The concept of the Holy Spirit would eventually be seen as equal with the Father and Son as manifestations of the Triune God ”“ a monotheistic concept in which Christians attempt to explain three ways in which the single God is experienced by and revealed to believers. In modern times, the evangelical movement known as Pentecostalism places deep importance upon a personal experience with the Spirit, and especially upon being “baptized” by the Spirit in the model of the original Pentecost.
Outside of this and similar movements, however, the role of the Holy Spirit in Christian theology and worship is too often misunderstood and underemphasized. And indeed, with rare exception, Pentecost Sunday will go by once again like the crazy uncle at Christmas dinner ”“ forgotten and ignored; it will go largely unnoticed by the global church it helped plant so many years ago.
Here’s what I find fascinating, the church today looks see the same fruit as the early church while valuing a book they didn’t have more than the Holy Spirit they did have.
Which book are you referring to Steve? The Bible (which they had – albeit not in the form we have today) or the Book of Common Prayer (which they didn’t have)?
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
both.
Steve, Could you please clarify? Which church values the Bible more than the Holy Spirit?
As a Charismatic, Evangelical, Anglo-catholic, I value the Holy Spirit as I value God – for He is God. The problem is that I am very good at listening for the voice of the Holy Spirit and hearing my own instead. Perhaps you don’t have that problem.
Be that as it may, one way that I try to discern the voice of the Holy Spirit is to test the words I hear with the Word of God, written – Holy Scripture. According to what I have been taught and what I faith to be true, the Holy Spirit speaks though the Word of God – Holy Scripture. It would seem to me to be rather odd of the Holy Spirit – who spoke through the Apostles and Prophets – to contradict what He has said in the past.
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
Well, they may not have had the book, at least not all of it, but they did have something arguably even better than that: the people who were there and whose testimony would eventually make the book!
And I daresay, although some scholars would pour scorn on the idea, that the testimony they had at their disposal was in substantial continuity with the testimony we so value in the book we now have. Play it down at your grave peril.