OT/NT Holy Spirit

Hi Sonya,

I suggest reading through Proverbs, Chapter One, to get a sense of Who the Holy Spirit was to the ancients.

"Wisdom crieth without; she uttereth her voice in the streets: She crieth in the chief place of concourse, in the openings of the gates: in the city she uttereth her words, saying, How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge? Turn you at my reproof: behold, [i]I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you.[/i]" (PRO 1:20-23)

"Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me." (PSA 51:11)

"But they rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit: therefore he was turned to be their enemy, and he fought against them. Then he remembered the days of old, Moses, and his people, saying, Where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of his flock? where is he that put his holy Spirit within him?" (ISA 63:10)

john1140 wrote:
Then Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the midst of his brothers; and the Spirit of the LORD came mightily upon David from that day forward. And Samuel arose and went to Ramah. 1 Samuel 16:13
**********************************************************
I have been taught that in the OT there was no indwelling of the Holy Spirit, but that He came upon people to empower them to do God's work and then left. In the verse above, the HS had left Saul and came upon David, but it does not imply that God's Spirit ever left David. Is this type of the Spirit's "coming upon" similar to or a foreshadowing of the power Stephen displayed (when addressing the Council), Paul, and when we are given boldness to proclaim and defend the gospel?

Thanks for any insight.
Sonya

I've also heard this teaching, but have come to believe that it isn't true, although I can understand the reasoning behind it.

Maybe it's a result of making an artificially large separation between the Old and New covenants, while in fact the New is more of a "new chapter" of the Old, rather than a totally new "book", as some would claim. The New is based upon the Old, and derived from it - neither is complete without the other.

They [i][u]are[/u][/i] different of course; especially because Jesus is the ultimate Revelation of God (Hebrews 1:1 following) and the Mediator of the New Covenant. He is also the Fulfilment of the OT ritual law, so that there is no more need of the OT priestly ordinances and sacrifices.

However, the God who inspired the New also inspired the Old , and His salvation was for them as well as for us.

Jesus is spoken of as the "lamb slain from the foundation of the world". Jesus was born and lived on earth as a man only during a few years of historical time, but the salvation He gained for us is eternal in nature and has eternal effects - past, present and future.

There is no doubt therefore that the OT believers were "saved" just as we are, and I don't see how anyone can be unless he has the Spirit dwelling within him...

But it is true that the working of the Spirit in individuals was fuller afterwards than it was before Pentecost. Especially in the outpouring of spiritual gifts and in closeness to God, which was apparently rare before, mostly restricted to designated prophets, and a few others such as king David.

As Peter said on that day (Acts 2):
[color=990000]16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: 18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: [/color]

Jeremiah spoke about this in a different way - that everyone would be able to have the sort of relationship with God that only a few experienced in his day…
[color=990000]31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. [/color]

But the conclusive scripture to me is in 1Peter 1:10 f. Even though he’s speaking of the greater thing that God has done in the New Covenant, he still says that the Spirit was [i][u]in[/u][/i] the prophets who foretold His coming.

[color=990000]10 …Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:
11 Searching what, or what manner of time [i][u]the Spirit of Christ which was [b]in[/b] them[/u][/i] did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.
12 Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into. [/color]

Thank you for this question, it was interesting to look at a subject that I hadn’t really thought too much about before.

Blessings

Jeannette

While I was composing my reply, Rookie got in with the Peter reference before me!

Great minds think alike, as they say... :-P

letsgetbusy wrote:
john

I posted on this before under "OT Indwelling". I did some research to find that many of the giants of the faith believed in OT indwelling. I am of the opinion that OT saints were saved the same way and received the baptism of the Holy Ghost the same as us, they just used different terms. Pentecost was different because it was the first outpouring that was directed to all nations, not just the Jews.

I welcome differing opinions.

Just joking.

It's a difficult thing to "prove" either way. At least one kind of Christian grouping (among the more orthodox of the non-mainline churches) teaches that none of the OT saints were actually born again. As said above, I can see where they are coming from. I used to believe it merely out of respect for the men of God who taught it, but that's not a good reason for believing something - even the most Godly teachers can make mistakes.

This is the sort of thing that is difficult to "prove" Scripturally, one way or the other, so probably should be left to God.

One thing is certain, we shall meet OT men and women in heaven (assuming we ourselves "make it") ;-).

The other thing that is certain is that there is an eternal dimension to the New Birth. The salvation of mankind didn't [i]begin[/i] at the Crucifixion or at Pentecost, although the battle for our souls was won at Calvary, and the Spirit was poured out in a new way - to all who believed - at Pentecost.

The key question to me is: "Do [i]we[/i] who live the other side of Pentecost, in the fulfillment of the New Covenant that Jeremiah foresaw, have the depth of relationship with God that Abraham , Moses, Samuel, Jeremiah, and many others had?"

And if not, why not?

I find that thought extremely challenging.

Abraham was called the friend of God, Moses habitually spoke with Him face to face, Samuel seemed quite upset with the Lord for not telling him about the death of the Shunnammite woman's son - such was the closeness of their relationship.

And so on...

Yet there are difficulties with this view too. Why did Jesus say that the least in the Kingdom of heaven was greater than John the Baptist - who He also said was the greatest [i][u]born of woman[/u][/i]? Surely this must refer to what the Apostle John later wrote, that those who received Him were [i][u]born of God[/u][/i].

I find this quite perplexing, because it would be easy enough to make a case either way, as has been done on this and the other thread on this subject.

Probably it's another of the "paradoxes of God", where He deliberately doesn't spell it out for us very clearly.

Maybe its also none of our business... as Jesus said in effect to Peter, "What is that to thee, follow thou me!"

in Him

Jeannette