The idea of the baptism of the Holy Spirit is one that has people taking sides. Some agree with it, others are strictly against it. Some welcome it, while others are paranoid about anything that bears even the slightest resemblance to it. The main point of argument is the question of whether the event described in Acts 2 was meant to be a unique event, or something for all believers to experience. Before explaining some of the deeper questions about this baptism, I will address this question.

In the record of what we know as Acts 2, the disciples had been waiting in Jerusalem, as Jesus has told them to in Acts 1:4-5, "Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about. For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit." They waited, and,

"when the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them..."

The people who were there heard them in their own language, and were bewildered as to what it meant. Then Peter addressed the crowd. He gives the gospel message, and three thousand people were saved. In his sermon, Peter brings up Joel 2:28-29 to show the prophecy of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, and so even though the wording in these verses doesn't include the word "baptism", we can take the idea of the Spirit being poured out, and filling people, to mean the same thing, since what is known as the baptism of the Spirit is the subject in this event, and also from Christ's words, "but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit."

Without getting into one or more of several arguments for and against the uniqueness of this event, there are two simple pieces of evidence from the Bible that prove that this was not a one-time event. The first one is found in the prophecy of Joel. In Joel 2:28-29 there are mentions of sons, daughters, young men, old men, and servants. This represents all generations, and social positions, whether rich or poor. The disciples were all approximately the same age, and none of them were women, so this prophecy cannot be said to be applicable only to the apostles. "Jesus' promise that 'you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you' (Acts 1:8) ought to apply to succeeding generations as well as to the earliest Christians." (Inch, 258)

That piece of logic cannot support the idea that the events of Pentecost can happen again by itself, because there could have been, and probably were people of every generation there at that event. If this were the only time that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is recorded in the Bible then the evidence is inconclusive. However, this is not the case. In Acts 10, Peter was speaking to some Gentiles after a vision and being called to Cornelius' house, and in verses 44-46 what is sometimes referred to as the Gentile Pentecost is recorded. They also spoke in other tongues, and praised God. The terminology used is this: "the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles," the same wording as in Acts 2. It is interesting to note here that this baptism happened before they were baptized in water.

And yet another incident such as the one in Acts 10 is recorded in Acts 19, when Paul was in Ephesus. He encountered some disciples who had received John's baptism. Paul explained to them the purpose of that baptism, then baptized them into the name of Jesus. Verse six says, "When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied." At this event, there were about a dozen men there.

So this kind of event is recorded three times in Acts, once in Jerusalem, with Jews; once in a house, with Gentiles; and once in Ephesus (with no reference to being inside) with some disciples. In each incident the people who were filled with the Holy Spirit had different backgrounds, different races, some were baptized, others weren't. So it seems that there are no prerequisites as to who can receive this, only that they believe in Jesus. And with the promise in Joel being directed to several generations, it seems extremely unlikely that this was limited to these three events. Therefore, the possibility does, then, exist for this kind of event to happen again, even in our day.

This argument is not a deductive argument, meaning that it the premises do not necessitate this conclusion beyond all doubts, but an inductive argument, that seeks to give the most assurance possible. To fully, deductively prove this issue either way is not possible, and will not be possible until we are in heaven. Then we can ask God. But for now, this will suffice. More important than arguing the reality of this experience is understanding what it is all about. This is the quest that the rest of this paper will attempt to aid.

What is the baptism of the Holy Spirit? What are its signs, effects, and results? How can one tell the real from the counterfeit? These are some common questions dealing with the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and they do have answers.

I've heard it said that when someone is saved the Holy Spirit takes residence, and that the change that comes with the baptism of the Holy Spirit is that the Holy Spirit takes presidency. Now a theology should not be based on statements such as these, but the analogy works to the extent that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is the infilling of a person with the power and the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and more importantly, the Holy Spirit himself.

The analogy of baptism in general is one of death of an old nature, and the birth of a new one. So with "the baptism of fire" (another Scriptural term referring to the baptism of the Holy Spirit), a new nature of power and the ability to witness is brought forth. This is not to say that those who are not baptized in the Holy Spirit cannot witness, but that those who are have been indued with a power to witness, as Christ promised in Acts 1:8. Fire is a symbol of purification, power, and light.

The purification aspect of the baptism of fire is explained in depth by the Wesleyan doctrine of entire sanctification. That term and the baptism of the Holy Spirit are considered (rightly) by many to be synonymous. However, there is a distinction, because what is described by the doctrine of entire sanctification is the effect that this baptism should have on a person's life. Living upright is a necessity to being a witness, and both are referred to as a sort of second blessing. At the beginning of the Pentecostal movement at the start of the century this was not the case.

"Because of their Wesleyan holiness background, they were teaching that it was necessary to receive a sanctification experience first, as a preparation for receiving the baptism in the Holy Spirit. Sanctification, they said, was 'a second definite work of grace' that would cleanse believers from 'inbred sin' and make them a clean vessel for the Holy Spirit to fill" (Dieter et al., 106).

However, later on, there was a divergence between those who believed sanctification to be a prerequisite to Spirit-baptism and those who didn't. The Assemblies of God has taken the view that it is not necessary as a prerequisite, and is the largest group to take that stand. They still believe in entire sanctification though, as it is rendered in their ninth point out of sixteen in their "Statement of Fundamental Truths" (Dieter, 112).

In this book, Five Views of Sanctification, Melvin E. Dieter responds to Stanley Horton's Pentecostal view of sanctification:

"Horton and all Pentecostals continue to remind the whole church powerfully--especially the Wesleyan holiness movement--that both the gifts and the fruits of the Spirit are essential to the edification and witness of the church... The founding Pentecostal leaders rightly challenged the holiness movement not to be so concerned with the interior life of purity that they lost the dynamic witness in the Spirit, which only the ministry of the gifts in love could provide" (Dieter, 138).

So what is the purpose of the baptism of the Holy Spirit? As Dieter said, the holiness movement is in fact incomplete if it has no outlet, and this happens through the gifts that are activated by the baptism of the Holy Spirit. In talking about the church after the New Testament age, Morris A. Inch states,

"There were other precursors, such as the Quaker focus on inner light and the Holiness emphasis on sanctification. But these stopped short of the needed renewal. The revivalists also stirred people to appreciate the need for power from 'on high' for effective evangelism. Williams concludes that the Pentecostal movement added the notion of enduement with power to the emerging streams of holiness and revivalism. It was a fuller recovery of the primitive dynamic of the Holy Spirit with empowering the people of God for their calling" (Inch, 259).

So the purpose of the Spirit-baptism is, therefore, the enduement of power from God to accomplish the task to which He has called us. This is stated by Christ in Acts 1:8, immediately following the promise of being baptized with the Holy Spirit. The purpose in this verse seems to be evangelism. And it is, but there is more. The verse says that the disciples will be Christ's witnesses in all the nations, and just as much as evangelism is intended there, so is discipleship, because we are witnesses through our character, and our testimony of our own experience with God. The best sermon is a good example.

In all this, the emphasis is on the experience of true Christianity. The Bible predicted that in the last days some people would have "a form of godliness but denying its power" (NIV, 2 Tim.,3:5). This has happened in many Christian circles, some to a lesser extent than others, but the problem remains. We are asked this pertinent question by Peter E. Gilquist, which needs to be considered carefully:

"The Reformation pulled us out of the theological death of the Dark Ages. Doctrinally, some very crooked places were made straight. Could it be that the current work of the Holy Spirit will enhance the task of saving us from the experiential deadness of the Dark Ages--from which we never really emerged at Reformation time?" (Gilquist, 17).

The gifts of the Spirit, listed in 1 Corinthians 12, also focus on both of these objectives. The gifts of the Spirit are: a message of wisdom, a message of knowledge, faith, healing, miraculous powers, prophecy, distinguishing between spirits, speaking in tongues, and the interpretation of those tongues. All of these, in their own way, work in evangelism, discipleship, and these gifts work together, however they are not all for everyone, as different people have different gifts.

It is, in fact, unfortunate, that there has been so much division over the gift of speaking in tongues, but one must not be lead to believe that other gifts are accepted universally. Healings are often disputed, as well as prophecy and others. Many sincere believers have adopted a "theology of reaction", to use George Mallone's terminology in his book, Those Controversial Gifts. Personally, I have seen many comments by writers and commentators against the idea of a present-day Pentecost that use circular reasoning, multiple assumptions, and unusually bad exegesis.

"Nowhere in Scripture does it state that the gifts of the Spirit have ceased. Arguments which suggest that Scripture supports such a position are usually bad exegesis, a deduction from theology or an argument from the silence of Scripture. The 'perfect' of 1 Corinthians 13:10, for example, cannot be taken to mean canonized Scripture....The Greek word 'telios' simply means 'end', 'purpose' or 'completion'...[this] suggests that with the 'perfect' comes a full face-to-face encounter with Jesus Christ--at His second coming" (Mallone, 17-18).

I have never found a solid argument against the use of speaking in tongues, or healing, or any other of the gifts. I have seen troubles though, on the importance placed on some of these things. To the most extreme, I knew a girl who was ready to commit suicide because she had not received the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and specifically, the gift of speaking in tongues, which she had been praying for. This does not mean that the gift itself is wrong, as some would like to proclaim, but that there must be careful teaching as to the reality of these gifts.

These spiritual gifts, given by the same Spirit, the Holy Spirit, are a large part of how God equips us to do his work. "In these nine gifts the Holy Spirit divides omnipotence and omniscience into nine parts. Just as the one white light, falling upon a prism, is divided into the various colours of the spectrum so the manifestations of the Holy Spirit are divided into these nine glorious gifts" (Kingston, 9). In this book the gifts are divided into three categories: Gifts of inspired illumination, gifts of inspired power, and gifts of inspired utterance (Kingston, 10). Going back to Acts 1:8, the baptism of the Holy Spirit, whether called that or otherwise, is the prerequisite for these gifts.

I have seen people in tears at seeing fellow workers involved in the "charismata", saying over and over that, "My pastor told me this wasn't real." There comes a conflict when this kind of outside opinion is met with the reality of this kind of situation. Fortunately, in that experience there were people there who knew about the gifts of the Holy Spirit and were able to help explain some things to those who were distraut about this. But if there weren't? Confusion would've ensued, and the blame cannot be placed on the gifts themselves, because these were used for the furtherance of God's kingdom. An ignorance and unbased opinion denying the possibility of these gifts is dangerous, because it contradicts the Word of God, robbing it of its power. To quote all of 1 Tim. 3:5, "having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them." (NIV)

For sure, there are people now and have been many people in the past, who either abuse an existing gift or fake a gift. Tony Campolo, in his book, How to be Pentecostal Without Speaking in Tongues, gives some ways to spot the fakes. Among them are tests of their fruits, their motives, any price they would attach to the gift, and how scriptural their teaching is (or isn't). These methods can be used to test the spirits as some people would seek to use the Holy Spirit or the idea of the Holy Spirit and the gifts for personal profit.

Some people would use instances of counterfeit gifts to say that the gifts aren't real. This, also, is a fallacy in logic, because if there is a counterfeit, there must be by definition, a reality that the fake is "impersonating." In this case, the fake would be impersonating the Holy Spirit, a serious offense to Christians, the gospel, and to the Holy Spirit himself. If there is a real gift though, we should seek to find where it is being used correctly, with the right motivation and the right priorities in place. Ignoring the reality of a gift because other people fake it is in fact allowing those who fake the gift, and the evil spirits that inspire this kind of abuse, to rob us of a wonderful experience that is meant to bring us closer to God.

But no matter what your individual view is on the gifts of the Holy Spirit, the purpose of this experience is to grow in the grace of God. "The experience of the supernatural gifts of the Spirit tends to divide Christians into two groups...The message of the grace of God in the present tense, however, is for both" (Hession, 8). Whether it is growing in the gifts of the Spirit, or the fruits of the Spirit, or in purity, or holiness, or witness, or spiritual passion, the Holy Spirit is essential, not just as the catalyst, because a catalyst by definition only speeds up a reaction that would happen anyway, but as the source. And the deeper our relationship with the Spirit, the better.

No other project has sparked me such as this. After reading some parts of the books I used, I have felt the need, as should other believers, to know more about this subject, to read more and to experience all that God is offering through the baptism with fire. We can't forget, however, that there is a cost in this. The cost is our life. As the baptism image is one of death and rebirth, it is not, in a sense, our selves who are reborn, but Christ in us. We are not our own, as the Bible tells us. Selfish desires must be forsaken, so that we don't fall into the trap of trying to use the Holy Spirit's power for ourselves, whether for benefit in power, fame, money, or any other motive that focuses on ourselves. Simon the sorcerer tried to do this in Acts, and was rebuked as sternly as the Pharisees who are rebuked by Christ for not living out the law the way they should be. As in that case, we need to live out the gospel the way it is written, so as not to fall in the trap of ignoring a part of its teaching due to a lack of understanding on our part or because it doesn't fit into our worldview. Our worldview, as with other things from ourselves, needs to die and be replaced by God's worldview. The baptism of the Holy Spirit is a clear teaching of the Bible, that equips us for effective evangelism and a holy life.

Where there is misunderstanding or lack of understanding, we should seek enlightenment from God. Where there is confusion, we should seek clarification. Where there is bias and therefore bondage, we should seek freedom and therefore peace. Where there is emptiness, we should seek filling, and filling with the Holy Spirit, who will guide us into all truth, which is a gospel and a baptism that gives us the power to accomplish the works of God through illumination to the truth, with works to accompany us to reward faith, and using any way necessary to communicate this message that we have, a message of truth, of love, of life, and of power. "Be filled with the Spirit," as God says in Ephesians 5:18, so that we can live this life to the fullest, all for God's glory.