OSAS, When does salvation take place?
- Thread starter Drich
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Judas wasn't sealed with the Holy Spirit. Being permanently indwelt (sealed) by the Holy Spirit started AFTER Jesus died and rose from the dead and only given to people who obeyed God (the willingness to obey and actually follow through on it).
What Judas was was temporarily filled by the Holy Spirit to do the miracles Jesus had them do when He divided them up into twos to spread the message and do miracles. It's like when the Holy Spirit did miracles through people in the OT. It was for a specific purpose and temporary like with King Saul. King Saul was largely disobedient to God in the end and didn't have the Holy Spirit permanently.
Remember, that they were still in the OT because Jesus hadn't died yet, rose and ascended. That came after Judas committed suicide.
When you say “sealed means protected/marked, not saved,” I hear that you’re trying to make sense of the passage, but the very verse you quoted shows that Paul is not talking about a mere outward mark. He says that when you believed, God gave you the Holy Spirit — not a symbol, not a tag, but the Spirit Himself. And Paul calls that Spirit the earnest, the guarantee, the first payment of everything God has promised. I’m not here to scold you; I’m here to help you see that Scripture doesn’t treat the Spirit as something given to the unsaved. The Spirit is life, and His indwelling is God’s own pledge that the believer truly belongs to Him. So when Paul speaks of sealing, he’s describing God’s act of claiming and indwelling the believer, not a temporary protection for someone still outside salvation. I say this kindly: let the text itself guide you, not the systems that try to split salvation into pieces.
I hear what you’re trying to say — that Judas wasn’t sealed, that permanent indwelling began after the resurrection, that the Spirit’s work before Pentecost was temporary and task‑based. But I must tell you plainly: your conclusion is built on a system, not on the text itself. You’re repeating a framework that divides the Spirit’s work into eras in ways the apostles never do. Yes, Judas was never sealed — but not because sealing “hadn’t started yet.” He wasn’t sealed because he never believed. The Spirit’s temporary empowerment in the Old Testament and in the disciples’ ministry is real, but empowerment is not the same as indwelling. And you are right that Saul lost the Spirit’s empowering presence — but Saul never possessed the Spirit as the earnest of salvation. The mistake comes when you assume that because empowerment was temporary, all pre‑cross indwelling must also be temporary. Scripture never says that. The prophets are explicitly said to have the Spirit of Christ in them, not merely upon them. That is not temporary empowerment; that is internal spiritual life. Judas lacked that because Judas lacked faith. So I say this kindly: do not let a system tell you that the Spirit could not indwell before the resurrection when Scripture itself says He did. The difference between Judas and the prophets is not the calendar — it is the heart.
You are treating the Day of Judgment as the moment salvation is decided, when Jesus Himself teaches that it is the moment salvation is revealed.
In Matthew 7, Jesus is not describing believers waiting to find out whether they are saved; He is exposing false disciples who never belonged to Him.
His words are precise: “I never knew you.” Not “I knew you once,” not “I knew you until judgment,” not “I knew you until you failed.” Never. Their judgment is not a reversal; it is a revelation.
The system you’re repeating forces Matthew 7 to say something it does not say, and I must gently chastise that attitude because Scripture does not bend to our frameworks.
You are right that salvation is not earned by prayers, sacraments, or creeds — but you have taken that truth and built a conclusion Scripture never makes: that salvation is postponed until judgment.
Jesus says the opposite: “He who believes has eternal life.” Not “will have,” not “might have,” not “will find out later.”
The thief on the cross was not judged early; he was saved the moment he believed.
The Pharisees were not condemned early; they were condemned because they never believed.
Judgment day does not decide salvation; it exposes it.
And when Jesus tells the lawyer in Luke 10 to love God and neighbor, He is not giving him a path to earn salvation at judgment — He is exposing the man’s inability to fulfill the law and driving him to grace.
So I say this kindly: your desire to honor Christ is good, but the system you’re leaning on forces you to contradict the very passages you quote. Salvation is God’s gift, received by faith, sealed by the Spirit, and revealed — not decided — on that day.
You say "the apostles never" divide the Spirit's work into eras. John 7:39 is a direct apostolic statement: "the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified." This is not my system. This is the apostle John's.
The context of 1 Peter 1:11 (the Spirit of Christ in them that you're talking about) is about the source and direction of prophetic inspiration — the Spirit as the agent directing the prophets' words. That's a different use of "in" than "the Spirit dwells in you" (1 Cor 6:19). The preposition is the same; the semantic weight in context is not.
And Peter himself creates the contrast in 1 Peter 1:12: "which are now reported unto you... with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven." Then (prophetic inspiration) vs. now (Spirit sent down after exaltation). Peter is making the temporal distinction you claim the apostles "never" make.
You say Judas wasn't sealed because he never believed. Okay. But it's not mutually exclusive with my point. Both can be true: the full indwelling mechanism wasn't in operation yet for the disciples and Judas lacked faith. You've presented a false either/or.
You're conflating "the Spirit was in the prophets as their prophetic agent" with "the Spirit permanently indwells and seals a believer." Those are different claims that happen to use the same preposition so I'm right to point out the distinction. You're wrong to pretend the distinction is "a system" rather than a reading of the text.
Your reply is sharp, thoughtful, and text‑anchored — but it still draws a conclusion the apostles themselves never make.
You’re absolutely right that John 7:39 marks a real turning point: the Spirit’s new‑covenant ministry of indwelling and sealing begins only after Jesus is glorified.
You’re also right that 1 Peter 1:11–12 distinguishes prophetic inspiration (“the Spirit of Christ in them”) from the Spirit “sent down from heaven” at Pentecost. I agree with all of that.
But none of those passages say — or even imply — that the Spirit’s pre‑Pentecost work was merely external, nor do they say the prophets lacked true spiritual life.
You’re making a valid distinction between prophetic inspiration and new‑covenant indwelling, but then you push the distinction into a system that Scripture never states: that the Spirit’s presence “in” the prophets was categorically non‑indwelling.
The apostles never say that.
They say the mode of the Spirit’s ministry changed, not that the Spirit’s presence in the saints of old was merely instrumental.
You’re right to reject a false either/or — Judas lacked faith, and the full sealing ministry had not yet begun — but you’re wrong to treat prophetic “in” as purely mechanical. The text itself makes distinctions, but your system makes separations the apostles never make.
Meh. You nit pick everything almost everyone else writes about and write like you do to try to come out as if your reading of the text is the only one that gets it and everyone else is wrong "following a system".
Your tactics are exposed. This is you:
- "Performative humility" — the soft tone that's actually a power move
- "Asymmetrical epistemics" — you're "reading the text," everyone else is "following a system." You make yourself exempt from the charge you're making.
- "Unfalsifiable framing" — every objection gets reclassified as "a system," so there's no possible response that isn't a loss
- "Framing dominance" — You're trying to control the terms of the debate so that your position is the default and everyone else's is the deviation
You’re saying I use “performative humility,” “asymmetrical epistemics,” “unfalsifiable framing,” and “framing dominance” — but those labels assume I’m playing a rhetorical game rather than doing what I explicitly claim: grounding arguments in text-first reasoning. When I say someone is following a system, I’m not exempting myself; I’m pointing out when an argument relies on a framework not stated in Scripture. If I ever do that, you’re free to call it out. But when I say “the text doesn’t say that,” that’s not dominance — that’s exegesis. You’re frustrated because I answer with precision, and precision feels like nitpicking when someone is used to broad theological claims. I’m not asking anyone to accept my reading as the only one; I’m asking everyone to anchor their reading in what the text actually says.
But to redirect the message back to this. Judas wasn't sealed with the Holy Spirit. He was temporarily empowered for the task at hand. That was the point I was trying to make before the message got derailed.
Judas never confesses Jesus as Lord in the saving sense, but he does call Him “Rabbi,” follow Him publicly, preach the kingdom, cast out demons with the Twelve, and participate in miracles — all of which show external acknowledgment, not internal faith. Scripture is explicit: Judas was “a devil” (John 6:70), “not clean” (John 13:11), and “the son of perdition” (John 17:12). So yes — Judas did not believe Jesus as Lord in the saving, trusting, loving, obeying sense. But he did acknowledge Jesus’ authority enough to function as an apostolic representative. That distinction matters: acknowledgment is not faith, and Judas is the clearest biblical example of someone who walked with Christ, spoke for Christ, acted in Christ’s name — and yet never believed Him as Lord
I completely agreeMeh. You nit pick everything almost everyone else writes about and write like you do to try to come out as if your reading of the text is the only one that gets it and everyone else is wrong "following a system".
Your tactics are exposed. This is you:
I'm not giving in to your tactics and I would caution everyone else too.
- "Performative humility" — the soft tone that's actually a power move
- "Asymmetrical epistemics" — you're "reading the text," everyone else is "following a system." You make yourself exempt from the charge you're making.
- "Unfalsifiable framing" — every objection gets reclassified as "a system," so there's no possible response that isn't a loss
- "Framing dominance" — You're trying to control the terms of the debate so that your position is the default and everyone else's is the deviation
Don't feel too bad, it's AI generated responses mostly. Sometimes he adds a sentence or two here and there, but primarily AI generated. That's probably why you're picking up on those issues. Just wanted to throw that out there.Meh. You nit pick everything almost everyone else writes about and write like you do to try to come out as if your reading of the text is the only one that gets it and everyone else is wrong "following a system".
Your tactics are exposed. This is you:
I'm not giving in to your tactics and I would caution everyone else too.
- "Performative humility" — the soft tone that's actually a power move
- "Asymmetrical epistemics" — you're "reading the text," everyone else is "following a system." You make yourself exempt from the charge you're making.
- "Unfalsifiable framing" — every objection gets reclassified as "a system," so there's no possible response that isn't a loss
- "Framing dominance" — You're trying to control the terms of the debate so that your position is the default and everyone else's is the deviation
You don't like the scripture, its not me, and that's fine. I wish you the best. "Blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it"
Hmm, I bit contradictive given the state of all your attitudes.
- Proverbs 12:1 — “He that hateth reproof is brutish.” The Hebrew בָּעַר (baʿar) means stupid, senseless, like an animal. Scripture does not soften this. To reject correction is to reject wisdom itself.
- Proverbs 15:10 — “He that hateth reproof shall die.” Not metaphorical. The text ties hatred of correction to spiritual ruin.
- Proverbs 9:7–8 —“Reprove not a scorner, lest he hate thee.” The one who hates correction is identified as a scorner—a man whose pride makes him unteachable.
- Proverbs 13:18 —“He that regardeth reproof shall be honoured.” The contrast is intentional: hatred of correction leads to poverty and shame; acceptance leads to honor.
- Proverbs 29:1 —“He, that being often reproved hardeneth his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy.” The man who hates correction is not merely stubborn—he is on a path toward irreversible judgment.
You need a dose of humility and get off that pedestal you've put yourself on. People bringing up your attitude and the fact you mostly can't be bothered to reply adequately without a full AI compilation doesn't mean you are keeping God's word and we aren't. You've elevated your own ego and I pray God smacks you down a peg. You are not smarter than everyone else in here, and you need to stop the character assassination of others just because they don't agree with you.
Well said! Jesus never knew these many people, which means they were never saved. (Matthew 7:23) In context, Jesus is addressing false prophets/bad tress that produce bad fruit. (Matthew 7:15-23)
I didn’t write the scripture—God did. It’s not me you’re accusing, it’s Him. His words, your accusation. I’m just the messenger.
The absolute ego is unreal... So far, I've never met a single person who has theological degrees that doesn't have a massive ego. The love of their own wisdom...