According to the Westminster Confession of Faith 21:5, “God is to be worshipped everywhere, in spirit and truth, …” A similar phrase is found in the OPC’s Directory for Public Worship (II.6). In my experience in the OPC and other Reformed churches, the phrase is often interpreted to mean that we must worship God “in our spirits,” i.e., not in a bodily or outward way, and “truthfully,” i.e., in a way that accords with Scripture and which is not idolatrous.
I certainly agree that biblical worship should involve our spirits and be according to the truth of God’s word. But is this what Jesus was teaching in using the phrase to describe new covenant worship in Jn. 4:23-24? My purpose in this paper is to explore the answer to that question by closely examining our Lord’s words in John 4.
Worship in Spirit
In order to understand what Jesus was saying in this important passage, we need to do a little research into the phrase “in spirit and truth,” which in the original Greek in both verses is en pneumati kai aletheia.1 As noted above, many interpret en pneumati here to refer to our human spirits, and that is often justified because there is no definite article. The presence of the definite article would seem to suggest that it is a reference to “the Spirit” (the Holy Spirit), while its absence here leads many to see the word “spirit” as referring to something else. As one author has written,
What does it mean to worship God “in spirit”? This is not a reference to the Holy Spirit, since the Greek does not have the definite article before the word. Jesus was speaking of our spirits, which the NIV and most other modern versions indicate by printing “spirit” with a small s. Jesus was teaching that in the new age which he was inaugurating, the place for our worship would not matter, since a person would be able to worship “in [his or her] spirit”–which could be anywhere.2
While this author’s application point is fine as far as it goes, this interpretation of en pneumati without the article (anarthrous) needs to be explored and challenged. Of the 36 occurrences of this phrase in the NT, all but a very few clearly refer to the Holy Spirit.3 Granted, many of these occurrences include the modifier “Holy” (hagio) or “God” (theou) after pneumati. But then again, there are many occurrences that do not have either of these modifiers, and yet these also clearly refer to the Spirit, i.e., the Holy Spirit: Mt. 22:43; Rom. 2:29; 8:9; Eph. 2:22; 3:5; 5:18; 6:18; Col. 1:8; 1 Tim. 3:16; Rev. 1:10; 4:2; 17:3; 21:10.
It is also worth pointing out that the phrase “in the Spirit” (en to pneumati, with the article) is actually not very frequent in the NT, and where it does occur, it is almost peculiarly Lukan: the occurrences with the article have modifiers (“my,” “Holy”) in Mk. 12:36; Rom. 1:9; 1 Co. 6:11. The other occurrences are all in Luke-Acts: Lk. 2:27; 4:1; 10:21; Acts 19:21 (only 10:21 has the modifier, “Holy”). Indeed, the only time Luke does not use the article is when he uses the stock expression, found in all of the gospels and Acts, that the Messiah will baptize his people “by/in/with the Spirit” (Lk. 3:16; Acts 1:5; 11:16).4
Indeed, when we compare the number of occurrences of anarthrous en pneumati meaning “in/by the Spirit” vs. articular en to pneumati, we find that the normal NT way of speaking of “in/by/with (en) the Spirit” is with pneumati as anarthrous (without the article) and not articular.5 When NT authors (except for Luke) want to speak of something being done in/with/by the Spirit by using the preposition en (whether with the modifier “Holy,” “of God” or without), they write en pneumati without the article, not en to pneumati. This evidence strongly suggests that Jesus’ statement in Jn. 4 refers to worshipping “in/by the (Holy) Spirit,” rather than a reference to our human spirits.
But what about John and his writings in particular? John uses en pneumati seven times, including the two occurrences in Jn. 4:23-24 (Jn. 1:33; 4:23f; Rev. 1:10; 4:2; 17:3; 21:10; he never uses en to pneumati). And strikingly, in every occurrence (leaving aside, for the moment, Jn. 4:23-24), he uses the phrase to refer to the Holy Spirit, and he does so without the modifier “holy” (hagio), except for the stock expression “the one baptizing with the Holy Spirit” (Jn. 1:33)!6
What we are seeing, then, is this: without strong indications discouraging us from it, en pneumati in Jn. 4:23-24 should be taken to mean “in the Spirit,” the Holy Spirit. But assuming that this interpretation and translation is correct, what then does Jesus mean? In order to understand it, we have to remember the context, and specifically the issues of time and place that Jesus mentions.
First, regarding place: Jesus contrasts this “worship in Spirit” with the worship in Jerusalem. In the old covenant, we could say that the tabernacle/temple was the “dwelling of the Spirit” (Ex. 40:34-38; 1 Kings 8:10-12 = 2 Chr. 7:1-2). But now, the promised Spirit will soon dwell in a different place: in and among those who are disciples of Messiah Jesus (Jn. 7:37-38; 14:16-17). Worship “in the Spirit” will no longer be restricted to Jerusalem, because the Spirit will be present wherever the “living stones” of the Church are, in and among all the nations.
Second, regarding time: Jesus asserts that this “worship in Spirit” will happen “in an hour that is coming, and is now here.” As with the contrast with Jerusalem, this is a contrast with the old covenant. Many have pointed out how John in his gospel stresses an “inaugurated” eschatology: Jesus came to usher in the new era promised by God in the prophets. The promise of the Spirit was integrally bound up with this prophetic expectation (Isa. 44:3; Ezek. 36; Joel 2:28f). Jesus is telling the Samaritan woman that the long-expected “age of the Spirit” is about to arrive, even as it eventually did on Pentecost Sunday.
Jesus is not talking in Jn. 4 about worship that will be “interior” rather than “exterior,” “spiritual” rather than “bodily.” He is talking about the arrival of the Spirit that will free God’s people from having to go to the earthly temple in Jerusalem. Instead, wherever they gather in the name of Christ and in dependence upon his Spirit (1 Cor. 5:4), they will be able to go to the heavenly Jerusalem and worship in the eternal realities (Heb. 12:22f), of which the tabernacle and the temple were only earthly copies (Heb. 8:5; 9:23-24).
Is Jesus concerned about our heart-attitude in worship? Of course! (Mt. 15:8-9) How can we “worship in the Spirit” if we are not coming with an attitude of faith and trust in the Lord God? The point is that this particular issue is not what Jesus is addressing in Jn. 4:22-23. Jesus is not saying that we need to worship with our spirits rather than our bodies. He is not saying that new covenant worship is strictly interior, having nothing to do with the senses or outward forms. How could it, if we need our sense of hearing to hear God speaking to us in the reading and preaching of the Word? How could it, if the Lord’s Supper, which engages so many of our senses, is an element of worship (Acts 2:42; 1 Cor. 11:17f.)? How could new covenant worship not involve the senses if we are required to assemble–together, as embodied creatures–in the name of the Lord Jesus to worship the Father “in Spirit”? (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 5:4; Jas. 2:2)
The Truth
Now to the issue of “truth” in the same passage. Just as with “worship in spirit,” this has been taken to mean “worship in … truth.” In Reformed circles, it is generally taken to mean that we need to worship in the way that God tells us to: that our worship must be “truthful” in the sense that it must conform to God’s will for his worship revealed in Scripture. But again, is this Jesus’ precise point in Jn. 4? Is Jesus using “true” as an antonym for “false”?
As many readers of John’s gospel know, “true,” “truth,” and “truly” are very important words for him. Of the various aleth- words, I found 93 occurrences in the Johannine literature–over half of the 185 occurrences in the entire NT! Of the 93 in John’s writings, 59 are in his gospel (again, about one-third of all NT occurrences). We could approach the issue of understanding the aleth- word group in John by looking at one of the first occurrences in the gospel: “For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ” (1:17). First, we should note that the one giving in both cases is God, much as in Heb. 1:1-2, where it is God who spoke by the prophets in the OT, but who now speaks to us in these last days “by his Son.” It is the one God who gave both the Law (through Moses) and grace and truth (through Jesus Christ). Secondly, “truth” (aletheia) in this verse is obviously not contrasting with “false.” John is not saying that Moses and the Mosaic Law are false (either because it always has been so, or because Christ has now come and somehow “falsified” it). How could he, when John repeatedly tells us in this gospel that Moses and the Torah speaks about Christ? (1:45; 3:14; 5:45-47; 6:32; 8:17-18; 12:34; 15:25) John’s point instead seems to be the one that the author of Hebrews makes: while God indeed spoke, and spoke truly, through Moses and in the Law, these were only a shadow of a greater reality that has now come in Jesus Christ. Not false, but “shadowy,” incomplete.
Again, consider how the word true is used in John 6:32: Jesus then said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread from heaven.” His point is not to say that the manna in the wilderness was “false.” How could it have been, when it sustained the Israelites in the wilderness for 40 years?! Indeed, it is even described by Paul as “Spiritual food” (1 Cor. 10:3; cf., Ps. 78:24, “the grain of heaven”). Moses says that God used the manna to teach Israel that “man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD” (Dt. 8:3). Clearly, the contrast is not between false and true bread, but between bread that is shadowy and incomplete (“typical”?) with that which is full, complete, and final. In theological language, the manna was the “type” of which Christ became the “antitype” (fulfillment).
In an important article on the use of aleth- words in John, G. Vos wrote,
The words for true, truth, possess inherently two distinct connotations. … expressed by the two adjectives, veracious and veritable. … When Jesus is called “the true light” (Jn. 1:9), or “the true bread” (6:32), this has nothing to do with His telling the truth, but may be approximately rendered “the veritable light,” “the veritable bread.” Veritable is that which answers to the highest conception or ideal of something.7
Now, we are not saying that every occurrence of these words in John refers to that which is veritable rather than that which has veracity. “Truly, truly, I say to you” is certainly about Jesus speaking truly (accurately) and not just fully and finally. But we at least have to recognize that John is often using this word-group to contrast the types of the OT with the reality that Christ has brought in the NT, and that very well may be the case here in 4:23-24.
In order to help us appreciate what Jesus is saying in Jn. 4:23 about “worshipping in … truth,” we have to look at what he says in v. 22: “You (Samaritan woman, thinking you worship the true God on Mt. Gerizim) worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews.” While criticizing the Samaritans’ worship, he gives an implicit endorsement of the temple worship in Jerusalem: “salvation is from the Jews.” And yet now, worship will no longer be in Jerusalem–at least in the sense of the earthly temple in the earthly Jerusalem (4:21). This is not because the worship in Jerusalem is “false,” but rather because something greater, fuller, and eternal–worship that is “true” in the Johannine sense of what is veritable–has finally arrived.
Jesus’ point in Jn. 4 is not so much about the truth content of what is supposed to happen in worship. It is rather about the “truth,” the reality, the fulfillment that has now come because Messiah has come (4:25). It is not so much about truth in Christian worship (though that should not be ignored), but the fact that there just is Christian (new covenant) worship in and through the Messiah, Jesus, and the Spirit, as opposed to Jewish (old covenant) worship in Jerusalem or Samaritan worship at Mt. Gerizim. He has tabernacled among us (1:14), fulfilling the Mosaic tabernacle. He is the true temple (2:23). He is the one through whom we receive the Spirit (7:39), that we might become the temple in which God dwells by his Spirit, offering Spiritual sacrifices to him (Eph. 2:19-22; 1 Pet. 2:4-5). Arguing that “in Spirit and Truth” thus a form of hendiadys (saying one thing with two words), Ridderbos asserts,
“Spirit and truth” refer to the fellowship [with God] thus established [through Christ] in its life-creating and life-giving power, as leading to the fullness of God’s gifts (cf. 1:16) that is no longer mediated by all sorts of provisional and symbolic forms [as in Jerusalem], but by the Spirit of God himself, which is why it is repeatedly called worship of the “Father.”8
Worshipping in the Spirit and the Truth
My suggestion is that we translate en pneumati kai aletheia in Jn. 4:23-24 with not just one, but two, capital letters: the Father is seeking those who will worship him “in (the) Spirit and the Truth (i.e., the reality of the new covenant/Christ).” To put it quite strongly (without becoming either dispensational, or worse, Marcionite), what Jesus is talking about in Jn. 4:23-24 is something that old covenant believers simply could not do: not because their hearts were not right with God, but because Christ, the true temple, had not yet come, and the Spirit had not yet been poured out (cf., Jn. 7:39; 16:7).9 Jesus’ words cannot apply to old covenant believers needing to worship God from their hearts and according to the terms of the Mosaic covenant (though they certainly were called to do that, as the condemnations of the prophets, e.g., Isa. 1:10f., repeatedly shows). Jesus is talking about something that could not happen until “the hour” of his advent, climaxing in his death, resurrection, ascension, and the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost. His words are only a condemnation of old covenant worship in so far as it was “shadow” (not Truth, reality) and restricted to one people and one location, the temple in Jerusalem.
On the interpretation I am suggesting, Jesus’ main point to the woman at the well is this: the form of worship is changing, in that it will not longer be bound to the geographical location of Jerusalem and the temple. It will, in the new era he is inaugurating, be bound to the geographical “location” of … himself. In him and through the Spirit, he causes “Jerusalem” to become a world-wide place of worship (Gal. 4:26-27; Heb. 12:22).
There are some practical conclusions to this interpretation.
- Jn. 4:23-24 is not the passage to use to encourage people to make sure that they have a proper attitude in worship. “In Spirit” is not referring to “our (human) spirits,” as if Jesus is trying to teach us that we must make sure worship is from the heart (he does that in Mt. 15 and Rev. 2-3). He is referring to the radical change that is about to take place because the Spirit is about to be poured out. In terms of traditional theological language, the OT ceremonial Law is about to be fulfilled and therefore abrogated, and so the ceremonies of worship are all about to change: they will no longer involve animal sacrifices; they will not be restricted to one earthly building. But even OT saints were supposed to have the right attitude in worship, as Isa. 1 reminds us. This is not Jesus’ point in Jn. 4:22-24.
- A correct understanding of this passage would caution us against trying to make new covenant worship strictly a matter of the inner man/soul/mind in distinction from the body. We know that the apostle who says that “we worship by the Spirit of God” (Phil. 3:3) also commands a particular posture in prayer: the lifting of hands (1 Tim. 2:8). This same apostle also models a particular posture in prayer, kneeling, both in narrative (Acts 21:5) and in one of his epistles (Eph. 3:14). We know from Rev. 4-5 that the worship of heaven involves not just kneeling, but prostrating oneself before the living God.10
Obviously, simply kneeling without actually “praying in the Spirit,” i.e., without dependence and reliance upon Christ by his Spirit, would receive the condemnation of drawing near to God with our lips while our hearts are far from him. The point is that we should not think that praying or worshipping in the Spirit means “without any involvement of the body.” We should not think that drawing near with hearts means not drawing near with our lips, our hands, or our knees. We should not think, e.g., that read or rote prayers–the Lord’s Prayer; “Come, O Lord”/maranatha (the only prayer repeated in the NT: 1 Cor. 16:22; Rev. 22:20)–cannot also be the expression of our hearts.
- This passage is not a passage that we should use to argue for the Regulative Principle of Worship (RPW), at least in a direct sense. Again, “truth” here is not being contrasted with “false.” It is the reality of the new covenant being contrasted with the shadow of the old covenant (cf., Col. 2:16-17; Heb. 8:5; 10:1). It is the “truth” that we do not go to the temple in Jerusalem to worship, but we instead assemble in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 5:4),11 and in dependence upon his Spirit, seeking him through the means that he has appointed: not animal sacrifices, but devotion to the apostles’ doctrine, the prayers, the breaking of bread (in the Supper), the fellowship (of material needs), and the singing of psalms, hymns and Spiritual songs (Acts 2:42; 1 Cor. 11:17, 20, 23f.; Eph. 5:18-20; Col. 3:16; Heb. 6:4-5; 10:19-25; 12:22-29; 1 Pet. 2:4-5; Rev. 5:8, 11; 6:9-14). In other words, while “worship in Truth” may not be directly about the RPW, yet in so far as it is about the reality of new covenant worship that is set down for us in the NT in terms of elements–Word, prayer, praise, sacramental meal, etc.–then it is about the RPW. But it will not do to use it as a bare proof-text for the RPW.
All this suggests that the use of the phrase “in spirit and in truth” as it is used in the OPC Directory for Public Worship II.6 is not overly helpful, because it is applied there to the issue of hypocrisy and externalism. Again, not that these are not important issues that the Scriptures do address, but that this is not what our Lord is trying to teach us in Jn. 4:23-24 with the language “in Spirit and Truth.” It is much more about the objective reality that has taken place in Christ rather than the subjective attitude of our hearts and minds in worship. It is about the redemptive-historical, epochal shift from old covenant to new covenant, the transition from the people of God within one nation and in one place to the people of God among all the nations in every place.12
The Rev. Brian D. Nolder, B.Mus., M.Div., is the Student Affairs Administrator at Reformation Bible Institute-Oregon City (www.rbioc.org). RBI is a Theopolis-friendly, distance-learning seminary. He has pastored two churches and is currently involved in theological education and ministerial formation. He also occasionally composes church music.
- In Greek, there is never a capital letter in the word pneuma, so that one must decide in context whether it refers to “a spirit” (angelic, demonic, satanic or human) or “the Spirit” (of God/Christ, the Holy Spirit). It is safe to say that the large majority of occurrences of pneuma in the Greek NT refer to “the Spirit.” In the BAGD article on pneuma, there is a page and a half of the word referring to spirits of men or angels, demons and Satan, while there are three pages on pneuma as the (Holy) Spirit or the Spirit of God/Christ. (BAGD is the standard lexicon for NT Greek.) ↩︎
- James M. Boice, Whatever Happened to the Gospel of Grace? Rediscovering the Doctrines That Shook the World (Wheaton: Crossway, 2001), 185 (author’s emphasis). Cf., the similar comment by John MacArthur in his article, “How Shall We Then Worship?” in The Coming Evangelical Crisis, ed. John Armstrong (Chicago: Moody, 1996), 176. ↩︎
- All statistics are based on string searches in BibleWorks 5. ↩︎
- Lk. 1:17 clearly refers to “the spirit … of Elijah,” speaking of John the Baptist’s fulfillment of the Elijah-prophecy in Mal. 4. Note: the reason for the multiple prepositions (by/in/with) in the above sentence is to recognize that Gk. en can have any of those meanings in English, and it is not my purpose in this paper to decide what its meaning is here or elsewhere. ↩︎
- If either the dative theo or the omission of the modifier altogether is the correct reading at Phil. 3:3, then we would have an explicit reference to “worshipping in/by the Spirit” without the article (but also without en). But even if the genitive theou is original (as in UBS3/NA27), we still see that Paul, as he normally does, uses pneumati anarhtrously (without the article). ↩︎
- It is possible that all of the occurrences of en pneumati in Revelation mean “in spirit” (as opposed to “in body/the flesh”; cf., NASB margin), but all of the English versions that I looked at besides the KJV and the NJB had “in the Spirit” (i.e., the Holy Spirit) as the translation. ↩︎
- G. Vos, “‘True’ and ‘Truth’ in the Johannine Writings,” in Redemptive History and Biblical History: The Shorter Writings of Geerhardus Vos, ed. Richard B. Gaffin, Jr. (Philipsburg: P&R, 1980), 343-44. ↩︎
- Herman Ridderbos, The Gospel of John: A Theological Commentary, trans. John Vriend (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 164. ↩︎
- The reason Jesus can tell the Samaritan woman that “the time is coming and now is” is because he was already there before her as the one who had received the eschatological Spirit (1:32-33; 3:34). The “coming” time would happen after Jesus’ exltation (resurrection, ascension) and the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost. ↩︎
- It is worth noting that the root meaning of the Heb. and Greek words that we normally translate “worship” mean “prostrate/kneel.” “Thou shalt not bow down before them.” (Ex. 20:5) “Come up to the LORD … and prostrate yourself from afar.” (Ex. 24:1) The portrayals of worship in Rev. 4-5 suggest that such kneeling and prostration is still appropriate in new covenant worship. ↩︎
- I do not cite Mt. 18:20 here, because even though that passage does have bearing on assembling for new covenant worship, its first application is to those gathered together to exercise the keys of the kingdom in discipline (i.e., the session [board of elders], presbytery, etc.). ↩︎
- Thus the use of the phrase in the Westminster Confession of Faith 21:5, viz., in reference to the universality of new covenant worship, seems entirely appropriate. ↩︎