The Holy Trinity

[patricia1]

When someone gets healed, and another for whatever reason states " Thats not of God!!" Then who is the author of that healing? They indirectly are saying that it is of the devil? Lets get down to the nitty gritty. No one can heal except God.

A person accused Jesus of casting out devils as haveing satanic authorship. That is Blaspheme of the Holy Spirit right there! Jesus answered that satan cannot cast out satan.

The resistance to the Holy Spirit, rejection is grieving the Holy Spirit.

two different things coming from to different kinds of hearts. One heart is accusatory. The other heart is hardened.

In Mark what Jesus was saying is that those whom refused to understand, Literally rejecting of the truth which was Him and what He came into this world to do were hopeless.

That is griveing the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit a extention of the God as person, cries. Just as jesus and God would cry over losing a soul.

Speaking against The precious Spirit of the living God gets God angry. The very person who is our helper, the very person who brings us into truth, the very person who illuminates our minds, who intercedes for what we need, who is the hand of God moving in us and through us who has nothing but healings and deliverance for us would be accused of being satan...God help that one!!

If I said God is a women---thats blaspheme

if i said God had no feminine qualities that is blaspheme.

If i brought God down to my level thats blaspheme it is devalueing and defaming who He is.

In Job 2:9 His wife tells Job to curse God and die. Job did not sin with his lips.

The hebrew word used for sin here is not only to breach his relationship it also meant to miss the mark or tarfet so to speak. To blame God. To blame God for what is happening in his life would be slander.

That is the result of cursing God.

Matt. 12: 22-32 is are scriptures that discuss Christs miracles attributed to satan. What people miss as they read this word is the Fact Jesus even being the son of our God had the Holy Spirit within Him as well.

One sees the trinity come together all the time and the three personages of Jesus the day John baptised Him in the water.

[patricia1]

yoo hoo???

[Guest shiloh357]

Actually, IMO, the Holy Spirit isn't an actual being. It is the unity and one-ness that God and Christ share. It is, in layman's terms, the power of God. And Christ and God are two separate beings, one family.

This is wrong. The Bible ALWAYS refers to the Holy Spirit as person and a "being." The Holy Spirit can be grieved and lied to. He can be communed with and is also called a comforter and a teacher. The Holy Spirit is referred to as omnipresent in Psalm 139:7-10. He is said to lead us to Christ. In Roman 8:27, he is said to have a mind, and He is called God in 1 Corinthians 6:19. The Holy Spirit can speak according to Acts 1:16. Those are just a few examples, but I could list several more. The Holy Spirit fits the description of an actual being or person.

The Holy Spirit is NEVER refer to as an "it" or an impersonal force like "the power of God."

You need to have a more biblical based understanding of the Holy Spirit.

With all due respect, Shiloh, my understanding is biblical. The power of God can comfort and teach. When we have the Holy Spirit within us, it can be lied to.

With all due respect your understanding is unbiblical and borders on heresy in the literal sense of the word. The Holy Spirit in the Bible is ALWAYS referred to with the personal pronoun "HE." You do not have the biblcal evidence to support your position that the Holy Spirit is not a being.

Furthermore, to say that in personal force can be lied to, grieved, give comfort or teach is a rather embarrassing and childish stretch of logic. You might as well say that you can grieve, or be taught by a chair or table. I am sorry, but that is just unsubstantiated, nonsense.

Your position is less than irrational and requires one to leave their mind at the door.

[Richard_yaash]

With all due respect your understanding is unbiblical and borders on heresy in the literal sense of the word. The Holy Spirit in the Bible is ALWAYS referred to with the personal pronoun "HE." You do not have the biblcal evidence to support your position that the Holy Spirit is not a being.

If I may interject something here: May we define exactly which pronouns are in use/being refered unto here. Are we simply referring to autos [G846] alone? Or is 'ho; he; to' involved in this?

I wouldn't mind taking a brief look into this. Regardless though, the Holy Spirit will always be refered unto in a masculine form, so yes, I agree with you Shiloh.

My point in this: Is this merely a matter over a choice of 'pronoun' and therefore not really that much of an issue, or does it go deeper.

Furthermore, to say that in personal force can be lied to, grieved, give comfort or teach is a rather embarrassing and childish stretch of logic. You might as well say that you can grieve, or be taught by a chair or table. I am sorry, but that is just unsubstantiated, nonsense.

Having studied the various concepts [ie trinity/oneness/other], I can understand where Jenwat is coming from as well as her position.

[Guest shiloh357]

QUOTE (shiloh357)

Furthermore, to say that in personal force can be lied to, grieved, give comfort or teach is a rather embarrassing and childish stretch of logic. You might as well say that you can grieve, or be taught by a chair or table. I am sorry, but that is just unsubstantiated, nonsense.

Having studied the various concepts [ie trinity/oneness/other], I can understand where Jenwat is coming from as well as her position.

An impersonal "force" is inanimate. It is incapable of possessing personality, emotions, intellect, etc. I'm sorry, but I am not going to sacrfice my intellect and pretend that such nonsense contains intellectual or biblical value, when it clearly does not.

I understand that you are trying to be diplomatic, but there comes a point when a line has to be drawn when it comes to false doctrine, especially when it flies in the face of what is clear biblical teaching.

[Richard_yaash]

An impersonal "force" is inanimate. It is incapable of possessing personality, emotions, intellect, etc.

Your position understood. My apologies, for I was not reading it in that manner [ie impersonal force].