Is Pentecostalism Truly a Second-Blessing Movement?
 |
| Icon of the Pentecost (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
Those who raise this concern are defending the biblical teaching that the believer receives the Spirit at salvation, and they are rejecting what they perceive to be a misguided view of the efficacy of salvation.
Indeed, it is a common misunderstanding of Pentecostalism to charge that it denies the Spirit to non-Pentecostal believers. To my knowledge no classical Pentecostal holds the view that the Spirit is not received at salvation (which would clearly contradict Scripture). Those who believe in Christ also have the Spirit living within; if anyone does not have the Spirit, he or she is not of Christ at all. Moreover, this is not a partial reception of the person of the Spirit; it is unqualified and complete (cf. Rom. 8:14, 9–17; Gal. 3:1–5; 4:6; Eph. 1:13–14).
When Pentecostals speak of “receiving” the Spirit as a postconversion experience, they are speaking of the work of the Spirit in which he empowers the believer in “charismatic” ways for witness and service. Several points of clarification are needed here. (1) To reiterate what was stated above, they do not mean that some believers are without the Spirit.5
The emphasis of postconversion experience (or, within Pentecostalism, subsequence) is not on a necessary time lag between regeneration and “filling” (cf. Acts 8:12–16, where there was some delay between salvation and filling; 10:44–47, where everything happened as part of one complex of events), but rather theological separability of two works of the Spirit—one inner-transforming (regenerating/sanctifying, e.g., Rom. 8:1–11; Gal. 3:1–5; 4:6; 5:16–26) and the other empowering (empowering/charismatic, e.g., 1 Cor. 12–14).6 The remission of sins must come first, but there is not always a discernible lapse of time between conversion and Spirit-baptism. In fact, Pentecostals historically have emphasized that this experience is available from the moment the Holy Spirit indwells the believer, and their testimonies often speak of being both saved and baptized in the Holy Spirit all at once, while responding to an invitation for salvation. Perhaps an apt expression of the Pentecostal view, then, is “extra-conversion experience.”
Pentecostals do not believe that being baptized in the Holy Spirit is a once-for-all experience of empowerment. In fact, historically they have emphasized the necessity of being “refilled,” a traditional expression to indicate that the empowering work of the Spirit, with diverse manifestations, is something that happens repeatedly in the life of a believer.7
In sum, then, whether Pentecostalism is truly a second-blessing movement depends on one’s definition. Pentecostal pneumatology does not include the “second blessing” defined by nineteenth-century holiness revivalism as a once-for-all sanctifying or empowering work, but rather one that is closer to (but not identical with) the “many fillings” view.8 Baptism in the Holy Spirit, as Pentecostals have defined it in their systematic theology, is the first experience of the Spirit’s empowering work, which inaugurates a life characterized by continued anointings with the Spirit. It is not of the same once-for-all nature as regeneration. Moreover, the empowering work of the Spirit is available to the believer from the moment of faith, with no necessary delay and no prerequisite of attaining a certain level of sanctification first.9
However, if one defines second-blessing theology as the view that believers have experiences that are different from regeneration/sanctification and that these experiences are distinct works of the Spirit, empowering in nature, theologically separable from conversion, and inaugurated by a baptism in the Holy Spirit (as defined within Pentecostalism), then Pentecostalism is a second-blessing movement. As a Pentecostal, my own perception is that our pneumatology includes a first, a second, a third, a fourth, and so forth, anointings. In other words, being filled with the Spirit is as characteristic of the Christian life as sanctification.
In any event, the New Testament itself describes postconversion “fillings” and also commands the believer to be “filled” with the Spirit, subsequent to salvation. In Acts 4:31 the same group that was present on the day of Pentecost is once again “filled” (eplesthesan, the same verb and form as 2:4) with the Holy Spirit, after which they preached boldly and performed at least one miraculous sign (cf. also Acts 4:8; 6:3, 10; 7:55; 10:19, 38; 13:1–4, 9, 52).10 And Paul exhorts the Ephesians to “be filled [continually] with the Spirit” (Eph. 5:18) and the Corinthians to prophesy, heal, speak in tongues, etc. (1 Cor. 12–14). The issue concerning the legitimacy of extra-conversion experiences boils down, then, not to whether there are experiences different from salvation, but to what kind of experiences these are. To construct a Pentecostal view of this issue, we turn now to a biblical-theological survey of the Spirit’s work, including consideration of the differences between Pauline and Lukan presentations.11
Oss, D. A. (1996). A Pentecostal/ Charismatic View. In S. N. Gundry & W. A. Grudem (Eds.), Are Miraculous Gifts for Today?: 4 Views (pp. 241–244). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
When Pentecostals speak of “receiving” the Spirit as a postconversion experience, they are speaking of the work of the Spirit in which he empowers the believer in “charismatic” ways for witness and service. Several points of clarification are needed here. (1) To reiterate what was stated above, they do not mean that some believers are without the Spirit.5
The emphasis of postconversion experience (or, within Pentecostalism, subsequence) is not on a necessary time lag between regeneration and “filling” (cf. Acts 8:12–16, where there was some delay between salvation and filling; 10:44–47, where everything happened as part of one complex of events), but rather theological separability of two works of the Spirit—one inner-transforming (regenerating/sanctifying, e.g., Rom. 8:1–11; Gal. 3:1–5; 4:6; 5:16–26) and the other empowering (empowering/charismatic, e.g., 1 Cor. 12–14).6 The remission of sins must come first, but there is not always a discernible lapse of time between conversion and Spirit-baptism. In fact, Pentecostals historically have emphasized that this experience is available from the moment the Holy Spirit indwells the believer, and their testimonies often speak of being both saved and baptized in the Holy Spirit all at once, while responding to an invitation for salvation. Perhaps an apt expression of the Pentecostal view, then, is “extra-conversion experience.”
Pentecostals do not believe that being baptized in the Holy Spirit is a once-for-all experience of empowerment. In fact, historically they have emphasized the necessity of being “refilled,” a traditional expression to indicate that the empowering work of the Spirit, with diverse manifestations, is something that happens repeatedly in the life of a believer.7
In sum, then, whether Pentecostalism is truly a second-blessing movement depends on one’s definition. Pentecostal pneumatology does not include the “second blessing” defined by nineteenth-century holiness revivalism as a once-for-all sanctifying or empowering work, but rather one that is closer to (but not identical with) the “many fillings” view.8 Baptism in the Holy Spirit, as Pentecostals have defined it in their systematic theology, is the first experience of the Spirit’s empowering work, which inaugurates a life characterized by continued anointings with the Spirit. It is not of the same once-for-all nature as regeneration. Moreover, the empowering work of the Spirit is available to the believer from the moment of faith, with no necessary delay and no prerequisite of attaining a certain level of sanctification first.9
However, if one defines second-blessing theology as the view that believers have experiences that are different from regeneration/sanctification and that these experiences are distinct works of the Spirit, empowering in nature, theologically separable from conversion, and inaugurated by a baptism in the Holy Spirit (as defined within Pentecostalism), then Pentecostalism is a second-blessing movement. As a Pentecostal, my own perception is that our pneumatology includes a first, a second, a third, a fourth, and so forth, anointings. In other words, being filled with the Spirit is as characteristic of the Christian life as sanctification.
In any event, the New Testament itself describes postconversion “fillings” and also commands the believer to be “filled” with the Spirit, subsequent to salvation. In Acts 4:31 the same group that was present on the day of Pentecost is once again “filled” (eplesthesan, the same verb and form as 2:4) with the Holy Spirit, after which they preached boldly and performed at least one miraculous sign (cf. also Acts 4:8; 6:3, 10; 7:55; 10:19, 38; 13:1–4, 9, 52).10 And Paul exhorts the Ephesians to “be filled [continually] with the Spirit” (Eph. 5:18) and the Corinthians to prophesy, heal, speak in tongues, etc. (1 Cor. 12–14). The issue concerning the legitimacy of extra-conversion experiences boils down, then, not to whether there are experiences different from salvation, but to what kind of experiences these are. To construct a Pentecostal view of this issue, we turn now to a biblical-theological survey of the Spirit’s work, including consideration of the differences between Pauline and Lukan presentations.11
Oss, D. A. (1996). A Pentecostal/ Charismatic View. In S. N. Gundry & W. A. Grudem (Eds.), Are Miraculous Gifts for Today?: 4 Views (pp. 241–244). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
