Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Defending the faith: A discussion of Catholic Doctrine

Word play.
I read of Pentecost. There "baptism" was not with water.
John answered them all, “I baptize you with water. But one who is more powerful than I will come, the straps of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

Not word play.

Scripture does not say baptism with the Holy Spirit.
If you want to interpret Acts 1:4-5 and Mk 1:8 to mean there is such a thing as baptism with the Holy Spirit then that is your personal interpretation; not what is in the Bible.
It's a man made term not scripture.
 
Not word play.

Scripture does not say baptism with the Holy Spirit.
If you want to interpret Acts 1:4-5 and Mk 1:8 to mean there is such a thing as baptism with the Holy Spirit then that is your personal interpretation; not what is in the Bible.
It's a man made term not scripture.
Scripture states Jesus baptizes with the Holy Spirit. What would you like to call that baptism?

Jesus tied the Fathers promise to His statement of being baptized with the Holy Spirit. So its put together by the Lord. Elsewhere Jesus spoke of what we tend to believe of that promise as being born from above or born of the Spirit as in born of God.

And while staying with them he charged them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, ‘You heard from me, for John baptized with water, but before many days you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’

Fathers promise
In the last days I will "pour" out my Spirit.....
 
Last edited:
The term baptism with the Holy Spirit is NOT in scripture.
Baptism with the Holy Spirit is NOT biblical.

Your denial of truth is blatant.
If the term baptism with the Holy Spirit were in the Bible you could quote me chapter and verse - but you can't.
You have interpreted Acts 1:4-5 and Mk 1:8 to mean there is such a thing as baptism with the Holy Spirit.
But that is your personal interpretation; not what is in the Bible.
It's a man made term not scripture.



The two quotes you give do not say baptism with the Holy Spirit.

for John truly baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.” Acts 1:5

What would you call being baptized with the Holy Spirit?

Christians are to be baptized with the Holy Spirit, as well as be baptized in water.



JLB
 
Scripture states Jesus baptizes with the Holy Spirit. What would you like to call that baptism?

Jesus tied the Fathers promise to His statement of being baptized with the Holy Spirit. So its put together by the Lord. Elsewhere Jesus spoke of what we tend to believe of that promise as being born from above or born of the Spirit as in born of God.

And while staying with them he charged them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, ‘You heard from me, for John baptized with water, but before many days you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’

Fathers promise
In the last days I will "pour" out my Spirit.....

for John truly baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.Acts 1:5

What would you call being baptized with the Holy Spirit?

Christians are to be baptized with the Holy Spirit, as well as be baptized in water.

I believe that being "baptised with the Holy Spirit" was not intended to be taken by literlly JtB or Jesus.

It is a figure of speech - a metaphor
metaphor
n noun a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable.

It was used by JtB and Jesus to indicate some new experience, which those addressed had not had before, relating it to something they had experienced (being baptised in water).

You cannot call it being literally baptised and cannot translate it into a noun form.

In Luke 's gospel Jesus used another metaphor to indicate the same (Pentecost) experience to the apostles.
And behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you; but stay in the city, until you are clothed with power from on high. (Lk 24:49)

They were not literally going to be clothed. And translating that into a noun form - power clothes - make even less sense.

Do we ask "have you received your power clothes yet?"
I started a thread on this (Power Clothes) but only one person responded - and that with an irrelevant comment.
Yet it had 141 views.

We are familiar with metaphors - Jesus is a door (John 10:7) but we don't think he is literally a door with a handle and hinges.

Protestants claim that they are sola scriptura - scripture alone.
But this shows they are not.
They are scripture + personal interpretation.
Of course claims are made that their interpretation is infallible - based on 1 John 2:20-21. But that claim in itself is interpretation.

So what the apostles experienced at Pentecost (and others experienced later) was real, but not a baptism.
 
I believe that being "baptised with the Holy Spirit" was not intended to be taken by literlly JtB or Jesus.

It is a figure of speech - a metaphor
metaphor
n noun a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable.

It was used by JtB and Jesus to indicate some new experience, which those addressed had not had before, relating it to something they had experienced (being baptised in water).

You cannot call it being literally baptised and cannot translate it into a noun form.

In Luke 's gospel Jesus used another metaphor to indicate the same (Pentecost) experience to the apostles.
And behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you; but stay in the city, until you are clothed with power from on high. (Lk 24:49)

They were not literally going to be clothed. And translating that into a noun form - power clothes - make even less sense.

Do we ask "have you received your power clothes yet?"
I started a thread on this (Power Clothes) but only one person responded - and that with an irrelevant comment.
Yet it had 141 views.

We are familiar with metaphors - Jesus is a door (John 10:7) but we don't think he is literally a door with a handle and hinges.

Protestants claim that they are sola scriptura - scripture alone.
But this shows they are not.
They are scripture + personal interpretation.
Of course claims are made that their interpretation is infallible - based on 1 John 2:20-21. But that claim in itself is interpretation.

So what the apostles experienced at Pentecost (and others experienced later) was real, but not a baptism.
Johns testimony is that he baptized with water but Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit.
I baptized you with water; but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.”

This is not a metaphor neither the water that John baptized with nor the Spirit that Jesus baptized with.
Jesus's language is cohesive with John's testimony. "baptize with"
And while staying with them he charged them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, ‘You heard from me, for John baptized with water, but before many days you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.

In considering John's and Jesus's testimony I disagree with you. But what's new.:)
 
Johns testimony is that he baptized with water but Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit.
I baptized you with water; but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.”

This is not a metaphor neither the water that John baptized with nor the Spirit that Jesus baptized with.
Jesus's language is cohesive with John's testimony. "baptize with"
And while staying with them he charged them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, ‘You heard from me, for John baptized with water, but before many days you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.

In considering John's and Jesus's testimony I disagree with you. But what's new.:)

On the contrary, it's exactly consistent with what I claimed.
I said "It was used by JtB and Jesus to indicate some new experience, which those addressed had not had before, relating it to something they had experienced (being baptised in water)."

First JtB & Jesus draw attention to that with which they were familiar "John baptized with water" then they moved to the something new which they had not experienced (the pouring out of the Holy Spirit) and described it in terms of a metaphor "you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit" relating to the being baptised with the water.

I note you have ignored the point I made about being "clothed with power" as a different metaphor and "power clothes".

And you ignore the point that moving from being baptised with the Holy Spirit (a verb and scriptural) to baptism with the Holy Spirit ( a noun and not scriptural).
 
On the contrary, it's exactly consistent with what I claimed.
I said "It was used by JtB and Jesus to indicate some new experience, which those addressed had not had before, relating it to something they had experienced (being baptised in water)."

First JtB & Jesus draw attention to that with which they were familiar "John baptized with water" then they moved to the something new which they had not experienced (the pouring out of the Holy Spirit) and described it in terms of a metaphor "you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit" relating to the being baptised with the water.

I note you have ignored the point I made about being "clothed with power" as a different metaphor and "power clothes".

And you ignore the point that moving from being baptised with the Holy Spirit (a verb and scriptural) to baptism with the Holy Spirit ( a noun and not scriptural).
Isn't baptized with water a baptism at the hands of men? Likewise baptized with the Holy Spirit is a baptism from God.
Peter explains to the circumcised believers in regard to Cornelius.
“As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them as he had come on us at the beginning. 16 Then I remembered what the Lord had said: ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ 17 So if God gave them the same gift he gave us who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to think that I could stand in God’s way?
 
On the contrary, it's exactly consistent with what I claimed.
I said "It was used by JtB and Jesus to indicate some new experience, which those addressed had not had before, relating it to something they had experienced (being baptised in water)."

First JtB & Jesus draw attention to that with which they were familiar "John baptized with water" then they moved to the something new which they had not experienced (the pouring out of the Holy Spirit) and described it in terms of a metaphor "you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit" relating to the being baptised with the water.

I note you have ignored the point I made about being "clothed with power" as a different metaphor and "power clothes".

And you ignore the point that moving from being baptised with the Holy Spirit (a verb and scriptural) to baptism with the Holy Spirit ( a noun and not scriptural).
What's the difference in your last paragraph?
Aren't both baptisms WITH the Holy Spirit?
This means when the Holy Spirit is received.
Exactly what the CC teaches.
 
Jesus was speaking to John, the Apostle.
He was not a brother of Jesus.
I don't see where the account says that the disciple was someone named John, much less an apostle. But even if it was John the apostle what is there in scripture which absolutely prevents him from being a brother of the Messiah?
 
Last edited:
I believe that being "baptised with the Holy Spirit" was not intended to be taken by literlly JtB or Jesus.

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 1:4-5

We all see from scripture that all 120 disciples were indeed baptized with the Holy Spirit, and spoke in tongues on the day of Pentecost, LITERALLY!

It's called the Promise of the Father. It's a LITERAL PROMISE from God the Father.


When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. Then there appeared to them divided tongues, as of fire, and one sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
Acts 2:1-4


This literally happened on the day of Pentecost and continued to happen afterward.


While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word. And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God. Then Peter answered, “Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days. Acts 10:44-48

again


And it happened, while Apollos was at Corinth, that Paul, having passed through the upper regions, came to Ephesus. And finding some disciples he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” So they said to him, “We have not so much as heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.” And he said to them, “Into what then were you baptized?” So they said, “Into John’s baptism.” Then Paul said, “John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on Him who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.” When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied.
Acts 19:1-6

The baptism with the Spirit is literal and has literal evidence with is speaking in tongues.



JLB
 
What's the difference in your last paragraph?
Aren't both baptisms WITH the Holy Spirit?
This means when the Holy Spirit is received.
Exactly what the CC teaches.

No. There are not both baptisms because there is only one baptism - with water.
The term baptism with the Holy Spirit is a man made term. It does not exist in scripture. It was not used by the early fathers and, as far as I know, it was never used until the late 19th century at the start of the Pentecostal movement.

Hve you read my post #684 ?
 
Isn't baptized with water a baptism at the hands of men? Likewise baptized with the Holy Spirit is a baptism from God.
Peter explains to the circumcised believers in regard to Cornelius.
“As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them as he had come on us at the beginning. 16 Then I remembered what the Lord had said: ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ 17 So if God gave them the same gift he gave us who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to think that I could stand in God’s way?
No, baptism with the Holy Spirit is not a baptism as I have already explained.
 
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 1:4-5

We all see from scripture that all 120 disciples were indeed baptized with the Holy Spirit, and spoke in tongues on the day of Pentecost, LITERALLY!

It's called the Promise of the Father. It's a LITERAL PROMISE from God the Father.


When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. Then there appeared to them divided tongues, as of fire, and one sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
Acts 2:1-4


This literally happened on the day of Pentecost and continued to happen afterward.


While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word. And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God. Then Peter answered, “Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days. Acts 10:44-48

again


And it happened, while Apollos was at Corinth, that Paul, having passed through the upper regions, came to Ephesus. And finding some disciples he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” So they said to him, “We have not so much as heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.” And he said to them, “Into what then were you baptized?” So they said, “Into John’s baptism.” Then Paul said, “John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on Him who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.” When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied.
Acts 19:1-6

The baptism with the Spirit is literal and has literal evidence with is speaking in tongues.



JLB

At Pentecost and, at Cornelius' house God poured out his Spirit upon all mankind just as Joel prophesied. (and Peter quoted - Acts 2:16-18)
“And it shall come to pass afterward,
that I will pour out my spirit on all flesh;
your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
your old men shall dream dreams,
and your young men shall see visions.
Even upon the menservants and maidservants
in those days, I will pour out my spirit."

Joel 2:27-29

And he poured out his Spirit in Acts 19 but that is not a baptism. Scripture never calls it a baptism.
As I have already said "So what the apostles experienced at Pentecost (and others experienced later) was real, but not a baptism."

Since you seem not to have red post #684, here it is again.
I believe that being "baptised with the Holy Spirit" was not intended to be taken by literlly JtB or Jesus.

It is a figure of speech - a metaphor
metaphor
n noun a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable.

It was used by JtB and Jesus to indicate some new experience, which those addressed had not had before, relating it to something they had experienced (being baptised in water).

You cannot call it being literally baptised and cannot translate it into a noun form.

In Luke 's gospel Jesus used another metaphor to indicate the same (Pentecost) experience to the apostles.
And behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you; but stay in the city, until you are clothed with power from on high. (Lk 24:49)

They were not literally going to be clothed. And translating that into a noun form - power clothes - make even less sense.

Do we ask "have you received your power clothes yet?"
I started a thread on this (Power Clothes) but only one person responded - and that with an irrelevant comment.
Yet it had 141 views.

We are familiar with metaphors - Jesus is a door (John 10:7) but we don't think he is literally a door with a handle and hinges.

Protestants claim that they are sola scriptura - scripture alone.
But this shows they are not.
They are scripture + personal interpretation.
Of course claims are made that their interpretation is infallible - based on 1 John 2:20-21. But that claim in itself is interpretation.

So what the apostles experienced at Pentecost (and others experienced later) was real, but not a baptism.
 
No. There are not both baptisms because there is only one baptism - with water.
The term baptism with the Holy Spirit is a man made term. It does not exist in scripture. It was not used by the early fathers and, as far as I know, it was never used until the late 19th century at the start of the Pentecostal movement.

Hve you read my post #684 ?
I just read your post no. 684.
I also have never read any of the ECFs mention baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Sorry if I already asked this Mungo,
but what did JtB mean when he said that he baptized with water for the forgiveness of sin,
but:
Matthew 3:11
“I baptize with water those who repent of their sins and turn to God. But someone is coming soon who is greater than I am—so much greater that I’m not worthy even to be his slave and carry his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.


It is commonly known that in the OT times the Holy Spirit did not inhabit man as He now does in New Testament times. Would you say this is the explanation?
 
I just read your post no. 684.
I also have never read any of the ECFs mention baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Sorry if I already asked this Mungo,
but what did JtB mean when he said that he baptized with water for the forgiveness of sin,
but:
Matthew 3:11
“I baptize with water those who repent of their sins and turn to God. But someone is coming soon who is greater than I am—so much greater that I’m not worthy even to be his slave and carry his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.


It is commonly known that in the OT times the Holy Spirit did not inhabit man as He now does in New Testament times. Would you say this is the explanation?

Let's go back to the Jewish origins of baptism. I got a lot of this information from Jewish sites.

The origins are the ritual purification of full body washing known in Hebrew as tevilah in a mikvah (ritual bath). Mikvah means a gathering of water and so a river is a mikvah. Since rivers were not commonly available it was any suitable pool of water, but not a free standing bath in the modern sense. It had to be dug into the ground, or built into the structure of a building and should contain rainwater with a minimum of 77 gallons. Bathing should be by total immersion and naked to ensure every part of the body was purified.

When the Jews and Evangelists wrote in Greek they avoided the Greek words for bathe and bath because of the sexual connotations. The Greek communal bathing was a place of gossip (often crude), communal nudity and homosexuality. So they used the word baptizo (and it’s derivatives) instead. The word therefore expresses this ritual purification in water. It is unnecessary to say “water baptism” as water was integral to the process, just as it was unnecessary to say a water mikvar or a water tevilah. That is what baptism was and is There was no “dry” baptism.

Scripture doesn’t need to explicitly mention water but in many cases where baptism is mentioned it does either directly or indirectly
For example Stephen baptises the Ethiopian in water in Acts 8:36-38. Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that he was doing the same when he baptised the Samaritans earlier in the chapter
Peter refers to the waters for baptising in Acts 10:47, and he refers to Noah and his family be saved through water and says This prefigured baptism (2Pet 3:21).
Paul also refers to his baptism when he quotes Ananias saying have yourself baptised and your sins washed away (Acts 22:16)

The origins of this purification ritual go back to the book off Leviticus. There seem to be three occasions where a mikvar is required in Leviticus, those involving birth (including sex and menstruation), death (including skin diseases) and coming into the presence of God. They seem to be a reminder of our uncleanness and the need for purification. So the tevilar/mikvar also became a symbol of repentance, of expressing faith that cleansing was available and of asking for it.

Hence John the Baptist baptised in the Jordan as a baptism of repentance.

Jesus took this Jewish ritual and made it a Christian one (Mt 28:19 and Mk 16:16) but making the effects more powerful because it is Jesus who is the prime baptiser.
We can see the three purposes I noted above in Christian baptism.

Birth – we are born from above (born again) in baptism (Jn 3:5)

Death – Paul compares baptism to dying with Christ and rising to new life. There are two connotations here because entering a mikvar involved physical descent and coming out a physical ascent (rising), something Paul would be very aware of. (Rom 6:3-4 and Col 2:11-12). When Jews became Christians the public and private mikvahs became used for baptism instead.

Coming into the presence of God and forgiveness of sin – In baptism we are made children of God and our sins are forgiven (1Cor 12:12-13, Coll 2:11-13, Acts 2:38 and Acts 22:16).

The Pharisees bathed daily for ritual cleansing and before entering the temple (coming into the presence of God). Excavations of the Temple Mount area have shown that there were 48 mikvahs for ritual bathing (hence why the apostles could baptise 3,000 at Pentecost).
I had a link to an article on this but, as so often happens, it no longer works.

But see: http://www.essene.com/B'nai-Amen/MysticalImmersion.htm

There are two more uses of the mikvah that have some parallels in Christianity.
Firstly, when a Rabbi took a student as his disciple the Rabbi supervised the student taking a mikvar in his name . Thus you became cleansed from your old life (born again) with your Rabbi as your spiritual father, and you were to believe and observe everything he taught you, and obey his commands. I had a link for this but that doesn't work now.

Thus in Christian baptism we become cleansed from our old life, with Jesus as our Rabbi, and we promise to believe and obey him. Also the reference to be baptised in the name of Jesus (Acts 8:16, Acts 10:48, Acts 19:5)

Secondly when a gentile became a Jew, he/she was taught the Jewish faith, and then with prayers took a mikvah, and men were circumcised. In Acts 15 circumcision was dispensed with. The mikvah was part of the initiation into Judaism just as baptism is a part of the initiation into Christianity.

As to what JtB meant in Mt 3:11, I offer this from Haydocks Catholic Bible Commentary:
He shall baptize you in, or with the Holy Ghost, i.e. by his baptism, he will give you the remission of your sins, and the graces of the Holy Ghost, signified also by fire, which may allude to the coming of the Holy Ghost at Pentecost, in the shape of fiery tongues.
It is in baptism (with water) that we receive the Holy Spirit internally - the sanctifying gifts (graces).
 
That's what every one does here. But at least I don't invent scripture.

Here are the words of Jesus.



for John truly baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.” Acts 1:5


Nothing invented.

Here is the literal fulfilment of His words.

When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. Then there appeared to them divided tongues, as of fire, and one sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
Acts 2:1-4


Just scripture.



JLB
 
Back
Top