Replies

Except you have been shown multiple times now that assertion is NOT true. If "nobody in bible times knew it or believed it" then WHY are there many, many verses in Scripture that say the Holy Spirit DOES exist

Well again I'm NOT arguing that there's no such thing as a holy spirit. Of course there is.

Except those passages speak about the Holy Spirit as a person (HE) apart from the Father and the Son, as proceeding FROM the Father and the Son, that does things and that things can be done TO Him.

"He" in English. Study the greek term for "spirit".

You ought to acknowledge that you have your OWN presuppositions prejudiced against the Holy Spirit as God

I have no prejudice against the holy spirit at all. I reject a doctrine that took 300 plus years to formulate and instead believe what Jesus, Peter and Paul believed. They did NOT believe in a trinity. This is obvious. If they believed this it would be contained in their teachings. Yet it's not. The only thing that is affirmed is that the Godhead is father and son. What is your interpretation of John 1:1-2? Where is the holy spirit in that clear picture of the Godhead? And where is the holy spirit in the glimpes of God's throne in Revelation? Where is the throne for the holy spirit?

I respect your right believe what you want on this and I would never force anyone to accept my word on a topic. I hope that you try to look at this objectively and pour through Scripture seeking God's insight (the Holy Spirit, Scripture says, will lead us into ALL truth). God is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.

I would ask you to do the same. I've seen, weighed and evaluated both views and chose the scriptures over tradition. That's not meant as an insult but the trinity is clearly tradition based. Again nobody in the bible EVER taught the trinity. It evolved through tradition. The tradition is believed and then scripture is used to justify tradition. Throw out the tradition and what we're left with is what Jesus and the apostles believed.

Some additional passages the Holy Spirit just reminded me of while I was taking a shower:o)...Jesus said:

Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: Of sin, because they believe not on me; Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.

I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. 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. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

The Holy Spirit glorifies Jesus and not Himself. Scripture says we can "grieve" the Holy Spirit with whom we are sealed until the day of redemption. We grieve Him, I believe, when we sin, when we ignore His power within us to walk in good works prepared for us and, even, when we deny Him or - as some sects do - overemphasize His role and place in the Godhead. The Nicean Creed was formulated in the fourth century, sure, but it really is undeniable that the truth of the threescore, triune nature of Almighty God is prevalent throughout Scripture - spoken of in Old Testament passages as well as the New Testament. The above passage from the Gospel of John is one of the main Scripture verses where the term about the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son comes from. It is an ancient Tradition (capital T) of the rule of the Christian faith as is the one, true God, the Deity of Jesus Christ, His virgin birth, His resurrection, His death on the cross for our justification and salvation by grace through faith. It would be a mistake to reject it just because its formal definition came later. What matters is if the doctrine can be proven BY Scripture and I believe it certainly can which is why I accept it.