The Trinity Doctrine

[GeneBalthrop]

WJ…….> why can't you understand GOD THE FATHER IS SPIRIT and can INDWELL Us. It's ONE GOD, in ALL and THROUGH ALL. Jesus PLAINLY SAID ” It was GOD IN HIM DOING HIS WORK. That why Thomas said My Lord (AND) My GOD. Both Jesus the Man and GOD The FATHER were present. GOD indwelt JESUS.

[NickHassan]

Hi WJ,
A page of greek logic does not equal one verse of scripture.
You should know that by now.
But then again..

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 01 2008,12:12)

Hi WJ, Of course Jesus referred to the Spirit as the Spirit of the Father. Matthew 10:20 for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you. Is that not enough for you?

NH

What are you saying? That the other scriptures have no bearing?

Of course the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God, for he proceeds from the Father and the Son and speaks whatever he hears and shows it unto us. He does not speak of himself but in fact glorifys the Son and takes from the Son and reveals it unto us….

Jn 16:13
Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
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.

Quite an amazing declaration for a mere man, wouldn't you say?

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 01 2008,15:50)

Hi WJ, A page of greek logic does not equal one verse of scripture. You should know that by now. But then again..

NH

Why dont you show me where the greek logic is?

I just quote scriptures without twisting or denying them, and you call it greek logic!

[NickHassan]

Hi WJ,
Do you still not know the Spirit of God
Is
the spirit of God?

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Jan. 01 2008,13:34)

WJ…….> why can't you understand GOD THE FATHER IS SPIRIT and can INDWELL Us. It's ONE GOD, in ALL and THROUGH ALL. Jesus PLAINLY SAID ” It was GOD IN HIM DOING HIS WORK. That why Thomas said My Lord (AND) My GOD. Both Jesus the Man and GOD The FATHER were present. GOD indwelt JESUS.

No GB.

The scriptures clearly say…

And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. Jn 20:28

said unto him, Not said unto them.

Notice Jesus did not rebuke him for his proposed blasphemy.

I agree with the others that you mortalize Jesus to just another man anointed by God.

What do you think about a mortal man having the same attributes of an infinite God?

Matt 28:20
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

2 Cor 13:5
Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

You see GB I believe the Spirit of God lives inside of me.

One Spirit, Three persons, One God.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 01 2008,16:57)

Hi WJ, Do you still not know the Spirit of God Is the spirit of God?

NH

Thats very profound!

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (martian @ Jan. 01 2008,12:00)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 01 2008,11:13) Martian, you said… Quote WJ, I am not going to dig through all your diatribe and get caught up in the details that lead down dead ends. Intelectual sidetracking is not my game. Diatribe? Have you looked at your own post? I address your post line by line, you ignore mine and proceed to post your own “diatribe” and accuse me of sidetracking! Quote None of what you say here proves that the Holy Spirit or breath has a personality that is additional to that of the Father. I never denied that the Holy Spirit was God. Well then if the Holy Spirit is God, then God has a personality right? If you say the Holy Spirit is the Father then why didn’t Jesus just say so? Why would he speak of the Holy Spirit as one that he sends? Why does Jesus speak of the Holy Spirit as  one that is subservient to him as the verses I show proves, which you will not address. Does Jesus send the Father? Jn 15:26, Jn 16:7 Why do we not see the Apostles refer to the Holy Spirit as the Fathers Spirit? Quote I deny it is anything other then the Father manifesting himself in the natural realm. No, apparently you deny that John 16:13,14 is in the scriptures. Or, I can hear you saying the biased translators added it. If not please give me your interpretation. Look again… Jn 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. 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. Cant be the Father… for he shall not speak of himself but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you. Cant be Yeshua… He shall glorify me:  for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you. Not to mention all the verbs surrounding the pronouns that invariably show the Holy Spirit is a person that Speaks, hears, comforts, leads, teaches, glorifys, recieves, takes, shows, strengthens, gives power, gives life, testifys of Jesus, can be grieved, lied to, and blasphemed, and create and on and on. Quote What I deny is the use of the term “Holy Spirit” when used to add credibility to that false belief. “Hole Spirit” carries with it an idea of a separate animated personality added to the Father . So since you say the Spirit is the Father, again why didn’t Jesus say so? So if we are to say it is just a breath then you would be saying the Father is a breath. If the Spirit is the Father then how does that work in these verses?… Matt 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the (Father), and with fire: Jn 7:39 (But this spake he of the (Father), which they that believe on him should receive: for the (Father) was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.) Jn 14:26 But the (Father), which is the (Father), 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. Quote It is no surprise that it is translated that way. With the influence of the Catholic Church and 1700 years of tradition it has been justified and propagated over and over again. Most scholars are afraid to even broach the subject for fear that they will be ostracized by their peers. Finally, here it is. Since the translations do not agree with you then it is the bias of the translators influenced by the RCC. So who is interpreting the scriptures with their own doctrine instead of letting the scriptures form their doctrine? Since you show no proof of how the text should be interpreted otherwise or that over 600 scholars were biased then your accusations are pointless. If you believe the text is so corrupt then what is the point. I could claim that Arius who was an RCC priest changed the text and injected Jn 17:3 or 1 Cor 8:6. But, I however do not cry bias or foul play. In fact I see those scriptures as supportive of the deity of Christ since Jesus is elevated in the same breath with the Father. I have also heard all the lame and weak arguments that Trinitarians killed thousands of non-trinitarians, but history shows that their was killing on all sides in those days. Check your history, Arians were also guilty of mudering Trinitarians. Millions of Trinitarians died because of there faith and are still dieing because of their faith. “Interestingly Constantine's son sided with the Arians and exiled Athanansius for his beliefs in the Trinity…. eventually the northern Germanic tribes, also Arians, sacked Rome and persecuted trinitarians until they eventually became trinitarians themselves….. “Constantius was pro-Arian in his leanings and took an active part in the affairs of the Christian church — convening one council at Rimini and its twin at Seleuca, which met in 359 and 360.” (Wikpedia) So this argument is a straw. Quote Scripture says we are to be filled with the Spirit. What is it that fills us but the very presence of the Father. Just like Jesus we are to have the Father in us to do His good pleasure. Jesus prayed that we would be one with the Father as He is.  The filling of the Spirit is that oneness being brought about. (not in completion, but the start) Is it the “Presence of the Father” o r the Father? You seem confused! Quote The scriptures you quote pertaining to the Spirit being called He, ect do not prove a separate person either. The He refers to the fact that this breath/wind/spirit is the Father, but not a separate person/personality . Are you  sure? Is the Spirit the Father? For you just said the Spirit is the presence of the Father. If the Holy Spirit is the Father then who is this… Phil 1:19 For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ, Here you see that the Spirit is the Spirit of Jesus, not the Father. Gal 4:6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Here you see that the Father sent the Spirit that crys “Abba” Father. Is the Father crying to himself? Rom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. 10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. Compare these verses with this… II Cor 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that *Jesus Christ is in you*, except ye be reprobates? Here we see that the Spirit of God is the Spirit of Jesus the “Christ”, which means “Messiah” who is in us. Rom 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. Here we see the same Spirit praying through us. I would like to know how a breath does that? So does the Father pray to himself? Obviously with your view there is a lot of unanswered questions. Quote It is true that pneuma has been translated as other things for example the Human spirit as in John 19/30 and Luke 8/55 – And her spirit came again, and she arose straightway: and he commanded to give her meat. I doubt you want to start substituting “human” spirit every place you see pneuma . Then why would you want to substitiute Holy Spirit with the Father or just a breath? You are making my point. Quote There are many other Greek words that are translated holy and carry meanings as to identify it with God, but none are used in most places where Holy Spirit is translated. Example Mat 1/18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Most people read the terms Holy Ghost and equate it equally with the third person of the Trinity, however here the terms Holy Ghost comes from two words meaning most holy one and breath or wind. Hagios – most holy or holy one. Pneuma – breath or wind. So Mary was found with child of the most holy one’s breath. We accept this as being the Father because that is what Jesus himself says. Where does Jesus say the Holy Spirit is the personal spirit of the Father? Quote Tie this in with Acts 2/4 and an interesting picture arises. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. Same exact words used to describe what fills us. Not another person of the Godhead, but the Father Himself. This understanding was common understanding at the time and did not need repeated time and again. For example in that very verse God uses the term pneuma alone referring to that self same Father’s breath. For this reason the term pneuma in the vast majority of cases refers to the breath of the Father. In most cases there is no justification in the Greek for adding the term “Holy” to the translation of pneuma. It is simply poor translation. Translators come across pneuma and instead of properly translating it wind or breath they add an extra word/concept to it that does not exist in the Greek. This is done to add a false personalization, other then the Father, to the word pneuma that does not exist in the Greek. Can you give me an example of the translators adding to the greek? What about the Hebrew scriptures? Did they add to those also?… Ps 51:11 Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me. Is 63:10 But they rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit: therefore he was turned to be their enemy, [and] he fought against them. Is 53:11 Then he remembered the days of old, Moses, and his people, saying, Where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of his flock? where is he that put his holy Spirit within him? Quote If there is any personalization due the term “Holy Spirit” in the NT, it should come from the above examples in scripture. Identifying the Holy Spirit as the breath of the Father and not some separate personality added to the one true God the Father. Well then you need to ignore much of the NT to hold that view. It is clear that the Holy Spirit is not the Father, but that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son and speaks not of himself but glorifys the Son and takes what he hears from the Son and gives it to us. Quote This is proper hermeneutics using scripture to define scripture. Not using doctrine to define it. Not using English translations or trinitarian scholars because they lend cresence to my preconcieved ideas of doctrine. Yes of course, poor translations. Maybe you can give us your version of the scriptures. At least show us where the greek differs from the English translations or how it is you can prove bias on the translators part. Good hermeneutics requires taking “all” of the scripture and data that we have and letting that dictate to us our doctrine. Please answer my questions? For I have not sidetracked you! BTW!  Happy New Year!   This post is not worth the time to wade through. You have still not agreed to a system for interpreting scriptur. I refuse to deal with you on that level. Take your intelectualised philosophy and peddle it to someone else.

martian

You say…

Quote

You have still not agreed to a system for interpreting scriptur.

But you also said…

Quote

This is proper hermeneutics using scripture to define scripture.

Look again my friend, for that is exactly what I did!

[NickHassan]

Hi WJ,
Is hermeneutics the human science of bible study?
Better to compare verse with verse.
That is the way of God.

[NickHassan]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 01 2008,17:29)

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 01 2008,16:57) Hi WJ, Do you still not know the Spirit of God Is the spirit of God? NH Thats very profound!

Hi WJ,
Simplicity is profound.
It is the wisdom grasped by children
The intellect of man adds nothing useful.

Do not devise your own God.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 01 2008,17:52)

Hi WJ, Is hermeneutics the human science of bible study? Better to compare verse with verse. That is the way of God.

NH

Amen!

[NickHassan]

Hi WJ,
You may have questions about the abilities of the Spirit of God.
They certainly are amazing and far above our grasp.
Leave it there.
Do not join the throng who would devise a God.

[Anonymous]

Well it really does amaze me people can't see what thr trinity is and represents the virgin birth of the son of god is an ancient old trinity well before they created the fraud known as the bible, how can it be plaugurism by pagans when pagan is a christian term anyway to denote the connection.
the ancients all had stories of dying godman born of a virgin all around the same time as the 25th dec winter solstice date why because these men the trinity is an allogory and jesus / horus/ mithras / tammuz buddah/ herculese and the rest are not real charatcers but allogory of the sun its eclipse and its relationship with earth. the birthdate the three kings following the bright star the virgin birth the death on the cross for three days and the rising saviour are all astronomical they all show the suns movement three the twelve months four seasons and twelve zodiac sign thats why thirteen is a famouse number because u have the sun in the middle and the twelve followers the twelve zodiac signs!!! the real da vinci code is fesus middle sun with halo to proove it and the twelve discipiles are on the table surrounding him in four groups of three note seasons! so all religion public and official is a cover story for esotoric knowledge weather u r a jew muslem or christian u are all wrong from the beggining . foolish literalists

[martian]

Wj,
Let me try one more time to explain.
This forum is a computer game. This is not a real ministry nor is it even indicative of real life. This is entertainment.
This game FROM MY PERSPECTIVE (and yours will no doubt be different) is as follows.
You are the bad guy. I know that I can never stop you from being the bad guy. It is your programming to be so. The purpose of this game is not to change your program but to engage in battle. These battles take the form of debate. As any good general, I pick and choose (as much as possible) where and when I will fight. I do not return to old battle grounds that have already been fought. I know not to engage in areas where you have your strengths. It has nothing to do with whether you are right or not, it has to do with the battles. It becomes evident after a while that some tactics in these areas are only diversions and result in no conclusive end.
Some battles (level one) have been fought to conclusion already. Even if you do not except defeat, I choose not to play level one again. Once all the levels have been played to conclusion the game loses it’s luster. All that can be done is fight the same levels over again. Not very entertaining.

Now the only decision you have to make is if you want to put another quarter in and play more or not. Makes no difference to me. There are plenty on here and many many other boards that will play.

[martian]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 01 2008,17:43)

Quote (martian @ Jan. 01 2008,12:00) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 01 2008,11:13) Martian, you said… Quote WJ, I am not going to dig through all your diatribe and get caught up in the details that lead down dead ends. Intelectual sidetracking is not my game. Diatribe? Have you looked at your own post? I address your post line by line, you ignore mine and proceed to post your own “diatribe” and accuse me of sidetracking! Quote None of what you say here proves that the Holy Spirit or breath has a personality that is additional to that of the Father. I never denied that the Holy Spirit was God. Well then if the Holy Spirit is God, then God has a personality right? If you say the Holy Spirit is the Father then why didn’t Jesus just say so? Why would he speak of the Holy Spirit as one that he sends? Why does Jesus speak of the Holy Spirit as  one that is subservient to him as the verses I show proves, which you will not address. Does Jesus send the Father? Jn 15:26, Jn 16:7 Why do we not see the Apostles refer to the Holy Spirit as the Fathers Spirit? Quote I deny it is anything other then the Father manifesting himself in the natural realm. No, apparently you deny that John 16:13,14 is in the scriptures. Or, I can hear you saying the biased translators added it. If not please give me your interpretation. Look again… Jn 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. 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. Cant be the Father… for he shall not speak of himself but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you. Cant be Yeshua… He shall glorify me:  for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you. Not to mention all the verbs surrounding the pronouns that invariably show the Holy Spirit is a person that Speaks, hears, comforts, leads, teaches, glorifys, recieves, takes, shows, strengthens, gives power, gives life, testifys of Jesus, can be grieved, lied to, and blasphemed, and create and on and on. Quote What I deny is the use of the term “Holy Spirit” when used to add credibility to that false belief. “Hole Spirit” carries with it an idea of a separate animated personality added to the Father . So since you say the Spirit is the Father, again why didn’t Jesus say so? So if we are to say it is just a breath then you would be saying the Father is a breath. If the Spirit is the Father then how does that work in these verses?… Matt 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the (Father), and with fire: Jn 7:39 (But this spake he of the (Father), which they that believe on him should receive: for the (Father) was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.) Jn 14:26 But the (Father), which is the (Father), 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. Quote It is no surprise that it is translated that way. With the influence of the Catholic Church and 1700 years of tradition it has been justified and propagated over and over again. Most scholars are afraid to even broach the subject for fear that they will be ostracized by their peers. Finally, here it is. Since the translations do not agree with you then it is the bias of the translators influenced by the RCC. So who is interpreting the scriptures with their own doctrine instead of letting the scriptures form their doctrine? Since you show no proof of how the text should be interpreted otherwise or that over 600 scholars were biased then your accusations are pointless. If you believe the text is so corrupt then what is the point. I could claim that Arius who was an RCC priest changed the text and injected Jn 17:3 or 1 Cor 8:6. But, I however do not cry bias or foul play. In fact I see those scriptures as supportive of the deity of Christ since Jesus is elevated in the same breath with the Father. I have also heard all the lame and weak arguments that Trinitarians killed thousands of non-trinitarians, but history shows that their was killing on all sides in those days. Check your history, Arians were also guilty of mudering Trinitarians. Millions of Trinitarians died because of there faith and are still dieing because of their faith. “Interestingly Constantine's son sided with the Arians and exiled Athanansius for his beliefs in the Trinity…. eventually the northern Germanic tribes, also Arians, sacked Rome and persecuted trinitarians until they eventually became trinitarians themselves….. “Constantius was pro-Arian in his leanings and took an active part in the affairs of the Christian church — convening one council at Rimini and its twin at Seleuca, which met in 359 and 360.” (Wikpedia) So this argument is a straw. Quote Scripture says we are to be filled with the Spirit. What is it that fills us but the very presence of the Father. Just like Jesus we are to have the Father in us to do His good pleasure. Jesus prayed that we would be one with the Father as He is.  The filling of the Spirit is that oneness being brought about. (not in completion, but the start) Is it the “Presence of the Father” or the Father? You seem confused! Quote The scriptures you quote pertaining to the Spirit being called He, ect do not prove a separate person either. The He refers to the fact that this breath/wind/spirit is the Father, but not a separate person/personality . Are you  sure? Is the Spirit the Father? For you just said the Spirit is the presence of the Father. If the Holy Spirit is the Father then who is this… Phil 1:19 For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ, Here you see that the Spirit is the Spirit of Jesus, not the Father. Gal 4:6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Here you see that the Father sent the Spirit that crys “Abba” Father. Is the Father crying to himself? Rom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. 10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. Compare these verses with this… II Cor 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that *Jesus Christ is in you*, except ye be reprobates? Here we see that the Spirit of God is the Spirit of Jesus the “Christ”, which means “Messiah” who is in us. Rom 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. Here we see the same Spirit praying through us. I would like to know how a breath does that? So does the Father pray to himself? Obviously with your view there is a lot of unanswered questions. Quote It is true that pneuma has been translated as other things for example the Human spirit as in John 19/30 and Luke 8/55 – And her spirit came again, and she arose straightway: and he commanded to give her meat. I doubt you want to start substituting “human” spirit every place you see pneuma . Then why would you want to substitiute Holy Spirit with the Father or just a breath? You are making my point. Quote There are many other Greek words that are translated holy and carry meanings as to identify it with God, but none are used in most places where Holy Spirit is translated. Example Mat 1/18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Most people read the terms Holy Ghost and equate it equally with the third person of the Trinity, however here the terms Holy Ghost comes from two words meaning most holy one and breath or wind. Hagios – most holy or holy one. Pneuma – breath or wind. So Mary was found with child of the most holy one’s breath. We accept this as being the Father because that is what Jesus himself says. Where does Jesus say the Holy Spirit is the personal spirit of the Father? Quote Tie this in with Acts 2/4 and an interesting picture arises. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. Same exact words used to describe what fills us. Not another person of the Godhead, but the Father Himself. This understanding was common understanding at the time and did not need repeated time and again. For example in that very verse God uses the term pneuma alone referring to that self same Father’s breath. For this reason the term pneuma in the vast majority of cases refers to the breath of the Father. In most cases there is no justification in the Greek for adding the term “Holy” to the translation of pneuma. It is simply poor translation. Translators come across pneuma and instead of properly translating it wind or breath they add an extra word/concept to it that does not exist in the Greek. This is done to add a false personalization, other then the Father, to the word pneuma that does not exist in the Greek. Can you give me an example of the translators adding to the greek? What about the Hebrew scriptures? Did they add to those also?… Ps 51:11 Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me. Is 63:10 But they rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit: therefore he was turned to be their enemy, [and] he fought against them. Is 53:11 Then he remembered the days of old, Moses, and his people, saying, Where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of his flock? where is he that put his holy Spirit within him? Quote If there is any personalization due the term “Holy Spirit” in the NT, it should come from the above examples in scripture. Identifying the Holy Spirit as the breath of the Father and not some separate personality added to the one true God the Father. Well then you need to ignore much of the NT to hold that view. It is clear that the Holy Spirit is not the Father, but that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son and speaks not of himself but glorifys the Son and takes what he hears from the Son and gives it to us. Quote This is proper hermeneutics using scripture to define scripture. Not using doctrine to define it. Not using English translations or trinitarian scholars because they lend cresence to my preconcieved ideas of doctrine. Yes of course, poor translations. Maybe you can give us your version of the scriptures. At least show us where the greek differs from the English translations or how it is you can prove bias on the translators part. Good hermeneutics requires taking “all” of the scripture and data that we have and letting that dictate to us our doctrine. Please answer my questions? For I have not sidetracked you! BTW!  Happy New Year!   This post is not worth the time to wade through. You have still not agreed to a system for interp reting scriptur. I refuse to deal with you on that level. Take your intelectualised philosophy and peddle it to someone else. martian You say… Quote You have still not agreed to a system for interpreting scriptur. But you also said… Quote This is proper hermeneutics using scripture to define scripture. Look again my friend, for that is exactly what I did!

Wrong again. Any one can move in cut and paste theology. Pulling out scriptures that seem to give strength to their argument. It is like juggling stats to make the picture seem one way when in actuality it is something else all together.
These is much more to proper interpretation then finding scriptures on the sme subject. Befoe one of thse scriptures can be used one must determine what the author is trying to say from his perspective.
The conclusions from your argument must make sense within the overall plan of God. Scriptural interpretation is subject to the plan of God not the other way around. Scripture interpetation is also subject to the accepted attributes and character of God.
In these two areas your doctrines continue to fail.
The third and most crucial principle that you have not yet grasped or if you have you have chosen to pervert to your own means is that of functionality. Scriptural interpretation is also subject to functionality.

If your conclusions fail to rightly promote and help the plan of God it is wrong?
If your conclussions run contrary to th character or known attributes of God it is wrong.
If your doctrine does nothing othr then engineer intelectual philosophy tehn it is wrong.

So far in all that you have posted you fail all three tests.

[IM4Truth]

Quote (martian @ Jan. 02 2008,03:04)

Wj, Let me try one more time to explain. This forum is a computer game. This is not a real ministry nor is it even indicative of real life. This is entertainment. This game FROM MY PERSPECTIVE (and yours will no doubt be different) is as follows. You are the bad guy. I know that I can never stop you from being the bad guy. It is your programming to be so. The purpose of this game is not to change your program but to engage in battle. These battles take the form of debate. As any good general, I pick and choose (as much as possible) where and when I will fight.  I do not return to old battle grounds that have already been fought. I know not to engage in areas where you have your strengths. It has nothing to do with whether you are right or not, it has to do with the battles. It becomes evident after a while that some tactics in these areas are only diversions and result in no conclusive end. Some battles (level one) have been fought to conclusion already. Even if you do not except defeat, I choose not to play level one again. Once all the levels have been played to conclusion the game loses it’s luster. All that can be done is fight the same levels over again. Not very entertaining. Now the only decision you have to make is if you want to put another quarter in and play more or not. Makes no difference to me. There are plenty on here and many many other boards that will play.

martian You and Stu must be twins

[martian]

Quote (IM4Truth @ Jan. 02 2008,05:34)

Quote (martian @ Jan. 02 2008,03:04) Wj, Let me try one more time to explain. This forum is a computer game. This is not a real ministry nor is it even indicative of real life. This is entertainment. This game FROM MY PERSPECTIVE (and yours will no doubt be different) is as follows. You are the bad guy. I know that I can never stop you from being the bad guy. It is your programming to be so. The purpose of this game is not to change your program but to engage in battle. These battles take the form of debate. As any good general, I pick and choose (as much as possible) where and when I will fight.  I do not return to old battle grounds that have already been fought. I know not to engage in areas where you have your strengths. It has nothing to do with whether you are right or not, it has to do with the battles. It becomes evident after a while that some tactics in these areas are only diversions and result in no conclusive end. Some battles (level one) have been fought to conclusion already. Even if you do not except defeat, I choose not to play level one again. Once all the levels have been played to conclusion the game loses it’s luster. All that can be done is fight the same levels over again. Not very entertaining. Now the only decision you have to make is if you want to put another quarter in and play more or not. Makes no difference to me. There are plenty on here and many many other boards that will play. martian You and Stu must be twins

Well I just see a whole lot more important things to get worked up about that do not include web sites.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (martian @ Jan. 02 2008,03:04)

Wj, Let me try one more time to explain. This forum is a computer game. This is not a real ministry nor is it even indicative of real life. This is entertainment. This game FROM MY PERSPECTIVE (and yours will no doubt be different) is as follows. You are the bad guy. I know that I can never stop you from being the bad guy. It is your programming to be so. The purpose of this game is not to change your program but to engage in battle. These battles take the form of debate. As any good general, I pick and choose (as much as possible) where and when I will fight.  I do not return to old battle grounds that have already been fought. I know not to engage in areas where you have your strengths. It has nothing to do with whether you are right or not, it has to do with the battles. It becomes evident after a while that some tactics in these areas are only diversions and result in no conclusive end. Some battles (level one) have been fought to conclusion already. Even if you do not except defeat, I choose not to play level one again. Once all the levels have been played to conclusion the game loses it’s luster. All that can be done is fight the same levels over again. Not very entertaining. Now the only decision you have to make is if you want to put another quarter in and play more or not. Makes no difference to me. There are plenty on here and many many other boards that will play.

   

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (martian @ Jan. 02 2008,03:16)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 01 2008,17:43) Quote (martian @ Jan. 01 2008,12:00) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 01 2008,11:13) Martian, you said… Quote WJ, I am not going to dig through all your diatribe and get caught up in the details that lead down dead ends. Intelectual sidetracking is not my game. Diatribe? Have you looked at your own post? I address your post line by line, you ignore mine and proceed to post your own “diatribe” and accuse me of sidetracking! Quote None of what you say here proves that the Holy Spirit or breath has a personality that is additional to that of the Father. I never denied that the Holy Spirit was God. Well then if the Holy Spirit is God, then God has a personality right? If you say the Holy Spirit is the Father then why didn’t Jesus just say so? Why would he speak of the Holy Spirit as one that he sends? Why does Jesus speak of the Holy Spirit as  one that is subservient to him as the verses I show proves, which you will not address. Does Jesus send the Father? Jn 15:26, Jn 16:7 Why do we not see the Apostles refer to the Holy Spirit as the Fathers Spirit? Quote I deny it is anything other then the Father manifesting himself in the natural realm. No, apparently you deny that John 16:13,14 is in the scriptures. Or, I can hear you saying the biased translators added it. If not please give me your interpretation. Look again… Jn 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. 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. Cant be the Father… for he shall not speak of himself but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you. Cant be Yeshua… He shall glorify me:  for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you. Not to mention all the verbs surrounding the pronouns that invariably show the Holy Spirit is a person that Speaks, hears, comforts, leads, teaches, glorifys, recieves, takes, shows, strengthens, gives power, gives life, testifys of Jesus, can be grieved, lied to, and blasphemed, and create and on and on. Quote What I deny is the use of the term “Holy Spirit” when used to add credibility to that false belief. “Hole Spirit” carries with it an idea of a separate animated personality added to the Father . So since you say the Spirit is the Father, again why didn’t Jesus say so? So if we are to say it is just a breath then you would be saying the Father is a breath. If the Spirit is the Father then how does that work in these verses?… Matt 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the (Father), and with fire: Jn 7:39 (But this spake he of the (Father), which they that believe on him should receive: for the (Father) was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.) Jn 14:26 But the (Father), which is the (Father), 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. Quote It is no surprise that it is translated that way. With the influence of the Catholic Church and 1700 years of tradition it has been justified and propagated over and over again. Most scholars are afraid to even broach the subject for fear that they will be ostracized by their peers. Finally, here it is. Since the translations do not agree with you then it is the bias of the translators influenced by the RCC. So who is interpreting the scriptures with their own doctrine instead of letting the scriptures form their doctrine? Since you show no proof of how the text should be interpreted otherwise or that over 600 scholars were biased then your accusations are pointless. If you believe the text is so corrupt then what is the point. I could claim that Arius who was an RCC priest changed the text and injected Jn 17:3 or 1 Cor 8:6. But, I however do not cry bias or foul play. In fact I see those scriptures as supportive of the deity of Christ since Jesus is elevated in the same breath with the Father. I have also heard all the lame and weak arguments that Trinitarians killed thousands of non-trinitarians, but history shows that their was killing on all sides in those days. Check your history, Arians were also guilty of mudering Trinitarians. Millions of Trinitarians died because of there faith and are still dieing because of their faith. “Interestingly Constantine's son sided with the Arians and exiled Athanansius for his beliefs in the Trinity…. eventually the northern Germanic tribes, also Arians, sacked Rome and persecuted trinitarians until they eventually became trinitarians themselves….. “Constantius was pro-Arian in his leanings and took an active part in the affairs of the Christian church — convening one council at Rimini and its twin at Seleuca, which met in 359 and 360.” (Wikpedia) So this argument is a straw. Quote Scripture says we are to be filled with the Spirit. What is it that fills us but the very presence of the Father. Just like Jesus we are to have the Father in us to do His good pleasure. Jesus prayed that we would be one with the Father as He is.  The filling of the Spirit is that oneness being brought about. (not in completion, but the start) Is it the “Presence of the Father” or the Father? You seem confused! Quote The scriptures you quote pertaining to the Spirit being called He, ect do not prove a separate person either. The He refers to the fact that this breath/wind/spirit is the Father, but not a separate person/personality . Are you  sure? Is the Spirit the Father? For you just said the Spirit is the presence of the Father. If the Holy Spirit is the Father then who is this… Phil 1:19 For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ, Here you see that the Spirit is the Spirit of Jesus, not the Father. Gal 4:6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Here you see that the Father sent the Spirit that crys “Abba” Father. Is the Father crying to himself? Rom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. 10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. Compare these verses with this… II Cor 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that *Jesus Christ is in you*, except ye be reprobates? Here we see that the Spirit of God is the Spirit of Jesus the “Christ”, which means “Messiah” who is in us. Rom 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. Here we see the same Spirit praying through us. I would like to know how a breath does that? So does the Father pray to himself? Obviously with your view there is a lot of unanswered questions. Quote It is true that pneuma has been translated as other things for example the Human spirit as in John 19/30 and Luke 8/55 – And her spirit came again, and she arose straightway: and he commanded to give her meat. I doubt you want to start substituting “human” spirit every place you see pneuma . Then why would you want to substitiute Holy Spirit with the Father or just a breath? You are making my point. Quote There are many other Greek words that are translated holy and carry meanings as to identify it with God, but none are used in most places where Holy Spirit is translated. Example Mat 1/18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Most people read the terms Holy Ghost and equate it equally with the third person of the Trinity, however here the terms Holy Ghost comes from two words meaning most holy one and breath or wind. Hagios – most holy or holy one. Pneuma – breath or wind. So Mary was found with child of the most holy one’s breath. We accept this as being the Father because that is what Jesus himself says. Where does Jesus say the Holy Spirit is the personal spirit of the Father? Quote Tie this in with Acts 2/4 and an interesting picture arises. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. Same exact words used to describe what fills us. Not another person of the Godhead, but the Father Himself. This understanding was common understanding at the time and did not need repeated time and again. For example in that very verse God uses the term pneuma alone referring to that self same Father’s breath. For this reason the term pneuma in the vast majority of cases refers to the breath of the Father. In most cases there is no justification in the Greek for adding the term “Holy” to the translation of pneuma. It is simply poor translation. Translators come across pneuma and instead of properly translating it wind or breath they add an extra word/concept to it that does not exist in the Greek. This is done to add a false personalization, other then the Father, to the word pneuma that does not exist in the Greek. Can you give me an example of the translators adding to the greek? What about the Hebrew scriptures? Did they add to those also?… Ps 51:11 Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me. Is 63:10 But they rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit: therefore he was turned to be their enemy, [and] he fought against them. Is 53:11 Then he remembered the days of old, Moses, and his people, saying, Where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of his flock? where is he that put his holy Spirit within him? Quote If there is any personalization due the term “Holy Spirit” in the NT, it should come from the above examples in scripture. Identifying the Holy Spirit as the breath of the Father and not some separate personality added to the one true God the Father. Well then you need to ignore much of the NT to hold that view. It is clear that the Holy Spirit is not the Father, but that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son and speaks not of himself but glorifys the Son and takes what he hears from the Son and gives it to us. Quote This is proper hermeneutics using scripture to define scripture. Not using doctrine to define it. Not using English translations or trinitarian scholars because they lend cresence to my preconcieved ideas of doctrine. Yes of course, poor translations. Maybe you can give us your version of the scriptures. At least show us where the greek differs from the English translations or how it is you can prove bias on the translators part. Good hermeneutics requires taking “all” of the scripture and data that we have and letting that dictate to us our doctrine. Please answer my questions? For I have not sidetracked you! BTW!  Happy New Year!   This post is not worth the time to wade through. You have still not agreed to a system for interpreting scriptur. I refuse to deal with you on that level. Take your intelectualised philosophy and peddle it to someone else. martian You say… Quote You have still not agreed to a system for interpreting scriptur. But you also said… Quote This is proper hermeneutics using scripture to define scripture. Look again my friend, for that is exactly what I did! Wrong again. Any one can move in cut and paste theology. Pulling out scriptures that seem to give strength to their argument. It is like juggling stats to make the picture seem one way when in actuality it is something else all together. These is much more to proper interpretation then finding scriptures on the sme subject. Befoe one of thse scriptures can be used one must determine what the author is trying to say from his perspective. The conclusions from your argument must make sense within the overall plan of God. Scriptural interpretation is subject to the plan of God not the other way around. Scripture interpetation is also subject to the accepted attributes and character of God. In these two areas your doctrines continue to fail. The third and most crucial principle that you have not yet grasped or if you have you have chosen to pervert to your own means is that of functionality.  Scriptural interpretation is also subject to functionality. If your conclusions fail to rightly promote and help the plan of God it is wrong? If your conclussions run contrary to th character or known attributes of God it is wrong. If your doctrine does nothing othr then engineer intelectual philosophy tehn it is wrong. So far in all that you have posted you fail all three tests.

[Proclaimer]

Hi WJ.

I am going to pay you a compliment.

Are you ready?

OK. You are very determined and consistent.

Now for the bad news. You are batting for the wrong team.

That is not to say that you are not a child of God. That is not for me to judge. But you are doing a favour for the Kingdom of Darkness by continuing to promote works that were not probogated by God. Namely the Trinity Doctrine that has led many a good believer astray into untruth.

Our lives are short WJ, wouldn't it be wonderful to hear “well done my good and faithful servant” when your life is through?

Sure it would. But I can assure you that you must be serving the Truth and truth to be considered a worthy servant. If you are promoting the works of the enemy, then you are giving the wrong side a helping hand.

Consider what I am saying. Why don't you just teach that which is written and then it will be a win win situation. A win for you and a win for those who read here.

[Author]

Posts