- Jul 22, 2014
- 41,511
- 7,861
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
Introduction:
Refuting My Previous Position on Spirit Baptism Replacing Water Baptism:
I originally started out believing that Christians should be water-baptized. Then one day, a believer brought up how Spirit baptism replaced water baptism by mentioning Acts 19:1-7. At first glance, it appeared this passage taught Spirit baptism replaces water baptism. I believed this for about a year or so. Then one day, my belief that Spirit baptism replaced water baptism was challenged by another believer. So I began to re-examine what I believed on this matter yet again. In other words, to make a long story short, I discovered that inferences are made off of certain verses when they can equally be in defense of water baptism still being in effect. In short, a believer would need something like the following words to defend their belief that Spirit baptism replaces water baptism:
“And the apostle Paul said to the believers gathered together. My brothers. We should no longer water baptize. This was the old way that no longer applies to us anymore. Only the apostle John was to water baptize. We cannot baptize in the name of Jesus anymore. The Spirit now baptizes us when we believe on Jesus Christ.” (Imaginary Bible passage).
Also, a Christian video that was not even focused on water baptism primarily had double confirmed my own conviction on the matter. It was a video on faith. You can check that out here. (Note: Please understand I do not share all views expressed by Alan Ballou in the video; I agree with his teaching on sin and salvation). Anyways, my New Position is my Original Position in regards to water baptism.
My Previous Position was believing that Spirit Baptism had replaced Water Baptism.
I now no longer hold to this viewpoint.
My New Position (Original Position) is that water baptism is required of Christians but it is non-salvific.
Spirit baptism is what happens when a person receives Jesus Christ as their Savior (John 1:12), they believe the gospel message in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, and they seek forgiveness with Jesus (Romans 10:9, Romans 10:13).
Refuting My Previous Position on Spirit Baptism Replacing Water Baptism:
#1. My Previous Position would use Ephesians 4:5 which says that there is “one baptism.”
My rebuttal (My New Position): Ephesians 4:5 is in context to behavior and not what God does upon us. Ephesians 4:1-2 says, “I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;”. Ephesians 4:14 says, “That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;” We have one faith just as we have on baptism. Both the faith and baptism are things we must employ and not God. Jesus Himself tells us in the great commission that we are to teach all that He commanded Him baptizing in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost in Matthew 28. This is exactly what the apostles did in that they baptized in that one name that represents all three persons of the Godhead or Trinity (Which was the name of Jesus). At no point did God tell them to stop baptizing in the name of Jesus. This is what we need to see in Scripture if such a thing actually happened.
#2. My Previous Position would use 1 Corinthians 12:13 as proof. 1 Corinthians 12:13 says, “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.”
My rebuttal (My New Position): This is not actually saying Spirit baptism replaces water baptism. This is merely describing what the Spirit does to us when we accept the Lord as our Savior. In the early church, they obeyed the Lord’s instructions on water baptism in the name of Jesus. The apostles would water baptize right away once a person established faith in Jesus Christ as their Savior. When a person was water baptized, the Spirit would come upon them. This is what happened in Acts 19 when Paul was about to water baptize believers in the name of Jesus (See: Acts 19:1-7). As Paul was about to baptize them in water in the name of Jesus, and he laid his hand upon the Ephesian believers to immerse them in water, they received the baptism of the Holy Spirit. If for some reason Paul was not to water baptize in the name of Jesus in this instance, then why didn’t the Spirit say not to water baptize these Ephesian believers in the name of Jesus? Anyways, the point here is that when a believer was water baptized, they would in most cases be Spirit baptized as a result. Granted, there were exceptions to the rule on this like with Cornelius and his family. But Peter expressed how they also needed to be water baptized, and neither Jesus, nor the Holy Spirit objected to Peter water baptizing them. Neither do we see the apostles gathering together to discuss this issue and explaining how things have changed, either. In Acts 15, we learn that the Gentile believers were not required to keep the Laws of Moses. The point here is that this event recorded in Scripture clearly lets us know that Gentile believers are not obligated to be under the Old Covenant system of law through Moses. Its clear. But saying that water baptism has ended is not clear from Scripture.
#3. My Previous Position: The prophecy and fulfillment of the new baptism: John the Baptist stated: “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:” (Matthew 3:11). Jesus stated: “For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.” (Acts of the Apostles 1:5).
My rebuttal (My New Position): In regards to being baptized into the Spirit with these verses, this is referring a very specific event, which was Pentecost. This event is not repeatable. First, we are not Jewish believers. Second, Jewish believers are not told to go to Jerusalem and wait there today. Foreign Jews are not now expected to repeat this event in Jerusalem with the Spirit translating their languages again. This is a unique event in church history and these verses refer to this unique event and they are not repeatable for us today. It was the birth of the church. Granted, John’s baptism of water does not apply anymore. We are now to be water baptized in the name of Jesus after believing in Christ as our Savior. When this happens genuinely, we will be baptized by the Spirit. This is exactly what we see described to us in the rest of the book of Acts.
#4. My Previous Position would quote 1 Corinthians 1:17 as proof. 1 Corinthians 1:17 says, “For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.”
My Rebuttal (My New Position): At first glance, this may sound like water baptism has ended by Paul making this statement. However, Paul recounts how he has baptized some in this chapter and he did not mention how baptism was no longer in effect anymore. So this must mean that Paul’s main thrust of being a minister for Jesus Christ is not baptism but it is preaching the gospel. Meaning, Paul is saying, I come not to just baptize alone or as the main thrust of my mission, but it is to preach the gospel. In other words, baptism does not mean anything if there is no preaching of the gospel that should come before it. This is the most logical deduction to conclude based on the context given to us in this chapter.
#5. My Previous Position would quote Acts of the Apostles 18 that says, “Apollos… knowing only the baptism of John… when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.” In short, Aquila and Priscilla (who were taught by Paul) expounded the Word of God more perfectly unto Apollos because he only knew of John’s baptism of water. Apollos needed to learn of Spirit baptism (Which is the true New Covenant way of being baptized).
My rebuttal (My New Position): Nothing in Acts 18 describes how water baptism in the name of Jesus has ended. John’s water baptism of repentance is what is in view of ending here. To put it to you another way, there is a distinction between John’s water baptism of repentance, vs. water baptism done in the name of Jesus. They are not the same thing. In John’s baptism a person would confess of their sins to God as they were being water baptized. This was called the baptism of repentance. But when a believer is water baptized under the New Covenant, they first are to believe the gospel as found in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 that basically says that we are to believe that Christ died for our sins, He was buried, and risen the third day for our salvation. Then one can be water baptized in the name of Jesus and receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. This is the new way and it was not the way of the Old Covenant with John’s water baptism of repentance. Yes, believers still need to repent, or seek forgiveness with the Lord Jesus, but we are to first believe the gospel before being water baptized and this was to be done in the name of Jesus (the name that represents all three persons of the Trinity or Godhead).
#6. My Previous Position would use Acts 19 as proof. Acts of the Apostles 19 says, “And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should 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 his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. And all the men were about twelve.” In other words, the believers at Ephesus only knew of John’s baptism of water, and they were not aware of the Holy Ghost. So Paul baptized them into the Holy Ghost by laying his hands on them. So they received the baptism of the Spirit.
My rebuttal (My New Position): This was the passage that initially swayed me to believe that Spirit baptism replaced water baptism. But after re-examining this passage yet again more closely, I noticed that Paul says he baptized. If this was Spirit baptism, then Paul could not have baptized them. So what is going on here is that Paul needed correct these believer’s on John’s water baptism and have them experience the gift of the Holy Spirit. Notice, that Paul says to believe on Jesus in this passage. This is the new way. Believing on Jesus first, and then be water baptized in the name of Jesus. So when Paul is about to submerge these believers in water, the Spirit comes upon them. This shows the validity of what Paul was doing. If for some reason Paul was not acting in the will of God by water baptizing them, then how could the Spirit come upon them? Would not God explain it to them so they are acting in God’s will? At Pentecost, they believed the gospel message and they were to repent, be baptized, and receive the gift of the Spirit. Acts 2 is clearly talking about water baptism. There is no way around this one. The only excuse is to say that Peter made a mistake while baptizing them. But this was the birth of the church, and why would God have imperfection riddle such a birth? It makes no sense. God would want them to be within His will.
#7. My Previous Position would use Mark 16:16 as proof. Mark 16:16 says: “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.”
My Rebuttal (New Position): This again is not a contradiction with the continuation of water baptism in the name of Jesus. I see this verse as referring to either water baptism or Spirit baptism. Again, with either reading it does not say that water baptism has ended by any means. Spirit baptism compliments water baptism as we see in Acts 2 and with Cornelius and his family. Peter still water baptized Cornelius and his family after they were Spirit baptized. God did not say to Peter…. “No, do not do this, I have already baptized them.” This is what we need to see if Spirit baptism had replaced water baptism in any form.
#8. My Previous Position would bring forth Hebrews 9:10. Hebrews 9:10 says, “Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.“ The word “washings“ is the Greek word “baptismos“ (βαπτισμός) (Check out here for the Strong’s definition). In other words, Hebrews 9:10 is saying that diverse baptisms (washings) were imposed on believers until the time of reformation. Meaning, water baptism will give way or pass away until the time of reformation (Which means that Spirit baptism is now the one and only true baptism for today).
My Rebuttal (My New Position): I believe the time of reformation was the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. The Old Covenant way had officially ended with Christ’s death upon the cross. So all of the old ritual washings of the Old Covenant system would end that was tied to the Laws of Moses and John’s water baptism of repentance. The New Covenant is not full of tons of different washings or water rituals. There is only one now and not many. This is how I would understand this. If not, then we would have multiple contradictions in Scripture and a hidden narrative that Peter and others were water baptizing by mistake and acting outside of God’s will without the Lord correcting them (When He cleary could have done so).
Last edited:
