I have enjoyed the discussion, thank you!

LAYMOND,
LOL!!! Thanks for the good laugh! I am actually 41 yrs old.

You later said, "Yes, I know the scripture where Jesus promises to send a comforter to his apostles to help in his work, but I don’t recall where he said it was free to all who asked."

I believe that's what Jesus was saying in this verse:
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 11.13

Also,
"'And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; even on my male servants and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit, and they shall prophesy."
Acts 2.17-18

We are still living in the "Last Days".

Just some of my thoughts, hope this helps!
(Jay, I hope it is ok for me to give my thoughts on Laymond's post. I'm not real clear on the etiquette, sorry.)

Jhn 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
Jhn 8:31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, [then] are ye my disciples indeed;
Jhn 8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

Rev 3:8 I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name.

Yes, I know the scripture where Jesus promises to send a comforter to his apostles to help in his work, but I don’t recall where he said it was free to all who asked.
I believe the reason for his mission was to inform the apostles, and bring to remembrance what Jesus had said, in other words “God’s words”
When someone shows me a CoC congregation that has the power to, heal the sick, raise the dead, and forgive sins, or even claim to do so. Then I will be forced to eat my “words”

I think tomorrow's post (written to Hank) will respond to your points. If not, let me know.

I agree that the apostles didn't necessarily receive the Spirit at Pentecost. But there's no evidence at all that they received the Spirit when they were baptized.

Luke 3:21 is not the baptism of the apostles —

(Luk 3:15-22 ESV) 15 As the people were in expectation, and all were questioning in their hearts concerning John, whether he might be the Christ, 16 John answered them all, saying, "I baptize you with water, but he who is mightier than I is coming, the strap of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire. 17 His winnowing fork is in his hand, to clear his threshing floor and to gather the wheat into his barn, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire." 18 So with many other exhortations he preached good news to the people. … 21 Now when all the people were baptized, and when Jesus also had been baptized and was praying, the heavens were opened, 22 and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form, like a dove; and a voice came from heaven, "You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased."

There's no reason to suppose that all 12 apostles plus Matthias were present at this event. The text certainly doesn't record that — and it's hard imagine why Luke would have omitted that information had it been true. And even if they'd all been baptized, they would have been baptized by John, and not with the Holy Spirit. We know from Eph 19 that John's baptism was inadequate to save. John himself says that his baptism is not yet the baptism of the Spirit that the Messiah would bring in that very passage.

I appreciate your desire to avoid exceptions, but I urge you to reflect on the nature of the Spirit and his work.

(Joh 3:8 ESV) 8 "The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit."

(1Co 12:4-11 ESV) 4 Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; 5 and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; 6 and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone. 7 To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. 8 For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 11 All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.

There's a very natural inclination to reduce the work of God through the Spirit to rules and to force the Spirit to behave predictably — but we've been told that this is not the Spirit's nature. The Spirit is a person, not a law of nature. He doesn't reduce to a nice systematic theology.

On the other hand, we must also accept that which is taught as true —

(Rom 8:9-11 ESV) 9 You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. 10 But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness. 11 If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.

This passage pretty clearly says that those with the Spirit are saved and only the saved have the Spirit. Just so, even Ezekiel describes receipt of the Spirit as the saving event —

(Eze 37:14 ESV) 14 And I will put my Spirit within you, and you shall live, and I will place you in your own land. Then you shall know that I am the LORD; I have spoken, and I will do it, declares the LORD."

Read the whole chapter. It speaks of dead bones being made alive again by the Spirit.

And consider —

(Gal 3:2-3 ESV) 2 Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith? 3 Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?

Paul plainly says that the Spirit is received when we begin as Christians from the "hearing with faith." It's not a subsequent event.

(1Jo 3:24 ESV) 24 Whoever keeps his commandments abides in God, and God in him. And by this we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit whom he has given us.

(1Jo 4:13 ESV) 13 By this we know that we abide in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit.

John teaches that we can know that God abides in us "by the Spirit whom he has given us." He assumes that every single Christian has received the gift of the Spirit.

Therefore I find the OT prophecies (see more in tomorrow's post) and the epistles very clear that all Christians have the Spirit but that we have differing gifts of the Spirit.

It's also clear that the "filling" of the Spirit is not the same as the initial receipt of the Spirit at baptism.

(Eph 5:18-21 ESV) 18 And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit, 19 addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with your heart, 20 giving thanks always and for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, 21 submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ.

Paul was writing to Christians. He wasn't telling them to be converted. He was telling them to submit to a greater influence of the Spirit in their lives. See also —

(Act 13:52 ESV) 52 And the disciples were filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit.

So there's the indwelling, prophesied of old and spoken of throughout the New Testament, which all Christians have and which should be visible in and to the Christian. And there are gifts that the Spirit gives, not necessarily at baptism. Indeed, a gift may well not be received or evident until many years later. And then there is the "filling" by the Spirit which seems to be about experiencing joy and deeper Christian living.

It would seem, therefore, that the Spirit is always received at the moment of salvation. Paul and John sure think so. But there are also plenty of verses teaching that salvation (and the Spirit) are received at baptism. But the reality is that not all the conversion accounts in Acts fit that pattern. Cornelius received the Spirit before baptism. The Samaritans after. The apostles without. But none of these are a great problem with regard to the Spirit. It may well be that God delayed the salvation of the Samaritans until the apostles laid hands on them.

Bruner's A Theology of the Holy Spirit is the book to buy. Without being dogmatic, he suggests that the Spirit was following the plot of Acts —

(Act 1:8 ESV) 8 "But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth."

Notice the parallel. God used extraordinary workings (or non-workings) of the Spirit to push the gospel, first, to the Jews at Pentecost, second, to the Samaritans, and third, to the Gentiles. You see, the apostles didn't bother going to Samaria. Rather, it was someone else. But God forced the apostles to make the trip and endorse the work by withholding the Spirit until they did.

Just so, Peter was very reluctant to accept Gentiles into the church until God forced his hand through the giving of the Spirit.

God used different means, but all for the same purpose: to extend the gospel to the entire world. And that's the story of Acts. (Some have suggested that "Acts of the Apostles" would be better titled "Acts of the Spirit.")

Now, while I think this interpretation makes a lot of sense, I don't think it's a rule or a limitation on God. As I argued a few weeks ago, I think Apollos was saved by the work of the Spirit and faith in Jesus in Acts 18 without water baptism into Jesus, and this one doesn't fit the Bruner theory. But that's ok. God can do as he pleases. He is not a rulebook.

God will always, always, always keep his promises, but God is never limited to just his promises.

You are 17.5 yrs old?

You must wreak utter and absolute havoc in your Bible Bowl competitions!

The fact that you see two patterns and "exceptions" tells me that maybe we don't quite have a proper grasp or understanding yet.

As for the apostles receiving the Spirit at Pentecost, it appears that Jesus gave the disciples the HS, before Acts 2 (see verse after this para), and some of them were filled with the HS again in Acts 4.31. Maybe Christians can be "filled" more than once.

Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you."
And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.
John 20.21-22

This next passage seems to be saying Jesus sent out his Apostles with power. Wouldn't the power come from the HS? (Lk 4.14)

And he called the twelve together and gave them power and authority over all demons and to cure diseases, and he sent them out to proclaim the kingdom of God and to heal.
Luke 9.1-2

And in Mat 10 Jesus sent out disciples in pairs to: heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse lepers, and cast out demons. Would they be able to do this without the Spirit? He said they received without paying, and to give without pay. What did they receive? Could it have been the HS?

When I endeavor to understand a Biblical truth, I look for the understanding that doesn't leave any "holes" or inconsistencies. I cannot accept that God can be inconsistent if he wants in Acts, but we have to live by the epistles. If it appears that God has "exceptional cases", maybe we just don't have a clear understanding yet. After all, Acts is the history of what was actually happening as most of the epistles were being written.

Maybe the apostles were baptized here, Luk 3:21.

I think 3 is the most likely case.

The epistles and Acts reveal two different patterns for receipt of the Spirit. According to the epistles, all with the Spirit are saved and only those with the Spirit are saved. The Spirit is received when someone is saved and lost when they fall away. But Acts has a number of accounts where that pattern is broken.

The correct analysis, I think, is to treat the epistles as normative but recognize that God is not bound by his own norms. He can make exceptions when it suits him to do so, and Acts has a number of exceptional cases.

The apostles received the Spirit at Pentecost although they had had faith long before and there's no recorded baptism of them. Cornelius received the Spirit before baptism. The Samaritans received the Spirit after baptism.

But each of these exceptional cases drives the narrative of Acts — showing God working through the Spirit to spread the gospel throughout the world.

1 Cor 12 discusses gifts of the Spirit, such as tongues as prophecies, and explains that the Spirit gives gifts as he pleases. There's no uniform rule as to how someone obtains a particular gift. Indeed, the passage is clear that not everyone gets the same gifts. But we all receive the Spirit.

Acts 8.15-17
…who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, for he had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit.

We teach that one is saved at the point of immersion…this passage seems to indicate that the people had been converted to the point of being immersed in the name of Jesus (this is as far as I got at 15 yrs old) it doesn't say they weren't "saved". BUT they sent men to these ppl of Samaria to make sure they received the Holy Spirit.

Is Rom 8.9 saying that these ppl in Acts 8 weren't saved until the ppl from Jerusalem came and laid hands on them and they received the Spirit? Does this mean that we should we be sure to send ppl out to verify that all who are "saved" have the Spirit?

It seems that both the Spirit and the gifts that he "apportions to each one individually as he wills" (1 Cor 12) can come at a later time than "when saved". What does this do for what Paul said? Could there be a translation inconsistency? or something?

I'm just trying to gather a clear understanding, it's not my intent to argue, but there seems to be more to it than, just "We receive the Spirit when saved."

Thank you for your discussion.

I'm working on an extensive reply. It should show up as a post in a couple of days.

First, I know that the Bible "plainly teaches we can resist the Holy Spirit" and that "God does not take away our free will." That is my point. Conversely, we can obey the HS without God doing anything to our free will just the same? Too, this concept is nothing new. Jay, you are the one arguing that we cannot really obey God fully unless the HS himself personally and directly "changes our hearts so that we can obey…" You also put it this way, "The Spirit circumcises our hearts, that is, changes our hearts so that we want to obey his will." Thereby, implying that before Pentecost, believers would not even want to "obey his will." For why would we require the HS in a special way today if and when they did not need as much before? I mean, what then is it that makes us want to obey to beome Christians in the 1st place? Is it not the same HS "working on our hearts" then? Seems to me that either 1) the OT faithfull were not able to want to please God and obey his will (since they did not have deity personally indwelling them and thereby changing their hearts) OR 2) the OT faithful were in fact just as able to want to please and obey God as we are today (even without having said personal indwelling). Do you see what I'm saying?

My whole point is that God"s children are able to either obey or resist the HS today, in the same way as they were throughout the OT.

I have more to add but allow me at least the following: In your response, to prove that we can "resist the HS," you cite Eph 4, Isa 63, 1 The 5, and Acts 7. But, according to your view, how could people in Isa and Acts 7 actually resist the HS when they didn't even have him to begin with? And, assuming they were actually able to obey rather than resist…how could they even want to if such requires the HS being personally in the first? Basically, why would we require something today in order to obey God that our brethren did not need to have back in the day? Do you believe that you and I are more able to fully obey God today than were, say, Joseph and Zebedee?

Lastly, while I believe that Jesus (and all deity) are "in" me in precisely the same way that they were "in" the disciples when Jesus said that he was "in" them in Jn. 15…that does not automatically imply that I believe God works in me (strengthens, convicts, etc.) ONLY "through the word." I don't believe that, you were wrong to assume as much. Nor do I believe that we can rightly replace "the Holy Spirit" with '"the word" throughout the NT and come away with the same meaning. That was just silly man. I actually believe that God can operate directly upon me according to his will to either make me remember, cause me to forget, strike me dead in my tracks or whatever he so desires.

I just don't think he must first get inside me personally to do so. After all, God is spirit.