Open Theism Discussion Board

Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Questions about Christianity > Receiving the Holy Spirit in Acts 8

Forum Quick Jump

38 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2

[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

MrIndifference
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 144

Posted 2/11/2002 8:04 PM (GMT -6)

One thing that I have noticed is that in much of Modern Evengelical Christianity, the role of the Holy Spirit has been reduced to nearly nothing. We have nearly banned Spiritual Works, Wonders, and Miracles from the theology and beliefs of Christianity. We have left no room for them. Why does the church feel the need to oust the Holy Spirit?

The world is hungry for spirituallity. Turn on your TV and a good portion of what you see deals with Witchcraft, Ghosts, Magic, the Occult, Psychics, etc. Why is there this fascination? It is much more than simple amusement.

Within the bounds of the church, we have two camps when you look at the spirituality of the religion. You have those like the baptists (which I grew up one, so I have the right to use them as an example) who have the theology of what they believe down pat, but on the most part don't believe the Holy Spirit works in the world today. Then we have the Pentacostol/Charasmatics who believe in the workings of the Holy Spirit, but are severly lacking when it comes to the Theology to back their beliefs. There does not seem to be a happy medium here.

I understand why people try running and hidding when they see Oral Roberts, Benny Hinn, or any of the other Tele-Evangelists on TV. Alot of the time they scare me and I consider myself a Pentacostal. What is the point in continually verbally bashing them unless we plan to do something about it. It will not do any good except letting out hot air.

Does anyone see this major divergence between these two camps or is it just me? Modes, Mighty-Don...do you see a lack of theological basis and accountability behind the Pentacostal movement? Pot, Rove... do you see a lack of spirituallity and downplaying of the Holy Spirit in much of the church? Why is this? What do you think we can do about it?

MrI. :|

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 2/12/2002 1:17 AM (GMT -6)

quote:
Pot, Rove... do you see a lack of spirituallity and downplaying of the Holy Spirit in much of the church?

The Doctrine of theTrinity is central to Christianity; and the Holy Spirit is integral to that Doctrine. (To say it awkwardly.)

Holy Spirit

Edited by - potonwheel on 02/12/2002 06:20:39 AM

Modes of Thought
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 817

Posted 2/12/2002 4:31 AM (GMT -6)

There is such a strong connection between baptism in the name of Jesus Christ and the baptism o fthe Holy Spirit that I think the distinction finally breaks down. What the goal is in every case is the reconciliation of the individual with the WHOLE Godhead. This is why the great commission is worded in the trinitarian formula. It seems for a while before the time of that book's writing it was not yet done in that manner. BUT the amazing thing is either, when some where baptized in the name of Jesus Christ they were overcome by the Spirit and some seem to have been overcome by the Spirit though not yet baptized.

Here's the MAIN POINT. Whatever the formula is (and I say that facetiously, for it is certianly NOT a formula, per se) it is completely OUT of our hands.

Matt 28:19: baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Acts 2:36-41: the Spirit moved upon them (see verse 33) and they were "cut to the heart" then they repented were baptized and believed. The Spirit that cut them to the heart entered them after the repentence and baptism. BUT it is not always this way.
Acts 8:9-24: shows that things are radically complicated when there is a confusion of what spirit power comes from. There was a baptism into Christ, but the resident spirit was not exercised. Simon's mind and heart clearly were not captive to Christ as this portion shows and the people who are spoken of here were loyal followers of this Simon the Sorcerer. Clearly this was a situation that required Simon's repentance and submission to the Spirit of God (and in this way to CHRIST) through the challenges of Peter. The context matters.
Acts 9:17-18: Here we have an interesting one, Saul gets the Spirit BEFORE he is baptized. What's up with that?
Acts 10:44-48: it happens again when Peter is preaching and the gifts of the Spirit are manifest by those who have not been baptized. THEN he gets his bright idea, hey, maybe we should baptize them? Eh? (not an exact quote but close

)
Acts 19:1-7: the baptism of John was obviously not the same as the baptism of Christ since there was such a thing as pre-christian baptism which was a form of repentance and washing, the Christian version retains that meaning but adds the obviously central aspect of identity with Christ in Christ's death and resurrection (see Romans 6:1-11). So this occurance offers no reason to seek a second baptism of any sort.

The langauge "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" should be kept under the trinitarian rubric of Baptism in the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit as Matt. has it in the Great Commission. The church has protected itself from these confusions by incorporating an exorcism more clearly into the baptismal ceremony itself. The order is not essential but the elements are all important:
* exorcism of spirits other than God's
* repentance of individual (or community on behalf of the individual via covenant)
* baptism in the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit
* indentity with the community of faith

If these things are done, then the individual has been identified not merely with those who have experienced likewise, but with Christ himself (Romans 6:1-11). This individual will also have opened oneself (voluntarily, of course the Spirit doesn't always wait as seen above) to the power and movement of the Holy Spirit and it is already true that the Spirit of God is present in the individual. This individual is committed to obedience to the Father as a member of the Body of Christ. All in all, this individual has been initiated into the Kingdom of God and is now an alien in this world.

I guess that's pretty much enough for me. What more do you want? It is GOD'S perrogative what happens when in relation to the individual. We can do the repenting and the baptizing (in terms of getting people more or less wet), but God is responsible for the showing up and the empowerment of any situation. Anyone who suggests otherwise has some rude awakenings in store for them. God is not at our disposal.

"Christianly understood, truth is obviously not to know the truth but to be the truth. Despite all modern philosophy, there is an infinite difference here..." SK

Starkman
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747

Posted 2/12/2002 10:04 AM (GMT -6)

I think it's worth stressing that the stereo type usage of the phrase "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" certainly cannot mean one isn't saved if one doesn't experience what is noted throughout the book of Acts.

I myself claim no experience of this baptism (though I am certainly open to such), but I am surely saved. So, what does this mean to not have this experience that is, according to Scripture, so closely associated with the salvific event of an individual? And as a result, what is it I lack, if anything, in not experiencing this baptism?

If can say one thing in regard to those today who claim the experience: they do NOT show any more or less spirituality than I. That's not an incrmination, just a fact I note. No one I know is more spiritual or walking a cleaner or better life than I as a result of this baptism. That certainly isn't to say that there aren't those more spiritual than I but it's not attributed to the baptism. It's there love and adoration for the Lord Himself. And, amazingly, I don't see it making one more "spiritual" in the New Testament either. Peter was certainly not more bolder - he already was as bold as they came. But he still shows his fear trait, too, years after having been "baptised"; he is confronted by Paul in the book of Galatians for hypocracy. (Some issues in our lives, you know! They just don't want to die!!!)

So,

God saves by faith through Jesus Christ. If as a subsequent event or in a seemingly undividable salvific context God baptises with His Spirit, I am yet to see its significance TODAY! Oh, I don't mean it's not for today, I'm saying something might very well have been going on in NT times which utilized this baptism more so than what is going on today especially with regard to speaking in tongues as evidence (at least, the most common occuring evidence of the baptism of the Spirit).

I'm not convinced that there's a salvation issue at stake here. I am, however, convinced that there's a relationship issue (both individually, corporately as a church and before the world) which is different in some manner than what it in NT times. Is it suppose to be this way? I don't think so, but I've yet to figure out why it isn't the same. Only that, perhaps, the means by which God used (the baptism) to get the attention of the world to the Christian faith was served better back then by the particular style of how God baptized people with His Holy Spirit.

For the conversation

Starkman

rove
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2002
Total Posts : 6

Posted 2/12/2002 5:42 PM (GMT -6)

MrIndiff: I see it. I don't know how to overcome it other than to offer that through individuals who are committed to seeking truth through God these patches in our theology, thinking, understnading and, yes, experience will be bridged. That's my hope anyway.

Modes: you say
"There is such a strong connection between baptism in the name of Jesus Christ and the baptism o fthe Holy Spirit that I think the distinction finally breaks down."
and
"The langauge "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" should be kept under the trinitarian rubric of Baptism in the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit as Matt. has it in the Great Commission."
is this to say you believe there is really no difference in the baptisms provided for in the bible and that they are essentially the same? In this case how does this support Hebrews 6:1 and the "doctrine of BaptismS" (plural) is given. From this I'd say there is more than one and they are not the same.

Starkman: I'd agree that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and the salvation experience are certainly not one and the same.
Also, if you see no benefit derived from it, why do you seek it and why do think it was instituted by God in the first place? (curious)
Looking at Acts 10:44 onwards - they appeared to know (peter and the jews) here that the Holy Spirit had baptised the gentiles - how? there must've been some evidence to it? Could it be that they spoke in tougues?

Thoughts?

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 2/12/2002 5:57 PM (GMT -6)

quote:
In this case how does this support Hebrews 6:1 and the "doctrine of BaptismS" (plural) is given. From this I'd say there is more than one and they are not the same.

History might help you with that one.

Many in the CRC (a Reformed denomination) are looking back at historical practices, and seeing that along with Baptism the giving of the Holy Spirit THEN was the norm. The Eastern Orthodox Churches practice this and always have.

Water Baptism and"Chrismation",
then, give you two -- by my count.

Starkman
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747

Posted 2/13/2002 2:56 AM (GMT -6)

Hey rove,

In regard to your questions:

quote:
Also, if you see no benefit derived from it, why do you seek it and why do think it was instituted by God in the first place? (curious)

Let me clear up something I left muddy! It isn't that I dont' believe there's a benefit from the baptism of the Holy Spirit, what I meant was that there may be no benefit of it today (particularly, say, in this country) as also may be the case in healing.

In other words, the last thing this country needs is (and simply hasn't seen) are true, real healings on the scale of what was going on in NT Times. This country needs to repent, not have a bunch of people be physically healed who could care less about God. And that's probably partially (in my opinion) why we don't have healing today on the scale of NT times.

The same could probably be said about the baptism of the Holy Spirit; it's the last thing the church needs right now. There's been such a departure of strong, solid Biblical teaching in this country that the last thing we need is the baptism of the Holy Spirit. (it's always needed, if you understand what I mean, but it's the least concern of God, I believe, for this country at the moment).

quote:
Looking at Acts 10:44 onwards - they appeared to know (peter and the jews) here that the Holy Spirit had baptised the gentiles - how? there must've been some evidence to it? Could it be that they spoke in tougues?

I believe that tongues was what indicated to Peter and his colleagues that Cornelius's band had been baptized in the Spirit.

For the conversation,

Starkman

Edited by - Starkman on 02/13/2002 08:01:06 AM

rove
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2002
Total Posts : 6

Posted 2/13/2002 4:18 PM (GMT -6)

thanks for sharing your take pot and stark.
(altho i'm not sold on the chrismation)
: )

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 2/14/2002 2:58 AM (GMT -6)

Re: Chrismation.

I'm not very precise unless I've read something recently, and really honed in on it. (The exception is repeated honing--then I'm "shartp.") So this won't be precise; it might even waver.

Semething interesting about when a Lutheran minister joins an Eastern Orthodox church. Baptism is not repeated--no way. But Chrimation is administered. Why?

Asking that qhestion and answering it illumines a few very interesting things.

(So I hope that I don't mess this up.)

Stepping back a pace, it is sometimes remarked that Christ and the Holy Spirit are like th"right and left hands" of the Father. They do things inconsort. One such team effort is that Christ baptises us into the Holy Spirit and the Spirit baptizes us into Christ.

By why a Chrismation for someone who is already a Christian?

By guess or hopefully by memory -- I'll take all blame -- I think that the answer is to be found in the fact that the person entering the Orthodox Church is not entering some vague abstraction. Not entering an umbrella institution. The asnwer is to be found in the fact of what the nature of the chruch is. What is its nature?

The Church, though "universal" is LOCAL. (Which very early Father said that the Chruch is the Bishop and all the faithful surronding him?) The Spirit unites us all in Christ, really, not in some Gnostic sense. The Body of Christ is incarnated in a real, physical, local body. And it is into a body that we come into Christ. So uniting with a body means to involve the Holy Spirit.

It is, then, very clear, that to join a body that has not had "communion" with another requires some act involving the Holy Spirit.

When my friend, a former Lutheran minister became Orthodox (now a priest) he was Christmated. I don't think that anyone present doubted his being in Christ up to that moment. But the answer to the question of why perform a Chrismation is, I think (all blame on me), to be found in the fact that he was joining a particular local, physical body and the Spirit consititutes (I hope I'm saying that correctly) the Body of Christ.

I think that makes sense.

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 2/14/2002 3:03 AM (GMT -6)

This is kind of similar to the practice, even in the BGC I think, of ordaining ministers for mission work in the local body. There is no abstract Body.

Entering EOC from RCC also requires Chrismation -- due to the horrible mutual excommunications that are being tried to resolved. But from Oriental Orth. (Coptic, Ethiopian, Arminian) there is only the necessity of reciting the Nicene Creed, which all agree has been agreed in idea even through centuries of misunderstanding the words each was using. (The guy who messed up the words is a Saint on BOTH sides of the disagreement!!!)

Kyle Essary
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 113

Posted 2/14/2002 4:25 AM (GMT -6)

quote:
In this case how does this support Hebrews 6:1 and the "doctrine of BaptismS" (plural) is given.

Ephesians 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling
5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism
6 one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all, and in you all.

I believe that if you read Hebrews 6:2 (baptismS), in light of the passage, you will see that he/she is not talking about a doctrine of MULTIPLE baptisms, but simply the doctrine of baptisms. The doctrine of his/her baptism, the doctrine of who he/she is writing to, etc. Also, the greek text (or at least UBS4) says "doctrine" of baptisms. I think if this were talking about multiple baptisms, then it would have said "doctrines of baptism" or "doctrine of the baptisms." I don't know for sure, but I do believe that the meaning of this passage may be too inconclusive to base an argument on. Many times I am wrong in my conclusions though.

Kyle Essary

boljer
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 18

Posted 2/14/2002 9:33 AM (GMT -6)

My take:---Baptism in the Spirit happens at conversion when the HS baptizes you into the body of Christ..Being filled with the Spirit is different than that...It's not the question how much of the holy spirit do I have rather how much of you does the HS have???How much have you allowed him that dwells in you to be lead, guided, controlled byu the Spirit--that is what the spirit lead life is all about!!!

Jered P. Boley

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 2/14/2002 11:23 AM (GMT -6)

Amen, Jered.

38 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2

Forum Information

Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 3:32 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads

Need Support? | Forum Help Manual