We have seen in our last few articles that the baptism of the Holy Spirit was something that was promised only to the apostles, and there is no longer any purpose for it. Someone may ask, “What about the case of Cornelius and his household?” In this final article on Holy Spirit baptism, let us look at what happened to Cornelius, and the other Gentiles in his house, as recorded for us in Acts 10.
The events of Acts 10 represent the only other Bible example of one receiving a miraculous measure of the Spirit without the laying on of an apostle’s hand. Were Cornelius and his house baptized with the Holy Spirit on that occasion? I am not sure. Yes, the Spirit fell upon them miraculously, but is that irrefutable evidence that they were baptized with the Holy Spirit? Maybe not. While the events that transpired on this occasion reminded Peter of the baptism of the Holy Spirit which the apostles experienced, that could have been due simply to the great similarities between the two events. On both occasions, the Spirit fell on individuals without the laying on of hands, and on both occasions, it was followed by the gift of speaking in tongues. However, three things cause me to hesitate to say that this was the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
First, it is not called Holy Spirit baptism in the text. I realize that it is not specifically stated that what the apostles received on Pentecost was Holy Spirit baptism in Acts 2, but there the context and events leading up to Acts 2 make it obvious (Acts 1:1-5; Luke 24:49).
Second, there is no evidence that Cornelius and his household received the same power that the apostles received when they were baptized with the Holy Spirit. Someone may say that this only proves that there were different degrees of Holy Spirit baptism. That might be the case, but is there any evidence of different degrees of Holy Spirit baptism? Did not the apostles all receive the same measure of the Spirit which allowed them all to do the same thing? All the apostles were inspired. All the apostles could transfer miraculous gifts to others. These were directly related to their receiving the baptism of the Spirit (Acts 1:8). Again, it could be that Cornelius and his household received a lesser degree of Holy Spirit baptism, but it seems as if we must at least consider the possibility that what they received was not Holy Spirit baptism at all.
Third, the promise of Holy Spirit baptism was made to the apostles alone. We have seen conclusive evidence of this. The promise of the Comforter was made to the apostles alone (John 14:26; 15:26; 16:13). Jesus told the apostles to wait at Jerusalem for the promise of Holy Spirit baptism (Acts 1:4-5), and in Acts 2 we find them receiving the promise. This is the biggest problem I have with calling what happened in Acts 10 Holy Spirit baptism. We teach the truth to Pentecostals about to whom the promise was made, then we turn around and say that Cornelius, a man who was not an apostle, was baptized with the Spirit. That is a hard argument to sell to Pentecostals in a discussion about this matter. Of course, that does not mean that it is wrong, and I am not yet totally convinced that Cornelius was not baptized with the Spirit, but these are some of the problems that I have with that conclusion.
Having said all this, let us now assume, momentarily, that Cornelius and his house were baptized with the Spirit. The language of the text still reveals that what happened was for the express purpose of showing that the Gentiles were granted repentance unto life (Acts 11:18). Since this no longer has to be proven, there is no purpose for Holy Spirit baptism. Furthermore, the language indicates that what happened on this occasion, i.e., the receiving of the Holy Spirit without the laying on of the apostles’ hands, had not happened since Pentecost ten years earlier (Acts 11:15). If every Christian receives the baptism of the Holy Spirit, like those associated with the Assemblies of God affirm, why did what happened to Cornelius remind Peter of the day of Pentecost? Why did it not remind him of what happened the week before, a month before, or whenever the last conversion took place. It is inferred that what happened in Acts 10 was a rare occurrence, not something that was happening regularly. Indeed, the only other time anyone received a miraculous measure of the Spirit, apart from the laying on of an apostle’s hand, was on the day of Pentecost when it happened to the apostles. That’s why this event immediately reminded Peter of Pentecost.
The baptism of the Holy Spirit was a promise, not a command
Pentecostals indicate that being baptized with the Holy Spirit is more than a promise. To them, it is something that is commanded. In the previous articles, we have quoted them on this, confirming their position. Their conclusion, however, is not scriptural. Nowhere did God command anyone to be baptized with the Holy Spirit. As we have already seen, only the apostles were baptized with the Holy Spirit baptism, and it was in fulfillment of a promise, not a command (Acts 1:4-5).
This proves two things: 1) Pentecostals are wrong about everyone being baptized with the Spirit, as well as their teaching that it is commanded. 2) Even if people were being baptized with the Spirit today (which they are not), we know that Pentecostals have not been. Why do we know this? We know it because those who were baptized with the Spirit were guided unto all truth (John 16:13), and, since Pentecostals teach error on the subject, they could not have been baptized with the Spirit.
Holy Spirit baptism served its purpose (inspiration and confirmation) and has now ceased. Today, we live and serve God by following His precepts which are found in the Bible.