SEARCH

Creation and Spirit: The work of the Holy Spirit in our world and God’s

Creation by ‘the word’ of God is a well-understood part of the Bible’s account by Christians generally: As Psalms 33:6 says, “By the word of the LORD were the heavens made…” But what is the role of the Spirit of God in creation, exactly? And what is his role in all things?

Attention to the work of the Holy Spirit has often concentrated on his gifts and miraculous workings, such as healing. It is in the realm of the ‘spiritual’ that we often focus when looking to see the Spirit at work. Does the Bible share such a singular focus when highlighting the Spirit’s work? What type of picture do the Scriptures paint when read in their entirety about the working of the Holy Spirit in the world?

The ‘Wind’ or the ‘Breath’ of God

Progressively throughout the Bible’s account of creation, we see the development of the revelation of the Spirit of God as the central agent involved in all of God’s work in the universe he has made, from creation through to new creation.

The Hebrew word for ‘spirit’ literally connotes the movement of air, and so may be translated simply as ‘wind’. What is often translated in our English Bibles as the “Spirit” of God should perhaps be translated more literally as the “wind” of God. Genesis 1:2 is a prime example. The context dictates the intended meaning of the root word so that in Hebrew this verse would read to the Jew: “the wind of God was hovering over the face of the waters.”

As the Bible’s narrative develops it becomes clear that a ‘wind’ from God and the ‘breath’ of God have a central purpose in God’s own acts of creation and recreation. From Genesis 1 onwards, the activity of God seems to involve – quite mysteriously at first – the agency of this ‘wind’ or ‘breath’ that comes from the LORD (Genesis 1:2; 8:1; Exodus 14:21 Numbers 11:31).

And in this way, a ‘wind’ becomes in the Scripture a sign and symbol of God’s activity by his Holy Spirit (2 Samuel 22:11; Psalms 18:10; Psalms 104:3; John 3:8; Acts 2:2). So too, the ‘breath’ is used throughout the Bible as a symbol of God’s activity by his Spirit (Genesis 2:7; Ezekiel 37:5 ff; John 20:22)

The ‘Spirit’ and the ‘Word’ of God

The significance of this becomes apparent as the Scriptural revelation unfolds, portraying a deep intrinsic relationship between the ‘Spirit’ of God and the ‘Word’ of God. The LORD works, or affects his will, in one way but by two means. The one way that he works is with his mouth – figurative language (an anthropomorphism) for God working by speaking his will into existence. But from his mouth come two things that together are two means by which his one work and one will are carried out: from the mouth of the LORD come his Word and his Spirit.

Notice Isaiah 34:16: “For the mouth of the LORD has commanded, and his Spirit has gathered them.” Here are some further examples of where we see this. The following passages show this close connection between the work of both the word and spirit, proceeding from the mouth of the LORD:

“Then the channels of the sea were seen; the foundations of the world were laid bare, at the rebuke of the LORD [mouth/word], at the blast of the breath [or ‘spirit’] of his nostrils” (2 Samuel 22:16; cf. Psalms 18:15).

“By the word of the LORD the heavens were made, and by the breath [or ‘spirit’] of his mouth all their host” (Psalms 33:6).

“He hurls down his crystals of ice like crumbs; who can stand before his cold? He sends out his word, and melts them; he makes his wind [or ‘spirit’] blow and the waters flow” (Psalms 147:17-18).

“Seek and read from the book of the LORD: Not one of these shall be missing; none shall be without her mate. For the mouth of the LORD has commanded, and his Spirit has gathered them” (Isaiah 34:16).

“He will strike the earth with the rod of his mouth; with the breath of his lips he will slay the wicked” (Isaiah 11:4).

“…the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.” (Ephesians 6:17; cf. Hebrews 4:12; 2 Timothy 3:16); compare, “He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God… Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations” (Revelation 19:13-15; cf. Revelation 1:16; 2 Thessalonians 2:8).
God’s word carries his command: his decree as to what will be done. His Spirit carries his power to enact that command and so is his agency by which that decree is done.

The Word of God is not the Spirit of God, though the two, of course, cannot be separated. Both proceed from God together. In order, the Word of God comes first, because it proceeds directly from the will of God who commands it; it is because he speaks his word that his breath is generated. So the Spirit proceeds from both God and the Word of God, just as the spoken word immediately generates breath. And the Spirit carries the Word of God (as breath carries the spoken word), just as the Word of God carries the will or decree of God.

And so it is said in Scripture both that God sends out his word and that he sends out his Spirit to perform his work:

He sends his Word:
“He sends out his command to the earth; his word runs swiftly;” (Psalms 147:15) “So is my word that goes out from my mouth: It will not return to me empty, but will accomplish what I desire and achieve the purpose for which I sent it” (Isaiah 55:11).

He sends his Spirit:
“When you send forth your Spirit, they are created, and you renew the face of the ground;” (Psalms 104:30) “Thus says the Lord GOD: Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe on these slain, that they may live" (Ezekiel 37:9).
The agency of the Spirit

We are more familiar with the role of God the Father and of the Son in creation and salvation, partly because of summary verses readily found in the New Testament that explain: “For us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.” (1 Corinthians 8:6; cf. Romans 11:36)

Here we see that while all things are from and for God the Father, all things are at the same time through God the Son. It is through the Son that all things exist because in him all things hold together (Colossians 1:17). And all things hold together in the Son because “he upholds the universe by the word of his power.” (Hebrews 1:3)

Hebrews 1:3 is significant also for the role of the Holy Spirit in God’s work because against the backdrop of the Old Testament revelation on the relationship between the Word and Spirit of God, it shows us the central role in creation of “the word of his power.”

It is by “the word of his power” that the universe was created, to begin with, which as we have seen involved the agency of the Spirit of God who affected that word of God. The power of the word of God comes by the activity of the Holy Spirit, by whom God’s word is accomplished in the world. In other words, all things from God are done by the agency of the Holy Spirit.

To summarize: All things come from God through his word by the agency of his Spirit, whose activity and power makes effectual the word which God sent for his purpose. Let me give a few examples of this throughout God’s work that we see revealed through Scripture:

Creation, life and death by the Holy Spirit

Clearly present at the beginning, and involved in creation, the Spirit as the wind or breath of God was moving over the waters (Genesis 1:2, where the ‘spirit’ of God is literally the ‘wind’ or ‘breath’ of God). And in fact, Psalm 33:6 continues, “…their starry host [were made] by the breath [or ‘spirit’] of his mouth.” Job, describing God’s power over creation, which trembles at his rebuke, declares, “by his wind the heavens were made fair” (ESV Job 26:13, KJV: ‘his spirit’, NIV: ‘his breath’).

And even clearer from the beginning, the creation of people occurred by God’s Spirit: “the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.” (Genesis 2:7; cf. Isaiah 42:5) Elihu speaking to Job says, “The Spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life.” (Job 33:4).

Not only does all life come by the Holy Spirit, but also “by the breath of God they perish, and by the blast of his anger they are consumed” (Eliphaz in Job 4:9). In a direct reversal of his work in Genesis 2:7, the Psalmist says, “When you take away their breath [‘spirit’], they die and return to their dust.” (Psalms 104:29) “The grass withers, the flower fades when the breath [or ‘spirit’] of the LORD blows on it; surely the people are grass. (Isaiah 40:7). Just as the LORD gives and takes away (Job 1:21), so also the Spirit breathes life and takes again that breath away.

Renewal by the Holy Spirit

Thankfully it is also in mercy that God by his Spirit brings from death, new life, in order to renew and so preserve his creation: “When you send forth your Spirit, they are created, and you renew the face of the ground.” (Psalms 104:30)

Genesis’ account in the opening chapters of the Bible is followed by an account of Adam’s line, whose children are born only to die, having been created in the likeness of their father whose sin brought God’s judgment of death (Genesis 5:1-5).

In the next account in Genesis, of the renewal of the world by water in Noah’s time, again a wind from God, moving over the waters, brings dry ground to the feet of a new creation that emerges from the Ark (Genesis 8:1). Noah’s children, however, spread the effects of sin and judgment over the face of the whole earth (Genesis 11:8-9).

The book of Genesis ends with the account of Jacob, a generation promised to bring God’s blessing to the whole world, but who after Joseph faced slavery under Egypt. But when he remembers his promise to Abraham, he again acts, this time to redeem Israel from Egypt, by a wind from God moving over the waters, causing God’s people to walk through the red sea on dry land and into their new world of service to God (Exodus 14:21). Moses responds in song: “By the blast of your nostrils the waters piled up…"The enemy boasted…But you blew with your breath, and the sea covered them” (Exodus 15:8-10).

Judgment by the Holy Spirit

God brought Israel up out of Egypt through water by the Holy Spirit so they would live and worship him as his own people. But after giving them his law to sanctify them, as he led them through the desert toward his promised paradise, in an act of judgment he provides for them the very food they crave having grumbled against Moses, “a wind went out from the LORD and drove quail in from the sea” (Numbers 11:31).

Sadly from their very exit of Egypt onwards, again and again, throughout their history, Israel rebelled against God’s Spirit who had acted to redeem and lead them into their inheritance, so much so that Psalmist can only in praise of God appeal for mercy to upon the basis of his covenant faithfulness for a future salvation (Psalm 106:6-47).

Isaiah also attributes Israel’s history to the work of the Holy Spirit, and their judgment to rebellion against him: “In his love and mercy he redeemed them… yet they rebelled and grieved his Holy Spirit. So he turned and became their enemy and he himself fought against them. Then his people recalled the days of old, the days of Moses and his people … Where is he who set his Holy Spirit among them, who sent his glorious arm of power to be at Moses' right hand, who divided the waters before them… they were given rest by the Spirit of the LORD…” (Isaiah 63:9-14)

A new judgment by the Holy Spirit

The prophet Isaiah spoke about one who would come not only to bring salvation, but also by the Spirit judgment: “he shall strike the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath [or ‘spirit’] of his lips he shall kill the wicked.” (Isaiah 11:4; cf. 11:15). And again, “Behold my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen, in whom my soul delights; I have put my Spirit upon him; he will bring forth justice to the nations” (Isaiah 42:1). The Holy Spirit will be the agent by which Christ brings his final judgment. Just as God’s final judgment will be executed through the mighty Word of God, it will also come by his powerful Spirit. For example, Paul describes God’s judgment of the lawless one, whom, “the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath [or ‘spirit’] of his mouth” (2 Thessalonians 2:8).

A new renewal by the Holy Spirit

But thankfully the Spirit will also bring for God’s people through judgment, salvation: “The Lord will wash away the filth of the women of Zion; he will cleanse the bloodstains from Jerusalem by a [or ‘the’] spirit of judgment and a [or ‘the’] spirit of fire” (Isaiah 4:4). Isaiah foretold the very thing John the Baptist spoke of when he said, “"I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me will come one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not fit to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Matthew 3:11; cf. Luke 3:16).

Comparable with both the agency of water (for washing/cleansing) and of fire (for refinement/judgment), Christ will baptize with the agency of the Spirit. Christ who will pour out the Holy Spirit on his people will by him make them clean and consequently accepted by God; that is, by giving them his Spirit they will have forgiveness of sins (Cf. Malachi 3:1-6; 4:1; Acts 2:36-38).

In the new age of the Spirit the Lord Jesus washes us clean from sin by a baptism that is not merely outward with ceremonial water, but is inward, by the Holy Spirit, and whose outpouring on God’s people brings spiritual regeneration and renewal:

“But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life” (Titus 3:4-7).
A new life, new death and new creation by the Holy Spirit

Ezekiel, at a time when eventually Israel was exiled and driven by the Spirit back into slavery to Babylon, foretold a day when, “I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules” (Ezekiel 36:25-27).

The Holy Spirit brings a new work in the hearts of his people: “circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit” (Romans 2:29); “by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code” (Romans 7:6; cf. Romans 6:17; 8:2-10); or in other words: “if anyone is in Christ he is a new creation.” (2 Corinthians 5:17; cf. Galatians 6:15)

And not only that, he will also affect a new work in their flesh too; there will also be a new work of creation in an age of resurrection from death and judgment: “Thus says the Lord GOD: Behold, I will open your graves and raise you from your graves, O my people…And I will put my Spirit within you, and you shall live (Ezekiel 37:11-14)”. Just as the Apostle Paul said in his letter to the Romans: “If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you” (Romans 8:11).

The Spirit’s work in all things

We’ve seen how the Holy Spirit works in the world. Against this backdrop, it is clearly a mistake to think of the Spirit’s activity in the world as involving a realm that is separate from the created physical universe. In the Bible’s universe, we do not actually see the Holy Spirit specializing more in the ‘spiritual’ than the ‘natural’ world.

To look for the Spirit’s activity primarily in the miraculous betrays a mistaken view of the Holy Spirit as working chiefly by intervention into the created world, usually with extraordinary effects: he manifests his presence with works of power that are super-natural. We may also seek the Spirit within the inner world of our emotions and subjective experience, betraying a tendency to think of the Spirit’s role in terms of the intangible world of feelings as opposed to the physical world of nature or the rational world of the mind, instead desiring after divine and personal encounters with God in search of experiences of his activity in ways that transcend the everyday order of the world.

But it is a mistake to think of the Holy Spirit’s work in the world with this type of false-separation between creation and spirit. The Spirit is involved in all things, just as God is behind all things. The Bible affirms that from and for God the Father are all things, who through his Son, who is the Word of God, are all things and through whom do all things exist, and that all these things are done by the power of his Holy Spirit.

Big and small, common and extraordinary, the grass growing, the leaves falling, storm and sunset, all of our living and moving, birth and rebirth, death and resurrection and eternity in the new creation: There is nothing that exists or comes to exist or is done in the universe that does not involve the agency of his Holy Spirit; all things are from God and there is nothing that he does not do by his Spirit. Our world is God’s world and nothing in all of his creation is isolated from and does not depend on the presence and power of his Spirit.


What is Holy Spirit: Who is He? - II

Who is the Holy Spirit? Firstly, Christians know the Holy Spirit is in terms of his relations, his name and his nature. But we also know the Spirit by his personal properties. God's Spirit, for example, is "the Spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the Spirit of counsel and of power, the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD" (Isaiah 11:2).

Although there are as many properties of the Spirit as there are of God himself, there are a few that are in particular ascribed to him distinctly. John Owen in The Holy Spirit outlines three, summarised here:

1. The Spirit of Truth

The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Wisdom and Understanding (Isaiah 11:2). The Spirit searches all things, the Spirit knows all things, the Spirit understands all things: including the depths of the wisdom and knowledge and understanding of God (1 Corinthians 2:11). It is also the Spirit who is the author and giver of wisdom, knowledge and understanding in others (1 Corinthians 12:11).

And so we are given the Spirit as Christians in order that we may be given understanding of what God has given us (1 Corinthians 2:12). He is the one who fulfills that great promise, "they will all be taught by God" (John 6:45). Accordingly, teaching is the great work of Holy Spirit; he alone is the great teacher of the Church. The many other teachers in the church cannot in fact teach at all without him to any real spiritual benefit in others. But the Holy Spirit teaches his Church with or without teachers (Jeremiah 31:34; 1 John 2:27).

In one direct continued discourse, Jesus to his disciples purposely instructed them in the nature and work of the Spirit, designed to inform them who the Comforter or Counselor was and what he would do for them (John 14-16). He is the Spirit of Truth, and here we find that the Father sent the Spirit to teach. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ himself, and would be with Christians in Christ's absence, taking not only his place but also his role as their teacher, reminding them of everything that he himself had taught them. 

2. The Spirit of Sovereignty
 
As the wind itself is not under our direction or at our disposal, so the Spirit is sovereign in his giving of salvation (John 3:8) and in his giving of all things from God, including gifts (1 Corinthians 12:11). The Spirit is the Spirit of the Sovereign Lord, having the freedom of choice only possessed by the God who is Lord over all. We are given God's Spirit as Christians so that he might sovereignly work through us what he determines to be for the common good of his body (1 Corinthians 12:7).
 
3. The Spirit of Power

The Spirit of God alone has the power that enables him to act according to the guidance of his understanding and the determination of his sovereign will. He is the Spirit of Power (Isaiah 11:2). We are given the Spirit as Christians so that we will have God's power at work in us: God himself enabling us to believe God's word (1Thessalonians 1:5), enabling us to have faith in Christ (Ephesians 3:16-17), enabling us to have love and self-discipline (2 Timothy 1:7).

--


Owen, John. The Holy Spirit--His Gifts and Power. Christian Focus Publications 2004, p. 69-72.

Worship: The End for which God's Word is given

We know that the end for which we were made is to worship and glorify God. It's surprising then that within Christianity, worship is a topic often surrounded today by much confusion. It's a key concern for Pentecostalism, as it should be among all true religion in the world. What is true religious worship and therefore what is true religion?

1. Foundation of true worship: God in himself

The reason for our worship is not merely what God has done for us, or what God is to us; but the reason our worship of God is an absolute duty is what God is in himself.

John Owen explains that it is the nature of God, his very being, that is the foundation of all true worship:
Because he is; that is, because he is an infinitely glorious, good, wise, holy, powerful, righteous, self-subsisting, self-sufficient, and all-sufficient being; the fountain and author of all being and good; the first cause, last end, and sovereign Lord of all; therefore, he is to be worshipped: therefore, are we to admire, adore, and love him; to praise, to trust and to fear him. [1]
Of course we worship God because of what he has done for us and is to us, but the principle reason for that worship, and what makes it true worship, is who and what God is. God is the great I AM; that name by which we are to know him. We worship him because he is I AM WHO I AM.

2. Rule of true worship: God's word about himself

And so our worship of God, owed him because of his divine nature, must be directed according to the revelation he has made of his being and nature to us. That is, if our worship is not ruled by God's revelation, if it does not conform to his word about himself, it is rebellion and wickedness.

The end for which the revelation of God is given through the Scriptures is that it would direct us to worship God; that is, the purpose of God's word to us is that we would respond to the true God with the obedience of faith in his word.

Our worship must therefore be a faith response of obedience to the Gospel, God's revelation of himself in the Scriptures. Otherwise we fail to worship under his rule: such worship dishonours the true and living God, is false religion, dead spirituality and idolatry.

Pentecostalism and true worship

Pentecostals may know that the end for which we were made is to worship and glorify God. But do you know that the end for which God's word is given is that it would direct your worship so that it does actually glorify God? The true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth (John 4:23).

--

Owen, John. The Holy Spirit--His Gifts and Power. Christian Focus Publications 2004, p. 61-62.

[1] Ibid.

What is Holy Spirit: Who is he? - I

What does the name ‘Spirit’ signify? The words translating Spirit from the original languages in the Bible are ambiguous, signifying a movement of air (wind, breath, breeze).

John Owen in The Holy Spirit answers:

“…It is sufficiently evident that there is in the Scripture, a full and complete revelation of the Spirit of God, as one singular, and every way distinct from every thing else denoted by that name; and that whatever is affirmed of this Holy Spirit, relates either to his person or operations.” (p. 55).

Though often simply called “the Spirit” in the Bible, in regard to his properties he is named the Spirit of truth, the Spirit of holiness and the Spirit of grace. And regarding his relations he is called the Spirit of God and the Spirit of the Son. And in regard to his person he is called the Holy Spirit.

His Relations: Persons of the Godhead

Throughout Scripture the Spirit is called either the Spirit of God or Spirit of the LORD (including in reference to God, “your good Spirit” or the “Spirit of your Father”), speaking of his relation to God the Father.

In the New Testament the Spirit is also called the Spirit of God’s Son, the Spirit of Christ, the Spirit of Jesus and the Spirit of the Lord, speaking of his relation to God the Son.

Just as the Son is called the Son of God, the Spirit is the Spirit of God. And just as the Spirit has eternally been God’s own Spirit, the Spirit has eternally been the Spirit of the Son who himself has eternally been one with the Father. Speaking of the Prophets in the Old Testament, before the coming of Christ, the Apostle Peter refers to the “Spirit of Christ in them” because the Holy Spirit has eternally existed as both the ‘Spirit of the Son’ and the ‘Spirit of God’ (1 Peter 1:10-11).

His Person: Name and Nature

The Spirit is also called the Holy Spirit, not only because his work relates to sanctification, but also more eminently, because his nature is holy. Just as God is himself ‘holy’ and is called the ‘Holy One’, so too God’s Spirit is called the Holy Spirit. Since he is God’s own Spirit he has God’s own nature, God’s own holiness.

God may command his holy ones (angels) to execute his commands, whether in mercy or in righteous judgment. But also in his righteous judgment there are some actions brought about by God’s decree that are not brought about by him directly; that is, they are not brought about by God’s own Spirit, but by evil spirits.

By God’s permission these actions are opposed to the Holy Spirit and are carried out by evil spirits acting upon persons or things, often decreed by God as punishment for wickedness, though not always (cf. Job 1). A famous example is in 1 Samuel 16:14-15, 19:9; an evil spirit is appointed and commissioned by God to punish Saul (cf. 1 Samuel 10:6, 9). This is explained more in God, Evil and Sovereignty.

But there is no good that God works that is not done by God directly; that is, God does it by the Holy Spirit. All spiritual benefits come through the Spirit. Whether mercy or grace, whatever good God works in us is by his Spirit, the Holy Spirit.

--

Owen, John. The Holy Spirit--His Gifts and Power. Christian Focus Publications 2004, p. 55-60.

Gifts of the Holy Spirit: 1 Corinthians 12:1-11 and Pentecostals

The Apostle Paul gives the ignorant Corinthians one criteria to determine genuine Christian spirituality: Holy spirituality looks like people confessing Jesus as Lord. Formerly they had been led and influenced by speechless idols. Now the power of the Spirit had led them to confess Jesus as their Lord. (v 1-3). This is the first thing they need to realize because it is the mark of what is actually genuinely spiritual.

Spirituality begins and ends with the Lordship of Jesus. His Lordship is what spiritual gifts are all about. In v 4-6 it is this same Spirit, the same Lord, this same God, who gives the diversity of the different gifts and service and workings in all of us. And all given for the good of us all, his church.

God is not only the author of spiritual gifts (and not us), they are also his working (not ours). And not only that, he uses the gifts he has given us to serve the good of others (not of ourselves directly).

What is Pentecostal spirituality? Whether or not we speak in tongues? Why are spiritual gifts so important to Pentecostals? Do spiritual gifts increase our own experience of spirituality? Are they given by God to esteem us? Do we become more and more spiritual, the more work we do in the church?

What is repeated and emphasised by Paul throughout the list of gifts in 1 Corinthians 12 is the sovereignty of the Spirit; the Lordship of Jesus. To one is given this gift, to another that. But all are the work of the one and same Spirit: the Spirit who led us to confess Jesus as Lord.

And now he leads us to serve others with what he has given us. And he gives as he determines. He is Lord.

Why the Holy Spirit matters: Pentecostalism and true spirituality

Authenticity is naturally of importance whenever anything may be of significant worth. Purchasing an item of gold may be gain only if the gold is genuine. Otherwise you suffer a loss, having traded your money for fool’s gold. Worse still, the dealer is a deceiver and a fraud.

Beginning Book I of The Holy Spirit, John Owen shows why this subject matters so greatly by pointing to, not only the absolute dependance of our salvation on the person and work of the Spirit (along with genuine Christianity, the gospel, Christian growth, and condemnation), but also to the many false claims of the Spirit’s work.

1. False spirituality

No area exists with greater levels of deceit than in the realm of spirituality: things pretend be God, or of God, but are not. And the reason is no mystery: The greater the value of a thing (and there is nothing of greater worth that God’s own Spirit), the more often false attempts will be made to represent it. And so the Holy Spirit’s work is often counterfeited. And the greater something’s value the more horrible its abuse. Consequently there is nothing more horrible than false spirituality.

The most visible gift of the Holy Spirit under the Old Covenant was prophecy. But throughout the Old Testament there were more false prophets than true. On the one hand were those who openly served other gods (Deuteronomy 18:20; 1 Kings 18:26); but on the other hand were those who spoke in the name of the Lord, and declared falsely to be inspired by God’s Spirit (Jeremiah 28:2; 1 Kings 22:26; Ezekiel 13:14).

Under the New Covenant it was the gospel that was given by immediate revelation from the Spirit (and declared by his enabling, made effectual by his power and often attested to by miraculous signs from him). Unsurprisingly, false teachers competed by pretending to the very same source of authority. And so the Apostles likened false teachers in this new age to the false prophets of old (2 Peter 2:1) who also claimed divine inspiration.

Consequently, Jesus and the Apostles warned of ‘lying spirits’ and urged Christians ‘not to believe every spirit’, not to give credit to doctrine simply because of an appeal to immediate revelation, but to ‘test the spirits’ because Satan’s work is disguised as the Holy Spirit’s (cf. Matthew 24:24).

And in the very place where we are commanded to this type of proactive caution regarding ‘every spirit’, we are given one very simple means. The Apostle John writes:

We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood. (1 John 4:6).
With definitive clarity the Apostle puts himself and his fellow Apostles up as the litmus test, whereby we can know who and what is from God, or not: “whoever is not from God does not listen to us;” that is, does not listen to the Apostles whose word we have now in New Testament Scriptures. Whoever is from God or knows God, listens to the Apostles: that is how we recognize the Spirit of truth. Everything else is the spirit of falsehood. Or to put it another way, the Spirit without the word is false spirituality.

2. Dead spirituality

Owen’s work also provided an apologetic against those who practice a form of Christianity while all the time denying the supernatural: this is “hostility to the Spirit of God”, and since it is a “sin of despising his person, and rejecting his work now, [it] is of the same nature with the idolatry of old, and the Jews’ rejection of the person of the Son”.

“The doctrine of the Spirit, and his work on the souls of men, in conviction of sin; in godly sorrow and humiliation; in regeneration and sanctification; the supplies of this grace, and his assistance in prayer, have been preached in the world. Men have been taught that the great concerns of their peace, comfort, and assurance, depend on his sacred influences. They have been urged to examine themselves as to their personal experience of these things; and they have been solemnly assured, that if there be not an effectual work of the Spirit on their hearts, ‘they cannot enter into the kingdom of God.’ Multitudes in every age have received these as sacred truths and are well persuaded, that they have found them realised in their experience: but all these things are called in question by some; they look upon them as ‘cunningly devised fables’, as incredible, irrational, and unintelligible notions.” [1]
The Jews had the word of God, and inspired tradition, and reason and sense. They diligently studied their Old Testament Scriptures. And yet the Spirit of God rejected them. So too we who have the New Testament, but if only the letter, if we only philosophise about it, without the Holy Spirit bringing us to obedience to the Lord Jesus of whom the Scriptures testify (John 5:39-40), we are no better than them, who though “they call themselves Jews, and are not, are a synagogue of Satan.” (Revelation 2:9; 3:9) Or to put it another way, the word without the Spirit is dead spirituality.

Pentecostalism and false spirituality

The subject of the Spirit matters so enormously because there are so many conflicting messages about the work of the Spirit. The world itself is full of differing views about ‘spirituality’ and unfortunately, so is the church. And we are told to take warning. There is only one true and living Spirit, God's holy Spirit. Consequently, there is only one true gospel, one message in Christianity, one teaching from God. But in the church today we see multiple conflicting teachings about the Spirit, so that as foretold, faithful Christians need to hold their leaders to the test.

The Pentecostal movement boasts of living and vibrant spirituality, but runs head long into the risk of false spirituality. It was the Holy Spirit speaking to the church of Sardis who said, “you have a reputation of being alive, but you are dead” (Revelation 3:1). Pentecostals and charismatic Christians should take care not to ignore this warning, because confidence in an emphasis on the Spirit’s work is misplaced confidence. The more the claim to the Spirit’s work, the more careful testing required. The only thing that counts for true spirituality is “listening to” the Apostles (1 John 4:6): “This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood.”

A Pentecostal may happily affirm that the ‘word without the Spirit’ is dead spirituality, but equally so the ‘Spirit without the word’ is false spirituality. The charismatic emphasis on direct and immediate revelation from the Holy Spirit in separation from and in isolation to the word of the Scriptural gospel puts Pentecostalism into this very camp.

Many Pentecostal 'prophets' speak in the name of the Lord, claiming to be inspired by God’s Spirit. But much of their teaching fails to listen to the Apostolic doctrine of the New Testament Scriptures. They are therefore, loathed as I am to admit it, false teachers. The 'full gospel' of 'divine healing' teachers and the 'prosperity gospel' of the 'Word of Faith' movement are obvious and stark examples.

But of more broad relevance is the two-tiered Christianity of everyday Pentecostalism. This comes from 'second-blessing' teachers, who insist on the importance of a subsequent step in Christian experience from conversion/sanctification (in order to receive the full work of the Spirit in power). This teaching puts mainstream Pentecostal preachers squarely into the realm of false teaching because this is a different doctrine(and indeed a different gospel) from what we are given by the Apostles as inspired by God through the pages of the New Testament. All Christians today should take great care to ‘test' this spirit to find out whether or not this is really from the Lord, who said "I will pour out my Spirit on all..." (Joel 2:28; Acts 2:17).

Again I quote the Apostle John:
We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood. (1 John 4:6).
---

Owen, John. The Holy Spirit--His Gifts and Power. Christian Focus Publications 2004, p. 47-54.

[1] Ibid, p. 54.

Why the Holy Spirit matters: Christianity and the importance of the Spirit

In a passage made famous for its teaching about spiritual gifts, Paul begins by stating emphatically, 'No one can say, "Jesus is Lord," except by the Holy Spirit.' (1 Corinthians 12:3). Today, the Holy Spirit is well known for his role as author and distributor of gifts. But to begin with, our very faith in Jesus and our profession of faith in Jesus (the two always go together if our Christianity is sincere) is a change that is effected in us by the Holy Spirit: to come under the subjection of the Lordship of Jesus is a work of the Spirit of God that no one is sufficient for themselves.

In Book I of The Holy Spirit, John Owen outlines what he calls 'General principles concerning the Holy Spirit and his work'. And he begins with something of an outline as to why the subject of the Spirit really does matter so very much. And I've tried to summarise the first part of that outline here with five reasons why the Holy Spirit matters:

1. Our salvation depends on the Holy Spirit

God gives his Spirit to save sinners. Two promises run throughout the Scriptures in salvation history from the beginning of sin: 1. God's Son would take on our nature and suffer for us, and 2. God's Spirit would make effectual to us his obedience and suffering for us. These 'two great means of recovering fallen man' are: 1. God gave his Son for us and 2. God gives his Spirit to us.

2. Genuine Christianity depends on the Holy Spirit

The reception of the Holy Spirit is the mark of genuine Christianity. Jesus promised to send the Spirit, not only to the Apostles and first Christians, but also to 'all who would believe in him through their word' (John 17:20). Christ sends the Spirit to supply his own absence, and ultimately to bring us to himself. 'If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ' (Romans 8:9).

3. The work of the gospel depends on the Holy Spirit

The effectiveness of the gospel depends on the Spirit. The gospel is itself called the 'ministry of the Spirit' (2 Corinthians 3:6-8). Without the Spirit the gospel would be dead and ineffectual. And to separate the gospel from the Spirit is to reject it, and to kill it. (Isaiah 59:21).

4. The Christian life depends on the Holy Spirit

Whatever God works in us, God works by his Spirit. And there is nothing done by us that is acceptable to God but that which is an effect of the Spirit's operation.

5. Condemnation depends on the Holy Spirit

The only unforgivable sin is against the Holy Spirit, because -- as God has no other Son to offer for our sins if he be rejected -- God has no other Spirit to make Christ's work effectual to us if the Holy Spirit is despised.

The importance of the Spirit

Today Pentecostals continue to emphasise the importance of the person and work of the Holy Spirit. Pentecostalism emerged as a movement, now over a century ago, intent on bringing the role of the Spirit back into focus, primarily because it felt that his work had been neglected in the Church largely since 'early times'. And to be sure, the Pentecostal desire has got something unequivocally right.

The importance of the subject is immeasurable because the necessity of the Holy Spirit's work is absolute: Our salvation, Christianity itself, the gospel, Christian growth and the condemnation of the unforgiven, all depend critically on the Holy Spirit, both his person and operation. The Spirit matters because God gives the Spirit to save us.

---

Owen, John. The Holy Spirit--His Gifts and Power. Christian Focus Publications 2004, p. 39-47.

God over Google: Pentecostalism and our search for answers

There's a generation now turning to the web to find the answers we once asked our parents. Good thing God is indeed God over Google.

I recall being a younster at age 11 when first becoming interested and puzzled by youth leaders describing Pentecostalism and asking me about my lack of experience with Spirit-baptism. After being asked on a mission by one of my leaders, "have you been 'empowered' by the Spirt?", I remember on my return going to my Father, an elder in our bretheren church: "Dad, I want to be empowered by the Spirit."

He gave me a big black reference Bible and showed me how to used the concordance. "Look it up in the Bible" -- seemed like straightforward advice at the time, and I went away feeling that if I could just nail down what the Bible said about this experience, I'd be a step closer to getting what I was obviously missing.

I went straigh back to my bedroom and sat on my bed attempting to look up the word 'empowerment' in the back of this old bible, of course with no joy. And with no idea why I might find nothing under the word 'empower' in the Bible at all, and having nowhere else to turn, I went back to my youth group leaders and friends, asking them for the answers.

That moment of frustration--sitting alone on the bottom of my bunkbed with no adequate access to a proper understanding from either my Father or from the Bible--that was the beginning of what became a 2 year slide into Pentecostalism, as I turned and came more and more under the influence of those with first-hand testimony, relying increasingly on their stories of their experiences.

In September 2006, some fifteen years later, I looked back on that bible flicking moment and had the realisation that if I was that 11 year-old again, but in the present day, I know that now I would have turned at that moment, not straight back to my friends, but first, of course, to Google!

And that's where the idea for this blog came from. And it's the reason I'm continuing to write and post-out to a world of online searchers who are now looking to the web and their social media networks for answers.

I'm looking to be there for those 'young ones' out there who are asking the questions that I once was, who are now going to Google and typing in "how to be empowered by the Spirit?". Hopefully more and more seekers asking these questions will increasingly be finding their way to my site, where they can get some more adequate answers than I first did at that crucial and vulnerable time, now twenty years ago.

The contents of articles in this blog to-date have investigated topics including: the Pentecostal Movement, Pentecostals and their beliefs, the Day of Pentecost, the Charismatic movement and Charismatics, Evangelical beliefs and the Holy Spirit; in particular special focus is given to the origin and history of the Pentecostal movement, baptism in the Holy Spirit, speaking in tongues, gifts of the Spirit and miracles, divine healing and the Word of Faith movement, prosperity doctrine and health-wealth teaching, the Praise and Worship movement, guidance, revelation and hearing the voice of the Holy Spirit.

INTRO

  • What is Pentecostalism
  • Why talk about it
  • More information


  • ORIGINS

  • Why origin is important
  • The dawning of Pentecostalism
  • The history of tongues
  • The theology of John Wesley
  • The legacy of Edward Irving
  • The Holiness movement
  • Why Pentecostalism began
  • How Pentecostals saw themselves
  • Why Pentecostalism was successful
  • How Pentecostalism developed
  • Australian Pentecostalism


  • SPIRIT BAPTISM

  • What Pentecostals believe
  • The basis of Pentecostalism
  • What the Scriptures say
  • What is it & what it does
  • The Apostles' experience
  • The day of Pentecost - The Event
  • The day of Pentecost - The Promise
  • The day of Pentecost - The meaning
  • The examples in Acts - Part I
  • The examples in Acts - Part II
  • Tongues and Spirit-baptism
  • The pattern of tongues in Acts
  • Why tongues were given
  • Filled with the Spirit
  • 'Witness' in the Book of Acts


  • GIFTS

  • What Pentecostals believe
  • The Pentecostal basis
  • Speaking in tongues
  • 1 Corinthians 14
  • Mark 16:9-20
  • Miracles
  • Healing
  • Prophecy
  • John Wimber changes his mind


  • PROSPERITY

  • Changing views on money
  • What Pentecostals believe
  • Reformation
  • Perfectionism
  • Divine Healing
  • New Thought
  • Word of Faith
  • A critique
  • A corrective
  • How to get really rich
  • Americanized Christianity
  • Neither Poverty nor Riches
  • How to pray


  • WORSHIP

  • What Pentecostals believe
  • Why Stephen died
  • What is worship
  • Why and how
  • Why we meet
  • What's at stake
  • Do we need the Bible
  • The centrality of Preaching
  • Prophecy & preaching
  • Music in church


  • GUIDANCE & DESTINY

  • What Pentecostals believe
  • Experiencing guidance
  • Listening to the Spirit
  • The Purpose Driven Life
  • The Gospel Driven Life


  • PROS & CONS

  • Positive characteristics
  • Negative tendencies


  • BARNETT & JENSEN

  • The Quest for Power
  • The Bewildered Believer
  • What Neo-pentecostals believe
  • Reading the Bible
  • The Holy Spirit in John
  • The Acts Passages
  • Holy Spirit and Conversion
  • Weakness and Power
  • Pentecostals and Conservatives


  • FOUNDATIONS

  • John Owen on the Spirit
  • Where to draw the line
  • The Answer for Pentecostalism
  • Starting from the Beginning
  • The Problem of Predestination
  • God, Evil & Sovereignty


  • TESTIMONIES

  • My Story
  • Mark Strom
  • James Brinkhoff


  • CORRESPONDANCE

  • Motives?
  • Born again at Pentecost?
  • Pentecostalism from Wesley?
  • Prosperity doctrine from Branham?


  • Why Pentecostals should love John Owen on the Holy Spirit

    Describing the value of reading John Owen (1616-1683) on the Holy Spirit, Sinclair Ferguson gives three emphases in his teaching, showing how they work in harmony and were born from Owen’s awareness of the importance of outlining the doctrine of the Holy Spirit in a ‘multi-dimensional’ way:

    1. Experimental focus

    The Spirit’s ministry bears fruit in Christian experience. The foundation of Owen’s own ministry and theology were a conviction about the pivotal distinction between the knowledge of truth and the knowledge of the power of the truth (cf. John 5:39-40). For John Owen both knowledge and experience were necessary for actual true godliness. He saw in the Scriptures that it was the work of the Holy Spirit to transform merely intellectual knowledge (‘head-knowledge’) into the experience of the power of the truth (true knowledge).

    Owen’s original subject, The Holy Spirit of God, and His Operations, is now accessible in a concise new modern edition (2004) and should be to Pentecostals and the entire charismatic movement a refreshing balance of emphasis on both knowledge and an experimental focus. (Christian Focus Publications’ 2007 edition is titled The Holy Spirit—His Gifts and Power).

    2. Theological exposition

    Owen’s predecessors had been concerned mainly with the divinity of the Spirit’s identity. Owen carved new ground by also applying himself to how the Spirit works. It is also the work of the Spirit that is the key interest of Pentecostals today and the ongoing question that has been raised by Pentecostalism and the charismatic movement generally. A Pentecostal should read Owen on the Holy Spirit because he is addressing the very subject of central importance to them.

    3. Apologetic teaching

    Another part of the great value of Owen’s work on the Holy Spirit is that today’s context is scarred by similar errors that Owen faced in his day, and clarifies through his teaching. We evangelicals now also find ourselves dealing with:

    a.Ritualism – that has a ‘form of godliness’ but has no experience of its power, being satisfied in the emotion aroused by the mystery of sacramental ceremonies.

    b.Rationalism – that denies the reality of the supernatural, being rooted in reason rather than in revelation.

    c.Spiritualism – that sidesteps careful study and proper treatment of the biblical evidence, and relies instead on direct experiences as the pathway to revelation from God.
    Recommendation

    Because of his beautiful balance of these three important dimensions in any treatment on the doctrine of God’s Spirit (experience, exposition and errors), reading John Owen on the Holy Spirit – a work done now over 300 years ago – is likely to help a Pentecostal or charismatic Christian, along with all of us, much more than keeping up with the latest thing on show out the front of Koorong.

    J. C. Ryle has summed up my feeling also:

    “I assert unhesitatingly that the man who wants to study experimental theology will find no book equal to those of Owen for complete Scriptural and [comprehensive] treatment of the subjects they handle. If you wish to study thoroughly the doctrine of [the Holy Spirit] I make no apology for strongly recommending Owen…”
    The language is quite a challenge and don’t let the back blurb put you off. And if a quick preview at Amazon.com is not now on your cards already, stay tuned here because I believe serial summaries and reflections on its 8 sections are in order.

    Where to draw the line: the command to break fellowship

    Pentecostals, like most Evangelicals, regard unity as of primary importance, reflecting an entire theme that runs through the Scriptures: unity is where God bestows his blessing (Psalm 133); Christian unity testifies to Christ’s identity and his love for his Church (John 17:23); unity in the Church glorifies God (Romans 15:5-6); we are commanded to be united because there is one body, one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all (Ephesians 4:3-6); it is the goal of Christian ministry and edification in the Church (Ephesians 4:11-16).
     
    Against the backdrop of this mountain of teaching on unity in the Bible, including an enormous emphasis in the Bible on oneness, agreeing with one another and putting aside differences, etc, the following verse should zap our attention like static electricity:
     
    “If anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of him. Do not associate with him, in order that he may feel ashamed. Yet do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother.” (2 Thessalonians 3:14-15)
     
    Association / unity / partnership
     
    Association is tied to unity. We associate with somebody when we spending time in friendship with that person; it is the very basis of fellowship; it is a mark of a relationship. More formally, we might call ‘associates’ those whom we are in partnership with, the people we work with.
     
    Associate (verb used without object):
    1. to enter into union; unite.
    2. to keep company, as a friend, companion or ally.
    3. to join together as partners or colleagues.
     
    (Dictionary.com)
     
    Christian ‘disassociation’ / Christian disunity
     
    We are accustomed to thinking of the instances when the Bible rebukes Christians for not associating with one another. As already described, the New Testament is very clear on the importance of Christians ‘fellowshipping’ with other Christians regardless or culture, gender, age, class, opinion on disputable matters etc. (Some examples include Acts 10:28; Romans 12:16; 14:1 ff). As a result Christians typically ‘hate’ disunity.
     
    It may be for this reason we think less about, even sidestep, passages such as 2 Thessalonians 3:14-15. However such clear commands are given in Scripture for very good reason. There are important and crucial reasons why Christians should, in certain situations, leave churches. So too there are situations in which it is not only good and right, but also imperative and vital that Christians withdraw fellowship or partnership from other Christians.
     
    So it’s well worth treating the subject of Christian disunity a little more seriously.  Paul’s command in 2 Thessalonians 3:14-15 is a central verse to consider, but it comes in the context of a whole series of similar commands that run through the New Testament.
     
    The command to break fellowship:
     
    1. With Questionable ‘Christians’
     
    1 Corinthians 5:11 is a command for Christians to stop associating with hypocritical ‘Christians’; that is, with anyone who calls himself a Christian but is not living as a Christian. This is to be a judgment on those inside the church whose fruit of wickedness necessitates they be either shipwrecked Christians or otherwise, even false Christians.
     
    Any of a whole list of ungodly lifestyles applies. In 1 Corinthians 5 and others like it Paul specifically lists:
    1. Sexual immorality, including impurity, debauchery and orgies, adulterers, male prostitutes, homosexual offenders;
    2. Idolatry, including witchcraft;
    3. Hatred, including discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions, envy and slanderers;
    4. Greed, including thieves and swindlers;
    5. Drunkenness.
     
    It should be confronting to us that hatred and the like, along with greed and the like, are listed along side drunkenness, idolatry and sexual immorality. We also see elsewhere that the same model of discipline as in 1 Corinthians 5 applies, for example, to divisiveness:
     
    Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him. You may be sure that such a man is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned. (Titus 3:10-11)
     
    In 1 Corinthians 5 Paul commands that with such a one as this in the church, the church should put him out of their fellowship (1 Corinthians 5:2, 13). This expulsion is in reality ‘handing him over to Satan’, but the purpose it at least encouraging. Rather than an ultimate sign of condemnation, this discipline is a last resort attempt at rescue: it is in order that his “sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved.”
     
    It is not only for the good of the church but also for the salvation of the person concerned that Christians should terminate fellowship with such a professing ‘Christian’ who nonetheless continues to walk in wickedness. 
     
    We know from Ephesians 5:5 and other statements like it that somebody with such a lifestyle – if characterized and continuing in such habitual sin – was not regarded by Paul as a true Christian.
     
    For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person--such a man is an idolater--has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God's wrath comes on those who are disobedient. Therefore do not be partners with them. (Ephesians 5:5-7)
     
    Or in the words of the ESV: ‘do not associate with them’ (Ephesians 5:7, ESV).
     
    In fact, about the Corinthians specifically he writes:
     
    And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God… [Therefore] flee from sexual immorality… (1 Corinthians 6:11, 18)
     
    It is vital to realize that in relation to unbelievers, those who make no profession to be Christians, the Bible clearly teaches that Christians should (of course!) continue to associate with them, not only for the sake of the gospel, but also because: 1. their judgment is not our business, and 2. nor is their judgment practically possible by us (1 Corinthians 5:10, 12).
     
    2. With False teachers
     
    Paul and the Apostles apply a similar logic to false teachers as to ‘wicked Christians’: It was in the context of false teachers in Corinth influencing the church there that Paul gave his famous command in 2 Corinthians 6:14-18: “Do not be yoked together with unbelievers…Therefore come out from them and be separate, says the Lord…”
     
    Also in similar vein Paul names Hymenaeus, one whom he had “handed over to Satan,” (exact same phrase as applied to the sexually immoral man of 1 Corinthians 5), this time though so that Hymenaeus will be “taught not to blaspheme.” (1 Timothy 1:20) Later in 2 Timothy 2:17 we find out that Hymenaeus had wandered from the truth, and was teaching a message that would spread like gangrene, saying that the resurrection had already taken place, and in so doing destroying the faith of some. In contrast Paul commands Timothy to ‘fight the good fight’ by ‘holding onto faith and a good conscience.’
     
    2 John 1:10-11 is an example of an even stronger command in this regard:
     
    If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching [they do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh], do not take him into your house or welcome him. Anyone who welcomes him shares in his wicked work.
     
    The New Testament actually promises that such false prophets, and false teachers will come into the church, secretly introducing heresies and exploiting the church in their greed with made-up stories. Worse still, many will follow them and bring Christianity into question. These are warnings we should not skim over:
     
    But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up… (2 Peter 2:1-3)
     
    What such commands indicate is that it is never ‘Christian’ to put unity above purity in the Church. We may ‘hate’ disunity, but we must hate ungodliness and falsehood more. Otherwise such unity jeopardizes the health the church and individual Christians, and thus by trying to save the unity of the church, we will kill it with sin and corruption. Unity for the sake of unity is not unity at all. Unity for the sake of purity is what the Bible commands; that meaning our unity should be applied in an exclusive way in order to preserve oneself and others as a true and faithful Church.
     
    As a result, obedience to the call of the New Testament to ‘disassociate’ with false or corrupt believers has actually been a God-glorifying trend in Church history that again and again has saved and preserved the true Church from oppression and extinction. The Reformation from the Dark Ages of Catholicism is a well-known example. Thus, Church division (or ‘splits’) are in truth often a God-given grace to preserve true and authentic groups of believers from compromising groups that, backsliding into error or ungodliness, refuse to conform to the truth or holiness (2 Tim 4:3).
     
    3. With True but disobedient Christians
     
    But in 2 Thessalonians 3:14-15 we have something different to wicked ‘Christians’ or false teachers:
     
    If anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of him. Do not associate with him, in order that he may feel ashamed. Yet do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother.
     
    This is a brother. This is not somebody to be regarded as an enemy, as we should a false teacher or a false Christian walking in unashamed wickedness within the Church. This is a loved member: someone part of the family.
     
    However, they are disobedient. They are not following the instructions of the New Testament, not with regard to gross wickedness, but with regard to a matter such as idleness.
     
    In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we command you, brothers, to keep away from every brother who is idle and does not live according to the teaching you received from us. For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example… Such people we command and urge in the Lord Jesus Christ to settle down and earn the bread they eat. And as for you, brothers, never tire of doing what is right. (2 Thessalonians 3:6-13)
     
    This is a simple matter of submission to authority of the Apostle, by following both his direct instruction and his example in the model he laid down for Christian life and godliness. Again, this is clearly a brother in the Lord, though disobedient and in need of warning. The reason for refusing to associate with him is so that he will feel ashamed, and by God’s grace, come to repentance.
     
    2 Thessalonians 3:6-13 is no isolated text in this train of teaching. Acts 5:1-11 is a monumental example of how seriously God wants us to treat holiness among Christians, his Church. Here God himself acts to bring his discipline by striking down Ananias and his wife following an enormous gift of money that they had contributed to the church. They sold their property, giving part of the proceeds to the church, but deceitfully acting as though the money they were giving was the full amount received for the land (Acts 5:1-11). This precedent from God in the Early Church is analogous to the lesson for Israel in Joshua 7 following Achan’s sin following their first steps of entry into the Land promised to Abraham.
     
    1 Corinthians 11:17-34 is another significant passage for this subject. Here we have immature, unspiritual Christians who are failing to love one another in the most basic sense in their church meetings. There are divisions, there is self-serving, there is indulgence:
     
    In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you…When you come together, it is not the Lord's Supper you eat, for as you eat, each of you goes ahead without waiting for anybody else. One remains hungry, another gets drunk. (1 Corinthians 11:18-21)
     
    Again, these are Christians. These are brothers and sisters in the Lord. But again too the Lord’s discipline is no light matter: “many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep” (1 Corinthians 11:30). Revelation 2:23 is an even more serious example.
     
    Paul’s advice and encouragement are very significant:
     
    But if we judged ourselves, we would not come under judgment. When the Lord judges us, we are being disciplined so that we will not be condemned with the world. (1 Corinthians 11:30-32)
     
    So:
    1. We ought to judge ourselves. This includes Christians judging other Christians. The church ought to judge the church.
    2. Such discipline is for our salvation, so that we will not fall under condemnation. There is a big difference between judgment and condemnation here. One is discipline for the sake of salvation; the other is final punishment without salvation.
     
    Jesus himself instructed that the discipline of a sinful brother in the church should ultimately end, after a process, in disassociating from him by withdrawal of fellowship: “treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector” (Matthew 18:17).
     
    When to leave a church?
     
    All of the above applies similarly to the question of church attendance. In the same way as for an individual Christian, if a so-called ‘church’ is characterised by leaders and members whose Christianity is only self-professed but not self-evident, whose lifestyles are marked by the same sin as the unbelieving world, then true Christians are called to withdraw fellowship from such Christians: they should leave that church. Don’t wait indefinitely for whatever true leader may not exist to exercise some level of church discipline: ‘do not associate with them’ (Ephesians 5:7).
     
    If a church continues in false teaching, or if the leadership of a church continues to tolerate false teaching – teaching that is contrary to the sound doctrine of the New Testament and according to godliness, or if they teach a gospel that is different to the gospel of the Apostles of the New Testament (cf. Gal 1:6-10) – don’t follow them or continue in that church and in so doing bring the truth into disrepute: “come out from them and be separate” (2 Corinthians 6:17).
     
    Those instances of course call for drastic action. But the challenge here is that much of this teaching may also apply in part to some of our dearly loved believers in the Lord also. Perhaps an individual Christian, but perhaps even a whole church, if they or their leadership are characterised by the type of immaturity and lack of obedience to the Scriptures that we see in 2 Thessalonians 3:
     
    Whether there be a direct instruction they ignore, or simply the whole example laid down for us in the godliness and ministry of the Apostle’s model—the point is that such brothers – dearly loved family – in their disobedient, ignorance, or gross immaturity need the warning of your obedience to this command of Scripture:
     
    “If anyone does not obey our instruction...
    Do not associate with him, in order that he may feel ashamed.
    Yet do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother.”
    (2 Thessalonians 3:14-15)
     
    By leaving such a church your action may just shame some into repenting, with God’s mercy. If not, by his grace, you will have at least saved yourself and any of those whom God may also bring with you.
     

    A critical analysis of Pentecostalism: Is that the Spirit?

    A critique of the Pentecostal and charismatic movement from an Evangelical perspective

    This blog is in many ways a response to conversations I have had with many Christians over the last decade and more who are a part of the Pentecostal and charismatic movement [1], as I once was myself. Despite some differences with other Evangelicals it's evident that many Pentecostals nonetheless feel that actually we are all not too far apart in our basic theology, if at all. The idea is not uncommon: ‘when you boil it all down, we all really believe the same thing,’ right? But is it the case?

    It’s a good question: What are the differences between charismatic and Pentecostal emphases and those of 'mainline' Evangelicals; and do they matter? And despite whatever distinctive emphases exist, do we actually disagree on any foundational truths?

    For if our differing emphases do not prove to matter, and are founded on the same basic core beliefs, perhaps the way forward it to major on our common unity and begin to (or continue to?) work together towards the same ends.

    But if our differing emphases really do prove to matter, and are founded on differing core beliefs, then other very important questions must be asked: Where does our disunity come from? What it the Biblical perspective on such disunity within the Church? Can unity be re-established and if so what would need to happen to establish a biblical unity? Can we work together at all towards the same end, and if so how?

    In order to answer these questions, this blog attempts to offer a critical analysis of the distinctive emphases of the Pentecostal movement that are seen in charismatic emphases also, from an Evangelical perspective. [2] Pentecostals and charismatics alike have the view that the role of the Holy Spirit has been overlooked and under-emphasised within the Church at large for centuries, and that God has used their movements to bring his presence and work within the Church back into the light, in a way that has been ‘refreshing’, ‘awakening’, ‘renewing’, even 'reforming'.

    This new and united focus on the role of the Spirit – his gifts and power - in relatively recent times has proved to be positive in many ways, however it has also generated many new understandings (or doctrines) on the role of the Spirit that are distinct from mainline Evangelicalism. What has been the effect of these new doctrines? The purpose of this blog is to firstly identify and explain these distinct emphases within charismatic circles and the Pentecostal movement, and where they came from. Secondly I attempt to explain where, how and why I think the Scriptures clearly differ with these emphases. Thirdly, I try to outline some of the effects these theological differences have had on the Christianity of Pentecostals and charismatics. Lastly what I want to do is answer some of these 'big picture' questions I've posed above.

    My analysis involves obvious emphases that appear on the surface, but also more underlying beliefs evident only on a deeper level. Only after this is established can my basic questions be addressed: are the distinctive emphases of the charismatic and Pentecostal movements significant? When you boil it all down, do we all really believe the same thing?

    My prayer for you as the reader is mine for myself also: that God would grant you an understanding of the Scriptures so that you will know Him better, that you would take great care to heed it's warnings and commands not to stray from sound doctrine (2 Timothy 4:3), and that in so doing you would save both yourself and your hearers (1 Timothy 4:16).

    --

    [1] The Pentecostal movement is so named because it’s most predominant distinctive concerns ‘baptism in the Spirit’, which relates to the Spirit’s coming at Pentecost (Acts 2). The ‘charismatic’ movement was so named because initially its most predominant distinctive was an emphasis on the active operation of the ‘gifts of the Spirit’ within everyday church life (‘charismatic’ literally means ‘gifts’). Though Pentecostalism has a series of churches specifically aligned with it (such as the Assemblies of God in Australia, for example), the charismatic movement is distinguished from Pentecostalism primarily because its influence operates within any Christian denomination.


    [2] The majority of distinctives pointed out within the articles of this blog would certainly apply to both Pentecostals and charismatics, though it may well be that in each case Pentecostal beliefs will be better defined, accentuated more and more readily articulated than those of charismatics. Thinking in the charismatic movement is clearly diverse (and more so than within Pentecostalism), and so it is impossible to say what is the view held by everybody. I only attempt to make generalisations of characteristics that appear to be adhered to by the majority, and point out the differences or exceptions where I am aware of them.

    The Quest for Power: Barnett & Jensen


    © Anzea Publishers 1973
    These articles are a series of excerpts that were first published as a book, The Quest for Power | Neo-Pentecostalism and the New Testament by Paul Barnett and Peter Jensen (Sydney: Anzea Publishes, 1973, p. 1-106). It is reproduced here with permission.

    Concerned Christians in every age have tried to rediscover the secret of effective life and service which was so evident in the witness of the apostolic church.

    An encouraging aspect of the contemporary world-wide interest in the charismatic evidences is the renewed emphasis on the Holy Spirit.

    In this book two younger Australian ministers, who are involved in theological teaching, share insights which have arisen out of practical experience at St. Barnabas, Broadway, where they exercise a team ministry. It is their desire to relate the truth of the New Testament to the claims of the neo-pentecostal movement.

    Paul Barnett [now retired Bishop of North Sydney] is chaplain at Sydney University and teaches Early Church History, New Testament and Pastoralia at Moore Theological College.

    Peter Jensen [currently Archbishop of Sydney] shares the ministry at St. Barnabas and teaches Biblical Exegesis and Greek at Moore Theological College.

    CONTENTS













    The Acts Passages: Barnett & Jensen


    © Anzea Publishers 1973
    This article is an excerpt that was first published in The Quest for Power | Neo-Pentecostalism and the New Testament by Paul Barnett and Peter Jensen (Sydney: Anzea Publishes, 1973, p. 29-41). It is reproduced here with permission.

    There is no doubt that five passages in the Acts of the Apostles (2:1-42; 8:4-24; 9:1-19; 10:1-48; 19:1-7) are the most important source of neo-pentecostal doctrine. It is on the basis of these five occasions that the neo-pentecostal lays on the conscience of his fellow believer, with the awful solemnity of a word of God, the command to be baptized in the Holy Spirit. Can the book of Acts support such a position?

    In order to support his thesis the neo-pentecostal must prove all the following points (not some):

    1. A narrative in the Bible contains a command from God.
    2. His understanding of the passages is the only reasonable one.
    3. The reception of the Holy Spirit in fact resulted in 'power for witness'.
    4. Certain conditions had to be fulfilled beyond becoming a Christian.
    5. The Holy Spirit's coming for power was subsequent to his first coming in our conversion. There is a second and different experience of him ('subsequence').

    We will examine each passage in turn, then discuss the question of whether the five 'pillars' above have been established in fact.

    The Day of Pentecost

    Undoubtedly this was a subsequent experience of the Holy Spirit for the disciples of Jesus. They were converted men, they had been ministered to by the Holy Spirit already. They were, in fact, in the same position as Abraham or Moses or David: born again by the Holy Spirit. But the delay experienced by these men was caused by their unique position in God's timetable. They were both believers under the old covenant, and as such had the Holy Spirit in some measure, and believers under the new covenant, when by an act of Jesus the Holy Spirit was poured out so that God's people had a new and deeper experience of him. This was connected with belief in Christ's Lordship (Acts 11:17).

    An illustration may clarify the point. If one went to Bondi on the last tram before buses took over the rout, one would have to travel back by bus. But that is not to say that any other traveller to Bondi would from now on travel by tram there and bus back. On the contrary, only the bus is now available both ways, and the trip was virtually unique, because of the date.

    So with the disciples. A type of subsequent experience is true for them, but their situation is unique, not the norm for Christians who now live after Pentecost. Certainly there is no breath of a command from God that we are to have two experiences.

    In fact, as can be seen from Peter's speech, since the dawning of the last days, the era of the Spirit, it is expected that Christian conversion will include the baptism of the Holy Spirit. This is the plain meaning of Acts 2:38:

    Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    In other words, take the ordinary steps to become a Christian and you will be baptized in the Holy Spirit. At this point the neo-pentecostal will want to say that further faith and further repentance may be required. Such attempts to read further conditions into and out of this text seem hopeless in the face of the unambiguous nature of what is said. No one doubts that the tree thousand saved that day received the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and the only condition mentioned is that they become Christians.

    The same may be seen in Acts 5:32 where Peter says, 'And we are witnesses to these things, and so is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those to obey him.' This is often used to prove that 'obedience' is a condition for receiving the baptism over and above the conditions of Acts 2:38. However this is not the case. The meaning of the text is: '…the Holy Spirit whom God has given [one decisive past action] to those who obey [present continuous] him.' The past coming of the Holy Spirit has produced the present obedience of the Christians, not vice versa.

    Another suggestion is that the disciples were praying for the Holy Spirit at the moment when he came, an idea without any support in the text, and most unlikely, since they were seated, a posture for prayer not adopted by the Jews (Acts 2:2). As one would have expected they did pray during the period of waiting (Acts 1:14), but no one knows the content of their prayer.

    Samaria

    On this occasion we are certainly confronted with a case of delay. We find Philip preaching and being believed. We find him baptising the Samaritans. But we find the apostles Paul and John in Samaria praying for the Samaritans to receive the Holy Spirit 'for he had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit' (Acts 8:14ff.).

    At first glance this passage seems to validate the neo-pentecostal position, but we ought to note the following features of it.

    First, as far as the Samaritans were concerned we read of no conditions to be fulfilled. The delay is not their fault. The apostles prayed, and laid hands, but we are given no indication that the Samaritans did any more than they had done already in order to be baptized.

    Second, there is no command here for us to follow, not even that of laying on hands. The passage is not being put forward by Luke as an encouragement to neo-pentecostal type practices. Luke's understanding seems to be that something abnormal is happening. The Samaritans had believed and had been baptized but the Spirit had not yet fallen. The norm of Acts 2:38 was for some unexplained reason not fulfilled. This abnormal incident (as suggested by Luke's words 'not yet fallen') cannot be made the basis for imitation.

    Third, there is no mention of 'power for witness' attendant on the reception of the Spirit.

    Fourth, although it is true that no explanation is given as to why this situation is abnormal, yet at least two other explanations are possible besides the neo-pentecostal one. One is that although the Samaritans had believed and been baptized, the object of their belief was inadequate (as was the case with the Ephesian disciples in Acts 19:2), and hence the Holy Spirit had not come. The other, which is more likely in our opinion, was that Philip's evangelistic activity with the outcast Samaritans was so contrary to what many in Jerusalem believed ought to be done (as was Peter's with Cornelius) that an extraordinary sign was given, witnessed by apostles, to prove the authenticity of the conversion. It is interesting to see that the apostles evangelised in Samaria on their way home (Acts 8:25). Here is the breakthrough described by Jesus (Acts 1:8)—a notable moment in the book of Acts, and surrounded by an extraordinary event: the leading of the Holy Spirit indeed! But hardly a normative pattern for today's believers.

    Different people make this passage prove different things. From this passage Catholics prove confirmation and neo-pentecostals prove 'subsequence'. But can anyone prove more than one explicit coming of the Holy Spirit? Any such attempt would be in contradiction to what Luke himself says: 'he had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized…' (Acts 8:16).

    Saul

    Here the position is made quite clear. The neo-pentecostal claim is that Saul's conversion was completed on the road to Damascus. Then it is said that at a later date Ananias was ordered to lay hands on Saul in order that he might receive his sign, and be filled with the Holy Spirit ('subsequence'). After this was done he was baptized, as the formal mark of his conversion.

    As can be seen, all depends on the fact that Saul was actually converted on the road. We may confidently assert that he was not.

    The substantial reasons put forward to support the neo-pentecostal position are that Saul called Jesus 'Lord' (Acts 9:5; 22:8, 10; 26:15), that Ananias addressed him as 'brother' (Acts 9:17), and that Ananias laid hands on him (Acts 9:17). However, we note that Saul was so impressed by the light that he called Jesus 'Lord' even before he knows who was there, so this cannot be the 'calling on the name of the Lord' for salvation mentioned in Romans 10:13. Nor can his request that Jesus tell him what to do be construed in the same way. (Note that Cornelius called an angel 'Lord' and obeyed him, Acts 10:1-8).

    Furthermore, 'brother' was a common designation for a fellow Jew, and did not necessarily imply 'Christian brother' (see Acts 2:29, 37; 13:26 etc.).

    Also, contrary to what some say, Ananias was told to lay hands on Saul in order that he might receive his sight (Acts 9:12). It is true that Ananias told Saul about receiving the Holy Spirit while laying hands on him (9:17), but this is quite a different matter from saying that the Holy Spirit came through the laying on of hands.

    In fact we know that the Holy Spirit did not come then. In Acts 22:16 we find out that Ananias commanded Saul, after his sight had returned (and so after the laying on of hands):

    Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name (22:13).

    Thus Saul was not even saved at that stage; he had still to wash away his sins and call on the name of the Lord. It is safe to assume in the absence of contrary evidence that his experience was quite normal, as set out in Acts 2:38.

    This passage teaches a valuable lesson. One might be led to believe the neo-pentecostal claim but for the second account in Acts 22 which disproves it. Here is a basic problem with narratives like that about the Samaritans as opposed to statements as in the epistles and Acts 2:38. If we knew more, we might understand better. In the meantime we need to be very careful before we find commands from God in narrative passages.

    Cornelius

    This account, which is included in the list on which neo-pentecostal claims are based, is actually in direct opposition to these claims.

    We have already noted in chapter one how the neo-pentecostal position is that we believe in the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation, but then must further believe in the Lord's promise for the Spirit in order to be baptized.

    This condition is not in any text. But more, in this case it could not even possibly be in the text. Cornelius and his friends hear the gospel message, which may be read in Acts 10:34-43. In it there is no mention at all about receiving the Holy Spirit by any means. But they do hear about believing in Jesus for forgiveness.

    At precisely this point they believe in Jesus. Peter says in Acts 15:7-9 while speaking about this incident:

    Brethren, you know that in the early days God made choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God who knows the heart bore witness to them, giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us; and he made no distinction between us and them, but cleansed their hearts by faith (authors' italics).

    It is therefore while Peter is talking, in fact before he has finished (11:15), that they believe in Jesus. And at once the Spirit falls. There is no separate step mentioned or possible. There is no faith in the promise of the Holy Spirit released, for there has been no promise. Furthermore all the terminology of the alleged experience is used: 'received the Holy Spirit' (10:47); 'the Holy Spirit fell' (10:44); 'the gift of the Holy Spirit' (10:45); 'baptized with the Holy Spirit' (11:16). Receiving the word (11:1) and the baptism of the Spirit are part of one and the same work in this passage.

    Notice in particular the teaching (as opposed to narrative) of Peter in Acts 15:7-9 above. The Holy Spirit is given as a witness of God's acceptance of them, that is of his forgiveness. His coming testifies also to the breach of that barrier between Jew and Gentile. There is no talk of coming to give power for witness in this or any part of the account. Rather, Peter remembers:

    As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning… If then God gave the same gift to them as he gave to us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could withstand God? (Acts 11:15-18; authors' italics).

    One of the effects of this passage is to make it impossible for neo-pentecostals to reserve a special vocabulary for the 'subsequent' experience. Here is an experience of the Holy Spirit occurring precisely when men believed in Jesus (not the promise of the Spirit) which is called the baptism in the Holy Spirit.

    Further note
    It may be urged by some that this was a subsequent baptism of the Holy Spirit for power since Cornelius was a regenerate man before he heard Peter (see Acts 10:2). But even if we assume this, it would not validate the neo-pentecostal claims, for the following reasons: (a) Cornelius would then be part of that strange never-to-be-repeated group who were converted under the old covenant and then called into the new. This cannot be a pattern for Gentiles today. (b) The text itself makes it clear that Cornelius was believing in the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation when the Holy Spirit fell (see, e.g., Acts 15:7-9). (c) The text also makes it clear that the Holy Spirit fell while Peter was talking about Christ and forgiveness, not the baptism of the Holy Spirit (10:44). Thus faith could only have been exercised in Christ, a point substantiated in Acts 11:15-17 and Acts 15:7-9.

    Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7)

    There are two points at which neo-pentecostal teaching appears to receive strong support in this passage.

    The first is Paul's question in verse 2: 'Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?' It is said that this question would be pointless, and even stupid, if men received the Spirit always when they believed in the Lord Jesus. If Paul know that a believer always received the Holy Spirit, why ask these men (designated 'disciples' and 'believers') whether the Spirit had come to them? Surely they would have received the Spirit automatically, if traditional Protestant teaching is correct.

    Now this argument is most imposing if two conditions are reasonably proved: (a) that 'disciples' means 'Christian disciples'; (b) that Paul thought they were Christians.

    But consider the actual case. We know for a fact that they were not true believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, for otherwise they would not have been later re-baptized. Therefore Luke could not mean 'Christian disciples' in verse 1. Yet we also know that they had some belief in the coming of Jesus since they had received John's baptism (Mark 1:8-9). In this sense Luke calls them 'disciples'; and they claimed to be believers, as appears in Paul's question.

    Thus Paul's question is easily understood. Here he is confronted with a group claiming to be believers (else his question would really have no point!), but who were not. A simple test is applied.

    'Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?' If the answer is positive their claim is true and all they needed is more instruction, like Apollos (see Acts 18:24-28). If the answer is negative then these men are not genuine believers and need to give their submission to the Lord Jesus Christ.

    Paul's question is neither pointless nor stupid. It is based not on his own estimate of their situation, but the claims of the twelve to be believers. He tests them, they fail the test, and he baptizes them. In fact, when the import of his question is understood it provides more evidence that the teaching of Acts 2:38 is to be taken as the norm, for their variance from that necessitated their rebaptism. Certainly it warns us about the difficulty of assessing narratives.

    The second point at which neo-pentecostal teaching appears to receive strong support in this passage is in verse 5 and 6. This is because when Paul laid his hands on the Ephesians, as distinct from baptism, the Holy Spirit came upon them. Thus there reappears the neo-pentecostal claim to subsequence, since it is assumed that the Holy Spirit came when they were baptized, and for a second time a few moments later.

    It is certainly impossible to say exactly what happened. It may be that the laying on of hands was part of baptism; our knowledge of how this was conducted is very slight. It may be that the laying on of hands was subsequent in the same sense (though without the same long delay) as occurred in Samaria. This possible lack of conformity to the norm of Acts 2:28 is not altogether surprising in view of the uncertain beginning that these twelve had experienced.

    Our uncertainty stems from a lack of knowledge as to the precise significance of the laying on of hands. In general it does seem to express the subject's identification with the person prayed for. Sometimes it is for the recognition of gifts/commission (Acts 6:6; 13:3; 1 Tim. 4:14; 5:22; 2 Tim. 1:6); sometimes it is for healing (Acts 9:12); twice it occurs in abnormal pastoral situations—at Samaria and Ephesus. On the available evidence there can be no doctrine of the laying on of hands, as many neo-pentecostals admit when they say that it is not a necessary pre-condition for the baptism in the Spirit. What is certain is that no one can prove two comings of the Spirit, for Luke mentions only one. The neo-pentecostal must assume a subsequence not found in the text.

    However, let us agree to assume that in this passage the case for 'subsequence' is proved beyond shadow of reasonable doubt (which is what the neo-pentecostal must do if he is to lay a command from God on the conscience of other Christians). There is still no command for us to do likewise in the text. There is still complete silence about the conditions for receiving this other blessing. There is no indication of power for witness being received. We are not told that God is going to work like this for others. If these details were supplied elsewhere, we may validly consider the Ephesian case of subsequence in line with the neo-pentecostal claims. But where is this information?

    We began by setting out a list of the things to be established before the neo-pentecostal reading of Acts can be justified. Let us see how well the list has fared.


    1. Have we discovered a narrative which is or contains a command by God for men to be baptized in the Spirit subsequent to their acknowledgement of Jesus as Lord?
    Pentecost—no.
    Samaria—no.
    Saul—no.
    Cornelius—no.
    Ephesus—no.

    2. Is the neo-pentecostal understanding of the passages the only reasonable one?
    Pentecost—It is not reasonable at all.
    Saul—It is not reasonable at all.
    Cornelius—It is not reasonable at all.
    Samaria—It is not the only reasonable one.
    Ephesus—It is not the only reasonable one.

    3. Do the texts prove that the reception of the Holy Spirit resulted in 'power for witness?'
    Pentecost—yes! This was promised to the disciples by Jesus in Acts 1:8. But the promise cannot and does not apply to any Christian who has not seen the risen Christ, since he is not a 'witness' (see Appendix 4) in Luke's sense of that word.
    Samaria—no.
    Saul—yes; for he witnessed the risen Lord and was commissioned by him. Hence he began to preach (Acts 9:20-23; 22:25 etc.).
    Cornelius—no.
    Ephesus—no.

    It is true, of course, that tongues speaking occurred with Cornelius, at Ephesus, and probably Samaria. But there is no suggestion that this represents power for witnessing, an activity which Luke restricts to a select group, or even power for evangelism. The same is true of the prophesying in Acts 19:6. Rather, the tongues and other signs seem to be an initial witness by God to the reality of the Spirit's coming (see Acts 15:8).


    4. Do the texts show that certain conditions had to be fulfilled beyond becoming a Christian?
    Pentecost—only that of remaining in Jerusalem for the risen Lord to inaugurate his new age; a position impossible to repeat.
    Samaria—no conditions.
    Saul—no conditions.
    Cornelius—no conditions even possible.
    Ephesus—no conditions.

    Acts 2:28 is the only relevant teaching on this topic; the norm is that a man's conversion will be the time when God's Holy Spirit is poured out and no further step is required beyond that of becoming a Christian. This is confirmed by what is said of Cornelius (Acts 11:14-17).


    5. Are these cases of 'subsequence'? (A second coming of the Holy Spirit.)
    Pentecost—no.
    Samaria—no.
    Saul—no.
    Cornelius—no.
    Ephesus—no.

    This is not to deny that there was a delay in some cases. At Pentecost this is not only explicable but necessary in that situation. In Samaria there is delay between repentance/baptism and the coming of the Holy Spirit, but the Holy Spirit comes only once. Luke himself hints at some oddity. The delay is explicable in terms of the breakthrough involved, and the ideas of condition and power are absent. This is not neo-pentecostal 'subsequence' which requires two comings of the Holy Spirit. In Ephesus it is impossible to prove beyond doubt that there was a delay, let along subsequence in the neo-pentecostal sense. But if there was delay it is explicable in the circumstances, not a blueprint for future generations. Luke's descriptions of delay is not the neo-pentecostal theology of subsequence.

    When our examination of the Acts passages is complete, we have three incidents which comply with Acts 2:38—men were baptized with the Holy Spirit on becoming Christians; and we have two seemingly abnormal situations of delay about which we are not told enough to be able to do more than speculate. Such is not the stuff with which consciences may be bound.


    Christian Discussion on the Spirit & Pentecostal, Charismatic, Evangelical & Reformed Belief, the day of Pentecost, the Bible and Jesus; including the origin and history of the Pentecostal movement, baptism in the Holy Spirit, speaking in tongues, gifts and miracles, divine healing and word of faith, prosperity and wealth, praise and worship, guidance, revelation and hearing the voice of the Holy Spirit - TALKING PENTECOSTALISM | By Joe Towns