manning5 wrote:
My sense of things regarding the Holy Spirit is:
1. God's Spirit
2. God's restraints
3. God's Powers
4. Has personhood
5. Communicates with Man
6. Can be visible as a Spirit, or not
7. Is the third member of the Trinity.
Read Acts
I can see where you could come to the conclusion of a Trinity...
If you ignore the fact that Jesus said the Jews knew what they worshiped...
And if you ignore the fact they were adamant that God was one in personality...
And if you ignore that the first commandment is that God is one He...
And if you ignore the fact that the apostles commanded not to teach (explain or expound in) other teachings than they taught...
And if you ignore the fact that the apostles didn't ever preach (openly proclaim) even the idea of the Trinity, let alone it being part of the good news (gospel) that is to be believed for salvation...
And if you ignore that the apostles said if anyone preach any other good news they were to be called accursed...
And if you ignore the fact that the apostles warned against going to worldly philosophy, nor would they use philosophy to preach or teach Christ...
And if you ignore the fact that the ones the apostles called anti-Christian, who merged Christian words with pagan philosophical concepts, and were thereby the ones who first came up with the word Trinity and it's concept...
And if you ignore the fact that Justin Martyr, began merging philosophy with Christianity and thereby began talking of two and three gods...
And if you ignore the fact that Tertullian, also one of the earlier Trinitarian trailblazers (who believed there was a time when the son was not), was accused of, and admitted, that he got his ideas of projections of one God out of another from the antichristian gnostics...
And if you ignore the fact that the antichristian gnostics were the ones who, as Irenaeus testified, invented the doctrine of "dual natures" whereby Christ could be conceived of and explained as both God and man at the same time, and Irenaeus called it blasphemy, and he said it was that doctrine that was the reason for which John wrote against the antichristians...
And if you ignore that Irenaeus, a disciple of Polycarp, who in turn was trained by John, said the antichristian idea of one God produced out of another before all creation would be impossible because there would be nowhere for this other god to be born into, and would be superfluous if that God didn't get born out of the godhead but remained within it, he thereby rejected both the antichristian idea and the Trinitarian idea after them based in the same concept, showing the earlier Christians didn't believe in such a thing, but were adamantly against it...
And if you ignore the fact that Tertullian, contrary to Irenaeus before him, adopted the antichristian gnostic doctrine of "dual natures"...
And if you ignore the fact that the idea of the "eternal generation" of the son wasn't even invented until Origen c. 184 – 253 AD (after both Irenaeus and Origen)...
And if you ignore the fact that the Trinity was made an "official" doctrine at a council presided over by Emperor Constantine, who, because Rome was bequeathed the throne of Satan as spoken of by Jesus in Revelation 2:13...
And if you ignore the fact that Jesus said you would know them by their fruits, and once the Trinitarians made the Trinity doctrine the law of the land they began murdering and rioting and all manner of unrighteousness against those who wouldn't go along with their newly defined Trinity doctrine...
And if you ignore the fact that Jesus was described as "a man approved of God", and that many Scriptures teach that he was exalted because of his righteousness...
And if you ignore the fact that Jesus said eternal life was to know his Father as the only true God...
And if you ignore the fact that Jesus explained himself, not as the person of God, but as the son and agent (representative) of God...
And if you ignore the fact that Jesus died, but God can't die...
Under those conditions, and others that could be added to the list of biblical teachings you'd have to ignore, then and only then, yes, I can see how you'd conclude that God was a Trinity.
But I for one can't ignore these facts.
I can't and won't ignore the fact that it is the one who died for my sins who told me he could do nothing of himself, through his words in the Bible, and led me on this path to know him and his Father, and my Father, and his God, and my God.
It was men who didn't die for my sins, who don't keep Jesus' commandment that God is one He, who developed and taught the Trinity. It was men who were disobedient to the apostle's commandment to teach no other doctrine that ignored that commandment also and arrogantly took it upon themselves to teach things the apostles would have had no knowledge of...they are the ones who developed and taught the Trinity.
I've read and studied the book of Acts many times. The second chapter should tell you what you need to know. The Jews had put Jesus to death because they claimed he said and did things that made himself out to be equal to God. The apostles told them to repent of that idea, and believe instead that Jesus was "a man approved of God by mighty works that God did by him".
I choose to believe in the Jesus that apostles openly proclaimed, not the one invented by the imaginations of evil, disobedient, lying, men.
"13"Enter in by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and many are those who enter in by it. 14How narrow is the gate, and restricted is the way that leads to life! Few are those who find it." Matthew 7:13-14
Edited