The Holy Spirit/God's Word

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
NewLifeInChrist said:
I am too literal a person to take this at face value without objection. You must mean something other than "The Bible is God". Maybe you can explain it in another way.

We are on the same page here.

It technically satisfies my request, but I'm mainly interested in the intimacy of the relationship. For instance, what do you make of 1 Corinthians 2 where it says that God reveals to us by His Spirit the deep things of God that only He knows and that cannot be learned by the physical senses of seeing and hearing and sensing and can only be learned by the direct revelation of God to us by His Spirit? And when we observe instances of this happening in our hearts, do we not grasp quite clearly the intimacy we share with God in that He is sharing these intimate things of His with us and they become some of our most cherished personal possessions?
Click to expand...

I believe there are two ways we perceive God: via creation (Romans 1:20) and via God's Word/Scripture, which is what 1 Corinthians 2 teaches where it says that God reveals to us by His Spirit the deep things of God that only He knows and that cannot be learned by the physical senses and can only be learned by the direct revelation of God to us by His Spirit.

Jesus indicated this would happen as the Holy Spirit taught truth to believers (John 14:26 & 16:13). Paul describes this teaching/learning process as involving apostles, prophets, evangelists and pastor-teachers (Eph. 4:11-13). We should grasp that this is "intimate", because GW = HS = love per John 6:63 & Romans 5:5.

Hope this explanation puts us on the same page. :love:
 
GWH said:
I believe there are two ways we perceive God: via creation (Romans 1:20) and via God's Word/Scripture, which is what 1 Corinthians 2 teaches where it says that God reveals to us by His Spirit the deep things of God that only He knows and that cannot be learned by the physical senses and can only be learned by the direct revelation of God to us by His Spirit.

Jesus indicated this would happen as the Holy Spirit taught truth to believers (John 14:26 & 16:13). Paul describes this teaching/learning process as involving apostles, prophets, evangelists and pastor-teachers (Eph. 4:11-13). We should grasp that this is "intimate", because GW = HS = love per John 6:63 & Romans 5:5.

Hope this explanation puts us on the same page. :love:
Click to expand...
Certainly God's Spirit uses the Bible as a resource and He teaches us its meaning. But they are not one and the same entity. This is clear from many passages that speak of Him. For instance, Romans 8:26 says,

Likewise the Spirit also helps in our weaknesses. For we do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. (Ro 8:26)​

We would not say that "The Bible Itself makes intercession for us", would we? Likewise, when Jesus said, "that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (Jn 3:6), He was not referring to the Bible giving birth to us, was He? You must be able to distinguish between the Bible and God's Spirit, right?
 
NewLifeInChrist said:
Certainly God's Spirit uses the Bible as a resource and He teaches us its meaning. But they are not one and the same entity. This is clear from many passages that speak of Him. For instance, Romans 8:26 says,

Likewise the Spirit also helps in our weaknesses. For we do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. (Ro 8:26)​

We would not say that "The Bible Itself makes intercession for us", would we? Likewise, when Jesus said, "that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (Jn 3:6), He was not referring to the Bible giving birth to us, was He? You must be able to distinguish between the Bible and God's Spirit, right?
Click to expand...

Yes, GW and the Bible are not the same entity.
Yes, one way the HS teaches GW is via Scripture/the Bible.
Yes, it does not work to say the Bible is the HS.
Substituting the Bible for GW is called Bibliolatry.
 
GWH said:
Yes, GW and the Bible are not the same entity.
Yes, one way the HS teaches GW is via Scripture/the Bible.
Yes, it does not work to say the Bible is the HS.
Substituting the Bible for GW is called Bibliolatry.
Click to expand...
OK, what does GW stand for?
 
the 1st thing to do is to become a born again Christian to receive the Holy Spirit. immediately upon becoming born again, the Holy Spirit enters our life. a slight background to who the H.S. is: He is the 3rd person of the trinity. He is our comforter, teacher & guide. He is in us & dwells with us for the remainder of our lives. He communicates with us during our lives. He tells us right from wrong, do this, don't do that, nudges us in the right direction & leads us to make the proper decisions. Romans 8:26- "likewise, the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities, for we know not what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which can not be uttered". Romans 8:9- "but ye are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you.........". Romans 8:16, ( 1of my favorites ): "for the Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit that we are the children of God". He assures us of our salvation. the H.S. is the only person, place or thing that reveals the truth of God, Jesus & the H.S. & He convicts us of it. we are sealed in other words, forever.
 
Karlon said:
the 1st thing to do is to become a born again Christian to receive the Holy Spirit. immediately upon becoming born again, the Holy Spirit enters our life. a slight background to who the H.S. is: He is the 3rd person of the trinity. He is our comforter, teacher & guide. He is in us & dwells with us for the remainder of our lives. He communicates with us during our lives. He tells us right from wrong, do this, don't do that, nudges us in the right direction & leads us to make the proper decisions. Romans 8:26- "likewise, the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities, for we know not what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which can not be uttered". Romans 8:9- "but ye are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you.........". Romans 8:16, ( 1of my favorites ): "for the Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit that we are the children of God". He assures us of our salvation. the H.S. is the only person, place or thing that reveals the truth of God, Jesus & the H.S. & He convicts us of it. we are sealed in other words, forever.
Click to expand...

Yes, with the understanding that everything you said is conditional upon a believer having saving faith.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Karlon
GWH said:
Okay, but when we meet in heaven I bet it will be because we satisfied God's condition of repentance.
And you will agree when you understand that "for everyone who believes" indicates the condition of repentance from unbelief.
Click to expand...

Why is it, you at looking form it. God knows who are God's and who are not
I trust God and still am available to God fro his righteousness, having none of my own, Thank you, see you there as we each grow in our calls to do in love and mercy for all
 
  • Like
Reactions: BonnieClaire
homwardbound said:
Why is it, you at looking form it. God knows who are God's and who are not
I trust God and still am available to God fro his righteousness, having none of my own, Thank you, see you there as we each grow in our calls to do in love and mercy for all
Click to expand...

Yes, but if you did NOT trust God, you would not satisfy His condition for being forgiven and thus would not be God's.
 
GWH said:
Yes, but if you did NOT trust God, you would not satisfy His condition for being forgiven and thus would not be God's.
Click to expand...

So you agree, God died once for us all as reconciled, everyone as forgiven in the last shed blood of son for us all, Whether yet believe yet or not Hebrews 10:10. 1 John 2:1-27
Left only one free choice left to each of us each personally
To believe, choose God in risen son for them, that Son did take away the sin of the world in his one time willing death (John1:29, 2 Cor 5:17-20) once for us all on that cross, done finished over 2,000 tears ago now., is the law being under it, finished for us by Son or not? John 19:30, for new life to enter in us from not quitting belief to see it too? God Father living in us with the done work of Son as risen in love to all in mercy and truth to all or not? It is finished, under Law to see upholding law as good from God to all to love all in response?

And his condition, is for people to see God only wants what is good for each person period, It is not a have to, it is a willing to do between God and you, who wants only the best for us all Jeremiah 29:11, Psalms 1:1-4

God loves us all y'all, please choose and see
Don't keep saying show me and I will believe you
How about believe God and see God show you, and that can take a long time to see it through (Job). I see it takes not denying God no matter what troubles happen, I love the last Chapter of Job, anyone else?
 
homwardbound said:
So you agree, God died once for us all as reconciled, everyone as forgiven in the last shed blood of son for us all, Whether yet believe yet or not Hebrews 10:10. 1 John 2:1-27
Left only one free choice left to each of us each personally
To believe, choose God in risen son for them, that Son did take away the sin of the world in his one time willing death (John1:29, 2 Cor 5:17-20) once for us all on that cross, done finished over 2,000 tears ago now., is the law being under it, finished for us by Son or not? John 19:30, for new life to enter in us from not quitting belief to see it too? God Father living in us with the done work of Son as risen in love to all in mercy and truth to all or not? It is finished, under Law to see upholding law as good from God to all to love all in response?

And his condition, is for people to see God only wants what is good for each person period, It is not a have to, it is a willing to do between God and you, who wants only the best for us all Jeremiah 29:11, Psalms 1:1-4

God loves us all y'all, please choose and see
Don't keep saying show me and I will believe you
How about believe God and see God show you, and that can take a long time to see it through (Job). I see it takes not denying God no matter what troubles happen, I love the last Chapter of Job, anyone else?
Click to expand...

Yes, "God loves us all", and yes, His "condition" for forgiveness "is for people to see God only wants what is good for each person".

Oops, I do not find a Scripture supporting the last part!
Instead, I find Acts 16:31, etc.
 
GWH said:
Yes, GW and the Bible are not the same entity.
Yes, one way the HS teaches GW is via Scripture/the Bible.
Yes, it does not work to say the Bible is the HS.
Substituting the Bible for GW is called Bibliolatry.
Click to expand...
I know GW is an acronym for "God's Word". I am confused about what exactly you are referring to by "God's Word".

In a previous post you combined GW and Scripture togeter as "God's Word/Scripture", indicating God's Word is synonymous with Scripture. But then you say here that GW is not the Bible.

In a previous post you said, "I regard God's Word as God Himself aka the Holy Spirit". But then you say here that the Holy Spirit teaches us God's Word.

When you say, "Substituting the Bible for GW is called Bibliolatry", you are equating GW with God because otherwise it would not be Bibliolatry if we were to say that the Bible is God's word.

I'm not trying to be picky. I'm trying to understand who/what you're referring to when you say GW/God's Word. The most straightforward thing to assume is that you are using GW as another name for the Holy Spirit. But then it is confusing why GW is needed, since the Holy Spirit already has a name. And it would be more straightforward to say GW is Jesus since we have verses that obviously refer to Jesus being the Word (John 1) and the Word of God (Revelation 19:13). But then it would still be confusing to refer to Him as GW when it would be much more straightforward to refer to Him as Jesus, or Lord, or Christ.
 
NewLifeInChrist said:
I know GW is an acronym for "God's Word". I am confused about what exactly you are referring to by "God's Word".

In a previous post you combined GW and Scripture togeter as "God's Word/Scripture", indicating God's Word is synonymous with Scripture. But then you say here that GW is not the Bible.

In a previous post you said, "I regard God's Word as God Himself aka the Holy Spirit". But then you say here that the Holy Spirit teaches us God's Word.

When you say, "Substituting the Bible for GW is called Bibliolatry", you are equating GW with God because otherwise it would not be Bibliolatry if we were to say that the Bible is God's word.

I'm not trying to be picky. I'm trying to understand who/what you're referring to when you say GW/God's Word. The most straightforward thing to assume is that you are using GW as another name for the Holy Spirit. But then it is confusing why GW is needed, since the Holy Spirit already has a name. And it would be more straightforward to say GW is Jesus since we have verses that obviously refer to Jesus being the Word (John 1) and the Word of God (Revelation 19:13). But then it would still be confusing to refer to Him as GW when it would be much more straightforward to refer to Him as Jesus, or Lord, or Christ.
Click to expand...
 
NewLifeInChrist said:
I know GW is an acronym for "God's Word". I am confused about what exactly you are referring to by "God's Word".

In a previous post you combined GW and Scripture togeter as "God's Word/Scripture", indicating God's Word is synonymous with Scripture. But then you say here that GW is not the Bible.

In a previous post you said, "I regard God's Word as God Himself aka the Holy Spirit". But then you say here that the Holy Spirit teaches us God's Word.

When you say, "Substituting the Bible for GW is called Bibliolatry", you are equating GW with God because otherwise it would not be Bibliolatry if we were to say that the Bible is God's word.

I'm not trying to be picky. I'm trying to understand who/what you're referring to when you say GW/God's Word. The most straightforward thing to assume is that you are using GW as another name for the Holy Spirit. But then it is confusing why GW is needed, since the Holy Spirit already has a name. And it would be more straightforward to say GW is Jesus since we have verses that obviously refer to Jesus being the Word (John 1) and the Word of God (Revelation 19:13). But then it would still be confusing to refer to Him as GW when it would be much more straightforward to refer to Him as Jesus, or Lord, or Christ.
Click to expand...

Something went whacky with my first attempt to reply, so here is my second try.

GW is the HS, incarnate as Jesus (John 1:1-14), who communicates with souls via human languages that are recorded as
Scripture/the Bible. Such communication is also called teaching and revelation. Because humans are finite and fallible,
it seems improbable that extant Bibles are inerrant. Here is how I explain it in our website:

Those who view the biblical canon as inspired by God disagree about what this means. Some people speak as though God dictated every word of the Bible to the human writers, which causes many atheists to be confused, because they do not realize that the dictation theory has several caveats, such as that it refers to the original manuscripts (which we do not have) correctly interpreted. And the key to correct interpretation is NOT viewing the Bible as a modern science or history textbook, but rather as concerned with communicating God’s will to humanity regarding His requirement for salvation: THAT is what is inerrant!

The salvationist view of inspiration seems more logical than the dictationist view according to the following train of thought: Suppose God Himself wrote the inerrant message to humanity: “Thou shalt not lie, steal, murder or fornicate.” Suppose the first manuscript copier accidentally left out the comma between lie and steal. Would that invalidate God’s commandment? No, but it is still a mistake and no longer perfectly inerrant.

Now suppose an evil copier intentionally changed the word fornicate to fumigate. Would that invalidate God’s commandment? Not all of it; only the changed word. How could we know which word or words were correct and not changed? We would need to compare the commandment with other statements purported to be inspired by God in order to see what is the overall or consistent message, so that we can acquire sufficient evidence to have reasonable belief that the word fumigate should be discounted.

Finally, suppose that no one changed God’s original commandment. How could we know absolutely or infallibly that it was inerrant? We could not; we walk by faith. We would still need to compare it with the totality of truth in order to discover whether there were any inconsistencies. Thus, a completely inerrant Bible is not needed, as long as there is sufficient consistency in God’s messages to humanity via the creation (TOJ #4), the scriptures (TOJ #3), the incarnate word (TOJ #186) and logic (TOJ #182) for souls to discern God’s requirement for salvation.

Inspiration is like a river: God determines its banks so that the overall revelation each generation along its banks has includes truth sufficient regarding salvation (kerygma), but God allows the river of revelation to have eddies or discrepancies or minor errors that do not prevent God’s purpose from being accomplished (Isa. 55:10f, 1Pet. 1:10-12, Heb. 11:2-12:2). This topic will conclude by considering the claim of contradictions in the Bible.

I do not claim to eliminate all confusion with this explanation or understanding, but does it make sufficient sense to be helpful? HAND
 
GWH said:
Something went whacky with my first attempt to reply, so here is my second try.

GW is the HS, incarnate as Jesus (John 1:1-14), who communicates with souls via human languages that are recorded as
Scripture/the Bible. Such communication is also called teaching and revelation. Because humans are finite and fallible,
it seems improbable that extant Bibles are inerrant. Here is how I explain it in our website:

Those who view the biblical canon as inspired by God disagree about what this means. Some people speak as though God dictated every word of the Bible to the human writers, which causes many atheists to be confused, because they do not realize that the dictation theory has several caveats, such as that it refers to the original manuscripts (which we do not have) correctly interpreted. And the key to correct interpretation is NOT viewing the Bible as a modern science or history textbook, but rather as concerned with communicating God’s will to humanity regarding His requirement for salvation: THAT is what is inerrant!

The salvationist view of inspiration seems more logical than the dictationist view according to the following train of thought: Suppose God Himself wrote the inerrant message to humanity: “Thou shalt not lie, steal, murder or fornicate.” Suppose the first manuscript copier accidentally left out the comma between lie and steal. Would that invalidate God’s commandment? No, but it is still a mistake and no longer perfectly inerrant.

Now suppose an evil copier intentionally changed the word fornicate to fumigate. Would that invalidate God’s commandment? Not all of it; only the changed word. How could we know which word or words were correct and not changed? We would need to compare the commandment with other statements purported to be inspired by God in order to see what is the overall or consistent message, so that we can acquire sufficient evidence to have reasonable belief that the word fumigate should be discounted.

Finally, suppose that no one changed God’s original commandment. How could we know absolutely or infallibly that it was inerrant? We could not; we walk by faith. We would still need to compare it with the totality of truth in order to discover whether there were any inconsistencies. Thus, a completely inerrant Bible is not needed, as long as there is sufficient consistency in God’s messages to humanity via the creation (TOJ #4), the scriptures (TOJ #3), the incarnate word (TOJ #186) and logic (TOJ #182) for souls to discern God’s requirement for salvation.

Inspiration is like a river: God determines its banks so that the overall revelation each generation along its banks has includes truth sufficient regarding salvation (kerygma), but God allows the river of revelation to have eddies or discrepancies or minor errors that do not prevent God’s purpose from being accomplished (Isa. 55:10f, 1Pet. 1:10-12, Heb. 11:2-12:2). This topic will conclude by considering the claim of contradictions in the Bible.

I do not claim to eliminate all confusion with this explanation or understanding, but does it make sufficient sense to be helpful? HAND
Click to expand...
I think the first four words clarify that when you refer to GW you are not referring to the Bible but to the Holy Spirit Himself. The remainder of the post seems to not point to the Holy Spirit, but to His ministries (teaching and revelation) and to something He inspired to be written (the Bible). Am I following you correctly?

This statement caught my attention: "the HS... communicates with souls via human languages that are recorded as Scripture/the Bible." Do you mean to exclude Spirit-to-spirit communications as in, "The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God" (Ro 8:16)?
 
NewLifeInChrist said:
I think the first four words clarify that when you refer to GW you are not referring to the Bible but to the Holy Spirit Himself. The remainder of the post seems to not point to the Holy Spirit, but to His ministries (teaching and revelation) and to something He inspired to be written (the Bible). Am I following you correctly?

This statement caught my attention: "the HS... communicates with souls via human languages that are recorded as Scripture/the Bible." Do you mean to exclude Spirit-to-spirit communications as in, "The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God" (Ro 8:16)?
Click to expand...

Yes, you are following me correctly.
Spirit to spirit communication is via GW, such as the verse you cited.
However, I would not exclude Spirit to spirit emotion--although I would point out that godly love is rational as much as emotional.

As I say in Lesson 1: I emphasize logic/reason/GW without intending to demean emotion. Both are important aspects of personality,
but their relationship is analogous to that of saving faith and works: faith precedes love (per Gal. 5:6), and right reasoning should guide one’s emotion (1Cor. 14:15-20).

Do not divorce the mind of Christ (1Cor. 2:16) from the person of the Holy Spirit (Rom. 5:5). Right reasoning or logic functions in a way similar to the OT law: leading sinful souls to learn the need for God’s Gospel (Gal. 3:19-25).
 
GWH said:
Yes, you are following me correctly.
Spirit to spirit communication is via GW, such as the verse you cited.
Click to expand...
The Spirit Himself is the one who bears witness/testifies that we are His children (Ro 8:16). If HS=GW, then saying HS communicates via GW is saying HS communicates through HS, which does not make any sense. It would make sense if GW=the words contained in the Bible. Then, HS communicates through GW would mean HS communicates through what is written in the Bible. And then the follow-on phrase ("such as the verse you cited") would make sense. So now, I am thinking you really mean GW=the Bible (plus other reveleations, like creation). At least that's how you seem to be using GW here.
GWH said:
However, I would not exclude Spirit to spirit emotion--although I would point out that godly love is rational as much as emotional.

As I say in Lesson 1: I emphasize logic/reason/GW without intending to demean emotion. Both are important aspects of personality,
but their relationship is analogous to that of saving faith and works: faith precedes love (per Gal. 5:6), and right reasoning should guide one’s emotion (1Cor. 14:15-20).

Do not divorce the mind of Christ (1Cor. 2:16) from the person of the Holy Spirit (Rom. 5:5). Right reasoning or logic functions in a way similar to the OT law: leading sinful souls to learn the need for God’s Gospel (Gal. 3:19-25).
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back