Lol, Rhino.

@Nuclearboy, I'm tempted to digress but I'll not. I admit that the idea of one as three is easier for me to swallow than three in one. Let me just ask in lieu of your analogy that, is it not conceivable that God might be a 'quadranity' or 'decinity' or even an 'infinity' as He might well have countless manifestations? Bear in mind that prior to Jesus' arrival on earth the idea of a trinity was not in existence as far as the Jewish people are concerned anyway. What evidence do we have that God's manifestations are strictly these three? (and one might say two for God, the father is hardly one of the manifestations). From your analogy, even though I concede that you drafted it on the spur of the moment and is not so admissible, makes it seem as though it is the manner in which God chooses to communicate with us that is the trinity. Is this correct?

Reading back, someone, I think Noetic, said scripture has always pointed to the existence of this trinity. I don't know if that's true but if it seems as though, I'm pretty sure the people of those times never interpreted it that way. Someone also said Jesus was in essence the Yahweh of old. Ah, many so called "sophisticated Christians" will sharply disagree with that.

nuclearboy:

The question here, is what is Trinity? In a discussion between myself and Viaro long ago, it came out that there exists 2 definitions - [1] 3 persons in the GodHead which is accepted as Trinity [2] 1 God showing Himself as 3 which is "Tri" ethism/whatever (I no hear english this night)

I believe in [2]. There is only one God but just as Enigma has very cleverly asked above (seemingly without anyone noticing), who ever saw God the Father to know He is "Sentient" and who also then, did see the HS and decide He too, is Sentient. Jesus is what we have all seen. What I have said before on this forum is the following. . .

^Of similar opinion. My view is that the "Trinity" concept is a Greek philosophical construct which men fashioned as they tried to formulate in intellectual terms the nature of God. While correct in some aspects, it nonetheless introduces errors that have constituted a stumbling block to many especially the Muslims. For myself I find that the best approach is to discuss it using only what the Bible actually says: Jesus is God and so is the Holy Spirit.
An example of the pitfalls inherent in using extra-biblical representations may be seen on this thread opened by Jesoul where it was discussed awhile back.

^^^^ Exactly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Human "descriptions", "representations"  or "depictions" rarely if ever work! We all (at least we Christians) recognise that we cannot fully encapsulate God --- thus in a way the less said the better. We can only confine ourselves to that much that is revealed in Scripture and confirmed to our own individual spirit (the experiential element) by the Holy Spirit. This much is revealed in Scripture:

a. the Father is God
b. Jesus Christ is God
c. the Holy Spirit is God

We will be on strong and surer ground if we confine ourselves within the boundaries of revelation. Whenever we go beyond that we are always likely to fall short or to stray. In fact, that is what is at the heart of the debates from the very beginning (i.e. pre Nicene/Athanasian creeds) (a) understanding what is revealed and (b) going beyond or even falling short of what is revealed because of trying to fit revelation within the very finite limits of human conceptions and perceptions.

^^^Hmmmn, whilst a commendable attitude, isn't this also akin to being dogmatic?

The Holy Spirit is not a being. Its not something that will just come out of nowhere in a church service or mosque and make you shake around and "speak in tongues". Having the holy spirirt simply means that youve refrained from doing evil and everything that is against the command of God.Once youve done that and which is following Gods command/word your spirit is now clean and holy. Thats what holy spirit means. dont let others fool you.

Also, if you actually take time and read the Bible instead of flipping it open once in a while and just picking any verse and start reading it, you would understand that there were jews from different land and each had their own language(native tongue). Some traveled to a place outside of their land and could speak the language of the people whos land they were going to along with their own language. In the other land they often met people from home and became close with them.whenever people from the land that they were in were plotting against one of them then they would speak in there own tongue(language) so that the plotters/devils couldnt hear/understand what they were saying. That is what speaking in tongues means. All of that nonsense that people in the church do is not real. They may make themselves believe that they were speaking in "tongues" but its all nonsense. READ YOUR BIBLE!

It is very simple, the Holy Spirit is God. I still wonder why people do not know God to this much. Maybe people get confused because of it divers application in the bible. But the bible says"it is the same spirit that works all in all"

Originally, they have the concept of God. Every religious mind have the concept of God but they would not worship him as God because they were not satisfied because they could not see him. So they began to imagine the idea of what God was like. By thinking so their minds were darkened and they started building images to represent God. Romans 1:21

@enigma
Given your submission above, are you not contraditing yourself? Cause it is clear to all that the trinity concept is extra biblical and it was introduced by the early catholic church centuries after the apostles had passed on. Is the trinity doctrine also not men using extra biblical intution to make the bible what it is not saying to suit some people's opinion of who God is? Is there not enough overwhelming evidence in the bible that makes it obvious that the man made trinity doctrine simply can't be true?

@kunleoshob

Instead of making foolish allegations that you have not thought through why not outline the contradiction that you allege? Here are three questions for you:

Does the Bible say the Father is God or not?

Does the Bible say Jesus is God or not?

Does the Bible say the Holy Spirit is God or not?

^^^ Kunle will avoid those questions!

@vescucci:

I did not make them up on the spur of the moment. I've been saying the same since I came to NL and thats awhile now.

And yes, my analogy does support what you are trying to posit - vis that God could manifest as a quandary  or even an infinity. In practise, I believe He does just that seeing as most of us cannot handle "total" truth. Manifesting in a manner that keeps you in your comfort zone would likely allow you find it easier to be corrected, guided, led into truth etc.

However, for the purposes of the Bible, there are three manifestations that stand out. Where I think confusion comes in is that most forget the Bible has been around only for a few hundred years. Such as Abel, Noah, Moses, Elijah to state a few, never had recourse to it yet had faith, truth and the Spirit of God. They heard His voice and recognised Him. It is for simplicity's sake that we separate God and say 3 or 7 or infinity. In reality, there is but one God and He is all-encompassing thus His being here as Jesus did not stop Him being someplace else in another form/manifestation. It also didn't reduce His Glory.

All "Deists" keep saying God can do anything but most are liars who mouth the words but do not believe what they say. Elementary thought brings one question to mind. Vescucci, does God have the right to decide (out of love and for your sake) to be a small beautiful bird whose chirps make you smile one day when you are feeling low? Or a tiny chipmunk who's gymnastics brightens your day? Or is He restricted to being a "terrible", "overbearing" God whose voice kills? Pray, who would be the party restricting Him? If the first 2 are possible, would it mean that any hunter that shoots and hits the bird/chipmunk has killed God? Would you then not realise that basically God is to be found in all of creation since we model His existence albeit in limited forms?

Your answer, please, to the bolded?

The answer to the above shows the asinineness of sensual/feeling based theories on Jesus.

@enigma
I take except to the term "foolish" which you used in addressing my queries, this is supposed to be a mature discuss and you don't need to resort to abuse just becos someone exposes deep flaws and contradictions in your hypothesis. In answering your questions, this is what the bible says:

>That the father is God.
>That Jesus is his only begotten son.
>That the holy spirit is the spirit of God which can be interpreted to mean a spirit of Godliness. Now where in the bible is it stated that these three entities are the same being even though the bible makes it clear they have similar attributes. Jesus said in clear terms that the father is greater than he is and that he is subject to the will of the Father, I don't why supposed christians would try and make Jesus what he or the bible NEVER claimed him to be.

^^^
Your aversion for the RCC is turning you into a "joagbaje" who chooses what he likes and discards the truth. You're no longer the same man

"And He will be called Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlssting Father, Prince of Peace" Is 9:6a. From String's Hebrew Dictionary, we get Mighty God defined as "Shortened from H352; strength; as adjective mighty; especially the Almighty (but used also of any deity): - God (god), X goodly, X great, idol, might (-y one)".

So yes, Kunle, the Bible calls Jesus God. On your assertion that He said the Father was greater than Him, look above at the question I asked Vescucci and tell me if God was not the bird yet wouldn't get killed by a gunshot. And if Father requested the bird to fly, wouldn't All you do with these legalistic arguments is handcuff God into your preferred mold.

And if the father requested the bird to take off, wouldn't it? Would it then be receiving orders from itself?

You're usually more calm than this. without the ID, I'd say it was nopugeater or joagbaje posting the above

The Holy Spirit is a Cosmic force, while referred to as He (clearly for comprehension reasons) the Holy-spirit is an expression of the Power-Cosmic, the same elements that Galactus draws his seemingly infinite powers from. Other Inter-galactic beings are imbued with and , okay. i know, getta outta here . I am gone, sorry

nuclearboy:

The question here, is what is Trinity? In a discussion between myself and Viaro long ago, it came out that there exists 2 definitions - [1] 3 persons in the GodHead which is accepted as Trinity [2] 1 God showing Himself as 3 which is "Tri" ethism/whatever (I no hear english this night)

Actually Tri theism refers to three deities and not one deity showing himself as three.

Enigma:

^^^^ Exactly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Human "descriptions", "representations"  or "depictions" rarely if ever work! We all (at least we Christians) recognise that we cannot fully encapsulate God --- thus in a way the less said the better. We can only confine ourselves to that much that is revealed in Scripture and confirmed to our own individual spirit (the experiential element) by the Holy Spirit. This much is revealed in Scripture:

a. the Father is God
b. Jesus Christ is God
c. the Holy Spirit is God

We will be on strong and surer ground if we confine ourselves within the boundaries of revelation. Whenever we go beyond that we are always likely to fall short or to stray. In fact, that is what is at the heart of the debates from the very beginning (i.e. pre Nicene/Athanasian creeds) (a) understanding what is revealed and (b) going beyond or even falling short of what is revealed because of trying to fit revelation within the very finite limits of human conceptions and perceptions.

I would have loved to comment that this post suffers an internal inconsistency, however I recall that you are yet to grant me permission to discuss with your esteemed self, so I reserve my comments and await the permission, if it will ever come.

Enigma:

@kunleoshob

Instead of making foolish allegations

Permit me to say that this is rather heavy handed. The gentlemen merely stated his view in very civil terms and did not insult you.

chyz:

The Holy Spirit is not a being. Its not something that will just come out of nowhere in a church service or mosque and make you shake around and "speak in tongues". Having the holy spirirt simply means that youve refrained from doing evil and everything that is against the command of God.Once youve done that and which is following Gods command/word your spirit is now clean and holy. Thats what holy spirit means. dont let others fool you.

Also, if you actually take time and read the Bible instead of flipping it open once in a while and just picking any verse and start reading it, you would understand that there were jews from different land and each had their own language(native tongue). Some traveled to a place outside of their land and could speak the language of the people whos land they were going to along with their own language. In the other land they often met people from home and became close with them.whenever people from the land that they were in were plotting against one of them then they would speak in there own tongue(language) so that the plotters/devils couldnt hear/understand what they were saying. That is what speaking in tongues means. All of that nonsense that people in the church do is not real. They may make themselves believe that they were speaking in "tongues" but its all nonsense. READ YOUR BIBLE!

Thank you for this brilliant post.

nuclearboy:

^^^
Your aversion for the RCC is turning you into a "joagbaje" who chooses what he likes and discards the truth. You're no longer the same man

"And He will be called Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlssting Father, Prince of Peace" Is 9:6a. From String's Hebrew Dictionary, we get Mighty God defined as "Shortened from H352; strength; as adjective mighty; especially the Almighty (but used also of any deity): - God (god), X goodly, X great, idol, might (-y one)".

So yes, Kunle, the Bible calls Jesus God.

On Isaiah – NOTICE that he says that the child born will be called “Mighty God” and “Everlasting Father”. I ask you – is Jesus the Father? No – he is the son, and he made it very clear that he is not the Father in several statements -

“The father is greater than I” – John 14:28 and -

“Of that day no one knows, not the angels, nor the son, but only the Father”. Mark 13:32.

This point is also made clear in a multitude of scripture including Mark 10:18; Jn 17:3; 1 Pet 1:3; Acts 2:22; Luke 22:42.

THEREFORE it is clear that when Isaiah calls him “Everlasting Father”, it is meant in a representative fashion: to wit – He represents the Father. Thus “Mighty God” must be understood in the same way: he represents God. This is clear because you cannot deny that Jesus is not the father. That much he himself made clear in the two quotes above. So Isaiah’s statement is representative. Please read the Bible with a compound approach.

Just as an aside it might also interest you to note that the word translated as ''Mighty God in Isaiah is El Berith.  El Berith is also a canaanite diety.

At all events I did not intend this to be another trinity-bashing thread: we have had enough of that already. Let's focus on the nature of the Holy Spirit.

KunleOshob:

@enigma
I take except to the term "foolish" which you used in addressing my queries, this is supposed to be a mature discuss and you don't need to resort to abuse just becos someone exposes deep flaws and contradictions in your hypothesis.

If you make an allegation that someone is self contradictory without providing proof of the alleged contradiction, then I think it is reasonable if the person calls your allegation foolish. If you can dish it then you should expect to receive it. I put it to you that in the few discussions I've had with you on this Trinity issue, you always start to get abusive even when I had been deliberately cautious to be polite to you. You can go and check the thread For Trinity Sunday for example.  EDITED

KunleOshob:

In answering your questions, this is what the bible says:

>That the father is God.
>That Jesus is his only begotten son.
>That the holy spirit is the spirit of God which can be interpreted to mean a spirit of Godliness. Now where in the bible is it stated that these three entities are the same being even though the bible makes it clear they have similar attributes. Jesus said in clear terms that the father is greater than he is and that he is subject to the will of the Father, I don't why supposed christians would try and make Jesus what he or the bible NEVER claimed him to be.

Well, the Bible teaches that (a) the Father is God, (b) Jesus is God, and (c) the Holy Spirit is God. If you disagree and think that the Bible doesn't teach any of these, that is perfectly fine by me (edited). It is nothing new; you won't be the first and you won't be the last. Go and read up on things like Arianism, Modalism, Sabellianism etc etc.

The Holy Spirit is not a person.

Rather than describing the Holy Spirit as a distinct person or entity, the Bible most often refers to it as and connects it with God's divine power (Zechariah 4:6; Micah 3:. Jewish scholars, examining the references to it in the Old Testament Scriptures, have never defined the Holy Spirit as anything but the power of God.

In the New Testament, Paul referred to it as the spirit of power, love and a sound mind (2 Timothy 1:7). Informing Mary that Jesus would be supernaturally conceived in her womb, an angel told her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you , ," and he defined this as "the power of the Highest," which "will overshadow you" (Luke 1:35).

Jesus began His ministry "in the power of the Spirit" (Luke 4:14). He told His followers, "You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you" (Acts 1:.

Peter relates that "God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power" (Acts 10:38). This was the same power that enabled Christ to perform many mighty miracles during His ministry. Likewise, Jesus worked through the apostle Paul "in mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God" (Romans 15:19).

The Holy Spirit is the very nature, presence and expression of God's power actively working in His servants (2 Peter 1:4; Galatians 2:20). Indeed, it is through His Spirit that God is able to be present everywhere at once throughout the universe and affect it at will (Psalm 139:7-10).

Again and again the Scriptures depict the Holy Spirit as the power of God. Furthermore, it is also shown to be the mind of God and the very essence and life force through which the Father begets human beings as His spiritual children. The Holy Spirit is not God, but is rather a vital aspect of God—the divine substance of the Father and Christ as well as the agency through which They work.


Impersonal attributes of the Holy Spirit

The Holy Spirit is spoken of in many ways that demonstrate that it is not a divine person. For example, it is referred to as a gift (Acts 10:45; 1 Timothy 4:14). We are told that the Holy Spirit can be quenched (1 Thessalonians 5:19), that it can be poured out (Acts 2:17, 33), and that we are baptized with it (Matthew 3:11).

People can drink of it (John 7:37-39), partake of it (Hebrews 6:4) and be filled with it (Acts 2:4; Ephesians 5:18). The Holy Spirit also renews us (Titus 3:5) and must be stirred up within us (2 Timothy 1:6). These impersonal characteristics are certainly not attributes of a person.

It is also called "the Holy Spirit of promise," "the guarantee of our inheritance" and "the spirit of wisdom and revelation" (Ephesians 1:13-14, 17).

In contrast to God the Father and Jesus Christ, who are consistently compared to human beings in Their form and shape, the Holy Spirit is consistently represented, by various symbols and manifestations, in a completely different manner—such as wind (Acts 2:2), fire (verse 3), water (John 4:14; 7:37-39), oil (Psalm 45:7; compare Acts 10:38; Matthew 25:1-10), a dove (Matthew 3:16) and an "earnest," or down payment, on eternal life (2 Corinthians 1:22; 5:5; Ephesians 1:13-14, KJV). These depictions are difficult to understand, to say the least, if the Holy Spirit is a person.

In Matthew 1:20 we find further evidence that the Holy Spirit is not a distinct entity, but God's divine power. Here we read that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit. However, Jesus continually prayed to and addressed God the Father as His Father and not the Holy Spirit (Matthew 10:32-33; 11:25-27; 12:50). He never represented the Holy Spirit as His Father. Clearly, the Holy Spirit was the agency or power through which the Father begot Jesus as His Son.

Culled from Beyond-Today Booklets

KunleOshob:

. . . Cause it is clear to all that the trinity concept is extra biblical and it was introduced by the early catholic church centuries after the apostles had passed on. . . .

nuclearboy:

^^^
Your aversion for the RCC is turning you into a "joagbaje" who chooses what he likes and discards the truth. . . .

Now here is a thing. It seems that people tend to confuse the c[/i]atholic Church with the [i]C[/i]atholic Church or Roman Catholic Church (RCC). The [i]c[/i]atholic Church simply means the universal church. It is the universal Church (granted with dissentients) that formulated the Trinity doctrine and not the [i]C[/i]atholic or Roman Catholic Church. (EDITED See further this thread: https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-497445.0.html#msg6576034 )


Second, it seems to me that people making allegations against the early Church Fathers who formulated the Trinity doctrine are not fully aware of the circumstances in which the Trinity doctrine emerged. It seems there is a sort of ignorance/insufficient awareness of or insufficient credit for the fact that the formulation of the Trinity doctrine was an enforced necessity in view of the fact that the Church Fathers faced various teachings that were considered wrong, heterodox or heretical. There seems to be this unfair suggestion of out and out caprice on the part of the Church Fathers who formulated the Trinity doctrine.

Third, it is wrong to suggest that the Trinity doctrine is purely one of intuition or that it is extra-biblical especially if on the rather flimsy basis that the word Trinity is not mentioned in the Bible or even on the relatively more solid claim that the doctrine of the Trinity is not [i]explicit in the Bible. If one believes that there is One God and the Bible teaches that the Father is God, Jesus is God and the Holy Spirit is God, I would like to see what better doctrine than the Trinity one can come up with.

Fourth, I'm not aware that the Trinitarians here have been claiming that the Trinity doctrine fully encapsulates God; even I will be willing to countenance a suggestion that the Trinity doctrine is not perfect. But again, has there ever been any doctrine on the relationship of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit that is better than the Trinity? In my view, all of Arianism, Modalism, Sabellianism, Docetism etc are inferior to the doctrine of the Trinity. Let alone talking of things like Tri-theism or Oneness of infinity.  

Finally, it is such a pity that the Church has become fragmented and divided on many issues. God gave the Church and ordinarily we should believe that the Holy Spirit is guiding the Church. For this reason we can sing this verse from a personally much beloved Trinitarian hymn:

And I hold in veneration
For the love of Him alone
Holy Church as His creation
and her teachings as His own

Taken from Firmly I Believe and Truly

Deep Sight:

I would have loved to comment that this post suffers an internal inconsistency, however I recall that you are yet to grant me permission to discuss with your esteemed self, so I reserve my comments and await the permission, if it will ever come.
“Of that day no one knows, not the angels, nor the son, but only the Father”. Mark 13:32.

Surely, you can post any comment you like; I cannot stop you though it would be my choice whether to respond or not. You started the thread anyway.

One reason why I may not bother to respond is that I raised a more fundamental issue earlier on to which patently there has been no response i.e. Is God the Father a personal OR sentient being?

EDITED Whether or not I respond further, this thread fails if you are unable to prove that the Holy Spirit is not sentient as well as proving that He is not personal.

Furthermore the thread still fails if you are unable to prove that God the Father is both personal and sentient.

The Holy Spirit is frequently referred to by metaphor and symbol, both doctrinally and biblically. Theologically speaking these symbols are a key to understanding of the Holy Spirit and his actions, and are not mere artistic representations.

Water - signifies the Holy Spirit's action in Baptism, such that in the manner that "by one Spirit [believers] were all baptized", so they are "made to drink of one Spirit".[1Cor 12:13] Thus the Spirit is also personally the living water welling up from Christ crucified[Jn 19:34] [1 Jn 5:8] as its source and welling up in Christians to eternal life.

Anointing - The symbolism of anointing with oil also signifies the Holy Spirit, to the point of becoming a synonym for the Holy Spirit. The coming of the Spirit is referred to as his "anointing".[2Cor 1:21] In some denominations anointing is practiced in Confirmation; ("chrismation" in the Eastern Churches). Its full force can be grasped only in relation to the primary anointing accomplished by the Holy Spirit, that of Jesus. Christ (in Hebrew, messiah) means the one "anointed" by God's Spirit.

Fire - symbolizes the transforming energy of the Holy Spirit's actions. In the form of tongues "as of fire", the Holy Spirit rested on the disciples on the morning of Pentecost.

Cloud and light - The Spirit comes upon the Virgin Mary and "overshadows" her, so that she might conceive and give birth to Jesus. On the mountain of transfiguration, the Spirit in the "cloud came and overshadowed" Jesus, Moses and Elijah, Peter, James and John, and "a voice came out of the cloud, saying, 'This is my Son, my Chosen; listen to him!'"[Lk 9:34-35]

The dove. When Christ comes up from the water of his baptism, the Holy Spirit, in the form of a dove, comes down upon him and remains with him.[Mt 3:16]

Wind The Spirit is likened to the "wind that blows where it will,"[Jn 3:8] and described as "a sound from heaven like the rush of a mighty wind."[Acts 2:24]

Culled from Wikipedia.org/wiki/holy_spirit

Enigma:

One reason why i may not bother to respond is that i raised a more fundamental issue earlier own to which patently there has been no response i.e. Is God the Father a personat OR sentient being?

I may respond to this in two ways. Scripturally and philosophically.

The scriptural response is that which is apt for this thread: for in the OP i have referred to the scriptural ontology of the Holy Spirit. The simple response to your question in scriptural terms is that God, from the very first chapter of genesis through his interaction with the nation of Israel in the Old Testament, and right up to his Judgment and desciption in revelation is emphatically decribed and conveyed as very personal indeed, and not just sentient, but omniscient. I am sure that I do not need to start with the analysis of the creation account, God resting on the sixth day, his walking in the garden and talking with Adam and Eve, the accounts of his special relationship with Moses and ISRAEL, his discourses and special relationship with Abraham, his selection of prophets and messages dictated to such prophets, the account of his discussion with the satan as contained in the Book of Job, HIS sitting on the Throne in Revelation. . .amongst a trillion other personal references in the Bible to God the Father as being a personal being. In addittion to all these he is also described as being very emotional. . .he feels jealousy, anger, regret, love - all of these undeniably render the biblical ontology of God as being a very personal being.

In view of the foregoing, your question is clearly answered: and I am mildly surprised that you would ask it in the first place, as the Bible presents God emphatically as being a personal being.

If I were to give you a philosophical answer, however, I might very carefully say that God may not be personal at all: but finds its personal expression in created beings.

^^^ I'm sorry you would have to do much much better; here is a little clue: the Holy Spirit teaches; the Holy Spirit comforts; the Holy Spirit can be grieved.

Try again.

Enigma:


EDITED Whether or not I respond further, this thread fails if you are unable to prove that the Holy Spirit is not sentient as well as proving that He is not personal.

See Posts No 79 & 82 above.

Furthermore the thread still fails if you are unable to prove that God the Father is both personal and sentient.

See post above. The biblical ontology of the father is emphatically personal and sentient. You cannot reasonably deny that.

I need to point out to you that there is no such thing as success or failure for this thread. In the OP i did not mention proving anything. I simply asked a question and we are discussing the question. I wonder why all the bitterness at the simple fact that a question is asked?

What I find extremely sad and disgusting is the tendency for ''christians'' to miss the whole point in itself of christianity and rather focus and expend energy on bickering like pregnant earthworms about inanities like ''doctrine''.

What does it really matter if god has 3 or 25 heads or the holy spirit is a goat or person Shouldnt your entire living and existence be about living a life of christ and preparing for the glorious return of the bride and rapture of the church

You clowns have totally lost the plot and your chaotic conduct just shows religion for what it really is, Shame on you all.

Deep Sight:

. . . .
See post above. The biblical ontology of the father is emphatically personal and sentient. You cannot reasonably deny that.

No, sorry I don't see where you have so far shown that the Father is sentient; rather, it seems to me that you are conflating personal and sentient.

Try again.

Deep Sight:

I need to point out to you that there is no such thing as success or failure for this thread. In the OP i did not mention proving anything. I simply asked a question and we are discussion the question. I wonder why all the bitterness at the simple fact that a question is asked?

I'm afraid I do not see any bitterness on my part; what I see is myself challenging ideas.

Enigma:

^^^ I'm sorry you would have to do much much better; here is a little clue: the Holy Spirit teaches; the Holy Spirit comforts; the Holy Spirit can be grieved.

Try again.

It is not fair for you to deliberately skim over the pointers I referred to. God the Father is undeniably presented as both personal and sentient in the bible -

1. He rests on the seventh day after his work of creation.

2. He visits the garden of Eden and discusses with Adam and Eve

3. He has debates with the satan. See the Book of Job. Perhaps you wish to show me the Holy Spirit doing such?

4. He has a personal relationship with individuals such as Moses and Abraham.

5. He sits on a throne.

6. He gets jealous and angry.

7. He experiences regret.

And many more. Now you cannot reasonably insist that the biblical ontology of the father is impersonal or non-sentient. No non-sentient being could do and say all that the Father is said to have done and said! That would be absurd.

Enigma:


No, sorry I don't see where you have so far shown that the Father is sentient; rather, it seems to me that you are conflating personal and sentient.

Enigma - do you seriously assert to me that the Father as conveyed throughout the OT is not obviously, emphatically and undeniably sentient? ? ?

How does a non-sentient being talk, wage war, demand worship, feel jealousy, engage in debates. . .Are you serious on this point?

Deep Sight:

Enigma - do you seriously assert to me that the Father as conveyed throughout the OT is not obviously, emphatically and undeniably sentient? ? ?

How does a non-sentient being talk, wage war, demand worship, feel jealousy, engage in debates. . .Are you serious on this point?

Nope

@ post no 88

And the Holy Spirit teaching, comforting, being grieved?

He who asserts must prove.

Your primary task: prove that the Holy Spirit is (a) not personal and (b) not sentient. Until I see anything approaching such proof, I'm not sure there is much I need to say further. Lawyers call it "no case submission"!

Secondly, prove that the Father is sentient ----- not just personal! If you can prove that, then compare your proof of it with whether the holy Spirit is also sentient.

Deep Sight:

Enigma - do you seriously assert to me that the Father as conveyed throughout the OT is not obviously, emphatically and undeniably sentient? ? ?

How does a non-sentient being talk, wage war, demand worship, feel jealousy, engage in debates. . .Are you serious on this point?

Unfortunately, you are missing the point.  

^^^ You are still asking for proof that the Father is conveyed within the Bible as sentient? ? ?

I can only ask you to pick up the Book of Job and read it through.

Enigma:

@ post no 88

And the Holy Spirit teaching, comforting, being grieved?

1. Teaching - The Holy Spirit is not recorded to teach anybody in words - by preaching in words as Jesus did - or as the Father did in the OT. The teachings of the Holy Spirit are spiritual unctions of love which emanate within the spirit. You cannot show me a place where the Holy Spirit is quoted as saying for instance - "Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth."

2. Comforting - Again you will not see the Holy Spirit cuddling a person and massaging his frayed nerves. The comfort of the Spirit is the assurance of God's spiritiual grace and protection.

3. Grieving - You will not see the Holy Spirit grieving as Jesus is depicted to grieve in Gethsemane, for instance. The spirit is at odds with an evil thing and this may metaphoricallyt be described as grief.

Now nowhere will you see the Holy Spirit being said to do any of the definitely personal things I mentioned, and which you skimmed over, such as -

- sitting on a throne

- engaging the devil in a debate

- strolling through a garden searching for Adam.

All of which the Father is said to do: which closes the shop on your argument that the Father cannot be shown to be sentient either if the Holy Spirit is not so.

Sorry, don't mean to be rude but you still really haven't got my point.

BTW who did the Father "cuddle"? We at least know various people that the Holy Spirit "cuddled" --- and I will not tell you who! Perhaps if you research that you will start to get my point?

^^^ Enigma. . .the Father is recorded as phsyically wrestling one of his prophets in the OT!

I am not missing your point: correct me if I am wrong, but what you are trying to convey is that the very qualities which render the Father sentient are the same qualities that the Holy Spirit posesses and thus this shows the HS to be personal and sentient just as the father is.

This cannot be the case as I have already articulated above and cannot articulate again: the HS is not to be seen preaching in words, strolling in gardens, debating devils, or wrestling prophets. The ontology of the father is thus markedly different from that of the HS.