The Holy Spirit Descends (AI generated image)
This is Part 2 in a series about the timing and precedent of receiving the Holy Spirit.
In Part 1, we saw that Jesus was first baptized, and then he received the Holy Spirit. In Part 2, I will examine this order for a precedent, if any, concerning the timing of when new covenant believers receive the Holy Spirit.
For starters, in considering any potential precedent of Jesus’ experience of “first baptism, and then the Holy Spirit,” I am not talking about a precedent concerning Jesus’ specific identity or ministry purpose that for him receiving the Spirit signified or empowered. I am, however, talking about precedent concerning the order and timing of receiving the Holy Spirit, as well as purpose in general of why God gives his Spirit.And at this point, I feel a need to explain briefly that many popular doctrines exist today concerning the order and timing of when a convert receives the Holy Spirit (this would be a blog post all its own). Included in this is a necessary explanation of the demarcation between receiving the indwelling Spirit versus the coming upon or filling of the Spirit, each serving a somewhat different purpose according to any particular doctrine.
Suffice it to say that some believe a convert receives the indwelling Spirit before salvation, in order to bring him to faith and salvation. Some believe a convert receives the indwelling Spirit at the exact moment of and for the purpose of salvation, for example, during a sinner’s prayer for salvation, or in water baptism for the forgiveness of sins. And some believe a convert receives the indwelling Spirit at the moment of and for the purpose of salvation, but also later experiences a second Spirit reception for ministry empowerment, either described as a filling or a coming on or upon of the Spirit.
I needed to summarize this issue because, depending on one’s position, any apparent precedent concerning Jesus’ experience of “first baptism, and then the Holy Spirit” may seem foreign or contradictory. Sometimes doctrinal starting points can hinder our ability to see what scripture may be teaching. I have found it is always best to strive to understand any position, regardless if it is one I accept or not.
I will now turn to what reveals itself as the major precedent: first baptism in water, and then the Holy Spirit.
Without a doubt, Jesus first was baptized, and then he received the Holy Spirit. The question is whether this is a normative sequential order God established, and therefore, whether it then serves as a precedent for everyone coming after. The key that unlocks the answer is Jesus’ response to John when John tried to prevent Jesus from being baptized:
13 Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptized by him. 14 John would have prevented him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?” 15 But Jesus answered him, “Let it be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he consented. (Matthew 3:13-15)
Although Jesus had no sin and thus did not need John’s baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of his sins (Luke 3:3), God still required Jesus to be baptized with John’s baptism. Why would God still require Jesus to be baptized? Jesus understood his obedience to the requirement as to “fulfill all righteousness.” Couldn’t God just have given the Spirit to Jesus at any time? Perhaps, but God chose to order it sequentially as first baptism, and then the Holy Spirit. Both Jesus and John knew that God had ordered it so. God had told John that Jesus must first be baptized (John 1:31-33), that he may then receive the Spirit, thus being revealed as the Son of God. Fulfilling all righteousness refers to Jesus obeying what God told him to do in order to receive the Holy Spirit.
In John’s ministry, water baptism is the cleansing ritual God prescribes in which he forgives sin. The precedent here is in the nature of baptism as a conditional cleansing and purification ritual that rightly and orderly prepares an individual to receive a prescribed benefit. In the case of John’s audience, the benefit is the forgiveness of sins. In the case of Jesus, the benefit is receiving the Holy Spirit. As Jesus said, it is “fitting” for him to be baptized so that he ultimately may receive the Holy Spirit. Jesus fulfilled all righteousness by obeying John’s baptism so that he may receive the Holy Spirit, even though he did not need John’s baptism for any forgiveness. This was God’s prescribed sequential order.
And in the new covenant, water baptism remains the cleansing ritual God prescribes in which he forgives sin (Acts 2:38), which rightly prepares the vessel to receive the presence of God via the Holy Spirit. The precedent of “first baptism, and then the Holy Spirit” proves itself when Peter, by inspiration of the Spirit, commands the same sequential order: first baptism, and then the Holy Spirit:
“Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” (Acts 2:38)
In this prescribed sequential order, God first applies justification (forgiveness) in the water, and then those who have been baptized are to receive the Holy Spirit for purposes of sanctification and empowerment—the very presence of God, which is in a sense a realization of their salvation while alive on the earth. This sequential order makes perfect sense, as the condition for receiving the Holy Spirit is first obeying God in repentance and baptism (Acts 2:38 and Acts 5:32). Jesus obeying John’s baptism so that he would receive the Holy Spirit is the inauguration of the prescribed, sequential norm for all after Jesus had poured out the Spirit. It is fitting for Jesus to be the first in line to experience this, for he is the forerunner.
If the order and timing were that God gave Jesus the Holy Spirit in the water of his baptism, we would expect to see this same prescription clearly on Peter’s lips. But we do not. No one listening to Peter at Pentecost would have been confused about the timing of the reception of the Spirit, nor would they have thought that Peter meant they would receive the Spirit in the water of baptism. This is because he plainly tells them that baptism is for the forgiveness of sins. They all rightly understood the conditional nature of “first baptism, and then the Holy Spirit.”
Water baptism retains its foundational purpose from John to Peter—mainly, that in baptism God is working and applying forgiveness for the individual, not of the individual’s doing, but of God’s working. The ritual of baptism never in itself included the concept of conveying the Holy Spirit, neither for Jesus, nor for new covenant believers. By prescribing baptism for the forgiveness of sins, Peter simply continues what was already the well-understood norm, but now those who obey it may receive the Holy Spirit. One must note the seamless continuation of the doctrine of baptism for the forgiveness of sins from John to Peter, which, for Peter, now is a prescribed condition and prerequisite for receiving the Holy Spirit, and to be done in Jesus’ name. First baptism, and then the Holy Spirit, is now the prescribed, sequential, normative pattern for all believers.
In summary, the prescribed order of “first baptism, and then the Holy Spirit” for new covenant believers finds its precedent in Jesus’ baptism and subsequent reception of the Holy Spirit.
But this brings up two very important questions:
1. What about the teaching that a convert receives the indwelling gift of the Holy Spirit at the moment of salvation in order for the Spirit to work salvation (whether in water baptism for the forgiveness of sins, or during a sinner’s prayer, or at the initial moment of coming to faith in Jesus)?
2. What about the accounts of Acts 8 (Samaritans) and Acts 10 (Cornelius/gentiles) that do not exactly follow this prescribed order of “first baptism, and then the Holy Spirit”?
These questions will be the topics of Part 3, Part4, and Part 5 to come.
