What about post 378?
Acts 22:16 Paul's salvation
- Thread starter dwight92070
- Start date
Doug Brents
Well-known member
Just repeating your previous post with different highlighting does not change my reply to it. The men had not received the miraculous empowerment of the Holy Spirit, but they did have the indwelling because they were in Christ, they were saved, they had been baptized into Christ and had their sins removed. According to Eph 1, that means they had the indwelling of the Spirit because He is the down-payment, the first installment of the reward we have through Christ.
Doug Brents
Well-known member
According to your assumption, but not according to Scripture. They received the Spirit when God (Jesus) breathed upon them and commanded that they "receive the Spirit" in John 20:22. From that time on, they had the indwelling of the Spirit. Jesus had been glorified, and so the Spirit could, and did, come into them.
mailmandan
Active member
From the article below, Bob L Ross exposes Campbellism and said something similar to what you said:
"Is this not why, as so many have observed, Campbellite preaching is so dead, so staccato, and relies so heavily upon human “logic” and “legalism?” The only explanation of this barren spirituality is the absence of the Holy Spirit. This likewise explains their lack of a proper understanding of the Word of God (I Cor. 2:14)."
Spot-on.
Sorry you ignored the argument and your own obvious contradiction
You are ignoring the point you had agreed with
Did you really think this trough?
You agreed the indwelling is receiving the Spirit
HELLO
The text states they had not received the Spirit
If they were indwelt then according to your own agreement they received the Spirit
The text however states they did not
That is a major contradiction you do not address but run from
You and so many think that 1 Corinthians 2:14 says that you directly receive the "things of the Spirit of God". How come all those who think that do not always agree? How can it be that the Spirit of God apparently doesn't directly reveal the same thing to all of you?
There you go again, identifying receiving the spirit with the indwelling
but then turn around and contradict yourself claiming the Samaritans were indwelt when the text states they had not received the Spirit
Your arguments change with your needs of the moment
Doug Brents
Well-known member
The fact that Thomas was not there is irrelevant. We are not told many things about what happened, and it is probable that Thomas received the Holy Spirit after he touched Jesus' hands and side. But in the Study of the Word, it is best to take things literally until and unless there is compelling evidence in the text that points to it having a prophetic interpretation. There is no evidence in the text that points to this being prophetic in any way. Jesus breathed on then, and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained." This did not point toward Pentecost, but happened immediately as Jesus breathed upon them.
As for Luke 24:49, it says that they were to wait in Jerusalem until the Spirit comes on them in power. He was already within them, but had not yet empowered them, as would happen on Pentecost in Acts 2:4.
Doug Brents
Well-known member
I am ignoring your argument because it is irrelevant. There is no contradiction. While "receiving the Spirit" sometimes refers to the indwelling, that does not mean that it always refers to the indwelling, nor does it mean that someone cannot have the indwelling if they have not "received the Spirit". You refuse to see the truth that is in Scripture. Receiving the indwelling of the Spirit is automatic upon being saved. It is not flashy, it is not demonstrated with power, it is not obvious the instant it happens, but it happens none the less. There has never been a person who was "IN CHRIST" who did not have the indwelling of the Spirit because He is the first installment of our inheritance in Christ and is the evidence that one is in Christ (not the miraculous empowerment which only some had, but the indwelling which every Christ follower has).
The men in Acts 8 had not received the miraculous empowerment of the Spirit, but they had the indwelling because they were "in Christ"; they had been baptized into Christ (in Christ's name) having believed in Him. What was it that Simon wanted to buy? Did he want to buy the ability to lay hands on someone and have them receive something that could not be seen? Something that was invisible and without a "wow" factor? Or did he want to buy the ability to give miraculous empowerment with signs and wonders to the people on whom he laid his hands? Obviously he wanted the latter, which is exactly what he saw given to the Samaritans.
Doug Brents
Well-known member
My argument does not change at all. I simply understand that there are different manifestations of the Spirit and what is called "receiving the Spirit". You lump all of the Spirit together into one little package, and say that if one has one part he must have it all. But that is not how the Spirit works.
When will you deal with the logic of the point
You affirmed the indwelling is receiving the Spirit
The text stated they did not receive the Spirit
there is then no logical way for you to claim they were indwelt given the statement they had not received the Spirit
Ignoring is the right word
Your claim is irrational
You affirmed the indwelling is receiving the Spirit
The text stated they did not receive the Spirit
there is then no logical way for you to claim they were indwelt given the statement they had not received the Spirit
Maybe you should stop ignoring it and deasl with it
Doug Brents
Well-known member
I have dealt with your logic. You perceive the Spirit in one small, neat, manageable package. But He is not manageable, nor is He small. Just because "receiving the Spirit" means the indwelling sometimes, it does not mean that "receiving the Spirit" always means the indwelling. In the case of Acts 8, it is referring to the miraculous empowerment of the Spirit, which is what Simon was trying to buy.
When are you going to deal with the fact that the indwelling of the Spirit is immediately received upon salvation, and these men were saved when they were baptized into Christ. Even if we go with your understanding, baptism is not received until after one is saved, so the fact that these men had been baptized means that they had already been saved and had the indwelling presence of the Spirit within them.
Doug Brents
Well-known member
See post 395
You can try to believe that.
Thus, you are assuming.
The Bible makes clear that he wasn't there.
Doug Brents
Well-known member
No, Thomas was not there. But that does not change what it says about those Apostles who were there. The Spirit was given to them twice. Once when He came to indwell their hearts (in John 20:22), and then again when they were empowered by Him in Acts 2:4. Two totally different events with completely different effects and results, and both of them are referred to as "receiving the Spirit".
Doug Brents
Well-known member
Your opinion in noted. But I choose to accept the testimony of Scripture over your opinion, so forgive me if I choose to ignore your fictional ideas.
Similar threads
