God the Holy Spirit - third person of the Godhead

[bbyrd009]

And we can all read.

"we" can all be drunk on tares too i guess.
We def cannot all logically read the Bible though, or i guess we would all be agreeing with each other right
We can all be deceived though huh

 

[BobRyan]

We all have free will
We can all read the Bible

"we" can all be drunk on tares too i guess.
We def cannot all logically read the Bible though, or i guess we would all be agreeing with each other right
We can all be deceived though huh

We can all read the Bible clearly and accurately.
Acts 17:11 proves that even non-Christians can do it -- when testing a first-order NT Apostle.

That is not the hard part.

The hard part is choosing not to reject the clear and obvious text. The hard part is choosing not to stick our own bias in "instead". The hard part is to not let our tradition and conditioning dictate what we read -- and what we think.

 

[BobRyan]

Yes my lack of belief in the trinity is my concern. You call it a problem,

Might be both.

but I do not. So long as I am seeking first His kingdom and His righteousness what will I be lacking of importance?

There is no such thing as overtly claiming to ignore God's Word and yet truly "seeking first His Kingdom"

You knew that - right?

John 17:17 "Sanctify them in Thy Truth - Thy WORD is truth"

 

[BobRyan]

With regard to the Word of God, my question was not intended to be rhetorical. Many people, I believe, do not know what the Word of God is

Certainly we can all choose "to make stuff up" - using our own feelings and imagination as "the Word" of God.

I for one - choose the Bible "instead"

 

[BobRyan]

I believe His Word and I accept any obvious details provided by God.

God provided the Bible.

"All scripture is given by inspiration from GOD" 2 Tim 3:16

"Holy men of old moved by the Holy Spirit - spoke from GOD" 2 Pet 1:21

"The Holy Spirit said..." Hebrews 3 -- speaking of the text of scripture.

You indicate in your posts that you are very busy "editing" the Word of God including the teachings of Jesus - as to what part of it you will accept and what you will reject - to be viewed as unbiased and objective in reading it.

This personhood of God is not written in my heart. In my heart is where God writes His Word to me.

God writes "His Law" in the heart.
John 16 says that many who claim to follow God would "believe in their hearts" that they are doing God a favor by persecuting the saints.

John 16
“These things I have spoken to you so that you may be kept from stumbling. 2 They will make you outcasts from the synagogue, but an hour is coming for everyone who kills you to think that he is offering service to God."

The subjective standard of "ignore whatever part of the Bible that you feel like ignoring" is not a safe place to find good doctrine. But it is a safe place for error.

 

[amadeus]

We can all read the Bible clearly and accurately.
Acts 17:11 proves that even non-Christians can do it -- when testing a first-order NT Apostle.

That simply confirms what Jesus said here:

"Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled." Matt 5:6

You say they were not Christians, but what does that mean? If someone is pursuing God's truth, is he not a Christian in any case for who or what is truth?

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

That is not the hard part.

The hard part is choosing not to reject the clear and obvious text. The hard part is choosing not to stick our own bias in "instead". The hard part is to not let our tradition and conditioning dictate what we read -- and what we think.

So then instead of making it hard go the easy way:

"Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.
For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light." Matt 11:28-30

You say not to let "our" tradition dictate, but what tradition is acceptable? Only the one that God has approved for me, I would say. This requires a personal contact with God... rather than simply following what a man or a church group has decided beforehand. Have we not been dead until we became able to hear?

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live."John 5:25

 

[amadeus]

There is no such thing as overtly claiming to ignore God's Word and yet truly "seeking first His Kingdom"

You knew that - right?

John 17:17 "Sanctify them in Thy Truth - Thy WORD is truth"

The way to seek first His Kingdom is by eating His flesh and drinking His blood on a very regular basis, hopefully every day. If we do then we have Life and those who have Life are able to hear, are they not?

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said: ↑
We can all read the Bible clearly and accurately.
Acts 17:11 proves that even non-Christians can do it -- when testing a first-order NT Apostle.

That simply confirms what Jesus said here:

"Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled." Matt 5:6

You say they were not Christians,

The text says it... so I accept and believe it.

but what does that mean? If someone is pursuing God's truth, is he not a Christian in any case for who or what is truth?

The lost unsaved person can be lead by God and be confronted by Truth. Then and there to "choose" of their own free will whether to respond to the evidence presented or to reject it.

That is the case of a lost person "choosing" based on evidence.

Romans 10
9 if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.

 

[amadeus]

God provided the Bible.
"All scripture is given by inspiration from GOD" 2 Tim 3:16
"Holy men of old moved by the Holy Spirit - spoke from GOD" 2 Pet 1:21
"The Holy Spirit said..." Hebrews 3 -- speaking of the text of scripture.

I agree! But without the direction of the Holy Spirit, no man can receive God's message as it is written in the scripture. When we follow our minister alone or our church alone without communicating with God we will miss His message to us even though we are reading the Bible. Ministers are intended to edify, but if they err and we follow them we join them in a ditch.

You indicate in your posts that you are very busy "editing" the Word of God as to what you will accept and what you will reject - to be viewed as unbiased and objective in reading it.

I don't edit the Word of God. God spoke it before the foundation of the world. People edit the Bible at times, but not the Word of God though some might like to. There is a difference. I have been changed over the years by God, but God and His Word do not change.

God writes "His Law" in the heart.
John 16 says that many who claim to follow God would "believe in their hearts" that they are doing God a favor by persecuting the saints.

John 16
“These things I have spoken to you so that you may be kept from stumbling. 2 They will make you outcasts from the synagogue, but an hour is coming for everyone who kills you to think that he is offering service to God."

The subjective standard of "ignore whatever part of the Bible that you feel like ignoring" is not a safe place to find good doctrine. But it is a safe place for error.

As I already said in this thread, I do not ignore any part of scripture. Some of it may not have been quickened in me yet because it has not been God's time, but that is not ignoring. Rather it is simply me waiting on the Lord. In His time, when it is His time, He will quicken it in me. Any correct doctrine that I hold came from the quickening Spirit. Persecution of the saints is done as Saul did it before he met Jesus on the road to Damascus. After that he began to allow the Spirit to quicken the scriptures in the him. He had eaten the flesh previously but after the Damascus road encounter he began to drink the Blood. Then Saul/Paul stopped killing the saints.

 

[amadeus]

Certainly we can all choose "to make stuff up" - using our own feelings and imagination as "the Word" of God.

I for one - choose the Bible "instead"

Do you really believe I make stuff up? I do not.

 

[faithfulness]

The way to seek first His Kingdom is by eating His flesh and drinking His blood on a very regular basis, hopefully every day. If we do then we have Life and those who have Life are able to hear, are they not?

Please help me understand.
Seeking Him every day, first-hand, and hearing His Voice/Word which is Spirit and Truth--does that constitute drinking His blood and eating His flesh? What if we don't hear every time, during that time, but later, I hear Him through another as if He was speaking first-hand to me. (?)

 

[bbyrd009]

We can all read the Bible clearly and accurately.

ha, good one.
i won't bother you with all the "seeing they will not see" i guess

Acts 17:11 proves that even non-Christians can do it -- when testing a first-order NT Apostle.

Acts 17:11 can prove whatever you like then, i guess. Personally i would be using it to confirm that Scripture is not Word myself, and then i would find that "hidden from the wise" passage, and maybe reflect on the "scribes" passages too.

 

[bbyrd009]

Certainly we can all choose "to make stuff up" - using our own feelings and imagination as "the Word" of God.

I for one - choose the Bible "instead"

Acts 17:11 proves the Bible is not Word, Bob, and since we can all read the Bible clearly i'm sure you are nodding your head right now, right? These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. Yup, pretty open and shut i guess.

The text says it... so I accept and believe it.

guess we're about to find out!

I'm passing curious if you celebrate Easter now, Bob?
i mean the text says that too, right?

"
Both Agent K and Willy Wonka were right: there is vast potential in imagination and there's nothing "unreal" about it. A realization — as in: "I just realized ... " — is precisely that: making something real. The magnificent noun δοξα(doxa), meaning "glory" or rather "image-forming", comes from the verb δοκεω (dokeo), meaning to imagine, and the entire universe exists in God's pure imagination (Psalm 33:9, HEBREWS 11:3)..." http://www.abarim-publications.com/DictionaryG/a/a-g-g-e-l-o-sfin.html#.W4BbtuhKiUl

 

[bbyrd009]

oracles

 

[TheHolyBookEnds]

It's like a loaf of bread. Pieces were broken off and then after certain things had been fulfilled, those pieces will and have returned to the original loaf as it had always been. The same loaf but with different purposes. There is a piece of the loaf [HS] that is still around. That one encumpasses and represents the whole loaf and will return at the end of all things being fulfilled according to scripture....

I disagree enrtirely. The Father, Son and Holy Ghost are three distinct persons/beings that work together in harmony, like as one accord, as a single chord. Nothing, therefore, is broken off, for the Godhead is not 'pie in the sky'.

What it sounds like to me, is that you are teaching "partialism" (the following is from a Lutheran pastor, I am not Lutheran, nor advocate what it teaches):

Just for kicks

 

[amadeus]

Please help me understand.
Seeking Him every day, first-hand, and hearing His Voice/Word which is Spirit and Truth--does that constitute drinking His blood and eating His flesh? What if we don't hear every time, during that time, but pray for others instead, etc.? But later, I hear Him through another as if He was speaking first-hand to me. (?)

Perhaps some will say the following verses speak of what men call communion or the eucharist. They may be right but if they are there is a more important part: Jesus is the Word of God. His flesh is the raw words of scripture even to be consumed [read or heard] by us but then to become a part of the Body.

"And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." John 1:14

"Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him." John 6:53-56

The natural man eats a bit of dead flesh in his steak or his hamburger, but as it is digested and taken into the blood, it will live again as a part of our body of flesh. ​

​

Similarly we have consumed the dead flesh of Jesus, but the Blood is not the red blood of our bodies nor even the red blood of Jesus which he shed on the cross. Rather that which was poured out [shed] on all flesh [Joel 2:28, Acts 2:33], the Holy Spirit is the Blood we drink. The Blood is the quickening Spirit that brings Life to the words which we consumed so that they be written on our hearts [II Cor 3:2] as the Word of God.​

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Gender neutral (since God does not have a sex and does not procreate) is not the same thing as "not a person".

"When He the Spirit of Truth comes - HE will guide you into all truth" is the action of a person not necessarily of a male. HE will not speak on His own - but whatever HE hears HE will speak. So that person does have "His own" Word, His own thought - in addition to accurately conveying the word and thought of someone else.

We do not say "the phone will not speak its own word or convey its own thought - but the phone will convey whatever I speak into it" because that would be nonsensical.

Rom 8:27
And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for God's people in accordance with the will of God.

We do not say that someone "knows the mind of the telephone".

Acts 15 "it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to lay on you any other burden"

We do not say "it seemed good to the telephone and to me that I tell you the truth".

It would make no sense.

John 14 "IF I go I will send you ANOTHER comforter" - We do not say "IF I go away I will send you another telephone just like me"[/QUOTE

Gender neutral (since God does not have a sex and does not procreate) is not the same thing as "not a person".

"When He the Spirit of Truth comes - HE will guide you into all truth" is the action of a person not necessarily of a male. HE will not speak on His own - but whatever HE hears HE will speak. So that person does have "His own" Word, His own thought - in addition to accurately conveying the word and thought of someone else.

We do not say "the phone will not speak its own word or convey its own thought - but the phone will convey whatever I speak into it" because that would be nonsensical.

Rom 8:27
And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for God's people in accordance with the will of God.

We do not say that someone "knows the mind of the telephone".

Acts 15 "it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to lay on you any other burden"

We do not say "it seemed good to the telephone and to me that I tell you the truth".

It would make no sense.

John 14 "IF I go I will send you ANOTHER comforter" - We do not say "IF I go away I will send you another telephone just like me"

you have ignored what I said regarding the Greek manuscripts. Did John use the masculine pronoun despite the neuter gender of the word “spirit”? Was his purpose to show that the spirit is indeed a person? Why not reread John chapter 16:7,8? What is the antecedent of the pronoun “he”? In other words what word is before the word "he", "Comforter[pa·raʹkle·tos] or Spirit [pneuʹma] Is it not the word “Comforter”? Yes, and the Greek word so rendered is pa·raʹkle·tos and is masculine in gender. Rightly, then, John used masculine pronouns in this passage because grammatical usage required it.

John did not use masculine pronouns when the antecedent was actually the neuter word pneuʹma (spirit). This can readily be seen from the readings of literal translations, such as the one by Rotherham (Rotherham Emphasized Bible). At John 14:16, 17, Rotherham renders Jesus’ words as follows: “I will request the Father, and Another Advocate [pa·raʹkle·tos] will he give unto you, that he may be with you age-abidingly, —the Spirit [pneuʹma] of truth,— which the world cannot receive, because it beholdeth it(not he or him) not nor getteth to know it(not he or him). But ye are getting to know it(not he or him); because with you it(not he or him) abideth, and in you it(not he or him) is.” Notice that the pronoun is masculine in gender (“he”) when the antecedent is the masculine noun pa·raʹkle·tos but neuter (“it”) when the antecedent is the neuter noun pneuʹma. John doesn't use the word "he" in regard to the word spirit but only to words like advocate or comforter. You and others can ignore this all you want.

 

[Angelina]

I disagree enrtirely. The Father, Son and Holy Ghost are three distinct persons/beings that work together in harmony, like as one accord, as a single chord. Nothing, therefore, is broken off, for the Godhead is not 'pie in the sky'.

What it sounds like to me, is that you are teaching "partialism" (the following is from a Lutheran pastor, I am not Lutheran, nor advocate what it teaches):

Just for kicks

Neither am I.... I am a pentecostal believer however I believe all things come from one loaf which consists of ~ God the Father, God, his Son and God the Holy Spirit. I am not a oneness advocate but I do believe that all three are one just as the bible says in John 17 20 “I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; 21 that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. 22 And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: 23 I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me.

 

[Heart2Soul]

I am giving you points for the word ‘kerfuffle’

that is definitely worth points! at least it was full word...lol

 

[TheHolyBookEnds]

Neither am I.... I am a pentecostal believer however I believe all things come from one loaf which consists of ~ God the Father, God, his Son and God the Holy Spirit. I am not a oneness advocate but I do believe that all three are one just as the bible says in John 17 20 “I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; 21 that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. 22 And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: 23 I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me.

But you spoke of 'breaking pieces' off, which diminshes the fullness of your 'loaf'. That is the partialism.