Is the Baptism of Holy Spirit a separate experience form the New Birth?

This post is concerning the topic of the baptism of Holy Spirit and "tongues". I feel strongly that it is incumbent upon us all to discover what the Word says on the topic, and not rely on experience, or well meaning teachers who have no practical knowledge of the subject, or religious traditions that deny these things ar for today.

Note: apologies to all, this is a bit long, but please take the time to read it all - thanks

I commend you readers sincerely for your desire to study and understand the Word of
God.

However, I am confused by some people's logic concerning the Baptism of Holy Spirit (complete with speaking in tongues) and the New Birth being one and the same.

Let me try to explain.

If, as some say, the event in Acts 2, when the Holy Spirit was poured out on the first disciples,
and they spoke with tongues, also corresponds with being "born again", then, because God is not a respecter of persons (i.e. what He does for one, He must do for all), and if this account is supposed to show us, today, that this is what should happen when we too are "born again", then by that definition, most people who call themselves Christian are not!! Before you get all upset, please bear with my continuing argument.

The account in Acts 10, when the Gentiles first received the Gospel, also explicitly says that when they had received the gospel from Peter, they all believed and were then filled with Holy Spirit and spoke in other tongues. The account here is VERY clear that Peter and his 6 companions knew that the Gentiles had received the baptism of Holy Spirit because they spoke in tongues.

Again, making the assumption that being "born-again" and receiving the Baptism of Holy Spirit are one and the same, the pattern clearly would be that if we were "born again" by and through what the Bible terms the Baptism of Holy Spirit, this should be evident to anyone watching, because we too would speak in tongues.

On this basis, these two accounts clearly would seem, based on the above assumption, to
establish the biblical pattern for what to expect when we are "born again".

However, since in our experiences today, and I believe you would at least agree with me on this, it does not usually happen like this, our understanding and interpretation of what the Word says MUST be incomplete... or even incorrect.

Romans 10:9-10 says that in order to be saved = "born-again", ALL that is required of us is that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

This is simple, very straightforward, and easily understood. There is no mention of "speaking in tongues". So, either our understanding is incomplete concerning what the Baptism of Holy Spirit actually means, or we are all not "born-again" if we do not "speak in other tongues", as
some would (and do) actually teach (I AM NOT ADVOCATING THIS POSITION - I am
playing devil's advocate).

Since this is obviously the NOT the case, we must dig deeper.

We need to see where the first disciples became "born again". This must have happened at some prior time to the events in Acts 2.

Fortunately, the Bible tells us.

On the day that Jesus rose from the dead, after He had ascended to His Father, he returned to earth and met with the disciples, who at that time were in hiding in the Upper Room.

You will find, upon studying the scriptures, that in spite of the women (Mary Magdalene in particular, Salome, and Mary the mother of James/Joses - I personally think that this other "Mary" mentioned in the Gospel accounts was in fact Jesus' birth mother, since He had brothers named James and Joses) telling the disciples that Jesus was risen from the dead, they refused to
believe their eye witness account of the Resurrection, for which Jesus subsequently rebuked them for their lack of faith and unbelief.

John's account clearly says that at this time, in actuality at the end of that very same day, Jesus came amongst them and "breathed" on them and said to them "Receive the Holy Spirit". [John 20:22] At this point in time, the disciple MUST have been "born-again", since Jesus had clearly told them that no one could enter the Kingdom of God unless they had been "born again" of the Spirit. This event mirrors what happened in the Garden of Eden, when God "breathed" His
Spirit into Adam, and he became a speaking, living, spirit being.

(Side note: when Adam sinned, his spirit died; therefore, Jesus had to breath on the disciples to impart new life to their dead spirits, so that they could become part of God's family again - i.e. they were, at this moment, "born again" into the Kingdom of Heaven, just as Jesus had said would have to happen in John 3, during His conversation with Nicodemus).

Going back to the Gospel accounts, it is recorded that some 40 days later, just before Jesus' ascension, He instructs the disciples to remain in Jerusalem until they receive "power from on high", or as Luke puts it, until they had received the "promise of the Father and had been "endured with power from on high. [Luke 24:49, Acts 1:4]. Since the disciples had already "received the Holy Spirit" the same day that Jesus rose from the dead, you have to ask what is this "promise of the Father" that results in being "endued with power from on high". Given the time frame, they obviously cannot be the same.

Let us see what Scripture has to say about this "promise of the Father". In Acts 1:5 Jesus calls this the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and said it would come UPON them. Now, since they were already "born-again", since Jesus had "breathed" Holy Spirit INTO them some 40 days before, these are clearly NOT the same event. It is important to note the distinction between INTO and UPON to fully grasp what is actually happening.

Furthermore, in Acts 3:33, Peter confirms that the "promise of the Father' is the outpouring of Holy Spirit in power with the evidence of speaking in tongues, upon the believers, since that is what everyone in Jerusalem saw and heard (according to Acts 2:5-13):

33 “Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the
promise of the Holy Spirit, He [Jesus] poured out this [the Holy Spirit] which you now see and hear.

If you look at what John has to say about the coming of the Holy Spirit, you see that:

(1) Holy Spirit was going to be sent by the Father,
(2) He could only be sent AFTER Jesus had returned to Heaven, to sit at God's right hand,
(3) It would be to our advantage that Holy Spirit came,
(4) He would testify of Jesus, along with us,
(5) He would be our Helper, Comforter, Advocate, Counselor, Intercessor, Strengthener,
Standby who comes along side of us
(6) He would lead us into all Truth,
(7) He will tell us of things to come

Now, according to Genesis 1:1-2, the Holy Spirit has been here on earth since the world was created. So, He was already on here earth during Jesus' ministry, so obviously, Jesus is talking about a different manifestation of Holy Spirit's work and ministry, that relates specifically to the ongoing work and ministry of His Body the Church, once He had gone away to Heaven.

Just to make sure we get this, Luke records that the command to remain in Jerusalem until they received the Promise is given to the disciples more than 40 days AFTER they had already received Holy Spirit WITHIN themselves, just before Jesus ascended again to Heaven, to sit at the right hand of the Father - Acts 1:8.

Then, in Acts 2:1-4, we see the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit, with power, on the disciples - all 120 of them, together with the manifestation of the gift of tongues, as the Spirit gave then utterance (i.e. the Holy Spirit gave them the words - utterances - to say, and the disciples spoke them out, using their tongues and mouths - in other words they exercised their ability to speak, and spoke out the words that Holy Spirit placed in their spirits - Holy Spirit did not, as some teach, take them over, override their free wills, and cause them to speak in ecstatic
languages).

Clearly, Scripture identifies the process of being "born again" as a separate experience from receiving the "Baptism of Holy Spirit".

I have given two examples from the Scriptures where a group of people were first "born again", and then subsequently received the "Baptism of Holy Spirit", in both cases with the evidence of speaking in other tongues. Now, Scripture says that we need two or more witnesses to confirm something in the Word. In order to ensure we have received a proper understanding of these
matters, let us look at one more, specific example, where a person was "born again" and then, a few days later received the Holy Spirit, with the evidence of speaking in tongues (although in the account this latter fact is not specifically mentioned, but the person involved makes a statement later on that he had received the gift of speaking in tongues).

Go with me to Acts 9:1-19. Here is the account of Saul/Paul's conversion and subsequent receiving (infilling) of the Holy Spirit. Now, in v5, you see Saul already acknowledging that the person speaking to him was worthy of obedience and submission, because he called what at this point in time is just an unknown voice, "Lord". Then Jesus reveals to Saul that He is Jesus, and that Saul's activities against the Church are a direct persecution of Jesus. In v6 Saul acknowledges that what Jesus is saying is Truth, thereby admitting that Jesus had been raised from the dead, since He is obviously now very alive, and immediately submits himself to the Lordship of Jesus, asking what he should do next. Now, according to Romans 10:9-10, if you believe in your heart and confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, you will be saved.

It is obvious from this account so far that Saul not only recognized that Jesus had been raised from the dead, but that he was also worthy to be called "Lord", and more than that, he confessed this out aloud. In doing so he fulfilled the requirements for being saved.

So, Saul is now a "born again" member of the Church - he then continues on to Damascus. As we continue to read through the account, we see Ananias, an ordinary follower of Jesus (not an apostle or elder, just a believer like one of us) calling Saul his brother (v17), meaning that Ananias understood from his conversation with Jesus that Saul was now a "born again" member of the body of Christ, and should be treated as such - much to Ananias' initial discomfort and
misgivings.

Ananias then explains to Saul that he has been instructed personally by Jesus to come and lay hands on Saul for him to receive his sight, and to receive the Holy Spirit. Since Saul is already "born again" - which had happened 3 days previously, Ananias is about to used to do something
more - Saul is to "be filled with the Holy Spirit" (v17). So now Saul has been "born again" and has received or has been "filled" with the Holy Spirit. You could argue that what Saul/Paul experienced was not the same experience as the first disciples experienced on the day of Pentecost, but then you have to explain at what point when Saul/Paul received the gift of tongues that he claims in his letter to the Corinthian church "to speak more than any of you" (1 Cor. 14:18). You would also have to explain why Saul/Paul's experience is materially different from the other disciples experiences.

Now, and this is key to understanding the experience of the "baptism of Holy Spirit" as being distinct from the need to be "born-again" in order to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, Jesus, following his water baptism by John also received the "baptism of Holy Spirit". It says in Luke 4:1 that Jesus, being filled with the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness. Jesus had to be "filled with the Holy Spirit" before he could commence his ministry. Jesus confirms this in Luke 4:18-19, when he declares that

"“The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me,
Because He has anointed Me
To preach the gospel to the poor;
He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted,
To proclaim liberty to the captives
And recovery of sight to the blind,
To set at liberty those who are oppressed;
To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.”"

Jesus, because He was "without sin", did not need to be "born again" of the Spirit, because His spirit was never dead in the first place (until He died on the Cross - but that's another teaching for another day). He had the Holy Spirit living in Him from the moment He was conceived. He did however need to have Holy Spirit come UPON Him to anoint Him for His supernatural ministry. Remember, Jesus laid aside His power and glory and became a Man when He was born, so He no longer had access to the omnipotent and omnipresent power and knowledge of God whilst he walked the earth as a man. As He said Himself, He could only do what the Father told Him to do, and what Holy Spirit empowered him to do.

We, as sinful humans, all need to be "born again" because we need our spirit man to be given life - every person born into the world since Adam has a "dead" spirit - i.e. a spirit that is not alive to God. That's why we need to be saved, and our spirit man made a "new creation" - when the Holy Spirit comes to live on the inside of us.

So likewise for Saul/Paul (and according to Jesus' own words and the accounts in Acts, for everyone else in the Church) - he too needed the "enduing with power from on high" - the baptism of Holy Spirit so he could start his ministry, with the Holy Spirit coming UPON him.

If Jesus, the first disciples and the Apostles, the first Gentiles in the Church, Saul/Paul needed this "infilling", "baptism", which ever you call it, of "power from on high", when the Holy Spirit comes UPON a believer - who by definition already has the Holy Spirit WITHIN them, why should we nowadays be any different or have no need of it? Are we, in effect, by saying we do not need the baptism of Holy Spirit, in fact guilty of telling God we don't need such supernatural gifts and power in our lives - in reality telling God we don't need such things nowadays?

In order to help clarify what the Word says, let me quote someone who presents the following argument against separate experiences of the New Birth and the baptism of Holy Spirit. They made the statement:

That clearly means that all believers have the Holy Spirit. If all are baptized into one body by the Holy Spirit but not all speak in tongues, it makes much more sense to me that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is an event that occurs when the Holy Spirit initiates faith at the time of the believer’s
salvation.

If this statement is true, then, according to the biblical accounts I have discussed, we should all speak in tongues when we get born again, since that is what happened in every case when believers received the baptism of Holy Spirit. Since it is clear from your own admission that you do not speak in tongues, by your own statements you are also implying that you are not born again, which statement is obviously, to all of us, not true.

Every believer receives the presence of the Holy Spirit WITHIN them at the new birth. But the Bible clearly teaches that there is also the experience of the Holy Spirit coming UPON a believer and "enduing them with power from on high". All the accounts in Acts indicate that this second experience is accompanied in every case by the believer being able to speak with other tongues.

I have tried to present a reasoned argument from Scripture as to why being "born-again" and receiving the "baptism of Holy Spirit" are two distinct and separate experiences for every believer. So, if you have not asked God to baptize you with Holy Spirit, so that you might receive "power from on high", I cannot more strongly recommend that you ask Him, and in faith receive, and open your mouth and allow Holy Spirit to give you your own supernatural prayer language. It will, I guarantee, revolutionize your walk with God.

John