Jump to content
The World News Media

The Holy Spirit


Cos

Recommended Posts


  • Views 21.1k
  • Replies 387
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Cos: What you have stated is OPINION.  You have proved NOTHING, except that you can type. Both God and Christ have a personal name ... what is the Holy Spirit's name .... Casper? If so,

The quote referenced above reads: "In the Bible, God’s holy spirit is identified as God’s power in action. Hence, an accurate translation of the Bible’s Hebrew text refers to God’s spirit as “God’s ac

Claims of irrationality have always been levelled against witnesses who have experienced Gods great gift. "And we are witnesses of these matters, and so is the holy spirit, which God has given to thos

Posted Images

  • Member
1 hour ago, Cos said:

Otto,

As I mentioned to Gone fishing, you JW’s want it both ways with wisdom in the Book of Proverbs; you would have it merely personified to help you explain away the passages in John’s Gospel because they go against  your teaching about the Holy Spirit, but then also make wisdom an actual person to try and verify your idea that Christ was a created person.

Proverbs is written in poetic and allegorical form, there is nothing in John’s Gospel to indicate that such is the case. <><

But still nowhere is the HS referred to God the Holy Spirit and I would say that the personification of sin, wisdom and death shows the bible is no stranger to the personification of concepts in order to help us comprehend them...the Holy Spirit is no different, just as the sin is not a person nor death neither is the HS.

Regarding the use of poetic language, if we look at Genesis where God says to Cain "sin is crouching" where exactly is the rest of the poem that you seem to think proves that this is not personification of a concept and...

 

also these things are not personified by JWs but by God.

 

The HS is constantly sandwiched in among concepts like faith, Joy  Mat 3v11 and Cor 6v6 puts it in with purity, knowledge, patience, Holy spirit, and love...all of them NOT PEOPLE, The NT does this a lot maybe that's poetic in nature also when it describes the HS like that.

What verse would you use to show the "oneness" of the HS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
8 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

I confess that discussions of trinity instantly lose me. I have never seen anyone yield on any point.

I agree, what 1 says about it another contradicts...because its a man made idea and designed to confuse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
13 minutes ago, Otto said:

I agree, what 1 says about it another contradicts...because its a man made idea and designed to confuse.

I like to write. This is from a book I penned a while back:

If I am returning to the car after a long and productive return visit, I will nonetheless say to Tom Pearlsnswine upon entering: “I can’t believe that person won’t admit that Jesus and Jehovah are different!” I pretend not to notice as he reddens – you should see him! You can almost see the steam coming from his ears: “You kept me waiting an hour to argue the Trinity?!”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
13 hours ago, Cos said:

You asked me for my perspective of the Holy Spirit and I provided that for you from the very scripture passages you referred to.

Thank you.

13 hours ago, Cos said:

Now it is clear to me that you only take those passages in John’s Gospel to be a personification, as does Otto.

Your clarity is very easily assumed?

I only applied the technique you demonstrated with regard to Jesus words about Holy Spirit to another passage of scripture  and asked you to share your view or opinion. I don't recall I said anything about what my understanding of Proverbs 8 is as it is not the topic under discussion. I was more interested in the application of your technique to that passage and what you felt it might reveal.

13 hours ago, Cos said:

That is not describing for me what your idea of the Holy Spirit is. Please describe your idea of the Holy Spirit.

I do not have an  "idea" of what the Holy Spirit is. I would not even know that there was Holy Spirit had not Jesus explained the matter. So for me to add, expand, or interpolate on Jesus words seems rather impertinent. I am happy with what he said and that is why I quoted him in answer to your question. Not enough for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
19 hours ago, Otto said:

But still nowhere is the HS referred to God the Holy Spirit and I would say that the personification of sin, wisdom and death shows the bible is no stranger to the personification of concepts in order to help us comprehend them...the Holy Spirit is no different, just as the sin is not a person nor death neither is the HS.

Regarding the use of poetic language, if we look at Genesis where God says to Cain "sin is crouching" where exactly is the rest of the poem that you seem to think proves that this is not personification of a concept and...

 

also these things are not personified by JWs but by God.

 

The HS is constantly sandwiched in among concepts like faith, Joy  Mat 3v11 and Cor 6v6 puts it in with purity, knowledge, patience, Holy spirit, and love...all of them NOT PEOPLE, The NT does this a lot maybe that's poetic in nature also when it describes the HS like that.

What verse would you use to show the "oneness" of the HS

Otto,

 

Personification is a rhetorical figure of speech in which inanimate objects or abstractions are endowed with personal qualities.

 

As you show, personification are found throughout the Scriptures, But in all these examples we know by way of life experience that they are not really persons. Not so with the Holy Spirit, that is an opinion you JWs have. No one can know the Holy Spirit is a thing (and not a person) the way we can know a mountain is not a person from life experience.

 

We can prove something is personification by finding places in the Bible that outright states it is not a person but a thing. We can do this with sin, death, hills, wisdom, stars etc.

 

When a passage that ascribes personal characteristics or action to a thing cannot be interpreted literally, then the passage is using personification. Personification is an example of poetic license: saying something that ordinary logic tells us is impossible. If this ordinary signal is absent, it stands to reason that the passage is not using personification. For example, death does not literally rule as king, nor does sin literally rule as king, a martyr’s blood does not literally cry out from the ground. Tongues do not literally strut. Rivers do not literally clap their hands. Light and truth are not literal travel guides to a sacred site. Money is not a literal god and so on.

 

When we turn to the Scriptures that describe the person and work of the Holy Spirit, however, this ordinary signal is absent. There is nothing in the descriptions of the Holy Spirit that cannot be true of an actual spiritual being. For example: “If I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you” (John16:7); “The Spirit intercedes for us” (Rom.8:26); “The Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God” (1Cor.2:10).

 

None of these passages states any personal characteristic or action that is impossible for a spiritual entity to possess or to perform. The usual signpost that says “personification” is absent. There is nothing in these passages that puts them into the company of valleys that sing (Ps.65:13) and stones that cry out (Hab.2:11).

 

There is a second principle that also comes into play: does personification fit the context? When we try to interpret the descriptions of the Holy Spirit as mere figures of speech, the attempt fails. The contexts of the passages do not fit the premise that the Holy Spirit is not a person.

 

You say, “The HS is constantly sandwiched in among concepts like faith, Joy  Mat 3v11 and Cor 6v6 puts it in with purity,     knowledge, patience, Holy spirit, and love...all of them NOT PEOPLE, The NT does this a lot maybe that's poetic in nature also when it describes the HS like that.”

 

Otto, this type of argument you raise does not hold any substance for the Bible regularly associates and connects persons with impersonal things.

 

Using the SAME reasoning you employ for Matthew 3:11 and 2 cor. 6:6 you would have to conclude that because death is not a person, then Jesus is not a person. And the same would apply in Galatians 3:27. Do these comparisons disprove the personality of Christ?

 

Let’s take a look at the many times Jesus, a person, is associated with impersonal things; but these do not argue against HIS PERSONALITY. Jesus refers to Himself as the vine (John 15:1), the door (John 10:17), bread (John 6:35) etc,. Because these terms are used in association with Jesus they do not cancel out His personality, right?

 

Is it legitimate to say that Jesus is not a person because HE is often associated in Scripture with impersonal things such as a vine, a door, bread? Please provide an answer. <><

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
11 hours ago, Gone Fishing said:

Thank you.

Your clarity is very easily assumed?

I only applied the technique you demonstrated with regard to Jesus words about Holy Spirit to another passage of scripture  and asked you to share your view or opinion. I don't recall I said anything about what my understanding of Proverbs 8 is as it is not the topic under discussion. I was more interested in the application of your technique to that passage and what you felt it might reveal.

I do not have an  "idea" of what the Holy Spirit is. I would not even know that there was Holy Spirit had not Jesus explained the matter. So for me to add, expand, or interpolate on Jesus words seems rather impertinent. I am happy with what he said and that is why I quoted him in answer to your question. Not enough for you?

Gone Fishing,

 

When I gave you my perspective on the Holy Spirit you made repeated comments like “to you” and then said, “to me it is not strange, and makes perfect sense”, you then asked me what I thought about the poetic passage in Proverbs as though that’s the “sense” you understand John Gospel.

 

Isn’t that where you were leading with what you said? It is what all JWs do when confronted with the clear text that goes against their belief. So, isn’t that where you were going?

 

You then say that you have no “idea of what the Holy Spirit is" maybe that’s because you reject the obvious. <><

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
14 hours ago, Cos said:

you then asked me what I thought about the poetic passage in Proverbs as though that’s the “sense” you understand John Gospel.

This is a pure presumption on your part I'm afraid.

14 hours ago, Cos said:

You then say that you have no “idea of what the Holy Spirit is"

You asked me to describe what my "idea" of the Holy Spirit is. I assumed (maybe wrongly) that  you meant what is my understanding of what the Holy Sprit is. Anyway, I will try to clarify my answer for you.

My understanding of what the Holy Spirit is is best expressed by Jesus who distributes it (John 20:22). I do not see how I could add to what he said at John 14:16-17, 26; 16:13-14 quoted below. The bold highlights hopefully add clarity to what my understanding comprises.

(John 14:16, 17) And I will ask the Father and he will give you another helper to be with you forever,  the spirit of the truth, which the world cannot receive, because it neither sees it nor knows it. You know it, because it remains with you and is in you.
(John 14:26) 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 15:26) 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 16:13, 14) However, when that one comes, the spirit of the truth, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak of his own initiative, but what he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things to come.  That one will glorify me, because he will receive from what is mine and will declare it to you.

My comment which you reference (quoted above) in context was to indicate that I have no "idea" other than the teaching of Jesus on this matter which, for me, provides adequate clarity on what the Holy Spirit is.

However, in case your question addresses the standard definitions of the word "idea" in connection with the Holy Spirit, I will try and align my thinking with these.

The word "idea" is defined as:

1. a thought or suggestion as to a possible course of action.

2. the aim or purpose.

With regard to these definitions of the word " idea" in connection with the Holy Spirit:

I suppose my thought or suggestion as to a possible course of action would include to work with the Holy Spirit's direction in producing the fruitage of the Spirit; take care not to put out the fire of the Spirit; avoid blasphemy against the Spirit;  (Gal.5:22; 1Thess.5:19; Matt.12:31 ). That would seem to address also the second definition suggested in connection with my aim or purpose in connection with the Holy Spirit.

14 hours ago, Cos said:

It is what all JWs do....................

Taking issue with these kind of remarks, whilst tempting, I find counter-productive so excuse me if I do not take the bait and try to stick to the factual elements of your postings.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
1 hour ago, Gone Fishing said:

This is a pure presumption on your part I'm afraid.

You asked me to describe what my "idea" of the Holy Spirit is. I assumed (maybe wrongly) that  you meant what is my understanding of what the Holy Sprit is. Anyway, I will try to clarify my answer for you.

My understanding of what the Holy Spirit is is best expressed by Jesus who distributes it (John 20:22). I do not see how I could add to what he said at John 14:16-17, 26; 16:13-14 quoted below. The bold highlights hopefully add clarity to what my understanding comprises.

(John 14:16, 17) And I will ask the Father and he will give you another helper to be with you forever,  the spirit of the truth, which the world cannot receive, because it neither sees it nor knows it. You know it, because it remains with you and is in you.
(John 14:26) 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 15:26) 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 16:13, 14) However, when that one comes, the spirit of the truth, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak of his own initiative, but what he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things to come.  That one will glorify me, because he will receive from what is mine and will declare it to you.

My comment which you reference (quoted above) in context was to indicate that I have no "idea" other than the teaching of Jesus on this matter which, for me, provides adequate clarity on what the Holy Spirit is.

However, in case your question addresses the standard definitions of the word "idea" in connection with the Holy Spirit, I will try and align my thinking with these.

The word "idea" is defined as:

1. a thought or suggestion as to a possible course of action.

2. the aim or purpose.

With regard to these definitions of the word " idea" in connection with the Holy Spirit:

I suppose my thought or suggestion as to a possible course of action would include to work with ithe Holy Spirit's direction in producing the fruitage of the Spirit; take care not to put out the fire of the Spirit; avoid blasphemy against the Spirit;  (Gal.5:22; 1Thess.5:19; Matt.12:31 ). That would seem to address also the second definition suggested in connection with my aim or purpose in connection with the Holy Spirit.

Taking issue with these kind of remarks, whilst tempting, I find counter-productive so excuse me if I do not take the bait and try to stick to the factual elements of your postings.

 

Gone Fishing,

 

Why ask me what I thought on the poetic passage in Proverbs if that was not where you were leading? Please, if it is “pure presumption” explain the reason you brought the passage up? <><

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
50 minutes ago, Cos said:

Why ask me what I thought on the poetic passage in Proverbs if that was not where you were leading? 

Why not ask you? I wanted to know what you thought of it and what the analysis technique which you applied to the passage in John would reveal if utilised with regard to the inspired passage in Proverbs. 

Your presumption is that I was leading somewhere. Where did you presume I was leading? Better to let God's Spirit do the leading don't you think? No need to be so cagey and suspicious then: 

"Teach me to do your will, for you are my God. Your spirit is good; may it lead me on level ground" Ps 143:10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
18 minutes ago, Gone Fishing said:

Why not ask you? I wanted to know what you thought of it and what the analysis technique which you applied to the passage in John would reveal if utilised with regard to the inspired passage in Proverbs. 

Your presumption is that I was leading somewhere. Where did you presume I was leading? Better to let God's Spirit do the leading don't you think? No need to be so cagey and suspicious then: 

"Teach me to do your will, for you are my God. Your spirit is good; may it lead me on level ground" Ps 143:10.

Gone fishing,

 

Come on…the passage from Proverbs had nothing to do with the context of the thread. You and I know full well why you brought it up; you even emphasized certain portions indicating your intention. <><

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
14 minutes ago, Cos said:

You and I know full well why you brought it up; 

 You are still presuming, and now it seems indulging in some mentalism it appears? 

"whatever things are true, whatever things are of serious concern, whatever things are righteous, whatever things are chaste, whatever things are lovable, whatever things are well-spoken-of, whatever things are virtuous, and whatever things are praiseworthy, continue considering these things." Ph 4:8

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,670
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Apolos2000
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.