WE have seen that, in the Acts, except on three special occasions, the gifts of the Spirit were only obtained by the laying on of the hands of the apostles, this latter term being extended to include a few in addition to the twelve. As some people today claim to possess some of these gifts, it will be profitable to look at them more closely.
Healing
In the New Testament, this was first exhibited by the Seventy (or the Twelve), when Jesus sent them out. It is apparent from the record that the gift was to be a “sign”. When we look at other cases, especially in the Acts, we find that this gift was practised only for the benefit of unbelievers. The apostles could not heal each other, nor themselves.
The apostle Paul suffered from some ailment called a “thorn in the flesh”, which, in spite of the gifts of healing which he possessed, he could not cure. When we consider the claims of “Christian Scientists,” we are surprised to read in 2 Tim. 4. 20, that Paul admits : “Trophimus have I left at Miletum, sick”. In Phil. 2. 26,27, Paul tells how Epaphroditus was “sick nigh unto death. but God had mercy on him”. And we remember, too, how Paul advised Timothy’ “Use a little wine for thy stomach’s sake and thine oft infirmities”. We do not know what particular mineral in the water of Ephesus—or whatever city it was that Timothy lived in—upset Timothy’s digestion, but again it is clear that the apostolic gift of healing could not help him. When Tabitha died2, Peter did not have the power to raise her : it was necessary for him to pray to God, who performed the miracle. There is nothing in the Scripture to lead us to suppose that this gift of healing was available to any but those few, in apostolic times only.
Faith Healing
James3, advises that if any be sick, he should call for the elders, who should anoint him and pray over him. They did not have the miraculous power of healing, which was possessed by only a few to convince unbelievers ; it was necessary for them to pray to God. Sometimes the question is asked. “Why don’t we follow James’ advice, seeing that the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much”. Bro. Roberts was asked this question about 90 years ago. His answer, in the “Christadelphian”, was brief : “Ah, yes ! but where shall we find a righteous man ?”
Faith-healing cannot mend a broken leg or a burst appendix. All it can do is to set up a psychological approach which enables the patient to fight against his trouble. A Melbourne physician, who is noted as a psychologist, once told me that all that 50 per cent of his patients needed was religion. In the Melbourne “Age” for 26th January, 1960, there appeared and article entitled, “Fear, a Major Infection”, in which a New York writer showed how fear is a cause of so much ill health. The writer said,”75 per cent of the pain which is felt when a person is tense and emotionally jittery vanishes entirely when he relaxes”.
A knowledge of the scripture and faith in the future of the Kingdom brings the perfect peace which “passeth all understanding” and is a tremendous help to us in facing up to illness, operations, etc. We do not need somebody claiming to have the Holy Spirit to do this for us. The writer has himself applied these psychological methods to change the mental outlook of one of his staff, who suffered from pains in the head and neck, nervous upsets, etc., but which vanished with the new outlook.
Tongues
The gift of tongues was spectacularly manifested on the day of Pentecost, to prove to the unbelieving Jews that Jesus was the Messiah. When Peter was sent to Cornelius, there was4 “poured out—on the gentiles—the gift of the Holy Spirit”. Which gift ?tongues 1 We have no other examples of this gift in the Scriptures, unless it be when Paul spoke’ in the speech of Lycaonia. On the other hand, Paul was a well educated man, brought up in Tarsus in Asia Minor, and might well have become acquainted with the language there. In 1 Cor. 14, Paul deprecates their desire for the gift of tongues. Indeed, he says in v. 22 : “Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not.” Verse 23 is very enlightening—the gift of tongues could do more harm than good, because it might only lead the unbeliever to think that you are mad ! Prophecy—which does not mean the future, but a sound exposition of the word of God—is much to be preferred (says Paul) than tongues. However, we may have a suspicion that the “spiritual gifts” of 1 Cor. 12-14, are not specific manifestations of the Holy Spirit, but natural gifts which we may train, develop and exercise in the service of God.
Other Gifts
The gift of Boldness was given for a specific purpose, in the face of persecution during which James, the brother of John, and Stephen perished.
We note that in spite of these various gifts the disciples were far from perfect. Peter doubted the propriety of associating with Cornelius—and he got into trouble with the other apostles, who in spite of their gift, did not know that their mission included the Gentiles. Paul and Barnabas quarrelled. If the Corinthians “had” the Holy Spirit, their behaviour was not what one would have expected. Timothy’s gift—whatever it was —did not relieve him of the necessity to study, in order to be able to “rightly divide the word of truth”.
Prophecy
We do not read of this gift being specifically given. In 1 Cor. 14-3, we see that “prophecy” means interpretation of the scripture for the purpose of exhortation. The primary meaning of the word is simply “speaking forth” God’s word. As God’s messengers generally spoke of the future, we erroneously assume that the definition of a prophet is one who foretells the future. In 1 Cor. 13. 8, Paul points out that all these special gifts would cease. The statement that “prophecies . . . shall fail” does not mean that men would utter forecasts which would not come to pass, but that the power of prophecy would fade away, just as in Isaiah 59. 15, the prophet says, “yea, truth faileth”. Truth cannot be false ; but it can cease to exist. Bro. Carter has suggested that the reference in verse 10 to “that which is perfect” means the completion of God’s word by the writing of the New Testament. Certainly, if we study the scriptures, we today should not need special miraculous powers to successfully preach the word—study plus natural gifts, stimulated by faith, are all we need.
Pentecost
Certainly, if we study the scriptures, we shall see how it has been misunderstood.
We note that Peter speaks of the Promise to David, which was fulfilled in Christ. We note also that whereas the worthies of Heb. 11. 13, “received not the promise”, that is, they received not the fulfillment of the promise, Jesus6 had received the (fulfillment of) the promise—that is he had been raised and made immortal, by the power of the Holy Spirit. We note, too, in verse 33 that it was Jesus who had “shed forth this, which ye now see and hear”—that is, the power to speak with tongues, thus proving that Jesus, whom they had crucified, was indeed the Messiah.
Now, what did the audience do ? They were convinced ; and their guilty consciences prompted them to ask Peter for help. Peter assured them that, if they were baptised, they could be forgiven, and would receive the “gift of the Holy Spirit”. Here let us suggest that this does not mean, “You will receive the Holy Spirit as a present”, but, “you will receive the gift which the Holy Spirit gives”. And we suggest further that the great gift which the Holy Spirit will give them is eternal life. Foreign languages are always difficult to understand, and the original meaning can be readily obscured.
Misunderstood
We can illustrate with a few English examples. A house-painter paints houses, but a steam roller does not roll steam. A bath-heater does not heat a bath, but the water in the bath. When we say, “I will have a bath” we do not mean that we are going to the shop to buy a new bath, but we mean that we are going to wash ourselves in water in the bath. Perhaps when we say, “I will have the Holy Spirit”, we also mean, “I am going to be spiritually cleansed by the Holy Spirit, and receive eternal life.” The phrase, “the gift of . . .” does not necessarily mean “the gift consisting of . . .” but it can mean “the gift from”.
We have seen that Timothy had a “gift of the Holy Spirit”. In 2 Tim. 1. 6, Paul describes this as “the gift of God”. We would not suggest that “the gift of God” means that God was given to Timothy. Why take it for granted then, that the “gift of the Holy Spirit” means anything different from “the gift of God”. In Romans 6. 23, “the wages of sin” does not mean that sin is given to us in payment (like a wage of £20 per week), but the wages paid by sin, and we all know the rest : “the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” I suggest that the Gift of ( or from) the Holy Spirit, which Peter promised, was forgiveness of sins, plus the hope of Eternal Life. If you doubt whether eternal life is the gift, read Romans 5. Incidentally, in verse 5 of that chapter we do read of the Holy Spirit being given, but here it is the gift of boldness or strength—the Comforter—for Paul speaks of the love of God being shed on their hearts by the Holy Spirit, which had been given to them. But note in verse 6 that “when we were without strength” Jesus died ; now, they had the strength of that particular gift called the Comforter.
Afar Off
In verse 39, Peter tells them that the promise was to them and to their children and to them that are afar off. It has been suggested that “to them and their children” means two generations, after which the gift died out. A closer study, however, gives a different approach. Peter here is quoting from Isa. 57. Reading from verse 15, we see that God is promising forgiveness to the people. Verse 18 says, “I have seen his ways and will heal him”. Verse 19 gives the promise to which Peter referred : “Peace, peace, to him that is afar off and to him that is near, saith the Lord, and I will heal him”.
The promise to those who were near, that, “you and your children”—the Jews—and to those who are afar off, that is (says Paul in Eph. 2. 1 7) the Gentiles, was therefore forgiveness of sins, and peace—presumably because they would ultimately receive eternal life. And was this not precisely what the Jews asked Peter ? They realized they had crucified their Messiah, and therefore merited eternal death. But Peter promised them forgiveness and the gift which the Holy Spirit (which could mean the Holy Word—the Scripture) promised in Isa. 57. It is hardly likely that when the Jews realized that they had crucified their Messiah, their main concern would be that they should be enabled to speak in foreign tongues !
Summary
By metonymy, possession of one of the gifts which the Holy Spirit gives is sometimes described as “having” the Holy Spirit. The expression “the gift of the Holy Spirit” really means “the gift which the Holy Spirit gives”. Gifts such as healing and tongues, were restricted, as signs to unbelievers. In Isa. 57, God promised forgiveness, healing (query—immortality ? ) and peace to Jew and Gentile, and Peter’ repeats this, adding baptism as a condition.
The supreme “Gift of the Holy Spirit” is identical with “the Gift of God” : eternal life. May we all concentrate on qualifying for this in the future, rather than grasping at a shadow now.
There are some other aspects of “theSpirit” yet to be considered.
References
1— 1 Tim 5. 2-3
2—Act 9. 40
3—James 5. 14
4—Acts 10. 45
5—Acts 14. 11
6—Acts 2. 330
7—Acts 2. 38, 39
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One