Re: An ex pentecostal view of the Holy Spirit -- Qohelet Web Ministry

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 10:52:26 06/22/02 Sat
Author: Doug
Subject: Re: An ex pentecostal view of the Holy Spirit
In reply to: Richard Fentiman 's message, "An ex pentecostal view of the Holy Spirit" on 21:09:21 06/20/02 Thu

Hi Richard,

Although your interpretation of Acts 2:39 is pausible, I don't believe that it is accurate and for several reasons.

First, the entire context of Joel 2/Acts 2 is dealing with a promise. Peter declares on Pentecost that this promise has now arrived. What arrived? Acts 2:16 states "this" is "that." What is the "this"? It was what was beginning to transpire in Acts 2:1-4. Further, Acts 2:17-18 and Acts 2:33 provide more insight as to what the Spirit was giving. Acts 2:38-39 is imply Peter's summary of the events of the day and of the promise of Joel.

It seems to me that the only promise Peter is referencing is Joel's promise (Joel 2:28-32) and he directly points this out in Acts 2:16ff and offers Joel's promise as the background. Again, the promise of Joel was the promise of coming miraculous endowments that would eminate from the Spirit and this was taking place (being fulfilled) on
Pentecost.

So, the promise mentioned in Acts 2:39 is still the same promise he has been referencing throughout the entire chapter. I do not see any indication of change in promise in the context. The expression "all that are afar off" is certainly not any broader in extent than the expression "all flesh" in Acts 2:17. Of course, and most often, how one views verse 39 is largely dependent on how one views verse 38. If one advocates that that the main topic is salvation (forgiveness of sins), then they might assert that the words "and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" are a parenthetical statement. This same individual will then say that Peter in verse 39 is returning to the main topic of discussion - namely salvation. Richard, if I understand you correctly, this seems to be where you are going. Right?

It seems to me that the promise of Acts 2:39, based solely upon the context of Acts 2/Joel 2, is indeed the promise of Joel (Joel 2:28-32) and nothing more. This seems valid and more accurate and for several reasons.

1. The nearest matter which related to an Old Testament promise is the gift (miraculous endowments from Joel 2).

2. The word "promise" has a definite article, which is frequently used, and denotes previous reference.

3. The word translated "shall call" is in the subjunctive mood indicating "possibility" and not "sureness" of the call.

4. This same Greek word is used in Joel 2:32 (LXX) for the miraculous endowments.

5. This is the only interpretation which is derived from the immediate contex. Of course, in a sound exegetical format (hermeneutics) the immediate context must be dealt with first.

I believe it goes without saying that forgiveness of sins is equal to salvation or to being saved. With that said, then, if the gift of the Holy Spirit is nothing more than salvation then Acts 2:38 could read: "repent and be baptized everyone of you....for the remission of sins and you shall be saved. Since the two expressions are indeed equal it would literally be saying "...for the remission of sins and you shall receive remission of sins." or "...to be saved and you shall be saved." The idea is redundant and grammatically awkward.

Now, I realize that the Abrahamic promise is the most frequent promise found in Scripture (Gen.12:1-3; Acts 13:23;32,26:6-7,Rom.4:13,16,9:8-9,Gal.3:16, 4:28, Eph.3:6, Heb.6:13, 17, and 10:23. So, I can see how that it has some appeal to the idea that the promise of Acts 2:39 is the Abrahamic promise. However, the weakness of this argument lies in the 5 points I mentioned above. There's a sixth but I chose not to add it.

So, in summary; the gift of the Holy Spirit is the miraculous endowments of the Spirit based on the context of Joel 2/Acts 2. It was a promise of miraculous endowments for only those of the first century and since the miraculous age (signs and wonders) has ceased (and we at least agree here) then it goes without saying that the promised gift of the miraculous is not intended for us.

I used to believe that it was referring to the Abrahamic promise but no longer subscribe to that. By the way, where are you posting these days since the GA Forum folded? Hope things are well with you and yours! It's too bad the GA Forum shut down like it did. Oh well, take care.

Brotherly,
Doug

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: An ex pentecostal view of the Holy Spirit -- Jay Dee, 15:39:46 06/24/02 Mon
- Re: An ex pentecostal view of the Holy Spirit -- David Proffitt, 09:25:02 07/02/02 Tue
- Re: An ex pentecostal view of the Holy Spirit -- Richard Fentiman, 16:39:48 07/05/02 Fri
Re: An ex pentecostal view of the Holy Spirit -- Richard Fentiman, 16:36:09 07/05/02 Fri