Link: Copy link
"Anonymous" doesn't support his accusations with Biblical references. Saying Ken is wrong does not make "Anonymous" right....againm this has nothing to do with the doctrine of the trinity. You don't know what you are talking about, as usual.
Donnie: John clearly explains the relationship between the Father and His Son. In John's account -- "that I am IN the Father, and the Father IN me" -- just where was/is the spirit of Jesus Christ?[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]You may have a point: "this has nothing to do with the doctrine of the trinity." Why? Because the trinity doctrine is NOT FOUND in the Bible.
John clearly explains the relationship between the Father and His Son. In John's account -- "that I am IN the Father, and the Father IN me" -- just where was/is the spirit of Jesus Christ?
Now, we know about the spirit of Jesus Christ or the spirit of God in: Philippians 1:9; Romans 8:9; I Peter 1:11. Find out and study these and other passages very carefully.[/color]
<table width="90%" border="1" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="2"><tr><td valign="top">John 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
http://www.piney.com/Nashville.School.o ... pirit.html
Seeing God as three "persons" each with their "centers of consciousness" and each given their own dispensation was invented by H. Leo Boles of David Lipscomb College (LU) and promoted by the Gospel Advocate and therefore the dogma of many churches of Christ.
This raises the question of who or what is "The angel of the Lord". By your reasoning, the angel is the Lord yet context clearly shows that the angel is a separate and different person than the Lord.[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Brian,
There is no confusion here between trinitarianism and tritheism. There are differences, but there is also commonness in both doctrines. Both teach that there are three separate persons or beings. That is not taught in the Scripture.
We can go for a lengthy discussion of the Trinity doctrine. But we can start with a simple premise -- by properly defining the word, the noun, the common/improper noun called "spirit." Let's expand that a bit to the expression "holy spirit" as it is commonly claimed that the "Holy Spirit of God" refers to the third person in the Trinity doctrine.
Would you be willing to accept the expressions [notice the capitalization for your benefit]:
(1) "the Spirit" and
(2) "the Holy Spirit" and
(3) "the Spirit OF God" and
(4) "the Holy Spirit OF God" and
(5) "the Spirit OF the Lord" and
(6) "the Spirit OF the Father" and
(7) "the Spirit OF Christ" and
(8) "the Spirit OF our God" and
(9) "the Spirit OF life in Christ Jesus"
(10) "the Spirit OF the living God"
(11) "the Spirit OF His Son"
(12) "the Spirit OF Jesus Christ"
(13) "the Spirit OF life from God"
(14) NOTE: The preposition "OF" denotes that from which anything proceeds or possession or ownership or "belonging to"
... are synonymous expressions that are commonly identified by Christendom as referring to the third person in the Trinity doctrine????
So, some of the simple questions for you at this point are as follows:
(1) What is the definition of the word "spirit"?
(2) Is "spirit" a noun -- a proper noun or common noun?
(3) Is the word "holy" a proper noun or an adjective in "holy spirit"?
(4) If Scripture teaches about "the spirit OF the Father" ...
(5) If Scripture teaches about "the spirit OF His Son" ...
(6) Does the Scripture teach about "the spirit OF the Holy Spirit"?
(7) Before we go any further, do you understand the question listed in items (4), (5) and (6)?
(8) In other words, (a) if the Father has a spirit and (b) if the Son has a spirit, (c) why would you say or not say that the Holy Spirit has a spirit?
Finally, in response to your comment about the Movement, truth is not only that the change agents are off but also that the change agents are the ones who are rewriting the history of the Restoration Movement.[/color]