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

[NickHassan]

Hi Tim2,
Can we all guess as you have done?
Should we not go by Scripture?

[Tim2]

Hi Nick,

Everything I said is straight out of Scripture. Jesus is God. John 20:28. Why don't you follow this Scripture?

Tim

[NickHassan]

Hi Tim2,
God is one.
God has a son.
Did you know scripture can be made to say lots of things-such as there is no God?
Psalm 14:1
The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.

Seek truth.
You will not find it in trinity theory.
Playing word games does not serve our Father God

[Tim2]

Hi Nick,

“My Lord and My God.” John 20:28. Where's the word game?

Tim

[NickHassan]

Hi Tim2,
So sad that you hold so close what proves nothing.
God is the God and father of Jesus

[Tim2]

Hi Nick,

It is sad if you won't listen to the words of Thomas and confess that Jesus is your God.

Tim

[NickHassan]

Hi Tim2,
If for us there is one God which is it? The Son of God or his God?

[Tim2]

Hi Nick,

The Son of God and His Father are the same God. John 10:30.

Tim

[NickHassan]

Hi Tim 2,
So what do these verses mean?
Jn 14
1Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.
Jn 20
31But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

[Tim2]

Hi Nick,

“Ye believe in God, believe also in Me.” It means that Jesus is God. If Jesus is not God, then why would we have to believe in Him?

“Jesus Christ, the Son of God” means that Jesus is God. That's what John 5:18 says.

Tim

[NickHassan]

Hi tim2,
So you believe in one God and then another one.
Sons of God are God too.
Ah well.
Since you are happy in your deception we should not continue to disturb you.

[Tim2]

Hi Nick,

You know what I believe. It's in the Athanasian Creed. I've said over and over again, I believe in one God. If you want to argue with me, argue with what I'm actually saying. The Son of God is the same God as the Father, one God. Argue with that, please.

Tim

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 05 2007,05:40)

Hi Tim 2, So what do these verses mean? Jn 14 1Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. Jn 20 31But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

NH

You only have to look three verses up from John 20:31 to see who John believed the “Monogenes Son of God” is!

So do you believe in this  “Son of God” that John and Thomas believes in?

Do you believe that he is “Lord and God”, The Lord from heaven?

[TimothyVI]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 05 2007,00:00)

Quote (TimothyVI @ April 04 2007,23:46) Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 04 2007,22:19) Hi Tim2, Deliberately. The Spirit of God is a manifestation of God and as Acts 5 shows us that Spirit must be treated with the respect due to God Himself. Why is blasphemy against the Spirit more serious than that against the Son of God? Hi Nick, Blaspheming against the Holy spirit is explained in verses 22-23. It is attributing to Satan the very works of God. You can blaspheme against the Son, but do not give Satan credit for what God does. The Holy Spirit is the Holy Spirit of God. One and the same. “But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Spirit hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation ” (Mark 3:29). Hi Tim 4, So the Spirit is the Spirit of God and there is no trinity. Thanks.

Hi Nick,

That is how I see it.

Tim

[TimothyVI]

Quote (Tim2 @ April 05 2007,00:58)

[/quote] Tim, I would say that supports that a parakletos is a person. So if the Father is a person, Jesus is a person, and the Spirit is a person, and they are all the same God, I'd say that is one God in three persons.   Tim

Hi Tim2,

Parakletos was only used to describe Jesus, not the Father.
Jesus only said that the Father would send the parakletos.
The spirit of Jesus as a new comforter.

I still do not agree that the the Spirit of God is something seperate from God, or a person for that matter. It is God's spirit. God is spirit, and He can send His spirit to us. He can also send the spirit of Jesus to us. Everything is from God, just as Jesus told us.

Man had to come up with a trinity so that in his mind he would not break the commandment of having only one God, while still worshipping Jesus. So if we make Jesus and the Father one person. Why not add the spirit as well, and then we can have a trinity like all of the pagans are used to anyway.

I still see only one Father God and his fully authorized representative, and son, Jesus. Even without a trinity.

Tim

[Tim2]

Matthew 28:19

[TimothyVI]

Quote (Tim2 @ April 05 2007,17:54)

Matthew 28:19

Hi Tim2,

Read what some of these experts say.

The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics:
As to Matthew 28:19, it says: It is the central piece of evidence for the traditional (Trinitarian) view. If it were undisputed, this would, of course, be decisive, but its trustworthiness is impugned on grounds of textual criticism, literary criticism and historical criticism. The same Encyclopedia further states that: “The obvious explanation of the silence of the New Testament on the triune name, and the use of another (JESUS NAME) formula in Acts and Paul, is that this other formula was the earlier, and the triune formula is a later addition.”

Edmund Schlink, The Doctrine of Baptism, page 28:
“The baptismal command in its Matthew 28:19 form can not be the historical origin of Christian baptism. At the very least, it must be assumed that the text has been transmitted in a form expanded by the [Catholic] church.”

The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275:
“It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but…a later liturgical addition.”

Wilhelm Bousset, Kyrios Christianity, page 295:
“The testimony for the wide distribution of the simple baptismal formula [in the Name of Jesus] down into the second century is so overwhelming that even in Matthew 28:19, the Trinitarian formula was later inserted.”

The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263:
“The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century.”

Hastings Dictionary of the Bible 1963, page 1015:
“The Trinity.-…is not demonstrable by logic or by Scriptural proofs,…The term Trias was first used by Theophilus of Antioch (c AD 180),…(The term Trinity) not found in Scripture…” “The chief Trinitarian text in the NT is the baptismal formula in Mt 28:19…This late post-resurrection saying, not found in any other Gospel or anywhere else in the NT, has been viewed by some scholars as an interpolation into Matthew. It has also been pointed out that the idea of making disciples is continued in teaching them, so that the intervening reference to baptism with its Trinitarian formula was perhaps a later insertion into the saying. Finally, Eusebius's form of the (ancient) text (“in my name” rather than in the name of the Trinity) has had certain advocates. (Although the Trinitarian formula is now found in the modern-day book of Matthew), this does not guarantee its source in the historical teaching of Jesus. It is doubtless better to view the (Trinitarian) formula as derived from early (Catholic) Christian, perhaps Syrian or Palestinian, baptismal usage (cf Didache 7:1-4), and as a brief summary of the (Catholic) Church's teaching about God, Christ, and the Spirit:…”

The Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge:
“Jesus, however, cannot have given His disciples this Trinitarian order of baptism after His resurrection; for the New Testament knows only one baptism in the name of Jesus (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:43; 19:5; Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 1:13-15), which still occurs even in the second and third centuries, while the Trinitarian formula occurs only in Matt. 28:19, and then only again (in the) Didache 7:1 and Justin, Apol. 1:61…Finally, the distinctly liturgical character of the formula…is strange; it was not the way of Jesus to make such formulas… the formal authenticity of Matt. 28:19 must be disputed…” page 435.

The Jerusalem Bible, a scholarly Catholic work, states:
“It may be that this formula, (Triune Matthew 28:19) so far as the fullness of its expression is concerned, is a reflection of the (Man-made) liturgical usage established later in the primitive (Catholic) community. It will be remembered that Acts speaks of baptizing “in the name of Jesus,”…”

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, page 2637, Under “Baptism,” says:
“Matthew 28:19 in particular only canonizes a later ecclesiastical situation, that its universalism is contrary to the facts of early Christian history, and its Trinitarian formula (is) foreign to the mouth of Jesus.”

Etc.etc.etc.

Tim

[Tim2]

TimVI,

So your argument is, “The Trinity is not in the parts of the Bible that I accept.” Ok. Let me know when you accept the whole Bible.

Tim

[NickHassan]

Quote (Tim2 @ April 05 2007,05:49)

Hi Nick, You know what I believe.  It's in the Athanasian Creed.  I've said over and over again, I believe in one God.  If you want to argue with me, argue with what I'm actually saying.  The Son of God is the same God as the Father, one God.  Argue with that, please. Tim

Hi Tim,
So this humanly derived creed is of more importance than the words of Jesus? So your god has a name -TRADITION.

[Tim2]

Hi Nick,

No, my creed is from the Bible and is based on the words of Jesus, “I am the first and the last.”

Why don't you submit to the Bible?

Tim

[Author]

Posts