how to know you're really saved?

[DHK]

Originally posted by Janosik:
Are you telling me that a person filled with the Holy Spirit can not turn against God?

Are you saying that when your parents got you baptised the Holy Spirit was not present?

I was baptized as an infant into the Roman Catholic Church. Contrary to what the Catholic Church teaches, that baptism did nothing but get me wet. In fact that is all that any baptism will do. Truthfully Roman Catholic Baptism is not a Scriptural baptism and doesn't count as baptism. The Bible teaches repeatedly that one must be saved, and then baptized. The order is given clearly in Acts 2

Acts 2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
#1. They received his word--that is were saved.
#2. Then they were baptized.
#3. Then they became added to the church, the local church at Jerusalem--church members.
This is always the order. There is not one case of infant baptism in the Bible. No infant was ever baptized in the Bible. It is contrary to the teaching of the Bible.

The Bible teaches that you must believe to be saved. "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved" (Acts 16:31). An infant does not have the capacity to believe and therefore cannot be saved. If you read the story in Acts 16, you will find that the Philippian jailor believed, let Paul out of the jail cell, took him to his house where many of his household also believed. Then after they believed they were baptized.

In Acts 8 Philip met the Ethiopian eunuch riding through the desert. He got on board his chariot and began to witness to him about Christ through the Book of Isaiah. As the neared a place where there was plenty of water, the eunuch said: "Here is water, what does hinder me to be baptized."
Philip replied, "If you believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, thou mayest." The eunuch said, "I believe that Jesus is the Son of God." And the Bible records how they both went down into the water (where he was baptized), and they both came out of the water--indicating that the eunuch had been immersed, as the mode of baptism following his salvation.
What does it do? Nothing. It is a simple step of obedience in the Christian life after one is saved, done because Christ commanded us to be baptized. (Mat.28:19,20)
The symbolism is explained by Paul in Romans 6:3,4,
Where Paul tells us we are dead and buried to our old life of sin, and rise again to a new life in Christ. Thus we are totally immersed. Our old life of sin is buried. It is put to death and buried. Then we rise again to a new life in Christ. It pictures what happened to us at salvation--the day one was born again; the day one trusted Christ as their personal Saviour. But it is not a sacrament. It does not impart grace. It is not a means of receiving the Holy Spirit.
DHK

 

[Janosik]

Let me repeat the first question: Are you telling me that a person filled with the Holy Spirit can not turn against God?

Infant baptism is not contrary to the Bible. If it's not metioned it does not imply that it's excluded. Infant baptism is practiced based on tradition and teaching of Fathers of the Church.
Are you saying that all children that die before 'they are saved' are not saved (they go to hell)?

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Janosik:
Let me repeat the first question: Are you telling me that a person filled with the Holy Spirit can not turn against God?

A person filled with the Holy Spirit will never turn against God. In fact if he is filled with the Holy Spirit he will never even sin. Unfortunately we are not always filled with the Holy Spirit as Paul commanded us to be in Eph.5:18. But every believer is indwelt with the Holy Spirit from the time of his salvation onward, that is, from the time that he is born again--when he personally trusted Christ as his Saviour.
A believer in Christ, indwelt by the Spirit can and will sin. None of us are perfect. But will a true Christian sin to the point of turning against God and become an apostate? Is this what you are asking? The answer is no. If that is what seems to be happening then the person was never a Christian in the first place.
Consider:
1 John 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

They (false teachers)
went out from among us (the believers in the church),
but they were not of us (they were not true believers);
for if they had been of us (true believers)
they would no doubt have continued with us (true believers continue in the faith, they do not apostasize, as you suggest. They persevere)
but they went out (they quit the assembly of the true believers)
that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us (that it might be made know to everyone that these were false teachers and not true believers)

Infant baptism is not contrary to the Bible. If it's not metioned it does not imply that it's excluded. Infant baptism is practiced based on tradition and teaching of Fathers of the Church.

So is the blessing of dogs and cats. That doesn't make it Biblical. There will be no dogs and cats in Heaven no matter what you read into Scripture. You are reading into Scripure that which is not there. That is typical Catholic Theology. It is man-made invented doctrine. It is not found in the Bible, so just invent the doctrine. The moons around Saturn are made of green cheese, and God loves the little red men that live up there too. If they are really good, and eat only 10 ounces of green cheese each day they can go to heaven also. I can prove it through the Bible. How? Just as much as you can prove infant baptism through the Bible. It is not there. You cannot prove anything that the Bible is silent on.

Are you saying that all children that die before 'they are saved' are not saved (they go to hell)?

No, I never said that. Baptism doesn't save anyone. You are asking a different question now. The question of the salvation of infants is a totally different topic than what we have been discussing. One thing is for certain. Baptism doesn't save. It only gets you wet.
DHK

 

[Janosik]

The Bible says differently. There is a man in the Bible that turned against God.

Tradition and teaching of Fathers of the Church is biblical. While on the contrary we can say that everything what you say is not biblical because your knowledge does not come in the biblical way. Take it as a chalenge to prove that your explanations are biblical.

Baptism has multiple effects:
- remision of the original and actual sin
- to be born again of water (to get wet

)
- to be born again of the Holy Ghost
This is taught by Fathers of the Church therefore it's biblical!

I remember by grace throuh faith

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Janosik:
The Bible says differently. There is a man in the Bible that turned against God.

Tradition and teaching of Fathers of the Church is biblical. While on the contrary we can say that everything what you say is not biblical because your knowledge does not come in the biblical way. Take it as a chalenge to prove that your explanations are biblical.

One of the early church fathers (I believe it was Iraeneus) beleived that Jesus lived to the ripe old age of 80. Origen was the father of Arianism. Origen was known for many of the early heresies of the church. Tertullian believed in baptismal regeneration, which beforetimes was not commonly practiced and was always considered one of the foremost heresies of the early church.

Oral Tradition: There was no Oral Tradition with the early church. The very term, even as Catholics define it defies its own definition. Tradition takes time, even centuries to develop. What tradition did the early church have at the end of the Apostolic Age (100 A.D.) when John died near 98 or 99 A.D. and Paul died around 68 A.D. In just 30 years or so how much "Oral Tradition" do you think could develop. There wasn't. They had the Apostles. And during that time and immediately after they had the Scriptures. There was and is no need for Oral Tradition. Our only source of authority is the Word of God for all matters of faith and practice. We need no other. All of our beliefs are based on the Bible. You have come to a Baptist Board. Our beliefs are based on the Bible and on nothing else. If it is not based on the Bible it is not Scriptural, and not of God (speaking of spiritual things). The Bible is our final authority in all things. The Church, the church fathers, Oral Tradition, other books such as the Book of Mormon, reallly don't matter to me. They don't have any authority when compared to the inspired Word of God. It is the Bible that counts not other peoples' words.

All of my beliefs are based on the Bible. If they are not I challenge you to show me where they are not.

Baptism has multiple effects:
- remision of the original and actual sin
- to be born again of water (to get wet

)
- to be born again of the Holy Ghost
This is taught by Fathers of the Church therefore it's biblical!

I remember by grace throuh faith

None of the above can be shown through Scripture. Every statement you have made is Scripturally wrong. Just because somebody said it doesn't make it true. Take each statement you made and demonstrate from the Bible that it is true.
DHK

 

[Janosik]

The Bible has an example of a person filled with the Holy Spirit that turned against God. Why are you trying to deny that? If that happened so how you can say it can not happen to you?

Tell me what are the Biblical ways of spreading teaching of the Bible? How you are suppose to obtain the teaching of the Bible?

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Janosik:
The Bible has an example of a person filled with the Holy Spirit that turned against God. Why are you trying to deny that? If that happened so how you can say it can not happen to you?

As far as I know the Bible gives no example of any person filled with the Holy Spirit who has turned against God. Can you provide me with such an example.

Tell me what are the Biblical ways of spreading teaching of the Bible? How you are suppose to obtain the teaching of the Bible?

The Biblical way of spreading and teaching the Bible:

Mark 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

Matthew 28:19-20 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Acts 1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

How you are suppose to obtain the teaching of the Bible?
2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

Joshua 1:8 This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success.

Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.
DHK

 

[Janosik]

King Solomon turned against God even though he was filled with the Holy Spirit before.

As well as we can see in Acts 8:28-31 when you read/study the Bible it has to be explained to us. Who is(was) teaching and explaining the Bible to you?

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Janosik:
King Solomon turned against God even though he was filled with the Holy Spirit before.

The Old Testament is different than the New Testament. Only from the Day of Pentecost onward, was a believer indwelt with the Holy Spirit of God. In Old Testament times the Spirit came to rest upon individuals at certain times in their lives, but they were never "filled" with the Holy Spirit, such as the New Testament believer is. Solomon's heart was turned away from Jehovah, but he never stopped believing in Him. He never apostasized. He always maintained his faith in Jehovah, though he disobeyed the first of the Ten Commandments at the same time, in the latter years of his life.

As well as we can see in Acts 8:28-31 when you read/study the Bible it has to be explained to us. Who is(was) teaching and explaining the Bible to you?

Acts 8:28-31 Was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet.
29 Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot.
30 And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?
31 And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.

Philip explained the way of salvation to the Ethiopian Eunuch. In verse 35 it says:

Acts 8:35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.

Later it gives the confession of the Ethiopian eunuch, that He believed that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and therefore he was baptized.

"Who taught me?" I already gave you a detailed account of my salvation. Two university students that had alraedy been saved shared the message of salvation when I was on the campus of the university here. I could give you their names if you wish, but that it is not appropriate on a public board as this one, nor is it necessary information. The fact is that these individuals shared with me the way of salvation, just as Philip did with the Eunuch. One cannot be saved with hearing the gospel.

1 Corinthians 1:18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
DHK

 

[Janosik]

Solomon is very good example of a person that was influenced by the Holy Spirit. He got wisdom and discerning heart from God. It's the same Holy Spirit and the Spirit was known to the people of the Old Testament. Look how Israel was punished because of Solomon's deeds at the end. This is an example that a person has a free will and God respects that. If Solomon turned against the God then any person can do that unless you deny the free will.

It's different when you talk about Jesus in general compare to detailed discussion about some doctrines. Smarter people then us came to different conclusions on some subjects even though they studied the same Bible. That's why I am saying teaching is important and also who is the teacher is important. Where teacher's authority comes from. That was my question. If only those two students are your teachers then I am not going to trust your opinions.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Janosik:
Solomon is very good example of a person that was influenced by the Holy Spirit. He got wisdom and discerning heart from God. It's the same Holy Spirit and the Spirit was known to the people of the Old Testament. Look how Israel was punished because of Solomon's deeds at the end. This is an example that a person has a free will and God respects that. If Solomon turned against the God then any person can do that unless you deny the free will.

Solomon aksed for wisdom at the beginning of his reign, and God gave it to him. He became the wisest man that ever lived, apart from Jesus Christ Himself. But he still was a sinner. We all are. No one is excused from sin but Christ. He aloe is sinless. Solomon's sin was obviously women. Israel was not punished because of Solomon. Israel was punished because of Solomon's son Reheboam. Reheboam became king over Israel, when Israel was still a united kingdom. Reheboam went to the elder advisors and asked their advice. They gave wise advice to bring down the taxes that his father had levied because of his extensive building projects, and the people would serve him forever. Reheboam then went to his own friends (peers). They told him to tax them even more. Get all the money you can. Reheboam foolishly took his friends advice, and consequently the kingdom was split in two. Ten tribes followed Jeroboam (became known as Israel), but only two followed Reheboam (known now as Judah). This was not the doing of Solomon, but the foolishness of Reheboam.

It's different when you talk about Jesus in general compare to detailed discussion about some doctrines. Smarter people then us came to different conclusions on some subjects even though they studied the same Bible. That's why I am saying teaching is important and also who is the teacher is important. Where teacher's authority comes from. That was my question. If only those two students are your teachers then I am not going to trust your opinions.

You asked me who my teachers were in reference to my salvation. The plan of salvation is very simple. It is the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. It is how the message is appropriated to our life personally. This is not difficult. I personally trusted Christ over 30 years ago, when a couple of university explained in simple terms the way of salvation, as I explained to you above. This was your question. You didn't ask specifically who were my teachers since then.
If you must know I have a B.A., plus two Master's degrees, and I am not finished yet. My education has been quite extensive and I myself have been a college professor for some years.
DHK

 

[Janosik]

I guess your Master's degrees look suspicious if you don't know this:

1 Kings 11:9-13
9 The LORD became angry with Solomon because his heart had turned away from the LORD , the God of Israel, who had appeared to him twice. 10 Although he had forbidden Solomon to follow other gods, Solomon did not keep the LORD's command. 11 So the LORD said to Solomon, "Since this is your attitude and you have not kept my covenant and my decrees, which I commanded you, I will most certainly tear the kingdom away from you and give it to one of your subordinates. 12 Nevertheless, for the sake of David your father, I will not do it during your lifetime. I will tear it out of the hand of your son. 13 Yet I will not tear the whole kingdom from him, but will give him one tribe for the sake of David my servant and for the sake of Jerusalem, which I have chosen."

So who were your teachers at your college or university? Where did your teachers study? What would be genealogy of your education? Would it make it to the early Church?

Where is the origin of your opinion that you can not turn against God once you were filled with the Holy Spirit. Who came with the idea?

 

[DHK]

Jasonik
Stick to New Testament Theology. As I told you already, the saints of the Old Testament, were not indwelt with the Holy Spirit. You are comparing apples to oranges. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit came on the Day of Pentecost. You cannot compare Old Testament saints to the believers of the New Testament and form a doctrine out of it. Solomon never left believing totally from Jehovah although his wives turned him from following the Lord His God fully as David his father did.

This discussion has nothing to do with our original discussion.
You have yet to show me any person filled with the Holy Spirit who turned against God. The Old Testament saints were not filled with the Holy Spirit of God. You must use a New Testament example.
DHK

 

[Janosik]

So you are saying: "The Old Testament saints were not filled with the Holy Spirit of God."

Look at this:
Acts 28:25-26
They disagreed among themselves and began to leave after Paul had made this final statement: “The Holy Spirit spoke the truth to your forefathers when he said through Isaiah the prophet: 26“ ‘Go to this people and say, “You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.”

How do you explain that the Holy Spirit spoke through Isaiah. How do you explain writing of the OT books if the Holy Spirit wasn't in OT saints? The Holy Spirit wrote OT books through Solomon. The whole nation suffered because of him. It emphasizes how terrible it is willingly disobey God.

As far as I know the OT was not abolished. It's part of the Bible. The Bible says a man filled with the Holy Spirit turned against God. You can not deny that no matter what. If Solomon turned against God what is going to stop anybody from doing so.

Jesus says there is the sin. You say it's not relevant to these days. How come? Where does this idea/opinion come from?

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Janosik:
So you are saying: "The Old Testament saints were not filled with the Holy Spirit of God."

Look at this:
Acts 28:25-26
They disagreed among themselves and began to leave after Paul had made this final statement: “The Holy Spirit spoke the truth to your forefathers when he said through Isaiah the prophet: 26“ ‘Go to this people and say, “You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.”

How do you explain that the Holy Spirit spoke through Isaiah. How do you explain writing of the OT books if the Holy Spirit wasn't in OT saints? The Holy Spirit wrote OT books through Solomon. The whole nation suffered because of him. It emphasizes how terrible it is willingly disobey God.

Hebrews 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,

2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

God used holy men of old, as vessels, to write down His inspired words, His revelation to mankind. It was not the men that were inspired, it was the words that God had them write down. There is a difference. God used these men to write down His Words for us. That does not mean these writers were inspired or filled with the Holy Spirit such as New Testament believers were. They were not. They lived under a different dispensation; the dispensation of law, where the Holy Spirit came upon them for periods of time. They were not permanently indwelt with the Holy Spirit as NT believers are. That did not happen until Pentecost. What do you think happened at Pentecost that made it such an unusual event? It marked the beginning of the Church Age, the age where every believer is indwelt with the Holy Spirit.

You talk about Solomon and his many wives.
What about David, a man after God's own heart, and yet a murderer and an adulterer?
Adam, who plunged the entire human race into sin?
Elijah, who after killing 450 prophets of Baal, went into a depression because of the threat of one female??
Noah, rescued from the flood by the grace of God, planted a vineyard and became drunk?
Gideon who defeated the Midianite army, numbering as the sand of the sea (his own army only 300). In his later age he hung up an ephod which caused all the nation of Israel to be plunged into idolatry--a worse sin than Solomon's.
Samson, one of the great judges of Israel--when the Holy Spirit came upon him he had supernatural strenght to do unbelievable feats in the name of the Lord. When he disobeyed God, the Spirit left him, and he often fell into fornication. He had the same problem as Solomon did, and it eventually caused his death, but not before the Holy Spirit came upon him one last time, when he was able to bring down the temple of the Philistines and kill more of them on that day than he had during his entire lifetime--also the time of his own death.

The Holy Spirit came upon and came off these men. It did not indwell them as they indwell believers now. As I said: you are comparing apples to oranges.

As far as I know the OT was not abolished. It's part of the Bible. The Bible says a man filled with the Holy Spirit turned against God. You can not deny that no matter what. If Solomon turned against God what is going to stop anybody from doing so.

Where does it say this? I have asked for a reference and you have not provided me one. There is no example of anyone that has been filled with the Holy Spirit and has turned against God.

Jesus says there is the sin. You say it's not relevant to these days. How come? Where does this idea/opinion come from?

Jesus said that there is a sin called "blasphemy of the Holy Spirit." Did he say who has committed it? Is there any evidence that anyone has committed it? Can you point to anyone filled with the Holy Spirit that has committed it? Where is your evidence of anyone at all committing this sin? You haven't any, nor have you shown any. All that Jesus said, is that there is, or was, such a sin. You haven't given any proof whatsoever that anyone has ever committed that sin.
DHK

 

[Janosik]

They were not permanently indwelt with the Holy Spirit as NT believers are.

Where it's written that the Holy Spirit stays in you permanently?

Jesus says there is the sin and here is another reference to the same sin.
Hebrews 10:26-31
"26If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, 27but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. 28Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? 30For we know him who said, "It is mine to avenge; I will repay,"[4] and again, "The Lord will judge his people."[5] 31It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God."

And here you go from New Testament:
1 Timothy 1:18-20
"18Timothy, my son, I give you this instruction in keeping with the prophecies once made about you, so that by following them you may fight the good fight, 19holding on to faith and a good conscience. Some have rejected these and so have shipwrecked their faith. 20Among them are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan to be taught not to blaspheme."

Over to you

 

[DHK]

Ephesians 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

Ephesians 4:30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.

1 Corinthians 6:19-20 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

Romans 8:8-9 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you.
Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

The Scripture is plain, especially the last quote in Romans 8:8,9. Either you are indwelt by the Spirit of God, or you do not belong to God. If the Spirit of God is not in you, you are not a believer, but are acting according to the flesh, that is, an unsaved person.
And, as Rom.8:8 says, they that are in the flesh cannot please God. An unsaved person cannot please God, for they are not indwelt by the Spirit of God.

Hebrews 10:28-29 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

Context is everything here. The author of the Book of Hebrews was writing to mostly Jewish believers. However, among them were some Jewish unbelievers who were thinking of returning back to the Jewish faith. They fellowshipped with the Jewish Christians, but were not quite yet converted from the Jewish faith yet. Thus Paul gives an example here to warn them of the severe consequences of rejecting Christianity.
The Jews that knew about the law of Moses and rejected it, despised it, died without mercy. That was Old Testament Law.
Now they lived during the New Testament age, and had no doubt even seen the miracles of the Messiah himself before He had been crucified. It will be a far greater punishment that they will face, having this knowledge of the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and then rejecting it, then any Old Testament Jew ever faced. Their judgement that they will face at the Great White Throne Judgement (Rev.20:11-15), will be great indeed. Paul is not addressing Christians. He is addressing those who are considering returning to Judaism instead of embracing Christianity.

1 Timothy 1:20 Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.

This phrase simply refers to the excommunication of two individuals outside of the local church. Because of their sin. Delivering them to Satan means they are outside of the protection of the fellowship of the church, where they would normally have, and be surrounded by, other believers.
Either way, the passage does not say that these people were "filled" with the Holy Spirit. Even if they were indwelt with the Holy Spirit as believers, they certainly were not filled with the Holy Spirit. A person "filled" with the Holy Spirit CANNOT sin as long as he is filled with the Holy Spirit. There is a difference between being filled with the Holy Spirit and being indwelt with the Holy Spirit. Every believer is indwelt with the Holy Spirit, but not every believer is filled with the Holy Spirit. The Bible commands the believer to be filled with the Holy Spirit. It involves a total submission of one's spirit to God, and a consequent willingness to do anything that God desires and/or commands him to do.

Ephesians 5:18 And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;
DHK

 

[Janosik]

Please, make up your mind and stop shooting from your hip.
Once you said:"The indwelling of the Holy Spirit came on the Day of Pentecost."
Now you say:"Even if they were indwelt with the Holy Spirit as believers, they certainly were not filled with the Holy Spirit."
So which one is it? Indwelt or filled?

Now Hymenaeus and Alexander were part of the church if Paul mentioned them by name and as you said they were excommunicated. If they were part of the church we can believe they were baptized and according to your definition they were saved. Another indication is that they had faith. Paul is very clear that they shipwrecked their faith and they blasphemed. I believe that your argument that they were not saved is not right. If we used your thinking so for example Philemon wasn't saved as well even though Paul wrote a letter to him. Can you show me where it says he was saved, filled with the Holy Spirit?

Now I have another question for you. You say you are saved and that's it. Look what Paul says:
1 Corinthians 4:4-5
"4My conscience is clear, but that does not make me innocent. It is the Lord who judges me. 5Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God."

How do you know before the appointed time that you are saved. The Lord will judge you at the appointed time so how do you know the result now? Even Paul says that his clear conscience doesn't make him innocent so how come you are innocent?

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Janosik:
Please, make up your mind and stop shooting from your hip.

My mind has always been made up. My beliefs are based entirely on the Bible. I don't shoot from the hip; I'm no cowboy.

Once you said:"The indwelling of the Holy Spirit came on the Day of Pentecost."
Now you say:"Even if they were indwelt with the Holy Spirit as believers, they certainly were not filled with the Holy Spirit."
So which one is it? Indwelt or filled?

Indwelt and filled are two entirely different operations of the Holy Spirit. Every believer is indwelt by the Holy Spirit at the time of salvation as I demonstrated to you already through Scripture. See Rom.8:8,9. But not every believer is filled with the Holy Spirit. The filling of the Holy Spirit has to do with service not salvation.

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.
--These were all believers. They had already been saved and indwelt by the Spirit. When they prayed they were filled with the Holy Spirit. The result? God gave them the power to speak the Word of God with power. The "filling" of the Holy Spirit was for service, as contrasted to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit which comes to every believer at salvation.

In Eph.5:18 Paul commands the "believers" at Ephesus to be filled with the Holy Spirit. They were already saved, born again, indwelt with the Holy Spirit. Now he commands them to be filled with the Holy Spirit, a different operation of the Holy Spirit. It is a total submission of the believer to the Holy Spirit, whereby the Holy Spirit controls every action of the believer.

Now Hymenaeus and Alexander were part of the church if Paul mentioned them by name and as you said they were excommunicated. If they were part of the church we can believe they were baptized and according to your definition they were saved. Another indication is that they had faith. Paul is very clear that they shipwrecked their faith and they blasphemed. I believe that your argument that they were not saved is not right. If we used your thinking so for example Philemon wasn't saved as well even though Paul wrote a letter to him. Can you show me where it says he was saved, filled with the Holy Spirit?

Paul mentions many people by name that are not necessarily saved.
To Elymas Paul said:

Acts 13:10 And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?
--Read about this man in Acts 13. He was not a saved man. Just because his name is mentioned does not mean he is saved. That is a ludicrous suggestion. The devil is mentioned in the Bible too. The devil also comes to church, in case you haven't noticed.
1John 2:19 indicates that there were false teachers and unsaved people that had crept into the church. 1Cor.5 Paul instructs the Corinthians to excommunicate the man among them that had been committing incest. He calls that man, in spite of his sin, a brother. Thus I do note say it is an impossibility for Hymaneus to be a believer, but the passage doesn't say specifically whether he was or wasn't.
It says nothing about baptism. Baptism is totally irrelvant as it has nothing to do with salvation. Baptism only gets you wet. One can be saved without being baptized. The thief on the cross was not baptized. Baptism and salvation have nothing to with each other. They are mutually exclusive. What I wrote has nothing to do with Philemon.

Now I have another question for you. You say you are saved and that's it. Look what Paul says:
1 Corinthians 4:4-5
"4My conscience is clear, but that does not make me innocent. It is the Lord who judges me. 5Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God."

How do you know before the appointed time that you are saved. The Lord will judge you at the appointed time so how do you know the result now? Even Paul says that his clear conscience doesn't make him innocent so how come you are innocent?

I know I am saved. I know that for a certainty. I am sure that if I died right now I would go straight to Heaven. I am absolutely positive of that fact. Christ has given me eternal life and forgiveness of sins. He has put all my sins under the blood of Christ, never to be remembered any more. They are buried in the depths of the deepest sea. They are cast behind his back. As far as the east is from the west so far has he removed them. They have been atoned for. The price has been paid with his blood. I am his child, forever His. He will never, never disown me. I have a relationship with Him. He is my Father and I am His son. My Father will never cast me out. That is a promise made to me, and God does not lie. I am one of his sheep. I know his voice, and He knows me. He has promised me that I will never perish, and I believe Him, for God does not lie.

So what did Paul say, and what did he mean:
1 Corinthians 4:4-5 For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord.
Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God.
--The situation was this. There were false teachers in the church at Corinth. They were questioning the salvation of Paul, and especially his right to be an apostle. If you go back and read chapter three, they demand that he bring letters of commendation--that is letters to authenticate that he is a true apostle. Paul didn't need to prove anything to these shysters. He had started the church in Corinth. He had won many of them to the Lord himself. He had labored there more than them all. He tells them in chapter three: Ye are my letters of commendation.

So to these false teachers he tells them plainly (for their benefit), that God will bring everything into the light in the last day. They will be judged for their works and he for his. This is the judgement seat of Christ he is referring to, not the Great White Throne Judgement. There are two judgements: one for believers and one for unbelievers. Compare 1Cor.3:11-15 to Revelation 20:1-15. Just as there are two resurrections there are two judgements. Paul is saying that if you do not believe me that I am an apostle now, then you will find out when you stand before God.
DHK

 

[wopik]

how do you know you're really saved?

by faith (Hebrews 11)