We are reflecting on Why They Left: Listening to Those Who Have Left Churches of Christ
Yeakley next addresses the complaint of many former members of the Churches of Christ: “Churches of Christ Do Not Believe in the Indwelling of the Holy Spirit.”
Yeakley responds, as I would,
Some claim that in Acts 2:38 the Holy Spirit is the giver and forgiveness of sins is the gift. But it is clear that God is the giver, and the Holy Spirit is the gift (5:32). …
[However, some] went so far away from Calvinism and Pentecostalism that they adopted a “Word Only” doctrine that limited the Holy Spirit’s indwelling to nothing more than the influence of the Bible in our lives.
Amen. And — at last! — Yeakley concedes that many within the Churches of Christ have indeed been in error on this point.
This is no small matter. For decades, the editorial position of the Gospel Advocate has been “word only” — heavily influenced by Guy N. Woods. I’m a little surprised that the GA has allowed Yeakley to frankly criticize this view. It’s a good thing indeed.
____
Of the 325 responders to the survey, 127 (nearly 40%) said they had no religious affiliation at all. Among these, 24 (7%) denied faith in God or Jesus entirely.
53 — about 16% — joined the Christian Churches. Another 53 joined community churches.
And so, very roughly, about 33% joined either Christian Churches or nondenominational “community” churches, about 39% rejected organized Christianity — and even faith in God and Jesus, and a bit more than 28% joined other denominations, mainly Baptist and Methodist churches.
The following comment from Yeakley troubles me greatly. He is speaking of the nearly 40% who left all organized religion —
In an effort to win back these unbelievers, Churches of Christ could become the social equivalent of a church for the unbelievers. But most unbelievers feel no need for such a fellowship. If Churches of Christ changed in that way, why would they even want to exist?
Really? The only way the Churches could address losing so many of their own children, not just to the Churches but to Jesus, would be to reorganize as social clubs? Are we so certain of the rightness of our doctrine, our hearts, our lives, and our conduct that repentance can’t even be considered?
Granted that the Churches will never retain all their children — parents are a bigger influence than the congregations — but we can obviously do a better job, and doing a better job begins with repentance from some of the very sins Yeakley’s responders point us to.
I can’t begin to express my disappointment with the “blame the victim” mentality I’m reading.
Rather than explaining away the problems and dismissing the rejection of Jesus as the fault of our own children, we should be on our knees begging God to show us a better way, offering to make whatever change that may require.
Amen, brother Jay!
Jay,
Why is it such an error for those who deny the (personal) indwelling of the Holy Spirit, but not a problem for YOU to deny the (personal) indwelling of Jesus?
In actuality, the Bible is just as clear and plain in teaching the Jesus dwells, abides, and lives in his disciples as it is concerning the Spirit. In fact, Jesus himself said that he was abiding IN his disciples (and they in him), before the day of Penttecist and the “gift of the HS”.
Why the need to assume that one indwelling is real and personal (the HS), and yet the other is not real at all but figurative (Jesus).
Why not be consistent and interpret the passages the same way, as they say the same things?
I just don’t see how you can be upset with those who don’t believe in the personal indwelling of the Spirit while at the same time you yourself deny the personal indwelling of Jesus. Its not as if the Bible says that one indwelling is real and that the other is not. What gives?
I can remember Guy N. Woods holding Gospel Meetings in my home town congregation, as well as a debate he had with a Pentecostal minister in Northeast Arkansas. That the Holy Spirit indwelled by the word only was mentioned often. One “scriptual” argument he used against a personel indwelling has stuck with me all these years. He said that the Holy Spirit could not live in each believer because that would mean that the Holy Spirit would be divided between all believers, and since John 17 said Christ is not divided we can be certain that the HS cannot be divided. Even as a passionate CoC teenager, that use of the Bible did not feel right. It wasn’t until I attended Harding that I at least heard a healthy scriptual treatment of the Holy Spirit.
As to those who leave the CoC, many, including myself, hungered for a more intellectually honest and open domain. Now, before someone accuses me of being a snob for using the word “Intellectual” let me remind all that the CoC has been the group that has always boasted of what the Christian “has to know”, and how it just happens to be the church that “knows”. But while it boasted of much it stayed in a small box, creating fear as to what might be outside the box. I am reminded of a quote of Jesus in the Gospel of Thomas, which was also proverb outside of Christian circles, adapted by whomever used it. It said, “Woe to you Scribes, Pharicees. You are like a dog sleeping in a cattle manger; you do not eat, and you do not let the cattle eat”. So many in the CoC starved. Many knew what was happening to them and left; too many still sit in the pews, quoting the same old arguments from the same old pamphlets. I would say that most of those of my generation that left entered the Christian Church, Disciples of christ. It was there they felt free to learn.
As I started changing from a narrow way of thinking to a more hungry religious existence, I agonized. At first I thought something was wrong with me. I re-read and re-read time and time again the book “Why I Am a Member of the Church of Christ”, thinking I could get that old CoC passion back. But I also kept picking up other books, books whose authors hungered for God and truth; something I was always told that other “so-called believers” did not and could not do. Then, the old line of wisdom gradually became real to me; “God is always more than we can ever think or imagine God to be”, and it did not frighten me. What it did was fill me with the awe that there is no box, only the eternal God and the eternal in each child of God’s heart. Now, that’s a feast!
We believe in the Threeness and the Oneness in the Threeness so that where One dwells All will dwell. A believer in the Trinity who believes in the indwelling of the Spirit by default accepts the indwelling of the Son and the Father. Thus we as a Body and as individuals have become the temple of God.
Hank,
I presume that you have reference to such passages as —
(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.
(Col 1:27 ESV) To them God chose to make known how great among the Gentiles are the riches of the glory of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.
(2Co 13:5 ESV) Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?- unless indeed you fail to meet the test!
(Eph 3:14-19 ESV) 14 For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, 15 from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named, 16 that according to the riches of his glory he may grant you to be strengthened with power through his Spirit in your inner being, 17 so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith–that you, being rooted and grounded in love, 18 may have strength to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, 19 and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.
Please correct me if I’m mistaken.
How do you read these passages? Are you saying that I should or should not agree with Paul that Christ indwells the Christian? Which doctrine do you teach? Do you consider these no longer in effect or in effect?
And what do you take the presence of Christ within the Christian to refer to?
So we have God’s power at work within us; Christ’s energy working powerfully in us; and manifestations of the Spirit given for the common good. Are those three separate things? Or are they different ways to refer to the same thing?
Whatever they are, they are *not* merely references to the text of the Bible.
Jay wrote: “How do you read these passages? Are you saying that I should or should not agree with Paul that Christ indwells the Christian?”
It’s not just Paul, Jesus Himself makes the promise in John 14:23: “Jesus answered and said to him, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him.”
I find that very comforting, all the more so now.
For those of us who believe Jesus/The word of God, dwells within us through God’s word, within our memory. (and guides us through a good conscience) The word we have read and memorized with the help of the recorded word/the scriptures since we were not present with the original voices that spoke that word, when we are asked, for the reason we believe what we believe, we reference the book, or an embedded scripture within our mind, with the book as backup. And if the Holy Ghost, the powers of God are within us, those powers are minimal compared to those of the original receptors of that power, the Apostles of Jesus. It is strange to me that those who say the holy ghost endwellment is by a person, reference this same book
Jay,
I do have in mind those passages, and many more. I just find in inconsistent to teach that the HS dwells in us “personally” and “literally” and to deny as much concerning Jesus, when there are scores of passages that just as clearly teach that he (Jesus) is IN and dwelling in and abiding in his disciples, just the same. Why must we say that the indwelling of the HS is actually real but that the indwelling of Christ is not actually real? Why not be consistent and understand their “abidings” equally?
For example, in John 15, Jesus charged his disciples to abide (remain) in him as he abided (remained) in them v. 4. Several times, Jesus said that he was IN them. And there are many other passages wherein we can read the same.
Jay, you asked:
“How do you read these passages? Are you saying that I should or should not agree with Paul that Christ indwells the Christian? Which doctrine do you teach? Do you consider these no longer in effect or in effect?”
I read those passages to mean what they say. You (we all) SHOULD AGREE with Paul that Christ indwells the Christian. That is definitely what I believe and teach. I do still consider them still in effect.
You also asked:
“And what do you take the presence of Christ within the Christian to refer to?”
I take the presence of Christ within the Christian to refer to Christ.
Allow me to ask you Jay (or whoever feels like commenting) — when Jesus proclaimed that he was in and abiding in his disciples in John 15, what did he mean?
In what sense do you believe that he was IN them? Do you deny that he actually was?
Also, if you deny that Jesus was “personally” and “literally” IN his disciples when Jesus that he was in them, how can you have a problem with brethren who do THE EXACT SAME THING regarding the indwelling of the Holy Spirit? On what basis do you justify that?
Hank,
If you deny that Jesus dwells personally and literally in the Christian, all the while affirming that Jesus dwells within them, what is the nature of this indwelling?
Jay wrote:
“Hank,
If you deny that Jesus dwells personally and literally in the Christian, all the while affirming that Jesus dwells within them, what is the nature of this indwelling?”
Jay, I assume that you too deny that Jesus dwells “personally” and “literally” within the Christian. Is that correct?
If so, what do YOU believe is the nature of his indwelling? I understand you to believe that the indwelling of Jesus is not personal and literal BUT that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit IS personal and literal. If that is correct, why the need to understand the indwellings differently?
Great thoughts, Jay.
While I appreciated Yeakley’s criticism of the word-only view taught by many CoCers, I was very sad when he pretty much threw away his argument with the following statement:
“It is important to note that every blessing the Bible attributes to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit the Bible also attributes to the influence of the inspired Word as recorded in the Scriptures.”
Really?! If Yeakley believes that, then I don’t see how he is different from the traditionalists he criticizes.
Hank,
The discussions within the Churches of Christ on the indwelling rarely get much past the bandying of words and slogans. To do better, we need to be thoughtful enough to define what it is we’re trying to say. I can neither agree nor disagree with you until I know what you mean by your words.
The usual 20th Century Church of Christ view of “indwelling” suggests that the Spirit and/or Jesus indwells the Christian solely through the Word of God, making the indwelling largely propositional, that is, a body of knowledge. And while knowledge is certainly a part of the answer, I reject propositional knowledge as the complete answer.
Consider —
(Gal 4:18-19 ESV) 18 It is always good to be made much of for a good purpose, and not only when I am present with you, 19 my little children, for whom I am again in the anguish of childbirth until Christ is formed in you!
I understand “Christ … formed in you” as the Christian taking on the character and passions of Jesus — a transformation of our hearts to be like the heart of Jesus. Knowledge of the Word unquestionably helps move us in that direction, but is plainly an inadequate means. After all, we all know people with vast knowledge of the Bible who are not remotely Christ-like in their character.
So what forms Christ in us? The Holy Spirit — by direct operation on the heart of the Christian. The Spirit has multiple tools at his disposal, including the Bible, the church, our friends, our families, and many other things — but it’s the Spirit who shapes these influences into Christ within the Christian.
Paul writes,
(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.
The clear implication is that Jesus is in us via the Spirit. This is true in more than one sense. Jesus is represented by his agent, the Spirit, and the Spirit transforms us into the image of Christ.
(2Co 3:18 ESV) 18 And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another. For this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit.
Paul explains it in similar terms in —
(Eph 3:14-19 ESV) 14 For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, 15 from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named, 16 that according to the riches of his glory he may grant you to be strengthened with power through his Spirit in your inner being, 17 so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith–that you, being rooted and grounded in love, 18 may have strength to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, 19 and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.
Paul prays that we may be empowered by the Spirit in our inner beings “so that Christ may dwell” in our hearts. The Spirit changes us so that Jesus may dwell within us.
The Spirit works with us (helps us) so that our hearts are changed, allowing the character and passions of Jesus to become a part of us. Indeed, Paul plainly implies that we cannot have the strength to understand the love of Christ without divine empowerment by the Spirit — and so our ability to beome like Jesus depends on the Spirit’s work within us. Human unhelped human understanding is woefully insufficient.
If one were to remove direct operation by the Spirit on the heart of the Christian, these verses would become nonsensical. After all, why pray? It’s up to us! How could we know that which surpasses knowledge — short of divine intervention in our understanding?
ao,
In John 15, Jesus proclaimed that he was IN and ABIDING IN his disciples.
In what sense do you understand Jesus to have been IN them?
Surely you do not deny that he was in them? But, how so?….. Personally and literally, or in some other sense?
Hank’s post contains a very important key phrase that underlies this discussion as well as many, perhaps even most, discussions over putative differences in thinking between people in the church. We could go a long way toward bringing people together if we could just address this —
“I assume….”
Jay, you wrote:
“The clear implication is that Jesus is in us via the Spirit. This is true in more than one sense. Jesus is represented by his agent, the Spirit, and the Spirit transforms us into the image of Christ.”
I have heard that idea often. I have also heard that “the Spirit of Christ in you” and “Christ in you” in Rom. 8:9ff are actually references to the Holy Spirit and not Christ! As if the HS is actually called Christ, or the “Spirit of Christ.”
But arguing that Christ is in us “represented by his agent” does not work before “his agent” was even in his disciples. Which is why I keep going back to John 15. There, Jesus proclaimed that he was IN and ABIDING IN his disciples.
In what sense do you believe such was possible? Do you believe that he actually was in them? How so?
Hank, I think Jay’s comment right before your comment to me did an excellent job of addressing your concerns, and I think Rom. 8:9-11 is one of the places to start. My comment, however, was more about a separate issue. For all Yeakley’s talk about how the word-only view is inadequate, he caveats everything away with:
“It is important to note that every blessing the Bible attributes to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit the Bible also attributes to the influence of the inspired Word as recorded in the Scriptures.”
That, to me, is the same Holy Spirit = Holy Bible argument, no matter how many pages he spends appearing to say otherwise.
ao,
I read Yeakley as struggling with deep disagreements with much of the 20th Century Church of Christ agenda while having a deep loyalty to the Churches (and perhaps with being published by the GA). His mistake, I think, is in believing that loyalty requires defending the Churches, whereas true love for the Churches would compel him to call for repentance.
Of course, if he speaks too boldly, not only might he not be published, the most conservative readers would write him off as a change agent. He gets more of a hearing by publishing through GA rather than ACU!
I wonder whethr Yeakley figures his audience is the Churches, not those who left, and therefore he writes in terms they can hear. Little direct confrontation, but careful implicit criticism. Thus, when he denies that we teach that we’re the only ones going to heaven, perhaps he’s attempting to subtly convince the more legalistic among us that they’re in the distinct minority and out of step.
Or maybe he’s just in a time of personal transition, trying to fit together a better theology with an institution he loves but that often disagrees with him. I’ve been there.
Theo,
Don’t forget that as soon as wrote “I assume”, I immediately added, “is that correct?” and an “if so”.
Hank,
In fairness, you need to be willing to state precisely what you believe the answer to be. Every interpretation is going to have its difficult passages — or otherwise I doubt we’d be disagreeing. And so I’m not interested in an asymmetric discussion. After all, for me to be mistaken, something else needs to be right — and so the readers should be allowed to compare the two views. Lay your views out plainly, so that your and my views may be compared.
Re John 15 —
(Joh 15:4 ESV) 4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit by itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in me.
This is a command, not a statement of present fact. And he is obviously speaking of the coming of the Kingdom — the relationship he’d share with his disciples in the coming age. Maybe if you referred to an exact verse?
What a wonderful discussion !
Is there a difference between the “indwelling” of those in the first century and those in the 21st? Laying aside for just a moment a miraculous apostolic measure of indwelling, and laying aside for just a moment the level of indwelling that was “administered by the laying on of apostolic hands”, did the first century Christian receive a measure of the Holy Spirit at their individual conversion? Would we not then receive that same “conversion level” measure of the Spirit?
I am a collector of questions and questionnaires that congregations seeking ministers use to make sure that the potential candidates are “their type of man”. Below are two such questions and the answers I provided
Do you believe that the Holy Spirit addresses Christians or Non-Christians apart from the written word of God?
The Holy Spirit speaks to us today only through the Scriptures. I know that the Holy Spirit lives within me. I know that He does this through the Word. I know that the Gospel of Christ is the Power of God unto Salvation. I know that continued sinful living on my part will grieve the Holy Spirit. But just how exactly does the Holy Spirit act upon the alien sinner and just exactly how He acts on me, I do not know. Does He choose only some for salvation? Absolutely not. Does he save them against their will? Again that is absurd. But does He prepare the seeking to find? Yes, I believe so. Does He till the soil for our seeds to grow in? Perhaps. Is He constantly yelling in my ear trying at times to get a message through my thick skull? Without a doubt. Far greater minds that mine have debated this over and over through the years.
Do you believe that miracles occur today?
Miraculous Holy Spirit Gifts such as tongues and healings have ceased. The miraculous nature of the Scriptures and the change that happens within the individual upon instilling the truths contained therein have taken the place of the other gifts. The greatest gifts of Faith, Hope and Love are all to be had through a greater understanding of God’s Word, and the continued grooming of a maturing Spirit.
Jay wrote:
“(Joh 15:4 ESV) 4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit by itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in me.
This is a command, not a statement of present fact. And he is obviously speaking of the coming of the Kingdom — the relationship he’d share with his disciples in the coming age. Maybe if you referred to an exact verse?”
I disagree. It may be a command, but it IS ALSO a statement of present fact. Obviously, the only way Jesus could “abide in” them (“remain” in other versions), would only be if he was already IN them presently. He did not say that “I WILL” be in you, but that “I AM” in you, and I believe he was. Besides, it was obviously possible for them to produce fruit at the time he told them that he was presently in them. To KEEP ON producing fruit, Jesus would need to REMAIN IN them.
And since this is your site, I will go ahead and state my belief first:
1. Jesus said that he was IN them and that it was needful for him to REMAIN in them in order for them to produce fruit.
2. He was IN them in the sense (and to the extent) that his word remained in them.
3. He was not “personally” nor “literally” in them (which I assume you believe?)
4. Nevertheless, he proclaimed that he was IN them (and they in him) indeed.
Now, IF Jesus could say that he was IN THEM and yet not mean himself personally, WHY can God not mean THE SAME when later speaking of the Holy Spirit being IN us?
Why is it acceptable to you to believe that Jesus was not personally IN them at the time that he clearly said that he was in them, but NOT leave room for the same understanding regarding the Holy Spirit? Do you deny that Jesus was IN them in John 15, even though he clearly affirmed that he was?
WHY is it not possible to be consistent and believe that the Holy Spirit is IN us today in the same sense that Jesus was (and is) in us today? Why the need to make the indwelling of Jesus not a personal indwelling, and at the same time insist that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit must be a personal indwelling? Especially knowing that the Bible affirms that Christ is in us JUST as clearly as it affirms that the Holly Spirit is in us?
We may disagree, but I believe the pressure is on you to explain the difference in interpretations rather than for me to explain the consistency.
Again, (and the way I see it), is that you need to either deny that Jesus was in them WHEN he said that he was, OR explain HOW he was IN them, without being in them personally.
If he could be in them “thru the word” in John 15, why cant he (and the HS) be in us the same way today? That, seems the most consistent way to go.
What do you say?
I should add that I do not deny a “direct operation” from God. I just do not believe he must personally be in me to “speak to” and/or convict me of sin. I mean, God can make me die before I hit “submit” if he so desires. So can he help me. Just as he was able to guide, comfort and convict his people before the day of Pentecost. The fruit producer of Psalm 1 comes to mind…
It appears many forget the scripture, Jesus said I come that you can have life and have it more abundantly. People leave because they are searching for hope of an abundant life. We have failed to give hope, people are hurting.
Hank,
I’m still having trouble finding the language you are referring to. Perhaps you are referring to —
(Joh 15:5 NIV) “I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.
I can see where the use of “remain” would lead one to conclude that the relationship already exists. Although “remain” is possible, most translators prefer “abide” which is more consistent with the rest of the passage.
Thus,
(Joh 15:5 ESV) I am the vine; you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing.
I’m not sure it matters that much. I just want to be sure we’re talking about the same passage.
You’ve still not answered the question. You’ve denied a personal indwelling, but you’ve not said what the indwelling is. A negative is not a definition.
Given that the Godhead is omnipresent, Jesus is surely not referring to some connection that we Christians have in common with the entire universe. There must be something special and different about Jesus’ dwelling within his disciples. Thus, it cannot refer merely to the fact that he is all powerful and can do anything he wishes anywhere and anytime. There must be something that is … personal … about this indwelling or else he’s merely claiming to be Deity — and he’s plainly speaking of a personal, special relationship.
Now, at the time he spoke, that relationship was as personal as could be. He physically lived with his disciples 24/7 and spoke directly with them. His abiding was as literal as could be!
And yet he plainly anticipates that this abiding would continue beyond his Ascension. Obviously, it would take a different form — but it would still be sui generis, that is, of the same type. It would still be an abiding that is similar to the abiding the disciples enjoyed while Jesus was on earth — that is, personal and effective to change and help the disciples.
The discourse that includes c. 15 also includes Jesus’ promises about the Spirit/Helper. And so it makes sense to figure these are connected concepts. Indeed, Jesus says,
(Joh 14:16-17 ESV) 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever, 17 even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you.
(Joh 14:26 ESV) 26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.
(Joh 15:26 ESV) 26 “But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me.”
(Joh 16:7-11 ESV) 7 Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you. 8 And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment: 9 concerning sin, because they do not believe in me; 10 concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no longer; 11 concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged.
Plainly, Jesus anticipates that the Spirit will fill some of the role that he had personally filled while present in the flesh. Indeed, 14:26 refers to the Spirit being sent “in my name” — the language of agency.
(Joh 5:43 ESV) I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not receive me. If another comes in his own name, you will receive him.
(Joh 10:25 ESV) Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name bear witness about me,
Thus, the Spirit will dwell within the disciples — language that evokes God’s personal dwelling among the Israelites in the Tabernacle and Temple.
So what does Jesus’ promise to “abide” within his disciples mean? To live within them in a personal, efficacious way by means of the Spirit — who would be sent after the Ascension to be “another Helper” — continuing the work begun by Jesus himself while physically present.
Thus, Jesus promised to abide within his disciples in a personal, effective way that continues his work on earth as teacher and comforter, helper and strengthener — the very kinds of things the epistles credit to the Spirit.
Now I understand where Hank is coming from. Don’t agree with it, however: seems to be based on a very inadequate interpretation of “word” in the text.
Jay,
Not sure what question is it that I have not attempted to answer? Ask it plainly and I will give it a shot.
In fairness, here is my question for you:
1. Do you believe that Jesus claimed to be IN his disciples in John 15 (presently, at the time that he told them he was)? If so, in what sense was he in them?
2.
Ok, catching up after a day out of pocket:
Hank-Jay: It seems that Hank is arguing that Jay denies the indwelling of Jesus as while accepting the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and yet Jay seems to be affirming the indwelling of Jesus as well as the Holy Spirit. I’m confused, what did I miss? If Jay is affirming what Hank says he should affirm why is there an argument?
Phil: “The Holy Spirit speaks to us today only through the Scriptures.” Really? You got some Scripture for that? How would you answer numerous witnesses who speak of dreams, visions and “urges” as being from the Spirit that wind up meeting the test of Deut.18:21-22?
Jesus is the Holy Spirit. They are one with God. Both, and all three, reside in us.
How different from the COC teaching that only the word dwells in us and to the extent we have studied and our degree of understanding.
What they do inside you is guide you in all righteousness and help you on your human journey. Think of a conscience or spiritual awareness.
What I find interesting is being Cherokee, this is what they have taught for thousands of years. Maybe we as members of the COC are coming to a better understanding and now, instead of having it more right than all others are finally catching up.
I don’t see the problem understanding this as most Christians do not have a problem with it. The exception is only among those of us that have been taught all our lives those who think like I just stated were wrong and destined for hell so to accept this thinking is scary for us old timers.
Hank,
You deny a personal indwelling of the Spirit and of Jesus and yet seem to agree that there is an indwelling of some sort. What is the character of that indwelling? Is it solely via the word of God? Is it propositional truth only? Or does the indwelling reflect some of personal relationship?
Since you consistently fail to cite a particular verse, I’m going to assume you refer to John 15:5.
(Joh 15:5 ESV) 5 I am the vine; you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing.
The passage may well be speaking proleptically — a figure of speech referring to the future as though present, to emphasize the imminence of the new age that would shortly dawn. It’s a figure of speech frequently used by Jesus in this discourse. Therefore, we should be cautious of insisting that he’s speaking of the present merely because of the grammar.
But it’s not a big deal either way. If he’s speaking of the present reality, then he’s speaking of the influence and character formation he has on the disciples at that time, an influence that would continue post-Ascension by the power of the Spirit.
Both both and after the Ascension/Pentecost, Jesus lived within the disciples by virtue of a real, personal, literal presence. Before hand, his presence was in the flesh. Afterwards, it was via the Spirit.
I think the new covenant is aptly described in Jer 31, and repeated in Hebrews 8.
” I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts:”.
I don’t see where anyone will be indwelled as the keeper and or the enforcer of God’s laws except the mind and heart upon which they are written.
I don’t know about anyone else but God’s law is written upon my mind and in my heart. I truly believe I know right from wrong, and when I falter it is my own fault, but God can forgive a stumbling child when he falls down. But in my opinion if God had placed a faultless guide within a Christian, and that guide let his disciple fall into the fiery pit, I doubt God would forgive that guide. Just my opinion, no words from heaven .
Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Jer 31:32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers —————
Jer 31:33 But this [shall be] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
Jer 31:35 Thus saith the LORD, ——————-
I would be interested to hear about these prophets about which Todd wrote.
“How would you answer numerous witnesses who speak of dreams, visions and “urges” as being from the Spirit that wind up meeting the test”
Jay,
Not sure what question is it that I have not attempted to answer? Ask it plainly and I will give it a shot.
In fairness, here is my question for you:
1. Do you believe that Jesus claimed to be IN his disciples in John 15 (presently, at the time that he told them he was)? If so, in what sense was he in them?
Hank
I surely cannot conceive what ever concept that you are trying to promote. I believe that Jay has covered the completeness of the subject in the translations that he has identified to you, but I have noticed that you have never identified the translation of the verse of John 15 that you are trying to use as your source. Is the version that you are using different than the versions that we have access to? You have only written comments about that verse as you see it but never provided Jay or us with the exact text. The message that you seem to referring to does not look appropriate for any of the translations that I have searched. Larry
Todd,
Since our discussion a couple of months ago, you seem to have really come out of your shell in a defense of the Trinity. Wonderful!!
Those who reject the literal indwelling of God is yet another erroneous reaction that SOME factions of the COC embrace. The Apostolic Fathers and ECF based ones spiritual regeneration (i.e. being a Christian) on the indwelling of God. Denying a literal indwelling is another example of “me, my Bible, and my interpretation” run awry. I pray this error will disappear.
Jay, I am enjoying your blog on this book.
Okay I can’t say I know a whole lot about the CoC at large though I guess we can all read scripture and come to conclusions aside from what someone else may teach. I am more of a mystic myself. Sure I have a lot of my parents in me. They have past on habits, customs and beliefs and so on. In that way I can read scripture and have Christ in me according to my willingness to put His teachings into practice in my life. In the mystical sense when I pray for help in that endeavor He without fail answers. In fact It reminds me how close He really is. It’s a little scary when I think of all the times I fail in a day without thinking of the fact that there He is in me. He answers in many ways. More than I could list but for example sometimes He just has a conversation with me on a walk. I say something like can you believe the way that guy is acting and He reminds me of the way I act sometimes or how He is treated by me sometimes and is still my closest friend. Sometimes He puts the question out there for me and we talk about that. Sometimes I hear a sermon then another sermon on the radio then I go to Bible study or read a book and there it is again and by then I get the picture God wants me to hear what ever it is. So my belief is He is here in me it’s not because He is that small it’s because He is that big. I have my responsibility to the relationship to study and listen and respond. God always does His part leading and protecting and changing me.
Anyone mentioned Mark3:28-29? What did Jesus say about this?
The unforgivable sin?
Isn’t blaspheming the Holy Spirit saying NO to Him?
WE in many ways have become to use a phrase we all are familiar with, Gods “Frozen Chosen”.
We don’t like the mystery of the Holy Spirit and want to have it all figured out but, Isaiah55:9 says His ways are higher than our ways and His thoughts are higher than our thoughts.
Change is coming, and fast and I say Bout Time!
Hank asked, 1.” Do you believe that Jesus claimed to be IN his disciples in John 15 (presently, at the time that he told them he was)? If so, in what sense was he in them?”
To all that are having a problem (or pretending to) with what Hank is saying.
In my opinion Hank is asking (how can Jesus both be standing with them, and be personally in them) Good question if you were to ask me, which no one has. I would answer “metaphorically” as many of Jesus sayings were.Jesus is not personally within your body, but his teachings are to remain within your mind continually. Jesus was in the Apostles, Just as the “Holy Ghost” was later.
Jesus said to the Apostles , if you need anything ask God in my name and he will give it to. If you forget what I have told you, ask the Father he will remind you of what I told you.
AJ said; “Change is coming, and fast and I say Bout Time!”
I am afraid you are right John, but that ain’t a good thing, We are asked to do three things, believe that Jesus is who he said he was, and believe in the message sent by God, and treat others as we wish to be treated. We can’t even to that without a sigh, a messenger within us, that makes us pretty important, don’t it? What happened to Faith, Hope, and Charity ?
1Cr 13:13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these [is] charity.
Jay,
Here is what you seem to be affirming:
When Jesus charged his disciples to abide/remain in him, he didn’t mean to imply that he was actually in them then. Rather than being IN them, he meant that he was WITH them physically. When he told them that he desired to remain IN them, he really meant that he would be IN them in the future once the Holy Spirit is given to be in them. Once the Holy Spirit entered into them in the future, Jesus too would be in him then “representatively thru his agent”. He would be in them then even though it wasn’t actually him that would really be in them, but the Spirit.
All of that seems at odds with what the Bible actually says though. Are there ANY respected Bible commentators that you know of who also believe that when Jesus said that he wanted to abide/remain IN his disciples, that he didn’t mean he was actually in them then? I would be really curious to know if anybody else has said that?
In his commentary on John 15, FF Bruce says “There is no practical difference between Jesus’ personal indwelling in his disciples and his words remaining in them” p. 309.
And for whatever its worth, the word translated abide (meno #3306), according to Kittel, means “to stay in a place”.
There can be no doubting the fact that Jesus told his disciples that he wanted to abide/remain IN them and that he wanted them to abide/remain IN him.
I doubt you will be able to find a single known commentator to suggest that Jesus did not mean that he was IN them presently, at the time he told them to abide/stay/remain IN him. Notwithstanding the fact that the discourse includes some future promises and blessings. Remember, in v.3 that he said “You are ALREADY clean….REMAIN IN ME”.
The whole idea that he was not in them yet and that he would be later on representatively “thru his agaent the Holy Spirit” is a major stretch. It also ignore the clear statements of Jesus for them TO REMAIN.
All of that to say this –
If Jesus could be indwelling his disciples without personally and literally being in them then, why cannot the same be said of the Holy Spirit (and Jesus and God) today?
Why the need to be so inconsistent and insist that the indwelling of Jesus is “not real” and that the indwelling of the HS is real?
With all due respect, in denying the indwelling of Jesus in John 15, you seem to be grasping at straws…
“And if the Holy Ghost, the powers of God are within us, those powers are minimal compared to those of the original receptors of that power, the Apostles of Jesus.”
>>
How anyone says this without his face in the dirt in repentance puzzles me. And how anyone says this with a certain satisfaction in his voice is completely beyond my understanding.
And how our becoming increasingly poor and blind and naked and lame became a mark of piety escapes me altogether.
As to Jay’s more potent question, I can only reply, “Silly rabbit, repentance is for OTHERS!”
Phil wrote: “The Holy Spirit speaks to us today only through the Scriptures.”
>>>
Phil, please offer clear BCV for this statement. Failing that, I would ask you to please repent of it. Sorry, but those are the only two options your statement allows. I’ll try to make clear why this is so—
If you KNOW that the Holy Spirit speaks to us today only through the scriptures, then this information must of necessity have come to you from the scriptures themselves. If it did not, then by your own statement, it is not divine truth at all. That leaves it to be strictly your opinion. Now, I don’t mind you offering this opinion, but you are not stating it as such. You put forth this as a FACT, not just Phil’s two-cents-worth. So, AGAIN, your statement calls for either BCV or repentance.
There is no DOOR #3, mi hermano.
I must confess to a mild frustration at the ongoing presentation by so many of bad reasoning and fallacious logic, presented by folks who either don’t understand these flaws, or who think they can fill in the gaping holes with bluster and repetition. Jesus talked about the Pharisees being “blind”. This suggests to me that they COULD NOT SEE what was before them. Not so much that they saw it and rejected it, but that they couldn’t see it in the first place. I run into this disorder a lot in presentations of CoC doctrine. Not saying I don’t have the same affliction, but I DO have a history of letting someone else work on the beam in my own eye on many occasions. All of us who have made significant changes in our POV over the years can probably testify to this.
Charles,
Do you see any difference between a person being spoken to directly by God and being inspired? If so, could you explain the difference?
Because, I always thought that getting divine information directly from on High was what being inspired means.
My dictionary says:
Main Entry: divine inspiration
Part of Speech: n
Definition: an act or process that is purportedly inspired by a deity; inspiration endowed by God upon spiritually gifted persons.
I wonder if you believe that God has ever spoken to you in terms of what you should or should not say here? If so, I wonder if you believe that when people are arguing with you….they are at times arguing with God?
whoa…
Christ is in us. The Holy Spirit is in us. We are immersed into Christ. We are immersed in the Holy Spirit. Which is it? Are Christ and the Holy Spirit inside us or outside and surrounding us? We are obviously dealing with metaphorical statements. You can’t really locate deity using prepositions. We are also dealing with the miraculous. The apostles didn’t work miracles by the power of Jesus’ words being in their memories. They worked miracles by the power of Jesus/The Spirit being “in” them. I don’t think “Christ “in” you” and the Spirit being “in”you took on a completely different meaning when it was applied to those who were not apostles or could not work miracles. Christ/ The Spirit/ God “dwelling in” us still means that we have an unexplainable, miraculous power to help us do what God would have us do.
But if salvation is a matter sifting the Bible to find all the essential commands to obey and then obeying them the best we can, who needs deity “dwelling in” them?
Hank, I have been told many times. “I see your dad in you” or “you are the image of your dad” That means one of two things, you act like your dad, or you look like your dad. Just so happens (I have been told by those who would know) that I both look and act like my dad. My dad is in me, and I in him. is that so hard to understand. I think not. (my dad has long since past, so you know he is not personally in me)
I only hope it can one day be said of me and my God, as it was of Jesus and my God and his God. Naturally if I act and look like Jesus, it only follows that I also act and look like The Father. As Jesus explained to the apostle who asked to see God.
If you believe I look like my dad, you can see him by looking at me, If you believe Jesus is the image of God, you see God when you look at Jesus. I think nothing could be greater than when anyone looked at me , they saw Jesus.
Laymond,
Your right on that, and its not so hard to understand.
Some people would be better off having less of one person IN them and more of another. I need to have more of Jesus IN me and less of the world. We all know that that means I need to be and act more like Jesus. Nobody (that I know of) thinks that means I need to have more of the actual and literal person of Jesus in me. I don’t understand why people can see that and yet cannot be consistent when it comes to the Holy Spirit.
Being filled with the Holy Spirit is a command (Eph. 5:18) to all Christians. We can be more or less filled with the Spirit and it is up to us (hence the command to be filled). Obviously, we are not commanded to capture and have more of the actual and literal 2nd person of the Godhead. It is our duty to fill our own selves up with the Spirit of God and we do that by letting the word of Christ dwell in us richly.
Same goes with the mind of Christ….
Clearly, Jesus said that he was IN his disciples way back in Jn 15. He told them that it was needful for him (Jesus) to REMAIN IN them in order for them to be fruitful. Clearly, he meant that he was IN them and would remain in them in the sense and to the extent that his words remained in them.
The less of Jesus’ word in them = the less of Jesus in them. Thats HOW he was IN them – through the words that he had spoken. He didnt mean that he was actually IN them personally and literally.
Which is why in his commentary on John 15, FF Bruce says “There is no practical difference between Jesus’ personal indwelling in his disciples and his words remaining in them” p. 309.
And for whatever its worth, the word translated abide (meno #3306), according to Kittel, means “to stay in a place”.
I challenge anybody here to explain HOW Jesus was IN them OTHER than through his words. He claimed to be in them….HOW was he?
And then ask why we cannot be consistent when we read that the Holy Spirit is IN us as well.
Why insist that the indwelling of Christ is not actually him personally IN us but the indwelling of the Holy Spirit IS actually him in us?
Why can’t we rather be consistent with both? The Bible teaches that they both (even the Father) are in us. It never says one is “figurative” and the other is “for real”
“It is our duty to fill our own selves up with the Spirit of God, and we do that by letting the word of Christ dwell in us richly.”
>>>
Good grief. We’re back to “in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Bible”. Sigh. Last time I heard this in person in a CoC was in 1983, and even then it was a non-starter, except for one old curmudgeon whom nobody listened to. Maybe the anti-Sunday School CoC clan where I preached was more advanced than I assumed…
I do wonder how the Ephesians did this without a New Testament? They did not yet have even the gospels, nor Acts. In fact, this letter predates most of the NT canon. So, does that mean that the Ephesians could only be, say, 40% filled with the Spirit? Or maybe “half-full”?
“Be filled with the Spirit” is passive voice, because the actor is the Holy Spirit himself. We can either be open and willing for the Holy Spirit to fill us, or stubborn and resistant and not allow him to fill us. Or perhaps we might be so full of something already –by our own efforts–that we no longer need any such filling by the Spirit.
Hank asked me, “Do you see any difference between a person being spoken to directly by God and being inspired?”
>>>
God speaking is God speaking, whether through Moses, or Jesus, or Peter, or a cloud, or Agabus, or me or you or Balaam’s ass. Getting a council of the Roman Catholic Church to accept a writing and add it to the canon is NOT what caused that writing to be from God.
Charles wrote:
“I do wonder how the Ephesians did this without a New Testament? They did not yet have even the gospels, nor Acts. In fact, this letter predates most of the NT canon. So, does that mean that the Ephesians could only be, say, 40% filled with the Spirit? Or maybe “half-full”?”
Charles, that is why I started with Jn 15, where Jesus proclaimed that he was IN his disciples. He (Jesus) wanted to REMAIN IN them.
Virtually all reputable scholars write that Jesus was IN them via his word. I agree.
Do you believe that Jesus was IN them, as he clearly said he was? If so, in what sense?
Answer that and then consider being consistent regarding the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Why insist on making the indwelling of Christ be NOT literal and personal (representatively), and then turn around and insist that the indwelling of Holy Spirit IS personal and literal.
Whats so bad about being consistent. The Bible does equally declare that both Jesus and the Holy Spirit (and the Father) are ALL IN us. Why not just be consistent.
I’d love to hear your thoughts regarding HOW Jesus was IN his disciples when he said he was IN them in John 15.
Oh yeah, the disciples didn’t have New Testaments back in John 15 either….
“Virtually all reputable scholars write that Jesus was IN them via his word. I agree.”
>>>
Are you offering this as an argument? If so, it sports at least four logical fallacies:
1. Ispe dixit. “They said it, and so do I.” So what?
2. Appeal to authority. “…scholars write..” Scholars? Wow! Who? And how do we know they are right?
3. Appeal to popularity. “Virtually all reputable scholars…” So, the scholars who don’t agree are thus not reputable? And here, it’s not even “all”, but “virtually” all. What does that even mean?
4. Ambiguous middle. “…via his word…” By this, do you mean the NT canon? If so, where does anyone IN the canon say one equals the other?
If this statement was supposed to support your view, it doesn’t really support anything. If you just tossed it into your argument to increase the word count, well, okay….
Oh yeah, the disciples didn’t have New Testaments back in John 15 either….
>>>
Which is rather my point, Hank. Now, I could be misunderstanding you, and if so, please correct me, but it seems that you are saying that the only way you and I can be filled with the Spirit is by reading the Bible and doing what it says. Did I misread you?
Charles,
You’re right about “the scholars”, lets forget about them for a second. Instead, what do YOU believe?
Jesus said that he wanted to REMAIN IN his disciples. That much is beyond dispute. Obviously, to “remain IN” them, he must’ve been IN them in the first place.
Question – HOW (in what sense) do you believe that Jesus was IN them then (when he said that he wanted to REMAIN IN them in, Jn 15)?
Forgetting that all of “the scholars” say it was through (via) his word, what do YOU say?
Do you also believe that when Jesus said that he was IN them, that he meant representatively through his word? Or that he was actually IN them literally and personally?
Answering that will really help. Is that not a fair question?
Again, Jesus’ desire was to REMAIN IN them…. did he really mean to imply that he was IN them then? If so, How?
Thanks bro
My Brother Charles,
I am sorry that this is a bit late. I have been busier than usual of late. Regarding your request for either a BCV or repentance; I ask, did you read ALL of the post? Did you read between the lines in that I said this was in response to “clearing questions” posed by some congregations in their search for a minister? Did you see where I said, “greater minds than mine have debated this…” Did you see were I said, ” I don’t know”?
After reading all of these postings I can affirmatively say, “I still don’t know”. As for BCV, try Deut 29:29
Speaking the truth in love…phil
Hank,
Are you or are you not suggesting that every single passage that speaks of the indwelling Spirit refers to the Spirit indwelling in the sense that we read or hear the word of God and incorporate that word into our lives — utterly without divine help other than, of course, the word?
If I’ve misunderstood you, please state affirmatively just what it is you believe these passages mean.
Jay asks:
“Hank, Are you or are you not suggesting that every single passage that speaks of the indwelling Spirit refers to the Spirit indwelling in the sense that we read or hear the word of God and incorporate that word into our lives — utterly without divine help other than, of course, the word?”
I am not suggesting that “…the indwelling Spirit refers to the Spirit indwelling in the sense that we read or hear the word of God and incorporate that word into our lives — utterly without divine help other than, of course, the word.”
I believe that we can (and have) divine help “other than the word”.
What you keep denying Jay, is that the Lord proclaimed that he was IN his disciples way back in John 15, He said that he desired to REMAIN (Strongs 3306) IN them.
Everybody knows that in order to REMAIN IN a thing (or person), you must first be IN the person or thing ALREADY.
You have dodged around the question, but you have not logically explained how Jesus could be IN is disciples without actually being IN them.
Again:
Are there ANY respected Bible commentators that you know of who also believe that when Jesus said that he wanted to abide/remain IN his disciples, that he didn’t mean he was actually in them then? I would be really curious to know if anybody else has ever said that?
Jay,
It seems to me that you believe that in order for a person to have “divine help” (beyond the word of God), that God must literally and personally be inside of a person. Is that so?
I just don’t see where the Bible teaches that. I mean God can make a donkey speak, make a king eat grass like a beast, harden a pharaoh’s heart, cause people to die, raise people to life, and on and on without first needing to personally dwell inside of said persons. Why couldn’t he? Surely, he can put a thought in my mind, heal a disease in my body, or whatever else he so chooses – without first needing to be personally inside of my body.
Remember that it is the Holy Spirit who convicts sinner’s in order to bring them to repentance and obedience to the gospel. That is perhaps the greatest of “divine helps” offered to man. Yet nobody believe that the HS must personally indwell a lost sinner in order to do all of that. And I don’t believe that his divine help is limited to having a person hear or read the word of God (although that surely is one way).
I want to be clear on that – just because I believe that God (and the Holy Spirit) dwell inside of me in the precise way that Jesus claimed to be IN his disciples when he said he was in John 15…. it does not mean that I deny any “divine help” beyond the revealed word of God. It just doesn’t. Otherwise, why pray?
Having said all of that, Jesus could hardly have been plainer in declaring that he was IN his disciples well before the day of Pentecost, his resurrection, and the coming of the Spirit.
Most people believe that THE WAY in which he WAS IN his disciples in John 15 was via his word. The text is plain enough there. It says precisely that. And I can hardly imagine any reputable Bible scholar saying otherwise.
My whole point here is in asking IF when Jesus claimed to BE IN his disciples he meant that he was in them “through his word” and NOT literally and personally — why then can we not be consistent with the indwelling of God and the Holy Spirit? I mean, Bible teaches that Jesus IS IN us just as clearly as it teaches that the Holy Spirit IS IN us. Why insist that the indwelling of Jesus is NOT personal and direct but that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is different?
WHY can’t it be possible that God meant the same thing, in each case?
It would not prevent God from being able to offer his divine help beyond the Bible. The one just does not imply the other.
Lastly, it seems to me that you are being forced to ignore or tweak the otherwise plain words of Jesus in John 15 in order to avoid the issue. Which is why I believe you said all of that about Jesus meaning he WAS NOT in them then but that he “would be” (future tense) in his disciples representatively “through his agent the Holy Spirit”. The text just does not say any of that and again, I challenge you to reference a single known commentator to offer as much.
I also would love to hear back from Charles (or anybody else) regarding the indwelling of Jesus back in John 15. He was IN THEM THEN and if it was via his word…why not be consistent later on?
If it was OTHER than via his word…. then please explain HOW
And when I said that nobody believes that the Holy Spirit indwells lost sinners in order to convict them… I had in mind no non Calvinists.
Hank said, “Most people believe that THE WAY in which he WAS IN his disciples in John 15 was via his word.”
(not speaking for Hank) Just to expound on what Hank stated, My understanding of Jesus or the holy ghost being in the Christian, is only after the person, hears the word, accepts the word, (as truth) and decides to obey the word. Then and only then does God have spiritual influence over the Christian’s life. The word spoken of here is the “Word of God”, if, (and I believe He did) God created the heavens and the earth with only the spoken word, I see it as no problem that he can guide/influence the Christian simply through his word. God did not need to live within the earth in order to create it. God does not need to live (personally) within the Christian in order to guide them.
Some here may not know where Jesus is or what the holy ghost is, but Peter seems to know the answer to both questions.
1Pe 3:21 The like figure whereunto [even] baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
1Pe 3:22 Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.
Where is Jesus? Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God
What is the holy ghost? powers being made subject unto him.
The power of his word to convince, the power of baptism to save.
Charles,
How about it? Will you acknowledge that Jesus claimed to be IN his disciples back in John 15?
If so, how? In what sense?
Hank wrote,
And so, it seems to me that you contend that the Spirit indwells via the word, but that this indwelling is more than mere human effort to read and be changed by the word. You seem to suggest that God, Jesus, and/or the Spirt somehow exercise a direct influence over the human mind/heart to increase the efficacy of the word.
Do I interpret correctly?
Yeah, God can exercise a direct influence over a lot of things.
But, how about answering my question? If you really deny that Jesus claimed to be IN his discipes in John 15, are you familiar with ANY Greek scholar that would agree with you?
Hank
You have been trying to get Jay and others to commit to a statement about abiding or remaining in Jesus in John 15. I believe that almost everyone is having a problem providing the answer that you seem to be seeking. No one has been able to satisfy your desire for the meaning. Your own comments don’t seem to help us understand the exact stance that you are seeking for us or Jay to confirm. Therefore, I decided that I must look into the text of John 15 that you are referencing to help me understand. After doing that, it appears to me that you are expecting a different concept than I see in the text. Let’s notice the communication from the master teacher Jesus. I believe that if you will let Jesus explain what he means in the context that he is using it, it will easily be understood by all of us. But, if you or anyone attempt to interject your own assumptions into the meaning it will create confusion.
I had a three tables side by side with all of the words, remain, remains, and all forms of the word abide in bold print. In that context you could read multiple translations comparing as you read, if you have logos Bible software this is easily accomplished.
When I copied that into html all was lost. So I removed all but KJV, you really should build your own study in this fashion it will help with your understanding. You should be able to notice that those words have multiple meanings in the context that Jesus uses them. If you attempt to use a meaning from a dictionary or commentaries sometimes they just don’t fulfill the message being portrayed, those helps written by men do not always allow for the meanings in the context. Trust Jesus’s interpretation I believe that then you will always be correct.
John 15 King James
15:1 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.
2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.
3 Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.
4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.
5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.
7 If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.
8 Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples.
9 As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love.
10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love.
11 These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full.
Larry,
Huh? What were you trying to say there?
That Jesus could abide and/or remain in his disciples WITHOUT being in them in the first place?
I appreciate you trying to help em out, but you really didn’t.
Besides, and no offense, but when I was asking them about naming one known scholar who denies that the text teaches that Jesus WAS IN them then… I meant an actual known scholar/commentator. Not some guy with Bible Logos Software and three tables side by sidewith all the translations on em.
Not to say that I wouldn’t have consider your point – had you actually made one.
Hank wrote,
Hank,
The dispute over the personal indwelling of the Spirit is normally couched in terms of a rejection of the “direct operation” of the Spirit, with the word-only advocates insisting that the Spirit works only through the word — that is, his work ended with the completion of the drafting of the NT.
But I nearly always find that, only closer questioning, the advocates concede that God/Jesus/Spirit can and do in fact exercise a direct influence on the Christian distinct from the word — which means we’re arguing over next to nothing.
The most important part of the indwelling question is whether God, via the Spirit, exerts an influence on the Christian beyond the mere reading of the Bible and application of the Bible to life by purely human effort. If you concede that the Spirit does in fact exercise an influence beyond the mere reading and application of the word, then we’re dealing largely in semantics.
After all, even those who contend earnestly for a personal indwelling, don’t mean that the Spirit occupies some physical habitation within the human. The Spirit is, you know, spirit and not flesh. The indwelling is spiritual, not physical or fleshly.
It is analogous to the indwelling of God among the Israelites in the wilderness — a special presence by which God communicates whenever and however God wishes, offering direction and guidance — when it suits the Spirit to do so.
It’s analogous to God’s glory dwelling in the Holy of Holies.
And it’s the fulfillment of this promise:
(Jer 31:31-34 ESV) 31 “Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the LORD. 33 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the LORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34 And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.”
Quoted in Heb 8 and alluded to throughout the NT. The distinction God promises is that he will help transform the hearts of his people rather than counting on them to transforms themselves all by themselves. It’s not that Christians will be more diligent students and work harder, but that God himself will write his laws on their hearts and minds.
I think Jeremiah and the author of Hebrews were entirely serious, and so I believe this to be true. Absent some sort of direct operation, Jer 31 is reduced to nonsense. And it’s the direct operation that the NT refers to as an indwelling — a phrase that refers to the personal relationship that God has with Israel in the desert, the Tabernacle, and the Temple
Indeed, we are each temples of the Holy Spirit, and that image plainly presupposes that in some sense the Spirit has a special presence in his temples – as that is the very definition of “temple” in ancient times.
Now, you’ll notice (as I’ve said before) that there is more than one way for Divinity to indwell. It could be as a column of smoke and fire, as the Shekinah dwelling above the ark, or even as Jesus himself walking the earth with his disciples.
Before his ascension, did Jesus indwell his disciples through his teachings? Yes, of course, but also through his personal presence. It was far more than mere propositional truth. It was an intense, personal relationship. God sent his “word” not as a book but as Jesus — because you can’t have a personal relationship with a book.
That relationship — which produced teaching but was much more than teaching — is the “abiding” that Jesus refers to John 15. And when Jesus sent “another Helper” in the form of the Spirit to “abide” with his disciples, the Spirit abided within them not only as propositional truths learned from study, but also in an intense, real personal relationship.
Thus, Jesus very reasonably compares his personal presence during his three-year ministry with the personal presence of the Spirit who was to come.
Jay wrote:
“The most important part of the indwelling question is whether God, via the Spirit, exerts an influence on the Christian beyond the mere reading of the Bible and application of the Bible to life by purely human effort. If you concede that the Spirit does in fact exercise an influence beyond the mere reading and application of the word, then we’re dealing largely in semantics.”
I have always believed that God can, has, and does exercise an influence beyond the mere reading and application of the word. We may disagree in terms of the extent to which he “influences” us, but we both seem to agree that he does. I am familiar with those who believe God does not do anything “directly” which is illogical.
My question(s) for you Jay, are these:
1. Does God really need to “personally indwell” a person or thing in order to perform a direct influence?
2. If Jesus could be “IN” his disciples without “personally” indwelling them, do you believe that the same could be said concerning the indwelling of the Holy Spirit?
3. When the Bible says that Christ strengthens and/or gives power to a disciple, do you believe that Christ is actually able to do that? Or, does the Bible mean that it is not actually Christ, but the Holy Spirit who does those things?
4. When the Bible says that Christ is IN us, do you believe that it is not really Christ, but the Holy Spirit that is being referred to? In other words, do you believe that the Holy Spirit is sometimes called “the Spirit of Christ” or even simply “Christ”?
Hanked asked,
The scriptures refer to the Spirit indwelling a Christian repeatedly. Therefore, I believe that to be true. Moreover, I believe the indwelling has the consequences described in Scripture.
The exact nature of the indwelling is not described, and therefore I have no position on that — at least, not one that I’d insist on. Clearly, the Spirit is spirit and not flesh, and therefore the indwelling occurs in some sense that is spiritual and not fleshly. There’s no physical hole inside me inhabited by the Spirit.
Because we have fleshly minds and therefore can’t understand spiritual things perfectly, God teaches by metaphor and analogy. The indwelling is thus like God’s dwelling among the Israelites, God’s dwelling in the tabernacle and the temple, and even Jesus’ dwelling among his disciples. But these are metaphors and similes.
God may influence my heart and mind any way he pleases. He’s God. The question is how he chooses to influence me, not what is theoretically possible. And for Christians, he often acts through Spirit. That is not necessarily the only means by which God acts on me, but it is a means.
Why does God choose to act that way? I have no idea. But I believe his promises and celebrate the blessings that come from them
No, because Jesus was “in” the disciples by virtue of a personal relationship built on his literal presence with them. Therefore, for the Spirit’s indwelling to be like Jesus’, there must also be a literal presence (not a physical presence, but an actual, special presence not given to all humans).
You argue what we lawyers call “a distinction without a difference.” If Jesus chooses to strengthen or give power via the Spirit, it’s still Jesus doing so. And, being Divine, he can do as he pleases. And being true, what he promises is what really happens.
To argue that Jesus must always act directly and not through the mediating Spirit is to impose a human boundary on Christ that is not justified by Scripture or logic.
(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.
In this passage, “Spirit of Christ” plainly refers to the Holy Spirit. The same is true of —
(1Pe 1:10-11 ESV) 10 Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, 11 inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories.
If you study the OT prophets, they are said to possess the Holy Spirit.
Are there times when “Christ” refers to the Spirit? Yes and no. Sometimes “Christ” refers to Christ acting through the Spirit. Sometimes it refers to Christ acting on his own. It’s perfectly ordinary way for people to speak. The distinction is normally clear from the context for those who read with a Biblical understanding of the Spirit’s work.
“But I nearly always find that, only closer questioning, the advocates concede that God/Jesus/Spirit can and do in fact exercise a direct influence on the Christian distinct from the word — which means we’re arguing over next to nothing.”
Jay, If, I believed that God only influences me through the “written word”why would I pray, why not just read the bible, I am one who has never contended God had no influence other than the bible. That would be idiotic on my part, I am not an idiot, I can vouch for that. others can too, if need be.