A Theological Pilgrimage

A Charismatic Pentecostal

Systematic Theology

J. Rodman Williams, Ph.D.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS_ 3

PREFACE_ 4

Chapter 1, Renewal In The Spirit 29

Chapter 2, A New Era In History_ 96

Chapter 3, The Upsurge Of Pentecostalism__ 126

Chapter 4, The Person And Work Of The Holy Spirit 151

Chapter 5, Baptism In The Holy Spirit 162

Chapter 6, The Missing Dimension_ 192

Chapter 7, The Charismatic Movement And Reformed Theology_ 202

Chapter 8, God's Mighty Acts_ 237

Chapter 9, Why Speak In Tongues?_ 257

Chapter 10, The Holy Spirit And Eschatology_ 266

Chapter 11, A Pentecostal Theology_ 272

Chapter 12, The Greater Gifts_ 334

Chapter 13, Biblical Truth And Experience_ 370

Chapter 14, Theological Perspectives Of The Pentecostal/Charismatic Movement 400

Chapter 15, The Gifts Of The Holy Spirit And Their Application To The Contemporary Church_ 411

Chapter 16, The Engagement Of The Holy Spirit 431

Abbreviations_ 456

Bibliography_ 459

PREFACE

A Theological Pilgrimage derives its title from the fact that the material included in this book represents an ongoing theological pilgrimage. For a number of years I have been gripped by the reality of the Holy Spirit and have sought in various ways to express this reality through speaking, teaching, and writing. It has been, and continues to be, an exciting theological pilgrimage.

In a larger sense this book reflects the contemporary spiritual renewal known as "Pentecostal" or "charismatic." As a theologian, I have been active in the renewal since 1965. The writings in this book accordingly are set within a renewal context.

During this time I have served as professor of theology in three institutions: Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary, Austin, Texas; Melodyland School of Theology, Anaheim, California; and Regent University School of Divinity, Virginia Beach, Virginia. I have authored four books that deal with the Holy Spirit: The Era of the Spirit (1971); The Pentecostal Reality (1972); The Gift of the Holy Spirit Today (1980); and Renewal Theology, Volume 2, Salvation, the Holy Spirit, and Christian Living (1990). Also I have participated in many gatherings, spoken to numerous groups, and generally helped to give direction to the renewal.

This book is a collection of writings and addresses in the area of the Holy Spirit that date from 1971 to 1995. Included are selections from several books as well as various articles and addresses relating to a diversity of situations. Because of the span of years, some materials reflect the particular period when written. However, by the Spirit's help, I believe that throughout there is a controlling unity.

My theological pilgrimage began in November 1965. All of the writings on the Holy Spirit included in this book derive from a spiritual encounter on the day before Thanksgiving. I will now relate some of the events leading up to that date, give some description of the encounter, and then what has happened since that time.

During the academic year 1964-65 I was on sabbatical leave with my family from Austin Seminary. In August 1964, as a theological consultant, I attended an official gathering in Frankfurt, Germany, of delegates from Presbyterian and Reformed churches around the world.[1] The theme for the meeting was "Come, Creator Spirit!" The theme itself was significant because Presbyterian/Reformed churches have traditionally been more inclined to stress the sovereignty of God or the lordship of Christ than to take cognizance of the Holy Spirit. Further, the theme was not simply doctrinal (as, for example, "The Holy Spirit and the Church" would be) but actually a prayer, an entreaty, for the Holy Spirit to come. The New Testament, it was pointed out, is much more concerned about the question "Did you receive the Holy Spirit" (Acts 19:2) than "What do you know about the Holy Spirit?" In an article that I later wrote for the Austin Seminary Bulletin[2] entitled "The Concerns of Frankfurt," I summed up with these words: "Whatever else may come from the meeting, no one who was a part of it will soon forget that Presbyterians and Reformeds from all over the world have seriously prayed 'Come, Creator Spirit!' and exposed themselves to whatever may happen in answer to such a prayer." I had absolutely no idea at the time of writing how prophetic, indeed in my case how personally prophetic, these words would be. I recall one Presbyterian leader saying, "I wonder what would happen to us Presbyterians if the Holy Spirit really did come." In any event we exposed ourselves "to whatever may happen"-and that indeed was a risky prayer!

In November 1964 I went down to Rome as a guest observer at several sessions of the Roman Catholic Ecumenical Council, Vatican II.[3] This Council had been earlier convoked by Pope John XXIII who in a prayer to the Holy Spirit said, "Renew Your wonders in our time as for a new Pentecost." I was impressed by the continuing invocation of the Holy Spirit, and the spirit of openness to the renewal of the church. Late in the fall the Council promulgated the document entitled Dogmatic Constitution of the Church which at one point asserts about the Holy Spirit: "Allotting His gifts 'to everyone according to His will' (1 Cor. 12:11), He distributes special graces among the faithful of every rank....These charismatic gifts, whether they be the most outstanding or the more simple and widely diffused, are to be received with thanksgiving and consolation, for they are exceedingly suitable and useful for the needs of the Church."[4] This new official openness to the Holy Spirit and His charismatic activity would have significance for the future of many.

Throughout the fall and early winter I spent much of my time doing research near Geneva, Switzerland, for a book on systematic theology. I wrote several preliminary chapters, sent them off to a Presbyterian publishing house, but received only a negative response. Much better was my success with a book on existentialism, which was finally published in the summer of 1965 under the title of Contemporary Existentialism and Christian Faith. Although this book was essentially a vigorous polemic against existentialism-"Existentialism is ultimately wrong, because it fails to understand man in the light of God"[5]-I did seek to draw out the existentialist value of recognizing that ultimate truth must be inwardly, even passionately, appropriated, if it is to have any vital significance. Both philosophy and theology may be so dispassionately concerned with the rational, the objective, as to miss this altogether. However, existentialism did probe my inwardness, but offered little or nothing by way of positive results. As I later came to look back on both my unsuccessful effort to get a book in theology published and my success in the publication of the book on existentialism, one fact stood out startlingly clear: the almost total lack of reference to the Holy Spirit in both.

The second half of my sabbatical was spent in Taiwan. On the long trip to Taiwan from Geneva, we visited many places, the most memorable being the Mount of Beatitudes in Israel. While we stayed there in a Franciscan convent-hospice, a storm quickly arose one day on the Sea of Galilee below and a beautiful double rainbow appeared in the clouds. The presence of the Lord was strongly sensed, and the rainbow seemed a sign of God's future blessing.

From February through June 1965, I taught a course on systematic theology at the Tainan Theological College, Taiwan, and likewise gave lectures on existentialism at the Tunghai Christian University in Taichung. So it was that I continued with both theology and philosophy; and though there was much satisfaction in teaching Taiwanese students, I increasingly felt an emptiness in what I was doing. There were Sunday evening meetings for fellowship and prayer with the English-speaking faculty, and thereby some uplift. But by the time we left Taiwan for the United States in June 1965, I personally felt much spiritual hunger.

Now let me put in place several factors that further led to the spiritual encounter of November 1965. First, there was the rise in the mid-60s of the so-called "death of God" theology.[6] The language is still both shocking and absurd, but it became the "in" thing for several younger theologians. The reality of God's presence had become so distant and seemingly unattainable that, as they viewed it, only "death" could express the total loss. I knew two of the three leaders personally, so felt all the more deeply disturbed by the paths they had taken. My problem, however, was that I seemed unable to make any vital response. The climax came when I heard a public address of one of them who asserted that the task of the theologian was to explain to people how to live in the darkness of God's total absence, indeed His death. This address precipitated for me a deep crisis that in part led to a Thanksgiving week of spiritual breakthrough. I will say more later about this.

Second, and of much significance, during the late summer and fall of 1965 I became acquainted with the opposite extreme: a movement of spiritual revitalization among many Christians. Rather than God being dead, He seemed to them very much alive! My wife and I began to attend some meetings of these believers and at first were put off by their highly enthusiastic faith: God, the Lord, Jesus, they were constantly praising. The people-about a dozen of them from several mainline denominations-gathered together on Sunday evenings in the kitchen of a Presbyterian church, not being allowed by the church authorities to meet in the main sanctuary. Although for many years I had known Christ and His presence, these people seemed to have a far deeper and more intimate awareness. They read the Bible with much zeal, spoke out words of prophecy (I had never heard such before), were quick to minister to any expressed need, and prayed expectantly for miracles to occur. They also now and then referred to an experience of being "baptized in the Holy Spirit." I was amazed by it all-and confused. These people were surely none other than fellow believers, and it was a meeting outwardly not too different from innumerable ones I had attended over the years; but here was a certain almost qualitative difference from anything I had before experienced. And it was all happening in a church kitchen!

After about two hours the meeting concluded, whereupon the group moved quietly into the church sanctuary to pray at the altar (such action presumably was not prohibited!). My wife and I sat in the back frankly a little fearful by now of what these strange people would do next; however, one of them soon called back to me, requesting that I come forward and say the benediction. I felt somewhat relieved since I knew I could officially do that as the only ordained minister present! But by the time my wife and I were down front at the altar I was sensing my need for a benediction more than they, and begged them instead to pray for me. And pray they did-not as I had expected, someone offering a single prayer-but asking us to kneel and then laying hand after hand upon us to receive God's blessing.

Thus in a relatively short time I experienced the utter incongruity between the two worlds of a God so totally distant as to be called dead and that of a God so dynamically present as to be almost shockingly alive. Could it be that what was going on in a church kitchen was at least one way of the living God making Himself vividly manifest? I began to wonder if the death of God theology was not a cry of despair over the lack of vitality in much of the church and the call for a deeper experience of the reality of God. Could it be that the Holy Spirit was the key to an answer?

Third, and of critical importance, a particular Scripture passage began to speak in a fresh way to me. It was Luke 11:5-13, the parable of Jesus which climaxes thus: "If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him?" I began to wonder for the first time seriously if I personally had received that gift. But let me first briefly review this Scripture.

The background for Jesus' words about the gift of the Holy Spirit is that of a man who, having no bread to give a friend who has arrived late on a journey, goes to another friend's house at midnight to ask for bread: "Friend, lend me three loaves." The man inside, already in bed with his children, replies, "Do not bother me." However, this does not stop his friend outside from persisting. Then Jesus adds, "Because of his importunity he will rise and give him whatever he needs. And I tell you, Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For every one who asks receives, and he who seeks find, and to him who knocks it will be opened." Then shortly the words follow about the heavenly Father giving the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him.

Several things in this passage of Scripture began to stand out for me. First, since the gift of bread being sought was not for the personal benefit of the one seeking but for that of another person, it follows that the gift of the Holy Spirit is the same: to help, possibly to bless, others. Second, even as the seeker expressed his earnestness by persistent asking, seeking, and knocking, so there needs to be earnest zeal on the part of one asking for the gift of God's Holy Spirit. Third, this gift being sought was from a friend, not a stranger; even so, the gift of the Holy Spirit is from the heavenly Father: it is available to His children.

The passage in Luke spoke to me increasingly. During the fall of 1965 I was back at my regular job of teaching students. More and more I yearned to minister the life-giving bread of the gospel, but often felt empty. The right words were generally spoken, my theology was evangelical and orthodox, but there was a definite lack of spiritual fervor. My students were not being truly fed. At the same time I sought to continue the writing on systematic theology, but found myself writing and rewriting, especially in the area of the doctrine of God. I despaired more and more of "getting it all together," or of saying anything that would make a significant impact on others. My problem, I must quickly add, was not that I was an outsider to faith. In terms of Jesus' parable, I could call God "Friend" and He was indeed my "heavenly Father," but I still lacked the spiritual dynamic for truly delivering the bread of the word. Indeed, in many ways I felt like the apostles probably did before Pentecost. They had been commissioned by Jesus to proclaim the gospel (Matt. 28:19-20), but still needed the gift of the Spirit to impart life (Acts 1:8). However, I identified more with the man in Jesus' parable who was almost desperate to receive that same gift. I was ready to ask, and seek, and knock.

But now before proceeding to the climax, let me review my rather complex situation. First, there was the background of Frankfurt (and to a lesser degree of Rome) with the theme "Come, Creator Spirit!" and my own statement that the people there "exposed themselves to whatever may happen in answer to such a prayer." Second, in my book on existentialism, while decrying its basic orientation, I stressed the value of the existential concern that ultimate truth must be inwardly appropriated. Third, the "death of God" theology brought home deeply to me both the despair of many for whom God was no more and my own spiritual incapacity to offer any vital response. Fourth, our meetings with the small group in Austin came as a total opposite to both existentialist and "death of God" human-centered orientations: God was indeed alive and at the center of everything. Fifth, and most importantly, I found myself again and again pondering Luke 11:5-13 and praying about the gift of the Holy Spirit. I did that not only in relation to my felt need for life-giving bread in teaching and writing, but also in regard to the surrounding theological emptiness.

I should add in relation to the small group that, although my wife and I attended most Sunday evenings and sensed God's presence there, I was also often quite uncomfortable. They seemed to move much more freely than I in a dimension of the Spirit's presence and power. I knew that I was a believer (I had a powerful conversion experience many years before), but I still did not really fit in. Perhaps I was even being led astray from the true pattern of faith. Yet I could not really believe this was so. They recognized the Scriptures to be God's infallible Word, their faith was in the Triune God, they rejoiced in Christ's salvation; indeed, at no point could this group be called heretical. In fact, it was the very deep experience of the reality of Christ in faith that seemed to mark their existence. The only new area of outward experience for me was that the members occasionally spoke in tongues.

Now a word about tongues. I of course knew that there was reference in the New Testament to speaking in tongues in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost and at some other places and times, but I had not thought much about it, saw little reason for it, and certainly had no desire to do it. Then one day my wife greeted me with the news that she had just begun praying in tongues! Despite her obvious joy, I thereupon felt like withdrawing from all association with the group: things were getting too close for comfort. What if I somehow likewise became a "tongue speaker"? What would "people" think? How would the seminary react? What might happen to my professional future? To be sure, I was eager to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit but surely not tongues!

Here I must interject a brief account concerning Dennis Bennett and his ministry to me. Dennis was the Episcopal priest who a few years before in Van Nuys, California, had received national publicity for announcing from his pulpit that he had recently begun to speak in tongues. On one occasion Dennis came to Austin, and I was much impressed by his testimony to his own baptism in the Spirit. He spoke with enthusiasm and sincerity-and not with the least touch of irrationality. Afterward, upon my invitation, Dennis graciously agreed to visit me in my seminary office and to pray on my behalf about the Holy Spirit. I got out of my chair (of theology) and knelt on the floor while Dennis laid hands on, and prayed over me. At one point in his prayer he asked if I cared whether he continued by praying in tongues. I surely had not expected or wanted that to happen, but still managed to respond: "It's all right if you think it will do any good." To this Dennis replied: "Yes, I think that you particularly need to hear and accept this because you are still too locked up in the mind." At the conclusion of Dennis's prayer for my reception of the Holy Spirit I remarked that I did not sense anything had happened. His reply was simply that I might yet have to become more childlike, humble, and willing to receive what God had to give.

Weeks went by. I continued to pray for the gift of the Holy Spirit. The gracious heavenly Father heard my prayer and answered during Thanksgiving week, 1965. I shall be forever thankful. Praise His glorious Name!

I had returned the previous Saturday from Atlanta, Georgia, where I heard one of the death of God theologians go to the ultimate extreme by proclaiming (hear this): "The theologian must will the death of God." I was sick of mind and heart. Sunday was a rather dismal day. When it came to a decision about whether to attend the prayer group that night, I said no. The tension between the deadness of theology and the aliveness of the group was simply too much to take. So we stayed home and sought to relax.

On Monday with an extra effort of willpower I turned again to writing the book on theology. Although I labored at my desk through the day, I felt myself accomplishing absolutely nothing-it all seemed wordy, dull, lifeless. Also, I knew that on the following Monday I was to begin lecturing at the seminary on "The Doctrine of God." But in spite of all my teaching in the past, I simply felt I had no idea where or how to begin. For a while I turned aside to write a letter to one of the "death of God" theologians (a personal friend) urging him not to give up on God, the church, or prayer. However, I found my letter to be so powerless that rather than mailing it, I simply threw it into the waste basket. By late afternoon I was in abject misery and began to cry out, "O God, O God, what shall I do-what, what, what?" I felt empty-through and through.

Tuesday was a day of relative calm. Somehow I sensed God's peace and blessing. The book? The course? After an hour or two of work in my study a new outline on the doctrine of God began to emerge: one in which God's glory was paramount and His love occupied a central place. The "death of God"?-the whole idea seemed even stranger, more absurd than ever. So I felt calm: all was somehow O.K. I was not sure quite what was happening, but everything was in good hands; this I knew.

Then came Wednesday, the day before Thanksgiving-THE DAY! I felt at ease, and began to turn to letters on my desk. One letter was from a pastor who described his experience of recently visiting the seminary and being prayed for by a student to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. He wrote about how later he began to speak in tongues and praise God mightily. As I read and re-read the letter, the words somehow seemed to leap off the page, and I found myself being overcome. I was soon on my knees practically in tears praying for the Holy Spirit, and pounding on the chair-asking, seeking, knocking-in a way I never had done before. Now I intensely yearned for the gift of the Holy Spirit. Then I stood and began to beseech God to break me open, to fill me to the fullest-with sometimes an almost torturous cry to what was in myself to possess my total being. But for a time all seemed to no avail. With hands outstretched I then began to pray to God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit-and mixed in with the entreaty was a verse of Scripture I kept crying out: "Bless the Lord, O my soul; and all that is within me, bless his holy name!" I yearned to bless the Lord with all my being-my total self, body, soul, and spirit-all that was within me. Then I knew it was happening: I was being filled with His Holy Spirit. Also, for the first time I earnestly desired to speak in tongues because the English language seemed totally incapable of expressing the inexpressible glory and love of God. Instead of articulating rational words I began to ejaculate sounds of any kind, praying that somehow the Lord would use them. Suddenly I realized that something drastic was happening: my noises were being left behind, and I was off with such utterance, such words as I had never heard before.

Waves after wave, torrent after torrent, poured out. It was utterly fantastic. I was doing it and yet I was not. I seemed to be utterly detached and utterly involved. To some degree I could control the speed of the words-but not much; they were pouring out at a terrific rate. I could stop the flow whenever I wanted, but in operation I had absolutely no control over the nature or articulation of the sounds. My tongue, my jaws, my vocal chords were totally possessed-but not by me. Tears began to stream down my face-joy unutterable, amazement incredible. Over and over I felt borne down to the floor by the sheer weight of it all-and sometimes I would cry: "I don't believe it; I don't believe it!" It was so completely unlike anything I had ever known before.[7]

Finally, I sat down in my chair, but still felt buoyed up as if by a vast inner power. I knew I was on earth, but it was as if heaven had intersected it-and I was in both. God was so much there that I scarcely moved a muscle: His delicate, lush, ineffable presence.

Suddenly, it dawned on me that I had not yet so much as glanced at a Bible. Quickly I opened one up-to Acts 2. To be sure I had read the Pentecostal story many times, but this was incredibly different. I felt I was there. As I read the words with my eyes and my mind, and began to do so out loud, I knew I could speak, as I read, in a tongue. This I did, verse after verse-reading the account of the filling with the Holy Spirit, speaking in other tongues, and what immediately followed-reading all this with the accompaniment of my own new tongue! By the time I arrived at the verse, "Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he [Christ] has poured out this which you see and hear" (v. 33), I was so overwhelmed that I could only stand and sing, "Praise God, praise God," over and over again.

The whole event lasted about an hour. Then I felt strangely impelled by the Holy Spirit to move around the house, room after room, each time to speak out with a prayer in the tongue. I was not sure why I was doing this, but it was as if the Holy Spirit was blessing each spot, each corner. Truly, as it later turned out, He was preparing a sanctuary for His presence and action.

Shortly after this I dashed over to the nearby school where my wife was a teacher. At recess time with both faltering and excited words I tried to tell her all about what had happened-and her tears flowed in glad thanksgiving. When evening came, and the children were in bed, we had the finest prayer time of our married life. At first I was scared and anxious to try the tongue, but when she prayed first in her own soft, gentle, and clear tongue, I finally "cut loose"-and how can one express it? God was almost terrifyingly real. There was praise in the tongues, and then intercession. Somehow we felt the whole world had been prayed for, both in general and in particular (wherever there was need). Finally, my dear wife asked me to lay hands on her head and pray for the healing of a cold that was bothering her. That I did-in the tongue-and after several moments of near ecstatic and delicate silence, we went to bed.

I mentioned a paragraph ago how the Lord was preparing our home as a sanctuary. In a few weeks people began to gather each Sunday evening in our home for prayer, fellowship, and ministry. They were mostly from mainline churches-Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists, and the like-but some from Pentecostal churches, and some Roman Catholics began to come. Indeed, the numbers grew so large that people gathered in every room in the house with an overflow to the outside yard. Some said that as they drew near they saw flames of heavenly fire upon the rooftop. Sunday night after Sunday night for some five years we met-and the Lord blessed richly and bountifully.[8]

During those same years (about 1966-71), I also wrote a number of related theological articles. First, there was a reply to the "death of God" theology. This article appeared in the Austin Seminary Bulletin, April 1966, entitled "Theology in Transition-and the Death of God," and was later reprinted by the Presbyterian, U. S. (Southern) General Assembly for distribution throughout the denomination. In this article I sought to give a careful examination and critique of the writings of each of the three leaders. Near the end, I added: "It might turn out that the 'death of God' theology does not signify a dead end but, exposing the emptiness of much of our theology, confession, and worship, it calls upon the whole church to a renewed concern for the Holy Spirit....Theology in transition may be the movement to a theology of the Holy Spirit." This was my farewell statement to this vain and empty theology, for, praise God, by His grace I had passed through and could thereafter focus on a theology of the Spirit. Second, I wrote an article entitled "A New Theological Era." I gave this as an address upon my inauguration as full professor of systematic theology and philosophy of religion at Austin Seminary in the fall of 1966.[9] My opening statement began: "The thesis of this Convocation address will be that we stand on the verge of a new theological era. It could be as profound and as exciting as anything that has happened in the history of theology. The focus of the new era will be the doctrine of the Holy Spirit." In the second part of the address[10] I gave a brief historical overview of the church's reflection about the Holy Spirit since New Testament times. Third, also in 1966, as a member of the Southern Presbyterian Church's Task Force on Evangelism, I wrote a paper entitled "The Holy Spirit and Evangelism"[11] in which I said: "We need to be visited by the reality of God in such fashion that we know His full presence....[and] the power of God's Holy Spirit which alone can lead man to a deep conviction of sin and to faith in Jesus Christ."[12] Fourth, during the late 60s I served as a member of the North American Area Council of the World Reformed Alliance and wrote two papers: "The Holy Spirit and the World" (1967)[13] and "The Upsurge of Pentecostalism: Some Presbyterian/Reformed Comment" (1971). The latter paper was reprinted in condensed form in The Reformed World.[14] In it I sought to demonstrate how many Presbyterian and Reformed churchmen and theologians were helping to prepare the way to a positive recognition of the significance of the Pentecostal witness for the future of the church. Fifth, also during the late 60s, serving as chairman of the Southern Presbyterian Church Permanent Committee of Theology, I edited the paper entitled "The Person and Work of the Holy Spirit: with Special Reference to the Baptism of the Holy Spirit." The paper was adopted by the General Assembly in 1971.[15] This represented a significant step ahead in giving denominational approval to a special working of the Holy Spirit.

Now I will add a few words about what has happened since those first five years. 1971-72 was a transitional period. Increasingly I moved beyond the Presbyterian/Reformed context into a wider ministry. During the summer and fall of 1971 I made two trips[16] through many countries in Europe to meet with pastors, priests, and laymen in regard to the charismatic renewal. The first trip-my wife and I with David du Plessis ("Mr. Pentecost")[17] and his wife-was highlighted by a June meeting in Rome at the Vatican to help plan for a forthcoming Roman Catholic/Pentecostal dialogue on the Holy Spirit. Later in the summer I participated in an International Conference on "The Fellowship of the Holy Spirit" held at the University of Surrey in England. There I spoke on "A New Era in History"[18] and led a theological workshop for other theologians and pastors. In the fall the second trip to Europe was made in the company not only of David du Plessis but also of Fr. Kilian McDonnell, the Roman Catholic scholar. We spoke together in many places including New College, Edinburgh, the World Council of Churches in Geneva, and again went to Rome to plan further for the Vatican/Pentecostal dialogue. During 1971-72 I was on sabbatical leave from Austin Seminary to be a resident fellow at the Ecumenical Institute in Collegeville, Minnesota. While there a number of my writings were published under the title The Pentecostal Reality.

In the summer of 1972 I again traveled to Europe[19] for three reasons. First, I went over to participate in the first international Roman Catholic/Pentecostal dialogue. It was a dialogue sponsored by the Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity of the Roman Catholic Church with both Pentecostal leaders from Pentecostal churches as well as participants in the charismatic movement from Protestant, Anglican, and Orthodox churches. For the dialogue I presented papers on "Pentecostal Spirituality"[20] and "Baptism in the Holy Spirit."[21] It was indeed a challenging time! Second, I went to Europe as founder and chairman of the first European Charismatic Leaders Conference held at Schloss Craheim in Germany. The previous winter and spring I had sent out invitations to many European leaders to attend. Approximately one hundred persons from some twelve European countries came together for united study, conversation, prayer, and planning. Third, I was privileged later to go to southern France and speak at a meeting of Reformed pastors. This meeting was in old Huguenot country, which long before had been an area of charismatic activity. It was a joy to share with these pastors what God was also doing in other sections of the Reformed world.

In the fall of 1972 I moved with my family from Austin to Anaheim, California and began a School of Theology at Melodyland Christian Center. At the peak time of the "Jesus Movement" in southern California, it was a challenge to provide biblical and theological training for many very "turned on" believers. The school began in January 1973, and soon had developed a program of theological study for high school, junior college, and college graduates. By the mid-70s the number of students enrolled was approximately 700. I served as both president of the school and professor of theology until 1982.

During the period (1973-82) I continued other charismatic activity. I will mention a few highlights. In the spring of 1973, the international Charismatic Communion of Presbyterian Ministers[22] (of which I was president) held its annual meeting at the Word of God Community in Ann Arbor, Michigan. This was an extraordinary event in that the Word of God Community that hosted the meeting was largely Roman Catholic! During the summer of that same year I was in Europe again to chair the second European Charismatic Leaders Conference in Schloss Craheim and later attended the second Vatican/Pentecostal dialogue. (I continued to be an active participant on the dialogue each year until 1976.) In the fall of 1973 I traveled with my wife to Australia and New Zealand to speak and teach at various charismatic seminars and conferences. Particularly significant in 1974 was a conference at Princeton Theological Seminary on "The Person and Work of the Holy Spirit" at which I read a paper entitled "Theological Perspectives of the Person and Work of the Holy Spirit."[23] In 1974 and 1975 I was a speaker and teacher at the first and second World Conference on the Holy Spirit held in Jerusalem. In 1975 I wrote an article for Christianity Today magazine entitled "A Profile of the Charismatic Movement." The article was also expanded into a paper, "The Charismatic Movement and Reformed Theology,"[24] for a meeting of the North American Area Council of the World Reformed Alliance. In 1977 in Kansas City at the National Conference on Charismatic Renewal in the Christian Churches, the Presbyterian Charismatic Communion section, I gave an address entitled "New Theology for a New Era: God's Mighty Acts."[25] This was a major attempt at providing a Trinitarian basis for the spiritual renewal. In 1978 I wrote an article for New Covenant magazine entitled "Why Speak in Tongues?"[26] My third book on the Holy Spirit, The Gift of the Holy Spirit Today, was published in 1980. In 1981 Pneuma magazine contained a brief article by me entitled "The Holy Spirit and Eschatology."[27]

Since the fall of 1982 I have served as professor of theology at Regent University in Virginia Beach, Virginia, and devoted myself largely to teaching and writing. For the Evangelical Dictionary of Theology (1984) I wrote articles on "Charismatic Movement" and "Holiness," and for the Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements (1988) several articles including "Baptism in the Holy Spirit." As president of the Society for Pentecostal Studies I gave an address entitled "A Pentecostal Theology,"[28] at the annual meeting in 1985. This was an effort on my part to elaborate a basic Pentecostal theology. Other articles and papers have been written. Among these are: "The Greater Gifts"[29] (1985), "The Gifts of the Holy Spirit"[30] (1992), and "Biblical Truth and Experience-a Reply to John F. MacArthur, Jr."[31] (1993).

I traveled to Seoul, Korea in 1994 to deliver addresses at Soon Shin University entitled "Theological Perspectives of the Pentecostal/Charismatic Movement"[32] and at Yonsei University entitled "The Gifts of the Holy Spirit and Their Application to the Contemporary Church."[33] The second of these addresses was given at a conference on "The Holy Spirit and the Church." In 1995, I read a paper entitled "The Engagement of the Holy Spirit"[34] at the Evangelical Theological Society Eastern Region conference on "The Role of the Holy Spirit in the Interpretation of Scriptures."

My major work since coming to Regent University has been the writing of a three-volume work entitled Renewal Theology. Volume 1 is subtitled God, the World and Redemption (1988); volume 2, Salvation, the Holy Spirit and Christian Living (1990); volume 3, The Church, the Kingdom and Last Things (1992).[35] Under the book title each volume contains the words, "Systematic Theology from a Charismatic Perspective." Thus even though volume 2 more directly relates to the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, there is a charismatic perspective in all volumes. My deepest concern, however, is not the charismatic as such, but to speak forth the full counsel of God.[36]

As I said at the beginning of this Preface, the writings included are part and parcel of a theological pilgrimage. On each step of the way all that has been written stems from a passionate concern for spiritual truth. I speak at one point of "a theology of explosion."[37] That may well be the best expression to capture the dynamic that drives my writing. For truly it was a theological explosion in November, 1965 that undergirds all my activity. It has resulted in a pilgrimage to the praise and glory of God.

Footnotes

[1]This was the Nineteenth General Council of the Alliance of Reformed Churches throughout the World holding the Presbyterian Order (official title), August 3-13, 1964.

[2]November 1964, page 6.

[3]The Second Vatican Council met from 1962 to 1965 with lengthy sessions each fall.

[4]Section 12.

[5]Page 176.

[6]The three chief proponents were Thomas J. J. Altizer, William Hamilton, and Paul van Buren. See, for example, Radical Theology and the Death of God (1966) edited by Altizer and Hamilton. It was on April 8, 1966, that Time magazine had as its cover, "Is God Dead?"

[7]The paragraph above is taken word for word from what I wrote down within twenty-four hours of the event.

[8]The opening chapter in this book, "Renewal in the Spirit," taken from my book The Era of the Spirit (1971), reflects the spirit of these meetings. However, wherever the renewal has happened, and continues to happen, the same Holy Spirit of the Lord is gloriously manifest.

[9]See Austin Seminary Bulletin, November 1966.

[10]Not included in the above Austin Seminary Bulletin, but in essence appearing in a later address entitled "A New Era in History" (see chap. 2 in this book).

[11]See The Pentecostal Reality, chapter 5, for the complete article.

[12]Ibid., 95.

[13]Not included in this book.

[14]December 1971. Chapter 3 in this book contains the entire article.

[15]For excerpts from this paper see chapter 4.

[16]A full description of these two trips entitled "Charismatic Journey I" and "Charismatic Journey II" may be found in The Charismatic Communion of Presbyterian Ministers Newsletter, September and November, 1971.

[17]David de Plessis was a renowned Pentecostal leader who for years carried the Pentecostal message to the established churches. See A Man Called Mr. Pentecost by Bob Slosser.

[18]The address is found in chapter 2 of this book.

[19]This "Charismatic Journey III" is detailed in the Charismatic Communion of Presbyterian Ministers Newsletter, September 1972.

[20]Included in The Pentecostal Reality, chapter 4.

[21]Included in chapter 5 of this book.

[22]The Charismatic Communion of Presbyterian Ministers was founded in May 1966, in Austin, Texas, by six Presbyterian ministers (including myself), with George C. ("Brick") Bradford being named general secretary. Also present as advisees at this historic meeting (the first charismatic organization to be formed in a mainline denomination) were John A. Mackay, former president of Princeton Seminary, and David du Plessis.

[23]Chapter 6 of this book, appearing as "The Missing Dimension."

[24]See chapter 7 in this book.

[25]See chapter 8.

[26]See chapter 9.

[27]See chapter 10.

[28]See chapter 11.

[29]See chapter 12. This article was first an address given at the Society for Pentecostal Studies meeting in 1982, and later appeared in the book Charismatic Experiences in History, ed. by Cecil M. Robeck, Jr. (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1985), chapter 3.

[30]Not included in this book. The article appeared in Charisma magazine, November, pages 25-29.

[31]See chapter 13. This article was first an address given at the Society for Pentecostal Studies meeting in 1992, and later appeared in Paraclete magazine, Summer, 1993.

[32]See chaper 14.

[33]See chapter 15.

[34]See chapter 16.

[35]Now published as one volume, Renewal Theology.

[36]A complete bibliography of my published writings through 1993 can be found in the festscrift Spirit and Renewal: Essays in Honor of J. Rodman Williams, edited by Mark Wilson.

[37]See chapter 1 "Renewal in the Spirit."

Chapter 1, Renewal In The Spirit

It is indeed an exciting time to be alive in the church! For there is taking place in our day a dynamic movement of the Holy Spirit for renewal. This is happening here and there in many Protestant denominations and in Roman Catholicism. What is occurring can only be described as the resurgence within the forms and structures of Christendom of the vitality of the early Christian community. It is an extraordinary renewal through the presence and power of the Holy Spirit.

When it happens we find ourselves almost overwhelmed at the marvel of it all. It is hard still to believe that life can be so pervaded by the reality of the Spirit! There is a kind of awesome delight, a rejoicing in God, a sense of His vital presence as Father, Son, and Spirit. Something has happened by His Spirit that has made it all stand out with intense vividness. At the same time we find ourselves renewed as a fellowship of the Spirit in ways wonderful to contemplate. What a joy to discover afresh some of the profound depths of the praise of God in the context of a deepened love and unity! How the ancient Scriptures likewise have come to life as fellow witnesses to God's present action, and the whole realm of understanding of the truth of God has opened up! How strange and wonderful again to contemplate ways in which the Spirit of God is moving upon the inner life of the expectant community, and bringing forth powers that have long lain dormant or ceased to be! What new opportunities for the church to minister to mankind under the impact and direction of the Holy Spirit, and to be built up in its own life and fellowship! It is truly a wonderful day to be alive when such things are happening in the church of Jesus Christ.

What follows is but a further reflection on some of these matters. There may be repetition, backtracking, reflections of various kinds here and there. But it is hoped that the reader will catch something of the joy and excitement which many of us share.

I, Renewal In The Spirit

Let us speak first of this renewed sense of the reality of God. He may have seemed absent, distant, even nonexistent to many of us before, but now His presence is vividly manifest. Suddenly God is here, not in the sense of a vague omnipresence but of a compelling presence. Still more, it is as if one were now submerged in the flowing stream of God's reality! Or, to change the figure, it is as if one knows for the first time the wonder of an atmosphere so laden with the divine Reality that everything around becomes glorious with the sense of God's ineffable presence.

But it is the marvel not only of God moving without but also within! It were enough weight of glory perhaps to become alive to His compelling presence, but there is also His movement through the whole of one's existence wherein there is the indescribable knowledge of being somehow filled with His divine Spirit. It is as if, after many years of now and then sensing His presence (but always in a fleeting fashion), the full reality has broken through! It is amazing- -as well as overwhelming- -but at last something like the glory of God which filled the tabernacle of old, comes now to fill the tabernacle of His human creature.

At the same time we strongly affirm that this movement of the Spirit centers in Jesus Christ. For we find it happening in the fellowship of those who have heard the good news about Jesus Christ. He through whom we have received forgiveness of sins is Himself the mediator of this plenitude of the Spirit. Many of us were long-time disciples of Christ- -though this was not always the case- -but, in any event, there is conviction that only against the background of what God has done through Jesus Christ is the Spirit now so abundantly poured out.

Jesus Christ is Lord! Not only in the sense that we are committed to Him and seek to serve Him, but because the Holy Spirit is also His Spirit, and this Spirit is now freshly moving in our midst. Lives have been strangely enriched by the abundance of His Spirit- -the Spirit that worked in and through Him, the Spirit that both conceived Him and possessed Him. The Lord is not only the distant one "at the right hand of the Father"; He is not only the One who has brought us into a new life orientation; He is also the One who has visited us with His promised Spirit. The Lord is also the Spirit- -and the plenitude of the Spirit is the fullness of His presence and grace!

This means that Christ is alive indeed! Not only is this so because of the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth from the dead, but because it is through His living reality that the Spirit has come. If the resurrection had before been a doctrine to be believed- -on the testimony of Scripture and the church- -it is now a certitude, confirmed by His presence in the Holy Spirit. If there were doubt that the resurrection signified anything other than the memory of a challenging life that death could not overcome, then such doubt has been totally erased. For what has happened is that Christ has come to possess His own- -and in that possession through the Holy Spirit we can but cry forth the certitude of the reality of the living Lord.

But there is one further word of witness about Jesus Christ. It is in the very knowledge of Christ's presence in the Spirit that we all the more yearn for His advent in the body. Come, Lord Jesus! Not because He is absent does this cry go forth- -but it is because He is present in living experience that the yearning is all the more intense to behold Him in His full glory. Further, this hope for the future is built on more than a memory of the past or even a promise that He will come; it is grounded in the full assurance of His presence even now and the knowledge of being carried forward by Him into a yet more glorious future.

But again what so surprises us is a new awakening to the fact that God really is Spirit! The former attitude of many that God was a Being somewhere far removed- -a kind of transcendent Other- -has been radically altered. For there has been brought home to us the deep certainty that He also has made Himself wholly immanent in the Spirit. Here truly is mystery and wonder! It is more than having our being in God, it is God's having His being- -through imparting His being- -in us. God has by no means ceased to be other than man, but in His own grace He has invaded His creation and pervaded it with His fullness.

Here indeed is a miracle comparable to the Incarnation! To know God's coming in the Spirit is not, by any means, to testify less to the mystery of the Word made flesh. That God did become man for the sake of the world's redemption is mystery beyond human comprehension. And this will cause wonder and joy throughout the ages to come. But here is surely no less a wonder: that this same God also in the Spirit comes to possess His people. God is thereby- -beyond being wholly other than us (as Father) and wholly one of us (as Son)- -wholly in us and through us (as Spirit). Here by the presence and power of the Holy Spirit is the miracle that carries creation into a new dimension of reality- -and the end is not yet!

To sum up: we have then the assurance that after whatever has been known and experienced in regard to God as Father and Son (or Creator and Redeemer) that something additional has become remarkably vivid. For God is at work beyond creation and redemption to bring about a new order in the Spirit.

What we next attest is that the community of faith has taken on a new and exciting meaning. Something has happened which has vastly deepened and heightened this as a fellowship in the Spirit. Many of us had known a fellowship of commitment and concern, but here was something that suddenly opened up whatever we had experienced into a fellowship in which the Spirit imbued all.

Now in the communion of the Spirit there is a continuing mood of praise and thanksgiving to God. If there is any one expression that breaks forth again and again, it is "Praise the Lord!" Many of us to be sure had often in the past read this expression in the Psalter, sung it from the hymnbook, and used it variously in worship. But now it has become the deeply felt and joyously expressed verbalization of a way of life in which the Lord is constantly being praised and glorified. Or maybe the expression at times is simply "Thank you, Jesus," because His presence is intimate and real, gracious and good. Constantly those who know this rich fellowship in the Spirit are blessing the name of the Lord, and discovering that the more the praise and the magnifying of His name occurs, the more fully life expresses its reason for being.

Again in this renewal which the Spirit is bringing we are beginning to realize afresh something of a deeper love for one another in the Lord. Here is fellowship in depth wherein through the praise of the Lord there is all the more a love for the other person, and a yearning to share in all things with him. Here is communion that becomes a kind of union of one person with another through the Spirit where ties of love transcend all human relationships. "Brother," "Sister"- -terms that had before been foreign or formal to us in the fellowship of faith (and seemed proper only in human, family relationships)- -now become the natural expressions of a profoundly felt communal love. Further, there is a deepened desire to make whatever one has in time, abilities, possessions totally available to the other. It is hard to count anything as really one's own when in the fellowship of praise to the Lord we recognize His goodness in things both great and small- -and that His Spirit is constantly multiplying gifts and graces!

And, once again, in the fellowship of the Spirit what great joy is to be found! This is embedded most profoundly in that compelling sense of the reality of God's presence. Here are faces lighted with heavenly luster, hearts leaping up in newfound gladness, and through it all there is known joy beyond measure. This joy is profoundly inward joy- -that the earth cannot give or take away. It is (as in one of the songs sometimes sung) "joy unspeakable and full of glory, and the half has never yet been told!" Something has happened that has transformed a community of faith from the stance of looking to God- -and knowing some joy surely in acclaiming His wonderful deeds- -to a community through whom God lives and moves and multiplies His own joy and gladness! In this there is also abundant rejoicing in the presence of the neighbor, for in him God is also encountered- -and the joy, even the laughter, of eternity!

Then, again, what is remarkable is the freedom that abounds. In the fellowship of the Spirit there is no sense of coercion, for example, even in terms of "I (you) ought to do this or that," but only freely- -willed activity. No one is made to feel obligation or pressure of any kind, for where the Spirit is there is freedom. People come and go at pleasure, they participate only as they are led by the Spirit, and there are no strategies for getting things done. And in the time of prayer and praise all moves as the Spirit directs: each one in the Spirit making his own contribution- -and the only leader of the meeting is the Lord. What an amazing situation: whether it is testimony or Scripture, prophecy or intercession, song or silence- -all occurs in complete freedom. Each person is heard as seriously as another, not only because of respect for the individual but also because the Lord as the Spirit is making known through this person His will and way.

Another aspect of the renewal of the Spirit within the fellowship is the atmosphere of peace that prevails. This is something almost indescribable in its heights and depths. The tensions and frictions that are so often operative in human communities are both confessed and transcended in the communion of the Spirit. Here is more than peace through mutual respect, or even through a willingness to forgive the faults that appear. It is the peace wherein the Spirit of God moves into all the harsh and abrasive spots and communicates the divine calm. When someone perhaps begins to sing, "I have the peace that passes understanding down in my heart," and others pick up the refrain, there is quiet but sure testimony to the wonder of the peace of God. This is no pseudopeace where harsh reality is anesthetized by pious sedatives. Instead, it is peace which, even in the midst of storm and strife, makes for a kind of infinite calm. Sometimes, especially after the praise of God has been sounded forth in the Spirit, and wave upon wave of heavenly melody has echoed through the room, there is such peace at the conclusion as truly to surpass imagination. It is the peace of eternity.

And this leads to one other thing: the deep and stirring spirit of unity. In the renewal of the Spirit factionalism, division, party spirit of all kinds are overcome under the impact of the Holy Spirit. Here is not a monotonous uniformity wherein all do and say the same thing, but a situation wherein the Spirit weaves together the various strands, the shades and hues, the divergencies and differences into a pattern of incomprehensible unity. The most scattered and seemingly disorganized expressions either quietly pass away if they bear a divisive stamp, or if they are of the Lord they are marvelously blended into an unexpected wholeness. How glorious is the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace!

A further word or two might be added about the altogether remarkable unity that the Spirit brings about among those who wear various denominational labels. In the renewal of the Spirit it simply does not make any difference what the church affiliation may be, for no tradition of the past is able to subordinate the prevailing presence of the Spirit of unity. Protestants of many stripes- -Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Methodists, Baptists, Church of Christ, Lutherans, and on and on- -find in this fellowship of the Spirit such an intense oneness that customary rationales for separateness (theological, ecclesiastical, liturgical, social) collapse under the impact of the Spirit.

This fellowship in the Spirit, however, is by no means confined to Protestants, for this higher unity transcends even ancient differences between Protestants and Catholics, and we find ourselves coming together in deep solidarity. How amazing is the discovery that the same thing which has so recently happened to us has also been happening to them, and as we come together in churches and homes we are one in the Spirit- -one in the Lord! Yet Catholics and Protestants alike find themselves inspired with fresh zeal for the sacraments, the worship, the practice of their own denominations. How extraordinary it all is!

Nor ought we to fail to mention at this juncture that all of this is likewise bringing about a unity with the "third force" of Christendom, the Pentecostal churches. In many ways the Pentecostals have been the forerunners of us all in witnessing to this renewal of the Spirit. So it is with joy that Protestants and Catholics reach out united hands saying from the heart, "Thank you," and together sit down with these long "separated brethren" (separated from Protestants and Catholics alike) in the unity of the Spirit. Praise the Lord!

Now another matter to be mentioned is the way in which the Bible has taken on vital meaning, becoming indeed a quite contemporary document. What may have been thought of as a kind of external rule or norm of Christian faith, or merely a historical witness to God's mighty deeds, has become a coordinate testimony to God's amazing activity. There is a newfound delight in reading here and there in Scripture and saying, "Why, of course ... I don't know why it seemed so strange and distant before." Some things that had been viewed as belonging to God's past work (if not to pious legend) now stand out as compellingly vivid. It is as if a door had been opened and, walking through the door, we find spread out before us the extraordinary Biblical world- -a world with dimensions of angelic heights and demonic depths, of Holy Spirit and unclean spirits, yes, even of God and Satan. Nor is this a trip into illusion or into things proved fanciful by our modern "enlightenment." It is the opening of the eyes to dimensions of reality only vaguely surmised before.

The Bible truly has become a fellow witness to God's present activity. What happens today in the fellowship and in individual lives also happened then, and there is the joy of knowing that our world was also their world. If someone today perhaps has a vision of God or of Christ, it is good to know that it has happened before; if one has a revelation from God, to know that for the early Christians revelation also occurred in the community; if one speaks a "Thus says the Lord," and dares to address the fellowship in the first person- -even going beyond the words of Scripture- -that this was happening long ago. How strange and remarkable it is! If one speaks in the fellowship of the Spirit the Word of truth, it is neither his own thoughts and reflections (e.g., on some topic of the day) nor simply some exposition of Scripture, for the Spirit transcends personal observations, however interesting or profound they may be. The Spirit as the living God moves through and beyond the records of past witness, however valuable such records are as model for what happens today. For in the Spirit the present fellowship is as much the arena of God's vital presence as anything in the Biblical account. Indeed, in the light of what we may learn from this past witness and take to heart, we may expect new things to occur in our day and in days to come.

This leads to a further exciting thing about this fellowship, namely, that one is always looking forward from the biblical record. We do not expect the days and years ahead to be but repetition of the past or the present, for we live under the word that "greater works" (John 14:12) than even our Lord did are to be expected. In an age fast leaving the past behind and rushing toward a new millennium- -with almost breathtaking discoveries in science, ventures in space, and so on- -the community looks forward also to new spiritual breakthroughs carrying us far beyond what can be dreamed of now. If there stands at the end the final Advent of Jesus Christ and "a new heaven and a new earth" (Rev. 21:1), what happens between now and then in preparation for such is the ultimately important thing. Thus do we look every day for the new in anticipation of the final consummation!

Something was said earlier about the opening of our eyes to dimensions of reality only vaguely surmised before. We may now add that one of the great joys that comes to those in this renewal of the Spirit is the way in which the Spirit so enlightens the understanding as to bring assurance about many things. It may be a matter of depth apprehension when in the Spirit there is a profound certitude in many areas of faith: the indubitable conviction, for example, of belonging to Christ and participating in His salvation. Here is not only a belief in Christ, it is also a full conviction. This does not mean that faith has passed into sight; but faith has become certainty. Or this enlightenment may refer to the future whereby there is imparted through the Spirit the full assurance that what is promised at the "end" is going to take place. This is due to the fact that the Spirit, who is the inward "earnest" or pledge of all Christians, now opens our eyes to behold with awe and gratitude the riches of the inheritance which is yet to come. All in all, it is not necessarily as if one sees what he had not seen before, though this may be the case. Rather, it is as if what was vague and fleeting, somewhat dim and unclear, now becomes full of substance. In all humility and joy there breaks forth the simple utterance: "Now, at last, I know."

Nor is this a gnosis (higher knowledge) belonging to a presumed spiritual elite. Here is nothing esoteric for which only certain ones, ushered into celestial mysteries, are qualified. Indeed, there is nothing seen or heard or known that was not there already, the common heritage of all the children of God; but here is the marvel of it all breaking through in vivid form. Nor can there be any claim to have achieved something wherein there may be boasting, for nothing has been achieved- -it has all come as a gift of the gracious Lord.

In addition to this spiritual enlightenment in terms of understanding, there is the realization of extraordinary power. Almost incredible to relate, it is not other than the immeasurably great power that raised Christ from the dead and enthroned Him at the right hand of God that now becomes operative in human life. Here are resources of strength hitherto unrecognized or untapped that suddenly begin to flow- -surely not from our own potential (for who could possibly have such?), but through the Spirit of the living God moving in and through the human depths- -"the inner man." Here is power breaking in and out of the conscious and subconscious depths of the human spirit that, while making use of human channels, transcends every human possibility.

But how can it really be described? It is as if one were passing from a situation of relative impotence into a dynamic world wherein God's own activity flows through the totality of existence. For when the Spirit of God begins to move upon and within the spirit of man, it is like a driving wind blowing through every fiber of the human personality, like a blazing fire igniting the speech of man to proclaim God's deeds abroad. It is Acts 1 and 2 all over again! It is, to be sure, a different cast, a different scene, a different millennium- -and people obviously not existing in the same proximity to the original event of Christ's death and resurrection, nor called upon to be the original witnesses to God's mighty deeds- -but visited by the same power that broke out in the primitive Christian community.

This leads in turn to an extraordinary manifestation of the Spirit of God- -like wind and fire- -possessing the inmost being. It is the breaking forth of the praise of God from the depths of the human spirit. Suddenly we find to our own astonishment that this praise, carried by the divine Spirit and welling up through the human spirit, transcends all that human language can express. Here indeed is the Spirit Himself speaking through the human spirit and the utterance coming forth is not the language of man but the language of the Spirit! This is the glorifying of God in "tongues"- -in speech not of human devising but brought about by the Spirit of the living God. And in this spiritual praise there is the overwhelming sense that no richer worship of God could possibly be offered, for in it the Spirit is communicating directly through the human spirit the profoundest adoration of Almighty God.

What joy follows, as the praise of God, pouring forth from the human spirit, is in turn offered up by the mind- -and heavenly language blends with earthly in paeans of blessing and thanksgiving! Indeed, the whole being- -spirit and mind, body and soul, feeling and will- -is so swept by the high wind of the Spirit as to be carried up and out into new dimensions of living for the praise of God's glory. How vast and marvelous this power of the Spirit to break through long existing barriers!

But there is not only power to praise God with the total being, there is also power to speak forth His word so that it comes with full conviction. Formerly many of us had sought to bear witness to Jesus Christ but had found our words and actions of insufficient weight and consequence. While there may have been sincerity of effort and some success in terms of others hearing and responding, lives were not being changed. Transformation brought about by Spirit and word, wherein the heart of the "righteous" as well as the "unrighteous" is broken open and remade in its center, simply had not been happening. But now, by God's grace, the power of the Spirit has come- -and the word is going forth to change lives. Not by any means that all to whom the word will henceforth be spoken will be profoundly affected- -for there always remains the freedom to resist- -but the possibility at last is here! Nor is there any guarantee of invariably ministering in the Spirit, for the Spirit is never a human possession (He may possess us but not we Him) and needs to be sought continually. But now that the original barriers to His activity have been breached, there are human channels newly open to His working. And what a difference it does make to witness for Jesus Christ in the power of the Holy Spirit!

What is further amazing is the way in which God confirms this witness by "signs and wonders." Now and again there is not only life- -giving proclamation of the message but also accompanying it are extraordinary occurrences including the deliverance of people from evil powers, the healing of cases of hopeless illness, and (some say) even the raising of the dead. This is a world of God's miraculous activity, surely represented in the New Testament, but just beginning to become actual for some of us today. These "signs and wonders" we now know to be confirmations of the word; and if they are very rare or nonexistent, it would seem questionable whether the witness is going forth fully in the power of the Spirit. Are lives being radically transformed- -a miracle in itself- -if there are not also such signs as deliverances from evil possession and the healing of the helpless and hopeless? Now in the power of the Spirit "signs and wonders" are reappearing, and the gospel is being remarkably confirmed!

Surely, however, there is more here than confirmation of the word proclaimed. For these are not only confirming signs, they also in themselves represent ministry to a vast area in which there is desperate need today. But here, hitherto because of insufficient resources of power, we have by no means fulfilled our responsibility and opportunity. This is not to say that we have not generally supported and sought to further the work of healing through physicians, hospitals, clinics of various kinds, and stood behind efforts of psychiatrists, psychologists, agencies for dealing with mental and emotional problems; however, there are many situations beyond the competency of medicine and psychology. There are profound human needs that only the power of the Spirit can reach and resolve- -and now we know such power is available! For we are beginning to see things happen whereby health and deliverance are coming in conditions of hopeless plight. What then is opening up today is not only fresh confirmation of the gospel through "signs and wonders" but also more complete ministry in Christ's name.

There remains another important aspect of this power of the Spirit. Not only does the Holy Spirit bring forth a wholeness of divine praise, a witness to the word in full conviction, and a more total ministry, but there is also an enabling to stand firm against manifold forces that threaten. The Holy Spirit is the power of boldness to proclaim God's truth without hesitation and fear; it is also the courage to move ahead regardless of opposition and even persecution. Here by the Spirit is not a natural virtue of fortitude, but the strength of God that nothing can daunt and overcome.

Let us return now to the exciting renewal of the Christian community as fellowship of the Spirit. We have spoken earlier about certain matters such as the spirit of praise and thanksgiving, love, joy, freedom, peace, and unity which prevails in the fellowship. Now let us comment further on some of the ways in which the Spirit actually functions in the community. Here I refer to the operation of the Spirit whereby, for the upbuilding of all, there are various manifestations of the Spirit. Some of this has been mentioned in passing; here we may note in more detail what happens.

One of the extraordinary ways the Spirit functions and manifests Himself in the fellowship is through utterance of spiritual wisdom and/or knowledge. Reference has been made before to the matter of spiritual enlightenment (wherein there is discernment and assurance) which comes about through the movement of the Holy Spirit and occurs to all. Here, however, I am referring to special moments when a word may be spoken by someone that provides deep spiritual understanding. This happens not as the expression of natural prowess, but through the Spirit's own activity. Accordingly, it may occur with the ignorant as well as the learned, the "foolish" as well as the wise. In fact, such spiritual utterance is altogether a gift of the Spirit, and operates through those who are so gifted.

In this regard it may happen that those least qualified (according to ordinary judgment) in terms of a word of wisdom and/or knowledge- -and who accordingly have little to boast about- -are the very ones through whom the Spirit brings forth truth. As they speak, perchance in halting manner, sometimes improper English, even inaccurate quotation from Scripture, the Spirit may be heard in the fellowship.[1] Here is charisma unrelated to office or ability and, by its occurring among the least, the fellowship is reminded that all of the glory belongs to God.

A further word should be added about the range of this spiritual utterance. By no means does it apply only to "things spiritual," that is, to deep matters of faith. Doubtless the Spirit operates most profoundly there, for in the fellowship frequently those who are so gifted by the Spirit do unfold mysteries about the ways of God, for example, in incarnation, redemption, and sanctification. But as God Himself is not limited in concern to mankind's salvation but is involved with the totality of things, even so, utterance by the Spirit (better perhaps than "spiritual utterance") may relate to many other matters. In the fellowship it often happens that the word of wisdom and/or knowledge is spoken in relation to some material need (a job, a house), perhaps desire for direction, even in so small a matter as something lost that seems important to locate. It may be a word of guidance in economic, social, or political affairs- -not necessarily in broad detail but just that word which points the way ahead. What is important is not the full picture (for which natural wisdom and intelligence are the God- -given means) but simply that "Spiritual" word which provides more than human light and perspective.

Now all of this is so new and different from ordinary ways that we have a hard time adjusting to it. This is especially true if the word comes with unexpected, even undesired, content. "This good brother or sister really knows little about my situation; why should I listen?" And of course not every utterance spoken as a word of wisdom or knowledge will be that, for there is no guarantee in the fellowship that only the Holy Spirit is at work. Thus there must be a weighing of things said- -by the Spiritual community. But quite often the problem is not that of the presence of a "foreign" spirit; it is, rather, the difficulty we naturally have of hearing a word that may not altogether please, especially if it comes from those who seem to possess little or no talent for understanding the complexity of human affairs. It is indeed a new world; but the opportunity for moving ahead under the impact of divine direction is- -despite all danger and difficulty- -truly a challenging one![2]

Let us pass on to two other manifestations of the Spirit in the fellowship, namely, the effecting of healings of various kinds and the performance of extraordinary deeds of deliverance. Since reference has already been made to the confirmation of the proclamation of the gospel by "signs and wonders," we will not need to add very much. Our concern in this instance, however, is not with witness to the world but with what happens in the fellowship for the upbuilding of the community.

Again, what a strange, new world we have entered! In an amazing confirmation that extraordinary healings of body, mind, and soul did not end with the New Testament community, the fellowship of the Spirit is finding today in its midst the Spirit at work performing mighty deeds. The same Lord who cured the helpless and hopeless and wrought deliverance from oppressive forces is at work through His Spirit accomplishing like deeds of might and compassion. He has given His Spirit and through the movement of that same Spirit in power He is at work to make His people whole.

Here we are having to learn much (almost as neophytes) in matters of the Spirit. We now know that the world of extraordinary healing, mighty works of deliverance, and so on, ought never to have become alien to us. It surely was not thus to primitive Christianity. We now realize how much we have been blinded by a modern world view that intellectually and empirically views all that happens- -or may happen- -as belonging to the realm of natural forces. So, despite at times its being a slow process (especially since we have so much rationalism and empiricism in our blood), and our frequent falling back, we are beginning to move ahead in this world reopening before our eyes. It was true after all- -what we read in the New Testament! By the Spirit of God people really were healed of all manner of diseases and ailments; they actually were delivered from forces of evil beyond the reach of natural means. For such is happening again in our midst.

For example, in the fellowship manifold healings are taking place. Numerous are the occasions when persons, simultaneously with their movement into the dimension of the Spirit's power, have received instantaneous healings of longsuffered ailments. This occurs quite often without any specific ministering of healing- -or even an expressed desire for this to happen. Rather the very power of the Spirit engaging the total person- -psyche (soul) and soma (body)- -often brings about "impossible" cures. The Spirit operative in the whole person inevitably affects every dimension of existence, and the result may be that of extraordinary healing taking place. From the viewpoint of the Spirit there is nothing really incredible here because such occurrences are signs of the dynamism of the Spirit. From the natural perspective, however, these healings are occasion for wonder because there is no way of accounting for them. Powers are at work through the dynamic movement of the Holy Spirit. Thus miracles now and again are bound to happen.[3]

In addition (to these initial healings) many today are being healed of various diseases in the fellowship of the Spirit. One regular aspect of the gathering is prayer for restoration to health of those ailing. And, again and again, there is the joy of seeing the sick (including the medically incurable) made well. Often those present with ailments come forward for prayer. This may be offered by the laying on of hands and some such declaration as, "In the name of Jesus of Nazareth, be made whole!" On occasion there is also anointing with oil as prayer for healing is offered. And God richly blesses as the Spirit of Jesus Christ reaches out to the faith of those asking. Once again, as of old, He makes them well.

We find also in the fellowship that often certain persons are particularly used by the Spirit as vehicles for healing and deliverance. They are "gifted" by the Spirit for this purpose. Strangely enough this gift seems to have little or no relationship to their natural talents, interests, or training[4]- -though it may come to them in the context of a strong desire to be of help to the sick and ailing. Such gifted persons (humbly amazed that God should so use them) often will minister for the whole group, and frequently follow up by visitations to hospitals and homes. They live in a world of miracles- -and never cease to be channels for new ones to occur!

The word "deliverance" has several times been used, so a note of explanation should be added. Here there is a kinship to healing, since the result is that of return to normalcy. However, "deliverance" refers not so much to making well as to breaking free from dominating forces. Now and again people will be present in the fellowship who are bound by powers that have them under control. They simply cannot break free- -whether it be from an addiction of some kind, a deeply ingrained anxiety, or from irrational drives that frustrate their efforts to live in freedom. In many cases this is something more profound than a psychological problem, hence, although there may be some relief found in working through the situation, bringing its complexity to awareness, and perhaps seeking out a supportive group, they are still essentially in bondage. For the problem is not basically on the level of psyche but of pneuma (spirit). The human spirit is possessed by a "demonic" spirit; and until this is dealt with, there can be no deliverance. The only force capable of dealing with the demonic spirit is the Holy Spirit, and by the Holy Spirit (we are finding afresh) such oppression can be relieved. Now it is not an "In the name of Jesus, be made whole!" but "In the name of Jesus, let him go!" It is a battle enjoined against "principalities and powers"- -and we are seeing the marvel today of many a deliverance by the power of the Holy Spirit.

Again, as in the case of healing, some persons in the fellowship are called particularly to "deliverance ministry." The group often does function as a whole, and together will pray for someone's release; but because of the nature of the situation- -involving sometimes a long and arduous struggle- -individuals (or perhaps two or three) may act in this capacity. This, of course, is not determined by the fellowship, but, as with all other activities, some persons are gifted by the Spirit and called for this weighty task. What a joy it is to know that today the Spirit of the Lord is anointing people to do what He anciently did, namely, set persons free from their torturous bondage! And though it often seems a battle to the death (with no little agony and pain), we are grateful for those upon whom the Lord lays this fearsome responsibility.

We could go on, but perhaps this is enough concerning healings and deliverance. We have much, much to learn- -but none of us questions that the "impossible" in these areas is happening. Praise the Lord!

Finally, we may consider the way in which the Spirit is manifest in the fellowship through prophecy and tongues. Some reference, in a different connection, has already been made to these matters; however, there are some things that need to be elaborated further.

If there is any area of surprise for all of us, it is surely here! What has been said thus far about extraordinary operations of the Spirit (words of wisdom and knowledge, healing and deliverance) is surely not without the new and strange, but here we find things in many ways even more startling. For now we come to manifestations of the Spirit that, while using mind and speech, transcend both, and represent in startling fashion direct communication between God and man.

As far as the upbuilding of the fellowship is concerned, prophecy stands out as the most significant of all the Spirit's operations.[5] Certainly the fellowship as the body of Christ, if it is to fulfill its function of praise to God and witness in the world, needs constantly to be edified. This edification- -or upbuilding- -through prophecy consists of consolation, encouragement, stimulation, exhortation, strengthening. It may come in terms of judgment as well as blessing; however, in all things it is not for breaking down but for building up, for it is God's word to His people for the living of their lives before Him.

Now let us speak further about the startling element in prophecy, namely, that in it God's word is directly spoken! It is not that through prophecy there is a key to the knowledge of future events, so that we may have our curiosity satisfied. What is amazing here is not that we are given to know certain happenings ahead of time, but that in human language God's voice is heard! To be sure, the word of God may contain reference to the future- -for it is a word that probes the whole human situation- -but it is not esoteric knowledge. It is the illumination of life in all of its dimensions by the light of God's own revealing.[6]

In prophecy God speaks. It is as simple and profound and startling as that! What happens in the fellowship is that the word may suddenly be spoken by anyone present, and so, variously, a "Thus says the Lord" breaks forth in the fellowship. It is usually in the first person (though not always), such as "I am with you to bless you . . . " and has the directness of an "I- -Thou" encounter. It comes not in a heavenly language, but in the native tongue of the person speaking and with his or her accustomed inflections, cadences, and manners. Indeed, the speech may even be coarse and ungrammatical; it may be a mixture of "King James" and modern; it may falter as well as flow- -such really does not matter. For in prophecy God uses what He finds, and through frail human instruments the Spirit speaks the word of the Lord.

What is distinctive in prophecy is that the words do not issue from human reflection or premeditation. Indeed, there may have been much time given to prayer, study of Scriptures, waiting upon God; but when the word of God goes forth it is the operation of the Spirit upon and within the human mind so that the message spoken, while in the language of man, is the direct utterance of God. The prophet does not know what he will say in advance of saying it, nor can he be sure just when the moment will come- -or even if it will come- -but he speaks when and as God wills. Thus in the fellowship there is no scheduling of prophecy: it just happens!

All of this- -to repeat- -is quite surprising and startling. Most of us of course were familiar with prophetic utterance as recorded in the Bible, and willing to accept it as the word of God. Isaiah's or Jeremiah's "Thus says the Lord..." we were accustomed to, but to hear a Tom or a Mary today, in the twentieth century, speak the same way ...! Many of us also had convinced ourselves that prophecy ended with the New Testament period (despite all the New Testament evidence to the contrary),[7] until suddenly through the dynamic thrust of the Holy Spirit prophecy comes alive again. Now we wonder how we could have misread the New Testament for so long!

Perhaps a further word is in order here. Preaching, we also recognize, is not prophecy- -nor is teaching. In the past if we had not thought of prophecy as ending with the Biblical canon, we often tended to identify it with the office of preaching or teaching. Preaching, however, is the proclamation (kerygma) of the good news; it is the heralding of the faith to the world. Teaching is instruction (didache) in sound doctrine, and is necessary for maturing in the faith. Both therefore are quite important- -but they are not prophecy (propheteia). Now it may well be that the preaching of today, which is often addressed more to the community of faith than to the world, has in it prophetic elements, and at times prophecy will break through. However, preaching as ordinarily done, whether in terms basically of Scriptural exposition or analysis of the human situation, does not as such represent God's direct address to man. Teaching, even less direct than preaching, is essential to the life of the community, but is at some remove from prophecy. Surely what is needed today- -and we are seeing it happening- -is not a displacement of preaching or teaching, but the return of that which is still more basic: the prophetic function within the fellowship of the Spirit.[8]

It was earlier mentioned that prophecy is addressed to the community of faith for its upbuilding. However, we have noted on many occasions that, coincidental with this edification, prophecy often has a profound effect on those present who are not truly believers. As the very word of God, it so much conveys an impression of God's reality and presence that persons now and again are brought under conviction, cry out for help, and thereby enter into a new life in Christ.[9] Thus prophecy indirectly becomes proclamation and evangelism.

Because of the high-powered nature of prophecy- -it is important to add- -the fellowship finds it imperative to weigh judiciously what is said. Prophecy can by no means be taken casually. Since it is verily God's message to His people, there must be quite serious and careful consideration given to each word spoken, and application made within the life of the fellowship. Also because of the ever present danger of prophecy being abused- -the pretense of having a word from God- -there is need for spiritual discernment.[10] Some in the fellowship may recognize through the Holy Spirit that a given "Thus says the Lord" is not truly of the Lord, and therefore stand against it. Here a delicate balance is needed between complete openness to the word and sensitivity to its distortion. But even with all possible dangers attendant, no one who has experienced prophecy can question its tremendous value for the church of today.

Finally, though all may prophesy, we find that some persons especially exhibit this manifestation of the Spirit. In the fellowship it is not unusual in a given time of worship for two or three persons (sometimes one after another, or at irregular intervals) to prophesy. These may be men or women, young people or old- -as the Spirit enables.[11] Again (as with the other manifestations of the Spirit described) there are no prior qualifications, and those who may seem outwardly least to exercise profundity of utterance are often the ones so gifted. Somehow God's ways are just not our ways!

Now we come to tongues.[12] Already reference has been made to the "language of the Spirit" wherein the praise of God is uttered in words far beyond human capacity. At that point, however, nothing was said about the place of this language in the fellowship.

We may begin with the recognition that as background for the gathering of the community they have incalculable value. First, as we prepare ourselves spiritually ahead of time, prayer in tongues makes for personally heightened edification. Here is speech addressed not to men but to God. Here is worship in spirit through the Spirit. Here (and we will never cease to be amazed at it) the tongue moves in customary manner, but every sound, every syllable, every sentence is produced not by our own devising but by the eternal Spirit Himself. Here is expressed in the most intense, deepest, and highest possible way the unutterable yearnings of the soul of the Christian to give praise and blessing to the God who made him, who redeemed him in His Son, and who has poured forth His own Spirit. What marvel, what joy! This is speech that can never really become commonplace- -and, in reference to the fellowship, the rich presence of God known in such prayer of the Spirit makes for immensely valuable preparation.[13] Second, even if there should be no outward expression of tongues in the fellowship, we find that quiet praying in the Spirit[14] during the meeting helps to maintain an openness to God's presence and a readiness for His word and will to be carried out. There is also the sense of much greater power and effectiveness when at last one begins to utter a prayer with the mind that has been undergirded by prayer with the Spirit.

However, in addition to background, we find that tongues may also have an important place in the meeting of the fellowship. For in the fellowship there are those particularly gifted by the Spirit in this regard, namely, for the upbuilding of the community. Since tongues declare variously the wonders and mysteries of God, when they are understood, they vastly enrich the community. As this is utterance by the Spirit, the truth spoken is of signal importance.

But how can this be, since tongues are not in the common language of the community? How can any one understand? The answer- -again marvelous to relate: they may be understood through interpretation given by the Holy Spirit! Interpretation is another gift or manifestation of the Spirit,[15] and when there are those present able to interpret,[16] the meaning of what has been spoken can immediately follow. If there is no one present having this gift, then obviously tongues cannot edify, and it is far better to forego them altogether, looking instead to prophecy, teaching, and the like. If, however, interpretation occurs, tongues have no less value than prophecy, for once again there is direct utterance of the Spirit of God. Indeed, this is no small thing- -and it has been for many of us a source of continuing marvel to hear tongues interpreted in the Spirit and to sense the overwhelming import and impact of divine mystery being communicated to man!

It should be added to what has been said about tongues in the fellowship- -and their operation through certain gifted persons there- -that tongues are primarily for devotional use. Since they basically build up the believer in his faith, most persons pray in tongues privately (or with a few others) and find great joy and strength in so doing. Praying with the Spirit becomes the fruitful base for praying with the mind, and it is in the alternation and interplay of these two dimensions of prayer and praise that spiritual growth and maturation takes place.

A final word might be said about something quite akin to speaking and praying in tongues, namely, "singing in the Spirit." This likewise may be done privately and represents also rich background for singing with the mind. However, because our concern here is with the life and upbuilding of the community, we shall make a brief comment about singing in the Spirit in connection with worship.

Since every gathering of the fellowship is essentially for praise and adoration, blessing and thanksgiving, music is, of course, one of the most elevated of all expressions. Thus in worship, ancient hymns of the church, psalms from the Old and verses from the New Testament, and popular choruses that have become freighted with spiritual meaning are sung by all assembled. Occasionally words will be sung out (perhaps a bit of Scripture, maybe an ejaculation of praise) by some person in the common language but in a free manner- -based on no fixed music from the past- -and others soon join in the newly formed melody. Indeed, there may be long periods of joyful, lilting music, quite unplanned, moving back and forth through psalms, hymns, choruses, and the like- -as the Spirit guides the meeting. But the climax is the moment when not only is the melody given by the Spirit but also the language, as words and music sung by the assembled worshipers blend into an unimaginable, humanly impossible, chorus of praise. Here is "singing in the Spirit" at its zenith- -the sublime utterance of the Holy Spirit through the human spirit to the glory of Almighty God.[17]

Having discussed some of the operations of the Holy Spirit in the fellowship, we ought to stress that all of this exists for one purpose only, namely, the building up of the body of Christ. All the gifts and manifestations mentioned are important, and none dare be discounted. If there are some who declare that there is no need of healers and prophets, or healers and prophets declare that they have no need of others, the body is hurt thereby. If there are those who would seek to bypass, disregard, or even check some or all of these manifestations, such persons surely must give justification by the Spirit of God. It is rather in a readiness for all of God's gifts that the body truly is blessed and built up for a more total ministry. Accordingly, it would be hard to overemphasize the importance of complete openness and receptivity to the Spirit's activity.

What is happening today among people in the fellowship of the Spirit is quite the opposite of being hesitant in the area of the Spirit's manifestations. For there is a growing desire to be a channel for the varied operations of the Holy Spirit. This is quite important for, though these workings are gracious deeds (gifts) of the Holy Spirit, they do not happen if the fellowship is basically closed to them. These gifts are to be sought after and gladly received, not for pride's sake or personal boasting, but because they are God's own offering to the community of His people. So the fellowship earnestly desires the charismata of the Spirit, that God may in all things be glorified.

One more word about the fellowship of the Spirit- -and this in relation to the world. All that has been said earlier about the fellowship in terms of the praise of God, love and concern, abundance of joy, newfound freedom, profound peace, deep and lasting unity, is too good to keep! Indeed, it is surely not the will of Him who has made such blessings possible to confine them to the few, but to make them available to all mankind. Thus while at the same time the community is being built up through the multiplication of the gifts of the Spirit, it is greatly concerned to share what it has found with the whole world. What has been said earlier about the Holy Spirit as the Spirit of power to witness is therefore fundamental. The community can never exist satisfied in itself to know the wonder of God and His ways, but in the power of the Spirit proclaims the word of life to all who will hear, so that people everywhere may share in the goodness and glory of God!

Now we turn to a consideration in this chapter of how this renewal through the Holy Spirit has been coming about. Variously we have sought to relate ways in which this movement of the Spirit has brought a lively sense of the reality of God- -as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; the fellowship of faith has taken on new dimensions of praise and thanksgiving, love of the brethren, freedom, peace, joy, and unity; the Bible has unfolded with amazing contemporaneity; vistas of understanding and power have opened up; likewise, the community has become the scene of extraordinary manifestations of the Spirit. But, except indirectly, nothing has been said about how all this has happened. Obviously, this final matter is of no small importance.

Here there are a wide variety of testimonies- -and in large part this is due to the fact that we are talking about the Holy Spirit. To try to track the Spirit is a little like tracking the wind; it is indeed hard to accomplish! "The pneuma blows where it wills...."[18] There is about the Spirit an unpredictability, a freedom that makes suspect any claim that "this is exactly the way it always happens," etc. The Spirit has a way of moving not according to our plans and schemes but according to His own sovereign intention. So the dynamic movement of the Spirit cannot be charted but occurs in an unlimited number of ways and situations. Blueprints are out!

Also, persons and groups who share in this renewal represent a broad range of experience, variegated backgrounds, and many cultural differences. And, as already noted, the religious spectrum of church affiliations is by no means limited to a few traditions. Even people who may be closely related in terms of background, tradition, and communal life may still pass through exceedingly diverse religious experiences. So even if the Spirit did not operate freely in many ways, there would continue to be manifold expressions of the Spirit's movement in the lives of individuals and communities.

But having said all this- -and without seeking to fix a pattern- -we may now go on to affirm that the movement of the Spirit (about which we speak) is wholly related to Jesus Christ and our faith in Him. It is not some operation of the Spirit in the broad universe which may have reached us in some mystical moment; rather it happens through the Spirit mediated to us by Jesus Christ. In a variety of ways, but none the less truly, we had at some time recognized Christ's claim upon us, been convicted of our unworthiness, and entered into a life of witness in His name. There may have been no "great light" from heaven, no cataclysmic conversion, but we did come to a life-changing acknowledgment of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and were sealed by His Spirit. That very moment for some of us was the occasion in which we experienced the dynamic movement of the Holy Spirit. For others this was not the case; it happened later- -perhaps only a short time thereafter, maybe days, months, even years. But whenever it took place, it was related to Jesus Christ and His coming to us in our faith and repentance.

One thing is surely true, namely, that this dynamic movement of the Spirit occurred in the context of openness and expectation. For though the Spirit cannot be patterned or programmed, it is certain that He will not force His way, but moves where there is a readiness for His activity. He does not batter down closed doors, but flows freely and mightily wherever the barriers are removed. Indeed, it was for many of us the admission of our poverty and need, the realization of the inadequacy of our witness, the surrender of the citadel of mind as well as heart- -none of which was easy- -that finally made way for that climactic moment when the Spirit of God moved like wind and fire. When at last we could be empty before Him, He swept through our whole being.

But also there was a kind of intense yearning for more of His reality and presence. To be sure, there was much variety- -all the way from an almost unconscious sigh to a "Come, Holy Spirit, come!" In any event there was a hungering and thirsting after God beyond all earthly desires, and often a profound yearning to praise and magnify His name in a total kind of way. So there was much time devoted to persistent, importunate prayer-asking, seeking, knocking- -that His power and presence might be manifest and His name truly glorified. When the time had fully come, He did not fail to answer.

Another thing, significant for many of us, was the willingness- -after a struggle- -to be ministered to by others. We came to realize that, despite our commitment and dedication, we really needed help. For it was borne in upon us that some people whom we encountered were walking in a dimension of the Spirit, evidenced through their joy in the Lord, abundant love, eagerness to witness (and much else), that we knew little about. So, at the humbling of pride and vanity, we sought to learn from them, even be instructed by them. Yes- -and for some of us this was the hardest- -we finally became willing for them to pray for us, even lay hands upon us, that we might be granted the renewing of the Holy Spirit. This for many of us was a turning point- -even a breakthrough- -as we submitted to their ministry.

But we should not fail to add that this movement of the Holy Spirit also occurred for some of us under the growing conviction of serious need in the church. There was our own personal realization of the lack of "fire" in our witness for Jesus Christ, and we saw little more of it in the church around us. Outwardly the church was carrying on its mission, but there was serious inner weakness evidenced by sharp factionalism, confusion about purpose, and slight impact upon the world. Further, it seemed not to matter whether one was on the side of evangelism or social action, old confession or new, ancient liturgy or experimental forms (or various combinations thereof), there was still little deep and abiding fellowship among the brethren. Where was the joy in worship (genuine- -not formalized or forced), the passionate love of Jesus Christ, the intense yearning for "the Spirit of unity in the bond of peace"? Where was the lively sense of God's presence and power, so real that people would be overwhelmed with the weight of His glory? One looked and looked: God might not be dead, but His people were gasping for breath. If only the wind of the Spirit might blow...surely His people could live again.

One final thing that drove some of us onward was the vision of a world filled with the knowledge and glory of God. We sensed that somehow the vague, even uncertain, yearnings of mankind for the reality of God (however named), for participating in the ultimate mystery suffusing the universe, for knowing the eternal in the midst of time, must find an answer. And we had seen enough of the glory of God in Jesus Christ to make us yearn that that glory might envelop all. We believed, to be sure, that in the "age to come" it would all be fulfilled, but should not the "powers" of that age be operative now? Could there not be a conjoining of the natural and the supernatural, the immediate communion of God with man in this world? Was this not the way, the only way, to universal brotherhood among men- -where Christ is enthroned as Lord and where men are ruled by the sway of His inner Spirit? With some such vision before us of the knowledge and glory of God we were driven to more earnest questing.

And now we say with great rejoicing: this day is at hand! How good it is to be in the fellowship of faith! For the church of Jesus Christ is the arena in which the renewal in the Spirit is occurring. Therein all people may know the wonder and greatness of God.

II, Renewal In The Spirit

Now I am eager to move on to some theological implications of what has been written in the previous pages. And here the attempt will be made to show that this dynamic movement of the Holy Spirit- -with all its wonder and excitement- -makes for fresh ways of theological reflection.

Actually what has happened to those of us who are also called to particular theological responsibility is that we have found ourselves having much difficulty articulating it all. We have tried to make use of given theological patterns, but have found them frequently wanting. But again- -and to our surprise- -we have found old formulas taking on new meaning, and this has truly been a delight! In the latter instance it is as if something long dormant, in coming to life, has suffused energy through the whole. In any event, we now find ourselves being challenged to renewed theological endeavor.

We may begin by noting the fact that the dynamic movement of the Spirit does not fit very well into traditional theological categories. Our inherited theology- -in both historical Protestantism and Roman Catholicism- -has dealt in various ways with the work of the Holy Spirit, for example, in creation (as "Lord and Giver of Life"), in the Incarnation (as the divine power of conception), in regeneration (as bringer of "new life"), in sanctification (as the Spirit of holiness), in word and sacraments (as inspirer, sealer, and so on), and in the final redemption (as perfecter). But none of these categories adequately expresses this movement of the Spirit.

Let us look more closely. Perhaps among the categories just mentioned this movement of the Holy Spirit might seem to be closely identified with regeneration. For Christian theology has traditionally held that "new birth" is the work of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit awakens faith in Christ, convicts of sin, and brings about repentance. It is He, therefore, who unites the believer to Christ; this, accordingly, is the beginning of a new life. Without the Spirit, Christ remains distant and the effects of His redemptive work are not appropriated by us. By the action of the Spirit, however, Christ is no longer afar but comes to dwell within the heart. It is by this work of the Spirit that the transition occurs from non-Christian to Christian existence.

Now this is all very important. We must return to it shortly since it is essential to the dynamic movement of the Spirit. But our point, for the moment, is that we have not been talking about regeneration or becoming a Christian. It has been stressed that this movement of the Spirit is something that has been happening to Christians, to believers. To be sure, those involved may or may not have been exceptionally good ones, but that is irrelevant. It has occurred to people believing in Jesus Christ; thus, despite the felt poverty and need (as earlier described), it is scarcely a matter of regeneration.

What then about sanctification? Here we might seem to come closer, for sanctification is often thought of as the particular work of the Holy Spirit. Almost by definition the Holy Spirit- -the Spiritus Sanctus- -sanctifies. It is He who, having mediated a new life in Christ, now sets us apart for the service of God, and perfects in us His own holiness. Thereafter, day by day, despite the struggles with the flesh, the Spirit is able to overcome, and we grow in the likeness of Jesus Christ.

Now who could gainsay the importance of this? Every Christian is called upon to a life of faithful commitment to the Lord and to wrestle daily with the barriers that stand in the way of growth in holiness. But this movement of the Spirit is by no means identical with sanctification nor is it, as such, concerned with the area of Christian maturation.

One further possibility might be to think of this new movement of the Holy Spirit in terms of confirmation (one of the sacraments in the Catholic tradition and a rite in many Protestant churches). Here one is on rather difficult ground because confirmation itself has been variously understood, and in many churches it has no place at all. In general, however, it might be said that confirmation is viewed as the strengthening of a person in his faith, the renewal of his baptismal vows, and perhaps some increment of the Holy Spirit whereby he is better able to live the Christian life.

Here we might seem to be still closer, for there is the laying on of hands (by the bishop or minister), the context of prayer, and often reference to reception of the Holy Spirit. There seem to be two differences, though, from what has been earlier described: first, there is more stress in confirmation on "increase of grace" than on the movement of the Spirit in a new dimension; second, there seldom seems to occur experientially for those confirmed a vital renewal through the Spirit. Confirmation (however it may have been understood originally[19]) can scarcely qualify to comprehend the extraordinary reaches of this present dynamism of the Spirit.

So traditional categories- -such as regeneration, sanctification, confirmation- -do not suffice; hence, we must turn in another direction. Here the question concerns the larger theological arena: the significance of this movement of the Spirit and its implication for the whole of theology. We may find ourselves exploring some new ground.

In order to get at a proper answer regarding this dynamic movement it may be helpful to recall again that we are talking about something happening to believers. Here it is quite important to stress that believers, Christianly speaking, are more than those who give assent of the mind to some kind of faith statement. They are also more than people who seek to follow God's commands, or to pattern their lives after the example and teaching of Jesus Christ. Believers are those who have heard the call of God in Christ, have received forgiveness in His name, and have become tabernacles for His Spirit. To be a believer is to enter into a new way of life which centers wholly in Jesus Christ.

The status of the Christian believer in relation to the Holy Spirit is that he has been "born of the Spirit." He has passed out of death into life through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and as a result the Spirit of God dwells within. This indwelling of the Spirit is not to be understood as a natural fact of human existence. God is surely everywhere present, and man may be said to have his being in God, but only man in Christ is one in whom Christ's Spirit resides. The hardness of a person's heart sets a barrier against the presence of God's Spirit; so, until this is broken open and forgiveness received, there can be no inwardness of the Holy Spirit. It is accordingly through faith in Jesus Christ that the Spirit moves into the center of human existence- -the human spirit- -and sets up a totally new situation.

It is quite important to stress at this juncture that there is no point in talking about the dynamic movement of the Spirit except against the background of this faith in Jesus Christ. There must be that kind of faith- -to repeat- -which appropriates what God has done in Christ. Such appropriation cannot be automatically assumed merely because someone is a Christian by name or is attached to some Christian community or organization. Only as a person hears the word of the gospel in faith- -the word that smites the heart thereby bringing about conviction of sin and guilt- -and repents of the evil in which he is bound, does he become a new person in Christ. There is a narrow pass to go through (which only the grace of God makes possible), but through it one must go if he is to know salvation and have the Spirit of God dwelling within. At the risk of too much emphasis here, let me repeat how important all of this is: it is meaningless to reflect upon the movement of the Spirit unless the Spirit is an inward actuality. To put it another way: only the man of the Spirit- -"spiritual man"- -is able to begin to comprehend what this is all about.[20] The "natural" man, whether outside the church or in the church, can only be completely baffled by the movement of the Spirit; and the result quite possibly is that he turns away- -maybe even adopts a negative attitude- -because he is not in a position to understand.[21] Thus a word of rather blunt counsel: if a person does not have the Spirit of Christ, let him not seek to judge that for which he has no capacity. However, it is far better that he should become a man in whom the Spirit dwells- -Christian man, "spiritual" man- -and have the spiritual antenna by which he can receive the things of God.

Theologically what has just been said may be expressed in language earlier used, namely, that regeneration (new birth, conversion) is the presupposition for the movement of the Spirit, and again, in reference to sanctification, that the Spirit of sanctification has been given. Thus regeneration and sanctification (in the sense of the presence of the sanctifying Spirit) are the ground, the basis, the framework in which and out of which the movement of the Spirit may come. Also, to be sure, justification is to be presupposed, for it is through the declaration of forgiveness that one is accepted as righteous ("justified") and the Spirit of regeneration and sanctification is at work.

This last statement leads to a further word about justification and its relationship to the movement of the Spirit. I am quite convinced that a major problem is the way in which justification is frequently misunderstood, so that there can be no adequate comprehension of sanctification- -and much less of the movement of the Spirit. The term "justification" in this connection may not be employed; perhaps the language will be that of "God's free grace," or "total forgiveness," or "complete acceptance," and to be a Christian (from this perspective) is to live as a "free man" unburdened by the past, accepted in the present, and open to the future. Now all of this is very good if it grows out of a faith in Jesus Christ wherein there is true repentance- -a turning in deep contrition from the old to the new- -so that the talk about justification, or acceptance, is not simply a cover-up for staying the same, but represents the coming to be of a new reality. "Justification" that "justifies" the sinful status of man is not Christian justification: it knows nothing of God's righteousness, and is ill-equipped to talk about sanctification at all.[22] A fortiori, the movement of the Spirit cannot even come into sight.

Justification- -properly understood- -is inseparable from regeneration (and sanctification in the primary sense). For there is no genuine appropriation of God's forgiveness in Jesus Christ that does not also signify the emergence of a new man. This means that not only is he a forgiven sinner, living by God's continuing grace, but he is also one in whom God has begun a new work through the Spirit that comes to dwell within. To be sure, this new man remains a sinner needing constantly to be sustained by God's mercy in forgiveness, but he is also not the same person he was before. Further, he now has the awesome responsibility of showing forth God's holiness and righteousness in all of his life.

Now- -with this excursus on justification done- -let us go back to the earlier statement about what must be presupposed to talk about the movement of the Spirit, namely, justification, regeneration, and sanctification (in its beginning). Without the transition into a new condition, a new being, a new reality which these terms signify, we are not operating from a basis that makes either comprehensible or possible the talk about a dynamic movement of the Spirit. Only when this transition has occurred are we ready to proceed further with theological reflection.

We are now ready to address ourselves theologically to the question of Christian existence and this movement of the Spirit. Here we assume that God's redemptive deed in Jesus Christ has been appropriated in faith and repentance, that regeneration has taken place, that there has been a transition from non-Christian into Christian existence. Against this background, in this situation, the dynamic movement of the Spirit occurs. How are we to understand this as Christians?

Here we may encounter the difficulty of the unfamiliar and the strange. This is a different kind of problem from the one already discussed, namely, that talk about "spiritual" matters is incomprehensible to the "natural" (or "unspiritual") man. It is no longer a matter of something totally outside comprehension, for Christians as "spiritual" persons are in the realm where the movement of the Spirit occurs. They have spiritual antennae and therefore cannot be altogether outside the range of perception, yet the Spirit's operation may still be quite unclear, strange, and hard to grasp. It is as if there were a whole world of the Spirit's activity stretching out ahead, but one may not yet have made the trip. However truly the "spiritual" man is at the right point of viewing, he may yet be quite uncertain of it all.

In this situation there is quite possibly one of two reactions. On the one hand, a strong desire may be elicited to look further into what all this means. Indeed, the pulse may beat faster at the realization that there lies at hand something for which there has been deep, perhaps hitherto unrecognized, yearning. Hence, despite unfamiliarity about it- -and maybe hesitation- -there is a compelling urge to move ahead. On the other hand, there may be, despite the sense that there is something real, a turning away. This may occur for a number of reasons: for example, fear of what is unusual, extraordinary, mysterious; long-time Christian existence that has become rather routine and lethargic, and is not sure exploration is worth the effort; anxiety at what such a venture would mean in terms of status (what would other people think?). So there may be an attempt to "tune out"- -and forget it all. Indeed, the same person may for a time go through both of these reactions- -attraction and repulsion- -for it is not easy to venture into ways relatively unfrequented. But now and then there is a breakthrough, and subsequent wonder that there could have ever been hesitation to move ahead!

Now we must return to the question of how as Christians we are to understand this dynamic activity of the Holy Spirit. There is some difficulty in finding the right language because we are talking about a movement of the Holy Spirit and not a result or effect (such as incarnation or regeneration). Further, since we are seeking to deal with that which moves into the realm of the less well-known, even the extraordinary, there is more than the usual difficulty in discovering adequate ways of expression.

Perhaps the best way to begin is once more to say that this movement of the Spirit happens only among those who believe in Jesus Christ. The Spirit of Christ comes to those who believe, and thereby they are "spiritual" persons. This is an aspect of the work of redemption wherein God calls us in Christ, freely forgives us in Him and seals us with His Spirit.[23] In all of this the Spirit is active, applying the work of God in Christ and making new life an actuality. That much we need to say by way of review- -all pointing up the Spirit's activity in relation to the work of redemption.

But (and now we come to the new) here is a movement of the Spirit beyond redemption! And it is based on the fact that, by virtue of the Spirit's activity in relation to the work of Christ, a situation is present laden with dynamic possibilities. For the Spirit who comes as token and seal of God's work in and through Jesus Christ may act in such fashion as to possess human existence, and thereby move upon, into, and through it in totality. This may be viewed on the one hand as an inward action whereby the Holy Spirit indwelling the human spirit moves from the depths to the heights of creaturely reality, thereby fully claiming the human vessel. From another perspective it may be seen as an external movement whereby the Spirit comes upon the human creature and moves from the heights to the depths of the prepared vessel, thereby penetrating it through and through. As a result of this movement within and without[24] all of life is bathed in the presence and power of the Spirit. Here indeed is a renewal of the whole human situation!

We may now proceed to speak of this external movement of the Spirit as effusion, the inward as pervasion. Or we may make use of such Biblical language as "outpouring" of the Spirit for the former, "filling" with the Spirit for the latter,[25] both markedly vivid pictures of the Spirit's unlimited operation externally and internally. A deluge "from above," a flooding "from within"- -such is the Spirit's dynamic operation! Or to change the figure, "wind" and "fire," blowing and blazing- -and who can tell whether without or within?[26] Obviously no imagery[27] really suffices because the movement of the Spirit cannot be adequately described. But the exact wording is clearly not important as long as it points to the magnitude and comprehensiveness of the divine possession!

Let us push on- -theologically. It would seem evident that we are called upon to recognize a major activity of the Holy Spirit beyond the sphere of redemption. Indeed, this may well be underscored as the major activity of the Spirit. For as significant as is the Spirit's role in bringing about faith in Jesus Christ, convicting of sin, initiating new life, such is all focused on Christ's redemptive work. Therein He applies, makes subjective, what God has done in Christ. Now, though we by no means leave Christ behind (for the Spirit is likewise the Spirit of Christ), we are talking about the activity of the Spirit which, while presupposing redemption, is no longer auxiliary thereto but moves freely in another dimension. This, I would urge, is that climactic activity of the Spirit which is most properly His own, whereby He moves in freedom, pervading and filling human reality. As a result there is the initiation of a new world of the Spirit wherein God and man are in such dynamic interaction that new powers are released to praise God, to witness in His name, to perform "signs and wonders"; there is a new sense of His immediate presence whereby His joy, peace, and love become radiant; also there is the commencement of the transformation of all things into the likeness and image of God!

Now I do not believe that the activity of the Spirit in pervading and filling (with these accompanying results) has generally stood out in theology with sufficient clarity. In our various doctrinal traditions a number of things have been in the way. For example, we have so tended to subordinate the activity of the Spirit to the work of Christ in redemption- -whereby (as just noted) the Spirit is viewed largely in terms of His applicative instrumentality- -that any further activity is less well recognized.[28] Again, at the other extreme, we have (in some traditions) tended to lay such strong emphasis upon the work of the Holy Spirit as making men "partakers of the divine nature" (2 Peter 1:4) that His work is viewed largely as that of the deification of man. In this case the work of Christ is actually subordinated to that of the Spirit, so that the Incarnation of the Word is the instrument of the Holy Spirit to transmute humanity into divinity. Again, in certain traditions, the activity of the Holy Spirit is viewed basically as that of the process of sanctification. Here there is a much closer approximation to what is central; however (as we have emphasized), sanctification as process is not the "dynamic movement" itself but only an effect. Elsewhere the Spirit is thought of largely as inspirer of Scripture, "soul" of the church, or the anointer of offices.[29] But whatever the element of truth in all these understandings- -and to be sure there is much- -none of them focuses on the peculiar and dynamic movement of the Spirit upon and within the community of faith.

And the result- -a quite disturbing one- -is that the believing community may still be existing without the actualization of its potential. This is not to deny that such a community is the people of God, called into being by His word and Spirit, and living by His grace; such is to be vigorously affirmed. But the release may not yet have occurred where the Spirit from "on high" and from within moves mightily to actualize the vast potential. The Christian community (the community of "saints"- -"spiritual" people), despite the fact that the new has come, may not yet have entered upon the fullness of what is available. Latently it is all there, but it has not yet come to manifestation. The situation, thus, is one laden with vast possibility, but the "happening" whereby it takes on dynamic actuality may not have occurred. The explosive power has yet to break loose!

What this chapter is really attempting to set forth is "a theology of explosion"! It is based on the conviction that many of us have lived long as Christians, have shared variously in many of the important activities of the believing community, and have generally not been unmindful of its life or worship, its service and sacraments, its responsibilities and challenges, but the power has been bottled up, energies unreleased. However, there is more than we ever deemed possible! "More" is scarcely the word, for when the power of God begins to pour out of the heights, emerge from the depths, flow through the whole, such forces become operative as to go beyond quantitative measurement. To be "filled" with the Spirit of God is not so much to have something "more" as it is to be in the new, wonderful, and at times fearful situation of having the Spirit of God break into the whole round of existence and pervade it all. As a result of this- -yes, explosion- -what may be violent at the beginning can become the steady and driving power of a mighty dynamo- -the Spirit of the living God.

Let me seek to summarize a bit at this point. What I have been attempting to stress is that the theological implications of this dynamic movement of the Spirit are of no little significance. At the critical center there is the knowledge that something has happened for which one has difficulty finding adequate theological language or ways of relating it to various doctrines of Christian faith. I am quite convinced, however, that something is being recovered, generally long hidden, that can make for a vital renewal of the church.

What is opening up in our day is a dimension of the Spirit's activity that calls for fresh thinking about many matters and for a willingness to be led into deeper understanding. The chief problem could be simply the failure to recognize this dimension or- -what amounts practically to the same thing- -to assume that it is already operative. Such an assumption is found, for example, wherever it is held that the Spirit is God's gift to the church and "Pentecost" (as symbol of the effusion of the Spirit) is something that is related only to the church's original coming to be. In that case, since Pentecost is viewed as constitutive of the life of the church, it would be improper to suggest that Pentecost may have yet to occur. Thus this dynamic dimension of the Spirit's activity drops out of sight as completely as if it were not recognized at all. Why be bothered about some effusion of the Spirit when it has already taken place?[30] Alongside this failure is another which, while recognizing the need for an outpouring of the Spirit, still does not adequately comprehend what it signifies. Sometimes it is said that the church needs a fresh "baptism" of the Spirit, and by this is often meant a kind of spiritual pickup, a move ahead with increased commitment, a rededication to witness and service. But, however much the church may need these things, this dynamic movement of the Spirit is far more radical, even more revolutionary, than merely an increase of some kind in spiritual vitality. Nor does it happen to the "church" as an institution, but to people, in people, who (if and when it takes place) are projected into a dynamic realm, scarcely beforehand imagined, of spiritual reality.

This is exactly what is seldom understood. As long as the movement of the Spirit is thought of in terms only of something happening to an institution, or to people, as a kind of tonic, nothing significant is going to occur. Indeed, even the symbol of Pentecost can be misused so as to suggest only an external addition to faith. But- -and it cannot be emphasized too strongly- -the effusion of the Spirit is profoundly existential and personal. It is no mere supplement, but the movement through the whole being (community and/or individual) of a mighty power that renews the total situation.

It is a whole new world! So much is this the case that some who talk about the desirability of an outpouring of the Spirit would be quite shocked if it really happened! For this is a world in which the Spirit is so profoundly and mightily present that people may communicate with God in a new language of the Spirit, prophesy with authority in His name, discern the counter-world of evil forces and dare to exorcise them, have the faith to lay hands on the "incurably" ill and declare their healing- -on and on. Do many people want their ideas that such things belonged only to apostolic times exploded? Do others, who are quite convinced that all of this represents a mythological world view and primitive practices long ago superseded, want such rationales swept away? Accordingly it may even be wise for such persons to investigate a great deal before they talk (or pray) much about an outpouring of the Spirit. Still, wherever there is willingness, sincerely and expectantly, to move ahead, the new world of extraordinary and startling things may again become an actuality.

It is also a new world in the realm of what begins to happen in bearing witness to Jesus Christ. For what is primary in this effusion of the Spirit is the anointing of people so richly with the presence and power of God that they are witnesses to Jesus Christ. Here are people whose existence is so marked by His love, joy, and peace that they show forth (not just talk about) what life can really be like. Others sense it and know it- -and yearn for something of that same fullness of joy, profound peace, surpassing love to become a reality in their own lives. Thus it is that the embodiment of the reality confirms the testimony to Christ and gives it the ring of living credibility. Accordingly, witness to Jesus Christ goes forth in power- -as the One through whom forgiveness comes and the gift of the Spirit. What then is new is not simply that the word is spoken with more effectiveness, nor even that the word is accompanied or surrounded by deeds of concern and compassion (as important as both are), but that the word issues from the reality of those who demonstrate the abundant life in the Spirit.[31]

Perhaps the most exciting thing about this new world is that through the effusion of the divine Spirit there is the realization of a new immediacy between God and man. The "strange" signs- -such as prophecy, healing, miracles, exorcism, speaking in tongues, discernment of spirits- -are only strange so long as there has not yet been an interpenetration of the divine and the human, the supernatural and the natural. When this occurs- -bringing about a new immediacy between God and man- -then what is alien to ordinary existence becomes (without losing its wonder) a part of the regular ongoing life and activity of the community. It is also this very interpenetration that brings together divine and human joy, the peace of God and peace of man, the love of God and human love- -and the result is that of an inexpressible participation in God's own reality. This does not mean human deification, for we never cease to be men. But it does point to the wonder of life in which the love, peace, joy (on and on) of God so commingle with their human counterparts that all of existence is thereby irradiated.

Again, this new world of the interpenetration of the spiritual and the natural not only brings into play spiritual powers but also enhances natural capacities and functions. By no means does the natural become less important, but it is given fuller power and direction under the impact of the Holy Spirit. The mind takes on keener awareness of the true shape of reality; the feelings become more sensitive to the moods, the concerns, the hopes of the world and of people; the will finds itself strengthened to execute with more faithfulness and determination those ethical actions to which it gives itself. Thus through the conjoining of the spiritual and the natural, in which strange powers penetrate and invigorate the natural realm (the vast area of the intellectual, the aesthetic, the moral), there is a renewal and advancement of the whole human situation.

Finally, this is a new world wherein there is the dawning of a profound and lasting unity among brethren. For in this movement of the Spirit what is implicit in the Christian community becomes explicit: not only the immediacy of God with man but also man with his neighbor. Here truly is the transcendence of ancient walls of creed and tradition, race and nationality, cultural, economic, and social differentiation by the overarching Spirit of love. Thus does the moving Spirit, interfusing and pervading all, bring about lasting unity in the bond of peace.

Now we must treat another important matter not yet considered, namely, the theological implications of the situation in which the dynamic movement of the Holy Spirit comes about. It was mentioned earlier that this happened with some persons many years after an earlier crisis experience of lifechanging significance, with others after a relatively short time of being Christian, and with some it occurred coincidentally with the faith and repentance wherewith a new life began. Mention was also made of prayer and- -in many instances- -the laying on of hands. It was further stressed that this movement of the Spirit was by no means coerced, but was God's own gracious doing. What, theologically, does all this have to say?

Answer in part has already been given by talking about the presupposition of the redemptive work of God in Christ and its appropriation through faith and repentance. Therein forgiveness of sins is mediated, and the Holy Spirit, as seal of God's grace, comes to dwell within. Without this occurring (God's redemptive work, faith, sealing of the Spirit) there is no dynamic movement of the Spirit. The reason is evident: this very movement is a continuation- -with or without delay- -of what has already happened. The Spirit, given in faith, now moves to lay claim to the whole of human reality.

Now this movement of the Spirit, as noted, may occur simultaneously with faith and repentance. The Spirit who comes to seal the divine redemption and to dwell within may, in the same action, move mightily to possess the whole of the human vessel. If this happens one would have to say, theologically, that regeneration and the "effusion" of the Spirit, though pointing to two different aspects of God's deed and human experience, are chronologically one. Since, however, it is by no means the case that the "filling" with the Spirit invariably occurs at the moment of regeneration, it is apparent that, while affirming continuity, one must also recognize the possibility of temporal separation. Thus obviously there is diversity, but no contradiction between the two ways.

In the case of chronological separation (which is quite common) it should be stressed that this does not mean that during the intervening time (hours, days, years) there is a kind of substandard Christian existence. Many of us can recall quite clearly a previous day when the grace of God in Jesus Christ, His mercy and forgiveness, was appropriated in true contrition, and we knew the joy of being alive again! Thereafter, whatever the "ups" and "downs," the failures and backslidings, times of emptiness and even despair, we continued to know something of God's faithfulness and by His grace that we were Christians. Thus during this time it was not a question of low-level faith (whatever that might mean), semi-conversion (again, meaning what?), or nonspiritual Christianity (an impossible contradiction). In fact, the whole emphasis ought to be put the other way: it is because one is a Christian (not semi- or anything else) that he or she is in a position to experience the movement of the Holy Spirit.

We are now ready to consider further the questions of difference in timing. How, theologically, is one to deal with the fact that the Holy Spirit is "poured out" on some at the beginning of their Christian existence, upon others later? A partial answer surely lies in the freedom of the Spirit to act when and how He will, and in the wide variation among people in patterns of faith and life. However, we have also spoken of such matters as openness, expectancy, prayer, and the laying on of hands. Is it perhaps that the readiness of a person makes an important difference? The answer, I believe, is Yes. But before elaborating this further, we need to consider the relationship between God's free action and human receptivity.

Here the important theological point is that there exists a beautiful harmony between God's free action in the Spirit and our openness to it. The Spirit is a gift and therefore cannot be bought; consequently, there is no earning the Spirit by any amount of prayers, vigils, and the like. The Spirit also moves freely and cannot be compelled or coerced by any human contrivance- -no matter how astutely performed. But for the very reason that the Spirit acts graciously in freedom, He will not grant a gift where it is not wanted or asked for, nor will He break through barriers that resist His coming. Thus only the open and expectant, the eager and hungry, the askers and seekers (not because of what they do but because of their very readiness) receive God's blessing. Even then no expertise in timing is possible (as if to say that it will occur after "x" number of days of prayer, "y" number of spiritual hunger pangs, "z" number of requests), for when the Spirit moves there is a suddenness, a wholly unexpected character, which sets at naught all schedules and plans.[32] Also one can never know when those last barriers are down and the whole person is prepared for the Spirit's movement. It is only by the event itself occurring that there is evidence that the Spirit has now found ready hearts.

From what has just been said it is patent that the human readiness side is important- -even if one can have no prior knowledge of the time of fulfillment. Now I should like to add that this readiness factor also represents a kind of total letting go. That is to say, combined with openness, eagerness, and the like, there is the surrender of all that one is and has to the movement of God's Spirit. There must be the forfeiting of any claim upon one's life and reputation, future and success; it is the offering of self as a total sacrifice.[33] This includes more than the dedication of one's conscious existence through an act of will; it also refers to the large, even hidden, area of one's unconscious life. In the latter case especially, there is a letting go wherein the Holy Spirit moves through the subconscious depths and, even temporarily bypassing the conscious mind, gives expression to the praise of God; or the Spirit may make use of the conscious mind to declare God's truth.[34] None of this occurs easily, even for the long-time Christian, because- -whatever the testimony of the inward Spirit (maybe even His groans at times!)- -it is extremely hard to let go. The fact is that a conscious act of will cannot possibly release the unconscious energies of the Spirit: thus there is no simple way. All (a very important "all") that can be done is to offer the self- -body, mind, and even the tongue- -so that the Spirit of God may have full possession. Wherever the Spirit finds the way prepared, He will move in strange and wonderful ways!

The human readiness factor may also partially[35] explain why it is that some persons at the moment of their faith in Jesus Christ experience the dynamic movement of the Holy Spirit. If they come to faith against the background of a long search for truth, perhaps even years of prayer and devotion- -making for an openness of the whole self- -it is quite possible that at that very time the Spirit will be poured out.[36] Or it may be the case that there has been no obvious search for God, no particular evidence of prayer and devotion, but there is a kind of childlike lack of pretension, a "whole-souledness." In either event, beyond the Spirit's sealing of faith in Jesus Christ (which happens to all who truly believe), He takes possession in a total kind of way. Such persons are ready- -the barriers are down and God moves mightily upon and through their whole being.

Now a further word about the laying on of hands. It has been mentioned in passing that, in some instances, the movement of the Holy Spirit occurred in the context of prayer and the laying on of hands. This is to say that it was not always just the preparation of persons themselves (as individuals or as groups), but there was also the ministry of others in praying for and placing hands upon those who have yet to experience the effusion of the Spirit. For many of us this laying on of hands was quite important as background and further preparation. It was our acknowledgment- -by no means always easy- -of the need for willing submission to the help of others and thereby of receiving God's blessing through them.

Let me quickly add that wherever this laying on of hands occurs it is not, as such, a sacramental action.[37] It is rather, the simple ministry by one or more persons who themselves are channels of the Holy Spirit[38] to others not yet so blessed. The "ministers" may be clergy or laity; it makes no difference. In fact, it has been the humbling experience of some of us who are clergymen to have laymen place hands on us to receive this fullness of the Spirit. Obviously God is doing a mighty work today bound neither by office nor by rank.[39]

Finally, it should be stressed that the laying on of hands is by no means necessary for the outpouring of the Spirit. Many persons have received this gift without any physical contact- -sometimes alone, sometimes in a group. Prayer may or may not have been the immediate context, though surely there was openness. They simply were ready (and who knows what all was involved?), and God willed to renew them with His Spirit. So it is that the Holy Spirit, acting with or without human means, remains the free and sovereign Lord.

Footnotes

[1]This does not discount the possible advantages of further training and schooling to make such people more proficient, but the point here is that such is not the fundamental thing.

[2]The preceding several paragraphs on word of wisdom and word of knowledge represent a broader understanding of those two manifestation gifts than I later came to have (cf. with Renewal Theology, 2:348-58).

[3]The word "miracles" is, I believe, important to use. The word so translated in most English versions of the New Testament as "miracles" is often dunameis, "powers." So we could simply speak of "powers" at work, making for healing. However, since these "powers" are never viewed as natural to, or inherent in, the human situation, one would constantly have to bear in mind that they are "Spiritually" based (that is in the Holy Spirit), and, therefore, are other than ordinary powers of man such as intellect, vitality, will (even at their maximal functioning). Only such a word as "miracles" seems capable of expressing this difference-as "signs" of the Spirit's functioning and "wonders" to those who first behold them. It might be added that "miracles," "signs," and "wonders" are often closely associated in the New Testament. For example, Acts 2:22 (KJV): "Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs (dunameis kai terasi kai semeiois)."

[4]Thus a parallel to what was written earlier about the utterance of Spiritual wisdom and knowledge being, at base, unrelated to natural capacities and training.

[5]Tongues may also occupy this high position, if interpretation follows (see 1 Cor. 14:5).

[6]One hardly need comment that what passes for prophecy in the popular mind is far removed from prophecy as it occurs in the fellowship. The tremendous boom of interest in astrology, fortune-telling, seances, etc.-all having to do with presumed knowledge of things to come or things hidden-is actually a modern-day gnosticism, even a counterfeit knowledge. It has nothing to do with the living God, His presence among His people, His grace and judgments-but leads into snare and delusion. Indeed, we find in the fellowship that one of the most urgent things that has to be done by those who wander into such paths is to abjure them utterly in the name of Jesus Christ. Incidentally, both Old and New Testaments totally condemn the whole perverted realm of spurious prophecy, visitation upon "mediums," soothsaying, practice of magic, and the like (see, e.g., Lev. 19:31; 20:6-8; Deut. 18:9-22; 2 Kings 21:1-9; Jer. 23:9-40; 27:9-10; Isa. 8:16-22; Mic. 5:12; Acts 16:16-18).

[7]It is unmistakable that prophets and prophetesses functioned in the early Christian community (e.g., see Acts 11:27: "Now in those days prophets came down from Jerusalem to Antioch"; 13:l: "...in the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers"; 21:8-9: "Philip the evangelist... had four unmarried daughters, who prophesied"; 21:10-11: "...a prophet named Agabus came down...and said, 'Thus says the Holy Spirit'"), and that the apostle Paul strongly encourages prophecy (". . . earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy" 1 Cor. 14:1) and warns against its disregard ("... do not despise prophesying" 1 Thess. 5:20). There is no suggestion anywhere of prophecy ceasing (1 Cor. 13:8: "as for prophecies, they will pass away" refers of course only to the end when we see God "face to face").

[8]In the Ephesians letter the order of "gifts" has prophets before evangelists, pastors, and teachers (see Eph. 4:11), and in both Romans and 1 Corinthians the "gifts" or "appointments" list prophecy prior to teaching (Rom. 12:6-7; 1 Cor. 12:28).

[9]How meaningful now are the words of Paul in 1 Corinthians! "...if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or outsider enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all, the secrets of his heart are disclosed; and so, falling on his face, he will worship God and declare that God is really among you" (14:24-25).

[10]On the matter of pretense in prophecy recall the scathing indictment of the false prophets about whom the Lord says (through Jeremiah): "I did not send the prophets, yet they ran; I did not speak to them, yet they prophesied." They "prophesy the deceit of their own heart," they "use their tongues and say, 'Says the LORD,'" etc. (Jeremiah 23 passim.) Our problem is not quite the same as Jeremiah's since only certain ones were called to be prophets then, and people were at the mercy of a few who might abuse the office. With the Christian community, however, all people may prophesy (see preceding note from 1 Cor. 14), and thus we are in the new situation of the community having to exercise spiritual judgment among its own members. Paul speaks of one of the gifts of the Spirit as "the ability to distinguish between spirits" (1 Cor. 12:10), and this coming just after a reference to the gift of prophecy (same verse) may well refer to the Spirit's operation wherein some-for the edification of the whole-are gifted particularly to distinguish true from false utterance.

[11]In the experience of many of us, women and young people quite often exercise this particular gift. I am not sure why this is the case, unless the Lord likes to use those less often viewed as the authorities to speak His word! There is New Testament precedent here, to be sure, for example, Acts 2:17: "your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions," and 21:9 (noted earlier) where reference is made to "four unmarried daughters, who prophesied." Paul also gives instruction, in 1 Corinthians 11:5, to "any woman who prays or prophesies."

[12]In what follows we shall be using interchangeably for "tongues" such expressions as "speaking in tongues," "praying in tongues," "praying in the Spirit," "praying with the Spirit," and "language of the Spirit." This, I believe, is proper in that tongues are speech addressed to God, therefore prayer; they are spoken in (or by) the Holy Spirit and with the spirit (not the mind); they are language (even if unknown) and not nonsensical utterances. It might be of interest for the reader to note how Paul, in 1 Corinthians 14:13-15, shifts rapidly from the terminology of "speaks in a tongue" to "pray in a tongue" to "pray with the spirit." Also that it is a "language" is suggested in preceding verses.

[13]I am referring here not only to individual preparation. Often it is the case that married couples, two or three friends gathered together, or a small group will spend time ahead praying in the Spirit. In so doing there is greatly multiplied the sense of God's presence and power that carries over into the gathering of the fellowship.

[14]After one has become accustomed to praying in tongues aloud, which is as the breath of the Spirit articulating itself, it soon becomes a possibility for one's own breath, moving across vocal chords and tongue, to manifest the Spirit's breathing, and thereby for prayer to go on quietly, yet profoundly, within.

[15]Interpretation lies on the boundary between prophecy and tongues. It is solely for the purpose of expressing what is said in tongues, but since it is in the common language of the community and is spoken in one's own manner without premeditation, it is akin to prophecy. Interpretation is not translation, and so the interpretation following a tongue may vary from it considerably in length. The only important thing is that the meaning comes through.

[16]The speaker in tongues may himself also have the gift of interpretation, and, if so, there is no problem: he can immediately (by the Spirit) interpret what he has said. If he does not have the gift, he holds in check his utterance until an interpreter is present; otherwise, there can be no edification. Paul suggests (in 1 Cor. 14:13) that "he who speaks in a tongue should pray for the power to interpret."

[17]In the letters to the Colossians and Ephesians Paul writes of "psalms and hymns and spiritual songs." "Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly...and as you sing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs with thankfulness in your hearts to God" (Col. 3:16); "... be filled with the Spirit, addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with all your heart..." (Eph. 5:18-19). These "spiritual singers, songs inspired by the Spirit. According to the Expositor's Greek Testament, "the adjective pneumatikais is attached to the odais not merely to differentiate these odai as religious and not secular, but to describe them as inspired by the Holy Ghost" (Eph. 5:19). The Jerusalem Bible interestingly comments that these "spiritual songs" (translated in Col. 3:16 as "inspired songs to God") "could be charismatic improvisations suggested by the Spirit during liturgical assembly," hence obviously of a quite different order from the usual hymns and anthems in worship. This is exactly what we have found about singing in the Spirit, namely, that it is singing "inspired by the Holy Ghost," "charismatic improvisations," and therefore a marvelous climax to the psalms and hymns (choruses, melodies, etc.) in which we all share.

[18]"Pneuma" may be translated "wind" or "Spirit" in this quotation from John 3:8.

[19]We do not here go into the origins of the practice of confirmation. That the sacrament points to a historic concern of the church for something beyond baptism (with its relationship to regeneration) is not unimportant, and that formally it is connected with a forward step in Christian life is also significant. The only point made here is that what we have been variously describing for many people as renewal through the presence and power of the Holy Spirit seems to have little or no relation to their confirmation-or lack of it.

[20]So Paul writes: "...we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit" (1 Cor. 2:13). One who possesses the Spirit is called a "spiritual man [pneumatikos]" (v. 15).

[21]Paul continues: "The unspiritual ["psychical" or "natural"] man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Cor. 2:14).

[22]If there is talk about sanctification, it quite often becomes little more than the old terminology used (with some obvious difficulty) for talking about obedience, service, life in the world, etc.

[23]Here the previously used language of justification, regeneration, and sanctification in its beginning is appropriate.

[24]Of course spatial language is inadequate to deal with the Spirit. Words such as "external" and "internal" may, however, convey something of the uncircumscribable nature of the Spirit's movement.

[25]For "outpouring" of the Spirit, see, for example, Acts 2:17-18, 33; 10:45 (cf. also Titus 3:6 and Rom. 5:5); for "filling" with the Spirit see, for example, Acts 2:4; 4:8, 31; 9:17; 13:9, 52 (cf. also Eph. 5:18).

[26]Compare Acts 2:1-4.

[27]In what follows any one of these terms or images may be employed to represent the wholeness of the Spirit's activity. Hence if "effusion" or "filling" or "outpouring" or "pervasion" (or other similar terms) is used, there is no intention of speaking only of what happens "from above" or "from within." Such a limitation is impossible anyhow. Every such activity of the Spirit, however named, includes the other, for there is no external movement that is not internal and vice versa.

[28]Indeed, in the main tradition of theology, especially in the West, this has actually meant if not an essential subordinationism (in terms of Trinitarian theology) a practical one. The Holy Spirit, by dogmatic definition, is "consubstantial" with Father and Son, and proceeds from Father and Son. But this very procession (which makes possible the "dynamic movement" of the Spirit), in its singularity and end, has been dealt with less than the work of Christ and the place of the Spirit in connection therewith. On the matter of viewing the Holy Spirit as applicative and instrumental I would especially call attention to Professor Hendrikus Berkhof's The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit where he writes: "This is the main pneumatological trend in ecclesiastical theology. The Spirit is customarily treated in noetical, applicative, subjective terms. He is that power which directs our attention to Christ and opens our eyes to his work. The main result of his work is the awakening of faith in Christ. His work is merely instrumental....So the Spirit is a second reality beside Christ, but entirely subordinate to him, serving in the application of His atoning work..." (23). Berkhof expresses dissatisfaction with this long tradition and urges that "the Spirit is far more than an instrumental entity, the subjective reverse of Christ's work." I gladly confess to having received helpful insight from what Berkhof has said in this connection.

[29]In this connection see the next chapter on "A New Era in History."

[30] In the Book of Acts the effusion of the Spirit-whether worded as "baptism," "outpouring," "falling upon," "filling," "coming upon," etc.-occurs a number of times and to different people. See, for example, Acts 1:5, 8; 2:4, 17-18, 33; 8:16-17; 9:17; 10:44-45; 11:15-16; 19:6. It seems evident that one of the very things the writer of Acts wants to avoid is any easy assumption that the Holy Spirit has already come and been received. See especially Acts 19:2-"Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?"

[31] It hardly needs to be said that no community demonstrates this in every word and deed. Love, joy, peace are not invariably evidenced-and so there is need of God's continuing forgiveness and renewal. But this does not justify an attitude that would say it does not really matter, that Christ is what we are not, etc. It is we who, in the language of Paul, are "known and read by all men" (2 Cor. 3:2).

[32] It might be helpful to recall that the effusion of the Spirit at Pentecost was not forecast for Pentecost! According to Acts 1, the disciples were not told that if they would pray ten days, on the tenth day (Pentecost) the Spirit would come. They were simply told that "before many days" (v. 5) it would happen. When the event occurred, it came about "suddenly" (Acts 2:2).

[33] I know of no word in the New Testament that more beautifully expresses this than the entreaty of Paul: "I appeal to you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice..." (Rom. 12:1).

[34] Tongues represents the first of these, prophecy the second. When one speaks or prays in tongues the mind is not functioning. Concerning the former Paul says (1 Cor. 14:13), "If I pray in a tongue...my mind is unfruitful" (akarpos)-"inactive" [Phillips], "lies fallow" [NEB], "barren" [JB]. Thus prayer in tongues is other than rational or mental prayer. (Incidentally, Paul does not for that reason discount the value of such prayer; for he adds [v. 15]: "What am I to do? I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also." It is true that Paul does want to discourage those who would put all their emphasis on speaking or praying in a tongue, and says that "in church I would rather speak five words with my mind, in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue" [v. 19]. However this statement, referring to a situation in church where an "outsider" [v. 16] could not understand [hence it is better in that case to forego incomprehensible utterance], does not intend to discount the importance of tongues. How could it when Paul has earlier [v. 5] said, "I want you all to speak in tongues"?) The very unfruitfulness or inactivity of the mind at the moment of tongues is sign that the Holy Spirit is speaking through the human spirit utterances too profound for conceptualization, and signifies the vast movement in a person's subconscious depths into a new key of divine praise and thanksgiving.

[35]We do need to repeat here other factors such as the freedom of the Spirit, individual differences in personality, religious tradition, culture, etc.

[36]The classic case of this in the New Testament is surely that of Cornelius the Roman centurion (Acts 10-11). He is described as "a devout man who feared God with all his household, gave alms liberally to the people, and prayed constantly to God" (10:2). It was upon such a Godfearing man (with a Godfearing household) of singular devoutness and constant prayer that, at the same moment of his coming to faith in Christ, God "poured out" His Spirit (see especially vv. 43-45).

[37]See earlier discussion of "confirmation" (pp. 75-76).

[38]This is the basic consideration, not the matter of "apostolic succession." Whatever the merits of "apostolic succession" for the validation and order of ministry, this is not our concern here. The important thing is that those who minister (whether in or out of such a "succession") have themselves experienced the movement of the Holy Spirit.

[39] One thinks of Ananias, an unknown layman in Damascus, ministering to erstwhile "Pharisee of the Pharisees," Saul of Tarsus: "And laying his hands on him he [Ananias] said, 'Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus who appeared to you on the road by which you came, has sent me that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit'"(Acts 9:17).

Chapter 2, A New Era In History

A new era in history is opening up before us in a fresh and powerful way. There is a working of the Spirit of God in our day that is bringing about a resurgence within Christendom of the vitality and dynamism of the early church. I refer to the Pentecostal or charismatic renewal which vividly represents the inbreaking of this new era.

The Spirit of God doubtless is active in many ways making for the renewal of the church. We may rejoice at every evidence of the Spirit's work in such areas as worship, evangelism, Christian nurture, social involvement, and ecumenical activity. However, I know of nothing that more significantly shows forth a renewal in depth than the present Pentecostal/charismatic movement. For herein is a concentration of the activity of the Holy Spirit that provides a personal and community dynamic which can bring about a radical transformation of all of life.

What we behold in this present movement of the Holy Spirit is, I believe, a recurrence of the primordial power of the New Testament church. Something is happening today that is more than just one possible renewal among many; it is rather a coming to expression of primitive vitality due not to natural forces but to the operation of the Holy Spirit. It thus has vast potential for the depth renewal of the church throughout the world.

Let us turn briefly to the New Testament period to note this primitive vitality and dynamism. The Christian community as "fellowship [koinonia] of the Holy Spirit" lived in the dimension of the Spirit's immediate operations. God the Father through the risen and exalted Christ had poured out His Spirit upon one person and community after another. As a result there was such an irruption of the Spirit as to produce extraordinary manifestations of spiritual utterance, mighty powers of witness and healing, manifold expressions of love and unity (e.g., see Acts 2 and thereafter). The Holy Spirit had penetrated all the levels of human existence, through the conscious and subconscious to the depths of the human spirit, bringing forth new powers. He had provided energy for the proclamation of the gospel and the coming of new life to the bodies and souls of people. The Holy Spirit had broken into the usual ordering of family and society life, and reconstituted it a rich unity in faith and love. It was the same Holy Spirit who multiplied His gifts within the Christian fellowship and gave constant direction to its daily activity.

What occurred in terms of "extra-rational" phenomena was striking demonstration of this primordial vitality and power. We do well to note two of these phenomena, tongues and prophecy. The first was doubtless the stranger of the two, and could be interpreted by outsiders as irrational nonsense (even drunkenness or madness). But for those with personal experience, utterance in tongues signified a deeply spiritual communication of praise, intercession, or even utterance of divine mysteries. This was, all in all, an immediate communication between man and God through the human spirit and Holy Spirit in intimate relationship. Man did the speaking, freely and joyously, but the Spirit gave the language. Thus there was the conjoining of the natural and the spiritual in a way beyond human comprehension. Prophecy likewise signified immediacy of address not, as with tongues, from man to God but from God to man. Here through the ordinary language of man, the "extra-rational" again occurred, for the words spoken in prophecy were not derived from human reflection but came by the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit: He provided the message. This prophetic utterance not only made for edification of the community; it often had a penetrating effect on those who visited the community, laying bare the secrets of their hearts and revealing God's presence. That prophecy was a sign of God's potent presence no one could doubt. In addition to tongues and prophecy there were other spiritual manifestations through which the early church expressed its life in the Spirit. Even where it was the matter of a "word of wisdom" or "a word of knowledge," or seemingly such ordinary appointments as "helpers" and "administrators," there was the same sense of its being an activity of the Holy Spirit, and, accordingly, not merely a rational or human capacity in operation.

The primitive Christian community was wholly "charismatic," that is, operating by freely bestowed gifts- -whether in terms of manifestations for the common good, the functioning of the body, or the maturation of the community in Christ. The all-important matter was the "gift" ("charisma" or "doma"), not natural human abilities. Anyone in the community, by virtue of the Spirit's disposition, might be "gifted" for the word of wisdom or of knowledge, for the performance of miracles or healings, for prophecy or distinguishings of spirits, for tongues or interpretation of tongues, for helping or administration (1 Cor. 12). Regardless of background and learning anyone might be "gifted" to be an apostle, an evangelist, a pastor, a teacher (Eph. 4). To be sure, study and training consequent upon such a gift were important, but the primary matter was the gift. There were also gifts of enablement for serving, exhortation, liberality, and deeds of mercy (Rom. 12, 1 Peter 4). In all of these the community functioned charismatically, the Risen Lord through the Spirit exercising His direct headship and rule through the gifts He bestowed upon men.

Further, there were no set forms or places of worship. Usually meetings were held in homes, and everyone was free to participate. Whomever the Spirit "anointed" could offer a song, a lesson, a testimony, even a revelation. This was to be done in orderly manner, but order was not the fundamental thing. Nothing was fixed or rigid, for the whole community was living daily in the dimension of the Holy Spirit.

Much more could be said about this divine presence and compelling power in the New Testament community. God, to be sure, was still the transcendent Other, awesome and holy; but in Jesus Christ He had come in man's own flesh, and now through the Holy Spirit He again and again became the indwelling, empowering force of the Christian life. Here was transcendence/immanence in such fashion as had not been experienced before; and people went forth into the world God-inspired, God-filled, God-directed. Their worship, their witness, and their work were under the dynamic operation of the Holy Spirit.

What, we may ask, is the record of the church following the New Testament period? One can only answer that almost immediately there was spiritual decline. For example, the letters of the postapostolic Fathers bear little trace of the original spiritual vitality, and the free sway of the Spirit's rule and life is greatly diminished.[1] Charisma is soon understood to be conveyed by ordination, and sacraments become the established channels of the Spirit's activity. The church is increasingly viewed as an institution rather than a fellowship, and priestly and episcopal office deemed to be constitutive for the church's existence. Pneumatic ordering of the community gives way to legal administration, and the church comes to understand itself as controller and dispenser of the Spirit. The Spirit is thus domesticated and canalized, and little room is left for Him freely to anoint leaders and to multiply His own gifts and graces.[2] For a time there are scattered references in early patristic writings to the gifts of the Holy Spirit, but it is not long before many of the gifts disappear. The situation is expressed thus by one fifth-century church Father: "Without a doubt they [the miraculous gifts of the Spirit] accompanied the effusion of the Spirit in the apostolic age, but they have ceased long ago to find a place among us."[3] Thus, despite occasional outbreaks such as Montanism[4] in the second century, the picture is largely one of increasing officialism, institutionalism, sacerdotalism- -and dimming spiritual vitality. The church lived no longer in the full dimension of the Spirit's spontaneous and enabling activity.

A word should be added about the doctrine of the Holy Spirit during these early centuries. References to the Holy Spirit in the ante-Nicene Fathers are relatively sparse (that is, in comparison with the New Testament), and seem to belong to a world of inadequate experience and understanding. This becomes, I believe, all the more apparent in early creedal formulations. The Nicene Creed of 325, after a lengthy affirmation about Christ- -His being of "the same essence as the Father...Who for us men and our salvation came down...," says only, "And we believe in the Holy Spirit." Nothing is added about who or what He is or does.[5] Later at Constantinople (381) there is a lengthier and more significant statement about the Holy Spirit: "And [we believe] in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and life-giver, Who proceeds from the Father, Who is worshipped and is glorified together with the Father and the Son, Who spoke through the prophets...." Quite importantly, some statement concerning who the Holy Spirit is, His procession from the Father, and His deity are affirmed- -and this surely is progress beyond Nicea. However, His particular operation which stands at the heart of the New Testament witness is not at all mentioned. "...Who spoke through the prophets" is all that is said; but such would scarcely seem to move beyond an Old Testament understanding of the activity of the Holy Spirit.[6] The Western Church did later add the "filioque" clause (Toledo, A.D. 589)- -"the Lord and life-giver, Who proceeds from the Father and the Son." However, there is still nothing about the rationale of this procession: proceeded for what purpose, to whom, how, and so on. Even as late as this, there is no further word about the work of the Holy Spirit; just a repetition of "who spoke by the prophets." The church, therefore, while affirming the deity of the Holy Spirit, His place in the Trinity, hence His nature and person, and His relation to Christ, did not give sufficient consideration to the Spirit's operation in the life of humanity. Again, this suggests an inadequate experience and recognition of His activity which is prevalent in the New Testament record and in the early Christian community.

Thus there would seem to be a close connection between the diminution of the experience of the Holy Spirit and the church's rather limited creedal statements. The problem would surely lie with the former, for statements of belief basically reflect the life and experience of the community. The church lived no longer in the full dimension of the Spirit's presence and power, His gifts and graces, His spontaneity and freedom.

The Middle Ages represent no satisfactory improvement of the situation. There were many monastic treatises on spirituality, thus a concern for the inward life of prayer and the growth of the soul. Yet for the most part this relates to various practices designed to achieve a state of contemplation by the ascent of the soul through several stages. The Holy Spirit scarcely figures in this, except as the infusion of love; His coming to humanity to anoint and empower is little mentioned. It is more a matter of what people undergo than of what the Holy Spirit does- -and so the New Testament perspective is seriously neglected. Concern about charisms of the Spirit does emerge, but this refers not so much to 1 Corinthians 12:8-10 as to Isaiah 11:1-3.[7] Hence, the operation of the Holy Spirit known in the early Christian community does not clearly come into focus.

We may now turn to some consideration of the Reformation. Few today would deny the significance of the Reformation in the recovery of many important truths- -such as the sole headship of Jesus Christ, the priority of Scripture over tradition, and justification by faith alone.[8] Also it ought to be stressed that the Reformers variously did speak of the role of the Holy Spirit in uniting men to Christ,[9] in inspiring Scriptures, in making faith possible, and in bringing about regeneration and sanctification. Surely all of these were great gains, but, I would urge, in the area of the Spirit's dynamic activity much was left unsaid.

Let us note three things. First, there was insufficient recognition of the extraordinary and unique event of the coming of the Holy Spirit. Despite all the discussion concerning the work of the Spirit in bringing people to Christ- -hence the area of salvation- -there was little said about the coming of the Spirit and the new situation this creates. It was not clearly understood by the Reformers that the Spirit not only points to Christ but also Christ to the Spirit, and that the coming of the Spirit is a decisive new event in the series of God's mighty acts. They did not see that beyond the actuality of salvation is the event of the Spirit's bestowal; indeed, they tended to view the latter as simply the applying of the former (thus Pentecost, the subjective side of Christ's work of redemption). Accordingly, by overlooking- -even misunderstanding- -the event of the Spirit's coming, the Reformers failed to grasp the important New Testament dimension of the Spirit's activity wherein the people of faith are filled with God's reality and presence, fresh powers of praise and proclamation are brought forth, and their common life is led into new and dynamic expressions.[10]

Second- -and following upon what has just been said- -the Reformation was not able fully to break free from the structural rigidity of the medieval church. To be sure, much was done to crack open the monolithic structure of the Church of Rome and thereby to relieve a repressive condition. However, the churches of the Reformers did not succeed in recapturing the vision of a church guided by the Holy Spirit distributing gifts and ministries as He wills. Their continuing stress on form and order was of course necessary, especially in light of the separation from Rome, and thus the importance given to such "offices"[11] as pastor and teacher. But the freedom in the Spirit to be led into new patterns was not fully realized. Further, the definition of the church as existing where the word is truly preached and the sacraments rightly administered[12] leaves much to be desired.[13] For as important as preaching and sacraments are, it is only people living in the "koinonia" of the Holy Spirit who represent the true ecclesia. It is in such a fellowship of the Spirit (insufficiently recognized by the Reformers) that the charismatic ordering of the life of the community can again become a reality.

Third, the Reformers did not adequately grapple with the gifts (charismata) of the Holy Spirit. Calvin is a particular case in point. Many times in his writings he speaks quite appreciatively of such gifts as tongues, prophecy, and working of miracles, but he does not satisfactorily come to terms with them. This may be seen in that Calvin frequently speaks of these extraordinary workings of the Spirit not only as having ceased with the early church but also that this cessation was quite proper. One reason given for this is that God provided these gifts only for the early adornment of the gospel: "Those miraculous powers and manifest workings...have ceased; and they have rightly lasted only for a time. For it was fitting that the new preaching of the gospel, and the new kingdom of Christ should be illumined and magnified by unheard of and extraordinary miracles."[14] Concerning the gift of tongues (to Cornelius and household) Calvin writes: "They were endowed with a variety of tongues to praise God in many languages....tongues were given, not only to meet a need, when the Gospel had to be preached to foreigners with a different language, but also for the adornment and honour of the Gospel itself."[15] Another reason given by Calvin for the cessation of these extraordinary gifts is that people so quickly corrupted them that God simply took them away. He writes that "the gift of the tongues, and other such like things are ceased long ago in the Church"; and, Calvin adds concerning the gift of tongues, that "many did translate that unto pomp and vain glory....No marvel if God took away that shortly after which he had given, and did not suffer the same to be corrupted with longer abuse."[16] So whether because of no need for further extraordinary gifts or due to the corruption that soon came about, it is evident that for Calvin "miraculous workings" have long ago rightly ceased. Thus Calvin, like others before him, affirms the end of the miraculous gifts, but also goes farther: he assures the church that this cessation was altogether fitting, and implies that, since God Himself withdrew them, they are gone without possibility of return.[17]

What all of this signifies regarding the Reformation is a blind spot concerning the primordial dynamism of the Holy Spirit. To the left of the classical Reformers were the "Enthusiasts" (or "Spiritualists") who placed much emphasis on the area of spiritual vitality. They stressed, for example, the church as a shared fellowship of believers, cultivation of evangelical fervor, and simplicity of organization and worship. They also tended to lay more weight on guidance by the Holy Spirit than direction of the Scriptures. The Reformers reacted strongly against the Enthusiasts, viewing them as "fanatics" who left Scripture behind,[18] elevating their own guidance by the Spirit to the place of primacy. Still, these "Left Wing" people, however exaggerated some of their ideas and actions, were seeking a more radical New Testament renewal. They represented an attempt to make some further headway toward overcoming the formalism and institutionalism of the past.

There is not space here to follow in detail the way of the church since the Reformation. One might mention, almost in passing, a number of events relating to spiritual renewal, such as the rise of Pietism on the continent; the incidence of Puritanism, Quakerism, and Wesleyanism in England; the "Great Awakenings" and the emergence of Holiness groups in America. Of these, I should like to touch upon a few that have particular bearing on the contemporary scene.

A word, first, about Quakerism, which arose in the seventeenth century. In its concern to move away from such things as institutional forms, ordained clergy, structured worship, and dogmatic formulas, there would seem to be a return to much of the New Testament pattern. Also, at the heart of Quaker life is the emphasis on immediate religious experience (the "Light within") without which Christianity is an empty faith. Further, there is stress on the power of Christ or the Spirit as that which is most needed by the church. So writes George Fox, founder of the Quaker movement: "The Lord...said unto me that if but one man or woman were raised by His power to stand and live in the same Spirit that the prophets and apostles were in who gave forth the Scriptures, that man or woman should shake all the country...."[19] Often in Fox's writing there is reference to people trembling before the word preached, and a number of instances are given of extraordinary healing and deliverance. Also Fox, and those after him, stress the importance in the gathered meeting for waiting on the Lord until His word can truly be heard and spoken.

One may see in this Quaker belief and practice a recapturing of many elements of the New Testament. However, two comments must be added about how fully this was accomplished. First, the "Light within," which is sometimes called by Quakers the Holy Spirit, tends to be viewed not so much as a light or power which becomes an actuality through the redemption in Christ, but is understood as a resident fact of all people's lives. Thus this "Light" only needs to be recognized and elicited that people may come to truth and salvation.[20] But the New Testament pattern is quite otherwise: there is no "Light within" until Christ enlightens the inner darkness; and the Holy Spirit is He who is sent to those made new in Christ. Without the vigorous New Testament emphasis on the presence of the Holy Spirit as occurring only through forgiveness of sins"[21] and redemption in Christ, there is danger that "the power of the Spirit" (a frequent expression of Fox) may become indistinguishable from human assertion and activity, and the breaking down of ancient forms and practices little more than the work of the human spirit. Further a man or woman may "shake the country," but is this necessarily God's own shaking? Second, despite references made by such a commanding figure as Fox to extraordinary happenings- -people frequently "quaking," and healings now and then occurring- -there is no clear picture of the recovery of the primitive dimension of the Holy Spirit within the community. The Quaker meeting, while beautifully depicted as a time of silence, waiting, and speaking only by inward prompting, does not fully succeed in recapturing the New Testament picture of a community in which the Holy Spirit manifests His gifts and workings. There is more emphasis on inward silence than outward praise, and on simplicity and directness of speech than on charismatic utterance.[22]

Second, in regard to the Wesleyan movement of the eighteenth century one may note how it goes beyond the Reformation in a concern for entire sanctification or Christian perfection. As in Luther's teaching, there is emphasis on sin and justification, as in Calvin's there is stress on regeneration and sanctification, but in addition there is Wesley's conviction of the possibility of realizing perfection in this present life.[23] By the Holy Spirit we are daily conformed to Christ in the process of sanctification, but there may, and also ought to, come a time when the Christian is granted entire sanctification: a freedom from inbred sin and the perfection of love. Wesley by no means minimizes the need for salvation of a deep, inward kind; indeed, without this there is no sanctifying Spirit at work within humanity. Wesley's fuller concern, however, is for the realization of that perfection which may occur in Christian life.

It is important to note, first, that Wesley's emphasis leads to a view of two great blessings- -salvation and entire sanctification. Both are of faith, and though separated by years, each occurs instantaneously.[24] How does this sanctification come about? Wesley writes: "Expect it by faith; expect it as you are; expect it now...a poor sinner that still has nothing to pay, nothing to plead but 'Christ died.'" Again, in more activist fashion, he writes in answer to the question, "How are we to wait for this change?" the following: "Not in careless indifference or indolent inactivity, but in vigorous and universal obedience; in a zealous keeping of all his commandments; in watchfulness and painfulness; in denying ourselves and taking up our cross daily; as well as in earnest prayer and fasting and a close attendance on all the ordinances of God. And if a man dream of attaining it any other way, he deceiveth his own soul."[25] It is significant that Wesley does not lay stress on the Holy Spirit in the attainment of this perfection. He occasionally mentions that the Holy Spirit will bear inward witness when this comes about. It would therefore seem clear that, despite Wesley's "second blessing" teaching, there is no thought of a special coming of the Holy Spirit; and so, as with the Reformers, this dimension of the Spirit's work is still not recognized.

Wesley's attitude toward the New Testament charismata is likewise revealing. In his preaching there were many occasions of people being "deeply smitten," crying out in anguish, falling to the ground, even going into convulsions before they came to salvation. Wesley saw in this the convicting power of the Holy Spirit. But he never laid claim to "extraordinary operations" of the Holy Spirit; indeed he sought to defend his movement against them.[26] At one time Wesley preached a sermon in which, referring to "extraordinary gifts" such as healing, tongues, and interpretation, he says: "Whether these gifts of the Holy Ghost were designed to remain in the church throughout all ages, and whether or no they will be restored at the nearer approach of the 'restitution of all things' are questions which it is not needful to decide." And then shortly thereafter, he adds, "It was, therefore, for a more excellent purpose than this, that 'they were all filled with the Holy Ghost.' It was, to give them the mind that was in Christ...those holy fruits of the Spirit...love, joy, peace...."[27] At least it can be said for Wesley that he goes beyond Calvin in envisioning the possibility of some future restoration of the extraordinary gifts; however, he does not view the matter as one of any great consequence.

Third, the stress on revivalism and holiness, especially on the American scene in the nineteenth century, began to bring about a new emphasis on the work of the Holy Spirit. The Holiness movement represents a continuation of Wesleyan theology in its stress on a "second blessing" of entire sanctification, or complete holiness. In this movement it became common to speak of this second experience as "baptism with the Holy Spirit," or "Spirit baptism."[28] Along with the Holiness movement was the growth of a revivalism that likewise came to speak of Spirit baptism as a second experience, but not one so much of holiness as of "enduement of power." Revivalists such as Finney, Moody, and Torrey came increasingly to say that the need of the church in its evangelistic efforts was power for witness. And this, "baptism with the Spirit" alone could provide.[29] It is this combination of revivalism and holiness that immediately prepared the way for the spiritual renewal of the twentieth century.[30]

Now in coming to the twentieth century we discover a fuller recovery of the primitive dynamism of the Holy Spirit in the rise of the Pentecostal movement. Pentecostalism (originating about 1901) represented a kind of merging of holiness and revivalism by adding to the second blessing of holiness a third blessing of the enduement of power. However, as in revivalism, baptism with the Holy Spirit was identified with the latter. Thus it was held that beyond conversion (or justification) and holiness (or sanctification) there was a further experience of empowering, which is baptism with the Spirit.[31] This empowering, furthermore, was understood not only for missionary activity (as with revivalism) but for the individual's and community's life of praise, witness, and edification. It was to be "filled with the Spirit"- -with all that the fullness of God can mean. In this event of Spirit baptism, which many now began to experience, there was indeed the resurgence of the New Testament reality of the presence and power of God.

It is important to note the close connection Pentecostals recognized between baptism with the Holy Spirit and the charismatic manifestation of tongues, or glossolalia. We have noted how this phenomenon, along with many other extraordinary workings of the Spirit, became almost unknown after the first few centuries; how theologians such as Aquinas and Calvin were at a loss to understand its significance and viewed tongues only as an event of past history; how after the Reformation there is no experience of this kind by men such as Fox and Wesley. It should be added that there was some manifestation of tongues in the late seventeenth century among the Huguenots of the Cevennes ("the little prophets") and the Catholic Jansenists, and then in the early nineteenth century among the Irvingites of Scotland, but none of these occurrences was ever widespread. Nor did these movements stress the Pentecostal connection between a special event of Spirit baptism and glossolalia. It was in the linking of the two, and the emphasis on tongues as "initial evidence" of baptism in the Spirit, that Pentecostalism made its unique contribution.[32]

This address is not the place to evaluate the Pentecostal doctrine of tongues as "initial evidence," but to stress rather the point that the Pentecostals saw an integral relationship between Spirit baptism- -or being "filled with the Spirit"- -and extra-rational utterance. To be "Spirit-filled" signifies that man in the entirety of his being, his conscious and his unconscious life, is now pervaded by the Holy Spirit.[33] The spirit as well as the mind is included; accordingly, the most primary form of utterance in this event is spiritual not rational. The tongue as the instrument of human utterance may speak in self-transcending fashion because the Holy Spirit is now freely moving through the human spirit. On the deepest level this utterance is extra-rational in the sense of not being in the ordinary language of the speaker; but very close to it is utterance in ordinary language which is also extra-rational in that it is not a result of the speaker's own rational reflection. The first is glossolalia, the second is prophecy- -and in their occurrence witness is borne to the fresh opening up of the world of the Spirit.

Pentecostals by no means stopped with the extra-rational of tongues and prophecy. They also testified to experiencing the whole gamut of spiritual gifts such as word of knowledge, gifts of healing, working of miracles, and discernment of spirits. It is significant that for the first time since the early church the whole range of spiritual manifestations was claimed, and people sought to order their personal and community life in terms of these New Testament operations of the Holy Spirit.

To summarize: Pentecostalism represented a crucial breakthrough in the realm of the Holy Spirit. The focus, as noted, was not the Spirit's work in salvation, or even in sanctification, but in the much-needed empowerment of Christian life. The Pentecostal movement came about not through a highlevel conference of theologians, biblical experts, or an ecumenical council, but through ordinary Christians who were raising in a fresh way a long-neglected question- -not about incarnation and atonement, not about sacraments, not about ministerial orders, and the like, but about the power they saw in the New Testament witness. They sensed that this power was missing or quite minimal in their own lives and experience. Thus the pressing question came to be: What is the secret of the recovery of that power? And what they essentially discovered was the New Testament "hot line," namely, the coming of the Spirit through Jesus Christ to those who truly believed in Him with such force as to penetrate and pervade their existence, to set loose hitherto unrecognized and unknown powers for praising God, for witnessing mightily with accompanying "signs and wonders," and for bringing about a pneumatic ordering of the whole life of the Christian community.

Now this Pentecostal reality which broke in at the turn of the twentieth century was generally too much for the various churches and religious groups to absorb. Even among many in the Wesleyan, revivalist, and Holiness movements- -which had prepared the way for Pentecostalism- -there was strong opposition. Vigorous exception was taken particularly to the joining of Spirit baptism and glossolalia. The older churches of Protestantism (such as Lutheran, Presbyterian, and Episcopalian) paid little attention, largely viewing the Pentecostal movement as emotionalism, irrationalism, sectarianism gone wild, and beyond the pale of serious consideration. With growing opposition on many sides Pentecostals soon found themselves being spurned, and, more and more, were forced into pursuing their own path. Most people of Pentecostal experience were quite ready to dissociate themselves from those who opposed this new movement, and sought in their own assemblies a larger freedom. Thus as the years went by, the Pentecostals became increasingly a kind of third force alongside Protestantism and Roman Catholicism.

Within a half-century the Pentecostal movement (which came to be divided into a number of denominations) had spread over a large part of the world, and in many places today is the fastest growing of all Christian bodies. Then about mid-century there came a new wave of Pentecostal experience among people here and there in historic Protestant churches. This occurred not so much among people of Wesleyan and revivalist traditions, but, surprisingly, among more formal churches such as Episcopal, Presbyterian, and Lutheran. What began in the 1950s rapidly picked up momentum in the 1960s until there was scarcely a Protestant denomination not feeling the Pentecostal impact from within. Then came an even greater surprise (than traditional Protestants becoming Pentecostally involved) when in the late 60s the same Pentecostal reality began to stir within the Roman Catholic Church. No one can fairly estimate the number of neo-Pentecostals, or "charismatics,"[34] there are today, but it seems evident that the movement is really just getting under way.[35] Far more significant than numbers, however, is the way in which mainline (or "classical") Pentecostals in many places are having fellowship, praying and working together, with their Protestant and Catholic brethren in a remarkable spirit of Christian unity.

What is quite different about the neo-Pentecostal, or charismatic, upsurge is the fact that it is going on inside the established churches and is helping to restore the dynamism of the early church. Though there have been a number of struggles within these churches, and now and then a minister or layperson has been evicted because of his Pentecostal testimony, the traditional churches are beginning to open up. It would be too much to say that a groundswell of receptiveness and enthusiasm has developed, but a new climate is emerging. Many who were convinced that the "old wineskins" could not take the "new wine" of Pentecost (thus rejection or withdrawal being the only possibility) are finding that the church is not past renewal. The way has been prepared through the centuries by the church's continuing life and witness, and, rather than the Pentecostal reality being a foreign intrusion, many are becoming aware that what is happening today is indigenous to the church's own reality. For here is found a rejuvenation of ancient forms, and a fresh flowing of the Spirit to infiltrate every aspect of the church's life.

If it is true that the Pentecostal reality is helping to bring about a renewal within the historic churches, it is also the case that these churches have their own contribution to make. Many have a long and meaningful confessional history, there is the experience of centuries of faith and worship, and numerous theological insights have been gained- -all of this, and more, can bring depth and enrichment to the charismatic renewal. Pentecostalism, with its one great contribution to make in the area of the work of the Holy Spirit, needs the balance of other traditions. Furthermore, as a twentieth-century phenomenon, also largely American in origin, it has tended to take on a particular cultural conditioning and expression that is by no means essential to the truth of the Pentecostal testimony. Thus the historic churches have much to give in return for the making of a more complete witness to the Christian faith in our day.

To close: Truly an extraordinary spiritual renewal is occurring across Christendom. We are seeing the release of the primitive dynamism of the early church in our own century. By no means is it happening without the contribution of our fathers in the faith who helped prepare the way. Still, there is something refreshingly new and challenging about a movement that has no denominational or confessional limits; for everywhere that people are caught up in the Pentecostal reality there is an air of discovery, of excitement, of joy. Furthermore, what an amazing sense of unity- -among Protestants of all persuasions, "classical" Pentecostals, and Roman Catholics alike- -is found in this renewal! Here is "spiritual ecumenism"[36] of the richest possible kind- -many Christians everywhere sharing an abundant fellowship in the Spirit.

This is a new era in history. What is happening today, to be sure, is a resurgence of the power that broke out almost two thousand years ago, but it is now taking place within a Christendom long established and multiple in its forms. All over the world the way is thereby prepared, as it could not have been at the beginning of the Christian era, for this fresh outpouring of the Holy Spirit. At the first Pentecost, 120 believers were gathered together in one place, Jerusalem; but now Jerusalem is the world, with Christians in almost every place. As the Holy Spirit moves in mighty power over the earth, baptizing people from on high, we can but rejoice exceedingly! For this verily is the renewal of God's people: to carry forward their mission to the world with new strength and vision, and to live more fully to the praise of His great glory.

Footnotes

[1]H. B. Swete writes: "When the student of early Christian literature passes from the New Testament to the postcanonical writers, he becomes aware of a loss of both literary and spiritual power" (The Holy Spirit in the Ancient Church, 3).

[2]Rudolf Bultmann writes that "The Spirit is no longer the power that now and again breaks out in 'gifts'-the words and deeds and conduct of the believers-but is a power immanent in the institutions, particularly in the sacramental cult; it is the officebearers' equipment for office" (Theology of the New Testament, 2:114).

[3]Theodore of Mopsuestia (this quotation from his commentary on 1 Thess. 5:19f., 2 Thess. 2:6 may be found in Swete, op. cit., 262).

[4]See, e.g., Maurice Bennett's A Living Flame, chapter 10, "Montanism: A Revival of Prophecy." Montanism represents the sad, and to be repeated, story of new impulses emerging in the church too powerful for established forms. Whatever the excesses and imbalances of such a movement, the pity is that the "living flame," which might have given light and warmth to the church, is simply put out.

[5]One might of course say that one council cannot do everything, and since the urgent problem facing Nicea was Christological-growing out of the Arian controversy-that the brief statement concerning the Holy Spirit would not necessarilv point to any failure in the church's life or understanding. However, I would argue that this very concern with the Christological question, and the concentration thereon, was occasioned partly by an insufficient pneumatology. If the church had worked out its Christology in more dynamic, even pneumatic fashion, there could have been both a more satisfactory understanding of the event of Jesus Christ and the significance of the activity of the Holy Spirit.

[6]George Hendry, in his The Holy Spirit in Christian Theology, writes regarding the Creed of Constantinople: "As a formulation of the Christian faith, the statement is patently defective, both by the standard of the New Testament and in comparison with the second article of the Creed in which it is incorporated...[there is] absence of any reference to the distinctively New Testament work of the Spirit" (italics mine), 37-38.

[7]Thomas Aquinas (A.D. 1224-1274) does seek to deal with the charisms of 1 Corinthians 12, in his section on "gratuitous graces" (Summa Theologica, 2, 2, Questions 171-178). Consideration is given, in order, to prophecy, rapture, tongues, word of wisdom and knowledge, miracles. However-to note two of these "graces"-prophecy is considered primarily as intellectual knowledge, though Godinspired ("the mind being enlightened to know an intelligible truth," 176), and tongues are viewed as the supernatural gift of foreign languages for the proclamation of the gospel ("Paul and the other apostles were divinely instructed in the languages of all nations sufficiently for the requirements of the teaching of the faith," 176). Aquinas thus intellectualizes these "gratuitous graces," and fails to appreciate their spiritual dynamism. He also writes as if all of this were a matter of past history, and suggests no relevance of these gifts for the church in his day.

[8]H. Bornkamm in his book, The Heart of Reformation Faith, summarizes the "fundamental axioms" as "by faith alone," "by grace alone," "Christ alone," and "Scripture alone" (chap. 1).

[9]John Calvin, for example, begins the third book of his Institutes of the Christian Religion with a chapter on the Holy Spirit in which he states, against the background of what Christ has done for mankind's salvation (discussed in Book 2), that salvation is without effect unless it becomes an internal reality. This can happen, Calvin adds, through "the secret energy of the Holy Spirit, by which we come to enjoy Christ and all his benefits" (3.1.1. Battles trans.).

[10]Thus the Reformers carry forward a failure in pneumatology which existed from the early church on. It had been recognized (supra) that the Spirit proceeded from the Father (and the Son-Western tradition), but the significance of this procession was not understood. Nor is it understood by the Reformers, despite their advances in talking about the Holy Spirit in relation to many areas of Christian experience. Theologically, since Constantinople the Holy Spirit has been viewed as equal with Father and Son, but in terms of the understanding of His own "proper" work there is a practical subordination.

[11]Martin Luther, for example, in his German version of the Bible, often translates the word "diakonia" (ministry) as "Amt" or "office." Thus there is a continuation of the idea of ecclesiastical office which began in the postapostolic period.

[12]E.g., Calvin in his Institutes declares: "Wherever we see the Word of God purely preached and heard, and the sacraments administered according to Christ's institution, there, it is not to be doubted, a church of God exists" (4.1.9. Battles trans.).

[13]Emil Brunner astutely observes that "no one will suppose that one of the apostles would recognize again in this formula the Ecclesia of which he had living experience" (The Misunderstanding of the Church, 103).

[14]Institutes, 4.19.6 (Battles trans.).

[15]Commentaries on Acts lO:46 (Fraser and McDonald trans.).

[16]Commentaries on Acts 10:44, 46 (Beveridge trans). Since Calvin views the gift of tongues as having ceased, he may seem inconsistent in writing in his Commentaries on 1 Corinthians 14:5 (Beveridge trans.): "As it is certain that the Holy Spirit has here honoured the use of tongues with neverdying praise, we may very readily gather, what is the kind of spirit that actuates those reformers, who level as many approaches as they can against the pursuit of them." However, Calvin here, as reading of the context will show, is talking about the knowledge and value of foreign languages, and urges that we should pursue them. Still, there is a bit of inconsistency in that Calvin views tongues in the early church as a passing miracle-and therefore not to be sought-whereas here it is a knowledge to be cultivated and prized. In either event, it might be added, Calvin, like Thomas Aquinas, here misses the spiritual dimension of speaking in tongues.

[17]There are places, however, in Calvin's writings where his attitude about the availability of the gifts is more positive. For example, in reference to the "rivers of living water" (John 7:38) that Jesus said would come from those who had received the Holy Spirit, Calvin declares that the rivers signify "the perpetuity, as well as the abundance of gifts and graces of the Holy Spirit...promised to us." However, Calvin thereafter adds, "How small is the capacity of our faith, since the graces of the Holy Spirit scarcely come into us by drops...[they] would flow like rivers, if we gave due admission to Christ; that is, if faith made us capable of receiving Him" (these quotations are from the Commentary on John 7:38). It is significant that Calvin here relates the paucity of gifts and graces not to a divine termination of them but to our little faith.

[18]Calvin warns against the "fanatics" who see no further need of Scripture because they claim to be taught immediately by the Spirit (note his Institutes, 1.9, appropriately titled "Fanatics, Abandoning Scripture and Flying over to Revelation, Cast Down All the Principles of Godliness" in the Battles trans.).

[19]The Journal of George Fox, 149.

[20]So Fox writes: "I exhorted the people to come off from all these things (outward temples...traditions and doctrines of men ...hireling teachers, etc.), directing them to the Spirit and grace of God in themselves, and to the Light of Jesus in their own hearts; that they might come to know Christ, their free teacher, to bring them salvation, and to open the Scriptures to them" (Journal, 140).

[21]One searches in vain in Fox's Journal for any reference on his part to a personal conviction of sin, or of his own coming to salvation. He writes about himself, "When I came to eleven years of age I knew pureness and righteousness" (66), and he never admits to a departure therefrom.

[22]I have discovered no reference to tongues in Fox's Journal. Philip Schaff, in his History of the Christian Church, 1:237, however, speaks of glossolalia "among the early Quakers and Methodists." If Schaff is correct, I do not know when this appeared among the Quakers. It might be added that Roland Knox in his book, Enthusiasm, does not agree with this statement about either early Quakers or Methodists (see p. 551). I am inclined to agree with Knox, especially about the Methodists (whom I will discuss below). He may be right also about the Quakers.

[23]See especially Wesley's book, A Plain Account of Christian Perfection.

[24]For Wesley's discussion of whether entire sanctification or perfection occurs gradually or instantaneously see John Wesley, (ed. by Albert C. Outler), pages 282 and 294. Instantaneousness is stressed in both accounts. In a letter Wesley puts this position succinctly: "A gradual work of grace constantly precedes the instantaneous work both of justification and of sanctification, but this work itself is undoubtedly instantaneous. As after a gradual conviction of sin you are justified in a moment, so after a gradually increasing conviction of inbred sin you will be sanctified in a moment" (Letter of June 21, 1784. I am indebted to F. D. Bruner's A Theology of the Holy Spirit, 38, for this quotation.)

[25]Quotations from John Wesley, pages 282 and 294.

[26]In separate letters Wesley wrote, "I deny that either I, or any in connection with me...do now, or ever did, lay claim to...extraordinary operations of the Spirit" (Nov. 4, 1758), and "I utterly disclaim the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Spirit" (Nov. 17, 1759). See The Letters of the Rev. John Wesley, John Telford, ed..

[27]Sermon preached, August 24, 1744, on Acts 4:31 (Sermons on Several Occasions, 1:41). It is interesting to note that in another letter Wesley also said: "While we do not depend on supernatural activities of the Holy Spirit we do not believe miraculous activities of the Spirit have ceased....I am not aware that God hath anywhere precluded himself from thus exerting His sovereign power, from working miracles, in any kind or degree, in any age, to the end of the world. I do not recollect any Scripture wherein we are taught that miracles were to be confined within the limits either of the apostolic or the Cyprianic age, or any period of time...."

[28]Though Methodist in its origins, the Holiness movement rapidly became interdenominational. Also, there were a number of evangelicals variously related to the Holiness movement who were advocates of a "higher life." Among the Holiness and evangelical leaders were such men as W. E. Boardman, John S. Inskip, Robert Pearsall Smith, F. B. Meyer, J. Wilbur Chapman, A. J. Gordon, Andrew Murray, and A. B. Simpson. A. J. Gordon in a chapter entitled "The Enduement of the Spirit" writes: "For it is as sinners that we accept Christ for our justification, but it is as sons we accept the Spirit for our sanctification....It is an additional and separate blessing..."(The Ministry of the Spirit [1894], 69-70).

[29]See, for example, Charles Finney's Memoirs where he describes his own "baptism with the Spirit" (17-18) and the need for this on the part of clergy in general (55). Also, see his Power from on High, chapter 4, "Enduement of Power from on High." R. A. Torrey's The Baptism with the Holy Spirit (1897) and his Person and Work of the Holy Spirit (1910) clearly set forth a second experience, beyond regeneration, of enduement of power. For example, "In regeneration, there is the impartation of life by the Spirit's power, and the one who receives it is saved: in the baptism with the Holy Spirit, there is the impartation of power, and the one who receives it is fitted for service" (Person and Work of the Holy Spirit, 176).

[30]Though there are charismatic aspects in both revivalism and holiness (some reference to tongues, for example, especially in the Holiness movement), neither emphasis represents the concern for charismatic life of the community that was to develop in the twentieth century.

[31]Rev. Charles Parham, first leader of the Pentecostal movement (who had been, in turn, Congregationalist, Methodist, and Holiness) said a few days before his own Pentecostal experience: "Though I honor the Holy Ghost in anointing power both in conversion and in sanctification, yet I believe there is a greater revelation of his power" (The Promise Fulfilled, Kendrick, 50). It was the inbreaking of this power on January 1, 1901, that was the beginning of the modern Pentecostal movement.

[32]According to Donald Gee, Pentecostal leader, "It was the linking together of speaking with tongues and the baptism in the Holy Spirit that sparked off the Pentecostal revival" (Pentecost, no. 45, Sept., 1958). See Bruner, op. cit., 48 n. 34.

[33]Karl Barth writes: "Where men may receive and possess the Holy Spirit, it is of course a human experience and a human act.... The whole man, right into the inmost regions of the so-called 'unconscious' is taken in claim" (Dogmatics in Outline, 139). Likewise Emil Brunner: "...the Holy Ghost seizes the heart, not merely the nous [mind]: it pierces the depths of the unconscious and even the very constituents of the personality" (The Misunderstanding of the Church, 48). I quote these words from Barth and Brunner not because they refer directly to such matters as tongues and prophecy but because what they say about the Holy Spirit claiming and piercing the unconscious makes "extra-rational" utterance plausible. Brunner adds that "we ought to face the New Testament with sufficient candour to admit that in this 'pneuma' which the Ecclesia was conscious of possessing, there lie forces of an extra-rational kind which are mostly lacking among us Christians today" (ibid, 48). We may be grateful that this lack is being remedied in the present charismatic renewal.

[34]By these terms reference is made to persons of Pentecostal experience in the historic churches.

[35]David B. Barrett, editor of World Christian Encyclopedia, has estimated that in 1970 there were 3,788,700 charismatics, and that this figure grew in 1988 to 123,342,710. Barrett then projected that the number would rise to 140,572,050 in 1990 and 222,076,500 in A.D. 2000. This indeed is a huge growth! (For these figures see Barrett's article, "Statistics, Global," Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements, 812-13.)

Vinson Synan writes: "Beginning in 1901 with only a handful of students in a Bible School in Topeka, Kansas, the number of Pentecostals increased steadily throughout the world until by 1993 they had become the largest family of Protestants in the world. With over 200,000,000 members designated as 'Denominational Pentecostals,' this group surpassed the Orthodox churches as the second largest denominational family of Christians, surpassed only by the Roman Catholics" ("The Origins of Pentecostalism in the USA", page 1).

[36]An expression used in the Vatican II "Decree on Ecumenism."

Chapter 3, The Upsurge Of Pentecostalism

Some Presbyterian/Reformed Comment

Among the extraordinary religious phenomena of the twentieth century is the upsurge of Pentecostalism. I should like to note in this chapter some reflections by Presbyterian and Reformed church leaders and theologians upon the significance of the Pentecostal phenomenon.

Among the first of the church leaders in the Presbyterian and Reformed tradition to write about the world-wide Pentecostal movement was Leslie Newbigin. Newbigin- -former missionary of the Church of Scotland, Bishop of the Church of South India, and thereafter Director of the Division of World Mission and Evangelism of the World Council of Churches- -in his book, The Household of God (first published in 1953), called for a clear recognition of the importance of "the Pentecostal stream" (p. 120).[1] In addition to historic Protestantism with its primary emphasis upon the given message and Catholicism with its stress upon structure, there exists, says Newbigin, "a third stream of Christian tradition," which, while mingling with the other two, has its own distinct character. This stream is characterized by the central conviction that "the Christian life is a matter of the experienced power and presence of the Holy Spirit today" (p. 95). Their answer to the question, "Where is the Church?", is neither in terms of a given message (where the pure word is preached and rightly understood) nor a given structure (where the continuation of the apostolate is claimed) but where "the Holy Spirit [is] recognizably present with power" (p. 95).

It is interesting to note that Newbigin goes ahead positively to say "...what I have called the Pentecostal Christian has the New Testament on his side when he demands first of all of any body of so-called Christians, 'Do you have the Holy Spirit?' For without that all your credal orthodoxy and all your historic succession avails you nothing" (p. 101). This being the case, the Church (in its Protestant/Catholic forms) should, says Newbigin, extend to the Pentecostals the widest possible welcome, even if their presence may be "revolutionary" and "subversive." "Here we must frankly face the fact that there is in this teaching a revolutionary element which could be dangerously subversive to our existing ways of thought" (p. 106). But, adds Newbigin, we must be prepared to run the risk today, despite our fear of uncharted country and fanaticism, and think much more seriously about what it means to say that the church is also "the fellowship of the Holy Spirit."

Newbigin's plea is also directed to the Pentecostals, urging them to recognize that there is much to be learned and received from the traditional churches. There is need for more stress on confession, on order and continuity- -the long perspective of the church's history- -and a willingness, through acknowledging the Body of Christ elsewhere, to leave their isolation and enter into ecumenical conversation.[2] In a particularly striking word of address Newbigin says: "In your emphasis upon the primacy of the Spirit, and upon the fact that the Church is intended to be a Spirit-filled fellowship in which the Spirit's gifts are known and enjoyed and used for the edification of the Church you are right. But you are wrong in severing the Spirit from the Body" (p. 120). Newbigin's main thrust however is directed to the traditional Protestant and Roman Catholic, and, speaking for both in humble and moving fashion, he adds: "We must remember that we without them [the Pentecostals] cannot be made perfect" (p. 121).

Finally, in an important paragraph, Newbigin suggests that the way ahead in the Protestant/Catholic dialogue "may be found in a new understanding of the doctrine of the Holy Spirit." Then comes a decisive, possibly prophetic question:

May it not be that the great Churches of the Catholic and Protestant traditions will have to be humble enough to receive it in fellowship with their brethren in the various groups of the Pentecostal type with whom at present they have scarcely any fellowship at all? (p. 122).

There can be little doubt, from what is contained in The Household of God, of Newbigin's generally positive assessment of Pentecostal Christianity and its important contribution to the rest of Christendom. This is the case even though there may be implications of something revolutionary involved in the upsurge of Pentecostalism.

Another church leader-seminary president, author, theologian- -who early sounded a call for the recognition of a "third force" was Henry P. Van Dusen. In an article in Christian Century (August 17, 1955), Van Dusen first spoke about a "third mighty arm of Christian outreach" and forecast that future historians in looking back at the twentieth century will say that, next to the ecumenical movement, "by all odds the most important fact in the Christian history of our times was a New Reformation, the emergence of a new, third major type and branch of Christendom, alongside of and not incommensurable with Roman Catholicism and historic Protestantism."[3] Then three years later, following a trip around the world in which Van Dusen interviewed a large number of church leaders, many of whom expressed concern over the phenomenal growth of nontraditional churches, he wrote an article which appeared in Life magazine (June 6, 1958) entitled "The Third Force in Christendom." This "third force, says Van Dusen, includes a broad spectrum of churches such as Nazarenes, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Seventh-Day Adventists; but, he adds, "Of the third force's world membership of twenty million, the largest single group is 8.5 million Pentecostals."[4] This "third force," Van Dusen further says, is "the most extra-ordinary religious phenomenon of our time." Then the primary matter: "They place strong emphasis upon the Holy Spirit- -so neglected by many traditional Christians- -as the immediate, potent presence of God in each human soul and the Christian fellowship." One other paragraph is particularly significant:

Until lately, other Protestants regarded the movement as a temporary and passing phenomenon, not worth much mention. Now there is a serious growing recognition of its true dimension and probable permanence. The tendency to dismiss its Christian message is being replaced by a chastened readiness to investigate the secrets of its mighty sweep, especially to learn if it may not have important, neglected elements in a full and true Christian witness.[5]

Reference might also be made to Van Dusen's book, Spirit, Son and Father (published in 1958) which, without making any significant mention of Pentecostalism as such, is a call for a more adequate theology and experience of the Holy Spirit. For example, Van Dusen writes, "In current Christian thought there is wanting an adequate and convincing apprehension and appropriation of the Holy Spirit"(p. 12), and later he adds, "A Church devoid of a vital and vibrant possession by the Holy Spirit is a Church congealed in ancient forms, or well on the way to spiritual sterility." By implication what is lacking in many churches is "the immediate, potent presence of God" which (according to the Life article of the same year) belongs to the "third force" of Christendom.

One additional statement in another context, referring specifically to Pentecostalism, is perhaps the most striking of all. In the early 1960s Van Dusen is quoted as saying: "I have come to feel that the Pentecostal movement with its emphasis on the Holy Spirit is more than just another revival.... It is a revolution comparable in importance with the establishment of the original church and with the Protestant Reformation."[6] Thus Van Dusen, while joining Newbigin in speaking of the revolutionary implications of Pentecostalism, actually goes farther in viewing it as no less significant than the emergence of early Christianity and the Reformation of the 16th century.

A third eminent churchman-missionary, seminary president, ecumenical leader- -John A. Mackay, has likewise frequently summoned the church to view the Pentecostal phenomenon positively and openly. As a missionary for many years in South America Mackay became intimately acquainted with both Roman Catholicism and Pentecostalism, and through the years maintained a particular interest in the latter. For example, as chairman of the International Missionary Council meeting in Ghana in 1957, Mackay observed in his keynote address that there are "some notable cases in which the Church is literally the mission. This is true...of the Pentecostal Churches."[7] Another example: as president of the World Presbyterian Alliance that met in Sao Paulo in 1959, Mackay welcomed David du Plessis, world Pentecostal leader, as a fraternal delegate and remarked: "Whatever history may say about my friend, this fact will surely be recorded. This is the first confessional body that has extended recognition to the Pentecostal movement."[8] Du Plessis was also invited by Mackay that same year to be missionary lecturer at Princeton Theological Seminary.

Along with this quite positive interest in classical Pentecostalism Mackay has had a similar attitude regarding the rise of neo-Pentecostalism. In his Ecumenics: the Science of the Church Universal (published in 1964) Mackay writes forcefully about both forms of Pentecostalism:

Pentecostalism represents the rediscovery of the Holy Spirit as a reality in the life of the Church and in the lives of Christians. Despite all the aberrations that may be attached to it in certain places, neo-Pentecostalism is a rebirth of primitive, First-Century Christianity. Protestants who glory in belonging to Classical or Radical Christianity will look down their noses at Pentecostal Christianity only at their peril. For this is a phenomenon of God's springtime (p. 198).

What is striking about Mackay's statement is not only his view that the Pentecostal phenomenon is an important factor (such as "third stream" or "third force") which the rest of Christendom needs to recognize, but also that Pentecostalism "represents the rediscovery of the Holy Spirit" in Christian life and experience and "a rebirth of primitive...Christianity." This being the case, as Mackay sees it, not only is it possible to say (with Newbigin) that "we without them cannot be made perfect" but also that with them- -or in sharing their experience- -the Holy Spirit's dynamism may be rediscovered in our day.

It is further significant to note that thereafter- -in the light of post-Vatican II developments and increasing Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal rise- -Mackay sounded a challenge and warning to Protestantism. He writes in Christian Reality and Appearance (published in 1969):

In a time of revolutionary change- -when all institutional structures are crumbling in the secular and religious order, when the churches of historical Protestantism are becoming increasingly bureaucratized, when more and more church members are meeting in an unecclesiastical underworld, when the Roman Catholic Church is developing evangelical concern and a deepening sense of what it means to be Christian, when the charismatic movement is growing across all boundaries- -might it not happen that unless our Protestant churches rediscover dimensions in thought and life they are losing or disdaining, the Christianfuture may lie with a reformed Catholicism and a matured Pentecostalism? (pp. 88-89).

That Mackay's deepest concern is with the latter- -"a matured Pentecostalism"- -seems to come through in words that immediately follow: "Meantime, let members of the body of Christ listen to their divine Head. Let them be filled with the Spirit."[9]

Finally, in an article, "Oneness in the Body: Focus for the Future," written in 1970,[10] Mackay includes a very high appraisal of the charismatic movement among both Protestants and Roman Catholics:

What is known as the charismatic movement- -a movement marked by spiritual enthusiasm and special gifts, and which crosses all boundaries of culture, race, age, and church tradition- -is profoundly significant. A product of the Holy Spirit, and marked by a passionate love of Jesus Christ and the dedication of time and talent to his service among people everywhere, the charismatic movement is today the most dynamic and creative happening in the world of religion. It is the spiritual phenomenon which alone can match the dedicated enthusiasm of youthful nationalists, racists, marxists and guerrillas. Because "no heart is pure that is not passionate and no virtue is safe that is not enthusiastic," the charismatic movement of today is the chief hope of the ecumenical tomorrow.

It would be hard to imagine a stronger endorsement of the neoPentecostal, or charismatic, movement as the wave of the future.

It is apparent that in the viewpoint of these eminent churchmen- -Newbigin, Van Dusen, and Mackay- -the Pentecostal phenomenon has much positive significance. Their attitude doubtless contrasts sharply with many in traditional churches who look upon Pentecostalism in any form (whether classical or otherwise) as quite unacceptable. It often conjures up pictures of excessive emotion, bizarre behavior, irrational attitudes, and the like. "There still prevails the assumption," writes Father Kilian McDonnell, leading Roman Catholic interpreter of Pentecostalism, "that Pentecostalism is somehow psychologically disreputable, socially unwashed, and theologically barren."[11] All this does not seem to bother the churchmen cited; for they appear to be saying that whatever Pentecostalism's inadequacies, perhaps its exaggerations, even uncouthness,[12] it is a quite important force for vital Christianity today. Radical, revolutionary- -and thus possibly both threatening and challenging- -such is Pentecostalism: unmistakably essential to the present and future of Christendom.

Let us now turn to a consideration of the viewpoint of several Reformed theologians about the Pentecostal phenomenon.

Reference may first be made to Arnold C. Come and his attitude expressed in Human Spirit and Holy Spirit (published in 1959). At one place in his book Come speaks of our witnessing today "a new era of revivalism, mysticism, and the formation of pietistic groups at the fringe or outside the traditional churches, and of a phenomenal surge in the growth of the socalled 'holiness' or 'pentecostal' churches" (p.137). In the context of that statement Come faults these churches for being exclusive: "They all claim to be in possession of true Christianity as over against the institutionalized churches." However- -and this is important in our consideration- -Come, farther on, calls for "a serious re-study and re-evaluation." In, what I believe to be, a very significant statement Come writes:

The historical crisis confronting Christianity, the ecclesiastical dilemma of a fractured church, the need of deeper spiritual resources, all are demanding a serious restudy and re-evaluation of the whole anabaptist, pietist, gnostic, and pentecostal traditions (p. 175).

Though Come lumps a good many things together, there is little doubt of his view of the importance of fresh examination of Pentecostalism along with other elements in this tradition. What may be most noteworthy here is Come's recognition of the serious need arising out of historical crisis, a broken church, and depleted spiritual resources. And though Come does not proceed to make the called for study himself, he does acclaim its urgency.

Next we may note George S. Hendry and his book, The Holy Spirit in Christian Theology (1953, revised 1965). Though Hendry nowhere mentions Pentecostalism directly, it is interesting to observe that he regards the Left Wing (or "Spirituals") as having its own positive contribution to make. In the second preface he says clearly that "if the three great divisions of western Christendom will recognize that they have been divisive in their respective testimonies to the work of the Holy Spirit," we can move to a fuller unity. Then, in one of the new chapters, "The Holy Spirit as the Giver of Life and Unity," Hendry develops the theme of the Holy Spirit as "the source of solidarity, authority, and vitality," each in turn being represented by Roman Catholicism (solidarity of the Church), classical Protestantism (authority of the Word) and the Spirituals Wing (vitality in Christian life). The tendency, says Hendry, is for each of these traditions to subordinate the other two aspects, but all are needed for the wholeness of the Church. Then Hendry significantly adds:

Neither the solidarity of the Spirit in the Church nor the authority of the Spirit in the Word is of any avail unless it is accompanied by the vitality of the Spirit in the lives of Christian people (p. 122).

It is important to observe that though Hendry does not speak with as much emphasis as Newbigin, Van Dusen, and Mackay about the third "stream" or "force"- -nor does he discuss Pentecostalism as such- -there is a recognition of the importance of those representing the "vitality of the Spirit." Thus does Hendry join the others in urging the importance of this third motif in contemporary Christendom.

What seems to be coming through from churchman and theologian alike is that there is serious need today of what the third "stream" (however worded) represents. Whether put in terms of "the experienced power and presence of the Holy Spirit" (Newbigin), "the immediate, potent presence of God in each Christian soul and in the Christian fellowship" (Van Dusen), or "the rediscovery of the Holy Spirit in the life of the Church and in the lives of Christians" (Mackay), the churchmen have little question that the Pentecostal reality is utterly essential for Christendom. Likewise Come in the expression of need for "deeper spiritual resources" and Hendry for "the vitality of the Spirit," while not singling out Pentecostalism, seem to be moving in the same direction. However, there is some difference- -and surely not unimportant- -namely that the churchmen lay larger stress on the revolutionary character of what Pentecostalism represents. Indeed- -and this must be explored further- -it is almost as if they are saying that Pentecostalism is more than simply a third factor to be added to two others (traditional Protestantism and Catholicism). Rather it points in some sense to a missing or forgotten dimension of the Holy Spirit's presence and power. Thus there is something radical, even "subversive" (Newbigin) about the Pentecostal witness, for it unavoidably subjects the rest of Christendom to a probing scrutiny.

This essay is hardly the place to attempt an extended theological study of the understanding of Pentecostalism. It is evident, however, that at the heart of Pentecostal thought is the mystery of Pentecost- -the tremendum of the Holy Spirit's coming, which is viewed as present experience and the source of vitality and witness. Further, it is a result of this experience, so Pentecostalism claims, that the various charismata (especially of 1 Corinthians 12-14) are being manifested once more. Thus do the Pentecostals press upon the Church at large the question concerning participation in the vitalizing and empowering reality of the Holy Spirit. Has much of Christendom failed to appropriate the full significance of Pentecost?

Let us move on to two other Reformed theologians who have sought to grapple with the meaning of Pentecost and Pentecostalism. We may first note Karl Barth, particularly the section in his Church Dogmatics IV/3 entitled "The Promise of the Spirit." Though Barth does not deal directly with Pentecostalism, what he has to say about "the promise of the Spirit" may aid in further reflection. Since, particularly, Barth herein defines the promise of the Spirit as "His [Jesus Christ's] direct and immediate presence and action among and with and in us" (p. 350), this would seem to point directly to the vital area of the Pentecostal witness.

Barth holds that the "coming again" of Jesus Christ has a threefold form, yet it is essentially one. We must "plainly distinguish the resurrection, the outpouring of the Spirit and the final return of Jesus Christ" (p. 295), while recognizing in them the one coming of Jesus Christ. The Easter event, as the first form of this coming again, is the gift of new life- -"the gift of this life, given in virtue of His radiating light, is thus in the form of its commencement the gift of Easter day" (p. 305). By virtue of Christ's coming in the Resurrection the early disciples "found themselves addressed and claimed as justified and sanctified in the revelation of the work accomplished in the life and death of Jesus. They were taken up into the victory of life over death....Their liberation for eternal life and therefore for service in this life had taken place" (p. 303). So it is with us: eternal life is given through the Resurrected Lord; thus there is "no greater, higher, or better gift" (p. 306). And yet there are other forms.

Thus we come to the "second form," the outpouring of the Spirit. This coming, says Barth, happens to two kinds of people, "Christians who know Jesus Christ and non-Christians who do not" (p. 351). Barth speaks first of Christians to whom the Spirit comes: "It is presupposed that the Spirit, the Holy Spirit, i.e. Jesus Christ acting and speaking in the power of his resurrection, is present and active among certain men," namely, Christians. These persons, through the present operation of the Spirit, "exist as recipients, bearers and possessors of the promise of the Spirit, in fellowship with its Giver, the Spirit Himself, touched and indeed filled by His power, and therefore by the power of the risen Jesus Christ..." (p. 352). These recipients of the Spirit are Christians who know themselves as reconciled, justified, and sanctified in Him, and whom Jesus sets upon the way into the world, at the same time "bestowing upon them in the twofold form and strength of His promise the gifts and lights and powers which they need for this purpose" (p. 353). These believers to whom the Spirit comes, even in the weakness of their flesh, are "spiritual men" (p. 353).

There are other persons, non-Christians, who lack the Holy Spirit. Christ is "not yet present and active in them in the subjective realization corresponding to His objective reality. The Holy Spirit Himself and as such is here a reality which is still lacking and is still to be expected" (p. 353). These are "unspiritual men," for "in them the Holy Spirit comes up against closed doors and windows, not reaching or dwelling in those who do not know Jesus" (p. 354). They are "not yet caught up in the living stream of life, not yet moved by the promise of the Spirit, not yet living by the lights and powers bestowed with this promise, but still without on the rocky banks of the stream" (p. 355).

So, Barth adds, we live in the time of the Holy Spirit, but differently as Christians and non-Christians, for the Spirit is a gift to one and a promise to the other: "...it is the time of the Holy Spirit given to Christians with His sure and powerful pledges, and promised to non-Christians with His equally sure and powerful pledges" (p. 359). If however, we do not live joyfully, and in glad expectation of his final coming- -Barth proceeds to ask- -"Have we really received the Spirit and His pledge...?" (p. 360).

I have quoted from Barth in some detail because I believe his words have relevance for the Pentecostal situation of today. For their witness about the presence of the Holy Spirit is also twofold: concerning both Christians and non-Christians. Pentecostals are insistent that the message of Pentecost is primarily addressed to Christians (those in whom the Holy Spirit is already present) to alert them to the bestowal of the Spirit and His gifts and powers; and, not unlike Barth, their probing question is also, "Have we really received the Spirit?" This is the heart of the Pentecostal concern. It is addressed not to unbelievers but to believers, and they would urge that it speaks to the Church of today at the point of most critical need. Pentecostals also stress that whatever Christ has done objectively in His death and resurrection must be followed by subjective realization- -and this comes only through the Holy Spirit breaking open closed doors. So the other aspect of the Pentecostal witness to the Church at large focuses on the need for a vital experience wherein the unbeliever enters upon "the living stream of life."

But let me return to the former point above. In so doing I feel constrained to express my judgment that this may well be the "blind spot" in the Church that the Pentecostals have peculiarly turned the light upon. If it is true that many in our midst, indeed Christian people, are sensing a kind of powerlessness and emptiness of spiritual vitality- -and little of God's "gifts and lights and powers"- -it could be that the word particularly needed is that concerning the presence and power of the Holy Spirit. It remains true that the imperative need of non-Christians is that the Holy Spirit make effectual the objective act of God in Jesus Christ, thus their justification and sanctification. But if this has taken place, as for all Christians, there may yet be on our part the failure to hear and receive the word of Pentecost, addressed first to believers, whereby we begin to live and move in the presence and power of the Spirit. For the Holy Spirit is not only active in reconciliation, but He is also (and even primarily according to the Pentecostal motif) active in enabling for witness. The Holy Spirit is indeed promised and given to Christians, and we are called to live by His lights and powers. But- -and this is the crucial matter- -this objective endowment may not yet be operative; we may not yet have received what has been given. How much do we know about being "touched and indeed filled by His power" (to use Barth's language) if our very joylessness and impotence signifies something out of kilter? In this situation it may well be that "the rediscovery of the Holy Spirit" (Mackay) in our day, as especially attested by the Pentecostals, will turn out to be the opening up afresh of this dynamic dimension of the Holy Spirit's presence and power.

This brings us finally to the theologian, Hendrikus Berkhof, and particularly his book, The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit (published in 1964). Herein Berkhof makes the first attempt in Reformed theology- -so far as I know- -to focus directly upon the Pentecostal witness[13] and to affirm its viewpoint as important for the whole church.

Early in his book Berkhof stresses that in the Western, mainline tradition of theology (as represented by both Roman Catholicism and Protestantism) there is a serious neglect in the area of the Holy Spirit. The prevailing pneumatological trend has been that of seeing the work of the Holy Spirit as only the "subjective reverse" of Christ's work. Accordingly, the Holy Spirit's chief role has been viewed as that of awakening faith in Christ; thus the Spirit's work is understood as purely instrumental and subordinate. To this prevailing trend Berkhof registers objection:

The Spirit is far more than an instrumental entity, the subjective reverse of Christ's work. His coming to us is a great new event in the series of God's saving acts. He creates a world of his own, a world of conversion, experience, sanctification; of tongues, prophecy, and miracles; of upbuilding and guiding the Church... (p. 23).

Now this, Berkhof adds, is what has been in the minds of all who "in every century of church history, protested against the lack of spiritual reality in the official church life...from the Montanists of the second century...[to] the Pentecostals of the twentieth" (p. 23).

While not dealing with Pentecostalism only in the statements above, Berkhof is clearly seeking to cope with what he views to be a critical defect in the theology of Western Christendom. As long as the Holy Spirit is not understood as, in some sense, independent of Christ, Berkhof is urging, even a concentration on Christ, His work, faith, and the like, may result in a diminution of spiritual vitality.

We may now note specifically what Berkhof has to say about the Pentecostal position. In a chapter (4) on "The Spirit and the Individual" Berkhof speaks of how Revivalist and Pentecostal movements stress a working of the Holy Spirit beyond justification and sanctification, "now widely known as the 'filling by the Holy Spirit' or 'the baptism by the Holy Spirit'" (p. 85). This position, says Berkhof, so important in Pentecostalism, has scarcely been heeded by official theology,[14] and not recognized in the traditional churches of Christendom.

It is quite interesting, and doubtless significant, that Berkhof, a Reformed theologian, proceeds to express his general agreement with the Pentecostal position just described. First, he recognizes in Luke-Acts a special "filling" by the Holy Spirit through which "the faithful are empowered to speak in tongues, to prophesy, to praise God...to give a powerful expression of God's mighty deeds to those around them" (p. 86). Second, he sees in Paul's discourse about the charismata (1 Cor. 12-14) a pointing to the same or similar things; for though Paul does not use the language of "filling" he does speak of such manifestations of the Spirit as word of wisdom, healing, miracles, prophecy, tongues. Thus Berkhof concludes:

For him [Paul] also the work of the Spirit is not exhausted in justification and sanctification; an additional working is promised and must therefore be sought. All this leads us to the conclusion that the Pentecostals are basically right when they speak of a working of the Holy Spirit beyond that which is acknowledged in the major denominations (p. 87).

This obviously is a quite far-reaching statement. It clearly grows out of Berkhof's earlier expressed dissatisfaction with traditional pneumatology that, in his view, subordinates the Holy Spirit to Christ and fails to recognize that the Spirit "creates a world of his own." Berkhof is particularly stressing that this "world" includes the "filling" or empowering work of the Holy Spirit. Further, it is to be noted that Berkhof stresses not only that this "additional working" of the Spirit is promised but also that it "must therefore be sought." Hence the Holy Spirit's presence and power is not to be presupposed, but may await a fresh concern on the part of the church throughout Christendom.[15] To be alert to such a possibility could signalize a revolutionary new breakthrough in the world of the Spirit.

The "filling" by the Holy Spirit- -which lies at the heart of Pentecostal witness- -Berkhof tries variously to describe. It means that a person is thereby equipped to become "an instrument for the ongoing process of the Spirit in the church and in the world" (p. 83). Again, "the filling by the Spirit means that the justified and sanctified are now turned, so to speak, inside out" (p. 89). Through this "filling" the community becomes "charismatic," being supplied with multiple graces and gifts, and thereby is enabled to give bold and compelling witness to the good news of Jesus Christ.

But, whatever the description, the decisive matter in all of this is Berkhof's view that the Pentecostals are conversant with a working of the Spirit unacknowledged by traditional churches. In much of this Berkhof does not differ greatly from Barth, for example, that there is a work of the Spirit beyond justification and sanctification,[16] that Pentecost represents in some sense a happening for Christians, and that this event makes possible various gifts and graces. Further, the fact that Barth raises the crucial question, "Have we really received the Spirit?," is in and of itself quite probing and points in the direction of something that Christians may need to face with utter candor. Berkhof however goes beyond Barth in the radicalism of his statement that this working of the Spirit is unacknowledged by Western Christendom in general, and that Pentecostalism (and some forms of Revivalism) is the herald of this long neglected reality.

All of this points, according to Berkhof, in the direction of the church at large needing to rediscover a dimension of the Holy Spirit's working that has been long overlooked. This seems to be essentially what the Pentecostal movement also is saying in our day. It bears witness to the reality of such a rediscovery, and calls upon the churches of Christendom to awaken to the possibility of this happening to all.[17]

This brings us full circle to some of the things we first noted in Newbigin's writing. There is, as Newbigin puts it, something quite revolutionary in the Pentecostal witness, "dangerously subversive to our existing ways of thought." But could it be that this "subversion"- -if we are willing to undergo it- -would be not for the crippling of Christendom but for its renewal? Is Newbigin by any chance right in saying that "without them [the long neglected and frequently despised people of 'the Pentecostal stream'] we cannot be made perfect"? Dare we face the possibility that Pentecostalism (whatever its aberrations) represents a first-hand experience of presence and power only vaguely surmised[18] in the church at large? Newbigin, it will be recalled, urges the importance of new understanding of the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, but also suggests that this is far more than an intellectual enterprise. Indeed, we may have to be "humble enough to receive it in fellowship" with "various groups of the Pentecostal type." Are we really prepared to humble ourselves that much?

It is obvious that I stand in hearty agreement with many of our Reformed and Presbyterian spokesmen that the upsurge of Pentecostalism represents a vital renewal of Christianity at its original sources. I do not think it an exaggeration to say that it is "a phenomenon of God's springtime," and that we must be willing to "investigate the secrets of its mighty sweep." If it is the case that there is something going on here comparable in importance to the advent of Apostolic Christianity and the Protestant Reformation[19]- -and I am coming increasingly to suspect that there is- -then we are called upon to delay no longer in giving ourselves without stint to fuller experiential and theological understanding.[20]

Footnotes

[1]Newbigin does not write about Pentecostalism as a denomination but as a "stream" involving many people. Hence references to "Pentecostals" or "Pentecostal Christians" hereafter should be understood as representing a broad stream to the "left" of much of Christendom.

[2]In the years that soon followed the publication of Newbigin's The Household of God, it is noteworthy that some of the Pentecostal churches left their ecumenical isolation. At the Third Assembly of the World Council of Churches (New Delhi, 1961), two South American (Chilean) Pentecostal churches were accepted into membership, and at the Fourth Assembly (Uppsala, 1968) there were fifteen Pentecostal participants in various capacities.

[3]"Caribbean Holiday," pp. 946-48.

[4]Article cited, p. 124.

[5]Ibid.

[6]See John L. Sherrill's book, They Speak with Other Tongues, 27.

[7]The Ghana Assembly of the International Missionary Council, "The Christian Mission at This Hour," 115. Mackay speaks of this also being true of the Mormon Church. However, that his concern is particularly with Pentecostalism may be noted in the sentence that immediately follows: "In many parts of the world today every member of the several churches that make up the Pentecostal World Fellowship are not only committed Christians, but ardent missionaries."

[8]See The Spirit Bade Me Go by David J. du Plessis, 19.

[9]Under the heading, "Be Filled with the Spirit," Mackay, in an earlier book entitled God's Order discussed the Pentecostal movement in South America (see 176ff.).

[10]World Vision, April, 1970.

[11]See "The Ideology of Pentecostal Conversion" in the Journal of Ecumenical Studies, Winter, 1968, 126. I might add that McDonnell, on the basis of extended research in the field, views this attitude as essentially unwarranted.

[12]One further-and delightful-quotation from Mackay: "uncouth life is better than aesthetic death"! (Ecumenics, 198).

[13]Barth, as mentioned, makes no reference to Pentecostalism as such. My point here is that Berkhof, whose ideas seem to parallel many of Barth's above, writes consciously with the Pentecostal witness in mind. (For a previous reference to Berkhof see chap. 1, n.28.)

[14]Berkhof laments what he calls "a watertight partitionwall between these [Pentecostal and Revivalist] groups and the theology in seminaries and universities." He adds: "I believe that this partition is to the detriment of both parties, and I will make an attempt to break through the wall" (85).

[15]Barth has written elsewhere that "a presupposed spirit is certainly not the Holy Spirit," that "a foolish church presupposes his presence and action in its own existence," and that "only where the Spirit is sighed, cried, and prayed for does he become present and active" (Evangelical Theology: An Introduction, 58). Barth's words likewise probe the vitals of the Church's existence.

[16]Berkhof mentions that the "one important exception" to official theology's neglect of a third work of the Holy Spirit is Barth. After having dealt with justification in Church Dogmatics IV/1 and sanctification in IV/2, Barth comes to "calling" in IV/3 (from which volume we quoted above) whereby "the justified and sanctified Christian is now called to participate in the work of Christ, that is: to be a witness." Thus, Berkhof adds, "Barth is aware of a third dimension in pneumatology" (see Berkhof, 90).

[17]I should like to add one further quotation from Berkhof that, while having nothing directly to do with Pentecostalism, speaks powerfully about the need for "a new experience of the Holy Spirit." In a later article entitled "A New Age-A New Theology?", written in the aftermath of the "death of God" theology, Berkhof has this to say: "The only adequate response to the experience of the death of God is a new experience of the Holy Spirit, an authentic revival and renewal. A new theology as such has no power to renew. It must itself be born of renewal, in order to lead modern man out of thinking to the steep cliff of God's free power and to wait in need of renewal for the promise of the Holy Spirit. Only where this promise is fulfilled will 'signs of the Spirit and of power' become visible in our world of alienation from God. Only this sign-and not our most sophisticated apologetic-can lead modern man to the joyful confession that God is truly in our midst" (Reformed World, Dec. 1967, 361-2).

[18]Emil Brunner, in his book The Misunderstanding of the Church writes about the Holy Spirit in the primitive ecclesia as "a reality whose dynamic power we can now entertain scarcely a vague surmise" (51). Thus does Brunner question Christendom as a whole. What I am suggesting is that this "dynamic power" may well be reappearing in the Pentecostal witness of today.

[19]Though I am referring to Van Dusen's statement (see preface), it may be worth noting that Frederick Denison Maurice had already said, in the nineteenth century, "I cannot but think that the reformation in our day, which I expect to be more deep and searching than that of the sixteenth century, will turn upon the Spirit's presence and life as that did upon Justification by the Son" (quoted in the preface to The Spirit, ed. by B. H. Streeter).

[20]A final word: I have not intended to suggest in this article that the only hope for our future rests in simply adopting everything in Pentecostal theology and practice. Such of course would be quite unwise and surely impossible. Indeed even if it were possible, those in the Reformed tradition (and Christendom in general) would only come off the losers, since there is doubtless much in Pentecostalism that is unessential, perhaps even misleading. Moreover, I would insist that we are called upon to give as well as to receive, and that it is in the manifold witness of the great traditions of Eastern Orthodoxy, Western Catholicism, and Protestantism-and possibly others-that richness of truth is to be found. Nonetheless, as the paper no doubt has shown, I am convinced that what Pentecostalism represents-which is far more than a particular tradition of the twentieth century-remains utterly essential for all our churches: the renewed experience of the presence and power of the Holy Spirit.

Chapter 4, The Person And Work Of The Holy Spirit

With Special Reference to "The Baptism in the Holy Spirit"

Excerpts from a report adopted by the General Assembly of the former Presbyterian Church, U.S. (Southern), in 1971[1]

I, Certain Contemporary Experiences of the Spirit

A. There are a number of people in historic Protestant churches- -and most recently in the Roman Catholic Church- -who have had an experience which they call "the baptism of (with, in) the Holy Spirit," or sometimes "the filling of (with) the Holy Spirit." This experience has been so meaningful and vivid to those who have gone through it that they have difficulty putting it into words: "a new relationship, a deeper encounter, a closer walk." Many speak of it primarily as an extraordinary sense of God's reality and presence, and lay claim to a praise and adoration of God hitherto unknown to them. At the same time they often testify to a new bond of community with those who have had the same experience, and a heightened desire and capacity to bear witness to the gospel. In all aspects of life they claim a deeper love, joy, and peace.

Frequently they testify to a multiplicity of "charismata," such as speaking in tongues, prophecy, healing, and so on. Many claim that speaking in tongues was the primary manifestation of their "filling" or "baptism," for it has been either an immediate accompaniment of their experience or has followed some time later. They usually disclaim an interest in the spectacular as such; rather, their testimony is to the reality of God, a deeper awareness of His presence, and the wonder that the Holy Spirit has filled their being.

As these people seek to understand what has happened to them, they generally speak of it as an occurrence within their Christian life. Usually they think of themselves as having been believers for a long time; hence, they do not interpret this experience as entrance into faith but as something beyond. Sometimes they speak of salvation and being "filled with the Spirit." They claim that both could (and sometimes do) occur at the same moment, but for most of them there has been a separation in time. Frequently this "baptism with the Spirit" has occurred after the laying on of hands; but this is not true in all cases. For most of these people the testimony is that- -with or without the laying on of hands- -the experience occurred after extended prayer and seeking. Some speak of this event as a transition within their Christian experience, from the state of Christ's (or the Spirit's) being with them to His being in them. Others say that the transition is rather to be understood as a fuller realization of what was already within them. In any case, these people feel sure that they have entered into a new and exciting life in the Spirit.

B. The events which we have enumerated have raised some critical problems for our Church, and especially for those congregations in which the events have occurred. In the first place, we have tended to stress the work of the Spirit in the life of the believer as uniting the believer to Christ and thereby bringing to him God's grace in salvation. Justification has been viewed as the initial work of the Spirit in applying to man the benefits of Christ's work, and sanctification as the ongoing work of the Spirit in completing the divine purpose by transforming a human life more and more into the likeness of Jesus Christ. But in this contemporary experience of the Spirit there seems to be testimony to an additional working of the Spirit that goes beyond the initiation of Christian life (justification) and its progress (sanctification)- -a "baptism" or "filling" with the Holy Spirit. The critical question here is how, in the light of the Biblical witness and the Reformed tradition, this understanding is to be adjudged.

In the second place, problems of another kind also arise from the situation to which we have referred. When some members of a congregation claim special pneumatic experiences, or claim extraordinary gifts- -e.g., healing, speaking in tongues- -the peace, unity, and fellowship of the Church may be seriously jeopardized. Differing views of the Spirit and His work may give rise to a schism between those who claim a Spirit baptism and those who do not, or between those who recognize the validity of such claims and those who do not. Obviously our Church ought to provide some guidance in these matters where strong differences of opinion may result in contention and the disruption of the Church's work.

Manifestly, any valid guidance that can be given on this, or on any other subject, must be derived from the teachings of Scripture, and must be evaluated in the light of the Standards of our church. We shall therefore attempt to sketch what the Old and the New Testaments have to say with regard to the Spirit, and then to examine the teachings of the Confession of Faith and the Catechisms, before proceeding to draw conclusions.[2]

II, Concluding Observations

An evaluation of contemporary events involving a "baptism of the Holy Spirit" must begin, as the structure of the report implies, with the guidance furnished us by the Scriptures. At the same time we are called upon to give serious heed to the doctrinal Standards[3] of our denomination. Likewise it is imperative that we seek to understand what is deeply involved, and at stake for those who claim to have had such a "baptism" within their Christian experience, and particular "charismatic" manifestations. The Scriptures remain our primary source; yet our understanding of Scripture depends upon the illumination provided by the Spirit Himself.

Our study of the Old and New Testaments, however, has revealed no single consistent doctrine of the Spirit which is now immediately applicable to the contemporary situation; nor has it furnished us with a simple straight line of doctrinal development in this regard. Moreover, we must avoid the temptation to improve on the concept of the Spirit through any speculative theory drawn from other sources. Hence, our point of departure in this task can be no other than the New Testament's close identification of the Spirit with Jesus Christ. As Christians we must be guided first of all by God's self-revelation in Christ, testing our understanding by the Scripture's testimony to Him who is our Lord.

A. As we seek to give an expression of our faith in the Holy Spirit that will be an aid in comprehending the experiences which have prompted the present study, there are several basic principles which we must bear in mind. First, as the Scriptures repeatedly affirm, the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of the holy God, the God of the Bible. All our speech about the Holy Spirit is therefore speech about God. We shall make no attempt to define the concept of "spirit" in general and then move to an understanding of the Holy Spirit based on our ideas about the essential properties or characteristics of "spirit." Rather, our task is to discern the meaning of God's action, in the person of His Spirit, in the lives of His people.

Second, as the New Testament makes clear, and as Calvin aptly reminds us (Institutes, 3.1.4), there is no understanding of the Spirit apart from faith. This means that all our statements about the Holy Spirit are in essence affirmations of faith. They are not "factual" statements in the sense that they purport to give objective data or information which may then be tested for accuracy by scientific means. In speaking of the Holy Spirit we speak from faith to faith.

Third, since the Holy Spirit is the spirit of the God whom we know only through Jesus Christ, we are compelled, in regard to the contemporary spiritual phenomena, to "test the spirits to see whether they are of God" by the measure of their confession of Jesus Christ (1 John 4:1-3). Nothing that contradicts what we see in Christ can rightly be regarded as the activity of the Spirit; on the other hand, whatever bears witness to Christ and His work of the redemption of mankind exhibits the incontrovertible evidence of the Spirit's presence.

B. With the foregoing principles in mind, and with constant reference to the Biblical teachings, the Standards of our Church, and the contemporary situation, the Permanent Theological Committee offers the following statement for the guidance of the Assembly.

1.   The greatest emphasis in the Bible, and the most prominent aspect of our Reformed tradition, is to be found in the work of the Spirit in bestowing upon man all the benefits of God which come to him in Jesus Christ. Faith in Jesus Christ is the way whereby all benefits are received, such as justification, sanctification, and eternal life (1 Cor. 6:11; John 3:16; Confession of Faith, 14.2), and through the Holy Spirit this salvation is a reality.

2.   The Holy Spirit accordingly dwells in all who thus believe. If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him (Rom. 8:9). Thus it is impossible to speak of a transition within Christian existence from the state of Spirit's being with to being in. The Spirit indwells all Christians.

3.   Baptism with water is a means of grace whereby the grace of salvation is not only offered but conferred by the Holy Spirit (Confession, 30.6). However, according to the Confession, the significance of baptism is not tied to the moment of administration, for, though God's saving grace is conferred thereby, such grace may become efficacious at a later time, or it may have become efficacious earlier. For example, there are those who do not come to an appropriation of this grace (especially if baptized in infancy) until a later date. Calvin speaks (particularly regarding infants) of being "baptized into future repentance and faith" (Institutes 4.20), and urges that this should fire us with greater zeal for renewal in later years. From this perspective it is possible to say that baptism with water may very well be separated from salvation, or at least from full entrance upon it. Though baptism is a channel of God's grace, this grace is not automatically efficacious. Accordingly, there may be special need in the Reformed tradition to lay stress on later occasions (such as entrance into communicant membership) on which God's grace may also be appropriated. Reformed teaching about baptism must be held in creative tension with all that is also said about the importance of conversion and regeneration, and the practice of our church should be in harmony therewith.

4.   "Baptism with the Holy Spirit," as the Book of Acts portrays it, is a phrase which refers most often to the empowering of those who believe to share in the mission of Jesus Christ. The significance of "baptism with the Spirit" is also represented in terms such as "outpouring," "falling upon," "filling," and "receiving," being for the most part attempts to depict that action of God whereby believers are enabled to give expression to the gospel through extraordinary praise, powerful witness, and boldness of action. Accordingly, those who speak of such a "baptism with the Spirit," and who give evidence of this special empowering work of the Spirit, can claim Scriptural support. Further, since "baptism in the Spirit" may not be at the same time as baptism with water and/or conversion, we need to be open-minded toward those today who claim an intervening period of time. If this experience signifies in some sense a deepening of faith and awareness of God's presence and power, we may be grateful.

5.   We are called upon to recognize a work of the Spirit which involves the application of special gifts and benefits to the members of Christ's church. The Confession of Faith suggests this in Chapter 9.4, where, following the paragraph on the Spirit's work in redemption, the words, in part, read, "He calls and anoints ministers for their holy office, qualifies all other officers in the church for their special work, and imparts various gifts and graces to its members." Here is a special work of the Holy Spirit of calling and anointing that is peculiarly related to the life of the believing community. We would add that it is important for the church constantly to bear this work of the Holy Spirit in mind so that there will be a continuing readiness for, and recognition of, the calling, the qualifying, and the imparting of the gifts and graces of the Holy Spirit to the community of faith. Both a fresh confrontation with the biblical record and contemporary spiritual experience, we believe, are bringing us into a fuller understanding of the work of the Holy Spirit.

6.   The "baptism of the Holy Spirit" may be signified by certain pneumatic phenomena, such as speaking in tongues and prophecy (Acts 2:4; 10:46; 19:6). In the Old Testament, as we have noted, the Spirit is understood at times as an invading power, a charismatic fury; also it is frequently associated with ecstatic prophecy. However, since the Spirit came only to certain exceptional persons, this was quite limited. With the New Testament dispensation the Spirit is now available to all who believe in Jesus Christ. Hence such signs of this invading power as ecstatic language and prophecy could occur with anyone who has experienced this visitation. Clearly it would be a mistake to say that all upon whom the Spirit comes must manifest specific pneumatic phenomena. The Spirit usually manifests Himself in other ways. However, that such extraordinary manifestations may occur- -and in so doing give evidence of the Spirit's working- -is quite in accord with the witness of the New Testament.

7.   There may be further bestowal of the Holy Spirit. "Baptism with the Spirit" signifies the initial outpouring of God's Spirit wherein the community and/or person is filled with the presence and power of God. But also there may be later bestowal in such fashion as o signify implementation of the original event, whether or not accompanied by pneumatic phenomena (cf. Acts 2:4 with 4:31). This renewed activity of the Spirit ought not to be designated "baptism" (at least, the New Testament never uses this term for it), but as "filling," wherein the empowering Spirit moves to renew the believer and believing community.

8.   The bestowal and reception of the Spirit, or the gifts of the Spirit, does not signify a higher level of spirituality nor ought it to suggest that some Christians have more of the Holy Spirit than others. Such expressions as "baptism," "filling," and the like point rather to the Spirit's implementing activity; endowment for the witness to the gospel. The Spirit is active in all believers, and they may be "filled" with the Spirit in various ways for the mission of the Church. It should be added that such expressions as "having" or "filled with" the Spirit are not to be construed as obviating the possibility and actuality of growth in grace and knowledge.

9.   Both the coming of the Spirit Himself and the various abilities or charismata which He may bestow upon people are, above all, to be received as the benefits of God's free grace. Neither the Spirit, then, nor His gifts may be considered "possessions" of the believer; he does not own them, nor can he presume that they are, or will be, at all times (or at any given time) available. Each occasion on which the Spirit's presence is known or His gifts made manifest is to be an occasion for new thanksgiving and praise to God. Hence, there should be no jeopardizing of the peace, unity, and fellowship of the Church because of special experiences of the Holy Spirit, but a rejoicing together in all those ways whereby God leads His people into fuller apprehension of the riches of His grace.

10.                     An experience of the Spirit can neither be validated as such, nor evaluated with respect to its theological significance, by any scientific (i.e., psychological, sociological, etc.) means. It is to be acknowledged that such events, just as any other human events, may become the legitimate objects of scientific inquiry. But regardless of the scientific conclusions which may be reached, the question of the theological significance of the phenomena will remain, and it may be answered only within the context of the Christian faith. The Corinthians' ability to speak in tongues, for example, may have a perfectly good psychological explanation; but whether the Spirit of Jesus Christ was active in the phenomenon is a question which neither psychology nor any other science can answer. But this conclusion leads also to the observation that the extraordinary or unusual nature of an experience (and the same would apply to gifts) is no criterion by which to judge its significance for faith. Ecstasy is not in itself an unambiguous occurrence. Not every dramatic event, experience, or ecstasy is necessarily a work of the Spirit.

11.                     It is clear the there is Biblical and Reformed witness concerning baptism of the Holy Spirit and special endowment of the Holy Spirit in the believing community. Of course, it is impossible to make any general pronouncement concerning the validity of particular claims made, since multiple factors may be at work. But where there is divisiveness, judgment (expressed or implied) on the lives of others, an attitude of pride or boasting, etc., the Spirit of God is not at work. However, where such an experience gives evidence of an empowering and renewing work of Christ in the life of the individual and the Church, it may be acknowledged with gratitude. This means above all that Christ should be glorified, His own Spirit made manifest in human lives, and the Church edified. For such evidences of the presence of the Holy Spirit the Church may rejoice.[4]

Footnotes

[1]A complete copy of the report may be found in Presence, Power, Praise: Documents on the Charismatic Renewal, edited by Kilian McDonnell, 1:287-317.

[2]For reasons of space I will omit sections II, III, and IV dealing respectively with the Old Testament, New Testament, and Church Standards. However, those sections are well worth reading because they provide a valuable biblical and ecclesiastical foundation.

[3]The Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms.

[4]Concluding remark: This report is highly significant in that it officially recognizes a "special empowering work of the Spirit" and that "baptism with the Spirit may not be at the same time as baptism with water and/or conversion" (B. 4 above). Moreover, the report closes quite positively with the statement that "where such an experience gives evidence of an empowering and renewing work of Christ in the life of the individual and the Churcit may be acknowledged with gratitude" (B. 11). This is indeed an extraordinary step ahead for a Presbyterian denomination!

Chapter 5, Baptism In The Holy Spirit

A Biblical Study

This article will be limited to a study of New Testament passages relating to "baptism[1] in the Holy Spirit." I will note where such passages occur, and attempt to observe their meaning and usage. The paper is written under the growing conviction that fresh study in this area is of importance for the Church in our time.

As a biblical expression "baptism in[2] the Holy Spirit" occurs in each of the four Gospels, twice in the Book of Acts, and possibly in 1 Corinthians 12:13. According to Mark 1:8 John the Baptist said, "I have baptized you in water; but he will baptize you in the Holy Spirit." In Matthew 3:11 and Luke 3:16 the words are added: "and fire." According to the Fourth Gospel the words of John the Baptist are: "He who sent me to baptize in water said to me, 'He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes in the Holy Spirit'" (John 1:33). According to Acts 1:4-5 Jesus tells the disciples to "wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, 'you heard from me, for John baptized in water, but before many days you shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit.'" In Acts 11:15-16 Peter, describing the event at Caesarea, says, "The Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning. And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, 'John baptized in water, but you shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit.'" The other possible text, 1 Corinthians 12:13, reads: "For by[3] one Spirit we were all baptized into one body- -Jews or Greeks, slaves or free- -and all were made to drink of one Spirit." Whether Paul is here dealing with the same concept as the Gospels and Acts is not clear.[4] We shall therefore focus on the six specific references to "baptism in the Holy Spirit," and seek to elaborate various aspects.

I, Baptism In The Holy Spirit

The first matter to be observed is that the references in the Gospels and Acts distinguish clearly between baptism in water and baptism in the Holy Spirit. John baptized in water, but there is another baptism which Christ performs, namely, in the Holy Spirit. There is no suggestion that John's baptism in water is the medium for baptism in the Holy Spirit, or any statement that one must precede the other. The promise in Acts 1:5 does mention John's baptism first, but no connection is drawn between it and baptism in the Holy Spirit. It may be presumed that those who first received the fulfillment of this promise (see Acts 2:1-4) had been baptized by John, but nothing is directly made of it.[5] Obviously the Gentiles at Caesarea received baptism in the Holy Spirit (Acts 11:15-16) without regard to any baptism by John, and also without having received water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ (see Acts 10:44-48).

The latter point should be noted: there is also no necessity for water baptism in the name of Christ to precede baptism in the Spirit. For it is only after the Gentiles at Caesarea are baptized in the Holy Spirit that they are baptized in water in the name of Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit "fell"[6] (10:44), was "poured out" (10:45); and following this, Peter asks, "'Can any one forbid water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?' And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ" (10:47-48). In this case baptism in water, and in the name of Jesus Christ, is unmistakably neither precondition nor medium for baptism in the Holy Spirit. Baptism in water is not unimportant (Peter "commanded" it to be done), even if, in this case, the function is not that of preparing the way for, or being the instrument of, baptism in the Holy Spirit.

We may now raise the question: Is there any further delineation in Acts of the connection between baptism in water and baptism in the Holy Spirit? As has been mentioned, the expression, "baptism in the Holy Spirit," occurs only twice in Acts, and the events describing its occurrence are found in 2:1-4 and 10:44-48 (compared with 11:15-17). However, since it has already become evident that such expressions in Acts as the Spirit's "falling," being "poured out," refer likewise to Spirit baptism, we may turn to the account of the Samaritans in Acts 8. According to this narrative the Samaritans, through the witness of Philip, "believed" and were "baptized" (8:12), for the Holy Spirit "had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus" (8:16). Here is a clear case of water baptism in Jesus' name prior to the "falling" of the Holy Spirit. Some days after their baptism Peter and John came down from Jerusalem, and "they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit" (8:17). Thus again baptism in water is not depicted as a vehicle for the "falling"- -or "baptizing"- -of the Holy Spirit, since the Spirit is "received" some time thereafter. Nor is there any stress on baptism with water as a precondition, although in this instance it undoubtedly preceded Spirit baptism.

Since from the above account it is evident that to "receive" the Holy Spirit refers to the Spirit's "falling" and therefore to Spirit baptism, we may now look at a further passage on receiving the Holy Spirit and observe its connection with water baptism. I make reference to Acts 19:1-7. Here Paul inquires of some twelve Ephesians, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" It turns out that these people have no knowledge of the Holy Spirit and, further, have only been baptized "into John's baptism." Consequently, after hearing that John had proclaimed the need for believing in Jesus, "they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus." Following this water baptism "Paul laid his hands upon them," and "the Holy Spirit came on them." The picture is indeed an interesting one: two different water baptisms- -into John and Jesus- -but in neither is the Holy Spirit received. Only as Paul lays his hands upon them does "baptism in the Holy Spirit" occur.

The Ephesian situation, in respect to baptism with water, is a kind of composite of Acts 1 and Acts 8. Those baptized in the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:1-4 had at most received only the baptism of John; those upon whom the Holy Spirit fell in Acts 8 had only been baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. The Ephesians in Acts 19 had received both water baptisms. Further, in all three of these cases baptism in the Holy Spirit follows upon the various water baptisms- -either years thereafter (in the case of the Acts 1 disciples), days after (in the case of the Samaritans), or immediately following (in the case of the Ephesians). It is obvious that there is no identification of water baptism with Spirit baptism, nor is there any evidence that baptism in the name of Jesus, any more than John's baptism, confers the Holy Spirit. This is all the more emphasized in the account of Acts 10 where the Spirit is given prior to any water baptism at all.

To summarize the relationship in Acts between water baptism and baptism in the Holy Spirit: water baptism may precede (Acts 8 and 19) or may come thereafter (Acts 10). It is even possible that water baptism may not have occurred at all (some instances in Acts 1). We might add, however, that the usual order would seem to be that of Acts 2:38 where Peter declares to the assembled crowd: "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." But the usual order- -if one bears in mind Acts 10- -is not rigid; and there is no sense of water baptism as conveying the Holy Spirit. However, after Acts 1 it is clear that whatever the sequence, all who are baptized in the Spirit are baptized in water.

It is important further to recognize that water baptism has but one distinctive purpose: it is "for"[7] the forgiveness of sins.[8] Since baptism means immersion,[9] hence, being literally submerged in, surrounded by, and covered with water, it points to the spiritual reality of total forgiveness in union with Christ. This is the distinctive feature of water baptism: its relation to forgiveness of sins. However- -to repeat what was earlier said- -there is no immediate connection of water baptism with baptism in the Holy Spirit (which may even have preceded water baptism). Water baptism is not also "for" the Holy Spirit: this is the purpose of another action- -to which we now turn.

II, Baptism In The Holy Spirit

Next let us consider the connection in Acts between the laying on of hands and baptism in the Holy Spirit. In contrast to water baptism, the laying on of hands- -wherever such is done- -is closely connected with Spirit baptism.

In the Samaritan account several days following their expression of faith and water baptism, the people are visited by Peter and John. The two apostles pray for the Samaritans (8:15), and "then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit" (8:17). Laying on of hands, so to speak, was "for" the reception of the Holy Spirit.

The picture is quite similar in the Ephesian narrative. We have already noted that after the two water baptisms the Holy Spirit is received: "And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them" (Acts 19:6). The laying on of Paul's hands would seem to be the outward symbol of the coming on of the Holy Spirit. Thus again- -as in the case of the Samaritans- -a close connection is shown between the imposition of hands and receiving the Holy Spirit.

However, we need immediately to add: first, there is no suggestion in Acts that laying on of hands is essential for the Holy Spirit to be received. The disciples at Jerusalem receive baptism in the Holy Spirit without laying on of hands (Acts 2:1-4). Further, when Peter thereafter proclaims the Christian message, and directs the people concerning what to do, he says simply (as we have noted): "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" (2:38). No mention is made of the need for imposition of hands to receive this gift, nor in the narrative following is there any suggestion of such an act occurring. The record only says, "So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls" (2:41). In the case of the Gentiles at Caesarea the message of forgiveness of sins is preached by Peter; and "while Peter was still saying this, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word" (10:44). There is no laying on of hands.

Second, it would be unwarranted to conclude that where hands are laid that they must be those of apostles. It is true that in both the Samaritan and Ephesian accounts hands of apostles (Peter and John in Samaria and Paul at Ephesus) are laid for the reception of the Holy Spirit. In the former instance Philip the "deacon" (not the apostle) baptizes with water but does not lay hands; further the text says that "the Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles' hands." But there is no statement in these narratives that only apostles could have done this. It may be that in the Samaritan situation the laying on of hands by leaders from Jerusalem was important to assure the long despised Samaritans of their inclusion in the new Christian community; thus it was fitting that apostles- -and not elders for example- -come down for this occasion. In the case of the Ephesians while hands are laid by Paul an apostle, there is no mention of his exercising a peculiarly apostolic function. The whole emphasis is the Ephesian need, and Paul as missionary rises to meet it both through water baptism and the laying on of hands.

If, however, the idea persists that apostolic hands alone suffice, one further narrative in Acts shows this to be mistaken. I refer to the account of Paul's own receiving the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17). The language is that of Paul's being "filled with the Holy Spirit," an expression earlier used to describe the Spirit baptism of the disciples in Jerusalem. Acts 2:1-4, the record of the fulfillment of the promise that "before many days you shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit," does not use the language of "baptism" but "filling," so that when the event occurred, the text says, "they were all filled with the Holy Spirit." So it is with Paul (at that time still called Saul): he too was said to be "filled." However, unlike the disciples at Jerusalem, there was one to help him, a Christian at Damascus named Ananias. Ananias is no apostle: he is simply described as "a disciple at Damascus" (9:10). Ananias comes to Paul, "And laying his hands on him he said, 'Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus who appeared to you on the road by which you came, has sent me that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit'" (9:17). Thus were hands laid not by an apostle but by a Christian brother. The important matter is not that Ananias was executing an apostolic office but that he was fulfilling a specific command of the Lord Jesus. Ananias is later described by Paul as "a devout man according to the law, well spoken of by all the Jews who lived there [in Damascus]" (Acts 22:12); thus he was a man of strong faith and perhaps peculiarly prepared through his devotion to the law to minister to Saul the Pharisee. It may be suggested that a combination of factors, the most fundamental being his devoutness,[10] made him suited to exercise the role of ministering to Paul's need. Hence, to repeat, the basic qualification for the imposition of hands was not that of apostolic office or function.

To summarize: the laying on of hands is frequently in Acts closely associated with the reception of the Holy Spirit. It is in connection with the imposition of hands, not water baptism, that the Spirit on different occasions is given. However, the Spirit is also received without the laying on of hands: thus there is no suggestion of hands as being essential. Further, where hands are laid the emphasis does not rest on office. Apostles may serve, but also a relatively unknown Christian disciple may fulfill the role. Thus the sovereignty of God's Holy Spirit to use or not use human means, to use or not use ecclesiastical position, is shown in the Book of Acts.

III, Baptism In The Holy Spirit

It is now important to consider the relationship in Acts between baptism in the Holy Spirit and Christian faith or belief. For it is readily apparent in all the cases of Spirit baptism (whatever the language: "outpouring," "falling," "filling," etc.) that the essential background is faith. There may or may not be water baptism, hands may or may not be laid, but without faith the Holy Spirit is not given and received.

A brief review of salient passages will show the prior emphasis on faith or belief. The Samaritans "believed Philip as he preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ" (8:12); days later they receive the Holy Spirit (8:17). Peter preaches the word to the Gentiles at Caesarea that "every one who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name," and at that very moment the Spirit "fell on all who heard the word" (10:43-44). Before the Ephesians receive the Holy Spirit Paul speaks of Jesus Christ by reminding them that, "John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus" (19:4). Saul of Tarsus does not have the Gospel preached to him by man, but has a direct revelation of Jesus Christ- -"I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting" (9:5); thereafter he is "filled with the Holy Spirit" (9:17). The disciples at Jerusalem were already believing witnesses to Jesus' resurrection (1:22)- -and upon them the Holy Spirit came in baptizing power (2:1-4).

The faith visited by the Holy Spirit is unmistakably faith centered in Jesus Christ. Believing in Him- -not in an idea, a doctrine, but a person- -serves as background for the reception of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit in Acts is invariably the Spirit given by Jesus Christ,[11] and comes only to those who believe in Him. This belief involves a turning from the former way, thus repentance, and brings with it the forgiveness of sins, which is the way to life. But the one essential requirement is faith in Jesus Christ, and to such faith the Holy Spirit is promised. So says Peter on the Day of Pentecost: "For the promise [of the gift of the Holy Spirit] is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him" (2:39).[12]

We pass on to observe that in the Book of Acts faith, while the background, may not be immediately accompanied by the gift of the Holy Spirit. Though this has not been directly commented on before, some of the passages cited in connection with such matters as baptism and the laying on of hands have already illustrated or suggested this point. Perhaps the clearest example is that of the Samaritans who "believed"; but it is several days before they receive the Holy Spirit. The Ephesians, when they are first accosted by Paul, are asked, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" (Acts 19:2).[13] The question is important because it suggests the possibility of believing without receiving the Holy Spirit. This is the case even though it turns out that these "disciples" (so 19:1), who know only John's baptism and are ignorant about the Holy Spirit, need to be reminded of John's word about Christ, and have not received baptism in Jesus' name. They do come to a positive faith in Christ, but it is only after their new baptism when Paul lays hands on them that they receive the Holy Spirit. So whether one understands Christian faith as already in some sense present when Paul first encounters the Ephesian disciples,[14] or as only eventuating through Paul's word, it is evident that this gift of the Holy Spirit is subsequent to their initial faith. We may next recall the case of Paul himself. Paul is encountered on the Damascus road by the risen Lord (9:5), and for three days thereafter he is without sight, and neither eats nor drinks (9:9). At the conclusion of those days Ananias comes to Paul, and Paul receives the Holy Spirit. Thus, though nothing is said directly about Paul's believing, the narrative shows him acting under Jesus' lordship (at the command of Jesus to "rise and enter the city" Paul goes [9:6]), and thus in some sense faith in Christ is present. Now looking back at the first disciples in Jerusalem, it is evident that they had for some time been believers before baptism in the Holy Spirit occurred. They had confessed Jesus as Lord, had received His forgiveness, and had known Him in His resurrection appearances; but it was not until some weeks later that the Holy Spirit was given. Thus faith in Jesus Christ was present before the gift of the Holy Spirit.[15] What seems to be the case, over all, is that to everyone who believes the Spirit is promised (recall Acts 2:38 and 39), but the promise may well be fulfilled at a later time.[16]

The one instance where faith and baptism in the Holy Spirit are depicted as simultaneous is that of the Gentiles at Caesarea. The text reads: "While Peter was still saying this, the Holy Spirit fell" (10:44). The word "this" refers to the message of the Gospel. When that message was heard and believed, simultaneously the Holy Spirit was given. There are a number of other incidents in Acts where people come to faith in Jesus Christ, but nothing is said about a reception of the Holy Spirit.[17] However, in this paper I am only commenting on those passages where some reference to the Holy Spirit is made.

The question naturally follows: Why is there this disparity in Acts? Why do some who believe receive the Holy Spirit immediately whereas the Holy Spirit comes to others only at a later time? One answer, sometimes offered, especially in the case of the Samaritans, lies in their peculiar situation vis-à-vis Jerusalem. The Samaritans, while believing and baptized, needed the assurance of the Jerusalem church that they were fully incorporated (recall the long history of Jewish-Samaritan antagonism) in the new people of God. Also, it is suggested, this signifies that the Samaritans are likewise included in the missionary enterprise- -the Spirit being the "missionary Spirit" (see below), so that Luke is saying that their baptism with the Spirit signifies that the Gospel now also radiates outward from Samaria. Though there is surely some truth in this analysis, one wonders, for example, why further on in the same chapter the Ethiopian is likewise baptized by Philip but nothing is done from Jerusalem or elsewhere to see that he also has this symbol of inclusion in the larger church community. Also, when the gospel is later preached in Antioch- -a city at least as important as Samaria, and indeed destined to become the radiating center of missionary enterprise- -"a great number that believed turned to the Lord" (Acts 11:21). When the apostles at Jerusalem hear this, they send down Barnabas, but not to perform some act such as laying on of hands for the reception of the Holy Spirit. All that Acts says is that "When he [Barnabas] came and saw the grace of God, he was glad; and he exhorted them all to remain faithful to the Lord with steadfast purpose" (11:23). Thus some better answer is needed to explain the Samaritan delay in receiving the Holy Spirit.[18]

Though there can be no certainty of a final answer concerning the reason for separation between initial faith and the reception of the Holy Spirit, I would suggest that what is several times described in Acts is a kind of faith in movement or in process. In thinking back again to the original disciples gathered in Jerusalem (Acts 1) who receive the baptism in the Holy Spirit (Acts 2), it is clear that what I have called their faith or belief was much a matter of growth. It was not a static, once for all thing; rather their minds and hearts were increasingly being laid claim to by Jesus Christ. At a certain moment in this process of faith, the Holy Spirit breaks through and they are baptized.[19] Thus in one sense they had been believers for a long time; in another sense this was the climactic moment within faith. We do not therefore have to decide: Were they believers before, or did they only become believers at the time of the gift of the Spirit. Rather it is better to say that on the way of faith the Holy Spirit was poured out. This same situation, I believe, obtains, for example, in the account of the Ephesians. As we have noted, these people are called "disciples" even though it becomes evident that they are not very far along the Christian way. Further, the question of Paul, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?"[20] points, as we have observed, to the possibility of a faith that has not yet received the Holy Spirit. Hence, one may see in this narrative a movement from a kind of incipient faith, signified by John's baptism, to a focused faith in Christ, attended by baptism in His name, even to the openness of faith in which the Holy Spirit is given and received. The account of Paul's experience is apropos of the same. It would, I think, be a mistake to say either that Paul believed, and three days later was filled with the Holy Spirit, or to say that Paul did not truly believe until the Spirit came upon him. Paul was undergoing a process of inward change, and faith was in movement. At a certain moment in faith Paul was able to receive the fullness of God's Spirit. Finally, the same situation, in general, would seem to have occurred among the Samaritans. At the outset they "gave heed to what was said by Philip, when they heard him and saw the signs which he did" (8:6). Thus some faith is evident, even if perhaps superficial and miracle- -impressed. Later they "believed Philip as he preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ" and were baptized (8:12). This would seem to signify a movement in their faith to a much deeper grounding in Jesus Christ. Climactically, several days later- -and after further inward growth- -they receive the Holy Spirit through the ministry of Peter and John (8:17).[21]

It is not without significance that, in the cases just described of the Ephesians, Paul himself, and the Samaritans, various sets of circumstances affected their coming to baptism in the Holy Spirit. The Ephesians, though "disciples" and thus in some sense believers, obviously had been inadequately instructed, for though they knew John's baptism they had not heard of the Holy Spirit; indeed, they were not even clearly directed to Jesus Christ. The Ephesians had much to unlearn as well as to learn, and much to experience more profoundly. Thus Paul led them step by step into a deeper reality of faith. They could scarcely have come to baptism in the Holy Spirit any sooner. Paul himself earlier, as we have observed, was struck down on the road to Damascus by the glory of the risen Lord- -an experience hard to imagine in its inward effects upon the previously vehement and hostile Saul. It is scarcely to be wondered that there was much inward turmoil, revolution, and change before he was at the place of receiving the Holy Spirit. The Samaritans had been long wrapped in superstition- -they were laden with "unclean spirits" (8:7) and had prostrated themselves before Simon the magician (8:9-11). Once again, it is not really surprising that they, despite their faith and baptism, did not for a time receive the Holy Spirit.

But what about the Gentiles at Caesarea? Why did they receive such an outpouring of the Holy Spirit at the moment of their believing in Jesus Christ? Again, no certain answer is given in the text. The Spirit was poured out at the moment of Peter's proclaiming the good news of forgiveness; and perhaps this signifies the sovereign unpredictability of the Holy Spirit. Nor should this be discounted, for God surely moves in His Spirit freely and not according to any preconceived pattern. However, while recognizing this, the question is whether the text of Scripture affords any answer in terms of the human condition. I think the Scripture does- -when read in the broader context of the Caesarean situation. The centurion Cornelius is depicted from the outset as a God-fearing man, and therefore in some sense also a man of faith. Throughout the whole narrative of Acts 10 one sees in the centurion a righteous man, and open to whatever God would have him do. Later when the gospel is proclaimed to him and his household, Peter begins by declaring that "any one who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him" (8:35). Thus, to this kind of man and household- -far different from the Samaritans in their pagan idolatry, quite other than Paul in his violence and vehemence, and having far fewer problems than the Ephesians in their John the Baptist background- -the gospel is preached. Immediately, the ground being ready, the Spirit is poured out upon the people in Caesarea.

IV, Baptism In The Holy Spirit

All of this leads to a further consideration, namely, the relation of prayer to the gift of the Holy Spirit. Several times prayer is mentioned as the context wherein the Holy Spirit is received.

We may begin with Acts 1. It is apparent that the chief activity of the disciples in Jerusalem during the ten days before Pentecost was prayer. According to 1:4 the risen Lord "charged them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father." Following His ascension, the apostles went to the Upper Room, and "All these with one accord devoted themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers" (1:14). Though the disciples did other things, such as the selection of a successor to Judas (1:15-26), the overall situation is one of continuing prayer: this was their devotion. We may assume that this was not just prayer in general, but for the fulfillment of the promise of the Father. One should not fail to underscore also the note of unity: "All these with one accord." Persistent prayer in unity of spirit: such was the context for the gift of the Holy Spirit.

At Samaria prayer is again mentioned as preparatory to the coming of the Holy Spirit. As earlier observed, the Samaritans believe, are baptized, and some time thereafter Peter and John come down to minister to them the gift of the Holy Spirit. Reference has been made to the laying on of the apostles' hands. But now we should note that prior to the imposition of hands, Peter and John engage in prayer: they "came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit" (8:15).[22] The situation is somewhat different from Acts 1, for there those who are to receive (the apostles and company) do their own praying- -who else could pray for them? In Samaria the recipients-to-be are prayed for by others. But prayer unmistakably in each case is background and preparation for the Holy Spirit to be received.

In the case of Paul, the atmosphere surrounding his reception of the Holy Spirit is also that of prayer. Ananias, commissioned to go to Paul, is addressed by the Lord in a vision, hence likely at a time of prayer (9:10). We are told that in the vision the Lord says, "Rise and go to the street called Straight, and inquire in the house of Judas for a man of Tarsus named Saul; for behold, he is praying" (9:11). Attention has already been called to Paul's fasting- -neither eating nor drinking- -for three days. Thus prayer and fasting make up the context for Paul's being filled with the Holy Spirit.

Now we come again to the centurion at Caesarea and his household. We have made reference to his being a God-fearing man. It is apparent from the beginning of the account that the situation is also one of prevailing prayer: the centurion was a "devout man who feared God with all his household, gave alms liberally to the people, and prayed constantly to God" (10:2). To this man of constant prayer a vision is also given; and acting on that vision, the centurion summons Peter to come to him with a message from God. Thus the "Gentile Pentecost" of Acts 10 is shrouded with a similar atmosphere of prayer and devotion to that of the "Jewish Pentecost" in Acts 1 and 2.

The only account (among those we have been considering) not specifying prayer is that concerning the Ephesians. All that is said is that Paul laid his hands upon the people, and they received the Holy Spirit. However, if one reads this story against the background of the other occasions where hands are imposed for the gift of the Spirit (the two accounts of Saul of Tarsus and the Samaritans: both prayer and the laying on of hands in each instance), it would seem proper to conclude that Paul's act here is likewise done in prayer. Indeed, the very laying on of hands may itself be understood as an act of prayer, invoking the coming of the Holy Spirit upon those who believe.

It is significant that the Gospel according to Luke likewise depicts prayer as context for the coming of the Holy Spirit. This may be noted, first, in the account of Jesus' own baptism: "Now when all the people were baptized, and when Jesus also had been baptized and was praying, the heaven was opened, and the Holy Spirit descended upon him" (Luke 3:21-22). Thus Jesus praying and thereupon receiving the Holy Spirit is the primary example of later persons in Acts who likewise in prayer receive the gift of the Spirit.[23] Second, on another occasion where Jesus is asked by his disciples, "Lord, teach us to pray," He proceeds not only to give the "Lord's Prayer" but also to stress the need for importunate prayer- -"ask," "seek," and "knock"- -and concludes saying, "If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!" (Luke 11:1-13).[24]

To conclude: not only is faith viewed as essential for the gift of the Spirit to be received (as we have earlier observed), but also the Spirit is given within the situation, the atmosphere, the context of earnest prayer. Further, this prayer is evidently of an expectant nature, believing that God will give what He has promised. It is the prayer of openness for all that God has to offer, and one that awaits in humble submission His full impartation.

V, Baptism In The Holy Spirit

We have now to consider the significance of baptism in the Holy Spirit. Primarily it is a matter of being immersed in the presence and power of God. Even as baptism in water means immersion in water- -the whole person being submerged in and surrounded by water- -so does baptism in the Holy Spirit mean immersion in the reality of God's dynamic presence. The language of the Spirit's being "poured out," "falling upon," "coming upon" are various descriptions of the Spirit's external coming; "filled" points to the internal dimension- -a being filled within; "baptism in the Holy Spirit" highlights the central fact of being enveloped by, surrounded with, immersed in the presence and power of God.

The immediate consequence of this spiritual baptism in several biblical instances was speaking in tongues. In three accounts of the receiving of the Holy Spirit, the response of glossolalia was prior to all else: Acts 2:4- -"they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance"; 10:45-46-"the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. For they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God"; 19:6- -"the Holy Spirit came on them; and they spoke with tongues and prophesied."[25] In two of the three instances (thus also likely in the third) it is evident that speaking in tongues was an address to God of transcendent praise- -"telling...the mighty works of God" (2:11), "speaking in tongues and extolling God" (10:46). These were "other tongues" uttered by the Holy Spirit's enabling, thus transcending the capacities of those who spoke them. All of this was the primary response of those baptized, that is, immersed, in the presence and reality of the living God.

Baptism in the Holy Spirit primarily intends the endowment of power for witness and ministry. According to Acts 1, at some time after Jesus had spoken the words, "before many days you shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit," He also said, "you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the end of the earth" (v. 8). So it was that on the Day of Pentecost, just following the filling with the Holy Spirit and the immediate response of tongues of praise, that "Peter, standing with the eleven, lifted up his voice and addressed them" (2:14), namely, the multitude of devout Jews who had assembled. Thus did the apostles, Peter as spokesman, bear witness- -and with great power and effectiveness so that thousands came to salvation. There is likewise power for ministry, indeed miraculous ministry. Following the influx of three thousand souls, according to Acts 2:43, "many wonders and signs were done through the apostles"; also in the next account in Acts 3 Peter and John are channels for the miraculous healing of a man lame from birth.

In the case of Paul it is also clear that the purpose of the gift of the Spirit is power for witness and ministry. Before Ananias lays hands on Paul for him to be "filled" with the Spirit, the Lord had spoken: "Go, for he [Paul] is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel" (9:15). Hence, it would seem proper to understand the gift of the Spirit elsewhere mentioned- -at Samaria, Caesarea, and Ephesus- -as having to do with the endowment of power for witness and ministry. This is to say that as the gospel is proclaimed in an ever-widening circle, those who receive it not only come to salvation but also are endowed with the Holy Spirit for witness and ministry to others.

It is apparent that baptism in the Spirit is both a matter of the presence of God and the power of God. It was said of Jesus Himself that He was "anointed...with the Holy Spirit and with power," and that as a result, "He went about doing good and healing all that were oppressed by the devil" (Acts 10:38). So, when Jesus told His disciples to "wait for the promise of the Father," it was the promise of being immersed in the presence of God and an endowment of power for the ministry in Jesus' name. Such is the full meaning of baptism in the Holy Spirit.

Concluding Comments

In the Gospels and Acts two major events are attested: first, Christ's life, death, and resurrection; second, the effusion of the Holy Spirit. Through the first there is forgiveness and cleansing of sins- -pointed to by water baptism; through the second, there is baptism in the Holy Spirit[26]- -pointed to by the laying on of hands. While closely related, they are clearly not the same.

It is also apparent that both forgiveness of sins and Spirit baptism come from Jesus Christ. Forgiveness is through Jesus Christ, and it is also He who immerses in the Holy Spirit. They are gifts from Christ, and it is by faith in Him that both gifts are received.

While these gifts come from Christ, they are quite different from each other. The first- -forgiveness of sins- -has to do with conversion, a radical turning to Christ from sin; the second- -baptism in the Holy Spirit- -relates to immersion in the reality of God's presence and the ensuing power for witness and ministry. The former has to do with becoming a Christian, the latter with Christian ministry. Together the two make up the fullness of Christian discipleship.

Not only are these two gifts quite different in nature, but they may also be separated in time from each other. Such separation, however, does not mean a going beyond Christ or outside Christ, since He is the source of both; nor does it mean a going beyond faith into a work whereby the Holy Spirit is received. Temporal separation is a possibility; separation from Christ and faith in Him is an impossibility.

It is also clear in Acts that those who believe may not yet have received the Holy Spirit. Wherever that is the case, it is not viewed as satisfactory, and steps are taken to see that the reception of the Spirit occurs. This does not mean that such persons are not true believers, or that they lack forgiveness of their sins, or that somehow their salvation is incomplete. It rather means that they have not yet received that endowment of the Spirit wherein the presence and power of the Holy Spirit becomes fully effective in their lives. Particularly does this affect their witness to the world. Thus believers who have not received the Holy Spirit are ministered to for this presence and power.

Baptism in the Holy Spirit, accordingly, belongs not to some presumably higher level of Christian attainment but to the foundations of Christian faith and practice. For the true follower of Jesus Christ is not only one who has received His forgiveness and entered into life, but also has received His Spirit and entered into His ministry.

Epilogue

This article has sought to deal as objectively as possible with the Scriptures specifically relating to "baptism in the Holy Spirit." I have in no way sought to relate these Scriptures to the New Testament epistles. It is surely a proper question to ask: What does the rest of the New Testament have to say in this regard? Can we really apply the biblical testimony in Acts to our contemporary situation without further study? My brief answer here is twofold: first, of course we must attend to the whole biblical witness, and not be guided only by the record in Acts; second, we must, however, not fail to hear what Acts has to say because it is the only canonical record to show what the church was like in its origination. The Epistles were written to churches that have had their foundations secured by apostolic work and witness. Hence, we can believe that they all have already, for example, received the Holy Spirit (e.g., see Gal. 3:2; Eph. 1:13); thus the Epistles are dealing with matters that presuppose this. Hebrews 6:1-2 (NIV) speaks of various "baptisms"[27] and "laying on of hands" as being "elementary teachings"- -but also belonging to "the foundation"- -that should be left behind as we "go on to maturity." But what if something as "elementary" as "baptisms" is not well understood today; what if something so foundational as "laying on of hands" is no longer truly practiced? Do we not need a thorough reexamination?

I firmly believe that this calls us back to the record in Acts. It can be the instrument of a new Reformation in our own time.

Footnotes

[1]The noun "baptism" is actually not used in the New Testament in the passages under consideration. It is the verbal form, baptizein-"baptize," "baptizes," or "baptized" that is to be found. This will be apparent in the study that follows. I will, however, make use of the expression "baptism in the Holy Spirit" as an inclusive term for the various verbal forms.

[2]The Greek word en is translated as "with" in the RSV and in most other New Testament versions. However "in" (ASV) may be the more likely translation, especially as used in connection with "baptism." Hence I will be substituting "in" for "with" in my use of the RSV throughout this article.

[3]The word here translated as "by" is also the Greek ‘by’.

[4]Hence we shall not in this paper enter upon discussion of the Pauline text.

[5]The Scriptures nowhere specifically say that the disciples in Acts 1 had received John's baptism. Perhaps all the apostles had, but what of the women, Mary the mother of Jesus, and Jesus' own brothers? They are all depicted in Acts 1:12-14 as awaiting the fulfillment of the promise.

[6]The language of "baptism in the Holy Spirit," while not occurring in Acts 10, is used (as we have noted) in Acts 11 in regard to the same event viewed retrospectively. The Spirit's "falling" (used in 10 and 11) is verbally identified (in 11) with baptism in the Holy Spirit.

[7]The word ei, "for," could suggest "for the purpose of," "in order to obtain," thus requirement for forgiveness to be received. However, ei may also be translated "concerning," "with respect to," "with reference to," "with regard to." For example, note the earlier use of ei in the same chapter (v. 25), where Peter prefaces a quotation from a psalm thus: "For David says concerning him [the Christ]...." The word translated "concerning" (RSV and KJV) is ei. Here ei clearly means "regarding," "in reference to." etc. (Cf. Rom. 4:20, ei translated as "concerning" [RSV], "with respect to" [NASB]); Eph. 5:32, "concerning" [KJV], "with reference to" NASB); 1 Thess. 5:18, "concerning" [KJV]).

[8]This was also true of John's baptism-he came "preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins" (Mark 1:4). However, this was only preparatory to the baptism in Jesus' name, the name which brought total forgiveness and salvation. [9]baptiz = to "dip, immerse" (BAGD); to "immerse, submerge" (Thayer); to "dip in or under" (TDNT).

[10]This may be seen also in the fact that Jesus spoke to him in a vision while Ananias was doubtless at prayer (Acts 9:10).

[11]Also note, for example, Peter's words about Jesus on the Day of Pentecost to the assembled multitude: "Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this which you see and hear" (2:33).

[12]The preceding words of Acts 2:38 might suggest baptism in water as a prerequisite: "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." Two comments: that baptism in Jesus' name before receiving the gift of the Spirit is the usual pattern has been shown from a study of Acts 8 (the Samaritans) and Acts 19 (the Ephesians), but that the Spirit was also given without such baptism (Acts 10-the Caesareans) shows that this is no binding rule. Further, even in Acts 2:38 the focus is "the name of Jesus Christ" upon which or in which (the Greek preposition is either epi or en, depending on the texts used) baptism occurs. This is not to deny the importance of baptism, since it is regularly administered (also in Acts 10-even if afterwards); it is only to insist that the one binding requirement is faith in Jesus Christ for the gift of the Holy Spirit to be received.

[13]The Greek word for "believed" is the aorist participle pisteusantes. The aorist participle may express action antecedent to or simultaneous with the action of the main verb (see, e.g., A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek Testament, 860-61). If antecedent, then a proper translation could be, "Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?" (KJV). If simultaneous, or coincident, then the RSV, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" is correct. Only the context can show which is better; though usually the aorist participle expresses antecedent action (see James D. G. Dunn's Baptism in the Holy Spirit, 159). Whichever is the more appropriate translation for Acts 19:2, the text suggests the possibility of belief not accompanied at the outset by the reception of the Holy Spirit.

[14]Eduard Schweizer holds that "In 19:1-7 Luke is telling about Christians who have not yet experienced the outpouring of the Holy Spirit" (see article on pneuma in TDNT, 6:413). This may be saying too much, but at least they were disciples no longer of John but of Jesus.

[15]The one exception to this interpretation might seem to be that of Acts 11:17 where Peter, in reflecting upon the gift of the Holy Spirit to the Caesareans, says (according to the RSV): "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?" This suggests that Peter and the others did not believe until the time the Spirit was given. However, this is again an aorist participle, pisteusasin, which may also represent (as earlier noted) antecedent time. In that event the proper translation would be more like the KJV: "Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ." Here, I submit, the antecedent aorist much better fits the context.

[16]Schweizer summarizes the evidence by saying: "Days, and in exceptional cases even weeks and years, may pass before endowment with the Spirit follows faith" (TDNT, 6:412).

[17]Attention might be called to the Scripture in Acts 8 about the Ethiopian eunuch. Philip "told him the good news of Jesus" (8:35), and this is followed by water baptism-"they both went down into the water, Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him" (8:38). The received text follows: "And when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught up Philip." The Western text, however, reads: "And when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord fell upon the eunuch, and the angel of the Lord caught up Philip." This Western reading, probably an interpolation, does however express the sense of the Book of Acts, namely, that along with faith, and possibly baptism, the reception of the Spirit is involved-even if the original text does not specify it.

[18]Dunn is likewise unconvinced by the argument as generally outlined above (Baptism in the Holy Spirit, 62-63).

[19]I have already commented on the text in Acts 11:17 to the effect that the pisteusasin may represent either antecedent or concurrent time in relation to the main verb. I would now suggest that the participle may contain both ideas, and therefore the most adequate translation would be neither the RSV, "when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ," nor the KJV, "who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ," but simply "believing in the Lord Jesus Christ." Belief was neither a past occurrence, nor had it suddenly come to be; rather it was a process and within that process the Holy Spirit was poured out.

[20]Again, the best translation here for pisteusantesmay be neither the RSV (as quoted) nor the KJV, "Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?" "Since" represents the antecedent aorist, "when" the concurrent (see earlier footnote). Neither translation satisfactorily embodies the idea of process. The simplest, and perhaps the most direct, translation would be: "Did you, believing, receive the Holy Spirit?"

[21]I have difficulties with Dunn's interpretation that the believing of the Samaritans in 8:12 was only "intellectual assent to a statement or proposition" (Baptism in the Holy Spirit, 65), so that only when the Samaritans received the Spirit did they "come to genuine faith" (p. 67). This means for Dunn that in Acts until a person receives the Holy Spirit he is not really a Christian. I submit that this interpretation both misunderstands the text (only "intellectual assent," for example?), and the dynamics of faith.

[22]Schweizer writes that "as a preparation for reception of the Spirit prayer is far more important than baptism in Luke's eyes" (TDNT, 6:413).

[23]According to G. W. H. Lampe (The Seal of the Spirit, 1951, 44), "thus Luke applies to Christ's reception of the Spirit his repeated doctrine that the grand object of prayer is the gift of the Spirit, and points to a similarity between this initial bestowal of the gift upon Jesus at prayer and the later outpourings upon the praying church."

[24]In Matthew the parallel account does not speak of the gift of the Holy Spirit but of "good things"-"how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him" (7:11). I am not concerned to debate which may be the original account (of course, Jesus could have said it both ways on different occasions), but to note that Luke in both Gospel and Acts stresses prayer-even persistent prayer-as the context for the coming of the Holy Spirit.

[25]It is also probable that the Samaritans in Acts 8 spoke in tongues. Nothing directly is stated about the immediate consequence of their reception of the Spirit; however, as F. F. Bruce says: "It is clearly implied that their reception of the Spirit was marked by external manifestations such as had marked his descent on the earliest disciples at Pentecost" (The Book of Acts, 169).

[26]The Holy Spirit is of course also active in the forgiveness of sins; indeed, without the Holy Spirit there could be no repentance and forgiveness; for it is He who convicts of sin, brings about forgiveness, and unites to Christ. However, the effusion of the Spirit is a further dimension of the Spirit's activity in which-the way prepared by forgiveness-He comes uniquely on the scene. It is the coming of His presence and power.

[27]The Greek word (baptisrwn, from baptizmos) translated in NIV (also KJV) as "baptisms" is rendered as "ablutions" in RSV and "washings" in NASB, and is viewed by some as Jewish ceremonial washings (see, e.g., F. F. Bruce, Hebrews, 115). However, it is hard to see how such could belong to "the foundation" and "elementary teachings [or 'doctrines' RSV] about Christ." "Baptisms" seems the more natural translation, and especially is this the case since just following the word "baptisms" the writer to the Hebrews adds "laying on of hands." (For a further discussion of Heb. 6:1-2, also Gal. 3:2 and Eph. 1:13, see chap. 14, "A Pentecostal Theology.")

Chapter 6, The Missing Dimension

In 1964 Professor Hendrikus Berkhof delivered the Warfield Lectures at Princeton Theological Seminary on "The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit," which were published thereafter under the same title.[1] In these lectures Berkhof, after discussing justification and sanctification, spoke of the Revivalist and Pentecostal movements who "experienced still another blessing...now widely known as the 'filling by the Holy Spirit' or 'the baptism by the Holy Spirit.'"[2] This working of the Holy Spirit, Berkhof added, has scarcely been heeded by "official theology." These pertinent sentences follow:

Small wonder, because there is a watertight partition-wall between these groups and theology in seminaries and universities. I believe that this partition is to the detriment of both parties, and I will make an attempt to break through the wall. I do so although I am aware that I set foot on an unexplored field and that my thoughts here...must be considered as preliminary and needing correction by others.[3]

In Berkhof's attempt to "break through the wall" he concluded that "the work of the Spirit is not exhausted in justification and sanctification; an additional working is promised and must therefore be sought....The Pentecostals are basically right when they speak of a working of the Holy Spirit beyond that which is acknowledged in the major denominations."[4]

My own reflection and experience has confirmed for me, likewise, that there is a basic dimension of the Holy Spirit's work largely overlooked by theology and church, and that "official theology" hitherto has given little consideration to this working of the Spirit. We may be grateful, however, that the two major Presbyterian bodies in America within recent years have adopted related statements on the work of the Holy Spirit.[5] I would call particular attention to the report of the Presbyterian Church, U.S., because of its focus on the special work of the Holy Spirit. With caution, but nonetheless clearly, the Presbyterian Church, U.S., report concludes:

It is clear that there is Biblical and Reformed witness concerning baptism of the Holy Spirit and special endowments of the Holy Spirit in the believing community....where such an experience gives evidence of an empowering and renewing work of Christ in the life of the individual and the church, it may be acknowledged with gratitude. This means above all that Christ should be glorified, His own Spirit made manifest in human lives, and the church edified. For such evidences of the presence of the Holy Spirit the church may rejoice. Now I should like to elaborate some of my thinking in this area. If it helps further to break open the "watertight partition-wall," I shall be grateful. For it seem to me that we still have such to do to get this dimension of the Spirit's work clearly before us.

My concern is with that aspect of the work of the Spirit that has to do with the energizing of the community of faith. Presupposing the creation of such community by the Word and Spirit, this activity of the Spirit has to do with the empowering of the community for witness and mission. The Holy Spirit, while active in the origination of such community, now invests the community with fresh resources of praise, proclamation, and service. Going beyond "salvation history" this belongs to the life of the community both in its upbuilding and outreach.

Here a brief biblical and theological review may be in order. The work of the Holy Spirit stretches from creation to consummation. The Spirit of God is active in creation as the power by which all things are brought into being and infused with life (the Holy Spirit as "Lord and Giver of life"). He is likewise the power of God that sustains the universe; for without His Spirit all things would return to chaos and emptiness. The Spirit of God is at work in the world to further all that is good, to restrain evil; and He is to be recognized as the source of truth, purity, and holiness. The Spirit is present everywhere among people- -for "whither shall I go from thy Spirit? Or whither shall I flee from thy presence?" (Psalm 139:7). The Holy Spirit is active in the Incarnation, for it is by His overshadowing power that the Son of God is born of a woman, and it is with His anointing that Jesus enters upon and executes His ministry. The Spirit of God likewise brings about conviction of sin, and by Him the "new birth" takes place. The Spirit unites to Christ by faith, and through His indwelling presence the believer is more and more transformed into the likeness of Christ. The Holy Spirit is present in the Word and sacraments exhibiting and confirming grace, and in all Christian living provides strength and direction. At the end, the Holy Spirit will be the power of God that brings resurrection life- -for "he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit which dwells in you" (Romans 8:11). Thus from creation to consummation the Spirit of God is at work.

In the above summary there is nothing that has not been said many times, and theological reflection has done much by way of clarification. However, there is another line much less pursued, and one that is directly relevant to our present concern. It has to do with the Holy Spirit as a mysterious divine energy that comes variously upon the people of God. In the Old Testament this divine energy now and again comes upon people and enables them to fulfill certain tasks: for example, an artisan for the building of the tabernacle (Ex. 31:3), a judge or a king for the ruling of Israel (e.g., Judg. 3:10; 1 Sam. 16:13), a prophet for the speaking of God's word (e.g., Mic. 3:8). At times this energy comes with such force as to represent a kind of divine seizure (e.g., Judg. 6:34), "taking possession" of a man for the performing of prodigious feats (e.g., Judg. 14:6), sometimes "coming mightily" upon one so that he prophesies day and night (1 Sam. 19:24), sometimes even carrying a person bodily from one place to another (1 Kings 18:12). Nowhere in the Old Testament is the Spirit said to be given to the people as a whole; however, the hope is held out that this will someday occur. Moses expresses a deep yearning that all God's people might be prophets ("Would that all the Lord's people were prophets, that the Lord would put His Spirit upon them!" Num. 11:29), and Joel prophesies that the time will come when God will pour out His Spirit on all flesh (Joel 2:28).

In the New Testament there is a kind of step-by-step unfolding of fulfillment. First, certain persons, prior to Jesus' ministry, continue the Old Testament line of individuals occasionally anointed by the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:41-42, 67-68; 2:25-32); upon them the divine energy comes for prophetic utterance. Second, John the Baptist is said to "be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother's womb" (Luke 1:15)- -hence a precursor of the permanent anointing to come- -for the lifelong purpose of preparing the way for Christ. John goes "in the spirit and power of Elijah" (Luke 1:17), and the divine energy is such as to set fires of repentance burning in the hearts and lives of those who hear him. Third, Jesus upon His baptism at Jordan receives the anointing of God's Spirit (Luke 3:22, 4:1), and the Spirit who so comes is said to "descend and remain" (John 1:33), thus a continuing endowment. According to one account, just following Jesus' baptism, the Holy Spirit "immediately drove him out into the wilderness" (Mark 1:12)- -thus the picture of a divine energy that mightily propels and directs. Thereafter He begins His prophetic ministry with the words, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because He has anointed me to preach good news" (Luke 4:18). Fourth, at Pentecost the Holy Spirit comes in plenitude upon all the disciples who are assembled together- -thus the initial fulfillment of Joel's prophecy- -and with such extraordinary force that they begin "to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance" (Acts 2:4-13) and to proclaim powerfully the good news about Jesus (Acts 4:14-36). Fifth, in ensuing years recurrences of the descent of the Spirit happen in varying situations (e. g., Samaria, Caesarea, and Ephesus), and with similar powerful results. Both Caesareans and Ephesians speak in tongues- -the former are observed to be "speaking in tongues and extolling God" (10:46), the latter "spoke with tongues and prophesied" (19:6). The mysterious divine energy, from Pentecost onward, clearly propels the community of faith into depths of utterance hitherto unexperienced, and into a powerful witness to the good news in Jesus Christ.

It is important to note that the line we have been pursuing represents enabling power bestowed upon the community of faith. Before Pentecost it is apparent that the divine energy comes upon those who are the people of God, thereby enabling them to fulfill certain divine tasks. The same thing is portrayed in Acts, the thematic text being chapter 1:8, "You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be my witnesses." The donation of the Spirit for witness is promised to the apostolic community of believers; and after the reception of this gift the promise is renewed: "The promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him" (2:39). Thereafter the record in Acts portrays many who are called- -new communities of faith- -who are invested with power for the mission of the Gospel. The Samaritans receive this enabling power several days after they hear the word, believe, and are baptized; the Caesareans at the moment of their hearing and believing the Gospel are invested with power ("While Peter was still saying this, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word" [10:44]); the Ephesians, after their coming to faith and baptism, have hands laid upon them to receive this spiritual endowment (19:4-6).

It is to be observed, therefore, that this enablement of the Holy Spirit presupposes faith, calling, community. Whether it is an Old Testament judge, prophet, or king; or in the New Testament, John the Baptist, Jesus Himself, or the early disciples, the Holy Spirit activates those who are God's people. Hence, this action of the Holy Spirit is not for the creation of faith and community, but for the enablement of those who believe to fulfill God's purposes. As the New Testament unfolds, the situation is made more complex by the fact that the community of faith is no longer simply a continuation of Israel, but is that brought into being by a fresh generation of God's Spirit. Hence, it is to those born of the Spirit that the Spirit is given! Jesus Himself, in unique fashion, is an exemplar of this, for He is shown to be "conceived by the Holy Spirit" (Matt. 1:20-25; Luke 1:31-35), and later the Spirit comes upon Him in anointing power. These operations of the Holy Spirit are clearly not the same, and uniquely foreshadow what is intended for those who turn to Christ: both a conception by the Spirit (a new birth) wherein Christian life and community comes to be, and the bestowal of the Spirit in anointing power for the mission of the Gospel.

Now, I repeat, it is this second line- -the Spirit coming with anointing power- -that has been much less considered in theology. Here it is not the Holy Spirit as active in salvation, but in implementation; it is the mighty coming of the Holy Spirit upon those who believe. This coming is not for the origination of faith, but belongs to that action of God wherein power is bestowed for witness, praise, and proclamation. Furthermore, there is nothing automatic about this bestowal of the Spirit. It is promised to all whom God calls to Himself, and accordingly is to be received in faith. The result is access of divine energy- -with striking manifestations frequently accompanying- -and entrance into fresh dimensions of personal and communal life.

This then brings us to the crucial point, namely, that many people today in the so-called "charismatic movement" are experiencing a similar input of divine energy. Berkhof, as we noted, wrote in the past tense, of those who "experienced still another blessing...the 'filling by the Holy Spirit' or 'the baptism by the Holy Spirit.'" We may now shift into the present and say, "are experiencing." It is happening across the world, and bids fair to be the greatest renewal movement of our time.

What must be recognized- -if theology is adequately to come to terms with all this- -is that we are talking about a vast infusion of spiritual energy. The spiritual input of the Old Covenant leading up to Christ is obviously not a small thing (attested by supernatural wisdom, prophetic inspiration, driving force, and so on), but with the new creation made possible by the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ the potential input is greatly increased, and the resulting effects are markedly more profound and pervasive. Here there is a fullness of penetration that the people of the Old Covenant could not know or experience. It is verily the community of faith being immersed in the presence and power of Almighty God. The phenomenon of tongues is peculiarly a New Testament sign of this spiritual penetration. In previous prophetic utterance, whereby a person boldly spoke forth a "thus says the Lord," there is obviously a remarkable intensity of spiritual presence. For therein God directly communicates His message through ordinary language. The New Testament manifestation of tongues represents a further stepping up of spiritual intensity. It is a sign of that profound penetration wherein the depths of the human spirit are probed by the Holy Spirit, and the consequent language moves past the mental and conceptual into spiritual utterance. Here there is direct address of man to God in "other tongues," declaring His praise, attesting His greatness, extolling His Name, even speaking His mysteries. Like prophecy this manifestation of the Spirit is extraordinary utterance.

However, unlike prophecy it is not in the known language of the speaker, and further it is not directed to people but to God. It is the speaking forth from the depths of the human spirit, invaded by the divine Spirit, of a transcendent utterance that ordinary language cannot express. This is the ultimate in communication from earth to heaven, and represents with peculiar vividness the penetration of the spirit made possible with the dawn of the New Testament period.

But one needs to add quickly that such depth phenomena as prophecy and tongues are only initiatory signs of the new spiritual era. A broad range of other phenomena- -such as extraordinary healing powers, spiritual discernment and exorcism of evil powers, and miracles of innumerable kinds- -now become operative. All these manifestations- -and many others- -signalize a tremendous release of spiritual force for the renewal and upbuilding of persons and communities, and for the implementation of Christian witness to the world.

Let us now return to the basic issue before us which is not the matter of spiritual manifestations (as important as they are), but that of the infusion of the Holy Spirit. People today are undoubtedly experiencing, in a variety of ways, this "fullness" of the Spirit. It is of such potency as to make the praise of God the focus of their existence, a joyful sense of community across all denominational lines, and a fresh witness to Jesus Christ apparent in their everyday lives. This spiritual movement is also of such force as to begin to provoke the church at large into asking the Pentecostal question, "What does this mean?" (Acts 2:12), and into a growing realization that something is happening here that could make for a radical renewal of the body of Christ throughout the world.

Footnotes

[1]The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit. My address was given at the same seminary ten years after Berkhof delivered the Warfield Lectures there.

[2]Ibid., 85.

[3]Ibid.

[4]Ibid., 87. For some of the quotations above, also see the previous chapter, "The Upsurge of Pentecostalism."

[5]The Work of the Holy Spirit, official statement of the former United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A., and The Person and Work of the Holy Spirit, official statement of the former Presbyterian Church, U.S. Both reports may be found in Presence, Power, Praise: Documents of the Charismatic Renewal (Kilian McDonnell, ed., 1:221-82, 287-317). Also see the earlier chapter entitled "The Person and Work of the Holy Sprit with Special reference to 'the Baptism with the Holy Spirit'" for sections quoted from the Presbyterian Church.

Chapter 7, The Charismatic Movement And Reformed Theology

I, A Profile of the Charismatic Movement

The charismatic movement[1] began within the historic churches in the 1950s. On the American scene it started to attract broad attention in 1960, with the national publicity given to the ministry of the Reverend Dennis Bennett, an Episcopalian in Van Nuys, California. Since then there has been a continuing growth of the movement within many of the mainline churches: first, such Protestant churches as Episcopal, Lutheran, and Presbyterian; second, the Roman Catholic (beginning in 1967); and third, the Greek Orthodox (beginning about 1971).[2] By now the charismatic movement has become worldwide and has participants in many countries.

As one involved in the movement since 1965, I should like to set forth a brief profile of it.[3] A profile of the charismatic movement within the historic churches would include at least the following elements: (1) the recovery of a liveliness and freshness in Christian faith; (2) a striking renewal of the community of believers as a fellowship (koinonia) of the Holy Spirit; (3) the manifestation of a wide range of "spiritual gifts," with parallels drawn from 1 Corinthians 12-14; (4) the experience of "baptism in the Holy Spirit," often accompanied by "tongues," as a radical spiritual renewal; (5) the reemergence of a spiritual unity that essentially transcends denominational barriers; (6) the rediscovery of a dynamic for bearing comprehensive witness to the Good News of Jesus Christ; and (7) the revitalization of the eschatological perspective.

A Liveliness and Freshness in the Christian Faith

Persons in the charismatic movement ordinarily stress this first. This may be expressed in a number of ways.

For example, the reality of God has broken in with fresh meaning and power. God, who may have seemed little more than a token figure before, has now become vividly real and personal to them. Jesus Christ, largely a figure of the past before, has now become the living Lord. The Holy Spirit, who previously had meant almost nothing to them, has become an immanent, pervasive presence.

The Bible, which may have been thought of before as mostly an external norm of Christian faith or largely as a historical witness to God's mighty deeds, has become also a testimony to God's contemporary activity. It is as if a door had been opened, and walking through the door they found spread out before them the extraordinary biblical world, with dimensions of angelic heights and demonic depths, of Holy Spirit and unclean spirits, of miracles and wonders- -a world in which now they sense their own participation. The supposed merely historical (perhaps legendary for some) has suddenly taken on striking reality.

Prayer, formerly little more than a matter of ritual and often practiced hardly at all, becomes a joyful activity often carried on for many hours. The head of a theological seminary now involved in the charismatic movement speaks of how his administrative routine has been revolutionized: the first two hours in the office, formerly devoted to business matters, have been replaced by prayer; only thereafter comes the business of the day.

The Eucharist has taken on fresh meaning under the deepened sense of the Lord's presence- -the doctrine of Real Presence has become experiential fact. The Table has become an occasion of joy and thanksgiving far richer than they had known before.

All of Christian faith has been enhanced by the sense of inward conviction. Formerly there was a kind of hoping against hope; this has been transformed into a buoyant "full assurance of hope" (Heb. 6:11).

The Community as a Fellowship

There has occurred in the charismatic movement a striking emergence of the gathered community as a koinonia of the Holy Spirit. People in this movement are seldom loners; they come together frequently for fellowship in the Spirit. Formerly for many the gathered church had become a matter of dull routine, but now they are eager to be together in fellowship as often and as long as possible.

The fellowship of faith has become greatly deepened and heightened as a fellowship in the Spirit. Here there is first of all a new note of praise to God. The mood of praise- -through many a song and prayer and testimony- -is paramount in the charismatic fellowship. Indeed, the expression "Praise the Lord" has become the hallmark of the movement. An Episcopal bishop, commenting on what had happened to him recently, said, "After centuries of whispering liturgically, 'Praise ye the Lord,' it suddenly comes out more naturally- -and it's beautiful." The "joy of the Lord" is another common expression, and in charismatic fellowships everywhere there are frequent expressions of enthusiasm, delight, rejoicing in the presence of the Lord. As one chorus that is sung puts it, "It is joy unspeakable and full of glory; and the half has never yet been told!" Often there are evidences of exuberance such as hand clapping and laughter. Many expressions of love in the Lord are common, such as the unaffected embracing of one another in the name of Christ, the quick readiness to minister to others within the fellowship (often through the laying on of hands with prayer), and the sharing of earthly goods and possessions through varying expressions of communal life. Much else could be added, but suffice it to say that the gathered fellowship has become for many an exciting, eventful koinonia of the Holy Spirit.

The Manifestation of Spiritual Gifts

Of striking significance is the manifestation of a wide range of spiritual gifts, or charismata. The gifts of 1 Corinthians 12 have become very meaningful for people in the renewed fellowship of the Spirit. There is the fresh occurrence of all the Corinthian spiritual manifestations: the word of wisdom, the word of knowledge, faith, gifts of healing, working of miracles, prophecy, discernment of spirits, tongues, and the interpretation of tongues (1 Cor. 12:8-10).

A number of things may be said about these gifts. First, they are all understood as extraordinary- -the word of wisdom just as much as gifts of healing, the word of knowledge as working of miracles, faith as discernment of spirits, prophecy as tongues. They are not essentially expressions of natural prowess but are spiritual manifestations; that is, they occur through the activity of the Holy Spirit. Second, these gifts are not viewed as private possessions but operate within the context of the koinonia for the edification of the gathered group. Third, these gifts are earnestly sought after and prayed for, not for the sake of display or novelty, but because it is believed that the Lord wants to express Himself through these various means; hence, all the gifts are essential for the harmonious functioning of the body. Fourth, among the gifts prophecy is especially valued, for in the charismatic fellowship this is heard as a direct dominical utterance (a "thus says the Lord") that has great power to edify the believers and to bring under judgment ("God is in this place!"- -see 1 Cor. 14:25) any unbelievers who might be present. Fifth, these gifts of 1 Corinthians 12-14 are not viewed in isolation from other charismata such as are found in Romans 12:6-8 and 1 Peter 4:10-11, all of which are gladly recognized and desired; however, the Corinthian charismata are understood to represent a kind of profound opening up of the full range of spiritual manifestations.

It is important to add that in the charismatic fellowship the focus is not on the gifts but on the Giver, Jesus Christ. The meeting of the fellowship is for the purpose of proclaiming "Jesus is Lord" by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 12:3), and whether the pneumatic manifestations do or do not occur is altogether incidental to the praise that is continually offered to His name.

The Baptism in the Holy Spirit

The charismatic movement lays strong emphasis on the experience described as "baptism in the Holy Spirit" and its frequent concomitant of "speaking in tongues." Indeed, it may be said that the experience of this "baptism" represents the spiritual breakthrough out of which people move into the varied charismatic expressions and into their fresh and lively faith.

Persons in the charismatic movement come into this experience of "spiritual baptism" out of various backgrounds: non-Christian, nominally Christian, even longtime Christian. The word "baptism" signifies for them an immersion in spiritual reality so that, whatever may have been the situation before, this is a spiritual experience of far greater intensity. Or to put it a bit differently, this is an experience of "fullness"- -"filling with the Spirit"- -that cannot be measured in quantitative terms alone, for there is the sense of entrance upon a fresh dimension of fullness of the Spirit. Wherever they were before spiritually, such persons now experience the exhilaration of a breakthrough of the Holy Spirit into their total existence.

This "baptism with the Spirit" is wholly related in the charismatic movement to faith in Jesus Christ. It is ordinarily thought of not as a "second work of grace" but as a deepening of the faith that is grounded in Christ and the new life in His name. The immediate background may have been that of an increased hunger and thirst after God, a desire to be "filled with the Spirit" for more effective witness, or simply a kind of total yielding to Christ wherein He now becomes in a new way the Lord of all of life. Prayer, often persistent and expectant, is frequently the spiritual context, and the laying on of hands for the "fullness" of the Spirit is often the occasion when this "baptism" occurs. In every case, the experience of spiritual baptism flows out of the life in Christ, and is understood to be the effusion of His Spirit with power for praise, witness, and service.

The occurrence of "speaking with tongues," which so often accompanies this spiritual baptism, is ordinarily experienced as one of transcendent praise. Many persons coming into this dimension of fullness find their ordinary speech transcended by a kind of spiritual utterance in which the Holy Spirit provides a new language of jubilation and praise. Here there is a moving past the highest forms of conceptual expression into the spiritual, wherein there is indeed meaning and content but on the level of transcendent communication. This communication is directed not to man but to God, whose glory and deeds are extraordinarily magnified.

This language of praise not only occurs frequently at the initial moment of "baptism with the Spirit," but also continues as a prayer language in the life of faith. To "pray in the Spirit" (Eph. 6:18, Jude 20) now becomes filled with new significance as a deep spiritual utterance possible at all times. Most persons in the charismatic movement will speak of their time of prayer as praying with both the mind and the spirit (1 Cor. 14:15), wherein there is alternation between conceptual and spiritual utterance. This may be not only for praise but also as prayer for others- -as the Spirit makes deep intercession according to the will of God (Rom. 8:26-27).

Spiritual Unity

One of the most striking features of the charismatic movement is the resurgence of a deep unity of spirit across traditional and denominational barriers. For though the movement is occurring within many historic churches- -and often bringing about unity among formerly discordant groups- -the genius of the movement is its transdenominational or ecumenical quality.

This may be noted, for one thing, from the composition of the charismatic group that meets for prayer and ministry. It is not at all unusual to find people fellowshiping and worshiping together from traditions as diverse as classical Pentecostal, mainline Protestant, and Roman Catholic. What unite them are matters already mentioned: a renewed sense of the liveliness of Christian faith, a common expectancy of the manifestation of spiritual gifts for the edification of the community, and, most of all, a spiritual breakthrough that has brought all into a deepened sense of the presence and power of God. The overarching and undergirding unity brought about by the Holy Spirit has now become much more important than the particular denomination.

Herein is ecumenicity of a profound kind in which there is a rediscovery of the original wellsprings of the life of the church. Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox charismatics alike are going back far behind the theological, liturgical, and cultural barriers that have long separated them into a recovery of the primitive dynamism of the early ecclesia. It is this common rediscovery of the New Testament vitality of the Spirit that unites people of diverse traditions and remolds them into a richer and fuller koinonia of the Holy Spirit.

The charismatic movement has, I believe, been well described as "the chief hope of the ecumenical tomorrow."[4] For this is "spiritual ecumenism," not organizational or ecclesiastical ecumenism. With all due appreciation for the ecumenical movement, which has helped to bring churches together in common concern and has now and again brought about visible unity, this cannot be as lasting or far-reaching as the ecumenism emerging from a profound inward and outward renewal of the Holy Spirit. For this ecumenism is not an achievement derived from a common theological statement, an agreed upon polity, or an acceptance of differing liturgical expressions. It is rather that which is given through Jesus Christ in the renewed unity of the Holy Spirit.

A Witness to the Good News

The charismatic movement represents the rediscovery of a fresh thrust for witness to the gospel. This may be illustrated by a reflection upon the previous points in the context of the continuing command of Christ to the church: "You shall be my witnesses." What primarily has been recovered through "baptism in the Spirit" is the plenitude of power for witness. Many before had found their witness to the Good News weak and ineffectual; now it has become much more dynamic and joyful. It is not so much a matter of strategies and techniques of witness as of transparent and vibrant testimony to the new life in Jesus Christ. What it means to be Christ's witness- -and not simply to "talk" it- -is a new experience for many in the charismatic renewal. That "the kingdom of God does not consist in talk but in power" (1 Cor. 4:20) is a fresh and exciting discovery!

Among the common tensions within the church are the competing claims of personal and social witness: the gospel as a call to personal conversion and a call to minister to a wide range of human needs. Frequently it is said that the question is one not of either/or but of both/and, for the good news concerns the whole of man in his personal and corporate existence. Therefore the question is often put as one of relating the two dimensions, and giving proper attention to each. But, however true the importance of a comprehensive witness, the need actually runs much deeper, namely, that of a fresh dynamic or power for pursuing and accomplishing both personal and social aims. Indeed, today one finds a "tired" personal evangelism as much as a "tired" social concern- -each, perhaps unknowingly, desperate for a new anointing of power and vision.

In the charismatic movement there are clear evidences that the contemporary endowment of the Spirit is making for more effective witness, both personal and social. It is apparent on many charismatic fronts that there are both a fresh kind of "reality evangelism"- -a joyous, often indirect but highly potent, form of witness about the new life in Christ- -and many vigorous and creative expressions of concern for the manifold disorders in personal and corporate life.[5]

The Eschatological Perspective

The charismatic movement signalizes a revitalization of the eschatological orientation of the Christian faith. For many persons now active in the movement the whole area of eschatology had meant very little. Whatever the Christian faith had to say, there was a consciousness that it dealt with the present: some kind of amelioration or renovation of the prevailing human situation. Scarcely more than passing thought was given to "last things." Others in the movement had viewed Christian faith as focusing almost exclusively on the future: the resurrection, parousia, kingdom, and so on. Salvation itself was largely a matter to be experienced at the "end." The present world was scarcely a place of God's joyful presence- -but one could hope for something better in the future.

What is patently happening among people in the charismatic movement is the recovery of a lively sense of present and future under the impact of the Holy Spirit. For those preoccupied with the future, the present has now taken on rich significance through the activity of the Holy Spirit. All of life is now pulsating with the vitality and dynamism of the divine presence and action. For those who previously could see little beyond the contemporary world, the future has taken on an exciting meaning because of the new sense of Christ. He is so personally real now that there is a fresh yearning for His future coming in glory, the establishment of the kingdom, and the fulfillment of all things. Because of what has so abundantly happened in the now, the future prospect is viewed with keen anticipation. The result is a vital eschatology in which present and future are united through the dynamism of the Holy Spirit.

II, The Charismatic Movement and Reformed Theology

In reflecting upon the charismatic movement from a Reformed viewpoint I shall, because of space limitations, narrow this basically to a consideration of John Calvin's perspective on the Holy Spirit, and briefly note some of the development since that time. I shall also limit myself to a consideration of only the first five of the seven distinctives (in the profile above), making extended comments in the two areas that are most commonly discussed, namely, the charismata and "baptism in the Holy Spirit."

In the first matter of the recovery of liveliness and freshness in Christian faith Reformed theology can surely rejoice. Going back to the Reformed father, John Calvin, and particularly to his Institutes of the Christian Religion, one finds continuing testimony of the need for vital experience. The knowledge of God, Calvin affirms, "consists more in living experience than in vain and high-flown speculation;"[6] there is need for being "truly and heartily converted" to Christ;[7] and every Christian is called to "glory in the presence of the Holy Spirit."[8] Calvin called his Institutes, for all its theological content, not a "summa theologiae" but a "summa pietatis,"[9] and would summon all his readers to that lively faith without which it is hardly worth being called a Christian. The charismatic movement (scarcely foreseen by Calvin) with its emphasis on vital and "living experience" would surely seem to be in accord with the spirit of Calvin and the best of the Reformed tradition.[10]

In the second area of the church as "koinonia of the Holy Spirit" there would seem to be less emphasis in Calvin and the Reformed tradition. Calvin recognized the importance of common worship and praise, but his view of the church as existing "wherever we see the Word of God purely preached and heard, and the sacraments administered according to Christ's institution"[11] too easily leads to an overemphasis on instruction and order. As important as the marks of preaching and sacraments are, it is only, in addition, people living in the koinonia of the Spirit who represent the fully functioning ecclesia. Thus the charismatic movement signalizes, I believe, an enrichment of the Reformed tradition in stressing a possible "third mark" of the church, namely, that it exists wherever people gather for praise, fellowship, and ministry in the koinonia of the Holy Spirit.[12]

Now we turn to a more extended consideration of the third area, namely, that having to do with the full range of the charismata. We shall note both Calvin's somewhat mixed position, and the increasing Reformed recognition of all the biblical gifts as having continuing validity.

In looking at Calvin's view of the gifts of the Spirit we observe several things. It is apparent, first, that Calvin speaks quite affirmatively of the gifts and graces of the Holy Spirit. For example, he writes, "We are furnished, as far as God knows to be expedient for us, with gifts of the Spirit, which we lack by nature."[13] Again, "He (the ascended Christ)...sits on high, transfusing us with his power that he may quicken us to spiritual life, sanctify us by his Spirit, adorn his church with diverse gifts of his grace."[14] Not only does Calvin speak positively of the gifts in general but also of the seemingly more extraordinary, which he terms variously as "miraculous powers," "manifest powers and visible graces (or gifts)," and "singular gifts." For example, Calvin writes about the laying on of hands by the apostles that it was not only for the reception of a person into the ministry, but "they used it also with those upon whom they conferred the visible graces of the Spirit [Acts 19:6]."[15] He refers to the gift of tongues as "the singular gift of tongues,"[16] speaks of the gift of tongues along with prophecy as special gifts of God,[17] and declares that "the Holy Spirit has here[18] honoured the use of tongues with neverdying praise." The New Testament gift of tongues, according to Calvin, had double significance: both for preaching and adornment. Regarding the Gentiles at Caesarea, Calvin writes: "So...they did glorify God with many tongues. Also...the tongues were given them not only for necessity, seeing the Gospel was to be preached to strangers and to men of another language, but also to be an ornament and worship [or 'honour'] to the Gospel."[19] Thus, in general, Calvin speaks affirmatively of the biblical charismata.

Second, Calvin tends to view the "extraordinary" gifts as having irrevocably ceased. One reason given for this is that God provided these gifts only to illuminate the new proclamation of the gospel:

The Lord willed that those visible and wonderful graces...which he then poured out upon his people, be administered and distributed by his apostles through the laying on of hands.... But those miraculous powers and manifest workings...have ceased; and they have rightly lasted only for a time. For it was fitting that the new preaching of the Gospel and the new Kingdom of Christ should be illumined and magnified by unheard-of and extraordinary miracles.[20]

Another reason given for the cessation of the unusual gifts is that people so quickly corrupted them that God simply took them away. Calvin writes that "the gift of tongues, and other such like things, are ceased long ago in the Church....many did translate that [the gift of tongues] unto pomp and vain glory....No marvel if God took away that shortly after which he had given, and did not suffer the same to be corrupted with longer abuse."[21] So whether because of no further need (the "new preaching" being a thing of the past) or because of the corruption that so rapidly set in, the extraordinary gifts, by God's decision, have ceased once and for all.

It may be important to observe that Calvin does not relate the cessation of the extraordinary gifts to the passing off the scene of the apostles. It is not that the apostles have ceased but that the [supra] "miraculous powers and manifest workings have ceased." Since the ministry of the miraculous gifts has been withdrawn, there is no longer need, for example, of the laying on of hands. "If this ministry [of the gifts] which the apostles then carried out still remained in the Church, the laying on of hands would also have to be kept. But since that grace [or gift] has ceased to be given, what purpose does the laying on of hands serve?"[22]

Third, Calvin at times suggests that if we but had more faith and less slothfulness, the "gifts and graces" of the Holy Spirit would be poured out afresh. For example, in reference to the "rivers of living water" (John 7:38) that Jesus said would come from those who had received the Holy Spirit, Calvin declares that the rivers signify "the perpetuity, as well as the abundance of gifts and graces of the Holy Spirit...promised to us." However, Calvin thereafter adds, "How small is the capacity of our faith, since the graces of the Holy Spirit scarcely come into us by drops...[they] would flow like rivers, if we gave due admission to Christ; that is, if faith made us capable of receiving Him."[23] Though Calvin does not here speak as such of "miraculous gifts" and "visible graces," it is significant that he relates the paucity of gifts and graces not to a divine termination of them but to our little faith. In similar vein Calvin writes:

That we lie on the earth poor, and famished, and almost destitute of spiritual blessings, while Christ now sits in glory at the right hand of the Father, and clothed with the highest majesty of government, ought to be imputed to our slothfulness, and to the small measure of our faith.[24]

Thus, though Calvin does not himself directly draw the conclusion, it may be possible to say that the dearth of spiritual blessings, of gifts and graces, whether ordinary or extraordinary, is not due to divine fiat (namely, no more miraculous workings forever) but to lack of human faith and zeal. What if we gave "due admission to Christ," what if the gifts and graces thereby began to "flow like rivers?" Would there be any limit set on even the most unusual of the charismata of the Holy Spirit?[25]

It is my conviction that while Calvin, the father of Reformed theology, may be cited as depicting the permanent cessation of the extraordinary charismata, his attitude is essentially positive. His obvious esteem for the "wonderful graces" of the Holy Spirit, for the "singular gift of tongues," etc., and his concern about our spiritual slothfulness and little faith whereby we receive so little of God's gifts and graces, could readily combine to point to a more comprehensive charismatic position. In other words, the renewed manifestation of the full range of charismata in our day, while not according to Calvin's technical position,[26] corresponds with his high evaluation of all the gifts and with his view that God is eager to pour out his spiritual blessings upon those who have faith and zeal. It might also have been the case that if Calvin had personally experienced the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, his theology- -already straining in an affirmative direction- -would have been revised to make room for them. Since Calvin never gives any exegetical basis for the cessation of the extraordinary gifts (not even that of apostolic office), it seems apparent that he writes out of lack of experience.[27] With experience confirming the biblical record Calvin, I believe, would readily have taken a fully charismatic position.

The situation today in Reformed theology generally could be called that of openness to the full range of charismatic gifts. Despite the "Warfield position" of some wherein the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit are linked to the original apostolic office,[28] there is a growing readiness to recognize the contemporary validity of the charismata. Karl Barth, for example, in writing about extraordinary manifestations of the Spirit (in the context of 1 Corinthians 13) says, "Where these are lacking, there is reason to ask whether in pride or sloth the community as such has perhaps evaded this endowment, thus falsifying its relationship to its Lord, making it a dead because a nominal and not a real relationship."[29] Emil Brunner writes: "The miracle of Pentecost, and all that is included under the charismata- -the gifts of the Spirit- -must not be soft-pedaled from motives of a theological Puritanism."[30] Even the conservative Reformed theologian A. A. Hoekema, who is opposed to present-day glossolalia ("a human reaction...psychologically induced"), nonetheless concedes that "we certainly cannot bind the Holy Spirit by suggesting that it would be impossible for him to bestow the gift of tongues today."[31]

A number of recent Reformed documents on the charismatic movement have likewise recognized the validity of the gifts for the present day. On the matter of glossolalia the Dutch Reformed Church of the Netherlands, in its Pastoral Letter of 1960 (probably the first ecclesiastical statement dealing with the charismata) about The Church and the Pentecostal Groups, says: "We think it presumptuous to maintain that tongue-speaking was something only for the beginning of Christianity. Biblical evidence in Acts and 1 Cor. 12 and 14 are much too explicit for that....The fact that tongue-speaking also has a meaning for our time is therefore not to be ruled out."[32] The former United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. in its 1970 document on The Work of the Holy Spirit declares that "we cannot...follow the view of some theologians that the purely supernatural gifts ceased with the death of the apostles. There seems no exegetical warrant for this assumption."[33] Again: "We believe that the Holy Spirit is witnessing to the church that it should be 'praying and sighing' for his ministry and manifestations, but too often the charismatic dimension is being reduced to the level of psychological dynamics and dismissed as an emotional aberration."[34] In the 1974 Report of the Panel on Doctrine of the Church of Scotland, entitled The Charismatic Movement Within the Church of Scotland, there is an unmistakable difference with Calvin on the cessation of certain spiritual gifts. Criticizing Calvin's interpretation of Mark 16:17,[35] the Panel says:

Since God has finally spoken in Christ, what have undoubtedly ceased are new revelations. What has not ceased according to Scripture is the promise of gifts. The promise in Mark was made "to them that believe," and this is a promise valid for all times, and to the end of time. There is no warrant in Scripture for confining it to the "commencement" of the Gospel.[36]

In a "Brief Summary of Conclusions" the Panel states: "The gifts of the Spirit are to be expected. Where there is expectation, the Church may well be endowed with a larger and more evident measure of these gifts than a church which has long believed that these gifts have ceased may hope for."[37]

We turn next to the consideration of "baptism in the Holy Spirit" in Reformed theology. It will be recalled that this represents in the charismatic movement a spiritual breakthrough in which varied charismatic expressions become operative, and in which the Christian life is variously renewed. Here Reformed theology is much more ambivalent, and as yet no consensus has emerged.

Some of the ambivalence is found in Calvin himself. Calvin in dealing with the expression "baptized in the Holy Spirit" has a double understanding which he never resolves. On the one hand he views "baptism in the Spirit" as the means of salvation or regeneration:

We have said that perfect salvation is found in the person of Christ. Accordingly, that we may become partakers of it "he baptizes us in the Holy Spirit and fire"...bringing us into the light of faith in his gospel and so regenerating us that we become new creatures...and he consecrates us, purged of worldly uncleanness, as temples holy to God.[38]

Similarly Calvin writes that "to baptize by the Holy Spirit and by fire is to confer the Holy Spirit, who in regeneration has the function and nature of fire."[39] Calvin does not hesitate to say elsewhere that water baptism is little more than an outward sign, but that Christ is "the author of inward grace,"[40] that is, the grace of salvation.

On the other hand, Calvin also speaks of "baptism in the Holy Spirit" as having to do with the conferring of the gifts of the Holy Spirit:

[It is] the visible graces of the Holy Spirit given through the laying on of hands. It is nothing new to signify these graces by the word "baptism." As on the day of Pentecost, the apostles are said to have recalled the words of the Lord about the baptism of fire and of the Spirit. And Peter mentions the same thing...when he had seen those graces poured out upon Cornelius, his household, and kindred (Acts 11:16).[41]

Again in his Commentary on Acts, Calvin says:

It is no new thing for the name of baptism to be translated unto the gifts of the Spirit, as we saw in the first and in the eleventh chapters (Acts 1:5, and 11:6) where Luke said, that when Christ promised to his apostles to send the Spirit visible, he called it baptism....When the Spirit came down upon Cornelius, Peter remembered the words of the Lord, "Ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost."[42]

Calvin's position is a peculiar one. Exegetically it seems that he favors the latter position, namely, baptism in the Spirit as not identical with regeneration but with the "visible" gifts of the Spirit. Yet since he views those gifts as having been withdrawn (as we have earlier noted), baptism in the Spirit from this perspective can actually have no relevance for the church today. Hence, Calvin's first position (Spirit baptism = regeneration)-even though less satisfactory- -is seemingly the only one that relates to a continuing possibility. Of course, if Calvin had been able freely to embrace the charismata, then baptism with the Spirit could have been understood as the ongoing possibility of charismatic endowment.

It is quite significant that Calvin views the Christian life since apostolic times as not missing anything essential through the disappearance of this early charismatic endowment. In other words it is possible, from this perspective, to be Christian (regenerated, new creatures, etc.) and not baptized in the Spirit.

Now let us raise the further question: assuming Calvin is right in his exegetical identification of baptism in the Spirit with charismatic endowment, what if the deeper issue were not basically the gifts (charismata) but the gift of the Spirit? What if the real lack since the early church often has been not extraordinary gifts but that endowment of the Spirit wherein the charismata become operative? What if baptism in the Spirit refers, as Calvin in places exegetically maintains, to something not essential to Christian existence, but to a gracious gift wherein there is a deepened sense of the Spirit's presence and power along with various charismatic manifestations? We could then say that Calvin helped prepare the way by his recognition of baptism in the Spirit as reaching beyond salvation history into the realm of spiritual endowment- -even if he identified such a baptism with the charismata and largely saw no hope of their recurrence.

In brief, Calvin's signal contribution to contemporary understanding is his recognition that there has been something in the dimension of the Spirit often missing since apostolic times. It is not the actuality of salvation or regeneration that is the issue here but the matter of charismatic endowment: in the broadest sense, the endowment of the Holy Spirit with His gifts. This of course is what the charismatic movement of our time is also saying, namely, that this aspect of the Spirit's activity is again becoming operational. In that sense "baptism in the Holy Spirit"- -a newly recovered dimension- -is grounded in Calvin's own pneumatological orientation.

Within recent years in Reformed theology there have been signs of recognition of "baptism in the Spirit" as a long neglected dimension of the Holy Spirit's activity. So far as I know, Professor Hendrikus Berkhof of Leiden was the first to point this direction in his book, The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit. He speaks therein of how, in addition to justification and sanctification, various "Revivalists and Pentecostal movements...experienced still another blessing of the Holy Spirit in the life of the individual which is now widely known as the 'filling by the Holy Spirit' or 'the baptism by the Holy Spirit.'"[43] Then after discussing the work by the Holy Spirit in Acts, Berkhof emphasizes:

The main line is clear: by a special working of the Spirit, the faithful are empowered to speak in tongues, to prophesy, to praise God, that is, to give a powerful expression of God's mighty acts to those around them.[44]

We may note that Berkhof's special point is not so much the charismata themselves as the empowering for their expression. Then after a discussion of Paul's treatment of the spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 12-14, Berkhof adds:

For him also [as with Luke] the work of the Holy Spirit is not exhausted in justification and sanctification; an additional working is promised and must therefore be sought. All this leads us to the conclusion that the Pentecostals are basically right when they speak of a working of the Holy Spirit beyond that which is acknowledged in the major denominations.[45]

By this statement Berkhof has sprung open the charismatic dimension in Reformed theology, and become in many ways the theological precursor of the contemporary charismatic movement in the Reformed tradition.

On the ecclesiastical front a most significant development has been the recognition of this "additional working" of the Spirit by the former Presbyterian Church, U.S. (Southern), in its statement entitled "The Person and Work of the Holy Spirit: With Special Reference to 'the Baptism of the Holy Spirit.'"[46] A part of the statement reads:

Baptism with the Holy Spirit, as the Book of Acts portrays it, is a phrase which refers most often to the empowering of those who believe to share in the mission of Jesus Christ....believers are enabled to give expression to the gospel through extraordinary praise, powerful witness, and boldness of action. Accordingly, those who speak of such a "baptism with the Spirit," and who give evidence of this special empowering work of the Spirit, can claim Scriptural support. Further, since "baptism with the Spirit" may not be at the same time as baptism with water and/or conversion, we need to be open-minded toward those today who claim an intervening period of time. If this experience signifies in some sense a deepening of faith and awareness of God's presence and power, we may be thankful.[47]

Finally (the last paragraph begins): "It is clear that there is Biblical and Reformed witness concerning baptism of the Holy Spirit and special endowments of the Holy Spirit in the believing community."[48]

Now I do not want to suggest that there is unanimity in Reformed circles regarding this "additional working" of the Holy Spirit. Neither the former United Presbyterian Church nor the Church of Scotland report adopts the above position. The United Presbyterian report, while recognizing that "the predominant testimony of the Book of Acts concerning the Holy Spirit concentrates on the outpouring, the gift, the reception, the falling of the Holy Spirit upon Christian believers," argues semantically that "nowhere is reference made to 'the baptism in (or, with) the Spirit.'"[49] Actually in this report there is a cautious drawing away from Acts, the report arguing both that we should give primary attention to the didactic (i.e., non-Acts) portions of the New Testament, and that there is the "notorious difficulty of ascertaining any single, consistent pattern in Acts of the sequence of conversion, reception of the Holy Spirit, and waterbaptism."[50] In spite of all this, the Report earlier says: "We must, however, keep in mind that the pattern of empowering by the Spirit revealed in these narratives is both a stimulus for the church today and a help in the understanding of Neo-Pentecostal experience among us"![51] Hence, one senses in the United Presbyterian report both an uncertainty in this area and a desire to be open to what charismatics are experiencing and saying. The Church of Scotland report declares quite bluntly: "From the Reformed point of view, to insist on baptism in the Holy Spirit as an experience subsequent to conversion is to deny the allsufficiency of Christ. Although there are passages in Acts which suggest a theology of subsequence when interpreted literally, there are others which are not in harmony with this."[52] The Church of Scotland is obviously also uncomfortable with the narrative in Acts. Still, in the summary, it is significant to note the statement that "the Panel does not deny the reality of an experience which can transform the faith of a believer or give new life to a jaded ministry."[53]

What, of course, the charismatic movement is saying is that this transforming experience in the faith of a believer is precisely what the Book of Acts (for all its alleged inadequacies) is talking about in terms of "baptism" (outpouring, falling, etc.) of the Holy Spirit. Here I believe the former Presbyterian Church, U.S., report is showing the way- -although there is surely room and need for much further development.

Summary

A number of things may now be summarized: First, "baptism in the Holy Spirit," however worded, is not the Holy Spirit active in salvation but in implementation: it is the mighty coming of the Spirit upon those who believe. This coming is not for the origination of faith but belongs to that action of God through Christ in which there is enablement of praise, witness, and service. Second, as the record in Acts demonstrates, this is the action of the "missionary Spirit," who in coming propels the faithful out into the world as a vital part of the mission of Jesus Christ- -"the justified and sanctified are now turned, so to speak, inside out."[54] Third, "baptism in the Spirit" presupposes faith in Christ, forgiveness of sins in His name, and therefore is totally grounded in a living relationship to Him as Savior and Lord. Fourth, such a spiritual baptism may be preceded by years in which the Holy Spirit has been active in personal and/or communal life. Now there is a further breakthrough of spiritual endowment and intensity. Fifth, "baptism in the Spirit" points to an immersion in the reality of the Spirit of God. Whatever may have been the relation of the Holy Spirit to the person and/or community before, this spiritual baptism is a flooding of divine presence and power. Sixth, utterance in "tongues" is peculiarly a sign of this spiritual baptism, wherein the depths of the human spirit are probed by the divine Spirit and the consequent language moves past the mental and conceptual into spiritual utterance. In such expression-which is not ecstatic babbling but transcendent praise- -there is declaration of the mighty acts of God and the extolling of His glorious name. Seventh, prayer, self-surrender, expectancy- -openness to "the promise of the Spirit"- -is often the context in which the Holy Spirit is poured out. Even as the heavenly Father delights to "give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him" (Luke 11:13), so may those who ask in faith expect to receive bountifully from His grace.

A word here may be added not about Reformed theology but about the concern frequently expressed in the Reformed and Presbyterian churches for an outpouring of God's Holy Spirit. As far back as 1892 at the World Presbyterian Alliance meeting in Toronto it was said that "there should be a more realizing sense of the necessity of an outpouring of the Spirit." And at the Alliance meeting in 1899 in Washington, D.C., the Council noted that there is "a deepening thirst for a present day experience of the fullness of His [the Spirit's] power."[55] All of this of course preceded the birth of the Pentecostal movement in the first decade of the twentieth century. Those who were privileged to be at the 1964 Alliance meeting in Frankfurt, Germany, will recall the theme of the meeting, "Come, Creator Spirit!" in which there was frequent expression of desire for the Spirit to come in fresh power. Dr. W. A. Visser 't Hooft's opening sermon included these remarks:

Veni Creator Spiritus cannot possibly be taken to signify: "Let's have a little bit of Holy Spirit; just enough to put some energy into our sleeping institutions." It can only mean: "Come, Thou living God, Thou Living Christ, Thou Creator Spirit, and transform us altogether, so that we may be truly converted, radically changed."[56]

It is some such transformation by the Spirit of the living God that is at the heart of the charismatic movement in our time, and bids fair to bring about the radical renewal of the church of Jesus Christ throughout the world.

Finally, we shall make brief reference to the fifth aspect of the charismatic movement- -the striking sense of spiritual unity and communion that transcends traditional denominational barriers. This corresponds well with the genius of the Reformed tradition which since the day of Calvin has had a strong ecumenical orientation. One recalls, for example, Calvin's letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury wherein Calvin bespeaks his own zeal for unity:

This other thing also is to be ranked among the chief evils of our time, viz., that the Churches are so divided, that human fellowship is scarcely now in any repute amongst us, far less that Christian intercourse which all make a profession of, but few sincerely practice.[57]

This attitude of Calvin, despite occasional departures, belongs to the consciousness of the Presbyterian and Reformed churches. These churches a century ago were the first to form a world confederation (the World Alliance beginning in 1875), and have been active from the inception of the ecumenical movement in the twentieth century.

Hence the charismatic movement, representing a profound unity among Christians of every communion through the renewal of the Holy Spirit, is not only in accord with the spirit of the Reformed tradition but also has a signal contribution to make. Since in the charismatic movement there is a rediscovery of the wellsprings of the life of the church which unite in depth Christians of all denominations- -Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox alike- -then there is realized a major step on the way to the unity of all churches. There may remain, to be sure, many doctrinal, liturgical, and cultural differences, but these can be dealt with from a new perspective under the transcending impact of the Holy Spirit.

Footnotes

[1]Many prefer the expression "charismatic renewal" to emphasize: (1) that this is not a movement in the sense of an organized effort to achieve certain ends, (2) that since (as will be noted in more detail below) one important aspect of the movement is the renewal of a wide range of biblical charismata, the better, and more precise, name is "charismatic renewal." I shall retain the term "movement," despite the difficulties with the word, because there is actually more involved than charismatic renewal. Indeed what is basic, I believe, is a movement of the Holy Spirit wherein the charismata are reappearing in wide measure. Hence "charismatic movement" is difficult from another perspective. I shall later speak of this also as a dynamic movement of the Holy Spirit wherein the charismata are recurring.

[2]The first national Orthodox Charismatic Conference was held the summer of 1973 at Ann Arbor, Michigan. National (or International) Episcopal, Lutheran, Presbyterian and Roman Catholic Conferences are now held each year. There are also Baptist, Methodist, Mennonite, and other conferences held regionally and locally throughout the United States.

[3]My more extended reflection is set out in The Era of the Spirit and The Pentecostal Reality.

[4]Words of John A. Mackay, former president of Princeton Theological Seminary: "What is known as the charismatic movement-a movement marked by spiritual enthusiasm and special gifts, and which crosses all boundaries of culture, race, age, and church tradition-is profoundly significant....Because 'no heart is pure that is not passionate and no virtue is safe that is not enthusiastic,' the charismatic movement of today is the chief hope of the ecumenical tomorrow" ("Oneness in the Body: Focus for the Future," World Vision, April 1970). (See also chap. 3, "The Upsurge of Pentecostalism," for a fuller quotation.)

[5]See the book by Larry Christenson (a leading charismatic Lutheran pastor), A Charismatic Approach to Social Action. See also, inter alia, Gathered for Power by charismatic Episcopal priest, Graham Pulkingham. This is a remarkable story of a charismatic parish moving freely in both personal and corporate witness.

[6]Institutes, 1.10.2 (Battles trans. here and hereafter).

[7]Ibid., 3.3.25.

[8]Ibid., 3.2.39. "It is a token of the most miserable blindness to charge with arrogance Christians who dare to glory in the presence of the Holy Spirit, without which glorying Christianity itself does not stand!" It is not without interest that Calvin says this in a section in which he also talks about the gifts of the Holy Spirit. If we say "'we know the gifts bestowed on us by God' [1 Cor. 2:12], how can they yelp against us without abusively assaulting the Holy Spirit?"

[9]Ibid. Introduction, 51.

[10]Unfortunately the Reformed tradition has not always held to the attitude of Calvin. Theology hardening into an orthodoxy that left out piety, along with an exaggerated fear of "subjective experience," has often been the picture.

[11]Ibid., 4.1.9. Emil Brunner astutely observes that "no one will suppose that one of the apostles would recognize again in this formula the Ecclesia of which he had living experience" (The Misunderstanding of the Church, 103).

[12]In Reformed orthodoxy, after Calvin, the third mark of the church came to be discipline (see, e.g., Leiden Synopsis [40:45]). This is hardly progress in the direction of koinonia of the Spirit!

[13]Institutes, 2.15.4.

[14]Ibid., 2.16.16. Also we may recall the words of Calvin in 3.2.39. See note 8 supra.

[15]Ibid. 4.3.16.

[16]Ibid., 3.20.33.

[17]This is done in conjunction with a reference to the power to work miracles wherein, says Calvin, Paul "uses the terms 'powers' and 'faith' for the same thing, that is, for the ability to work miracles. This power or faith, therefore, is a special gift of God, which any impious man can brag about and abuse, as the gift of tongues, as prophecy, as the other graces" (Institutes, 3.2.9).

[18]Commenting on 1 Corinthians 14:5 (Beveridge trans., here and hereafter regarding Calvin's Commentaries), Calvin's full statement reads: "As it is certain, that the Holy Spirit has here honoured the use of tongues with never-dying praise, we may very readily gather, what is the kind of spirit that actuates those reformers, who level as many reproaches as they can against the pursuit of them." The context incidentally shows that Calvin here understands tongues as foreign languages.

[19]Commentary on Acts 10:46.

[20]Ibid., 4.19.6.

[21]Commentary on Acts 10:44, 46. Also note may be made of Calvin's word regarding Mark 16:17-18-"And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues...they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover"-wherein he says, "Though Christ does not expressly state whether he intends this gift to be temporary....yet it is more probable that miracles were promised only for a time, in order to give lustre to the gospel...[also] the world may have been deprived of this honour through the guilt of its own ingratitude" (Commentary on a Harmony of the Evangelists, Mark 16:17. Here both reasons for the cessation of the gifts are suggested.

[22]Institutes, 4.19.6.

[23]These quotations are from the Commentary on John 7:38.

[24]Ibid., John 7:39.

[25]One other passage from Calvin's Commentary on 1 Corinthians 14:32 may be quoted. Calvin speaks of "how very illustrious that Church was, in respect of an extraordinary abundance and variety of spiritual gifts." Then he adds, "We now see our leanness, nay, our poverty; but in this we have a just punishment, sent to requite our ingratitude. For neither are the riches of God exhausted, nor is his benignity lessened; but we are neither deserving of his bounty, nor capable of receiving his liberality."

[26]There is not space here to note in detail that a large part of Calvin's position that the extraordinary gifts were withdrawn stems from his opposition to the Catholic teaching about confirmation. Since the Roman Catholics used the laying on of hands for confirmation-"increase of grace"-and supported this practice from some of the texts (e.g., Acts 8:17 and 19:16) that Calvin saw to be referring to the "extraordinary" gifts, he could dismiss confirmation as meaningless since God had withdrawn the gifts. "Since that grace [wherein the gifts were administered] has ceased to be given, what purpose does the laying on of hands serve?" (Institutes, 4.19.6).

[27]This lack of experience is admitted in a backhanded way where Calvin says that even "the Papists...themselves are enforced to grant that the Church was beautified for a time only with these gifts" (Commentary on Acts 8:16).

[28]B. B. Warfield wrote concerning the extraordinary gifts: "They were part of the credentials of the Apostles as the authoritative agents of God in founding the church. Their function thus confined them to distinctively the Apostolic Church, and they necessarily passed away with it" (Counterfeit Miracles, p. 6). It may be noted that Warfield's view of the reason for the disappearance of the charismata, namely apostolic demise, is not that of Calvin.

[29]Church Dogmatics IV/2:828.

[30]Dogmatics, 3:16.

[31]What About Tongue-Speaking?, 127-28.

[32]De Kerk en de Pinkstergroepen, (Herderlijk Schriiven van der Netherlandse Hervormde Kerk, 1960), 41-42.

[33]See Presence, Power, Praise: Documents on the Charismatic Renewal (Kilian McDonnell, ed., 1:230).

[34]Ibid., 1:232.

[35]See note 21 above.

[36]Presence, Power, Praise, 1:530.

[37]Ibid., 1:545. This is one of eight brief summary statements.

[38]Institutes, 3.1.4. In Calvin's Commentary on Matthew 3:11-"He shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire"-he similarly says this means that Christ "bestows the Spirit of regeneration."

[39]Institutes 4.16.25.

[40]Ibid., 4.15.8.

[41]Ibid., 4.15.18.

[42]Commentary on Acts 19:5.

[43]The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit, 85.

[44]Ibid., 86.

[45]Ibid., 87. For a fuller presentation of Berkhof's view see chapter 3, "The Upsurge of Pentecostalism." Also see my preceding chapter, "Theological Perspectives of the Person and Work of the Holy Spirit," the opening two paragraphs.

[46]Adopted by the General Assembly of 1971. For extended excerpts from this statement, see my chapter 4.

[47]See Presence, Power, Praise, 1:314.

[48]Ibid., 1:316.

[49]Ibid., 1:261. The report quibbles (as I see it) in several places over the contemporary expression "baptism with the Holy Spirit," arguing that the verb "baptize" is always used in the New Testament. This is true; however, the critical question is not one of semantics but whether-however the expression is worded-this refers to something that may happen to Christian believers. The above statement by a semantic dodge avoids the obvious conclusion, namely, "baptism (or 'baptized') with the Holy Spirit" is a parallel expression to "outpouring," "falling," etc., and therefore according to the Book of Acts is something additional possible within Christian experience.

[50]Ibid.

[51]Ibid., 1:230.

[52]Ibid., 1:527. The language of "theology of subsequence" is derived from F. D. Bruner's book, A Theology of the Holy Spirit. It is unfortunate that so much reliance in the report is placed on this basically anti-charismatic treatise, and no reference made, for example, to Berkhof's book. Also though the Presbyterian Church, U.S., report is mentioned in the Introduction to the Church of Scotland report, no reference is made thereafter to it. Incidentally, it is hard to see how the "all-sufficiency of Christ" is denied by an experience subsequent to conversion. If it is the same Christ who turns people to Himself who may then or thereafter baptize them in the Holy Spirit, the sufficiency is totally of Him.

[53]Ibid., 1:545.

[54]Berkhof's words in his The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit, 89.

[55]Marcel Pradervand, "Leaves from the Alliance History," Reformed World, June 1972, p. 78. Dr. Pradervand, General Secretary of the World Alliance from 1948 to 1970, has written me personally, "I for one believe that unless we take the Holy Spirit seriously and are really baptized by the Spirit there is little hope for the traditional Churches."

[56]As quoted in the Charismatic Communion of Presbyterian Ministers Newsletter, Fall 1974, p. 9.

[57]Letter to Cranmer, April, 1552, Letters of John Calvin, 132.

Chapter 8, God's Mighty Acts

I, The Mighty Acts of the Triune God

It is urgent that the whole church become freshly aware of the mighty acts of the Triune God. The creation of the universe from nothing, the incarnation of the eternal Son, and the effusion of the Holy Spirit: herein is the essential series of God's mighty acts. It is this climactic act of the outpouring of the Spirit that, following upon the other two, presses today for our attention.

Let us focus upon the role of the Triune God in these mighty acts. Creation is peculiarly the act of God the Father, although both Son and Spirit are also involved: God the Father as fountainhead and source, God the Son as instrument (the eternal Word), and God the Spirit as lifegiving power. Incarnation is peculiarly the act of God the Son, although God the Father is initiator and God the Spirit the effecter (the power of the Incarnation). Effusion is peculiarly the act of God the Holy Spirit, although God the Father is the promiser/sender and God the Son the one who "pours forth" the Spirit. None of these acts is to be identified with or subsumed under another, yet all are essential actions of the one God.

A Trinitarian theological imbalance occurs whenever there is an over- or under-emphasis on one of the persons and/or acts of the Triune God. There may, for example, be a focus on God the Father and His activity in creation with a devaluation of God the Son and Spirit to the status of divine attributes (such as wisdom or power), or to creaturely and impersonal manifestations. The same thing practically occurs in the case of an exaggerated Christocentrism wherein Jesus Christ is the total focus of worship and reflection[1] or with an overblown pneumatism in which the Holy Spirit (Spirit of God, eternal Spirit, etc.) is the center of concern.[2] In all these cases, either explicitly or implicitly, God as Trinity is not adequately recognized. These are actually instances of a theological/practical unitarianism: whether of the Father, Son, or Holy Spirit.

There may also be a focus on God the Father and the Son- -an implicit binitarianism- -that largely disregards the Holy Spirit or subordinates Him to Father and/or Son. Theologically this occurred early in the life of the church when consequent to Arianism (with its denial of the eternal Son) there were the Semi-Arians (Pneumatomachi) who insisted on the creaturehood of the Holy Spirit. While this deviation was corrected in the Constantinopolitan Creed of A.D. 381 which recognized the Holy Spirit in His essential deity as one who "proceeds from the Father" and is "worshiped and glorified together with the Father and Son," and sees in Him "the Lord and life-giver" (in relation to creation), and as the potency of the incarnation (the Lord Jesus Christ "incarnate by the Holy Spirit"), there is nothing said about the effusion of the Spirit, nor the attendant results. The later Western filioque addition brings the Son into the procession- -"who proceeds from the Father and the Son"- -while pointing in the direction of the effusion of the Spirit, does not really make much progress. That is to say, the nature of this effusion- -its dimensions, its significance, its results- -is neglected; and this corresponds to a continuing lack in the church, especially in the West, of sensitivity to the presence and power of the Holy Spirit.[3] Thus the implicitly theological binitarianism is of a piece with inadequately formed Christian experience.

II, The Purpose of God's Mighty Acts

We turn next to a study of what stands at the heart of each of these mighty acts of the Triune God. Creation is for the purpose of bringing into existence those to whom God can communicate His glory, who may become knowledgeable of His love and holiness, and share His ineffable presence. Incarnation- -the event of Jesus Christ's life, death, and resurrection- -is for the purpose of redeeming a lost creation. Effusion is for the purpose of filling those renewed in Christ with the Holy Spirit so that all things may manifest His presence and power. Each of the complex of acts- -works[4] presupposes what has gone before. Without creation and communication there would be no incarnation and redemption; without incarnation and the ensuing redemption there would be no outpouring of God's fulfilling Spirit.

Before noting the matter of purpose in more detail, it is important to observe that, despite orthodox formulation of the ontological equality of the Holy Spirit with Son and Father, there has tended to be a functional subordination. The Holy Spirit has been largely understood as "Creator Spirit"- -the life-giving and life-sustaining power in creation and providence- -and as the One who applies the redemption wrought by God the Son. In the latter case the Holy Spirit is viewed as the convicter of sin, the regenerator of the heart, and the One who unites to Christ through faith; whereas His further and peculiar activity in effusion is inadequately recognized. Thus the Holy Spirit's work is functionally subordinated to that of Christ and is viewed as a work of applicative instrumentality.[5] It is insufficiently recognized that not only does the Spirit point to Christ but also Christ to the Spirit, and that beyond the Spirit's work in uniting to Christ is Christ's mediation of the Spirit. Indeed, this latter act of mediation, from the Father through the Son, is that climactic act of the effusion of the Holy Spirit. This act, presupposing redemption, represents the bestowal of the Spirit upon a redeemed humanity. It is as distinctive and unique an act as that of creation and incarnation, of communication and redemption.

It is quickly to be added that while Christianity is a Triune faith it is also Christ-centered. Christian faith focuses on Jesus Christ in whom "the whole fullness of the deity dwells bodily" (Col. 2:9). Hence, while it is the case that incarnation/redemption is Christ's primary role, He is also the way back to the Father's work in creation and communication, and the way forward to the work of the Holy Spirit in the manifestation of God's presence and power. No one comes to the Father but by the Son, and no one is baptized with the Spirit except by the Son's mediation.[6] Thus Christian faith is both Triune and Christocentric.

Returning to the third of God's mighty acts, the effusion of the Spirit, we have already observed that the act of effusion is that wherein the fullness of God's presence and power is poured out. It is apparent that this act of God the Holy Spirit takes place in relation to a redeemed creation. As long as humanity is dominated by sin and evil there is no effusion of the Holy Spirit, but when the power of darkness is overcome by the victory of Christ at the cross and in the resurrection, then the mighty act of effusion may occur. It is upon a humanity, a creation made new in Christ, that God bestows His Holy Spirit and becomes the fulfilling power.

In further consideration of the purpose of the divine effusion, it is important to add that the intention is that God in Christ may fulfill His own will and purpose on earth as in heaven. God in the effusion of the Spirit enters into such a dynamic interaction with man that new powers are released to praise God, to witness boldly in the name of Christ, to perform "signs and wonders," to be living demonstrations of the reality of God's kingdom- -thus the essential penetration and fulfilling of all things whereby they may more and more be resplendent with the presence and glory of God.

The purpose, it may be added, is not primarily sanctification. In the redemption effected through Jesus Christ there is both justification and sanctification. Through the work of redemption both forgiveness and holiness are imparted. In this holiness, or sanctification, one is to grow and increasingly be conformed to the likeness of Christ. The Holy Spirit is surely at work in sanctification (He is the "Spiritus Sanctus"), and thereby He is carrying forward the redemptive work of Christ to its fulfillment. But the effusion of the Spirit is for another purpose, namely, that the human vessel may be so possessed by the divine as to be an instrument through which God may fulfill His will and purpose. This, though not unrelated to sanctification, is not identical with it, for God may fill with His Spirit even those who have known little of the process of sanctification. Also there may be marked increase of sanctification for those filled with God's Spirit, since there is great influx of spiritual power. The point, however, is that the effusion of the Spirit carries the recipient beyond Christian living (in its various ramifications of justification, regeneration, sanctification, and the like) into the dimension of Christian witness.

What is basically being described here is the enablement of the church to fulfill the ministry of the gospel. The church, which is the community of those who in Christ have experienced the Father's goodness in creation, and the Son's grace in redemption, is called upon to be the avenue of Father and Son in carrying forward the gospel. The effusion of the Spirit bestows upon the community of the redeemed the presence and power of the Holy Spirit whereby the church becomes a living demonstration of the Triune God.

III, The Appropriation of God's Mighty Acts by Faith

It is now important to stress that all the mighty acts- -works of God are to be recognized and appropriated by faith in Jesus Christ. Creation which intends communication is fulfilled in communion and fellowship between God and man; it is in faith that the creature may respond to God's paternal love and care. However, due to man's alienation from God through sin, such communication was not fully realized until the advent of Jesus Christ, and the way back to the Father was revealed: "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me"(John 14:6). Through faith in Jesus Christ the way is opened afresh to a filial relationship in which God the Father is known in His intimate, providential, sustaining grace and thereby the purpose of creation is fulfilled. Incarnation, which is for the purpose of redemption of a fallen creation, attains its end with those who in faith and repentance accept Christ as Savior. More than sharing the Father, which Jesus did in his life and teachings, thereby leading many into deeper understanding of the Creator, Jesus brought about a transformation in human nature. By faith in Christ people are forgiven, made new creatures, and set upon the path of eternal life. Effusion, wherein the Holy Spirit is poured forth upon a redeemed creation, becomes effective with those believing in Jesus Christ who are ready and open to receive it. Thereby they are enabled to be a forceful witness to Christ, do mighty works in His name, and to be channels for many operations and manifestations of the Holy Spirit.

In Jesus Christ all these blessings are found- -the goodness of God the Father in creation, the grace of God the Son in redemption, the glory of God the Spirit in effusion- -all these through faith in Him. Faith is directed to Jesus Christ, for in Him is all fullness of Godhead and all blessings ("every spiritual blessing" [Eph. 1:3]). However, the very faith directed to Jesus Christ may be a faith in movement, whereby there is a step-by-step unfolding of God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and an accompanying realization of God's creative, redemptive, and effusive activity.

The prime example of this step-by-step unfolding of God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is found in the case of Jesus' first disciples. Jesus Himself was the center of their devotion, and as they followed Him day by day they first became increasingly aware of God as Father. The teachings of Jesus had much to do with this, for He frequently spoke of God as Father and taught His disciples to pray, "Our Father...." In many sayings and parables Jesus depicted God's paternal care. More than this, the disciples came to experience God as Father through sharing with Jesus His trust, assurance, and confidence in the Father's will. God as Son, Jesus Christ, in His forgiving, redemptive activity- -the disciples increasingly experienced as the years went by. Thus it was that they came to life in Him. By His death and resurrection they were raised up and experienced what it was to be new creatures. Through faith in Jesus as the Son of God they received the wonder of forgiveness and entered into eternal life. Finally, they came to know God as Holy Spirit as He was poured out upon them at Pentecost, and thereafter, filled with God's presence and power they bore mighty witness to the truth of the gospel. Again it was through faith in Jesus who had promised the Holy Spirit that this took place. But it did not happen all at once: it occurred over a period of time.

We may note in more detail that the effusion, or outpouring, of the Holy Spirit occurred some fifty days after the disciples had experienced the death and resurrection of Jesus through which they had come to new life in Him. With a living faith in Jesus they also believed in the promise of His Spirit, and waited in prayer until the Spirit was poured out from on high. The effusion of the Spirit, like the redemption they had experienced, was an act of grace: it was the gift of the Holy Spirit. They also told those who would repent and believe in Christ for forgiveness of their sins that the same gift of the Spirit was available, not only to them but to the generations thereafter. "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. For the promise [of the Spirit] is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him" (Acts 2:38-39).[7] The gift is promised to all who are "called" (= calling to salvation), and is received, even as forgiveness, by faith.

It is apparent from the account in Acts that the gift of the Spirit was sometimes received concurrent with saving faith in Jesus Christ, and on other occasions was received later. It is also clear that apostles such as Peter, John, and Paul were not satisfied until believers in Jesus had also received this gift: the bestowal of the Holy Spirit. Variously there was baptism and the laying on of hands, but the single most important preparation (as with the original disciples before Pentecost) was prayer. In prayer there doubtless was present the atmosphere of openness, expectancy, even readiness for the bestowal of the Spirit. Thus it was, throughout the New Testament church, believers in Jesus by faith participated in the third mighty act of God, the effusion of the Holy Spirit.

Finally, it is important to emphasize again that the gift of the Spirit was not limited to the New Testament period. It is a continuing promise to the people of God. This also signifies that the effusion of the Spirit was not a once for all matter, but occurs ever and again where there are those receptive to God's gracious gift. By no means- -it should be added- -was the gift of the Spirit given once for all at Pentecost, so that the church in some sense has become possessor of the Holy Spirit and thereby needs no longer to look forward to the receipt of God's gift. Indeed, there may be special need in our day for the church to pray earnestly for the outpouring of God's Spirit. If the church lacks here, there is no possible way of adequately fulfilling the Great Commission.

IV, Christian Baptism: Sign and Seal of God's Mighty Acts

It is important next to note that Christian baptism- -baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit- -is both sign and seal of God's mighty acts- -works appropriated by faith.

The words of Jesus in Matthew 28:19- -"Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you"- -have been recognized as mandate for the church since the earliest times. Three things are herein expressed: first, the making of disciples, which signifies bringing to faith, that is, Christianizing; second, that along with bringing to faith there is to be a baptizing in the Triune Name; and third, teaching is imperative for all who are made disciples and baptized. Baptism is thereby closely connected with discipleship and faith, and is as much a part of the Great Commission as the teaching that follows it.

Regarding baptism it is relevant to observe that it is a visible sign or symbol and seal of discipleship entered into, and it is background for teaching to follow. Baptizing is to be done in the name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and thereby demonstration is given of what discipleship, Christianization, faith are all about. The disciple is one who has been set on the way of faith- -a faith that, while surely focusing on Jesus, represents entrance into the full reality of God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and His work in creation, redemption, and effusion.

Since baptism is in the Triune name, then the fullness of faith includes relationship to God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Likewise since baptism by definition suggests immersion, the reality of faith thereby signified is that of immersion in, participation in, the activity of the Triune God. Thus if baptism, for example, is in the name of the Son, the spiritual reality is that of baptism into Christ (which is the meaning of faith as identification) whereby new life is received; if baptism is in the name of the Holy Spirit, then the spiritual reality is that of baptism in the Holy Spirit by which power for ministry is given. In other words, the full reality of faith- -or discipleship- -includes immersion in the Triune God's threefold action of creation, redemption, and effusion.

It is significant to note that baptism in the Book of Acts is in the name of Jesus only. Such baptism clearly refers to the forgiveness of sins which comes through faith in Jesus Christ. Faith in Jesus which mediates forgiveness is actually a baptism or participation of which water baptism is visible sign or seal. There is no mention of practice of triune baptism in Acts. However, on several occasions there is an additional rite of laying on of hands subsequent to baptism in the name of Jesus. Such a rite is in relation to receiving the Holy Spirit and thus completes the full range of entrance into Christian discipleship. Those receiving the Holy Spirit in Acts are thereby baptized in the Holy Spirit (as a study of parallel passages shows). Such spiritual baptism is none other than the immersion of those who believe in the presence and power of the Holy Spirit whereby they become effective witnesses for Jesus Christ. Christian discipleship is completed by baptism in (or in the name of) the Holy Spirit; however, the purpose of such spiritual baptism is more clearly specified in the Book of Acts than in Matthew.

Several observations about the record in Acts are relevant. First, two different spiritual realities are being attested. On the one hand there is the forgiveness of sins given through faith in Jesus Christ to which baptism in the name of Jesus is related; on the other, the empowering presence of the Holy Spirit-baptism in the Holy Spirit- -with which laying on of hands is connected. Second, both baptism in water and laying on of hands, while sign and seal of the spiritual realities attested, are not so identical with these realities that they (forgiveness of sins and empowering presence) may not occur without them. Third, both forgiveness of sins and the empowering gift occur through faith in Jesus Christ; He is the One who both redeems from sins and baptizes in the Holy Spirit. Fourth, baptism in the Holy Spirit is not the other (spiritual) side of baptism in water. Baptism in water in the name of Jesus Christ, as noted, is for (or "unto") forgiveness of sins; baptism in the Spirit signifies the reality of empowering presence (with which laying on of hands, not water baptism, may be connected). Fifth, baptism in the Holy Spirit may occur simultaneously with faith in Jesus Christ for forgiveness of sins (of which water baptism is sign and seal), or it may occur at a later time. However, not until both spiritual realities are experienced is Christian discipleship fully entered upon.

Now in returning to the Great Commission in Matthew it is apparent that the whole of Christian discipleship (or initiation) is comprehended in the formula of Triune baptism- -"in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." There is no suggestion either of baptizing in the name of Jesus only or of an additional act of hands for receiving the Holy Spirit. However, in shorthand fashion all is included, so that Triune baptism represents the sign and seal of the fullness of initiation into Christian discipleship.

What then does baptizing in the Triune name signify? Let us be quite specific: Through discipleship to Jesus ("Go...make disciples") we enter into a relationship to the Triune God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit wherein there is immersion in the reality of God in His creative, redemptive, and effusive activity. Even as God is one and not three, Christian discipleship is a unity, related basically to the reality of Jesus Christ. Hence, there is "one Lord, one faith, one baptism" (i.e. in the Triune name) (Eph. 4:5). However as God is one God in three persons, and accordingly three basic mighty acts, Christian discipleship/initiation may occur in a process, possibly over an extended period of time. Baptism in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit may- -as the Book of Acts attests- -happen all at once, and in separate moments. Still there is a unity, one initiation (not several), no matter how long the process may take.

The command, or commission, in Matthew may then well include - -"in the name of the Holy Spirit"- -the bringing of people into the climax of their initiation, namely, to be baptized in the Holy Spirit. It is sometimes said that there is no New Testament command regarding baptism in the Holy Spirit (except for the original disciples in Acts 1:1-5). However, there is the command to baptize in the name of the Holy Spirit, which could mean essentially the same thing (even as to baptize in the name of the Son = to baptize in the name of Jesus). Certainly this ought not to be identified with baptism in the name of the Son, which is the second part or aspect of the baptismal formula. What the third part of the formula quite likely is dealing with is the anointing or empowering of the Holy Spirit. Otherwise, there is nothing in Jesus' words of the Great Commission relating to this highly important matter.

Let us pursue this matter a step further by comparing with Luke's Gospel. In Luke 24 nothing is said about baptizing, but two critical things are affirmed: (1) that "repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in his name to all nations" (v. 47); (2) that the disciples are "to stay in the city, until...clothed with power from on high" (v. 49). The last two elements of the Matthean baptismal formula, it would clearly seem, are there: repentance and forgiveness of sins to which baptism in the name of the Son points, and the endowment of power to which baptism in the name of the Holy Spirit may well refer. The difference- -and a highly important one for us today- -is that the command in Matthew unmistakably extends to all thereafter who are to become disciples!

Triune baptism- -to sum up- -actually covers the whole of God's mighty acts and the totality of Christian initiation. There is no mention of laying on of hands (which would be in order if baptism were in the name of the Son only), for triune baptism symbolically includes that to which laying on of hands points. This does not mean that laying on of hands for baptism in the Holy Spirit (as is frequently practiced) is wrong; indeed, the action may be helpful, but it adds nothing to what is conveyed in triune baptism. The important thing, however, is not water baptism but entrance into the reality of a filial relation with the Father, forgiveness in the Son, and empowering through the Holy Spirit. Triune baptism should follow upon (as sign) and in connection with (as seal) the fullness of Christian discipleship.

A proper understanding of Christian baptism as sign and seal of the mighty acts of God is essential for the progress of the church in our time. As sign and seal of the grace of the Triune God, it is both a challenge to enter into the fullness of discipleship and at the same time the assurance of God's prevenient grace already at work in the lives of those who belong to Christ. It is to be hoped that by some such understanding the church today will be able better to enter into the fullness of its inheritance. However, people often simply do not know what is means to be baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and are not challenged to move ahead and fully participate in the mighty works of God. United by faith in Jesus Christ and baptism in the Triune name, the whole church of Christ may now look forward to entering upon the fullness of what God is doing in our time. We can ill afford to delay any longer. May the Lord give all of us the grace and the vision to be fully a part of the glorious fulfillment of God's purpose in history.

V, God's Mighty Acts: Summary and Reflection

It has become increasingly apparent that both our theology and our experience have been insufficiently Trinitarian. The church, with some difficulty, came to speak in orthodox manner of the divinity and equality of each person in the Godhead, but throughout history the church has had great difficulty in recognizing just what this signifies. Especially has the Holy Spirit had a hard time coming into His own, and being recognized as unique in His person and activity as are Father and Son. To be sure, the Holy Spirit glorifies the Son, even as the Son glorifies the Father, but this does not mean that either Son or Spirit is to be ontologically or functionally subordinated to any other person in the Trinity. Though all persons participate fully in every action of the Godhead, each has His own proper function to which the other persons in the Trinity relate. Especially it is the case that in our day the particular role and function of the Holy Spirit in effusion is coming to light, and what all of this implies for the church in its life and mission.

It should be clear by now that the third mighty act of God- -the effusion of the Holy Spirit- -is by no means limited to the first century of the history of the church. Unlike the Incarnation, which is a once for all matter, effusion of the Spirit occurs again and again throughout history. This mighty work of God does not so much belong to salvation- -history (Heilsgeschichte) as it does to pneumatic history. The Holy Spirit, as we have noted, is involved along with the Father and Son in the work of salvation, but this must not be confused with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit which is for a distinctly different purpose. It is God's sovereign action upon a people renewed in Jesus Christ, whereby their whole life and community are claimed by the presence and power of God. As we have observed, this brings about a situation of intensification of praise, proclamation, mighty works, boldness, and courage that may lead even to martyrdom. Without this special anointing of the Holy Spirit the church is still the church of the Lord Jesus Christ, but it may be severely limited in its ability to witness effectively. It might be added that especially in our time when there is such a preponderance of evil in the world, of secularism, blatant atheism, and rampant immorality, the church needs to move in all the power that God the Holy Spirit can give. Surely there has never been a time in history when the third mighty act of God- -the effusion of the Holy Spirit- -so much needs recognition and appropriation for both the rejuvenation and empowering of the people of God, and for the world to receive the impact of the gospel message.

Accordingly, we must avoid many of the mistakes that the church has made in relation to the Holy Spirit. For example, it is a critical mistake to relegate Pentecost to an event of the past, and thereby to close off the possibility of the effusion of the Spirit in our time. It is equally devastating to affirm that at Pentecost the Holy Spirit was given once for all to the church, so that there is no need to expect or pray for the fullness of God's Holy Spirit to be poured out again. Of like seriousness is the mistake frequently made of identifying effusion of the Holy Spirit either with regeneration or with sanctification. Each of these areas of salvation (regeneration and sanctification) represents an important aspect of the Holy Spirit's work in relationship to Jesus Christ, but the effusion of the Spirit is something quite different. Also the mistake is sometimes made to think of the gift of the Holy Spirit as given automatically along with salvation. On the contrary, it is important to recognize that the promise of the Holy Spirit always accompanies redemption, forgiveness of sins, baptism into Jesus; but the promise is not the gift itself. It is to be received rather by those who through faith in Jesus Christ look expectantly for the promise to be fulfilled, in order that the fullness of the Holy Spirit may be at work to carry forward the mission of Christ.

We must also avoid any such language as a "second work of grace" (or "third work of grace"), for in Jesus Christ we have received "grace upon grace" (John 1:16). Accordingly the effusion of the Holy Spirit is not an additional work of grace- -as if something were lacking in what we have received from Jesus Christ- -but it is the outpouring of God's Spirit upon those who have known grace beyond measure. If anything, the effusion of the Holy Spirit belongs not to the dimension of grace but to the dimension of glory, whereby God glorifies His people that they may more truly and fully glorify His name! Any suggestion, furthermore, that to experience the effusion of the Holy Spirit is to enter into a kind of superspirituality or super- -Christianity must be totally repudiated. Indeed, normal discipleship- -as the Great Commission attests- -includes baptism in the Triune name, and therefore the true disciple of Jesus is one who knows the reality of baptism in the Triune name. What has happened in the church too often is that we have accepted as normal what is actually subnormal. The church has not lived up to its potential, and as a result both church and world have suffered thereby.

Nothing has been said in this address about the charismatic gifts. The reason is that the gift of the Holy Spirit- -its understanding and reception- -is of more basic importance than the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Where the gift is welcomed and received, there the charismata tend to flourish. For the gifts of the Holy Spirit are nothing other than manifestation of the outpouring of God's Holy Spirit whereby the whole community of faith becomes the arena of the Holy Spirit's activity. One cannot emphasize too strongly the importance of the gifts of the Holy Spirit for the life of the church, and how weakened much of the church has become through its failure to know and experience them, but the crucial matter for the church in our day remains the effusion or outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The important thing at Corinth, for example, was not that they had experienced all the gifts (which indeed they had) but that, as Paul writes, "in every way you were enriched in him...so that you are not lacking in any spiritual gift" (1 Cor. 1:5, 7), or as an early noncanonical writer says, there was a "full outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon you all."[8] There was much carnality in the Corinthian situation, but they did repent of their sins, and continued to remain open to the fullness of whatever God had to give. What in our day is so desperately needed is openness to the fullness of what God has to give to His people, and thereby not only to participate in the gifts of the Holy Spirit, but also to make a life-changing impact on the world.

We live in an extraordinary time- -the time by God's sovereign disposition of the outpouring of His Holy Spirit around the world. Let us not hesitate to summon the whole church to be receptive to what God is now doing, and to be constantly open to God's renewal for effective witness in our day and generation. And to God be the praise and the glory! Amen.

Footnotes

[1]Theologically there are elements of this in Karl Barth's writings, for example in his doctrine of election where Jesus Christ is both the "electing God" and the "elected man" (see his Church Dogmatics, II/2, "Jesus Christ, Electing and Elected," 94-127). On the popular level the "Jesus Movement," with a concentration on Jesus-almost to the neglect of God the Father-is a recent example.

[2]This may be found in some mystical forms of Christianity (with parallels in various religions of the East) and among enthusiasts and pneumatics appearing at various times in the life of the Church.

[3]The Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches, in referring to Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, speaks thus: "Theology and practice of these churches has to a large extent neglected the Holy Spirit, except for some standard affirmations about His continuing presence. The doctrine of the Holy Spirit and even more the sensitivity to His active presence in the Church and the world were and still are underdeveloped in the western tradition of Christianity" (see Faith and Order: Louvain, 1971, paper 59, pp. 117, 131-132).

[4]"Act-works" refers to the combination of creation/communication, incarnation/ redemption, and effusion/fulfillment.

[5]See my book The Era of the Spirit on the matter of "applicative instrumentality" (53-54). Attention is also called therein to Hendrikus Berkhof's dissatisfaction with what he calls "the main pneumatological trend in ecclesiastical theology...[wherein] the Spirit is customarily treated in noetical, applicative, subjective terms. He is that power which directs our attention to Christ and opens our eyes to His works....So the Spirit is a second reality besides Christ, but entirely subordinate to Him, serving in the application of His atoning work." Berkhof expresses his disagreement with this trend, and adds that "the Spirit is far more than an instrumental entity, the subjective reverse of Christ's work" (quotations from Berkhof's The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit, 23). This is my own opinion as well.

[6]John 1 conveys in a special way this threefold mediation of Jesus Christ: the Word through whom all things were made (v. 3), the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (v. 29), and the One who baptizes with the Holy Spirit (v. 33).

[7]See, in addition to Acts 2:38-39, Galatians 3:13-14: "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us...that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith."

[8]1 Clement, 2:2.

Chapter 9, Why Speak In Tongues?

Not too long after my first experience of speaking in tongues, I recall a colleague saying something like this: "I don't deny that such a phenomenon exists, but actually I see no reason for it, no value in it." In other words, why should one want to speak in tongues? What need is there for it, what worth to it?

The basic reason for such questioning, I am convinced, is the failure to comprehend the essential nature of speaking in tongues, which is transcendent praise of God. Speaking in tongues- -glossolalia- -is an expression of that praise of God wherein there is the breakthrough of usual speech limitations of one's native tongue into a higher and fuller realm of praise, blessing, adoration, and thanksgiving. It is to go beyond the most elevated of earthly expressions- -even "Hallelujahs" or "Hosannas"- -into spiritual utterance. To put it directly: it is the praise of God in language given by the Holy Spirit.

If such transcendent praise is possible, would one not want to share in it? Would one not want to speak in tongues, yes to sing in tongues, that is, to speak and sing by the Holy Spirit's inspiration? Would one not want to transcend the limits of earthly language in the high praises of God? Why speak in tongues? The answer is not far off: because it is the vehicle of praise par excellence for glorifying and extolling God. If there is little desire to praise God, then tongues are of little significance; but if the worship, the praise, the adoration of Almighty God is the chief concern of one's life, then tongues have unlimited value as a supernatural avenue of that transcendent praise.

The praise of God, of course, should also sound forth as fully as possible in the native speech of man. One's mother tongue- -whether it be English, French, German, or something else- -is so much a part of one's whole being that it is the most natural vehicle of worship. Hence there are hymns, anthems, prayers which, whether sung liturgically or spontaneously, may in human language declare the glory of God. And surely those who are enamored of God will ever seek ways of fuller worship in the speech of their own place and time. However, there comes- -or may come- -a moment when the level of natural speech is left behind and one enters upon the extraordinary praise of God in the language of the Spirit.

A word of personal testimony may be helpful. My attitude concerning tongues formerly was much like that expressed at the outset of this article: I could see no value in it. Indeed the whole matter was a bit repugnant to my sensibilities. However there came a day and hour when all this suddenly changed. And what brought it about? Namely, there came a sudden intensity of desire to praise God more totally and completely. It was in the context of saying the opening words of Psalm 103- -"Bless the Lord, 0 my soul, and all that is within me bless his holy name; bless the Lord, 0 my soul, and forget not all his benefits"- -that my spirit, full of joy, yearned to express this totally- -"all...within me" to break forth in heavenly blessing. Then came the gracious gift of a new tongue, a spiritual language- -an extraordinary, even shocking event. But now at last I was praising God with my whole being- -body, soul, and spirit.

When speaking in tongues is understood primarily as transcendent praise, there is every reason to be grateful for its occurrence. For example, there has been a long history in the church of what many have called "jubilation." To jubilate is to go beyond ordinary speech into a praise of God that even the most expressive words cannot convey. St. Augustine wrote much of jubilation in his commentary on Psalms, for example: "If you cannot express your joy, jubilate: jubilation expresses your joy; it cannot be a silent joy." Again, "What is jubilation? Joy that cannot be expressed in words; yet the voice expresses what is conceived within and cannot be expressed verbally." St. Thomas Aquinas, also in his commentary on Psalms, wrote: "Jubilation is an unspeakable joy, which one cannot keep silent; yet neither can it be expressed (in words)...it is beyond comprehension."[1] Other quotations might be added, but these should suffice to show how jubilation has often been experienced as a matter of transcendent joy, transcendent praise. Although jubilation may not be identified with glossolalia as such, since the emphasis is on wordless praise rather than praise in a new language, the connection is quite close. Each is motivated by the same intense yearning: to express the inexpressible- -thus to go beyond ordinary speech into the realm of transcendent praise.

Next it is important to add that speaking in tongues can be understood only against the background of a kind of total yielding to God. This is not a "yielding to tongues" (as is sometimes said), but a yielding to God in which everything, including the tongue, becomes the avenue of God's presence and power. The apostle Paul urges that we present our "bodies...a living sacrifice" (Rom. 12:1); in other words, our total selves to be completely given to God. Surely there is no part of the body that causes more havoc than the tongue. James speaks of the tongue as "an unrighteous world among our members, staining the whole body, setting on fire the cycle of nature, and set on fire by hell...with it we bless the Lord and Father, and with it we curse men" (James 3:6, 9). How essential the surrender of the tongue, how urgent its purifying, how marvelous that God may grant a new tongue to "bless the Lord and Father"! But, to repeat, the basic matter is that of surrender of everything to God.

So let us probe deeper. In the yielding of the total self- -body, soul, and spirit- -to God, the situation is that in which the Spirit of God is able to take full possession. This is what the Scriptures refer to in the language of being "filled with the Holy Spirit." The prime example of this is the apostles and many others- -men and women alike- -who "with one accord devoted themselves to prayer" (Acts 1:14). On the Day of Pentecost "they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance" (Acts 2:4). The primary matter was the filling with the Spirit, out of which came glossolalic speech. Their speech, so full of joy that many observers thought them to be "filled with new wine," was that of transcendent praise as they spoke forth "the mighty [or "wonderful"] works of God" (Acts 2:11, 13). Truly they were filled with new wine- -but it was wine of the Spirit, not of the grape. The Spirit of God had filled them: they were people possessed by the divine presence.

We may note further that when the Spirit of God fills a person, this signifies that on the deepest level of his being, namely, the spirit, he or she has been penetrated and pervaded by the Holy Spirit. Not only has the conscious mind been probed but also the subconscious, even into the depths of the human spirit. The Spirit of God may already have been at work within (as is the case for every true believer); but this is a further visitation in which the Spirit takes inward possession. This does not mean domination but freely given control wherein the Holy Spirit now functions without hindrance through the human spirit. Thus when speech occurs it may be not rational utterance but spiritual utterance- -or utterance, which, though spoken by man, is in spiritual language, language the Holy Spirit provides. The mind is no longer the controlling center so that this utterance is in conceptual speech, nor for that matter is the subconscious predominant so that the utterance is ecstatic;[2] rather the Holy Spirit moving upon the human spirit brings forth utterance which is other than both the conceptual and the ecstatic. It is glossolalic utterance: the language of the Holy Spirit spoken through the speech organs of people.

Given the conditions of being "filled with the Holy Spirit," speaking in tongues is a quite normal occurrence. One cannot say a "natural" occurrence because the spiritual (the Holy Spirit) is the source. Rather it is basically supernatural, and belongs to the realm of "signs and wonders" (a New Testament frequent definition of miracle) which may occur when the spiritual breaks in. However, when a person is filled with the Spirit it is normal for spiritual utterance to occur: one follows directly from the other. Of course, there may also be rational utterance (though penetrated by fresh spiritual content), for the Holy Spirit moves through all levels of the spiritual and mental. There is often an alternation between spiritual and natural language- -with mutual enrichment. But my basic point is that speaking in tongues, while miraculous, is a normal aspect of being filled with the Spirit of God.

The question is sometimes asked: Must believers speak in tongues if they are Spirit-filled? The question, incidentally, usually expresses some fear or disquiet about the possibility. The answer is not that one must, but that one may! If people are filled with the Holy Spirit, a new and wonderful thing can now happen. They may, through the infilling Spirit, speak in tongues. The Holy Spirit will never force His way ("where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom" [2 Cor. 3:17]), but a new- -even supernatural- -possibility is now given. The Spirit, if allowed free access to the organs of speech, may bring forth a new and spiritual language. There is no "must" about it- -but an exciting and wonderful new possibility is now at hand.

It is important to add that situations vary among people who first speak in tongues. Some filled with the Holy Spirit are so flooded with the reality of God's presence and power that they can scarcely contain themselves; thus speaking in tongues, or transcendent speech, quickly occurs. They sense deep within their spirit a great yearning and urge to break forth in fresh praise to God, and so they allow the Holy Spirit to provide the language. Others, likewise Spirit-filled, through ignorance, fear, and uncertainty, may seek to hold things in check and thus do not immediately speak in tongues. However, the possibility is now present, and with the proper conditions and a willingness to venture forth, they will soon be speaking a new language of the Spirit.

This is not always easy. There is so much resistance to the whole matter of speaking in tongues- -as being irrational, hyperemotional, even a bit shameful- -that it takes some courage for many even to contemplate it. Furthermore, when people speak in tongues they often burn their bridges behind them. They may now be labeled a "tongues-speaker" (with all the negative images usually associated). Reputation, respect, and position may be forfeited. Thus it is not easy for some to take the step. However, on the other hand, it may be that what is folly in the sight of others is wisdom in the eyes of God and that God has established this strange, and often despised, way as a channel for His praise and glory.

Finally, let me summarize a number of values of speaking in tongues. First, whatever others (in the world or church!) may think, when people speak in tongues, they begin to experience in a fresh way the reality of God. They may start with only a few syllables or words, or with the whole new language, but there is a growing sense of awe that God is present, speaking in them and through them. This new language, which is known not to have been made up or conjured up, is an audible reminder, whenever spoken, of the miraculous activity of God.

Second, speaking in tongues as it moves into singing in tongues or singing in the Spirit (where both words and melody are given by the Holy Spirit) becomes a joyful expression of praise when people are gathered together for worship. Where people not only sing psalms and hymns but also are able to sing "spiritual songs,"[3] there is the zenith of the worship of God.

Third, speaking in tongues has great benefit in the life of prayer. The apostle Paul enjoins us to "pray at all times in the Spirit" (Eph. 6:18), for such prayer is essentially that which the Holy Spirit utters in us. Many persons find themselves, like Paul, praying with the Spirit (which is praying in tongues) and praying with the mind also (cf. 1 Cor. 14:14-15), and discover in the alternation between the two an increasing enrichment of the spiritual life. It is hard to overestimate the value of tongues in the daily experience of prayer. Many begin their prayer time with praying in the Spirit and find these prayers of the Holy Spirit a rich background and force for the prayers of the mind that follow. Often people move back and forth between the two: and their life of prayer becomes all the richer and fuller. Thus it is that praying in tongues does much to build persons up in their faith. The words of Paul are indeed true: "He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself" (1 Cor. 14:4); and the words of Jude are a continuing challenge: "beloved, build yourselves up on your most holy faith; pray in the Holy Spirit" (Jude 20).

Fourth, speaking in tongues often proves to be the doorway into a deeper experience of the other gifts of the Spirit. Since tongues are such an extraordinary avenue of prayer and praise, many persons soon find themselves moving more freely in the realm of other spiritual gifts, or manifestations, of the Holy Spirit. It is not at all unusual to experience prophecy, healings, miracles and other gifts of the Spirit (see 1 Cor. 12:8-10) after having begun to speak in tongues. Tongues often are the key turning the lock of the door into the whole realm of God's extraordinary workings.

Fifth, and finally, speaking in tongues wherein the Holy Spirit communicates through us to the Father and glorifies the Son is that kind of praise which is very near to the glory of the world to come. Since the Holy Spirit provides the language, it is a pure and holy language- -whatever the imperfection of the one who speaks. Thus it is the noblest language this side of heaven.

Footnotes

[1]These quotations from St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas are taken from Eddie Ensley's book Sounds of Wonder, 8, 53. Ensley, in this valuable book, later says, "Indications are that jubilation is a continuation of the glossolalia of the New Testament," and that "plainsong and the musical parts of the liturgy emerged from the early practice of glossolalia" (pp. 115, 117). In any event the connection between speaking in tongues and the praise of God is unmistakable.

[2]By "ecstatic" reference is commonly made to speech uncontrolled by the conscious mind, which is an expression of the non-rational depths. Such expression, in which the subconscious breaks through, may have tremendous spiritual vigor and drive. However, such ecstatic utterance, in which strong emotion may dominate, often passes into irrationality, frenzy, even madness. Speaking in tongues is not ecstasy; for there is continuing control under the direction of the Holy Spirit. There is joy, elevation-but no irrationality, no lack of conscious control.

[3]Paul speaks in both Ephesians and Colossians about "psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs" (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16). Psalms and hymns doubtless signify known and frequently used musical expressions (as is true in the church today), but "spiritual songs" (or songs inspired by the Spirit) probably refers to songs where words and melodies are spontaneously given by the Holy Spirit. In the Jerusalem Bible a footnote to Colossians 3:16 speaks of these spiritual songs as "charismatic improvisations" (!).

Chapter 10, The Holy Spirit And Eschatology

This article on "The Holy Spirit and Eschatology" was written just following the last session of a seminar on eschatology. For almost three months a dozen graduate students met twice a week to study and reflect upon the whole range of matters having to do with eschatology, or the "last things." As their leader I told them at our final meeting of my commitment to write an article on "The Holy Spirit and Eschatology," and asked them for their suggestions. The seminar had not really focused on the Holy Spirit as such: it dealt much more with matters as Jesus Christ our "blessed hope," the kingdom, eternal life, and so on. However, the seminar members were quick to express a number of ideas concerning the Holy Spirit and eschatology. So I shall summarize some of these, along with a few additional reflections. For brevity these will be listed under several headings.

1. The Holy Spirit leads us into understanding.

The whole area of eschatology is one of the most difficult to comprehend. Despite the Bible being the infallible word of God, there are many difficulties in apprehending its teachings about things yet to come. This is apparent from the fact that there are many schools of interpretation and, despite intended adherence to the Scriptures, they frequently differ quite radically from one another. The word accordingly needs the Spirit for comprehension- -and only those who earnestly seek the illumination of the Holy Spirit can make genuine progress in understanding. Too often eschatology has become a matter of words alone- -arguments from selected biblical texts, predetermined theological positions- -with little or no attention to the urgent need for the guidance of the Holy Spirit. It should be recalled constantly that Jesus said, "When the Spirit of truth [the Holy Spirit] comes, he will guide you into all the truth" (John 16:13). Without Him the word profits nothing.

2. The Holy Spirit intensifies our yearning for the Lord to return.

The New Testament speaks of "awaiting our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ" (Titus 2:13), and "waiting for and hastening (or 'earnestly desiring') the coming of the day of God" (2 Peter 3:12). This has continued to be the stance of true believers in Christ who, grateful for the salvation He has wrought, look forward to His return in glory. This very anticipation is vastly brightened by the presence of the Holy Spirit- -who is none other than the Spirit of Jesus- -making us all the more eager to behold our Lord in glory. It is not because Jesus is absent now that we yearn for His coming (or that Satan is Lord- -Jesus is Lord!) but just because He is so fully present in the Spirit that we yearn all the more to behold Him in His glorious body. The Spirit-filled Christian above others cries out continually, "Come, Lord Jesus!"

3. The Holy Spirit's outpouring signalizes the ushering in of the "last days."

The "last days" began almost 2000 years ago at Pentecost when the Holy Spirit was first poured out. The apostle Peter announced that what had happened to the 120 who were "filled with the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:4) was the fulfillment of the ancient prophecy that "in the last days...I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh" (Acts 2:17; cf. Joel 2:28). However, this was only the beginning of fulfillment, for the outpouring was limited to Jerusalem and Jews dwelling there. Of course this soon spread beyond Jerusalem and the Jewish people (e.g., Acts 8, 10, and 19). However, at no time in the history of the church has there been such a universal outpouring of the Holy Spirit as in our time- -as is evidenced by the worldwide Pentecostal/charismatic movement. In a sense far beyond the original Pentecost this outpouring is "upon all flesh," and therefore may well herald the culminating of the ages in the final advent of Jesus Christ.

4. The Holy Spirit alone can make effective the proclamation of the Gospel to all nations.

According to our Lord Jesus it is this universal preaching of the gospel that precedes His final coming: "This gospel of the kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world, as a testimony to all nations; and then the end will come" (Matt. 24:14). It is important to realize that the chief mission of the church as it contemplates the end- -time should be that of bearing testimony to the whole world about Christ- -that is, to complete the missionary task. Strategies, programs, human devices are all insufficient, especially in this time of increasing secularism. Only the power of the Holy Spirit can energize the witness in such fashion as to break through the barriers. Perhaps never before in the history of the church is it quite so necessary for the believer to be "baptized with the Holy Spirit" (Acts 1:5), for only that supernatural power is sufficient to deal with the godlessness of the world.

5. The Holy Spirit gives the Christian in the "end times" the courage and wisdom to endure whatever persecution that may come.

In the Book of Acts it is clear that one of the results of being Spirit-filled was boldness to stand firm in witnessing to the gospel: "they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God with boldness" (Acts 4:31). Regardless of persecution they continued to preach about Jesus as the Christ. Further, Jesus Himself had said that to the very end all who followed Him would endure persecutions; nevertheless "when they bring you to trial and deliver you up, do not be anxious beforehand what you are to say; but say whatever is given you in that hour, for it is not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit" (Mark 13:11). This persecution will intensify just before the Lord returns, and the believer trusting in his own wisdom is sure to fail. But he who relies on the Holy Spirit- -regardless of what may come at the end- -will find wisdom and courage that none can stand against.

6. The Holy Spirit is the power of God that alone can cope with the demonic spirits that multiply their activity in the last days.

According to Scripture, "In later times some will depart from the faith by giving heed to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons" (1 Tim. 4:1). Hence, we are to "test the spirits to see whether they are of God" (1 John 4:1). As the time of the end rushes to its climax and "the spirit of antichrist" (1 John 4:3) more and more emerges, the believer's reliance on the Holy Spirit to perceive and combat the false spirit- -and not to be carried away by its vain pretenses- -is all the more imperative. The devil, knowing his time is short, is today multiplying his activity, and, being a counterfeit, is having his own counter-Pentecost, pouring out his evil spirits (witness the rise of the occult, witchcraft, Satan worship, and so on). Therefore, without the promise and power of the Holy Spirit the Christian cannot possibly stand against all this wicked onslaught. But in that power the believer can discern the vicious dimensions of evil, rebuke and overcome it in the name of Jesus Christ, and win the victory! Praise the name of the Lord!

7. The Holy Spirit is the sanctifier who prepares the believer for the coming of the Lord.

The true believer in Jesus Christ constantly looks forward to the Lord's return in glory, and in so anticipating that return he wants to be prepared. So does Paul pray: "May the God of peace himself sanctify you wholly; and may your spirit and soul and body be kept sound and blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Thess. 5:23). There are those who are very keen about the coming of the Lord, the Rapture, and other eschatological events, but who unfortunately seldom seem to think about their state of preparedness. The apostle John urges that we "abide in him, so that when he appears we may have confidence and not shrink from him in shame at his coming" (1 John 2:28). It is the Holy Spirit who prepares us, purifies us, molds us, enables us more and more to die to sin and live to righteousness, and to be like Jesus at His coming. We need, in the power of the Holy Spirit, to "strive...for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord" (Heb. 12:14). Are we really concerned about growth in holiness, being more like Jesus so that when he appears we shall not be ashamed?

8. The Holy Spirit enlivens our mortal bodies so that with the coming of the Lord we shall be raised from the dead.

One of the great empirical facts of the Christian life is that every true believer is indwelt by God's Spirit. When we become children of God by faith, the Holy Spirit becomes the inner reality of our being- -"because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, 'Abba! Father!'" (Gal. 4:6). It is this same indwelling Spirit that will some day move upon these mortal remains of ours and bring life immortal to them. As the apostle Paul says, "If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies also through his Spirit which dwells in you" (Rom. 8:11). So when the Lord comes back and the summons goes forth for the dead in Christ to be raised, the great event will occur by the inward power of the Holy Spirit. Thus will the natural or physical body become a spiritual body (a body transformed by the Holy Spirit), the perishable become imperishable, and the mortal put on immortality. Praise be to God for the victory forever and ever! Amen.

A final word: the Holy Spirit up to the very end is ever seeking to bring people into life eternal. Thus read the beautiful words of invitation in the last few verses of the Bible, "The Spirit and the Bride say, 'Come.' And let him who hears say, 'Come.' And let him who is thirsty come, let him who desires take the water of life without price" (Rev. 22:17). The Holy Spirit unceasingly invites people to new life in Christ. He will be sending forth that invitation until the day Jesus returns.

Chapter 11, A Pentecostal Theology

One of the common criticisms of the Pentecostal/ charismatic movement is its lack of an adequate theology. This criticism comes both from within and without the movement. Russell Spittler, from within, has declared that "Pentecostals have made better missionaries than theologians. They write pamphlets, not books- -tracts, not treatises. When a Pentecostal book is published, it will reflect more likely personal testimony than reasoned argument."[1] J. I. Packer, from without, has written that "the charismatic life stream still needs an adequate biblical theology and remains vulnerable while it lacks one....The charismatic movement is theologically immature, and its public speech and style seem on occasion half-baked as a result."[2] Both statements declare the need- -the serious need- -for the development of a valid Pentecostal/charismatic theology.

In line with this need, the 1984 meeting of the Society for Pentecostal Studies had as its general theme, "Toward a Pentecostal/Charismatic Theology." Some fourteen papers were presented, and hopefully progress was made in the direction of a maturing theology. With this by way of background I should like to attempt a theological/biblical study.[3] The title of my paper will be simply "A Pentecostal Theology."

Introduction:

A Pentecostal theology finds its scriptural basis primarily in several accounts in the Book of Acts. They are as follows: chapters 1 and 2; 8:4-24; 9:1-19; 10-11:18; and 19:1-7. There are some references to Old Testament texts, the Gospels, and the Epistles, but the focus is the specified passages in Acts.

The relevance of the Acts passages for Pentecostal theology is that all refer in varying ways to a particular event/experience of the Holy Spirit. For example, several expressions are used in Acts 1-2: "baptized in[4] the Holy Spirit" (1:5); "the Holy Spirit...come upon you" (1:8); "filled with the Holy Spirit" (2:4); "the Holy Spirit ... poured out" (2:33); "receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (2:38). All refer to the experience in Jerusalem relating to Jesus' disciples which is described in 2:1-4. Another later reference to the event of Acts 2:1-4 is that "the Holy Spirit fell...on us" (11:15). One or more of these six expressions- -with some slight variations- -is found in all the subsequent narratives. See the Samaritan account in Acts 8:15-17 for "receiving" and "falling"; Saul of Tarsus in 9:17- -"filling"; the Caesareans in 10:44-47- -"falling," "outpouring," "receiving," and 11:15-17- -"falling" and "baptized in"; and the Ephesians in Acts 19:2-6- -"receiving" and "coming upon." It is apparent, linguistically if nothing else, that all these accounts refer to essentially the same experience.

Hence, what occurred on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1) in regard to the Holy Spirit is a repeated experience. The Day of Pentecost is, of course, a historic, once-for-all occurrence as are all events in history. However, the essential identity of the experiences of the Spirit following the Day of Pentecost with the experience of the Spirit on that day is apparent not only linguistically but also evidenced from some words of Peter. Peter, who of course was there on the Day of Pentecost, describes the Caesareans as "people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have" (10:47), and says later that "the Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning" (11:15). If this is true of the events in Jerusalem and Caesarea- -often called the Jerusalem and Gentile Pentecosts- -it is certainly also true of the other occasions. In this sense we may properly speak of all these as Pentecostal experiences.[5]

Finally, it is of particular importance in Pentecostal theology that receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38) not only relates to certain events in Acts but also to events thereafter. For just following the statement about receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit are the words: "For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him" (Acts 2:39). The promise of the gift of the Holy Spirit[6] in its fulfillment is the experiential center of Pentecostal theology.

In what follows we shall seek to identify various aspects of the Pentecostal event/experience. Our procedure will be that of utilizing the Jerusalem Pentecost as the archetypal and paradigmatic account. For even as the account in Acts 1 and 2 contains all the basic terminology, so likewise are all the fundamental factors related to Pentecostal experience found therein. It will also be apparent that not all the succeeding accounts make reference to all the various elements (any more than all make use of the terminology), but they may well be included. Let us now proceed to some elaboration of the Pentecostal event/experience and thereby of Pentecostal theology.

I, The Essential Reality

What lies at the heart of the Pentecostal event/experience is the dynamic presence of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is poured out on, falls on, comes upon; hence there is movement, action. As a result, people are baptized (i.e., immersed) in, filled with the Holy Spirit. All of this points to a momentous event and experience of the dynamic presence of God.

It occurs as a movement from God the Father through Jesus Christ. On the Day of Pentecost, just following the disciples' experience of the Holy Spirit, Peter declares the event to be the fulfillment of the promise in Joel: "And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh" (Acts 2:17; cf. Joel 2:28). Thereafter Peter adds that "exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he [Jesus] has poured out this which you see and hear"[7] (Acts 2:33). The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Father and Son, thus the fullness of God's presence.

Hence, the essential reality is that of a mediated experience of the Holy Spirit. He does not, so to speak, come on His own so as to provide in Himself a direct awareness of God,[8] but comes from God through Jesus Christ. Yet there is the immediacy of God's dynamic presence through the Holy Spirit. Paradoxically then, it is a matter of mediated immediacy. The Holy Spirit is fully and actively present, but it happens only through the instrumentality of Jesus Christ.

Next we may note the significance of this event in being called "the gift of the Holy Spirit." This means two things. First, what happens is wholly a matter of God's grace. A gift cannot be earned, else it ceases to be a gift. Second, the gift is the Holy Spirit Himself. Accordingly, the gift is not something the Holy Spirit gives- -such as holiness, life, even power- -but is the gift from Father and Son: the Holy Spirit.

It would be hard to overestimate the momentousness of this event. Since the Holy Spirit is God (though a distinct person) it means that at the heart of the Pentecostal experience is the reality of God's dynamic presence. As noted, in one sense it is an invasion from without (the Spirit falling upon, coming on); in another, it is an immersion, a submergence within (being baptized in); still another it is a penetration, a permeation all through (a being filled with). Persons in the totality of their being, even to their subconscious depths and suprarational heights, are possessed by God.

Truly the essence of Pentecost and its continuation is dynamic event. In this event God is moving,[9] dynamic, even driving. The "sound...from heaven" like "the rush of a mighty wind" on the Day of Pentecost and "tongues as of fire" resting on each person dramatizes the divine action. It is the Spirit of God moving dynamically within the human scene. Although this imagery is not repeated in other accounts, the language of "coming upon," falling on," "filling with" continues to express this divine momentum.

We may turn back for a moment to the Gospels and the beginning of Jesus' ministry for the primary example of this dynamic presence of the Holy Spirit. After Jesus has been baptized by John in the Jordan, Luke's account reads: "the heaven was opened, and the Holy Spirit descended upon him in bodily form, as a dove" (3:21-22). The heaven "opened" is the antecedent to the great "sound" at Pentecost, and the dove "alighting on him" (Matthew 3:16) to the tongues "resting" on each person. Jesus thereby is "full of the Holy Spirit" (Luke 4:1), again the antecedent of those at Pentecost being "filled with the Holy Spirit."

Another way of describing it is to say that the same Holy Spirit that came from God the Father upon Jesus also came upon His disciples. In that sense it is a transferring of the Spirit. An Old Testament precursor of this may be found in the narrative about Moses and the seventy elders of Israel where the text reads, "Then the LORD...took of the Spirit that was on him [Moses] and put the Spirit on the seventy elders" (Num. 11:25 NIV). Jesus, of course, is far more than Moses, for (as we have noted) He is also the medium of the Spirit's coming. However, there is also a transferring of the Spirit. The same Spirit that was upon Jesus, even as upon Moses, now is placed not upon some elder but upon His disciples.[10]

However, as was observed at the outset, what happened to the disciples in Jerusalem at Pentecost was variously repeated on several other occasions in the Book of Acts. The Spirit that came upon Jesus now comes through Him to many others. The "just as" of Acts 10:47 and 11:15, which confirms the one-to-one correspondence between the Caesarean and the Jerusalem Pentecosts, doubtless applies to all other similar instances.

We have spoken of the dynamic presence of the Holy Spirit in the Pentecostal events and reviewed a number of linguistic expressions. How, one might inquire, does this compare with Old Testament events that use much of the same terminology? For one thing, the language of "coming on" is employed frequently in the early history of Israel. The Spirit "came upon" or "took possession of" a number of persons in the Book of Judges: Othniel (3:9-10); Gideon (6:34); Jephthah (11:29); Samson (14:19; 15:14); Saul (1 Sam. 10:10; 11:6; 19:23); David (1 Sam. 16:13). Thereafter, the Spirit "came upon" David's chieftain, Amasai (1 Chron. 12:18); Azariah a prophet (2 Chron. 15:1); Zechariah the son of a priest (2 Chron. 24:20). "Filled with the Spirit" terminology is used in connection with the craftsman Bezalel (Ex. 31:3); the prophet Micah (Mic. 3:8). Also there is the language of "falling": the Spirit "fell upon" the prophet Ezekiel (Ezek. 11:5). It is interesting, however, that the language of "outpouring" is not used except in reference to the future. We have already quoted from the promise of Joel: "I will pour out my spirit on all flesh" (Joel 2:28). To this futuristic reference we may add similar words from Isaiah: "I will pour my Spirit upon your descendants (Isa. 44:3); also from Ezekiel: "I will pour out my Spirit upon the house of Israel" (Ezek. 39:29).

What shall we make of all this? The answer, I would suggest, is that the Old Testament, for all that has been experienced of the Spirit's presence and activity, foresees a plenitude of the Spirit yet to come, for which the word "outpouring" is the vivid expression. There is undoubtedly in the Old Testament an active presence of God through His Spirit, for which the term "coming on" is the main representative. But there is far more to happen in the future: a day when God will bless without measure. The aforementioned prophecy in Isaiah, "I will pour out my Spirit on your descendants," continues with the words: "and my blessing on your offspring. They shall spring up like grass amid waters, like willows by flowing streams" (44:4). Hence, whatever the measure of blessing in the Old Testament, that to come will be far richer and greater. It will be verily the fullness of God's presence in the Holy Spirit.

II, The Primary Response

The primary response to the event of the Holy Spirit is praise. When human existence- -individually and corporately- -is bathed with the divine presence, there is only one truly significant response, namely, the glorifying of God. God has acted through Jesus Christ to pour out His Spirit, and so marvelous is its occurrence that nothing else can capture it but the high praise of God.

On the Day of Pentecost when the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit they all began immediately to praise God. This is apparent from the words of Acts 2:11 which record the multitude saying, "We hear them in our own tongues speaking of the mighty [wonderful, magnificent[11]] deeds of God" (Acts 2:11 NASB). It is not hard to imagine that, having so recently lived through the events of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection, they were praising God for the mighty deed of redemption. Also, now He had just fulfilled His promise to pour out the Holy Spirit. They had much to praise God for!

Years later at the Caesarean Pentecost essentially the same thing happened: their first response was the glorifying of God. This time the Spirit was poured out on the Caesareans (or Gentiles) assembled, and others (Peter and his fellow Jews) "heard them speaking in tongues and extolling [magnifying[12]] God" (Acts 10:46).

We might also note the connection between being filled with the Holy Spirit and praise in Paul's letter to the Ephesians. Paul writes: "Be filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody with your heart to the Lord" (5:18-19 NASB). In response to being filled with God's Spirit, psalms, hymns, spiritual songs break forth: the heart is filled with melody and rejoicing in the Lord.[13]

Now we come to the recognition in the Book of Acts of the close connection between praise and tongues. The Caesareans (the Roman centurion Cornelius and his household), as we have observed, were heard to be "speaking in tongues and extolling God." This probably does not mean two different, though closely related, activities, but rather that their speaking in tongues was extolling or praising God.[14] This becomes all the more likely in reviewing the Jerusalem narrative, because there the praise of God was unmistakably done through tongues. To go back to Acts 2:4: "And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance." The "other tongues" were understood by the multitude as speaking in their own tongues "the mighty deeds of God." Hence they were tongues of praise.

Praising God in tongues may best be understood as transcendent praise- -praise that goes beyond ordinary capacity and experience. This praise is sometimes spoken of as "ecstatic praise,"[15] or "praising God in ecstatic utterances."[16] If such language is used, we must be careful to emphasize that "ecstatic" should not be taken to mean out of control, irrational, frenzied speech. Rather it is the praise of God that transcends ordinary utterance, subject to a higher control, hence suprarational. It is the worship of God in a speech, therefore, that is "other"[17] than one's own native language. It is utterance through the enabling of the Holy Spirit.[18]

All of this is possible because of the new situation created by the event/experience of the Holy Spirit. God, while remaining transcendent, scales the heights and plumbs the depths of creaturely existence, thus effectuating a situation in which human existence is so penetrated by the Holy Spirit that response may come forth in a new spiritual key. A transposition thereby occurs wherein human language, as representative of this dynamic situation, can become, in an extraordinary way, the vehicle of the Holy Spirit for the praise of Almighty God.[19]

We may also understand this by focusing upon the situation of high spiritual intensity which results from the outpouring of God's Holy Spirit. The sense of God's abundant presence evokes a breaking forth in praise expressive of the occasion. Ordinary language, even music, may be inadequate to declare the wonder of God and His deeds. Herein lies the marvel: God through His Spirit goes beyond what has been uttered or sung before and brings forth a new language!

Now to return to the Book of Acts: let us observe that the last account, namely, concerning the Ephesians, relates tongues and prophesying. "And when Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them; and they spoke with tongues and prophesied" (19:6). Again, as in Jerusalem and Caesarea, the initial activity following the coming of the Spirit is speaking in tongues. Once more this points to praise- -as suggested by the additional wording about prophesying. Whereas prophesying in many biblical contexts signifies a closely related phenomenon to speaking in tongues, it is possible here that the reference is to transcendent praise. Let us consider this further.

We observe that on the Day of Pentecost after the disciples have praised God in tongues, Peter describes this as fulfillment of the words of Joel: "I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh; your sons and your daughters shall prophesy." This seemingly unusual identification of prophesying with praise quite possibly has its Old Testament antecedents. One example is that of the Holy Spirit upon the seventy elders. Just following the words about the Spirit being "put on" the elders the text reads: "When the Spirit rested on them, they prophesied" (Num. 11:25 NIV). There is nothing said concerning what they prophesied; hence this is most likely an instance of transcendent utterance[20] under the dynamic presence of the Holy Spirit. Not unlike the later Pentecost when the Spirit that had been upon Jesus comes upon His disciples, so the Spirit upon Moses came upon his elders; in both cases there is resulting inspired speech. One has only to ponder for a moment the awesome and transcending nature of each event to expect the response in speech to be carried beyond previous utterance. Such ecstatic utterance is none other than transcendent praise.[21]

Another Old Testament example in which praise and prophesying are closely related is that of 1 Chronicles 25:1 where David is said to have appointed persons to "prophesy with lyres, with harps, and with cymbals." Thereafter, certain ones "prophesied with the lyre in thanksgiving and praise to the LORD" (verse 3). Prophecy seems here identical with praise.

Returning to the New Testament and the Book of Acts, we emphasize again the intimate relationship of the event/experience of the Spirit and transcendent praise. In three of the five instances we have been considering, namely, Jerusalem (2:4), Caesarea (10:46), and Ephesus (19:6), such speech in "tongues" is specifically mentioned. In the case of Samaria nothing is directly said about the Samaritans speaking in tongues; however, such seems clearly implied. For just after the statement that "they received the Holy Spirit" (Acts 8:17) are the words: "Now when Simon [the magician] saw that the Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles' hands, he offered them [Peter and John] money" (8:18). What he saw that made him eager to pay money was, in all likelihood, the Samaritans speaking in tongues, something extraordinary, beyond his previous manifold occult practices. He was willing to pay for the power to lay hands on others for similar miraculous results. The Samaritans, we may therefore conclude, likewise responded to the Spirit's dynamic presence with transcendent praise.[22]

In the case of Saul of Tarsus and his reception of the Spirit, nothing is said about his speaking in tongues (see Acts 9:17-18). However, by Paul's own testimony to the Corinthians, "I thank God that I speak in tongues more than you all" (1 Cor. 14:18), we know he did. It is quite possible, though Luke does not so specify, that Paul first spoke in tongues when he was filled with the Holy Spirit. However, it may also be that he began to speak at a later time.

To summarize: in the majority of cases- -three out of five- -people who had received the gift of the Holy Spirit definitely did speak in tongues. There is strong likelihood of such in the fourth case, and a possibility in the fifth, making five instances where people did so speak. Based on the evidence in Acts we can draw no absolute conclusion that speaking in tongues invariably followed the reception of the Spirit; however, the texts do incline in that direction. This is further suggested by the fact that, as already noted, wherever tongues are explicitly mentioned, all speak. It is not the expression of just one or two but of everyone who has received the Holy Spirit. The commonality of speaking in tongues would strongly suggest their occurrence, whether or not directly mentioned, in all situations where the Spirit was given.

In the present-day spiritual renewal, the intimate connection between receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues is recognized everywhere. It happens again and again that when people are filled with the Holy Spirit, they immediately begin to speak in tongues. Indeed, since praise is the initial response to the gift of the Spirit, and tongues represent transcendent praise, one follows readily upon the other. In some instances, speaking in tongues may occur later. But that it does occur is the common testimony of the renewal through the world. Tongues are the Spirit-given opportunity for fullness of praise.

III, Purpose and Function

The basic purpose of the event of the Holy Spirit is that of enabling power.[23] The biblical term for this power is dynamis- -power, strength, might, force- -and such comes from the gift of the Holy Spirit. It is transcendent, enabling power.

The key text for the event/experience of the Spirit is Acts 1:8, where Jesus declares: "You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the end of the earth." The transcendent praise of God is the first thing; but the purpose of the gift is the enabling of witness and ministry.

The primary New Testament example is Jesus Himself. After the Holy Spirit's descent upon Him, and following His temptations in the wilderness, Jesus "returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee" (Luke 4:14) to begin His ministry. Thus the endowment of the Holy Spirit was clearly for enabling power. In a later summary of Jesus' ministry, Peter speaks of "how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power[24] [and] he went about doing good and healing all that were oppressed" (Acts 10:38). Thus was Jesus enabled to carry forward His ministry.[25] If He needed this enabling power, how much more those who follow Him!

It might be interjected that the coming of the Holy Spirit upon Jesus had nothing to do with His salvation or sanctification. Jesus, of course, had no need to be saved from sin or to grow in holiness. Hence, the coming of the Spirit was for a totally different purpose, namely, to enable Him to fulfill His vocation. As the Son of man, a truly human being though without sin, He needed this endowment of power.

Now to return to the Book of Acts: it is important to recognize that the words of Jesus in Acts 1:8 apply not only to the apostles (to whom they were originally spoken) but also to others thereafter upon whom the Spirit comes. Before the Day of Pentecost the number had already enlarged to approximately 120 (Acts 1:15). At least that many received the gift of the Holy Spirit and the accompanying power when the day arrived. Thus all upon whom the Spirit later comes will receive a like enabling power for witness and ministry.

In the case of Saul of Tarsus this is clearly spelled out. We have already noted that Saul was filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17). This occurred through the laying on of hands by a disciple named Ananias. The Lord had spoken to Ananias: "Go, for he [Saul] is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel" (9:15). Thus the gift of the Spirit will be for the purpose of carrying forward this far-reaching witness.

It is not specifically stated in the account of the Samaritans, Caesareans, and Ephesians that the event of the Spirit was for the purpose of power for ministry; however, such would seem to be implied.[26]

In the case of the Samaritans, who had believed and been baptized, Peter and John came down from Jerusalem to pray for and lay hands on them that they might receive the Holy Spirit. The reason for this mission was quite possibly that the Samaritans might have the same empowering for ministry that Peter and John had received at Pentecost and thus become also a vital part of the witnessing outreach. It is not that some lack in the Samaritans' faith was remedied by the apostles' coming[27] or that the purpose was to incorporate them into the Jerusalem church,[28] but primarily that the Samaritans might receive the same empowering that Peter and John had received at Pentecost. Since Jesus had said, "You shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and all Judea and Samaria and to the end of the earth," reference to Samaria could signify not only a people to whom witness is made but also by whom it is to be continued.

The Holy Spirit in Acts is unmistakably a "missionary Spirit." Hence when He comes upon people, it is for the basic purpose of driving them beyond themselves into a witness for Jesus Christ. They thereby become participants in the continuing outreach of the gospel to the whole world. There is an ever-widening missionary circle: Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, Caesarea, Ephesus. All represent a further extension of the gospel and additional persons and areas that through the gift of the Spirit become participant in the witness to Christ. Thus, though nothing is said directly in the biblical narratives about the ministry of the gospel through the Samaritans, Caesareans, and Ephesians, the fact that they also receive the Holy Spirit- -the "missionary Spirit"- -would suggest that they too become proclaimers of the Good News.

It should also be stressed that this enabling power was not only for witness by word but also by deed. When Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit to Galilee, the first thing mentioned is His word or teaching ministry: "he taught in their synagogues, being glorified by all" (Luke 4:15). Thereafter, he goes to the synagogue in Nazareth and reads from the words in Isaiah: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor"- -hence a Spirit-anointed word ministry. But then the quotation continues, "He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind" (4:18), thus a ministry of deed also. After this, Jesus moves mightily in healing the sick, casting out demons, working miracles, and so on.

Likewise, when the Spirit came upon the disciples at Pentecost, they not only witness by word thereafter but also carry forward Jesus' ministry of miraculous deeds.[29] Jesus, according to the Fourth Gospel, had said, "He who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the Father" (John 14:12). In the power of the Spirit sent from the ascended Jesus, they perform many mighty works. Although the apostles often do such works, Jesus does not limit such activity to them alone ("he who believes"). Indeed, the Book of Acts records the large company of disciples on one occasion praying, "Grant to thy servants to speak thy word with all boldness, while thou stretchest out thy hand to heal, and signs and wonders are performed through the name of thy holy servant Jesus" (4:29-30). It is the ongoing ministry of Jesus to be carried forward by the whole body of Spirit-anointed believers. Examples of this are Stephen and Philip, who perform many miracles though neither is an apostle (6:8; 8:6-7).

The apostle Paul, looking back over his ministry, speaks of both word and deed in the power of the Spirit: "I will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has wrought through me to win obedience from the Gentiles, by word and deed, by the power of signs and wonders, by the power of the Holy Spirit, so that from Jerusalem as far around as Illyricum I have fully preached the gospel of Christ" (Rom. 15:18-19). It was the power of the Holy Spirit that made all this possible.

The basic purpose of the gift of the Holy Spirit is dynamis- -enabling power for the ministry of the gospel.

Before proceeding further we might briefly look back to the Old Testament and observe the Spirit in His enabling power. Earlier we have called attention to the wide range of terminology in the Old Testament similar to the Book of Acts, e.g., such expressions as the Spirit's "coming upon," "taking possession of," "being filled with," "falling upon." Now we note that in all these instances the purpose of this activity of the Spirit is to enable a task, a calling, a vocation to be fulfilled. The Spirit endows a craftsman to design the tabernacle (Ex. 31:3), a judge to make decisions (e.g, Judg. 3:10), a king to rule wisely and effectively (e.g., 1 Sam. 16:13), a prophet to speak God's word (e.g., Mic. 3:8). In all these cases the Spirit comes as a dynamic presence for the purpose of enabling a task, a calling, a vocation to be fulfilled.

Likewise, we might mention the prophecies in Isaiah about a coming One who will act in the enabling power of the Holy Spirit. "There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse....And the Spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him" (11:1-2); "Behold my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen...I have put [or 'will put' NIV] my Spirit upon him, he will bring forth justice to the nations" (42:1); "The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me, because the LORD has anointed me to bring good tiding to the afflicted" (61:1). The Spirit will "rest upon," be "put on," "anoint" the Messiah to enable Him to fulfill His manifold calling and ministry.

As we have previously commented, Jesus upon whom the Spirit came is the channel for that same Spirit to come upon others. This means, therefore, that the Spirit given at Pentecost and thereafter is for the central purpose of enabling people to carry forward His ministry after Him. Jesus received power for ministry when the Holy Spirit came upon Him; He promised power for ministry when the Holy Spirit comes upon His disciples: "You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be my witnesses" (Acts 1:8). Hence, all occasions of the event of the Spirit in Acts refer basically to an empowering for witness and service.

Next we should observe that there is also a special function of the Spirit's coming, namely, testimony. In a sense we have been considering testimony already in that through the Holy Spirit testimony, or witness, is made to the world about Jesus Christ. As Peter on one occasion puts it: "We are witnesses to these things [about Jesus Christ and salvation], and so is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey him" (Acts 5:32). But now we are referring not to the power to bear witness to the world (from Jerusalem to the ends of the earth) but to the role of the Holy Spirit in bearing testimony to God's acceptance and approval of those who belong to Him.

Let us begin with Jesus Himself. We have already made mention of the descent of the Holy Spirit from heaven upon Jesus and how with this enabling power He began His ministry. But now we may go back to the occasion of the Spirit's coming and observe that, immediately following Jesus' baptism and the descent of the Spirit as a dove, "a voice came from Heaven, 'Thou art my beloved Son; with thee I am well pleased'" (Luke 3:22). In other words, the very coming of the Holy Spirit from heaven pointed to God's approval, as the words specify- -"my beloved Son...well pleased." This was demonstrative testimony to any bystander as well as to Jesus Himself that He was God's Son, approved and pleasing in His Father's sight.[30]

Now we may skip over to the account in Acts of the Caesareans and observe likewise that the coming of the Holy Spirit was testimony to their acceptance and approval by God. When the Holy Spirit falls on the Caesareans (evidenced by their praising God in tongues), Peter is thereby convinced the Gentiles have been accepted by God, for he declares, "Can any one forbid water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" (Acts 10:47). Some time later when Peter rehearses these events to the apostles and brethren in Jerusalem and describes how the Holy Spirit fell on the Caesareans "just as on us at the beginning" (Acts 11:15), those in Jerusalem "glorified God, saying, 'Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance unto life'" (11:18). The gift of the Holy Spirit to the Caesareans was the divine certification of their salvation- -their "repentance unto life"- -and thus of acceptance and approval of God.

But not only is the gift of the Holy Spirit testimony to others of their acceptance and salvation, but also it was God's witness to the Caesareans themselves. On a later occasion Peter speaks to the apostles and elders how "God made choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles [at Caesarea] should hear the word of the gospel and believe." Peter immediately adds: "And God who knows the heart bore witness to them, giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us" (Acts 15:7-8). God "bore witness to them" means "shows that he accepted them" (NIV): it was the Gentiles' own certification that they had truly heard and believed, hence had come to salvation. Indeed, they were now sons of God- -attested by the Holy Spirit.[31]

It is also quite likely that the gift of the Holy Spirit to the Samaritans and the Ephesians had the same dual testimony and certification. In addition to the fact that the Holy Spirit- -the "missionary Spirit"- -was given for the enabling of witness to the world, His very coming at Samaria and Ephesus doubtless was also God's own attestation that they had been accepted as His children. The Samaritans in particular had long been despised by the Jews, and viewed as total outsiders. But now the Holy Spirit was also given to them. The far distant Ephesians likewise, by the gift of God's Spirit, were shown both to others and to themselves as accepted into God's family.

To move briefly to the contemporary scene: one of the striking features of the present Pentecostal (or charismatic) movement is the way in which people in many churches or denominations that have been long separated from, and even antagonistic to, one another have changed their attitude. For example, many Protestants who had become involved in the movement in the early to mid-1960s were ill prepared to accept Roman Catholics for the reason that they (the Protestants) were not at all sure whether Roman Catholics had experienced salvation. Then the Holy Spirit began to move among the Catholics with the resulting dynamic presence of God, transcendent praise, and powerful witness to the gospel. All the Protestants could do, like the apostles and brethren, was to glorify God and say: "Then to the Roman Catholics also God has granted repentance unto life!"

IV, The Role of Faith

The Holy Spirit, in one event after another, is given to those who believe in Jesus Christ. Believing means to look to Him as Lord and Savior and through Him to enter into new life. The essentials are shown to be repentance and forgiveness: "that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in his name to all nations" (Luke 24:47). To all who so repent and receive forgiveness (usually accompanied by water baptism), and thus exercise faith, the Holy Spirit is promised. In the words of Peter on the Day of Pentecost: "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ[32] for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is to you..." (Acts 2:38-39). The promise of the Spirit is to those who come to faith in Christ.

In all the Acts narratives that relate to the gift of the Spirit, faith in Christ is essential. Only those who believe in Him receive the Holy Spirit. This is demonstrated most clearly in the accounts of the Caesareans, Samaritans, and Ephesians. Let us observe each in turn.

Peter proclaims Jesus Christ, His life, death, and resurrection, and climaxes his message to the Caesareans with the words: "To him all the prophets bear witness that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name. While Peter was still saying this, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word" (Acts 10:43-44). It is to those who believe in Christ (those "who heard the word") that the Holy Spirit is given.

Philip at Samaria "proclaimed to them the Christ" (Acts 8:5). As a result, the Samaritans come to faith and are baptized: "When they believed Philip as he preached the good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women" (8:12). Later Peter and John come from Jerusalem and minister to them the Holy Spirit (8:14-17). Again, the Holy Spirit is received by those who had come to faith in Jesus Christ.

Paul proclaims Jesus Christ to the Ephesians before they receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. He reminds them that "John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is Jesus" (Acts 19:4). "On hearing this" the Ephesians "were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus" (19:5). Thereafter Paul lays hands on them and they receive the Holy Spirit (19:6). Once again, the Holy Spirit is given to those who believe in Christ.

In these three narratives faith is essential to receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit. It is apparent also that believing in Jesus and receiving the Holy Spirit occur at the same time (Caesareans), shortly thereafter (Ephesians), or some days later (Samaritans). This does not mean that faith is only the background as if, so to speak, the Samaritans believed one day and received another; rather faith operates throughout.

Basically then it is a matter of faith not as a static fact, a once-for-all thing, but a living, even growing reality. Hence, to those believing, whether at the moment of initial faith or along the way of faith, the Holy Spirit is given.

We may better appreciate this understanding of faith by viewing the situation of the disciples at Pentecost. In a real sense they were believers in Jesus already. They had known Him in His life, death, and resurrection, had received His forgiveness[33] and were waiting at His behest in Jerusalem. Hence they had believed surely, and now at Pentecost they were believing when the Holy Spirit came. Some later words of Peter to the apostles and brethren in Jerusalem about his recent experience with the Caesareans underscore this: "So if God gave them the same gift [of the Holy Spirit] as he gave us, who believed[34] in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to think that I could oppose God?" (Acts 11:17 NIV). It was not that only at Pentecost the disciples had come to believe or that believing was a past action; it was rather that as believers the Holy Spirit was poured out upon them.

It is important to recognize before proceeding further that in the Acts accounts persons may be believers and not yet have received the gift of the Holy Spirit. In the case of the Ephesians Paul at the outset questions them: "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?"[35] (Acts 19:2). Hence there may be a believing in Christ[36] prior to the reception of the Holy Spirit. To be sure, faith- -a continuing believing- -is necessary to this reception, but the critical matter here is that Paul implies the possibility of genuine faith that has not yet resulted in the reception of the Holy Spirit.

Let it now be emphasized from the record in Acts: it is through faith in Christ that persons initially receive forgiveness. It is likewise through faith that they receive the Holy Spirit. Or to put it differently, it is the same Christ who through faith brings both the forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Spirit.

We may speak, accordingly, of faith in movement, faith in process. Such a recognition of the dynamics of faith as depicted in Acts is essential to proper understanding of the reception of the Holy Spirit. At a certain moment in faith- -whether at the outset or somewhere along the way- -the Holy Spirit may be received. This moment may or may not coincide with the initial moment of receiving forgiveness of sins. It happened at the same time (Caesareans), shortly thereafter (Ephesians), days later (Samaritans[37]), or even longer (Jerusalem[38]). Whatever the case, faith in Jesus Christ is shown to be the essential matter whenever the Holy Spirit is given.

What must not be said is that forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Spirit are identical. For example, there are those who equate the gift of the Spirit with the gift of saving grace[39] or regeneration. However, there is nothing in the Acts narrative to suggest such an equation. To say that the disciples had not experienced such grace before the Pentecostal gift of the Holy Spirit runs counter to any perceptive reading of the New Testament record. Or to claim that the Samaritans had not truly believed in Christ through Philip's ministry prior to their later reception of the Holy Spirit strains credulity.[40] Surely the Ephesians had come to faith in Christ, and were baptized in His name, before Paul lays hands upon them to receive the Holy Spirit.

It is also apparent that there simply is no evidence in Acts that forgiveness of sins (salvation) automatically leads to the reception of the Spirit. Philip had brought the Samaritans to this point, but Peter and John were also needed to minister the Holy Spirit. Saul had begun to follow Jesus on the way of faith, but Ananias was needed to pray for Saul that he would be filled with the Holy Spirit. Paul had led the Ephesians to faith and baptism in Jesus' name, but it was necessary that he take a further step for them to receive the Holy Spirit.

Here we need to speak to another concern. There are those who may agree on the whole with our account of what happened in Acts, but either are unwilling to apply it to today or claim that the Epistles do not bear out the interpretation given. I will spend no time in relation to the first category, since it has few responsible adherents, but the second is important. Do the Epistles bear out what has been said regarding Acts? I have time and space for only a few comments, but trust they will be helpful.

First of all, it is important to recognize that the Epistles are written to Christian believers in various churches and situations. No epistle therefore directly shows people coming to faith in Christ or receiving the Holy Spirit. The dynamics of Christian beginnings have already happened. Second, as will be apparent, there is significant evidence for the reception of the Holy Spirit occurring subsequent to initial faith. Although such subsequence cannot be proven to be temporal, there can be no question of at least a subsequence in order (as will be noted). Such subsequence in order lends credence to a possible subsequence in time.

The main example is found in Ephesians 1:13- -"In him you also, who have heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and have believed [or 'having believed'[41] NIV] in him, you were sealed[42] with the promised Holy Spirit." The Ephesians' believing in Christ precedes their being sealed by the Holy Spirit. There is unmistakably a precedence in order (believing in Christ and then sealing); there is also a suggestion of temporal precedence in Paul's words[43]: "have believed" (or "having believed"). This becomes all the more likely if we look to the account in Acts 19 where, as we have observed, Paul raises the question that assumes the possibility of prior belief;[44] moreover, after the Ephesians come to faith in Christ, he lays hands on them to receive the Holy Spirit.

We may say, then, that the narrative in Acts about the Ephesians shows a definite temporal order, however brief, from initial faith in Christ to a subsequent reception of the Holy Spirit. The whole event is described in its occurrence. In the letter to the Ephesians, Paul is looking back on what has already happened[45] without detailing each aspect as it occurred. If we may properly use the narrative in Acts for illumination of the statements in Ephesians,[46] we behold a temporal movement from initial faith to reception of the Holy Spirit. The Ephesians had come to faith in Christ before they received the Holy Spirit.

One further thing about the Ephesian narrative may be noted, namely, that Paul both baptized and laid on hands. The Ephesians had already been baptized "into John's baptism" (19:3). Upon their believing in Jesus, they "were baptized [by Paul] in the name of the Lord Jesus." Thereafter Paul "laid his hands upon them" and "the Holy Spirit came on them." It is important to observe that the act of baptizing in water related to their faith in Christ and the following imposition of hands to their receiving the Holy Spirit. All- -faith in Christ, baptism in Christ (going beyond John's baptism), laying on of hands, receiving the Holy Spirit- -were important factors in their Christian beginnings. In this Ephesians passage, Paul does not mention either baptism or hands, though they possibly may be assumed.

This leads to our second example, namely, another significant New Testament passage that refers in sequence to a number of basic Christian elements in sequence. Here we look at Hebrews 6 which reads: "Let us leave the elementary teachings about Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God, instruction about baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment" (vv. 1-2 NIV). Six "elementary teachings" are mentioned, the first two of which, repentance and faith, are obviously the most basic since it is by repentance and faith that one comes to salvation. The last two are climactic, the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment. In between are instructions about "baptisms"[47] and the laying on of hands. "Instructions about baptisms" could refer to the difference between various Jewish lustrations or between John's baptism and Christian baptism,[48] or how Christian baptism relates to repentance and faith. "The laying on of hands" very likely refers to the gift of the Holy Spirit[49] as often imparted through the imposition of hands (as at Ephesus).[50] It is quite interesting that the sequence of faith in Christ- -repentance, baptisms (probably John's and Christ's), and laying on of hands- -is the same as that in the Ephesian narrative of Acts 19. Moreover, the imposition of hands goes beyond matters of salvation (faith/repentance) into the area of reception of the Holy Spirit.[51]

With Acts 19 again as a possible historical precedent, Hebrews 6 demonstrates the dynamic movement from initial faith (and repentance) through the matter of baptisms into the reception of the Holy Spirit. Moreover, just as water baptism is a distinct and prior action relating to faith and repentance, so laying on of hands is distinct and subsequent in both Acts 19 and Hebrews 6. Thus this condensed passage in Hebrews, which enumerates elementary Christian principles, may be helpfully understood against the background of the narrative of such events as occurred in Acts 19.[52]

In regard to these "elementary teachings" in Hebrews, it is to be noted that the word "instruction" precedes baptisms and the laying on of hands (this is not the case in relation to the prior mention of faith and repentance). Is it too much to suggest that this is the area where instruction is particularly needed in our time? Of faith and repentance- -the area of salvation- -much is said, especially in evangelical circles, but what of baptisms (in the plural)[53] and the laying on of hands?

But to return to our main point: both Ephesians 1:13 and Hebrews 6:1-3 bear out much of what has been detailed in various Acts narratives. While written in compact and nonnarrative fashion, they both include the full dynamics of Christian beginnings. Moreover, there is subsequence in order (Ephesians) and in presentation (Hebrews) in dealing with initial faith and the reception of the Holy Spirit. The subsequence in order also suggests subsequence in time (especially in Ephesians), hence a possible later reception of the Spirit after initial faith.

A third example that may be mentioned is Galatians chapter 3. Paul first asks: "Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law, or by hearing with faith?....Does he who supplies [or 'gives'] the Spirit to you and works miracles among you do so by works of the law, or by hearing with faith?" (vv. 2, 5). In Paul's questions there is unmistakable reference to the reception of the Spirit, that it occurs by faith (as we have previously observed), and that the working of miracles results from the giving of the Spirit.[54] All of this sounds quite familiar against an Acts background. There is, however, nothing in these opening verses that states or suggests the temporal relationship to their salvation- -justification, redemption (the two Pauline terms most used in Galatians). As we move on, however, to verses 13-14, we read: "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us...that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith."

What is important here is that against the background of redemption ("Christ redeemed us"), we receive through faith "the promise of the Spirit." Note carefully: not that through faith we receive the Spirit but the promise of the Spirit. "The promise of the Spirit"[55] is essentially the same expression as found in Acts 2:33 ("the promise of the Holy Spirit"[56]), and is the promise given to those who come to faith in Christ (repent, be baptized in His name, receive forgiveness of sins): "you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off" (Acts 2:38-39). In Galatians the order is clear: first, there is redemption;[57] second, to those who receive such through faith there is the promise of the Spirit. Hence, faith by which salvation is appropriated is accompanied by the promise but not necessarily at the same time by the realization of the promise.

Thus in Galatians, as clearly in Acts, and likely in Ephesians and Hebrews, there may be a separation in time between the occurrence of forgiveness of sins (redemption, salvation) and the reception of the Holy Spirit. It is still by faith in Christ (not "by works of the law"-Gal. 3:2) that such occurs, even though it may be on a later occasion.

We shall not take time to examine other relevant New Testament passages.[58] It is hoped that what has been discussed in connection with Ephesians 1, Hebrews 6, and Galatians 3 will be sufficient to demonstrate basic congruity with the Acts narratives.

V, The Reception of the Spirit

We come finally to consider the actual reception of the gift of the Holy Spirit. The question here concerns three matters in particular: prayer, obedience, and the laying on of hands. How do they relate to the reception of the Holy Spirit?

In regard to prayer, it is apparent from most of the narrative accounts that prayer has much to do by way of background. We may begin with Jesus Himself and the coming of the Holy Spirit upon Him. The relevant passage in the Gospel of Luke reads: "Now it came about that when all the people were baptized, that Jesus also was baptized, and while He was praying, heaven was opened, and the Holy Spirit descended upon Him" (3:21-22 NASB). Although no details are given, the Gospel clearly portrays a connection between Jesus' act of praying and the descent of the Holy Spirit.

The background of prayer is graphically set forth in relation to the coming of the Holy Spirit upon the disciples at Pentecost. After the apostles had heard Jesus tell them "to wait for the promise of the Father" (Acts 1:4), they "went up to the upper room"(13), and along with several others "devoted themselves to prayer"[59] (1:13-14). For ten days they continue in prayer, with their number growing to about 120, until the Holy Spirit rushes upon them at Pentecost.

In the story of the Samaritans the record reads that when Peter and John come down from Jerusalem to minister the Holy Spirit, their primary action is prayer: "Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God [i.e., had come to faith in Jesus Christ], they sent to them Peter and John, who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit" (Acts 8:14-15). The praying in this case is done by the apostles, and such prayers (possibly including the Samaritans praying also) immediately precede the laying on of hands and the Samaritans' reception of the Holy Spirit (8:17).

The narrative about Saul of Tarsus is suffused with prayer. For three days Saul, blinded by the light from heaven, neither eats nor drinks (Acts 9:9) as he gives himself to prayer. Ananias, who will minister to Saul, is likewise in prayer. The Lord speaks to him in a vision and tells him to go to the house where Saul may be found, for "behold, he is praying" (9:10-11). Hence, extended prayer is the background for Ananias' subsequent ministry wherein Saul is filled with the Holy Spirit (9:17-18).

In the case of the Caesareans, prayer again is very much the background. The centurion at Caesarea, Cornelius, is described as "a devout man who feared God with all his household...and prayed constantly to God" (Acts 10:2). Cornelius is told by an angel in a vision that "your prayers and your alms have ascended as a memorial before God" (10:4). The angel then instructs Cornelius to send for a man named Simon Peter in another city. The next day Peter is praying (he "went up on the housetop to pray," 10:9) and also has a vision. As a result Peter goes with the delegation from Caesarea and proclaims the gospel to Cornelius and his household. Prayer on both sides- -Peter who will minister and the Caesareans who will receive- -precedes the event of the Spirit.

Only in the incident about Paul's ministering to the Ephesians is nothing said about prayer. However, since he does lay hands upon them to receive the Holy Spirit, this was probably preceded (as in Samaria) by prayer. Even the laying on of hands itself may be viewed as a kind of outward act of prayerful ministry.[60]

All in all, prayer is shown to be vital background for receiving the gift of the Spirit. One further Scripture passage highlights this all the more, namely, Luke 11:1-13. When Jesus is praying at a certain place, His disciples ask Him to teach them to pray. Jesus thereupon gives the "Lord's prayer," but then tells a parable emphasizing importunate prayer: "Ask...seek...knock" (v. 9). It climaxes with the words: "If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!"(v. 13). The asking- -meaning importunate, earnest prayer- -is background for God's giving the Holy Spirit.[61] Prayer to the heavenly Father is channel for God's blessed gift.[62]

Why prayer is so important for the gift of the Spirit may be understood in light of the nature of the gift and the human situation. It is prayer which invites God's holy and dynamic presence[63] to invade a believer's life. The channel needs to be open for this to happen. This may call for prayer over an extended time; or if the channel is in readiness, the Spirit may be immediately poured out. The moment Jesus looks to heaven after His baptism and prays the Holy Spirit descends: the channel is open and ready for a tremendous visitation of the Holy Spirit.[64] The Caesarean centurion and his devout household are ready to receive God's dynamic visitation. The moment the blockage of sin is removed through forgiveness (hearing and receiving Peter's message) and they come to faith in Christ, the Holy Spirit is poured forth. The channel was already prepared.[65]

Here we must be careful not to overstate the case, but it seems quite likely that the reason in several instances for the Spirit not being given until some time after repentance and faith is that further preparation is needed. Jesus' own immediate disciples, though receiving forgiving grace by the risen Lord, had much debris in their channel- -some still doubting,[66] many still divided in their devotion,[67] all still concerned about material fulfillment.[68] So they were told to tarry, to wait. Doubtless they needed the ten days of earnest praying as preparation for the Holy Spirit to be given. When at last they had become a vacuum- -emptied of nagging doubt, dividedness of heart, self-striving-the wind of the Holy Spirit rushed in. They were filled with the Holy Spirit.

Saul of Tarsus seems to have been very much in a similar situation. Although acknowledging the risen and ascended Jesus as Lord, he undoubtedly had much self-dying to do. The formerly proud, self-reliant, bitter Pharisee, now blinded by the glory of Jesus, needed time not just to rethink his theology but to surrender wholly to the Lord. Such surely was the burden of his three days of praying. At last emptied, Saul of Tarsus was likewise filled.

What shall we say about the case of the Samaritans? To compare them even briefly with the Caesareans shows a vast difference. Unlike the God-fearing, God-seeking household of Cornelius, they were a people caught up in many unclean practices[69] and totally given over to Simon the magician (Acts 8:10). So even when they come to faith in Jesus, unlike the Caesareans, they are scarcely ready to receive the Holy Spirit. Hence, Peter and John's prayers with them may well have been to help them further to abjure the demons of their past[70] and to make an unreserved surrender to the lordship of Jesus Christ.

Several things should be emphasized before proceeding further. First, in no case is God reluctant to give the Holy Spirit. He delights to "give good gifts" (Matthew 7:11)[71] to His children; He delights to give the Holy Spirit. But He does not give to those for whom the way is not prepared. Second, moreover, since this is a gift, there is no way of earning it. Prayer- -earnest and importunate- -is a negation of all work: it is to allow God to remove the barriers so that He may take over. Third, at the heart of such prayer is self-surrender, the total yielding of the person to the lordship of Jesus Christ. Those thus empty before the Lord He delights to fill with His Holy Spirit.[72]

This leads next to a consideration of the matter of obedience. It will be recalled that on one occasion Peter declared: "We are witnesses of these things, and so is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey him" (Acts 5:32). If prayer is background for the gift of the Holy Spirit, obedience is the proper attitude of heart and will.[73]

In the case of the original disciples who received the Holy Spirit, it is apparent that they obeyed Christ by waiting as He had commanded. According to Luke 24:49, Jesus had said: "Stay in the city, until you are clothed with power from on high." Acts 1:4 records that Jesus "charged them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father." This command of Jesus they fully obeyed, and God gave them the Holy Spirit. Saul of Tarsus similarly obeyed the words of Jesus. Acknowledging Jesus as Lord, "What shall I do, Lord?" he receives a command: "Rise, and go into Damascus" (Acts 22:10; cf. 9:5-6). Saul goes, waits, and prays. Ananias likewise receives a command: "Rise and go to the street called Straight" (9:11), where Saul would be found. The centurion of Caesarea is commanded by an angel: "Send men to Joppa, and bring one Simon who is called Peter" (10:5). Peter is told by the Spirit: "Rise and go down, and accompany them without hesitation" (10:20). In these latter two instances, those of the centurion[74] and Saul, there is obedience on the part of both sides: the one to minister and the other to be ministered to.

Now these are all acts of specific obedience that relate directly to preparation for the gift of the Holy Spirit. Behind all of these we may refer again to the words of Jesus, earlier quoted: "Ask...seek...knock" (Luke 11:9). These words, it should now be emphasized, are a strong command, indeed threefold, which relates altogether to the gift of the Holy Spirit. There may, or may not be, a direct word from Christ (as with the disciples and Saul), but such is not necessary. The words of Christ are inscribed for all to read and obey: Ask, seek, and knock. For the Holy Spirit, as Peter said, is given "to those who obey him."

But lest this be viewed only as a matter of obedience to a particular command relative to the gift of the Holy Spirit, we should recall the words of Christ in the Fourth Gospel: "If you love me, you will keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father, and he will give you another Counselor...the Spirit of truth" (John 14:15-17). Keeping Christ's commandments, striving to be faithful to His words, abiding in His truth: all such prepares the way for the gift of His Spirit.[75] This does not mean that beyond faith obedience is required (not faith plus works), but this is the obedience that faith engenders, and to such faith/obedience the Spirit is given. For the Holy Spirit is given in the atmosphere of obedient faith.

All of this suggests that those who seek to walk faithfully in the way of Christ are living in an atmosphere conducive to the reception of the Holy Spirit. There may be failures, but the essential intention and direction is that of obedience to the word of the Lord. Already in some sense walking in the way of holiness,[76] such persons are in a position for a further implementation of the Holy Spirit (who is the Spirit of holiness). Conversely, if a person is not walking in the way of faithful obedience to Christ; if he is harboring anger, lust, bitterness in his heart; if love has grown cold and holiness aggrieved- -such a one is hardly in a position to receive God's Holy Spirit. For obedience lies at the heart of faith, and it is by faith alone that the Holy Spirit is received.[77]

Finally, let us look into the matter of the laying on of hands. What relation has such an action to the reception of the Holy Spirit? What do the Acts narratives show? The immediate answer is that there obviously is no necessary relationship. For in the case of both the disciples at Jerusalem and of the Caesareans, there is no laying on of hands. Of course, since the Jerusalem disciples were the first, there was no one who could have laid hands. In the instance of the Caesareans Peter was present and could have done so; however, there was no opportunity or need, for the moment they come to faith the Holy Spirit is given. In both cases it is apparent that hands were not involved; hence, they were not necessary.

In the other three instances- -the Samaritans, Saul at Damascus, and the Ephesians, there was laying on of hands. After Peter and John have prayer for the Samaritans, "then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit"[78] (Acts 8:17). Following Saul's three days of praying and Ananias' "laying his hands on him," Saul is "filled with the Holy Spirit" (9:17). In regard to the Ephesians, "when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them" (19:6).

Since in the Acts accounts there is shown to be no necessary connection between imposition of hands and the reception of the Spirit, the question emerges: Why is there a difference between Caesarea[79] on the one hand and the Samaritans, Saul, and the Ephesians on the other? Why the laying on of hands in the latter three instances? The answer would seem to be much in line with what was said about prayer and obedience: the Caesareans were so ready to receive everything from God that He immediately, without human mediation, pours forth the Holy Spirit. The others needed further help which the laying on of hands provided.

It is apparent that the laying on of hands, for one thing, is a dramatic symbol for the giving of the Holy Spirit. Hands placed upon a person clearly represents the Holy Spirit coming upon the person. Moreover, by the very act of allowing hands to be placed upon the head, the individual is thereby expressing submission and docility[80] to a fresh work of God. Also hands signify contact, community, sharing- -a human channel for the divine gift. Although a person may receive the gift of the Spirit without human mediation, the imposition of hands may greatly facilitate this reception.

Now let us emphasize several matters. First, based on the accounts of Jerusalem and Samaria, God is not dependent on the mediation of human hands for the giving of the Holy Spirit. Other things, such as prayer and obedience, are far more basic. Second, where there is laying on of hands, there is no limitation to office. Apostles do lay hands in Samaria (Peter and John) and Ephesus (Paul), but a lay brother, Ananias, places hands on Saul. Third, there is no suggestion in Acts that the laying on of hands of itself[81] confers the Holy Spirit. It is true that each time in Acts when hands are laid the Holy Spirit is received, but this is not because of any latent power in the transmitter.[82] Rather it is due to God's grace operating through a human channel to the faith of those who are prepared to receive it.

Unmistakably there is need for much further consideration of the laying on of hands. It will be recalled that instruction about the laying on of hands (along with baptisms) belongs to "elementary teachings" (Hebrews 6:1). The proper understanding and practice of the laying on of hands is much needed in our time.

A word should be added about two things: God's sovereignty and human expectancy. Although we have been declaring that prayer is the regular background, obedience important preparation, and the laying on of hands the means, we must not overlook God's sovereign disposition. This to be sure is seen in that He may or may not use hands as a channel. In addition it would be an error to give prayer, no matter how fervent or protracted, or obedience, no matter how devout, the place of primacy. God as the sovereign Lord, regardless of such factors, is free to give His Holy Spirit to those who believe, when and how He wills. On the human side the only critical matter is faith- -a continuing belief and trust; but there is no guarantee of God's timetable of further action.

Moreover, if it is true- -as many firmly believe- -that we are living in an extraordinary time of the outpouring of God's Spirit, this is not first of all our doing but His. God has promised that "in the last days" He would pour out His Spirit upon all flesh; and if we are in the last of these "last days," then what is happening stems basically from His sovereign intention. It is not because we are more prayerful or obedient or saintly than generations before us, so that God is responding thereto and sending us His Holy Spirit. No, it is primarily and profoundly a matter of God's will and purpose. He is sending forth His Spirit, quite possibly in preparation for the consummation of all things.

But there is also the important side of human expectancy. The first disciples before Pentecost lived in expectation of the Spirit's being poured out. Although they did not know just when the promise of the Holy Spirit would be fulfilled in their behalf, they waited and prayed with full expectancy that it would come about. Moreover, after it happened to them, Peter declared that it was by no means a once-for-all event, but that the gift of the Holy Spirit was promised likewise to all who come to faith in Christ: "the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him" (Acts 2:39). Surely this built up great expectation. Since, moreover, the promise was not just to people in that day but to those throughout the ages, then everyone called by God stands under the same promise. So should the expectation of the people of God be exceedingly great to enter into that promise and live more fully in the reality of God's dynamic presence and power.

Summary of A Pentecostal Theology

The critical center of a Pentecostal theology is the gift and reception of the Holy Spirit. In the early church, as recorded in the Book of Acts, the Holy Spirit was poured out upon, fell on, came upon people; and they were immersed in, filled with the Holy Spirit. The Spirit thus given and received came from God the Father through Jesus Christ. The result of this event was the dynamic immediacy of God's presence. Since the gift of the Holy Spirit was promised for all generations to come, it is available in our time.

The primary response to the gift/reception of the Holy Spirit in the early church was praise, the glorifying of God. In the Book of Acts, this praise came forth in tongues as a recurring expression of transcendent praise. This may be viewed as resulting from the dynamic penetration of the Holy Spirit bringing about a situation of high spiritual intensity. Since tongues occurred frequently in the early church as the primary response to the gift of the Holy Spirit, they may be expected likewise in the church thereafter.

The basic purpose of the gift/reception of the Spirit in the early church was enabling power. This was the case in Jesus' own ministry as well as His disciples thereafter: it was power for ministry. The gift was not for salvation or sanctification but for service in word and deed. At the same time the Spirit who came was a testimony to God's acceptance and approval: for Jesus as God's Son, for those after Him that they had repented unto life.

What was true in New Testament times is true also today: the reception of the Holy Spirit brings about both power for ministry and certification of sonship and salvation.

The role of faith was central in the reception of the Holy Spirit; only those who believed in Jesus received this gift. Each account in Acts makes this unmistakably clear. To believe truly (i.e., to repent and believe) resulted immediately in the forgiveness of sins, hence salvation. However, in many cases the gift of the Spirit did not occur at the moment of initial faith and salvation but shortly thereafter, or even days and weeks later. In such cases people were believers prior to receiving the gift of the Spirit. Hence, in the Acts narratives there is witness to a chronological subsequence of the gift of the Holy Spirit, not to faith but to salvation. On the matter of subsequence the Epistles, though there is no narrational description, attest to the reception of the Holy Spirit following upon salvation. This subsequence in order lends credence to a possible separation in time, and thus a confirming of the record in Acts. In any event faith, believing, continued to be the essential condition for the reception of the Holy Spirit. The role of faith, whatever the situation of subsequence, remains until today central in the reception of the Holy Spirit.

The reception of the Spirit in the early church occurred ordinarily against the background of prayer and self-surrender. The proper attitude of heart and will was obedience- -thus acting in accordance with Christ's command. Both prayer and obedience were the context, not the condition (which was faith only), for receiving the Holy Spirit. The laying on of hands, while not necessary, was often the external medium for the Spirit to be given.

However, the imposition of hands in and of itself did not confer the Holy Spirit. Far more basic was the matter of faith and prior salvation, prayer and obedience. Ultimately, the reception of the Spirit was due to God's grace communicated with or without human mediation to the faith of those ready to receive it. It follows that the same situation continues to prevail in our time.

Finally, it is apparent in the early church that both God's sovereignty and human expectancy were involved in the gift and reception of the Holy Spirit. Can this be any less true now?

Some Critical Points in A Pentecostal Theology

1.     The gift of the Holy Spirit is a recurring event. The earliest church historical record (Acts) depicts the Spirit being given and received on several occasions. There is also the promise of the gift of the Holy Spirit to generations thereafter.

The Spirit was not given once-for-all at Pentecost.

2.     The narratives in the Book of Acts that record the giving and receiving of the Holy Spirit are, in their unity and variety, the primary exegetical basis for the gift/reception of the Holy Spirit. Against the narrational background the Epistles may best be understood. It is not proper to place the so-called didactic (e.g., Paul's epistles) above the narrational.

3.     The gift of the Holy Spirit is the Holy Spirit Himself. He comes from the Father through the Son. The result is the dynamic and immediate presence of God.

The gift of the Holy Spirit is not an unmediated immediacy; the Spirit comes through the mediation of Jesus Christ.

4.     The occurrence of tongues (glossolalia) in Acts is best understood as transcendent praise. Tongues of praise are expressive of the situation of divine penetration and high spiritual intensity. Tongues, accordingly, are the primary (though not necessary) response to the gift/reception of the Holy Spirit. Glossolalia is not the speaking of foreign languages, nor is it a passing phenomenon of the early church.

5.     The primary purpose of the gift of the Spirit is enabling power. It is to enable the believer to minister more effectively and to provide authentication of sonship and salvation. The gift of the Holy Spirit is not the gift of saving grace; however, there can be no gift of the Spirit without prior grace and salvation.

6.     Faith is basic to the reception of the Holy Spirit; however, the Spirit may not be given at the moment of salvation but at some time thereafter. Thus one may believe in Christ and not yet have received the Holy Spirit.

It is not correct to say that believers invariably receive the gift of the Holy Spirit at the inception of their faith.

7.     The background of prayer and obedience, and often the laying on of hands, are the context for the gift/reception of the Holy Spirit. The imposition of hands in and of itself does not convey the gift of the Holy Spirit.

The Challenge of A Pentecostal Theology

Five groups may here be addressed: (1) those who affirm that the Spirit of God is immediately present to all persons, hence without mediation through Jesus Christ- -often a feature of mysticism, especially in non-Christian religions; (2) those who claim that by virtue of salvation through Jesus Christ all persons have received the gift of the Holy Spirit- -the position of many evangelicals; (3) those who hold that through the proper sacramental action (baptism or confirmation) the Holy Spirit is invariably given- -sacramentalists in general; (4) those who stress the validity of the gifts of the Spirit for today but who hold that the gift of the Spirit is the release or actualization of what has been received in salvation or through the sacraments- -the viewpoint of many charismatics; (5) those who express much concern for the renewal of the church through such means as worship and fellowship, witness and service but who lay little emphasis on either the gift or the gifts of the Holy Spirit- -the perspective of many who might be called "renewalists."

My challenge is as follows:

(1)         To many mystics- -there can be no immediate presence of the Holy Spirit without the redemptive action of Jesus Christ that makes possible the gift of the Holy Spirit. Faith in Jesus Christ whereby sins are forgiven is the precondition of God's immediate and dynamic presence. The urgent question to such mystics is: "Do you believe in Jesus Christ?"

(2)         To many evangelicals- -the fact that a person has come to faith in Jesus Christ and thereby entered into salvation is no guarantee of the reception of the Holy Spirit. The gift of eternal life and the gift of the Holy Spirit are not the same. The critical question to such evangelicals is the Pauline one: "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?"

(3)         To many sacramentalists- -the sacramental action cannot, ex opere operato, convey the spiritual reality. Only where there is vital faith is it possible to receive the Holy Spirit. The important question, similar to the preceding one, is: "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when the sacramental action occurred?"

(4)         To many charismatics- -the gift of the Holy Spirit is a distinct and unique action of God, so cannot be viewed as simply a release or an actualization of what is already there. There is serious danger in such a viewpoint of minimizing the necessity of the special event/experience whereby the gifts may flourish. Perhaps the best word to such charismatics is: "Do not quench the Spirit" (1 Thess. 5:19).

(5)         To many renewalists- -genuine and lasting renewal can only come about through the undergirding of various activities by the dynamic presence and power of the Holy Spirit. Otherwise renewal is little more than an accentuation of what is already there. The command of Jesus needs much to be heeded: "Stay [tarry, wait expectantly] ...until you are clothed with power from on high" (Luke 24:49).

Footnotes

[1]Pneuma: the Journal for Pentecostal Studies, vol. 5, no. 2, Fall, 1983, p. 39.

[2]Keep in Step with the Spirit, 231-32.

[3]A fuller elaboration of many of the matters discussed in this paper may be found in my book, The Gift of the Holy Spirit Today (1980). Also see Renewal Theology, vol. 2, Salvation, the Holy Spirit, and Christian Living (1990).

[4]Instead of "with" as is found in the RSV and most translations. The Greek word en may be translated as "in," "with," or "by." "By," in this context, however, is quite misleading.

[5]There are a number of other reasons besides the linguistic and empirical for speaking of the basic identity of the five experiences. This will become apparent as we proceed.

[6]That "the promise" in Acts 2:39 refers to the gift of the Holy Spirit is apparent from 2:33 where the promise is stated specifically as "the promise of the Holy Spirit." This is called "the promise of the Father" in 1:4 (cf. Luke 24:49-"the promise of my Father").

[7]"This which you see and hear" refers to the visible and audible demonstrations which accompanied the outpouring (see hereafter), but the basic reality is the Holy Spirit Himself.

[8]Mysticism, in some of its forms, speaks of a direct or unmediated sense of God's presence.

[9]The first reference in the Bible to the Spirit of God, i.e., the Holy Spirit, is that of "the Spirit of God...moving over the face of the waters" (Gen. 1:2).

[10]See Roger Stronstad, The Charismatic Theology of St. Luke, 77, on "the transfer of the Spirit motif." Stronstad's book has many valuable insights not only on Luke's "charismatic theology" but also on the Old Testament background.

[11]The Greek word is megaleia.

[12]Greek: megalunonton.

[13]Cf. also the relation between joy and the filling of the Spirit in Acts 13:52-"And the disciples were continually filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit" (NASB).

[14]EGT in reference to Acts 10:46 calls this "jubilant ecstatic praise."

[15]As in the quotation in the preceding note regarding Caesarea.

[16]F. F. Bruce, The Book of the Acts, NICNT, 57. According to Bruce, this was "possibly" what occurred at Pentecost. He had just described the utterances at Pentecost as "words spoken by the disciples in their divine ecstasy."

[17]Acts 2:4. "Other" is sometimes taken to mean other in the sense of additional human languages. However, the more likely understanding of "other" in this text is qualitative otherness. Thayer has two headings under heteros ("other") referring to (1) Number and (2) Quality. "Number" would point to other tongues as additional, thus in the case of Acts 2:4, the speaking of additional languages such as Arabic, Greek, Chaldean; "quality" would signify difference in kind-"not of the same nature, form, class, kind."

[18]The word translated "utterance" is apophthengesthai, literally "to speak out." It is a term used "of the speech of the wise man [in Greek literature]...but also of the oracle-giver, diviner, prophet, exorcist, and other 'inspired persons'"(BAGD). This "inspired" speech is given by the Holy Spirit through human lips.

[19]C. S. Lewis in his address entitled "Transposition" (in Transposition and Other Addresses) describes how a transposition occurs whenever a higher medium reproduces itself in a lower. If viewed merely from the perspective of the lower, the higher may be completely missed. Concerning glossolalia (speaking in tongues) Lewis writes, "all non-Christian opinion would regard it as a kind of hysteria, an involuntary discharge of nervous excitement" (p. 9). However, "...the very same phenomenon which is sometimes not only natural but even pathological is at other times...the organ of the Holy Ghost" (p. 10). "Those who spoke with tongues, as St. Paul did, can well understand how that holy phenomenon differed from the hysterical phenomenon-although...they were in a sense exactly the same phenomenon" (p. 17). Lewis later speaks about "the inevitableness of the error made about every transposition by one who approaches it from the lower medium only" (p. 19). "Transposition" accordingly is an excellent term to express what happens when the Holy Spirit, the higher medium, is expressed in the lower, the human spirit. The vehicle of expression, human language, becomes transposed into a new dimension of utterance.

[20]Keil and Delitzsch have an interesting comment about the prophesying of the elders "not as the foretelling of future things, but as speaking in an exalted and elevated state of mind, under the impulse and inspiration of the Spirit of God, just like the 'speaking in tongues' which frequently followed the gift of the Spirit in the days of the apostles" (Commentary on the Old Testament, 1:70).

[21]Leon Wood identifies the elders' prophesying with praise: "In the instance of the seventy in the wilderness... 'prophesying' would be that these seventy began to render praise to God, when the Spirit was placed upon them" (The Holy Spirit in the Old Testament, 111).

[22]A. T. Robertson states that the word structure in Acts 8 "shows plainly that those who received the gift of the Holy Spirit spoke in tongues" (Word Pictures in the New Testament, 3:107). F. F. Bruce affirms that "the context leaves us in no doubt that their reception of the Spirit was attended by external manifestations such as had marked His descent on the earliest disciples at Pentecost" (The Book of Acts, NICNT, 181). For similar comments see Johannes Munck, The Acts of the Apostles, AB, 75 and F. J. Foakes-Jackson, The Acts of the Apostles, MC, 73.

[23]In Renewal Theology, vol. 2, I have more recently spoken of the first purpose of the coming of the Holy Spirit as guidance "into all the truth" (see pp. 237-43). Thereafter I speak of "power for ministry" (pp. 248-63), a fuller elaboration of the purpose described above.

[24]The Holy Spirit and power are not identical. As earlier observed, the gift of the Holy Spirit is the Spirit Himself, not something else. However, the basic purpose of the gift is power for ministry.

[25]In John 6:27 Jesus says that "on him [Jesus Himself] has God the Father set his seal"-literally, "this one God the Father sealed" (touton ho pater esphragisen ho theos). The idea of sealing here would seem clearly to refer to this anointing with power at the Jordan: "to dedicate," "to consecrate," "to endow with heavenly power" (TDNT, 7:949, n.83).

[26]According to R. R. Williams, "throughout Acts, the Holy Spirit is thought of as the means whereby Christians receive power to witness to Christ and His resurrection" (The Acts of the Apostles, 36).

[27]James D. G. Dunn holds that "the Samaritans' response was simply an assent of mind to the acceptability of what Philip was saying" (Baptism in the Holy Spirit, 65). Hence, Peter and John came down to lead them into a genuine Christian experience. This, I submit, is a faulty reading of the narrative.

[28]As, e.g., I. H. Marshall writes: "God withheld the Spirit until the coming of Peter and John in order that the Samaritans might be seen to be fully incorporated into the community of Jerusalem Christians" (The Acts of the Apostles, TNTC, 157).

[29]E.g., observe how Peter's sermon of Acts 2 is followed by a healing ministry in Acts 3.

[30]"This opening of the heaven, the descent of the Holy Ghost in a visible shape, and the voice from heaven, were to Jesus the final assurance from God that He was indeed His Son and the anointed Messiah, and that God wholly approved of His assumption of the work of redemption." So writes Norval Geldenhuys in The Gospel of Luke, NICNT, 147.

[31]Obviously there is a great difference between the approval given to Jesus who needed no salvation and the Gentiles who had received it. However, the Gentiles had been accepted through faith in Jesus whereby they likewise had become sons of God. Hence, it was as if God were saying to them because of their salvation through Christ, "You are my beloved sons; with you I am well pleased."

[32]Baptism itself is not essential to forgiveness of sins (as the account in Acts 10 will show), but the faith that baptism signifies is wholly necessary.

[33]The words of Jesus after His resurrection to the disciples, all of whom had forsaken Him, are three times repeated: "Peace be unto you" (John 20:19,21,26). They contain a strong note of forgiveness and grace. This peace, in the words of R. V. G. Tasker, is "the peace of the pardoned sinner" (The Gospel According to St. John, TNTC, 266).

[34]"When we believed" (RSV) is misleading. This suggests that Peter and the others at Pentecost did not believe until the time the Spirit was given. The Greek word involved here is pisteusasin, an aorist participle which may express action antecedent to or concurrent with the action of the main verb (see, e.g., A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, 860-61). If concurrent, then "when we believed" would be correct. However, as Dunn says, "the aorist participle does in fact usually express antecedent action, but it is the context, not the grammatical form, which determines this" (Baptism in the Holy Spirit, 159). Since the aorist does usually express antecedent action, and, I would add, the context here suggests the same (the disciples had believed prior to Pentecost), then "who believed" is more accurate. However, since this is not only a matter of the past but a continuing reality, "believing" (embodying both antecedence and concurrence) may be an even better translation. Believing was both a past fact for the Pentecost disciples as well as a continuing reality ("after believing" (NASB) fails to capture the continuation of faith). (Also see previous chap. 5, nn. 15 and 19.)

[35]Pisteusantes is the aorist participle (as in Acts 11:17). "When you believed" (also NIV, NEB) is again misleading since it conveys only the idea of concurrence. "Since ye believed" (KJV) and "after" (NIV margin) both point to antecedence. Probably the best translation (though awkward) would be: "Did you receive the Holy Spirit, believing?" (antecedence and concurrence). However, I have retained the "when" since in this context (unlike Acts 11:17 supra) it, along with "since" or "after," points to a past believing wherein the Holy Spirit may not have been received. (Also see previous chap. 5, nn. 13 and 20.)

[36]Although it turns out that these "disciples" (Acts 19:1) did not yet have a saving faith in Christ (vv. 3-5), hence were not believers in a full Christian sense, this does not alter the fact that Paul viewed them as such in his initial encounter and question.

[37]Saul of Tarsus could also be mentioned here. Three days after his initial faith in Christ he is filled with the Holy Spirit. It is sometimes argued that Saul did not really believe until Ananias came to him. However, Saul recognizes Jesus as Lord (Acts 9:5; cf. with Acts 22:10), and when Ananias comes to him Ananias greets him as "Brother Saul" (Acts 9:17; 22:13). For a helpful discussion of this, see Howard M. Ervin, Conversion-Initiation and the Baptism in the Holy Spirit, chap. 5, "Paul's Conversion."

[38]Eduard Schweizer writes that, according to Luke, "days, and in exceptional cases even weeks and years may pass before endowment with the Spirit follows faith" (TDNT, 6:412). I agree with Schweizer that the New Testament record shows the possibility of a later impartation of the Spirit; however, I would prefer to say not "follows faith," but follows "initial faith." Clearly, people are still believing when they later receive the Holy Spirit.

[39]E.g., Dunn who writes that "the gift of the Spirit...is the gift of saving grace by which one enters into Christian experience and life" (Baptism in the Holy Spirit, 226).

[40]Contra Dunn who holds that "the Samaritans' response was simply an assent of the mind to the acceptability of what Philip was saying" but not true faith (ibid., 65; recall n. 27.

[41]The Greek word is pisteusantes; "having also believed" (NASB), "after that ye believed" (KJV).

[42]The Greek word for seal, sphragizo, may refer in the New Testament to power for witness and ministry. As stated in John 6:27 (as we have noted), Jesus declares about Himself that "him hath God the Father sealed [esphragisen]" (KJV). According to BAGD, syragizw in this context means "endue with power from heaven." Likewise 2 Corinthians 1:22-"he has put his seal upon [literally 'having sealed'-sphragisamenos] us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee" means "more than just 'provide with a mark of identification.'" It represents, according to BAGD, the same enduement of power. Hence, I would submit, we may view the sealing of Ephesians 1:13 in the same manner. The fact that this is "with the promised Holy Spirit" (literally, "the Holy Spirit of promise") lends further support to the sealing as primarily an enduement of power. However, sealing may also refer to certification, attestation, acknowledgment-to "attest, certify, acknowledge (as a seal does on a document)" (BAGD, syragizw, 2. c). Thus the sealing with the Holy Spirit, in this sense, brings an assurance of forgiveness, of salvation, of new life in Christ (recall the prior discussion of the testimonial function of the gift of the Spirit). Both attestation and empowerment are probably included. According to J. O. F. Murray, "the sealing [cf. Eph. 1:13]...as in the case of our Lord at his Baptism (Jn. vi. 27), and of the disciples on the Day of Pentecost (Acts xi.17), and of the household of Cornelius (Acts x.44, xv.8) was at once the Divine attestation of a spiritual fact already revealed and appropriated and the means by which the recipient was empowered to live up to the truth he had heard and believed" (Ephesians, CGT, 26).

[43]Since pisteusantes is an aorist participle which (as previously noted) usually expresses antecedence-or, as we have discussed, antecedence plus continuance.

[44]Quite significantly, the same aorist participle, pisteusantes, is used in both Acts 19:2 and Ephesians 1:13.

[45]There were, to be sure, only "about twelve" (Acts 19:7) involved in the earlier narrative and doubtless many more persons than twelve to whom the Ephesian letter was addressed. So obviously there can be no one-to-one correspondence between the two Scriptures. However, the pattern of Ephesians 1 clearly follows the narrated events of Acts 19.

[46]I recognize that such an approach, utilizing a narration in Acts to illuminate a Pauline letter, is quite different from the view that the so-called didactic (i.e., Paul's writing in this case) ought invariably to take precedence over narrative or historical parts. John R. W. Stott holds that "the revelation of the purpose of God in Scripture should be sought in its didactic, rather than its historical parts. More precisely, we should look for it in the teaching of Jesus, and in the sermons and writing of the apostles, and not in the purely narrative portions of Acts" (Baptism and Fullness, 8). Why not both-with the historical as background for the didactic? This is surely the case in the Gospels: the teaching of Jesus is to be best understood against the background of His life and ministry.

[47]The Greek word is baptismon; also translated as "baptisms" in KJV. RSV has "ablutions," NASB "washings," NEB "cleansing rites."

[48]According to TDNT, " baptismwn didach, denotes the difference between Jewish [and pagan?] 'washings' [including John's baptism?] and Christian baptism" (1:545).

[49]F. F. Bruce refers this statement in Hebrews to "an early Christian practice, associated especially with the impartation of the Holy Spirit," and adds "that is most probably its significance here" (The Epistle to the Hebrews, NICNT, 116). Leon Morris writes: "It is Christian beginnings, perhaps with the thought of God's gift of the Spirit, that is in mind here" (Hebrews, EBC, 12:53).

[50]Also in relation to the Samaritans (Acts 8:17) and Saul (Acts 9:17).

[51]Hebrews 6:4, thereafter, also suggests both salvation and the reception of the Holy Spirit. Reference is made to those who have "once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit." "Once been enlightened" doubtless refers to salvation (cf. Heb. 10:32), "tasted the heavenly gift" probably to enjoying the graciousness of the Lord (cf. 1 Peter 2:3, esp. KJV), and "partakers [or 'sharers'] of the Holy Spirit" definitely suggests participating in the Spirit's presence and power. It is to be noted that one follows upon another.

[52]The sequence in Hebrews is also quite similar to Acts 8, the Samaritan account. First, in Acts 8 there is repentance (turning from their previous domination by Simon the magician) and faith in Christ, baptism (though not baptisms; however, they may have received such instruction), the laying on of hands, and the reception of the Holy Spirit (the overall pattern follows that of Peter's words in Acts 2:38).

[53]Of course, John's baptism is no longer a relevant issue. However, instruction about baptisms might legitimately include both baptism in water and baptism in the Spirit, especially how the latter may be received through the laying on of hands.

[54]Herman Ridderbos writes that "Paul reminds them [the Galatians] of their conversion and of their receiving the gift of the Spirit [italics mine]." Then Ridderbos adds, in regard to verse 5, "We are to think of those special operations of the Spirit by which in the early period of the Christian church the acceptance of the gospel was sometimes accompanied and confirmed (verse 5; cf. also Acts 8:14-17, 10:44-46, and 19:6)" The Epistle of Paul to the Churches of Galatia, NICNT, 112.

[55]The Greek phrase is ten epangelian tou pneumatos.

[56]The Greek phrase is ten epangelian tou pneumatos tou hagiou (parallels in Luke 24:48; Acts 1:4; 2:38-39).

[57]As likewise in Acts 2:38.

[58]Others that merit consideration include: John 7:37-39; Romans 5:5; 8:15-16; 15:18-19; 1 Corinthians 2:12; 2 Corinthians 1:21-22; Ephesians 5:18-19; Galatians 4:6; 1 Thessalonians 1:5, 4:8; Titus 3:5-7; 1 Peter 1:12; 1 John 3:24 and 4:13. Valuable discussions of most of these passages, and others, may be found in Spirit-Baptism: A Pentecostal Alternative by Harold D. Hunter, and Conversion-Initiation and the Baptism in the Holy Spirit by Howard M. Ervin.

[59]NIV translates: "they all joined together constantly in prayer."

[60]Francis A. Sullivan, SJ, writes that "even when no explicit mention is made of prayer accompanying the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Spirit (as in Acts 9.17; 19.6), we can rightly see the gesture itself as expressive of prayer, since it is obvious that the apostles were aware that this gift could only come from the risen Lord" ("Laying on of Hands in Christian Tradition" in Spirit and Renewal: Essays in Honor of J. Rodman Williams, Mark Wilson, ed., 45).

[61]One of the questions in the Heidelberg Catechism (Q. 116) is: "Why is prayer necessary for Christians?" Then follows the striking answer: "Because it is the chief part of the gratitude which God requires of us, and because God will give his grace and Holy Spirit only to those who sincerely beseech him in prayer, and who thank him for these gifts" (italics mine).

[62]Incidentally, this passage in Luke also demonstrates that the gift of the Holy Spirit is for believers, those who know God as Father and are truly His children. Further, the passage shows that the gift is not primarily for oneself (salvation, edification, sanctification), but for ministry to others since the importunate prayer is for bread to give to a visiting friend (see vv. 5-6).

[63]Recall our first section on "The Essential Reality.

[64]In Jesus' case, of course, there is no sin blocking the channel. His baptism was not for His own sins but an act of identification with others. Hence, once this has been done and He is about to begin His ministry, the moment has come for the descent of the Spirit to anoint and further empower Him. So does He pray, and the Spirit comes upon Him.

[65]Indeed, the whole narrative in Acts 10 about Cornelius and his household depicts a situation of earnestness, eagerness, and readiness for all that God has to give.

[66]Thomas in John 20:24-28. Also, even up to the moment of his ascension "some doubted" (Matt. 28:16-17).

[67]Peter and several others go fishing again; later Jesus asks Peter, "Do you [really] love me?" (John 21:1-17).

[68]Acts 1:6.

[69]Before they come to faith through Philip's ministry, "unclean spirits" come out of many (Acts 8:7).

[70]In the contemporary Pentecostal movement this has often been found necessary. See, e.g., Dennis and Rita Bennett, The Holy Spirit and You, chap. 4, "Preparing to Receive the Baptism in the Holy Spirit."

[71]Matthew 7:11 is the parallel verse to Luke 11:13. For "good gifts" or "things" in Matthew, Luke has "the Holy Spirit."

[72]John Rea puts it well: "Those seeking to be baptized and filled with the Holy Spirit must be willing to yield control of every part of their being to the Holy Spirit ....Yield your will so that your motives are pure....Yield your members, especially your tongue as the organ of expression of the Holy Spirit through you" (The Holy Spirit and the Bible, 181).

[73]Frederick D. Bruner writes that "the obedience spoken of in Acts 5:32 is an obedience which flows from [italics: his] the prior gift of the Holy Spirit" (A Theology of the Holy Spirit: The Pentecostal Experience and the New Testament Witness, 173). This is an extraordinary misreading of the text, prompted by Bruner's view that if the text really says otherwise, then obedience becomes a condition of receiving the Holy Spirit. Obedience, however, should be viewed not as a condition (the only condition is faith), but as an attitude of heart and will: it is really "the obedience of faith" (see hereafter). Incidentally, Schweizer has no hesitation in saying that "obedience must...precede [italics: mine] the reception of the Spirit according to [Acts] 5:32" (TDNT, 6:412). This, rather than Bruner's, is proper exegesis.

[74]At the time of the command to the centurion, Cornelius is not yet a believer. However, he does become a believer, at which moment the Holy Spirit is poured out. Hence, his obedience is caught up in faith: to such a one the Spirit was given.

[75]The close connection between Jesus' commandments and the gift of the Spirit to the apostles is shown not just in the specific command that He gave them to stay in Jerusalem (Acts 1:4), but prior to this Jesus had been giving other commandments to his apostles (1:2 KJV): "he had given commandments [plural] unto the apostles whom he had chosen." Hence we may believe that their obedience in the days prior to Pentecost was not only to the command to stay in Jerusalem, but also the obedience of heart and will to whatever else Jesus had commanded.

[76]This does not mean that one must be without sin to receive the Holy Spirit. If such were the case, no one would be a recipient, for all continue to sin. Hence, those who call for "complete sanctification" or total "heart purification" as necessary for the reception of the Spirit are asking for the impossible. What is necessary is not the attainment of perfection, but ever seeking, regardless of many a failure, to walk in the way of obedience.

[77]There was nothing said in the above section on obedience about the Samaritans and Ephesians. In the case of the Samaritans the delay in receiving the Holy Spirit may have been due to the need for more time after the beginning of faith for obedience to develop. Long devoted to idolatrous practices, they may have needed more time for commitment and obedience to Christ to replace their deep-seated commitment to Simon the magician. In the case of the Ephesians, the atmosphere is that of readiness to do what John the Baptist had commanded, and thereafter to follow Paul's injunctions (see Acts 19:4-6).

[78]Literally, they "were laying [epetithesan-imperfect tense] their hands on them and they were receiving [elambanon] the Holy Spirit." NASB translates: "Then they began laying their hands on them and they were receiving the Holy Spirit." The Greek tense suggests an action over a period of time, and possibly that the Samaritans one by one received the Holy Spirit.

[79]Omitting Jerusalem for the moment since, unlike Caesarea, as we have noted, no one was there who could have laid hands.

[80]Donald Gelpi, S.J., speaks of praying for "full docility to Christ." He adds: "...[this] is in effect to express one's willingness to do whatever God may be calling one to do, no matter what the personal sacrifice or suffering that call might entail. The person who cannot pray such a prayer and mean it is not yet ready for 'Spirit-baptism'" (Pentecostalism: A Theological Viewpoint, 183).

[81]In the Roman Catholic view, grace is transmitted through proper sacramental action, ex opere operato, in this case through the laying on of hands. Such a view, however, makes basically unnecessary all that has been said about faith, prayer, and the like: the Spirit is given-regardless. Some Roman Catholic participants in the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement seek to mitigate this by saying that the important matter is that of appropriating what has already been received sacramentally. That is where personal reception comes in. Kilian McDonnell, a leading Roman Catholic interpreter, while affirming ex opere operato speaks of "the scholastic doctrine of ex opere operantis [wherein] we receive in the measure of our openness" ("The Distinguishing Characteristics of the Charismatic-Pentecostal Spirituality," One in Christ, 10. 2 [1974], 117-18). My reply is that since there is no guarantee that the Spirit is given in sacramental action, there may be nothing to receive, or appropriate, ex opere operantis.

[82]Simon the magician is condemned by Peter for thinking that the power belongs to the transmitter. He offers money to Peter and John saying, "Give me also this power that any one on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit" (Acts 8:19). Peter angrily denounces Simon thereafter for thinking he could "obtain the gift of God with money" (v. 20).

Chapter 12, The Greater Gifts

This paper intends to be an exegetical and theological reflection stemming from the words of Paul in 1 Corinthians 12:31a: "zeloute de ta charismata ta meizona"-"but earnestly desire the greater[1] gifts." What are the "greater gifts," the meizona charismata, and how do they relate to the life of the church in our time?

Based on Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 12 up to verse 31 two possibilities may be suggested. First, since in the delineation of nine charismata[2] (vv. 8-10), he begins with "word of wisdom" and "word of knowledge" and ends with "tongues" and "interpretation of tongues," "the greater" could be those first listed, hence "word of wisdom" and "word of knowledge."[3] Second, since shortly before Paul speaks of earnestly desiring the greater gifts, he declares that "God has appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, helps, administrations, various kinds of tongues" (v. 28), the greater gifts could be "apostles" and "prophets" (perhaps also "teachers").

The latter possibility may readily suggest itself as Paul's intention both in light of the fact that he has just spoken of "apostles" and "prophets" and since he has also specifically given a prioritized listing: "first apostles," "second prophets," "third teachers." Accordingly, "apostles," "prophets," and possibly "teachers" could be the greater gifts to be desired. However, this interpretation immediately runs into a twofold difficulty. First, the listing is not designated by Paul as gifts (charismata) but as "appointments"- -"God has appointed[4] in the church...." In the earlier listing (vv. 8-10), the background is: "Now there are varieties of gifts [charismata], but the same Spirit"; hence "word of wisdom," "word of knowledge," etc. are specified as spiritual charismata. But in verse 28 Paul is referring to divine appointments (settings, placements) within the church, consisting both of certain offices (prioritized), namely, apostles, prophets, and teachers[5] and certain spheres in which the gifts function, namely, miracles, healing, helps, administrations, various kinds of tongues.[6] Both offices and spheres are divine placements within the church- -but they are not charismata.[7] Second, it is quite foreign to Paul's writing, indeed, to the New Testament, to view the offices of apostles and prophets (and teachers) as something to be "earnestly desired." In the language of Ephesians 4 they are divine domata (v. 9)- -not charismata[8]- -the sovereign Lord gives as He wills. They are "callings" of God.[9] Thus it can scarcely be the case that Paul is referring to the appointments listed in 1 Corinthians 12:28 when he adds- -"earnestly desire the greater gifts."

What then may we say of the list in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10? As observed, they are designated charismata by Paul, hence might seem more likely to contain the greater gifts, the meizona charismata. In other words- -to recall our earlier quotation- -they would be "word of wisdom" and "word of knowledge" (and possibly the next one or two charisms on the list). But, again, certain difficulties emerge. First, unlike the listing of appointments in verse 28, which contains some specific priorities- -"first," "second," "third"- -there is no such enumeration in verses 8-10. Of course, it is possible to assume that the gifts in the list first mentioned by Paul would be "the greater gifts" by virtue of their prior listing, but such is only an assumption.[10] Indeed, since Paul speaks of "varieties of gifts"[11] (v. 4) prior to listing them, it would seem that the emphasis falls not on priority but diversity.[12] Second- -and here we look beyond, into 1 Corinthians 14:1- -Paul will later say, "desire earnestly spiritual gifts, but especially that[13] you may prophesy." If prophecy, or prophesying, is especially to be desired, then it would clearly seem to be of high priority. However, in the listing of the charismata in 12:8-10 Paul mentions prophecy after five other gifts. This alone is sufficient evidence to refute any idea that Paul is giving a hierarchical list in this first account.

Before we proceed further, it is to be noted that Paul, immediately after saying, "But earnestly desire the greater gifts," adds: "And I show you a still more excellent way" (12:31b). This translation of the Greek text[14] seems to point another direction in Paul's thought, namely, that rather than encouraging his readers to desire earnestly the charismata, he will show a way far better than striving after these gifts. If such be the case, the whole question of what are the "greater gifts" becomes moot in light of there being a "more excellent way" than zeal for the greater gifts. However, a more precise rendering of the Greek text- -if nothing else- -points a quite different direction; literally it reads: "And [yet] I show you a way beyond measure."[15] Thus it is that Paul is not here setting forth an alternative to desiring the greater gifts: he does not intend to show something better. Rather Paul is declaring that he will show a super-excellent way- -"a way beyond measure"- -wherein the gifts, including "the greater," are to be exercised.

From this understanding of Paul's words, what he has to say in 1 Corinthians 13, the "love" chapter that immediately follows, falls into proper perspective. Verse after verse, from 1 through 13 (the last), Paul is describing the way beyond measure of love. All the gifts- -tongues (v. 1), prophecy, knowledge, faith (v. 2)- -must be exercised in love; else they are noisy, abrasive, and virtually worthless. Hence, the importance of love cannot be exaggerated. Moreover "love never ends"[16] (RSV), whereas the gifts will pass away when "the perfect" has come (vv. 8-10)- -"as for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away...but when the perfect comes, the imperfect (lit., "that which is in part" [KJV]) will pass away" (RSV). "The perfect"[17] refers to the perfection of the glory to come, for Paul shortly adds, "For now we see in a mirror dimly; but then face to face" (v. 12). When we are "face to face" with the majestic glory, tongues, prophecy, knowledge- -indeed all the charismata- -fall away, for they belong to the present age, and are utterly transcended in the visio dei. So it is that in the glory to come (as Paul reaches his climax): "faith, hope, love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love" (v. 13 RSV).

But- -to return to our earlier point- -Paul is by no means saying that love is a better way than the charismata, hence to be earnestly desired rather than the gifts. To be sure, the gifts will some day be no more, but while they are available in our present life they are much to be desired. However, they must be exercised in love, if there is to be genuine edification. Thus, it is not at all proper to say that the concern for gifts should be transcended by the pursuit of love. Indeed, as Paul makes his transition to chapter 14, just after saying, "the greatest of these is love," he writes, "Pursue love, yet desire earnestly spiritual gifts."[18] It is not either/or but both/and: with love as the way- -the way beyond measure wherein the gifts find their truly meaningful expression.

Now- -going back to chapter 13- -we need to mention an additional matter, another error sometimes made: that of viewing the greatest of the gifts as love. We have reflected upon the mistake of considering love as a superior way to the gifts; but we need also to observe that love is in no sense the greatest- -or "the greater"- -of the gifts. Paul does indeed say that "the greatest [lit., "the greater"[19]] of these is love"; however, it is apparent that he is not talking about the greater among the charismata, but the greater (or greatest) among the triad of faith, hope, and love. Paul is speaking of eternal verities: those realities of faith, hope, and love that "abide" or "remain"[20]; he is not referring to gifts, that for all their greatness, pass away in eternity.[21] It should be added that love- -neither here nor elsewhere in the Scriptures- -is depicted as a gift, or charism. Rather it is a fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22- -the first mentioned fruit). It is an effect of the Holy Spirit's inner presence: "the love of God has been poured out within our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us" (Rom. 5:5); but love is not a charism. Since love is not a gift, it cannot be one of the "greater gifts" about which Paul speaks.

Incidentally, it is not always recognized that this classic chapter[22] on love is set in the midst of a discussion of the gifts. Paul writes to those who know the gifts and who are experiencing them. He urges them to desire earnestly the "greater gifts," indeed "spiritual gifts" in general (1 Cor. 14). Chapter 13 is not basically a dissertation by Paul on the Christian life at large, the way of love, and so forth.[23] It is mainly a discourse on the way the gifts are to be exercised. Paul's words (it is apparent from the still larger context) were written to people who were not lacking in any spiritual gift, but who obviously lacked much in love.[24] Hence, the apostle's words are surely applicable to believers today who need to be encouraged to seek after the charismata and in their every expression to exhibit the spirit of love.

With all this by way of background, we may turn again to Paul's injunction: "but earnestly desire the greater gifts." Since these gifts cannot be identified with the top listing of the charismata of 1 Corinthians 12:8-10, or with the primary placements (the offices) of 12:28-29, and since- -according to 1 Corinthians 13- -the charismata are not to be superseded by love (or by faith, hope, and love), what then are these "greater gifts"?

One answer has already been mentioned- -prophecy. For after his injunction to "pursue love" and "desire earnestly spiritual gifts," Paul adds, "but especially that you may prophesy" (1 Cor. 14: 1). It is scarcely to be doubted, therefore, that prophesying is to be viewed under the heading of "greater gifts,"[25] if not the greatest- -or the "greater of the great," if Paul has only two gifts in mind. And the reason given for desiring to prophesy, Paul shortly thereafter states: "one who prophesies speaks to men for edification and exhortation and consolation" (v. 3). For truly, Paul adds, "one who prophesies edifies the church" (v. 4). Apparently, the measure of a gift, a charisma, is the measure of its ability to build up the body of Christ. And nothing can stand higher than prophecy in that regard.

Inasmuch as prophecy is a direct, intelligible communication from God primarily addressed to believers, it cannot be surpassed by any other manifestation of the Spirit. Prophecy is a "speaking for"[26] God wherein He provides the words and the message; the result is that the whole body, or its various members are built up in the faith. Little wonder that Paul, in reference to seeking the spiritual gifts says, "especially that you may prophesy." He also adds later, "desire earnestly to prophesy" (1 Cor. 14:39).

Does Paul give information concerning any other "greater" gift? Unmistakably, prophecy is such a gift, but what else? The answer is that- -in an extraordinary kind of way- -speaking in tongues may also occupy the top position. Let us follow Paul carefully here. It would seem at first glance that Paul places glossolalia on a rather low level. This might be deduced from the list of charismata in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10, where speaking in tongues is mentioned next to last, or from the list of placements in 1 Corinthians 12:28 which mentions tongues last. However, as we have seen, the listing in verses 8-10 is clearly not by rank,[27] and that in verse 28 is not a gradation of gifts.[28]

Now moving on to chapter 14, where Paul begins to discuss the relationship between prophecy and tongues, he may initially seem to hold a lower view of tongues: "One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself; but one who prophesies edifies the church" (v. 4). Since edification of the church is the purpose of the gifts,[29] and the "greatness" of a gift is measured by its capacity to edify, or build up, the church, and since tongues are said to edify the speaker, the conclusion would seem to be that tongues in relation to the body would have little or no value. Any other gift presumably would rank higher. But let us listen further to Paul, for shortly after the above quoted statement, he declares: "greater is one who prophesies than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may receive edifying" (v. 5). This means in the event that interpretation follows upon tongues the gift of prophecy is not greater.[30] Indeed speaking in tongues, then, may be recognized, along with prophecy, as a "greater gift" which has none higher or greater. Prophecy, for all its ability to upbuild, exhort, and console is not, therefore, greater than tongues. But why? How can tongues with interpretation following compare with such edification?

For an answer to this question we may now turn back to verse 2: "One who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit"[31] (RSV). Since glossolalia is on the high level of speaking to God, even that of speaking mysteries in the Holy Spirit, if there is an interpretation, the church will be immensely edified. The reason is clear: there will be the unfolding of divine mysteries. Paul does not reveal the nature of these mysteries, but by definition they are "hidden things."[32] Such things are declared by the one speaking in tongues, for no one understands what he is saying,[33] and only the Spirit can make them known. When this occurs through the gift of interpretation, the church is greatly edified.[34] How could it be otherwise?

It follows that prophecy could not possibly be "greater" than tongues when there is interpretation. The one speaking in tongues is at least on the same level as the prophet,[35] because in both cases there is genuine edification from God, even though the content of the speech may be different.[36] Further, another point now needs to be made: both prophecy and tongues are direct spiritual utterances. This has already been mentioned in relation to prophecy- -a "speaking for" God in which He provides the message. In the case of tongues it is a "speaking to" God wherein the Holy Spirit provides the language.[37] Though the human aspect is not denied- -persons do the speaking in both cases- -it is apparent that in a way beyond any other charismata, prophecy and tongues are operations of divine directness and immediacy.

For all of this it is not hard to conclude that prophecy and tongues are both numbered as "greater gifts" which are much to be desired. However, once again it needs to be emphasized that the latter only occupies that high level in the body of Christ if interpretation also occurs. When Paul speaks of tongues alone, he states a preference for prophecy: "Now I wish that you all spoke in tongues, but even more that you would prophesy" (1 Cor. 14:5).[38] Moreover, he makes many statements beginning with verse 6 about the unedifying character of uninterpreted tongues in the body,[39] and climaxes with the words, "Therefore let one who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret" (v. 13). Paul in none of this is depreciating all tongues,[40] but only tongues that are not interpreted.

Just following his statement that a person who speaks in tongues should pray for interpretation of this speech, Paul adds, "For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. What is the outcome then? I shall pray with the spirit and I shall pray with the mind also; I shall sing with the spirit and I shall sing with the mind also" (1 Cor. 14:14-15).

First, praying in a tongue, praying with the spirit, and singing with the spirit are all references to essentially the same phenomenon: glossolalia, whether spoken, prayed, or sung.[41] What is striking is Paul's very mention of the variety of glossolalic utterance- -in speech, prayer, song- -which he by no means discounts or devalues; rather, he declares that he will do them all. There is, further, no suggestion that such utterance should be superseded by something other,[42] perhaps higher.

Second, the introduction of the terminology of "praying with the spirit" and "singing with the spirit" are obviously further amplifications of speaking in tongues. Glossolalia is an utterance in prayer and/or song; and since it is done "with the spirit," not the mind, it refers to something other than communication through the mind (be it word of wisdom, prophecy, teaching, or anything else similar). It is undoubtedly a spiritual utterance in which the Holy Spirit within the human spirit speaks forth through human lips prayer[43] and praise to God. Thus praying with the spirit and in the Spirit (recall 1 Cor. 14:15), singing with the spirit and in the Spirit are actually the same phenomenon.

Moreover- -and here let us look briefly beyond 1 Corinthians- -there is affirmative mention elsewhere of such spiritual utterance. In Ephesians Paul urges his readers to "pray at all times in the Spirit" (6:18), even as he earlier urged them to be "filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs"[44] (5:18-19). Thus praying in the S(s)pirit and singing in the S(s)pirit ("spiritual songs") are both spoken of very highly. It is to be recognized that in his letter to the Ephesians Paul's reference to praying in the Spirit does not call for interpretation since such praying is for the individual's own edification and strengthening[45]; however, its great importance cannot be minimized: "pray at all times in the Spirit." Nor is there any suggestion that "spiritual songs" done by the assembly are to be followed by interpretation; perhaps the point is that such is not needed in the context of "psalms and hymns" which, being sung in the vernacular, are understood by all. Additional references to praying and singing in the Spirit occur in Jude 20-"praying in the Holy Spirit"[46]- -and Colossians 3:16- -"spiritual songs."[47] These additional statements in Ephesians, Colossians, and Jude- -related to speaking in tongues- -point further to their great importance. Accordingly, as we return to 1 Corinthians 14:14-15, it is with enhanced recognition of the high significance of glossolalia- -whether prayed or sung- -for both individual and community.

Third, since Paul is vitally concerned about the edification of the body in the Corinthian situation, he emphasizes repeatedly the urgency of interpretation. What is done in the S(s)pirit, whether prayer or song, is to be followed by prayer and song "with the mind," or "understanding" (KJV). In no way does Paul suggest that spiritual utterance should be eschewed in favor of comprehensible articulation- -even though with the former the mind is "unfruitful." Rather, what happens in spiritual utterance is far too important for its being minimized or set aside.[48] However, in the body there definitely should be interpretation that all may be edified.

Now we move on to Paul's next statement- -in 1 Corinthians 14:16- -where again he stresses both the high value of spiritual utterance and the importance of interpretation: "Otherwise if you bless[49] in the spirit only [i.e., in tongues only], how will the one who fills the place of the ungifted[50] say the 'Amen' at your giving of thanks, since he does not know what you are saying?" We may first recognize here the vital significance of speaking in tongues, in this case as a way of blessing and giving thanks to God that is superlative: "...thou verily givest thanks well" (v. 17 KJV).[51] Second, however, once again an interpretation is immediately needed (to return to v. 16) for the "ungifted" person, so that he may be able to participate in the blessing.[52] Thus, despite the high value of praising and thanking God in tongues- -as Paul continues (in v. 17)- -"the other man is not edified." Hence, the apostle again stresses the need for interpretation that other believers may be edified.

The conclusion- -stated quite vigorously- -is this: "I thank God, I speak in tongues more than you all; however, in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind, that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue" (vv. 18-19). First again is the high valuation placed on tongues ("I thank God"), but in church (where both "gifted" and "ungifted" believers are present) five words that are understood by all are preferable to any number, however many, of words spoken in tongues. This is not a devaluation of tongues as if Paul were saying that speaking with the mind is better[53] or that speaking in tongues does not really belong in church. The basic point rather, as the whole context shows, is that speaking a multitude of words without interpretation will not edify a congregation with its wide range of experienced and inexperienced believers.

As we look back over the words in 1 Corinthians 14:6-19, it is apparent that Paul is not denying the great value of tongues with interpretation in the assembly (as declared in v. 5). But he is speaking throughout against uninterpreted tongues;[54] they simply do not edify the body.

Therefore, it is not that revelation and knowledge, prophecy and teaching are profitable, whereas glossolalia is not; words with the mind are not better than words spoken in tongues; thanksgiving in understandable speech is not preferable to blessing with spiritual utterance. To be sure, when there is no interpretation given, all these comprehensible operations of speech are far more significant- -simply because they edify all. But tongues with interpretation occurring- -which greatly edifies- -remains among the "greater gifts."

It would seem proper to say from Paul's discussion of prophecy and tongues that both represent "greater gifts" that are much to be desired. The only difference is that prophecy in its very utterance edifies the assembled body of believers, whereas tongues must be followed by interpretation for the same to occur. Nevertheless, one is not "greater" than the other; each carries its own message and by their functioning together the church may be richly blessed.

Further evidence that Paul is referring to tongues and prophecy as the "greater gifts" is the fact that in all the discussion of the way of love in 1 Corinthians 13, tongues and prophecy are mentioned first (cf. vv. 1-2 and v. 8)[55] and that in the whole of chapter 14 (vv. 1-40) the only gifts that Paul discusses in detail are prophecy and tongues. In our reflection on 1 Corinthians 14 thus far we have only considered verses 1-19; however, even a cursory glance over the remaining verses of the chapter shows Paul's continuing great concern with these gifts. To be more specific, verses 20-25 are a presentation of the relationship of tongues and prophecy primarily to unbelievers[56]; in 26-33, after a brief mention of "psalm...teaching...revelation ...tongues...interpretation" (that all should be practiced for edification), Paul devotes his complete attention to the proper ordering of tongues with interpretation and prophecy[57]; and 37-40 contain a final comment on prophecy and tongues.

Let us particularly consider these last verses in 14:37-40. According to the common reading of the passage, tongues and prophecy are mentioned only in verse 39- -and in that verse the presumption usually is that Paul suggests a greater desirability for prophecy than tongues ("Therefore, my brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak in tongues").[58] But let us first note the interesting statement of Paul's in verse 37- -then we shall return to verse 39.

Paul begins this passage (v. 37) with the statement, "If any one thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I wrote are the Lord's commandment." The word translated "spiritual,"[59] pneumatikos, is a substantival adjective paralleling the noun "prophet," thus literally such a one is "a spiritual." Thus "a prophet or a spiritual" is the literal rendering of the text. But who is "a spiritual?" Some would say "a Spirit-filled" person[60]; however, a prophet- -a prophetes- - is surely "Spirit-filled," and yet he is mentioned in contradistinction to the one designated as a pneumatikos. Accordingly, there is a further meaning, namely, that Paul is referring to one who speaks in tongues. This is clearly suggested by the parallelism with verse 39 where prophecy and speaking in tongues are specifically mentioned, and in the same order as verse 37 (prophetes first, pneumatikos second). Thus the one who is a pneumatikos is peculiarly one who speaks in tongues.[61] Hence, climactically in Paul's discourse of chapters 12-14, the speaker in tongues bears the title of pneumatikos.[62] In a unique fashion he is a pneumatic, a Spirit-endowed person[63]- -not by any means more "spiritual" than others; but pneumatikos because through the language of the Spirit, i.e., tongues, he speaks directly to God. If such is the case, this is an additional reason for viewing speaking in tongues as a "greater gift."

But let us proceed to a more careful look at 14:39. Even if it be granted that Paul is referring to prophecy and tongues- -speech in verse 37, that a pneumatikos is one who speaks in tongues- -all of which sounds like a high evaluation of tongues- -it might seem here that Paul is finally subordinating tongues to prophecy. For, to repeat, according to a common reading of the text- -"desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak in tongues"- -there seems to be a definite lowering of the place of tongues. Does not such an injunction afford positive affirmation for the one, and give only a negative permission for the other? That is to say, speaking in tongues, unlike prophecy, is not to be sought after or desired; such is not to be forbidden either.[64] If this is what Paul is stating here, it would seem quite out of harmony with any idea that tongues belong to the category of "greater gifts" to be desired. Rather, tongues are perhaps only reluctantly to be permitted. The answer, I believe, to this seeming shift of emphasis, almost to a self-contradiction, rests in a misapprehension of Paul's meaning in this verse- -and it stems from the usual English translation, "Do not forbid." However, from another understanding of the meaning of the Greek word, and against the background of what Paul has been stating, the apostle is much more likely to be saying: "Do not restrain[65] speaking in tongues." It is not a matter of granting negative,

perhaps grudging, permission, but of declaring that tongues should not be hindered or checked. In other words, what is often read as negative permission is more likely a positive affirmation. Paul is saying to any who would view tongues as only tolerable, thus not to be sought after, "Let them be spoken!" From this perspective, he is not saying prophecy is desirable whereas speaking in tongues is not to be desired. It is rather that any restraint upon tongues needs to be removed so that they may have their proper expression and significance in the body of believers.[66]

Paul concludes with the words: "But let all things be done properly and in an orderly[67] manner" (14:40). Since this final statement is the conclusion of his injunction, "desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not restrain speaking in tongues," it points up Paul's great concern that especially these highly potent charismata of prophecy and tongues be properly ordered. As was mentioned, Paul devotes a rather lengthy statement to this matter (14:27-33), specifying in part, "if any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn; and let one interpret.... Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh[68] what is said" (RSV). Propriety and orderliness call for both the interpretation of tongues and the weighing or discerning of prophecy.[69] Therefore, while tongues and prophecy are greatly to be desired, of all the gifts they doubtless need the most judicious exercise.

Possibly enough has now been written to substantiate the thesis that Paul's words "earnestly desire the greater gifts" refer to prophecy and tongues.[70] No attempt will be made to summarize the evidence set forth in the preceding pages. However, one point made earlier that indicates their being "greater gifts" needs further emphasis, namely, that prophecy and tongues are uniquely (among the charisms) direct utterances relating to Almighty God. In prophecy the words spoken are the speaker's own language, but the message is given by the Spirit of God[71]; there is no mental involvement on the part of the speaker.[72] The words are God's message in human language[73]; hence the one prophesying simply speaks it forth. Thus there is direct utterance from God. In the case of tongues the directness is even more apparent since the words first spoken (before interpretation) are not in the speaker's own language; the words themselves are given by the Holy Spirit and addressed directly to God. The interpretation (in the body), as with prophecy, does not actually involve the mind, but sets forth directly in the common language what has been declared in and by the Holy Spirit.[74] Thus, prophecy and tongues represent, as no other charismata,[75] a directness, even an immediacy, of communication between God and humanity. This being the case it seems again all the more surely that they are the "greater gifts."

Here we may- -leaving Paul for a moment- -also be reminded from the Book of Acts that in the initial outpouring of the Holy Spirit prophecy and tongues occupy a high place. On the Day of Pentecost speaking in tongues (2:1-4) and prophecy (2:14-18) are the primary demonstrations of the Holy Spirit, indeed his direct workings- -"And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit was giving them utterance" (v. 4); "I will pour forth of my Spirit upon all mankind; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy" (v. 17). It is the Holy Spirit giving persons utterance in tongues; the same Holy Spirit outpoured upon people brings forth prophecy through them.[76] Whatever else will happen on that day (and surely much will, including the salvation of some three thousand persons and the formation of the first Christian community), and however much the Holy Spirit will be involved in it all (and surely He will: convicting of sin, bringing about faith, enabling koinonia)- -the prior and direct workings are unmistakably tongues and prophecy.[77]

One further note concerning the Book of Acts should be made. It is significant that on another occasion in the early mission of the church, there is reference to both tongues and prophecy. Paul had been ministering to some Ephesians with the result that "the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking with tongues and prophesying" (19:6). What the Ephesians said is not disclosed; but that the primary manifestation of the Holy Spirit's coming was tongues and prophecy is apparent. Again glossolalia and prophecy are shown to be His primary and immediate working.

It would seem to follow from the Book of Acts that if prophecy and tongues are ongoing possibilities,[78] they would rank as the most to be desired. For as no other manifestations of the Spirit they express directly the presence and power of the Holy Spirit. Of course, this brings us full circle; for Paul clearly speaks of continuing manifestations of the Spirit, stressing the desirability of all and urging the seeking of the "greater gifts," one of which he specifies as prophecy. Our conclusion is based primarily on the inner evidence of 1 Corinthians 12-14; and from a quick review of Acts, tongues surely qualifies for inclusion in "the greater." In sum: prophecy and tongues, in their proper functioning, are gifts of the Spirit greatly to be desired.

A concluding word: this article has been written under the growing conviction that prophecy and tongues are of a potency and value seldom realized in the church. This is said not simply to those who may have difficulty accepting their validity at all (at least for the church today), but also to those who do claim their continuance. It is to this latter group that some closing remarks follow.

My point is this: I believe that we have scarcely begun to realize the basic importance of prophecy and tongues. If they are direct, immediate utterances of the Holy Spirit for the body, they should have primacy in all gatherings of assembled believers.[79] This is not in any way to minimize the importance of evangelizing and teaching,[80] of liberality and mercy,[81] or of any of the other ninefold gifts of the Holy Spirit. All just mentioned are gifts of grace,[82] hence of great value, but none of these are quite as powerful and direct expressions of Almighty God as are prophecy and tongues. For what else can correspond to a prophetic "Thus says the Lord"? If God is truly speaking therein, then prophecy calls for the highest place and consideration. Again, what else can transcend an utterance in tongues that declares divine mysteries, the hidden things of God? If God's secret truth is being declared thereby for His gathered people, there can be nothing else of more importance to comprehend.

It is quite a sad thing that even where the gifts of the Spirit are recognized, and prophecy and tongues are expected, far too often there is a failure both to appreciate their extraordinary character and their proper functioning. There should, on the one hand, be a holy awe in the presence of Him who is now speaking, an eagerness to hear every word spoken, and a yearning to appropriate and act upon whatever is being declared. On the other hand, realizing the human element in all prophetic utterance and interpretation of tongues, there should be a fresh sense of urgency in discerning the truth that is being proclaimed, not hesitating if need be to separate out what is not truly of God, and thereupon earnestly and faithfully seeking to fulfill whatever God has spoken. It could be a new day in the church when the "greater gifts" are both earnestly desired and truly exercised. May the Lord grant us fresh zeal and determination!

Footnotes

[1]NASB translation (here and throughout the article, unless otherwise noted). The Greek word meizona is rendered as "best" in the KJV, "higher" in the RSV and NEB. "Greater"-also so translated in the NIV-seems closer to the root meaning (meizona from megas, usually translated "large" or "great").

[2]In verse 4 Paul speaks of "varieties of gifts" or "charismata"-also "varieties of ministries" (v. 5) and "varieties of effects" (v. 6). Then he adds: "But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit" (v. 7). Thus Paul will be setting forth charismata of the Spirit, spiritual gifts, in verses 8-10.

[3]"Greater" suggests at least two gifts; however, if Paul is giving a hierarchy of gifts in verses 8-10, the next one "faith," perhaps also next "gifts of healings," might be viewed as in the "greater" category. Actually, from a hierarchical perspective any gift in the list might be viewed as greater than the next one listed.

[4]The Greek word is etheto-also "set" (KJV) or "placed."

[5]The parallel with Ephesians 4:11 is unmistakable-"He [Christ] gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers." The order-omitting "evangelists" and "pastors"-is the same. Although the word "appointed" is not used, there is clearly a sense that these are set offices. The word "gave" (edoken) expresses a completed and fixed action.

[6]The latter listing of spheres is not said to be fourth, fifth, sixth, etc. The Greek word preceding "miracles" is epeita, translated as "then" in the NASB, but perhaps better as "after that" (as in the KJV). Thus there is succession in the spheres, but not necessarily a prioritized listing. Epeita also precedes "gifts of healing," but is not used in reference to the last three spheres, namely, helps, administrations, tongues. Hence, this suggests even more strongly that the prioritized listing by no means includes them.

[7]Hence, for example, the charisma of "prophecy" (v. 10) is one thing, the office of "prophets" is another. All may prophesy (see Paul's later words, "you can all prophesy" [14:31]), thus the charisma-but not all are prophets (see Paul's question with implied negative answer: "Are all prophets?" [12:29]). Also, there is both the charism of "the effecting [or working] of miracles" (v. 10), and the sphere of "miracles" (v. 28). Because God has placed miracles in the church, the workings of miracles can happen: the placement is antecedent to the charism.

[8]Both domata and charismata are "gifts," but the former refers to gifts of office: they are "for the equipping of the saints for the work of service [or 'ministry']" (Eph. 4:12).

[9]E.g., Paul speaks of himself as "called to be an apostle" (Rom. 1:1; cf. Cor. 1:1; Gal. 1:15); but neither had he "earnestly desired" it, nor does he ever urge anyone else so to desire.

[10]Paul speaks of faith, hope, and love in 1 Corinthians 13:13 in that order, but declares that the greatest is love. The first mentioned in this case is not specified as the greatest!

[11]Also, as we have noted, "varieties of ministries" and "varieties of effects" (or "workings").

[12]RSV translates as "diversities of gift," KJV-"differences of gifts"; the Greek phrase is diaireseis charismaton.

[13]The Greek phrase is mallon de. KJV translates as "rather that" which gives an adversative sense. Though mallon de often carries that connotation (e.g., Eph. 4:28), it may have a supplementary meaning (Thayer: it "marks what has the preference: more willingly, more readily, sooner") as in the NASB translation (similarly in RSV, NIV; NEB has "above all").

[14]Almost identical in the RSV. KJV omits "still," NIV has "the most excellent way." All are essentially the same.

[15]The Greek phrase is kath' hyperbolen-"beyond measure" or "comparison" (see, e.g., Gal. 1:13- "beyond measure"; 2 Cor. 4:17-"beyond all comparison" [also RSV]). Thus the translation earlier given, "a still more excellent way" (with parallels in other versions) is quite misleading. According to EGT, "kath' hyperbolen...is superlative, not comparative; Paul is not pointing out a more excellent way than that of seeking and using the charisms of chapter xii, but a super-excellent way to win them." Although I might differ on the last phrase, "to win them," EGT is surely right in speaking out against the comparative idea.

[16]The Greek word is piptei-"fails" (NASB, NIV; KJV-"faileth"). NEB, as RSV, has "ends." "Ends" is the more likely translation in view of verse 13.

[17]The Greek phrase is to teleion. The attempt on the part of some to identify to teleion with the completion of the canon of Scripture hardly needs comment. Such an attempt-which actually is only a device to seek invalidation of the gifts as continuing in the church-is utterly futile.

[18]The word here is not charismata but pneumatika, literally "spirituals" (as also in 1 Cor. 12:1). However, English translations regularly render pneumatika as "spiritual gifts" in light of the context (in both 1 Cor. 12 and 14).

[19]The Greek word is meizon.

[20]NEB translates: "there are three things that last forever: faith, hope, and love."

[21]Faith (pistis) uniquely functions both as a gift of the Spirit (see 1 Cor. 12:9) and as one of the eternal verities. However, a fuller discussion (not possible here) would show that faith as a charism is a special faith for healing, working of miracles, etc. The faith that "abides" is eternal faith and trust in the living God.

[22]Of course, there is no chapter in the original letter. Unfortunately, the chapter separation can easily lead to isolation from the overall context.

[23]This is not to say that the chapter has no relevance to the general Christian walk. Quite the contrary, there is much of great edification (note esp. vv. 4-7), regardless of the gifts. But the chapter both begins specifically with the gifts (vv. 1-3), and later continues with them (vv. 8-10). Thus it is clear that, however much Paul goes beyond the gifts as he speaks of love, the context is the charismata.

[24]See especially chapter 1. Whereas Paul expresses his thanksgiving to God that the Corinthians were "not lacking in any gift [charisma]" (vv. 4-7), he also-immediately thereafter-speaks of "the quarrels" (v. 11) and divisions among them.

[25]Later Paul uses the word "greater" in describing prophecy as it relates to speaking in tongues: "greater is the one who prophesies" (1 Cor. 14:5). The Greek for "greater" is meizon, the same as the meizona in "greater gifts."

[26]The Greek is pro + phemi.

[27]Since prophecy is mentioned sixth, and yet is especially to be desired, the listing of tongues thereafter-actually eighth-does not imply inferiority.

[28]As previously noted, though 28 contains a prioritized listing of offices and a designation of various spheres of charismatic activity, it is not a hierarchy of gifts.

[29]When Paul first discusses the gifts, he speaks of them as "the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good" (1 Cor. 12:7). "The common good" is the edification, or upbuilding, of all in the body.

[30]This is apparent even though Paul speaks (in v. 5) more specifically of the person who is the channel for the gift than the gift itself.

[31]NASB, KJV, and NIV have lower case "s." NASB and NIV give "by the Spirit" as possible renderings (see margins). Since Paul has earlier characterized tongues as a manifestation of Spirit (not spirit), I believe that the RSV reading (and NASB, NIV margins) of "Spirit" is preferable.

[32]The Greek word mysterion is "a hidden thing, secret, mystery...not obvious to the understanding" (Thayer), thus mysteries are "hidden things."

[33]"The one who speaks in tongues...utters secret truths in the Spirit which he alone shares with God, and which his fellow-man, even a Christian, does not understand" (musthrion, BAGD).

[34]It is important to add that mysteries uttered in tongues and made known by the Spirit through interpretation are not "new truths" beyond what are recorded in Scripture. They are rather in line with Paul's prayer that believers may have "all the riches of assured understanding and the knowledge of God's mystery, of Christ, in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge" (Col. 2:2-3 RSV). In that sense God's mystery is Christ, with all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge contained in Him. Hence, a mystery spoken in tongues, when interpreted, will in some sense be a declaration of those treasures both in themselves and in relation to His body.

[35]In EGT the following interesting comment is to be found: "The power to interpret superadded to the glossolalia...puts the mystic speaker on a level with the prophet: first 'uttering mysteries' (2) and then making them plain to his hearers, he accomplishes in two acts what the prophet does in one" (2:903). Note especially "...on a level with the prophet."

[36]What is revealed in the interpretation of a mystery may not be the same as what is contained in a message that upbuilds, exhorts, and consoles. The two may overlap, even at times prove identical, but there is not necessarily an equivalence. Tongues plus interpretation may equal prophecy (as is often said), but equality is not equivalency. They are equal in value to the community when properly exercised.

[37]We may recall that in the first occurrence of glossolalia on the Day of Pentecost, those assembled "began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance" (Acts 2:4).

[38]This immediately precedes the words: "greater is the one who prophesies than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets."

[39]E.g., such is of no more value than a bugle that gives an indistinct sound, and thus prepares no one for battle; also it is but a "speaking into the air" (v. 9).

[40]Verse 6 is sometimes read as a devaluation: "But now, brethren, if I come to you speaking in tongues what shall I profit you, unless I speak to you either by way of revelation or of knowledge or of prophecy or of teaching?" A first impression could be that tongues are of no profit to the body of believers: there is profit only if one speaks rather by revelation, knowledge, prophecy or teaching. However, such a reading of Paul's words seems unwarranted, first of all, by the fact that they follow immediately from his statement about the need for interpretation "so that the church may receive edifying." Hence what Paul is emphasizing is that speaking in tongues alone (i.e., without interpretation following) is of no profit.

It has been proposed by some that Paul's words, "if I come to you speaking in tongues what shall I profit you, unless I speak to you either by way of revelation...knowledge... prophecy...teaching," refer to the great value of tongues plus interpretation, namely, that through the interpretation revelation, knowledge, prophecy, or teaching will occur. If this is Paul's meaning, tongues (with interpretation) unquestionably transcends all other gifts (even revelation itself) as a channel of their functioning. (See Howard M. Ervin, These are Not Drunken, as Ye Suppose, pp. 163-65; Ray Hubbard, Gifts of Grace, pp. 92-94.) Although I like the strong emphasis on tongues in this view, it really says too much. For Paul is not speaking of tongues' interpretation as bringing revelation, knowledge, prophecy, teaching. This is especially clear in light of Paul's later statement, "When you assemble, each one has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation" (1 Cor. 14:26). In this verse "tongue" and "interpretation" are set alongside "revelation" and "teaching"; the latter do not come by way of interpretation of the former. Thus for all the importance of tongues, it is an overstatement to view their interpretation as bringing about revelation, teaching, etc.

[41]As reference back to verse 13 makes clear.

[42]This emphasizes all the more that Paul did not mean earlier (recall v. 6) that there is no profit in tongues unless one also speaks by way of revelation, prophecy, etc.

[43]NEB, rather than rendering 1 Corinthians 14:14a as "if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays" (as NASB and many others similarly), translates the latter phrase as "the Spirit in me prays." The NEB correctly catches the deeper meaning.

[44]The Greek phrase is odais pneumatikais; "pneumatic odes," songs given by the Spirit.

[45]We may recall 1 Corinthians 14:4-"One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself."

[46]"But you, beloved, building yourself up on your most holy faith; praying in the Holy Spirit." The focus here is also on personal edification through tongues.

[47]Identical with Ephesians 5:19-"psalms and hymns and spiritual songs." An interesting comment on "spiritual songs" (in Col. 3:16) is made by a footnote in the Jerusalem Bible stating that they "could be charismatic improvisations suggested by the Spirit during liturgical assembly"(!). Accordingly, I would add, such "improvisations" are "singing in the Spirit."

[48]As observed earlier, "mysteries in the Spirit" are being uttered. See the next paragraph for the further significance of tongues.

[49]The Greek word is euloges. The better translation may be "praise" (as in NIV and NEB). In any event it is directed to God and contains the note of thanksgiving (as the continuation of the verse shows).

[50]The Greek word is idiotou-"unlearned" (KJV); "those who do not understand" (NIV); "outsider" (RSV); "him that is without gifts"(RSV mg.); "the plain man" (NEB). The idiotai seem to represent those who are not unbelievers but are "outsiders" to spiritual gifts ("unversed in spiritual gifts" NASB mg.). Incidental note: perhaps the idiotai are represented today by believers unfamiliar with and unversed in charismatic experience.

[51]The KJV is quoted here because most other translations produce a misimpression. "For you are giving thanks well enough" (NASB), "you may give thanks well enough" (RSV, similarly NIV), "your prayer of thanksgiving may be all that could be desired" (NEB)-all sound like a grudging admission of the value of this blessing of God in the Spirit. The KJV is on target, since the Greek text literally reads: "For you indeed give thanks well (sy men gar kalos eucharisteis)."

[52]One might wonder why Paul here singles out the "ungifted" as not being edified by uninterpreted tongues. Would that not be true of all believers present? The point, however, is that tongues described here are peculiarly expressions of blessing and thanksgiving to God. The "gifted" among believers would know what is going on, hence could very well say an "Amen" to such an uninterpreted expression; but the "ungifted," not comprehending, would be quite at a loss to do so.

[53]Sometimes the words of Paul, "I desire [or 'would rather'-RSV, NIV, NEB] speak five words with my mind," are understood to mean, "It is better to speak comprehensively." However, Paul never (here or elsewhere) deemphasizes the extraordinary value of glossalalic utterance.

[54]Undoubtedly the Corinthians were out of order in this regard. In the midst of the passage Paul writes: "since you are zealous of spirits (lit. 'pneumaton'), seek to abound for the edification of the church" (v. 12). The Corinthians being "zealous (or zealots-zelotai) of spirits" signifies zealous for spiritual realities in general (not simply spiritual gifts-which are pneumatika [see earlier note] and for which Paul urges them to be zealous). Being thus zealous, they should be all the more concerned to abound in what edifies the church. Interpretation of tongues (which Paul discusses immediately thereafter in verse 13) is urgent if this is to happen.

[55]The order in verses 1-2 is tongues, prophecy, knowledge, faith; in verse 8 it is prophecy, tongues, knowledge (incidentally, "knowledge" probably refers to word of knowledge" in 12:8; "faith" to the gift of faith in 12:9).

[56]The concern about unbelievers (apistoi) in the church assembly goes largely beyond Paul's earlier concern about the "ungifted" (idiotai). The question now is an additional one: not how do tongues and prophecy edify the believer, but what are their effects on the unbeliever? Tongues, Paul says, are a sign (of judgment) for the unbeliever, but not so for the believer; prophecy on the other hand can bring an unbeliever (also an "ungifted" person) into a profound experience: "But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or an ungifted man enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all; the secrets of his heart are disclosed; and so he will fall on his face and worship God, declaring that God is certainly among you" (vv. 24-25).

57The parity of tongues with interpretation and prophecy is further suggested by the fact that Paul directs that there be "two or at most three" speakers in tongues, "two or three" who prophesy. The high importance of both is also implied in that Paul does not speak of two or three with "word of wisdom," "word of knowledge," etc. This again suggests that Paul views tongues and prophecy as the "greater gifts."

[58]Similarly in KJV, RSV, NIV, NEB, and other translations.

[59]Also in KJV, RSV.

[60]E.g., Thayer-in references to pneumatikos-"one who is filled with and governed by the Spirit of God. " BAGD-in regard to pneumatikoi-"spirit-filled people."

[61]Attention may be called to Hermann Günkel's seminal work, The Influence of the Holy Spirit, in which he says forcefully: "In 1 Cor. 14:37; pneumatikos in contrast to prophetes...clearly denotes glossolalia" (p. 31). A. T. Robertson likewise views the pneumatikos as the speaker in tongues: "The prophet or the one with the gift of tongues" (Word Pictures in the New Testament, 4:185). (I owe this quotation to Howard M. Ervin's These Are Not Drunken, as Ye Suppose, 114).

[62]It is interesting to observe that Paul begins 1 Corinthians 12-14 thus: "Now concerning pneumatikon...." The word "gifts" is usually added; however, it could be "matters" or "things," or even "persons." I am inclined to the usual translation of "gifts"; however, there is undoubtedly some attractiveness in thinking that Paul at the outset is primarily concerned with those who speak in tongues. (For a helpful discussion of 1 Corinthians 12:1 see Ervin's These Are Not Drunken, chap. 14.)

[63]Rudolf Bultmann writes similarly: "Since Paul can say, 'If anyone thinks that he is a prophet or one Spirit-endowed...' he presupposes a usage of speech according to which the ecstatic [sic] speaker in tongues (in the context it can mean only him [italics: mine]) is the 'Spirit-endowed' par excellence" (Theology of the New Testament, tr. by Kendrick Grobel, 1:158).

[64]In regard to speaking in tongues from this perspective, a good rule of thumb would indeed be: "Seek not, forbid not."

[65]The Greek word is kolyete. The translation for kolyo often is "forbid." However, "restrain" or "check" is far more likely in this context. We may note the use of kolyo in 2 Peter 2:16, where only "restrained" or "checked" makes good sense: "a dumb donkey, speaking with the voice of a man, restrained (ekolysen) the madness of the prophet" (KJV translates ekolysen as "forbid," but such unfortunately only confuses the meaning; RSV and NIV, like NASB, translate as "restrained"). Incidentally, BAGD refers to 2 Peter 2:16, and the translation as "restrained," in the context of discussing 1 Corinthians 14:39 (see article on kwluw). In line with this (and the overall context), I repeat that "do not restrain speaking in tongues" is surely Paul's meaning. Weymouth's New Testament in Modern Speech is one of the few versions that translates in similar fashion thus: "Do not check speaking with tongues." Also see Moffatt's New Translation: "Do not put any check upon speaking in 'tongues.'"

[66]It is interesting to observe that Paul writes similarly about prophecy in 1 Thessalonians 5:20-"do not despise prophetic utterances." A restraint upon speaking in tongues and a despising of prophecy are both serious handicaps for the body of Christ. Incidentally, in words just preceding "do not despise prophetic utterance," Paul says: "Do not quench the Spirit" (v. 19). It is quite possible that this first exhortation concerns speaking in tongues (e.g., Günkel writes: "in 1 Thess. 5:19 pneuma is set next to propheteia as the capacity for speaking in tongues" [The Influence of the Spirit, p. 31]); if so there is a close parallel between 1 Corinthians 14:39-"desire earnestly to prophesy and do not restrain speaking in tongues"-and 1 Thessalonians 5:19-20-"Do not quench the Spirit; do not despise prophetic utterances."

[67]The Greek word is euschemonos-"decently" (KJV, RSV, NEB), "in a fitting way" (NIV). "Becomingly" is another good translation (cf. Rom. 13:13; 1 Thess. 4:12).

[68]The Greek word is diakrinetosan-judge" (KJV); "pass judgment" (NASB); "exercise judgment upon" (NEB). "Weigh" (RSV and NIV) avoids any negative impression that may be contained in the idea of judging or judgment. "Discern" is another helpful translation. Since prophecy is "in part," not everything said may be a word from the Lord; thus there is particular need for weighing, judging, discerning.

[69]It is probably not without significance that in the listing of the nine charismata of the Spirit in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10 that the sixth and seventh relate to prophecy and the "discernings (diakriseis-from the same root as diakrinetosan in 14:29) of spirits," the eighth and ninth to tongues and interpretation of tongues. Although "discernings" (weighing, judging) may refer to more than prophecy, it surely has a connection therewith. Thus prophecy needs discernment even as tongues need interpretation. In accordance with this is the climactic listing of the nine gifts in 12:8-10-and to the same matters Paul returns in 14:27-33.

[70]Or, as in the prior observation: "prophecy with discernment" and "tongues with interpretation." The shorthand for this is simply "prophecy and tongues."

[71]Bear in mind that prophecy is "in part," or partial; hence not everything said may come from the Holy Spirit (thus the need for discernment).

[72]"Word of wisdom" and "word of knowledge," on the other hand, are gifts in which the mind while anointed by the Holy Spirit is fully involved. In these two gifts, or manifestations of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit inspires the utterance of wisdom and knowledge which is given by the speaker. But no such "word of wisdom" or "knowledge" comes forth with the directness of a prophetic "Thus says the Lord."

[73]"Human language" includes a person's natural way of speaking, his own inflection and tone, even his peculiarities of speech. The Holy Spirit, while speaking directly, does not reduce the human instrument to a mere automaton.

[74]As with prophecy, since the interpretation comes through a human vessel, it may likewise be "in part." This could mean that because of human limitations only a part of the message is given, or that the interpretation of it contains elements which are not fully consonant with what is spoken in the tongue.

[75]The other spiritual charismata (after word of wisdom and word of knowledge and before prophecy and tongues), namely, faith, gifts of healing, and working of miracles are of course not in the realm of communication. They are supernatural powers but not supernatural utterances.

[76]It is significant to note that the same Greek word, apophthengomai, is used in Acts 2:4 and Acts 2:14 for communication regarding both tongues and prophecy. The word for "utterance" in 2:4 is "apopthengesthai"; likewise in the preface to the words concerning the outpouring of the Holy Spirit the text reads: "Peter...declared to them," the word for "declared" being apephthenxato. English translations do not carry the full force of apophthengomai, which contains the note of inspired speech. According to BAGD, in Greek literature, the word is used "of the speech of the wise man...but also of the oracle-giver, diviner, prophet, exorcist, and other 'inspired persons.'" Against that background the New Testament usage of the word signifies speech inspired by the Holy Spirit. In the one case it was speech in tongues, in the other it was speech in prophecy-both given directly from the Holy Spirit.

[77]Günkel writes in his The Influence of the Holy Spirit that in "the Pentecost narrative...the Spirit directly [italics mine] works only glossolalia and prophecy" (p. 16). This, I believe, is a correct statement.

[78]In regard to prophecy, the words of Peter (quoting Joel)-"your sons and your daughters shall prophesy..."-clearly point to such a possibility. Also there is continuing prophetic activity recorded in various places in Acts. There is, however, no reference as such to the continuation of tongues beyond the initial events (in Acts 2, 19; cf. Acts 10:46). In the latter case we need to turn to other portions of the New Testament-as we have previously done-which imply continuance. Mark 16:17-not previously mentioned-"they shall speak with new tongues"-underscores an ongoing reality.

[79]0f course, I do not mean by this that words spoken in prophecy and tongues stand above Scripture, for the Scriptures are normative, decisive, and unerring; whereas, as observed before, prophecy calls for discernment, and tongues need interpretation. Accordingly, in both prophecy and tongues the human element is present. Neither gift in its exercise can be normative, nor can it have the assurance of being free of all error. However, in spite of this, through prophecy and tongues the living God, whose written word is in Holy Scripture, speaks in and to His people today.

[80]As in Ephesians 4:11-two domata among five (or four-if "pastors" and "teachers" are the same office).

[81]As in Romans 12:8-two charismata among seven.

[82]Whether domata or charismata.

Chapter 13, Biblical Truth And Experience

A Reply to John F. MacArthur, Jr.

In his book Charismatic Chaos, John F. MacArthur, Jr. frequently stresses the priority of biblical truth over experience. For example, "Experience, however, is not the test of biblical truth; rather, biblical truth stands in final judgment on experience."[1] MacArthur writes these words in connection with his charge that charismatics give priority to experience over Scripture.

As one against whom MacArthur levels this charge,[2] I should like to make reply.[3] I have no disagreement with MacArthur about the priority of biblical truth or theology over experience,[4] but I am concerned primarily about the way MacArthur handles biblical truth in regard to the charismatic renewal. So I will speak to that matter first. Thereafter, I will briefly comment on MacArthur's relationship to experience.

I, Biblical Truth

MacArthur claims to stand forthrightly on biblical truth. It is "our responsibility to examine everything carefully in light of Scripture" (22), MacArthur declares. Let us examine how MacArthur operates with relevant scriptural truth. We will begin by turning first to chapter 7, "How Do Spiritual Gifts Operate?" and note several statements. I begin here because a primary concern of the charismatic renewal relates to spiritual gifts.

MacArthur writes in regard to 1 Corinthians 14:19 that "condemning the Corinthians' misuse of the gift of tongues, the apostle [Paul] argued that all ministry of spiritual gifts in the church should be aimed at people's minds [italics his]" (157). MacArthur thereupon quotes Paul's words, "In the church I desire to speak five words with my mind, that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (NASB)." I must reply to MacArthur that Paul's statement about people's minds relates only to his preference for prophecy over tongues in the church assembly. He by no means is declaring that all spiritual gifts should be "aimed at people's minds." Indeed, in the elaboration of 1 Corinthians 12-14, Paul deals with quite a number of spiritual gifts, including faith, healings, miracles, and tongues (12:8-10) that are not basically mental operations. However, in regard to tongues, MacArthur seeks to bring them under the mental umbrella by adding later that "the true gift of tongues was the ability to speak in a foreign language" (166).

MacArthur's statement is far wide of the mark, for, with the possible exception of Pentecost, there is no suggestion in the New Testament that tongues were foreign languages. For example, speaking in tongues by the Roman centurion and household (Acts 10:46) is set within the context of worship- -"speaking in tongues and extolling God" (RSV); moreover, what point would there have been in their speaking foreign languages? Further, Paul quite explicitly dissociates speaking in tongues from a mental activity (i.e., speaking in a foreign language) by saying, "If I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful" (1 Cor. 14:14 RSV). Then Paul adds, "What am I to do? I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also" (v. 15a RSV). Praying in a tongue, according to Paul, is not praying in a foreign language, a mental activity, but praying with the spirit wherein the mind is idle or unfruitful.

Further, in this chapter MacArthur contrasts "the true gift of tongues" with "ecstatic speech," adding that "nothing in the New Testament suggests that the gift of languages was ecstatic speech" (166). Ecstatic speech, according to MacArthur, borders on the demonic, for in the next sentence he states, "God would not give a gift that is the same as the one used by Satan to hold people in the grip of false religions." Thus, tongues are either foreign languages or demonically inspired[5] utterances. MacArthur fails to recognize a third possibility, namely, that true tongues are neither foreign languages nor demonically inspired speech but spiritual utterances. Or in Paul's words, they are praying "with the spirit."

We observe next that, in regard to the situation of the Corinthian church, MacArthur speaks of "spiritual confusion." His words: "The depth of the spiritual confusion in Corinth certainly revealed that many of the ecstatic and miraculous phenomena in their midst were not true spiritual gifts" (169). Hence, according to MacArthur, the ecstatic and miraculous mixed together in deep spiritual confusion was the problem Paul had to deal with. To reply: this was surely not the problem; it was rather the Corinthians' disorder in the expression of the gifts. Paul's final words in 1 Corinthians 12-14 are: "All things should be done decently and in order" (14:40 RSV).

MacArthur, however, goes back to Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 12:3-5- -"I want you to understand that no one speaking by the Spirit of God ever says 'Jesus be cursed!' and no one can say 'Jesus is Lord' but by the Holy Spirit" (RSV). Thereupon MacArthur adds: "In fact, it seems obvious that if people in the Corinthian assembly were calling Jesus accursed, the gifts they claimed to have received from the Holy Spirit were counterfeit" (169-70). Paul, however, makes no connection between such a cursing of Jesus (by whom Paul does not say) and any Corinthian activity in spiritual gifts. The Corinthians may have exaggerated the importance of certain gifts, they may have shown too little love in their expression, and there may have been disorderliness, but in no way does Paul suggest that some of the expressions were not from God. The gifts were all from the Holy Spirit who, says Paul, "apportions to each one individually as he wills" (1 Cor. 12:11 RSV).

MacArthur, viewing the Corinthian situation as one of "deep spiritual confusion," thereupon applies this to the charismatic movement by adding: "Who can deny that the charismatic movement as a whole is suffering from exactly the same spiritual problems that Paul found in the Corinthian church?" (170). Yes, there are many of the same spiritual problems[6] but not from saying "Jesus be cursed" with resulting counterfeit gifts. "Jesus is Lord" is the continuing affirmation, and the gifts basically are from the Holy Spirit.

Is there then a valid operation of the spiritual gifts? MacArthur affirms such in the last sentence of chapter 7: "The church can be built up only when the spiritual gifts are used properly, when Scripture is understood and taught accurately, and when believers are walking in the Spirit with self-control, committed to obeying the Word of God" (170). I can agree heartily with this statement; however, in regard to the spiritual gifts operating "properly," it turns out that MacArthur is actually referring only to certain ones.

In this regard let us move on to a statement of MacArthur's in chapter 9, "Does God Heal?" MacArthur speaks of several of the spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10 as "temporary sign gifts" (199; italics his). He adds: "These were specific enablements given to certain believers for the purpose of authenticating or confirming God's Word when it was proclaimed in the early church before the Scriptures were written. The temporary sign gifts included prophecy (revelatory prophecy[7]), miracles, healings, tongues, and interpretation of tongues. The sign gifts had a unique purpose: to give the apostles credentials, that is, to let the people know that these men all spoke the truth of God. Once the Word of God was inscripturated, the sign gifts were no longer needed and they ceased" (199). So it turns out that the words "when the spiritual gifts are used properly" can only refer now to what MacArthur calls "permanent edifying gifts" (199; italics his). These include "knowledge, wisdom, prophecy (authoritative preaching), teaching, exhortation, faith (or prayer), discernment, showing mercy, giving, administration, and helps" (199). Thus regarding the nine spiritual gifts that Paul delineates in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10, only four in some sense continue to be available: word of wisdom, word of knowledge, faith, and discerning of spirits.[8] It follows, for example, in regard to healing, that "those who claim the gift of healing do not really have it" (203). According to MacArthur, God has withdrawn the gift long ago.

Before looking further into the reasons MacArthur gives for the cessation of many spiritual gifts, I can only first react in amazement. For Paul in no way suggests a division of the gifts between temporary and permanent, or that any of these would have no place in the future life of the church. The gifts are all mixed together, MacArthur's (not Paul's) "temporary" and "permanent"[9] in no particular order, and all are headed by Paul's statement, "To each is given..." (1 Cor. 12:7 RSV). Moreover, according to Paul, they are all apportionments of the Holy Spirit and all are needed for the proper functioning of the body of believers. In regard specifically to the gift of healing, how can MacArthur dare to say it cannot exist today when Paul states: "to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit" (1 Cor. 12:9 RSV)? This is just as much a continuing gift of the Holy Spirit as any "permanent" gift that Paul names. MacArthur surely does not have Paul on his side in declaring that the gift of healing has ceased.

The reasons MacArthur gives for the cessation of the "sign gifts" are equally questionable. On the one hand, as noted, MacArthur says that these gifts occurred to authenticate the proclamation of the gospel only as long as the Word of God was not inscripturated; on the other hand, that the gifts occurred only to certify genuine apostleship. Once there was no longer need for apostolic credentialing and the canon of Scripture was completed, the gifts would be withdrawn. However, the spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 12 are not apostolic credentials: they are manifestations of the Holy Spirit in the assembly among ordinary church members. Further, there is not the slightest hint that the "sign gifts" will cease with the completion of Scripture because they are no longer needed. On the latter point, what possibly can the finalizing of the canon have to do with the cessation of spiritual gifts? There is surely no mention in the New Testament itself- -the completed canon- -that some of the spiritual gifts have finally been withdrawn.

MacArthur's position is indeed a peculiar one. The Corinthians presumably could practice all the spiritual gifts because the apostles were still around and Scripture was not yet complete. However, once the apostles were gone from the scene and their teachings had been inscripturated, the Corinthians could no longer exercise such gifts as healings, miracles, and tongues. Did Paul himself even hint at this? Had he so notified the Corinthians? Does he suggest this in any of his letters? Such questions hardly need a serious answer.

What is most disturbing- -to repeat- -about MacArthur's position on the "sign gifts" is that by declaring their cessation he does not hesitate to rule out all subsequent expression of these gifts. We have already commented on MacArthur's statement that "those who claim the gift of healing do not really have it." MacArthur spends much effort to demonstrate empirically that all claims to the gift of healing today are fake claims, but such demonstration does not really matter because, according to MacArthur, in actuality the gift has long ago been removed by God Himself. So when MacArthur takes a jaundiced look at any and all contemporary expressions of healing, it really cannot be otherwise.

Now let us observe how similarly MacArthur speaks about miracles. In an earlier chapter (5), entitled, "Does God Do Miracles Today?" MacArthur declares, "I am convinced that the miracles, signs, and wonders being claimed today in the charismatic movement have nothing in common with apostolic miracles" (109). The reason MacArthur gives later: "Nothing in Scripture indicates that the miracles of the apostolic age were meant to be continuous in subsequent ages" (117). MacArthur has many disparaging remarks about the character of contemporary claims to "signs and wonders" (especially in chap. 6, "What is Behind the 'Third Wave'?"), and seeks to show their spuriousness. Indeed, from MacArthur's perspective, miracle claims, as with healing, must be spurious, not because of any sensational expression, but because miracles no longer can possibly take place! It is surely not without significance that MacArthur, herald of biblical truth over against experience, does not hesitate to use contemporary experience to fortify his negative viewpoint!

Looking further into MacArthur's chapter on miracles, we note that he recognizes miracles in the New Testament as also occurring through others closely associated with the apostles. He writes: "Miracles were unique to the apostles and those who worked most closely with them" (120-21). Still, MacArthur adds in the next sentence, "The average Christian had no ability to perform signs and wonders" (121). We must question, first, if others than the apostles could also work miracles, what happens to the view that miracles are uniquely apostolic credentials; second, if others who worked closely with them could work miracles, how can one rule out "the average Christian"? MacArthur identifies those who "worked most closely with him" as those "commissioned by him," and writes that "no miracles ever occurred in the entire New Testament record except in the presence of an apostle or one directly commissioned by an apostle" (121). Examples that MacArthur mentions are Stephen and Philip; however, MacArthur quickly adds, "the power never went any further" (121). I must rejoin: if such power never went any further, what does Paul mean in writing the Corinthians "to another [is given] the working of miracles" (1 Cor. 12:10 RSV)? Was such a person "commissioned" by Paul? Hardly. He would seem to fit far better into the category of "average Christian." But, according to MacArthur, as noted, such a person could not perform miracles!

Another attempt by MacArthur (in chap. 4) to assign such gifts as miracles, healings, and tongues to the apostolic circle is evidenced in the way he treats Mark 16:17-18: "These signs will accompany those who believe: in my name thy will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover." MacArthur, assuming that the verses are a reflection of an original inspired manuscript, states: "It is incorrect to assert that these signs should be the norm for all believers today" (102).

However, this clearly is MacArthur's judgment; but by no means does the text suggest inapplicability for believers at any time. MacArthur seeks to shore up his view by appealing, first, to history, namely, that believers in general have not demonstrated these signs, and second, that biblically, "these signs were true of one certain group- -the apostolic community" (102). To reply: if Mark 16:17-18 reflects a genuine word of Jesus, it would seem much better to take this as a possibility for all believers rather than boldly to contradict the text. Also, discounting Mark 16:17-18 because of a view derived from other texts that presumably only the apostolic community could do such signs hardly seems credible. The words of Mark 16:17-18- -"these signs will accompany those who believe" (RSV)- -unmistakably go far beyond "the apostolic community."

In his clear affirmation that certain gifts were limited to the apostolic circle, MacArthur frequently quotes 2 Corinthians 12:12 and Hebrews 2:3-4. Paul writes in the Corinthian passage, "The signs of a true apostle were performed among you in all patience, with signs and wonders and mighty works" (RSV). Such a statement, according to MacArthur, emphasizes that miracles were singular "proofs" of apostleship; accordingly, "If doing miracles had been the common experience of ordinary Christians, it would be foolish for Paul to try to prove his apostleship by citing the miracles he had done" (121). However, Paul's statement, I must reply, was not intended to position himself over against "ordinary Christians" but to emphasize that he was "not in the least inferior to the 'super-apostles'"[10] (2 Cor. 12:11 NIV). Hence, Paul is not saying that miracles were limited to apostles, but that "as a true apostle" he performed genuine miracles. Incidentally, if Paul were saying in 2 Corinthians 12, as MacArthur claims, that miracles were a kind of apostolic preserve, Paul is contradicting what he says in 1 Corinthians 12 about miracles being one of the gifts in the body that the Holy Spirit sovereignly apportions. Not only does Paul say to "ordinary [non-apostolic] Christians" "to another the working of miracles" (v. 10), but also later adds the category of miracles as separate from apostles: "God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles" (v. 28 RSV). In sum, 2 Corinthians 12:12 cannot consistently be used to rule out miracles from common Christian experience.

What about Hebrews 2:3-4? The author of Hebrews, speaking about "a great salvation," adds that "it was declared at first by the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard him, while God also bore witness by signs and wonders and various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed each according to his will" (RSV). Unquestionably, miracles are here attributed to "those who heard" the Lord, their witness being "attested" or "confirmed" by "signs...wonders...miracles...gifts of the Holy Spirit." The apostles may be identified as those about whom Hebrews speaks, for surely they "heard" the Lord and worked many miracles; however, that by no means limits miracles to the apostles. A statement of occurrence is not necessarily a statement of circumscription. In this connection I would call attention to a question of Paul to the Galatians: "Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you do so by works of law, or by hearing with faith?" (3:5 RSV). Here is a somewhat similar statement to Hebrews regarding miracles and the Holy Spirit, but without any suggestion in Galatians that the apostles (or an apostle) were those who worked the miracles. The miracles, in Paul's words- -and with no reference to himself- -simply occurred "among" the Galatians. The Galatian situation seems not too different from the Corinthian where "ordinary Christians"- -as we have seen- -surely worked miracles. MacArthur, incidentally, while frequently citing Hebrews 2:3-4 never mentions Galatians 3:5. This, as is frequently the case, is an unbalanced use of God's written Word.

I would also call attention to the prayer of the company of believers in Acts 4:23-31. Peter and John had wrought a miracle of healing on a lame man and were later threatened and imprisoned. Then verse 23 begins: "On their release, Peter and John went back to their own people and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said to them. When they [the 'people'] heard this, they raised their voices together in prayer to God" (NIV). The prayer of the people, the gathered believers, concludes: "Now, Lord, consider their threats and enable your servants to speak your word with great boldness. Stretch out your hand to heal and perform miraculous signs and wonders through the name of your holy servant Jesus" (NIV). The apostles Peter and John were there- -and presumably the other ten apostles- -but the prayer was obviously that of the larger company of believers who prayed for boldness to witness and for miracles to be performed through them by Jesus. There is no suggestion in their prayer that miracles will be done thereafter only by the apostles in their midst. Earlier in Acts there is the statement that "many wonders and signs were done through the apostles" (2:43). However, some time later, as we have just noted, the larger company prayed that the Lord would accompany their witness by "miraculous signs and wonders." Would they have prayed thus, especially with the apostles present, if miracles were a sole apostolic prerogative? Further, who knows but that later miracles performed by non-apostles Stephen and Philip were an answer to the prayer of the company of believers rather than the result of apostolic commissioning? MacArthur again has drawn the net too tight in his elimination of "ordinary Christians" from miraculous activity.

Finally, in the matter of biblical truth I would like to return to MacArthur's view of speaking in tongues, especially chapter 10, "Is the Gift of Tongues for Today?" I will also make some reference to chapter 8, "What was Happening in the Early Church?".

MacArthur states: "Tongues are mentioned in three books of the Bible: Mark (16:17); Acts (2, 10, 19); and 1 Corinthians (12-14)" (224). However, says MacArthur, we may first eliminate Mark 16:17- -"Those who believe...will speak in new tongues," because "Mark 16:17 simply mentions tongues as an apostolic sign" (224). Really? Such biblical interpretation is far from the mark. The text has no reference whatever to apostles or apostolic signs: it refers totally to "those who believe." Thus all the more egregious is the statement, earlier quoted, in regard to Mark 16:17 by MacArthur: "It is incorrect to assert that these signs [including tongues] should be the norm for all believers." This obviously is MacArthur's opinion, but it is not what Mark 16:17 says. It would be far more profitable and edifying if MacArthur, rather than distorting the text, might question what are "new tongues," and, for example, how do they relate to tongues spoken in the Acts accounts and in 1 Corinthians? On the Day of Pentecost people spoke in "other tongues" (Acts 2:4). Were these "new tongues"- -or what? How do "new tongues" relate to "strange tongues" in 1 Corinthians 14:21? MacArthur's determination to remove "tongues" from the Christian community at large seems so strong that he fails to pursue many challenging possibilities.

In regard to Acts 2, 10, and 19 MacArthur seeks to dismiss these references by saying that since Acts is "primarily historical narrative...the extraordinary, miraculous events [including tongues] it recounts do not represent a normative pattern for the entire church age" (224). Despite the questionableness of a view that historical narrative provides no pattern for the ensuing church age, I will simply comment that MacArthur views all tongues in Acts as human languages, and allows that view to control his interpretation of tongues in 1 Corinthian 12-14. For example, MacArthur comments: "Nowhere does the Bible teach that the gift of tongues is anything other than human languages" (226). Actually, as we have seen, 1 Corinthians 12-14 by no means corroborates this view.

Let us move on again to the Corinthian chapters. I have already made several comments, especially in reference to chapter 12, so will now note two other of MacArthur's interpretations.

First, there is MacArthur's view of 1 Corinthians 13:8: "Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away" (NASB). MacArthur claims that prophecy and knowledge will be done away "when the perfect comes" (v. 10), the perfect being viewed as the eternal state- -"face to face" (v. 12). However, tongues, without regard to the final perfection, will simply cease: "the gift of tongues will 'stop itself'" (231 n.20). MacArthur adds: "When is not stipulated, but they won't be around when the perfect thing arrives. History suggests that tongues ceased shortly after Paul wrote this epistle" (ibid.) To put it bluntly, MacArthur is skewing this passage badly. For one thing, Paul never intended to separate a period of future prophecy and knowledge from that of tongues. They will all end when the perfect comes. "Done away" and "cease" are simply stylistic variants,[11] not references to different time schedules. For another, since MacArthur views prophecy and knowledge as continuing to the consummation, he is constrained to posit them both as "permanent gifts." Prophecy, accordingly, says MacArthur, in this context is not a miraculous gift but "the ability to proclaim truth powerfully" (ibid.). Such a view of prophecy is altogether foreign to the biblical meaning, and totally rationalizes what Paul is saying. Still again, MacArthur finally does not rely on the biblical data but on presumed historical evidence that tongues ceased shortly after Paul's letter. Such a statement is quite controversial[12]; moreover, it shows an attitude that is too dogmatic regarding history. MacArthur so much as says: If the Bible is not convincing that tongues will shortly stop, history is! This is not a very scholarly way of dealing with an issue of much importance.

Second, I must comment on MacArthur's interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14:2 and 4. 1 Corinthians 14:2 reads: "One who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit" (RSV). MacArthur quotes these words of Paul and then adds, "he was using irony, pointing out the futility of speaking in tongues without an interpreter, because only God would know if anything was said" (228). Using irony? How possibly can one see irony in Paul's words which are a simple and profound statement that tongues are addressed to God, not to men, and that mysteries, hidden things, are being spoken? To be sure, interpretation is needed, as Paul later says, for other believers to be edified (v. 5), but that does not in any way discount the fact that tongues are essentially addressed to God.[13] MacArthur is way off target. But worse is yet to come: MacArthur adds in a footnote,[14] "Because of the absence of any definite article in the Greek text, it is also possible to translate this verse as, 'One who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to a god' [italics his]- -referring to a pagan deity" (228 n.17). To a pagan deity? I can reply only that MacArthur's words are not only exegetically quite questionable[15] but very close to being blasphemous. "Mysteries in the Spirit" to a pagan deity? It is not hard to see why MacArthur continues in the footnote with the reminder: "Either way ["to God" or "to a god"], 1 Corinthians 14:2 is condemnation, not commendation." Again this is exegetically indefensible: there is no genuine option, nor is Paul by any means condemning such speaking in tongues.

Next we note Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 14:4- -"He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church" (RSV). MacArthur writes, "Paul was not commending the use of tongues for self-edification, but condemning people who were using the gift in violation of its purpose and in disregard of the principle of love" (228). To reply: while it is true that the Corinthians lacked much in terms of love (note 1 Corinthians 13) and may have been valuing tongues more highly than prophecy, this does not mean that Paul was negating or condemning the value of tongues for self-edification. MacArthur's further statement about one who speaks in tongues that "the chief value he gets out of it is the building of his own ego" (229) is, to say the least, deplorable. MacArthur's biases[16] are so strong that he cannot envision the possibility of language as prayer to God in which there is at the same time genuine spiritual edification.[17] Why must one think of self-edification as selfish ego-building? To leave Paul for a moment- -Jude writes: "You, beloved, build yourselves up on your most holy faith; pray in the Holy Spirit"[18] (v. 20 RSV). This indeed is an injunction to self-edification, and has nothing to do with "building" one's "own ego." Not dissimilarly Paul was commending the use of tongues for self-edification, for being built up in faith.

However, tongues as such do not immediately edify the church whereas prophecy does- -"but he who prophesies edifies the church." So Paul adds: "Now I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy" (v. 5a RSV). Furthermore, when tongues are interpreted they are equal in value to prophecy: "He who prophesies is greater than he who speaks in tongues, unless some one interprets, so that the church may be edified" (v. 5b RSV). It is obvious that Paul is not disparaging tongues but is desirous that they be used through interpretation to edify the body of believers.

But let us go back to the value of tongues. MacArthur sees them at best in terms of egocentric activity, at worst as possibly diabolical (addressed to "a god"). He would therefore surely warn against any practice of tongues. Thus he is light years away from Paul who declared, "I want you all to speak in tongues." MacArthur can only urge people to stay away from all such practice, and thus falls victim to Paul's later words, "So, my brethren, earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues" (v. 39). MacArthur may not directly forbid, but his attitude is so negative that this conclusion follows practically.

MacArthur finally seeks to fortify his negativity by saying quite bluntly: "The tongues being spoken today are not biblical. Those who speak in tongues are not practicing the gift described in Scripture" (244). This is a confusing statement. Since, as we earlier observed, MacArthur views tongues in the Bible as foreign languages- -"the true gift of tongues was the ability to speak in a foreign language,"[19] and since his view, as noted, is highly questionable, MacArthur has really no adequate way of coping with the contemporary phenomenon. MacArthur's additional view, as noted, is that false tongues in the Bible were "ecstatic speech." Since today foreign languages cannot be proved as occurring, all that can remain is ecstatic and irrational utterance.[20] It is quite unfortunate, but by a basic misunderstanding of the nature of biblical tongues as spiritual utterance (praying with the spirit, uttering mysteries in the spirit, the extolling of God in transcendent speech, and so on), MacArthur is incapable of rendering adequate judgment on the contemporary scene.

To sum up this section: it is apparent that MacArthur's professed allegiance to biblical truth is quite problematic. His claim to stand fully on the Bible in regard to charismatic matters cannot be substantiated. MacArthur correctly states that biblical truth stands in final judgment on all experience; however, his views of that truth are so confused that his judgments far miss the mark. There is evidently an anti-charismatic bias operating that colors and slants all of his writing about charismatic matters.

II, Experience

Now we turn to the matter of experience. MacArthur, in chapter 1, "Is Experience a Valid Test of Faith?," speaks affirmatively of experience by declaring personally, "Many of my own spiritual experiences have been profound, overwhelming, life-changing events" (24). Then he adds, "Spiritual experience by definition is an internal awareness that involves strong emotion in response to the truth of God's Word, amplified by the Holy Spirit and applied by him to us personally." How does this differ from what charismatics say?

MacArthur proceeds: "Charismatics err because they tend to build their teachings on experience, rather than understanding that authentic experience happens in response [italics his] to truth." Thus, according to MacArthur, both non-charismatics and charismatics affirm experience, but the latter fail to do so in response to biblical truth. Before commenting on charismatics and experience, I must immediately comment that if "authentic experience happens in response to the truth of God's Word," and there is some misapprehension of that truth, then the ensuing experience may very well be partial or lacking. Since, as we have seen, MacArthur is seriously off base in much of the scriptural data relating to things charismatic, his experience can hardly be adequate. By failure to interpret certain Scriptures accurately, his resulting experience unfortunately can only be short-circuited. So while he pillories charismatics for claims to certain experiences, MacArthur boxes himself off from sharing in them.

The most obvious example of this is speaking in tongues. MacArthur, by holding that genuine speaking in tongues was originally speaking in foreign languages (a misapprehension) and that the gift of tongues has necessarily ceased (a serious error), virtually closes the door to any recognition of tongues as valid today or for the church or for his own personal spiritual life!

Charismatics generally have no problem here: they read about tongues in the Bible, hear the words, "They will speak in new tongues," note in Acts that many people spoke in tongues, and hear Paul's words "to another tongues" and "I want you all to speak in tongues." Thus when people speak in tongues, is this a matter of putting experience first or acting on biblical truth? Charismatics do not spend their time evacuating the plain teaching of Scripture by intellectualizing tongues, or claiming such as only an apostolic prerogative, or seeking to discover a scriptural cut-off time. Charismatics are humbly grateful that this biblical truth has come alive in their experience. Whose experience then is authentic?

MacArthur seems determined to disavow all such spiritual gifts as tongues, healings, and miracles. There are, to be sure, charismatics that exaggerate in all these areas, but at least they are open because of the biblical record. Thus they are able to experience those things that MacArthur strongly resists. Charismatics do not therefore begin with experience; rather, their experience is the outworking of scriptural truth. Experience is not (here I agree with MacArthur) a valid test of truth; but it surely does serve to confirm the teachings of the Bible.

Furthermore, in regard to MacArthur, it follows that by his denial of the continuing validity of many of the spiritual gifts, he effectively shuts himself off from any real apprehension of them. Experience of the biblical gifts, while not primary (the Scriptures must remain first), opens up deeper understanding. MacArthur unfortunately does not have this, so that his discussion about the spiritual gifts not only lacks biblical validity, but also lacks genuine vitality. Vital understanding of such biblical realities, for example, as justification and regeneration, calls for participation and experience. So it is with spiritual gifts.

In his Introduction MacArthur quotes my words: "Against the background of sharing in the Holy Spirit and the consequent gifts of the Holy Spirit, information, instruction, and teaching concerning them becomes relevant. A fundamental thesis may here be set forth: Any vital information concerning the gifts of the Spirit, the pneumatic charismata, presupposes a participation in them. Without such a participation, whatever is said about the gifts may only result in confusion and error"[21] (19). This is the quotation to which I earlier referred[22] that was followed by MacArthur's words, "Experience, however, is not the test of biblical truth, rather, biblical truth stands in final judgment on experience."

MacArthur misunderstands my words. I was not saying that experience is the test of biblical truth; rather, that participation makes for vital understanding. Without such participation- -as is true for all the realities of the Christian faith- -there may be some intellectual apprehension but little more. Especially if there is negativity about the possibility of the biblical realities happening, in this case the spiritual gifts, there can be even more serious misunderstanding. I do not hesitate to say it again: there may be only "confusion and error."

Let me illustrate this further by once more referring to speaking in tongues. The reality of tongues is unquestionably in the New Testament. Unless, however, one has spoken in tongues, it is not possible to grasp the full meaning. Until one can share with Paul his experience of praying "with the spirit" (as well as with the mind), there may be not only confusion but also opposition. In MacArthur's case there is obviously a lack of sensitivity in regard to those who speak in tongues. He can shed little light because he stands in the dark. Paul could write the Corinthians about the purpose of tongues as one who himself shared the experience; MacArthur, struggling to distance himself, consequently has little to say that is vital or helpful.

This brings me to the point of emphasizing the damaging effect of lack of experience. MacArthur faults charismatics for their presumed primary stress on experience- -and doubtless some charismatics may lay too much emphasis here. However, even more critical can be lack of experience wherein there is little or no confirmation of the biblical witness. Thus there is no empathy for the original scriptural texts. It is as if MacArthur is on a different wave length, so that nothing comes through clearly. There is a kind of bewilderment- -for MacArthur professes to see many good things about the charismatic movement[23]- -but because of lack of experience cannot really understand what it is all about.

Far worse than charismatic chaos is non-charismatic negativity. In the charismatic movement prophecy may be over done, healings over claimed, miracles over stressed, tongues over employed, but far worse is the negativity that makes no room for these spiritual realities to occur. Moreover, if these are indeed gifts of the Holy Spirit, and they are happening today, is there not the very serious danger of opposition to them being opposition to the Holy Spirit Himself?

Finally, in a brotherly fashion, I would encourage John MacArthur to reinvestigate his theological and biblical moorings; and to be open to fresh activities of the Holy Spirit in his life and ministry. May it so be.

Appendix:

I would like to speak to three charges MacArthur levels against me in reference to quotations from my early book, The Era of the Spirit.[24]

1. Theology should be adapted to experience

"J. Rodman Williams argues that we should adapt our theology to experience, rather than insisting that experience be evaluated by theology" (45). Then MacArthur quotes my words, "What I have been attempting to stress is that the theological implications of this dynamic movement of the Spirit are of no little significance. At the critical center there is the knowledge that something has happened!" MacArthur interrupts my words at that point; in the original they continue (without an exclamation point) "for which one has difficulty finding adequate theological language or ways of relating it to various doctrines of the Christian faith." By breaking my statement with "something has happened," MacArthur can add, "That is the key- -something has happened. Never mind if it fits 'airy-fairy' doctrine or theology" (45-46).[25] Thus MacArthur tries to include me in a statement made a few sentences earlier, "The experiential wave rolls on, and doctrine and theology are being washed out the door" (45). To identify my position as not caring about doctrine and theology is grossly unjust.[26] But what I am saying is that the "dynamic movement of the Spirit" (an objective, biblical, and primarily nonexperiential reality) is difficult to express in adequate theological language. A parallel would be the difficulty the early church had in finding adequate theological language to express, for example, the Incarnation or the Triune reality of God. Today the same thing, I believe, is happening in the area of the Holy Spirit (an area for which the church has never found adequate theological expression), so that we are called upon particularly in our time to serious theological work.

Thus MacArthur completely misunderstands and misrepresents me: my concern is anything but the washing away of theology or doctrine. Indeed three pages earlier in Era of the Spirit (p. 52) I say, "Let us push on theologically"- -and the basic thrust of the whole book is theological against the background of the movement of God's Holy Spirit. Thus I am not suggesting that we should "adapt our theology to experience" but to the biblically grounded activity of God in the Holy Spirit.

2. Christians can add to the Bible

"Williams is declaring that Christians can add to the Bible- -and that they can accept others' additions to Scripture as normal and conventional" (51). MacArthur's charge against me is against the background of a fairly lengthy quotation of mine which begins: "The Bible truly has become a fellow witness to God's present activity." Then I comment about Christians who may speak a "'Thus says the Lord'...even going beyond the words of the Bible," and I add the words: "The Spirit as the living God moves through and beyond the records of past witness, however valuable such records are as a model for what happens today" (50). In no way do I declare that "Christians can add to the Bible," or that they can make "additions to Scripture." All I am saying is that God as the living God who spoke in the Bible still speaks- -He is not silent. What He said there is the "model" (= pattern, norm) for speaking today. Hence any "Thus says the Lord"- -whatever the wording- -must be wholly consonant with Scripture to be truly a word from God.

3. Charismatic prophecy is divine revelation equal to Scripture

After another lengthy quotation of mine about prophecy, MacArthur concludes: "That is tantamount to saying that current instances of charismatic prophecy are divine revelation equal to Scripture" (55). In the quotation I speak of how prophecy is recurring today: "In prophecy God speaks....Most of us of course were familiar with prophetic utterance as recorded in the Bible....Many of us also had convinced ourselves that prophecy ended with the New Testament (despite all the New Testament evidence to the contrary), until suddenly through the dynamic thrust of the Holy Spirit prophecy comes alive again. Now we wonder how we could have misread the New Testament for so long!" In no way do I say in these words that charismatic prophecy is "divine revelation equal to Scripture." All legitimate prophecy must stand under the norm of Scripture. I am grateful that MacArthur added my words from another source: "I vigorously affirm the decisive authority of Scripture; hence, God does not speak just as authoritatively today as He spoke to the biblical authors. But He does continue to speak (He did not stop with the close of the New Testament canon)."[27] Nevertheless MacArthur adds, "The distinction between biblical authority and additional revelation seems to be artificial. How could some of God's words be less authoritative than others?" (56). Note again: I said nothing about "additional revelation." Prophecy beyond Scripture is not additional revelation; nor does it carry the authority of Scripture. Surely God speaks today, for example, often through preaching and teaching, but His words therein spoken are less authoritative than those in the Bible. Prophecy does have a directness about it; it is a gift of the Holy Spirit. But it must always stand under God's inscripturated Word.

Footnotes

[1]Charismatic Chaos, 19.

[2]MacArthur's words immediately follow a quotation by him from my book Renewal Theology, vol. 2, Salvation, the Holy Spirit, and Christian Living, 326.

[3]Shortly after MacArthur's previous book The Charismatics: A Doctrinal Perspective appeared, I wrote a paper privately circulated entitled A Reply to The Charismatics: A Doctrinal Perspective (1979). Since MacArthur's recent book is largely a revision of the first, I will seek in this article to provide an updated and more public reply.

[4]Despite MacArthur's statement: "J. Rodman Williams argues that we should adapt our theology to experience, rather than insisting that experience be evaluated by theology" (Charismatic Chaos, 45). I will return to this later (see Appendix).

[5]We shall note hereafter that MacArthur does not view all tongues today as demonically inspired: they may also be learned behavior or psychologically induced utterance.

[6]I would not deny that the counterfeit may occur (there is always the possibility of alien voices in a church assembly), but that was not Paul's real concern. MacArthur seems intent on making the counterfeit, even the demonic, the basic issue.

[7]These are MacArthur's words. He makes a distinction between prophecy as "revelatory prophecy" and prophecy as "authoritative preaching" (199). The latter, MacArthur claims, is a continuing gift. Such a view is patently unbiblical. Prophecy cannot at any time be subsumed under the category of "authoritative preaching." There is no biblical basis for such.

[8]I say "in some sense" because MacArthur has modified even these four: knowledge for word of knowledge, wisdom for word of wisdom, prayer (possibly) for faith, discernment for discerning of spirits.

[9]A student in one of my classes after reading Charismatic Chaos and MacArthur's division of the spiritual gifts into temporary and permanent, asked in a written critique: "Is MacArthur perhaps receiving extrabiblical revelation?" Maybe MacArthur would like to reply!

[10]According to BAGD, "the super-apostles...[were] either the original apostles...or, perhaps with more probability, the opponents of Paul in Ephesus" (see 'uperlion). If the latter is the case, Paul's concern is all the more clearly not to establish his credentials over against "ordinary Christians" but in relation to "self-inflated super-apostles" (Philip E. Hughes' characterization in his commentary, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, NICNT, 455).

[11]Gordon Fee writes: "Some have argued that the change of verbs (including the change of voice) with tongues...has independent significance, as though this meant that tongues might cease before prophecy and knowledge. But that misses Paul's concern rather widely. The change of verbs is purely rhetorical" (First Epistle to the Corinthians, NITNC, 643-44 n.17). D. A. Carson similarly speaks of "stylistic variation" (Showing the Spirit: A Theological Exposition of 1 Corinthians 12-14, 66).

[12]For a more balanced viewpoint see Grant Osborne's article, "Tongues, Speaking in," Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 1100-03.

[13]Recall, again, Acts 10:46-"speaking in tongues and extolling God." Also, on the Day of Pentecost speaking "in other tongues" was declaring "the mighty works of God" (Acts 2:11). Only thereafter did Peter address the crowd, "Men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem..." (v. 14).

[14]The footnote, with minor verbal differences, is a part of the main text in MacArthur's earlier book, The Charismatics: A Doctrinal Perspective (see p. 161). One should be grateful, I suppose, that the statement above has been lowered to a footnote. However, either way it is a most unfortunate misinterpretation.

[15]E.g., Paul begins his letter to the Corinthians, "Paul, called to be an apostle by the will of God." Since "God" is likewise without a definite article there, theoretically one could also translate by "the will of a god." But who (not even MacArthur) would entertain such an idea?

[16]Gordon Fee writes in this connection that MacArthur's "biases intrude on his interpretation" (First Epistle to the Corinthians, NICNT, 657 n.24).

[17]What Paul actually was condemning was not the value of tongues for self-edification but their community expression without interpretation following. See verses 13-16.

[18]Praying in the Holy Spirit probably was in tongues. Richard J. Bauckham, commenting on Jude 20, states that the language "indicates charismatic prayer in which the words are given by the Spirit" (2 Peter and Jude, WBC, 113). James D. G. Dunn writes similarly: "A reference to charismatic prayer, including glossolalic prayer, may...be presumed for Jude 20" (Jesus and the Spirit, 246). However, even if one were to argue against Jude 20 as referring to glossolalia, the point still remains: there is need for self-edification; it is not as such ego satisfaction.

[19]Can one possibly imagine Paul to mean: "I want you all to speak in a foreign language"?

[20]Either satanic or psychological in origin. Tongues may be "satanic or demonic" (239), "learned behavior" (240), or "psychologically induced" (242, emphases MacArthur's). I would not disagree that "false tongues" may be any, or all, of these. The problem is that MacArthur places all contemporary glossolalia under these categories. True tongues are none of these.

[21]From Renewal Theology, vol. 2, Salvation, the Holy Spirit, and Christian Living, 326 (emphasis in the original).

[22]In footnote 2.

[23]Perhaps more so in his earlier volume The Charismatics where he has a fine concluding chapter entitled, "What Can We Learn from the Charismatic Movement?" That chapter is omitted in Charismatic Chaos.

[24]Since 1971 I have written two further books on the Holy Spirit, The Pentecostal Reality and The Gift of the Holy Spirit Today. Also the major portion of Renewal Theology, vol. 2, Salvation, the Holy Spirit, and Christian Living, is directed to the Holy Spirit. I earlier commented in this article on MacArthur's quotation from Renewal Theology, vol. 2.

[25]MacArthur does proceed at this point with the rest of my statement above; however, by virtue of his words just quoted he severely distorts my viewpoint.

[26]In addition to Renewal Theology, vol. 2 (previously mentioned), I have also written Renewal Theology, vol. 1, God, the World, and Redemption and Renewal Theology, vol. 3, The Church, Kingdom, and Last Things . This hardly suggests on my part a lack of concern for theology.

[27]Quoted from Logos Journal, "Opinion" (May-June, 1977), 35.

Chapter 14, Theological Perspectives Of The

Pentecostal/Charismatic Movement

Introduction: Nomenclature

I am using the two terms "Pentecostal" and "charismatic" interchangeably. "Pentecostal," however, is often applied to the movement in the first half of the twentieth century that resulted in the separate formation of Pentecostal churches. "Charismatic" (at first called "Neo-Pentecostal") is the name often given to those of Pentecostal persuasion in the second half of the twentieth century who remained in their own churches. Both groups share basically the same perspectives.

There are, however, two aspects: Pentecost as continuing event and the validity of the gifts (charismatic) of the Holy Spirit for today. I will focus in this address on the former[1] by setting forth ten biblical propositions with appended theological comment.

1. The event of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost originated from a mighty act of God: it is God Himself who sent forth the Holy Spirit.

Acts 2:16-17- -"This is what was spoken of through the prophet Joel...that I will pour forth of My Spirit upon all mankind"[2] (cf. Joel 2:28). Jesus had earlier spoken of "the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name" (John 14:26).

Comment: One may speak of this sending as the third mighty act of God: the other two being the creation of the universe by God and the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. The third act, highlighting the Holy Spirit, was as distinctive as the other two. The church and theology have often failed to give due recognition to this third mighty act of God.

2. The background of Pentecost was the promise of God the Father and the exaltation of Jesus Christ.

(1) The promise of the Father- - Luke 24:49- -"Behold, I am sending forth the promise of My Father upon you." Acts 1:4- - "He commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father" (KJV).

(2) The exaltation of Jesus Christ- -John 7:39- -"The Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified." Acts 2:33- -"Having been exalted to the right hand of God, and having received the promise of the Spirit, He has poured forth this."

Comment: There are many promises of God in the Bible; however, since "the promise of the Father" uniquely relates to the Holy Spirit, it should be taken with utmost seriousness. Does God ever renege on His promises? In regard to the exaltation of Christ, it is important to recognize that the sending forth or giving of the Holy Spirit occurred through the channel of the risen and exalted Savior, Jesus Christ (recall John 14:26). The Holy Spirit is a mediated Spirit. This is contrary to any view that the Spirit comes on His own.

3. The Holy Spirit was sent to those believing in Christ, to the community of faith.

The 120 at Pentecost were firm believers in Christ. According to Luke 24:53, just following the Ascension of Jesus, the disciples "were continually in the temple praising God," and prior to Pentecost the 120 often gathered together for prayer (see Acts 1:!4). Peter many years after Pentecost spoke of what happened to him and others as occurring "after believing in the Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts 11:17).[3]

Comment: The sending of the Spirit accordingly was not to unbelievers. It is a critical error to view Pentecost as an act of God's saving grace. Rather the Spirit came to those who believed in Christ.

4. The sending of the Holy Spirit is variously described: clothing, baptizing, coming upon, filling, outpouring.

(1) Clothing- -Luke 24:49- -"You are to stay in the city until you are clothed with power from on high." Cf. Judges 6:34- -"The Spirit of the Lord clothed Gideon with Himself" (Amp.).

(2) Baptizing- -Acts 1:5- -"You shall be baptized ['immersed'] in[4] the Holy Spirit not many days from now." Cf. Acts 11:16.

(3) Coming upon- -Acts 1:8- -"You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you." Cf. Jesus Himself- -"the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon Him" (Matt. 3:16; parallels in Mark 1:10, Luke 3:22, John 1:32-33).

(4) Filling- -Acts 2:4- -"They were all filled with the Holy Spirit." Cf. Jesus Himself as "full of the Holy Spirit" (Luke 4:1).

(5) Outpouring- -Acts 2:33- -"[He] has poured forth this which you both see and hear." Cf. Joel 2:38- -"I will pour out My Spirit on all mankind."

Comment: All of these terms express the many-sided aspects of the event of the Spirit's sending and coming. It was an invasion from without (the Spirit clothing people, coming upon, poured out upon, an immersion within (being baptized), a permeation throughout (being filled with). This does not deny the Spirit's being already active (see Acts 1:2) and indwelling (see John 20:22). However, this was an experience of the presence of God in almost overwhelming reality.

5. Speaking in other tongues was the immediate accompaniment of the Holy Spirit's coming.

Acts 2:4- -Those "filled with the Holy Spirit...began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance." Cf. Mark 16:17- -"These signs will accompany those who have believed...they will speak in new tongues."

Comment: Speaking in other (or new) tongues was spiritual utterance, the language of the Spirit through human voices. The content of the tongues was praise: "We [the audience] hear them [the Spirit-filled disciples] declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues" (Acts 2:11 NIV). This was praise that goes beyond normal utterance, transcendent joyous praise. Some in the audience mockingly said, "They are full of sweet wine" (v. 13), but it was the joyful exuberance of the Holy Spirit!

Speaking in tongues was not proclaiming the gospel: they were not "missionary tongues." Proclamation came later. The first thing the 120 did, after being filled with the Spirit, was to speak in other tongues.

6. The purpose of the sending of the Holy Spirit was power (dynamis) for ministry.

Acts 1:8- -"You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth." Cf. Luke 24:47-48- -"that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in His name to all the nations...You are witnesses of these things"- -words of Jesus that preceded His statement about need of "power from on high." Also cf. Luke 4:14-15-"Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit....and He began teaching." Acts 10:38- -"God anointed Him with the Holy Spirit and with power, and...He went about doing good, and healing all who were oppressed by the devil." Luke 24:19- -Jesus was "a prophet mighty in deed and word." So were Peter and the other disciples "mighty" after being filled with the Holy Spirit. See, for example Acts 2:14-40, a mighty message with some 3000 souls being saved (v. 41), and Acts 3:1-9, a mighty deed of healing for a man lame from birth.

Comment: the sending of the Spirit was not primarily for the benefit of those who received but for their benefit to others. The Spirit came at Pentecost for neither salvation nor sanctification but for ministry.

7. The context of the Spirit's coming was God's sovereign action and the disciples' earnest, expectant prayer.

Acts 2:1-2- -"And when the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. And suddenly there came from heaven...." God's action was primary- -and sudden- -to them who were gathered together.

Acts 1:14- -"These all with one mind were continually devoting themselves to prayer, along with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers."

Cf. Luke 3:21-22- -"While He was praying, heaven was opened, and the Holy Spirit descended upon Him."

Comment: God sent the Holy Spirit as He willed- -it was His sovereign action- -but not without regard to the prayerful attitude of those who were to receive. To those earnestly and expectantly praying, the Holy Spirit came with power.

8. The promise of the gift of the Holy Spirit is a continuing promise to those who believe.

Acts 2:38-39- -Peter's words: "Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and your children, and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God shall call to Himself."

Cf. John 7:38-39- -"Whoever believes in me...streams of living water will flow from within him. By this [John adds] he [Jesus] meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive" (NIV).

Comment: The word "promise" (recall Luke 24:49; Acts 1:4; 2:33) again refers to the Holy Spirit. But now the projection goes beyond the first disciples. The Holy Spirit in the future will be given to those who believe ( to those who repent and are forgiven). The word "gift" makes it clear that this coming of the Spirit will be of God's gracious doing. The gift here promised again is not salvation but presupposes such (those whom the Lord calls to Himself, i.e., calls to salvation). The promise extends to Jews and Gentiles alike of all ages and places. Thus the promise of the Holy Spirit to believers reaches far beyond the early Pentecost.

9. As the proclamation of the gospel extended beyond Jerusalem, believers variously received the gift of the Holy Spirit.

(1) Samaria- -"They believed Philip as he preached the good news...they were baptized, both men and women...The Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them....Then Peter and John [same day, later] placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit" (Acts 8:12, 16-17 NIV).

(2) Saul of Tarsus- -He acknowledged Jesus as "Lord" (Acts 9:1-3) and three days later (v. 9), after hands were laid on him by Ananias, Saul was "filled with the Holy Spirit" (v. 17).

(3) Caesarea- -Peter preached in Caesarea to the Roman centurion, Cornelius, his relations, and friends that "everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins," and at the same time "the Holy Spirit fell [or 'came' NIV] upon all those who were listening to the message...the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out upon the Gentiles also. For they [Peter and associates] were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God" (Acts 10:43-46).

(4) Ephesus- -Paul informed some dozen Ephesians of their need to "believe in Him [Christ]," and thereafter "when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking with tongues and prophesying" (Acts 19:4-6).

Comment: That these were all extensions of the Pentecostal event is apparent for several reasons:

(a) All who received the gift of the Holy Spirit were also believers. Some had been believers for many days (the disciples at the first Pentecost), some for a few days (the Samaritans and Saul of Tarsus), some only briefly (the Ephesians), some received immediately upon believing (the Caesareans).

(b) Much of the same Pentecostal language about the different events is employed: coming upon, filling, outpouring, and baptizing (see Acts 11:16 also in regard to baptizing).

(c) Speaking in tongues is explicitly said to have occurred not only at Pentecost but also in Caesarea and Ephesus. The Scripture may imply the same about the Samaritans[5] and Paul (Saul of Tarsus himself later claims to speak in tongues- -see 1 Cor. 14:18). Speaking in tongues each time was the primary activity upon receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit; it was also initial evidence that the Spirit had been poured out (recall Caesarea- -"For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God").

(d) All such comings of the Spirit occurred as at Pentecost in connection with the extension of the gospel from one place to another. In the case of Saul of Tarsus, the text makes clear that the "filling" was in connection with Jesus declaring, "He [Saul] is a chosen instrument of Mine, to bear My name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel" (Acts 9:15). Thus the Samaritans, Ephesians, and Samaritans were not only those who received the good news of salvation but also became empowered by the gift of the Spirit to bear powerful witness in word and in deed.

(e) The context, humanly speaking, of the various events was prayer.[6] Saul of Tarsus was praying- -"behold, he is praying" (Acts 9:11) when Ananias came; the Roman centurion "prayed to God continually" (10:2); and Peter and John "came down and prayed for them [the Samaritans], that they might receive the Holy Spirit" (8:15). Earnest prayer, as at Pentecost, helped to prepare the way for the coming of the Holy Spirit.

Laying on of hands for the reception of the Holy Spirit is a new feature after Pentecost. This occurred in regard to the Samaritans, Saul of Tarsus, and the Ephesians, but not the Caesareans. Laying on of hands symbolically represents the Spirit's coming down upon people; it also points to the value of ministry of believers to one another.

10. Pentecostals[7] today claim to stand in the succession of Pentecost.

They believe that the promise of the Spirit did not end with the book of Acts and that as believers they have received the gift of the Holy Spirit. They frequently claim that this has happened after earnest prayer and, in many cases, the laying on of hands. They freely use such terms as being baptized in the Holy Spirit, filled with the Holy Spirit, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, and refer to speaking in other tongues as an immediate accompaniment and as initial evidence. Pentecostals attest that the Spirit has given them both a richer sense of God's presence, a higher language of praise, and a greater power for ministering the gospel in word and deed.

Comment: I am fully convinced that Pentecostals have recovered a vital dimension of the New Testament. It is the coming of the Holy Spirit to those who believe in such richness and fullness as to release tongues of transcendent praise and to enable the gospel to go forth with supernatural power and effectiveness.

It is hard to overestimate the importance of the Pentecostal witness for both church and world. Pentecost is a continuing event!

Concluding Remarks:

The coming of the Spirit should not be confused with His activity in either regeneration (in which there is new birth by the Spirit) or sanctification (in which He is the sanctifying Spirit). Both of these refer to the large and vital area of salvation and Christian living (dealt with especially in the New Testament letters) in which the Holy Spirit is fully active. However, the critical point is that the coming of the Holy Spirit is for an entirely different purpose. It presupposes a vital (saving, sanctifying) faith enabled by the same Spirit who now comes in dynamic presence and power.

Further, this coming of the Spirit does not invariably follow upon faith. Paul asked the Ephesian twelve, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when[8] you believed?" (Acts 19:2). The question implies the possibility of believing without receiving. Thus while the promise of the Spirit always is present to those who believe, the reality may not yet have occurred. Hence it is highly important that Paul's question be raised again in our time. The evangelical question "Have you believed in Christ?" is and remains absolutely primary, for it deals with salvation. But now we must press on to the second question, not about believing in Christ but about receiving the Holy Spirit. For it is in the reception of the Holy Spirit that the door is opened to further vistas of God's presence and power.

Footnotes

[1]See my paper entitled "The Gifts of the Holy Spirit and Their Application to the Contemporary Church" for the latter.

[2]The New American Standard Bible (NASB) translation is used here and elsewhere unless otherwise stated.

[3]For other possible translations see Renewal Theology, vol. 2, p. 274 and n. 7.

[4]Rather than "with."

[5]Just following the Samaritans' reception of the Holy Spirit, the text reads, "Now when Simon [the magician] saw that the Spirit was bestowed through the laying on of the apostles' hands, he offered them money..." (Acts 8:18). Simon probably observed the newly Spirit-filled Samaritans speaking in tongues. See Renewal Theology, vol. 2, pp. 209-210, also n. 5.

[6]God's sovereignty was surely, as at Pentecost, also an important factor. For example, at Caesarea "while Peter was still speaking...the Holy Spirit fell" (Acts 10:44). God sovereignly broke into Peter's message!

[7]I mean by this term to include charismatics (see Introduction). I should add, however, that some charismatics focus almost entirely on the gifts (charismata) of the Holy Spirit.

[8]Or "since" (KJV), "after" (NIV note).

Chapter 15, The Gifts Of The Holy Spirit

And Their Application To The Contemporary Church

I. Introduction - Divine Gifts

There are various gifts that God makes available to the church. Let us note three basic categories.

A. Domata- -Ephesians 4:8, 11-12- -gifts of the ascended Christ for the equipping of the church- -ministries.

B. Charismata- -Romans 12:4-8- -functional gifts of God's grace- -also broadly stewardship gifts- -1 Peter 4:10-11.

C. Pneumatic (spiritual) charismata- -dynamic, manifestational gifts of the Holy Spirit- -1 Corinthians 12:1-11. They are listed as: word of wisdom, word of knowledge, faith, gifts of healing, miracles, prophecy, distinguishing of spirits, tongues, and interpretation of tongues (vv. 8-10).

Only the last category is designated as spiritual gifts- -"Now concerning spiritual gifts" (1 Cor. 12:1)- -although all are essential to the life of the church (also see 1 Cor. 12:27 for a mix of the various gifts [there labeled "appointments"]). The need is great for all the gifts in all categories to be operational.

The most New Testament information is to be found in regard to the pneumatic charismata. 1 Corinthians 12-14 are devoted to this subject. Despite the broad range of information, there are wide differences today of opinion, interpretation, and exercise. My concern corresponds to Paul's continuing words, "Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware"[1] (or, perhaps better, "uninformed" RSV). So let us seek to follow some of Paul's teaching in 1 Corinthians 12-14.

II. Context

A. The Fullness of Gifts- -1 Corinthians 1:4-7- -"In everything you were enriched in Him...so that you are not lacking in any [spiritual] gift." The Corinthians were exercising the spiritual gifts. Hence Paul's teaching is not addressed to inexperienced people! It was a church laden with spiritual gifts.

The Corinthians had the gifts of the Spirit in abundance- -the opposite of what is found in many of our churches today. For the church in Corinth- -as Paul's letter later shows- -it was a matter of propriety and order. Because of the abundance of gifts, they could hardly restrain themselves- -all wanting to prophesy, all speak in tongues (see chap. 14)- -so much so that there was confusion. Paul felt constrained to write that "God is not a God of confusion but of peace" (14:33), and his final words were: "But let all things be done properly and in an orderly manner" (v. 40).

B. The Outpouring of the Holy Spirit- -1 Corinthians 12:13- -"For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body...and we were all made to drink of one Spirit" (or "one Holy Spirit poured out for us all to drink" NEB). According to one early Christian writer, the Corinthians had experienced "a full outpouring of the Holy Spirit."[2]

This language suggests a Pentecostal outpouring. Here we recall the Pentecostal fulfillment of the prophet Joel's words, quoted by Peter, "I will pour forth My Spirit upon all mankind; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy" (Acts 2:17; cf. Joel 2:28); also Peter's words, "He [Christ] has poured forth this which you both see and hear" (Acts 2:33). As a result of this outpouring, there was prophesying, also tongues (Acts 2:4)- -both gifts of the Holy Spirit as described by Paul in 1 Corinthians 12-14.

Here we need to begin with basics: Has any given church, or Christian community, and individual members experienced this outpouring? If no outpouring, there can be little understanding or activity in regard to the gifts. If the outpouring has occurred and continues to occur, the gifts may be present in abundance.

C. Pentecostal Experience

All of this leads to a stress on the importance of the Pentecostal experience of the gift of the Holy Spirit. In his message on the Day of Pentecost Peter not only proclaimed the way of salvation, "Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins," but he also added: "And you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38). Then Peter extends the promise of this outpoured gift to future generations: "For the promise is for you and your children, and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God shall call to Himself" (v. 39). To all who are effectually called to God (hence, are saved), the promise of the gift of the Holy Spirit is extended.

In Acts the language often simply is that of receiving the Holy Spirit. See Acts 8:17- -"they [the Samaritans] were receiving the Holy Spirit"; 10:44- -"[they] [the Caesareans] received the Holy Spirit just a we did"; 19:12- -"Did you [Ephesians] receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" The question in 19:2 points to the importance of the matter- -and Paul later laid his hands upon the Ephesians for the reception to occur.

The Corinthians had received the gift of the Holy Spirit. This is stated indirectly in 2 Corinthians 11:4- -"If you receive a spirit different from the Spirit already given to you" (REB). Their reception of the gift of the Holy Spirit was context for the occurrence of spiritual gifts.

So again the Pentecostal experience- -however described- -is basic to the full operation of the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

III. Background

A. The Lordship of Christ

Behind the operation of the spiritual gifts is the Lordship of Jesus Christ. Although the charismata are pneumatic, hence operations of the Holy Spirit, they are all derived from Jesus the exalted Lord. It is through His Lordship, recognized and affirmed, that the gifts of the Holy Spirit become a reality.

Paul states, in 1 Corinthians 12, that the community moving in the Spirit is one that declares "Jesus is Lord" (v. 3). Those who affirm and continue to affirm His Lordship are those to whom the Holy Spirit distributes His gifts. The focus of the Spirit-filled community is not the Spirit but the exalted Lord. For it is Christ the Lord who acts in the Spirit to multiply these gifts. Through the pneumatic gifts He makes known depths of wisdom and knowledge, performs mighty deeds of healing and deliverance, indeed works miracles of many kinds.

To say "Jesus is Lord" is far more than a verbal declaration. It is to be uttered, Paul adds, "by [or 'in'] the Spirit" (12:3). In other words, it is a profound expression of worship and praise[3] that prepares the way for all the gifts to flow. Truly there is no place so full of anticipation and excitement as that in which the Lord Jesus is glorified.

The Lordship of Christ affirmed in the Spirit is the primary background for the operation of the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

B. The Triune God

This leads to the next important matter, namely, that of recognizing the activity of the Triune God. Paul writes: "There are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord. And there are varieties of effects ['workings' NIV], but the same God who works all things in all persons" (1 Cor. 12:4-6).

This means, first, that whatever the variety of gifts, ministries, and workings, it is the same Holy Spirit, the same Lord Jesus, the same God at work in each. There is diversity but at the same time unity. Separation, division, factionalism- -any playing off of one activity against another- -cannot be of God. Second, although there is no simple identification of gifts, ministries, and workings,[4] the Triune God is at work in and through all of them. There is no gift that is not a ministry, no ministry that is not an operation or working, and the same God- -Father, Son, and Holy Spirit- -is in them all. Third, this means that while the spiritual gifts are primarily expressions of the Holy Spirit, they have behind them the full weight of the Triune God.

Accordingly, a community moving in the gifts of the Holy Spirit is Trinitarian in its fundamental orientation and lifestyle. Just as the focus is not the Holy Spirit but Christ (as previously discussed), so the total operation is not that of the Holy Spirit but the Triune God. To be truly pneumatic is to be both Christocentric and Trinitarian.

C. The Manifestation of the Holy Spirit

The final and most immediate background for the spiritual gifts is "the manifestation of the Spirit" (1 Cor. 12:7). Through the pneumatic charismata the Holy Spirit shines forth and openly shows Himself. The Spirit who is invisible thereby manifest Himself visibly and audibly.

In his message on the Day of Pentecost, Peter declared about Jesus that "having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured forth this which you both see and hear" (Acts 2:33). What the crowd saw and heard was some 120 Spirit-filled people speaking in "other tongues." This, accordingly, was the manifestation, or showing forth, both visibly and audibly of the Holy Spirit.

However, all the spiritual charismata, not just glossolalia, are the Spirit's selfmanifestation. The nine gifts listed by Paul in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10 thus are exhibitions, the showing forth, of the Holy Spirit. To use an analogy, the gifts may be thought of as lights that turn on from a hidden electrical current. The current cannot be seen, but when the lights come on, they are vivid evidence and demonstration of its presence and power. So it is that in and through the spiritual gifts the invisible Holy Spirit shines forth.

Before proceeding farther, a clear distinction should be made between the gifts of the Spirit and the fruit of the Spirit. Paul elsewhere writes, "The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control" (Gal. 5:22-23). Hence there is both a ninefold manifestation (beginning with "word of wisdom" and "word of knowledge") and a ninefold fruit. Although they are the same in number, the gifts and the fruit are totally different in nature. The gifts of the Spirit are the immediate self-expression of the Spirit occurring through instruments open to His presence and power. Very young and immature believers may manifest these (as did the Corinthians), but with the fruit there must be a lengthy process of growth and maturation. Both gifts and fruit are valuable for very different reasons, but they are by no means the same. Gifts are dynamic manifestations, gifts of power; fruits are expressions of character. How much we need them both!

To conclude: in regard to the gifts as dynamic manifestation there must be the background of the gift of the Holy Spirit. By that gift there is entrance into the dynamic dimension; by the occurrence of the gifts there is dynamic manifestation. Hence, when we are dealing with spiritual gifts, their importance is neither little nor secondary. For through the gifts, the Holy Spirit is on the scene in dynamic selfexpression.

IV. Ministry

The gifts of the Holy Spirit are all ministry gifts. Paul writes next: "To each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good" (1 Cor. 12:7). Let us carefully examine Paul's statement.

A. The Common Good

The orientation of the gifts is the good of the community. Thus each of the spiritual gifts named, from word of wisdom to interpretation of tongues, is for the profit of all. Accordingly, when the Holy Spirit manifests Himself in a gift to an individual, it is not for the sake of the individual but for the good or profit of others. The gifts have a horizontal reference. The ministry may be to one person, to several, or to the whole body- -whatever the need may be.

The gifts of the Spirit are for the upbuilding of the community. Paul further on writes, "When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation" (1 Cor. 14:26). He adds immediately, "Let all things be done for edification." Whatever the manifestation of the Holy Spirit, its one purpose is the edification, the building up, of the body of believers. It is the purpose of the Lord that His people be strengthened as a community.

It is apparent that concern for the spiritual gifts is by no means a self-centered preoccupation. They are not for private benefit but wholly for the edification of others. Moreover, it is not a matter of upbuilding in the natural realm by human words and acts of kindness but "in the Spirit" by persons open to His ministrations.

B. Each Person

Each person has a distinctive role to fulfill. Not only are the spiritual gifts for the sake of the community, but also each member is a participant: "to each one...." The common good is the orientation of the community, and to that end each person is involved.

Note carefully: each and every person in the community is given a manifestation of the Spirit. It is not a matter of certain individuals, perhaps leaders or officeholders, who are so gifted. No one is left out. Even as the spiritual gifts are for the whole body, so everyone in the body is equally involved in the ministry of edification.

Accordingly, in a truly Spirit-gifted community people do not look to one person or a few to minister to the assembly. Rather they look to the Lord, expecting Him to minister by the Spirit through each one present. In this sense, pulpit and altar become secondary, for the spiritual ministry is not through preacher or priest, but through each and every individual. Every person in the assembly is to be actively involved, for the Holy Spirit wishes to manifest Himself not through a few but through all.

This total involvement is neglected in most church traditions. Especially is this true in liturgical churches where worship is largely ritualistic and the congregation is little more than spectators. However, even where the assembly is expected to join in prayers, singing, and responses, there is rarely the expectation that any individual, much less all, will be the channel for the manifestation of the Holy Spirit.

But, practically speaking, how can this happen? Many church gatherings are quite large, so that even if everyone wanted to participate, it could scarcely occur. Going back to Paul's instructions about "to each," I believe that he is viewing a gathering of believers of such size that this participation can more readily happen. A large assembly may surely be in order for a time of preaching, teaching, and public worship, but it is scarcely suitable for a full ministry in the spiritual gifts. Clearly, something like the "house church" is needed, not to replace the "temple church" but to supplement it. In such a smaller gathering there is better opportunity and often more freedom for the spiritual gifts to operate.

All of this calls for individual responsibility of a high order. For however true it is that the Holy Spirit gives to each and distributes as He wills (1 Cor. 12:11), it happens through individuals who, in turn, are responsible for the expression of the gift. This means, for one thing, to follow closely the leading and prompting of the Holy Spirit and whenever He imparts a gift not to hold back.

So it is that all members in the body function. Paul presses on with the analogy of the physical body by saying that "the body is not one member, but many" (1 Cor. 12:14). Even as the human body has many members- -hands, eyes, ears, nose, and so on- -and each is essential to full functioning, and none is to be neglected or despised, so must each person in the Christian body fulfill his or her own activity.

Incidentally, there are some today, outside the Spirit-filled community, who seek to divide the gifts into temporary and permanent. It is as if to say "hands, yes," "feet, no," "ears, yes," "eyes no," "word of wisdom, yes," "miracles, no," "faith, yes," "prophecy, no," and so on. It is hard to imagine a more devastating dismemberment of the body if or when such an attitude prevails.

But back to the main point: each person as a member of the body has a role to fulfill. Now we may know this theologically and historically, and still not take it to heart personally. You mean I have a gift, and it is up to me to exercise it? Yes, it is a fearful and wonderful responsibility. This leads to the next point.

C. Is Given

"To each one is given...."

Notice that Paul's words do not say "may be given." No, the words are "is given." It is not a matter of "maybe" the Holy Spirit will gift me, and if so, I will surely act. Paul's words are blunt and inescapable: no one is kept out and all have a role to play whatever the particular gift.

"Is given" also suggests the non-possessive character of the gift. One does not own a gift, rather it is freely given as an act of grace: they are grace- -gifts. Also they ordinarily are given at the occasion of assembling together. Thus the community and each individual becomes a place of lively expectation. What will be the gifts that the Holy Spirit will manifest as we come together?

Moreover, the gifts vary with individuals from time to time. "Is given" suggests that at a particular meeting a particular gift may be given. It may be a word of knowledge, the next time a prophecy, one time a gift of healing, the next time a distinguishing of spirits. There is nothing fixed or rigid about the spiritual gifts. This fact when realized can make of any assembly of Spirit-filled believers a place of keen expectation and excitement.

Again, the "is given" rules out any idea that the gifts belong only to past history. Outside charismatic circles there are those who hold that the charismata were only for the early church. The argument for non-contemporaneity is sometimes drawn from 1 Corinthians 13:8- -"If there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease." But clearly this does not refer to a cessation in our present history, since Paul declares that this refers to the coming of the "perfect" (v. 10, the final day when we see Christ "face to face," v. 12). The various gifts will surely no longer be needed then (what, for example, would one need to prophesy about?- -the future will be complete!), but for now we may be grateful for their gracious availability and operation.

To each one is given- -what a challenge, what a joyous responsibility!

V. Description

Because of time and space limitations it will not be possible to go very far into Paul's description of the spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10.[5] The gifts may be viewed under three headings: mental, extra-mental, and supra-mental. Here I follow a two-five-two grouping in sequence.[6]

A. Mental- -gifts operating through the mind: word of wisdom and word of knowledge. In Christ "are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge" (Col. 2:3). These gifts are those of utterance, speaking forth out of the treasures in Christ, as the Holy Spirit illuminates the mind and is manifest through them.

B. Extra-mental- -gifts operating outside the mind: faith, gifts of healing, working of miracles, prophecy, and distinguishing of spirits. They may be called active ministry gifts. The gift of faith heads the list and makes operational the gifts that follow.

C. Supra-mental- -gifts operating above the mind: various kinds of tongues and interpretation of tongues. The final two gifts function together in a group setting because the expression of tongues must be followed by interpretation for the body to be edified.

I will add three general comments.

(1) The gifts are not listed in order of importance. If so, word of wisdom would be of first importance and tongues and interpretation of tongues the least. However, Paul later says, "Earnestly desire spiritual gifts...especially that you may prophesy" (1 Cor. 14.1). Yet in Paul's enumeration of the ninefold gifts prophecy is sixth in the list! This means also that tongues and interpretation are not the least. There is no hierarchy of gifts in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10.

(2) All the gifts are equally supernatural. For example, a word of wisdom is just as much a supernatural manifestation as working of miracles, distinguishing of spirits as speaking in tongues. It is a mistake to identify the supernatural with the sensational; if so a miracle might be viewed as more supernatural than a prophecy. All are supernatural, not natural, workings. They are not enhancements of what is already there, as if to say a word of wisdom is only increased wisdom. The gifts rather are endowments, coming from beyond the human, even as they operate through human channels.

(3) The Holy Spirit is not dependent on our understanding of the gifts to operate in them. While understanding is valuable- -surely we need all we can attain- -the Spirit may move, for example, in a word of knowledge, a gift of faith, or a distinguishing of spirits without the one who is a channel being able exactly to identify it. Also, there may even be other manifestations of the Spirit beyond the nine specified. The critical thing is to be open so that the Holy Spirit is not blocked and at the same time not to be too concerned about the precise identification of the gift. Come, Holy Spirit, move as You will!

VI. The Spiritual Gifts and Love

A. Earnest Desire

As we have noted, Paul writes, "Desire earnestly [or 'eagerly'] spiritual gifts" (1 Cor. 14:1). Such an admonition may on first reflection seem contrary to an earlier statement of Paul's: "One and the same Spirit works all these things [the gifts], distributing to each one individually just as He wills" (1 Cor. 12:11). If the spiritual gifts are His sovereign action, His distributions, what difference does anyone's desire make? To answer: although the gifts are the Spirit's sovereign bestowal, it is the Lord's way often to give to those who earnestly desire and ask. Jesus declared: "If you...know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more shall your Father who is in heaven give what is good [or 'good gifts'] to those who ask Him!" (Matt. 7:11). God, the Lord, the Holy Spirit, delights to respond to our sincere asking, and multiply His gifts as we earnestly and eagerly desire them.

Concern for the spiritual gifts- -as earlier emphasized- -is in no sense a self-concern; hence to desire them earnestly is not a self-centered desire. Zeal for the gifts is anything but a preoccupation with "my needs," "my wishes," "my pleasures." The concern is essentially altruistic, for other persons. The intention of each and every gift is not one's own blessing but ministry to the body of fellow believers.

How much do we desire the gifts- -even, for example, such a seemingly small one as "interpretation of tongues"? Of course, the Holy Spirit knows far more than any of us what the needs are, so He may want to use us in another gift. Still, to repeat, eager desire is important. The Holy Spirit is not likely to waste His gifts on those who do not want them. God's sovereign will and our earnest desire make a beautiful combination!

B. The Way of Love

Love is the way of the gifts. "Pursue love" (1 Cor. 14:1) actually precedes "desire earnestly spiritual gifts"- -for love is the way, the path, along which the gifts should operate. Let us turn back to 1 Corinthians 12:31, end of verse, ""And I show you a still more excellent way" (just following "Earnestly desire the greater gifts," beginning of verse). The usual translation, I quickly add, is misleading, for it suggests a way better- -a "still more excellent way"- -than the gifts. If such is the case, why not forget the gifts; why go the inferior route when there is a far better one available; namely, the way of love? Since what follows in chapter 13 focuses on love, why not disregard all these confusing gifts! There is surely need for a better and more literal translation, e.g., "I now show you a way beyond measure"[7] (NIV is close: "I will show the most excellent way"). So Paul is not setting forth an alternative to desiring the gifts; he does not intend to show something better. Rather is he showing a super-excellent way wherein the gifts, including "the greater," are to be exercised.

The spiritual gifts must be exercised in love if there is to be genuine edification. The Corinthians much needed Paul's admonition. They had no lack of spiritual gifts, but much lack of love. Early in his letter Paul faults the church at Corinth for its divisiveness. Indeed, immediately after his praise for the Corinthians not lacking in any gift (1:4-9), he criticizes them for divisions and quarrels (vv. 10-15). And on throughout the letter Paul feels constrained to speak about many other lack of love problems: e.g., gross immorality (chap. 5), lawsuits against one another (chap. 6), thoughtless actions (chaps. 8 and 10), and selfishness at the Lord's Supper (chap. 11). Likewise, in regard to the gifts there was much unloving practice: some boasted of their gifts (see chap. 4:7), some looked down upon those who manifested presumably lesser gifts (implied in 12:14-27), some were disorderly in their gift expression (14:40).

Incidentally, love should not be viewed as a spiritual gift. Since Paul says, "Desire earnestly the greater gifts (1 Cor. 12:31), just before "I show you a way beyond measure," and later writes, "Now abide faith, hope, and love, these three; but the greatest [literally, 'greater'] of these is love" (1 Cor. 13:13), the conclusion is sometimes drawn that love is the greatest (or greater) of the spiritual gifts. Clearly the answer is that love is the greatest in comparison not with the gifts, but with faith and hope. The gifts are for edification in this world; faith, hope, and love "abide"- -go on forever.

A final word: where there is genuine love there should be a strong desire for the gifts, for theirs is a ministry of love and compassion. The more there is love for one's brother, one's sister in Christ, the more there will be an earnest and eager desire to receive spiritual gifts and pass on blessings to others.

Pursue love- -and let the gifts flow!

VII. Application for Today

I will close with a statement of mine in Renewal Theology, volume 2:

"Let it be firmly said that the church cannot be fully and freely the church without the presence and operation of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. What is depicted therefore in 1 Corinthians- -and recurring in our day- -is in no sense a peripheral matter but is crucial to the life of the church. For the recurrence of the charismata of the Holy Spirit signals the church's recovery of its spiritual roots and its emergence in the twentieth century with fresh power and vitality."[8]

Appendix A: The Community Moving in the Spiritual Gifts- -a Practical Guide

Preparation: Be thoroughly informed about the nature and operation of spiritual gifts- -"Concerning spiritual gifts...I do not want you to be uninformed" (1 Cor. 12:1). Study and ponder all of chapters 12 through 14.

1. Confess the Lordship of Jesus- -"Jesus is Lord!" (1 Cor. 12:3). As the community gathers, focus on Jesus in worship and obedience.

2. Pray for all the gifts of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 12:8-10) to be operational. The Corinthian community was "not lacking in any spiritual gift" (1 Cor. 1:7)- -nor should we be in our day.

3. Expect each person in the community to be a channel for some manifestation of the Spirit- -"To each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit" (1 Cor. 12:7).

4. Be concerned wholly for "the common good" (1 Cor. 12:7). Spiritual gifts are not for personal blessing but for the benefit of others.

5. Remain aware that the Holy Spirit will distribute gifts to each person as He wills- -"distributing to each one individually just as He wills" (1 Cor. 12:11).

6. Be zealous for all the spiritual gifts- -"Desire earnestly the spiritual gifts" (1 Cor. 14:8)- -especially prophecy- -"especially that you may prophesy" (1 Cor. 14:11). Move boldly as the Spirit manifests Himself.

7. Let love be the controlling force in every operation of the spiritual gifts- -"Pursue love" (1 Cor. 14:1, also all of 1 Cor. 13).

8. Exercise all the spiritual gifts in an orderly manner- -"Let all things be done properly and in an orderly manner" (1 Cor. 14:40).

9. Do everything to the glory of God- -"Whatever you do, do all to the glory of God" (1 Cor. 10:31).

Appendix B: Theses on Spiritual Gifts

1.   Spiritual gifts are the manifestation of the Holy Spirit; by the gifts the Holy Spirit openly expresses Himself.

2.   Spiritual gifts include: word of wisdom, word of knowledge, faith, gifts of healing, miracles, prophecy, distinguishing of spirits, tongues, and interpretation of tongues.

3.   Spiritual gifts stand in the line of Old Testament special anointings by the Spirit of God.

4.   Jesus Himself was a channel of spiritual manifestations.

5.   Spiritual gifts are multiplied with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

6.   Spiritual gifts while similar to other gifts are peculiarly the operation of the Holy Spirit.

7.   Spiritual gifts are all spiritual, or supernatural, endowments; thus they are all extraordinary.

8.   Spiritual gifts are given for the upbuilding of the body of believers; they are "power tools."

9.   The Holy Spirit distributes gifts to each believer as He wills; accordingly, there is diversity in the exercise of the gifts, some thereby prophesy, some heal, etc.

10.                     Though individuals in the body have differing apportionments of gifts, this does not preclude all from prophesying, speaking in tongues, etc.

11.                     Each person in the body is to be a channel for some spiritual expression.

12.                     The spiritual gifts are essential for the functioning of the body; none is unimportant or unnecessary.

13.                     Spiritual gifts are earnestly to be desired and expected. Especially is this true of the "greater gifts" (1 Cor. 12:31).

14.                     Spiritual gifts are to be expressed in love, else they profit nothing.

15.                     Spiritual gifts pass away when we shall see the Lord "face to face."

16.                     Spiritual gifts may be apprehended only by spiritual discernment.

17.                     Exercise of the spiritual gifts needs to be properly ordered.

18.                     Spiritual gifts belong to the continuing life of the church.

Footnotes

[1]New American Standard Bible (NASB). Unless otherwise noted, this translation is used throughout.

[2]See 1 Clement 2:2.

[3]James D. G. Dunn writes that "the confession of Jesus' Lordship...is a charismatic conviction born of inspiration and expressed in words given from beyond" (Jesus and the Spirit, 319). F. W. Grosheide goes even further to say: "This confession nobody can make except he be in the Spirit of God....In this context these words are not to be taken of the ordinary confession of the believer but of the confession in glossolalia" (First Epistle to the Corinthians, NICNT, 281).

[4]The earlier distinction between domata, charismata, and pneumatic charismata may be relevant here: "ministries" relating to the domata of the ascended Christ, "workings" to the functional charismata of God's grace, and the pneumatic charismata to the Holy Spirit.

[5]See, for example, my more comprehensive presentation in Renewal Theology, volume 2, chapter 14, "The Ninefold Manifestation."

[6]Rather than a three-three-three arrangement not fully in sequence which is sometimes done.

[7]The Greek phrase is kath hyperbolén-"beyond measure [or 'comparison'] a way." The Greek phrase is not comparative but superlative.

[8]Page 327.

Chapter 16, The Engagement Of The Holy Spirit

The question of "The Role of the Holy Spirit in the Interpretation of Scriptures"-the overall conference theme-has been particularized for this session as to what sort of activity of the Holy Spirit should we expect in regard to interpreting Scripture? I was invited to speak as a charismatic theologian, hence presumably my answer would reflect a charismatic stance and therefore be subject to debate.[1]

Let me describe first what I take to be an essential point of agreement in answer to the general theme of the role of the Holy Spirit in interpreting Scripture, namely illumination. When all has been said and done about proper exegesis, there still remains the need for the illumination of the Holy Spirit. What is meant by illumination? One very helpful statement, I find, is that by Millard J. Erickson: "The role of the Spirit in illumination...is to convey insight into the meaning of the text. Illumination does not involve the communication of new information, but a deeper understanding of the meaning that is there."[2] "Deeper understanding" not "new information" is the result of the Spirit's illumination.

Now I would like to pursue the matter of illumination further by speaking of engagement. Here I believe we all stand on the same ground, namely that without personal engagement in many areas there can be little or no illumination.

Let me take as a prime example a deeper understanding of the kingdom of God. In the Synoptics there are many teachings and parables about the kingdom of God that rightly call for careful study- -comparison, correlation, critical analysis, and the like. However, something vital is lacking unless we also appropriate the words of Jesus in the Gospel of John: "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God"[3] (3:3). No matter how much one may study about the kingdom of God, there can be no seeing, hence no understanding in a deeper sense, without a new birth. Jesus spoke elsewhere of the inability to see- -"while seeing they do not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand" (Matt. 13:13). In the Gospel of John Jesus makes it clear that the only way to see truly is through being a born again person. Further, this can happen only by entrance into that kingdom through the agency of the Holy Spirit. So His continuing words, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" (John 3:5). By being born again, or regenerated, one is then in the kingdom and can for the first time truly ("truly, truly") see and understand.

Thus there needs to be a radical engagement by the Holy Spirit resulting in new birth for there to be true perception of the kingdom of God. No matter how much we may read about the kingdom, even ponder Jesus' own parables in the Synoptics- -as important as all this is- -there can be no deep understanding without a rebirth by the Holy Spirit. The best exegesis possible of the kingdom can gain no depth perception unless we have been radically engaged by the Holy Spirit. A deeper illumination of texts relating to the kingdom of God calls for participation in that kingdom. Who of us would trust the final word in such exegesis to an unregenerated person?

This does not mean that as a result of regeneration one may simply lay aside careful study of Scripture about the kingdom of God. Indeed, this has far too often happened with shoddy exegesis and personal biases becoming dominant. Thus it is urgent that there be the constant and normative guidelines of Scripture through which spiritual understanding is channeled. There should be no imparting of a new and different meaning to the biblical text. Rather through spiritual engagement- -rebirth by the Holy Spirit- -there should be deeper understanding of what already is there.

Basically, what is called for is an ongoing interaction between the biblical text and spiritual experience. Scripture must be the external norm with which spiritual experience must be in harmony. In turn, a valid spiritual experience will surely throw further light on the biblical record. But the core of depth understanding is engagement by the Holy Spirit.

Incidentally, the same thing could be said for the work of the Holy Spirit not only in regeneration but also in sanctification. There needs to be as careful and accurate reading as possible of the biblical texts that relate to sanctification but also an ongoing personal engagement by the Holy Spirit. For example, Paul's injunction of "Do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit" (Rom. 8:4) must be lived out not only for growth in holiness but also for deeper understanding of the meaning of sanctification. There must be engagement by the Holy Spirit.

Now let us move to charismatic theology and note its particular emphases. They are basically two: Pentecost is viewed as a continuing event and spiritual gifts are said to be valid for today. For the purpose of this dialogue I will consider only the claim to contemporary Pentecostal experience.[4]

The biblical record of Pentecost in Acts actually contains two main events: first, the Spirit's coming with the result that the disciples of Jesus were filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke in other tongues (2:1-21); second, the preaching of the gospel with thousands coming to salvation (2:22-41). Charismatics,[5] along with other evangelicals, lay strong emphasis on the ongoing proclamation of the saving message. In that sense what happened at Pentecost surely continues. But charismatics further affirm that the Pentecostal filling also continues to take place. Moreover they claim that this event has been confirmed in their own life and experience. There has been a personal engagement of the Spirit's coming and filling accompanied by speaking in tongues.[6] Further, because of this engagement, charismatics hold, there is a deeper understanding of the primary Pentecostal event.[7]

This claim sometimes encounters the criticism that charismatics exegete their own experience rather than the Scripture. The objectivity of the biblical norm presumably is biased by the subjectivity of personal experience. In reply, subjectivity is surely always a danger and must be guarded against; however, there is also the danger of exegesis without experience of the biblical reality thereby resulting in serious lack of understanding or even misunderstanding. Recall our previous discussion of the kingdom of God.

Still the critic has every right to challenge charismatics at the point of Scriptural integrity. What do the Scriptures say?

Let us turn to the biblical record. Long before Pentecost the Scriptures record the Spirit 's coming upon individuals to enable them to fulfill certain tasks: for example, an artisan for the building of the tabernacle (Ex. 31:3), a judge or a king for the ruling of Israel (e.g., Judg. 3:10; 1 Sam. 16:13), a prophet for the speaking of God's word (e.g., Mic. 3:8). At times the Spirit came "mightily" upon a man for the performing of prodigious feats (e.g., Judg. 14:6), sometimes upon one so that he prophesied day and night (1 Sam. 19:24), sometimes even carrying a person bodily from one place to another (1 Kings 18:12).

Nowhere in the Old Testament is the Spirit said to be given to the people as a whole; however, the hope is held out that this will someday occur. Moses expressed a deep yearning that all God's people might be prophets ("Would that all the LORD's people were prophets, that the LORD would put His Spirit upon them!" Num. 11:29), and Joel prophesied that the time will come when God will pour out His Spirit on all mankind (Joel 2:28).

In the New Testament there is a kind of step-by-step unfolding of fulfillment. First, certain persons, prior to Jesus' ministry, continued the Old Testament line of individuals occasionally anointed by the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:41-42, 67-68; 2:25-32); upon them the divine Spirit came for prophetic utterance. Second, John the Baptist is said to "be filled with the Holy Spirit even from birth" (Luke 1:15 NIV), for the lifelong purpose of preparing the way for Christ. John moved "in the spirit and power of Elijah" (Luke 1:17), and the divine fervor was such as to set fires of repentance burning in the hearts and lives of those who heard him. Third, Jesus upon His baptism at Jordan received the anointing of God's Spirit (Luke 3:22, 4:1), and the Spirit is said to "come down and remain" (John 1:33 NIV), thus a continuing endowment. According to one account, just following Jesus' baptism, the Holy Spirit "immediately drove him out into the wilderness" (Mark 1:12 RSV), thus the picture of a divine energy that mightily propels and directs. Thereafter He began His prophetic ministry with the words, "The Spirit of the LORD is upon Me, because he anointed Me to preach the gospel" (Luke 4:18). At one point Jesus declared that the "heavenly Father [would] give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him" (Luke 11:13).[8] Toward the end of Jesus' ministry He spoke of the coming power of the Spirit with which the disciples will later be endowed (Luke 24:49).

Pentecost was therefore the climax to which preceding events pointed. It was an outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the community of faith long ago prophesied by Joel: "This is what was spoken of through the prophet Joel...I will pour forth of My Spirit upon all mankind" (Acts 2:16-17). Pentecost was also a baptism with the Holy Spirit. Jesus had said, "You shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now" (1:5). Further, the Pentecostal event, as had nothing before, related to the exalted and glorified Christ: In Peter's words, "He [Christ] has poured forth this which you both see and hear" (2:33). This event occurred to the disciples of Jesus, to those who believed in Him, with a Spirit filling of such intensity that the disciples began speaking in other tongues. Thereby they were declaring "the wonderful works of God" (2:11 KJV). This was evidently done with such exuberance that some mockingly said that the disciples were drunk: "full of new wine" (v. 13 KJV).[9] The purpose of this outpouring was power for ministry: "You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth" (1:8). Pentecost was both a climactic and a future oriented event.

Now we come back to the charismatic testimony, namely that they too have shared in the Pentecostal event. Of course, the original Pentecost historically has happened. The claim rather is that Pentecost has basically recurred in their lives in that they too have been filled with the Spirit, spoken in other tongues, and been given fresh power for witness in word and deed.

This brings us back to the objectivity/subjectivity question. Charismatics believe that their experience not only confirms the Scripture but also through the engagement of the Holy Spirit sheds further light upon it. Only a participant in the Pentecostal event can fully understand its meaning and significance. On the other hand, the criticism may again be raised in regard to charismatic testimony that it is a subjective reading of Scripture. For was not Pentecost unique in that it was the event of the long promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit? This event, along with speaking in other tongues, should not be expected to happen again.

Let us return again to the record in Acts. Does the biblical text suggest continuation of the primary Pentecostal event? First, we observe some words of Peter spoken on the Day of Pentecost about the promise of the Spirit. Peter had finished his message which consisted of two parts, the first an explanation that what had just happened to him and the other gathered disciples was the fulfillment of Joel's promise (Acts 2:14-21), and the second the proclamation of the death and resurrection of Christ (vv. 22-36). Then Peter declared, "Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and your children, and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God shall call to Himself" (vv. 38-39). The word "promise" refers to "the promise of the Holy Spirit," for Peter shortly before had spoken about Christ thus: "Having been exalted to the right hand of the Father, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured forth this which you both see and hear" (v. 33). Thus the promise of the gift of the Spirit is not the promise of salvation (which relates to repentance and baptism) but the promise of the same Spirit of power that the disciples had received.[10] Further, according to Peter, the promise will reach out to those "far off" in both time and space,[11] to all whom God "calls to Himself," that is to salvation. Thus while the event of the Spirit at Pentecost in Jerusalem was an historical first, it was only the beginning of the fulfillment of God's promise: the gift of the Spirit would continue through the generations.[12]

The second reason for viewing the coming of the Spirit at Pentecost as a continuing event is the further record in the Book of Acts. Particularly outstanding is the narrative in Acts 10 and 11 about the centurion Cornelius, relatives and friends in Caesarea, who while Peter was preaching the gospel also experienced an outpouring of the Holy Spirit accompanied likewise by speaking in tongues: "The gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out upon the Gentiles also. For they [Peter and those with him] were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God" (10:45-46). Peter later emphasized that this event of the Spirit was identical with what had happened to himself and others at Pentecost. Seeking to justify his action of preaching to the Gentiles, Peter declared: "As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them, just as He did upon us at the beginning....If God therefore gave to them the same gift as He gave to us after believing[13] in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to stand in God's way?" (11:15, 17). The Pentecostal event of the Spirit had occurred again.

Under the impact of the Holy Spirit the Gentiles likewise spoke in tongues. Since the gift of the Spirit was the same as "at the beginning," the tongues must likewise have been the same in essence. Since at the original Pentecost the disciples were speaking "the wonderful works of God" in tongues and in Caesarea were "speaking with tongues and exalting God," they both were undoubtedly a speaking of praise to God.[14]

Other Acts accounts likewise depict Pentecost as a continuing event. In Samaria Philip had preached the gospel with the result that many "believed Philip" and were baptized (8:12). Peter and John some days later "came down [from Jerusalem] and prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Spirit" (vv. 15-16). Thereafter the apostles' hands were laid and the Spirit "was bestowed" (v. 18). The words following about Simon the magician seem to imply that the Samaritans then spoke with tongues.[15] In Ephesus Paul led some twelve men to faith in Christ- -"to believe in Him" (19:4)- -and baptized them. Thereafter "when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking with tongues and prophesying" (v. 6).

Thus we see that Pentecost was a continuing event. The promise of the Spirit was proclaimed by Peter as given to all generations, and in demonstration there was an ever widening circle of fulfillment in the Book of Acts. Since no limits have been set, the promise surely continues in our time.

Now let me summarize some of the biblical data.

1. The Spirit was given for enablement. In the Old Testament the Spirit brought additional wisdom and power for fulfilling certain tasks. The Spirit came upon Jesus to enable the fulfillment of His ministry. The disciples at Pentecost upon whom the Spirit was poured out were enabled thereby to carry forward the mission of the gospel. The texts in Acts further imply that the Samaritans, Caesareans, and Ephesians by the gift of the Spirit were included in the ever enlarging circle of those called likewise to be witnesses of Christ.

2. The Spirit was not given for either salvation or sanctification. This is obviously the case in the line of anointings through John the Baptist, and surely true for Jesus who needed neither salvation nor sanctification. The disciples at Pentecost were already believers when the Spirit was poured out. The Samaritans had come to faith and baptism before the Spirit was bestowed,[16] and like the Ephesians received the Holy Spirit thereafter with the laying on of hands. Although the Holy Spirit was outpoured while Peter was preaching the gospel to the Caesareans, the context suggests that it was for the further outreach of the gospel.[17] Acts has little to say about the activity of the Holy Spirit in the occurrence of salvation because the focus of the book is on the role of the Holy Spirit in the outreach of the gospel and the empowering of its messengers.[18] This is a marked difference, for example, from the letters of Paul in which much attention is given to the Holy Spirit's activity in the Christian life.

3. There is an ongoing concern in Acts that believers receive (the gift of) the Holy Spirit. Although God sovereignly poured out His Spirit in Jerusalem and Caesarea without a human medium, Peter and John in Samaria and Paul in Ephesus laid hands for the reception of the Holy Spirit. Paul's concern is particularly shown in that he earlier asked the Ephesians, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?"[19] (Acts 19:2). Paul's question implies the possibility that believers may not yet have received the Holy Spirit (recall, for example, the Samaritans). Since it turns out that the Ephesians' knowledge of the Holy Spirit was lacking and they have only known the baptism of John, Paul led them to faith in Christ and afterwards laid hands on them to receive the Holy Spirit. Believing was primary, but receiving was also important.

4. In the Book of Acts it is apparent that the gift of the Holy Spirit occurred both subsequent to and coincident with initial faith. In regard to subsequence, the Holy Spirit "filled" some 120 waiting believers, fell upon the Samaritans some time after they had believed and been baptized, and came upon the Ephesians following their faith, baptism, and laying on of hands. In regard to coincidence, the Holy Spirit was poured out upon the Caesareans while Peter was proclaiming salvation in Christ. In light particularly of the incidents of sequence, the important matter is both the non-identity of salvation and the coming of the Spirit, and that there was often a separation in time between the two events.

5. Speaking in tongues is specifically said to have occurred in Jerusalem, Caesarea, and Ephesus. It is also implied (as noted) in Samaria. Thus speaking in tongues, according to Acts, may be called the normal or usual accompaniment of receiving the Pentecostal gift of the Spirit. Moreover, it also is apparent that tongues was both the primary activity and the initial evidence of the reception of the Spirit.[20] In each case the first thing that happened was speaking in tongues- - tongues and preaching (Jerusalem), tongues and exalting God (Caesarea), tongues and prophesying (Ephesus). In regard to initial evidence the clearest statement regards the Caesareans. Just after the words "the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also," the text adds, "For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God" (Acts 10:45-46).[21]

6. Prayer and sometimes laying on of hands often provided the context for the Holy Spirit to be received. Jesus Himself was praying immediately prior to the Spirit coming upon Him: "While He was praying, heaven was opened, and the Holy Spirit descended upon Him" (Luke 3:21-22). The disciples in Jerusalem prior to Pentecost were "continually devoting themselves to prayer" (Acts 1:14); the centurion in Caesarea before the outpouring of the Holy Spirit was one who "prayed to God continually" (10:2); Peter and John "came down and prayed for them [the Samaritans]," and afterward "began laying their hands on them, and they were receiving the Holy Spirit" (8:15, 17); "Paul laid his hands upon them [the Ephesians]" (19:6). In regard to prayer this may point to asking for the gift of the Holy Spirit in accordance with Jesus' words: "If you...know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him?" (Luke 11:13).

What I have done in the preceding paragraphs is to seek to present the biblical data as objectively as possible. If and where there is error, it should be pointed out. Charismatic experience, to repeat my earlier words, must stand wholly under the biblical norm. If that is the case, I am convinced there will be vindication. With the engagement of the Holy Spirit there then occurs a deeper understanding of the inscripturated word.

In some evangelical circles objection is raised not so much from an exegetical base as from the use of Acts as a guideline for contemporary experience. For example, one writer's view is that Acts is a transitional book "from law to grace" and thus "the transitions [i.e., Jerusalem, Caesarea, etc.] it records are never to be repeated."[22] Another somewhat similar viewpoint is that since Acts is historical narrative and the Epistles didactic material "the revelation of the purposes of God should be sought primarily in its didactic rather than its descriptive parts....what is described as having happened to others is not necessarily intended for us."[23] Such viewpoints as "transitional" and "descriptive" only avoid the necessity of coming to terms with Acts and its own particular importance for us in our time.

Persons of charismatic experience find such attitudes about Acts very strange. Unlike those who stand at a distance from the Acts narratives, charismatics feel much at home. They claim that the promise of the gift of the Holy Spirit has been actualized in their own lives. Often it has occurred, they say, against the background of much prayer, and sometimes the laying on of hands: thus was the gift received. The usual testimony adds that they too have spoken in tongues and thereby glorified God. In most cases they were already believers, and they claim that the gift of the Holy Spirit further equipped them for ministering the gospel. For charismatics, the Holy Spirit has engaged them personally in such a way as to give vital understanding of and resonance with the biblical record.

Incidentally, I sometimes wonder about non-charismatic critics. What can they really say to the millions of Christians who claim to a continuing Pentecost in their lives? Are they all misguided? Are they guilty of scriptural distortion? What about the testimony to a speaking in tongues that again and again accompanies their experience? Are they all deluded? Is it possible that charismatics are on a genuine biblical track which has been confirmed in their lives? Could it be that many critics are not able to really cope with basic charismatic issues because of lack of engagement in their own lives?

Perhaps a word of personal testimony is in order. Prior to my own charismatic experience I was quite negative about the whole matter. I did sense among many charismatics a certain vitality and enthusiasm, but was it- -whatever they had- -biblical? Soon two passages of Scripture began to stand out for me: Acts 2:39 and Luke 11:13. In the former (as earlier noted) Peter declared that the gift of the Holy Spirit would be available to all generations thereafter. What was that gift? For a time I identified it with salvation,[24] but exegetically came more and more to question this interpretation. For it seemed to refer to what Peter and the other disciples had been promised and received- -and that was hardly salvation. Still even if it was a distinct promise to those who believed, did not the gift come automatically along with salvation? Had I not therefore already received this gift? Reading then with more determination than ever, and noting that the gift often occurred to believers and that prayer was frequently the context, I wondered all the more. Incidentally, the matter of speaking in tongues was totally beyond my comprehension.

What turned the tide for me was my going back prior to Acts to Luke 11:13, Jesus' words about the gift of the Holy Spirit (as earlier quoted): "If you...know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him?" Ah, there was the same promise of the gift of the Spirit to God's children, but with all emphasis on asking for the gift- -indeed asking, seeking, knocking (previous words of Jesus). Continuing prayer! This made me reflect on Jesus' own praying prior to the descent of the Holy Spirit upon Him, the disciples constantly devoting themselves to prayer before they received the promised gift, the Roman centurion who prayed continually to God prior to the Spirit's being poured out- -on and on. God, the heavenly Father, sovereignly gives, but not without the sincere praying of His children.[25] So not quite knowing what to expect, I entered into earnest prayer for the gift of the Holy Spirit. Then suddenly it happened- -the coming of a personal presence and power that led me immediately to praise and glorify God. Ordinary language no longer sufficing, I was soon speaking in another language as the exaltation of God went on and on. It seemed like Pentecost all over again- -and as if I were with the early disciples declaring the "wonderful works of God." As a result I found myself more fully endowed to bear witness to God's truth.

But this is enough personal testimony. Against the background of the Scriptural record I am convinced that the charismatic experience of many has confirmed and illuminated the biblical text. There has been the engagement of the Spirit of such a kind as to make the Acts narratives vividly contemporaneous. It has- -and this is critical- -happened with untold numbers of people.

Addendum:

It may be objected that my paper scripturally has been almost exclusively devoted in the New Testament to the Lukan material: the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts. This has been done in part because I am convinced that theological reflection, exegetical study, and personal experience have not sufficiently come to terms with Luke's distinctive charismatic emphases.[26] Especially is this true of the Book of Acts.

This paper by no means intends to suggest a canon within the canon: Lukan theology and experience over against the rest of the New Testament. Indeed, we need all the biblical record for a fully rounded picture of truth. However, it is a fact that in Luke-Acts- -especially Acts- -is to be found the scriptural data relating to the empowering of the witness in various stages. Paul, for example, writes to churches already founded by that witness (especially by Paul himself[27]), and so focuses on the way of Christian living. None of the New Testament letters are missionary oriented as is Acts. Nor is Luke concerned about such pneumatological matters as life in the Spirit, sanctification, the inner assurance of the Spirit, and so forth. It is apparent that we need Luke and Paul for both the missiological and ecclesiological New Testament emphases.

It is important to recognize two basic operations of the Holy Spirit: the Spirit upon (or on) persons for outward witness and the Spirit within (or in) people for inner character. As earlier noted, there is an Old Testament line- -we may call it "charismatic"- -that extends all the way to the ministry of Jesus Himself ("the Spirit of the Lord is upon me") and reaches a zenith at Pentecost (where Jesus' words were fulfilled- -"the Holy Spirit will come upon you) in such measure as to be an outpouring, and continuing beyond Pentecost to other communities of Christians (recall, e.g., Ephesus- -the Spirit came on the twelve disciples). In Acts, however, there is no reference to any interior work of the Spirit. The New Testament letters deal largely with the Spirit within- -for example, "the Holy Spirit who dwells in us" (2 Tim. 1:14). By the Spirit within we are no longer "in the flesh" ("you are not in the flesh...if indeed the Spirit of the Lord dwells in you"- -Rom. 8:9), the same "Spirit who indwells" will some day give life to our mortal bodies (v. 11), by the Spirit we may "put to death the deeds of the body" (v. 13)- -on and on. Also to be noted is the fruit of the indwelling Spirit, namely, "love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control" (Gal. 5:22). Truly, "the Spirit upon" and "the Spirit within" are both vital operations of the Holy Spirit.

What charismatics attest is that "the Spirit upon" is a distinctive operation of the Holy Spirit, hence not to be identified with "the Spirit within." It is the coming of the Holy Spirit upon people of faith with such explosive force as to cause a breaking forth in pneumatic speech and in powerful expression of the gospel. This operation of the Spirit is not to be assumed because the Spirit is already at work within a community or person; it is rather a unique operation that presupposes saving faith.

Charismatics, it should be added, do not claim that by virtue of their Pentecostal experience that they alone are able to bear witness to the gospel. All true believers by virtue of the Spirit's indwelling reality can surely and effectively attest to the gospel. Pentecost rather represents an additional infusion of power that makes still more effective the witness in word and deed.[28] It is a filling with the same Spirit who dwells within.

Nor does the event of Pentecost create a superior class of Christians. All believers by grace stand on the same level. Thus Pentecost is not a "second work of grace," for all have received "grace upon grace" (John 1:16). Rather Pentecost is a release of "power from on high" (Luke 24:49) that enables believers to be more effective witnesses to the gospel. Unlike the grace of salvation which is self oriented, the Pentecostal experience is wholly other-directed. Pentecost is not for salvation but for service. It is not a graduation to a super-spirituality but a release of power for the missionary challenge.

Footnotes

[1]Since this address was given at a meeting of the largely non-charismatic Evangelical Theological Society, debate was to be expected.

[2]In Evangelical Interpretation: Perspectives on Hermeneutical Issues (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993), 54.

[3]NASB here and throughout unless otherwise noted.

[4]This paper, accordingly, is not a study of the relationship of the Holy Spirit to various and sundry biblical texts. My focus is one thing only, namely, Scripture that relates to the basic Pentecostal experience. Another paper might well deal with charismatic understanding of such texts as Romans 15:18-19; 1 Corinthians 2:1-4; Ephesians 5:18-20; Colossians 3:10-17; 1 Thessalonians 5:19-20; Hebrews 6:1-2; 1 John 2:20-21, 26-27. 1 Corinthians 12-14 of course would call for special attention. (For an extended study of the spiritual gifts, see my Renewal Theology, vol. 2 [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990] , 323-409.)

[5]By "charismatics" I refer to those in the mainline churches who claim contemporary Pentecostal experience. "Pentecostals," sometimes called "classical Pentecostals," while sharing the same experience, ordinarily refers to denominational Pentecostals. I write as one standing within the Reformed tradition.

[6]Some charismatics would say, "often accompanied by speaking in tongues."

[7]References to Pentecost hereafter will relate to this primary event.

[8]The parallel passage in Matthew 7:11, instead of "the Holy Spirit," reads as "good things" (KJV), agatha.

[9]F. F. Bruce refers to this as "words spoken by the disciples in their divine ecstasy," The Book of the Acts, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 52.

[10]William Neil describes the gift of the Spirit as the "gift of the new power which Peter's audience has seen at work in the Pentecostal experience of the Apostles and Peter's associates," The Acts of the Apostles, NCBC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981), 79. Eduard Schweizer writes that in Acts "salvation...is never ascribed to the Spirit. According to Ac. 2:38 the Spirit is imparted to those who are already converted and baptized," TDNT, article on pneuma, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1968), 6:412. Kirsopp Lake states that in the various Acts passages that deal with the gift of the Spirit "there is no suggestion of regeneration by the Spirit, or of the view that salvation depends on it," Beginnings of Christianity, The Acts of the Apostles, eds. Frederick J. Foakes-Jackson and Kirsopp Lake (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979), 5:109.

[11]"Far off" is a translation of eis makran. Makran is used of "both place and time," TDNT 4:372.

[12]"Ac 2:39 probably refers to future generations," BAGD, makran (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1979), 487.

[13]"After believing," the NASB translation of the Greek aorist participle pisteusasin, expresses antecedent action. NIV and KJV read "who believed." J. D. G. Dunn states that "the aorist participle does in fact usually express antecedent action," Baptism in the Holy Spirit (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1970), 159. According to Ernest DeWitt Burton, "the aorist participle is most frequently used of an action antecedent in time to the action of the principal verb," (Syntax of the Moods and Tenses in New Testament Greek (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1898), 63. The aorist participle may also express coincident action. If so, the translation above would read (as in the RSV) "when we believed." In Dunn's continuing words, "it is the context, not the grammatical form, which determines this." I would urge that the context here clearly points to antecedent action (as in NASB, NIV, and KJV).

[14]I. Howard Marshall writes: "Just as the Jewish believers had received the Spirit and praised God in other tongues on the day of Pentecost, so now these Gentiles received the identical gift of God," The Acts of the Apostles, TNTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 194.

[15]Both the word structure and context suggest tongues. Simon the magician seeing [idon] that "the Spirit was bestowed through the laying on of the apostles' hands" (v. 18). Regarding word structure, A. T. Robertson states that the participle [idon] shows plainly that those who received the gift of the Holy Spirit spoke with tongues," Word Pictures in the New Testament (Nashville: Broadman, 1930-33), 3:107. Concerning context F. F. Bruce states that "the context leaves us in no doubt that their [the Samaritans'] reception of the Spirit was attended by external manifestations such as had marked His descent on the earliest disciples at Pentecost," The Book of the Acts, 181. See my Renewal Theology, 2: 210, n. 5, for other quotations.

[16]Thus says Calvin, "Luke is not speaking here [in regard to the Spirit's bestowal-Acts 8:18] about the general grace of the Spirit, by which God regenerates us to be His own 'sons,'" New Testament Commentaries, The Acts of the Apostles 1-13, trs. J. W. Fraser and W. J. G. McDonald (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), 236. F. F. Bruce writes, "The prior operation of the Spirit in regeneration is not in view here," The Book of the Acts, 188, n. 34.

[17]According to R. R. Williams, "Throughout Acts, the Holy Spirit is thought of as the means whereby Christians receive power to witness to Christ and His resurrection," The Acts of the Apostles (London: SCM, 1953), 36. This would surely include the Caesareans. In connection with the Caesareans, R. C. H. Lenski writes: "This falling of the Holy Spirit upon people...is entirely separate from the Spirit's reception by faith for salvation," The Acts of the Apostles (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1961), 431.

[18]In I. H. Marshall's words, "Acts is a book about mission. It is not unfair to take 1.8 as a summary of its contents: 'You shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the end of the earth.' The purpose of the Christian church was to bear witness," The Acts of the Apostles, 25. Basic to this mission and witness is the need for empowerment. Thus I would add that the "contents" of Acts also includes the first part of 1:8-"You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you." Since, as Marshall says, "the purpose of the Christian church was to bear witness," the primary matter is enabling power. Acts again and again portrays how the power was received. This emphasis is vital to an understanding of the Book of Acts. It is both a book about mission and the empowerment of the gospel messengers at certain critical points.

[19]KJV reads, "Have ye received the Holy Spirit since ye believed?" NIV, while translating as NASB does above, has a footnote to "when" as "after." Again, this is an instance of an aorist participle, namely pisteusantes (recall pisteusasin in Acts 11:17). Even if the aorist participle in this case expresses coincident action, the sense is still the same, implying the possibility of a believing prior to reception of the Holy Spirit.

[20]J. D. G. Dunn writes: "It is a fair assumption that for Luke 'the Samaritan' Pentecost, like the Christian Pentecost [i.e., in Jerusalem], was marked by ecstatic glossolalia. If so, then the fact is that in every case [italics Dunn's] where Luke describes the giving of the Spirit it is accompanied and 'evidenced' by glossolalia," Jesus and the Spirit (London: SCM, 1975), 189.

[21]Dunn adds: "The corollary is then not without force that Luke intended to portray 'speaking in tongues' as 'the initial evidence' of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit" (ibid, 189-190). Ernst Haenchen states: "The Spirit makes itself known in Acts by the gift of speaking in tongues," The Acts of the Apostles (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1971), 304.

[22]John F. MacArthur, Jr., Charismatic Chaos (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992), 172.

[23]John R. W. Stott in Baptism and Fullness (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1976), 15.

[24]As do some exegetes, e.g., Dunn and Bruce. Dunn writes: "The gift of the Spirit...is the gift of saving grace by which one enters into Christian experience and life," Baptism in the Holy Spirit, 226. Bruce states: "The gift of the Spirit may comprehend a variety of gifts of the Spirit, but first and foremost 'the saving benefits of Christ's word as applied to the believer by the Spirit,'" The Book of the Acts, 71. (Recall, however, earlier quotations from William Neil, Eduard Schweizer, and Kirsopp Lake with which I agree.)

[25]In the Heidelberg Catechism one of the questions (116) is: "Why is prayer necessary for Christians?" Then follows the striking answer: "Because it is the chief part of the gratitude which God requires of us, and because God will give his grace and Holy Spirit only to those who sincerely beseech him in prayer without ceasing, and who thank him for these gifts" (italics added).

[26]See, however, The Charismatic Theology of St. Luke by Roger Stronstad (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1984). Clark Pinnock in the foreword writes: "The meaning of this book is that the walls must come down between Pentecostals and evangelicals. If canonical Luke has a charismatic theology as Stronstad proves, we cannot consider Pentecostalism to be a kind of aberration born of experiential excesses but a 20th century revival of New Testament theology and religion" (pp. vii-viii).

[27]Paul refers to "the power of the Spirit"-the empowered witness-by which he proclaimed the gospel-"in the power of signs and wonders, in the power of the Spirit; so that from Jerusalem and round about as far as Illyricum I have fully preached the gospel of Christ" (Rom. 15:19).

[28]A final note: Dwight L. Moody, a century ago, testified to this additional infusion of power. After many years of preaching, Moody relates how two women would say to him regularly, "You need the power of the Holy Spirit." Moody reflected thereafter: "I need the power! Why, I thought I had power [because] I had the largest congregation in Chicago and there were many conversions." Soon though, the two godly women were praying with Moody, and "they poured out their hearts in prayer that I might receive the filling of the Holy Spirit. There came a great hunger into my soul....I began to cry out as I never did before. I really felt that I did not want to live if I could not have this power for service." Then, "one day, in the city of New York-oh, what a day!-I cannot describe it, I seldom refer to it; it is almost too sacred an experience to name." After this, says Moody, "I went to preaching again. The sermons were not different; I did not present any new truths, and yet hundreds were converted. I would not now be placed back before that blessed experience if you should give me all the world" (W. R. Moody, The Life of D. L. Moody (Westwood, NJ: Barbour, repr. 1985), 146-47, 149). Moody, while of course not being a participant in the present charismatic renewal, is surely a precursor of those who likewise in our time are being filled with the Holy Spirit and finding a fresh power for witness.

Abbreviations

AB

Anchor Bible

BAGD

Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, and Danker, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament

CGT

Cambridge Greek Testament

EBC

Expositor's Bible Commentary

EGT

Expositor's Greek Testament

HNTC

Harper's New Testament Commentary

JB

Jerusalem Bible

KJV

King James Version

MC

Moffatt Commentary

NASB

New American Standard Bible

NCBC

New Century Bible Commentary

NEB

New English Bible

NICNT

New International Commentary of the New Testament

NIGTC

New International Greek Testament Commentary

NIV

New International Version

RSV

Revised Standard Version

TDNT

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament

TNTC

Tyndale New Testament Commentary

WBC

World Bible Commentary

Bibliography

Altizer, Thomas and Willam Hamilton, editors. Radical Theology and the Death of God. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1966.

Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologica, London: Burns Oates & Washbourne, Ltd., 1922.

Augustine. Confessions. Translated by E. B. Pusey. New York: Dutton, 1946.

Barrett, C. K. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. HNTC. New York: Harper & Row, 1968.

Barrett, David. World Christian Encyclopedia. Oxford: Oxford University, 1982.

_____. "Statistics, Global," Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements. Edited by

Stanley M. Burgess and Gary B. McGee. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1988.

Barth, Karl. Dogmatics in Outline. London: SCM, 1958.

_____. Evangelical Theology: An Introduction. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1963.

_____. Church Dogmatics. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1936-69.

Bauckham, Richard J. 2 Peter and Jude. WBC. Waco: Word, 1983.

Bauer, Walter; William F. Arndt; F. Wilber Gingrich; and Frederick W. Danker. A

GreekEnglish Lexicon of the New Testament. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1979.

Bennett, Dennis and Rita. The Holy Spirit and You. Plainfield, N.J.: Logos, 1971.

Bennett, Maurice. A Living Flame. London: Epworth, 1953.

Berkhof, Hendrikus. The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit. Richmond: John Knox, 1964.

_____. "A New Age-A New Theology?" Reformed World, Dec. 1967.

Bittlinger, Arnold. Gifts and Graces: A Commentary on 1 Corinthians 12-14. London:

Hodder & Stoughton, 1967.

Bornkamm, H. The Heart of Reformation Faith. New York: Harper and Row, 1965.

Bruce, F. F. The Book of Acts, revised edition. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988.

_____. 1 and 2 Corinthians. NCBC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980.

_____. The Epistle to the Hebrews. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964.

_____. Commentary on Galatians. NIGTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982.

Bruner, Frederick Dale. A Theology of the Holy Spirit: The Pentecostal Experience and the New Testament Witness. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970.

Brunner, Emil. The Misunderstanding of the Church. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1953.

Bultmann, Rudolf. Theology of the New Testament, 2 vols. Translated by Kendrick Grobel. NewYork: Chas. Scribners Sons, 1951, 1955.

Burgess, Stanley M., editor and Gary B. McGee, assoc. editor. Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1988.

Burton, Ernest D. W. Syntax of the Moods and Tenses in New Testament Greek. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1898.

Calvin, John. Commentaries. Translated by Beveridge. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948-50.

_____. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Translated by Beveridge. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957. Translated by Battles. Library of Christian Classics, vol. 20. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1960.

_____. Letters of John Calvin. Selected from the Bonnet edition. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1980.

Carson, D. A. Showing the Spirit: A Theological Exposition of 1 Corinthians 12-14. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1987.

Christenson, Larry. A Charismatic Approach to Social Action. Minneapolis: Bethany, 1974.

Clement. First Clement

Come, Arnold C. Human Spirit and Holy Spirit. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1959.

Cox, Harvey. Fire from Heaven: the Rise of Pentecostal Spirituality and the Reshapingof Religion in the Twenty-first Century. Reading, Mass.:Addison-Wesley, 1995.

Du Plessis, David. The Spirit Bade Me Go, revised edition. Plainfield, N.J.: Logos, 1970.

Dunn, James D. G. Baptism in the Holy Spirit. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1970.

_____. Jesus and the Spirit. London: SCM, 1975.

Ensley, Eddie. Sounds of Wonder. New York: Paulist, 1977.

Erickson, Millard J. Evangelical Interpretation: Perspectives on Hermeneutical Issues. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993.

Ervin, Howard M. These are not Drunken, as Ye Suppose. Plainfield, N.J.: Logos, 1968.

_____. Conversion-Initiation and the Baptism in the Holy Spirit. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1984.

_____. Spirit Baptism: A Biblical Investigation. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1987.

Faith and Order: Louvain, 1971. Paper 59. Geneva: World Council of Churches.

Fee, Gordon. First Epistle to the Corinthians. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987.

Finney, Chas. G. Memoirs. New York: Revell, 1903.

_____. Power from on High. Sussex: Victory, 1944.

Foakes-Jackson, F. J. The Acts of the Apostles. MC. New York: Harper, 1931.

_____. The Beginnings of Christianity, The Acts of the Apostles. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979.

Fox, George. The Journal of George Fox. New York: Capricorn Books, 1963.

Gee, Donald. Pentecost, no. 45, Sept. 1958.

Geldenhuys, Norval. The Gospel of Luke. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1951.

Gelpi, Donald L. Pentecostalism: A Theological Viewpoint. New York: Paulist, 1971.

Godet, F. L. Commentary on First Corinthians. Grand Rapids: Kregel, repr. 1977.

Gordon, A. J. The Ministry of the Spirit. Minneapolis: Bethany Fellowship, 1964.

Grosheide, F. W. First Epistle to the Corinthians. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953.

Günkel, Hermann. The Influence of the Holy Spirit. Translated by Roy Harrisville and Philip A. Quanbeck II. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979.

Haenchen, Ernst. The Acts of the Apostles. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1971.

Hendry, George S. The Holy Spirit in Christian Theology. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1956, rev. 1965.

Hoekema, A. A. What About Tongue-Speaking? Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1966.

Hubbard, Ray. Gifts of Grace. Kent, England: New Life, 1971.

Hughes, Philip E. The Second Epistle to the Corinthians. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962.

Hunter, Harold D. Spirit-Baptism: A Pentecostal Alternative. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1983.

Keil, C. F. and F. Delitzsch. Commentary on the Old Testament, 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, repr. 1983.

Kendrick, Klaude. The Promise Fulfilled. Springfield, Mo.: Gospel Publishing House, 1961.

Kierkegaard, Søren. Works of Love. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University, 1946.

Knox, Roland A. Enthusiasm. Oxford: Oxford University, 1950.

Lampe, G. W. H. The Seal of the Spirit. New York: Longmans, Green, 1951.

Lenski, R. C. H. The Interpretation of First and Second Corinthians. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1963.

_____. The Acts of the Apostles. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1961.

Lewis, C. S. Transposition and Other Addresses. London: Geoffrey Bles, 1949.

Lindsell, H. The Holy Spirit in the Latter Days. Nashville, Tenn.:Abingdon, 1982

Lloyd-Jones, M. Joy Unspeakable: Power and Renewal in the Holy Spirit. Wheaton: Harold Shaw, 1984.

MacArthur, John F., Jr. The Charismatics: A Doctrinal Perspective. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979. Revised under the title Charismatic Chaos. Zondervan, 1992.

Mackay, John A. God's Order. New York: Macmillan, 1953.

_____. Ecumenics: the Science of the Church Universal. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1964.

_____. Christian Reality and Appearance. Richmond: John Knox, 1969.

_____. "Oneness in the Body: Focus for the Future." World Vision, April 1970.

_____. "The Christian Mission at This Hour." Ghana Assembly of the International Missionary Council, 1957.

Marshall, I. H. The Acts of the Apostles. TNTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980.

McDonnell, Kilian, editor. Presence, Power, Praise: Documents on the Charismatic Renewal, vol. 1. Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 1980.

_____. "The Ideology of Pentecostal Conversion." Journal of Ecumenical Studies, Winter, 1968.

McGee, Gary B., ed. Initial Evidence. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1991.

Menzies, R. F. Empowered for Witness: the Spirit in Luke-Acts. Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994.

Moody, W. R. The Life of D. L. Moody. Westwoord, NJ: Barbour, repr. 1985.

Morris, Leon. Hebrews. EBC. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981.

Munck, Johannes. The Acts of the Apostles. AB. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1967.

Murray, J. O. F. Ephesians, CGTC. London: Cambridge University, 1933.

Neil, William. The Acts of the Apostles. NCBC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981.

Newbigin, Leslie. The Household of God. New York: Friendship, 1953.

Orchard, Ronald K., editor. The Ghana Assembly of the International Missionary Council. New York: Friendship, 1958.

Osborne, Grant. "Tongues, Speaking in," Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. Edited by Walter A. Elwell. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984.

Outler, Albert C., editor. John Wesley. New York: Oxford University, 1964.

Packer, J. I. Keep in Step with the Spirit. Old Tappan, N. J.: Fleming H. Revell, 1984.

Pradervand, Marcel. "Leaves from the Alliance History," Reformed World, June 1972.

Pulkingham, Graham. Gathered for Power. New York: Morehouse-Barlow, 1972.

Rea, John. The Holy Spirit and the Bible. Lake Mary, Fla.: Creation House, 1990.

Ridderbos, Herman. The Epistle of Paul to the Churches of Galatia. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953.

Robertson, Archibald and Alfred Plummer. 1 Corinthians. ICC. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1911.

Robertson, A. T. A Grammar of the Greek Testament in Light of Historical Research. Nashville: Broadman, 1934.

_____. Word Pictures in the New Testament, 6 vols. Nashville: Broadman, 1930-33.

Schaff, Philip A. History of the Christian Church, vol. 1. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1950.

Schweizer, Eduard. Article on pneuma, TDNT, 6:412. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1968.

Sherrill, John L. They Speak with Other Tongues. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1964.

Slosser, Bob. A Man Called Mr. Pentecost. Plainfield, N.J.: Logos, 1977.

Spittler, Russell. Pneuma: the Journal for Pentecostal Studies, vol. 5, no. 2, Fall, 1983.

Stott, John R. W. Baptism and Fullness. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1975.

Streeter, B. H., editor. The Spirit. New York: Macmillan, 1919.

Stronstad, Roger. The Charismatic Theology of St. Luke. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1984.

Swete, H. B. The Holy Spirit in the Ancient Church. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1966.

Tasker, R. V. G. The Gospel According to St. John. TNTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1960.

Telford, John, editor. The Letters of the Rev. John Wesley. London: Epworth, 1931.

Thayer, Joseph H. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. New York: Harper, 1899.

Torrey, Reuben A. The Baptism with the Holy Spirit. New York: Revell, 1897.

_____. The Person and Work of the Holy Spirit. London: James Nisbet, 1910.

Van Dusen, Henry P. Spirit, Son and Father. New York: Charles Scribner and Sons, 1958.

_____. "Caribbean Holiday." Life, June 6, 1958.

_____. Christian Century. August 17, 1955.

Warfield, Benjamin B. Counterfeit Miracles. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, repr. 1976.

Wesley, John. Sermons on Several Occasions, vol. 1. London: Wesleyan Conference Office. 1872.

_____. A Plain Account of Christian Perfection. London: Epworth, 1952.

Williams, R. R. The Acts of the Apostles, London: SCM, 1953.

Williams, J. Rodman. Contemporary Existentialism and Christian Faith. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1965.

_____. The Era of the Spirit. Plainfield, N.J.: Logos, 1971.

_____. The Pentecostal Reality. Plainfield, N.J.: Logos, 1972.

_____. The Gift of the Holy Spirit Today. Plainfield, N.J.: Logos, 1980.

_____. Renewal Theology: God, the World, and Redemption, vol. 1. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1988.

_____. Renewal Theology: Salvation, the Holy Spirit, and Christian Living, vol. 2. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990.

_____. Renewal Theology: The Church, the Kingdom, and Last Things, vol. 3. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992.

_____. "Concerns of Frankfurt," Austin Seminary Bulletin, Nov. 1964.

_____. "Theology in Transition-and the Death of God," Austin Seminary Bulletin, Apr. 1966.

_____. "A New Theological Era," Austin Seminary Bulletin, Nov. 1966.

_____. "A Profile of the Charismatic Movement," Christianity Today, Feb. 28, 1975.

_____. "Opinion," Logos Journal, May-June, 1977.

_____. "The Holy Spirit and Eschatology," Pneuma, Fall, 1981.

_____. "Charismatic Journey" (1-3) Newletter of the Charismatic Communion of Presbyterian Ministers. Black Mountain, N.C.: Presbyterian Renewal Publications, Sept. 1971, Nov. 1971, Sept. 1972.

Wilson, Mark, editor. Spirit and Renewal: Essays in Honor of J. Rodman Williams. Sheffield, Eng.: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994.

Wood, Leon. The Holy Spirit in the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976.

Table of Contents

Chapter 1, Renewal In The Spirit

Chapter 2, A New Era In History

Chapter 3, The Upsurge Of Pentecostalism

Chapter 4, The Person And Work Of The Holy Spirit

Chapter 5, Baptism In The Holy Spirit

Epilogue

Chapter 6, The Missing Dimension

Chapter 7, The Charismatic Movement And Reformed Theology

Chapter 8, God's Mighty Acts

Chapter 9, Why Speak In Tongues?

Chapter 10, The Holy Spirit And Eschatology

Chapter 11, A Pentecostal Theology

Chapter 12, The Greater Gifts

Chapter 13, Biblical Truth And Experience

Chapter 14, Theological Perspectives Of ThePentecostal/Charismatic Movement

Chapter 15, The Gifts Of The Holy SpiritAnd Their Application To The Contemporary Church

Chapter 16, The Engagement Of The Holy Spirit

Table of Contents

Chapter 1, Renewal In The Spirit

Chapter 2, A New Era In History

Chapter 3, The Upsurge Of Pentecostalism

Chapter 4, The Person And Work Of The Holy Spirit

Chapter 5, Baptism In The Holy Spirit

Epilogue

Chapter 6, The Missing Dimension

Chapter 7, The Charismatic Movement And Reformed Theology

Chapter 8, God's Mighty Acts

Chapter 9, Why Speak In Tongues?

Chapter 10, The Holy Spirit And Eschatology

Chapter 11, A Pentecostal Theology

Chapter 12, The Greater Gifts

Chapter 13, Biblical Truth And Experience

Chapter 14, Theological Perspectives Of ThePentecostal/Charismatic Movement

Chapter 15, The Gifts Of The Holy SpiritAnd Their Application To The Contemporary Church

Chapter 16, The Engagement Of The Holy Spirit