No, they are not. 1 Cor 12:4-11 is very clear that there are many manifestations of the Spirit. As I have demonstrated to Tom, the Holy Spirit indwells EVERY person who is born again. But not everyone receives any or all of the gifts listed in 1 Cor 12.
Nope you are dodging
no-one claims anyone has all of the gifts.
The point you miss is those who are indwelt have received the Spirit
I agree.
So if being indwelt is evidence of receiving the spirit
agreed I don't know where I have ever said otherwise. if I did it was a mistake.
No not you,
no worries brother
Ok thanksno worries brother
Logic is irrelevant in the face of evidence and facts. The fact is, though you refuse to accept it, that these men were saved, they were in Christ, and as such had the indwelling of the Spirit which is promised to be given to every person who is saved. That being the case, we know that "received the Spirit" cannot be referring to the indwelling, because clearly these men already had the indwelling, since they were saved. This is why Peter and John did not instruct them to be baptized again, or teach them about Jesus again, or instruct them to believe again. They only needed to have hands laid on them and to be given the miraculous empowerment of the Spirit which they had not been able to receive from Philip.
Every believer has a minimum of the indwelling, but not everyone has the gifts listed in 1 Cor 12. The gifts listed here as manifestations of the Spirit do not include the indwelling, because the indwelling is not a manifestation. It is not something you can see or experience (if you are not the one experiencing it). The men in Acts 8 that Tom and I are discussing were saved when Philip baptized them, therefore they had the indwelling of the Spirit. But they did not receive any of the miraculous empowerments or manifestations of the Spirit until Peter and John laid hands on them.
LOL
Yes, that is one meaning of the phrase "received the Spirit". But it is not the only meaning. As stated before, it is entirely possible to have the indwelling but not the miraculous empowerment of the Spirit. These men had the indwelling. But they had not received the miraculous empowerment of the Spirit. Thus, they had not "received the Spirit".
They had not received the Spirit, meaning that they had not received miraculous empowerment. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the indwelling of the Spirit.
Like I said, logic plays no part in this.
What did Simon SEE when the Spirit was given? He saw miraculous empowerment: speaking in tongues, healing, prophesying, etc. He could not see them receiving the indwelling. But these men already had that, because they were already saved. These men were the first among the non-Jews to receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, because they were the first of the non-Jews to be saved.
Even arguing that does not matter
It matters completely and totally. That is the whole point I am making. I do not need to change the definition of the phrase, because I made it clear from the beginning that there are multiple ways in which we receive the Spirit, and they are not mutually inclusive. The Samaritans had NOT received the miraculous empowerment of the Spirit (which is exactly what the 120 received on Pentecost). The Samaritans HAD already received the indwelling of the Spirit, because they were in Christ (saved/born again). You cannot be born again and not have the indwelling. But you can be born again and not have the empowerment of the Spirit that the Samaritans received when Peter and John laid hands on them.
You did change the definition
