Receive YE the H.G. - Page 3

Hoovie · #21 01-21-2011, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Irreligious

EXCELLENT!!!

It's funny, though, to watch the tongues and 3-steps people attempt to wiggle their way out of this stuff!

So what happened to Kutless?

All steps aside how do you view this Irr?

Kutless? We have a gag order on that one.

OneAccord · #22 01-21-2011, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Irreligious

I don't see it as a command or a promise. It sounds like an impartation to me. If he had stretched forth his hand and said, "Be ye healed" I'm guessing that person would have been healed.

I see it as a promise due to the fact that Jeus referred to the Gift of the Holy Ghost as "the promise of the Father" 3 times.

Luk 24:49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.

Act 1:4 And, being assembled together with [them], commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, [saith he], ye have heard of me.

Act 2:33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.

Irreligious · #23 01-21-2011, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneAccord

I see it as a promise due to the fact that Jeus referred to the Gift of the Holy Ghost as "the promise of the Father" 3 times.

Luk 24:49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.

Act 1:4 And, being assembled together with [them], commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, [saith he], ye have heard of me.

Act 2:33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.

I suppose this could spiral off into a side discussion, which ultimately goes nowhere, about what it meant when people were "full of the Holy Spirit" before the Day of Pentecost.

Hoovie · #24 01-21-2011, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Irreligious

I suppose this could spiral off into a side discussion, which ultimately goes nowhere, about what it meant when people were "full of the Holy Spirit" before the Day of Pentecost.

Regardless there was something, some measure or fullness they did not have prior to Acts.

OneAccord · #25 01-21-2011, 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Irreligious

I suppose this could spiral off into a side discussion, which ultimately goes nowhere, about what it meant when people were "full of the Holy Spirit" before the Day of Pentecost.

Thats true, that is a separate discussuin for a separate thread. Don't want to muddy the waters up here with a side discussion. But then, I don't think it would have to go no where. I think it could go somewhere if we all opened our minds for deeper undertanding. Like this discusion. One sees it as a command, another ses it as a promise, another sees it as an impartation. Isn't it true that it very well could be all 3? You know, 3 in 1? Now where have we heard that before?

Irreligious · #26 01-21-2011, 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hoovie

Regardless there was something, some measure or fullness they did not have prior to Acts.

Well, I don't know....that's debatable to some. What's different about being full of the Holy Spirit before Pentecost and full of the Holy Spirit? It's full vs full.

Irreligious · #27 01-21-2011, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneAccord

Thats true, that is a separate discussuin for a separate thread. Don't want to muddy the waters up here with a side discussion. But then, I don't think it would have to go no where. I think it could go somewhere if we all opened our minds for deeper undertanding. Like this discusion. One sees it as a command, another ses it as a promise, another sees it as an impartation. Isn't it true that it very well could be all 3? You know, 3 in 1? Now where have we heard that before?

By "going nowhere", I just mean that it ends up being the same ole argument every time.

crakjak · #28 01-22-2011, 07:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mizpeh

No, because Jesus said the Holy Ghost could not be given until He went to the Father and because He was not yet glorified. It was symbolic.

Joh 7:39 -(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.)

Joh 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

Yet, John was filled with the Holy Ghost from birth, or even before so. Seems every time one wants to put God in a box He just pops right out!! LOL So, He was given earlier.

Digging4Truth · #29 01-22-2011, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Exactly. Thats why you see them receive later.

Now where do we see them receive it later?

Praxeas · #30 01-22-2011, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kutless

Hey that rhymes!

Did they receive the Holy Ghost in John 20:22?

I don't really know. It does not say they did or did not.

Barnes notes
He breathed on them - It was customary for the prophets to use some significant act to represent the nature of their message. See Jer. 13; Jer. 18, etc. In this case the act of breathing was used to represent the nature of the influence that would come upon them, and the source of that influence.
Receive ye the Holy Ghost - His breathing on them was a certain sign or pledge that they would be endowed with the influences of the Holy Spirit. Compare Act_1:4; John 2.

Perhaps this was prophetic, I mean this was the stage at which Jesus instructed the Disciples to go to Jerusalem and wait for the Promise of the Father