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

Participant

Quote (terraricca @ Jan. 15 2012,06:57)

Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 15 2012,12:53)

Quote (terraricca @ Jan. 15 2012,05:40)

Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 14 2012,18:49)

Quote (terraricca @ Jan. 14 2012,11:34)

No, God did not send his holy spirit to us, …

Hi Pierre, Scripture do NOT agree with you?

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the HolySpirit, whom the Father will send in my name,
he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Are you going to man up on this?

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

edj

LESSON NUMBER ONE;DID YOU RECEIVED DIRECTION AND (1)DID CHRIST TALK IN PERSON TO YOU BEFORE HE DIED ?

(2)IF NO ;THEN YOU WILL NOT RECEIVE THE HOLY SPIRIT FOR COMFORTING YOU FOR THE LOST OF YOUR LEADER Jesus CHRIST ,

(3)AND SO THE ONLY WAY YOU COULD RECEIVE THE HOLY SPIRIT IS THROUGH THE DISCIPLES IMPOSING HANDS ,RIGHT ,(4)BUT THERE ALSO YOU HAVE A PROBLEM THEY ALL DIE BEFORE YOU WERE BORN RIGHT ?(5)YES SO NO HOLY SPIRIT FOR ANY ONE (6)BUT HELP IS STILL THERE FOR THOSE WHO SEEK GOD WITH AN UPRIGHT HEART,

Pierre

Hi Pierre,

1) I don't see what any relevance to this question is?

2) Huh? Could you please rephrase this, this English is fuzzy at best.

3) That is not what Scripture teaches?

4) What?

5) That is not what Scripture teaches?

6) What kind of help? …the “HolySpirit”?

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

edj

you are not supplying scriptures to show that i am wrong ,

and my English is good but when you refuse what I say then suddenly my written English becomes foggy ,

answer my questions ;

but I know all your answers ,

Pierre

Hi Pierre,

Me not being able to understand you English is just that, NOTHING MORE!
Your points numbered 2 and 4 need to be reworded for me to understand
what you are asking. Using a question?mark helps when asking a question.

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

January 15, 2012 at 4:26 am#272429

Participant

Brother Pierre,

My brother I will show you where the Holy Ghost was promised to be given, OK

And then you show me where it was stopped and where you had to have hands laid on to receive.

ACTS 2:39 † For the promise is unto you, Jew and to your children, Jew's children and to all that are afar off, US even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
And my brother He is still calling at this time.

You doctrine of laying on of hands is the same as having to speak in tongues, it just isn't so.

God Bless
Marlin

January 15, 2012 at 4:38 am#272430

Participant

Brother Mike,

Jesus on earth was both man and God, He was the God Man.
When Jesus cried, got cold and hungry He was a man.
But when He said Lazarus come forth, He was God.

He was a man, when he got hungry.
He was God when He toke a few fish and bread of fed 5,000.

He was the fullness of the Godhead in flesh form.
COL 2:9 † For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

He was the God Man.

We didn't live in that time period, we live now. Who is He now?

I am still waiting on you to reconcile WATER BAPTISM.

You turn

God Bless
Marlin

January 15, 2012 at 4:51 am#272431

Participant

Brother Pierre,

Sorry my friend, you explanation on friend has one major flaw. Let one of your children go into a theater and sat in a chair and call for father. All the fathers there would think he was nuts.

My children know me by father too, but they also know my name and they also know that father is just one of my titles.

If you truly believe that you name is father, then sign a check “Father” and take to the bank to cash.

God has a Name and the early church new that Name.

Reconcile Mat 28:19 to Acts 2:38, The man that had been given the keys to the kingdom. What ever he bound on earth would be bound in heaven forever. which by the way, happened 10 days after Mat 28:19..

God Bless
Marlin

January 15, 2012 at 3:15 pm#272458

Blocked

Quote (Marlin1 @ Jan. 14 2012,21:38)

Brother Mike,

Jesus on earth was both man and God, He was the God Man.
When Jesus cried, got cold and hungry He was a man.
But when He said Lazarus come forth, He was God.

How convenient for you, Marlin. This way, you can just pick and choose and make up your own Jesus at will, right?

Let's start with a simple thought:
Acts 2:22
“Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.

Marlin, WHO did the miracles, signs, and wonders? And THROUGH WHOM were those miracles, signs, and wonders done?

You should have TWO answers here, not one.

Answer these simple questions DIRECTLY, and you will have begun your journey on the path of scriptural truth.

January 15, 2012 at 4:15 pm#272472

Participant

Brother Mike,

I Timothy 3:16 says, “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into Glory”

It says GOD was manifest in flesh. One God. That ONE GOD was manifested in flesh. That should settle it. God came in a human form. That didn't make Him ANOTHER GOD. HE WAS GOD, THE SAME GOD. It was a revelation then, and it is a revelation now. One God.

Who was the pillar of fire, a blinding light. that Paul seen?
Paul met Him on the road to Damascus and He spoke to Paul and said, “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou Me?” Paul said, “Who art Thou, Lord?” He said, “I am Jesus.”

Who was the pillar of fire that led Israel? It was the one and the same GOD.

God Bless
Marlin

January 15, 2012 at 4:36 pm#272474

terraricca

Participant

Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 15 2012,14:21)

Quote (terraricca @ Jan. 15 2012,06:57)

Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 15 2012,12:53)

Quote (terraricca @ Jan. 15 2012,05:40)

Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 14 2012,18:49)

Quote (terraricca @ Jan. 14 2012,11:34)

No, God did not send his holy spirit to us, …

Hi Pierre, Scripture do NOT agree with you?

Are you going to man up on this?

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

edj

LESSON NUMBER ONE;DID YOU RECEIVED DIRECTION AND (1)DID CHRIST TALK IN PERSON TO YOU BEFORE HE DIED ?

(2)IF NO ;THEN YOU WILL NOT RECEIVE THE HOLY SPIRIT FOR COMFORTING YOU FOR THE LOST OF YOUR LEADER Jesus CHRIST ,

Pierre

Hi Pierre,

1) I don't see what any relevance to this question is?

2) Huh? Could you please rephrase this, this English is fuzzy at best.

3) That is not what Scripture teaches?

4) What?

5) That is not what Scripture teaches?

6) What kind of help? …the “HolySpirit”?

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

edj

you are not supplying scriptures to show that i am wrong ,

and my English is good but when you refuse what I say then suddenly my written English becomes foggy ,

answer my questions ;

but I know all your answers ,

Pierre

Hi Pierre,

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

edj

(2)are you one of the 11 apostles ?IF NO ;THEN YOU WILL NOT RECEIVE THE HOLY SPIRIT FOR COMFORTING YOU, FOR THE LOST OF YOUR LEADER Jesus CHRIST ,got it ??

(4)the holy spirit was transmitted through the imposing of hands by the apostles;; BUT THERE ALSO YOU HAVE A PROBLEM THEY ALL DIE BEFORE YOU WERE BORN RIGHT ?so who could impose his hands on you ???got it ??

Pierre

January 15, 2012 at 4:42 pm#272475

Blocked

Quote (Marlin1 @ Jan. 15 2012,09:15)

Brother Mike,

It says GOD was manifest in flesh.

Marlin,

You are using a doctored translation. 1 Tim 3:16 really says:
And we all agree, our religion contains amazing revelation: He was revealed in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among Gentiles, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.

The word “God” is not really there, and you can read all about it here. Just click on footnote #3 in the NETBible translation at the top of the page. And while reading the information, keep in mind that NETBible was produced by 25 TRINITARTIAN scholars. So if there was any chance that “God” was the proper translation, they would have surely jumped at that chance.

Quote (Marlin1 @ Jan. 15 2012,09:15)

Who was the pillar of fire that led Israel? It was the one and the same GOD.

Exodus 23
20 “See, I am sending an angel ahead of you to guard you along the way and to bring you to the place I have prepared. 21 Pay attention to him and listen to what he says. Do not rebel against him; he will not forgive your rebellion, since my Name is in him.

Marlin, provided that this “angel of God” even was Jesus, it would make it clear that Jesus was an ANGEL OF GOD, and not God Himself.

Don't get me wrong, Marlin. I completely understand how people like you can be misguided by others, and come to very wrong interpretations of scripture. But I'm here where the rubber meets the road, so to speak. I am here to scripturally correct these common misunderstandings.

So, before you bring up even more scriptures for us to discover the real truth of, deal with the last one I listed, okay?

I asked you about Acts 2:22, remember?

Marlin, in Acts 2:22, WHO did the miracles, signs, and wonders? And THROUGH WHOM were those miracles, signs, and wonders done?

I await your TWO answers to these questions.

peace,
mike

January 15, 2012 at 5:12 pm#272483

terraricca

Participant

Quote (Marlin1 @ Jan. 15 2012,21:51)

Brother Pierre,

Sorry my friend, you explanation on friend has one major flaw. Let one of your children go into a theater and sat in a chair and call for father. All the fathers there would think he was nuts.

My children know me by father too, but they also know my name and they also know that father is just one of my titles.

If you truly believe that you name is father, then sign a check “Father” and take to the bank to cash.

God has a Name and the early church new that Name.

God Bless
Marlin

Merlin

you see my kids would never do that “going to a theater and call their father there ,”they know who I am ,and so it is with God only the fools go out and cry out for God ,instead of going in their hearts and in his word,

so their is no flaw,

and yes God as many names but in the last days he made him know through his son as FATHER to all his prodigy sons that will come back to him Jews or Gentiles,

Pierre

January 15, 2012 at 10:39 pm#272521

Participant

Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 14 2012,11:15)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 14 2012,10:57)

Scriptures say no such thing, Ed. In fact, Jesus says that his Father will SEND the Holy Spirit. Two things, only ONE of them the Father of Jesus.

Hi Mike, (it is more on topic in this thread)

The Father did indeed send us his “HolySpirit”.
The Fathers spirit is “HOLY”, are you suggesting something different?
Consider this verse (as in, please explain it as you see it in reference to what we are discussing)…

…Like God the Father is (perhaps) the father of his “HolySpirit”.

“shall we not much rather be in subjection unto THE FATHER OF SPIRITS, and live?” (Heb 12:9)

Are you going to attempt to leave the HolySpirit out of this verse?

And also, please explain this one while you are at it too; OK?…

Eph.4:4-6 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord,
one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who
is above all, and through all, and in you all.

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

Mike?

January 16, 2012 at 12:23 am#272538

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 16 2012,02:42)

Quote (Marlin1 @ Jan. 15 2012,09:15)

Brother Mike,

It says GOD was manifest in flesh.

Marlin,

You are using a doctored translation.

Hi Mike,

Are you suggesting that the “AKJV Bible” (according to Mike)
is a doctored (altered) translation? (2:31:50 – 2:33:54 – two minutes).

This (3-hr) complete video explains the history of how we got our “Holy Bible”,
what it took to comprise the “AKJV Bible” (2:34:03 – 2:37:33 – three and a half minutes).
And also about how the newer English bible translations based on altered (or doctored) Greek
manuscripts, called the 'Codex Sinaiticvs' and 'Codex Vaticanvs' (2:47:27 – 2:52:10 – five and a half minutes)

I would, however, suggest start watching it at the timeline 2:28:42 – and watch it all the way to the end. (30 minutes)

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

January 16, 2012 at 1:03 am#272547

terraricca

Participant

Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 16 2012,17:23)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 16 2012,02:42)

Quote (Marlin1 @ Jan. 15 2012,09:15)

Brother Mike,

It says GOD was manifest in flesh.

Marlin,

You are using a doctored translation.

Hi Mike,

Are you suggesting that the “AKJV Bible” (according to Mike)
is a doctored (altered) translation? (2:31:50 – 2:33:54 – two minutes).

I would, however, suggest start watching it at the timeline 2:28:42 – and watch it all the way to the end. (30 minutes)

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

edj

never under estimate Gods hand,

men are Gods tools ,no more

Pierre

January 16, 2012 at 1:12 am#272549

Participant

Hi Mike,

There is nothing to suggest that the Angel spoken of in Exodus 23:20 was (according to you) Jesus.
I would, however, agree with you in that Exodus 23:20 “IS” a “shadow-picture”
of what Jesus did in bringing us “Spiritually” to the Father.

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

January 16, 2012 at 1:31 am#272561

Participant

Brother Mike,

You are no more where the rubber meets the road then anybody. You have doctrine of man. Every time that someone shows you something that will completely destroy your STRONG DELUSION, you claim that their bible is wrong. I could do the same thing, but I don't because I don't have to change the Word to make it fit.

John 1:1, 14 should have straightened this out, but no you claim the KJV bible is wrong.
1 Tim 3:16 should have straightened this out, but no you claim the KJV bibles are wrong.

I tell you this, yours says the same thing.
Great is the mystery of GODLINESS, HE,(GOD) was manifested in the FLESH.

Brother that is the same thing. The 'HE' can be none other then God Himself. I am glad that I don't have to attempt to change the bible to fit, as you do.

You still haven't answered my question….. Mat verse Acts….. you know the verses.
I wait in excited anticipation.

God Bless
Marlin

January 16, 2012 at 2:15 am#272584

Participant

Brother Mike,

Branes notes on the bible.

1 Tim 3:16

Quote

The question which has excited so much controversy is, whether the original Greek word was Θεὸς Theos, “God,” or whether it was ὅς hos, “who,” or ὁ ho, “which.” The controversy has turned, to a considerable degree, on the reading in the “Codex Alexandrinus;” and a remark or two on the method in which the manuscripts in the New Testament were written, will show the true nature of the controversy.

It was a common thing to abridge or contract words in the manuscript. Thus, πρ would be used for πατερ pater, “father;” κς for κυριος kurios, “Lord;” Θς for Θεος Theos, “God,” etc. The words thus contracted were designated by a faint line or dash over them. In this place, therefore, if the original uncials (capitals) were ΘC, standing for Θεὸς Theos, “God,” and the line in the Θ, and the faint line over it, were obliterated from any cause, it would easily be mistaken for OC – ὅς hos – “who.”

To ascertain which of these is the true reading, has been the great question; and it is with reference to this that the microscope has been resorted to in the examination of the Alexandrian manuscript. It is now generally admitted that the faint line “over” the word has been added by some later hand, though not improbably by one who found that the line was nearly obliterated, and who meant merely to restore it.
But the passage is not “necessary” to prove the doctrine which is affirmed, on the supposition that that is the correct reading. The same truth is abundantly taught elsewhere; compare Matthew 1:23; John 1:14.

Was manifest – Margin, “Manifested.” The meaning is, “appeared” in the flesh.

In the flesh – In human nature; see this explained in the notes on Romans 1:3. The expression here looks as though the true reading of the much-disputed word was “God.” It could not have been, it would seem evident, ὁ ho, “which,” referring to “mystery;” for how could a mystery “be manifested in the flesh?” Nor could it it be ὅς hos, “who,” unless that should refer to one who was more than a man; for how absurd would it be to say that “a man was manifested, or appeared in the flesh!” How else could a man appear? The phrase here means that God appeared in human form, or with human nature; and this is declared to be the “great” truth so long concealed from human view, but now revealed as constituting the fundamental doctrine of the gospel.

It doesn't look like there was ever the choice of 'He'. it was either 'God', 'Who', or 'Which' in the original manuscript. And only God would fit in the text.

God Bless
Marlin

January 16, 2012 at 3:09 am#272602

Blocked

Quote (Marlin1 @ Jan. 15 2012,18:31)

John 1:1, 14 should have straightened this out, but no you claim the KJV bible is wrong.

I don't remember us ever discussing John 1. But if you'd like to, it's cool. I've become rather an expert on that verse.

Quote (Marlin1 @ Jan. 15 2012,18:31)

1 Tim 3:16 should have straightened this out, but no you claim the KJV bibles are wrong.

Did you read the source I linked you to? Do you remember this is a Trinitarian source who would like nothing more than for 1 Tim 3:16 to say “God came in the flesh”? Yet they can't say it because it just isn't true.

Quote (Marlin1 @ Jan. 15 2012,18:31)

…..yours says the same thing. The 'HE' can be none other then God Himself.

Hmmmmm…………… Well, here's yet another TRINITARIAN translation that doesn't agree with you:
1 Timothy 3:16 BBE (Bible in Basic English, 1949)
And without argument, great is the secret of religion: He who was seen in the flesh, who was given God’s approval in the spirit, was seen by the angels, of whom the good news was given among the nations, in whom the world had faith, who was taken up in glory.

It seems that this translator believes the one who was flesh was approved of BY God, and not that he was God Himself.

Really Marlin, do you think God Himself was “VINDICATED BY SPIRIT”? Was God Almighty “TAKEN UP IN GLORY”?

Because it seems to me that these things happened to the Son OF God, according to the scriptures.

Quote

You still haven't answered my question….. Mat verse Acts….. you know the verses.

I have addressed your point already. But I'll dig deeper for you now.

Concerning Matthew 28:19, there are only three possibilities that I can see:

1. The verse was added later, and not really a part of scripture, as many sources, including the Catholic Encyclopedia agree.

2. The disciples disregarded the words of Jesus, and used a different baptismal formula than the one he told them to use.

3. The name of God Almighty is “Jesus Christ”, meaning “Jesus, the Anointed one of God”.

It is clear to all of us that you have chosen #3 as your sensible choice. To which I asked you if it really made sense to you that God's name would include the words “the anointed one of God”.

And because one of the most basic requirements of being a “Jesus is God Almighty” supporter is the ability to say the most asinine things imaginable with a straight face, you have answered “YES” to my question, and offered what you considered an explanation of the differences between the spirit and flesh natures of God.

Well, that answer set me so far aback that I thought it best to move on to other scriptures that clearly distinguish the Son of God from the God he is the Son of. (Because, as it says in the Billy Joel song Movin' Out, “You should never argue with a crazy mind”)

But, since you are not willing to move on, and you ARE willing to stand your ground and claim with a straight face that the name of God Almighty would have the phrase “anointed one of God” in it, you leave me no choice but to try other avenues.

Revelation 3:12
Him who overcomes I will make a pillar in the temple of my God. Never again will he leave it. I will write on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God; and I will also write on him my new name.

So Marlin, assuming that you are correct, and the name of God Almighty is “Jesus Christ”, and knowing that it was Jesus Christ who said the above words:

1. WHO is God Almighty referring to as “my God”?
2. Does God Almighty have a God of His own?
3. Why will some have written on them the name of Jesus' God (who he said was also our God in John 20:17)……….AND ALSO Jesus' new name?

Doesn't that make it seem as if some of them will have written on them the new name of “God Almighty” AND the name of the God of “God Almighty”? How do you explain these conundrums, Marlin?

Marlin, in the process of me addressing your point, I would also like for you to address mine from before:

In Acts 2:22, WHO did the miracles, signs, and wonders? And THROUGH WHOM were those miracles, signs, and wonders done?
I'm waiting for the TWO names that answer these questions.

January 16, 2012 at 3:26 am#272608

Blocked

Quote (Marlin1 @ Jan. 15 2012,19:15)

It doesn't look like there was ever the choice of 'He'. it was either 'God', 'Who', or 'Which' in the original manuscript. And only God would fit in the text.

From NETNotes:
On the other side, the masculine relative pronoun ὅς is strongly supported by א* A* C* F G 33 365 pc Did Epiph. Significantly, D* and virtually the entire Latin tradition read the neuter relative pronoun, ὅ (Jo, “which”), a reading that indirectly supports ὅς since it could not easily have been generated if θεός had been in the text.

This is but a small snippet from the link I gave you, but as you can see, some mss have the pronoun “ho” in the masculine singular form, meaning “he”, and not “which”. “Which” is contrived from the Latin mss, which render “ho” in the neuter, and not the masculine form. So “HE” is the actual translation if translating from any of the many mss that have the singular masculine form of “ho” in them.

These scholars also point out that the mss which have “ho” in the neuter form (“which”), leave no chance of it being “God”, or even referring to “God”, because God is always referred to by masculine pronouns.

And the reason the Trinitarian commentator Barnes gives for it having to be “God” is how absurd would it be to say that “a man was manifested, or appeared in the flesh!” How else could a man appear?

This is only good reasoning if there are but TWO choices – that Jesus was either God Himself or nothing but a human being.

His reasoning conveniently ignores the third (and only scriptural) possiblility – that Jesus was a spirit being existing and having glory alongside his own God in the form of his own God BEFORE the world was created, and BEFORE he was made into the likeness of a human being.

Barnes, being the Trinitarian that he is, conveniently pretends like this isn't even one of the possibilities. Yet you and I know it is EXACTLY what the scriptures teach, right?

I will be sure to use Barnes' how absurd would it be to say that “a man was manifested, or appeared in the flesh!” point when dealing with the non-preexisters on this site though. So, thanks for that!

January 16, 2012 at 3:43 am#272611

Blocked

Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 15 2012,18:12)

Hi Mike,

There is nothing to suggest that the Angel spoken of in Exodus 23:20 was (according to you) Jesus.

Ed,

Re-read my post, and look to the part where I said provided that this “angel of God” even was Jesus……...

Don't say “according to me” unless it actually IS “according to me”.

As for the rest of your posts, I have no interest in showing you yet again that if Holy Spirit is OF God, it can't BE God.

Let it go, because you have shown yourself unwilling to accept the meaning of the word “OF”, not to mention the scriptures that clearly list God's Holy Spirit as something He SENDS or GIVES. If you are unwilling to accept these simple kinds of things, then I am unwilling to waste my time showing them to you again.

peace,
mike

January 16, 2012 at 3:43 am#272612

Participant

Brother Mike,

Before we move on to your next scripture, let us look deeper at your response to Mat – Acts.

you said,

Quote

1. The verse was added later, and not really a part of scripture, as many sources, including the Catholic Encyclopedia agree.
2. The disciples disregarded the words of Jesus, and used a different baptismal formula than the one he told them to use.
3. The name of God Almighty is “Jesus Christ”, meaning “Jesus, the Anointed one of God”.

You were right that the one that I picked was that the Lord Jesus Christ is God Almighty. I choose to believe the bible as written.

But you didn't say which one you picked, so you believe in water baptism, right?
How were you baptized. What formula Mat 28:19 or Acts 2:38…….

In other words, Which door did you choose door 1 meaning Mat 28:19 was added later and the correct formula was Act 2:38

or door 2, meaning that the early church was mistaking.

or door 3, meaning that God came in the Flesh.

God Bless
Marlin

January 16, 2012 at 3:48 am#272613