Holy Spirit baptism

[Preach]

In Acts Chapter one, our Lord tells the disciples that He is going to baptize with the Holy Spirit. What does He mean in the Acts ch #1 context?

Also, how does this differ, if at all, from John the Baptis's testimony regarding Christ and His baptizing with the Holy Spirit? Thanks.

 

[WrittenFromUtopia]

John (Calvin) says:

5. Because John truly. Christ repeateth this unto his apostles out of John's own words. For some part of them had heard that at John's mouth, which the Evangelists report, "I truly baptize you with water, but he that cometh after me shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire." Now Christ pronounceth that they shall well perceive that that is true indeed which he said. Furthermore, this serveth greatly to confirm the sentence next going before, for it is an argument drawn from the office of Christ. And that thus: John was sent to baptize with water, he fulfilled his function as it became the servant of God. The Son of God is sent to baptize with the Holy Ghost; it remained, therefore, that he do his duty. Neither can it be otherwise but he must do that which his Father hath commanded him to do, and for which also he came down into the earth. But it seemeth a very absurd thing to restrain that unto the visible sending of the Holy Ghost, which was spoken universally of regeneration. 3 I answer, that Christ did not then only baptize with the Holy Ghost, when as he sent him under the form of fiery tongues; for he had baptized his apostles before this; and he baptizeth all the elect thus daily. But because the sending of the Holy Ghost after so glorious a sort was a token of the hidden grace wherewith he doth daily inspire his elect, he doth fitly apply thereunto the testimony of John. And truly this was as though it had been the common baptism of the Church. For besides that the apostles did not receive the Spirit for themselves only, but for the use of all the faithful, there was also declared the universal favor of Christ towards his Church, while that he poured out thereupon the gifts of his Spirit in great abundance.

Although, therefore, he doth daily baptize the elect of his Father, yet was this no let why he might not show forth this token to be remembered above all others, that the apostles might know that they were only entered by John; and that not in vain, seeing their perfection was hard at hand. And that is frivolous which some gather out of this place most commonly, 4 namely, that the baptism of John and the baptism of Christ were diverse. For here doth not he dispute in this place of baptism, but maketh only a comparison betwixt the person of John and the person of Christ. When as John did say that he did baptize with water only, he did not reason of what sort his baptism was; but what he himself was; lest he should arrogate that unto himself which was proper to Christ. As also, the ministers in these days ought not to speak otherwise of themselves; but they must acknowledge Christ to be the author of all those things which they do prefigure in the outward baptism, and leave nothing to themselves save only the outward administration. For when as these titles are attributed unto baptism, namely, that it is the laver of regeneration, (Titus 3:5,) a washing away of sins, the fellowship of death, and burying with Christ, (Romans 6:4,) and a grafting into the body of Christ, it is not declared what man, being the minister of the outward sign, doth; but rather what Christ doth, who only giveth force and efficacy unto the signs. We must always hold fast this distinction, lest, whilst we deck man too much, we take from Christ. 5

But here may a question be moved, why he doth rather name John here than any other; first, It is manifest enough that John did profess himself to be the minister of the outward sign, namely, of water, and that Christ was the author of the spiritual baptism; secondly, Because it was meet that John should decrease and Christ increase; and, thirdly, Because the apostles did so much esteem of John, (John 3:30,) it might have been that thereby the glory of Christ might have been obscured. Therefore, Christ, to the end he might reclaim them to himself, telleth them that John did only minister unto them the external baptism; notwithstanding, he confirmeth them also, lest they should doubt of the promise; for they did attribute very much unto John, and therefore were they persuaded that the baptism which they had received by him was not in vain. Now, if that the verity and force thereof must be looked for at Christ's hands, then ought the apostles to hope that that shall surely be fulfilled which John prefigured.

So must we, in like manner, think that we are not in vain baptized with water by men, because Christ, who commanded the same to be done, will fulfill his office, and baptize us with the Spirit. So faith draweth a consequent from the outward sign unto the inward effect; yet doth it not attribute any more than is meet, either to the sign or to the minister thereof, because in the sign it only looketh unto the promise, which is Christ's, and doth acknowledge him to be the only author of grace. Let us, therefore, use such a mean that we do in no part diminish Christ's honor; and yet, nevertheless, let us hope for that fruit by our baptism which is noted in this place. By assigning so short a time our Savior maketh them more joyful to hope well. Whereupon it followeth, that that death was not to be lamented which brought with it presently so precious fruit. And let us note this also, that this word baptism is used improperly in this place, that the contrariety may be full. After the same sort, Paul, in his Epistle unto the Romans, (Romans 3:26,) after he hath set down the law of works, to the end that the contrary may answer on the other side, he useth the law of faith for faith itself.

[Edited on 2-20-2006 by WrittenFromUtopia]

 

[WrittenFromUtopia]

Calvin seems to be emphasizing the fact that the baptism of water is the responsibility of an lawfully ordained minister of the gospel, while the baptism of the Holy Spirit is the work of Christ Himself. Mere baptism by water does not regeneration cause, but only the work of Christ in sending the Holy Spirit to regenerate THE ELECT. Then, and only then is their baptism a baptism of both water and the Holy Spirit. Without the work of Christ in the heart of the elect, a baptism is merely water.

 

[JohnStevenson]

Originally posted by PreachIn Acts Chapter one, our Lord tells the disciples that He is going to baptize with the Holy Spirit. What does He mean in the Acts ch #1 context?

The context of Acts 1 is Acts 2. The Spirit baptism that is promised in Acts 1 takes place in Acts 2. In this particular instance, it takes place in a way that is accompanied by sights and signs so that there will be no mistaking it.

 

[Preach]

If the baptism of the Holy Spirit equates usually to either regeneration or conversion, then what did Christ mean by baptizing with the Holy Spirit at Pentecost?

In other words, was the New Testament Church baptized on Pentecost? If so, what did that baptism actually do? Is it tied in with the Holy Spirit empowering the Church to carry out the Great Commission and empower believers withspiritual gifts?

After all, Old Testament saints were regenerated and sealed with the Holy Spirit too. Thanks
-Bobby-