Reconcile this

[Bowas]

Luke 1:41.. And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:..

Luk_1:15.. For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb.

Luk_1:67.. And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying,

John 7:38.. He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water...
John 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.)..


How were these example of people being "filled with the Holy Ghost" prior to the outpouring of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost?

[coksiw]

LUKE-ACTS

The Book of Luke starts with the visitation of angels and the working of the Holy Spirit to bring the birth of John and Jesus.

Luke reports that the angel that visited Zacharias says that John would be _filled_ with the Holy Spirit from his mother's womb (Luke 1:17).

In that same chapter we see Elizabeth was _filled_ with Holy Spirit and spoke with a loud voice, indicating it was a inspired speech, or prophetic utterance (Luke 1:41-45). This is followed by Mary's prayer that reads like a prophetic speech as well (Luke 1:46-55).

Later in this same chapter, Zacharias was _filled_ with the Holy Spirit and prophesied (Luke 1:67).

In chapter 2, Luke introduces a man called Simeon, who was a devout man, who the Holy Spirit was _upon_ him (Luke 2:25-28). It means this man walked with God, filled with the Spirit. In fact, he gets a revelation from the Spirit about the opportunity to meet the Savior in his lifetime. He is then _moved_ by the Spirit to the Temple at the right time to see Jesus.

To this point, we see Old Testament (O.T.) saints being _filled_ with the Spirit, like a vessel is _filled_ with water. Does that word mean that the Spirit came, and left on these O.T saints? We will answer that by looking at Acts.

Luke himself uses the same phrase in Acts to speak about the manifestation of the Spirit in disciples of Christ that were already _filled_ with the Spirit before.

- "And they _were_ all _filled_ with the Holy Spirit…" (Acts 2:4) Peter was filled with the Spirit on the day of Pentecost.

- "Then Peter, _filled_ with the Holy Spirit, said to them." (Acts 4:8) Wasn't Peter filled before?

- "And when they had prayed, the place where they were assembled together was shaken; and they _were_ all _filled_ with the Holy Spirit, and they spoke the word of God with boldness." (Acts 4:31) Weren't these disciples already of Christ filled with the Spirit before?

- "Then Saul, who also is called Paul, _filled_ with the Holy Spirit, looked intently at him." (Acts 13:9) Paul was already filled with the Spirit before.

- "And the disciples _were_ _filled_ with joy and with the Holy Spirit." (Acts 13:52) These were disciples already, they had the Spirit.


Luke uses this word to mean a manifestation of the Spirit through a person from within. It could refer to the initial infilling of the Spirit or a later manifestation of his presence and work. In the Gospel of Luke, we see Luke, the writer, using the same word, without technical distinction, to refer to the experiences the O.T. saints had in chapter 1 and 2. The description of the experiences in those chapters do not indicate that the Spirit came and left, and came and left, again and again. In fact, when he introduces Simeon, there is no room to doubt that that O.T. saint was continually in the Spirit. We cannot draw from his writings the conclusion that the Spirit wasn't _in_ them permanently. For Luke, the O.T. saints were _filled_ inside like a vessel with the Holy Spirit as well as the N.T. saints in Acts were. He uses the same terminology.

Later in chapter 11 verse 13, Luke writes that Jesus said: "how much more will your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him!" This encouragement implies the understanding that the Spirit was indeed available to the O.T. saints but having it was somehow rather scarce in Israel.




The O.T. writings are in fact, full of evidences of people being filled with the Spirit, and staying with them, and manifesting himself later on with great power and signs.

The Spirit filled people in the congregation of Israel in the wilderness in order to empower them supernaturally. The empowerment was to perform works related to the building of the sanctuary, where the sacrificial system would take place according to the law (Exodus 31:3, Exodus 35:30-34).

Seventy two people total were filled with the Spirit as well in the wilderness to assist Moses with the ruling of Israel (Numbers 11:25-27). It says that the Spirit _rested_ on them, and that they prophesied, but did not do it again. Prophesying was recognized as the visible sign of the infilling of the Spirit. In fact, there was a young man that could recognize the experience happening in the camp to two more people. The infilling of the Spirit was an identifiable experience for the individual, and at least in this case, there was a noticeable external sign for the people watching. The text does also say that they did not prophesy again, therefore, even though the visible sign was prophesying, the infilling was not to empower as prophet, but as rulers.

It is said also that Joshua was already filled with the Spirit by the time he was called as successor (Numbers 27:18). Joshua was a man of faith and also righteous (Numbers 14:6-9, Joshua 1:8, Joshua 24:14-15).

After Israel took Canaan, God raised leaders called judges to govern over the Israelites and deliver them from their enemies. We see in many instances the Spirit of God _coming upon_ them to empower them supernaturally to perform the task they were called to do (Judges 3:10, 6:34, 14:19).

When Samuel gave Saul instructions, he said that the Spirit of God would come upon him, and he would prophesy and he would be _turned into another man_ (1 Samuel 10:6-7). Then he said that when these _signs_ happened, to do what the occasion demands because God is with him. Basically, the prophesying event was a sign of him being filled with the Spirit, and the _turned into another man_ refers to the empowerment he would receive from thereon to lead the people of Israel. The Spirit _rested_ on Saul.

About David, it is also said that the Spirit _came upon him_ to lead Israel after Samuel anointed him (1 Samuel 16:13). However, before this anointing, we can see David testifying that the Lord gave him victory over beasts (1 Samuel 7:37). We can assume that the Spirit came upon David before to deliver his flock and himself from the lion and the bear with his own hands, but the Spirit coming upon him after Samuel's anointing refers to the empowerment to lead Israel.

During the time of Samuel, we see other prophets as well beside him, that at this point we can say that they were filled with the Spirit as well (1 Samuel 10:5, 19:20). Therefore, the filling of the Spirit was happening in more people than the Bible details.

We can see that Saul received the Spirit with the sign of prophesying, and the Spirit was with him from thereon. We see the Spirit eventually left him because of sin (1 Samuel 16:14). Therefore, there was a continuity, not a _come-leave-come-leave_ situation. The same can be seen in David, it is said that it _came upon_ him from the time the anointing of Samuel, as it were a permanent infilling. And then later on when David sinned, we can see his concern of losing the Spirit of God in his prayer in Psalms 51:11 when he says "do not take Your Holy Spirit from me." The phrase _come upon_ means a specific moment in which a visible manifestation of the empowerment of the Spirit happens to perform a work (like when Luke says _filled_). It does not mean that it comes, and then leaves, and then comes again, and then leaves.

There are many more evidences of the Spirit in O.T. people. In general, seeing the strong link between having the Spirit and prophesying in the O.T., we can assume that the prophets were people filled with the Spirit, e.g. Abraham, Jeremiah, Isaiah, etc…

In none of these writings, including the Gospel of Luke, the authors communicate somehow that the Spirit was _around_ them but not _inside_ them. The Spirit simply _filled_ them, rested in them, and manifested through them later on, and sometimes left them because of their not repented sins.





What is the change regarding the Spirit after the Cross according to Luke? In Luke 24:46-48, Jesus commissioned the disciples to be witnesses of Him, and specifically of his resurrection. Then, in verse 49, Jesus said that they needed to go to Jerusalem, and in there they would receive _the Promise of my Father_, and that was the _power from on high_, that would assist them in the mission to be witnesses of Him. On the day of Pentecost, Peter identified the Spirit coming upon them as that promise of the Father which was given to Jesus, and Jesus had sent upon them (Acts 2:33). Then, Peter explained that it is the fulfillment of Joel's prophecy. Joel's prophecy gave the understanding that there was going to be a change: the Spirit, which wasn't upon all the people of God, would be upon **all** the people of God.

In Luke, we see the people of God according to the flesh (physical descendants of Abraham) gathered in the land of Israel, and a minority of them are filled with the Spirit. In Acts, we see the new people of God being born according to the Spirit from all nations, including Israel herself, **all** filled with the Spirit, scattered among the nations; while the previous people of God defined according to the flesh being rejected. At the same time, we see that the coming of the Spirit is also to empower for the proclamation of the testimony of the Apostles about Jesus' teachings, deeds, crucifixion and resurrection, which points to Jesus as the Son of God, and Lord and Christ. As a clarification note, we also know from other writings that the Spirit not only comes to empower, but it is also necessary to live holy lives.

The covenant of Moses did not provide for the Spirit for **all** the people of God. The covenant in Christ does. The former defined according to the flesh, and the latter defined according to being born of the Spirit. Though, the people of God according to the flesh did not receive the Spirit as a covenant group, individuals did receive it within them as the Biblical evidence reveals. Luke-Acts does not make a distinction in the experience of the O.T individual vs the N.T. individual such as _with_ vs _in_ or _comes-and-leaves_ vs _stays_. There **is** a distinction in the experience, such as the manifestation (e.g., speaking in tongues), and the empowerment purpose, but not in the sense mentioned before.

What happened with people like Mary, who prophesied in Luke 1:46-55, so had the Spirit, but also spoke in tongues in Acts 2 (see Acts 1:14)? Mary needed the anointing of the Spirit for the new empowerment to be a witness of Jesus in the new covenant. Mary needed to speak in tongues. The disciples of Christ were living during a unique period of transition between covenants. If they were already filled with the Spirit before under the previous covenant with the corresponding purposes, they also needed an anointing for the new covenant purposes. The same way, if someone was baptized before in John's baptism, they needed to be re-baptized in Christ (Acts 19:1-5).

What about the doctrine that says that N.T. saints now have the Spirit, hence, the ability to live holy lives, but the O.T. saints were basically on their own without the Spirit? There is no one single passage of the Scripture that stays such thing, in fact, it is an _derived_ doctrine from the interpretation of some passages, but unfortunately, ignoring the overwhelming Biblical evidences indicating otherwise. But really, look around in your congregation. Are they a lot holier than the great men and women filled with the Spirit from the OT? I still see the same Spirit-filled humans, with their victories and their mistakes.

(continuing...)

[coksiw]

JOHN

In John 7:38-39, Jesus talks about those that believe in him will receive the Holy Spirit, and John clarifies that it refers to the day of Pentecost and beyond. He exactly says as seen in the Greek: "Holy Spirit was not yet". This presents an apparent contradiction to texts already surveyed like in Luke, and others in the O.T.. How can we harmonize the biblical theology that we see in Luke with that of what we see here in John?

John's writing is concise in many places, for example, he says in 1:33 "I did not know Him, but He who sent me to baptize with water said to me, 'Upon whom you see the Spirit descending, and remaining on Him, this is He who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.'". However, John the Baptist did know Jesus, and even recognized his superiority before seeing the Spirit descending upon him: "And John tried to prevent Him, saying, "I need to be baptized by You, and are You coming to me?" (Mat 3:14). John also wrote things like this: "Whoever abides in Him does not sin. Whoever sins has neither seen Him nor known Him. …'' (1 John 3:6) and "Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God." (1 John 3:9) Those are pretty strong statements, even in the original Greek. However, he also says first in the same letter: "My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous." (1 John 2:1). So the saints cannot sin, or can they?

John used terse language in his writings, which is also typical of Semitic poetry. He does not give you a lot of clarification in the text sometimes, expecting the reader to understand his style. The only way to find out is, first, by harmonizing the text with other writings of John to understand the full sense, and second, with the rest of the Bible. But why would John write like that? Perhaps to not only communicate truth but also to communicate a tone. In the case of 1 John, you can understand after reading the letter that "sin" sometimes means to practice sin, and sometimes means to have ever committed sin or have committed sin. But also the blunt expressions do have a rhetorical impact, as it warns the believer that he or she is not expected to sin. In the case of John the Baptist, it has to be that he did not have a confirmed knowledge from God that Jesus was the Christ even though he recognized his amazing piety since they both were relatives and knew each other; however, the realization and confirmation from God that Jesus was indeed the Christ is so significant that it is like if he did not really know Him before. There are sort of _qualifiers_ to those terse statements from John, however, the lack of them is intentional.

Therefore, seeing that the Spirit did work in the O.T., and the writing style of John, it is reasonable to think that the text in 7:38-39 has to mean that the Spirit was not yet in a _specific sense_, not in an _absolute sense_.

Let's start by looking at a couple of passages of what was supposed to be happening with the O.T. saints in the Gospel of John.

John shows an assumed communion between the Spirit and the O.T. saints: "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught by God.’ Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me." (John 6:44-45). It even appears that those that did not have already some communion with God will not be able to _come_ to Jesus.

In John 3:3-15, Jesus tells Nicodemus that he must be born again of the Spirit to enter into the Kingdom. Notice that according to John 3:10, Nicodemus was supposed to understand this metaphor. You tell me how people like Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the Prophets can be saved and be part of the Kingdom of God without the Spirit: "There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and yourselves thrust out." (Luke 13:28)

Let's now look into another passage that brings more light into the "the Spirit was not yet" phrase.

In John 14:16-18, Jesus tells the disciples that the Spirit of truth will abide _with_ them forever. This _with_ in Greek is in the general sense of _after them_, _behind them_, or _supporting them_. Then, Jesus comments that the world cannot receive it because the world does not _see Him_ nor _knows Him_. The Spirit of God cannot be seen, therefore, Jesus is more likely referring to himself as the Spirit of truth. Jesus then says that this _Him_ dwells _with_ them and will be _in_ them. The _with_ in the Greek this time means rather _beside_ in a positional sense. Finally, in the next verse Jesus says _I will come to you_. The interpretation is this: Jesus is telling the disciples that the Spirit of God will come and abide with them, but then he clarifies that basically, the Spirit will be Him. The Spirit is coming in the name of Jesus, or in representation of Jesus, … it is Jesus' presence, and therefore, will manifest the grace of God as seen in Jesus. Jesus was _with_ them in the flesh, but was going to be _in_ them through the Spirit. That's the explanation of how the Spirit of truth was going to be _with_ (_after_ _them_, _behind them_, _supporting them_) forever. This does not negate that the Spirit was filling saints already in the Old Testament. The Spirit of God was the presence and operation of Yahweh in the Old Testament, but it is the presence and operation of Jesus in the New Testament.

Nobody in the O.T. had the saving, delivering, healing power that Jesus had. The grace of God was in Him greatly manifested as never seen before. Beside the emotional side of it, if Jesus left, the fear was that his grace will depart with Him, ... but Jesus comforts them saying that the same Spirit, and specifically all the manifestation of the grace of God seen in Jesus, was going to be within them, empowering them, to do the same collectively (through the different gifts of the Spirit and authority of His Name). In fact, that is what that same chapter says right before: "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do he will do also; _and greater *works* than these he will do, because I go to My Father_. And whatever you ask _in My name, that I will do_, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask anything _in My name, I will do it_." (John 14:12-14). Remember the reason why the Spirit was _not yet_? Because Jesus was _not yet glorified_ (John 7:39), which is what Jesus refers to in _because I go to My Father_. So, when Jesus went to the Father, the Spirit finally _was_, and they were able to do the _greater works_. Perhaps, because of the modern development in medicine, and professional medical and mental services, many have lost perspective of how needed and important this was. It was the restoration of life for many, and a little bit of the taste of the life in the future manifestation of the kingdom of God where all reasons for tears and suffering will be completely removed.

Spirit was _not yet_ cannot mean another thing but that the Spirit had not yet come with the full manifestation of grace as seen in Jesus (John 1:14), including his signs (Luke 7:22, John 9:32, John 20:30-31), and the giving of the Spirit by imposition of hands, even to Gentiles (Acts 10:45), which confirms this great Salvation message that the Lord Jesus Christ brought with Him (Hebrews 2:4). Moses brought the law, but Jesus brought a manifestation of the grace of God as never seen before (John 1:14, 17).

Some people argue that stating that the O.T. saints received the infilling of the Spirit and therefore were also assisted in their walk with God is like weakening the work of the Cross. They expect the reader to believe that the O.T. saints were on their own, and that we are a lot holier than them. As we have seen, the Biblical evidence shows otherwise. I could even argue that their position weakens significantly the relevance of the O.T. to us, which was given by the Spirit, and represents 60% of the Bible. This theology does not weaken the Cross. The Cross was necessary for the forgiveness of sin so that souls through out _all ages_ can inherit everlasting life. The Cross is the gate to life, the Spirit helps you walk thru it.

[coksiw]

I wrote that in markdown format in my notes hence all those symbols, but there it is

[Amanah]

The Holy Ghost could not be poured out until Jesus was glorified:

John 7:39 KJV
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.)

**

In the Old Testament prophecy was under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, but they weren't filled with the Holy Ghost.

2 Peter 1:19-21 KJV
19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

**

In the New Testament, the Holy Ghost is the earnest of our inheritance, meaning we can't be resurrected to immortality without the Holy Ghost.

Ephesians 1:13-14 KJV
13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

2 Corinthians 5:5 KJV
5 Now he that hath wrought us for the selfsame thing is God, who also hath given unto us the earnest of the Spirit.

Colossians 1:27 KJV
27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:

**

This raises an interesting question. How are the OT saints resurrected to immortality without the infilling of the Holy Ghost?

[coksiw]

Amanah,
Perhaps the whole theology that the OT saints didn't have the Spirit filling them is wrong? Perhaps John's words are being misinterpreted?

That's exactly what I answered in my long two posts.

[Amanah]

It's hard for me to see how we are misunderstanding the passage.

Here's a literal Greek-to-English translation of John 7:38-39:

*John 7:38*

Ἐκεῖνος πιστεύων εἰς ἐμέ, καθὼς εἶπεν ἡ γραφή, ποταμοὶ ἐκ τῆς κοιλίας αὐτοῦ ῥεύσουσιν ὕδατος ζῶντος.

Literal translation:

"That one believing into Me, just as the Scripture said, rivers out of his belly will flow of living water."

*John 7:39*

τοῦτο δὲ εἶπεν περὶ τοῦ Πνεύματος οὗ ἔμελλον λαμβάνειν οἱ πιστεύσαντες εἰς αὐτόν· οὔπω γὰρ ἦν Πνεῦμα Ἅγιον, ὅτι Ἰησοῦς οὐδέπω ἐδοξάσθη.

Literal translation:

"Now this He said concerning the Spirit, whom those who believed into Him were about to receive; for not yet was the Holy Spirit, because Jesus not yet had been glorified."

Some key Greek words:

- ἐκ (ek) - out of
- κοιλία (koilia) - belly, innermost being
- ῥεύσουσιν (rheusousin) - will flow
- ὕδατος ζῶντος (hydatos zontos) - living water
- Πνεῦμα (Pneuma) - Spirit
- Ἅγιον (Hagion) - Holy
- ἐδοξάσθη (edoxasthe) - had been glorified

This passage emphasizes:

1. Believers' inner transformation through faith in Jesus.
2. The promise of the Holy Spirit.
3. The Spirit's arrival being contingent upon Jesus' glorification.

[Amanah]

Here are various literal English translations of John 7:39:

1. NKJV (New King James Version)

"Now this He said concerning the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were about to receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified."

1. NASB (New American Standard Bible)

"This He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified."

1. ESV (English Standard Version)

"Now this he said about the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were to receive, for as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified."

1. KJV (King James Version)

"(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.)"

1. ASV (American Standard Version)

"But this he spoke of the Spirit, which they that believed on him were to receive: for the Spirit was not yet given; because Jesus was not yet glorified."

1. YLT (Young's Literal Translation)

"And this He said concerning the Spirit, which those believing in Him were about to receive; for not yet was the Holy Spirit, because Jesus was not yet glorified."

1. DARBY (Darby Translation)

"But this he said concerning the Spirit, whom those that believed on him were about to receive; for the Spirit was not yet, because Jesus was not yet glorified."

1. LEB (Lexham English Bible)

"Now he said this concerning the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were about to receive. For the Spirit was not yet, because Jesus had not yet been glorified."

These translations consistently convey:

- Jesus spoke about the Holy Spirit.
- Believers would receive the Spirit.
- The Spirit's arrival depended on Jesus' glorification.

[Amanah]

There seems to be a difference between with you vs in you

John 14:15-18 KJV
15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.

[coksiw]

Yup, I addressed those in my posts above.