What Is The Holy Spirit

Nope. It's a well-documented fact. I can only go by what you say here - and you have denied many times what Jesus said. My "interpretation" is just a plain reading. Yours is a self-serving fiction.

Do you specifically remember what He said (as character in a book, by the way)which I refused to do or scoffed at? I only remeember one argument...that of the rich young ruler. IIRC you said that Jesus required for everyone to give all that they had whereas I tried to argue that since you didnt believe that Jesus was real and alive, your argument had no clout...(also because you yourself never gave everything away)As I said before, my argument was not with Jesus---whom I believe is more than a book character. It was with your ineffective argument.

For an atheist, reality is the summation of the physical universe. Rocksa dont cry out. Trees dont weep. Oceans don't moan. And stars do not speak. Reality cant care. Reality has no emotion.Now...if you want to talk about the father of our Lord Jesus Christ who was, is, and is to come, then we can have a discussion about reality. If, however, you want to introduce Loki, or rabbit, or sonic the hedgehog into the discussion you are crossing the line into fantasy and human imagination. Of course, othyer humans may care about what you or I think, but none of your Fosters Characters can even do so apart from the imagination of the human who wrote about them.

Great, let's talk. Please present any evidence or a reasoned argument that might support the thing you claim exists.

Phat, if you can actually manage to ignore Ringo and jar in all these matters for the last 16 years I have no idea how to get through.Except maybe this one:I will give you $100 if you can provide me with a 5 page college freshman analysis with at least 5 footnotes according to Turabian style, at no more than a 20% flag rate for plagiarism. The topic of this term paper is:Compare and contrast the Gospel according to St. Matthew with Bernie Sanders platform for the 2020 Democratic primary election.No slummin', no Shining-level typewriter exercises, no bullshit.Must achieve a 70% grade as judged by your peers (as in forum members).Obviously, the paper will be published here. Should you achieve a passing grade you do not need to provide any contact information to receive the award. As a librarian, I have a special set of skills, I will hunt you down, I will find you, and I will hand you $100 ($150 if it takes longer than 30 days). If you run off to the Yukon, well, no find, no money.Hey, the acquisition of money alone should pique you interest being the good capitalist image you project. You post a lot, so it should not even be work.I look forward to the results of this challenge.

Don’t do it, Phat. It’s a trap.They are both heathen soviet-style communism brought into this world by Satan himself masquerading as Jesus. Anglagard is just trying to get you to believe that helping others is a good Christian thing. It’s Satan’s Anti-American Socialism.Also, pick up your pride game. I wouldn’t even put my name on the title page for less than $250. If he wants it so much ... make him pay.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

We could post it in the Columnists Corner. A couple of questions, though.
1) Where do I get a reasonable and concise summation of the Sanders platform?
2) Do you have a preference from which Bible version I read Matthew? I prefer either NKJV or ESV.And since we are all altruistic, be we Christian or Humanist, we can agree to give the $100.00 to a worthy charitable cause.Also...in browsing the web I came up with this version of Sanders basic platform:

quote:

---

Bernie Sanders 2020 platform and issues

​

1) Medicare for All

​

Defining healthcare proposals can be tricky. This is particularly true in our current moment when Medicare for All is gaining popularity but a number of presidential hopefuls are still taking cash from the healthcare industry.

​

The essential distinction between a real Medicare for All plan and a pretender is the role of private insurance companies: there shouldn’t be one in the real deal.

​

Under the plans championed by Sanders, Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wa.), Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and other progressives, private insurance companies would no longer play a role in the healthcare needs of Americans. They argue that this is vital because if private insurance companies continue to exert power in the martketplace, the government will have trouble keep prices low for patients.

​

A public option, by contrast, would allow the government to provide a plan that is offered alongside private insurance plans. Under this policy, the price-gouging of private insurance companies would remain a part of American life.

​

A quick, handy way to tell if other candidates’ plans stack up is if they support a single health program with comprehensive coverage that is free at the point of service and covers everyone while the government oversees pricing.

​

That is what Bernie Sanders supports.

​

This quick and dirty analysis does not account for every aspect of healthcare. Sanders’ plan is the truest to Medicare for All of the candidates currently in the presidential race, but he has been criticized from the left for some aspects of his plan, including the way it handles long-term care and elder care.

​

For a full accounting of the differences between the various iterations of Medicare for All, Tim Faust’s, The Only Guide to Medicare for All That You Will Ever Need at Splinter is a nice deeper dive.
2) Green New Deal

​

Similarly, many candidates say that they support a Green New Deal, but they don’t necessarily support the Green New Deal resolution introduced by Ocasio-Cortez. Furthermore, Ocasio-Cortez’s resolution is just a broad framework, and so it is easy for less environmentally friendly candidates to say they support it while still taking cash from corporations and lobbyists working against its goals

​

When it comes to a Green New Deal, Sanders is the real deal. He is reportedly working on his own version of a Green New Deal, and early speculation is that it is will flesh out Ocasio-Cortez’s version in similarly aggressive terms.

​

Though we are likely months away from Sanders’ official plan being released, it is expected to dig into how America could move towards zeroing out carbon emissions, while offering many of the same aggressive benchmarks laid out by Ocasio-Cortez.

​

Reading Ocasio-Cortez’s resolution (introduced alongside Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)) and progressive thinktank Data for Progress’ 40-page proposal should give you an idea of where Sanders will land.

​

Ocasio-Cortez’s non-binding resolution contains a variety of measures aimed at curbing climate change and protecting the environment. Some of the proposed measures include overhauling and upgrading America’s infrastructure, investing in renewable energy, expanding public transportation, and jobs training. Expect a similar focus in Sanders’ expanded proposal.
3) $15 minimum wage

​

Here we have a policy proposal that requires less explanation: Bernie Sanders supports raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour.

​

The current minimum wage in the United State is $7.25 an hour and has not been raised since 2009.
4) Bernie Sanders’ tax plan

​

How are we going to pay for it? is a common refrain among Bernie’s opponents. What this ignores is that Bernie has a fairly detailed proposal for how to pay for his programs.

​

In addition to cuts to military spending, Sanders would raise taxes. It is important to point out that for your average working class person, the modest increase would be mostly offset by getting rid of things like health insurance premiums and student loans.

​

The bulk of the money to pay for Sanders’ programs would come from wealthy corporations and individuals. Steep increases in capital gains and estate taxes would be accompanied by increases in the marginal tax rate for high-income earners, topping out at a rate of 70 percent for dollars earned in excess of $10 million.

​

Along with raising the minimum wage, Sanders supports accompanying economic measures aimed at leveling the playing field between the one percent and the rest of Americans.

​

But taxes aren’t his only plan for the economy. Sanders is known for wanting to break up the big banks and imposing greater regulations on the financial sector. The most recent version of this plan would limit Wall Street banks to holding no more than $584 billion in assets.

​

Sanders has expressed his support for unions organizing across a variety of industries. Since the 2016 election, he has supported workers at a Mississippi Nissan plant, at Disneyland, and at Amazon struggling for higher wages and better working conditions. He plans on introducing labor-friendly legislation to help the recent resurgence of union strength in America.

​

Sanders also believes that campaign finance reform aimed at diminishing the role of money in politics is essential. In his email announcing his candidacy to supporters, Sanders specifically called out Citizens United, voter suppression, and gerrymandering. He does not take money from corporate PACs.

​

The gender pay gap is also a deep concern for Sanders. He hopes to make pay equity a part of his campaign. The Paycheck Fairness Act, which Sanders co-sponsored, would bar employers from retaliating against employees who ask questions about their wages. Sanders also supports paid family leave: he co-sponsored Sen. Kirstin Gillibrand’s (D-N.Y.) bill that would establish universal paid family leave.
5) Free tuition

​

Bernie Sanders tax plan

​

When it comes to secondary school, Sanders is a big supporter of teachers unions and public education. He is opposed to charter schools.

​

Public college tuition should be free according to Sanders. He is also in favor of drastically reducing student loan interest rates. He has previously floated halving all existing student loan interest rates and allowing those with debt to refinance.
6) Criminal justice

​

A battery of criminal justice reforms is on the table for Sanders, including ending cash bail, abolishing private prisons, legalizing marijuana, and limiting gun sales.

​

Sanders has also indicated that he would like to launch automatic federal investigations into deaths in police custody.

​

7) Foreign policy

​

Generally, Sanders has focused on domestic policy far more than foreign policy during his time in politics. But he has worked on his foreign policy bonafides since 2016. He has been an instrumental part of the effort to end America’s involvement in Saudi aggression in Yemen. However, unlike Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mi.), he has been reticent to speak out in favor of the Palestinian people.

​

More broadly, Sanders’ foreign policy views are generally anti-war, anti-imperialist, anti-colonial, and anti-fascist.

​

Now, as more and more candidates adopt his long-held stances, the only question is not will Bernie run, but will he win?

---

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.Edited by Phat, : added Sanders PlatformEdited by Phat, : punctuation

For starters, are we in agreement that we are talking about the One whom Jesus referred to as "Father"? Is this not GOD, Creator of all seen and unseen?If so, you and I both know that there is no objective evidence. Thus, the only thing I can do is to provide a reasoned argument.Do you have any parameters as to what you consider reasonable?Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

No Phat, it is another character in the story that is as so often the case simply undefined.Remember, The character God that would be referenced in any Bible story of Jesus is NOT the three in one character of contemporary Dogma.I can see no way that there could ever be any agreement when it comes to some god in the Bible beyond what is the the actual reference. As soon as you try pulling pieces parts out of other areas you end up with the god that you create. In your example it is some undefined but most likely Hebrew concept of a God that could not possibly have a son or be some three in one amalgam.It's not Jesus that created the father of our Lord Jesus Christ who was, is, and is to come.

So in other words, if I understand what you write and have written, you believe that there is no God character apart from the one we create...correct? I am talking about GOD, while you are talking about God. If so, explain to me how I would be able to even present a reasoned argument...without objective evidence...in light of your framework?Add By Edit: Lets see what Tangles link says shall we?
Category:Creator gods
God
God The FatherIt appears that in your Critically taught relativistic brain you were taught the first one whereas I was taught the 2nd one, yet you claim to be as Christian as I do.
Sometimes human wisdom serves to cloud and confuse a mind while Faith & Belief appear to clear it up. Just sayin... Edited by Phat, : added Tangles link and a few more comments

No Phat, I was not taught one period, I was exposed to the many god characters that exist.You are claiming that you have the ability to describe GOD as the god you want. But you never produce any evidence or reasoned argument to support that assertion.GOD, if GOD exists is whatever GOD actually is; good bad, incomplete, complete, far, unfair, loving, hateful, kind, cruel ... the list goes on and.No one has ever provided and evidence, model, method, process, procedure or reasoned argument to allow you or any one of us to say what GOD might be like.But we and you and the various authors and story tellers that created the Bible stories have created god(s) as we want them. So has every other religion, known and unknown that ever existed. All of those God(s) and god(s) are equally plausible or implausible. There is absolutely no reason to think any of them exist.We can believe that GOD exists and that GOD picked us but it is irrelevant whether that GOD is Vishnu or The Great A'tuin or Coyote or Jesus or God or Ganesh or pick whatever god creation fits you needs and desires.BUT, if GOD does exist then GOD will be whatever GOD actually is rather than anything we might wish GOD was.

So in other words, is it fair to say that you...as a believer....believe that GOD exists and is

quote:

---

whatever GOD actually is rather than anything we might wish GOD was.

---

Correct? So as a "Cradle creedal Christian" do you believe that Jesus is God?The Wiki article states that a minority of Christians are non-trinitarians, and I'm curious if you believe that the Nicene Creed is Trinitarian or not.And of course we know beforehand that it is irrelevant what you believe (But only what actually is) I of course believe that it is relevant, but I will have to study more scripture and church history before reaffirming this belief. And thanks for being honest, by the way. You have reasoned argumentation for your beliefs and I respect that.

You are conflating yet again religion and reality. They are not the same.I am a Christian, as you mention a Cradle Creedal Christian and so I accept those things that are in the creeds. By accept, I acknowledge that they are a significant part of the dogma of the religion.The question of whether or not Jesus is god is one of those things that has no possible answer unless you add a whole laundry list of qualifiers Phat and we have run down that path many many many many times. The Nicene Creed is neither Trinitarian or Non-Trinitarian but was a significant step in the creation of Trinitraianism.It's the first Church document that actually seems to acknowledge the Holy Spirit as an actual entity as opposed to some force or attribute and was part of the political struggle opposing Arian Christianity.Remember, the passage in the "We Believes" that references the Holy Spirit was a later addition to the original Nicene Creed stuck in 56 years after the original version.(aside: The Nicene Creed is the only one of the Creeds that is almost universally accepted among Club Christian unlike the Athanasian Creed which is the authoritative one regarding Trinitarianism and is another product of unknown origin but from at least another half century after the Nicene Creed.)The reality is that classic Trinitarianism makes no sense and is another example of mutually exclusive dogma. The traditional drawing of the triangle with the nots on the edges and is pointing to the middle just is plain silly; a representation of an impossibility. It's one of those things that can result in lip service but I have never yet found anyone who can provide reasoned or even rational argument that it is a representation of reality rather than fantasy.

I don't know about you but to me it makes perfect sense and is not all that difficult nor mysterious.
GOD is the creator of all seen and unseen.
Jesus was made man and was human while on earth. When He left,l He promised the Holy Spirit which was a continuation of GOD's personal presence on earth.
This allowed for people such as myself to experience a transformation.I realize that you are uncomfortable with this belief and will likely label it as silly, but for some reason you as a believer kept one foot firmly in the thinking camp of logic,reason, and reality (perhaps out of deference towards all of the other beliefs you learned about) and continued to ask questions rather than settle on any affirmative answer or declaration. You seem to feel more comfortable being an inclusive believer rather than an exclusive believer.And yes, I agree. The triangle is a silly attempt at symbolic understanding.Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

But Phat, what you just posted is NOT what is claimed by Trinitarianism.You just posted yet another made up apologetic to get around what is actually written.