In an article I wrote some time ago I had
a gentleman of the Pentecostal persuasion respond seemingly upset with me over
the issue of baptism as I was emphasizing the importance of water baptism which
he was discounting as being nothing more than a picture of salvation (whatever
that means). Of course, his emphasis was
on Holy Spirit baptism. In any case, since I said I would respond I will do so here thinking I might as well make an
article out of my response.
When one reads the gospels the very first
mention of the subject of baptism comes with the introduction of John the
Baptist. Mark says, "Then all the
land of Judea, and those from Jerusalem, went out to him and were all baptized
by him in the Jordan River, confessing their sins." (Mark 1:5 NKJV) We know Jesus when baptized, by John,
"came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened
to Him, and He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting upon
Him." (Matt. 3:16 NKJV) So our very first introduction to the subject
of baptism relates it to water, not the Holy Spirit.
However, John did prophecy of two other
baptisms to come. He says, "I
indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is
mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you
with the Holy Spirit and fire."
(Mat 3:11 NKJV)
It is very important to note who will be
doing the baptizing in the Holy Spirit and fire. Will it be the apostles, will it be man? No, for the text says "He," a
reference to Jesus, which means what? If
you are going to receive Holy Spirit baptism it will not be at the hands of
men. It will have to come directly from
heaven itself. Jesus will be the
administrator.
But, it means even more. It means it cannot be a command for it is
something Christ does for you. In other
words, it is a baptism you cannot obey.
It is something you receive, not something you do. Pentecostals ought to keep this in mind
because it is going to cause problems down the road. Indeed, it is going to cause problems before
one even finishes the book of Matthew.
In the Great Commission of Matt. 28:18-20
Jesus speaking to the apostles said, "All authority has been given to Me
in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am
with you always, even to the end of the age." (NKJV) The reader already knows enough from what has
been said previously that this is a command for water baptism for it is the
only baptism men can administer. Men
could baptize others with water but not with the Holy Spirit. Only Jesus could do that.
Furthermore, the command of the Great
Commission was to teach those they baptized to go out and do the same with
others--make disciples and baptize them—thus making the Great Commission a
perpetual command for the ages. This
means in Eph. 4:5 when Paul said there was "one baptism" we know
which one it was.
Before the time of Paul's writing of
the book of Ephesians, there had been two baptisms--water baptism and Holy
Spirit baptism (the baptism of fire being yet future at the Day of Judgment). However, by the time Paul wrote the book of
Ephesians, scholars say sometime between 61 and 64 AD, only one baptism
remained. This was approximately 30
years after Jesus had ascended back into heaven and Paul now says as he writes
there is but one baptism.
This puts Pentecostals in a tight
spot. If they say we still have Holy
Spirit baptism then they must deny we have water baptism. If they say we still have both they make
Paul, speaking by the Holy Spirit, out to be a liar for that makes two baptisms
rather than one.
Did Jesus speak about baptizing some in
the Holy Spirit? Yes, he did, but to
whom? It was to those with whom he met
in Luke 24:33-49. It was with those who
were to "tarry in the city of Jerusalem until you are endued with power
from on high." (Luke 24:49 NKJV) It
was to those who would first preach "repentance and remission of sins … in
His name … beginning at Jerusalem."
Now who did that? Was Peter the
first one? Did he preach baptism for the
remission of sins (Acts 2:38) "beginning at Jerusalem"? Yes, he did.
In the book of John starting with chapter
13 and going through chapter 17 Jesus is with the apostles he had chosen at the
Last Supper. Here he again speaks about
this select group being baptized with the Holy Spirit or words to that effect
(John 14:16-18, 26, 16:13).
Luke, in the book of Acts, speaks of
"the apostles whom He had chosen" (Acts 1:2) and then says, "to
whom He also presented Himself alive after His suffering by many infallible
proofs, being seen by them during forty days and speaking of the things
pertaining to the kingdom of God. And being assembled together with them, He
commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the Promise of the
Father, 'which,' He said, 'you have heard from Me; for John truly baptized with
water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from
now.'" (Acts 1:3-5 NKJV)
Thus the promise of the baptism of the
Holy Spirit was only to a select few, not to all Christians. All Christians received the Holy Spirit but
not all received the baptism of the Holy Spirit and there is a difference. Many received spiritual gifts and thus had a
measure of the Holy Spirit in that special sense as well, but the promise of
the baptism of the Holy Spirit was only to those few Jesus chose. I remind the reader that while Holy Spirit
baptism had to come directly from heaven spiritual gifts could be received at
the hands of the apostles. "And
when Simon saw that through the laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy
Spirit was given." (Act 8:18 NKJV)
Even spiritual gifts were not to last
endlessly until the Day of Judgment.
Paul says, in Eph. 4:11-14 (NAS), "And He gave some as apostles,
and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and
teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the
building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the
faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure
of the stature which belongs to the fulness of Christ. As a result, we are no
longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves, and carried about by
every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful
scheming."
Apostles and prophets were obviously men
with spiritual gifts. Are there,
apostles and prophets, still with us today?
The reader ought to highlight the word "until" in the above
passage. Words do have meaning. "Until" places a time limit. Then note the last verse that begins with
"As a result." The result is
we will not be carried away "by every wind of doctrine" thus the
earth will still be here when the apostles and prophets are gone and so will
every wind of doctrine which we will not be carried away by.
A passage that is even a little clearer
is 1 Cor. 13:8-10, "Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy,
they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is
knowledge (miraculous spiritual--DS), it will be done away. For we know in
part, and we prophesy in part; but when the perfect comes, the partial will be
done away." Some say this refers to
Jesus' second coming. Does it? It is hard to see how you or I need to be
told that there will not be prophecy in heaven.
Is that not self-evident? Let me
tell you what is "perfect" in addition to Jesus--his completed
revelation to man in his word, the New Testament itself. Do you doubt the word of God is perfect? See Psalms 19:7.
The one who takes issue with me says, "In
John 3:5 water does not refer to Christian baptism in the name of the
Lord. Prove that it does." If you recall John 3:5 reads as follows,
"Jesus answered, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water
and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.'" (NAS) Well, what are the other options? Is it "Jesus answered, ‘Truly, truly, I
say to you, unless one is born of the Holy Spirit and the Spirit, he cannot
enter into the kingdom of God.'"
That is how this sincere man would have it read, but I think it is readily seen that this will not work in the context of how the sentence is
phrased.
He also argues that Rom. 6:3, Gal. 3:27,
and Col. 2:12 all refer to Holy Spirit baptism, not water baptism. I have already shown that since there is only
one baptism today, according to Paul, then it is an either/or option--either it
is Holy Spirit baptism or water baptism.
If it is Holy Spirit baptism then the baptism Jesus commanded in the
Great Commission is of no effect today and you cannot carry out the Great
Commission.
In Romans 6:3 Paul says, "Or do you
not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized
into His death?" By using the word
"us" Paul includes himself. Let
us hear Ananias at the time of Paul's baptism, Acts 22:16, "'And now why
are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the
name of the Lord.'" It sounds to me
like the responsibility is on Paul to "arise and be baptized." It sounds like it is something Paul can attend
to. He can't if it is Holy Spirit
baptism as my critic claims. He will
have to wait on Jesus to do that. Thus
my critic is in error.
Gal. 3:27 reads as follows, "For all
of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ."
(NAS) Am I baptized "into
Christ" or am I baptized by Christ?
Holy Spirit baptism is by Christ, not into Christ. If Christ both baptizes one and puts one into
himself (salvation is in Christ--2 Tim. 2:10) then if you are lost it looks
like it is his fault since there is something he did not do for you. I can obey the command for water baptism but
I cannot obey Holy Spirit baptism for Jesus has the responsibility for that. I have not clothed myself with Christ, and
cannot do so, if it is out of my hands which would be the case if this passage
refers to Holy Spirit baptism.
Finally, Col. 2:12, which he says is a
reference to Holy Spirit baptism, reads as follows with me including verses 11
and 13 in order to read the text in context.
"And in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made
without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of
Christ; having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised
up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.
And when you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your
flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our
transgressions." (NAS)
Beginning with Abraham if a male child
was not circumcised the eighth day he fell out of covenant relationship with
God. This remained true on up through
the entirety of the Mosaical Era. You
can read about it in Gen. 17:12-14. If
one is in covenant relationship with God he is a child of God. He may or may not remain faithful and thus
can be lost later but at the time he becomes a child of God he is saved.
I have a question. In Acts 2 on the day of Pentecost when the
first gospel sermon ever preached after Christ's ascension, after the giving of
the Great Commission, when were those gathered there, the three thousand, placed
into a covenant relationship with God?
Was it before water baptism for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38)? Water baptism was necessary both for the
forgiveness of sins and for the reception of the Holy Spirit and was prior to
both. Without the forgiveness of sins
first, there was no covenant relationship with God, not under the new covenant.
It would be good, perhaps, to quote Acts
2:38 here: "Then Peter said to them,
"Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ
for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."
(NKJV)
Circumcision placed one into covenant
relationship with God under the Law of Moses.
When were people placed in that relationship in Acts 2--was it before or
after the receiving of the gift of the Holy Spirit? One can readily see it was before the
receiving of the Holy Spirit but after water baptism. If you have received "remission of
sins" you are saved and in a covenant relationship with God. Circumcision in the covenant of Christ, in
Christianity, is baptism from the heart of faith for the remission of sins in
water, not Holy Spirit baptism. In that
act, when based on faith, sins are cut away (removed). Colossians 2:11-13 is a reference to water
baptism.
But, sometimes it is good to argue
against ourselves so, putting myself in my critic's shoes, I would come back
and say have you not read Rom.2:29, "But he is a Jew who is one inwardly;
and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose
praise is not from men but from God"? (NKJV)
The same Paul who wrote Colossians wrote
Romans. We shall tie them together. I remind the reader my critic believes the
talk about baptism in Rom. 6, the first several verses, is a reference to
baptism in the Holy Spirit. But, Paul
says in Rom 6:17-18, "But God be thanked that though you were slaves of
sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were
delivered. And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of
righteousness." There are two
points to be made. (1) You cannot obey
Holy Spirit baptism thus his argument fails when he says the baptism of Romans
6 is Holy Spirit baptism. (2) When were
they set free from sin according to Paul?
Answer--when they obeyed.
This excursion off on Romans 6 throws
light on Rom. 2:29. As this passage—Rom.
2:29--relates back to Col. 2:12 it shows, when combined with the study of
Romans 6, that one cannot divorce faith from obedience. Obedience is from the heart. What is in the heart to produce this
obedience? Faith! When understood that obedience is a part of
saving faith, that there is no such thing as saving faith apart from obedience,
I readily concede that salvation is by that kind of faith. This faith always includes as an integral
part of itself obedience.
The trouble is the advocates of salvation
by faith are generally such as do not define faith this way. Their faith does not necessarily include any
ideas of obedience thus water baptism is just kind of an option if I get to it,
if I do it, when I do it, sort of thing.
When God says jump you cannot say I will if I want to, and when I want
to, if I decide to. That is neither
faith nor obedience, it is rebellion. How
can one claim a circumcision of heart and talk of having the Spirit all the
while saying it does not matter whether you obey what the Spirit has said, you
can be saved whether you obey or do not obey?
Jesus, a man full of the Spirit, did not disobey a single commandment
but we do and say it is okay and that we have the Spirit.
If the baptism of the Holy Spirit still
exists today then along with it we must have as a necessity those things that
accompany it which include the spiritual gifts of the first century. All Holy Spirit baptized individuals (the
apostles) had miraculous spiritual gifts (2 Cor. 12:11-12). Who ever heard of having the baptism of the
Holy Spirit and not having spiritual gifts?
Do we have prophets today, do we have miracle workers today, do we still
have revelation being given today? Let
each reader judge for themselves.
[To download this article or print it out click here.]
