Please hit "WEBCASTS"
What are some characteristics of a Spirit-filled/Spirit-led church?
According to Scripture, there are five characteristics/actions associated with or manifested by a Spirit-filled church (Eph. 5:19–20).[1]
The Spirit filled life, or Spirit-possessed life, is not one in which we have a certain amount of the Spirit, but rather one in which He possess all of us. . . . The Spirit-filled life is one in which the Spirit expresses Himself within an individual as a controlling and overflowing force. The condition is one of yieldedness on our part. We are filled as we are emptied of self.[2]
What does “praying in the Spirit” mean?
The phrase “praying in the Spirit” occurs three times in the New Testament. They can be found in 1 Cor. 14:15; Eph. 6:18; and Jude 20. This phrase can mean “in the sphere of,” “with the help of,” “by means of,” or “in connection to.” It means we pray for things as the Spirit leads us and with his help (cf. Rom. 8:26).
Some think that “praying in the Spirit” is praying in tongues based on 1 Cor. 14:15. However, it is unlikely based on the context. Note that in Eph. 6:18, we are instructed to “pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests.” Hence, it makes better sense to take this phrase to mean we are to pray in the power of the Spirit and by the leading of the Spirit.[3]
In sum it means to be prompted and guided by the Spirit. “It means the Holy Spirit directs the prayer, creates the prayer within us, and empowers us to offer it and pray it.”[4]
What does Baptism in/of the Spirit mean?
We need to differentiate baptism in the Spirit as 1) conversion-initiation, and 2) the fullness of the Spirit for empowerment. The former is an event that happens to us, and the latter is an experience. The former is the work of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:13), while the latter is the work of Jesus Christ (John said that Jesus would “baptise with the Holy Spirit.” These words appear six times in the Bible: Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; John 1:33–34; Acts 1:5; 11:16).
Note that the phrase “baptism in the Spirit” was used differently by Paul and Luke. When Paul talked about baptism in the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:13), he was talking about conversion experience where a believer is incorporated into the body of Christ (positional truth). When Luke talked about baptism in the Spirit/filled with the Spirit, he was talking of post-conversion where one receives power from high (the two can happen simultaneously) which is an experiential truth. There is a continual redemptive narrative in the Bible beginning with the Old Testament. However, each book must be read in its own context. Hence, we need to read Luke not through the lens of Paul or Luke through the lens of Paul. [5]
Today, the phrase “baptism in the Spirit” is used in four different ways. First, it is used in conversion. When a person becomes a believer, he receives the Holy Spirit and is baptized by the Holy Spirit into the body of Christ: “Some of us are Jews, some are Gentiles, some are slaves, and some are free. But we have all been baptized into one body by one Spirit, and we all share the same Spirit” (1 Cor. 12:13). This is the common view of evangelicals (includes mainline denominations, independents, charismatics). This is a positional truth (non-experiential).
Second, after a person has become a believer, he has an encounter with the Holy Spirit. One of the evidences of that experience may or may not be the manifestation of tongues and other gifts. This is the charismatic post-conversion view (mainline or independent churches that experienced the Holy Spirit and subscribe to the supernatural spiritual gifts). This is experiential truth.
Third, after a person has become a believer, he has an encounter with the Holy Spirit. The primary evidence of that experience is manifestation of tongues. This is the Pentecostal post-conversion view (e.g., Assemblies of God). In Pentecostal churches, to be a local pastor, one must manifest this “baptism in/of the Spirit.” This is a central doctrine of Pentecostal churches. This is experiential truth.
Fourth, this phrase is a term used by many preachers/teachers in post-conversion to refer to an encounter with the Holy Spirit without manifestation of tongues. The result is power for service in their life and ministry. So is the commitment and passion for his work. This is experiential truth.
In sum, the evangelical view is that all believers are baptized (automatically) by the Holy Spirit. Spirit baptism happens at the moment of conversion. Each believer is baptized once into the body of Christ which makes all Christian believers members of the body of Christ.[6] However, the filling of the Holy Spirit or fullness of the Spirit is a different story that requires some action on the believer’s part. The fullness of the Spirit needs to be “continuously and increasingly appropriated” and “a normal characteristic of every dedicated believer.”[7]
To avoid confusion, “baptism in/of the Spirit” (only happens once) is used in relation to conversion-initiation but “filling of the Holy Spirit/fullness of the Spirit” (can happen many times) refers to spiritual renewal which is used for special empowerment for service.[8] In other words, there is one baptism but many fillings and re-fillings. There is general agreement that we receive the Spirit at conversion, but can be filled afresh, time and again, with the Spirit on later/different occasions.
Did the Old Testament believers have the Holy Spirit?
There are five basically different views concerning this question.[9] One, they were regenerated (born again) and indwelt by the Holy Spirit (John Owen, Benjamin Warfield, Sinclair Ferguson, J. A. Motyer, J. B. Payne, Leon Wood). This subscribes to the view of the continuity between the Old Testament and New Testament.
Two, they were regenerated (born again) and indwelt by the Holy Spirit but New Testament believers experienced this in greater measure (Augustine, John Calvin, Wayne Grudem, D. L. Block, G. E. Ladd). This also subscribes to the view of continuity between the two testaments.
Three, they were regenerated (born again) but not indwelt by the Holy Spirit (J. I. Packer, Bruce Ware, Millard Erickson, Willem Van Gemeren). This holds to the view of the continuity and discontinuity between the Old and New Testaments.
Four, they were not regenerated (born again) but the Spirit gave them faith to believe in God’s promise. The Spirit came upon them (selected individuals) but did not indwell them (Martin Luther, Don Carson, Michael Green, L. S. Chafer, C. Blasing). In this view, there is a discontinuity between the Old and New Testaments.
Five, the issue of regeneration is not raised. The Spirit came upon them (selected individuals) but the Spirit’s indwelling is denied (C. K. Barrett, R. E. Brown, C. C. Ryrie, J. F. Walvoord). There is a vague discontinuity between the testaments.
I subscribe to the fourth view since John’s Gospel informs us that believers could not be indwelt by the Spirit till Jesus was glorified (John 7:39; 14:16–17; 16:7).
Is speaking in tongues the only evidence of being Spirit-filled?
Scripturally speaking, the answer is no. When we read the book of Acts, we discover that the gift of the Holy Spirit was accompanied by tongues (Acts 2:1–4; 10:44–46; 29:1–6) but other passages like Acts 8:17 and Acts 9:17–19 do not.
Second, the phrase “they were filled with the Spirit” is followed by the conjunction “and.”
Third, more often than not, the result of being filled with the Spirit is boldness to testify/preach. Interestingly, when they prayed for boldness, they were filled with the Holy Spirit!
Four, When Paul was filled with the Holy Spirit, nothing was mentioned about him speaking in tongues (although we know from Scripture Paul did). “So Ananias went and found Saul. He laid his hands on him and said, ‘Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road, has sent me so that you might regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.’ Instantly something like scales fell from Saul’s eyes, and he regained his sight. Then he got up and was baptized” (Acts 9:17–18).
Paul’s admonition is, “But in a church meeting I would rather speak five understandable words to help others than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue” (1 Cor. 14:19).
[1] This newer view, compared to the older view where the emphasis is on individuals and steps given/taken to be filled, has textual merit.
[2] Myron S. Augsburger, Quench Not the Spirit (Scottdale, PN: Herald Press, 1961), 17–18.
[3] For more questions and answers, see Michael S. Houdman, ed., Questions about the Holy Spirit (Bloomington, IN: Westbow Press, 2013).
[4] Selwyn Hughes, HCSB Every Day with Jesus Bible (Nashville: B & H Publishing, 2004), 1062.
[5] For an understanding of the differences between Pauline and Lukan understanding of the Spirit, consult Youngmo Cho, Spirit and Kingdom of Luke and Paul (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock,2005). He argues that the former deals more (prophetic) of the soteriological dimension, while the latter emphasizes the Charismatic dimension of the Spirit in relation to the kingdom. Hence it is not exegetically correct to interpret one in light of the other.
[6] See Andreas J. Köstenberger, “What Does it Mean to be Filled with the Holy Spirit? A Biblical Investigation,” JETS 40/2 (June 1997), 229–40.
[7] John Stott, Baptism and Fullness: The Work of the Holy Spirit Today (London: InterVarsity Press, 1975), 47–8.
[8] See D. A. Carson, Showing the Spirit (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1987), 158–60.
[9] For those interested to learn more, see James Hamilton, “Were Old Testament Believers Indwelt by the Holy Spirit?” Themelios 30/1 (September 2004), 12–22.