logo

Many scholars insist that to be filled with the Holy

Spirit is to be controlled by the Holy Spirit.

 

John F. MacArthur comments on the meaning of “to be filled with the Spirit.”

What does it mean to be filled with the Holy Spirit? In Ephesians 5:18 he told us how to achieve that worthy walk: being filled with the Spirit. As the Israelites gathered manna daily, the Christian must be kept filled by the Spirit daily. We often speak of people being “filled” with anger or “filled” with joy. We mean they are totally under the control of those things. That is what Paul had in mind; we are to be utterly controlled by the Holy Spirit. The word filled, then, is used in Scripture of those who are totally controlled by an emotion or influence. Scripture means exactly the same thing when it talks about being filled with the Holy Spirit. Obviously, a lot of believers are not filled with the Spirit. Moreover, a lot of charismatics who claim to have had the experience show no evidence of being filled, or controlled, by the Spirit. A Spirit-filled person always gives thanks for all things in the name of Christ. Spirit-filled Christians are subject to one another. (John F. MacArthur, Charismatic Chaos, p.313-6)

Michael Green comments on the meaning of “to be filled with the Spirit.” To be filled with Spirit means to allow Jesus to have the full control in our lives that we are conscious of. (Michael Green, I believe in the Holy Spirit, Grand Rapids: WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1992, p.185)

     The statements mentioned above can be summarized as follows:

A person who is filled with joy is controlled by joy.

A person who is filled with alcohol is controlled by alcohol.
A person who is filled with the Spirit is controlled by the Spirit.
To be filled with Spirit is to allow Jesus to have the full control in our lives.

     All these statements seem to be sensible and reasonable. The statement “being filled with anger or filled with joy” is right, but the note “being filled with the Spirit” is quite erroneous. The Spirit is not a material noun or an abstract emotion like anger or joy or power. The Holy Spirit is God. It is His personal name. The statement, “A person who is filled with joy is controlled by joy. A person who is filled with alcohol is controlled by alcohol,” obviously makes sense. It is a correct explanation, but “A person who is filled with the Spirit is controlled by the Spirit” is an unbiblical interpretation. It springs from the mistranslation and misinterpretation of Acts 2:4.

     Why is it unbiblical interpretation? When did the 120 disciples become the sons of God? When were they filled with the Holy Spirit? When did they begin to be controlled by the Holy Spirit? When the Bible answers these questions, it is simple to find that the statement “to be filled with the Spirit is to be controlled by the Spirit” is in great error. To declare that the Bible will affirm that “to be filled with the Spirit is to be controlled by the Spirit” is unprovable. This conclusion is based on the mistranslation of the Greek text.

All believers are controlled by the Spirit even though they were not filled with the Spirit.

Rom. 8:8  those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God. (NIV)

     The text can be inferred to mean that unbelievers can not please God, but those who controlled by the Spirit can please God.

Rom. 8:9  You are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. (NIV)

     The text suggests several conclusions: (1) The Spirit controls all believers if the Spirit lives in them. (2) To believe in Jesus is to be in Jesus. (3) To receive Jesus is to receive the Holy Spirit. The 120 had already received Jesus before the day of Pentecost, so they had already received the Holy Spirit by faith before that day. John 14:17 and Rom. 8:6-16 confirm that the Holy Spirit has already lived in the 120 disciples of Jesus (See the detailed discussion on “the Spirit is in you and comes on you.) before they were filled with the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. The word of Rom. 8:9 should be applied to the case of the 120 disciples. They were controlled by the Spirit since the Spirit has lived in them before Pentecost. They were already controlled by the Spirit before being filled with the Spirit. This fact confirms that to be filled with the Spirit is not to be controlled by the Spirit. The argument “to be filled with the Spirit is to be controlled by the Spirit” is from the mistranslation of Acts  2:4: “They were all filled with the Holy Spirit.” It must be translated as “They were all filled with the power of the Holy Spirit” (Author). This translation will be examined in this chapter.

Rom. 8:9      If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ. (NIV)
Rom. 8:14    those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. (NIV)

     If anyone accepts Christ as Savior and Lord, he belongs to Christ. If he belongs to Christ, he has already become a son of God. Rom. 8:9 indicates that every Christian has the Spirit. Through Rom.  8:9, a doctrine of the Holy Spirit can be constructed: “To receive Christ is to belong to Christ. To receive the Spirit is to have the Spirit. To belong to Christ is to receive the Spirit.” Luke 4:1 says, “Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit in the desert.” The word “to lead” means “to control or dominate.” When Jesus was led by the Spirit, He was controlled by the Spirit. The phrase “those who are led by the Spirit are sons of God” in Rom. 8:14 means that all sons of God are led/controlled by the Spirit. The 120 disciples had already become the sons of God before Pentecost. So they were already under the control of the Spirit before being filled with the Spirit on the day of Pentecost. This fact affirms that to be filled with the Spirit is quite distinct from being controlled by the Spirit.

Rom. 8:15-16  You did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him we cry, Abba, Father. The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children. (NIV)

     The text indicates that all Christians received the Spirit and God’s children cry, “Abba, Father” by the Spirit who is in them. The phrase means that the mouth of God’s children is controlled by the Spirit. Before Pentecost, the 120 disciples cried, “Abba, Father” by the Spirit who is in them. Therefore, they had already received the Spirit before being filled with the Spirit on the day of Pentecost. They were already controlled by the Spirit who was received before being filled with the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. This fact confirms that to be filled with the Spirit is not to be controlled by the Spirit.

1 Cor. 12:3     Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God calls Jesus accursed and no one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit. (NKJ)

     Only those who speak by the Holy Spirit call Jesus Lord. If one accepts Jesus as Savior and Lord, he has confessed Jesus as his Lord with his mouth. This means that he has yielded control of his mouth to the Holy Spirit. If the Holy Spirit does not control one’s mouth, it is impossible to make a genuine confession that Jesus is Lord. Through these texts it can be concluded that the Holy Spirit controls everyone who receives Jesus as Savior and Lord. The argument “to be filled with the Holy Spirit is to be controlled by the Holy Spirit” also is proven to be in great error. If it were translated “to be filled with the power of the Holy Spirit,” there will be no controversial debates.

The 120 have already become the sons of God before being filled with the Spirit.

Matt. 6:6-13  But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him. This, then, is how you should pray: Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us today our daily bread. (NIV)

     The 120 Upper room disciples have already been the sons of God before meeting Jesus. They had already believed in God as their God the Father from the time of children through their parents who were Jews believed in God. All OT and NT believers were controlled by the Spirit since they believed in God or Jesus. It is confirmed that before being filled with the Spirit, the 120 disciples were already controlled by the Spirit. Therefore, to be filled with the Spirit does not mean to be controlled by the Spirit. “They were all filled with the Holy Spirit” in Acts 2:4 is from a mistranslation. The correct translation must be “They were all filled with the power of the Holy Spirit.” These facts confirm that John F. MacArthur’s and Michael Green’s aforementioned comments are based upon a mistranslation. Unfortunately, all of Christian society has accepted these erroneous interpretations and mistranslations on the Holy Spirit as a scriptural truth.

Mal. 3:16  Then those who feared the Lord talked with each other, and the Lord listened and heard. A scroll of remembrance was written in his sence concerning those who feared the Lord and honored his name. (NIV)

Matt. 16:16   Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” (NIV)
Luke 10:20    However, do not rejoice that the spirits submit to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven. (NIV)
John 15:3      You are already clean because of the word I have spoken to you. (NIV)

     The texts indicate that the names of the 12 and 70 disciples and believers who accepted Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord were written in heaven. They were already the sons of God before being filled with the Spirit on the day of Pentecost. If the life of Jesus Christ recorded in Luke  3:22,  4:1,14,18 and Acts 10:38 are thoroughly examined, it is simple to understand the meaning of “to be filled with the Holy Spirit.”

Billy Graham insists, “We must not be confused by mere terminology.”

We must make ourselves available to the Holy Spirit so that when He fills us we will become vessels of blessing to the world. So it is critical that we be filled with the Spirit. In considering this, however, we must not be confused by mere terminology...we actually be filled with the Spirit. We are to be continuously filled by the Holy Spirit. Why do we need the fullness of the Holy Spirit? Because only in the power of the Spirit can we live a life that glorifies God. God the Holy Spirit gives us power for a purpose–power to help us glorify God in every dimension of our lives. This Person is the Holy Spirit Himself, indwelling the Christian and filing him with the fullness of His power. ((Billy Graham, The Holy Spirit, p.119-120,129)

John F. MacArthur asks, “Why all the confusion and contradiction?”

Significantly, charismatic writers are not all agreed on how believers are to receive the baptism of the Spirit. Why all the confusion and contradiction? Why is it that charismatic writers do not quote the Bible plainly and let it go at that? The reason no charismatic writer can do that is the Bible never tells how to get the baptism of the Spirit; it only tells believers that they are already baptized with the Spirit. (John F. MacArthur, Charismatic Chaos, p.234-236)

John F. Walvoord insists, “The terminology is confusing.”

Baptism is often identified with the filling of the Holy Spirit. Particularly older writers such D. H. Dolman use the expression baptism as a synonym for filling. While their teaching may be most helpful as in the case of Dolman, The terminology is confusing and in the case of some writers results in the end in unscriptural teaching. (John F. Walvoord, The Holy Spirit, p.139)

     The writings of Billy Graham, John MacArthur and John F. Walvoord themselves are much confused by mere terminology used by their writings on the Holy Spirit. Let’s examine briefly their writings mentioned above. Billy Graham’s statement (“For it is critical that we be filled with the Spirit. We actually are filled with the Spirit. We are to be continuously filled by the Holy Spirit.”) can be twisted to mean that “to be filled with the Spirit” means “to be filled by the Holy Spirit.” The terminology “to be filled with the Spirit” makes no sense. The Spirit is to be treated as God not as a material noun like water or an abstract noun like power. “To be filled by the Spirit” makes sense. The Spirit is treated as God. “To be filled with the Holy Spirit” is quite distinct from “to be filled by the Holy Spirit.” Billy Graham uses both expressions interchangeably. “To be filled with the Spirit” is an inaccurate terminology found only in the English versions. It is not in the original Greek text but from the mistranslation of the Greek text. While men might insist they are not confused by mere terminology, they themselves are confused by the terminology of their own books.

     Their teachings about the Holy Spirit show great contradictions. An unclear, incorrect and unbiblical terminology certainly leads to misunderstandings of the word of God. Without a single exception, all scholars and pastors treat the Holy Spirit as God and a proper noun and also as a material or an abstract noun. If the Holy Spirit is not treated as only God the Spirit and a proper name, it is absolutely impossible to construct a correct, biblical doctrine of the Holy Spirit. Without a single exception, all writings regarding the Holy Spirit are in great confusion, filled with many contradictions and inconsistencies since they accept the mistranslated versions as authentic.

Chuck Smith insists that it doesn’t matter what terminology you might choose.

This outflow of the Spirit from our lives is something. “Out of your innermost being will gush torrents of living water,” Jesus promised. I don’t care what you call this: the baptism of the Holy Spirit, the gift of the Holy Spirit, the filling of the Holy Spirit. It doesn’t matter what terminology you might choose. What’s important is the under- lying reality…a life overflowing with the power and the love of the Holy Spirit. (Chuck Smith, Living Water, p.287)

     The note “What’s important is the underlying reality” is correct, but the note “It doesn’t matter what terminology you might choose” is quite erroneous. Illogical and unbiblical terminology misleads to misunderstanding. The terminology “this outflow of the Spirit” is quite unbiblical since it does not speak of the Spirit as a divine Person. This makes sense if it were to read, “this outflow of living water of the Holy Spirit.” To speak of “a life overflowing with the power and the love of the Holy Spirit” is quite biblical since the Holy Spirit is treated as God. The terminology “the filling of the Spirit” is quite unbiblical and must instead read, “the filling of the power of the Spirit.” It does matter what terminology one might choose.

John Calvin inconsistently treats the Spirit as God and also not as God.

Unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he can not enter into the kingdom of God (John 3:5). Christ indicates here the way in which God regenerates us, namely through water and the Spirit. It is as if he said: through the Spirit, who in cleansing and watering faithful souls performs the function of water. I therefore simply understand “water and Spirit” as “Spirit, who is water.” (John Calvin, Ibid., IV. 16. 25)

     The Holy Spirit must be regarded as God the Holy Spirit. To speak of “…water and Spirit as Spirit, who is water” is to deny and disregard the Deity of God the Holy Spirit.

Billy Graham inconsistently treats the Spirit as God and also not as God.

We accept the fact that the Holy Spirit is God, just as much God as God the Father and God the Son. The Bible teaches that the Holy Spirit is a person. Throughout the Bible it is clear that the Holy Spirit is God Himself. Thus, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit were together creating the world. The Bible teaches us that the Holy Spirit is a living being. He is one of the three persons of the Holy Trinity. If the Father is God, and Jesus is God, then the Holy Spirit is also God. (Billy Graham, The Holy Spirit, p.1-7,10)
 
     In this note “the Spirit” is virtually regarded as God the Holy Spirit. This is correct. Billy Graham continues:

He filled men: I have filled him with the Spirit of God (Exodus. 31:3). When were you baptized with the Holy Spirit? He asked. He had not questioned the others on this. “The moment I received Jesus Christ as my Savior,” I replied...The scriptural usage of the word baptism shows that it is something initiatory both in the case of water baptism and Spirit baptism, and that it is not repeated. In like manner, all believers are baptized with the Holy Spirit. This does not mean, however, that they were filled or controlled by the Spirit. For example some Christian holds that the Spirit’s baptism only comes at some time subsequent to conversion. At this time we can and should be filled with the Holy Spirit. I used to wonder if I had been wrong in thinking that having been baptized by the Spirit into the body of Christ on the day of my con- version I needed on other baptism. (Billy Graham, The Holy Spirit, p.66-70.)

     The statements, “I have filled him with the Spirit of God, and to be filled with the Spirit, and all believers are baptized with the Holy Spirit,” are thoroughly unbiblical. The Holy Spirit is not treated as God and a living being. According to the doctrine of the Trinity, “To be filled with the Spirit and all believers are baptized with the Holy Spirit” could be changed into “To be filled with God and all believers are baptized with God.” But this is quite unbiblical. Billy Graham said that we should be filled with the Holy Spirit. But it makes no sense to treat the Holy Spirit like water and power. While the terminology “water baptism” is appropriate, “Spirit baptism” is quite unbiblical. Again this terminology speaks of “Spirit” as water. It is correct to speak of the Spirit’s baptism. Graham continues:
 
I think it proper to say that anyone who is not Spirit-filled is a defective Christian. Paul’s command to the Ephesian Christians, “Be filled with the Spirit,” is binding on all of us Christians everywhere in every age. There are no exceptions. We must conclude that since we are ordered to be filled with the Spirit, we are sinning if we are not filled. And our failure to be filled with the Spirit constitutes one of the greatest sins against the Holy Spirit. We must make ourselves available to the Holy Spirit so that when He fills us we will become vessels of blessing to the world. So it is critical that we be filled with the Spirit. In considering this, however, we must not be confused by mere terminology....we actually be filled with the Spirit. We are to be continuously filled by the Holy Spirit. So, seeking the fullness of the Spirit, we receive and enjoy His filling and His fullness more and more. At such a time we need a new filling of the Holy Spirit that He might control and dominate us. (Ibid., p.121.) (Billy Graham, The Holy Spirit, p.116,119-121)

     The term “Spirit-filled” is unbiblical. According to the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, can one be said to be “God-filled”? No. The biblical terminology should be “the Spirit’s power-filled. We are not filled with the Spirit but we are to be filled with the power of the Holy Spirit.” The Holy Spirit is God. The phrase “we need a new filling of the Holy Spirit” is in great error because it fails to treat the Holy Spirit as God and a divine Person. Billy Graham’s argument and terminology mentioned above are mixtures of biblical and unbiblical elements.

John F. MacArthur inconsistently treats the Spirit as God and also not as God.

What does it mean to be filled with the Holy Spirit? In Ephesians 5:18 he told us how to achieve that worthy walk: being filled with the Spirit. When Paul said, “Be filled with the Spirit, he used terms that speak of being continuously filled. We are to be continuously filled with the Spirit. Paul never said, “Be baptized in the Spirit.” As the Israelites gathered manna daily, the Christian must be kept filled by the Spirit daily. We often speak of people being “filled” with anger or “filled” with joy. We mean they are totally under the control of those things. That is what Paul had in mind; we are to be utterly controlled by the Holy Spirit. The word filled, then, is used in Scripture of those who are totally controlled by an emotion filled with the Holy Spirit. Obviously, a lot of believers are not filled with the Spirit. Moreover, a lot of charismatics who claim to have had the experience show no evidence of being filled, or controlled, by the Spirit. (John F. MacArthur, Charismatic Chaos, p.313-5)

     Again, “to be filled with the Holy Spirit” is quite erroneous. This note is based on the mistranslation of Acts 2:4 and Eph. 5:18. The Holy Spirit must be treated as God the Holy Spirit. The note “the Christian must be kept filled by the Spirit” is correct. The Holy Spirit is God. MacArthur insists that to be filled with the Holy Spirit is the same as to be filled by the Holy Spirit. No. The terms “with the Holy Spirit” and “by the Holy Spirit” are quite different. The reason they are quite diff- erent will be examined more closely in later chapter. MacArthur continues:

What is the difference between the baptism and the filling? As I continue to talk with charismatics and study their writings, it becomes more and more apparent that they are confusing Spirit baptism, which places the Christian in the body of Christ, and the fullness of the Spirit, which produces effective Christian living (see Eph. 5:18-6:11). (Ibid., p.234.)

     The terminology “Spirit baptism” as well as “the fullness of the Spirit” is quite erroneous. We should speak of “the Spirit’s baptism and the fullness of the power of the Holy Spirit.” In this way, the Spirit is respected as God. John F. MacArthur continues:

Charles and Frances Hunter, for example, lead seminars instructing people how to be baptized with the Holy Spirit. Charles Hunter has written: Picture yourself in the position of being one to whom we are ministering. Here is how we lead people into the baptism: “You are about to receive what the Bible calls the baptism with the Holy Spirit, or the gift of the Holy Spirit. Your spirit, the same size as your body, is about to be filled completely with God’s Spirit, and just as Jesus instructed, you will speak in a spirit language as the Holy Spirit gives the utterance.” (Ibid., p.234.)

     The expressions, “to be baptized with the Holy Spirit, the baptism with the Holy Spirit and to be filled completely with God’s Spirit,” are quite inaccurate. They do not honor the Holy Spirit as God. These expressions are based on the mistrans- lations of Luke 3:16 and Acts 2:4. To write “the Holy Spirit gives the utterance” is correct because the Holy Spirit is honored as God the Holy Spirit. John F. MacArthur continues:

In the first place, the idea that one’s spirit is the same size as one’s body is absurd. A spirit, being nonmaterial, has no size. Second, and more significantly, Hunter speaks of the baptism with the Holy Spirit and the fullness of the Holy Spirit as if they were the same. They are not. As you walk in obedience to the Word of God, the Spirit of God fills you and energizes your life. (Ibid., p.234-235.)

     To speak of “the baptism with the Holy Spirit” and “the fullness of the Holy Spirit” is misleading because the Holy Spirit is not respected as God. The correct biblical terms should be “the baptism with/in the fire of the Holy Spirit” or “the baptism of the Holy Spirit and the fullness of the power of the Holy Spirit.” These expressions reveal the Holy Spirit as God.

John R. W. Stott inconsistently treats the Spirit as God and also not as God.

The Holy Spirit is God. What happened on the Day of Pentecost was that Jesus ‘poured out’ the Spirit from heaven and thus ‘baptized’ with the Spirit first the 120 and then the 3,000. The result of this baptism of the Spirit was that ‘they were all filled with the Holy Spirit’ (Acts 2:4). Thus, the fullness of the Spirit was the consequence of the baptism of the Spirit. The baptism is what Jesus did (pouring out the Spirit from heaven); the fullness is what they received. (John R. W. Stott, Baptism & Fullness, p.22,48)

      “The Holy Spirit is God.” Yes! But these expressions, “Jesus poured out the Spirit,” “baptized with the Spirit,” and “they were all filled with the Spirit,” and “the fullness of the Spirit,” are quite erroneous because they do not speak of the Spirit as God. Stott’s arguments are mixtures of biblical and unbiblical elements.

Oral Roberts inconsistently treats the Spirit as a Person and also not as a Person.

Now Jesus said, “The Holy Spirit [Paraclete] is with you, but He shall be in you.” So the Paraclete, the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, is a Person. He is not a thing. He is not an it. He is a person. A completely whole person–not bruised, not divided nor fragmented–and He comes with total care, love, and concern for every man. Let me tell you of the Holy Spirit’s power as it relates to your life today. The Holy Spirit filled Jesus, giving Him His power. Jesus said that he did nothing outside the power of the Holy Spirit. I pray that God will fill you with the Holy Sprit. I don’t have to see Jesus Christ as a physical man. God has filled me with the Holy Spirit. I have that Comforter, the Paraclete, the one called alongside to help. I was so filled with the power of the Almighty that I seemed to have supernatural strength. Jesus was filled with the Holy Spirit. Jesus says, “I am baptizing you with the Holy Spirit.” The important thing is that they were all filled with the Holy Spirit. (Oral Roberts, The Holy Spirit In The Now, Tulsa: Oral Roberts University, 1981, p.27,3,8, 21,32)

     “The Holy Spirit is not a thing. He is not an it. He is a person.” This is correct and should be applied consistently when speaking of the Holy Spirit. Oral Roberts says, “I pray that God will fill you with the Holy Spirit, and Jesus was filled with the Holy Spirit, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit.” Sadly, Roberts reverts to speaking of the Holy Spirit as an object and not God. This shows that he himself is in great confusion. To write, “The Holy Spirit filled Jesus, giving Him His power,” is quite ambiguous. Rather, it should read, “The Holy Spirit filled Jesus with His power.” “Jesus was filled with the Holy Spirit. They were filled with the Holy Spirit” should read, “Jesus was filled with the power of the Holy Spirit. They were filled with the power of the Holy Spirit.”

Stanley M. Horton inconsistently treats the Spirit as God and also not as God.

The overflow of the Spirit from Him was available to satisfy the thirst of their souls. The Spirit was already working in their lives, but they were waiting for the baptism, the enduement with power (Luke 24:49). In a sense, the power may have come with the Spirit and the Spirit might be considered the power. (Stanley M. Horton, What the Bible says about the Holy Spirit, p.116,140,160)

     To write of the “overflow of the Spirit” treats the Holy Spirit as an object, water. To write “The Spirit was already working in their lives” is right since the Spirit is treated as God. The note “the Spirit might be considered the power” is thoroughly unbiblical. The Spirit is the source of the power. The Spirit is not simply the power, but the Person of power. If “the Spirit might be considered the power” were to be accepted as biblical truth, it would become absolutely impossible to construct a correct doctrine of the Holy Spirit. Stanley M. Horton continues:

What Micah says about his call was undoubtedly true of all genuine prophets of God: “I am full of power by [even] the spirit of the Lord, and of judgment [justice including right decisions], and of might [courageous strength], to declare unto Jacob his transgression (rebellion, guilt), and to Israel his sin” (Micah 3:8). In the midst of a corrupt society God filled him with His Spirit so he could see what was right before God and what was wrong. Then the Spirit gave him the power, courage, and strength to come to grips with the situation. (Compare John 16:8).
The Spirit drove Him. He was already full of the Spirit. For 40 days the Spirit continued to guide Him. Still identifying himself with us as a Spirit-filled Man. As the Spirit filled Micah so he could warn against sin (Micah 3:8), so the Holy Spirit filled Jesus and sent Him immediately into the battle against sin and Satan. Jesus was not filled with the Spirit just to do miracles, but to prepare Him to do all God’s work. He was given the Spirit without measure because He was sent to speak the words of God and because the Father, in love for Him, has given Him all things (John 3:34,35). They will be filled with the Spirit who will give both wisdom and the words to bring a testimony that will glorify Jesus. (Stanley M. Horton, What the Bible says about the Holy Spirit, p.58,93,94,107)

     The note “God filled him with His Spirit” is quite incorrect, but “the Spirit gave him the power” is correct. “God filled him with His Spirit” must be revised to read, “God filled him with the power of His Spirit.” To write “the spirit,” as in “I am full of power by [even] the spirit of the Lord” does not speak of the Holy Spirit. It would better read, “I am full of power by [even] the Spirit of the Lord.” The notes “the Spirit filled Micah,” and “the Holy Spirit filled Jesus” are better understood when written, “the Spirit filled Micah with power,” and “the Holy Spirit filled Jesus with power.” Micah 3:8 testifies that God filled Micah with the power of His Spirit.
     The note, “Jesus was not filled with the Spirit just to do miracles, but to prepare Him to do all God’s work,” is also corrupt. It should read, “Jesus was filled with the power of the Spirit to do all God’s work, that is, to preach the gospel with power of miracles.” “They will be filled with the Spirit who will give both wisdom and the words to bring a testimony that will glorify Jesus,” is a mixture of truth and error. “They will be filled with the Spirit” is quite erroneous, but “the Spirit who will give both wisdom and the words” is correct. “They will be filled with the Spirit” is from the mistranslation of Acts 2:4. The following sentence, “They will be filled with the Spirit who will give both wisdom and the words to bring a testimony that will glorify Jesus,” needs to be revised to read, “They will be filled with the wisdom and words given by the Spirit to bring a testimony that will glorify Jesus.” That would be an excellent interpretation.  

Guy P. Duffield and N.M. Van Cleave themselves are in great confusion.

Some false teachers, beginning in apostle times, have doubted or denied the Personality of the Holy Spirit, thinking of Him as a force or influence exerted by God, rather than a Person. This tendency may derive in part from the word “spirit,” from the Latin spiritus which means “breath.” The Greek word pneuma, and the Hebrew word ruach both have the same meaning of “breath” or “wind,” as well as “spirit.” If one thinks of the Holy Spirit as merely the “breath” or “force” of God, then He could be conceived of as impersonal, and not a Being having separate identity from the Father. (Guy P. Duffield/N.M. Van Cleave, Foundations of Pentecostal Theology, p.107)

     The note is correct since neither Guy P. Duffield nor N. M. Van Cleave present the Holy Spirit as merely the “breath” or “force” of God but as God. But the following statements are in great confusion.  Duffield and Van Cleave continue:

On the day of Pentecost, a “rushing mighty wind” is associated with the Holy Spirit’s outpouring (Acts 2:2). On the day of Pentecost, Peter said they were filled with the Spirit prophesied by the prophet Joel (Acts 2:13-15). (Ibid., p.114.) The fullness of the Holy Spirit through faith. (Ibid., p.216). The Holy Spirit baptizes and infills believers, giving power for service. (Ibid., p.281.) The Holy Spirit gives power for preaching the Word of God. Effective preaching of the Gospel must be under the anointing of the Holy Spirit. Note the ignorance of the disciples before they received the infilling of the Spirit. (Ibid., p.283.) The gifts of the Spirit are bestowed by the Holy Spirit. The bestowal of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost was “suddenly.” And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance (Acts 2:4). (Ibid., p.297.)

…in other churches who enjoy the fullness of this blessing. The Baptism with the Holy Ghost is the second of the four cardinal truths upon which the Foursquare Gospel is found–Jesus Christ the Baptizer with the Holy Ghost. (Ibid., p.304.) The Spirit was poured out after the Day of Pentecost. (Ibid., p.307.) Jesus was anointed with the Holy Ghost before He began His public ministry. (Ibid., p.308.) The believer needs the fullness of the power of the Holy Spirit upon his life. (Ibid., p.309.) Believers today may have the same power through the fullness of God’s Holy Spirit. (Ibid., p.310.) An examination of every passage in the book of Acts, which mentions the Holy Spirit baptism. (Ibid., p.318.) as one follows on in the Spirit–filled life. (Ibid., p.323.)

     In some phrases (“the Holy Spirit’s outpouring,” “filled with the Spirit,” “the fullness of the Holy Spirit,” “the anointing of the Holy Spirit,” “the infilling of the Spirit,” “the baptism with the Holy Ghost,” “Jesus Christ the Baptizer with the Holy Ghost,” “the Holy Spirit was poured out,” “anointed with the Holy Ghost,” “the fullness of God’s Holy Spirit”), the Holy Spirit is not honored as God and a divine Person. In these instances it can be said that Guy P. Duffield and N.M. Van Cleave mistakenly present the Holy Spirit as merely the “breath” or “force” of God. But in other notes (“The Holy Spirit baptizes and infills believers,” “the Holy Spirit gives power,” “the gifts of the Spirit are bestowed by the Holy Spirit,” “the Spirit gave them utterance,” “the fullness of the power of the Holy Spirit”), the Holy Spirit is recognized as God and a divine Person. Again, to use the termi- nology “the baptism with the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit baptism” is thoroughly unbiblical. Neither do these expressions (“as one follows on in the Spirit-filled life,” “the Spirit-filled life”) treat the Spirit as God and a divine Person. If the phrase “the Spirit-filled life” be applied consistently to the doctrine of the Trinity, we should also speak of a “God-filled life” or “Jesus-filled life.” That does not make sense.

     Such a phrase as “the Spirit-filled life” is thoroughly inaccurate. It is correct to speak of “the Spirit’s power-filled life.” Therefore the above mentioned statements of  Guy  P. Duffield and N.M. Van Cleave confirm that they themselves have great confusion and inconsistency in their works.

H. Orton Wiley and Paul T. Culbertson comment on Acts 2:4.

    Wherefore by ye unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is. And be not with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit (Eph. 5:17-18). This refers to the promised gift of the Holy Spirit, which the disciples received at Pentecost and of whom it is said, they were all filled with the Spirit. The implication is that the disciples had some measure of the Spirit prior to Pentecost, but that a cleansing was mandatory to the complete infilling of the Holy Spirit. (H. Orton Wiley and Paul T. Culbertson, Introduction to Christian Theology, Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1964, p.306.)

     This note mistakenly accepts the translations of Eph. 5:18 and Acts 2:4. In the note, “the disciples had some measure of the Spirit prior to Pentecost and the complete infilling of the Holy Spirit,” the Spirit is not treated as God the Spirit but some type of material like water.

Frederick D. Bruner inconsistently treats the Spirit as God and also not as God.

The gift of God is the filling of God. Finally, the Holy Spirit is a person, therefore where he is, he is fully, and not two-thirds or three-quarters. But every reception of the Spirit is, in Luke’s teaching, a filling of the Spirit. To be filled with the Holy Spirit is to want others to know God’s deeds in Christ. The Spirit of God is the Spirit of God, i.e., a gift. Paul wishes to emphasize that Christians are not only baptized by the Spirit (1 Cor 12:13), but they are at the same time filled with him. He fills their innermost being. (Frederick D. Bruner, A Thelogy of the Holy Spirit, p.163-4,294.)
 
     When we examine this sentence “The gift of God is the filling of God,” we find it is in great error because “God” in “the filling of God” is not treated as God. The note “the Holy Spirit is a person” is correct. The words “a filling of the Holy Spirit” are quite erroneous. To say “they are filled with him” makes no sense at all. Overwhelmingly, all Christian scholars inconsistently accept the Holy Spirit not only as God but also as an object like water or an abstract noun like spiritual power. These writings are inconsistent, confusing and contradictory. The Holy Spirit must be always accepted as God the Holy Spirit, a divine Person and a proper name.

Robert Gromacki inconsistently treats the Spirit as God and also not as God.

When the Spirit of God controls us, we will be full of Christ, not full of ourselves. From His baptism, Christ was full of the Holy Spirit in all He did. (Ibid., p.466.) Speaking in tongues was an outward evidence that the Gentiles were truly saved and filled by the Spirit. (Ibid., p.483.) On the Day of Pentecost the apostles were all filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:4). (Ibid., p.485.) We are filled with the Spirit…The Holy Spirit fills us when we understand and apply the Scriptures to our lives…Sprit-filled believer…a Spirit-controlled saint …The Sprit-filled believers… (Robert Gromacki, The Holy Spirit, p.462,483,485,502.)

     This note expresses a great confusion. “We will be full of Christ” and “Christ was full of the Holy Spirit” are inaccurate. Neither treats Christ nor the Holy Spirit as God. It should read, “We will be full of the power of Christ” and “Christ was full of the power of the Holy Spirit.” The note “the Gentiles were filled by the Spirit,” does not treat the Spirit as an element but as God the Spirit and a divine Person. But in the note “the apostles were all filled with the Spirit,” the Spirit is not treated as God the Holy Spirit but as an element like water. The words “Spirit-filled believer” and “a Spirit-controlled saint” are quite inaccurate since “Spirit” and “a Spirit” is not God the Spirit and a divine Person. If one does not accept the Holy Spirit as God the Holy Spirit and a divine Person, it is absolutely impossible to translate correctly or to comprehend the Holy Spirit. Gromacki continues:

 pimplemi and pletho, lengthened forms of pleo, are used of both mundane and spiritual fillings. A wedding was filled with guests (Matt. 22:10), a sponge was filled with vinegar (27:48), a time period was filled or accomplished (Luke 1:23,57; 2:6, 21-22), and boats were filled with fish (5:7). In addition, people were filled with fear (5:26), rage (6:11), awe (Acts 3:10), indignation (5:17), envy (13:45), confusion (19:29). The above verbs also describe those who were filled with the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:15,41,67; Acts 2:4; 4:8,31; 9:17; 13:9). Another key verb, pleroo, is translated “to fill” or “to fulfill.” The verb pleroo also is used of being filled with wisdom (Luke 2:40), joy, (John 15:11), sorrow (16:6), unrighteousness (Rom. 1:29), peace (15:13), knowledge (15:14), comfort (2 Cor.7:4), and the fruits of righteousness (Phil. 1:11). Filling can happen in several ways. What is empty can be filled from outside, or a filling can originate from within a person, such as being filled with anger or fear. Does the Holy Spirit fill a believer from outside or within him? Since the Spirit began to dwell within a believer at conversion. He must consequently fill from within. (Robert Gromacki, p.501.)

     This statement is a mixture of both correct and erroneous elements. The note “boats were filled with fish, and people were filled with fear, rage, awe, peace, and wisdom” is right, but such expressions as “Believers were filled with the Holy Spirit,” and “Does the Holy Spirit fill a believer from outside or within him, that is, the Holy Spirit fills a believer?” add great confusion. The note “the Holy Spirit fills a believer” would make better sense if it were completed as “the Holy Spirit fills a believer with power.” The note, “Believers were filled with the Holy Spirit” is thoroughly erroneous. It is impossible for this passive voice to transform into an active voice. Henry W. Holloman insists that to be Spirit-filled is to be Spirit-controlled. (Henry W. Holloman, Sanctification, in Understanding Christian Theology, 996.) This statement is unbiblical. It should be noted that to be filled with the power of the Spirit is to receive the power of the Spirit.  

Chuck Smith inconsistently treats the Spirit as God and also not as God.

The Holy Spirit is God Himself, a Person. He is not merely an impersonal force or power or essence within the universe, but He is rather a Person who can speak to you and to whom you can speak. (Chuck Smith, Living Water, p.13.) 

     This note is right and thoroughly biblical. Without a single exception, it must be applied to every word of God in the Bible. Chuck Smith continues:

Acts 2 describes how God fulfilled His promise to baptize His children with the Holy Spirit…and all the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues. A certain disciples named Ananias said, “Brother Saul…you may receive your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 9:17). Note that Paul’s filling with the Spirit was subsequent to, and distinct from, his conversion on the road to Damascus. (Ibid., p.263-264.)
In Acts 9, the Holy Spirit was imparted by Ananias, “a nobody”, a common believer from Damascus. (Ibid., p.266). So be open. Don’t try to pattern God. Just experience His dynamic power in your life to be what God wants you to be….We need so urgently to wait upon God until we overflow with His Holy Spirit…God has filled us with His Spirit. As you ask the Lord to fill you with His Spirit…When a person is overflowing with the Spirit…But This outflow of the Spirit from our lives …a life overflowing with power and the love of the Holy Spirit....Allow the mighty dynamic of the Spirit to be released in your life.…who is walking in the fullness of the Spirit…One morning I cut off a tree limb filled with several apples. (Ibid., p.267~291)
 
     In these notes, the Holy Spirit is not treated as God Himself and a Person but as an impersonal force or power or essence. For instance, in many expressions (“God baptizes His children with the Holy Spirit.” “All the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit.” “Paul’s filling with the Spirit.” “The Holy Spirit was imparted by Ananias.” “We overflow with His Holy Spirit.” “God has filled us with His Spirit” and “who is walking in the fullness of the Spirit.”), the Holy Spirit is not treated as God Himself and a Person but as an impersonal force or power or essence, so Chuck Smith himself is in great contradiction. Small but significant changes would make these expressions thoroughly biblical (“God baptizes His children with the fire (power) of the Holy Spirit.” “All the disciples were filled with the power of the Holy Spirit.” “Paul’s filling with the power of the Spirit.” “The power of the Holy Spirit was imparted by Ananias.” “We overflow with the power of His Holy Spirit”).

     To write, “I cut off a tree limb filled with several apples” is grammatically correct. The phrase [fill with  +  several apples] is right, but the phrase [fill with  +  a personal name, the Holy Spirit] makes no sense in the Scripture since the Holy Spirit is God Himself and a divine Person.
 

The spirit of Ex. 28:3 in the English version is distinct from the Spirit.

Ex. 28:3  And thou shalt speak unto all that are wise hearted, whom I have filled with the spirit of wisdom, that they may make Aaron’s gar- ments to consecrate him, that he may minister unto me in the priest’s office. (KJV)

NKJ      So you shall speak to all who are gifted artisans, whom I have filled with the spirit of wisdom, that they may make Aaron’s garments, to consecrate him, that he may minister to Me as priest.
NIV      Tell all the skilled men to whom I have given wisdom in such mat- ters that they are to make garments for Aaron, for his consecration, so he may serve me as priest.

     The KJV and NKJ say, “I have filled them with the spirit of wisdom.” As noted already, the word “the spirit” is quite distinct from the Spirit. “I have filled them with the spirit of wisdom” does not make sense. Bu it will make sense when translated as “I have filled them with the wisdom of the Spirit.” Then, the Spirit is treated as God the Spirit. The text means that God has filled them with the wisdom of the Spirit. The phrase “I have given wisdom” of the NIV should be inferred to mean “I have given them wisdom by the Spirit” or “I have given them the wisdom of the Spirit.”  

The Spirit of Ex. 31:3-6 in the English version is not treated as God the Spirit.

Ex. 31:3-6   and I have filled him with the Spirit of God, with skill, ability and knowledge in all kinds of crafts–to make artistic designs for work in gold, silver and bronze, to cut and set stones, to work in wood, and to engage in all kinds of craftsmanship. Moreover, I have appointed Oholiab son of Ahisamach, of the tribe of Dan, to help him. Also I have given skill to all the craftsmen to make everything I have commanded you. (NIV)  

     The phrase “I have filled them with the Spirit of God, with skill, ability and knowledge” should be read that God has filled them with skill, ability and know- ledge given by the Spirit because in the phrase (“I have filled him with the Spirit of God”) the Spirit is not treated as God. Here, it can simply be concluded that they were filled with the skill by the Spirit of God. The doctrine of the Holy Spirit of the OT must be the same as that of the NT.

Stanley M. Horton accepts the mistranslation of Ex. 31:3 as authentic.

God promised to fill two men, Bezaleel and Aholiab, with the Spirit to sharpen their own skills and to enable them to teach others also (Exodus 31:2,3; 35:30,31). This filling with the Spirit would be the source of “wisdom, understanding, knowledge, and all manner of workmanship.” In other words, the Spirit would supply them with supernatural help in connection with the practical tasks of preparing materials for the tabernacle that would be both useful and beautiful. Wisdom in the Old Testament usually means practical wisdom and skill that makes it possible to reach your goals. Understanding usually includes insight and intelligent decisions. Knowledge includes “know-how” that sees what needs to be done and how best to do it. All this came from the Spirit. Bezaleel and Aholiab were not to depend on their natural abilities and skills alone. They would still work hard, but at the same time they would depend on the Spirit and receive help from Him. Note, however, that not all the workers were filled-only those two who were specially named and chosen by the Lord. (Stanley M. Horton, What the Bible says about the Holy Spirit, p.26.)

     Horton’s argument is a mixture of correct and erroneous elements since he accepts the mistranslation of “God filled two men with the Spirit” as authentic. The phrase “God filled two men with the Spirit” makes no sense since the Spirit is not treated as God and a divine Person. It should be inferred that the word wisdom is here omitted.

     Therefore, it must be translated and interpreted, “God filled two men with the wisdom of the Spirit.” This additional note makes no sense when the Spirit is not treated as God: “This filling with the Spirit would be the source of wisdom.” It should be “this filling with the wisdom of the Spirit, and the Spirit would be the source of wisdom.”

The spirit of Deut. 34:9 is distinct from the Spirit.

Deut. 34:9  Now Joshua son of Nun was filled with the spirit of wisdom because Moses had laid his hands on him. (NIV)
NKJ            Now Joshua the son of Nun was full of the spirit of wisdom, for Moses had laid his hands on him.

     The translations (“Joshua was filled with the spirit of wisdom” or “Joshua was full of the spirit of wisdom”) make no sense since the spirit does not mean the Spirit. Without a single exception, the Spirit must be treated as God, as noted already. So it should be inferred “Joshua son of Nun was filled with the wisdom of the Spirit, or Joshua the son of Nun was full of the wisdom of the Spirit.” Then, the Spirit is effectively treated as God the Spirit and a divine Person.  

If Matt. 10:29 is carefully examined, it is possible to translate Acts 2:4.

Matt.10:29    οὐχὶ δύο στρουθία ἀσσαρίου πωλεῖται; καὶ ἓν ἐξ αὐτῶν οὐ πεσεῖται ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν ἄνευ τοῦ πατρὸς ὑμῶν.(BNT)
KJV             Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? And one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father.
NKJ             Are not two sparrows sold for a copper coin? And not one of them falls to the ground apart from your Father’s will.
NIV              Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father.
TNIV           Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground outside your Father’s care.
RSV             Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? And not one of them will fall to the ground without your Father’s will.
NRS             Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father.
ASV             Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? And not one of them shall fall on the ground without your Father.
NAS             Are not two sparrows sold for a cent? And yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father.
ESV             Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? And not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father.
YLT             Are not two sparrows sold for an assar? And one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father.
DRA            Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? And not one of them shall fall on the ground without your Father.
DBY            Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall to the ground without your Father;
GWN           Aren't two sparrows sold for a penny? Not one of them will fall to the ground without your Father's permission.
GNV            Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing, and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father?
TEV             Yet not one sparrow falls to….without your Father’s consent.
NEB             Are not sparrows two a penny? Yet without your Father’s leave not one of them can fall to the ground.
NLT             Not even a sparrow, worth only half a penny, can fall to the ground without your Father knowing it.
NJB              Can you not buy two sparrows for a penny? And yet not one falls to the ground without your Father knowing.
NAB            Are not two sparrows sold for a small coin? Yet not one of them falls to the ground without your Father’s knowledge.

     The Greek text of Matt. 10:29 lacks the term “will.” The KJV translates it just as in the original Greek text, but without the word “will” it makes no sense. Therefore, the NKJ translators, to clarify the meaning, added the word “will” in Matt. 12:50. This translation is excellent. This principle of translation must be applied to the texts in [the verb pimplemi (pi,mplhmi pletho) + the genitive pneumatos hagiou (πνεύματος ἁγίου)] in Acts 2:4 and [the verb pleroo) + the genitive noun] and [the adjective pleres  + pneumatos hagiou (πνεύματος ἁγίου)] in Luke 4:1 and [the noun pleroma + the genitive noun]. However, the translators of the NKJ, NIV, and RSV do not apply the principle applied to Matt. 10:29 to these passages (Acts 2:4; Luke 4:1). So without a single exception, all English versions are inconsistent, and this inconsistency misleads those who would construct a proper doctrine of the Holy Spirit. It is a significant principle of translation that all translations must be sensible and consistent. If not, it is a mistranslation. Matt. 10:29 reveals one of many omissions in the Bible. The omitted words must be found to translate correctly.  

     For example, the translations of Matt. 10:29 of the KJV, NKJ, NIV, and RSV are excellent, but their translations of  Luke 4:1, Acts 2:4 and Eph. 5:18 are thoroughly inaccurate. If one does not wish to add the word “will” to Matt. 10:29, it should be noted in the footnote for readers. The principle of translation for Matt. 10:29 must be applied consistently to all the Bible. Where this principle is not applied the translation will be inconsistent and leads to confusion. Without the consistency of translation, it is impossible to grasp God’s meaning with clarity. The KJV, NKJ, NIV, and RSV translators do not apply the same consistent principle of translation to both Matt. 10:29 and Acts 2:4. This inconsistency makes the doctrine of the Spirit inconsistent. Unfortunately, without a single exception, all scholars, all pastors, and all teachers in all Christian society have accepted the mistranslation of Acts 2:4 (“They were all filled with the Holy Spirit”) as authentic. However, according to the principle of translation of Matt.10:29, Acts 2:4 must be translated either, “They were all filled with of the Holy Spirit,” or “They were all filled with the power of the Holy Spirit.” The Holy Spirit in the Greek text of Acts 2:4 is not in the dative but the genitive pneumatos (πνεύματος ἁγίου,  of the Holy Spirit). The translation of Acts 2:4 must be consistent with that of Matt.10:29.

The usage of omission in John 6:11-26 must be examined to understand that of Acts 2:4. 

John 6:11-26  Jesus took the loaves, and when He had given thanks He distributed them to the disciples, and the disciples to those sitting down; and likewise of the fish, as much as they wanted. So when they were filled, He said to His disciples, “Gather up the fragments that remain, so that nothing is lost.” Therefore they gathered them up, and filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the five barley loaves which were left over by those who had eaten....Jesus answered them and said, “Most assuredly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw the signs, but because you did eat of the loaves and were filled.” (KJV)

John 6:26  ἐφάγετε ἐκ τῶν ἄρτων  (BNT)
KJV       you did eat of the loaves.
NKJ       you ate of the loaves.
NIV       you ate the loaves             
TNIV     you ate the loaves.       
NRS      you ate your fill of the loaves.
NAS      you ate of the loaves.
NET       you ate all the loaves of bread.
TEV       you ate the bread.

     The Greek accusative verb ephagete (ἐφάγετε, ate) in John 6:26 requires an accusative noun. The Greek ek ton arton (ἐκ τῶν ἄρτων,  of the loaves) is here not in an accusative noun but a genitive noun. The KJV, NKJ, and NAS translate the passage as the original Greek text. The phrase “you ate of the loaves” is awkward, therefore, the NIV, TNIV and TEV removed the preposition “of” that is in the Greek text. Instead of taking away “of,” the RSV and NRS added the word “your fill” to make the meaning clear. The phrase “You did eat of the loaves” makes little sense in English since the verb “eat” requires an accusative noun. It must be inferred that some word has been omitted, and the omitted word must be found to make sense.

     The omitted word can be found in John 6:11-26. John 6:13 says they filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the five barley loaves. The word “the fragments” is omitted in John 6:26, so the correct translation of v. 26 should be “they ate the fragments of the five barley loaves.” The right translation must be “you ate of the loaves,” or “you ate the fragments of the loaves” to be consistent with Matt. 10:29. The KJV and NKJ translate John 6:26 as the original Greek text, but they did not translate Acts 2:4 as the original Greek text. No English version including the KJV and NKJ and NIV follows the consistent principles of trans- lation. The NKJ added the word “will” to Matt. 10:29 to clarify, but in John 6:26, the NKJ did not add the word “fragment.” So the NKJ did not translate John 6:26 according to the same principle of translation applied to Matt. 10:29. The NIV added the word “will” to Matt. 10:29 to clarify, but in John 6:26, both the NIV, TNIV, and TEV took away the Greek preposition “of” for the sake of clarity. Here, every English version inconsistently translates the Greek text. As we have already seen, all English versions take away from the word of God or add the word they like to the word of God, and they add to the word of God through their human being’s ideas. This kind of translation makes a great confusion. This inconsistency of translation has also been applied to Acts 2:4 and Eph. 5:18. As a result, all English versions incorrectly translate those passages as “They were all filled with the Holy Spirit,” or “Be filled with the Spirit.” These translations spring from the inconsistency and mistranslation of the Greek text.  

     Proverbs 30:5-6 says, “Every word of God is flawless; Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar” (NIV). Deuteronomy 12:32 says, “Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it” (NKJ). Every translator must keep this commandment foremost in mind. Every passage must be translated faithfully to the original text. If a translation makes no sense, the word that seems to be lacking must be found. Then, the omitted word could be added to the translation, or noted in the footnote. This principle must be a strict principle of translation.

The usage of omission in John 21:10 must be examined to understand that of Acts 2:4.

John 21:10    ἐνέγκατε ἀπὸ τῶν ὀψαρίων ὧν ἐπιάσατε νῦν. (BNT)
KJV             Bring of the fish which ye have now caught.
NKJ             Bring some of the fish which you have just caught.
NIV             Bring some of the fish you have just caught.
TNIV           Bring some of the fish you have just caught.

     The Greek verb enegkate (ἐνέγκατε, bring) is in an accusative verb and requires an accusative noun. But apo ton opsarion (ἀπὸ τῶν ὀψαρίων, of the fish) is not in the accusative but the genitive. The KJV translates it as “Bring of the fish which ye have now caught.” This is literally from the Greek text, but the text seems to make no sense. It does make sense when a certain word is added, so the NKJ, NIV, and TNIV added the word “some.” It is obviously correct translation. But the NKJ, NIV, and TNIV translators do not apply the same principle to the translation of Luke 4:1, Acts 2:4 and Eph. 5:18. Their translations are in great confusion and inconsistency.

The term “power” is omitted in Numbers 11:25-30.

Num. 11:25-30   The Lord came down...and spake unto him, and took of the spirit that was upon him, and gave it unto the seventy elders: and it came to pass, that, when the spirit rested upon them, they prophesied, and did not cease. But there remained two of the men in the camp, the name of the one was Eldad, and the name of the other Medad: and the spirit rested upon them;…And Moses said unto him, Enviest thou for my sake? Would God that all the Lord’s people were prophets, and that the Lord would put his spirit upon them! (KJV)

NKJ             Then the Lord came down in the cloud, and spoke to him, and took of the Spirit that was upon him, and placed the same upon the seventy elders; and it happened, when the Spirit rested upon them, that they prophesied.....the Lord would put His Spirit upon them!
NIV              The Lord took of the Spirit that was on him and put the Spirit on the seventy elders. When the Spirit rested on them, they prophesied.
GWN            He took some of the Spirit that was on Moses and put it on the 70 leaders. When the Spirit came to rest on them, they prophesied, but they never prophesied again.
NRS              The Lord took some of the spirit that was on him and put it on the seventy elders; and when the spirit rested upon them, they prophesied.
NAS              He took of the Spirit who was on him and placed Him upon the se- venty elders. When the Spirit rested upon them, they prophesied.
TEV              He took some of the spirit he had given to Moses and gave it to the seventy elders. When the spirit came on them, they began to shout like prophets.

     All these translations could be simply summarized as follows:

The Lord took of the spirit that was upon him put his spirit upon them. (KJV)
The Lord took some of the spirit that was on him and put it on them. (NRS)
The Lord took of the Spirit that was on him and put the Spirit on (NKJ, NIV)
The Lord took the Spirit who was on him and placed Him on them. (NAS)

     Each of these phrases is different from the other. In “the Lord took some of the spirit that was on him and put it on them,” the words “the spirit” and “it” do not refer to God the Spirit as they were intended, but to some material or abstract thing. So the phrase “The Lord took some of the spirit that was on him and put it on them” is a mistranslation. The KJV, RSV, NRS, and TEV translate incorrectly it as “the spirit,” but the NKJ and NIV do correctly as “the Spirit.” It must be “the Spirit.”

Num. 11:25  κύριος παρείλατο ἀπὸ τοῦ πνεύματος τοῦ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ  (LXX )
The Lord took of the Spirit that was on him.
The Lord took some of the Spirit that was on him.
The Lord took the Spirit who was on him.

     The verb pareilato (παρείλατο, took) requires an accusative noun. The word “of the Spirit (apo tou pneumatos, ἀπὸ τοῦ πνεύματος ) is in the genitive. Therefore, “the Lord took of the Spirit” is a correct translation. The phrase “take of the Spirit” is quite different from “take the Spirit.” For example compare, “A mother took her child” and “A mother took of her child.” Here, “A mother took of her child” must be inferred that some word is omitted just as in John 21:10. Likewise, in the phrase “the Lord took of the Spirit,” some word is omitted. The RSV, NRS and TEV add the word “some,” but it is incorrect since the word “power” is omitted. How do we know that the word “power” is omitted? The answer is found in considering the following phrase, “The Lord took the power of the Spirit that was on Moses” to be consistent with Matt. 10:29. The NKJ and NIV added the word “will” to Matt. 10:29 to make sense, but here the NKJ and NIV do not add any word to Numbers 11:25. So their translations are inconsistent.

Deut. 34:10-12  Since then, no prophet has risen in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face, who did all those miraculous signs and wonders the Lord sent him to do in Egypt - to Pharaoh and to all his officials and to his whole land. For no one has ever shown the mighty power or performed the awesome deeds that Moses did in the sight of all Israel. (NIV)

     Here, “Moses did all those miraculous signs and wonders” means that Moses did those signs and wonders with the mighty power of the Spirit of God. Romans 15:18-19 should be read to understand Deut. 34:10-12.

Romans 15:18-19  I will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me in leading the Gentiles to obey God by what I have said and done-by the power of signs and miracles, through the power of the Spirit. (NIV)

     The apostle Paul did the signs and miracles through the power of the Spirit. So did Moses. Therefore, “the power of doing these signs” in Rom. 15:18-19 must mean the power of the Spirit. Moses received the power of the Spirit at Horeb the mountain of God when God came on him in fire (Ex. 3:1-22; 4:1-17). The phrase “The Spirit was on Moses” means “the power of the Spirit was on Moses.” The reason “the Spirit was on Moses” (See Numbers 11:25) was because the power of the Spirit was on him. This will be examined more closely later.

     If “When the Spirit rested on them, they prophesied” (Num. 11:25b) is reworded, the meaning (“The Lord took of the Spirit that was on him and put the Spirit on the seventy elders” in Num. 11:25a) is simply understood. This text (“When the Spirit rested on them, they prophesied”) is the same structure as found in Acts 19:6-7 (“When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. There were about twelve men in all”-NIV). The 12 believers at Ephesus were filled with the power of the Holy Spirit when He came on them. At that time they received the power, that is, the gift of the Holy Spirit. Likewise, the seventy elders of Numbers 11:25 received the power, that is, gift of the Holy Spirit when He came on them. This confirms that Numbers 11:25 should be inferred to mean that the Lord took the power of the Spirit that was on Moses and put the same power of the Spirit on the seventy elders. Therefore, “the Lord took of the Spirit that was on Moses” means that the Lord took the power of the Spirit that was on Moses.

What dose it mean, “the Lord put the Spirit on the seventy elders” in Num. 11:25?

Num. 11:25   The Lord put the Spirit on the seventy elders. (NIV)
Is. 42:1          Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen one in whom I de- light; I will put my Spirit on him and he will bring justice to the nations. (NIV)
Luke 3:22      and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice came from heaven: “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.” (NIV)
Luke 4:1        Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan (NIV)
Luke 4:14      Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit. (NIV)
Luke 4:18      The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. (NIV)
Acts 10:38     how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power. (NIV)

     To understand the phrase “I will put my Spirit on him” in Isaiah 42:1, we must examine Numbers 11:25. The phrase “I will put my Spirit on him” in Isaiah 42:1 means that God will put the Spirit of God on Jesus. This phrase is explained by Luke 3:22, 4:1, 4:14, 4:18 and Acts 10:38. These phrases clearly state that God put the power of the Spirit on Jesus. Therefore all the records of the Bible cited above confirm that the word “power” is omitted in the phrase “The Lord took of the Spirit that was on him” in Numbers 11:25. So it must be inferred that the Lord took the power of the Spirit that was on Moses and put the power of the Spirit on the seventy elders. Let’s examine one example.

Matt. 10:1     He called his twelve disciples to him and gave them authority to drive out evil spirits and to heal every disease and sickness. (NIV)
Luke 4:36     All the people were amazed and said to each other, “What is this teaching? With authority and power he gives orders to evil spirits and they come out!” (NIV)
Luke 9:1       When Jesus had called the Twelve together, he gave them power and authority to drive out all demons and to cure diseases. (NIV)
Luke 10:19    I have given you authority to trample on snakes and scorpions and to overcome all the power of the enemy. (NIV)
Mark 3:14-15 He appointed twelve–designating them apostles–that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach and to have authority to drive out demons. (NIV)

     God gave Jesus the power of the Holy Spirit. Jesus also gave the power of the Holy Spirit to his disciples to help him. Just like this case of Jesus, God had given the power of the Spirit to Moses and then also to the 70 elders to assist him. These facts confirm that the Lord took the power of the Spirit that was on Moses and put the power of the Spirit on the 70 elders.

What does it mean, “Do not take Your Holy Spirit from me” in Ps. 51:11?

Ps. 51:11 Ps. 51:11 Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me. (KJV)              
NKJ        Do not cast me away from Your presence, And do not take Your Holy Spirit from me.
NIV        Do not cast me from your presence or take your Holy Spirit from me. 

     What does Ps. 51:11 mean, “Do not take Your Holy Spirit from me”? To answer to the question it must be understood that the phrase “the Holy Spirit comes on you” means that you receive the power of the Holy Spirit. (See the detailed discussion on “the Holy Spirit is in you and comes on you.”)

Luke 1:35      And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee. (KJV)

     This passage means that the Virgin Mary received the power of the Holy Spirit when He came on her. The Holy Spirit gave her His power.

Acts 1:8     You will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you. (NIV)

     The text means that believers will receive the power of the Holy Spirit when He comes on them. The Holy Spirit will give them His power.

Luke 3:22     And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased. (KJV)
Luke 4:14     And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee. (KJV)
Luke 4:18     The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor. (KJV)
Luke 10:38   How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppre- ssed of the devil; for God was with him. (KJV)

     These passages mean that Jesus Christ received the power of the Spirit when He came on Jesus. The Spirit gave His power to Jesus when He came on Jesus.

1 Sam. 16:13 Then Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the midst of his brothers; and the Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward. (KJV)

     There is a proverbial “give and take” in human society. A thing which is given is to be taken; the thing taken should be something given. What is given, ideally will also be taken. God gave His Spirit to David. There is no description of how God gave His Spirit to David. Instead, 1 Sam. 16:13 says, “The Spirit of the Lord came upon David.” This is the same as saying that God gave His Spirit to David. The phrase “The Spirit came on David” infers that David received the power of the Spirit. (See the detailed discussion on “the Holy Spirit is in you and comes on you.”)

     Therefore, “God gave His Spirit to David” means that God gave the power of the Spirit to David. David realized that God who gave the power of the Spirit to him could take that power from him. “Do not take Your Holy Spirit from David” is David’s plea to God: “Do not take the power of God’s Holy Spirit from me.” “Do not cast me away from your presence” reminds us that David received the authority and power of the kingship from God. This happened when the Holy Spirit of God came on David through anointing with oil by the prophet Samuel.

2 Sam. 12:9-13  Why have you despised the commandment of the Lord, to do evil in His sight? You have killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword; you have taken his wife to be your wife, and have killed him with the sword of the people of Ammon. ‘Now therefore, the sword shall never depart from your house, because you have despised Me, and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife.’ Thus says the Lord: ‘Behold, I will raise up adversity against you from your own house; and I will take your wives before your eyes and give them to your neighbor, and he shall lie with your wives in the sight of this sun. For you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel, before the sun.’ Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.” (NKJ)

     After becoming the king of Israel, David sinned against the Lord. After listening to Nathan concerning his sin, David prayed to God “Do not cast me away from Your presence. And do not take Your Holy Spirit from me” (Ps. 51:11). It is clear that God could have cast David away from his God-given kingship. God could have taken away the power given by the Holy Spirit because he sinned against God. So “Do not take Your Holy Spirit from me” should be inferred to mean “Do not take the power of Your Holy Spirit from me.”

What does it mean, “The Spirit departed from Saul” in 1 Sam. 16:14?

1 Sam. 10:10 And when they came thither to the hill, behold, a company of pro- phets met him; and the Spirit of God came upon him, and he pro- phesied among them. (KJV)
1 Sam. 16:14 The Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the Lord troubled him. (KJV)
Num. 11:25   The Lord came down in the cloud, and spoke to him, and took of the Spirit that was upon him, and placed the same upon the seventy elders; and it happened, when the Spirit rested upon them, that they prophesied, although they never did so again. (NKJ)

     “The Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul.” The verb “depart” in 1 Sam. 16:14 is used with the verb “come” in 1 Sam. 10:10. The phrase “the Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul” means that the Spirit who came on King Saul departed from him. “The Spirit came on him” tells us that Saul received the power of the Spirit. Therefore, the phrase “The Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul” means that which God gave, which Saul received, God removed.

What does it mean, “When the Spirit rested on them, they prophesied” in Num. 11:25?

Num. 11:25   When the Spirit rested on them, they prophesied. (NIV)  
Acts 19:6       The Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. (NIV)  
Acts 1:8         But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you.  
Acts 2:3-4     They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. All of them were filled with (* the power of) the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them. (NIV)  

     Both Acts 2:3-4 and Acts 19:6 can be summarized: “When the Holy Spirit rested on them, they were filled with the power of the Spirit, and they received the power of the Spirit, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied.” The 120 disciples of Jesus received the power of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost through the Holy Spirit sent by Jesus. The 12 disciples at Ephesus received the power of the Holy Spirit by placing Paul’s hands. Moses and the 70 elders also received the power of the Spirit through God. What does it mean, “When the Spirit rested on them, they prophesied”? They received the power of the Spirit when the Holy Spirit came on them and they prophesied. By the phrase “They prophesied” we understand that they received the power of the Spirit or the gift of prophecy by the Holy Spirit written of in 1 Cor. 12:10.

1 Sam. 16:13 and Luke 4:18 show the usage of omission.

1 Sam. 16:13 Then Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the midst of his brothers; and the Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward. (NKJ)
Luke 4:18      The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He has anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor. (NKJ)
Acts 10:38     how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power, who went about doing good and healing all who were opp- ressed by the devil, for God was with Him. (NKJ)

     1 Sam. 16:12 says the Lord’s word to Samuel: “Anoint David.” 1 Sam. 16:13 says that Samuel anointed David. The “anoint” requires the preposition “with” and a noun (like oil or power). The preposition “with” and the noun “oil” are omitted in 1 Sam. 16:13, but this passage would better read: “Anoint him with oil, and then Samuel anointed him with oil.” Luke 4:18 says that the Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He has anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor. Here, the verb “anoint” is found. And “anoint with” also can be found in Acts 10:38. So Luke 4:18 must be inferred, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He has anointed Me with the power of the Holy Spirit to preach the gospel to the poor.” It confirms the words “with the power” are omitted in Luke 4:18.

Luke 5:6-7 shows the usage of omission.

Luke 5:6-7   When they had done this, they caught a great number of fish, and their net was breaking. So they signaled to their partners in the other boat to come and help them. And they came and filled both the boats, so that they began to sink. (NKJ)

     The words “a great number of fish” in Luke 5:6 is understood as the subject of Luke 5:7. The verb “fill” (pimplhmi) necessitates the preposition “with” in English grammar. Then, v. 7 should read: “They filled both boats with a great number of fish.” The principle applied to Luke 5:6-7 must consistently be applied to Acts 1:8 and Acts 2:4 since both Acts and the Gospel of Luke were written by Luke. All English versions of Acts 2:4  are definitely in great error. If Luke 5:6-7 is not perfectly understood, it becomes impossible to translate and interpret Acts 2:4. The term “fish” in Luke 5:6 is omitted in Luke 5:7 since it is previously recorded. Likewise, the term “power” in Acts 1:8 is omitted in Acts 2:4 since this term is recorded in Acts 1:8. Therefore, Acts 2:4 must be translated and interpreted, “They were all filled with the power of the Holy Spirit.” If the principle of translation and interpretation on the usage of an omission is not understood, it is impossible to construct the doctrine of the Holy Spirit.

Luke 11:13 and Matt. 7:11 show the usage of omission.

Luke 11:13   If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him! (NIV)     
Matt. 7:11     If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! (NIV)        

     Obviously the writers of Luke 11:5-13 and of Matt. 7:7-11 are different and both passages are literally different, but both must give the same meaning since both writers describe the same teaching of Jesus. To assign different meanings to the same word of Jesus on an identical subject makes no sense at all. Therefore, both meanings must be same and consistent. The reason these passages seem different is caused by the usage of an omission.  

     Both must be examined together with Luke 5:6-7 and Matt. 10:29 since the usage of the omission is found here. “How much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” This translation literally makes no sense. A singular proper name “the Holy Spirit” is used of a plural, material noun like eggs. The terms “much more” are surely used of plural. The Holy Spirit is not a material noun like egg. Neither is the Holy Spirit a plural noun. The word of Jesus as translated in Luke 11:13 makes surely sense because the term “good gifts” is included. Therefore, it (“good gifts”) must be added to the text to make proper sense.

     So it will be the flawless word of God. According to the literal description of Matt. 7:11, the phrase “How much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!” makes perfect sense. But the meaning seems different from Luke 11:13. We must conclude both have the same meaning. If the missing words included in Luke 11:13 are introduced to Matt. 7:11, it will be the same. Matt. 7:11 must be translated as follows to be consistent with Luke 11:13. Since every word of God is flawless, both passages must be translated and interpreted as having the same meaning.

Luke 11:13   If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts of the Holy Spirit to those who ask him! (Author)
Matt. 7:11    If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts of the Holy Spirit to those who ask him! (Author)

     Sinclair B. Ferguson notes Luke 11:13, “In Luke’s writings, the Spirit is given regularly in response to prayer and in connection with the advance of the king- dom.” (Sinclair B. Ferguson, The Holy Spirit, p.45.)

     This note is quite erroneous since he accepts the Spirit as a material like egg. The note should read, “In Luke’s writings, the gifts of the Spirit are given regularly in response to prayer and in connection with the advance of the kingdom.” Harry N. Wendt comments on, “It is helpful to compare Matthew 7:11 with Luke 11:13. The good things referred to in Matthew are interpreted as the Holy Spirit in Luke.” (Harry N. Wendt, recited from Crossways International, The Divine Drama, p.137.)

     This comment is quite erroneous. Here, the Holy Spirit is referred to as “good things,” but the Holy Spirit always must be recognized as God. Without a single exception, the Holy Spirit must be not treated as a “good thing” but as God the Holy Spirit and a divine Person.

John 4:10 explains the meaning of Luke 11:13.

John 4:7-10  When a Samaritan woman came to draw water, Jesus said to her, “Will you give me a drink?” (His disciples had gone into the town to buy food.) The Samaritan woman said to him, “You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you ask me for a drink?” (For Jews do not associate with Samaritans.) Jesus answered her, “If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water.” (NIV)

     Luke 11:5-13 says, “If your son asks for three loaves of bread, a fish, and an egg, you will give it to your child, and if you ask good gifts, that is, the gifts of the Holy Spirit, your Father in heaven will give it to you” (Author). Likewise, John 4:7-10 says, “If a Samaritan woman asks Jesus for the gift of God, that is, living water, He will give her the gift of God, that is, living water.” Here, it can be inferred that Luke 11:5-13 carries the same meaning as John 4:7-10. If John 4:10 means the Samaritan woman asked Jesus for the gift of God (ten dorean tou theou), and Jesus gave God as the gift, it makes no sense. Likewise, if Luke 11:13 means that when a son of God asks for the gifts of the Holy Spirit, the heavenly Father will give him the Holy Spirit as the gifts, this makes no sense. Consequently, the phrase “how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him” (Luke 11:13) must be inferred that “the Father in heaven will give the good gifts of the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him.”

The following passages explain the meaning of Luke 11:13.

     The passages of Luke 11:9-13 could be simply summarized, “eagerly desire the gifts of the Holy Spirit, then your Father will give to you.” This is the promise of God the Father and Jesus Christ.

1 Cor. 12:31   But eagerly desire the greater gifts. And now I will show you the most excellent way. (NIV)
1 Cor. 14:1     Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy. (NIV)
1 Cor. 14:39   Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. (NIV)

     These passages could be summarized simply as “eagerly desire the gifts of the Holy Spirit, then your Father will give to you.” This is the same meaning as found in Luke 11:9-13. This affirms that “how much more will your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him” should be translated as “how much more will your heavenly Father give the gifts of the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him.” This translation is quite logical according to the Holy Spirit’s doctrine and in the usage of English grammar.

Acts 8:14-17 When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them. When they arrived, they prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit. (NIV)

Acts 19:5-7   On hearing this, they were baptized into (* eis) the name of the Lord Jesus. When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. There were about twelve men in all. (NIV)  * “into (eis)” should be “in.”

Rom. 1:11     I long to see you so that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to make you strong. (NIV)

     Why did Paul, Peter and John place their hands on the believers at Samaria and Ephesus? Why did Paul want to see the believers in Rome? These apostles desired God to give believers the gifts of the Holy Spirit. It is wise for all believers to desire eagerly the gifts of the Holy Spirit (I Cor. 14:1). The promise of Jesus Christ in Luke 11:9-13 was fulfilled literally and actually in Acts 2, 8 and 19 through His disciples, the apostle Paul, Peter and John.

John 3:34 shows the usage of omission.

 John 3:34     For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God gives the Spirit without limit. (NIV)

     We read that God gives the Spirit without limit. Here, the Spirit is treated as a material thing and not as God the Spirit. Since every word of God is flawless, we understand the usage of omission as similar to the passages mentioned above. The phrase “the words of God” is understood as omitted in “God gives the Spirit without limit.” So “the words” should be added to John 3:34 as follows: “For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God gives the words of the Spirit without limit.” Now, it can be inferred, “For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God since God gives him the words without limit through the Spirit.”

1 John 4:13 shows the usage of omission.

1 John 4:13  Ἐν τούτῳ γινώσκομεν ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ μένομεν καὶ αὐτὸς ἐν ἡμῖν, ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος αὐτοῦ δέδωκεν ἡμῖν. (BNT)
KJV         Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.
NIV         We know that we live in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit.
NAS        By this we know that we abide in Him and He in us, because He has given us of His Spirit.

     The Greek didomi (δέδωκεν, given) requires an accusative noun. Pneumatos (πνεύματος, of Spirit) is not the accusative noun but the genitive. So “He has given us of his Spirit” should be understood to mean that some word is presumed just as in John 3:34. In 1 John 4:13 the word “power” is omitted. “Because he has given us of his Spirit” should be “because he has given us the power of his Spirit.” These insights testify that the word “power” in Acts 1:8 is omitted in Acts 2:4. Acts 2:4 must be translated as the original Greek text, “They were all filled with of the Holy Spirit.” Then, it must be “They were all filled with the power of the Holy Spirit.”

Billy Graham comments on the relation between “fill” and “full.”

Two words used in the New Testament sometimes puzzle Christians: the words are full and filled. Some people make a distinction between them. I agree that there may be some distinction, but it is only minor. For instance, to be full of the Spirit seems to me to refer to the “state of being” of the believer. I think that John the Baptist and the apostle Paul were full of the Spirit all the time; that is, it was a continuous state. However, for them to be “filled with the Spirit” might also refer to a particular and occasional empowering or “anointing” for special purposes and special tasks. On occasion some of the New Testament saints God used for special assignments were said to be “filled with the Spirit.” They might not have been able to bear it if that surcharge of power filled them all the time. But in moments of great need they could bear it for a season. (Billy Graham, The Holy Spirit, p.124.)

Sinclair B. Ferguson comments on the relation between “fill” and “full.”

Luke-Acts speaks of being filled with or being full of the Spirit as an ongoing con- dition, but also describes particular occasions when individuals appear to experience distinct fillings. In the case of the former the pleroo family of word is used (e.g. Lk. 4:1; Acts 6:3; cf. Eph. 5:18); in the latter the verb pimplemi is employed (e.g. Lk. 1:41,67; Acts 2:4; 4:8,31; 9:17). In the former sense, to be filled with refers predominantly to exhibiting the fruit of the Spirit in a life that is under the lordship of the Spirit (cf. Eph. 5:18). But the latter occasions refer to a special influx of ability and power in the service of the kingdom. This is what is in view in Acts 1:8 and evidenced in Acts 2:4. Interestingly this seems to be invariably related to the speech of those whom the Spirit fills. They receive ‘power’ to be Christ’s witness. This elapse of power at Pentecost and the filling of the Spirit, while extraordinary in itself, is not seen in Acts as an isolated phenomenon, or as tied to the specific program of Acts 1:8. (Sinclair B. Ferguson, The Holy Spirit, 89.)

Michael Green comments on the relation between “fill” and “full.” 

The meaning of ‘full of the Spirit’ is therefore not hard to fathom. It signifies someone who is habitually governed and controlled by the Lord the Spirit just as Jesus was. There is no suggestion that this state is due to any particular ritual or experience. The second way in which the notion of being filled with the Spirit meets us in the Scriptures is quite different. If we look back over these references to being filled with the Spirit, what may we conclude? Surely that Christians should be full of the Spirit, as Jesus was (Luke 4:1), as Stephen was (Acts 6:5), as Barnabas was (11:24), as Seven were (6:3). This should be the continual state of the Christian, but he can look for special fillings of the Spirit in special circumstances, particularly when he has opportunity to witness for Christ. To be filled with the Spirit means to allow Jesus to have the fullest control on our lives that we are conscious of. (Michael Green, I believe in the Holy Spirit p.180-185.)

     The relations between “fill” and “full” must be examined to understand the reason “to be filled with the Spirit” comes from a mistranslation. The arguments mentioned above are from the mistranslation and misinterpretation of the Greek text. The following  passages, including Micah 3:8, show the usage of the verb “fill” and the adjective “full.” If these words are not exactly understood, it is absolutely impossible to build an accurate doctrine of the Holy Spirit.

Micah 3:8 shows the usage of the verb “fill” and the adjective “full.”

Micah 3:8     ἐὰν μὴ ἐγὼ ἐμπλήσω ἰσχὺν ἐν πνεύματι κυρίου (LXX)
KJV             But truly I am full of power by the spirit of the Lord
NKJ             But truly I am full of power by the Spirit of the Lord
NIV             But as for me, I am filled with power, with the Spirit
GWN           But I am filled with the power of the LORD's Spirit,
NRS             But as for me, I am filled with power, with the spirit
TEV             But as for me, the Lord fills me with his spirit and power

     Here, “his spirit and the spirit of the Lord” are mistranslations because the Spirit is not treated as God and a divine Person. It must be “His Spirit’” or “his Spirit” and “the Spirit of the Lord” since the Spirit is God. Micah 3:8 should be understood as, “I am filled with the power of the Spirit,” or “I am full of the power of the Spirit.” The text shows that both “fill” and “full” have the same meaning. The distinction is only that the term “fill” is in a verb and “full” is in an adjective. “The Lord fills me with his spirit and power” (TEV) is in an active construction, but it is erroneous since his spirit does not mean God the Spirit. So it should be “The Lord fills me with the power of the Spirit.” Then, it makes sense.

Deut. 34:9 and Acts 2:13 show the usage of the verb “fill” and the adjective “full.”

Deut. 34:9     Ἰησοῦς υἱὸς Ναυη ἐνεπλήσθη πνεύματος συνέσεως ἐπέθηκεν γὰρ Μωυσῆς τὰς χεῖρας αὐτοῦ  (LXT)
NIV              Now Joshua son of Nun was filled with the spirit of wisdom because Moses had laid his hands on him.
NKJ              Now Joshua the son of Nun was full of the spirit of wisdom, for Moses had laid his hands on him.
NAS             Joshua the son of Nun was filled with the spirit of wisdom.

     Here, “the spirit of wisdom” must be “the Spirit of wisdom” since the Spirit is the Spirit. Joshua was full of the Spirit of wisdom, and he was filled with the Spirit of wisdom. In these instances, neither the NIV nor NKJ treat the Spirit as God. Therefore, the right interpretation must be “Joshua was full of the wisdom of the Spirit,” or “Joshua was filled with the wisdom of the Spirit.” Deut. 34:9 shows the usage of the verb “fill” and the adjective “full.” The text confirms that both terms have the same meaning. Acts 9:17 says, “Paul will be filled with (the power) of the Holy Spirit through placing Ananias’ hands on him.” Therefore, Deut. 34:9 means the same as Acts 9:17.
 
Acts 2:13       γλεύκους μεμεστωμένοι εἰσίν. (BNT)  
NKJ             They are full of new wine.
NAS             They are full of sweet wine
NRS             They are filled with new wine.  
NIV              They have had too much wine.

     The translation of the NKJ is literally different from that of the NRS, but it carries the same meaning. “They are full of new wine” means “they are filled with new wine.” Both the OT and NT confirm that to argue over the distinction of “fill” and “full” is quite unbiblical. Both words carry the same meaning.

Luke 4:1 shows the usage of the verb “fill” and the adjective “full.”

Luke 4:1       Ἰησοῦς δὲ πλήρης πνεύματος ἁγίου ὑπέστρεψεν ἀπὸ τοῦ Ἰορδάνου (BNT)
NIV              Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan.    
KJV              Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan.
NKJ              Jesus, being filled with the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan.
NLT              Then Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, left the Jordan River.
NAB              Filled with the holy Spirit, Jesus returned form the Jordan.
NAS              Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan.
GWN            Jesus was filled with the Holy Spirit as he left the Jordan River.

     In the text the Greek pleres (πλήρης, full) is an adjective and pneumatos hagiou (πνεύματος ἁγίου, of the Spirit) is a genitive. This should read, “full of the Spirit” as in the NIV. But both translations of the KJV and NKJ are correct since “Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost” is the same as “Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit” and “Jesus, being filled with the Holy Spirit.” The distinction is only that the word “fill” is a verb and “full” is an adjective. If these two words “fill” and “full” are not fully understood as they are used in the Bible, it is impossible to understand the Holy Spirit.

     Christian society is in great confusion about the doctrine of the Holy Spirit because of the misunderstanding of these two words. Billy Graham argues, “two words used in the New Testament sometimes puzzle Christians: the words are full and fill. Some people make a distinction between them. I agree that there may be some distinction, but it is only minor.” But this puzzle originates from the mistranslation and misinterpretation regarding the Holy Spirit. The Bible use of “fill” and “full” should by no means puzzle Christians.

Billy Graham himself is in great confusion.

Why do we need the fullness of the Holy Spirit? Because only in the power of the Spirit can we live a life that glorifies God. God the Holy Spirit gives power for a purpose–power to help us glorify God in every dimension of our lives. The apostles needed a special filling of God’s power. In the Christian life, power is dynamically related to a Person. This Person is the Holy Spirit Himself, indwelling the Christian and filling him with the fullness of His power. But the filling of the Spirit for power was not limited to preaching. (Billy Graham, The Holy Spirit, p.120,126,129,131.)

     To write of “the filling of the Spirit for power” is quite erroneous. In the note “the apostles needed a special filling of God’s power,” the words “filling of God’s power” is correct and biblical. Billy Graham argues here that the fullness of the Holy Spirit requires the power of the Spirit and the apostles needed this special filling of God’s power. It shows that both statements have the same meaning. The phrase “the fullness of the Holy Spirit needs for the power of the Spirit” should read “the fullness of the power of the Holy Spirit.” And “the filling of the Spirit for power” should be “the filling of the power of the Spirit” because the Spirit in both instances is to be treated as God the Spirit. The note “This Person is the Holy Spirit Himself, indwelling the Christian and filling him with the fullness of His power” is ambiguous since it is based on the mistranslation of Acts 2:4 and the misinterpretation of Luke 4:1.

     Acts 2:4 must be translated, “They were all filled with the power of the Holy Spirit.” And Luke 4:1 must be translated, “Jesus was full of the power of the Holy Spirit,” or “Jesus was filled with the power of the Holy Spirit.” Then, there is no debate on the relation between “full” and fill.” Billy Graham is in great confusion because of the misunderstanding of the words “full” and “fill.” If the words “full” and “fill” are not fully understood, it is impossible to construct a correct and biblical doctrine of the Holy Spirit.