bible verses changed to support trinity

[Macca]

Jesus was created of God.
NO! Jesus was always with God ,He was there at creation, He was not created, He is, was ,and always eternal. (without beginning and no end.)
Macca

 

[Rechtgläubig]

This event occured prior to the time when Jesus was in the garden of gethsemane and his crucifiction. this knowledge that he would be ressurected on the third day was taken away from him in the garden not prior to the garden of tgethsemane. anyone placed in a similar situation is going to be bombareded with doubts and isnt going to remember everything relevant to the situation he is in. its easy to say "they can point a gun at my head an i will not deny christ for I know I have the promise of eternal life if they do." when no one is pointing a gun at your head. but when it actually happens , some christians buckle and deny christ. doubts creep in at that time your overwhelmed with the situation. you don't remember all the promises of god at that time. thats what happened to Jesus.

Ok so He knew it, then forgot, but then He remembers again?

39One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: "Aren't you the Christ? Save yourself and us!"
40But the other criminal rebuked him. "Don't you fear God," he said, "since you are under the same sentence? 41We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong."
42Then he said, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom. "
43Jesus answered him, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise." (Luke 23)


No offense, but where do you get this stuff?

 

[Der Alte]

Previously posted;
"Can you explain why you deliberately omitted the first half of this definition, especially definition number 3?"

86 AdhV hades hah’-dace
from 1 (as negative particle) and 1492; TDNT-1:146,22; n pr loc
AV-hell 10, grave 1; 11
1) name Hades or Pluto, the god of the lower regions
2) Orcus, the nether world, the realm of the dead
3) later use of this word: the grave, death, hell

In Biblical Greek it is associated with Orcus, the infernal regions, a dark and dismal place in the very depths of the earth, the common receptacle of disembodied spirits. Usually Hades is just the abode of the wicked, #Lu 16:23; Re 20:13,14; a very uncomfortable place. TDNT.
​

​

Of course I should have addressed that, which I almost did.

Note two words: "LATER USE."

If it simply meant the grave, why didn't they use the word "Tartarus"?

Hades is what was most often used to describe the abode of wicked spirits, not simply the grave. And "grave" cannot explain the other verses in Ephesians & 1 Peter....

I have noted the words “Later use.” Koine or Biblical Greek is a simplified classical Greek. The classical period extended from ca. 600 b.c. to ca. 200 a.d. The original meaning, as shown by Strong’s and LSJ, below, was 1 and 2, from Strong’s. The later, i.e. N.T. era, meaning was 3. the grave, death. Based on the LSJ definition, below, "Biblical Greek," in Strong's, is a misprint, it should read "Pre-Biblical Greek"

We have the passage where it says he descended into the lower parts of the earth. (Ephesians 4:9)

See Hebrew understanding of that passage. Also Jesus said He was going to paradise when He died, not hell!

Eph 4:8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. (Psa 68:18)
9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? (Psa 139:15)

John Gill Exposition of the Whole Bible. – Eph 4:9
Hades, in the state of the dead, in the grave, in the heart of the earth, as Jonah in the whale's belly: reference seems to be had to Psa_139:15 where "the lower parts of the earth", is interpreted by the Targum on the place of, אמאד אסירכ "his mother's womb";

Psa 139:15 My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.

Psa 68:18 Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive: thou hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that the LORD God might dwell among them.

Liddell-Scott-Jones Lexicon of classical Greek.

Haidês [from a_privat, idein] [aidês in Hom., attic a_idês; but in Trag. also a_idas:-- gen. aideô as an anapaest in Hom.; gen. aida_o Id=Hom.; gen. a_idos before a vowel, Il.]

I. Hades or Pluto (cf. Ploutôn), the god of the nether world, son of Kronus and Rhea, brother to Zeus, Zeus kai egô, tritatos d' Aidês Il.; called Zeus katachthonios id=Il.; ein or eis Aïdao (sc. domois, domous) in, into the nether world, Hom.; ein Aïdos Il.; en Haidou, es Haidou (sc. oikôi, oikon) attic:-- also Aïdosde adv., Il.
II. as appellative,Hades, the world below, eisoken aïdi keuthômai id=Il.; epi ton haidên Luc.; eis aïdên Anth.; en tôi haidêi NTest.
2. the grave, death, haidês pontios death by sea, Aesch., etc.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/resolveform
​

​

We have the passage where he preached to the spirits in prison. (1 Peter 3:19 - 20) Note in verse 20 these were those from the time of Gods longsuffering in the days of Noah.

Unless this verse is the lone exception, which cannot be proven, hell is never called prison and prison is never called hell in the N.T.. Also Jesus said, “Before Abraham was I am.”

John Gill Exposition​

The plain and easy sense of the words is, that Christ, by his Spirit, by which he was quickened, went in the ministry of Noah, the preacher of righteousness, and preached both by words and deeds, by the personal ministry of Noah, and by the building of the ark, to that generation who was then in being; and who being disobedient, and continuing so, a flood was brought upon them which destroyed them all;​

​

We also have the "Thou hast not left my soul in hell" verses regarding Jesus. (Psalm 16:10, Acts 2:27 & 31.) Luke writes the Greek word "Hades" in the 2 verses in Acts.

Yep, that’s what we have alright. Now lets understand it from the Hebrew POV. One form of Hebrew poetry was to say the same thing in two slightly different ways. The book of Psalms is filled with poetry. Also the word translated hell, in PS 16:10, “sheol” and the word translated corruption, “schachath,” have similar meanings. We know that Jesus did “see” the grave. Therefore the meaning is, “You will not leave my soul in the grave; neither will thou suffer (allow, permit) your Holy One to see corruption, decay, decomposition, etc.” The phrases "leave my soul in Hell" and "permit your Holy One to see corruption" are talking about the same thing.

Psa 16:10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

07845 שחת shachath shakh’-ath
from 07743; TWOT-2343.1c, 2370d; n f
AV-corruption 4, pit 14, destruction 2, ditch 2, grave 1; 23

1) pit, destruction, grave
1a) pit (for catching lions)
1b) pit (of Hell)
​

​

 

[jessedance]

Ok so He knew it, then forgot, but then He remembers again?

39One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: "Aren't you the Christ? Save yourself and us!"
40But the other criminal rebuked him. "Don't you fear God," he said, "since you are under the same sentence? 41We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong."
42Then he said, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom. "
43Jesus answered him, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise." (Luke 23)


No offense, but where do you get this stuff?

well peter remembered what the lord had said to him after he denyed the Lord 3 times. If Jesus saying that he would be in paradise with him today proves that JEsus knew he would be reseructed . it only proves that he knew then that he would be resurected. peter didnt know that he would deny the lord 3 times before the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] crowed until after he did it. Jesus didn't have the knowleddge that he would be resurected taken away from him for always , just so he could make a choice. You can't choice to go to the second death for someone if you believe you wont go to the second death. You can only make the choice to go to the second death if you believe you will if you make that choice.
Jesus was tempted in all points like us. that means jesus was tempted as john the baptist was and as peter was, both of whom were temtped without the knowledge that peter would deny the lord 3 times and john without the knowledge that Jesus was the christ. both things they both knew previously. so if peter and john were tempted that way then jesus too was tempted that way for he was in a similar situation as those two. peter failed, I don;t know if john did , and jesus succeeded. remember , jesus was tempted in all points like unto us. also, if the devil would tempt jesus for 40 days and 40 nights why souldnt he tempt jesus at his last opourtunity to do so and at JEsus weakest moment in his life.? satan desired to sift peter, and although it doesnt say so, i believe satan desired to sift Jesus, satan wants to sift all of us i believe.
where do I get this? the implication is that all my explanations are nothing. this is a way of discrediting what i have said without tackling the issues i have brought up.

 

[jessedance]

Hello JD

I think your explanations for memories taken away are a stretch. If anybody caused Peter to forget, it was Peter.

You still have no scripture about Jesus being made to forget.

Thanks


<><

"Luke 22:31 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat:
Luke 22:32 But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.
Luke 22:33 And he said unto him, Lord, I am ready to go with thee, both into prison, and to death.
Luke 22:34 And he said, I tell thee, Peter, the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] shall not crow this day, before that thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me."

This is the reason that peter forgot that Jesus had said to him ' before the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] crow 3 times you shall deny me thrice" He just didn't forget , satan , with gods permission, took that knowledge away from him to test his faith. we follow god , jesus by faith. faith in him makes us righteous, we don't follow god by sight with everything spelled out for us so we understand everything completly. peter was placed in a trying situation to test his faith, jesus was placed in a trying situation and it tested his faith, "if it be possible let this cup pass from me , nevertheless not my will but thy will be done." said Jesus. If jesus knew everything all the time he wouldn't have said "if it be possible"

 

[Starcrystal]

Jessedance,
I believe Jesus was in the grave for 3 days and three nights. the sabbath that Jesus was crucified before was the passover sabbath which was on a thursday. so Jesus was crucified on wed. evening. thursday evening ,friday evening, saturday evening that makes that makes 3 days. Jesus actually arose sat. night. not sunday morning.

True. The women found the empty tomb early Sunday morning, but Jesus had already left. I have no idea where the Friday business comes from. (Well, I probably do, but how & why?) If he were crucified Friday he'd only have been in the grave for a little over 24 hours, which does not line up with His own prediction of 3 days & nights.

Der Alter, why then is Hades used to describe the place of fire in Luke 16?
I beleive He went into paradise, and this is where he "led captivity captive." But you're forgetting that he spoke also to the spirits in prison, which were from the time of Noah. Maybe he preached to them from the paradise side, seeing as it appears they were able to converse back and forth over the great gulf, but not travel?

 

[Der Alte]

Der Alter, why then is Hades used to describe the place of fire in Luke 16? I beleive He went into paradise, and this is where he "led captivity captive."

Excuse me? Did you even read my post? The word “hades” in Greek is used for both the place of torment and simply the grave. The context determines which it is. When the N.T. passage is a quote from or reference to an O.T. passage, as the ones I addressed, then the context of the O.T. passage will determine whether it is the place of punishment or the grave.

In Luke 16 “hades” clearly refers to the place of torment. Dead bodies in the grave do not lift up their eyes and see anything, let alone Lazarus in the bosom of Abraham.

But you're forgetting that he spoke also to the spirits in prison, which were from the time of Noah. Maybe he preached to them from the paradise side, seeing as it appears they were able to converse back and forth over the great gulf, but not travel?

I’m not forgetting anything. You are. From my previous post, perhaps you will read it this time.

”Unless this verse is the lone exception, which cannot be proven, hell is never called prison and prison is never called hell in the N.T.. Also Jesus said, ‘Before Abraham was I am.’”​

John Gill Exposition
The plain and easy sense of the words is, that Christ, by his Spirit, by which he was quickened, went in the ministry of Noah, the preacher of righteousness, and preached both by words and deeds, by the personal ministry of Noah, and by the building of the ark, to that generation who was then in being; and who being disobedient, and continuing so, a flood was brought upon them which destroyed them all;
​

Jesus existed before Abraham and Noah. Did the Spirit ever speak to men at that time? 1 Pet 3:19 says, "By [the Spirit] which also he [Christ] went and preached unto the spirits in prison;" There is no Biblical justification for the false belief that Jesus went to hell and preached to the damned there. What would have been the purpose, just to torment them? Because there is nothing in the N.T. which states or implies that those who die in sin and are condemned to hell, have a second chance after death. Just the opposite, after men die there is only judgment, not a second chance. It appears that you just keep trying and trying to force your presuppositions onto the text.

Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.​

​

 

[Starcrystal]

Der Alter,
There is no Biblical justification for the false belief that Jesus went to hell and preached to the damned there. What would have been the purpose, just to torment them? Because there is nothing in the N.T. which states or implies that those who die in sin and are condemned to hell, have a second chance after death. Just the opposite, after men die there is only judgment, not a second chance. It appears that you just keep trying and trying to force your presuppositions onto the text.

Same thing I've said to those who teach it. (Btw, its NOT "my" teaching. Several denominations teach that he went and preached to spirits in hell.) I've questioned why would he preach to those already condemned? The answer I usually get is: Jesus preached to them so they would be without excuse in the final judgement, because they had not heard directly about Christ in Noahs day. I agree, it doesn't quite fit.

Also, do I beleive Jesus actually suffered in hell? Doubtful. He may have thought for a moment he would, like Jessedance says, but whern he went in there, it was in power, to "destroy the works of the devil," and to (supposedly) take back the keys of death and hell from Satan. Now theres another popular teaching not exactly found in Scripture, but preached from numerous pulpits: That Jesus went into hell and took the keys from Satan. Just because Revelation 1:18 says Jesus has the keys of hell and death does not mean he went into hell to get them from Satan. So I don't agree with that particular teaching which often goes along with Jesus desending into hell.

 

[jessedance]

i think it might be helpfull to post the relevant scripture here.

Peter I 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
Peter I 3:19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
Peter I 3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

In the days of noah it took something like 120 years to build the ark and Noah had a lot of help from people who were sometimes obedient in building the ark. 120 years is a long time. some people fell away from building the ark that god had commanded. just like today people fall away from following the Lord. we can establish for a fact that Jesus preached to these people after his death, and before his resurection. it seems clear to me that Jesus only preached to those who were envolved in the building of the ark who fell away from the task, and who consequently were destroyed in the world wide flood. Did Jesus also preach to saved souls who died under the old covenant? It seems logical, but I don't know of any scripture to support either view.

Luke 16:22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
Luke 16:23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
Luke 16:24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

KJV
I take these verses literally, except abrhams bosom which is a figure of speech (metonymy?) for paradise.

 

[jessedance]

I found some catholic sources that confirm my belief that matthew 28:19 is bogus scritpure.

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."
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 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."
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.

http://www.apostolic.net/biblicalstudies/matt2819-willis.htm

And

28, 19: Go, therefore, and make... the nations: some regard these words as an interpretation of Jesus' final instructions in the light of the church's early change from a mission to the Jews to one in behlaf of the Gentiles; see introduction to Acts. Baptize them.. Holy Spirit: the baptismal formula reflects the church's gradual understanding of God as three Persons (Acts 2, 38; 2 Cor 13, 13)

THE NEW AMERICAN BIBLE , Saint Joseph Edition, Catholic book publishing, 1970 , footnote to matthew 28:19

 

[Der Alte]

I found some catholic sources that confirm my belief that matthew 28:19 is bogus scritpure.

No you have not “found some catholic sources that confirm [your] belief that matthew 28:19 is bogus scritpure!” You have cut and pasted some quotes from a secondary source, a website, that claims they are quotes from Catholic sources. What you claim the Catholic Encyclopedia says, below.

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."

What the Catholic Encyclopedia actually says, about Matt 28:19.

V. INSTITUTION OF THE SACRAMENT

That Christ instituted the Sacrament of Baptism is unquestionable. Rationalists, like Harnack (Dogmengeschichte, I, 68), dispute it, only by arbitrarily ruling out the texts which prove it. Christ not only commands His Disciples (Matthew 28:19) to baptize and gives them the form to be used, but He also declares explicitly the absolute necessity of baptism (John 3):

(2) Form

The requisite and sole valid form of baptism is: "I baptize thee (or This person is baptized) in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost." This was the form given by Christ to His Disciples in the twenty-eighth chapter of St. Matthew's Gospel, as far, at least, as there is question of the invocation of the separate Persons of the Trinity and the expression of the nature of the action performed.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02258b.htm​

Here is what is claimed to be the NAB Mt 28:19, footnote.

28, 19: Go, therefore, and make... the nations: some regard these words as an interpretation of Jesus' final instructions in the light of the church's early change from a mission to the Jews to one in behlaf of the Gentiles; see introduction to Acts. Baptize them.. Holy Spirit: the baptismal formula reflects the church's gradual understanding of God as three Persons (Acts 2, 38; 2 Cor 13, 13)

Here is what the real online NAB footnote to Mt 28:19, actually says.

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.

http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/matthew/matthew28.htm​

If I had access to the other material, I'm sure we would find that they are equally false.

 

[Peterson]

I fail to see where Matthew 28:19 requires newborn babies to be dabbed with a few drops of water by a "qualified priest," and thus establish them as bonafide members of the Roman church, as the only mechanism by which one is acceptable in the eyes of a triune God. I hardly think the apostles interpreted Jesus this way.

And incidently, this verse has nothing to do with proving trinitarianism.

 

[Der Alte]

I fail to see where Matthew 28:19 requires newborn babies to be dabbed with a few drops of water by a "qualified priest," and thus establish them as bonafide members of the Roman church, as the only mechanism by which one is acceptable in the eyes of a triune God. I hardly think the apostles interpreted Jesus this way.

I didn't say anything about a "qualified priest" and dabbing newborn babies. I simply posted the real article from the Cath. Ency. to prove that the other one was false.

But since the original poster did not respond he has shown that he is not interested in the truth.

And incidently, this verse has nothing to do with proving trinitarianism.

Thank you for your opinion. With that opinion and $3 I can get a cup of Latte almost anywhere.

 

[Peterson]

Hey,I will be glad to give you my opinion over a senior 35 cent cup of coffee at
McDonald's anytime. Starbuck's? Forget it.

 

[jessedance]

And incidently, this verse has nothing to do with proving trinitarianism.

true, but this verse and 1 john 5:7, both of which are bogus as I have already shown, are used as foundational scritpure for trinity. saying 'father son and holy ghost' doesnt prove trinity but its all they have.

 

[Peterson]

The same goes for 2 Corinthians 13:14.

 

[jessedance]

The same goes for 2 Corinthians 13:14.

boy thats a tuff one to find.