With the exception of the Gospel itself, only a few aspects of what the Bible teaches have been more fought over and been more divisive than that concerning the person and work of the Holy Spirit.

It seems that the nature of things through the centuries has been for the Church to move steadily away from anything that suggests the present, visible work of the Holy Spirit in the lives of believers. We are much more comfortable with the predictability and the “safety” of organizations and structures. We are much like ancient Israel in the wilderness, longing for a “god” they could see, such as the Egyptians and everyone else around them had. Worshipping and following someone who is invisible and unpredictable can be an unnerving task.

In an effort to maintain control and “safety,” we have defined and understood the Holy Spirit and his work in a manner that effectively eliminates him from any real role in our lives. We don’t deny that He exists, of course, and we don’t deny that He plays a role in the workings of God and in bringing us to salvation. However, virtually anything that suggests that the Holy Spirit might yet be active in the manner we see in the life of Jesus and in the early Church as recounted by Luke and Paul, is rejected. Further, those who believe the events and issues recorded in Acts and I Corinthians are the norm and not "just" history, and are to be sought and expected today, are too often attacked and, reminiscent of the treatment of early believers, “thrown out of the synagogues.”

There is, on the part of too many Christians, a high level of ignorance and misinformation. Surely this is a classic illustration of what Mark Twain meant when he said, “It isn’t what a man doesn’t know that gets him in trouble. It’s what he does know that just isn’t so.”

Why is this ignorance so widespread and readily accepted? Why don’t most people seem to care?

I believe there is one factor – mentioned above – that explains the hesitancy of many to accept the plain teaching of Scripture in this area: control. It is our nature to want to retain control of our lives and circumstances. It is an accepted psychological principle that people will prefer and hang onto an unsatisfying, dangerous – but known – present, over a promising but unknown – hence risky – future.

God calls us to yield our lives to his sovereignty, to give up our control. He wishes to remake us from the inside out, “re-creating” in us holiness and a reflection of his own nature. The instrument of that work is the Holy Spirit. True safety is in him, and all else is an illusion and a false premise. In the end, the tendency away from the Holy Spirit, the tendency to “naturalize” God, is a response to a lie from the pit of Hell.  

Ephesus all over again

Author Edith Schaeffer relates a story about her husband, Francis Schaeffer, who came to breakfast one morning with the following question:

Supposing we had awakened today to find everything concerning the Holy Spirit and prayer removed from the Bible…. What difference would it make practically between the way we worked yesterday and the way we work today, and tomorrow? What difference would it make in the majority of Christians’ practical work and plans? …Where does the supernatural power of God have a real place?[1]

For a majority of Christians, the answer would be the same as that of John’s Ephesian disciples, who responded to Paul’s question, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” with, “No, we have not even heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.”[2]

We live in the land of mega-churches, a land where 85% of the adult population claims to believe in the life, death, resurrection and “spiritual existence” of Jesus.[3] Americans are described as one of the most religious people on earth. Yet we live in a land where immorality is rewarded, where cheating is the norm, where disrespect is honored, and where, even in the Church, ethics are in short supply. The American Church makes little practical difference in society, and church members exhibit socially destructive behaviors – divorce, drug use, pornography use – with a frequency in many cases greater than that of the world. In a time of mega-churches and church growth movements, we do well to examine what is without question the most successful and most powerful time in the history of the Church. Never, in any place of time, has there been anything to match the events of the First Century Church – the “Acts Church.”  

The right stuff

What was their secret? Why did they “upset their world”[4] when the American church in general accomplishes little, and ranks with used car salesmen in respect from the public?

A friend relates[5] how he and his wife left their mainline church after reading the book of Acts, and seeing a great disparity between what they read and what they experienced in their church, where he had been an elder and teacher for some 20 years. “We began looking around,” he said, “searching for a church that most closely resembles the Acts church.” They found and settled in a Messianic Jewish congregation, and he became an elder there.

However, he and others like him miss the point. The unique element in the first century church was not that they prayed in Hebrew or lived a “Torah-observant” lifestyle. They did that because they were Jews, little different from most other Jews in that time and place. Indeed, it would have been remarkable had they not done these things. The key is not in language or practice, but somewhere else.  

Déjà vu all over again

Twentieth-century America has much in common with the first century in which the “Acts church” existed. There were among the gentile peoples a questioning of traditional religions. There was a search for meaning, a wondering about the commonly accepted standards that were being shaken to the point of destruction. Among many Jews there was a longing for someone to bring about change and solve the problems of their lives under the Romans.[6] The situation was ripe for the introduction of a “new thing,” the Gospel.

Americans, too, are searching as never before for meaning and answers to life’s questions, but they are not, apparently, asking the church. Many pastors apparently do not often preach from the Bible,[7] and most Christians do not often read the Bible.[8] A pastor of a major evangelical church, one that prided itself on being a “Bible church,” claimed that one biblical sermon a week from the pulpit was sufficient for the people.[9] There was apparently no reason to study the Bible anywhere else in the life of that church. Churches develop programs and strategies for church growth and evangelization, generally without measurable results. What church “growth” there is consists mostly of “church shopping,” as people move from one church to another, shopping for something they like.[10] There is little evangelism.

What is missing? What did the “Acts church” have that most American churches do not? The difference is not in language, liturgy, polity, programs or even in inspired preaching. The real difference is that the Acts church experienced the present, active, evident power of the Holy Spirit.[11] The thing that set the claims of the early church apart from the cacophony of competing voices was not the Gospel. The Good News was unique, but just so many more religious words without something to “validate” it to the hearers. How did they know the Gospel message was really from God and was truly different? By the present, active, powerful – and evident – work of the Holy Spirit.

From the “birthday of the Church” in Jerusalem[12] – on  the day of Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit was first poured out on the believers – to Samaria,[13] and from Ephesus[14]to Galatia,[15] there was an evident presence of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit was powerfully present in 18^th Century Massachusetts[16] and 20^th Century Azusa Street in Los Angeles, California.[17] And He is present in much of the developing world of the 21^st Century. Without question, the hallmark of a powerful church making a difference in lives is the present, active, visible power of the Holy Spirit.  

We know what to call it, but what is it?

But what does all that mean? There are innumerable competing claims to truth in this matter. Virtually every Christian group has a position on it, and it is evident that someone is wrong: Opposites cannot both be correct. There is agreement that the Holy Spirit is active in salvation, and that He indwells believers. There is also agreement that He is the “down-payment” of our inheritance in God. However, there is a chasm of disagreement when we ask, with Schaeffer, what practical effect does the Holy Spirit have in the life of a Christian? Is there a visible difference?

To begin moving toward a renewed empowerment of the Church, there are steps that must be taken first. We must know what this is all about, and how God usually chooses to operate. What is the phenomenon we are looking at, and perhaps more important, how to we know it if we see it? For this, our primary source must be the Bible, and there are also some useful examples in history.  

Ambiguous language

We will begin by examining three biblical sources: John the Baptist, Luke, and Paul.

John spoke of one coming after him, superior to him, who would baptize with the Holy Spirit.[18] The one he referred to was Jesus. However, he did not elaborate on what this baptism with the Holy Spirit actually was, though it seems it was something new. Then writing his account of the beginnings of the early church, Luke wrote of the Spirit “coming upon” believers.[19] Moving further into the New Testament we encounter Paul’s exhortation to “be (being) filled with the Holy Spirit.”[20]

None of these explained to us just what we should be looking for, in our new experience with the Holy Spirit. Perhaps the “omission” is because their listeners and readers already knew, and there was no need. There are some clues, however, and we can come to a fairly good understanding with a little investigation.  

“Baptism in/with/by the Holy Spirit”

There are two terms in this phrase that need clarification: baptism and in/with/by. The first is fairly easy, since the word was used commonly in the “secular” Greek of the time.[21] It was used to describe a ship that had sunk, being totally immersed in the water, and eventually becoming intermingled with it. It was used to describe dipping a piece of cloth in dye, so that the dye permeated the cloth, causing the cloth to take on the characteristics of the dye. So being baptized in this sense is to be immersed in some “substance,” in this case the Holy Spirit.

In/with/by is a little more difficult, since the Greek term can mean any of the three, depending on the context.[22] In this case, whether it is in or with makes little difference to the reading: The end is the same. By is different, but the verses where this fits are generally obvious, such as I Corinthians 12:13, where the actor is clearly the Holy Spirit.

So to be baptized in or with the Holy Spirit is to be immersed in the Holy Spirit, so that He permeates every part of our being, causing us, over time, to adopt the very nature of God, which is the character of the Messiah.[23]  

‘Holy Spirit comes upon…’

Jesus told the disciples that they would receive power when the Holy Spirit came upon them.[24] By comparing this with other accounts in the same book,[25] we see that this phrase is essentially synonymous with “baptized in” the Holy Spirit.  

‘Filled with the Holy Spirit’

Paul wrote that we are to be “filled with the Holy Spirit,”[26] and that it is to be a continuing process. However, what is it to be filled with the Holy Spirit? Is it the same as being baptized with the Holy Spirit? Is Paul referring to the same experience as Luke or is this something else? This question will be answered as we proceed through this paper. The answer will become evident by examining the outward manifestations that accompanied the baptism of the Holy Spirit, the infilling of the Holy Spirit, and the experiences of the Holy Spirit “coming upon” someone or being “poured out” on someone. The same experience should produce at least similar results.  

HWIKIIISI?

The motorcycle manufacturer Harley Davidson nearly went out of business some years ago, after being sold to a “cut rate” bicycle company. “Harley” became synonymous with junk. The previous owners bought the company back and set about reinventing the Harley. It is one of the great success stories of management and leadership.

In the “redemption” process, Harley coined “word” to ask when examining their operations. When attempting to restructure an assembly line, for example, they would ask, “If this were an ideal line, what would it look like?” This became abbreviated to HWIKIIISI: “How will I know it if I see it?”

The same question must be asked concerning the work of the Holy Spirit: How will we know it if we see it? What does the Holy Spirit look like when acting in a situation “with skin on”?

Some would argue that the work of the Holy Spirit is quiet and virtually undetectable by any outward sign. The presence of the Spirit is evidenced by a nice, warm, “spiritual” feeling. Others say the opposite is true. Where the Spirit is, there is pandemonium, including laughing, shouting, rolling on the floor, perhaps barking, and more. According to Scripture, neither is true.

In Texas some years ago, a rural Pentecostal church was having “revival” services. Every night, a man repeatedly interrupted the service, shouting hallelujah and acting in a boisterous manner, even rolling on the floor. The congregation became excited at this, exclaiming that the “Holy Ghost has come over him.” This continued every night for at least two weeks, and was seen as evidence of the presence of the Holy Spirit and of a successful revival.

After that church stopped their revival meetings, a nearby church, this one Methodist, began their own revival services. The same man appeared and he behaved in the same manner. In this case, however, the pastor and the evangelist, sensing something amiss, approached the man and quietly commanded a “religious spirit” to come out of him. He instantly fell to the floor, became very quiet, and an air of peace came over him. He was peaceful for the remainder of the services. He appeared to be enjoying worshipping, and was in no way disruptive.[27]

This true story illustrates the difficulty of recognizing the genuine work of the Holy Spirit. It is an inviolable rule that whenever God begins to work in power, Satan begins a corresponding attempt to confuse and discredit what God is doing. The result is often somewhat messy.

So how do we recognize (1) the initial baptism of the Holy Spirit in an individual life, and (2) the experience of “being filled with the Holy Spirit”?

We will examine the initial outpouring first.

Evidence

The primary source of information is the book of Acts. There are five examples in Acts of the Holy Spirit coming upon believers: in Jerusalem, Samaria, Caesarea, on the road to Damascus, and Ephesus.[28] There are times when the Holy Spirit works in a quiet manner, but it doesn’t seem that this is one of them. In every case, there were visible and dramatic manifestations. Apparently it is important for both the recipient and the observers to see manifestations, perhaps as a sign of the reality of the experience.[29]

In three of the five,[30] we are clearly told that the recipients spoke in tongues. In the other two, there are clear indications that something happened, though we cannot say conclusively what it was, and whether they spoke in tongues, or if they did, that it happened at that time. In one of these two, the conversion of Paul, the recipient himself clearly stated at a later time[31] that he spoke – a lot – in tongues, but we cannot say whether it was associated with the initial outpouring of the Spirit.

The five examples are:

Jerusalem and the Day of Pentecost

Clearly here there is an immediate relationship between being “filled” with the Holy Spirit and speaking with other tongues: “And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance….”[32] This is also an indicator that being “filled” with the Holy Spirit is the same as being “baptized” with the Holy Spirit.[33]

It is also interpreted by Peter as the beginning of a new phase in God’s redemption plan, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on all mankind.[34]

Phillip in Samaria

This case is somewhat mysterious, since it clearly states that the Samaritans received the Holy Spirit,[35] and there was apparently some visible manifestation, attracting the attention of Simon, but there is no indication of the nature of that sign. (Earlier there is a note that there was “much rejoicing.”[36] Could this be the first recorded instance of “holy laughter”?)

Conversion of Paul

After his famous “Damascus road experience,” Paul was taken to Damascus, where he fasted and prayed for three days. At that time, Ananias, a local believer, was sent by God to pray for Paul. His statement to Paul was that he had been sent that Paul might regain his sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.[37] There is no indication of any kind of outward manifestation of the coming of the Holy Spirit, though Paul did receive back his sight. In another place,[38] Paul says that he spoke in tongues more than any of his readers, but we still don’t know when he began.

Peter in the house of Cornelius

This is the first outpouring of the Spirit on Gentiles, and is a part of one of the most fascinating events in Acts. It is clear that there was a general outpouring of the Spirit on all Gentile believers in that place, and it is equally clear that the Jewish believers present recognized the phenomenon as equal to their own by the presence of speaking in tongues.[39] The linkage is explicit.

John’s disciples in Ephesus

The final example is Paul’s encounter with 12 disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus. In response to Paul’s questions, they expressed complete ignorance of the existence of the Holy Spirit. After explanation, they were baptized both in water, and as Paul laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit “came upon them” and they spoke in tongues.[40] Again, there is a clear linkage.

So what?

It seems clear that there is some connection between the baptism of the Holy Spirit, being filled with the Holy Spirit, and a variety of other phrases similarly used. It also seems evident that there is some connection between these and speaking in tongues. But what is it?

Some say that speaking in tongues is the absolute evidence of the presence of the Holy Spirit. However, this is making a rule of something that is not consistently demonstrated in Scripture. In three of our examples, the rule applies. However, in the other two, it does not. Making a hard and fast rule of 60% occurrence is unwise, at the least.

Others say that Acts recounts the introduction of the Holy Spirit into different groups of people, and means little for us today – all believers have it, anyway – and any role on tongues is completely disregarded. This, too, is lacking. Certainly there is more than simply the introduction of something new to diverse groups of people. How do we explain the continuing existence of this connection of the Holy Spirit and tongues for the past two millennia? It never has stopped, after all.

I am more comfortable with saying that the evidence indicates that there is a “usual” relationship, but not an absolute one. It seems that the normal pattern was for recipients to speak in tongues, but the pattern was not always followed, or it was not recorded as such. To make the pattern into an absolute rule fails to account for biblical examples such as that of Samaria on the one hand, and the existence of “tongues” in pagan cults on the other. There is certainly a relationship, but we can say neither that the lack of tongues means the lack of the Holy Spirit, nor that the presence of tongues indicates unfailingly the presence of the Holy Spirit.

So how do we know, if not by speaking in tongues, that we have been filled with the Holy Spirit?

Someone has illustrated the baptism of the Holy Spirit with this marvelous story:

The Jones family – Mom, Dad and Suzy – is expecting the Smiths for dinner. Mon and Dad are upstairs getting ready, running a little behind schedule, when the doorbell rings. Suzy answers the door and calls out, “Mom! Dad! The Smiths are here!”

“Invite them in,” comes the response. “We’ll be down in a minute.”

Suzy invites the Smiths in, and asks them to be seated in the front room. In a few minutes, Mom and Dad come down, welcome the Smiths – “receive” them – and invite them to “Make yourselves at home. Our house is your house.”

When we – the Jones family – put our faith in the Messiah as our Lord and Savior, the Holy Spirit – his name is actually Smith – enters our “home,” and from that point nothing is the same again. Mom and Dad, who have not yet seen the Smiths, act differently, as does Suzy. Life has changed with the presence of a new person.

However, when Mom and Dad actually come and “receive” the Smiths, inviting them to “make yourselves at home,” they not only have a changed life, but they enjoy the benefits of fellowship with the Smiths, and the gift that the Smiths have brought along.

The Holy Spirit indwells all believers, but when they are baptized in the Holy Spirit – yielding to him access to every area of life – they begin to enjoy the full benefit of his presence, and the gifts that He bring with him.

The result of the Smiths’ presence is the enjoyment of gifts, but it is also, and more importantly, deeply changed lives.

Spirit of purity, Spirit of prophecy

We have seen that there is some connection between the initial filling or baptism with the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues. However, we have also seen that the connection is not absolute, and we cannot draw safe conclusions about the presence or absence of the Spirit in an individual by the presence or absence of tongues. The most that we can say is that when one is baptized in the Holy Spirit, he or she should be able to speak in tongues. Probably.

In asking, then, what is it to be “filled with the Holy Spirit” and what is the evidence of that filling, there are other evidences that we must examine.

Craig Keener writes of the ancient Jewish concept of the Holy Spirit as functioning in two areas. They saw the Holy Spirit as the Spirit of Purity on the one hand, and as the Spirit of Prophecy on the other.[41] There is much that we can find useful in this concept. The two deal with two areas of life of major importance for a believer: holiness and ministry.

Spirit of Purity

The Holy Spirit, functioning as the Spirit of Purity, works in us, enabling us to live a life separated from God, a life of holiness and righteousness. He grows in us the character of the Messiah – which is the fruit of his working in us[42] -- and teaches us, causing us to become partakers of the very nature of God.[43] It is only through the work of the Holy Spirit that we become witnesses with any sort of credibility.

An undeniable evidence of the presence and work of the Holy Spirit is a changed and changing life. Those who would claim the descriptor “Spirit-filled” while living a worldly, unrighteous life are fooling only themselves.

Spirit of Prophecy

The other aspect – ministry – deals with fruitfulness and functioning as a part of the body in the Kingdom of God.

The Spirit of Prophecy is aptly named in this regard, since the prophet was a minister of God: He spoke for God to the people, and for the people to God. He was, in a sense, the servant of both. Prophecy stands as a representative of all the “equipping” or “empowering” gifts of the Holy Spirit, given to enable us to be effective agents in God’s redemptive plan.

God did not redeem us to sit in a pew, doing nothing.[44] He called is to become a part of his glorious plan to cast down the strongholds of Hell and redeem all of creation for his glory. He called us to be soldiers in this army. And since He has called us, He has also equipped us for the task, with the gifts and power of the Holy Spirit.

A large part of our responsibility in being a part of the larger task, according to Jesus,[45] is to abide in him – the Vine – remaining focused on out relationship with him. As we do this, He pours his strength into us, and the fruit just naturally happens. And the medium by which his strength comes, and by which we grow and mature, bearing fruit, is the indwelling, filling Holy Spirit.

As the Spirit fills us and has free reign in us, something happens. Certain “tools” and fruit become evident in our lives. The tools are the manifestations of the Spirit, abilities given to us by the Holy Spirit for our use in carrying out our assigned task. The fruit within us individually is the fruit of the Spirit, which is the character of the Messiah, Jesus. When these two are in evidence, other fruit, in the form of a life that honors God and draws others to want a similar relationship with him, is also in evidence.

Conclusion

Being “filled” with the Holy Spirit is a continuation of the initial experience with him, spoken of as the baptism of the Holy Spirit or of having the Holy Spirit come upon us. It is the means b which power to witness is imparted to us, and is imperative for living a biblical life and entering into a living relationship with God.

Evidence of having experienced the filling may include speaking in tongues, but the absolute indicator is that of a life characterized by holiness, by the presence of both the gifts and fruit of the Spirit, and by a continued progression in becoming partakers of the very nature of God.

Amen.

Bibliography

Barna, George. Today’s Pastors. Ventura, Calif.: Regal Books, 1993.

Brady, Matthew. “Doesn’t anybody read the Bible anymore? Christians are turning to other books for illumination.” Fort Worth Star-Telegram, January 17, 2000. http://www.reporternews.com/religion.bible0117.html.

Brown, Colin, ed. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1975.

Fee, Gordon D. God’s Empowering Presence. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 1994.

Grabbe, Lester L. An Introduction to First Century Judaism. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996.

Johnson, Timothy Luke. The Writings of the New Testament. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999.

International Inductive Study Bible. New American Standard Bible. Eugene, Ore.: Harvest House Publishers, 1993.

Keener, Craig. The Spirit in the Gospels and Acts. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 1997.

Lovelace, Richard. Dynamics of Spiritual Life. Downers Grove, Ill.: Inter-Varsity Press, 1979.

Marlatt, Gene and Dotti. Leadership to a Higher Power. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1998.

Marlatt, Gene. Multifacety: Ethics for the Next Millenium. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1998.

Noll, Mark A. A History of Christianity in the United States and Canada. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1992.

Schaeffer, Edith. L’Abri. Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House Publishers, 1969.

Snyder, Howard A. Liberating the Church: The Ecology of Church and Kingdom. Downers Grove, Ill.: Inter-Varsity Press, 1983.

Strong, James. Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. New York: Abingdon Press, 1970.

Synan, Vinson, ed. Aspects of Pentecostal-Charismatic Origins. Plainfield, N.J.: Logos International, 1975.