Jump to content

Mike 2

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    499
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Mike 2

  1. Oh yes I definately know that but I think a lot of people are confused in how "God" works. I believe that the definition of the Trinity is antiquated, that is, the meaning of three persons in one is different today than it was 1700 years ago when the theologians of the time were trying to describe how these 3 different references to God were related, and as the word "person" is understood today it is causing a lot of confusion. At the time that the Trinity doctrine was being formed there was a lot of heated discussion, so much so that some views were considered herectical and those that shared those views were ostricised or even persecuted. The way the definition was understood then is different then the way it is understood today (particularly among laypeople), much like when someone says "you suck" today means 'you're not very good at it' but 50 or 60 years ago if you said that to someone you would have been slapped in the face. To make matters worse, today, in trying to understand the the Holy Spirit as a person, many people try to personify the Holy Spirit by dropping the word "the" from in front of Holy Spirit, that's not biblical. Its no different than dropping "the" from in front of the policeman, the butcher, the hockey player, instead of talking to the policeman you would be talking to policeman, if that is done policeman now becomes personified. Would you call me "the" mike2 or mike2? I think in trying to understand the Trinity as our man made doctrine defines it we are missing out on a clear description of how we are made in the image of God, we are missing on the make-up of God and how the creation proccess works, both in God and, because we are made in his image, in us. We miss out on seeing the perfection in God and therefore understanding the inperfection in us, where, in our decision making proccess we are flawed. There is a proccess that proceeds from the Father through the Holy Spirit that is then manifested (created ) out into the physical world (by the Sons). The gospel of John is one of the best places to find this described but there are other biblical references as well. I am thinking that because we consider them as 3 different persons we are giving each one of them the 3 in 1 creation proccess (which includes the initial thought, the deciding how to do it and the actually doing it) when we should really be looking at the Trinity as the 3 of them together making up the creation proccess within God and together make up God.....now before someone says "each one is God" consider thoughtfully what I just wrote. Each one is God, but the Father or Holy Spirit is not all of God, the 3 must be together (as we see in the Son) to be all of God, they cannot work independantly ........ and ....... ..........hence my question....... Does the Holy Spirit have free will? and I might add on to this..... if we create in a similar way, where is it in the proccess that sin has its effect? (Rom 7:13-20) ......I don't think the Holy Spirit struggles with this...........
  2. The understanding of your query, I may be wrong, is you wonder The Persons of God have individuality to the point of Self actualization... I think in God’s Word this is best answered here: John 14:9-13 (KJV) [9] Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? [10] Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. [11] Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake. [12] Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. [13] And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. Matthew 26:39 (KJV) [39] And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt. As we, in these passages, can glean this understanding: The will of The Father and The will of The Son are one of sameness... yet when it was time for The Son to bear the sins of the world upon His Own Self the reality of loosing oneness of righteousness is reflected in the Son’s desire of letting the cup pass from Him >YET< the righteousness remaining by removing His Will to that of The Father’s that we might have life in The Son ... 1Cor 13 is so wonderfully viewed in this instance from the garden to death on the cross that it should convert all hearts to that of God’s Blessed Persons of Glory but alas it does not I see in this and accept that the Son has his own will and that He chooses to do the will of the Father. But what about the Holy Spirit in the matter. I understand the Holy Spirit to be that part of God that reveals the thoughts of the Father 1Co 2:10 these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. 1Co 2:11 For who knows a person's thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. Paul goes on to say...1Co 2:12 Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. These verses seem to indicate that the Holy Spirit understands the... thoughts of God..even the depths of God.. then shares those with us. Does the Holy Spirit have the free will to tell us something other than what the thoughts of God are?
  3. Thanks for your response. BranchesofHim, I am serious with my question because I see verses like this : Joh 16:13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. 15:26 “But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me. Jayne brings up 1 Corinthians 12:1-11 specifically verse 11 I look at verse 8 For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, I can find other verses that indicate that the Holy Spirit does not act independently because as branchesofHim has indicated the Holy Spirit, together with the Father and Son work as God. Within that though, does the Holy Spirit have free will, or as is indicated in Joh 16:13, do whatever he hears or speaks as part of the perfect unity within God. Does the Holy Spirit have the potential / ability to communicate to the Son (and us as sons/ daughters) other than what he hears? (Joh 16:13)
  4. Does the Holy Spirit have free will? I'm guessing there may be a fair bit of reasoning in any answer but please try to include biblical references to back up your thoughts.
  5. This is a city/ culture he was talking about not an individual like so many of us will encounter. It would be pretty amazing to go into a city and not find anyone seeking God. I think you will agree that in the passage you have quoted the disciples started out with the love thing
  6. I think it is important at this time that we don't hit people too hard with the theological words and biblical passages that will seem condemning. People are already concerned and worried. Some are close to snapping, in time many more will be. Although it may be understood by us here; I think if we approach people using the language the OP is using we will have people thinking we are condemning them, in fact based on some of the responses I have seen in this post some of us are thinking this ourselves.......and we know something about our loving God. We need to be mindful that we are sharing the hope we have in Jesus based on the love and forgiveness he has shown us. Use what we know from the bible to indicate that this and so much more is expected by us because the bible has shown us this..... that bible prophecy has an accurate track record, and that we can trust that what we learn from it is true. The best thing we learn from the bible is the significance of Jesus and what he offers every one of us. Put that pebble in their shoe (that may be all you are asked to do) and save the heavy theology for God 401 when they are able to consume it. Lets not scare people into learning about a God that condemns, lets share about a God that loves Lets give hope in a time when people are looking for hope, in a time when the short life of the material world is coming into focus. Peace and Blessings
  7. This has been taken out of context and given a new meaning! In so doing the poster is implying we are not to go door to door witnessing. That's far from what the bible is teaching in the passage. This is about where the disciple was to dwell while in a town preaching.
  8. Can you give me a reference to that so I can read it as well
  9. God is a person. Any reference to any part of him is referring to Him We are son (and daughters) of God The Father communicates to the Son through the Holy Spirit (1Cor2-10....) When the Holy Spirit is at work we are seeing God at work and if we know its the Holy Spirit and deny it that is blasphemy. Is it really at all possible to truly know that it is the Holy Spirit at work, I mean undeniably in our own spirit, and still say it is the devil? Why would you want to do that?
  10. I don't think it is impossible. If he wanted, if it was part of the plan, he would have had children. It appears from some of the posts here that you are revisiting this question. Logically though, can I suggest that you approach this question in a different way..... "What would be the ramifications if Jesus had a child?' I think if you ask that question you will understand why he did not. (keep in mind what his purpose was)
  11. I do wonder though....where the talent comes from, why are some drawn to one thing and not another?
  12. I've been looking at the spiritual gifts that God gives us in; 1 Cor 12 - The Holy Spirit at work for a time Eph 4 - gifts through the positions in the church Romans 12 - gifts that are a part of our character, that effect the way we view things and engage the world around us. Rom 12:6 We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us. If your gift is prophesying, then prophesy in accordance with your[a] faith; 7 if it is serving, then serve; if it is teaching, then teach; 8 if it is to encourage, then give encouragement; if it is giving, then give generously; if it is to lead, do it diligently; if it is to show mercy, do it cheerfully. These gifts are in us, in our own personal nature. My question pertains to the personal gifts in Romans....' Are these gifts not in us before we accept Christ, or does everybody have their particular gift(s) but is not able use it to its fullest, or for what it is intended, without Christ?'
  13. ....so well put..... It is so predictable that we have become cynical and apathetic....even exasperated
  14. I often see the phrase "that is false teaching" on this forum. What is that? Is it something contrary to your belief, is it expressly contrary to a biblical principle or .....? Can you give an example of something you have seen, read or heard recently.
  15. What Al Capone did was no different than what corporations do....it's all business! The blood running through corporations is money....not love, it's only about the bottom line. If you see a corporation....or a gangster helping people out, it is ultimately because it will help the bottom line. Based on the fruits of Al Capone's spirit of killing, stealing and lying I would say that his helping the poor etc. "was only business" just like bumping someone off "was only business".
  16. Time has a start and an end. Before anything was created there was no "start". Once anything is created it will eventually have an "end" God did not create time, time was a result of something being created. Once something is created, it has a beginning and an end, it has a time in which it will exist.
  17. Maybe a bit of reasoning will help with this. If we know that God is love 1 Jn 4:8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. Pure love is other-centered and if God is other-centered then it stands to reason the opposite, self-centered is evil This selfishness is so pervasive in the "I wills" of Satan's fall as described in Isaiah 14: 12- In these he is completely consumed by the desire to be above all, with no concern for any others. This is something we are seeing quite prevalent today it's result is a lot of hatred and ill will towards others resulting in no ability to enjoy the "successes" of others.
  18. I recommend you find 3 or 4 commentaries that you find easy to read and compare them BUT BEFORE YOU GO TO THE COMMENTARY spend time meditating and praying for understanding through the Holy Spirit about what you are reading. Jas 1:5 If any of you lacks wisdom, you should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to you Also, what ever you are reading make sure you read it in it's context. You will often get the meaning once you have it in context. Although it's older I enjoy William MacDonalds
  19. The bible is split into two parts 1. The Old Testament where we see man trying to come into relationship with God by following rules (the "10 commandments"). Only to find out time and time again that we fail at that and sin (miss the mark). We realize we don't have a hope of getting to God by anything we try to do. Its impossible, we'll mess up. We are without hope, until.... 2. The New Testament is marked by the arrival of Jesus. At his birth the angels announce the Gospel, "good news" to the shepherds.... .....Luke 2:10 But the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid. I bring you good news that will cause great joy for all the people. What is the GOOD NEWS? Mat 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. This is the GOOD NEWS, the GOSPEL, we can't get to God so God comes to us.... in the form of Jesus who, as the Christ, will make a way to God for us!! Merry Christmas
  20. It makes me think of Adam being formed in Genesis 2...for a purpose?.... as opposed to the rest of man in Genesis 1 that were created.
  21. If what is written Gen 2:5 Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up, for the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth , there would be nothing but dry earth and water for an environment (Gen 1:10) nothing else had yet been created, pretty desolate and harsh for the man He had formed Unless..... Gen 2:8 .... the Lord God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed Putting this in the chronology where it is seems to indicate it should be, for one, explains how Adam took part in naming the animals. It also explains where satan and the fallen angels were. It's possible with this that satan and the fallen angels were outside the garden having their influence on mankind that was "created".... and satan eventually came into the garden to entice the man that was "formed". We do not know how long Adam and Eve were in the garden before the fall, obviously ADAM was from day 3 until after day 7. Eve must have arrived before Adam had his first son. It's possible the first son arrived shortly after leaving the garden. Seth was born when Adam was 130+ years old. In that time there could possibly be 7 generations born to mankind outside the garden. Think about this...scientists believe mankind originated in Africa, yet the garden was in the east (Gen 2:8) near Iraq(?). 130+ years would probably be enough time for mankind to spread that far and make wives available for Adams sons. This all fits without guessing. It comes together just by looking at what the text says about the timing of when "the man" was formed. Does anyone know of any study on this?
  22. I don't think this is a repeat of day 6 with added details because... Gen 1:11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day. This tells me that plant life was created on the third day Gen 2:5 Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up, This tells me that NO plant life was on the earth yet Gen 2:7 Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground This tells me that even when no plant life had yet appeared on the earth... the planet, God created a man, not man and woman, a man only. How did he survive with no plants or animals? Gen 2:8 the Lord God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed The garden is separate from the world and created prior to the rest of the created plants in Gen 1:11. Why?..God did not put mankind (the man and woman) of Gen 1:27 in the garden He created it to put the man in Gen 2:7 in the garden This appears to be a parallel story with distinctions between the two. One indication is how the man was formed in an intimate way in Ch 2 compared to created man and woman in Ch 1 just as the name for God is more intimate in Ch 2 than in Ch 1. The whole distinction seems to point to the "man" in the garden being set aside from "mankind" outside the garden for some reason.
  23. I've been giving this a lot of thought lately and am not finding any writing on this. There are 2 accounts of creation Gen 1 and Gen 2 with some significant differences (or so it seems). It seems obvious to me that the time line set out in Gen 2:5 Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up, indicates the story of Adam and Eve (Genesis 2:5 and on) actually STARTED before Gen 1: 11, it's like it should be an aside like; "by the way, this was done at this point" It indicates that Adam was created before the rest of Gen 1:11 and on. That would seem impossible... UNLESS... Gen 2:8...... Now the Lord God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed........ It sure looks like God intentionally took some time to set up this garden off to the side, almost like a green house away from the harsh outside environment....Then..... He continued from Gen 1:11 and on This would indicate that God had created Adam first, set him in this pre-created garden oasis while He created the rest of the world and then involved Adam as he created the animals. God then ....created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them Gen 1:27. The implications are rather profound, not only were there really two creations, one within the other, but when we look at the obvious differences such as how God is referred to, the lineage of the chosen (Israel) and separate people and where the wives of Adam and Eves children came from it becomes easier to understand how that is not only possible but logical. This idea is not adding to or changing the story, it is just bringing to light what the writing can be saying. I can't believe there are no writings on this. Has anyone heard of this or know where I can find something on it?
  24. Based on vs 5 above I would say Adam was created earlier than those in Ch 1 vs 27 who were created after everything else was created
×
×
  • Create New...