Talk:Baptism with the Holy Spirit
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. | ||
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Charismatic Christianity. (with unknown importance) | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
 |
Baptism with the Holy Spirit falls within the scope of WikiProject Calvinism, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Calvinism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familier with the guidelines.
|
|
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. | |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, which collaborates on articles related to the Roman Catholic Church. To participate, edit this article or visit the project page for details. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. |
| Top | This article has been rated as top-importance on the Project's importance scale. |
Contents |
[edit] Elaborate
This article only talks about the Pentecostal interpretation of the Baptism With The Holy Spirit. It needs to be expanded to talk about all of the theological interpretations of this subject.
[edit] elaborated June 2006
I have expanded this article to separate out viewpoints from the Catholic, Reformed and Wesleyan perspectives as well.
[edit] Edits 15 May
Just reversed the following edits because they were POV:
- But, the spoken of actually refers to judgment. The baptism of "spirit" refers to new life and the baptism of "fire" refers to judgment for unbelievers. So, no one born again will have a batism of fire. The baptism of water in that verse simply refers to John's baptism. John's baptism of repentance, but it is not Christian baptism as occurs after Christ's death burial and resurrection. If the later baptism of water at conversion and baptism of the spirit were separate, then that would mean baptism saves and you could fulfill God's will with or without the baptism of the Holy Spirit, which scripturally is actually conversion, being born again.
Have saved it here for the record in case anyone (including the original editor) wants to do anything with it or use it for a future NPOV edit. David L Rattigan 12:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Needs expanding?
There probably needs to be more explanation of how the term has been used through Christian history, rather than simply by Pentecostals. When I have time, I will also try to add more charismatic interpretations - Henry Lederle's book Treasures Old and New is an excellent resource on this. David L Rattigan 09:33, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Untitled discussions
Why is the page title "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" -- almost all versions of the Bible refer to it as "Baptism with the Holy Spirit". It is an important distinction, as the Bible describes that Jesus baptizes with the Holy Spirit, not that the Holy Spirit does the baptizing.
Copied from [[User talk:DJ Clayworth]
We'll have to work together on this "Baptism in the Holy Spirit", if you dont mind. The thing is, all denominations accept that the holy spirit is received at the moment of salvation. What they differ on is on the endowment of power for life and service. Pentecostal/Full Gospel/Charismatic say that this endowment is given on a second experience, titled the baptism in the Holy Spirit. Some inside pentecostal circles see the glossolalia as a confirmation, some not. But thats it. User:Nbarr
Hi Nbarr. Sorry if I was unclear, but my edits were not intended to disagree with what you said at all. The only thing I wanted to do was to be explicit that all Christians agree about the Holy Spirit being received at conversion (or baptism) and to add that some outside the Pentecostal church would agree that Baptism in the HS is subsequent; although they would disagree as to whether glossolalia was always given. DJ Clayworth 18:57, 6 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Thats ok. I made some minor changes, please see if you think they are correct. My problem is that english is not my mother language, and I may be failing to describe the term in proper ways. Do you feel it is ok right now, and that it reflects the things I said above? Nbarr 19:00, 6 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- I agree fine. However I would go further than you went. Pretty much all churches, including Catholic, would agree that the Holy Spirit is received at conversion, or baptism or possibly confirmation. I remember the Bishop praying for me to receive the Holy Spirit at my confirmation, in a church that was a long way from being Evangelical. DJ Clayworth 19:10, 6 Nov 2003 (UTC)
We seem to have Baptism of the Holy Spirit as well as this. Unless I've missed a subtle point of theology these are the same thing, and we need to merge them. DJ Clayworth 13:43, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- These have now been merged. "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" was marginally more popular in Google, so I put the article at that rather than "Baptism in the Holy Spirit". Angela. 01:11, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)
I think this page currently misrepresents the Pentecostal and Charismatic views, and the differences between them (check the relevant articles). Both Pentecostals and Charismatics believe (by definition) that the "charismatic gifts" of the Spirit are still active today, but, according to the Assemblies of God, Pentecostals also believe that everyone who is baptized in the Holy Spirit must speak in tongues. Charismatics, by definition, believe that baptism in the Holy Spirit is separate from salvation. Some believers are both, some are only one or the other. Currently, the page looks to me like it claims that both pentecostals and charismatics believe that someone who has not been baptized in the Holy Spirit is not saved. This would only be true of someone who was Pentecostal but not Charismatic as, e.g., the Pentecostal Church of God, which does, consequently, hold that a person is not saved unless he speaks in tongues. --kpearce 07:36, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- In my church (and the churches I have attended) we see Baptism of the Holy Spirit as evidence of being born-again. But I don't necessarily believe you must speak in Tongues to be saved/born-again. In any case, we believe a person inhabited by the Holy Spirit is saved, and I'm not sure, but some believe that you must be inhabited with the Spirit to be saved (I am one), but speaking in Tongues or Interpreting them is not a requirement, merely evidence. Эйрон Кинни 02:42, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
In order to have a correct appreciation of Spirit blessings, we must look to the life of Jesus where he was baptised with water by John the Baptist and then the Holy Spirit descended upon Him like a dove. There was another experience though, even more powerful than the baptism of the Spirit. It happened at the mount of transfiguration where God said "This is my Son, with Him I am well pleased" This is experience is the equivalent of another experience talked about in the scriptures which is the mystery that has been hidden for generations which is "Christ in you, the surety of glory" This experience is talked about in revelation and described as "To him who overcomes" The baptism in the Spirit is for new believers. The purpose is to give power to be a witness of Christ Acts 1:8 The evidence of the baptism is power in the Spirit of God for the believers walk with Christ. (unsigned comment from 202.156.6.54)
Perhaps 'Holy Spirit baptism' would cover both 'in' and 'of'. Some would draw distinctions between these useages. Secondly, the main difference between those who argue that the Holy Spirit baptism is a subsequent experience to conversion is whether the associated gifts of the Spirit were for all christians generally or just for the initial apostles during the establishment of the early church. The term Pentecostal principally refers to those who believe that Holy Spirit baptism is a repeat of the first Pentecost experience where speaking in tongues was an obvious sign to those observing the phenomenon. As tongues was mentioned in the majority (but not all) of subsequent biblical examples the 'initial evidence' theology was developed. One biblical example suggests the HS Baptism was experienced before a full understanding of the Gospel message.
Most Pentecostals would agree that Baptism of or in the Holy Spirit would ideally take place simultaneously with conversion (although Holiness Pentecostals would always seperate the two to allow a period of sanctification following conversion). The fact that it often does not ( for a variety of reasons) led to Christians who attended non pentecotal / charismatic churches after experiencing the Baptism, having to decide whether to stay in that church or leave and form organisations that recognise or at least accept the second experience. It is a concern that individuals have felt either under pressure to conform either to established ways or to new experiences as some kind of measure of orthodoxy or acceptability. People are unique individuals and if accepting a personal God with a character then wouldn't there be some variety and personalisation of the experience given to fit the receivers circumstances and needs? In order to ensure all points of view are covered it should be noted that those who claim to use gifts such as tongues etc are seen by some to be at least immature, misguided or worse. Johnmarkh 21:57, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] 1 Cor 12:13
John R W Stott in his book Baptism and Fullness attempted a different approach. Using 1 Cor 12:13 as the starting point, he built his Theology upon the foundation that ALL Christians are Baptised in the Holy Spirit. Not, as it were, some have it - some don't.
I read this over twenty years ago, and at the time, it was like a light bulb going on in my head. I have never forgotten it. I recall this every time I see this issue resurface.
I can absolutely guarantee that by firmly and persistently applying this teaching one will develop a Theology enriching and satisfying. Hope this helps. Added on 23:34, May 15, 2006 by Brother Lee Love == Thanks for the contribution - it serves to show that there are differing approaches to the subject that should probably be mentioned. Most pentecostals would hold that all those born again have the Holy Spirit within in them but that Baptist in/of/with Holy Spirit is a subsequent experience possibly with the emphasis on the Holy Spirit coming 'upon them'.rgds, ||:) johnmark† 21:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 14:02, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Addition removed - POV, no citation - Original research?
The reader should note that the Apostle Paul expressly provided the Church with an explanation of the purpose of "speaking in tongues" in 1 Corinthians 14:22. In that verse the Apostle stated that tongues were to serve as a sign to unbelievers whereas prophecy was for the believers. Indeed, in each case in the New Testament where tongues were exhibited there was, in some expressed form or manner, the presence of unbelief or as some might put it, doubt. Also, the Apostle stated plainly that not all Christians share the same gifts, viz a viz, tongues in 1 Corinthians 12:30.
I have removed the above paragraph as it expresses an intrepretation of scripture and appears to be original research. Whilst this may be a valid POV it does not provide citations and simply asserts a difference from the previous paragraph johnmark† 18:48, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Removal of quotations
I removed the biblical quotations (after first thinking of cleaning them into bullet points like the current ones) because the section is copied directly from a website which was added to the links section at the same time [1]. Que (talk) 21:49, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
