Was the Spirit of God Indwelling the Redeemed before Pentecost?

[Arial]

But I understand and do not disagree with the concept you are presenting. You don't need to waste your time on me there.
You've been very gracious in answering my questions.

It is the concept that I am talking about and still I think Paul was in Romans. He is constantly speaking of the law and our responsibility to be obedient to God's law, and we know that he is not saying we are to obey the Mosaic law, other than its concepts---be obedient to God and bear His image as we were created to do. But the law does not condemn us in Christ, and there is no written code of law in the NC. But there is no need to belabor the point as you say.

And I have no quibble about what you say about 2 Cor.

 

[Josheb]

@Eleanor @Arial @ReverendRV @Reformedguy @Josheb @fastfredy0 @atpollard @His clay @Carbon @Ladodgers6 @Red Baker @Manfred @TMSO @Dave_Regenerated @CrazyCalvinistUncle @severalothers,nodoubt​

​

Was the Spirit of God indwelling the redeemed before Pentecost?

Yes.

But.....

....indwelling comes in many forms throughout scripture and regeneration should not be conflated with the other forms of indwelling.

 

[Eleanor]

 

[Eleanor]

It is the concept that I am talking about and still I think Paul was in Romans. He is constantly speaking of the law and our responsibility to be obedient to God's law, and we know that he is not saying we are to obey the Mosaic law, other than its concepts. I believe Paul said otherwise in Romans 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. (I quote that separated from its context for the sake of space and because I am lazy at the moment, but the full meaning and understanding what he means by that of course is found within the context of the chapter.

For what it's worth:

The context of chp 7 is imparted (not imputed) righteousness; i.e., sanctification, wherein we are free from the law's condemnation and serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code (Ro 7:6), the difference being the new way in the Holy Spirit is life, and the old way of the written code is death.

As in baptism, we died to sin and rose to a new life with Christ (Ro 6:2-4), so in that baptism we likewise died to the law's condemnation (Ro 7:4), just as a married woman bound to her husband is released from the law of marriage at his death. (Ro 7:1-4), for the law of marriage no longer has a hold on her, she is no longer under it, just as the law no longer has a hold on us, we are no longer under its condemnation, for we have died to the law (Ro 7:4).

Paul is saying here that, because we are born again, the Spirit indwells us and we are in Christ, the law no longer condemns us and our service now brings life, whereas before Christ and without the Holy Spirit, our service brought only death.
And what service is that? To the law of love:
"he who loves has fulfilled the law" (Ro 13:8). . .
"whatever other commandments there may be are summed up in one rule, 'Love your neighbor as yourself' "(Ro 13:9). . .
"love is the fulfillment of the law" (Ro 13:10). . .
I am not under the law (1 Co 9:20). . .
I am under Christ's law (1 Co 9:21). . .(love of God and neighbor as self, Mt 22:37-40).
The distinction Paul is making here is between service in the power of the Holy Spirit and service in the powerless flesh (sinful nature), the flesh being natural (sinful) and the law being spiritual, by the fact that is from the Divine Spirit, God

So in its context, wouldn't the application of "spirit and letter" to Ro 7:4 look something like this:
the "spirit of the law" and the "letter of the law," neither found in Scripture, can be applied to Ro 7:4, which likewise is not about the "spirit of the law" and the "letter of the law" (it being about the power of the Spirit and the powerlessness of the flesh)?

And I think supports the one sentence as meaning what it says. The law, though a written law that must be obeyed, has a spiritual aspect----that being the very character of God is contained within it. It is also consistent with first the natural then the spiritual. And if there is a natural, a spiritual also exists. The furnishing in the tent of meeting and the tabernacle were copies of what was in heaven. In fact everything that is given in the natural must of necessity be a product of and consistent with the One who gives it.)

I Co 15:46 - "It is not the spiritual which is first, but the physical, and then the spiritual."

In 1 Co 15:35-57, Paul is answering questions:
1) how are the dead raised, with what kind of body will they come? (vv. 35-50),
2) revealing the mystery of things regarding the resurrection body ( vv. 51-55), and
3) our victory over condemnation, death and the grave (vv. 56-57).

In discussing the nature of the resurrection, Paul compares it to plant life (vv. 36-38), to fleshly beings (v.39) and to celestial and earthly physical bodies (vv. 40-41) where, although there is much that is similar in the organizational character within each group--plants, fleshly beings, and celestial bodies--there is also difference within each group. In it all, God can take similar physical material and organize it differently to accomplish his purpose.
Likewise with the resurrection body--God will take a perishable, dishonorable, weak (and sinful) body--a "natural" body characterized by sin--and in the resurrection make it an imperishable, glorious, powerful, spiritual, physical body, similar to the present natural body organizationally, but radically different in that it will be imperishable, glorious and powerful, fit to live eternally with God. There is continuity, but there is also change (vv. 42-44).

For there is a natural body and there is a spiritual body. As we have our natural body from the first Adam, so we have our spiritual body from the second Adam. The first man was of the earth and earthly, and the second man was of heaven. As the man of the earth gave us a natural body, so the man of heaven gives us a spiritual body. We must first have natural bodies from the first Adam before we can have spiritual bodies from the second Adam. We must first bear the image of the earthly before we can bear the image of the heavenly. That is the order God has established. We must first have weak, fragile mortal bodies by descent from the first Adam before we can have strong, spiritual and immortal bodies by the enlivening power of the second Adam. We must die before we can live to die no more (vv. 44-49).

So in context, 1 Co 15:44-49 is actually not an application of
1) the natural (physical) law having a spiritual aspect--because it is about the natural (sinful) body becoming a resurrection spiritual (sinless) body,
2 ) (a required) existence of the spiritual because of the natural--because it is about a required existence of the natural to even have (much less require) the spiritual.

 

[Arial]

So in its context, wouldn't the application of "spirit and letter" to Ro 7:4 look something like this:
the "spirit of the law" and the "letter of the law," neither found in Scripture, can be applied to Ro 7:4, which likewise is not about the "spirit of the law" and the "letter of the law" (it being about the power of the Spirit and the powerlessness of the flesh)?

Romans 7 is Paul is discussing the dual position we are in. Though we are in the Spirit according to our position in Christ, we still battle with the flesh, just as when one is under law. When he says the letter of the law he means the written legal law that condemns. But rather than repudiating the law he says it sets forth the standard by which life governed by the Spirit should conform.

I Co 15:46 - "It is not the spiritual which is first, but the physical, and then the spiritual."

That is what I said but what that means is that we as humans, from the earth. experience that first and eventually arrive at immortality, and incorruptible. But the spiritual always exists and is from which the natural comes."In the beginning God---"

In discussing the nature of the resurrection, Paul compares it to plant life (vv. 36-38), to fleshly beings (v.39) and to celestial and earthly physical bodies (vv. 40-41) where, although there is much that is similar in the organizational character within each group--plants, fleshly beings, and celestial bodies--there is also difference within each group. In it all, God can take similar physical material and organize it differently to accomplish his purpose.
Likewise with the resurrection body--God will take a perishable, dishonorable, weak (and sinful) body--a "natural" body characterized by sin--and in the resurrection make it an imperishable, glorious, powerful, spiritual, physical body, similar to the present natural body organizationally, but radically different in that it will be imperishable, glorious and powerful, fit to live eternally with God. There is continuity, but there is also change (vv. 42-44).

For there is a natural body and there is a spiritual body. As we have our natural body from the first Adam, so we have our spiritual body from the second Adam. The first man was of the earth and earthly, and the second man was of heaven. As the man of the earth gave us a natural body, so the man of heaven gives us a spiritual body. We must first have natural bodies from the first Adam before we can have spiritual bodies from the second Adam. We must first bear the image of the earthly before we can bear the image of the heavenly. That is the order God has established. We must first have weak, fragile mortal bodies by descent from the first Adam before we can have strong, spiritual and immortal bodies by the enlivening power of the second Adam. We must die before we can live to die no more (vv. 44-49).

Isn't it amazing and wonderful?!

So in context, 1 Co 15:44-49 is actually not an application of
1) the natural (physical) law having a spiritual aspect--because it is about the natural (sinful) body becoming a resurrection spiritual (sinless) body,
2 ) (a required) existence of the spiritual because of the natural--because it is about a required existence of the natural to even have (much less require) the spiritual.

I know that is what it is specifically talking about. I was merely using it as an example of there being a spiritual aspect to everything as everything comes from what is spirit. Even the tabernacle was a copy of what was in heaven. There is a spiritual meaning, which is the real meaning, of every letter, number, place, time---everything as it is used in the Bible simply because there is not a single dot or tittle about God or what He does that is not pregnant with meaning and purpose.

 

[makesends]

I don't believe OT saints were regenerated, let alone 'kept by their own integrity subsequent to the Spirit's initial work's, although I do believe they were totally depraved and unconditionally elected.

Our argument against the arminianistic view is that unregenerated man is unable to have saving faith, by which faith alone we are saved. Are you saying that in the Old Testament times salvation operated off of a different Gospel?

 

[prism]

Our argument against the arminianistic view is that unregenerated man is unable to have saving faith, by which faith alone we are saved. Are you saying that in the Old Testament times salvation operated off of a different Gospel?

Nope, same Gospel promises to be received by faith. Same basis of election, just a different operation of God's Spirit.
I think I see where you are coming from though, please continue and we'll see where this goes.
ould you also explain what you meant by, "kept by their own integrity subsequent to the initial work of the Holy Spirit"? Was that a hypothetical or ?

 

[Eleanor]

Romans 7 is Paul is discussing the dual position we are in.

That would be the dual position he was in before Christ, in the second part (vv. 9-25) about in his mind being a slave to God's law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin, from which he is rescued through Christ and to which he is no longer a slave.

But the first part (vv. 1-8) is about imparted (not imputed) righteousness; i.e., sanctification, wherein we are free from the law's condemnation and serve in the New Covenant way of the Spirit, and not in the Old Covenant way of the written code (Ro 7:6), the difference being the new way in the Holy Spirit is life, and the old way of the written code is death. It's about baptism where we died to the law's condemnation (Ro 7:4),

Though we are in the Spirit according to our position in Christ, we still battle with the flesh, just as when one is under law. When he says the letter of the law

But don't you see, he never says "the letter of the law" nor the "spirit of the law."

In 2 Co 3:6 he says "the letter" which is the written code, and "the Spirit" who is the holy author of that written code.
Under the Old Covenant, "the letter" (written code) kills because of disobedience.
Under the New Covenant, "the Spirit" gives life, and in fulfillment of the promise of the New Covenant writes that same law inwardly "on tablets of human hearts" (2 Co 3:3). The Holy Spirit of the New Covenant provides the believer with love for God's law, which previously he had hated, and with power to keep it, which previously he did not have.
It's about the ministry of the New Covenant which brings life in contrast to the ministry of the Old Covenant which brought death (2 Co 3:7), and not about the external, literal sense of Scripture being deadly or unprofitable, while the inner, spiritual sense is life giving.

And in Ro 7:14, it's about being sold as a slave to sin apart from Christ, not about the "law is spiritual" being synonymous with "the spirit of the law,"

he means the written legal law that condemns. But rather than repudiating the law he says it sets forth the standard by which life governed by the Spirit should conform.

That is what I said but what that means is that we as humans, from the earth. experience that first and eventually arrive at immortality, and incorruptible. But the spiritual always exists and is from which the natural comes."In the beginning God---"

However, in terms of our physical bodies, we must first have natural bodies from the first Adam before we can have spiritual bodies from the second Adam. That is the order God has established for our bodies.

Isn't it amazing and wonderful?

Indeed!

 

[makesends]

David did ask that God not take His Holy Spirit from him (Psalm 51:11).

One who is a Christian would not have to pray such a prayer.

Unless he was afraid that God would take his Holy Spirit from him. I doubt there are less people nowadays that don't know the Holy Spirit permanently indwells the believer. David didn't have the disciples to teach him.

 

[makesends]

Nope, same Gospel promises to be received by faith. Same basis of election, just a different operation of God's Spirit.
I think I see where you are coming from though, please continue and we'll see where this goes.
ould you also explain what you meant by, "kept by their own integrity subsequent to the initial work of the Holy Spirit"? Was that a hypothetical or ?

Yes, hypothetical. From the sound of it, and from how the self-determinist thinks, God does a work —is even said to "being a work"— but it is the responsibility of the human to see it through (or words to that effect).

But I say we not only lack the ability, but lack the integrity to know to what we have committed, and to understand even what is going on, nor are we privy to God's ways to such an extent to actually add to his efforts. It would be more accurate to say that we are along for the ride, than to say that God can't do what he planned without our help. It is God who will complete what he has begun.

 

[makesends]

When Corenlius and the other Gentiles with him were filled with the Holy Spirit they were indwelt with the Holy Spirit. This filling was related to their salvation.

Simultaneous is not therefore causal.

 

[Arial]

In 2 Co 3:6 he says "the letter" which is the written code, and "the Spirit" who is the holy author of that written code.

I do not believe Paul is talking about the authorship of the code. God gave the law directly to Moses. The letter Paul refers to is the written code----the letters in it. God says you shall not commit adultery. The written letter. It means literally unfaithfulness to a spouse. But it applies to much more than that. It also applies to unfaithfulness to covenant relationships period---such as worshiping other Gods. What is the spiritual element there? We, as image bearers of God are to be faithful, just as He is faithful. God's faithfulness is what is behind the written code on faithfulness.

 

[makesends]

Regeneration...interesting question.

John 3 speaks of being "born again"....and from what I understand born again means regeneration while Eph 2 uses "made alive".

In John 3:5 ...5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit.

When applied against the question..."Was the Spirit of God Indwelling the Redeemed before Pentecost?" (I feel the answer is "no" except on special occasions for prophets and such)....when did regeneration occur for the OT saints?

In the parable of Lazarus and the rich man we see Lazarus in the bosom of Abraham....and not heaven. Was Lazarus and the OT saints regenerated then or did they have to wait for the resurrection or day of Pentecost?

More importantly to me than the terminology of 'indwell' vs 'bring to salvation' vs 'fill' is the matter of the HOW of regeneration, if not by the fact of the continuing work of the Spirit of God within. To my thinking, one is not made alive from the death of his flesh, without that life being endemic to the Spirit of God, rather than ontologically become the way of the believer.

We ARE become new creatures, we are changed within, though not yet glorified, but that is ALL of it the work of God, and not of man.

I'll try to be a little more specific: The faith by which we are saved, is not ours by our mental or emotional prowess. It is ours because it is generated by the Spirit of God within us. Further, we are not safe in the 'OSAS' manner, where once we have crossed a certain threshold we are unable to go back, but rather, we are safe because we are KEPT by the work of God. It is only a sure thing because God will complete what he has begun. Not because we have completed a recipe.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

Was the Spirit of God Indwelling the Redeemed before Pentecost?​

Yes.

"Pentecost" WAS NOT the Holy Sprit "INDWELLING at all. Jesus word was "ENDUED" (externally clothed) at Pentecost.

The INDWELLING happened at John 20:22 when Jesus ministered the Spirit to the disciples, the efeect of which was Luke 24:45.

Before John 20:22, the Holy spirit was "With" people, but never IN them. John 14:17.

 

[makesends]

I would say (and this is off the cuff), that it is possible that Pentecost indicated in a change/addition to the Holy Spirit's modus operandi. At Pentecost, He entered believers to empower them to action through gifts and provision. (Hard to word that last one. Jesus said not to worry what we will say when we face death, for the Holy Spirit will provide testimony through us. So, some differences between the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and His actions that bring us to salvaiton. So while He may be seen as having always worked in the life of believers, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit as ambassadors of Christ, and for the enrichment and edification of the church, came at Pentecost. This may be completely wrong, which is why I said it is off the cuff. I just got home from work (I am a night owl shift worker) and going to sleep soon, so I wanted to at least give voice to thoughts on the subject, in case this stirs up some discussion.

Seems to me you conflate the filling with the indwelling. Maybe those aren't the right words here, but they do the job well enough for me.

You say that at Pentecost he entered to empower them to action. THAT is a separate issue, (though certainly related), from salvation or even from being brought to salvation. That is not indwelling, but filling for a purpose, temporary, though we are urged to 'be being filled'.

In the Old Testament, the Spirit of God did the same thing —yes, certainly in different ways, but— for specific purposes. Those were not related to the salvation of the believers of the OT, but they are saved the same way in the OT as in the NT —by God's mercy, through regeneration, by faith, the gift of God.

 

[makesends]

I don't believe OT saints were regenerated, let alone 'kept by their own integrity subsequent to the Spirit's initial work's, although I do believe they were totally depraved and unconditionally elected.

Then how were they saved? And how were they transformed?

 

[makesends]

Happy Hunting!

About revamping your thinking; one thing that made a difference for me, was realizing much of what Jesus said in the Four Gospels applied to the Old Testament. That's why John 3 is about Old Covenant Regeneration. Jesus told Nicodemus, 'You are the Teacher of Israel and you don't know this?' The implication is that Nicodemus should have been teaching his Israel, which was under the Old Covenant, that they MUST be Born Again...

While in the deer stand, think about how some of the Words in Red were meant for Nicodemus; not to You and Paul. Instances such as our seeming to Lose our Salvation; that's not New Covenant. Perhaps Luke 12:46 for instance?

The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the unbelievers.

How is that going to revamp my thinking. Sounds like you agree with me.

But in case you meant otherwise, by, "the Words in Red were meant for Nicodemus; not to You and Paul", that the New Testament gospel is indeed different, then yeah, I disagree with you. —It is the same gospel, which is not just who saves, but HOW: by grace through faith, and that, not of ourselves.

 

[fastfredy0]

What is the outpouring of the Holy Spirit?​

https://www.gotquestions.org/outpouring-of-the-Holy-Spirit.html
Apparently Gotquestion.org has some ideas on the Holy Spirit and INDWELLING and FILLING.

I believe God's work of salvific faith in individuals and their subsequent sanctification is monergistic in both the O.T. and N.T.
I define INDWELLING as God working in believers (sanctification) in both the O.T. and N.T. Maybe the definition of INDWELLING escapes me.

 

[makesends]

Do you think David was in fear of his salvation?

He didn't say, "Restore unto me my salvation", but, "Restore unto me the joy of my salvation".

There comes a point where what is foremost on one's mind is no longer the question of the security of your eternal end, but of fellowship with God. One's point of view becomes that life is about God, and not about self. The struggle of compliance with the law is about self, but the pursuit of obedience is about God.

 

[makesends]

Yes.

But.....

....indwelling comes in many forms throughout scripture and regeneration should not be conflated with the other forms of indwelling.

Thank you. Yes, agreed. "Indwelling" is only a good way to put what happens when the Spirit of God takes up residence in the believer, and is the means of regeneration, and, consequently the means of salvific faith, repentance, etc.