Recently I did some study on being baptized in the Holy Spirit, and here's what I found...
[Mat 3:11 NASB] 11 "As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
[Mar 1:8 NASB] 8 "I baptized you with water; but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit."
[Luk 3:16 NASB] 16 John answered and said to them all, "As for me, I baptize you with water; but One is coming who is mightier than I, and I am not fit to untie the thong of His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
[Jhn 1:26, 33 NASB] 26 John answered them saying, "I baptize in water, [but] among you stands One whom you do not know. ... 33 "I did not recognize Him, but He who sent me to baptize in water said to me, 'He upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining upon Him, this is the One who baptizes in the Holy Spirit.'
All four gospels show John saying this.
[Act 1:5 NASB] 5 for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now."
Jesus promises the baptism of the Holy Spirit, tying it to John’s baptism, as John did back in the day.
The HS isn’t explictly shown as given in this passage… but Peter says they will receive it when baptized..
[Act 8:12-13, 16 NASB] 12 But when they believed Philip preaching the good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were being baptized, men and women alike. 13 Even Simon himself believed; and after being baptized, he continued on with Philip, and as he observed signs and great miracles taking place, he was constantly amazed. ...
4 When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to Samaria. 15 When they arrived, they prayed for the new believers there that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 because the Holy Spirit had not yet come on any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.
They were baptized without being filled with the Holy Spirit. Baptism preceded the giving of the Holy Spirit in this case.
[Act 10:47 NASB] 47 "Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we [did,] can he?"
Gentiles baptized AFTER receiving the Holy Spirit - order apparently isn’t rigid… but it indicates, along with multiple other passages in Acts, that baptism was the normal thing when you come to faith in Jesus.
[Act 18:25 NASB] 25 This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in spirit, he was speaking and teaching accurately the things concerning Jesus, being acquainted only with the baptism of John;
Apollos gets baptized in the Holy Spirit, although he’s already a believer in Jesus
{Act 19:3-4 NASB] 3 And he said, "Into what then were you baptized?" And they said, "Into John's baptism." 4 Paul said, "John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in Him who was coming after him, that is, in Jesus."
Paul finds disciples of John in Ephesus, but they only knew John’s baptism. He fills them in, baptizes them in Jesus name, and lays his hands on them, and they’re filled with the Holy Spirit and speak in tongues.
Baptism in the Holy Spirit is of course a controversial subject in the church. Some folks think God doesn’t speak anymore, doesn’t heal anymore, and that the Holy Spirit is really an upgrade to your conscience.
Some believe there’s a “second work of grace” needed, (the first work of grace being justification by faith after profession and/or baptism in water). They identify baptism in the Holy Spirit as the means by which the believer is empowered for service.
Some go so far as to say that tongues is required as proof or evidence of your baptism in the Holy Spirit.
In reading what the scriptures say about baptism in the Holy Spirit, a few important points stand out to me:
John’s clear message as the forerunner of Jesus was that he was preparing the way for the one who would baptize in the Holy Spirit. This is stated in all 4 gospels, and is a key fact in the understanding of what Jesus came to do.
These two mandates - revealing the kingdom, and baptism in the Holy Spirit, are the summary, thesis statement, and key descriptors of Jesus’ ministry. His death on the cross, while absolutely and eternally central, is the beginning of the story, not the culmination. The Cross provides the mechanism by which we access the main event, which is the Kingdom and the indwelling Spirit.
The samaritan believers had been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus, but had not received the Spirit. (what that means, and whether Holy Spirit indwelt them without them having ‘received’ Him, is a matter that could be debated)
Apollos was also missing a key element, although “he was speaking and teaching accurately the things concerning Jesus, though he knew only the baptism of John”.
Aquilla and Priscilla explained the way of God “more adequately” to Apollos, but the story doesn’t detail what that means, beyond that he only knew the baptism of John. The next story in Acts 19:1-7 provides a parallel narrative that might imply what Priscilla and Aquilla made clear to him, as Paul encounters the same circumstance with disciples in Ephesus.
There he found some disciples and asked them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”
They answered, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.”
So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?”
“John’s baptism,” they replied.
Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. There were about twelve men in all.Why would Paul ask that? “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed”?
These two stories point to the possibility that a person can repent and believe but still not be fully baptized in the Holy Spirit. The question remains what the difference is between these two baptisms, both of which are scriptural and necessary.
“When all the people and the tax collectors heard [this,] they acknowledged God's justice, having been baptized with the baptism of John. 30 But the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected God's purpose for themselves, not having been baptized by John.”
Verse 30 is heavy - the pharisees ‘rejected God’s purpose for themselves’ when they rejected John’s baptism.
John himself says that he’s not worthy even to untie Jesus’ sandals, and that “He who comes after me is greater than me, because he was before me”. What then, if we reject the baptism offered by one greater than John?
But there are these strange cases in Acts where people are called believers, whom have been baptized for repentance of their sins, and also have not received the Holy Spirit. In two of those three cases, laying on of hands released the Holy Spirit to them. One of those times, the recipients are said to speak in tongues and prophesy.
Rather than formalize a doctrine that says “every believer has the Holy Spirit at the time of their confession of faith (or their baptism, depending on how strict we are about that)” I’d rather take the testimony of scripture in both aspects as equally true.
It seems like legitimate faith in Jesus means you have the Holy Spirit in you. The Holy Spirit is the medium through which you are made alive in Christ, through which the regeneration of your spirit happens, how eternal life is conferred through justification by faith, and the Holy Spirit enables you to bear fruit, live the christian life, etc.
But scripture clearly shows an event, separate from confession of faith or baptism, which baptizes the believer with the Holy Spirit.
Possibly the ‘normal case’ is that the Baptism of the Spirit be matched up with the baptism that confesses your repentance and the Lordship of Jesus in your life. But scripture clearly shows a wide range of other experiences where people did those things in different orders and at different times.
My big scriptural takeaway from these stories in the book of Acts is “Everyone needs to be baptized with the Holy Spirit”, and it doesn’t really matter in what order it happens.
If you have believed in Jesus, then all the scriptures that describe the indwelling of the Holy Spirit are true, and their reality is available to you.
Apparently, it's also true that you could be an earnest believer in Jesus, and not be filled with the Spirit.
So: if you sense that anything is missing… if the promises offered to you as a believer don’t seem real in your life… if you feel like you lack the promised power ‘for life and godliness’, or even if you just can’t definitively say that you’ve had the experience of being baptized in the Holy Spirit, you should get someone to lay hands on you and ask God to baptize you in the Holy Spirit, and see what happens.
As discussed above, scripture clearly shows an event, sometimes conjoined with the baptism of repentance, sometimes separate from it, which fills the believer with the Holy Spirit.
That event is sometimes described as being accompanied by supernatural gifts like tong1ues and prophecy, but not every account contains that fact.
I think that means being filled with the Holy Spirit does not REQUIRE any evidence at all in the moment, but we should expect supernatural things to happen when we pray for the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
If nothing happens right away, the next thing to do is sleep on it and see if supernatural empowerment or gifts are emerging, including but not limited to
Emphasis on tongues as required evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit has its roots in the Pentecostal movement of the early 1900s, at Azuza Street in Los Angeles and other pentecostal revivals of the time.
1 Corinthians 12:4-11 says:
Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord. There are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons. But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.
For to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, and to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit; to another faith by the same Spirit, and to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, and to another the effecting of miracles, and to another prophecy, and to another the distinguishing of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, and to another the interpretation of tongues.
But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills
So God gives gifts by the Holy Spirit as he chooses - requiring tongues for all believers that are baptized in the Holy Spirit doesn’t seem consistent with that.
Historically, speaking in tongues was a mark of the way God moved during the pentecostal revival of the 20th century. That’s what he was doing at that time.
But that’s our tendency - God emphasizes a scriptural truth, like his sovereignty, or justification by faith, or God moves in a certain way, like with speaking in tongues, and we freeze right there. This is how denominations form, when people camp on the truth God revealed at a certain point in time and reject what God is doing when he begins to emphasize something else for the good of the Body. This is a pattern throughout history.
The desire to capture and codify what God is doing in any particular season is a very human tendency. Beyond that sinful tendency, it gives a foothold for the spirit of religion to choke out what God is doing next, to calcify it and hinder the next movement that God wants to bring forth.
In that sense, I think the ‘evidence of speaking in tongues’ is an artifact of a move that happened 100 years ago, and represents an old religious wineskin that we can safely throw away, while honoring its place in our history.
Further, insisting on the “baptism of the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues” takes that one gift and elevates it to a place higher than Paul gave it when encouraging the Corinthians to seek the ‘greater gifts’.
It can also be damaging to the faith of the person who doesn’t speak in tongues, to be told that they’re not filled with the Holy Spirit if they don’t. This leads to a ‘have-not’ or ‘second-class’ syndrome that can be very difficult for people to break out of.
Instead, I suggest that when we ask the Lord to fill a person with the Holy Spirit, we use that opportunity to exercise our own gifts as we lay hands on them, and then expect in faith that when we ask for a good gift from the Father, they will receive the Holy Spirit (Luke 11:13). Then we get to watch and see the uniqueness of that expression in that specific person at that moment, and over time.
John proclaims that Jesus is coming after him, and will baptize in the Holy Spirit
[Mat 3:11 NASB] 11 "As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
[Mar 1:8 NASB] 8 "I baptized you with water; but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit."
[Luk 3:16 NASB] 16 John answered and said to them all, "As for me, I baptize you with water; but One is coming who is mightier than I, and I am not fit to untie the thong of His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
[Jhn 1:26, 33 NASB] 26 John answered them saying, "I baptize in water, [but] among you stands One whom you do not know. ... 33 "I did not recognize Him, but He who sent me to baptize in water said to me, 'He upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining upon Him, this is the One who baptizes in the Holy Spirit.'
All four gospels show John saying this.
[Act 1:5 NASB] 5 for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now."
Jesus promises the baptism of the Holy Spirit, tying it to John’s baptism, as John did back in the day.
Examples of baptism in the Holy Spirit
[Act 2:38, 41 NASB] 38 Peter [said] to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. ... 41 So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about three thousand souls.The HS isn’t explictly shown as given in this passage… but Peter says they will receive it when baptized..
[Act 8:12-13, 16 NASB] 12 But when they believed Philip preaching the good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were being baptized, men and women alike. 13 Even Simon himself believed; and after being baptized, he continued on with Philip, and as he observed signs and great miracles taking place, he was constantly amazed. ...
4 When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to Samaria. 15 When they arrived, they prayed for the new believers there that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 because the Holy Spirit had not yet come on any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.
They were baptized without being filled with the Holy Spirit. Baptism preceded the giving of the Holy Spirit in this case.
[Act 10:47 NASB] 47 "Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we [did,] can he?"
Gentiles baptized AFTER receiving the Holy Spirit - order apparently isn’t rigid… but it indicates, along with multiple other passages in Acts, that baptism was the normal thing when you come to faith in Jesus.
[Act 18:25 NASB] 25 This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in spirit, he was speaking and teaching accurately the things concerning Jesus, being acquainted only with the baptism of John;
Apollos gets baptized in the Holy Spirit, although he’s already a believer in Jesus
{Act 19:3-4 NASB] 3 And he said, "Into what then were you baptized?" And they said, "Into John's baptism." 4 Paul said, "John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in Him who was coming after him, that is, in Jesus."
Paul finds disciples of John in Ephesus, but they only knew John’s baptism. He fills them in, baptizes them in Jesus name, and lays his hands on them, and they’re filled with the Holy Spirit and speak in tongues.
Darren’s Thoughts
Baptism in the Holy Spirit is of course a controversial subject in the church. Some folks think God doesn’t speak anymore, doesn’t heal anymore, and that the Holy Spirit is really an upgrade to your conscience.
Some believe there’s a “second work of grace” needed, (the first work of grace being justification by faith after profession and/or baptism in water). They identify baptism in the Holy Spirit as the means by which the believer is empowered for service.
Some go so far as to say that tongues is required as proof or evidence of your baptism in the Holy Spirit.
In reading what the scriptures say about baptism in the Holy Spirit, a few important points stand out to me:
Baptism in the Holy Spirit was one of two key mandates of Jesus’ earthly ministry
Both Jesus and John came preaching ‘Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near’. John’s ministry focused on repentance, stated publicly through baptism in water as a demonstration of submission to God and cleansing.John’s clear message as the forerunner of Jesus was that he was preparing the way for the one who would baptize in the Holy Spirit. This is stated in all 4 gospels, and is a key fact in the understanding of what Jesus came to do.
These two mandates - revealing the kingdom, and baptism in the Holy Spirit, are the summary, thesis statement, and key descriptors of Jesus’ ministry. His death on the cross, while absolutely and eternally central, is the beginning of the story, not the culmination. The Cross provides the mechanism by which we access the main event, which is the Kingdom and the indwelling Spirit.
Baptism in the Holy Spirit is an event that should happen for every believer
The stories of Peter and John in Samaria (Acts 8), and of Apollos and the Ephesian disciples (Acts 18 and 19) make it clear that being baptized in water is not the end of the story.The samaritan believers had been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus, but had not received the Spirit. (what that means, and whether Holy Spirit indwelt them without them having ‘received’ Him, is a matter that could be debated)
Apollos was also missing a key element, although “he was speaking and teaching accurately the things concerning Jesus, though he knew only the baptism of John”.
Aquilla and Priscilla explained the way of God “more adequately” to Apollos, but the story doesn’t detail what that means, beyond that he only knew the baptism of John. The next story in Acts 19:1-7 provides a parallel narrative that might imply what Priscilla and Aquilla made clear to him, as Paul encounters the same circumstance with disciples in Ephesus.
There he found some disciples and asked them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”
They answered, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.”
So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?”
“John’s baptism,” they replied.
Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. There were about twelve men in all.Why would Paul ask that? “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed”?
These two stories point to the possibility that a person can repent and believe but still not be fully baptized in the Holy Spirit. The question remains what the difference is between these two baptisms, both of which are scriptural and necessary.
Rejecting the baptism of the Holy Spirit
Jesus, speaking to the crowds about John, told them John was the greatest person ever to live, prior to the advent of the kingdom. Luke 7:29-30 says:“When all the people and the tax collectors heard [this,] they acknowledged God's justice, having been baptized with the baptism of John. 30 But the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected God's purpose for themselves, not having been baptized by John.”
Verse 30 is heavy - the pharisees ‘rejected God’s purpose for themselves’ when they rejected John’s baptism.
John himself says that he’s not worthy even to untie Jesus’ sandals, and that “He who comes after me is greater than me, because he was before me”. What then, if we reject the baptism offered by one greater than John?
Does the Holy Spirit live in every believer, regardless of the baptism of the Holy Spirit?
Of course - scripture after scripture tells us that Holy Spirit is given after baptism, that we are baptized into one spirit, that we have everything we need for life and godliness…But there are these strange cases in Acts where people are called believers, whom have been baptized for repentance of their sins, and also have not received the Holy Spirit. In two of those three cases, laying on of hands released the Holy Spirit to them. One of those times, the recipients are said to speak in tongues and prophesy.
Rather than formalize a doctrine that says “every believer has the Holy Spirit at the time of their confession of faith (or their baptism, depending on how strict we are about that)” I’d rather take the testimony of scripture in both aspects as equally true.
It seems like legitimate faith in Jesus means you have the Holy Spirit in you. The Holy Spirit is the medium through which you are made alive in Christ, through which the regeneration of your spirit happens, how eternal life is conferred through justification by faith, and the Holy Spirit enables you to bear fruit, live the christian life, etc.
But scripture clearly shows an event, separate from confession of faith or baptism, which baptizes the believer with the Holy Spirit.
Possibly the ‘normal case’ is that the Baptism of the Spirit be matched up with the baptism that confesses your repentance and the Lordship of Jesus in your life. But scripture clearly shows a wide range of other experiences where people did those things in different orders and at different times.
My big scriptural takeaway from these stories in the book of Acts is “Everyone needs to be baptized with the Holy Spirit”, and it doesn’t really matter in what order it happens.
If you have believed in Jesus, then all the scriptures that describe the indwelling of the Holy Spirit are true, and their reality is available to you.
Apparently, it's also true that you could be an earnest believer in Jesus, and not be filled with the Spirit.
So: if you sense that anything is missing… if the promises offered to you as a believer don’t seem real in your life… if you feel like you lack the promised power ‘for life and godliness’, or even if you just can’t definitively say that you’ve had the experience of being baptized in the Holy Spirit, you should get someone to lay hands on you and ask God to baptize you in the Holy Spirit, and see what happens.
So what does Baptism in the Holy Spirit look like? What should I expect? Do I have to speak in tongues?
As discussed above, scripture clearly shows an event, sometimes conjoined with the baptism of repentance, sometimes separate from it, which fills the believer with the Holy Spirit.
That event is sometimes described as being accompanied by supernatural gifts like tong1ues and prophecy, but not every account contains that fact.
I think that means being filled with the Holy Spirit does not REQUIRE any evidence at all in the moment, but we should expect supernatural things to happen when we pray for the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
If nothing happens right away, the next thing to do is sleep on it and see if supernatural empowerment or gifts are emerging, including but not limited to
- the 1 Corinthians 12:8-10 gifts of the Holy Spirit (healing, prophecy, tongues, interpretation, etc),
- the gifts in 1 Corinthians 12:28, including apostolic, prophetic, helps, administrative, etc
- demonstrable increase of the fruit of the spirit in your life (Galatians 5)
- Conviction of sin (John 16:8-11)
- Supernatural understanding (John 14:26, 16:13, 17:17 your word)
- Comfort (freedom from anxiety) us - advocate, (John 14:16)
- Greater revelation of who Jesus is (John 14:26, 17:6)
- Reminding us of everything Jesus spoke (14:26)
- Bringing Jesus glory (John 16:14)
- Supernatural protection, especially leading to unity with God and other believers “now protect them by the power of your name so that they will be united just as we are.” John 17:11b
- Greater holiness (John 17:17) Make them holy by your truth
- Unity with other believers and with God. (John 17:22,23)
- Any of the manifestations of the Holy Spirit’s personality and work.
- Boldness to witness and endure persecution (Acts 4:29-31)
If those things are in evidence as a result of the laying on of hands, then that person is full of the Spirit of God
What about “The Evidence of Speaking in Tongues”
Certain charismatic traditions (denominational and non-denominational) insist that anyone who gets baptized in the Holy Spirit has to speak in tongues. I think that’s an error. Here’s why:Emphasis on tongues as required evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit has its roots in the Pentecostal movement of the early 1900s, at Azuza Street in Los Angeles and other pentecostal revivals of the time.
1 Corinthians 12:4-11 says:
Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord. There are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons. But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.
For to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, and to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit; to another faith by the same Spirit, and to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, and to another the effecting of miracles, and to another prophecy, and to another the distinguishing of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, and to another the interpretation of tongues.
But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills
So God gives gifts by the Holy Spirit as he chooses - requiring tongues for all believers that are baptized in the Holy Spirit doesn’t seem consistent with that.
Historically, speaking in tongues was a mark of the way God moved during the pentecostal revival of the 20th century. That’s what he was doing at that time.
Camping on the mount of transfiguration
However, standing still at that point and expecting that God will never use another method is the equivalent of Peter suggesting that they build a tent on the mount of transfiguration. (Matthew 17) Camping there would have prevented them from moving forward to the cross, and everything that came after.But that’s our tendency - God emphasizes a scriptural truth, like his sovereignty, or justification by faith, or God moves in a certain way, like with speaking in tongues, and we freeze right there. This is how denominations form, when people camp on the truth God revealed at a certain point in time and reject what God is doing when he begins to emphasize something else for the good of the Body. This is a pattern throughout history.
The desire to capture and codify what God is doing in any particular season is a very human tendency. Beyond that sinful tendency, it gives a foothold for the spirit of religion to choke out what God is doing next, to calcify it and hinder the next movement that God wants to bring forth.
In that sense, I think the ‘evidence of speaking in tongues’ is an artifact of a move that happened 100 years ago, and represents an old religious wineskin that we can safely throw away, while honoring its place in our history.
Further, insisting on the “baptism of the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues” takes that one gift and elevates it to a place higher than Paul gave it when encouraging the Corinthians to seek the ‘greater gifts’.
It can also be damaging to the faith of the person who doesn’t speak in tongues, to be told that they’re not filled with the Holy Spirit if they don’t. This leads to a ‘have-not’ or ‘second-class’ syndrome that can be very difficult for people to break out of.
Instead, I suggest that when we ask the Lord to fill a person with the Holy Spirit, we use that opportunity to exercise our own gifts as we lay hands on them, and then expect in faith that when we ask for a good gift from the Father, they will receive the Holy Spirit (Luke 11:13). Then we get to watch and see the uniqueness of that expression in that specific person at that moment, and over time.
Comments
A few more things to add some more context.
- it seems that even being able to say Jesus is Lord is a work of the Spirit, and so at some level it will be working on someone's heart before baptism. (1 Corinthians 12:3)
- Jesus' disciples were baptizing people, apparently at his direction (John 3:22)
- Looking at the work of God's Spirit in the OT can also bring clarity. For example, Exodus 31:1-6, giving some men exceptional skill at a certain craft. There are lots of ways that can be interpreted (was it an instantaneous zapping of knowledge, or like getting wisdom, a slower process of maturation that is no less a work of the Spirit?)
I do think it's important that, no matter what our interpretation of what the Spirit does in the current climate, that Christians are not functional materialists. God created all things and sustains all things, and there is so much we don't understand, and we shouldn't pretend to. Wierd things happen.
Definitely agree - God is the author of the whole subject, and we only know what he's revealed in scripture, which we partially understand, and what we experience, which is also only partly knowable. In my studying of scripture I want to leave room for that uncertainty, and for God to change my understanding over time as I walk with Him.
With a couple of days since I posted it, I've got a few updates I want to make which would make this more of a post and less a bunch of notes with some commentary. I'll include your references there.
For instance I think that reordering the content I've posted to lead with "defining the baptism of the Holy Spirit", what it is and isn't would probably set the stage better... Your points about OT and Pre-salvation working of the Holy Spirit (HS acting externally, as opposed to the indwelling HS, and the nuance between the HS living in you and being baptized in the HS is perhaps worth discussing... )
Also, noting that the disciples baptized in water both under Jesus' supervision and continually after his ascension are all important bits that round out the picture. Both John's baptism of repentance and the baptism in the Holy Spirit that Jesus brought were necessary and expected in the book of Acts.
Thanks again for the input!