King Saul's possession

[Guest ninhao]

I did address it. You are out of context.

In the OT the Spirit came upon people, but God never indwelt anyone who was full of sin and dead in tresspasses. That person must die because their Blood is required for their sins. The only way that the Holy Spirit could be sent to indwell a believer in the NT was after the substitutionary death and the subsequent ressurection of the Lord and His ascension to the Father.

Sampson was not indwelt and neither was David. David was anointed and Gods Spirit came upon him. Samson had God's Spirit come upon him. it also left him.

Jg 14:6

And the Spirit of the LORD came mightily upon him, and he tore him as he would have torn a kid, and he had nothing in his hand: but he told not his father or his mother what he had done.

Jg 16:20

And she said, The Philistines be upon you, Samson. And he awoke out of his sleep, and said, I will go out as at other times before, and shake myself. And he knew not that the LORD was departed from him.

I believe that this poses a problem for your theory. How do you propose to solve it?

Peace,

Dave

This post was found in the crossfire and I will now answer.

It can be solved with several scriptures of which I will only post one for your consideration, for now.

1Pe 1:9-11 Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls. (10) Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: (11) Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

The Holy Spirit was in these prophets. How can you suggest He wasn't ?

A late edit, if i may.

We see the Holy Spirit coming upon people also in the NT even Lord Jesus.

Luk_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.

Act_2:17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

Do these occurrences of the Holy Spirit suggest He is only external to the recipients ?

[Matthitjah]

I did address it. You are out of context.

In the OT the Spirit came upon people, but God never indwelt anyone who was full of sin and dead in tresspasses. That person must die because their Blood is required for their sins. The only way that the Holy Spirit could be sent to indwell a believer in the NT was after the substitionary death and the subsequent ressurection of the Lord and His ascension to the Father.

In the NT, some disciples received the Holy spirit before the resurrection of our Lord.

Joh 20:22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:

There instances in the OT where the Holy Spirit is said to be in believers.

1Pe 1:9-11 Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls. (10) Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: (11) Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

Can you tell what you consider the hope of the 12 tribes is ? I did not see you answer this question in relation to indwelling of the Holy spirit.

Act 26:7 Unto which promise our twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night, hope to come. For which hope's sake, king Agrippa, I am accused of the Jews.

That scripture from Peter does not signify that the Prophets were indwelt with the Holy Spirit. Merely that God's Spirit spoke from within them as they were inspired. The case is being made by Peter that the Spirit that spoke was the pre-incarnate Christ or the Word.

The Hope that they served diligently day and night for was bound up in Christ. Paul when he was a Pharisee did not receiev it and he is making the case as he preaches the Good News of the Gospel that he has done nothing deserving of punishment becauase he preaches the same hope that Agrippa supposedly holds. The Hope of the Messiah who is the fulfillment of the promised Blessing because now, meaning while Paul is speaking, He has in fact come.

[GoldenEagle]

Ninhao I think I see what Matthijah is saying here... Perhaps the view you're taking might take away from the awesome power of the death and ressurection of Jesus Christ.

I've read what you propose that supports your position but I believe we'll have to agree to disagree brother. I don't believe that before Jesus Christ death, burial, and ressurection God's Holy Spirit indwelled people who were unforgiven. Light and darkness cannot mix. In Christ there is no darkness. To me it's really that simple.

God bless,

GE

[Matthitjah]

What was bound up in that "Hope to come" that Paul spoke of? Wasn't it the Promise and what is the fullness of the Promise? Can you receive Christ and not His Spirit?

How could Abraham receive something that hadn't yet come to pass? I know that your answer will be by faith and that is correct because that is how he obtained it, but scripture indicates that he saw the promise afar off and died having never received it. However, we are on the polar opposite side that Abraham was on.

Peace,

Dave

The passage is specifically about the resurrection and so possibly my premise may also be allowed.

Act 26:7-8 Unto which promise our twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night, hope to come. For which hope's sake, king Agrippa, I am accused of the Jews. (8) Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead?

Yes Abraham did look forward to the promises.

No not at all because they were receiving the Blessing and the Promise who was Christ Himself, the Messiah, and you cannot receive Him without receiving His new Life and His Spirit which is why the Messiah told Nicodemus that he had to be born again.

The Blessed Hope was not only the Ressurection because that merely signified Christ's victory over hell, death, and the grave. Absent receiving His New Life and Spirit you remain dead. There are millions of people in the world who have heard the Testimony of His Ressurection and refuse to receive it. They are absent the Blessed Hope of the Fathers. Even those of Abrahams flesh.

[Matthitjah]

I did address it. You are out of context.

In the OT the Spirit came upon people, but God never indwelt anyone who was full of sin and dead in tresspasses. That person must die because their Blood is required for their sins. The only way that the Holy Spirit could be sent to indwell a believer in the NT was after the substitutionary death and the subsequent ressurection of the Lord and His ascension to the Father.

Sampson was not indwelt and neither was David. David was anointed and Gods Spirit came upon him. Samson had God's Spirit come upon him. it also left him.

Jg 14:6

And the Spirit of the LORD came mightily upon him, and he tore him as he would have torn a kid, and he had nothing in his hand: but he told not his father or his mother what he had done.

Jg 16:20

And she said, The Philistines be upon you, Samson. And he awoke out of his sleep, and said, I will go out as at other times before, and shake myself. And he knew not that the LORD was departed from him.

I believe that this poses a problem for your theory. How do you propose to solve it?

Peace,

Dave

This post was found in the crossfire and I will now answer.

It can be solved with several scriptures of which I will only post one for your consideration, for now.

1Pe 1:9-11 Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls. (10) Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: (11) Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

The Holy Spirit was in these prophets. How can you suggest He wasn't ?

A late edit, if i may.

We see the Holy Spirit coming upon people also in the NT even Lord Jesus.

Luk_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.

Act_2:17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

Do these occurrences of the Holy Spirit suggest He is only external to the recipients ?

You're missing the key part there, "and your sons and your daughters," this already happened at Pentecost and many people are still not prophesying. Only those sons and daughters have received the promise. Peter was explaining what these folks were witnessing. This happened at pentecost when the Blessed Hope of the Father's or Patriarches that Paul spoke about was fulfilled.

Ac 21:9

And the same man had four daughters, virgins, who did prophesy.

It appears that Philip had four daughters who did prophesy.

[Guest ninhao]

No not at all because they were receiving the Blessing and the Promise who was Christ Himself, the Messiah, and you cannot receive Him without receiving His new Life and His Spirit which is why the Messiah told Nicodemus that he had to be born again.

Jesus not only told nicodemus that he must be born again but He also infered Nicodemus should have already understood this concept because he was "a master of Israel".

Joh 3:10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

Being born again was not a new concept but only explained more clearly by Jesus.

The Blessed Hope was not only the Ressurection because that merely signified Christ's victory over hell, death, and the grave. Absent receiving His New Life and Spirit you remain dead. There are millions of people in the world who have heard the Testimony of His Ressurection and refuse to receive it. They are absent the Blessed Hope of the Fathers. Even those of Abrahams flesh.

Yes this is true but I don't see how it applies to indwelling of the Holy Spirit. the blessed hope of the resurrection was held by all pre Christ believers in the same manner as we hold it.

[Guest ninhao]

That scripture from Peter does not signify that the Prophets were indwelt with the Holy Spirit. Merely that God's Spirit spoke from within them as they were inspired. The case is being made by Peter that the Spirit that spoke was the pre-incarnate Christ or the Word.

The Hope that they served diligently day and night for was bound up in Christ. Paul when he was a Pharisee did not receiev it and he is making the case as he preaches the Good News of the Gospel that he has done nothing deserving of punishment becauase he preaches the same hope that Agrippa supposedly holds. The Hope of the Messiah who is the fulfillment of the promised Blessing because now, meaning while Paul is speaking, He has in fact come.

Yes the Spirit that spoke from IN the prophets was pre incarnate Christ, of course. there is no other Holy Spirit. The text says the Holy Spirit was IN them and so I don't understand why you insist He wasn't.

I will ask you know a couple of simple questions to clarify your position, if I may.

1. Do you believe all believers must be born again to enter the Kingdom of God ?

2. Do you believe being born again necessitates the indwelling of the Holy spirit ?

3. If so when do you say the OT Saints became born again and received the Holy Spirit ?

Now I have heard people use 1 Peter 3:9 to suggest Jesus "saved" these OT Saints while He was in the grave. Is this you position ?

[Guest ninhao]

Ninhao I think I see what Matthijah is saying here... Perhaps the view you're taking might take away from the awesome power of the death and ressurection of Jesus Christ.

I've read what you propose that supports your position but I believe we'll have to agree to disagree brother. I don't believe that before Jesus Christ death, burial, and ressurection God's Holy Spirit indwelled people who were unforgiven. Light and darkness cannot mix. In Christ there is no darkness. To me it's really that simple.

God bless,

GE

I am interested why the OT Saints looking forward to the Christ Who would redeem the world takes away from the power the resurrection, really.

The OT Saints had the same hope we have of the blessed assurance of the resurrection and needed to be born again to be part of it. Jesus expected Nicodemus to know this and I'm very sure ALL OT Saints did.

If God considered an OT Saint righteous I'm not sure how you could suggest they were, some way, in darkness. They were saved by grace through their faith in the same manner as we are today. I am quite confused by your position and don't understand why we separate these OT Saints in such a way.

Well I do know. It is common dispensation doctrine that has been accepted widely. It is a very incorrect doctrine though imo and I suggest you look into more closely. It isn't something that is deathly important but I am always interested how some doctrines form their base.

How, and when, do you say the OT Saints became born again ? ( if you've spent enough time upon this subject feel free not to reply )

[GoldenEagle]

Ninhao I think I see what Matthijah is saying here... Perhaps the view you're taking might take away from the awesome power of the death and ressurection of Jesus Christ.

I've read what you propose that supports your position but I believe we'll have to agree to disagree brother. I don't believe that before Jesus Christ death, burial, and ressurection God's Holy Spirit indwelled people who were unforgiven. Light and darkness cannot mix. In Christ there is no darkness. To me it's really that simple.

God bless,

GE

I am interested why the OT Saints looking forward to the Christ Who would redeem the world takes away from the power the resurrection, really.

The OT Saints had the same hope we have of the blessed assurance of the resurrection and needed to be born again to be part of it. Jesus expected Nicodemus to know this and I'm very sure ALL OT Saints did.

If God considered an OT Saint righteous I'm not sure how you could suggest they were, some way, in darkness. They were saved by grace through their faith in the same manner as we are today. I am quite confused by your position and don't understand why we separate these OT Saints in such a way.

Well I do know. It is common dispensation doctrine that has been accepted widely. It is a very incorrect doctrine though imo and I suggest you look into more closely. It isn't something that is deathly important but I am always interested how some doctrines form their base.

How, and when, do you say the OT Saints became born again ? ( if you've spent enough time upon this subject feel free not to reply )

I will take a look at what you say again. I tend to take a Futurist view of Biblical revelation which from I understand seems to be in line with dispensationalism.

If you are not a dispenstionalist what would you consider yourself? Are you in favor of supersessionism?

When do you think think OT Saints became born again?

Curious.

God bless,

GE

[Guest ninhao]

I will take a look at what you say again. I tend to take a Futurist view of Biblical revelation which from I understand seems to be in line with dispensationalism.

If you are not a dispenstionalist what would you consider yourself? Are you in favor of supersessionism?

When do you think think OT Saints became born again?

Curious.

God bless,

GE

Supersessionism ( replacement theology ) certainly not !

Rom 11:28-29 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes. (29) For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

I will add that being a dispensationalist implies supersessionism in many circles. Did you know this ?

I do not consider myself any "ist" really because I have found positions amid them all which are illogical. However I can safely say I am post-tribulation and several other subset positions of the "ists"

The OT Saints were saved by the grace of God through their faith and became born again the moment they believed, the same as us. I think dispensation position makes a simple story quite complicated.

Your turn.

When do you say OT Saints became born again Mr GoldenEagle( -come Nicodemus )?