2 kinds of Holy Spirit Fillings

hislegacy said:

Oh, I did not realize that - if you point out what you would like me to clarify, I'd be happy to do my best.

Click to expand...

I've pointed it out where I needed it.

hislegacy said:

I don't know - scripture is silent on that, so anything I add would come from my opinion and in the things of scripture, my opinion just doesn't qualify for very much except for me.

What do you think? If he was not there, he was not breathed on, obviously and he certainly did not hear Jesus say "receive ye the Holy Ghost". He kinda argued the entire encounter with Jesus and the Disciples later, didn't he?

Interesting, I never really gave thought to that element. Thank you, I might just do some looking into it. I love challenging thoughts.

As for the call out regarding my teaching thread - I welcome your input in the peanut gallery. Perhaps you have some insight I do not have. Love it!

Click to expand...

We do grow the most where we are challenged.

Your response is wise. You are correct, any answer would be conjecture, yet I think we can all agree as an Apostle Thomas did indeed receive the Holy Spirit. The problem with rigid applications of scripture in scenarios like this (John 20 vs Acts 1) is that at some point we always have to become flexible, in this case with Thomas, and turns us in to the authors, not God. This is why I always start with God's heart, His intention, and try to interpret through that lens.

This is my take on the situation. My mentor often says that the principles of God are not adversarial they are complimentary (In fact he wrote a book that addressed that idea). For example, some believers (including some on this forum) say things like, I don't need the local church we ARE the church. Pitting those two ideas against one another, when in fact, they are complimentary. Yes we are the church AND part of being the church is attending the local assembly. You can go to church and be the church at the same time, there is zero reason it cannot be both.

I believe that there are two complimentary events that happen, both involving the Holy Spirit, at salvation and being baptized with the Holy Spirit. They are intimately related, like two sides of the same coin. It's not one or the other, it's both. This also fits with the inverse duality nature of so many things that Jesus taught (the least will be first, ect...)

That being said, I do not think that John 20:22 is describing one of those events. Thomas being just one of the reasons. I think that John 20:22 is an official commissioning & blessing of the disciples as ministers. The context seems to bear that out. The Greek seems to bear that out. And other cross-reference material seems to bear that out.

topher694 said:

I believe that there are two complimentary events that happen, both involving the Holy Spirit, at salvation and being baptized with the Holy Spirit. They are intimately related, like two sides of the same coin. It's not one or the other, it's both. This also fits with the inverse duality nature of so many things that Jesus taught (the least will be first, ect...)

Click to expand...

Good post.

It's my contention that the born again immersion and the filling of The Holy Spirit happened back to back at acts 2 and also acts 10:44 with Cornelius's household. Those events are the only two that I see happening this way, whereas others needed one of the apostles to lay hands on them to receive the subsequent filling of The Holy Spirit after they believed.

What saith thee?

chad kincham said:

How it works is: everyone born again receives a measure of the Holy Spirit, but ever since pentecost, being filled with, aka baptized with the Holy Spirit, takes place when an already Spirit filled believer lays hands on them.

We see this in scripture where Paul and the apostles lay hands on those who already are believers, and the evidence that they are filled with the Spirit is always speaking in tongues:

Act 8:14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:

Act 8:15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:

Act 8:16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

Act 8:17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.



Act 19:1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,

Act 19:2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.

Act 19:3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.

Act 19:4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

Act 19:5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Act 19:6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

Notice in Acts 19 they already believed, but had not yet received the filling of the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues, until Paul laid hands on them.

This is a common practice today in Pentecostal churches, to lay hands on believers to receive the Holy Spirit baptism, aka infilling.

Click to expand...

True.

With the born again experience we are "sealed" with The Holy Spirit, and then we are subsequently "filled" with The Holy Spirit.

One grants us the fruits of The Spirit in the newborn life, the other grants us the gifts of The Spirit.

ARBITER01 said:

The true born again event happened in acts 2, not before that.

Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree.

topher694 said:

I believe that there are two complimentary events that happen, both involving the Holy Spirit, at salvation and being baptized with the Holy Spirit. They are intimately related, like two sides of the same coin. It's not one or the other, it's both. This also fits with the inverse duality nature of so many things that Jesus taught (the least will be first, ect...)

Click to expand...

On that we agree.

hislegacy said:

I respectfully disagree.

Click to expand...

Of course.

The more I'm looking at this doctrinal stance online, the more I see how wrong it is.

GOD doesn't discriminate. He doesn't favor one Christian above another, nor would He give something to a Christian that He wouldn't give to another. This idea that somehow Jesus singled out a number of the newly awaiting disciples to give them The Holy Spirit before the rest of the 120 really doesn't make sense.

There was not a single person in the 120 of that upper room who was born again ahead of the others.

ARBITER01 said:

Good post.

It's my contention that the born again immersion and the filling of The Holy Spirit happened back to back at acts 2 and also acts 10:44 with Cornelius's household. Those events are the only two that I see happening this way, whereas others needed one of the apostles to lay hands on them to receive the subsequent filling of The Holy Spirit after they believed.

What saith thee?

Click to expand...

I haven't forgotten this request. I just haven't had time to give it the proper attention (still getting our Christmas service ready for tomorrow). I'll respond further at some point though.

Hark said:

So I ask the question again, if you believe there is only one other filling of the Spirit apart from salvation, what happens when someone else testify to a 3rd drink, a 4th drink, and so on and so on?

Click to expand...

I belive in only one Holy Spirit baptism at conversion. If someone knows the 5 Holy Spirit baptisms I would be curious to read about it.
Blessings

Peter J Barban said:

This thread is not about Baptism of the Holy Spirit at conversion. (Yes, we receive the Holy Spirit only once.) It is about what the Holy Spirit does inside you after conversion.

As examples, both Peter and Paul were spontaneously filled with the Spirit long after their conversion, which gave them boldness and power to speak during a difficult encounter.

And there are other verses that imply a slow filling of the Spirit which leads to transformation into Christlikeness.

Click to expand...

Oh well, one is converstion and the other is santification. The only thing that stops His work in us is if we quench His Holy Spirit.
Blessings!

Peter J Barban said:

This thread is not about Baptism of the Holy Spirit at conversion. (Yes, we receive the Holy Spirit only once.) It is about what the Holy Spirit does inside you after conversion.

As examples, both Peter and Paul were spontaneously filled with the Spirit long after their conversion, which gave them boldness and power to speak during a difficult encounter.

And there are other verses that imply a slow filling of the Spirit which leads to transformation into Christlikeness.

Click to expand...

This is something that if talked about is not talked about at all. Something I never heard of before. To me your taking some verses out of context. Now maybe man sometimes gets in the way? Its all done when we ask yet we can get in His way so what happens instantly in the spirit the flesh gets in His way to the world looked as if it went slowly.. Sorry not good with words.

Peter J Barban said:

Here is some context, let me know if you want more.
First, Peter was filled with the Spirit with 120 people on the day of Pentecost:
Acts 2: When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. 2 Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3 They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. 4 All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.

Then Peter was filled with the Spirit a second time in Acts 4:8
5The next day the rulers, the elders and the teachers of the law met in Jerusalem. 6Annas the high priest was there, and so were Caiaphas, John, Alexander and others of the high priest’s family. 7They had Peter and John brought before them and began to question them: “By what power or what name did you do this?”

8Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them: “Rulers and elders of the people! 9If we are being called to account today for an act of kindness shown to a man who was lame and are being asked how he was healed, 10then know this, you and all the people of Israel: It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed...

Greek translators say that word "filled" means a sudden spontaneous event. Both times this filling led to speaking the word of God with boldness, it was not a slow filling for sanctification.

Click to expand...

That would have been more of a re-filling if anything. Peter didn't receive anything beyond an inner strength. Stephen had a similar thing happen to him.

Peter J Barban said:

Refilling - That sounds good.

We don't really get more Holy Spirit, rather the Holy Spirit's power can well up in us again and again.

We all have the same Holy Spirit living inside us, no one has more of the Spirit, but the Holy Spirit does more within some of us, like Peter and Paul than others.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

We don't receive anymore gifts and such, but GOD can strengthen us for any situation that way, like in the example I gave of Stephen before his martyrdom.

We should expect GOD to operate that same way for us inside also.

Peter J Barban said:

I wanted to give a testimony about being filled with the Spirit, but then I wondered if we are all talking about the same thing. I even confused myself by trying to untangle spiritual gifts, the anointing, walking in the spirit, etc.

So after a bit of internet research, I found an explanation that seems reasonable:
The Two Kinds of Spirit Filling – A Thimble-full of Theology for Daily Living

Basically, there is Acts 2:4 sudden anointing for immediate work of the Spirit. (Greek word: pimplemi)

and there is Ephesians 5:18 progressive taking on the moral qualities of the Holy Spirit. (Greek word: pleroo)

I encourage everyone to read the whole article and see if you agree.

Click to expand...

I think broadly I agree with the article however I wouldn't use the same language for these 2 "fillings" as the charismatic church already has its struggles and I might add abuse with wide interpretations of being filled with the spirit.

What is clear in Acts is the baptism of the Holy Spirit (BHS) is a subsequent experience to both salvation and the water baptism. Salvation, of course, is first but the BHS as inferred through the events detailed in Acts is not automatic upon salvation and is a separate experience to water baptism that can be before or after. Such as the case of the house of Cornelius who received the spirit before water baptism (Acts 10), or the case of John's disciples Paul encounters who received the HS upon water baptism (Acts 19). the BHS also can be given multiple times for different purposes as we see with the initial Pentecost event with the product of tongues and a subsequent experience in Acts 4 with the same group with a product of boldness. The BHS is not mentioned a whole lot in Acts but it is remarkably contrasted and we can responsibly develop teaching on how it looks through these handfuls of events.

The other concept of the HS is the infilling of the HS which we see first in John 20:22 where Jesus literally breaths on his disciples and receive the HS. clearly, this is a separate HS experience than the Pentecost event in Acts since Jesus is present and it would be irresponsible to argue they are the same event. So the disciples receive the HS in John then receive the HS again in Acts. These two events alone call for these to be unpacked as to their unique purpose and why it would seem the disciples receive the HS twice.

Acts opens with Jesus preparing his disciples that they will receive power from the Holy Spirit, so there is justification for separating this infilling we see when Jesus breathes on his disciples in John 20:22 and the BHS that Jesus preps them for what they are about to receive. the John 20:22 breathing upon is a different event, it is more private with the 12 only in a locked room where Pentecost is a more public event where the 120 are present and the product is very different as well. in John there is no visible product except the disciples are given more authority but in Acts the BHS there is an immediate visible product.

many Christians will see this "infilling" and "baptism" of the HS as the same thing and will also cite the teaching of the gifts of the HS in 1 Cor 12-14 and of course, argue that we are all "all baptized into one body" (1 Cor 12:13) but although are one body we are different parts and not all are given the same gifts. yet Paul's handbook of the HS in 1 Cor 12-14 does not follow how the BHS is demonstrated in Acts. To start Paul says the gifts are discriminately given (one body different parts...) but in Acts, we see the HS indiscriminately poured out and all appear to receive the same from the HS. Paul's focus of the gifts is clarified to edify the body of believers (1 Cor 14) so it is an inner focus whereas in Acts I see something else going on. Rather than an inner focus, in Acts, the BHS seems to be more about an outer focus of expanding the gospel. There is no teaching in the bible on this difference, I think Paul seems to be touching on it a little in 1 Cor 14:22 when he speaks of tongues being a sign for unbelievers (but he does so cryptically in typical Paul fashion) What is clear is the HS in Acts does not follow the guidelines Paul lays down and I don't think it irresponsible to conclude these are different things.

Acts speaks of the "gift" (gk. dorea) of the HS whereas in the case of 1 Corinthians 12 Paul speaks of the "gifts" (gk charisma) of the HS. dorea is the proper word for gift but charisma is not. it is rooted in the word for grace (gk charis) and that -ma affix turns it into something like the product of grace. so if it is "gifts" it is gifts given as the result of grace. the same word is used in Rom 6:23 saying "the gift [charisma] of God is eternal life" some translations will say "free gift" but the proper greek words for "free" or "gift" aren't in this passage and it is "charisma". So there is this biblical established concept that charisma is linked with salvation or grace itself where the BHS does not make those connections and it simply is a "gift" in the proper use of the word.

Charisma is use to edify the church and it develops and grow with the Christian upon salvation which is consistent with the article's idea of this other filling of the HS with more of a moral product and other concepts of the fruit of the HS and I would suggest the John 20:22 breathing upon is the initial event of this infilling that is paralleled with God himself breathing into Adam to give him life. Jesus here is giving new life and his breath is the mark of the new spiritual life given upon salvation. However, Acts does not follow this pattern presented in John 20:22 or Paul's outline for the gifts of the HS and it appears to be for temporary empowerment with a focus of the spreading the gospel or expansion not some inside the church hype which I think is where the Corinthian church was at fault with. So we should seek the filling of the HS but not seek different types of fillings. We should know that the infilling is upon salvation and we already have this but the BHS is a subsequent experience that can be repeated and sought but we need to understand its role so seek it with purpose, not for personal edification.

Peter J Barban said:

I hadn't made the connection between Acts 20:22 and Genesis before. That's intersting.

Click to expand...

Not Acts 20:22 but John 20:22

John 20:22
And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit."

Genesis 2:7
Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

but there's nothing new about this, many cross-references will show the same.

DamianWarS said:

Not Acts 20:22 but John 20:22

John 20:22
And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit."

Genesis 2:7
Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

but there's nothing new about this, many cross-references will show the same.

Click to expand...

We just went through this in this very thread.

The consensus was that this was not an event that gave the apostles the newborn life since Thomas wasn't there when Jesus did this, and it was probably just a blessing of sorts for them while pointing towards the future event of acts 2.

The church started over in acts 2 not before that. GOD didn't discriminate and give the newborn life to some of the 120 while the rest had to wait, everyone had to wait for the arrival of The Holy Spirit to have the newborn life.

You're posting without reading much of the thread.