His Spirit Dwells In You
There are several passages of Scripture that indicate that God sends his Spirit to dwell within his children. Here is one of those passages:
If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you. (Romans 8:11 ESV)
Have you thought about how incredible it is that God’s Spirit dwells within us?
The Spirit convicts, encourages, strengthens, guides… so many different functions. Yet, the Spirit of God does not force us to do or say anything.
I’ve studied several aspects of the Spirit. I even wrote a paper once about the Holy Spirit in the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament). But, the more I think about and read in Scripture about the Spirit, I realize that there is much that I don’t understand.
Perhaps I’ll write a series of posts about the Spirit after I finish my series about internet ministry.
What is the most amazing thing about being indwelled by the Holy Spirit to you? What major question(s) do you have about the Spirit indwelling people?
Admonish One Another
Eric (from “A Prilgrim’s Progress”) wrote a post last week called “Able to Admonish One Another.” He is commenting on the following passage from Romans:
I myself am satisfied about you, my brothers, that you yourselves are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge and able to instruct one another. (Romans 15:14 ESV)
By the way, “admonish” (or “instruct” as the ESV translates it) carries the idea of teaching someone with the goal of changing something about them – primarily their behavior.
Eric concludes his post with this:
The church gathering is not a show. It should not be a ceremony. Rather, the bible describes it as a time when God is glorified through our building one another up in Jesus Christ. This is something Paul tells us that we should do for the good of the body. It is what we all should do.
So, let us actively admonish and be admonished. In doing this, we all grow closer to Christ together.
I agree with Eric’s post. I’ll add just one thing. Paul had never been to Rome. While he knew a few of the Roman Christians, he did not know them all. He had never met the majority of them. But, he knew that they were able to admonish (instruct) one another.
How did Paul know this? Did he know that they were educated or well-trained? Nope. It’s much simpler than that.
Paul knew that the Roman Christians were indwelled by the Holy Spirit.
In the same way and for the same reason, I’m convinced that any Christian is able to admonish (instruct) any other Christian.
Led by the Spirit
What does it mean to be “led by the Spirit”? Often, when someone says something like, “I think the Spirit may be leading me to do something,” what they really mean is, “I think this is what I should do, but I want to sound spiritual.” But, of course, they also don’t want to blame God for any bad moves they make, so they give God an out by saying things like “I think” or “maybe” or “I’m trying to discern” etc.
I was thinking about that when I read this passage in Acts:
And they (Paul and his team) went through the region of Phrygia and Galatia, having been forbidden by the Holy Spirit to speak the word in Asia. And when they had come up to Mysia, they attempted to go into Bithynia, but the Spirit of Jesus did not allow them. So, passing by Mysia, they went down to Troas. And a vision appeared to Paul in the night: a man of Macedonia was standing there, urging him and saying, “Come over to Macedonia and help us.” And when Paul had seen the vision, immediately we sought to go on into Macedonia, concluding that God had called us to preach the gospel to them. (Acts 16:6-10 ESV)
Notice a few things… first, Paul and his team attempted to make at least two moves that were not in God’s plan. They tried to “speak the word in Asia” and they attempted to “go into Bithynia.” Luke does not say that they thought God was leading them to do this.
But, second, they knew that God stopped them from doing it. Twice Luke says that the Spirit stopped them. This was a definite act of God, but whether they knew it before hand or afterwards, Luke doesn’t tell us.
Finally, Paul has a vision of going to Macedonia. It’s only after a direct communication from God that they were willing to say that God was telling them to do something. Even then, there appears to be some consideration of the vision, since they had to “conclude” that God had called them to Macedonia.
While there are plenty of other passages in Scripture that helps us understand how God leads his people by his Spirit, we can see a few things in this passage.
Paul and his team did not feel the need to credit (or blame) God for every decision that they made. Just in these few verses we see that Paul and his team made decisions and began following plans that were later changed by God. Reading through Acts, you could probably say that this was their default way of making decisions. Certainly they prayed and considered all their options and started along the path that seemed best to them.
But, they were also always cognizant of the fact that they might make decisions that were contrary to God’s plans, and thus, they were also willing to change their plans. If God clearly revealed to them to stop what they were doing (as he did concerning Asia or Bithynia), or if God clearly revealed something that he wanted them to do (as he did concerning Macedonia), then Paul and his team would change their plans.
God is our Father, and he loves as. We can make decisions based on the information that we have and the wisdom that he’s given us. We don’t have to say something like, “I think God is leading me to…” But, at the same time, we should always be ready to change our plans if he reveals something else to us.
You see, being “led by the Spirit” is not a feeling that you get. It is a definite direction that God reveals to us.
Testing spirits
Last Sunday was Pentecost Sunday. Since that first Pentecost after Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection, the church (and each believer) has been indwelled by the Holy Spirit… the promise of God.
But, we know that there are other spirits at work in the world as well. So, John tells us to “test the spirits”… but how do we test them? He says:
Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already. (1 John 4:1-3 ESV)
Is this enough of a test for you?
More unhypocritical love
A few days ago, I pointed out that unhypocritical (or sincere) love (Romans 12:9) includes the practice of “showing more honor” to one another (Romans 12:10).
But, Paul described “unhypocritical love” in other ways as well. He says unhypocritical love (Romans 12:11-13):
- is not idle in eagerness
- is burning for the Spirit
- is a slave to the Lord
- is rejoicing in hope
- is enduring troubles
- is persisting in prayer
- is contributing to the needs of the saints (God’s children)
- is pursuing hospitality.
I’ve translated these in a way that indicates a sense of continual action. What do you think?
Something is different since Pentecost
According to Luke, something happened on the Pentecost following Jesus’ death, resurrection, ascension. He records Peter and the other followers of Jesus telling everyone who would listen that the Holy Spirit had come, just as God has promised. Peter said that the same promise was available to all who repented and were baptized in the name of Jesus.
Needless to say… this was something different… something new.
Today, the promised Holy Spirit is still given to God’s children. Being indwelled by the Spirit makes us different, both individually and when we’re together. Our lives (personally and corporately) should demonstrate this difference.
We should be different than we were before we were indwelled by the Spirit, and we should be different than the people and groups around us who are not indwelled by the Spirit.
More ready to submit than to impose
About 1 1/2 years ago, I wrote a post called “More ready to submit than to impose.” The post was in response to a book by Lesslie Newbigin. It seems that in our current “church order,” leader impose on the freedoms of others. Meanwhile, Newbigin says it should be just the opposite. Anyway, I thought this would be a fitting end to our week-long discussion on spiritual gifts and serving others.
—————————————-
More ready to submit than to impose
I recently read Lesslie Newbigin’s book The Household of God (Friendship Press, 1954). Kärkkäinen describes Newbigin’s ecclesiology as a “missionary ecclesiology” – “The new conciliar understanding of mission is based on the idea that the essential nature of the church is missionary, rather than mission being a task given to the church. (Velli-Matti Kärkkäinen, Introduction to Ecclesiology, Downers Grove: IVP, 2002, pg. 151).
However, Newbigin does not begin his book with mission. Instead, he begins with the essence or nature of the church:
We are to be speaking about the Church, and it is necessary at the outset to say that this means a society of human beings, which—so far as those still living in the flesh are concerned—is a visible community among the other human communities. The question, ‘What are its boundaries?,’ is part of the question we have to discuss, but just for that reason it is important to make clear that we are speaking of a society which has discernible boundaries. We are not speaking of an abstract noun, or of an invisible platonic idea… We are called to recognize and join ourselves to God’s visible congregation here on earth. This congregation is truly known only to faith, because it is constituted in and by the Holy Spirit. (19-20)
According to Newbigin, the Spirit plays an essential role in the constitution, nature, and task of the church. The Spirit primarily functions through his abiding presence:
The Holy Spirit is now [in contrast with what was described in the OT] no more an occasional visitant to a favored individual, but the abiding and indwelling principle of life in a fellowship. The supreme gift of the Spirit is not the spectacular power by which an individual may gain preeminence, but the humble and self-effacing love by which the body is built up and knit together. (115)
Finally, the Spirit also functions during the meeting of the church, not only through the gifts that he gives to those he indwells, but also – and primarily – through the manner of life of the believers who are meeting together:
In the building up of the common life of the body there will be need for the due operation of the principles both of order and of freedom. Where these clash with one another there will be room for honest difference of opinion, and there will need for a common seeking of the Spirit’s guidance. But the mark of the man in Christ will be that he is more eager to claim freedom for his brother than for himself, and more ready to submit himself to good order than to impose it on his brother. In any case the fundamental principle will always be the love which seeks not its own good, but the common good of the body. (116)
I believe this is one of the most best explanations of the work of the Spirit among the body of Christ while the church meets! When the church meets, if each individual – or any one particular individual – is seeking to exercise his or her own spiritual gifts without first considering and giving preference to other present, then this is a clear indication that there is a lack of “a common seeking of the Spirit’s guidance.”
It seems that the mark of the church today is that some people have freedom to exercise their gifts – and are even required to by the church – while others do not have that freedom. It also seems that very little “submission” is done when it comes to spiritual gifts. Certain people exercise their gifts and impose those gifts on others every time the church meets. Thus, some claim and even demand freedom for themselves, while imposing “order” on others at the same time. This is backwards!
In fact, I believe that the common, traditional way the church meets – one or a few people exercising their gifts week after week while the others watch or listen – is detrimental to the spiritual health of the church. In order for us to seek the “common good of the body” we (especially leaders – who are supposed to be mature) must submit to others and allow the Spirit to work through them – even if their “offering” is less than “excellent”.
Read and ponder this sentence from Newbigin one more time: “But the mark of the man in Christ will be that he is more eager to claim freedom for his brother than for himself, and more ready to submit himself to good order than to impose it on his brother.” May God change us – especially us leaders – so that we are more ready to submit to others than to impose ourselves on others!
Charismatics
About 18 months ago, I wrote a post called “Charismatics.” This post was not about charismatic or pentecostal denominations. All children of God are charismatics, meaning all believers are indwelled by the Spirit and gifted by Him. Those gifts are given so that we can serve one another. And… perhaps most importantly… and gifts and all people serving is important to the growth of the church!
—————————————-
This post is not about charismatic or pentecostal denominations. Instead, its about all of those who are indwelled by the Holy Spirit – that is, all Christians. You see, when the Spirit indwells and fills, He also gives gifts – the charismata.
In my recent reading of modern ecclesiologies, I ran into a couple of interesting quotes about believers serving through their spiritual gifts, meaning “charismatics”. First, in The Church in the Power of the Spirit: A Contribution to Messianic Ecclesiology (trans. by Margaret Kohl, New York: Harper & Row, 1977), Jürgen Moltmann writes:
The New Testament knows no technical term for what we call ‘the church’s ministry’. Paul talks about charismata, meaning the energies of the new life (I Cor. 12.6, 11), which is to say the powers of the Spirit. These are designations of what is, not of what ought to be. They are the gifts of grace springing from the creative grace of God. When he talks about the use of these new living energies, on the other hand, he evidently avoids all the words expressing conditions of rule. He does not talk about ‘holy rule’ (hierarchy) but chooses the expression diakonia [service].
There are a couple of interesting and important points in Moltmann’s statements. In Paul’s descriptions of the working of spiritual gifts, the apostle does not talk about hierarchy, or a rule associated with those gifts. Perhaps a case can be made that some gifts are more important than others (although an equal case can be made that we usually place importance on the wrong gifts), importance of gifts does not equate with importance of the individual, nor does it equate with a certain leadership. Instead, the Spirit works his gifts according to his own will – that is, through whom he desires and for the purpose he desires.
Also, instead of focusing on rule or control, Paul focuses on service. Thus, exercising spiritual gifts is not a function of leadership but of service – to service to other brothers and sisters in Christ and service to the world. These gifts exist (in reality, not in potential) for the benefit of other people, not primarily for the benefit of the ones exercising the gifts – although there may be some personal benefit as well.
This leads me to the second quote by Hans Küng in his book The Church (trans. by Ray and Rosaleen Ockenden, New York: Sheed and Ward, 1967). (I discusses another part of this book earlier in my post “Küng on the Church in Corinth“.) Again concerning the charismata, Küng says:
By linking his teaching about charismata with that about the body of Christ Paul at all events made clear that the Church is never – as some people in Corinth seem to have supposed – a gathering of charismatics enjoying their own private relationship with Christ independently of the community. According to Paul, all charismatics are part of the body of Christ, of the community. The fact that all charismatics are members of one body does not of course mean uniformity, but on the contrary a variety of gifts and callings. But fundamentally all individual members, having been baptized, are equal. But, by contrast with this fundamental equality all differences are ultimately without importance.
Here, Küng makes another couple of important distinctions about spiritual gifts which follow nicely from Moltmann’s observations. The body of Christ is not made of individuals who gather and exercise their gifts for the sake of the individuals and “their own private relationship with Christ”. Instead, because of the work of the Spirit, the individuals become part of the body of Christ together. Thus, the gifts are to be exercised for the good of the community, not primarily for the good of the individual.
But, this does not mean that there is uniformity within the community. On the contrary, as Paul points out, the Spirit works in many different way within the community. The variety works to strengthen the body in a way that uniformity could not. The teachers need the prophets who need the helpers who need the exhorters, etc. The difficulty comes when the individual must deny himself and the importance of his own gift and service in order to receive help from someone who is gifted in a different way.
When we gather together with other believers, we should be gathering with people who are different from us. We should expect and encourage people who are different from us to exercise their spiritual gifts. We should recognize that our gifts and giftedness (even teaching!) is neither less important nor more important than the gifts and giftedness of the other people around us. Why? Because the community benefits through the variety of gifts that the Spirit offers.
But, when some people or some gifts are considered more important, or when some people or gifts are not allowed to operate during the meeting of the church, or when we make the church about hierarchies instead of service, then the spiritual health of the community is weakened.
Man-made or (super)Natural Community?
Two years ago, our family took a vacation to the mountains of western North Carolina. While we were there, we stopped by several waterfalls. These waterfalls helped me think about our community in Christ. I wrote about it in a post called “Man-made or (super)Natural Community?”
——————————————-
Man-made or (super)Natural Community?
Last week, while we were on vacation in the mountains of North Carolina, we had several opportunities to spend some time at a few waterfalls in the area. We enjoyed stopping by the side of the road and walking the trails to the falls. Usually we only had to walk a few yards into the woods to find the waterfall.
We saw small waterfalls that were only a few feet high, and we saw Whitewater Falls which claims to be the highest waterfall in the eastern United States. We saw cascade falls, tiered falls, and plunge falls. We even saw one fall that was called a “sliding rock” with swimming holes at the top and bottom, although Jeremy and Miranda said the water was too cold for swimming.
All of the waterfalls were different and all of them were very beautiful in their own way. We enjoyed the natural beauty of the water, the sound of the water cascading over rocks or falling into a pool below, and the deep green of the woods around the waterfalls.
However, there was one waterfall did we did not enjoy. In fact, once we stopped to look at the waterfall, we only stayed for a few seconds. Why? The waterfall was not natural. It was a man-made fall. Yes, there was water cascading down over rocks, but above there was an earthen dam that controlled the flow of water. We could immediately tell that there was something different about this fall. Even though it had all the proper ingredients – water, rocks, sound, woods – it was not the same. This waterfall was contrived… controlled… man-made. It was not a real waterfall.
As I have been thinking about these waterfalls, especially in relation to the man-made waterfall, I wonder if our churches are similar. Could it be that many of us are not experiencing real Spirit-created community, but instead are we experiencing something that is contrived, controlled, and man-made?
I’m thinking specifically about alot of “small groups” of people who are placed together because of age, interests, etc. Placing people together does not create community, although it could certainly allow God opportunities to create community. The question is, are we trying to create something, or are we allowing God to create the community. If we are allowing God to create the community, are we giving him complete control, or are we setting limits for him. The more we become involved in trying to create community, the more contrived, controlled, and man-made it will become. It will not be a community that finds their identity in Christ and shares fellowship in the Spirit. Instead, it will be a group of people who find their identity in a certain person, location, time, etc.
I’m sure that the people who created the waterfall wanted to make something that was just as beautiful as the natural waterfalls around the area. In the same way, the people who try to create community themselves are trying to create something wonderful, something necessary. Probably, in many cases, they are trying to create a community because they have experienced and lived in a Spirit-created community. But, man cannot create something that only God can create. We can create something close – something that looks right – something that feels right at times – but it remains contrived, controlled, and man-made.
Theological Sources: Scripture, Tradition, Reason, Experience, And?
Two years ago, I wrote a series called “Theological Sources” (Introduction, Scripture, Tradition, Reason, Experience, Conclusion). I enjoyed thinking through these issues and putting this series together. I’ve included the introduction to the series below, as well as links to the other articles. I’d love to continue discussing these issues. If you’d like to reply, please reply to this post so that we can keep the discussion in one place.
————————————————————-
Theological Sources (Introduction)
In this series, I want to discuss the various sources that inform our theology – that is, our understanding of God. For an outline, I will use John Wesley’s Quadrilateral: Scripture, Tradition, Reason, and Experience. I realize that this is not new information for many of my readers. However, perhaps we can all help ourselves think about this important topic.
Everyone thinks theologically. Whether a person believes in one god, multiple gods, or no gods, they think theologically. This series of posts is intended to help all of us think theologically. Specifically, I hope we are able to think about the sources of our understanding of God.
Wesley (and others) suggested that people generally develop their understanding of God through four sources: Scripture, Tradition, Reason, and Experience. According to Wesley, Scripture must be our primary source. In fact, he said that Scripture is our only true source, while Tradition, Reason, and Experience work to help us understand Scripture.
In this series, I’ll comment briefly about how each “source” is related to theology in general, I will primarily focus on Christian theology. Of course, focussing on sources for Christian theology does not mean that this will be a simple task. Unfortunately, there is no single understanding among Christian concerning how to develop a theology. Different followers of Jesus – different “Orthodox” followers of Jesus – think differently about God.
While it would be simple and perhaps expedient to suggest that my way of thinking about God is right, and all other ways are wrong, it would also be prideful and arrogant, and it would say more about ourselves than about God himself. Therefore, I think it would be beneficial for all of us to think seriously about our understanding of God, and specifically why we understand God the way that we do.
By the way, these theological sources affect more than our theology proper – that is, our thinking about God. These sources affect our thinking about salvation, mankind, sin, even the church. In fact, it is common for Christians to use the sources in different ways and in different proportions for different aspects of their theology. Perhaps we will be able to discuss some of these differences as well.
I hope that more people than myself are interested in this topic. I’m hoping for a great discussion in the comment concerning each theological “source”. This is one area in particular where I think we can learn from one another.
Here are a few questions to help all of us think about these various theological sources and to kick-off our discussion:
1) Do you think that Scripture, Tradition, Reason, and Experience inform our theology? Are there other theological sources besides these four?
2) Do you think theological sources work independently of one another, or do you think there is interaction between the different sources?
3) What happens when different people place different emphases on different theological sources?
————————————————————-
Theological Sources Series:
1. Introduction
2. Scripture
3. Tradition
4. Reason
5. Experience
6. Conclusion