Jonathan Jenkins

We have seen in previous essays how the spread of the prophetic powers into new fields of preaching was integral to the spread of the church. The Spirit’s powers were essential in Jerusalem, Samaria, with Cornelius, and to defend the work of Paul’s first missionary journey. Is it reasonable to think that the same emphasis about the work of the Holy Spirit would be missing from the first epistle written to one of the first apostolically planted churches among the Gentiles in Europe?

Neither Hebrews nor James has an argument like Galatians 3-4 or Romans 8. The “indwelling” is not emphasized in argumentation before Acts 10. It is not found in the epistles to the “Hebrews.”

it must be understood that the measures paradigm exists simply to explain an expositional trap which should not exist in the first place. The snare is created when it is rejected that Joel’s prophecy actually refers to “all flesh” in the early church. By refusing to consider that truly “all flesh” in the church had access to prophecy, visions, and dreams, modern expositors who reject the charismatic understanding of the Spirit are placed into an interpretive dilemma.

Acts 8 is the text that illustrates how the apostles went about carrying out the promise made in Acts 2. It is the passage to which we should appeal to explain the manner by which God ensured that “all flesh” in His kingdom would have the Holy Spirit “poured out” on them. It is the bridge that ties Acts 2 to the rest of the New Testament. Unfortunately, most teachings of the work of the Holy Spirit cannot cross it.

The objection might be raised that Acts 2:38 states that the Holy Spirit is given in baptism. Since proponents of a non-prophetic indwelling believe almost universally that the gift of the Holy Spirit is the Holy Spirit’s indwelling of a Christian, that statement would appear justified. However, their insistence that Acts 5:32 unilaterally excludes the prophetic powers of the Holy Spirit places them in a bind in trying to apply the Bible’s language consistently.

Stated as simply as possible: “The gift of the Holy Spirit is the fulfillment of the promise of the Holy Spirit.” That promise is said to have been responsible for the presence of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:33). The nature of that promise is explained in the quotation of Joel 2 in Peter’s defense of the apostles’ actions (Acts 2:16-21).

The apparent difficulty in holding that two baptisms were active in the Ephesian church despite Paul’s statement that there was “one baptism” is resolved by noting that in Paul’s list of seven one’s the baptism of the Holy Spirit has already been addressed before Paul mentions water baptism.

The key to understanding Peter’s words is found in allowing the Bible to define its own “ages.” There are various interpretive systems among Bible students today that describe the stages of the biblical story. The dispensational pre-millennialist has at least seven dispensations or ages in which God has and will work. Another common division of the Bible ages has three main ages: the Patriarchal Age, Mosaic Age, and Christian Age. The problem for both of these approaches is that the Bible never uses any such structure or labels to describe its own ages.