Significance of Gift of Spirit - Revision history

David Persyn: add link to TOC

2015-01-05T23:37:26Z

add link to TOC

David Persyn: add tag

2015-01-05T23:04:41Z

add tag

David Persyn: footnotes and quotes

2015-01-05T23:02:27Z

footnotes and quotes

Show changes

David Persyn: footnotes and quotes

2015-01-05T22:45:22Z

footnotes and quotes

Show changes

David Persyn: footnotes and quotes

2015-01-05T21:58:36Z

footnotes and quotes

David Persyn: footnotes and quotes

2015-01-05T21:36:42Z

footnotes and quotes

David Persyn: footnotes

2015-01-05T21:28:36Z

footnotes

David Persyn: footnotes

2015-01-05T21:11:55Z

footnotes

David Persyn: footnotes

2015-01-05T21:00:04Z

footnotes

David Persyn: ref

2015-01-05T20:46:14Z

ref

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:37, 5 January 2015
Line 7:		Line 7:
	© Robert J. Spitzer, S.J.,/Magis Institute July 2011		© Robert J. Spitzer, S.J.,/Magis Institute July 2011

		+	[[Why_Believe_in_Jesus%3F \| Back to Table of Contents]]

	== Introduction ==		== Introduction ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:04, 5 January 2015
Line 267:		Line 267:

	We may now proceed to the manifestation of Jesus’ divinity in His ministry: His miracles (Unit II-F) and His self-revelation (Unit II-G).		We may now proceed to the manifestation of Jesus’ divinity in His ministry: His miracles (Unit II-F) and His self-revelation (Unit II-G).
		+
		+	== Footnotes ==
		+
		+	<references/>

@@ Line 120: / Line 120: @@
 It was noted above that Paul did not believe the Holy Spirit to be a blind force, but rather, a conscious and sensitive power capable of knowing the heart of the Father.  This conclusion was grounded in Paul’s (and others’) experience of these interior gifts, which include prayer, hope, trust, love, zeal, peace, and joy.<ref>Paul gives one list of interior gifts as “fruits of the Spirit” in Gal 5:22-3:  “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.…”  He includes many of these gifts under the general gift of love in 1Cor 13:1-5.</ref>  Though these gifts may not be immediately recognized as supernatural power or be manifest in a group or public setting (as visible, tangible, powerful gifts), they do lead to the build-up of the Church through the deepening conversion arising out of them.  Since these gifts are more subtle and difficult to recognize as divine, Paul takes pains not only to exhort his communities to them, but also to point to their origin in the Holy Spirit and the risen Christ.  Four of these gifts (prayer, hope, faith, and love) need to be examined more closely.
-Prayer.  Though Paul does not mention prayer as a specific charisma, he does speak in many contexts about prayer inspired by the Spirit (e.g, “The Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for words…” (Rom 8:26.  See also Eph. 5:18 and 6:18).  The most important manifestation of inspired prayer is the Abba prayer,  which Paul believes is inspired by the Spirit who is shared by both the Father and Son.  This prayer is vital to Paul’s spiritual life (as well as that of the early Church).  It is also central to Paul’s notion of adopted sonship which constitutes one of the grounds for the connection between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.  Thus, special attention should be given to the two central passages concerning this prayer.
+'''Prayer'''.  Though Paul does not mention prayer as a specific charisma, he does speak in many contexts about prayer inspired by the Spirit (e.g, “The Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for words…” (Rom 8:26.  See also Eph. 5:18 and 6:18).  The most important manifestation of inspired prayer is the Abba prayer,<ref>I am indebted to James Dunn for his deep insights in this regard.  See, for example, Dunn 1975, pp. 240-242.</ref> which Paul believes is inspired by the Spirit who is shared by both the Father and Son.  This prayer is vital to Paul’s spiritual life (as well as that of the early Church).  It is also central to Paul’s notion of adopted sonship which constitutes one of the grounds for the connection between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.  Thus, special attention should be given to the two central passages concerning this prayer.
-But when the time had fully come God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons.  And because you are sons, God has sent His Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying “Abba!  Father!”  So through God you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son then an heir (Gal 4:4-7).
+<blockquote>But when the time had fully come God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons.  And because you are sons, God has sent His Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying “Abba!  Father!”  So through God you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son then an heir (Gal 4:4-7).
-For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the spirit of sonship.  When we cry, “Abba!  Father!” it is the Spirit Himself bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children then heirs, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with Him in order that we may also be glorified with Him (Rom 8:15-17).
+For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the spirit of sonship.  When we cry, “Abba!  Father!” it is the Spirit Himself bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children then heirs, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with Him in order that we may also be glorified with Him (Rom 8:15-17).</blockquote>
-Evidently, these passages closely parallel each other, and even though there was probably a four year separation between their writing,  Paul maintains his interrelated views of inspired prayer, adopted sonship, and freedom from slavery almost identically over this period.  Three points merit consideration:
+Evidently, these passages closely parallel each other, and even though there was probably a four year separation between their writing,<ref>See Fitzmyer 1990, p. 781 (6).  Fitzmyer believes that the dating of Romans at AD 58 can be well established, though it is more difficult to establish the date of the Letter to the Galatians – Fitzmyer believes that most data point to a date for Galatians prior to the writing of both the first and second letters to the Corinthians, making a date of approximately 54 AD likely.</ref> Paul maintains his interrelated views of inspired prayer, adopted sonship, and freedom from slavery almost identically over this period.  Three points merit consideration:
 ) the need for the Spirit’s inspiration to cry out “Abba!”, and
-With respect to the first point, “Abba” (the emphatic form of “Ab” – Father) in Aramaic is generally a familiar address used by children toward their fathers.   It therefore can have a tone of affection and trust, as well as an expression of respect.  This endearing, trust-filled address for God is recounted in the Gospel of Mark (14:36).  This single use in the synoptic gospels is complemented by “Abba” substitutes which Joachim Jeremias first identified, and has subsequently been confirmed by other studies.  As noted in The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia:  In Greek there are three ways in which Jesus addresses God as “Father” in prayer contexts: (1) pater (“father”), the Greek vocative (Mt. 11:25 par. Lk 10:21a; Lk. 11:2; 22:42; 23:34, 46; Jn. 11:41; 12:27f.; 17:1, 5, 11, 21, 24f.); (2) ho pater (“the father”), the articular nominative used as a vocative (Mk. 14:36 [abba ho pater; cf. Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6]—correct Greek form, since the second member of a compound address is always in the nominative [Robertson. p. 461]; Mt. 11:26 par. Lk. 10:21b—incorrect Greek usage, and therefore in all probability a Semitism, since the articular nominative constitutes the vocative in both Hebrew and Aramaic [Turner, p.34]); (3) pater mou (“my father”), Greek vocative with first person singular possessive pronoun (Mt. 26:39, 42). This variation in expression makes it probable that the Aram. ‘abba’ was the original form of address used in each of these prayers, since the term could legitimately be translated in all of these ways (Black, p. 283).
+) how this inspiration of the Holy Spirit overcomes slavery (inferior status, not belonging to the family), fear, and even hopelessness.</blockquote>
 If we considered the three above Greek expressions to be translations of “Abba,” then “Abba” appears 16 times in the New Testament (21 times including parallels). This address for God (in common usage) has its origins in Jesus, because its use (as applied to God) is exceedingly rare in second-temple Judaism.  As Joachim Jeremias notes:
-…in the literature of Palestinian Judaism no evidence has yet been found of ‘my Father” being used by an individual as an address to God.  It first appears [in Judaism] in the Middle Ages, in Southern Italy.
+<blockquote>…in the literature of Palestinian Judaism no evidence has yet been found of ‘my Father” being used by an individual as an address to God.  It first appears [in Judaism] in the Middle Ages, in Southern Italy.<ref>Jeremias 1971, p. 64.</ref></blockquote>
 Since Jeremias’ day, some examples have been found of a non-Christian use of “Abba” to address God in Palestinian Judaism; however, this usage is exceedingly rare (in stark contrast to Christianity), and so Wright concludes:
-… it should not be supposed that Jeremias has been disproved completely:  there is a striking phenomenon to be observed in the prayers of Jesus, and, once we relieve it of the strain of being the load bearing wall in a much larger construction, it can relax and make a valuable contribution to a different one.
+<blockquote>… it should not be supposed that Jeremias has been disproved completely:  there is a striking phenomenon to be observed in the prayers of Jesus, and, once we relieve it of the strain of being the load bearing wall in a much larger construction, it can relax and make a valuable contribution to a different one.<ref>Wright 1996, p. 649.</ref></blockquote>
 The use of the expression “Abba, Father” in not only the communities founded by Paul, but also in those not founded by him (e.g., the Roman community) is so well-known and so commonplace, it indicates how important Jesus’ unique address of God was to the early community and therefore, presumably, to Jesus Himself.  In view of this, it would be difficult to deny that Jesus taught His disciples to address God as “Abba,” and that He emphasized this as a central part of His doctrine on prayer.
@@ Line 146: / Line 148: @@
 With respect to the second and third points, Paul feels that he needs the power and assurance of the Holy Spirit in order to address God with this expression of filial consciousness and confidence.  Though Paul does not specifically say that he can utter “Abba” only by means of the Holy Spirit, his wording in Romans 8:16 (to pneuma summarturei tō pneumati hēmōn – the Spirit witnesses [testifies to the truth] with our spirits) implies that if the Holy Spirit were not testifying to the truth of our adopted sonship in conjunction with our own spirit, we would not be able to believe it, or, at least, we would doubt it sufficiently to lapse back into our lives of fear.  This sentiment is expressed more directly eight verses later in the same letter where Paul declares:
-The Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for words…
+<blockquote>The Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for words…<ref>(Rom 8:26).</ref></blockquote>
-It seems that Paul, left to his own devices, finds it virtually impossible to use Jesus’ address for the Father (with its childlike affection, trust, and even presumption) without supernatural assistance.  His natural state of fear (arising out of his former belief in a God of strict justice) undermines his confidence in the fact that he has truly been redeemed, and is now truly a member of God’s family with Jesus.  Left to himself (that is, to his natural feelings of servitude and fear), Paul does not feel that he could ever call upon God confidently and affectionately as “my Father.”   The best he can do is to try justifying himself by means of strict obedience to the law.  When he discovers the foolishness of this attempt (which is doomed to failure because of natural imperfection), he is relegated not only to fear, but also to the brink of despair.  Paul knows well that he cannot raise himself out of the absurdity (and hopelessness) of his “natural” position.
+It seems that Paul, left to his own devices, finds it virtually impossible to use Jesus’ address for the Father (with its childlike affection, trust, and even presumption) without supernatural assistance.  His natural state of fear (arising out of his former belief in a God of strict justice) undermines his confidence in the fact that he has truly been redeemed, and is now truly a member of God’s family with Jesus.  Left to himself (that is, to his natural feelings of servitude and fear), Paul does not feel that he could ever call upon God confidently and affectionately as “my Father.”<ref>“Without the Spirit, the Christian would never be able to utter this cry” (Fitzmyer 1990, p. 788).</ref>  The best he can do is to try justifying himself by means of strict obedience to the law.  When he discovers the foolishness of this attempt (which is doomed to failure because of natural imperfection), he is relegated not only to fear, but also to the brink of despair.  Paul knows well that he cannot raise himself out of the absurdity (and hopelessness) of his “natural” position.
 It is at this juncture that Paul is fully cognizant of the grace of the Holy Spirit testifying in transcendent otherness to the truth that God is “Abba.”  This testimony of the Spirit is not something to which Paul has reasoned himself, but rather, is a truth that comes through the experience of inspiration, that is:
-[an experience] of being addressed by God’s Spirit, of being grasped by divine power, of being convinced beyond doubt of the existential truth…quite apart from any consideration of reason or logic.  [An experience] not as a human word from without, but as a divine energy within.
+<blockquote>[an experience] of being addressed by God’s Spirit, of being grasped by divine power, of being convinced beyond doubt of the existential truth…quite apart from any consideration of reason or logic.  [An experience] not as a human word from without, but as a divine energy within.<ref>Dunn 1975, p. 226.</ref></blockquote>
 This experience of the Holy Spirit’s assurance allows Paul not only to say, but to “cry out,” “Abba!”  This exclamation seems to be an irresistible urge emanating from the deepest parts of his being.  Dunn notes:
@@ Line 265: / Line 267: @@
    Dunn 1975, p. 240-1.
    Gal 5:5

@@ Line 100: / Line 100: @@
 The working of miracles (energōn dunameis) factored prominently into Paul’s ministry in new communities, and in encouraging converts among people who had not yet heard the Word.  In Galatians 3:4f, Paul uses the history of miracles worked in the community through the Holy Spirit as a proof of why the Galatians should remain faithful to him:
-Did you experience so many things in vain?  If it really is in vain.  Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you, do so by works of the law, or by hearing with faith?
+<blockquote>Did you experience so many things in vain?  If it really is in vain.  Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you, do so by works of the law, or by hearing with faith?<ref>Though dunameis here may include healings, it certainly should not be restricted to this, for Paul would have used the more appropriate term “charismata iamatōn” if he meant it in the restricted sense.  Therefore, he probably meant it to include exorcisms and possibly even nature miracles.</ref></blockquote>
 Given that Paul is writing to those who have directly experienced “dunameis,” it can hardly be doubted that the experience of these persuasive outward signs is not only common to Paul’s ministry, but continues after Paul has left (presumably through people with that charism), and is sufficiently powerful within the community to persuade it of the veracity of Paul’s words years after his departure.
@@ Line 108: / Line 108: @@
 Despite the incredible persuasiveness of healing and miracles in the early community, Paul believes that they must be put in perspective to allow for the prominence of gifts which produce deep conversion of the heart.  In this respect, Paul is distinct from Luke, who gives clear prominence to visible, tangible, powerful gifts of the Spirit.
-Speaking in Tongues.  Paul views this ecstatic charism as a proof of the Spirit (power of God), an aspect of his ministry of initial conversion, a spiritual benefit to individual believers,  and an occasional benefit to the community (when there is an authentic interpreter of the tongues).   However, Paul views speaking in tongues as the lowest of the “deeds of power,” because it does not directly serve either to deepen conversion, or to build up the community’s understanding of God, Jesus, or even itself.  Hence, in 1Cor 14:6, Paul warns the community not to seek speaking in tongues as an end in itself, and to prefer prophesy (which builds up the community and leads to its deeper conversion) over glossolalia:
+'''Speaking in Tongues'''.  Paul views this ecstatic charism as a proof of the Spirit (power of God), an aspect of his ministry of initial conversion, a spiritual benefit to individual believers,<ref>See Dunn 1975, pp. 230-231.</ref> and an occasional benefit to the community (when there is an authentic interpreter of the tongues).<ref>As Paul notes in 1Cor 14:18:  “I thank God that I speak in tongues more than you all….”</ref>  However, Paul views speaking in tongues as the lowest of the “deeds of power,” because it does not directly serve either to deepen conversion, or to build up the community’s understanding of God, Jesus, or even itself.  Hence, in 1Cor 14:6, Paul warns the community not to seek speaking in tongues as an end in itself, and to prefer prophesy (which builds up the community and leads to its deeper conversion) over glossolalia:
-Now brethren, if I come to you speaking in tongues, how shall I benefit you unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or teaching?  If even lifeless instruments, such as the flute or the harp, do not give distinct notes, how will anyone know what is played?  …  So with yourselves; since you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit, strive to excel in building up the Church. … I thank God that I speak in tongues more than you all; nevertheless, in church, I would rather speak five words with my mind in order to instruct others [prophesy or revelation] than ten thousand words in a tongue [1Cor 14:6-7, 12, 18-19].
+<blockquote>Now brethren, if I come to you speaking in tongues, how shall I benefit you unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or teaching?  If even lifeless instruments, such as the flute or the harp, do not give distinct notes, how will anyone know what is played?  …  So with yourselves; since you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit, strive to excel in building up the Church. … I thank God that I speak in tongues more than you all; nevertheless, in church, I would rather speak five words with my mind in order to instruct others [prophesy or revelation] than ten thousand words in a tongue [1Cor 14:6-7, 12, 18-19].</blockquote>
 It will not be necessary here to delve into prophecy and revelation to establish my central point, namely, that there were frequent “deeds of healing and power” in the early Church (as there apparently are today) which are very difficult to explain in any natural causative sense, and that these extraordinary occurrences were not unreasonably or irresponsibly interpreted by the early Church to be the power (Spirit) of God, and that the ongoing source of this power was thought to be the risen Jesus, for it arises out of His name.  This threefold interrelated conclusion enabled the early Church to corroborate (along with the resurrection appearances) the divinity of Jesus.
@@ Line 118: / Line 118: @@
 Though Paul saw the importance of the visible, tangible, powerful manifestations of the Spirit in initial conversion and in initiating and sustaining communities, he prefers to address the interior gifts of the Spirit which include the ability to cry out “Abba,” deeply inspired prayer, the capacity for extraordinary love, and the overcoming of fear.  The reason for his preference for the interior over the exterior gifts arises out of his belief that the interior gifts have a more profound and lasting effect on the believer and the community.  The interior gifts not only lead to initial conversion (as do the tangible, visible, powerful gifts) but also to a deeper conversion of the heart in imitation of Christ.
-It was noted above that Paul did not believe the Holy Spirit to be a blind force, but rather, a conscious and sensitive power capable of knowing the heart of the Father.  This conclusion was grounded in Paul’s (and others’) experience of these interior gifts, which include prayer, hope, trust, love, zeal, peace, and joy.   Though these gifts may not be immediately recognized as supernatural power or be manifest in a group or public setting (as visible, tangible, powerful gifts), they do lead to the build-up of the Church through the deepening conversion arising out of them.  Since these gifts are more subtle and difficult to recognize as divine, Paul takes pains not only to exhort his communities to them, but also to point to their origin in the Holy Spirit and the risen Christ.  Four of these gifts (prayer, hope, faith, and love) need to be examined more closely.
+It was noted above that Paul did not believe the Holy Spirit to be a blind force, but rather, a conscious and sensitive power capable of knowing the heart of the Father.  This conclusion was grounded in Paul’s (and others’) experience of these interior gifts, which include prayer, hope, trust, love, zeal, peace, and joy.<ref>Paul gives one list of interior gifts as “fruits of the Spirit” in Gal 5:22-3:  “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.…”  He includes many of these gifts under the general gift of love in 1Cor 13:1-5.</ref>  Though these gifts may not be immediately recognized as supernatural power or be manifest in a group or public setting (as visible, tangible, powerful gifts), they do lead to the build-up of the Church through the deepening conversion arising out of them.  Since these gifts are more subtle and difficult to recognize as divine, Paul takes pains not only to exhort his communities to them, but also to point to their origin in the Holy Spirit and the risen Christ.  Four of these gifts (prayer, hope, faith, and love) need to be examined more closely.
 Prayer.  Though Paul does not mention prayer as a specific charisma, he does speak in many contexts about prayer inspired by the Spirit (e.g, “The Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for words…” (Rom 8:26.  See also Eph. 5:18 and 6:18).  The most important manifestation of inspired prayer is the Abba prayer,  which Paul believes is inspired by the Spirit who is shared by both the Father and Son.  This prayer is vital to Paul’s spiritual life (as well as that of the early Church).  It is also central to Paul’s notion of adopted sonship which constitutes one of the grounds for the connection between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.  Thus, special attention should be given to the two central passages concerning this prayer.
@@ Line 265: / Line 265: @@
    I am indebted to James Dunn for his deep insights in this regard.  See, for example, Dunn 1975, pp. 240-242.
    See Fitzmyer 1990, p. 781 (6).  Fitzmyer believes that the dating of Romans at AD 58 can be well established, though it is more difficult to establish the date of the Letter to the Galatians – Fitzmyer believes that most data point to a date for Galatians prior to the writing of both the first and second letters to the Corinthians, making a date of approximately 54 AD likely.

@@ Line 71: / Line 71: @@
 Now let us turn to Paul’s testimony.  Though Paul’s letters were written before the final redaction of Luke’s Acts of the Apostles, Luke saves and recounts traditions and expressions of the Spirit which precede Paul’s theology of the Spirit.  A cursory exploration of Paul’s theology of the Spirit reveals his awareness of these earlier traditions and expressions, and his personal experience of the visible and tangible manifestations of the Spirit emphasized by Luke.
-Paul’s experience and view of the Spirit, as Fitzmyer notes, is “God’s gift of his creative, prophetic, or renovative presence to human beings or the world…[italics mine].”   This “presence of God” is more than merely “the power of God” viewed as a blind supernatural force; it has a subjective (indeed, intersubjective) quality.  The Spirit not only searches the hearts of human beings, but also searches the depths of God the Father, having a comprehensive knowledge of Him:  “For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God” (1Cor 2:10b).
+Paul’s experience and view of the Spirit, as Fitzmyer notes, is “God’s gift of his creative, prophetic, or renovative presence to human beings or the world…[italics mine].”<ref>Fitzmyer 1990, p. 1396 (82:65).</ref>  This “presence of God” is more than merely “the power of God” viewed as a blind supernatural force; it has a subjective (indeed, intersubjective) quality.  The Spirit not only searches the hearts of human beings, but also searches the depths of God the Father, having a comprehensive knowledge of Him:  “For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God” (1Cor 2:10b).
 When Paul refers to either the visible, tangible gifts, or the interior gifts of the Spirit, he generally uses the term “charismata” (a specific instance of “charis” – a gratuitous gift for the well-being of another – which, in this case, is God’s gratuitous gift of salvation).  When he looks at the charismata from the vantage point of agency, he refers to them either as “phanerōsis tou pneumatos” (manifestation of the Spirit – e.g., 1 Cor 12:7), or as “dunamis tou Theou” (the power of God – e.g., 1 Cor 1:24), or as “onomati tou kuriou” (what is given in the name of the Lord/Christ – e.g., 1 Cor 6:11).  As Dunn, referring to Gunkel’s longstanding work, notes:
-…[S]o far as Paul was concerned charismata are the manifestation of supernatural power.  Charisma is always God acting, always the Spirit manifesting himself. …[F]or Paul, every charisma was supernatural.  The character of transcendent otherness lies at the heart of the Pauline concept of charisma.  …  The “infinite qualitative distinction” (Kierkegaard) between divine and human means that every expression of grace is always something more than human.
+<blockquote>…[S]o far as Paul was concerned charismata are the manifestation of supernatural power.  Charisma is always God acting, always the Spirit manifesting himself. …[F]or Paul, every charisma was supernatural.  The character of transcendent otherness lies at the heart of the Pauline concept of charisma.  …  The “infinite qualitative distinction” (Kierkegaard) between divine and human means that every expression of grace is always something more than human.<ref>Dunn 1975, p. 255.  See also Gunkel 1888, pp. 82f.</ref></blockquote>
 We may now explore the vast array of Paul’s and others’ experience of the supernatural power of the Spirit, beginning with the public charismatic gifts (Section II.A) and concluding with the interior gifts (Section II.B).
@@ Line 84: / Line 84: @@
 It is noteworthy that Paul is writing (and even correcting) communities and individuals who have witnessed the visible, tangible, powerful manifestations of the Spirit multiple times.  It is therefore reasonable to assume that these gifts were virtually commonplace in the early community as Luke indicates in the Acts of the Apostles.  Dunn mentions further:
-…[I]t is worth pointing out that in 1 Cor. 12.9, 28, 30 we have first hand testimony to the fact that there were cures and healings experienced in the Pauline communities for which no natural or rational explanation would suffice – they could only be put down to the action of God.
+<blockquote>…[I]t is worth pointing out that in 1 Cor. 12.9, 28, 30 we have first hand testimony to the fact that there were cures and healings experienced in the Pauline communities for which no natural or rational explanation would suffice – they could only be put down to the action of God.<ref>Dunn 1975, p. 210.</ref></blockquote>
 So what do the visible, tangible gifts consist in?  From the list given in 1 Cor 12:8f, three may be easily identified:
@@ Line 94: / Line 94: @@
 There are two other gifts which the community thought to be supernatural and public (as distinct from interior), namely, prophesy and revelation.  As Paul recognizes, there are false prophets who can lead the Church astray, and so there is need to discern the quality of prophesy within the early community.  I will give a brief description of the first three gifts as an illustration of why the community believed that the Holy Spirit was the power of God, that Jesus was the ongoing source of that Spirit, and therefore, that “Jesus is Lord.”
-Healing.  Paul uses the plural “charismata” (in contrast to using the singular in referring to the other gifts) because he probably believed that there was a special charisma for every kind of illness.   From this, we may infer that Paul witnessed different kinds of healings, and that those healings probably resembled those recounted by Luke in Acts, and in the Gospels with respect to Jesus’ ministry.  There can be little doubt that Paul views these as arising solely out of the power of God (that is, not occurring in nature, but only through supernatural power).
+'''Healing'''.  Paul uses the plural “charismata” (in contrast to using the singular in referring to the other gifts) because he probably believed that there was a special charisma for every kind of illness.<ref>Dunn 1976, pp. 210-211.</ref>   From this, we may infer that Paul witnessed different kinds of healings, and that those healings probably resembled those recounted by Luke in Acts, and in the Gospels with respect to Jesus’ ministry.  There can be little doubt that Paul views these as arising solely out of the power of God (that is, not occurring in nature, but only through supernatural power).
-Miracles.   Paul’s distinct listing of miracles next to healings would seem to indicate that they included supernatural acts other than cures.  Exegetes suspect that these would be of two sorts:  exorcisms  and nature miracles.   Clearly, Paul was familiar with Jesus’ exorcisms, and even though they do not figure as prominently in Paul’s ministry as in Jesus’, Paul certainly was involved in exorcisms.   Paul may also have in mind nature miracles, such as cures taking place through his handkerchief (Acts 19:18) or other “signs and wonders” (en dunamei sēmeiōn kai teratōn – by power of signs and wonders – Rom 18:19) which he evidently worked from Jerusalem to Illyricum.
+'''Miracles'''.<ref>I am indebted to the fine work of James Dunn (Jesus and the Spirit:  A Study of the Religious and Charismatic Experience of Jesus and the First Christians as Reflected in the New Testament) from which I have derived the majority of the following materials on miracles and speaking in tongues.  (See Dunn 1975.)</ref> Paul’s distinct listing of miracles next to healings would seem to indicate that they included supernatural acts other than cures.  Exegetes suspect that these would be of two sorts:  exorcisms <ref>See Dunn 1975, p. 210.</ref>   and nature miracles.<ref>See Dunn 1975, p. 210.</ref>  Clearly, Paul was familiar with Jesus’ exorcisms, and even though they do not figure as prominently in Paul’s ministry as in Jesus’, Paul certainly was involved in exorcisms.<ref>See Acts 16:18 – “Turning to the Spirit, Paul said, ‘I charge thee, in the name of Jesus Christ, to come out from her;’ and it came out in the same hour.”  See also, Acts 19:17  “And diseases left them, and the evil spirits came out of them.”</ref> Paul may also have in mind nature miracles, such as cures taking place through his handkerchief (Acts 19:18) or other “signs and wonders” (en dunamei sēmeiōn kai teratōn – by power of signs and wonders – Rom 18:19) which he evidently worked from Jerusalem to Illyricum.
 The working of miracles (energōn dunameis) factored prominently into Paul’s ministry in new communities, and in encouraging converts among people who had not yet heard the Word.  In Galatians 3:4f, Paul uses the history of miracles worked in the community through the Holy Spirit as a proof of why the Galatians should remain faithful to him:
@@ Line 263: / Line 263: @@
 We may now proceed to the manifestation of Jesus’ divinity in His ministry:  His miracles (Unit II-F) and His self-revelation (Unit II-G).
    Though dunameis here may include healings, it certainly should not be restricted to this, for Paul would have used the more appropriate term “charismata iamatōn” if he meant it in the restricted sense.  Therefore, he probably meant it to include exorcisms and possibly even nature miracles.
    See Dunn 1975, pp. 230-231.

@@ Line 36: / Line 36: @@
 == Charismatic Manifestations of the Spirit in the Acts of the Apostles ==
-In the Acts of the Apostles, Luke recounts three kinds of experiences which are so unusual and powerful that the earliest Church community attributes them to God, or more specifically, to “the Spirit of God” or “the power of God”:  (1) healings and miracles , (2) prophesy, and (3) ecstatic experiences (such as glossolalia and visions).
+In the Acts of the Apostles, Luke recounts three kinds of experiences which are so unusual and powerful that the earliest Church community attributes them to God, or more specifically, to “the Spirit of God” or “the power of God”:  (1) healings and miracles<ref> Extreme naturalistic positions which rule out the possibility of miracles (such as the one advanced by David Hume and appropriated by late 19th and early 20th century liberal theologians), are unjustifiable; for natural laws are not inviolable in the sense that their violation implies logical impossibility (an intrinsic contradiction, such as a square-circle).  For example, a violation of E=Mc² is not logically impossible (an intrinsic contradiction); it is a logical possibility which we assume will not occur.  Now, inasmuch as natural laws are not inviolable, and inasmuch as “miracle” is defined as a supernatural intervention in the natural order, and inasmuch as a supernatural power is neither governed nor conditioned by the natural order (and therefore the natural order cannot prevent a supernatural power from affecting it), then “miracle,” as defined, is neither impossible in principle nor impossible in our natural order.  Hence, any a priori denial of miracles must be a priori unjustified.  Though 1st century Jewish thought did not have a formal conception of miracles similar to the one given above, its view of miracles was commensurate with it.  See Wright 1996, p. 186 and Harvey 1982, pp. 101ff and also Unit II-F, Section I.A.</ref>, (2) prophesy, and (3) ecstatic experiences (such as glossolalia and visions).
 Though all three of these areas merit consideration, a cursory overview of the first will be sufficient to manifest two points which ground the proclamation of Jesus’ divinity:  (1) that the charisms are seen to be explicit manifestations of God’s power and God’s Spirit, and (2) that the risen Jesus is seen to be the source of this power/Spirit (because the Spirit works through His name).
-Luke recounts a large range of healings and miracles effected by Peter, Paul, and others in the Acts of the Apostles:
+Luke recounts a large range of healings and miracles effected by Peter, Paul, and others in the Acts of the Apostles:<ref>See the more complete list in Dunn 1975, pp. 163ff.</ref>
 •	the healing of the lame man at the temple (Acts 3:1-10)
@@ Line 58: / Line 58: @@
 •	Paul’s liberation from prison (Acts 16:26)
-There can be little doubt that such healings and miracles occurred in the earliest Church communities, as they are recounted not only by Luke, but also by Paul  (who is writing to the actual witnesses of the events) and the author of the Letter to the Hebrews.  With respect to the first category of healings (those worked through the personal intercession of the apostles), few scholars doubt that Luke either had firsthand experience of these miracles (the “we” passages) or reliable firsthand sources.  Dunn notes even with respect to the raising of Tabitha by Peter, “It is quite likely that the tradition goes back to a genuine episode in the ministry of Peter.”
+There can be little doubt that such healings and miracles occurred in the earliest Church communities, as they are recounted not only by Luke, but also by Paul<ref>See Rom. 15:19; 1Cor. 12:10, 28; 2Cor. 12:12; Gal. 3:5; Heb. 2:4.  See also Dunn 1975, p. 163.</ref> (who is writing to the actual witnesses of the events) and the author of the Letter to the Hebrews.  With respect to the first category of healings (those worked through the personal intercession of the apostles), few scholars doubt that Luke either had firsthand experience of these miracles (the “we” passages) or reliable firsthand sources.  Dunn notes even with respect to the raising of Tabitha by Peter, “It is quite likely that the tradition goes back to a genuine episode in the ministry of Peter.”<ref> Dunn 1975, p. 165.</ref>
-If one accepts that such healings and miracles were quite frequent within the early Church community, and that the members of that community viewed them as extraordinary and powerful (in contemporary terminology, falling outside normal boundaries of natural causation), then it will not be difficult to understand why they thought that the “power of God” / the “Spirit of God” was in their midst.  When this is combined with Luke’s contention that the Spirit’s power arises out of the name of Jesus (or the disciples’ ministry on behalf of Jesus), it seems reasonable to conclude that the primitive Church experienced the risen Jesus as the ongoing source of the Holy Spirit (the power of God) in the world.   Dunn notes in this regard:
+If one accepts that such healings and miracles were quite frequent within the early Church community, and that the members of that community viewed them as extraordinary and powerful (in contemporary terminology, falling outside normal boundaries of natural causation), then it will not be difficult to understand why they thought that the “power of God” / the “Spirit of God” was in their midst.  When this is combined with Luke’s contention that the Spirit’s power arises out of the name of Jesus (or the disciples’ ministry on behalf of Jesus), it seems reasonable to conclude that the primitive Church experienced the risen Jesus as the ongoing source of the Holy Spirit (the power of God) in the world.<ref>This key insight is justified in a detailed way in Dunn 1975, pp. 163-165.</ref>  Dunn notes in this regard:
-Where Jesus healed in his own right, by the immediate power and authority of God (cf. Acts 2:22; 10:38), his disciples healed in the name of Jesus.  It would appear that from the first they recognized that their power to heal was somehow dependent on Jesus and derivative from him (cf. Luke 10:17).  Whereas he had been the direct representative of God in his healing ministry, they saw themselves primarily as representatives of Jesus.  They healed by the same power, but that power was now linked with the name of Jesus.
+<blockquote>Where Jesus healed in his own right, by the immediate power and authority of God (cf. Acts 2:22; 10:38), his disciples healed in the name of Jesus.  It would appear that from the first they recognized that their power to heal was somehow dependent on Jesus and derivative from him (cf. Luke 10:17).  Whereas he had been the direct representative of God in his healing ministry, they saw themselves primarily as representatives of Jesus.  They healed by the same power, but that power was now linked with the name of Jesus.<ref>Dunn 1975, p. 164.</ref></blockquote>
 The frequent occurrence of the charismatic manifestation of the Spirit arising out of the name of Jesus seems to constitute an experiential ground (within the very early Church) for the association of Jesus with divine power and even the source of divine power, and gives a partial explanation for why the primitive Church proclaimed Jesus’ Lordship despite the sacrifices that had to be made in order to protect this apologetically unappealing doctrine.
@@ Line 265: / Line 265: @@
    Fitzmyer 1990, p. 1396 (82:65).
    Dunn 1975, p. 255.  See also Gunkel 1888, pp. 82f.

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 The answer, I presume, is obvious.  God alone has the power to give away God’s personal power to the world to be possessed by human beings for all eternity.  And so it was that the early Church could not help but conclude that the One who was clothed in the power and glory of God through His resurrection and who actualized the world-changing event of giving the personal power of God to the world was Lord and God.  As this Unit develops, this inevitable conclusion will become more and more apparent.  The early Church did not have to “stretch the evidence” to proclaim Jesus as Lord; it could not help itself.  Not to have done so would have been the real falsity—a betrayal of truth and self.  This proclamation was apologetically unappealing and it had a high cost (adversely affecting the lives and well-being of many).  But the early Church really felt itself compelled by the divine power it experienced and possessed – the very power that was given to it by the risen Jesus.  And so the early Church freely bore the high cost of preaching this truth – a truth which Jesus announced about Himself (see Unit II-F&G), a truth borne out and confirmed by His resurrection in glory, and His gift of the Holy Spirit.
-Before looking at the impact of the Holy Spirit within the early Church, it might do well to address a question which some students have asked me throughout the last twenty years:  “Why isn’t the Holy Spirit as active today as in the time of the Apostles?”  In many respects, the Holy Spirit could be seen as more active today than in apostolic times.  One does not have to look far to see the millions of testimonies to the charismatic manifestation of the Spirit (with literally hundreds of thousands of websites devoted to charismatic prayer, healings, glossolalia, and prophesy) which resemble those recounted by Luke and Paul almost 2,000 years ago.
+Before looking at the impact of the Holy Spirit within the early Church, it might do well to address a question which some students have asked me throughout the last twenty years:  “Why isn’t the Holy Spirit as active today as in the time of the Apostles?”  In many respects, the Holy Spirit could be seen as more active today than in apostolic times.  One does not have to look far to see the millions of testimonies to the charismatic manifestation of the Spirit (with literally hundreds of thousands of websites devoted to charismatic prayer, healings, glossolalia, and prophesy) which resemble those recounted by Luke and Paul almost 2,000 years ago.<ref>A simple Google search on the internet for “Holy Spirit healing,” for example, reveals 1,120,000 sites, and “charismatic prayer” reveals 460,000 sites.</ref>
-It occurred to me that if these hundreds of thousands of websites with multiple testimonies (mostly in the United States) are devoted primarily to charismatic manifestations of the Holy Spirit (e.g., healings, miracles, glossolalia – 1Corinthians 12), how much greater would be the accounts of the interior gifts of the Holy Spirit; and how much greater still when both the charismatic and interior gifts of the Spirit are seen throughout the entire world?  It seems evident that the Holy Spirit is truly alive and well in any individual or culture that wants the Spirit’s help, guidance, inspiration, peace, and above all, love.  The Holy Spirit is most anxious to help when invited into our lives.
+It occurred to me that if these hundreds of thousands of websites with multiple testimonies (mostly in the United States) are devoted primarily to charismatic manifestations of the Holy Spirit (e.g., healings, miracles, glossolalia – 1Corinthians 12), how much greater would be the accounts of the interior gifts of the Holy Spirit; and how much greater still when both the charismatic and interior gifts of the Spirit are seen throughout the entire world?  It seems evident that the Holy Spirit is truly alive and well in any individual or culture that wants the Spirit’s help, guidance, inspiration, peace, and above all, love.  The Holy Spirit is most anxious to help when invited into our lives.<ref>See Chapters 4 and 5 of my book, Five Pillars of the Spiritual Life: A Practical Guide to Prayer for Active People (Ignatius Press 2008).  The themes treated are:  peace, inspiration, guidance, transformation, consolation, desolation, and discernment of spirits.</ref>
 Since the Spirit’s charismatic and interior manifestations so highly resemble those recounted by Luke and Paul, a brief review of their accounts will help us to know what to look and pray for.  When prayers are answered and lives are transformed, then we will know in our heart of hearts not only that the Holy Spirit is alive and well, but also that the Spirit of God is revealing that Jesus is Emmanuel.
@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 The early Christians characterized the Holy Spirit as “the power of God” (“dunamis tou Theou”) which was uniquely possessed by Jesus during His ministry, and continued to flow from Him in the life of the Church.  As their understanding of the Holy Spirit developed through experience, they became progressively aware of Its personal presence flowing through Jesus.  McKenzie succinctly describes this more developed theology as follows:
-The spirit is basically the divine and heavenly dynamic force; it is conceived as peculiarly existing in Jesus (and specifically in the risen Jesus), as pervading the body of Jesus which is the Church, and as apportioned to the members of the Church.  Jesus is the son of David in the flesh but the son of God in power according to the spirit (Rm 1:3); the unique possession of the spirit by Jesus and the unique power which flows from this possession reveal His true reality, which is the reality of the spiritual sphere, i.e., the divine and heavenly sphere.
+<blockquote>The spirit is basically the divine and heavenly dynamic force; it is conceived as peculiarly existing in Jesus (and specifically in the risen Jesus), as pervading the body of Jesus which is the Church, and as apportioned to the members of the Church.  Jesus is the son of David in the flesh but the son of God in power according to the spirit (Rm 1:3); the unique possession of the spirit by Jesus and the unique power which flows from this possession reveal His true reality, which is the reality of the spiritual sphere, i.e., the divine and heavenly sphere.<ref>McKenzie 1965, p 843.</ref></blockquote>
 We can trace the development of the early Church’s experiential understanding of the Spirit through its early exposition, recorded in Luke-Acts (Section I), and later exposition in Saint Paul (Section II).  Let us begin with the earlier exposition.
@@ Line 265: / Line 265: @@
    Extreme naturalistic positions which rule out the possibility of miracles (such as the one advanced by David Hume and appropriated by late 19th and early 20th century liberal theologians), are unjustifiable; for natural laws are not inviolable in the sense that their violation implies logical impossibility (an intrinsic contradiction, such as a square-circle).  For example, a violation of E=Mc² is not logically impossible (an intrinsic contradiction); it is a logical possibility which we assume will not occur.  Now, inasmuch as natural laws are not inviolable, and inasmuch as “miracle” is defined as a supernatural intervention in the natural order, and inasmuch as a supernatural power is neither governed nor conditioned by the natural order (and therefore the natural order cannot prevent a supernatural power from affecting it), then “miracle,” as defined, is neither impossible in principle nor impossible in our natural order.  Hence, any a priori denial of miracles must be a priori unjustified.  Though 1st century Jewish thought did not have a formal conception of miracles similar to the one given above, its view of miracles was commensurate with it.  See Wright 1996, p. 186 and Harvey 1982, pp. 101ff and also Unit II-F, Section I.A.
    See the more complete list in Dunn 1975, pp. 163ff.

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 Though this would explain how the Christian messianic movement received its remarkable jumpstart – with its certainty, exuberance, hopefulness, strong proclamation, uniform doctrinal proclivities, and its large number of missionaries (who, as we saw, were very likely recipients of resurrection appearances among the 500+ and the apostles), it does not completely explain how this Christian messianic movement accelerated and received such an open reception among both Jewish and Gentile communities (many of whom had not even heard about Jesus or the Jewish background from which He came).  This seems to require another sufficient cause which John P. Meier believes to be the apostles’ power to perform healings and miracles in a similar fashion to Jesus (with the important exception that Jesus performed miracles by His own authority while the apostles performed them in His name):
-…[T]here was a notable difference between the long-term impact of the Baptist and that of Jesus.  After the Baptist’s death, his followers did not continue to grow into a religious movement that in due time swept the Greco-Roman world.  Followers remained, revering the Baptist’s memory and practices.  But by the early 2d century A.D. any cohesive group that could have claimed an organic connection with the historical Baptist seems to have passed from the scene.  In contrast, the movement that had begun to sprout up around the historical Jesus continued to grow – amid many sea changes – throughout the 1st century and beyond.  Not entirely by coincidence, the post-Easter “Jesus movement” claimed the same sort of ability to work miracles that Jesus had claimed for himself during his lifetime.  This continued claim to work miracles may help to explain the continued growth, instead of a tapering off, of the group that emerged from Jesus’ ministry.
+<blockquote>…[T]here was a notable difference between the long-term impact of the Baptist and that of Jesus.  After the Baptist’s death, his followers did not continue to grow into a religious movement that in due time swept the Greco-Roman world.  Followers remained, revering the Baptist’s memory and practices.  But by the early 2d century A.D. any cohesive group that could have claimed an organic connection with the historical Baptist seems to have passed from the scene.  In contrast, the movement that had begun to sprout up around the historical Jesus continued to grow – amid many sea changes – throughout the 1st century and beyond.  Not entirely by coincidence, the post-Easter “Jesus movement” claimed the same sort of ability to work miracles that Jesus had claimed for himself during his lifetime.  This continued claim to work miracles may help to explain the continued growth, instead of a tapering off, of the group that emerged from Jesus’ ministry.<ref>Meier 1994, p. 623.</ref> </blockquote>
 Though these miracles are performed in the name of Jesus, the power which is used to perform them (in His name) is attributed to the Holy Spirit.  As we shall see below, Jesus gave the Holy Spirit to His apostles and disciples after His resurrection and the early Church became the instrument of this “power of God” by using the name of Jesus.  Hence, Jesus is both the initiator (giver) and activator of the Holy Spirit which the early Church recognized to be the “power of God” (the dynamis tou Theou).  This “power of God” was not viewed as a blind force, but rather the personal power of God who knows the heart of God the Father and probes the human heart.
@@ Line 264: / Line 264: @@
 We may now proceed to the manifestation of Jesus’ divinity in His ministry:  His miracles (Unit II-F) and His self-revelation (Unit II-G).
-−
    A simple Google search on the internet for “Holy Spirit healing,” for example, reveals 1,120,000 sites, and “charismatic prayer” reveals 460,000 sites.
    See Chapters 4 and 5 of my book, Five Pillars of the Spiritual Life: A Practical Guide to Prayer for Active People (Ignatius Press 2008).  The themes treated are:  peace, inspiration, guidance, transformation, consolation, desolation, and discernment of spirits.