This past summer (1998) I celebrated my 20th year as a Christian. For nearly the first ten years of my Christian life, I belonged to a charismatic church. As a young believer, I eagerly devoured the teaching I received. However, as I matured in my faith and my knowledge of Scripture increased, I found myself rethinking many of the doctrines I embraced so readily in my youth. In this article I want to describe three such doctrines, and how I came to believe differently through a careful study of God’s Word.
The Doctrine of the “Baptism With The Holy Spirit”
One of the doctrines I was taught as a babe in Christ was the doctrine of the baptism with the Holy Spirit. We were taught that this was a second work of grace experienced subsequent to conversion in answer to prayer, and that it was essential to give us power to be witnesses for Christ. Sadly, those of us who believed we had been baptized with the Spirit began to look down upon others who had not shared our experience. We felt that they lacked God’s power, and thus, were spiritually deficient. Of course, we would never actually state this in so many words, but it was a definite attitude that many of us shared. Often in our meetings, we would have people who had recently been converted come up to the front of the auditorium so that the pastor would lay hands on them and pray that they would be baptized with the Holy Spirit. We were taught to accept the “baptism” by faith, and wait for the Holy Spirit to begin manifesting His power in our lives in some particular way. If an individual began to speak in tongues, that was a sure sign that they had been baptized with the Spirit, but we also looked for other signs, such as power in witnessing or a greater love for the Word of God. I felt that I had experienced the baptism with the Holy Spirit about nine months after my conversion, when I suddenly began to speak in tongues in the midst of my evening prayers.
Our understanding of the baptism of the Spirit as a second blessing in the life of a Christian hinged almost entirely on the book of Acts. We were taught that though the disciples on the day of Pentecost were already saved, at this later point in their Christian lives they received the baptism with the Spirit so that they could be witnesses for Christ. In Acts 1:4 Jesus commanded his followers not to leave Jerusalem but to wait for the promise of the Father, which is restated in verse five as the baptism with the Holy Spirit. Later in Acts 1:8 Jesus told these same disciples “you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon them, and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth.” These passages provided the theological underpinnings for our understanding of “the baptism.” With these texts we felt certain we could prove that those who were already saved needed to receive a further enduement of power from the Holy Spirit to be effective witnesses for Christ.
We found further evidence for the doctrine in Acts 8 where Philip preached the gospel to the Samaritans. Scripture records that the Samaritans believed Philip preaching the good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ and were being baptized. Yet, in spite of the fact that many were apparently saved in Samaria, Peter and John still had to come down, lay their hands on these converts, and pray for them to receive the Holy Spirit (8:14-15). This passage seemed to teach quite convincingly that those who were saved needed a subsequent work of grace – they needed to receive the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, we saw from the passage that when an individual did receive the Spirit, something quite remarkable was sure to follow. This was made clear in the text where Simon saw that the Spirit was bestowed through the laying on of hands (8:18). In fact, Simon was so impressed, that he offered money to the apostles in order to purchase this Spirit-conferring ability. Again, it seemed clear that someone could be saved and yet not “receive” the Spirit, and that when the Spirit was received something dramatic was sure to follow.
Further, in Acts 19 we saw that when some men who had been baptized by John the Baptist, later believed in Christ, Paul laid his hands on them, and the Holy Spirit came upon them, enabling them to speak in tongues and prophesy. We believed that the apostle deemed it so essential for these new Christians to be baptized in the Spirit, that as soon as they were converted and baptized, he laid his hands upon them in order for them to experience the Spirit’s power.
I was quite happy and convinced that the teaching I had received on the baptism with the Spirit was Biblical, until I came across a principle of Biblical interpretation in my reading that caused me to stop and wonder. The principle was, “Never develop a doctrine based on historical narrative alone. Search the teaching portions of Scripture for teaching that will support the example found in historical narrative.” When I submitted the teaching I had received on the baptism with the Spirit to this test, I found that it came up short. My whole theological position on the baptism with the Spirit rested almost entirely on the book of Acts. I realized that I could not go to the doctrinal books like Romans, Galatians, Ephesians Hebrews, or any other New Testament epistle to find a theology for the “baptism” as a second step in the Christian life. Surely, I began to wonder, if this experience was so essential for every Christian, the apostles would have given instruction in their epistles on how believers were to receive it. However, after much study I had to admit that I could not find this teaching in the New Testament epistles.
Furthermore, I began to realize that not everything found in Acts should be considered normative for all of church history. I knew that I didn’t believe that God still routinely killed people who lied (Acts 5:1-5), that we should send anointed prayer cloths to sick people to deliver them of illnesses and demons (Acts 19), or that people would be healed when a Christian leader’s shadow passed over them (Acts 5). Why then should I be compelled to believe that “receiving the Spirit” was an experience that takes place subsequent to salvation, when I could not find any clear teaching in the epistles to substantiate it?
As I studied further, I found that there are seven places in the New Testament in which the verb “to baptize” is connected with the Holy Spirit. Five of those texts are references to the outpouring of the Spirit upon the church on the day of Pentecost (Mt.3:11; Mk.1:8; Luke 3:16; John 1:33; Acts 1:5), which was a historic and non-repeatable event, like the resurrection of Christ. The only remaining reference to Spirit-baptism in the book of Acts (11:16), describes something not subsequent to conversion, but the sovereign the work of the Holy Spirit in uniting Cornelius and his household to Christ and granting them repentance unto life (11:18). Rather than this Spirit-baptism being distinct from conversion, in this instance, it actually coincided with conversion!
The only other reference to a Spirit-baptism in the New Testament is found in 1 Corinthians 12:13 which states, “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.” Far from asserting that Spirit-baptism is an experience separate and distinct from conversion which all believers need to seek, this text teaches that all Christians have been Spirit-baptized at the moment of their conversion. It was by this Spirit-baptism that they were joined to the body of Christ. I saw clearly from this text that Christians don’t need to seek the baptism with the Spirit; they already possess it![i]
That truth fit nicely with other clear New Testament texts I was discovering. For example, Colossians 2:10 says, “and in Him you have been made complete …” while 2 Peter 1:4 states, “seeing that His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness…”
Well, if my new conclusions drawn from Scripture were accurate, why did believers seem to experience a Spirit-baptism subsequent and distinct from conversion in Acts 2, 8, and 19? I was able to rule out the Acts chapter two example, because the day of Pentecost was a historic, non-repeatable event. Thus, we should not expect to experience our own private “day of Pentecost.”
The Acts 8 passage, on the other hand, seems to describe an event in which God, in His providence sovereignly waited to bestow the reception of the Spirit until the apostles in Jerusalem came down to lay their hands on them, so that it might be evident to the highest leadership in the Jerusalem church that the Samaritans were not second-class citizens but full members of the church. This was important because of the historical animosity between Jews and Samaritans, and because Jesus had specified that the spread of the gospel to Samaria would be the next major step after it had been preached in Jerusalem and Judea (Acts 1:8). Thus, the event in Acts 8 was a kind of “Samaritan Pentecost,” a special outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the people of Samaria, who were a mixed race of Jewish and Gentile ancestry, so that it might be evident to all that the full new covenant blesings and power of the Holy Spirit had come to this group of people as well, and were not confined to Jews only.[ii]
The only other passage that needed clarification was Acts 19 where some disciples of John the Baptist were converted and then received the Spirit as Paul laid his hands on them. Upon closer examination of the text, I saw that this passage did not fit with the present two-stage charismatic teaching either. Acts 19 describes some men who were baptized by John the Baptist and became followers of his teaching. However, it is very unlikely that they knew even the most elementary truths of Christianity, for Paul had to tell them that it was Jesus that John spoke about (19:4). Furthermore, they hadn’t even heard of the Holy Spirit, which can only mean that they had never heard the gospel of Christ. Clearly, these men in Ephesus are not a model for regenerated believers who need to receive a second experience of the Holy Spirit, for believers today do not first have faith in a Messiah who is to come, and then later learn that Jesus has come, lived, died and risen again. We come into an understanding of the gospel of Christ immediately, and we, like the Corinthians, enter immediately into the new covenant experience of the power of the Holy Spirit.[iii]
Singing In The Spirit
Another phenomenon I experienced many times in my charismatic church was what we called “singing in the Spirit.” In our church, we would begin our meetings by singing songs of praise and worship. Usually these were contemporary choruses or scripture verses put to music. Sometimes toward the end of our time of singing, the church, at the pastor’s prompting would begin to sing out all at once, yet each person would sing whatever words of praise came into his head. Some sang in English, while many others sang in tongues.[iv] The church would continue to sing in this way for several minutes. Often as this “singing in the Spirit” died down, a brother or sister would excitedly speak a “prophetic word from the Lord” or give an utterance in tongues.
Several years after I had first been introduced to this practice, I began to study 1 Corinthians 14 more carefully, and began to question whether it was Biblical at all. I read 1 Corinthians 14:13-19 which states, “Therefore let one who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. What is the outcome then? I shall pray with the spirit and I shall pray with the mind also; I shall sing with the spirit and I shall sing with the mind also. Otherwise if you bless in the spirit only, how will the one who fills the place of the ungifted say the “Amen” at your giving of thanks, since he does not know what you are saying? For you are giving thanks well enough, but the other man is not edified. I thank God, I speak in tongues more than you all; however, in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind, that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue.”
From this passage I began to understand that Paul permitted the speaking and singing in tongues in the church, only under certain conditions. He states very plainly that if one speaks in a tongue, his mind is unfruitful. Furthermore, he says that if someone blesses God in the spirit only (another way of describing speaking in tongues), the other members of the church will not be able to say “Amen” at his giving of thanks, for they do not understand what he is saying. Thus, the rest of the church will not be edified unless someone interprets the tongues uttered in the church meeting. Paul winds up his instruction on the importance of interpreting the tongues uttered in a church meeting by stating that he is thankful to God that he speaks in tongues so frequently, yet in a meeting of the church, he would rather speak five words that all could understand, rather than ten thousand words in a foreign tongue.
The overarching principle the apostle gives the Corinthians, is that everything that is done in their meetings must be done for edification (1Cor.14:26). A tongue that is spoken or sung that is not interpreted does not edify the rest of the church, for they can’t understand it. Therefore, unless someone is going to interpret the utterance in tongues (whether spoken or sung), the person should keep silent in the church, and just speak to himself and to God (1Cor.14:28).
The “singing in the Spirit” that I experienced early on in my Christian life, was a time when many different people sang in tongues at the same time. There was never an interpretation of what had been sung for the edification of the rest of the church. Thus, I concluded that according to Scripture we were out of order, and should not have allowed the practice to go on in the church meetings.
Slain In the Spirit
A third practice that I witnessed in my church as a young believer was what we referred to as being “slain in the Spirit.” Sometimes during our worship services, the Pastor would ask those who wanted special prayer for physical healing, marriage problems, or the baptism with the Holy Spirit to come up to the stage at the front of the auditorium. The Pastor would then lay his hands on their head and pray, while “catchers” would stand behind the one who was being prayed for in order to catch them if they fell down. On a number of occasions I went forward to be prayed for. The Pastor encouraged us to lift up our hands and receive what God wanted to do for us. Then, as he laid his hands on us he would give a slight push. The little push was often enough for anyone who was already “receptive” and whose emotions were flying high to cause them to let go and “fall under the power.” I still vividly recall an evening which our Pastor had labeled as a “Miracle Night.” Right before the service, he called all of the leaders of the church together and instructed them that when he prayed for them he wanted them to “let go and receive” all that God had for them. We all understood that he was telling us he wanted us to fall down when he laid hands on us.
It wasn’t long before I began to question this practice as well. Although the Pastor justified this practice with texts like 2Chron.5:14, John 18:6, Acts 9:4, and Rev.1:17, upon closer examination I ascertained that none of these texts supported the practice of being “slain in the Spirit” that I was witnessing in my church.
In 2 Chronicles 5:11-14, the Bible describes the dedication of Solomon’s temple, when the priests, Levitical singers and instrumentalists praised and glorified God for all his goodness and lovingkindness. In response to these praises, the Bible tells us that the house of the Lord was filled with a cloud so that the priests could not stand to minister because of the cloud, for the glory of the Lord filled the house of God (2Chron.5:14). Several things need to be noted about this passage. First, no where does the Scripture state that anyone fell down in the temple. Secondly, no where do we read that any man laid his hands on someone in the temple which caused them to fall to the ground. The text simply says that when God’s glory was manifested in a cloud, the priests could not stand to minister. Probably the priests were either so dazzled by the light proceeding from the cloud, or so awe-struck with reverence from the darkness of the cloud, that they could not proceed with their service in the temple. This text simply does not speak of the common “slain in the Spirit” experience which frequently takes place in charismatic churches.
John 18:1-6 describes the action of the Roman soldiers and temple police in seeking to arrest Jesus. When Jesus asked them who they sought, they replied, “Jesus the Nazarene.” Jesus replied, “I am He” and they all drew back and fell to the ground. However, the persons who drew back and fell to the ground were unconverted men. They certainly were not converted by falling to the ground, for they proceeded to get up and arrest Christ. Furthermore, Jesus never laid his hands on any of them. He merely spoke the words, “I am He” and they all fell to the ground. Surely, this example is a far cry from the popular practice of a man laying his hands on believers, who subsequently fall down “under the power.”
In Acts 9:1-4, we have the account of Paul’s conversion. While Paul approached Damascus in order to arrest the Christians there, a light from heaven flashed around him, and he fell to the ground while he heard Jesus ask him why he was persecuting Him. Interestingly, this narrative reveals the same things we have seen in our previous two examples. Paul fell to the ground as an unconverted man, and under the power of the risen Christ alone. Again, no human agency caused him to fall. Furthermore, shouldn’t we expect those who take Paul’s experience in Acts 9 as the pattern for their “slain in the Spirit” experience today, to also experience a blinding light, and the audible voice of Jesus Christ?!
In Revelation 1:17, as a response to seeing Christ in all of his risen glory, John fell at His feet as a dead man. John the apostle, however, did not fall backward as Christ laid his hands on him. Rather, he fell forward at his feet, in utter humility as he recognized the majesty of the exalted Christ in all his glory. This text has nothing to do with the modern practice of being “slain in the Spirit” but rather everything to do with a proper response to the majesty of the living Christ.
As I evaluated the passages in Scripture that were most similar to the “slain in the Spirit” phenomena, I was struck by the fact that I could not find a single place in all of Scripture where a man of God lays his hands on others and prays for them with the result that they fall to the ground “under the power.” Indeed, The Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements points out:
An entire battalion of Scripture proof texts is enlisted to support the legitimacy of the phenomenon [of being slain in the Spirit], although Scripture plainly offers no support for the phenomenon as something to be expected in the normal Christian life….From an experiential standpoint it is unquestionable that through the centuries Christians have experienced a psycho-physical phenomenon in which people fall down; moreover, they have attributed the experience to God. It is equally unquestionable that there is no biblical evidence for the experience as normative in Christian life.[v]
As a result of my study of Scripture, I rejected many facets of charismatic teaching, including the doctrine of the baptism with the Spirit as an experience subsequent to conversion, and the practices of “singing in the spirit”, and being “slain in the Spirit.” I’m thankful that I learned how to go to the Word for myself to confirm or reject the practices I witnessed happening around me. In American charismatic churches today, people laugh uncontrollably, bark like dogs, roar like lions, and claim to be Apostles of Jesus Christ. Others manipulate people into giving money by promising them material prosperity, miracles, or physical healing. With so many bizarre and unbiblical practices taking place all around us, I am thankful God has given us an unerring guide in His holy Word. I’m grateful to be able to move away from the authority of an experience, to the authority of God’s infallible Word. Let us painstakingly and diligently study it, all the while praying for the illumination of the Holy Spirit to open its precious truths to our minds and make us adequate, equipped for every good work (2Tim.3:17).
[i] Hoekema, Anthony A., Saved By Grace, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989), 47-49.
[ii] Grudem, Wayne, Systematic Theology, (Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994), 774.
[iii] Grudem, Systematic Theology, 775.
[iv] By singing “in tongues” I am speaking of the popular pentecostal and charismatic belief that many, if not all, persons who are baptized with the Spirit will be given the ability to speak in tongues as a sign of their having received Spirit-baptism. Speaking in tongues is believed to be the supernatural ability immediately given by the Spirit to a believer, so that he can pray, or praise God in an entirely new language. This language is given so that the believer can “give thanks” (1Cor.14:17), “bless” (1Cor.14:16), pray (1Cor.14:14), or bring a message to the church (1Cor.14:5).
[v] Burgess, Stanley M., and McGee, Gary B., eds., Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1988), 790-91.
______________________________________
© Stone Bridge Ministries
Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way and do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction. For web posting, a link to this document on our website is preferred. Any exceptions to the above must be approved by Stone Bridge Ministries.
Please include the following statement on any distributed copy: By Brian Anderson. © Stone Bridge Ministries. Website: www.StoneBridgeMinistries.net
Follow Us!