Why? Because

[Jbuza]

Paul in his second letter to Timothy says 7Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding in all things. Now notice that Paul doesn't say understand what I have to say, or consider that you may understand, but specifically says that the understanding will come from the Lord.

Yes, but how?

Now lets think look back across the two or three dozen passages and think how the Lord can give understanding

[Fortigurn]

Man also has his own understanding doesn't he? Certianly heretical understanding comes from man not from God, right? Can two different understandings of the same thing be correct? Clearly the Bible talks about false teachers, and false doctrines, so I am very suspicious of having man lead me to an understanding, I mean man can teach and all, but I believe that I can know if something is from God becuase I have the mind of Jesus and the sprit of God within myself.

The Ethiopian eunuch sought a man to teach him. God sent Philip. Philip taught the Ethiopian eunuch. What is wrong with that?

Why didn't God teach the Ethiopian eunuch? Why didn't he send Philip? Why didn't Philip tell the Ethiopian eunuch that the Holy Spirit was the proper teacher for him?

[Jbuza]

Man also has his own understanding doesn't he? Certianly heretical understanding comes from man not from God, right? Can two different understandings of the same thing be correct? Clearly the Bible talks about false teachers, and false doctrines, so I am very suspicious of having man lead me to an understanding, I mean man can teach and all, but I believe that I can know if something is from God becuase I have the mind of Jesus and the sprit of God within myself.

The Ethiopian eunuch sought a man to teach him. God sent Philip. Philip taught the Ethiopian eunuch. What is wrong with that?

Why didn't God teach the Ethiopian eunuch? Why didn't he send Philip? Why didn't Philip tell the Ethiopian eunuch that the Holy Spirit was the proper teacher for him?

Perhaps I am wrong, Philip did it to Philip be the Glory. I can assure you that Philip would be aghast to hear that, and that that work would perish. I have posted several times that say that people, the ethiopian Eunuch included cannot say that Jesus is the Son of God, except that it come from the spirit.

I am not trying to say that we do not need teachers, or preachers, or prophets, or apostles, but the Bible is clear that understanding comes from God, if you would like I can open the Old Testament and show How the Lord gave the understanding to those people as well. ACtually we cross posted a bit back, and there are a couple of passages that show together with the others that understanding comes from God.

[Fortigurn]

Paul in his second letter to Timothy says 7Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding in all things. Now notice that Paul doesn't say understand what I have to say, or consider that you may understand, but specifically says that the understanding will come from the Lord.

Yes, but how?

Now lets think look back across the two or three dozen passages and think how the Lord can give understanding

We've seen:

• The Bible (the Bereans)
• Teachers who know the gospel (Acts 2 and 3, the Ethiopian eunuch, and Romans 10)

I can throw in the centurion Cornelius (taught by Peter), and pretty much the rest of the Acts. What else do you have in mind?

[Fortigurn]

Man also has his own understanding doesn't he? Certianly heretical understanding comes from man not from God, right? Can two different understandings of the same thing be correct? Clearly the Bible talks about false teachers, and false doctrines, so I am very suspicious of having man lead me to an understanding, I mean man can teach and all, but I believe that I can know if something is from God becuase I have the mind of Jesus and the sprit of God within myself.

The Ethiopian eunuch sought a man to teach him. God sent Philip. Philip taught the Ethiopian eunuch. What is wrong with that?

Why didn't God teach the Ethiopian eunuch? Why didn't he send Philip? Why didn't Philip tell the Ethiopian eunuch that the Holy Spirit was the proper teacher for him?

Perhaps I am wrong, Philip did it to Philip be the Glory.

What 'glory'?

Why is it so hard to accept that God sent Philip, and that Philip taught the Ethiopian eunuch, as the Bible says?

What is wrong with that? Why are you resisting the text?

[Jbuza]

Man also has his own understanding doesn't he? Certianly heretical understanding comes from man not from God, right? Can two different understandings of the same thing be correct? Clearly the Bible talks about false teachers, and false doctrines, so I am very suspicious of having man lead me to an understanding, I mean man can teach and all, but I believe that I can know if something is from God becuase I have the mind of Jesus and the sprit of God within myself.

The Ethiopian eunuch sought a man to teach him. God sent Philip. Philip taught the Ethiopian eunuch. What is wrong with that?

Why didn't God teach the Ethiopian eunuch? Why didn't he send Philip? Why didn't Philip tell the Ethiopian eunuch that the Holy Spirit was the proper teacher for him?

Perhaps I am wrong, Philip did it to Philip be the Glory.

What 'glory'?

Why is it so hard to accept that God sent Philip, and that Philip taught the Ethiopian eunuch, as the Bible says?

What is wrong with that? Why are you resisting the text?

I am not resisting the text, what you say is true. Philip taught and clearly for the Eunuch to be able to say that Jesus is the Son of God than he must have recevied that from the Spirit

1 Corinthians 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

1 John 4:15 Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.

Clearly the Holy SPirit was involved, it was the Spirit that told Philip to go, and it was the Spirit that GAve the Eunuch the Understanding.

These two passages do not say that a man can confess Jesus is Lord and Son of God by philip, but only by the Spirit.

[Fortigurn]

Acts 8:37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he (The Ethiopian Eunuch) answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. I can continue, this is a small sample...

Here, I'll add a few...excellent quotes Jbuzza

Unfortunately none of the quotes you provide say that we are unable to understand the Bible without the Holy Spirit.

Yes, flesh and blood did not convince the eunuch — God's Holy Spirit did through the messenger of Philip as it is written in:

John 14:17,20 “…the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot accept, because it does not see him or know him. But you know him, because he resides with you and will be in you.” …20 You will know at that time that I am in my Father and you are in me and I am in you.” NET

John 15:26-27 “When the Advocate comes, whom I will send you from the Father — the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father — he will testify about me, and you also will testify, because you have been with me from the beginning.” NET

You propose that the Holy Spirit was only indirectly responsible for the conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch, but quote passages which speak of the direct assistance of the Holy Spirit which was given to the apostles.

[Fortigurn]

I am not resisting the text, what you say is true. Philip taught and clearly for the Eunuch to be able to say that Jesus is the Son of God than he must have recevied that from the Spirit

1 Corinthians 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

1 John 4:15 Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.

Clearly the Holy SPirit was involved, it was the Spirit that told Philip to go, and it was the Spirit that GAve the Eunuch the Understanding.

These two passages do not say that a man can confess Jesus is Lord and Son of God by philip, but only by the Spirit.

I believe you misunderstand that passage in 1 Corinthians. Even demon possessed people - and demons - confessed that Jesus was the Christ, and the son of God.

[Byblos]

Fortigurn, why do you like to play games? I am certainly not asserting that it exists, I am asserting that it may have existed (as per your link). You offered the 2 examples of the Ethiopian and the Bereans as proof that one does not need the Holy Spirit in order to believe. In other words, you are offering your examples as proof of the non-existence of the Holy Spirit in those 2 examples.

I am not playing any games.

Yes you are. You keep insisting the two examples are proof of the non-involvement of the Holy Spirit whereas your own link shows that the non-existence of something, while it is not proof, it does leave the possibility that it may have existed. You just can't admit it, can you? It is simply not within you to even entertain the thought that you might be wrong, is it?

What I simply showed you as per your own link that your proof is not really a proof as it is quite possible that the Holy Spirit was present in those 2 situations, you just can't say definitively. Can't be simpler than that but, yet again, you want to complicate things and try to muddy the waters.

If you had offered these 2 examples such that the Holy Spirit may or may not be involved (as per your own link), I would tend to agree with you, but you're not.

What both texts say very plainly is that people were led to believe by means other than the Holy Spirit:

Where exactly does it say very plainly we believed without the Holy Spirit? You know it does not and what's more you know it's possible they were influenced by the Holy Spirit not knwing it. That's what your own link shows. It is just beneath your nature to admit it.

Acts 8:
31 The man replied, “How in the world can I, unless someone guides me?” So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.

34 Then the eunuch said to Philip, “Please tell me, who is the prophet saying this about—himself or someone else?”
35 So Philip started speaking, and beginning with this scripture proclaimed the good news about Jesus to him.

We are told here that the Ethiopian eunuch understood by the Bible because Philip taught him. We are told that he believed because Phillip taught him. There is no room for claims that he was taught by both Philip and the Holy Spirit. That would contradict what is said here.

There most certainly is room for claim as the possibility cannot be completely ruled out. That's what you're not getting even after you posting a link that proves the possibility does exist.

The incident with the Bereans is the same:

Acts 17:
11 These Jews were more open-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they eagerly received the message, examining the scriptures carefully every day to see if these things were so.
12 Therefore many of them believed, along with quite a few prominent Greek women and men.

Unregenerate men and women received the message, they examined the Scriptures carefully to see if these things were so, and therefore they believed.

In both cases we are told that unregenerate people were led to believe by a combination of being taught by men, and reading the Bible themselves.

This, we are told, is how they were converted. To say otherwise is to contradict what is said. I have referred to the conversion accounts of Acts 2 and 3, as well as to Romans 10, all of which say the same.

There is no contradiction as, yet again, the possibility CANNOT be completely ruled out AS PER YOUR OWN LINK. It is just incredulous you do not see it.

For some reason you feel the need to prove yourself right even in the face of clear and simple logic (offered by you) that contradicts your very position. It is quite clear that both your examples offer no proof whatsoever that the Holy Spirit was not involved.

You also seem to feel the need to have the last word so, as always, I will extend you the curtesy of a response as from my side I'm quite satisfied with how your 2 examples are viewed in the context of the Holy Spirit.

[Fortigurn]

Yes you are. You keep insisting the two examples are proof of the non-involvement of the Holy Spirit whereas your own link shows that the non-existence of something, while it is not proof, it does leave the possibility that it may have existed.

You keep missing the point entirely. I am arguing that the text says that people were converted by being taught by other people, and by the Bible. I therefore believe what the Bible says - that these people were converted by being taught by other people, and by the Bible.

I am not simply arguing from the absence of the Holy Spirit here, I am providing positive evidence for their conversion process - the text tells us plainly how they were converted, you don't have to make up things which aren't in the Bible.

This tells me that it is possible to understand the Bible without the Holy Spirit.

I am not arguing from silence.

Where exactly does it say very plainly we believed without the Holy Spirit? You know it does not and what's more you know it's possible they were influenced by the Holy Spirit not knwing it.

Firstly, I highlighted the relevant text which shows this. Secondly, you'll have to provide all the passages of Scripture which talk about people being influenced by the Holy Spirit without knowing it.

That's what your own link shows. It is just beneath your nature to admit it.

Could you spare the personal insults please?

There most certainly is room for claim as the possibility cannot be completely ruled out.

How can you say that, given that what the text says? How can you claim that when the text says X, it really means that we don't know if it was X, or if it's X plus Y?

That's what you're not getting even after you posting a link that proves the possibility does exist.

No, the problem is that like many people you misread the argument from silence and the 'proof of a negative' argument. It's a common misreading.

I have declared that the text says X. You agree that the text says X. It is therefore encumbent on you to prove that anything other than X took place.

There is no contradiction as, yet again, the possibility CANNOT be completely ruled out AS PER YOUR OWN LINK. It is just incredulous you do not see it.

See above.

What disturbs me the most about this discussion is the lack of Scripture you bring to it.

[Jbuza]

1 Corinthians 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

I believe you misunderstand that passage in 1 Corinthians. Even demon possessed people - and demons - confessed that Jesus was the Christ, and the son of God.

Perhaps lets see. I understand it to be saying that Paul tells the Christians so that they will understand the fact that no one can say that Jesus is cursed if they speak from the Spirit, and that no man can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Spirit. Hmmmm seems clear. As I understand it you think I don't understand because the passage actually means that man can say that Jesus is Lord without the Holy Spirit. I don't get how you can understand it any differently than what it says.

IT should not be suprising that Fallen angels that were once in heaven in open fellowship with God would know who his son is. Besides Angels are not men. There are many passages that say that we4 have the spirit of God within us, and that understanding comes from the Spirit, but you have not shown one verse that indicates there is no Spirit within us, and that man can understand the things of God without the Spirit.

You seem to have put a great deal of effort into trying to explain to people how the Bible doesn't mean what it means. Why?

[R7-12]

I am not simply arguing from the absence of the Holy Spirit here, I am providing positive evidence for their conversion process - the text tells us plainly how they were converted, you don't have to make up things which aren't in the Bible.

This tells me that it is possible to understand the Bible without the Holy Spirit.

In all fairness, it appears the disciples were not converted until Passover when they received the Holy Spirit. They certainly weren't converted just prior to the death of Christ (Luke 22:32).

Thus, the Holy Spirit is crucial to the conversion process.

R7-12

[Fortigurn]

Perhaps lets see. I understand it to be saying that Paul tells the Christians so that they will understand the fact that no one can say that Jesus is cursed if they speak from the Spirit, and that no man can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Spirit. Hmmmm seems clear. As I understand it you think I don't understand because the passage actually means that man can say that Jesus is Lord without the Holy Spirit. I don't get how you can understand it any differently than what it says.

I think you don't understand because even a demon, a demon possessed person, or an atheist acan say 'Jesus is Lord'.

IT should not be suprising that Fallen angels that were once in heaven in open fellowship with God would know who his son is.

That's not the point. The point is that the text here, as you read it, says that no one can say that Jesus is Lord unless they have the Holy Spirit. And that doesn't deal with demon possessed people, either.

Besides Angels are not men.

You're making too much of the English. Women aren't men either, but that's not the point of the text. The text means 'no one', not 'no men' (as opposed to non-men).

There are many passages that say that we4 have the spirit of God within us, and that understanding comes from the Spirit, but you have not shown one verse that indicates there is no Spirit within us, and that man can understand the things of God without the Spirit.

I haven't shown any verses which indicate there is no Spirit within us, because I believe that there is a Spirit within us. I agree that no one can understand the things of God without a spiritual mindset, but I believe that a spiritual mindset does not require the personal indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

I have certainly shown that man can understand the Bible without the Holy Spirit.

You seem to have put a great deal of effort into trying to explain to people how the Bible doesn't mean what it means. Why?

I don't. I'm not the one who is trying to tell people that 'son of God' means 'God', that 'image' means 'spiritual image', that 'death' means 'not dying but going to live somewhere else', and that 'taught by Philip' means 'taught by the Holy Spirit'.

[Fortigurn]

I am not simply arguing from the absence of the Holy Spirit here, I am providing positive evidence for their conversion process - the text tells us plainly how they were converted, you don't have to make up things which aren't in the Bible.

This tells me that it is possible to understand the Bible without the Holy Spirit.

In all fairness, it appears the disciples were not converted until Passover when they received the Holy Spirit. They certainly weren't converted just prior to the death of Christ (Luke 22:32).

Not only were the disciples converted prior to Passover, but Christ himself instructed them for days, teaching them about the Bible:

Luke 24:
27 Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them the things written about himself in all the scriptures.

Acts 1:
To the same apostles also, after his suffering, he presented himself alive with many convincing proofs. He was seen by them over a forty-day period and spoke about matters concerning the kingdom of God.

It's clear that he didn't leave this job to the Holy Spirit.

Thus, the Holy Spirit is crucial to the conversion process.

Scripture please. I read this:

Acts 2:
37 Now when they heard this, they were acutely distressed and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “What should we do, brothers?”
38 Peter said to them, “Repent, and each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Repentance and baptism first, Holy Spirit afterwards.

Romans 10:
13 For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.

14 How are they to call on one they have not believed in? And how are they to believe in one they have not heard of? And how are they to hear without someone preaching to them?
15 And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How timely is the arrival of those who proclaim the good news."

How are they to believe? Someone preaches to them. Nothing about the Holy Spirit.

[R7-12]

I said,

Thus, the Holy Spirit is crucial to the conversion process.

Fortigurn responded,

Scripture please. I read this:

Quote:
Acts 2:
37 Now when they heard this, they were acutely distressed and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “What should we do, brothers?”
38 Peter said to them, “Repent, and each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Repentance and baptism first, Holy Spirit afterwards.

We are led by the Holy Spirit prior to repentance and baptism, afterwards it is given to dwell in us if we are obedient to God.

Here are the scriptures:

“No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. 45“It is written in the prophets, 'And they shall all be taught by God.' Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me (John 6:44-45).

In order to drawn by the Father, His Spirit must be involved in leading us in the truth, wisdom and understanding necessary to choose obedience to God which the natural human carnal mind is enmity against.

For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. 7Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. 8So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God (Rom. 8:6-8 ).

Or do you despise the riches of His goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance? (Rom. 2:4).

If we wish to understand the things of God we must first be willing to obey Him. It is then that He will open our minds giving the understanding we need to recognize why He has commanded us to do what He says in His law.

Commit your works to the LORD, And your thoughts will be established (Prov. 16:3).

“And we are His witnesses to these things, and so also is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey Him.” (Acts 5:32).

“If you love Me, keep My commandments. 16“And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever— 17“the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you (John 14:15-17).

We are of God. He who knows God hears us; he who is not of God does not hear us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error (1 John 4:6).

This is He who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ; not only by water, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth (1 John 5:6).

The Spirit is truth and thus reveals the truth of God to us. If we can know the truth of God without His Spirit then we have no need for the Spirit to teach us truth. Important truths of God must be understood in order to know what sin is, why we must repent, what we must do to please God, how we must conduct ourselves, etc. before we even come to repentance, otherwise we wouldn't even understand what we are doing.

Thus God leads us to repentance through His Spirit before we repent as per Romans 2:4 above. It is through this process of the Spirit leading us to repentance, teaching us and giving us the ability to correctly discern good and evil, and learn to live in faith by trusting God, that we become sons of God.

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God (Rom. 8:14).

Without the Spirit of God guiding or leading us, we will think we can see and hear and understand His word, but the truth is only those who obey God are given to understand the mystery of the kingdom of God.

And He said to them, “To you it has been given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God; but to those who are outside, all things come in parables, 12“so that 'Seeing they may see and not perceive, And hearing they may hear and not understand; Lest they should turn, And their sins be forgiven them.' ” (Mark 4:11-12).

But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the ages for our glory, 8which none of the rulers of this age knew; for had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9But as it is written: “Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, Nor have entered into the heart of man The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.”10But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. 11For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God (1 Cor. 2:7-11).

The Bible says that the Spirit of God is given only to those who obey God. Thus it can be known if someone has the Spirit of God by what they speak and what they do.

But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves. 23For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man observing his natural face in a mirror; 24for he observes himself, goes away, and immediately forgets what kind of man he was. 25But he who looks into the perfect law of liberty and continues in it, and is not a forgetful hearer but a doer of the work, this one will be blessed in what he does (James 1:22-25).

To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them (Isaiah 8:20).

Without the Spirit of God to guide and direct the sinner, he cannot begin to think in a manner that approaches the way God thinks and thus repent as God instructs because it is recognized as truth. Rather he remains carnal and therefore his carnal mind continues in enmity against God, rejecting His ways even if he appropriates religious traditions, concepts, norms, and practices. One such as this may have a form of godliness but the power of the word of God is denied in practice (2 Tim. 3:1-5).

“For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Nor are your ways My ways,” says the LORD. 9“For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts (Isaiah 58:8-9).

This is the primary cause for disunity among the many so-called Christian groups and the reason there is so much disagreement on bible forums.

R7-12