This blog post has been revised and turned into a chapter in The Rethinking Series.
The series includes each book in PDF, Kindle, and Nook formats.
Click here to view the Table of Contents for each book and how to get it
Frank Viola | Beyond Evangelical
Official Blog of Author & Speaker Frank Viola. Digging below the surface and moving beyond the shallows in today's Christianity.
Rethinking the Baptism of the Holy Spirit: Part IV
Rethinking the Baptism of the Holy Spirit: Part III
My question is, who has the authority to baptize a new believer, and who has the authority to do the laying on of hands? Does the baptizing/laying on of hands person have to be a member of the clergy, some other “important person”, or can any believer do these things? After reading Pagan Christianity (I’m halfway through Reimagining Church and the Story of the NT), I am truly wondering if church authority as I’ve always known it (pastors and other ecumenical persons) are the only ones who can officiate such practices.
Your questions are answered in “Reimagining Church.” After finishing that book, the answers should be rather obvious to you. Thx.
Ok, I will keep pluggin’ away!
Thanks for this Frank. I find your teaching on this very persuasive.
I wanted to ask a couple of questions :
1. Could you please give some of your thoughts about how many deeper life authors from the 1800’s and the Keswick revival, seem to say that a person needs to go through a “crisis surrender” to be empowered by the Spirit? I thought even Watchman Nee believed in this too, though as has been said, he did not seem to speak in tongues. This (crisis surrender) happened to me a few years ago and it changed my life dramatically for the better. I thought that this was also the basis of the original 12 step programs. What are your thoughts on this or are you going to write about it soon?
2. Could you also give your thoughts on the apparent difference between the filling or empowerment for the gifts of the Spirit, and the empowering of the Spirit for service, or is there a difference?
Sure.
1. I don’t think there’s a second experience, as it were, that’s normative to all believers. What I think is happening is that some Christians are awakened to the Spirit’s power or gifting, and they (like the Kewsick folks) equate that with a baptism of the Spirit. Remember, even the believers at Pentecost were “filled” afterwards. We can have many different experiences, awakenings, and realizations of the Spirit’s power and life all flowing from that one baptism that every believer is given.
2. The Spirit’s fillings will manifest themselves in different ways in a believer’s life during different times. Sometimes it’s for witness. Sometimes it’s for a spiritual gift to be effected. Sometimes it’s giving the right word to someone in need. Sometime’s it’s spiritual insight into a matter. Etc.
Hope that helps.
Same conclusion I came to long ago. Seems we over- analyze and want to ‘name’ all our experiences according to our doctrinal background and hang out with those who have had an identical experience. But God works with each of us as different individuals — even in strongly corporate encounters. I think all the second work of grace doctrines (sanctification in some denominations)come from this need to explain ongoing life changing encounters with the Lord and a desire to share/justify an experience to others. God forbid we are limited to 2!
Really enjoying the series… love the clear delineation of the baptism of the Spirit as chiefly membering the believer into the body of Christ. That’s the biggest thing I’ve drawn from this series.
Brokenness is key. It is beautful when Jesus Christ is allowed to move in and through His people freely, no matter what doctrinal position we might hold. The enemy flees at the sound of broken clay jars.
May Christ be manifest in us all until the day of completion.
Love your thoughts on water baptism. That’s what baptism is…with water. I know that a baptism of the Spirit is also spoken of, but in nearly all instances in the New Testament that speak of baptism, it is referring to water baptism.
In Matthew 28 where Jesus commanded us to go into the whole world and people all people (ponta ethane), he wasn’t ordering us to give people the Holy Spirit. I don’t we have that capability. But he was telling us to baptize people, in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Jesus was baptized in the River Jordan…with water. And John said that Jesus’ baptism (when Christ Jesus Baptizes people) it will have real power.
Anyway, my 2 cents. Thanks, very much.
Frank, actually your position, though not common for a classical Pentecostal, is the same as other Renewalists’, for e.g. David Watson, John Wimber, Peter Wagner. One other classical pentecostal share a similar view – Gordon Fee. I think the only difference is that David Watson & Gordon Fee would encourage Christians to actively seek the gift of tongues whereas Peter Wagner would not. John Wimber is somewhere in between. There is another, not-so-common position – that of David Pawson’s (re: “The Normal Christian Birth” & “The Fourth Wave”).
I’ve heard John Wimber on this long ago, and I would say that it’s not exactly the same (though he agrees that tongues is not the initial evidence). But I’ve never heard him explain the “why” of tongues in those 4 incidences as I have in Part IV. If he has, please send me the link where he gives an identical interpretation.
I ask for this because so many people over the years have said, “Frank, your view on xyz is the same as Joey Budafooko’s (insert another person’s name).” Only to find that it was similar in some ways, but not the same.
I’d actually be curious if someone else has the IDENTICAL view as I have presented in Parts II, III, and IV. I’ve yet to come across that, but I’d really LOVE to.
John Wimber stated in “Power Evangelism” that a rasa2person is baptised in the Spirit when he comes to know Christ. And so, there is no need for one to speak in tongues at this initiation-born again experience. Then, in the Vineyard’s Statement of Faith where he played a part in formulating, it’s mentioned that one can receive an empowering experience, often in a conscious manner. In the same book he wrote (PE) he did mention that, from his observations, all the ministers who had ministered effectively also had the gift of tongues (and he did not know why this was so). A Bible study on the subject of prayer found in The Vineyard’s web-site encouraged the students to pray in tongues. John Wimber never articulated publicly an official position on tongues. That’s why I mentioned in my posting above that JW’s position was “in between”. Joey Budafooko, by the way, is a Buddhist. 😉
Again, he may have had the same view on tongues not being the “initial evidence,” but I am unaware of anything he wrote that presents the same exact theological framework as I have in Part IV. As I recall, you said my view was “the same” as his and some others. Perhaps in certain details, but I’d love to see a document showing an identical interpretation to what I presented in Part IV. If one cannot be provided, I’m not so sure the view is the exactly same. Thx.
That last response by me belonged to Sabrina but wasn’t linked to her.
Frank, my church teaches that the miraculous gifts can only be received by the laying on of an apostle’s hands, since that’s what all the biblical examples show. And since all the apostles are dead, there are no more miraculous gifts. 1 Corinthians 13 is used to back this up by saying “that which is perfect” is the Bible. And since we have the Bible we have no more need for miraculous spiritual gifts. They needed them in the first century because they didn’t have the whole Bible yet.
I don’t believe any of that and came to most of your same conclusions on my own years ago. I’m just curious what you would say to this group of people about that teaching (once you’re done laughing)?
I really don’t have time to interact with the cessationist position. Countless others have done that and there’s no need to reinvent the wheel. The idea that there miraculous gifts have ceased when the canon was closed is one that has a very limited audience today. Too many scholars have refuted it over the years.
Yes, yes, yes!
Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, but this sounds quite similar to Watchmen Nee in ‘The Normal Christian Life’. I’m pretty sure that his take on it was that forgiveness and the Spirit are given at the same time, and then the baptism in the Spirit is more of just a revelation of the already indwelling Christ and that there can be many different expressions of it. Did you draw from some of his material? I haven’t read his stuff in a bit, so I could be mistaken.
I read that book in my 20s and don’t remember that part, but as I recall, Nee believed the Pentecostal view of the baptism for power after salvation. Only that tongues wasn’t required. And he reportedly never spoke in tongues.
Hi Frank,
Why would you say some people believe and make confessions of faith but Later receive the Holy Spirit through the laying on of hands and or he falls on them. And Some people believe and receive him right away? Has this been addressed by your discussion.
Or is it not possible to believe and not receive the Holy Spirit right away…?
I don’t understand your question. I’d suggest reading the whole series and the comments. That may address it.
Well.. I appreciate your answer at least you didn’t make something weird up 😛
Thanks
Dear Frank
I am a mexican christian. I follow your texts since 5 years ago.
I give thanks God to find a christian man with experience into and out the church, your teaching have been for me a great blessing. Now I have about 12 christian young & pro people attending an abusive church (prosperity doctrine & another teachings as speaking in tongs to proof they are a really christians). That’s why your “Rethinking the Baptism of the Holy Spirit” have been so usefull for all of us. God bless your ministry. We pray for you and as soon we can we will ask to you more about the attending to an abusive church or we can to join us in a home to have our bible studies and worship (pray, songs, teaching) in a home. Can you to recommend us one of your book as guide for this situation? P.S. Sorry if my english is not so good. God bless you every day, Frank.
Thx. My books PAGAN CHRISTIANITY and REIMAGINING CHURCH are in Spanish. I’d get those books for everyone and go through them in that order. https://www.frankviola.org/europe
I’m really enjoying this series, Frank. My main contention thus far is that we need to differentiate between having the indwelling of the Spirit and being filled with the Spirit. The Scriptures draw a clear distinction.
All believers always have the Spirit inside of them. That is the indwelling. However, not all believers always have the Spirit filling them.
When we look through Acts, for example, we see men, already believers, being filled with the Spirit again and again. Or, to contrast that, Paul tells us in Ephesians that we can allow other things (like wine, Ephesians 5:18) to dissipate us, preventing us from being fully filled with the Spirit.
Yes, we have the Spirit in us at all times, but it is when we are actually filled with the Spirit that we are truly acting in accordance with God’s will.
It may seem like a minor distinction, but I believe it to be a vitally important one.
Looking forward to the rest of this Series, Frank. Keep up the good work, and God bless, brother!
Distinct but not separate, and both occur at the same time for believers in the post-ascension period. I do not see evidence to the contrary. However, as I point out and will point out tomorrow, a person can be “filled with the Spirit” many times.
I’m confused. If you can be filled with the Spirit many times, and if filling occurs at the same time as indwelling, would that not mean that you are also indwelt many times? Am I missing something in what you’re saying?
I can fill an empty glass with water once. It’s indwelt with water at that point. But I can keep pouring water into it thus continuing to “fill” it. An imperfect example for sure, but it conveys the image. In tomorrow’s post, I will list Scriptures that without dispute show people who already were indwelt and baptized with the Spirit being “filled” again. As well as a text that exhorts Christians to continue to be filled with the Spirit. Stay tuned . . .
I completely agree with what you say here. 🙂 However, that seems to contradict the idea that indwelling and filling are the same thing.
Perhaps you just mean that the first instance of filling occurs at the same time as indwelling?
Yes. I believe it all happens at once. In/with/in/upon, etc. and then subsequent fillings and empowerings.
Thanks for the clarification. I think I agree in that case, and I look forward to tomorrow’s post.
Chuck, my understanding of indwelling Spirit and filled Spirit has over the years come to be the same as you describe…what I have learned is that I have the Holy Spirit indwelling from the moment of salvation, but that throughout my journey sometimes I increase and He decreases…that my desire should be that He increase and I decrease and that is the daily battle of keeping the flesh at bay so the Christ, through His indwelling Spirit be more visible.
Frank…any comment?
Part V addresses this, I think.
Hi Frank, Leonard here (ryu from facebook) This is a great read. I received the holy spirit without the laying on of hands…I remember hearing the gospel on tape and thinking It can’t be that easy to be forgiven and BAM! I felt a warm heat in my chest… Like it entered me… From that day my Christian life changed…Since then I have felt that heat over and over again but I never thought I was baptized again into the spirit. But that God was filling me further with the spirit or my friends from the Pentecostal background said he was anointing me etc. This read has so far put my experience into perspective.
I’m almost wholly with you in all this, Frank. Just two little bones to pick!
First, and I suspecct a typo, you refer to ‘fruits’ of the Spirit instead of ‘fruit’. I only point this out in case some readers may be misled.
Second, while talking about water baptism you say ‘we should take them to water, encourage them to make a public and verbal confession of faith in Christ, immerse them in water in the name of the Lord Jesus…’ While agreeing with this principle, scripture does not actually say this. I know you have previously justified the statement by drawing perfectly reasonable inferences from scripture, but as this series starts by stating the importance of following what scripture actually says it seems to me that the blog itself should follow this dictum.
None of what I have said here diminishes or is intended to diminish your points about the Holy Spirit, and I sincerely hope you will not be offended by my observation. Like many others, I value your prophetic voice.
Yes, most translations have “fruit,” but it’s followed by many virtues or “fruits” (love, joy, peace, etc.), hence the Aramaic version has “fruits.” But I won’t quibble.
Yes, there is no verse of Scripture that specifically states verbatim – “take a person out to be baptized in Jesus’ name immediately after they believe.” But why does that matter when the whole testimony of the NT shows us that’s what the apostle did and they clearly did it in the name of Jesus? (Ref. my “Rethinking Water Baptism” post). In addition, Philip clearly talked about baptism when he shared the gospel with the Eunuch, else why would the Eunuch say “here’s water, what prevents me from being baptized?” when Philip finished speaking to him? These are clear enough examples to support my suggestion.
Personally, I think we should be careful to not take a “silence of Scripture” stance on those things that have ample biblical support. I never have nor have I asserted such.
p.s. It’s almost impossible to offend me. Your note didn’t bother me in the least. I hope my response didn’t trouble you either. 😉 Thx. for the kind words at the end.
Hey Frank – I really enjoy the wise words you bring to Kingdom talk. Still, something in this reply caught me by some surprise.
You mentioned that underlying the “fruit”/”fruits” of the Spirit (detailed by nine virtues) is a plural Aramaic term (if I understood what you wrote there).
Based on all the earliest texts we have, I think NT scholars would universally agree that Paul wrote the Galatian letter in Greek. Transliterating, what we find at Gal 5:22-23 is ‘ho de karpos tou neumatos’ or ‘and/but the fruit of the Spirit. It’s kinda neat in that Paul talks about both the fruit and the Spirit in definite terms and as singular entities.
As for the Aramaic, maybe there’s something in Daniel I’m not thinking about. Keep up your clearly ordained work.
I have no problem with the translation of “fruit” in Gal. 5. . . it’s probably right. But regardless, the “fruit” is plural in that text as Paul lists it. So the Aramaic isn’t wrong in that particular sense. My own view for many years has been that the FRUIT of the Spirit is LOVE. And in love we have patience, kindness, peace, etc. a ala 1 Cor. 13. All the things that Paul lists in Gal. 5. Hope that helps.
I like that thought on the fruit as love and the other eight attributes as expansions on it. I’m still lost on the Aramaic. How does that language come into a discussion about Paul’s writing?
It’s a different translation that uses “fruits” – that’s all. Let’s move on from this discussion. It’s a minor point in the series and as I say, “fruit” is fine with me. 😉
Not sure I understand the being plunged into the body of Christ statement, but am in full agreement that the Spirit indwells us from the moment we accept Christ as Lord of our lives.
The comment on corporate experience sheds light on some things. I’ve wondered why I often sense a stronger presence of His Spirit when in fellowship than when alone. Still, there are many times that His presence is quite strong during private study and prayer. Usually when I have a deeper need for His closeness or confirmation.
I see the Holy Spirit as being always present in believers, yet we as vessels, determine via our life and attitudes how much we allow Him control. All part of the free-will gift God has given us. I like to describe it as a glass of water. When a waiter comes to refill it we can say yes please or we can cover the glass with our hand and reject it. Maybe I’m over simplifying it here, but this image works for me. Still, I’m reading and learning. Looking forward to tomorrow.
See the 1 Cor. 12 text in the post. Baptized = plunged or immersed.
Okay, don’t laugh, but what came first; the chicken or the egg? Are you referring to baptism of the Spirit or baptism by water? Which one comes first or are they simultaneous?
Personally, it seems that the baptism of the Spirit must come first for it is He who draws us to repentance. As you mentioned, baptism by water is a public profession, which comes after repentance and acceptance of Christ. Yet, clearly the Bible shows multiple situations where the Spirit came after conversion. A topic I’ve often debated and misunderstood.
It just happens that I am reading Acts during my quiet time. A God-incidence that this blog topic came up simultaneously. This morning I was a bit boggled by 8:14-16. They had already received the Word, but not the Spirit. My head is spinning. Granted I am getting older and my mind doesn’t sort information as well as it used too, but all this talk of different types of tongues and different types of Holy Spirit events is beginning to overwhelm me just a little. Very excited to see what else is coming on this topic.
I don’t think we should make hard/fast rules on order. In the NT, the general pattern is repentance, faith, water baptism, laying on of hands. At what moment the Spirit enters a person in that process isn’t clear. The Spirit’s working operates all throughout from conviction to awakening, and for the Reformed, they were born again before faith, causing faith to spring up in the heart. In one case in the NT, people were filled with the Spirit then baptized. But this was probably because Peter wouldn’t have laid his hands on Gentiles unless God showed him clearly they were “clean” in a dramatic unmistakable way. Anyways, these are theological questions that really go beyond the aim of these posts.
Thanks, I understand and agree. This series has brought up some deeper questions for me.
Loving this series Frank! It just keeps getting better and better!!!
Yes!!! It rings of truth. Blessings on you brother.
What caught my eye the most in this article were these words: “The Spirit knows what each of us needs according to our personality, our past experiences, and what we will go through in the future.” As I was reading yesterday’s post and responses, that was the thought that repeatedly ran through my mind. Doesn’t God know what each one of us needs. God/Jesus/Holy Spirit is so awesome!
OK Frank, so far so good. The only question I have today is this. Based on your thesis at the first;
“2,000 years ago, when the Jews and Gentiles were plunged into the body of Christ. When you came to Jesus Christ, you received His life by the Spirit. The Spirit came in and upon you. He filled you with His life and He clothed you with His power. And you were made part of the same body of Jesus that came into being 2,000 years ago. God in Christ dwells in you by the Spirit (Rom. 8:9-11). And you’re a member of His body. That is true for every Christian.”
That would mean the disciples had already been baptized in the Spirit. Why did Jesus tell them to wait until the Spirit came in Luke 24:49 “I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high.”.
I have traitionally understood this as the baptism of the Spirit along with the other cases you sited where people had come to believe and the apostles layed hands on them that they might receive the Spirit. By your description, they already had it.
I always understood that when we received Jesus we received His spirit and there was a subsequent event from the laying on of hands for the “Baptism of the Spirit” (not to be considered in the same context as the current errors in charismatic and pentecostal circles). Looking forward to your explanation.
Keep bringin’ the Heat!
The Twelve, minus Judas, received a firstfruits supply of the indwelling Spirit because Jesus hadn’t ascended yet. This was a living mode that He had become a life-giving Spirit. They had to await Pentecost before He poured out His Spirit “on all flesh” as it were.
what about the incidents in Acts, which you have topically discussed, that have people coming to faith in Christ but not receiving the fullness of the HS? Came by laying on of hands.
I don’t understand your question.
I’m reading, I’m nodding yes. Keep going. This is important.
Thanks Frank, after encountering Christ in my teens (I’m now in my 60’s), taking God’s Word very seriously as a chemical engineer and then a seminary graduate, marrying a wonderful pentecostal girl, 38 years of pastoring mainline denominational churches, doing postgraduate work in theology, practising simple/organic church for the last 6 years with heavy involvement in community work (among the poorest of the poor in South Africa), seeking a biblical theology and balance in all things, connecting with 2 vital inter-denominational fraternals in our city, I can only agree with so much of what you’ve said! You’ve also given me a number of new insights – old dogs CAN learn new tricks! Thanks for the hard work. And thanks to the other ‘commentators.’ Let’s all be life-long students of Jesus and His Word…
Thanks for this series, Frank, and the willingness to discuss a vital and sensitive topic. Maybe it’s still in the series to come, but I’m interested in a discussion on infant baptism. My questions on it now are about Christians who were baptized at infants, yet in their adult life, are only nominally Christians. If asked, they say their religion is Christian, but in their life and in their daily habits, they don’t live a life guided by the Holy Spirit. They are not bearing spiritual fruit or showing concern for the Kingdom of God. This varies in degree, of course. Some struggle, some don’t seem to care, preferring to pursue the things of this world and attend church services on Christmas and Easter, or some similar surface-level lip service.
In light of these souls and this tension between God’s Kingdom and the devotion to the world, what are we to make of infant baptism? I have always been taught that infant baptism is valid because it is God’s work, received grace and not works, and the New Testament records instances of households being baptized (Acts 16 where Paul and Silas tell the jailer to believe on Jesus Christ, he and his household, and for them all to be baptized). The inference then is that household would include children and possibly infants, at least those who were young enough that they would not comprehend believing and confessing Christ.
Frank, I hope I have managed to phrase things well enough that you can pick out my meaning and help me with my thinking on this topic. It’s been on my mind for a while now, so this series on Baptism has been a great help.
Barna and I address infant baptism a little in the notes of “Pagan Christianity” http://www.PaganChristianity.org – referring to some of the scholarship on it.
What abot doing a rethinking hell, that is if rethinking hell has crossed yor mind
I’ve already addressed hell on this blog. See my post on Rob Bell.
I’m enjoying this series immensely. Thanks so much for your thoughtful insight. My question is this- what if “the laying on of hands” never happened in someone’s salvation experience? Meaning they repented, believed and were even baptized, but the community they were part of did not understand or practice the laying on of hands. Have these people still been “baptized” in the Holy Spirit?
Also, I would love to see a similar series on the gift of prophecy.
Grace and peace.
A person can receive the Spirit without the laying on of hands. However, I think it’s best to practice it just as I think it’s best to lead them to water baptism immediately . . . see my post on “Rethinking Water Baptism.”
Prophecy – Yes! I believe this is as relevant today as it was for the ancients. Just putting in my vote 🙂
I find this question really interesting for this reason: If everything depended on us to get it right, no one would ever accept Christ or make it to heaven. It’s a work that God does in the heart of a child who comes to God by the conviction of the Holy Spirit. It’s instinctive to be repentant and humble under such conviction and without knowing all the practices of the church. Why do we even ask these questions? If it’s something we do, is it not us being legalistic and telling God how He “has” to operate? Am I missing something?
Nancy…I love these questions and I love discussing spiritual topics, digging, learning more, and this series seems especially interesting because we are talking of the Holy Spirit who is the part of GOD that is here with us and in us right now. But, I do see your point, and I believe that is Franks point of it all…it’s important that we get the understanding of these things correct because many people get caught up in issues that paralyze them or paralyze others. YOU ARE RIGHT in that salvation is ALL the work of God and we need to give Him more credit (all the credit :)) to be able to properly and correctly finish what He starts in a person LOL! I believe that ultimately might be part of Frank’s point…encouraging us toquit judging others on this whole “tongues” issue…it’s not their place and they have no biblical basis for the burdens, constraints and requirement some are placing on others. It’s kind of like the Jewish leaders in biblical times requiring of the people that which was not required.