One Baptism

A commenter asked if/argued that I teach two separate baptisms. I don’t.

Paul was emphatic that there is one baptism (Eph 4:5). Jesus’ baptism is the ideal. He was baptised in water and the Spirit in one event. That should be the norm for all those who trust in Jesus. Peter knew this, because when the Holy Spirit came upon Cornelius and his household, he realised that they needed to be baptised in water at the same time (Acts 10:47; 11:15-16).

Unfortunately, for various reasons, some people who are baptised in water do not receive the Holy Spirit at that time. In the case of Philip at Samaria the reason was that the believers had “only been baptised in Jesus name”. The word “only” suggests the baptism was incomplete. To remedy the situation, Peter and John came down and laid hands on the Samaritans to receive that Holy Spirit (Acts 8:14-17). However, this was not a normative situation. It was a remedy for a situation where baptism had not been done properly in the first place.

Most of my generation received the gift of the Holy Spirit well after they were baptised in water, because we did not know about the fullness of the Spirit when we were baptised. At a later date, when we knew more about his activity, we were prayed over to receive the Spirit. However that was remedying a problem with our initiation into the faith. Praying for baptism in the Spirit separate from baptism in water from was remedying this mistake.

We must be careful not to make a remedial practice normative. Receiving the fullness of the Spirit after coming out of the water is the norm, as per Jesus example.

Moreover, receiving the fullness of the Holy Spirit is absolutely essential for every follower of Jesus. If for some reason, the Holy Spirit has not come upon the person being baptised, the situation should be remedied by laying on hands and praying for the Spirit to come upon them (as Peter and John did at Samaria).

Teaching that there are two baptisms, one in water and a subsequent one in the Holy Spirit is dangerous, because it makes a problem that needs remedial action into the norm for everyone. It is better for baptism to be done in the way it happened for Jesus. But we must also correct any problems that arise, as quickly as possible.

Sinner's Prayer

Neither Jesus nor the apostles used anything like the sinner’s prayer.

Jesus announced that he had come from God and called people to follow him (serve and obey him), He challenged them to become his disciples (follower-learners).

Paul preached that Jesus is the Messiah/Rescuer and Lord/King (in charge of the world). He did not ask people to say a sinner’s prayer. He challenged them to give allegiance to Jesus, by being baptised and receiving the Holy Spirit.

• Baptism is a public declaration of allegiance to Jesus.
• Baptism is a sign to the spiritual powers of evil that you belong to Jesus and that they should stay away from the disciple.
• Baptism is the process by which we receive the Holy Spirit, to set us on the right track.

More at Baptism.

Baptism

On Script has a good interview with Alan Street about his book called Caesar and the Sacrament.

Alan Street explains that the word sacramentum was the oath of loyalty of a Roman soldier. He pledged allegiance to Caesar unto death. Christians borrowed the term and applied it to baptism.

Baptism was an act of resistance. Not overthrowing the Roman government by violence, but saying that I am giving my allegiance to the Kingdom of God and therefore resisting Rome’s agenda.

Baptism is a political act, not just a spiritual once. By making baptism a religious rite, we have devalued it.

This interview is worth a listen. The message is a good companion to Mathew Bates Gospel Allegiance.