General religious discussion thread

[Oranjejuicemonki He/Him]

5 hours ago, Mattel said:

"On the last day, the climax of the festival, Jesus stood and shouted to the crowds, 'Anyone who is thirsty may come to me! Anyone who believes in me may come and drink! For the Scriptures declare, "Rivers of living water will flow from his heart."' (When he said 'living water,' he was speaking of the Spirit, who would be given to everyone believing in him. But the Spirit had not yet been given, Because Jesus had not yet entered into his glory." (NLT).

I've always read that as if you believe in Him, you can have the Holy Spirit. It doesn't sound like speaking of the Spirit in the first person, just if you're thirsty come to me and drink the living waters or in other words have the Spirit. It's like if I say come to me and drink orange juice you could interpret that as I am orange juice or just there's orange juice you can get from me. 

It is really interesting though to hear what you get out of reading the same thing, and I hope I didn't convey rudeness in the way I said stuff. I'm not saying you're wrong, I just don't see why it has to mean that and personally it seems kinda counterintuitive to me.

[NameIess]

On 4/22/2026 at 7:21 PM, Frustration said:

Since the majority hold to it some churches/individuals will claim that those who don't agree with the Nicaean creed aren't Christians as a result.

It’s not merely because it’s a majority view. The identity of Jesus Christ is very important to the religion named after him.

On 4/22/2026 at 7:21 PM, Frustration said:

I guess that makes a bit more sense, but just to clarify, can I ask if saying that Satan and Michael the Archangel were brothers would provoke a similar response?

No, it would not. At least not from me. Not sure if it would be entirely accurate (like Matell, I’m not an angelologist) but certainly not offensive.

On 4/23/2026 at 8:45 AM, Qianweilian said:

Well, I believe the main source that for belief is John 10:30. "I and my Father are one." The general interpretation of this in the Church, I believe, is one in purpose. But taken literally, it can suggest that they are the same being.

There are more sources than just John 10:30. John chapter 1 is one of the most explicit examples of Jesus and God’s oneness, though I believe you would dispute the translation and/or the interpretation. John chapter 8 is another great example, where Jesus identifies himself with God. The critical verses are 24:

Spoiler

“I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.”
‭‭John‬ ‭8‬:‭24‬ ‭KJV‬‬

28:

Spoiler

“Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.”
‭‭John‬ ‭8‬:‭28‬ ‭KJV‬‬

and finally 58:

Spoiler

“Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.”
‭‭John‬ ‭8‬:‭58‬ ‭KJV‬‬

the phrase ‘I am he’ in verses 24 and 28 are actually the same greek words used in 58, translated word for word it would be simply ‘I am’ all three times. Jesus’s wording here is clearly intentionally meant to hearken back to Exodus 3, when God speaks from the burning bush to Moses:

Spoiler

“And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.”
‭‭Exodus‬ ‭3‬:‭14‬ ‭KJV‬‬

As evidenced by the Jew’s immediate response of attempting to stone Jesus for heresy, they understood his meaning.

[Frustration]

11 minutes ago, NameIess said:

It’s not merely because it’s a majority view. The identity of Jesus Christ is very important to the religion named after him.

I really don't see a difference between this and Catholics calling early Protestants heretics for rejecting Papal authority. They would say that following Christ's successor on Earth is very important to the religion named after Him. The basic principle of the distinction remains.

We do not claim anything less than divinity for our Lord, we merely recognize a distinction between Him and the Father.

17 minutes ago, NameIess said:

and finally 58:

  Reveal hidden contents

“Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.”
‭‭John‬ ‭8‬:‭58‬ ‭KJV‬‬

the phrase ‘I am he’ in verses 24 and 28 are actually the same greek words used in 58, translated word for word it would be simply ‘I am’ all three times. Jesus’s wording here is clearly intentionally meant to hearken back to Exodus 3, when God speaks from the burning bush to Moses:

  Reveal hidden contents

“And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.”
‭‭Exodus‬ ‭3‬:‭14‬ ‭KJV‬‬

As evidenced by the Jew’s immediate response of attempting to stone Jesus for heresy, they understood his meaning.

Indeed, and we don't dispute that Jehovah was the premortal Christ

From The Living Christ

Quote

He was the Great Jehovah of the Old Testament, the Messiah of the New.

I could give a full in depth explanation of our particular views on the issue but for now I'll just site John 17, with a particular emphasis on verses 20-22 as being an accurate description.

Spoiler

Jesus, praying to the Father on behalf of His Apostles: John 17

20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

KJV

 

[NameIess]

5 hours ago, Frustration said:

I really don't see a difference between this and Catholics calling early Protestants heretics for rejecting Papal authority. They would say that following Christ's successor on Earth is very important to the religion named after Him. The basic principle of the distinction remains.

We do not claim anything less than divinity for our Lord, we merely recognize a distinction between Him and the Father.

The identity of God is more important than the authority of the church. I can call someone in the catholic church my brother or sister in Christ because we believe in the same God, three in one. I might disagree with them on many important beliefs and doctrines, but we worship the same God, place our faith in the same Jesus, and the same Holy Spirit indwells both of us.

The Jesus I believe in is equal with God the Father, co-eternal with Him.

The Jesus you believe in (and forgive me if I misrepresent your beliefs, if I do it is out of nothing other than my ignorance) is a created being, the firstborn of God. All things (aside from himself) were created through him, and he is divine, immortal, uniquely inheriting both spiritual and physical 'essence' (probably not the right word) from God the Father.

These are different. Whether Jesus is eternal, equal, and one with the Father is an important distinction.

6 hours ago, Frustration said:

I really don't see a difference between this and Catholics calling early Protestants heretics for rejecting Papal authority. They would say that following Christ's successor on Earth is very important to the religion named after Him. The basic principle of the distinction remains.

We do not claim anything less than divinity for our Lord, we merely recognize a distinction between Him and the Father.

I had not heard of that view before. I suppose that would make Jesus's words in John 8 consistent with your view, but I do think that causes some problems with the Old Testament. For example in Exodus 20:2-3, God identifies himself by the name Yahweh or Jehovah, then continues to tell the Israelites they shall have no other gods before him.

Spoiler

I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

Exodus 20:2-3 KJV

How would you explain this? 

[Frustration]

8 hours ago, NameIess said:

The Jesus you believe in (and forgive me if I misrepresent your beliefs, if I do it is out of nothing other than my ignorance)

No offense taken. This is actually far more pleasant than the last time I had this conversation.

All citations are from the KJV unless otherwise stated.

8 hours ago, NameIess said:

The Jesus you believe in (and forgive me if I misrepresent your beliefs, if I do it is out of nothing other than my ignorance) is a created being, the firstborn of God. All things (aside from himself) were created through him, and he is divine, immortal, uniquely inheriting both spiritual and physical 'essence' (probably not the right word) from God the Father.

These are different. Whether Jesus is eternal, equal, and one with the Father is an important distinction.

This is the Jehovah's Witnesses' view. Which while it has some similarities is different.

The first is that we reject Creation Ex Nihilo, or that God made everything out of nothing. Jesus was not created, and is eternal. 

Now, He was the firstborn of God's spirit children¹, but Jesus existed before that.

At that time, and during His mortal ministry He was, while sinless, imperfect and had not yet received of the Father's fullness.

Luke 13:31-32

Spoiler

31 ¶ The same day there came certain of the Pharisees, saying unto him, Get thee out, and depart hence: for Herod will kill thee.

32 And he said unto them, Go ye, and tell that fox, Behold, I cast out devils, and I do cures to day and to morrow, and the third day I shall be perfected.

Here Christ's pefrection is stated to be a yet future date, while at the same time He aknowledges that the Father is perfect

Mattew 5:48

Spoiler

48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

However, following His ressurection Christ received a fullness of the glory of the Father, and at this time stands both perfect and equal with Him in all things.

Mattew 28:18

Spoiler

18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

Revelations 3:21

Spoiler

21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

And in the Book of Mormon, following His ressurection Jesus appeared and gave a sermon very similar to the Sermon on the mount, only this time He lists both Himself and the Father as perfect.

3 Nephi 12:48

Spoiler

48 Therefore I would that ye should be perfect even as I, or your Father who is in heaven is perfect.

So we would both say that Jesus is coeternal and equal with the Father, the only real distinction is whether they are the same person or two.

Spoiler

¹ While several theories have been advanced, the manner of procreation on the Deity level is unknown, and the Church has no doctrine on it.

 

8 hours ago, NameIess said:

I had not heard of that view before. I suppose that would make Jesus's words in John 8 consistent with your view, but I do think that causes some problems with the Old Testament. For example in Exodus 20:2-3, God identifies himself by the name Yahweh or Jehovah, then continues to tell the Israelites they shall have no other gods before him.

  Reveal hidden contents

I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

Exodus 20:2-3 KJV

How would you explain this? 

I likewise have not heard this argument before, so thank you. I'm so used to seeing the same 4-5 verses. This is quite refreashing.

It's hard to know from only the Biblical record if Israel had been given a full knowledge of God and Jesus. While I believe that Moses knew, it's unclear how much he was allowed to share.

Mark 4:11 Jesus does something similar.

Spoiler

11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:

Paul and Isaiah both speak of similar things

Isaiah 28:9-10

Spoiler

9 ¶ Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.

10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

1 Corinthians 3:1-2

Spoiler

1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.

2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.

 

Personally I think that it was understood as specifically a prohibition against idolatry, not of the worship of the Father and Son, though I recognize that that isn't what is explicately in the text.

[Immortal Platypus]

10 hours ago, NameIess said:

I had not heard of that view before. I suppose that would make Jesus's words in John 8 consistent with your view, but I do think that causes some problems with the Old Testament. For example in Exodus 20:2-3, God identifies himself by the name Yahweh or Jehovah, then continues to tell the Israelites they shall have no other gods before him.

can I ask why you specified that he identifies himself as Yahweh? 

I will also note that it seems to me that beings that are not the Father bear the name Yahweh, for example, in Genesis 31:11-13, the angel of God refers to himself as the God of Bethel, which was where Jacob swore an oath to Yahweh in Genesis 28:13-20

Spoiler

Genesis 31:

11 And the angel of God spake unto me in a dream, saying, Jacob: And I said, Here am I.

12 And he said, Lift up now thine eyes, and see, all the rams which leap upon the cattle are ringstraked, speckled, and grisled: for I have seen all that Laban doeth unto thee.

13 I am the God of Bethel, where thou anointedst the pillar, and where thou vowedst a vow unto me: now arise, get thee out from this land, and return unto the land of thy kindred.

 

Genesis 28:

13 And, behold, the Lord stood above it, and said, I am the Lord God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac: the land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed;

14 And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.

15 And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and will bring thee again into this land; for I will not leave thee, until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of.

16 ¶ And Jacob awaked out of his sleep, and he said, Surely the Lord is in this place; and I knew it not.

17 And he was afraid, and said, How dreadful is this place! this is none other but the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven.

18 And Jacob rose up early in the morning, and took the stone that he had put for his pillows, and set it up for a pillar, and poured oil upon the top of it.

19 And he called the name of that place Beth-el: but the name of that city was called Luz at the first.

20 And Jacob vowed a vow, saying, If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on,

 

(bold added)

 

[Mattel]

Another thing to note is that Jesus at a few instances did something so entirely unprecedented. He said the holy YHWH name a few times. A notable one is when he is talking with the Samaritan woman at the well. She tells Jesus she believes one day the messiah will come, and in our English translations Jesus says “I am.” He said the exact same thing that Moses was told during the burning bush verses “I AM is sending you,” as @Nameless also alluded to. He did it another time when confronted by the Pharisees, I think, but I don’t know the exact location in the Bible. 
 

in Jewish culture you did NOT say that word. That’s why they used words like Elohim, which translates to lord, because they needed a way to talk about God but they did not even say his name because they held it so reverently. So Jesus saying that “I AM,” is a big deal. 

[Immortal Platypus]

1 hour ago, Mattel said:

He did it another time when confronted by the Pharisees, I think, but I don’t know the exact location in the Bible

that was toward the end of John 8, I believe

[NameIess]

On 4/27/2026 at 10:22 AM, Frustration said:

This is the Jehovah's Witnesses' view. Which while it has some similarities is different.

The first is that we reject Creation Ex Nihilo, or that God made everything out of nothing. Jesus was not created, and is eternal. 

Now, He was the firstborn of God's spirit children¹, but Jesus existed before that.

At that time, and during His mortal ministry He was, while sinless, imperfect and had not yet received of the Father's fullness.

Luke 13:31-32

  Reveal hidden contents

31 ¶ The same day there came certain of the Pharisees, saying unto him, Get thee out, and depart hence: for Herod will kill thee.

32 And he said unto them, Go ye, and tell that fox, Behold, I cast out devils, and I do cures to day and to morrow, and the third day I shall be perfected.

Here Christ's pefrection is stated to be a yet future date, while at the same time He aknowledges that the Father is perfect

Mattew 5:48

  Reveal hidden contents

48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

However, following His ressurection Christ received a fullness of the glory of the Father, and at this time stands both perfect and equal with Him in all things.

Mattew 28:18

  Reveal hidden contents

18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

Revelations 3:21

  Reveal hidden contents

21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

And in the Book of Mormon, following His ressurection Jesus appeared and gave a sermon very similar to the Sermon on the mount, only this time He lists both Himself and the Father as perfect.

3 Nephi 12:48

  Reveal hidden contents

48 Therefore I would that ye should be perfect even as I, or your Father who is in heaven is perfect.

So we would both say that Jesus is coeternal and equal with the Father, the only real distinction is whether they are the same person or two.

  Reveal hidden contents

Thank you for the correction. I had heard about the rejection of ex nihilo, but it does raise some questions for me, such as: in what form did we exist before creation? I guess this might be getting into your footnote, but what form did Jesus exist in before he was God’s spirit child? Where did whatever it was we were come from? Is there official teaching on whether God always existed in the same way as he does now?

To the question of whether Jesus claimed he would be made perfect, I would have to argue towards innacurate translation there. I think the word translated ‘I shall be perfected’ would be better translated as ‘I shall (perfectly) complete my work’.

And an eternally perfect Jesus is different from a Jesus who was once less than God, and only became equal with him at his resurrection. (If I am understanding your view correctly)

On 4/27/2026 at 10:22 AM, Frustration said:

likewise have not heard this argument before, so thank you. I'm so used to seeing the same 4-5 verses. This is quite refreashing.

It's hard to know from only the Biblical record if Israel had been given a full knowledge of God and Jesus. While I believe that Moses knew, it's unclear how much he was allowed to share.

Mark 4:11 Jesus does something similar.

  Reveal hidden contents

11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:

Paul and Isaiah both speak of similar things

Isaiah 28:9-10

  Reveal hidden contents

9 ¶ Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.

10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

1 Corinthians 3:1-2

  Reveal hidden contents

1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.

2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.

 

Personally I think that it was understood as specifically a prohibition against idolatry, not of the worship of the Father and Son, though I recognize that that isn't what is explicately in the text.

I agree that the Israelites were not fully informed of God. For example, the afterlife was discussed very little in the Old Testament. And even today, there are questions we have about God that are not answered. We have what is needed to follow God and to be saved. However, worshipping the wrong being as God is not the same as not knowing everything about God. And indeed it seems to me that for the entirety of its history the entire nation of Israel (those who were not falling away to worship idols, at least) was worshipping a being who was not God, to the preclusion of worshipping God. The temple was Yahweh’s house:

Spoiler

“Then David said, This is the house of the LORD God, and this is the altar of the burnt offering for Israel. And David commanded to gather together the strangers that were in the land of Israel; and he set masons to hew wrought stones to build the house of God. And David prepared iron in abundance for the nails for the doors of the gates, and for the joinings; and brass in abundance without weight; also cedar trees in abundance: for the Zidonians and they of Tyre brought much cedar wood to David. And David said, Solomon my son is young and tender, and the house that is to be builded for the LORD must be exceeding magnifical, of fame and of glory throughout all countries: I will therefore now make preparation for it. So David prepared abundantly before his death.”
‭‭1 Chronicles‬ ‭22‬:‭1‬-‭5‬ ‭KJV‬‬

The psalms proclaim Yahweh as God. 

Spoiler

“Praise ye the LORD. Praise, O ye servants of the LORD, Praise the name of the LORD. Blessed be the name of the LORD From this time forth and for evermore. From the rising of the sun unto the going down of the same The LORD's name is to be praised. The LORD is high above all nations, And his glory above the heavens. Who is like unto the LORD our God, who dwelleth on high,”
‭‭Psalm‬ ‭113‬:‭1‬-‭5‬ ‭KJV‬‬

The people of Israel stopped speaking the name Yahweh out loud, due to the commandment in Exodus 20:

Spoiler

“Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.”
‭‭Exodus‬ ‭20‬:‭7‬ ‭KJV‬‬

It seems clear from the Old Testament scripture that Yahweh is God. The names are used interchangeably. I don’t think you can make a case from the Old Testament that Yahweh is not God, and so going by the revelation of the Old and New Testament, it seems that when Jesus identifies himself with Yahweh, he is claiming to be God.

That said, I would like to add that this by no means disproves your faith. Again, please correct me if I am wrong, but LDS teachings are that portions of the Bible were lost which would have explained the distinction between God and Jesus.

However, I would ask, considering the Old testament identifies Yahweh as God repeatedly, and Jesus identifies himself with Yawheh in the New, if that helps you understand why we who do not accept the book of Mormon or any of Joseph Smith’s revelations as inspired scripture wholeheartedly affirm the trinity.

On 4/27/2026 at 11:05 AM, Immortal Platypus said:

can I ask why you specified that he identifies himself as Yahweh? 

I will also note that it seems to me that beings that are not the Father bear the name Yahweh, for example, in Genesis 31:11-13, the angel of God refers to himself as the God of Bethel, which was where Jacob swore an oath to Yahweh in Genesis 28:13-20

  Reveal hidden contents

Genesis 31:

11 And the angel of God spake unto me in a dream, saying, Jacob: And I said, Here am I.

12 And he said, Lift up now thine eyes, and see, all the rams which leap upon the cattle are ringstraked, speckled, and grisled: for I have seen all that Laban doeth unto thee.

13 I am the God of Bethel, where thou anointedst the pillar, and where thou vowedst a vow unto me: now arise, get thee out from this land, and return unto the land of thy kindred.

 

Genesis 28:

13 And, behold, the Lord stood above it, and said, I am the Lord God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac: the land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed;

14 And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.

15 And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and will bring thee again into this land; for I will not leave thee, until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of.

16 ¶ And Jacob awaked out of his sleep, and he said, Surely the Lord is in this place; and I knew it not.

17 And he was afraid, and said, How dreadful is this place! this is none other but the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven.

18 And Jacob rose up early in the morning, and took the stone that he had put for his pillows, and set it up for a pillar, and poured oil upon the top of it.

19 And he called the name of that place Beth-el: but the name of that city was called Luz at the first.

20 And Jacob vowed a vow, saying, If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on,

 

(bold added)

 

Because Yahweh is the name God gives to Moses at the burning bush. The name Jesus is identifying Himself with by saying ‘before Abraham was, I Am’. Is that what you meant by the question?

I would say that in this verse, we don’t see the angel speaking. We see Jacob recounting the event to his wives. Now, one could say that Jacob was mistaken about what the angel had said, but that’s not what I’m trying to get at here. I would like to point out that if an angel appeared to me in a dream and said ‘I am God’, then based off of the context I probably wouldn’t say that an angel of God had appeared in a dream, but that God had appeared in a dream. So, either Jacob was able to distinguish between God and an angel, which is possible, or he just didn’t mention the part about how the angel first said something like ‘I am a messenger of God, here is the message.’

Regardless of whether that is what happened, the bigger point is that the angel brings Jacob a message from God. If I write a letter, I will sign my name on it.  Just as the postman delivering that letter is not claiming to be me, the angel was making no claim to divinity by delivering God’s message.

[Immortal Platypus]

14 minutes ago, NameIess said:

Because Yahweh is the name God gives to Moses at the burning bush. The name Jesus is identifying Himself with by saying ‘before Abraham was, I Am’. Is that what you meant by the question?

lowkey, I don't recall why I asked that.

9 minutes ago, NameIess said:

So, either Jacob was able to distinguish between God and an angel, which is possible, or he just didn’t mention the part about how the angel first said something like ‘I am a messenger of God, here is the message.’

I feel like the first scenario is significantly more likely. The odds of him being able to tell the difference seems more likely to me than the odds of him forgetting to say that the angel declared he was a messenger of God, but remembering that the angel said that he was God.

 

Unfortunately, I don't have a lot of time for this, cause it's end of year for me, so I probably won't be on much

[NameIess]

4 minutes ago, Immortal Platypus said:

I feel like the first scenario is significantly more likely. The odds of him being able to tell the difference seems more likely to me than the odds of him forgetting to say that the angel declared he was a messenger of God, but remembering that the angel said that he was God.

I wouldn't say he would have to forget. He doesn't have to recount word for word what happened in order to get the important information across to his wives. But still, in the first case the angel is still a messenger of God, bringing a message from God to Jacob. Not making a claim to personal divinity.

[CoderDrag0n8 He/Him]

I have a question for the christians here

How did the holy spirit?

I mean, I get The Father and The Son, but how did the Holy Spirit get in there? What even is it?

[Myst He/Him]

2 minutes ago, CoderDrag0n8 said:

I have a question for the christians here

How did the holy spirit?

I mean, I get The Father and The Son, but how did the Holy Spirit get in there? What even is it?

Like, why does it exist, how do we know it does?

Well, as for what it is(keep in mind I’m a member of the church of Jesus Christ of latter day saints and so this comes from what I believe, it’s different for other people, especially when considering the trinity)

I’d say that the Holy spirits job is to confirm truth, and it does that it different ways, for some it’s feelings, other it’s words in their mind, it depends, but the Holy Ghost testifies of Christ, confirms truth, and warns of danger(physical or spiritual)

It’s always hard to know whether something is the Holy Ghost or just your thoughts, and that seems to be true for most people I know.

I am simplifying because I don’t know exactly how to explain it, but hopefully it gets the gist across.

Anything I missed that you want the answer to?

[Oranjejuicemonki He/Him]

17 hours ago, NameIess said:

It seems clear from the Old Testament scripture that Yahweh is God. The names are used interchangeably. I don’t think you can make a case from the Old Testament that Yahweh is not God, and so going by the revelation of the Old and New Testament, it seems that when Jesus identifies himself with Yahweh, he is claiming to be God.

We don't deny that Jesus is God. We believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, it's just we don't believe that they are one being. In fact, lots of scriptures from the Book of Mormon and Doctrine & Covenants say the same kinds of things that the Bible says that could be interpreted as supporting the Trinity. We interpret them as different beings, and also don't do the no body, parts, or passions stuff that came from later philosophies.

Here are some of those verses

Quote

"And he hath brought to pass the redemption of the world, whereby he that is found guiltless before him at the judgment day hath it given unto him to dwell in the presence of God in his kingdom, to sing ceaseless praises with the choirs above, unto the Father, and unto the Son, and unto the Holy Ghost, which are one God, in a state of happiness which hath no end." - Mormon 7:7

Quote

"Which Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God, infinite and eternal, without end. Amen." - D&C 20:28

 

[CoderDrag0n8 He/Him]

7 minutes ago, Myst said:

Like, why does it exist, how do we know it does?

Well, as for what it is(keep in mind I’m a member of the church of Jesus Christ of latter day saints and so this comes from what I believe, it’s different for other people, especially when considering the trinity)

I’d say that the Holy spirits job is to confirm truth, and it does that it different ways, for some it’s feelings, other it’s words in their mind, it depends, but the Holy Ghost testifies of Christ, confirms truth, and warns of danger(physical or spiritual)

It’s always hard to know whether something is the Holy Ghost or just your thoughts, and that seems to be true for most people I know.

I am simplifying because I don’t know exactly how to explain it, but hopefully it gets the gist across.

Anything I missed that you want the answer to?

Mmm

I mean I guess? I was more asking how it like, came to be. Cause like, god was from Judaism, and Jesus was a real dude, but then there is also this ever-present entity that is everything? Yeah I guess how you know it exists.

[Myst He/Him]

Just now, CoderDrag0n8 said:

Mmm

I mean I guess? I was more asking how it like, came to be. Cause like, god was from Judaism, and Jesus was a real dude, but then there is also this ever-present entity that is everything? Yeah I guess how you know it exists.

Ohh, you’re talking historically.

I don’t know. This is not something I’ve done the research on.

The best guess I can give is that it’s a similar concept of Mana or magic in the air, and maybe that?

As for how I know it exists, well, I’ve felt it, and I seen its influence in my life. I’ve had it tell me to do and not do things. Sometimes as words, sometimes as feelings, and sometimes through other people. That’s how I know at least.

[Oranjejuicemonki He/Him]

Just now, CoderDrag0n8 said:

Mmm

I mean I guess? I was more asking how it like, came to be. Cause like, god was from Judaism, and Jesus was a real dude, but then there is also this ever-present entity that is everything? Yeah I guess how you know it exists.

It's from scriptures. The Holy Spirit is in the Old Testament so there is an aspect of that in Judaism

Quote

"Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me. Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me." - Psalm 51: 10-11

But maybe they interpret that as just the power of God or something, I'm not the most knowledgeable about Judaism so they might not believe in the Holy Ghost as a separate being.

Jesus taught more about the Holy Spirit all over the New Testament so there's that too. In the Old Testament it's mostly just passing references.

[NameIess]

21 minutes ago, Oranjejuicemonki said:

We don't deny that Jesus is God. We believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, it's just we don't believe that they are one being. In fact, lots of scriptures from the Book of Mormon and Doctrine & Covenants say the same kinds of things that the Bible says that could be interpreted as supporting the Trinity. We interpret them as different beings, and also don't do the no body, parts, or passions stuff that came from later philosophies.

Here are some of those verses

 

I’m don’t dispute that you believe Jesus to be a God. I was arguing that point because based on what Frustration was saying, it sounded like it wouldn’t be right for Jesus to be worshipped exclusively in the time of the old testament. However, it really sounds like that’s exactly what the nation of Israel did, without being rebuked by any of the prophets for doing so.

18 minutes ago, CoderDrag0n8 said:

Mmm

I mean I guess? I was more asking how it like, came to be. Cause like, god was from Judaism, and Jesus was a real dude, but then there is also this ever-present entity that is everything? Yeah I guess how you know it exists.

Genesis 1:2 says:

Quote

“The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭1‬:‭2‬ ‭ESV‬‬

That’s a clear reference to the spirit of God. Also, throughout the OT, God’s spirit is described as coming upon various prophets, judges, and kings for limited amounts of time. Then in the New Testament, the Spirit came and remained upon Jesus. And before He returned to heaven after His resurrection, Jesus promised to send the Holy Spirit to His disciples, which it did on the day of Pentecost, emboldening them to preach the gospel and working miracles through them.

[CoderDrag0n8 He/Him]

40 minutes ago, Oranjejuicemonki said:

It's from scriptures. The Holy Spirit is in the Old Testament so there is an aspect of that in Judaism

But maybe they interpret that as just the power of God or something, I'm not the most knowledgeable about Judaism so they might not believe in the Holy Ghost as a separate being.

Jesus taught more about the Holy Spirit all over the New Testament so there's that too. In the Old Testament it's mostly just passing references.

Mmm so it’s like an actual thing he talked about huh

23 minutes ago, NameIess said:

I’m don’t dispute that you believe Jesus to be a God. I was arguing that point because based on what Frustration was saying, it sounded like it wouldn’t be right for Jesus to be worshipped exclusively in the time of the old testament. However, it really sounds like that’s exactly what the nation of Israel did, without being rebuked by any of the prophets for doing so.

Genesis 1:2 says:

That’s a clear reference to the spirit of God. Also, throughout the OT, God’s spirit is described as coming upon various prophets, judges, and kings for limited amounts of time. Then in the New Testament, the Spirit came and remained upon Jesus. And before He returned to heaven after His resurrection, Jesus promised to send the Holy Spirit to His disciples, which it did on the day of Pentecost, emboldening them to preach the gospel and working miracles through them.

Ahhh so that’s like what sainthood is

using the Holy Spirit for miracles

[NameIess]

20 minutes ago, CoderDrag0n8 said:

Ahhh so that’s like what sainthood is

using the Holy Spirit for miracles

Maybe? I don’t know the catholic doctrines on sainthood that well. I think that’s part of it though.

Personally I don’t know that I believe in the distinction of canonical sainthood, although certainly many of the saints have been exemplary servants of God. And since the Holy spirit does inhabit all Christians, I believe God can work miracles through any of us.

Edited May 6 by NameIess

[Verdance he/him]

Never heard of the Holy Spirit as something like the Force from Star Wars. I always was of the opinion that it is the person of god that performs miracles and sanctifies believers.

[Frustration]

@NameIess I have to say I love how all of our conversations inevitably become us quoting books at each other, be they Sanderson or scripture.

On 5/5/2026 at 9:02 PM, NameIess said:

Thank you for the correction. I had heard about the rejection of ex nihilo, but it does raise some questions for me, such as: in what form did we exist before creation? I guess this might be getting into your footnote, but what form did Jesus exist in before he was God’s spirit child? Where did whatever it was we were come from?

There's a lot of speculation around this topic, which I can understand, but I'm only going to go over what we have confirmed.

Spoiler

1. Before we were spirits we were something called "Intelligences"
2. Intelligences cannot and were not created, nor can they be destroyed
3.  Jesus was the "Most Intelligent" though what that means is unclear

Anything beyond that is largely speculation.

On 5/5/2026 at 9:02 PM, NameIess said:

Is there official teaching on whether God always existed in the same way as he does now?

No, and there's a long story to go with it. This is also something I'm a lot better at explaining in person.

There is a maxim attributed to President Lorenzo Snow, though I can't confirm if he ever said it:

Quote

As man now is God once was, and as God now is man may become.

However no official teaching was ever made about it, and President Hinckley said quite unequivocally that while, "As God now is man may become," is the official doctrine of the Church, "As man now is God once was," is not something the Church emphasizes.

While God, as He is now, is unchangeable and the same yesterday today and forever, He also experiences time differently than we do, and may not necessarily always have existed in that state. However the Church does not make a claim one way or the other.

On 5/5/2026 at 9:02 PM, NameIess said:

I agree that the Israelites were not fully informed of God. For example, the afterlife was discussed very little in the Old Testament. And even today, there are questions we have about God that are not answered. We have what is needed to follow God and to be saved. However, worshipping the wrong being as God is not the same as not knowing everything about God. And indeed it seems to me that for the entirety of its history the entire nation of Israel (those who were not falling away to worship idols, at least) was worshipping a being who was not God, to the preclusion of worshipping God. The temple was Yahweh’s house:

It seems clear from the Old Testament scripture that Yahweh is God. The names are used interchangeably. I don’t think you can make a case from the Old Testament that Yahweh is not God, and so going by the revelation of the Old and New Testament, it seems that when Jesus identifies himself with Yahweh, he is claiming to be God.

Ah, I seem to have been unclear in my initial response. I wasn't trying to say that the answer was that the early Israelites didn't have a perfect understanding of God, just that the fact that they didn't, and that as I don't know exactly what their understanding was makes it difficult to answer with certainty.

My personal belief is that the commandment to have no other gods was understood within a cultural context to forbid idolatry, not the worship of the Father and the Son.

My apologies, that's on me.

On 5/5/2026 at 9:02 PM, NameIess said:

That said, I would like to add that this by no means disproves your faith. Again, please correct me if I am wrong, but LDS teachings are that portions of the Bible were lost which would have explained the distinction between God and Jesus.

Lost, or intentionally destroyed, as the people who killed and stoned the prophets God sent likely wouldn't keep any scripture they wrote either.

On 5/5/2026 at 9:02 PM, NameIess said:

However, I would ask, considering the Old testament identifies Yahweh as God repeatedly, and Jesus identifies himself with Yawheh in the New, if that helps you understand why we who do not accept the book of Mormon or any of Joseph Smith’s revelations as inspired scripture wholeheartedly affirm the trinity.

Indeed I can, and I will congratulate you, as you've put up a far better case for the Trinity than really anyone else I've had this conversation with. I do hope as well that the times in the New Testament, where Jesus draws distinctions between Himself and the Father can help you understand why we do not.

On 5/6/2026 at 2:55 PM, CoderDrag0n8 said:

I have a question for the christians here

How did the holy spirit?

I mean, I get The Father and The Son, but how did the Holy Spirit get in there? What even is it?

That depends on who you ask, the others have given purposes that the Holy Ghost fills, I'll try and list the various interpretations.

Trinitarians would say that it's just one of the ways that God manifests, or one of God's three forms, depending on which interpretation of the Trinity that they support.

Historically the Holy Ghost was added to the initial creed of the Father and the Son being One some time later though the date of the council that took place in escapes me.

Jehovah's Witnesses deny the personhood of the Holy Ghost, calling it the 'active force' of God, or in layman's terms, the name for God's power, without actually having any will or intelligence unto itself.

In the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints we believe the Holy Ghost to be the final member of the Godhead, and a divine being and personage of spirit, who ministers among the people of the world and testifies of the Father and the Son. Basically ideas that are inspired from heaven, or messages sent from God are often delivered by the Holy Ghost, who speaks directly to our spirits, which we interpret as thoughts and feelings.

[Shatter He/Him]

On 5/6/2026 at 5:24 PM, Oranjejuicemonki said:

It's from scriptures. The Holy Spirit is in the Old Testament so there is an aspect of that in Judaism

But maybe they interpret that as just the power of God or something, I'm not the most knowledgeable about Judaism so they might not believe in the Holy Ghost as a separate being.

Jesus taught more about the Holy Spirit all over the New Testament so there's that too. In the Old Testament it's mostly just passing references.

The Ru'ach HaKodesh (רוח הקודש)(lit. Spirit of Holiness) is divine inspiration. It's not the same thing, but it seems to be what Christians call the Holy Spirit. Ru'ach HaKodesh will grant you prophecy, also known as nevu'ah (נבואה).

Also, not sure where you sourced this.

Quote

"Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me. Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me." - Psalm 51: 10-11

That's 

“.תשמיעני ששון ושמחה תגלנה עצמות דכית. הסתר פניך מחטאי וכל־עונתי מחה”

As best I can translate it: Make me hear joy and gladness; let the bones You have crushed rejoice. Hide Your face from my sins, and erase all my iniquities.

I assume your translations have gotten muddled.

[Verdance he/him]

4 minutes ago, Shatter said:

The Ru'ach HaKodesh (רוח הקודש)(lit. Spirit of Holiness) is divine inspiration. It's not the same thing, but it seems to be what Christians call the Holy Spirit. Ru'ach HaKodesh will grant you prophecy, also known as nevu'ah (נבואה).

Also, not sure where you sourced this.

That's 

“.תשמיעני ששון ושמחה תגלנה עצמות דכית. הסתר פניך מחטאי וכל־עונתי מחה”

As best I can translate it: Make me hear joy and gladness; let the bones You have crushed rejoice. Hide Your face from my sins, and erase all my iniquities.

I assume your translations have gotten muddled.

Those are both psalm 51, my favorite psalm, i think theres just a verse error

[Shatter He/Him]

9 minutes ago, Verdance said:

Those are both psalm 51, my favorite psalm, i think theres just a verse error

lemme have a look

".לב טהור ברא־לי אלהים ורוח נכון חדש בקרבי. אל־תשליכני מלפניך ורוח קדשך אל־תקח ממני"

Create in me a pure heart, O God, and renew a steadfast spirit within me. Do not cast me away from Your presence, and do not take Your holy spirit from me.

 

רוח קדשך (ru'ach kodshecha) means 'Your spirit of holiness'. In Judaism, this means God’s presence or influence within a person, the divinely granted capacity for moral clarity, wisdom, or inspiration, and it is also tied to prophetic ability (but not in this case). Basically, King David is praying that God doesn't leave him, and that God doesn't remove His guidance.

(For context, King David was in BIG trouble. Dude killed Batsheva's husband and took her for himself. God typically frowns down on that sort of thing.)

 

This is in Psalm (Tehillim) 51:12-13.
 

Edited May 13 by Shatter