Jesus the ventriloquist?

[DNB]

I am fully aware that you reject the biblical doctrines of the Holy Trinity and the Deity of Christ.

I am pleased that I have made my position very clear on this matter, thanks for the acknowledgement!

But to answer your question, any unbiased person will note that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all present and evident at the baptism of Jesus of Nazareth.

But Enoch111, the passage quoted was Matthew 17:5, the transfiguration of Christ, which is the one that you replied to r1xlx, of which I replied to you. Where you unaware, ...please tell me that you see my point here?

As to establishing the Deity of Christ, it does not matter how many Scriptures are presented to cultists. THEY SIMPLY REFUSE TO BELIEVE THE BIBLE. Therefore I will leave you to your false beliefs.

It's a very hard pill to swallow, Biblically, exegetically, ontologically, soteriologically, etc.. You must admit that it's riddled with spurious and implausible assertions.
The ultimate point is, that it invariably reflects one's esteem and reverence of God, not just ontologically, but characteristically.
What type of Biblical attestation is imparted in this inferred manner, and where's the wisdom behind the legislator and judge paying the penalty to allay his own wrath?
Besides, what's a god-man?

 

[Nancy]

Why in the world would you make such a claim as, God from heaven, spoke to God the Son on earth, and not feel an need to elaborate on, or explain such a radical statement? Earlier you said 'I do believe Jesus is Deity. God the Son.' You appear to be rather oblivious to the implications and implausibility of your conviction. I would never make such an unfathomable and un-Biblical assertion, without feeling a dire need to qualify my statement.
I personally, cannot conceive of what you just said, nor have I ever read 'God the Son' or 'trinity', from anywhere in the Bible?
Am I lacking the wisdom, or are you being reckless and irresponsible with your affirmations?

Stranger said: ↑
I have read your posts, they always seem to have a bitterness in them.
I think you assume too much.
(Matt. 17:5) is clear concerning the distinction between the Father and Son. But, that doesn't mean the Son is not God also.
Stranger

What is needed to elaborate on? @Stranger gave the best (IMHO) scripture verse where God the Father (Speaking from Heaven) The Holy Spirit (Dove) and of course Christ. All there at the same time, all distinct in purpose but all as one. Far as I'm concerned, God could manifest Himself in 7 ways if He wanted to. Yet, it seems "these three are one"
1 John 5:7 reads: For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

 

[Enoch111]

Yep, we all often say of stranger that he lacks IQ

I doubt that very much. Stranger has soon good intelligent thoughts, along with some *strange* thoughts.:cool:

 

[DNB]

Stranger said: ↑
I have read your posts, they always seem to have a bitterness in them.
I think you assume too much.
(Matt. 17:5) is clear concerning the distinction between the Father and Son. But, that doesn't mean the Son is not God also.
Stranger

What is needed to elaborate on? @Stranger gave the best (IMHO) scripture verse where God the Father (Speaking from Heaven) The Holy Spirit (Dove) and of course Christ. All there at the same time, all distinct in purpose but all as one. Far as I'm concerned, God could manifest Himself in 7 ways if He wanted to. Yet, it seems "these three are one"
1 John 5:7 reads: For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

Hi Nancy, ...you know that Stranger was not referring to me (bitter), in his statement that you quoted? So I don't know the relevance off-hand?

What in the world is going on here, the Biblical verse in question was Matthew 17:5, of which there is absolutely no mention of the Holy Spirit, nor a dove for that matter. Thus no three persons, nor a dove. Why are people contending my point, with some extraneous verses?

Nancy, very, very bad exegesis, you do know that there is no reputable textual critic that accepts the Comma Johanneum (1 John 5:7) as being authentic, don't you? Now, of course, this is not your ultimate arsenal. For as far as you are concerned, you have a myriad of other proof-text that you feel will validate your point.

And therefore, I was very explicit in stating simply the logistical implausibility of what he said i.e. God spoke to God? And, I questioned his use of the words 'God the Son', and 'trinity'. I merely said that I couldn't find those terms from anywhere within scripture, nor did I understand the concept, as many will agree. That is, it clearly warrants explanation. He cannot come and make such radical assertions, in such a presumptuous manner that he did, without qualifying them.
I said nothing more than that.

 

[Nancy]

Hi Nancy, ...you know that Stranger was not referring to me (bitter), in his statement that you quoted? So I don't know the relevance off-hand?

What in the world is going on here, the Biblical verse in question was Matthew 17:5, of which there is absolutely no mention of the Holy Spirit, nor a dove for that matter. Thus no three persons, nor a dove. Why are people contending my point, with some extraneous verses?

Nancy, very, very bad exegesis, you do know that there is no reputable textual critic that accepts the Comma Johanneum (1 John 5:7) as being authentic, don't you? Now, of course, this is not your ultimate arsenal. For as far as you are concerned, you have a myriad of other proof-text that you feel will validate your point.

And therefore, I was very explicit in stating simply the logistical implausibility of what he said i.e. God spoke to God? And, I questioned his use of the words 'God the Son', and 'trinity'. I simply said that i couldn't find those terms from anywhere within scripture, nor did I understand the concept, as many will agree. That is, it clearly warrants explanation. He cannot come and make such radical assertions, in such a presumptuous manner that he did, without qualifying them.
I said nothing more than that.

My apologies. I was lax with the verse. I thought we were speaking of Matthew 3:13-16.

 

[DNB]

My apologies. I was lax with the verse. I thought we were speaking of Matthew 3:13-16.

No worries, of course, ...it just happened earlier by someone else also, that I even began to think that maybe I mis-referenced the verse.
Thanks!

 

[Paul Christensen]

Actually, you do. You assume it is just you and God and all others just need to listen to you. And if they don't, then you are quick to insult. Your reactions are based on your many false assumptions.

Thus your analysation can't be trusted.

Your insults are empty.

Stranger

There is no point in trying to defend yourself to this guy. Don't come down to his level. There is a report function - use it and allow the moderators to deal with him over his violation of the forum rules. He needs to learn respect for other members who don't agree with him.

 

[Brakelite]

I've been wavering back and forth over the concept of the Trinity/Godhead for several years now. At times I would find myself firmly on the trinitarian side, then firmly anti trinitarian. Right now, simply because the Bible does not elaborate on the actual nature of good at all, and most of our beliefs regarding such are merely assumptions, I would rather just leave the subject alone. But I feel myself being constantly drawn back into these discussions. Oh well, sigh.

 

[Dcopymope]

I've been wavering back and forth over the concept of the Trinity/Godhead for several years now. At times I would find myself firmly on the trinitarian side, then firmly anti trinitarian. Right now, simply because the Bible does not elaborate on the actual nature of good at all, and most of our beliefs regarding such are merely assumptions, I would rather just leave the subject alone. But I feel myself being constantly drawn back into these discussions. Oh well, sigh.

The discussion will continue because its very difficult for our little pea brains to truly understand the concept of the Godhead. For me, I understand that the holy spirit is not really a "person", but the power emanating from God. Its not really a separate entity from God like Jesus is described, and that's where the issue starts. I think the key is in understanding that there is a chain of command in the Godhead, seeing that Jesus always directed all glory and praise to the Father instead of himself.

 

[DNB]

I've been wavering back and forth over the concept of the Trinity/Godhead for several years now. At times I would find myself firmly on the trinitarian side, then firmly anti trinitarian. Right now, simply because the Bible does not elaborate on the actual nature of good at all, and most of our beliefs regarding such are merely assumptions, I would rather just leave the subject alone. But I feel myself being constantly drawn back into these discussions. Oh well, sigh.

I assume that by this statement, '..the actual nature of good at all,...' you meant '...nature of God....'? And thus, His ontological essence.

I would apply a very basic and fundamental approach to this. For such a radical doctrine and concept, and without exception, a paramount one, we would expect a verbose, exhaustive and comprehensive Biblical testimony. Like we do for such paradigm shifts as Faith over Works, and the Gentiles allowance into the Kingdom of God. For the latter two doctrines, we have prophetical attestation, verified by inspired authors, predominantly Matthew. We have didactic passages that explain the grounds for both, the former Law's inception, and the reasons for the subsequent transition to the new Laws. We have explicit passages that affirm and emphasize the Historical results of these changes (Message preached, and Holy Spirit given, to all races, just for believing). And we have all the necessary terminology from the Bible, to define and explain these revelations and doctrines. And we can go on....

None of this can be said about the trinity.
And we can go on...

 

[Brakelite]

I assume that by this statement, '..the actual nature of good at all,...' you meant '...nature of God....'? And thus, His ontological essence.

I would apply a very basic and fundamental approach to this. For such a radical doctrine and concept, and without exception, a paramount one, we would expect a verbose, exhaustive and comprehensive Biblical testimony. Like we do for such paradigm shifts as Faith over Works, and the Gentiles allowance into the Kingdom of God. For the latter two doctrines, we have prophetical attestation, verified by inspired authors, predominantly Matthew. We have didactic passages that explain the grounds for both, the former Law's inception, and the reasons for the subsequent transition to the new Laws. We have explicit passages that affirm and emphasize the Historical results of these changes (Message preached, and Holy Spirit given, to all races, just for believing). And we have all the necessary terminology from the Bible, to define and explain these revelations and doctrines. And we can go on....

None of this can be said about the trinity.
And we can go on...

Yes, I meant God, have to be more careful about editing my own typing. Even there, it came up as topping my own tipping.
I agree with the rest. If God had intended we understand His nature, He may have granted us a great deal more detail. I do believe in a Trinity. However, I think the church has gone too far in attempting to define it, way too far in demanding our acceptance of the church's definition, and way way too far in persecuting those who don't.
From my reading of scripture I notice the the Spirit of God suggests ownership. Yet we also read that the Spirit can be poured out... Be grieved.... Be blasphemed... Be obeyed... We can be led, inspired, and filled by the Spirit. And more. There appears to be a great deal of multi tasking going on here. And yet we are also told that God ministers to mankind through His angels. We can get confused I think between the work of angels and that of the holy Spirit. It may even be a combination of both. But the actual nature of the holy Spirit and how it's... His? Union with the Father and Son is realised, is not revealed, and I think we ought not go down that path.
As for the Father and Son, that more simple. Is Jesus deity? If course. He is His Father's Son. The same Divine nature which the Son inherited. There is nothing the Father has that the Son wasnt given. Except as was said previously, rank. It appears that Jesus deferred constantly to the Father as being His Superior in rank and authority. And Corinthians reveals that after the Father has put all Christ's enemies under his feet, then Christ once again gives the kingdom into the hands of the Father that the Father may continue to rule and reign over all. That where I am at the moment. I'm reluctant to venture too much deeper... Yes, there are some more truth revealed but I don't think it changes what I have testified to above.

 

[Brakelite]

The discussion will continue because its very difficult for our little pea brains to truly understand the concept of the Godhead. For me, I understand that the holy spirit is not really a "person", but the power emanating from God. Its not really a separate entity from God like Jesus is described, and that's where the issue starts. I think the key is in understanding that there is a chain of command in the Godhead, seeing that Jesus always directed all glory and praise to the Father instead of himself.

I agree with much of the above, except for the pea brain idea. I think if explained adequately, the nature of the Godhead would be understood even by us, with the aid of His Spirit, but the truth is, there is no such explanation.
As for the Spirit not being a separate person,? I think He/it? is a separate person, but not in the same way we think of the Father and Son being separate persons.
I agree with the authority and rank idea. Yes, it seems the Son in inferior in rank. But not in anything else.

 

[Paul Christensen]

I assume that by this statement, '..the actual nature of good at all,...' you meant '...nature of God....'? And thus, His ontological essence.

I would apply a very basic and fundamental approach to this. For such a radical doctrine and concept, and without exception, a paramount one, we would expect a verbose, exhaustive and comprehensive Biblical testimony. Like we do for such paradigm shifts as Faith over Works, and the Gentiles allowance into the Kingdom of God. For the latter two doctrines, we have prophetical attestation, verified by inspired authors, predominantly Matthew. We have didactic passages that explain the grounds for both, the former Law's inception, and the reasons for the subsequent transition to the new Laws. We have explicit passages that affirm and emphasize the Historical results of these changes (Message preached, and Holy Spirit given, to all races, just for believing). And we have all the necessary terminology from the Bible, to define and explain these revelations and doctrines. And we can go on....

None of this can be said about the trinity.
And we can go on...

There are one or two questions I have about the trinity.
How come the Hebrew word for God is a plural?
Why did God say when Adam and Eve ate the fruit, "they have become like us, knowing good and evil". Who is the "us", and who was God speaking to?
When Jesus was baptised, whose was the voice from heaven that said, "This is my beloved Son"? And, what was the bodily form that descended on Jesus from we don't know where?
Is the Holy Spirit, God?
Is Jesus God?
Is the Father God?
How do we explain that?
When Jesus was transfigured, whose was the voice from heaven that said, "This is my beloved Son. Listen to Him."
When Mary met Jesus after His resurrection, why did Jesus tell Mary not to touch Him because He had not yet ascended to the Father?
How come Jesus said that He did only the will of His Father?
Why did John say, "Truly our fellowship is with the Father, and His Son Jesus Christ"?
Why did Paul say, "That I might know you, the only true God, and Jesus whom you have sent?"
If Jesus isn't God, how come He was able to take upon Himself the eternal wrath of God for every single soul who received Christ, past, present and future, within just the three hours He hung on the cross before He died?
How come the Father is a spirit, and no man has ever seen Him, and yet Jesus, as God, is a man that everyone could see clearly?
Who was Jesus crying out to when He said, "My God, my God, why have you abandoned me?" And when He said, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit".
If the Father is invisible and cannot be seen, who was the fourth person in the fiery furnace with the three young Hebrew men, and was described as someone who looked like "the Son of God?"
And, the Father being invisible, who was the Lord whom Isaiah saw high and lifted up and said, "I am undone"?
Why does the Scripture say that a person who has the Holy Spirit, has Jesus and the Father as well? Does this mean that the Holy Spirit is God as well?
If so, then we have to accept that the Holy Spirit is separate from the Father and Jesus, because Jesus told His disciples that when He goes, He will send the Holy Spirit to be in them, and He will teach them all things they need to know.

I think there is only one way to satisfactorily answer these questions - that God is plural, and is in the persons of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

This means that the Scripture is very clear about the trinity, even though it does not use the word, or to define it as such. But it makes is very clear that there are three separate Persons that are identified as God.

 

[Philip James]

If God had intended we understand His nature, He may have granted us a great deal more detail.

Hello Brakelite,

He gave us all the detail we can comprhend in Jesus.
' if you have seen me you have seen the Father'
'the Father and I are One'

'you will die in your sins unless you come to believe I AM HE'

Peace be with you !

 

[Paul Christensen]

Yes, I meant God, have to be more careful about editing my own typing. Even there, it came up as topping my own tipping.
I agree with the rest. If God had intended we understand His nature, He may have granted us a great deal more detail. I do believe in a Trinity. However, I think the church has gone too far in attempting to define it, way too far in demanding our acceptance of the church's definition, and way way too far in persecuting those who don't.
From my reading of scripture I notice the the Spirit of God suggests ownership. Yet we also read that the Spirit can be poured out... Be grieved.... Be blasphemed... Be obeyed... We can be led, inspired, and filled by the Spirit. And more. There appears to be a great deal of multi tasking going on here. And yet we are also told that God ministers to mankind through His angels. We can get confused I think between the work of angels and that of the holy Spirit. It may even be a combination of both. But the actual nature of the holy Spirit and how it's... His? Union with the Father and Son is realised, is not revealed, and I think we ought not go down that path.
As for the Father and Son, that more simple. Is Jesus deity? If course. He is His Father's Son. The same Divine nature which the Son inherited. There is nothing the Father has that the Son wasnt given. Except as was said previously, rank. It appears that Jesus deferred constantly to the Father as being His Superior in rank and authority. And Corinthians reveals that after the Father has put all Christ's enemies under his feet, then Christ once again gives the kingdom into the hands of the Father that the Father may continue to rule and reign over all. That where I am at the moment. I'm reluctant to venture too much deeper... Yes, there are some more truth revealed but I don't think it changes what I have testified to above.

We need to be careful that we don't stray into Jehovah's witnesses or Mormon theology concerning Jesus and the Holy Spirit; or the Oneness Pentecostals who recognise Jesus only as God, and subscribe to Modalism in saying that God reveals Himself in three different modes - sometimes in the mode of the Father, other times in the mode of Jesus, and still other times in the mode of the Holy Spirit.

I'm not saying this is what you are doing at all, but just putting up a warning sign that we don't stray off what the Scripture actually says. In fact, the nature and character of God is in many ways a mystery and we know only partially. The Scripture clearly points out that there is a Father, and a Son who came to the world as Jesus Christ, and a Holy Spirit whom Jesus sent to be with and in us until He comes again. How that all fits together is something we cannot perfectly know. We just have to take the Word of Scripture for it.

We have to get away from the notion that the Holy Spirit is some sort of "mist" or "electricity", and not an actual invisible spirit person who comes to reside in us with our spirit (which is our real person who lives in our body). He is not some sort of "presence" that "hovers" over believers in a church service, as some have asked Him to do. One preacher said we don't want Him to just "hover" but to land! But really, He lives in us. Therefore when we come to church, we bring the Holy Spirit with us. If no believers were present, the Holy Spirit wouldn't be there either. "Holy" buildings where the Holy Spirit resides is just fantasy. He doesn't live in buildings, but in converted believers. This means that people don't have to be "hyped up" to achieve a Holy Spirit atmosphere, because when they walk in they bring the atmosphere with them. They actually are the atmosphere, and the Holy Spirit works through the contribution they make to the services. The problem with many is they are just passive pew-sitters silently observing the performance up the front, and so the Holy Spirit can do very little through them. That's why many churches are just cold monuments with very little of the Holy Spirit working in them, because most of the people in the services are doing nothing to enable the Holy Spirit to work with them.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Hello Brakelite,

He gave us all the detail we can comprhend in Jesus.
' if you have seen me you have seen the Father'
'the Father and I are One'

'you will die in your sins unless you come to believe I AM HE'

Peace be with you !

Yes. If we could work God out completely, He wouldn't be God, would He?

 

[Brakelite]

which is our real person who lives in our body

This I disagree with. Smacks of Platonism. Greek mythology where the pure Spirit inside is seeking to escape the evil flesh body. Not biblical.

 

[Dcopymope]

I agree with much of the above, except for the pea brain idea. I think if explained adequately, the nature of the Godhead would be understood even by us, with the aid of His Spirit, but the truth is, there is no such explanation.
As for the Spirit not being a separate person,? I think He/it? is a separate person, but not in the same way we think of the Father and Son being separate persons.
I agree with the authority and rank idea. Yes, it seems the Son in inferior in rank. But not in anything else.

Well, the holy spirit is never described as a "person", which is the problem.

 

[Paul Christensen]

This I disagree with. Smacks of Platonism. Greek mythology where the pure Spirit inside is seeking to escape the evil flesh body. Not biblical.

I never said that. The Holy Spirit is living inside of converted Christians. He is not trying to escape! He is the one working within us to conform us to the image of Christ.

I know what Plato says about the evil of our bodies, and that the spiritual is more important. I don't go along with his view. I subscribe to what the Scripture says about the kingdom of God being in us, and that we are born again and transformed by the Holy Spirit coming into us. This is what Jesus meant when He said, "Lo, I will be with you unto the end of the world". He is physically in heaven interceding for us before the Father, so it is the Holy Spirit, as Jesus' Representative living in us to maintain our faith in Him.

 

[Enoch111]

Well, the holy spirit is never described as a "person", which is the problem.

How did you arrive at that conclusion? All you have to do is read John 16. But there are many other passages which show that the Holy Spirit is the third Divine Person of the Godhead.