The Trinity in Luke 2:40-56

[Ellen Brown]

Matthew 1:18

The Holy Spirit is not the Father. Three separate persons ....

 

[Ellen Brown]

Sorry, I can't buy that there were two beings and one was God and the other something else. We can't blame everything on language differences.

Agreed.

 

[nPeace]

Fair enough. It strongly implies it rather than stating it out right.

On the other hand ... Matthew 1:18 is very clear about it. The holy Ghost/Spirit is the Father.

Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. (Matthew 1:18)

The holy Spirit is not separate from God the Father. The holy Spirit is the Spirit of the Father. This is the only reasonable conclusion when you mesh together Matthew 10:20 and Mark 13:11.

Not to mention John 4:24

God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

So now the holy spirit is the father, and yet is the spirit is of the father?
More confusion.
What you are saying is not of the spirit of God.

Jesus said he cast out devils by means of God's finger - his holy spirit. God sent the spirit upon Jesus and the disciples. God gave the holy spirit to Jesus, who in turn poured it out on the disciples. God promised to send another comforter besides Jesus - the holy spirit.

You are contradicting the scriptures more and more.
What are you trying to do?

The holy spirit is not the father.
Take a look here, and here.

 

[iam1me]

Maybe that is where the problem occurs. Jesus sits at the right hand of the Father who is described as "God". That does not mean Jesus can't also be God.

It doesn't say at the right hand of the Father - it says at the right hand of God. These are just a few of many examples that explicitly differentiate Jesus from God and make it clear that Jesus is beneath God.

1 Cor 15:20-28 But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. 24 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27 For he “has put everything under his feet.”c]">[c] Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. 28 When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.
​

However, your suggestion that "Father" and "God" are interchangeable is something I would agree to - for scripture does treat them as interchangeable. That's because the scriptures never teach that God has a multiple personality disorder, as with the Trinity.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

Please do not be taken in. 18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

I view God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost as three different beings. (JS said personages).

I think I might be done talking to any JW because of the trickery.

It also says Mary was overcome by the power of God. Maybe the Holy Spirit is not a separate person but just a personification of God's power.

 

[Ellen Brown]

It also says Mary was overcome by the power of God. Maybe the Holy Spirit is not a separate person but just a personification of God's power.

Perhaps. We do not define God, he defines himself and it is doubtful that he has fully revealed himself to mankind.

If he is there still, I want to know and worship the God

 

[nPeace]

I can't resist.

Seriously though, no I'm definitely not a genius.

Do you know what a revelation is? It's something revealed by God and not mankind. There is a wisdom that is higher than mankind and beyond his reach. So we must look to God to give it. He gives it to whoever He will; irregardless of intelligence.

Jesus said God's word is truth, and persons will be judged by that word. The apostles had the revelation, and wrote it down.
(1 Corinthians 2:6-10)
6 Now we speak wisdom among those who are mature, but not the wisdom of this system of things nor that of the rulers of this system of things, who are to come to nothing. 7 But we speak God’s wisdom in a sacred secret, the hidden wisdom, which God foreordained before the systems of things for our glory. 8 It is this wisdom that none of the rulers of this system of things came to know, for if they had known it, they would not have executed the glorious Lord. 9 But just as it is written: “Eye has not seen and ear has not heard, nor have there been conceived in the heart of man the things that God has prepared for those who love him.” 10 For it is to us God has revealed them through his spirit, for the spirit searches into all things, even the deep things of God.

According to scripture, the only revelation to be seen next, is the one that will reveal the liars.
(Revelation 21:8) . . .and those practicing spiritism and idolaters and all the liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur. This means the second death.”

God is omnipresent and everywhere at once. (Jeremiah 23:24) Otherwise we would be in trouble because God could not hear all people's prayers at once.

According to scripture, that's where his holy spirit come in. It is his active force that moves throughout the universe.
The same force mentioned at Genesis 1:2

I think I will make a new thread soon to discuss this topic. How and why God became a man. I've been planning to do it for awhile.

Why don't you answer these two posts now then?
The Trinity in Luke 2:40-56
The Trinity in Luke 2:40-56

 

[Windwalker]

I'm sorry, but I really don't understand exactly what you are saying or asking. I'm not sure what you ostensibly want me to explain, but I have a feeling that whatever it is you wouldn't buy my answer. You seem biased against me.

You could try to answer, and then determine whether or not I was showing some form of "bias" based on how I responded at that time. To assume I would at this point seems just a tad premature.

What I said in all that which I posted can be summarized thusly. You showed how silly it was to take the language of theology and superimpose it on what was in Luke, "God's mother," and such. But my point was is any belief about God, and any doctrine or such about God, can be shown to be utterly absurd too. Point in hand, the Christian view of God as Omnipresent. Do you believe that is true?

If you do, then I could quite easily do the same thing you did in the OP and show how absurd it is that Christians speak of God "outside" of themselves. How is that possible? How can God be Infinite, and yet finite? Yet that is how you think of God, in contradictory terms.

It is therefore no different that the self-contradicting things you made fun of, such as how can Jesus be both a man and God at the same time, and such. The sauce for the goose, which you prepared, is equally sauce for your gander. Does this make more sense now?

I look forward to your response.

 

[nPeace]

But, you see, the doctrine admits that Jesus was fully human.

If you mean the scriptural doctrine, yes. The trinity doctrine teaches contrary - falsely claiming that Jesus is both fully God and man. No.

 

[Katzpur]

Your solution is perfect. The key is in fact understanding what is meant when Jesus said he and his father are one.

1Cor 3:6-8,

6 I (Paul) have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.
8 Now he that planteth (Paul) and he that watereth (Apollos) are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.
​

We can't assume that 2 things being called "one" means they are the same thing. A group of people being called "one" is a common phrase we use to mean they are united in purpose, they both work together for a common goal. In any case, Paul and Apollos were most certainly not the same person even though they were called "one."

I agree. I understand the use of the word "one" pretty much as you do.

Why in world is it imperative that he even be God? The story reads just fine if they are taken as a father and His son. Jesus was born, like Adam, with innocent blood. They both had the same free will you and I have. They were both tempted like you and I. Of course you and I, being descendants of Adam come into the world with tainted blood, so we haven't a prayer of living a sin free life. But both Jesus and Adam had a shot at living a sin free life because they both came into the world sin free. They did not have a sin nature like everybody since Adam. Jesus started out with innocent blood as did Adam. Adam sinned, whereas Jesus always did his father's will, even to the death of the cross, not a pretty way to die.

You're not exactly making sense here. You're saying that we all have a sinful nature but that neither Adam nor Jesus did, that both of them came into the world without sin. I believe that each and every one of us came into the world without sin. We are predisposed to being sinful, but we are not guilty of anything until we actually do wrong. And by the time we have reached a point where we can understand the difference between right and wrong, we will have done wrong, and will continue to do wrong. The pull of sin is simply too great for us to withstand.

Now you're insisting that Jesus is not divine, but fully human (if I'm understanding you correctly). I assume this is because He was conceived by and born to a mortal mother. Since you're not Catholic, you apparently don't believe in the Immaculate Conception, which states that Mary, like her Son, was free from "Original Sin." If Mary was a mortal like the rest of us, Jesus Christ, like all of the rest of us, was also a descendant of Adam. And who exactly do you believe His Father to have been, if not God? I'm simply asking you how a man born as a human being to a mortal mother could be any different from any other man unless His Father was divine and He shared in His Father's divinity (which I believe was the case).

If he were God, what's the big deal? But if he was a man like you and I, his accomplishment becomes monumental. Don't take that away from him. Give him the credit he deserves.

My belief is that He inherited His mortality from His mother, a mortal, and His divinity from His Father, who was God. He would therefore have both the qualities and characteristics of both of His parents. From His mother, He would have received a mortal body, subject to pain, disease, injury and death; He would also have received from her the ability to be tempted and the ability to sin. From His Father, He would have received the ability to "have life in himself," i.e. to have power over death, the power to "take [His life] again" after having laid it down. Speaking of "big deals," that's a pretty enormous one. How many men like you and I have that power? Only a Deity could do that. And acknowledging that power which He had in and of Himself, is giving Him the credit He deserves.

God had a plan, the logos of John 1:1 (study what the word logos really meant to the folks at the time that John was written, don't just substitute the word "Jesus" for it). God came up with that plan (logos) which required that a man (Jesus) get us out of the mess that another man (Adam) got us into. Otherwise why didn't he just come down right after Adam sinned and make things right?

I don't get your point of your question here. Yes, the Plan required a Redeemer. It wouldn't have mattered whether Jesus Christ came down to fulfill that role 3000 years before He did, when He did, or 1500 years later. He was the "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." He alone could do this because He alone was perfect, as His Father was perfect.

The things God had to plan for are incredibly complex. He had to convince another man to follow His will in order to undo the mess the first man did by not following His will. It was an incredibly complex plan to somehow get some man to say, "not my will, but thine be done." He couldn't force Jesus into doing anything. He had to persuade him via the scriptures, the writings of the Old Testament. No human could ever conceive of such a plan, but thankfully God is not a human! Jesus was a human, but not God.

Are you saying that God convinced Jesus to do what He did, and that this happened after He was born, and that this role was not His in the beginning?

Making Jesus God not only robs God his due worship for coming up with the plan (logos) in the first place, but it also robs Jesus of the his accomplishment in following that plan to the letter, despite the great personal cost. Jesus could have sinned at any point in his life (unlike God). He could have easily taken the devil up on the offer of ruling over all the kingdoms of the world. The devil was quite correct when he told Jesus it was in his power to do just that, and Jesus knew that. Fortunately for us, he didn't. Other wise we'd still be waiting for redemption. All in all, the scriptures make a much better story if the 2 main characters are kept straight.

Wow. I just can't buy that. Sorry. I believe that Jesus Christ was with His Father before our world was ever created and that He, in fact, created it under His Father's direction. I believe He was chosen before the Creation to be our Savior, and that despite the fact that He had it within His power to refuse to do His Father's will, He could have reneged on His promise. Rather than do so, He willingly gave up His life for us, proving that He and His Father were, indeed "one in will, purpose, mind and heart."

 

[Katzpur]

Before this Luke 1:31, and this John 1:14, and this John 3:16, and this Hebrews 10:5, the logos - the word - the only begotten son of God, was divine - like God or a god, in nature.

When Mary did become pregnant, the above verses were fulfilled. The word became flesh, and eventually was born, and given the name Jesus - a fleshly being - a mortal - not a divine being - not a god, but a man.
Is it any clearer?

To me, what's clear is that if He had a divine Father, He was divine as well as mortal. Mary was indeed His Mother; God was indeed His Father. The word "Father" is not a meaningless label. Jesus Christ was the "Only Begotten Son" of God, and God did not beget any other human beings.

 

[Katzpur]

Yes definitely. Jesus was God manifest in the flesh.

Where was the Father when He became the Son? According to scripture, the Son frequently referenced His Father as being in Heaven. He frequently prayed to Him, and He said that His Father was greater than He. None of that makes sense if the Father became the Son.

Why so hasty? (James 1:19) Pray about it. Study a bit into the scriptures to see if I'm right. Give it some thought at least.

Hasty? I'm nearly 70 years old. Do you think this is the first time I've ever given this any thought? What in the world makes you think I haven't done plenty of studying the scriptures and praying about them in my lifetime?

 

[Katzpur]

Please do not be taken in.

Are you saying you think I am being taken in?

I view God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost as three different beings. (JS said personages).

As do I, but then you already know that.

I think I might be done talking to any JW because of the trickery.

I can certainly understand that. My experience in talking to them on this forum has never resulted in anything other than a huge argument, for the simple reason that they always insist on having the last word. There are times when it just makes sense for people to say, "Yeah, I get that you believe that and I understand your rationale for doing so. But my reasons for not believing as you do are [such and such]." There comes a point at which further arguing is simply unproductive. There are a couple of JWs currently posting on RF with whom I think I might be able to have a respectful dialogue. But I've thought that before and have been mistaken.

 

[nPeace]

Well maybe not. A human being has two aspects. One is the physical body and one is the spirit. A regular person has a human body and a human spirit. Jesu has a human body but his spirit was godly. That is how He was fully human ( in body) and fully divine (in spirit) at the same time. Jesus was God in human form because He had the spirit of God.

Scriptural reference please
According to scripture, the only spirit man has is the one mentioned in these verses.
Genesis 2:7; Job 12:10; 27:3; 33:4; 4:14, 15; Psalm 104:29, 30; 146:4; Ecclesiastes 3:19-21; 12:7
That spirit is not divine.

Many persons had the spirit of God, but they were not God. Acts 2:17, 18

 

[Katzpur]

Well maybe not. A human being has two aspects. One is the physical body and one is the spirit. A regular person has a human body and a human spirit. Jesu has a human body but his spirit was godly. That is how He was fully human ( in body) and fully divine (in spirit) at the same time. Jesus was God in human form because He had the spirit of God.

The Bible actually says that God is the "Father of spirits." That means that He is the Father of the spirits of each and every one of us. Our parents, on the other hand, are the parents of our physical body.

 

[nPeace]

Matthew 1:18

Matthew 1:18 English translations; Greek.

 

[74x12]

Scriptural reference please
According to scripture, the only spirit man has is the one mentioned in these verses.
Genesis 2:7; Job 12:10; 27:3; 33:4; 4:14, 15; Psalm 104:29, 30; 146:4; Ecclesiastes 3:19-21; 12:7
That spirit is not divine.

Many persons had the spirit of God, but they were not God. Acts 2:17, 18

Not sure how you don't see that Jesus is special and different. Even Jehovah's Witnesses believe He was Michael an angel before He was born. So your argument here refutes Michael being Jesus. Because you say Jesus only had a human spirit.

Here is scriptural reference you asked for:

Colossians 2:8-9 King James Version (KJV)
8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

So that means in Jesus dwells all the fullness of the divinity bodily. That means in His body the fullness of what it means to be God was living.

Also supported in Colossians 1:19

Colossians 1:19 Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
19 because in him it did please all the fulness to tabernacle,

 

[nPeace]

Sorry, I can't buy that there were two beings and one was God and the other something else. We can't blame everything on language differences.

Language difference? What do you mean? Explain please.

 

[74x12]

So now the holy spirit is the father, and yet is the spirit is of the father?
More confusion.
What you are saying is not of the spirit of God.

Jesus said he cast out devils by means of God's finger - his holy spirit. God sent the spirit upon Jesus and the disciples. God gave the holy spirit to Jesus, who in turn poured it out on the disciples. God promised to send another comforter besides Jesus - the holy spirit.

You are contradicting the scriptures more and more.
What are you trying to do?

The holy spirit is not the father.
Take a look here, and here.

The Spirit of God is holy. So they call this "the holy Spirit". It's that simple. You people make "the holy Spirit" out to be another person than God Himself. It's simply the Spirit of God which just so happens to be very holy. So we call this Spirit "the holy Spirit". Even John 4:24 makes clear that God is Spirit.

The first mention of the holy Spirit is Genesis 1:2 where we find it "fluttering" on the face of the deep. The water is symbolic of peoples, languages, nations etc (Revelation 17:15) ... The Spirit of God hovering over the face of the waters is symbolic of God continually working on mankind to turn them to Him. This is why in Genesis 6:3 God says "My Spirit shall not always strive with man ... etc."

God's Spirit is constantly at work to turn people to Himself.

The holy Spirit is God's presence or God's breath/wind literally. He can send it out wherever He wishes and it is omnipresent. The holy Spirit is infinite. The holy Spirit is God in action. When God acts on anything it is "the holy Spirit". So hence, "God's finger" is true. Especially when God acts upon a human being. Such as in Judges 3:10. This is God moving upon or acting upon someone. Ruach Ha Qodesh.

Just as the Spirit hovered over the waters and then God spoke so that their was Light. So to the Spirit hovered over Mary(she the chosen vessel, the daughter of Adam) and again there was Light. The Messiah; the Son of God is the Light. (Isaiah 9:2) Born of the holy Spirit. Which is also translatable as the holy Wind or Breath. Just as God "breathed" upon Adam the breath of Life. So to the holy "Breath" of God was overshadowing Mary. Breathing the Word of Life(Jesus). (1 John 1:1)

The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit. (John 3:8)

I said the holy Spirit was "the Father" because the holy Spirit is the Spirit that created the body of Jesus in the womb of Mary. This is why in Luke 1:35 we find that the holy Spirit overshadows her. Then in Matthew 1:18, she is found with child by the holy Spirit.

In Young's Literal translation we see that this is to mean she was found to have conceived "from" the Holy Spirit.

Matthew 1:18 Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
18 And of Jesus Christ, the birth was thus: For his mother Mary having been betrothed to Joseph, before their coming together she was found to have conceived from the Holy Spirit,

And here in the English Man's Greek New Testament I find an extremely literal translation.

Now of Jesus Christ the birth thus was. Having been betrothed for his mother Mary to Joseph, before came together they she was found to be with child of[the] Spirit Holy.

Since the "of[the]" part is what you seem to be drawing into question; you can look that word up here.

In conclusion people should consider and believe that to believe Jesus was born of God is the same as to believe that Jesus was breathed out by God Himself. Jesus is the breath of Life. The Ruach Ha Qodesh.

 

[nPeace]

Not sure how you don't see that Jesus is special and different. Even Jehovah's Witnesses believe He was Michael an angel before He was born. So your argument here refutes Michael being Jesus. Because you say Jesus only had a human spirit.

Here is scriptural reference you asked for:

Colossians 2:8-9 King James Version (KJV)
8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

So that means in Jesus dwells all the fullness of the divinity bodily. That means in His body the fullness of what it means to be God was living.

Also supported in Colossians 1:19

Colossians 1:19 Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
19 because in him it did please all the fulness to tabernacle,

Jesus was special and different, as he was a sinless perfect human, but the scriptures evidently do not support the teaching you are promoting.
When Jesus yielded up his spirit, he spoke in harmony with scripture - the spirit returns to the true God who gave it.
Did you bother to read any of those scriptures? Am I right t suggest, you didn't?

Which ones support your ideas?