That is not a fact; that is a belief. Just because you believe something doesn't make it true, Alex. You can claim it as a belief but not as a fact.
[Kosta: and how do you know "we" know the original intent of that his choice?] Alex: The Holy Spirit dictates her what to decide.
How do you know that? Again, you are presenting your beliefs as facts. if they are facts I want factual proof.
In Luke 12, for example, Jesus says "the Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what you must say".
No, the verse reads "what is necessary (dei) to say."The choice is still yours. Is this like the one "don't worry what you will eat...?" How many have starved doing that?
The oldest Luke copies date to the third century (P45 and P75). We don't know if those words are a latter-day interpolation or not. We know how the Old Testament speaks of the Spirit of God, and it doesn't match Luke or John. The word for spirit simply means "breath" in Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek. Also, you can be taught without speaking in words or dictating.
That is closer to dictation than to moving people
Obviously not, Alex. A hot stove "taught" me what was necessary not to do. A knife "taught" me what wabsolutely necessary not to cut myself.
Likewise in John 16, "when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will teach you all truth. For he shall not speak of himself; but what things soever he shall hear, he shall speak [and he will shew you things to come.]"
That sentence makes no sense. The Spirit will serve as your "fly on the wall!?" This Spirit, whom Christians believe is God Himself, has to "hear" things in order to let you know?! This is like that Old Testament passage where God has to come "down" to see what's going on in order to know! LOL!
An in John 14, "the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring all things to your mind, whatsoever I shall have said to you". All these passages refer to actual speach of the Holy Ghost, and not to mere suggestons and encouragements
No, they don't, Alex. What they show is a state of doctrinal confusion and development of doctrine in the early Church as to who or what the Holy Spirit is and what He really does. Obviously John's concept of an all-seeing and all-knowing Holy Spirit is deficient because He has to "hear" things in order to tell you.
Or, in another exmaple, all known surviving copies of John call Jesus God, yet in John 15:15 Jesus says "For all things that I have heard [sic] from my Father I have made known to you"! You don't see serious Chrisotlogical and Penumatic issues in these passages?
Another problem is: If Jesus told his disicples everything he heard from the Father that means the Father hasn't told the Son everything if the Spirit has to teach us the rest.
Of course, +John wrote at the end of the century. His Gospel is like night and day compared to the other three. A lot has happened between 33 AD and 99 AD. Christianity was no longer a Jewish sect.
In fact, John depicts Jesus referring to the Jews as if he were not one of them — "your law" or "of the Jews" (John 5:1; 7:2; 11:55). A whole new religion was in the making...
It sound, Kosta, that you have your own interpretation of the passages in view which competes with the Catholic interpretation. If the Catholic interpretation has not become clear to you till this point, let us focus on what your remaining questions are.
As to your own ideas, I might have a comment if you present them in some systematic way.