How to walk by the spirit.

[Peterlag7]

Your knowledge of the Jew's perspective on sin in Jesus's day is severely lacking.
No conversation from a strictly Jewish perspective concerning sins that have separated the Jew from God as you claim is what Jesus is giving instruction about in the Lords Prayer could not include the edifice of Jewish worship.
For the Jew the sacred place where God Himself dwells on earth. the Temple.
For the Jew not just a place of worship, but the sacred sanctuary of God on earth.
That you esteem this to be a strictly Jewish prayer concerning sin of the Jew & yet not one word from Jesus to these Jews of the Temple which for Jews under the Old Covenant represented the True provision that God had given just to them as their means of atonement from sin and Spiritual cleansing shows a complete lack of understanding of the Jewish Temple System .
You are wrong on both counts.
That Jesus's prayer is not speaking to His disciples about things future and eternal.
And that Jesus's prayer is speaking to them about things past



Our Father, which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy Name. Thy Kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, As it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our trespasses, As we forgive them that trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation, But deliver us from evil. For thine is the kingdom, The power, and the glory, For ever and ever. Amen.

There is no give us our daily bread for the Christian. God already gave us everything in Christ. You are completely complete in him. The present administration of God is in the time period of the New Testament known as Grace. It deals with the new covenant, and it belongs to the time that is called the administration of the mystery. It's a period in time that was not made known to any one prior to this administration because God kept it a secret since the world began. From this our Grace administration, we learn God’s secret purpose that He had placed in Himself, according to the administration of Grace, which was first revealed to the apostle Paul.

From the eighth chapter of the book of Romans, it's written to those who live in this present Grace administration, “There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus” and “that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

From the sixth chapter of the book of Deuteronomy, it was written to those who lived under the Law administration, “it shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the Lord our God, as he hath commanded us.” However, from the third chapter of the book of Romans, it's written to those who live in this present Grace administration, “by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight.” What was written to those who lived under the Law administration is the complete opposite of what is written to us who live under the Grace administration.

We will always be in darkness and confusion regarding the truth of God’s Word if we do not understand the different administrations in the Bible. All hope for our redemption is in Jesus Christ, who was born into this world, died, and in the resurrection, he became the head of a new creation. The living resurrected Christ Jesus has become the one great subject that occupies the Word of God that the church belongs to. It's this Christ Jesus that is the key to the divine revelation in the Word of God for this our Grace administration. The contents of the New Testament must be understood in reference to Christ Jesus our Lord because the doctrine and nature of God for this our Grace administration are centered in His Christ.

Quoted from Stephen full of Faith and Power., 2000. pp. 34.
https://walking-by-the-spirit.com

 

[Consecrated Life]

Peter has the same mindset as Paul when he writes in 1 Peter "that we, being dead to sins,...

So who is Peter warning here , you never said ?

1Peter 5:8
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

 

[Free]

The words “HOLY SPIRIT” in the Bible are primarily used in two very different ways: One way is to refer to God Himself and the other is referring to God’s nature that He gives to people. God is holy and is spirit and therefore “the Holy Spirit” with a capital “H” and a capital “S” is one of the many “names” or designations for God. God gives His holy spirit nature to people as a gift and when HOLY SPIRIT is used that way it should be translated as the “holy spirit” with a lowercase “h” and a lowercase “s.” The Bible says there is one God, and one Lord, who is the man Jesus Christ; and one gift of the holy spirit. Most Christians are aware that the original manuscripts of the Bible were written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. However, it's not well known that Hebrew and Aramaic do not have uppercase and lowercase letters, but rather they just have one form for their letters.

Greek does have upper and lowercase letters, but the early Greek manuscripts were all written with only uppercase letters. Therefore, the early manuscripts had no such thing as the “Holy Spirit” or the “holy spirit” because what was always written was the "HOLY SPIRIT." The capital or lowercase letters are always a translator’s interpretation whenever we read “Holy Spirit” or “holy spirit” or “Spirit” or“spirit” in the English Bible. The difference is usually due to the theology of the translator. The bottom line is we cannot know from the Hebrew or Greek texts whether the Author meant the “Holy Spirit” or the “holy spirit”because we must decide based on the context and scope of Scripture whether the reference being made is to God or God’s gift.

So, you're fallaciously begging the question and undermining your own argument. You are beginning by assuming there is a difference between Holy Spirit and holy spirit, but admit that the NT was written in all uppercase. If it was all written in upper case, on what basis do you know that both "Holy Spirit" and "holy spirit" are mentioned? How do you know it isn't simply one or the other?

There are many descriptions, titles, and names for God in the Bible and I would like to add God’s proper name is “Yahweh” which occurs more than 6,000 times in the Hebrew Old Testament and is generally translated as “LORD.” But God is also referred to as Elohim, Adonai, El Shaddai, the Ancient of Days, the Holy One of Israel, Father, Shield, and by many more designations. Furthermore, God is holy (Leviticus 11:44), which is why He was called “the Holy One” (the Hebrew text uses the singular adjective “holy” to designate “the Holy One." He is also spirit (John 4:24). It makes perfect sense since God is holy and God is spirit that “Holy”and “Spirit” are sometimes combined and used as one of the many designations for God. Thus, the Hebrew or Greek words for the "HOLY SPIRIT" should be brought into English as the "Holy Spirit” when the subject of a verse is God.

Again, you're fallaciously begging the question. Of course God has many names, and, yes, God is holy and he is spirit, but it doesn't follow that God is the Holy Spirit. If the Father is God, and Jesus tells us he is, then the Father cannot be the Holy Spirit.

Mat 3:16 And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him;
Mat 3:17 and behold, a voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.” (ESV)

Mat 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (ESV)

Joh 14:16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever,
...
Joh 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you. (ESV)

Joh 16:13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.
Joh 16:14 He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you.
Joh 16:15 All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you. (ESV)

Notice that the Father and the Holy Spirit are mentioned as distinct. It is pointless and even misleading if they are one and the same. Again, throughout the NT, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are always kept distinct. There is no verse that says the Father is the Holy Spirit or that God is the Holy Spirit. The consistent distinctness between them really matters.

None of the dozens of descriptions, titles, or names of God are believed to be a separate, co-equal “Person” in a triune God except for the “HOLY SPIRIT” and there is no solid biblical reason to make the "Holy Spirit” into a separate “Person.” In other contexts the “HOLY SPIRIT” refers to the gift of God’s nature that He placed on people and the new birth to the Christian, and in those contexts it should be translated as the “holy spirit." God placed a form of His nature which is “holy spirit” upon people when He wanted to spiritually empower them because our natural fleshly human bodies do not have spirit power of their own. This holy spirit nature of God was a gift from God to humankind and we see this in the case of Acts 2:38 when the spirit is specifically called a "gift" when given to the Christian.

But, this is once again just begging the question by assuming that the Holy Spirit is just another name or title for God. It clearly is not, as the consistent distinction between the Father and the Holy Spirit points out. As the verses I gave above show, and as many more show, there are very valid reasons for the Holy Spirit being a distinct person from the Father.

God put His gift of the “holy spirit” or the “spirit” on as many people as He deemed necessary in the Old Testament, and we see this when we look at how God took the spirit that was upon Moses and put it upon the 70 elders of Israel. However, today everyone who makes Jesus Christ their Lord receives the indwelling gift of the holy spirit and that's why Peter on the Day of Pentecost quoted the prophecy in Joel that said God would “pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh." Many scholars admit the concept of the Trinity that also includes reference to the "Holy Spirit” as an independent “Person” cannot be found in the Old Testament. The Jews to whom the Old Testament was given did not recognize any such being.

Which doesn't really matter. All the Jews of Jesus's day expected him to vanquish their enemies and setup a physical kingdom, but they got that wrong and further revelation corrected them.

It's a well-known historical fact that “Hear, O Israel! Yahweh is our God, Yahweh alone,” was the cry of Israel. No verse or context openly states or even directly infers that there is a separate “Person” called “the Holy Spirit."

What doesn't seem to be well known, although it should be, is that that is a statement of monotheism only, not a statement about the nature of God (whether he is one person or three or ten). So, that too is begging the question.

 

[Free]

Almost every English version translates John 14:17 similarly to “even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him.” Translators capitalize “Spirit” and use “he” and “him”because of their theology.

Not necessarily. That argument is going to get you into some trouble...

The Greek word “spirit” is neuter and the text could also be translated as “the spirit of truth” and paired with “which” and “it.” The New American Bible reads “which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it.” Capitalizing the “H” and “S” and using the English pronoun “He” is appropriate when God is being referred to as “the Holy Spirit.” However, when we see the “h” and “s” having the lowercase such as "the holy spirit" and all the pronouns referring to that spirit being impersonal such as “it” and “which” is when the subject under discussion is the gift of God’s nature.

First, according to Mounce, the gender of nouns, for the most part, don't indicate the gender of the object. That is, grammatical gender doesn't indicate personal gender. The gender of a noun never changes. Yes, “spirit” in the Greek is neuter. However, look at John 14:16, 26, 15:26 and 16:7, where “Helper,” parakletos, is masculine. According to the gender argument then, that means the Helper is a he. So, which is it? Is the Holy Spirit a "he" or an "it"? The Holy Spirit cannot be a “he” in one context and an "it" in another context.

Then we also know that "spirit," ruach, in Hebrew is feminine, but masculine in Aramaic. Which are you going to go with? Jesus said that "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me," which, according to the gender argument, shows that the Spirit is neuter. But that is a quote from Isa 61:1, where Spirit is feminine. So, which do we go with?

To sum, then, it is clear that the argument that the Holy Spirit is an "it" based on the neuter gender of “spirit” is fallacious.

Second, let's look at the context of John 14:17:

Joh 14:16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever,
Joh 14:17 even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you.
...
Joh 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you. (ESV)

Jesus says the Holy Spirit is “another Helper.” That implies both that Jesus is the first “Helper” and that the Holy Spirit is one who is like him but distinct from him, which implies personhood. That is the plain reading of the text.

And what is a "Helper"? When we look at the Greek, it is the word parakletos, which means "helper, counselor, comforter, advocate;" all of which either are or can be actions of persons. The meaning of advocate is important since persons advocate on behalf of other persons; an "it" cannot advocate for anyone or anything.

Parakletos is used only five times in the NT. In addition to the above four instances in John, the fifth is also by John here, for "advocate":

1Jn 2:1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. (ESV)

Jesus is said, by John, to be an advocate. It is not insignificant, then, that John records Jesus saying that he will send "another parakletos." Jesus was the first parakletos, and remains so, but in John’s gospel he was returning to the Father and the disciples still needed much help and guidance. It all points to the Spirit being a person and also being truly God, in the same way Jesus is truly God.

An advocate can only be a person. Jesus also says it is for their advantage that he leaves and sends this Advocate. How is it, then, that having an "it" would be to their advantage, especially since Jesus is a person?

Third, notice what the Holy Spirit does, according to John 14:26--teaches and brings to remembrance. Those are actions of personal agency. We also have:

Joh 15:26 “But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me. (ESV)

Joh 16:8 And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment:
...
Joh 16:13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.
Joh 16:14 He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you.
Joh 16:15 All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you. (ESV)

Again, we see actions of personal agency: bearing witness; convicting; guiding; hearing; speaking; declaring; taking.

Additionally, the Holy Spirit:

Acts: Matt 4:1; Acts 8:39, 16:7
Listens: John 16:13
Speaks: John 16:13-15; Acts 1:16, 10:19, 11:12, 11:28, 13:2, 15:28; 1 Tim 4:1; Heb 3:7
Can be lied to: Acts 5:3, which is the same as lying to God (5:9)
Bears witness: Rom 8:16; Heb 10:15; 1 John 5:6
Helps, intercedes, and searches: John 14:16, 15:26, 16:7; Rom 8:26-27; 1 Cor 2:10
Teaches: Luke 12:12; John 16:13; 1 Cor 2:13
Gives gifts: Acts 20:28; 1 Cor 12:11; Heb 2:4
Leads: John 16:13; Gal 5:18, Heb 9:8
Can be grieved: Eph 4:30
Can be outraged: Heb 10:29
Can be blasphemed: Matt 12:31-32
Convicts: John 16:8-11

These are all actions of personal agency. Everything about the Holy Spirit in these passages strongly imply that the Holy Spirit is a divine person who is distinct from the Father and the Son.

 

[Free]

One of the ways we know that “pneuma hagion” often refers to the gift of God’s nature is that it “belongs” to God, who calls it “my” spirit. The spirit is called “God’s” spirit in many verses and King David understood the holy spirit belonged to God because he wrote “…do not take your holy spirit from me.” The Bible shows us that “the holy spirit” is under God’s authority and direction, which makes sense when we understand it's the gift of His nature that He gives to believers. The words “Messiah” in Hebrew (mashiyach מָשִׁיחַ) and “Christ” in Greek (christosΧριστός) both mean “anointed one.” Thus, the early Christians would have known him as “Jesus the anointed one.” God “anointed” Jesus Christ with the holy spirit and that's why Jesus was said to have been “anointed” even though people knew he had never been formally anointed with oil (Acts 4:27;10:38).

And, this is precisely why I brought up that the Holy Spirit is also known as the Spirit of Christ and the Spirit of his Son. It's why I brought up two passages that equate the Spirit of Christ with the Holy Spirit, one of which actually says the OT prophets prophesied by the Spirit of Christ.

We have no evidence in the Bible that “the Holy Spirit” was ever used as a name because no one ever used it in a direct address. Many people spoke or prayed directly to God, starting out by saying “O Yahweh” (translated as “O LORD” in almost all English versions). Furthermore, the name “Jesus” is a Greek form of the name“Joshua” (in fact, the King James Version confuses “Joshua” and “Jesus” in Acts 7:45 and Hebrews 4:8) and many people spoke “to Jesus” in the Bible. But no one in the Bible ever used “the Holy Spirit” in a direct address because there's simply no actual name for any “Person” known as “the Holy Spirit” anywhere in the Bible.

Holy Spirit could be a name. Even if it's only a title, the Holy Spirit is mentioned numerous times throughout the gospels and the rest of the NT, as distinct from the Father.

The “holy spirit” God gave in the Old Testament was God’s nature,

Again, begging the question.

The gift of the holy spirit that Christians have is a gift and thus an “it.”

Non-sequitur. It doesn't follow that because the Holy Spirit is a gift that "it" is therefore an "it." It just means that he's given freely and not based on merit.

Jesus told the apostles that the spirit would be “in” them (John14:17)—which is what happened on the Day of Pentecost when the holy spirit went from being with or “upon” people in the Old Testament and Gospels to being born “in” people on and after the Day of Pentecost. The spirit is sent by the Father (John 14:16-17) and Jesus (John 16:7). It does not speak on its own, but it speaks only what it hears (John 16:13). Thus, the gift of the holy spirit is directed by God and Jesus, which is what we would expect since it's God’s nature born in us. The gift of the holy spirit is the nature of God, and when it's born in us it becomes part of our very nature (2 Peter 1:4).

But, you're ignoring the obvious: the Holy Spirit speaks. As I have already pointed out, that's an action of personal agency.

God does not change, but the gift of God’s holy spirit that believers have today is different from the spirit that God gave in the Old Testament, and so the gift of God’s spirit has changed.

The Holy Spirit is a distinct, divine person, hence the Spirit in the OT is the very same Holy Spirit given to believers in the NT. So, I agree that God doesn't change.

The simple and straightforward reading of the Scripture is that there is one God, who is sometimes referred to as “the Holy Spirit” and one Lord who is the man Jesus Christ, and one gift of the holy spirit that is the nature of God that He gives to people.

There is simply no way that a "simple and straightforward reading of the Scripture" shows 'that there is one God, who is sometimes referred to as “the Holy Spirit”.' A simple and straightforward reading shows that the Father, who is most often the one referred to by "God" in the NT, is not the Holy Spirit. God gives us the Holy Spirit to convict us of sin, to guide and teach us, to declare things to us, to bear witness about Jesus, to intercede, etc. Again, all actions of personal agency, which precludes the Holy Spirit from being an "it."

 

[Peterlag7]

So who is Peter warning here , you never said ?

1Peter 5:8
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

Christians who do not have a sin nature.

 

[Consecrated Life]

So who is Peter warning here , you never said ?

1Peter 5:8
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

Christians who do not have a sin nature.

With no sin nature how would it be possible that the devil "may devour" a Christian according to Peter ?

 

[Peterlag7]

With no sin nature how would it be possible that the devil "may devour" a Christian according to Peter ?

Why do you think the devil cannot mess with Christians who are not being sober and who are not being strong in the Lord?

 

[Consecrated Life]

Why do you think the devil cannot mess with Christians who are not being sober and who are not being strong in the Lord?

It is obvious as Peter says having a fallen sin nature means that all Christians must be constantly sober and vigilant or their sin nature will make them vulnerable to Satan's attacks.
Glad you can see that.

1Peter 5:8
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

 

[Peterlag7]

It is obvious as Peter says having a fallen sin nature means that all Christians must be constantly sober and vigilant or their sin nature will make them vulnerable to Satan's attacks.
Glad you can see that.

1Peter 5:8
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

It's not obvious to me. To me it looks like Christians are vulnerable to satan's attacks when they are not strong in the Lord.

Ephesians 6:10-11
Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.

Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.

 

[Peterlag7]

The Christians of today believe they are alive to sin and it's with much effort, frustration, and failure that they battle this sin nature the rest of their lives. It now seems clear to me that this concept of what the Christians believe today is not what the Scriptures teach.

Romans 6:3
Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?

We experience a death to our old sin nature once we are baptized into Christ. It’s dead and gone because it does not exist anymore. We become totally new in our spirit when we are born again, and this is how our old nature has been completely changed. Our minds are similar to computers in the sense they can be programmed, and once programmed, they will continue to function as programmed until we reprogram them. And this is what Romans is talking about when it states we should renew our minds. Our old sin nature programmed our minds how to walk by the flesh when we were born in sin.

2 Corinthians 5:17
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

It’s not in the process of becoming new because it’s already as pure and perfect as it can be.

1 Corinthians 6:17
But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

Ephesians 4:24
And that ye put on the new man,which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.

1 John 4:17
Herein is our love made perfect,that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world.

Romans 6:5-6
For ifwe have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection.

Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.

This is not something that has yet to happen or has to happen over and over. It’s a done deal because in our new, born-again spirit, we are dead to sin. And so our sin nature is dead and gone, but it left behind a body that has a carnal mind, and therefore it will still function as programmed until we reprogram it. It's what the New Testament calls the "renewed mind" when our lives are transformed by the process of reprogramming our thoughts.

Romans 12:2
And be not conformed to this world:but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

Therefore, victory in the Christian life is as simple as renewing our minds to who we are and what we have already received in Christ. It’s not the struggle of two natures inside of us. We will continue to struggle with sin if we see ourselves as old sinners saved by grace. And so it's also true we will manifest the change that took place in our new nature when we understand we are not old sinners saved by grace. Thus, we act like being part of the senses world when we see ourselves as being part of the senses world. We act like being part of the Christian world when we see ourselves as being part of Christ—i.e., in our born-again spirits.

 

[Consecrated Life]

It's not obvious to me. To me it looks like Christians are vulnerable to satan's attacks when they are not strong in the Lord.

Ephesians 6:10-11
Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.

Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.

Glad to see you get the message of Peter, that Christians are still retain a sin nature & that we must always be vigilant in our walk with the Lord to guard against the attack of Satan .
Glad to help guide you in learning that.

1Peter 5:8
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

 

[Peterlag7]

Glad to see you get the message of Peter, that Christians are still retain a sin nature & that we must always be vigilant in our walk with the Lord to guard against the attack of Satan .
Glad to help guide you in learning that.

1Peter 5:8
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

No I'm not getting your message. Christians do not have a sin nature because they are many times not being strong in the Lord. I have the nature of my father as a human. If I am not strong when I'm driving I could get killed. That does not mean I have a different nature if I drive poorly. Why you believe nature changes based on behavior is a great mystery to me.

 

[Peterlag7]

So, you're fallaciously begging the question and undermining your own argument. You are beginning by assuming there is a difference between Holy Spirit and holy spirit, but admit that the NT was written in all uppercase. If it was all written in upper case, on what basis do you know that both "Holy Spirit" and "holy spirit" are mentioned? How do you know it isn't simply one or the other?


Again, you're fallaciously begging the question. Of course God has many names, and, yes, God is holy and he is spirit, but it doesn't follow that God is the Holy Spirit. If the Father is God, and Jesus tells us he is, then the Father cannot be the Holy Spirit.

Mat 3:16 And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him;
Mat 3:17 and behold, a voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.” (ESV)

Mat 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (ESV)

Joh 14:16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever,
...
Joh 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you. (ESV)

Joh 16:13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.
Joh 16:14 He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you.
Joh 16:15 All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you. (ESV)

Notice that the Father and the Holy Spirit are mentioned as distinct. It is pointless and even misleading if they are one and the same. Again, throughout the NT, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are always kept distinct. There is no verse that says the Father is the Holy Spirit or that God is the Holy Spirit. The consistent distinctness between them really matters.


But, this is once again just begging the question by assuming that the Holy Spirit is just another name or title for God. It clearly is not, as the consistent distinction between the Father and the Holy Spirit points out. As the verses I gave above show, and as many more show, there are very valid reasons for the Holy Spirit being a distinct person from the Father.


Which doesn't really matter. All the Jews of Jesus's day expected him to vanquish their enemies and setup a physical kingdom, but they got that wrong and further revelation corrected them.


What doesn't seem to be well known, although it should be, is that that is a statement of monotheism only, not a statement about the nature of God (whether he is one person or three or ten). So, that too is begging the question.

The Jews would not have considered Jesus a threat, but insane if he had walked around saying he was God. Why you hold on to such a concept is a great mystery to me. There is not one verse that says Jesus is God the Son. Nor has there ever been a teaching on it anywhere in the Bible. The Jews never saw it anywhere in the entire Old Testament nor anyone in the New Testament ever taught it. The Catholics who invented this nonsense have used only about 8 verses that they have to piece together from statements that are scattered all over the New Testament. One should think if such nonsense was true and important that it would have been taught by someone. And it is not.

There's no teaching on the trinity anywhere in the Bible. No whole paragraph or chapter teaching that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God. If the Jews had no trinity, and the Christians had no trinity until it was officially declared by the Catholic Church in the 4th century. Then don’t you have to wonder where it came from? If it was formulated by the same Church that brought you Mary Mother of God, immortality of the soul, purgatory and hellfire... then don't you wonder just a little bit?

 

[Corinth77777]

What is written directly to the Jews, belongs to and is for the Jews. What is written directly to the Gentiles, belongs to and is for the Gentiles. What is written directly to the Church of God, belongs to and is for the Church of God. What does God mean when He tells us that the visions shown to Isaiah was concerning Judah and Jerusalem? It was not addressed to us or written concerning us, but it was addressed to and concerning Judah and Jerusalem. It would be dishonest for the Church of God to interpret to the Church of God what God said concerns Israel.

Peterlag7
Do you believe you have to be water baptized to be saved?

 

[Consecrated Life]

. Christians do not have a sin nature...

So who exactly is it that Peter giving this warning to that if they are not on guard they may fall victim to Satan's devices ???

1Peter 5:8
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

 

[Free]

The Jews would not have considered Jesus a threat, but insane if he had walked around saying he was God.

On the contrary, they would have considered it blasphemous, and they did, which is precisely one of the main reasons they killed him.

Joh 5:18 This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God. (ESV)

Joh 8:58 Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.”
Joh 8:59 So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple. (ESV)

Joh 10:33 The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.” (ESV)

Why you hold on to such a concept is a great mystery to me.

Because it is biblical. It is the most important truth about who Jesus is and central to the gospel and salvation.

There is not one verse that says Jesus is God the Son. Nor has there ever been a teaching on it anywhere in the Bible.

There are the teachings that there is only one God, Jesus is the Son of God, that he is God, but that he isn't the Father. It's putting the pieces together, taking God's revelation as a whole, which is what we must be doing.

The Jews never saw it anywhere in the entire Old Testament

Which, as I have pointed out, isn't relevant since they couldn't even understand that the Messiah was not going to come and vanquish their enemies. They completely missed that the Messiah was going to die and rise again for the salvation of all.

nor anyone in the New Testament ever taught it.

That Jesus is truly God in addition to being truly man is taught throughout the NT, even by Jesus himself, as I have given above.

The Catholics who invented this nonsense have used only about 8 verses that they have to piece together from statements that are scattered all over the New Testament.

When did they supposedly invent the deity of Jesus? There are significantly more than 8 verses.

One should think if such nonsense was true and important that it would have been taught by someone. And it is not.

It is. It's in numerous places in the NT.

There's no teaching on the trinity anywhere in the Bible. No whole paragraph or chapter teaching that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God.

Again, it's found by taking the entire revelation of God into account, not by taking one verse at a time, which is what anti-Trinitarians typically do. Besides, on what basis is a doctrine declared true because there is a "whole paragraph or chapter teaching that we should believe," especially when such divisions came later and were somewhat arbitrary? Good theology and doctrinal development are always done by taking all the relevant verses and passages into account.

Joh 20:28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” (ESV)

Thomas confessed that Jesus was both his Lord and his God, without any rebuke from Jesus, so that makes me think that we should too. John begins and ends his gospel with the clear teaching of the deity of Jesus:

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 He was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.
...
Joh 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him.
...
Joh 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.
...
Joh 1:18 No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known. (ESV)

And, John shows the deity of Jesus throughout his gospel, some of which I have already given.

If the . . . the Christians had no trinity until it was officially declared by the Catholic Church in the 4th century.

But, that isn't true. The deity of Christ is found very early in Christian writings. Take Ignatius, for example, who often speaks of Jesus and the Son as being God: "Jesus Christ, our God" (Ephesians 1); "For our God, Jesus Christ, was, according to the appointment of God, conceived in the womb by Mary, of the seed of David, but by the Holy Ghost" (Ephesians 18); "God Himself being manifested in human form for the renewal of eternal life (Ephesians 19); "the Church which is beloved and enlightened by the will of Him that willeth all things which are according to the love of Jesus Christ our God . . . in Jesus Christ our God" (Romans 1); "For our God, Jesus Christ" (Romans 3); "Look for Him who is above all time, eternal and invisible, yet who became visible for our sakes; impalpable and impassible, yet who became passible on our account; and who in every kind of way suffered for our sakes" (Polycarp 3). He also has some very Trinitarian language, "as being stones of the temple of the Father, prepared for the building of God the Father, and drawn up on high by the instrument of Jesus Christ, which is the cross, making use of the Holy Spirit as a rope" (Ephesians 9).

Or, look at what Polycarp, said to have been a disciple of John, writes in his letter to the Philippians:

'2 Now may God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the "eternal Priest" himself, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, build you up in faith and truth, and in all gentleness, and without wrath, and in patience, and in longsuffering, and endurance, and purity, and may he give you lot and part with his saints, and to us with you, and to all under heaven who shall believe in our Lord and God Jesus Christ and in his "Father who raised him from the dead"' (12:2).

https://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/polycarp-lake.html

Also, when praying at his martyrdom, he reportedly stated: "I praise You for all things, I bless You, I glorify You, along with the everlasting and heavenly Jesus Christ, Your beloved Son, with whom, to You, and the Holy Ghost, be glory both now and to all coming ages. Amen." (The Martyrdom of Polycarp, 14:3).

https://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/martyrdompolycarp-lightfoot.html

Those are early to mid second century.

Then don’t you have to wonder where it came from?

No, I don't, because worship of Jesus and claims of his deity started in the NT, which is why those have continued throughout Church history. The doctrine of the Trinity simply best takes into account and makes the most sense of all that the Bible reveals about the nature of God and Jesus.

If it was formulated by the same Church that brought you Mary Mother of God, immortality of the soul, purgatory and hellfire... then don't you wonder just a little bit?

That was also the Church that gave us our canon. Just because it took time to develop a more robust Trinitarian doctrine and theology, and just because there are other disagreeable doctrines developed, doesn't mean that the Trinity is false or unbiblical. It's a non-sequitur to make such an association.

 

[Bruce.Leiter]

Why would Jesus be instructing His apostles, who are about to go forth giving the Gospel to the world, in a very detailed prayer that will have no application to anybody in a couple of months ?
That makes no biblical sense.
It contrary .
Jesus Said that this prayer that He has spoken will never pass away .
If the prayer of Jesus will never pass away then it has application for believers .
It cannot be otherwise.

Luk 11:1
Lord, teach us to pray, as John also taught his disciples.
Luk 11:2
And he said unto them,
When ye pray, say,........
.........And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil.

Why are you questioning Jesus' teaching about the kind of prayer disciples would need to pray? Why won't it have "no application to anybody in a couple months"? What are you talking about? Why doesn't it make "biblical sense," and why is it "contrary"? Please be clearer when you question Jesus' teachings. What you have said doesn't make much sense.

 

[Bruce.Leiter]

The words “HOLY SPIRIT” in the Bible are primarily used in two very different ways: One way is to refer to God Himself and the other is referring to God’s nature that He gives to people. God is holy and is spirit and therefore “the Holy Spirit” with a capital “H” and a capital “S” is one of the many “names” or designations for God. God gives His holy spirit nature to people as a gift and when HOLY SPIRIT is used that way it should be translated as the “holy spirit” with a lowercase “h” and a lowercase “s.” The Bible says there is one God, and one Lord, who is the man Jesus Christ; and one gift of the holy spirit. Most Christians are aware that the original manuscripts of the Bible were written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. However, it's not well known that Hebrew and Aramaic do not have uppercase and lowercase letters, but rather they just have one form for their letters.

Greek does have upper and lowercase letters, but the early Greek manuscripts were all written with only uppercase letters. Therefore, the early manuscripts had no such thing as the “Holy Spirit” or the “holy spirit” because what was always written was the "HOLY SPIRIT." The capital or lowercase letters are always a translator’s interpretation whenever we read “Holy Spirit” or “holy spirit” or “Spirit” or“spirit” in the English Bible. The difference is usually due to the theology of the translator. The bottom line is we cannot know from the Hebrew or Greek texts whether the Author meant the “Holy Spirit” or the “holy spirit”because we must decide based on the context and scope of Scripture whether the reference being made is to God or God’s gift.

There are many descriptions, titles, and names for God in the Bible and I would like to add God’s proper name is “Yahweh” which occurs more than 6,000 times in the Hebrew Old Testament and is generally translated as “LORD.” But God is also referred to as Elohim, Adonai, El Shaddai, the Ancient of Days, the Holy One of Israel, Father, Shield, and by many more designations. Furthermore, God is holy (Leviticus 11:44), which is why He was called “the Holy One” (the Hebrew text uses the singular adjective “holy” to designate “the Holy One." He is also spirit (John 4:24). It makes perfect sense since God is holy and God is spirit that “Holy”and “Spirit” are sometimes combined and used as one of the many designations for God. Thus, the Hebrew or Greek words for the "HOLY SPIRIT" should be brought into English as the "Holy Spirit” when the subject of a verse is God.

None of the dozens of descriptions, titles, or names of God are believed to be a separate, co-equal “Person” in a triune God except for the “HOLY SPIRIT” and there is no solid biblical reason to make the "Holy Spirit” into a separate “Person.” In other contexts the “HOLY SPIRIT” refers to the gift of God’s nature that He placed on people and the new birth to the Christian, and in those contexts it should be translated as the “holy spirit." God placed a form of His nature which is “holy spirit” upon people when He wanted to spiritually empower them because our natural fleshly human bodies do not have spirit power of their own. This holy spirit nature of God was a gift from God to humankind and we see this in the case of Acts 2:38 when the spirit is specifically called a "gift" when given to the Christian.

God put the holy spirit upon Jesus immediately after he was baptized by John the Baptist because Jesus himself needed God’s gift of the holy spirit to have supernatural power just as the leaders and prophets of the Old Testament did. This fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies that God would put the holy spirit upon the Messiah enabling him in his ministry. The gift of the holy spirit was born “in” believers (John 14:17) after the Day of Pentecost rather than resting “upon” them and this is one reason why Christians are said to be “born again” of God’s spirit (1Peter 1:3, 23). Christians have spiritual power when they receive the gift of the holy spirit (Acts 1:8) because the holy spirit is born in them and becomes part of their very nature, and this is why Christians are called God’s “holy ones” which is usually translated as “saints” in the New Testament.

God put His gift of the “holy spirit” or the “spirit” on as many people as He deemed necessary in the Old Testament, and we see this when we look at how God took the spirit that was upon Moses and put it upon the 70 elders of Israel. However, today everyone who makes Jesus Christ their Lord receives the indwelling gift of the holy spirit and that's why Peter on the Day of Pentecost quoted the prophecy in Joel that said God would “pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh." Many scholars admit the concept of the Trinity that also includes reference to the "Holy Spirit” as an independent “Person” cannot be found in the Old Testament. The Jews to whom the Old Testament was given did not recognize any such being. It's a well-known historical fact that “Hear, O Israel! Yahweh is our God, Yahweh alone,” was the cry of Israel. No verse or context openly states or even directly infers that there is a separate “Person” called “the Holy Spirit."

Almost every English version translates John 14:17 similarly to “even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him.” Translators capitalize “Spirit” and use “he” and “him”because of their theology. The Greek word “spirit” is neuter and the text could also be translated as “the spirit of truth” and paired with “which” and “it.” The New American Bible reads “which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it.” Capitalizing the “H” and “S” and using the English pronoun “He” is appropriate when God is being referred to as “the Holy Spirit.” However, when we see the “h” and “s” having the lowercase such as "the holy spirit" and all the pronouns referring to that spirit being impersonal such as “it” and “which” is when the subject under discussion is the gift of God’s nature.

One of the ways we know that “pneuma hagion” often refers to the gift of God’s nature is that it “belongs” to God, who calls it “my” spirit. The spirit is called “God’s” spirit in many verses and King David understood the holy spirit belonged to God because he wrote “…do not take your holy spirit from me.” The Bible shows us that “the holy spirit” is under God’s authority and direction, which makes sense when we understand it's the gift of His nature that He gives to believers. The words “Messiah” in Hebrew (mashiyach מָשִׁיחַ) and “Christ” in Greek (christosΧριστός) both mean “anointed one.” Thus, the early Christians would have known him as “Jesus the anointed one.” God “anointed” Jesus Christ with the holy spirit and that's why Jesus was said to have been “anointed” even though people knew he had never been formally anointed with oil (Acts 4:27;10:38).

We have no evidence in the Bible that “the Holy Spirit” was ever used as a name because no one ever used it in a direct address. Many people spoke or prayed directly to God, starting out by saying “O Yahweh” (translated as “O LORD” in almost all English versions). Furthermore, the name “Jesus” is a Greek form of the name“Joshua” (in fact, the King James Version confuses “Joshua” and “Jesus” in Acts 7:45 and Hebrews 4:8) and many people spoke “to Jesus” in the Bible. But no one in the Bible ever used “the Holy Spirit” in a direct address because there's simply no actual name for any “Person” known as “the Holy Spirit” anywhere in the Bible.
The “holy spirit” God gave in the Old Testament was God’s nature, but after the Day of Pentecost He gave His nature in a new and fuller way than He had ever given it before and this is what was foretold in the Old Testament (Ezekiel 11:19;36:26). It was because this new spirit was promised in the Old Testament that the New Testament calls it “the promised holy spirit” Ephesians 1:13; Acts 2:33; Galatians 3:14). We have the “firstfruits” of the spirit (Romans 8:23) because Christians are the first to receive this new spirit and that's why we have the guarantee that we will be in the coming Messianic Kingdom.

The gift of the holy spirit that Christians have is a gift and thus an “it.” Jesus told the apostles that the spirit would be “in” them (John14:17)—which is what happened on the Day of Pentecost when the holy spirit went from being with or “upon” people in the Old Testament and Gospels to being born “in” people on and after the Day of Pentecost. The spirit is sent by the Father (John 14:16-17) and Jesus (John 16:7). It does not speak on its own, but it speaks only what it hears (John 16:13). Thus, the gift of the holy spirit is directed by God and Jesus, which is what we would expect since it's God’s nature born in us. The gift of the holy spirit is the nature of God, and when it's born in us it becomes part of our very nature (2 Peter 1:4).

God does not change, but the gift of God’s holy spirit that believers have today is different from the spirit that God gave in the Old Testament, and so the gift of God’s spirit has changed. The simple and straightforward reading of the Scripture is that there is one God, who is sometimes referred to as “the Holy Spirit” and one Lord who is the man Jesus Christ, and one gift of the holy spirit that is the nature of God that He gives to people.

I read a commentary once by a theologically-liberal scholar about the Gospel of John. At its end, though he didn't believe that God inspired the Bible, he came to the conclusion that John believed in the Trinity, which means that God is three Persons in one God. Why, really, do you deny that truth that so many Christians believe because of John's gospel and other passages? Why?

 

[Consecrated Life]

Why are you questioning Jesus' teaching about the kind of prayer disciples would need to pray? Why won't it have "no application to anybody in a couple months"? What are you talking about? Why doesn't it make "biblical sense," and why is it "contrary"? Please be clearer when you question Jesus' teachings. What you have said doesn't make much sense.

That's the trouble with internet forums, it is difficult to keep up with extended discussions that contain a dozen or more back and forth posts .
As to what you are asking about my response, I was responding to another person's contention that the Lord's Prayer applies only to Jews and not to Christians.