Spirit-Baptism

Since the rise of Pentecostalism and the charismatic renewal in this century, there has been continuous controversy over the work of the Holy Spirit. One of the focal points of controversy is the interpretation of Spirit-Baptism(1). This topic has become important today because many Christians say that they have experienced a ‘baptism in the Holy Spirit’ that came after their conversion experience, that brought them great blessing, and often a reception of new spiritual gifts. (2)

The purpose of this present essay is to open up the question of separability and subsequence of Spirit-Baptism once again.(3) I will comment on the two main current understandings of Spirit-Baptism, represented by Pentecostals and Evangelicals and to suggest that there is little support for the traditional Pentecostal position on this matter. For this purpose, I will survey the NT for a fuller understanding of its occurrence. However, I will argue further that this is of little consequence to the doctrine of Spirit-Baptism, either as to the validity of the contemporary experience itself, or to its articulation.

The Pentecostal or Charismatic (4) understanding of Spirit Baptism

The Pentecostal understanding of Spirit-Baptism is basically a missiological (5) one. According to classical Pentecostalism, Spirit-Baptism is said to be distinct from and subsequent to conversion, and its purpose is empowering in ministry.(6) They are inclined to take a person’s conversion as stage one, and a subsequent overpowering experience, which is normally accompanied by speaking in tongues, as stage two. It is said to be another blessing of the Spirit promised to all Christians, and is seen as the indispensable step to spiritual power and a ‘fuller’ Christian life. John Wesley himself has taught there is a ‘second work of grace’ in the believer subsequent to justification.(7)

This movement is then mediated into the Pentecostal-charismatic movement of the twentieth-century, and the term ‘Spirit-Baptism’ has been used for an infilling with the Spirit, which was generally connected with praying in tongues and can include other striking charisms. (8) It is primarily a new bringing to life, a new sending of the Spirit and an individual experience of the presence and power of the Holy Spirit, given to whomever and however He wills. This baptism would certainly sanctifies afresh the believers, but with the orientation of a new kind of unction.(9) For Charles Finney, the Baptism in the Spirit is experiential by definition and until a believer appropriates the power of the Spirit in his own experience, he cannot be said to have been baptized in the Spirit. (10)

Spirit-Baptism is, therefore, not restricted to being the fullest form of experience of the Spirit, but is one among other clear-cut ways to experience the Spirit, which is imparted by the Spirit as He wills. Pentecostalism speaks of Spirit-Baptism as an infilling with the Spirit (for which every one should be open) and its reception (it is universal, in or outside of the sacrament), but not every reception is an infilling with the spirit, and not every infilling with the Spirit is a Spirit-baptism.(11)

The biblical support of the Pentecostal position comes mainly from Luke’s record in which the promise foretold by John the Baptist and Jesus is fulfilled in the early churches in Acts. They support their doctrine by the events recorded in Acts 2:1-42 (Pentecost event); 8:14-24 (Samaria event); 10:148 (Cornelius event); and 19:1-7 (Ephesus event). All these events they say clearly show that Spirit-baptism should be subsequent to conversion as all people mentioned here were already converts before they ‘received’ the Holy Spirit (12). Although the disciples were understood to be born-again long before Pentecost, they received a ‘baptism with the Holy Spirit’ (Acts 1:5, 11:16) that came later, and resulted in great empowering for ministry as well as speaking in tongues.

Therefore, if it was common for Christians in Acts to have this second experience sometime after conversion, should it not be common for us today? How should we understand the ‘second experiences’ that came to born-again believers in Acts? To these questions, we now turn to the Evangelical position and examine the passages that supported Pentecostal’s view on Spirit-baptism thereafter.

The Evangelical Understanding of Spirit-Baptism

For the Evangelicals, Spirit-baptism is understood in a soteriological sense, effected at Christian initiation (13). It is seen as equivalent to the Spirit endowment through Christ’s atoning death for regeneration and transformation, symbolized in water-baptism.(14) The primary purpose of Spirit-baptism is the initiation into the Body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13-14). Thus, there is no need to wait for another baptism in the Spirit after conversion. Quoting John Stott:

“…the Baptism of the Spirit is identical with the ‘gift’ of the Holy Spirit, that it is one of the distinctive blessings of the new covenant, and, because it is an initial blessing, is also a universal blessing for members of the covenant.” (15)

Numerous passages are cited to support their stand although the phrase ‘to baptise in/with the Spirit’ is not always mentioned explicitly (1 Cor 12:13-14; Gal 3:1-4; Heb 6:2-4; Eph 4:4-5; Rom 6:2-11; John 3:5; Acts 2:38; 10:47). In all these passages, repentance, forgiveness, reception of the Spirit, union with Christ and initiation into the Body of Christ are simultaneous and integrally related.

However, seeing the reception of the Spirit just for the initiation process and nothing more makes it difficult to explain why there is a need for another ‘baptism’ in the Spirit for the Samaritan and Ephesian cases, since they should have been initiated into the kingdom of God through water-baptism. (16) On the other hand, some evangelicals explain the seeming delay of the bestowal of the Spirit concern special cases, which are only significant in salvation history, and should not be taken as a norm. (17) However, for the Pentecostals, it is too presumptuous of us to think that Luke’s intention is only to provide historical description of the past without any theological prescription for Christians thereafter.

Both understandings of Spirit-baptism have their strengths and weaknesses and they are not mutually exclusive. Therefore, we need to examine the meaning of ‘baptism in the Holy Spirit’ in the NT and the confirmation that Spirit-baptism is indeed initiatory. What I hope to show is that the Pentecostals are right on target biblically on their experience of the Spirit, but their difficulties arose from the attempt to defend it biblically at the wrong point.(18)

Baptism in the New Testament

There are only seven passages in the NT where we read of someone being baptized in the Holy Spirit. The first four uses of the expression is found in John the Baptist’s prophecy of the ministry of the Lord Jesus: “He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Matt 3:11. Parallels are Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; John 1:33).(19) In these passages, Jesus is the one who will carry out the Spirit-baptism.

The next two passages refer directly to Pentecost; Acts 1:5; 11:16. This event of baptism certainly took place at the day of Pentecost as recorded in Acts 2 when the Holy Spirit fell on the disciples and those with them in great power, and tongues-speaking was manifested (2:14). Six of these verses use almost exactly the same expression in Greek, with only some variation in the word order or verb tense in the sentence. (20)

The seventh and only other occurrence is found in 1 Corinthians 12:13. In this verse, there is an emphatic repetition of the word ‘all’ (‘all baptized’, ‘all… made to drink’) and the word ‘one’ (‘by one Spirit’, ‘into one body’, ‘of one Spirit’). Moreover, the first chapter of 1 Corinthians 12 have ‘the one Spirit’ written three times (9b, 13a, 13b), also ‘the same Spirit’ three times (4, 8, 9a) and once, ‘the one and the same Spirit’ (11). Paul reaches the climax in verse 13 and the baptism of the Spirit in this verse, acts more as the uniting factor (an experience we all had).(21) I believe they are written by the apostle in such a way to emphasize the unity of the Spirit and he is underlining our common experience as Christian believers of the Holy Spirit. Spirit-baptism in this sense, is the means of entry into the body of Christ.

It has been frequently argued by the Pentecostals that Spirit-baptism here is distinct from the Spirit-baptism prophesied by John and Jesus and experienced at Pentecost. They see this verse as ‘For by one Spirit..’(RSV) and said in all six occurrences, Jesus is the baptizer and the Spirit is the element but over here; the Holy Spirit is the baptizer and the body of Christ is the object into which we are baptized.(22) Moreover, the Greek phrase ‘in one Spirit into one body’ is too odd in grammar sense as to be unacceptable. (23) Therefore, they think the phrase must be instrumental: ‘we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body’. If so, this would be the only place in the NT where the Spirit is the agent of baptism.

However, wherever the verb ‘baptize’ is used in the NT, it is always referring to the medium of the baptism, such as water, fire and cloud- and not the agent. Although the distinction seems to make sense in some English translations, it cannot be supported by an examination of the Greek text, for the Greek expression is precisely the same in all its seven occurrences. Therefore, as a sound principle of interpretation, it should be taken to refer to the same baptism experience in each verse. (24)

This definitely has significant impact to our understanding of Spirit-baptism. As far as Paul was concerned, baptism in the Holy Spirit occurred at conversion. The baptism happened to all Corinthians when they became Christians. For it was the baptism that resulted in them being members of the body of Christ, the church. ‘We all’ have shared in this baptism and this drinking according to 1 Corinthians, and it is a blessing personally received by all Christians at their conversion. This Spirit-baptism therefore, is referring to the activity of the Holy Spirit at the beginning of the Christian life when He regenerates us, and cleanses us and cannot refer to an experience after conversion. (25)

Even if the above points to Spirit-baptism as ‘conversion-initiation’ act, how do we then understand the experience of the disciples at Pentecost in Acts 2, and those who had a ‘second experience’ of empowering of the Holy Spirit in Samaria, Cornelius’ household and the Ephesians? Were these not the disciples having previously been regenerated by the Holy Spirit, and only receiving the ‘second blessing’ after their conversion?

Pentecost and the Disciples

It is true that the disciples were Christians long before Pentecost.(26) However, we must realize that Pentecost cannot be viewed as an individual event in the lives of Jesus’ disciples and those present in the upper room. They, uniquely, span the period of transition from the old covenant work and ministry of the Holy Spirit to the new covenant faith. Ferguson said that the disciples’ experience is ‘epoch-crossing’ and is not paradigmatic for the church.(27) They received this remarkable new empowering from the Spirit because they were living at the transition between the old and the new, thus although it was a ‘second experience’ coming after their conversion, it is not a pattern for us to follow- simply because we are not living at a time of transition in the work of the Holy Spirit.(28)

It is by necessity the disciples enter into the full measure of the Spirit’s ministry and empowerment in two stages, reflecting a pattern of continuity (same Spirit) and discontinuity (only at Pentecost the Spirit come in his capacity).(29) Therefore, their experience is viewed as ‘singular’ even though they did experience a ‘baptism in the Holy Spirit’ after their conversion. This happened because they were living in the unique point of history and should not be a revealed norm for all subsequent believers of Christ.(30)

Second Experiences in Acts (8:4-24; 10:148; 19:1-7)

These are not convincing examples to prove the Pentecostal/Charismatic doctrine of Spirit-baptism either. In the case of the Samaritan believers, the answer lies in the centuries old split between the Jews and Samaritans.(31) God, in his providence and sovereignty, withheld the manifestation of the Spirit, till apostles laid their hands as a symbol of God’s channel (8:14-17) 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.(32) If the Spirit had been given immediately upon profession of faith and baptism, the ancient schisms between the Jews and the Samaritans would be carried into the church. The gift of the Holy Spirit in this case showed that both of them were being equally blessed through Christ, and being united by one baptism.

However, the Pentecostals think this is reading too much into the Scripture. Even Packer would have it as ‘a guess, and could not be more’! Thus, in this case of Samaria, the Pentecostals do seem to have a biblical precedent, both for subsequence and almost certainly, for tongues as evidence.(33) However, a caution should be given. Is this single precedent the intended divine pattern for us, or should it be dismissed as a special event in the history of redemption?

The situation in Acts 10 is less complicated as Cornelius is not even mentioned clearly as a genuine believer. He is rather a Gentile (or proselyte Jew) who was one of the first examples of the gospel reaching ‘to the ends of the earth’ (Acts 1:8). He has not first believed and then later come into the second stage of blessing. We encounter the similar situation in Acts 19. The Ephesians had been baptized into the baptism of John the Baptist, but they had not even heard of the Holy Spirit (Acts 19:2)- which is a fact that no one who was present at Pentecost or who heard of the gospel could have failed to know.(34) Therefore, the disciples at Ephesus did not have the new covenant empowering of the Holy Spirit. When they heard of the gospel, they believed in Jesus, and received the power of the Holy Spirit, marking the inbreaking of the new covenant, similar to the disciples at Pentecost.

We are not like the disciples at Ephesus who do not first have faith in a Messiah that we are waiting for, nor are we living in the transition between the old and the new covenant like the disciples at the day of Pentecost. We came to understanding of the gospel immediately, and that makes us like the Corinthians, entering immediately into the new covenant experience of the power of the Holy Spirit.

There are simply no NT texts that warrant us to seek for a ‘second blessing’ of the Holy Spirit that comes after conversion. However, the question remains, “What is actually happening to the millions of Christians who claim they have received the second baptism of the Spirit?” Could they be a genuine work of the Holy Spirit but the biblical examples and categories used have been incorrect? In my opinion, yes.

How should we understand Contemporary Experience?

It is crucial for us to understand the early Christians understanding of the Holy Spirit before we evaluate the contemporary experience. To the early Christians, the Spirit was an eschatological reality, a sure sign from God that the coming age had dawned, and they were set in motion in awaiting the final consummation of all things at Christ’s second coming.(35) To communicate this, Luke intentionally relates the experience on the day of Pentecost as a fulfilment of God’s promise of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:49, Acts 1:4; 2:33) which was foretold long ago by the prophet Joel. This eschatological mindset can be seen by Peter altering the phrase ‘after these things’ to ‘in the last days’.

What we must understand further is that the Spirit is the chief element for this new existence of the eschatological community. For the early believers, it was not merely to be saved, forgiven and waiting for heaven. It was above all else to receive the Holy Spirit and to walk into the coming age with power.(36) Thus, for all early Christians, to be Spirit-baptized, is the presupposition of the NT writers and the Spirit was always thought as a powerful presence. In fact, the terms ‘Spirit’ and ‘power’ at times are used interchangeably.(37)

In comparison, most Christians in the history of the church scarcely experienced the Spirit as a powerful experience (although they believed in) comparing to the earlier believers. It is upon this background of reading the NT existence of empowerment by the Spirit so correctly, along with the frustration over the ‘quiet, mediocre, and less-than-adequate’ norm of power-inbreaking that the Pentecostals experienced- that led them to seek for the NT experience.

With the historical understanding of the NT converts and expectations, when one was converted, the dynamic empowering dimension with gifts, miracles and evangelism was a normal part of their experience and expectation. However, in the subsequent history of the church, the ‘empowerment’ seems to be effectively lost. We are familiar and come to experience with the fact that Christian life came to consist of conversion without real growth, baptism without real obedience and ministry without empowering.

It is precisely out of such background that one is to understand the Pentecostal movement with its deep dissatisfaction with life in Christ without life in the Spirit, and their subsequent experience of a mighty baptism in the Spirit.(38) Even if their timing was off as far as the biblical norm was concerned, their experience was not. The Pentecostals and Charismatics have captured for the church what the early Christians experienced as a norm- the empowering of life in the Spirit as the normal Christian life.

Now, we can understand why our use of terms to describe this experience, and the category of understanding we put in is so important. Spirit-baptism is therefore, a single experience of being empowered for ministry that is inseparable from becoming a Christian (or being brought into the body of Christ), and people have either received that experience, or they have not at all.

We have also seen the experience that has come to millions of people in the charismatic renewal as ‘a large step of growth’ (39) in several aspects of the Christian life so much so it is equivalent to a ‘rebaptism’ of the Spirit.

Yet, we must avoid the confusion of coining the same word for both experiences; during conversion and after conversion. To describe genuine ‘second experiences’ today that describe a new empowering or infilling for ministry, or a renewed growth in the things of God, the NT speaks of ‘be filled with the Spirit’ (Eph 5:18). Paul uses a present tense imperative verb that could be more explicitly be translated as ‘Be continually being filled with the Holy Spirit’, an experience that can be repeated.(40)

This infilling of the Spirit will result in renewed worship and thanksgiving to God (Eph 5:19-20) and in renewed relationships to others as well (Eph 5:21-6:9). When the Holy Spirit fills us, He is the one who would empower us for service by giving us spiritual gifts, and increase the effectiveness and power for ministry unto Him. All these ‘empowering works’ are the results of the ‘second-baptism’ understood by the Pentecostals. The divisiveness that comes with the term ‘baptism in the Holy Spirit’ could easily be avoided by using this alternative term.

On the other hand, if the terminology ‘baptism in the Holy Spirit’ is changed for something more representative of the NT teaching, there should be no objection for people to come into churches, and be encouraged to prepare their hearts for spiritual renewal. This can be done by their sincere repentance and renewed commitment to Christ, and by believing that the Holy Spirit can work more powerfully in their lives. In fact, every self-professed believer of Christ should genuinely long for greater power in ministry, greater joy in worship, and a deeper fellowship with God.

Conclusion

As we have seen, the effect of Spirit-baptism is manifold. It is not meant only for the purification and regeneration of God’s people, but the church is also endowed with charism and power, which are important for building the body of Christ. Both of them are mutually dependent from a collective point of view, especially when it is viewed primarily from an eschatological and soteriological perspective.(41) Pentecostals have contributed significantly in discovering the charismatic and empowerment dimension of Spirit-baptism. Evangelicals have highlighted the salvific and regenerating dimension of it. All of these traditions have contributed, yet none of us can confine the work of the Holy Spirit to our own human formulations. Knowing our limitations and bearing with one another in love, we should have mutual understanding and respect for one another.

Notes"

(1) Tak-Ming Cheung, “Understanding of Spirit-Baptism” in JPT, Issue 8, (Apr 1996): 115. In this essay, the

term ‘Spirit-Baptism’, ‘Baptism in the Holy Spirit’, ‘Baptism with the Holy Spirit’ is used interchangeably.

(2) Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: an introduction to biblical doctrine. (Leicester: IVP, 1994) 764.

(3) By separability and subsequence, I mean the question of ‘second baptism’ understood by Pentecostals.

(4) Pentecostals refers to any denomination that traces its origin back to the Pentecostal revival that began in the US in 1901. They believe that baptism in the Holy Spirit is ordinarily a subsequent event to conversion and is made evident by the sign of speaking in tongues, and all NT’s spiritual gifts are still valid and should be sought and used today. Charismatic refers to any denomination that traces their origin to the charismatic renewal movement of the 1960s and 1970s. This group seeks to practice all the spiritual gifts mentioned in the NT (non-cessationist), and they allow differing viewpoints on whether Spirit-Baptism is a subsequent event to conversion, and whether it must be accompanied by tongue-speaking. In the 1980s, a third renewal movement arose, called the ‘third wave’ and the most prominent leaders being Professor Peter Wagner at Fuller Seminary. This group of people is encouraged to seek and use the NT’s spiritual gifts and that the proclamation of the gospel should be accompanied by ‘signs and wonders’, following the NT pattern. However, they believed that Spirit-Baptism happens to all Christians at conversion and the subsequent experiences are called ‘filling’ with the Holy Spirit.

(5) They believe that the second baptism in the Spirit is to empower believers to do missions and good works.

(6) F. D. Bruner, A Theology of The Holy Spirit: the Pentecostal experience and the New Testament witness.

(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdsman, 1970) 61.

(7) Michael Green, I believe in the Holy Spirit. I believe Series. (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1975) 125. This Pentecostal doctrine of a second work was mediated into twentieth-century Pentecostalism through Wesley and his varied heirs in the several evangelical movements of nineteenth-century Christianity. It was principally connected to the American revivalism, led by Charles Finney and then more directly to the holiness movements. Worth mentioning people of influences are Walter Palmers, R .Pearsall Smiths, W. J. Boardman, and later, Andrew Murray, F.B. Meyer, A.B. Simpson, A.J. Gordon, and especially R.A. Torrey. Refer to Bruner, 62.

(8) The ‘tongues’ remains the typical Pentecostal-charismatic characteristic. They are an ‘initial evidence’ for a Spirit-baptism, bit not a sign of initiation as a Christian.

(9)Nobert Baumert, “Charism and Spirit Baptism: presentation of an analysis” in JPT Vol 12:2, (Apr 2004): 161.

(10) John L.Gresham Jr, Charles Finney’s Doctrine of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1989) 55.

(11) Ibid., 171.

(12) Cheung, 116.

(13) Initiation here means ‘the moment a person accepts Christ as his or her Lord and Saviour.

(14) Ibid., 119.

(15)John Stott, Baptism and Fullness: the work of the Holy Spirit today. 2^nd Ed. (London: IVP, 1975) 43.

Most evangelical scholars and leaders hold this view: Billy Graham, The Holy Spirit. WBC Series (Waco,

TX: Word, 1978), A.A. Hoekema, Holy Spirit Baptism (Exeter: Paternoster Press, 1982) 18-20, Gordon Fee,

Michael Green and F.D. Bruner. Dunn, Baptism in the Holy Spirit. (London: SCM, 1970) 54, has argued the

basic soteriological interpretation of Spirit-baptism most forcefully and influentially.

(16) In both cases, the baptism that the disciples received is authentic Christian Baptism. This stand is argued

convincingly in R.P. Menzies, “Luke and the Spirit: a reply to James Dunn” in JPT, Issue 4, (April 1994), 125.

(17) Bruner, 213-214.

(18) I would concur with the general view given by Gordon D. Fee, Gospel and Spirit: issues in New testament

hermeneutics. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1991) 108-119.

(19) Unless otherwise noted, Scripture quotations are taken from the NIV.

(20) Grudem, 766. All six passages use the verb baptize (baptize), plus the prepositional phrace en pneumati hagio (“in [or with] the Holy Spirit”) except that Mark omits the preposition en. There is no difference in meaning, because the dative nonce alone can take the same sense as the preposition en plus the dative noun.

(21) Stott, 39.

(22) Sinclair Ferguson, The Holy Spirit: contours of Christian theology. (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1996) 88.

(23) D. A. Carson, Showing the Spirit: a theological exposition of 1 Corinthians 12:14. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker,

1987) 47.

(24) Stott, 40. In fact, if Paul had wanted to say that we were baptized by the Holy Spirit, he would have used a different expression. To be baptized by someone in the NT is always expressed by the preposition hypo followed by a genitive noun. Refer especially Matt 3:6, Mark 1:5 where people were baptized in the Jordan river by John. Or Luke 7:30, where the Pharisees had not been baptized Or Luke 7:30, where the Pharisees had not been baptized by John. However, Paul here used en plus the dative therefore the verse should strongly be read as ‘baptized in or with the Holy Spirit’.

(25) Grudem, 768.

(26) In fact, they were born-again believers long before Jesus breathed on them and told them to receive the Holy Spirit in John 20:22.

(27) Ferguson, 80.

(28) Grudem, 772.

(29) Ferguson, 80.

(30) J.I.Packer, Keep In Step With The Spirit. (Grand Rapids, MI: Fleming H. Revell, 1984) 205.

(31) Green, 138. The hands of the apostles were, figuratively speaking, the bridge that spanned the chasm of racial prejudice. It is known as the Samaritan Pentecost and serves as a dramatic and convincing proof that God’s people, in Christ, were one. Refer to John Williams, The Holy Spirit Lord and Life-Giver. (New Jersey: Loizeaux Brothers, 1980) 193.

(32) Packer, 204.

(33) Fee, 110.

(34) Grudem, 774.

(35)Cheung, 124 also noted the importance of understanding Spirit-baptism as a metaphor to describe the abundant endowment of the Spirit in a new way.

(36) Fee, 114.

(37) See especially Luke 1:35; 24:49.

(38) Fee, 119.

(39) There are other experiences that normally occur other than tongues and prophecies when being ‘filled’ with the Spirit. To some, reading the bible has become meaningful, prayer bas become real, the presence of God was acknowledged, worship has become an experience of deep joy, and they have begun to experience spiritual gifts that they had not known before. It brought excitement, and in essence, are experiences of assurance what it means to be one with Christ. According to Packer, 226: It is an intensifying of the sense of acceptance, adoption, and fellowship with God, which the Spirit imparts to every Christian and sustains in

him more or less clearly from conversion.

(40) Grudem, 781.

(41) Cheung, 128.

Bibliography

BOOKS

Bruner, F.D. A Theology of The Holy Spirit: the Pentecostal experience and the New Testament witness. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdsman, 1970.

Carson, D.A. Showing the Spirit: a theological exposition of 1 Corinthians 12:14. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1987.

Dunn, James. Baptism in the Holy Spirit. London: SCM, 1970.

Fee, Gordon. Gospel and Spirit: issues in New Testament hermeneutics. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1991.

Ferguson, Sinclair. Holy Spirit: contours of Christian theology. Downers Grove, Ill: IVP, 1996)

Green, Michael. I believe in the Holy Spirit. I believe series. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1975.

Gresham, John Jr. Charley Finney’s Doctrine of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1989.

Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology: an introduction to biblical doctrine. Leicester: IVP, 1994.

Graham, Billy. The Holy Spirit. WBC . Waco, TX: Word, 1978.

Hoekema, A.A. Holy Spirit Baptism. Exeter: Paternoster Press, 1982.

Packer, J.I. Keep in Step with the Spirit. Grand Rapids, MI: Fleming Revell, 1984.

Stott, John. Baptism and Fullness: the work of the Holy Spirit today. 2^nd ed. London: IVP, 1975.

Williams, John. The Holy Spirit Lord and Life-Giver. New Jersey: Loizeaux Brothers, 1980.

JOURNALS

Baumert, Norbert. “Charism and Spirit Baptism: presentation of an analysis” in JPT, Vol 12:2 (Apr 2004): 147-179.

Cheung, Tak-Ming. “Understandings of Spirit-Baptism” in JPT, Issue 8 (Apr 1996): 115-128.

Menzies, R.P. “Luke and the Spirit” in JPT, Issue 4 (Apr 1994): 115-138.