Sab, read John 14: 15-17, and compare it to John 14: 18-21
Christ says the SAME things about the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth... that He says about Himself... in those same verses.
I did a comparison elsewhere; I'll try and find it and link it for you.
Quote:
The Holy Spirit is sent IN THE NAME of Christ and teaches FOR HIM.
Then why did Christ teach Paul? Why did CHRIST come, and not this other person? Christ even identifies Himself to Paul, clearly.
Quote:
There are THREE entities mentioned in the verses. The Son, who is speaking, the Father and the Holy Spirit.
Read the verses in John. Christ speaks of the Holy Spirit coming to them; and then immediately switches to speak of Himself coming to them.
Quote:
When you say "Christ IS the Spirit" then you are saying that Christ is the breath of God which was used to bring Adam to life.
No I am not.
There is the breath of God... holy spirit; likened to the grain (spirit) that Joseph (Christ) gave out to the people who came to him for grain (spirit/life), that belonged to Pharaoh (God)
It is an analogy to help us to see the relation.
The spirit (holy spirit) comes FROM God, THROUGH Christ, TO those Christ chooses to give it to.
Paul also makes this distinction:
But for us there is but one GOD, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.
Then there is also THE Holy Spirit, who is Christ. A person.
Quote:
This is not correct. Christ is NOT the breath of God, the Holy Spirit is the breath of God.
See above.
THE Holy Spirit - Christ
holy spirit - breath of god, the life that sustains us, that comes from God through Christ.
Quote:
Christ is the Son of God and he has his OWN breath which is ALSO the Spirit of God as they share the same essence. They are One!
Yes, they are one. No one is arguing that. Just as we may be one with them.
Quote:
The reason why I say listen to me is because I am taught by the Spirit.
Really? The spirit you listen to that missed that all the law and prophets hang on the first two commandments, and taught you the opposite instead?
Why should I listen to you OR the one who teaches you if he teaches you wrong... when my Lord is the One who taught me what is true?
Quote:
I WOULD tell you to listen to the Spirit yourself, but you are blocking yourself from the Spirit and therefore the truth. You need someone like me to guide you to the Spirit and then the Spirit can take over from there. I don't want disciples I want to save people from untruth by leading them to the Spirit and therefore Christ and therefore the Father. Sadly, you have given into a type of greed and passion. You have put faith in a shortcut that lacks any lasting value. You say you have the truth, just like the WT, but your truth doesn't hold up to simple logic and reason. It's one of the saddest things I have ever had to witness. You simply will not let go of the crutch and it will be your ultimate undoing.
Sab, I'm just going to let the response given to you in my last post stand, rather than go in circles. You did not do the whole line for line thing I noticed, and I think that is because you would have had to acknowledge that this spirit you listen to... or your logic and reason... whichever one, teaches you wrong.
Quote:
What I have learned from this experience is that when people follow a false Christ (Shelby) their ultimate defense against people who try to wake them up will be, "Stop trying to take me away from Christ." They will label you as being directed by agents of darkness and will not be able to back up their words. Truly the blind leading the blind.
You are the one who has done the labeling here, Sab.
You have said that I follow a wrong voice, a tainted voice, a false christ, etc.
Just keeping that in perspective before someone tries to twist it around.
Oh, and i think it got lost somewhere, but i did ask if you could link to the article that your post is actually supposed to be about, because that would be interesting. I just like to see what it is I am supposed to be commenting on, rather than take someone else's interpretation of that article (such as the person you linked to in your OP), and speak on their interpretation instead. Do you have a link to that Sab?
Peace,
tammy