1.
Major
Research
Paper
A
Case
for
the
Spirit
According
to
St.
Luke
Date:
Mar
7,
2014
NEWT
0733
Luke’s
Charismatic
Theology
Intersession,
2014
Tyndale
Seminary
Dr.
Roger
Stronstad
Submitted
by:
Kevin
M.
A.
Cole
Mailbox:
89

2. 1
The
Holy
Spirit
is
third
Person
in
the
Godhead,
who
is
most
mysterious
in
his
workings
throughout
the
economy
of
salvation.
God’s
mission
in
the
world
greatly
depends
on
the
charismatic
work
of
the
Spirit
in
the
Church.
There
has
been
much
debate
in
defining
this
religious
experience
of
the
Spirit,
particularly
in
the
biblical
phrases,
“baptized
in
the
Spirit”
and
“filled
with
the
Spirit.”
Is
being
baptized
in
the
Spirit,
God’s
work
of
“regeneration”
or
“prophetic
empowerment”
within
the
believer?
And
does
the
“filling
of
the
Spirit”
comprise
of
gradual
spiritual
developments
within
the
believer
since
the
time
of
their
conversion,
or
is
there
a
second
work
of
grace
of
divine
endowment
for
ministry?
This
prose
aims
to
answer
these
questions
and
more
as
it
will
give
a
case
for
Luke’s
charismatic
understanding
of
the
phrases,
“baptism
in
the
Spirit”
and
“filled
with
the
Spirit.”
This
discussion
will
cover:
1)
varying
perspectives
on
Spirit
baptism,
2)
the
distinctions
between
Pauline
and
Lukan
pneumatology,
and
3)
the
nature
of
the
charismatic
experience,
itself.
In
the
final
analysis,
contemporary
implications
will
be
gleaned
for
the
Church
to
better
discern:
how
to
handle
the
Spirit
baptism
debate,
if
there
is
any
significance
in
waiting
on
the
Spirit,
and
how
to
find
a
place
for
glossolalia.
Perspectives
on
Spirit
Baptism
There
has
been
varying
perspectives
shared
in
efforts
to
better
understand
what
the
baptism
of
the
Spirit
really
means.
It
has
generally
fallen
between
two
camps
within
the
Christian
faith
traditions:
the
evangelical
position
of
conversion-­‐initiation
or
the
Pentecostal/Charismatic
position
of
prophetic
empowerment.
One
of
the
most
influential
scholars
for
the
evangelical
position
on
this
subject
was
James
D.
G.
Dunn
in
his
book,
Baptism
in
the
Holy
Spirit.
His
aim
was
to
give
a
critique
to
the
Pentecostal
view
of
Spirit
baptism,
claiming
how
the
“baptism
in
the
Spirit”
from
the
start
was
understood
to
be
an

3. 2
“initiating”
experience.1
The
foundation
of
his
argument
is
from
John
the
Baptist’s
prophesy
of
a
future
baptism
that
has
both
gospel
and
judgment.2
He
notes
that
this
coming
“baptism
in
Spirit-­‐and-­‐fire
was
not
to
be
something
gentle
and
gracious,”
but
rather
it
was
to
be
something
for
all:
the
unrepentant
will
experience
total
destruction
and
the
repentant
will
have
all
their
sins
purged
to
enjoy
the
messianic
blessings
of
the
kingdom.3
This
two-­‐fold
understanding
of
a
future
baptism
for
Dunn
was
used
to
explain
how
Jesus
had
providentially
experienced
the
anointing
to
entered
the
covenant
of
a
new
age
for
his
disciples
to
follow
after
him.4
Eventually,
“[This]
messianic
work
of
the
Spirit
that
was
birthed
at
the
Jordan
[became]
cumulated
in
the
cross
where
Jesus
accepted
and
endured
the
messianic
baptism
in
Spirit-­‐and-­‐fire
on
behalf
of
his
people.”5
This
led
Dunn
to
interpret
the
day
of
Pentecost
narrative
as
the
end
of
the
old
and
the
beginning
of
a
new
stage
in
salvation
history,
where
Jesus’
ascension
makes
him
“Lord
of
the
Spirit,”
allowing
him
to
“initiate
others
into
this
new
age”
as
the
“Baptizer
of
the
Spirit”
(Act
1:5;
2:33;
cf.
1
Cor.
12:13).6
Thus
Dunn
concludes
that
Pentecost
can
never
be
repeated
in
this
sense
of
the
outpouring
of
the
Spirit,
but
can
be
repeated
in
the
experience
of
becoming
a
Christian.7
It’s
in
this,
where
Dunn
differs
from
Pentecostal
understanding
of
empowerment
and
embraces
the
idea
of
Luke’s
narrative
of
Pentecost
to
be
primarily
about
“initiating”
and
secondarily
about
“empowering.”8
1
James
D.
G.
Dunn,
Baptism
in
the
Holy
Spirit:
Re-­examination
of
the
New
Testament
Teaching
on
the
Gift
of
the
Spirit
in
relation
to
Pentecostalism
today
(Naperville,
IL:
Alec
R.
Allenson
Inc.,
1970),
4-­‐5.
2
Ibid.,
11.
3
Ibid.,13.
4
Ibid.,
32,
41,
43.
5
Ibid.,
42.
6
Ibid.,
44.
7
Ibid.,
51.
8
Ibid.,
54.

4. 3
Despite
Dunn’s
influential
position
on
this
subject,
there
has
been
some
recent
research
in
understanding
Luke’s
“baptism
of
the
Spirit”
to
have
a
prophetic
empowerment
dynamic.
In
his
work,
Luke’s
Charismatic
Theology,
Stronstad
lays
a
strong
case
for
this
prophetic
empowerment
understanding
of
Spirit
baptism.
He
brings
attention
to
how
Luke
highlights
John
the
Baptist’s
near
future
messianic-­‐harvest-­‐baptism
metaphor
of
blessings
and
judgment
(Luke
3:16,
17).9
And
at
the
coming
of
Jesus’
ministry,
judgment
is
not
yet
to
be
administered
as
depicted
from
his
admonition
(Luke
12:49-­‐50).10
Rather,
Jesus
promises
the
Spirit
only
as
a
blessing
to
the
disciples
in
anticipation
to
his
ascension
(Act
1:5;
cf.
Luke
24:49;
Acts
11:16).11
Stronstad
contends
that
this
anticipated
“baptizing
in
the
Spirit”
for
his
disciples
was
a
typology
of
Jesus’
Spirit
Baptism
at
the
Jordan.
It
was
here
that
he
was
anointed
by
God
to
function
as
the
eschatological
prophet.12
It
was
in
this
“commissioning”
event,
that
Jesus
not
only
became
a
prophet-­‐like-­‐Moses,
but
is
also
the
One
whom
God
would
transfer
his
anointing
to
his
disciples
as
Moses
did
to
the
seventy
elders
(Numbers
11:10-­‐30).13
This
transfer
motif
of
the
Old
Testament
was
demonstrated
after
the
ascended
Christ
poured
out
the
gift
of
the
Spirit
upon
the
120
disciples
for
their
prophetic
empowerment
as
seen
through
the
eyes
of
Joel,
fulfilling
the
desire
of
Moses
(Acts
1:15;
2:16;
Joel
2:28-­‐32;
Numbers
11:29).14
By
describing
Pentecost
as
a
typology
also
for
the
Old
Testament,
it
leads
to
the
rejection
of
Dunn’s
interpretation
on
the
gift
of
the
9
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Charimatic
Theology
of
St.
Luke,
second
edition
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
57.
10
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Charimatic
Theology
of
St.
Luke,
second
edition
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
57;
Craig
S.
Keener,
Acts:
An
Exegetical
Commentary
-­
Vol
1
-­
Introduction
and
1:1-­
2:47
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012);
678.
11
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Charimatic
Theology
of
St.
Luke,
second
edition
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
58.
12
Ibid.,
45.
13
Ibid.,
66,
68.
14
Ibid.,
23-­‐24,
52-­‐53,
66,
69.

5. 4
Spirit.15
Thus,
Stronstad
provides
a
sound
case
in
describing
Luke’s
perspective
on
“baptism
of
the
Spirit”
in
prophetic
empowerment
terms
over
that
of
stereological
initiation-­‐conversion.
Robert
P.
Menzies
further
highlights
Stronstad’s
“prophetic
empowerment”
observations
on
Jesus’
Spirit
baptism
over
that
of
Dunn’s
“entrance
into
a
new
age,”
showing
significance
in
Luke’s
redactions
of:
1)
Mark
1:12
about
Jesus
being
led
into
the
desert
(Luke
4:1),
and
2)
Isaiah
61:1-­‐2
and
Mark
6:1-­‐6
about
Jesus’
baptism
of
the
Spirit
at
the
Jordan
(Luke
4:18-­‐19).
In
the
redaction
of
Mark
1:12,
adhering
more
to
the
Q
material,
Luke
adds,
“full
of
the
Holy
Spirit.”16
This
signifies
that
Jesus
has
access
to
the
Spirit
of
God
to
provide
what
is
required
at
each
moment
of
need.17
Menzies
goes
on
to
suggest,
“With
the
insertion
of
this
phrase,
Luke
has
consciously
edited
this
source
in
order
to
emphasize
the
fact
that
Jesus’
experience
at
Jordan
was
the
moment
he
was
filled
with
the
Spirit.”18
This
shows
continuity
between
Jesus’
experience
of
the
Spirit
and
that
of
the
early
Church,
being
empowered
to
carry
out
their
divinely
appointed
task.19
Furthermore,
Menzies
notes
how
this
phrase
(“filled
with
the
Spirit”),
used
by
Luke
to
describe
the
disciples
in
Acts,
shows
that
this
experience
of
the
Spirit
was
not
unique
to
Jesus
(Acts
11:24).20
In
the
redaction
of
Mark
6:1-­‐6,
Luke
moved
the
Nazareth
pericope
forward
in
the
chronology
of
the
Gospel,
so
as
to
better
link
this
account
with
Jesus’
reception
of
the
Spirit.21
In
this
15
Ibid.,
40.
16
Robert
P.
Menzies,
Empowered
For
Witness:
The
Spirit
in
Luke-­Acts
(Sheffield,
England:
Sheffield
Academic
Press,
1991),
141.
17
Darrell
L.
Bock,
Baker
Exegetical
Commentary
on
the
New
Testament
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Books,
1994),
369.
18
Robert
P.
Menzies,
Empowered
For
Witness:
The
Spirit
in
Luke-­Acts
(Sheffield,
England:
Sheffield
Academic
Press,
1991),
141.
19
Ibid.,
141,
142.
20
Ibid.,
140.
21
Ibid.,
155.

6. 5
passage,
Luke
alters
the
wording
of
Isaiah
61:1-­‐2,
omitting,
“He
has
sent
me
to
bind
up
the
brokenhearted”
and
“the
day
of
vengeance
of
our
God,”
and
adding,
Isaiah
58:6c,
“to
set
the
oppressed
free”
(NIV).
Menzies
notes
how
this
was
done
due
to
Luke’s
distinctive
pneumatology,
wanting
to
emphasize
the
salvific
dimension
of
Jesus
work
and
the
liberating
power
of
Jesus’
Spirit-­‐inspired-­‐preaching.22
This
is
Luke’s
way
of
intentionally
bringing
this
quote
into
conformity
to
his
distinctive
prophetic
pneumatology.“23
Thus,
Menzies
argues
that
Jesus’
baptism
of
the
Spirit
is
not
for
his
“initiation”
into
a
new
messianic
age,
but
rather
an
inauguration
of
his
prophetic
messianic
task.24
Other
scholars
support
this
“prophetic
empowerment”
interpretation
of
“baptism
in
the
Spirit”,
but
it’s
not
without
some
minor
criticisms.
For
instance,
Charles
H.
Talbert’s
in
his
monograph,
Literary
Patterns,
Theological
Themes
and
the
Genre
of
Luke
Acts,
identifies
parallel
literary
patterns
of
the
Spirit
baptism
events
between
Jesus
at
Jordan
and
his
disciples
on
the
day
of
Pentecost.25
He
shows
here
how:
both
Jesus
and
the
disciples
were
praying
(Luke
3:21;
Acts
1:14,
24),
the
Spirit
descended
upon
them
after
their
prayers
(Luke
3:22;
Acts
2:1-­‐13),
both
Jesus
and
the
disciples
had
inspired
speech/sermon,
showing
the
fulfillment
of
prophecy
and
rejection
of
Jesus
(Luke
4:16-­‐30;
Acts
2:14-­‐40),
and
the
fulfillment
of
preaching
with
miracles
were
illustrated.26
Also,
G.
W.
H.
Lampe
sees
an
intentional
symmetry
within
Luke-­‐Acts
between
the
Spirit’s
descent
on
Jesus
at
baptism
22
Ibid.,
155.
23
Ibid.,
156.
24
Ibid.,
137-­‐138.
25
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Charimatic
Theology
of
St.
Luke,
second
edition
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
58;
Craig
S.
Keener,
Acts:
An
Exegetical
Commentary
-­
Vol
1
-­
Introduction
and
1:1-­
2:47
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
521.
26
Charles
H.
Talbert,
Literary
Patterns,
Theological
Themes
and
the
Genre
of
Luke-­Acts
(Missoula,
Montana:
Scholars
Press,
1974),
16.

7. 6
and
the
Spirit
baptism
of
the
disciples
at
Pentecost.27
In
his
view,
the
same
Spirit
that
operated
in
Jesus’
ministry
was
imparted
to
his
followers,
who
became
empowered
to
work
miracles
and
to
preach.28
Even
Max
Turner
joined
Stronstad
in
rejecting
Dunn’s
notion
of
“Jesus
as
‘the
first
Christian
in
an
epoch
before
others
could
be
come
Christians.’”29
However,
he
makes
hairline
delineations
from
the
“prophetic
empowerment”
view,
explaining
Jesus’
eschatological-­‐prophetic-­‐anointing
as
not
to
be
pragmatic
for
the
Church.30
Rather,
the
ascended
Christ
continues
his
redemptive
ministry
in
a
new
way,
dispensing
the
“Spirit
of
Jesus”
(not
the
“Spirit
of
the
Lord”
that
came
upon
him)
to
direct
the
ministry
of
the
Church.31
There
seems
to
be
no
point
in
Turner’s
effort
to
distinguish
the
“Spirit
of
the
Lord”
from
the
“Spirit
of
Jesus.”
It
is
the
same
Holy
Spirit,
who
is
empowering
both
the
work
of
Jesus
and
the
Church.
If
there
is
any
distinction,
it
should
not
be
in
the
Spirit’s
empowerment,
but
in
the
unique
salvific
work
that
Christ
did
in
the
Easter
event.
To
veer
off
this
understanding
of
the
Spirit
baptism
for
Jesus
is
to
minimize
the
functional
human
Servant
role
that
he
played
in
his
earthly
messianic
prophetic
ministry
through
the
Spirit.32
A
number
of
scholars,
including
Pentecostals,
have
opted
for
a
middle
ground
position
on
this
Spirit
baptism
debate,
due
to
Dunn’s
convincing
arguments.
Harold
D.
Hunter
agrees
with
Dunn’s
view
on
the
Pentecost
event
in
Acts
being
unrepeatable,
in
that,
27
Mark
Allen
Powel,
What
Are
They
Saying
About
Luke?
(Mahwah,
NJ:
Paulist
Press,
1989),
108.
28
Ibid.,
108.
29
Ibid.,
109.
30
Mark
Allen
Powel,
What
Are
They
Saying
About
Luke?
(Mahwah,
NJ:
Paulist
Press,
1989),
109;
Keith
Warrington,
Pentecostal
Theology:
A
Theological
Encounter
(New
York,
NY:
T&T
Clark,
2008),
57.
31
Mark
Allen
Powel,
What
Are
They
Saying
About
Luke?
(Mahwah,
NJ:
Paulist
Press,
1989),
110.
32
Robert
P.
Menzies,
Empowered
For
Witness:
The
Spirit
in
Luke-­Acts
(Sheffield,
England:
Sheffield
Academic
Press,
1991),
136-­‐138;
Darrell
L.
Bock,
Baker
Exegetical
Commentary
on
the
New
Testament
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Books,
1994),
405-­‐406.

8. 7
its
participants
prior
to
it
were
not
Christians
in
the
full
sense
of
the
word.
“Although
they
had
made
a
commitment
to
Jesus
as
Christ,
they
had
not
experienced
the
charismatic
Spirit
in
the
corporate,
permanent
way
that
was
characterized
in
the
New
Testament.”33
Along
with
Dunn,
he
also
supports
a
division
of
salvation
history
view—before
creation,
creation
to
parousia,
and
time
after
parousia—that
allows
Christianity
to
distinguish
itself
between
the
first
and
second
period
through
this
unique
historical
Pentecost
event.34
Thus,
Hunter’s
view
on
the
Spirit
baptism
for
the
Pentecost
event
is
“that
no
other
group
will
be
a
part
of
the
unique
historical
events
related
to
Christ
birth
and
resurrection…
[In
a
sense]
the
experience
of
120
is
not
relevant
for
generations
which
follow.”
This
led
Hunter
to
conclude
a
“mediating
position”
of
accepting
the
historical
facts
of
Pentecost
to
be
non-­‐
transferable
to
future
generations
of
the
church,
while
embracing
the
theological
fact,
in
that,
charismatic
work
of
the
Spirit
cannot
be
isolated
to
a
single
event
in
history.
The
concern
with
this
position
is
that
Hunter
has
not
yet
been
influenced
by
the
important
developments
that
have
made
headways
in
recent
New
Testament
and
Pentecostal
Scholarship.
33
Harold
D.
Hunter,
Spirit
Baptimsm:
A
Pentecostal
Alternative
(Lanham,
MD:
University
Press
of
America,
1983),
81.
34
Hunter
supports
Oscar
Cullman
view
on
the
breakdown
of
Heilsgeschichte
in
Harold
D.
Hunter,
Spirit
Baptimsm:
A
Pentecostal
Alternative
(Lanham,
MD:
University
Press
of
America,
1983),
81;
Dunn
supports
Hans
Conzelmann’s
extensive
Lukan
studies
on
this
discontinuity
as
it
spans
three
epochs:
the
period
of
Israel,
the
period
of
Jesus,
and
the
period
between
the
coming
of
Jesus
and
his
Parousia
in
James
D.
G.
Dunn,
Baptism
in
the
Holy
Spirit:
Re-­examination
of
the
New
Testament
Teaching
on
the
Gift
of
the
Spirit
in
relation
to
Pentecostalism
today
(Naperville,
IL:
Alec
R.
Allenson
Inc.,
1970),
40.

9. 8
Pauline
and
Lukan
Pneumatology
Distinctives
These
New
Testament
developments
within
scholarship
gave
Pentecostals
the
footing
to
refine
their
interpretation
of
Luke’s
Spirit
baptism
to
a
“prophetic
empowerment”
priority
over
that
of
a
“regeneration”
experience.
This
was
largely
due
to
a
greater
understanding
of
Pauline
and
Lukan
pneumatology
and
a
theological
appreciation
for
Luke-­‐
Acts
historiography.
“The
historical-­‐critical
approached
espoused
by
modernity
became
the
dominant
mode
of
investigating
the
New
Testament.”35
Luke
and
Acts
became
books
that
were
read
separately,
where
Luke
was
read
in
search
for
the
historical
Jesus,
and
Acts
was
read
for
the
birth
of
Christianity.36
Pentecostals
used
the
book
of
Acts
to
build
their
distinctive
theology
around
the
gift
of
the
Spirit
(Acts
2:1-­‐13;
8:14-­‐19;
9:17-­‐18;
19:1-­‐7).37
But
this
had
not
stood
up
well
with
those
who
hesitated
to
form
a
theology
from
historical
narratives.
John
R.
W.
Stott,
in
“The
Baptism
and
Fullness
of
the
Holy
Spirit,”
noted
how
purposes
of
God
should
be
determined
from
didactic
parts
of
Scripture,
rather
than
from
its
historical
parts,
such
as
Acts.38
This
approach
resulted
in
an
evangelical
push
to
impose
a
Pauline
theology
upon
Acts
with
influences
from
James
Dunn,
John
Scott
and
Michael
Green.39
Stronstad
discredits
this
approach
because
it
only
ends
up
driving
a
wedge
between
instruction
and
narrative
Scripture.
He
notes
how
this
is
alien
to
the
general
New
Testament
understanding
of
historiography.
He
illustrates
this
by
showing
how
Paul
35
Luke
Timothy
Johnson,
Prophetic
Jesus,
Prophetic
Church:
The
Challenge
of
Luke-­Acts
to
Contemporary
Christians
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
William
B.
Eerdmans
Publishing
Co.,
2011),
2.
36
Ibid.,
2.
37
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Charismatic
Theology
of
St.
Luke:
Trajectories
from
the
Old
Testament
to
Luke-­Acts,
second
edition
(Grand
Rapids,
Michigan:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
6.
38
H
Ray
Dunning,
Larry
Hart,
Stanley
M.
Horton,
Walter
Kaiser
Jr.,
Ralph
Del
Colle,
Perspectives
On
Spirit
Baptism:
5
Views,
ed.
Chad
Owen
Brand
(Nashville,
TN:
B
&
H
Publishing
Group,
2004),
15.
39
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Charismatic
Theology
of
St.
Luke:
Trajectories
from
the
Old
Testament
to
Luke-­Acts,
second
edition
(Grand
Rapids,
Michigan:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
7,
11.

10. 9
developed
his
theology
through
the
historical
narrative
of
the
Old
Testament
(2
Tim.
3:16-­‐
17;
Rom
15:4).40
I.
Howard
Marshall
echoes
this
in
how
Luke
is
modeling
after
Hellenistic
historiographer
writing
style,
where
stories
are
shaped
to
bring
about
a
moral
meaning
to
the
reading
audience.41
Stronstad
concludes,
“Since
Luke
has
a
theological
interest,
his
narratives,
though
they
are
historical,
are
always
more
than
simple
descriptions
or
records
of
brute
facts.”42
Luke
T.
Johnson
echoes
this
about
Luke,
showing
how
theology
within
the
church
can
never
just
be
deductive,
where
everything
is
derived
from
first
principles.
Rather,
theology
must
include
inductive
and
nonsystematic
approaches
as
already
demonstrated
in
Lukan
historiography.43
It
is
based
upon
this
theological
character
of
Luke-­‐Acts
that
Stronstad
further
depicts
this
historical
narrative
to
have
an
independent
theology
distinct
from
the
didactic
Pauline
epistles,
especially
on
his
perspective
of
the
Holy
Spirit.44
As
it
has
been
determined
that
historical
narratives
have
an
equal
voice
to
didactic
parts
of
Scripture
in
forming
theology,
one
then
has
the
right
to
resolve
any
theological
tensions
that
may
seem
to
exist
between
Pauline
and
Lukan
pnuematologies,
especially
surrounding
the
subsequent
doctrine
of
Spirit
Baptism
to
that
of
conversion.
Does
“being
baptized
in
the
Spirit”
have
a
two
or
one
dimension
understanding
of
the
Holy
Spirit?
Walter
C.
Kaiser,
who
argues
for
a
one
stage
dimension,
notes
the
following:
“[for]
Luke
and
Paul
[to]
speak
of
two
dimensions
of
the
Holy
Spirit,
so
that
one
is
power
for
prophetic
40
Ibid.,
7-­‐8.
41
Ibid.,
8.
42
Ibid.,
9.
43
Luke
Timothy
Johnson,
Prophetic
Jesus,
Prophetic
Church:
The
Challenge
of
Luke-­Acts
to
Contemporary
Christians
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
William
B.
Eerdmans
Publishing
Co.,
2011),
68-­‐69.
44
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Charismatic
Theology
of
St.
Luke:
Trajectories
from
the
Old
Testament
to
Luke-­Acts,
second
edition
(Grand
Rapids,
Michigan:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
13.

11. 10
inspiration
(Luke)
and
the
other
is
stereological
(Paul),
is
to
erect
barriers
where
they
do
not
exist.”45
However,
having
a
two-­‐dimension
view
of
Spirit
baptism
doesn’t
necessitate
this
understanding
of
a
functional
barrier
that
exists
for
the
Holy
Spirit.
Rather
than
seeing
the
Spirit’s
work
of
“empowerment”
and
“conversion”
as
a
one-­‐stage-­‐event
or
a
two-­‐stage-­‐
event
to
being
Spirit
baptized,
the
Spirit’s
“empowerment”
and
“conversion”
can
both
be
seen
as
complimentary
roles
that
the
Holy
Spirit
has
to
offer
the
believer.
This
shouldn’t
be
hard
to
grasp,
especially
as
C.
F.
D.
Moule
outlines
various
roles
of
the
Holy
Spirit
in
relation
to
Christ
to
having
up
to
nine
activities
for
the
believer.46
Hunter,
another
scholar,
notes
how
Green
too
argues
for
this
one
stage
unity
of
Spirit
baptism
experience.
But,
Hunter
contends
how
it’s
inappropriate
to
use
non-­‐Pentecostal
view
of
Paul
on
Lukan
texts,
especially
when
Pauline
literature
doesn’t
deny
the
doctrine
of
subsequence
in
the
first
place.47
Along
with
this,
Craig
S.
Keener
comments,
“In
Paul’s
theology
(and
apparently
in
Luke’s
theology,
Act
2:38),
empowerment
for
ministry
belongs
to
the
entire
sphere
of
the
Spirit
activity
initiated
in
the
believer’s
life
through
conversion.”48
He
explains,
however,
with
Luke
departing
from
this
“conversion”
priority
in
his
narrative,
it
suggests
how
in
his
time
the
Christian
experience
was
diversely
understood.49
Luke
rarely
focuses
explicitly
on
the
Spirit’s
role
in
“conversion;”
he
focused
most
often
on
the
prophetic-­‐empowerment
direction
of
the
Spirit’s
activity.50
However,
Luke
doesn’t
depart
too
far.
Stronstad
45
H
Ray
Dunning,
Larry
Hart,
Stanley
M.
Horton,
and
Walter
Kaiser
Jr.
Ralph
Del
Colle,
Perspectives
On
Spirit
Baptism:
5
Views,
ed.
Chad
Owen
Brand
(Nashville,
TN:
B
&
H
Publishing
Group,
2004),
35.
46
C.
F.
D.
Moule,
The
Holy
Spirit:
Contemporary
Christian
Insights
(London,
New
York:
Continuum,
2000),
27-­‐37.
47
Harold
D.
Hunter,
Spirit
Baptimsm:
A
Pentecostal
Alternative
(Lanham,
MD:
University
Press
of
America,
1983),
85.
48
Craig
S.
Keener,
Acts:
An
Exegetical
Commentary
-­
Vol
1
-­
Introduction
and
1:1-­2:47
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
522.
49
Ibid.,
521.
50
Ibid.,
523.

12. 11
identifies
how
Lukan
narratives
bring
several
kinds
of
relationships
between
the
Spirit
and
salvation.51
Another
scholar,
who
argues
against
subsequent
doctrine
of
Spirit
baptism,
is
Gordon
Fee.
He
claims
that
Luke
has
no
“historical
intent”
to
show
this
empowerment
dimension
of
Spirit
Baptism
to
be
a
normative
value
for
future
Christians.52
Menzies
claims
that
Fee
is
theologically
indistinguishable
from
James
Dunn
and
many
other
non-­‐
Pentecostal
scholars,
ignoring
the
important
developments
in
New
Testament
and
Pentecostal
scholarship.53
Menzies
argues
how
Luke
does
show
“historical
intent”
to
teach
how
the
“baptism
of
the
Spirit”
is
distinct
from
conversion
for
every
believer,
as
proven
in
Stronstad’s
work
and
his
own
research.54
All
this
points
to
the
evidence
that
one
can
keep
Paul’s
and
Luke’s
pneumatologies
compatible,
while
still
staying
true
to
Luke’s
Charismatic
theology.
“The
gift…
technically
begins
at
conversion
in
principle,
but
in
terms
of
Luke’s
emphasis
on
its
prophetic
empowerment
dimension
for
missions,
may
be
experienced
in
this
prophetic
form
subsequent
to
conversion
(on
multiple
occasions).”55
“For
Luke,
empowerment
to
tell
others
about
Christ
is
central,
not
peripheral,
to
the
Spirit’s
activity
with
believers.56
51
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Prophethood
of
All
Believers:
A
Study
in
Luke's
Charismatic
Theology
(Cleveland,
TN:
CTP
Press,
2010),
119.
52
Robert
P.
Menzies,
Empowered
For
Witness:
The
Spirit
in
Luke-­Acts
(Sheffield,
England:
Sheffield
Academic
Press,
1991),
234.
53
Ibid.,
233,
235.
54
Ibid.,
233,
237.
55
Craig
S.
Keener,
Acts:
An
Exegetical
Commentary
-­
Vol
1
-­
Introduction
and
1:1-­2:47
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
523.
56
Ibid.,
681.

13. 12
Nature
of
the
Charismatic
Experience
When
describing
the
nature
of
the
charismatic
experience
of
the
Spirit,
as
in
the
case
with
the
discussion
on
the
“baptism
in
the
Spirit,”
it’s
important
to
keep
distinct
the
Pauline
and
Lukan
pnuematologies
in
gaining
understanding
of
Luke’s
phrase,
“filled
with
the
Spirit.”
One
must
recognize
how
this
phrase
for
Luke
in
his
narratives
have
a
different,
yet
complementary
meaning
to
Paul’s
one
use
of
this
phrase
in
Eph
5:18.
In
his
book,
The
Baptism
and
Fullness
of
the
Holy
Spirit,
Scott,
like
many
others,
have
made
the
mistake
to
limit
this
meaning
to
Paul’s
use
of
the
term.57
However,
Keith
Warrington
identifies
how
the
meaning
of
this
phrase
is
different
for
Paul
than
that
of
Luke
and
must
be
understood
in
their
perspective
contexts.58
Where
most
of
Luke’s
references
to
the
“fillings
of
the
Spirit”
likely
results
in
the
disciples
speaking
in
tongues
(Acts
2:4)
or
speaking
boldly
(Acts
19:6),
Paul’s
references
serve
a
different
purpose,
referring
to
spirituality
in
a
corporate
setting
of
worship
and
service
(Eph.
5:18).59
What
does
this
nature
entail
in
regards
to
the
religious
experience
of
being
filled
with
the
Spirit?
Luke
uses
“filled
with
the
Spirit”
repeatedly
within
Luke-­‐Acts
to
further
describes
the
nature
of
the
charismatic
gift
of
the
Spirit.
It
is
one
of
the
biblical
phrases
that
Luke
uses
from
Old
Testament
and
Septuagint
terminology
to
describe
the
Spirit’s
activity.60
Stronstad
illustrates
the
usage
of
the
term
in
Luke-­‐Acts
nine
times
(See
appendix
57
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Charimatic
Theology
of
St.
Luke,
second
edition
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
12.
58
Keith
Warrington,
Pentecostal
Theology:
A
Theological
Encounter
(New
York,
NY:
T&T
Clark,
2008),
126.
59
Ibid.,
126.
60
Craig
S.
Keener,
Acts:
An
Exegetical
Commentary
-­
Vol
1
-­
Introduction
and
1:1-­2:47
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
805;
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Charimatic
Theology
of
St.
Luke,
second
edition
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
20-­‐21.

14. 13
I).61
The
usage
yields
for
him
four
observations:
1)
gift
of
the
Spirit
to
the
disciples
on
the
day
of
Pentecost
is
not
an
isolated
and
unique
event
(Luke
1:67;
Acts.
4:8);
2)
being
filled
with
the
Spirit
is
both
an
individual
and
a
collective
experience;
3)
being
filled
with
the
Spirit
is
not
a
once-­‐for-­‐all
experience
(Acts
2:4;
4:8;
4:31;
9:17;
13:9);
and
4)
being
filled
with
the
Spirit
always
describes
joyful
inspired
speech.62
“Stronstad
argues
that
the
phrase
‘filled
with
the
Holy
Spirit’
specifically
describes
prophetic
inspiration
and
vocation,
and
should
be
used
as
a
technical
term
to
introduce
the
office
of
a
prophet…
or
prophetic
speech.”63
He
also
recognizes
how
Luke
portrays
other
additional
effects
of
the
Spirit
upon
a
believer,
outside
of
the
Spirit’s
empowerment
for
service,
such
as:
rejoicing,
praise,
purifying
the
church,
warnings,
joy,
and
strength
in
affliction.64
However,
Menzies
identifies
this
power
derived
from
the
Spirit
in
Luke-­‐Acts
as
more
strictly
related
to
prophetic
witness
and
proclamation
than
miracles
or
praise.65
He
emphasizes
that
the
driving
force
behind
their
witness
to
Christ
are
the
disciples
receiving
the
Spirit
for
others.66
It
may
be
seen
how
Menzies’
observations
are
too
restrictive
a
position
for
Luke
as
Stronstad’s
research
illustrates
in
understanding
the
Charismatic
work
of
the
Spirit.
Is
being
“filled
with
the
Spirit”
according
to
Luke
a
distinct
charismatic
experience
or
work
from
being
“baptized
in
the
Spirit?”
Some
scholars
believe
that
there
is
no
distinction
61
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Charimatic
Theology
of
St.
Luke,
second
edition
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
59.
62
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Charimatic
Theology
of
St.
Luke,
second
edition
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
60-­‐61.
63
Keith
Warrington,
Pentecostal
Theology:
A
Theological
Encounter
(New
York,
NY:
T&T
Clark,
2008),
58.
64
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Prophethood
of
All
Believers:
A
Study
in
Luke's
Charismatic
Theology
(Cleveland,
TN:
CTP
Press,
2010),
120.
65
Keith
Warrington,
Pentecostal
Theology:
A
Theological
Encounter
(New
York,
NY:
T&T
Clark,
2008),
58;
Robert
P.
Menzies,
Empowered
For
Witness:
The
Spirit
in
Luke-­Acts
(Sheffield,
England:
Sheffield
Academic
Press,
1991),
177.
66
Robert
P.
Menzies,
Empowered
For
Witness:
The
Spirit
in
Luke-­Acts
(Sheffield,
England:
Sheffield
Academic
Press,
1991),
175.

15. 14
between
Luke’s
Spirit
baptism
of
the
disciples
on
the
day
of
Pentecost
and
their
latter
Spirit
fillings
encounters.
Rather,
it’s
all
a
combination
of
repetitive
charismatic
endowments
in
one’s
Christian
pilgrimage.
Clinton
and
Lin
share
this
view,
where
Spirit
baptism
is
a
series
of
crisis
experiences
throughout
the
normal
Christian
life.67
This
Charismatic
(more
than
Pentecostal)
traditional
understanding
of
the
Spirit’s
empowerment
is
what
Hunter
believes
as
well.
Vying
towards
Dunn’s
one-­‐stage
unity
of
God’s
saving
gift
within
a
believer,
he
sees
the
charismatic
work
of
the
Spirit
as
“pneumatic
experiences”
that
are
both
repetitive
and
continuous
to
one’s
spiritual
pilgrimage.68
Stronstad
contends
for
the
view
that
“baptism
in
the
Spirit”
is
a
distinct
charismatic
event,
where
one
is
commissioned
for
service.69
He
acknowledges
how
Luke-­‐Acts
indicates
no
concrete
experiential
difference
in
the
religious
experience
of
the
charismatic
gift
between
the
“filling
of
the
Spirit”
and
the
“baptism
in
the
Spirit.”70
However,
there
is
a
difference
in
Luke’s
terminology
used
between
the
initial
filling
encounter
identified
by
Luke
as
the
“baptism
in
the
Spirit,”
and
the
subsequent
filling
encounters
that
come
after.71
A
“two-­‐fold”
distinction
must
be
made,
where
the
terms
“anointed”
and
“baptized,”
describe
the
consecrating
work
of
the
Holy
Spirit,
and
the
terms
“filled,”
clothed,”
and
“empowered”
describe
the
actual
equipping
by
67
Keith
Warrington,
Pentecostal
Theology:
A
Theological
Encounter
(New
York,
NY:
T&T
Clark,
2008),
103.
68
Harold
D.
Hunter,
Spirit
Baptimsm:
A
Pentecostal
Alternative
(Lanham,
MD:
University
Press
of
America,
1983),
284-­‐285.
69
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Charimatic
Theology
of
St.
Luke,
second
edition
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
95.
70
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Charimatic
Theology
of
St.
Luke,
second
edition
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
95.
71
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Charimatic
Theology
of
St.
Luke,
second
edition
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
56-­‐57,
95;
Craig
S.
Keener,
Acts:
An
Exegetical
Commentary
-­
Vol
1
-­
Introduction
and
1:1-­2:47
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
806.

16. 15
the
Spirit.72
Thus,
“baptism
in
the
Spirit”
is
a
specific
one-­‐time-­‐commissioning
event
distinct
from
the
fillings
of
the
Spirit
that
can
occur
thereafter
for
a
believer’s
public
ministry.
Contemporary
Significance
In
light
of
these
theoretical
Lukan
scholarly
developments
around
the
charismatic
work
of
the
Holy
Spirit,
the
contemporary
church
must
face
forward
in
ways
that
makes
room
for
the
Spirit’s
prophetic
empowerment
to
happen
amongst
believers.
One
of
the
ways
this
can
happen
is
in
how
these
scholarly
debates
on
Spirit
baptism
are
handled.
For
some,
this
has
caused
many
to
take
sides
on
the
issue,
creating
separate
camps
to
exist
within
Christian
faith
traditions.
For
instance,
the
Reformed
position
maintains
that
the
“baptism
in
the
Spirit”
is
received
at
the
time
of
one’s
conversion,
and
the
Holiness
and
Pentecostal
Christians
are
just
as
concerned
that
the
Scripture
speaks
of
a
special
empowerment
that
comes
subsequent
to
the
moment
of
conversion.73
It’s
really
a
discussion
between
these
two
camps,
who
are
trying
to
answer
the
questions
that
surround
the
timing
of
the
baptism
of
the
Holy
Spirit
and
the
nature
of
the
Spirit’s
empowerment.74
More
scholars
and
churches
in
both
camps
need
to
make
a
shift
discussing
and
embracing
both
Luke’s
and
Paul’s
pnuematologies
as
equally
significant.
Stronstod
makes
the
point
for
non-­‐Pentecostal
churches
needing
not
to
view
themselves
only
as
“didactic
communities,”
but
also
as
prophetic
ones.75
He
goes
on
to
say
that
the
preaching
and
72
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Charimatic
Theology
of
St.
Luke,
second
edition
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
95.
73
H
Ray
Dunning,
Larry
Hart,
Stanley
M.
Horton,
and
Walter
Kaiser
Jr.
Ralph
Del
Colle,
Perspectives
On
Spirit
Baptism:
5
Views,
ed.
Chad
Owen
Brand
(Nashville,
TN:
B
&
H
Publishing
Group,
2004),
16.
74
Ibid.,
16.
75
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Prophethood
of
All
Believers:
A
Study
in
Luke's
Charismatic
Theology
(Cleveland,
TN:
CTP
Press,
2010),
120-­‐122.

17. 16
teaching
of
the
Scripture
is
not
to
displace
Spirit-­‐filled,
and
Spirit-­‐empowered
ministry
or
what
will
happen
is
the
“Spirit
of
prophecy
[will]
be
quenched”
and
the
“gifts
of
the
Spirit
[will]
be
sanitized
and
institutionalized.”76
Warringtom,
who
is
also
carefully
sympathetic
towards
resolving
this
tension,
suggests
what
could
be
valuable
to
the
debate
is
dispensing
with
the
term
“subsequent”
and
replacing
it
with
“separate”
to
concentrate
the
discussion
of
Spirit
baptism
on
its
identity,
which
is
more
important
than
timing.77
He
notes
that
this
may
be
the
distinctive
nature
of
Luke’s
charismatic
theology
that
is
of
value,
rather
than
its
subsequence.78
At
the
same
time,
there
is
an
understanding
of
what
significance
the
concept
of
“subsequent”
brings
in
a
practical
sense,
developing
the
idea
of
progression
in
the
life
of
a
believer.
However,
is
this
idea
of
personal
spiritual
progression
apart
of
Luke’s
Charismatic
theology?
This
makes
one
wonder
if
Luke’s
Spirit
Baptism
is
more
about:
developing
some
experience
of
the
Holy
Spirit
within
the
believer,
developing
Christ’s
mission
outside
of
the
believer,
or
developing
mutually
related
personal
and
missionary
experiences
of
the
Holy
Spirit?
The
subject
of
experiencing
the
Spirit
as
the
main
priority
for
Christian
living
has
been
one
of
the
major
vulnerabilities
within
the
Pentecostal
tradition.
Stronstad
argues,
“Too
often
the
Pentecostal/Charismatic
movements
focus
on
experiences,
emotion,
and
the
blessing
more
than
they
do
on
the
Spirit-­‐filled,
Spirit-­‐led
and
Spirit-­‐empowered
service.”79
He
goes
on
to
say
that
this
shift
from
vocational
to
personal
experience,
from
being
worldly-­‐
76
Ibid.,
120-­‐122.
77
Keith
Warrington,
Pentecostal
Theology:
A
Theological
Encounter
(New
York,
NY:
T&T
Clark,
2008),
105.
78
Ibid.,
105.
79
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Prophethood
of
All
Believers:
A
Study
in
Luke's
Charismatic
Theology
(Cleveland,
TN:
CTP
Press,
2010),
120-­‐122.

18. 17
centered
to
self-­‐centered
renders
the
service
of
these
movements
to
become
impotent.80
In
the
end,
Stronstad
gives
sound
admonition
to
those
who
are
in
either
camp
on
how
to
better
handling
this
debate
facing
forward.
He
claims
the
antidote
to
the
“malaise
in
which
the
Spirit
of
prophecy
is
either
quenched
or
misused
is
for
the
contemporary
church
to
recapture,
doctrinally
and
vocationally,
the
first
century
reality
which
Luke
reports.”81
Thus,
in
light
of
these
discussions
and
practices,
the
main
goal
is
becoming
clearer
for
all
to
take
care
in
not
comprising
either
pnuematologies
of
Paul
or
Luke
to
accommodate
the
other.
Another
way
the
contemporary
church
can
make
room
for
the
prophetic
empowerment
of
the
Holy
Spirit
is
to
discover
how
to
waiting
on
the
Spirit
as
they
did
in
the
early
church.
There
has
been
some
confusion
within
the
Pentecostal
traditions
in
coming
up
with
a
systematic
way
in
how
one
receives
the
Spirit.
Various
guidelines
for
how
to
receive
the
baptism
of
the
Holy
Spirit
have
evolved
over
time,
where
some
are
more
stringent
than
others.82
Warrington
claims
this
confusion
around
Spirit
baptism
may
be
due
to
too
much
scholarly
attention
focused
on
biblical
articulation
of
the
doctrine,
rather
than
on
an
explanation
of
the
experience
itself.83
On
the
other
hand,
Stronstad
observes
that
Acts
does
not
depict
a
systematic
method
for
“conferring”
the
“baptism
in
the
Spirit”
to
others,
even
in
regards
to
prayer,
water
baptism
and
the
laying
on
of
hands.84
He
notes
Luke’s
primary
concern
is
in
the
fact
of
the
gift
of
the
Holy
Spirit
and
not
to
provide
any
80
Ibid.,
120-­‐122.
81
Ibid.,
120-­‐122.
82
Keith
Warrington,
Pentecostal
Theology:
A
Theological
Encounter
(New
York,
NY:
T&T
Clark,
2008),
98.
83
Ibid.,
96.
84
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Charimatic
Theology
of
St.
Luke,
second
edition
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
83.

19. 18
means
for
which
it
can
be
conferred.85
Stronstad
argues
how
the
means
for
which
the
Holy
Spirit
can
be
conferred
is
irrelevant
to
Luke’s
charismatic
theology.86
At
the
same
time,
he
is
also
cognizant
that
prayer
can
play
a
significant
role
in
the
reception
of
the
Spirit,
not
through
means
of
conferring
the
Spirit,
but
providing
the
spiritual
environment
for
which
the
Spirit
is
often
bestowed.87
In
other
words,
Stronstad
notes
how
God
doesn’t
arbitrarily
impose
his
Spirit
upon
his
disciples
apart
from
their
response
to
his
initiative.88
This
is
depicted
in
Luke’s
carefully
use
of
the
verb
“filled
with
the
Spirit”
(Acts
2:4),
being
in
its
passive
voice
and
the
use
of
the
verb
“receive
the
Holy
Spirit”
(Acts
2:38),
being
in
its
active
voice.89
Luke
makes
it
clear
in
these
passages
that:
1)
no
one
can
take
from
God
what
he
has
not
first
given,
and
2)
receiving
the
Holy
Spirit
is
a
necessary
compliment
to
being
filled
with
the
Spirit.90
Thus,
the
contemporary
church
must
have
this
priority
of
waiting
on
the
Spirit,
providing
the
spiritual
environment
for
the
reception
of
the
Spirit,
who
commissions
believers
for
divine
service.
Finally,
this
brings
us
to
the
topic
for
the
church
to
understand
the
place
for
glossolalia
in
relation
to
Luke’s
charismatic
theology.
Is
the
gift
of
tongues
a
valid
sign
of
the
“baptism
of
the
Spirit,”
as
Classical
Pentecostalism
claims
it
as
the
“initial
evidence?”
“Although
tongues
as
the
“initial
physical
evidence”
of
the
Spirit
baptism
became
the
dominant
view
in
Pentecostalism,
many
influential
proponents
of
tongues…
apparently
denied
or
came
to
deny
that
tongues
speaking
was
a
necessary
evidence
of
the
seminal
85
Ibid.,
83.
86
Ibid.,
83.
87
Ibid.,
83.
88
Ibid.,
84.
89
Ibid.,
84.
90
Ibid.,
84.

20. 19
experience
of
the
Spirit
described
in
Acts.”91
However,
Menzies
provides
conclusions
in
claiming
this
“initial
evidence”
of
tongues
as
an
“appropriate
inference
drawn
from
the
text,”
especially
since
Luke
has
inspired-­‐speech
closely
related
to
people
receiving
the
Spirit
in
Acts.92
He
further
illustrates
the
validity
of
this
in
how
the
doctrine
of
the
Trinity
came
about
in
the
same
way.93
Stronstad,
like
Menzies,
agrees
with
the
consistent
pattern
of
tongues-­‐speech
associated
with
gift
of
the
Spirit
within
Acts,
but
he
differs
in
that
the
significance
of
the
gift
for
the
disciples
was
not
to
be
in
their
experience
of
tongues;
rather,
the
significance
was
to
be
in
their
future
role
as
witnesses.94
Furthermore,
he
implies
how
the
Acts
narrative
provides
no
clear
directives
about
tongues
being
a
normative
Christian
experience.
Rather,
what
it
does
show,
however,
is
an
“invariant
pattern”
for
the
gift
of
the
Spirit
to
always
effect
mission
or
vocation.95
Keener
trends
towards
this
view,
claiming
how
the
experience
of
Spirit
baptism
in
Acts
is
more
about
“junctures”
in
relation
to
the
church’s
cross-­‐cultural
communication
of
the
gospel
than
about
tongues-­‐speech.96
He
also
elaborates
on
the
compatible
pnuematologies
Paul’s
and
Luke’s
understandings
of
tongues-­‐speech
both
share,
even
with
their
different
settings
and
theological
emphasis.97
See
appendix
II
and
III.98
Keener
concludes
that
Luke
does
not
use
tongues
as
the
“initial
evidence”
of
the
91
Craig
S.
Keener,
Acts:
An
Exegetical
Commentary
-­
Vol
1
-­
Introduction
and
1:1-­2:47
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
825-­‐826.
92
Robert
P.
Menzies,
Empowered
For
Witness:
The
Spirit
in
Luke-­Acts
(Sheffield,
England:
Sheffield
Academic
Press,
1991),
251;
Keith
Warrington,
Pentecostal
Theology:
A
Theological
Encounter
(New
York,
NY:
T&T
Clark,
2008),
120.
93
Robert
P.
Menzies,
Empowered
For
Witness:
The
Spirit
in
Luke-­Acts
(Sheffield,
England:
Sheffield
Academic
Press,
1991),
252.
94
Roger
Stronstad,
The
Charimatic
Theology
of
St.
Luke,
second
edition
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
77,
68.
95
Ibid.,
95
96
Craig
S.
Keener,
Acts:
An
Exegetical
Commentary
-­
Vol
1
-­
Introduction
and
1:1-­2:47
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012),
824.
97
Ibid.,
815.
98
Ibid.,
814-­‐815.

21. 20
“baptism
in
the
Spirit,”
because
he
did
not
see
tongues
as
an
arbitrary
evidence.99
Rather,
it
was
highlighted
in
Luke’s
narrative
to
attest
the
nature
of
the
experience
of
the
Spirit’s
gift.100
The
contemporary
church
needs
not
to
limit
the
gift
of
the
Spirit
to
an
“initial
evidence”
understanding
of
tongues.
Neither
is
the
church
to
make
it
an
exclusive
and
mandatory
sign
of
every
individual’s
reception
of
the
Spirit.
Rather,
a
more
authentic
sign
of
Luke’s
Spirit
baptism
is
the
inspired
speech
of
believers,
demonstrating
vocational
and
missionary
prophetic
witness.
While,
there
has
been
much
debate
on
the
biblical
meaning
of
“baptism
of
the
Spirit,”
there
is
a
strong
case
developed
that
welcomes
a
Lukan
charismatic
interpretation.
It
is
understood
to
be
a
second
work
of
grace,
where
believers
are
divinely
commissioned
and
equipped
to
advance
the
mission
of
Christ
in
the
world.
This
charismatic
work
of
the
Spirit
described
within
Luke-­‐Acts
is
not
primarily
to
mean
a
work
of
regeneration,
but
rather
to
mean
a
work
of
prophetic
empowerment
by
the
Spirit.
These
distinctions
of
Spirit
baptism
in
Pauline
and
Lukan
data
are
not
incompatible.
Rather,
they
have
complimentary
pneumatologies,
where
Luke’s
emphasis
on
the
Holy
Spirit
is
for
the
proclamation
of
the
gospel
and
Paul’s
is
for
the
renewal
of
the
Church.
And
it’s
Luke’s
prerogative
to
emphasize
the
nature
of
this
“filling
with
the
Spirit”
to
that
which
empowers
believers
to
have
inspired
speech
and
prophetic
vocation.
In
facing
forward,
the
Church
is
left
with
the
challenge
to
better
discern
how
to:
1)
recapture,
doctrinally
and
vocationally,
this
first
century
reality
of
the
Spirit,
2)
be
open
for
the
reception
of
the
Spirit’s
charismatic
work,
and
3)
identify
the
authentic
signs
within
believers
that
demonstrate
their
prophetic
vocational
and
missionary
empowerment.
99
Ibid.,
830.
100
Ibid.,
830.

22. 21
Appendix
I
The
Phrase
“filled
with
the
Spirit”
in
Luke-­‐Acts
Text
Persons
Phenomenon
Luke
1:15
John
the
Baptist
Prophetic
ministry
Luke
1:41
Elizabeth
Prophecy
Luke
1:67
Zacharias
Prophecy
Acts
2:4
Disciples
Glossolalia/prophecy
Acts
4:8
Peter
Witness
Acts
4:31
Disciples
Witness
Acts
9:17
Paul
(None
recorded)
Acts
13:9
Paul
Judgment
pronounced
Acts
13:52
Disciples
Joy

23. 22
Appendix
II
Lukan
and
Pauline
Biblical
Similarities
on
glossolalia
Lukan
“tongues”
(esp.
Acts
2:24)
Pauline
“tongues”
(1
Cor.
12-­14)
Tongues
(glossia)
i.e.
languages
(2:4)
Tongues
(glossia)
i.e.
languages
(13:1;
14:10-­‐11)
Tongues
are
inspired
by
the
Spirit
(2:4,
17-­‐18)
Tongues
are
a
gift
from
the
Spirit
(12:7-­‐11)
The
speakers
apparently
do
not
know
the
languages
(2:4)
The
speakers
do
not
know
the
languages
(14:13-­‐15)
They
are
understandable
(when
some
who
recognize
the
languages
are
present
[2:8-­‐11],
but
apparently
not
in
other
cases,
when
no
one
is
present
who
knows
the
languages
[10:46;
19:6]
The
are
understandable
(to
those
with
supernatural
interpretation
[12:10,
30;
14:13]
They
are
not
intelligible
to
those
who
do
not
recognize
the
languages
(2:13;
cf.
10:46;
19:6)
They
are
not
normally
intelligible
(without
a
supernatural
interpretation
[14:2,
9-­‐11,
19,
23]
They
apparently
function
as
inspired
praise
(2:11;
cf.
10:46)
They
function
as
praise
and
prayer
(14:2,
14-­‐15)
They
can
be
associated
with
(though
distinguishable
from)
other
speech
gifts,
such
as
prophecy
(19:6),
and
are
related
to
prophetic
speech
(2:17-­‐18;
cf.
2:43)
They
can
be
associated
with
(though
distinguishable
from)
other
speech
gifts,
such
as
prophecy
(12:8-­‐10;
14:2-­‐6;
22-­‐33,
39-­‐40)
Tongues
speech
belongs
to
a
larger
sphere
of
the
Spirit’s
activity
(e.g.,
visions
and
dreams,
2:17-­‐18;
cf.
2:43)
Tongues
speech
belongs
to
a
larger
sphere
of
the
Spirit’s
activity
(e.g.,
healings
and
miracles,
12:8-­‐10,
28-­‐30)
Tongues,
at
least
on
this
occasion,
function
as
a
sign
to
unbelievers
(2:11-­‐13)
Tongues
can
function
as
a
sign
to
unbelievers
(14:22)
The
emotion
of
tongues
speech
leads
to
some
outsiders
assuming
the
speaker’s
drunkenness
(2:13)
The
emotion
of
tongues
speech
leads
to
some
outsiders
assuming
madness
(14:23)
The
gift
of
tongues
speech
is
God’s
choice,
not
always
mediated
through
human
agency
(2:4;
10:44-­‐46),
through
such
agency
is
possible
(cf.
19:6)
Tongues
speech,
like
other
gifts,
is
God’s
sovereign
choice
(12:10-­‐11),
though
individuals
can
apparently
seek
for
gifts
(12:31;
14:1,
39)

24. 23
Appendix
III
Lukan
and
Pauline
Biblical
Differences
on
glossolalia
Lukan
“tongues”
(esp.
Acts
2:24)
Pauline
“tongues”
(1
Cor.
12-­14)
Hearers
understand
tongues
(but
only
at
Pentecost,
not
in
10:46;
19:6)
Hearers
would
not
(normally)
understand
the
tongues
(14:2,
16-­‐19,
23)
Tongues
are
not
abused
in
the
instances
described
in
Acts,
which
are
positive.
Tongues
are
abused
in
the
instances
presupposed
in
1
Corinthians,
although
Paul
affirms
this
experience
as
a
divine
gift
(12:10;
14:26),
especially
valuable
for
private
use
(14:2,
4);
he
practices
it
privately
(14;18),
and
he
warns
against
forbidding
its
public
use
if
it
is
accompanied
by
interpretation
(14:39)
Multiple
speakers
apparently
speak
in
tongues
simultaneously,
in
group
worship
(2:4;
10:46;
19:6)
Those
who
speak
in
tongues
should
do
so
one
at
a
time,
allowing
for
interpretation
of
each
(14:27-­‐28)
Tongues
are
a
sign
of
power
to
witness
to
the
nations
(1:8)
Tongues
are
one
among
many
gifts
(among
the
less
useful
in
public),
useful
especially
for
private
prayer
Tongues
begin
in
(2:5-­‐11)
and
attest
(10:45-­‐46)
the
Spirit’s
multicultural
work.
Paul
addresses
the
use
of
tongues
in
a
more
homogeneous
setting
of
Corinthian
house
churches
(14:23)
Tongues
seem
to
accompany
the
inauguration
of
the
Spirit’s
activity
where
they
occur,
i.e.
toward
the
beginning
of
believers’
experience
of
the
Spirit
(2:4;
10:44-­‐46;
19:6)
Tongues
are
one
among
many
gifts
(among
the
less
useful
in
public),
useful
especially
for
private
prayer
Luke
does
not
use
the
analogy
of
the
body
and
its
members
or
speak
of
spiritual
“gifts”
(focusing
instead
on
the
gift
of
the
Spirit)
Paul
speaks
of
diverse
gifts
of
grace
(ideally
especially
as
enablement’s
for
service
to
others)
or
of
the
Spirit
in
the
context
of
a
body
with
many
members
(Rom
12:4-­‐8;
1
Cor.
12:4-­‐30)

25. 24
Bibliography
Bock,
Darrell
L.
Baker
Exegetical
Commentary
on
the
New
Testament.
Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Books,
1994.
Dunn,
James
D.
G.
Baptism
in
the
Holy
Spirit:
Re-­examination
of
the
New
Testament
Teaching
on
the
Gift
of
the
Spirit
in
relation
to
Pentecostalism
today.
Naperville,
IL:
Alec
R.
Allenson
Inc.,
1970.
Hunter,
Harold
D.
Spirit
Baptimsm:
A
Pentecostal
Alternative.
Lanham,
MD:
University
Press
of
America,
1983.
Johnson,
Luke
Timothy.
Prophetic
Jesus,
Prophetic
Church.
Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Williams
B.
Eerdmans
Publishing
Co.,
2011.
Keener,
Craig
S.
Acts:
An
Exegetical
Commentary
-­
Vol
1
-­
Introduction
and
1:1-­2:47.
Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012.
Menzies,
Robert
P.
Empowered
For
Witness:
The
Spirit
in
Luke-­Acts.
Sheffield,
England:
Sheffield
Academic
Press,
1991.
Moule,
C.
F.
D.
The
Holy
Spirit:
Contemporary
Christian
Insights.
London,
New
York:
Continuum,
2000.
Powel,
Mark
Allen.
What
Are
They
Saying
About
Luke?
Mahwah,
NJ:
Paulist
Press,
1989.
Ralph
Del
Colle,
H
Ray
Dunning,
Larry
Hart,
Stanley
M.
Horton,
and
Walter
Kaiser
Jr.
Perspectives
On
Spirit
Baptism:
5
Views.
Edited
by
Chad
Owen
Brand.
Nashville,
TN:
B
&
H
Publishing
Group,
2004.
Stronstad,
Roger.
The
Charimatic
Theology
of
St.
Luke.
second
edition.
Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Academic,
2012.
—.
The
Prophethood
of
All
Believers:
A
Study
in
Luke's
Charismatic
Theology.
Cleveland,
TN:
CTP
Press,
2010.
Talbert,
Charles
H.
Literary
Patterns,
Theological
Themes
and
the
Genre
of
Luke-­Acts.
Missoula,
Montana:
Scholars
Press,
1974.
Warrington,
Keith.
Pentecostal
Theology:
A
Theological
Encounter.
New
York,
NY:
T&T
Clark,
2008.