I have decided to post some of my research papers online. They will be on topics that are interesting but are either too long or too tedious to make into a series of posts.
My first topic is on the Conistiutional Nature of Man. It was a research paper I wrote for my Systematic Theology class. You can either go to my Links section or click here to read it. Read More......
The omnipresence of God is an interesting topic of discussion. While most people take the expression "God is everywhere" as a good definition of the term, Michael Patton takes an entirely different approach. Here is what I believe to be a better definition of God’s omnipresence: “Everywhere is in God’s immediate presence.” I write this because I see many Christians describing God in such a way that toys with pantheism. God is present everywhere. One can be present in a room and not be in the walls, and I believe that this is the essence of omnipresence.God is omnipresent. But his omnipresence does not have to do with his extension in space but space’s relationship to him. God is not everywhere if you are talking about his essence.
I definitely agree with Michael that the "God is everywhere" statement is misleading to people. I believe though that his definition limits omnipresence. It would seem that such a statement is better described as omniscience than omnipresence. I believe that there is a better definition for omnipresence:
We have looked at many different views of Spirit baptism in this series. Today though, we will finally come to a biblical definition of Spirit baptism. The third view sees “en” as being interpreted in the same fashion as the prophetic passages of John. Therefore, “en” in I Corinthians 12:13 should be translated “in.” Gordon Fee in his book, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, states that nowhere else does this dative (en) when used with ‘baptizo’ imply agency, but it always refers to the element ‘in which’ one is being baptized (606). Thus the verse should be rendered, “in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body.” While at first this doesn’t seem to make sense, a closer examination reveals otherwise. In I Corinthians 10:2, we find that “all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.” Grudem explains that in this verse there are not two locations for the same baptism but one was the element (the cloud and the sea that surrounded the Israelites) and the other was the location (namely Moses which represents the new life of participation in the Mosaic covenant and the fellowship of God’s people) that the Israelites found themselves in after they had passed through the cloud and the sea (768). Spirit baptism operates in the same fashion. The Holy Spirit is the element that we are baptized in, and the body of Christ or the church is the location that we find ourselves in after this baptism. This is detrimental to those who hold to an experiential view of Spirit baptism. If it is admitted that I Corinthians 12:13 refers to baptism in the Spirit, then it is impossible to maintain that it is an experience that comes after conversion. In this verse, the apostle Paul states that Spirit baptism made us members in the body of Christ. Thus, Spirit baptism happens at conversion because if one is not in the body of Christ, one if not a Christian. According to Paul, Spirit baptism is universal and has happened to all believers so it is impossible to say that Spirit baptism occurs after salvation. There is consequently no need to seek Spirit baptism since it is universal and has happened to all believers. A strict definition therefore is that Spirit baptism refers to the time at salvation in which Christ baptizes us in the Holy Spirit, and all the ministries of the Holy Spirit begin (indwelling, sealing, etc...). Spirit baptism is a doctrine that affect ones views on soteriology, ecclesiology, pneumatology, and harmatiology. Because of this one can see that it is an important doctrine to clearly understand. While it is clear that Spirit baptism is not experiential, all vital experience flows from the realities which have been brought into being by the baptism in the Spirit. Bibliography Fee, Gordon D. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. NICNT. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1987 Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994 «« Previous Post: Are You "By" - Next Post »»
We finally come to our last passage. On this verse hangs the teaching of Spirit baptism. An individuals intrepretation will shape not only his view of Spirit baptism but all doctrines that are connected with the Holy Spirit. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. (1Co 12:13) The controversy in interpreting this verse centers around the preposition “en” and its translation. In the prophecies of John, found in the Gospels and Acts, the exact Greek phrase is used as found in I Corinthians 12:13. Three different views have been proposed for the translation of “en”. These views are not divided along experiential and non-experiential lines but purely exegetical lines. Grudem explains that Pentecostals are eager to accept this view since it throws out of consideration I Cor. 12:13 in the discussion on what is baptism in the Spirit (767). They state that in the other six verses Jesus is the one who baptizes people and Holy Spirit is the element whereas here in I Corinthians we have the Holy Spirit as the agent. Therefore, I Corinthians should not be taken in to account when discussion is centered on baptism in the Spirit. The problem with this view is that it really does not make sense when one examines the Greek text because the expressions are identical in the Gospels, Acts, and I Corinthians. If we translate this same Greek expression “baptize in the Holy Spirit” in the other six New Testament occurrences it only seems proper that we translate it in the seventh occurrence (Grudem, 767). Also, it seems hard to fathom that the original readers would not have seen this phrase as referring to anything but the same concept because the Greek words were the same. The last fallacy with this view is that it denies the fact that there is one baptism. There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism. (Eph 4:4-5) A strict interpretation of the preposition would lead to this locative idea (translated “in”). The same preposition though is used in the instrumental sense with sufficient frequency in Scripture to free the translator from any artificial interpretation (cf. Matt. 12:24; Lk. 22:49; Heb. 11:37)…It can be said, therefore, that we are baptized by Christ in the sense that Christ sent the Spirit. (147-148) This view has a major problem. In the Gospel passage, the thought is that just as John baptized in water so Christ will baptize in fire and the Holy Spirit. It is a direct parallelism that loses its meaning if changed. If one decides to translate “en” consistently in the Gospel verse, the result would be confusion. To baptize by water does not make sense. Water cannot become the agent. In the next post, we will see what is the proper way to interpret this passage. Bibliography Houghton, Myron. “Systematic Theology II Syllabus.” Course Handout. Systematic Theology II. Dep. of Systematic Theology, Faith Baptist Theological Seminary. 14 Jan. 2009 Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994 Walvoord, John J. The Holy Spirit. 3rd ed. Findlay, OH: Dunham Publishing, 1958.
Our last explicit passage is our main passage for interpreting the others. In I Corinthians 12, we find a straightforward verse detailing the doctrine of Spirit baptism.1.) The View that En is a Completely Unique Translation
The first view sees the “en” in I Corinthians as a completely unique translation. There are therefore two Spirit baptisms. One in which Christ is the agent (the Gospel passages) and the other in which the Holy Spirit is the agent (I Corinthians 12:13). Myron Houghton states that the baptism by the Spirit places believers into the church which is Christ’s body while the baptism in the Spirit occurs when Christ places the Spirit in us (131). Both baptisms occur simultaneously at salvation.2.) The View that En is Always Translated "by"
The second view sees “en” as being interpreted in the same fashion in all the Spirit baptism passage. The view proposes that “en” should be translated “by.” Walvoord, a proponent, comments on this view:
Christ had died. He later appeared to his disciples and told them they were to wait in Jerusalem for the baptism of the Spirit. At Pentecost, the Spirit came. What happened that day continues to affect the church. This is especially seen in the issue of Spirit baptism. As we continue our study, we will examine the passages in Acts that speak of or imply Spirit baptism. A general principle for hermeneutics is that unless Scripture explicitly tell us we must do something, what is only narrated or described does not function in a normative (obligatory) way – unless it can be demonstrated on other grounds that the author intended it to function in this way (Fee and Stuart, 119). This is important because narrative passages should never be used to interpret explicit doctrinal passages or be used for doctrine. Almost exclusively, narrative passages should be used to illustrate or apply truth not to reveal it. In Acts, we find that Luke’s intent was to show how the church emerged as a chiefly Gentile, worldwide phenomenon from its origins as a Jerusalem-based, Judaism-oriented sect of Jewish believers, and how the Holy Spirit was directly responsible for this phenomenon of universal salvation based on grace alone (Fee and Stuart, 120). And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. (Act 1:4-5) And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost. (Act 11:15-16) These passages clearly refer back to John’s prophecy. What is unique in these passages is that we find that believers were the ones that would be Spirit baptized. The disciples had already been regenerated because they had believed the revelation they had received and feared God (Erickson, 895). These people were the last of the Old Testament believers, and this Spirit baptism was to transition them into New Testament Christians. Pentecost marked the transition between the Old Covenant work of the Holy Spirit and His New Covenant work and ministry (Grudem, 770). This resulted with the disciples experiencing the change from the Old Covenant less-powerful ministry of the Holy Spirit in their lives to a more-powerful New Covenant experience of the Holy Spirit working in them. Thus, Pentecost was a day of extraordinary change. Whatever happened when the Holy Spirit fell it resulted in great spiritual power for the disciples. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. (Act 2:2-4) It is interesting to note here that Luke uses the phrase “filled with the Holy Ghost” in the context with tongues. Unless one tries to force baptism and filling as interchangeable, one should come to the conclusion that the baptism of the Spirit was omitted intentionally so as to not confuse it as the cause of the disciples’ speaking in tongues. Though Pentecost was a great day, some would attach significance to it in ways the Bible does not. A common mistake is to equate the effects of the gift of the Spirit, namely tongues, with Spirit baptism. What is forgotten is that on the day of Pentecost many ministries of the Holy Spirit began simultaneously. Spirit baptism, filling of the Spirit, sealing of the Spirit, indwelling of the Spirit, and spiritual gifts bestowed by the Spirit are all ministries that appeared for the first time at Pentecost. Therefore, it is incorrect to link any of these ministries with the gift of tongues. Walvoord states that the fact that there was evidence of an outward sign of the baptizing work of the Spirit does not equate that evidence with Spirit baptism (144). Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost. (Act 8:15-17) Walvoord presents an easy explanation for the Samaritan instance. He points out that while the delay of the normal indwelling of the Spirit until the arrival of Peter is difficult to accept it must be admitted (153). He notes though that this phenomenon was never repeated in the book of Acts. It has been previously discussed these early chapters are transitional so it was important that the receiving of the Spirit by the Samaritans be closely identified with the apostles themselves. In Acts 10, we find the entrance of Gentiles into the church. While it is often debated whether Cornelius was regenerated or not, it is really inconsequential because if he was then he needed to undergo the same transformation that the apostles and Samaritans experienced. Thus, Peter, the one who had been given the keys to the kingdom, had one last group to bring in. So he went to Joppa and introduced these Gentiles to the gift of the Holy Ghost. Regarding Acts 19, these disciples were baptized by John but had not received the truth of Christ and therefore could not have the Holy Spirit indwelling them. If regenerated, they were neither baptized, indwelt, sealed, nor filled with the Spirit (Unger, 73). They were disciple of John the Baptist but not of Christ. Therefore, they needed to accept Christ as Savior and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. Even though the book of Acts sheds more light upon the doctrine of Spirit baptism, there is still not sufficient evidence to discern what Spirit baptism truly entails. It clearly has importance with the advent of the Spirit and the beginning of the church but its unique role remains to be seen. Bibliography Fee, Gordon D. and Douglas Stuart. How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth. 3rd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2003 Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1957 Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994 Unger, Merrill F. The Baptizing Work of the Holy Spirit. Wheaton, IL: Van Kampen Press, 1953 Walvoord, John J. The Holy Spirit. 3rd ed. Findlay, OH: Dunham Publishing, 1958.1.) Narrative Hermeneutics
Experientialists rely heavily on the narrative passages in the book of Acts. With this reliance, the question must be asked: do historical narratives function as precedents for the church.2.) Explicit Passages
There are two passages that refer exclusively to Spirit baptism in the book of Acts.3.) Implied Passages?
But what about the events where the Samaritans, Gentiles, and disciples of John received the gift of the Holy Spirit? It would seem that in the case of the Samaritans that Spirit baptism came after conversion.
There are many questions that have to be answered to come to a complete and biblical view of Spirit baptism. This requires a very precise interpretation of the seven passages concerned with this doctrine. In this post, we will study the context of Spirit baptism in the Gospels.
In the Gospels, we find four texts that refer exclusively to Spirit baptism. All four are attributed to John the Baptist and his description of the character and work of Christ.
I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: (Mat 3:11)
I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost. (Mar 1:8)
John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire: (Luk 3:16)
And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. (Joh 1:33)
In these passages, we find John the Baptist announcing the coming of the Messiah. He describes the Messiah as one who will baptize with fire and with the Holy Ghost.
Many experientialists would interpret the “baptism with fire” as being fulfilled when the cloven tongues of fire appeared above each disciple’s head. In the Gospel texts though, the implication is one of judgment and not spiritual power.
Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and will gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable. (Luk 3:17)
Also, it is interesting to note that Luke does not include “baptism with fire” in Acts 1:4-5 though he did in his Gospel account. This further goes to show that this baptism had nothing to do with Pentecost. It seems biblically accurate then to attribute the baptism with fire as still waiting to be fulfilled at the Second Advent. Thus, there is no relationship between Spirit baptism and “fire” baptism.
We see that John contrasts “baptism with the Spirit” with his own baptism. This relationship is important in interpreting Spirit baptism. This comparison shows Spirit baptism’s agent and agency. Just as John was the agent and water was the agency into which he placed people so Christ would be the agent and the Holy Spirit would be the agency.
While we find four passages that speak directly about Spirit baptism, the only content we draw is that Christ would baptize people in the Holy Ghost. The meaning and effects of Spirit baptism are not revealed.
«« Previous Post: Experiential Views - Next Post »»
Read More......
Spirit baptism is not just a theological concept. It has very practical implications in the lives of experientialists. In this article, we will look at experientialist teaching on how to obtain Spirit baptism and the different views of what that experience entails. It is important first off that the individual be a believer. Since who the Holy Spirit descended upon were saved, we should not expect it to be any different. Next, we need to have repented of our sin. In Acts 2:37-38, Peter states that to receive the Spirit one needs to repent. Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Act 2:37-38) Third, one needs to be baptized by water (Acts 2:37-38). Lastly, one needs to have a deep conviction of their need for the Holy Ghost while also having a great measure of consecration. Experientialist continue to follow their method of using the book of Acts as their authority for Spirit baptism by showing the manner in which Spirit baptism is received by a believer (Duffield and Cleave, 317): suddenly while sitting and expecting him to come (Acts 2:1-4); instantly and unexpectedly, while listening to a sermon (Acts 10:44-46); through prayer and the laying on of the apostle’s hands (Acts 8:14-17; 9:17; 19:6); through the seeker’s personal prayer and faith (Lk. 11:9-13; Jn. 7:37-39). Experientialist all agree that one can know he has been baptized in the Spirit. In fact, it is argued that it is logical that the supernatural experience of the baptism with the Holy Spirit would be accompanied by some definite and unmistakable sign by which the speaker would be assured that he had received the baptism in the Spirit (Duffield and Cleave, 320). There are four groups that advocate their own unique experience. Most Pentecostals state that the only clear Scriptural evidence for the baptism of the Spirit is speaking in tongues (Basham, 61). It is stated that it is the clear pattern given in the book of Acts and is therefore to be emulated in doctrine and practice. Charismatics tend to be less dogmatic on tongues as an exclusive evidence for Spirit baptism. While an experience of being filled with the Holy Spirit may result in the gift of speaking in tongues, or in the use of some other gifts that had not previously been experienced, it also may come without the gift of speaking in tongues. In fact, many Christians throughout history have experienced powerful infillings of the Holy Spirit that have not been accompanied by speaking in tongues. With regard to this gift as well as all other gifts, we must simply say that the Holy Spirit ‘apportions each one individually as he will’ (1 Cor.12:11). (Grudem, 784) Therefore, while the baptism of the Spirit may include tongues, it technically is an experience in which the Holy Spirit comes upon the believer to anoint and energize him for special service. There is also a group within fundamentalism that believe there is a second blessing and equate that with Spirit baptism. One such man was R. A. Torrey. In his book, What the Bible Teaches, he outlined his three propositions concerning Spirit baptism. In the first place, the Baptism of the Holy Spirit is a definite experience of which one may know whether he has received it or not. . . . In the second place, the Baptism with the Holy Spirit is a work of the Holy Spirit distinct from and additional to His regenerating work. . .In the third place, the Baptism with the Holy Spirit is a work of the Holy Spirit always connected with and primarily for the purpose of testimony and service. (270-272) Most fundamentalists would equate this with the filling of the Spirit and in a certain sense, so did R. A. Torrey. He felt that the baptism with the Spirit, filled with the Spirit, the Holy Ghost fell on them, the gift of the Holy Ghost, receive the Holy Ghost, the Holy Ghost came on them, the gifts of the Holy Ghost, and endued with power from on high were all expression used in the New Testament to describe one and the same experience (270). The last view on what the experience that accompanies Spirit baptism is concerns the Holiness movement. Certain groups within this movement associate Spirit baptism with a second work of grace within the believer’s heart. This work of grace refers to the entire sanctification of one’s being that cleanses him from sinful corruption. It (entire sanctification) is wrought by the baptism with the Holy Spirit and comprehends in one experience the cleansing of the heart from sin and the abiding, indwelling, presence of the Holy Spirit, empowering the believer for life and service. (Church of the Nazarene, Manual, 34) Bibliography Basham, Don. A Handbook on Holy Spirit Baptism. 3rd ed. Monroeville, PA: Whitaker Books, 1969 Duffield, Guy P. and Nathaniel M. Van Cleave. Foundations of Pentecostal Theology. Los Angeles, CA: L.I.F.E. Bible College, 1983 Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994 Manual, Church of the Nazarene. Kansas City, MO: Nazarene Publishing House, 2005. Torrey, R. A. What the Bible Teaches. Basingstroke, UK: Marshall Pickering Press, 1987.
1.) How to Obtain Spirit Baptism
Since the chief purpose of Spirit baptism is to have power for Christian service (Acts 1:8), it is important to strive to obtain Spirit baptism. Experientialists base their “road map” to Spirit baptism on the experiences of the book of Acts. In Foundations of Pentecostal Theology, Duffield and Cleave give four steps to be baptized in the Holy Spirit (312-313).2.) Views on the Experience of Spirit Baptism
dsfdsfa.) Pentecostal View
dsfdsfb.) Charismatic View
dsfdsfc.) Second Blessing View
dsfdsfd.) Holiness View
I found Tim White's post helpful as I wrote my original research paper.
Read More......
In the last article, I presented the views of Non-Experientialist. Our second grouping deals with those who take Spirit baptism to be experiential. This view is primarily promoted by Charismatics, Pentecostals, and certain Holiness movements. Though each group has different views on what the experience of Spirit baptism entails, they all predominantly agree that Spirit baptism is normally a definite experience that is subsequent to salvation.
And he saith unto them, Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith? Then he arose, and rebuked the winds and the sea; and there was a great calm. (Mat 8:26)
While the disciples are said to have little faith, they still had faith. Thus, experientialists argue that all the accounts of the coming of the Holy Spirit are not concerned with salvation (Williams, 205). Other such arguments are found in the conversions of the Samaritans and the disciples of John at Ephesus.
Second, even though they were already born again they are commanded to wait for Spirit baptism.
For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. (Act 1:5)
In this verse, Jesus commands his disciples to wait in Jerusalem for the baptism with the Holy Spirit. Because Christ commanded the disciples to wait, experimentalist state that Christians should wait and ask Christ for this baptism for it will result in increased power for ministry.
Third, on the day of Pentecost, they subsequently received the baptism of the Holy Ghost.
And when the day of Pentecost was 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 all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. (Act 2:1-5)
Lastly, another key truth for some experientialists is that the baptism is in the Spirit.
John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire: (Luk 3:16)
It is argued that just as John was the agent and water was the agency into which the person was baptized so Christ is the agent (or baptizer) and the Spirit is what the person is baptized into (Williams, 199). The effect of Spirit baptism is being enveloped in the reality of the Holy Spirit. Just as water baptism envelopes the individual in the baptismal waters.
Bibliography
Williams, J. Rodman. Renewal Theology. Vol. 2. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1990
«« Previous Post: Non-Experiential Views - Next Post »»
Read More......
There are many different views on Spirit baptism. Some are relatively similar while others are diametrically opposed to each other. While there many opinions on this subject, each view can be classified under two broad categories.
The first category deals with those who take Spirit baptism to be non-experiential. While several sub-categories are within this group, the unifying concept is that Spirit baptism is not experienced. Non-experientialists agree that a believer may be relieved from conviction or may have joy because of his sins being washed away, but this is not caused by Spirit baptism. Spirit baptism is therefore a positional truth and not an experiential truth (Walvoord, 146).
All non-experientialists agree that Spirit baptism occurs at salvation. Therefore, Spirit baptism is universal of all saved believers and is never repeated. The technical nature of Spirit baptism, though, is debated among non-experientialists and falls into two groups.
For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. (1Co 12:13)
Thus, Spirit baptism occurs simultaneously with regeneration but is distinguished. In this verse, Spirit baptism is linked with the placing of a believer into the body of Christ. Therefore, it is argued that Spirit baptism is decidedly different.
Bibliography
Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994
Harvey, Cyrus. The Baptism of the Holy Spirit for Salvation. Wichita, KS: 1906
Walvoord, John J. The Holy Spirit. 3rd ed. Findlay, OH: Dunham Publishing, 1958.
«« Previous Post: Introduction - Next Post »»
Read More......
I’ve been baptized with fire! This phrase has been used repeatedly to describe an experience where the Holy Spirit comes upon a believer and endues him with power for some special work. Another name for it is the baptism of the Spirit. The subject is incredibly divisive, yet it is essential that you establish a position on the topic. With this in mind, I have set out to determine what the Bible truly teaches about Spirit baptism.
For centuries, Spirit baptism received insignificant attention from theologians. If you were to look at the systematic theology books of that era, you would be hard pressed to find a section that deals with this doctrine.
Everything changed at the beginning of the twentieth century. The Azusa Street Revival brought this doctrine to the forefront and since then it has been a major issue.
There are a few preliminaries that need to be covered:
With that said, let us begin by looking at the various views of Spirit baptism.
