132 Dimensions of Baptism
and the Spirit" \^37 However, this overlooks the point that Christian bap-
tism is to be distinguished from John's baptism and Jesus' baptism pre-
cisely because it gets its distinctive meaning from the resurrection of
Christ and the gift of the Spirit (cf., e.g., Rom. 6.3-11 and Acts 2.38).
Thirdly, this is another example of Dunn's oscillating between conver-
sion-initiation at times and separating the various components of this
'process' at others. If it is right to talk of conversion-initiation at all it must
be seen as a process in which the order of the components of this 'process'
is not the essential factor. The differences of order as recorded by Luke in
Acts can be understood as evidence that the process of conversion-initia-
tion was recognized by the earliest believers. For so long Christians have
tended to understand conversion in punctiliar terms, as happening at a
specific and identifiable moment—a moment which was either anticipated
in infant baptism or witnessed to in believer's baptism. But the under-
standing of becoming a Christian as a process of conversion-initiation
should free us from having to try and determine which is the normative
order of conversion: repentance, water-baptism, forgiveness and reception
of the Spirit (Acts 2.38,41); believing, water-baptism, laying on of hands
and reception of the Spirit (Acts 8.12-17); reception of the Spirit, speaking
in tongues and water-baptism (Acts 10.44-48); believing and water-baptism
(Acts 16.31-33); or believing, water-baptism, laying on of hands, reception
of the Spirit and speaking in tongues (Acts 19.1-6; see also 9.17-18 and
22.16^38 ). Howard Marshall observes that 'It is clear that Luke had received
several varying accounts of how the Spirit was received by men, but he
has not tried to harmonize them and impose a pattern upon them... If Luke
was wishing to fit the work of the Spirit into a pattern, he had no need to
record these anomalous experiences.'^39
It is important to point out that Fee appears not to accept the view ofbecoming a Christian as a process, least of all in terms of conversion-
initiation: 'In light of Paul's infrequent mention of baptism—especially so
- Dunn, Theology, pp. 450-51 n. 45.
3 8. Acts 22.16 in relation to the earlier two Lukan accounts of Paul' s conversion is
discussed by S.E. Porter, The Paul of Acts: Essays in Literary Criticism, Rhetoric, and
Theology (WUNT, 115; Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999), pp. 70-72, who concludes
(p. 72) that 22.16 'provides very little detail regarding how and when the Spirit worked
in Paul at or after his conversion, except to note that it did, and that its working is
explicitly noted in the first account of his conversion in Acts [9.17]'. - I.H. Marshall, Luke: Historian and Theologian (Exeter: Paternoster Press, 3rd
edn, 1988), pp. 198-99.