- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Surely a son by birth is more important than all the other sons? Scripture seems to set Jesus a part from all other “sons.”
Angels will worship him.
We will bow down to him.
He belongs to the family.
We will be adopted.A brief history of time
Chapter 1: WorshippingJesus wisdom and conduct
WJ said that Ignatius was a disciple of John and his writings were significant and then used his writings to support his view.
In reality he completely misunderstood Ignatius because Ignatius uses the word “theos” differently to him, and Ignatius said that those who say that Jesus is the God over all are ministers of Satan. He continues to promote this lie even in light of this.
In his defense he said that the God over all was the Father and that Ignatius was simply stating that Jesus wasn't the Father.
Well there you have it, in order for him not be seen (by Ignatius wisdom) as a minister of Satan, he conceded on something that he has been opposing since he came here. Had he not got himself into a corner I guess that he would still oppose the truth that the Father is the God over all and not the son.
So perhaps he needs to stop the pretense and stubbornness. We can all see clearly the holes in his argument. It is of no profit for him to continue in this manner.
Let's recap:
He first rejects what Jesus, Paul, and Peter taught regarding the Father being the only true God and Jesus being the true son of the true God. He then rejects Ignatius teachings of whom he says is significant because he was a disciple of John. And now he continues to promote his faulty argument despite these findings.What kind of man hears such words from scripture and from a disciple of John (who he says is significant) and continues right on with his crusade?
He respects Ignatius and Ignatius calls him a Minister of Satan and then he continues on as if nothing happened.
If he ignores them, then what chance does anyone here have of showing him the truth?
Hi kejonn and Mandy,
I thought I'd try and answer both of you posts with one.Quote (kejonn @ July 17 2007,23:38) Yes, I did. What do I need to address? I provided the verse that shows the old adage: “what's mine is yours and what's yours is mine”. I could get detailed and provide lessons on many of the passages, and in particular Romans 8:9, but in the end the Holy Spirit originates from the Father but is shared by Yeshau, the monogenes Son who inherited all things from the Father. The only thing Yeshua did not inherit was certain rights and titles that he could never have, like being God and therefore being “God of gods”.
Okay, I see your point of view now. Thanks for explaining. I actually agree with you that He did not inherit the title “God”. He always was (John 1:1c), is (John 20:28) and always will be “God” (Zech 14; Heb 1:8-12; Rev 1:17, 2:9, 22:13). I don't believe “being God” is something that one can inherit anyway, you either are God (from eternity) or you are not. And there is only One.
Quote I'm sorry if my answer does not satisfy you. In fact, if you look again at Romans 8:9, you would see that with the separation of “Spirit of God” and “Spirit of Christ” in the same verse, you would realize that both Yeshua and the Father influence you through their roles. Would “One God” need to make such distinction? Why the need to have Yeshua and God's Spirit, both the same but with each contributing a little different essence to our lives be necessary?
I agree there is a distinction between the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ. You can see this most clearly in John 14:23 where plural pronouns are used in the context of us being indwelled, which would be confusing (to say the least) if there was no distinction. But it's also plain that there is One Spirit and One God indwelling us.Ezekiel 11:19
And I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh:1 Corinthians 12:13
For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.Ephesians 2:18
For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.Ephesians 4:4
There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;Ephesians 4:6
One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.One Spirit and One God, but at least two persons….
and I think we can reasonable surmise that The Holy Spirit is personal but neither the Father's nor the Son's personal Spirit from these passages:
The Holy Spirit:
1. Is personal
As He:
1) Helps: Jn 14:16,26, 15:26, 16:7, Rom 8:26, 1 Jn 2:1.
2) Glorifies: Jn 16:13-14.
3) Can be Known: Jn 14:17.
4) Gives Abilities: Acts 2:4, 1 Cor 12:7-11.
5) Referred to as “He”: Jn 14:26, 15:26, 16:7-8,13.
6) Loves: Rom 15:30.
7) Guides: Jn 16:13.
8) Comforts: Jn 14:26, 15:26, 16:7, Acts 9:31.
9) Teaches: Lk 12:12, Jn 14:26.
10) Reminds: Jn 14:26.
11) Bears Witness: Jn 15:26, Acts 5:32, Rom 8:16.
12) Has Impulses: Jn 16:13.
13) Hears: Jn 16:13.
14) Leads: Mt 4:1, Acts 8:39, Rom 8:14.
15) Pleads: Rom 8:26-27.
16) Longs (Yearns): Jas 4:5.
17) Wills: 1 Cor 12:11.
18) Thinks: Acts 15:25,28.
19) Sends: Acts 13:4.
20) Dispatches: Acts 10:20.
21) Impels: Mk 1:12.
22) Speaks: Jn 16:13-15, Acts 8:29, 10:19, 11:12, 13:2.
23) Forbids: Acts 16:6-7.
24) Appoints: Acts 20:28.
25) Reveals: Lk 2:26, 1 Cor 2:10.
26) Calls to Ministry: Acts 13:2.
27) Can be Grieved: Is 63:10, Eph 4:30.
28) Can be Insulted: Heb 10:29.
29) Can be Lied to: Acts 5:3-4.
30) Can be Blasphemed: Mt 12:31-32.
31) Strives: Gen 6:3.
32) Is Knowledgeable: Is 40:13, Acts 10:19, 1 Cor 2:10-13.
33) Can be Vexed: Is 63:10.
34) Judges: Jn 16:8.
35) Prophesies: Acts 21:11, 28:25, 1 Tim 4:1.
36) Has Fellowship: 2 Cor 13:14.
37) Gives Grace: Heb 10:29.
38) Agrees: 1 Jn 5:7-8.
39) Offers Life: 2 Cor 3:6, Rev 22:17.
40) Was involved in Creation: Job 33:4.
(source: I got this list from a post “Scripture Seeker” wrote, but modified it slightly)These are all attributes of a person, not a thing, amd the sheer magnitude of the evidence for personal attributes makes it plain that the Holy Spirit is a person. The notable scriptures (to me) from the list are those that report that the Spirit has a “mind” (Romans 8:27) – which denotes intelligence, and has a “will” which denotes individuality. I can’t fathom how it could be possible for these descriptives could legitimately be used of a “force”, that would be quite misleading to readers, I think. There are a number of passages in which the masculine pronouns (sometimes EMPHATICALLY masculine pronouns – e.g. Jn 14.26) are used in referring to the Spirit, lending more support to a “Personal Agent” understanding of Him, than to an impersonal “central nervous” understanding.
2. Is not the Father's personal Spirit:
John 16:7
7″But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you.Yeshua here speaking of the “helper” declared that He will send “Him”. If this were the Father’s personal Spirit then this would run counter to the clearly defined line of authority between the Father and Son. It’s the father that does the sending…..This theme emphasised to a higher degree in vss 13 and 14:
John 16:13-14
13″But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come. 14″He will glorify Me, for He will take of Mine and will disclose it to you.We see a clear picture of subservience to the Son in this passage (i.e. He will “hear, speak and disclose” [all of which are attributes of a person, BTW] only what He “takes” of Yeshua), so the Father's Spirit does not fit in this regard either. Just to underscore this Yeshua proclaimed that the Helper will “glorify” Him. There are also some telling passages in Romans 8….
Romans 8:14-15
14For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. 15For you have not received a spirit of slavery leading to fear again, but you have received a spirit of adoption as sons by which we cry out, “Abba! Father!“Paul articulates that the Spirit induces us to cry out “Abba! Father!”. Would the Father’s Spirit cry out to Himself this way? Makes no sense to me. In later verses of this chapter it's even more obvious that the Holy Spirit is not the Father's personal Spirit…
Romans 8:26-27
26In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but
the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words; 27and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.The Spirit “intercedes” (to intercede in behalf of: – make intercession for. [Strongs]) on our behalf. Who does He intercede to? Wouldn't it be TO the Father? Seems to account for some other scripture. So to affirm that The Holy Spirit is the Father’s personal spirit you must hold that The Father (Who is Spirit) makes intercession by His Spirit TO HIMSELF…..which is the very essence of confusion, I think. It’s also germane that the Spirit does this “according to the will of God”, would this affirmation not be the very epitome of redundancy if the Spirit was the Father’s Spirit? I think it would be…..
3. Is not the Son's personal Spirit either:
It’s more plausible to me that the parakletos is Yeshua’s Spirit, but I think it’s unlikely on account of the following texts:
John 14:16-17
16″I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; 17that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you.Again the language here is interesting to me. Yeshua foretold He would send “another Helper”, to me this infers that it would be a helper other than Himself. If He meant that He (or the Father) would send His own personal Spirit then why not just say it plainly?
John 15:26
26″When the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify about Me1. The “Helper” proceeds from the Father.
2. The Helper testifies about Yeshua.The Spirit of the Son would naturally proceed from the Son I believe, but John tells us the He proceeded from (Gr. ekporeuomai – to depart, be discharged, proceed, project: – come [forth, out of], depart, go [forth, out], issue) the Father so there is a metaphysical conundrum for those who affirm that it’s the Son’s personal Spirit, The Spirit is proceeding from the wrong source! Also, given that the Helper testifies about Yeshua leads me to conclude that it’s a person other than Yeshua in view here. Yeshua testifying about Himself appears a little nonsensical, at least to me.
John 16:7
7″But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you.If this is Yeshua speaking of His personal Spirit here why does he use the third person pronoun “Him” and why does he express that He will “send Him”. These are words used to describe a person other than yourself. Also, does Yeshua send Himself? Would He not instead say “I will come to you” (as He did in other passages). It seems evident that Yeshua was speaking of another person here…..
John 16:13-14
13″But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come. 14″He will glorify Me, for He will take of Mine and will disclose it to you.This is a passage I cited before, but as well as arguing against the Holy Spirit being the Spirit of the Father, it also argues against Him being Yeshua's personal Spirit. The data in this verse that suggest it's extremely unlikely that the “Spirit of Truth” is Yeshua's personal Spirit are:
1. The usage of third person pronoun by Yeshua. If He was speaking of His own Spirit, He would undoubtedly say “I, me, my”, but not “he” (i.e. he will glorify me)
2. The developed theme of subservience by the Spirit to Yeshua. Including the affirmation that the Spirit of truth will glorify Yeshua (wouldn’t that be a patent description of self-glorification?)
3. A clear distinction in operational attributes in ministry between Yeshua and the “helper”. Note how the Spirit will “disclose” what he “hears” in verse 13. In the next verse we see that it is Yeshua that He will hear from. He will “take of” Yeshua and “disclose it to” us.
So clearly this is not Yeshua speaking of His own Spirit here…..
I guess the other possibility is the parakletos is a co-joint union of the Father and Son, John 14:23 would appear to suggest this, but again we have a violation of the clearly taught line of authority between the Father and son with the “sending” of the Helper. The Son cannot logically send Himself, nor is it plausible that He would send the Father’s Spirit.
I hope I've given you some insight into why I see things 9i.e the Holy Spirit) the way I do.
Quote There is a lesson for you in Romans 8:9-11, and it is not that the Holy Spirit being a third member of a triune God. Haha, in fact, by showing that Yeshua and God each own the Holy Spirit, one sees rather quickly that the Holy Spirit cannot be a third person, but a mutually shared essence. Where do we see “Spirit of God”, “Spirit of Christ” and “Spirit of Holy Spirit”? We don't. Ooops, you're theology stumbles again.
You wrote: “by showing that Yeshua and God each own the Holy Spirit, one sees rather quickly that the Holy Spirit cannot be a third person, but a mutually shared essence.”That's actually an interesting way to look at it. A blend of God's divine essence and Yeshua's human essence though? It's a little out of left field. What scriptures would lend support to this postulation?
Quote Here is the lesson of Romans 8:9-11 – Having the Spirit of God means we are not in the flesh. Having the Spirit of Christ allows us to be more like Yeshua. We can't be like God because God was never flesh and never faced temptation and overcame. Yeshua did and he is our kindred, our brother, and the head of our collective body because he shares our humanity.
Hang on a minute, in the last paragraph you inferred that the Spirit of Christ and the Spirit of God had blended to become the Holy Spirit, but now you're making a distinction between them again. Just when I think I'm beginning to get a good read on your view you write something that contradicts a previous statement and I'm left scratching my head again.Blessings
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 21 2007,08:00) The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians being blessed in the greatness and fulness of God the Father, and predestinated before the beginning, that it should be always for an enduring and unchangeable glory, being united and elected through the true passion by the will of the Father, and *Jesus Christ, our God*: Abundant happiness through Jesus Christ, and His undefiled grace*.
Being the followers of God, and stirring up yourselves *by the blood of God* (see Acts 20:28), ye have perfectly accomplished the work which was beseeming to you.
There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; *God existing in flesh* (1 Tim 3:16) [/b]; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first passible and then impassible, even Jesus Christ our Lord.
We have also as a Physician *the Lord our God, Jesus the Christ*, the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, Or, “before the ages. but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For “the Word was made flesh. John i. 14. Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passible body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts.
For he who shall both “do and teach, the same shall be great in the kingdom. Matt. v. 19. *Our Lord and God, Jesus Christ*, the Son of the living God, first did and then taught, as Luke testifies, “whose praise is in the Gospel through all the Churches.
*For our God, Jesus Christ*, was, according to the appointment Or, “economy,” or “dispensation.” Comp. Col. i. 25; 1 Tim. i. 4. of God, conceived in the womb by Mary, of the seed of David, but by the Holy Ghost. He was born and baptized, that by His passion He might purify the water.Hence worldly wisdom became folly; conjuration was seen to be mere trifling; and magic became utterly ridiculous. Every law of wickedness vanished away; the darkness of ignorance was dispersed; and tyrannical authority was destroyed, *God being manifested as a man, and man displaying power as God.
So let me see if I understand, Ignatius goes around calling Jesus his God yet accusing those who say that Jesus is God as Polytheist?
WJ has a good point here, Ignatius continually refers to Yeshua as “our God”. If he understood Yeshua to be another God, who along side of YHWH was his God, then He has made overtly poytheistic statements. Was Ignatius a polytheist? or did he hold to a personal plurality within ontological unity concept of YHWH? Those are the only two options as I see it.But not the God overall Isaiah.
God > Christ > Man
1 Corinthians 11:3
Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.Ignatius uses 'theos' in different senses. It is not always the God over all and he stipulates that very point.
His warning about those who preach that Jesus is God overall is condemning.
Hi Is 1.18,
So does each “Person ” in the proposed trinity have a spirit including the Spirit?
Is the one Spirit also a person in God?Quote (t8 @ July 21 2007,14:29) But not the God overall Isaiah. God > Christ > Man
1 Corinthians 11:3
Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.
T8,
To you, does 1 Corinthians 11:3 teach that Yeshua is a lesser god than the father? If not what point are you trying to make by using it?Quote Ignatius uses 'theos' in different senses. It is not always the God over all and he stipulates that very point.
Alright t8, in what sense does Ignatius use “theos” of Christ?, please provide some proof of your contention here.Quote His warning about those who preach that Jesus is God overall is condemning.
I missed this, where is quote showing Ignatius' warning?Quote (Is 1:18 @ July 21 2007,14:06)
Okay, I see your point of view now. Thanks for explaining. I actually agree with you that He did not inherit the title “God”. He always was (John 1:1c), is (John 20:28) and always will be “God” (Zech 14; Heb 1:8-12; Rev 1:17, 2:9, 22:13). I don't believe “being God” is something that one can inherit anyway, you either are God (from eternity) or you are not. And there is only One.
Yep, only one. Now it depends what you mean by “one”
. Hehe, I note how you deftly left out the whole “title”. I'll show you the versesDeu 10:17 For the LORD your God [is] God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward:
Jos 22:22 The LORD God of gods, the LORD God of gods, he knoweth, and Israel he shall know; if [it be] in rebellion, or if in transgression against the LORD, (save us not this day,)
Psa 136:2 O give thanks unto the God of gods: for his mercy [endureth] for ever.
Dan 2:47 The king answered unto Daniel, and said, Of a truth [it is], that your God [is] a God of gods, and a Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets, seeing thou couldest reveal this secret.Not just “God” but “God of gods”. That belongs to YHWH alone.
Quote I agree there is a distinction between the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ. You can see this most clearly in John 14:23 where plural pronouns are used in the context of us being indwelled, which would be confusing (to say the least) if there was no distinction. But it's also plain that there is One Spirit and One God indwelling us.
Yes, just one God. Then again, its either one God (YHWH) and one Lord (Yeshua) or one God (F,S,HS). Depends on your view, eh? I'm choosing the former.Quote Ezekiel 11:19
And I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh:1 Corinthians 12:13
For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
Context of this chapter is the Holy Spirit, so yes, just one Spirit. I don't believe that Yeshua's Spirit ever indwells us like the Holy Spirit, but his spirit does bear witness with our own.Quote Ephesians 2:18
For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.Ephesians 4:4
There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
One Spirit that indwells Christians – the Holy Spirit.Quote Ephesians 4:6
One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
Are you saying Yeshua is the Father? Why else list his verse? So He is Father and Son? Why bother with all the drama?Quote One Spirit and One God, but at least two persons….
Are you becoming a Binitarian?Quote and I think we can reasonable surmise that The Holy Spirit is personal but neither the Father's nor the Son's personal Spirit from these passages: The Holy Spirit:
1. Is personal
As He:
1) Helps: Jn 14:16,26, 15:26, 16:7, Rom 8:26, 1 Jn 2:1.
2) Glorifies: Jn 16:13-14.
3) Can be Known: Jn 14:17.
4) Gives Abilities: Acts 2:4, 1 Cor 12:7-11.
5) Referred to as “He”: Jn 14:26, 15:26, 16:7-8,13.
6) Loves: Rom 15:30.
7) Guides: Jn 16:13.
8) Comforts: Jn 14:26, 15:26, 16:7, Acts 9:31.
9) Teaches: Lk 12:12, Jn 14:26.
10) Reminds: Jn 14:26.
11) Bears Witness: Jn 15:26, Acts 5:32, Rom 8:16.
12) Has Impulses: Jn 16:13.
13) Hears: Jn 16:13.
14) Leads: Mt 4:1, Acts 8:39, Rom 8:14.
15) Pleads: Rom 8:26-27.
16) Longs (Yearns): Jas 4:5.
17) Wills: 1 Cor 12:11.
18) Thinks: Acts 15:25,28.
19) Sends: Acts 13:4.
20) Dispatches: Acts 10:20.
21) Impels: Mk 1:12.
22) Speaks: Jn 16:13-15, Acts 8:29, 10:19, 11:12, 13:2.
23) Forbids: Acts 16:6-7.
24) Appoints: Acts 20:28.
25) Reveals: Lk 2:26, 1 Cor 2:10.
26) Calls to Ministry: Acts 13:2.
27) Can be Grieved: Is 63:10, Eph 4:30.
28) Can be Insulted: Heb 10:29.
29) Can be Lied to: Acts 5:3-4.
30) Can be Blasphemed: Mt 12:31-32.
31) Strives: Gen 6:3.
32) Is Knowledgeable: Is 40:13, Acts 10:19, 1 Cor 2:10-13.
33) Can be Vexed: Is 63:10.
34) Judges: Jn 16:8.
35) Prophesies: Acts 21:11, 28:25, 1 Tim 4:1.
36) Has Fellowship: 2 Cor 13:14.
37) Gives Grace: Heb 10:29.
38) Agrees: 1 Jn 5:7-8.
39) Offers Life: 2 Cor 3:6, Rev 22:17.
40) Was involved in Creation: Job 33:4.
(source: I got this list from a post “Scripture Seeker” wrote, but modified it slightly)These are all attributes of a person, not a thing, amd the sheer magnitude of the evidence for personal attributes makes it plain that the Holy Spirit is a person. The notable scriptures (to me) from the list are those that report that the Spirit has a “mind” (Romans 8:27) – which denotes intelligence, and has a “will” which denotes individuality. I can’t fathom how it could be possible for these descriptives could legitimately be used of a “force”, that would be quite misleading to readers, I think. There are a number of passages in which the masculine pronouns (sometimes EMPHATICALLY masculine pronouns – e.g. Jn 14.26) are used in referring to the Spirit, lending more support to a “Personal Agent” understanding of Him, than to an impersonal “central nervous” understanding.
Ah, now we'll be getting into a new realm. If the Holy Spirit is a “person”, what makes you think it (he, she) is equal in all aspects to God and/or Yeshua? Now that will be fun to see you prove. That is one of the aspects of Trinity. I'll let you pass on being equal in substance since God is a spirit (but Yeshua is flesh and spirit), but the rest will have to be shown.Quote 2. Is not the Father's personal Spirit: John 16:7
7″But I tell you the truth, it is to y
our advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you.Yeshua here speaking of the “helper” declared that He will send “Him”. If this were the Father’s personal Spirit then this would run counter to the clearly defined line of authority between the Father and Son. It’s the father that does the sending…..This theme emphasised to a higher degree in vss 13 and 14:
John 16:13-14
13″But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come. 14″He will glorify Me, for He will take of Mine and will disclose it to you.We see a clear picture of subservience to the Son in this passage (i.e. He will “hear, speak and disclose” [all of which are attributes of a person, BTW] only what He “takes” of Yeshua), so the Father's Spirit does not fit in this regard either. Just to underscore this Yeshua proclaimed that the Helper will “glorify” Him. There are also some telling passages in Romans 8….
Romans 8:14-15
14For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. 15For you have not received a spirit of slavery leading to fear again, but you have received a spirit of adoption as sons by which we cry out, “Abba! Father!“Paul articulates that the Spirit induces us to cry out “Abba! Father!”. Would the Father’s Spirit cry out to Himself this way? Makes no sense to me. In later verses of this chapter it's even more obvious that the Holy Spirit is not the Father's personal Spirit…
Romans 8:26-27
26In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words; 27and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.The Spirit “intercedes” (to intercede in behalf of: – make intercession for. [Strongs]) on our behalf. Who does He intercede to? Wouldn't it be TO the Father? Seems to account for some other scripture. So to affirm that The Holy Spirit is the Father’s personal spirit you must hold that The Father (Who is Spirit) makes intercession by His Spirit TO HIMSELF…..which is the very essence of confusion, I think. It’s also germane that the Spirit does this “according to the will of God”, would this affirmation not be the very epitome of redundancy if the Spirit was the Father’s Spirit? I think it would be…..
No disagreement here. But you'll still have to show where the Holy Spirit is God since it is not God's personal spirit.Quote 3. Is not the Son's personal Spirit either: It’s more plausible to me that the parakletos is Yeshua’s Spirit, but I think it’s unlikely on account of the following texts:
John 14:16-17
16″I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; 17that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you.Again the language here is interesting to me. Yeshua foretold He would send “another Helper”, to me this infers that it would be a helper other than Himself. If He meant that He (or the Father) would send His own personal Spirit then why not just say it plainly?
John 15:26
26″When the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify about Me1. The “Helper” proceeds from the Father.
2. The Helper testifies about Yeshua.The Spirit of the Son would naturally proceed from the Son I believe, but John tells us the He proceeded from (Gr. ekporeuomai – to depart, be discharged, proceed, project: – come [forth, out of], depart, go [forth, out], issue) the Father so there is a metaphysical conundrum for those who affirm that it’s the Son’s personal Spirit, The Spirit is proceeding from the wrong source! Also, given that the Helper testifies about Yeshua leads me to conclude that it’s a person other than Yeshua in view here. Yeshua testifying about Himself appears a little nonsensical, at least to me.
John 16:7
7″But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you.If this is Yeshua speaking of His personal Spirit here why does he use the third person pronoun “Him” and why does he express that He will “send Him”. These are words used to describe a person other than yourself. Also, does Yeshua send Himself? Would He not instead say “I will come to you” (as He did in other passages). It seems evident that Yeshua was speaking of another person here…..
John 16:13-14
13″But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come. 14″He will glorify Me, for He will take of Mine and will disclose it to you.This is a passage I cited before, but as well as arguing against the Holy Spirit being the Spirit of the Father, it also argues against Him being Yeshua's personal Spirit. The data in this verse that suggest it's extremely unlikely that the “Spirit of Truth” is Yeshua's personal Spirit are:
1. The usage of third person pronoun by Yeshua. If He was speaking of His own Spirit, He would undoubtedly say “I, me, my”, but not “he” (i.e. he will glorify me)
2. The developed theme of subservience by the Spirit to Yeshua. Including the affirmation that the Spirit of truth will glorify Yeshua (wouldn’t that be a patent description of self-glorification?)
3. A clear distinction in operational attributes in ministry between Yeshua and the “helper”. Note how the Spirit will “disclose” what he “hears” in verse 13. In the next verse we see that it is Yeshua that He will hear from. He will “take of” Yeshua and “disclose it to” us.
So clearly this is not Yeshua speaking of His own Spirit here…..
I guess the other possibility is the parakletos is a co-joint union of the Father and Son, John 14:23 would appear to suggest this, but again we have a violation of the clearly taught line of authority between the Father and son with the “sending” of the Helper. The Son cannot logically send Himself, nor is it plausible that He would send the Father’s Spirit.
I hope I've given you some insight into why I see things 9i.e the Holy Spirit) the way I do.
I can handle 3 different entities. I just don't think they are equal to each other. And I have not been shown why anyone would consider the Holy Spirit “God”.Quote You wrote: “by showing that Yeshua and God each own the Holy Spirit, one sees rather quickly that the Holy Spirit cannot be a third person, but a mutually shared essence.” That's actually an interesting way to look at it. A blend of God's divine essence and
Yeshua's human essence though? It's a little out of left field. What scriptures would lend support to this postulation?
Actually none. I'll freely admit that. But we don't have a clear indication of what is happening in this whole relationship either. The men that wrote the Bible were inspired, not super geniuses.Quote Hang on a minute, in the last paragraph you inferred that the Spirit of Christ and the Spirit of God had blended to become the Holy Spirit, but now you're making a distinction between them again. Just when I think I'm beginning to get a good read on your view you write something that contradicts a previous statement and I'm left scratching my head again. Blessings
You are correct. I'll be upfront and say I am still fine-tuning my theology. I think that is acceptable because it allows me to be open to the leading of the Spirit in my life. I had been on “cruise-control” for too much of my Christian life so here are still many things I will need to nail down. The Holy Spirit is more complex than some would think.But I know I have the essentials for my salvation. The rest is just knowing mre about God, His Son, and the Holy Spirit. When I get a point where I know as much as I can while on earth about these, there is still a ton of stuff to learn.
t8,
Well, to be fair, that quote is from a spurious epistle of Ignatius. It is fairly certain that Ignatius did not write it. I realize that WJ used it but perhaps he has overlooked the fact that there were several epistles attributed to Ignatius that scholars have agreed where not written by him.
Of course, his support of the spurious Epistle in one area should indicate he supports in others.
We formerly stated that eight out of the fifteen Epistles bearing the name of Ignatius are now universally admitted to be spurious. None of them are quoted or referred to by any ancient writer previous to the sixth century. The style, moreover, in which they are written, so different from that of the other Ignatian letters, and allusions which they contain to heresies and ecclesiastical arrangements of a much later date than that of their professed author, render it perfectly certain thatthey are not the authentic production of the illustrious bishop of Antioch.
In that to the Tarsians there is found a plain allusion to the Sabellian heresy, which did not arise till after the middle of the third century.
And from wikipedia
In Christianity, Sabellianism (also known as modalism, modalistic monarchianism, or modal monarchism) is the nontrinitarian belief that the Heavenly Father, Resurrected Son and Holy Spirit are different modes or aspects of one God (for us only), rather than three distinct persons (in Himself). God was said to have three “faces” or “masks” (Grk. prosopa). The question is: “is God's threeness a matter of our falsely seeing it to be so (Sabellianism/modalism), or a matter of God's own essence revealed as three-in-one (orthodox trinitarianism)?” Modalists note that the only number ascribed to God in the Holy Bible is One and that there is no inherent threeness ascribed to God explicitly in scripture. The number three is never mentioned in relation to God in scripture, which of course is the number that is central to the word Trinity. The only possible exception to this is the Comma Johanneum, a disputed text passage in First John known primarily from the King James Version and some versions of the Textus Receptus but not included in modern critical texts. It is attributed to Sabellius, who taught a form of this doctrine in Rome in the third century.
Knowing this, and realizing that some Oneness people believe that Yeshua is YHWH Himself, one could then interpret the quote properly:
I have learned that certain of the ministers of Satan have wished to disturb you, some of them asserting that Jesus was born in appearance, was crucified in appearance, and died in appearance; others that He is not the Son the Creator, and others that He is Himself God over all
The last phrase “He is Himself God over all” would not be a Trinitarian view, but a Oneness view. I think this is closer to what CB believes because he often asserts that Jesus=Jehovah in his posts. Trinitarians would not believe that Yeshua Himself (that is, alone) was God over all, but that he is one of the persons who make up God over all.
Thanks for that info kejonn.
I only really brought up Ignatius because WJ said that he was an original disciple of John and that his writings were significant. He then went on to say that Ignatius supported his view. The conversation at this point looked like it was going to swing toward ante-Nicene fathers supporting his view with none supporting the notion that the Father is the one true God and he sent the only begotten who came from him.
However it actually worked the other way and this is why I quoted Ignatius and others.
I still hold to the idea that scripture is the authority and even disciples of John can get things wrong.
That said, it isn't only Ignatius that condemns the Trinity doctrine view.
Justin Martyr (ca. 150 A.D)
And the first power after God the Father and Lord of all is the Word, who is also the Son; and of HimAnd His Son, who alone is properly called Son, the Word, who also was with Him and was begotten before the works,
Tatian (165 A.D)
And by His simple will the Word sprang forth, and the Word, not coming forth in vain, became the firstbegotten work of the Father.Athenagoras (ca. 175 A.D)
But if, in your surpassing intelligence, it occurs to you to inquire what is meant by the Son, I will state briefly that He is the first product of the Father, not as having been brought into existence (for from the beginning, God, who is the eternal mind [nous], had the Logos in Himself, being from eternity instinct with Word, but inasmuch as He came forth to be the idea and energizing power of all material things,Irenaeus (ca. 185 A.D)
Beyond the primary Father, therefore, that is, the God who is over all…'Wherefore I do also call upon You, LORD God of Abraham, and God of Isaac, and God of Jacob and Israel [YAHWEH], who is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,
And therefore One God, the Father is declared, who is above all, and through all, and in all. The Father is indeed above all, and He is the Head of Christ.
Clement of Alexandria (ca. 200)
The nature of the Son, which is nearest to Him who is alone the Almighty One, is the most perfect, and most holy, and most powerful, and most noble, and most kingly, and most esteemed. This is the highest excellence, which orders all things in accordance with the Father's will. (Stromata, Book VII, 2).Regarding the above views it would be hard to accept that these guys believed the Trinity doctrine.
As far as some of Ignatius writings being spurious, that may well be the case, but I would also balance that view with the fact that some say similar things regarding the books in the bible.
It could make for an interesting discussion regarding the authenticity of these books that were written after the Book of Revelation, but it could also be a lot of work with less gain than studying the bible itself.
WJ
Quote Kejonn, you exert a lot of energy my friend to make Jesus just a mere man. I say that because if he is not God in the flesh then what is he?
Hi WJ. The Watchtower folk are traditionally difficult to do Bible study with because they have been brainwashed by their sect. Though I personally know some who have left because they choose to think for themselves.http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%2….m
1Ti 3:16 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.
WJ
Quote Of course I fully expect for you to say “the Son of God”! Yes, the Son of God is God.
Isa 9:6 For to us a Child is born, to us a Son is given; and the government shall be on His shoulder; and His name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
2Co 11:4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.
Quote (Cult Buster @ July 22 2007,17:02) WJ Quote Kejonn, you exert a lot of energy my friend to make Jesus just a mere man. I say that because if he is not God in the flesh then what is he?
Hi WJ. The Watchtower folk are traditionally difficult to do Bible study with because they have been brainwashed by their sect. Though I personally know some who have left because they choose to think for themselves.
Is everyone who does not believe that Yeshua is God a JW? Seems you think so. Again, I'm thinking some JW stoled your girlfriend or something. Your obsession is disturbing.Besides, I was a Trinitarian for 20 years. So much for being brainwashed.
Quote Yes, the Son of God is God. Isa 9:6 For to us a Child is born, to us a Son is given; and the government shall be on His shoulder; and His name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
“Name shall be called”. But why bother, you always ignore this vital tidbit.kejonn
Quote Quote Yes, the Son of God is God. Isa 9:6 For to us a Child is born, to us a Son is given; and the government shall be on His shoulder; and His name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
“Name shall be called”. But why bother, you always ignore this vital tidbit.Jesus' name shall be called “The mighty God” because Jesus is The mighty God.
Kejonn. Don't twist the meaning of scripture.
Do yourself a favor and accept the truth that Jesus is your Mighty God
Quote (kejonn @ July 23 2007,10:21) Is everyone who does not believe that Yeshua is God a JW? Seems you think so. Again, I'm thinking some JW stoled your girlfriend or something. Your obsession is disturbing. Cultbusters typically have pamplets and books that list all the cults side by side and their creeds and then compares them with the Trinity doctrine.
What a pity that CultB cannot see that he is in the biggest cult of all, even the mother of cults.
Therein lies the irony.
Luk 4:1 And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness,
Luk 4:2 Being forty days tempted of the devil. And in those days he did eat nothing: and when they were ended, he afterward hungered.
Luk 4:12 And Jesus answering said unto him, It is said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.Who was being tempted here? Jesus; The Lord thy God..
Luk 4:13 And when the devil had ended all the temptation, he departed from him for a season.
Who did the devil depart from. He departed from Christ who he was tempting.
The truth of Luke 4:1-13 is that it was Jesus “the Lord thy God” who was being tempted. This battle at the highest level is between God and Satan. Christ and Satan.
Jesus is The Lord Thy God. Worship Him!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
