The Holy Spirit

[Cos]

Here is another claim, “most translations incorrectly translate ekeinos as ‘He.’”

 

The NWT translation at John 2:21 has; “But he (Greek ekeinos) was talking about the temple of his body”.

 

If “spirit” [pneuma] means “an impersonal force” as claimed by sami, WHY then are actual persons also deemed pneuma in Scripture?

 

The only blatant departure from the rules is reading a false premise in to bible text and then constructing straw man arguments to try and maintain that false premise.<><

[Evacuated]

1 hour ago, Cos said:

constructing straw man arguments

By way of a general observation, the real straw man argument here being so vigorously opposed and defended is that the Holy Spirit is God's power, which it patently is not.

1 hour ago, Cos said:

“into your hands I commit my spirit” means, in fact, that even though His body died His spirit continued existing.

Purely an interpretation based on personal opinion of the nature of the "spirit" committed. An interpretation and opinion the holder is perfectly entitled to, but nevertheless this does not change the nature of it. It is a false interpretation based on an erroneous understanding of the nature of the "spirit" here.

Yet even given this incorrect basis, there is still no logic in equating the expression "commit my spirit" with the notion of "continued existence".

I can't decide if this is an evidence of blindness or an attempt to blind.

 

 

[Space Merchant]

On 7/21/2018 at 2:06 AM, Cos said:

Jesus died on the cross, but that does not mean He ceased to exist. What Jesus says in Luke 23:46, “into your hands I commit my spirit” means, in fact, that even though His body died His spirit continued existing. This can be seen from the stoning of Stephen.

I commit [yielded up] my spirit and or receive my spirit does not mean that a person lives on after death. Jesus was dead, his body, his temple ceased for 3 days, and you have already been corrected on Jesus speaking to evil spirits, which took place after he resurrected, warning them of incoming judgment to demons, who are the spirits that are in prison.

We as humans are not spirits. The situation is different for those who are raised back to life, those who are of the Firstfruits, with Jesus being the first one pertaining to the Revelation of John.

Hence the saying, Jesus being the First of the Firstfruits of the New Creation. Not only that, Jesus was the Firstborn out of the Death because he makes of those who benefit of the New CovenantÂ’s chosen ones for priesthood, with the Christ being the King chosen by God.

In that same verse it says Jesus expired, the temple, his body was broken down, but days later, the temple was built back up when he conquered death, God bringing Jesus back to life.

yielded up or commit my spirit means to be ceased to/of breathe. Some people make  suggestion that the saying yielded up/commit means that Jesus just stopped struggling to stay alive since all things had been accomplished, willingly pouring out his life even to death, only to later on, conquer it (Isaiah 53:12; John 10:11, 19:30).

On 7/21/2018 at 2:06 AM, Cos said:

“And they went on stoning Stephen as he called upon the Lord and said, ‘Lord Jesus, receive my spirit’” (Acts 7:59). This verse virtually makes no sense if you interpret that Stephen ceased to exist at the moment of his death. Why would Stephen pray to Jesus to “receive” what was about to cease existing?

Stephen prayed to God in JesusÂ’ name in regards to those who are stoning him, those fooled by the religious leaders. Stephen was stoned to death and he cease when he was killed via stoning. He, being dead, did not go anywhere.

Yield up my spirit is the same as commit my spirit and or receive [up] my spirit, regardless of translation, there is no change to the actual meaning of what that points to.

Stephen, on the other hand, will be among the early ones to be resurrected, there is no question about that. For all who follow the Christ who is the only way to God the Father, these ones who have their names in the book of life, these persons will be resurrected, this ones will gain eternal life that is everlasting due to not being subjected to the likes of sickness, pain and lastly, death.

On 7/21/2018 at 2:06 AM, Cos said:

Then there is the claim that “Jesus himself slept in Hades”. This claim ignores many Scriptures. Anyway let’s look at this; sleeping is NOT the cessation of personal existence as some seem to assume. Death is compared to sleep because the person “sleeping” is not aware of the physical realm.

Jesus did sleep in Hades aka in death, also known as Hell and or the Grave, to the Jews, Sheol - that is, if you take what has been spoken of in Psalms seriously.

The last point is indeed 100% true and I do agree with that, that death is like sleeping (Psalm 13:3, John 11:11-14, Acts 7:60), we all sleep in Hades, also referred to as Sheol in Hebrew and to some in the Western society, Hell. As for the death, they do not go to any realm and or some afterlife, they remain in death until the day of resurrection comes when the Kingdom of God executes the actions for mankind pertaining to GodÂ’s purpose and will, among them being giving life to those in death, and with his chosen Christ, the dead are able to return to life, according to Isaiah, he makes mention of being in death and await the resurrection and he will rise and sing, he also speaks of the those in death, who will be made alive, those powerless in the earth will live again, referring to those in death as residence of dust (Isaiah 26:19), there is a large list of cross-references that pretty much amounts to what I said for this point also, for instance, Jesus, GodÂ’s chosen one, with authority and power being able to resurrect those in death, both the righteous and the unrighteous.

Death is the opposite of Life and Death itself is spoken of to be an enemy, for the Bible says Death is the last enemy that will be dealt with (1 Corinthians 15:26)

The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

We see in the Bible that it shows a promise, a day will come when death will be no more (Revelation 21:4). God gives us many gifts, but among them is of high importance and it is something that mankind most certainly needs – That is, the Christ.

We learn in the Bible, also this should be very much known, that God sent his Son, Jesus, the one prophesied to come, the Horn of Salvation, have an actual chance to escape death by means of living forever, and by sending his Son to earth, who later gave his own life in places of ours by ransom, God has proved by means of this, that he loves us, for it is by means of God’s grace through the sacrifice of his Son to which we have this chance.

• Matthew 20:28 - even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” (see John 3:16, 1 John 4:9, 10)

 

Death is a ceasing of function for in death a dead man, a corpse cannot move, cannot communicate, cannot think or ponder to thought for the mind itself has perish (Ecclesiastes 9:5; Psalm 146:4). In a way, to some, death is like when someone turns off a light, the spirit of which gives us life, of which God put in us being that power that enables to light to laminate, without said power, the function is gone, or perhaps like batteries in a devices that goes out. Us humans are corruptible, we succumb to death and sickness and can and will eventually die, thus being negated to the opposite of life, death, thus perishing.

All under the sun, can work, can enjoy themselves, can do this or that, but a dead man cannot do anything at all, for down to Sheol he has gone, and to dust he returns. Then again, of my experience, there has been Satan followers who dwell in the domain of sorcery, such things it is good you never see at all oppose to those that do and God is not cool with sorcery.

Some churches out there of the mainstream teach that we are spirits, but in reality, we are humans, for as God puts in Genesis 2:7, we are dust – and to dust we shall return. Spirit is what makes dust alive and makes it a soul. We are not spirits, angels are spirits, not humans, and therefore we do not go to some afterlife upon death. The spirit of which gives us life goes back to God; it is not any of us. The Bible also makes it clear that other than us humans, animals also, originate from dust, is given life and can and will die, thus returning to dust and it’s life, it’s spirit goes back to God (Ecclesiastes 3:19, 20).

Spirit is what makes this dust alive, and of what that is called is the Soul. Soul in the Bible is a translation of the Hebraic word nephesh (??????? Strong’s 5315) and in the Greek, word psuché  or psyche (???? Strong’s 5590). The Hebrew word means a creature that breathes, in the Greek word: a living being (a being that [is] lives [living]). The Soul is the entire living being itself, not something inside that survives the death of the body , be it from man or beast.

 

But what can be assured is Death is not the be all end all of things. The dead are not conscious of anything, as stated, yet, the Bible teaches that God can awaken the dead as if from sleep and give them life again, an enable function oppose to a ceasing of function (Job 14:13-15). For those whom God resurrects, death is not the end of everything and we should not consider it to be the end, at the time, we shouldnÂ’t be making mention of anything connected to Immortal Soul Doctrine or Afterlife based doctrine, for that did not originate with the early church, the same goes for Limbo and Purgatory, as said before, we are human, we are not spirits, the yielding of out spirit of which gives life simply goes back to God, not us.

On 7/21/2018 at 2:06 AM, Cos said:

Anyway none of what the claimant says shows that death means the person ceases to exist.

First Born out of the Dead. I am Alive forever and ever. Firstfruits of the New Creation.

If a man who wants to learn about who Jesus is and speak of these things, how would you explain when you make the claim Jesus never really died? How can you remain to claim when prophecy said otherwise?

You will also have those question the resurrection if atonement has never really been made when no death has occurred, therefore, putting of one to seek, to learn and to believe.

To say Jesus did not die for his body being the Temple and it being raised up, by God who made him Lord and Christ, you automatically defeat the purpose of why Jesus is said of to be these things, even showing a total disregard to a foretold prophecy of the Christ.

There is a reason as to why the New Covenant came into affect prior to the death of Jesus and his Resurrection, and, Lord behold, we fall back to Acts chapter 2 for perhaps the 14^th time. Jesus, who being first of the fruits, the first out of death to be raised and be of glory, now we see the others, who will join him when the time comes, Jesus spoke of this before with his disciples when it was spoken of them being with Jesus again, these same disciples, Matthias included, were among those present when they received the Holy Spirit, numbering up to 3,000 in Jerusalem.

In a simple sense, the opposite of Life, is Death

Life - the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death. the existence of an individual human being or animal.

Death - the action or fact of dying or being killed; the end of the life of a person or organism. the state of being dead. the permanent ending of vital processes in a cell or tissue.

On 7/21/2018 at 2:06 AM, Cos said:

Now, I am being accused of ignoring what actually is not stated.

That is because you are ignoring, you made it obvious with the verses for 1 Peter, before it and after it. For instance John 14 and 16 of which you made mention of, several times now you make claim that the Holy Spirit is a Person, only to be met with the information of Greek Language Forms in regards to Masculine, Feminine, Neutered words, which defeats the purpose to claim of which you made. You stated before somewhere as to why the Holy Spirit is called a HE/HIM and alluding to the Holy Spirit itself being a person, but the reality of the situation is in Greek, we know the Spirit has been modified from neutered to neuter-masculine, this is elementary in Greek, and the very reason as to why your Greek was called into question to begin with, for even some of the information you made mention of before makes that same conclusion briefly.

So it is not common for some to point that out. You also factor in Paul, Peter and John, when their own testimony, in of itself, counters nearly several points you are trying to convey, the only thing that is not mentioned as yet is GodÂ’s own testimony which is seen in the Hebrew Old Testament, that alone is a pretty strong one and it is known by majority of Christendom, it would seem you are not among those who know of what that testimony even is.

That being said, it can be said you are ignoring things because you are repeating over and over some points you made on the other pages of this thread, example, when corrected about the gospel of John, you continue with the same passage, over and over and over, what did you expect? And every time, it what was said has been made known, and even of which that has been made known, you continue on to claim. You do not only do this here, but you have done it elsewhere also.

On 7/21/2018 at 2:06 AM, Cos said:

I hold that nowhere in Scripture does it say “the Holy Spirit is a power” or “the Holy Spirit is the power of God”. Nowhere! Every passage where the idea the Holy Spirit is a power must be read in into them.

Once again, this has already been addressed, I have linked this information 3 times for you, and I will surely not do it a 4th time because it is literally in the last response made. But I suppose according to your belief, God clearly had someone else doing the creating for him in the Genesis Act of Creation instead of He himself.

The Bible makes it clear of how God's divine power is expressed, in operation, in to and or through things, outpouring, aiding his followers, etc.

On 7/21/2018 at 2:06 AM, Cos said:

First one that I supposedly ignored, Zechariah 4:6 “He then said to me: ‘This is the word of Jehovah to Zerubbabel: ‘“Not by force, nor by power, but by my Spirit,” says Jehovah of armies.’”

The source, as well as the verse, in connection with Micah 3:8, is in connection; rather than describing the Holy Spirit as a distinct person or entity, the references to connecting the Holy Spirit to that of God’s divine power, moreover, I also mentioned by means of my source that Jewish scholars, examining the references to it in the Hebrew Old Testament, have never really defined the Holy Spirit as anything but the power of God, again, fact and true – granted if one sees the description and actual instances where that one Spirit, the Holy Spirit is used and or in action, a primary example is filling up and or those having the outpouring of the Spirit, other situation as to what is enabled to speak because of the Spirit and or they speak because of the Holy Spirit and say what needs to be said.

Other than that, Zechariah 4:6 was mention very briefly, but the context and cross-references of such verses as well as what we have from the Jews who do study these things, in application.

Which begs the question, are you even aware of what this verse entails and everything in connection with it since you did mention it?

Again, you express your view vs. what the bible teaches of what the Holy Spirit is.

On 7/21/2018 at 2:06 AM, Cos said:

Now I don’t see in this passage where it says the Holy Spirit is a power, unless one reads that idea into the verse, in fact just substitute the word “Spirit” with the word “power” and you will see how absurd such an idea actually is!

Did you even check to see of both [A] The description of the Holy Spirit which was mention several times now and As to what was shown via repost link of which you have not even checked out? Or is it the norm for the common mainstreamer to put upon his own understanding that God is somehow limited as they usually do?

On 7/21/2018 at 2:06 AM, Cos said:

Next is Micah 3:8, again the idea must be read into the verse, in fact being filled “with power BY the Spirit” shows that “power’ and the “Spirit” are NOT synonymous.

Again you are adding on to the verse of your own interpretation sacrificing the context of which is presented.

At this point, it is just you pulling any verse that has spirit in it and trying to speak of the verse, without context, with the addition of your own opinion of said verse. I have you know even some of your own say differently of said verses compared to you.

This verse, in connection with Zechariah 4:6, was mention briefly and it is in application of what is address from the same source of information posted on page 23 of this thread to which I will link: 

 

On 7/21/2018 at 2:06 AM, Cos said:

2 Tim. 1:7 again is reading into the passage that “a spirit” is supposedly the “the Spirit”. Here “a spirit” is the proper temperament and character formed in Paul and Timothy. Simple test; “for God gave us a power not of fear but of power…” once again an absurd idea read into 2 Tim 1:7.

I believe I had spoken of this to you before and or someone else and I even stated cross-references allows one to pick up the full context of the verse in question.

You consider it as absurd because you fail to apply context and what we see here is you are applying the thinking of man, your thinking in regards to your own opinions rather than what the verse is all about, in addition to other verses in connection with this verse.

In short, you are just pointing to the word Spirit and applying things that are clearly not pertaining to the verse itself, thus proves my point you do not adhere to cross-references, of which came from a guy who brought up cross-references to begin with, but made the choice to and or ignorantly avoiding it, which was the case with 1 Peter chapter 1Â’s verse 3.

What was addressed of this verse can be seen here:

 

 

On 7/21/2018 at 2:06 AM, Cos said:

It is claimed Luke 4:14 “records” that Jesus “began His ministry in the power of the {power}” Once again this demonstrates the absurdity of the idea that is being read into the passage of Luke 4:14.

It is not a claim, Jesus had the outpouring of the Holy Spirit immediately upon Baptism at the river, with John the Baptist who not only bore witness to what took place, but his own testimony made acknowledgment to GodÂ’s chosen one, Jesus Christ, as well as making known of who the Holy One is, God the Father.

I will say it again; the Holy Spirit is associated with the power by which God the Father was with Jesus and the power through which Jesus Christ performed mighty miracles during His earthly – that is if you take into account anything that Simon Peter has to say and or even understand it. During his ministry and travels, He did the good works in regards to the ministry and helping, healing the people and those who were affected by Satan the Devil, example, people being possessed by Demons who are of Satan, since they have all connections to Heaven cut and unable to become men thus prompting them to dwell within humans, this should be a no brainer to anyone who reads the four gospel accounts, mainly Matthew and Mark. As with Jesus, the same can be said about those who are servants of God like Jesus and his disciples are, hence Apostle Paul and what he had addressed about the church.

So therefore, I will say it again, the Holy Spirit is associated with the power by which God the Father was with Jesus and the power through which Jesus Christ performed.

Also I believe I made mention of fact in regards to Luke 4:14 of which I will address again:

FACT: In the gospel of Luke, Luke 4:14, it records that Jesus Christ began His ministry in the power of the Spirit. Luke 1:35 identifies the Holy Spirit with the power that is of the Highest. Speaking of the Holy Spirit, which would be given to His followers after His death, Jesus told them, You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you.

In the Gospel of Luke, Luke 4:14, it records that Jesus Christ began His ministry in the power of the Spirit.

On 7/21/2018 at 2:06 AM, Cos said:

Next claim is that Luke 1:35 “identifies the Holy Spirit with the power that is of the Highest” Let’s note that this verse is NOT saying that the Holy Spirit is synonymous with the “power”, that idea must be read into the verse.

  And yet we see in the verse the as seen below,

• Luke 1:35 - And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you (A), and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy (B)—the Son of God [GodÂ’s Son] (C).

Current and Additional CR: [Mt. 1:18, 3:3, Mk. 1:24, Lk.1:32, 34, 36, Jn. 1:34, 1:49, 20:31]

[A] Matthew 1:18, 20

John 6:68, 69, Hebrews 7:26

[C] Mt. 14:33, John 1:32, 34, 20:31

The Holy Spirit that has overshadowed Mary, is the same Holy Spirit that resulted in her pregnancy, is the very power of God, Mary, as some hold to belief, has never had any sexual relations at all until after Jesus was born, hence the birth of JesusÂ’ siblings, to say that a person other than Joseph and or to say a spirit person was somehow involved is accursed teachings, such that is practice by some in the mainstream as of today. We already know that Mary didnÂ’t have sexual relations whatsoever based on what she said just in the previous verse:

• Luke 1:34 - And Mary said to the angel, “How will this be, since I am a virgin? [I have not had sexual relations with a man?"]” (see Isaiah 7:14, Matthew 1:24, 25)

Spirit Beings are not suppose to have relations of any kind in this manner with daughters of men, that in itself is totally illegal in GodÂ’s perspective, for we know of this because of what Angels did before which resulted in the superhuman-like giants known as Nephilim.

Now, we can clearly see when an Angel of God is sent (Shliah Principle) they tend to send a message and or explain what is to come and or happen, in this case, it was Gabriel who was sent, who went to visit Mary as soon as he was done with speaking to Zechariah, who lost his ability to speak.

Quote

 

[1] Note: According to what you addressed about Jesus talking to Spirits in Prison, of which I corrected you on, The Bible states that the disobedient fallen angels, called demons, are referred to as spirits in prison. These fallen angels are prisoners having been thrown into Tartarus and they remain there and are reserved with eternal bonds under dense darkness for the judgment of the great day of God, the very reason why the risen Jesus said what he said, pertaining to my last response. This somewhat indicate that they are greatly restricted, unable to materialize as they did prior to the Flood in NoahÂ’s day (1 Peter 3:19, 2 Peter 2:4, Jude 6), moreover, which is also another reason as to why demons, who cannot materialize bodies to resemble like men, as Angels do, therefore, they take control and or possession of humans, dwelling in them, only to be expelled and or cast out by Jesus Christ verbally and coming out they did, and it did not cause harm to those who were under control of these demons, even legions of them in one person.

[2] Note: Ever since the fallen ones lost their position, the being in presence of God, they have been become minions, followers of Satan the Devil, in addition, they now on the side of the Devil have served his evil agenda. Fast-forward into time, the demons have no longer had the power to materialize human bodies since not being in the presence of God and losing the ability to do so, for in Noah’s day they were forced out, de-materialize back into Spirit Being prior to being cast out of Heaven, but, they can entice men and women to engage in various forms of things, ranging from corruption, violence, sexual immortality, and a list of things. They can also deceive mankind via spiritism, to us islanders this is called Black Magic (Vodou) which involves such things as magic spells and spirit mediums (the talking to spirits, and or the dead, raising the dead, etc.), something of which is illegal in God’s prospective (Deuteronomy 18:10-13; 2 Chronicles 33:6)  and it is practice by people today, in some case, the sorcery of which they produce can be grime, be it influence and or manifested into something literal, resulting in many victims, if I am not mistake some Americans and even JWs have become victims, but Magic practitioners of such darkness tend to pick targets or one of those wrong place wrong time situations. The destiny of the wicked fallen ones, these demons, is the same as that of the Devil, judgment and eternal destruction (or everlasting destruction), to be brought to nothing; wiped from existed and or ceasing from the plain of existence, in simple English, deleted/purged. (Matthew 25:41, Revelations 20:10, 2 Thessalonians 1:9) The good news is, we can stand up to demons, resist them even as well as Satan himself. We have to be both aware and wise to consider how powerful Satan is and how we can successfully put forth a resistance against him and his demons.

 

 

On 7/21/2018 at 2:06 AM, Cos said:

FACT; Luke 1:35 is not saying “The Holy Spirit is the power of the Highest”.

Did you make this fact up yourself and or pulled this fact from a cited source? The facts I bring up are from an actual source as well as what the Bible states, but it would seem what you have addressed is unfounded. When I did look this up, this is what can be found, mind you, a few from a Trinitarian source:

• [1] Fact: the Bible clearly defines that the Holy Spirit is “the Power of the Highest” [or Power of God the Father]

And another:

• [2] Fact: Clearly the Holy Spirit is the power of the Highest

And another:

• [3] Fact: The Holy Spirit is ‘the power of the Highest

And another:

• [4] Fact: the Holy Spirit is spoken of in the Bible as being God's divine power.

And another:

• [5] Fact: The power of the Holy Spirit is the power of God.

And another:

• [6] Fact: The Power of the Most High as the Holy SpiritÂ… Whereby the Power of the Most High spoken of is made identical to the Holy Spirit

The list goes on.

It would seem it is only you who make this claim and no other source makes mention of this fact at all. Perhaps a note, for yourself of course, but clearly not fact which has no clear and or direct source of origin but your own.

Now, on the contrary, the context and cross-references, once again, defeats your own opinion of the verse. Not only that, it defeats the belief by majority in Christendom that the Virgin Mary, not having sexual relations with no man is ever so evident, for the power of the Holy Spirit overshadowed her, as said by Gabriel, no secondary person was present – this was the same case with Zechariah losing his ability to speak.

Also I will state an actual fact of which I posed before, not a made up fact of which you attempt to profess here, but rather, just a note of yours - this fact for Luke 1:35 has been addressed above, and before, no need to bring it up again when it is located in this response now and or the link to the other response.

This fact is proven true, that is, if you actually took the time to study, research and read these kinds of passages, you are simply yielding upon your own understanding when you are not really addressing the context of the verse itself.

On 7/21/2018 at 2:06 AM, Cos said:

In Romans 1:16 the Scriptures are called the power of God; “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation…” but everyone knows that they are not used interchangeably synonymous in this verse but are two distinct things: "You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures, or the power of God." Matt. 22:29.

Romans 1 (16, 17) is The Righteous Shall Live by Faith, when outlined, it is Righteous one will live by faith (16, 17). Now, this passage tells us that the Apostle was not to be ashamed of the task of which he is doing, even to the likes of those in the world who clearly is against what is true, moreover, he cannot be ashamed of what he is doing which will so greatly benefit him.

The gospel that the Apostle preaches is that the objective of which God the Father Himself has set in motion, and the core object of which is the Salvation of all who put their faith in it, regardless of nation and or race a person of either sex and or age belongs to, etc. This can also be in connection with Acts 17:32 (see 1 Corinthians 1:23).

The objective and or agency is, indeed, The Power of God, of which is put forth by God himself, in this sense, the very tool of which He would move this in his favor, which is also in connection with what is read in the references of the Christ, those taking into what the Christ himself professed, which originated from God the Father, hence the purpose and will of God. Salvation, being the core object of the gospel, an open blessing from the Messianic Kingdom, given as a promised gift to mankind.

For the Apostle was not ashamed at all of what JesusÂ’ death and resurrection entails, in fact, he does everything in his power to profess such in application and to teach the gospel to others and what they, those who hear, will be rewarded, should they accept. That is why the cross-reference tells us that people will hear the message of what the gospel entails, but they will ignore it, but there will be those, regardless of who they are, will hear it and accept it.

Matthew 22:29 is in connection with Mark 12:24-27 (in-depth study additional cross-references Mt. 22:28, John 20:9, 1 Cor. 15:34), this verse is in no connection with Romans 1:16. Moreover, this verse sheds light on what GodÂ’s power is capable of doing in regards to those who are dead and or held powerless by means of death (those in death). Such ones, who are to be resurrected out of death, will be made anew, in a sense, like angels as the cross-references says. The dead will be restored to life by means of what GodÂ’s power is capable of and these persons, obviously, will have eternal life. They will not be able to suffer as they did as imperfect person, but now perfect when GodÂ’s purpose and will has been accomplished, those who were powerless to the earth will no longer feel pain, injury, sickness and or death, for death itself, will be the last enemy that will be dealt with once and for all.

On 7/21/2018 at 2:06 AM, Cos said:

 The Scriptures were the source of the Jews doctrinal misunderstandings and God's power would raise all men from the dead at the second coming. To demand that Scriptures and God's power are interchangeably synonymous in Matt. 22:29 is just as wrong as claiming the Holy Spirit and power are interchangeably synonymous in Luke 1:35.

And yet we are to ignore examples such as Mary and Zechariah, both of whom having been visited by the Angel of God, Gabriel?

The main source of the Jews was the Hebrew Old Testament thus the origin of their belief just as the origin of Baptism itself. The very reason when most of them, Virgin Mary, Elizabeth, Zechariah, Joseph, Simeon, and even Jesus, recited, read, observed the Law, as well as reading and putting into application the Hebrew Old Testament, learning of the God of Israel, the very reason why Jesus often quotes what is written and the laws the Jews of his day followed, both the good and those who are bad, those few who were influenced by the Devil thus using the law in twisted application and to act out things of lawlessness. In Jesus’ case, among the Laws, is a Law of which one acknowledges he has a God that is his Father, thus excluding Jesus being God for this Law, this commandment, is affirming the One True God, which all the Jews learn about in the Old Testament of their God, who is the God of Israel.

The Jews, who do follow the Tanakh, specifically the Torah, which is the same case with the Samaritans to some degree, however, the Samaritans tend to hold to and or be more strict and applying of Deuteronomy, awaiting for the prophet of God to come, the one who is the Abrahamic Seed – the very reason why we see what is said in John’s Introductory (John chapter 1) and how it is a reference to Deuteronomy 18:18 and or what is seen in John chapter 4 regarding the conversation with the Samaritan woman and Jesus at the Well of Jacob, near the base of Mount Gerizim.

On 7/21/2018 at 2:06 AM, Cos said:

Acts 1:8 is another text I supposedly ignored; again one must read into this passage the idea that ‘power” and “the Holy Spirit” are interchangeably synonymous when the two are not.

For starters, you have been avoiding Acts 1 and 2 since previous discussion regarding the word proskuneos. That being said, Acts 1:8 has been addressed clearly to you and you are clearly not taking the context of what the verse is telling the reader, the same way you are not taking into context in regards to Greek Language in regards to a normal and or modified word.

Other than that, as said before regarding this verse and anything and everything pertaining to this verse: God was with him, Jesus, especially during his ministry and the like via said power.

On 7/21/2018 at 2:06 AM, Cos said:

As can be seen these verses, which I supposedly ignored, must have the idea that the Holy Spirit is a “power” read into them.

As can be seen, this verses have been explained before as well, including the very basics deemed elementary when it comes to the Greek Language and how a neutered word can be modified.

On 7/21/2018 at 2:06 AM, Cos said:

Nowhere in Scripture does it say “the Holy Spirit is a power” or “the Holy Spirit is the power of God” unless one reads that idea into a passage or text. <><

You have said this many times, but every time you speak of any verse and or what the Holy Spirit actually is and what it is capable of, you solely put into application of your own opinions, personal interpretation and the like, furthermore, you base some of what you say of Trinitarian commentary, even when one source itself defeated your own words when it comes to the what we see previously. As stated before, the early Church 2,000+ years ago knew exactly what the Holy Spirit is, and what it can do, the very reason I have made mention of both Acts 1 and 2 several times to which you are failing to actually see in context, for the proof of such can be seen here and elsewhere.

I suggest you start reading into context the verses presented several times for you already, see the cross-references for if I last recall, you brought this up and it would seem you are not even taking a look, after all, you are relying on a 1984 JW bible that holds your hand in this sense and if additional cross-references is needed, you can simply find them on Biblehub.

On 7/21/2018 at 2:09 AM, Cos said:

Here is another claim, “most translations incorrectly translate ekeinos as ‘He.’”

The NWT translation at John 2:21 has; “But he (Greek ekeinos) was talking about the temple of his body”.

And? 100% all Translations is using He/His for this verse, John 2:21, in regards to Jesus, an actual person. if I am not mistake @sami was not referring to this verse, but rather, any verse of which a neutered word has been modified. He/His used in John 2:21 in regards to Temple is already masculine, even the word Temple is masculine.

Again we see you trying to point a finger without understanding of what is being addressed, the very reason why previously, your Greek was called into question, and once again we see why it was to begin with.

On 7/21/2018 at 2:09 AM, Cos said:

If “spirit” [pneuma] means “an impersonal force” as claimed by sami, WHY then are actual persons also deemed pneuma in Scripture?

Spirit is a neutered word, it is only referred to as a HE/HIM because it was modified for the person speaking, Jesus in John 14-16 chapters. I told you this time and time again and you being called out for ignoring is 100% true.

Examples of where this is addressed: 

I was more in-depth in this response found here:

 

 

 

On 7/21/2018 at 2:09 AM, Cos said:

The only blatant departure from the rules is reading a false premise in to bible text and then constructing straw man arguments to try and maintain that false premise.<><

Why should @sami ignore the rules of which the Greek Language is spoken and or applied? It is not a false premise because among a brief source of which you had posted addressed the same thing. That is what I call being hypocritical of actual truth, Cos, therefore, it is safe to say your Greek is to be called into question and that question has been answered, you do not know the Greek Language forms in regards to neutered and modified words.

 

(Don't mind the bold, on edits it auto-bolds for some reason)

[sami]

On 7/21/2018 at 1:09 AM, Cos said:

Here is another claim, “most translations incorrectly translate ekeinos as ‘He.’”

 

 

 

 

 

The NWT translation at John 2:21 has; “But he (Greek ekeinos) was talking about the temple of his body”.

 

 

 

 

 

If “spirit” [pneuma] means “an impersonal force” as claimed by sami, WHY then are actual persons also deemed pneuma in Scripture?

 

 

 

 

 

The only blatant departure from the rules is reading a false premise in to bible text and then constructing straw man arguments to try and maintain that false premise.<><

 

 

 

If one is making a study of scripture and not merely mouthing the pagan teachings of weeds it would be quite possible to understand what the Bible is teaching.  If that same person has to be told and shown the same information time and again,  this is a person who does not want to know what the Bible has to say but is following the same pattern as Adam and Eve "you will be like God." Yes, making your own determination as to what is truth. Truth was spoken by Almighty God, Satan told the lie.
The same is put before all of us today "life and good and death and bad" Dueteronomy 30:15-20 "I do put before you today life and good, and death and bad. 16 [If you will listen to the commandments of Jehovah your God,] which I am commanding you today, so as to love Jehovah your God, to walk in his ways and to keep his commandments and his statutes and his judicial decisions, then you will be bound to keep alive and to multiply, and Jehovah your God must bless you in the land to which you are going to take possession of it.
17 “But if your heart turns away and you do not listen, and you are actually seduced and bow down to other gods and serve them, 18 I do tell YOU today that YOU will positively perish. YOU will not lengthen YOUR days on the ground to which you are crossing the Jordan to go to take possession of it. 19 I do take the heavens and the earth as witnesses against YOU today, that I have put life and death before you, the blessing and the malediction; and you must choose life in order that you may keep alive, you and your offspring, 20 by loving Jehovah your God, by listening to his voice and by sticking to him; for he is your life and the length of your days,..."

The spirit is "HOLY" BECAUSE IT BELONGS TO JEHOVAH.
 Some of the ways the holy spirit is represented are water, oil, a dove and fire. These comparisons would make no sense if the spirit were a person.
At Judges 6:34 the spirit is coming upon someone "Then Jehovah’s spirit came upon Gideon and he sounded the horn, and the Abiezrites rallied behind him".

And at Judges 15:14  the spirit is empowering "When he came to Lehi, the Philistines shouted triumphantly at meeting him(Samson). Then Jehovah’s spirit empowered him, and the ropes on his arms became like linen threads that were scorched with fire, and his fetters melted off his hands."

 

The teaching asserting holy spirit as a divine person was foreign to the writers of the Bible and originated several centuries after the Greek Scriptures were completed. How does the Bible actually define holy spirit ?

As said before, the word “spirit” is translated from the Hebrew ruach and the Greek pneuma, both words also denoting breath or wind, an invisible force. Scripture says that “God is a Spirit” (John 4:24). God is a spirit but not all spirits (forces that are invisible) are God.
Young's Literal Translation
God is a Spirit, and those worshipping Him, in spirit and truth it doth behove to worship.'
GOD'S WORD® Translation
God is a spirit. Those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth."
Jubilee Bible 2000
God is a Spirit and those that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
King James 2000 Bible
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
American King James Version
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
American Standard Version
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship in spirit and truth.

Yet we are also told that God has a Spirit.
Genesis 1:2; 6:3; Exodus 31:3; 35:31; Nehemiah 9:20; Job 33:4; Ps. 139:7; Isaiah 11:2; 32:15; 40:13; 42:1; 44:3,4; 59:19-21; 61:1; 63:14; Ezekiel 36:27; 37:14; 39:29 etc. etc.

So I ask again, what is holy spirit?
It is the power of the Almighty God Jehovah, the limitless power by which he created the universe.  
Pay attention because your life depends upon knowing God's truth and not man's attempted rewrite. The Scripture never describs holy spirit as a distinct person or entity but most often refers to it as and connects it with God's devine power "As for me, I am filled with power by the spirit of Jehovah, And with justice and might, To tell to Jacob his revolt and to Israel his sin." Micah 3:8  
Jewish scholars, examining the references to the Spirit in the Hebrew texts, have never defined  holy spirit as anything but the power of God.

In the Greek Scriptures, Paul referred to it as the spirit of power, love and a sound mind (2 Timothy 1:7). Informing Mary that Jesus would be supernaturally conceived in her womb, an angel told her, “ Holy spirit will come upon you,” and the divine messenger described this spirit to her as “the power of the Most High will overshadow you” (Luke 1:35).

Jesus began His ministry “filled with the power of the spirit” (Luke 4:14). He told His followers, “You shall receive power when the holy spirit comes upon you” (Acts 1:8).

Peter relates that “God anointed Jesus with holy spirit and with power” (Acts 10:38). This was the same power that enabled Christ to perform many mighty miracles during His earthly ministry. Likewise, Jesus worked through the apostle Paul “in mighty signs and wonders, with the power of the spirit of God” (Romans 15:19).

Even the New Catholic Encyclopedia admits: “The OT [Old Testament] clearly does not envisage God’s spirit as a person .   .   .   God’s spirit is simply God’s power. If it is sometimes represented as being distinct from God, it is because the breath of Yahweh acts exteriorly . . . The majority of NT [New Testament] texts reveal God’s spirit as some thing , not some one ; this is especially seen in the parallelism between the spirit and the power of God” (1965, Vol. 13, “Spirit of God,” pp. 574-576).

The reference work A Catholic Dictionary similarly acknowledges, “On the whole the New Testament, like the Old, speaks of the spirit as a divine energy or power” (William Addis and Thomas Arnold, 2004, “Trinity, Holy,” p. 827).

The Scriptures depict holy spirit as the power of God many times over.It is also shown to be the mind of God and the very essence and life force through which our heavenly Father begets (anoints)  human beings as His spiritual children. The holy spirit is not God, but a vital aspect of God, the agency through which Jehovah and Christ both work.

The Anchor Bible Dictionary describes it as the “manifestation of divine presence and power perceptible especially in prophetic inspiration” (Vol. 3, 1992, p. 260).

The Scriptures continually reveal that God imparted divine inspiration to His prophets and servants through His holy spirit. Peter noted that “prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by holy spirit” (2 Peter 1:21).

Paul wrote that God’s purpose for mankind had been “revealed by the spirit to His holy apostles and prophets” (Ephesians 3:5) and that his own teachings were inspired by God's spirit (1 Corinthians 2:13). Paul further explains that it is through His spirit that God has revealed to true Christians the things He has prepared for those who love Him (1 Corinthians 2:9-16). Working through the spirit, Jehovah is the revealer of truth to those who serve Him.

Jesus told His followers that the holy spirit, which the Father would send," would teach" "But the helper, the holy spirit, which the Father will send in my name, that one will teach you all things and bring back to your minds all the things I told you."(John 14:26).

Jesus had this spiritual comprehension in abundance. “And the spirit of Jehovah will settle upon him, The spirit of wisdom and of understanding, The spirit of counsel and of mightiness, The spirit of knowledge and of the fear of Jehovah.” (Isaiah 11:2).

As the Son of Man on earth, Jesus portrayed in His personal conduct the divine attributes of Almighty God through completely living by His Father’s biblical standards through the power of the holy spirit  "And the spirit of Jehovah will settle upon him, The spirit of wisdom and of understanding, The spirit of counsel and of mightiness, The spirit of knowledge and of the fear of Jehovah.( 1 Timothy 3:16).

The Father imparts the same spirit to true Christians through Jesus Christ   "But the helper, the holy spirit, which the Father will send in my name, that one will teach you all things and bring back to your minds all the things I told you".John 14:26

 "When the helper comes that I will send you from the Father, the spirit of the truth, which comes from the Father, that one will bear witness about me." John 15:26;

"(not because of any righteous works we had done, but because of his own mercy), he saved us by means of the bath that brought us to life and by making us new by holy spirit. 6 He poured this spirit out richly on us through Jesus Christ our Savior,"Titus 3:5-6

 "For all who are led by God’s spirit are indeed God’s sons." (Romans 8:14

" for his divine power has granted us all the things that contribute to life and godly devotion through the accurate knowledge of the One who called us by his own glory and virtue. 4 Through these things he has granted us the precious and very grand promises, so that through these you may become sharers in divine nature, having escaped from the world’s corruption produced by wrong desire."2 Peter 1:3,4).

 Holy spirit is spoken of in many ways that demonstrate that it is not a person. For example, it is referred to as a gift  "And the circumcised believers who had come with Peter were amazed, because the free gift of the holy spirit was being poured out also on people of the nations." Acts 10:45

" Do not neglect the gift (the spirit) in you that was given you through a prophecy when the body of elders laid their hands on you."1 Timothy 4:14

God gives without limit  "For the one (Christ) whom God sent speaks the sayings of God, for He does not give the spirit sparingly."John 3:34

 We are told that holy spirit can be quenched " Do not put out the fire of the spirit."1 Thessalonians 5:19

and that it can be poured out on people "And in the last days,” God says, “I will pour out some of my spirit on every sort of flesh, and your sons and your daughters will prophesy and your young men will see visions and your old men will dream dreams, 18 and even on my male slaves and on my female slaves I will pour out some of my spirit in those days, and they will prophesy. 19 And I will give wonders in heaven above and signs on earth below—blood and fire and clouds of smoke. 20 The sun will be turned into darkness and the moon into blood before the great and illustrious day of Jehovah comes. 21 And everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.”’ 22 “Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus the Nazareneʹ was a man publicly shown to you by God through powerful works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, just as you yourselves know. 23 This man, who was handed over by the determined will and foreknowledge of God, you fastened to a stake by the hand of lawless men, and you did away with him. 24 But God resurrected him by releasing him from the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held fast by it. 25 For David says about him: ‘I keep Jehovah constantly in front of me, for he is at my right hand that I may never be shaken. 26 On this account my heart became cheerful and my tongue rejoiced greatly. And I will reside in hope; 27 because you will not leave me in the Grave, nor will you allow your loyal one to see corruption. 28 You have made life’s ways known to me; you will fill me with great joy in your presence.’ 29 “Men, brothers, it is permissible to speak with freeness of speech to you about the family head David, that he died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. 30 Because he was a prophet and knew that God had sworn to him with an oath that he would seat one of his offspring on his throne, 31 he foresaw and spoke about the resurrection of the Christ, that neither was he forsaken in the Grave nor did his flesh see corruption. 32 God resurrected this Jesus, and of this we are all witnesses. 33 Therefore, because he was exalted to the right hand of God and received the promised holy spirit from the Father, he has poured out what you see and hear. Acts 2:17-33

and that we are also baptized with holy spirit " I, for my part, baptize you with water because of your repentance, but the one coming after me is stronger than I am, whose sandals I am not worthy to take off. That one will baptize you with holy spirit and with fire. Matthew 3:11.

People can drink of it "John 7:37-39

partake of it (Hebrews 6:4) and be filled with it (Acts 2:4; Ephesians 5:18).  Holy spirit also renews us (Titus 3:5) and must be stirred up within us (2 Timothy 1:6). These impersonal characteristics are certainly not attributes of a person or personal being!

The Spirit is also described by other designations—”the Holy spirit of promise,” “the guarantee of our inheritance” and “the spirit of wisdom and revelation” which show it is not a person. "But you also hoped in him after you heard the word of truth, the good news about your salvation. After you believed, you were sealed by means of him with the promised holy spirit, 14 which is a token in advance of our inheritance, for the purpose of releasing God’s own possession by a ransom, to his glorious praise. 15 That is why I also, since I have heard of the faith that you have in the Lord Jesus and the love that you demonstrate toward all the holy ones, 16 never stop giving thanks for you. I continue mentioning you in my prayers, 17 that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the accurate knowledge of him.(Ephesians 1:13-17)

In contrast to Jehovah God and Jesus Christ, who are consistently compared to human beings in Their form and shape, the holy spirit is consistently represented, by various symbols and manifestations, in a completely different manner—such as breath (John 20:22), wind (Acts 2:2), fire (Acts 2:3), water (John 4:14; John 7:37-39), oil (Psalms 45:7; compare Acts 10:38; Matthew 25:1-10), a dove (Matthew 3:16) and an “earnest, or down payment, on eternal life (2 Corinthians 1:22; 2 Corinthians 5:5; Ephesians 1:13-14, KJV).

These depictions would certainly be difficult to understand if the holy spirit is a person!

In Matthew 1:20 we find further proof that holy spirit is not a distinct entity, but God’s divine power. Here we read that Jesus was conceived by holy spirit. However, Jesus continually prayed to and addressed Jehovah God as his Father and not the holy spirit - another thing that is apparent, is Jesus himself is not a co-equal part of a trinity or he would be praying to himself. (Matthew 10:32-33; Matthew 11:25-27; Matthew 12:50). He never represented the spirit as his Father! Clearly, holy spirit was the agency or power through which the Father begot Jesus as His Son.
Paul’s example and teaching were in line with that of Christ

If God were a Trinity, surely Paul, who was taught directly by the resurrected Jesus Christ (Galatians 1:11-12) and who wrote much of the theological underpinnings of the early Church, would have comprehended and taught this concept. Yet we find no such teaching in His writings.

Moreover, Paul’s standard greeting in his letter to the congregations, as well as individuals to whom he wrote, consistently mentions “God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” Yet in each of his greetings he never mentions the holy spirit! (The same can also be said of Peter in the salutations of both his epistles.)

The same greeting, with only minor variations, appears in every epistle that bears Paul’s name. Notice how consistent he is in not including the holy spirit in his greetings:

• “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (Romans 1:7).

• “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Corinthians 1:3).

• “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Corinthians 1:2).

• “Grace to you and peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ” (Galatians 1:3).

• “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (Ephesians 1:2).

• “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (Philippians 1:2).

• “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (Colossians 1:2).

• “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thessalonians 1:1).

• “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Thessalonians 1:1-2).

• “Grace, mercy, and peace from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord” (1 Timothy 1:2).

• “Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord” (2 Timothy 1:2).

• “Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Savior” (Titus 1:4).

• “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (Philemon 1:3).

Mention of a holy spirit is always left out of these greetings, an unbelievable and inexplicable oversight if the spirit were indeed a person or entity coequal with Jehovah God and'or Christ Jesus!

This is even more surprising when we consider that the congregations to which Paul wrote had many gentile members from polytheistic backgrounds who had formerly worshipped numerous gods. Paul’s epistles record no attempt on his part to explain the Trinity or the spirit as a divine person equal with God, Jehovah and Jesus Christ.

In all of Paul’s writings, only in 2 Corinthians 13:14 is the spirit mentioned along with the Father and Jesus Christ in such expressions, and there only in connection with the “fellowship of  holy spirit”  in which believers share, not in any sort of theological statement on the nature of God...."The undeserved kindness of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the sharing in the holy spirit be with all of you."

 The point Paul makes here is that God’s spirit is the unifying agent that brings us together in godly, righteous fellowship, not only with one another but with the Father and Son.

As 1 John 1:3 tells us, “ that which we have seen and heard we are reporting also to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us. And this fellowship of ours is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ." There is no mention whatsoever of holy spirit.

Jesus likewise never spoke of holy spirit as a divine third person. Instead, in numerous passages He spoke only of the relationship between the Father and himself "And going a little way forward, he fell facedown, praying: “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass away from me. Yet, not as I will, but as you will.” Matthew 26:39

"Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son, but the Father." Mark 13:32

"And at the ninth hour, Jesus called out with a loud voice: “Eʹli, Eʹli, laʹma sa·bach·thaʹni?” which means, when translated: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” Mark 15:34

"This is why the Jews began seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath but he was also calling God his own Father, making himself equal to God. 19 Therefore, in response Jesus said to them: “Most truly I say to you, the Son cannot do a single thing of his own initiative, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever things that One does, these things the Son does also in like manner. 20 For the Father has affection for the Son and shows him all the things he himself does, and he will show him works greater than these, so that you may marvel. 21 For just as the Father raises the dead up and makes them alive, so the Son also makes alive whomever he wants to. 22 For the Father judges no one at all, but he has entrusted all the judging to the Son,"John 5:18-22

The spirit as a person is conspicuously absent from Christ’s teaching in general. Of particular interest in this regard are His many statements about himself and the Father, especially when he never makes similar statements about himself and the spirit.
The spirit is absent in visions of God’s throne

In visions of God’s throne recorded in the Bible, although the Father and Christ are seen, the spirit as a third person is absent.

In Acts 7:55-56, which describes the martyrdom of Stephen, we read that he “gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God, and said, ‘Look! I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!’” He saw the Father and the Son, but no other spirit creature, equal, co-equal or otherwise.

Daniel 7:9-14 similarly describes Daniel’s vision of heaven. There he saw “the Ancient of Days” - Jehovah, the Father - plus millions of angelic beings and “One like the Son of Man,” the preexistent Jesus Christ, but no third person as a Triune entity.

And in Revelation 4-5 and Revelation 7:10 we see that Jesus, the Lamb of God, is mentioned as being at the right hand of the Father, but no one is mentioned as being at the Father’s left hand. Nowhere is a third spirit person mentioned. Nowhere in any of these passages, or anywhere in Scripture, are three divine persons pictured together.

In the final book of the Bible (and the last to be written), the Holy spirit as a divine person is completely absent from its pages. The book describes “a new heaven and new earth” (Revelation 21:1) wherein “the holy city is with men, and He (Jehovah) will dwell with them” (Revelation 21:3). Christ the Lamb is also present (Revelation 21:22, 23) "because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple." "And the city has no need for sun or moon to shine on it, because the glory of God illuminates the city, and the Lamb is its lamp."
Again, no third person.

This is why Paul states in 1 Corinthians 8:6 that “there is one God, the Father . . . and one Lord Jesus Christ,” no mention of the holy spirit as a divine person or co-equal personage. Elsewhere he (Paul) makes reference to Colossians 2:2 "This is so that their (the congregation) hearts may be comforted and that they may be harmoniously joined together in love and may have all the riches that result from the full assurance of their understanding, in order to gain an accurate knowledge of the sacred secret of God, namely, Christ" Here again mentioning only the two  not three.

We should also consider that nowhere do we find any prayer, psalm or hymn addressed to or dedicated to a trinity. Nowhere do we see worship of a third person. Again and again, the biblical record just doesn’t support the Trinity doctrine in places where it should be obvious if it were true!

This is why, as we have seen from numerous quotes by many historians and biblical researchers, admitting the doctrine of the Trinity is not found in the Bible. We must not cling to long-held religious traditions if they contradict the Scriptures! Our beliefs must rest solidly on the teachings of the Bible. Jesus said, “[God’s] word is truth” (John 17:17).
What about scriptures describing actions of a co-equal partner, a triune Spirit?

Some scriptural passages seem to describe holy spirit as apparently engaging in personal activity. Does this mean that the Spirit is a distinct person?

While at first this might seem to indicate as much, it doesn’t really prove that at all. In the languages of Bible times, nonpersonal things were sometimes described in personal ways and as having personlike activities.

For example, in Genesis 4:10 God says to Cain: “What have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood cries out to Me from the ground.” Here Abel’s shed blood is described as having a “voice” that “cries out” from the ground. Yet clearly this is figurative language, as blood has no voice and cannot speak.

Similarly, in the book of Proverbs, wisdom is personified as calling aloud and crying out (Proverbs 1:20-21). Proverbs 8 describes wisdom as crying out, standing on a high hill, calling to men, speaking, having lips and a mouth, loving and being loved, having children and having accompanied and rejoiced with God. Yet obviously wisdom is not a person and does none of these things in a literal sense!

Likewise, Psalms 65:13 describes valleys shouting for joy and singing. Psalms 96:11-12 attributes emotions to the heavens, earth and fields. Psalms 98:8 says the rivers clap their hands. Psalms 148:4-5 describes the skies and rain praising God.

Isaiah 3:26 says the gates of the city of Jerusalem will lament and mourn. Isaiah 14:8 speaks of cypress trees rejoicing and cedar trees talking. Isaiah 35:1 ascribes emotions to the wilderness and says the desert will rejoice. Isaiah 44:23 and Isaiah 49:13 describe mountains, forests, trees and the heavens singing.

Isaiah 55:12 says that hills will break into singing and trees will clap their hands. In Habakkuk 2:11 stones and timbers are described as talking to each other.

We find similar personifications of nonpersonal things in the New Testament as well. Matthew 11:19 speaks of wisdom having children. Romans 6 says that sin enslaves and reigns over human beings (Romans 6:6; Romans 6:12; Romans 6:16). In Romans 10:6 righteousness is described as speaking. In 1 John 5:8 water and blood are said to testify and agree.

Yet clearly none of these things happen literally. At times the Bible similarly applies such figurative language to the Holy Spirit, ascribing activity to it as though it were a person. Yet, as noted earlier in this chapter, the Bible also describes the Holy Spirit in ways that clearly show it is not a person.

As even the New Catholic Encyclopedia, quoted from earlier,acknowledges: “The majority of New Testament texts reveal God’s spirit as something, not someone; this is especially seen in the parallelism between the spirit and the power of God. When a quasi-personal activity is ascribed to God’s spirit, e.g., speaking, hindering, desiring, dwelling (Acts 8:29; Acts 16:7; Romans 8:9), one is not justified in concluding immediately that in these passages God’s spirit is regarded as a Person; the same expressions are used also in regard to rhetorically personified things or abstract ideas In Acts, the use of the words ‘Holy Spirit,’ with or without an article, is rich and abundant. However, again, it is difficult to demonstrate personality from the texts” (2003, Vol. 13, “Spirit, Holy,” p. 428).

Thus we see that in some cases where the Holy Spirit is described in a personal activity, we should understand this as God using his Spirit as the power or agency through which He acts.

Consider, for example, that if a man’s hand takes hold of a book and lifts it, we can say the man lifted the book. This does not make the hand a separate person. Nor does it mean that the hand is the man. The hand is merely part of, or an extension of, the man. And it is the agency through which the man is acting. Similarly, the Holy Spirit is the agency through which God or Son or both acts.

Of course, Jehovah's Holy spirit is far more than a hand. It is His limitless power by which God, as Psalms 139:7-10 and Jeremiah 23:23-24 shows us, It is the invisible energizing force that God puts into action to accomplish his will. It is holy because it comes from Jehovah, who is clean and righteous to the highest degree, and because it is God’s means to accomplish what is holy.Luke 1:35; Acts 1:8.

This is why Peter in Acts 5:1-10 said that Ananias and Sapphira “lied to the Holy spirit” and also that they “lied . . . to God.” This passage doesn’t indicate that the Spirit is God or one of the supposed three persons of God, as some read into this passage. The apostles were anointed with Holy spirit and through the power of God's spirit Peter knew Ananias was lying. Jehovah's Spirit is the agency through which Peter knew he lied and acted accordingly.
" However, a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, sold some property. 2 But he secretly held back some of the price, with his wife’s knowledge, and he brought just a part of it and deposited it at the feet of the apostles. 3 But Peter said: “Ananias, why has Satan emboldened you to lie to the holy spirit and secretly hold back some of the price of the field? 4 As long as it remained with you, did it not remain yours? And after it was sold, was it not in your control? Why have you thought up such a deed as this in your heart? You have lied, not to men, but to God.” 5 On hearing these words, Ananias collapsed and died. And great fear came over all those who heard about it. 6 Then the younger men rose, wrapped him in cloths, carried him out, and buried him. 7 Now after an interval of about three hours his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8 Peter said to her: “Tell me, did you two sell the field for so much?” She said: “Yes, for that amount.” 9 So Peter said to her: “Why did you two agree to make a test of the spirit of Jehovah? Look! The feet of those who buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out.” 10 Instantly she collapsed at his feet and died. When the young men came in, they found her dead and they carried her out and buried her alongside her husband."

Jesus Christ’s reference in John 16:7 to holy spirit as a “Helper” (or “Counselor,” “Comforter” or “Advocate” as some versions translate it) is a personification that provides a good analogy of part of the Spirit’s function in the lives of true Christians. And as noted before, many passages show the Spirit as the power of God to help and assist us, not a distinct person as Trinitarians maintain.

And BTW, the Scripture you quoted (John 2:21) was referencing Christ not the holy spirit. EKEINOS means that one; From ekei; that one (or (neuter) thing); often intensified by the article prefixed -- he, it, the other (same), selfsame, that (same, very), X their, X them, they, this, those.

[sami]

On 7/21/2018 at 1:09 AM, Cos said:

Here is another claim, “most translations incorrectly translate ekeinos as ‘He.’”

 

 

 

 

 

The NWT translation at John 2:21 has; “But he (Greek ekeinos) was talking about the temple of his body”.

 

 

 

 

 

If “spirit” [pneuma] means “an impersonal force” as claimed by sami, WHY then are actual persons also deemed pneuma in Scripture?

 

 

 

 

 

The only blatant departure from the rules is reading a false premise in to bible text and then constructing straw man arguments to try and maintain that false premise.<><

 

 

Historical Background of the Trinity

---

The current mainstream teaching in Christianity is that God is a coequal, coeternal, one-substance trinity, and that Jesus Christ is God. This doctrine is considered by many as the cornerstone of Christianity, but where did this doctrine come from? The historical record is overwhelming that the church of the first three centuries did not worship God as a coequal, coeternal, consubstantial, one-substance three in one mysterious godhead. The early church worshipped one God and believed in a subordinate Son. The trinity originated with Babylon, and was passed on to most of the world's religions. This polytheistic (believing in more than one god) trinitarianism was intertwined with Greek religion and philosophy and slowly worked its way into Christian thought and creeds some 300 years after Christ. The idea of "God the Son" is Babylonian paganism and mythology that was grafted into Christianity. Worshipping "God the Son" is idolatry, and idolatry is Biblically condemned; it breaks the first great commandment of God of not having any gods before him (Exodus 20:3). Then three centuries after Christ the corrupt emperor Constantine forced the minority opinion of the trinity upon the council of Nicea. The Christian church went downward from there; in fact some of the creeds and councils actually contradict each other. The council of Nicea 325 said that "Jesus Christ is God," the council of Constantinople 381 said that "the Holy Spirit is God," the council of Ephesus 431 said that "human beings are totally depraved," the council of Chalcedon 451 said that "Jesus Christ is both man and God." If you follow the logic here then first you have Jesus Christ as God, then you have man totally depraved, and then you have Jesus Christ as man and God. If Jesus Christ is both man and God does this mean that God is also totally depraved? Well maybe the doctrine of the coequal, coeternal, one-substance, mysterious three in one triune godhead is deprived of any historical foundation tying it into the Christianity of the Bible and the Christianity of the first three centuries. However the historical information ties the trinity into various pagan origins.

And yet most Christian churches continue to teach and believe the doctrine that God is a coequal, coeternal, one-substance, mysterious three in one triune godhead, and that Jesus Christ is God, and that the trinity is "the cornerstone of Christianity".

The Church of the First Three Centuries 1865 Alvan Lamson

" . . . The modern doctrine of the Trinity is not found in any document or relic belonging to the Church of the first three centuries. . . so far as any remains or any record of them are preserved, coming down from early times, are, as regards this doctrine an absolute blank. They testify, so far as they testify at all, to the supremacy of the father, the only true God; and to the inferior and derived nature of the Son. There is nowhere among these remains a coequal trinity. . . but no un-divided three, -- coequal, infinite, self-existent, and eternal. This was a conception to which the age had not arrived. It was of later origin."

During the first three centuries, Christians did not believe that Jesus Christ was coequal, and coeternal with God, or that he was God the Son, they believed that Jesus Christ was subordinate to God, and that he had a beginning, that he was born. Those that believed otherwise were the exception.

The Doctrine of the Trinity Christianity's Self-Inflicted Wound 1994 Anthony F. Buzzard Charles F. Hunting

"Those Trinitarians who believe that the concept of a Triune God was such an established fact that it was not considered important enough to mention at the time the New Testament was written should be challenged by the remarks of another writer, Harold Brown:"

"It is a simple fact and an undeniable historical fact that several major doctrines that now seem central to the Christian Faith – such as the doctrine of the Trinity and the doctrine of the nature of Christ – were not present in a full and self-defined generally accepted form until the fourth and fifth centuries. If they are essential today – as all of the orthodox creeds and confessions assert – it must be because they are true. If they are true, then they must always have been true; they cannot have become true in the fourth and fifth century. But if they are both true and essential, how can it be that the early church took centuries to formulate them?"

A History of the Christian Church 2nd Ed. 1985 Williston Walker

"AD 200. . Noetus had been expelled from the Smyrnaean church for teaching that Christ was the Father, and that the Father himself was born, and suffered, and died."

Man's Religions John B. Noss 1968

"The controversy first became heated when Apollinarius, a bishop in Syria . . . asserted that Christ could not have been perfect man united with complete God, for then there would not have been one Son of God, but two sons, one by nature and one by adoption, the first with a divine, the second with a human will. Such a thing seemed inconceivable, religiously abhorrent."

"Nestorius . . . preached a sermon against calling the virgin Mary "the mother of God" declaring she did not bear a deity, she bore a man,"

Numbers 23:19 states that God is not a man. God was not born, and God certainly did not die, but when people deviate from what the Bible teaches you can come up with the bizarre complexities of trinitarian religious mysteries that contradict logic, common sense and God's Word.

New Bible Dictionary 1982

"The word trinity is not found in the Bible . . ."

". . . it did not find a place formally in the theology of the church till the 4th century."

". . . it is not a biblical doctrine in the sense that any formation of it can be found in the Bible, . . ."

"Scripture does not give us a formulated doctrine of the trinity, . . ."

The HarperCollins Encyclopedia of Catholicism 1995

". . . scholars generally agree that there is no doctrine of the trinity as such in either the Old Testament or the New Testament."

If the trinity is the cornerstone of Christianity then how did the church of the first three centuries get along so well without it? If the trinity is the cornerstone of Christianity then why is it not mentioned in the Bible?

The Encyclopedia Americana 1956

"Christianity derived from Judaism and Judaism was strictly Unitarian (believing in one God). The road which led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching."

The trinity is a deviation from believing in one God; it is a deviation from what the early church taught and it is a deviation from the scripture.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia 1967

"The formulation 'one God in three persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century."

Who is Jesus? Anthony Buzzard

"The Old Testament is a strictly monotheistic. God is a single personal being. The idea that a trinity is to be found there or even in any way shadowed forth, is an assumption that has long held sway in theology, but is utterly without foundation."

The New Encyclopedia Britannica 1976

"Neither the word trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord' (Deut. 6:4). . . The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. . . . By the end of the 4th century . . . the doctrine of the trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since."

The Shema consists of three sections of scripture Deuteronomy 6:4-9, 11:13-21, and Numbers 15:37-41. It is called the Shema after the Hebrew word hear, the first word in Deut. 6:4. The Shema was to be recited twice daily once upon arising and once when going to bed. So the Old Testament Jews would start and finish their day with 'Hear O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord.'

The Complete Word Study Old Testament 1994

"To the Jew, (Deut. 6:4-9) this is the most important text in the Old Testament. Jesus himself called the injunction in 6:5 'the first and great commandment' Matt.22:36-38. . . Moses is teaching not only the priority of belief in one God, but also a means to preserve that belief. As time went on, the proper understanding of the Shema with its spiritual implications was no longer grasped by the people. This absence of saving knowledge became a factor in their spiritual downfall."

Whenever God's people forget that there is only one God and they follow after other gods this will result in their downfall. This can be seen time and time again in the Old Testament where God's people forsook the Lord and then evil came upon them. God does not send this evil, but He warns us to stay away from the evil of worshipping more than one God.

Dictionary of The Bible 1995 John L. Mckenzie

"The trinity of God is defined by the church as the belief that in God are three persons who subsist in one nature. The belief as so defined was reached only in the 4th and 5th centuries AD and hence is not explicitly and formally a biblical belief."

Why You Should Believe In The Trinity 1989 Robert M. Bowman Jr.

"The New Testament does not contain a formalized explanation of the trinity that uses such words as trinity, three persons, one substance, and the like."

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology 1976

"The Bible lacks the express declaration that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are of equal essence. [said Karl Barth]"

Exploring The Christian Faith 1992

"nowhere in the Bible do we find the doctrine of the trinity clearly formulated"

"People who are using the King James Version might be inclined to point to I John 5:7 'For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost' But it is now generally recognized that this verse does not belong to the original text of the letter; it is a later insertion."

"The theological formulation took place later, after the days of the apostles."

"the doctrine of the trinity is not found in the Bible"

"The doctrine was to develop along mainly Greek lines"

Take note of the words "explicitly and formally", "formalized explanation", "express declaration", and "clearly formulated". These words are indicative of the fact that all the clear verses on the subjects of God, Jesus Christ, and Holy Spirit do not even hint at a trinity. There are only a few verses that seem to hint at a trinity, and then only when they are twisted. The difficult or unclear verse must always be interpreted in light of the clear verses. If God is a coeternal, coequal, one substance, three-in-one Godhead, trinity, if that is what God really is, then he would have made himself known as such to the first century apostles; they would have made the trinity part of their beliefs teachings and writings. They would have used words like God the Son, coequal, coeternal, one substance, or trinity, but the scripture is devoid of all of these trinitarian words and phrases because the first century apostles did not believe or teach, or write about God being a trinity, or Jesus Christ being God. But the pagan and Greek and Babylonian religions used those words.

Dictionary Of The Bible 1995 John L. Mckenzie

"The trinity of persons within the unity of nature is defined in terms of 'person' and 'nature' which are Greek philosophical terms; actually the terms do not appear in the Bible. The trinitarian definitions arose as the result of long controversies in which these terms and others such as 'essence' and 'substance' were erroneously applied to God by some theologians."

The Rise of Christianity W.H.C. Frend 1985

"For him [Clement] the trinity consisted of a hierarchy of three graded beings, and from that concept - derived from Platonism - depended much of the remainder of his theological teaching."

The Doctrine of the Trinity Christianity's Self-Inflicted Wound 1994 Anthony F. Buzzard, Charles F. Hunting

"Eberhard Griesebach, in an acedemic lecture on "Christianity and humanism" delivered in 1938, observed that in its encounter with Greek philosophy Christianity became theology. That was the fall of Christianity. The Problem thus highlighted stems from the fact that traditional orthodoxy, while it claims to find its origins in scripture, in fact contains elements drawn from a synthesis of Scripture and Neo-Platonism. The mingling of Hebrew and Greek thinking set in motion first in the second century by an influx of Hellenism through the Church Fathers, whose theology was colored by the Platonists Plotinus and Porphyry. The effects of the Greek influence are widely recognized by theologians, though they go largely unnoticed by many believers."

". . . the Trinity is an unintelligible proposition of platonic mysticisms that three are one and one is three"

The Greek mythology and pagan religious beliefs were derived from Babylon.

Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel 1870

"The Platonic trinity, itself merely a rearrangement of older trinities dating back to earlier peoples, appears to be the rational philosophic trinity of attributes that gave birth to the three hypostases or divine persons taught by the Christian churches . . . This Greek philosopher's (Plato, 4th century BC) conception of the divine trinity . . . can be found in all ancient (pagan) religions"

The Two Babylons 1916 Rev. Alexander Hislop

"Egypt and Greece derived their religion from Babylon"

Microsoft Encarta Funk & Wagnalls 1994

"Neoplatonism is a type of idealistic monism in which the ultimate reality of the universe is held to be an infinite, unknowable, perfect One. From this One emanates nous (pure intelligence), whence in turn is derived the world soul, the creative activity of which engenders the lesser souls of human beings. The world soul is conceived as an image of the nous, even as the nous is an image of the One; both the nous and the world soul, despite their differentiation, are thus consubstantial [one substance] with the One."

Microsoft Encarta Funk & Wagnalls 1994

"The theologians Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and St. Augustine were early Christian exponents of a Platonic perspective. Platonic ideas have had a crucial role in the development of Christian theology"

The Rise of Christianity W.H.C. Frend 1985

"we find Christianity tending to absorb Greek philosophical values, until by the end of the third century the line between the beliefs of educated Christian and educated pagan in the east would often be hard to draw."

The early Christians began mixing Greek and pagan and Babylonian philosophical and religious trinitarian concepts with their Christian doctrine which lead them to begin considering the trinity, and after three centuries that thinking finally took hold. Acts 17:22 says that the Greeks were too superstitious, and I Corinthians 1:22 says that the Jews require a sign and the Greeks seek after wisdom. The Greeks were too intellectual in their approach to God's Word. They became wise in their own eyes and the truth of God’s Word became foolishness to them, so they grafted their own superstitious philosophical wisdom into God’s Word and changed the truth into a lie; they changed Son of God to God the Son.

Catholic Encyclopedia 1991

"The term 'Trinity' does not appear in scripture"

"(The Doctrine of the Trinity) - hammered out over the course of three centuries of doctrinal controversy against modalism and subordinationism"

Why You Should Believe In The Trinity 1989 Robert M. Bowman Jr.

"Roman Catholics . . often claim that the trinity is not a biblical doctrine and was first revealed through the ministry of the church centuries after the Bible was written. This is in keeping with the Roman Catholic belief that Christian doctrine may be based either on the Bible or on church tradition."

The Roman Catholic Church did not get the doctrine of the trinity from the Bible, they hammered out their own theology of what they wanted God to be over several hundred years, and mixed Greek philosophy with Babylonian mystery religion, and their own private interpretations of the Bible.

I Peter 1:20, 21 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

II Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

People don't respect God's Word, they are more interested in inventing their own theology by the will of man instead of believing the word of God, they are not interested in rightly dividing God's word of truth. The trinity is private interpretation and wrong dividing of God's word.

Jesus Christ is not God 1975 Victor Paul Wierwille

"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 Hindu trinity was made up of the gods Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. 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."

Who is Jesus? Anthony Buzzard

". . . we shall find not a hint that Jesus believed himself to be an uncreated being who had existed from eternity. Matthew and Luke trace the origin of Jesus to a special act of creation by God when the Messiah's conception took place in the womb of Mary. It was this miraculous event which marked the beginning-the genesis, or origin of Jesus of Nazareth"

Arius and his followers believed that Jesus Christ was created, that he was not in the beginning with God. They believed that he had a beginning, whereas God has no beginning. This makes Jesus Christ substantially different from God, which means he cannot be of one-substance with God as the trinitarians believe.

Documents of the Christian Church 2nd Ed 1963 Henery Bettenson

(quotes from Arius and his followers)

"If, said he, the Father begat the Son, he that was begotten had a beginning of existence; hence it is clear that there was a [a time] when the son was not."

"The Son of God is from what is not and there was [a time] when he was not; saying also that the Son of God, in virtue of his free will, is capable of evil and good, and calling him a creature and a work."

The Rise of Christianity 1985 W.H.C. Frend

"If the Father begat the son, there must be when he was not. He could not therefore be coeternal with the Father."[said by Arius]

Man's Religions 1968 John B. Noss

"Arius held that Christ, . . . was a created being; he was made like other creatures out of nothing, . . . The Son, he argued, had a beginning, while God was without beginning."

The Church in History 1964 B. K. Kuiper

"The heathen believe in many gods. Arius thought that to believe that the Son is God as well as that the Father is God would mean that there are two Gods, and that therefore the Christians would be falling back into heathenism."

Arius believed that Jesus Christ was born, that he had a beginning, he believed that Jesus Christ was the created Son, not the Creator, and for taking the Word of God literally he was excommunicated and anathematized. Starting with Nimrod in ancient Babylon until today man has stubbornly rebelled against the doctrine of one God.

Exodus 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

Exodus 34:14a For thou shalt worship no other god:

The trinity is idolatry, it puts Jesus Christ as a god before God.

Forgers of the Word 1983 Victor Paul Wierwille

"To say Jesus Christ is God the Son is idolatry. To say Jesus is the Son of God is truth."

I Samuel 15:23 For Rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry.

Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord:

The Lord God Almighty, the Creator, the Father of Jesus Christ is one God not three, not three-in-one, not one-in-three, ONE! and only ONE! God is not a three-headed multi-personality trinity.

The Bible clearly refers to Jesus Christ as the Son of God 50 times; it never refers to him as God the Son. The phrase, Son of God, is in the genitive case; showing that Jesus Christ originated from and belongs to God. In no way can the Son of God be the same as God the Son, that violates grammar, language and common sense. God the Son is not a biblical term, it does not appear in the Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic texts. God the Son is however a Babylonian term. The Babylonians made Nimrod a god, and when he died they deified his son Tammuz as God the Son. Making God a man and man a god was invented in Babylon. This idolatry and false belief has been carried into pagan religions, and it has worked its way into Christianity as the doctrine of the trinity.

Ravaged By The New Age 1996 Texe Marrs

"Nimrod, the first of the great Babylonian rulers, was also declared to be the first of the man-gods."

The Two Babylons 1916 Rev. Alexander Hislop

"He was worshipped in Babylon under the name of El-Bar, or 'God the Son'."

It is clear that the trinity does not have a Biblical origin. It can be traced back to ancient Babylon, pagan Greeks and Romans. It was forced upon the Christian Church by the emperor Constantine. It was adhered to by bishops who were afraid to speak against it. Then when the Protestants broke away from the corrupt Roman Church most of them still carried the pagan doctrine of the trinity, because they had practiced error for so long that they accepted the trinitarian doctrine.

Encyclopedia Britannica 1968

"The Council of Nicaea met on May 20, 325. Constantine himself presiding, actively guiding the discussion, and personally proposed the crucial formula expressing the relation of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council 'of one substance with the father.' Over-awed by the emperor, the bishops, with two exceptions only, signed the creed, many of them against their inclination. Constantine regarded the decision of Nicaea as divinely inspired. As long as he lived no one dared openly to challenge the creed of Nicaea."

The Origins of Pagan and Christian Beliefs Edward Carpenter 1920 1996

"And when at the Council of Nicea (325 AD) it [the early church] endeavored to establish an official creed, the strife and bitterness only increased."

"-the Nicean creed had nothing to propound except some extremely futile speculations about the relation to each other of the Father and the Son, and the relation of both to the Holy Ghost,"

Man's Religions 1968 John B. Noss

"This creed, adopted under pressure from the emperor, who wanted peace, did not immediately solve the doctrinal difficulties or save the peace. The phrases (not made) and (of the same substance with the Father) were bitterly denounced by many"

The Rise of Christianity 1985 W.H.C. Frend

"The Emperor exerted all his influence toward winning unanimous acceptance and nearly succeeded. Only two bishops stood out against it; but two other senior bishops refused to sign the anathemas against Arius and were exiled."

Constantine was really only interested in unifying the empire and gaining more power. He broke truces, started wars, and even had relatives killed to further his power. Constantine was more interested in unity than in getting the correct doctrine of the trinity. In fact before he died Constantine switched sides and took Arius' position regarding the trinity instead of the position that he forced through the council of Nicea. Without Constantine's presiding, actively guiding, and actively controlling the discussion there would not have been a 'coequal' 'coeternal' 'God the Son' Nicene creed. But what manner of man was this person who pushed through this doctrine which was to become the cornerstone of Christianity?

A History of Christianity Volume 1 1997 Kenneth Scott Latourette

"Constantine. . . although only a catechumen, [One who is being instructed in a subject at an elementary level] presided over its [the council of Nicea] opening session, and was active in its deliberations. Whether Constantine appreciated the niceties of the questions at issue is highly doubtful, for he was a layman, a warrior and administrator, not a philosopher or an expert theologian."

The Rise of Christianity 1985 W.H.C. Frend

"Like all great conquerors from Alexander to Napoleon or even Hitler his [Constantine's] aim was unity and unification on a worldwide scale."

A History of the Christian Church 2nd Ed. 1985 Williston Walker

"He [Constantine] accepted the pagan title of Pontifex Maximus, and his coins still showed the emblems of the Sun-God."

Babylon Mystery Religion 1981 Ralph Woodrow

". . his [Constantine's] conversion is to be seriously questioned. Even though he had much to do with the establishment of certain doctrines and customs within the church, the facts plainly show that he was not truly converted-not in the Biblical sense of the word."

"Probably the most obvious indication that he was not truly converted may be seen from the fact that after his conversion he committed several murders-including the murder of his own wife and son!"

"Yet in 326-very shortly after directing the Nicean Council-he had his son put to death."

The Doctrine of the Trinity Christianity's Self-Inflicted Wound 1994 Anthony F. Buzzard Charles F. Hunting

"It was Constantine who by official edict brought Christianity to believe in the formal division of the Godhead into two – God the Father and God the Son. It remained the task of a later generation to bring Christianity to believe in the Triune God."

". . . years after winning this heaven-inspired triumph, history divulges that the alleged follower of Jesus murdered an already vanquished rival, killed his wife by having her boiled alive in her own bath – and murdered an innocent son." [speaking of Constantine]

A History of Christianity 1976 Paul Johnson

". . . appears to have been a sun-worshipper, one of a number of the late pagan cults which had observances in common with Christians. Worship of such gods was not a novel idea. Every Greek or Roman expected that political success followed from religious piety. Christianity was the religion of Constantine's father. Although Constantine claimed that he was the thirteenth apostle, his was no sudden Damascus conversion. Indeed it is highly doubtful that he ever truly abandoned sun-worship. After his professed acceptance of Christianity, he built a triumphal arch to the sun god and in Constantinople set up a statue of the same sun god bearing his own features. He was finally deified after his death by official edict in the Empire, as were many Roman rulers."

". . . His private life became monstrous as he aged . . . His abilities had always lain in management . . . [he was] a master of . . . the smoothly-worded compromise."

It would be an understatement to say that Constantine was a crooked politician; yet this is the man who is mainly responsible for the Nicene Creed's doctrine of the coequal, coeternal, one substance three in one God. One day he is setting the doctrine for the Christian church another day he is murdering people; it would seem that to anyone with any common sense that formulating church doctrine should not be done by a non-repentant murderer. How many of you would like to have a non-repentant murderer setting your Christian doctrine? Yet if you believe the Nicene Creed you have done just that.

Documents of the Christian Church 2nd Ed 1963 Henery Bettenson

"The decisions of Nicea were really the work of a minority, and they were misunderstood and disliked by many"

Forgers of the Word 1983 Victor Paul Wierwille

"The truth of Jesus Christ the Son of God was deliberately forged into the doctrine of God the Son. Seeds of Jesus Christ as God were planted and sprouted during the lifetime of Paul, continued growing during Timothy's lifetime and flourished shortly thereafter, reaching full bloom for all future creeds by 325 AD"

"The doctrine that Jesus Christ the Son of God was God the son was decreed by worldly and ecclesiastical powers. Men were forced to accept it at the point of the sword or else, Thus, the error of the trinity was propounded to the end that ultimately people believed it to be the truth. Thus Christianity became in essence like Babylonian heathenism, with only a veneer of Christian names."

A History of Christianity Volume 1 1997 Kenneth Scott Latourette

"To enforce the decisions of the Council of Nicea, Constantine commanded, with the death penalty for disobedience, the burning of all books composed by Arius, banished Arius and his closest supporters, and deposed from their sees Eusebius of Nicomedia and another bishop who had been active in the support of Arius."

The Rise of Christianity 1985 W.H.C. Frend

"the controversial term, defining the son as Consubstantial with [homoousios] the father was introduced by Constantine. The term was objectionable to any Origenist bishop and had been rejected by Dionysius of Alexandria when used by the Libyan bishops, and the Council of Antioch"

"The great majority of the eastern bishops were placed in a false position. they dared not challenge the emperor"

A History of the Christian Church 2nd Ed. 1985 Williston Walker

"The majority (of the bishops) were conservatives in the sense that they represented . . . subordinationism of the eastern tradition. The Emperor himself was present at the assembly and dominated its proceedings."

"From the very beginning, however, people like Eusebius of Caesarea had doubts about the (Nicene) creed, doubts focused on the word 'homoousios'. (Greek for one substance) . . . The term was non-Scriptural, it had a very doubtful theological history."

"Eusebius of Nicomedia and all save two of the other bishops, signed the creed-willing no doubt, to go along with what the emperor wanted. Yet he and many others continued to suspect its language."

The majority of the bishops at the council of Nicea believedin what is called subordinationism, which is a belief that Jesus Christ is subordinate to God the Father, not coequal, not coeternal, and not God the Son. The teachings of Arius were condemned in 325, but the teachings of Arius did not die, by 359 Arianism was widely accepted, that is until the minority trinitarian bishops found another emperor that they could get to propose their trinitarian creed at the Council of Constantinople in 381.

Man's Religions John B. Noss 1968

"The doctrine of the trinity he [Michael Servetus] felt to be a Catholic perversion and himself to be a good New Testament Christian in combating it. . . According to his conception, a trinity composed of three distinct persons in one God is a rational impossibility;"

 

Saying that Jesus Christ is not God does not degrade Jesus Christ it merely sets things in their proper order so we can know God and worship Him in spirit and truth.

John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way the truth and the life: no man cometh to the Father, but by me.

John 14:13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do that the Father may be glorified in the Son.

Satan the Devil strongly desires man to worship him instead of the one true God, and when he can't achieve his primary goal then his next desire is to get man to worship anything other than the true God. Satan has been quite successful in tricking good Christians into worshipping Jesus Christ as God instead of worshipping the one true God, the Father of Jesus Christ.

Eph 5:14 Wherefore he saith Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light.

We can no longer be lulled to sleep by the bizarre, complex, confusing, ritualistic, mysterious Babylonian traditions of trinitarian doctrines. We must come back to God's Word and worship the one true God; the Father of Jesus Christ.

1 Corinthians 8:4b there is none other God but one.

1 Corinthians 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.

The Doctrine of the Trinity Christianity's Self-Inflicted Wound 1994 Anthony F. Buzzard Charles F. Hunting

"The God of Moses, Isaiah, Jesus, and the apostles was one person, the Father. One cannot be made equal to two or three. All that can be done with one is to fractionalize it. Divide it into smaller segments and it is no longer one. Expand it, and in spite of prodigious mental gymnastics on the part of Trinitarians, it cannot be made into two or three and still remain one."

". . . it is not uncommon for religious leaders to insist that you must believe in the Trinity to be a Christian, or be branded a cultist."

"One of the great marvels of Christian history has been the ability of theologians to convince Christian people that three persons are really one God."

A Statement of Reasons for Not Believing the Doctrine of the Trinitarians Concerning the Nature of God and the Person of Christ 1833 Andrews Norton

"When we look back through the long ages of the reign of the Trinity . . . we shall perceive that few doctrines have produced more unmixed evil."

The Bible does not give us a doctrine of a trinity, the historical record shows that modern Christian trinitarian beliefs were not formulated until about 300 years after the death of Jesus Christ, but in pagan religions trinitarian beliefs date back to ancient Babylon, thousands of years before Jesus Christ. The coequal, coeternal, one substance, three in one trinity is not a Christian Biblical doctrine; yet there are those who insist that it is the cornerstone of Christianity.

In our day and time the doctrine of the trinity is a cornerstone of idolatry.

 

[Cos]

Why would Jesus “yield up”, what was about to cease existing, into the hands of His father (Luke 23:46)? What is more revealing is the fact that the Greek word παρατίθημι is never translated “yield up” or “yielded up” nor does the word mean such a thing the word means “the keeping of”.

 

Here once again is blatant reading into the Scriptures what is not there to try to make something say what it doesn’t. The sheer nonsense can be seen by asking why would Jesus παρατίθημι, what was to cease existing, into the hands of His Father.

 

Steven PRAYED “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit”. But according to some Jesus was asked to “receive” what ceased existing!

 

This type of irrational nonsense is typical of those that constantly read into Scripture their false view such as when they read into Zechariah 4:6, Micah 3:8 2, Tim. 1:7, Luke 4:14, Acts 1:8, Acts 10:38 and think that these say that the Holy Spirit is not a Person.

 

No matter how irrational and contradictive are the claims made, the typical response is “this has already been addressed” as can be seen by the continual jumping to other post which are claimed as “more in-depth”, when they are only a “more” incoherent tirade. Good luck to anyone trying to find any semblance to reason in them. <><

[Cos]

Our friend sami, whose other comments were shown to be, well, wrong, goes into a long winded accusation to try to maintain the false idea. Once again sami quotes passages where the idea that the Holy Spirit is a power must be read into them,

 

What is more disturbing is the quoting out of context of some works, here is an example, the quote from the New Catholic Encyclopedia;

 

“The OT [Old Testament] clearly does not envisage God’s spirit as a person .   .   .   God’s spirit is simply God’s power. If it is sometimes represented as being distinct from God, it is because the breath of Yahweh acts exteriorly . . . The majority of NT [New Testament] texts reveal God’s spirit as some thing , not some one ; this is especially seen in the parallelism between the spirit and the power of God”

 

Below is what the Encyclopedia actually says and more importantly, what was left out;

 

“…’Holy Spirit,’ therefore, means ‘Divine Spirit’. This article treats the spirit of God as it is presented in the OT and Judaism, and in the NT. Consideration is given in each of these sections to the spirit of God as a power and as a Person...

God's Spirit Not Presented as a Person. The OT clearly does not envisage God's spirit as a person, neither in the strictly philosophical sense, nor in the Semitic sense. God's spirit is simply God's power. If it is sometimes represented as being distinct from God, it is because the breath of Yahweh acts exteriorly (Is 48.16; 63.11; 32.15). Very rarely do the OT writers attribute to God's spirit emotions or intellectual activity (Is 63.10; Wis 1.3-7). ... As a result of the teaching of Christ, the definite personality of the Third Person of the Trinity is clear. However, in most cases, the phrase "spirit of God" reflects the OT notion of "the power of God." ...

The Spirit of God as a Person. Although the NT concepts of the spirit of God are largely a continuation of those of the OT, in the NT there is a gradual revelation that the Spirit of God's a Person…

In the Synoptic Gospels…The majority of NT texts reveal God's spirit as something, not someone; this is especially seen in the parallelism between the spirit and the power of God… The only passage in the Synoptic Gospels that clearly speaks of the person of the Holy Spirit is the Trinitarian formula in Mt 28.19. ... The statement in Acts 15.28, "the Holy Spirit and we have decided," alone seems to imply full personality. ... However, the Trinitarian formulas employed by St. Paul (e.g., 2 Cor 13.13), indicate a real personality. ... So clearly does St. John see in the Spirit a person who takes Christ's place in the Church, that he uses a masculine pronoun (Greek) in reference to the Spirit even though [spirit] is neuter in gender ( 16.8, 13-16). Consequently, it is evident that St. John thought of the Holy Spirit as a Person, who is distinct from the Father and the Son, and who, with the glorified Son and the Father, is present and active in the faithful (14.16; 15.26; 16.7).” (New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1965, Spirit of God, Vol 13, p574-576)

 

As you can see, the (copy and paste) quote by sami deliberately and deceptively is selective on what the Catholic encyclopedia says, and ignores the fact that it clearly does states that the Bible outright teaches the personality of the Holy Spirit in the New Testament.

 

So when the whole article is read in context, yes the Holy Spirit is associated with God's power, but is often attributed clear personality.

 

In another post our friend focuses on many quotes from a wide variety of sources. But before I address these our friend’s gives a brief short history in the introduction prior to all the quotes which is false. As can be shown, the early Christians before the fourth century referred to Jesus as God, here are a few of the many examples.

 

Ignatius of Antioch (c. 50–117): “Consequently all magic and every kind of spell were dissolved, the ignorance so characteristic of wickedness vanished, and the ancient kingdom was abolished when God appeared in human form to bring the newness of eternal life.” (Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians, 19.3)

 

Justin Martyr (100–165): And that Christ being Lord, and God the Son of God, and appearing formerly in power as Man, and Angel, and in the glory of fire as at the bush, so also was manifested at the judgment executed on Sodom, has been demonstrated fully by what has been said. (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 128)

 

Tertullian (155-220) "Thus the connection of the Father in the Son, and of the Son in the Paraclete, produces three coherent Persons, who are yet distinct One from Another. These Three are, ONE essence, not one Person” (Against Praxeas, chapter 25).

 

None of the above Christians were expelled from the Christian Church like Noetus who taught heresy. And even if you don’t fully agree with what these Christians taught it would be nonsense to claim that the Deity of Christ was not taught until the fourth century.

 

Anyway, to keep this brief, which some don’t do, let me say that the majority of quotes which sami provides are taken out of context and chopped up to portray a false idea just like the above from the  Catholic encyclopedia.

 

The others fall into the category of self-quotes, that is, quoting from those who are Arian/Unitarian in the first place. <><

[Space Merchant]

7 hours ago, Cos said:

Why would Jesus “yield up”, what was about to cease existing, into the hands of His father (Luke 23:46)? What is more revealing is the fact that the Greek word ?????????? is never translated “yield up” or “yielded up” nor does the word mean such a thing the word means “the keeping of”.

And yet the four accounts make the confirmation he ha expired, and eventually addressed that he is alive due to hang risen, the very reason why,a s said before since Trinitarians are afraid of this term (Firstborn of out of the dead), and it would seem it is true as to why you and majority of Trinitarians brush over this of which Jesus is called and every cross-references that pertain to it, yet have the ignorance to attempt to quote the very man who said this of Jesus and or Jesus saying such.

That being said, you continue to spark ignorance here and not only try to defend a Hersey that those who believe in Immortal Soul (and show a total disregard to the firstfruits, the first being Jesus) and or complete denial of what the resurrection entails, mainly when it is in regards to the Christ, who's body is in fact the Temple foundation.

We are not talking about words, Cos, we are talking about an expression used, and this is why your Greek has come into question before because it would seem even now, when corrected, you lack and continue to lack and dwell in your own pool of ideas and opinions - I can tell you this, the water is indeed murky.

As to why Jesus yield up his spirit, as it was prophesied in the Book of Psalms (which was mentioned but you do not like the OT very much as seen before) he willing gave up his life to God for it was to be fulfilled and for 3 days this man was in death only to be resurrected again, thus prompting his followers to believe in the life and resurrection, and eventually this is taught to others. God is the life giver and by means of God, through Jesus, God gives life to the Son, and the authority and power as seen in Matthew 28:18 which is God Given, just as the Father is able to grant life, the Son is able to do the same, hence during his Kingship, Jesus will be able to bring back a great multitude of people. When Jesus has risen, he did talk to spirits, evil spirits, therefore you were ultimately incorrect as to what you said before and Jesus did not do this in Hades, for anyone can check the scriptures and find out as to when this took place, when the Son has risen.

One can address the same thing when the expression used, "my spirit" which, for example we see this being said by the human mother of Jesus, Mary, but that is to be explain another day for you have butchered this saying and other expressions already, and it can be seen as evidence in everything you have posted on this topic.

When you mention a Greek word, show some respect.?????????? to our guests and visitors who cannot read it is paratithémi (par-at-ith'-ay-mee), it's Greek Strong's number is 3908 which can be seen here http://biblehub.com/greek/3908.htm and this word, a verb has about over a dozen occurrences in the Bible. The word in Luke 23:46 is in singular use, 1st person; present tense.

In some translations, the expression, in full, is read as Yield/ed up [I commend] my ghost, however, this, out of the occurrences, is seen primarily in the Four Gospel accounts and or Four Evangelists seen in the Bible and it is agreed by these writers that the use of this expression is more fitting than to simply say He [Jesus] died, but in some accounts, mainly in the Gospel of Mark, and I believe in Matthew as well, the addition of Jesus expired is seen in all translations.

FACT: Another saying for this expression is dismissed my [His] Spirit pertaining to the original Greek Text: ????? ?? ?????? (He left/dismissed the Spirit).

Other than that, this expression suits the very words of our Lord, Christ Jesus, as seen in the following verse below, which is indeed a cross-reference

• John 10:18 - No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.”

 

7 hours ago, Cos said:

Here once again is blatant reading into the Scriptures what is not there to try to make something say what it doesnÂ’t. The sheer nonsense can be seen by asking why would Jesus ??????????, what was to cease existing, into the hands of His Father.

Not a blatant reading as to what is said is true, no man who study and think otherwise of what is present in the scriptures, i.e. of what you stated before about Jesus speaking to spirits only to be corrected when the truth was Jesus spoke to this Spirits when he had risen, and these spirits were not of people, they were fallen ones, demons, in Tartarus who are reversed for Judgement.

Again, if you understood the expression used, you'd realize full and well of what the expression conveys, mainly in regards to context and cross-references. You have already shown yourself to show a total disregard to this therefore, your knowledge in Greek is as broken as totaled car, thus bearing no foundation to claim. But there are many examples of your ignorance here, therefore, the correction can and will be made.

7 hours ago, Cos said:

Steven PRAYED “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit”. But according to some Jesus was asked to “receive” what ceased existing!

It is Stephen, not Steven. It is already explain as to whom Stephen was praying to by means of Jesus' name, and it is already explain as to how the expression was used. For our viewers, who do look into this stuff, they can see how you are butchering even the words of Stephen for it is known Trinitarians love to mess around with even this follower of the Lord and show hypocrisy as they do such.

The irony is you continue to prove my point, time and time again, you tend to repeat things like a broken record, only to be met with a correction of the same thing you have stated before:

 

7 hours ago, Cos said:

This type of irrational nonsense is typical of those that constantly read into Scripture their false view such as when they read into Zechariah 4:6, Micah 3:8 2, Tim. 1:7, Luke 4:14, Acts 1:8, Acts 10:38 and think that these say that the Holy Spirit is not a Person.

Not irrational for even with the proof before you, you show total ignorance to claim. You cannot convince a men to belief in a dying doctrine of a Triune God, therefore, any man who really knows God, who really knows Jesus, let alone the very practices of the Early Church, they know what the Holy Spirit is.

And as I last recall, not only you claim the Holy Spirit to be The God, you dodged, 3 times when given question as to if this God knows the day of Judgement, to which you had refused to answer, the same can be said with Deserter, for this is something such ones like yourself hope that no one brings up. The very reason why as to he Trinity doctrine in the EU is crumbling and many people are paying attention to such, me included since the very day it began.

7 hours ago, Cos said:

No matter how irrational and contradictive are the claims made, the typical response is “this has already been addressed” as can be seen by the continual jumping to other post which are claimed as “more in-depth”, when they are only a “more” incoherent tirade. Good luck to anyone trying to find any semblance to reason in them. <><

Actually it has already been addressed, because time and time again, as stated, like a broken record, you repeat yourself, and every time you repeat yourself I can bring correction to claim by briefly mentioning what has been addressed and or just share the link to what it is that has been addressed. Example, the number of times you used John 14 and 16 and the number of times which you have been corrected when met with the likes of Greek forms in regards to Masculine, Feminine, and Neutered words, you even quoted something that defeated your own opinion and belief and every time you bring this up, this can only be seen by both guests and visitors of who is in the right and who isn't. Just the other day I seen someone used your example and pointed out your flaws - that alone tells you something, and now we have here @sami who can even see your errors.

Your errors are indefensible.

6 hours ago, Cos said:

Our friend sami, whose other comments were shown to be, well, wrong, goes into a long winded accusation to try to maintain the false idea. Once again sami quotes passages where the idea that the Holy Spirit is a power must be read into them,

Actually @sami is in the correct. His head isn't buried in the sand compared to the likes of you., Cos, and your past discussions, it shows, not just here alone.

6 hours ago, Cos said:

What is more disturbing is the quoting out of context of some works, here is an example, the quote from the New Catholic Encyclopedia;?

How so?

6 hours ago, Cos said:

“The OT [Old Testament] clearly does not envisage God’s spirit as a person?? .   .   .   God’s spirit is simply God’s power. If it is sometimes represented as being distinct from God, it is because the breath of Yahweh acts exteriorly . . . The majority of NT [New Testament] texts reveal God’s spirit as some thing , not some one ; this is especially seen in the parallelism between the spirit and the power of God”?

This actual quote comes from this piece of literature, 1965, Vol. 13, "Spirit of God," pp. 574-576, which can be traced back to other sources as well. The irony here is you show a total disagreement to what the Holy Spirit is in description, only to see several of said descriptions in this quote alone from this Encyclopedia itself, regardless of belief, such is presented here - now that is being hypocritical to a very strong degree, Cos, when it comes to the actual description of the one Spirit, the Holy Spirit.

That being said, this quote is often brought up time and time again by several, mainly when it comes to what the Holy Spirit truly is and or the very teachings of the 1st Church.

Other than that, it would be best to read fully as to what @sami had addressed, from start to finish, therefore it would be understandable as to what he has quoted.

Plus it didn't stop you before, now did it? the Only difference between you two is one actual reads, and you, only pull what you can see and not address the conclusion.

I'd also like to point out the full quote makes no mention of the 13:13/13:14 confusion some translations have, however, this verse(s) is among many of which have already been put into context against the teachings of the Trinity, in full force years ago.

6 hours ago, Cos said:

As you can see, the (copy and paste) quote by sami deliberately and deceptively is selective on what the Catholic encyclopedia says, and ignores the fact that it clearly does states that the Bible outright teaches the personality of the Holy Spirit in the New Testament.

It should be mentioned as to where said Encyclopedia got it's information from, why stop there? Also it is hypocrisy as to what you have stated because what @sami has done, it never stopped you from copying and pasting things before, mainly when when it was in regards to the discussion of Church Fathers.

6 hours ago, Cos said:

So when the whole article is read in context, yes the Holy Spirit is associated with God's power, but is often attributed clear personality.

And yet when questioned in regards to personality, you have failed to present, even trying to twist the Greek Forms of passages in order to prove something that is unfounded. This cannot help you nor give benefit, nor does it help anyone else, therefore, it is agreed by all about the current situation of mainstream Christendom.

6 hours ago, Cos said:

In another post our friend focuses on many quotes from a wide variety of sources. But before I address these our friendÂ’s gives a brief short history in the introduction prior to all the quotes which is false. As can be shown, the early Christians before the fourth century referred to Jesus as God, here are a few of the many examples.

You make the claim such information is false, but fail to prove otherwise?

6 hours ago, Cos said:

Ignatius of Antioch (c. 50–117): “Consequently all magic and every kind of spell were dissolved, the ignorance so characteristic of wickedness vanished, and the ancient kingdom was abolished when God appeared in human form to bring the newness of eternal life.” (Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians, 19.3)

Justin Martyr (100–165): And that Christ being Lord, and God the Son of God, and appearing formerly in power as Man, and Angel, and in the glory of fire as at the bush, so also was manifested at the judgment executed on Sodom, has been demonstrated fully by what has been said. (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 128)

Tertullian (155-220) "Thus the connection of the Father in the Son, and of the Son in the Paraclete, produces three coherent Persons, who are yet distinct One from Another. These Three are, ONE essence, not one Person” (Against Praxeas, chapter 25).

And here we go again with Church Fathers, to which you have been brutally refuted on before, to spar our visitors and guests the whole ordeal, I will simply put the conclusion to the Church Father discussion of which not only you failed, but you revealed yourself to be the son of the deceiver by going back on a word of which you yourself stated.

 

6 hours ago, Cos said:

None of the above Christians were expelled from the Christian Church like Noetus who taught heresy. And even if you donÂ’t fully agree with what these Christians taught it would be nonsense to claim that the Deity of Christ was not taught until the fourth century.

This is the problem with you Trinitarians, you have not read any of these people's work from start to finish and yet you pull quotes from them without coming to the conclusion of their actual belief and or what they said perhaps in the next few paragraphs, you have been corrected brutally, if not, savagely on this topic before.

Tertullian, just like Noetus, was a Modalist (the practice of Sabellianism), despite misrepresenting Noetus before. Tertullian's Modalistic views, if you read is work in chronological order, is heavily expressed - but never, as did before and called out for such, you haven't read any of his works and or the works of others, even to the point as to you being called out for cutting and meshing paragraphs together to spark deception.

Other than that, it is said that Sabellianism is perhaps only known from their detractors for even scholars today are not in agreement as to what exactly Sabellius or Praxeas was all about. As said breifly here and before, both Tertullian and Hippolytus in some instances misrepresented the opinions of their opponents.

It is also good to mention the fact that Noetus originated from Smyrna, that alone should tell you something. That being said, I addressed before the original early Church, our early brothers and sisters believed that God the Father is One and Jesus being the Son of God, thus being a subordinate of God.

It was accepted in the 4th century, clearly it had a small belief circle around the late 2nd into the 3rd century and Trinitarians and Modalist pretty much tag-teamed to get the belief to mainstream, only very later on, this belief was enforced and anyone who is to deny this enforced belief, which had already dwell in Roman Paganism, were to be put to death. Surely God does not like it when people are forced to do things they do not see as right, and clearly not a fan of those who oppress such power which actual gets people to accept a belief out of fear, you have Empower Theodosius II to thank for that.

6 hours ago, Cos said:

Anyway, to keep this brief, which some don’t do, let me say that the majority of quotes which sami provides are taken out of context and chopped up to portray a false idea just like the above from the  Catholic encyclopedia.

Unfortunately they are not taken out of context. If you are going to bring up an explanation, now would be the time, Cos. Just be careful because this same Encyclopedia is being used by your own people, mainly those who are attempting to twist what the Four Marks of the Church means.

6 hours ago, Cos said:

The others fall into the category of self-quotes, that is, quoting from those who are Arian/Unitarian in the first place. <><

Here we go again comparing Unitarians to Arians, like I said before, Arians believe in Jesus to be God also, as well as the Holy Spirit, hence they share the same belief as you and you thrown your own kind under the bus, not once, not twice, not even 3 times, but a good number of times already, this just shows people like you do not know the Christology of others well despite their beliefs being slightly different. Trinitarians, like Oneness believers, Modalist, New Agers believe Jesus should be religious worshiped like God, once again you toss your own under the bus, therefore it shows you lack in your own Christology. Lastly, accepting Tridition of Men as well as Paganism, Arians among the mainstream Christianity space, and you, Trinity believers, accept such Traditions that have no folly with the early Church whatsoever. And like your Arian counterparts, you believe a literal Spirit Person was the one responsible for Mary's pregnancy, when Mary said in the following verse she clearly never had relations with a man so how was she suppose to become pregnant? But it would seem the Tomfoolery does not end and every time you response your you will be corrected and your own words will bite you.

It is no surprise that every claim you make is being refuted elsewhere and it is very chilling to see that even the non-religious is even correcting you, that alone is very sad.

What I have quoted are not of my own originality there is always a source to everything in which I speak, if not the Bible itself and or the very Language and forms of both Hebrew and Greek, but unlike you, I do not make up unfounded facts, as to which you have been, once again, called out for making such a fact up:

 

The irony is, the facts of which I made mention of can actually be looked up, as for yours, well.... It cannot be found, therefore, you tend to make up things as you go, just as you did before, and will continue to do again and again.

 

That being said, you are the first Trinitarian to not just allude to the Immortal Soul belief, but show a bit of Apollinarianism, far, far worse than what your Arian buddies believe.

 

Due to this topic, this only hastens a very detailed refutation to the erroneous Trinitarian view of the Holy Spirit and of Christ, which I have only given just cookie-like topics on, expect to receive the whole jar of it in full soon, coupled with various claims main here which had been refuted by those outside of the conversation.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

If "souls" were immortal, every McDonalds would be surrounded by a thick dark cloud of angry cow ghosts.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

etc.

[Space Merchant]

18 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

If "souls" were immortal, every McDonalds would be surrounded by a thick dark cloud of angry cow ghosts.

Granted how many animals are wiped out for consumption, that would be quite the sight, but I have seen even prankster who manage to pull some things off to get in quite the scare on some folks. Other than that, the bad thing about the immortal soul belief is that it opens doors to believing in Spirits (not only that it is nearly in relation with that of Gnosticism and or Apollinarianism as well as Sorcery, believing and or communication with the dead), which helms very close to that of paganism practices of old, to people such as myself who is from the islands with Caribbean roots, such things is referred to in Black Magic practices, what I can say is demons tend to make people do the most craziest things therefore such ones are deemed evil persons. The rabbit hole gets far deeper than that and mainstream Christians actually believe this stuff to be true, that we live on when the reality is, we are as dead as a rock, in a sense, like pulling the plug from a Super Computer, thus it's soul (power) is gone an the computer is no longer functioning... And would possibly get you fired for such an action.

Other than that, the bible makes it clear, when we die, we die, this goes for Jesus as well for his temple, his body was brought down, but he conquered death and he had risen, for God raised him from the dead.

The irony here is most Trinitarians teach the life and resurrection, but here we see one among the fold who professes Jesus didn't really die, thus defeating the purpose of what the resurrection means and or what is included in the authority God has given Jesus as seen in Matthew 28:18.

Among all things, anything pertaining to Jesus being The Firstborn out of the dead (as well as the first of the firstfruits) is sure to send mainstream Trinitarians packing because any verse that mentions this defeats the purpose of many chunks of their doctrine. That of which Jesus is called is a very, very strong title, even Jesus himself makes mention to himself as such.

[Cos]

No bible version translates the Greek word παρατίθημι as “yielded up” no matter how some try to twist translations; they just like to build an argument around what is not there. But of course those that read their ideas into Scripture will continue to do so regardless. The meaning of the word παρατίθημι is, “the keeping of”.

 

Now the excuse that the passages that prove the Holy Spirit a Person, that these are just personification fails on many levels, in fact there are so many problems with this ‘blanket” excuse which ignores the context and fails to exegete the passages.

 

Really, how do they know that these passages are personification?

 

Because they have already assumed the Holy Spirit is a power. This is called reasoning in a circle. They need to show that the Holy Spirit is a power before they can even begin talking about supposed personifications. But this is exactly what they cannot do! All they can do is read into certain passages that fake idea.

 

Realistically there are many instances that cannot be explained away as a “personification”. For example, why is it that what we do supposedly generates a “personified” characteristic in a thing?

 

“But they were the ones who rebelled, and they grieved his Holy Spirit.” (Isa. 63:10)

 

“Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God” (Eph. 4:30).

 

Why is it, because of what we do, that that generates a “personified” characteristic in a thing? <><