Holy Spirit

[joyinhim]

It seems that "Holy Spirit" is misunderstood by many Christians.

Some denomination insist that if we don't seak tongues (I believe they mean nonsense babble) we don't have Holy Spirit. I wholeheartedy disagree.

Holy Spirit is Jesus' ambassaor. If we are true believes He is in us to help us to do His will.

How can we tell if the Holy Spirit is us? its by our good works. If we are improving our servanthood as days and years go by Holy spirit is definitely in us.

 

[Gendou Ikari]

I'll agree with you on that. But I believe that the Holy Ghost is not a personality. Rather, it is something that both Jesus and God possess. Read John 14-16, I think. You will see that Jesus has Holy Ghost.

 

[joyinhim]

I'll agree with you on that. But I believe that the Holy Ghost is not a personality. Rather, it is something that both Jesus and God possess. Read John 14-16, I think. You will see that Jesus has Holy Ghost.

Hi ikari, thank you for your reply.

I just wanted express how some denomination misusing the Holy Spirit in ungodly way. We have to stop misusing or misrepresenting Holy Spirit in this manner.

 

[Blazin Bones]

I'll agree with you on that. But I believe that the Holy Ghost is not a personality. Rather, it is something that both Jesus and God possess. Read John 14-16, I think. You will see that Jesus has Holy Ghost.

gendou, would you mind explaining this a little more?

 

[Vic C.]

That is basically a binitarian concept, Tim.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls= ... an&spell=1

 

[SputnikBoy]

Whether those who refer to an 'infilling' of the Holy Spirit as meaning 'speaking in tongues' or not, almost all of those who claim to be 'Spirit-filled' do so in an almost accusatory or demeaning manner to others who they consider not 'Spirit-filled'. Their focus is centered so much on the Holy Spirit - which they may honestly believe they possess - that it becomes almost impossible to converse or dialogue with them as human to human.

As soon as the supposed 'Spirit-filled' person senses that one is NOT 'Spirit-filled' according to THEIR definition of that term, then they behave or respond to the other person as being a 'lesser' Christian, whether intentional or not. The very fact that they demean other Christians by virtue of their supposed 'infilling of the Holy Spirit' should set alarm bells ringing right away. If this is the example and behavior of one's being 'Spirit-filled' ...then who, honestly, would want it?

'Spirit-filled' as we refer to the term today is a Pentecostal or 'charismatic' phenomenon that crept into Christianity some hundred years ago. Prior to the early 1900's no Christian had even heard the term, let alone having been 'physically' affected by it. It has since bloomed into the phenomena we know of today which often manifests itself in the strange and questionable behavior we see or hear about in some of the present-day Pentecostal churches.

We perhaps need to ask ourselves, would Jesus allow Himself to be 'slain in the Spirit?' Would He (whether in the name of the Holy Spirit or not) bark like a dog? cackle like a hen? snort like a pig? run up and down the aisles of the church streaming ribbons behind Him? roll on the floor in hysterical laughter (the 'Toronto Blessing')? Would He babble away in meaningless gibberish merely to 'prove' He has an infilling of the Holy Spirit?

While there are those on this forum who perhaps don't participate in any of the above practices and yet claim to have an 'infilling of the Holy Spirit', a number of them certainly DO possess an air of superiority that only serves to demean others in the process. While it isn't up to the likes of me to pass judgment on others, I believe that the Holy Spirit can be seen by the love a Christian displays toward others. Simple. Forget the tangible, the dramatic, the 'lip service', the self-serving practices, the exalting of self ...these things MAY indeed indicate that one is being led by a spirit but it may not necessarily be the Holy Spirit.

 

[Gendou Ikari]

gendou, would you mind explaining this a little more?

I'd love to.

And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. (John 14:16-18)

This comforter is clearly Jesus since it says that I will come to you. Pretty simple isn't it.

At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. (John 14:20)

The Comforter is something that links entities persons together.

Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. (John 14:23)

God and Jesus will come to us through the Comforter.

But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. (John 14:26)

The Comforter is the Holy Ghost[spirit]. And the comforter is of the Son and of the Father, which makes the Holy Ghost also of them. The Holy Ghost is their spirit.

Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I. (John 14:28)

Jesus must go away before the Holy Ghost can come. Why? Because the Holy Ghost is Christ. It is his Pneuma[spirit] but it is not just any spitit, it is Holy Spirit: hagios pneuma.

That is basically a binitarian concept, Tim.

I'm not a Binitarian. I guess that I am closer to a unitarian but I don't agree with a lot of their doctrines.

This is what I believe:

But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. (I Corinthians 8:6)

That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: (Ephesians 1:17)

That's right! Jesus has a God. Is that wrong of me to say?

 

[Merry Menagerie]

It seems that "Holy Spirit" is misunderstood by many Christians.

Some denomination insist that if we don't seak tongues (I believe they mean nonsense babble) we don't have Holy Spirit. I wholeheartedy disagree.

Holy Spirit is Jesus' ambassaor. If we are true believes He is in us to help us to do His will.

How can we tell if the Holy Spirit is us? its by our good works. If we are improving our servanthood as days and years go by Holy spirit is definitely in us.

We are known by our fruits!

I agree with your stance Re: tongues - even though I speak in tongues myself I do not agree that it is the initial evidence of the Holy Spirit nor do I agree that it's necessary for salvation.

The evidence is faith...

"Faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things unseen".

 

[Free]

And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. (John 14:16-18)

This comforter is clearly Jesus since it says that I will come to you. Pretty simple isn't it.

It is simple, but you have missed the obvious points which contradict your conclusion. Clearly Jesus states that the Father will send "another Comforter". By definition, "another" is someone or something other than the original. The Holy Spirit, the "Spirit of truth," is also referred to as "he," which clearly indicates personality.

This is why the doctrine of the Trinity best explains the Godhead. This passage can only be rightly understood within the context of the doctrine of the Trinity.

The Comforter is something that links entities persons together.

Again, you overlook the fact that not only is the Holy Spirit referred to as "he," but there are numerous verses that speak of the Holy Spirit in personal terms - he can be grieved, he talks, directs, etc.

But here you also contradict your previous argument. You stated that Jesus is the Comforter, yet here you argue that the Comforter is a "something". Is Jesus a something? You also stated in your previous post that "[you] believe that the Holy Ghost is not a personality."

God and Jesus will come to us through the Comforter.

And here it is, the blessed communion of the Holy Trinity - Father, Son, and Spirit. The three are distinct personalities, but yet are so closely intertwined that one cannot fully tell where one ends and the other begins.

But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. (John 14:26)

The Comforter is the Holy Ghost[spirit]. And the comforter is of the Son and of the Father, which makes the Holy Ghost also of them. The Holy Ghost is their spirit.

Again, the Holy Spirit is referred to, by Jesus, as "he". Also, it is the Holy Spirit who "teaches" and will "bring to remembrance" all the things that Jesus said unto them.

Not only will the Holy Spirit do things that persons do (so Christ rightfully refers to him as "he"), but Jesus also distinguishes the Holy Spirit from himself.

Jesus must go away before the Holy Ghost can come. Why? Because the Holy Ghost is Christ.

Here it is again despite your claim that the Holy Spirit is "something" and "not a personality". If the Holy Spirit is Christ, how can it be a something?

 

[Gendou Ikari]

Free, I didn't really check what I said. I should have spent more time writing. I'm just getting over a cold. The last thing that I want to do it to contradict.

 

[Dave...]

sputnikBoy wrote:

'Spirit-filled' as we refer to the term today is a Pentecostal or 'charismatic' phenomenon that crept into Christianity some hundred years ago. Prior to the early 1900's no Christian had even heard the term, let alone having been 'physically' affected by it. It has since bloomed into the phenomena we know of today which often manifests itself in the strange and questionable behavior we see or hear about in some of the present-day Pentecostal churches.

I think one of the many places that the Pentecostals/Charismatics fall short in understanding the "filling" is that they fail to make a proper distinction between being baptised with the Holy Spirit, and being filled with the Holy Spirit.

From Macarthur

"Being filled with the spirit must be distinguished from being baptized with the spirit. The apostle Paul carefully defines the baptism with the spirit as that act of Christ by which He places believers into His body (Romans 6:4-6; 1 Corinthians 12:13; Galatians 3:27). In contrast to much errant teaching today, the New Testament nowhere commands believers to seek the baptism with the Holy Spirit. It is a sovereign, single, unrepeatable act on Gods part, and is no more an experience than are its companions justification and adoption. Although some wrongly view the baptism with the Spirit as the initiation into the ranks of the spiritual elite, nothing could be further from the truth. The purpose of the baptism with the spirit is not to divide the body of Christ, but to unify it. As Paul wrote to the Corinthians, through the baptism with the Spirit "we were all baptized into one body" (1 Corinthians 12:13; cf. Galatians 3:26-27; Ephesians 4:4-6)

Unlike the baptism with the Spirit, being filled with the Spirit is an experience and should be continuous. Although filled initially on the day of Pentecost, Peter was filled again in Acts 4:8. Many of the same people filled with the Spirit in Acts 2 were filled again in Acts 4:31. Acts 6:5 describes Stephen as a man "full of faith and the Holy Spirit," yet Acts 7:55 records his being filled again. Paul was filled with the Spirit in Acts 9:17 and again in Acts 13:9.

While there is no command in scripture to be baptized with the Spirit, believers are commanded to be filled with the Spirit (Ephesians 5:18 ). The grammatical construction of that passage indicates believers are to be continuously being filled with the Spirit. Those who would be filled with the Spirit must first empty themselves. That involves confession of sin and dying to selfishness and self will. To be filled with the Holy Spirit is to consciously practice the presence of the Lord Jesus Christ and to have a mind saturated with the Word of God. Colossians 3:16-25 delineates the results of "letting the word of Christ richly dwell" in us. They are the same ones that result from the filling of the Spirit (Ephesians 5:19-33). As believers yield the moment by moment decisions of life to His control, they "walk by the Spirit" (Galatians 5:16). The baptism of the Spirit grants the power that the filling with the Spirit unleashes." (Macarthur)

Free said:

It is simple, but you have missed the obvious points which contradict your conclusion. Clearly Jesus states that the Father will send "another Comforter". By definition, "another" is someone or something other than the original. The Holy Spirit, the "Spirit of truth," is also referred to as "he," which clearly indicates personality.

This is why the doctrine of the Trinity best explains the Godhead. This passage can only be rightly understood within the context of the doctrine of the Trinity.

I agree 100%. Interesting, that the word "another" in that passage, depending on sentence structure, etc., can be defined in one of two ways. The first would be "Another of a different kind". In this passage though, the second option is the proper definition, "another of the same kind". I like this more detailed understanding because I think it not only allows for the one person to be distinguished from the other "Another", but also shows and supports the doctrine of the Trinity.

Dave

 

[PHIL121]

My view of the Holy Spirit is somewhat unorthodox in that I believe that while the Holy Spirit has a distinct personality, it has a different nature that God or Jesus.

I think the fact that the Holy Spirit is always portrayed in a non-humanform in both art and literature is significant.

 

[Imagican]

Free,

Once again we butt heads. I believe that the answer lies in 'just the opposite' of what you offer with your 'trinity'.

I believe that the Holy Spirit is the 'same' Spirit that dwelt within Christ. It is nothing more, nothing less, than the Spirit of God. NO, not God. God is disgusted by the flesh, for the flesh is sin. Therefore He will not touch us.

But there is the Spirit that filled Christ upon His Baptism and this same Spirit can fill us also. That part of Christ, which you refer to as Godlike, is this Spirit. Contained within the soul of Christ, but seperate, Spiritual and NOT of this world. Nothing physical that we so desperately seem to need to label in a way in which we can completely understand it.

Jesus was the Son of God. Any arguments here? The apostles told us that we can be the Son's of God also. If this is the case, then there are those that aren't the Son's of God. What makes the difference? The Holy Spirit. The same thing that seperated Christ from the rest of humanity until after His reserection, the Holy Spirit.

The same Spirit that allowed Christ to heal the blind and raise the dead, is the same Spirit that can fill us and allow us to perform deeds and miracles, 'greater than these'.

The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God. No, not God the Spirit. It is something created by God to offer those that accept it, 'true' guidance and understanding of His will. If God can't even look upon us as sinners, then you KNOW He can't dwell within us. Not yet at least. So the Holy Spirit can't be God Himself, but something other than Himself that he has offered to those that believe.

Matthew 3:16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, when up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:

This is NOT the Spirit of God descending upon God Himself, nor God descending upon His Son, but the Spirit of God descending upon His Son, "in whom He is well pleased".

John 1:12 But as many as recieved him, to them gave he power to become the Sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.

I John 3:1 Behold, (See), what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.
2. Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and, |though|, it doth not yet appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

Jesus the 'man' was only here for a minute. But the Spirit that dwelt within him was left to us indefinitely. Like our conscience, it is there as our direct link to the will of the father. The problem being that we must be open to it's guidance to even feel it's presence. This takes acceptance, obedience and love. Without these, the Spirit knocks, but we refuse to open up and let it in.

 

[kwag_myers]

And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. (John 14:16-18)

This comforter is clearly Jesus since it says that I will come to you. Pretty simple isn't it.

No, it's very complicated. Jesus is leaving but He's staying with us as a Comforter? That makes no sense. Also, Jesus refers to the Comforter in third person (as "him" and "he").

The Amplified Bible translates the last sentence as "I will come [back] to you". This would indicate that Jesus may have been speaking of His second coming. It may also be translated, "I will draw near to you", which may be viewed as a spiritual experience as well as a physical one. But to say that Jesus is referring to Himself as the Comforter is a stretch, IMHO.

At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. (John 14:20)

The Comforter is something that links entities persons together.

Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. (John 14:23)

God and Jesus will come to us through the Comforter.

Goes with "I will draw near to you" (spiritually).

But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. (John 14:26)

The Comforter is the Holy Ghost[spirit]. And the comforter is of the Son and of the Father, which makes the Holy Ghost also of them. The Holy Ghost is their spirit.

?????You lost me on that one. Would you mind connecting the dots?

Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I. (John 14:28)

Jesus must go away before the Holy Ghost can come. Why? Because the Holy Ghost is Christ. It is his Pneuma[spirit] but it is not just any spitit, it is Holy Spirit: hagios pneuma.

So when Jesus said, "It is finished" (John 19:30), He was just referring to part 1? No, He was saying that His work is done. Hebrews 10:12, "But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;" But not really, 'cause He came back?

Sorry dude. Your theory doesn't line up with the Word.

 

[Free]

It is nothing more, nothing less, than the Spirit of God. NO, not God.

This then begs the question that if something is "of God" is it possible for it to not "be God"? But more importantly your statement ignores the fact that there are numerous instances in the NT where the writers use personal pronouns and words that are indicative of personality when speaking of the Holy Spirit.

But there is the Spirit that filled Christ upon His Baptism and this same Spirit can fill us also. That part of Christ, which you refer to as Godlike, is this Spirit.

Jesus is God in the flesh and was so even prior to the annointing of the Holy Spirit at his baptism. It is not the Spirit that makes Christ "Godlike".

Jesus was the Son of God. Any arguments here? The apostles told us that we can be the Son's of God also. If this is the case, then there are those that aren't the Son's of God.

I believe that we have gone over this before. You need to do something: look up all the instances of "Son of God" in reference to Christ and note and responses by people around him. Do not confuse the use of "Son of God" in reference to Christ with "son of God" in reference to humans.

This is a fatal error that is commony committed, and not only in this context. Words or phrases that are used of both men and Jesus do not necessarily mean the same thing when applied to both. It is extremely important to note the nuances of Scripture when it comes to the nature of God and Christ.

What makes the difference? The Holy Spirit. The same thing that seperated Christ from the rest of humanity until after His reserection, the Holy Spirit.

Be very careful here. You are implying that everyone who receives the Holy Spirit is on the same level as Christ, that they could die for the sins of the world. Jesus was and is God Incarnate, he is the God-man and that is what separates him from the rest of humanity.

If God can't even look upon us as sinners, then you KNOW He can't dwell within us. Not yet at least. So the Holy Spirit can't be God Himself, but something other than Himself that he has offered to those that believe.

I am wondering where you get these ideas from as there is much wrong with them, logically and theologically. Where does the Bible say that "God can't even look upon us as sinners"? How does it follow that because we are saved, yet sometimes sin, that the Holy Spirit cannot be God Himself?

The problem is that you are arguing that the Holy Spirit is a something, something that is used by God to effect his purposes on earth. But a something is useless for those types of purposes unless it is so intimately tied to God that it is essentially God dwelling in us. I know what I am trying to say here but it isn't coming out quite right.

This is NOT the Spirit of God descending upon God Himself, nor God descending upon His Son, but the Spirit of God descending upon His Son, "in whom He is well pleased".

But here you are confusing the issue. It is God the Spirit decending upon God the Son as God the Father speaks.

 

[cj]

Free said:

It is simple, but you have missed the obvious points which contradict your conclusion. Clearly Jesus states that the Father will send "another Comforter". By definition, "another" is someone or something other than the original. The Holy Spirit, the "Spirit of truth," is also referred to as "he," which clearly indicates personality.

This is why the doctrine of the Trinity best explains the Godhead. This passage can only be rightly understood within the context of the doctrine of the Trinity.

I agree 100%. Interesting, that the word "another" in that passage, depending on sentence structure, etc., can be defined in one of two ways. The first would be "Another of a different kind". In this passage though, the second option is the proper definition, "another of the same kind". I like this more detailed understanding because I think it not only allows for the one person to be distinguished from the other "Another", but also shows and supports the doctrine of the Trinity.

Dave

Jesus is this "another" Comforter.

Jesus after His death and resurrection was not the same pre-crucifiction Jesus.

In fact, scripture tells us that Jesus is the Comforter..... Isaiah 51....

"Listen to Me, you who pursue righteousness, Who seek after Jehovah, Look to the rock from which you were hewn, And to the excavation of the quarry from which you were dug.

Look to Abraham your father, And to Sarah who travailed with you; For I called him when he was one person, And blessed him and multiplied him.

For Jehovah has comforted Zion; He has comforted all her waste places, And made her wilderness like Eden, And her desert like the garden of Jehovah. Gladness and joy will be found in her, Thanksgiving and the voice of song.

Hearken to Me, O My people; Give ear to Me, O My nation; For instruction will go out from Me; And I will set My judgment as a light for the peoples.

My righteousness is near; My salvation has gone forth; My arms will judge the peoples; The coastlands will wait for Me And place their hope in My arm.

Lift up your eyes to the heavens, And look upon the earth beneath; For the heavens will vanish away like smoke, And the earth will wear out like a garment, And those who dwell there will die in like manner; But My salvation will be forever, And My righteousness will not be abolished.

Listen to Me, you who know righteousness, A people in whose heart is My instruction, Do not fear the reproach of man; Do not be terrified at their revilings.

For the moth will eat them up like a garment, And the worm will eat them like wool; But My righteousness will be forever, And My salvation from generation to generation.

Awake, awake! Put on strength, O arm of Jehovah; Awake as in the days of old, As in the generations of past ages. Was it not You who cut Rahab in pieces, Who pierced through the dragon?

Was it not You who dried up the sea, The waters of the great deep; Who made the depths of the sea into a way For the redeemed to pass through?

Therefore the ransomed of Jehovah will return And will come to Zion with a ringing shout, And eternal joy will be upon their heads. They will lay hold on gladness and joy, And sorrow and sighing will flee away.

I, even I, am He who will comfort you....


In love,
cj

 

[Free]

I agree 100%. Interesting, that the word "another" in that passage, depending on sentence structure, etc., can be defined in one of two ways. The first would be "Another of a different kind". In this passage though, the second option is the proper definition, "another of the same kind". I like this more detailed understanding because I think it not only allows for the one person to be distinguished from the other "Another", but also shows and supports the doctrine of the Trinity.

I hadn't seen your response until cj's reply. I agree with your definitions of "another," something which I didn't do clearly. I look at it this way:

The first definition can be analogous to someone who, having had a piece of one type of cake, wants another piece but of a different type of cake. Or, one could go further and say the person wants another desert altogether, such as jello. This definition can lead to heresies such as polytheism (another God).

The second definition would be analogous to the person wanting another piece of the same cake. The two pieces, coming from the same cake, are essentially the same, yet they are distinct because one is not the other. It is this second definition that I had in mind in regards to the Trinity.

Realizing that they are simple analogies, do they more-or-less fit what you were saying?

 

[Imagican]

No, it's very complicated. Jesus is leaving but He's staying with us as a Comforter? That makes no sense. Also, Jesus refers to the Comforter in third person (as "him" and "he").

No, this is NOT what I said. I said that the 'comforter' was the same SPIRIT as that which filled Christ. And it does indeed make plenty of sense. Christ was filled with the Spirit of God. Regardless of ones belief of God being Christ or Christ being God, or whatever, there can be NO DOUBT that Christ was filled with the Spirit of God. I simply offered that the comforter is that same Spirit. NOT the same Christ, but the same Spirit which filled HIM. If Christ dwells within us, does that mean that the 'man', Jesus, lives within us, or that we can have an indwelling of the 'Spirit' of Christ? And Christ Himself stated that the 'comforter' would be 'left behind'. Come on man, He didn't state that He or God would 'produce' a 'new' Spirit, but that an 'existing Spirit' would be left behind. Where was this Spirit up until then? It dwelt with Christ Himself.

Oh yeah, and in the context offered of 'another', Christ, the man, was leaving. So in this respect, the Spirit left behind 'would be' another comforter. At the time they had Christ physically with them. After He returned to the Father, there would be 'another' comforter, Spiritual, left behind to continue to guide and comfort those that believe upon His name. Not a 'new' ententy, but a different form of the 'same entity, the Spirit of Christ.

 

[Imagican]

If the Spirit that dwelt within Christ was indeed 'the Spirit of God', what need would there be for ANY OTHER SPIRIT? Is it even possible that there could be any other Spirit to guide us than 'The Word'?

Is God 'a spirit'? Or is He an entity beyond our understanding, that guides us through His Spirit? I find it hard to understand how God could 'only' be Spirit. For we were created in His image and we are certainly more than Spirit. We are Spirit, soul, and body.

I would NEVER offer that God's body is of the same form as ours, but that He is Body as well as Spirit, I have no doubt. We just aren't privy to the understand of the exact state of His body yet. As far as we know, His body is EVERYTHING. All matter that exists, period. But not all of that matter is embedded with His Spirit. A part of His body perhaps, but separated by will, as far as Spirit is concerned.

 

[Imagican]

Ok Free,

No, I did not say that everyone that receives the Spirit of Christ is on the same level with Christ. What I have stated on numerous occasions is that when we accept Christ into our hearts 'we are Christ'. NO, not literally the 'man' Jesus Christ, but a part of the 'body' of Jesus Christ. NO, not equal to, but nevertheless, an ACTUAL part of Jesus Christ. He is our Head, just as the Father is His Head. We are commanded to 'DO' as Christ did. The only way it would even be possible for this to take place would be for us to 'be Christ', or let me state it a little more clearly, "Christ-like", hance the word 'Christian'.

It is simple, but you have missed the obvious points which contradict your conclusion. Clearly Jesus states that the Father will send "another Comforter". By definition, "another" is someone or something other than the original. The Holy Spirit, the "Spirit of truth," is also referred to as "he," which clearly indicates personality.

And here you also refer to the Spirit as a 'possible' something Your words, not mine.