Acts 22:16 Paul's salvation

[Doug Brents]

That does not change the fact you cannot remove the indwelling as a form of receiving the Spirit

so someone who has not received the Spirit cannot have been indwelt

think

You are trying to define the phrase and then apply that definition to all situations. You must use the facts we already know to define the phrase in each circumstance. These men were indwelt; they were saved, and therefore had to have already been indwelt. Therefore, the phrase cannot mean anything to do with the indwelling. It can only apply to them not having received empowerment from the Spirit.

 

[TomL]

You are trying to define the phrase and then apply that definition to all situations. You must use the facts we already know to define the phrase in each circumstance. These men were indwelt; they were saved, and therefore had to have already been indwelt. Therefore, the phrase cannot mean anything to do with the indwelling. It can only apply to them not having received empowerment from the Spirit.

Sorry you do not get to employ changing definitions

If the indwelling is a case of receiving the Spirit even if for argument’s sake we include other possibilities

then that is true at all times and there cannot exist a case where one has not received the Spirit but is indwelt

again think.

receiving the spirit cannot

 

[Doug Brents]

Sorry you do not get to employ changing definitions

Sorry, but when there are multiple way of understanding a phrase, the one that fits the context is the one that must be used.

If the indwelling is a case of receiving the Spirit even if for argument’s sake we include other possibilities

then that is true at all times and there cannot exist a case where one has not received the Spirit but is indwelt

You assume that "had not received the Spirit" in Acts 8 refers to the indwelling. It does not because it cannot. It only applies to the empowerment of the Spirit, because the text is clear that these men had the indwelling because they were saved. The only thing they had not received was the empowerment of the Spirit.

 

[TomL]

Sorry, but when there are multiple way of understanding a phrase, the one that fits the context is the one that must be used.

You assume that "had not received the Spirit" in Acts 8 refers to the indwelling. It does not because it cannot. It only applies to the empowerment of the Spirit, because the text is clear that these men had the indwelling because they were saved. The only thing they had not received was the empowerment of the Spirit.

Again you cannot change the definition

If the indwelling is receiving the Spirit no matter what else you might imagine receiving the Spirit is

you cannot make it (the indwelling) a failure to receive the spirit

Again think

You are altering the meaning of the term to fit your doctrine.

 

[Doug Brents]

Again you cannot change the definition

If the indwelling is receiving the Spirit no matter what else you might imagine receiving the Spirit is

you cannot make it (the indwelling) a failure to receive the spirit

Again think

You are altering the meaning of the term to fit your doctrine.

Tom, we can go round and round forever on this, so I will make this the last thing I say about it. Your rigid insistence that if they "did not receive the Spirit" must mean that they could not have the indwelling is in clear defiance of the facts in the Text. The phrase "receive the Spirit" can refer to the indwelling, but most of the time it only refers to the miraculous empowerment of the Spirit (as it does in Acts 8). It is only referring to the fact that these men had not yet received any miraculous empowerment, because that empowerment can only be given via an Apostle, and Philip (the one who baptized these men into Christ) was not an Apostle. This means that they were indwelt, but had not yet "received the Spirit" from an Apostle laying hands on them to give them the miraculous empowerment of the Spirit. You can continue to believe whatever you want, but the evidence in Scripture is clear.

 

[TomL]

Tom, we can go round and round forever on this, so I will make this the last thing I say about it. Your rigid insistence that if they "did not receive the Spirit" must mean that they could not have the indwelling is in clear defiance of the facts in the Text. The phrase "receive the Spirit" can refer to the indwelling, but most of the time it only refers to the miraculous empowerment of the Spirit (as it does in Acts 8). It is only referring to the fact that these men had not yet received any miraculous empowerment, because that empowerment can only be given via an Apostle, and Philip (the one who baptized these men into Christ) was not an Apostle. This means that they were indwelt, but had not yet "received the Spirit" from an Apostle laying hands on them to give them the miraculous empowerment of the Spirit. You can continue to believe whatever you want, but the evidence in Scripture is clear.

Wrong

You agreed that those indwelt received the Spirit.

Now you want to deny what you affirmed because it is contrary to your theology.

Any time one is indwelt they have received the spirit.

Had the Samaritan been indwelt they would have received the Spirit even by your own confession,

but scripture is clear they had not received the Spirit.

Scripture clearly shows they received the Spirit at a time after water baptism

But you cannot abide with the fact this transpired after water baptism

 

[TomL]

Wrong

You agreed that those indwelt received the Spirit.

Now you want to deny what you affirmed because it is contrary to your theology.

Any time one is indwelt they have received the spirit.

Had the Samaritan been indwelt they would have received the Spirit even by your own confession,

but scripture is clear they had not received the Spirit.

Scripture clearly shows they received the Spirit at a time after water baptism

But you cannot abide with the fact this transpired after water baptism

Let me put it to you this way

You have two things

We will call them A and B

If you have either A or B then you have C

So if A then C

and

If B then C

Let A = the indwelling

Let B = endowment with miraculous power as you argue

Let C - having received the Spirit

The only time you do not have C is if you have neither A or B

The Samaritans according to scripture did not have C

Then logically they had neither the indwelling or endowment for miraculous power

 

[David Koberstein]

Was Naaman cured from leprosy because of self/works righteousness, or by surrender to God's will?
Did the walls of Jericho fall because of self/works righteousness, or by surrender to God's will?
Was the widow who gave her last piece of bread to the prophet fed because of self/works righteousness, or by surrender to God's will?
Did the widow fill all the jars with oil because of self/works righteousness, or by surrender to God's will?

Faith requires, demands, is dead/non-existent without, works.

Yeshua and Leprosy

Love Israel 8th annual conference session 4: Matthew 8:1-4 About Baruch: R. Baruch is the senior lecturer at the Zera Avraham Institute based in Israel. He also appears on the Israeli Television program Pdut L

player.lightcast.com

 

[TomL]

Let me put it to you this way

You have two things

We will call them A and B

If you have either A or B then you have C

So if A then C

and

If B then C

Let A = the indwelling

Let B = endowment with miraculous power as you argue

Let C - having received the Spirit

The only time you do not have C is if you have neither A or B

The Samaritans according to scripture did not have C

Then logically they had neither the indwelling or endowment for miraculous power

Logically it is proven, one who has not received the Spirit is neither indwelt or endowed with miraculous power from the baptism en the Holy Ghost

 

[Doug Brents]

Logically it is proven, one who has not received the Spirit is neither indwelt or endowed with miraculous power from the baptism en the Holy Ghost

Only if you take your narrow view of what it means to "receive the Spirit". But if you understand that one can receive the indwelling of the Spirit and still not receive the Spirit's empowerment, and if you understand that the men we are discussing were in Christ, which means that they were saved and therefore had the indwelling of the Spirit, then you will realize that the phrase "had not received the Spirit" refers only to the miraculous empowerment of the Spirit, and not the indwelling which they obviously already had.

 

[TomL]

Only if you take your narrow view of what it means to "receive the Spirit". But if you understand that one can receive the indwelling of the Spirit and still not receive the Spirit's empowerment, and if you understand that the men we are discussing were in Christ, which means that they were saved and therefore had the indwelling of the Spirit, then you will realize that the phrase "had not received the Spirit" refers only to the miraculous empowerment of the Spirit, and not the indwelling which they obviously already had.

Sorry no

I allowed for both possibilities

Let me put it to you this way

You have two things

We will call them A and B

If you have either A or B then you have C

So if A then C

and

If B then C

Let A = the indwelling

Let B = endowment with miraculous power as you argue

Let C - having received the Spirit

The only time you do not have C is if you have neither A or B

The Samaritans according to scripture did not have C

Then logically they had neither the indwelling or endowment for miraculous power

Remember you have affirmed that the indwelling is an example of receiving the spirit

you cannot adjust the facts to fit your theology.

 

[Jim]

Sorry no

I allowed for both possibilities

Let me put it to you this way

You have two things

We will call them A and B

If you have either A or B then you have C

So if A then C

and

If B then C

Let A = the indwelling

Let B = endowment with miraculous power as you argue

Let C - having received the Spirit

The only time you do not have C is if you have neither A or B

The Samaritans according to scripture did not have C

Then logically they had neither the indwelling or endowment for miraculous power

Remember you have affirmed that the indwelling is an example of receiving the spirit

you cannot adjust the facts to fit your theology.

The problem with your logic is that there is not just a C; there is a C1 and a C2. C1 is the receiving of the indwelling Spirit and C2 is the receiving of the empowering Spirit. Even though C1 and C2 are completely different, both C1 and C2 are often referred to as simply receiving the Spirit. Since you have failed to understand that your logic is flawed.

 

[TomL]

The problem with your logic is that there is not just a C; there is a C1 and a C2. C1 is the receiving of the indwelling Spirit and C2 is the receiving of the empowering Spirit. Even though C1 and C2 are completely different, both C1 and C2 are often referred to as simply receiving the Spirit. Since you have failed to understand that your logic is flawed.

Um both c1 and c2 are referred to as receiving the spirit.

In particular C1 indwelling

John 7:38–39 (KJV 1900) — 38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (indwelling) 39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

thus one who has not received the spirit has not been indwelt

 

[Johann]

Um both c1 and c2 are referred to as receiving the spirit.

In particular C1 indwelling

John 7:38–39 (KJV 1900) — 38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (indwelling) 39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

thus one who has not received the spirit has not been indwelt

Eph 1:13 in whom also you, when you heard [*This participle (“hearing”) and the following one (“believing”) are understood as temporal] the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, in whom also when you believed you were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit,
Eph 1:14 who is the down payment of our inheritance, until the redemption of the possession, to the praise of his glory.

J.

 

[Doug Brents]

Um both c1 and c2 are referred to as receiving the spirit.

In particular C1 indwelling

John 7:38–39 (KJV 1900) — 38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (indwelling) 39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

thus one who has not received the spirit has not been indwelt

No necessarily. If (and it is clear that it is) the phrase "had not received the Spirit" refers only to miraculous empowerment, then your "logic" is meaningless.

 

[civic]

Sorry you do not get to employ changing definitions

If the indwelling is a case of receiving the Spirit even if for argument’s sake we include other possibilities

then that is true at all times and there cannot exist a case where one has not received the Spirit but is indwelt

again think.

receiving the spirit cannot

ditto

 

[Doug Brents]

ditto

Sorry Civic, but I am not employing "changing definitions". There are multiple ways in which we "receive the Spirit", and while the phrase may sometimes mean the indwelling, in the case we are discussing it cannot possibly refer to the indwelling. These men were in Christ, they had been baptized into Christ, they were saved, and that means that they had the indwelling of the Spirit as ALL who are saved do.

 

[Johann]

Sorry Civic, but I am not employing "changing definitions". There are multiple ways in which we "receive the Spirit", and while the phrase may sometimes mean the indwelling, in the case we are discussing it cannot possibly refer to the indwelling. These men were in Christ, they had been baptized into Christ, they were saved, and that means that they had the indwelling of the Spirit as ALL who are saved do.

I see what you are driving at-@Doug Brents.


Indwelling of the Spirit at Salvation (Romans 8:9-11; Ephesians 1:13-14):

In Romans 8:9, Paul says, "But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him." Here, "ἔχει" (echei), meaning "to have" or "to possess," is used to express that the Spirit indwells every believer.

Ephesians 1:13 speaks of believers as "sealed" (Greek: ἐσφραγίσθητε or esphragisthēte) with the Holy Spirit at the point of belief, indicating that receiving the Spirit in this sense is inseparable from salvation.

Filling of the Spirit for Empowerment (Acts 4:31; Ephesians 5:18):

In Acts 4:31, the disciples, already believers, are described as being "filled" with the Holy Spirit (ἐπλήσθησαν or eplēsthēsan), which empowered them to speak boldly. This shows an empowerment for ministry that is distinct from the Spirit’s indwelling.

Ephesians 5:18 uses the command πληροῦσθε (plērousthe), "be filled with the Spirit," indicating a continuous need for believers to allow the Spirit to lead and empower them, which is distinct from the initial indwelling at salvation.
Receiving the Spirit through Laying on of Hands (Acts 8:14-17):

"but be filled with the Spirit" This is a present passive imperative meaning "you must continue to be filled with the Spirit" or "ever be filled with the Spirit." This is a command, not an option! It is the normal state for all believers, not the exception. This phrase implies that believers are to be available, sensitive, and obedient to the Spirit's forming of Christ in their daily lives (cf. Rom_8:28-29; Gal_4:19; Eph_1:4; Eph_2:10; Eph_4:13; Col_1:28). Believers cannot fill themselves, but must allow the Spirit to have freedom and influence. Human performance is not the key to effective living but the Spirit (cf. Gal_3:1-3). However, believers must volitionally open themselves to the Spirit's leadership and control on a recurrent basis.

The term "filled" is used often in the NT for that which motivates and characterizes one's life. Believers have a choice in what fills their lives. In Acts being "filled" with the Spirit is associated with evangelism. Peter was "filled" several times in Act_2:4; Act_4:8; Act_4:31. Filling was an ongoing need and experience.
The structural parallel (Colossians & Ephesians are based on almost the same outline) in Col_3:16 changed the "ever be filled with the Spirit" to "let the word of Christ richly dwell within you." They both refer to daily intentional submission to the Spirit's producing Christlikeness, particularly as it relates to dealing with people. Jesus died for people. People are priority; people are eternal.
Utley

In Acts 8:15-17, Peter and John pray for new believers in Samaria, who "had received" (ἐδέξαντο or edexanto) the word but had not yet received (ἐλάβοσαν or elabosan) the Holy Spirit until the apostles laid hands on them. Here, λαμβάνω (lambanō) indicates an imparting of the Spirit’s presence and power, following belief, that was outwardly evident and distinct from the internal indwelling.
Baptism with the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:5, Acts 2:4):

Jesus, in Acts 1:5, tells the disciples they will be "baptized with the Holy Spirit" (βαπτισθήσεσθε or baptisthēsesthe), pointing toward Pentecost in Acts 2:4 when they are "filled" with the Spirit and empowered for ministry. This baptism is separate from their initial belief and indwelling, focusing on equipping and empowering.
These examples highlight how the Spirit's work involves various "receivings" (indwelling, empowering, and filling) that differ in purpose and manifestation, according to Greek terms used in each context. For believers, this demonstrates that receiving the Spirit can mean being indwelt at salvation, empowered for service, or filled for spiritual vitality—all facets of the Spirit’s ministry in the life of the believer.

J.

 

[Jim]

Um both c1 and c2 are referred to as receiving the spirit.

In particular C1 indwelling

John 7:38–39 (KJV 1900) — 38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (indwelling) 39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

thus one who has not received the spirit has not been indwelt

Has not received the indwelling Spirit, but may have received the impowering Spiri. Many received the empowering Spirit before the institution of the indwelling Spirit. Give it up. You are wrong in your analysis. And your theology is suffering for it.

 

[TomL]

Has not received the indwelling Spirit, but may have received the impowering Spiri. Many received the empowering Spirit before the institution of the indwelling Spirit. Give it up. You are wrong in your analysis. And your theology is suffering for it.

Nope

Receiving the spirit covers being indwelt by the Spirit as per the verse quoted

John 7:38–39 (LEB) — 38 the one who believes in me. Just as the scripture said, ‘Out of his belly will flow rivers of living water.’ ” 39 (Now he said this concerning the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were about to receive. For the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus had not yet been glorified.)

The evidence contradicts your claim