Re: Knowing the Holy Spirit -- The Baptism of the Spirit

On Feb 15, 2025, Steve Hayes wrote
(Message-ID:<[email protected]>):

> On Thu, 13 Feb 2025 07:56:42 +0200, Steve Hayes
> <[email protected]>  wrote:
>
> > For St Symeon the New Theologian on Baptism in the Holy Spirit, see:
> >
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-FHHkit6Y4
> >
> > The expression "Holy Spirit Baptism" has been described, in the first
> > part of this paper, as a critical moment in the spiritual life as seen
> > and lived by Saint Symeon the New Theologian. Historical backgrounds.
> > The Pentecostal movement was inspired by the Holiness 36 and Keswick
> > 37 movements in which regards the Holy Spirit Baptism.
> >
> > See here:
> >
> > <https://www.academia.edu/32062037/Baptism_in_the_Holy_Spirit_An_Analysis_of
> > _the_Doctrine_at_Symeon_the_New_Theologian_and_in_Classical_Pentecostal_Move
> > ment>
>
> I don't know if there are any Orthodox Christians still reading
> alt.religion.christian.east-orthodox, but in case there are, here is
> the conclusion of the last-mentioned article by Mihai-Iulian Grobnicu,
> comparing Orthodox and Pentecostal pnematology:
>
> ----------------
>
> Although Pentecostal effort to return to the Christian experience from
> the days of the Apostles is remarkable, one can note their shift from
> community to individuality, from salvation to mission, sharp
> distinctions which were not part of the pattern noticed in the
> development of the Christianity during the first centuries. Beside
> this discrepancy, I consider that Spirit baptism doctrine points to a
> gap in the Pentecostal theological system, lacking the connection
> between the doctrines concerning Christ’s work and Spirit’s activity.
> Christ and the Holy Spirit are working on earth together, in a close
> relationship which reminds the unity that exists in the Holy Trinity.
>
> The Word of God does not take flesh without the coming of the Spirit,
> and the Spirit is sent, from the Father, on earth, by the Son of God.
>
> That is why I think that only such a real connection between
> Christology and Pneumatology can make this teaching more theologically
> adequate. Moreover, to make that, I believe that Spirit baptism has to
> be elaborated on the entire Scripture, not only on the theology of
> Saint Luke, which is seen by Pentecostals mainly as a charismatic
> theology. Nonetheless, it has to be emphasized that throughout the
> entire New Testament the baptism with the Holy Spirit is related to
> the experience of becoming a Christian and to water baptism90.
>
> The dialogue is about persons. In a dialogue, different persons come
> forth together with their entire experience, their features, and their
> background. To put it short, in a dialogue is brought ahead one’s
> whole life. In the first two parts of this paper I have discussed, on
> the one hand, the personality and the experience of Saint Symeon the
> New Theologian and, on the other hand, the features and the experience
> of Classical Pentecostals. My paper has dealt with their views on the
> Baptism with the Holy Spirit until this point.
>
> During this study, I have observed a lot of similarities as well as
> discrepancies between these two interpretations. Therefore, this final
> section is looking to bring more light on some major points the
> teaching about Spirit Baptism has brought up during our analysis and
> what is the relevance for the current inter-confessional discussions.
> What kind of experience is behind it? What place does it have in the
> process of Salvation? Which is the relation with the sacramental
> baptism? Is there any connection between Spirit baptism at Symeon and
> in Pentecostalism? Can this doctrine be used as starting point in a
> dialogue between Orthodox and Pentecostals?
>
> To answer to that, few aspects have to be taken into consideration.
> First of all, both Symeon and Classical Pentecostal theology speaks
> about a second baptism, named baptism in the Holy Spirit, described as
> superior to the first baptism with water.
>
> Second, for both, Symeon and Pentecostals, this baptism does not deny
> the efficacy of first baptism or the original conversion and
> justification. Nonetheless, Symeon relates this baptism with
> the work of salvation, being a fulfillment of the grace received
> through the Holy Mystery of Baptism, which is a baptism with water and
> Holy Spirit. Everything for Symeon is related to salvation, understood
> as restoration and transformation of the human being. The baptism of
> tears is also related to entire sacramental life, especially with Holy
> Eucharist, which is the continuous actualization of the grace that
> Christians received through baptism in infancy. This baptism does not
> bring a different grace but is the grace received previously through
> Holy Mysteries, which is now fulfilled by one’s response to it.
>
> The distinction, however, stands in the different purpose Spirit
> baptism has for Symeon and Pentecostalism. As seen, Pentecostals
> describe this event as an endowment with power for evangelization,
> never regarding it as a part of the ordo salutis. This is one of the
> reasons why Spirit baptism has no relation with the sacraments,
> besides the fact that sacraments have just an anamnetic function.
> Moreover, I think that this is the place where the dialogue can be
> fruitful. There are well-known theologians within Classical
> Pentecostalism which want to adopt a more sacramental vision to make
> the doctrine of Spirit baptism more theologically coherent.
>
> I have presented the position of Simon Chan and Frank Macchia earlier
> in my paper, stressing the fact that both are trying not to make a
> sharp separation between conversion-initiation and Spirit baptism,
> relating the first part to Holy Baptism and confirmation, and Spirit
> baptism to Holy Communion. This position is coming near to Saint
> Symeon’s tradition, where “baptism of tears” is in straight relation
> to Holy Communion.
>
> On the one hand, adopting such a view, the Pentecostal doctrine about
> Spirit baptism will become more coherent, not only about justification
> but also about the entire spiritual life of the church. On the other
> hand, from such a discussion about the importance of Spirit baptism,
> Orthodox can re-discover something that is present in their Tradition,
> but they forgot it. That is the missionary feature of Holy Communion.
>
> In essence, this means that Christians can go and speak about God only
> after they experienced the presence of God in a conscious way.
> Moreover, the Holy Communion is the peak of that experience. One can
> speak the word only after she or he took and eat the Word through the
> coming of the Holy Spirit. In that sense, Saint Symeon is very clear.
> For him, no one can teach “the things of the Spirit without the
> Spirit.”
>
> For a good explanation of the subject I divided this paper into three
> parts: in the first part I have presented Saint Symeon’s teaching
> regarding the experience of the Holy Spirit, in the second part I did
> the same for the Pentecostal position, and in the third part I pointed
> out some of the most significant similarities and differences between
> them.
>
> Hence, my paper is dealing with two main topics. First of them is the
> importance of a conscious experience of the Holy Spirit in the
> Christian life, which does not deny the unconscious presence of the
> Holy Spirit and its efficacy in the spiritual life. Second, while are
> speaking about the sacrament of baptism, both these teachings
> emphasize the necessity of a second baptism, a superior one: the
> baptism in the Holy Spirit.
>
> The most important topic regarding the teaching about the experience
> of the Holy Spirit in Christian life and for a future enriching
> dialogue between Orthodox and Pentecostals is the doctrine of Spirit
> baptism. Why do I believe that? First of all, because the teaching
> about the baptism with the Holy Spirit is the crucial point regarding
> the personal and conscious relationship with God, emphasized both by
> Symeon and Pentecostal. Secondly, because from this doctrine Orthodox
> and Pentecostals could start new discussions regarding some
> ecclesiological subjects as the importance of hierarchy, the
> significant role of the sacraments in the life of the Church, the way
> in which is understood the divine grace, etc. Thirdly, because this
> teaching brings new insights about Christian mission, about the fact
> that Christians has to experience God in order to speak about Him, has
> to accomplish His commandments to teach them.
>
> Therefore, starting from this doctrine and using the theology of Saint
> Symeon, Orthodox and Pentecostals can not only agree that they have a
> lot in common, but they can bring new points of dialogue on the
> ecumenical table. I am sure that at the beginning of the 21st century
> one of the major theological debates is going to be the experience of
> the Holy Spirit in the life of Christian people and at this point, the
> dialogue between Orthodox and Pentecostals can be fruitful.

Ok, I read through this section, Where in any of this is there any scriptural 
support given for the suppositions of this theological paper. His focus is 
not on the Holy Spirits operations in the individual person, he seems to put 
a lot of weight on the communion that one is to partake of, per Jesus, in 
remembrance of Him, His sacrifice for men. Side note here is that we are to 
this as often as we do this, many partake of bread and wine for dinner every 
day. And if we do this in remembrance of Him and we have aught against a 
brother, etc. we are, per Paul, to stop, go resolve the issue and then come 
back to partake of it. Literally in todays time I’d say that 70% or more 
would have to leave and then come back, some never coming back as their 
hearts are just to hardened with unfotgiveness to either receive or offer 
forgiveness. We need a real work of God in all our lives so that we walk not 
as dead men walking.

If one looks at the Body of Christ, and its many parts that make up of His 
Body, we are all supposed to work with the common goal of Glory to God. No 
one to think less or greater of one another since all have a necessary 
function and place in His body.

Whatever happened to the understanding and experiential relationship we are 
to have via walking in the spirit and not the theology achieved through 
carnal understandings?