Ratings for inference steps

onTheConversionStep

The step from 1 Corinthians 12:13 to Spirit baptism at conversion is rated disputed, conservatively. Dunn and Stott hold it. The Assemblies of God reject its conclusion, but by denying a ground — that the verse speaks of Christ baptizing in the Spirit: "'by' is the best translation, indicating that the Holy Spirit is the instrument" — so they do not contest the step itself. No reader was sought who grants both grounds and denies the conclusion, so the step is not rated above the bottom.

def onTheConversionStep : Source :=
  { primary := Reference.work dunnBaptismInTheHolySpirit,
    supporting :=
      [Reference.work stottBaptismAndFullness,
        Reference.work agBaptismPositionPaper],
    tradition := Tradition.christianHistoricalGrammatical,
    confidence := Confidence.disputed }

menziesAgainstNoSecond

The step from Spirit baptism at conversion to "no second to seek" is contested, by Menzies. He grants that Paul's baptism in the Spirit at 1 Corinthians 12:13 is tied to conversion, and holds that Luke's is a different, prophetic gift, to be sought after it. Whether that is granting the ground and denying the conclusion, or reading "baptism in the Spirit" in two senses, is the question of Paul's word and Luke's, which this argument does not yet encode.

def menziesAgainstNoSecond : Source :=
  { primary := Reference.work menziesLukesUnderstanding,
    supporting := [Reference.work menziesEmpoweredForWitness],
    tradition := Tradition.christianHistoricalGrammatical,
    confidence := Confidence.disputed }

onTheInstrumentalStep

The step from the Pentecostal reading of 1 Corinthians 12:13 is rated disputed, conservatively. The Assemblies of God hold it. Dunn and Stott reject its conclusion, but by denying a ground — they read the verse as the baptism in the Spirit that Christ gives, not the Spirit as instrument — so they do not contest the step itself. No reader was sought who grants both grounds and denies the conclusion, so the step is not rated above the bottom.

def onTheInstrumentalStep : Source :=
  { primary := Reference.work agBaptismPositionPaper,
    supporting :=
      [Reference.work dunnBaptismInTheHolySpirit,
        Reference.work stottBaptismAndFullness],
    tradition := Tradition.christianHistoricalGrammatical,
    confidence := Confidence.disputed }

actsToSubsequence

The step from the Acts narratives to a second Spirit baptism is well supported: grant that believers in Samaria and Ephesus received the Spirit later, that Luke's Spirit baptism is empowerment, and that his narratives are a pattern, and the conclusion follows. Unlike the steps rated conservatively here, this one was audited for a reader who grants all three grounds and denies the conclusion, and none was found: the readers who reject it deny a ground — Dunn, that the Samaritans were yet Christians; Stott and Fee, that the narratives are a pattern. The other steps were not audited in their encoded form, so they stay at the bottom.

def actsToSubsequence : Source :=
  { primary := Reference.work agBaptismPositionPaper,
    supporting := [Reference.work stronstadCharismaticTheology],
    tradition := Tradition.christianHistoricalGrammatical,
    confidence := Confidence.wellSupported }

wesleyAgainstTheHolinessName

The holiness step is contested, from within the Wesleyan tradition. The Church of the Nazarene holds it (Manual 2023, Article X). Wesley grants the "second change, whereby they shall be saved from all sin and perfected in love", and denies that it is Spirit baptism: "If they like to call this 'receiving the Holy Ghost,' they may: only the phrase in that sense is not scriptural and not quite proper; for they all 'received the Holy Ghost' when they were justified" (to Joseph Benson, 28 December 1770). The Nazarene seminary faculty, keeping entire sanctification, "no longer view the American holiness hermeneutic of the 'baptism of the Spirit' as exegetically tenable" (2010).

def wesleyAgainstTheHolinessName : Source :=
  {
    primary :=
      Reference.work wesleyLetters
        (Bib.Locus.sectionRef "to Joseph Benson, 28 December 1770"),
    supporting := [Reference.work nazareneWhitePaper],
    tradition := Tradition.christianHistoricalGrammatical,
    confidence := Confidence.disputed }

onTheRite

The sacramental step is rated disputed, conservatively. Rome holds it (Catechism 1302). Westminster rejects the sacramental view, but by denying a ground — that the Spirit is given in the rite as Rome says: baptism's efficacy "is not tied to that moment of time wherein it is administered" (XXVIII.6) — so it does not contest the step itself. No reader was sought who grants the grounds and denies the conclusion, so the step is not rated above the bottom.

def onTheRite : Source :=
  {
    primary :=
      Reference.work catechismCatholicChurch (Bib.Locus.sectionRef "1302"),
    supporting :=
      [Reference.work westminsterConfession (Bib.Locus.sectionRef "XXVIII.6")],
    tradition := Tradition.romanCatholic, confidence := Confidence.disputed }

onTheSacramentalExclusion

The step from the Spirit given in the sacraments to "no second baptism to seek" is rated disputed, conservatively. Rome holds it (Catechism 1302). The natural contester is the Catholic charismatic renewal, which keeps the sacramental gift and speaks of a "baptism in the Spirit" of its own; its texts were not verified, so it is not cited, and the step is not rated above the bottom.

def onTheSacramentalExclusion : Source :=
  {
    primary :=
      Reference.work catechismCatholicChurch (Bib.Locus.sectionRef "1302"),
    tradition := Tradition.romanCatholic, confidence := Confidence.disputed }

agAgainstTheVariety

The step from the variety of Acts is contested, by the Assemblies of God. They grant Acts 10 and 2:38 and still read Acts as a pattern: their paper lists Acts 10:44–46 among the evidence for a subsequent experience.

def agAgainstTheVariety : Source :=
  { primary := Reference.work agBaptismPositionPaper,
    tradition := Tradition.christianHistoricalGrammatical,
    confidence := Confidence.disputed }

stottOnTheTransitions

The step from the transitions reading is rated disputed, conservatively. If the episodes of Acts are unrepeatable, they set no norm for believers today, Stott argues. No reader was sought who grants the transitions reading and still holds a second Spirit baptism to be the norm, so the step is not rated above the bottom.

def stottOnTheTransitions : Source :=
  { primary := Reference.work stottBaptismAndFullness,
    tradition := Tradition.christianHistoricalGrammatical,
    confidence := Confidence.disputed }

Citations

cite

Citation and classification for every atom. Total, so nothing is uncited.

def cite : Claim → AtomMeta