INDWELLING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT
Personal Presence of the
Holy Spirit—Not in Word Only
Published in IMPACT,
May—June—July—August, 1981
A. Ralph Johnson
1Thes.
1:5. “...our gospel came not to you in word only, but also in power, and in the
Holy Spirit...”
INTRODUCTION:
In my unsophisticated state as a beginner student at
Bible college in San Jose, California I thought Acts 2:38-39 offered the
promise of the Holy Spirit to all who repented and were baptized. However, one of the professors “knew
better,” scoffing at such “Pentecostal nonsense,” declaring that the “gift” was salvation and that the Spirit
works only through the Word. This was
the “safe” ground occupied by the esteemed fathers of the Restoration Movement
in successfully warding off the “Holy Roller” excesses of “experiential
religion” manifested by “quakes,” “shakes,” “jerks,” “barks” and “swoons,” so
prevalent in the 19th century frontier revivals. Thus, I was initiated to the “Word only” doctrine which old
Archie Word, who rarely wasted words, curtly dismissed as making Pentecost seem
like a bunch of Bibles must have been dumped on their heads!
In considering this issue, I would first caution
against seizing upon a position merely to escape some other excess. We can end up like the Biblical illustration
of the man who fled from the lion and was bitten by a serpent. It is true that sign-seeking and reliance
upon “feeling,” rather than the word of God, has resulted in grave errors. I am afraid that on Judgment Day a lot of
them are going to be jolted to learn that what they thought was the Holy Spirit
moving within them was only a quiver of the liver (cf. Matt. 7:22-27). But, swerving off the road to the other side
into rationalistic, powerless materialism may be just as fatal, and because
extremes beget extremes, may actually serve to cause others to veer off into
the very error we sought to escape. The
roads of history are littered with such wrecks of faith. The ditch is just as deep on one side as the
other.
Secondly, let us be cautious against permitting
“explanations” of “possible meanings” to be accepted on equal footing with the
simple, natural, obvious statement of the text in its own context. Many years of experience has demonstrated
that no matter how plain the statement, somebody will come up with an ingenious
rationalization to escape its truth.
Our gospel is not veiled (2Cor. 3:15--4:4). God intended it to be understood, and if anyone can say what God
means, he can. Let us beware of being
corrupted from “the simplicity which is in Christ” (2Cor. 11:3).
Thirdly, be cautious about appeals to the “fathers”
and attempts to pressure by accusations of departure from the “old
ground.” This was one of the chief
obstacles encountered by Jesus. There are those who will full well disregard
the word of God to maintain their traditions (Mark 7:7-9).
Does the Holy Spirit dwell and function in the
Christian, or is it only the Word? “You
who profess to follow the Word, do you not hear the Word?”
I. THE IDENTITY OF THAT WHICH COMES.
A. The Holy Spirit is a
person, not a word. If the Word was
meant, why was that not said? Surely
God knew that to say otherwise would be misleading.
1. The Holy Spirit shares personality with the Father and the Son
(Mat. 28:19).
2. Throughout the New Testament, “Spirit” commonly indicates personality. God (John 4:24; 2Cor.
3:17-18), angels (Heb. 1:7, 14) and demons (Luke. 11:24-26; Mat. 3:11), are all
“spirits.”
3. The Holy Spirit has a “mind”
(Rom. 8:26-27. cf. 8:6); and a “will”
(1Cor. 12:11).
4. He “speaks” (1Tim. 4:1),
“hears” (John 16:13), “says” (Acts 19:15) and “teaches” (John 14:26).
5. He can be “grieved” (Eph.
4:30) and “lied to” (Acts 5:3).
6. He “searches” (1Cor.
2:10) and “comforts” or “helps” (John 14:16, 26; 16:7; 15:26;
Rom. 8:26-27; Acts 9:31).
7. He can evaluate whether things “seem
good” (Acts 15:28).
B. The Holy Spirit is clearly distinguished from the Word.
1. The Holy Spirit was sent to teach the Word (John 14:26; 15:26;
16:13). The Spirit FIRST came and THEN
taught the Word!
2. The Spirit CAME to provide the special gifts (Knowledge &
prophecy) through which the Word was given (1Cor. 12:8, 10; 2Pet. 1:20,21).
3. The Holy Spirit and the
Word are repeatedly distinguished in the same passages (Acts 16:6; 2Cor. 6:6-7;
Eph. 6:17-18; 1:13; 2Thes. 2:13; 1Thes. 1:5; Heb. 6:4-5).
C. The Holy Spirit came in person.
He did not just send the Word.
1. He came to Jesus in a bodily form (Mat. 3:16; Mark. 1:10; Luke.
3:22; John 1:32,33).
2. He came visibly upon the apostles (Acts 2:3. cf. 1:8)
3. He repeatedly came “upon”
others (Acts 10:44-45; 11:15-17; 8:16; 19:6).
These hardly sound like the descent of the Word.
Some have claimed that this
is only the “power” of the Holy
Spirit. However, “power” is also distinguished from the Holy Spirit (1Thes. 1:5; Acts
10:38; 2Cor. 6:6-7). If it doesn’t mean
what it says, it appears to me that some people must be relying on the very
thing they are attempting to deny--a special gift of being able to understand
what God “intended” without saying.
Others will argue that this
“coming” was only to those with miraculous gifts. However, “a coming is a coming is a coming.” He therefore did come and the same words are
applied to those who did NOT receive the gifts. No rule of grammar would support making one literal and the other
metaphorical. The choice of the Spirit
to be manifested openly in one case or only to work inwardly in the other, in
no way discredits the reality of His presence.
The promise of the Holy
Spirit clearly extended to those beyond the Apostles. The statements are general and in no way limited to those with
the special inspired gifts.
A. The Holy Spirit was to come and remain “forever” (John 14:16-18).
The fact that His coming was sometimes manifested by miraculous powers,
in no way requires that it ALWAYS be so.
His work extends to things other than miraculous gifts (Rom. 8:16, 27;
Gal. 5:22,23; John 16:8). The special manifesting gifts (1Cor 12:7) had
special limited objectives (Mark 16:20; Heb. 2:4) and were subject to special
limitations (1Cor. 13:8-13; Zech. 13:1-6; Eph. 2:20). Even in the days when the special gifts were needed to provide
and confirm the Word in getting the church established, all did not have them
(1Cor. 12:29-30. cf. whole chapter).
B. The promise of receiving the Spirit extended to “any man” who thirsts (John 7:37-39; cf.
Heb. 6:4 “tasted”).
C. All who are baptized into the “body”
“drink” of the Spirit (1Cor. 12:13).
The “body” is the church composed of individual members of Christ (1Cor.
12:27-28; Eph. 1:22-23; 2:15-16, 22; 3:6, 10; 4:4, 12, 15-16: 5:23, 25, 32;
Col. 1:18, 24). As seen in John
7:37-39, “drink” means to receive the
Holy Spirit.
We “drink
of one Spirit” when baptized “into”
(Greek: “eis”) Christ (Rom. 6:3, cf.
4-7, 17-18; Col. 2:12-13; Gal. 3:27; cf. 26-29; 1Cor. 10:2 cf. 1-12; 2Cor. 5:17; Mat. 28:19; Mark.
16:16; Acts 8:16; “in” = “eis.”
Cf. 22:16; 2:38 “for” = “eis”).
Compare also 1Pet. 3:21; John. 3:5-8, and also 1John. 5:6, 8; Titus
3:4-6; 1Cor. 6:11; Eph. 5:26).
It may be contended that if
“body” and “drink” can be metaphorical terms, why can not “spirit” be speaking of a “spiritual attitude” since, “the Holy” does not precede it? In reply, there are many non-metaphorical
words in the passage. The context must
be the determining factor. “Body” is specifically identified as
being figurative (1Cor. 12:27) and “drink”
is a metaphor relating to the body’s function. The context clearly establishes
“Spirit” as the Holy Spirit
(12:3). It is common for “the Holy” to be omitted (cf. Mark. 1:8,
10; Luke. 3:16, 22; John. 1:32-33) rather than laboriously repeating it over
and over before every use of “Spirit.”
In Greek, the definite
article, “the” is not used
identically with that in English. It is
not always necessary when something is specific. To assume “spirit” to
be something else than what the context indicates is a violation of contextual
rules. It is incumbent upon the
objector to demonstrate the exception.
It may also be argued that
this is concerned with receiving the miraculous manifestations when baptized in
the Holy Spirit. However, the Greek
construction of the phrase, “by one
Spirit we are baptized” is different from, “baptized in the Holy Spirit,” as found in all of the other
passages. Here the Holy Spirit is
represented as the prime mover behind our baptism (providing the Word which is
heard and convicting of sin (Rom. 10:17; John 16:8; Eph. 5:26). The direct connection of “drink of one Spirit” with being baptized
into Christ’s body clearly indicates that all who are baptized receive Him.
D. The Spirit
is promised to those who ask (Luke.
11:9-13; cf. Acts 22:16).
E. The Spirit is promised to “all
that are afar off, even to as many as the Lord our God shall call,” on
condition of repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ, for the
remission of sins (Acts 2:38-39, cf. Gal. 3:14).
The claim that the “gift” here is eternal life (Rom. 6:23)
or forgiveness, really makes the statement redundant, and, to say the least, is
presumptuous. Nothing contextually
supports such an idea. The Greek word
translated, “gift” (“doorea”) in Acts 2:38 is not the same as
in Rom. 6:23 (“Charisma”). Throughout Acts, Luke uses “doorea” to identify the Holy Spirit as
being the gift (Acts 8:20; 10:45; 11:17).
The verb, “receive” is also
used in other passages in connection with the Holy Spirit identified as the
gift (Acts 8:15, 17, 19; 10:47).
F. The Holy
Spirit is given to them that OBEY him
(Acts 5:32).
G. The Spirit is the “seal”
that identifies us as belonging to Christ (Eph. 1:13-14, 4:30; 2Cor. 1:21-22).
H. The Spirit is the “earnest”
or pledge, that we are God’s possession to be preserved to Him in redemption
(Eph. 1:12-14; cf. Eph. 4:30; Rom. 8:16; 1John 3:24; 4:13). This earnest of the Spirit is “in our hearts” (2Cor. 1:21-22).
I. We have our access to God in
the Spirit. We are built together
for a “habitation of God” in the
Spirit (Eph. 2:18, 22. cf. 1Cor. 3:9,
16; Rom. 8:26-27).
J. Without the Spirit of God in us, we cannot please God (Rom.
8:1-9). The “Spirit of God” is the Holy Spirit (Mat. 3:16; Mark. 1:8; Luke.
3:16, 22).
K. Without the Spirit of Christ,
we are “none of His” (Rom. 8:9). Cf.
Gal. 4:6; 1Pet. 1:11; Phil. 1:9
Some have denied this to be
the Holy Spirit, maintaining this is only a “spiritual attitude about
Christ.” In reply:
(1)
The
Holy Spirit IS the Spirit of Christ according to 1Pet. 1:10-12.
It testified before of the sufferings of Christ and the glories to
follow. This is prophecy and in Peter’s
second letter he says these things did not come by interpretation of men but by
the Holy Spirit (2Pet. 1:19-21).
(2) The Holy Spirit was sent by Christ to testify of Him (John 15:26;
16:14), to bring to remembrance what Christ said (John 14:26) and would be
Christ coming to them (John 14:18).
(3) “Spirit
of Jesus” and “Holy Spirit” are
used interchangeably in Acts 16:6-7, according to the best authorities.
(4) The “Spirit of the Lord”
(Jesus, Acts 4:33) is the Holy Spirit
(Acts 4:9, 3).
L. We must have the Spirit of Christ in order to call God our “Father” (Gal. 4:5-6; 3:26-27; Rom.
8:14-15)
If some should contend that
Romans 8 is speaking of the miraculous measure of the Spirit, note that Rom.
1:11 indicates they had no Spiritual gifts.
In an attempt to dispute this, some have cited Rom 12:6 but that is
speaking not just of the church at Rome but of the Body of Christ in general
(12:5) which included Paul, himself.
The terminology used to describe the coming of the Holy Spirit
clearly presents it as real and not just a figure. No words could have said it better. The variety of words and the number of times repeated throughout
the New Testament cannot be figurative.
Furthermore, the same words are repeatedly used in similar ways
concerning other personalities.
A. The Holy Spirit himself was “promised”
(Acts 2:39, 33; Eph. 1:13-14; Gal. 3:14).
B. He was “sent” (John
14:26; 15:26; 16:7; 1Pet. 1:12).
C. He “descended” (Mat 3:16;
Mark. 1:10; Luke. 3:22; John 1:32-33).
D. He “came” (John 15:26;
16:7-8, 13; 19:6; Mat. 3:16).
E. He is “given” (Luke.
11:13; John 7:39; 14:16; Acts 2:38; 5:32; 8:18, 20; 10:45; 11:17; 15:8; Rom.
5:5; 2Cor. 1:22; 5:5; 1Thes. 4:8; 2Tim. 1:7; 1John 4:13; 3:24).
F. He is “received” (John
7:39; 14:17; 20:22; Acts 2:38; 8:15, 17; 19:2; 1Cor. 2:12; Gal. 3:2; 3:14).
G. He can be “had” (Rom.
8:9; Jude 19).
H. He dwells “within” (John
7:38; 14:17; Rom. 8:9, 11; 2Tim. 1:14; 1Pet. 1:11; 1John 3:24; 4:4).
I. His abode is the “inward
man” (Eph. 3:16).
J. He dwells “in the heart”
(Gal. 4:7; Rom. 8:26-27 cf. 8:6-11).
K. He can “fill” the person
(Acts 2:4; 4:8, 31; 6:3, 5; 7:55; 9:17; 11:24; 13:9, 52; Eph. 5:19).
L. He “abides” in us (John
14:17, 23).
M. He can make us a “habitation”
of God through the Spirit (Eph. 2:22).
N. We are a “temple” in
which He dwells (1Cor. 3:16; 6:19-20)
IV. PURPOSE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT’S
COMING.
This is the chief point of
issue with those who deny the personal presence of the Holy Spirit in the
Christian. They maintain that accepting
his literal coming opens the floodgates of dependence upon feeling rather than
the Word of God. I appreciate their
concern, but truth must be accepted in faith that God knows best.
A. The Holy Spirit came to give and confirm the Word (John 14:16-18,
26; 16:7, 12; Mark 16:20; Heb. 2:3,4.
Thus, the Holy Spirit came BEFORE the Word (in NT times). The word was certainly important. But, to
attribute all of the Spirit’s work to the Word is to claim more than one can
prove. Without the Holy Spirit having
first come, there would have been no Word.
E. The Spirit helps our weakness.
He makes intercession for us with groanings
which cannot be uttered. He that searches the hearts knows the
mind of the Spirit (Rom.
8:26-27; Eph. 6:18; 1Cor. 14:15; John 4:24; Phil. 3:3; Jude 19-20).
F. The Spirit is the means through which we have access to God (Eph.
2:18, 22). (It appears that not only
did the Word come to man through Him but also our needs are in turn conveyed
back to God through the same means.)
G. We are strengthened with
power through the Spirit in the inward man (Eph. 3:16-17; cf. Phil.
4:13).
H. By the Spirit we put to death
the deeds of the body (Rom. 8:134; Gal. 5:16-25).
I. The Holy Spirit is the means of Christ being with us (John
14:16-18, 23, 24-28; 14:26; 16:7).
Jesus was sent first. In order
for the Spirit to come Jesus had to go away and send Him. Thus, we see that Jesus now is with the
father in heaven and communicates with us through the Spirit.
J. The love of God is shed
abroad in our hearts through the Holy Spirit which was given to us
(Rom. 5:5; Gal. 5:22-23; 2Tim. 1:7; Col. 1:8).
K. The Holy Spirit produces “joy” and other fruits (1Thes. 1:6;
Gal. 5:22; Rom. 14:17; 15:13).
L. Whether we are in the flesh, or in the Spirit, is conditioned
upon whether the Spirit of God dwells
in us (Rom. 8:9).
M. The Holy Spirit is the means of our sanctification (2Thes. 2:13; 1Pet. 1:2).
N. As we have shown previously, our very status as the recognized
possession of God and being raised like Christ, depends upon our having the
Spirit (Rom. 8:6-11, 16; Gal. 4:6; 5:24; Eph. 1:13-14; 4:30; 2Cor. 1:21-22;
5:5).
O. We know that he abides in us by the Spirit which he gave us (1John 3:24; 4:13) and He “bears witness” with our spirit that we
are children of God (Rom. 8:16).
The “Word-only” advocates
maintain that the Holy Spirit operates in us exclusively through the Word.
I. It is argued that to admit the indwelling presence is to open the
floodgates to “Holy Roller” excesses.
ANSWER:
A. This is not a valid argument.
It is an appeal to prejudice.
B. It is unscriptural. Paul
never used such an argument to prove that the false prophets of his day were
wrong.
C. The Bible provides very effective ways of countering Charismatic
excess. We will not be able to do it
better with this argument.
D. We may actually bring greater harm by turning people away through
our own extreme, or lessening direct reliance upon the Spirit’s help.
Far more damage may be done
by denying the Spirit’s presence. Some
students in the school in California who accepted the “Word only” doctrine,
when faced with the frustrations of the field, turned from that extreme to the
charismatic error. It left them trying
to use a textbook to lift themselves by their own bootstraps. They needed a God at hand--not one that was
far off. Even the school itself ended
up swinging from the “word only” extreme to being largely charismatic
influenced. Meanwhile, the next school
I attended who accepted the indwelling was never effected by the Charismatic
error.
It is simply not
true that accepting the view that the Holy Spirit dwells within us makes us
more susceptible to the Pentecostal excesses.
We have never had any problem with it in our churches. On the contrary, we have been successful in
winning people out of it.
II. Some argue that there is nothing the Holy Spirit does that is not
provided through the Word.
This claim is
presumptive. It presumes that because
the Word is given by the Holy Spirit that therefore the Holy Spirit cannot be
also present. Think. Is it logical that if a man were said to
have been cut by a sword that the owner could not have been present to use it?
(Eph. 6:17-18) This is just as much in
error as one who would claim that because the Holy Spirit is said to do things
attributed to the Word that therefore the Word only functions through the Holy
Spirit.
Furthermore, it is simply
not true that nothing is done by the Holy Spirit other than what is said to be
done by the Word. The Word cannot “make intercession” for the child of God
and cannot be properly said to “know”
his needs and weaknesses (Rom. 8:26-27).
It is clear that the Word alone cannot resolve the struggle of
strengthening the inner man (Eph. 3:16; Gal. 5:16-25; Rom. 8:1-14). If this were possible then Paul, who had the
Word, would have been able to win the struggle without the Holy Spirit’s help.
(Rom. 7:15-25 and on into chapter 8).
III. Some maintain that the Holy Spirit cannot
dwell within us today because there are no visible manifestations.
In reply let it be noted
that in the Bible not everything the Holy Spirit did was openly manifested by
some miraculous act. God is free to act
as He pleases when He pleases, and where he pleases. He is not obliged to restrict Himself to what we can see and
understand (Deut 29:29). At one time He
chose to openly display His power to confirm His Word (Mark 16:20; Heb
2:3-4). Today He has chosen to do
otherwise.
To argue that there must be
some miraculous manifestation the Holy Spirit if the Holy Spirit is present,
undercuts the very basis of God being with us and answering prayer. James 1:5-7 says that if we lack wisdom to
ask of God who gives to all…But let him ask in faith, nothing doubting…for he
will receive nothing. In spite of what
men may suppose, God is not dead, on a long journey, or asleep. Heb 11:6 says that he who comes to God must believe that He is and is a rewarder of
them that diligently seek him. We
walk by faith, not by sight (2Cor. 5:7).
Acts 8 has sometimes been
cited to prove that only those with miraculous gifts have the Holy Spirit. It speaks of them being baptized but not
having had the Holy Spirit fall “upon”
them. However, note that while it does
say that the Apostles prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit,
it does not actually say that they had received no measure of the Spirit
when they were baptized. This is
clearly speaking of receiving the measure of the Spirit manifested by
coming “upon” them (cf.
Luke. 24:49; Acts 1:8; 2:3; 10:44,45; 11:15; 19:6) with miraculous “power” as a visible manifestation. It is not discussing the personal presence within. As we have previously shown, every Christian
must have the Spirit to belong to Christ.
Today, the Holy Spirit
manifests Himself to us through our willingness to stand faithful to Christ and
overcome the flesh. A “wicked and
adulterous generation seeketh after a sign” (Matt. 12:39).
IV. The “fruits of the Spirit”
have been cited as being better explained among outsiders if the Holy Spirit
dwells representatively through the Word.
However, the wicked have
fruits which, though sometimes similar, may not be from the Spirit at all,
whether in or out of the Word. False
prophets use “sheep’s clothing”
(Matt. 7:15). Satan’s ministers appear
as ministers of righteousness (2Cor. 11:13-15). Publicans and sinners had “love” (Matt. 4:46). There is a “faith” that is dead (James 2:14-26). One can say, “Lord, Lord”
and yet be denying him (Matt. 7:21-23; Titus 1:16; cf. 1Cor. 12:3). There can be a “joy” that is not from God (James 4:9).
V. Some have questioned how it would be possible for the Holy Spirit
to be “poured out” and how could He,
as a person, dwell in many people at one time?
Again, He is not dependent upon my limited
understanding for His capacity. God’s
ways are past finding out (Isa.
55:8-9; Rom. 11:33). There is nothing
to which we can liken Him (Isa. 40:25-28).
Indeed, how can He hear so many people in the world all praying at once? Rationalism proves nothing other than our
own ignorance.
CONCLUSION:
I would like to close this
with two thoughts. First, the Bible
plainly says that “the Spirit of God
dwells in you” (Rom 8:9-11; 2Tim 1:14) so why cannot it mean what it
says? Why speak of the Holy Spirit as
coming and dwelling within us if it is not so?
Why would God use misleading language when it would be so much simple to
have said it was only the Word? If God
did not say what He meant, who can better say what He meant?
Finally, it concerns me that
the underlying assumptions tend to be so materialistic. I have difficulty seeing the validity of
arguments aimed at proving that nothing is done by the Holy Spirit, except
through the Word, when common sense indicates that by its very nature this
would also exclude answers to prayer.
James says that if any man lacks wisdom he should ask of God who gives
to all liberally (1:5-8). Thus, we do
have direct help from God. This cuts
right at the root of their whole case.
If God actively works to provide wisdom, it is clear that we are not
solely dependent upon the word for help.
That, of course, leaves the charismatic a pretext to follow His own
feelings as divine guidance. But it
also leaves it open for the Holy Spirit to be the means of God helping us in
prayer and giving strength. Praise God!
We are not left desolate (John 14:18)!