul's discussion at the end of Romans 2.) Therefore, it took a degree of humility for proud Israelites to submit to baptism in water. John's point to them as the herald of the Messiah, Jesus, was that He would baptise them in the Holy Ghost and with fire. In other words, he was warning them that water baptism for the remission of sins was not the end of God's dealings with them. There was more to come for those who followed John's teaching. This is where we find Andrew and John in John 1:35 - 38 - leaving John to follow Jesus. Read their conversation. It is instructive. We have to have the same desire to know where Jesus 'lives', and to be willing to travel from where we are now, to where He 'is'.

John 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

The reference to 'water' was well understood by Israelites, as a reference to the word of God. There can be other meanings when 'water' or 'waters' is used in the Bible, but the best one that fits here, is 'the word'. John 15:3.

Ephesians 5:26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word.

John 1: 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.


There is plenty of sprinkling/sprinkle, in the Old Testament, particulary in the law but also in the prophets. A well-known one was when Moses sprinkled both the book and the people. Sprinkling has the significance of joining the ones who are sprinkled, with the Lord in agreement.

Here is another famous reference to sprinkling:

Jeremiah 36:25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

If there are any idols in a person's life, God will want them to be abandoned. This is something you can seek to do without any special additional direction from the Lord. He calls Himself 'Jealous', very early in the Old Testament, and Jesus taught that we should be single minded and single hearted for God.

Here are two from the New Testament:

1 Peter 1:2 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.

Hebrews 10:19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, 20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; 21 And having an high priest over the house of God; 22 Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.


The written word of God can act like a mirror. In it we see where we fall short. The good news is that as we look steadily to the Lord Jesus Christ, He changes us into His own image.



It is necessary to see that baptism in water was a stage which Israelites had to go through, which because Jesus and His apostles taught that we also should be baptised, we should do. I am not going to enter the dispute about whether having been baptised 'saves' a person, but certainly it is true that a person who is not 'believing' for salvation in the name of Jesus Christ, is unlikely to seek water baptism, even if they attend church, have a good grasp of the Bible, and can explain the way of salvation through faith in the resurrection of Christ.

Baptism is, in fact, a picture. Jesus prefigured His own death for us, when He went under the water. We identify with His death for us, when we go under the water. This is what Romans 6 is about.


Baptism in the Holy Spirit signifies God sending His power into you life. That is not only power to live free from sin, but power to obey Him in a very detailed way, which has the potential to make you unpopular with the world, and even with your family and other Christians.


You might enjoy listening to Carter Conlon's testimony, as he also became a Christian in a Baptist church setting; He lives in me

Who said Paul spoke in tongues later??...Only you,
Itsn't it strange that every time peiople in the Bible spoke in tongues as soon as they were baptised in the Holy Ghost, Yet the might Apostle Paul didn't...According to you.
When did Paul speak in tongues????., They same time the others did, When he received the baptism in the Holy Ghost.

So you have never spoken in tongues to people that do not speak your language yet you profess to speak in tongues.

I can only presume it has something to do with your understanding of the definition of tongues, by my count I see two types.
I would be interested in a detailed description of the 8 types of tongues you see in the biblical account.

I do agree that the gift described in Acts 2 is possible but I have never seen it nor have I seen it demonstrated in a pentecostal service, yet thousands in the USA claim to posses the gift, and point to a less than "Acts 2" type of demonstration to validate being born of the Spirit.


Or should I say an unknown tongue is spoken that is not interpreted nor understood by those that witness it.
To which Paul speaks about as being useless to the body of Christ

Tongues that are a foreign languuage, Are just one of the eight manifestations of tongues,
And I have spoken in tongues that are a foreign language.


Tongues that build us up, 1 Cor 14: 4, Certainly aren't useless.
Tongues that are our spirit prayer language, 1 Cor 14: 14--15, Certainly aren't useless.
Tongues that sing God's praises, 1 Cor 14: 15--17. Certaily aren't useless.
Tongues that reveal mysteries, 1 Cor 14: 2, Certainly aren't useless.

 

[Rex]

Lets just agree that you choose to build on a different foundation than I do. I don't profess to speak in tongues as it is understood and explained in the fullness of its meaning in scripture, I have never been en-powered to witness to another that speaks a different language.
And speaking in a prayerful language to God is "useless" as far as bringing edification or understanding to anyone but myself.

1 Cor 14
18 I thank my God I speak with tongues more than you all; 19 yet
in the church I would rather speak five words with my understanding,
that I may teach others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue.

IMO yours and others obsession with tongues is just that an obsession with the last listed of gifts.
Do we really need to speak in tongues to praise and bring glory to God? I think not.

1 Cor 12
27 Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually. 28 And
God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets,
third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps,
administrations, varieties of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? 31 But earnestly desire the best[d] gifts. And yet I show you a more excellent way.


1 Cor 12:31 But earnestly desire the best gifts.
Do you consider tongues the best of gifts?


IMO it is nether the best or necessary

 

[dragonfly]

Hi Alanforchrist,

When did Paul speak in tongues????., They same time the others did, When he received the baptism in the Holy Ghost.

We can go only by what is written, I believe, and there are places where tongues happened immediately the Holy Spirit was given.

This is not mentioned in Acts 9. Not once.

Or, are you suggesting that when the scales fell from Saul's eyes, and Ananias urged him to be baptised, he had not yet been baptised in the Holy Spirit?

To answer your question, Paul says in 1 Corinthians 14 that he speaks in tongues.



Hi Rex,

Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones suggested that some people speak in tongues when they receive the Holy Spirit, and never again. For myself, I didn't speak in tongues until a short number of days after I'd received the baptism in the Holy Spirit, and like you, I have never given a tongue in an assembly meeting.

There is no reason to qualify the gift of tongues in the way that you do, as the Holy Spirit gives the expression of the gift in all the ways that scripture describes. One is not better or more 'Holy Spirit' than another. None is less 'Holy Spirit'. Look at the number of times Paul uses the phrase 'the same' in the early part of 1 Corinthians 12, concluding his opening salvo with v 11: But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will. See that word 'severally'? Maybe each kind of 'gift of tongues', is a separate gift, and we should count them singly? But clearly, not everyone has (any gift of any kind of) tongues as a sign of their receipt of the Holy Spirit, and that is okay, too.

I have a friend who specifically asked for the Lord not to give her the gift of tongues, but some other gift. (Which He did.) If we believe that God inspires what we pray in the Spirit, then even that request was the Lord's will for this sister. Praise the Lord for the diversity which He enjoys!

 

[horsecamp]

Listen and watch this rather short video to it see if it answers the objection you have about holy baptism COMPARED WITH YOUR BELEIFS about Spirit baptim ..


this video shows some one stating why they think Spirit baptism is better than holy baptism ..WATCH AND SEE if they state your view ..

see if the other person who believe in holy Baptism gets and understand the point the spirit baptism person is saying and see if he is able to answer it..








http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8rAkjL58co

 

[Alanforchrist]

Hi Alanforchrist,



We can go only by what is written, I believe, and there are places where tongues happened immediately the Holy Spirit was given.

This is not mentioned in Acts 9. Not once.

Or, are you suggesting that when the scales fell from Saul's eyes, and Ananias urged him to be baptised, he had not yet been baptised in the Holy Spirit?

To answer your question, Paul says in 1 Corinthians 14 that he speaks in tongues.



Hi Rex,

Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones suggested that some people speak in tongues when they receive the Holy Spirit, and never again. For myself, I didn't speak in tongues until a short number of days after I'd received the baptism in the Holy Spirit, and like you, I have never given a tongue in an assembly meeting.

There is no reason to qualify the gift of tongues in the way that you do, as the Holy Spirit gives the expression of the gift in all the ways that scripture describes. One is not better or more 'Holy Spirit' than another. None is less 'Holy Spirit'. Look at the number of times Paul uses the phrase 'the same' in the early part of 1 Corinthians 12, concluding his opening salvo with v 11: But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will. See that word 'severally'? Maybe each kind of 'gift of tongues', is a separate gift, and we should count them singly? But clearly, not everyone has (any gift of any kind of) tongues as a sign of their receipt of the Holy Spirit, and that is okay, too.

I have a friend who specifically asked for the Lord not to give her the gift of tongues, but some other gift. (Which He did.) If we believe that God inspires what we pray in the Spirit, then even that request was the Lord's will for this sister. Praise the Lord for the diversity which He enjoys!

Dragonfly.
Who said Paul spoke in tongues later??...Only you,

Itsn't it strange that every time peiople in the Bible spoke in tongues as soon as they were baptised in the Holy Ghost, Yet the might Apostle Paul didn't...According to you.

When did Paul speak in tongues????., They same time the others did, When he received the baptism in the Holy Ghost.

Listen and watch this rather short video to it see if it answers the objection you have about holy baptism COMPARED WITH YOUR BELEIFS about Spirit baptim ..


this video shows some one stating why they think Spirit baptism is better than holy baptism ..WATCH AND SEE if they state your view ..

see if the other person who believe in holy Baptism gets and understand the point the spirit baptism person is saying and see if he is able to answer it..








http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8rAkjL58co

Water baptism DOES NOT SAVE.
The man misquoted scriptures, He's also mistaken about baptism not being limited to immmersion, As every Greek meaning for baptism, Is by tottal immersion.
Also the "One baptism", Is the rebirth, 1 Cor 12: 13. Not the baptism in the Holy Ghost or baptism in water.

 

[dragonfly]

Hi Alanforchrist,

When did Paul speak in tongues????., They same time the others did, When he received the baptism in the Holy Ghost.

Where is scripture to support your statement, specifically in respect of Paul?


Just for the record - and not to antagonise anyone any more than they already feel - if you think about natural birth, (which I believe is modeled on spiritual birth) - there is no spirit (breath) in the baby, until the baby is in the spirit (air). In other words, until the baby is 'baptised in the Spirit', it is not 'born again' - ie separated from the old flesh (its mother) by which it used to draw its 'life'. This is the foundation of the teaching that the baptism in the Spirit is the catalyst for new birth in the era since Pentecost. You can tell me that the baby is alive in the womb. Yes, but it is totally dependent on its mother for most of its time there. The 'spirit' which diffuses from her blood stream to the baby's, goes through two cell barriers, and the baby's heart pumps a mixture of oxygenated and deoxygenated blood round a two way circulatory system, while it is in the womb.

Not until it is physically born, and the umbilical cord stops supplying it with oxygenated blood, does the combination of the new action of its lungs, and the rise in blood pressure which follows the infusion of cord blood, cause the fetal structures in the circulatory system begin immediately to close down, so that - as it has received 'a new spirit' - the baby (also) receives (effectively) 'a new heart', that no longer pumps 'mixture' round its body. These are facts.

Ezekiel 36:26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.


I fully, fully, fully accept that many people experience baptism in the Spirit subsequently to having come to faith in Christ and received a measure of the Spirit within, and that we can call this new birth, but.... there is no evidence that any of the disciples had actually been 'born again' before the day of Pentecost, even though Jesus had breathed on them and offered them the Holy Spirit. Or, let us say that if they were 'born again' ('from above', by the definition John gives in the first chapter of his gospel, vv 12, 13), then it was an entirely powerless experience for them.

The problem with the theory that they were born again but powerless, is that it is not mirrored in natural birth. Most babies cry immediately, and their tiny lungs are extremely powerful. Although they may not have intellectual understanding of their situation, they have instantly developed a whole new set of hungers and needs, and nothing stops them from the attempt to have these hungers and needs filled as soon as possible. Not only are they no longer confined in the darkness of the womb where sounds are muffled, they have a liberty of movement which was hitherto unknown to them. They are now children of the light, where they see with new eyes, and sounds are heard with great clarity, with their 'new' ears.

The idea that a person who is born again from above by the Holy Spirit, does not yet have the power and gifts of the Spirit, is foreign to scripture.

But, many believers do not experience 'the baptism in the Spirit' with their first step of faith, and God graciously draws them to Himself, until they do.