John 14.17 - Second Time Around
My last post on John 14.17 caused a stir. One of our most ardent readers even stopped his email subscription. Since my rendering of “among” in John 14.17 has caused some bewilderment and has even been called “false teaching” (I’ll get to that at the end of this post), I thought I’d flesh it out a little bit more to demonstrate where I am coming from (and to allay the concerns of false teaching).
In his book, The Spirit Within and the Spirit Upon, Kenneth Hagin deals with the teaching of the indwelling of the person of the Holy Ghost. To flesh out this teaching a bit, I thought I’d respond to some of Hagin’s teachings on the subject (I greatly respect Hagin’s teachings, but that doesn’t mean that his teachings are infallible).
In Chapter Two of the book, he states:
The Holy Spirit comes within the believer in the New Birth or as it sometimes called, conversion, being born again, receiving remission of sins, receiving eternal life, or receiving Christ as Savior and Lord. But on the other side of that dual working, the Holy Spirit comes upon the believer when he or she is baptized in the Holy Ghost. (Kenneth Hagin, The Spirit Within and The Spirit Upon 17)
I am in line with Hagin on this, except for the indwelling of the person of the Holy Ghost. As I stated in the previous post, the word “in” in John 14.17 can (and should) be translated “among.” This is what Hagin writes about John 14.17:
But once the Father sent the Holy Ghost to the disciples, He - the Holy Spirit - would be in them. [quote of John 14.17] The Spirit of Truth - the Comforter - indwells those who believe in Jesus. Remember, the Bible says, ” … if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. (Rom. 8.9) The Spirit of Christ is the Holy Spirit, or the Holy Ghost. (Kenneth Hagin, The Spirit Within and The Spirit Upon 18-19)
I differ with Brother Hagin on the definition of the “spirit of Christ.” He writes that the term means the person of the Holy Ghost. Further down the page, Hagin writes:
But it’s through the power of the Holy Ghost that He enters us. The Bible says it is ” … Christ IN you, the hope of glory” (Col. 1.27) Thanks be unto God, He sent the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of Christ, and He could be in us! (Kenneth Hagin, The Spirit Within and the Spirit Upon 19)
By my reading of Paul, the “Spirit of Christ” and the person of the Holy Ghost are not synonymous. The “Spirit of Christ” is the reborn human spirit that may have been effectuated by the means of the Holy Ghost, but is not, in itself, the person of the Holy Ghost.
In Galatians 4.6, Paul writes:
And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the spirit of his son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. (KJV)
With regard to this verse, Hagin writes:
Now remember that Jesus said the Comforter - the Holy Spirit - shall be in us. Galatians 4.6, which says, ” … God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son … “, refers to the Holy Ghost, or the Holy Spirit. And for one who has the Holy Spirit within him, Paul says, “The Spirit itself [a better translation would be the “the Spirit Himself”] beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God …” (Rom. 8.16) These verses in Romans and Galatians, which speak of our being children of God, or sons of God, refer to the New Birth, not to the baptism in the Holy Ghost. In the New Birth, the Holy Spirit is in our spirits, bearing witness with our spirits that we are the children of God. (Kenneth Hagin, The Spirit Within and The Spirit Without 20-21)
As to Galatians 4.6, I believe that Paul is more concrete - “the spirit of his son” is all about the New Creation. We are the ones that cry, “Abba, Father,” not the Holy Ghost. In Romans 8.16, the Holy Ghost can bear witness with our spirits, but that does not mean that he indwells us in doing so.
One commenter, Justin, took issue with my rendering of John 14.17, calling it “false teaching.” He asks, “How do you reconcile these verses?” and proceeds to list a few verses out of Acts and Ephesians. Fair enough. Let me make a comment on each verse as a full exegesis would be too long.
And they were all filled (diffused throughout their souls) with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other (different, foreign) languages (tongues), as the Spirit kept giving them clear and loud expression [in each tongue in appropriate words]. (Acts 2.4, Amplified)
In past posts, I written about how the “Upon” Baptism of the Holy Ghost is an experience secondary (or subsequent) to being born again. In John 20.22, Jesus blew into all of these disciples and they were born-again. Here, in Acts 2.4, since Jesus had been anointed “upon” by the Holy Ghost and thereafter ascended to heaven, God poured out the Holy Ghost upon the church. Notice here that Jesus had told the disciples that they would be “clothed upon” with power from on high.
Then Peter, [because he was] filled with [and controlled by] the Holy Spirit, said to them, Rulers of the people and members of the council (the Sanhedrin) (Acts 4.8, Amplified)
As E.W. Bullinger points out in his book, Word Studies on the Holy Spirit, Peter was filled with the “power from on high,” that is, the gifts of the Holy Ghost. While I say that John 14.17 states “among y’all,” that vitiate the facts we see in Acts. There is an “upon” baptism of the Holy Ghost in the New Testament consistent with what we read about the Old Testament saints in Hebrews 2.4:
God also bearing joint-witness both with signs and wonders, and manifold powers, and distributions of the Holy Spirit, according to His will. (Hebrews 2.4, Young’s Literal Translation)
Justin also cites:
And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery; but ever be filled and stimulated with the [Holy] Spirit. (Ephesians 5.18, Amplified)
There are many things that can be said about this verse about Paul’s use of grammar, etc., but let me quote E.W. Bullinger:
In Eph. 5.18 (the verse under consideration), ἐν πηευματι [in pneuma/spirit] must be taken exactly in the same way as in chap. 2.22; where we read that “Ye are builded together for an habitation of God through (or by) the Spirit.” He is the great builder; Christ is the foundation; and we are the “living stones” of this spiritual Temple, built into it by the Holy Spirit. It it were the pnuema with which we ere to be filled, pnuema would necessarily be in the Genitive case, and the Greek would have been “filled of the Spirit.” But it is not! It is in the Dative case (emphasized by the preposition ἐν, en) denoting the One who fills. So that the rendering “filled with the Spirit” is quite misleading. The capital “S” is correct, for it the Holy Spirit who is meant. But He is the Filler: and it is with His gifts and graces and “power from on high” that he fills the children of God. (E.W. Bullinger, Word Studies on the Holy Spirit 160)
Suffice it to say that I fall right in line with Bullinger.
In Him you have also heard the Word of Truth, the glad tidings (Gospel) of your salvation, and have believed in and adhered to and relied on Him, were stamped with the seal of the long-promised Holy Spirit. That [Spirit] is the guarantee of our inheritance [the firstfruits, the pledge and foretaste, the down payment on our heritage], in anticipation of its full redemption and our acquiring [complete] possession of it - to the praise of His glory. (Ephesians 1.13-15)
In the Greek in this verse, “Holy” and “Spirit” are separated by the words “of promise” to read “spirit of promise holy.” That separation is crucial to a proper understanding of the verse. Virtually anytime that the translators saw “spirit” and “holy” anywhere in proximity, they just assumed that the Word meant the person of the Holy Ghost. That, however, is not the case. As Bullinger points out:
The fourteenth example of the usage of πνευμα (pneuma) “spirit” in the New Testament in its combination with the word ἁγιον (hagion) “holy”. Of this combination, there are three kinds:
1. When neither of the two words has the article: e.g., pnuema hagion.
2. When both of them have the article: e.g., the pneuma the holy [pneuma].
3. When only one of them has the article: e.g., the holy pneuma.
Each of these must be distinct from the others: for surely the perfection of the Divine Word involves the perfection of the Divine words. The Scripture is made up of “words … which the Holy Ghost teacheth.” Surely God not only means what he says, but He must have a distinct meaning for everything He says.
As “spirit” and “holy” are separated with the words “of the promise,” the verse does not refer to the person of the Holy Ghost. It actually refers to the reborn human spirit, the “spirit of Christ,” which is our guarantee of the full resurrection to come, i.e., the resurrection of our bodies. Bullinger agrees:
The articles are used here: but the words “pneuma” and “hagion” are separated (in the Greek) by the words “of the promise”; which looks as though the Father was the Sealer, sealing them with pneuma, by the bestowal of the new nature, and with other spiritual gifts which the Gentiles received, as well as the Jews. (E.W. Bullinger, Word Studies on the Holy Spirit 151)
If you read it that way (which is the right way), the verse and Paul’s chapter makes a lot more sense (and I’m into that).
False teaching? Not on your life. Even Mac, our Cheesy Theologian, could get rockin’ on this one.