Paul's salutations, no Holy Spirit?

Hebrews 1:3
The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of His nature, upholding all things by His powerful word. After He had provided purification for sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.

Hebrews 10:12
But our High Priest offered himself to God as a single sacrifice for sins, good for all time. Then he sat down in the place of honor at God's right hand.

Would not this be at or in a subordinate place or role? The right hand of his God? The God, oh god?

Again, no mention of the Holy Spirit.
Adam failed to represent God to the world, yet Jesus represented him so well that he was credited with being the exact representation of his being
 
You left off verse 9. Interesting that you think I ignore a verse, yet your doing the same, are you not? Verse 9 says Jesus has a God. "Therefore God, your God, has annointed you". So.... what is going on here? Lets look at the context. God says to let all the angels worship him. If he were God, would that not be assumed. He tells us that Jesus is greater than the angels. Hmmm, would that not be assumed, if the writer just told us that Jesus is God. The context is that God has made Jesus greater than all. Hmmmm, made him this way? Was he not already. Clearly, the writer of Hebrews has used verse 8 to clarify where the next verse is coming from. Apparently he wanted to draw attention to the Psalms verse and used a previous verse to help identify it. The writer is not saying unto the son he called him God, but rather pointing to a verse that is the same context as the context he is expounding on. The context is that Jesus has been made higher than the angels, not that he is God. Read it again, I concede that standing entirely alone.... it seemingly says Jesus is God. But you have to consider the context. Jesus has a God, Jesus was not greater before, Jesus is greater than the angels. If the writer had wanted to say Jesus is God then he would not go on to say that he was greater than the angels. Hmmmm, you have about ran out of the 5 or 6 go to verses. A few left, but they no longer, standing alone, seemingly look like Jesus is called God. After those 2, it gets much easier on my part. Again, you will think I am ignoring what it says. So why did you ignore that it says Jesus has a God?
Not ignoring anything purposely. I think the disconnect here is that you are seeing the concept of Jesus' temporary divesting of His glory and applying it to His eternal existence. It is true that while He was on this Earth, He gave up much of His former majesty. But, it's very important to realize this was only temporary, so that He could be our faithful high priest tempted in ALL points, like as we are. It was the only way. But when the atonement was finished, He was restored by the Father to the glory He had before the world began. He was always God. Even as a man He was God.

As a side note, let me also insert this. While Jesus was on earth, He did not flaunt His position. There is a reason for this. He remained humble in every way, not exalting Himself above anyone. In this way, many were blinded to His purpose and position....many are still blinded to it. But it's by divine purpose.
 
There is an OT concept that is lost on todays bible thumpers. Everything was created "in word" in the seven days. God spoke everything into being although most of it existing "in word" only. The OT saints were commended for considering God's words/promises as fact, although not yet come to pass. Each of us were foreknown from the beginning. So, in word, it all preexisted. Yet, only Adam had glory with God before time began [ the curse]. Jesus speaking as "the second Adam", speaks of what man lost and now regained.
 
Thread starter #64
There is an OT concept that is lost on todays bible thumpers. Everything was created "in word" in the seven days. God spoke everything into being although most of it existing "in word" only. The OT saints were commended for considering God's words/promises as fact, although not yet come to pass. Each of us were foreknown from the beginning. So, in word, it all preexisted. Yet, only Adam had glory with God before time began [ the curse]. Jesus speaking as "the second Adam", speaks of what man lost and now regained.
So maybe we didn't pre-exist as spirits but in Word only. We were already created, God knew us, we just weren't inserted into the story line yet.

But Jesus was aware of his pre-existance with God, with his Father.
 
Thread starter #66
Art, do you believe Jesus is God?
No, I believe he is the Son of God. I believe he has always been. I believe he has always been a subordinate Son to his Father. I don't believe he became a subordinate Son at his incarnation. I believe the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God.
I believe in the unity of the three, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

If I had to choose between a Trinity belief and Oneness, I would choose Oneness. I can see God becoming the Son more than God always existing as a Father and Son.

Notice how in most Trinity dialogues the Holy Spirit is not presented as often? We don't pray to the Holy Spirit. We don't sing; "The Holy Spirit loves the little Children."
Do you hear that the Holy Spirit loves you as much as you hear that God and Jesus love you?
1/3 of the Godhead and he isn't even presented as equal. Even if God and Jesus were equal it doesn't appear the Holy Spirit is as well.
 
So maybe we didn't pre-exist as spirits but in Word only. We were already created, God knew us, we just weren't inserted into the story line yet.

But Jesus was aware of his pre-existance with God, with his Father.
No, I believe he is the Son of God. I believe he has always been. I believe he has always been a subordinate Son to his Father. I don't believe he became a subordinate Son at his incarnation. I believe the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God.
I believe in the unity of the three, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

If I had to choose between a Trinity belief and Oneness, I would choose Oneness. I can see God becoming the Son more than God always existing as a Father and Son.

Notice how in most Trinity dialogues the Holy Spirit is not presented as often? We don't pray to the Holy Spirit. We don't sing; "The Holy Spirit loves the little Children."
Do you hear that the Holy Spirit loves you as much as you hear that God and Jesus love you?
1/3 of the Godhead and he isn't even presented as equal. Even if God and Jesus were equal it doesn't appear the Holy Spirit is as well.
Your close to what Arius believed.
 
Thread starter #70
Your close to what Arius believed.
I believe so. Regardless of exactly how we believe, there is a certain mystery about God's power and his unity and Oneness.

Does the singular one God become man? Does the persona known as Christ, co-equal to the Father, become man?
I believe the Father/Son relationship is eternal with no beginning or end. I do see as many holes in my belief as I see in the others, especially the Trinity and Oneness.
 
Last edited:
Thread starter #71
1 Corinthians 2:10-12
But God has revealed it to us by the Spirit. The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. 11For who among men knows the thoughts of man except his own spirit within him? So too, no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 12We have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us.

Interesting the Spirit searches the deep things of God. Our own spirit knows our thoughts.
My spirit knows my thoughts. God's Spirit knows my thoughts. My spirit through the help of God's Spirit can guide me.
Does that make me a trinity or does it just show unity?
Does this process in any way fractionalize God? If anything it shows the Oneness and Unity of God.

Maybe man likes to put everything in a box. We need labels. Thinking more about my own trinity of body, soul, and spirit.
Then compare that to God's Trinity. The Father(soul), the Son,(body), and the Holy Spirit(spirit).

Some of this from
CATHOLIC DOORS MINISTRY
https://www.catholicdoors.com/know/godv.htm

I haven't read it all but it looks interesting.
 
Last edited:
Thread starter #74
I don't know what that is, do you?
It could be a lot of things.
When the Holy Spirit awakens a person's spirit to their guilt? To their spirit's understanding that Jesus is their redeeming Savior?
Does he enlighten them as to his persona of the Godhead or does that come later?

I guess what I'm seeking and this is not really a Trinity vs something else question. When a person "believes?"
Maybe in a small African village. They have been awakened by the Spirit of God. They believe God sent his Son . They believe in the Father and the Son.
How do they learn of the concept if the Trinity? Is this a part of their effectual calling/special revelation?

When someone is suddenly filled with the Spirit of God, how does he know it is a 1/3 co-equal part of the Godhead and not just the Spirit of God? Even if they are the same? You may know that they are but how does this new believer know?
 
Last edited:
I call it Unity. Others see it as God becoming Jesus but not having always been Jesus. God isn't divided into always being fractions, he just changes modes.
When the Holy Spirit awakens a person's spirit to their guilt? To their spirit's understanding that Jesus is their redeeming Savior?
Does he enlighten them as to his persona of the Godhead or does that come later?

I guess what I'm seeking and this is not really a Trinity vs something else question. When a person "believes?"
Maybe in a small African village. They have been awakened by the Spirit of God. They believe God sent his Son . They believe in the Father and the Son.
How do they learn of the concept if the Trinity? Is this a part of their effectual calling/special revelation?

When someone is suddenly filled with the Spirit of God, how does he know it is a 1/3 co-equal part of the Godhead and not just the Spirit of God? Even if they are the same? You may know that they are but how does this new believer know?
:huh:I'm lost. You have everything from Sabellianism to special revelation to sanctification mixed up in that hash.:huh:
 
The Holy Spirit coming to dwell within man, the new covenant is contrasted with the Spirit of God living in the temple. Luke's debut of the HS on mankind is likened to the spirit of God coming to dwell in the temple Solomon built. It was the Spirit of God then, so it would seem that it would also be the Spirit of God in the NT. [not a coequal 3rd person of a triune God]
 
Thread starter #77
Was reading how scripture originally didn't have small letters or punctuation. Later the translators made it easier to read by adding it.
Now we may see spirit of God or God is spirit, Holy Spirit, spirit, or Spirit. I think the word is "pnuema." The translators decide how God was using this as they saw fit. May also mean wind or breath.
We have fruit of the light or fruit of the spirit.

One translation used Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit. I think others originally did but over time quit using Holy Ghost. So even it was the same word it may be used a Holy Ghost, Holy Spirit, God's spirit, Spirit, spirit, etc.
Then we have Word,word, him, Him, God, and god. All at the mercy of how the translator thought God wanted him to use it.
 
Was reading how scripture originally didn't have small letters or punctuation. Later the translators made it easier to read by adding it.
Now we may see spirit of God or God is spirit, Holy Spirit, spirit, or Spirit. I think the word is "pnuema." The translators decide how God was using this as they saw fit. May also mean wind or breath.
We have fruit of the light or fruit of the spirit.

One translation used Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit. I think others originally did but over time quit using Holy Ghost. So even it was the same word it may be used a Holy Ghost, Holy Spirit, God's spirit, Spirit, spirit, etc.
Then we have Word,word, him, Him, God, and god. All at the mercy of how the translator thought God wanted him to use it.
However, those who choose to disregard the work of those men, who have made the translation of scripture their life's work, on the basis of their use of Strong's or other similar tools, or based on an idiosyncratic theological approach, are on a fool's errand.
 
Was reading how scripture originally didn't have small letters or punctuation. Later the translators made it easier to read by adding it.
Now we may see spirit of God or God is spirit, Holy Spirit, spirit, or Spirit. I think the word is "pnuema." The translators decide how God was using this as they saw fit. May also mean wind or breath.
We have fruit of the light or fruit of the spirit.

One translation used Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit. I think others originally did but over time quit using Holy Ghost. So even it was the same word it may be used a Holy Ghost, Holy Spirit, God's spirit, Spirit, spirit, etc.
Then we have Word,word, him, Him, God, and god. All at the mercy of how the translator thought God wanted him to use it.
If you find this interesting, look at how they recklessly translated the word master. Lord, lord, master, Lord God, etc. They same exact word for Lord was used for Peter, if I recall, maybe it was another disciple.
 
Here is one translation, the first that popped up. How can this be?
NAS Exhaustive Concordance
Word Origin
from kuros (authority)
Definition
lord, master
NASB Translation
lord (10), Lord (626), Lord of lords (2), Lord's (12), lords (1), master (38), master's (3), masters (8), masters' (1), owner (6), owners (1), sir (11), sirs (1).
 
Top