The question has been raised -- Is it right for one to say that he is "filled with the Holy Ghost"? May this not savor of egotism? John said of Jesus -- "Behold the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world; ... the same is He that baptizeth with the Holy Spirit" (John i.29, 33). Christ's twofold office here is to "take away sin," and "to baptize with the Holy Spirit." Each one who knows Christ as the "Sin-bearer" should have an experimental acquaintance with Him as the "Baptizer" too. Indeed, this alone is full salvation. To have sin taken away is but half salvation; to be "baptized with the Holy Spirit" as well, is to possess full salvation. Now, if Christ has taken away a man's sin, may that man not know it? Certainly. And if he knows it, may he not bear witness to the fact? Nay, does Christ not expect him to confess? -- to tell what great things the Lord hath done for him? No right-thinking person would regard it as wrong for a saved man to confess his Saviour, or would regard his confession as egotism. By parity of reasoning, if Christ has baptized a pardoned man with the Holy Ghost, may that man not know it? Surely! and if he knows it, may he not bear witness to the fact? May he not tell what still greater things the Lord hath done for him? Would this be wrong? Must this necessarily be egotism? At the same time, while it is perfectly scriptural for a Spirit-filled man to testify, for Christ's glory, as to the Infilling of the Holy Spirit when questioned upon it -- for we must be careful not to libel the grace of God that is in us, and not to grieve the Holy Spirit by ignoring Him or His work within us -- one cannot be too careful lest he be found casting his "pearls before the swine" (Matt. vii.6), and as a rule it will be better in this matter to let the life speak rather than the tongue. Indeed it will not often be necessary for the Spirit-filled man to be questioned on the subject at all; his speech will betray him, his manner of life, his fruitful service.