An Author Interview from Books At a Glance
Greetings! I’m Fred Zaspel, and welcome to another Author Interview here at Books At a Glance.
Since I first heard it was in the making I’ve been eagerly waiting for this book, and finally it’s here. I’m talking about the new book on the Holy Spirit in the Theology for the People of God series from B&H by Gregg Allison and Andreas Köstenberger – and I have to say it does not disappoint! It’s an excellent contribution to the study of this wonderful doctrine, and Dr. Allison and Dr. Köstenberger are here with us today to talk about it.
Gregg, Andreas – welcome, and congratulations on this major accomplishment!
Allison:
Thank you very much, Fred. It is great to be with you.
Zaspel:
Please introduce yourselves so our listeners can attach a name to your voice.
Allison:
I am Greg Allison, a Professor of Christian Theology at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. It was a complete joy to work with Andreas Köstenberger on the volume.
Köstenberger:
Thank you so much. Likewise, it has been very special to collaborate with Gregg. We have known each other for over 20+ years—all way the back to our days at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. I am Andreas Köstenberger. I am Research Professor of New Testament and Biblical Theology at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Kansas City, MO. I am also the Director of our Center for Biblical Studies.
Zaspel:
Yours is far from the first book to be written on the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, and in fact we’re a long way from a generation or so ago when Christians lamented that this is a neglected area of study, and I want to ask you about that next. But first, with all that’s been written, what is distinctive about your work, and what is the contribution you hope to make?
Köstenberger:
We start out with a Biblical Theology (BT) of the Holy Spirit in both Testaments. BT is a discipline that looks at the biblical teaching on a given topic historically, inductively, and descriptively. BT looks at a series of passages where the referent is the Holy Spirit and tries to understand them in their historical original context. That means something different in the Old Testament (OT) than it does in the New Testament (NT). Then, depending on whether the text is in the Pentateuch or the prophets, the context must be carefully understood. Being descriptive is important. BT wants to understand biblical teaching as it is rather than refracting the biblical teachings from our given faith tradition or from other extrabiblical assumptions on the work of the Holy Spirit.
As for the inductive part of my definition, BT seeks to connect the dots between the different Spirit passages in Scripture. I start with Genesis 1:2 where the Spirit is first mentioned. Gradually, I make my way through the different books of the OT and into the NT. I tried to understand the teaching of each passage and to organically connect them so that what surfaced inductively, historically, and descriptively, was an understanding of the Bible’s own teaching on the Holy Spirit.
The second thing that makes our book distinctive is that that we collaborated in our respective areas of expertise, me as a NT scholar, on the one hand, and Gregg as a systematic and historical theologian, on the other hand. That is the beautiful thing about this series. This is the inaugural volume. We jointly cover fifteen major doctrines in this collaborative fashion.
Allison:
My part was greatly enhanced because I was able to build off the wonderful BT that Andreas handed to me. Both of us agree that there is a mutuality between BT and Systematic Theology (ST). Andreas handed me all this wonderful biblical work. I was able to build a ST of the Holy Spirit.
We contributed to what is often an overlooked doctrine, at least among people that I teach and know. There is a great degree of ignorance about the Holy Spirit. Some people would even consider him to be like a junior God—almost like an invisible God. There is also a certain amount of fear about the Holy Spirit. People have experienced some of the excesses, or craziness, associated with the Holy Spirit.
Andreas and I argue that if we yield to the Spirit, we are filled with the Spirit, giving him control of our life, then most of us find that we are actually frightened by the notion of giving up control. Andreas and I, collaborating together, hope to make a contribution to overcome those deficits.
Zaspel:
Are there specific considerations that have brought this doctrine to the forefront in our generation? Is it just the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements?
Allison:
It started with the rise of Pentecostal theology in the early part of the 20th century. That carried over into the parent movement back in the 1970s. In the 1980s, some evangelicals bring some of the Pentecostal theology about the Holy Spirit in their realm. There is a new emphasis on Holy Spirit baptism—on, with, or by the Holy Spirit.
Among evangelicals, we are now engaging in a Retrieval Theology (RT) by going back into the past and looking at the Early Church and the Reformation. There is not much attention given to the Holy Spirit. The Nicene Creed affirms, “We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life proceeds from the Father and the Son with the Father and Son together is worshiped and glorified.” That is a major statement at the end of the 4th century, and RT picked up on that and asks, “Have that we neglected this doctrine of the Holy Spirit?”
In the last 50 years, there has been a resurgence in Trinitarian theology, with an emphasis on the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. That calls our attention to this overlooked doctrine. The last point refers to Karl Barth who is famous for his Christology. At one point, he comments on the importance of developing a pneumatology. He pointed a number of us in the direction of developing this doctrine of the Holy Spirit.
Köstenberger:
On a less academic and more popular level, we address misconceptions about the person and the work of the Holy Spirit. Misunderstandings can be present in campus and student ministry. People may desire to be “filled with the Spirit,” but that does not mean they do so with the proper grounding regarding what Scripture actually teaches on the topic.
Zaspel:
Give us a broad overview of your book and how you approach your subject – just in broad strokes.
Allison:
The first part is BT written by Andreas. The second part consists of ST. Andreas covers the Holy Spirit in the Old and New Testaments. In the OT, he emphasizes the work of the Spirit in the Pentateuch, the historical book, the wisdom books, and the prophetic books. In the NT, he analyzes the passages about the Spirit in the Gospels, the book of Acts, the Pauline letters, the general epistles, and the book of Revelation. Then he puts it all together in a BT of the Holy Spirit from all of Scripture.
Part two connects ST with a measure of Historical Theology (HT). In this section I cover the deity and personhood of the Spirit, the Holy Spirit, and the holy Trinity—so intra-Trinitarian relations between the Spirit and the Father, the Spirit and the Son, and then Trinitarian procession and mission. I connect the doctrine of the Holy Spirit with other theological doctrines like providence, angelic beings, human beings, sin, Christ, salvation, the Church, and the future. I end with contemporary issues in pneumatology. and then we finish up with contemporary applications for individuals and churches.
Zaspel:
Let’s talk big picture. In Galatians Paul connects the reception of the Spirit to God’s promise to Abraham, but the nature of that connection is not always clear. So just what is it? How is the reception of the Spirit a fulfillment of the promise to Abraham?
Köstenberger:
It is very interesting that in Galatians, which is one of the main NT books on the Spirit, especially chapter 5, there is not a single reference to the Spirit in the first two chapters. Then, all of a sudden at the beginning of chapter 3, Paul introduces the Spirit in the discussion and in 3:2–3, he says, “Let me ask you only this, did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?” This is a real dressing down of the Galatians by the apostle. He reminds them how they got started in the Christian life. He also reminds them that they would agree that they didn’t receive the Spirit at conversion because of the works of the law, especially circumcision, but by putting their faith in Christ.
Paul’s argument is very logical—if that is how they started in the faith, then that is how they should continue. Salvation is by grace through faith. Sanctification is by grace through faith, too. He does not switch gears, so to speak, now that you are saved and received the Spirit by faith apart from works. He takes them back to the beginning of the Christian life—back to the basics.
This is a preamble to address your question. The third and final reference to the Spirit in Galatians 3 is what you were asking about. He says in vv. 13 and 14 that Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us so that the blessing of Abraham would come to the Gentiles by Christ Jesus. The larger purpose was so that we could receive the promised Spirit through faith. Faith is the emphasis again.
The main point is that God’s promise always operated through faith back to Abraham. Coincidentally, a few verses earlier, in v. 9, he calls Abraham “the believer,” a rather striking phrase. This is a novel teaching that Paul is giving. He says that the gospel extends the reach of God’s grace beyond the Jewish world and now brings the blessing of Abraham even to non-Jews.
Trying to discern the flow of the argument and Paul’s logic here, which is critical in understanding of Galatians 3 especially, is that he says that the reception of the Spirit by Gentiles proved to Paul that the promise to Abraham was being fulfilled in Christ. It almost sounds like he is backtracking, like it seems that Peter and Paul do at the Jerusalem Council, saying that apparently the Spirit has fallen on the Gentiles as well.
That must mean that certain other realities that are predicted in the OT are now beginning to be fulfilled. Paul speaks of the reception of the Spirit in the same vein as he speaks of justification by faith and union with Christ in vv. 7 and 14. Justification by faith, union with Christ, and the reception of the Spirit are inseparable.
Much of what I have said is in keeping with some of the major commentators: James Dunn, Gordon Fee, etc. Thomas R. Schreiner argues that the blessing of Abraham and the Spirit are one and the same thing. In other words, the blessing of Abraham is the Spirit. He bases this on the juxtaposition of the words “blessing” and “Spirit” in Isaiah 44:3. I am not sure if it may be an entailment of what Paul is saying. But I do not think it is his primary point. His primary point is that it is by faith that we received the Spirit as opposed to by works of the law. I demonstrate this by looking at Galatians 3:2–3.
Zaspel:
Schreiner is arguing that the promise to Abraham was a blessing to the world, received by grace through faith, that ultimately comes through Christ in his atoning work, and it comes to our experience in Christ’s bestowal of the Spirit on us.
Köstenberger:
It is more the way we appropriate the promise rather than that the Spirit himself is the promise. But then again, I hesitate to disagree with the preeminent Pauline scholar Schreiner.
Zaspel:
At the conclusion of the section on BT, Andreas, you do a little systematizing yourself when you draw together the various strands of biblical teaching about the Holy Spirit. I thought it was very helpful – can you just highlight that for us in brief?
Köstenberger:
I present my study under four main rubrics: the OT, the early church, Paul, and the rest of the NT. When it comes to the OT, in Genesis 1:2 in the beginning, the Spirit of God is very actively involved in creation. We see at the outset of the flood that the Spirit is also God’s agent of judgment. That is another interesting dimension of the Spirit. In the book of Exodus, the Spirit empowers craftsmen who will build the tabernacle. The Spirit came on them to empower them to accomplish that task. The Spirit is active through leaders such as the seventy elders, Joshua, the successor of Moses, the judges, better termed “national delivers,” Gideon, and Samson. I enjoyed studying Samson in conjunction with the Holy Spirit in the book of Judges.
The early days of the monarchy refer to the Spirit. The Spirit comes upon David. David is particularly important. Of course, in conjunction with the Spirit, we see that in the time of the judges and the monarchy, the Spirit is particularly coming upon national delivers, or rulers. He has an important leadership function, especially with David in particular. The teaching on the Spirit up to that point culminates in David. He is a national deliverer, a king, and a prophet. He is the prototype of the Messiah Jesus, being the son of David. We see the incredible organic connection there!
Finally, in the Old Testament, the Spirit is mentioned repeatedly in the prophetic books. This is very important, especially in Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Zechariah. The NT authors pick up all the key references on the Holy Spirit: Joel in Acts 2, Isaiah in Luke 4, etc. Clearly, the NT writers knew the OT theology of the Holy Spirit very well and were able to invoke just the right passages at the right time. In many ways to look at the Spirit really is part of the end of the age, as a sign that the end of the ages has now dawned.
In the NT, Luke in Luke-Acts speaks of the Spirit. Luke starts out by showing that the Spirit was actively engaged in the lives of John the Baptist, Jesus, his mother Mary, John the Baptist’s parents Elizabeth and Zechariah, and with leaders like Simeon. Luke signals that this new stage in salvation history was marked explicitly by the work of the Holy Spirit in all those key figures in salvation history, including Jesus’ forerunner, his parents, even Jesus’ mother.
Jesus himself possessed the Spirit to an unlimited degree. The Spirit is depicted as descending on Jesus at his baptism, resting on him, and continuing to rest on in him through his entire ministry, again, in fulfillment of passages such as Isaiah 61. A fascinating passage is the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit in Jesus’ ministry. It implicitly asserts the deity of the Holy Spirit and that the Spirit is more powerful than Satan and his demons.
In Matthew’s Gospel, in the Great Commission, it mentions baptism in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. There is an incipient Trinitarian teaching there. Luke recounts how Jesus told his followers to wait for the promised Holy Spirit. Finally, the Spirit is poured out at Pentecost. We may talk more about the difference between OT and NT, but this is a new stage of salvation history now that the Spirit is poured out. Joel prophesied that it would happen on all flesh, not just on selected leaders as in the OT.
In Paul, we talked about Galatians 3 already. Galatians 5, of course, has an abundance of Spirit terminology. It talks about walking and living by the Spirit, being led by the Spirit, and keeping in step with the Spirit. They are all related and find differences in nuance in the well-known reference to the “fruit of the Spirit” in Galatians 5.
The Thessalonian books are often overlooked in discussions of the Spirit. The Spirit is active both at conversion and in sanctification, as Paul tells us. That is something else that is overlooked. Also often overlooked is the word “spiritual.” It is used in 1 Corinthians, typically with reference to the persons who are led and controlled by the Spirit.
One other interesting thing is that in 1 Corinthians 12, there are references to the “same Spirit” or “one Spirit” or “one and the same Spirit.” It made me realize that Paul is using the Spirit as the foundation of the church’s unity. He would argue that believers all have one and the same Spirit. Therefore, because they have this unity of the Spirit, he exhorts them. They are supposed to be careful to maintain this. This is very important, and it sometimes gets lost in the confusion about some of the gifts that are talked about there, especially tongues and so forth.
Second Corinthians 3 is important when speaking about the new covenant ministry.
Romans is probably the climax of the NT discussion of the Spirit in Romans 8. Paul talks about the new law of the Spirit, enabling us to have a new way of life. The Spirit that sets us free from bondage to sin is the same Spirit who raised Jesus from the dead. He conveys to believers their spiritual adoption and sonship. The Spirit enables them to meet the righteous requirements of the law, and we are observing the law in a way that we never otherwise could.
In Ephesians, there is the passage about “being filled with the Spirit” (Ephesians 5:18), and it is somewhat unique in Paul’s writings. In Titus 3:3, there is a significant passage on the washing of regeneration and renewal by the Spirit. In Hebrews, there are a few fascinating references, and a stunning reference about those who disregard the blood of the covenant, “enraging the Spirit of grace.” It took me a while to get to the bottom of this stunning phrase. Note that Peter, interestingly, links the Spirit’s role in the ministry of the OT prophets and the NT apostles, both in 1 Peter 1 and 2 Peter 1—both famous passages. He also says that Christ was “made alive in the Spirit,” a difficult passage in 1 Peter 3:18ff.
John always has had his own unique take on this doctrine. He talks about the Spirit as believers having received an anointing from the “holy one.” Just doing a word study on “Spirit” for the OT references is where people often start with this doctrine, and that is where I started. But, then you have to realize that there are multiple ways the NT might speak of the Spirit.
Probably the last passage I discovered that I overlooked previously is 1 John 3:9. John writes, “No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God’s seed abides in him.” Although commentators do not all agree on God’s seed being the Word of God, some commentators argue that he probably refers to the Holy Spirit. Looking at passages such as John’s Prologue in 1:12–13, he does talk about the Holy Spirit as the agent of the new birth.
Finally, in Revelation there is mention about “the sevenfold Spirit.” The “seven spirits of God” was seven for a reason, being the perfect number. Each of the four visions in Revelation is signaled by the phrase “in the Spirit.” It stresses that the Spirit was the source of divine revelation to John about the end times. The seven letters to the churches mentioned in Revelation, every time the constant refrain was “hear what the Spirit says that to the churches.” Again, the role of the Spirit being the agent of divine revelation comes through loud and clear. At the very end of the canon in Revelation 22:17, John talks about the Spirit in the church pleading with Jesus to come soon. That is in a nutshell the Scriptures’ teaching on the Holy Spirit.
Zaspel:
Gregg, you spend a good amount of time on trinitarian issues and the relation of the Spirit to the Father and the Son. Talk to us about the “procession” of the Spirit. You take a Western view, of course, that the Spirit proceeds from the Father “and the Son” – the filioque clause. How do we best ground this exegetically? And clarify this for us – just what does this “procession” mean? What does it mean when you say “The Father and the Son eternally spirate the Holy Spirit, such that the Spirit eternally comes forth from the Father and the Son in terms of his divine person-of-the-Spirit.”
Allison:
The eternal procession of the Holy Spirit distinguishes him as the third person from the first and second persons. Even before the creation of the world, all persons cooperated in all works. Some of the works are more geared towards one of the three. Before the creation of the world and individual roles, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were distinguished in this way.
The Father is eternally characterized by paternity, the Father of the Son. The second person is eternally characterized by eternal generation, or begotten of the Father, and the Holy Spirit is eternally characterized by eternal procession, or if you just said eternal spiration. The Holy Spirit eternally proceeds of the Father and the Son. The Father and the Son eternally spirate the Holy Spirit. These eternal characteristics of these three go to the very heart of who God is in himself eternally.
How do we warrant the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit exegetically? In John 14:16, the upper room discourse, Jesus pledges the future coming of the Holy Spirit coming to be a “helper.” It could be a reference to Pentecost. In John 14:26, Jesus says “the counselor, the Holy Spirit whom the father will stand in my name.” In John 15:26 Jesus says, “when the counselor comes, the one I will send to you from the Father, Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will testify about me.” In John 16:7, Jesus says, “I’m telling the truth. It is for your benefit that I go away, because if I don’t go away, the counselor will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you.”
We hear these words of promise and in we hear in tandem the sending out the Spirit. The Father from whom the Spirit proceeds will send the Holy Spirit and will send the Holy Spirit in Jesus’s name. Jesus himself will send the Holy Spirit. He will send the Holy Spirit from the Father. These words of promise point toward the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. On that day, the promise begins to be fulfilled. Peter, speaking of Jesus in Acts 2:33, puts it this way, “Christ has been exalted to the right hand of God, and has received from the Father, the promised Holy Spirit. Jesus is poured out in what you both see and hear.” We have the Father and the Son together pouring out the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost.
Here is the question that I alluded to just a moment ago. Why did the Father and the Son send the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost? Why didn’t the father do it alone? Why doesn’t the Son do it alone? The church has historically answered by appealing to the Spirit’s eternal procession. The Holy Spirit is characterized by eternal procession from the father and the son. Therefore, he comes when the Father and the Son send him on the day of Pentecost. That, then, is a brief primer on the Trinity and eternal procession.
There are other passages that also connect the Holy Spirit with both the Father and the Son. In Matthew 10:20, the Holy Spirit is referred to as the “Spirit of your father.” In Philippians 1:19, Paul talks about “the Spirit of Jesus Christ.” In Galatians 4, Paul refers to the “Spirit of his Son.” In a very interesting passage that is Romans 8:9, Paul refers to the “Spirit of Christ.” The Spirit is the Spirit of God the Father and of Christ. He is the Spirit of God in the context referenced in the Father and of Christ, the Son.
Now we are in a place to put all this together. There is the association of the Father and the Son sending the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. He is the Spirit of the Father and the Spirit of the Son. If we go back, then, into eternity past—if we can talk about it that way—the Holy Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father and Son.
Zaspel:
The economic Trinity is necessarily a revelation of the ontological Trinity. Just as the Son is characterized by begottenness, so the Father sends the Son in the incarnation. And just as the Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son, so they sent him.
Köstenberger:
The outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost is grounded in that eternal ontological reality that you and Gregg both talked about.
Zaspel:
You both may want to chime in on this next question – it’s one of the more difficult questions in theology, I think. In the OT we have this great anticipation of the coming of the Spirit in the day of Messiah. Moses wishes for it, and it is prophesied in tones of great expectation in places like Joel, Isaiah, and Ezekiel. In that day there will be a great outpouring of the Spirit. Then John the Baptist announces the arrival of Jesus who will baptize with the Spirit. Then in Acts 1 Jesus commands his disciples to wait in Jerusalem for the arrival of that promise. And then in Acts 2 we have Pentecost, and the promise is fulfilled. And now we have the Spirit indwelling, assuring of sonship, leading in holiness, gifting, and so on. So, in terms of the experience of the believer in the Old Testament age and the believer in this NT age, what changed? What is new? How is the work of the Spirit different in his people now that the promise is fulfilled? And for OT I’m not thinking of Moses, David, and the inspired Prophets, but what we might consider the average believer – let’s say, Ruth. In terms of the Spirit’s ministry, what do we have that she didn’t?
Köstenberger:
When I did my quick overview of the biblical teaching, there is an organic development in the biblical teaching on the Spirit. As I mentioned in the OT, the Spirit came on individual believers, especially leaders, such as national deliverers, of course with David being the culmination point. Incidentally, one of the only two references to the Holy Spirit by that name is found in Psalm 51. David prays, “Do not take your Holy Spirit from me.” That implies that he thought it was possible for God to do something like that. God will not do that for NT regenerated believers, but that is just an aside for now.
We see in the OT that God put his Spirit at his own sovereign initiatives on individuals, especially leaders, but I don’t know a single passage that indicates that individual believers – ordinary, everyday believers, as you mentioned, not just the leaders of that occasion, were indwelt by the Holy Spirit. The reason for that is that Jesus had not yet come and died for our sins. John 7:38 tells us that was the indispensable prerequisite for the Spirit’s universal outpouring. We see in the Gospels that Jesus comes, dies, is buried, and rises to the Father, but it is only after the resurrection that the Father and the Son jointly pour out the Spirit on all believers from heaven. Now that Jesus has completed his work on the cross, there is a marked difference between the Spirit’s operation in the OT and the NT.
It has to do with the salvation-historical logic. When we talk about the current economic Trinity, we are speaking about the unity among the three persons of the Godhead. We are also speaking about distinct roles. It is not the Father or even the Spirit of God who died on the cross for our sins. It was the second person of the Trinity, Jesus. The third person of the Trinity, the Spirit, had to wait for the completed cross-work of the second person of the Trinity before indwelling believers.
My last comment is that there might be very a striking difference in the new covenant prophecy in Jeremiah 31. It stresses very strongly the difference between the old and the new covenant in the new covenant. What would be different is that God would write the Spirit upon people’s hearts. The book of Hebrews comments on that extensively, quoting Jeremiah 31 at length.
Allison:
I totally agree with Andreas. I would add, according to Peter’s words in Acts 2 to quoting the prophecy of Joel 2, we now live in the age of the Spirit in which the Holy Spirit is poured out men and women, slaves, free, Jews, and Gentiles. That was significantly unlike the reality in the OT, the old covenant. We as new covenant believers have been incorporated into the body of Christ, the temple of the Holy Spirit. That is a significant difference.
Because of Christ’s resurrection and his grace, the ascension is one victory over all his enemy’s court. And in doing so, he gives us spiritual gifts; all believers have at least one gift. That is another significant advantage that we have living in the church in the new covenant.
Zaspel:
I have to ask this. These days when anyone picks up a book on the Holy Spirit, one of the big questions that will come to mind concerns the miraculous gifts – continuationism vs. cessationism. You guys take the continuationist position, although you don’t deal with it at great length. I don’t at all want to debate the question here, but I’d like to ask a question that often puzzles those of us that lean to the cessationist side. You say that the gifts of miracles, healings, tongues, and prophecy all continue, but where do we see them? In the days of the Apostles, it was pretty obvious, but it often seems to us that in order to maintain the “continuance” of these miraculous or sign gifts they have to be redefined – the gift of healing becomes something like praying for someone who is sick, and God may or may not heal. The gift of tongues doesn’t look at all like what we see at Pentecost. For the gift of miracles, we certainly don’t see anyone looking someone blind as Paul did in Acts. And honestly it seems to us to be a kind of special pleading to say these gifts “continue” when the gifts we see exercised in the New Testament seem so different. How do you respond?
Allison:
Second Corinthians 12:12 associates these sign gifts/miraculous gifts in some particular way with the apostles. Yet, we also see in the pages the NT, these gifts were not just confined to the apostles. Stephen, Philip, Philip’s four daughters, referred to as prophetesses, were using these gifts. We have to expand the appropriations of these gifts beyond the apostolic circle. In Galatians 3, we have the working of miracles by the Holy Spirit in the churches of Galatia. People in the church were performing miracles—unnamed people in the pew, so to speak. First Corinthians 12:13–14 discusses spiritual gifts. There is of revelation on speaking in tongues, its interpretation, and tongue in the congregations of the church in Corinth. Paul in his letter to the Roman gives instructions about how to exercise spiritual gifts like prophecy, leading, etc.
These letters written to the churches instructing and exhorting about spiritual gifts would indicate to us as continuationists, that there is actually quite a bit of this miraculous activity, distributed spiritual gifts, in the early church. Historical evidence would confirm the continuation of this kind of activity even for today where we see contemporary experience of the same things.
Köstenberger:
From a biblical theology standpoint, there is some common ground here with cessationists. Clearly the signs and wonders in the OT are heavily concentrated around the exodus. There is also a second cluster around Elijah and Elisha. In the NT, clearly the ministry of Jesus and the apostles are major clusters of unusual miraculous activity. Part of the reason might be because of the absence of a NT written revelation, the canon, what we call the NT. There was an added need for authentication of the apostles as God’s authorized representatives who proclaim Jesus resurrection. That explains the higher frequency of miracles.
Comparatively, there is a lesser degree of need for this authentication aspect of those miraculous gifts. Because we have the NT Scriptures, I would certainly resonate with the cessationist position. But, like Gregg, I believe we ought not to totally limit God’s operation through miracles to the apostolic period. There would not be any reason why God could no longer perform those works today.
Allison:
In terms of the quality of the expression of the gifts, we see an explosive evidence of them in operation. We don’t believe that explosiveness that extreme manifestation today. Picking up on Andrew Wilson, a pastor in Great Britain, who says, “Our church planting efforts today are not as they were in the early church.” Peter preaches, and 3,000 people believed. Again, he preaches, then 5,000. I am not aware of church planting efforts today of that quality.
With evangelism, we do not see that kind of explosive evangelism. Again, Peter preaches, and 3,000 believed. In terms of our church discipline, do we see an Ananias and Sapphira situation of people dropping dead? Again, just because we don’t see an explosive manifestation of the gifts doesn’t mean that they have ceased. The quality is there. There is somewhat less than what was in the early church.
Köstenberger:
When the NT is not available, perhaps in unreached people group situations, there might still be that need for miraculous authentication of missionaries as we saw in the early church.
Zaspel:
Okay, I said I didn’t want to debate, so we’ll let it go with that. (laughing).
Paul’s command to “be filled with the Spirit” in Ephesians 5:18 is often puzzling, not least because he doesn’t stop to define formally exactly what it means. Tell me if I’m missing something, but I’ve always tended to understand this as another of Paul’s “be what you are” kind of exhortations. For example, he tells us that we are “led” by the Spirit, and the corresponding obligation is that we “walk” in the Spirit. We must be who we are – live in keeping with the indicative. So also, “filled with the Spirit” – that’s who we are as new covenant believers, and so Paul tells us here just to live accordingly: “Because the Spirit indwells you, be filled with the Spirit. Be what you are.” Am I on the right track? Or are there further nuances that would help?
Köstenberger:
There are further nuances. Years ago, I wrote an article on what it means to be filled with the Spirit published in JETS. Working on this project gave me a chance to revisit the issue. Ephesians 5:18 is the only place in all of Paul’s thirteen letters where he uses that exact language “being filled with the Spirit.” It is unique for Paul. For whatever reason, that language only occurs there. When you look at that phrase of “being filled with the Spirit,” it does occur a few times. Interestingly, it always refers to God sovereignly filling believers with the Spirit corporately as a group, both individually at conversion in Acts 2 and then later on during special occasions with regard to empowering the people of God for bold witness.
Looking at Ephesians 5:18, the command “be filled with the Spirit” is in the plural. The next few verses refer primarily to the church corporately rather to individual believers. Paul talks about evidence of Spirit filling in the church’s corporate worship, which were expressions of the Spirit filling in the church’s corporate worship, singing songs and spiritual songs, and interestingly, in the marriage relationship. Verses 21ff continue the same sentence that started with that command to “be filled with the Spirit” in verse 18, which incidentally that is obscured in most of our English translations. They break up the long sentence in the original into shorter sentences. I am sure it is driven by English style considerations, and it’s well-intentioned, no doubt. But it is unfortunate and unhelpful. It severs the connection that Paul establishes between Spirit filling with worship and marriage.
I would argue that our Western individualism and other traditions, even on the popular level, surrounding Spirit filling have sometimes misled us in the wrong direction with an emphasis on more individual filling, or a certain mode of filling. I do not see Spirit filling in Paul or Luke-Acts as something that we as believers are commanded, or even encouraged to ask for. Rather, it is something that God chooses to do whenever he sovereignly determines there is a need to empower believers for bold witness. It is usually also in the ministry of the context of ministry rather than confessing sins and so forth. We are ready been filled with the Spirit unless we indulge in sin, then we are full of the Spirit, which is another phrase that’s in Luke-Acts in Acts 7 with reference to deacons.
One last background that is Paul’s language here invokes the OT depiction of the temple as being God’s beautiful house being, filled with God’s presence. This is really the tip of the iceberg. Knowledge of him conceiving of the church as God’s temple and then the Spirit is filling the church corporately with his presence. That is evidenced by spiritual worship. Spirit-filled relationships also occur between husband and wife.
Now, lest anybody misconstrue what I am saying, it is of course true that the church is made up of individual Spirit-filled believers. That is more of an assumption Paul makes rather than being his main point, in terms of biblical theology. One key passage would be 1 Kings 8:10–11 which speaks about Solomon’s Temple as the main set of passages in the OT where filling language is used. It says that when the priest came out of the holy place, the cloud filled the house of the Lord, so that the priests could not stand to minister because of the cloud, for the glory of the Lord filled the house of the Lord.
Notice the repeated filling language. Interestingly, the parallel in 2 Chronicles 14 even talks about corporate praise in conjunction with filling, just like Paul does in Ephesians 5:18ff. It is when the priest came out of the holy place again, similar starting point in any talks about all the Levitical singers ascending up and some others with fine linen with cymbals, harps, and lyres, and with 120 priests who are trumpeters. He talks about how the trumpeters and singers joined in the singing praise and thanksgiving to the Lord.
They are singing, “For his steadfast love endures forever,” an existing biblical song in such places as Psalms 118 and 136. Then he said after he saying the house was filled with a cloud, that the priests could not stand to minister because of the cloud, for the glory of the Lord filled the house of God. Hopefully those passages help our listeners realize that this is really the biblical background for Paul’s reference to being “filled with the Spirit” corporately in Ephesians 5:18.
Zaspel:
Gregg, anything to add?
Allison:
No, excellent work!
Zaspel:
Okay, you’ve written a major book on the doctrine of the Holy Spirit; I decide I want the people in our church to benefit from your work, so I invite you to come and speak. You have one hour on Sunday morning – or perhaps even two if we throw in the Sunday School hour. It’s a huge topic – how will you narrow it down and decide what would be most beneficial to us. What do we most need to hear? What will you focus on? And how ought the doctrine of the Holy Spirit inform our devotion and our worship?
Köstenberger:
I have actually had the opportunity to speak to a local association of pastors a few months back. They gave me about an hour and a half to talk about the Holy Spirit. It is important for people to realize that the unfolding development of the Bible that speaks of the Spirit in both testaments. It is important to understand where we are today as NT believers, but again, that is just for me as a theologian, starting with this inductive, historically descriptive approach on the Bible’s teaching on the Spirit. I am sure Gregg would probably take a little bit of a different approach given his own area of expertise.
Allison:
I begin with Jesus’ statement about how our heavenly Father promises to give good gifts to his children. That is Matthew’s rendition of it, and then I would look at Luke’s rendition of it. Jesus emphasized the Father gives the Holy Spirit to his children. I am going to start with this thesis that the greatest gift that God the Father gives to those who follow his Son is the Holy Spirit.
Now, that can be controversial because people say, “Wait a second, we are Christ-centered churches, Christ is the greatest gift.” But notice how I phrased it, “the greatest gift that God the Father gives to those who follow the Son.” We are in Christ. The greatest gift to those with appropriate that marvelous saving gift of Jesus Christ is the Holy Spirit.
Zaspel:
That actually coincides well with John 16, where Jesus says, “It is to your advantage that I go away because if I don’t go, the Holy Spirit cannot come to you.” He is explaining to them that they are better off without him physically present.
Allison:
That is right. If I were preaching in your church, I would preach from Roman 8. I would preach on living in the Spirit. In your Sunday school class, I would divide up the time on discussing worshiping God the Holy Spirit and walking with God the Holy Spirit.
Zaspel:
We’re talking to Drs. Gregg Allison and Andreas Köstenberger about their new book, The Holy Spirit. It’s an excellent major contribution to this important area of study. I don’t think I have the gift of prophecy, but I think I can say rather confidently that this will be a standard resource on this area of doctrine for some time to come. It’s a book you will not want to be without.
Gregg, Andreas, many thanks to you both for your faithful ministry and for talking to us today.
Köstenberger:
Thank you so much, Fred!
Buy the books
THE HOLY SPIRIT (THEOLOGY FOR THE PEOPLE OF GOD), by Gregg R. Allison and Andreas J. Köstenberger