Donnie
Donnie

August 31st, 2010, 8:13 pm #91

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Change,

Feel free to do so if you change your mind and decide to post again. I really think it is a good idea to continue searching the truth and discussing doctrinal issues. And in doing so, we should be careful as to what scriptural teachings to adhere to and false teachings to reject.

I'm afraid that I am being accused of being "so particular" in scriptural matters that I want to believe in and teach and even discuss. But that's OK.

In the specific study of the HOLY spirit OF Jesus Christ, I just want, if nothing else, to leave this with you -- that I am concerned about (and it is important to me) what I envision the Spirit OF the Lord to be.

If someone tells me that we ought to "worship" the Holy Spirit OF God, I will first question the veracity of that assertion, especially since the entire Bible talks about "worship" [of the living God or the Father] but says NOTHING whatsoever about worship of God's [HIS] spirit. We don't even find in the entire Bible ANY reference to "God the Holy Spirit."

We have already reviewed the history of the man-made Trinity Doctrine. Just because the Nicean Council decreed such an invented doctrine or that the Roman Catholic Church approved it, that doesn't make it right and acceptable.

I don't know how much more do I need to stress the point that the adjective "HOLY" describes the nature or is an attribute of His spirit. God's Spirit is not a proper noun. God's Spirit is NOT a BEING nor is it God's NAME. The holy spirit of God is not a proper name.

Let's put it simply with this example: "The mind of Einstein" [following the pattern of "the spirit of Jesus Christ"].

Would you consider the "mind" of Einstein as a separate "being" or "person" from Einstein the being or person himself? I think NOT!!!

Let's modify Einstein's "mind" as being "bright." [Oh, the bright mind of Einstein!!!]. Would you consider the "bright mind" of Einstein as a SEPARATE BEING from Einstein himself? Again, I think NOT!!!

In the same manner, would you consider the "spirit" of Christ as a separate "being" or "person" from Christ Himself? I think NOT!!!

Let's modify Jesus Christ's "spirit" -- scripturally speaking -- as being "holy." [Oh, the holy spirit of Jesus Christ!!!]. Would you consider the "holy spirit" of Jesus Christ as a SEPARATE BEING from Christ Himself? Again, I think NOT!!!

The adjective "HOLY" makes a lot of difference in identifying the Spirit of the living God.

So much for the adjective.

Let's briefly deal with the preposition "OF" in discussing the spirit which is holy and which belongs to God.

Beforehand, let's clarify one thing -- that we're not dealing here with [as in your example] a person [your son] in the family who "belongs to" you as a parent. That example clearly illustrates two SEPARATE PERSONS and the relationship.

But dealing with what constitutes the being or the person as Einstein is a different matter. We'd be dealing with his mind, his eyes, his nose, his heart, his spirit, his soul, etc. The nose or mind OF Eistein would not be a different person from Einstein. Would it? I think NOT!!!

Same for the holy Spirit of Jesus Christ.

So, let's be careful about making claims that the Holy Scripture does not support.

Do we worship, praise or pray to the spirit or mind of Jesus Christ? I would if there were evidence in Scripture. But there just isn't.[/color]
Quote
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

August 31st, 2010, 8:41 pm #92

Question: If we are saved and have a relationship with God then we are connected with God through His Spirit. Think, if you can blaspheme God and Christ and be forgiven but you cannot blaspheme the Holy Spirit and be forgiven, then the Spirit of God has to be a Person

That's not exactly what Jesus said.

Mark 3:22 And the scribes which came down from Jerusalem said,
......He hath Beelzebub, and
......by the prince of the devils casteth he out devils.


They say that the spirit IN Jesus was the Devil.

Mark 3:28 Verily I say unto you,
......All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men,
......and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:
Mark 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost
......hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:


Now look closely: Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit was saying that the Spirit in Jesus was an UNCLEAN spirit.

Mark 3:30 Because they said, HE hath an UNclean spirit.

Instead, the Spirit that Jesus had was A HOLY Spirit perfectly clean.

Now, look at the supporting evidence.

James 2:1 My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.

James 2:7 Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?


The Spirit OF Christ is the Advocate or Comforter.

1John 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not.
......And if any man sin,
......we have an advocate (Comforter) with the Father,
......Jesus Christ the righteous:

So, what about saying that THE Spirit which was IN Jesus Christ as a clean or HOLY Spirit was NOT His at all? Can people believe that the spirit that Jesus HATH was a HE and another person standing outside of Jesus? That leaves Jesus without His own Spirit or Mind as Paul draws the parallel in 1 Corinthians 2.
Spirit NEVER speaks of a PERSON but the mental disposition of that person. Spirit primarily means a WIND or a violent, angry blast. When the Spirit was manifest in the upper room it was a rushing WIND and FIRE. God had to pour out this BLAST to intimidate the doubting Jews to quit refusing baptism to the Gentiles. Here is something to think about conserning SPIRIT and FALLING on which to the viper race would be a baptism of WIND and FIRE to blast the chaff away so it could be burned up.



People who CALL on the SPIRIT and FIRE to fall on them are INVITING God to VIPERIZE them.

Pneuma A. blast, wind, first in Anaximen. (but pno is commoner in Poets; Hom. uses pnoi
2. metaph., thalerter p. with more genial breeze or influence, A.Th.708(lyr.
en andrasin philois bebken the wind is constantly changing even among friends, S.OC612;
II. breathed air, breath, salpigx broteiou pneumatos plroumen A.Eu.568; auln, ltou p., E.Ba.128(lyr.), Ph.787 (lyr., pl.); p. aperrxen biou the breath of life, A.Pers.507; p. aplesen Id.Th.984 (lyr.); p. athroison collect breath, E.Ph.851;
3. flatulence, in pl., Eub.107.9, Arist.Pr. 948b25, Dsc.2.112, D.L.6.94.
5. that which is breathed forth or exhaled, odour, theion odms p. E.Hipp.1391; p. baru aphieisa, of a tree, Plu.2.647b.
Long before it speaks of III. divine inspiration, agria . . pneumata theuphoris
Or the spirit OF God or the spirit OF man

Epipipto ,
A. fall upon or over, epepipton alllois Th.7.84; epi ti X.Oec.18.7, cf. Thphr.CP5.4.5: metaph., epepese moira Pi.Pae.2.64; epi ti Isoc.5.89; dialogismoi epipiptousi tini Plu.Oth.9.
2. . of money, accrue, to meros ho heuriskomes epipipton epi to khreos to opheilomenon SIG953.66 (Cnidus, ii B.C.).
II. . fall upon in hostile sense, attack, assail, tini Hdt.4.105, Th.3.112; aphulakt aut e. Hdt.9.116; apharkt t stratoped Th.1.117; aparaskeuois tois enantiois X.Cyr.7.4.3; also es tous Hellnas, v.l. for es-, Hdt.7.210; of storms, toisi barbaroisi ho bors epepese ib.189; kheimn epipesn Pl.Prt. 344d; of winds meeting one another, Arist.Mete.364b3; of diseases, Hp.Aër.3; h nosos e. tois Athnaiois Th.3.87; so of grief, misfortunes, etc., oukhi soi mona epepeson lupai E.Andr.1043 (lyr.), etc.; epepese polla kai khalepa kata stasin tais polesi Th.3.82, etc.
2. . come on after, e. rhigos puret Hp.Aph.4.46.
3. . accumulate, plth sitou epipeptkenai PPetr.2p.62 (iii B.C.).
Last edited by Ken.Sublett on September 13th, 2010, 9:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Ray
Ray

September 1st, 2010, 11:46 am #93

Source: "The Reluctant Messenger"



History of the Trinity


Trinity Definition: Within the nature of the One True God, there simultaneously exists three eternal Persons, namely, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. All three Persons are co-equals in all the attributes of the Divine Nature.

This definition defines God, not as a family, but as a committee. But how did this doctrine come to exist in modern Christianity? In the preface to Edward Gibbon's History of Christianity, it reads:

If Paganism was conquered by Christianity, it is equally true that Christianity was corrupted by Paganism. The pure Deism of the first Christians was changed, by the Church of Rome, into the incomprehensible dogma of the Trinity. Many of the pagan tenets, invented by the Egyptians and idealized by Plato, were retained as being worthy of belief.

Most theologians know that the Trinity doctrine is not scriptural.

Because the Trinity is such an important part of later Christian doctrine, it is striking that the term does not appear in the New Testament. Likewise, the developed concept of three coequal partners in the Godhead found in later creedal formulations cannot be clearly detected within the confines of the canon.

But nowhere do we find any Trinitarian doctrine of three distinct subjects of divine life and activity in the same Godhead.

All Pagan religions from the time of Babylon have adopted in one form or another a Trinity doctrine or a triad or trinity of gods. In Babylon it was Nimrod, Semiramas, and Tammuz. In Egypt it was Osiris, Isis, and Horus. Within Israel paganism it was Kether, Hokhmah, and Binah. In Plato's philosophy it was the Unknown Father, Nous/Logos, and the world soul. In the book, A Statement of Reasons, Andrews Norton says of the Trinity:

We can trace the history of this doctrine, and discover its source, not in the Christian revelation, but in the Platonic philosophy The Trinity is not a doctrine of Christ and his Apostles, but a fiction of the school of the later Platonists.

Historians also know that the Trinity doctrine is not authorized in the New Testament.

There is no evidence the Apostles of Jesus ever heard of a Trinity.

The Bible does not teach the doctrine of the Trinity. Neither the word Trinity itself, nor such language as one in three, three in one, one essence or substance or three persons, is biblical language. The language of the doctrine is the language of the ancient Church, taken not from the Bible but from classical Greek philosophy.

Long before the founding of Christianity the idea of a triune god or a god-in-three persons was a common belief in ancient religions. Although many of these religions had many minor deities, they distinctly acknowledged that there was one supreme God who consisted of three persons or essences. The Babylonians used an equilateral triangle to represent this three-in-one god, now the symbol of the modern three-in-one believers. The Greek triad was composed of Zeus, Athena and Apollo. These three were said by the pagans to 'agree in one.' One of the largest pagan temples built by the Romans was constructed at Ballbek (situated in present day Lebanon) to their Trinity of Jupiter, Mercury and Venus. In Babylon the planet Venus was revered as special and was worshipped as a Trinity consisting of Venus, the moon and the sun. This triad became the Babylonian holy Trinity in the fourteenth century before Christ. Although other religions for thousands of years before Christ was born worshipped a triune god, the Trinity was not a part of Christian dogma and formal documents of the first three centuries after Christ. That there was no formal, established doctrine of the Trinity until the fourth century is a fully documented historical fact. Clearly, historians of church dogma and systematic theologians agree that the idea of a Christian Trinity was not a part of the first century church. The twelve apostles never subscribed to it or received revelation about it. So how then did a trinitarian doctrine come about? It gradually evolved and gained momentum in late first, second and third centuries as pagans, who had converted to Christianity, brought to Christianity some of their pagan beliefs and practices.

When we turn to the problem of the doctrine of the Trinity, we are confronted by a peculiarly contradictory situation. On the one hand, the history of Christian theology and of dogma teaches us to regard the dogma of the Trinity as the distinctive element in the Christian idea of God, that which distinguishes it from the idea of God in Judaism and in Islam, and indeed, in all forms of rational Theism. Judaism, Islam, and rational Theism are Unitarian. On the other hand, we must honestly admit that the doctrine of the Trinity did not form part of the early Christian-New Testament-message. Certainly, it cannot be denied that not only the word "Trinity", but even the EXPLICIT IDEA of the Trinity is absent from the apostolic witness of the faith.. The doctrine of the Trinity itself, however, is not a Biblical Doctrine.

Since the doctrine is unscriptural, it took an emperor to make Christianity start embracing the concept.

It was at this stage that Constantine made his momentous suggestion. Might not the relationship of Son to Father be expressed by the term homoousios ("of the same substance"). Its use, however, by the Sabellian bishops of Libya had been condemned by Dionysius of Alexandria in the 260s, and, in a different sense, its use by Paul of Samosata had been condemned by the Council of Antioch in 268. It was thus a "loaded" word as well as being unscriptural. Why Constantine put it forward we do not know. The possibility is that once again he was prompted by Hosius, and he may have been using it as a "translation" of the traditional view held in the West, that the Trinity was composed of "Three Persons in one substance," without inquiring further into the meaning of these terms. The Emperor had spoken, and no one dared touch the creed during his lifetime. The great majority of the Eastern bishops found themselves in a false position.

There is only one passage in the Authorized Version of the Bible used by Trinitarians to support their view.

[color=#FF0000" size="3" face="times]I John 5:7-8, For there are three that bear record <font color="#0000FF" size="3" face="times">[in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in Earth][/color], the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. AV


Editors added the bracketed words in the early fourth century to the Latin Vulgate translation. They are not in the older Greek manuscripts. For this reason, modern translations omit them. Bible commentaries explain that these words were never in the apostle John's manuscript or any existing early copies of it.

How does the Trinity Doctrine apply to mankind?

God's PURPOSE in having created humanity is to reproduce GOD.

God is not merely one Person, nor even limited to a "Trinity," but God is FAMILY. The doctrine of the Trinity is not a family.

This former Lucifer, who became Satan, has so cleverly DECEIVED all humanity that almost no one today knows that God is, actually, a Divine FAMILY. One Family, God IS a Family. That Family is one GOD. Satan has deceived people into almost every other belief. Perhaps the largest number have been deceived into believing God is a "Trinity."

In order to understand how mankind becomes part of the divine family, one must understand the Plan of God.</font>

____________________________________

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]NOTE: There are countless sources that explain the history of the Roman Catholic Church-invented, Protestant-propagated Trinity Doctrine. I find this particular article concise while it is consistent with other sources.

I have already pointed out that in the various hymnbooks [Great Songs of the Church, Majestic Hymnal, Christian Hymns, Praise for the Lord, etc.] used in churches of Christ, in the very popular hymn:

"Holy, Holy, Holy!"

"God in three Persons, blessed Trinity!" [as originally written]

------------- is not found in the verses. Instead, we have -----------

"[color=#FF0000" size="3" face="times]God over all, and blest eternally.[/color]"

I think that this reflects a rejection of the Trinity Doctrine in the Restoration Movement as well as by the publishers and compilers of hymns used in the churches.
[/color]
While the word "trinity" is not found in the scriptures, it has been proven that the theology is in the scriptures. Donnie denies what the scriptures teach, but his denials do not make him correct.

Many Church Fathers prior to Nicea affirmed belief in a triune theology, something Donnie's source ignores.

Is it so surprising that a website that is so void of the influence of the Spirit of God is pwned by a following that denies the Spirit?

But Donnow and his mentor and his disciples deny so much of what is plainly written in God's word that one more teaching against God's Word should not surprise us.
Quote
Share

Ken Sublett
Ken Sublett

September 1st, 2010, 5:30 pm #94

Question: If we are saved and have a relationship with God then we are connected with God through His Spirit. Think, if you can blaspheme God and Christ and be forgiven but you cannot blaspheme the Holy Spirit and be forgiven, then the Spirit of God has to be a Person

That's not exactly what Jesus said.

Mark 3:22 And the scribes which came down from Jerusalem said,
......He hath Beelzebub, and
......by the prince of the devils casteth he out devils.


They say that the spirit IN Jesus was the Devil.

Mark 3:28 Verily I say unto you,
......All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men,
......and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:
Mark 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost
......hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:


Now look closely: Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit was saying that the Spirit in Jesus was an UNCLEAN spirit.

Mark 3:30 Because they said, HE hath an UNclean spirit.

Instead, the Spirit that Jesus had was A HOLY Spirit perfectly clean.

Now, look at the supporting evidence.

James 2:1 My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.

James 2:7 Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?


The Spirit OF Christ is the Advocate or Comforter.

1John 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not.
......And if any man sin,
......we have an advocate (Comforter) with the Father,
......Jesus Christ the righteous:

So, what about saying that THE Spirit which was IN Jesus Christ as a clean or HOLY Spirit was NOT His at all? Can people believe that the spirit that Jesus HATH was a HE and another person standing outside of Jesus? That leaves Jesus without His own Spirit or Mind as Paul draws the parallel in 1 Corinthians 2.
Please give us a reference to the use of TRIAS before

Denying the Spirit is to deny that the NAME of father, son and spirit is Jesus Christ.

1John 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
1John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
1John 2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.

When Peter and everyone else baptized in the NAME of the Father, Son and Spirit they baptized in the NAME Jesus Christ.

http://www.piney.com/HsTheopTrinity.html

It seems to have been a man named Theophilus of Antioch who first applied the term "trias" to this Biblical concept as early as 181 A.D. But it was the Anathasian Creed, completed some time in the fifth century, which stated it most clearly: "We worship one God in trinity, and trinity in unity, neither confounding the persons, nor separating the substance."
I am pretty sure that no one was so undereducated that they didn't know about prepositional phrases.


Last edited by Ken.Sublett on September 13th, 2010, 9:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Share

Judge Knott
Judge Knott

September 1st, 2010, 7:51 pm #95

Spirit NEVER speaks of a PERSON but the mental disposition of that person. Spirit primarily means a WIND or a violent, angry blast. When the Spirit was manifest in the upper room it was a rushing WIND and FIRE. God had to pour out this BLAST to intimidate the doubting Jews to quit refusing baptism to the Gentiles. Here is something to think about conserning SPIRIT and FALLING on which to the viper race would be a baptism of WIND and FIRE to blast the chaff away so it could be burned up.



People who CALL on the SPIRIT and FIRE to fall on them are INVITING God to VIPERIZE them.

Pneuma A. blast, wind, first in Anaximen. (but pno is commoner in Poets; Hom. uses pnoi
2. metaph., thalerter p. with more genial breeze or influence, A.Th.708(lyr.
en andrasin philois bebken the wind is constantly changing even among friends, S.OC612;
II. breathed air, breath, salpigx broteiou pneumatos plroumen A.Eu.568; auln, ltou p., E.Ba.128(lyr.), Ph.787 (lyr., pl.); p. aperrxen biou the breath of life, A.Pers.507; p. aplesen Id.Th.984 (lyr.); p. athroison collect breath, E.Ph.851;
3. flatulence, in pl., Eub.107.9, Arist.Pr. 948b25, Dsc.2.112, D.L.6.94.
5. that which is breathed forth or exhaled, odour, theion odms p. E.Hipp.1391; p. baru aphieisa, of a tree, Plu.2.647b.
Long before it speaks of III. divine inspiration, agria . . pneumata theuphoris
Or the spirit OF God or the spirit OF man

Epipipto ,
A. fall upon or over, epepipton alllois Th.7.84; epi ti X.Oec.18.7, cf. Thphr.CP5.4.5: metaph., epepese moira Pi.Pae.2.64; epi ti Isoc.5.89; dialogismoi epipiptousi tini Plu.Oth.9.
2. . of money, accrue, to meros ho heuriskomes epipipton epi to khreos to opheilomenon SIG953.66 (Cnidus, ii B.C.).
II. . fall upon in hostile sense, attack, assail, tini Hdt.4.105, Th.3.112; aphulakt aut e. Hdt.9.116; apharkt t stratoped Th.1.117; aparaskeuois tois enantiois X.Cyr.7.4.3; also es tous Hellnas, v.l. for es-, Hdt.7.210; of storms, toisi barbaroisi ho bors epepese ib.189; kheimn epipesn Pl.Prt. 344d; of winds meeting one another, Arist.Mete.364b3; of diseases, Hp.Aër.3; h nosos e. tois Athnaiois Th.3.87; so of grief, misfortunes, etc., oukhi soi mona epepeson lupai E.Andr.1043 (lyr.), etc.; epepese polla kai khalepa kata stasin tais polesi Th.3.82, etc.
2. . come on after, e. rhigos puret Hp.Aph.4.46.
3. . accumulate, plth sitou epipeptkenai PPetr.2p.62 (iii B.C.).
1 Corinthians 13:14, KJV "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen."

The wording of this benediction implies equality between the sources of grace, love and fellowship (Greek koinnia, which can also be
rendered communality, commonness, communion)that is, between the Father (God), the Son (the Lord Yeshua the Messiah) and the Holy Spirit (the Ruach HaKodesh). But this equality remains an implication and is not stated as a proposition. As pointed out elsewhere, Adonai is never called a Trinity in the New Testament. However, the three terms which appear here, along with equivalent terms, are used in various ways in both the New Testament and the Tanakh when speaking of God. (2 Corinthians 13:14 from Jewish New Testament Commentary)
Quote
Share

Judge Knott
Judge Knott

September 1st, 2010, 7:58 pm #96

Spirit NEVER speaks of a PERSON but the mental disposition of that person. Spirit primarily means a WIND or a violent, angry blast. When the Spirit was manifest in the upper room it was a rushing WIND and FIRE. God had to pour out this BLAST to intimidate the doubting Jews to quit refusing baptism to the Gentiles. Here is something to think about conserning SPIRIT and FALLING on which to the viper race would be a baptism of WIND and FIRE to blast the chaff away so it could be burned up.



People who CALL on the SPIRIT and FIRE to fall on them are INVITING God to VIPERIZE them.

Pneuma A. blast, wind, first in Anaximen. (but pno is commoner in Poets; Hom. uses pnoi
2. metaph., thalerter p. with more genial breeze or influence, A.Th.708(lyr.
en andrasin philois bebken the wind is constantly changing even among friends, S.OC612;
II. breathed air, breath, salpigx broteiou pneumatos plroumen A.Eu.568; auln, ltou p., E.Ba.128(lyr.), Ph.787 (lyr., pl.); p. aperrxen biou the breath of life, A.Pers.507; p. aplesen Id.Th.984 (lyr.); p. athroison collect breath, E.Ph.851;
3. flatulence, in pl., Eub.107.9, Arist.Pr. 948b25, Dsc.2.112, D.L.6.94.
5. that which is breathed forth or exhaled, odour, theion odms p. E.Hipp.1391; p. baru aphieisa, of a tree, Plu.2.647b.
Long before it speaks of III. divine inspiration, agria . . pneumata theuphoris
Or the spirit OF God or the spirit OF man

Epipipto ,
A. fall upon or over, epepipton alllois Th.7.84; epi ti X.Oec.18.7, cf. Thphr.CP5.4.5: metaph., epepese moira Pi.Pae.2.64; epi ti Isoc.5.89; dialogismoi epipiptousi tini Plu.Oth.9.
2. . of money, accrue, to meros ho heuriskomes epipipton epi to khreos to opheilomenon SIG953.66 (Cnidus, ii B.C.).
II. . fall upon in hostile sense, attack, assail, tini Hdt.4.105, Th.3.112; aphulakt aut e. Hdt.9.116; apharkt t stratoped Th.1.117; aparaskeuois tois enantiois X.Cyr.7.4.3; also es tous Hellnas, v.l. for es-, Hdt.7.210; of storms, toisi barbaroisi ho bors epepese ib.189; kheimn epipesn Pl.Prt. 344d; of winds meeting one another, Arist.Mete.364b3; of diseases, Hp.Aër.3; h nosos e. tois Athnaiois Th.3.87; so of grief, misfortunes, etc., oukhi soi mona epepeson lupai E.Andr.1043 (lyr.), etc.; epepese polla kai khalepa kata stasin tais polesi Th.3.82, etc.
2. . come on after, e. rhigos puret Hp.Aph.4.46.
3. . accumulate, plth sitou epipeptkenai PPetr.2p.62 (iii B.C.).
1 Cor 12:4-6, KJV Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all."

In this passage, gifts, services, workings are but different words for pneumata, the inspirations or spiritual gifts which build up the body of Christ. And Spirit, Lord, God are...the <b>one source of all the gifts.</b> (Paul Hinnebusch, Community In The Lord, Notre Dame, Indiana: Ave Maria Press, 1975, p. 169)

Quote
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

September 1st, 2010, 9:49 pm #97

Question: If we are saved and have a relationship with God then we are connected with God through His Spirit. Think, if you can blaspheme God and Christ and be forgiven but you cannot blaspheme the Holy Spirit and be forgiven, then the Spirit of God has to be a Person

That's not exactly what Jesus said.

Mark 3:22 And the scribes which came down from Jerusalem said,
......He hath Beelzebub, and
......by the prince of the devils casteth he out devils.


They say that the spirit IN Jesus was the Devil.

Mark 3:28 Verily I say unto you,
......All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men,
......and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:
Mark 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost
......hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:


Now look closely: Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit was saying that the Spirit in Jesus was an UNCLEAN spirit.

Mark 3:30 Because they said, HE hath an UNclean spirit.

Instead, the Spirit that Jesus had was A HOLY Spirit perfectly clean.

Now, look at the supporting evidence.

James 2:1 My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.

James 2:7 Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?


The Spirit OF Christ is the Advocate or Comforter.

1John 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not.
......And if any man sin,
......we have an advocate (Comforter) with the Father,
......Jesus Christ the righteous:

So, what about saying that THE Spirit which was IN Jesus Christ as a clean or HOLY Spirit was NOT His at all? Can people believe that the spirit that Jesus HATH was a HE and another person standing outside of Jesus? That leaves Jesus without His own Spirit or Mind as Paul draws the parallel in 1 Corinthians 2.
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]To my post that "the Trinity is not based on scripture" [August 22, 2010], Ray responded as follows:[/color]
  • [color=#000000" size="3" face="times]Donnie's source is wrong (and that surprises us?) September 1 2010, 7:46 AM

    While the word "trinity" is not found in the scriptures, it has been proven that the theology is in the scriptures. Donnie denies what the scriptures teach, but his denials do not make him correct.

    Many Church Fathers prior to Nicea affirmed belief in a triune theology, something Donnie's source ignores.

    Is it so surprising that a website that is so void of the influence of the Spirit of God is pwned by a following that denies the Spirit?

    But Donnow and his mentor and his disciples deny so much of what is plainly written in God's word that one more teaching against God's Word should not surprise us.
    [/color]

    </li>
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Ray,

That's correct: The word "trinity" is not found in the scriptures. Neither is the name "God the Holy Spirit." Neither has it been proven that the theology [Trinity Doctrine] is in the Holy Scripture. So, why not deny or reject that which the Scripture does not teach?

It is true that there were Church Fathers that believed in a "triune theology" -- an invented theology itself. It is also true that there were church fathers who believed that the Trinity theology was non-existent. There was the assumption that the three essences in baptizing in "the NAME [singular] of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" (Matt. 28:19) comprised "God in THREE PERSONS." So, there was confusion. Is the Scripture to blame for providing a list of essences or entities? Keep in mind that an essence or an entity is not necessarily a person or being. Keep also in mind that a spirit [yours or mine and God's] is never a person or a being as Trinitarians assume.

But why should the Council of Nicea be permitted to permanently settle the confusion regarding the man-contrived Trinity Creed, as well as other issues confronting the to-be Roman Catholic Church? The church of Rome [originally one of the churches of Christ established several years after the Jerusalem church] was dominant in that part of the world at the time and was strongly influenced by the Roman government, as well by paganism (cf. "History of the Trinity" above).

Even certain Bible translations have been affected or influenced by the "Trinity Creed." Would you believe that?

As already mentioned in the "History of the Trinity," there is only one passage in the Authorized Version of the Bible used by Trinitarians to support their view.

I John 5:7-8, For there are three that bear record <font color="#0000FF">[in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in Earth], the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.[/color] AV

Editors added the bracketed words [in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in Earth] in the early fourth century to the Latin Vulgate translation. They are not in the older Greek manuscripts. For this reason, modern translations omit them. Bible commentaries explain that these words were never in the apostle John's manuscript or any existing early copies of it.

You're right, Ray, in that this website prefer not to have the holy spirit of God [according to the Trinitarian's concept of a PERSON] be standing in the midst of a structure that houses this site. Know why? Because the spirit or mind of Christ indwells the Christian -- not in some other location.</font>
Quote
Like
Share

Judge Knott
Judge Knott

September 1st, 2010, 10:51 pm #98

1 John 5:7-8

For these verses KJV, following the Textus Receptus, has: For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. Concerning this uniquely clear reference to the Trinity, Bruce Metzger writes: That these words are spurious and have no right to stand in the New Testament is certain.His reasons: (1) the passage is absent from all but four Greek manuscripts, none earlier than the fourteenth century C.E., (2) it was unknown to the Greek fathers, who would otherwise have seized on it in the fourth-century Trinitarian controversies, (3) it is not found in versions or quotations of any kind prior to the fourth century, (4) if the passage were original, no good reason can be found to account for its omission, and (5) the passage makes an awkward break in the sense. (A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, New York: United Bible Societies, Corrected Edition 1975, pp. 715-717)
Quote
Share

Ken Sublett
Ken Sublett

September 2nd, 2010, 1:34 am #99

Question: If we are saved and have a relationship with God then we are connected with God through His Spirit. Think, if you can blaspheme God and Christ and be forgiven but you cannot blaspheme the Holy Spirit and be forgiven, then the Spirit of God has to be a Person

That's not exactly what Jesus said.

Mark 3:22 And the scribes which came down from Jerusalem said,
......He hath Beelzebub, and
......by the prince of the devils casteth he out devils.


They say that the spirit IN Jesus was the Devil.

Mark 3:28 Verily I say unto you,
......All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men,
......and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:
Mark 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost
......hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:


Now look closely: Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit was saying that the Spirit in Jesus was an UNCLEAN spirit.

Mark 3:30 Because they said, HE hath an UNclean spirit.

Instead, the Spirit that Jesus had was A HOLY Spirit perfectly clean.

Now, look at the supporting evidence.

James 2:1 My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.

James 2:7 Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?


The Spirit OF Christ is the Advocate or Comforter.

1John 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not.
......And if any man sin,
......we have an advocate (Comforter) with the Father,
......Jesus Christ the righteous:

So, what about saying that THE Spirit which was IN Jesus Christ as a clean or HOLY Spirit was NOT His at all? Can people believe that the spirit that Jesus HATH was a HE and another person standing outside of Jesus? That leaves Jesus without His own Spirit or Mind as Paul draws the parallel in 1 Corinthians 2.
1 Corinthians 13:14, KJV "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen."

The wording of this benediction implies equality between the sources of grace, love and fellowship (Greek koinnia, which can also be

rendered communality, commonness, communion)that is, between the Father (God), the Son (the Lord Yeshua the Messiah) and the Holy Spirit (the Ruach HaKodesh). But this equality remains an implication and is not stated as a proposition. As pointed out elsewhere, Adonai is never called a Trinity in the New Testament. However, the three terms which appear here, along with equivalent terms, are used in various ways in both the New Testament and the Tanakh when speaking of God. (2 Corinthians 13:14 from Jewish New Testament Commentary)


The benediction needs word definition: the salutations do not mention the Holy Spirit because the Spirit OF God is that which passes between the "Father" and the "Son." Pneuma literally means WIND but is used to speak of BREATH. In the words of classical trinitarians Father thinks, Spirit breathes invisible power and Son articulates audible WORDS: that is why they all say (along with Restoration scholars) the Son of the ONE GOD is His Word as in words.

ASK: why did the writers never appeal to The Holy Spirit in the salutations. Where The Holy Spirit is diminishingly missing in the epistles, the context prevents us from understanding it to mean a GOD PEOPLE as in the LU "Family of persons."

1Cor. 1:1 Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ
....through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,
1Cor. 1:2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth,
....to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints,
....That means that WE have A holy spirit (holy is an adjective)
....with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours:
1Cor. 1:3 Grace be unto you, and peace,
....from God our Father,
....and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

1Cor. 8:5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth,
....(as there be gods many, and lords many,)
1Cor. 8:6 But to us
....there is but ONE GOD, the Father, OF whom are all things, and we in him;
....and ONE LORD Jesus Christ, BY whom are all things, and we by him


Notice in this passage that holy spirit is not defined as a PEOPLE.

2Cor. 6:6 By pureness, by knowledge, by longsuffering, by kindness,
....by the holy spirit,
....by love unfeigned,
SPIRIT always has words or COMMUNICATION as its end product:

Turn you at my reproof: behold,
....I will pour out my spirit unto you,
....I will make known my words unto you. Proverbs 1:23

John 3:32 And what he hath seen and heard,
....that he testifieth; and no man receiveth his testimony.
John 3:33 He that hath received his testimony (Jesus Christ the Son)
....hath set to his seal that God is true.
John 3:34 For he
....whom God hath sent
....speaketh the words of God:
....for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.
John 3:35 The Father loveth the Son,
....and hath given all things into his hand.

Not MUCH left over for the Holy Spirit to replace Jesus Christ the Son.

NOW, Notice that there are TWO ACTORS: There is no MEDIATOR Being between Father and Son. John said that if you deny that Christ is Father and Son you are an Anti-Christ.

2Cor. 13:14 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ,
....and the love of God,
....and the communion of the Holy Spirit,
....be with you all. Amen.


Again, communion is not what John Mark Hicks etc teach as a family warmth: The stealing of the Comunity Church is based on the idea that God NEEDED comanionship and church should be COMMUNE instead of the directly commanded "School (only) of the Word (only."

....2Cor. 4:13 We having the same spirit of faith, according as it is written,
........ I believed, and therefore have I spoken;
........we also believe, and therefore speak;


Commncto , I. a making common, imparting, communicating
II. in rhet., a figure of speech, = anakoinsis, in accordance with which one turns to his hearers, and, as it were, allows them to take part in the inquiry, Cic. de Or. 3, 53, 204; Quint. 9, 1, 30; 9, 2, 20 and 23.

G2842 koinnia koy-nohn-ee'-ah From G2844 ; partnership, that is, (literally) participation, or (social) intercourse, or (pecuniary) benefaction:(to) communicate (-ation), communion, (contri-), distribution, fellowship.

There are similar passages:

1Cor. 1:6 Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you:
1Cor. 1:7 So that ye come behind in no gift;
....waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:
1Cor. 1:8 Who shall also confirm you unto the end,
....that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.
1Cor. 1:9 God is faithful,
....by whom ye were called unto the fellowship
....of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.


The "testimony" or Christ IS the Spirit of prophecy.

<font>Rev. 19:10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me,
See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God:
for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.<b></b></font>

Therefore, the communion of the Holy Spirit is that which Jesus Christ communicated to the Apostles.
The apostles treat the Word of Christ as The Spirit
That is because Jesus said:

John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing:
....the words that I speak unto you,
....they are spirit, and they are life.

Speaking by the Father, Jesus as the Son COMMUNED Spirit to the Apostles.
Quote
Share

Ray
Ray

September 2nd, 2010, 12:22 pm #100

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]To my post that "the Trinity is not based on scripture" [August 22, 2010], Ray responded as follows:[/color]
  • [color=#000000" size="3" face="times]Donnie's source is wrong (and that surprises us?) September 1 2010, 7:46 AM

    While the word "trinity" is not found in the scriptures, it has been proven that the theology is in the scriptures. Donnie denies what the scriptures teach, but his denials do not make him correct.

    Many Church Fathers prior to Nicea affirmed belief in a triune theology, something Donnie's source ignores.

    Is it so surprising that a website that is so void of the influence of the Spirit of God is pwned by a following that denies the Spirit?

    But Donnow and his mentor and his disciples deny so much of what is plainly written in God's word that one more teaching against God's Word should not surprise us.
    [/color]

    </li>
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Ray,

That's correct: The word "trinity" is not found in the scriptures. Neither is the name "God the Holy Spirit." Neither has it been proven that the theology [Trinity Doctrine] is in the Holy Scripture. So, why not deny or reject that which the Scripture does not teach?

It is true that there were Church Fathers that believed in a "triune theology" -- an invented theology itself. It is also true that there were church fathers who believed that the Trinity theology was non-existent. There was the assumption that the three essences in baptizing in "the NAME [singular] of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" (Matt. 28:19) comprised "God in THREE PERSONS." So, there was confusion. Is the Scripture to blame for providing a list of essences or entities? Keep in mind that an essence or an entity is not necessarily a person or being. Keep also in mind that a spirit [yours or mine and God's] is never a person or a being as Trinitarians assume.

But why should the Council of Nicea be permitted to permanently settle the confusion regarding the man-contrived Trinity Creed, as well as other issues confronting the to-be Roman Catholic Church? The church of Rome [originally one of the churches of Christ established several years after the Jerusalem church] was dominant in that part of the world at the time and was strongly influenced by the Roman government, as well by paganism (cf. "History of the Trinity" above).

Even certain Bible translations have been affected or influenced by the "Trinity Creed." Would you believe that?

As already mentioned in the "History of the Trinity," there is only one passage in the Authorized Version of the Bible used by Trinitarians to support their view.

I John 5:7-8, For there are three that bear record <font color="#0000FF">[in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in Earth], the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.[/color] AV

Editors added the bracketed words [in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in Earth] in the early fourth century to the Latin Vulgate translation. They are not in the older Greek manuscripts. For this reason, modern translations omit them. Bible commentaries explain that these words were never in the apostle John's manuscript or any existing early copies of it.

You're right, Ray, in that this website prefer not to have the holy spirit of God [according to the Trinitarian's concept of a PERSON] be standing in the midst of a structure that houses this site. Know why? Because the spirit or mind of Christ indwells the Christian -- not in some other location.</font>
Donnie,

I have given you multiple proofs from Holy Scripture alone that you are following heresy and not the Word of God. But you continue to deny the Word of God regarding His Holy Spirit.

Your heretical teaching against God's Holy Spirit is against God's Word, against Christian history, and against the teacings of the Churches of Christ.

Makes any rational and spiritual person wonder if you really are a member of the Lord's Church. You do not teach like one.
Quote
Share