Doctor REALITY

Little Rock, AR

#468096 Nov 22, 2012
Serah wrote:
<quoted text>And Happy Thanksgiving to you too Doc :)
Thanks!!! You too,Serah!!

“Become Love!”

Since: Jan 09

Nowhere/Now here

#468097 Nov 22, 2012
LAWEST100 wrote:
Lets see if I can help clear this up, to began with I am afraid that you are misreading me if you think that I stated somewhere that I believe in a "trinity", not in the least
But, isn't the doctrine of the "trinity" based on the belief that "God" is only one entity, but revealed in three distinct positions? Isn't this what you believe?
LAWEST100 wrote:
and not in two Gods as well,
If Father is called "God," and our anointed Savior is called "God," then wouldn't this explain why Father is called "God of gods" at such verses as Deuteronomy 10:17?
LAWEST100 wrote:
but it is best to quote and print scripture directly as it is read in the Word, although I understand what you are trying to do here but that always run the risk of putting a stumberling block in the way of someone who may be less enlightened in the mystery of the Godhead so again..........lets lrint tbe quotes directly as the bible reads it word for word.
No offense intended and I apologize, but I only substitute the terms used with terms that share the exact definition.
LAWEST100 wrote:
And yes those events in the scriptures that you posted does pertain to a future event,
But, what say you regarding the "implication" that our anointed Savior is and going to remain subject to Father in those verses? How is this possible?
LAWEST100 wrote:
but remember the Word lets us know that Jesus is now at this time the Word that IS God of which he was in the beginning and not the son at this time as we speak as that which was son is who will come back and rapture the church away, later set up his kingdom upon the earth and deliver it up to God the father, you see this is a great mystery of which many cannot see or understand without that spiritual boost from God himself to open up their understanding just as Jesus did for his Apostles so that they could understand the scriptures with a true meaning of it's contents, and so without this being done I can see where the scriptures may seem as if in some regards it is speaking of at two maybe three seperate entities but believe me..........there is only ONE God, ephesians 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism and it goes on to say ONE God and Father of all.
From Acts on, our anointed Savior was referred to as "God's" Son more than 60 times. My point is, our anointed Savior had already ascended by this time. Why did the authors of our "New Testament" still refer to our anointed Savior as "God's" Son if he no longer serves as His Son?
LAWEST100 wrote:
And so there there is only one God who sits upon the throne in heaven, and again the son Jesus is currently again the Word who was with and who IS God of whom was once made flesh and blood and walked the earth for 33 and a half years is whom will come back and deliver up the kingdom to the father, does this clear anything up my brother?
Not really, my Brother. And I apologize. I am trying. Consider the following, please and if you will.

John 17:5
And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

How is this possible, that our anointed Savior, first, asked to be glorified by Father and had glory with Father while he, according to you, was Father?

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Isn't it possible that the "God" in the center portion of this verse is different from the "God" in the latter portion, explaining why our Father is called "God of gods" at such verses as Deuteronomy 10:17?

John 17:3
And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

Was our anointed Savior speaking to himself?

1Corinthians 8:6
But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

What's the significance of the terms "of" and "by?"

“Jesus is coming soon”

Since: Nov 09

Location hidden

#468098 Nov 22, 2012
Serah wrote:
<quoted text>Hey BLL, I give some scriptures much thought, as I suppose many of us do, but Genesis 4:17 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch gives much to think about too.
Would one call a home of Father, Mother and Son a city?
And Genesis 6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown...
Where did the giants come from?
Ahhh, much to think about indeed, and I think that is why I love the Bible so much, it surely swims with time and knowledge :)
Good evening Serah, hope your Thanksgivings day was a Blessed, safe and happy one. You've hit on a subject from the 6th chapter of Genesis that I've always been interested in concerning the giants of olden times, I once had a conversation with my minister on this subject and it opened my eyes to some very common sense facts concerning the origin of their existence.

To begin with many television preachers have eluded to and taught that the giants of olden times were the offspring of a union between the sons of God ( believed to be a reference to angelic beings ) and human females refered to as the daughters of men, and that these angels found them attractive and took some of them as their wives and again the result were these physically huge and gigantic beings of whom some became tbe stuff of myth and legend that may have inspired say Hercules for example, now granted he was just a Greek myth but there may have been someone in history under another name who may have inspired the legend, point is that in this conversation with my minister he eluded that Angels whom are SPIRIT beings and cannot procreate and reproduce flesh and blood beings and God only can do so through the human reproductive system that he instilled in the human biological system, the sons of God mentioned in Genesis were only a reference to the human male.

When I asked him how then did the giants come about he answered that GOD created them like he did everybody else, he did create the gigantic Dinosaurs also, makes so much sense doesn't it? I would like to your response to this as you brought the subject up or anyone else's for that matter.

Blessings.(C:

“Become Love!”

Since: Jan 09

Nowhere/Now here

#468099 Nov 22, 2012
Serah wrote:
Cheers, and of course, Happy Thanksgiving!! I heard Obama's speech this morning, and was very happy to hear him say God Bless everyone and to think of those who are less fortunate and perhaps suffering as a result of 'Sandy'..
I didn't really think he was a GOD loving person, somehow, so was happy to hear his words.
I might need protection for this one, but don't be deceived by such crafty terminology.

In these United States of southern North America, it's been most common to use the title "God" in a most general way. You see, this nation, as is, was founded, if you will, by Deists. These Deists were more than well aware of the public's most common interpretation of the title when it was used and heard. Therefore, these Deists were more than comfortable using such a general title, because they were more than well aware that the majority of the public would believe they were referring to the "God" of the bible-- Iehovah, or even "Iesus Christ." But, they weren't. In actuality, they, personally, were referring to Lucifer. Now, when I say "Lucifer," I mean not the Lucifer that many believe to be the devil. I mean "Lucifer," defined by the literal interpretation of the term, which is "morning star." The general public wasn't aware of this, of course, and still aren't. So, when you see the motto, "In God We Trust," Lucifer is the "God" being referred to, actually.

Let it be known, I don't know the beliefs of our Commander-In-Chief. But, let us not think, for one iota of a second, that he's automatically referring to the "God" of the bible. I've, personally, heard numerous people from numerous, different religions refer to their primary deity as "God." It is good, though, that he remembered those injured by "Sandy."
Serah wrote:
The Bible surely gives us much to think about and to ponder on.... and yep, inquiring minds surely want to know :)
I'm definitely one of them. I like this thread, too, as I can clearly see that I'm not the only one. And for the most part, people here remain civil, unlike the majority of forums and threads on Topix.

Until next time...may the shalowm of our 'Elohiym remain with you and yours.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#468100 Nov 22, 2012
Serah wrote:
<quoted text>Happy Thanksgiving LW ~ and thank you for your Scriptures :)
Thank you Serah.Family,friends all gethered at Daughters home for nice dinner and interesting conversation this evening.This day has been quite,peaceful and a happy one for me.

When I post scripture I only trying to share with others is all.Not preaching or debating just simple sharing with others.
Must admit I do sometimes get side tracked with not staying within the subject matter being discussed at a given moment.Sometimes wonder off in another area of the Bible.Due my best to respect others in there beliefs.Have a good evening.
endtime

AOL

#468101 Nov 22, 2012
.

PROOF Obama's ReElection = ANTICHRIST_______

&fe ature=plcp

.

“Jesus is coming soon”

Since: Nov 09

Location hidden

#468102 Nov 22, 2012
Brother Lee Love wrote:
<quoted text>But, isn't the doctrine of the "trinity" based on the belief that "God" is only one entity, but revealed in three distinct positions? Isn't this what you believe?
<quoted text>If Father is called "God," and our anointed Savior is called "God," then wouldn't this explain why Father is called "God of gods" at such verses as Deuteronomy 10:17?
<quoted text>No offense intended and I apologize, but I only substitute the terms used with terms that share the exact definition.
<quoted text>But, what say you regarding the "implication" that our anointed Savior is and going to tremain subject to Father in those verses? How is this possible?
<quoted text>From Acts on, our anointed Savior was referred to as "God's" Son more than 60 times. My point is, our anointed Savior had already ascended by this time. Why did the authors of our "New Testament" still refer to our anointed Savior as "God's" Son if he no longer serves as His Son?
<quoted text>Not really, my Brother. And I apologize. I am trying. Consider the following, please and if you will.
John 17:5
And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.
How is this possible, that our anointed Savior, first, asked to be glorified by Father and had glory with Father while he, according to you, was Father?
John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Isn't it possible that the "God" in the center portion of this verse is different from the "God" in the latter portion, explaining why our Father is called "God of gods" at such verses as Deuteronomy 10:17?
John 17:3
And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
Was our anointed Savior speaking to himself?
1Corinthians 8:6
But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
What's the significance of the terms "of" and "by?"
You know it is interesting that in your attempt to understand what I have been trying to explain here you have have posted scriptures that bare out the point that I have been trying to make that Christ and God are ONE, you ask me why the Apostles continued to refer to him as the son of God after he ascended back up into heaven, the bible lets us that that the things of God that WERE is often spoken of as if they still ARE and those things that are to COME as well, I say again that Jesus and God are ONE as per the scripture you posted in John 17:5 and from the first chalter of John that tells us that he is the Word that was with God in the beginning and the Word that WAS God that created all things in existence.

Jesus is the Word right now in the 3rd heaven and again..........that which was son is whom will be coming back with heavenly army to do battle ar armageddon, Revelation 19:13 says his name is the WORD OF GOD, this is all the mystery of the ONE true Godhead and so Jesus will always be refered to as the son of God regardless as he is the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost all rolled into ( for lack of a better term ).

But I suggest that you pray over what you do not understand brother and may God Bless you.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#468103 Nov 22, 2012
BIBLE TRUE JEHOVA wrote:
<quoted text>
your quotes and own preachings or trying to play private advisot to others,doesn't have any spiritual value,or positive changes
Only Bible laws are able to change human animal to be descent moral godly human being
just give up with your worthless advises,and don't teach people who knows perfectly Gods Law
have nice journey to be out of here asap,
you are welcome if you got biblical knowledge,and stop playing 21 century jesus christ(you are not)
There were many sages and wise men in the past, who had given laws, wisdom and knowledge. It was not just the Bible.

Was there any Bible 2,000 years before Moses? The sayings and teachings of wise men of China and India pre-dated the Bible and the Patriarchs.

They were far more moral than the folks of the Bronze Age Bible.

Jesus was not the only person, who taught, Mate! You know well that Jesus did not bring anything new and nor did he come with anything new.

Please stop patronizing, let others speak freely and discuss your Bible and if you like, the Jewish Bible too, with me as I do have knowledge of the three Bibles, namely the Jewish Bible, the Catholics' Bible and the protestants' Bible.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#468104 Nov 22, 2012
G_O_D wrote:
<quoted text>
The word translated as "spirit" should be properly translated as "inspiration/influence " or "respiration/breath" .
That is okay. It is still from God for everyone and everything. The point is that the so-called "Holy Spirit' does not exist at all besides God, for through Isaiah, God had declared that there was no God besides God at all.

And after Jesus was long gone, the men created "God, the Holy Ghost aka the Holy Spirit".

Thanks, G_O_D

“Become Love!”

Since: Jan 09

Nowhere/Now here

#468105 Nov 22, 2012
LAWEST100 wrote:
Good evening Serah, hope your Thanksgivings day was a Blessed, safe and happy one. You've hit on a subject from the 6th chapter of Genesis that I've always been interested in concerning the giants of olden times, I once had a conversation with my minister on this subject and it opened my eyes to some very common sense facts concerning the origin of their existence.

To begin with many television preachers have eluded to and taught that the giants of olden times were the offspring of a union between the sons of God ( believed to be a reference to angelic beings ) and human females refered to as the daughters of men, and that these angels found them attractive and took some of them as their wives and again the result were these physically huge and gigantic beings of whom some became tbe stuff of myth and legend that may have inspired say Hercules for example, now granted he was just a Greek myth but there may have been someone in history under another name who may have inspired the legend, point is that in this conversation with my minister he eluded that Angels whom are SPIRIT beings and cannot procreate and reproduce flesh and blood beings and God only can do so through the human reproductive system that he instilled in the human biological system, the sons of God mentioned in Genesis were only a reference to the human male.

When I asked him how then did the giants come about he answered that GOD created them like he did everybody else, he did create the gigantic Dinosaurs also, makes so much sense doesn't it? I would like to your response to this as you brought the subject up or anyone else's for that matter.

Blessings.(C:
Genesis 6:1-4
And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
__________

Greetings, salutations, and shalowm, my Brother.

I've heard that interpretation before, that the "sons of God" were actually direct descendants of Adam, Seth, Enos, Cainan, etc., etc. But, of course, I question such assertions. And why?

Well, for starters, Jude 1:6 declares, "And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. And secondly, 2Peter 2:4 declares, "For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment." Now, here's my issue.

It's hard to accept that the angels mentioned by Jude and Peter are merely those that rebelled with the devil, and that this is why they were cast down to hell and "reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day." I say this, because wicked spirit-beings have always been accredited for tormenting and injuring people, especially during the days our anointed Savior walked among us. Obviously, then, only a specific group of these wicked spirit-beings are mentioned by Jude and Peter. But, which? Note, too, that Peter seems to have wrote about these events in the order they occurred, beginning with these angels, then mentioning Noah, then Sodom and Gomorrha, and finally Lot.

As I believe, Jude and Peter were referring to the "sons of God" mentioned at Genesis 6. What also causes me to believe as I do is the fact that a distinction is made between "men" in verse 1 and these "sons of God" in verses 2 and 4.

What say you, my Brother?

“Become Love!”

Since: Jan 09

Nowhere/Now here

#468106 Nov 22, 2012
LAWEST100 wrote:
You know it is interesting that in your attempt to understand what I have been trying to explain here you have have posted scriptures that bare out the point that I have been trying to make that Christ and God are ONE, you ask me why the Apostles continued to refer to him as the son of God after he ascended back up into heaven, the bible lets us that that the things of God that WERE is often spoken of as if they still ARE and those things that are to COME as well, I say again that Jesus and God are ONE as per the scripture you posted in John 17:5 and from the first chalter of John that tells us that he is the Word that was with God in the beginning and the Word that WAS God that created all things in existence.
Jesus is the Word right now in the 3rd heaven and again..........that which was son is whom will be coming back with heavenly army to do battle ar armageddon, Revelation 19:13 says his name is the WORD OF GOD, this is all the mystery of the ONE true Godhead and so Jesus will always be refered to as the son of God regardless as he is the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost all rolled into ( for lack of a better term ).
But I suggest that you pray over what you do not understand brother and may God Bless you.
Shalowm again, my Brother.

I apologize for continuing with this. I'm really not trying to be a jerk. I truly am trying to understand, but my mind won't stop with the questions. Bear with me, please and if you will. Anyway...

I believe I know the scripture you're referring to. At John 10:30, it's recorded that our anointed Savior declared, "I and my Father are one." I don't question this. I agree. But, what I do question is what was meant. Following is an example as to why.

1Corinthians 6:16
What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.

Now, what do these two verses, John 10:30 and 1Corinthians 6:16, have in common?

ANSWER: Both use the identical Greek term and definition for "one," which is "heis."

John 10:30
I and my Father are [heis].

1Corinthians 6:16
What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is [heis] body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.

As we can see, Paul used the identical Greek term and definition that's interpreted as "one" at 1Corinthians 6:16 as John used at John 10:30. Now, my questions to you are these.

1) Are we to interpret Paul's use of the term "one" as literal rather than figurative?

2) Does a man and harlot, according to Paul, become "one body," literally?

3) Was Paul simply alluding to how a man and harlot become joined, but in a figurative sense?

As you most likely know, most (if not all) agree that Paul was speaking figuratively. Now, my question to you is this.

1) Knowing that the interpretation of the Greek term and definition is used figuratively at 1Corinthians 6:16, why should we apply a literal interpretation of the same Greek term and definition at John 10:30?

2) Why should we believe that Paul was speaking figuratively, but John literally?

What say you, my Brother?

“Love much, trust none”

Since: Jul 11

There

#468107 Nov 22, 2012
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
That is okay. It is still from God for everyone and everything. The point is that the so-called "Holy Spirit' does not exist at all besides God, for through Isaiah, God had declared that there was no God besides God at all.
And after Jesus was long gone, the men created "God, the Holy Ghost aka the Holy Spirit".
Thanks, G_O_D
I am not sure why there is a need if anyone to chop up God and then try and put him back together again with duct tape. Makes no sense at all to me.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#468108 Nov 22, 2012
Brother Lee Love wrote:
<quoted text>Shalowm again, my Brother.
I apologize for continuing with this. I'm really not trying to be a jerk. I truly am trying to understand, but my mind won't stop with the questions. Bear with me, please and if you will. Anyway...
I believe I know the scripture you're referring to. At John 10:30, it's recorded that our anointed Savior declared, "I and my Father are one." I don't question this. I agree. But, what I do question is what was meant. Following is an example as to why.
1Corinthians 6:16
What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.
Now, what do these two verses, John 10:30 and 1Corinthians 6:16, have in common?
ANSWER: Both use the identical Greek term and definition for "one," which is "heis."
John 10:30
I and my Father are [heis].
1Corinthians 6:16
What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is [heis] body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.
As we can see, Paul used the identical Greek term and definition that's interpreted as "one" at 1Corinthians 6:16 as John used at John 10:30. Now, my questions to you are these.
1) Are we to interpret Paul's use of the term "one" as literal rather than figurative?
2) Does a man and harlot, according to Paul, become "one body," literally?
3) Was Paul simply alluding to how a man and harlot become joined, but in a figurative sense?
As you most likely know, most (if not all) agree that Paul was speaking figuratively. Now, my question to you is this.
1) Knowing that the interpretation of the Greek term and definition is used figuratively at 1Corinthians 6:16, why should we apply a literal interpretation of the same Greek term and definition at John 10:30?
2) Why should we believe that Paul was speaking figuratively, but John literally?
What say you, my Brother?
Hey Lee

Haven't had time to research further on the Holy Spirit yet as there are some things I want to check out in the OT. But just wanted to throw out a few verses into the conversation you and Lawest are having and see what you guys think about them...

1Timothy 3:16
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

John 20:28
"Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

Colossians 2:9
“For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.”

...(T) Peace

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#468109 Nov 22, 2012
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
That is okay. It is still from God for everyone and everything. The point is that the so-called "Holy Spirit' does not exist at all besides God, for through Isaiah, God had declared that there was no God besides God at all.
And after Jesus was long gone, the men created "God, the Holy Ghost aka the Holy Spirit".
Thanks, G_O_D
Psalm 51:11
Do not cast me away from Your presence, And do not take Your Holy Spirit from me.

The Holy Spirit was basically always referred to as the Spirit of God in the Old testament from what I have seen. Even with the wording here it is "your" Holy Spirit and not "the" Holy Spirit.

However the idea behind the Trinity isn't 3 Gods combining to make one but rather one triune God. I guess the question is how one defines it.

How would you define the Spirit of God. Do you see it solely as the breath of life serving a function like described in Job

Job 33:4
The Spirit of God has made me; the breath of The Almighty gives me life.

Or do you feel the spirit of God is God manifest in a spirit form? In other words do you believe the Spirit of God has sentience and thought? Or if not how would you describe to someone what the spirit of God is? Use the following verse to illustrate if you don't mind

Genesis 1:1-2
In the beginning God Created The Heavens And The Earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and The Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

I am more curious as to how someone else may describe it more than trying to challenge anything so any response is appreciated

(T) Peace

“Thank you GOD for JESUS”

Since: Jul 07

And thank you JESUS for caring

#468110 Nov 22, 2012
LAWEST100 wrote:
<quoted text> Good evening Serah, hope your Thanksgivings day was a Blessed, safe and happy one. You've hit on a subject from the 6th chapter of Genesis that I've always been interested in concerning the giants of olden times, I once had a conversation with my minister on this subject and it opened my eyes to some very common sense facts concerning the origin of their existence.
To begin with many television preachers have eluded to and taught that the giants of olden times were the offspring of a union between the sons of God ( believed to be a reference to angelic beings ) and human females refered to as the daughters of men, and that these angels found them attractive and took some of them as their wives and again the result were these physically huge and gigantic beings of whom some became tbe stuff of myth and legend that may have inspired say Hercules for example, now granted he was just a Greek myth but there may have been someone in history under another name who may have inspired the legend, point is that in this conversation with my minister he eluded that Angels whom are SPIRIT beings and cannot procreate and reproduce flesh and blood beings and God only can do so through the human reproductive system that he instilled in the human biological system, the sons of God mentioned in Genesis were only a reference to the human male.
When I asked him how then did the giants come about he answered that GOD created them like he did everybody else, he did create the gigantic Dinosaurs also, makes so much sense doesn't it? I would like to your response to this as you brought the subject up or anyone else's for that matter.
Blessings.(C:
I agree that GOD made the Giants, perhaps they were needed for hard times and perhaps they became aggressive, such as Goliath... sadly, evil walks hand in hand with many and even GOD is astounded! The Book of JOB is one of my favourites ~ no matter what is put against us, GOD can take it away.

1 Samuel 17:49 And David put his hand in his bag, and took thence a stone, and slang it, and smote the Philistine in his forehead, that the stone sunk into his forehead; and he fell upon his face to the earth.

50 So David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and with a stone, and smote the Philistine, and slew him; but there was no sword in the hand of David...

GOD indeed gives us inner strength, especially when we have such Faith as David had, that we can triumph when surely triumph seems out of our reach :)

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#468111 Nov 22, 2012
G_O_D wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not sure why there is a need if anyone to chop up God and then try and put him back together again with duct tape. Makes no sense at all to me.
Yes, the butchery of God makes no sense. There was no need to butcher God.

Long after Paul went West, the Bishops became victims of Greek and Roman philosophers, who gave them the idea of the absurdity and monstrosity known as the Trinity or the alleged Triune God. It pleased the pagans more and became palatable.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#468112 Nov 22, 2012
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
Psalm 51:11
Do not cast me away from Your presence, And do not take Your Holy Spirit from me.
The Holy Spirit was basically always referred to as the Spirit of God in the Old testament from what I have seen. Even with the wording here it is "your" Holy Spirit and not "the" Holy Spirit.
However the idea behind the Trinity isn't 3 Gods combining to make one but rather one triune God. I guess the question is how one defines it.
How would you define the Spirit of God. Do you see it solely as the breath of life serving a function like described in Job
Job 33:4
The Spirit of God has made me; the breath of The Almighty gives me life.
Or do you feel the spirit of God is God manifest in a spirit form? In other words do you believe the Spirit of God has sentience and thought? Or if not how would you describe to someone what the spirit of God is? Use the following verse to illustrate if you don't mind
Genesis 1:1-2
In the beginning God Created The Heavens And The Earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and The Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
I am more curious as to how someone else may describe it more than trying to challenge anything so any response is appreciated
(T) Peace
Thanks.

Will be out for my project meeting and will write later tonight.

Salaams

“Love much, trust none”

Since: Jul 11

There

#468113 Nov 22, 2012
Serah wrote:
<quoted text>I agree that GOD made the Giants, perhaps they were needed for hard times and perhaps they became aggressive, such as Goliath... sadly, evil walks hand in hand with many and even GOD is astounded! The Book of JOB is one of my favourites ~ no matter what is put against us, GOD can take it away.
1 Samuel 17:49 And David put his hand in his bag, and took thence a stone, and slang it, and smote the Philistine in his forehead, that the stone sunk into his forehead; and he fell upon his face to the earth.
50 So David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and with a stone, and smote the Philistine, and slew him; but there was no sword in the hand of David...
GOD indeed gives us inner strength, especially when we have such Faith as David had, that we can triumph when surely triumph seems out of our reach :)
"Giants" is another word mistranslated into English.

There are Nephalim (giants) in Genesis are the offspring of the Sons of God and daughters of men. This notion of demigods is prevelant throughout ancient religions and Genesis is simply retelling the Sumerian story although the Sumerian story is much clearer.

Now, if there were "Sons of God" in Genesis then Jesus has a whole bunch of brother gods, right ?

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#468114 Nov 22, 2012
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks.
Will be out for my project meeting and will write later tonight.
Salaams
Cool, I look forward to it.

The more I get into it, the more difficult it has become, for me anyway, to try to properly articulate exactly how one would describe the Spirit of God in the Old Testament.

I look at verses like...

Nehemiah 9:20
You also gave Your good Spirit to instruct them, And did not withhold Your manna from their mouth, And gave them water for their thirst.

Verses like that seem more like an entity or part of God acting on His behalf compared to just like the breath of life. However, Isaiah makes it clear the Spirit of the Lord is synonymous with the Lord in Isaiah 40:13-14 when it first asked ""Who is able to advise the Spirit of the LORD?" And then later says "Has the LORD ever needed anyone's advice? Does he need instruction about what is good?" And also I see a pattern in the OT of it saying the Spirit of God came UPON them and not things like "dwelled in them:

I am wondering of the best way to describe the Spirit of God might be to say "touched by God". Whether when getting the breath of life or being instructed or being moved to act in a certain way; these are all things that would be the result of an interaction with God through His Spirit.

But why then even make a distinction at all? Why not just say God came upon someone or God breathed life into someone or God instructed someone? Why the need to qualify it as God sent His Spirit to do these things? Especially if the Spirit is not in a way an entity itself but still a function and part of God?

Sometimes it feels like the more i learn, the less I know

Look forward to hearing back.

(T) Peace

“Jesus is coming soon”

Since: Nov 09

Location hidden

#468115 Nov 23, 2012
Brother Lee Love wrote:
<quoted text>Genesis 6:1-4
And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
__________
Greetings, salutations, and shalowm, my Brother.
I've heard that interpretation before, that the "sons of God" were actually direct descendants of Adam, y, Enos, Cainan, etc., etc. But, of course, I question such assertions. And why?
Well, for starters, Jude 1:6 declares, "And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. And secondly, 2Peter 2:4 declares, "For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment." Now, here's my issue.
It's hard to accept that the angels mentioned by Jude and Peter are merely those that rebelled with the devil, and that this is why they were cast down to hell and "reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day." I say this, because wicked spirit-beings have always been accredited for tormenting and injuring people, especially during the days our anointed Savior walked among us. Obviously, then, only a specific group of these wicked spirit-beings are mentioned by Jude and Peter. But, which? Note, too, that Peter seems to have wrote about these events in the order they occurred, beginning with these angels, then mentioning Noah, then Sodom and Gomorrha, and finally Lot.
As I believe, Jude and Peter were referring to the "sons of God" mentioned at Genesis 6. What also causes me to believe as I do is the fact that a distinction is made between "men" in verse 1 and these "sons of God" in verses 2 and 4.
What say you, my Brother?
Thank you BLL, and I defintely agree with you that fallen angels / demons are responsible for certain terminal illnesses that human kind suffer such as various forms forms of cancer and other diseases that man has yet to find a permanent cure to, and I believe that they torture people in other ways as well including certain forms of mental illness just for example, the bible itself bares these things out, and they also know those specifically who belong to Christ Jesus as the demon possessed man who told the false disciples 'Jesus i know, and Paul i know but who are you?' and the demon that was in that man the bible says jump on them and overpowered them and ran them out of that house hurt and naked, that would actually sound humorous if it wasn't so dangerous and creepy.

Howevet I still don't believe that they have the ability to procreate with human women, at least not anymore, but I agree with the idea that those angels that left their habitation and are being reserved in chains of darkness are a different group aside from that 3rd of the heavenly host that rebelled along side satan.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
US modern-day slaves 3 min andet1987 2
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 4 min Pegasus 265,266
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 7 min hojo 559,811
Why do White Women think Blacks actually love t... (Apr '12) 8 min 57hello 289
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 10 min BenAdam 776,215
Play "end of the word" (Jan '11) 12 min andet1987 5,124
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 15 min Coco chimp 119,668
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 21 min Freebird USA 175,728
Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 1 hr RiccardoFire 96,771
More from around the web