24
THE EARTHLY ORIGIN OF THE CHURCH
The previous chapter showed
how the Church ultimately originated in heaven when the Lord Jesus Christ was
seated on the “high ground” at the Father’s right hand. Between His first and
second advents, He guides history to progressively complete the final
judgment/salvation work of God. Christ has become the great “divider” of
mankind and the conqueror of the principalities and powers. And the Church is
centrally involved in this process.
When in His humanity Jesus
Christ was given the supreme rank over all angels and men, He immediately took
steps to begin the Church on earth. While both the Father and Son in heaven
were thus ready to begin the Church, further work was needed. The unanswered
question of the disciples in Acts 1:6 had to be answered. What about the coming
of the Kingdom promised in the OT now that the nation Israel had rejected
Christ? What about the role of Israel in this new situation? How long would the
inter-advent age last? To deal with these questions and to found the new body
of believers, the Father and Son “sent” the Holy Spirit to planet earth on a
unique mission.
The Holy Spirit began this
mission on a special day in the divinely-designed calendar of Israel, the day
of Pentecost. Just as the advent of the Son was a complicated event involving
many OT prophecies, a divided reception among the Jews, and a “stretching out”
of history into a new age, so the advent of the Third Person of the Trinity
similarly became a complicated event. This chapter will trace the Spirit’s
Pentecostal work and show how the Church began amidst a time of tumult in
Israel. We will follow the same method we used in the previous section
regarding the ascension and session of Christ.
First, we shall study what
actually happened on the day of Pentecost over against what many think
happened. Then, we’ll look at how that event was interpreted by the early
church. Various unscriptural interpretations of this event will be answered.
Finally, we’ll look at some doctrinal consequences that follow from this
miraculous historic happening. To prepare for this study, please read Acts 1-3.
THE DAY OF PENTECOST:
HISTORICAL OBSERVATIONS
The advent of the Holy
Spirit on the day of Pentecost was no less of a historical event than the
birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Like the Lord’s ascension
and session, however, it could only partially be observed in its total
workings. Certain physical phenomena were observed but what happened
spiritually had to be interpreted by the early Christians through the grid of
the OT scriptures and subsequent revelation to the Church in the NT scriptures.
Let’s look first at what happened and then at when it happened.
WHAT WAS OBSERVED AT
PENTECOST?
The narrative in Acts 2:1-13
describes the miraculous happening on the day of Pentecost, but it must be
understood in the context of prior events going all the way back to John the
Baptist at the beginning of the gospels.
The Gospel Background. The Lord had commanded the
disciples to remain in Jerusalem until they received the baptism of the Spirit
promised by John the Baptist (Acts 1:4-5). As the author of Acts, Luke also
chronicled the ministry of John the Baptist in Luke 3:1-22. In that passage
Luke records the announcement of the Messianic coming which we studied in Part
V of this series. Clearly, John the Baptist repeatedly cited OT passages that
spoke of the Kingdom of God that was prophesied throughout the history of Israel
(see previous Parts in this series). Part of his message concerned three
baptisms—a water baptism of repentance which he administered, a Spirit baptism
administered by the Messiah, and a Fire baptism also administered by the
Messiah (Lk. 3:16).
John acted as the
“king-making” prophets had in the OT in that he was called to authenticate and
anoint the king that God was raising up for the nation. Included in this
preparation for the Messianic king he was also to prepare the nation to receive
Him. Since the Kingdom of God would admit only saved individuals, it was
necessary that the people be challenged to believe on the Messiah. Those who
did would constitute what OT prophecies referred to as the faithful “remnant.”
There had to be a “judgment” upon the nation to separate believers and
unbelievers. The believers were asked to submit to a water baptism which
usually was a practice the Jews used to admit Gentiles into their communities.
In other words, the faithful remnant underwent a cleansing ceremony that
identified publicly the need for forgiveness of sin prior
to entrance into the
Kingdom.
It is very important to
recognize John’s activity as a key marker, historically, of the imminent coming
of the long-awaited Kingdom. Jesus said that if Israel had accepted Him, John
would have been the prophesied Elijah who was to come just prior to the great
judgments of the Kingdom on earth (Matt. 11:14-15; cf. Mal. 3:1; 4:5). John the
Baptist was given further revelation (Lk. 3:2) concerning the Messiah’s work in
installing the Kingdom. He would administer two baptisms: one of the Spirit and
one of fire. These baptisms—which could only be done by the Messiah Himself,
not a prophet like John—refer, respectively, to the saved and the lost under
the metaphor of the wheat and the chaff (Lk. 3:17). At harvest time, farmers
would separate the wheat from the chaff by pitching the mixture into the air to
have the wind blow away the lighter chaff while the heavier wheat fell back to
the ground. In similar fashion, only the unsaved will be removed from the earth
prior to the installation of the Kingdom so that it begins with only the saved.
This gospel background provides the meaning behind Jesus’ words in Acts 1:4-5. Note that Jesus mentions only the baptism of the Spirit because He addresses only those who have already believed. During his earthly ministry he had given further revelation concerning this coming of the Spirit (e.g., the Upper Room Discourse in John 14-16). Jesus revealed that after His ascension and session, He would petition the Father to send the Spirit to the disciples, a petition that the Father certainly would grant in recognition of His authority (John 14:16; 16:7).
The Lord’s Further
Revelation.
The disciples’ reaction in Acts 1:6 clearly shows that they immediately
identified the Spirit baptism with the Kingdom yet to come. Jesus’ response is
very important and forms the core of the book of Acts. He loosens the
association of the Spirit baptism with the Kingdom by insisting that the Spirit
baptism would come shortly whereas the time when the Kingdom would come was not
necessarily so imminent (Acts 1:7-8). Here is another instance of the same
phenomenon we have noted repeatedly in this series. God’s plan for history
includes “surprises” which generally consist in fulfillment delays. In Eden Eve
assumed that the Promised One would come as one of her immediate children. In
Daniel’s day, it was assumed the captivity of 70 years would be followed
immediately by a total restoration of Israel and advent of the Kingdom. So now
with the rejection of Christ by the nation Israel we observe the “surprise
effect” of an inter-advent age.
By the time of the Lord’s
ascension and session the disciples knew a lot more about the details of the
Kingdom than any OT saint. They now knew who the Messiah was. They knew that
the two Messianic roles—the Suffering Servant and the glorious Son of Man—were
going to be fulfilled in one Person, not two. They also knew of His rejection
by the nation and that this rejection had to be dealt with prior to the Kingdom
being restored to Israel. In addition to these Kingdom details, they also were
aware of Jesus’ detailed briefings on the coming of the Holy Spirit to them.
They thus faced Pentecost with many pieces of the puzzle in hand that had been
unavailable to OT saints, but they also were not able to “put them together” into a coherent picture.
Happenings on Pentecost
Morning.
Three miracles are reported in the Acts 2 narrative. First, there was a noise
similar to that of a hurricane or tornado. It sounded like it was coming from
above, from heaven. The amplitude was so great that it dominated the whole
structure where the disciples, probably many dozens, were seated (Acts 2:2).
The second miracle consisted of a strange visible phenomenon that resembled the
brilliance and movement of fire, glowing “pieces” shaped like human tongues
that split apart. Each of the “pieces” came to rest on a disciple so that
everyone in the place had a
piece come upon him (2:3). The third miracle was an instantly received
capability in each disciple to speak a language foreign to that disciple (2:4).
The third miracle of
language was observed by two groups of people, each with a differing
interpretation. One group consisted of Jews from throughout the Diaspora attending
Pentecost festivities in Jerusalem—Jews from many different cultures and
speaking many different home dialects (2:5- 8). At least 12 different cultural
regions are mentioned (2:9-11). Initially attracted by the noise of many
languages being spoken by the disciples, these visiting Jews quickly discovered
that the disciples were speaking in all their native dialects. And the content
of the conversation was apparently centered upon the recent works of Jesus
Christ. They were amazed, mystified, and wholly focused upon what was
happening. A second group distinct from the visiting Jews, apparently native
Palestinian Jews, did not understand the foreign languages. They interpreted
what they were hearing as drunken mumbling (2:13).
These three miraculous happenings
on Pentecost had to be explained in the context of what the disciples knew from
Jesus’ previous ministry and from the OT Kingdom revelation. Peter does just
that in his first major address of the Church age. Before studying his
explanation, however, we must note something about the day of Pentecost.
WHAT WAS SPECIAL ABOUT
PENTECOST?
What is not well known is
the significance of the day of Pentecost in Israel’s calendar. Christian teachers
unfamiliar with the OT hastily conclude from an isolated observation of Acts
1:4 that the Holy Spirit came only because the disciples “tarried”. The
application is often made that we believers in the inter-advent age should
similarly “tarry” in order to receive the Spirit. Did this event occur on the
particular day of Pentecost, then, merely as an accident of the disciples’
waiting, or did it
happen on Pentecost because
of a deeper design?
Israel’s Calendar. God’s chosen nation had a
unique calendar system. The calendar is given in the following OT passages:
Exodus 12:1-30; Leviticus 16:1-34; 23:1-44; Numbers 28:16-29:40; and
Deuteronomy 16:1-17. In the Spring portion of the annual calendar four events
occurred: (1) Passover; (2) Feast of Unleavened Bread (7 days); (3)
Firstfruits; and (4) Pentecost. In the Fall portion, three events occurred: (1)
Trumpets; (2) Day of Atonement; and (3) Tabernacles (7 days). What do these
events signify?[1]
Unlike pagan calendar systems, Israel’s calendar was God-ordained and prophetic. Each feast commemorated aspects of God’s plan with Israel (not the Church) that set it apart from the rest of the nations. The Passover looked at Israel’s unique origin, its redemption by blood during the Exodus judgment/salvation in Egypt. Recall in our discussion in Part III of this series, Chapter 3, that Israel’s origin was supernatural: it wasn’t caused by human political maneuvering nor revolutionary war; it was a supernatural happening that merited an everlasting remembrance. The seven day feast of Unleavened Bread stressed the break in culture between Egypt and Israel, reminding man that just as there was no continuity in leaven from Egypt to the new land, there was to be no continuity of religion from Egypt to Israel. Israel was a divinely-designed counter-culture to the paganized Noahic civilization. The day of Firstfruits commemorated the first harvest of the first Spring crop, a barley sheaf. It testified to God’s power to continue producing the same kind of crop all the way until the Spring harvest was finished. It denied all pagan fertility beliefs by attributing crop production to Yahweh rather than deified “Nature.”
Pentecost came seven weeks
and a day or 50 days after Firstfruits, and closed the Spring series of
calendar events. Because Pentecost itself is often called “first fruits” like
the day of Firstfruits proper, these two holidays must be carefully
distinguished. Whereas on Firstfruits proper a raw unprocessed sheaf of
barley was used, on Pentecost a baked loaf was used. Pentecost thus
looked at the Spring harvest as actually realized and laid up for use. It
reminded Israel to be thankful to the God of creation for His supply (cf.
Paul’s comment to pagans in Acts 14:17).
The Fall cycle of three
events also had significance. The Feast of Trumpets featured the blowing of
rams’ horns which reminded Israel in the Fall of the two following events on
her calendar. The Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) included prayer and sacrifice
which pictured national repentance and confession, a spiritual preparation for
what was to follow. Unlike pagan holidays that celebrate the works of man, it
focused upon the sinfulness of man in need of atonement. On the Feast of
Tabernacles the nation celebrated the end of the autumn harvest by living for a
week in specially-prepared shelters or “tabernacles.” This last event looked to
Yahweh as Israel’s final Provider and Protector Who would one day bring the
nation into His rest. It therefore contrasted with pagan fertility celebrations
that inevitably viewed history as cyclical, going nowhere. Such was Israel’s
ancient supernaturally-designed calendar.
The importance Israel
attached to this calendar, and to the three major feasts in particular, is
shown in the OT record of the Golden Era of Solomon. Solomon specifically
directed that each of the three feasts---Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, and
Tabernacles be celebrated (II Chron. 8:13).
Historical Fulfillment. It is a peculiar fact of
history that the Spring part of Israel’s calendar, but not the Fall part, has
been “fulfilled” by NT events. Exactly on the day of Passover Christ
died—not before or after (see Part V of this series, Chapter 4, for a
discussion of the date of the crucifixion). In fact Jesus Himself spoke of his
coming death as His “exodus” (Luke 9:31). Hulbert comments upon the parallels between the original
Exodus of Israel from Egypt and its potential exodus from Satan by the death of
Christ.
“The ultimate purpose of
what took place on the night of that 14th of Nisan was a release from the sovereignty of Satan. Just as the
exercise of faith was necessary to obey God’s command to apply the blood that
night, so faith in the means of appropriating deliverance from Satan’s hold in
all the ages.”
This series has repeatedly
pointed out the parallelism between God’s judgment/salvation in the Exodus
event and the judgment/salvation centering upon the death of Christ (note the
language in John 1:29; I Cor. 5:7). Now we see both events happened on
literally the same calendar day, testifying to the One Who controls history! We
must also mention, however, that the nation Israel does not now enjoy the
saving benefits of Christ’s atonement due to unbelief (Rom. 11:7-12) although
it could (and eventually will) if (when) it repents and believes in the dying
Messiah (Rom. 11:22-29).
The next event, the Feast of
Unleavened Bread, was “fulfilled” in the provision Christ made for independence
from the world, the flesh, and the devil. He provided a new life utterly
separate from that of unredeemed Adam. Paul uses the unleavened bread as a type
of this new life in I Corinthians 5:6-8.
This provision of a new life, like that of Christ’s death, is not
Israel’s today as a nation because of its rejection of the Messiah. Nevertheless,
it is available to Israel theoretically if it would “repent. . .and turn again.
. .so there might come seasons of refreshing from the presence of the Lord”
(Acts 3:19).
The third Spring event was
the day of Firstfruits. Significantly, Christ rose from the dead as the first
fruits of the resurrection on exactly this day (cf. Lev. 23:11; John
20:1; I Cor. 15:20). Just as the barley sheaf had reminded Israel of God’s
ability to complete the Spring harvest, so the resurrection of Christ “gave
personal assurance that every believer in that nation would be raised from the
dead” just as Daniel 12:1-3 prophesied (see Part V, Chapter 5, of this series).
As in the case of the day of Passover, so in the case of the day of First
Fruits: the special calendar days seem to be “markers” on which Christ executes
a fulfillment of the plan of salvation.
The final Spring event, of
course, was Pentecost. Exactly on this day the Holy Spirit came down to
earth (Acts 2:1). Did this advent of the Holy Spirit “fulfill” the picture of
the feast of Pentecost? Hulbert suggests that just as the baked bread pictured
the Spring harvest that organically united the grain which had started becoming
available on the previous day of Firstfruits into an eatable form (bread) for
practical use, so the advent of the Holy Spirit made practical the resurrection
life of Christ.
Israel could have nationally
enjoyed Christ’s resurrection power if it had accepted Him as the Messiah.
Pentecost, Hulbert says, marked the giving of all spiritual provisions to live the
life of the Kingdom under the New Covenant—if the King were accepted.
What of the Fall calendar
cycle involving the Feast of Trumpets, the Day of Atonement, and the Feast of
Tabernacles? The NT writers report no events that fit these special days. This
fact has already been noted in the Appendix of Part IV of this series. The
Spring cycle has been “fulfilled”; the Fall cycle has not. The implication of
Scripture is that the Fall calendar, too, will one day be “fulfilled”. Some
future event will answer to the Feast of Trumpets. On some future Day of
Atonement Israel may nationally confess its sin and recognize that Jesus, after
all, really was the Messiah (cf. Isa. 53). During some future Feast of
Tabernacles, Israel may enter its promised rest as the millennium finally
begins.
Table Four pictures the
calendar and its NT “fulfillments”. Compare Table Four with Figure One of the
previous chapter. A parallel emerges between Christ’s career and Israel’s
calendar. The Spirit’s arrival on the day of Pentecost appears to have provided
Israel with every spiritual blessing the nation would need for Kingdom living.
Standing in the way was Israel’s national rejection of Christ that is addressed
by Peter in Acts 2 and 3. The background of Israel’s calendar provides valuable
insight into the significance of what happened on the particular day of
Pentecost in Acts 2:1.
|
Calendar Event |
Picture Given |
Historical “fulfillment” |
|
Passover |
Judgment/Salvation exodus from Egypt via the
judgments and the blood on the doors |
Christ’s
Judgment/Salvation exodus from Satan’s dominion via the Cross |
|
Unleavened Bread |
No continuity between the pagan culture of Egypt and Israel |
No continuity between the old life in Adam and the
new life in Christ |
|
Firstfruits |
Assurance of a future,
full harvest by the first
barley crop. |
Assurance of a future,
full resurrection by Christ’s resurrection. |
|
Pentecost |
Harvest realized and laid
up for use. |
Christ’s resurrection
power ready for national use by
the Coming of the Spirit |
|
Trumpets |
Reminder of the following
two Events |
None yet |
|
Day of Atonement |
National repentance and Confession |
None yet |
|
Feast of Tabernacles |
Enjoyment of God’s
finished Harvest |
None yet |
Table 4.—Israel’s supernaturally-designed calendar as
an outline of history.
So far we have studied the
historical observations of Pentecost happenings in Acts 2:1-13. We have also looked
at the special significance of this day in Israel’s calendar. Now we are ready
to examine the interpretation of these happenings given in the NT.
THE DAY OF PENTECOST: THE NT
INTERPRETATION
It will be convenient to
study the NT interpretation by looking at two apparently different streams of
thought put forward by Peter and by Luke/Paul. Peter’s interpretation of the
event occurred within minutes and is recorded for us in Acts 2:14-36. It
primarily concerns the nation Israel. On the other hand, Luke portrays a longer
historical perspective spanning the years described in his book of Acts from
Pentecost to the imprisonment of Paul in Rome. As the close traveling companion
of Paul, Luke undoubtedly reflects Paul’s view of the origin of the Church
and the gradual realization of its existence as an entity separate from the
nation Israel.
PETER’S INTERPRETATION
In Acts 2:14-36 Peter
addresses Jewish observers of the Pentecost happenings. Whereas Peter and his companions
had experienced a tempest-like noise, strange fire-like tongue-shaped glowing
masses, and the ability to speak in foreign languages, the Jewish observers had
experienced only one of these three miracles: the supernaturally-enabled
foreign language speaking. They had seen nothing else—no geophysical or
astronomical phenomena. Nevertheless, Peter cites an OT prophecy of the coming
Kingdom of God that includes many elements, including geophysical and
astronomical phenomena (Joel 2:28-32).
Clearly, Peter saw the
Pentecost event as something prophetically anticipated in connection with the
coming Kingdom. Is he saying that the speaking in foreign languages wholly
fulfills Joel’s Kingdom prophecy? Or is his argument more oblique, more about
the King than about the Kingdom? Let’s follow his line of reasoning. He first
cites Joel 2:28-29 and inserts a comment at the end of Acts 2:18 “and they
shall prophesy” which is not in the Joel text. This comment shows that Peter is
emphasizing the aspect of new revelation coming through ordinary “lay” Jews.
Not only has the silence of God since the close of the OT canon been
interrupted, but the new revelation is now occurring with multiple Jews instead
of with one or two special prophets as in ancient Israel. The citation in Acts
2:17-18 emphasizes the “pouring out” of the Spirit of the Lord, a phrase that
refers to a teaching or revealing ministry.[2]
Joel foresaw this phenomenon
as something that would occur just prior to the coming judgment of God and establishment
of the long-awaited Kingdom. Peter then cites the rest of the Joel passage
(2:30-32) that speaks of “wonders” and “signs” which would also precede the
coming Kingdom. The problem here is that whereas the wonders and signs
prophesied by Joel are geophysical and astronomical, few if any such wonders
and signs had occurred in that period of NT history.[3]
Peter’s meaning, however, is
shown by his remarks in Acts 2:22 where the terms, “wonders” and “signs” refer
to the miracles Jesus did during His life on earth only a few of which might
qualify as geophysical in nature (e.g., Matt. 8:23-27). As it unfolds, Peter’s
argument links ever more explicitly both the pouring out of the Spirit and the
miraculous signs to the King Himself, Jesus Christ. Before we mistakenly
conclude that Peter is claiming that all of the Joel prophecy has been
fulfilled on Pentecost, we must follow the flow of his preaching.
From verse 23 to verse 32
Peter meets the Jewish disbelief that a dead man could be the Messiah who brings
in the Kingdom. He utilizes Psalm 16:8- 11 to show that David as an OT prophet
(verse 30) foresaw that the Messiah could not die and fulfill the Davidic
Covenant (see Part III of this series). The resurrection, Peter insists, is
implicit in the Davidic vision of Messiah. Following closely upon the
resurrection, of course, is the ascension and session, and Peter finally
centers his preaching on this last event in Jesus’ journey.
In verses 33-35 Peter cites
the ascension and session as the explanation for the pouring out of the Spirit.
Pentecost’s miraculous languages are empirical evidence that Jesus had arrived
at the Throne of God and accomplished what He had promised earlier, viz., He
would “ask of the Father” and “send the Spirit” (John 7:39; 14:26; 16:7). In
other words, Peter’s emphasis throughout this address is to show forth the
Messiahship of Jesus Christ and the need for Jews to believe on Him.
What, then, is Peter’s
interpretation of Pentecost? What is the rationale of his preaching? The logic
seems to be anchored in a set of prophetic assertions:
• the OT foretold a new work
of the Holy Spirit prior to the Kingdom which included new revelation coming
through many different Jews and miraculous disturbances in the natural
environment;
• the OT foretold that the
Davidic Messiah would not succumb to death;
• Jesus foretold His ascent
into heaven and dispatching of the Spirit to earth. The logic then refers to
actual historical events:
• Jesus performed miracles
that disturbed some parts of man’s natural environment (in most cases the
natural environment of his body);
• new revelation was given
through miraculous language on Pentecost. The logic finally deduces that Jesus
Christ is the King of the Coming Kingdom because:
• as ascended and seated
Messiah He now stands in the role of Yahweh in sending the Holy Spirit to the
believing Jews;
• as incarnate God He
performed miracles of enough magnitude to qualify as the One Who will one day
perform the specifically prophesied miracles in the Joel passage which bring in
the pre-Kingdom judgments.
The bottom line of Peter’s
interpretation of Pentecost is that Jesus Christ is now in the role prophesied
of Yahweh with respect to the OT Kingdom
promises. He sends the
Spirit. He does miracles. So Israel must deal with Jesus Christ in order to
enter the Kingdom they longed so for. Note verses 37-40.
Shortly after Pentecost
Peter gave another address in which he again made the point that Israel would
have to submit to Jesus Christ in order to receive the “times of refreshing”,
i.e., the Kingdom rest (cf. Acts 3:12-26, especially verse 19). As Alva McClain
pointed out years ago, this era of history in and shortly after the day of
Pentecost was characterized by continued Jewish anticipation of an imminent Kingdom.[4]
“[Peter’s] hearers could
have drawn only one conclusion, namely, that the restoration of the
long-awaited Kingdom to Israel was still a possibility in their own generation.
That the Jewish converts did
so conclude seems to be indicated by their immediate course of conduct. First,
there is absolutely no record of any break with the Jewish Temple worship, but
on the contrary they continued daily with one accord ‘in the temple’ (Acts
2:46) where, according to Old Testament prophecy, all worship would be centered
in the future Kingdom (Isa. 56:7).[5]
In fact, Peter in Acts 3
appears to be offering the Kingdom to Israel once again after the first offer
of John the Baptist and Jesus. That the OT Kingdom would be offered twice is
revealed in the parable of Matthew 22:1-7. Two calls are sent out by the king
for a marriage feast for his son. The second call announced that the dinner is
“prepared” and “all things are ready”. This latter terminology, according to McClain,
is: “certainly a reference to our Lord’s finished work of redemption at
Calvary. Such a call could not have gone out until after the Resurrection. But
again the call is rejected, this time by actions which help identify it in
Biblical history: some Jews would turn away with contemptuous indifference,
according to the parable, while others would mistreat and kill the messengers
(vs 6). This points to the post-Pentecostal offer, as described in the Book of
Acts, when the officials of Israel did exactly that. During the gospel period
not an official disciple of Christ was killed by the Jews, but during the
period of Acts the terrible persecution and killing of the messengers began.
There is no third call for this generation of Israel, but judgment falls: the
King sends forth his armies, destroys the murderers, and burns their city—a
parabolic prediction of the awful destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 (vs 7).[6]
Peter’s interpretation of
Pentecost is that the OT Kingdom is still a hypothetical option for Israel if
the nation would whole-heartedly trust in Jesus as their Messiah. The Church is
not in view. The equal footing of Jew and Gentile isn’t seen. The believers’
union with Christ, their constituting of the new Temple of God, and the new
life outside of the Mosaic Law have not yet been realized.
As the author of Luke and
Acts, Dr. Luke reflects Paul’s thinking as his traveling companion. He wrote
after many years of observing what happened after Pentecost. Unlike Peter’s first
few sermons, Luke’s account benefits from seeing the overall trend in God’s
working. He reports on Peter’s own enlarging view about the work of the Holy
Spirit. Luke can, therefore, put Pentecost in a larger perspective. Likewise
Paul reflects further revelation given in the years following Pentecost. Let’s
observe how these two
authorities interpret the day of Pentecost.
Subsequent
“Mini-Pentecosts”. Luke reports three events that occurred after Pentecost but
which showed certain parallels with that event. In Acts 8 after the martyrdom
of Stephen (in which Paul as Saul was involved), a deacon colleague of Stephan,
Philip, left Jerusalem and headed into Samaria with the gospel. After many
Samaritans believed, the apostles came from Jerusalem to pray that these new
believers would “receive the Holy Spirit” (Acts 8:15). Luke reports that as the
apostles laid their hands on the Samaritan believers the Holy Spirit came upon
them, presumably in some form physically recognizable as at Pentecost.
A second such event occurs
in Acts 10. In this case Gentiles receive the Holy Spirit in a clear analog to
Pentecost: they speak in foreign languages. Peter spots the similarity. He
identifies the phenomenon as that of Pentecost (10:47). Luke makes the
connection very obvious by noting that God had to prepare Peter beforehand so
that he would be open to the possibility that non-Jews who were viewed as “far”
from God would receive the Holy Spirit.
Finally, a third
“mini-Pentecost” occurs in Acts 19:1-7. This third event is striking in that
Luke isn’t with Paul at this time. Thus Luke’s narrative depends completely
upon Paul’s report. And Paul’s report uses the vocabulary of the previous
events, showing that terms like “receive the Holy Spirit”, “languages”, and
“prophesying” are used in exactly the same way by Luke and Paul. The
implication is, therefore, that the vocabulary of Acts and Paul’s epistles
regarding Pentecostal phenomena share identical meanings—a very important
point in NT interpretation as we shall see below. Moreover, in this third event
the disciples of John the Baptist are integrated into the Church, showing that
the Church age believers are different than OT saints. These disciples were
Jews that lived outside of Israel—Jews of the Diaspora.
If we take Luke’s account of
these three “mini-Pentecosts”, we detect a pattern to the work of God during
those years given in Table Five. The
|
The Text |
The Event |
The Implication |
|
Acts 8:1-25 |
Samaritans receive the HS |
Witnessing spreads to
Samaria |
|
Acts 10:1-48 |
Gentiles receive the HS |
Witnessing spreads to
Gentiles |
|
Acts 19:1-7 |
John’s disciples receive
the HS |
Witnessing spreads to OT
saints of the Diaspora |
Table 5. The pattern of post-Pentecost “mini-Pentecosts” showing
fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy of Acts 1:8.
pattern fits precisely the
prophecy of Jesus in Acts 1:8! In that prophetic dialog Jesus carefully
distinguished the restoration of the kingdom from the work of the Holy Spirit
Whom He would send once ascended and seated at the Father’s right hand (Acts
1:6-8). The witness to the gospel would spread outward from Jerusalem not
because the early Christians were so zealous of missionary work but because God
decreed it would happen. Careful attention to the text of Acts shows that in
most cases the spread of the gospel was forced upon the Church by adverse
circumstances and overt persecution rather than being the result of deliberate
missionary planning. Luke’s literary work of Acts, then, records God’s
faithfulness in doing specific things which He had promised just as the OT
historical narratives had done centuries before.
The Baptism of the Holy
Spirit. As
we learned above, John the Baptist in introducing Jesus as the Messianic King
to Israel prophesied that He would baptize with the Holy Spirit. John sharply
distinguished this Spirit baptism from water baptism (Luke 3:16). It was
something new that would happen to those who welcomed Messiah in preparation
for His kingdom. Jesus continued the revelation about Spirit baptism in Acts
1:5, prophesying that it would happen on Pentecost.
The word “baptize” carries
the meaning of “identification” and can refer to a wide variety of events, some
wet but most dry. Spirit baptism is obviously dry. What particular meaning does
“baptism” have when used in the phrase “baptism of the Holy Spirit”? On the day
of Pentecost and immediately thereafter Peter grasped that it meant a new work
of the Spirit that could usher in the long-awaited Kingdom of God.
Paul and Luke, however,
became aware that it meant something more than that. They understood it to
refer to creation of something entirely unforeseen in the OT. They could see
this new thing only after Peter’s challenge to Israel to accept the Messiah was
completely and clearly rejected by the nation’s leadership. Whatever Spirit
baptism was, it wasn’t to be thwarted by man. Further information was revealed
to Paul on the Damascus road by Christ Himself when He said that to persecute
believers after Pentecost was to persecute Him (Acts 9:4). By now it had become
obvious that post-Pentecostal believers were somehow united with the ascended
Christ in heaven. This new thing had a heavenly origin (see title of the
previous chapter). It also had an earthly origin at Pentecost after the Session
of Christ. It was something never before seen, never prophesied in the OT, and
not recognized until some time after Pentecost.
In I Corinthians 12:13 Paul
reveals that Spirit baptism enters one into the Body of Christ, the
Universal Church. Christ in heaven is the Head but only the Head. He must
be “completed” by acquiring a Body. Now the mystery of the OT prophecies that
we studied in the previous chapters (Dan. 7; Pss. 2 and 110) becomes clearer.
These OT texts looked forward to the Son of God / Son of Man / Messiah as being
officially accepted by God yet not ready to reign (note Figure 1). We mentioned
that in Daniel 7 the Son of Man figure represents not only the king of the
fifth kingdom but also the people of that kingdom. Paul adds to the OT
revelation by noting that the ascended Christ has begun to build His body.
This new thing, the Church,
is to Christ what David’s mighty men were to him (see II Sam. 22). In both
instances the king has been officially anointed by God’s prophet (David by
Samuel, Jesus by John) yet must bide his time waiting for the status quo to
change (the dynasty of Saul to exit, Satan’s rulership to end). In both
instances the king attracts defectors from the other side (David attracts Jews
defecting from Saul, Jesus calls believers to defect from the god of this
world).
Spirit baptism unites
believers retroactively with the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ (Rom.
6:1-7; Col. 2:11-12). It totally “transfers” in some way believers from the
status of being in Adam amidst a cursed world to the status of Christ amidst a
perfect heavenly environment. These truths we will develop later. Here it is
appropriate only to mention them as later revelation of what the Holy Spirit
began on the fateful day of Pentecost. The Baptism of the Holy Spirit marks
His Advent as Indweller of every believer.
Languages, Prophesying, and
Miracles.
Another line of revelation developed by Luke and Paul concerns the unique
phenomena that accompanied this coming of the Holy Spirit--miraculous speaking
in languages unknown to the speaker, revelation of things present and future
unknowable to ordinary human beings, and amazing works of bodily healing.
These phenomena were signs
to authenticate the new message about Jesus that would penetrate all of human
civilization (note Mark 16:17-18). Miraculous language-speaking authenticated
the universal nature of the gospel and assured that human linguistic diversity
brought on by Babel in Genesis 11 would be no barrier. If speaking in
foreign languages could successfully publish the gospel, writing in languages
other than Hebrew and Greek could, too. Unlike the Koran and Book of Mormon the
New Testament puts no premium on its “original language.” It belongs to all
people groups everywhere regardless of their language. Its inerrancy is not
abrogated by translations of its text (see Part IV, Chapter 5 for discussion of
this textual issue).
Prophesying authenticated the
continuity of the NT with the OT that had been a product of Moses and
subsequent prophets after him. There was the same supernatural revelation
behind both of them and therefore the same infallible authority. The message of
the gospel was shown to be the direct product of the Holy Spirit (cf. II Pet. 1:19-21).
Healing miracles authenticated the authority of the risen, ascended Christ
over man’s natural environment. Christ is dramatically shown by these
events truly to have authority over heaven and earth (cf. Matt. 28:18).
These supernatural abilities,
however, were never universally present in every believer. Only some believers
exercised them, notably the apostles and those closest to them. They continued
for a time in Church history as part of the set of spiritual gifts given to the
Church. In Paul’s discussion of I Corinthians he clearly declares that the
Spirit distributes individual gifts as He wills and no gift is universally
shared (I Cor. 12).
Not only were these
particular authenticating gifts not universally shared with every believer in
the NT era, they have not been shared across the centuries of Church history.
Mark 16:19-20 points out that these miraculous capabilities began only after
Jesus sat down at the Father’s right hand and had apparently ceased by the time
he wrote this text (past tense verb “confirmed” in 16:20). The author of
Hebrews also reports their cessation in Hebrews 2:4.
Toward the end of his
ministry Paul had apparently lost the apostolic capacity to heal (cf. Acts
19:11-12 with Phil. 2:27; I Tim. 5:23). In fact, Paul taught that these
particular authenticating gifts would eventually cease (I Cor. 13:8-10). They
would cease when their role became unnecessary, which happened when the NT had
been written at the end of the first century.
Protestants have generally
been “cessationists” on this matter because these gifts, including that of
apostle and prophet, were part of the necessary foundation gifts of the Church
(Eph. 2:20). Once that foundation had been laid, they were no longer necessary.
The completed canon of Scripture once completed is left as the sole authority
in history for the Church (sola scriptura). Over against this
cessationist position is that of certain cults such as the Mormons and of the
Roman Catholic Church, both of which insist upon a continuing apostolic-like
authority and periodic post-NT revelation. Although they generally adhere to
the Protestant doctrine of sola scriptura, Pentecostals also open the
door to post-NT revelation by their insistence upon the continuation of the
authenticating sign gifts.[7]
Fulfillment of the OT
Covenants.
It is remarkable that Luke and Paul throughout all their writings in the NT
never state that the OT covenants—Abrahamic, Mosaic, Palestinian (Land),
Davidic, or New—have been fulfilled. While these writers admit certain benefits
flowing to the Church from these covenants, such benefits come indirectly through
union with Jesus Christ, not through the Church replacing the original covenant
addressee, the nation of Israel.
The Abrahamic Covenant had
promised a land, seed, and world-wide blessing to Abraham and his family. The
subsequent biblical covenants with Israel amplified these three promises. The
so-called “land” or “Palestinian” covenant (Deut. 30) revealed further details
of the land promise to Israel. That unconditional covenant is not fulfilled by
the Church. The seed promise is elaborated in the Davidic Covenant (II Sam. 7;
Ps. 89), and Jesus Christ is revealed as the One Who will eventually reign on
David’s earthly throne in Jerusalem. Until He does so, however, that covenant
is not fulfilled.
The New Covenant (Jer.
31:27-37; Ezk. 34:25-30; 36:22-38) is presented in the NT in a manner similar
to that of the Davidic Covenant. Jesus Christ is revealed as the One Who
establishes the covenant by accomplishing the founding sacrifice (Luke 22:20; I
Cor. 11:25). Yet Israel nationally does not receive 100% regeneration, a
complete regathering to the land, nor world-wide dominance. Until those
conditions occur historically, the New Covenant cannot be said to be fulfilled.
Some Protestant theologians, because of their commitment to Covenant Theology
(see Appendix A), insist that the New Testament, while not explicitly saying
that this covenant has been fulfilled, certainly implies it. Dispensational
theologian Renald Showers replies:
“Many Covenant Theologians
claim that the New Covenant is being fulfilled totally in the Church today.
According to this view, the literal nation of Israel forfeited any relationship
to the New Covenant because of its unbelief and rebellion against God. The
Church in the present age has replaced Israel in that relationship. Thus, the
promises of the New Covenant which were presented in the Old Testament are to
be fulfilled in a spiritualized Israel (Church) now. They are not to be
fulfilled in the literal nation of Israel in the future. . . .
By contrast, Dispensational
Theologians claim that since God promised to establish the New Covenant with
the literal people of Israel (Jer. 31:31), since God intended the New Covenant
to be unconditional in nature. . .and since God declared that He would fulfill
the promises of the New Covenant with Israel, not because the nation would
deserve it, but because of its disobedience (Ezk. 36:21-36), then the literal
nation of Israel has not forfeited its relationship to the New Covenant because
of
its unbelief and rebellion
against God.[8]
The interpretation of
Pentecost by Luke/Paul enlarges the earlier interpretation by Peter. Luke/Paul
see Pentecost as marking a major change in God’s historical dealing with
mankind. Whereas Peter correctly notes that Israel had a second chance to
receive its Messiah and the promised Kingdom, Luke/Paul describe how a new
movement of God appeared after the nation again rejected the invitation. The
book of Acts “transitions” from an age of dealing with Israel under the OT
covenants to a new age of dealing with something called the Church whose
blessings come from those covenants through the rejected Messiah. Figure Two
pictures this transition.
|
Israel / / / / Church |
Figure Two. Diagram of the transition in Acts from an Israel-centered program to a Church-centered program.
DOCTRINAL CONSEQUENCES OF
PENTECOST: THE PERSON AND WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT
If the birth and subsequent career
of the Lord Jesus Christ heightened biblical revelation of the Trinity, the
advent of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost was an equally major addition. Never
before in history was the Third Person of the Trinity revealed more clearly. In
Part V of this series, Appendix A, we studied the doctrine of the Trinity.
There were five propositions that expressed biblical revelation. Let’s review
them:
God is Absolutely One: He
cannot be divided into parts based upon some prior categories or qualities. He
is fully each of His attributes.
God is Absolutely Three: God
has an aggregative nature that is eternally threefold, which is itself the
archetypical source of logic and number. God’s Threeness Refers to Modes of
Being, Not Just Roles: The so-called “economic trinity” derives from a
fundamental “ontological trinity”.
The Subordination Within the
Trinity Does Not Refer to Essence: There is a relationship among the three
Persons of subordination from the Father through the
“begotten” Son to the
“proceeding” Spirit.
With Respect to the
Salvation of Man the Triunity is Perceived With Both Threeness and Oneness: The
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit each have distinct roles in man’s
salvation, yet at the same
time we worship the One God.
Although no illustration
comprehensively grasps the incomprehensible nature of God, there appear to be
finite replicas within creation. Previously, we noted how the essential
structures of the universe—things like space, matter-energy, time—have an
inherent threeness that coexists with oneness (length-width- height,
energy-motion-differentiated motion or phenomena, past-present-future). Another
finite replica has recently been noted by Vern Poythress. Poythress explores
the nature of human communication. He writes:
“We are familiar with
instances of human communication. One person speaks to another, in order to
produce some effect. By calling the Second Person of the Trinity ‘the Word’,
John 1:1 invites us to understand the Second Person of the Trinity by analogy with
human utterance. The Second Person of the Trinity is the Word spoken by a
Person. Clearly, the speaker is preeminently the Father. To who is this Word
spoken and with what effect? John 1:1 does not say explicitly. But since the
speaking takes place from all eternity (John 1:1a), it is not merely a matter
of God speaking to human beings or speaking to some other created thing or even
to the created world as a whole. In the beginning was God alone. Hence, we
infer that God speaks to himself and finds satisfaction in himself.[9]
Poythress further notes
that: “in the realm of [redemption], the Spirit of God is operative. . .is
instrumental in the impact of the word on our hearts: he writes the word
on our hearts. To engage in
all these operations, the Spirit must himself understand the purpose of God.
And so we find places in the Bible that represent the Spirit not only as active
and initiating, but as receptive of the truth of God. . .(John 16:13. . .I Cor.
2:10).[10]
In this survey of the person
and work of the Holy Spirit we first must view what is revealed about His
Person in the Trinity. Then we will move on to some of His work that is unique
to the Church age.
That the Holy Spirit is as
much a “Person” of the Trinity as the Father and Son are, is a truth that has
been denied repeatedly since Pentecost. Appendix A of Part V lists the various
heretical perversions of the Trinity, all of which denied or are still denying
His Personality. Perversion of the Trinity and denial of the Personality of the
Holy Spirit can occur not only through outright apostasy but also through
friendly negligence. Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer, founder of Dallas Theological
Seminary,
put the matter well:
“For want of extended and
constructive teaching with respect to the Holy Spirit, the Christian church is,
for the most part, in the same position as the twelve disciples of John the
Baptist whom Paul found at Ephesus. Their statement—sincere and free from
pretense—was, ‘We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost’
(Acts 19:1). . . .Almost every error or disproportionate emphasis upon some
aspect of doctrine on the part of a few is caused by the neglect of that truth
on the part of the many. The Pentecostal errors with their misuse of Biblical
terms and their assumptions would never have developed to any extent had the
full and right doctrine of the Holy Spirit been taught generally in its right
proportions.[11]
To do justice, therefore, to
the NT revelation of the Holy Spirit since Pentecost, we’ll examine His
“Procession” jn the Trinity and the revelation of His Person as distinct from
the Father and the Son.
The Holy Spirit “Proceeds”
from the Father and the Son. Just as the Son is said to be “eternally begotten”
of the Father, the Holy Spirit is said to “eternally proceed” from both the
Father and the Son. The statement that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father
and the Son is called the Filoque in Church history.[12]
It arose in the Western part
of Europe (Spain) in the 6th century after a long battle
with the heresy of Arianism. Arianism, of course, was a subordinationist heresy
that upheld the deity of the Father but made the Son and the Spirit of
sub-divine natures. Arius “distinguished the one eternal God from the Son who
was generated by the Father and who had a beginning. He also believed that the
Holy Spirit was the first thing created by the Son.[13]
Since the Son was not true
deity in this heresy, He could not be the One on the same plain as the Father
and as the Sender of the Holy Spirit. Thus the Spirit was
said by the
subordinationists as proceeding from only the Father but not the Son.
To guard against the
subordinationist heresies, the Western Church added the Filoque to the Nicean
Creed which had been written many years previously. The Eastern Church
(Orthodox) resented this addition that was made without calling for a
conference of both Western and Eastern churches.
Left outside of the vigorous
rejection of Arianism in the West, the eastern Orthodox churches did not
sharpen their understanding of the Trinity and eventually fell into serious
error that led historically to political tyranny in Russia and eastern Europe.
How this happened is a fascinating illustration of the importance of Bible
doctrine in the great affairs of mankind.
With a weak and undeveloped
concept of the Trinity, the Orthodox churches sought a unifying principle in
the Father alone rather than in all three persons of the Trinity. Rushdoony
comments:
“Because of subordinationism,
the development of the state was furthered in the East. . . .Subordinationism
gave primacy to nature, and hence to the natural ability of man. As a result,
man becomes in effect his own savior, and grace is cooperating grace, but not
prevenient. If the Holy Ghost proceeds only from the Father, then the Holy
Ghost, in a system which accords primacy to nature, becomes absorbed into
nature. . . . The state is man’s true order, and the church is the concentrated
area in which the social process of deification occurs. . . .The kenotic Christ
of Eastern [Orthodox] thought abandons His deity in the world.[14]
In other words denial of the
procession of the Holy Spirit from the Son shows that the Son is not “God
enough” to send the Spirit, i.e., the Son is no longer the God-Man of the New
Testament. And this weak Christ view led historically to acceptance of
tyrannical political powers by eastern European culture. To this day, for
example, the Russian people who grew up in a culture saturated with Orthodox
theology (the Russian Orthodox church is the only “true” church in their eyes)
simply cannot find the strength to stand up to political abuse and tyranny.
In the West, however, the
vigorous debates with heretics produced a deep searching of Scripture and a
powerful articulation of the Trinity. The Son was seen as co-equal with the
Father and therefore equally involved in sending the Holy Spirit. The Trinity
as the One and the Many, the Unified and the Diversified, gave the West a model
of human society in which unifying authority could co-exist with diversified
authority. The state, the church, the family, and other diversified authorities
could all function inside their respective “spheres” without each one trying to
wholly dominate the others. Rushdoony points out that in the West the strong
and balanced view of the Trinity led to a series of developments politically
and religiously that were responsible for constitutionalism and liberty.[15]
The Holy Spirit is a
Full-Fledged Member of the Trinity. He is both a Person and God. First, He is revealed
to be as much of a “person” as the Father and the Son. He has intellect (Rom.
8:27; I Cor. 2:10-11) that teaches men (I Cor. 2:13); sensibility toward other
persons (Eph. 4:30; Heb. 10:29); and a will of His own (I Cor. 12:11). He
commands people (Acts 8:29; 13:2), guides them (Rom. 8:14), argues for the
truth with them (John 16:7-8; Rom. 8:14), and is sometimes lied to (Acts 5:3).
And He prays (Rom. 8:26).
Some have tried to deny His
personality and turn Him into a mere “influence.” They cite the neuter gender
of the Greek noun for spirit (pneuma). They fail to recognize that although the
noun is neuter, when it is used by NT authors for the Holy Spirit it sometimes
is accompanied by pronouns in the masculine gender (e.g., John 15:26;
16:7-8,13-14; Eph. 1:14). This violation of Greek grammar clearly shows
deliberate intent by NT authors to assert the true personality of the Spirit
over against the notion that “it” is a vague “influence.” That the Holy Spirit is
a true Person as much as the Father and Son are, is vital to the Christian
life. As we shall note below, He indwells each believer during the Church
age moment by moment here on earth, watching our every thought, word, and deed!
We either offend Him or please Him as the “on-scene” Director of our lives.
The doctrine of His personhood, therefore, is not a trivial matter for academic
theologians! It puts us on the front lines of our relationship with God
Himself.
The Holy Spirit is God
Himself.
The Bible consistently ascribes to the Holy Spirit work that only God Himself
can do. He did the creating work in Genesis 1 and the providential sustaining
of creation thereafter (Gen. 1:2; Job 26:13; 27:3; Ps. 33:6; 104:30). He
created the Scripture (II Pet. 1:21). He caused the Incarnation in Mary’s womb
(Luke 1:35). He fulfills the same role of Comforter that Jesus did prior to His
death (John 14:16). In the New Testament He “replaces” Yahweh in OT citations
(Acts 28:25 cf. Isa. 6:1-13; Heb. 10:15-17 cf. Jer. 31:31-34).
One of the most glaring NT
passages that points to His deity is Matthew 28:19. Here in the very center of
the Great Commission is the Three-fold Name of God that includes the Holy
Spirit. The Bible reveals that the Holy Spirit has divine attributes. He is
omniscient (I Cor. 2:11-12), omnipresent (Ps. 139:7), omnipotent (Job 33:4),
and holy (Luke 11:13).
Since we are discussing the
doctrine of the Holy Spirit in connection with Pentecost, we need to focus on
His work from Pentecost to the present day, i.e, His work in the present
dispensation of the Church. One way to focus is to contrast His present work
with His work prior to Pentecost. Jesus distinguished His pre-Pentecost work
from His post-Pentecost work
in John 14:17. Prior to Pentecost, Jesus said, the Holy Spirit was “with” the
disciples. After Pentecost He would be “in” them.
There is a dispensational
shift in His work.
Prior to Pentecost, the Holy
Spirit sustained the universe (Ps. 104:29- 30), generated the Old Testament (II
Pet. 1:21), and restrained sin (Gen. 6:3). He had a special role in the growth of Israel. He worked to empower
Joseph as ruler in Egypt (Gen. 41:38) and Joshua as a key leader of the new nation
(Num. 27:18). He gave special “natural” skills to workers on the Tabernacle
(Exod. 31:3). He directed in a special way later leaders of Israel such as the
judges, prophets, and kings (Jud. 3:10; 6:34; 11:29; I Sam. 10:9-10; 16:13; cf.
I Pet. 1:11).
Great as this work was,
however, it was limited compared to the prophesied work associated with the New
Covenant (cf. Isa. 59:21; Ezk. 39:29). It was limited to only certain Jews, not
all, as the New Covenant promises point out. The Holy Spirit did not permanently
abide with any of the OT saints: He could withdraw at any time (I Sam. 16:14;
Ps. 51:11). The point to note here is that the Holy Spirit was primarily
concerned with the nation Israel, not with individuals of that nation (Cf. Isa.
63:10-11, 14).
What separated this OT pre-Pentecostal work of the Holy Spirit from His post-Pentecostal work was the career of the God-Man King, the Lord Jesus Christ. As we noted in Part V of this series, Jesus Christ through the hypostatic union was true humanity united with undiminished deity without confusion in one person. His life, therefore, was utterly unique. We studied two doctrines concerning this unique life and said that they looked forward in time to them Church age. Now we will look at four doctrines about our relationship to Jesus Christ through the post-Pentecostal work of the Holy Spirit.
Regeneration. By this term biblical
theologians mean the action of God, primarily the action of the Holy Spirit, in
imparting eternal life to human beings (cf. John 3:3-7; Titus 3:5). It means
“born again” in the true theological sense, not the in the often sloppy use of
the term for the process of conversion. Conversion includes human actions and
experiences; regeneration is confined to the work of God alone. It is
instantaneous (John 1:13 and the birth metaphor in John 3:3-7), not a
continuing process. It is as miraculous if not more miraculous than creation
itself.
The life that is given, eternal life, is the inseparably related to Jesus Christ (I John 5:12). Until the Incarnation, therefore, eternal life could not have been given to OT believers. They received a similar work, “circumcision of the heart” that enabled them to live godly lives, but it wasn’t quite the same as regeneration for post-Pentecostal NT believers (Deut. 10:16; 30:6; cf. Col. 2:11). Eternal life comes out of the life and ministry of Jesus Christ. During His time on earth, Jesus Christ lived out a perfect life in utter dependence upon the Holy Spirit. Even though He was undiminished deity, He lived under the “kenosis principle” (see Chapter 3, Part V). The doctrine of kenosis, you will recall, states that our Lord gave up the independent use of His divine attributes. He used them only rarely when it was the Father’s will and never to “cheat” against Satan’s temptations. Kenosis qualified Jesus to become our intercessory priest and judge because He knows what it is to live in this fallen world in complete dependence upon God the Holy Spirit. He lived with humble faith that