Part 9 (1/2)
The Holy Spirit has used both of these methods in the past.
1. In the case of the apostles and prophets, he immediately, mechanically and directly controlled their actions and speech, so much so that Jesus told them that under the influence of the Spirit they should take no thought what they should say. ”For it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Spirit” (Mark 13:11). ”And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance” (Acts 2:4).
2. In the case of the men to whom the apostles preached on the day of Pentecost, the Spirit used a rational moral influence through the words of Peter's sermon, which conveyed ideas that swayed their minds and hearts. It is claimed by some that both of these methods are used by the Spirit to-day. The modern teaching concerning the first of these influences is well set forth in the following selection from a widely known book by L.B. Dunn, ent.i.tled ”The Mission of the Spirit”: ”Even where the light of the gospel does not s.h.i.+ne, and the inst.i.tutions of the gospel are not enjoyed, there the Spirit acts directly upon man's heart and conscience, writes the law of G.o.d upon his mind, gives him the sense of sin and the need of forgiveness. Hence, wherever man is, there the Comforter is at work upon his heart and mind. The divine influence is imparted _unconditionally_ and _irresistibly_. The Holy Spirit is ever employed to bring man back to G.o.d; and _whether he desires it or not_, whether he is _willing_ or _unwilling_, still the Comforter comes to him with his heavenly illumination, his divine influence, convincing him of sin, and his consequent need of the mercy of G.o.d. May I not truly say that man really _has no choice_ in the matter as to whether he will or will not have this divine influence upon his soul? _He is, he must be_, enlightened and convinced, _whether he will hear or forbear_, whether he _will be saved or d.a.m.ned_. He _can not prevent_ the entrance of the Spirit into his heart.”
In connection with the above we quote also from a sermon in ”The Baptist Pulpit,” by Rev. J.W. Hayhurst: ”G.o.d has given us no means by which the conversion of sinners, or the general revival of religion, can be effected, irrespective of the _direct_ agency of the Spirit. The gospel itself _will not do it_.”
These quotations give us a pretty clear and explicit statement of the theory of the direct mechanical and _immediate_ operation of the Holy Spirit upon the human spirit.
The second method is aptly stated by an editorial which appeared in the _Sunday School Times_ during the year 1908: ”It is a strange fact that, notwithstanding the _explicitness_ and _uniformity_ of the New Testament teachings on this subject, there is a widespread popular opinion that the Holy Spirit's work is directly and immediately on or in the heart of the unbeliever, without the intervention or agency of the Christian whatever. To hear what is said in the sermons, or sung in the hymns, or prayed in the prayers of many Christians, one might believe that the Holy Spirit is sent directly to the unbelieving sinner, to strive with him, to show him his sin, and to point him to, the Saviour; and that therefore the Christian preacher or teacher has rather to wait the results of this work of the Spirit, than to be the instrument or the avenue of this work. Many a Christian seems to think that the Holy Spirit's work is that of a _revival preacher_, in moving sinners to repentance by a _direct appeal_ to their consciences and understandings, instead of stirring up Christians to appeal, in the power of the Spirit, to unbelievers to believe and turn to G.o.d. It is true that, in this present dispensation of the Spirit, all power in the evangelizing of the world, and in the swaying of the hearts of men toward Christ and in the service of Christ, is primarily with the Holy Spirit. But it is also true that the Holy Spirit, according to the Bible teachings, works _in and by and through_ believers in Jesus. Hence if one who is not a believer in Jesus is to be won to disciples.h.i.+p, the question is not, 'Will the Holy Spirit work on his mind immediately, or will the Holy Spirit work through one who already believes?' for that question _the Bible has already answered_. The Holy Spirit can use the written words, like the spoken words, of a chosen messenger of G.o.d to an unbelieving soul. But in every case _the Spirit reaches the believer mediately, not immediately_.”
Now, these theories are directly contradictory. If one is true, the other can not be. The only question to decide is as to which one is true. Let us examine these theories in the light of reason, revelation and experience. If the Holy Spirit works directly and immediately on the heart of man, surely there should be some tangible evidence of it given in such a striking way as to demonstrate the truth of the theory. But the experience of Christendom for nineteen centuries fails to furnish a single unquestioned evidence of it. The proof of the theory is made to hinge upon far-fetched inferences drawn from Scripture statements, and even these fail to furnish the evidence sought. Let us notice some of the Scriptures that are relied upon to prove a direct operation of the Spirit in the conversion of sinners:
1. ”A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you; and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep mine ordinances, and do them” (Ezek. 36:26, 27). This pa.s.sage has been much relied upon to prove the theory of an abstract operation of the Spirit upon the sinner in conversion. Its failure to support the theory is evidenced by the following facts:
(1) The Lord was not talking about the conversion of a sinner, but the renewal of Israel as a people.
(2) The pa.s.sage says nothing about the work of the Holy Spirit.
(3) There is nothing mentioned in the pa.s.sage that could not have been accomplished by ordinary means.
(4) The very point to be proven is a.s.sumed.
2. ”But their minds were hardened: for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remaineth, it not being revealed to them that it is done away in Christ. But unto this day, whensoever Moses is read, a veil lieth upon their heart. But whensoever _it shall turn to the Lord_, the veil is taken away” (2 Cor. 3:14-16).
Just what is found here to prove a direct operation of the Spirit would be difficult to say. The apostle is speaking of the Jews reading the Scriptures with a veil which blinds them. The veil was undoubtedly a false interpretation, which prevented their _seeing Christ_ in their Scriptures. If they had not this wrong interpretation, they would see Christ and their Scriptures would _be plain._ As it was, they were dark and mysterious. The apostle tells what will remove the veil: ”_When they shall turn to the Lord_,” the veil shall be _taken away_. There is nothing in the whole pa.s.sage that even hints at an immediate operation of the Spirit.
3. ”For we are his workmans.h.i.+p, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which G.o.d afore prepared that we should walk in them” (Eph. 2:10). There is nothing here to even hint at a direct operation. It says the Ephesians were created in Christ Jesus (not in the Holy Spirit) unto good works. If the reader wishes to learn by what means they were so created, let him turn to chapter 1, verse 13, and he will obtain the information: ”In whom ye also, _having heard_ the word of the truth, _the gospel_ of your salvation,--in whom, _having also believed_, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise.” That is something to the point. They ”heard the word of truth,” the gospel of their salvation.
Then, _after they believed_, they ”were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise.” There is nothing in the pa.s.sage to warrant the teaching of a special operation to enable them to believe.
4. ”And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, one that wors.h.i.+pped G.o.d, heard us: whose heart the Lord opened to give heed unto the things which were spoken by Paul” (Acts 16:14).
This is relied upon to prove a direct work of the Spirit upon Lydia that she might _hear_ and _believe_. The very thing to be proved is again a.s.sumed. True, the Lord opened Lydia's heart, but he didn't do so that she might ”receive the word,” for Paul had already preached it to her.
Her heart was opened that ”she gave heed to the things spoken by Paul.”
Before she heard Paul she had a narrow, bigoted Jewish heart. After she heard the preaching, her heart was opened to attend to the things she had heard. That is, she obeyed the gospel. Nothing about the Holy Spirit in the entire history.
5. ”And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may be with you for ever, even the Spirit of truth: whom the world cannot receive; for it beholdeth him not, neither knoweth him: ye know him; for he abideth with you, and shall be in you” (John 14:16, 17). As I have elsewhere shown, this pa.s.sage has a private and peculiar application to the apostles, and not to the world of mankind. It specifically states that ”the world cannot receive” this Comforter. That kills it as a proof-text that the world ”must receive it” before it can believe. Those who affirm a direct operation of the Spirit on ”the world” make a clear-cut issue with the Saviour.
6. ”I planted, Apollos watered; but G.o.d gave the increase” (1 Cor. 3:6).
Those who use this to prove a special operation of the Spirit make it mean, ”I have planted _the word_ and Apollos has watered it, but G.o.d by a special work of the Holy Spirit makes the increase of the word.” This is a false interpretation, as the apostle was not speaking of ”the word”
at all. How could Apollos ”_water the word_”? The apostle was speaking of the _congregation_ at Corinth, which he had planted and Apollos had tended, and which, under the care of G.o.d, had made increase. There is nothing in the pa.s.sage about the Holy Spirit.
7. ”While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Spirit fell on all them that heard the word” (Acts 10:44). This has reference to G.o.d's signifying his acceptance of the Gentiles by an outpouring similar to the one on the day of Pentecost. It was purely a supernatural act, and has never been repeated since that day. But even then it would not prove the necessity of an operation of the Spirit, that men might _hear the gospel_ and believe it. The record says ”it fell on all them that _heard the word.”_ Cornelius was told by the angel to send for Peter, ”who shall tell thee words whereby thou shalt be saved.”
8. ”Now the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of G.o.d: for they are foolishness unto him; and he cannot know them, because they are spiritually judged. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, and he himself is judged of no man” (1 Cor. 2:14, 15). This is held to be one of the strongest pa.s.sages to confirm the teaching of the necessity of a direct operation of the Holy Spirit to enable a man to hear and to believe the gospel. A brief examination of the context will show that such an idea was not in the mind of the apostle at all. The apostle is not even speaking of _conversion_ when he uses the language. He is speaking of _inspiration_. The spiritual man in Paul's mind was a man inspired by the Spirit, and the natural man was an uninspired man. If the reader will turn to the ninth verse of the chapter and read to the conclusion of the chapter, and place ”uninspired” where he finds ”natural,” and ”inspired” where ”spiritual” is found, the pa.s.sage will be as clear as a sunbeam. ”The things of the Spirit” are things produced by the Spirit, which needed an inspired man to explain. The day of Pentecost was a ”thing of the Spirit,” and there was not an uninspired man in all that great throng that could understand it. The best solution they could give was, ”These men are drunk,” but Peter, an inspired man, explained in inspired language that ”this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel: It shall come to pa.s.s in the last days, saith G.o.d, that I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh.” When these natural (uninspired) men heard Peter's (inspired) spiritual explanation, they could understand it. They did understand it and obeyed it to the number of three thousand. Nebuchadnezzar's vision was a ”thing of the Spirit,”
and there was not a natural (uninspired) man in all his realm that could interpret it. But Daniel, a spiritual (inspired) man, explained it in spiritual language and then all could understand it. There is nothing in the pa.s.sage to support the theory of a direct operation to enable man to understand the gospel.
9. ”Him did G.o.d exalt with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, to give repentance to Israel, and remission of sins” (Acts 5:31). This pa.s.sage is used because it speaks of Christ giving repentance. They infer that is done by a direct operation of the Spirit. But the pa.s.sage says nothing as to _how_ he grants repentance. Christ gives many things that are not the result of a direct operation of the Spirit. The very next verse says G.o.d gives ”the Holy Spirit to all them _that obey_ him.”
This directly contradicts the theory of the necessity of a direct operation of the Spirit to enable men to obey him.