[QUOTE=kanicbird]
God is one, the spirit that Jesus released into the world is God, anyone with another spirit is indwelled by a evil spirit.
[/QUOTE]
Who gets to judge that?
What are the indicators of the indwelling of that spirit?
If Jesus released a certain spirit into the world then why is the holy spirit mentioned as existing and moving men in the OT as well?
[QUOTE=kanicbird]
You misunderstand me then. there are different versions of Christianity because we have different missions. Someone who has the gift of evangelism would tend towards a certain category of Christianity to help fill their mission, this category would not be the ideal to those with the gift of prophecy.
[/QUOTE]
Are non Christian charitable acts also born of that same spirit?
Is sincere love still love among other religions and the non religious?
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
And since you acknowledge much of it is man made, some group who envisions themselves as the hand of god, may be something entirely different.
[/QUOTE]
I’d agree with this
True
That is my understanding also
Also my understanding and my experience
God
In short the Holy Spirit will do that through the fruit of the Spirit, but there are several indications, one such that does not acknowledge that Jesus has come in the flesh is not of God.
It is hard to understand OT times in our times, but in the OT the Holy Spirit was never shown as a permanent indwelling, but only given to certain people for a limited time for God’s mission.
Possible but not necessarily. God is in control, but He allows acts of the flesh and for that matter evil spirits. It is possible that God will overrule the flesh/evil spirit and cause a act of charity in a nonbeliever.
I don’t know
[QUOTE=gigi]
Those are all the flip side of actions that reflect love, though. Be chaste, be faithful, respect your body as it’s the temple of your soul, respect God through a day of rest, be chaste, respect human life from the womb to the tomb, honor God as your God.
And if you think of love as wanting for others what God wants for them, there is no conflict.
[/QUOTE]
These are not how the actions are generally presented to the viewing public, though, you’d have to admit. (It’s worth noting that those who go around pressuring the viewing public are by default the more fervent/evangelical of the believers.)
And what conflict are you talking about? I was talking about the meaning of the term “christian values”, to the degree it is best understood. Unless you’re just somewhat randomly saying that you think it’s not rude to try to force your values on somebody if you think you know what’s best, in which case I’ll just point out that the amazing heights of ego that that stance requires are decidedly unhumble, and therefore unchristian.
(Pretty much everyone respects human life from the womb to the tomb; they respect human life in the womb exactly as much as you respect human life in the tomb!)
[QUOTE=Captain Amazing]
Putting aside rhetorical or political usages of the term, though, groups can have a set of values associated with them, and when we’re talking about philosophies/religions, they almost always have a system of morality associated with them.
Compassion for the poor and marital fidelity aren’t “atheist values” because there’s no organized atheist group in the same way that there is Christianity. They’re your values, and you’re an atheist, but if I cheated on my wife and kicked poor people, you might say, “Captain Amazing is a bad person.”, but you certainly wouldn’t say, “Captain Amazing isn’t living up to his atheist principles.”. It wouldn’t make much sense. But, back when Pat Robertson, if you remember, said that hurricanes should hit Florida because Disneyworld had that Gay Day, I heard people saying, “That’s not very Christian of him.”, and everybody understood what that meant.
To make an analogy, let’s look at the Boy Scouts. If you remember, “A Scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent.”
Now, it’s true that not all boy scouts have those traits, and it’s certainly true that there are people who aren’t boy scouts who do have those traits. But those are the values of the Boy Scouts…they’re the values the Boy Scouts try to instill in their members. Just because those are the values of another group as well doesn’t mean they aren’t Boy Scout values.
[/QUOTE]
Except nobody uses that term and with good reason.
I acknowledge that there are values and principles taught within Christianity just as there are certain values and principles taught within the Boy Scouts or other organizations. I think it’s important to see that the organization is merely a vehicle or method for teaching those fairly universal principles.
We could say certain behavior , even by an atheist was “unchristian” and people would get the reference. It’s how the term is used and the purpose for it’s use that I’m referring to.
When communicating with others , especially communication intended for those not of your group, then let’s speak of the values as the primary importance rather than using a descriptor designed to to focus on a particular group.
So the principles of liberty and justice for all, equal rights, the pursuit of happiness etc might be principles that all people can embrace regardless of any group affiliation , by abandoning that language and choosing the term “Christian principles and values” we are choosing a language specifically designed to divide rather than unite.
[QUOTE=kanicbird]
n short the Holy Spirit will do that, but there are several indications, one such that does not acknowledge that Jesus has come in the flesh.
It is hard to understand OT times in our times, but in the OT the Holy Spirit was never shown as a permanent indwelling, but only given to certain people for a limited time for God’s mission.
Possible but not necessarily. God is in control, but He allows acts of the flesh and for that matter evil spirits. It is possible that God will overrule the flesh/evil spirit and cause a act of charity in a nonbeliever.
[/QUOTE]
You strongly imply here that to do good requires godly intervention. Taken in combination with the fact that you also state here thate the Holy Spirit is not permanently indwelling, we can safely conclude that all christians periodically go around doing evil and heinous deeds, in contiguous blocks, on account of the holy spirit having left them. From the fact that being non-christian is an indicator of being possessed of evil spirits, we can also safely conclude that all atheists who ever do good deeds are possessed simultaneously by evil spirits and the Holy Spirits, neither interfering with the other.
It must be easier to accept if you avoid thinking about it.
[QUOTE=begbert2]
You strongly imply here that to do good requires godly intervention.
[/QUOTE]
I’ll outright state it as we in our flesh can’t know what is truely good.
Until Jesus released it, now He is.
The Holy Spirit never makes us do things, there is always a war between the flesh and the Spirit, free will and all.
Or no indwelled spirits, carry on…
The flesh will sometime do acts and not commit sin, but the flesh has no way of really discerning this as sin is not only doing things you shouldn’t but not doing things you should.
Holy Spirit is singular (God is one), the only case that I can think of being indwelled by both the Holy Spirit and evil spirits is in a believer, usually one who has accepted a evil spirit then has been saved, without dealing with the evil spirit first.
Always interfering with each other.
Maybe, divine revelation helps too 
[QUOTE=kanicbird]
Or no indwelled spirits, carry on…
[/QUOTE]
Then this:
[QUOTE=kanicbird]
In short the Holy Spirit will do that through the fruit of the Spirit, but there are several indications, one such that does not acknowledge that Jesus has come in the flesh is not of God.
[/QUOTE]
was nothing but hate speech against atheists and other non-christians. I think that’s all that needs to be said about your “divine revelation”. :mad:
Okay, I’m done perpetuating this particular hijack.
[QUOTE=kanicbird]
God
[/QUOTE]
Which indicates to me that while we limited humans must make judgment calls we should be cautious about being to sure and acknowledge our imperfect understanding.
It seems to me that charitable loving actions are obviously the first priority and the true indicator according to the NT. It is religious tradition that dwells so much on the person of Jesus and the white bearded male icon. Select verses are pointed out repeatedly as being conclusive while other verses are avoided or rationalized.
I always found this verse interesting
You need to look at it again
Doesn’t that sound similar to the purpose of the HS in the NT?
How about
It seems more likely to me and more in keeping with the words of JC and other spiritual leaders that sincere love is sincere love and it is the actions that spring from this that matter not the labels, dogma and tradition that men establish.
an honest answer. Thanks. Something very worthy of contemplation isn’t it?
[QUOTE=begbert2]
Then this:was nothing but hate speech against atheists and other non-christians. I think that’s all that needs to be said about your “divine revelation”. :mad:
[/QUOTE]
In my experience, this will be countered by the statement that it’s not hate speech because it’s true.
[QUOTE=begbert2]
was nothing but hate speech against atheists and other non-christians. I think that’s all that needs to be said about your “divine revelation”.
[/QUOTE]
Hate speech is telling the truth? Hate speech is helping others come to God? Hate speech is helping others avoid evil?
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
Which indicates to me that while we limited humans must make judgment calls we should be cautious about being to sure and acknowledge our imperfect understanding.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, scripture instructs having at least two people to accuse someone.
Yes, but to diffuse this line quickly, we can’t know how to act charitably to the overall good in our flesh. Perhaps a person in the flesh donates $1000 to a struggling charity, or compare that the Holy Spirit may motivate that person in the spirit to donate $100. That charity with the $900 shortfall may make the news and get much more - which is the greater good.
Re Matthew 12:32
I tend to relate this to
[QUOTE=Hebrews 6]
4It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, 6if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because**to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. - NIV
[/QUOTE]
To speak again the Holy Spirit, you really have to know who He is, basically have been enlightened and have experienced His (God’s) power through you, know it is of God, then speak against it, basically claiming the work of the Holy Spirit was done by Satanic forces.
This is my take on it, it is basically the only way once saved to lose salvation IMHO.
I was thinking of that verse when I was posting the above, I don’t take that as a perminate indewlling. The part about asking not to take the Holy Spirit from Him (David) indicates it could be.
I’ll give you the above, but one person’s definition of what sincere love is is not another’s. Love that angels can project is not the same as love that God can,
[QUOTE=kanicbird]
Hate speech is telling the truth? Hate speech is helping others come to God? Hate speech is helping others avoid evil?
[/QUOTE]
Predicted this, I did. 
[QUOTE=kanicbird]
Hate speech is telling the truth? Hate speech is helping others come to God? Hate speech is helping others avoid evil?
[/QUOTE]
Since you ask, I will point out that the answers to these questions are usually No, No, and No, respectively. Which makes your speech singularly indicitave of the truth of your religious position.
It would be worth noting that you have explicity contradicted yourself in your own posts as to whether one can conclude demonic possession from non-christianity, effectively cutting your own theological legs out from under yourself. And with them, and flimsy defense that claiming to believe that you’re speaking God’s truth might provide.
[QUOTE=begbert2]
Since you ask, I will point out that the answers to these questions are usually No, No, and No, respectively. Which makes your speech singularly indicitave of the truth of your religious position.
[/QUOTE]
Yes and it is God who judges and justifies.
Please provide my contradiction. Socrates even admitted to have a deamon an d I think it’s pretty safe to assume he was not a Christian.
[QUOTE=QtM]
Predicted this, I did
[/QUOTE]
You get a gold star 
I speak for no man but myself, and do not speak with any authority but my own.
I Love Jesus, who is Christ.
I am bidden to love my fellow man, and if I fail to do that, I fall short of the values of Christ. I do fail. I am not the exemplar of Christian Values.
I am bidden to forgive those who trespass against me. I am specifically forbidden to judge the soul of my fellow man. Here, too, I fall short of the mark.
All else that I must do in life proceeds from these things. And in all aspects of my life, I fall short of the mark.
I am promised that my failure will not keep me from the Lord. I am loved, however far I am from giving love as the Lord gives it. You are loved as I am.
Tris
[QUOTE=kanicbird]
Please provide my contradiction. Socrates even admitted to have a deamon an d I think it’s pretty safe to assume he was not a Christian.
[/QUOTE]
Right here.
Are you cool with metaphor? Or are you challenging Christians? Are you inclusive or limiting? I am just wondering.
Linnea
[QUOTE=begbert2]
Right here.
[/QUOTE]
Ok I need to make a correction, mainly due to trying to keep my posts short and to the point.
You can notice the Holy Spirit by the fruit of the Spirit. You can also recognize evil spirits through certain traits, and through a spiritual gift of discernment from the Holy Spirit (also IMHO through satanic spirits sometimes). Non-believers don’t necessarily have evil spirits indwelling them.
[QUOTE=kanicbird]
Yes, scripture instructs having at least two people to accuse someone.
[/QUOTE]
So as long as it;s two against one the two must be right?? That’s handy.
That is an empty and meaningless speculation. The NT upon a close reading , and other religious teachings agree, that it is the intent of the heart that matters. A generous gift given for social praise and accolades is not charity, it’s self serving. A sincere gift of any amount is exactly that.
the next verses
also speaking of our works and actions. If the you speak of the HS but it doesn’t reflect in your actions then it’s empty words. The question that occurs to me is what does it mean to fall away? Sinning? A moment or a few moments of weakness? I doubt Christians believe that. They acknowledge that they continue to be imperfect and sin while seeking to grow.
The first verse of that chapter
It indicates that growth is an ongoing process. Experiencing real life tells us that that is true.
IMO we must bear the consequences of our choices and there is no escape from that. There may be however a big difference between the very same action based on whether we know it is the wrong choice or not. Other passages seem to bear that out.
which means what is taught based on tradition is in serious question and basically that doctrine is only one of several possible interpretations and not necessarily the best or most correct one.
There are lots of things we call love that may not be love but IMO the quest is to try and learn the difference and identify true edifying love. That quality is about what it does to the person and the people it affects. Not about labels. To look at acts of love and diminish them because they don’t carry the Christian brand name strikes me as the polar opposite of what JC taught. Coincidently it’s also in line with other teachings by other teachers.