BASF VERSUS BELIEF IN A PRESENT POSSESSION OF THE SPIRIT

PROBLEM:

SOLUTION:

This statement is a contradiction of "THE FOUNDATION".

When a person alleges he has access to another source of revelation₁ or instruction or inspiration or power apart from the Word through an "experience" or "indwelling of the Spirit", then he disagrees with the foundation₂ of our Statement of Faith. He becomes a man "who is right" because he has had an experience.

Under "Doctrines to be Rejected" Statement 25 we have

The person who claims present possession₃ will and does claim that only those who have had "an experience with the Lord" "are on the track".

BEING BORN AGAIN

The Prologue of John's Gospel shows that there is a deliberate analogy drawn between the Son of God, and those who, through belief in him, are themselves subject to divine birth₁. It sometimes is argued, on the basis of this evident relationship (between the begettal of Jesus by the Holy Spirit upon Mary, and that of "the sons of God") that the Holy Spirit must have been the medium of the miracle in their case also. But John's Prologue does not say so. The passage says that belief is the spiritual basis of rebirth.

Both the Prologue to John's gospel and the discussion between Jesus and Nicodemus₂ teach that the new birth is a spiritual process which involves "receiving" Christ and "believing on his Name" through the message of "the Voice" of "the Spirit" speaking through God's prophets (both O.T. and N.T.) and preeminently through His Son. The seed of truth thus planted in the heart, is part of a spiritual process which after germination and growth, "brings forth" a new born "son of God", who, as he rises from the baptismal water, can rightly claim to have been born both "from above" and "anew" (RV translation of Gr. anothen).

Several scriptures support the preceding interpretation:

Biblical figures

By a simple transfer to agricultural figures, conversion is compared in Scripture to seed (the gospel) planted in soil (minds). Two examples demonstrate this:

1. The Parable of the Sower (Luke 8): "The seed is the word of God" (v. 11) "And the seed in the good ground, these are the ones who have heard the word in an honest and good heart" (v. 15).
2. In his teaching about the Divine begettal of the believer, James says: "Receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls" (1:21).

Those who teach that the Holy Spirit is in some mystical sense the direct medium of the believer's new birth, and that without this direct intervention any conversion is ineffectual and invalid, claim that it is absurd to expect the cold print of Scripture to effect a miracle₃ of rebirth. Yet it is in terms of human language, by the spoken or written word, that God has always seen fit to speak to men about sin and salvation. This "word of God is living and active and sharper than any two edged sword and... able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart" (Heb. 4:12).

CONVERSION: WHEN DOES IT TAKE PLACE?

PROBLEM:

It is maintained by some that their conversion took place months and even years after they were "baptized" and that this conversion was "an experience which gave them the Spirit and put them on the track."

SOLUTION:

1. Conversion in its primary sense must take place before baptism, otherwise the alleged "baptism" is not baptism but a mere washing of a dry sinner to get a wet sinner. If there has not been a change in mind and living before, then the "baptism" was not a death to an old life, nor was it a rising to a new one. If it was not these things then there was no forgiveness and no being born again.

2. There is no scriptural evidence that "an experience with the Lord" is a necessary part of conversion. Ask any Pentecostal how he found conversion and he will give you an account psychologically similar to the experiences of many pagan cult-worshippers.

3. The case of the Apostle Peter (Luke 22:32) is often cited to prove the above claim. However, it was not an "experience with Jesus" that caused Peter to "turn" and this did not give him the Spirit. Peter, after his denial, remembered the words of Jesus, and he repented and "wept bitterly".

   This example of Peter is a case where a person is originally converted to the Truth, yet through weakness of the flesh, errs and transgresses from the ways of God. The turning back again is a re-conversion. In all instances where the Greek verb epistrepho is translated in the AV as convert(ed), the meaning is "to turn again" NASB). It does not suggest a first conversion but a re-conversion. The position of needing re-conversion is a very dangerous one (cf. James 5:19; Matt. 13:15; Acts 28:27).

4. The true conversion of which the Scriptures₁ speak is connected with repentance, remission of sins, and eternal life. A man by this word comes to know the will of God and His promises, is converted by that knowledge from walking contrary thereto. He repents or changes his mind, and perceiving that God has promised to forgive his sins for Christ's sake, upon his belief of the gospel of the kingdom that Jesus preached, and baptism into his name; he obeys from the heart ... and is "Baptized into Christ." Being then "in Christ" (Gal. 3:28) he is an "heir according to the promises" and if he endure in well doing until the end, he will receive eternal life at the Lord's hand in the day of his coming.

5. The process of "conversion", like that of being "saved", is threefold₂-
   
   a) opening the eyes.
   
   b) turning to God.
   
   c) receiving the inheritance of the saints.

   In a primary sense a) and b) occur before baptism but in a lesser sense may occur afterwards when the word (or contrition based on action) forces us to turn to God more fully. Final conversion does not occur until the body is immortalized.

THE SPIRIT DID NOT CAUSE RIGHTEOUSNESS

Personal possession of the Spirit DID NOT CAUSE RIGHTEOUSNESS and was no guarantee of Salvation.

PROBLEM:

It is alleged that the Holy Spirit

SOLUTION:

1. If it is demonstrated that the Spirit did not cause righteousness in the past, then the onus is on the claimant to show that it is otherwise today.

2. Defections to the Apostasy by those who possessed the "Spirit of grace" must have occurred, otherwise the writer to the Hebrews would not have mentioned what he did. "In the case of those who have once been enlightened... and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit ... and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance." (Heb. 6:4-6, NASB).

   "How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God ... and has insulted the Spirit of grace?" (Heb. 10:29).

3. The evidence is that the moral life of those through whom the Spirit operated was not affected because they faced trials like others and they felt the temptations common to all men.
   1. MOSES obviously worked miracles (in the plagues, the drying up of the Sea and in the wilderness) but this did not prevent him from "trespassing against" the LORD. Because he did he was barred from the Promised land. This sin occurred despite the fact that Moses possessed such an abundance of the spirit that the LORD "took of the spirit that was upon him (Moses) and gave it unto the seventy elders". (Num. 11:25).

   2. BEZALEEL was "filled ... with the spirit of God" (Exod. 31:3; 35:31) so that he would have the ability to build the tabernacle, but he was not one of the two who entered the Promised Land.

   3. All those occupied in the construction of the dwelling place "grieved his holy spirit" and perished in the wilderness. (Isa. 63:10 NASB)

   4. ELIJAH. After his great victory over the prophets of Baal (which he obtained as a supernatural display of fire from heaven) and the breaking of the drought, it might be thought that such a man was invincible. But the very next day, we find him fleeing from a woman (1 Kings 19:2,3) and desiring death (v. 4).

   5. SAMSON. "The Spirit of the LORD came mightily upon him" (Jud. 14:6) so that he had great physical power yet he took wives of the Canaanites and was brought to death because of this. His progressive downfall caused his gift to cease (Judges 16:20).

   6. DAVID, the prophet, had the Holy Spirit (Psa. 51:11,12) but that did not prevent lust, adultery, deceit and murder.

   7. JESUS had the Spirit without measure yet in Gethsemane when he sorely needed comfort, it did not arise from the Spirit he had but came by angelic ministration. (Luke 22:43).

   8. Judas Iscariot was an apostle who had the power to heal every kind of sickness but this did not prevent him from the wickedness of betraying the Messiah (Matt. 10:1-8; Acts 1:17, 25).

   9. PETER (who received the Spirit at Pentecost) was so far out of line that Paul "withstood him to the face". (Gal. 2:11).

   10. PAUL had what some would call "an experience" with Christ and was "filled with the Holy Spirit", (Acts 9:17) but his own words describe his conflict:
       
       "to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not" (Rom. 7:18).
       Paul guarded against the possibility of him becoming a castaway (1 Cor. 9: 27) and yet he probably had more of the Spirit than any other apostle did.

       The Corinthians abused the very gifts the Spirit bestowed, and were guilty of immorality and of teaching false doctrine. (cf. 1 Cor. 5:9; 15:12).

       The Galatians. "God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son" (4:6) to them, but it did not prevent them from being bewitched and turning from the gospel. (3:1).

       The Ephesians (some of whom were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise (1:13) were instructed "grieve not the Holy Spirit of God". (4:30). The parallel between the Ephesian ecclesia and Israel of the past is evident in this verse. Both had the Holy Spirit in their midst in the form of miraculous powers, yet their conduct too often "grieved" God.

       TIMOTHY had to be exhorted to increased action for "neglect" of "the spiritual gift within..." him. (2 Tim. 1:6; 4:5; 1 Tim. 4:14, NASB).

       cf. also Acts 6:3 - two requirements:

       1. of honest report
       2. full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom.

It may be seen, therefore, that the bestowal of the Spirit neither prevented apostasy nor built up character.

By the effort put out to know and keep God's commandments they developed characters of faithfulness and holiness. If it were otherwise then God could be accused of being partial, because it is easy to see the advantage they would have.

THE SUPPOSED "DIFFERENCE" BETWEEN THE HOLY SPIRIT AND THE GIFTS OF THE SPIRIT

PROBLEM:

When it became apparent to the Apostate church that all evidence of Holy Spirit effusion had ceased, they made the suggestion that there is a difference between the gift of the Holy Spirit on one hand and the gifts of the Holy Spirit.₁

SOLUTION:

1. The two are inseparable. Holy Spirit is God's power set apart for very special work on special occasions. The Holy Spirit was "the gift"₂; "the gifts" in various manifestations was the Holy Spirit.

2. No one could have the "gift" of the Holy Spirit without having the Holy Spirit. Likewise, the operation of the Holy Spirit in a person was expressed in some particular gift that they could use. This is evident from Paul's discourse in 1 Cor. 12:
   "Now there are varieties of gifts but the same Spirit." (v. 4).
   "But one and the same Spirit works all these things." (v. 11).

3. "With great power gave the apostles witness" (Acts 4:33).
   "We are his witnesses, and so also is the Holy Spirit, which God hath given to them that obey him." (Acts 5:32).

They had healed a man lame from birth, had struck Ananias and Sapphira dead and had spoken with spontaneous divine assurance that confounded all their enemies. Thus was fulfilled the promise of the Lord:

"When they deliver you up take no thought how or what ye shall speak. For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you." (Matt. 10:19, 20).

This special power was proof of the possession.

DIVINE ASSISTANCE₁

If we can understand the principles involved in Divine assistance on a natural plane, this will enable us to understand it on a spiritual plane. The proposition before us is that: God does not perform for us, things which we are capable of doing for ourselves. His assistance consists of furnishing us with the means of doing things. This is the basis of Divine assistance except in miraculous cases.

In the natural sphere God does not perform for man the numerous actions upon which his bodily happiness depends. He furnishes only the capacity and the means of performing them. God plows no man's field; He sows no man's seed; He reaps no man's harvest; He grinds no man's grain; He bakes no man's bread; He plants no man's vineyard; collects no man's grapes nor converts them into wine; He manufactures no man's cloth; nor cuts nor sews it into garments. But He provides the bacteria which can work on loose soil; He provides the sunshine and nutrients which cause the seed to grow, mature and ripen; He provides the food value in the grain which makes it worth grinding; He provides the latent heat in the fuel and the process of combustion to bake the bread plus the process which causes bread to rise; He causes the grapes to grow and fermentation. The above points clearly prove the proposition.

Likewise God does not perform any of those mental actions which enable the advancement of human happiness because he has qualified the human mind to perform these when it desires. God has furnished the means for sight, hearing, tasting and smelling but he does not do these actions for man. God thinks, meditates, reasons and judges for no man; nor does he perform for any man the mental actions of imagination, memory, attention or conscience. Also God does not read, comprehend, believe, repent or reform for any man; nor does he love, hate, sorrow, rejoice or feel any emotions on behalf of any member of our race. No, all these actions man must and does perform for himself. But if man must perform all these actions for himself, what does God contribute towards their performance? He furnishes only capacity, means and motives. This answer can easily be proved to be correct by the Socratic method of argumentation that follows:

1. When the human mind acquires the knowledge of God and divine things, does God perform this action for it, or does he merely assist in its performance by furnishing the necessary capacity and the necessary means of information, and by presenting the most powerful motive of its incalculable benefit and advantage to the acquirer to rouse him to action?

2. When the human mind believes or admits the truth of what God has declared, does God perform the act of believing for the believer, or does he only furnish the declarations to be believed, attested by his own infallible veracity, and in order to excite the mind to the performance of the act of believing what God has declared, propose to it in clear language the immeasurable advantage of divine faith, that is, of believing what God has declared? Thus we perceive what man contributes towards the act of faith or believing, and what God contributes. God bestows the capacity necessary to enable man to perform the act.

   He also furnishes the means without which the act, notwithstanding man's capacity, could not be performed; and He furnishes and proposes the inducement which excites to its performance, and man thus excited exerts the capacity bestowed upon him who believes.

3. When a person repents does God perform the act of penitence₂ for the individual, or does He furnish only the capacity necessary to enable man to repent (as well as the clear revelation that all will be destroyed unless they repent)? Here again it is obvious that God furnishes capacity, means and motives. Aided by these the creature performs the act.

4. When one loves God, delights, rejoices, or confides in God, does He perform these actions? Or does He furnish only the capacity (which man exerts in their performance), as well as a declaration of His love to us (which awakens a response, based on gratitude, in His creation)? If then, we are desirous to have the emotions of agape excited in our minds towards our Maker, let us read and meditate upon God's revelation about His lovely perfection's and beneficial actions until these emotions are awakened within us by that effort.

CONCLUSION₃

The analysis of these spiritual actions proves to us that man is the performer of these actions since God has furnished only the capacity, means and motives which enable him to do so. To ask for or expect to receive more, is to suggest that God is incapable of deciding what His creation requires. If God performed these actions for us, then we would be robots.

ENLIGHTENMENT₁

a) How God calls₂
Man has been given free will and God's actions take this into account. By circumstantial pressures exerted through the ministry of angels, God now guides and directs the lives of men and of nations, who are free to respond to or resist the providential activity of God. God "opens" the eyes of people if the light of the Gospel shines where there is potential for belief; He "closes" their eyes when the blaze of the same light meets a refusal to believe. These points are fundamental principles underlying the calling, by God, of individuals to the Truth. This is reinforced by what follows.

b) The method of enlightenment before baptism
Is the church correct in its view that the Holy Spirit is the agency through which the person is morally cleansed and converted? No! The parable of the sower (Luke 8) deals specifically with the method used to bring people to God. It demonstrates that men and women are taught the truth by the preaching of the word.

"The seed is the word of God" sown by Christ and later by the Apostles. The various kinds of ground represent the various kinds of people and their response to the preaching (v. 12-15). It was what was "heard" that caused the response; not some mysterious work of the Spirit.

Enlightenment occurs because God has "manifested His word through preaching" (Titus 1:3). Conversion then is the result of preaching, not of some mysterious action of the Holy Spirit. Acts 16 demonstrates how the Philippian jailer came to know the truth - Paul and Silas "spake unto him the word of the Lord" (v. 32). The record of Acts 13 also shows that the manner in which God brings men and women to Him is through the preaching of the word - "the word of the Lord was published throughout the region" (of Antioch, v. 49).

If God does not reveal His secrets to us in just the same way today, are we not bound to admit, that though the end result may be the same, there is an important difference between the actual mechanics of Divine enlightenment then and now? Their experiences were unlike ours in some respects as is evident from the record which contains references to phenomena which are not part of the fabric of our lives. Why therefore do some persist in trying to apply to themselves many Scriptural verses that are clearly not repeated in identical fashion today? To abandon the first century context of the writings of the New Testament is to set sail on the sea of confusion.₄

c) Enlightenment after baptism

The Word of God as we have it can be understood by any or all who will make the effort to listen with careful attention to the voice of the Spirit which speaks from its pages. As well as the perfection which the Word displays, there is the providential care of the angels who "minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation". (Heb. 1:14).

Even the minutest circumstances in our daily lives, all under angelic control, (especially so if we prayerfully request it) can assist us to understand and appreciate God's word.

The direct action of the Holy Spirit may have been the means by which the inspired Psalmist received the fulfillment of his petition "open thou mine eyes that I may behold wondrous things out of thy law" (Psa. 119:18) but who can claim such revelatory inspiration now?

Rather our posture should be that of Joshua (1:8), Daniel₅ or the Bereans (Acts 17:11-12). These examples are the ones we should follow in attempting to know more of God's revealed purpose. It will not be revealed again!

d) Enlightenment - by spirit or word?

PROBLEM: It is sometimes argued that we must possess the Holy Spirit before we can have real knowledge of Divine truth, i.e. "It is not the sunlight of other centuries which fills the heavens and the earth with its glory today; and it is not by the inspiration of other centuries that men now come to know God₆."

SOLUTION:

1. The above is in direct contradiction to Scripture which declares "the holy Scriptures ... are able to make thee wise unto salvation ... All scripture is given by inspiration of God, ... that the man of God may be perfect." (complete) (2 Tim. 3:15-17).

2. Those who say, "both the Spirit₇ and the Word can cause enlightenment" generally emphasize the former and minimize the latter. In so doing they surely forget that the "word of God is living and active, sharper than any two edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart" (Heb. 4:12 RSV).

   And they forget:
   

   "Blessed is he that readeth and they that hear the words of this prophecy." (Rev. 1:3)

   At Pentecost, (where perhaps the largest number of converts were made in a single day) what was the cause of enlightenment? Was it "transcendent endowments" operating on those who had "opened their hearts" to receive the Holy Spirit? or was it hearing the words of Peter plus the signs that confirmed what he said?

   If hearing the words of Peter caused enlightenment that led to repentance at Pentecost are we to suppose that there should be a different method used in our case? No! It is obvious that if we "hear" the same words of Peter, they can have the same effect as they did at Pentecost.

   When they of Samaria believed it was because "Philip preached the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ₈." The cause of their enlightenment was that they "had received the word of God." (Acts 8:14).

   Philip "could instruct them (Samaritans) in the way of salvation; they believed and were baptized, but they had not the Holy Spirit either before or after through Philip's ministry, neither presumably would they ever have had it, if Peter and John had not₉" come.

   Cornelius and his friends were given the Holy Spirit before being baptized. However, it was not the Holy Spirit that enlightened them. It was the Inspired words of Simon Peter.

   "We are all here present before God to hear all that you have been commanded by the Lord." (Acts 10:33 NASB).

   "While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Spirit fell on all them which heard the word." (v. 44)

   The Holy Spirit₁₀ was not a means of their enlightenment but was to show the circumcised Jews that the Gentiles were now included in God's plan of salvation.

   Paul did not receive the Holy Spirit until three days after his conversion. (Acts 9:9, 17.)

   We do not find in the examples given, any indication of any supernatural endowment enabling the first believers to know the gospel.₁₂

   Most examples of enlightenment demonstrate that the person is drawn near to God by hearing₁₁ or reading God's Word, rather than "being taught directly by the Spirit."₁₂ i.e. "Every man, therefore, that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me." (John 6:45).₁₃

   If enlightenment is by the Spirit operating directly upon a person's mind, and if this illumination is essential to understanding the Bible, then the Bible alone is ineffective in its witness, being dependent upon a divine act on the reader to complete the revelation. The inspired author would then need an inspired reader to complete the revelation. If the first carries infallibility, we would expect the second to also, since it is only a completion of the process. As a result of this process we would expect an absolute uniformity of interpretation. The claimants to illumination are legion: Roman Catholics, Protestants, etc. Each makes its own claims and denies the claims of others to have Spirit guidance. The history of "Enthusiasm" is a sad story of human aberrations. These claims clearly have their source in flesh. The phenomenon had a pagan counterpart and is not exclusively "Christian".

FREEWILL AND THE SPIRIT

God, in His infinite wisdom, gave man the freedom of choice that we term freewill. Therefore, He will not overrule that principle. Christ, for example, who was given the Spirit without measure, could have yielded to his temptations. He still had the choice to obey or disobey (Heb. 4:15).

Those who claim that the Spirit directly causes righteousness, joy, happiness, and zeal display a fundamental error in their thinking. God did not and will not give the Spirit for these purposes because it would make man a robot without the choice to obey or disobey God.

God could have peopled the earth with robots if He had wished. Because He did not is evidence that He does not compel us to do what He desires. That would not give Him glory. God has no pleasure in a man persuaded against his will. (Matt. 9:13).

A modern example may help us to appreciate these facts. A computer programmer can program a computer so that it obeys all his instructions and performs the desired task. However, a programmer cannot love a computer and a computer cannot love its programmer.

In the voluntary submission of a man to God, there is for Him immeasurable satisfaction and sweetness. This is to be expected as God is a person and His relationship to His people is a personal one. Such a thing as direct interference with the mental processes of an individual seems contrary to all that God is.

The scriptures₁, from Genesis to Revelation, make it clear that man has freedom of choice. God does not seek the programmed response of automatons which are incapable of thought or independent action. Rather he seeks the obedience and love of individuals with personality and character.

Christ "learned obedience by the things that he suffered" and the process for us is essentially the same.

A great deal of evidence exists in the Bible to show that many who had the Spirit misused that power. The ecclesia at Corinth is an example of the misuse of tongues. Those who claim that the possession of the Holy Spirit causes righteousness₂ need to reread their Bible, because the evidence there is just the opposite.

GOD IS CORPOREAL₁

PROBLEM:

Most of the people who misunderstand the subject of the Spirit assume or declare that Spiritual beings are immaterial. This misunderstanding gives rise to all sorts of arguments about "mysterious activities" of the Spirit.

SOLUTION:

"We should not assume that anything we cannot see or hear or touch is by nature, by its basic character, silent, immaterial or invisible. We cannot see God who is Spirit. We cannot, today, see angels who are spirits. We hear no voice from heaven. Yet we know that some men heard, saw and touched things which are eternal, things which may be described as eternal." ₂

Stephen saw the "heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God",₃ while those around saw nothing. So we cannot argue that God, Jesus and the angels are immaterial because we by our limited senses cannot see or touch them.₄

That conception of God that thinks of Him as mere abstract power, impalpable, universal, without person or locality is not true. We cannot worship abstract universal power and claim we worship God.

The phrase "God is Spirit" is sometimes offered as evidence that He is immaterial, but Jesus (whom we know to be a corporeal being₅) is called the Lord the Spirit in 2 Cor. 3:17,18. "He is now no longer flesh and blood; but Holy Spirit Nature a flesh and bones embodiment of Spirit."₆

Dr. Thomas' comments as follows:

Since Jesus has flesh and bones it seems incongruous that his Father would not. The writer to the Hebrews says that Christ was "the express image of His person"₈

The angels are "ministering spirits"₉ but they were seen by men many times.

Many passages in scripture show that God is corporeal and shares emotions that we do:

"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." (Gen. 1:26).

"God created man, in the likeness₁₀ of God made he him" (Gen. 5:1, 3).

"He that sitteth in the heaven shall laugh" (Psa. 2:4).

"Hide not thy face . . . incline thine ear unto me" (Psa. 102:2).

"He hath looked down from the height of His sanctuary" (Psa. 102:19).

" ... sat on the right hand of God" (Mark 16:19).

"Man... is the image ... of God" (1 Cor. 11:7).

"Christ, who is the image of God"₁₁ (2 Cor. 4:4).

"Men, which are after the similitude of God" (James 3:9).

OBJECTION CONSIDERED

Psalm 34:7 "The angel of the LORD encampeth round about them that fear him, and delivereth them" is sometimes advanced as evidence that spirit beings can materialize or dematerialize.

SOLUTION:

1. We are made in the image of the Elohim. Gen. 1:26. This means what it says!

2. The angels₁ cannot be seen because our eyes are closed and not because angels are invisible 'ghosts'. Balaam's "ass saw the angel" but Balaam could not until "the LORD opened the eyes of Balaam." (Num. 22:27, 31).
   Elisha saw "the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire" but his servant could not see this until "the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw" (2 Kings 6:16,17).

3. The fact that angels and Christ appeared or disappeared suddenly does not prove that they materialized or dematerialized. The example of Philip, a mortal physical being proves this. No one would claim he dematerialized when the Bible says "the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away; and the eunuch saw him no more."

- see also Gen. 9:6: Psa. 94:9,10; Luke 1:35; John 14:9; Neh. 1:6; Luke 20:35-36. ¹¹ cf. also Col. 1:15.

GOD IS WORKING THROUGH MEN

PROBLEM: It is often assumed that when God works through men it means that they have the Holy Spirit.

		God Working Through:
Ex. 9:16	"For this cause I raised thee up for to shew in thee my power."	Pharaoh
Dan. 4:17	"The Most High ruleth in the kingdom of man"	Nebuchadnezzar
Jer. 43:10	"I will send my Servant."	Nebuchadnezzar
Isa. 10:5	"O, Assyrian, the rod of mine anger ..."	Assyrians
Ezra 1:2	"Thus saith Cyrus, king Of Persia, The LORD God of heaven . . . hath charged me to build him an house at Jerusalem . . ."	Cyrus
Isa. 45:1,4	"Thus saith the LORD to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden... though thou hast not known me."	Cyrus

SOLUTION:

1. No one would suggest that these men possessed the Holy Spirit!

2. God influenced them, but God working through them by His Spirit, and their possessing the Holy Spirit are two totally different things.

3. God today continues His work indirectly through the ways of providence.

GRACE

PROBLEM:

1. Today some of those who claim to have the Holy Spirit regard it as a means of special grace, a means to holiness of life.
2. It is maintained by some that they have received a mystical divine inspiration from heavenly sources which purified them and 'made them good'. This they call "Grace".

SOLUTION:

1. The following facts should be carefully noted:
   1. When the Apostles died, the power of passing on the Holy Spirit died with them. From that angle there can be no possession of the Holy Spirit today. (See Section D -"Spirit Gifts not Available").
   2. Those who claim their experience was that of direct descent must remember that whenever this occurred (as recorded in scripture) it was always visible to others. We have no record of the Spirit descending when only the recipient was aware of it.
   3. The possession of the Holy Spirit did not cause holiness₁. Paul frequently had to rebuke those who did possess it, even describing them as "carnal₂" and "babes", fit only to feed on "milk" and not on "meat".

2. Problem B is related to A so solution A should be noted here. The definition given to "Grace" in problem B above is a counterfeit, deceiving meaning, derived from pagan sources such as Plato and Augustine of Hippo - and not the Scriptures₃.
   1. "Grace" is the unmerited favor of God and has been revealed by three main gifts:
      1. life in the first place (breath of life).
      2. the revelation of eternal life (eventually eternal life itself).
      3. forgiveness through Jesus.

   2. "Grace" is sometimes used in Scripture as the means by which God reveals or brings His salvation (cf. 1.b. above). Examples of this usage are to be found in:

      1. Eph. 3:2, 7 where "grace" not only describes the revelation that eternal life was to be the hope of Gentiles but also the means by which God revealed His salvation to the Gentiles.
         "The stewardship of God's grace ... that the Gentiles are fellow-heirs,"
         This use of grace describes the revelation that Gentiles were included.
         "of which I was made a minister, according to the gift of God's grace ... to me, the very least of all saints, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles" (NASB).
         This use of grace describes the means by which God revealed His salvation.

      2. Rom. 12:6-8 "Having then gifts₄ differing according to the grace that is given us, whether prophecy... ministry... teaching... exhortation... giving, ruling, showing mercy₅."

         These gifts were given so that the possessor might help others by:
         

         (1) "ministering" the gospel.
         (2) "perfecting the saints".
         (3) "edifying the body of Christ".
         They were not given to a person for his personal satisfaction or use.

   3. To use these "gifts of grace" to one's own end was a detrimental misuse of them, as is evident from the following words of Paul:
      "to think of himself more highly than he ought to think." (Rom. 12:3)

      "I would rather speak five words with my mind, in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue." (1 Cor. 14:19 RSV).

      "God is not a God of confusion." (v. 33 RSV).

   4. Those, therefore, who see this grace₆ as something which benefits them personally, do not understand the subject.

      - These gifts of grace did not "purify or make good" the recipients!

      - They were given for an interim period only and are in no way available today.₇

GUIDANCE AND PRAYER

Our attitude to prayer generally fits into one of the following four categories:

1. We realize that we must "worship in spirit (sincerity) and in truth". This means that our words should accurately reflect our thoughts which are based on Scripture. i.e. "If we ask anything according to His will He heareth us" (1 John 5:14).

2. We don't altogether understand how to pray so we borrow nice sounding generalized clichés. Very often we don't know the meaning of these phrases but nevertheless we think everyone else does. We feel that words are not important because God understands what we mean not from our words but from our motives, our heart and our need.

3. We convey our ideas by carefully choosing words which are acceptable both to our radical friends and our enemies in the truth. Little thought is given to how the Father views such an activity.

4. We feel prayer is unnecessary most of the time for one of several different reasons:
   1. We have the Spirit which directly guides us in right ways, or
   2. We have lost our zeal for God, or
   3. Today, God is not active in our lives. The only thing that can assist us is endless study of His revelation.

It almost 'goes without saying', that all attitudes except the first are wrong. If we do not know what we are saying then we must not say it. This type of prayer indicates a lack of sincerity. Also it is easy for false doctrine to creep into this type of prayer. When prayer is not based on the word of God it becomes "an abomination" (Prov. 28:9). If we deliberately give prayers that have two meanings, then we are not sincere and God will not be pleased with our action. If we do not offer acceptable prayer then we can have no hope of salvation.

It is the second category - that of not fully understanding our words and therefore possibly assisting false doctrine₁ - that we are initially concerned with here. Some Christadelphians argue that believers today possess the Holy Spirit, and say that even those who claimed not to accept this idea really demonstrated their belief in it when they prayed for divine help to be given to a speaker, "that God may be mouth, matter and wisdom"₂

This deduction is correct, for if we really do expect God to answer this kind of prayer then it can only be through the direct intervention of God by His power, and it follows that if God does answer such prayer then the speaker's words are God-given, and therefore infallible!

All who are well grounded in the Truth will see the absolute folly of this position. Those entrusted to exercise the privilege of prayer on behalf of the Ecclesia should take care lest, in making such petitions, they provide the faulty premise on which such reasoning is based.

The request that God may be "mouth, matter and wisdom" conflicts with God's divine revelation that we are to:

Most brethren, when questioned about the phrase, have admitted that they had used borrowed words and hadn't understood their full implication.

A true follower of Christ must "pray without ceasing". Those who expect to obtain salvation without asking God to intervene and help them will not attain that end. Conversely those who expect God to intervene in the sense of giving them the Spirit or influencing them directly by His Spirit₃ will not receive answers to their requests because they are not in accordance with the revealed purpose of God.

In view of the above points how should we pray for "divine guidance" and how should we expect it to operate in our lives? This is a crucial question and certainly not an easy one to answer. There are several facts, however, which are immediately apparent and these will help to steer us to the right answer:

1. In God's wisdom this is not a time for open communications from God, but a time for studying the communications He has already made and preserved so wondrously in the Bible.
   It would, therefore, be wrong to expect God to communicate to each and every man a separate store of divine knowledge of his own to meet his separate needs. Rather, He has spread a common table for all, and invites all to come and partake of that feast. It is there in the completed revelation that He requires each to receive his 'Divine guidance' and strength from (cf. Prov. 28:9; Psa. 119:97-106). It is no use praying for what we already have within our reach.

2. We do not experience open Angelic visitations. We experience, however, their providential control of our lives. This, therefore, is what we should mean by 'divine guidance'. It is the wonderful way in which the Father intervenes indirectly in the circumstances of the lives of His children for their encouragement, protection and correction, so that their characters might be developed in the days of probation (cf. Psa. 34:7 and Heb. 12:6).

3. We are not witnesses of the Apostolic age of miracles. We should not expect to be either because miracles were an accompaniment of revelation that has been completed.
   We are witnesses, however, of miracles in the political sphere, which further demonstrates angelic guidance.

Prayer for the Holy Spirit

The Holy Spirit had been given to David without requiring that he pray for it. After his sin with Bathsheba he prayed that the Spirit be not taken from him (Psa. 51) but this can not be construed as prayer for the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit was given at Pentecost but this did not require the disciples to pray for it. It was a promise that the Father gave and fulfilled. Any other example of prayer for the Holy Spirit, as can be seen upon examination, relates only to the first century miraculous gifts.

For us to pray for the Spirit so that it may cleanse us and make us righteous is to speak the words not of Truth but of the Apostasy. It is through the words or truth of Christ that we are sanctified (John 17:19) and this was his prayer. He did not pray that the Spirit in some miraculous way should do the sanctifying. There is more of the Holy Spirit available from the written word than was ever given to the early ecclesia. And He has never undertaken to send His Spirit to open unto us for wisdom what He has put in our power to open for ourselves.

What prayer "for the spirit" means today

It means a reversal of the process of salvation. It means that the Scriptures are a sealed book, and that unless we have the Spirit we need not trouble ourselves with opening it. It means substituting prayer for action. It means the petitioner wants to save himself the bother of searching the Scriptures. It means what the Church of Rome and her harlot daughters teach about "grace"₄. It means that those who ask will find themselves answered by fancies and frenzies of their own imagination which have as much relation to the work of God on their hearts as the rantings of those "led astray to dumb idols".

Divine guidance

The ways of God are not confined to the ages of miracles. God has done and continues to exercise his will by means of divine regulation of natural circumstances. All who commit their way to God in a scriptural manner are included in the operations of this providence - that is the control of natural circumstances by angelic agency in an unseen manner and without any apparent interference with natural ways. Where angels do not operate, providence is not at work.

This divine guidance does not dispense with the necessity for individual prudence and action. Human action is the basis for divine supervision. In its absence, there is nothing for the angels to work on.

God has conferred upon man independent volition within natural boundaries. This limited independence of will is the basis of God's dealings with His children. "Providence" manipulates circumstances, and so acts through, without setting aside, the action of the unconstrained human will. Cooperation between God and man in this way is God's glorious arrangement and is expressed in scripture in the following way: "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God which worketh₅ in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure." (Phil. 2:12-13).

When God works with and by means of man, human agency is far from superfluous. God requires men humbly, faithfully, and diligently to do their part as the condition and means of enabling Him to work out His purpose with and concerning them. There is a time to stand still and see the salvation of God, but it is not when He proposes to work by us. All the promises of God presuppose active, diligent, courageous, and caretaking co-operation on the part of those to whom they are made. Try to imagine God making the promises to Abraham without his response in leaving Ur. Another example is when the angel appeared to Lot and said:

Conclusion

With these facts before us it is clear that, while we must commit our needs unto God and seek for His help, we should not ask God for "guidance" and expect such to come directly in a miraculous, mystical way.

Rather we should ask God to work in our lives (not in us) and expect that the answer will come in providential adjustment of events in our lives (not in a 'Spirit operation' on our brain). This may seem to some to be splitting hairs but the difference in meaning is vast. The first is part of the gospel; the latter is part of another perverted gospel.

There is not a particle of Scriptural evidence to suggest that we must be Divinely guided before we can understand the Word of God.

Open thou mine eyes

That God will help His servants to understand more of His Word in answer to their prayers is a fact to which we agree. However, to claim that this is now done by the direct influence₆ of the Holy Spirit would be very unwise indeed.

It is perhaps not altogether surprising that the Bible student should instinctively attribute the remarkable experience of a "flash of inspiration" to direct illumination by the Spirit. But let the student reflect, and he will remember how often some find or sudden solution that he so gladly "received" in this way had to be modified or abandoned in later years in the light of maturer knowledge of the Word of God! God is not the author of confusion or error, and great care must be exercised in claiming our own sometimes imperfect ideas as Spirit guided. It is a known fact that sudden "flashes" occur in the study of subjects other than the Gospel. This author has had many computer programming problems solved in sudden "flashes". Is this direct guidance?

HAVE WE THE HOLY SPIRIT NOW?

PROBLEM:

Do the saints at the present day possess the Holy Spirit? If so, in what sense? If not, why not?

SOLUTION:

1. "No! If they did they could give proof of it in the various ways in which the apostles gave proof of it for the conviction of the people and the edification of believers"₁ (Mark 16:17, 18; Eph. 4:12).

2. Evil men and seducers waxed worse and worse, until at last God withdrew the gift of the Spirit and open attestation and approval of the works of professing Christian men, as He had done ages before in the case of Israel, when there was no open vision.

3. When God pours out His Spirit again there will be no mistake about it, any more than there was in times past (Acts 2:7).

4. The present days are barren days, as regards the Spirit's direct operations. They are the days predicted₂ by the following language:

   "Therefore, night shall be unto you, that ye shall not have a vision; and it shall be dark unto you, that ye shall not divine; and the sun shall go down over the prophets; and the day shall be dark over them. Then shall the seers be ashamed and the diviners confounded; yea, they shall all cover their lips, for there is no answer of God" (Micah 3:6-7).

5. We are not required to present new revelation. We are not brought before magistrates and forbidden to teach the truth. For most readers, the Bible is in our own language and we have the enormous advantage of printing.

METHODS OF IMPARTING THE SPIRIT GIFTS

IN THE OLD TESTAMENT two methods are recorded:

A. Directly by God (i.e. Elohim bearing the title YAHWEH).

B. Indirectly by laying on of hands.

IN THE NEW TESTAMENT two methods were also employed:

A. Directly by God or Christ.

B. Indirectly by prayer and the laying on of hands₁ of the Apostles₂.

THE OUTPOURING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT WAS LIMITED AND SPECIAL₁

PROBLEM: It is often argued that the Holy Spirit was and is given to everyone at baptism, or when they 'Have an experience with the Lord'.

SOLUTION:

1. The Holy Spirit was never bestowed automatically at baptism, thus indicating that its possession was not necessary for salvation.
   1. This is abundantly evident in Acts 8 when Philip taught and baptized the people of Samaria, but they did not receive the Holy Spirit until Peter and John came.
   2. The Apostles did not receive the Holy Spirit at baptism but at Pentecost. (cf. also John 20:22).
   3. Cornelius received it before baptism but he was still required to be baptized. d) When Paul at Ephesus baptized "certain disciples" in the name of the Lord Jesus they did not automatically receive the Spirit. It was necessary that Paul lay "his hands upon them" before "the Holy Spirit came on them; and they spake with tongues and prophesied."

2. Three different figures are used in the New Testament to indicate that the possession of the Holy Spirit was only a temporary arrangement.
   1. They are described as "powers of the world to come". (Heb. 6:4-6). If the gifts had a permanent place in the present order they could not fittingly be described as belonging to the future age, because they would then belong to both ages.
   2. Paul speaks of "firstfruits of the spirit". There is a long time between the firstfruits and the harvest. Christ was the firstfruits from the dead but it will be about 2,000 years from that to the harvest. It is reasonable to see the "harvest" of the Spirit as the "redemption of our bodies".
   3. The third is the Greek "arrabon" meaning pledge, down payment, earnest, guarantee. (See notes on Eph. 1:13,14). A pledge is only given once, not repeated many times as the years go by. We must exhibit faith in that first pledge and not doubt God by seeking another in our time.

3. Three illustrations are employed in 1 Cor. 13:9-13 to indicate that the Spirit outpoural in the first century produced limited results:
   1. The Spirit gifts are termed childish in contrast to the completed revelation, which is compared by Paul with manhood.
   2. The operation of the gifts was compared with seeing in a dim glass obscurely in contrast to the completed revelation which was likened to seeing face to face.
   3. The gifts only gave partitive knowledge whereas the completed Scriptures would allow the reader to "know fully".

4. Not all believers in the first century received it. Simon did not have it. "Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter". (Acts 8:21). It was only "given to them who obeyed Him". (Acts 5:32).

5. Joel 2:23 shows that there was to be:
   
   1. a former rain (or teacher of righteousness cf. John 14:26 which shows this was the Holy Spirit or Comforter).
      
   2. a latter rain.

   In effect, he is saying there would be two outpourings of the Spirit, one at the time of the Apostles and the other later on. Between there would be a dry time in which there was no rain of the Spirit (cf. Isa. 44:2-3; Isa. 32:13-15).

6. The "seven men of honest report" chosen to "serve tables" (Acts 6) are specifically mentioned.

   1. Stephen 2. Philip 3. Prochorus 4. Nicanor

   5. Timon 6. Parmenas 7. Nicolas

   We know that Stephen was stoned and we have no record of any replacements upon the death of the other 6. Therefore, this aspect of the Holy Spirit assisted work probably ceased when they all died.

   The ability to pass on the Holy Spirit was only given to the Apostles₂. In Acts 8 we are told of Philip preaching and baptizing, but he could not pass on the Holy Spirit. It was necessary for Peter and John to come down "that they might receive the Holy Spirit". (v.15).

   The Spirit was not received equally and in the same form by all. 1 Cor. 12:29, 30 clearly shows this. "All are not Apostles; all are not Prophets; all are not Teachers; all do not work miracles" etc.

PLATO'S INFLUENCE₁

A. Introduction

The purpose of this subject is to demonstrate that the teaching and claims of some in the Brotherhood have their origins in the pagan philosophies of Plato. It is easy to see that some ideas on the Spirit are drawn directly from that source₂. On the other hand certain phrases and words are so colored and tainted by hundreds of years of theological 'dust' that it is difficult to see the fact that they too have their origin in Greek mythology and metaphysics.

Plato (but more especially his theological descendants) believe, in reality, that 'righteous' man is God. True they accept the fact that God exists, but believe that this God gives to each chosen man a mystical emanation of Himself which then is mystically united with Him so that the things this man says and does is under the direction of His will. The logical extension of this belief is the claim that there is no sin in those whose spirit or divine essence is properly united to God. The written word is discounted by these men and self-deluding 'enthusiasm'₃ gains importance. It is then claimed that only those with this mystical spirit can know spiritual things₄.

B. The cycle of history

Plato and Aristotle always accompany Bible Truth₅. The process is a cycle and may be described as follows:

1. The desire to read, study and learn from the scriptures in a reasoned way (Truth).
2. The desire to rebel politically against the state (or official position) to have individual freedom of thought. (Aristotelian Corruption).
3. The desire of the individual to be personally guided by a mystical spirit. (Platonic position).

When the apostate churches became oppressive and outdated, desire 3 lost prominence and desire 1 and 2 began to be the lot of the common people. It is easy to see that, in the main, desire 1 has ceased. Gone are the Bible readers and debaters of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. In a recent rock festival held on July 4, 1973 in Washington, D.C., U.S.A. there was an obvious lack of political rebels. The 'do your own thing' gang has moved in two directions:

1. to the 'Jesus freaks' ("good" mystical spirits) or
2. towards the occult, Satanism and demon worship (evil mystical spirits), and so in the past 150 years society has gone through all three phases of the cycle.

The same phases of the cycle have been (and are) evident in the Brotherhood.

• Phase one was the first step taken by J. Thomas and his early followers.

• Phase two was initiated by the Endeavour magazine and by certain Brethren advancing their theories on prophecy. Then came the Believer magazine.

• Once the bastion of faith of phase one was largely destroyed by phase two freedom of thought, then phase three immediately appeared in the open, by brethren claiming Spirit gifts and the theory that they were personally guided by a mystical spirit.

C. The reformers and Plato

Although the Reformers were originally motivated by the desire to have freedom of religion, this quickly gave way to teachings that had their origin in Plato.

1. "GRACE"	To gain freedom from the necessity of confessing sins to the priest, the reformers taught that sins were forgiven directly by God through the individual possession of the Holy Spirit. This process was termed "grace".
2. "FAITH"	In an effort to shake off the Romish law of works and indulgences, the Reformers denied that the action of a man had any relevance to salvation so that faith alone mattered. Their definition of "faith" was a quality that was bestowed by God and enabled men to believe in Christ.
3. "GUIDANCE"	Although the reformers taught individual possession of the "Spirit" brought "grace" and "salvation", they also stated that those who had been ordained had a special "grace" - the divinely received ability to interpret scripture. This established their authority:   a) above that of scripture.   b) above the people.
4. "SIN"	In Plato is the teaching that the physical frame of man was created essentially wicked, and the "good" in man was given by "god" in the form of part of his spirit (sometimes called the soul). "...he (god) ordered his own children to make the generation of mortals. They took over from him an immortal principle of soul and imitating him, encased it in a mortal physical globe (the head), with the body as a whole for vehicle. And they built onto it another mortal part, containing terrible and necessary feelings. ... To this mixture they added irrational sensation and desire that shrinks from nothing." (Plato, Timaeus). The Gnostics, students of Platonic thought, separated the reasoning mind from the physical being. The first was totally good, divine in origin; the other evil and worthless. The Roman church building on these ideas, formulated the doctrine of "original sin". They taught that man could not overcome this inherited sin. His Spirit (or soul) had to be regenerated by the Holy Spirit in the form of ritual.

The reformers substituted experience for ritual. Thus 'grace' (the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit acting on the believer's portion of the Holy Spirit) was thought to descend on the believer after prayer. This emotional experience ("conversion") removed Adam's sin and is the Baptism or Sanctification by the Holy Spirit. So it can be seen that this false doctrine of Adamic sin requires the equally false doctrine of regeneration by the Holy Spirit. (cf. ESSA, P. 2, 30.)

In the pamphlet "Clerical Theology Unscriptural", Bro. J. Thomas establishes truth. He denies the error of regeneration by 'grace' and teaches the regeneration of the heart of man by the gospel believed and obeyed.

D. Greek ideas on the nature of God

Anything immortal was thought to be essentially immaterial and immutable. This was one of the most basic feelings in Greek philosophy. It is at the root of most of the corruption₆ of the gospel by paganism.

The Gnostics also believed this basic Platonic idea that "good" existed only in immaterial, eternal things such as soul or spirit. The churches today teach something very similar₇. We would like to stress that the idea of an immaterial₈ God is not found in Scripture but belongs to Platonism.

E. Summary

Mystical pagan philosophy (largely originated by Plato) characterizes almost every shade of the Apostasy. Anyone with a bit of fortitude can discover that the ideas Evangelicals hold on "spirit" are founded in Plato. These ideas deny the authority of Scripture. A person led by the Spirit in intuitive ways has no need of Scripture.

Let us beware of the apostasy₉ and its false theories on spiritual beings and 'spirit'. The strength of the Christadelphian position is that it is Biblical₁₀. It is not necessary to have the help of:

1. a divine inspired church tradition or individual or
2. Spirit guidance

before one can understand. We hold that the Bible is God's inspired revelation to man. It is complete and needs no other ingredient to make "the man of God" perfect or complete. It is a clear and reasonable book. Our posture needs to be one of prayer and of willingness to read and obey God's Word.

PREDESTINATION

'…The opportunity can now be taken, in considering the operation of Divine providence in election, to consider the continuing work of God's power on behalf of those who are "called to be saints"....

Predestination

An attempt must be made to face up to the formidable subject of 'predestination', at least as far as the Word and out own limited intellects will take us. The word "predestinate" occurs in Romans 8:29, 30 and Ephesians 1:5, 11, and the same Greek word proorizo is also translated "determine before" in Acts 4:28 and "ordained" in 1 Corinthians 2:7. The word means 'marked out' or marked off" with the prefix pro ('before') added; this is the origin of the English 'horizon', which 'marks off' the boundary between the earth and sky. Jesus was "declared (Gr horizentos, 'marked out') to be the Son of God ... by the resurrection from the dead" (Rom. 1:4). The crucial passages need to be quoted in full:

From these Scriptures we learn that:

The order of the opening phrases of Romans 8:29 ("whom He did foreknow, He also did predestinate ..." would seem to warrant this conclusion; but this cannot be taken to mean that God's will is subordinate to or attendant upon, His foreknowledge. The two are so closely interfuses in the mind and purpose of God that they cannot be separated for the purposes of a watertight definition of categories. Nor is there any evidence to suggest that a predestination implies that in the beginning God planned an earth full of His glory as the ultimate object of His will, and then, as He guided the course of history toward that end he made adjustments as necessary on the way to defeat the persistent obstructions of perverse men. This deterministic view has long been widely held in different forms, but it is not the way God works — not, at least, according to the overwhelming evidence of Scripture.

Foreknowledge of God

Whatever the ultimate truth may be about the relationship of predestination to God's foreknowledge, a study of some Scriptures relating to the latter will perhaps help to clear away some of the obscurities. The passages concerned are:

Earlier study has shown that God's decrees for inanimate things and irrational creatures are always fulfilled instantly. Free will is not involved. But with man, God's decrees take free will into account, and His predestination is based on a knowledge of what any and every man will do in the situations in which God places him. God chooses people for His glory on the basis of foreknowledge of their character and conduct, and yet this does not diminish in the slightest degree His sovereign prerogative and purpose, nor their responsibility. By circumstantial pressures exerted through the ministry of angels God guides and directs the lives of men and or nations, who are free to respond to or resist the providential activity of God. It is God's foreknowledge of human reactions in life and history as they gradually unfold that causes predestination to harmonise perfectly with foreknowledge down to even the minutest detail in the purpose of God.

Confirmation of this is to be found in a study of actual cases. The census that took Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem in fulfillment of Micah 5:2; the piercing of the Saviour's hands and feet in crucifixion by the Romans (when, only a few weeks before, the disciples were fearing his death by stoning) in fulfillment of Psalm 22:16; the apparently unpredictable impulse of the soldiers to throw dice for the garment of Jesus that they could not share, in fulfillment of Psalm 22:18; the remarkable whim of the soldier who broke the legs of the two thieves, but viciously thrust a spear into the Lord's side because he was already dead, in fulfillment of Psalm 34:20—all these were foretold by Divine prescience. Foreknowledge down to such apparently trivial details supplies the only possible explanation of how the prophecies could have been made in the first place.

But the same foreknowledge is still more outstanding when viewed in greater breadth. The whole course of history follows a plan that has the glorification of God through the redemption of mankind as its goal. After Babel, all the tribes were distributed numerically and geographically in direct proportion and relation to the eventual fluctuating population and location of the children of Israel, as God's ground plan from which eventually all nations might be blessed and the earth be filled with His glory (Deut. 32:8). Indeed. all the stages of God's purpose, even those that seem to be historically unimportant and local when viewed in this Divine perspective, assume a necessary place in the Divine purpose.

But the marvel of foreknowledge reaches even further. Paul wrote that all the events of redemption (including personal salvation of individual men and women) were foreordained (predestinated) before the worlds (Gk. pro ton aionon, 'before the ages') (1 Cor. 2:7). Because the Biblical record does not, and by its very nature cannot, trace back 'before the ages', it is not possible to confirm this statement. But in his teaching about the love of Christ for his ecclesia, the Apostle Paul's inspired commentary (Eph. 5:25-33) on the narrative of Genesis 2 treats the formation of Eve from the side of Adam whilst he was under a deep sleep as a parabolic prophecy of the formation of the ecclesia (which is Christ's bride) from his 'riven side' at Calvary. The "great mystery" (so called) because it had not previously been revealed by God through His prophets) was lodged in the oracle of Genesis 2, and is made the more remarkable by the fact that it was enacted before the fall of man, and therefore even before the need arose for a Saviour. A remarkable prophetic type such as this illustrates, though it does not explain, the intimate relationship between God's foreknowledge and His predestination both of His Son and our ourselves, if we are among the chosen who will form part of the bride of Christ.'

This amazing exposition on the work of the Holy Spirit/the election of Grace is quoted from WHCA, pages 132, 135-138.

"PROVIDENCE" AND ANGELS₁

Introduction

Evangelicals do not expect "Saints" to answer their prayers - as do Catholics - nor do they expect angels to be involved in the answer. Not understanding God manifestation they expect to deal with God. They (and too many Christadelphians) expect God's influence to descend directly to man, without the agency of angels. Most major errors in doctrine stem from a misunderstanding of the angels. The subject of the Spirit is no exception. Indeed for those who claim to be in direct contact with God there is little need for angels. However, those who know the truth realize that God works through the angels by a process we call providence₂.

Angels in the lives of the faithful

The angel of the Presence "appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac and unto Jacob". The language used by the Angel indicated the very close association he had with the faithful.

ISAAC

"I will be with thee, and will bless thee" (Gen. 26:3).
"Fear not, for I am with thee (v. 24).

JACOB

"I am with thee, and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest" (Gen. 28:13-15).

JOSEPH

"Behold, I die: but God shall be with you" (Gen. 50:24).

TO ISRAEL (under Moses)

"Certainly I will be with thee" (Ex. 3:12).

The Angel did indeed go with Israel, walking among them in the cloud and fire, filling the Most Holy Place, sometimes going before to lead them, sometimes standing behind to protect them, advising them, reproving them, always leading them in the way YAHWEH had planned.

"My presence shall go with thee" (Ex. 33:14-16).

"He (Angel of the presence) it is that doth go with thee; he will not fail thee" (Deut. 31:6).

"In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the Angel of his presence saved them; in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old" (Isa. 63:10).

"Fear not, for I am with thee" (Isa. 41:10; 43:5).

TO THE APOSTLES

(This theme is traced in the
  a) notes on John 14-16
  b) Additional Notes on John 14-16
  c) word study on Parakletos to which the reader is referred).

TO ALL HIS BRETHREN

This verse allows no change in the operation of Divine providence through the angels. The many visions of angels in the Revelation complete the picture of a continuing angelic ministry.

The only difference in the New Testament (to the oft-repeated Old Testament promise: "I will never leave thee nor forsake thee") is that the active participation of the Son is added to God's omniscient presence. The "abiding" presence is therefore no more "mystical" or "spiritual" than in former ages. The only difference today is the withholding of the overtly miraculous.

Providential control or the function of angels

The Psalmist said: "He maketh His angels Spirits (RV: winds); His ministers a flaming fire" (104:4). The angels are evidently able to exercise control over the elemental forces of nature, and by doing so, they exert pressures on men and nations to influence their decisions and actions without interfering with human choice or free-will.

In the prophetic visions of the Apocalypse, God is seen to be using this "pressure of circumstances" which consists of natural phenomena under the control of the angels. The angels are seen holding back or releasing winds (7:1); they produce "voices, and thunderings and lightnings and an earthquake" (8:3,5), and many other upheavals which channel the freely disposed inclinations and purposes of men and nations towards the fulfillment of God's will. There can be no doubt that there is actually a much larger literal element in certain parts of the apocalyptic visions than has hitherto been appreciated, and the role of angels, in the outworking of the Divine purpose is one example of it. The Old Testament supplies ample confirmation of this fact. At the exodus, locusts came on an east wind and were withdrawn by a west wind at precisely pre-stated times (Exod. 10:13-19). A strong east wind parted the Red Sea before the enclosed Israelite host (14:21), and a wind from God brought quails exactly as and when Moses foretold (Num. 11:31). A great wind (cyclone?) from the wilderness destroyed the house of Job's eldest son and killed all his children (Job 1:19). In order to bring Jonah back into the path of duty, "the Lord hurled a great wind into the sea", so that the ship in which he was journeying "was like to be broken" (1:4). In all these instances, God "rode upon a cherub (angel) ... he flew swiftly (RV) upon the wings of the wind" (Psa. 18:10). The list of passages could be greatly extended, and more lists could be compiled to show God's angels employing other elements of nature to divert and direct the attentions and plans of men. Even where the Divine record makes no overt mention of the angelic supervision of particular events, their role can be easily deduced. The death of Ahab is a good example of this. 1 Kings 22:34 relates that "a certain man drew a bow at a venture, and smote the king of Israel between the joints of the harness". It is not too farfetched to say that from the moment the arrow left the bow it was under Divine control; it was not mere chance that brought about the fulfillment of the prophet Micaiah's pronouncement of doom on Ahab (1 Kings 22:28).

The student seeks humbly to penetrate still deeper into the Divine mystery. Israel's early history provides a thought-provoking illustration. God commanded them: "Three times in the year shall all thy males appear before the Lord God ... neither shall any man desire thy land, when thou goest up to appear before the Lord thy God three times in the year" (Exod. 34:23, 24 RV). On each occasion the land would virtually be left defenceless, and would invite invasion, especially at harvest-time "when kings go forth to war" (2 Sam. 11:1). God demanded faith which He would reward with guaranteed protection. And what was true of a nation, could be true also of individuals, as Proverbs 16:7 shows: "When a man's ways please the Lord He maketh even his enemies to be at peace with him". Such providential control would require the cumulative effect of thousands of circumstances large and small, all marvelously correlated to produce each Divinely desired result.

We can take it therefore that the description of "thousand thousands, and ten thousand times ten thousand" of angels in Daniel 7:10 is a clear indication that the angels are so numerous as to be beyond computation; and yet they all are tirelessly active and ready on the instant (Dan. 9:21) to fulfil God's commandment, at "the Voice of His Word"…

Unseen angels

If the twentieth century is not favored with visible manifestations of angels, it ought not to be assumed that they no longer superintend the affairs of God's creation. There are Scriptural examples enough of unseen angels at work to convince any faithful reader of God's Word that though now invisible, "the angel of the Lord" still "encampeth round about them that fear Him" (Psa. 34:7). To doubt this is to fall into one of the errors of the Sadducees (Acts 23:8).

Jesus was certainly aware that the Psalmist had promised him the providential protection of angels (Psa. 91:11). Hence his confident rebuke to Peter, who wanted to prevent his arrest: "Thinketh thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and He shall even now send me more than twelve legions of angels?" (Mt. 26:53). Jesus believed, without any doubt, that even at that late hour, angels could have intervened to change the course of events that was leading up to his crucifixion.

It was Christ, also, who gave the reassurance to all those who believe on him (typified by the little child he called and set in the midst of the disciples), that "their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven" (Matt. 18:10). The continuing ministry of the angels is thus guaranteed by the Master himself.

Conclusion

It ill behoves us therefore to devise our own ideas as to how God works in our lives. The Holy Spirit is not now given to men to use for Divinely appointed ends; the angels of God are not now openly revealed; the Spirit of God is nonetheless still at work among men, through His Word and through His unseen ministers. We must beware not only lest we entertain mistaken ideas about the operations of God with men but also lest we forget that He works at all.₃

SANCTIFICATION

PROBLEM:
Some have the mistaken idea that sanctification is an operation of the Spirit directly upon our minds₁. In some mysterious way, it is said, the Spirit enters them and cleanses and sanctifies their minds. This Holy Spirit gift is "grace" and it counsels and guides and leads to sanctification either apart from or together with the word.

SOLUTION:
The ideas above are false for the following reasons:

1. God today does not deal directly with us. Rather angels arrange circumstances in our lives₂.
2. We are cleansed by receiving forgiveness of sins, not by "grace" entering us.
3. Those who lived before Pentecost (the alleged time of the start of this special sanctification) were fully sanctified₃ without this alleged action of the Spirit. They are held out to us in Hebrews 11 as our examples.

A. IN OLD TESTAMENT TIMES

1. The word "sanctify" takes us back through the LXX to Old Testament usage, where the word is used of the consecration of the prophet₄ and of sacrifices.
   i.e. "Before I formed thee…I sanctified thee and I ordained thee a prophet". (Jer. 1:5)
   "Sanctify unto me all the firstborn ... both of man and of beast..." (Exod. 13:2).
   These two illustrations demonstrate that sanctification₄ can have nothing to do with "possession of the Spirit" as is claimed by some. In fact, sanctify and sacrifice essentially become synonyms in Deut. 15:19, 21.

2. Since the language of the O.T. eliminates the possibility of believers then possessing the Spirit (as a divine effluent which intuitively led them), then it must be conceded that either:
     a) their sanctification is not as complete as is possible under Christ or
     b) it is not essential to possess the Holy Spirit to be sanctified₅.

Those believing the Truth can not discriminate between those living before and those after Christ. Certainly they were fully sanctified and without the possession of the Holy Spirit! They are held out to us as our examples.

God perfected their characters by the power of His Word, and by angelic supervision of their lives. We must reject conclusion 2a) and be left with 2b).

B. IN NEW TESTAMENT TIMES

Sanctification occurs when we understand and obey the gospel. "Sanctify them through ("in" RV) thy truth: thy word is truth", said Jesus. (John 17:17). Only through the Word is sanctification achieved; without it there is none.

He did not say they were clean by the indwelling of the Spirit. In writing to the Ephesian ecclesia, Paul says that Christ gave himself for the ecclesia,

The process is as follows:

1. BEGETTAL:

   James says that the Father "begat us with the word of truth ... wherefore ... let every man be swift to hear". (1:19).

   Peter says, "Being born again by the word of God". (1 Pet. 1:23).

2. and GROWTH:

   "Receive with meekness the implanted word which is able to save your souls" (Jam. 1:21) (RSV).

   "desire the sincere milk of the word that ye may grow thereby" (1 Pet. 2:2).

We grow if we are "built up on the foundation of the apostles and prophets₆" and Jesus Christ. If our foundation is not based on their words and lives then we are "strangers and foreigners".

The process of sanctification₇ in the O.T. and N.T. is the same, and this destroys the theory that we need the "Spirit" to lead us into sanctification.

SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF THE ECCLESIA TODAY

No mortal today possesses the Holy Spirit. We can be sure of that fact because it is not promised and no claimant can prove otherwise.

No doubt the Holy Spirit would be a powerful confirmer of our testimony to the truth if God gave the Holy Spirit to believers now. However, this is not promised and we must remember that God condescends to such special displays of power only at great turning points when it is necessary to show His endorsement of events for the confidence of that generation. Faith is the great thing God aims to produce (Heb. 11:6). The constant exhibition of His power would be "sight" - not "faith". One only has to reflect on the history of the Bible to see that faith is much greater and more enduring than "sight".

Nevertheless God is bringing about His purpose with the ecclesias through the unseen work of the Angels.

These ministering Spirits are sent forth to minister to those who shall be heirs of salvation₁.

THE "SPIRIT" WE MUST POSSESS

In our period of probation we must attempt to achieve the goal of moral perfection. This way of life is often described by the word "spirit"₁ - Paul also calls such characteristics "the fruit of the Spirit₂". This humble and contrite spirit is something we must possess if we are to expect to become a habitation of God through the Spirit in that day when the righteous are to become ministering spirits with Spirit bodies. Instead of falsely claiming now:

1. the power to perform miracles,
2. an effluence from God which causes actions independent of our efforts,
3. some mysterious influence which is received by prayer and by opening our hearts,

let us use the sword₃ of the Spirit so that the law of the spirit (of life in Christ) will make us free from the law of sin and death.