- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote Do you think he is called JEALOUS because he isn't human, just like Pinocchio? Stuart
Of course the english word “jealous” usually has negative connotation, but it was translated from the Hebrew and Greek words that carry a wide range of meanings. They can have either a positive or a negative connotation, depending on how the words are used. For instance, the Hebrew word translated “jealousy” can mean “insistence on exclusive devotion; toleration of no rivalry; zeal; ardor; jealousy [righteous or sinful]; envying.” The corresponding Greek word has a similar meaning. These words can refer to a warped, distorted emotion toward a suspected rival or one believed to be enjoying an advantage. (Proverbs 14:30) They can also refer to a positive expression of a God-given quality—wanting to protect a loved one from harm.—2 Corinthians 11:2.
Many times where that word appears, it could just as easily be translated “ardor” or “zeal.”
Quote (david @ Aug. 13 2008,14:20) Quote The Holy Spirit is referred to as the comforter and the helper, because that is what the Holy Spirit does, and yes he is referred to as a “he”, but show me a scripture that says he is a person, or a being. The fact that the B i b l e does not explicitly MENTION, EXPLAIN, or TEACH a trinity is in itself strong proof that the trinity teaching is false. And this is also borne out by what the Bible TEACHES regarding the holy spirit.
God’s Word will HELP US and GUIDE US to a correct understanding of the holy spirit.
One cannot just look at the fact that personal attributes are applied to the holy spirit and conclude that this proves the holy spirit is a person, for personal attributes are definitely applied to very impersonal things in the Bible by means of personification. Just above, we spoke of the Bible as “teaching,” “explaining,” ‘helping’ and ‘guiding.’ This is called personification.–The reason we know the Bible isn't a person? Because it's also described as a book in terms that a person would never be.
–The reason we know the holy spirit isn't a person? Because it's also described in terms being people being “filled with” it, being “anointed with” it. It being given,’ ‘poured out upon,’ and ‘distributed.’ You can be baptized in it.
A person can baptize others with water, dipping them into it, as John did, and a person can baptize others with fire by immersing them in flames or causing their destruction; but how can one person baptize others with another person?These impersonal characteristics are certainly not attributes of a person. None of these expressions would be appropriate if the holy spirit were a person.
If you want to try something interesting, look at all of Paul's letters in the first few verses.
The Apostle Paul sends personal greetings from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, AND NO MENTION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.Some examples, but check them all:
1 CORINTHIANS 1:3
“May YOU have undeserved kindness and peace from God our Father and [the] Lord Jesus Christ.”
2 CORINTHIANS 1:2
“May YOU have undeserved kindness and peace from God our Father and [the] Lord Jesus Christ.”
GALATIANS 1:3
“May YOU have undeserved kindness and peace from God our Father and [the] Lord Jesus Christ.”
EPHESIANS 1:2
“May YOU have undeserved kindness and peace from God our Father and [the] Lord Jesus Christ.”
PHILIPPIANS 1:2
“May YOU have undeserved kindness and peace from God our Father and [the] Lord Jesus Christ.”
COLOSSIANS 1:2
“to the holy ones and faithful brothers in union with Christ at Co·lośsae: May YOU have undeserved kindness and peace from God our Father.”
1 TIMOTHY 1:2
“to Timothy, a genuine child in the faith: May there be undeserved kindness, mercy, peace from God [the] Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.”
2 TIMOTHY 1:2
“May there be undeserved kindness, mercy, peace from God [the] Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.”
TITUS 1:4
“May there be undeserved kindness and peace from God [the] Father and Christ Jesus our Savior.”IMAGINE! Imagine three equal partners in a company and only two of them ever send their greetings out!
The holy spirit is always left out of these greetings— an unbelievable and unexplainable oversight if it were indeed a person or entity coequal with God the Father and Christ!James, Peter, and John used similar phrases in the introduction to their letters where they likewise do not mention the holy spirit. Why? Because they were not Trinitarians either.
Very good post David.Tim
And 'smite' can mean to casually shoulder-massage a person, in a loving way. When Jesus says he brings a 'sword', it actually refers to pen-knife, after all a pen is mightier than a sword. When god turned Lot's wife into a pillar of salt, it means salt as in salt of the earth: god was honouring Lot's wife as one of the meek who would inherit the earth.
With the bible, any old definition will suffice.
Stuart
Quote (kejonn @ July 27 2008,23:18) Don't forget this one because Yahweh specifically said this was his name: Exo 34:14 For you shall not worship strange gods, for the Lord God, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God;
amen, good point… God is a jealous God …..The fact is, the B i b l e does mention, explain and teach that God is triune…. the bible does not anywhere specifically state that there would be 66 books and 66 books only, so just getting hung up on the fact that nowhere does the word “trinity” appear in the scriptures is just shallow reasoning, and not only shallow, but arbitrary, since people who deny the trinity believe other things about God and the bible even though a specific word or phrase is not used in the bible itself. The word “trinity” is just shorthand to describe God's nature, just like “bible” (which is a word n o w w h e r e found in the b i b l e itself!) is shorthand for the collection of books that Christians say is God's word to man, inerrant and infallible.
blessings,
KenQuote And 'smite' can mean to casually shoulder-massage a person, in a loving way. Ok, let's begin simply: the Bible wasn't written in english. It wasn't the word “jealous” that was written. It was a word that can mean jealous. But, if you're at all familiar with languages, which I'm no so certain you are, you might be aware that not all words match up perfectly or have equal meanings.
Check the Bible. If you look at how the word is used, it would become plain.Quote the bible does not anywhere specifically state that there would be 66 books and 66 books only, so just getting hung up on the fact that nowhere does the word “trinity” appear in the scriptures is just shallow reasoning, and not only shallow, but arbitrary, –eppy
I agree. It's not strong reasoning. It wasn't the point I was making though. I was just showing how we can personify and often do personify things, such as the Bible, which teaches, guides, instructs, helps, etc, etc, etc.
What about the other point I made though, how in pretty much every single book after Romans, there are greetings from The Father and his Son, but not from the holy spirit.
How do you explain that? Read the introductions yourself. Read them all. It boggles my mind.
If three equal business parters were sending out instructions or letters, and only 2 of them ever gave their greetings, you'd have to be suspicious. It certainly makes me suspicious, of the whole trinity doctrine.
Is that sound reasoning?
Yes that is sound reasoning but on its own doesn't conclusively prove that there isn't a Trinity. But as you know the whole of scripture doesn't teach a Trinity and with what you said and scriptures that teach that the Father is the only true God, we only have one choice and that is that the Father is the one true God.
Of course for us there is one God the Father and one Lord Jesus Christ. All I can say is that anyone who argues otherwise may be danger of eliminating themselves from the term “US/believers”, (if they are actually a true believer that is).
Names:
Father – YHWH
Son – Yashua or similar
Spirit – YHWH2 Corinthians 3:17
Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.YHWH is the Spirit.
I tend to think like this.
Who is God? YHWH
What is God? Spirit.He is also known as the Father of Spirits and that of course includes our spirits and even Jesus spirit. It is also by spirit that we can be one with each another.
Quote (david @ Aug. 14 2008,10:10) Quote And 'smite' can mean to casually shoulder-massage a person, in a loving way. Ok, let's begin simply: the Bible wasn't written in english. It wasn't the word “jealous” that was written. It was a word that can mean jealous. But, if you're at all familiar with languages, which I'm no so certain you are, you might be aware that not all words match up perfectly or have equal meanings.
Check the Bible. If you look at how the word is used, it would become plain.
But the bible is written in English. Are you saying that the KJV is fallible, that it is not the word of god?Stuart
Quote But the bible is written in English. Are you saying that the KJV is fallible, that it is not the word of god? Yes, it is written in English. But, as we know, it wasn't originally. The word “jealous” was not the original word. And no, it's not a perfect translation of the word.
Quote (david @ Aug. 20 2008,17:01) Quote But the bible is written in English. Are you saying that the KJV is fallible, that it is not the word of god? Yes, it is written in English. But, as we know, it wasn't originally. The word “jealous” was not the original word. And no, it's not a perfect translation of the word.
So god does not speak English, or does not dictate in English or at least is unwilling to communicate with English-speaking people in their own language. Do you feel left out, not being one of god's chosen people?Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Aug. 20 2008,02:20) Quote (david @ Aug. 20 2008,17:01) Quote But the bible is written in English. Are you saying that the KJV is fallible, that it is not the word of god? Yes, it is written in English. But, as we know, it wasn't originally. The word “jealous” was not the original word. And no, it's not a perfect translation of the word.
So god does not speak English, or does not dictate in English or at least is unwilling to communicate with English-speaking people in their own language. Do you feel left out, not being one of god's chosen people?Stuart
Well, since Hebrew was not among the world's first languages, he likely didn't speak Hebrew either. Unless…Stu and Kevin,
Since you both are so good at pointing out the obvious, I'd like to ask you why you hope there is a God?
Stu – you hope there is a God or you wouldn't be here. You said so yourself in the beginning that you were here to see if anyone had any new argument that could convince you. I suppose that could lead one to believe that you want to be convinced?
Kevin – you know there is a God but just not the one depicted in the bible? If so, why poke fun at those who believe the God of the bible? I think that might be catagorized as being a bully? For instance, you wouldn't go over to a Muslim site and mock their belief in Allah, would you? I sure hope not!
Mandy
Quote (Not3in1 @ Aug. 20 2008,12:37) Stu and Kevin, Since you both are so good at pointing out the obvious, I'd like to ask you why you hope there is a God?
What does hope have to do with this? Was this addressed to both of us?
Quote Kevin – you know there is a God but just not the one depicted in the bible? If so, why poke fun at those who believe the God of the bible? I think that might be catagorized as being a bully? For instance, you wouldn't go over to a Muslim site and mock their belief in Allah, would you? I sure hope not!
Hmmm. I rarely understand why people take it as a personal attack to themselves if I point out what I see as fallacies in the bible. Are you saying that if I point out oddities in the bible, I am actually doing it to you?And as far as the Muslim comment, I don't know enough about the Koran to make any comments. I do, however, know the bible since I've studied it for 20 years. Therein lies the answer to your question.
On that note, though, I also frequent other boards where Christians come and attack the non-belief of others. Are you saying we should all stay in little hidey holes where our beliefs are not challenged? Things would be nicer that way, I guess.
But think about it: this board has an area neither I nor Stu can post in. Yet some “brave” souls confront us outside of the safety zone and then act offended about it. If you don't care for what we post, you should take the advice you gave Samuel and stay in the safer sections.
Kevin,
You don't scare me, I don't need to take refuge within the “safer sections”.
I merely pointing out that because you have studied the bible for years and years and now deem it not even worthy to wipe with….why mock those who cherish it's every word? Folks here believe the bible and have faith in it's God, you know this by now I assume? If you want to point out errors in the bible, do it, but realize you ARE attacking the very core of some people. An attack on the bible IS an attack on them personally. But I think you truely DO know this but think it's silly – again – not respecting other's.
Point out problems but don't hold it against those of us who believe despite the problems. And those of us who do not give you answers that satisfy your questions of world hunger and world pain. We are only Christians, we do not have all the answers….yet.
I don't think anyone should attack anyone based on personal beliefs. Period.
Love,
MandyQuote (Not3in1 @ Aug. 20 2008,14:11) Kevin, You don't scare me, I don't need to take refuge within the “safer sections”.
I merely pointing out that because you have studied the bible for years and years and now deem it not even worthy to wipe with….why mock those who cherish it's every word?
Can you show me where I have mocked someone? Is mocking the bible all of the sudden equivalent to mocking believers?
If you say yes, then you cannot be opposed to homosexuality without being opposed to the homosexual. Or any other “sin” because you must then equate the action with the person.
Quote Folks here believe the bible and have faith in it's God, you know this by now I assume? Yes. But if they cannot come up with reasonable, logical answers to what I post, is it my fault? You can go after any of my beliefs and I will certainly stand up for what I believe in. If you can show fallacies in my beliefs, I would consider them and be stronger for it.
Quote If you want to point out errors in the bible, do it, but realize you ARE attacking the very core of some people. I am of the opinion that a person's life should not be based around a 2000+ year old book. But that's just me.
Quote An attack on the bible IS an attack on them personally. But I think you truely DO know this but think it's silly – again – not respecting other's. If this is the case, you should leave here altogether. After all, you oppose pre-existence and the trinity, and that is the core of WJ's beliefs. Do you not see the hypocrisy of your words? WJ can defend himself against others who do not believe as he, why can't every one else?
Quote Point out problems but don't hold it against those of us who believe despite the problems. Please show me where I seem to hold a grudge against anyone for their beliefs. I do not. The worst I might say is that the bible is God to some people. It is not, it is a book.
Quote And those of us who do not give you answers that satisfy your questions of world hunger and world pain. We are only Christians, we do not have all the answers….yet. I am not looking for answers. I accept these things as a part of the world and life. I do, however, want to know why these things exist IF the bible is true. That is the whole point.
Quote I don't think anyone should attack anyone based on personal beliefs. Period. Love,
Mandy
Again, please show me where i have attacked anyone. No more equating the pointing out bible oddities with attacking people. Again, if so, stop opposing WJ's belief in the trinity and pre-existence because you are attacking him when you do.Kevin,
When I “attack” preexistence or even other topics, it is not the bible I am attacking (if I am attacking at all). It is there idea of what the bible is saying – their personal interpretation. That is a bit different than saying, “The bible is completely wacked.”. See the diffference?Quote (Not3in1 @ Aug. 20 2008,14:36) Kevin,
When I “attack” preexistence or even other topics, it is not the bible I am attacking (if I am attacking at all). It is there idea of what the bible is saying – their personal interpretation. That is a bit different than saying, “The bible is completely wacked.”. See the diffference?
Only slightly. Their beliefs are still their beliefs. Therefore, if you believe the bible is infallible, it is just another belief. Are only some beliefs fair game?Kevin,
You say:
I am not looking for answers. I accept these things as a part of the world and life. I do, however, want to know why these things exist IF the bible is true.
You say your not looking for answers and then in the next breath you ask, “Why?”. You've practiced all the answers, but you still have questions. Isn't it OK to still have questions? I hope so.
Mandy
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
