Trinity question

FYI,

To the Oneness theology this simply proves that the three manifestations are one flesh. See, they don't believe Jesus was with God in the beginning, but rather The Word was, which was the "plan" of manifestation in the flesh was. The plan was with God in the beginning. I know, it's crazy, but as I stated before, they are reading the Bible through their doctrine and not the other way around. The key is to know how to show it Biblically then prayfully show it to them. It's up to them whether they want to see it or not. Any version can be twisted, I think we can at least agree upon that.

~Lorelei

 

Dear hrhema,

You said...

So, God is three in one, just to say that I am unwise about this proves nothing about what the passage means related to the Trinity.


But, since you mentioned it, you also said ...

In Genesis 18 YHWH comes to talk with Abraham:

KJV Genesis 18:1 And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day;
2 And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground,
3 And said, My Lord, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant:
4 Let a little water, I pray you, be fetched, and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree:

God is a Spirit but is able to appear in a material form, eat drink , etc...


HankD

 

Yes, but they are also our brothers in Adam.

HankD

 

I'm just trying to help you Harvest.

You have a lot of good things to say.
Season it with salt.

The unregenerate deserve our respect:
"there but for the grace of God..."

Matthew 5
43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?
47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?
48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

 

Harvest,

Where did you get your “catholic manuscripts” info? Here is an excerpt from the NIV preface:

Regarding 1 John 5:7

The KJV is a beautiful translation, difficult to understand for most, but beautifully almost poetic. But the KJV translators took many liberties to include marginal notes from the manuscripts without so noting. Many of the MTs will footnote either their inclusion or exclusion of these marginal notes. I am amused when KJVonlyers accuse the MT translaters of editing out the Word of God in these cases. But then, when you refer to the KJV as the AV, it’s a dead giveaway where you’re coming from. But on the trinity, we are in agreement! Imagine that I could derive that from the NIV! BTW, I use a number of translations in addition to the NIV for a well-rounded understanding of the scriptures.

 

Not only was the scripture not in the original writings but neither was Matthew 28:19. It used to be taught this just like the scripture in I John. These scriptures were added by the council of Constantinople but people get up at arms about this but are willing to admit other scriptures such as Mark 16 was added or other things were added. If it doesn't suit their theological beliefs then it could not have happened.

I have posted this many times and I have received some off the wall remarks but why did not God reveal himself in the Trinitarian form from the beginning with out all the wrangling and arguing.
Paul said the Godhead is not a mystery but Christianity hold that it is so who is right?

 

It is NOT a mystery, I tried to show from the OT, especially in Genesis that the Trinity is revealed with the name of God YHWH-ELOHIM and the use of personal pronouns (let US make man in OUR image, likeness, etc).

People use the word "mystery" improperly when refering to the Trinity.

What they mean is that the concept of the Trinity is difficult to comprehend just as God's eternality (no beginning, no end) is difficult (no, impossible) for us to comprehend.

The essence of the Trinity "problem" is NOT with the doctrine of the Trinity but with the deity of Jesus Christ, God come in the flesh.

Remove the italicised words from John 8:24...

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

58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

Acts 20
28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
29 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.
30 Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

[ February 24, 2003, 09:15 AM: Message edited by: HankD ]

 

Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

What is your source, or is this just something you wished were true hrhema?

This verse is UNDISPUTED by everyone( including JWs) in the entire history of the Church.

HankD

 

It doesn't matter what is taught, Matthew 28:19 has never been proven to be false. People teach that it was added in because it is convenient to their theology. Do not believe everything you hear.

As was stated the trinity is not a mystery to us now. Even though we may not understand exactly how this can be, we know that it is indeed a fact.

With that said, we must realize that what we know about Christ now, was not fully revealed "from the beginning". God did not reveal the Godhead fully in the OT. Though He pointed to it, He clearly decided to wait to share the fulness of Christ and His ministry.

Lorelei

 

Forgive? of course.

HankD

 

No one wishes that is true for their theology about Matthew 28:19 because no one does what it says in the first place. Every denomination except the Jesus only groups when they baptize they say the Words that Jesus said but that is not what Jesus said to do. He said to Baptize them in the NAME (SINGULAR) of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. No one does that. They quote what Jesus said when they Baptize. They ignore the fact that the Book of ACts said the name of Jesus was used for baptism and they ignor e the fact that Paul himself said we are buried in Jesus.

The problem is that people got afraid this would hurt the belief in the Trinity. Why would it? Isn't salvation through the name of Jesus. Did not the Bible say that there is none other name under Heaven given amongst men whereby we must be saved?

 

Tentatively stepping out and posting for the first time off the welcome board....

Re I Jn 5:7, IIRC, neither the Alexandrian Texts or Majority Texts, which are the older versions and are generally regarded as being more trustworthy, contain the Trinitarian version of this passage. The earliest manuscript containing the Trinitarian version is the Latin Vulgate Bible of the late 4th century, after the Councils of Nicaea I and Constantinople I. The earliest Greek MS (remember the NT was originally written in Greek) that we have is the Textus Receptus of the 16th century, upon which the KJV was based. Therefore ISTM that the Trinitarian version of I Jn 5:7 represents a post-Nicene/Constantinopolitan redaction of the AT and MT MSs. (This in no way alters my thoroughly Trinitarian outlook - I'm just saying it is not a particularly good apologetic tool against non-Trinitarains such as JWs).

Matt 28:19 OTOH is very clear - all reliable MSS have the Trinitarian baptismal formula. The only variance is that I think the Nestle and United Bible College texts (and possibly the AT too but I can't remember for sure) omit the 'Amen' at the end - hardly a show-stopper, methinks.

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

I was reading another thread about 1 John 5. That the words Father, Word, and Holy Ghost had been left out of newer translations and the reason why is that they are questionable. Many scholars and theologians believe they were added later.

I know for a fact that in the 50's and 60's the same things were believed about Matthew 28:19 and there were some versions of the King James Bible that had the words FAther, Son and Holy Ghost in italics meaning not in the original manuscripts.

Those who question the authenticity of both of these scriptures do so based on the following.
The doctrine of the Trinity was not taught by the Apostles nor by the post-apostolic Fathers and did not come to full knowledge until the Councils of Nicea, Trent and Constantinople. Why would have Matthew or John used those titles? If the full revelation of the Trinity did not happen until hundreds of years later why would either writer used those titles?

Does Matthew 28:19 void Acts 2:38 and the other scriptures in Acts that says the name of Jesus is to be used to baptize. Absolutely not.

It has been said on this thread that it is wishful thinking on people part that this was not in the Bible but that is not true. Matthew 28:19 does not hurt any one's doctrine. It helps the Jesus name movement as far as their belief in baptism goes because Jesus in Matthew 28:19
did not say to say "I baptize you in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost." Jesus said to baptize them in the name (singular). ACts says the name used was Jesus.

Does not the Bible say that everything in Heaven is named after the name of Jesus. This seems to be a strange statement. If that is what it means then the Fathers name is Jesus and the Holy Ghosts name is Jesus and every other individual in Heaven will carry that name. No I am not talking Oneness. It really seems a mystery how all this works doesn't it.

 

What difference does it make?

In the Matthew 28:19 passage (which has never been disputed by anyone anywhere except apparently you) Jesus speaks to His apostles giving them the word formula to follow for baptism.

In the Acts passages the apostles are baptizing in the name or authority of Jesus as opposed to John's baptism.

Yes, there can be two meanings for this wording "in the name", fortunately we have the very same situation in English when we use such word constructions as "open the door in the name of the king" or "in the name of the law" signifying authority.

On top of all that again I ask, what difference does it make?

The undisputed passage of Matthew 28:19 proves the Trinity in its grammatical structure.

Prove it! What is the name of the Publisher and the KJV Edition? What are the manuscript names/numbers?

"I understand nothing else than the Holy Trinity to be meant; for the third is the Holy Spirit, and the Son is the second, by whom all things were made according to the will of the Father"
Clement of Alexandria, The Stromata, Chapter 5 . 215AD

"If the number of the Trinity also offends you, as if it were not connected in the simple Unity, I ask you how it is possible for a Being who is merely and absolutely One and Singular, to speak in plural phrase, saying, “Let us make man in our own image, and after our own likeness; ”128 whereas He ought to have said, “Let me make man in my own image, and after my own likeness,” as being a unique and singular Being? In the following passage, however, “Behold the man is become as one of us,”129 He is either deceiving or amusing us in speaking plurally, if He is One only and singular."
Tertullian, Against Praexus Chapter 12. 220AD.

"For these very words 'when' or 'never' have a meaning that relates to time, whereas the statements made regarding Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are to be understood as transcending all time, all ages, and all eternity. For it is the Trinity alone which exceeds the comprehension not only of temporal but even of eternal intelligence; while other things which are not included in it are to be measured by times and ages.
Origen, Summary, regarding the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, Book 5, 250AD

HankD

[ February 27, 2003, 07:54 PM: Message edited by: HankD ]