Truth Magazine

By Johnny Stringer

In order to understand this subject, one must remember that the words of the scripture are the words of the Spirit. The Spirit was responsible for revealing God’s word to man (John 14:26; 16:13; 1 Cor. 2:12, 13; Eph. 3:3-5; 1 Tim. 4:1), and it is through His words that the Spirit acts to persuade and motivate us to serve God. He moves our hearts and influences our lives in the same way that men so often move the hearts and influence the lives of other men – by words.

Many believe that the Spirit operates directly upon our hearts to influence our behavior, rather than indirectly, through the word. They charge that a denial of a miraculous, direct operation is really a denial that the Spirit works. However, the fact that the Spirit uses His words to influence men does not mean that the Spirit is not responsible for the effect produced in our lives. The Spirit is necessarily responsible for whatever effect is produced by His words. We know that eloquent speakers, by their words, can move an audience to tears; vociferous speakers, by their words, can move a mob to riot, burn, and kill. The fact that these speakers use words to produce the effects does not mean that the speakers are not responsible for producing the effects. Furthermore, it is a fact that the Spirit’s direct influence has never changed the character of any man. Balsam prophesied under the direct influence of the Spirit (Num. 24:2 ),yet remained evil in character (2 Pet. 2:15; Num. 31:6; Rev. 2:14); Saul, prophesied under the Spirit’s direct influence (1 Sam. 19:18-24), yet continued his evil efforts to murder David. God’s method of changing the character of a man has always been moral persuasion, not a miraculous direct operation of the Spirit.

The Alien Sinner

In all the word of God, we do not read of one instance in which the Spirit came directly upon the heart of a sinner so as to miraculously cause him to turn to Christ. The New Testament, however, is replete with the teaching that the gospel message which the Spirit revealed to men is the force that leads men to Christ. Note the following scriptures which plainly affirm that men are converted by the word of God:

(1) Romans 10:17 is quite clear in stating that faith comes, not by a direct operation of the Spirit, but by hearing God’s word. The Spirit is responsible for the faith that exists in a man’s heart, because the Spirit revealed the message which produced his faith. The truth stated in Rom. 10:17 is corroborated by other passages. For example, according to the Parable of the Sower, the word of God is necessary for faith to exist (Lk. 8:11-12). Also, John affirmed that the things which he wrote were designed to produce faith (John 20:30-31). Finally, John 17:20 shows that people would believe through the word preached by the apostles.

(2) John 6:44-45 shows that men are drawn to God by hearing and learning; hence, the Spirit draws through the word He revealed.

(3) 2 Thess. 2:14 teaches that men are called by the gospel. The gospel which He revealed, therefore, is the means by which the Spirit calls us. He calls through words.

(4) John 17.17 says that men are sanctified by the truth – the truth which the Spirit revealed. In 1 Cor. 6:11, Paul said the Corinthians had been sanctified by the Spirit. Putting these two Scriptures together, we conclude that the Spirit sanctifies by means of His revelation. When you hear that a gun killed a man, then you hear that Joe killed the man, you conclude that Joe killed the man by means of a gun.

(5) Romans 1:16 declares that the gospel is God’s power unto salvation. The Spirit’s role in our salvation is vital, for He made the gospel available to us.

(6) 1 Pet. 1:23 speaks of the word of truth as the incorruptible seed of the new birth. 1 Cor. 4:15 and James 1:18 corroborate this point. This fact helps us to understand Jesus’ statement in John 3:3-5 regarding the necessity of being born of water and the Spirit. He did not in that place explain precisely what part the Spirit would play in the new birth; and those who have concluded that Jesus had reference to a miraculous, direct operation of the Spirit on the individual’s heart have jumped to a conclusion which is not even hinted at in the passage. 1 Pet. 1:23 explains the Spirit’s role in the new birth. In order for a birth to occur, the seed must be planted. In revealing the word of God to man, the Spirit was providing the seed of the new birth. One is born again when he receives the seed which the Spirit provided into his heart, so that the seed produces an obedient faith in his heart. The Spirit’s part in the new birth was in providing the seed (the word of truth).

Not only do we have these plain affirmations that-men are converted through the influence of the word within their hearts, but we also have many examples of conversion in the book of Acts, all of which demonstrate this fact. In all the examples of conversion which we find in the book of Acts, we do not read of men getting some inexplicable “better-felt-than-told” feeling by a direct operation of the Holy Spirit; rather, we read of people hearing the words of the Spirit, believing, and obeying God. In Acts 2, Peter preached under the influence of the Spirit. Verse 37 says, “Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?” It was through hearing the words that they were pricked in the heart. Was the Spirit responsible for their being so moved? Surely, for it was His words that moved them. The same thing is repeated time and time again through the book of Acts. See Acts 4:4; 8:5, 12; 11:14; 14:1; 18:8. The idea of a miraculous, direct operation of the Spirit which gives a “better-felt-than-told” feeling is derived from the fertile imaginations of men, not from the word of God.

It is in this light that we understand 1 Cor. 12:13, where Paul said, “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body.” As we have already seen, the Spirit teaches and motivates people to obey God; this obedience includes baptism. It is by the Spirit’s teaching that men are led to be baptized, for the Spirit emphasizes the need for baptism. Some examples of the Spirit’s teaching on the subject are found in Acts 2:38; Rom. 6:3-4; Gal. 3:26-27; 1 Pet. 3:21. Being baptized by the Spirit meant “through the teaching of the Spirit,” just as offering sacrifices by the Law (Heb. 10:8) meant “through the’ teaching of the Law.”

Christians

The Spirit influences, not only the alien sinner, but also the Christian, through the word which He revealed. The word of God was the force which effectually worked within the Thessalonians (1 Thess. 2:13). The scripture is a complete guide for us (2 Tim. 3:16-17). Paul told the Ephesian elders, “And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified” (Acts 20:32). In revealing the word of God, the Spirit was providing the teaching which we need for guidance, strength, and motivation in serving God. In writing to Christians, James said that the word of God was able to save their souls (James 1:21). The New Testament epistles are filled with guidance and with pleas, exhortations, and facts designed to motivate and persuade Christians to live faithfully. In them we see the Spirit’s persuasive powers at work, as He sought through His words to influence Christians unto righteous conduct. When one yields to the Spirit’s teaching, the fruit of the Spirit will be seen in his life (Gal. 5:22-23).

In Romans 8:9, Paul said, “But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.” I do not believe that he here speaks of a personal, literal indwelling, for I believe that such a thought would contradict the teaching of Acts 8 regarding the Samaritans. We have seen in previous studies that the Samaritans, even after becoming Christians, did not receive the Spirit until the apostles came from Jerusalem and laid their hands on them. This proves that the Spirit does not automatically come and dwell personally, within one when he becomes a Christian. A personal, literal indwelling was not necessary in order for the Samaritans to belong to God. This must be admitted unless one is prepared to say that the Samaritans, though they were baptized believers, did not belong to God until the apostles came and laid their hands on them. Romans 8:9 must be interpreted in the light of this fact. I believe that any interpretation of this verse which says that the Spirit automatically comes to dwell personally within all Christians is contradictory to the case of the Samaritans, hence is false.

In seeking an interpretation of Rom. 8:9 which does not contradict the teaching of Acts 8, and which is in harmony with the teaching of Scripture regarding the role of truth in influencing our conduct, I have concluded that Paul had reference, not to a literal, but to a figurative indwelling of the Spirit. He dwells within us figuratively as He rules from within through His teaching. When we take into our hearts the truths which the Spirit has taught, and when we let these truths mold our thinking and our very personalities, we thereby enthrone the Spirit in our hearts. As His word works within us, the Spirit is working within us – through the word He gave us. He is dominating our lives. It should be noted that after speaking of the Spirit’s dwelling within us, Paul spoke in the same. breath of Christ’s dwelling within us (v. 10). We can say that Christ dwells within us, just as the Spirit does, for the Spirit’s teachings are Christ teachings. When the Spirit rules from within, Christ rules from within. In Gal. 2:20 Paul said, “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me.” Rather than saying that Christ lived within him, he could just as well have said that the Spirit lived within him. The idea would have been the same namely, that his heart, personality, and life was controlled and dominated by the teachings of Christ, revealed by the Spirit. The one in whom the Spirit dwells is not one who simply knows the Spirit’s teachings; he is one who is controlled by them, so that the Spirit rules him from within. Let us all permit the Spirit to exercise complete control over our minds and lives.

Guardian of Truth XXV: 24, pp. 374-375
June 11, 1981

By Steve Wolfgang

Clarification

In a prior article, I wrote the. following paragraph:

We are told, for instance, by some well-intentioned individuals, that “Christ plus nothing” will save a man; in other words, that a man’s own actions or beliefs have absolutely nothing to do with the salvation of his soul. Were this assertion true, it would by implication follow either that all men would be saved, or that God (making Himself a respecter of persons) arbitrarily (:hose some to be saved without regard to their beliefs or conduct, good or had and likewise ordained (equally as arbitrarily) that some should be doomed to damnation eternally. Since some preachers have taught this for years (and continue to teach it yet) many people believe it.

A friendly reader has called to my attention the fact that some may have misunderstood that paragraph, thinking that it accused those who teach that “Christ plus nothing” saves a person of believing that all men will be saved. That, of course, is not true, and it is not what I meant to say in that paragraph. Upon rereading what I wrote, I do not believe that is what I did say, but perhaps some clarification is in order.

When one considers salvation from a purely logical standpoint, the possibilities are as follows: (1) all persons will be saved; (2) no persons will be saved, or (3) some persons will be saved and others will not. I know of no one who believes or teaches the second alternative (though, the world being as it is, there may be someone somewhere who accepts that rather odd proposition). There are some individuals who would accept the universalism expressed in the first alternative listed above. It is not our purpose here to dispute or review that position, except to point out that it is a clearly unbiblical concept; for though the Bible teaches that God would like for all men to be saved (it is His will that none should perish but that all should come to repentance – 2 Peter 3:9, cf. 1 John 2:2), not all men will do that. We certainly were – not accusing our Calvinist friends of accepting the universalist position.

What we are left with, however, is the question of how, or upon what basis, is the decision made regarding those who will or will not be saved? If there are conditions which a man must accept, believe and obey in order to reach the state of salvation, then man’s response must be included, in addition to the very great sacrifice of Christ, in order to work together unto the salvation of souls. This is what we believe and teach, because we understand the Bible to teach it. There are some, however, who evidently accept (for they certainly preach it) that “Christ plus nothing saves.” That excludes a person’s faith, his obedience or anything else. It also necessitates some arbitrary standard which God must impose to decide who will be lost or who saved, for it is .clear as a sunbeam that if a person has nothing whatsoever to do with his own salvation, depending on “Christ plus nothing” then there must be some arbitrary standard which separates the lost from the saved. Either that, or we are back to the universalist position (all will be saved). If a human being is made righteous without any effort on his own, then why are not all righteous? It must be (1) because God is an arbitrary respecter of persons (which the Bible clearly denies) or (2) it must be that while Christ died for the sins of all the world, the response of each person in the world to either accept or reject God’s conditions determines one’s salvation. This we believe and teach, because the Bible so teaches.

“Stay tuned” for more installments on the above topics. We welcome constructive criticism, comments, inquiry, etc. in these matters or other items in this column. Study and investigate for yourself!

Guardian of Truth XXV: 24, p. 370
June 11, 1981

By Earl E. Robertson

Saul of Tarsus was going from Jerusalem to Damascus to persecute every Christian he could find. The distance was about one hundred and twenty miles. As he journeyed near Damascus, about noon, the voice of the Lord encountered him. Saul asked, “What shall I do, Lord?” The Lord responded, “Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do” (Acts 22:10).

What strange words for a sinner if human theology pertaining to salvation is true! Obviously, Saul recognized his need to do something; the Lord told him there were some things appointed for him to do. Augustine’s doctrines, perfected by John Calvin and parroted by lesser lights even in churches of Christ, flatly contradict the idea in the word “do” used by both Saul and Jesus. Shall we allow the mutterings of mere men to destroy our confidence in the actual words of Jesus? Shall we allow “good words and fair speeches” to deceive us (Rom. 16:18)?

The Lord’s response to Saul’s question did not make allowance for Saul to “establish his own righteousness” (Rom. 10:3) and manipulate it to his own salvation, but rather bound him to what was beforehand “appointed for him to do.” God has the right to set the terms by which He will save sinners. In Saul’s case, as in all others, God exercised this inherent right. The means by which sinners are made righteous before God come from without man (2 Pet. 1:3). From without Saul would come words conveying to him exactly what God had already appointed for him and all other sinners to do to be saved. The Lord wanted Saul to “know his will” – the things “appointed for him to do” (Acts 22:14). One cannot intelligently “do” what one does not know. The Lord sent his servant Ananias to Saul to tell him what he “must do” (Acts 9:6, 11). Ananias told Saul what was appointed for him to do – what he must do: “Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16). Now, one can argue a lifetime that baptism is not essential for salvation but it consists of nothing more or less than mere words of mere -men contradicting the eternal words of the eternal God. Do not circumvent the words of God which save believers (Rom. 1:16, 17) by trusting the cheap, fallible judgments of mere men. Respect God’s appointed truths for you.

Guardian of Truth XXV: 23, p. 363
June 4, 1981

By Johnny Stringer

A False View

Peter promised his audience on the day of Pentecost that if they would repent and be baptized for the remission of sins, they would receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. This fact is used by many to teach that the Spirit automatically comes to all Christians at their conversion and operates miraculously through them. This position can be proven conclusively to be false. In our second article, we discussed the Samaritans (Acts 8:12-19). They believed and were baptized (v. 12), yet did not automatically receive the Spirit. In fact, it is clearly stated that when the apostles later came to Jerusalem, the Spirit had not come to the Samaritans (vv. 14-16); and they did not receive the Spirit until the apostles laid their hands on them (vv. 17-18). Nothing could be plainer than the fact that the Spirit did not automatically come on these Christians at their conversion, and that their reception of the Spirit was contingent on the laying on of apostolic hands.

Furthermore, Acts 2:38 must be interpreted in the light of the fact that the miraculous powers were for a limited period of time, so that they now have ceased. This has been demonstrated in previous articles. While we can be certain that Acts 2:38 does not teach that Christians today receive miraculous endowments, there is some room for disagreement as to what Peter actually did refer to when he spoke of the gift of the Holy Spirit. Faithful Christians who reject the anti-Biblical idea that Christians presently are miraculously endowed hold differing views regarding this particular point.

Two Views Held by Faithful Saints

Some faithful brethren believe that the phrase, “gift of the Holy Spirit,” means the Holy Spirit’s gift, the gift given or promised by the Holy Spirit – namely, eternal life. Greek scholars inform us that from a grammatical standpoint, the phrase could mean either that the gift is the Holy Spirit or that the gift comes from the Holy Spirit. From a grammatical standpoint, therefore, these brethren could be right. While I cannot prove that they are wrong, however, I do not share their view. I believe that the Spirit is the gift which Peter promised. There are two facts which support the view that the gift is the Spirit: (1) Peter later said that the Holy Spirit was given to those who obeyed (Acts 5:32). Since this is the same as saying that the Spirit was given to those who repented and were baptized, it does not seem unreasonable to think that this is what Peter was talking about in Acts 2:38. (2) The phrase, “gift of the Holy Spirit,” is found only one other time in the New Testament (Acts 10:45), and there it very obviously means that the Spirit was the gift. It is used in that verse with reference to Cornelius’ reception of the Holy Spirit. I am not saying that the people on Pentecost would receive the Spirit in the same manner that Cornelius did. I am simply discussing the meaning of the phrase, “gift of the Holy Spirit.” Regardless of how the people in Acts 2 would receive the gift, the gift they would receive was the Holy Spirit, if the phrase means the same thing in Acts 2:38 that it does in Acts 10:45.

Another view that has been held by faithful brethren is that the Holy Spirit comes personally into the Christian at conversion to dwell within him, but that He does so without miraculous manifestations. This view is in harmony with the fact that the miraculous endowments have ceased; nevertheless, I cannot agree with it. I believe that the case of the Samaritans (Acts 8:12-19) disproves it. Remember that Acts 8:16 clearly says that the Holy Spirit had not fallen on any of them, and that this was some time after they had become Christians. It does not say merely that they had not been miraculously empowered by the Spirit; it says that they had not received the Spirit. If the Spirit had personally come to them to dwell within them -even without miraculous manifestations – then they had received the Spirit and it would be erroneous to say that they had not received Him. Furthermore, there is no scriptural proof that there was such a thing as a personal indwelling of the Spirit apart from miraculous manifestations.

This Writer’s View

Now we come to the position which I espouse. In Acts 2:38 we see that the Spirit was promised to those who would obey; and in Acts 8:12-19 and Acts 19:5-6, we see how that promise was fulfilled – that is, through the laying on of the apostles’ hands. Note that when Peter made the promise, he did not say that the reception of the gift would be immediately after their baptism. He did not tell them how or when they would receive it. The when and how are explained in Acts 8 and 19. In Acts 2:38 Peter promised the Holy Spirit to those who were baptized. Later on in Acts we have two examples of the reception of the Holy Spirit by those who had been baptized, and both times it involved the miraculous manifestations received through the laying on of apostolic hands. Hence, I believe that it was this to which Peter referred, and that the gift of the Holy Spirit was, therefore, limited to the time in which the Spirit’s miraculous manifestations continued.

In reply to this position it is sometimes said that if the gift of the Holy Spirit was limited in duration, then so is the remission of sins, which is promised in the same passage. However, Peter did not put the gift of the Holy Spirit on the same level with the remission of sins. He said that repentance and baptism were for the remission of sins; he did not say that repentance and baptism were for (in order to obtain) the gift of the Holy Spirit. He simply said that those who repented and were baptized for the remission of sins would also receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. In addition to receiving what the repentance and baptism were for, they would also receive this gift. Moreover, other passages which we have studied in previous articles show that this additional gift (the Holy Spirit in His miraculous manifestations) was for a limited period of time – the apostolic period. No other passages show that the remission of sins was limited to that period. To the contrary, the whole tenor of New Testament teaching is that remission of sins is what the gospel is all about, hence to endure throughout the gospel age until the end of time. As Acts 2:38 shows, remission of sins was the very purpose for which men and women werelto be baptized, hence would endure as long as the demand to repent and be baptized. Since the gift of the Holy Spirit was not the purpose for which men were to be baptized, it could cease even after baptism continued as a command; and other passages show that it has (if, as I believe, the gift was the Spirit in His miraculous manifestations).

Note the following chart which shows how, in my view, Acts 2:38 is parallel with certain other passages:

PASSAGE	WHO	THING RECEIVED	HOW RECEIVED
Acts 8:12-19	baptized believers	Holy Spirit	laying on of apostolic hands
Acts 19:5-6	those baptized	Holy Spirit (miraculous manifestations)	laying on of apostolic hands
Mk. 16:16-18	baptized believers	signs, miraculous powers	explained above (Acts 8, 19)
Acts 5:32	obedient	Holy Spirit	explained above (Acts 8, 19)
Acts 2:38	baptized repentants	gift of the Holy Spirit	explained above (Acts 8, 19)

Relation to Joel’s Prophecy

It is reasonable to understand Peter’s statement regarding the gift of the Holy Spirit in the light of the prophecy he had quoted regarding the Holy Spirit. Joel’s prophecy, which Peter had quoted earlier (Acts 2:16-18), predicted the Spirit’s coming upon people of all ages, classes, and ranks, endowing them with miraculous powers. It, obviously, had reference to the Christians on whom the apostles would lay hands. Acts 2:38 should be interpreted with that as its background. Try to put yourself in the place of the people on Pentecost. They had seen miraculous manifestations of the Spirit in the apostles. They had heard Peter quote a prophecy regarding the Spirit’s miraculous manifestations. Now what idea do you think they would naturally have gotten when Peter promised them that they would receive the gift of the Holy Spirit? I find it difficult to picture them, following their baptism, asking the apostles about the gift of the Holy Spirit which they had been promised, and being told that they had already received it in a non-miraculous way and just did not know it. I can much more readily picture them asking about the gift (if they had to ask), with the apostles responding by laying their hands on them so that they received miraculous endowments.

In verse 39, Peter told them why they could expect to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, introducing the verse with “for.” They could expect to receive it because the promise was to them, their children, all afar off, as many as were called. To what promise did Peter refer, which was so inclusive? The promise which he had quoted – Joel’s promise. In verse 39 Peter summarized the thought of Joel’s prophecy regarding who would receive the Spirit. As Joel had said “your sons and daughters,” Peter said, “your children”; as Joel had said “all flesh,” Peter said, “all that are afar off”; as Joel had included all ages, ranks, and classes, naming young and old, servants and handmaidens, Peter summarized by saying, “as many as the Lord our God shall call.” According to Joel’s promise, all were eligible. The reception was contingent on the laying on of apostolic hands, but none was excluded because of who he was or what rank he occupied. In reading of the apostles’ action in Samaria, we do not read of any Samaritan being excluded. None was told that he could not receive the Spirit because he was too old, too young, or a mere servant. Thus, Peter told the people on Pentecost that they would receive the Spirit because they were included in the promise that had been made and that he had earlier quoted. Of course, other passages which we have already studied show that Joel’s promise pertained to the limited period of time that miracles were needed in connection with the revelation of the gospel. (Note: I arrived at this view of verse 39 through reading Franklin Camp’s discussion of it in his book, The Work of the Holy Spirit. Though I do not agree with his position on every passage he discusses in that book, I do agree with his view of Acts 2:38-39).

Without accepting the false doctrine that miraculous endowments continue to exist, there is room for disagreement regarding the meaning of Acts 2:38. Dogmatism is altogether out of order. I am certain that many will disagree with the position presented in this article, and that is fine; 1 simply submit it for your consideration.

Although the Spirit’s miraculous manifestations have ceased, the Spirit wields a very great influence in the lives of many people today. The manner in which the Spirit works within us and brings forth fruit in our lives will be discussed in our next article, the final one of this series.

Guardian of Truth XXV: 23, pp. 359-360
June 4, 1981