Preexistence

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (bodhitharta @ July 28 2009,23:10)

Quote (Cindy @ July 29 2009,11:33) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2009,11:06) Quote (Cindy @ July 28 2009,19:00) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2009,03:07) Quote (Cindy @ July 28 2009,10:54) Quote (bodhitharta @ July 28 2009,11:16) Quote (Cindy @ July 28 2009,09:38) Gene t8 gave you several Scriptures that prove that.  Are you going to deny that?  I do not believe in a trinity and the Catholic Church never believed in a preexisting of Jesus.  So you call Scripture false? That truth God revealed to us after we even leave the W.W.C. of God.  And you know they do not believe that. Peace and Love Irene Peace and Love Irene Catholics do believe in a pre-existing Jesus Did you belong to that Church?  I did and I don't remember that they did!  We were born into that Church and I taught many doctrines to our 4 Children. We left there in 1984-85  Where did you get that information from? I can call a friend that belongs there, and ask Her if I can get hold of Her. Irene Irene Hi Irene The Catholics believe in the trinity, you have said yourself you taught the Trinity in the catholic church. There is no Trinity without Pre-existence! WJ You know what makes it interesting is that t8 and others believe in the preexisting of Jesus and do not believe in the trinity either.  So why would one have to do with the other? IMO nothing. It has been 25 years ago since we believed in the trinity, and who knows what the Catholic Church believes now. And I do not believe that I ever taught our Children the preexisting of Jesus. Peace and Love Irene Irene There is no Trinitarian that does not believe In Jesus pre-existence as the Word that was with God and was God! I do not see how you could have taught the Trinity and believe Jesus was God if he did not pre-exist coming in the flesh! WJ I know for certain that I did not teach the Preexisting of Jesus to our children.  And why would I, we did not believe in it.  I am sorry but I don't think I did.  That is really all I can say about this. O.K. Like I said before, that was a new revelation for us, after we left the W.W.C. of God. Love Irene I understand what you are saying because pre-existence doesn't mean being God and in basic Christian theology you would have only taught others about the existence of The Son of God who was sent into the world. You would have not really understood the theology of the trinity because it cannot be understood unless it is specifically taught to you. So you taught about Christ and you did well.

Hi BD

So you admit that her teaching about the Trinity was good?

WJ

[bodhitharta]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2009,18:59)

Quote (bodhitharta @ July 28 2009,23:10) Quote (Cindy @ July 29 2009,11:33) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2009,11:06) Quote (Cindy @ July 28 2009,19:00) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2009,03:07) Quote (Cindy @ July 28 2009,10:54) Quote (bodhitharta @ July 28 2009,11:16) Quote (Cindy @ July 28 2009,09:38) Gene t8 gave you several Scriptures that prove that.  Are you going to deny that?  I do not believe in a trinity and the Catholic Church never believed in a preexisting of Jesus.  So you call Scripture false? That truth God revealed to us after we even leave the W.W.C. of God.  And you know they do not believe that. Peace and Love Irene Peace and Love Irene Catholics do believe in a pre-existing Jesus Did you belong to that Church?  I did and I don't remember that they did!  We were born into that Church and I taught many doctrines to our 4 Children. We left there in 1984-85  Where did you get that information from? I can call a friend that belongs there, and ask Her if I can get hold of Her. Irene Irene Hi Irene The Catholics believe in the trinity, you have said yourself you taught the Trinity in the catholic church. There is no Trinity without Pre-existence! WJ You know what makes it interesting is that t8 and others believe in the preexisting of Jesus and do not believe in the trinity either.  So why would one have to do with the other? IMO nothing. It has been 25 years ago since we believed in the trinity, and who knows what the Catholic Church believes now. And I do not believe that I ever taught our Children the preexisting of Jesus. Peace and Love Irene Irene There is no Trinitarian that does not believe In Jesus pre-existence as the Word that was with God and was God! I do not see how you could have taught the Trinity and believe Jesus was God if he did not pre-exist coming in the flesh! WJ I know for certain that I did not teach the Preexisting of Jesus to our children.  And why would I, we did not believe in it.  I am sorry but I don't think I did.  That is really all I can say about this. O.K. Like I said before, that was a new revelation for us, after we left the W.W.C. of God. Love Irene I understand what you are saying because pre-existence doesn't mean being God and in basic Christian theology you would have only taught others about the existence of The Son of God who was sent into the world. You would have not really understood the theology of the trinity because it cannot be understood unless it is specifically taught to you. So you taught about Christ and you did well. Hi BD So you admit that her teaching about the Trinity was good? WJ

I don't believe she taught the trinity explicitly. What I mean is there are many people who will say Father, son and Holy Spirit but in truth they really believe that Jesus is the son of God and if you ask them is Jesus “God” they will laugh at you and say”no, he is God's son” if you inquire further about why they say there is a trinity they get quickly confused.

[gollamudi]

WHO IS CHRIST FOR US TODAY?
A good deal of what follows will be taken up with clearing the undergrowth, with prolegomena to a contemporary Christology, that is, to discerning the Human Face of God today. The burden of proof lies heavily on anyone offering another. Yet the Christ has over again to become the contemporary of each succeeding generation. And the ‘Christ for today’ the ‘Christ for yesterday’ cannot be written off. How today one can truthfully and meaningfully say (in the words of the earliest and shortest Christian confession), ‘Jesus is Lord’. ‘What think ye of Christ?’ That is a Christian question expecting a Christian answer. But originally put by Jesus himself, it was a Jewish question expecting a Jewish answer: ‘What is your opinion about the Messiah?’
But between the form of Jesus in Palestine and the shape of Christ in modern life there has been a blank. Or rather, the gap has been filled with the decaying deposit of religious images superimposed on each other through Sunday school, sermons and stained glass. These have purveyed two main pictures: of a Christ who was God in disguise and of Jesus the perfect man. Both have removed him from ‘the likes of us’ and therefore from much relevance to ordinary folk. What is bothering me incessantly is the question… Who Christ really is, for us today? Yet even to ask this question is to invite two closely related objections, which it will be well to clear out of way here. First, it may appear to spring from a desire to accommodate him, to make him ‘our man’ in the sense of a Christ we can find acceptable and accessible. But a Christ who is really a Christ (like a God who is really a God) is never going to be at home in this world. We cannot domesticate him without destroying him. But secondly, it is said, to see Christ as ‘our man’ is merely to subjectivize him, so that he becomes the reflection of our faces in the bottom of a well.
We remember that Jesus is recorded as deliberately inviting questions: ‘Who do men say I am? ‘Who do you say I am? What is your opinion about the Messiah? This is not theology by Gull up poll. It is not because the answer in themselves are significant contributions – even Peter’s reply according to our earliest record, gets pretty short shift – but because no answer that did not come from inside, that was merely given from above or without, was worth anything. For Jesus Christ to be ‘the same yesterday, today and forever’ he has to be a contemporary of every generation and therefore different for the men of every generation. He must be their Christ.
But the critical question is; what is the relation of the ‘Christ for us today’ to the Christ for other ages – whether of the first century or the fifth or fifteenth or Nineteenth or twenty-first? The test is still that formulated in I John 4:1-3 and II John 7 – that of ‘confessing’ Jesus Christ as come and coming in the flesh. If Jesus Christ is to be anything for us at all he must have been genuinely a man, with the peculiarities and limitations of one unique individual. One of the most powerful reasons against admitting that Jesus was in every sense a man has been that if he were simply an individual human being, his life and death would merely be significant for what he himself was and did. But if he is to be Christ, he must point beyond himself. He must be the clue to the nature of both man and God. He must be a representative figure, standing for all mankind and standing for God. What does it mean to say of Jesus Christ that he is ‘the proper man’ the norm of what a truly human existence should be? What does it mean to see the ideal of normality and universality in any one individual, and what relation does it bear to the Jesus of history? It has tended to be taken as axiomatic in Christian thinking and devotion that Jesus was complete and perfect in every respect. He must have had everything, he must have been everything – or he could not have been the Christ. And this has been a powerful influence in the separation of him from ordinary humanity.
But there is every reason to suppose that any goodness Jesus had was won – and hard-won – out of the struggle with evil within him and around. It is noteworthy that the Epistle to the Hebrews, which is the only New Testament document to refer to Jesus’ perfection, always uses of him the verb ‘perfected’, never the adjective ‘perfect’. And it insists that he ‘learned obedience in the school of suffering’ – through the things, that is, that touched him, affected him, changed him. There is every reason from the gospel evidence, as well as from the Epistle to the Hebrews, to suppose that Jesus was fully a man like ourselves, sharing the same unconscious drives and libido, with a temper and an intolerance, an anxiety and a fear of death, as strong anyone else’s. Jesus’ goodness is relevant to us if he in this situation in which we live his obedience was such that he chose God’s will even though, as in Gethsemane, it was clearly not what he wanted – and the evangelists use the strongest expressions for the ‘nevertheless not my will but thine’.
Jesus as a man of whom ‘God’ language can also be predicted without ceasing to be, in every sense, a human being like rest of us. How, as Christian doctrine has wished to assert, can he be ‘God’s man’, in the sense of a divinely commissioned ‘man from heaven’, ‘sent’ to earth ‘for us men and our salvation’? For we have been insisting that, whatever more may need to be said of Jesus as the Christ, nothing must be said that in any way detracts from a humanity, as the Epistle to the Hebrews put it, ‘at all points’ like our own. Yet there is also an entire range of statements about Jesus as the Christ which appears to undermine .this requirement at source. There are clusters around the concept of pre-existence of an eternal heavenly being who enters the conditions of our history and humanity to dwell within it from the outside. This, too, is apparently so fundamental a statement of Christian doctrine as virtually to be a definition of what ‘the Incarnation’ means. Yet Knox, writing both as a New Testament scholar and as a Christian, has made the outright judgment:
We can have the humanity without the pre-existence and we can have the pre-existence without the humanity. There is absolutely no way of having both.
It may be that we shall have to agree that pre-existence is a way of speaking that, like the language of virgin birth, can no longer be taken literally or descriptively and is so misleading as to be unusable today. The New Testament writers who speak most of pre-existence (Paul, John and the author to the Hebrews) say nothing of virgin birth, while the virgin birth story as such says nothing of pre-existence. On the contrary, it presupposes that Christ is brought into existence as son of Mary and Son of God simultaneously by the creative act of Holy Spirit. His link to God at the beginning is established not by pre-existence but by the line of human descent. It may be perfectly true, as Knox says, that what has usually been meant by ‘pre-existence’ is (when applied to Christ) that ‘Jesus as the particular individual he was had existed before all worlds’ or that his ‘existence as a man was in some self-conscious with his earlier existence as a heavenly being’; and I would fully agree with him that this – let alone the consciousness of it – is in compatible with genuine humanity. I suggest, rather, that it was in essence something much nearer to what Knox says must be our understanding of pre-existence if we use it today; namely, that:
God the Father Almighty, Maker of the heavens and the earth, was of, present in, and acting through the whole event of which the human life of Jesus was the centre…But just because a human career, any human career, is an integral part of an entire cosmic process, we cannot say this about the career of Jesus without implying that God was creating him, and creating him
for his supreme redemptive purpose, from the beginning of that process – that Jesus was ‘appointed’ to his high office ‘before the foundations of world’.
But this is to anticipate. In the classic presentations of Prov 8:22-31 we find Wisdom personified as God’s constant companion and agent in creation, a pure reflection of the glory of the Almighty, who ‘tabernacles’ among God’s people and in age after age enters into holy souls, making them prophets and friends of God. There is no suggestion that this indwelling in any sense threatens their common humanity or connections with human race. Nor, of course, is it ever implied that those – prophets and priests, kings and craftsmen – to whom the Word of Lord came or upon whom the Spirit descended were not completely normal human beings. The personification of all these functions attributes or activities of God, which, of course, were eternal like himself, constituted no problem. And when John says in his prologue that the Logos gradually found expression first in nature, then in a people and then in a person, we are still in the same world of discourse. In Jesus, the pre-existent Word became embodied in a single human individual who was so faithful a reproduction of it as to be its complete reflection and incarnation. But there is no suggestion that this individual was not a man in every sense of the word. This man is also described as the Son of God, and as such is seen as filling a role which, like those of the Word and Wisdom of God, goes right back to the beginning. Again, however, it is important that we should not read back, Niceane categories into first-century Hellenistic Judaism. Just as the Word and Wisdom, like the Spirit of God, were personified as agents of his relationship to the world, so the Son of God stands in Jewish thinking for the representative of his will and character, the one who truly embodies what he is and does, and in whom his authority is vested. God’s ‘son’ is not an individual superhuman being of pre-existent substance but whoever stands, or rather is called to stand, in that relationship For the embodiment, whether it be in his people, or its monarch or faithful Israelite, God’s true man, is always less than complete or faithful. God’s son, like his shekinah or presence, waits to be fully incarnate among men; the role waits to be filled by a true representative. It is this function, this prepared position, that the gospels present Jesus occupying. He is marked out at his Baptism and tested in the wilderness as the true son that the old Israel was called – and failed – to be.
In contrast with the prophets, who were sent as God’s servants, he is the son in whom all is vested, the representative who stands in and acts for God himself. In this capacity Christ is seen throughout the New Testament as the expression and agent of God’s purpose from the start. He fills a role prepared for him from the foundation of the world – though in this respect he is no different from the elect in general. But as Son he is uniquely the reflection of God’s person and character. As such he occupies the place of the Wisdom of God. It is thus entirely natural that Paul should see in Christ the pre-existent wisdom and image of God, with primacy over all created things, and the power of nature and history. Natural, too, that John should view him as the creative Logos who was from the beginning with God and was God, and portray him as speaking as one who was before Abraham, indeed shared the Father’s glory before the foundation of the world. But none of these affirmations, however exalted, is intended to suggest that Jesus was not fundamentally a man, with all the antecedents of every other man, who was yet called from the womb to embody this unique role.
There is one Pauline passage, which, as usually understood, would seem to suggest that the manhood of Christ, unlike ours, was ‘spiritual’ rather than ‘natural’, and had its origin not on earth but in heaven. This is 1 Cor 15:45-47 (NEB):
‘The first man, Adam, became an animate being’, whereas the last Adam has become a life-giving spirit….The first man was made ‘of the dust of the earth’: the second man is from heaven.
If the implications of this were pressed, we should have here an entirely eccentric, and indeed heretical, Christology – of a Christ figure whose humanity as well as whose divinity was of a heavenly substance. But as we have seen, Paul makes it absolutely clear elsewhere that the Incarnation meant the complete identification of God in Christ with our earthly humanity of powerless, sinful flesh.. One way in which exegetes have tried to get round the difficulty is to interpret the ‘becoming’ not of his incarnation but of his glorification. That is to say, by virtue of the resurrection he became a life-giving spirit, from having been (like us) an animal being. But this contrast destroys the parallelism with Adam (where egento eis must mean ‘was created as’), and it does not in any case account for subsequent phrase that the second man is ‘from heaven’ as opposed to ‘the dust of the earth’.
But in fact I am convinced that the reference in this passage, as the context shows, is not to Adam and Jesus Christ as individuals, but to two different ‘bodies’ or conditions of humanity, adam and anthropos being ways, in Hebrews and Greek, of referring to ‘man’ with capital M. Our primary manhood is that in which we share by virtue of the natural creation. But the second can be comprehended only in spiritual or heavenly categories: it is pneumatikos, epouranios. It is spirit – not ‘a spirit’ – and it is life – real life, in contrast with mere animation. For it is spirit alone that gives life, as John and Paul both insists. The first level of living Paul sees as having been initiated in Adam, the second as having been opened up through Christ. To that extent there is an irreversible historical sequence: ‘The spiritual does not come first; the animal body comes first, and then the spiritual ‘. It is ‘in Christ’, in the body of Christ, that all are ‘made alive’ and that the ‘law of the spirit of life’ operates. The last (or eschatological) Adam, the new man, which both has been created and is ‘being constantly renewed in the image of its Creator’, is the life-giving spiritual corporeity, which indeed is Christ.
Thus I believe the contrast in 1 Cor 15:44-49, as in the whole of previous paragraph, is between the soma psychikon (the natural body) and the soma pneumatikon (the spiritual body), the two solidarities to states of humanity, both of which Jesus shared and both of which we shall therefore share:
He died on the cross in weakness, but he lives by the power of God; and we share his weakness shall by the power of God live with him. (2 Cor 13:4)
So Paul speaks in precisely the same language of transformation of the human condition:
Sown in humiliation it is raised in glory; sown in weakness, it is raised in power (1 Cor 15:43)
The ‘it’ is the form of our humanity or manhood, and it is to the ultimate state of this, rather than to Jesus Christ as an individual, that heavenly Man refers. Just as ‘the first man’, ‘the old man’, ‘the outer man’, so too are the ‘the second man’, the last man’, ‘the new man’, ‘the inner man’, the spiritual man’. They refer to collectives in which the individual participates – as also does ‘the perfect man’. In the same way, ‘the man from heaven’ corresponds to ‘the habitation from heaven’ – the new corporeity.
How can Christ be God for us – without ceasing truly to be man? This is the ultimate question for Christology, the question of the vere dues of which the iota of difference between homoousios (of one substance) with the Father and homousios (of like substance) was at historic moment the touchstone. Whether or not Jesus can sustain such a claim for him is not at this point issue. The question is what really being asserted in saying, as Nicaea and Chalcedon said, that he is ‘very God of very God’
. At heart it is what John Hick has perhaps not very feliciously called the ‘numerical identity’ between his love and God’s love – that he is homoagape, of one love, with the Father. In other words, what Jesus was and did was the direct expression and implementation of God in action; not simply, in Austin Farrer’s phrase, a man doing ‘human things divinely’ but a man doing ‘divine things humanly’. That is to say, in what he was and what he did we do not merely see a love of the same quality, such a perfect reproduction that we could infer, ‘This is what God must be like’, because it was ‘so amazing, so divine’. Nor are we dealing, just with a man reporting however accurately, what he believed God said to him, as the prophets declared to their contemporaries ‘Thus saith the Lord’. We are concerned with whether it can be said of this man’s life and death that ‘God was in Christ reconciling the world to him-self’. Does what we see in Jesus actually bring us into contact with God at work, so that to have seen him, met him and been judged by him is to have seen, met and been judged by God? Such requirement does not imply that God is exclusively at work in this man or even that there is a difference in kind rather than degree between his action here and else where. Indeed, if it is God who is ‘behind’ everything that ever happens and in everyone who has ever lived. But to stress the ‘numerical identity’ or, as the Fourth Gospel puts it, to say that Jesus and Father are ‘one thing’, that ‘what God was, the Word was’, is not to be committed to any particular way of representing it, however hallowed by tradition. The Christ is the one who does what God does, who represents him. He stands in the place of God, speaking and acting for him. The issue is not where he comes from or what he is made of. He is not a divine or semi-divine being who comes from the other side. He is a human figure raised up from among his brothers to be the instrument of God’s decisive work and to stand in a relationship to him to which no other man is called. The issue is whether in seeing him men see Father, whether, in mercy and judgment, he functions as God, whether he is God to and for them.
In Christian tradition the Incarnation has been viewed as a temporary visitation, like a trip of a being from another world, landing, staying for a time and then taking off again after finishing his work – ‘Christ’s comet’ (to use Masefield’s title) zooming to earth before receding once more into space (though there is the promise that it will come round again before the end of the world). The drama of the myth has lost its connection with the ordinary experiences and hopes of the human being snow. The interpretative story banishes the Christ to other realms of being from those in which people live their daily lives. It thus effectively disincarnates him. For the New Testament Christ is unrepeatable: there is no other foundation. Like God he cannot be replaced, but like God he can – and must – be represented. For just as God is to be seen, known and received in him who represents him, so Christ is to be seen, known and received in those who represent him, whether in the disciples who act in his ‘name’ or in his nameless brothers. ‘He who receives you (or, whom I send, or one of these little one) receives me, and he who receives me receives not me but him who sent me.’ By this identification Jesus makes himself as dependent on them as God has made himself dependent on Jesus. For this is what incarnation means: ‘God’ is en-manned, represented by man. And the double pattern of representation shows that this is not finished and over with, but a continuing reality’.
God has emptied himself into Christ and Christ into his fellow men. What the exaltation does is not to cancel the kenosis: it seals the process of identification as the way of God’s coming to his identify in men and women in God, which is the kingdom. The resurrection, too, is not an isolated past event: it is the first-fruits of a continuing presence-by-representation. But Christ’s work is not finished. He lives on – in the lives of those who represent now the human face of God.

Hope God will open your understanding to know the real Christ.
Peace to all
Adam

[Proclaimer]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2009,11:50)

Hi Irene So really you never understood what the Trinity doctrine was? WJ

WJ, no one understands the Trinity including Trinitarians.

Here is a quote from a Pro-trinitarian web site which I think sums it up for most Tinitarians.

Trinity Doctrine – How Can We Comprehend It?
The most difficult thing about the Trinity Doctrine is that there is no way to adequately explain it. The Trinity is a concept that is impossible for any human being to fully understand, let alone explain. God is infinitely higher than we are, therefore we should not expect to be able to fully understand Him. The Bible teaches that the Father is God (Exodus 3:14), that Jesus is God (John 8:58), and that the Holy Spirit is God (Acts 5:3-4). The Bible also teaches that there is only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4; James 2:19). How these two statements of doctrine can both be true is incomprehensible to the human mind. However, this doesn't mean that they're both not true.

Trinity Doctrine – No Illustration Is Completely Accurate
With respect to the Trinity Doctrine, none of the popular illustrations are completely accurate descriptions. The egg fails in that the shell, white and yoke are parts of the egg, not the egg in themselves. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not parts of God, each of them is God. The water illustration is somewhat better, but still fails to adequately describe the Trinity. Liquid, vapor and ice are forms of water. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not forms of God, each of them is God. So, while these illustrations may give us a picture of the Trinity, the picture is not entirely accurate or complete. An infinite God cannot be fully described by a finite illustration.
http://www.allaboutgod.com/trinity-doctrine.htm

Notice how much human thinking there is in the reasoning?

[GeneBalthrop]

T8……human thinking without the Spirit guiding it is indeed confusion, but especially if they have recieved a delusion from GOD in order to believe a LIE. But T8 thoses who believe in the preexistence and doctrines about devil and demons are not much better Brother. IMO

peace and love to you and yours…………………….gene

[Lightenup]

Quote (t8 @ Aug. 07 2009,08:51)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2009,11:50) Hi Irene So really you never understood what the Trinity doctrine was? WJ WJ, no one understands the Trinity including Trinitarians. Here is a quote from a Pro-trinitarian web site which I think sums it up for most Tinitarians. Trinity Doctrine – How Can We Comprehend It? The most difficult thing about the Trinity Doctrine is that there is no way to adequately explain it. The Trinity is a concept that is impossible for any human being to fully understand, let alone explain. God is infinitely higher than we are, therefore we should not expect to be able to fully understand Him. The Bible teaches that the Father is God (Exodus 3:14), that Jesus is God (John 8:58), and that the Holy Spirit is God (Acts 5:3-4). The Bible also teaches that there is only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4; James 2:19). How these two statements of doctrine can both be true is incomprehensible to the human mind. However, this doesn't mean that they're both not true. Trinity Doctrine – No Illustration Is Completely Accurate With respect to the Trinity Doctrine, none of the popular illustrations are completely accurate descriptions. The egg fails in that the shell, white and yoke are parts of the egg, not the egg in themselves. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not parts of God, each of them is God. The water illustration is somewhat better, but still fails to adequately describe the Trinity. Liquid, vapor and ice are forms of water. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not forms of God, each of them is God. So, while these illustrations may give us a picture of the Trinity, the picture is not entirely accurate or complete. An infinite God cannot be fully described by a finite illustration. http://www.allaboutgod.com/trinity-doctrine.htm Notice how much human thinking there is in the reasoning?

Hi t8,
That does sum it up nicely. It is clear in scripture that there is the Father, the Son of that Father, and the Spirit of that Father. The trinity doctrine takes that truth beyond what is intended, IMO and that has led to quite the dilemma and a mass of people loyally following the unexplainable doctrine of no understanding, the trinity doctrine.

I believe how the Father is God is by Him being the source and thus the Most High GOD.
I believe how the Son is God is by Him being begotten as God and is not the source of His status and nature but the recipient, the receiver, the Son. (a human son is man by him being begotten as man, a human son is not the source of his human nature but the receiver of it from his father.)
I believe the Holy Spirit is the very Spirit of the Father. Humans all have a spirit within them, God the Father has a spirit within Him. When we listen to the Holy Spirit, we are truly listening to the personal Spirit that is within the Father which is given to us. That is not to say that the Spirit that is given to us is somehow no longer the Spirit within the Father. The Spirit of the Father is something that remains in the Father and also extends into the Son and all believers. How that happens is supernatural and totally cool! Spirits of the Father, the Son and us are able to unite…to become one and that is also phenomenal! The Father has a personal spirit, the Son has His own personal spirit, and humans have their own personal spirit. They can all become one spirit and will if we are believers and followers of Christ and His God.

So, the relationship between the Father and Son and Spirit is…get ready…Father, Son and Spirit of the Father. God reveals Himself in nature. It is easy once you get past the unbiblical adjectives of the doctrine of confusion-the trinity doctrine. My opinion-thanks for reading!

Kathi

[Cindy]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 08 2009,04:42)

Quote (t8 @ Aug. 07 2009,08:51) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2009,11:50) Hi Irene So really you never understood what the Trinity doctrine was? WJ WJ, no one understands the Trinity including Trinitarians. Here is a quote from a Pro-trinitarian web site which I think sums it up for most Tinitarians. Trinity Doctrine – How Can We Comprehend It? The most difficult thing about the Trinity Doctrine is that there is no way to adequately explain it. The Trinity is a concept that is impossible for any human being to fully understand, let alone explain. God is infinitely higher than we are, therefore we should not expect to be able to fully understand Him. The Bible teaches that the Father is God (Exodus 3:14), that Jesus is God (John 8:58), and that the Holy Spirit is God (Acts 5:3-4). The Bible also teaches that there is only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4; James 2:19). How these two statements of doctrine can both be true is incomprehensible to the human mind. However, this doesn't mean that they're both not true. Trinity Doctrine – No Illustration Is Completely Accurate With respect to the Trinity Doctrine, none of the popular illustrations are completely accurate descriptions. The egg fails in that the shell, white and yoke are parts of the egg, not the egg in themselves. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not parts of God, each of them is God. The water illustration is somewhat better, but still fails to adequately describe the Trinity. Liquid, vapor and ice are forms of water. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not forms of God, each of them is God. So, while these illustrations may give us a picture of the Trinity, the picture is not entirely accurate or complete. An infinite God cannot be fully described by a finite illustration. http://www.allaboutgod.com/trinity-doctrine.htm Notice how much human thinking there is in the reasoning? Hi t8, That does sum it up nicely.  It is clear in scripture that there is the Father, the Son of that Father, and the Spirit of that Father.  The trinity doctrine takes that truth beyond what is intended, IMO and that has led to quite the dilemma and a mass of people loyally following the unexplainable doctrine of no understanding, the trinity doctrine. I believe how the Father is God is by Him being the source and thus the Most High GOD. I believe how the Son is God is by Him being begotten as God and is not the source of His status and nature but the recipient, the receiver, the Son. (a human son is man by him being begotten as man, a human son is not the source of his human nature but the receiver of it from his father.) I believe the Holy Spirit is the very Spirit of the Father.  Humans all have a spirit within them, God the Father has a spirit within Him.  When we listen to the Holy Spirit, we are truly listening to the personal Spirit that is within the Father which is given to us.  That is not to say that the Spirit that is given to us is somehow no longer the Spirit within the Father.  The Spirit of the Father is something that remains in the Father and also extends into the Son and all believers.  How that happens is supernatural and totally cool!  Spirits of the Father, the Son and us are able to unite…to become one and that is also phenomenal!  The Father has a personal spirit, the Son has His own personal spirit, and humans have their own personal spirit.  They can all become one spirit and will if we are believers and followers of Christ and His God. So, the relationship between the Father and Son and Spirit is…get ready…Father, Son and Spirit of the Father.  God reveals Himself in nature.  It is easy once you get past the unbiblical adjectives of the doctrine of confusion-the trinity doctrine. My opinion-thanks for reading! Kathi

I agree with both t8 and you Kathi! Those that believe in the trinity say that it is a Mystery Doctrine. But it also says that the Mystery of God has been revealed to the Saint. Those that believe that Christ came in the flesh are the Sons of God and called the Saints. Nobody has been able to prove the trinity. Yet, we can prove that it does not exist. By Jesus own word He said:” My Father is greater then I.”
John 14:28…..My Father is greater then I.”
Ephesians 4:6 “one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in us all.
NO TRINITY DOCYTRINE.
The Apostles never kept them, and we should not either. IMO
Peace and Love Irene

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (t8 @ Aug. 07 2009,08:51)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2009,11:50) Hi Irene So really you never understood what the Trinity doctrine was? WJ WJ, no one understands the Trinity including Trinitarians. Here is a quote from a Pro-trinitarian web site which I think sums it up for most Tinitarians. Trinity Doctrine – How Can We Comprehend It? The most difficult thing about the Trinity Doctrine is that there is no way to adequately explain it. The Trinity is a concept that is impossible for any human being to fully understand, let alone explain. God is infinitely higher than we are, therefore we should not expect to be able to fully understand Him. The Bible teaches that the Father is God (Exodus 3:14), that Jesus is God (John 8:58), and that the Holy Spirit is God (Acts 5:3-4). The Bible also teaches that there is only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4; James 2:19). How these two statements of doctrine can both be true is incomprehensible to the human mind. However, this doesn't mean that they're both not true. Trinity Doctrine – No Illustration Is Completely Accurate With respect to the Trinity Doctrine, none of the popular illustrations are completely accurate descriptions. The egg fails in that the shell, white and yoke are parts of the egg, not the egg in themselves. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not parts of God, each of them is God. The water illustration is somewhat better, but still fails to adequately describe the Trinity. Liquid, vapor and ice are forms of water. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not forms of God, each of them is God. So, while these illustrations may give us a picture of the Trinity, the picture is not entirely accurate or complete. An infinite God cannot be fully described by a finite illustration. http://www.allaboutgod.com/trinity-doctrine.htm Notice how much human thinking there is in the reasoning?

Hi t8

Not all Trintarians speak for all Trinitarians no more than the Arians or Henotheist speak the same things!

Even so, it amazes me how the anti-trinitarians claim that they know and understand everything about an infinite God and his nature.

It also amazes me that they think God is limited to not being able to change his form.

The misunderstandings of the Trinity and the confusion is created by the unbelievers like yourself.

Trinitarians are never in disagreement with the fact that The Father is God, Jesus is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. That is found in scriptures.

You see the Henotheist like you and Kathi and Irene if you are believers also believe in a trinity.

If you and Kathi and Irene will answer the following questions, then you will see what I mean?

Here goes…

Does the Father live in you?

Does the Son live in you?

Have you recieved the Comforter the Holy Spirit since you believed?

If the answer to all the above is yes, then you have a Trinity!

Then ask yourself if they are one?

Now, then you will have to resolve how anyone or anything but the “One True God” lives in you!

Scripturally the conundrum that all anti-trinitarians have is that either they serve one God or they serve two, a big one and a little one and some force or impersonal power!

While you are at it, answer these questions…

When God speaks to you is it the Father, Jesus or the Holy Spirit and can you tell the difference, if not why not?

WJ

[Worshipping Jesus]

Hi Kathi

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2009,12:42)

The Father has a personal spirit, the Son has His own personal spirit, and humans have their own personal spirit.  They can all become one spirit and will if we are believers and followers of Christ and His God. So, the relationship between the Father and Son and Spirit is…get ready…Father, Son and Spirit of the Father.

So let me see if I understand.

The Father has a Spirit, the Son has a Spirit and we have a Spirit and we all will be “One Spirit”.

So then the Fathers Spirit, Jesus Spirit and our Spirits are dwelling in us as three spirits yet one Spirit?

So we dwell within each other?

So the relationship of the Father and Son and Spirit (which by definition is a trinity) is Father, Son and Spirit of the Father that lives in us?

So then if there is the Fathers Spirit, and the Sons Spirit and a Spirit of the Father, then that means you have 3 spirits in you!

How does that work in scripture? Scriptures tells us only the Spirit of God lives in us!

O but wait, it is the Spirit of the Son that lives in us.

Well on the other hand it is the Father who lives in us!

Yet we have all been made to drink of that “One Spirit”.

How is it that a mere man lives in you with the most High God!

Or is it the Most high God and a smaller god and a spirit of god that lives in you?

Scriptures teach there is only “One True God' that dwells in his people, and not “One True God” and a lessor god, and a spirit of God!

WJ

[Lightenup]

Nope Keith you need to reread what I wrote…it is really simple.
Kathi

[Lightenup]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 07 2009,17:49)

Quote (t8 @ Aug. 07 2009,08:51) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2009,11:50) Hi Irene So really you never understood what the Trinity doctrine was? WJ WJ, no one understands the Trinity including Trinitarians. Here is a quote from a Pro-trinitarian web site which I think sums it up for most Tinitarians. Trinity Doctrine – How Can We Comprehend It? The most difficult thing about the Trinity Doctrine is that there is no way to adequately explain it. The Trinity is a concept that is impossible for any human being to fully understand, let alone explain. God is infinitely higher than we are, therefore we should not expect to be able to fully understand Him. The Bible teaches that the Father is God (Exodus 3:14), that Jesus is God (John 8:58), and that the Holy Spirit is God (Acts 5:3-4). The Bible also teaches that there is only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4; James 2:19). How these two statements of doctrine can both be true is incomprehensible to the human mind. However, this doesn't mean that they're both not true. Trinity Doctrine – No Illustration Is Completely Accurate With respect to the Trinity Doctrine, none of the popular illustrations are completely accurate descriptions. The egg fails in that the shell, white and yoke are parts of the egg, not the egg in themselves. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not parts of God, each of them is God. The water illustration is somewhat better, but still fails to adequately describe the Trinity. Liquid, vapor and ice are forms of water. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not forms of God, each of them is God. So, while these illustrations may give us a picture of the Trinity, the picture is not entirely accurate or complete. An infinite God cannot be fully described by a finite illustration. http://www.allaboutgod.com/trinity-doctrine.htm Notice how much human thinking there is in the reasoning? Hi t8 Not all Trintarians speak for all Trinitarians no more than the Arians or Henotheist speak the same things! Even so, it amazes me how the anti-trinitarians claim that they know and understand everything about an infinite God and his nature. It also amazes me that they think God is limited to not being able to change his form. The misunderstandings of the Trinity and the confusion is created by the unbelievers like yourself. Trinitarians are never in disagreement with the fact that The Father is God, Jesus is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. That is found in scriptures. You see the Henotheist like you and Kathi and Irene if you are believers also believe in a trinity. If you and Kathi and Irene will answer the following questions, then you will see what I mean? Here goes… Does the Father live in you? Does the Son live in you? Have you recieved the Comforter the Holy Spirit since you believed? If the answer to all the above is yes, then you have a Trinity! Then ask yourself if they are one? Now, then you will have to resolve how anyone or anything but the “One True God” lives in you! Scripturally the conundrum that all anti-trinitarians have is that either they serve one God or they serve two, a big one and a little one and some force or impersonal power! While you are at it, answer these questions… When God speaks to you is it the Father, Jesus or the Holy Spirit and can you tell the difference, if not why not? WJ

Keith,

Quote

Does the Father live in you?

The Father Himself…no, His spirit…yes

Quote

Does the Son live in you?

The Son Himself…no, His spirit…yes

Quote

Have you recieved the Comforter the Holy Spirit since you believed?

Answered above. The comforter is the spirit of the Father united with the spirit of the Son and in that way the Father and Son dwell within the believer and become one with the spirit of the believer. So that would be a trinity of sorts and it looks like this:
The spirit of the Father, the spirit of the Son, and the spirit of the believer all united into one spirit.

Blessings,
Kathi

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2009,23:14)

Nope Keith you need to reread what I wrote…it is really simple. Kathi

Hi Kathi

No its not simple, because by your own writing you imply that our Spirit is Gods Spirit!

WJ

[Lightenup]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 08 2009,00:19)

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2009,23:14) Nope Keith you need to reread what I wrote…it is really simple. Kathi Hi Kathi No its not simple, because by your own writing you imply that our Spirit is Gods Spirit! WJ

Hi Keith,
I never said that our spirit is God's spirit.

We don't fill Him, He fills us through the Son. The united spirit that believers enjoy does not equal God's personal spirit, it is united, not replaced, with God's personal spirit.

Kathi

[Worshipping Jesus]

Hi Kathi

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2009,23:41)

Keith, Quote Does the Father live in you? The Father Himself…no, His spirit…yes

But you said…

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2009,12:42)

I believe the Holy Spirit is the very Spirit of the Father.

So you think the Holy Spirit is the personal spirit of the Father? If he is then he is the Father. For example, if you say “I sense in my Spirit that God is present”. You are referring to your personal Spirit which is you!

And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, And “my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour”. Luke 1:46, 47

Here we see Mary’s Spirit rejoicing in God her Saviour! Is Mary’s Spirit something other than Mary? So then Mary’s Spirit is Mary! In the same sense God’s Spirit is God!

And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect* the Lord's glory, are being transformed into his likeness with ever increasing glory, which comes from “the Lord, who is the Spirit”. 2 Cor 3:18

Yet you say the Father himself does not dwell in you. Scary!

Here is why…

Or what agreement has the “TEMPLE OF GOD” with idols? For we are “THE TEMPLE OF THE LIVING GOD”; just as God said, “I WILL DWELL IN THEM AND WALK AMONG THEM; AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE.
* 2 Cor 6:16

You see Kathi, our bodies are the “Temple of God”. The term means that God dwells in us! Now since you say that the Father does not dwell in you then you have just confessed that the Holy Spirit is God that lives in your body the Temple!

So again I ask you…

Does the Father live in you?

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2009,23:41)

Quote Does the Son live in you? The Son Himself…no, His spirit…yes

Well first of all, based on the above claim that the Spirit of the Father lives in your body “the Temple of God” then by claiming Jesus Spirit lives in you is also claiming that Jesus is God.

But does the Son live in you if his Spirit does?
“Test yourselves to see if you are in the faith“; examine yourselves! Or do you not recognize this about yourselves, “THAT JESUS CHRIST IS IN YOU–UNLESS INDEED YOU FAIL THE TEST”? 2 Cor 13:5

If Jesus Christ does not live in you then you are none of his!
Because you are sons, God has sent forth THE SPIRIT OF HIS SON INTO OUR HEARTS, CRYING, “ABBA! FATHER!” Gal 4:6

Yet Kathi you said…

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2009,12:42)

I believe the Holy Spirit is the very Spirit of the Father.

Does the Fathers personal Spirit cry out Abba! Father!?

Here’s is another one that says Jesus lives in us!
for I know that this will turn out for my deliverance through your prayers and the provision of the Spirit of Jesus Christ, Phil 1:19

So again, I ask you, does Jesus live in you?

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2009,23:41)

Quote Have you recieved the Comforter the Holy Spirit since you believed? Answered above.  The comforter is the spirit of the Father united with the spirit of the Son and in that way the Father and Son dwell within the believer and become one with the spirit of the believer.

Ok now that is double talk. For you said the Father does not dwell in you and Jesus does not dwell in you, now you say they do. Is God separated from his own Spirit? How about Jesus, is Jesus separated from his own Spirit that cries Abba! Father! That we have received? Scriptures clearly teach our bodies are the Temple of God and God lives in us!

However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, “if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him”. Rom 8:9

Do you remember 2 Cor 13:5, notice this scripture says the Spirit of God is the Spirit of Christ! Yet we know Paul said we have received One Spirit, not 2 in One! Paul uses the terms interchangeably because to him he is speaking of the One Spirit or One God that lives in our bodies which are the Temples of God! Now you have totally cast the third person out which is spoken of by Jesus in John 14 and 16.
He calls the Holy Spirit, “Another”, and he says that the Holy Spirit will be subject to him which cannot be the Fathers personal Spirit as you presume.
Jn 16:
14 *He shall glorify me*: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.
15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that *he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you*.

Here we see the Holy Spirit is subservient to Jesus, which cannot be the Fathers personal Spirit. But that is a post in itself.

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 07 2009,23:41)

So that would be a trinity of sorts and it looks like this: The spirit of the Father, the spirit of the Son, and the spirit of the believer all united into one spirit. Blessings, Kathi

So the believer is part of the Trinity of sorts?

No it looks like this…

“Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, Matt 28:19

One Spirit, three Persons, and One God!

Blessings WJ

[Lightenup]

Keith,
The spirit of a person is not the person, it is a part of a person. A person is made up of a mind, body, and a spirit. The spirit is not the body, the spirit is not the mind, the spirit is the spirit. It really can be simple.

The spirit of God is part of God but not every part of God. The spirit of man is part of man but not every part of man. God can live in us how…by His spirit living in us not by His entire being living in us. God is in heaven.

One Father, One Son, united in spirit with many believers.

Kathi

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 08 2009,02:28)

Keith, The spirit of a person is not the person, it is a part of a person.  A person is made up of a mind, body, and a spirit.  The spirit is not the body, the spirit is not the mind, the spirit is the spirit. It really can be simple. The spirit of God is part of God but not every part of God.  The spirit of man is part of man but not every part of man. God can live in us how…by His spirit living in us not by His entire being living in us. God is in heaven. One Father, One Son, united in spirit with many believers. Kathi

Kathi

Not so. The Spirit is the man! We are Spirit beings like the Father, who has a soul and lives in a body.

It is our Spirit that is the new creation or new man that is who we are, born again by the Spirit!

My Spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior is the same as saying I rejoiced in God my Saviour.

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 08 2009,02:28)

The spirit of God is part of God but not every part of God.

 

Are there scriptures that says the Spirit of God is part of God but not every part of God? Please show me!

Sounds like more extra-Biblical termonology to me!  

WJ

[Lightenup]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 08 2009,02:40)

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 08 2009,02:28) Keith, The spirit of a person is not the person, it is a part of a person.  A person is made up of a mind, body, and a spirit.  The spirit is not the body, the spirit is not the mind, the spirit is the spirit. It really can be simple. The spirit of God is part of God but not every part of God.  The spirit of man is part of man but not every part of man. God can live in us how…by His spirit living in us not by His entire being living in us. God is in heaven. One Father, One Son, united in spirit with many believers. Kathi Kathi Not so. The Spirit is the man! We are Spirit beings like the Father, who has a soul and lives in a body. It is our Spirit that is the new creation or new man that is who we are, born again by the Spirit! My Spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior is the same as saying I rejoiced in God my Saviour. Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 08 2009,02:28) The spirit of God is part of God but not every part of God.   Are there scriptures that says the Spirit of God is part of God but not every part of God? Please show me! Sounds like more extra-Biblical termonology to me!   WJ

Here is scripture for you Keith:

1 Cor 2:10-12
10 For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God.
11 For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God.
12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God,
NASU

I'm off to bed…your confusion has been keeping me up too late
Kathi

[Cindy]

Kathi and W.J. What sets us apart from the Animal is the mind. Without it we could not function. That is in the image of God. There is a Spirit in Man that God gave us. Without God's Holy Spirit however we could not understand the things of God. So by laying on of Hands we have received also God's Holy Spirit. Now we can understand the things of God. When we die the Spirit goes back to God who gave it. It all sound's rather confusing, but it really is not. God has always just been Spirit while Christ gave up the Spirit Being in order to become a Human man. To die for our sin's. On the cross He cried out:” My God why have you forsaken me.” Why was that? Christ took all sin's upon Him for us.
God the Father can not look on Sin, so at that time God looked away or rather it was sin in Christ that turned Christ away from God. The same happens when we sin. Now after Christ returned to God after His resurrection, we have a Mediator between us and God, to go directley to the Throne of God and ask for the forgiveness of our sins. Now we are again clean. What a wonderful Heavenly Father we have to have send His only begotten Son to die for us, so we can have eternal Life. All is well with my Soul. Amen and Amen.
Peace and Love Irene

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Cindy @ Aug. 08 2009,21:19)

Kathi and W.J.  What sets us apart from the Animal is the mind.  Without it we could not function. That is in the image of God.  There is a Spirit in Man that God gave us.  Without God's Holy Spirit however we could not understand the things of God.  So by laying on of Hands we have received also God's Holy Spirit.  Now we can understand the things of God.  When we die the Spirit goes back to God who gave it.   It all sound's rather confusing, but it really is not.  God has always just been Spirit while Christ gave up the Spirit Being in order to become a Human man.  To die for our sin's.  On the cross He cried out:”   My God why have you forsaken me.”  Why was that?  Christ took all sin's upon Him for us. God the Father can not look on Sin, so at that time God looked away or rather it was sin in Christ that turned Christ away from God.  The same happens when we sin. Now after Christ returned to God after His resurrection, we have a Mediator between us and God, to go directley to the Throne of God and ask for the forgiveness of our sins. Now we are again clean.  What a wonderful Heavenly Father we have to have send His only begotten Son to die for us, so we can have eternal Life. All is well with my Soul. Amen and Amen. Peace and Love Irene

How is it you say that there was sin in Christ and yet you say that Christ returned to the Father and the Father accepted him with all the sin.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 08 2009,02:59)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 08 2009,02:40) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 08 2009,02:28) Keith, The spirit of a person is not the person, it is a part of a person.  A person is made up of a mind, body, and a spirit.  The spirit is not the body, the spirit is not the mind, the spirit is the spirit. It really can be simple. The spirit of God is part of God but not every part of God.  The spirit of man is part of man but not every part of man. God can live in us how…by His spirit living in us not by His entire being living in us. God is in heaven. One Father, One Son, united in spirit with many believers. Kathi Kathi Not so. The Spirit is the man! We are Spirit beings like the Father, who has a soul and lives in a body. It is our Spirit that is the new creation or new man that is who we are, born again by the Spirit! My Spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior is the same as saying I rejoiced in God my Saviour. Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 08 2009,02:28) The spirit of God is part of God but not every part of God.   Are there scriptures that says the Spirit of God is part of God but not every part of God? Please show me! Sounds like more extra-Biblical termonology to me!   WJ Here is scripture for you Keith: 1 Cor 2:10-12 10 For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. 11 For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, NASU I'm off to bed…your confusion has been keeping me up too late Kathi

Hi Kathi

Can you show me how the Spirit of God in those passages is “A” part of God and not equal to God?  

These scriptures say no man knows the thoughts of God, but the Spirit does. I am in agreement that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. But he is equal to the Father, for the Father does nothing apart from the Spirit does he?

Jesus said all things were given to him and the Spirit which you are claiming is the personal Spirit of the Father is subservient to him and takes from him (Jesus) and gives to us.

You still havn't explained how if the Spirit is the personal Spirit of the Father, how he is subservient to him, (Jesus)?

WJ

[Author]

Posts