TRINITARIANS: A Question about the Holy Spirit?

[Cubes]

Why isn't it the Trinity?

Because in the Trinity, the Holy spirit is co-equal, distinct and a person. He is not God's. That would imply possession of something. And if you possess something/one, you have some authority over that person/thing. Trinitarianism shuns authority.

**I still recognize that the Holy Spirit is a separate person from the other two (while in unity with them),

If this is so, then why does the son he sired call someone else "father?" This can only be possible, if the Holy Spirit belongs to the Father. In that case, the co-equality is nullified. So you see why I say it is not exactly trinitarian.

yet even so he is "Spirit", he is "of God", and it is by his operative power that God begat His Son (much like the sperm metaphor you used).

I agree with that statement. Again, it is not Trinitarianism. Being god, or "of God" is different from being the Most High God. TD (Trinity Doctrine) states that Christ and the Holy Spirit and the Father are altogether the Most High God. This is false doctrine.

--------------------

From your earlier post:

Thus it is possible to speak of "God" as the father of Jesus and of "the Father" as the father of Jesus even though his conception occurred by the operative power of the Holy Spirit,

I agree with you here. The Most High God and the Father are the same, literally. One. Scriptural.

because the three are one.

I disagree. Unscriptural here.

You see, I don't necessarily disagree with you that God overshadowed Mary with "His own Spirit" so that his Son could be born on earth, because the Holy Spirit is his own Spirit according to the above model. Does that make sense?

I agreed with the above, but see the **above. As long as the HS is the Father's I agree. If he is a co-equal, 3rd person, I disagree because he would have become a contender for the son of God since it was he who overshadowed Mary. Do you see what I mean?

I disagree. Co-equality is something I've always had questions about. Even if Jesus is equal in nature to the Father, he at least willingly subjects himself to Him. I'm not clear on that point but don't consider it a major issue, and so I won't argue with you there.

Why isn't the father ever submitting to Jesus except to answer him in much the same way we hope that he answers when we call on him? Trinitarians are quick to cite the "I and my father are one," scripture but rarely if ever, cite the one that says, "my father is greater..."

So, if 1+4=5, then 1+4-2=3. We must use all the equations provided to get the correct answer.

But I think it's fairly clear that they are one substance, as I outlined in the diagram above. If they aren't one substance, then we have two Gods.

-CK

Trinitarians also say that each member is distinct so are they of the same substance or distinct or both? See the confusion?

 

[NEJTiger]

If they aren't one substance, then we have two Gods.

-CK

but remember, flesh is not part of the substance. God is not flesh and bones and no man has seen Him at any time. the Son was fully God and fully man. so u have one divine Spirit and one flesh, not two Gods. can u understand that?

 

[NEJTiger]

Jesus sits at the Right Hand of the Father.

<><

do u think that this refers to a literal "right hand" of the Father?

 

[NEJTiger]

If this is so, then why does the son he sired call someone else "father?" This can only be possible, if the Holy Spirit belongs to the Father. In that case, the co-equality is nullified. So you see why I say it is not exactly trinitarian.

it sounds to me as if some of these trinitarian folks are saying that the Holy Ghost was merely the Father's agent in conception as compared to artificial insemination!

 

[Cubes]

Correct in only that the scriptures do not explicitly say the word Trinity or that the Three are "One in substance" or "One in Being". You could certainly a argue a Duality from scripture, though I note you do not do that either. Interesting that you make this statement about the Trinity as if by its abscence in scripture you refute it and then launch into something that is also not in the Bible.

The absence of the actual word "trinity" is not the problem. The concept is.
I was trying to meet daneel halfway, having recognized some of the scriptures he was citing. Please let me know what is unscriptural so I can properly address it.

Also not sure why you think 3 Divine persons each having a Will, cannot collectively make One Divine Will, just as collectively the Three are God.

Sounds good but just not scriptural, that's all. There is only one will that everyone, including Christ and the holy spirit (and hopefully us) conform to.
Jesus said that it is the father's will that is to be done, that he seeks to do. I can find

You are making our belief more complicated than it needs to be, not that we can really comprehend the Infinite.

I am not. The gospel of Christ as found in the word of God is not complicated.

There is One God. The Most High God. He has a son. He sent his spirit to overshadow Mary so that this son can be born on earth to redeem us. His son came and did just that and told us about himself but mostly about his father and his father's kingdom.

God then sent his holy spirit to give new life to as many as would believe that his son came, died and rose again. His son is a god and is Lord of all creation.
The Trinity tweeks the story of Jesus Christ by making him out into someone else altogether, but it is him that we must believe in and his message.

 

[gort]

NEJTiger quote:

do u think that this refers to a literal "right hand" of the Father?

Ask Stephen. He saw.

<><

 

[gort]

NEJTiger quote:

it sounds to me as if some of these trinitarian folks are saying that the Holy Ghost was merely the Father's agent in conception as compared to artificial insemination!

Actually that is what the non-trinitarians try, but fail in their attempts.


I wonder why Jesus said that the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is unforgiveable??

<><

 

[Angel11]

I have a different take on the Trinity after studying the scriptures.

First, we know that we were created in God's own image (Gen. 1:26-27) ? “And God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…” “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” I believe that the reference to “man” and “he” is simply a formal usage of language, not pertaining to “male” as in a Male God. If God created both male and female in “our” image, then that would imply that God is both a Male and a Female. I think we’ve been living in a patriarchal society for so long that the understanding of male/female balance has been lost. The very essence of creativity is feminine in nature so how could there not also be a female God? They can be one in spirit so in that respect they are one God. Just as you can have a King and Queen Reign together in their Kingdom on Earth, so too can there be a King and Queen in the Kingdom of Heaven.

We also know that God is a Triune God, most commonly known as the "Trinity." This one God is three Persons whom are one in spirit, meaning, as I mentioned above, that they are "one" in their purpose and goals for this Universe. There are many, many references to the different aspects of the Trinity in the bible but I will just choose one for this hypothesis. (Mathew 19-29) "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen."

But who is the Holy Ghost? The Holy Ghost is certainly not a person, yet we know that God is three persons. The Holy Ghost is often times referred to as the Holy Spirit. Could this mean that the Holy Ghost is the spirit of God? As we are all creations of God, then we would all have the spirit of God within us, or the Holy Ghost (the still, small voice inside each of us), which some people refer to as our "conscience."

Concluding evidence would leave us to believe that the three persons who make up the trinity, who are God would have to be the Father (paragraph 1&2), the Mother (paragraph 1), and the Son (paragraph 2). And the combined energy of those three make the Holy Spirit.

Therefore, the virgin Mary was like a surogate Mother.

 

[CaliforniaKid]

Because in the Trinity, the Holy spirit is co-equal, distinct and a person. He is not God's. That would imply possession of something. And if you possess something/one, you have some authority over that person/thing. Trinitarianism shuns authority.

Trinitarianism doesn't shun authority. Trinitarianism outright acknowledges the de facto authority of the Father over both the other persons of the Trinity. To do otherwise would be stupid. The Father's authority is all over scripture. We're not stupid, Cubes. What we believe is that the Son is not a demigod. The Holy Spirit is not a demigod. Each of them is fully God (i.e. not a "lesser being"). But the Son willingly submits to the Father, and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. Thus the Son is functionally lower in the hierarchy than the Father, and the Holy Spirit literally belongs to both the Father and the Son. It is very wrong to think of the Trinity as something that erases the distinct interrelationships between the three persons. The Trinity acknowledges these relationships. The Trinity merely investigates into the deep metaphysical nature (as opposed to function or position) of God and of the three persons in an attempt to explain how the three can be one God and yet distinct.

If this is so, then why does the son he sired call someone else "father?" This can only be possible, if the Holy Spirit belongs to the Father. In that case, the co-equality is nullified. So you see why I say it is not exactly trinitarian.

No, the co-equality isn't nullified. Co-equality says they are equal in nature but not in function or authority. The Trinity acknowledges that the Holy Spirit is (functionally) God's operative power.

Because the Father functions as God'sTrinitarians are quick to cite the "I and my father are one," scripture but rarely if ever, cite the one that says, "my father is greater..."

That one passage is the single reason that I said I am not a dogmatic supporter of the tenet of coequality. Still, I think that if coequality is properly understood, even this verse is not a problem for it.

Trinitarians also say that each member is distinct so are they of the same substance or distinct or both? See the confusion?

Both.

I think the biggest problem you've got is that you misunderstand what Trinitarians believe. You're putting way too much emphasis on our understanding of the nature of the three persons and entirely neglecting our understanding of their function. I hope that even if you still disagree with it, you will walk away from this conversation with a better understanding of and greater respect for the Trinitarian position. Like I said, we're not complete morons.

My friend is looking over my shoulder and says we should "quit worrying about interpreting and start doing." He wanted me to type that at the end of my post.

God Bless,
-CK

 

[CaliforniaKid]

Tiger,

but remember, flesh is not part of the substance. God is not flesh and bones and no man has seen Him at any time. the Son was fully God and fully man. so u have one divine Spirit and one flesh, not two Gods. can u understand that?

I'm not at all sure I understand what you're getting at. Refer to the diagram I posted earlier on in this thread. The "one substance" is the primordial spirit God who is in all, through all, sees all, knows all, etc. The three persons of the Trinity are thus manifestations of this primordial God, and are composed of its/his substance.

So are you saying that the Father is the one divine spirit and the Son is the divine flesh, and together they make up one God? That sounds like a weird variant of the Trinity. Or are you just asking what we mean by "one substance"? If so, understand: Jesus was a spirit before he took on flesh. He existed before his incarnation as a spirit. Therefore he is, at the most fundamental level, still spirit. He just inhabits a body of flesh. Proverbs 8 calls him Wisdom and describes his role in the creation of the world (compare Col. 1:15-19). In light of Angel's post about a divine mom and dad, I'll also point out that Proverbs 8 uses female pronouns to describe him, so we may conclude that spirits are without gender but that male pronouns are usually used to describe them just for practical purposes.

-CK

 

[NEJTiger]

Tiger,

The three persons of the Trinity are thus manifestations of this primordial God, and are composed of its/his substance.

-CK

this statement of yours contradicts the doctrine of the trinity. "manifestations" is a "oneness" term thus contradicting the whole separation of "persons" theory. either your really not trinitarian or u just don't know the doctrine that well.

 

[NEJTiger]

Actually that is what the non-trinitarians try, but fail in their attempts.


I wonder why Jesus said that the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is unforgiveable??

<><

because the Son of God always includes the humanity of Christ. it is comparing diety to flesh.

now let me ask u, if the Son and Holy Ghost are coequal persons in the Godhead, why is blasphemy of the Holy Ghost unforgiveable but blashpemy of the Son is not? that clearly makes one unequal to the other. what is your explanation?

 

[NEJTiger]

Ask Stephen. He saw.

<><

i asked a direct question that u diverted into another question. please answer:

[do u think that this refers to a literal "right hand" of the Father?]

 

[gort]

NEJTIger quote:

now let me ask u, if the Son and Holy Ghost are coequal persons in the Godhead, why is blasphemy of the Holy Ghost unforgiveable but blashpemy of the Son is not? that clearly makes one unequal to the other. what is your explanation?

As most non-trinitarians don't believe the Holy Spirit to be God, but something along the lines of the "mind" or "power" of God, my question, is still unanswered.

Also, why can the HS be "grieved"? if it is just the 'mind' or 'power' of God?

And why does Jesus call the HS "HE", if the HS is just the 'mind', or 'power', or 'force' of God?

But to answer your question, to blasphemy the HS would be to do just that. Blasphemy the Holy Spirit.

i asked a direct question that u diverted into another question. please answer:

[do u think that this refers to a literal "right hand" of the Father?]

I diverted nothing. I gave you a direct answer. Stephen directly saw Jesus at the Right Hand of God. Please to read you Scripture. It is also in many other place.

The Son is seated at the Right Hand of God the Father.

<><

 

[Cubes]

....and let's not forget:

Heb 1:1 God, who at many times and in many ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets,
Heb 1:2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, by whom also He made the worlds,

What this says to me, daneel, is that, HE, the Most High God is the initiator:
HE spoke to us by HIS son, whom HE appointed heir of all things, by whom also, HE made the worlds.

This same thought carries over to the salvation process. It is the father who seeks reconciliation with us. So he reconciles us to himself through Christ his son.

In evolution vs creationism terms, this is easily understood by creationists that SOMEONE (GOD) started the ball rolling. Evolutionists largely deny this entirely or in parts.

Yes, He is. He once said, "If you have seen me, you have seen the Father."

Joh 14:9 Jesus said to him, Have I been with you such a long time and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father. And how do you say, Show us the Father?

So then by your reasoning, Jesus IS the father? If not, why not?
How can you say there is a father who is distinct from the son, yet, to see the son is to see that same father without borrowing from the truth below?

Body of Christ. Each member a living stone, Christ the chief cornerstone, together or apart, the temple of God...but always, Christ as the head, and the Father, the head of Christ.

Thus a person could point to a single christian and say, "there, the body of Christ," or to a whole assembly, and he'd be right. But we are not ourselves Jesus Christ in office or authority and should not be seen as him.

The Father has given the Son all things, and the Son gives the Father all things....

Aren't we invited to partake in that same nature? What do we have that we didn't receive? What do we have that we are not called to surrender to God? Our very lives. Romans 12:1f

Also, show me a biblical example of the son giving to the Father something he never first received from the Father. Or the Father being given something he didn't first give. Again, the Father is ALWAYS the Initiator, the primary source of all things, the ultimate giver and that is why he is the Highest.

Joh 10:33 The Jews answered Him, saying, We do not stone you for a good work, but for blasphemy, and because you, being a man, make yourself God.

And what was his response to them?

John 10:34 Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your law, 'I said, "You are gods"'?* 35 If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), 36 do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'? 37 If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; 38 but if I do, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, that you may know and *believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him."


Son of God does not equate equate with "My Father."

 

[WiseOne77]

Jesus is an image of someone else and therefore can't have all the same attributes as the one he is an image of. For example, if I make a copy of any document or anything really is the original "older" in age than the copy? The original always comes before the copy.

 

[gort]

What this says to me, daneel, is that, HE, the Most High God is the initiator:
HE spoke to us by HIS son, whom HE appointed heir of all things, by whom also, HE made the worlds.

Yet all things were made through Him (Jesus)

CaliforniaKid made a good point that non-trinitarians are missing, and that is the fact that Jesus is not His Father.

When Jesus said, "If you have seen me, you have seen the Father", Jesus does'nt mean Jesus is the Father. Jesus is the divine expression, express image of God the Father. But Jesus is not the Father, He is the Son. God the Son. Jesus has all the attributes, power, authority, that God the Father has.

<><

 

[gort]

Wiseone77 quote:

Jesus is an image of someone else and therefore can't have all the same attributes as the one he is an image of. For example, if I make a copy of any document or anything really is the original "older" in age than the copy? The original always comes before the copy.

Oh. We're back to finite examples of how some things just cannot be......

My unanswered question still remains.....

"When did the Word come into existence?"

<><

 

[WiseOne77]

Oh. We're back to finite examples of how some things just cannot be......

My unanswered question still remains.....

"When did the Word come into existence?"

<><

He came into existence in the beginning. Rev 3:14 shows this. He is the first of creation.

 

[Cubes]

As most non-trinitarians don't believe the Holy Spirit to be God, but something along the lines of the "mind" or "power" of God, my question, is still unanswered.

Also, why can the HS be "grieved"? if it is just the 'mind' or 'power' of God?

And why does Jesus call the HS "HE", if the HS is just the 'mind', or 'power', or 'force' of God?

But to answer your question, to blasphemy the HS would be to do just that. Blasphemy the Holy Spirit.

All the attributes of the Holy Spirit are true of God and originate from God. God gives his children some of those same attributes and Christ has its fullness.

I don't know why the blasphemy clause is exclusive to the holy spirit.

But It is similar to the tree of knowledge of good and evil in the garden of eden. God created the garden and put the tree there. He chose to make that the limit and boundary as to how far Adam and eve should go. It wasn't because the tree is greater than God.

Likewise, the Holy Spirit is from God as was that tree. God said don't eat of the tree...don't blaspheme the Holy Spirit. We'll do well simply to heed that. May God guide our steps during these discussions to not stray too far to the left or to the right in these matters. Amen.

Beyond that, I have no explanations and would welcome Trinitarian views with regards to NEJtiger's question (I think it was NEJtiger on this thread), that if God is 3 in 1 and all members are co-equal, then don't you have the burden of proof to tell us why the holy spirit is singled out?