John 20:22 and Acts 2 seems to be two separate events where the believers receive the Holy Spirit. Some say that John 20:22 represents the giving of the Indwelling Spirit and Acts 2 represents the giving Outpouring of the Spirit for empowerment in God's work.Any comments?
Hmmm I've always understood Jesus to be speaking prophetic there. This should be an interesting study. I was looking in Thayer's Lexicon and i think its interesting that this was in there for the word recieve: to associate with one's self as companion, attendant.That brings more to "recieving the Holy Spirit" than tougues or just an empowerment. Not saying that that is what you thought it was, but it just sparked up another light bulb in the ol' head for me.
John 20:21 So Jesus said to them again, “Peace to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you.” 22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. Also:Luke 24:44 Then He said to them, “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.” 45 And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures. Also:John 6:63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.Also:Job 32:8 \tBut there is a spirit in man,\tAnd the breath of the Almighty gives him understanding. Finally1Cor. 2:9 But as it is written:\t“Eye has not seen, nor ear heard,\tNor have entered into the heart of man\tThe things which God has prepared for those who love Him.”10 But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. 11 For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God. 1Cor. 2:13 These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 But he who is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is rightly judged by no one. 16 For “who has known the mind of the LORD that he may instruct Him?” But we have the mind of Christ. The carnal man cannot understand the things of God. It is only through the breath of God, the Holy Spirit, that man can understand the things of God. So these are two seperate events. The event in John 20 gives the Holy Spirit to the disciples so that they may understand the things that Christ is teaching them. Jesus gives the Holy Spirit then so that when the out pouring of the Spirit comes at Pentecost, His disciples will understand the moment. Remember, they shut themselves in an upper room studying Scripture and praying.In ChristJeff
So these are two seperate events. The event in John 20 gives the Holy Spirit to the disciples so that they may understand the things that Christ is teaching them. Jesus gives the Holy Spirit then so that when the out pouring of the Spirit comes at Pentecost, His disciples will understand the moment. Remember, they shut themselves in an upper room studying Scripture and praying.Jeff, I don't get to say this too often ;-) but I think you are right!
Hmmm I've always understood Jesus to be speaking prophetic there. This should be an interesting study. I was looking in Thayer's Lexicon and i think its interesting that this was in there for the word recieve: to associate with one's self as companion, attendant.PreachThe word for 'receive' is just 'lambano' which implies 'to receive actively'. What is more interesting, and I think undermines your 'prophetic' position, is that the verb is in the Aorist Imperative. The subtle difference is that an ordinary Present Imperative could mean 'Begin to receive' but the Aorist Imperative implies 'Receive Now!'
Oh ok... I'm deffinatly not schooled in greek grammer... so thank you for correcting me.
As my initial post implied, I do agree that these are two separate events. However, I would like to know how the two are different in nature.1. One view takes the cue from the word "breathe" which is the same word used in the Genesis account when God created man out of dust. From this, they infer this to be the regeneration of the new creation by the indwelling Spirit. In this case, the two events are different aspects of Christian life: inward regeneration and outward empowerment.2. The other view mentioned here is that this is a unique breathing on the particular disciples so that they may be prepared and enabled to understand the coming Pentecost event. In this case, the former event (John 20) is an unique event in preparation for the latter (Acts 2), thus John 20:22 is not applicable to subsequent Christians.(Question: what happened to Thomas who was absent? He did not receive the breathing!)A follow-on question would be how our interpretation of v. 22 relates to v. 23 "If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven." Why is the disciples' authority to forgive sins mentioned immediately after their reception of the Spirit?
It is true that Thomas was not present and we have no record of him receiving this 'breathing'. However there is an historical axiom which says 'absence of evidence is not evidence of absence'. God is recording the event; the process may have been different for Thomas as below?And the LORD came down in a cloud, and spake unto him, and took of the spirit that was upon him, and gave it unto the seventy elders: and it came to pass, that, when the spirit rested upon them, they prophesied, and did not cease. But there remained two of the men in the camp, the name of the one was Eldad, and the name of the other Medad: and the spirit rested upon them; and they were of them that were written, but went not out unto the tabernacle: and they prophesied in the camp. (Num 11:25-26 KJV)
Agent001 writes:A follow-on question would be how our interpretation of v. 22 relates to v. 23 "If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven." Why is the disciples' authority to forgive sins mentioned immediately after their reception of the Spirit?This is an old question and one I have never answered to my own satisfaction. I have thought along the lines of an interim provision for the time when technically the Old Covenant had ended but the New had not been fully inaugurated. There is a parallel passage in Exodus 24 which I see as pointing in so many ways to Pentecost. Moses the mediator of the covenant vanishes into cloud, having gone up to God; think ascension? But there is a line which shows Moses making an interim provision to operate during his absence;And Moses rose up, and his minister Joshua: and Moses went up into the mount of God. And he said unto the elders, Tarry ye here for us, until we come again unto you: and, behold, Aaron and Hur are with you: if any man have any matters to do, let him come unto them. And Moses went up into the mount, and a cloud covered the mount. (Exo 24:13-15 KJV) The fact of Pentecost being regarded as the anniversary of this exact moment may also be significant.One Sherlock Holmes method would be to eliminate all other suspects and see what we have left. ie. can we categorically eliminate 'priestly absolution'?
How does your view relate v. 22 and v.23? (See last paragraph of previous post)Edit: Never mind now, just saw your post.
This discussion is locked.
