1 Corinthians 6:19 The Indwelling of the Holy Spirit

[baron]

This article was written by Hank Hanegraaff back in 1997. When I asked six diffrent pastors about it they told me it was wrong and was heresy. Article makes sense to me but was wondering if some one could read and tell if it is theological correct. Even christians tell me its false because the Holy Spirit lives in us. One pastor even said thats why we should not smoke or drink, just think of what you are doing to the Holy Spirit. Choking on smoke and his head spinning from a hang over.

The Indwelling of the Holy Spirit

Thank you.

 

[rbcbob]

Hanegraaff's article is a mixture of clarity and turbidity. He has attempted to address the Personhood of the Holy Spirit in a brief paragraph and has not entirely succeeded. One problem that he has is that his argument from the non-corporality of the Holy Spirit to the conclusion that He cannot be in a given locality is a non-sequitur. Angels are non-corporeal and yet we read "Luke 1:26 Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth". This, of course, cannot speak to the issue of the Holy Spirit's omnipresence, it merely shows that one cannot reason from His non-corporality to the conclusion that He can not be in Jerusalem in a sense that He is not in Babylon on a given day.

 

[chbrooking]

The article is more problematic in what it denies than in what it affirms. The author seems to be confused about one crucial point. As Bob noted above, spiritual beings are not thereby denied location in space. They do not necessarily have extension in space, but they can have location. In the case of God, the infinite nature of his presence means that he has infinite location. I suppose you could call that extension, but not really. It's like saying a line is made up of points. Well ...

That said, there is a sense in which the Spirit is 'in' us that is not meant locally. In THAT sense, you could say that the Holy Spirit is not in an unbeliever. But you could not say that absolutely. So ... as for 'heresy', I tend to be gracious to authors where I can be. I think he's trying to say something good. He's just confused, and his confusion is creating error, not in what he's affirming, but in what he's denying.

 

[billy.leonhart]

The Bible does use spacial terms to refer to spiritual beings. In this sense, I believe that Hanegraaf is wrong to say that we should not "confuse categories" by using spacial terms ourselves. If the Bible does it, we have freedom to do it. However, this does not mean that the Holy Spirit exists in us in the same sense that I exist in my kitchen right now. It's anthropomorphic language. Let's not try to give it a woodenly literal definition.

Billy
SBC
Texas

 

[CharlieJ]

Would you all agree that the Old Testament Shekinah glory is a manifestation of the Spirit? The issue seems to be, not where is the Spirit, but where is the Spirit openly manifesting God's glory? God's Spirit is in believers in the sense that he is actively pouring out the love of God in our hearts (heart, there, by the way, is also not referring to a physical location) and working God's sanctification in us. We might be nit-picky, but I think Hanegraaff is right, that if we interpret "in" spatially, we've missed the big point.

 

[Peairtach]

I think the idea of God's presence in the Bible and in Christian language is often talking about His presence to bless without bothering to mention that it is His presence to bless we are talking about.

E.g. "Was God present at the meeting?", really means "Was God present to bless at the meeting?"

This comes into play regarding language about Hell, being separation from God.

We don't mean separation in an ultimate sense, because God is omnipresent, but separation from God's grace. But "separation from God" is shorthand for separation from His grace.

E.g. Psalm 139: 7-9.