[QUOTE=Steve MB]
Filioque Clause:
[/QUOTE]
I always found these arguments so ridiculous and twisted and tragic when allowed to excuse violence. Isn’t it obvious that we don’t and possibly can’t, really understand whatever this mystery is. I can understand wondering and giving it some thought but to allow it to separate people worshiping the same God and the same son seems an act totally contrary to the unity Jesus preached.
Thanks for filling in this obvious gap among my synapses, Steve
I am interested in this controversy of whether the Holy Spirit is mentioned in the Bible. Beyond the baptismal rerference, it it mentioned in aother places? For the non-Holy Spirit supporters, how do you claim it is not supported by the Bible if it appears at least once? Is it a translation issue?
[QUOTE=DanBlather]
I am interested in this controversy of whether the Holy Spirit is mentioned in the Bible. Beyond the baptismal rerference, it it mentioned in aother places? For the non-Holy Spirit supporters, how do you claim it is not supported by the Bible if it appears at least once? Is it a translation issue?
[/QUOTE]
“But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.” — John 14:26
The Holy Spirit is mentioned several times in the Bible. It is never equated to God, though (IIRC)
[QUOTE=DanBlather]
I am interested in this controversy of whether the Holy Spirit is mentioned in the Bible. Beyond the baptismal rerference, it it mentioned in aother places? For the non-Holy Spirit supporters, how do you claim it is not supported by the Bible if it appears at least once? Is it a translation issue?
[/QUOTE]
Really? A quick keyword search at Bible Gateway reveals a few.
There is of course the “He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.” quote from John the Baptist but plenty of others.
I always found this one interesting Jesus says
Matthew 12:32
Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.
a few others
Luke 11:13
If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him!”
John 14:26
But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.
Plenty of references in Acts although those may be the baptism you spoke of.
Acts 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them, as upon us at the beginning. 16 Then I remembered the word of the Lord, how He said, ‘John indeed baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’
Acts 15: 7 And when there had been much dispute, Peter rose up and said to them: “Men and brethren, you know that a good while ago God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. 8 So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, 9 and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
Romans 14:17
for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.
1 Corinthians 2:13
These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
Ephesians 1:13
In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,
Titus 3:5
not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit,
There might be some controversy over whether references to* the *spirit is intended to mean the Holy Spirit. There are a few references in the OT
Psalm 51:11
Do not cast me away from Your presence,And do not take Your Holy Spirit from me.
Isaiah 63:11
Then he remembered the days of old, Moses and his people, saying:“ Where is He who brought them up out of the sea With the shepherd of His flock? Where is He who put His Holy Spirit within them,
Daniel 4:18
“This dream I, King Nebuchadnezzar, have seen. Now you, Belteshazzar, declare its interpretation, since all the wise men of my kingdom are not able to make known to me the interpretation; but you are able, for the Spirit of the Holy God is in you.”
Lot’s of references. Did you have specific questions about them?
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
Lot’s of references. Did you have specific questions about them?
[/QUOTE]
I suppose I could have done the search myself :o No, I was just wanting to find out more on the arguments on both side. Reading back, however, I realize the issue is not the Holy Spirit, it’s the Trinity. :smack:
[QUOTE=DanBlather]
I suppose I could have done the search myself :o No, I was just wanting to find out more on the arguments on both side. Reading back, however, I realize the issue is not the Holy Spirit, it’s the Trinity. :smack:
[/QUOTE]
There has always been some question and disagreement as to the role, identity, and purpose of the Holy Spirit. In my discussions with some Christians they claim it wasn’t around until after Jesus ascended, and it is not given to the individual until they accept Jesus as Lord.
This is not without some possible support
John 7:38 He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water.” 39 But this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those believing in Him would receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.
John 16:5 “But now I go away to Him who sent Me, and none of you asks Me, ‘Where are You going?’ 6 But because I have said these things to you, sorrow has filled your heart. 7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you.
But we also see the Holy Spirit being spoken of in the OT as well and examples of the HS available to anyone who seeks God. Personally I see it as our connection to each other and the common source, whatever that is. Something that lives within all of us, whether we recognize it or not.
[QUOTE=Mangetout]
You might have to elaborate a bit there; it looks like you’re saying there’s more scripture for heaven than for omnipotence, but less for heaven than for omnipresence? Or are you just saying you don’t accept the arguments for one or the other?
[/QUOTE]
Forgive me for not citing it right now, but what I’m saying, irrespective of any consideration of heaven, is that the bible indicates an all powerful God; a God whose power and authority are unlimited. An omnipotent God.
A biblical case can be made that God is able to project his authority, insight and awareness in such a way that his knowledge and awareness are omnipresent, but not his [spirit] person. The bible represents God as being a [spirit] person, and who has a dwelling place.
This is not a minor distinction. It is popular to describe God like water vapor—a nebulous, hazy concept. Comments like, “God is all around us”, or “God is in our heart”, may accurately speak to God’s qualities, and specifically his awareness and power, but not his person. (although there is certainly nothing wrong with metaphor, as long as it is understood to be metaphor)
The bible shows God to be a specific person (albeit the Sovereign ruler of the universe…), with a dwelling place from which he projects his power, awareness and will. Whether God showing himself to Moses, or other spirit creatures presenting themselves for inspection to God (like the early chapters of Job), or the descriptions in Ezekiel he is always shown to have a defined person.
In short, a [biblical] case can be made that God’s qualities [may, based on his will] are omnipresent, but not his person.
Understood, thanks.
Back to the main point, I think the argument that the Trinity is never explicitly mentioned or described in the Bible is a weak argument; there are, I’m sure, other qualities/attributes of God that are similarly built up inferentially from a number of different and somewhat oblique references.
[QUOTE=badchad]
There is also a biblical basis for hell.
[/quote]
There is no compelling biblical case for a burning hell, to which evil people go. A thorough examination of the use of “hell” and the original words it is rendered from, indicate the most accurate definition of Hell is “grave.” If you believe that there is a compelling case in the bible for a burning hell, I’d be pleased to discuss it. If your consideration of the texts in question (and there are many) indicate that the biblical hell is simply the common grave, then we are in agreement. A burning hell has more in common with Dante’s Inferno than the bible.
My point ----then and now—is that many popular Christian beliefs are derived in large part from non-biblical sources. Like the non-biblical burning hell, the Trinity doctrine comes largely from non-biblical sources–traditions, folklore, and pagan religions. If you believe the bible indicates a triune God, I’d be pleased to discuss it. (without regard to whether God exists at all, in any form)
That is not relevent to whether the bible itself is folklore. I have no interest in that discussion, and could easily make my argument from the ‘bible as folklore’ POV.
Either a thorough, complete consideration of the bible indicates a triune God, or it doesn’t.
It does not.
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
There has always been some question and disagreement as to the role, identity, and purpose of the Holy Spirit. In my discussions with some Christians they claim it wasn’t around until after Jesus ascended, and it is not given to the individual until they accept Jesus as Lord.
[/quote]
Do these texts indicate a triune God, in the absence of a prior predicate belief in the Trinity?
In other words, do they indicate a Trinity, or do they support a pre-stated belief in the Trinity?
In other, other words, if a person who was unencumbered with any prior knowledge of the Trinity, and unencumbered with a deep rooted belief to support and defend, (often from early childhood, and fundamental to their understanding of God) read these texts and see clear evidence of a triune God?
Does this say, in any way, that Jehovah God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit are the same person? No, neither implicitly or explicitly.
This not only doesn’t make a case for the Trinity, it makes one against it. That Jesus was “sent” indicates not just two persons, but two persons with the potential for different purposes and wills. Jesus was “sent”—not by himself, to himself, (itself absurd) but sent by someone else. Further the text indicates that the “helper” wouldn’t be sent until Jesus’s commision was completed.
Further Jesus would then send—not himself—but the helper. To see the Trinity in this text absolutely requires a priori acceptance of the Trinity.
**In other words, one approaches these texts already accepting the Trinity Doctrine and then imputes Trinitarian meaning that the texts simply don’t say or indicate.
**
[QUOTE=BobLibDem]
From the 28th chapter of Matthew:
If there was no Trinity, why did Christ instruct that his apostles baptize in the names of it?
[/QUOTE]
In the absence of a prior belief and acceptance of the Trinity Doctrine is there a case in this text for the Trinity?
No, a stronger case is made against it. In this text Jesus identifies 3 persons, but makes no claims that they are the same. He simply states that there is a unity of purpose. The apostles could confidently baptize, knowing that that there was singularity of purpose, a consistency, an agreement among the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as to what Christian baptism represented.
How does the text begin? Jesus is given authority, authority he obviously didn’t have prior.
He wasn’t given authority by himself to himself, but given authority by someone else; given authority by someone who had it to give.
Further, this shows Jesus subordinate to someone who had greater authority.
[QUOTE=the raindog]
How does the text begin? Jesus is given authority, authority he obviously didn’t have prior.
He wasn’t given authority by himself to himself, but given authority by someone else; given authority by someone who had it to give.
Further, this shows Jesus subordinate to someone who had greater authority.
[/QUOTE]
Philippians 2 describes Jesus ‘being in very nature, God’ but abandoning equality and placing himself in that position of subordination.
[QUOTE=Mangetout]
Philippians 2 describes Jesus ‘being in very nature, God’ but abandoning equality and placing himself in that position of subordination.
[/QUOTE]
Great Scriptures, and some of my favorites.
Does Paul in any way, make a case for the Trinity? On the contrary, * he makes a [implicit] case against it.* In verses 1 through 4 he’s making a case for unity of purpose; he’s making a case that Christians should be like minded.
And who is the model for this case for humility, and singularity of purpose?: Christ. Christ, as Paul describes him, was humble, and subjected himself to do his God’s will. Jesus, “being in very nature[a] God”, showed humility and didn’t consider himself to be equal to God. Does Paul say Jesus was God, but, in nature God? Look at his words. Paul clearly indicates that Jesus had the nature of God, but he does not identify Jesus as part of a triune God, nor as Jehovah God. (and in hundreds of other texts, Paul always identifies Jesus as subordinate to Jehovah God)
Would Jehovah God humble himself? To whom? Jesus, could, and did, humble himself to his God. Would God humble himself to any other creature? To himself? (an absuridty) Yet Jesus made himself “nothing” by becoming a human being—certainly a lower stature than the one he enjoyed as the “firstborn of all creation.”
Does God need to be obedient to anyone? To himself? No, but Jesus did display obedience to his God.
Could/would God exalt himself? He holds the highest position in the universe-- Yet, did Jesus exalt himself to “the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name…”? Of course not, God exalted Jesus to this respected position. In verse 9 he clearly identifies a distinction between Christ and God as Christ is exalted by God.
[QUOTE=the raindog]
Do these texts indicate a triune God, in the absence of a prior predicate belief in the Trinity?
In other words, do they indicate a Trinity, or do they support a pre-stated belief in the Trinity?
In other, other words, if a person who was unencumbered with any prior knowledge of the Trinity, and unencumbered with a deep rooted belief to support and defend, (often from early childhood, and fundamental to their understanding of God) read these texts and see clear evidence of a triune God?
Does this say, in any way, that Jehovah God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit are the same person? No, neither implicitly or explicitly.
This not only doesn’t make a case for the Trinity, it makes one against it. That Jesus was “sent” indicates not just two persons, but two persons with the potential for different purposes and wills. Jesus was “sent”—not by himself, to himself, (itself absurd) but sent by someone else. Further the text indicates that the “helper” wouldn’t be sent until Jesus’s commision was completed.
Further Jesus would then send—not himself—but the helper. To see the Trinity in this text absolutely requires a priori acceptance of the Trinity.
**In other words, one approaches these texts already accepting the Trinity Doctrine and then imputes Trinitarian meaning that the texts simply don’t say or indicate.
**
[/QUOTE]
You really wasted your efforts on this post since I never argued for the trinity to begin. A poster asked about the Holy Spirit and that’s all I was discussing.
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
You really wasted your efforts on this post since I never argued for the trinity to begin. A poster asked about the Holy Spirit and that’s all I was discussing.
[/QUOTE]
I know. I didn’t perceive you were arguing your position, but a position that some trinitarians may make.
The Holy Spirit is certainly represented in the texts. (as you noted) I don’t see, however, compelling evidence for the Holy Spirit as part of a triune Godhead.
[QUOTE=the raindog]
I know. I didn’t perceive you were arguing your position, but a position that some trinitarians may make.
The Holy Spirit is certainly represented in the texts. (as you noted) I don’t see, however, compelling evidence for the Holy Spirit as part of a triune Godhead.
[/QUOTE]
Actually I wasn’t arguing from the trinitarians view at all. My comments and scriptural quotes were about the Holy Spirit, and had nothing to do with *any *trinitarian argument. I understand your position since you had already stated it. I’m just noting that your response to my post had nothing to do with my actual post. Not a big deal. Just an observation.
[QUOTE=the raindog]
There is no compelling biblical case for a burning hell, to which evil people go. A thorough examination of the use of “hell” and the original words it is rendered from, indicate the most accurate definition of Hell is “grave.”
[/quote]
Or sometimes Gehenna or Hades, but essentially, yes, they’re all just figurative references to death.
badchad knows this. I’ve had this debate with him more than once and in excruciating detail. I don’t know why he still clings to it.
To get back on topic, you’re also right about the Trinity not being Biblical. The idea was probably lifted from pagan theological models and then retroactively justified with eisogesic readings of scripture.
I don’t expect this discussion to go very far very quickly, but at this point, I’d like to ask the raindog to describe the doctrine of the Trinity. I know you don’t subscribe to it, but what do you think it is?