Posted on 12/14/2012 8:28:31 AM PST by DaveMSmith
Wrong analogy -- if you believe that God works as you do, then you cannot explain how Jesus says that "he will send the Holy Spirit" or how He would go to His Father" or How the Word was WITH God
This indicates distinction
Three ‘distinct persons’ I reject. The Father is the soul of Jesus Christ - the Holy Spirit is His Divine Proceeding or action. As He is infinite and omnipresent, there is no way to define things more. I worship Him and the Lord’s prayer makes perfect sense to me. Thy will be done!
Answered in the italics in #46. As for the rest, He was not yet Glorified. The Apostle’s Creed says how He rose. Jesus Christ is the Word made flesh - reading it and meditating on it put us in conjunction with Him - I believe it is the only way we have to do so.
Indeed This thread has been flagged as Cultic Swedenborgianism Spam. And documented to be so. For those missed the previous attempts to advertise this cult, which attempts resulted in it being exposed as such, see http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2962210/posts?page=70#70 and http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2962210/posts?page=86#86 and other posts
|
Very good and thanks for the ping. The OP confuses the Holy Spirit having a Divine attribute with being the Father, but as said and shown, what the Scriptures plainly collectively show is that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are all persons, plural, each possessing uniquely Divine attributes (which is one proof of their Deity) yet acting in response to the other: The Father sends the Son: "And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world. " (1 John 4:14) The Son does the will of the Father: "For I came down from heaven, not to do Mine own will, but the will of Him that sent Me. " (John 6:38) The Father sends the Spirit in response to the prayer of the Son: "And I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; " (John 14:16) The Father sends the Spirit: "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in My name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. " (John 14:26) The Spirit of truth says what Jesus gives Him: "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth: for He shall not speak of Himself; but whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak: and He will shew you things to come. " (John 16:13) Smith: We pray to the Lord alone, not to the Father in the name of the Son for the Holy Spirit to come to us -- that's crazy talk. That is ignorance or misconstruance of Scripture: "If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask Him? " (Luke 11:13) "And whatsoever ye shall ask in My name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it. " (John 14:13-14) Note here that as other verses state the Father is the one who does things, including sending the Spirit, yet He works through the Son (through whom all things were made: Jn. 1:1-3; Col. 2:16; Eph. 3:9; and Is. 44:24 states God did so by Himself, as being one God, and Job 33:4 states says “the Spirit of God hath made me”), and as the Father always hears the Son (Jn. 11:42) who always does His will, (Jn. 8:29) thus the Son can say that He will send the Spirit (Jn. 15:26) and will do anything that believers ask in His name (and He does, if prayer is not answered it was not truly in His name, which is not simply appending His name at the end of a petition, but consistent with His will and out of a right heart), "For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ, " (Philippians 1:19) |
A said and shown, some of the most perverse interpretations occur under sola ecclesia, that itself being one itself, that a person or office is supreme and possesses assured infallibility (perpetual or not), and thus the borg is more akin to the LDS and Rome.
By definition you reject the Trinity - with word games you try to redefine it into something it is not. You may reject the definition - that does not give you the right to redefine it and market it by the same term. That is deception.
And I note your colorful html rich posts who ping your ‘followers’ - and you call my posts ‘spam’? Look up boast in your Bible.
What our borg-buddy gets confused it what is refered to as the economy of the Trinity, basically how the Persons of the Trinity relate internally and externally. The economy does not negate the fact of the Three in Oneness of God, it clarifies God.
Speaking of word games, your screen name - isn’t that a violation of the 2nd Commandment?
Look up envy in your Bible
It is derived from Japanese word used. Careful about your accusations dave, the Holy Spirit will not tolerate being grieved.
Just asked if you considered it - you do not. Says volumes.
Just shows the degree of ignorance.
Gojira (ゴジラ?) is a portmanteau of the Japanese words: gorira (ゴリラ?, "gorilla"), and kujira (鯨（クジラ）?, "whale"), which is fitting because in one planning stage, Godzilla was described as "a cross between a gorilla and a whale",[3] alluding to his size, power and aquatic origin. A popular story is that "Gojira" was actually the nickname of a corpulent stagehand at Toho Studio.[4] The story has not been verified, however, and in the nearly sixty years since the film's original release, no one claiming to be the rumored employee has ever stepped forward and no photographs have ever surfaced. Kimi Honda (the widow of Ishiro Honda) always suspected that the man never existed as she mentioned in a 1998 interview that "the backstage boys at Toho loved to joke around with tall stories".[5] Godzilla's name was written in man'yōgana as Gojira (呉爾羅?), where the kanji are used for phonetic value and not for meaning. Many Japanese books on Godzilla have referenced this curious fact, including B Media Books Special: Gojira Gahô, published by Take-Shobo in three different editions (1993, 1998,[6] and 1999). The Japanese pronunciation of the name is [ɡodʑiɽa] ( listen); the Anglicized form is /ɡɒdˈzɪlə/, with the first syllable pronounced like the word "god", and the rest rhyming with "gorilla". When Godzilla was created (and Japanese-to-English transliteration was less familiar), it is likely that the kana representing the second syllable was misinterpreted[citation needed] as [dzi]; in the Hepburn romanization system, Godzilla's name would have been rendered as "Gojira", whereas in the Kunrei romanization system it would have been rendered as "Gozira".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godzilla
Unable to address a serious point - got it. Can't understand the simplicity of transliteration - got it. Have to try to mistate a fact - got it. Have to pass one's cultic beliefs off as "Christian" - got it.
My question still is unanswered: Where is there a definition of ‘personas’ that is used in your creeds that conforms to what Cronos said it does? If that cannot be provided, then those creeds that use that language are null and void.
Persona = Person in common language borgite. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not identical with one another nor separate from one another but simply three distinct persons (personae) of one substance (una substantia).
The Christian view of the Trinity is often described as a view of one God existing in three distinct hypostases/personae/persons. The Latin “persona” is not the same as the English “person” but is a broader term that includes the meaning of the English “persona.”
I am not going to waste my time further to provide definitions in greater detail. They can be found by a reasonable search of the internet in regards to their use in Trinitarian doctrine.
It is really stupid to think you can declare something null and void based upon your failure to do your own homework.
As I said, if these creeds can't handle the English language, then they are pointless and meaningless.
Spam is advertising, usually of a specific product, and while you are not the only one doing so, you are specifically promoting one church which claims to be the one true church and do so on a forum in which you likely are about the only actual member of the borg. Thus some of us consider it an abuse of a conservative forum.
And “while the most widely recognized form of spam is e-mail spam, the term is applied to similar abuses in other media.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spam_%28electronic%29
I may not be there as about half of it is missing, and it can mean fairly much anything they metaphorically want, contrary to the manner of doctrinal exegesis that upheld the core truths of the faith..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.