ON
DOCTRINE INFORMATION
The BAD NEWS
Messages Sent To On Doctrine
2009
All Messages Reproduced As Received Without Correction Or Alteration
Names and e-mail addresses removed in accord with the On Doctrine Privacy Policy
Messages are unverified as to content or accuracy
All responses labeled ON DOCTRINE NOTE are by Gary A. Hand unless stated differently
#1A
God the Father is a Holy Spirit Spirit = Ghost
therefore Jesus is Son of the Holy Ghost Mathhew 1:18,20
The Spirit of Jesus Christ is Holy and the other word for Spirit is Ghost
Why do you add a third person when Jesus said I and my Father are one John 10:30
Jesus also tells how they are one John 10:38 John14:10,11,20
Jesus said he that recieveth me recieveth him that sent me. which God the Father - the Father of all
spirits
Jesus John 15:1 IAM the vine my Father the Husband - no third person
A cloven tongue is one tongue with to heads symbolic of Father and Son one in Spirit
.
1Corintians 6:17 He that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.
Jesus power and Godhead - Father is plainly reaveld Romans 1:20
God Sent Forth the Spitit of his Son into our hearts Gal 4:6
Romans 8:9 If any man have not the Spirit of Christ he os none of his.
When you recieve the Holy Spirit of Jesus you also recieveth the Father who is the Spirit of Life in
Jesus John 1:4 Roman 1:2
Baptize in the name of the Father The Son And the Holy Ghost
symbolic of Father and Son One In Spirit
Why call him a third person, when his name is JESUS
You can not have the Father without the Spitit of our Lord Jesus Christ
Truly our fellowship is withe the Father and his Son Jesus Christ 1John 1:3
I can bring out more scrituers yet but this will do.
WHY CALL THE HOLY SPIRIT A THIRD PERSON WHEN IT IS JESUS CHRIST OUR
LORD?
Iowa, United States
[16-Vol 1]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
You began your comments with a false definition, so the rest of your premise becomes false also. There
is no such entity as a "ghost". The term Holy "Ghost" is incorrectly translated and incorrectly used in
the KJV - The proper term is Holy Spirit.
Apparently, by using your incorrect comparison of Spirit and Ghost, you are attempting to prove that
the Father is the Holy Ghost who was the father of Jesus Christ. As I noted, your definition is flawed,
so your conclusion is equally flawed.
The Holy Spirit is the third person of the Trinity, because He is referred to in the Scripture using the
masculine personal pronoun, ekeinos - that one, He - John 16:7, 8, 13-15.The baptismal
formula, ". . . in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit," indicates three separate
persons.
The Holy Spirit is granted personal characteristics:
1. Searching deepest truths of God and possessing knowledge of His God's counsel and purpose,
1 Corinthians 2:10, 11.
2. The Holy Spirit has a personal will, 1 Corinthians 12:11.
3. He displays characteristics of personality: wisdom, prudence, discretion.
4. He has a mind which is an attribute of personality, Romans 8:27.
5. He speaks to God - intercedes, prays, on behalf of believers, Romans 8:26, 27.
6. He speaks through the apostles, Acts 13:2; 16:6, 7; Revelation 2:7.
7. The Holy Spirit can be mistreated:
a. grieved - Ephesians 4:30
b. insulted - Hebrews 10:29
c. lied to - Acts 5:3
d. blasphemed and sinned against - Matthew 12:31, 32
#1B
If God the Father is not a Holy Spirit then, What is he?
If Jesus Christ is not a Holy Spirit the, What is he?
If I can not believe the KJV, then why should I believe you?
The Holy Spirit And Holy Ghost is tha same thing.
God.s Word says Jesus Christ is Son of the Holy Spirit
The Holy Spirit of the Father is the Father of all Spirits
Everything I have said is in the Scrpituers'
I know the danger of adding to Gods word therefore I make shure it is in there.
If you deny that The Father is a Holy Spirt and Jesus is his Son the you are fault
God's word saya Jesus is hi Son.
Jesus said I and the Father are one not three
1John truly our felloship is with the Father and his son Jesus Christ. no third person
The Spirit of the Father And the Spirit of Jesus are joined together as one so when you recieve the
Holy Spirit is the Father and Son working together as One. You can not Have one without the
other.
Jesus said he that revieveth, recieveth him that sent me.
why do you deny what Jesus said?
that why I do not look to ministers when the don't exhalt the Lord Jesus Christ and say he is not Holy
Spirit.
I do not look to religions I look only to the Lord Jesus Christ who is in the form of God thought i not
robbry to be equal with God.Philli[ians 2:5,6
The Father is also the Spirit of life in Jesus - are you going to deny that also? EVERYTHING I HAVE
SAID IS IN THE SCRIPTUERS.
Iowa, United States
[19-Vol 1]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Again, you come to a wrong conclusion because you claim I have stated something that I have not. I
did not say that God is not a Spirit or that He is not Holy - I said that God is not THE Holy Spirit. The
Father, The Son and the Holy Spirit are three individuals that are but one God. The Father is not the
Son or the Holy Spirit, Jesus is not the Father or the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit is not the Father or
Jesus - they are one God.
Jesus said that after His ascension He would ask the Father to send the Comforter, who is the
Holy Spirit:
"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."
John 14:16-17 (KJV)
"But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost [Holy Spirit], 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 (KJV)
The problem with your claim that God is the Holy Ghost, is the fact that the above quoted three verses,
which are direct quotes from Jesus, state that the Father would send the Comforter, who is the Holy
Spirit, and that Comforter is not God because God was not sending Himself. The Holy Spirit, who is
sent by God, is referred to using the personal pronoun "He" denoting personality, rather than "it"
denoting a non-personal force or fake appearance of a non-entity
At the baptism of Jesus, the following events occurred:
"And Jesus, when He was baptized, went 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: and lo a
voice from heaven, saying, 'This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased."
Matthew 3:16-17 (KJV), cf. Mark 1:10-11; Luke 3:22
In those two verses, you have the Holy Spirit on earth with Jesus, and the Father speaking from
heaven, all at the same time. The Father was not speaking through the Holy Spirit, but from heaven.
There are three individuals and they are one God.
You have contradicted yourself in relation to your first claim that the Father is the Holy Spirit, because
you are claiming that they are one, and now you are claiming that the Father and Jesus are one but not
stating that they are two, which is where your comparison takes you. I am not entirely sure where you
stand on the definition of the Godhead, because you exclude the Holy Spirit as a person but essentially
consider the name to refer to the power or force of God. Apparently you consider the Father and Jesus
to be one, but in what manner you don't clearly define. Are they one being, one God, separate Gods or
simply modalistic appearances created by God but who do not actually exist? I think that you are
trying to say that the Holy Spirit is simply the action of the Father and Jesus in concert that gives the
illusion that there is a person of the Holy Spirit when it is simply the power of the other two. That would
mean that you have adopted a Binitarian view of the Godhead, but again, you are not clear as to your
definitions.
It would be nice if you would ask where I stand on certain issues, rather than making a statement and
then claiming that I deny what you have said when I have not even been given a chance to address the
issue. I can neither deny or affirm any statement that you might make in relation to the Scripture which
you do not reference to specific verses or to which you do not explain the meaning of those passages in
relation to how they apply to your subject.
|
#2
You have some interesting writings on this site. But I noted that you include American
neo-Conservatives as your contributors. Is this who you are targeting - mainstream conservatives? I am
a fan of Rowan Williams the Archbishop of Cantebury who is very orthodox but defends
Homosexuality.
Thank you
Ontario, Canada
[25-Vol 1]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Rowan Williams is hardly Orthodox. Support of homosexuality, which also promotes inclusion into the
leadership of the church is quite unOrthodox, because it requires a denial of the statements in Scripture.
|
#3
I quickly checked your site that you said would state the facts that support your statements about what
my church teaches. I am still unclear as to how the statements there are facts. I'm sorry you are feel
negative about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. You have a great heritage because of
the church and how your ancestors lived.
I have heard many times that "Mormons" aren't Christian because of our belief in
the trinity being different from orthodox Christianity. Of course the subject of multiple wives comes up
all the time. Then there is the subject of revelation to prophets and individuals. I do know where the
differences lie between my church and other Christian churches.
I know that if I sincerely pray to God, I can receive an answer to that prayer through personal
revelation. Jesus taught us how to pray and that as we asked we would recieve. I happen to believe
what he said. It is only logical to me that God would reveal His words through prophets now, just as he
always has. I do believe the Bible to be the word of God. If parts of it is translated incorrectly, which is
a fact, how does that take away from it's being God's words to man? And yes, it is interpreted
differently by different people - that is also a fact. It was this very thing that brought the boy Joseph
Smith to the grove to pray - he wanted to know what was true. I'm sorry if you haven't experienced
personal revelation in your life - but that doesn't preclude the fact that many people do.
In any case, thank you for the information and the great work on the web site for your ancestors. My
cousin's wife is a direct decendant of [name removed]. I will forward
your information on to her. My grandmother was the granddaughter of [name
removed] who purchased [place name removed] from the
Church and then his grandson sold it back to them two generations later.
Utah, United States
[hanfam-2009]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
The facts in the articles are simply the statements of Mormon apostles and prophets, confirming what I
have stated are historic Mormon doctrinal beliefs, that are not necessarily reflected in current teaching
by the church, because those historic beliefs have been changed. The best example is the reality that the
Book of Mormon gospel message is not the gospel message taught in the church today or the fullness of
the gospel message that it has been said to be by Joseph Smith and later Mormon prophets. Even the
Book of Mormon has been changed from the first edition of 1830 in order to conform to later teaching
about the definition of God and Jesus Christ, represented by 1 Nephi 11:18; 1 Nephi 11:21; 1 Nephi
11:32 and 1 Nephi 13:40, which originally stated God and Jesus Christ were the same person, which
defines God in modalitic terms.
As far as the Bible being translated incorrectly, the Mormon church has had 179 years to present the
evidence, which it has been unable to do, so there is no "fact" that the claims, beginning
with Joseph Smith, are true. When the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered and it was found that a
complete copy of the Book of Isaiah was uncovered, many Mormons were convinced that the
document would confirm the claims that Joseph Smith was a true and accurate translator. However, the
Dead Sea Scroll copy of the Book of Isaiah confirmed the accuracy of the translation found in the Bible
and discredited Joseph Smith's claim of accurate translations of verses from Isaiah in the Book of
Mormon and of the entire book of Isaiah in his Inspired Translation (JST) of the Bible. Asserting a
testimony does not change that actuality, but allows a person to ignore reality, only to continue believing
as truth what has been falsely asserted as being true. It still feels good to believe under those
circumstances, but feelings are not the confirmation of truth or error.
I have posted an extended conversation between a Mormon and myself, in which those issues, and the
assertion of a testimony, were an integral part of the dialogue. If you wish to read the exchange, it can
be found at:
PART 1
PART 2
PART 3
PART 4
PART 5
There is also a list of 32 articles dealing with issues of Mormon doctrine in relation to Orthodox
Christian doctrine. I don't specifically know what you consider to be the major differences between
Mormon doctrine and Orthodox Christian doctrine, but the issue of the Trinity is just one of many that
differentiate the Jesus Christ in the Bible from the Jesus Christ of the Mormon church. The articles are
specific as to those differences, along with others, over a very broad spectrum of subjects. The articles
can be found at:
MORMONS
The conversations and articles are believed to be truthful in presenting historic Mormon doctrine,
which the church would not consider to be faith promoting, so you can decide if you wish to consider
the content.
There are many people who lived very difficult and demanding lives, and accomplished some
remarkable feats, who were not Mormons, so those issues are not a determining factor regarding the
truthfulness of their religious beliefs. Mormons look to the accomplishments of their ancestors as being
one of the confirmations of the truthfulness of the church, which is not a valid criteria. Adversity can
strike anyone, regardless of religious belief. In the case of [name
removed], some of that adversity came from Brigham Young himself when he sent the [name removed] family to Cedar City without proper provisions, clothing or
housing, resulting in their living in the shell of their wagon throughout the winter and a dugout had to be
prepared during the coldest part of the year, while Brigham Young was warm and cozy in Salt Lake
City with his wives, the output of his distillery and his pleasures of using tea, coffee, snuff and chewing
tobacco.
Thank you for visiting the website and your response. I appreciate your passing the information to
others. There are a number of [name removed] family members who
have contacted me regarding the articles, so I hope the documents have been helpful and informative.
|
#4
I only wanted to say that as a Christian, I do believe that we have the responsibility to address ungodly
situations. But I want to ask you, what are you doing to actually make the situations you write about
better? Are you laboring in prayers and fasting for these people? Are you going to these people directly
to tell them what God laid on your heart to tell them to help them repent? Is your goal to actually "help"
the christian community, or is it to stir up strife and debate? What happened to all the other verses you
missed that instructs us on the protocol of addressing a problem within the church. You apparently did
a lot of typing and fact finding and compiling lists, but I would like to hear a few testimonies of yours of
what things you've done to help others who have fallen.
Virginia, United States
[35-Vol 1]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
You are missing the entire point of the On Doctrine website, which is not to change the false teachers,
but to warn those who will follow them. The problem is not that false and immoral teachers have
accidentally fallen into a particular error and would gladly welcome some well-meaning Christian who
would explain the true path of understanding. False teachers are not ignorant of the Scripture, which is
the reason that they contradict correct doctrine with false doctrine. For the most part, the issue for them
is not even doctrine, but the best way that they can appeal to people in order to make money or exert
control over spiritual lives of people.
I do not expect or anticipate that false teachers will listen to or accept the challenge to them presented
on the website. Most of the people discussed on the website have distanced themselves from the
"church" by setting up their own organizations and starting their own churches, which they own and run
themselves by putting in place leadership who are their friends and relatives. They are responsible and
accountable only to themselves.
The issue is that Christians are undiscerning in relation to those leaders and the doctrines that they
teach, because they do not read the Scripture and because the appeal of most false teaching is based
on greed or the false promises of relief from overwhelming situations such as disease or bad
relationships.
I have noted the following in an article:
"Many Christians would claim that the only proper response to immoral and illegal conduct, and
the false teaching of many Christian leaders, is not to confront it, but only to pray for those
individuals. It is well that we should pray for them, but many Christians engage in pointless
prayers by constantly seeking guidance, when it is already revealed in the Scripture and their
prayers go amiss when they continue to support and accept leadership that is specifically
condemned by the Scripture."
What I have or have not done, or who I may or may not be has no bearing on the issue. There is
always the attempt to place the blame on the messenger who reveals the problem, while allowing the
perpetrator to run free under the guise of Christian love, only to suck more victims into the black hole of
the teachings of false hope and false salvation.
I have dealt with many of the issues in an article in the FAQS section which you can find at the link
below:
"Why do you and your miserable On Doctrine
website continue to criticize God's anointed . . ."
|
#5
I have begun to realize that Christians do the devils work for him. We have got to stop looking at the
wrong that our brothers and sisters have done.
Oral Roberts, Kenneth Hagen and the Copelands. Let us think of the millions of souls that have been
saved through their ministry. There is much division in the body of christ. We should work towards
unity and show the world that we are united. If some brother or sister has failed or made a mistake the
best thing we can do is pray for them.
If we publically expose them we bring shame to the gospel, it would be best to leave it to God. We
need to gain strength not weekness.
Never the less "souls are being save through so called false prophets" it is not for us to judge, but that is
God's work.
Be carefull.
God bless
I am very concerned.
West Midlands, United Kingdom
[36-Vol 1]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
SEE: #3 above.
READ on the On Doctrine website:
"Why do you and your miserable On Doctrine website continue to
criticize God's anointed . . ."
|
#6
Go f *** yourself talking about Dr. Morris Cerello like that
Ontario, Canada
[54-Vol 2]
ON DOCTRINE NOTE:
Ouch! Maybe not.
SEE the article:
MORRIS CERULLO
|
|
|
 COPYRIGHT © 2001, 2002, 2003,
2004,
2005 by ON DOCTRINE & ONDOCTRINE.COM, All Rights Reserved
|
|