Judas Iscariot: Saved for a while.

[smaller]

Trying to claim Saul's question; "What shall I do, Lord?" wasn't asking/seeking is .., what's the word I'm looking for???? Oh yea, "lame sight".

Acts 22:10 (NKJV) So I said, ‘What shall I do, Lord?’​

What you seem to be missing is that it was that very ENCOUNTER with Jesus that made Paul HIS WITNESS and His minister. Acts 26:13-18.

Why are you seeking to diminish HIS witness is the real question isn't it? When anyone tells us JESUS IS REAL and here is my "personal witness" why this is so, you are hearing from a TRUTHFUL CONVERT, a WITNESS of Jesus.

No one can say that Jesus Is Lord, except via the Holy Ghost. 1 Cor. 12:3.

Did Saul call Jesus Lord in that encounter? Absolutely!

Acts 9:
5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
6 And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?

Apart from the Holy Ghost Saul couldn't have even squeaked out that fact. The Holy Ghost was already "within him" to make that claim, SUBSEQUENT workings of same Holy Ghost notwithstanding.

 

[smaller]

Trying to claim Saul's question; "What shall I do, Lord?" wasn't asking/seeking is .., what's the word I'm looking for???? Oh yea, "lame sight".

Acts 22:10 (NKJV) So I said, ‘What shall I do, Lord?’​

Saul called Jesus LORD. That much is pretty obvious. 1 Cor. 12:3 tells us all we need to know, just from that.

 

[chessman]

The result of Saul's conversion on the road to Damascus, prompted Ananias, who was instructed by the Lord, to call Him "brother".

Acts 22:12 (NKJV) “Then a certain Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good testimony with all the Jews who dwelt there, ​

Yep, Saul was a "brother" of the Jews according to the law who dwelt in Damascus when he entered the city and after.
You didn't:

post the Scripture that teaches we must ask: "Lord, what do You want me to do?" in order to show we believe and by saved by faith.

Nor answer the question:

Do you believe genuine believers are born again by the Holy Spirit of God and are indwelt, baptized into the body of Christ?

 

[GodsGrace]

Error

 

[chessman]

What you seem to be missing is that it was that very ENCOUNTER with Jesus that made Paul HIS WITNESS and His minister. Acts 26:13-18.

Among the error you missed (Jesus said Saul was a persecutor after seeing the light), you are missing the fact that Jesus said Saul must do certain things in order to become His minister. Two of which was to go "into the city" and to receive the Holy Spirit in the city.

Apart from the Holy Ghost Saul couldn't have even squeaked out that fact.

Saul 'squeaked out' "Lord" his whole life. Not until after his indwelling of the Holy Spirit of God, did he mouth the Confession "Lord Jesus".

Acts 7:57-59 (LEB) But crying out with a loud voice, they stopped their ears and rushed at him with one purpose. And after they had driven him out of the city, they began to stone him, and the witnesses laid aside their cloaks at the feet of a young man named Saul. And they kept on stoning Stephen as he was calling out and saying, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit!”​

 

[chessman]

I asked: Do you believe genuine believers are born again by the Holy Spirit of God and are indwelt, baptized into the body of Christ? (Serious question)

From experience Jesus comes to believers in many different ways. I know many instant converts from my charismatic days and was "made so" myself. Not as in quite that dramatic fashion as Saul, but it was instant conversion for me. Can't say that's everyone's experience, but it's not unusual to hear accounts of instant conversion. You won't hear too many of such accounts in "dead ritual" churches however. And believers who've had instant conversions are not too fond of "dead ritual" assemblies, again, from observations.

I have seriously witnessed and participated by witnessing myself and seeing many "instant conversions." Many.

Is that a yes or no? I can't tell.

BTW, Jesus came to Saul that way as an unbeliever. Not a believer.

But to say Saul didn't have a dramatic life changing experience ON THE SPOT is just ridiculous.

I didn't say "Saul didn't have a dramatic life changing experience ON THE SPOT ". How ridiculous to claim that I did. For goodness sake, the man was blinded ON THE SPOT. That's quite life changing. As is his healing done inside the city. And his washing away of his sins done inside the city. And his baptism by the Holy Spirit done inside the city.

 

[smaller]

I asked: Do you believe genuine believers are born again by the Holy Spirit of God and are indwelt, baptized into the body of Christ? (Serious question)

Is that a yes or no? I can't tell.

Obviously you weren't paying attention. I noted prior the fact that SAUL called Jesus Lord validates the Holy Ghost already working in him. 1 Cor. 12:3. Not to mention the experience itself, directed specifically towards him and not the others.

BTW, Jesus came to Saul that way as an unbeliever. Not a believer.

Pretty sure it only took that one encounter to convince him otherwise. And BTW everyone starts out as an unbeliever prior to belief.

I didn't say "Saul didn't have a dramatic life changing experience ON THE SPOT ". How ridiculous to claim that I did.

Then why are you trying to diminish what happened? Paul himself claims this sight of Jesus was what turned him, even associating the term "BORN" with that event.

1 Corinthians 15:6-8
After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.

For goodness sake, the man was blinded ON THE SPOT. That's quite life changing.

No kidding? What was even your point in trying to claim otherwise?

As is his healing done inside the city. And his washing away of his sins done inside the city. And his baptism by the Holy Spirit done inside the city.

After a born again experience the scales always fall off afterwards. Your notions about sin is a completely different discussion. Sins were taken away at the Cross as far as sins being COUNTED AGAINST US. We are "reconciled" to the fact after belief but the fact of being sinners didn't change. Washing away sins didn't and doesn't make any of us SINLESS as in some notion that we are no longer sinners. That DIDN'T happen, before or after salvation.

Col. 2:
13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

He was crucified and we were forgiven long before we showed up to come to that realization. We are "quickened" to realize it after the fact, just as Paul came to realize. In any case NO ONE is made sinless post salvation, not even Paul by his own admissions of that fact. Romans 7:17-21, 1 Tim. 1:15 claim the exact opposite.

So the notions of "washing away sins" has to be examined for details on what that means. There are believers today who believe they become "sinless" after salvation or after baptism. That simply is NOT the case nor do scriptures present that is the case. I doubt Paul had a clue about the details of these things at that FIRST STRIKE of Jesus Lightening, just as many believers do not.

They just know Jesus, and that's probably all that matters in the end.

 

[chessman]

I noted prior the fact that SAUL called Jesus Lord validates the Holy Ghost already working in him. 1 Cor. 12:3.

Here's what 1 Cor 12:3 says:

1 Corinthians 12:3 (LEB) Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God says, “Jesus is accursed,” and no one is able to say “Jesus is Lord” except by the Holy Spirit. ​

Post where Saul confessed: "Jesus is Lord" while on the road outside the city of Damascus. It's not there that Paul said, "Jesus is Lord". "Jesus is Lord" is an early Christian confession/Creed and it's in quotation marks for a reason.

Not to mention the experience itself, directed specifically towards him and not the others.

You realize that the others saw the light too, right? They had an experience there too. Did it save them, in your opinion?

 

[GodsGrace]

chessman

[QUOTE="chessman, post: 1284879, member: 4074"
]I know who Saul was speaking to because Paul gives witness to the account three times. He was speaking to the Lord Jesus.
The issue is not who's voice it was (that's obvious), but rather, what did Saul say. Did he say; 'Lord Jesus, you are the risen Christ, wash me of my sins', no.

Chessman,
There's some confusion in your statements.
In your post no. 555 you tell JLB the following:
Saul never said "Lord Jesus" with his mouth, confessing Jesus as 'His Lord' with his mouth until after he entered into the city and was baptized with the Holy Spirit inside the city. And Saul was Ananias' Jewish brother and carried a letter in his hand from the High Priests to other Jewish brothers in the city authorizing Saul to arrest Christians. Plus, Saul was led into the city by other Jewish brothers wanting to do that very thing (arrest Christians). "Brother" in this context was being used as in a fellow Jew. Just as "Lord" was being used by Saul to inquire if the voice was the voice of God.

Saul did NOT confess with his mouth "the Lord Jesus" while on the road outside of Damascus.

Now, to me above, you state that you know that Paul was speaking to the Lord Jesus because he gives an account of this.
Which is it? Did Paul know the voice was Jesus or not?? Of course he DID. I agree with Smaller. One falls off his horse, sees a light, hears a voice - I'd say that's a conversion experience.

This Text doesn't say he confessed Jesus Christ is Lord, risen from the dead while outside Damascus. Why? Because he didn't say it then. If he had believed it, Paul's testimony would be that he believed it then. And what of the others with him. Did they hear Saul confess Jesus is Lord, then help him into the city??? No, Paul's testimony is that his first confession was to those in Damascus, not outside.
His own testimony is that he went into Damascus carrying a letter authorizing persecution of Christians being led by other persecutors.

The point is, Saul was baptized with the Holy Spirit inside the city, not out. And his sins were washed away inside the city, contrary to your previous claim. He did NOT become a genuine believer until he was baptized with the Holy Spirit. And guess what, Judas didn't either. Why? Because Judas was never baptized with the Holy Spirit. He was dead when the other disciples received the Holy Spirit.

You seem to employ a method as to how to be saved. One must confess Jesus is Lord, risen from the dead, and be baptized with the Holy Spirit. I don't agree with your method and no where in scripture does it state that all of the above must be done in order to be saved.
Acts 2:21 If we call on the name of the Lord, we shall be saved.

You still have not stated clearly that one must be baptized to be saved. Some believe this. Question: I accept Jesus as Lord. I die without being baptized. Am I saved?

You repeat the phrase "genuine believer". Could you please state the difference between a genuine believer and a believer?


It's theoretically possible Paul believed the voice was Jesus' voice on the road, sure. He could have also thought the voice was Jesus' angel as those who were praying for Peter's release from prison thought it was Peter's angle knocking at the door (see Acts 12:15). Or that he was simply hearing voices in his head that others couldn't hear.

Acts 12:15 (LEB) But they said to her, “You are out of your mind!” But she kept insisting it was so. And they kept saying, “It is his angel!”​

But, Scripturally speaking, neither Saul, nor Judas (nor anyone else) could have genuinely believed that Jesus Christ is Lord, raised from the dead without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. It's really just that simple.

Again, confusion. You say it's theoretically possible Paul believed the voice was Jesus'. But in this post you state at the beginning that you KNOW it was the voice of Jesus.

Let me ask you this also:
Does one believe in Jesus and THEN become indwelt
OR
Is one indwelt with the Holy Spirit and THEN comes to believe?

No person can be a genuine Christian believer without being baptized/indwelt with the Holy Spirit. There is a reason this Christian site has the Statement of Faith (not Terms of Service) that it does. It's true.

1 Corinthians 2:14 (NKJV) But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Acts 11:16-17 (LEB) And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ Therefore if God gave them the same gift as also to us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to be able to hinder God?”
​

Saul didn't know how to discern the voice being Jesus without the Holy Spirit's indwelling. And he didn't get the Holy Spirit's indwelling outside the city, per Paul's own testimony.

I meant Statement of Faith, sorry)
So Paul didn't get the Holy Spirit until he entered Damascus and thus could not know if was Jesus' voice.
However, once again, you state above that you know Paul knew it was Jesus because he gives this account three times.
You see, you need to clarify this position.
I agree with your statement above: That Paul DID KNOW the voice was that of our Lord.

​

Yes, it's important because genuine believers are born again by the Holy Spirit of God. Do you believe that genuine believers are born again by the Holy Spirit of God, yes or no? You didn't answer this question before.

You separate God. A person is born again because he comes to believe in Jesus. Father, Son and Holy Spirit are ALWAYS present.
John 3:16.
Acts 4:12
Galatians 2:16

Jesus saves us. I'm doing a study on this in the Foundation of Faith forum - check it out. God the Father...

Again you mention a genuine believer. Please remember to state the difference between that and a believer.

​

END PART I

 

[GodsGrace]

PART II

Why do you make claims about the Text that are so demonstrably false (all the while telling me my statements about the events are "wrong")??? Read it, study it, pray about it. Even state what you assume. But stop making these demonstrably false claims about it.

Why are my claims wrong and yours are correct?
Thanks for the advice: I'll make sure to read it, study it and pray about it. OR, I might already have done all three.

You claimed his sins were washed away outside the city, yet the Text clearly says his sins were washed away at his baptism of the Holy Spirit inside the city.

I've already stated my position on the above. John the Baptist, the Jewish baptism by John, the development of the "born again experience" as was conceived in the 1800's. At the time of Acts, one had to believe in Jesus as Savior and DO what a "Christian was expected to do."
For example, Mathew 5 to 7. When Jesus said in John 3 that one had to be born from above, He clearly states that one must be born from above to SEE the Kingdom of God so that the person may be a part of it by doing his share.

Now you're saying Saul was no longer a persecutor AFTER he saw the light. No Wondering, Jesus Himself says Saul was still a persecutor AFTER Saul saw the light (and heard the voice, BTW).

Acts 22:5-8 (NKJV) as also the high priest bears me witness, and all the council of the elders, from whom I also received letters to the brethren, and went to Damascus to bring in chains even those who were there to Jerusalem to be punished. “Now it happened, as I journeyed and came near Damascus at about noon, suddenly a great light from heaven shone around me. And I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?’ So I answered, ‘Who are You, Lord?’ And He said to me, ‘I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting.’​

Jesus doesn't say 'whom you were persecuting'. He says "you are persecuting" (presently). YES after Saul saw the light and heard the voice. And again (last time) Paul says that Saul went to Damascus with the letter in hand being led by the other persecutors he traveled with.

I already spoke to this. Whom you ARE persecuting. Present tense. IMMEDIATELY after seeing the light and hearing the voice and saying "Lord, what shall I do? (Acts 22:10), at THIS MOMENT Paul was saved and no longer persecuted ANYONE, as per Acts.
He was BLIND, he went into Damascus and Ananias embraced him as a brother. WHO did Paul persecute in between these two moments??

Please show me who Paul persecuted after he heard Jesus voice.


Do you think he and his companions threw the High Priests' letter to the "brethren" away outside the city or something??? He and his companions carried it into the city per Paul's on testimony.

Could you please show me what happened to letter of the High Priests?

Saul and Ananias were Jewish brothers. So were the High Priests and Jews living in Damascus. Ananias didn't call Saul a brother in Christ. He meant fellow Jew.

Please read Acts 9:10-17
Jesus tells Ananias to go to Paul. Ananias calls Him, Lord. Ananias is a member of The Way and a born again Christian.
Jesuss tells Ananias He has plans for Paul to bear witness to the gentiles.
Based on this, I do believe Ananias meant to greet Paul as a fellow Christian when addressing him as "brother."


Some understand that, some don't. I know people that think you aren't saved until you die and are judged a believer by Jesus. Odd really.

It doesn't matter what anyone believes, but what the bible says.
I must say, that to some point I'd have to agree with the above since we don't know for sure that we will remain in the Lord until
our dying breath.

But okay, Saul's sins were washed away inside the city (not outside) as I said. Poof, salvation inside the city not outside per your own understanding above (and mine). And once again (last time) this occured at his baptism of the Holy Spirit inside the city. I've already posted the verses from Paul's own testimony that proves Saul's sins were washed away inside the city (numerous times), contray to your earlier claim. How come Paul didn't say his sins were washed away while outside the city, on your view???

And genuine believers are born again by the Holy Spirit of God, right? You never answered this question. Nor has JLB.

Acts 22:9 (NASB) And those who were with me saw the light, to be sure, but did not understand the voice of the One who was speaking to me.​

Acts 9:7 (LEB) Now the men who were traveling together with him stood speechless, because they heard the voice but saw no one.​

There is no contradiction in Paul's testimony. The others heard a "sound" (phóné) but not the sound of someone speaking (the voice of the Lord).

John 12:27-30 (LEB) “Now my soul is troubled, and what shall I say? ‘Father, deliver me from this hour’? But for this reason I have come to this hour! Father, glorify your name!” Then a voice came from heaven, “I have both glorified it, and I will glorify it again.” Now the crowd that stood there and heard it said it had thundered. Others were saying, “An angel has spoken to him!” Jesus answered and said, “This voice has not happened for my sake, but for your sake.​

Jesus' sheep hear (and listen to) His voice. Others just hear noises.

But that's not why I underlined it. I underlined it because Saul is pointing out the very reason he responded to the voice with his question. It was because the others could not verify/testify to what the voice said. They just heard sounds.

We agree on this. Some hear Jesus. Some hear sounds. Paul heard Jesus.

We have the advantage of hindsight. We know all about the rest of Paul's life and how much the Lord Jesus meant to him, his dedication, etc. But think about how Saul felt that day (again without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit yet) in his situation outside the city.[/QUOTE]

END

 

[smaller]

Here's what 1 Cor 12:3 says:

1 Corinthians 12:3 (LEB) Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God says, “Jesus is accursed,” and no one is able to say “Jesus is Lord” except by the Holy Spirit. ​

Post where Saul confessed: "Jesus is Lord" while on the road outside the city of Damascus. It's not there that Paul said, "Jesus is Lord". "Jesus is Lord" is an early Christian confession/Creed and it's in quotation marks for a reason.

Saul knew that it was JESUS speaking and called him LORD. Do you think Jesus isn't LORD unless Saul used the term "Jesus?" Acts 9:5-6

Just how picky are you anyway?

You realize that the others saw the light too, right? They had an experience there too. Did it save them, in your opinion?

Of course it didn't save them. At least we have no record that it did.

The fact that only SAUL HEARD should tell us all we need to know. Saul was MADE to hear. The others were not.

Believers who have an extreme "bent or focus" to external forensics tend to not have had many encounters with the Holy Spirit themselves, because that IS an internal matter, of the heart.

Romans 5:5
And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.

I'll flat out guarantee there was NO DOUBT left in Saul's mind about either of these facts, after that event:

Romans 10:9
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

The exercises above are internal. It's only a shame when they are turned into dead rituals trying to make it so by external forensic exercises, which are quite meaningless. There are a lot of mumbling externally made pseudo believers who end up actually BELIEVING from their hearts, afterwards.

I'm also certain that Saul (and multiple millions of others) did a lot of meaningless dead rituals prior to the events of his actual conversion. There are certainly approaches done in a fleshly manner.

Phil. 3:
4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:
5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.

You can tell a "flesh convert" today by similar claims. External exercises (circumcision), belonging to X tribe/sect in X country and they believe X about scriptures (law), are blameless in those beliefs and persecute anyone who thinks otherwise. FLESH CONVERTS, all.

 

[Jim Parker]

I see a lot of posts about free will in this thread. Do we have a free will? We have a will but is it really free? We are always influenced by something. Judas was chosen by God to betray Jesus. Our hearts are putty in His hands. He can do with them as He pleases.

Yes we really do have free will.
There are many influences in our lives but we are still responsible for the choices we make. We can choose to do good or evil.
I believe that Judas was chosen to betray Jesus nut Judas had to make that decision on his own. God did not force him.
God does not tempt anyone to do anything evil.
James 1:13-15 (RSV) Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am tempted by God"; for God cannot be tempted with evil and he himself tempts no one; but each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin; and sin when it is full-grown brings forth death.

and what God pleases is found here:

2Pe 3:9 (RSV) The Lord is not slow about his promise as some count slowness, but is forbearing toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.

If we do not have free will but only do as God causes us to do then God is the author of all evil and sin and has no right to condemn anyone for what HE made them do.


iakov the fool
(beaucoup dien cai dau)




DISCLAIMER: By reading the words posted above, you have made a free will choice to expose yourself to the rantings of iakov the fool. The poster assumes no responsibility for any temporary, permanent or otherwise annoying manifestations of cognitive dysfunction that, in any manner, may allegedly be related to the reader’s deliberate act by which he/she has knowingly allowed the above rantings to enter into his/her consciousness. No warrantee is expressed or implied. Individual mileage may vary. And, no, I don't want to hear about it. No sniveling! Enjoy the rest of your life here and the eternal one to come.

 

[GodsGrace]

Saul knew that it was JESUS speaking and called him LORD. Do you think Jesus isn't LORD unless Saul used the term "Jesus?" Acts 9:5-6

Just how picky are you anyway?


Of course it didn't save them. At least we have no record that it did.

The fact that only SAUL HEARD should tell us all we need to know. Saul was MADE to hear. The others were not.

Believers who have an extreme "bent or focus" to external forensics tend to not have had many encounters with the Holy Spirit themselves, because that IS an internal matter, of the heart.

Romans 5:5
And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.

I'll flat out guarantee there was NO DOUBT left in Saul's mind about either of these facts, after that event:

Romans 10:9
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

The exercises above are internal. It's only a shame when they are turned into dead rituals trying to make it so by external forensic exercises, which are quite meaningless. There are a lot of mumbling externally made pseudo believers who end up actually BELIEVING from their hearts, afterwards.

I'm also certain that Saul (and multiple millions of others) did a lot of meaningless dead rituals prior to the events of his actual conversion. There are certainly approaches done in a fleshly manner.

Phil. 3:
4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:
5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.

You can tell a "flesh convert" today by similar claims. External exercises (circumcision), belonging to X tribe/sect in X country and they believe X about scriptures (law), are blameless in those beliefs and persecute anyone who thinks otherwise. FLESH CONVERTS, all.

Amen to all.
Well said.

 

[smaller]

I believe that Judas was chosen to betray Jesus nut Judas had to make that decision on his own. God did not force him.

Typical example of people trying to play it both ways.

Act 4:26-28 says it was Gods Hand and Counsel that turned these folk against Jesus.

26 The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ.
27 For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,
28 For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.

Had God NOT been actively involved in the events it wouldn't have even happened, other than by the random chance of a myriad of potential freewill elements.

What were the chances of ALL of those events transpiring in a strictly freewill setting? Laughably infinitesimal. Much smaller chance than the chances of Saul becoming a believer without Divine Intervention.

Freewill postures that the crucifixion was nothing but a random accident of multiple thousands of freewill actions that happened to accidentally churn out The Perfect and Foretold Will of God all on their own without Gods tampering whatsoever with any of them.

I'd find that not only highly unlikely, but completely preposterous.

 

[GodsGrace]

I see a lot of posts about free will in this thread. Do we have a free will? We have a will but is it really free? We are always influenced by something. Judas was chosen by God to betray Jesus. Our hearts are putty in His hands. He can do with them as He pleases.

If we don't have a free will, what does that make YOU?

Wondering

 

[chessman]

We agree on this. Some hear Jesus. Some hear sounds. Paul heard Jesus.

And was blinded for three days:

John 12:29-30, 34, 39-40, 42-43 (LEB) Now the crowd that stood there and heard it said it had thundered. Others were saying, “An angel has spoken to him!”​

Ah, but some heard the voice and simply thought it was the voice of an angel. In my opinion, like Saul. But Saul had a destination to be healed and to be baptized with the Holy Spirit in the city.

Jesus answered and said, “This voice has not happened for my sake, but for your sake. ​

He's referring to those in the crowd that heard the voice, but thought it was an angel (Like Saul, in my opinion) as the others in the crowd didn't hear a voice at all, they heard a sound (like those traveling with Saul).

Then the crowd replied to him, “We have heard from the law that the Christ remains forever! And how do you say that the Son of Man must be lifted up? Who is this Son of Man?” For this reason they were not able to believe, because again Isaiah said,​

“He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, lest they see with their eyes and understand with their hearts and turn, and I heal them.”
​

Again, Saul was healed inside the city (not out). Your view has Jesus striking a converted genuine believer blind on the spot versus healing a blind unbeliever (though an unbeliever destined to be a believer) in the process of washing away his sins. Suffice it to say, I believe my view makes a lot more sense.

It doesn't matter what anyone believes, but what the bible says.

And the Bible clearly says Saul was healed and Saul's sins were washed away inside the city.

Acts 9:11, 18-21 (LEB) And the Lord said to him, “Get up, go to the street called ‘Straight’ and in the house of Judas look for a man named Saul from Tarsus. For behold, he is praying,

Acts 22:5, 11, 16 as indeed the high priest and the whole council of elders can testify about me, from whom also I received letters to the brothers in Damascus, and was traveling there to lead away those who were there also tied up to Jerusalem so that they could be punished. And as I could not see as a result of the brightness of that light, I arrived in Damascus led by the hand of those who were with me.
​

I do believe Ananias meant to greet Paul as a fellow Christian when addressing him as "brother."

Maybe, maybe not. Or maybe Ananias knew what God was about to do with Saul. But notice how Saul had a letter to the "brothers" from the High Priests. It's inconclusive to base Saul's conversion on the use of the word "brother". It's not even clear that Ananias was of The Way. What's clear is that Ananias was still in good standing with those "brothers" in the city looking to arrest and punish those of The Way. So if he was of The Way (Christian), he did so relatively in the shadows (which is what I believe). But ask yourself this, since you agree that Saul's companions did not convert on the road. Who's house did they lead him to? Why would he be in the house of someone of The Way, if it were persecutors that led him to the city street and house???

And now why are you delaying? Get up, be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name!’
​

You're not going to convince me that Saul came into the city a washed man! Or one healed of blindness.

And immediately something like scales fell from his eyes and he regained his sight and got up and was baptized, and after taking food, he regained his strength.

And immediately he began proclaiming Jesus in the synagogues: “This one is the Son of God!” (see John 12)​

Could you please show me what happened to letter of the High Priests?

According to Paul, Saul was occupied with it all the way into the city. After that, I don't know what happened to it. Maybe he gave it to the man in Damascus named Judas, IDK.

Acts 26:12 (NKJV) “While thus occupied, as I journeyed to Damascus with authority and commission from the chief priests, ...​

Again you mention a genuine believer. Please remember to state the difference between that and a believer.

I mentioned it because I was quoting the SoF belief in what constitutes a "genuine believer".

So Paul didn't get the Holy Spirit until he entered Damascus and thus could not know if was Jesus' voice.

Close: Saul didn't know how to discern the voice being Jesus without the Holy Spirit's indwelling.

1 Corinthians 2:14 (NKJV) But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Again, confusion. You say it's theoretically possible Paul believed the voice was Jesus'. But in this post you state at the beginning that you KNOW it was the voice of Jesus.

Let me ask you this also:
Does one believe in Jesus and THEN become indwelt
OR
Is one indwelt with the Holy Spirit and THEN comes to believe?

Paul is recounting the experience he had as Saul. No one can discern (and genuinely believe) the spiritual things (like the indwelling of the Holy Spirit) without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit for it is spiritually discerned.

You still have not stated clearly that one must be baptized to be saved. Some believe this. Question: I accept Jesus as Lord. I die without being baptized. Am I saved?

Are you talking about water (H2O) baptism or baptism by the Holy Spirit of God. I haven't once mentioned water baptism. Obviously, water baptism is not required via the thief on the cross. But baptism by the Holy Spirit of God is required per this sites' SoF for genuine believers.

Which is it? Did Paul know the voice was Jesus or not?? Of course he DID. I agree with Smaller. One falls off his horse, sees a light, hears a voice - I'd say that's a conversion experience.

So the others were 'converted' on your view? Again, Saul never even said "Jesus" while on the road. It was Paul's testimony later (after he had discerned it) that the voice was Jesus'.

Please show me who Paul persecuted after he heard Jesus voice.

Jesus and the people of The Way. Per Paul's own testimony he went into the city occupied with the letter of persecution.

Why are my claims wrong and yours are correct?

All your claims are not wrong. But two were. The two I pointed out Scripturally.

I believe I answered all your relevant questions.

 

[MarkT]

Yeah. That would be the actual devil. No point making Judas the devil when the devil obviously had entered Judas.

Satan was not one of the twelve. Judas was a devil, not the Devil; Judas served Satan, the Devil.

Satan spoke through Peter no differently than Satan worked in Judas. Your position uses a double standard if you don't do with Peter what you do with Judas. Matt. 16:23

My position is Satan tempted Peter. So when Jesus said, "Get behind me, Satan", Jesus was putting himself between Satan and Peter. The question is not whether Satan entered Judas. He did. The question is whether Judas, who was declared unclean by our Lord, was a son of the Devil. ie. a devil.

Jesus said to Peter and the disciples, “He who has bathed does not need to wash, except for his feet, but he is clean all over; and you are clean, but not every one of you.” For he knew who was to betray him; that was why he said, “You are not all clean.” John 13:10-11 RSV

So Jesus declared they were clean, except for Judas. Judas was an unclean vessel.

Satan tempted Peter. Satan entered Judas.

Matthew 4:3
And the tempter came and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.”

1 Thessalonians 3:5
For this reason, when I could bear it no longer, I sent that I might know your faith, for fear that somehow the tempter had tempted you and that our labor would be in vain.

Satan is the tempter. Mt. 4:3 tells us Satan came to Jesus. It doesn't say Satan entered Jesus. So for that reason, I would not say Satan entered Peter. However Luke tells us Satan entered into Judas, "
Luke 22:3
Then Satan entered into Judas called Iscariot, who was of the number of the twelve

 

[smaller]

Satan was not one of the twelve. Judas was a devil, not the Devil; Judas served Satan, the Devil.

Apparently in your positional sight then Jesus chose a devil to be disciple and Apostle?

I wouldn't trust that kind of chooser myself.

And likewise we know the 12, the disciples/Apostles were sheep, and that their Father spoke through them. Matt. 10:16, Matt. 10:20. So sheep are now devils as well? And the Father speaks through devils? Isn't this where your position has to land?

My position is Satan tempted Peter. So when Jesus said, "Get behind me, Satan", Jesus was putting himself between Satan and Peter.

That's the odd thing about your positional claim. You see Peter and Satan, not the same, but you don't use the same measure with Judas.

Your position should logically see Peter the same way it sees Judas, if it were anything resembling consistency.

The question is not whether Satan entered Judas. He did. The question is whether Judas, who was declared unclean by our Lord, was a son of the Devil. ie. a devil.

IF Judas was indeed 'a devil' and Satan entered Judas, deceiving him, then Jesus should have see TWO devils, Judas and Satan. Again, your positional claim is extremely inconsistent and has other problems.

Anytime believers think people are devils they have their own wires crossed. People are people. Devils are an entirely different entity class in the unseen spiritual realm.

Matthew 16:23
But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

Luke 22:3
Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve.

How do you excuse Paul from being a messenger of Satan that was IN his own flesh?

2 Corinthians 12:7
And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.

 

[abide]

This post seems to be ongoing. We may be arguing whether or not Judas will be saved or whether he repented or not. I read this morning in my devotion
Matthew 25.41

Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.

Those words in red caught my attention. What IF those words were said to me...

 

[smaller]

This post seems to be ongoing. We may be arguing whether or not Judas will be saved or whether he repented or not. I read this morning in my devotion
Matthew 25.41

Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.

Those words in red caught my attention. What IF those words were said to me...

It's all in the perspective of the hearer.

Luke 4:4
And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

A woman reading only man there might have cause for concern.

If we are reading Matt. 25 with any kind of personal accuracy at all we should be able to come to an "honest" conclusion that we do sheep works and when not doing so, we do in fact do goat works. I'll guarantee any believer, when first reading that scripture set, will DENY the hard fact that they DO goat works, because they are blind to reality.

Not all is as simple as it seems when we cross off the texts we don't personally like and presume/paint ourselves into a dishonest picture/conclusion/corner, applying only one side of a brush that isn't TRUE and avoiding the other side of the brush, which will also be applied.

I personally don't hear FEAR whatsoever and hear LIFE, where others might refuse to even LISTEN TO HIM at all.

The flat out refusal to hear is 'classic.' We all know sin is iniquity. So along comes Jesus with this statement of fact:

Matthew 7:23
And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Every believer will read that and FLAT OUT refuse to hear the fact that we ARE sinners, and sin is iniquity. So they LIE to themselves, in their own minds when they read that, excusing their sins, claiming they are sinless, in Jesus Name, of course. Or they will double deal their sins as opposed to the sins of other people. Which is in direct opposition to Gods Ways. Romans 3:9, 1 Tim. 1:15.

At some point we might recognize that we will LIVE by every Word of God, and not have to be double dealers lie to ourselves or mark "our sins" as better than the other sinners. Which is the EXACT mistake the lying Pharisee made whom God did not HEED in Luke, who didn't think he was like 'other men are.'

Luke 18:11
The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.

The very FIRST way to hear is to come to honest conclusions, like this guy:

Luke 18:
13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.
14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

I expect that some believers who actually hear HIM will stand in line to HEAR those same Words you may fear to hear, and BE EXCEEDINGLY GLAD! Because they hear LIFE in Every Word.

If you managed to get this far, ask how sometime. It's quite simple. And BTW, scripture tells us Judas repented. Matt. 27:3. We are NOT advised of repentance for any of the other disciples who ALSO forsook Jesus other than Peter who wept when he realized how badly he lied to Jesus and what an utter failure he was.