• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Trinity is wrong.

gort

pedantric
Sep 18, 2003
10,451
194
70
Visit site
✟34,392.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Truth can be debated, and should be because God hides His deeper truth.

Prov 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to
search out a matter.

In reference to the trinity. The day someone shows me God is made up of three persons (chapter and verse please) is the day I believe in the trinity. Without three persons there is no trinity; God is simply one.

Here's 2 out of 3. You won't see the 3rd until you can see the first two. As you say, God does hide His deeper truth.

Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.


Here's a thought or maybe even two: When the Lord Jesus Christ ascended back to heaven from what some think was his second nature (earth) back to his first nature (heaven) he, according to Phil. 2:9-11, was given a superior role in that all creation show bow to Jesus to the glory of God. How can an equal being in his primary nature be given something if as an equal he would of had it already, even before coming to earth?

Trinitarianism does'nt necessarily hold to superior roles. I do view trinitarianism holding to the view that the Father is the fountainhead of the Trinity. All 3 contain all the attributes of God. I think love between Father, Son and Holy Spirit far far outweighs any sort of superior role scenario.



Trinitarians: How can a supposedly equal Son subject himself to a supposedly equal Father? Subjection means you, in this case, hand over to God a completed assignment which will be a completely peaceful and transformed new system as opposed to what we have now. Further no mention was made to the third equal party in this, that of the holy spirit. How could the Son give back something or even be given it if they are all equal? This is why many of us "heretics" understand the trinity to be of unscriptual basis and it is as the title of the thread states it is wrong.

It appears to me you don't quite understand what trinitarianism teaches. Seems like you're trying to cram 3 Gods into 1 God simply because of this superior role thing. It is easily observable that the Father has given all authority over to the Son and the Son shall give it back at some point in time. The HS is the quiet one.;) None of them have a complex about it. I do respectfully so state.

As a JW, I wonder how you'd explain the verse I posted above,

Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

The Father has called the Son, God. Why would the Father call a created angel (Michael), God? That's the one that is a stickey wicket.
 
Upvote 0
Mar 9, 2009
98
0
✟22,708.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Engaged
The son has subjected himself to the Father in His human nature not His divine nature.

It was believed Jesus Christ is God right from the beginning. This is what St Ignatius had to say:

Letter to the Romans Address (c.110 AD)
“Ignatius, also called Theophorus, to the Church that has found mercy in
the greatness of the Most High Father and in Jesus Christ, His only Son: to
the Church beloved and enlightened after the love of Jesus Christ, our God,
by the will of Him that has willed everything which is: to the Church also
which holds the presidency in the place of the country of the Romans ... To
those who are united in flesh and in spirit by every commandment of His,
who are filled with the grace of God without wavering, and who are filtered
clear of every foreign stain, I wish an unalloyed joy in Jesus Christ, our
God.”


St Ignatius was the student of St John the Gospel writer, there was no third party involved. This is evidence to show that even St John the Gospel writer believed Jesus Christ is God.

God bless,
 
Upvote 0

chingchang

Newbie
Jul 17, 2008
2,038
101
New Braunfels, Texas
✟25,259.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
"Everyone has bias," and Ehrman the atheist counted on that. Controversy sells. I don't need to read Ehrman's bias, Wallace addressed many of Bart's misrepresentations in the linked review. Try reading the rebuttal of a 30+ years Greek scholar who knows, better than Ehrman, what he is talking about.

For the record...Ehrman is Agnostic now. You must consider his experience and life-trail to understand how he got there. This is key. He reveals this...and his bias...at the beginning of the book. I already know what people think that believe the Bible is the 'inerrant Word of God'. They generally accept that 'fact' on faith instead of doing the research and looking into the history of the Church. The more one evaluates the facts...and the writtings of some of the earliest Church Fathers...the closer one gets to the truth about the Bible. If you don't think it is possible that our 'scriptures' have been corrupted...read this from your 'inerrant' Bible...

Jeremiah 8:8 (NIV):
" 'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?

I'm no expert...but Ehrman is. You limit your truth-search when you aren't willing to test your faith. Read the book for yourself if you're interested in the subject and then use the Holy Spirit to be discerning about it. Ehrman's critics have bias...and they can't handle the fact that their Bible may not be perfect...so they're determined to discredit Ehrman by exposing his bias with no admission to their own.

This is getting a tad off-topic...but I believe a proper understanding of this issue will help us discern whether or not the doctrine of the Trinity is false or not. For those bent on their belief that the Bible is the 'inerrant Word of God'...answer me this...which English version of Matthew 17:21 is inerrant?

Hugs,
CC
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,103
6,134
EST
✟1,120,961.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
For the record...Ehrman is Agnostic now. You must consider his experience and life-trail to understand how he got there. This is key. He reveals this...and his bias...at the beginning of the book. I already know what people think that believe the Bible is the 'inerrant Word of God'. They generally accept that 'fact' on faith instead of doing the research and looking into the history of the Church. The more one evaluates the facts...and the writtings of some of the earliest Church Fathers...the closer one gets to the truth about the Bible. If you don't think it is possible that our 'scriptures' have been corrupted...read this from your 'inerrant' Bible...

Ehrman himself said he did not believe there was a God in charge of all this. That = atheist.
Jeremiah 8:8 (NIV):
" 'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?

As yes, the standard out-of-context proof text. If this means that lying scribes corrupted the text why did God punish the "wise men?" How could they reject the "word of YHWH," when, according to you, they did NOT even have the word, only lies?
Jer 8:9 The wise men are ashamed, they are dismayed and taken: lo, they have rejected the word of the LORD; and what wisdom is in them?
Jer 8:10 Therefore will I give their wives unto others, and their fields to them that shall inherit them: for every one from the least even unto the greatest is given to covetousness, from the prophet even unto the priest every one dealeth falsely.​

I'm no expert...but Ehrman is. You limit your truth-search when you aren't willing to test your faith. Read the book for yourself if you're interested in the subject and then use the Holy Spirit to be discerning about it. Ehrman's critics have bias...and they can't handle the fact that their Bible may not be perfect...so they're determined to discredit Ehrman by exposing his bias with no admission to their own.

Let me know when you follow your own advice and read Wallace, unless, "You limit your truth-search when you aren't willing to test your faith?"

This is getting a tad off-topic...but I believe a proper understanding of this issue will help us discern whether or not the doctrine of the Trinity is false or not. For those bent on their belief that the Bible is the 'inerrant Word of God'...answer me this...which English version of Matthew 17:21 is inerrant?

I don't rely on English versions, I read both Biblical languages and have for over 3 decades. My God is able to do exactly what he said he would, His word "will not return unto him void but will accomplish whereunto he has sent it. " and "One jot or one tittle will not pass from the law until ALL is fulfilled."
 
Upvote 0

2ducklow

angel duck
Jul 29, 2005
8,631
125
✟9,570.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
For the record...Ehrman is Agnostic now. You must consider his experience and life-trail to understand how he got there. This is key. He reveals this...and his bias...at the beginning of the book. I already know what people think that believe the Bible is the 'inerrant Word of God'. They generally accept that 'fact' on faith instead of doing the research and looking into the history of the Church. The more one evaluates the facts...and the writtings of some of the earliest Church Fathers...the closer one gets to the truth about the Bible. If you don't think it is possible that our 'scriptures' have been corrupted...read this from your 'inerrant' Bible...

Jeremiah 8:8 (NIV):
" 'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?

I'm no expert...but Ehrman is. You limit your truth-search when you aren't willing to test your faith. Read the book for yourself if you're interested in the subject and then use the Holy Spirit to be discerning about it. Ehrman's critics have bias...and they can't handle the fact that their Bible may not be perfect...so they're determined to discredit Ehrman by exposing his bias with no admission to their own.

This is getting a tad off-topic...but I believe a proper understanding of this issue will help us discern whether or not the doctrine of the Trinity is false or not. For those bent on their belief that the Bible is the 'inerrant Word of God'...answer me this...which English version of Matthew 17:21 is inerrant?

Hugs,
CC
"
17.21 omit verse {B} I

Since there is no good reason why the passage, if 'originally present in Matthew, should have been omitted, and since copyists frequently inserted material 'derived from another Gospel, it appears that most manuscripts have been assimilated to

the parallel in Mk 9.29, "

A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Bruce Metzger , UBS, 1975, page 43.

Not a biggie though since matthew 17.21 says the same thing as the undisputed mark 9.29. The UBS is pretty sure it is spurious in matthew 17.21. probably cause it doesn't exist in early manuscripts.


I haven't read Ehrman's book, but it is a fact that no complete manuscript of the b ible exists prior to the 4th century, and it is a fact that the first 300 years of christianity were ripe with spurious additions and deletions to the bible. It is unlikely in the extreme, that no spurious additions to the bible escaped detection. Some of them had to slip in, but in most cases, probably all cases, one can determine the truth from scripture. If a scripture doesn't line up with other scripture, even if there is no evidence of it being spurious in Greek texts, then scripture condemns it, i refer specifically in this instance to matthew 28.19 which contradicts maybe 10 scriptures that say to baptise in Jesus name. Plus we have the writings of early christians as a witness. So the truth about what the word of god actually says is out there for the one who digs, for the one who is open to the leading of the holy spirit. It has been said that something like 95 percent of the b ible is indisputable, and really there are only about 50 spurious scriptures that affect doctrine. the only one that cannot be proven to be spurious from greek manuscripts is matthew28. 19 all others have paper trails in the Greek manuscripts, So God did leave his word for us, and for those who are sure of their faith, it is no problem to read ehrman and examine the evidence for any scripture. Those that want to bury their heads in the sand so to speak and not face the facts and hold on to false doctrine at all costs, will not examine the evidence.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

chingchang

Newbie
Jul 17, 2008
2,038
101
New Braunfels, Texas
✟25,259.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
"
17.21 omit verse {B} I

Since there is no good reason why the passage, if 'originally present in Matthew, should have been omitted, and since copyists frequently inserted material 'derived from another Gospel, it appears that most manuscripts have been assimilated to

the parallel in Mk 9.29, "

A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Bruce Metzger , UBS, 1975, page 43.

Not a biggie though since matthew 17.21 says the same thing as the undisputed mark 9.29. The UBS is pretty sure it is spurious in matthew 17.21. probably cause it doesn't exist in early manuscripts.


I haven't read Ehrman's book, but it is a fact that no complete manuscript of the b ible exists prior to the 4th century, and it is a fact that the first 300 years of christianity were ripe with spurious additions and deletions to the bible. It is unlikely in the extreme, that no spurious additions to the bible escaped detection. Some of them had to slip in, but in most cases, probably all cases, one can determine the truth from scripture. If a scripture doesn't line up with other scripture, even if there is no evidence of it being spurious in Greek texts, then scripture condemns it, i refer specifically in this instance to matthew 28.19 which contradicts maybe 10 scriptures that say to baptise in Jesus name. Plus we have the writings of early christians as a witness. So the truth about what the word of god actually says is out there for the one who digs, for the one who is open to the leading of the holy spirit. It has been said that something like 95 percent of the b ible is indisputable, and really there are only about 50 spurious scriptures that affect doctrine. the only one that cannot be proven to be spurious from greek manuscripts is matthew28. 19 all others have paper trails in the Greek manuscripts, So God did leave his word for us, and for those who are sure of their faith, it is no problem to read ehrman and examine the evidence for any scripture. Those that want to bury their heads in the sand so to speak and not face the facts and hold on to false doctrine at all costs, will not examine the evidence.

Thank you for your insight...and I couldn't agree more with you. I truly believe that the 'Word of God' is contained within the Bible...but that the Bible itself is not the 'Word of God'. I feel better knowing that I'm not a Lone-Ranger...although I am prepared to be one if necessary...

Hugs,
CC
 
Upvote 0

chingchang

Newbie
Jul 17, 2008
2,038
101
New Braunfels, Texas
✟25,259.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
I don't rely on English versions, I read both Biblical languages and have for over 3 decades. My God is able to do exactly what he said he would, His word "will not return unto him void but will accomplish whereunto he has sent it. " and "One jot or one tittle will not pass from the law until ALL is fulfilled."

O.k...then which Greek source documents do you use given that they are all not exact copies of one another? Which one is the 'inerrant' copy?

And...if you had to choose an English version of Matthew 17:21...which would you choose?

TIA,
CC
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,103
6,134
EST
✟1,120,961.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
O.k...then which Greek source documents do you use given that they are all not exact copies of one another? Which one is the 'inerrant' copy?

NA27/USB4. Try reading the available scholarship on N.T. manuscripts.

And...if you had to choose an English version of Matthew 17:21...which would you choose?

Irrelevant question.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,103
6,134
EST
✟1,120,961.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
[ . . . ]It is unlikely in the extreme, that no spurious additions to the bible escaped detection. Some of them had to slip in, but in most cases, probably all cases, one can determine the truth from scripture.

Logical fallacy! Argument from assumption and speculation.

If a scripture doesn't line up with other scripture, even if there is no evidence of it being spurious in Greek texts, then scripture condemns it, [An unsupported assumption!] i refer specifically in this instance to matthew 28.19 which contradicts maybe 10 scriptures that say to baptise in Jesus name. Plus we have the writings of early christians as a witness.

A contradiction is when one thing says something totally different than another, e.g. "'A' says the paper is black." and "'B' says the paper is white." A verse which says, "Baptize in the name of Jesus." does NOT mean "Don't also baptize in the name of the Father and the Spirit!" Yes, we do have the early church as a witness. If the Triadic formula in Matt 28:19 is spurious why is it the entire early church quoted it?
To verify citations, [ECF Link]

1. Ignatius – The Epistle to the Philadelphians [30-107 a.d.], [a disciple of John.] [218 + years before Nicaea]

Chapter IX.-The Old Testament is Good: the New Testament is Better

"Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
" All then are good together, the law, the prophets, the apostles, the whole company [of others] that have believed through them: only if we love one another.

2. Irenaeus – Against Heresies Book III [a.d. 120-202.], [a student of Polycarp, who was a disciple of John.] [123 + years before Nicaea]

That is the Spirit of whom the Lord declares, "For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you."308 And again, giving to the disciples the power of regeneration into God,309 He [Jesus] said to them," Go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. "

3. Justin – 1st Apology Chapter LXI.-Christian Baptism. [110-165 a.d. ][ca. 175 years before Nicaea]


Then they are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, "Except ye be born again, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.127

4. Tertullian – The Prescription Against Heretics.1 [a.d. 145-220] [105 + years before Nicaea]

Accordingly, after one of these had been struck off, He [Jesus] commanded the eleven others, on His departure to the Father, to "go and teach all nations, who were to be baptized into the Father, and into the Son, and into the Holy Ghost." 203

4a. Tertullian – On Baptism. [105 + years before Nicaea]

For the law of baptizing has been imposed, and the formula prescribed: "Go," He saith, "teach the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. "

5. The Extant Works and Fragments of Hippolytus. – Part II. – Dogmatical and Historical. (c.170-c.236). [89 + years before Nicaea]

The Father's Word, therefore, knowing the economy (disposition) and the will of the Father, to wit, that the Father seeks to be worshipped in none other way than this, [Jesus] gave this charge to the disciples after He rose from the dead: "Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. "265 And by this He showed, that whosoever omitted any one of these, failed in glorifying God perfectly. For it is through this Trinity that the Father is glorified. For the Father willed, the Son did, the Spirit manifested. The whole Scriptures, then, proclaim this truth.

6. Cyprian – Treatise XII.1 – Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews. [c.200-258][67 + years before Nicaea]

And He laid His right hand upon me, and said, Fear not; I am the first and the last, and He that liveth and was dead; and, lo, I am living for evermore289 and I have the keys of death and of hell."290 Likewise in the Gospel, the Lord after His resurrection says to His disciples: "All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.

7. Origen – de Principiis Book I [c.185-c.254] [71+ years before Nicaea]


From all which we learn that the person of the Holy Spirit was of such authority and dignity, that saving baptism was not complete except by the authority of the most excellent Trinity of them all, i.e., by the naming of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and by joining to the unbegotten God the Father, and to His only-begotten Son, the name also of the Holy Spirit.

8. The Lord's Teaching Through the Twelve Apostles to the Nations. –
Chapter VII. – Concerning Baptism. [120 AD][205 years before Nicaea]


1. And concerning baptism,73 thus baptize ye:74 [Jesus] Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,75 in living water.76 2. But if thou have not living water, baptize into other water; and if thou3canst not in cold, in warm. 3. But if thou have not either, pour out water thrice77 upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. 4. But before the baptism let the 4 baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whatever others can; but thou shalt order the baptized to fast one or two days before.

9. Constitutions of the Holy Apostles – Book II. Of Bishops, Presbyters, and Deacons. [Late 2d to early 3d century] [100 + years before Nicaea]

Let the presbyters be esteemed by you to represent us the apostles, and let them be the teachers of divine knowledge; since our Lord, when He sent us, said, "Go ye, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you."

10. Life and Conduct of the Holy Women Xanthippe, Polyxena, and Rebecca [mid 3d century] [75 years before Nicaea]

XIV.
Therefore the great Paul straightway taking her hand, went into the house of Philotheus, and baptised her in the name of the Father and of the Son and the Holy Ghost.

11. Tatian – The Diatessaron [ca. 175] [150 years before Nicaea]

Then said Jesus unto them, I have been given all authority in heaven 5 and earth; and as my Father hath sent me, so I also send you. Go now into [sup]6[/sup] all the world, and preach my gospel in all the creation; and teach all the peoples, and 7 baptize them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; and teach them to keep all whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you all the days, unto 8 the end of the world.

At the seventh Council of Carthage in 256 [69 years before Nicaea], a bishop named Vincentius of Thibaris said, "We have assuredly the rule of truth which the Lord by His divine precept commanded to His apostles, saying, 'Go ye, lay on hands in My name, expel demons.' And in another place: "Go ye and teach the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.'" Vincentius' second quotation is from Matthew 28:19. Despite attempts by some interpreters to connect the first quotation to Matthew 10:8, the references to going, laying on hands, expelling demons, and doing so in My name add up to a reference to Mark 16:15- 18, especially when placed side-by-side with the parallel passage from Matthew

Seventh Council of Carthage - Concerning the Baptism of Heretics. The Judgment of Eighty-Seven Bishops on the Baptism of Heretics. 256 a.d. [69 years before Nicaea]

12.
Lucius of Castra Galbae said: Since the Lord in His Gospel said, "Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt should have lost its savour, wherewith shall it be salted? It is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out of doors, and to be trodden under foot of men." And again, after His resurrection, sending His apostles, He [Jesus] gave them charge, saying, "All power is given unto me, in heaven and in earth. Go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

13.
Munnulus of Girba said: The truth of our Mother6 the Catholic Church, brethren, hath always remained and still remains with us, and even especially in the Trinity of baptism, as our Lord says, "Go ye and baptize the nations, in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. "

14.
Euchratius of Thenae said: God and our Lord Jesus Christ, teaching the apostles with His own mouth, has entirely completed our faith, and the grace of baptism, and the rule of the ecclesiastical law, saying: "Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

15.
Vincentius of Thibaris said: We know that heretics are worse than Gentiles. If, therefore, being converted, they should wish to come to the Lord, we have assuredly the rule of truth which the Lord by His divine precept commanded to His apostles, saying, "Go ye, lay on hands in my name, expel demons." And in another place: "Go ye and teach the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."​

the only one that cannot be proven to be spurious from greek manuscripts is matthew28. 19 all others have paper trails in the Greek manuscripts, So God did leave his word for us, and for those who are sure of their faith, it is no problem to read ehrman and examine the evidence for any scripture. Those that want to bury their heads in the sand so to speak and not face the facts and hold on to false doctrine at all costs, will not examine the evidence.

Strange you accuse people who will not read Ehrman of not examining the evidence. It appears that those who want to cite Ehrman, the atheist, as the be all, end all N.T. scholar, refuse to read scholarship which proves him wrong.
 
Upvote 0
Mar 9, 2009
98
0
✟22,708.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Engaged
The son has subjected himself to the Father in His human nature not His divine nature.

It was believed Jesus Christ is God right from the beginning. This is what St Ignatius had to say:

Letter to the Romans Address (c.110 AD)
“Ignatius, also called Theophorus, to the Church that has found mercy in
the greatness of the Most High Father and in Jesus Christ, His only Son: to
the Church beloved and enlightened after the love of Jesus Christ, our God,
by the will of Him that has willed everything which is: to the Church also
which holds the presidency in the place of the country of the Romans ... To
those who are united in flesh and in spirit by every commandment of His,
who are filled with the grace of God without wavering, and who are filtered
clear of every foreign stain, I wish an unalloyed joy in Jesus Christ, our
God.”


St Ignatius was the student of St John the Gospel writer, there was no third party involved. This is evidence to show that even St John the Gospel writer believed Jesus Christ is God.

God bless,

I would be most grateful if a non-believer would be kind enough to reply to my post...
 
Upvote 0

2ducklow

angel duck
Jul 29, 2005
8,631
125
✟9,570.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Logical fallacy! Argument from assumption and speculation
A contradiction is when one thing says something totally different than another, e.g. "'A' says the paper is black." and "'B' says the paper is white." A verse which says, "Baptize in the name of Jesus." does NOT mean "Don't also baptize in the name of the Father and the Spirit!" Yes, we do have the early church as a witness. If the Triadic formula in Matt 28:19 is spurious why is it the entire early church quoted it?
To verify citations, [ECF Link]
1. Ignatius – The Epistle to the Philadelphians [30-107 a.d.], [a disciple of John.] [218 + years before Nicaea]

Chapter IX.-The Old Testament is Good: the New Testament is Better

"Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." All then are good together, the law, the prophets, the apostles, the whole company [of others] that have believed through them: only if we love one another.

2. Irenaeus – Against Heresies Book III [a.d. 120-202.], [a student of Polycarp, who was a disciple of John.] [123 + years before Nicaea]

That is the Spirit of whom the Lord declares, "For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you."308 And again, giving to the disciples the power of regeneration into God,309 He [Jesus] said to them," Go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. "

3. Justin – 1st Apology Chapter LXI.-Christian Baptism. [110-165 a.d. ][ca. 175 years before Nicaea]

Then they are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, "Except ye be born again, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.127

4. Tertullian – The Prescription Against Heretics.1 [a.d. 145-220] [105 + years before Nicaea]

Accordingly, after one of these had been struck off, He [Jesus] commanded the eleven others, on His departure to the Father, to "go and teach all nations, who were to be baptized into the Father, and into the Son, and into the Holy Ghost." 203

4a. Tertullian – On Baptism. [105 + years before Nicaea]

For the law of baptizing has been imposed, and the formula prescribed: "Go," He saith, "teach the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. "

5. The Extant Works and Fragments of Hippolytus. – Part II. – Dogmatical and Historical. (c.170-c.236). [89 + years before Nicaea]

The Father's Word, therefore, knowing the economy (disposition) and the will of the Father, to wit, that the Father seeks to be worshipped in none other way than this, [Jesus] gave this charge to the disciples after He rose from the dead: "Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. "265 And by this He showed, that whosoever omitted any one of these, failed in glorifying God perfectly. For it is through this Trinity that the Father is glorified. For the Father willed, the Son did, the Spirit manifested. The whole Scriptures, then, proclaim this truth.

6. Cyprian – Treatise XII.1 – Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews. [c.200-258][67 + years before Nicaea]

And He laid His right hand upon me, and said, Fear not; I am the first and the last, and He that liveth and was dead; and, lo, I am living for evermore289 and I have the keys of death and of hell."290 Likewise in the Gospel, the Lord after His resurrection says to His disciples: "All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.

7. Origen – de Principiis Book I [c.185-c.254] [71+ years before Nicaea]

From all which we learn that the person of the Holy Spirit was of such authority and dignity, that saving baptism was not complete except by the authority of the most excellent Trinity of them all, i.e., by the naming of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and by joining to the unbegotten God the Father, and to His only-begotten Son, the name also of the Holy Spirit.

8. The Lord's Teaching Through the Twelve Apostles to the Nations. –
Chapter VII. – Concerning Baptism. [120 AD][205 years before Nicaea]

1. And concerning baptism,73 thus baptize ye:74 [Jesus] Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,75 in living water.76 2. But if thou have not living water, baptize into other water; and if thou3canst not in cold, in warm. 3. But if thou have not either, pour out water thrice77 upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. 4. But before the baptism let the 4 baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whatever others can; but thou shalt order the baptized to fast one or two days before.

9. Constitutions of the Holy Apostles – Book II. Of Bishops, Presbyters, and Deacons. [Late 2d to early 3d century] [100 + years before Nicaea]

Let the presbyters be esteemed by you to represent us the apostles, and let them be the teachers of divine knowledge; since our Lord, when He sent us, said, "Go ye, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you."

10. Life and Conduct of the Holy Women Xanthippe, Polyxena, and Rebecca [mid 3d century] [75 years before Nicaea]

XIV. Therefore the great Paul straightway taking her hand, went into the house of Philotheus, and baptised her in the name of the Father and of the Son and the Holy Ghost.

11. Tatian – The Diatessaron [ca. 175] [150 years before Nicaea]

Then said Jesus unto them, I have been given all authority in heaven 5 and earth; and as my Father hath sent me, so I also send you. Go now into [sup]6[/sup] all the world, and preach my gospel in all the creation; and teach all the peoples, and 7 baptize them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; and teach them to keep all whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you all the days, unto 8 the end of the world.

At the seventh Council of Carthage in 256 [69 years before Nicaea], a bishop named Vincentius of Thibaris said, "We have assuredly the rule of truth which the Lord by His divine precept commanded to His apostles, saying, 'Go ye, lay on hands in My name, expel demons.' And in another place: "Go ye and teach the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.'" Vincentius' second quotation is from Matthew 28:19. Despite attempts by some interpreters to connect the first quotation to Matthew 10:8, the references to going, laying on hands, expelling demons, and doing so in My name add up to a reference to Mark 16:15- 18, especially when placed side-by-side with the parallel passage from Matthew

Seventh Council of Carthage - Concerning the Baptism of Heretics. The Judgment of Eighty-Seven Bishops on the Baptism of Heretics. 256 a.d. [69 years before Nicaea]

12. Lucius of Castra Galbae said: Since the Lord in His Gospel said, "Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt should have lost its savour, wherewith shall it be salted? It is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out of doors, and to be trodden under foot of men." And again, after His resurrection, sending His apostles, He [Jesus] gave them charge, saying, "All power is given unto me, in heaven and in earth. Go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

13. Munnulus of Girba said: The truth of our Mother6 the Catholic Church, brethren, hath always remained and still remains with us, and even especially in the Trinity of baptism, as our Lord says, "Go ye and baptize the nations, in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. "

14. Euchratius of Thenae said: God and our Lord Jesus Christ, teaching the apostles with His own mouth, has entirely completed our faith, and the grace of baptism, and the rule of the ecclesiastical law, saying: "Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

15. Vincentius of Thibaris said: We know that heretics are worse than Gentiles. If, therefore, being converted, they should wish to come to the Lord, we have assuredly the rule of truth which the Lord by His divine precept commanded to His apostles, saying, "Go ye, lay on hands in my name, expel demons." And in another place: "Go ye and teach the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
Strange you accuse people who will not read Ehrman of not examining the evidence. It appears that those who want to cite Ehrman, the atheist, as the be all, end all N.T. scholar, refuse to read scholarship which proves him wrong.
Verbs have no subjects, nouns have no adjectives, sentences have no words, paragraphs have no sentences, book chapters have no paragraphs, books have no chapters, libraries have no books, the action of is, is is an action verb. What is the cause of is? what is the cause of become? what is the c ause of accuse? what is the cause of appears? whAT is the cause of refuse? Please tell me what kind of action is is. How exactly does someone is? because using your grammar rules I have no idea what anything you've said means above. It's a mystery. But then on the other hand , I ain't no college prof, so I's probably incapable of understanding sentences where the verb has no subject, nouns have no adjectives, and verbs have no adverbs. But course you college profs understand it real good, see if i's smarter i'd of said well but Idon'ts know grammar that good likes you do. maybe someday fore i die ill go back to college and learn that grammar stuff like verbs have no subjects, nouns have no adjectives, verbs have no adverbs, verbs have no direct objects, verbs have no indirect objects but then maybe not cause I'm 60 and prob too old to learn new tricks.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

k2svpete

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2008
837
42
48
Australia
✟16,298.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I'm a believer, in God and Jesus etc. but not in the trinitarian error.

What your post demonstrates is that a man Ignatius refers to Jesus as God. It does not reflect that this was the belief of John, even if this man did fellowship with him.

The reference to the Romans sounds alarm bells as the church that ended up being established in Rome was a melding of Christian and pagan beliefs, gods, and structures.

Contrast that with the rebuke Jesus gave to the people who referred to him as 'good' 'Why call me good as there is none good except for God?' If it wasn't an issue, he wouldn't have corrected them.
 
Upvote 0

Bananna

Contributor
Site Supporter
Apr 26, 2005
6,969
447
PNW
Visit site
✟76,962.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']all,[/FONT]
[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']For the sake of polite speech - please don't call anyone’s views "error". Just state your view as yours and their view as their view. [/FONT]
[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif'][/FONT]
[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']That said,[/FONT]
[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']Der Alter you are still skipping key lines of proofing. It is still hinging on what appears a variable definition here and there and a final authority of what you believe. Some times it is not even clear what trinitarian view you are defending.[/FONT]
[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif'][/FONT]
[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']Bananna[/FONT]
[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif'][/FONT]
 
Upvote 0
Mar 9, 2009
98
0
✟22,708.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Engaged
I'm a believer, in God and Jesus etc. but not in the trinitarian error.

What your post demonstrates is that a man Ignatius refers to Jesus as God. It does not reflect that this was the belief of John, even if this man did fellowship with him.

The reference to the Romans sounds alarm bells as the church that ended up being established in Rome was a melding of Christian and pagan beliefs, gods, and structures.

Contrast that with the rebuke Jesus gave to the people who referred to him as 'good' 'Why call me good as there is none good except for God?' If it wasn't an issue, he wouldn't have corrected them.

There is no indication St Ignatius (the 3rd Bishop of Rome) disagreed with St John. There was always harmony between the two or else he would not have been appointed Bishop.

You quoted an interesting passage from the Bible. What makes you think your intrepretation of that passage is the correct one?

God bless,
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,103
6,134
EST
✟1,120,961.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I'm a believer, in God and Jesus etc. but not in the trinitarian error.

What your post demonstrates is that a man Ignatius refers to Jesus as God. It does not reflect that this was the belief of John, even if this man did fellowship with him.

The reference to the Romans sounds alarm bells as the church that ended up being established in Rome was a melding of Christian and pagan beliefs, gods, and structures.

Contrast that with the rebuke Jesus gave to the people who referred to him as 'good' 'Why call me good as there is none good except for God?' If it wasn't an issue, he wouldn't have corrected them.

I cited the writings of the early church to show what was taught by the entire church, as reflected in the only existing history of that church, in the first few centuries.

I have often heard the accusation that "the church that ended up being established in Rome was a melding of Christian and pagan beliefs, gods, and structures" But I have never seen any credible, verifiable, historical evidence. That would be documents written at or near the time in question by participants or direct eye witnesses. Books, websites, etc, written in this century do NOT constitute such evidence.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,103
6,134
EST
✟1,120,961.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
That said,
Der Alter you are still skipping key lines of proofing. It is still hinging on what appears a variable definition here and there and a final authority of what you believe. Some times it is not even clear what trinitarian view you are defending.

No one has ever said that of me before. I write the way I always have, including when I was in grad school. None of my professors ever said anything like this.

If you have a specific question about one of posts, I will be glad to clarify it.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Bananna

Contributor
Site Supporter
Apr 26, 2005
6,969
447
PNW
Visit site
✟76,962.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Der Alter I'm sure it is easier to be understood by those that already agree with you and your definitions agree with theirs.

Everytime someone tells you here that you are not making sense to them - it is because you have neglected to show cause, or missed defining clearly and consistantly.
ie not adding up from what we are reading of your views.


The site statement of faith says:
God is three divine persons, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, who share one essence--the Trinity (John 6:27; John 1:1, 14; Romans 8:9; Hebrews 1:2-3).-site statement of faith

None of these verses define God as three persons. None of them use the term trinity nor explain why there are seven spirits at the foot of God's throne on High - or why the Messiah had to have seven spirits upon him.

God is a blowing wind, a burning fire, and many other things in scripture but "essence" is not a biblical description of God. The invisible God affects our lives unseen like the wind. IE using vague unrefined words like "essence" only complicates the communication.

Does the father and Yeshua smell the same "essence/aroma
Is God phylisophically one with Messiah? Essence/believe alike
existance of the immaterial entity/essence.

Well we know that Christ can't be immaterial. We also know that the immiterial have nothing to share as one other than concepts and ideas.

We are one in the spirit/ we are one body as we work together in Christ. WE are one body in service to God.

Our Lord, God and Savior, Jesus Christ, the incarnate second person of the Holy Trinity, fully God and fully man (John 1:1, 14) - site statement of faith

Trinity not mentioned in either verse and no "triunity" mentioned. Neither is the word "incarnate" used.

No Messianic Scriptures to support these traditions.

"in the beginning was the word[of God]"
God is what he speaks and does. Before written words, was Torah. And God said let there be, and it was.

And the Word/flesh came infused with grace and truth.

Literaly Messiah was given seven spirits. Holiness, wisdom, might, discernement ect.

Yeshua given the Holyspirit of God without measure, over flowing.

Isa 11:2And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD;
Mat 3:16And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:
Rev 1:4John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace [be] unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;
copyChkboxOff.gif
Rev 3:1And unto the angel of the church in Sardis write; These things saith he that hath the seven Spirits of God, and the seven stars; I know thy works, that thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead.
copyChkboxOff.gif
Rev 4:5And 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.
copyChkboxOff.gif
Rev 5:6And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.

This makes Christ filled with God's devine aspects, but not equal to the imo Father.
 
Upvote 0

ostrich

Junior Member
Mar 20, 2009
32
1
✟22,657.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
god is one god, but there are three different ways of viewing him.

The Father: the bible states that god is love. The father is the overarching description of god, The father is what god "is", the father is gods nature.

The Son: The son is the fathers human embodiment, the son IS the father but in a human form, a form we can begin to understand, and a form which can communicate with us.

The holy spirit: the holy spirit IS the father but in the context of our lives, the holy spirit is the god that resides in us.

they are three different views of exactly the same god.
Its like walking around a triangular pyramid, the pyramid is one object with three different faces.
 
Upvote 0

Tu Es Petrus

Well-Known Member
Dec 10, 2008
2,410
311
✟4,037.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Trinity is wrong

God is ONE: One being, three persons. A human is one being and one person: A cat or dog is one being and NO persons: God is one being and THREE persons. We can not FULLY understand the Trinity, but the scripures are pretty plain that God IS Trinity:

Jesus tells his apostles to baptize "in the name [notice, singular, not plural] of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt. 28:19). This is a proof-text: three distinct Persons united in the one divine name. In 2 Corinthians 13:14, Paul writes, "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all." We see this same unity of divine Persons in 1 Corinthians 12:4–11, Ephesians 4:4–6, and 1 Peter 1:2–3.

The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus is God (cf. John 8:58, 10:38, 14:10; Col. 2:9). It also clearly teaches that the Holy Spirit is God (cf. Acts 5:3–4, 28:25–28; 1 Cor. 2:10–13). Everyone agrees the Father is God. Yet there is only one God (Mark 12:29, 1 Cor. 8:4–6, Jas. 2:19). How can we hold all four truths except to say all three are One God?

And yes, Jesus DID say he was God. In John 8:58, when quizzed about how he has special knowledge of Abraham, Jesus replies, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I Am"—invoking and applying to himself the personal name of God—"I Am" (Ex. 3:14). His audience understood exactly what he was claiming about himself. "So they took up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple" (John 8:59).

Also significant are passages that apply the title "the First and the Last" to Jesus. This is one of the Old Testament titles of Yahweh: "Thus says Yahweh, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, Yahweh of armies: ‘I am the First and I am the Last; besides me there is no god’" (Is. 44:6; cf. 41:4, 48:12).
 
Upvote 0