Receiving the Holy Spirit

[Ovedya]

It never states that anyone received the Spirit at that moment when Jesus breathed on them.

I think you'd be alone in that opinion, Butero.

I agree. I have trouble believing that they refused the Holy Spirit when Jesus breathed into them.

They didn't refuse anything. It was something Jesus desired for them to have, and they received it on the day of Pentecost.

No. They received it right then and there! It was the fulfillment of His promise in John 14

Prove it.

Have you read the verse?

"And when He had said this, He breathed into them and said to them, Receive the Holy Spirit." (John 20:22)

Clearly His breathing out was their breathing in! It wasn't a request.

Now....What's really going to twist your brain is the fact that, when the apostles received the Holy Spirit in John 20:22 they also received the entire Triune God -The Father, the Spirit, [1]and the Son. Only Christ, as the Life-Giving Spirit, could accomplish this.

[Ovedya]

There are two differen't types of tongues. The tongues that are the initial evidence of receiving the Spirit are for prayer. The Spirit speaks through us directly to God, and since he bypasses our intellect, we pray for what we need as opposed to what we want. The gift of tongues is where God allows someone supernaturally to speak in a language unknown to them to convey something to the church. You will have someone receive a message in an unknown tongue, and then someone will be given the interpretation. Not everyone has this gift.

Actually this is not true at all. The teaching which originated with the Pentecostal movement that we may speak with "unknown tongues" is flase, and arises from a misinterpretation of 1 Cor. 13:1. Paul's point in that verses was not that he could speak with the tongues of angels, but that it didn't matter if he could. All tongues in the Bible are various languages - tongues.

That is merely your opinion. I hold the opposite point of view. Acts 2:39 tells us "For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call." We are part of that group that was 2000 years afar off that the Lord did call.

That promise was that of Joel 2:29, which is cited in verse 17. Once this promise was fulfilled on Pentecost it was (and is) poured out to the whole Body of Christ. As believers we are partakers of the pouring out of the Spirit. We are not required to experience a separate baptism.

Then explain the story in Acts 8:14-17.

The RcV footnotes do that better than I ever could: "

This does not mean that the believers in Samaria did not receive the Holy Spirit within them essentially when they believed in the Lord. According to the teaching of the New Testament in Eph. 1:13 and Gal. 3:2, they must have received the Holy Spirit essentially when they believed for their regeneration (John 3:6, 36). But they had not yet received the Spirit economically to identify them with the Body of Christ. The reason the Holy Spirit did not fall upon them outwardly and economically was so that the apostles, through whom the practical establishing of the church had been initiated in Jerusalem, might come to bring them into identification with the Body of Christ. This case is different from that of the ones in the house of Cornelius, who, when they believed in the Lord, received the Holy Spirit both essentially within them for regeneration and economically upon them for baptism into the Body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:13) and identification with the Body of Christ. That was because the gospel was preached then directly by Peter, who played the main role in the initiation of the practical establishing of the church."

I will give you credit for providing an opinion, but I don't see any proof that any of these conclusions are valid. They are nothing but conjecture. Take this line for instance. "The reason the Holy Spirit did not fall upon them outwardly and economically was so that the apostles, through whom the practical establishing of the church had been initiated in Jerusalem, might come to bring them into identification with the Body of Christ." How can anyone know that? Did God come down and give them a new revelation? This is nothing more than a feeble attempt to explain what occured to validate the author's pre-conceived ideas.

This is only one footnote on the matter. Obviously there is more to the subject in other footnotes. How can you draw such a conclusion without reading further into it?

[gypc]

In my own experience I believe I got the Holy Spirit the moment I ask the Lord to be my Lord.

One night at a prayer meeting about a year after I'd been saved, some people were laying hands on me to recieve the Holy Spirit. Nothing happened........people said things like you don't have enough faith yet. Man I didn't know what to do........I was clueless. Well about two weeks later I was driving home from church praising the Lord and like an explosion in the car.........I felt the presence of the Lord I had never felt. I began to speak in new tongues. That was about 25 yrs ago.

Since then I have felt his glory many times and I've always prayed in tongues but I don't think I was filled with the Holy Spirit that night...............I just believe that the Lord gave me a gift and has allowed me to come into presence.

When I first got saved I was fired up............the night I spoke in tongues I was fired up......I'm fired up right now. I believe the moment I got saved his Spirit made his dwelling in me. As far as an awesome feeling..........they come and go.....but my faith in him stands. Over the years I've come to know that I can go into his throne room by the Blood of Jesus and that he will never leave me or forsake me. And that being filled with his Spirit happens because of the Blood. Not because of some ceremony but because of his mercy towards me.

Anyway, that's how I see it and if I'm wrong may he open my eyes.

[Ovedya]

Also, regarding speaking in tongues. There are at least two examples of believers receiving the Holy Spirit and not speaking in tongues. So tongue-speaking cannot be strict evidence of such a baptism.

It certainly can. In one of those instances, something had to have occured because Simon desired to have the power to impart the Spirit. Just because it is not expressly mentioned, that is not proof it didn't occur. I don't have scripture that tells me when every convert was baptized in water either, but assuming they obeyed God, they were.

Odd then, How Paul, in 1 Cor. 14 explains that prophesying is the more excellent gift. How can you explain this if tongues is so essential as evidence of the Holy Spirit baptism?

[Fiosh]

"And when He had said this, He breathed into them and said to them, Receive the Holy Spirit." (John 20:22)

Clearly His breathing out was their breathing in! It wasn't a request.

Now....What's really going to twist your brain is the fact that, when the apostles received the Holy Spirit in John 20:22 they also received the entire Triune God -The Father, the Spirit, [1]and the Son. Only Christ, as the Life-Giving Spirit, could accomplish this.

Agreed. Jesus says, "Receive the Holy Spirit". There is no doubt that they right then and there DID receive the Holy Spirit---unless you do not believe Jesus' own words.

Can we chew on this awhile?

I can't think of anywhere in the Bible where it describes any of the Apostles being baptized. Could this be their "baptism"?

Then when the Holy Spirit comes upon them in the Upper Room,they again receive Him to prepare them to evangelize. (My Church's equivalent of Confirmation)

Agree or disagree?

F

[Ovedya]

It was something that was certainly going to occur because Jesus spoke it, but there is no indication it was immediate.

Huh? It's written in the present tense of course there's the indication that it was immediate.

He also prayed for someone to receive their sight, but at first they only saw men as trees.

Well that's an immediate receiving of sight, isn't it? I wear glasses with presciptions so bad that if I took them off I would see men as trees too. Does that mean I'm blind?

In another instance, he spoke healing to lepers, but they didn't receive till they were on their way to the high priest.

You can receive an innoculation for a virus and healing will take it's time. Doesn't mean that you aren't healed.

These are really poor examples, ridiculous means of trying to cast aside what the Scriptures plainly show. The apostles received the Holy Spirit when Jesus breathed into them: He breathed, they received.

[Ovedya]

"And when He had said this, He breathed into them and said to them, Receive the Holy Spirit." (John 20:22)

Clearly His breathing out was their breathing in! It wasn't a request.

Now....What's really going to twist your brain is the fact that, when the apostles received the Holy Spirit in John 20:22 they also received the entire Triune God -The Father, the Spirit, [1]and the Son. Only Christ, as the Life-Giving Spirit, could accomplish this.

Agreed. Jesus says, "Receive the Holy Spirit". There is no doubt that they right then and there DID receive the Holy Spirit---unless you do not believe Jesus' own words.

Can we chew on this awhile?

I can't think of anywhere in the Bible where it describes any of the Apostles being baptized. Could this be their "baptism"?

Then when the Holy Spirit comes upon them in the Upper Room,they again receive Him to prepare them to evangelize. (My Church's equivalent of Confirmation)

Agree or disagree?

F

Agree. They had al;ready been filled with the Holy Spirit when Jesus breathed into them. The baptism on the day of Pentecost was the initiation of the ministry of the Body of Christ - just as God breathed into Adam the breath of Life in creation, so also did He breathe the breath of Life into the Body of Christ on the day of Pentecost. This is the one new man which Jesus created on the cross (Eph. 2:15; Col. 3:10). See the connection?

[Floatingaxe]

In John we read of Jesus breathing on His disciples immediately after their salvation. That is the indwelling that was imparted, just as we receive today upon salvation. There was no manifestation, as this was not the Baptism for empowerment that is promised later for them. It is the same today. Indwelling at salvation, and baptism subsequent.

[Ovedya]

In John we read of Jesus breathing on His disciples immediately after their salvation. That is the indwelling that was imparted, just as we receive today upon salvation. There was no manifestation, as this was not the Baptism for empowerment that is promised later for them. It is the same today. Indwelling at salvation, and baptism subsequent.

I'm still waiting for that teaching from the Bible. It seems to be really scarce on that point. Why do you think that is? And why wouldn't we expect some teaching subsequent to the writings of the apostles in the first, second, or third century church? In fact, such teachings are very recent in Christendom's history - less than 200 years old.

[Floatingaxe]

In John we read of Jesus breathing on His disciples immediately after their salvation. That is the indwelling that was imparted, just as we receive today upon salvation. There was no manifestation, as this was not the Baptism for empowerment that is promised later for them. It is the same today. Indwelling at salvation, and baptism subsequent.

I'm still waiting for that teaching from the Bible. It seems to be really scarce on that point. Why do you think that is? And why wouldn't we expect some teaching subsequent to the writings of the apostles in the first, second, or third century church? In fact, such teachings are very recent in Christendom's history - less than 200 years old.

That teaching is from the Bible. A demonstration by Jesus Himself of the indwelling, and His promise (we all have it) of the baptism by power to come.

Oh well, we've got it together now, to usher in the last days and the Kingdom.