Sorry for long post...

Quote Originally Posted by tdidymas View Post
Adelphos: we might debate concerning whether I am taking scripture out of context or not. I think the essential disagreement is on the basic question about does every believer have the Spirit or not?
Sure, I would agree. However, context is very important regarding this matter.

Concerning your two statements:

"It appears that you have presented an interpretation of Ephesians that you have not exegeted for me. Please explain your position on that verse.

I believe Scripture teaches that believers are converted apart from receiving the Gift of the Holy Spirit."

this is the crux of the issue.
Yes, I agree this is the crux of the issue.

I think if you read Rom 8:9 carefully, it is not out of context in the way I have presented it.
For space sake, allow me to summarize a few thoughts concerning the context:

Romans 8:9-11:

But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if the Spirit of God dwelleth in you. Now if any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is not his. And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of him that raised Jesus from the dead dwelleth in you, he that raised Christ from the dead will also revive your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

1. Paul is addressing Spirit Filled believers (Romans 5:5).

2. This chapter is not primarily about "saved vs. unsaved" or "filled vs. unfilled," but rather "the spirit-led life vs. the flesh-led life" (see verse 4).

3. The word “dwelleth – oikeo” is referring to the Holy Spirit “having a home in them so as to possess the house”, inferring an everyday, ongoing walk with Him.

4. The Greek verb “oikei” is present, active, indicative, and confirms the idea that this text is referring to allowing the Holy Spirit continuous, ongoing and complete control if one is already filled with the Holy Spirit.

The Concordant Literal translation says, "if so be that God's Spirit IS MAKING (HIS) HOME in you”.

5. If a person is “None of His” (KJV) until the Holy Spirit “takes up residence” in him (which is what you are teaching), then the 120, the Samaritans, Saul, and the Ephesians were NONE OF HIS until after they had received the Holy Spirit. However, the texts clearly demonstrate that these were all true believers before they had received the Holy Spirit!

How verse 9 should be understood from a contextual interpretation:

But ye are not (walking) in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if the Spirit of God dwelleth (is continuously making His home) in you. Now if any man hath not the Spirit of Christ (continually making His home in you – for you already have the Holy Spirit/Romans 5:5), he is not his.

Furthermore, if one were to take these verses out of context, it creates a ver unusual problem in verse 9:

Verse 9 says "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit"

Does this verse teach that because one is a believer, one is automatically NOT IN THE FLESH? Anyone who has been around church life for a day knows that this cannot be the case! Besides, this contradicts Paul's admonition to "walk in the Spirit" (Gal. 5:16, 25). Why would Paul tell believers to walk in the Spirit if one automatically walks in the Spirit?

Then verse 9 says, "if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you".

So, if this verse is telling us that "if" the Spirit of God dwells in a believer they no longer walk in the flesh and automatically walk in the Spirit, this would fly in the face of all Biblical teaching on Christian living - I wish it were this simple!

Conclusion: The fact is that this verse is not referring to the mere indwelling of the Holy Spirit. It is referring to believers who have already been filled with the Holy Spirit (Romans 5:5) being admonished to allow the Spirit of God to make His home in one who claims to be filled with the Holy Spirit. This is not only in agreement with the entirely of the Book of Acts, it also agrees with Pauls admonitions to live out one's daily life "in the Spirit"!

Using out of context verses to form theology has brought great confusion to the body of Christ!

6. Why would Paul teach a doctrine that would contradict his own experience? Scripture shows quite clearly when He received the Gift of the Holy Spirit, and it wasn't as conversion!

7. Why would Paul teach a doctrine that would contradict his very practice. After he clarified the truth to the Ephesian believers, and after those believers were rebaptized, only then, did he lay hands on them to receive the Gift of the Holy Spirit. If Paul believed that the Gift of the Spirit was given at conversion, this seems like a strange practice indeed.

I firmly believe the whole of the scripture teaches that all true believers have the Spirit. The ramifications of any person not having the Spirit are:

1. 1 Cor. 2:12 - anyone not receiving the Spirit cannot have the wisdom to understand and receive the gospel.
1 Co 2:12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

This p***age does not teach one cannot have the wisdom to understand and receive the gospel. It simple says that those who have received the Spirit MIGHT know the things that are freely given to us of God. I really do not understand how you got anything more out of this p***age. In other words, one of the blessings of receiving the Spirit is coming to a deeper knowledge of those things God has given to us - but that isn't even automatic as I see it presently, for he uses the term "might."

2. Rom. 8:9 - anyone not having the Spirit does not belong to Christ.
I explained some of my thoughts about this above. I believe that this is out of context.

3. Rom. 8:14 - anyone not having the Spirit cannot be led by Him.
Out of context with Romans 8 and the rest of the Bible. This view would eliminate the entire list of Old Testament believers who never had the opportunity to receive the Gift of the Holy Spirit.

4. Rom. 8:16 - the Spirit cannot testify (***ure) the person without Him.
This is also out of context...

[qutoe]5. Rom. 8:26 - the Spirit cannot help the weakness of the one without Him.[quote]

Out of context...

6. Gal. 5:22 - without the Spirit there can be no fruit of the Spirit.
Scripture affirms that many Old Covenant believers had the fruit of the Spirit pre Gift days.

[quote]7. John 3:5 - without the Spirit there is no Spirit-birth, and such a person cannot be in the kingdom of God.[quote]

The fact is, I never said that the Holy Spirit isn't involved, for He obviously is involved. I merely pointed out that one is not indwelt by the Holy Spirit until (sarcasm) one is indwelt.

8. 2 Cor. 5:17 - without the Spirit, there cannot be a new creation, and thus no Biblical worldview in which to see the light of Christ.
The Spirit being involved is not the same as the indwelling of the Spirit.

9. ***us 3:5-6 - without the Spirit, there can be no regeneration (coupled with John 3:5), and subsequently no renewal.
Again, I have never claimed that the Holy Spirit was not involved with our conversion.

[qutoe]10. Eph. 1:14 - without the Spirit there is no guarantee (earnest) of inheritance in the kingdom.[/qutoe]

The Greek along with Paul's example to the Ephesians demonstrates that this is speaking directly about a post conversion truth.

[qutoe]11. Eph. 2:18 - without the Spirit there is no access to the Father./quote]

This is actually reading into the text here. It merely says that our access to the Father is through the Holy Spirit.

12. Eph. 2:22 - without the Spirit there is no dwelling of God.
This is speaking of a a corporate indwelling not a personal one.

These are only a few of the scriptures, I could spend hours showing one after another, in which the entire NT is filled with proof that all true believers have the Holy Spirit. Again, you have to take each scripture within its immediate context, as well as the whole of the NT. Anyone can nitpick apart each verse and interpretation into something different, if taken out of context.
I am willing to discuss each one together as a whole or individually.

Respectfully

Adelphos