Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Trinity Facts
http://www.biocrawler.com/encyclopedia/Talk:Trinity/old1 ^ | Many.

Posted on 02/05/2007 10:35:59 AM PST by MichaelTheeArchAngel

Historical proofs as to the way the trinitarian doctrine effected the pure doctrine of the disciples. The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics: As to Matthew 28:19, it says: It is the central piece of evidence for the traditional (Trinitarian) view. If it were undisputed, this would, of course, be decisive, but its trustworthiness is impugned on grounds of textual criticism, literary criticism and historical criticism.

Edmund Schlink, The Doctrine of Baptism, page 28: "The baptismal command in its Matthew 28:19 form can not be the historical origin of Christian baptism. At the very least, it must be assumed that the text has been transmitted in a form changed by the [Catholic] church."

The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275: "It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the exact words of Jesus, but a later liturgical addition."

The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263: "The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century."

Hastings Dictionary of the Bible 1963, page 1015: "The Trinity is not demonstrable by logic or by Scriptural proofs, The term Trias was first used by Theophilus of Antioch in (AD 180), (The term Trinity) is not found in Scripture." "The chief Trinitarian text in the New Testament is the baptismal formula in Matthew 28:19.This late post-resurrection saying, is not found in any other Gospel or anywhere else in the New Testament, it has been viewed by some scholars as an interpolation into Matthew. It has also been pointed out that the idea of making disciples is continued in teaching them, so that the intervening reference to baptism with its Trinitarian formula was perhaps a later insertion. Eusebius,s text ("in my name" rather than in the name of the Trinity) has had certain advocates. (Although the Trinitarian formula is now found in the modern-day book of Matthew), this does not guarantee its source in the historical teaching of Jesus. It is doubtless better to view the (Trinitarian) formula as derived from early (Catholic) Christian, perhaps Syrian or Palestinian, baptismal usage (cf Didache 7:1-4), and as a brief summary of the (Catholic) Church's teaching about God, Christ, and the Spirit."

The Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge: "Jesus, however, cannot have given His disciples this Trinitarian order of baptism after His resurrection; for the New Testament knows only one baptism in the name of Jesus (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:43; 19:5; Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 1:13-15), which still occurs even in the second and third centuries, while the Trinitarian formula occurs only in Matt. 28:19, and then only again (in the) Didache 7:1 and Justin, Apol. 1:61.Finally, the distinctly liturgical character of the formula is strange; it was not the way of Jesus to make such formulas the formal authenticity of Matt. 28:19 must be disputed." page 435.

The Jerusalem Bible, a scholarly Catholic work, states: "It may be that this formula, (Triune Matthew 28:19) so far as the fullness of its expression is concerned, is a reflection of the (Man-made) liturgical usage established later in the primitive (Catholic) community. It will be remembered that Acts speaks of baptizing "in the name of Jesus."

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, page 2637, Under "Baptism," says: "Matthew 28:19 in particular only canonizes a later ecclesiastical situation, that its universalism is contrary to the facts of early Christian history, and its Trinitarian formula is foreign to the mouth of Jesus."

New Revised Standard Version: In regards to Matthew 28:19. "Modern critics claim this formula is falsely ascribed to Jesus and that it represents later (Catholic) church tradition, for nowhere in the book of Acts (or any other book of the Bible) is baptism performed with the name of the Trinity."

James Moffett's New Testament Translation: In a footnote on page 64 about Matthew 28:19 he makes this statement: "It may be that this (Trinitarian) formula, so far as the fullness of its expression is concerned, is a reflection of the (Catholic) liturgical usage established later in the primitive (Catholic) community, It will be remembered that Acts speaks of baptizing "in the name of Jesus." Acts 1:5.

Tom Harpur: Tom Harpur, former Religion Editor of the Toronto Star in his "For Christ's sake," page 103 informs us of these facts: "All but the most conservative scholars agree that at least the latter part of this command [Triune part of Matthew 28:19] was inserted later. The formula occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, and we know from the evidence available that the earliest Church did not baptize people using these words ("in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost") baptism was "into" or "in" the name of Jesus alone. It is argued that the verse originally read "baptizing them in My Name" and then was changed to work in the [later Catholic Trinitarian] dogma. In fact, the first view put forward by German critical scholars as well as the Unitarians in the nineteenth century, was stated as the accepted position of mainline scholarship as long ago as 1919, when Peake's commentary was first published: "The Church of the first days (AD 33) did not observe this world-wide (Trinitarian) commandment, even if they knew it. The command to baptize into the threefold [Trinity] name is a late doctrinal addition."

The Bible Commentary 1919 page 723: Dr. Peake makes it clear that: "The command to baptize into the threefold name is a late doctrinal addition. Instead of the words baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost we should probably read simply-"into My Name."

Theology of the New Testament: By R. Bultmann, 1951, page 133 under Kerygma of the Hellenistic Church and the Sacraments. The historical fact that the verse Matthew 28:19 was altered is openly confesses to very plainly. "As to the rite of baptism, it was normally consummated as a bath in which the one receiving baptism completely submerged, and if possible in flowing water as the allusions of Acts 8:36, Heb. 10:22, Barn. 11:11 permit us to gather, and as Did. 7:1-3 specifically says. According to the last passage, [the apocryphal Catholic Didache] suffices in case of the need if water is three times poured on the head. The one baptizing names over the one being baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ," later changed to the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit."

Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church: By Dr. Stuart G. Hall 1992, pages 20 and 21. Professor Stuart G. Hall was the former Chair of Ecclesiastical History at King's College, London England. Dr. Hall makes the factual statement that Catholic Trinitarian Baptism was not the original form of Christian Baptism, rather the original was Jesus name baptism. "In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," although those words were not used, as they later are, as a formula. Not all baptisms fitted this rule." Dr Hall further, states: "More common and perhaps more ancient was the simple, "In the name of the Lord Jesus or, Jesus Christ." This practice was known among Marcionites and Orthodox; it is certainly the subject of controversy in Rome and Africa about 254, as the anonymous tract De rebaptismate ("On rebaptism") shows."

The Beginnings of Christianity: The Acts of the Apostles Volume 1, Prolegomena 1: The Jewish Gentile, and Christian Backgrounds by F. J. Foakes Jackson and Kirsopp Lake 1979 version pages 335-337. "There is little doubt as to the sacramental nature of baptism by the middle of the first century in the circles represented by the Pauline Epistles, and it is indisputable in the second century. The problem is whether it can in this (Trinitarian) form be traced back to Jesus, and if not what light is thrown upon its history by the analysis of the synoptic Gospels and Acts.

The Catholic University of America in Washington, D. C. 1923, New Testament Studies Number 5: The Lord's Command To Baptize An Historical Critical Investigation. By Bernard Henry Cuneo page 27. "The passages in Acts and the Letters of St. Paul. These passages seem to point to the earliest form as baptism in the name of the Lord." Also we find. "Is it possible to reconcile these facts with the belief that Christ commanded his disciples to baptize in the trine form? Had Christ given such a command, it is urged, the Apostolic Church would have followed him, and we should have some trace of this obedience in the New Testament. No such trace can be found. The only explanation of this silence, according to the anti-traditional view, is this the short christological (Jesus Name) formula was (the) original, and the longer trine formula was a later development."

A History of The Christian Church: 1953 by Williston Walker former Professor of Ecclesiastical History at Yale University. On page 95 we see the historical facts again declared. "With the early disciples generally baptism was "in the name of Jesus Christ." There is no mention of baptism in the name of the Trinity in the New Testament, except in the command attributed to Christ in Matthew 28:19. That text is early, (but not the original) however. It underlies the Apostles' Creed, and the practice recorded (*or interpolated) in the Teaching, (or the Didache) and by Justin. The Christian leaders of the third century retained the recognition of the earlier form, and, in Rome at least, baptism in the name of Christ was deemed valid, if irregular, certainly from the time of Bishop Stephen (254-257)."

Catholic Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger: He makes this confession as to the origin of the chief Trinity text of Matthew 28:19. "The basic form of our (Matthew 28:19 Trinitarian) profession of faith took shape during the course of the second and third centuries in connection with the ceremony of baptism. So far as its place of origin is concerned, the text (Matthew 28:19) came from the city of Rome." The Trinity baptism and text of Matthew 28:19 therefore did not originate from the original Church that started in Jerusalem around AD 33. It was rather as the evidence proves a later invention of Roman Catholicism completely fabricated. Very few know about these historical facts. "The Demonstratio Evangelica" by Eusebius: Eusebius was the Church historian and Bishop of Caesarea. On page 152 Eusebius quotes the early book of Matthew that he had in his library in Caesarea. According to this eyewitness of an unaltered Book of Matthew that could have been the original book or the first copy of the original of Matthew. Eusebius informs us of Jesus' actual words to his disciples in the original text of Matthew 28:19: "With one word and voice He said to His disciples: "Go, and make disciples of all nations in My Name, teaching them to observe all things whatsover I have commanded you." That "Name" is Jesus.


TOPICS: Other Christian; Religion & Culture
KEYWORDS: trinity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-312 next last
There is a great deal more proof,but what would the point be?
1 posted on 02/05/2007 10:36:06 AM PST by MichaelTheeArchAngel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MichaelTheeArchAngel

>> There is a great deal more proof,but what would the point be? <<

Exactly. What is your point?


2 posted on 02/05/2007 10:56:31 AM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MichaelTheeArchAngel
it must be assumed

There's a trustworthy foundation.

3 posted on 02/05/2007 11:02:08 AM PST by siunevada (If we learn nothing from history, what's the point of having one? - Peggy Hill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MichaelTheeArchAngel

If anybody wonders about trinitarianism, simply study His Word through faith in Christ and let Him guide the believer, categorizing precisely how God reveals and describes His actions with respect to explicit names He has revealed in Scripture.

Such studies simply reveal is is revealed to us in three persons, all one God.


4 posted on 02/05/2007 11:03:27 AM PST by Cvengr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MichaelTheeArchAngel
Many pieces of some literary puzzle....
No mysteries here...

Are you advocating FOR a revision/re-write of Matt 28:19??
OR....
Are you advocating AGAINST a theological view of the Trinity??

You need to clarify what your "proof" is "proving"... please.

Regards...

5 posted on 02/05/2007 11:06:34 AM PST by Wings-n-Wind (The answers remain available; Wisdom is obtained by asking all the right questions!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MichaelTheeArchAngel
I'm over here trying to sit at the right hand of myself. My wife is perplexed.

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
1Ti 2:6 who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time.

6 posted on 02/05/2007 11:08:01 AM PST by kerryusama04 (Isa 8:20, Eze 22:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MichaelTheeArchAngel

Too bad that the everyday churchgoer doesn't realize the amount of poor interpretation and outright lies there are in the KJV and in most "Church" doctrine.

Worshipping the Trinity is hardly different that worshipping the Baalim.


7 posted on 02/05/2007 11:12:44 AM PST by Eagle Eye (There oughta be a law against excess legislation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MichaelTheeArchAngel

"Affected," not "effected."


8 posted on 02/05/2007 11:19:12 AM PST by Tax-chick ("It is my life's labor to bring Christ to souls and souls to Christ through word and example.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
Worshipping the Trinity is hardly different that worshipping the Baalim.

Your blunt assessment is hardly different from the prevailing opinon of some of the Pharisees...

Matthew 12:22-32 refers....

9 posted on 02/05/2007 11:20:19 AM PST by Wings-n-Wind (The answers remain available; Wisdom is obtained by asking all the right questions!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr
If only it were that simple. Tell that to the the Arians, and Nestorians, and Sabellians, and Monophysites, and Monothelites, and Modalists, and ...

Fortunately, Christ left us with a Church, guided by the Holy Spirit.

10 posted on 02/05/2007 11:22:45 AM PST by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilisation is aborting, buggering, and contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Wings-n-Wind

Blunt? Yes, but very different.

The Pharisees judged by man's law.

As the article shows, the doctrine of the trinity isn't from the same God that fathered Jesus Christ.

The baalim fooled Isreal just as the trinity fools 'Christians'.

The very name "trinity" is anathema to monotheism.

There is one God and God is one, not three.

Believe what you want, I've learned to expect no more than that from people, they only believe what they want to believe.


11 posted on 02/05/2007 11:25:17 AM PST by Eagle Eye (There oughta be a law against excess legislation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
There is one God and God is one, not three.

Believe what you want, I've learned to expect no more than that from people, they only believe what they want to believe.

And some believe what they believe... as they have committed a lifetime of study, prayer and Biblical homework...

As I am sure you have done likewise....

The Pharisees were operating out of good theology...

They were just to proud of their own position and ambitions...

Some COULDN'T see Jesus...
Others WOULDN"T see Him...

have a good day....

12 posted on 02/05/2007 11:35:31 AM PST by Wings-n-Wind (The answers remain available; Wisdom is obtained by asking all the right questions!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
Too bad that the everyday churchgoer doesn't realize the amount of poor interpretation and outright lies there are in the KJV

KJV really has nothing to do with it ... every reputable translation includes the trinitarian formula in Matthew 28.

Further, even without it the doctrine of the Trinity is firmly established ... not by any isolated proof text, but by the overwhelming testimony of the whole of Scripture.

13 posted on 02/05/2007 11:37:30 AM PST by Oliver Optic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MichaelTheeArchAngel; NCSteve
Truth is made know[n] by the reason of the facts.

The truth is, you've got a Content-Free Sentence Generator, don't you! Did Jim Black sell it to you? I know he's got to have some whopped legal bills about now.

(Might amuse, Steve.)

14 posted on 02/05/2007 11:39:08 AM PST by Tax-chick ("It is my life's labor to bring Christ to souls and souls to Christ through word and example.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oliver Optic; Wings-n-Wind; Thinkin' Gal

The doctrine of the trininty has more holes than a collander at a shot gun range.

The Bible CLEARLY says that there is one God and one mediator between God and man, the MAN Christ Jesus.

God is invisible. Jesus was visible.

God is without begining and Jesus had a 'genesis', a birth, a beginning.

God is not a man that he should lie, nor the son of man that he should repent. Jesus was/is a man and was repeated referred to, even referring to himself as 'son of man'.

Jesus is the IMAGE of the invisible God.

If Jesus was God, then Jesus clearly promised that believers would do greater works than God because, he (Jesus) would go to his father. (If Jesus is God then who is the son of God? Jesus?)

God cannot be tempted with evil yet Jesus was tempted in all ways...

So before you yahoos start in with your John 1:1 stuff, answer the CLEAR as written and in context words from the Bible.


15 posted on 02/05/2007 11:47:16 AM PST by Eagle Eye (There oughta be a law against excess legislation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
It seems you have some very firm opinions and high-powered metaphors --- have fun with those....

IF.... you are interested in a thorough and objective expository catalog of Biblical concepts and Christian doctrine... but presented down here at the "every-man" level where even I can appreciate the scholarship...

I recommend -- simply as an exercise in your own investigation... this is a well-thought-out linear analysis... Agian, just a polite suggestion...

Foundations of Christian Doctrine
Kevin J Conner (& others)

Enjoy...

16 posted on 02/05/2007 11:55:19 AM PST by Wings-n-Wind (The answers remain available; Wisdom is obtained by asking all the right questions!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Wings-n-Wind
IF.... you are interested in a thorough and objective expository catalog of Biblical concepts and Christian doctrine... but presented down here at the "every-man" level where even I can appreciate the scholarship...

That's a dishonest statement.

You really mean that if I want to believe what you believe, then I might have accomplished some sort of study.

One need not have academic credentials or an advanced intellect to see that God created the heavens and the Earth and it is that God who fathered the Lord Jesus Christ.

This Jesus Christ was born a baby and grew to be a man who lived a sinless life and was crucified as payment for our sins.

This same Jesus was in the tomb three days and three nights then raised from the dead by God his father who also raised him up to sit on His (God's) own right hand in glory who will one day return for his believers.

The Bible CLEARLY says that there is One God. Clearly.

It also says CLEARLY that Jesus is the only begotten son of God. Clearly.

Some of us don't need high-fallutin' commentaries to tell us what to think, we can clearly read the Bible.

Me? I'm not interested in 'learning' about the trininty any more than Jehu was interested in learning about the baalim.

But I notice that you didn't dare find fault with what I said even though you tried to mock it.

17 posted on 02/05/2007 12:07:58 PM PST by Eagle Eye (There oughta be a law against excess legislation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard; Tax-chick

Gee, I wish this article had footnotes to show the sources.

I'd really like to see one of Eusebius' books that had a page 152. Or any page numbers for that matter.

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/index.htm#Demonstratio_Evangelica_(The_Proof_of_the_Gospel)


18 posted on 02/05/2007 12:36:29 PM PST by siunevada (If we learn nothing from history, what's the point of having one? - Peggy Hill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
Some of us don't need high-fallutin' commentaries to tell us what to think, we can clearly read the Bible.

BTTT

19 posted on 02/05/2007 12:48:27 PM PST by kerryusama04 (Isa 8:20, Eze 22:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MichaelTheeArchAngel
If you say that there is only three in the Godhead I would disagree. I don't believe that is a fact. I don't think that the word is clear to exactly how many are in the Godhead. I know that there are at least three could there be more perhaps then again perhaps not. Secret thing belong to God just because three have been revealed doesn't mean that is all. I just don't know but here is something to think about

Rev 4:5 And out of the throne proceeded lightnings and thunderings and voices: and there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God.
20 posted on 02/05/2007 12:59:14 PM PST by bremenboy (Just Because I Am Born Again Doesn't Mean I was Born Again Yesterday)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
The doctrine of the trininty has more holes than a collander at a shot gun range.

As I see it, EE, none of your arguments poke any holes in the doctrine of the Trinity. You are not so much disproving the Trinity as you are denying the incarnation.

If you accept the biblical truth of the incarnation ... that "the Word became flesh" ... all those arguments you made against the Trinity really become irrelevant.

21 posted on 02/05/2007 1:18:36 PM PST by Oliver Optic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: siunevada
Gee, I wish this article had footnotes to show the sources.

Yes, some of the quotations are disingenuous ... for instance, the citation from Tyndale NT Commentaries.

The evangelical scholars who wrote the Tyndale series are as trinitarian as they come. Yet the selective and partial quotation makes it appear as though R.T. France (the author of the Matthew volume) is calling into question the trinitarian formula in Matthew 28.

22 posted on 02/05/2007 1:27:23 PM PST by Oliver Optic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
It was just a recommendation...

Have a nice day...

23 posted on 02/05/2007 1:46:15 PM PST by Wings-n-Wind (The answers remain available; Wisdom is obtained by asking all the right questions!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
"The doctrine of the trininty has more holes than a collander at a shot gun range."

It does?

Man has a body, soul, and spirit. The spirit is all those things that combined form self, or the person. The body is the machine that supports the functions of spirit in this world. The soul is the Heavenly body that supports the functions of spirit elsewhere. Man is a trinity. As per Gen 1:26-27, man is made in the image and likeness of God, us, as it says in Gen 1:26. The image is a mirrored imaged, so God is also a trinity.

"The Bible CLEARLY says that there is one God and one mediator between God and man, the MAN Christ Jesus.

John 10:30, " I and the Father are one."

"God is invisible. Jesus was visible."

Man is visible, so is his spirit. His soul is not.

"God is without begining and Jesus had a 'genesis', a birth, a beginning. "

John 8:58, "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"

"God is not a man that he should lie, nor the son of man that he should repent. Jesus was/is a man and was repeated referred to, even referring to himself as 'son of man'."

It is true that He was a man. It is not true that all men lie, nor that all men are in need of repentance. See Gen 4. Enoch walked with God. Also, Noah was righteous.

"Jesus is the IMAGE of the invisible God. "

Man is the image of the invisible God, per Gen 1:27. Man is the image of the trinity, per Gen 1:26 and Gen 3:22.

"God cannot be tempted with evil yet Jesus was tempted in all ways... "

God has a free will. What makes you think He can't be tempted? What makes you think temptation causes one to choose evil?

"If Jesus was God, then Jesus clearly promised that believers would do greater works than God because, he (Jesus) would go to his father."

? no comprende...

"If Jesus is God then who is the son of God? Jesus?)"

If Eagle eye is the soul of Eagle eye, then who is Eagle eye, Eagle eye?

John 1:1-2, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning."

In the beginning was Eagle eye, and Eagle eye was with his soul, and Eagle eye was his soul. He was with his soul in the beginning. Is Eagle eye the right hand man of his soul?

24 posted on 02/05/2007 2:17:14 PM PST by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye; Thinkin' Gal; kerryusama04; Just mythoughts; DouglasKC
Remember this one:.........?

To support the idea of a three in one Godhead (Trinity) you have to use terms not found in the Bible, rely on false scripture, rely on twisted interpretations that contradict extremely clear scriptures and create a convoluted theory that no one really understands.....forcing it's adherents to declare it a mystery!

How people who ostensibly read their Bibles can believe this nonsense......is laughable!

25 posted on 02/05/2007 2:17:26 PM PST by Diego1618
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard

Closer yet, He's gifted us with the indwelling o fthe Holy Spirit in every believer through faithin Christ.


26 posted on 02/05/2007 2:27:37 PM PST by Cvengr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Diego1618

Indeed. The volume of scriptures indicating that Jesus and God are separate entities, yet completely united that one must ignore in order to hold Rome's Trinity doctrine is daunting.


27 posted on 02/05/2007 2:37:13 PM PST by kerryusama04 (Isa 8:20, Eze 22:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

I'm sure the Arians, Nestorians, etc. made the same claim.


28 posted on 02/05/2007 2:38:32 PM PST by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilisation is aborting, buggering, and contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: kerryusama04
Rome's Trinity doctrine

The fact that most Protestant organizations buy into this heresy is very curious.

29 posted on 02/05/2007 2:47:39 PM PST by Diego1618
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Diego1618
The fact that most Protestant organizations buy into this heresy is very curious.

I liken it to the environmental and leftist protestors who air their grievances about the US economic system over the internet, while talking on a cell, and eating a Big Mac.

30 posted on 02/05/2007 2:59:46 PM PST by kerryusama04 (Isa 8:20, Eze 22:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye

It aooears from your posts that either you do not understand Scripture, the Trinity, or are attempting to understand it indepedent of the enabling ministry of God, the Holy Spirit.

Instead of arguing it or taking another man's view of it, take His Word for it and allow Him to guide you through understanding and an outward knowledge of His doctrines.


31 posted on 02/05/2007 3:07:05 PM PST by Cvengr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: kerryusama04

Persons, yes, one entity, one Diety, same essence.


32 posted on 02/05/2007 3:11:14 PM PST by Cvengr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
Where to start.... Perfect man is/was body, soul, and spirit as man was formed, made, and created.

The body was formed, the spirit was created, and man was made aliving soul with his first breath.

Soul is life. Spirit is what God is and gives and is invisible.

Man is the image of the invisible God, per Gen 1:27. Man is the image of the trinity, per Gen 1:26 and Gen 3:22.

2Cr 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospelof Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

As I said, Christ is the image of the invisible God. That doens't mean that Christ looks like God, but that Christ was a perfect representation of the invisible God.

Man was created in God's image when God placed his spirit in him but that doesn't mean that mankind looks like God because God is invisible....

If you use a bit more care in your usage of words you'll stay more Biblically accurate.

John 10:30, " I and the Father are one."

One how? One in purpose and indicating unity because just as he prayed for the apostles to be one...in purpose and in unity.

Jhn 17:22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them;that they may be one, even as we are one,:

Rom 12:5 So we, [being] many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.

1Cr 10:17 For we [being] many are one bread, [and] one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

1Cr 12:12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also [is] Christ.

It is true that He was a man. It is not true that all men lie, nor that all men are in need of repentance. See Gen 4. Enoch walked with God. Also, Noah was righteous.

Rom 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

Num 23:19 God [is] not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do [it]? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?

Two things: God cannot lie and God is not a man. Jesus Christ is a man. God is not a man....Jesus is...Get it?

God has a free will. What makes you think He can't be tempted? What makes you think temptation causes one to choose evil?

Jam 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God:for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

If Jesus was God then his believers were greater than God in their works:

Jhn 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater [works] than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

Now please reflect on what you've been taught, what you thought the Bible said, and what it really says.

God is NOT three, but one and there is but ONE GOD, not three.

33 posted on 02/05/2007 3:51:25 PM PST by Eagle Eye (There oughta be a law against excess legislation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr
You saying it doesn't make it fact, true or accurate. In fact, what you've just done is mildly attack the messenger instead of the message.

I am quite happy to use the Bible to demolish trinitarian "logic" any time, any place.

Recognize this?

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds, God of God,

To believe this means that you have to reject clear scripture that says that Jesus was inferior to God, was a created being, and was a flesh and blood man.

34 posted on 02/05/2007 4:01:57 PM PST by Eagle Eye (There oughta be a law against excess legislation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Diego1618

They prefer the teachings of man over the wisdom of God.


35 posted on 02/05/2007 4:02:53 PM PST by Eagle Eye (There oughta be a law against excess legislation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
" The body was formed, the spirit was created, and man was made aliving soul with his first breath. Soul is life. Spirit is what God is and gives and is invisible."

Nevermind. God bless.

36 posted on 02/05/2007 4:20:16 PM PST by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye

The doctrine of kenosis helps to discern the differences.

I've found our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus doesn't refer to Himself as God directly so as not to exalt His humanity, yet indubitably in John's Revelation He is surrounded by four 6-winged angels declaring Him as the one who was, who is and is to come. The seals are not able to be opened by any man, but the Lion of the Tribe of Judah, the Root of David is able to break the seals (the Son). He describes Himself as the Alpha and Omega. Pretty hard to deny the Deity of our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus from these passages. That doesn't mean Jesus is the Father, nor the Holy Spirit. Rather God reveals Himself to us in these threee person, yet they are each God and one.

Perhaps the criticisms of the Trinity reveal some past thinking independent of God which now bears out the sinner.


37 posted on 02/05/2007 4:25:33 PM PST by Cvengr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye

Good to see you agree the Holy Spirit is God.


38 posted on 02/05/2007 4:38:59 PM PST by Cvengr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: MichaelTheeArchAngel
From the Bible:

Matthew
Chapter 28
 
18
11 Then Jesus approached and said to them, "All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
19
Go, therefore, 12 and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit,
20
teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. 13 And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age."
 
Footnotes:

11 [18] All power . . . me: the Greek word here translated power is the same as that found in the LXX translation of Daniel 7:13-14 where one "like a son of man" is given power and an everlasting kingdom by God. The risen Jesus here claims universal power, i.e., in heaven and on earth.

12 [19] Therefore: since universal power belongs to the risen Jesus (Matthew 28:18), he gives the eleven a mission that is universal. They are to make disciples of all nations. While all nations is understood by some scholars as referring only to all Gentiles, it is probable that it included the Jews as well. Baptizing them: baptism is the means of entrance into the community of the risen one, the Church. In the name of the Father . . . holy Spirit: this is perhaps the clearest expression in the New Testament of trinitarian belief. It may have been the baptismal formula of Matthew's church, but primarily it designates the effect of baptism, the union of the one baptized with the Father, Son, and holy Spirit.

13 [20] All that I have commanded you: the moral teaching found in this gospel, preeminently that of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7). The commandments of Jesus are the standard of Christian conduct, not the Mosaic law as such, even though some of the Mosaic commandments have now been invested with the authority of Jesus. Behold, I am with you always: the promise of Jesus' real though invisible presence echoes the name Emmanuel given to him in the infancy narrative; see the note on Matthew 1:23. End of the age: see the notes on Matthew 13:39 and Matthew 24:3.


39 posted on 02/05/2007 4:44:42 PM PST by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

God is Holy and God is Spirit. God is the ultimate Holy Spirit.

HOWEVER.....

pneuma hagion (spirit holy) is the gift from God given on the day of Pentecost.

There are many usages for 'spirit' in the Bible, including unclean or unholy spirit.

Capitalization in the KJV is totally man made. In Germany they find it humerous that Americans believe in any kind of ghost, let alone a holy one!


40 posted on 02/05/2007 5:06:27 PM PST by Eagle Eye (There oughta be a law against excess legislation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr
Perhaps the criticisms of the Trinity reveal some past thinking independent of God which now bears out the sinner.

Perhaps you enjoy bending the knee to Baal instead of worshipping El Shaddai.

Or we can resist personal remarks...?

41 posted on 02/05/2007 5:11:06 PM PST by Eagle Eye (There oughta be a law against excess legislation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: spunkets

All you have to do is look at the scriptures, but that seems to be something you're not used to doing.


42 posted on 02/05/2007 5:12:10 PM PST by Eagle Eye (There oughta be a law against excess legislation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
The truth is, you've got a Content-Free Sentence Generator, don't you!

My brain keeps trying to add the content back. Being literate can be a curse sometimes.

43 posted on 02/05/2007 5:26:18 PM PST by NCSteve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: NCSteve

You expect words to convey meaning. I have a problem with that, too.


44 posted on 02/05/2007 5:34:29 PM PST by Tax-chick ("It is my life's labor to bring Christ to souls and souls to Christ through word and example.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: MichaelTheeArchAngel; Eagle Eye; Thinkin' Gal; kerryusama04; Just mythoughts; DouglasKC
The Trinity doctrine is Pagan. If it were a New Testament doctrine, and believed and taught by the Apostles, they would have mentioned it.

Look at Paul's introduction to his epistles: "To all in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints: Grace and peace to you from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ." Paul never mentions the concept of a Trinity in any of his introductions.

Notice [James 1:1] "James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ."

Peter in his epistles never mentions the Trinitarian concept. [1 Peter 1:3] "Praise be to The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ."

John speaks of Christ and God as literal beings, never mentioning The Holy Spirit as a bodily person. His salutation in his second epistle is indicative; [2 John 3] "Grace, mercy and peace from God The Father and from Jesus Christ, The Father's son, will be with us in truth and love."

Jude's salutation is also: "To those who have been called , who are loved by God The Father and kept by Jesus Christ."

In the Revelation, John mentions Christ, God and the seven spirits before his throne but does not acknowledge The Holy Spirit.

The reason for this is that the Trinity doctrine was not taught by the early Church....nor the Apostles. It was, and is, a pagan concept! As the early Church gained new members this paganism was allowed to enter as doctrine because many new converts to Christianity brought it with them. Winning converts became all important and allowing them to bring in a Trinitarian idea continued the Babylonian concept of a "Nimrod/God", a "Semiramus/Mother of God" and a "Tammuz/Son" of God. It wasn't long thereafter that the early Church began claiming it too, had a Trinity!

The fact that the "Johannine Comma" [1 John 5:7-8]KJV, is found only in eight late manuscripts, four of which have the words in a marginal note, speaks volumes about this heresy.

45 posted on 02/05/2007 5:53:49 PM PST by Diego1618
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
11 Then Jesus approached and said to them, "All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

It was given to Him by whom? Himself?

46 posted on 02/05/2007 6:16:57 PM PST by kerryusama04 (Isa 8:20, Eze 22:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Diego1618
The fact that most Protestant organizations buy into this heresy is very curious.

I've always found that to be curious as well. Prots want nothing to do with the likes of pepetual virginity, papal authority, apostolic succession, praying to saints, etc,. etc., but they sure do lap it up when Catholics come calling with their trinity doctine.

47 posted on 02/05/2007 6:54:14 PM PST by Invincibly Ignorant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
"All you have to do is look at the scriptures, but that seems to be something you're not used to doing."

I see, you're not blind. Since you claim to know what you're talking about, I'll lay it out for you.

" Perfect man is/was body, soul, and spirit as man was formed, made, and created."

What is this? Is this a complete thought. It appears to be a claim.

" The body was formed, the spirit was created, and man was made aliving soul with his first breath. Soul is life. Spirit is what God is and gives and is invisible."

What does this mean? The body was formed, the spirit was created. It makes no sense. Man was made a living soul with his first breath? What is a spirit? What is a soul? The body was formed? What is it? What is a body? When a doc works on the body, does he reform it, or fix it's form? What's the diffence between form, create and make.

Re: Man is the image of the invisible God, per Gen 1:27. Man is the image of the trinity, per Gen 1:26 and Gen 3:22.

To which you posted:

2Cr 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospelof Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. An image is a mirror image. God is the image of Christ, so is man.

"Man was created in God's image when God placed his spirit in him but that doesn't mean that mankind looks like God because God is invisible...."

I'm invisible too! Do you know why? To be created in God's image means we are sentient rational beings. It refers to capacity to develop spirit, not that we were given any at all. When God placed his spirit in man? God's Spirit is the Holy Spirit! No one except God was born with the Holy Spirit! One can develop a spirit like His. That is possible because He made Himself known and one can use His gifts to learn and make His teachings and values theirs.

" If you use a bit more care in your usage of words you'll stay more Biblically accurate."

Yeah, right.

Re:"John 10:30, " I and the Father are one."

"One how? One in purpose and indicating unity because just as he prayed for the apostles to be one...in purpose and in unity.

It means He is God! It means His Soul is the Father and His Spirit is the Holy Spirit. His apostles were taught and asked to learn from him so there spirits would copy his as best they could.

" Jhn 17:22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them;that they may be one, even as we are one,:"

May be one in spirit! Not is one in Spirit.

" Rom 12:5 So we, [being] many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.

Roman's 12 refers to purpose, which would include spirit. As it acknowledges though, all spirits will be different, have different capacity, but all work towards the one goal of the Church.

" 1Cr 10:17 For we [being] many are one bread, [and] one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread."

One Church.

"1Cr 12:12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also [is] Christ."

Same 1 Cor 12, one Church, with one purpose.

Re: "It is true that He was a man. It is not true that all men lie, nor that all men are in need of repentance. See Gen 4. Enoch walked with God. Also, Noah was righteous.

" Rom 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged."

Then Paul's a liar, by his own words. That's your logic.

"Num 23:19 God [is] not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do [it]? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?"

Then Moses lies, by your logic.

" Two things: God cannot lie and God is not a man. Jesus Christ is a man. God is not a man....Jesus is...Get it?"

No, I don't get it. I reject it outright. Jesus is not a liar. He is God. The same way I reject your claims that Paul's a liar and so is Moses, Mary, Enoch, Noah, ect... Jesus is God!

Re: "God has a free will. What makes you think He can't be tempted? What makes you think temptation causes one to choose evil?"

" Jam 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God:for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:"

This refers to God's response to temptation, nothing else.

" If Jesus was God then his believers were greater than God in their works:
Jhn 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater [works] than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. "

You left out John 14:11, and John 14:13.

John 14:11-13
"Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves. I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father.

So, it is God that will do whatever they ask, because His work as Jesus is complete and He has returned to the Father in Heaven. Which means they are as before creation as per John 1:1-2, 1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning."

"God is NOT three, but one and there is but ONE GOD, not three."

Three persons in one God. God the Father, God the Son, snd God the Holy Spirit. The Trinity.

48 posted on 02/05/2007 8:20:57 PM PST by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: kerryusama04

By the Father. Again, I applaud you providing more proof of the Trinity.


49 posted on 02/05/2007 8:25:38 PM PST by Cvengr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: spunkets; Eagle Eye; Diego1618; All

We're do'in "The Holy Trinity" thread again??

I felt I represented the "Biblical" monotheistic viewpoint in respectable fashion here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1599380/posts

Posts: 11,21,22,33,35,37,149,152,154, and 156.

I just don't have time to type all that again.


50 posted on 02/05/2007 8:43:47 PM PST by Zuriel (Acts 2:38,39....nearly 2,000 years and still working today!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-312 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson