Here is a list of questions that are frequently asked at Westmount. They range from theological questions to those of ministerial practice. We hope the answers to these questions will be profitable as you think through issues biblically.
Question:
What does it mean to be filled or moved with the Holy Spirit?
Answer:
The expression “filled with the Holy Spirit” occurs 10 times in the New Testament (Luke 1:15, 41, 67; Acts 2:4; 4:8, 31; 9:17; 13:9, 52; Ephesians 5:18). A similar description—being “full of the Holy Spirit”—occurs 5 times in the New Testament (Luke 4:1; Acts 6:3, 5; 7:55; 11:24).
The first observation to be made from these statistics is that every single reference to being filled with the Spirit in the New Testament, with the exception of one, comes from Luke and Acts, which are a sort of “part 1” and “part 2” narrative. Luke is communicating something important about how the Spirit is specially working at the time of Christ’s incarnation and, later, at the time of the establishment of the Church. There may, then, be special actions connected with the filling of the Spirit in Luke-Acts which are not normative for all believers at all times.
When people are filled with the Holy Spirit in Luke and Acts, they do different things. Elizabeth cries a blessing upon Mary (Luke 1:41–45); Zachariah prophesies about Jesus and John the Baptist (Luke 1:67-79); the early disciples speak in tongues (Acts 2:4); Peter addresses the Jewish leaders (Acts 4:8); and Paul condemns Elymas the Magician (Acts 13:9–11). A number of these events are unique occurrences that played a special role in redemptive history. Just because Zachariah prophesied or the disciples spoke in tongues, for example, does not mean all believers will do this as well. Rather, Luke is pointing these events out to demonstrate that the Spirit is beginning His special way of working with God’s people in the latter days (Acts 2:17–21). This is part of God’s New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:31–33; Ezekiel 36:26–27). The Spirit will be the power behind the spread of the Gospel to all the nations (Acts 1:8) and will be the Person indwelling God’s Church (John 14:15–17) just as He indwelt Jesus Christ on earth (Luke 4:1, 18–21).
Perhaps the most descriptive text for believers in the church today being filled with the Spirit is Ephesians 5:18. This passage is part of Paul’s epistle to the Ephesian church and is not in the Luke-Acts narrative. What does it mean when Paul says, “And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit…” (Ephesians 5:18)?
The key to understanding this passage is context. The verses before say, “Look carefully then how you walk, not as unwise but as wise, making the best use of the time, because the days are evil. Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is,” (Ephesians 5:15–17). The section is about our “walk” (5:15)—our daily living. Our walk involves understanding the “will of the Lord,” (5:17). We may conclude, then, that filling with the Spirit is something practical, being a part of the daily Christian life and the will of the Lord. It is not a feeling or an emotion.
Paul goes on to spell out exactly what it means to be filled with the Holy Spirit in Ephesians 5:19–6:9. To be filled with the Spirit is…
If we could sum this up, we could say that to be “filled with the Holy Spirit” is to come under the control of the Holy Spirit in obedience to the Lord in your daily Christian walk. Additionally, the concept of being “moved by/with the Holy Spirit” (as it relates to a felt experience) is not directly in Scripture. While this idea could be included under the definition of being “filled with the Holy Spirit,” Scripture does not speak of filling with the Holy Spirit as some emotional moment in a Sunday morning service. Again, filling with the Holy Spirit is the life-practice of a congregation. We get a real glimpse of a congregation being filled with the Spirit when we see them singing and giving thanks to the Lord, when we see husbands and wives interacting in Christ-like ways with each other, and when we see children honouring their parents. After all, living in such a way will produce deep joy in the Lord for living His way—and this may, indeed, overflow in godly emotions. Joyous emotions thus become the blessed product of living a life under the control of the Holy Spirit.
Question:
Many churches which don’t baptize infants have “baby dedications.” Why doesn’t Westmount dedicate infants?
Answer:
There are some ‘believers’ baptism’ churches that practice child dedications. They may do this for a variety of reasons, such as (1) they feel they need to so something once a baby is born, or (2) there is a tradition of doing something for infants in the church.
There is something that should be done when an infant is born. This is the thrust of Deuteronomy 6:7-9. We need to teach and disciple out children from the earliest age – and that primarily happens in the home. As such, the local church comes alongside the family to support that biblical end. That is why the community of the local church body is so important and is one reason church membership is so vital. In this way, by virtue of the family being in membership (committed) to the local church, there is already the pledge of the local church family/community to help support the young parents in their commitment to raising the child in the fear and admonition of the Lord. Baby dedication would, if nothing else, be redundant because we have already committed at Westmount to support families in raising children to know and love the Lord.
In this way, the tradition of the church recognizing infants is also considered. The church does not base its practice strictly on tradition – this is why a church would not baptize infants despite the tradition of infant baptism over a large part of the church’s history. Ultimately, Scripture governs the church’s actions. Yet, it is helpful to consider what the saints of old have done. Saints of old have recognized a clear covenant community (i.e., the local church) and have sought to raise children in the fear and admonition of the Lord through the family as part of that covenant community. In this way, Westmount aligns with the church tradition of raising children in the covenant community as well as the early church tradition of baptizing only believers. Baby dedication, in and of itself, is not a longstanding church tradition (unlike infant baptism) – in fact, it is a modern tradition that flows out of a neglect of a robust church membership process.
Question:
Why does my translation have some verses missing?
Answer:
Some verses are, indeed, omitted from the ESV (and other versions). Examples include Matthew 17:21, John 5:4, and Acts 8:37. The simplest explanation is that those verses generally do not appear in the earliest and best attested manuscripts. Over time – especially since the KJV was translated in 1611 – we have access to many more manuscripts that attest to the text. Some of these manuscripts are old and close to the original writing of Scripture, thus, they may be more indicative of what the original text of Scripture said.
At first hearing, the fact that different manuscripts record different texts may sound disconcerting. In this, however, we must remember that God has still preserved His Word, even if it be through fallible men prone to copying errors. We can say with confidence that we do possess the Word of God. What we also need to keep in mind is that in every case where we see “missing” verses, there is nothing significantly altered with the meaning of the passage/text (sometimes, for example, there is simply an addition or repetition. See Mark 9:44, 46, which repeat 9:48).
In many versions, these omitted verses can also be found in the footnotes. Thus, the translation of these verses is still accessible to us today.
Some translations, such as the KJV, do not omit these verses. This is one reason many people – including whole denominations – prefer to stick with that version. While the KJV is certainly a good translation, it is not the only translation.
Question:
Who do we direct our prayers to? God the Father, God the Son, or God the Holy Spirit? Is it wrong to pray to one over the others?
Answer:
Fundamentally, all our prayers are always directed toward God. We do not direct prayers to “saints” (as the Roman Catholic Church believes); people that have died, such as departed family members (as the culture allows); or even other living people (as some may feel like they want to do around really “holy” people). So, our prayers are directed toward God, and God alone. However, God is one, but three persons. So, the question more specifically is – Do we direct our prayers toward one particular person of the Trinity?
First, we might consider whether it is wrong to pray to Jesus or the Holy Spirit. Since both Jesus and the Holy Spirit are fully God, and since we pray to God, we must conclude that it is not wrong – in a basic theological sense – to pray to God the Son or God the Spirit. But again, the specific question is whether the Bible teaches us to pray to a person of the Trinity in particular or not?
The answer to that question is not only ‘yes,’ but the Bible actually shows us that each member of the Trinity has a specific role in our prayers. Let’s consider first Matthew 6:9. This verse is in the context of a passage where Jesus is teaching his disciples on many things that relate to living life as His disciples. As we arrive in chapter six, Jesus turns to prayer. Simply, Jesus tells his disciples to “Pray then like this: Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name.” Notice who is addressed – God the Father. Additionally, when Jesus went himself to pray, note His prayers were always directed toward God the Father (Luke 22:42; John 11:41-42, 17:1). So, as Jesus taught and modelled for us, the pattern of our prayers is to pray to God the Father.
Now, we see that but still might feel we can or want to pray to Jesus. Further, we might reference Acts 7:59 where Stephen says: “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” However, in the context of that passage, where Stephen is being stoned, he is calling out to Jesus whom he sees in front of him “at the right hand of God” in heaven in a vision (Acts 7:55). Even more, this account of Stephen is in the Book of Acts, which is not discussing a pattern for a disciple’s daily prayers.
Yet, even more than that, we should ask: What does the Bible teach us about Jesus’ role in our prayers? That is a good question. And the answer is that Jesus is our Mediator and Intercessor who grants us access to the Father. Because of the blood of Jesus, we have access to pray to the Father (Hebrews 6:19-20, 10:19-22). Jesus’ role in our prayers is to intercede for us before the Father. Praying to Him is not wrong, but it is not His role to receive prayers.
Similarly, the Holy Spirit is God, and thus, it is not wrong to pray to Him, but is receiving prayers His role? Romans 8:26-27 indicates that the Holy Spirit acts as a help in our own hearts so that we know what we ought to pray. So, the Holy Spirit enables our prayers that can actually go up to the Father by way of Christ.
So, in summary, it is not wrong to pray to Jesus or the Holy Spirit. But the Bible (and Jesus Himself) teach us that when we pray, we pray to God the Father. That is the pattern, the prescription, and what Christ Himself modelled. Further, this makes sense because both Jesus and the Holy Spirit have specific roles in our prayers that enable us to pray to the Father.
Question:
Should we still be keeping the Sabbath commandment?
Answer:
If we should still be keeping the Sabbath strictly because of the fact that it appears in the Mosaic Law, then we should be keeping all 300+ of the laws we see in the Mosaic Law. While few today would say that we should be keeping all 300+ of those laws, and there are many other reasons for Sabbath-keeping, such a reminder none the less points us to the fact that the Mosaic Law was given in a particular time and a place for a particular people in that time and at that place. The Mosaic Law is simply an administration and communication of the greater “Law of God,” that Law which is His perfect standard transcending time, place, and people. Mosaic Laws directly reflective of God’s Law are transcendent, carrying over into the New Testament. In some way, for example, nine of the Ten Commandments are clearly expressed in the New Testament. The Sabbath, though, lacks a direct re-affirmation. So, how does it still apply?
What we see, not in the New Testament only, but since the creation of the world (thus outstripping the Mosaic Law), is a day of rest. Particularly, there is a day set aside and dedicated to the Lord. In the Mosaic Law, this consecrated day was the Sabbath. In the New Testament, this becomes the first day of the week (Acts 20:7) – Sunday, which is also the day of our Lord’s resurrection (Luke 24:1). The transcendent principle in God’s Law, built into creation, that there is to be a day dedicated and consecrated to the Lord does carry over from the Old Testament. The day of the week, however, changes, and so does the activity we see happening on it. Now, that day is set aside especially for fellowship (i.e., breaking of bread). This administration of God’s Law is new with the coming of Christ and His bringing of the New Covenant.
For further reference:
“Proper Days.” A sermon on Exodus 20:8-11, June 13, 2021: https://westmountbiblechapel.ca/exodus/