whoistheholyspirit's Blurty
 
 [Most Recent Entries] [Calendar View] [Friends]

Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in whoistheholyspirit's Blurty:

    [ << Previous 20 ]
    Sunday, July 19th, 2009
    4:21 pm
    Spiritual Gifts
    Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/kuyper/holy_spirit.html)

    Note: This is part thirty-seven of a 123-part series taken from the book Work of the Holy Spirit by Abraham Kuyper. The following excerpt is from "Volume One: The Work of the Holy Spirit As A Whole," Tenth Chapter "The Church of Christ," titled "Spiritual Gifts."


    XXXVII.
    Spiritual Gifts.

    "But desire earnestly the greater gifts. And a still more excellent way show I unto you." —1 Cor. xii. 31 (R.V.).

    The charismata or spiritual gifts are the divinely ordained means and powers whereby the King enables His Church to perform its task on the earth.

    The Church has a calling in the world. It is being violently attacked not only by the powers of this world, but much more by the invisible powers of Satan. No rest is allowed. Denying that Christ has conquered, Satan believes that the time left him may yet bring him victories. Hence his restless rage and fury, his incessant attacks upon the ordinances of the Church, his constant endeavor to divide and corrupt it, and his ever-repeated denial of the authority and kingship of Jesus in His Church. Altho he will never succeed entirely, he does succeed to some extent. The history of the Church in every country shows it; it proves that a satisfactory condition of the Church is highly exceptional and of short duration, and that for eight out of ten centuries its state is sad and deplorable, cause for shame and grief on the part of God’s people.

    And yet in all this warfare it has a calling to fulfill, an appointed task to accomplish. It may sometimes consist in being sifted like wheat, as in Job’s case, to show that by virtue of Christ’s prayer faith cannot be destroyed in its bosom. But whatever the form of the task, the Church always needs spiritual power to perform it; a power not in itself, but which the King must supply.

    Every means afforded by the King for the doing of His work is a charisma, a gift of grace. Hence the internal connection between work, office, and gift.

    Wherefore St. Paul says: "To each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit to profit withal," (1 Cor. xii. 7) i.e., for the general good (ðñïò 185 ro avpotpov) (1 Cor. xii. 7). And, again, still more clearly: "Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel, to the edifying of the Church" (1 Cor. xiv. 12). Hence the petition, "Thy Kingdom come," which the Heidelberg Catechism interprets: "Rule us so by Thy Word and Spirit that we may submit ourselves more and more to Thee; preserve and increase Thy Church; destroy the works of the devil, and all violence which would exalt itself against Thee, and also all wicked counsels devised against Thy Holy Word, till the full perfection of the Kingdom takes place, wherein Thou shall be all in all."

    It is wrong, therefore, to consider the life of individual believers too much by itself, separating it from the life of the Church. They exist not but in connection with the body, and thus they become partakers of the spiritual gifts. In this sense the Heidelberg Catechism confesses the communion of saints: "First, that all and every one who believes, being members of Christ, are in common partakers of Him and of all His riches and gifts; secondly, that every one must know it to be his duty readily and cheerfully to employ his gifts for the advantage and salvation of other members." The parable of the talents has the same aim; for the servant who with his talent failed to benefit others receives a terrible judgment. Even the hidden gift must be stirred up, as St. Paul says; not to boast of it or to feed our pride, but because it is the Lord’s and intended for the Church.

    St. John writing, "Ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things" (1 John ii. 20), and "Ye need not that any man teach you" (1 John ii. 27), does not mean to say that every individual believer possesses the full anointing, and in virtue of this knoweth all things. For if this were so, who would not despair of salvation, nor dare say: "I have, the faith"? Moreover, how could the statement, "Ye need not that any man teach you," be reconciled with the testimony of the same apostle, that the Holy Spirit qualifies teachers appointed by Jesus Himself? Not the individual believer, but the whole Church as a body possesses the full anointing of the Holy One and knows all things. The Church as a body needs not that any come to teach it from without; for it, possesses all the treasure of wisdom and knowledge, being united with the Head, who is the reflection of the glory of God, in whom dwelleth all wisdom.

    And this applies not to the Church of one period, but of all 186 ages. The Church of to-day is the same as in the, day of the apostles. The life lived then is the life that animates it now. The gains of two centuries ago belong to its treasury, as well as those received to-day. The past is its capital. The wonderful and glorious revelation received by the Church of the first century was given, through it, to the Church of all ages, and is still effectual. And all the spiritual strength and insight, the inward grace, the clearer consciousness, received during the course of the ages are not lost, but form an accumulated treasure, increasing still by the ever-renewed additions of spiritual gifts.

    He who realizes and acknowledges this fact feels himself rich, and blessed indeed. For this apostolic view of the matter causes us to be thankful for our brother's gift, which otherwise we might envy; inasmuch as those gifts do not impoverish, but enrich us. In one city there may be twelve ministers of the Word, all gifted in various directions. According to the natural man, each will be jealous of his brother’s gifts and fear that his talents will excel his own. But not so among the Lord’s own servants. They feel that together they serve one Lord and one flock, and bless God for giving them together what the leading and feeding require. In an army the artillerist is not jealous of the cavalryman, for he knows that the latter is for his protection in the hour of danger.

    Moreover, this apostolic standpoint excludes isolation; for it creates the longing for fellowship with distant brethren, even tho they walk in more or less deviating paths. It is impossible, Bible in hand, to limit Christ's Church to one’s own little community. It is everywhere, in all parts of the world; and whatever its external form, frequently changing, often impure, yet the gifts wherever received increase our riches.

    This apostolic standpoint is also against the foolish notion that for eighteen centuries the Church has received no gifts whatever; and hence that, like the early Church, each of us must take his Bible to formulate his own confession. That standpoint makes one so intensely conscious of the communion of spiritual gifts that he can not but appreciate the Church's treasure accumulated during the centuries. In fact, Christ's Church has received greatest abundance of spiritual gifts; and to-day we have the disposition not only of the gifts of the churches in our own city, but of all those imparted to the churches elsewhere, and of the historic capital accumulated during eighteen centuries.
    187

    Hence the treasure of every particular church is threefold: First, the charismata in its own circle; secondly, those given to other churches; and lastly, those received since the days of the apostles.

    According to their nature these spiritual gifts may be divided into three classes: the official, the extraordinary, and the ordinary.

    St. Paul says: "To one is given through the Spirit the word of wisdom, and to another the word of knowledge, according to the same Spirit, and to another faith by the same Spirit; and to another gifts of healing in the one Spirit; and to another workings of miracles, and to another prophecy; and to another discerning of spirits; and to another divers kinds of tongues; and to another the interpretation of tongues. But all these worketh the one and the same Spirit, dividing to each one severally even as He will" (1 Cor. xviii. 8-11). In like manner the apostle speaks to the Church of Rome: "Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith; or ministry, let us wait on our ministering; or he that teacheth, on teaching; or he that exhorteth, on exhortation; he that giveth let him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that showeth mercy, with cheerfulness" (Rom. xii. 6-8).

    From these passages it is evident that among these charismata St. Paul assigns the first place to the gifts pertaining to the ordinary service of the Church by its ministers, elders, and deacons. For by prophecy St. Paul designates animated preaching, wherein the preacher feels himself cheered and inspired by the Holy Spirit. By "teaching" he means ordinary catechizing. "Ministry" refers to the management of the temporalities of the Church. "Giving" has reference to the care for the poor and the miserable. "He that ruleth" refers to the officers in charge of the government of the Church. These are the ordinary offices embracing the care of the spiritual and temporal affairs of the Church.

    Then follows a different series of charismata, viz., tongues, healing, discernment of spirits, etc. These non-official gifts divide themselves into two classes—those that strengthen the gifts of saving grace, and those distinct from the grace of salvation.

    The former are, e.g., faith and love. Without faith no one can be saved. It is therefore the portion of all God’s children, and as such not a "charisma," but a "doron."But while all have faith, God is free to let it manifest itself more strongly in the one than in another. 188 Of one degree Scripture says: "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shaft be saved" (Acts xvi. 31); and of another: "If ye have faith as a grain of mustard-seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place, and it shall remove." (Matt. xvii. 20) The first works internally, the other externally. For this reason St. Paul speaks not only of ministries and gifts, but also of "workings," which consist in a more vigorous exercise of the grace which the believer as such possesses already. Where the faith of many languishes, the Lord frequently grants extraordinary workings of faith to some, thus to refresh and comfort others. The same is true of love, which also is the portion of all, but not in the same effectual degree. And where the love of many waxes cold, the Lord sometimes quickens it in the few to such extent that others see it and are provoked to holy jealousy.

    Besides these ordinary charismata, which are only more energetic manifestations of what every believer possesses in the germ, the Lord has also given to His church extraordinary gifts, working partly upon the spiritual and partly upon the physical domain. Of the latter are the charismata of self-restraint and healing of the sick. Of the former Christ speaks in Matt. xix. 12, where he calls such persons "eunuchs for the sake of the Kingdom." St. Paul says that for the sake of the weak brother he will abstain from meat; and again, that he keeps under the body, bringing it into subjection, etc. The charisma of healing refers to the glorious gift of healing the sick: not only those who suffer from nervous diseases and psychological ailments, who are more susceptible to spiritual influences, but also those whose diseases are wholly outside the spiritual realm.

    Of an entirely different nature are the extraordinary, purely spiritual charismata, of which St. Paul mentions five: wisdom, knowledge, discernment of spirits, tongues and their interpretation. These may also be divided in two classes, inasmuch as the first three mentioned are also found, altho in a different form, outside of the Kingdom of God; and the last two, which present a wholly peculiar phenomenon, within the Kingdom. Wisdom, knowledge, and discernment of spirits exist even among the heathen, and are much admired by those who reject the Christ. But those natural gifts appear in the Church in a different way. The charisma of wisdom enables one without much investigation, with great tact and clearness, to understand conditions and to offer judicious advice. Knowledge is a charisma whereby the Holy 189 Spirit enables one to acquire an unusually deep insight into the mysteries of the Kingdom. Discernment of spirits is a charisma whereby one can discern between the genuine spirits raised up of God and those that only pretend to be such. The charisma of tongues we have discussed at length in the twenty-eighth article.

    The charismata now existing in the Church are those pertaining to the ministry of the Word; the ordinary charismata of increased exercise of faith and love; those of wisdom, knowledge, and discernment of spirits; that of self-restraint; and lastly, that of healing the sick suffering from nervous and psychological diseases. The others for the present are inactive.
    4:20 pm
    The Church of Christ
    Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/kuyper/holy_spirit.html)

    Note: This is part thirty-six of a 123-part series taken from the book Work of the Holy Spirit
    by Abraham Kuyper. The following excerpt is from "Volume One: The Work
    of the Holy Spirit As A Whole," Tenth Chapter "The Church of Christ," titled "The Church of Christ."

    XXXVI.
    The Church of Christ.

    "It is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is ruth."—1 John v. 6.

    We now proceed to discuss the work of the Holy Spirit wrought in the Church of Christ.

    Altho the Son of God has had a Church in the earth from the beginning, yet the Scripture distinguishes between its manifestation before and after Christ. As the acorn, planted in the ground, exists, altho it passes through the two periods of germinating and rooting, and of growing upward and forming trunk and branches, even so the Church. At first hidden in the soil of Israel, wrapped in the swaddling-clothes of its national existence, it was only on the day of Pentecost that it was manifested in the world.

    Not that the Church was founded only on Pentecost; this would be a denial of the Old Covenant revelation, a falsification of the idea of Church, and an annihilation of God’s election. We only say that on that day it became the Church for the world.

    And in it the Holy Spirit has wrought a very comprehensive work.

    Not its formation, however, for that is the work of the Triune God in the divine decree; or, speaking more definitely, of Jesus the King when He bought His people with His own blood.

    Indeed, the Spirit of God regenerates the elect, whom He does not find in the world, but already in the Church. Every representation as tho the Holy Spirit gathers the elect out of a lost world, and so brings them into the Church, opposes the Scripture’s representation 180 of the Church as an organism. Christ's Church is a body, and as the members grow out of the body and are not added to it from without, so must the seed of the Church be looked for in the Church and not in the world. The Holy Spirit works that only which is already sanctified in Christ. Hence our form of Baptism reads: "Do you acknowledge that altho our children are conceived and born in sin, and therefore are subject to all miseries, yea to condemnation itself; yet that they are sanctified in Christ?"

    However, since regeneration belongs to His work in the individual, and we are considering now His work in the Church as a whole, as a community, we direct our attention, in the first place, to His work of imparting spiritual gifts, particularly those called "charismata." Some New Testament passages speak of gifts like those offered to God (Matt. v. 23): "If thou bring thy gift to the altar"; or gifts communicated to others (2 Cor. viii. 9 and Phil. iv. 17) and the gift of salvation; but those we do not consider.

    A gift offered to God is called in the Greek "doron"; imparted, to others, it is commonly called "charis"; while the gift of grace is usually called "dorea." Hence these gifts are distinct from those that now occupy our attention. And this distinction appears strongest when we compare the gift of the Holy Spirit with spiritual gifts. The Holy Spirit Himself is a gift of grace. But when He imparts spiritual gifts He adorns us with holy ornaments. The first refers to our salvation; the last to our talents.

    Referring to our salvation, the Scripture calls it a free and gracious gift, generally "dorea" in the Greek, which, being derived from a root meaning to give, denotes that we were not entitled to it, having neither merited nor bought it, but that it is a given good. St. Paul exclaims: "Thanks unto God for His unspeakable gift," i.e., of salvation (2 Cor. ix. 15). And again: "Much more the grace of God and the gift of grace, which is by one man Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many." "Much more they which receive abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ." (Rom. v. 15, 17). And lastly: "But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ." (Ephes. iv. 7).1717 It should be noticed that in Rom. v. 15, 16; vi. 23; xi. 29, the word "charisma" is found in the Greek text, referring to salvation. The reason is that these passages refer not to the graciousness of the gift, but to its scintillating brightness, in contrast with corruption and death. "The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life."
    181

    The same expression is used invariably for the imparting of the Holy Spirit: "Ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" (Acts ii. 38). And: "Because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost" (Acts x. 45). Hence it should be carefully noticed that this has nothing to do with the subject under consideration. When St. Paul speaks of faith as the gift of God, he refers to our salvation and God’s saving work in the soul. But the gifts of which we now speak are wholly different. They are not unto salvation, but to the glory of God. They are lent to us as ornaments, that we should show their beauty as talents to gain other talents therewith. They are additional operations of grace; which can not take the place of the proper work of the grace of salvation, nor confirm it, having an entirely different purpose. The work of grace is for our own salvation, joy, and upbuilding; the charismata are given us for others. The first implies that we have received the Holy Spirit; the latter that He imparts gifts unto us.

    Properly speaking, the charismata are given to the churches, not to individual persons. When a ruler selects and trains men for officers in the army, it is evident that he does this not for their personal enjoyment, honor, and aggrandizement, but for the efficiency and honor of the army. He can search for men with talents for the military service, and train and instruct them; but he can not create such talents. If this were possible, every king would endow his generals with the genius of a Von Moltke, and every admiral would be a De Ruyter.

    But Jesus is not thus limited. He is independent; unto Him all power is given in heaven and on earth. He can create talents, and freely impart them to whomsoever He will. Hence, knowing what the Church requires for its protection and upbuilding, He can fully supply all its need. His purpose is not merely to please or enrich individuals, much less to give to some what He withholds from others; but with the persons thus endowed to adorn and favor the whole Church. We do not put a lamp upon the table to show it a special favor or because it is more excellent than chair or stove; but simply because thus it serves its purpose, and the whole room is lighted. To consider the charismata as intended merely to adorn and benefit the person endowed would be just as absurd as to say: 182 "I light the fire to warm not the room, but the stove"; and to be jealous of the charismata given to others in the Church would be just as foolish as for the table to be jealous of the stove because it gets all the fire.

    The charismata must therefore be considered in an economical sense. The Church is a large household with many wants; an institution to be made efficient by the means of many things. They are to the Church what light and fuel are to the household; not existing for themselves, but for the family, and to be laid aside when the days are long and warm. This applies directly to the charismata, many of which, given to the apostolic Church, are not of service to the Church of the present day.

    These charismata have undoubtedly more or less an official character. God has instituted offices in the Church; not in a mechanical way, or depending upon robe or gown; such unspiritual conception is foreign to the Scripture. But as there is division of labor in the army or in the human body, so there is in the Church.

    Take, e.g., the body. It must be protected against injury; blood must be carried to muscles and nerves; venous blood must be converted into arterial; the lungs must inhale fresh air, etc. All these activities are laid upon the various members of the body. Eye and ear keep watch; the heart propels the blood; the lungs supply the oxygen, etc. And this can not be changed arbitrarily. The lungs can not watch; the eye can not supply oxygen; the skin can not propel the blood. Hence this division of labor is neither arbitrary, by mutual consent, nor, a matter of pleasure; but it is divinely ordained, and this ordinance must not be ignored. Hence the eye has the office and gift of watching over the body; the heart of circulating the blood; the lungs of supplying fresh air; etc.

    And this applies to the Church in every respect. That great body requires the doing of many and various things for the common weal. There is need of guidance, of prophesying, of heroism; mercy must be exercised, the sick must be healed, etc. And this great mutual task the Lord has divided among many members. He has given to His body, the Church, eyes, ears, hands, and feet; and each of these organic members a peculiar task, calling, and office.

    Hence to be called to an office simply means to be charged by Jesus, the King, with a definite task. You have done some work. Very well, but how? From impulse, or in obedience to the 183 charge of your Sender? This makes all the difference. The King may send us in the ordinary or in an extraordinary way. Zacharias was a priest of the course of Abijah; but his son John was the herald of Christ by extraordinary revelation. The Levite served by right of succession; the prophet because he was chosen of God. But this makes no difference; called in the one way or the other, the office remains the same, so long as we have the assurance that King Jesus has called and ordained us.

    For this reason our fathers devoutly spoke of an office of all believers. In Christ's Church there are not merely a few officials and a mass of idle, unworthy subjects, but every believer has a calling, a task, a vital charge. And inasmuch as we are convinced that we perform the task because the King has laid it upon us not for ourselves, nor even from the motive of philanthropy, but to serve the Church, to this extent has our work an official character, altho the world denies us the honor.
    Sunday, June 28th, 2009
    10:28 am
    The Need of the New Testament Scripture
    Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/kuyper/holy_spirit.html)

    Note: This is part thirty-four of a 123-part series taken from the book Work of the Holy Spirit
    by Abraham Kuyper. The following excerpt is from "Volume One: The Work
    of the Holy Spirit As A Whole," Ninth Chapter "The Holy Scriptures in the New Testament," titled "The Need of the New Testament Scripture."

    XXXIV.
    The Need of the New Testament Scripture.

    "For I testify onto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book."—Rev. xxii. 18.

    If the Church after the Ascension of Christ had been destined to live only one lifetime, and had been confined only to the land of the Jews, the holy apostles could have accomplished their task by verbal teaching. But since it was to live at least for eighteen centuries, and to be extended over the whole world, the apostles were compelled to resort to the written communication of the revelation which they had received.

    If they had not written, the churches of Africa and Gaul could never have received trustworthy information; and the tradition would have lost its reliable character ages ago. The written revelation has, therefore, been the indispensable means whereby the Church, during its long and ever-extending career, has been preserved from complete degeneration and falsification.

    However, from their epistles it does not appear that the apostles clearly understood this. Surely, that the Church would sojourn in this world for eighteen centuries, they did not expect; and almost all their epistles bear a local character, as tho not intended for the Church in general, but only for particular churches. And yet, altho they understood it not, the Lord Jesus knew it; He had thus planned it; hence the epistle written exclusively for the church of Rome was intended and ordained by Him, and without Paul's knowledge, to edify the Church of all ages.

    Hence two things had to be done for the Church of the future:

    First, the image of Christ must be received from the lips of the apostles and be committed to writing.

    Secondly, the things of which Jesus had said, "Ye can not bear 170 them now, but the Holy Spirit will declare them unto you," must be recorded. This is the postulate of the whole matter. The condition of the churches, their long duration in the future, and their world-wide extension demanded it.

    And the facts show that the provision was made; but not immediately. So long as the Church was confined to a small circle, and the remembrance of Christ remained fresh and powerful, the apostles' spoken word was sufficient. The decree of the Synod of Jerusalem was probably the first written document that proceeded from them. But when the churches began to extend across the sea to Corinth and Rome, and northward to Ephesus and Galatia, then Paul began to substitute written for verbal instructions. Gradually this epistolary labor was extended and Paul's example followed. Perhaps each wrote in turn. And to these epistles were added the narratives of the life, death, and Resurrection of Christ and the Acts of the Apostles. At last the King commanded John from heaven to write in a book the extraordinary revelation given him on Patmos.

    The result was a gradually increasing number of apostolic and non-apostolic writings, probably far exceeding that contained in the New Testament. At least Paul's epistles show that he wrote many more than we now possess. But even if he had not thus informed us, the fact would have been sufficiently well established; for it is improbable that such excellent writers as Paul and John should not have written more than a dozen letters during their long and eventful lives. Even in one year they must have written more than that. The controversy of former days over the assertion that no apostolic writings could have been lost was most foolish, and showed little reckoning with real life.

    It is remarkable that from this great mass a small number of writings was gradually separated. A few were collected first, then more were added, and arranged in certain order. It took a long time before there was uniformity and agreement; indeed, some writings were not universally recognized until after three centuries. But in spite of time and controversy, the sifting took place, and the result was, that the Church distinguished in this great mass of literature two distinct parts: on the one hand, this arranged set of twenty-seven books; and on the other, the remaining writings of early origin.

    And when the process of sifting and separating was ended, and 171 the Holy Spirit had borne witness, in the churches that this set of writings constituted a whole, and was, indeed, the Testament of the Lord Jesus to His Church, then the Church became conscious that it possessed a second collection of sacred books of equal authority with the first collection given to Israel; then it put the Old and the New Testament together, which unitedly form the Holy Scripture, our Bible, the Word of God.

    To the question, How did the New Testament Scripture originate? we answer without hesitation, By the Holy Spirit.

    How? Did He say to Paul or John: "Sit down and write"?

    The gospels and the epistles do not so impress us. It does indeed apply to the Revelation of St. John, but not to the other New Testament Scriptures. They rather impress us as being written without the slightest idea of being intended for the Church of all ages. Their authors impress us as writing to certain churches of their own definite time, and that after a hundred years perhaps not a single fragment of their writings would be in existence. They were indeed conscious of the Holy Spirit's aid in writing the truth even as they enjoyed it in speaking; but that they were writing parts of the Holy Scripture, they surely knew not.

    When St. Paul had finished his Epistle to the Romans, it never occurred to him that in future ages his letter would possess for millions of God's children an authority equal to, or even higher than that of the prophecies of Isaiah and the Psalms of David. Nor could the first readers of his epistle, in the church of Rome, have imagined that after eighteen centuries the names of their principal men would still be household words in all parts of the Christian world.

    But if St. Paul knew it not, surely the Holy Spirit did. As by education the Lord frequently prepares a maiden for her still unknown, future husband, so did the Holy Spirit prepare Paul, John, and Peter for their work. He directed their lives, circumstances, and conditions; He caused such thoughts, meditations, and even words to arise in their hearts as the writing of the New Testament Scripture required. And while they were writing these portions of the Holy Scripture, that one day would be the treasure of the universal Church in all ages, a fact not understood by them, but by the Holy Spirit, He so directed their thoughts as to guard them against mistakes and lead them into all truth. He foreknew what the complete New Testament Scripture ought to be, and what parts would belong to it. As an architect, by his mechanics, prepares the 172 various parts of the building, afterward to fit them in their places, so did the Holy Spirit by different workers prepare the different parts of the New Testament, which afterward He united in a whole.

    For the Lord, who by His Holy Spirit caused the preparation of these parts, is also King of the Church; He saw these parts scattered abroad; He led men to care for them, and believers to have faith in them. And, finally, by means of the men interested, He united these loose fragments, so that gradually, according to His royal decree, the New Testament originated.

    Hence it was not necessary that the New Testament Scripture should contain only apostolic writings. Mark and Luke were no apostles; and the notion that these men must have written under the direction of Paul or. Peter has no proof nor force. What is the benefit of writing under the direction of an apostle? That which gives divine authority to the writings of Luke is not the influence of an apostle, but that he wrote under the absolute inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

    Believing in the authority of the New Testament, we must acknowledge the authority of the four evangelists to be perfectly equal. As to the contents, Matthew's gospel may surpass that of Luke, and John's may excel the gospel of Mark; but their authority is equally unquestionable. The Epistle to the Romans has higher value than that to Philemon; but their authority is the same. As to their persons, John stood above Mark, and Paul above Jude; but since we depend not upon the authority of their persons, but only upon that of the Holy Spirit, these personal differences are of no account.

    Hence the question is not whether the New Testament writers were apostles, but whether they were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

    Assuredly, it has pleased the King to connect His testimony with the apostolate; for He said: "Ye are My witnesses." Hence we know that Luke and Mark obtained their information concerning Christ from the apostles; but our guaranty for the accuracy and reliability of their statements is not the apostolic origin of the same, but the authority of the Holy Spirit. Hence the apostles are the channels through which the knowledge of these things flows to us from Christ; but whether this knowledge reaches us through their writings or through those of others makes no difference. The vital question is, whether the bearers of the apostolic tradition were infallibly inspired or not.
    173

    Even tho a writing were indorsed by the twelve apostles, this would not be positive proof of its credibility or divine authority. For altho they had the promise that the Holy Spirit would lead them into all truth, this does not exclude the possibility of their falling into mistakes or even untruths. The promise did not imply absolute infallibility, at all times, but merely when they should act as the witnesses of Jesus. Hence the information that a document comes from the hand of an apostle is insufficient. It requires the additional information that it belongs to the things which the apostle wrote as a witness of Jesus.

    If, therefore, the divine authority of any writing does not depend upon its apostolic character, but solely upon the authority of the Holy Spirit, it follows, as a matter of course, that the Holy Spirit is entirely free to have the apostolic testimony recorded by the apostles themselves, or by any one else; in both cases the authority of these writings is exactly the same. Personal preferences are out of the question. So far as form, content, wealth, and attractiveness are concerned, we may distinguish between John and Mark, Paul and Jude. But when it touches the question of the divine authority before which we must bow, then, we no longer take account of any such distinctions, and we ask only: Is this or that gospel inspired by the Holy Spirit?
    10:28 am
    The Character of the New Testament Scripture
    Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/kuyper/holy_spirit.html)

    Note: This is part thirty-five of a 123-part series taken from the book Work of the Holy Spirit
    by Abraham Kuyper. The following excerpt is from "Volume One: The Work
    of the Holy Spirit As A Whole," Ninth Chapter "The Holy Scriptures in the New Testament," titled "The Character of the New Testament Scripture."

    XXXV.
    The Character of the New Testament Scripture.

    "And these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full."—1 John i. 4.

    From the two preceding articles it is evident that the New Testament Scripture was not intended to bear the character of a notarial document· If this had been the Lord’s intention we should have received something entirely different. It would have required a twofold legal evidence:

    In the first place, the proof that the events narrated in the New Testament actually occurred as related.

    Secondly, that the revelations received by the apostles are correctly communicated.

    Both certifications should be furnished by witnesses, e.g., to prove the miracle of the feeding of the five thousand would require:

    1. A declaration of a number of persons, stating that they were eye-witnesses of the miracle.

    2. An authentic declaration of the magistrates of the surrounding places certifying to their signatures.

    3. A declaration of competent persons to prove that these witnesses were known as honest and trustworthy people, disinterested and competent to judge. Moreover, it would be necessary by proper testimony to prove that, among the five thousand, there were only seven loaves and two fishes.

    4. That the increase of bread took place while Jesus broke it.

    In the presence of a number of such documents, each duly authenticated and sealed, persons not too skeptical might find it possible to believe that the event had occurred as narrated in the Gospel.

    To prove this one miracle would require a number of documents as voluminous as the whole of St. Matthew. If it were possible 175 thus to prove all the events recorded in the gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, then the credibility of these narratives would be properly established.

    And even this would be far from satisfactory. For the difficulty would remain to prove that the epistles contain correct communications of the revelations received by the apostles. Such proof would be impossible. It would require eye- and ear-witnesses to these revelations; and a number of stenographers to report them. If this had been possible, then, we concede, there would have been, if not mathematical certainty for every expression, yet sufficient ground for accepting the general tenor of the epistles.

    But when the apostles wrote them there was no audible voice. And when a voice was heard, it could not be understood, as in the base of Paul’s revelation on the way to Damascus. The same may be said of what occurred on Patmos: St. John actually heard a voice, but the hearing and the understanding of the words which it uttered required a peculiar, spiritual operation that was lacking in the people at the same time on the island.

    The fact is, that the revelation of the Holy Spirit granted to the apostles was of such a nature that it could not be perceived by others. Hence the impossibility to prove its genuineness by notarial evidence. He that insists upon it ought to know that the Church can not furnish it, either for the historical narratives of the gospels, or for the spiritual contents of the epistles.

    Hence it is evident that every effort to prove the truth of the contents of the New Testament by external evidence only condemns itself, and must result in the absolute rejection of the authority of the Holy Scripture. If a judge of the present day should condemn or acquit an accused person on the ground of the insignificant evidence which satisfies many honest people with reference to the Scripture, what a storm of indignation would it raise! The whole list of the so-called evidences as to the credibility of the New Testament writers, that they were competent to judge, willing to testify, disinterested, etc., proves nothing indeed.

    Such externals may suffice when it concerns ordinary events, of which one might say: "I believe that it has really happened; I have no reason to doubt it; but if to-morrow it should prove not to be so, I will lose nothing by it." But how can such superficial methods be applied when it concerns the extraordinary events related by the Holy Scripture, upon the positive certainty of which my own and 176 my children’s highest interests depend; so that, if they proved to be untrue, e.g., the report of the resurrection of Christ, we should suffer the priceless and irreparable loss of an eternal salvation?

    This can not be; it is absolutely unthinkable. And experience proves that the efforts of foolish people to prop their faith by such proofs has always ended with the loss of all faith. Nay, such kind of proof is by its very insignificance either unworthy to be mentioned with reference to such serious matters, or, if it be worth anything, it can not be furnished, nor ought it to be.

    Notarial or mathematical proof neither can nor may be furnished, because the character and nature of the contents of Scripture are inconsistent with or repellent to such demonstration.

    No man may demand legal proofs for the fact that the man whom he loves and honors as father is his father indeed; God has made such proof impossible by the very nature of the case. The delicacy which ennobles all family life cuts off the very appearance of such investigation; and, if it were possible, the son, furnished with such proof, would ipso facto have lost his father and mother; they would be his parents no more; and beneath the pile of evidence his child-life would be buried.

    The same principle applies to the Holy Scripture. The nature and character of the revelation has been so ordered that it allows no notarial demonstration. The revelation to the apostles is unthinkable, if other persons could have heard, recorded, and published it as well as they. It was an operation of holy energies; not intended to compel doubters to a mere outward faith, but simply to accomplish that for which God had sent it, without caring much for the contradiction of the skeptics. It concerns a work of God which legal or mathematical investigation can not fathom; which manifests itself upon the spiritual domain where certainty obtains not by outward demonstration, but by personal faith of the one in the other.

    As faith in father and mother springs not from mathematical demonstration, but from the contact of love, the fellowship of life, and personal trust in each other, even so here. A life of love unfolded itself. The mercies of God came bending down to us in tender compassion. And every man touched by this divine life was affected by its influence, taken up by it, lived in it, felt himself in sympathetic fellowship with it; and, in a way imperceptible and not understood, obtained a certainty, far above any other, that he was in the presence of facts, and that they were divinely revealed.
    177

    And such is the origin of faith; not supported by scientific proof, for then it would be no faith; which has mastered the reader of the Holy Scripture in an entirely different way. The existence of the Scripture is owing to an act of the unfathomable mercies of God; and for this reason man’s acceptance must equally be an act of absolute self-denial and gratitude. It is only the broken and contrite heart, filled with thankfulness to God for His excellent mercy, that can cast itself into the Scripture as into its life-element, and feel that here is found real assurance, casting out all doubt.

    Hence we must distinguish a threefold operation of the Holy Spirit with reference to faith in the New Testament Scripture:

    First, a divine working giving a revelation to the apostles.

    Second, a working called inspiration.

    Third, a working, active to-day, creating faith in the Scripture in the heart at first unwilling to believe.

    First comes revelation proper.

    E g., when St. Paul wrote his treatise on the resurrection (1 Cor. xv.), he did not develop that truth for the first time. Probably he had apprehended it previously, and in his sermons and private correspondence expounded it. Hence the revelation antedates the epistle. It belonged to the things of which Jesus had said: “When the Holy Spirit has come He shall guide you into all truth, and He will show you things to come.” (John xvi. 13) And he received that revelation in such a way that he had the positive conviction that thus the Holy Spirit had revealed it to him, and that thus he would see it in the Judgment day.

    But the epistle was not yet written. This required a second act of the Holy Spirit—that of inspiration.

    Without this the knowledge that St. Paul had received a revelation would be useless. What warrant should we have that he had correctly understood and faithfully recorded it? He might have made a mistake in the communication, adding to it or taking from it, thus making it an unreliable report. Hence inspiration was indispensable; for by it the apostle was kept from error while he recorded the revelation previously received.

    Lastly, the spiritual bond must be created connecting the soul and the consciousness with the spiritual realities of the infallible Word of God—positive conviction of spiritual things.

    The Holy Spirit accomplishes this by the implanting of faith, with the various preparations that ordinarily precede the breaking 178 forth of the act of believing. The result is inward conviction. This is not wrought by referring us to Josephus or Tacitus, but in a spiritual way. The content of the Scripture is brought to the soul. The conflict between the Word and the soul is felt. The conviction thus wrought causes us to see not that the Scripture must make room for us, but we for the Scripture.

    In the discussion of regeneration we shall refer to this point more largely. For the present we shall be satisfied if we have succeeded in showing that the existence of the New Testament Scripture and our faith in it are not the work of man, but a work in which the Holy Spirit alone must be honored.
    Sunday, June 14th, 2009
    10:16 am
    The Holy Scriptures in the New Testament
    Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/kuyper/holy_spirit.html)

    Note: This is part thirty-three of a 123-part series taken from the book Work of the Holy Spirit
    by Abraham Kuyper. The following excerpt is from "Volume One: The Work
    of the Holy Spirit As A Whole," Ninth Chapter "The Holy Scriptures in the New Testament," titled "The Holy Scriptures in the New Testament."



    XXXIII.

    The Holy Scriptures in the New Testament.

    "But these are written that ye might believe that
    Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have
    life through His name."—John xx. 31.

    Having considered
    the apostolate, we are now to discuss God's gift to the Church,
    viz. the New Testament Scripture.

    The apostolate placed a new power in the Church.

    Surely all power is in heaven; but it has pleased God to let this
    power descend in the Church by means of organs and instruments, chief
    among which is the apostolate. This organ was a consolation of the
    Comforter, given to the Church after Jesus had ascended to heaven and
    was provisionally not to govern His Church in person. Hence it was a
    forsaken Church, not yet planted, and soon to be scattered, to which the
    Holy Spirit gave the apostolate as a bond of union, as an organ
    for self-extension, and as an instrument for its own enrichment
    with the full knowledge of the life of grace. Commissioned by the
    King of the Church, the apostles were animated by the Holy Spirit. As the
    King works for His Church only by the Spirit, so He caused the apostolate
    to work also by the higher powers of the Holy Spirit.

    It was not the Lord's intention that His Church should set out in
    ignorance, to wander about in manifold error, finally the long journey
    ended, to arrive at a clearer perception of the truth; but that from the
    beginning it should stand in the light of complete knowledge. Hence He
    gave it the apostolate, that from the cradle of

    165 its existence it should receive the full sunshine of
    grace, and that no subsequent development of Christendom should ever
    surpass that of the apostles.

    This is a very significant fact.

    Indeed, in the course of history there is development, especially
    in doctrine, which has not yet ceased, and which will continue until
    the end. The King has cast His Church into the midst of warfare and
    trouble; He has not permitted it to confess His name in an unmanly and
    indolent manner, but from age to age He has compelled it to defend that
    confession against error, misunderstanding, and hostility. It is only
    in this warfare that it has learned gradually to exhibit every part
    of its glorious inheritance of truth. God shall judge heretics; but,
    besides much mischief, they have rendered the Church this excellent
    service of compelling it to wake up from slumbering upon its gold-mines,
    to explore them, and to open the hidden treasure.

    Hence our conscious insight into the truth is deeper than that of
    the preceding centuries. Semper excelsior! Ever higher! Research into
    holy things may never cease; even now the Lord fulfils His promise to
    every true theologian: "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye
    shall find." (Luke xi. 9) And in the development
    of the consciousness of the Church concerning its treasure of truth,
    the Holy Spirit has a special work, and he who denies it leaves the
    Church to petrify and is blind for the word of the Lord.

    Yet, however great its present and future progress, it will
    never possess a grain of truth more than when the apostolate passed
    away. Afterward the gold-mine might be explored; but when the apostles
    died the mine itself existed already. Nothing can be added to it or ever
    will; it is complete in itself. For this reason the great men of God,
    who, in the course of ages, by brave words have animated the Church,
    have always pointed back to the treasures of the apostles, and without
    exception told the churches: "Your treasure lies not before, but behind
    you, and dates from the days of the apostles."

    And herein was mercy; any other disposition would have been
    unmerciful. The people of one or eighteen centuries ago had the same
    spiritual needs as we have; nothing less than we have could suffice
    for them. Their wounds are ours; the balm of Gilead that has healed
    us, healed them also. Consequently the remedy for souls must be ready
    for immediate use. Delay would be cruel. Hence it is not strange and
    problematic, but perfectly in accord

    166 with God's mercy, that the whole treasure of saving
    truth was given to the Church directly in the first century:

    To accomplish this was the mission of the apostolate. It is like
    medical science in this respect, which makes constant progress in the
    knowledge of herbs. But however great that progress, no new herb
    has been produced. Those that exist now, existed always, having the
    same medicinal properties. The only difference is, that we know better
    than our ancestors, how to apply them. In like manner, since the days of
    the apostolate no new remedy for the healing of souls has been created
    or invented. Indeed, some of the powers then at work are lost to us,
    e.g., the, charisma of tongues. All the difference between the
    Church then and now is, that we, according to this thinking and emotional
    age, understand more profoundly the connection between the effect of
    the remedy and the healing of our wounds.

    This difference does not make us richer or poorer. For the
    simple peasant it is sufficient to receive the prescribed medicine,
    altho he is ignorant of its ingredients and effects upon blood and
    nerves. In his world this need does not exist. But the man of thought,
    understanding the connection between cause and effect, has no confidence
    in any medicine unless he knows something of its working. To him, this
    knowledge is a positive need, and to the psychological effect it is
    even indispensable.

    This is likewise true of the Church of Christ; it has not been always
    the same, neither have its needs. The development of our knowledge has
    been such that every age has received an insight adapted to satisfy
    its necessity. More than this: the very fermentation of the age has
    created the modified need, and has been used of God to give a clearer
    understanding of the truth.

    And yet, whatever the increased clearness and maturity of the knowledge
    concerning the secret of the Lord during the ages, the secret itself
    has remained the same. Nothing has been added to it. And the mystery of
    the apostolate is, that by the labors of its members the whole secret of
    the Lord was made known to the Church, under the infallible authorship
    of the divine Inspirer, the Holy Spirit.

    This is the great fact accomplished by the apostolate: the publication
    of the whole secret of the Lord, by which the revelation in the Old
    Testament, to John the Baptist and Christ was enlarged and worked out. For
    to complete a thing means to add that which before

    167 was lacking; after which nothing more can be added. And
    this is the second point that we emphasize.

    Through the apostles the Church received something not possessed
    by Israel nor imparted by Christ. Christ Himself declares: "I have yet
    many things to say unto you, but ye can not bear them now. Howbeit when
    He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth;
    for He shall not speak from Himself; but whatsoever He shall hear,
    that shall He speak; and He will shew you things to come. He shall
    glorify Me; for He shall receive of Mine, and shall shew it unto you"
    (John xvi. 12-14). St. Paul spoke not less clearly,
    saying: "That the mystery which was kept secret since the world began
    was now made manifest" (Rom. xvi. 25). And again:
    "To make men see what is the dispensation of the mystery which from all
    ages was hid in God." And again: "The mystery which has been hid from
    ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints"
    (Col. i. 16). Finally, St. John declares that
    the apostles testify of what they had looked upon with their eyes, and
    their hands had handled of the Word of Life, which was with the Father,
    and which is manifested.

    Altho we do not deny that the germ of saving knowledge was given in
    Paradise, to the Patriarchs, and to Israel; yet the Scripture teaches
    distinctly that truth was revealed to the Patriarchs, unknown in Paradise;
    to Israel, of which the Patriarchs were ignorant; and by Jesus, truth
    that was hidden from Israel. In like manner, truth not declared by Jesus
    was revealed to the Church by the holy apostolate.

    Against this last statement, however, objections are raised: Many
    unbelieving writers of the present century have frequently asserted that
    not Jesus, but Paul was the real founder of Christianity; while others
    have frequently exhorted us to abandon the orthodox theology of St. Paul,
    and to return to the simple teachings of Jesus; especially to His Sermon
    on the Mount.

    And really, the more the Scripture is studied the more obvious the
    difference between the Sermon on the Mount and the Epistle to the Romans
    will appear. Not as tho the two contradict each other, but in this way,
    that the latter contains elements of truth, new rays of light, not found
    in the former.

    If one objects to the doctrines of the apostles, as does the Groninger
    School, it is natural to place the gospels above the epistles. Hence
    the fact that many half-believers still receive the Parables and

    168 the Sermon on the Mount, but reject the doctrine of
    justification, as taught by St. Paul; while those who wish to break with
    Christianity entirely are inclined to consider the Pauline epistles
    as its real exponent, but only to reject them with the entire Pauline
    Christianity. For the Church of the living God, which receives both,
    there is in this unholy tendency an exhortation to have an open eye for
    the difference between the gospels and the epistles, and to acknowledge
    that our opponents are right when they call it a marked difference.

    Yet while our opponents use the difference to attack either the
    authority of the apostolic doctrine or that of Christendom itself, the
    Church confesses that there is nothing surprising in this difference. Both
    are parts of the same doctrine of Jesus, with this distinction, that the
    first part was revealed directly by Christ, while the other He gave to
    His Church indirectly by the apostles.

    Of course, so long as the apostles are considered as independent
    persons, teaching a new doctrine on their own authority, our
    solution does not solve the difficulty. But confessing that they are
    holy apostles, i.e., organs of the Holy Spirit through whom Jesus
    Himself taught His people from heaven, then every objection is met,
    and there is not even a shadow of conflict.

    For Jesus simply acted like an earthly father in the training of
    his children, who teaches them according to their, comprehension; and
    in case of his death, his task still unfinished, he will leave them
    written instructions to be opened after his departure. But Jesus died
    to rise again, and even after His Ascension He continued to be in living
    contact with His Church through the apostolate. And what we would write
    before our decease, Jesus caused to be written by His apostles under
    the special direction of the Holy Spirit. Thus the Scriptures of the
    New Testament originate—a New Testament in a sense now
    easily understood.

    The correctness of this representation is proven by Christ's own
    words, which teach us—

    First, that there were things declared to the apostles before His
    departure, and there were things not declared, because they could not
    bear them then.

    Secondly, that Jesus would declare the latter, also, but by the
    Holy Spirit.

    Thirdly, that the Holy Spirit would reveal these things to them,
    not apart from Jesus, but by taking them from Christ and declaring them
    unto them.
    10:15 am
    Apostles To-Day?
    Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/kuyper/holy_spirit.html)

    Note: This is part thirty-two of a 123-part series taken from the book Work of the Holy Spirit
    by Abraham Kuyper. The following excerpt is from "Volume One: The Work
    of the Holy Spirit As A Whole," Eighth Chapter "The Apostolate," titled "Apostles To-Day?."


    XXXII.

    Apostles To-Day?

    "Am I not an apostle? am I not free?
    have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are ye not my work in the
    Lord?"—1 Cor. ix. 1.

    We may not take leave
    of the apostolate without a last look at the circle of its members. It
    is a closed circle; and every effort to reopen it tends to efface
    a characteristic of the New Covenant.

    And yet the effort is being made again and again. We see it in
    Rome’s apostolic succession; in the Ethical view gradually
    effacing the boundary-line between the apostles and believers; and
    in its boldest and most concrete form among the Irvingites.1616 The Irvingites are known
    in England and America as the Catholic Apostolic Church.—Trans.......

    The latter assert not only that the Lord gave to His Church a college
    of apostles in the beginning, but that He has now called a body of
    apostles in His Church to prepare His people for the coming.

    However, this position can not be very successfully supported. Neither
    in the discourses of Christ, nor in the epistles of the apostles, nor
    in the Apocalypse, do we find the least intimation of such an event. The
    end of all things is repeatedly spoken of. The New Testament frequently
    rehearses the events and signs that must precede the Lord’s
    return. They are recorded so minutely that some even say that the exact
    date can be fixed. And yet, among all these prophecies, we fail to
    discover the slightest sign of a subsequent apostolate. In the panorama
    of the things to come there is literally no room for it.

    Nor have the results realized the expectations of these brethren. Their
    apostolate has been a great disappointment. It has accomplished almost
    nothing. It has come and gone without leaving a trace. We do not deny
    that some of these men have done wonderful

    159 things; but be it noticed, in the first place, that the
    signs wrought were far below those performed by the apostles; second, that
    a man like Pastor Blumhardt has also wrought signs that greatly deserve to
    be noticed; third, that the Roman Catholic Church sometimes offers signs
    that are not pretended nor artificial; lastly, that the Lord has warned
    us in His Word that signs shall be wrought by men who are not His own.

    Moreover, let us not forget that the apostles of the Irvingites
    completely lack the marks of the apostolate. These were: (1) a call
    directly from the King of the Church; (2) a peculiar qualification of the
    Holy Spirit making them infallible in the service of the Church. These
    men lack both marks. They tell us, indeed, of a call come to them by
    the mouth of prophets, but this is to little or no purpose, for a call
    from a prophet is not equal to one directly from Christ, and again the
    name "prophet" is exceedingly misleading. The word prophet has, on the
    sacred page, a wide application, and occurs in both a limited
    and a general sense. The former involves the revelation of
    a knowledge that mere illumination does not afford; while the latter
    applies to men speaking in holy ecstasy to the praise of God. We concede
    that prophesying, in the general sense, is an enduring charisma of the
    Church; for which reason the reformers of the sixteenth century attempted
    to revive this office. If the Irvingites, therefore, believe that in their
    circles the prophetic activity has been revived, we will not dispute it;
    altho we can not say that the reports of their prophesying have had a
    very overwhelming effect upon us. However, let it be granted that the
    gift has been restored; but even then we ask: What do you gain by it? For
    there is not the slightest proof that these prophets and prophetesses
    are like their predecessors in the Old Testament. The unrevealed will
    of God has not been revealed to them. If prophets at all, then their
    prophesying is merely a speaking to the praise of God in a state of
    spiritual ecstasy.

    The uselessness of an appeal to such prophets for the support of
    this new apostolate is evident. It is merely the effort to support an
    unsupported apostolate by an equally unsupported prophetism.

    Nor should it be forgotten that the labors of these so-called apostles
    have not carried out their own program. They have failed to exert any
    perceptible influence upon the course of events. The institutions founded
    by them have in no respect surpassed the many

    160 new church organizations witnessed by this century. They
    have established no new principle; their labors have manifested no new
    power. Whatever they have done lacks the stamp of a heavenly origin. And
    nearly all these new apostles have died not like the genuine twelve
    on cross or stake, but on their own beds surrounded by their friends
    and admirers.

    However, this is not all. The name of apostle may be taken (1) in
    the sense of being called directly by Jesus as an ambassador for. God,
    or (2) in a general sense, denoting every man sent by Jesus into
    His vineyard; for the word apostle means one that is sent. In
    Acts xiv. 14 Barnabas is called an apostle: not
    because he belonged to their number, but merely to indicate that he was
    sent out by the Lord as His missionary or ambassador. In Acts
    xiii. 1, 2 Barnabas is mentioned before Saul, who is not
    even called by his apostolic name; which shows that this call of the
    Holy Spirit bore only a temporary character, having in view only this
    special mission. For this reason the Lord Jesus Christ, as the One sent
    of the Father, the great Missionary come to this world, the Ambassador
    of God to His Church, is celled Apostle: "Wherefore, holy brethren,
    . . . consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, Christ
    Jesus" (Heb. iii. 1).

    If the Irvingites had called the great reformers of the sixteenth
    century, or some prominent churchleaders of the present time, apostles,
    there could have been no great objection. But they did not mean this. They
    claim that these new apostles shall stand before the Church in a peculiar
    character, on the same plane with the first apostles, altho differently
    employed. And this can not be conceded. It would be in direct opposition
    to the apostolic declaration of 1 Cor. iv. 9:
    "For I think that God hath set us forth as the last apostles,
    as it were appointed unto death" (see Dutch translation). How could
    St. Paul speak of the last apostles, if it were God's plan
    after eighteen centuries to send other twelve apostles into the world?

    In view of this positive word of the Holy Spirit, we direct all those
    that come into contact with the Irvingites to what the Scripture says
    concerning them that call themselves apostles, and are not: "For such men
    are false apostles, deceitful workers, fashioning themselves into apostles
    of Christ." And the Lord Jesus testifies to the church at Ephesus: "I know
    that thou halt tried them which say they are apostles and are not."
    161

    The notion that false apostles must be a sort of incarnate devils
    applies in no wise to the calm, respectable, and venerable men frequently
    seen in the circles of the Irvingites. But apart from this absurd notion,
    and considering that the false prophets of the Old Testament so closely
    resembled the true ones that at times even the people of God were deceived
    by them, we can understand that the false apostles of St. John's
    day could be detected only by a higher spiritual discernment: and
    that the pretended apostles of the nineteenth century, who by their
    similarity to the genuine twelve blinded the eyes of the superficial,
    could be detected only by the touchstone of the Word of God. And that
    Word declares that the twelve of St. Paul's day were the last
    apostles, which settles the matter of this pretended apostolate.

    This error of the Irvingites is therefore not so very innocent. It
    is easy to explain how it originated. The wretched and deplorable state
    of the Church must necessarily give rise to a number of sects. And we
    heartily acknowledge that the Irvingites have sent forth many warnings
    and well-deserved rebukes to our superficial and divided Church. But
    these good offices by no means justify the doing of things condemned by
    the Word of God; and those who have allowed themselves to be carried
    away by their teachings will sooner or later experience their fatal
    result. It is already manifest that this movement, which started among
    us under the pretext of uniting a divided church by gathering together
    the Lord's people, has accomplished little more than to add another
    to the already large number of sects, thus robbing the Church of Christ
    of excellent powers that now are being wasted.

    That the apostolate was a closed circle, and not a flexible
    theory, is evident from Acts i. 25: "Lord, show
    of these two, the one whom Thou hast chosen to take the place of
    this ministry and apostleship"; and again from St. Paul's word
    (Rom. i. 5): "By whom we have received grace
    and apostleship"; and again (1 Cor. ix. 2):
    "For the seal of my apostleship are ye in the Lord"; and lastly from
    Gal. ii. 8: "For He that wrought for Peter unto
    the apostleship of the circumcision, wrought for me also unto the
    Gentiles." And again it is evident from the fact that the apostles
    always appear as the twelve; and from their being specially appointed
    and installed by Jesus breathing upon them the official gift of the Holy
    Spirit; and from the exceptional power and gifts that were connected with
    the apostolate. And it is especially from its conspicuous place in the

    162 coming Kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ that the apostolate
    obtains its definite character. For the Holy Scripture teaches that
    the apostles shall sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes
    of Israel; and also that the New Jerusalem has "twelve foundations
    upon which are written the twelve names of the apostles of the Lamb."
    (Rev. xii. 14)

    St. Paul offers us in his own person the most convincing proof that
    the apostolate was a closed college. If it had not been, the question
    whether he was an apostle or not could never have caused contention. Yet
    a large part of the Church refused to acknowledge his apostleship. He did
    not belong to the twelve; he had not walked with Jesus; how could he be
    a witness? It was against this seriously meant contention that St. Paul
    repeatedly lifted up his voice with such energy and animation. This
    fact is the key to the right understanding of his epistles to the
    Corinthians and Galatians. They glow with holy jealousy for the reality
    of his apostleship; for he was deeply convinced that he was an apostle
    as well as St. Peter and the others. Not by virtue of personal merit;
    in himself he was not worthy to be called an apostle—1
    Cor. xv. 9; but no sooner is his office assailed than he
    arouses himself like a lion, for this touched the honor of his Master,
    who had appeared unto him in the way to Damascus; not, as is commonly
    said, to, convert him—for this is not Christ's
    work, but that of the Holy Spirit—but to appoint him an
    apostle in that Church which he was persecuting.

    As to the question, how the addition of St. Paul to the twelve
    is consistent with that number, we are convinced that not the name of
    Matthias, but that of St. Paul is written upon the foundations of the New
    Jerusalem with those of the others; and that not Matthias, but St. Paul
    shall sit down to judge the twelve tribes of Israel. As one of the tribes
    of Israel was replaced by two others, so in regard to the apostolate;
    for Simeon, who fell out, Manasseh and Ephraim were substituted, and
    Judas was replaced by Matthias and Paul.

    We would not imply that the apostles erred in electing Matthias to
    fill the vacancy occasioned by the suicide of Judas. On the contrary,
    the completion of the apostolic number could not be delayed until the
    conversion of St. Paul. The vacancy had to be filled immediately. But it
    may be said that when the disciples chose Matthias they had too small a
    conception of the goodness of their Lord. They supposed that for Judas
    they would receive a Matthias, and

    163 behold, Jesus gave them a Paul. As to the former, the
    Scripture mentions his election and no more. Yet even tho to the Church
    of later times the apostolate without St. Paul is unthinkable, and tho it
    allowed his person the first place among the apostles and his writings
    highest in authority among the Scriptures of the New Testament, to the
    person of Matthias the election to the apostolate must have brought
    highest honor. The apostolate stands so high that the fact of having
    been identified with it, even temporarily, imparts greater luster to a
    man’s name than a royal crown.
    Monday, May 25th, 2009
    10:09 am
    Apostolic Inspiration
    Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/kuyper/holy_spirit.html)

    Note: This is part thirty-one of a 123-part series taken from the book Work of the Holy Spirit
    by Abraham Kuyper. The following excerpt is from "Volume One: The Work
    of the Holy Spirit As A Whole," Eighth Chapter "The Apostolate," titled "Apostolic Inspiration."


    XXXI.

    Apostolic Inspiration.

    “When He, the Spirit of truth, is come,
    He will guide you into all truth.”—John
    xvi. 13.

    What is the nature
    of the work of the Holy Spirit in the inspiration of the apostles?

    Apart from the mechanical and natural theories, which are vulgar and
    profane, there are two others, viz., the Ethical and the Reformed.

    According to the former the inspiration of the apostles differs from
    the animation of believers only in degree, not in nature. They represent
    the matter as tho, by the incarnation of the Word, a new sphere of life
    was created which they call the “God-human.” They
    that have received the life of this higher sphere are called believers;
    others are unbelievers. In these believers the consciousness is gradually
    changed, illuminated, and sanctified. Hence they see things in a different
    light, i.e., their eyes are opened so that they see much of the
    spiritual world of which unbelievers see nothing. However, this result
    is not the same in all believers. The more favored see more correctly and
    distinctly than the less favored. And the most excellent among them, who
    possess this God-human life most abundantly, and look into the things of
    the, Kingdom with greatest clearness and distinctness, are the men called
    apostles. Hence the inspiration of the apostles and the illumination of
    believers are in principle the same; differing only in degree.

    The Reformed churches can not agree with this view. In their judgment
    the very effort to identify apostolic inspiration with the illumination of
    believers actually annihilates the former. They hold that the inspiration
    of the apostles was wholly unique in nature and kind,
    totally different from what the Scripture calls illumination of
    believers. The apostles possessed this latter gift even in its

    153 highest degree, and we heartily indorse all that the
    Ethical theologians say in this respect. But, when all is said, we hold
    that apostolic inspiration is not even touched upon; that it lies entirely
    outside of it; is not contained in, but added to, it; and that the Church
    must reverence it as an extraordinary, peculiar, and unique work of the
    Holy Spirit, which was wrought exclusively in the holy apostles.

    Hence both sides concede that the apostles were born again, that
    they had received illumination in a peculiarly high degree. But while
    the Ethical theorists maintain that this extraordinary illumination
    includes inspiration, the Reformed hold that illumination in its highest
    degree has nothing to do with inspiration; which was unique in its kind,
    without equal, given to the apostles alone; never to other believers.

    The difference between the two views is obvious.

    According to the Ethical view, the epistles are the writings of very
    worthy, godly, and sanctified men; the thoughtful utterances of highly
    enlightened believers. And yet, having said all this, they are after all
    only fallible; they may contain ninety per cent of truth, well expressed
    and accurately defined; but the possibility remains that the other ten
    per cent is full of errors and mistakes Even tho there be one or more
    infallible epistles, how can this avail us, since we do not know it? In
    fact, we are without the least certainty in this matter. And for this
    reason it is actually conceded that the apostles have made mistakes.

    Hence the Reformed churches can not accept this fascinating
    representation; and the conscience of believers will always protest
    against it. What we expect in “holy apostles” is this
    very certainty, reliability, and decision. Reading their
    testimony, we want to rely upon it. This certainty alone has been the
    strength of the Church of all ages. This conviction alone has given
    her rest. And the Church of to-day feels as instinctively that the
    reliability of the Word that is its Bible is being taken away
    from it, inasmuch as, these beautifully sounding theories strip the
    apostolic word of its infallibility.

    The holy apostles appear in their writings as
    such, and not otherwise. St. John, the most beloved among the twelve,
    testifies that the Lord Jesus gave them as apostles a rare promise,
    saying, “He shall guide you into all truth,” (John
    xvi. 13) a word that may not be applied to

    154 others, but to the apostles exclusively. And again:
    "The Comforter which is the Holy Ghost shall teach you all things, and
    bring to your remembrance all things whatsoever I have said unto you."
    (John xiv. 26); which promise was not intended
    for all, but for the apostles only, securing them a gift evidently
    distinct from illumination. In fact, this promise was nothing else than
    the permanent endowment with the gift received only temporarily when
    they went forth on their first mission among Israel: "For it is, not
    you that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you."
    (Matt. x. 20)

    Moreover, the Lord Jesus did not only promise them that the word
    proceeding from their mouth would be a word of the Holy Spirit, but He
    granted them such personal power and authority that it would be as tho
    God Himself spoke through them. St. Paul testified of this to the church
    of Thessalonica, saying: "For this cause we thank God that ye received it
    not as the word of men, but, as it is in truth, the Word of God"
    (1 Thess. ii. 13). And St. John tells us that, both
    before and after the resurrection, the Lord Jesus gave His disciples power
    to bind on earth in the sense that their word would have binding power
    forever: "Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and
    whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained"; — (John
    xx. 23) words that are horrible and untenable except they
    be understood as implying perfect agreement between the minds of the
    apostles and the mind of God. Of similar import are the words of Christ
    to Peter: "Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven;
    and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
    (Matt. xvi. 19)

    However, reading and pondering these remarkable
    and weighty words, let us be careful not to fall into the error of Rome,
    or, in order to escape from this, make the Word of God of no effect,
    which is equally dangerous. For the Church of Rome applies these words of
    Jesus to His disciples, to the whole Church as an institution; especially
    the word to Peter, making it to refer to all Peter’s successors
    (so-called) in the government of the Church of Rome. If that be indeed
    the meaning of these words, then Rome is perfectly right; then to the
    Pope is granted power to bind, and the priests of Rome have still the
    power to absolve. Our reason for denying that Rome has this power is not
    the impossibility for men to have it, for it was given to the apostles;
    Peter was infallible in his sentences ex cathedra, and the apostles
    could grant absolution. But we

    155 deny that Rome has the slightest authority to confer
    this power of Peter upon the Pope, or that of the apostles upon its
    priests. Neither Matt. xvi. 19 nor John
    xx. 23 contains the least proof for such claim. And inasmuch
    as no man has the liberty to exercise such extraordinary power except he
    can show the credential’s of his mission, so we deny Rome’s
    qualifications to exercise it in pope or priest, not because this is
    impossible, but because Rome can not substantiate its claims.

    At the same time, let us, in our contending with Rome, not fall into
    the opposite error of disparaging the plain and clear meaning of the
    word. This is done by the Ethical theologians; for the words of Jesus
    referred to do not receive justice so long as we refuse to recognize
    in the apostles a working of the Holy Spirit entirely peculiar, unique,
    and extraordinary. We dilute the words of Jesus and violate their sense
    so long as we do not acknowledge that, if the apostles were still living,
    they would have the power to forgive us our sins; and that Peter, if he
    were still living, would have power and authority to issue ordinances
    binding upon the whole Church. The words are so plain, the qualification
    was granted in such definite terms, that it can not be denied that John
    could forgive sin, and that Peter had power to issue an infallible
    decree. The Lord said to the disciples: "Whosesoever sins ye remit,
    they are remitted unto them" (John xx. 23); and to
    Peter: "Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven."
    (Matt. xvi. 19)

    Thus acknowledging the unique position and extraordinary power of the
    apostles, we immediately add that this power was granted to them alone
    and to no one else.

    We emphasize this in opposition to Rome and to those who apply the
    words of Christ, spoken to His disciples exclusively, to ministers
    and other believers. Neither Rome nor the Ethical theologians have
    the right to do this, unless they can show that the Lord Jesus gave
    them such right. But they never can. Care should be taken, therefore,
    in the choice of texts, proofs, and quotations from the Scripture, to
    ascertain not only what is said, but also to whom it was
    said. And thus the error concerning the apostolate will soon be overcome;
    and believers will see that the apostles occupy a different position from
    other Christians, that the promises quoted bear an exceptional character,
    and that the Word of the Lord is misunderstood when inspiration is
    confounded with illumination.
    156

    In opposition to these wrong views, which are Romish, clerical in
    principle, and at the same time strongly tending to rationalism, we
    maintain the ancient confession of the Christian Church, which declares
    that, as the ambassadors extraordinary of Christ, the apostles occupied
    a unique position in the race, in the Church, and in the history of
    the world, and were clothed with extraordinary powers that required an
    extraordinary operation of the Holy Spirit.

    But we do not deny that these men were born again and partakers of
    the heavenly illumination; so that the man of sin was driven back,
    and the new man was powerfully revealed in them. But their personal
    state and condition was the cause of their continued sinfulness until
    the hour of their death; hence their infallible authority could never
    spring from the fallible condition of their hearts. Even tho they
    had been less sinful, such power could not be thus accounted for. And
    if they had fallen more deeply into sin, it would not have hindered
    the Holy Spirit's operation with reference to the exercise of this
    authority. It is remarkable that Peter, who was clothed with the highest
    power, fell again and again into great sin. They were saints
    because they were hid in Christ like other Christians; but they were
    holy apostles not on the ground of their spiritual state and
    condition, but only by virtue of their holy calling and the working of
    the Holy Spirit that was promised and given unto them.

    Finally, the question arises, whether there was a difference
    between the operation of the Holy Spirit in the prophets and in the
    apostles. We answer in the affirmative. Ezekiel's oracles are
    different from St. John's Gospel. The Epistle to the Romans bears
    witness to a different inspiration from that of the prophecies of
    Zacharias. Undoubtedly the book of Revelation proves that the apostles
    were also susceptible to inspiration by visions; the book of the Acts is
    evidence that in those days there were also wonderful signs; and St. Paul
    speaks of visions and ecstasies. And yet the collective treasure that
    came down to us under the apostles' name bears evidence that the
    inspiration of the New Testament has another character than that of the
    Old. And the principal difference consists in the mighty fact of the
    outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

    The prophets were inspired before Pentecost, and the apostles after
    it. This fact is so strongly marked in the history of their mission that
    before it the apostles sit still, while immediately after it they appear
    in their apostolic character before the world.

    157 And since in the outpouring the Holy Spirit came to dwell
    in the body of Christ, which before He had been preparing, it is obvious
    that the difference of inspiration in the Old and the New Testament
    consists in the fact that the former was wrought upon the prophets from
    without, while the latter wrought upon the apostles from within,
    proceeding from the body of Christ.

    And this is the reason that the prophets give us more or less the
    impression of an inspiration independent of their personal, spiritual
    life, while the inspiration of the apostles acts almost always through
    the life of the soul. It is this very fact that offers to the error
    of the Ethical view its starting-point. Surely the person and his
    condition appear in the apostles much more in the foreground than in the
    prophets. And yet in both prophet and apostle inspiration is that wholly
    extraordinary operation of the Holy Spirit whereby, in a manner for us
    incomprehensible and to them not always conscious, they were kept from
    the possibility of error.
    Monday, May 18th, 2009
    7:22 pm
    The Apostolic Scriptures
    Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/kuyper/holy_spirit.html)

    Note: This is part thirty of a 123-part series taken from the book Work of the Holy Spirit
    by Abraham Kuyper. The following excerpt is from "Volume One: The Work
    of the Holy Spirit As A Whole," Eighth Chapter "The Apostolate," titled "The Apostolic Scriptures."


    XXX.

    The Apostolic Scriptures.

    “And I think that I also have the
    Spirit of God.”—1 Cor.
    vii. 40.

    We have seen that
    the apostolate has an extraordinary significance and occupies a unique
    position. This position is twofold, viz., temporary, with reference to
    the founding of the first churches, and permanent, with regard to the
    churches of all ages.

    The first must necessarily be temporary, for what was then accomplished
    can not be repeated. A tree can be planted only once; an organism can be
    born only once; the planting or founding of the Church could take place
    only once. However, this founding was not unprepared for. On the contrary,
    God has had a Church in the world from the beginning. That Church was
    even a world-Church. But it went down in idolatry; and only a
    small Church remained among an almost unknown people—the Church in
    Israel. When this particular Church was to become again a world-Church,
    two things were required:

    First, that the Church in Israel lay aside its national dress.

    Secondly, that in the midst of the heathen world
    the Church of Christ appear, so that the two might become manifest as
    the one Christian Church.

    By these two things the apostolic labor is almost exhausted. In
    St. Paul the two are united. No apostle labored more zealously to divest
    the Church of Israel of its Jewish attire, and no one was more abundant
    in the planting of new churches in all parts of the world.

    The apostolate had, however, a much more extensive and higher calling,
    not only for those days, but also for the Church of the ages. It was
    the task of the apostles for which they were, ordained: by giving to
    the churches fixed forms of government to determine their character;
    and by the written documentation of the revelation of Christ Jesus to
    secure to them purity and perpetuity.

    This is evident from the character of their labors: for they not

    147 only founded churches, but also gave them
    ordinances. St. Paul writes to the Corinthians: “As I have
    given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye”
    (1 Cor. xvi. 1). Hence they were conscious
    of possessing power, of being clothed with authority: “And so
    ordain I in all the churches,” says the same apostle (1
    Cor. vii. 17). This ordaining is not like that of our official
    church boards which have power to make rules; or as a minister in the name
    of the consistory announces from the pulpit certain regulations. Nay,
    the apostles exercised authority by virtue of a power they consciously
    possessed in themselves, independent of any church or church council. For
    St. Paul writes, after having given ordinances in the matter of marriages:
    “And I think that I also have the Spirit of God.” (1
    Cor. vii. 40) Hence the power and authority to command, to
    ordain and to judge in the churches, they derived not from the Church,
    nor from church council, nor from the apostolate, but directly from the
    Holy Spirit. This is true even of the power to judge; for, concerning
    an incestuous person in the church of Corinth, St. Paul judged that he
    should be delivered to Satan; the execution of which sentence he left
    to the elders of that church, but upon which he had determined by virtue
    of his apostolic authority—1 Cor. v. 3.

    In this connection it is remarkable that St. Paul was conscious of a
    twofold current running through his word: (1) that of tradition,
    touching the things ordained by the Lord Jesus during His ministry; and
    (2) that of the Holy Spirit, touching the things to be decided
    by the apostolate. For he writes: “Now concerning virgins, I
    have no commandment of the Lord; yet I give my judgment as one that
    hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful” (1
    Cor. vii. 25). And again he saith: “Unto the married
    I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her
    husband” (ver. 10).
    And in verse 12 he saith:
    “But to the rest speak I, not the Lord.” Many have received
    the impression that St. Paul meant to say: “What the Lord commanded,
    you must keep; but the things by me enjoined are of less account and not
    binding”;—a view destroying the authority of the apostolic
    word, and therefore to be rejected. The apostle has not the least
    intention of undermining his own authority; for having delivered the
    message, he adds expressly: "And I think that I also have the Spirit of
    God”; (1 Cor. vii. 40) which, in connection
    with the commandment of the Lord, can not mean anything else than this:
    “That which I have enjoined rests upon the same authority as the
    Lord’s own words”;—a declaration which was already

    148 contained in the word: “I have received mercy to be
    faithful,” i.e., in my work of regulating the churches.

    By these ordinances and regulations the apostles not only gave to
    the churches of those days a fixed form of life, but they also prepared
    the channel that was to determine the future course of the life of the
    Church. They did this in two ways:

    First, partly by the impressions they made upon the life of the
    churches, and which were never wholly obliterated.

    Secondly, partly also and more particularly by leaving us in writing
    the image of that Church, and by sealing the principal features of these
    ordinances in their apostolic epistles.

    Both these influences, that directly on the life of the churches,
    and that of the apostolic Scriptures, have taken care that the image of
    the Church should not be lost, and that, where it was in danger of such
    loss, by the grace of God it should be fully restored.

    This leads us to consider the second activity
    of the apostles, whereby they operated upon the Church of all ages,
    viz., the in heritance of their writings.

    Our writings are the richest and maturest products of the mind;
    and the mind of the Holy Spirit received its richest, fullest, and most
    perfect expression when His meaning was put into documental form. The
    literary labor of the apostles deserves, therefore, careful attention.

    When the apostles Peter and Paul preached the Gospel, healed the
    sick, judged the unruly, and founded churches, giving them ordinances,
    they performed in each of these a great and glorious work. And yet the
    significance of St. Paul’s labor when he wrote, e.g., the
    Epistle to the Romans so far surpassed the value of preaching and healing
    that the two can not be compared. When he wrote that one little book,
    which in ordinary pamphlet form would make no more than three sheets of
    printed matter, he performed the greatest work of his life. From this
    little book the most far-reaching influences have gone forth. By this
    one little book St. Paul became a historic person.

    We know, indeed, that many of our present theologians
    reverse this order, and say: “These apostles were profoundly
    spiritual men; they lived near the Lord and had entered deeply into the
    mind of Christ; they labored and preached and occasionally wrote a few
    letters, some of which have come down to us; yet this letter-writing

    149 was of little significance to their persons”; but
    against this whole representation we protest with all our might. Nay,
    these men were not such excellent personalities that the few occasional
    letters from their hands could scarcely have any significance in their
    lives. On the contrary, their epistolary labor was the most important of
    all their lifework; small in compass, but rich in content; apparently of
    less, but by virtue of its comprehensive and far-reaching influence of
    much higher significance. And since the apostles may not be considered
    half-idiots, knowing scarcely anything of the future of the Church,
    and without any realization of what they were doing, we maintain that
    a man like St. Paul, having finished his Epistle to the Romans, was
    indeed conscious of the fact that this work would occupy a prominent
    place among his apostolic labors.

    Even tho it be granted that the apostle was unconscious of it, yet this
    alters not the fact. To-day, when the churches founded eighteen centuries
    ago have all past away, and the church of Rome can scarcely be recognized;
    when the people who by his wonderful power were healed or saved have all
    crumbled to dust, and not a single memory remains of all his other toil;
    to-day his epistolary inheritance still governs the Church of Christ.

    We can not conceive what the condition of the Church would be without
    St. Paul’s epistles; if we were to lose the inheritance of the
    great apostle that has come to us through our fathers. What is it that
    controls our confession, if not the truths developed by him; what is it
    that governs our lives, if not the ideals so highly exalted by him? We
    can safely say, with reference to our own Church, that without the Pauline
    epistles its whole form and appearance would be totally different.

    This being so, we are also justified in saying that the objectifying
    of Christian truth in the apostolic epistles is the most important of
    all their labors. Instead of calling it a “dead-letter,”
    we confess that in it their activity reached its very zenith.

    However, the peculiar work of the Holy Spirit
    in the apostolate being the subject of our present inquiry, and not the
    apostolate itself, we will consider now the serious question: What is
    the nature of this work?

    Our choice lies between the theory of the mechanical, and that
    of the natural, process.
    150

    The supporters of the first say: “Nothing can be more simple than
    the work of the Holy Spirit in the apostles. They had only to sit down,
    take pen and ink, and write at His dictation.” The advocates of
    the natural process state its case as follows: “The apostles had
    entered more deeply into the mind of Christ; they were holier, purer,
    and more godly than others; hence they were better fitted to be the
    instruments of the Holy Spirit, who after all animates every child of
    God.” These are the extreme views. On the one hand, the work of the
    Holy Spirit is considered as a foreign element introduced into the life
    of the Church and that of the apostles. Any schoolboy competent to write
    a dictation might have written the Epistle to the Romans just as well
    as St. Paul. The obvious difference of style and manner of presentation
    between his epistles and those of St. John does not spring from the
    difference of personalities, but from the fact that the Holy Spirit
    purposely adopted the style and way of speaking of His chosen scribe,
    be he St. Paul or St. John.

    The other extreme considers that the persons of the apostles account
    for the whole matter; so that to speak of a work of the Holy Spirit
    is only to repeat a pious term. According to this view, the influence
    of Christ’s personal intercourse had an educating effect upon His
    disciples, which left such impress of His life upon them that they could
    understand His Person and aims much better than others; hence being the
    best-developed minds of the Christian circle of those days, they adopted
    in their writings—a certain apostolic authority.

    Besides these two extremes, we must mention the view of certain
    friendly theologians who turn this natural into a supernatural, but still
    self-developed, process. They acknowledge, with us, that there is a work
    of the Holy Spirit which they also call regeneration, and allow that to
    this the gift of illumination is often added. And from this they argue:
    “Among the regenerated there are some in whom this divine work
    is only superficial, and others in whom He operates more deeply. In
    the former; the gift of illumination is undeveloped; in the latter, it
    attains great luster; and it is to this class that the apostles belonged,
    who were partakers of this gift in its highest degree. Owing to these
    two gifts, the work of the Holy Spirit attained in them such clearness
    and transparency that, in speaking or writing concerning the things
    of the Kingdom of God, they struck almost invariably the right note,
    chose the right word,

    151 and continued in the right direction. Hence the power of
    their writings, and the almost binding authority of their word.”

    Over against these three opponents we wish to present the view of the
    best theologians of the Christian Church, which, altho fully appreciating
    the effects of regeneration and illumination in the apostles, still
    maintain that from these the infallible, apostolic authority can not be
    explained; and that the authority of their word is recognized only by
    the unconditional confession that these operations of grace were but
    the means used by the Holy Spirit when, through the apostles, He cast
    His own testimony into documental forms for the Church of all ages.
    Sunday, May 10th, 2009
    1:58 pm
    The Apostolate
    Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/kuyper/holy_spirit.html)


    Note: This is part twenty-nine of a 123-part series taken from the book Work of the Holy Spirit
    by Abraham Kuyper. The following excerpt is from "Volume One: The Work
    of the Holy Spirit As A Whole," Eighth Chapter "The Apostolate," titled "The Apostolate."




    XXIX.

    The Apostolate.

    “That ye also may have fellowship
    with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son
    Jesus Christ.”—1 John i. 3.

    The apostolate bears
    the character of an extraordinary manifestation, not seen before or
    after it, in which we discover a proper work of the Holy Spirit. The
    apostles were ambassadors extraordinary — different from the prophets,
    different from the present ministers of the Word. In the history of
    the Church and the world they occupy a unique position and have a
    peculiar significance. Hence the apostolate is entitled to a special
    discussion.

    Moreover, the apostolate belongs to the great things which the Holy
    Spirit has wrought. All that the Holy Scripture declares concerning
    the apostles compels us to look for an explanation of their persons and
    mission in a special work of the Holy Spirit. Before His ascension Jesus
    predicted repeatedly that they should be His witnesses only after they
    shall have received the Holy Spirit in an extraordinary manner. Until
    this promise is fulfilled they remain hiding in Jerusalem. And when
    they raise the banner of the cross in Jerusalem and in the ends of the
    earth, they appeal to the power of the Holy Spirit as the secret of
    their appearance.

    The apostolate was holy, and we call them holy
    apostles, not because they had attained a higher degree of perfection,
    but “holy" in the Scriptural sense of being separated, set apart,
    like the Temple and its furniture, for the service of a holy God.

    By sin many things have become unholy. Before sin entered

    140 into the world all things were holy. That part of creation
    which became unholy stands in opposition to that which remained holy. The
    latter is called Heaven; that which was made holy is called Church. And
    all that belongs to the Church, to its being and organism, is called
    holy.

    Hence Jesus could say to the disciples who were about to deny Him:
    “Ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.” In like manner the members of the
    Church and their children are called “sanctified”; and in his
    epistles St. Paul addresses them as holy and beloved: not
    because they were sinless, but because God had set them as called saints
    in the realm of His holiness, which by His grace He had separated from the
    realm of sin. In like manner the Scripture is called holy: not to indicate
    that it is the record of holy things only, but that its origin is not
    in man’s sinful life, but in the holy realm of the life of God.

    We confess, therefore, that the apostles of Jesus were set apart for
    the service of God’s holy Kingdom, and that they were qualified
    for their calling by the power of the Holy Spirit.

    By omitting the word “holy,” as many do, we make the
    apostles common; we consider them as ordinary preachers; in degree
    above us undoubtedly, being more richly developed, especially by
    their intercourse with Christ, and as His witnesses very dear to us,
    but still occupying the same level with other teachers and ministers
    of the Church of all ages. And so the conviction will be lost that the
    apostles are men different in kind from all other men; lost the
    realization that in them appeared a peculiar and unique ministry; lost
    also the grateful confession that the Lord our God gave us in these men
    extraordinary grace.

    And this explains why some ministers, at the special occasion of
    installation, departure, or jubilee, apply to themselves apostolic
    utterances that are not applicable to their persons, but exclusively
    to the men who occupy a peculiar and unique position in the Church
    of all ages and all lands. For this reason we repeat purposely the
    title of honor, “holy apostles,” in order that the peculiar
    significance of the apostolate may again receive honorable recognition
    in our churches.

    This peculiar significance of the apostolate
    appears in the Holy Scripture in various ways.

    We begin with referring to the prologue of the First Epistle of St.

    141 John, in which, from the fulness of the apostolic
    sense, the holy apostle solemnly addresses us. He opens his epistle by
    declaring that they, the apostles of the Lord, occupy an exceptional
    position regarding the miracle of the incarnation of the Word. He says:
    “The Word became flesh, and in that incarnate Word, Life was
    manifested; and that that manifested Life was heard and seen and handled
    with hands.” By whom? By everybody? No, by the apostles; for he
    adds emphatically: “That which we have seen and heard declare we
    unto you, and shew you that eternal life which was with the Father and
    was manifested unto us.”

    And what was the aim of this declaration? To save souls? Surely this
    also, but not this in the first place. The purpose of this apostolic
    declaration is to bring the members of the Church into connection with
    the abostolate. For, clearly and emphatically, he adds: “This
    we declare unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us.” And
    only after this link is closed, and the fellowship with the apostolate
    an accomplished fact, he says: “And truly our fellowship is with
    the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ.

    The apostle’s reasoning is as transparent as glass. Life was
    manifested in such a way that it could be seen and handled. They who
    saw and handled it were the apostles; and they were also to declare this
    life unto the elect. By this declaration the required fellowship between
    the elect and the apostolate is established. And in consequence of this,
    there is fellowship also for the elect with the Father and the Son.

    This may not be understood as referring only to the people then
    living; and, regarding Rome, one’s position, Bible in hand, is
    exceedingly weak if he maintain that this higher significance of the
    apostolate had reference only to the then living, and not in the same
    measure to us. Indeed, we, upon whom the end of the ages has come, must
    maintain the vital fellowship with the holy apostolate of our Lord Jesus
    Christ. Rome errs by making its bishops the successors of the apostles,
    teaching that fellowship with the apostolate depends upon fellowship with
    Rome: an error which is obvious from the fact that St. John expressly
    and emphatically connects the fellowship of the apostolate with men who
    have seen and heard and handled that which was manifested of the Word of
    Life—something to which no Roman bishop can appeal in the present
    day. Moreover, St. John says distinctly that this fellowship with the
    apostolate must be the result of the declaration of the Word

    142 of Life by the apostles themselves. And inasmuch
    as Rome established this fellowship not by the preaching of the
    Word; but by the sacramental sign, it is in direct opposition to the
    apostolic doctrine.

    However, from this it follows not that Rome errs in the fundamental
    thought, viv., that every child of God must exercise communion with
    the Father and the Son through the apostolate; on the contrary,
    this is St. John’s positive claim. The solution of this apparent
    conflict lies in the fact that they have not only spoken, but
    also written: i.e., their declaration of the Word of Life was
    not limited to the little circle of the men that happened to hear them;
    on the contrary, by writing they have put their preaching into real and
    enduring forms; they have sent it out to all lands and nations; that,
    as the genuine, ecumenic apostles they might bring the testimony of
    the Life which was manifested to all the elect of God in all lands and
    throughout the ages.

    Hence even now the apostles are preaching the living Christ in the
    churches. Their persons have departed, but their personal testimony
    remains. And that personal testimony, which as an apostolic document has
    come to every soul in every land and in every age, is the very testimony
    which even now is the instrument in the hand of the Holy Spirit to
    translate souls into the fellowship of the Life Eternal.

    And if one says, “Surely in this
    sense their word is still effective; however, it results no longer
    in fellowship with the apostles, and by means of this fellowship with
    Christ, but it points us directly to the Savior of our souls, which is
    a more simple way,” then we oppose this unscriptural notion most
    energetically.

    Such reasoning ignores the body of Christ and overlooks the great
    fact of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. There is not the saving of
    a few individual souls, but a bringing together of the body
    of Christ; and into that body every one that is called must be
    incorporated. And inasmuch as the King of the Church gives His Sprit now
    not to separate persons, but exclusively to them that are incorporated,
    and the inflowing of the Holy Spirit into this body, and principally in
    the persons of the apostles, took place on Pentecost, therefore no one
    can receive at the present time any spiritual gift or influence of the
    Holy Spirit unless he stands in vital connection with the body of the
    Lord; and that body is unthinkable without the apostles.
    143

    In fact, the apostolic Word comes to the soul to-day as the testimony
    of what they have seen and heard and handled of the Word of Life. By
    virtue of this testimony souls are inwardly wrought upon, and by their
    being incorporated into the body of Christ they become manifest. And this
    fellowship becomes manifest as a fellowship with the very body of which
    the apostles are the leaders, in whose persons and in the persons of whose
    associates the Holy Spirit was poured out on the day of Pentecost.

    We know that this view, or this confession rather, is in direct
    opposition to the view of Methodism,1414
    See section 5 in the Preface.—Trans....... which has pervaded all classes and
    conditions of men. And the deplorable results have become apparent in
    various ways. Methodism has killed the conscious appreciation of the
    sacrament; it is cold and indifferent toward church fellowship; it has
    cultivated an unlimited disregard for truth in the confession.†1515 † The truth
    of this is apparent in the Salvation Army, the latest exponent of
    Methodism. It denies the sacraments, stands isolated from the churches,
    and does not seem to care for truth in the confession, for it has no
    confession.—Trans....... And while
    the Lord our God has deemed it necessary to give us a voluminous Holy
    Scripture, consisting of six-and-sixty books, Methodism has boasted that
    it could write its Gospel upon a dime.

    This error can not be overcome, except the Word of God become again
    our Teacher and we its docile scholars. And then we shall learn—

    (1) Not that a few isolated persons are being rescued from the floods
    of iniquity, but that a body will be redeemed.

    (2) That all that are to be saved will be incorporated into that
    body.

    (3) That this body has Christ as its Head and the apostles as its
    permanent leaders.

    (4) That on Pentecost the Holy Spirit was poured out into that
    body.

    (5) That even now each of us experiences the gracious operations of
    the Holy Spirit only through fellowship with this body.

    Only when these things are clear to the soul, the glorious word
    of Christ, “Father, I pray not for these alone, but for them
    also which shall believe on Me through their word,” will be well understood.

    144 Taken in the current sense, this word has not the least
    comfort for us; for then the Lord has prayed only for these then living,
    who had the privilege of personally hearing the apostles, and who were
    converted by their verbal testimony. We are entirely excluded. But if this
    petition be taken in the sense indicated above, as tho Christ would say,
    “I pray not for My apostles alone, but also for them who through
    their testimony shall believe on Me, now and in all ages and lands and
    nations,” then it acquires widest scope, and contains a prayer
    for every child of God called even now and from our own households.

    This unique significance of the apostolate is so deeply embedded
    in the heart of the Kingdom, that when in the Revelation of St. John
    we get a glimpse of the New Jerusalem, we see that the city has twelve
    foundations, and on them the names of the twelve
    apostles of the Lamb—Rev. xxi. 14. Hence their
    significance is not transient and temporary, but permanent and including
    the whole Church. And when its warfare shall be ended and the glory of
    the New Jerusalem shall be revealed, even then, in its heavenly bliss,
    the Church shall rest upon the very foundation on which it was built
    here, and therefore bear, engraven on its twelve foundations, the names
    of the holy apostles of the Lord.

    The apostle Paul considers the apostolate so glorious and exalted that
    in his Epistle to the Hebrews he applies the name of Apostle to the Lord
    Jesus Christ. “Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly
    calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ
    Jesus.” The meaning is perfectly clear. Properly speaking, it is
    Christ Himself calling and testifying in His Church. But as the white ray
    of light divides itself into many colors, so does Christ impart Himself
    to His twelve apostles, whom He has set as the instruments through whom
    He has fellowship with His Church. Hence the apostles stand not each by
    himself, but together they constitute the apostolate, the unity of which
    is found not in St. Peter nor in St. Paul, but in Christ. If we
    should wish to comprehend the whole apostolate in one, it must be He in
    whom is contained the fulness of the twelve—the Apostle and High
    Priest of our profession, Christ the Lord.

    Not until we fully grasp these thoughts and live in them shall
    we be able to understand the epistles of St. Paul, and appreciate his
    spiritual conflict to maintain the honor of the apostolate for his divine
    mission. Especially in his epistles to the Corinthians and

    145 Galatians he sustains this conflict bravely and
    effectually; but in such a way that the Methodist can not have eye or
    ear for it. He rather feels like deploring the apostle’s zeal,
    saying: “If Paul had insisted less on his title and more humbly
    applied himself to the conversion of souls, his memory would have been
    much more precious.” And from his standpoint he is quite right. If
    the apostolate has no higher significance than to be the first teachers
    and ministers of the Church, then there can be no reason why St. Paul
    should waste his strength contending for a meaningless title.

    But the undeniable fact that St. Paul’s energetic contending
    agrees not with the current opinions of the present time ought
    to make us oppose the notion that, since his contention does not
    comport with our opinions, he must be wrong! and acknowledge that the
    standpoint which we can not occupy without condemning the apostle must be
    abandoned—the sooner the better. St. Paul must not conform himself
    to our opinions, but our opinions must be modified or altered according
    to St. Paul’s.
    1:56 pm
    The Miracle of Tongues
    Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/kuyper/holy_spirit.html)


    Note: This is part twenty-eight of a 123-part series taken from the book Work of the Holy Spirit by Abraham Kuyper. The following excerpt is from "Volume One: The Work of the Holy Spirit As A Whole," Seventh Chapter "The Outpouring of the Holy Spirit," titled "The Miracle of Tongues."

    XXVIII.

    The Miracle of Tongues.

    “If any man speak in an (unknown)
    tongue, . . . let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let
    him speak to himself, and to God.”— 1 Cor.
    xiv. 27, 28.

    The third sign
    following the outpouring of the Holy Spirit consisted in extraordinary
    sounds that proceeded from the lips of the apostles—sounds foreign
    to the Aramaic tongue, never before heard from their lips.

    These sounds affected the multitude in different ways: some called
    them babblings of inebriated men; others heard in them the great works of
    God proclaimed. To the latter, it seemed as tho they heard them speaking
    in their own tongues. To the Parthian it sounded like the Parthian, to
    the Arabian like the Arabic, etc.; while St. Peter declared that this
    sign belonged to the realm of revelation, for it was the fulfilment of
    the prophecy of Joel that all the people should become partakers of the
    operation of the Holy Spirit.

    The question how to interpret this wonderful sign has occupied the
    thinking minds of all times. Allow us to offer a solution, which we
    present in the following observations:

    In the first place—This phenomenon of spiritual speaking in
    extraordinary sounds is not confined to Pentecost nor to the second
    chapter of the Acts.

    On the contrary, the Lord told His disciples, even before the
    ascension, that they should speak with new tongues—Mark
    xvi. 8. And from the epistles of St. Paul it is evident
    that this prophecy did not refer to Pentecost alone; for we read in
    1 Cor. xii. 10 that in the apostolic Church,
    spiritual gifts included that of tongues; that some spoke in
    γενη γλωττῶύ,
    i.e., in kinds of tongues or sounds. In ver. 28 the apostle declares that God has
    set this spiritual phenomenon in the Church. It is noteworthy that in
    1 Cor. xiv. 1-33 the apostle gives special attention
    to this extraordinary sign, showing

    134 that then it was quite ordinary. That the gift of
    tongues mentioned by St. Paul and the sign of which St. Luke speaks in
    Acts ii., are substantially one and the same can
    not be doubted. In the first place; Christ’s prophecy is general:
    “They shall speak with new tongues.” Secondly, both phenomena
    are said to have made irresistible impressions upon unbelievers. Thirdly,
    both are treated as spiritual gifts. And lastly, to both is applied the
    same name.

    Yet there was a very perceptible difference between the two:
    the miracle of tongues on the day of Pentecost was intelligible to
    a large number of hearers of different nationalities; while in the
    apostolic churches it was understood only by a few who were called
    interpreters. Connected with this is the fact that the miracle on
    Pentecost made the impression of speaking at once to different hearers
    in different tongues so that they were edified. However, this is no
    fundamental difference. Altho in the apostolic churches there were but few
    interpreters, yet there were some who understood the wonderful speech.

    There was, moreover, a marked difference between the men thus
    endowed: some understood what they were saying; others did not. For
    St. Paul admonishes them, saying: “Let him that speaketh in
    an unknown tongue, pray that he may interpret” (1
    Cor. xiv. 13). Yet even without this ability, the speaking
    with tongues had an edifying effect upon the speaker himself; but it
    was an edification not understood, the effect of an unknown operation
    in the soul.

    From this we gather that the miracle of tongues consisted in the
    uttering of extraordinary sounds which from existing data could be
    explained neither by the speaker nor by the hearer; and to which another
    grace was sometimes added, viz., that of interpretation. Hence three
    things were possible: that the speaker alone understood what he said;
    or, that others understood it and not himself; or, that both speaker
    and hearers understood it. This understanding has reference to one or
    more persons.

    On the ground of this we comprise these miracles of tongues in one
    class; with this distinction, however, that on the day of Pentecost the
    miracle appeared perfect, but later on incomplete. As there
    is in the miracles of Christ in raising the dead a perceptible increase
    of power: first, the raising up of one just dead (the daughter of Jairus),
    then, of one about to be buried (the young man of Nam), and lastly, of one
    already decomposing (Lazarus); so there is also in the miracle of tongues
    a difference of power—not increasing, but decreasing.

    135 The mightiest operation of the Holy Spirit is seen first,
    then those less powerful. It is precisely the same as in our own heart:
    first, the mighty fact of regeneration; after that, the less marked
    manifestations of spiritual power. Hence on Pentecost there was the
    miracle of tongues in its perfection; later on in the churches, in
    weaker measure.

    Secondly—There is no evidence that
    the miracle of tongues consisted in the speaking of one of the known
    languages not previously acquired.

    If this had been the case, St. Paul could not have said: “If I
    pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding
    is unfruitful” (1 Cor. xiv. 14). The word
    “unknown” appears in italics, not being found in the
    Greek. Moreover, he says that tongues are for a sign not to them
    that believe, but to them that believe not—ver. 22. If it had been a question of foreign
    but ordinary languages, the matter of understanding them could not depend
    upon faith, but simply upon the fact whether the language was acquired
    by study or was one’s native tongue.

    Finally, the notion that these tongues refer to foreign languages
    not acquired by study is contradicted by St. Paul: “I thank my
    God that I speak with tongues more than ye all.” By which he can not mean that he had mastered
    more languages than others, but that he possessed the gift of tongues in
    greater degree than other men. The following verse is evidence: “Yet
    in the Church I had rather speak five words with my understanding,
    that I may teach others also, than ten thousand words in an (unknown)
    tongue.” According to the
    other view, this ought to have been: “I wish to speak in one
    language, so that the Church may understand me, rather than in ten
    or twenty languages which the Church understands not.” But the
    apostle does not say this. He speaks not of many languages in
    opposition to one, but of five sounds or words against
    ten thousand words. From this it follows that St. Paul’s
    “I speak with glottai (languages or sounds) more than ye
    all,” must refer to the miracle of sounds.

    For altho it is objected very naturally that on Pentecost the apostles
    spoke the Arabic, Hebrew, and Parthian tongues besides many others,
    yet the fact appealed to is not proven to be a fact. Surely we learn
    from Acts ii. that these Parthians, Elamites, etc.,
    received the impression that they were addressed each in his own

    136 tongue; yet the narrative itself proves rather the
    contrary. Let the experiment be tried. Let fifteen men (the number of
    languages mentioned in Acts ii.) speak in fifteen
    different languages at once and together, and the result will be not that
    every one hears his own language, but that no one can hear anything. But
    the narrative of Acts ii. is fully explained in that
    the apostles uttered sounds intelligible to Parthians, Medes, Cretans,
    etc., because they understood them, receiving the impression that these
    sounds agreed with their own mother-tongues. As a Dutch child seeing
    a problem on the blackboard worked out by an English or German child
    naturally receives the impression that it was done by a Dutch child,
    simply because figures are signs not affected by the difference of
    language, so must the Elamite have received the impression that he heard
    the Elamitian, and the Egyptian that he was addressed in the Egyptian
    tongue, when on Pentecost they heard sounds uttered by a miracle, which,
    being independent from the difference of language, were intelligible to
    man as man.

    We must not forget that speaking is nothing else than to produce
    impressions upon the soul of the hearer by means of vibrations in the
    air. But if the same impressions can be produced without the aid of
    air-vibrations, the effect upon the hearer must be the same. Try the
    experiment upon the eye. The sight of twinkling stars or dissolving
    figures excites the retina. The same effect can be produced by rubbing
    the eye with the finger when reclining on a couch in a dark room. And
    this applies here. The air vibrations are not the principal thing,
    but the emotion produced in the mind by the speaking. The Pamphylian,
    accustomed to receive emotions by hearing his mother-tongue, and receiving
    the same impression in another way, must think that he is addressed
    in the Pamphylian tongue.

    Thirdly—According to St. Paul’s
    interesting information, the miracle of tongues consisted in this,
    that the vocal organs produced sounds not by a working of the mind,
    but by an operation of the Holy Spirit upon those organs.

    St. Luke writes: “They began to speak with other tongues, as
    the Spirit gave them utterance” (Acts ii. 4);
    and St. Paul proves exhaustively that the person speaking with tongues
    spoke not with his understanding, i.e., as a result of his own
    thinking, but in consequence of an entirely different operation. That
    this is possible,

    137 we see, first, in delirious persons, who say things outside
    of their own personal thinking; second, in the insane, whose incoherent
    talk has no sense; third, in persons possessed, whose vocal organs are
    used by demons; fourth, in Balaam, whose vocal organs uttered words of
    blessing upon Israel against his will.

    Hence it must be conceded that in man three things are possible:

    First, that for a time he maybe deprived of the use of his vocal
    organs.

    Second, that the use of these organs may be appropriated by a spirit
    who has overcome him.

    Third, that the Holy Spirit, appropriating his vocal organs,
    can produce sounds from his lips which are “new,” and
    “other” than the language which ordinarily he speaks.

    Fourthly—In the
    Greek these sounds invariably are designated by the word
    ãëùôôáé, i.e., tongues,
    hence language. In the Greek world, from which this word is taken,
    the word “glotta” always stands in strong opposition to the
    “logos,” reason.

    A man’s thinking is the hidden, invisible, imperceptible process
    of his mind. Thought has a soul, but no body. But when the thought
    manifests itself and adopts a body, then there is a word. And the tongue
    being the movable organ of speech, it was said that the tongue gives
    a body to the thought. Hence the contrast between the logos, i.e.,
    that which a man thinks with the mind, and the glotta, i.e.,
    that which he utters with the vocal organs.

    Ordinarily the glotta comes only through and after the logos. But in
    the miracle of tongues we discover the extraordinary phenomenon that while
    the logos remained inactive, the glotta uttered sounds. And since it was
    a phenomenon of sounds which proceeded not from the thinking mind,
    but from the tongue, the Holy Scripture calls it very appropriately a
    gift of the glottai, i.e., a gift of tongue or sound-phenomena.

    Lastly—In answer to the question, How
    must this be understood? we offer the following representation: Speech
    in man is the result of his thinking; and this thinking in a sinless
    state is an in-shining of the Holy Spirit. Speech in a sinless state is
    therefore the result of inspiration, in-breathing of the Holy Spirit.

    Hence in a sinless state man’s language would have been the
    pure and perfect product of an operation of the Holy Spirit. He

    138 is the Creator of human language; and without the
    injury and debasing influence of sin the connection between the Holy
    Ghost and our speech would have been complete. But sin has broken the
    connection. Human language is damaged: damaged by the weakening of the
    organs of speech; by the separation of tribes and nations; by the passions
    of the soul; by tie darkening of the understanding; and principally by
    the lie which has entered in. Hence that infinite distance between this
    pure and genuine human language which, as the direct operation of the
    Holy Spirit upon the human mind, should have manifested itself, and the
    empirically existing languages that now separate the nations—a
    difference like unto that between the glorious Adam and the deformed
    Hottentot.

    But the difference is not intended to remain. Sin will disappear. What
    sin destroyed will be restored. In the day of the Lord, at the
    wedding-feast of the Lamb, all the redeemed will understand one
    another. In what way? By the restoration of the pure and original language
    upon the lips of the redeemed, which is born from the operation of the
    Holy Spirit upon the human mind. And of that great, still-tarrying event
    the Pentecost miracle is the germ and the beginning; hence it bore its
    distinctive marks. In the midst of the Babeldom of the nations, on the
    day of Pentecost, the one pure and mighty human language was revealed
    which one day all will speak, and all the brethren and sisters from all
    nations and tongues will understand.

    And this was wrought by the Holy Spirit. They spake as the Holy
    Spirit gave them utterance. They spoke a heavenly language to praise
    God—not of angels, but a language above the influence of sin.

    Hence the understanding of this language was also a work of the Holy
    Spirit. At Jerusalem, only they understood it who were specially wrought
    upon by the Holy Spirit. The others understood it not. And at Corinth
    it was not comprehended by the masses, but by him alone to whom it was
    given of the Holy Ghost.
    Sunday, April 26th, 2009
    9:08 pm
    The Signs of Pentecost
    Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/kuyper/holy_spirit.html)


    Note: This is part twenty-seven of a 123-part series taken from the book Work of the Holy Spirit by Abraham Kuyper. The following excerpt is from "Volume One: The Work of the Holy Spirit As A Whole," Seventh Chapter "The Outpouring of the Holy Spirit," titled "The Signs of Pentecost."

    XXVII.

    The Signs of Pentecost.

    “Signs in the earth
    beneath.”
    —Acts ii. 19.

    Let us now consider the
    signs that accompanied the outpouring of the Holy Spirit—the sound
    of a rushing, mighty wind; tongues of fire; and the speaking with other
    tongues—which constitute the fourth difficulty that meets
    us in the investigation of the events of Pentecost (see p. 113). The
    first and second precede, the third follows the outpouring.

    These signs are not merely symbolic. The speaking with other tongues,
    at least, appears as part of the narrative. Symbols are intended to
    represent or indicate something or to call the attention to it; hence it
    may be omitted without affecting the matter itself. A symbol is like a
    finger-post on the road: it may be removed without affecting the road. If
    the Pentecost signs were purely symbolic, the event would have been the
    same without them; but the absence of the sign of other tongues would
    have modified the character of the subsequent history completely.

    This justifies the supposition that the two preceding signs were
    also constituent parts of the miracle. The fact that neither of
    them is an apt symbol strengthens the supposition; for a symbol must
    speak. The finger-post that leaves the traveler in doubt concerning the
    direction he is to take is no finger-post. Considering the fact that
    for eighteen centuries theologians have been unable to ascertain the
    significance of the so-called symbols with any degree of certainty, it
    must be acknowledged that it is difficult to believe that the apostles
    or the multitude understood their significance at once and in the
    same way. The issue proves the contrary. They did not understand the
    signs. The multitude, confounded and perplexed, said one to another:
    “What meaneth this?” And when Peter arose as an apostle,
    enlightened by the Holy Spirit, to interpret the miracle, he made no
    effort to attach any symbolic significance

    129 to the signs, but simply declared that an event had
    taken place by which the prophecy of Joel was fulfilled.

    Did the event of Pentecost then exhaust the prophecy of Joel? By no
    means; for the sun was not turned into darkness, nor the moon into blood;
    and we hear nothing of the dreams of old men. Nor could it; the notable
    day that will exhaust this and so many other prophecies can not come until
    the return of the Lord. But the holy apostle meant to say, that the day
    of the Lord’s return was brought so much nearer by this event. The
    outpouring of the Holy Spirit is one of the great events which pledge
    the coming of that great and notable day. Without it that day can not
    come. Looking back from heaven, the day of Pentecost will appear to us
    as the last great miracle immediately preceding the day of the Lord. And
    since that day shall be attended by awful signs, as was the preparatory
    day of Pentecost, the apostle puts them together and makes them appear as
    one, showing that in Joel’s prophecy God points to both events.

    If it be certain that the signs attending the Lord’s
    return—blood, fire, and vapor of smoke—shall not be
    symbolic, but constituent elements of that last part of the
    world’s history, viz., its last conflagration, then it is certain
    that Peter did not understand the signs of Pentecost to be symbolic.

    Neither can the still more unsatisfactory explanation be entertained
    that these signs were intended to draw and fix the attention of the
    multitude.

    The senses of sight and hearing are the most effectual means by which
    the outside world can act upon our consciousness. In order suddenly to
    arouse and excite a person, one need only startle him by an explosion or
    by the flash of a dazzling light. Acting upon this, some of the earlier
    Methodists used to fire pistols at their revival meetings, hoping that the
    report and flash would create the desired state of mind. The subsequent
    excitement of the people would tend to make them more susceptible to
    the operation of the Holy Spirit. Similar experiments are those of the
    Salvation Army. According to this notion, the signs of Pentecost bore
    a similar character. It is supposed by some that the disciples, still
    unconverted men, were sitting together in the upper chamber on the day
    of Pentecost. To render them susceptible to the inflowing of the Holy
    Spirit they must be aroused by a noise and fire. It must seem as tho a
    violent thunder-storm had burst upon the city; flashes of lightning

    130 and peals of thunder were seen and heard. And when the
    multitude were startled and terrified, then the desired condition for
    receiving the Holy Spirit prevailed and the outpouring took place. Such
    extravagances only hurt the tender sense of the children of God; while
    it is almost sacrilege to compare the signs of Pentecost to the report
    of a pistol.

    Hence there remains only one other explanation, i.e., to
    consider the Pentecost signs as actual and real constituents of
    the event; indispensable links in the chain of occurrences.

    When a ship enters the harbor we see the foaming spray under the bow
    and hear the waters dashing against the sides. When, a horse runs through
    the street we hear the noise of his hoofs against the pavement and see
    the clouds of dust. But who will say that these things seen and heard
    are symbolic? They necessarily belong to those actions and are parts
    of them, impossible without them. Therefore we do not believe that the
    Pentecost signs were symbolic, or intended to create a sensation, but
    that they belonged inseparably to the outpouring of the Holy Ghost, and
    were caused by it. The outpouring could not take place without creating
    these signs. When the mountain-stream dashes down the steep sides of
    the rocks we must hear the sound of rushing waters, we must see the
    flying spray; so when the Holy Spirit flows down from the mountains of
    God’s holiness, the sound of a rushing, mighty wind must be heard,
    and glorious brightness must be seen, and a speaking with foreign tongues
    must follow.

    This will sufficiently explain our meaning. Not that we deny that
    these signs had also a significance for the multitude. The noise of the
    horse’s hoofs warns travelers on the road. And we concede that
    the purpose of the signs was realized in the perplexity and consternation
    which they caused in the hearts of those present. But this we maintain,
    that even in the absence of the multitude and their consternation the
    sound of a rushing, mighty wind would have been heard and the fiery
    tongues would have been seen. As the horse’s hoofs cause the ground
    to vibrate tho there be no traveler in sight, so the Holy Spirit could
    not come down without that sound and that brightness, even tho not a
    single Jew were to be found in all Jerusalem.

    The outpouring of the Holy Spirit was real, not apparent. Having
    found His temple in the glorified Head, He must necessarily flow down
    into the body and descend from heaven. And this

    131 descent from heaven and this sowing into the body could
    not take place without causing these signs.

    To penetrate more deeply into this matter is not lawful. On Horeb
    Elijah heard the Lord pass by in a gentle breeze, Isaiah heard
    the moving of the door-posts in the Temple. This seems to indicate
    that the approach of the divine majesty causes a commotion in the elements
    perceptible to the auditory nerve. But how, we can not tell. We observe,
    however:

    First, that spirit can act upon matter is evident, for our spirits
    act upon the body every moment, and by that action are able to produce
    sounds. Speaking, crying, singing are nothing but our spirit acting
    upon the currents of air. And if our spirit is capable of such action,
    why not the Spirit of the Lord? Why, then, call it mysterious when the
    Holy Spirit in His descent so wrought upon the elements that the effects
    vibrated in the ears of those present?

    Secondly, in making the covenant with Israel upon Sinai, the Lord God
    spoke in peals of thunder so terrible that even Moses said, “I am
    exceedingly fearful and quaking”; yet not with the intention of
    terrifying the people, but because a holy and angry God can not speak
    otherwise to a sinful generation. It is not therefore surprising that the
    coming of God to His New Covenant people is attended by similar signs,
    not in order to draw men’s attention, but because it could not
    be otherwise.

    The same applies to the tongues of fire. Supernatural manifestations
    are always attended by light and brightness, especially when the
    Lord Jehovah or His angel appears. Recall, e.g., God’s
    covenant-making with Abraham, or the occurrences at the burning bush. Why,
    then, should it surprise us that the descent of the Holy Spirit was
    attended by phenomena such as those seen by Elijah on Horeb, Moses in
    the bush, St. Paul on the way to Damascus, and St. John on Patmos? That
    the cloven tongues sat upon each of them proves nothing to the contrary;
    for He proceeded to each of them and entered their hearts, and in each
    going He left a trace of light behind.

    The question, whether the fire seen by these men on those occasions
    belonged to a higher sphere, or was the effect of God’s action
    upon the elements of the earth, can not be answered.

    Both views have much in their favor. There is no darkness in heaven;
    and the heavenly light must be of a higher nature than ours, even above
    the brightness of the sun, according to St. Paul’s

    132 description of the light on the way to Damascus. It
    is very probable, therefore, that in these great events the boundary
    of heaven overlapped the earth, and a higher glory shone in upon our
    atmosphere.

    But, on the other hand, it is possible that the Holy Spirit wrought
    this mysterious brightness directly by a miracle. And this seems to be
    confirmed by the fact that the signs attending the law-giving on Sinai,
    which event was parallel to this, were not from higher spheres, but
    wrought from earthly elements.

    Finally, let it be noticed, that the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on
    the house of Cornelius and on the disciples of Apollos was attended by a
    speaking with other tongues, but not by the other signs. This confirms
    our theory; for it was not a coming to the house of Cornelius,
    but a conducting of the Holy Spirit into another part of the body
    of Christ. If symbolism had been intended, the signs would have been
    repeated; not being symbols, they did not appear.
    9:07 pm
    Israel and the Nations
    Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/kuyper/holy_spirit.html)

    Note: This is part twenty-six of a 123-part series taken from the book Work of the Holy Spirit by Abraham Kuyper. The following excerpt is from "Volume One: The Work of the Holy Spirit As A Whole," Seventh Chapter "The Outpouring of the Holy Spirit," titled "Israel and the Nations."



    XXVI.
    Israel and the Nations.

    "Because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost."—Acts x. 45.

    The question that arises with reference to Pentecost is: Since the Holy Spirit imparted saving grace to men before and after Pentecost, what is the difference caused by that descent of the Holy Spirit?

    An illustration may explain the difference. The rain descends from heaven and man gathers it to quench his thirst. When householders collect it each in his own cistern, it comes down for every family separately; but when, as in modern city life, every house is supplied from the city reservoir, by means of mains and water-pipes, there is no more need of pumps and private cisterns. Suppose that a city whose citizens for ages have been drinking each from his own cistern proposes to construct a reservoir that will supply every home. When the work is completed the water is allowed to run through the system of mains and pipes into every house. It might then be said that on that day the water was poured out into the city. Hitherto it fell upon every man's roof: now it streams through the organized system into every man's house.

    Apply this to the pouring out of the Holy Spirit, and the difference before and after Pentecost will be apparent. The mild showers of the Holy Spirit descended upon Israel of old in drops of saving grace; but in such a manner only that each gathered of the heavenly rain for himself, to quench the thirst of each heart separately. So it continued until the coming of Christ. Then there came a change; for He gathered the full stream of the Holy Spirit for us all, in His own Person. With Him all saints are connected by the channels of faith. And when, after His ascension, this connection with His saints was completed, and He had received the Holy Spirit from His Father, then the last obstacle was removed and the full stream 124 of the Holy Spirit came rushing through the connecting channels into the heart of every believer.

    Formerly isolation, every man for himself; now organic union of all the members under their one Head: this is the difference between the days before and after Pentecost. The essential fact of Pentecost consisted in this, that on that day the Holy Spirit entered for the first time into the organic body of the Church, and individuals came to drink, not each by himself, but all together in organic union.

    To the question where that system of connecting channels uniting us in one body under our Head may be found, we can give no answer. This belongs to things invisible and spiritual which escape our observation, of which we can have no other representation than that by an image.

    Yet this does not alter the fact that the organic union really exists. The Word of God is to us its undeniable witness. Organic life appears in nature in two forms: in the plant, and in the body of man and animal. These are the very types that Christ uses to illustrate the spiritual union between Himself and His people. He said: "I am the Vine, ye are the branches." (John xv. 5) And St. Paul speaks of having become one plant with Christ. And he frequently uses the image of the body and its members.

    Hence there can be no doubt that there exists a mystic union between Christ and believers which works by means of an organic connection, uniting the Head and the members in a for us invisible and incomprehensible manner. By means of this organic union the Holy Spirit was poured out on Pentecost from Christ the Head into us, the members of His body.

    If it were possible to construct the city's water-works in the air above the city, the chief engineer could properly say: "When I turn on the water for the first time I will baptize the city with water." In similar sense Christ may be said to have baptized His Church with the Holy Spirit. For the word of John the Baptist, "I indeed baptize you with water, but He that cometh after me is mightier than I; He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost," (Matt. iii. 11; Luke iii. 16) is explained by Christ Himself as referring to the day of Pentecost (Acts i. 5): "And being assembled together with Him, He commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith He, ye have heard of Me. For John truly baptized with water, but ye shall be baptized with the 125 Holy Ghost not many days hence";—a promise that undoubtedly referred to the Pentecost miracle. This agrees with the fact that Jesus during His ministry allowed His disciples to continue the Baptism of John. And this shows that even before the crucifixion, John and Peter, Philip and Zaccheus, and many others received saving grace of the Holy Spirit, each for himself, but none of them was baptized with the Holy Spirit before the day of Pentecost.

    With reference to the apostles, we must therefore distinguish a threefold giving of the Holy Spirit:

    First, that of saving grace in regeneration and subsequent illumination—Matt. xvi. 17.

    Secondly, official gifts qualifying them for the apostolic office—John xx. 22.

    Thirdly, the Baptism with the Holy Ghost—Acts i. 5 in connection with Acts ii. 1 ff.

    One more difficulty remains. We often read of outpourings of the Holy Spirit after Pentecost. How can this be reconciled with our explanation? In Acts x. 44, 45 we read: "While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all who heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost." And Peter confirms this by saying: "Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?" Acts x. 47 From this it is evident that the outpouring on the house of Cornelius was of the same nature as that on Pentecost. Moreover, we hear of a descent of the Holy Ghost in Samaria (Acts viii.), and of another in Ephesus (Acts xix. 6). This descent took place in both instances after the laying on of hands by the apostles; and at Caesarea and Corinth it was followed by a speaking with foreign tongues as in Jerusalem.

    It is evident, therefore, that the outpouring of the Holy Spirit was not limited to Pentecost in Jerusalem, but was afterward repeated in a weaker and modified form, but still extraordinarily, as on Pentecost.

    And who would deny that there is an outpouring of the Holy Spirit to-day in the churches? Without it there can be no regeneration, no salvation. Yet the Pentecost signs are lacking, e.g., there is no more speaking with tongues. Hence it is necessary to 126 distinguish between the ordinary outpouring which occurs now, and the extraordinary at Corinth, Caesarea, Samaria, and Jerusalem.

    Hence the question stands as follows: If on the day of Pentecost the Holy Spirit was poured out once for all and forever, how do we account for the ordinary and extraordinary outpourings?

    Allow us once more to recur to our former illustration. Suppose that the city above referred to consisted of a lower and an upper part, both to be supplied from the same reservoir. Upon the completion of its system the lower city may receive the water first, and the upper part receive it only after the system shall have been extended. Here we notice two things: the distribution of the water took place but once, which was the formal opening of the waterworks, and could take place but once; while the distribution of the water in the upper city, altho extraordinary; was but an after-effect of the former event. This is a fair illustration of what took place in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The Church consisted of two, parts sharply defined, viz. the Jewish, and the Gentile world. Yet both are to constitute one body, one people, one Church; both are to live one life in the Holy Ghost. On Pentecost He is poured out into the body, but only to quench the thirst of one part, i.e., the Jewish; the other part is still excluded. But now apostles and evangelists start from Jerusalem and come into contact with the Gentiles, and the hour has come for the stream of the Holy Ghost to pour forth into the Gentile part of the Church, and the whole body is refreshed by the same Holy Spirit. Hence there is an original outpouring in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost, and a supplementary outpouring in Caesarea for the Gentile part of the Church; both of the same nature, but each bearing its own special character.

    Besides these there are some isolated outpourings of the Holy Spirit, attended by the laying on of, the apostles' hands, as in the case of Simon Magus. We explain this as follows: as from time to time new connections are made between individual houses and the city reservoir, so new parts of the body of Christ were added to the Church from without, into whom the Holy Spirit was poured forth from the body as into new members. It is perfectly natural that in these cases the apostles appear as instruments; and that, receiving into the Church persons that come from a part of the world not yet connected with the Church, they extend to them by 127 the laying on of hands the fellowship of the Holy Ghost who dwells in the body.

    This also explains why to-day newly converted persons receive the Holy Spirit only in the ordinary way. For they who are converted among us stand already in the covenant, belong already to the seed of the Church and to the body of Christ.1313 The author refers either to persons baptized in infancy, instructed by the ministers of the Word in the doctrines of the Church and at suitable age received into the Church on confession of their faith, or to persons not so received into the Church, and then on the ground that Holland belongs to the baptized nations.—Trans. .. type=text/javascript>.. initNote("fnf_vi.vii.iii-p20.1"); //-->..> Hence no new connection is formed, but a work of the Holy Spirit is wrought in a soul with which He was already related by means of the body.

    And thus every objection is met and every detail is put in its own place, and the lines of the domain which had become vague and confused are once more clearly drawn.

    It is evident also that the prayer for another outpouring or baptism of the Holy Spirit is incorrect and empty of real meaning. Such prayer actually denies the Pentecost miracle. For He that came and abides with us can no more come to us.
    Sunday, April 5th, 2009
    4:05 am
    The Holy Spirit in the New Testament Other than in the Old
    Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/kuyper/holy_spirit.html)

    Note: This is part twenty-five of a 123-part series taken from the book Work of the Holy Spirit by Abraham Kuyper. The following excerpt is from "Volume One: The Work of the Holy Spirit As A Whole," Seventh Chapter "The Outpouring of the Holy Spirit," titled "The Holy Spirit in the New Testament Other than in the Old."



    XXV.
    The Holy Spirit in the New Testament Other than in the Old.

    "By His Spirit which dwelleth in you."—Rom. viii. 11.

    In order to understand the change inaugurated on Pentecost we must distinguish between the various ways in which the Holy Ghost enters into relationship with the creature.

    With the Christian Church we confess that the Holy Spirit is true and eternal God, and therefore omnipresent; hence no creature, stone or animal, man or angel, is excluded from His presence.

    With reference to His omniscience and omnipresence, David sings: "Whither shall I go from Thy Spirit, or whither shall I flee from Thy presence? If I ascend up to heaven, Thou art there; if I make my bed in hell, behold, Thou art there. If I take the wings of the morning and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, even there shall Thy hand lead me and Thy right hand shall hold me." (Psalm cxxxix. 7-10) These words state positively that omnipresence belongs to the Holy Spirit; that neither in heaven nor in hell, in the east nor in the west, is there a spot or point from which He is excluded.

    This simple consideration is, for the matter under discussion, of the greatest importance; for it follows that the Holy Spirit can not be said ever to have moved from one place to another; to have been among Israel, but not among the nations; to have been present after the day of Pentecost where He was not before. All such representations directly oppose the confession of His omnipresence, eternity, and immutability. The Omnipresent One can not go from one place to another, for He can not come where He is already. And to suppose that He is omnipresent at one time and not at another is inconsistent with His eternal Godhead. The testimony of John the Baptist, "I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode on Him," (John i. 32) and that of St. Luke, "The Holy Spirit fell on all them which heard the Word," (Acts x. 44) may not therefore 118 be understood as tho the Holy Spirit came to a place where He was not before, which is impossible.

    However—and this is the first distinction which will throw light upon the matter—David's description of omnipresence applies to local presence in space, but not to the world of spirits.

    We know not what spirits are, nor what our own spirit is. In the body we can distinguish between nerves and blood, bones and muscles, and we know something of their functions in the organism; but how a spirit exists, moves, and works, we can not tell. We only know that it exists, moves, and works in an entirely different way from that of the body. When a brother dies nobody opens a door or window for the exit of the soul; for we know that neither wall nor ceiling can hinder it in its heavenward flight. In prayer we whisper so as not to be overheard; yet we believe that the man Jesus Christ hears every word. The swiftness of a thought exceeds that of electricity. In a word, the limitations of the material world seem to disappear in the realm of spirits.

    Even the working of spirit on matter is wonderful. The average weight of an adult is abut one hundred and sixty pounds. It takes three or four men to carry a dead body of that weight to the top of a high building; yet when the man was alive his spirit had the power to carry this weight up and down those flights of stairs easily and quickly. But where the spirit takes hold of the body, how it moves it, and where it obtains that swiftness, is for us a perfect mystery. Yet this shows that spirit is subject to laws wholly different from those that govern matter.

    We emphasize the word law. According to the analogy of faith, there must be laws that govern the spiritual world as there are in the natural; yet owing to our limitations we can not know them. But in heaven we shall know them, and all the glories and particulars of the spiritual world, as our physicians know the nerves and tissues of the body.

    This we know, however, that that which applies to matter does not therefore apply to spirit. God's omnipresence has reference to all space, but not to every spirit. Since God is omnipresent, it does not follow that He also dwells in the spirit of Satan. Hence, it is clear that the Holy Spirit can be omnipresent without dwelling in every human soul; and that He can descend without changing place, and yet enter a soul hitherto unoccupied by Him; and that He was present among Israel and among the Gentiles, and yet 119 manifested Himself among the former and not among the latter. From this it follows that in the spiritual world He can come where He was not; that He came among Israel, not having been among them before; and that then He manifested Himself among them less powerfully and in another way than on and before the day of Pentecost.

    The Holy Spirit seems to act upon a human being in a twofold manner—from without, or from within. The difference is similar to that in the treatment of the human body by the physician and the surgeon: the former acts upon it by medicines taken inwardly; the latter by incisions and outward applications. A very defective comparison, indeed, but it may illustrate faintly the twofold operation of the Holy Spirit upon the souls of men.

    In the beginning we discover only an outward imparting of certain gifts. On Samson He bestows great physical strength. Aholiab and Bezaleel are endowed with artistic talent to build the tabernacle. Joshua is enriched with military genius. These operations did not touch the center of the soul, and were not saving, but merely external. They become more enduring when they assume an official character as in Saul; altho in him we find the best evidence of the fact that they are only outward and temporal. They assume a higher character when they receive the prophetic stamp; altho Balaam's example shows us that even thus they penetrate not to the center of the soul, but affect man only outwardly.

    But in the Old Testament there was also an inward operation in believers. Believing Israelites were saved. Hence they must have received saving grace. And since saving grace is out of the question without an inward working of the Holy Spirit, it follows that He was the Worker of faith in Abraham as well as in ourselves.

    The difference between the two operations is apparent. A person outwardly wrought upon may become enriched with outward gifts, while spiritually he remains as poor as ever. Or, having received the inward gift of regeneration, he may be devoid of every talent that adorns man outwardly.

    Hence we have these three aspects:

    First, there is the omnipresence of the Holy Spirit in space, the same in heaven and in hell, among Israel and among the nations.

    Second, there is a spiritual operation of the Holy Spirit according to choice, which is not omnipresent; active in heaven, but not in hell; among Israel, but not among the nations.

    120

    Third, this spiritual operation works either from without, imparting losable gifts, or from within, imparting the unlosable gift of salvation.

    We have spoken so far of the work of the Holy Spirit upon individual persons, which was sufficient to explain that work in the days of the Old Testament. But when we come to the day of Pentecost, this no longer suffices. For His particular operation, on and after that day, consists in the extending of His operation to a company of men organically united.

    God did not create humanity as a string of isolated souls, but as a race. Hence in Adam the souls of all men are fallen and defiled. In like manner the new creation in the realm of grace has not wrought the generation of isolated individuals, but the resurrection of a new race, a peculiar people, a holy priesthood. And this favored race, this peculiar people, this holy priesthood is also organically one and partaking of the same spiritual blessing.

    The Word of God expresses this by teaching that the elect constitute one body, of which all are members, one being a foot, another an eye, and another an ear, etc.—a representation that conveys the idea that the elect mutually sustain the relation of a vital, organic, and spiritual union. And this is not merely outwardly, by mutual love, but much more through a vital communion which is theirs by virtue of their spiritual origin. As our Liturgy beautifully expresses it: "For as out of many grains one meal is ground and one bread baked, and out of many berries, being pressed together, one wine floweth and mixeth itself together, so shall we all, who by a true faith are ingrafted into Christ, be altogether one body."

    This spiritual union of the elect did not exist among Israel, nor could it exist during their time. There was a union of love, but not a spiritual and vital fellowship that sprang from the root of life. This spiritual union of the elect was made possible only by the incarnation of the Son of God. The elect are men consisting of body and soul; therefore it is partly at least a visible body. And only when in Christ the perfect man was given, who could be the temple of the Holy Spirit body and soul, did the inflowing and outpouring of the Holy Spirit become established in and through the body thus created.

    However, this did not occur directly after the birth of Christ, but after His ascension; for His human nature did not unfold its fullest perfection until after He had ascended, when, as the glorified 121 Son of God, He sat down at the right hand of the Father. Only then the perfect Man was given, who on the one hand could be the temple of the Holy Ghost without hindrance, and on the other unite the spirits of the elect into one body. And when, by His ascension and sitting down at the right hand of God, this had become a fact, when thus the elect had become one body, it was perfectly natural that from the Head the indwelling of the Holy Spirit was imparted to the whole body. And thus the Holy Spirit was poured out into the body of the Lord, His elect, the Church.

    In this way everything becomes plain and clear: clear why the saints of the Old Testament did not receive the promise, that without us they should not be made perfect, waiting for that perfection until the formation of the body of Christ, into which they also were to be incorporated; clear that the tarrying of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit did not prevent saving grace from operating upon the individual souls of the saints of the Old Covenant; clear the word of John, that the Holy Spirit was not yet given because Jesus was not yet glorified; clear that the apostles were born again long before Pentecost and received official gifts on the evening of the day of the resurrection, altho the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the body thus formed did not take place until Pentecost. It becomes clear how Jesus could say, "If I go not away the Comforter will not come unto you," and again, "But if I go I will send Him unto you" (John xvi. 7); for the Holy Spirit was to flow into His body from Himself, who is the Head. It becomes clear also that He would not send Him from Himself, but from the Father; clear why this outpouring of the Spirit into the body of Christ is never repeated, and could occur but once; and lastly, clear that the Holy Spirit was indeed standing in the midst of Israel (Isa. lxiii. 12), working upon the saints from without, while in the New Testament He is said to be within them.

    We arrive, therefore, at the following conclusions:

    First, the elect must constitute one body.

    Second, they were not so constituted during the days of the Old Covenant, of John the Baptist, and of Christ while on earth.

    Third, this body did not exist until Christ ascended to heaven and, sitting at the right hand of God, bestowed upon this body its unity, in that God gave Him to be Head over all things to the Church—Ephes. iv. 12.

    Lastly, Christ as the glorified Head, having formed His spiritual 122 body by the vital union of the elect, on the day of Pentecost poured out His Holy Spirit into the whole body, never more to let Him depart from it.

    That these conclusions contain nothing but what the Church of all ages has confessed appears from the fact that the Reformed churches have always maintained:

    First, that our communion with the Holy Spirit depends upon our mystic union with the body of which Christ is the Head, which is the underlying thought of the Lord's Supper.

    Second, that the elect form one body under Christ their Head.

    Third, that this body began to exist when it received its Head; and that, according to Ephes. i. 22. Christ was given to be the Head after His resurrection and ascension.
    Thursday, April 2nd, 2009
    8:42 pm
    The Outpouring of the Holy Spirit
    Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/kuyper/holy_spirit.html)

    Note: This is part twenty-four of a 123-part series taken from the book Work of the Holy Spirit by Abraham Kuyper. The following excerpt is from "Volume One: The Work of the Holy Spirit As A Whole," Seventh Chapter "The Outpouring of the Holy Spirit," titled "The Outpouring of the Holy Spirit."


    XXIV.
    The Outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

    "The Holy Spirit was not yet given because that Jesus was not yet glorified."—John vii. 39.

    We have come to the most difficult part in the discussion of the work of the Holy Spirit, viz., the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the tenth day after the ascension.

    In the treatment of this subject it is not our aim to create a new interest in the celebration of Pentecost. We consider this almost impossible. Man's nature is too unspiritual for this. But we shall reverently endeavor to give a clearer insight into this event to those in whose hearts the Holy Spirit has already begun His work.

    For, however simple the account of the second chapter of the Acts may seem, it is very intricate and hard to explain; and he who earnestly tries to understand and explain the event will meet more and more serious difficulties as he penetrates more deeply into the inward connection of the Holy Scripture. For this reason we claim not that our exposition will entirely solve this mystery. We shall endeavor only to fix the sanctified mind of the people of God more earnestly upon it, and convince them that on the whole this subject is treated too superficially.

    Four difficulties meet us in the examination of this event:

    First, How shall we explain the fact that while the Holy Spirit was poured out only on Pentecost, the saints of the Old Covenant were already partakers of His gifts?

    Second, How shall we distinguish the outpouring of the Holy Spirit nineteen centuries ago from His entering into the soul of the unconverted to-day?

    113

    Third, How could the apostles—having already confessed the good confession, forsaking all, following Jesus, and upon whom He had breathed, saying, "Receive ye the Holy Ghost " (John xx. 22)—receive the Holy Spirit only on the tenth day after the ascension?

    Fourth, How are we to explain the mysterious signs that accompany the outpouring? There are no angels praising God, but a sound is heard like that of a rushing, mighty wind; the glory of the Lord does not appear, but tongues of fire hover over their heads; there is no theophany, but a speaking in peculiar and uncommon sounds, understood, however, by those present.

    With reference to the first difficulty: How to explain the fact that, while the Holy Spirit was poured out only on Pentecost, the saints of the Old Covenant were already partakers of His gifts. Let us put this in the concrete: How are the following passages to be reconciled? "I am with you, saith the Lord of Hosts, and My Spirit remaineth among you, fear ye not" (Hag. ii. 4, 5); and "This spake He of the Holy Spirit which they that believe should receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because that Jesus was not yet glorified" (John vii. 39).

    Scripture evidently seeks to impress us with the two facts, that the Holy Spirit came only on the day of Pentecost, and that the same Spirit had wrought already for centuries in the Church of the Old Covenant. Not only does St. John declare definitely that the Holy Spirit was not yet given, but the predictions of the prophets and of Jesus and the whole attitude of the apostles show that this fact may not in the least be weakened.

    Let us first examine the prophecies. Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Joel bear undeniable witness to the fact that this was the expectation of the prophets.

    Isaiah says: "The palaces shall be forsaken, the multitudes of the city shall be left—until the Spirit shall be poured upon us from on high; then the wilderness shall be a fruitful field, and the fruitful field shall be counted for a forest; then judgment shall dwell in the wilderness, and righteousness remain in the fruitful field." This prophecy evidently refers to an outpouring of the Holy Spirit that shall effect a work of salvation on a large scale, for it closes with the promise: "And the work of righteousness shall be peace, and the effect of righteousness, quietness, and assurance forever" (Isa. xxxii. 14-17).

    In like manner did Ezekiel prophesy "Then will I sprinkle 114 clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean; a new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you; and I will put My Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in My statutes; and ye shall keep My judgments, and do them; and I will save you from all your uncleanness. Not for yourselves will I do this, saith the Lord, be it known unto you" (chap. xxxvi. 25). Ezek. xi. 19 gives the prelude of this prophecy: "Thus saith the Lord God, I will give them one heart, and I will give a new Spirit within them; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, that they may walk in My statutes."

    Joel uttered his well-known prophecy: "And it shall come to pass afterward that I will pour My Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions; and also upon thy servants and upon thy handmaidens in those days will I pour out My Spirit" (Joel ii. 30, 31);—a prophecy which, according to the authoritative exposition of St. Peter, refers directly to the day of Pentecost.

    Zechariah adds a beautiful prophecy (xii. 10): "I will pour out the Spirit of grace and of supplication."

    It is true that these prophecies were given to Israel during its later period, when the vigorous spiritual life of the nation had already departed. But Moses expressed the same thought in his prophetic prayer: "Would God that all the Lord's people were prophets, and that the Lord would put His Spirit upon them" (Num. xi. 29). But these prophecies are evidence of the Old Testament prophetic conviction that the dispensation of the Holy Spirit in those days was exceedingly imperfect; that the real dispensation of the Holy Spirit was still tarrying; and that only in the days of the Messiah was it to come in all its fulness and glory.

    Regarding the second difficulty, our Lord repeatedly put the stamp of His divine authority upon this prophetic conviction, announcing to His disciples the still future coming of the Holy Spirit: "I will pray the Father and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you forever; even the Spirit of truth; whom the world can not receive, because it seeth Him not, neither knoweth Him, for He dwelleth with you and shall be in you" (John xiv. 16, 17); "When the Comforter is come whom I will send from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, He shall testify of Me" (John xv. 26); "Behold, I send the promise of the Father upon you, and ye shall be endued with power from 115 on high" (Luke xxiv. 49); "It is expedient for you that I go away; for if I go not away the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send Him unto you. And when He is come; He will reprove the world of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment" (John xvi. 7, 8). And lastly: He commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, "which, saith He, ye have heard of Me; for John truly baptized with water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. And ye shall receive power after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you" (Acts i. 4, 5, 8).

    The is met by the fact that the communications of the apostles agree with the teaching of Scripture. They actually tarried in Jerusalem, without even attempting to preach during the days between the ascension and Pentecost. And they explain the Pentecost miracle as the fulfilment of the prophecies of Joel and Jesus. They see in it something new and extraordinary; and show us clearly that in their day it was considered that a man who stood outside the Pentecost miracle knew nothing of the Holy Ghost. For the disciples of Ephesus being asked, "Have ye received the Holy Ghost?" answered naively: "We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost." (Acts xix. 2)

    Wherefore it cannot be doubted that the Holy Scripture means to teach and convince us that the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost was His first and real coming into the Church.

    But how can this be reconciled with Old Testament passages such as these? "Yet now be strong, O Zerubbabel, saith the Lord; and be strong, O Joshua, the High Priest; . . . for I am with you, . . . and My Spirit remaineth among you: fear ye not" (Hag. ii. 4, 5); and again: "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 them?" (Isa. lxiii. 13). David is conscious that he had received the Holy Spirit, for after his fall he prays: "Take not Thy Holy Spirit from me" (Psalm li. 13). There was a sending forth of the Spirit, for we read: "Thou sendest forth Thy Spirit, and they are created; and Thou renewest the face of the earth" (Psalm civ. 30). There seems to have been an actual descending of the Holy Spirit, for Ezekiel says: "The Spirit of the Lord fell upon me" (chap. xi. 5). Micah testified: "Truly I am full of the power by the Spirit of the Lord" (chap. iii. 8). Of John the Baptist it is written, that he 116 should be filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother's womb—Luke i. 15. Even the Lord Himself was filled with the Holy Spirit, whom He received without measure. That Spirit came upon Him at Jordan, how then could He be spoken of as still to come?—a question all the more puzzling since we read that in the evening of the resurrection Jesus breathed upon His disciples, saying "Receive ye the Holy Ghost" (John xx. 22).

    It has been necessary to present this large series of testimonies to show our readers the difficulty of the problem which we will endeavor to solve in the next article.
    Thursday, March 26th, 2009
    10:14 am
    The Holy Spirit in the Glorified Christ
    Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/kuyper/holy_spirit.html)

    Note: This is part twenty-three of a 123-part series taken from the book Work of the Holy Spirit by Abraham Kuyper. The following excerpt is from "Volume One: The Work of the Holy Spirit As A Whole," Sixth Chapter "The Mediator," titled "The Holy Spirit in the Glorified Christ."


    XXIII.
    The Holy Spirit in the Glorified Christ.

    "Declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead."—Rom. i. 4.

    From the foregoing studies it appears that the Holy Spirit performed a work in the human nature of Christ as He descended the several steps of His humiliation to the death of the cross.

    The question now arises, whether He had also a work in the several steps of Christ's exaltation to the excellent glory, i.e., in His resurrection, ascension, royal dignity, and second coming.

    Before we answer this question let us first consider the nature of this work in the exaltation. For it is evident that it must greatly differ from that in His humiliation. In the latter His human nature suffered violence. His sufferings antagonized not only His divine nature, but also His human nature. To suffer pain, insult, and mockery, to be scourged and crucified, goes against human nature. The effort to resist such sufferings and to escape from them is perfectly natural. Christ's groaning in Gethsemane is the natural utterance of the human feeling. He was burdened with the curse and wrath of God against the sin of the race. Then human nature struggled against the burden, and the cry, "Father, let this cup pass from Me," (Matt. xxvi. 39) was the sincere and natural cry of horror which human nature could not repress.

    And not in Gethsemane alone; through His whole humiliation He experienced the same, tho in less degree. His self-emptying was not a single loss or bereavement, but a growing poorer and poorer, until at last nothing was left Him but a piece of ground where He could weep and a cross whereon He could die. He renounced all that heart and flesh hold dear, until, without friend or brother, without one tone of love, amid the mocking laughter of His slanderers, He gave up the ghost. Surely He trod the winepress alone.

    108

    His humiliation being so deep and real, it is not surprising that the Holy Spirit succored and comforted His human nature so that it was not overwhelmed. For it is the proper work of the Holy Spirit by gifts of grace to enable human nature, tempted by sorrow to sin, to stand firm and overcome. He animated Adam before the fall; He comforts and supports all the children of God today; and He did the same in the human nature of Jesus. What air is to man's physical nature, the Holy Spirit is to his spiritual nature. Without air there is death in our bodies; without the Holy Spirit there is death in our souls. And as Jesus had to die, tho He was the Son, when breath failed Him, so He could not live according to His human nature, tho He was the Son, except the Holy Spirit dwelt in that nature. Since, according to the spiritual side of His human nature, He was not dead as we are, but was born possessed of the life of God, so it was impossible for His human nature for a single moment to be without the Holy Spirit.

    But how different in the state of His exaltation! Honor and glory are not against human nature, but satisfy it. It covets them and longs for them with all its energy of desire. Hence this exaltation created no conflict in the soul of Jesus. His human nature needed no support to bear it. Hence the question: What, then, could the Holy Spirit do for the human nature in the state of glory?

    Regarding the resurrection, the Scripture teaches more than once that it was connected with a work of the Holy Spirit. St. Paul says (Rom. i. 4) that Jesus was "declared to be the Son of God, by the Spirit of holiness with power; by the resurrection from the dead." And St. Peter says (1 Peter iii. 18) that Christ "being put to death in the flesh, was quickened by the Spirit," which evidently refers to the resurrection, as the context shows: "For Christ once suffered for our sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God." His death points to the crucifixion, and His quickening, being the opposite of the latter, undoubtedly refers to His resurrection.

    In Rom. viii. 11, speaking of our resurrection, St. Paul explains these more or less puzzling utterances, affirming that "if the Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by His Spirit that dwelleth in you." This passage tells three things concerning our resurrection:

    First, that the Triune God shall raise us up.

    109

    Second, that this shall be wrought by a special work of the Holy Spirit.

    Third, that it shall be effected by the Spirit that dwelleth in us.

    St. Paul induces us to apply these three to Christ; for He compares our resurrection with His, not only as regards the fact, but also as regards the working whereby it was effected. Hence with reference to the latter it must be confessed:

    First, that the Triune God raised Him from the dead, St. Peter stated this clearly on the day of Pentecost: "Whom God has raised up, having loosed the pains of death"; St. Paul repeated it in Ephes. i. 20, where he speaks of "His mighty power" which He wrought in Christ, when He raised Him from the dead.

    Second, that God the Holy Spirit performed a peculiar work in the resurrection.

    Third, that He wrought this work in Christ from within, dwelling in Him: "Which dwelleth in you."

    The nature of this work is apparent from the Holy Spirit's part in Adam's creation and in our birth. If the Spirit kindles and brings forth all life, especially in man, then it was He who rekindled the spark quenched by sin and death. He did so in Jesus; He will do so in us.

    The only remaining difficulty is on the third point: "Which dwelleth in you." The work of the Holy Spirit in our creation, and therefore in that of Christ's human nature, came from without; in the resurrection it works from within. Of course persons dying without being temples of the Holy Spirit are excluded. St. Paul speaks exclusively of men whose hearts are His temples. Hence, representing Him as dwelling in them, he speaks of Him as the Spirit of holiness, and Peter as the "Spirit," indicating that they do not refer to a work of the Holy Spirit in opposition to the spirit of Jesus, but in which His spirit agreed and cooperated. And this harmonizes with Christ's own words, that in the resurrection He would not be passive, but active: "I have power to lay down life and I have power to take it again. This commandment I have received of My Father." The apostles declare again and again not only that Jesus was raised from the dead, but that He has risen. He had thus foretold it, and the angels said: "Behold, He is risen."

    Hence we reach this conclusion, that the work of the Holy Spirit in the resurrection was different from that in the humiliation; was similar to that in the creation; and was performed from within by 110 the Spirit who dwelt in Him without measure, who continued with Him through His death, and in whose work His own spirit fully concurred.

    The work of the Holy Spirit in the exaltation of Christ is not so easily defined. The Scripture never speaks of it in connection with His ascension, His sitting at the right hand of the Father, nor with the Lord's second coming. Its connection with the descent at Pentecost will be treated in its proper place. Light upon these points can be obtained only from the scattered statements concerning the work of the Holy Spirit upon human nature in general. According to Scripture, the Holy Spirit belongs to our nature as the light to the eye; not only in its sinful condition, but also in the sinless state. From this we infer that Adam, before he fell was not without His inworking; hence that in the heavenly Jerusalem our human nature will possess Him in richer, fuller, more glorious measure. For our sanctified nature is a habitation of God through the Spirit—Ephes. ii. 22.

    If, therefore, our blessedness in heaven consists in the enjoyment of the pleasures of God, and it is the Holy Spirit who comes into contact with our innermost being, it follows that in heaven He can not leave us. And upon this ground we confess, that not only the elect, but the glorified Christ also, who continues to be a true man in heaven, must therefore forever continue to be filled with the Holy Spirit. This our churches have always confessed in the Liturgy: "The same Spirit which dwelleth in Christ as the Head and in us as His members."

    The same Holy Spirit who performed His work in the conception of our Lord, who attended the unfolding of His human nature, who brought into activity every gift and power in Him, who consecrated Him to His office as the Messiah, who qualified Him for every conflict and temptation, who enabled Him to cast out devils, and who supported Him in His humiliation, passion, and bitter death, was the same Spirit who performed His work in His resurrection, so that Jesus was justified in the Spirit (1 Tim. iii. 16), and who dwells now in the glorified human nature of the Redeemer in the heavenly Jerusalem.

    In this connection it should be noticed that Jesus said of His body: "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." (John ii. 19) The Temple was God's habitation on Zion; hence it was a symbol of that habitation of God that was to be set up in our hearts. 111 Hence this saying refers not to the indwelling of the Son in our flesh, but to that of the Holy Spirit in the human nature of Jesus. Wherefore St. Paul writes to the Corinthians: "Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost, which is in you?" (1 Cor. vi. 19) If the apostle calls our bodies temples of the Holy Ghost, why should we take it in another sense with reference to Jesus?

    If Christ dwelt in our flesh, i.e., in our human nature, body and soul, and if the Holy Ghost dwells, on the contrary, in the temple of our body, we see that Jesus Himself considered His death and resurrection an awful process of suffering through which He must enter into glory, but without being for a single moment separated from the Holy Spirit.
    Thursday, March 19th, 2009
    3:54 am
    The Holy Spirit in the Passion of Christ
    Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/kuyper/holy_spirit.html)

    Note: This is part twenty-two of a 123-part series taken from the book Work of the Holy Spirit by Abraham Kuyper. The following excerpt is from "Volume One: The Work of the Holy Spirit As A Whole," Sixth Chapter "The Mediator," titled "The Holy Spirit in the Passion of Christ."



    XXII.
    The Holy Spirit in the Passion of Christ.

    "Who through the Eternal Spirit offered Himself."—Heb. ix. 14.

    Thirdly—Let us now trace the work of the Holy Spirit in the suffering, death, resurrection, and exaltation of Christ (see "First" and "Second," pp. 93 and 97).

    In the Epistle to the Hebrews the apostle asks: "If the blood of goats and calves and the ashes of the heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purification of the flesh, how much more shall the blood of Christ purge your conscience from dead works?" adding the words: "Who through the Eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God." (Heb. ix. 13, 14) The meaning of these words has been much disputed. Beza and Gomarus understood the Eternal Spirit to signify Christ's divine nature. Calvin and the majority of reformers made it to refer to the Holy Spirit. Expositors of the present day, especially those of rationalistic tendencies, understand by it merely the tension of Christ's human nature.

    With the majority of orthodox expositors we adopt the view of Calvin. The difference between Beza and Calvin is that already referred to. The question is, whether as regards His human nature Christ substituted the inworking of the Son for that of the Holy Spirit; or did He have the ordinary operation of the Holy Spirit?

    At the present time many have adopted the former view without clearly understanding the difference. They reason thus: "Are the two natures not united in the Person of Jesus? Why, then, should the Holy Spirit be added to qualify the human nature? Could the Son Himself not do this?" And so they reach the conclusion that since the Mediator is God, there could be no need of a work of the Holy Spirit in the human nature of Christ. And yet this view must be rejected, for—

    First, God has so created human nature that without the Holy Spirit it can not have any virtue or holiness. Adam's original, 103 righteousness was the work and fruit of the Holy Spirit as truly as the new life in the regenerate is today. The shining-in of the Holy Spirit is as essential to holiness as the shining of light into the eye is essential to seeing.

    Second, the work of the Son according to the distinction of three divine Persons is other than the work of the Holy Spirit with reference to the human nature. The Holy Spirit could not become flesh; this the Son alone could do. The Father has not delivered all things to the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit works from the Son but the Son depends upon the Holy Spirit for the application of redemption to individuals. The Son adopts our nature, thus relating Himself with the whole race; but the Holy Spirit alone can so enter into individual souls as to glorify the Son in the children of God.

    Applying these two principles to the Person of Christ, we see that His human nature could not dispense with the constant inshining of the Holy Spirit. For which reason Scripture declares: "He gave Him the Spirit without measure." Nor could the Son according to His own nature take the place of the Holy Spirit; but in the divine economy, by virtue of His union with the human nature ever depended upon the Holy Spirit.

    As to the question, whether the Godhead of Christ did not support His humanity, we answer: Undoubtedly; but never independently of the Holy Spirit. We faint because we resist, grieve, and repel the Holy Spirit. Christ was always victorious because His divinity never relaxed His hold upon the Holy Spirit in His humanity, but embraced Him and clave unto Him with all the love and energy of the Son of God.

    Human nature is limited. It is susceptible of receiving the Holy Spirit so as to be His temple. But that susceptibility has its limits. Opposed by eternal death, it loses its tension and falls away from the fellowship of the Holy Spirit. Hence we have no unlosable good in ourselves, but only as members of the body of Christ. Apart from Him, eternal death would have power over us, would separate us from the Holy Spirit and destroy us. Wherefore all our salvation lies in Christ. He is our anchor cast within the veil. As to the human nature of Christ, it encountered and passed through eternal death. This could not be otherwise. If He had passed only through temporal death, eternal death would still be unvanquished.

    To the question how His human nature could pass through 104 eternal death and not perish, having no Mediator to support it, we answer: The human nature of Christ would have been overwhelmed by it, the in-shining of the Holy Spirit would have ceased if His divine nature, i.e., the infinite might of His Godhead, had not been underneath it. Hence the apostle declares: "Who through the Eternal Spirit offered Himself"; (Heb. ix. 14) not through the Holy Spirit. The two expressions are not identical. There is a difference between the Holy Spirit, the third Person in the Godhead, apart from me, and the Holy Spirit working within me.

    The word of Scripture, "He was full of the Holy Ghost," refers not only to the Person of the Holy Spirit, but also to His work in man's soul. So with reference to Christ, there is a difference between: "He was conceived by the Holy Ghost," "The Holy Ghost descended upon Him," "Being full of the Holy Spirit," "Who offered Himself by the Eternal Spirit." The last two passages indicate the fact that the spirit of Jesus had taken in the Holy Spirit and identified itself with Him, in almost the same sense as Acts xv. 28: "It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us." The term "Eternal Spirit" was chosen to indicate that the divine-human Person of Christ entered into such indissoluble fellowship with the Holy Spirit as even eternal death could not break.

    A closer examination of the sufferings of Christ will make this clear.

    Christ did not redeem us by His sufferings alone, being spit upon, scourged, crowned with thorns, crucified, and slain; but this passion was made effectual to our redemption by His love and voluntary obedience. These are generally called His passive and active satisfaction. By the first we understand His actual bearing of pain, anguish, and death; by the second, His zeal for the honor of God, the love, faithfulness, and divine pity by which He became obedient even unto death—yea, the death of the cross. And these two are essentially distinct. Satan, e.g., bears punishment also and shall bear it forever; but he lacks the willingness. This, however, does not affect the validity of the punishment. A murderer on the gallows may curse God and men to the end; but this does not invalidate his punishment. Whether he curses or prays, it is equally valid.

    Hence there was in Christ's sufferings much more than mere passive, penal satisfaction. Nobody compelled Jesus. He, partaker of the divine nature, could not be compelled, but offered 105 Himself quite voluntarily: "Lo, I come to do Thy will, O God; in the volume of the book it is written of Me." To render that voluntary sacrifice He had with equal willingness adopted the prepared body: "Who being in the form of God thought it no robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation; and being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross"; "Who, tho He were a Son, yet learned He obedience." And to give highest proof of this obedience unto death, He inwardly consecrated Himself to death, as He Himself testified: "I sanctify Myself for them."

    This leads to the important question, whether Jesus rendered this obedience and consecration outside of His human nature, or in it, so that it manifested itself in His human nature. Undoubtedly the latter. The divine nature can not learn, or be tempted; the Son could not love the Father with other than eternal love. In the divine nature there is no more or less. To suppose this is to annihilate the divine nature. The statement that, "tho He were the Son, yet learned He obedience," does not mean that as God He learned obedience; for God can not obey. God rules, governs, commands, but never obeys. As King He can serve us only in the form of a slave, hiding His princely majesty, having emptied Himself, standing before us as one despised among men. "Tho He were the Son" means, therefore: altho in His inward Being He is God the Son, yet He stood before us in such lowliness that nothing betrayed His divinity; yea, so lowly that He even learned obedience.

    Wherefore if the Mediator as man showed in His human nature such zeal for God and such pity for sinners that He willingly gave Himself in self-sacrifice unto death, then it is evident that His human nature could not exercise such consecration without the inworking of the Holy Spirit; and again that the Holy Spirit could not have effected such inworking unless the Son willed and desired it. The cry of the Messiah is heard in the words of the psalmist: "I delight to do Thy will, O God." (Psalm xl. 8) The Son was willing so to empty Himself that it would be possible for His human nature to pass through eternal death; and to this end He let it be filled with all the mightiness of the Spirit of God. Thus the Son offered Himself "through the Eternal Spirit that we might serve the living God."

    Hence the work of the Holy Spirit in the work of redemption did not begin only at Pentecost, but the same Holy Spirit who in 106 creation animates all life, upholds and qualifies our human nature, and in Israel and the prophets wrought the work of revelation, also prepared the body of Christ, adorned His human nature with gracious gifts, put these gifts into operation, installed Him into His office, led Him into temptation, qualified Him to cast out devils, and finally enabled Him to finish that eternal work of satisfaction whereby our souls are redeemed.

    This explains why Beza and Gomarus could not be fully satisfied with Calvin's exposition. Calvin said that it was the working of the Holy Spirit apart from the divinity of the Son. And they felt that there was something lacking. For the Son made Himself of no reputation and became obedient; but if all this is the work of the Holy Spirit, then nothing is left of the work of the Son. And to escape from this, they adopted the other extreme, and declared that the Eternal Spirit had reference only to the Son according to His divine nature—an exposition that can not be accepted, for the divine nature is never designated as spirit.

    Yet they were not altogether wrong. The reconciliation of these contrary views must be looked for in the difference between the existence of the Holy Spirit without us, and His working within us as received by our nature and identified with its own working. And inasmuch as the Son, by His Godhead, enabled His human nature, in the awful conflict with eternal death, to effect this union; therefore the apostle confesses that the sacrifice of the Mediator was rendered by the working of the Eternal Spirit.
    Thursday, March 12th, 2009
    3:02 am
    Not Like unto Us
    Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/kuyper/holy_spirit.html)

    Note: This is part twenty-one of a 123-part series taken from the book Work of the Holy Spirit by Abraham Kuyper. The following excerpt is from "Volume One: The Work of the Holy Spirit As A Whole," Sixth Chapter "The Mediator," titled "Not Like Unto Us."



    XXI.
    Not Like unto Us.

    "Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness."—Matt. iv. 1.

    The representation that Christ's human nature received animating and qualifying influences and impulses directly from His divine nature, altho on the whole incorrect, contains also some truth.

    We often distinguish between our ego and nature. We say: "I have my nature against me," or "My nature is in my favor"; hence it follows that our person animates and actuates our nature. Applying this to the Person of the Mediator, we must distinguish between His human nature and His Person. The latter existed from eternity, the former He adopted in time. And since in the Son the divine Person and the divine nature are nearly one, it must be acknowledged that the Godhead of our Lord directly controlled His human nature. This is the meaning of the confession of God's children that His Godhead supported His human nature.

    But it is wrong to suppose that the divine Person accomplished in His human nature what in us is effected by the Holy Spirit. This would endanger His true and real humanity. The Scripture positively denies it.

    Second—The work of the Holy Spirit in the consecration of Jesus to His office (see "First," on p. 93).

    This ought to be carefully noticed, especially since the Church has never sufficiently confessed the influence of the Holy Spirit exerted upon the work of Christ. The general impression is that the work of the Holy Spirit begins when the work of the Mediator on earth is finished, as tho until that time the Holy Spirit celebrated His divine day of rest. Yet the Scripture teaches us again and again that Christ performed His mediatorial work controlled and impelled by the Holy Spirit. We consider this influence now with reference to His consecration to His office.

    By the spirit of the prophets already Christ testified of this saving 98 by the mouth of Isaiah: "The Spirit of the Lord Jehovah is upon me, because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek." (Isa. lxi. 1) But the great fact which could not be learned from prophecy is that of the descent of the Holy Spirit at Jordan. Surely Isaiah referred partly to this event, but principally to the anointing in the counsel of peace. However, when Jesus went up out of Jordan, and the Holy Spirit descended upon Him like a dove, and a voice was heard from heaven saying, "This is My beloved Son," (Matt. iii. 7) then only the anointing became actual.

    In regard to the event itself, only a few words. That Christ's Baptism was not a mere form, but the fulfilling of all righteousness proves that He descended into the water burdened with our sins. Hence St. John makes the words, "Behold the Lamb of God," (John i. 29) precede the account of His Baptism. Wherefore it is incorrect to say, that Christ was installed into His Messianic office only at His Baptism. On the contrary, He was anointed from eternity. Wherefore He may not be represented as being for a moment unconscious, according to the measure of His development, of the Messiah task that rested upon Him. This lay in His holy Person; it was not added to Him at a later period, but was His before Adam fell. And as in His human consciousness His Person gradually attained stature, it was always the stature of the Messiah. This is evident from His answer when, at the age of twelve, He spoke of the things of His Father which were to occupy Him; and still more clearly from His words to John the Baptist commandingly saying: "Suffer it to be so now, for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness." (Matt. iii. 15)

    And yet it is only at His Baptism that Jesus receives the actual consecration to His office. This is proven from the fact that immediately after this He entered publicly upon His office as a Teacher; and also from the event itself, and the voice from heaven pointing to Him as the Messiah; and especially from the descent of the Holy Spirit, which can not be interpreted in any other way than as His consecration to His holy office.

    What we have said with reference to the communication of the Holy Spirit qualifying one for office, as in the case of Saul, David, and others, is of direct application here. Altho in His human nature Jesus was personally in constant fellowship with the Holy Spirit, yet the official communication was established only at the time of His Baptism. Yet with this difference, that while in others the person and his office are separated at death, in the Messiah the 99 two remain united even in and after death, to continue so until the moment that He shall deliver the Kingdom unto God the Father, that God may be all in all. Hence the descriptive remark of John: "I saw the Spirit descending from heaven, and it abode on Him" (John i. 32).

    And finally, to the question why the Person of the Mediator needed this remarkable event and the three signs that accompany it, we answer:

    First, Christ must be a true man even in His office, wherefore He must be installed according to the human custom. He enters upon His public ministry at thirty; He is publicly installed; and He is anointed with the Holy Spirit.

    Second, for His human consciousness this striking revelation from heaven was of the utmost necessity. The conflict of the temptation was to be absolute, i.e., indescribable; hence the impression of His consecration must be indestructible.

    Third, for the apostles and the Church it was necessary to distinguish unmistakably the true Messiah from all the pseudo-messiahs and antichrists. This is the reason of St. John's strong appeal to this event.

    If the work of the Holy Spirit with reference to the consecration is conspicuous and clearly indicated, the fact that the official influence of the Holy Spirit accompanied the Mediator throughout the entire administration of His office is not less clearly set forth in the Holy Scripture. This appears from the events immediately following the Baptism. St. Luke relates that Jesus being full of the Holy Spirit, was led by the Spirit into the wilderness. St. Matthew adds: "To be tempted of the devil." Of Elias, Ezekiel, and others it is said that the Spirit took them up and transferred them to some other place. This stands in evident connection with what we read here concerning Jesus. With this difference, however, that while the propelling power came to them from without, Jesus, being full of the Holy Spirit, felt its pressure in the very depths of His soul. And yet, altho operating in His soul, this action of the Holy Spirit was not identical with the impulses of Christ's human nature. Of Himself Jesus would not have gone into the desert; His going there was the result of the Holy Spirit's leading. Only in this way this passage receives its full explanation.

    That this leading of the Holy Spirit was not limited to this one act appears from St. Luke, who relates (chap. iv. 14) that after the 100 temptation He returned in the power of the Holy Spirit into Galilee, thus entering upon the public ministry of His prophetic office.

    It is evidently the purpose of the Scripture to emphasize the fact of the inability of the human nature which Christ had adopted to accomplish the work of the Messiah without the constant operation and powerful leading of the Holy Spirit, whereby it was so strengthened that it could be the instrument of the Son of God for the performance of His wonderful work.

    Jesus was conscious of this, and at the beginning of His ministry expressly indicated it. In their synagogue He turned to Isa. lxi. 1, and read to them: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because the Lord hath anointed me"; then added: "This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears."

    The Holy Spirit did not support His human nature in the temptation and in the opening ministry only, but in all His mighty deeds, as Christ Himself testified: "If I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the Kingdom of God is come unto you" (Matt. xii. 28). Moreover, St. Paul teaches that the gifts of healing and miracles proceed from the Holy Spirit, and this, in connection with the statement that these powers worked in Jesus (Mark vi. 14), convinces us that these were the very powers of the Holy Spirit. Again, it is frequently said He rejoiced in the Spirit or was troubled in the Spirit, which may be interpreted as a rejoicing or being troubled in His own spirit; but this is not a complete explanation. When it refers to His own spirit it reads: "And He sighed deeply in His spirit" (Mark viii. 12). But in the other cases we interpret the expressions as pointing to those deeper and more glorious emotions of which our human nature is susceptible only when abiding in the Holy Spirit. For altho St. John states that Jesus groaned in Himself (chap. xi. 38), this is not contradictory, especially with reference to Jesus. If the Holy Spirit always abode in Him, the same emotion may be attributed both to Him and to the Holy Spirit.

    Apart, however, from these passages and their interpretations, we have said enough to prove that that part of Christ's work of mediation, beginning with His Baptism and closing in the upper chamber, was marked by the operation, influence, and support of the Holy Spirit.

    According to the divine counsel, human nature is adapted in creation to the inworking of the Holy Spirit, without which it can not unfold itself any more than the rosebud without the light and 101 influence of the sun. As the ear can not hear without sound, and the eye can not see without light, so is our human nature incomplete without the light and indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Wherefore, when the Son assumed human nature He took it just as it is, i.e., incapable of any holy action without the power of the Holy Spirit. Hence He was conceived by the Holy Spirit, that from the beginning His human nature should be richly endowed with powers. The Holy Spirit developed these powers; and He was consecrated to His office by the communication to His human nature of the Messianic gifts by which He still intercedes for us as our High Priest, and rules us as our King. And for this reason He was guided, impelled, animated, and supported by the Holy Spirit at every step of His Messianic ministry.

    There are three differences between this communication of the Holy Spirit to the human nature of Jesus and that in us:

    First, the Holy Spirit always meets with the resistance of evil in our hearts. Jesus's heart was without sin and unrighteousness. Hence in His human nature the Holy Spirit met no resistance.

    Secondly, the Holy Spirit's operation, influence, support, and guidance in our human nature is always individual, i.e., in part, imperfect; in the human nature of Jesus it was central, perfect, leaving no void.

    Thirdly, in our nature the Holy Spirit meets with an ego which in union with that nature opposes God; while the Person which He met in the human nature of Christ, partaking of the divine nature, was absolutely holy. For the Son having adopted the human nature in union with His Person, was cooperating with the Holy Spirit.
    Monday, January 28th, 2008
    8:20 pm
    Whatever Happened to the Holy Spirit?
    Whatever Happened to the Holy Spirit?

    by

    John MacArthur
    All Rights Reserved



    I recently listened aghast as a Christian psychologist on live radio counseled a caller to express anger at his therapist by making an obscene gesture at him.

    "Go ahead!" he told the caller. "It's an honest expression of your feelings. Don't try to keep your anger inside."

    "What about my friends?" the caller asked. "Should I react that way to all of them when I'm angry?"

    "Why, sure!" this counselor said. "You can do it to anyone, whenever you feel like it. Except those who you think won't understand--they won't be good therapists for you."

    That's a paraphrase. I have a tape of the entire broadcast, and what the counselor actually said was much more explicit, even to the point of being inappropriate to print.

    That same week, I heard another popular Christian broadcast that offers live counseling to callers nationwide. A woman called and said she has had a problem with compulsive fornication for years. She said she goes to bed with "anyone and everyone" and feels powerless to change her behavior.

    The counselor suggested that her conduct is the result of wounds inflicted by a passive father and an overbearing mother.

    "There's no simple road to recovery," this radio therapist told her. "Your problem won't go away immediately--it's an addiction, and these things usually require extended counseling. You will probably need years and years of therapy to overcome your need for illicit sex."

    What kind of advice is that? First, the counselor in effect gave that woman permission to defer obedience to a clear command of Scripture: "Flee immorality" (1 Cor. 6:18). He seemed to be suggesting she could taper off gradually instead.

    But worse, he gave his nationwide audience the clear message that he has no real confidence in the Holy Spirit's power to transform a person's heart and behavior.

    Contrast both counselors' advice with the profound simplicity of Galatians 5:16: "But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh."

    Do we really think "years and years of therapy" can teach any- one to walk by the Spirit? Certainly not if the therapist is someone who encourages obscene gestures as an expression of honesty.

    Have you noticed that contemporary Christianity is obsessed with counseling and psychotherapy, and almost no one talks about the Holy Spirit anymore?

    Whatever happened to the Holy Spirit? The church seems to have turned away from His ministry in pursuit of a pragmatic, man-centered, psychological sanctification.

    This trend is evident in many of the popular books on Christian psychology. They offer all kinds of advice for struggling Christians. But the Holy Spirit is conspicuously absent. Rarely is any mention made of His power or ministry in the life of a believer. Little is said about walking in the Spirit, being filled with the Spirit, or yielding to the Spirit.

    Instead they usually offer a hodgepodge of current psycholog- ical thinking and clever, pragmatic methodology. In short, most of these books are more of the same kind of shallow "psycho-theology" one seems to hear everywhere these days. It's as if the church has gone to the other extreme from its preoccupation with the Holy Spirit in the previous decade.

    I'm convinced that what we're seeing is one of the most subtle and effective attacks Satan has ever mounted against the church. By substituting an artificial, non-supernatural simulation of sanctification, he is turning Christians away from the real source of spiritual power and victory.

    More and more churches are featuring sophisticated counseling programs as the hub of their ministries. Many pastors tell me they spend more time counseling than studying to preach. Seminaries are emphasizing psychological training as a major requirement, even at the expense of biblical instruction. And the result is a generation of Christians who are virtually dependent on prolonged psychotherapy.

    What's wrong with that? Several things.

    First, such therapy often substitutes human wisdom for God's Word. I need to be clear in saying that I am not against all forms of counseling. Biblical counseling--that is, counsel that faithfully emphasizes the commands and principles of God's Word--is important and much needed today. There are some valuable ministries that specifically offer biblical counsel.

    But sadly, most of the emphasis in Christian counseling today seems to be coming from another direction, drawing its authority from the premises and presuppositions of secular psychology--the wisdom of men--instead of God's Word.

    David said, "Thy testimonies also are my delight; they are my counselors" (Ps. 119:24).

    Second, this emphasis on secular psychology ignores the depravity of the human heart. Psychology says, "Get in touch with your feelings! You've got to reach deep within to understand yourself."

    Scripture is clear that if we do that, we'll come up with wrong answers. Your heart will lie to you: "The heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately sick; Who can understand it?" (Jer. 17:9).

    And if you can't understand your own heart, how can anyone else? That is a function of the Holy Spirit through the Word of God (cf. 1 Cor. 2:11; Heb. 4:12).

    Third, modern psycho-Christianity fosters dependency on human counsel and psychotherapy while obscuring the source of genuine sanctification.

    I heard one Christian psychologist assert that everyone has deep problems rooted in childhood conflicts. If you don't see a professional analyst regularly, he told his audience, your life is almost certainly not what it could be.

    Don't be deceived by such lies. It is true that we all strug- gle with the effects of humanity's sin, but no therapist can offer deliverance from that.

    "Are you so foolish?" Paul wrote the Galatians. "Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?" (Gal.3:3).

    Fleshly technique and human wisdom can neither restrain sin nor produce righteousness. Those are ministries of the Holy Spirit. "Though we walk in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh, for the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses" (2 Cor. 10:3-4).

    Only the Spirit can conquer the flesh. Galatians 5:17 says, "The flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another." The flesh and the Spirit are at war with one another, so there can be no fleshly solutions to spiritual problems.

    Don't settle for bogus answers. God has made a wonderful, supernatural provision:

    We have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things freely given to us by God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words.... He who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no man. For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he should instruct Him? But we have the mind of Christ (1 Cor. 2:12-16).

    Remember, "Walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh."


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (c) 1989 by John F. MacArthur, Jr. All rights reserved. This article originally appeared in Masterpiece and is used by permission of the author. Exact copies of this file may be freely copied and distributed through computer bulletin-board networks but may not be published in any periodical without prior permission in writing from the author.

    Distributed by: The Master's Communication PO Box 4000 Panorama City, CA 91412

    Write for a complete catalog of cassette tapes and printed materials.


    Added to Bible Bulletin Board's "MacArthur Collection" by:

    Tony Capoccia
    Bible Bulletin Board
    Box 314
    Columbus, New Jersey, USA, 08022
    Websites: www.biblebb.com and www.gospelgems.com
    Email: tony@biblebb.com
    Online since 1986
    Tuesday, January 22nd, 2008
    4:21 pm
    The Holy Spirit in the Mediator
    Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/kuyper/holy_spirit.html)

    Note: This is part twenty of a 123-part series taken from the book Work of the Holy Spirit by Abraham Kuyper. The following excerpt is from "Volume One: The Work of the Holy Spirit As A Whole," Sixth Chapter "The Mediator," titled "The Holy Spirit in the Mediator."



    XX.
    The Holy Spirit in the Mediator.
    "Who through the Eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God."—Heb. ix. 14.

    The work of the Holy Spirit in the Person of Christ is not exhausted in the Incarnation, but appears conspicuously in the work of the Mediator. We consider this work in the development of His human nature; in the consecration to His office; in His humiliation unto death; in His resurrection, exaltation, and return in glory.

    First—The work of the Holy Spirit in the development of the human nature in Jesus.

    We have said before, and now repeat, that we consider the effort to write the "Life of Jesus" either unlawful or its title a misnomer: a misnomer when, pretending to write a biography of Jesus, the writer simply omits to explain the psychological facts of His life; unlawful when he explains these facts from the human nature of Jesus.

    There never was a life of Jesus in the sense of a human, personal existence; and the tendency to substitute the various biographies of Jesus of Nazareth for the simple Gospel narratives aims really at nothing else than to place the unique Person of the God-man on the same level with the geniuses and great men of the world; to humanize Him, and thus to annihilate the Messiah in Him—in other words, to secularize Him. And against this we solemnly protest with all the power that is in us.

    The God-human Person of the Lord Jesus did not live a life, but 94 rendered one mighty act of obedience by humbling Himself unto death; and out of that humbling He ascended not by powers developed from His human nature, but by a mighty and extraordinary act of the power of God. Any one who successfully undertook to write the life of Christ could do no more than draw the picture of His human nature. For the divine nature has no history, does not run through a process of time, but remains the same forevermore.

    However, this does not prevent us from inquiring, according to the need of our limitations, in what manner the human nature of Christ was developed. And then the Scripture teaches us that there was indeed growth in His human nature. St. Luke relates that Jesus increased in wisdom and stature and in favor with God and men. Hence there was in His human nature a growth and development from the less unto the greater. This would have been impossible if in the Messiah the divine nature had taken the place of the human ego; for then the majesty of the Godhead would always and completely have filled the human nature. But this was not the case. The human nature in the Mediator was real, i.e., in body and soul it existed as it exists in us, and all inworking of divine life, light, and power could manifest itself only by adapting itself to the peculiarities and limitations of the human nature.

    When maintaining the mistaken view that the development of sinless Adam would have been accomplished without the aid of the Holy Spirit, it is natural to suppose that the sinless nature of Christ did equally develop itself without the assistance of the Spirit of God. But knowing from the Scripture that not only man's gifts, powers, and faculties, but also their working and exercise are a result of the work of the Holy Spirit, we see the development of the human nature of Jesus in a different light and understand the meaning of the words that He received the Holy Spirit without measure. For this indicates that His human nature also received the Holy Ghost; and not this only after He had lived for years without Him, but every moment of His existence according to the measure of His capacities. Even in His conception and birth the Holy Spirit effected not only a separation from sin, but He also endowed His human nature with the glorious gifts, powers, and faculties of which that nature is susceptible. Hence His human nature received these gifts, powers, and faculties not from the Son by communication from the divine nature, but from the Holy Ghost 95 by communication to the human nature; and this should be thoroughly understood.

    However, His human nature did not receive these gifts, powers, and faculties in full operation, but wholly inoperative: As there are in every infant powers and faculties that will remain dormant, some of them for many years, so there were in the human nature of Christ powers and faculties which for a time remained slumbering. The Holy Spirit imparted these endowments to His human nature without measure—John iii. 34. This has reference to a contrast between others, whom the Holy Spirit endowed not without measure, but in limited degree according to their individual calling or destiny; and Christ, in whom there is no such distinction or individuality—to whom, therefore, gifts, powers, and faculties are imparted in such a measure that He never could feel the lack of any gift of the Holy Spirit. He lacked nothing, possessed all; not by virtue of His divine nature, which can not receive anything, being the eternal fulness itself, but by virtue of His human nature, which was endowed with such glorious gifts by the Holy Spirit.

    However, this was not all. Not only did the Holy Spirit adorn the human nature of Christ with these endowments, but He also caused them to be exercised, gradually to enter into full activity.

    This depended upon the succession of the days and years of the time of His humiliation. Altho His heart contained the germ of all wisdom, yet as a child of one year, e.g., He could not know the Scripture by means of His human understanding. As the Eternal Son He knew it, for He Himself had given it to His Church. But His human knowledge had no free access to His divine knowledge. On the contrary, while the latter never increased, knowing all things from eternity, the former was to learn everything; it had nothing of itself. This is the increase in wisdom of which St. Luke speaks—an increase not of the faculty, but of its exercise. And this affords us a glimpse into the extent of His humiliation. He that knew all things by virtue of His divine nature began as man with knowing nothing; and that which He knew as a man He acquired by learning it under the influence of the Holy Spirit.

    And the same applies to His increase in stature and in favor with God and men. Stature refers to His physical growth, including all that in the human nature depends upon it. Not created an adult like Adam, but born a child like each of us, Jesus had to grow and develop physically: not by magic, but in reality. When He 96 lay in Mary's lap, or as a boy looked around in his stepfather's shop, He was a child not only in appearance with the wisdom of a venerable, hoary head, but a real child, whose impressions, feelings, sensations, and thoughts kept step with His years. No doubt His development was quick and beautiful, surpassing anything ever seen in other children, so that the aged rabbis in the Temple were astonished when they looked upon the Boy only twelve years old; yet it always remained the development of a child that first lay upon His mother's lap, then learned to walk, gradually became a boy and youth, until He attained the fulness of man's stature.

    And as the Holy Spirit with every increase of His human nature enlarged the exercise of its powers and faculties, so He did also with reference to the relation of the human nature to God and men, for He increased in favor with God and men. Favor has reference to the unfolding and development of the inward life, and may manifest itself in a twofold way, either pleasing or displeasing to God and men. Of Jesus it is said that in His development such gifts and faculties, dispositions and attributes, powers and qualifications manifested themselves from the inward life of His human nature that God's favor rested upon them, while they affected those around Him in a refreshing and helpful way.

    Even apart from His Messiahship Jesus stood, with reference to His human nature, during all the days of His humiliation, under the constant and penetrating operation of the Holy Spirit. The Son, who lacked nothing, but as God in union with the Father and the Holy Spirit possessed all things, compassionately adopted our human nature. And inasmuch as it is the peculiarity of that nature to derive its gifts, powers, and faculties not from itself, but from the Holy Spirit, by whose constant operation alone they can be exercised, so did the Son not violate this peculiarity, but, altho He was the Son, He did not take its preparation, enriching, and operation into His own hand, but was willing to receive them from the hand of the Holy Spirit.

    The fact that the Holy Spirit descended upon Jesus at His Baptism, altho He had received Him without measure at His conception, can only be explained by keeping in view the difference between the personal and official life of Jesus.
    Tuesday, January 15th, 2008
    5:39 pm
    The Holy Spirit in the Mystery of the Incarnation
    Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/kuyper/holy_spirit.html)

    Note: This is part nineteen of a 123-part series taken from the book Work of the Holy Spirit by Abraham Kuyper. The following excerpt is from "Volume One: The Work of the Holy Spirit As A Whole," Fifth Chapter "The Incarnation of the Word," titled "The Holy Spirit in the Mystery of the Incarnation."




    XIX.
    The Holy Spirit in the Mystery of the Incarnation.
    "The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory."—John i. 14.

    There is one more question in the treatment of this subject: What was the extraordinary operation of the Holy Spirit that enabled the Son of God to assume our fallen nature without being defiled by sin?

    Altho we concede it to be unlawful to pry into that behind the veil which God does not freely open to us, yet we may seek the meaning of the words that embody the mystery; and this we intend to do in the discussion of this question.

    The Incarnation of Christ, with reference to His sinlessness, is connected with the being of sin, the character of original sin, the relation between body and soul, regeneration, and the working of the Holy Spirit in believers. Hence it is necessary for a clear understanding to have a correct view of the relation of Christ's human nature to these important matters.

    Sin is not a spiritual bacillus hiding in the blood of the mother and received into the veins of the child. Sin is not material and tangible; its nature is moral and spiritual, belonging to the invisible things whose results we can perceive but whose real being escapes detection. Wherefore in opposition to Manicheism and kindred heresies, the Church has always confessed that sin is not a material substance in our flesh and blood, but that it consists in the loss of the original righteousness in which Adam and Eve bloomed and prospered in Paradise. Nor do believers differ on this point, for all acknowledge that sin is the loss of original righteousness.

    However, tracing the next step in the course of sin, we meet a serious difference between the Church of Rome and our own. The former teaches that Adam came forth perfect from the hand of his Maker, even before he was endowed with original righteousness. 89 This implies that the human nature is finished without original righteousness, which is put on him like a robe or ornament. As our present nature is complete without dress or ornament, which are needed only to appear respectable in the world, so was the human nature, according to Rome, complete and perfect in itself without righteousness, which serves only as dress and jewel. But the Reformed churches have always opposed this view, maintaining that original righteousness is an essential part of the human nature; hence that the human nature in Adam was not complete without it; that it was not merely added to Adam's nature, but that Adam was created in the possession of it as the direct manifestation of his life.

    If Adam's nature was perfect before he possessed original righteousness, it follows that it remains perfect after the loss of it; in which case we describe sin simply as "carentia justitix origirialis;" i.e., the want of original righteousness. This used to be expressed thus: Is original righteousness a natural or supernatural good? If natural, then its loss caused the human nature to be wholly corrupt; if supernatural, then its loss might take away the glory and honor of that nature, but as a human nature it retained nearly all of its original power.

    Bellarminus said that desire, disease, conflict, etc., naturally belong to human nature; and original righteousness was a golden bridle laid upon this nature, to check and control this desire, disease, conflict, etc. Hence when the golden bride was lost, disease, desire, conflict, and death broke loose from restraint (tom. iv., chap. v., col. 15, 17, 18). Thomas Aquinas, to whom Calvin was greatly indebted, and whom the present Pope has earnestly commended to his priests, had a more correct view. This is evident from his definition of sin. If disease, desire, etc., existed in man when he came from the hand of God, and only supernatural grace can restrain them, then sin is merely the loss of original righteousness, hence purely negative. But if original righteousness belongs to human nature and was not simply added to it supernaturally, then sin is twofold: first, the loss of original righteousness; second, the ruin and corruption of human nature itself, disorganizing and disjointing it. Thomas Aquinas acknowledges this last aspect, for he teaches ("Summa Theologiæ," prima secundæ, ix., sect. 2, art. 1) that sin is not only deprivation and loss, but also a state of corruption, wherein must be distinguished the lack of what ought 90 to be present, i.e., original righteousness, and the presence of what ought to be absent, viz., an abnormal derangement of the parts and powers of the soul.

    Our fathers held almost the same view. They judged that sin is not material, but the loss of original righteousness. But since original righteousness belongs to the sound human nature, the loss did not leave that nature intact, but damaged, disjointed, and corrupted it:

    To illustrate: A beautiful geranium that adorned the window was killed by the frost. Leaves and flowers withered, leaving only a mass of mildew and decay. What was the cause? Merely the loss of the sun's light and heat. But that was enough; for these belong to the nature of the plant, and are essential to its life and beauty. Deprived of them it remains not what it is, but its nature loses its soundness, and this causes decay, mildew, and poisonous gases, which soon destroy it. So of human nature: In Paradise Adam was like the blooming plant, flourishing in the warmth and brightness of the Lord's presence. By sin he fled from that presence. The result was not merely the loss of light and heat, but since these were essential to his nature, that nature languished, drooped, and withered. The mildew of corruption formed upon it; and the positive process of dissolution was begun, to end only in eternal death.

    Facts and history prove even now that the human body has weakened since the days of the Reformation; that bad habits of a certain character sometimes pass from father to child even where the early death of the former precludes propagation by education and example. Hence the difference between Adam, body and soul, before the fall and his descendants after the fall is not merely the loss of the Sun of Righteousness, which by nature shines no longer upon them, but the damage caused by this loss to the human nature, in body and soul, which thereby are weakened, diseased, corrupted, and thrown out of balance.

    This corrupt nature passes from the father to the child, as the Confession of Faith expresses it in article xv.: "That original sin is a corruption of the whole nature, and an hereditary disease, wherewith infants themselves are infected in their mother's womb, and which produces in man all sorts of sin, being in him as a root thereof."

    However, the relation between a person and his ego must be 91 taken into account. The disordered condition of our flesh and blood inclines and incites to sin, a fact that has been observed in the victims of certain terrible diseases as their effect. But this could not result in sin if there were no personal ego to allow itself to be excited. Again, tho the unbalanced powers of the soul which cause the darkening of the understanding, the blunting of the sensibilities, and the weakening of the will arouse the passions, yet even this could not result in sin if no personal ego were affected by this working. Hence sin puts its own mark upon this corruption only when the personal ego turns away from God, and in that disordered soul and diseased body stands condemned before Him.

    If according to established law the unclean brings forth the unclean, and if God has made our birth to depend upon generation by sinful men, it must follow that by nature we are born—first, without original righteousness; secondly, with an impaired body; thirdly, with a soul out of harmony with itself; lastly, with a personal ego which is turned away from God.

    All of which would apply to the Person of the Mediator if, like one of us, He had been born a human person by the will of man and not of God. But since He was not born a human person, but took our human nature upon Himself, and was conceived not by the will of man, but by an operation of the Holy Spirit, there could not be in Him an ego turned away from God, nor could the weakness of His human nature for a moment be a sinful weakness. Or to put it in the concrete: Altho there was in that fallen nature something to incite Him to desire, yet it never became desire. There is a difference between the temptations and conflicts of Jesus and those of ourselves; while our ego and nature desire against God, His holy Ego opposed the incitement of His adopted nature and was never overcome.

    Hence the proper work of the Holy Spirit consisted in this:

    First, the creation not of a new person, but of a human nature, which the Son assumed into union with His divine nature in one Person.

    Second, that the divine-human Ego of the Mediator, who, according to His human nature, also possessed spiritual life, was kept from the inward defilement which by virtue of our birth affected our ego and personality.

    Hence regeneration, which affects not our nature but our person, is out of the question with reference to Christ. But what Christ 92 needed was the gifts of the Holy Ghost to enable His weakened nature, in increasing measure, to be His instrument in the working out of His holy design; and finally to transform His weakened nature not by regeneration, but by resurrection into a glorious nature, divested of the last trace of weakness and prepared to unfold its highest glory.
[ << Previous 20 ]
About Blurty.com