Why didn't David kill Saul when Saul used the cave in which David was hiding to relieve himself?
Why did Paul retract his statement in Acts 23:5?
Here's the danger. If God might just at any time "lift the anointing and give it to someone else", then we would have no way of knowing who has the anointing. Throughout all of redemptive history, "the gifts and calling are irrevocable" (Rom 11:29). That notion that God might just (or maybe just did) "lift the anointing and give it to someone else", disconnects form and matter, word and witness, spirit and sacrament. It is a form of gnosticism that completely undermines the possibility of Church authority, for everyone gets to determine on his own who has the anointing, and that is an entirely subjective endeavor. But Jesus *breathed* on the Apostles. And the Apostles *laid hands* on the bishops. There was a physical endowment of the ordination authority they received through this sacramental act. The Church has always taught that no one who has been validly ordained can be unordained, just as one who has been baptized cannot be unbaptized (even if he renounces his baptism). If he repents and returns to Christ, he is not to be re-baptized, because his baptism remains with him eternally. And so does his ordination gift. That is (in part) why Paul tells Timothy not to be hasty in the laying on of hands. Sacraments cannot be undone.
-A8
Here's the danger. If God might just at any time "lift the anointing and give it to someone else", then we would have no way of knowing who has the anointing.
NOT AT ALL in my experience and in my reading of Scripture. Particularly, to the discerning, prayed up, confessed up, repented up, obeyed up, filled-up with Holy Spirit--the departure of the anointing is very obvious. And, sometimes, it's almost or literally as though a cold wind comes in behind the departure. Certainly there's a dryness, a hollowness, an empty-ness which seems to descend. Detecting the departure of the anointing is easy for anyone seriously spiritually sensitive . . .as all Christians ought to seek to be, imho.
Throughout all of redemptive history, "the gifts and calling are irrevocable" (Rom 11:29).
GIFTS AND CALLINGS of God are DIFFERENT from the ANOINTING of God.
David in your example above would probably have been blessed of God to have removed Saul then and there. After all, God delivered him into David's hand. DAVID CHOSE to respect God above that expected in terms of refusing to touch God's anointed in a functional, title sense. The spiritual anointing had left Saul long ago as Scripture is clear about.
Sampson was anointed again while chained between the two pillars in the banquet hall. He brought the house down literally. He had forsaken his anointing and it was lifted from him when he disobeyed God and told the woman the secret of his power, anointing.
That notion that God might just (or maybe just did) "lift the anointing and give it to someone else", disconnects form and matter, word and witness, spirit and sacrament. It is a form of gnosticism that completely undermines the possibility of Church authority, for everyone gets to determine on his own who has the anointing, and that is an entirely subjective endeavor.
NOT AT ALL. I Corinthians 14 takes care of that. Each local congregation is to test the spirits . . . discern what is of God in this or that prophetic sharing etc. Paul clearly laid it out for The Church Universal to follow. Few do.
But Jesus *breathed* on the Apostles. And the Apostles *laid hands* on the bishops. There was a physical endowment of the ordination authority they received through this sacramental act. The Church has always taught that no one who has been validly ordained can be unordained, just as one who has been baptized cannot be unbaptized (even if he renounces his baptism).
That's not THE ACTIVE, ALIVE, CURRENT VIBRANT, POWERFUL, POTENT, ANOINTING OF GOD'S SPIRIT UPON THAT INDIVIDUAL IN THAT MOMENT UNLESS GOD CONFIRMS IT AS SUCH WITH SUCH.
Folks can go down into baptism a dry sinner and come up a wet sinner depending on the attitude of their heart. They can have all the hands in the congregation laid on them in some sort of formal 'anointing' and installation in this or that office--it can mean nothing in terms of God's perspective. God looks on the heart and applies His Spirit's anointing, or not, ACCORDING TO HIS STANDARDS AND PRIORITIES, NOT OURS.
If he repents and returns to Christ, he is not to be re-baptized, because his baptism remains with him eternally. And so does his ordination gift. That is (in part) why Paul tells Timothy not to be hasty in the laying on of hands. Sacraments cannot be undone.
SACRAMENTS AND ANOINTING ARE VERY DIFFERENT THINGS IN TERMS OF THE ANOINTING I'M SPEAKING OF. There is an anointed with oil for an office. One hopes that Holy Spirit literally anoints with Himself in a powerful way at the same time. I've observed that He rarely does so . . . in this era--regardless of the Christian organization involved.