The Holy Spirit, a separate person, essence of God, or force?

[trettep]

No. I'm a babe in Christ. I don't even know everything and never will most likely until/if I enter the Kingdom. For me its much harder to discern who has the Holy Spirit and who doesn't. I know some doctrines that are anti-christ or satanic doctrines but still have a long way to go. I do believe that God is guiding me by the Holy Spirit. I am more convinced the more the Truth I have learned gets rejected. I still labor for others though.

Paul

[NickHassan]

Hi Paul,

We cannot define truth by the rejection of our message by others.
None of us is alone.
Never does the real message of the truth fail to produce fruit.
Never did Paul preach without one or two responding ,even in Athens.

Truth is defined in and by the Word of God and confirmed in the Spirit.
It is not the other way around.
We cannot just trust what we know to be the Spirit's message to us and then approach the Word for confirmation of what we know. We will always find support for our views if we look hard enough. I have listened to lying spirits and had to learn to check my path.

Jesus said we need to dig deep and lay our foundation on the rock of his teachings and they are the Word of God. We are talking about the foundations of our faith here and we should follow the advice of the master builder.

God said through John to test the spirits so they cannot be that foundation surely.

You are bravely sharing your insights here and we appreciate what you are doing. I believe you are sharing your insights with others who do have the Spirit of God and not with just those of the world. We should not be deaf to others and unteachable.

Even Peter had to be corrected by Paul.

[bic]

Quote

Bic, I asked Nick if the Gal 4 verse was referring to Jesus' personal spirit of the Spirit, he said it didn't and that it in fact referred to the Father's Spirit that indwelt Jesus. Perhaps you should read Nick's post more thoroughly before you jump to (wrong) conclusions.

I didn't really jump to any conclusions. You asked if the Father's own Spirit would call out to itself. I merely pointed out that the verse said “Spirit of His Son”, which then makes sense for it to cry out “Abba, Father”.

Quote

Hi Bic, I assume that you believe the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Jesus to be two seperate spirits. Is this true?

Not exactly. All humans are born with a spirit, the spirit of man. If we are filled with the Holy Spirit (the Spirit of God) then we have two spirits within us. If we are possessed with demon spirits, we can have many spirits but we cannot have the Holy Spirit (while possessed).

Jesus, however, is a special case. His Father is God. Therefore, His Spirit could never have been like our spirit but must have always been a more God-like Spirit. True, He's partly human, the result of being born to a human mother. But how much does that change Him, not having a human father? Only God knows for sure.

Therefore, I would think that no matter how much Jesus' Spirit was like that of His Father's, it would STILL be a different Spirit. So, yes. However, if two Spirits are exactly the same, are they really different? So, no.

It's a dichotomy, I guess…and a conundrum…and a riddle…and a paradox…and a mystery.

Quote

If we need both the Fathers and the Sons seperate spirits to seal our salvation why is this not written of in the NT letters? and, how do we recieve the Spirit of Jesus?

We receive the Spirit of Christ by receiving the Spirit of God THROUGH Christ. The same Spirit that entered Jesus from the Father, Jesus gives to us. That is why we are all ONE. We share the same Spirit…the Spirit of God…the Holy Spirit.

Quote

ex: Galations 3:5 “He” therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth “he” it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

The 'he' used here does not refer to the Holy Spirit

Quote

1 Corinthians 12:11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as “he” will.

This 'he' does not refer to the Holy Spirit; it refers to God.

Quote

1 Peter 4:14 If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on “THEIR” part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified

The 'he' here refers to Christ.

Quote

Revelation 2:7 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will “I” give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God. Revelation 2:17 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will “I“ give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

The PERSON talking here is Jesus Christ, identified as the Son of man in verse 1:13.

Concerning John 3:3 and being born again: Actually, no one has been born again yet, except Jesus. Only He has been born of Spirit. We have only been conceived and are still yet in the womb. Notice what Jesus said:

John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
3:8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

Notice how He likens everyone born of the Spirit to the INVISIBLE wind. No human beings upon the earth have attained this state as yet; we are still all in our flesh and blood bodies. It won't be until the resurrection that we will finally be born of the Spirit. At that time, we will no longer have bodies of flesh. It will be in these GLORIFIED spiritual bodies that we will enter the kingdom of God. This is really what Jesus was telling Nicodemus.

As far as salvation and baptism, I have only this to say:

Matt:16:19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Acts 2:1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place…
…2:14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:
…2:33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.
…2:37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
2:39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the LORD our God shall call.

trettep: It seems to be your contention that this baptism of Acts 2:38 is NOT a water baptism. I believe that it is. While I cannot say that water baptism is essential for salvation, I can say that it must be very important or desirable as Jesus Himself was baptised by water.

Jesus lived a life that was an example as to how we should live ours. If He felt compelled to be baptised by water (and notice that He received the Holy Ghost when He was), what reason could we give for not wanting to FOLLOW His example?

Have you resisted baptism because it forces you to fellowship with others? Some other reason?

Nevertheless, with Peter receiving the keys to the kingdom, with all of the other disciples in agreement with him, with the birth of the church on the Day of Pentecost, with the question asked, “What shall we do?”, Peter's procla
mation of Acts 2:38 seems ipso facto to be the definitive 'method' of salvation. If there be any creed or doctrine to follow, it should be this one.

Once you've received the promise of the Holy Ghost, God will take over from that point forward. While being led by God, you'll never wonder WHAT you should do next; however, you'll probably find yourself wondering WHY…or, perhaps, even HOW.

[trettep]

Bic, No, I believe Acts 2:38 IS a water baptism. I still think its part of the former rain and the latter rain in the first month. Jesus did set the example – except that he didn't baptize anyone because the water He gives is the pure water (Holy Spirit). That is why we don't find Jesus doing baptisms. He was still under the Old Covenant and John's preparation (physical water baptism) was still being set which had to take place first. John knew that he was preparing the way and that his baptism was a type of the latter that is why he told Jesus I have need to be baptized of you:

Mat 3:14 But John forbade him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?
Mat 3:15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness. Then he suffered him.

Joh 4:2 (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)

Jesus's disciples did the baptizing but not Christ. The physical water baptism had to take place as a preparation because all things physical were a prelude to the New Covenant and given as examples:

1Co 10:2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea

1Co 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

Those examples had to come. God has poured out His Spirit now after the New Covenant had come. But while Jesus was still on the earth he was fullfilling the end of the Covenant at the same time preparing the New Covenant.

I consider it a great revealing that I learned of these things. Others have said that there is no unbroken chain of authority needed but I say there is. The authority comes by the Holy Spirit. John the Baptist had the Holy Spirit from birth and was part of the Old Covenant Priesthood as a son of Zechariah and a Levite.

Act 11:16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.

Notice the comparison with the Water baptism now coming by the Holy Spirit. The baptism by John (physical water baptism) was the baptism for repentance.

In verse 18 we read:

Act 11:18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.

Here the Apostles are recognizing that repentance is been granted also by the same act.

Baptisms of the Gentiles had already been taking place but now we have an acknowledgement that Christ has baptized these before the very eyes of Peter and in the same manner as Peter was. Peter was being shown that the Gentiles were being given the Holy Spirit directly from Christ and without the need to be baptized with water first as was previously the doctrine.

I was criticized here for not paying attention to the word “and” but will acknowledge it again here:

Act 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

But here the baptism of water in Acts 10 was not done until after the Holy Spirit was received. Peter still didn't get the whole message because there was two parts to it.

Peter seen a sheet descending and the message was about this:

Act 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath showed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

What Christ did was baptized the Gentiles with the Holy Spirit and notice the second part of the message was that they were clean. We are not to call any man unclean that the Holy Spirit has selected and cleaned.

Everybody gets confused because the next part shows that Peter baptizes them but it doesnt say he did so in water. But Peter was being taught something that when he reported it to the Apostles. Notice again the message this time:

Act 11:9 But the voice answered me again from heaven, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

Notice the message above – the word CLEANSED!

People are still saying what God had cleansed was not clean even still right now in this forum.

Now notice:

Act 11:17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand (forbid) God?

Act 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

Peter was acknowledging that these men had received the Baptism of repentance. He then commands them to be baptized but it doesn't say in water. Baptising means immersed or submerged. They were submerged into character and authority of Jesus Christ:

Act 10:48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.

Nothing about water in that verse. They had to be given much more instruction about Jesus Christ such that they were immersed into that character so that they knew everything.

They then prayed him to tarry certain days most likely to get more teaching of the character of Jesus and of the mind of Christ that they are now to conform to.

Hope this helps someone.

Paul

[NickHassan]

Hi,
Acts 10 .47
“Surely no one can refuse THE WATER FOR THESE TO BE BAPTISED, WHO HAVE RECEIVED the Holy Spirit as we did, can he?” And he ORDERED THEM TO BE BAPTISED in the name of Jesus Christ”

Paul, you cannot see the simple fact that they were water baptised on the ORDER of Peter? Because the word 'water' occurs in verse 47 but not 48 you cannot see it is water baptism he is talking about?Do you think he was saying they should not be refused a glass of water? More bizarre still!

If they were baptised in the Spirit was it a repeat Spirit baptism he was talking about them receiving here? Peter said they had already received the Spirit so why would it need to be done again? That seems very bizarre to say the least. I do not think anyone was confused but you are forcing your doctrinal interpretation on the text surely?

[trettep]

I'm correcting my post here instead of directly in my last post. I said:

Peter still didn't get the whole message because there was two parts to it.

But I meant to say – People still don't get the whole message because there was two parts to it.

Peter did get the message! Let me make that clear.

Nick:

Peter recants the event to the other Apostles. He shows what he meant when he talked about the water:

Act 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

Here is the recounting:

Act 11:17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand (forbid) God?

Now to the part you think is water of which there is no mention at all in these verses that Peter ever baptized with water.

Act 10:48 And he commanded (arrange towards) them to be baptized (submerged) in the name (authority/character) of the Lord.

Those parens are Strongs Concordance results.

There is nothing also in the recounting of the event to show it being the water.

Nick – I have labored more to show you the Truth. This may be more meat then you were ready for. But I approach you in the hope that God's Grace is upon you.

To the others I hope some of this has been met with some understanding also in like manner. Keep your mind in the Word of God and keep proving the things I say – keep looking them up and investigating whether they are so or not. The advantage of my message is this – I have been where many of you are (believing that PHYSICAL water baptism was a requirement) and have come from there to here. It my hope that the experience gained will help me to help others.

Paul

[NickHassan]

Hi Paul,
You still do not understand that water baptism is the type of which Spirit baptism is compared?

[trettep]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 05 2005,03:56)

Hi Paul, You still do not understand that water baptism is the type of which Spirit baptism is compared?

I'm not sure if your asking a question or making a statement so I didn't want to answer it.

However, ask again so I don't misunderstand you.

Paul

[NickHassan]

Hi,
So all references to baptism to you, if they cannot be construed as Spirit baptism, are people being
” submerged in the authority\character of the Lord?”

Is this a process or an event? You say people like Peter can arrange it. How? Can you and I make these arrangements for other new converts too? Where is it described in the Word?

Can you not yet see how far you have wandered off the path of simple truth into a swamp of confusion my friend?

[NickHassan]

Hi bic,
Can we look again at Jn 3.8
” The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going;so it is with everyone born of the Spirit”

So the wind is ,as you say, invisible. It is powerful and can be heard but cannot be seen. We know it is there but not with the direct evidence of our trusted eyes.

So is faith
Heb 11.1
” Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen”

So the Spirit as wind describes the impact of the heavenly on the natural. It is in a different dimension from what we see with our eyes. It is of the faith dimension. It is beyond the understanding and control of our natural mind but does work in and through us. The gift of tongues is an example of the Spirit interceding beyond our natural minds with the Father for things we do not even know we need.[Rom 8]

Were the disciples born again of the Spirit?

Acts2 1f
” When the feast of Pentecost had come ,they were all together in one place. And suddenly there came from heaven a noise like a violent rushing WIND, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. And there appeared to them tongues of fire distributing themselves, and they rested on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance”

Was not the WIND evidence of the fulfillment of the word in Jn 3?
And the tongues evidence of the fulfillment of Mk 16?

Peter said the believers had been born again.

1 Peter 1.3
“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ ,who according to His great mercy HAS CAUSED US TO BE BORN AGAIN to a living hope , through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead”
1.23
“For you HAVE BEEN BORN AGAIN not from seed which is perishable but imperishable.that is, through the living and enduring word of God”

John tell us we are not embryos but CHILDREN of God. Children are already born.
1 Jn 3 2
” Beloved ,now WE ARE children of God..”
3.9f
” No one who IS BORN of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him. By this the CHILDREN OF GOD and the children of the devil are obvious; any one who does not practice righteousness is not of God”

1Jn 2.29″… you know that everyone also who practices righteousness iS BORN OF HIM”

We are Born of God and brothers of Jesus now my friend.

[trettep]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 05 2005,05:03)

Hi, So all references to baptism to you, if they cannot be construed as Spirit baptism, are people being ” submerged in the authority\character  of the Lord?” Is this a process or an event? You say people like Peter can arrange it. How? Can you and I make these arrangements for other new converts too? Where is it described in the Word? Can you not yet see how far you have wandered off the path of simple truth into a swamp of confusion my friend?

Nick,

I would answer you questions further but based on your predisposition – my words would be in vain. Therefore, I leave you to the path you have chosen. For I think not that you are trying to learn from my statements but instead are trying to debate which is a spirit of the flesh that I participate not in. I don't defend the Faith that I have received. I thank you for your time in response to my statements and hope with all gladness to see you in the Kingdom of God. As your an admin of this forum, I will not be further responding to you directly as is my custom in these situations – however, I wish to continue to contribute to your forum in the hopes that I may further my labor.

Paul

[NickHassan]

Yes Paul,
You are welcome to continue sharing here your love of the Word.

[trettep]

Thanks Nick. I do value that everyone is trying to learn.

Paul

[NickHassan]

Hi Paul,
Many are not here to learn.
Some are stones sharpening stones.

[stroshow]

bic….

1)It is easy to build an endless amount of false
doctrines by using one or two (or even more) verses to
'prove' a point whilst ignoring many other verses
which contradict said verses. Then as a scenario you
use Luke 24:26 to show how, out of context a person
might use that verse to justify hating their family.

Response. I agree that verses need to be taken in
context and that the Bible does not contradict itself.
During our discussions I have never used a verse out
of context nor has anything I said contradicted other
passages of scripture. This fact is proven by your own
example. Notice you did not give an example of where I
used a verse out of context, nor of where I
contradicted scripture.

a) Only in the gospel of John do we see the Holy
Spirit called a 'He'. This is obviously incorrect
usage…it should be rendered 'it'.

Response: This is not incorrect usage! A neuter
pronoun in greek is available but Jesus chose to use
a masculine pronoun when speaking of the Spirit. As
mentioned before as just one example. John 14:17 Even
the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive,
because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye
know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in
you.
———————–

2)a) Only in the gospel of John do we see the Holy
Spirit called a 'He'. This is obviously incorrect
usage…it should be rendered 'it'

I looked up this verse in 18 DIFFERENT translations,
and encourage you to do the same, including the
following: KJV, NKJV, NIV, NASB, NLT, ESV, CEV, ASV,
YLT, NLT, HCBS, NIRV, WENT, NIV (UK) The Message,
Amplified Bible, 21st Century KJV, Darby. ALL of which
translate using personal pronouns, He/Him

And if its only in John why is it used in John?

In addition, the Gospel of John is NOT the only place
where the Holy Spirit is referred to with personal
pronouns. Consider the following.

Galations 3:5 He therefore that ministereth to you the
Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth “he” it
by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

1 Corinthians 12:11 But all these worketh that one and
the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally
as “he” will.

b) Did you ever notice how there is NEVER any
mention of a PERSONAL NAME for
THE Holy Spirit and IT is always preceded by a 'THE'?
THE Holy Spirit and THE Comforter? Do we say THE Jesus
or THE God? No, of course ,It's because these are
PERSONAL NAMES and THE Holy Spirit isn't. Do a search
for every instance where Holy Spirit or Holy Ghost is
found. Notice carefully the usage. Look how in many
cases it is used in a POSSESSIVE way, such as “the
Spirit of God”.

Response: The Holy Spirit does have names. That you
choose not to recognize them as such is a different
matter. For example he is called the Spirit of Truth,
the Comforter, the Holy Spirit etc. these are his
names, which along with others defines his attributes
and his work. A person is not however determined to be
a person based on a name. Cars have names, so do pets,
these however are not person. A child, while still in
his or her mothers womb may not have been given a
name, may be referred to as “the baby”, but none the
less is still, a person.

The Holy Spirit is defined as a person because of His
characteristics, which define him as such. Also, that
“the” is used does not take away from his personality.
For example, “the God of Abraham” “the God of Isaac”
“the God of Jacob” “the Saviour” “the Christ”,” the
Son of man” “the Father” the Son of God”, none of
these take away from the fact that the Father and the
Son are persons.
3)You wrote:
a) Love: We read about God's love for His Son and we
read about Jesus' love for His Father and we read
about both of their loves for us. Show me one
scripture that speaks of Jesus or God's love for the
Holy Spirit or where the Holy Spirit loves us or God
or Jesus. If the Holy Spirit was an equal person of
the godhead, 'he' would be equally loved, wouldn't
'he'?

To begin, passages referring to the love of God would
include the Holy Spirit, since he is himself a person
of the triune God. In addition your argument here is
as valid as one would be to say Jesus loves us more
than the Father! When for example did the Father ever
die for our sins? When was the Father ever bruised for
our transgressions?

However to suggest that the Father loves us less than
Jesus I’m sure we would agree would be absurd.

However since you asked for a verse that speaks of the
Spirit’ love…

Romans 15:30 Now I beseech you, brethren, for the Lord
Jesus Christ’s sake, and “for the love of the Spirit”,
that ye strive together with me in your prayers to God
for me;

What does it mean, “for the love of the Spirit”? Only
a “person” can love.

b) Throne: Jesus has a throne (beside His Father's)
and God has a throne. Where is the Holy Spirit's
throne? Once again, if it was an equal person in some
trinitarian godhead, it too would have a throne,
wouldn't it?
Response: The form of the Spirit is just that,
“spirit”. Jesus demonstrated thing after his
resurrection, when he proved to his diciples that he
was not a spirit.
Luke 24:36-39 And as they thus spake, Jesus himself
stood in the midst of them,
and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. But they were
terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had
seen a spirit. And he said unto them, Why are ye
troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts?
Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself:
handle me, and see; “for a spirit hath not flesh and
bones, as ye see me have.”

In addition to Jesus demonstrating that he was not a
spirit, by showing that his crucified body had been
resurrected, we learn that a spirit, this would
include the “Holy Spirit”, by definition does not have
flesh and bones. What then would the Holy Spirit do
with a throne?

c) Worship: Worship is offered to both God and Jesus
but there is not one instance of worship being offered
to the Holy Spirit. Have you ever wondered why?
Response: Here you make an interesting point. Worship
is offered to both God (I presume you refer to the
Father) and to Jesus? The fact that Jesus is
worshipped and that HE accepts worship also speaks of
Jesus being God, for as Jesus himself said: Luke 4:8
…for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy
God, and him only shalt thou serve.”

However, since the Holy Spirit is God, when we worship
God we are worshipping the Father, the Son and the
Holy Spirit.

Interestingly, Jesus said in Luke 3:28 Verily I say
unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of
men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall
blaspheme: But he that shall blaspheme against the
Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of
eternal damnation.

Why is it that all blasphemies including those against
the Father and the Son shall be forgiven, but not
against the Holy Spirit? Why is that?
You wrote in response to the Holy Spirit talking: So
can a tape recorder or even a book. (Then you go on)
Notice, too, that just like a voice recorder, he will
only echo the things that Jesus had already told them.
Notice, once again, like a recorder, doesn't speak its
own thoughts but only those of Christ (what it hears).
Jesus is glorified and the HolySpirit merely relays
what Jesus says through it. 'he' should be rendered
'it'.

Response: To begin, recorders DO NOT talk. They can
not make decisions, as the
Holy Spirit does they can
not teach, guide, forbid, send forth inspire etc. all
of which and more the Spirit does. Nor can a recorder
be blasphemed.

Jesus said during his earthly ministry in John 12:49
For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which
sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say,
and what I should speak.

Does this mean that Jesus was not a person, but a mere
“thing” like a recorder? If Jesus speaking what the
Father told him does not make Jesus a mere recorder,
then why do you say that the Spirit is merely a
recorder?

Wouldn’t a better analogy be that of a messenger, a
person speaking?

Again consider the attributes of the Spirit. I
encourage you to read these, in context, not just the
verse sited.

He teaches and he reminds believers. (John 14:26)
He testifies (John 15:26)
He convicts of sin (John 16:8)He guides, hears, speaks
and shows (John 16:13)
He inspires scripture (Acts 1:16, 2 Peter 1:21)
He spoke to Phillip and told him where to minister.
(Acts 8:29)
He calls to ministry (Acts 13:2)
He sends forth his servants( Acts 13:4)
He forbids certain actions (Acts 16:6, 7)
He intercedes (Romans 8:26)
He has a will (1 Corinthians 12:11)
He has a mind (Romans 8:27)
He has knowledge (1 Corinthians 2:10, 11)

He can be treated like a person in that he can be,
Lied to (Acts 5:3)
Tempted (Acts 5:9)
Resisted (Acts 7:51)
Grieved (Ephesians 4:30)
Outraged (Hebrews 10:29)
Blasphemed against

[NickHassan]

Hi ss,
You mention a triune God. Where is this God in scripture?

We have examined the doctrine of trinity and found it to be a very unlikely description of the God we worship, who is the Father. It is not shown plainly in scripture but is a derived concept, a speculation based on misunderstood truth.

In fact  since it draws people away from worshipping the Father it is idolatrous. It insults the Father by somehow combining Him with the Son whom He begat and the Spirit He sent to fill us. It is also antichrist as it denies the Son is separate in nature and thus denies he came in the flesh.

So the rest is not really relevant is it but folly built on folly?

[Anonymous]

Hi Nick,
Why don't you disprove the trinity to all by refuting stroshow's points on the Holy Spirit one by one?

[NickHassan]

Sorry MM,
It is not for christians to disprove the trinity. It is a strange new teaching that you have to prove to us.

[Anonymous]

I didn't think you would.

[NickHassan]

Hi MM,
The same tired old arguments have surfaced many times in this forum and anyone interested in following those tracks back into the marshes and mists are welcome to review them. Personally I see no worth in abandoning the safe path of revealed truth.

[Author]

Posts