CherubRam
New member
Done.
If you would do a better job of studying your scriptures, you would see that your quotes are defective or out of context.
Christians worship Christ; JW's do not!
- Thread starter Apple7
- Start date
If you would do a better job of studying your scriptures, you would see that your quotes are defective or out of context.
If that's all He was saying, then why would they want to stone him, as they said, "for blasphemy, and . . . making [Himself] God"?
marhig
Well-known member
I've just looked at three title of this thread again
"Christians worship Christ and JWs do not."
And I wanted to show you how wrong we can be to judge like that.
I was on another Christian site, and they were mainstream christians, and they were talking disgusting about what they get up to in a crude way. I couldn't believe what I saw and I told them that what they were acting like was wrong before God it was sickening and terrible.
So my point is, what if a JW, or someone who's not a mainstream Christian, truly loves God and is living right before him. And then you have a mainstream Christian who is filthy minded, yet they say they are saved.
Who's right before God?
"Christians worship Christ and JWs do not."
And I wanted to show you how wrong we can be to judge like that.
I was on another Christian site, and they were mainstream christians, and they were talking disgusting about what they get up to in a crude way. I couldn't believe what I saw and I told them that what they were acting like was wrong before God it was sickening and terrible.
So my point is, what if a JW, or someone who's not a mainstream Christian, truly loves God and is living right before him. And then you have a mainstream Christian who is filthy minded, yet they say they are saved.
Who's right before God?
CherubRam
New member
Do you really think I have any interest in communicating with you? If you do, you're badly mistaken. No offence intended.
Dodge, dodge, dodge.
Good bye Dodge.
I didn't make that image. Tell the creator of that image this. I found it (through Musterion) here:
http://jesusisyhwh.blogspot.com/2011/10/jesus-is-jehovah-contents.html?m=1
CherubRam
New member
Sorry! I looked at some of his claims and found them to be lacking in truth.
If God truly was a Trinity, no one would complain; it is just that the scriptures do not truly support that belief. The Trinitarian proof text are all out of context, or have been perverted.
CherubRam
New member
What did Christ ask of us? He asked that we believe he is the Messiah, he did not ask us to believe he is part of a Trinity.
All of the people who belong to God are called [gods / elohiym.] Christ literally said he was [a god / elohiym] from haven.
John 10:36
what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations
All of the people who belong to God are called [gods / elohiym.] Christ literally said he was [a god / elohiym] from haven.
John 10:36
what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations
You try your BEST to make your OPINIONS sound like FACTS, huh? I doubt if you'll answer, but, I'll ask you anyway. What church or denomination are you affiliated with?
What? Who do you think you are, Marshal Matt Dillon? (For those posters not old enough, this is a reference to the old TV show; Gunsmoke.)
There are things that are plainly written in scripture, and people still complain, and you expect no one to complain about something that requires a little digging?
Right.
Sure they do.
Nope.
Cherub:
| THREE QUESTIONS TO DETERMINE IF THE TRINITY IS BIBLICALLY TRUE OR FALSE. If any one of these questions can be answered 'no,' then the Trinity can be rejected as an unbiblical belief. But if all three can be answered 'yes,' then the concept of the Trinity can be accepted as true. 1. Does the Bible mention three distinct persons? 2. Does the Bible refer to each of these persons as God? 3. Does the Bible teach there is only one God? The answers: 1. Are three distinct persons mentioned? YES. A. The Father (1 John 3:1) B. The Son (1 John 1:3) C. The Holy Spirit (John 14:6; 14:26; 15:26; 16:13-14; Romans 15:30; Ephesians 4:30) 2. Are each of these persons referred to as God? YES. A. God the Father (1 Thessalonians 1:1) B. God the Son (John 1:1; 20:28; Hebrews 1:8-9) C. God the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3-4) 3. Is there only one God? YES. (see Deuteronomy 4:35-39; Psalm 86:10; Isaiah 45:5; 45:22) |
Also, as far as the deity of Christ is concerned...
http://kgov.com/deity
Looks like you're a; 'You must EARN your way to Heaven' type of guy/gal.'
Yup. Works-based salvation and anti-trin usually go together.
Do you have a RELIABLE list to offer us or are we to assume that YOU are the ultimate judge of, who is and who is not, intellectually challenged?
Yep.
marhig
Well-known member
Are you kidding me? So you think that people who have filthy minds are saved because they are Christians who believe in the trinity? Yet people with clean minds who love God from their hearts are not mainstream christians aren't?
CherubRam
New member
This is only the tip of the iceberg.
Trinitarianism: What Non-Trinitarians Believe.
I would like to think that those who brought me up in the Trinity doctrine told me the truth to the best of their ability, the truth as they know it.
The reason why so many Christians are so firm about Trinitarianism, is because they believe that it is a divine truth from the Holy Spirit.
When people believe a doctrine is a divine truth from the Holy Spirit, then there is little you can say to convince them otherwise.
Like I always say, "Truth is made known by the reason of the facts."
Facts first, feelings last. When I prayed about it, it was revealed to me that I had deceived myself by my own feelings.
From now on its facts first.
God or god. A God or a god. It was understood that the Messiah would be an immortal being from heaven.
If Trinitarianism is a biblical truth, then how come it has never been taught in Orthodox Judaism?
Why did it take Pagans who were recent converts to Christianity to reveal this?
Orthodox Judaism has always known about Trinitarianism. The only Jews who believed in Trinitarianism were Pagans, Mystics, Hellenist, and Kabbalist.
We are all made in the image of God, and we also are called to be ONE in unity with the Father.
The word gnostic or gnosis was also used in a derogatory way by Gnostics against anyone who did not agree with Catholicism.
There were two different groups of Gnostic's during the first centuries AD.
The first group of Gnostic's were opposed to Christianity.
The other group of Gnostic's were not opposed, and joined Pagan notions to Christianity.
The Gnostic Christians believed in Sunday Sabbath, authority of the Pope, and Trinitarianism, while the Judaizing Christians were opposed to such things as Catholicism [Universalism.]
Micah 5:2
"But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times. "
Deuteronomy 18:15
The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own brothers. You must listen to him.
Psalm 82:6
"I said, 'You are "gods"; you are all sons of the Most High.'
John 10:34
Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your Law, 'I have said you are gods' ? 35If he called them 'gods,' to whom the word of God came—and the Scripture cannot be broken— 36what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, 'I am God's Son'?
The word "Godhead" is not in the original scripture, but is a interpretation. The term "Godhead" was first introduced by John Wycliffe (1330-1384 C.E.) in English Bible versions as godhede.
The word "Godhead" is a interpretation of three different Greek words, theion (meaning "divinity, deity", # 2304 in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament) at Acts 17:29, theiotçs (meaning "divinity, divine nature", # 2305 in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament) at Romans 1:20, and theotçs (meaning "deity", # 2320 in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament)
Both Yahwah and Yahshua are called Lord.
It was not until Around the sixth century, the word Filioque was added to the Nicene Creed, defining as a doctrinal teaching that the Holy Spirit "proceeds from the Father and the Son."
In Judaism, the idea of God as a duality or trinity is heretical.
In the only codices which would be even likely to preserve an older reading, namely the Sinaitic Syriac and the oldest Latin Manuscript, the pages are GONE which contained the end of Matthew 28. Frederick Cornwallis Conybeare (1856 - 9 January 1924) Professor of Theology at the University of Oxford.
Here is the oldest recorded document of Matthew 28:19.
"The Demonstratio Evangelica" by Eusebius:
Eusebius of Caesarea. 265 ? AD.– 337 ? AD.
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. Eusebius informs us of Yahshua's actual words to his disciples in the original text of Matthew 28:19.
Quote: "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...
And again Eusebius for example, in Book III of his History, Chapter 5, Section 2, which is about the Jewish persecution of early Christians, we read:
"But the rest of the disciples, who had been incessantly plotted against with a view to their destruction, and had been driven out of the land of Judea, went to all nations to preach the good news, relying upon the power of Christ, who had said to them, "Go ye and make disciples of all the nations in my name."
And again, in his Oration in Praise of Emperor Constantine, Chapter 16, Section 8, we read:
"What king or prince in any age of the world, what philosopher, legislator or prophet, in civilized or barbarous lands, has attained so great a height of excellence, I say not after death, but while living still, and full of mighty power, as to fill the ears and tongues of all mankind with the praises of his name?
Surely none save our only Savior has done this, when, after his victory over death, he spoke these words to his followers, and fulfilled it by that event, saying to them, "Go ye and make disciples of all nations in my name."
There is not a single occurrence of the disciples baptizing anyone using the Trinitarian formula. All of the scripture in the New Testament shows that people were baptized into the name of Yahshua, even after Pentecost.
And when people in church leadership received the Holy Spirit, it was without the Trinitarian formula as in Acts 8:17.
Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.
Trinity related
Acts 20:28 Holman bible foot note. Other mss read church of the Lord; other mss read church of the Lord and God
Acts 20:28 NIV foot note. Many manuscripts: “of the Lord” 28Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers.(a) Be shepherds of the church of God,(b) which he bought with his own blood.
1 Timothy 3:16 Holman bible foot note. Other mss read God
1 Timothy 3:16 NIV foot note. Some manuscripts God
1 Timothy 3:16 (New International Version)
16Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great:
He(a) appeared in a body,(b)
was vindicated by the Spirit,
was seen by angels,
was preached among the nations,
was believed on in the world,
was taken up in glory.
Footnotes:
a. 1 Timothy 3:16 Some manuscripts God
b. 1 Timothy 3:16 Or in the flesh
1 John 3:16 In this we have known the charity of God, because he hath laid down his life for us:...
The words (of God) are not in the original text of 1 John 3:16, but have been added.
NIV 1 John 5
6 This is the one who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. 7 For there are three that testify: 8 the[See a] Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.
NIV Footnotes:
a.1 John 5:8 Late manuscripts of the Vulgate testify in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. And there are three that testify on earth: the (not found in any Greek manuscript before the fourteenth century)
KJV 1 John 5:6
This is he that came by water and blood, Jesus Christ: not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit which testifieth, that Christ is the truth. 7And there are three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one.
1 John 5:7 implicitly states that all THREE are ONE.
This is the only verse in the Bible that explicitly states that all three persons are one.
Unfortunately, it was added to that verse.
No earlier version includes that last phrase about them being one.
The first 2 additions of Erasmus' master Greek text did not have this.
Stunica (a Catholic authority) demanded that he include the phrase.
Erasmus told Stunica that if he could provide one Greek manuscript with that phrase, he would include it.
But no Greek manuscripts up to that time had it.
Only Latin manuscripts had it. So Stunica had a Greek manuscript made up from the Latin and forced Erasmus to include it.
In 1514, before Erasmus had even begun to edit his text, but its publication was delayed until 1522, until permission of Pope Leo X had finally been obtained for it.
"The supreme Pontiff Leo X, Our Most Holy Father in Christ and Lord, desiring to favour this undertaking, sent from the apostolic library."
This claim seems to have been accepted by all at that time.
In view of its inclusion in the Clementine edition of the Latin Vulgate (1592), in 1897 the Holy Office in Rome, a high ecclesiastical congregation, made an authoritative pronouncement, approved and confirmed by Pope Leo XIII, that it is not safe to deny that this verse is an authentic part of St. John's Epistle."
Here’s some more info on the trinity doctrine.
"Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind." (Col 2:16-18)
1 Tim 6:20
"O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called."
The "oppositions of science falsely so called." is the opposition to Jewish and Pagan Gnosticism.
Science is "gnosis" in the Greek.
Philosophy and Gnosticism is the "profane and vain babblings" the Congregations had to combat.
The worshipping of angels was then and is now one of the distinctive marks of Jewish Kabbalism. Kabbalism today use’s angels, magic, and astrology in their occult system, attempting to control their destiny.
The Jewish Encyclopedia says: "The principal elements of Gnosticism were derived from Jewish speculation." The Jewish Encyclopedia also states that: "It is a noteworthy fact that heads of Gnostic schools and founders of Gnostic systems are designated as Jews by the early Church fathers."
The Roman Catholic Church with its philosophy of a hidden God who should be approached through intermediaries such as saints and angels is the same distinctive doctrine of the Kabbalah.
The angel that the Kabbalists call Metatron, is the female god of the Kabbalah, which they call the "shekhinah", it has emerged into Catholic theology as Mary.
The Catholic Church also absorbed the asceticism of the Gnostics into a system of celibacy for monks, priests and nuns.
Albert Pike, a high prophet of Freemasonry, spoke on the origin of Trinitarianism. In his secret book "Morals and Dogma" he says of the Kabbalist "Jews were the direct precursors of Gnosticism," their Kabbalist doctrine is derived from their captivity while in Babylon.
Philo of Alexandria was a Jew who played a key role in the development of the Trinitarian theory. Pike says, he was a Kabbalist "a initiate of the mysteries."
The Jewish Encyclopedia: “We are forced to conclude that the Pharisees introduced an element of confusion into Christian theology which we still have not emerged from.”
"Cast me not away from your presence; and take not your Holy Spirit from me" (Psalms 51:11.)
Moses received the Holy Spirit (Isaiah 63:11.)
Christ was filled with the Holy Spirit (Luke 4:1.) Was he filled with another person inside his body? No. He was filled with the presence of God.
"He that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me; Upon whom you shall see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he, which baptizes with the Holy Spirit" (John 1:33.)
So here we see a change. People are now given the opportunity to receive the Holy Spirit at baptism. This means more people (not just prophets and patriarchs) would receive the Holy Spirit.
"And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance" (Acts 2:4.)
Peter told the people at Jerusalem about Jesus being crucified and they responded by asking what they should do.
"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38.)
Was Peter telling them they could receive a person into their body? No.
So after the day of Pentecost (which is the same day as the Feast of First Fruits) people were able to repent, be baptized, and receive the Holy Spirit. No longer was this for only a few as in the Old Testament.
There is no mention of the word trinity in the entire Bible.
Polycarp, Clement, and Ignatius were the students of the original disciples. They lived at the turn of the century, before and after 100 AD. They did not mention a trinity or give a description of a trinity in all their writings.
It was not until the second century AD that the idea of a trinity began to take shape in the Gnostic Christian community.
Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus is also known as Tertullian. In the second century he formulated the idea of one substance having three persons.
Origen considered the Son to be not coequal, but derived from the Father whom is the Holy Spirit. Arius would adopt the idea of the Son being derivative of the Father in the third century AD. This eventually lead to a major crisis in the Counsel of Nicea.
Arius gained many followers as he taught that Christ was a created being, created by the Father.
Arians were the followers of Arius.
The creed that came out of the Counsel of Nicea in 325 AD did not explicate the Trinity. It simply proclaimed the divinity of Christ, rejecting Arianism.
There was no resolution on who the Holy Spirit is. That notion would not arise again until the Counsel of Constantinople in 381 AD.
Basilius, also known as Basil, bishop of Caesarea. In the later 3rd century AD, formulated ideas as to what the Holy Spirit was. This was mainly in reaction to Arius who was his enemy doctrinally. Basil and others such as Gregory of Nazianzus and Gregory of Nyssa were encouraged to develop ideas to combat the idea of Arianism. The person who encouraged them was Athanasius who hated Arianism and wanted it done away with.
Philo introduced the idea of a trinity to the Hellenistic Jews of Alexandria.
Philo did not equate the three members of his trinity. He wrote that “the middle person of the three,” was Yahweh, the Father of the Universe, who is uncreated and unbegotten. God, the Father of the Universe was accompanied by two “body-guards”: the creative power and the royal power. God being greater than them. These ideas of Philo made a great impact on Christianity.
More on How the Trinity Doctrine Entered Christianity
God commanded, “You will not make wrongful use of the name of the LORD your God, for the LORD will not acquit anyone who misuses his name.” (Exodus 20:7 NRSV) Because of this command the translators of the Septuagint, did not transliterate the name “Yahweh” into Greek. They believed that the transliteration would have been a misuse of God’s name. Instead, they translated it as “Kyrios,” which in English is the word LORD. So therefore, the word Lord/Kyrios, became the name of Yahweh in Greek. It was a common title for masters or men of authority. Also, the New Testament writers applied it to Jesus. In the end, Jesus and God shared the same name title: Lord/Kyrios.
In the early 4th century, Lactantius (born 240 A.D. died 320 A.D.) wrote: “He {Jesus} taught that God is one {person} and that He {the Father} alone ought to be adored, nor did He {Jesus} ever call himself God.” Lactantius did not recognize a Trinity. He emphasized that Jesus is an “improperly called god,” and must not be worshipped as God.
Wrong interpretations and the distortion of God’s word is what supports the doctrine of the trinity.
When asked, "Which is the most important commandment of all?" Jesus answered, "The most important of all the commandments is, hear, o Israel, the Lord our God is One." (Mark 12:29.)
That is what we find throughout the scriptures:
"Beside me there is no God." (Isa. 44:6.)
"I am God, and there is none else; there is no God beside me." (Isa. 45:5.)
"I am God, and there is none else." (Isa. 46:9.)
"One God and Father of all, who is above all." (Eph. 4:6.)
"Hear, o Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord." (Deut. 6.4.)
"There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." (1 Tim. 2:5.)
"There is but one God, the Father, whom made all things, and us by Himself , and one lord Jesus Christ, by whom we are in.
(1 Cor. 8:6.)
"This is life eternal, that they might know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom He has sent." (John 17:3.)
This last quotation is Jesus speaking; addressing God in prayer as the one true God, and speaking of himself as separate from that one true God.
Additional
Ps 110:1
1 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit Thou at My right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.
(KJV)
Acts 2:34-35
34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, sit thou on my right hand,
35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool.
(KJV)
1 Cor 15:28
28 And when all things shall be subdued unto Him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him, that God may be all, in all.
(KJV)
Heb 1:2-8
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, Whom He hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also He made the worlds;
3 Who being the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
4 Being made so much better than the angels, as He hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
5 For unto which of the angels said He at any time, "Thou art My Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to Him a Father, and He shall be to me a Son?"
(New International Version)
Psalm 97
1 The LORD reigns, let the earth be glad;
let the distant shores rejoice.
2 Clouds and thick darkness surround him;
righteousness and justice are the foundation of his throne.
3 Fire goes before him
and consumes his foes on every side.
4 His lightning lights up the world;
the earth sees and trembles.
5 The mountains melt like wax before the LORD,
before the Lord of all the earth.
6 The heavens proclaim his righteousness,
and all the peoples see his glory.
7 All who worship images are put to shame,
those who boast in idols—
worship him, all you gods!
John 17:21
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.
John 17:23
I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.
Isaiah 44:6
"This is what [the LORD / Yahwah] says— Israel's King and Redeemer, [the LORD / God] Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no [God / Elohiym.]
Isaiah 48:11-12
11 For my own sake, for my own sake, I do this. How can I let myself be defamed? I will not yield my glory to another."Listen to me, O Jacob, Israel, whom I have called: I am he; I am the first and I am the last.
Because KJV Rev 1:11 was found to be a corruption it is not included into other bibles.
KJV Revelation 1:11. Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last:
According to history Trinitarianism has its origins in Gnosticism.
There is also a document about a Kabbalist who suggested the Godhead is triune. That was at the same time Yahshua was preaching. Perhaps that is why Yahshua quoted this verse:
Mark 12:29.
"The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is [one / only.]
Trinity
In the fourth-century, Marcellus of Ancyra declared that the idea of the Godhead existing as three hypostases came from Plato, through the teachings of Valentinus. Valentinus is quoted as teaching that God is three, three prosopa (persons) called the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit:
These men also taught three hypostases, just as Valentinus the heresiarch first invented in the book entitled by him 'On the Three Natures'. It was believed he was the first to invent three hypostases and three persons of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, but he was discovered to have taken this from Hermes and Plato.
Valentinus (also spelled Valentinius) (c.100 - c.160) was known as a early Christian Gnostic Theologian.
It should be noted that Nag Hammadi library Sethian text such as Trimorphic Protennoia identify Gnosticism as also professing Father, Son and feminine wisdom Sophia or as Professor John D Turner denotes, God the Father, Sophia the Mother, and Logos the Son.
Comments by scholars.
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 that 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.
Eusebius was the Bishop of Caesarea and is known as “the Father of Church History.” Eusebius quotes many verses in his writings, and Matthew 28:19 is one of them. He never quotes it as it is today in our modern Bibles, but he always finishes the verse with the words “in my name.” For example, in Book III of his History, Chapter 5, Section 2, which is about the Jewish persecution of early Christians, we read:
But the rest of the apostles, who had been incessantly plotted against with a view to their destruction, and had been driven out of the land of Judea, went to all nations to preach the Gospel, relying upon the power of Christ, who had said to them, “Go ye and make disciples of all the nations in my name.”
And again, in his Oration in Praise of Emperor Constantine, Chapter 16, Section 8, we read:
What king or prince in any age of the world, what philosopher, legislator or prophet, in civilized or barbarous lands, has attained so great a height of excellence, I say not after death, but while living still, and full of mighty power, as to fill the ears and tongues of all mankind with the praises of his name? Surely none save our only Savior has done this, when, after his victory over death, he spoke these words to his followers, and fulfilled it by that event, saying to them, “Go ye and make disciples of all nations in my name.”
marhig
Well-known member
So how about trinity believers having filthy mouths and filthy minds? That's ok then?
I don't believe in the trinity and i believe that it's disgusting to talk crude and vulgar.
You talk about the works? True believers in God and Christ don't talk like that, and they do works, they do the works of God and if God is in our hearts, then he cleans us out and we don't think like that, never mind talk filthy. It was vile the way they were speaking, I couldn't believe it.
Apple7
New member
Its taught in the Tanak.
The Jews who understood what they read are now called Christians.