Spirit Baptism 5 Views Book Review
Brand, Chad Owen ed. “Perspectives on Spirit Baptism: Five Views.” Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman, 2004. ISBN-13:97808542594
The colloquial statement, “The devil is in the details,” ironically applies to Spirit baptism. In general, the idea of Spirit baptism is agreed upon by Reformed, Pentecostal, Charismatic, Wesleyan, and Catholic faith traditions. It is in the details that these faith traditions have different points of view. The following is a reflection on Chad Brand’s book on these five faith traditions views of Spirit baptism and answering eight specific questions. This reflection closes with the authors’ views of Spirit baptism.
What is the essence of Spirit Baptism?
Stanley Horton states the nature of Spirit baptism as the first sentence of his perspective. He writes that Pentecostals have viewed “Spirit baptism ‘as the coming of God’s Spirit into a believer’s life in a very focused way.'” (50). He views Spirit baptism as an outwardly perceptible and inwardly personal experience. (51) His view is undoubtedly seen faithfully through Scripture, yet he vividly paints Spirit baptism with colors of experiential stories and anecdotes. He bids the reader not to reject the Pentecostal view because it speaks of experience. He recounts the beginnings of Classical Pentecostalism as being sourced with a study of Scripture and fervent prayer that resulted in an experience. (52) He points out that Spirit baptism produces a zeal for evangelism, empowerment for miracles, a desire for holiness, and a hunger for the Scriptures, along with the opening of the mind to understand what the Scriptures say.
Pentecostal For the Most Part
Horton and I agree. Before reading this book, I would have thought that I was more Charismatic and less Pentecostal. From the perspectives presented in this book, I found that I am almost straight down the line Pentecostal. The idea of Spirit baptism being a subsequent act of the Holy Spirit in a person’s life that speaking in tongues is the initial evidence (with one variation), and its purpose in evangelism are all fundamental to me.
The idea of the subsequence is what separates most of the views of this book. The Pentecostal belief that Spirit baptism is a subsequent act of the Holy Spirit resonates with me but theologically and experientially. From a theological point of view, the “Pentecost” in John 20 and the Pentecost in Acts 2 help sum Spirit baptism as a subsequent act. John was present when both scenes took place. For them to be varied, descriptions of the same event would require a very extensive imagination. The details surrounding these events show them to be two separate events. Jesus breathed on them in John 20:22. This was more than for showmanship or theatrics. The Resurrected Savior would not have time to play games. This, from my point of view, was a real occurrence, and there was a genuine receiving of the Holy Spirit that created a new birth in those disciples. Simply put, the disciples were born again in John 20:22 and empowered in Acts 2. I believe I was genuinely saved months before receiving Spirit baptism. My experience with God was a produced fruit in my life. The moment I received Spirit baptism was just as real and very separate from the conversion experience. Hart, I suppose, would call both of those experiences Spirit baptisms. My terminology would more closely align with Jesus’ words about a description of what happened when He said, “. . . you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.” If Spirit baptism is a coverall term, then I would imagine He would have added the word “again.”
The second major reason for aligning with Horton is his view on initial evidence of Spirit Baptism. Horton’s first point about the fact that the upper room disciples were not psychologically conditioned is well put. (68) That was how I experienced Spirit baptism. I had never heard of speaking in tongues when I was prayed with for the experience. When it happened, I was a little concerned the people around me thought I was out of my mind. I did not realize that is what they expected. Biblically, there are five accounts of Spirit baptisms in Acts. Three of the five accounts explicitly state that those involved spoke in tongues. Two of the five, Acts 9:17 (Apostle Paul) and Acts 8:17-18 (Simon saw something), strongly suggest tongues were possible.
The third major reason for aligning with Horton concerns the importance of Spirit baptism. Acts 1:8 reveals very sobering words concerning Spirit baptism. The upper room disciples needed the power to witness. This delay in the mission shows its importance. All that was necessary for the Gospel to be preached was in order, but Jesus knew they needed help to preach the Gospel. They were to wait for Spirit baptism to preach the Gospel adequately. The wait defines the weight of Spirit baptism.
These various authors of this book have dealt with this needlessly controversial subject in a very respectful manner. Each passionately presented their view while not belittling the others. This book on Spirit baptism has taken “the devil” out of our discussion on Spirit baptism and made it a little more holy.
