|
Seal of God, Mark of the Beast
(Who or What is the Holy Spirit)? (What is the Mark of the Beast)? By J. Dean Few controversies have been sparked with more intrigue than that of the "mark of the beast," predicted to come upon the world in the book of Revelation, Chapter 13. The number 666 is as commonly known as the "lucky number 7." In fact, people recognize 666 as readily as they recognize the name "Jesus." There are people who can't tell you the names of the four gospels, but they can tell you what is 666. Most people would not believe you if you told them that there is a "mark of God," as well as a "mark of the Beast." I guess bad news truly does travel faster than good news. Yes, God puts a "mark" or "seal" on them whom he calls "His people." The first place we see an example of this is found in:
The mark in Ezekiel had but one purpose and that was to identify the righteous, prior to judgment, so that the righteous would be spared. That was also the significance of the lamb's blood in Exodus, when the Israelite's marked their door posts in Egypt, so that when the angel of death came, he would "pass over" their houses, and they would not be touched. This is the same basic principle of being marked for protection, or better put, exemption from judgment. In the case of Ezekiel, however; the mark was placed on the people themselves, thus protecting them wherever they might be when judgment began. In the New Testament this protecting "mark of God," is not called a mark at all, it's called "a seal." Actually it was the decision of the translators to use the word "seal" instead of "mark," when referring to God's mark, and for once I agree with the translators. They could have used the word "mark," because the Greek word "sphragizo" can mean a mark," but in so doing, it would be easy to confuse the mark of God with the "mark of the Beast" in scripture. Furthermore, the word used for the mark of God is a different word (in the Greek) as the word used for the mark of the Beast, "charagma." Thus, it would have been a huge mistake on the part of the translators to use the same word, "mark," to denote both the seal of God and the mark of the Beast. Especially when you know that the word "charagma" used for the mark of the Beast denotes "slavery," and is actually a "brand," given to mark a piece of property, whereas the word "sphragizo" denotes a "signet" or "etching" on a document for security or to authenticate it's author. If they had used the word "mark" instead of "seal," it may have sounded like they were saying God "brands" his servants in the same way the Devil "brands" those he enslaves, as property. A seal is for "preservation" while a mark is for "enslavement." Finally, the translators got something right. It was a good call on their part, for God sees us as children, not property to be branded like cattle. The word "sphragizo" from whence the tranlators took the word "seal" also denotes "secrecy." It's a "secret mark,." That's the difference between the seal of God, and the mark of the Beast. The seal of God can only be seen and recognized by God and his agents, while the mark of the Beast is a visible mark placed to claim his ownership, and therefore, must remain obvious, to deter "thieves." If it's "hidden" or unseen, then as a brand of ownership, it's completely useless! A lot more is said about the seal of God than is said about the mark of the Beast! How do you suppose it is, then, that most people know what 666 is, but aren't even aware that there is a "seal of God?" Is it because those who accept the mark of the Beast are sure to be "cast into the lake of fire?" (Revelations 14: 9-11) I don't see this as a plausible explanation as to why the number 666 is highly recognized and the seal of God isn't hardly even mentioned by religions. Especially when you consider that those who do not have the seal of God will all be tortured in the presence of Holy Angels, and also have their part in the Lake of Fire! Accepting the mark of the beast, and refusing the seal of God both hold the exact same punishment. Why would one be more well known than the other? Can I prove that those who do not have the seal of God meet the same fate as those who receive the mark of the Beast? Yes, I can, and that is the subject at hand, but in order to prove this, we must first understand what is the seal of God.
This "seal" of which Yahshua spoke is a curious thing. When did God "seal" Messiah? When was God's "mark of approval" manifest? In Matthew 3: 16, Mark 1: 10, Luke 3:22, and John 1: 32. I'm, of course, speaking of the event which occurred immediately after Messiah was baptized. When the Holy spirit descended on Messiah, in the shape of a dove, and a voice came out of Heaven saying, "this is my beloved Son." Thus we have a clear account of the "sealing" of Messiah, of which he spoke often, and it was signified by the descending of the Holy Spirit! Many teach that it's not necessary to receive the Holy Spirit to be "saved," or "redeemed," or to even be a "believer" for that matter. They argue that salvation comes when you "believe," and not when you "receive the Holy Spirit." Nothing could be further from the truth. They don't see that no one can believe without the Holy Spirit! Have they never read the New Testament for themselves! I wonder, for if they have read it, what did they make of these scriptures?
These aren't even all the verses on the Holy Spirit that I could find, and they're not even the most vital on the subject. There is so much about the central purpose of the Holy Spirit and his role in our salvation that anyone who misses it, just isn't reading the New Testament.
A Holy Ghost Story Many teach that the Holy Spirit is a personage, a God, a third member of a trinity of Gods, separate from God Almighty, yet equal, and in fact one in the same. They also refer to the Holy Spirit as the "Holy Ghost," and this term appears often in English and American translations going all the way back to the King James' Version, and in some Catholic English translations as well. They call the Holy Spirit, "the Ghost," because they see the Spirit as literally the disembodied soul or Spirit of God, roaming the Earth, much the way spiritists claim the souls of the dead roam the Earth. This distorted image of the human spirit is unique to pagan way of thinking and is not how Moses or the prophets described the spirit. Furthermore, the image of the Holy Spirit as the "Ghost" of God is not how Moses and the prophets saw the Holy Spirit either. To prove this all we have to do is compare the words they translated to "Ghost" from the Greek, and the word used for "Spirit," in the Hebrew texts. Why would we compare in this way? Because, we need to know if the word used by the Hebrews to describe the Holy Spirit is similar in any way shape or form to the word "Ghost," or if that word could have been translated as "Ghost," in the Hebrew. If not, then there exists an odd disparity between the way the Hebrew fathers saw the Holy Spirit, and the way religion now tries to depict the Spirit. You might be interested to know that not once in the Tanakh (older testament) is God's Spirit referred to as a "Ghost." This is significant if in fact the Holy Spirit were a "Ghost." It would mean that Moses and the prophets didn't understand what or who the Holy Spirit was! Yet, they managed to write holy scripture under inspiration of the Holy Spirit? That seems far fetched. It's therefore suspicious that the Hebrew fathers were unaware of the supposed "ghostly" nature. It's more likely that the translators have slipped in some of their own views by inserting the word "ghost" where "Spirit" would have done quite nicely. The 2 words from which translators saw fit to translate to the word "GHOST" found in the "old testament" are:
If the Holy Spirit, were a "ghost," the breath of God, and were a person, or a "creature" with his own identity and consiousness separate from God, as teach the Trinitarians, then "nephesh" certainly would have been used somewhere in the Tanakh to denote the Holy Spirit. However, "nephesh" was NEVER used. The Hebrew fathers never once called the Spirit a "Nephesh." Thus, we have no "Old Testament" or "scriptural" foundation or corroboration that the translators were justified in their use of the word "Ghost," in reference to the Holy Spirit. Does the word from which they translated "Ghost" in the New Testament come close to "Nephesh?" Not at all. There are 3 words from which the translators chose to translate "ghost" in the Greek NT.
Whenever you see the term "Holy Ghost" in the English or American transations they are taking "ghost" from the Greek word "pneuma." The other two, are only used to describe the dying breath of a person, the final exhale of a man who dies. The Strong's Exhaustive Concordance states that pneuma also has been used in the Greek to denote angels, demons, and the human or (rational) soul, as well as God's Spirit, Christ's Spirit, and the "mind." These, however are all variations that have their bias in the translators. Pneuma, in its strictest sense simply means "a current of air or breath." Only pagan religions traditionally used "pneuma" to denote "ghost." This is becuase spritists, occultists, and pagans alike see the "ekpsucho" or last exhalation of breath as the man's "eternal soul" escaping from his body to the "afterlife," or "ethereal plain." Ancient Hebrews, and particularly those who followed Torah did not view the last breath in this way, and in fact, did not believe in the "eternal soul," as is described in spiritism and the occult. In fact, under Torah law, in ancient Israel, spiritists and mediums who attempted to contact or propogate the contacting of disembodied spirits very quickly found themselves joining the dead spirits they were trying to contact. They were stoned. God's law does not recognize the pagan beliefs of "eternal souls" who escape the body at death and either wander the earth, or go to their "ethereal plain" or the "next plain of existence." Pneuma should not be translated to "ghost, unless you buy into the beliefs of spiritists. The translators, by using the word "ghost" for pneuma have revealed their occultist leanings, and their paganistic beliefs in "mediums and spiritists." They've pretty much exposed themselves as being under the influence of occultic theologies rather than following the true light of scriptural and Spritual inspiration! In the Tanakh, there is no such useage of "breath" to denote an "eternal soul" which passes from the body and lives on, nor is there any mention of a "consiousness" beyond the grave. Hebrews did not believe such pagan ideas, and Scripture did not teach such ideas, and it condemned those who did. The words found in the Hebrew texts used to denote the SPIRIT are:
The only word that even comes close to the word "spectre" or "ghost" in Hebrew is:
As is clearly seen here by the only word in the Hebrew text that said "ghost," in the sense of a "spectre," there is no way the Hebrews would ever use the phrase "Holy Ghost," because the only word for this type of "ghost" was a word that described a charlatan. They simply did not believe in "ghosts." The word "owb" is never used in a positive light, and is certainly never used to describe God's own Spirit. Scripture not only denounces the belief in ghosts, but teaches there is no "consiousness" in the grave.
Messiah, nor his Apostles, ever said anything to make one believe that there is consciousness in the grave, neither did they tell us that when we die our spirits go "immediately" to heaven. Neither did they teach that when we die, we don't really die, because our spirits are "eternal" entities! These are all foreign concepts, because they are not rooted in the truth. Some have taken a few verses and attempted to make them support the view of "consciousness while in the grave," however, when you study these scriptures you find that they do not support their contentions as well as they believe. One of the most commonly used scriptures is Luke 23: 43, when Messiah was on the cross and the thief asked him to remember him when he comes into his kingdom (verse 42) to which Messiah responds, "this day shall you be with me in paradise."
Those who want to use this to support a "consciousness in the grave," and the idea that we go "right straight to heaven" when we die, use this account of the thief as their main scripture because Messiah says, "today," you shall be with me in paradise? To them it can only mean that the thief (and Messiah) went straight to heaven when they died (their spirits did). They assume too much, however. First of all, "a day is with the Lord as a thousand years and a thousand years is as a day." (2 Peter 3: 8). Secondly, Messiah didn't enter paradise that same day, for we know that he went into "the heart of the earth for 3 days and 3 nights."
Thirdly, we know that, if there is no consciousness in the grave, the thief, after he died, would have no concept of time as we know it. Therefore, when he is resurrected some day, perhaps even thousands of years after his death, to him no time has passed at all. It will seem as though he entered the kingdom on the same day as he died. He simply could not be aware of the time that has passed, being "unconscious in the grave." Another scripture they like to use to try and prove "consciousness in the grave" is:
Some believe this story is a fabrication, added later to the gospel of Luke to give credence to the "consciousness in the grave" teaching. This story is omitted from the other gospels, and is absent in a few translations as well. I don't believe this story is necessarily a fabrication, for, if it was added to the Bible to give credence to the "consciousness in the grave," theory, whoever added it didn't do a very good job. This story in no wise proves that we go straight to heaven or torment after we die. Nowhere in these verses does Messiah back up the notion. When Lazarus and the rich man die, it does say the "angels carried Lazarus to Abraham's bosom." When do the "angels gather together the elect?" According to Matthew 24 it's at the resurrection of the dead. As I've already said, to Lazarus, being carried into heaven during the resurrection, it would seem to happen immediately upon his death, because he had no concept of time while he was in the grave. Likewise, the rich man finds himself immediately in "torments." When are the dead cast into "torments?" After the resurrection. This is called the "second death." So, likewise, the rich man is here in torments, after the resurrection of the dead. The conversation between Abraham and the rich man, therefore takes place after the resurrection, and indeed after the millenial reign of Messiah. Some argue that the rich man asked Abraham to send Lazarus back from the dead to warn his brothers, and this, they think, proves that not much time had passed from the time the rich man died, until the time he had his conversation with Abraham. Those who make this argument are assuming several things, first they are assuming the rich man and Lazarus lived in Messiah's day. Perhaps these two men lived in the age just prior to the resurrection? Messiah doesn't say. The other thing they assume is that the rich man has some sort of "knowledge." Perhaps the rich man is unaware (because he had no concept of time in the grave) that thousands of years have passed already and his brothers have already lived their lives out. How would he know anything different, one minute he was dying, the next minute (to him at least) he finds himself in torment, and he looks up and sees Abraham in paradise. Yet, what does a wicked rich man who has died and gone to eternal torments know about such matters anyway? Some also argue, "well, Abraham doesn't tell the rich man that his brothers lived thousands of years earlier, and that it's too late for Lazarus to go and warn them." This assumes that Abraham would be obligated to the wicked, to explain anything to them! Why should Abraham be obligated to explain to the wicked the gravity of their situation? He is not obligated, and instead simply tells the rich man that if his brothers won't believe in Moses and the prophets, they won't believe if a man is raised from the dead. One gets a sense from this, that Abraham knows what these brothers would or wouldn't believe, almost as if Abraham is already aware of what fate befell these five brothers when he answers the rich man. Of course, it's just a story, told by Messiah to make a point, or, is it? The fact that the spiritists want to quote a wicked rich man in torments to prove their beliefs shows how truly desperate they are for scriptures that back up their beliefs! The conversation between Abraham and the rich man does not prove that we have consciousness in the grave. It could mean that the conversation took place after the resurrection. So, the spiritists simply believe what they want to believe. Some say that Messiah "preached to the souls in prison" while he was "in the grave." They derive this confused notion from a single passage, completely taken out of context.
I almost laugh when I hear people trying to make this some revelation that Messiah was walking around the "spirit world" preaching while his body was in the grave. Especially since the same people that say this, also want to use the thief in paradise scripture. They can't seem to make up their minds. Was Messiah in paradise with the thief after he died, or was he wandering around the "land of the dead," preaching to imprisoned souls? Actually, verse 19 does not say anything about him "preaching while he was in the grave." His death is mentioned in verse 18, but nothing about his "time in the grave." Verse 19 simply says that "by which" he preached to the "souls" in prison. By which, what? By the same Spirit that raised him up from the dead. He was preaching to the "spirits in prison," after he was raised from the dead! Verse 18 says he died then was raised by the Spirit, then verse 19 says, and he preached to the spirits in prison. That would be those in prison to sin. Messiah spent many days, after his resurrection, preaching and teaching concerning the coming kingdom and the power of the Spirit! He was preaching to people who had been enslaved and imprisoned to sin their entire lives and was acting in the final phases of his ministry, "to preach release to the captives." You have to be one desperate, straw clutching individual to make verse 19 talking about some mission the Messiah undertook while in the grave! It's clearly talking about his activities after the Spirit raised him from the dead! Some make issue of verse 20.
What they try to do is say that the "spirits" Messiah preached to were those souls who died in the flood in Noah's day. If their interpretation of verse 19 is comical, their interpretation of verse 20 is hilarity itself! If you read verse 21 he makes it clear that his Noah reference is a "figure" or symbolism.
Listen, friends, Peter is merely using the flood as a symbol of eternal damnation, and he's using the ark as a symbol of salvation through the resurrection. That's all he's doing here. If we read verse 16 of this chapter we see that he first starts out by mentioning "evil doers," then he compares these wicked evil doers to those of the days of Noah's flood, and states that, their only way out is the safety offered by faith in Messiah! That's all these verses are about.
The Souls Of Them That Were Slain Cry Out! There's one more scripture that seems to talk about those who are "conscious in the grave."
This one, I admit, is very hard to deal with if you do not believe in the "consciousness in the grave." We have those who are already dead not only crying out, but being given white robes and told to have patience. It's looking pretty bad for the home team. First of all, we have to understand that their "blood" cries out from under that altar, not their actual consciousness. How do I know this? After Cain slew Abel, God came looking for Abel and asked Cain "where is your brother?" Then after Cain gave God the smart mouthed reply "how should I know, am I my brother's keeper?" God told Cain, "behold the blood of your brother cries out to me from the ground."
Abel wasn't crying out to God, his blood was, but God heard a voice, of Abel's blood! Get the picture? Next is the issue of the white robes, and them being told to have patience. If I buy someone a new suit and I hang it in the closet until they get home, and if I leave a note on the suit that says "wear this suit out to dinner tonight," then I then say to my wife "I gave so and so a new suit today and told him to wear it out to dinner tonight," am I lying to my wife? No, I'm simply counting the gift of the suit and the instructions as to what the suit is for as a "done deal." Get the picture?
Did King Saul Talk to the Ghost of Samuel? For the spiritists who really know their scriptures, there is one account in the older testament to which they really love to point!
This, indeed, does appear that Saul spoke to Samuel through a medium, after Samuel had died. Saul surely believed that he did. Those who witnessed it believed also. Yet, none of this proves that Samuel actually spoke to Saul from the grave! All this story really proves is that Saul's men found him a very clever and powerful medium to consult! Don't you see, mediums are called "them with familiar spirits," because they have a demonic spirit who is familiar with the dead person you are trying to contact. The evil spirit they possess at the time of the contact knows everything about the dead person to whom you are trying to talk. They can imitate the person's voice, speak to you about personal things that only you and the deceased knew. A good medium is very convincing, otherwise, people wouldn't believe in mediums at all! Satan knows quite a lot about you, remember, that. If, after you die, one of your loved ones tries to consult a medium to talk to you, how hard do you think it would be for Satan or an evil spirit to immitate your voice and convince your loved one that they are talking to you? Why would Satan do this? Well, in the case of our loved ones, maybe he just wants to convince them of the lie of "consciousness in the grave." In the case of Saul, however, the king of Israel, it's no mystery why Satan would want to immitate Samuel and speak to Saul. Saul fell victim to Satan's trick, and it cost him his life, the lives of all the soldiers who were lost in the ensuing battle, and Israel was defeated by the Philistines. All because Saul consulted a medium, against God's law, and then believed the medium when he was told that he would "lose the battle and he and his sons would all die!" Saul went into battle convinced that Samuel had told him he would lose, he lost the battle in his mind before it ever began! Satan got him bad on that one! Who knows, perhaps if Saul had never consulted a medium, he might have won that battle, and he might have lived. We'll never know, though will we? What a fool was Saul, trusting the fate of Israel and her armies to the word of a "medium" that God had already condemned, and had already ordered should be executed! Saul put the fate of Israel into the hands of God's enemies. That's what happens when we trust in lying words, and in lying doctrines about "ghosts" and "mediums," and "eternal souls." We put our fate in the hands of those who hate God! People that's serious business! I believe we've established two things for sure about the Holy Spirit so far. The Holy Spirit is vital to our salvation and the Holy spirit is not God's "Ghost," or "disembodied soul, wandering the earth." Is The Holy Spirit A Separate Personage? Sometimes in scripture, the Holy Spirit is referred to as "him," or "he." Does this mean the Holy Spirit is a separate person? I don't believe it does, because the Holy Spirit is "the breath of God," in other words the Holy Spirit is God's own Spirit, the Holy Spirit is God! In light of this, of course we aren't going to call the Spirit an "it." When the Spirit moves and speaks, it's actually God moving and speaking! The Spirit does not have his own separate will and identity. God is Spirit, and the Spirit is God! They are one in the same. We do not have to prove that the Holy Spirit is not a separate "personage" from God. It's impossible to prove a negative anyway. Since the scriptures refer to the Spirit and to God synonymously, it's up to those who want to say the Spirit is a "third God," in a "Trinity of Gods," to prove their claims scripturally. The word Trinity doesn't even appear in scripture. Meanwhile, I've already shown that all scripture speaks of the Holy Spirit and God as the same, there are no scriptures left for the Trinitarians to quote as proof the Holy Spirit is a separate God, with his own personality, and his own will, and his own identity. The Spirit is just what the scriptures say he is, "God's own breath, or Spirit." There's only one true God, according to the scriptures, and that God is "Spirit," namely, "The Holy Spirit." Is The Holy Spirit Messiah's "Soul?" I've covered this question extensively already. If the Holy Spirit was Messiah's own soul, why does it say that the Spirit "descended on Messiah, in the shape of a dove?" Didn't he already possess a soul when he was baptized, or was he a souless zombie until the moment the Holy Spirit descended? If the Holy Spirit is Messiah's "soul," then the desending of the Spirit on Messiah was all "just for show." God was putting on some elaborate ruse, for who knows what purpose! It's obvious, or it should be anyway, that Messiah had his own will and possessed his own identity, and his own quite mortal soul! We know Messiah's soul was mortal because he died, and was buried for 3 days and 3 nights, and then was resurrected an immortal man! If the Holy Spirit was in reality Messiah's soul, then Messiah didn't really die, for God's spirit is immortal. In which case, Messiah's death was just an elaborate show, and his resurrection was a show as well. If all this be true, Messiah never died for our sins (not really) and he never was raised again, which means our entire faith is completely in vain, and based on an elaborate "show" that the three Gods in Heaven got together and cooked up for their own amusement! The Holy Spirit was in the world long before Messiah was even born! Do you see what a mockery they make of the life and ministry of Messiah with this huge Trinity lie? Baptism of the Holy Spirit! There is no doubt that the Spirit was "with" the Apostles as they followed Messiah around Israel, prior to the crucifixion. The Spirit was with the Apostles when they first realized who Messiah was. In fact, they couldn't have realized who Messiah was if the Spirit hadn't revealed this to them. So, let's talk about the baptism in the Holy Spirit. Just as John the Baptist "immersed" people in water, even so, we are taught that Messiah "baptized" with the Holy Spirit and with fire! Is this baptism in the Spirit a requirement to be a believer (or to be saved as some put it)? I don't think so! Yes, we need the Holy Spirit to be a believer, but receiving the Holy Spirit and being "immersed" in the Holy Spirit are clearly two different things. Moses, Abraham, the prophets, all these men had the Holy Spirit, and so did the Apostles, and they possessed the Spirit long before Messiah was crucified. It wasn't until after the crucifixion that anyone was "baptized" in the Holy Spirit! Thus, "having the Spirit," and being "baptized in the Spirit," must be two different things. There are many "holiness" churches out there, (pentecostal and charismatic) who teach that if you aren't "baptized" in the Holy Spirit (immersed) you aren't a believer and are going to hell when you die. They also teach that the "evidence" of the Holy Spirit baptism is "speaking in tongues." I don't want to spend a lot of words on this subject, but, scriptures do not support these teachings. Scriptures do not say that "everyone" who is baptized speaks in tongues. The book of Acts recounts six separate instances of "baptism" in the Holy Spirit, and out of those 6, only half mention "speaking in tongues."
The accounts of "speaking in tongues" are found in Acts 2: 4, 19: 6, and 10: 46. Yet, in all six accounts there are other "evidences" of the Holy Spirit mentioned besides tongues. The other "manifestations" of Spirit Baptism are as follows:
Paul spoke of numerous gifts associated with Spirit baptism in 1 Corinthians, starting in chapter 12.
That Paul says, "do all speak in tongues," it becomes evident that not all do! Why would he ask this if he knew that everyone speaks in tongues when they receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit? Those who believe this argue, "he's talking about the 'gift' of tongues, and that's a different thing from the tongues that come upon you as evidence of the Holy Spirit baptism." They argue this but they can't show one scripture to prove that there are two distinct different manifestations of speaking in tongues, they just simply refuse to believe the scriptures apply to what they are doing! Gifts of the Spirit are gifts of the Spirit, whether we receive those gifts when we initially receive the Spirit, or when we are baptized in the Spirit, or when we are "filled" with the Spirit. It's the same Spirit giving the gift, therefore all the scriptures governing that gift will apply. The Spirit is not some whimsical power that operates sporadically, as the emotion strikes. We are talking about the unchanging, unmoveable, never swerving Holy Spirit of the living God, here! We all get different gifts. Yet, how do we know if a man is "filled" or "baptized in the Spirit? What's the "evidence" of this? Is it speaking in tongues? In that case, anyone who chatters incoherently in an unknown undecipherable tongue is proving they have the Holy Spirit. What utter nonsense! I'm sorry, but it's true, it's nonsense. The "evidence" of the infilling and baptism of the Holy Spirit is the love that shows forth in the person's life, in their behavior, it's "demonstration," through their walk and through the uprightness of their lives! That is exactly what Paul tells the Corinthians in the next verses.
Some might ask, yes, but when we pray with someone to be baptized in the Holy Spirit, don't we need to see some obvious manifestation in the flesh when they have received him? Isn't that what speaking in tongues is for? My answer is going to be harsh. You see, that is the problem with these religious teachings. They are like the Pharisees who seek to get believers circumcised so they can "glory in their flesh."
When a person is baptized in the Holy Spirit, believe me he or she will know it, and that's all that matters at first. Do those who are with them, praying for the baptism need instant confirmation? Not at all! Those who insist on seeing some spectacular display like tongues, or prophecy, or something else are seeking an emotional response to a Spiritual event, and are actually interested in the "show." It's almost like a form of entertainment. It keeps their Sunday meetings "exciting," and makes them look oh so very Spiritual to all! It's counterfiet! I've attended numerous pentecostal and charismatic meetings, many that you would describe as "holy roller." They are thus called by some because they actually get "slain in the spirit" (which has no basis in scripture) and while "slain in the spirit" they fall on the floor and either convulse, or roll around, or just lay still, as in a daze. Other activities I've seen attributed to "Holy Spirit infilling," are, rocking, shaking, crying uncontrollably, prolonged and uncontrollable hysterical laughter (even during the sermons), everyone chattering in "tongues" at one time, (and I do mean everyone), with no interpretation of these tongues in sight. I've seen people stumbling as in a drunken state, being held up by friends (and in the most extreme cases of this, the people remained in this state for WEEKS, and couldn't even go to work or function normally). I've seen a lot in these churches. I'm not deliberately trying to "trash" these beliefs, or to be overly critical, however, I must stress to the newcomer on the subject of the Holy Spirit baptism, there are clear outlines in scripture as to how these gifts operate. All things are done peacable and in order, because these gifts come from the Holy Spirit! The bottom line here is that the scriptures are very specific exactly how the Holy Spirit operates. Just read 1 Corinthians chapters 13 and 14. Not everyone who is "baptized" in the Holy Spirit speaks in tongues. Not surprising to me, most of the charismatic holiness pentecostal holy roller churches who teach you must speak in tongues to be saved or "born again" also teach that you must be baptized "in water" in the "name of Jesus alone." They teach that it is a great blasphemy to be baptized "in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit." They teach the Trinity is a false doctrine, but for all the wrong reasons, though. They say that "Jesus" is the actual name of God! There is no trinity, so they say, for Jesus is "the father," and Jesus is the Holy Spirit." My dear new comers to the faith, avoid these types of churches, for they are seriously in error. We do not have to speak in tongues to be "born again," but do we have to be "baptized," or "immersed" in the Spirit? Let me just preface my answer by saying up front, it is clear that a true believer will, at some time in his walk, be "baptized" in the Holy Spirit, and be "filled to overflowing." Just as every true believer has the promise of walking without sin in this life, we have the promise of being "filled with the Spirit." Yet, it might not happen right away! As I said earlier, being "baptized," in the Spirit is different from "being led" of the Spirit, and being "led" of the Spirit is different from having the Spirit "with you." I firmly believe scripture defends the idea of a "gradual" Spiritual life, by degrees. Let's look at it historically. The Apostles and even Moses and the prophets, prior to Messiah's death and resurrection, had the "Spirit" with them.
It is possible, therefore, to have the Spirit "with you" but not "in you." This is the condition we find obedient Jews in today, those who have never heard the True Gospel of Messiah, and thus haven't had a chance to receive the Spirit "in them." The Holy spirit is still "with" the obedient children of Abraham, just as he was with them before Messiah came. That is why they are still called "God's Elect," the Chosen People. Yet, Messiah made it clear that in order to "hear" from the Father, we must "hear" from the Son, and receive of the "Spirit of the Father," and be "born again." The spirit is with them, and he's trying to lead them to Messiah so that he can be "in them." Right now, God is "with them" but he's not "in them." When the Apostles first believed in Messiah, they received "revelation" of who he was from the Holy Spirit. This occurred prior to the gift of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. The "spirit in you," the comforter, who came as a result of the cross makes you "one" with Messiah and with the Father. The Apostles, when they first believed on Messiah, were being "led" of the Spirit. The Holy Spirit "leads" you to the truth of Messiah. You can't even know who Messiah is or believe on him unless you are "led of the Spirit." That is the "rock" foundation upon which Messiah would build the "congregation," the "body of Messiah."
God reveals to us who the Son of God is, and this is done through His Spirit, and that is the very foundation of our faith! The rock upon which the entire congregation is built. So, those who say you don't need the Holy Spirit have greviously erred against the Spirit, and have struck at the very foundation of our faith. In fact, they've blasphemed the Holy Spirit when they say you don't need the Holy Spirit to believe and be saved. I'm going to discuss this blasphemy of the Holy Spirit in the section of this chapter called "the mark of the Beast." You start out having the Spirit "with you" when you have an heart to obey the Father. Then, you are "chosen" because of that heart of obedience, and the Spirit begins to lead you into all truth. The Spirit leads you to the truth of who Messiah is. Then you receive the "earnest" of the Spirit, in you. This "earnest" is described in 2 Corinthians and in Ephesians.
An earnest is just like a "down payment" on a house or a partial payment amount in a contract made as a promisory note. It's called "earnest" because it shows that the person who pays is "earnest" in their intent to complete the contract. This partial or "earnest" of the Holy Spirit is what "seals us." It's what the Apostles received when they understood in their minds who Messiah was, "the Son of the living God." We receive the earnest of the Spirit once we "believe" on Messiah. This is called "the seal" of God by the writer of 2 Corinthians, and the writer says that this seal is "in our hearts." Yet, according to Revelation 7: 3 and 9: 4 this seal of God is "in their foreheads." It says "their foreheads" because the "earnest" of the Spirit reveals to you who Messiah is. It's a "revelation" of the mind, that changes your mind forever, and then gets down into your heart, causing a transformation of your whole being (eventually). The revelation of who is Messiah is not complete until it reaches your heart. Thus, the seal of God is in your forehead and in your heart. Cross reference this with Hebrews 8: 10.
The seal of God, the Holy Spirit, seals the "New Covenant agreement" between us and God! The other scriptures that talk about the "earnest" of the Spirit are:
The earnest of the spirit is the "earnest of our inheritance," which means, this seal is a promisory note of our inheritance of "righteousness" through Messiah! After we receive the earnest and are sealed with the Holy Spirit, we then press on to the "immersion" of the Holy spirit, whereby we are "full" of the Spirit, and "walk in the Spirit," and thus purge our bodies of dead works (sin). That is the purpose of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, to "cleanse" our bodies of impurities (sin). It is a holy fire that burns away all the impurities, like gold that is tried in a fire. That is our goal, to not only recieve the baptism of the Spirit but to walk "filled with the Spirit," every day, all day, and so defeat sin in our mortal flesh. Some people stop at "being led" of the Spirit. So they never receive the full inheritance, but settle for the "earnest." They imperil their own souls! They believe that "knowing who is Messiah is good enough." They never press on to being "filled." Yet, only those who are baptized will ultimately press on to the prize of the higher calling in Messiah Yahshua. Messiah is waiting for all of his followers to "walk in the Spirit" and thus "not fulfill the lusts of the flesh." So, I'd say that for the final generation, the ones who are alive when Messiah returns, a Spirit filled life is a must. Wouldn't you? Since we don't know if we are the final generatin or not, needless to say, a Spirit filled life is therefore a must for all believers! The Mark Of The Beast Just as being "sealed" with the Holy Spirit (the mark of God) manifests itself in physical form by way of our behavior, so also the "mark of the Beast," manifests itself in a behavior that is contrary to the Holy Spirit, and is fleshly, beastial, hence the term "mark of the Beast." While the seal of God is secret, and can only be seen in the hearts and minds of those who have it (and only the Spirit searches the thought and the intents of the heart)," nevertheless, the mark of the Beast is an obvious "brand." It's a brand that can be seen by all. The mark of the Beast is a aggrevious and unforgiveable sin against God. So much so that Revelation says all who receive the mark of the Beast "have their part in the lake of fire." Surprisingly enough, according to scripture there is only one "unforgiveable sin." Messiah identifies it as "blasphemy of the Holy Spirit."
Theologians have debated over "what is the unforgiveable sin," for centuries, and yet, here Messiah tells us plainly what that is. Where is the debate? The debate lies as to what constitutes "blasphemy of the Holy Spirit." I submit to you all, that the answer to that question lies in the context of Messiah's words. Messiah had just cast a demon out of a man, and the Pharisees accused him of doing this "by the power of the king of the demons."
Messiah was incensed by this accusation, and rightly so, for the Pharisees were saying that an act of righteousness was performed by devils through him. They were saying that Messiah's righteousness was "of the devil."
Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, therefore, is when you attribute the righteous acts of the Holy Spirit (and the righteous teachings of the Holy Spirit) to the devil. Also, it's when you attribute the evil works of the devilto the Holy Spirit. I don't know if your realize what a revelation this truly is, but, in it lies the key to understanding the "spirit of antimessiah." There comes a day when those who war against Messiah's followers will do so because Messiah's followers vocally believe and proclaim that we can be "sinless," and that we can walk "holy" before God. The wicked ones, will call this a "doctrine of devils!" If they actually behold the believers righteousness with their own eyes they will accuse the believer of doing this "by the power of the prince of the devils." That is why John warned in his letters, "brethren, let no man deceive you by any means, he that does righteousness, is righteous, even as he is righteous." (1 John 3: 7) This discussion by John, is a prelude to explaining how we can tell the "spirit of antimessiah," from the "Spirit of God." We can see shades of this persecution already. I have been told numerous times by sundry people that "any man who says he has no sin is a liar and the truth is not in him," and this is said to me to refute my belief that we can someday live without sin. They are, of course, quoting 1 John 1: 8, and taking it out of context, to make it say that no man can ever say "I have no sin," without being a liar. Thus, when the believers are perfected, and walk forth sinning not, and saying so plainly, the deceived will say to him, "you are a liar, and the truth is not in you," which is just the same as calling them a "child of the devil," because the devil is the father of all lies! The day comes, and yes, now is, when those who seek to be righteous and holy will be called "evil liars," and "of the devil." This, my friends is most assuredly the same thing as saying that Messiah cast out demons by the power of the demons, it is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, and furthermore it is the "mark of the Beast." For blasphemy of the Holy Spirit and the mark of the Beast are the same thing. There is only one forgiveable sin." Since the mark of the Beast and blasphemy of the Spirit are both unforgiveable sins we can only conclude, logically, that they are one in the same sin. When you tell someone that they can "live without sin in this life," and they quote back to you 1 John 1: 8, and deny it, they most assuredly are blapheming the Holy Spirit! They are receiving the mark of the Beast. For, if a man refuses to believe he can live without sin, he will remain in his sin forever, and will never be free. He will die "in sin," and have his part in the lake of fire! Yet, I've been told that I make mountains out of molehills when it comes to this subject. I get angry over people teaching this lie that 1 John 1: 8 says we can "never stop sinning!" I tell you again, it is blasphemy of the worst kind, and sets the person up for the mark of the Beast. They become Satan's property forever, and they are branded with a mark, which is their own sins that they will commit willingly, now, believing they have no choice in the matter, because they are "flesh." They, therefore see themselves as a "beast," who can never be anything else but a beast! It is no mystery what is the "mark of the Beast." John wrote of this antimessiah spirit at the end of chapter 3 and in chapter 4 of this very same letter.
Any spirit that confesses the Messiah is come "in the flesh." We are the flesh of which he is speaking here. If we confess that Messiah is in us, that is in our flesh, then we manifest that our flesh can be "conformed" to his image, and that we can live, not after the flesh to fulfill the lusts thereof, but after the Spirit, sinless and perfect! Blashphemy of the Holy Spirit is to say that you can "sin" while "walking in the Spirit." It's just as simple as that. Because first you are saying that your sin is a product of "walking in the Spirit," which makes the Spirit the author of your sin, then, secondly, you are denying the power of the Spirit to make you sinless, which means that you are denying that Messiah lives in you, and lives in your flesh! If Messiah lives in your flesh, your flesh will be conformed and transformed into the Spiritual creature! If you deny this possibility, you are denying that Messiah lives in you, in your flesh! If you don't believe we are the flesh of which John is speaking here, read the next verse:
If you don't believe John is talking about getting rid of sin here, read the beginning of chapter three:
It behooves every believer in Yahshua to immediately read the letter of 1 John, keeping in mind what is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, and what is the spirit of antimessiah! The day is not far off when we shed this life of sin, unto God's glorious liberty in Messiah, and walk worthy, "without spot or wrinkle." In that day the children of the devil will manifest themselves for they will call you a "liar," and they will use the scripture to "prove" this accusation. They then will twist your every word and deed to make you look like an horrible sinner! Eventually they will all band together to destroy us, but they know not that thier banding together is actually their prison, and that they are being "bound in bundles" to be burned at Messiah's return! When the son of perdition says that his flesh will remain sinful until the day he dies, and that it's impossible to be sinless, he's saying that Messiah does not live in his flesh, and that Messiah and the Holy Spirit have no power over his flesh. He's saying to the Holy Spirit "touch not my flesh, leave it alone, it shall stay sinful until it dies." Thus, he has chosen life over death! His fate is sealed, and he shall utterly perish in his own corruption! He is "marked" for the slaughter. When the son of perdition says to the true believer, "you are a liar to say you can be sinless, and you are speaking from the power of the devils," he is blapheming the Holy Spirit! Friends, the mark of the Beast is "in their right hand and in their foreheads." In other words, they "know how not to sin" but they choose to "sin anyway." Blashphemy of the Holy Spirit and the mark of the Beast are one in the same, the unforgiveable sin.
We are not even supposed to pray for someone who blasphemes the Holy Spirit by saying that our righteousness comes forth from the devil, and that our hope for righteousness through faith is a lie! Their judgment is sure and no praying for them will turn it back! I shall rest my peace on this subject! Guard your selves my brethren, for the time is short! Yahweh bless and keep you, IN HIS LOVE. Shalom J. Dean Click The |
