"Was the Holy Spirit upon Peter who cut off a soldier's ear?"
(from ealgeone to af_vet_1982, also ent to imardmd1)
My answer was "No" and I gave good and sufficient reasons to support that conclusion.
It is true that while following the Master Teacher, Peter was under His care, in that Jesus/God was not only Rabbi, but also Comforter. But so was Judas, who was given over to the Devil. During that period, The Holy Spirit, another Comforter of the same kind, was (as far as Peter or any of the other disciples were concerned) yet in The Heavens (Jn. 16:7). This pronouncement came on the same evening after supper.
Then they walked over to the Mount of Olives, where Jesus overcame the onslaught of the Devil who attacked him while Peter slept, without praying for his Master, while Jesus took up the cup of a mighty, blood-sweating battle.
Almost immediately after, Peter foolishly interfered with the temple guards who were trying to identify Jesus. Peter was not assigned to do this, but stepped in and performed an earotomy on the High Priest's servant Malchus. Peter, prompted by Satan, tried to get a knife fight going in which Satan might have gotten Jesus killed for "resisting arrest." This required Jesus to intervene and heal the wounded one supernaturally, so that He could continue on to the Cross, according to His plan.
And then, just a short time after, Peter six times very vociferously denied any association with Jesus the Galilean, even to the very face of the same Malchus whose ear had been healed from Peter's wound!
And then, after his Master had been crucified, but with the hope of an uprising against the Roman oppessors gone, Peter left the whole mess behind. Rather than following the resurrected Savior, he left for home, drawing away some of his pals, saying, "I go a-fishing" (Jn. 21:3). Was the Holy Ghost with/on him?
I say "No," and you can't prove otherwise, IMHO.
That was a sub argument from another that was subsequent to the main point in post 6445 where you asserted the Holy Spirit was always upon David from his anointing as King of Israel. You went further, much further than that, asserting Peter was not even saved.
The Spirit of the LORD descended on Yeshua/Jesus when John baptized Him. They were co-located, so to speak.
Then they walked over to the Mount of Olives, where Jesus overcame the onslaught of the Devil who attacked him while Peter slept, without praying for his Master, while Jesus took up the cup of a mighty, blood-sweating battle.
Is this your own interpolation, eisigesis, or interpretation ? Where in the scriptures, or in which faith group, do they teach this ?
Almost immediately after, Peter foolishly interfered with the temple guards who were trying to identify Jesus. Peter was not assigned to do this, but stepped in and performed an earotomy on the High Priest's servant Malchus. Peter, prompted by Satan, tried to get a knife fight going in which Satan might have gotten Jesus killed for "resisting arrest." This required Jesus to intervene and heal the wounded one supernaturally, so that He could continue on to the Cross, according to His plan.
Eisigesis again; nothing was going to happen as you describe; it was going to happen as ordained. There is no Satan in the text. Perhaps you saw it in a movie.
And then, just a short time after, Peter six times very vociferously denied any association with Jesus the Galilean, even to the very face of the same Malchus whose ear had been healed from Peter's wound!
Three, not six times:
Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, That this night, before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice.
-- Matthew, Catholic chapter twenty six, Protestant verse thirty four, as authorized by King James
Yes, Messiah miraculously healed his ear, Peter obeyed Messiah and put away the sword Messiah had authorized him to carry; no harm, no foul
And then, after his Master had been crucified, but with the hope of an uprising against the Roman oppessors gone, Peter left the whole mess behind. Rather than following the resurrected Savior, he left for home, drawing away some of his pals, saying, "I go a-fishing" (Jn. 21:3). Was the Holy Ghost with/on him?
Yes. Are you thinking of Thomas ?
Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. And when he had so said, he shewed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord. Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained. But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe. And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you. Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
-- John, Catholic chapter twenty, Protestant verses nineteen through thirty
I say "No," and you can't prove otherwise, IMHO.