First Response

October 2007

John Stott on the Holy Spirit: Still Relevant Today?

by Don Williams


John Stott, English pastor and theologian, has written a seminal book on the Holy Spirit which continues to determine the position of  many mainline evangelicals (Baptism and Fullness: The Work of the Holy Spirit Today, Inter Varsity Press, 1978). Thus, in First Response we revisit his work for our generation. The impact of Pentecostalism and the Charismatic Movement leads Stott to address the issues they raise. In these streams baptism and fullness of the Spirit come as a second experience after salvation and are signified by speaking in tongues, a supernatural Spirit-given language of praise and prayer. What are Biblical Christians to make of this?

Stott begins by laying his foundation. First, truth is objective. Second, it is found in the Word of God written. (Most Pentecostals/Charismatics would agree with him here.) But the dividing issue is on how we interpret this Word. Here Stott's asserts that Scripture's historical sections are to be understood from its didactic sections. They are relative to theological/ethical texts and the narratives (like the Book of Acts) are not normative apart from them. With this principle in hand, Stott tackles, first, the baptism of the Spirit and then, second, the fullness of the Spirit.

The Baptism of the Spirit

For classical Pentecostals and Charismatics, after conversion, there is a second, essential experience of being baptized in or with the Spirit. Modeled on the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2, it is sealed by speaking in tongues (known or unknown languages). This post-conversion event opens the baptized to further gifts of the Spirit, normally identified by the gift lists in I Corinthians 12. They include tongues, the interpretation of tongues, prophecy, healings, miracles and revelatory words of wisdom and knowledge.

For Stott, however, the Baptism of the Spirit is not a second work of grace which anoints the believer with the Holy Spirit and releases his gifting and power for ministry. Rather, the Baptism of the Spirit inaugurates the whole Christian life. It is synonymous with conversion or the New Birth. (John 3) There is no Christian, regardless of one's level of spiritual experience, who has not been baptized by the Spirit. No necessary spiritual gifts, such as tongues, accompany this event.

At its core, for Stott, to demand a second experience beyond conversion endangers the finality of Christ himself. It puts us into the position of  Christ plus the Baptism of the Spirit, which, characteristic of all heresies, adds something more to his sufficiency. Identifying conversion with Spirit baptism eliminates a second work of grace and makes us fully “Christocentric.”

The Fullness of the Spirit

But what about being filled with the Spirit? Many Charismatics and post-Charismatics (identified as “Third Wave” by  C. Peter Wagner) insist on a second experience of the Spirit. With better exegesis they use “filled” rather than “baptized” to identify the event. Stott rejects this, with some modifications, as well. Every Christian, once baptized by the Spirit at conversion, should continually be filled with the Spirit. As Paul exhorts the Ephesians, “Do not get drunk on wine which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit.” (Ephesians 5:18) The present imperative here, “be filled,” calls us to a continual filling. Thus all Christians are “Spirit filled” at conversion, not simply those who experience some second (or third) special filling.

At the same time, Stott acknowledges that for most Christians, the continual state of being filled is unusual. The way to fresh filling, however, is not through a Pentecostal/Charismatic experience, a special descent, anointing empowering or release of the Spirit. Filling is lost through sinful behavior. Therefore, it is restored through repentance. The Spirit-filled Christian will evidence the Spirit's work by bearing the fruit of the Spirit, Christian character, over a life-time of growth. Moreover, every Christian has at least one gift of the Spirit for ministry. This is not necessarily a supernatural endowment. Often, the gift simply enhances what God has already given in creation. For example, a person may be a gifted teacher. Coming to Christ, being baptized by the Spirit and filled with the Spirit will enhance that gift and redirect it to build up the church.

Stott deals with the controversial gift of tongues by simply identifying tongues-speaking in Acts 2 with Paul's teaching on tongues in I Corinthians 12 and 14. By conflating these texts, he concludes that tongues is a gift of known languages, not some special manifestation of the Spirit in unknown languages as Pentecostals and Charismatics claim.

At the same time, Stott acknowledges that there are special extraordinary moves of the Spirit such as happens in revival. The basic work of the Spirit, however, continues to be conversion/baptism and constant filling, growing the fruit of Christian character in our lives. We must not conclude from this that Stott advocates a stereotyped, predictable Christian life. Our God has “abundant diversity.” Stott writes, “My own belief...is that there is a wide variety of spiritual experiences and a wide variety of spiritual gifts.” However, “All our traditions, all our opinions and all our experiences must...be submitted to the independent and objective test of biblical truth.” In critiquing Stott, we ask, has he been successful in submitting Pentecostal/Charismatic experience to this test? Has he answered the force of the Pentecostal/Charismatic/Third Wave movements?

Critique

For us, Stott is exactly right in establishing the foundation for our faith in the objective Word of God written. Our issue, however, is with his principle of interpreting that Word. Is he right in claiming that our teaching, which is normative for faith, is to be found, not in the descriptive (historical) narratives but in the didactic (theological/ethical) expositions, such as Jesus' teachings, and the sermons and writings of the Apostles? We make the following points.

First, the teaching of Jesus (didache) can never be separated from the preaching of Jesus (kerygma), and the message of Jesus can never be separated from the ministry of Jesus. As Matthew reports, “Jesus went throughout Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the good news of the kingdom, and healing every disease and sickness among the people.” (Matthew 4:23) Jesus' message of the kingdom of God, breaking in upon this fallen, enslaved world, and his ministry (evangelizing the lost, delivering the demonized, healing the sick and restoring justice for the oppressed (Luke 4:16-21) are of one cloth. Without the ministry (historical narrative) the message, in Francis Schaeffer's phrase, is kicked into a spiritual upper story, unrelated to time, space and history. This borders on Platonism and turns concrete, incarnational faith into abstractions.

The theological/cultural background for this lies in rabbinic Judaism where the rabbi not only teaches Torah (Law), he lives Torah, in fact, he is “living Torah.” What he does is as essential as what he says. Thus Jesus calls his disciples to follow him and imparts the totality of his modeled ministry to them. Likewise, Paul calls his converts to imitate his life with Christ as the ultimate reference point.

Along with the dynamic of Jesus' kingdom message and ministry, then, the narrative sections of the Gospels and Acts show us what it means to be baptized in the Spirit, live a Spirit-filled life and minister the kingdom in power. To separate the work of Christ or the work of the Spirit from the narrative portions of Scripture, again, makes the faith abstract, ethereal, and detached from history. While this would not be Stott's intention, it tends to bland out the faith to creedal confessions and ethical living, rather than the Biblical dynamic of overcoming Satan's kingdom and restoring God's effective reign over the earth.

Second, Stott is exegetically right in identifying the baptism of the Spirit with conversion and/or the New Birth. He is also right in saying that the New Birth or baptism of the Spirit may occur without any emotional or physical manifestations or spiritual “high.” At the same time, this seems experientially remote from the New Testament. Stott writes that “The Christian life is life in the Spirit.” (p.19) Gordon Fee says that for Paul, Christians are best described as “Spirit-people.” But much of the church today is ignorant of the Spirit. A. W. Tozer claims that if the Spirit withdrew from most churches, no one would notice and nothing would change. This clearly was not true for the first generation of Christians. Paul can speak of their conversion as “receiving the Spirit” and the immediate consequences of this is miraculous ministry. (Galatians 3:1-5) In I Corinthians 12:3 Jesus is confessed as Lord through the Spirit. This results in the unity and diversity of the church, gifted and ministering with prophecy and healings in the Spirit's power.

Third, Stott says that the ideal Christian life issuing from conversion (Baptism of the Spirit) is the continuing state of being filled with the Spirit. All of this is based on one text in Ephesians 5:18 where Paul apparently contrasts being drunk with wine with being filled with the Spirit. Pentecostals claim that the contrast is really an analogy. As alcohol overpowers the body, so the Spirit-filled life is a life overpowered by the Spirit. Stott, however, claims the opposite. Drunkenness and the Spirit-filled life are antithetical. To be Spirit-filled is to be sober – living an ethical life of the fruit of the Spirit. (Galatians 5:22-23) But we have problems with this.

First, the Ephesians text is in the plural: “Church, don't be drunk with wine, but, Church, be filled with the Spirit.” The exhortation is not to an individual Spirit filled life but to a corporate Spirit-filled church. Second, the verb is passive. We don't fill ourselves. We yield to the Spirit who fills us all together. Third, the context and result of the Spirit's filling is corporate worship. The main verb is “be filled,” followed by participles which show the results of being filled: addressing each other with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs and making melody in our hearts to the Lord. Fourth, Drunkenness was an issue in early Christian worship. The Lord's Supper was celebrated as a full meal (from its original Passover context). I Corinthians 11 shows us the danger, therefore, of drunkenness at that meal. So it is likely that Paul's exhortation here not to be drunk with wine is not general but specific. “Don't be drunk with wine, Church, at worship, but be filled with the Spirit, Church, as you sing to each other (edification) and to the Lord (exaltation).” There is no analogy between drunkenness and being Spirit-filled. This exhortation brings correction and moves on to admonition.

This text then would only have an indirect application to the individual who functions in a Spirit-filled church. It cannot be the foundational text for an ideal “steady state” Spirit-filled individual life. It is foundational for the quality of Christian worship which builds the church and pleases God. In fact, for Acts, there are clearly many fillings of the Spirit beyond Pentecost, both corporately and individually. These are anointings for ministry that have immediate effects and are closely allied with spiritual gifts, especially prophecy.

Remember, the Christian life is dynamic, lived out in the eschatological tension of the “already” and the “not yet,” the kingdom come and coming. It is never “steady state.” Thus the flesh wars against the spirit. We must die to the works of the flesh and allow the fruit of the Spirit to grow in their place. We must engage in spiritual disciplines (I Corinthians 9:24-27) and hold each other accountable for relapses into sin. (Galatians 6:1) At the same time, the gifts of the Spirit are to be welcomed, sought and prayed for – to build up the body of Christ for its mission in the world. (I Corinthians 14:1)

Secondary Matters

The spiritual gift most to be sought after by Paul is neglected by Stott – the gift of prophecy. It is promised by Jesus and evidenced in both his ministry and in that of the early church. It is the living word of God, spoken in both “forth-telling” in the present and “fore-telling” for the future. Some object that the gift of prophecy necessarily adds to the now closed canon of Scripture. The spoken prophetic word, however, can never be equal to inspired Scripture and, therefore, canonized. Paul says that we prophesy in part and that all spoken prophecies must be tested and judged by the church. (I Corinthians 13:9 and 14:29-33) The closed canon of Scripture, however, is not to be judged by the church. Instead, it judges the church. But if the gift of prophecy is rejected, we are unfaithful to that same canon which exhorts us to “seek the gift of prophecy,” and “not [to] treat prophecies with contempt.” (I Corinthians 14:1 and I Thessalonians 5:20)

Stott also conflates tongues at Pentecost with tongues in Corinth, but this misses their separate functions. Tongues at Pentecost are known languages for unbelievers. Tongues in Corinth are unknown languages which edify believers. They are not to be used corporately apart from the accompanying gift of interpretation so that the whole church may be  edified. Paul reorders the use of the gift and gives it its proper value and place in the church. While favoring prophecy, he writes, “I would like every one of you to speak in tongues,” (I Corinthians 14:5) and polemically celebrates his own giftedness in tongues. ( I Corinthians 14:18)

By isolating Pentecost as unique and unrepeatable, Stott eliminates the Biblical paradigm for revival. But Christianity, at its heart, is a revivalistic  and missional movement. To use another word, it is, at its heart, eschatological. We are not waiting for the End, the End has already broken in upon us in Jesus, the Anointed Messiah, who bears the Spirit and gives the Spirit as the sign and seal of the End. While we cannot control revival (awakening the dead) we can pray for it, minister it in preaching and prayer and experience its individual and corporate in-breaking. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, late pastor of Westminster Chapel in London, writes that revival, at its heart, is a repetition of Pentecost.

Finally, for Stott, miracles are given to identify key periods of revelation. Therefore, he does not expect them today, But do miracles credential revelation or do they manifest and extend the kingdom? Do they credential Jesus' ministry or do they enable Jesus' ministry, reversing the effects of the Fall, bringing down Satan's counterfeit kingdom of darkness and restoring God's effective rule over his creation? We believe the latter. To this thesis, kingdomrain.net is devoted.