Ananais and Sapphira...lost?

Came across this timely quote by Charles Spurgeon this a.m. that is so clearly biblical:

" FAITH and works are bound up in the same bundle. He that obeys God trusts God; and he that trusts God obeys God. He that is without faith is without works; and he that is without works is without faith."

This is what James is telling us in his book, with all of his great examples!

 

First of all the NT Greek is not applicable to modern day usage. Second, in the context of the book of Acts the exact same verb was just used in the previous chapter to describe what is unarguably the filling of the Holy Spirit. In the immediate context it is pretty obvious that it's usage by the same writer would not dramatically alter several verses later. These two are to be seen in contrast to those who have just been filled with the Spirit. They are hypocrites and were dealt with accordingly.

Now James, I know it is hard to admit it when you are wrong, but pride is awefully dangerous vice. Becareful that you submit to the Word of God. The truth is evident here, so unless you are just out for jollies, you have no legs to stand on here, theologically, biblically or otherwise.:BangHead:

 

Satan is a created being who is not able to be in more than one place at one time. Only God is omnipresent. Satan is a created being who was in the garden and did tempt Adam and Eve but I have already made plain that my view is that Satan only has the ability to tempt believers and not possess them.

After reading your post I do not see that you made a case for anything other than you seem to think Satan is everywhere and in everything, which I assure you he is not.

Now in the Bible Satan is a metaphor for evil, but that does not do away with his actual existence and the fact that he is a fallen angel.

 

If you look into the Greek NT it says that Satan filled his heart. Satan in this sense has filled them with his presence and influence in the same way that the Holy Spirit had just filled the believers back in chapter 4:31. You do not have to like it but the Bible says what it says. This discussion was over for those who have any sense. But there you came to save the day throwing your hat in... yet to no avail.

 

Actually if you knew GREEK you would know they have the exact same root word meaning. Greek is morphological and the endings change but the meaning of the root words do not. They are the exact same word in different word form, which we will not get into, since this is not a GR NT seminar. You are really splitting hairs going there. Bottom line, Satan does not have that kind of influence over a believer and the bottom line is that these two are to be seen in contrast with those who have just been baptized with the Holy Spirit. Really this is not that difficult a thing to grasp. The Holy Spirit has a role in preserving the believer. I am arguing for the power of God and you guys seem to be arguing for the power of Satan. I always have enjoyed taking the higher in ground in a battle. You guys are having to do hermeneutical gymnastics to get around the plain obvious reading of the English text, not to mention the hard evidence of the GR NT.

 

I haven't changed my position, but I probably haven't made my position clear. I believe the justification in James 2 is not the same justification that Paul speaks about in Romans 4. James clearly says that a man is justified by works and not faith only. Paul says that to him that worketh not (that means does not work), but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. We are taught that 'what James really means' is that if you have faith, you will have works. Where did we get this interpretive principle? If James means something other than what he wrote, why can that principle not be used to interpret the rest of the bible? Well, in reality it probably is.

 

Seems to me there may be some confusion as to being indwelt by the Holy Spirit and filled by the Holy Spirit.

 

Nevermind the fact that you are talking about two seperate Greek words for "filled". (Filled means filled)

Acts 4:31 And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness. (They were all filled with the Holy Ghost)

Acts 5:3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land? (his heart was not filled with Satan, his heart was filled, by Satan, with the intent to lie about the price of the land)

 

1 Peter 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

 

Blammo you really show your ignorance of Greek when you say that they are two different words. They are the same root word in two different forms. Stay away from the original languages if you are not studied and learned in the very difficult task of interpreting Koine Greek. It is not a slant against you personally, it is just a fact. Greek is not the same as English. English is a word order language. Greek is a word form language. These are two words that mean the same thing because they are the same word in different forms, ie they have different endings, same root word, therefore same meaning. I am done trying to argue with you guys about this.

 

The Holy Spirit fills/indwells/baptizes the same folks. This discussion has lost any hope of resolution due to the complete inability of those in opposition to recognize the merits of the case against them.

1. The Holy Spirit preserves the believer.

2. Satan and the Holy Spirit do not co-exist in the believer.

3. Satan cannot possess a believer.

4. These two were infilled/possessed by Satan.

5. Therefore, more than likely they were not saved.

 

Again, totally missing the point. (on purpose?)

I said, "nevermind the Greek.... (filled means filled)". See? I was agreeing with you on that point.

What I don't agree with you on is what Ananias was filled with.

 

Okay, sorry mate if I read you wrong there.

Then you are suggesting that Satan filled them with a 'lie' and not his presence. The only problem is the very clear language of the Greek NT. Since you are no longer disputing the semantics of the language. It literally reads in the Greek, "because of what has filled SATAN the heart..." It then goes on and says "your for to lie to you the Spirit Holy..."

The way you smooth that out grammatically is to say, "Satan filled your heart" and "you lied to the Holy Spirit."

Do with it what you will but that is the exact wording of the Greek NT.

 

Filling and dwelling are not the same thing. The Holy Spirit indwells every person that has believed on Jesus Christ (as per Ephesians 2:8-9, Acts 16:30-31), but not every believer is filled with the Spirit.

The only case that I see against what I have said is a self-proclaimed "expert" disagrees with me.

If all believers are "filled" with the Holy Spirit at the moment of salvation and that never changes then why did Paul tell us in the book of Ephesians to be filled with the Holy Spirit.

Because being indwelt by the Spirit and filled with the Spirit are two separate matters, not the same.

Can you expound on that? What do you mean the Holy Spirit preserves the believer?

True.

True.

Not true. You are adding to what the text says. It asks why has Satan filled your heart, it doesn't ask why Satan possessed you. You are drawing your own conclusion there, which the text does not warrant.

Again a conclusion drawn from a wrong conclusion of the text.

 

I have said all I am going to say about this matter. If you want to talk about the finer points of theology that pertain to the difference between infilling, indwelling, baptism of the Holy Spirit, I would be glad to exchange ideas with you, but I am not going to hijack this thread, nor is there sufficient space in this thread to do so, since this thread is all but done.

 

Well I read it in English, since the only three languages I'm very conversant in are English, B.S., and 'Redneck'. Peter asks about Satan filling the heart of Ananias, in this general passage, but the only thing I read about "possession" was the one that Ananias and Sapphira sold. "And for the life of me", (good Redneck phrase) I could not find one single word about "blasphemy" as I attempted to "Deal with the text."

Ed

 

Uh, aside from the 'spiritual gift' of faith, given along with Apostle, teacher, knowledge, prophecy, tongues, etc. delineated in I Cor. 12, where does scripture ever say that "faith' is a gift given? Don't bother with Eph. 2:8-9, for that is not what is given there, but salvation. That has been exegeted before on these pages, and more than once. (Don't know why the exegesis and explanation has been overlooked or ignored just as many times by some, but I digress.) And does Scripture ever speak of "repentance" as a gift? Not that I'm aware of, but perhaps you could give me some Scripture that says otherwise. "Granted" is not a "gift" either, at least to an individual, as opposed to the Gentiles collectively in Acts 11:48, so some other verses, please, as I'm interested in where Scripture says an individual gets "repentance" as a gift. Thanks.

Ed

 

Ed there is really no need to sign Ed at the bottom of your posts because we see your name Ed Sutton as your call sign, that is unless putting Ed at the bottom is a type of euphemism for "Word." There now word from Ed... Ed out.:tongue3:

 

"I think Pipedude has a similar phrase patented and copyrighted!" - Language Cop

"L.C.!! Down boy!" - :laugh: :laugh:

Ed