As I noted in my previous post, contemporary Pentecostal systematic theologians are discussing Spirit baptism in ways that include, but go beyond, traditional Pentecostal emphases.

Amos Yong, a member of the Assemblies of God (USA), is arguably the most prolific Pentecostal theologian today. While he has not written a book solely devoted to Spirit baptism, he has discussed the topic in a number of places.

Full Experience of Salvation

In The Spirit Poured Out on All Flesh (2005), Amos Yong describes Spirit baptism as “a New Testament metaphor for the full salvific work of God” (SPO, 119). Given that Yong understands Spirit baptism in this expansive way, he asserts that “the one baptism in the Holy Spirit … demands a variety of experiences” (SPO, 119). This includes one’s experience of the Spirit in conversion, sanctification, and empowerment, along with the “experience of the full baptism of the eschatological Spirit resulting in union with the triune God” (SPO, 106).

In other words, in this book Yong presents Spirit baptism as encompassing the I “was saved,” I “am being saved,” and I “will be saved” aspects of the Holy Spirit’s work in salvation.

Baptism of Love

In his book Spirit of Love (2012), Amos Yong emphasizes that “the baptism of the Spirit is also the baptism of holy love.” And he draws out the implications of this “for the life of holiness and for pentecostal witness” (SL, 60).

Yong finds the connection between Spirit baptism and divine love in the testimonies of early North American Classical Pentecostals. In addition, he sees the connection in Jesus’ experience of baptism. On this occasion, Jesus received the Spirit as the Father affirmed his love for the Son (SL, 100).

Among other passages of Scripture, Yong also appeals to 1 John 3. This passage explains that the love of God dwells in believers (verses 10, 14, 17) through “the Spirit he gave us” (verse 24).

This leads Yong to speak of a “missiology of love” (155) where Spirit-filled believers witness not only with their minds, but also with their hearts and hands—or, not only through what they say, but also through loving actions.

Expansive Doctrine of Spirit Baptism

Amos Yong further develops his theology of Spirit Baptism throughout his Renewing Christian Theology (2014). Like in his former books, he presents Spirit baptism as the Spirit’s work in saving, sanctifying, and empowering believers for witness (Renewing, 93, 100).

In this book, Yong bases his conclusion primarily on his proposal that “the life of Christ is paradigmatic for what Spirit-filled and Spirit-empowered ministry ought to be” (Renewing, 57, cf. 93). And, in Luke’s gospel, Jesus’ ministry focuses on “the renewal and restoration of Israel” (Renewing, 95).

According to Yong, then, Spirit baptism includes one’s reception of the Spirit at conversion. But it “also involves a subsequent work of grace available to all…, involving the full scope of the saving work of God so that each encounter with God—each infilling of the Spirit—deepens the Christian life and intensifies its witness” (Renewing, 98). This includes even one’s encounter with the Spirit through water baptism and the Lord’s Supper (Renewing, 159).

Tongues and Spirit Baptism

For Yong tongues remains the normative sign of Spirit baptism (like most Pentecostal scholars, he prefers “sign” over “evidence”). He expresses some concerns regarding the initial evidence doctrine. Nevertheless, he suggests that the doctrine does well in that it encourages the “expectation that whenever the Spirit descends, the gift of divinely inspired speech should be expected to manifest itself” (Renewing, 97).

Summarizing his position, Yong writes, “The point is that those filled with the Spirit get to speak in tongues, not necessarily have to speak in tongues right there and then. Understood in this sense, tongues-speaking is normative for Christian spirituality in general in terms of signifying the Spirit’s presence and activity” (Renewing, 97).

Overall

Yong’s theology of Spirit baptism shares many features of Frank Macchia’s expansive theology of Spirit baptism. And both of these Pentecostal theologians represent a shift in how Pentecostal systematic theologians are thinking about Spirit baptism.

“ There’s been a shift in how Pentecostal systematic theologians are thinking about Spirit baptism.

You might also be interested in these posts:

• Spirit Baptism in Current Pentecostal Theology: Part 1 – Frank Macchia
• “Why do PENTECOSTALS care so much about SPIRIT BAPTISM?”
• 3 Ways People Misunderstand Tongues as “Initial Evidence” of Spirit Baptism

Andrew K. Gabriel, Ph.D., is the author of Touched by God: Experiencing the Holy Spirit (forthcoming) as well as three academic books, including The Lord is the Spirit. He is a theology professor at Horizon College and Seminary and serves on the Theological Study Commission for the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. You can follow him on Facebook or on Twitter.

The post Spirit Baptism in Current Pentecostal Theology: Part 2 – Amos Yong appeared first on Andrew K. Gabriel.

Contemporary Pentecostal systematic theologians are discussing Spirit baptism in a way that includes, but goes beyond, traditional Pentecostal emphases. Historically most Pentecostals have emphasized that any believer can be baptized in the Spirit, that this experience empowers believers for witness (Acts 1:8), and that the experience is accompanied by speaking in tongues.

The Growth of Pentecostal Scholarship

Many people would say that Pentecostal scholarship did not really come into its own until after 1970, when James Dunn published his critique of Pentecostal theology. Dunn argued that Spirit baptism occurs at conversion. In other words, whenever someone becomes a believer, they receive the Spirit as a Spirit baptism (consider 1 Corinthians 12:13).

Pentecostal biblical scholars, like Roger Stronstad and Robert Menzies, responded to Dunn by focusing on the books of Luke and Acts (both written by Luke). They first argued that even though Luke primarily presents historical narrative, Luke is still a theologian, not just Paul. They continued by arguing that Luke presents Spirit baptism as a post-conversion experience where the Spirit empowers believers for witness.

Pentecostal Systematic Theology Today

As time has passed Pentecostal scholarship has matured as scholars have engaged many topics and disciplines. You can see this in academic book series like Pentecostal Manifestos and the more established Journal for Pentecostal Theology Supplement Series.

At the same time, Pentecostal scholars have continued to think about Spirit baptism. Today, every Pentecostal systematic theologian publishing on the issue is expressing an expansive understanding of Spirit baptism, which includes, but is not limited to, the common classical Pentecostal emphasis on a post-conversion experience of Spirit baptism as expressed by Luke.

“ Every Pentecostal systematic theologian publishing on the issue is expressing an expansive understanding of Spirit baptism.

Frank Macchia on Spirit Baptism

Frank Macchia, an Assemblies of God theologian, is one of the most influential Pentecostal systematic theologians on this issue. In his book Baptized in the Spirit: A Global Pentecostal Theology he presents Spirit baptism not as a one-time experience (or even a repeatable experience), but rather as a process identified with the coming of the kingdom of God.

That is, according to Macchia the process of Spirit Baptism began at Pentecost, continues still, and will continue until the full consummation of the kingdom of God. For the individual believer, this means that Spirit baptism encompasses one’s reception of the Spirit at conversion, any post-conversion sanctifying or empowering experience of the Spirit, and even one’s being raised by the Spirit at the return of Christ.

Macchia believes he is justified to integrate the diverse biblical voices (e.g., Luke and Paul) that utilize the metaphor of Spirit baptism on account of the metaphor’s connection to the expansive concept of the kingdom of God. For example, in Acts 1:3 Jesus appeared to the apostles and “spoke about the kingdom of God.” As he did this, Jesus told them, “in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit” (verse 5). (Consider also Matthew 3:2, 11.)

Tongues?

If Spirit Baptism is, as Macchia proposes, a lengthy process of the coming of the kingdom of God, then what link is there between Spirit baptism and speaking in tongues? Macchia describes tongues as the “characteristic sign of Spirit baptism…because they symbolize God’s people giving themselves abundantly in a way that transcends limitations and creaturely expectations” (p. 281). In this sense, tongues serves as the decisive sign that confirms the experience of being baptized in the Holy Spirit.

Subsequence?

Macchia emphasizes that one cannot divide and fragment the work of the Spirit as though the Holy Spirit only does one thing at a time. This means that Pentecostals cannot claim that non-Pentecostals (in as much as they too have experienced the Holy Spirit) have not been empowered by the Holy Spirit to any extent, as though this only occurs when one speaks in tongues. At the same time, Macchia affirms that Pentecostals are “justified in calling Christians to a Spirit baptism [subsequent to conversion] as a fresh experience of power for witness with charismatic signs following” (p. 60).

Empowerment

Macchia believes Spirit baptism is about more than just receiving power for witness if that only means inspired speech. Instead, the Spirit’s empowerment includes sanctification, as the Spirit enables believers to witness through sanctified lives.

You might also be interested in these posts:

• Spirit Baptism in Current Pentecostal Theology: Part 2 – Amos Yong
• “Why do PENTECOSTALS care so much about SPIRIT BAPTISM?”
• 3 Ways People Misunderstand Tongues as “Initial Evidence” of Spirit Baptism

Andrew K. Gabriel, Ph.D., is the author of Touched by God: Experiencing the Holy Spirit (forthcoming) as well as three academic books, including The Lord is the Spirit. He is a theology professor at Horizon College and Seminary and serves on the Theological Study Commission for the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. You can follow him on Facebook or on Twitter.

The post Spirit Baptism in Current Pentecostal Theology: Part 1 – Frank Macchia appeared first on Andrew K. Gabriel.

I cringed as I sat there listening to the preacher. He based his sermon on John 14:17: “…the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you.”

The preacher declared, “The Spirit is a ‘him’, and ‘he’ lives in you.” And on account of this he boldly proclaimed to the congregation, “The Holy Spirit is a ‘he,’ not an ‘it.’ Therefore the Holy Spirit is personal.”

The preacher was both right and wrong.

Not “He”

The Spirit is not “he.” Looking at your English Bible, you might think so. But you would be mistaken.

In fact, in the Old Testament, “Spirit” (Hebrew=ruach) is a feminine noun. As a result, historically the Syrian Christian tradition spoke of the Holy Spirit as “she.” And they were biblically justified in doing so.

When we come to the New Testament, though, “Spirit”  (Greek=pneuma) is a neuter noun. And in Greek the Bible explicitly refers to the Spirit as “it” (John 14:17). Therefore, in some places the King James Version of the English Bible refers to the Spirit as “it” (for example, Romans 8:16).

Of course, in language grammatical gender doesn’t determine physical gender or sex. So, for example, the word “house” in Greek (oikos) is masculine, but a house is no more male than female. Similarly, the word “church” (ecclesia) is feminine in Greek, even though the church includes both males and females.

How did we end up with “he”?

In the fourth century a monk by the name of Jerome produced the Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible. This became the translation of choice in the Western Roman empire. And in Latin, the word for “Spirit” (spiritus) is a masculine noun. This is one of the big reasons that the Western Church (which includes the Roman Catholic and Protestant traditions) ended up speaking of the Spirit as “he.”

“ Bible translations can affect theology.

In addition, in a few places the Bible refers to the Spirit as “he,” namely when Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete.” This word is a masculine Greek noun (John 15:26). But, again, grammatical gender doesn’t really refer to sex.

What Really Matters

The Holy Spirit is not a he, she, it. The Spirit does not have a physical body, and therefore has no sex.

“ The Spirit is not a he, she, it. The Spirit does not have a physical body.

Biblically, we are justified to speak of the Spirit as it, he, or she. Nevertheless, it is a problem if we only think of the Spirit as a “he.” Some theologians have even suggested that to think of God only as a “he” is a form of idolatry (creating a human image of God).

While many English speakers aren’t comfortable with referring to the Spirit as “she,” the Bible does describe the Spirit as giving “birth” to us (John 3:5-6). And that’s not something that a “he” can do.

At the end of the day, what matters most is that we recognize that the Holy Spirit is indeed personal. The Spirit “teaches” us (John 14:26) and “intercedes” for us (Romans 8:26). And you can “grieve” the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 4:30). So the Spirit is not just a divine force or power, but personal. And you can have a relationship with the Holy Spirit.

On account of this theological conclusion, historically most theologians have preferred not to speak of the Spirit as “it” since that would seem to imply that the Spirit is impersonal. And theologically, that implication would be incorrect.

(In case you are wondering, in this post I answered two questions: “Why do we refer to the Spirit as ‘he’?” and “How can we show others that he’s personal and not just God’s active force in the world?”)

You might also be interested in my blog series called “The Holy Spirit in Life” (#HSLife).

The post The Holy Spirit is not a “He” appeared first on Andrew K. Gabriel.

I’m not talking about “fire tunnels,” where people walk in between two lines of people who place their hands on them and pray for them.

Instead, I’m talking about what John the Baptist refers to. He says that Jesus “will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Matthew 3:11 and Luke 3:16).

What does it mean to be baptized with fire?

(Unlikely) Option 1: Fire = the Spirit

One might wish that being baptized with fire means the same as being baptized with the Spirit.

This might make sense since in the Old Testament fire sometimes was a symbol of God’s favorable presence (consider Moses at the burning bush, Exodus 3:2). Also, on the day of Pentecost, when people were baptized in the Spirit, “tongues of fire” rested on each of them (Acts 2:3).

(Unlikely) Option 2: Fire = Purification

In the Old Testament, fire sometimes symbolized God’s purification, much like fire is used to refine metals. For example, in Zechariah 13:8-9 the Lord said, “This third I will bring into the fire; I will refine them like silver and test them like gold. … I will say, ‘They are my people,’ and they will say, ‘The LORD is our God.’”

If this is what John the Baptist means, then being baptized with fire would refer to an event of being made more holy, like increasing in the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5).

(More Likely) Option 3: Fire = Judgment

In the Old Testament, fire is sometimes used to refer to God’s judgment of Israel’s enemies. For example, Isaiah writes that “your many enemies will become . . . like blown chaff. …The LORD Almighty will come with . . . flames of a devouring fire (29:5-6).

Similarly, in the New Testament in the Gospel of Matthew, John the Baptist warns the Pharisees and Sadducees about “the coming wrath” (3:7). He adds that “every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire” (verse 10).

In the very next verse, John states that Jesus will baptize “with fire” (verse 11). And he immediately continues by adding that Jesus will burn “up the chaff with unquenchable fire” (verse 12).

In this passage fire is only presented in a negative light.

The same thing is true for Luke 3:9-17, the only other place in the Bible that speaks of being baptized “with fire” (3:16).

If this doesn’t convince you, let me give you…

Three more reasons that being baptized with fire means receiving judgement:

1) Jesus never told the disciples they would be baptized in fire on the day of Pentecost. Rather, he only said, “in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:5).

2) Even though they both quote John the Baptist as saying that Jesus “will baptize you with the Holy Spirit” (Mark 1:8, John 1:33), the gospels of Mark and John don’t mention being baptized with fire, and, likewise, they don’t mention anything about God’s judgment (unlike Luke and Matthew).

3) Even though Luke writes about being baptized with fire in his gospel, Luke never mentions it in the book of Acts (which he also wrote), and he also never says that anyone received the “fire” of the Spirit.

Baptism in the Spirit is great.

But, if someone asks you if you want to be baptized with fire, I suggest you run away from them while politely yelling, “No, thank you!”

In the meantime, please be careful that you “Do not put out the Spirit’s fire” (1 Thessalonians 5:19).  

You might also be interested in these posts:

• Why do PENTECOSTALS care so much about SPIRIT BAPTISM?
• Spirit Baptism in Current Pentecostal Theology: Part 2 – Amos Yong
• PAOC Clergy on Tongues and Spirit Baptism: Changing Views

Andrew K. Gabriel, Ph.D., is the author of Touched by God: Experiencing the Holy Spirit (forthcoming) as well as three academic books, including The Lord is the Spirit. He is a theology professor at Horizon College and Seminary and serves on the Theological Study Commission for the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. You can follow him on Facebook or on Twitter.

The post What it Really Means to be BAPTIZED IN FIRE appeared first on Andrew K. Gabriel.

Many Christians have the incorrect (dare I use the H word?) idea that the Holy Spirit only works in Christians.

Even worse, some Pentecostals would say you don’t “have the Spirit” unless you have spoken in tongues. (On their better days, Pentecostals will affirm that all believers have the Spirit dwelling in them [Romans 8:9] and that all believers can be baptized in the Spirit.)

The fact of the matter is, though, the Spirit is even in non-Christians.

1. The Spirit Gives Life

Obviously, since the Spirit is divine, the Spirit is omnipresent. As the apostle Paul wrote, God is “over all, and through all and in all” (Ephesians 4:6), and God “fills everything in every way” (Ephesians 1:23).

The Spirit is present throughout all of creation giving life and breath to every human being. The Bible says that “every creature … has the breath/ruach/Spirit of life in it” (Genesis 6:17) and that God “gives breath/ruach/Spirit…and life” to all people (Isaiah 42:5).

On account of this, if God “withdrew his ruach/Spirit and breath, all people would perish together and would return to the dust” (Job 34:14-15; also Psalm 104:29-30).

As Wilf Hildebrandt observes (another Pentecostal Prof), the Bible presents “the Spirit of God as the animating principle of life …When the Spirit is removed from a human being the body returns to its lifeless, inanimate state.”[1]

2. The Spirit Leads and Guides All People

Of course, the Spirit draws unbelievers to Christ, but the Spirit does much more than this.

This thought might make you feel uncomfortable, but the Church has always had a doctrine of common grace, which affirms just this. The problem (for some) is that when we move from a generic term like “grace” and put the name “Holy Spirit” on it, it becomes more real.

How do we know where and how the Spirit is at work among non-Christians? The difficulty of answering this question might seem to suggest that the Spirit isn’t at work in unbelievers.

But the question would be just as difficult to answer if we were talking about Christians.

Wherever the character of Christ is present, there the Spirit is at work. Even more broadly, wherever we see actions that are consistent with the ways that the Spirit works throughout the Scripture, there the Spirit is at work.

So, if my non-Christian neighbor brings me a casserole when my dog dies (I don’t have a dog ), I would thank God for working by the Spirit through my neighbor. I also see the Spirit at work inspiring great creativity in works of art and music.

3. The Holy Spirit Reconciles People

I also appreciate the guidance of the Latino theologian José Comblin: “The signs of the action of the Spirit in the world are clear: the Spirit is present wherever the poor are awakening to action, to freedom, to speaking out, to community, to life.”[2]

This makes me think that as messy as the whole process is, the Spirit is at work in Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation movement (concerning the relationships of Indigenous and non-Indigenous Canadians), similar to how the Spirit was uniting black and white Christians at the Azusa Street Revival (1906) and the “Memphis Miracle” (1994).

Some people may want to limit the Spirit to the Church, but I prefer what Jesus had to say: “The pneuma/Spirit/wind blows wherever it pleases” (John 3.8). As a result, I affirm that “every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights” (James 1:17).

The Spirit’s work may indeed be ambiguous in the world, not often being recognized by those in whom or around whom he works, but his work is also ambiguous in the Church” (Hendrikus Berkhof).[3]

 

You might also be interested in these posts:

• Spirit Baptism in Current Pentecostal Theology: Part 2 – Amos Yong
• The Gifts of the Spirit are not Limited to Charismatics (a video)
• Is Speaking in Tongues Only for a Few? Only for the Gifted?

Andrew K. Gabriel, Ph.D., is the author of Touched by God: Experiencing the Holy Spirit (forthcoming) as well as three academic books, including The Lord is the Spirit. He is a theology professor at Horizon College and Seminary and serves on the Theological Study Commission for the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. You can follow him on Facebook or on Twitter.

[1] An Old Testament Theology of the Spirit of God, p. 196.

[2] The Holy Spirit and Liberation, p. 185.

[3] The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit, p. 104.

The post 3 Ways the Holy Spirit Works Among Non-Christians appeared first on Andrew K. Gabriel.

Sometimes I think Pentecostals should just give up on talking about Spirit baptism. The students who sit in my classes and were raised in Pentecostal churches are confused about the whole thing. And I’ve had people crying in my office because they want to experience it, but haven’t.

And, of course, some Christians think it’s just stupid.

But, there it is in the Bible. Staring back at us. Calling us to something more.

Jesus obviously cared about it. He told his disciples to stay in Jerusalem until they were baptized in the Spirit (Luke 24:49, Acts 1:5).

Other than that, why do Pentecostals care so much about Spirit baptism?

It’s not just tongues. Nope.

I was 14 years old when I had the experience that Pentecostals call Spirit baptism. I was at church camp, the only possible place where anything spiritually good can happen.

The steel concave walls made the sanctuary, or tabernacle, as we called it, look more like a steel barn than a church. The preaching finished and the Pastor issued an altar call. I walked to the front and stood there singing the slow worship choruses as the band played their guitars and the keyboard on stage.

As I stood there with my hands raised and eyes closed, someone approached me. “Are you here because you want to be baptized in the Holy Spirit?”

I wasn’t too sure what he meant, but it sounded good. After all, I eagerly desired to have “more of God,” as the preachers put it.

He lead me in a prayer: “God, I ask you to now baptize me in the Spirit.” I thought this meant being slain in the Spirit, so I let myself fall backwards. He was kind enough to catch me. (Give me a break, I was 14.)

As I laid there on the cold, musty carpet,  I must have remembered a sermon or something because somehow I realized that Spirit baptism wasn’t the same as being slain in the Spirit.

I think I prayed the prayer again. Then . . . Peace. Love.

And as a result, I will

never

be

the

same.

It was as though I had been released from a spiritual slingshot of growth.

My parents often came into my room late at night to turn the light off because I had fallen asleep reading my Bible. I spent an hour in prayer every morning as I walked door-to-door around the neighborhood delivering the local newspaper.

My wife remembers watching me and my pale, blond-haired friend (you know who you are) at church with our arms raised in worship as high as they would go.

And I wore a big wooden cross around my neck that was formed out of the letters jeSus (now it hangs on my wife’s mirror). Friends at school had no doubt I was a Christian, and I had the privilege of leading a few people to faith in Christ before I graduated from High School and made the long drive to Bible College.

And now I’m a Pentecostal theology professor. (And so utterly grateful for my “job” at Horizon College & Seminary!)

Way back in 1906 when the Pentecostal movement was still in its infancy, one participant in the Azusa Street revival exclaimed, “It was a baptism of love. Such abounding love! Such compassion seemed to almost kill me with its sweetness! People don’t know what they are doing when they stand out against it. . . .This baptism fills us with divine love” (see this and other testimonies here).

“ Spirit baptism fills us with divine love.

Or, in other words, as my own Pentecostal denomination states it, through Spirit baptism “the believer comes to know Christ in a more intimate way and receives power to witness and grow spiritually.”

In case you missed it, it isn’t just about tongues.

But, if you are anxiously wondering, yes, I did pray in tongues that night at church camp.

In the many years since I attended that camp, my thinking about Spirit baptism has expanded, but I still value the post-conversion experience of being baptized in the Spirit.

If you want to read more about how my thoughts about Spirit baptism have evolved, see especially my articles:

• Spirit Baptism and the Intensity of the Spirit (a little dense, but well worth the effort)
• The Holy Spirit and Eschatology—with Implications for Ministry and the Doctrine of Spirit Baptism (a comparatively easy read)

I’ve also written a couple blog posts on the topic:

• Tongues is NOT the Only Sign of Spirit Baptism
• Misunderstanding Tongues as “Initial Evidence” of Spirit Baptism

Andrew K. Gabriel, Ph.D., is the author of Touched by God: Experiencing the Holy Spirit (forthcoming) as well as three academic books, including The Lord is the Spirit. He is a theology professor at Horizon College and Seminary and serves on the Theological Study Commission for the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. You can follow him on Facebook or on Twitter.

The post Why do PENTECOSTALS care so much about SPIRIT BAPTISM? appeared first on Andrew K. Gabriel.

Today I’m beginning a blog series called “Questions People Ask About the Holy Spirit”  (#HSQuestions). Thank you to everyone who submitted questions! You can still submit questions here. Today I’m answering two questions that people asked.

There are not a lot of worship songs directed to the Holy Spirit. And most songs that we do have in both history and contemporary music are prayers for the Spirit to come, but not actual worship of the Spirit.

You can sometimes find worship to the Spirit when it is directed to the Father, the Son, and the Spirit.

Is this lack of worship of the Spirit justified?

The Bible never says we are to worship the Holy Spirit. This might seem to settle the question, but….

For the early Church, the answer was clear. In the fourth century, some heretics were arguing that the Holy Spirit was not fully divine. To reject this claim, the church responded by confessing in the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed (381) that the Spirit is “the Lord and giver of life.” As stated in the creed, this implies that, “with the Father and the Son together [the Spirit] is worshipped and glorified.”  

When we wonder if it is okay to worship the Spirit it reveals that our doctrine of the Trinity is probably confused. When understood correctly, this historical doctrine of the church affirms that there is one God who exists as three persons or three distinct expressions.

“ When we wonder if it is okay to worship the Spirit it reveals that our doctrine of the Trinity is probably confused.

So we can start with the affirmation that the Spirit is personal (more on that in a later post!) and fully divine and that there is only one God. The Spirit is distinct from the Father and the Son, but not a different being.

Is the Spirit God? Yes. Should we worship God? Yes.

On the other hand, it is natural that we don’t have so many songs to the Spirit. The Spirit is what one theologian calls the shy member of the Trinity. (I’ll write more about the place of the Spirit in the Trinity in a future post.)

That is, the Spirit points us to Jesus and the Father. The Spirit reminds us of Jesus’ teachings (John 14:26) and leads us to confess “Jesus is Lord” (1 Corinthians 12:3). And we “worship the Father in the Spirit” (John 4:23).

So, yes, we can worship the Spirit, but, at the same time, the Spirit enables our worship of the Father.

You can still submit questions here, and I will answer many of them in this blog series.

The post What’s Wrong with Songs that Worship the Holy Spirit? appeared first on Andrew K. Gabriel.

Can you help me out by submitting your questions below?

Thanks!

(Feel free to share a link to this form with other people as well!)

Andrew K. Gabriel, Ph.D., is the author of Simply Spirit-Filled: Experiencing God in the Presence and Power of the Holy Spirit as well as three academic books, including The Lord is the Spirit. He is a theology professor at Horizon College and Seminary and serves on the Theological Study Commission for the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. You can follow him on Facebook or on Twitter.

The post What Questions do you (or Others) Have About the Holy Spirit? appeared first on Andrew K. Gabriel.