Anonymous
For follow-up discussion and general commentary on the topic. Comments are sorted chronologically.
Danny Hickman
Is it possible to not know what you believe? (don't answer that). It's impossible to not know that you don't "truly believe" something.
The "truly believe" is the tell. "Believe" should be enough, but it isn't; 'truly' is needed as if there's a way to believe (maybe, but not for sure), then there's a 'no doubt' believing, which is to "truly believe."
There is only belief and unbelief. You're either sure you believe or you don't believe; there’s no way to not know! There's admitting to what you believe and there is not wanting to admit.
Believe ~ to have confidence in the truth, the existence, or the reliability of something, although without absolute proof.
I understand the confusion about not knowing whether the Holy Spirit has moved in or not. If you can not know whether you believe that Jesus was crucified for the sins of every person who will ever live, was raised three days later, and will return someday to reign on the earth for a thousand years, then maybe you can not know if the Spirit of God indwells you.
Do you believe Jesus is the Son of God? Do you believe he was sent here by God to die for the sins of mankind? Do you think his death paid the penalty for your sins? (do you believe you need a Savior?).
Do you believe he was raised after being dead for 3 days? Do you believe he sits at the right hand of the Father today? Do you want him to return for you?
You either believe the good news of the Savior or you don't! There is no 'truly' to it!
Danny Hickman
When we say we don't know if we believe something, it means we won't put any confidence in the information we have. "I need more proof," is a diplomatic way of saying, 'No I don't believe it.'
Thomas, one of Jesus' disciples, said he wouldn't believe Jesus had been raised from the dead unless he saw the nail scars in his hands and the wound from the spear that was thrust into his side (John 20:25).
He didn't get a report of the resurrection off CNN, the local newspaper, or from the internet; his fellow disciples had seen the Lord and told him about it. Why did he not believe? Did he think they had conspired to lie to him?
This question highlights the lesson to be learned from Thomas saying, 'I won't believe unless I have irrefutable evidence FOR MYSELF.' (word of mouth testimony from witnesses won't do; I need to see his nail scars for myself).
Thomas didn't understand what it means to 'believe.' He's not alone; the world has the exact same problem. Eight days later Jesus appeared again to the disciples and Thomas was there. Jesus asked him, "Have you believed because you have seen me?"
No, that's not what it means to believe. To believe is to not have absolute proof (see) and yet trust the report; that's the lesson; Jesus made a special trip just for him; it's how we become believers; he now comes in Spirit; his words are spirit.
The others had seen Jesus and believed; no different from Thomas. The first "believers" (3,000) received Peter's sermon of Acts 2 vs 41.