One-on-One: AMR and God's Truth — The Holy Trinity

Ask Mr. Religion · Dec 2, 2013

God's Truth said:
-
Use words the Bible uses. Where in the Bible does it say what you say? Where in the Bible does it say God is essence? State plainly what you believe God’s essence is.

You have explained nothing. You say God is essence, yet you have no scripture that says that. You say God is essence, but you do not state what kind of essence. Spirit and soul are essences. Why cannot you state plainly what essence you believe God is? Here, I will help you.
God is Spirit.
Here is the scripture that tells us that:
John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
Is that the essence you are attributing to God, yes or no?

GT,

I am sorry, but you may not understand what essence means.

You claim God is a Spirit so God cannot have essence. You need to understand that the word essence is not restricted to physical properties.

The essence of God is the full nature of what God is. It is also proper to say that the being of God is His essence.

AMR

God's Truth · Dec 2, 2013

Ask Mr. Religion said:
GT,

I am sorry, but you may not understand what essence means.

You claim God is a Spirit

The Bible SAYS that God is Spirit. That is why I say God is Spirit.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
so God cannot have essence.

The Bible does NOT say God is essence.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
You need to understand that the word essence is not restricted to physical properties.

The essence of God is the full nature of what God is. It is also proper to say that the being of God is His essence.

AMR

I know what essence means. Look it up in the dictionary.
The synonyms for essence is spirit or soul.
The Bible does NOT say God is essence.
The Bibles says God is Spirit.
Speak according to the word.

Isaiah 8:20 NASB To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because they have no dawn.

Ask Mr. Religion · Dec 2, 2013

God's Truth said:
The Bible SAYS that God is Spirit. That is why I say God is Spirit.
The Bible does NOT say God is essence…
…I know what essence means. Look it up in the dictionary.

The word “essence” need not be in Scripture for Scripture to teach us about the being of God, which is His essence! You need to release this wooden literalism approach to Scripture. If you know what essence means then you know very well that statements in Scripture about God’s nature are statements about God’s essence. Your petulant refusal to agree is embarrassing.

[FONT=&quot]In John 4:24 we read that God’s essential nature is spirit. Likewise in 1 John 1:5, God is light, and 1 John 4:8, God is love. God is not material and Jesus emphatically states God is Spirit to make the point that since God is essentially spirit it necessarily follows that worship of Him must be spiritual in kind. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Jesus here, reminding us of his intimate knowledge (Matthew 11:27), declares God’s essence transcends that of all other spirits—human or angelic.[/FONT]<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w

oNotShowRevisions/> <w

oNotPrintRevisions/> <w

oNotShowMarkup/> <w

oNotShowComments/> <w

oNotShowInsertionsAndDeletions/> <w

oNotShowPropertyChanges/> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>HE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w

ontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w

oNotShowRevisions/> <w

oNotPrintRevisions/> <w

oNotShowMarkup/> <w

oNotShowComments/> <w

oNotShowInsertionsAndDeletions/> <w

oNotShowPropertyChanges/> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>HE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w

ontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->

Ask Mr. Religion · Dec 2, 2013

[FONT=&quot]GT’s position is that there are no personal distinctions between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Their personalities are the same.

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]GT asks:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
How do you get that it means they are different and separate?

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In Scripture we read that God described as blessed forever. When we consider the time before God created anything, then if God is blessed forever all the necessary conditions for this blessedness must exist within Himself alone. God did not need to create the universe to have an object to know, express joy, to love. If God existed alone without creation He would still be a Trinitarian God. Within the essence of God exists society of communion, blessedness, and self-knowledge independent of the created universe. I do not imply the Godhead is composed of separate substances, but rather distinctives of one substance—a unity that is trinal. Scripture supports these statements for we read of “filled with all the fullness of God” (Ephesians 3:19) and “the fullness of the Godhead” (Colossians 1:19; 2:9). A fullness of being implies a variety of existence. Consider the distinctions of God who judges out of which comes the sense of sin and guilt. God atones to pay for sin and guilt. God regenerates and converts to remove sin and guilt. There is but one God we owe for all these things, but the personal distinctions of our one God at work in these things. But I am getting ahead of myself with these conclusions.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]If we are to prove from Scripture there is such a thing as a Trinity we need to identify Scripture mentioning the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as well as Scripture that teaches the deity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The following text examples from Scripture mention the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: Matthew 3:16-17; Matthew 28:19; John 14;16; John 15:26; 1 Corinthians 12:4–6; 2 Corinthians 13:14; Ephesians 2:18; Ephesians 4:4-6; 1 Peter 1:2; Jude 20-21; Revelation 1:4-5.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Before looking at Scriptures teaching the deity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, we need to face head on the issues with the word “person” when used in Trinitarian discussions. Up until now I have avoided using the word in favor of subsistence. Understanding the Trinity is not helped by the plethora of terms that have been used to describe the personal distinctions within the Godhead. In the Greek we will encounter, hypostasis (Hebrews 1:3), hypokeimenon , or prosopon (Luke 12:56). In the Latin, we find substantia and persona used. Lastly, in the English, hypostasis, subsistence, distinction, person, relation, and mode.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In Philippians 2:6 the Apostle defines what a Trinitarian Person is: a form of God. These forms of God are three. The first person is the whole divine ousia (essence) subsisting (hyparchon) in the paternal form (morphe)—God the Father. The second person is the whole divine essence subsisting in filial form (John 5:26)—God the Son. The third person is the whole divine essence subsisting in the spirated (spirit) form (John 15:16)—God the Holy Spirit. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In other words, one simple essence (substance), three modes of subsistence (not modes as in the sense used by Unitarianism or Sabellianism), which are often called “persons”, which do not divide the essence of the one absolute God. Instead God’s essence is common to the three Persons in God, not communicated from one to another; each of them partake of the essence, and possess it as one undivided nature—“as all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in Christ”, so in the Holy Spirit; and of the Father. One God who eternally exists in three different persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, all of whom are fully God, all of whom are equal (Romans 16:26; Revelations 1:17; Matthew 28:20; Acts 17:28-29; John 14-16).[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]GT, in particular note that God the Son, one of the above forms of God, took the form of a servant, a likeness of men while not giving up His original divine form. Here from the Apostle we learn that a Person of the Trinity is invisible in form or more of divine essence. To be material or bodily, an incarnation would be required. In other words, contrary to your views, the Son of God possessed no body and was invisible, just like the Father and Holy Spirit, before the incarnation.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Contrary to your position, GT, that these persons of the Trinity are different, having clear distinctions is clear from Scripture. We cannot claim the actions of one person of the Trinity can be equally assigned to another person of the Trinity. For example, we know from Scripture that God the Father sends God the Son. We cannot say that God the Son sends God the Son. We read in Scripture that God the Father loves God the Son. We cannot say that God the Son loves God the Son. Rather Scripture teaches us that each of the persons of the Trinity are objective to one another: Phil. 2:5–11; Heb. 2:9; Gen. 16:7; John 14:26; Isa. 9:6; Gen. 1:26; 11:7; John 17:5; Luke 3:22; John 14:6; Heb. 1:8; Matt. 11:27; Zech. 13:7; John 14:10–11; John 3:35.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]That each of these persons of the Trinity are divine and possess distinctive personalities can be seen from the following:[/FONT]

Spoiler

GT, I have provided my answer to your question concerning the differences that can be seen in the persons of the Trinity. I await your detailed explanation to the contrary.

AMR
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w

oNotShowRevisions/> <w

oNotPrintRevisions/> <w

oNotShowMarkup/> <w

oNotShowComments/> <w

oNotShowInsertionsAndDeletions/> <w

oNotShowPropertyChanges/> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>HE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w

ontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->

God's Truth · Dec 2, 2013

Ask Mr. Religion said:
The word “essence” need not be in Scripture for Scripture to teach us about the being of God, which is His essence! You need to release this wooden literalism approach to Scripture. If you know what essence means then you know very well that statements in Scripture about God’s nature are statements about God’s essence. Your petulant refusal to agree is embarrassing.

You went against me for saying God is Spirit. You should be embarrassed.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
In John 4:24 we read that God’s essential nature is spirit. Likewise in 1 John 1:5, God is light, and 1 John 4:8, God is love. God is not material and Jesus emphatically states God is Spirit to make the point that since God is essentially spirit it necessarily follows that worship of Him must be spiritual in kind. Jesus here, reminding us of his intimate knowledge (Matthew 11:27), declares God’s essence transcends that of all other spirits—human or angelic.

If you stop saying what the Bible does not say, maybe you can learn something.

Stop saying, “God is essence”. Speak what the scriptures say. Say God is Spirit. Then I will show you how God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit are One and the same.

P.S. Stop putting all those hidden links in your posts.

God's Truth · Dec 2, 2013

Ask Mr. Religion said:
GT’s position is that there are no personal distinctions between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit:

Their personalities are the same. They are not different. God is the Father. The Father is God, and He came as a Son of Man, a Son of God. The Son is exactly like the Father, and both are the same God.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
In Scripture we read that God described as blessed forever. When we consider the time before God created anything, then if God is blessed forever all the necessary conditions for this blessedness must exist within Himself alone. God did not need to create the universe to have an object to know, express joy, to love.

Give scripture that says “God did not need to create the universe to have an object to know, express joy, to love.”
Jesus brought the Father glory on earth by finishing the work He gave him to do.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
If God existed alone without creation He would still be a Trinitarian God.

Within the essence of God exists society of communion, blessedness, and self-knowledge independent of the created universe. I do not imply the Godhead is composed of separate substances, but rather distinctives of one substance—a unity that is trinal. Scripture supports these statements for we read of “filled with all the fullness of God” (Ephesians 3:19) and “the fullness of the Godhead” (Colossians 1:19; 2:9). A fullness of being implies a variety of existence. Consider the distinctions of God who judges out of which comes the sense of sin and guilt. God atones to pay for sin and guilt. God regenerates and converts to remove sin and guilt. There is but one God we owe for all these things, but the personal distinctions of our one God at work in these things. But I am getting ahead of myself with these conclusions.

If we are to prove from Scripture there is such a thing as a Trinity we need to identify Scripture mentioning the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as well as Scripture that teaches the deity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

The following text examples from Scripture mention the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: Matthew 3:16-17; Matthew 28:19; John 14;16; John 15:26; 1 Corinthians 12:4–6; 2 Corinthians 13:14; Ephesians 2:18; Ephesians 4:4-6; 1 Peter 1:2; Jude 20-21; Revelation 1:4-5.

Before looking at Scriptures teaching the diety of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, we need to face head on the issues with the word “person” when used in Trinitarian discussions. Up until now I have avoided using the word in favor of subsistence. Understanding the Trinity is not helped by the plethora of terms that have been used to describe the personal distinctions within the Godhead. In the Greek we will encounter, hypostasis (Hebrews 1:3), hypokeimenon , or prosopon (Luke 12:56). In the Latin, we find substantia and persona used. Lastly, in the English, hypostasis, subsistence, distinction, person, relation, and mode.

In Philippians 2:6 the Apostle defines what a Trinitarian Person is: a form of God. These forms of God are three. The first person is the whole divine ousia (essence) subsisting (hyparchon) in the paternal form (morphe)—God the Father. The second person is the whole divine essence subsisting in filial form (John 5:26)—God the Son. The third person is the whole divine essence subsisting in the spirated (spirit) form (John 15:16)—God the Holy Spirit.

In other words, one simple essence (substance), three modes of subsistence (not modes as in the sense used by Unitarianism or Sabellianism), which are often called “persons”, which do not divide the essence of the one absolute God. Instead God’s essence is common to the three Persons in God, not communicated from one to another; each of them partake of the essence, and possess it as one undivided nature—“as all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in Christ”, so in the Holy Spirit; and of the Father. One God who eternally exists in three different persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, all of whom are fully God, all of whom are equal (Romans 16:26; Revelations 1:17; Matthew 28:20; Acts 17:28-29; John 14-16).

GT, in particular note that God the Son, one of the above forms of God, took the form of a servant, a likeness of men while not giving up His original divine form. Here from the Apostle we learn that a Person of the Trinity is invisible in form or more of divine essence. To be material or bodily, an incarnation would be required. In other words, contrary to your views, the Son of God possessed no body and was invisible, just like the Father and Holy Spirit, before the incarnation.

Contrary to your position, GT, that these persons of the Trinity are different, having clear distinctions is clear from Scripture. We cannot claim the actions of one person of the Trinity can be equally assigned to another person of the Trinity. For example, we know from Scripture that God the Father sends God the Son. We cannot say that God the Son sends God the Son. We read in Scripture that God the Father loves God the Son. We cannot say that God the Son loves God the Son. Rather Scripture teaches us that each of the persons of the Trinity are objective to one another: Phil. 2:5–11; Heb. 2:9; Gen. 16:7; John 14:26; Isa. 9:6; Gen. 1:26; 11:7; John 17:5; Luke 3:22; John 14:6; Heb. 1:8; Matt. 11:27; Zech. 13:7; John 14:10–11; John 3:35.

That each of these persons of the Trinity are divine and possess distinctive personalities can be seen from the following:
Spoiler
GT, I have provided my answer to your question concerning the differences that can be seen in the persons of the Trinity. I await your detailed explanation to the contrary.

Your writing is lengthy, but you still have not explained anything.

God created Himself the physical, Spiritual Body of the Man Jesus Christ before the creation of anything. God SPOKE and there was light. So then, we can see that God creates with HIS WORD. God spoke and created a body for HIM, this is the same person who spoke in the Old Testament. That is God. Jesus is the Word of God. Jesus was the Word of God before Jesus’ name as ‘Jesus’ was revealed.

Ask Mr. Religion · Dec 2, 2013

GT is obviously ill-equipped to defend her beliefs. All she has done is continue to make assertions without offering anything that resembles exegesis of Scripture. I have shown how Scripture supports the fact that the Godhead consists of three personal subsistences-Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. I have shown that these three persons are possessive simultaneously of the one divine essence. And that these persons possess distinctive personalities. To date GT is left mute, only able to say "No!" to my arguments.

AMR

God's Truth · Dec 2, 2013

Ask Mr. Religion said:
GT is obviously ill-equipped to defend her beliefs.

That is not true.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
All she has done is continue to make assertions without offering anything that resembles exegesis of Scripture.

I have explained my beliefs.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
I have shown how Scripture supports the fact that the Godhead consists of three personal subsistences-Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

You have stated falseness. You will not even use words supported by scripture. You use the word ‘essence’ instead of Spirit, or Light. You use words that support your false doctrine and hide the Truth.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
I have shown that these three persons are possessive simultaneously of the one divine essence.

Again, state what the essence is according to scripture---so we can speak of what is written in the Bible, and not merely what your false teachers have written.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
And that these persons possess distinctive personalities. To date GT is left mute, only able to say "No!" to my arguments.

That is all you do.

Ask Mr. Religion · Dec 2, 2013

[FONT=&quot]GT,[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Let’s recap on several important aspects of the Trinity. This will be important, even if you refuse to read the content. GT, you deny the Trinity, claiming it makes for a three-headed God. One cannot willfully deny the Trinity and be a true Christian. It is an essential of the faith. Yet, you claim to believe Jesus is God. This means you have fallen into one of the various heresies related to the nature of the Incarnation that I described in my opening post in this One-on-One. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]From your denial I am forced to assume you consider appearances of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in Scripture to be but mere manifestations, wherein the divine essence is at one time entirely manifest as the Father (but not in or as the Son or Holy Spirit), and then at another moment manifest exclusively as the Son, and yet again at another time solely as the Spirit. This is the denounced heresies of Modalistic Monarchianism or Sabellianism, a characteristic of the United Pentecostal Church. Your denial sounds very familiar: “One God in three eternal manifestations.” (Src: T.D. Jakes)[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]As discussed in my previous posts, all three persons of the Godhead exist simultaneously and are not mere manifestations. The Persons of the Trinity are not three separate divine essences. They are co-equal and co-sharers of the one divine essence of God. The only thing that is different from the Father to the Son to the Holy Spirit are their personal properties: unbegottenness, filiation, procession. Hence we say, in theological terms, the three Persons of the Trinity are three personal subsistences of the one, divine, essence. The word "Person" is unfortunately become overtaken by contemporary meanings, versus what the word meant when the doctrine of the Trinity was formulated from Scripture many, many, years ago. From Scripture prosopon is used of God the Father, so do not fall into the error of thinking person equals human being in discussions of the Trinity. GT, I think if you can agree with this caveat then some of your objections to the Trinity may just start to melt away.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]God is a simple and uncompounded spiritual being. We can say the same by stating, God is a simple and uncompounded spiritual essence. Essence is that by which something is what it is, that is, its nature. Generally speaking, essence and being are interchangeable in most discussions of God. Some also use nature and essence interchangeably.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]GT continues to irrationally complain that the word essence is not to be used when discussing God. She says the word is not in the Bible so its use is forbidden. The objection “the word does not appear in the Bible” is specious. In fact it is a [/FONT][FONT=&quot]degringolade—[/FONT][FONT=&quot]admitting defeat without even knowing it.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The word essence used of God signifies the divine nature with all its attributes, which exists but once in the Three Persons. By the term "essence" is meant the divine nature as it is in itself, all of which, with its attributes, is most simply one and singular, and thus also of the Three Persons the essence is only one. The term "essence" is therefore applied to God in a unique sense. When we apply it to men, namely, to denote something which is common to all men, the word is used as a generic term or as an abstract noun, which denotes something that does not exist concretely, but is merely abstracted from the concretely existing human beings. For example, "It is the essence of man to think or to will". However, when we speak of the divine essence which is common to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, the term "essence" is neither generic nor abstract, but concrete, denoting something that exists actually and concretely and belongs to the three divine Persons as one in number. In other words, the term "essence" denotes God Himself as He divinely exists as One in Three. The essence of God is God's spiritual and independent nature, common to the three divine Persons.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]While there is but one essence of God, there are three distinctly different modes of subsistence in that essence, which we call Persons. Unfortunately, as I stated above, in this modern era the word person carries much more baggage than it did when the Trinitarian doctrines were being formulated. We tend to think of a person as a separately existing beings from other beings. It is generally admitted that the word person is but an imperfect expression of the idea of the Persons of the Godhead. Hence, in God there are not three individuals alongside of, and separate from, one another, but three personal self-distinctions within the single divine essence, i.e., three modes of subsistence. Thus we can say that the divine essence does not exist independently along with the three Persons. The divine essence has no existence outside of and apart from the three Persons. For if the divine essence did, there would be no true unity, but a division that would lead into tetratheism.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]As stated, a divine person is not the same thing as a human individual. This is however, the closest analogy we have in our finite experience. As you will find in aBrakel and elsewhere, whenever we start to conceive of God, we must resort to the via negative, that is discussing, as I have been, what God is not when speaking of what God is. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]So, while we can think of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as distinct modes of subsistence or as distinct persons, we must deny the separateness these distinct modes of subsistence will always imply when it comes to the human analogy. We must think of God as one in essence, but we must deny that this unity precludes a diversity of modes of subsistence, again as it would with the human analogy. When speaking of the mind, like will, both are attributes of the nature and are not personal distinctions. God is of one will, and one mind. Each person of the Godhead has access to, use of, the entire extend of the mind. Yet, in the ultimate sense, we cannot make these separations for God does not have a mind or a will-- God is His mind and His will. The will of each person of the Godhead is always unified, for to be otherwise would mean that God is double-minded. May it never be!

Whenever we think about God our thinking will be partial, discursive, successive, and limited. The church has been careful to keep these limitations and qualifications in mind and still be precise and definite.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]GT, I have found that accepting the Scriptural testimony of the deity of Jesus Christ is an important stepping stone to acknowledging the Trinity:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1- There is one and only one God, eternal, immutable.
2- There are three eternal Persons described in Scripture—the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. These Persons are never identified with one another - that is, they are carefully differentiated as Persons.
3- The Father, the Son, and the Spirit, are identified as being fully deity—the Scriptures teach the Deity of Christ and the Deity of the Holy Spirit.[/FONT]

GT, unless we think of God as Trinitarian, we have no true knowledge of God.

[FONT=&quot]That Jesus Christ is fully divine was shown to be clear from Scripture (see my earlier posts). From a few of these passages I have listed we observe:[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Old Testament calls the Messiah God[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Isaiah 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

Matthew 1:23 "The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel" (which means "God with us").[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Jesus' opponents understand Jesus as claiming to be God. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]John 8:54-59
54 Jesus replied, “If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]55 Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and obey his word. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]56 Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.”
57 “You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”
58 “Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]59 At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]John 10:31-33
31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”
33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]These statements of Jesus are seen as blasphemy--a claim to be God. Jesus said he was God. When quizzed about how He has special knowledge of Abraham, Jesus replies, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I Am"—invoking and applying to himself the personal name of God—"I Am" (Ex. 3:14). The reaction of His audience clearly indicates that they understood exactly what Jesus was claiming about himself.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Jesus' approach was to reveal His identity inductively. The Pharisees' problem was not their logic in understanding the implications of Jesus' statements; it was their rejection of the conclusion and its implications. Jesus could have simply denied their conclusion as He did when they make false statements about Him. GT, you and I would deny the statement of anyone who asked us if we are God. You and I would tell people not to worship us. But Jesus readily accepted worship.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Jesus allows Thomas to call Him God without rebuke[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]John 20:26-29
26 A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.”
28 Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!”
29 Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

NOTE: Paul (Acts 14:11-15), Peter (Acts 10:2-26) and angels (Rev. 22:8-9) rebuke those who call them gods.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Jesus commands baptism in the names of the persons of the Godhead[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Jesus tells the Apostles to baptize "in the name [notice, singular, not plural] of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt. 28:19). This is a proof-text—three distinct Persons united in the one divine name. In 2 Corinthians 13:14, Paul writes, "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all." We see this same unity of divine Persons in 1 Corinthians 12:4–11, Ephesians 4:4–6, and 1 Peter 1:2–3.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Also significant are passages that apply the title "the First and the Last" to Jesus. This is one of the Old Testament titles of LORD: "Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, LORD of armies: ‘I am the First and I am the Last; besides me there is no god’" (Isaiah 44:6; cf. 41:4, 48:12).[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]It should be obvious by now that the Scriptures teach that Jesus is God (cf. John 8:58, 10:38, 14:10; Col. 2:9). The Scriptures also teach that the Holy Spirit is God (cf. Acts 5:3–4, 28:25–28; 1 Cor. 2:10–13). Now few would dispute that the Father is God. Yet there is only one God (Mark 12:29, 1 Cor. 8:4–6, James 2:19). How can we hold these four truths except to say all three are One God? GT, can you explain how you deny the Trinity yet would hold to these four truths?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]GT, given the ample evidence of the deity of Christ, and that you affirm Jesus was fully God, I would appreciate your answers to the following questions:[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]1. Was Jesus’ divinity a different substance than that of God the Father?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]2. Did Jesus possess a rational human soul?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]3. Was the divinity of Jesus a distinct person of the Trinity?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]4. Was Jesus God acting in the form of the Son?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]5. Were the divine and human natures of Jesus mixed together?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]6. Did the union of the divine and human natures in Jesus change the divine nature?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]7. Were the divine and human natures of Jesus two distinct persons?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]8. Did Jesus possess a true humanity?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]9. Did God the Son set aside any of his divine attributes during the Incarnation? For example, was God the Son still omnipresent while Jesus was walking the roads of Palestine?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]10. Did the divinity of Jesus communicate any of the divine attributes to the humanity of Jesus?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]11. Did Jesus exist independently as a human before God the Son assumed his humanity?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]AMR
[/FONT]

God's Truth · Dec 3, 2013

Ask Mr. Religion said:
GT,

Let’s recap on several important aspects of the Trinity. This will be important, even if you refuse to read the content. GT, you deny the Trinity, claiming it makes for a three-headed God.

I deny the trinity doctrine. I do not deny that there are three.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
One cannot willfully deny the Trinity and be a true Christian.

I know I am a true Christian.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
It is an essential of the faith. Yet, you claim to believe Jesus is God. This means you have fallen into one of the various heresies related to the nature of the Incarnation that I described in my opening post in this One-on-One.

I believe that God came to us in the flesh. You say another God other than the Father came in the flesh.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
From your denial I am forced to assume you consider appearances of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in Scripture to be but mere manifestations, wherein the divine essence is at one time entirely manifest as the Father (but not in or as the Son or Holy Spirit), and then at another moment manifest exclusively as the Son, and yet again at another time solely as the Spirit.

It sounds as if you are describing modalism. Modalists do not believe the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit exist at the same time. I do not believe like that. I know they exist at the same time.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
This is the denounced heresies of Modalistic Monarchianism or Sabellianism, a characteristic of the United Pentecostal Church. Your denial sounds very familiar: “One God in three eternal manifestations.” (Src: T.D. Jakes)

How many times do I have to explain to you how my beliefs are different from that of modalism? I could not care less about your false teachers declaring something as heresy. It does nothing for your defense to bring up what your false teachers say about what you think I believe.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

As discussed in my previous posts, all three persons of the Godhead exist simultaneously and are not mere manifestations.

Click to expand...

Why did you choose the word ‘manifestations’? That is kind of an odd choice of word. How exactly do you get that Jesus coming in the flesh is a manifestation?

Ask Mr. Religion said:

The Persons of the Trinity are not three separate divine essences.

Click to expand...

Now you say they are not separate. That is an improvement. You say here again ‘essences’. Are you willing to admit that the essence is Spirit? If yes, then you just admitted that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are the same Spirit. That would be the truth.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

They are co-equal and co-sharers of the one divine essence of God. The only thing that is different from the Father to the Son to the Holy Spirit are their personal properties: unbegottenness, filiation, procession. Hence we say, in theological terms, the three Persons of the Trinity are three personal subsistences of the one, divine, essence. The word "Person" is unfortunately become overtaken by contemporary meanings, versus what the word meant when the doctrine of the Trinity was formulated from Scripture many, many, years ago. From Scripture prosopon is used of God the Father, so do not fall into the error of thinking person equals human being in discussions of the Trinity.

Click to expand...

I do not think they are three humans.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

GT, I think if you can agree with this caveat then some of your objections to the Trinity may just start to melt away.

Click to expand...

I think you finally understand the error of the trinity doctrine and are moving away from it.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

GT continues to irrationally complain that the word essence is not to be used when discussing God. She says the word is not in the Bible so its use is forbidden. The objection “the word does not appear in the Bible” is specious. In fact it is a degringolade—admitting defeat without even knowing it.

Click to expand...

You do not want to say what essence God is because then you think you can better defend your false doctrine. If you are forced to speak according to the word, then you would have to stop calling God an essence, you would have to say that God is Spirit. Once you are forced to say God is Spirit, you will have to admit that there is only one Spirit. Once you admit there is only one Spirit, then you will have to admit that God is Spirit, and that same Spirit is the Spirit of Christ, and the Holy Spirit. However, you fight against the truth and deny it. Since you cannot be forced, we then spend much time with you arguing about nonsense.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

The word essence used of God signifies the divine nature with all its attributes, which exists but once in the Three Persons. By the term "essence" is meant the divine nature as it is in itself, all of which, with its attributes, is most simply one and singular, and thus also of the Three Persons the essence is only one. The term "essence" is therefore applied to God in a unique sense. When we apply it to men, namely, to denote something which is common to all men, the word is used as a generic term or as an abstract noun, which denotes something that does not exist concretely, but is merely abstracted from the concretely existing human beings. For example, "It is the essence of man to think or to will". However, when we speak of the divine essence which is common to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, the term "essence" is neither generic nor abstract, but concrete, denoting something that exists actually and concretely and belongs to the three divine Persons as one in number. In other words, the term "essence" denotes God Himself as He divinely exists as One in Three. The essence of God is God's spiritual and independent nature, common to the three divine Persons.

Click to expand...

I prove my case. Read above.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

While there is but one essence of God, there are three distinctly different modes of subsistence in that essence, which we call Persons. Unfortunately, as I stated above, in this modern era the word person carries much more baggage than it did when the Trinitarian doctrines were being formulated. We tend to think of a person as a separately existing beings from other beings. It is generally admitted that the word person is but an imperfect expression of the idea of the Persons of the Godhead. Hence, in God there are not three individuals alongside of, and separate from, one another, but three personal self-distinctions within the single divine essence, i.e., three modes of subsistence.
Thus we can say that the divine essence does not exist independently along with the three Persons. The divine essence has no existence outside of and apart from the three Persons. For if the divine essence did, there would be no true unity, but a division that would lead into tetratheism.

Click to expand...

That was nothing but falseness and contradictions when you say that they are not separate, but then say they are distinct. Distinct means different. They are not distinct. They are not different. God came in the flesh. Jesus only says what the Father says. The Holy Spirit only says what Jesus says.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

As stated, a divine person is not the same thing as a human individual. This is however, the closest analogy we have in our finite experience. As you will find in aBrakel and elsewhere, whenever we start to conceive of God, we must resort to the via negative, that is discussing, as I have been, what God is not when speaking of what God is.

Click to expand...

You can say God is Spirit, but you will not say it.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

So, while we can think of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as distinct modes of subsistence or as distinct persons, we must deny the separateness these distinct modes of subsistence will always imply when it comes to the human analogy. We must think of God as one in essence, but we must deny that this unity precludes a diversity of modes of subsistence, again as it would with the human analogy.

Click to expand...

Again, if you are forced to say that the essence of God is Spirit, then your trinity doctrine is forced to admit error. Since the essence of God is Spirit, then you have to admit that the same Spirit is in Jesus, and is the Holy Spirit. All three are the same Spirit.
The trinity doctrine will only say God is essence, but will not say what the essence is; thus the illusion of teaching something as if truth. When trinitarians are asked to explain some consequences to their beliefs, they merely deny them. When questioned about some consequences to their beliefs, they also say it is unexplainable. If it is not explainable, then there is no way you can defend it.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

When speaking of the mind, like will, both are attributes of the nature and are not personal distinctions. God is of one will, and one mind. Each person of the Godhead has access to, use of, the entire extend of the mind. Yet, in the ultimate sense, we cannot make these separations for God does not have a mind or a will-- God is His mind and His will.

Click to expand...

More contradictions, more confusion; you cannot say that God does not have a will, and then say He is a will.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

The will of each person of the Godhead is always unified, for to be otherwise would mean that God is double-minded. May it never be!

Whenever we think about God our thinking will be partial, discursive, successive, and limited. The church has been careful to keep these limitations and qualifications in mind and still be precise and definite.

GT, I have found that accepting the Scriptural testimony of the deity of Jesus Christ is an important stepping stone to acknowledging the Trinity:
1- There is one and only one God, eternal, immutable.
2- There are three eternal Persons described in Scripture—the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. These Persons are never identified with one another - that is, they are carefully differentiated as Persons.

Click to expand...

You are in error. Jesus says when you see him you see the Father. Jesus says he only says what the Father says. Jesus only does what the Father does.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

GT, unless we think of God as Trinitarian, we have no true knowledge of God.

Click to expand...

There are three, and the three are One and the same. I do not believe you have true knowledge of God.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

That Jesus Christ is fully divine was shown to be clear from Scripture (see my earlier posts). From a few of these passages I have listed we observe:

Click to expand...

When you debate someone, you should try to remember what his or her beliefs are. Where have I ever said that Jesus was not Divine?

Ask Mr. Religion said:

Old Testament calls the Messiah God

Isaiah 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

Matthew 1:23 "The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel" (which means "God with us").

Jesus' opponents understand Jesus as claiming to be God.

John 8:54-59
54 Jesus replied, “If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me.
55 Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and obey his word.
56 Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.”
57 “You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”
58 “Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”
59 At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.

John 10:31-33
31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him,
32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”
33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

These statements of Jesus are seen as blasphemy--a claim to be God. Jesus said he was God. When quizzed about how He has special knowledge of Abraham, Jesus replies, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I Am"—invoking and applying to himself the personal name of God—"I Am" (Ex. 3:14). The reaction of His audience clearly indicates that they understood exactly what Jesus was claiming about himself.

Jesus' approach was to reveal His identity inductively. The Pharisees' problem was not their logic in understanding the implications of Jesus' statements; it was their rejection of the conclusion and its implications. Jesus could have simply denied their conclusion as He did when they make false statements about Him. GT, you and I would deny the statement of anyone who asked us if we are God. You and I would tell people not to worship us. But Jesus readily accepted worship.

Jesus allows Thomas to call Him God without rebuke

John 20:26-29
26 A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!”
27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.”
28 Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!”
29 Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

NOTE: Paul (Acts 14:11-15), Peter (Acts 10:2-26) and angels (Rev. 22:8-9) rebuke those who call them gods.

Click to expand...

AMR, is this a copy and paste post? It is as if you are just throwing in ‘GT’occasionally to pretend this is a personal post to me. How do you expect me to read this long irrelevant post if you did not care enough to read it and edit it just for me? You did not take out the part where you say that Jesus is Divine that Jesus is God. I understand most people against the trinity doctrine need to understand that, and it proves that this is nothing more than a copy and paste.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

Jesus commands baptism in the names of the persons of the Godhead

Jesus tells the Apostles to baptize "in the name [notice, singular, not plural] of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt. 28:19). This is a proof-text—three distinct Persons united in the one divine name. In 2 Corinthians 13:14, Paul writes, "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all." We see this same unity of divine Persons in 1 Corinthians 12:4–11, Ephesians 4:4–6, and 1 Peter 1:2–3.

Also significant are passages that apply the title "the First and the Last" to Jesus. This is one of the Old Testament titles of LORD: "Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, LORD of armies: ‘I am the First and I am the Last; besides me there is no god’" (Isaiah 44:6; cf. 41:4, 48:12).

It should be obvious by now that the Scriptures teach that Jesus is God (cf. John 8:58, 10:38, 14:10; Col. 2:9). The Scriptures also teach that the Holy Spirit is God (cf. Acts 5:3–4, 28:25–28; 1 Cor. 2:10–13). Now few would dispute that the Father is God. Yet there is only one God (Mark 12:29, 1 Cor. 8:4–6, James 2:19). How can we hold these four truths except to say all three are One God? GT, can you explain how you deny the Trinity yet would hold to these four truths?

GT, given the ample evidence of the deity of Christ, and that you affirm Jesus was God, I would appreciate your answers to the following questions:

1. Was Jesus’ divinity a different substance than that of God the Father?

Click to expand...

Your lazy editing is showing.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

2. Did Jesus possess a rational human soul?

Click to expand...

Jesus had a flesh body and his Spirit is the Holy Spirit.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

3. Was the divinity of Jesus a distinct person of the Trinity?

Click to expand...

Jesus is not distinct from God.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

4. Was Jesus God acting in the form of the Son?

Click to expand...

Is not that what the trinitarians also believe?

Ask Mr. Religion said:

5. Were the divine and human natures of Jesus mixed together?

Click to expand...

Jesus had an earthly side and a Divine side.
Romans 1:3
who, as regards His human descent, belonged to the posterity of David,
Romans 1:4
but as regards the holiness of His Spirit was decisively proved by His Resurrection to be the Son of God--I mean concerning Jesus Christ our Lord,

Ask Mr. Religion said:

6. Did the union of the divine and human natures in Jesus change the divine nature?

Click to expand...

There is weakness in being a human.
2 Corinthians 13:4 For though it is true that He was crucified through weakness, yet He now lives through the power of God. We also are weak, sharing His weakness, but with Him we shall be full of life to deal with you through the power of God.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

7. Were the divine and human natures of Jesus two distinct persons?

Click to expand...

God came as a man.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

8. Did Jesus possess a true humanity?

Click to expand...

Jesus came in the flesh, but he was no mere man.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

9. Did God the Son set aside any of his divine attributes during the Incarnation? For example, was God the Son still omnipresent while Jesus was walking the roads of Palestine?

Click to expand...

Jesus is God come in the flesh. God did not stop existing.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

10. Did the divinity of Jesus communicate any of its attributes to the humanity of Jesus?

Click to expand...

You speak as if God over took a man’s body.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

11. Did Jesus exist independently as a human before God the Son assumed his humanity?

Click to expand...

You are speaking as if God just took over a man.
AMR, stop copying and pasting; discuss and debate my beliefs or concede.

Ask Mr. Religion · Dec 4, 2013

God's Truth said:
[FONT=&quot]I deny the trinity doctrine. I do not deny that there are three.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Can you explain how these three relate to one another? Do they have personalities? What distinctions do you identify in each of the three? If there are no distinctions then what makes them “three” in your opinion?[/FONT]

God's Truth said:
[FONT=&quot]It sounds as if you are describing modalism. Modalists do not believe the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit exist at the same time. I do not believe like that. I know they exist at the same time.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Who exists at the same time exactly? If it is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, yet you deny any distinctions between them, what do you mean by saying they all exist simultaneously?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Why did you choose the word ‘manifestations’? That is kind of an odd choice of word. How exactly do you get that Jesus coming in the flesh is a manifestation?

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]You have argued there are no distinctions between the persons of the Godhead. If there are none, then what remains is but manifestations of the one absolute God. So you must either admit your modalism or provide answers to my questions above.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Now you say they are not separate. That is an improvement. You say here again ‘essences’. Are you willing to admit that the essence is Spirit? If yes, then you just admitted that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are the same Spirit. That would be the truth.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I have always maintained that there is but one divine essence. There is but one divine being, not three. The words being and essence can be interchanged. I explained this in previous posts, but since you have stated you are not reading them, you force me to repeat myself often.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Once again, GT, God is one being (essence, from esse , “to be”), three persons, or conversely, three persons, one being . The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are each fully God. The whole of God (essence) is in each person, and each person is the whole God. Each person is God-in-himself. Each person possesses the entire being of God (the one divine essence) and the entire being of God is in each person. Thus, each person indwells each other—the three mutually contain (interpenetration) one another (perichoresis, see e.g., John 14:10-11, John 15:5; John17; 1 Corinthians 2:11, Ephesians 4:6.)—for the one being of God is undivided. This mutual indwelling means that no person of the Trinity does anything without corresponding activities of the other two persons.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
I do not think they are three humans.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Nor do I. What is it about “person” as used in discussing the Trinity would make you think this means “human.” Please review my previous response where I discuss in detail how the word “person” is to be used when discussing the Godhead. If you do not read my posts then you are just going to be talking past me and requiring me to repeat myself often.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
You do not want to say what essence God is because then you think you can better defend your false doctrine. If you are forced to speak according to the word, then you would have to stop calling God an essence, you would have to say that God is Spirit. Once you are forced to say God is Spirit, you will have to admit that there is only one Spirit. Once you admit there is only one Spirit, then you will have to admit that God is Spirit, and that same Spirit is the Spirit of Christ, and the Holy Spirit. However, you fight against the truth and deny it. Since you cannot be forced, we then spend much time with you arguing about nonsense.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]English is being used here, GT. When we use “essence” we are simply using a word that describes the essentiality of something. No one, GT, no one, denies God is Spirit. God is also light and love, won’t you agree? So why this continued sticking point? There is one absolute God. This one God possesses attributes that make God what He is. For God, these attributes inhere one another. All God’s attributes are primary, none can be elevated above the other to claim that the other attributes are somehow subordinate to something else in God. Hence, God is his attributes. When we speak of these attributes in their totality, we say they are God’s “essence”. So yes, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are all Spirit, for this is one important aspect of the essence of God. If you would only take the time to read my responses you would have seen this:[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

Ask Mr. Religion said:
In John 4:24 we read that God’s essential nature is spirit. Likewise in 1 John 1:5, God is light, and 1 John 4:8, God is love. God is not material and Jesus emphatically states God is Spirit to make the point that since God is essentially spirit it necessarily follows that worship of Him must be spiritual in kind. Jesus here, reminding us of his intimate knowledge (Matthew 11:27), declares God’s essence transcends that of all other spirits—human or angelic.

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
That was nothing but falseness and contradictions when you say that they are not separate, but then say they are distinct. Distinct means different. They are not distinct. They are not different.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]If the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not distinct, not different, you are left with modalism, GT. Accept it or explain how you avoid modalism. Why do you think Scripture uses “Father”, “Son” and “Holy Spirit” if everything is the same? Have you reviewed the different aspects of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit I have described in my previous post here? When Scripture teaches us that the Son of God assumed a human nature, do you claim the Holy Spirit and God the Father assumed a human nature?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
You can say God is Spirit, but you will not say it.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Actually I have said, GT, but you just have not read it. Please do so in this post and in my previous post.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
The trinity doctrine will only say God is essence, but will not say what the essence is; thus the illusion of teaching something as if truth. When trinitarians are asked to explain some consequences to their beliefs, they merely deny them. When questioned about some consequences to their beliefs, they also say it is unexplainable. If it is not explainable, then there is no way you can defend it.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I am defending the doctrine of the Trinity in this discussion. I have described what the Scriptures teach us about the essence of God in this thread in numerous places. Your statement is simply untrue. What is true, however, is that you have not provided a full disclosure of your own position. I continue to have to tease it out of you piecemeal. I am hoping you answer to my questions above will help create a better picture of what you exactly view.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
AMR, is this a copy and paste post? It is as if you are just throwing in ‘GT’occasionally to pretend this is a personal post to me. How do you expect me to read this long irrelevant post if you did not care enough to read it and edit it just for me? You did not take out the part where you say that Jesus is Divine that Jesus is God. I understand most people against the trinity doctrine need to understand that, and it proves that this is nothing more than a copy and paste.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I am posting what I have posted, GT. That what I post applies to you and others only serves to make my point about how much confusion exists related to the doctrine of the Trinity. That is one reason why we are having this discussion—so I can point out these errors in one location and need not have to repeat myself in future discussions. Your admission that Jesus was fully God is not in dispute. What is in dispute is your denial of the doctrine of the Trinity—a doctrine that avoids all manner of heresy. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Your lazy editing is showing.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Rather than this response, can you just answer the question: Was Jesus’ divinity a different substance than that of God the Father?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Jesus had a flesh body and his Spirit is the Holy Spirit.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Did Jesus possess a rational human soul? Why are you avoiding the question?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Jesus is not distinct from God.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Hopefully your responses to all my questions in this post will shed some light on exactly what you mean by this.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Is not that what the trinitarians also believe?

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]No Trinitarian believes God is acting in the form of the Son. You have not read my responses thoroughly or you would know this by now. What is your answer to the question?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Jesus had an earthly side and a Divine side.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Were the divine and human natures mixed together in Jesus Christ? (You are not plainly answering most of my questions, GT.)

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
There is weakness in being a human.

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
Was the divine nature changed in any way by the assumption of a human nature?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
God came as a man.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Was there a divine person and a human person in Jesus?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Jesus came in the flesh, but he was no mere man.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]When you say “Jesus” came in the flesh, do you mean Jesus pre-existed in heaven before coming in the flesh? Did Jesus possess a true humanity as well as divinity?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Jesus is God come in the flesh. God did not stop existing.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]So you would agree that God the Son was still omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient while walking the roads of Palestine in the assumed humanity of Jesus?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
You speak as if God over took a man’s body.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]God the Son took on (assumed) a human nature, which included a human body. My question concerns what you believe about this assumption. Did Jesus exist prior to this assumption? When this humanity was assumed by God the Son, were any of the divine attributes communicated to the humanity?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]GT, thank you for answering a few of my questions. If you can provide more detailed answers it will help form a more complete picture of your views such that I can respond more appropriately.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]AMR
[/FONT]
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>HE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w

ontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->

God's Truth · Dec 5, 2013

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Can you explain how these three relate to one another? Do they have personalities? What distinctions do you identify in each of the three? If there are no distinctions then what makes them “three” in your opinion?

God lives in unapproachable light. He made Himself a body, a Spiritual body, of the Man Jesus Christ. He is Jesus, but not yet known as Jesus, not until he came in the flesh. He is the First over all creation. He has the resurrected Spiritual body, the body we receive lastly. Jesus is the First and the Last.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Who exists at the same time exactly? If it is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, yet you deny any distinctions between them, what do you mean by saying they all exist simultaneously?

God the Father lives in unapproachable light. Jesus existed with God before coming to earth; He existed in the Spiritual body of the Man Jesus. Jesus in the flesh is God come as a Son of Man, a Son of God.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
You have argued there are no distinctions between the persons of the Godhead. If there are none, then what remains is but manifestations of the one absolute God. So you must either admit your modalism or provide answers to my questions above.

Modalists do not believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit exist at the same time. Again, I do not believe that.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
I have always maintained that there is but one divine essence. There is but one divine being, not three. The words being and essence can be interchanged. I explained this in previous posts, but since you have stated you are not reading them, you force me to repeat myself often.

Once again, GT, God is one being (essence, from esse , “to be”), three persons, or conversely, three persons, one being . The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are each fully God. The whole of God (essence) is in each person, and each person is the whole God. Each person is God-in-himself. Each person possesses the entire being of God (the one divine essence) and the entire being of God is in each person. Thus, each person indwells each other—the three mutually contain (interpenetration) one another (perichoresis, see e.g., John 14:10-11, John 15:5; John17; 1 Corinthians 2:11, Ephesians 4:6.)—for the one being of God is undivided. This mutual indwelling means that no person of the Trinity does anything without corresponding activities of the other two persons.

There are not three separate Gods. There is three and One God.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
English is being used here, GT. When we use “essence” we are simply using a word that describes the essentiality of something. No one, GT, no one, denies God is Spirit. God is also light and love, won’t you agree?

You need to stop saying God is essence. God’s essence is Spirit. Say God is Spirit.
God is also light. Say then that God is light, but do not just say God is essence. You will miss the truth if you do not speak according to the scriptures.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
If the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not distinct, not different, you are left with modalism, GT. Accept it or explain how you avoid modalism. Why do you think Scripture uses “Father”, “Son” and “Holy Spirit” if everything is the same? Have you reviewed the different aspects of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit I have described in my previous post here? When Scripture teaches us that the Son of God assumed a human nature, do you claim the Holy Spirit and God the Father assumed a human nature?

They are exactly the same.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Actually I have said, GT, but you just have not read it. Please do so in this post and in my previous post.

Stop saying God is essence. Say what essence God is, then you might see the truth.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
I am defending the doctrine of the Trinity in this discussion. I have described what the Scriptures teach us about the essence of God in this thread in numerous places. Your statement is simply untrue. What is true, however, is that you have not provided a full disclosure of your own position. I continue to have to tease it out of you piecemeal. I am hoping you answer to my questions above will help create a better picture of what you exactly view.

I always answer you. I want to say, this is the first time that you are listening to me better and discussing this topic more deeply. Thank you for discussing with me and not just posting a lesson for me to read.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Rather than this response, can you just answer the question: Was Jesus’ divinity a different substance than that of God the Father?

Jesus is the same as God the Father. The flesh counts for nothing.
Jesus is the Spirit of God come to us in the flesh.
John 6:63 The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you--they are full of the Spirit and life.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Did Jesus possess a rational human soul? Why are you avoiding the question?

Jesus’ Spirit is the Holy Spirit. If you think that Jesus had the spirit of a man, then how did he come from heaven? Then how is it his Father is God? Then where is the spirit of the Man Jesus now? Jesus is Spirit and he is the Spirit of God come to us in the flesh

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Hopefully your responses to all my questions in this post will shed some light on exactly what you mean by this.

Thank you again for discussing deeper with me.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
No Trinitarian believes God is acting in the form of the Son.

Please clarify. Are you saying you do not believe God came in the flesh?

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Were the divine and human natures mixed together in Jesus Christ? (You are not plainly answering most of my questions, GT.)

Just because you are having a hard time understanding does not mean I am not answering plainly.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Was the divine nature changed in any way by the assumption of a human nature?

God came as a Man, so there is something that is different; however, it is still God who came as a Man.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Was there a divine person and a human person in Jesus?

I believe Jesus’ flesh was sacred, being born of God. Jesus’ Spirit is the Holy Spirit.
If you believe you are saved and have the Holy Spirit living inside you…you are still you, you are not God in the flesh. Jesus is God in the flesh, and his Spirit is the Spirit of God.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
When you say “Jesus” came in the flesh, do you mean Jesus pre-existed in heaven before coming in the flesh?

Jesus says the Son of Man came from heaven.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Did Jesus possess a true humanity as well as divinity?

Jesus was in heaven with the Spiritual body of the Man Jesus. Jesus had this body First. We receive the Spiritual body last, at the resurrection. We shall be made like him.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
So you would agree that God the Son was still omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient while walking the roads of Palestine in the assumed humanity of Jesus?

Since Jesus is God come as a Man, then of course, there are limits because of being in a human body.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
God the Son took on (assumed) a human nature, which included a human body. My question concerns what you believe about this assumption. Did Jesus exist prior to this assumption?

As you can see by now, I have been answering this question above, and you hopefully understand better what I have been saying.
Jesus existed with a Spiritual Body (not just a Spirit, but a Spiritual body) before coming to earth in a flesh body.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
When this humanity was assumed by God the Son, were any of the divine attributes communicated to the humanity?

God came as a human. Jesus is God in the flesh, He learned as humans learn, He grew in stature, and in wisdom, as a human would learn and grow.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
GT, thank you for answering a few of my questions. If you can provide more detailed answers it will help form a more complete picture of your views such that I can respond more appropriately.

AMR

I have enjoyed this discussion. Thank you again.

Ask Mr. Religion · Dec 5, 2013

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
God lives in unapproachable light. He made Himself a body, a Spiritual body, of the Man Jesus Christ. He is Jesus, but not yet known as Jesus, not until he came in the flesh. He is the First over all creation. He has the resurrected Spiritual body, the body we receive lastly. Jesus is the First and the Last.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]What do you mean by “He made Himself a body, a Spiritual body”? Did this spiritual body exist in heaven before the incarnation?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
God the Father lives in unapproachable light. Jesus existed with God before coming to earth; He existed in the Spiritual body of the Man Jesus. Jesus in the flesh is God come as a Son of Man, a Son of God.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]You are not giving a precise answer to my question. You also ignore the Holy Spirit and focus on God the Father and God the Son. What exactly do you see as any differences between the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit? Next you state that Jesus existed before the incarnation. Are you confusing the Divine Logos with the man, Jesus, or do you really mean to state that Jesus really existed with God before the incarnation? This would be akin to Mormonism which you deny, yet your words imply otherwise. Let’s be more precise in our answers to avoid confusion.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
There are not three separate Gods. There is three and One God.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]You dismiss my very thorough reply to your earlier complaint that I am speaking of three Gods. You do not interact at all with what I have offered in support of my position. This is becoming increasingly disappointing as you wave off my arguments and merely repeat your snippets over and over again making no attempt to elaborate on these assertions. We are debating this matter and this requires you to do more than merely state “There are not three separate Gods” as if this describes my position (it does not). If you genuinely believe this is the position of Trinitarians, you must attempt to show how this is so in detail—not just assert it. Please review my response that you quoted and offer more than just brief retorts.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
You need to stop saying God is essence. God’s essence is Spirit. Say God is Spirit. God is also light. Say then that God is light, but do not just say God is essence. You will miss the truth if you do not speak according to the scriptures.

Good that you note that I reminded you that God is also light. God is also love. You need to come to grips with what the word essence means. Do you? You are in effect arguing that we cannot use words to describe Scriptural doctrines unless these words appear explicitly in Scripture. The word incarnation does not appear in Scripture, yet the word describes the first coming of the Lord from Scripture. Should we not use the word incarnation? When Scripture mentions the bride of our Lord, are we not permitted to use the word church? You must see how foolish your continued resistance to the word essence is becoming. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
What are you so fearful about concerning this simple word? As I noted above, you refuse to interact with my discussion of the word as it relates to the essential being of God. If you would take the time to study the matter, perhaps your resistance would evaporate. Lastly, please do not misquote me. I have never stated “God is essence”. I only use the word as a noun to describe the objective aspect of God. When someone is speaking about “who God is”, it is perfectly proper to speak about “the essence of God”. This essence of God is spirit, light, love, and more as I have stated, and you have ignored. If truth is being missed here it seems to me you are missing the truth more than anyone in this discussion. If truth is on your side, you have failed to make that truth known plainly. This discussion has went on for many pages now and it yet remains to anyone reading the discussion what your defense is for your views. You have asserted your view but offer no defense in support of said view. Please commence to do so. I am ready and willing to read all that you have to offer in your defense. I will not complain that you are writing too many words to instruct me for I welcome proper instruction when it is proffered.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
They are exactly the same.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]You ignored my comments. Please review my words and offer a direct answer to the three questions asked:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1. Why do you think Scripture uses “Father”, “Son” and “Holy Spirit” if everything is the same? [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]2. Have you reviewed the different aspects of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit I have described in my previous post here? [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]3. When Scripture teaches us that the Son of God assumed a human nature, do you claim the Holy Spirit and God the Father assumed a human nature?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Your waving off of my questions and comments does not serve your purpose well. Recall that you wanted this debate with me:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
You do not debate me because you know you will lose.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Here I stand ready to interact with your views. I am not afraid of losing any debate if my loss means I have come to a greater understanding of the truths I hold dear. When do you intend to demonstrate that I know I will lose in a debate with you, for it has yet to be shown? Can you back up this bold claim of yours?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Jesus is the same as God the Father. The flesh counts for nothing.
Jesus is the Spirit of God come to us in the flesh.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]When you say “Jesus is the same as God the Father” do you mean that the God the Son and God the Father share the same divinity in its totality? You continue to use “Jesus” when we are speaking of the Godhead before the incarnation. Before the incarnation there was no “Jesus”, but only the Divine Logos, God the Son. But, as you have stated often, “Jesus” somehow existed in some spiritual body even before the incarnation. You also state this spiritual body is just like the one all believers will possess in their glory. Please defend the view that Jesus pre-existed the incarnation in a spiritual body as it is part and parcel a Mormonistic notion.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Jesus’ Spirit is the Holy Spirit. If you think that Jesus had the spirit of a man, then how did he come from heaven? Then how is it his Father is God? Then where is the spirit of the Man Jesus now? Jesus is Spirit and he is the Spirit of God come to us in the flesh

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Again, please answer the question: Did Jesus possess a rational human soul? This question only needs a yes or no answer. We are not speaking of “Jesus’ Spirit”, whatever that may mean to you. Your response seems to imply that if Jesus possessed a rational human soul he could not have come from heaven. I suppose that would be the case in some contorted logic, given your view that Jesus pre-existed the incarnation. This “pre-existence” of Jesus issue is one of the roots of your various odd positions and you really need to explain how you come to this position when there is no Scripture to support the idea that Jesus pre-existed before he was born.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Please clarify. Are you saying you do not believe God came in the flesh?

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Note that I am not saying that God did not come in the flesh. He did. I clearly stated that no Trinitarian believes God is acting in the form of the Son. In other words, the incarnation was not some chimera, some illusion, but a real presence of the fully God and the fully human in the Theanthropos, the God-man, Jesus Christ.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Just because you are having a hard time understanding does not mean I am not answering plainly.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]GT, if you cannot plainly explain what you believe then you have failed to defend your position. I am not making this up as some debate bluster, but simply stating the obvious. Shall a poll be contructed to determine who is actually meeting their burden in this discussion? Would you then agree with the results of this poll?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
God came as a Man, so there is something that is different; however, it is still God who came as a Man.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]What “something” was different? What, if anything, was changed in the divine by the assumption of the humanity?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
I believe Jesus’ flesh was sacred, being born of God. Jesus’ Spirit is the Holy Spirit. If you believe you are saved and have the Holy Spirit living inside you…you are still you, you are not God in the flesh. Jesus is God in the flesh, and his Spirit is the Spirit of God.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]This flowery language is avoiding the answer to a direct question: “Was there a divine person and a human person in Jesus?” Why are you unwilling to answer direct questions?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Jesus was in heaven with the Spiritual body of the Man Jesus. Jesus had this body First. We receive the Spiritual body last, at the resurrection. We shall be made like him.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Do you agree that [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Jesus pre-existed the Incarnation, not as the eternal Son but as the eternal Spirit of God?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Since Jesus is God come as a Man, then of course, there are limits because of being in a human body.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]What limitations of the divinity were present? Please explain.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
As you can see by now, I have been answering this question above, and you hopefully understand better what I have been saying.
Jesus existed with a Spiritual Body (not just a Spirit, but a Spiritual body) before coming to earth in a flesh body.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I am glad you are making your position clear that Jesus existed with a spiritual body before coming to earth. The depths of your heresies are becoming plain for all to see.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]AMR[/FONT]
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves>false</w:TrackMoves> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>HE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w

ontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->

God's Truth · Dec 5, 2013

Ask Mr. Religion said:
What do you mean by “He made Himself a body, a Spiritual body”? Did this spiritual body exist in heaven before the incarnation?

I have already told you that it did.
I understand that you are steeped in your doctrines, but how many times do I have to explain everything to you?

Ask Mr. Religion said:
You are not giving a precise answer to my question.

You are speaking untruth.

Just because you do not understand what I am saying it does not mean I am not precise. It is very clear what I am saying. You are ensnared. How much plainer can I say it? God did not have a body until He created Himself one.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
You also ignore the Holy Spirit and focus on God the Father and God the Son.

No way, I do not ignore the Holy Spirit. Jesus is the Holy Spirit.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
What exactly do you see as any differences between the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit? Next you state that Jesus existed before the incarnation. Are you confusing the Divine Logos with the man, Jesus, or do you really mean to state that Jesus really existed with God before the incarnation? This would be akin to Mormonism which you deny, yet your words imply otherwise. Let’s be more precise in our answers to avoid confusion.

It is not so because you say it is.
I thought you regarded yourself as an educated man. Mormons do not believe Jesus is God.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
You dismiss my very thorough reply to your earlier complaint that I am speaking of three Gods. You do not interact at all with what I have offered in support of my position. This is becoming increasingly disappointing as you wave off my arguments and merely repeat your snippets over and over again making no attempt to elaborate on these assertions.

If you do not understand, there is a reason, and it is not because I am not explaining it clear enough.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
We are debating this matter and this requires you to do more than merely state “There are not three separate Gods” as if this describes my position (it does not).

You absolutely do state that there are three separate Gods.
You say there is a God the Father.
Another God Jesus.
Another God the Holy Spirit.

You say they are different.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
If you genuinely believe this is the position of Trinitarians, you must attempt to show how this is so in detail—not just assert it. Please review my response that you quoted and offer more than just brief retorts.

I have already shown you where trinitarians err.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Good that you note that I reminded you that God is also light. God is also love. You need to come to grips with what the word essence means. Do you?

I have already said it.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
You are in effect arguing that we cannot use words to describe Scriptural doctrines unless these words appear explicitly in Scripture.

Your mixed up trinitarian doctrine says God is essence. You refuse to speak according to the word. God is light, and Jesus is EXACTLY the SAME light. God is Spirit, and Jesus is EXACTLY the SAME Spirit. God is love, and Jesus is exactly the SAME love.

Again, you keep saying essence because your doctrine is false.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
The word incarnation does not appear in Scripture, yet the word describes the first coming of the Lord from Scripture. Should we not use the word incarnation? When Scripture mentions the bride of our Lord, are we not permitted to use the word church? You must see how foolish your continued resistance to the word essence is becoming.

We are debating about what the written Word of God says.
If you say God is essence, and that Jesus is that same essence, then you have just admitted that Jesus has the same Spirit as God. However, you deny that and say essence. Essence allows you to be confused.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
What are you so fearful about concerning this simple word?

You are making up things about me. I am not fearful.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
As I noted above, you refuse to interact with my discussion of the word as it relates to the essential being of God. If you would take the time to study the matter, perhaps your resistance would evaporate. Lastly, please do not misquote me. I have never stated “God is essence”. I only use the word as a noun to describe the objective aspect of God. When someone is speaking about “who God is”, it is perfectly proper to speak about “the essence of God”. This essence of God is spirit, light, love, and more as I have stated, and you have ignored.

You make no sense. Of course, you say God is essence.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
If truth is being missed here it seems to me you are missing the truth more than anyone in this discussion. If truth is on your side, you have failed to make that truth known plainly. This discussion has went on for many pages now and it yet remains to anyone reading the discussion what your defense is for your views. You have asserted your view but offer no defense in support of said view. Please commence to do so. I am ready and willing to read all that you have to offer in your defense. I will not complain that you are writing too many words to instruct me for I welcome proper instruction when it is proffered.

I have explained my beliefs plainly and clearly.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
You ignored my comments. Please review my words and offer a direct answer to the three questions asked:
1. Why do you think Scripture uses “Father”, “Son” and “Holy Spirit” if everything is the same?
2. Have you reviewed the different aspects of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit I have described in my previous post here?
3. When Scripture teaches us that the Son of God assumed a human nature, do you claim the Holy Spirit and God the Father assumed a human nature?

Your waving off of my questions and comments does not serve your purpose well. Recall that you wanted this debate with me:

I have answered your questions. Go study them some more.

You are the one who has a doctrine that says they cannot explain how Jesus is God but not the Father.

Why haven’t you explained it?

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Here I stand ready to interact with your views. I am not afraid of losing any debate if my loss means I have come to a greater understanding of the truths I hold dear. When do you intend to demonstrate that I know I will lose in a debate with you, for it has yet to be shown? Can you back up this bold claim of yours?

You are too ensnared to see it.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
When you say “Jesus is the same as God the Father” do you mean that the God the Son and God the Father share the same divinity in its totality? You continue to use “Jesus” when we are speaking of the Godhead before the incarnation. Before the incarnation there was no “Jesus”, but only the Divine Logos, God the Son.

Lol Jesus IS THE WORD OF GOD. Jesus says he is the Son of Man, and that HE CAME FROM HEAVEN.
See John 6:62, and John 3:13.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
But, as you have stated often, “Jesus” somehow existed in some spiritual body even before the incarnation. You also state this spiritual body is just like the one all believers will possess in their glory. Please defend the view that Jesus pre-existed the incarnation in a spiritual body as it is part and parcel a Mormonistic notion.

Someone taught you wrong about the Mormons. Mormons do not believe Jesus IS GOD; they believe he is a god. Kind of close to the trinitarians doctrine, go find where I already explained this to you.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Again, please answer the question:

Go back and read what I already answered. Study it harder.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Did Jesus possess a rational human soul? This question only needs a yes or no answer. We are not speaking of “Jesus’ Spirit”, whatever that may mean to you. Your response seems to imply that if Jesus possessed a rational human soul he could not have come from heaven.

Flesh and blood did not exist in heaven.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Not I am not saying that God did not come in the flesh. He did. I clearly stated that no Trinitarian believes God is acting in the form of the Son. In other words, the incarnation was not some chimera, some illusion, but a real presence of the fully God and the fully human in the Theanthropos, the God-man, Jesus Christ.

You contradict yourself. Your doctrine is nonsense. You say God came in the flesh but was not acting in the form of the Son. If God came in the flesh, and He did---That means God came in the form of a Man. Jesus Christ is the Son of Man.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
GT, if you cannot plainly explain what you believe then you have failed to defend your position. I am not making this up as some debate bluster, but simply stating the obvious. Shall a poll be contructed to determine who is actually meeting their burden in this discussion? Would you then agree with the results of this poll?

Are you really so dull? It is kind of like asking the Jews if Jesus is lying.
You are beyond ridiculous for suggesting a poll. Lol
I am not impressed with the beliefs of the many. Only a few find the Truth.
Your denomination, as the Catholics are the many. Don’t you agree that there are many Catholics and Reformed?

Ask Mr. Religion said:
What “something” was different? What, if anything, was changed in the divine by the assumption of the humanity?

God came as a Son of Man. If you cannot understand how that is different than you have no understanding.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
This flowery language is avoiding the answer to a direct question: “Was there a divine person and a human person in Jesus?” Why are you unwilling to answer direct questions?

I have already answered this.
Your way of debating is to pretend you did not see my answer, then falsely accuse me of being unwilling to answer.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Do you agree that Jesus pre-existed the Incarnation, not as the eternal Son but as the eternal Spirit of God?

God IS Spirit. Jesus is God, and then Jesus is Spirit. Jesus is God. Jesus is the Holy Spirit. Jesus is the visible of the invisible.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
What limitations of the divinity were present? Please explain.

A human is lower.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
I am glad you are making your position clear that Jesus existed with a spiritual body before coming to earth. The depths of your heresies are becoming plain for all to see.

AMR

Jesus is the First and the Last.
You deny the Truth.

Ask Mr. Religion · Dec 6, 2013

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
I have already told you that it did.
I understand that you are steeped in your doctrines, but how many times do I have to explain everything to you?

[/FONT]

God's Truth said:
[FONT=&quot]… God did not have a body until He created Himself one.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]You have not answered the questions:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]What do you mean by “He made Himself a body, a Spiritual body”? [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Did this spiritual body exist in heaven before the incarnation?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I assure you that if you give me direct answers to my questions I will not be repeating them.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Jesus is the Holy Spirit.

Do you think that when Jesus commands baptism in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, no real distinctions exist between the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. How do you explain John 14:16 in light of your position? If Jesus is the Holy Spirit, why does Jesus say “another Helper”? And if you examine John 14:26 you have God the Father stating he will send the Holy Spirit, which also teaches us there is a distinction between God the Father and God the Holy Spirit. With just two verses you have clear distinctions being made within the Godhead.[/FONT][FONT=&quot] So can you reconcile these with whatever Scripture you rely upon to claim that Jesus is the Holy Spirit?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
It is not so because you say it is. I thought you regarded yourself as an educated man. Mormons do not believe Jesus is God.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Your frequent sarcasm is noted. These deflections are not aiding the discussion. You have stated that Jesus existed before the incarnation. I was, and again am asking if perhaps you have confused the Divine Logos with the man, Jesus. Oftentimes I find that persons when discussing the Trinity prior to the incarnation use “Jesus” when they really mean God the Son, the Divine Logos. Using “Jesus” is only appropriate in the context of the incarnation. Given this, do you believe that Jesus existed prior to the incarnation or do you really mean God the Son existed prior to the incarnation?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
If you do not understand, there is a reason, and it is not because I am not explaining it clear enough.

Your comment is in response to my…[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

You dismiss my very thorough reply to your earlier complaint that I am speaking of three Gods. You do not interact at all with what I have offered in support of my position. This is becoming increasingly disappointing as you wave off my arguments and merely repeat your snippets over and over again making no attempt to elaborate on these assertions.

I have obviously mistook you as someone who was willing to honestly engage me in a discussion of your views. I have precisely explained Trinitarianism, explaining my terms and the context in which I use them. I have not hesitated to then re-explain many concepts, all in the hopes that you would engage me at the same level of thoroughness. It would seem to me that given the level of your participation in Trinity related topics at TOL, wherein you very regularly chime in to claim Trinitarians are all in error, that you would relish the chance to carefully explain your views and illustrate to everyone exactly why Trinitarians are in error. As things stand, all you seem willing to do is what you have been doing in the forums—just assert you are right, Trinitarians are wrong, with very little effort to justify these assertions.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
You absolutely do state that there are three separate Gods.
You say there is a God the Father.
Another God Jesus.
Another God the Holy Spirit.
You say they are different.

Perhaps you have (1)not read my detailed responses; (2)read my responses and do not understand them; or (3)read my responses and refuse to acknowledge their content.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The distinctions I have described between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are not ontological differences. Do you understand what this statement means? I would rather you admit when you do not understand me than simply dismissing my comments by putting words in my mouth. Constructing straw men of Trinitarians’ views by claiming we operate from the same presuppositions you do and therefore believe about our beliefs what you believe about our beliefs leaves no hope for honest discussion.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Your mixed up trinitarian doctrine says God is essence. You refuse to speak according to the word. God is light, and Jesus is EXACTLY the SAME light. God is Spirit, and Jesus is EXACTLY the SAME Spirit. God is love, and Jesus is exactly the SAME love.

Again, you keep saying essence because your doctrine is false.

Would the word substance be more acceptable to you? This continual fixation you have about the word essence has become enervating. Have you ever used the word essentially in a sentence, or conversation? Does this usage not imply you are trying to get to the bottom line of some topic? To sum many concepts into one nugget of truth? When I use the word essence I am not saying “God is essence.” Carefully review my use of the word in this One-on-One and you will find this to be the case. What I am saying is that Light, Love, Spirit, and so on all comprise the divine essence of God. Unless we refuse to speak of God, we have to use words, even when these words are inadequate to describe ineffability. As long as we acknowledge and define our terms, edifying conversation can proceed.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
I have answered your questions.
You are the one who has a doctrine that says they cannot explain how Jesus is God but not the Father.
Why haven’t you explained it?

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
How would you even know if I explained it, GT, since you have stated you are not reading my posts because it would be too many words for you to read?

Please identify the person who has stated they cannot explain “how Jesus is God but not the Father”. I do not know who would say this as it is imprecise and could be interpreted to mean that the Father is not God. Unlike you, I am not careless with my words on this topic. Perhaps you need to rephrase? I have repeatedly stated that Jesus is God, the Father is God, the Holy Spirit is God, that there is but one God and none of the persons of the Godhead are the other persons of the Godhead. These subsistences are not three separate Gods. The three persons (hypostaseis / prosopoi) co-inhering in the one divine nature (ousia) exist simultaneously with one another as distinct subsistences or persons. Each of the Persons has a distinct mode of subsistence, such that we can say that the Son is not the Father, the Father is not the Son, and the Holy Spirit is not the Father nor the Son. [/FONT]<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w

oNotShowRevisions/> <w

oNotPrintRevisions/> <w

oNotShowMarkup/> <w

oNotShowComments/> <w

oNotShowInsertionsAndDeletions/> <w

oNotShowPropertyChanges/> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>HE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w

ontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w

oNotShowRevisions/> <w

oNotPrintRevisions/> <w

oNotShowMarkup/> <w

oNotShowComments/> <w

oNotShowInsertionsAndDeletions/> <w

oNotShowPropertyChanges/> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>HE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w

ontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->
[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Lol Jesus IS THE WORD OF GOD. Jesus says he is the Son of Man, and that HE CAME FROM HEAVEN.
See John 6:62, and John 3:13

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“Lol”? Are you taking this discussion seriously or are you very young? I do not know.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]John 3:13 and 6:62 speak to the divinity of Jesus, not that Jesus the man came from Heaven. Please see my earlier point about the Son of Man designation here, in particular:[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Jesus was fully God and fully man. The divinity of Jesus assumed a humanity. That divinity, the Son of God, the Divine Logos, existed before that humanity. Contrary to your view, the Son of God was not in heaven in a spiritual body before the incarnation and John 6:62 does not support your view.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Flesh and blood did not exist in heaven.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Yes, flesh and blood does not exist in heaven and of course, I have never claimed otherwise. Jesus was fully God and fully man. Did Jesus possess a rational human soul?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
You contradict yourself. Your doctrine is nonsense. You say God came in the flesh but was not acting in the form of the Son. If God came in the flesh, and He did---That means God came in the form of a Man. Jesus Christ is the Son of Man.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]You misunderstand the word “form” being used in this context. You do so because you have stated you are not reading my responses. Thus I must repeat myself once more. By “form” as used in my statement I mean the incarnation was not some masquerade or illusion of just God acting as different personas. If you do some self-examination this is precisely your own position. You believe God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are all identical, with no differences. These are your own words. This means that they are all but illusions of the one absolute God. This is your view, GT, not mine.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
Are you really so dull?

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]No I am not.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
I have already answered this.
Your way of debating is to pretend you did not see my answer, then falsely accuse me of being unwilling to answer.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Please point me to the specific answer? I do not ask questions over and over again if they have been answered plainly. Was Jesus fully divine and fully human?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
God IS Spirit. Jesus is God, and then Jesus is Spirit. Jesus is God. Jesus is the Holy Spirit. Jesus is the visible of the invisible.

My question was intended to point out your view more plainly. I, of course disagree with the question I have asked, while you affirm it to be so. The source of my question is:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]David K. Bernard, Essentials of Oneness Theology, Word Aflame Press, Hazelwood, MO, USA, 1995, pages 21-22).[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Thank you for confirming your Oneness leanings.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:
A human is lower.

My question, “What limitations of the divinity were present?” as relates to the incarnation has nothing to do with the humanity assumed by God the Son. I am asking you if you believe that by this assumption of humanity some limitations or changes took place in God the Son. Your answer?[/FONT]

AMR
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>HE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w

ontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->

Ask Mr. Religion · Dec 7, 2013

GT's views are adequately summarized by the following:

It is clear that the terms "Father," "Son," and
"Holy Ghost" cannot imply three different persons,
personalities, wills, or beings. They can only denote
different aspects or roles of one Spirit-being-the one
God. They describe God's relationships to humanity,
not persons in a Godhead.

The Father Is the Holy Ghost
The Deity of Jesus Christ Is the Father
The Deity of Jesus Christ Is the Holy Ghost

It is clear that the terms "Father," "Son," and
"Holy Ghost" cannot imply three different persons,
personalities, wills, or beings. They can only denote
different aspects or roles of one Spirit-being-the one
God. They describe God's relationships to humanity,
not persons in a Godhead. We use "Father" to emphasize
God's roles as Creator, Father of spirits, Father
of the born-again believers, and Father of the humanity
of Jesus Christ. We use "Son" to mean the man
Jesus Christ and further to mean God as He manifested
Himself in the flesh for the purpose of our salvation.
We use "Holy Ghost" to emphasize God's active
power in the world and among people, particularly
His work in regeneration.

The above are taken from Bernard, David K., Pentecostal Theology The Oneness of God, VOLUME 1. Bernard's book is part of the required reading of persons seeking ordination in the UPCI: www.upci.org

Whether she will admit it or not, GT is but another UPCI Oneness proponent.

AMR

God's Truth · Dec 7, 2013

Ask Mr. Religion said:
I assure you that if you give me direct answers to my questions I will not be repeating them.

You will have to read and figure it out.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Do you think that when Jesus commands baptism in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, no real distinctions exist between the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. How do you explain John 14:16 in light of your position? If Jesus is the Holy Spirit, why does Jesus say “another Helper”?

The “another Helper” is a form not in the flesh as Jesus was in front of them.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
And if you examine John 14:26 you have God the Father stating he will send the Holy Spirit, which also teaches us there is a distinction between God the Father and God the Holy Spirit. With just two verses you have clear distinctions being made within the Godhead. So can you reconcile these with whatever Scripture you rely upon to claim that Jesus is the Holy Spirit?

When God came as a Son of Man on earth, He remained in heaven in the unapproachable light.

Jesus is the Holy Spirit. The scriptures say he is.

2 Corinthians 3:17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.

2 Corinthians 3:18 And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate the Lord's glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Your frequent sarcasm is noted. These deflections are not aiding the discussion. You have stated that Jesus existed before the incarnation. I was, and again am asking if perhaps you have confused the Divine Logos with the man, Jesus.

Jesus is the Word of God. Are you really going to keep denying that?

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Oftentimes I find that persons when discussing the Trinity prior to the incarnation use “Jesus” when they really mean God the Son, the Divine Logos.

Jesus is the Word of God; Jesus is the Son of God.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Using “Jesus” is only appropriate in the context of the incarnation. Given this, do you believe that Jesus existed prior to the incarnation or do you really mean God the Son existed prior to the incarnation?

You have now confirmed that you believe the same as Keypurr.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Perhaps you have (1)not read my detailed responses; (2)read my responses and do not understand them; or (3)read my responses and refuse to acknowledge their content.
The distinctions I have described between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are not ontological differences. Do you understand what this statement means? I would rather you admit when you do not understand me than simply dismissing my comments by putting words in my mouth. Constructing straw men of Trinitarians’ views by claiming we operate from the same presuppositions you do and therefore believe about our beliefs what you believe about our beliefs leaves no hope for honest discussion.

You absolutely do state that there are three separate Gods.
You say there is a God the Father.
Another God Jesus.
Another God the Holy Spirit.
You say they are different.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Would the word substance be more acceptable to you?

No.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
This continual fixation you have about the word essence has become enervating. Have you ever used the word essentially in a sentence, or conversation? Does this usage not imply you are trying to get to the bottom line of some topic? To sum many concepts into one nugget of truth? When I use the word essence I am not saying “God is essence.” Carefully review my use of the word in this One-on-One and you will find this to be the case. What I am saying is that Light, Love, Spirit, and so on all comprise the divine essence of God.

If you do say that, then you have finally admitted that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are the same.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Unless we refuse to speak of God, we have to use words, even when these words are inadequate to describe ineffability. As long as we acknowledge and define our terms, edifying conversation can proceed.

Stop using the word ‘essence’, then you might come to understand the truth better.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
How would you even know if I explained it, GT, since you have stated you are not reading my posts because it would be too many words for you to read?

Please identify the person who has stated they cannot explain “how Jesus is God but not the Father”. I do not know who would say this as it is imprecise and could be interpreted to mean that the Father is not God. Unlike you, I am not careless with my words on this topic. Perhaps you need to rephrase? I have repeatedly stated that Jesus is God, the Father is God, the Holy Spirit is God, that there is but one God and none of the persons of the Godhead are the other persons of the Godhead.

You make three different and separate gods.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
These subsistences are not three separate Gods. The three persons (hypostaseis / prosopoi) co-inhering in the one divine nature (ousia) exist simultaneously with one another as distinct subsistences or persons. Each of the Persons has a distinct mode of subsistence, such that we can say that the Son is not the Father, the Father is not the Son, and the Holy Spirit is not the Father nor the Son.

It is bizarre how you say you do not believe in three different gods, and then you describe three different gods.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
“Lol”? Are you taking this discussion seriously or are you very young? I do not know.

John 3:13 and 6:62 speak to the divinity of Jesus, not that Jesus the man came from Heaven. Please see my earlier point about the Son of Man designation here, in particular:

Jesus the Son of Man came from heaven. That is what the scriptures say.
(Leviticus 26:11) (Leviticus 26:30) (Isaiah 42:1) (Zechariah 11:8) (Matthew 12:18) (Hebrews 10:38).

These scriptures speak of God having a soul…a soul is a body with a spirit. If these scriptures are not about Jesus, and if Jesus did not exist in a Spiritual body, then how God who lives in unapproachable light that no one has seen have a body?

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Jesus was fully God and fully man. The divinity of Jesus assumed a humanity. That divinity, the Son of God, the Divine Logos, existed before that humanity. Contrary to your view, the Son of God was not in heaven in a spiritual body before the incarnation and John 6:62 does not support your view.

John 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Yes, flesh and blood does not exist in heaven and of course, I have never claimed otherwise. Jesus was fully God and fully man. Did Jesus possess a rational human soul?

A soul is a body with a spirit.
Jesus’ Spirit is the Holy Spirit.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
By “form” as used in my statement I mean the incarnation was not some masquerade or illusion of just God acting as different personas. If you do some self-examination this is precisely your own position. You believe God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are all identical, with no differences. These are your own words. This means that they are all but illusions of the one absolute God. This is your view, GT, not mine.

You speak nonsense. I do not believe as you say I do.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
My question was intended to point out your view more plainly. I, of course disagree with the question I have asked, while you affirm it to be so. The source of my question is:
David K. Bernard, Essentials of Oneness Theology, Word Aflame Press, Hazelwood, MO, USA, 1995, pages 21-22).
Thank you for confirming your Oneness leanings.

You keep speaking untruths about me for your defense.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
My question, “What limitations of the divinity were present?” as relates to the incarnation has nothing to do with the humanity assumed by God the Son. I am asking you if you believe that by this assumption of humanity some limitations or changes took place in God the Son. Your answer?

God came as a Man.

God's Truth · Dec 7, 2013

Ask Mr. Religion said:
GT's views are adequately summarized by the following:
It is clear that the terms "Father," "Son," and
"Holy Ghost" cannot imply three different persons,
personalities, wills, or beings. They can only denote
different aspects or roles of one Spirit-being-the one
God. They describe God's relationships to humanity,
not persons in a Godhead.

God the Father is the Godhead.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
The Father Is the Holy Ghost
The Deity of Jesus Christ Is the Father
The Deity of Jesus Christ Is the Holy Ghost
It is clear that the terms "Father," "Son," and
"Holy Ghost" cannot imply three different persons,
personalities, wills, or beings. They can only denote
different aspects or roles of one Spirit-being-the one
God. They describe God's relationships to humanity,
not persons in a Godhead.

Again, God the Father is the Godhead, for there is only One God, and He is the Father.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
We use "Father" to emphasize
God's roles as Creator, Father of spirits, Father
of the born-again believers, and Father of the humanity
of Jesus Christ. We use "Son" to mean the man
Jesus Christ and further to mean God as He manifested
Himself in the flesh for the purpose of our salvation.

Jesus also existed in a Spiritual body before the creation of anything.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
We use "Holy Ghost" to emphasize God's active
power in the world and among people, particularly
His work in regeneration.
The above are taken from Bernard, David K., Pentecostal Theology The Oneness of God, VOLUME 1. Bernard's book is part of the required reading of persons seeking ordination in the UPCI: www.upci.org

Whether she will admit it or not, GT is but another UPCI Oneness proponent.

The Oneness people believe that ONLY ONE EXISTS AT ONE TIME. I do NOT believe that.
God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit exist at the same time.

I have now then shown you where I differ from the Oneness doctrine. There are probably even more ways in which we differ. I am not here to debate nor defend their doctrine.

Ask Mr. Religion · Dec 9, 2013

[FONT=&quot]GT’s continued lack of substantive response to my posts warrant combining into one bulk quotation. As shown below, rather than present arguments in support of her oneness views and respond to my explanations of the Scriptures, including those she quotes, GT simply repeats similar “I am right, you are wrong” statements with a few unexplained Scripture verses. This should not be altogether unexpected, after all, the only tools in the toolbox of the odd duck opinion overlaid upon desperately wooden literal hermeneutics.[/FONT]

God's Truth said:
[FONT=&quot]- You will have to read and figure it out.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]- The “another Helper” is a form not in the flesh as Jesus was in front of them.
- When God came as a Son of Man on earth, He remained in heaven in the unapproachable light.
- Jesus is the Holy Spirit. The scriptures say he is. 2 Corinthians 3:17;2 Corinthians 3:18
- Jesus is the Word of God. Are you really going to keep denying that?
- Jesus is the Word of God; Jesus is the Son of God.
- You have now confirmed that you believe the same as Keypurr.
- You absolutely do state that there are three separate Gods.
- You say there is a God the Father.
- Another God Jesus.
- Another God the Holy Spirit.
- You say they are different.
- No.
- If you do say that, then you have finally admitted that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are the same.
- Stop using the word ‘essence’, then you might come to understand the truth better.You make three different and separate gods.
- It is bizarre how you say you do not believe in three different gods, and then you describe three different gods.
- Jesus the Son of Man came from heaven. That is what the scriptures say.
- These scriptures speak of God having a soul…a soul is a body with a spirit. If these scriptures are not about Jesus, and if Jesus did not exist in a Spiritual body, then how God who lives in unapproachable light that no one has seen have a body? Leviticus 26:11; Leviticus 26:30; Isaiah 42:1; Zechariah 11:8; Matthew 12:18; Hebrews 10:38
- John 17:5
- A soul is a body with a spirit.
- Jesus’ Spirit is the Holy Spirit.
- You speak nonsense. I do not believe as you say I do.
- You keep speaking untruths about me for your defense.
- God came as a Man.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]If others are following the discussion closely, they should have noted that GT shops around for some Scripture translations to support her preconceptions. Note that immediately above she quotes:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

2 Corinthians 3:17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.
2 Corinthians 3:18 And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate the Lord's glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]The first passage appears in the ESV, NIV, NRS, RSV, TNIV translations, while the second in only the TNIV. From this above I might conclude that GT is favoring the TNIV. An awful translation, but to each her own, I suppose.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
But, hold on now, when I examine, say this post here, I find GT using the Weymouth New Testament (for oh so obvious reasons)! These are two examples. GT never attributes the various translations she is using, and it is clear she is looking around for translations to bolster her position. This desperation is also sad and speaks to the aforementioned wooden literalism that guides GT’s views. Incapable of properly interpreting Scripture, she resorts to seeking out words that might fit her own presuppositions. Sigh. GT, my preferred translation is the NKJV or the KJV, but whatever you want to use is fine with me as long as you at least note you are using various translations hoping the bare words themselves will bolster your position.

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]GT points to 2 Corinthians 3:17-18 to assert Jesus is the Holy Spirit. GT ignores the fact that in verses Paul is expounding Exodus 34:29–35 and the veiledness of the Jews. Paul is explaining the meaning of 2 Corinthians 3:16 as relates to the blindness of the Jews and when the veil is taken away—here speaking of the law written by Moses. When the Jews are able to Jesus Christ in the law the veil over their eyes will be lifted. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]So let’s look closer at some exposition of the passage…[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Back in 2 Corinthians 3:14-15 Paul is discussing how veiled are the Jews (see verse 13). Next Paul, in 2 Corinthians 3:16-18, Paul discusses how the veil is removed from those who turn to the Lord. Observe also at how the subject changes from the plural Israelites, their minds, their hearts in verses 14 and 15, to the single, “whenever anyone turns to the Lord” in verse 16. Paul not only speaks here autobiographically but also representatively, But we all, with unveiled face, in verse 18.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Adapting a citation of Exodus 35:35, Paul interprets it in 2 Corinthians 3:17 with Holy Spirit in view, leveraging the argument from 2 Corinthians 3:1-8, and brings it all together in conclusion in 2 Corinthians 3:18—veil, Spirit, face, glory to teach what God has accomplished and will accomplish through Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit—abolishing the old covenant. In 2 Corinthians 3:17 the Lord is called by Paul the Spirit. Here is Paul’s brief means of directing us to the Lord of the new covenant of the Holy Spirit of our living God who gives life[/1], and freedom and unveiling (see 2 Corinthians 3:3, 6, 17-18). As a new minister of the new covenant (2 Corinthians 3:6) Paul declares himself a representative new covenant member, being given a heart of flesh since the Spirit of God has removed the tablets of stone (2 Corinthians 3:3). Given this, Paul can speak not only as apostle (2 Corinthians 3:4-6) but also as a representative of all persons of the new covenant (2 Corinthians 3:12,18). Paul is no longer veiled under the old covenant in which he once lived (2 Corinthians 3:14-15; 5:16-17). Persons of the new covenant, now unveiled though Jesus Christ, are now being transformed by the Spirit of God into the image of Christ.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Now we examine 2 Corinthians 3:17, “the Lord is the Spirit”…[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]As we will see this phrase is not pneumatological (“Jesus” equals “Spirit”) as GT would like it to be, but Christological. No, the first phrase the Lord is the Spirit is not teaching that the “Lord” in the phrase is “the Spirit” in the phrase. Examination of the second phrase the Spirit of the Lord makes it clear that “the Lord” that we turn to and “the Spirit of the Lord” are distinguished from one other—two different persons. He to whom we turn is Jesus Christ, so the Spirit of the Lord is Jesus Christ’s “Spirit”, who is the Spirit of the living God referred to in 2 Corinthians 3:3. From Romans 8:9-10 we clearly see the “Spirit of Christ” is the Spirit of God.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In 2 Corinthians 3 one emphasis is upon the work of the Holy Spirit, see 2 Corinthians 3:3,6,8,13-15. Only when the Holy Spirit works in the believer’s heart, those who are in Christ, is the veil removed, see the last part of 2 Corinthians 3:18. For Paul, it is the Holy Spirit working in those who are in Christ, and without the old covenant veil, Jesus Christ of the Scriptures is met by the believer. Paul’s view is the Lord to be the Spirit at work illuminating believers of proper understanding of God’s revelation. That is, through the Word, the Holy Spirit changes the heart of a person, leading him the freedom in Jesus Christ. In fact, using a wee bit different phraseology, Paul says the same thing elsewhere:[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]1 There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.
2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. (Romans 8:1-2)[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]We also have the testimony of the Scriptures in our support here teaching us that Jesus Christ is the giver of the Spirit, John 4:14; 7:37–39; 15:26; 16:7; 19:30; Acts 2:33, and that the Spirit is given as a result of hearing the Good News, Acts 10:44; 19:2; Gal 3:1–5; Eph 1:13.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Now we examine 2 Corinthians 3:18, “the Spirit” (in GT’s translation preference)…[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The “which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit” from GT’s translation preference or even the NASB’s “Just as from the Lord, that is, the Spirit” has only four Greek works in the underlying text: [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]καθάπερ [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ἀ[/FONT][FONT=&quot]π[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ὸ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] κυρίου [/FONT][FONT=&quot]πνεύματος[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The word [/FONT][FONT=&quot]καθάπερ[/FONT][FONT=&quot] is important to understanding the meaning here for it means, as relates to what Paul just wrote—as one would expect—“as one would expect transformation into the image of the Lord must come from the Lord.” The word [/FONT][FONT=&quot]κυρίου[/FONT][FONT=&quot](“Lord”) was anarthous (no Greek article) in the first part of 2 Corinthians 3:18 and it the same here, thus [/FONT][FONT=&quot]πνεύματος[/FONT][FONT=&quot](“Spirit”) is also anarthous. Paul here is teaching that the Lord is Jesus Christ who gives the Spirit (see John 16:7 and forward). Paul is also teaching that the Lord is He who has risen whose covenant is not identified by letter, but by the Holy Spirit.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Note that in 2 Corinthians 3:18 the opening two words of the clause containing the Spirit are just as. The Apostle here sets up a comparison, that is, “just as” to imply just as God’s glory was reflected in Moses and he was changed, we also are transformed in Christ’s image. We turn to the Lord Jesus Christ just as Moses turned to God and our glory is derived from Christ through the working of the Holy Spirit. Lastly, note that the word Spirit receives proper emphasis as the last word of 2 Corinthians 3:18, summarizing all of Paul’s focus on the Holy Spirit (see 2 Corinthians 3:3,6,8,17).[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]No, GT, these verses do not support your claims that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all the same with no differences. Those denying the Trinity like to point to this verse (and others) in hopes of forcing the Apostle to be teaching Jesus Christ is spiritual essence by linking these verses to John 4:24, just as you have attempted, GT. As we have seen the verse speaks to the office of Christ, for He is the Spirit of the law.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In one of the snippets quoted above, it appears GT ran few Scripture searches to find the words “God” and “soul”. Then she identifies search hits that contain words that may imply God has a soul. From this she then adds that “a soul is a body with a spirit”. I have no idea why she does so; unfortunately unsupported assertions are GT’s stock and trade. Perhaps this is the source of her claim that Jesus pre-existed in a spiritual body in heaven before the incarnation. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]A living soul is described in Genesis 2:7. From there we read that we are earthy, made from the dust of the ground and having life breathed into us by God. In the Genesis account we read that Adam's earthy body was quickened by the soul, the nephesh, the essence of life. A living being thus comprises body and soul. Note also that the use of nephesh in Genesis 2:7 is very different than the same use of the word in, say, Genesis 1:20, where the same word would imply vital motion. Unlike the soul (nephesh) of animals, man's soul possesses distinguishing intelligence and reason, and immortality. In the Old Testament we always see the term soul designating the combination as a whole, not just one of its components. The Scriptures GT claims in support of her view do not teach that God has a soul. God is not composed of parts, possesses no additional substances, essences, and so on. Other than the accommodation of God to our finitude, the most anyone could properly claim is that the “soul” of God, is God himself . When God speaks of himself in this way it is to affect us with apprehension of His concern about what He is speaking. This means of communication is directing our attention to our very cores, for we are that which our souls, i.e., our minds with all our affections, are engaged in.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Finally, using John 17:5 GT suggests the claim that since Jesus possessed "glory" before the world began then[/FONT][FONT=&quot] He must have possessed a glorified body, just like the one’s the saints will have come the eschaton. But, once more, this is an example of GT’s inability to properly interpret Scripture. The context of the passage in question is the humiliation of God the Son in the incarnation, in that He was brought low from the fullness of His pre-incarnation glory. The passage has absolutely nothing to do with glorified bodies pre-existing the incarnation.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]When I offer explanatory passages from Scripture in defense of my position, GT ignores them. When I offer rebuttals to Scripture GT cites, she promptly ignores my rebuttals and just tries to find more Scriptures. In effect, GT appears to be talking to herself in this One-on-One and not really serious about her bold claim that was the genesis of this discussion:[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

God's Truth said:

You do not debate me because you know you will lose.

Click to expand...

GT, I have no doubts that you are sincere in your beliefs, but the sad fact is that you are sincerely wrong in what you believe. Before the road to Damascus, the Apostle Paul sincerely believed he should do lots of things against the name of Jesus Christ. It was his sincerity in an erroneous set of beliefs that made him so dangerous. This discussion, and others' discussion with you elsewhere is a stellar example of what happens when a person cuts themselves off from the church militant, refusing to covenant themselves with a good local church and receive proper teaching. The numerous errors you have divulged in your posts are correctable errors if one is open to correction. Unfortunately, the heart hardens the more one remains decoupled from the local body for it is therein from which the wellsprings of grace, teaching, fellowship, worship, and rejoicing worthy discipline bountifully flow. Some will say, "Well, AMR, she means well", but as long as you refuse to seek and develop greater facility with Holy Writ all the while continuing to deny the Trinity, you are worshiping idols of your own making. Yes, when we do not worship the God of Scripture our minds turn into prolific idol factories. This is a very perilous path to walk upon.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]AMR[/FONT]

God's Truth · Dec 9, 2013

Ask Mr. Religion said:
If others are following the discussion closely, they should have noted that GT shops around for some Scripture translations to support her preconceptions.

I do sometimes choose a scripture that is worded more profoundly.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Note that immediately above she quotes:
2 Corinthians 3:17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.
2 Corinthians 3:18 And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate the Lord's glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.
The first passage appears in the ESV, NIV, NRS, RSV, TNIV translations, while the second in only the TNIV. From this above I might conclude that GT is favoring the TNIV. An awful translation, but to each her own, I suppose.

ALL translations say that the Lord is the Spirit, and is speaking of Jesus.
I have never even heard of TNIV.
Most translations do not make for false doctrines. You can use any translation you want when debating me, except for paraphrased and the JW’s.
Are you saying I can only discuss a translation that you choose?
I will use any translation you want except the two that I have mentioned.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
But, hold on now, when I examine, say this post here, I find GT using the Weymouth New Testament (for oh so obvious reasons)!

Weymouth is a good translation that I have seen.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
These are two examples. GT never attributes the various translations she is using,

That is an untruth.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
and it is clear she is looking around for translations to bolster her position.

That makes no sense. It is not a crime to use translation that is worded somewhat clearer.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
This desperation is also sad and speaks to the aforementioned wooden literalism that guides GT’s views.

What nonsense. You are wasting time speaking of your false opinions of me. You would think that you would know better.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
Incapable of properly interpreting Scripture, she resorts to seeking out words that might fit her own presuppositions. Sigh. GT, my preferred translation is the NKJV or the KJV, but whatever you want to use is fine with me as long as you at least note you are using various translations hoping the bare words themselves will bolster your position.

The scriptures on this site are set for NKJV. If I do not state a specific translation that translation comes up automatically. I do not prefer that translation, but the fact that I do not always state which translation I am using shows that I do not mind any one being used.

Ask Mr. Religion said:
GT points to 2 Corinthians 3:17-18 to assert Jesus is the Holy Spirit. GT ignores the fact that in verses Paul is expounding Exodus 34:29–35 and the veiledness of the Jews.

I have not ignored that. You say any falseness to defend your false beliefs.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

Paul is explaining the meaning of 2 Corinthians 3:16 as relates to the blindness of the Jews and when the veil is taken away—here speaking of the law written by Moses.

Click to expand...

It is the law as GIVEN TO MOSES BY GOD.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

When the Jews are able to Jesus Christ in the law the veil over their eyes will be lifted.

Click to expand...

The Jews will have the veil over their heart removed if they turn to Jesus.
That proves it is about Jesus.
How much clearer does it have to be?

Ask Mr. Religion said:

So let’s look closer at some exposition of the passage…

Back in 2 Corinthians 3:14-15 Paul is discussing how veiled are the Jews (see verse 13). Next Paul, in 2 Corinthians 3:16-18, Paul discusses how the veil is removed from those who turn to the Lord. Observe also at how the subject changes from the plural Israelites, their minds, their hearts in verses 14 and 15, to the single, “whenever anyone turns to the Lord” in verse 16. Paul not only speaks here autobiographically but also representatively, But we all, with unveiled face, in verse 18.

Click to expand...

You are not saying something that no one knows. The scriptures are plain and clear. Anyone can turn to Jesus and will have the veil removed.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

Adapting a citation of Exodus 35:35, Paul interprets it in 2 Corinthians 3:17 with Holy Spirit in view, leveraging the argument from 2 Corinthians 3:1-8, and brings it all together in conclusion in 2 Corinthians 3:18—veil, Spirit, face, glory to teach what God has accomplished and will accomplish through Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit—abolishing the old covenant. In 2 Corinthians 3:17 the Lord is called by Paul the Spirit.

Click to expand...

The Lord is called the Spirit.
Instead of you accepting the truth, you proceed with trying to make others believe the scripture does not say what it does.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

Here is Paul’s brief means of directing us to the Lord of the new covenant of the Holy Spirit of our living God who gives life[/1], and freedom and unveiling (see 2 Corinthians 3:3, 6, 17-18). As a new minister of the new covenant (2 Corinthians 3:6) Paul declares himself a representative new covenant member, being given a heart of flesh since the Spirit of God has removed the tablets of stone (2 Corinthians 3:3). Given this, Paul can speak not only as apostle (2 Corinthians 3:4-6) but also as a representative of all persons of the new covenant (2 Corinthians 3:12,18). Paul is no longer veiled under the old covenant in which he once lived (2 Corinthians 3:14-15; 5:16-17). Persons of the new covenant, now unveiled though Jesus Christ, are now being transformed by the Spirit of God into the image of Christ.

Click to expand...

You are merely repeating what the scriptures say. You are not explaining anything.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

Now we examine 2 Corinthians 3:17, “the Lord is the Spirit”…

As we will see this phrase is not pneumatological (“Jesus” equals “Spirit”) as GT would like it to be, but Christological. No, the first phrase the Lord is the Spirit is not teaching that the “Lord” in the phrase is “the Spirit” in the phrase. Examination of the second phrase the Spirit of the Lord makes it clear that “the Lord” that we turn to and “the Spirit of the Lord” are distinguished from one other—two different persons.

Click to expand...

The scriptures are speaking of the Lord, and the Spirit. That is what the scriptures are saying plainly and clearly. The scriptures plainly and clearly say twice that the Lord is the Spirit.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

He to whom we turn is Jesus Christ, so the Spirit of the Lord his Jesus Christ’s “Spirit”,

Click to expand...

You have now twisted the scripture that plainly and clearly says the Lord is the Spirit. You have twisted it to say the Spirit of the Lord. What you did is reprehensible.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

who is the Spirit of the living God referred to in 2 Corinthians 3:3. From Romans 8:9-10 we clearly see the “Spirit of Christ” is the Spirit of God.

Click to expand...

The Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ are the same Spirit.
There is only One Spirit.
See Ephesians 4:4, and Ephesians 2:18.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

In 2 Corinthians 3 one emphasis is upon the work of the Holy Spirit, see 2 Corinthians 3:3,6,8,13-15. Only when the Holy Spirit works in the believer’s heart, those who are in Christ, is the veil removed, see the last part of 2 Corinthians 3:18. For Paul, it is the Holy Spirit working in those who are in Christ, and without the old covenant veil,

Click to expand...

The three are One and the same.
You referenced 2 Corinthians 3:6. However, to prove to you that the three are One and the same study more carefully these scriptures:

The Spirit gives life, 2 Corinthians 3:6

God gives life see John 5:21.

Jesus gives life see John 5:21.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

Jesus Christ of the Scriptures is met by the believer. Paul’s view is the Lord to be the Spirit at work illuminating believers of proper understanding of God’s revelation. That is, through the Word, the Holy Spirit changes the heart of a person, leading him the freedom in Jesus Christ.

Click to expand...

Be careful that you do not get into Calvinism here.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

In fact, using a wee bit different phraseology, Paul says the same thing elsewhere:

1 There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.
2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. (Romans 8:1-2)

We also have the testimony of the Scriptures in our support here teaching us that Jesus Christ is the giver of the Spirit, John 4:14; 7:37–39; 15:26; 16:7; 19:30; Acts 2:33,

Click to expand...

God sends the Holy Spirit

Galatians 4:6 Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, "Abba, Father." And John 14:26.

Jesus sends the Holy Spirit.

Luke 24:49 I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high." And John 15:26; 16:7.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

Now we examine 2 Corinthians 3:18, “the Spirit” (in GT’s translation preference)…

The “which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit” from GT’s translation preference or even the NASB’s “Just as from the Lord, that is, the Spirit” has only four Greek works in the underlying text:
καθάπερ ἀπὸ κυρίου πνεύματος

The word καθάπερ is important to understanding the meaning here for it means, as relates to what Paul just wrote—as one would expect—“as one would expect transformation into the image of the Lord must come from the Lord.” The word κυρίου(“Lord”) was anarthous (no Greek article) in the first part of 2 Corinthians 3:18 and it the same here, thus πνεύματος(“Spirit”) is also anarthous. Paul here is teaching that the Lord is Jesus Christ who gives the Spirit (see John 16:7 and forward). Paul is also teaching that the Lord is He who has risen whose covenant is not identified by letter, but by the Holy Spirit.

Click to expand...

Stop writing so much. You think that with all your talk you can justify the twisting of the scriptures. You will be held accountable to God for what you are doing.
Again, the scriptures PLAINLY AND CLEARLY SAYS the Lord is the Spirit.
The scriptures also say what you do not, and that is God gives the Spirit, and Jesus gives the Spirit.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

Note that in 2 Corinthians 3:18 the opening two words of the clause containing the Spirit are just as. The Apostle here sets up a comparison, that is, “just as” to imply just as God’s glory was reflected in Moses and he was changed, we also are transformed in Christ’s image. We turn to the Lord Jesus Christ just as Moses turned to God and our glory is derived from Christ through the working of the Holy Spirit. Lastly, note that the word Spirit receives proper emphasis as the last word of 2 Corinthians 3:18, summarizing all of Paul’s focus on the Holy Spirit (see 2 Corinthians 3:3,6,8,17).

Click to expand...

This is just more useless ramblings.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

No, GT, these verses do not support your claims that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all the same with no differences. Those denying the Trinity like to point to this verse (and others) in hopes of forcing the Apostle to be teaching Jesus Christ is spiritual essence by linking these verses to John 4:24, just as you have attempted, GT. As we have seen the verse speaks to the office of Christ, for He is the Spirit of the law.

Click to expand...

Be quiet. You have not shown anything, except that you distort the truth.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

In one of the snippets quoted above, it appears GT ran few Scripture searches to find the words “God” and “soul”. Then she identifies search hits that contain words that may imply God has a soul. From this she then adds that “a soul is a body with a spirit”. I have no idea why she does so; unfortunately unsupported assertions are GT’s stock and trade. Perhaps this is the source of her claim that Jesus pre-existed in a spiritual body in heaven before the incarnation.

Click to expand...

The body is made a live by receiving its soul; it then becomes a living body.
Genesis 2:7 Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

Ask Mr. Religion said:

A living soul is described in Genesis 2:7. From there we read that we are earthy, made from the dust of the ground and having life breathed into us by God. In the Genesis account we read that Adam's earthy body was quickened by the soul, the nephesh, the essence of life. A living being thus comprises body and soul. Note also that the use of nephesh in Genesis 2:7 is very different than the same use of the word in, say, Genesis 1:20, where the same word would imply vital motion. Unlike the soul (nephesh) of animals, man's soul possesses distinguishing intelligence and reason, and immortality. In the Old Testament we always see the term soul designating the combination as a whole, not just one of its components. The Scriptures GT claims in support of her view do not teach that God has a soul. God is not composed of parts, possesses no additional substances, essences, and so on.

Click to expand...

The scriptures plainly and clearly say God has a soul. That soul is Jesus Christ whom existed before coming to earth.
(Leviticus 26:11) (Leviticus 26:30) (Isaiah 42:1) (Zechariah 11:8) (Matthew 12:18) (Hebrews 10:38).

Ask Mr. Religion said:

Finally, using John 17:5 GT suggests the claim that since Jesus possessed "glory" before the world began then He must have possessed a glorified body, just like the one’s the saints will have come the eschaton. But, once more, this is an example of GT’s inability to properly interpret Scripture. The context of the passage in question is the humiliation of God the Son in the incarnation, in that He was brought low from the fullness of His pre-incarnation glory. The passage has absolutely nothing to do with glorified bodies pre-existing the incarnation.

Click to expand...

Jesus plainly and clearly says with the same glory he had with God before the world began.

One-on-One: AMR and God's Truth — The Holy Trinity

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

New member

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

New member

New member

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

New member

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

New member

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

New member

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

New member

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

New member

New member

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

New member

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9