Jump to content
IGNORED

What is the doctrine of the Trinity?


angels4u

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  56
  • Topic Count:  1,664
  • Topics Per Day:  0.20
  • Content Count:  19,763
  • Content Per Day:  2.39
  • Reputation:   12,160
  • Days Won:  28
  • Joined:  08/22/2001
  • Status:  Offline

54 minutes ago, appy said:

A person will never understand the teaching and concept of the trinity without one important factor. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Because it is He who reveals this to us. Yes the bible teaches that there is only one God. God is in heaven and man is on earth so our understanding of him and all he is. . . is limited. No matter how smart we humans are; we can never fully understand it because we are earthly humans who are talking about heavenly things. Colossians 2:9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form. This is to mean and say Jesus is fully man and fully God at the same time. God is a trinity of persons consisting of one substance and one essence but only ONE God. These verses speak of the trinity.

1 Corinthians 2:14 The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned 

 

John 10:30 I and the Father are one

Isaiah 48: 16 – 17 "Come near me and listen to this: "From the first announcement I have not spoken in secret; at the time it happens, I am there." And now the Sovereign LORD has sent me, endowed with his Spirit. This is what the LORD says-- your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel: "I am the LORD your God, who teaches you what is best for you, who directs you in the way you should go.

Matthew 3;16 - 17 As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."

Matthew 28: 18-19 Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

John 14:24-26 These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me. All this I have spoken while still with you. But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

Hebrews 1: 1-3 In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.

Quote

A person will never understand the teaching and concept of the trinity without one important factor. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit. 

Amen Appy, only believers in Jesus will understand who the Holy Spirit is ..

  • This is Worthy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  69
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  1,625
  • Content Per Day:  0.80
  • Reputation:   2,033
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  09/10/2018
  • Status:  Offline

16 minutes ago, angels4u said:

May I ask if you believe that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are God indeed

Sure. I believe that Elohim is echad (one, unified). Comprising of the Father, Yahweh, His son, the Lord Yahushua (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit.  They are distinct and yet echad. 

The english word, God, makes this matter more difficult to comprehend. The Hebrew equivalent word, Elohim, allows for this understanding easily. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  125
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  2,082
  • Content Per Day:  0.57
  • Reputation:   500
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  04/03/2014
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  09/15/1956

I need to read through this thread sometime

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Non-Trinitarian
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  62
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  842
  • Content Per Day:  0.47
  • Reputation:   111
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  04/24/2019
  • Status:  Offline

It's a lie from the pits of hell, accepted by those who have no idea about the Hebrew Scriptures and meanings, nor about how the English Bible was manipulated and does not line up at all with the Original Greek nor the Latin Vulgate, that were in existence 1600 and 1100 years before the KJV was ever created!!

 

It irks me that people act and believe the English version Bible was the first Bible.   Most have no idea that the Old Testament comes from the Hebrew Canon, so they never read the Hebrew Canon to get educated.   Very little know that the New Testament Greek and the first translation of the Greek (Latin Vulgate) are word for word.   And when you compare the English KJV, there were changes to Matthew 28:19 and changes to 1 John 5:6-8.

 

KJV

1 John 5:

6 This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.

7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

 

Greek

1 John 5:

 6 This is He Who is coming through water and blood and spirit - Jesus Christ - not in the water only, but in the water and in the blood. And the spirit it is which is testifying, for the spirit is the truth, 

7 seeing that three there are that are testifying, 

8 the spirit, and the water, and the blood, and the three are for the one thing."

 

Latin Vulgate (5th Century)

1 John 5:

6 hic est qui venit per aquam et sanguinem Iesus Christus non in aqua solum sed in aqua et sanguine et Spiritus est qui testificatur quoniam Christus est veritas

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. 
 

7 quia tres sunt qui testimonium dant

And there are Three who give testimony

 

8  Spiritus et aqua et sanguis et tres unum sunt

the spirit and the water and the blood. And these three are one. 

 

 

***As you clearly see, VERSE 7 of the original Greek and Latin Vulgate verify one another, and the KJV is nowhere close to the manuscripts that are 1100/1600 years older.   Obvious tampering by the English to add Father-Son-Holy Spirit to verse 7***

 

 

And we know in the 4th Century, Yeshua's words were changed from Baptize in MY NAME to the trinity version.

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 fourth century."

 

With one word and voice He said to His disciples: “Go, baptize and make disciples of all nations in My Name, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you,” — (Proof of the Gospel by Eusebius, Book III, ch 6, 132 (a), p. 152)

 

Who said to them; “Baptize and make disciples of all the nations in my Name.” — (Eusebius, Proof of the Gospel, Book III, Chapter 7, 138 (c), p. 159)

 

Even the Catholic Bible Catechism explains Matthew 28:19 was changed from Baptize in MY NAME to the trinity (I added a picture but its at bottom of page : read last paragraph)

 

 

Many have no idea that the word ELOHIM in the Hebrew Language means ONE , not plural.

Elohim in Biblical Hebrew and in Modern Hebrew, is referred to the singular despite the -im ending that denotes plural masculine nouns in Hebrew.

 

Many have no idea that in Genesis 1:26 "Let us make man in our image," is God speaking to His Divine Council.   And that God ALWAYS speaks to His Divine Council before making Decisions in matters pertaining to mankind and specifically during Creation.

Names of the Council

The gatherings of God’s servants have several titles:

(“mount of assembly” — Isa 14:13, a mythological allusion 7); (“camp of God” — Gen 32:2);  (“company” [of destroying angels] — Ps 78:49);  (“council of God” — Job 15:8, 29:4);  (“council of YHVH” — Jer 23:18, 22);  (“council of holy ones” — Ps 89:7); (“congregation of God”— Ps 82:1);  (“assembly of holy ones” — Ps 89:6); and (court, Dan 7:10, 26).

 

 

But the real question should be:

(1) why doesn't the KJV match the OLDER VERSIONS (Greek/Latin Vulgate)?

(2) why did the English change Matthew 28:19 and 1 John 5:6-8 to include the trinity?

(3) that is clearly disobeying the Command of DO NOT ADD OR REMOVE from God's Holy Word, so why did the English do it anyways?

(4) why doesn't the KJV align with the Hebrew on the meaning of Elohim?

(5) why doesn't the KJV make the Council known that God goes before in matters where He makes decisions, not clearer for readers?

(6) why does the KJV literally DECEIVE readers by changing the WORDS spoken to us by Yeshua (God)?

catholiccatechismbaptism.jpg

Last Paragraph explains when the Baptismal Formula was changed in the 4th Century ^ from "in MY NAME" to the trinity.

Edited by childoftheking
  • Oy Vey! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Mars Hill
  • Followers:  7
  • Topic Count:  87
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  3,795
  • Content Per Day:  1.36
  • Reputation:   6
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  07/30/2016
  • Status:  Offline

55 minutes ago, childoftheking said:

It's a lie from the pits of hell, accepted by those who have no idea about the Hebrew Scriptures and meanings, nor about how the English Bible was manipulated and does not line up at all with the Original Greek nor the Latin Vulgate, that were in existence 1600 and 1100 years before the KJV was ever created!!

The Vulgate, a Latin bible, is known to be a treasure trove of Lies.  Its not accepted by modern scholarship, as it contains so many man made ideas and heretical twists on Paul's Doctrine.  Its really spiritual poison.

And there is no "original greek", as i told you last time.  There are 30 Greek texts, "extant"< and actually more then this if you count Origen's as well.

So, its like this.   You have God, and the Word, and the Holy Spirit.   Jesus is the Word who was manifested as God in the Flesh.

That's 3.  3 In One.   As you have one principle, "God'..... yet 3 manifestations including all their literal variations.... that we understand as :

 1. ) Father God  or as Jesus says...."touch me not as i have not yet ascended to your Father and MINE".

 2.) Son (Word made Flesh). 1 Timothy 3:16. "God was manifested in the Flesh"

 3.) Holy Spirit - (Spirit of Christ, - Holy Ghost -  Comforter)

Thats "3". 

"Trinity".

 

Edited by Behold
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Non-Trinitarian
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  62
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  842
  • Content Per Day:  0.47
  • Reputation:   111
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  04/24/2019
  • Status:  Offline

1 hour ago, Behold said:

The Vulgate, a Latin bible, is known to be a treasure trove of Lies.  Its not accepted by modern scholarship, as it contains so many man made ideas and heretical twists on Paul's Doctrine.  Its really spiritual poison.

And there is no "original greek", as i told you last time.  There are 30 Greek texts, "extant"< and actually more then this if you count Origen's as well.

So, its like this.   You have God, and the Word, and the Holy Spirit.   Jesus is the Word who was manifested as God in the Flesh.

That's 3.  3 In One.   As you have one principle, "God'..... yet 3 manifestations including all their literal variations.... that we understand as :

 1. ) Father God  or as Jesus says...."touch me not as i have not yet ascended to your Father and MINE".

 2.) Son (Word made Flesh). 1 Timothy 3:16. "God was manifested in the Flesh"

 3.) Holy Spirit - (Spirit of Christ, - Holy Ghost -  Comforter)

Thats "3". 

"Trinity".

 

 

 

The actual complaint of the Latin Vulgate are the [[COPIES]] of the original from the 5th Century.   You probably knew that, but to cover your side of things, You conveniently left that part out!!

 

And like I mentioned already in YOUR THREAD, the Greek copies align together enough, that EVERYONE but YOU find them ACCEPTABLE!!

 

So, knowing the truths of those Greek copies and the original Latin Vulgate, are more than enough to IGNORE YOUR OPINION!!

 

 

 

 

What I find hilarious concerning YOUR OPINION, is that YOU BELIEVE because GOD made HIMSELF into flesh (for the purpose of OUR SALVATION, TO CONQUER DEATH, TO BRING FORTH RESURRECTION, TO BE OUR EXAMPLE OF HOW WE SHOULD LIVE), that AUTOMATICALLY makes YOU ASSUME they are DIFFERENT ENTITIES!!

 

Look at Genesis 6:3

 

 גוַיֹּ֣אמֶר יְהֹוָ֗ה לֹֽא־יָד֨וֹן רוּחִ֤י בָֽאָדָם֙ לְעֹלָ֔ם בְּשַׁגָּ֖ם ה֣וּא בָשָׂ֑ר וְהָי֣וּ יָמָ֔יו מֵאָ֥ה וְעֶשְׂרִ֖ים שָׁנָֽה:

3 And the LORD said, My Spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

 

This is ELOHIM = THE ONE and ONLY PERSON OF GOD, calling the Holy Spirit His PERSONAL SPIRIT (like You and Myself have a personal spirit).   THIS IS NOT A SEPARATION BETWEEN ELOHIM and the HOLY SPIRIT!!  This is not 1st and 3rd person of the trinity!!   THIS IS THE ONE GOD BEING SPECIFIC THAT THE HOLY SPIRIT THAT LIVES INSIDE OF US IS HIS PERSONAL SPIRIT!!

 

Why do you continually DENY THE HEBREW?

Are YOU afraid of the TRUTH?

 

Another Example:

In the Gospel of John in Chapter 8, we learn that Yeshua is [[I AM]]!!

In the Book of Exodus Chapter 3, we learn that [[I AM]] [[we know I AM is Yeshua]] (speaking from the Burning Bush to Moses) told Moses WHO HE SPECIFICALLY WAS:

 

וַיֹּ֗אמֶר אָֽנֹכִי֙ אֱלֹהֵ֣י אָבִ֔יךָ אֱלֹהֵ֧י אַבְרָהָ֛ם אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִצְחָ֖ק וֵֽאלֹהֵ֣י יַֽעֲקֹ֑ב וַיַּסְתֵּ֤ר משֶׁה֙ פָּנָ֔יו כִּ֣י יָרֵ֔א מֵֽהַבִּ֖יט אֶל־הָֽאֱלֹהִֽים:

6 Moreover he said, I am the ELOHIM of thy father, the ELOHIM of Abraham, the ELOHIM of Isaac, and the ELOHIM of Jacob.

 

Yeshua [[I AM]] told Moses that HE was ELOHIM = THE ONE PERSON OF GOD!!

 

Now, add YESHUA = [[I AM]] = [[ELOHIM]] to Genesis 6:3 ((And the LORD said, My Spirit)) and you have GOD and HIS SPIRIT ((we know as the Holy Spirit)) wrapped up in the ONE PERSON of GOD!!

 

YESHUA in the Hebrew means YAHWEH'S SALVATION!!

Yahweh is known as the Father!!

YESHUA IS YAHWEH!!

 

If you add YESHUA + I AM + ELOHIM + YAHWEH + add HIS PERSONAL SPIRIT ((the HOLY SPIRIT)) = YOU GET THE ONE GOD AND THE ONE GOD'S ATTRIBUTES/MANIFESTATIONS OF FATHER-SON-HOLY SPIRIT all found in YESHUA!!

 

You just need to STOP IGNORING the HEBREW CANON, and this is what you will LEARN!!

 

 

And this ALL GOES BACK TO WHAT I SAID EARLIER IN THIS SAME POST: 

What I find hilarious concerning YOUR OPINION, is that YOU BELIEVE because GOD made HIMSELF into flesh (for the purpose of OUR SALVATION, TO CONQUER DEATH, TO BRING FORTH RESURRECTION, TO BE OUR EXAMPLE OF HOW WE SHOULD LIVE), that AUTOMATICALLY makes YOU ASSUME they are DIFFERENT ENTITIES!! 

 

2 Timothy 2:15 

Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

 

^YOU SHOULD APPLY THIS TO YOUR LIFE, IT WOULD BENEFIT YOU GREATLY!!

  • Oy Vey! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  125
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  2,082
  • Content Per Day:  0.57
  • Reputation:   500
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  04/03/2014
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  09/15/1956

On 5/19/2019 at 2:39 PM, childoftheking said:

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 fourth century."

 

With one word and voice He said to His disciples: “Go, baptize and make disciples of all nations in My Name, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you,” — (Proof of the Gospel by Eusebius, Book III, ch 6, 132 (a), p. 152)

 

Who said to them; “Baptize and make disciples of all the nations in my Name.” — (Eusebius, Proof of the Gospel, Book III, Chapter 7, 138 (c), p. 159)

 

I followed the links for the above quotes.   I could not find your quote from the Catholic Encylopedia, see links at end.  But, I did find your one quote by (Proof of the Gospel by Eusebius).

He did not write what you wrote or quoted.   That came from a footnote.   Not in the original text by Eusebius. 

" Matt, xxviii. 19. The verse is quoted thus seven times in the Demonstratio with the omission of the reference to Haptism and the Trinity. Conybcarc {Hibbcrt Jottnuil. i. (1902-3) p. 102), wlio holds that the reference was interpolated for doj^malic reasons, and was not fully assured in the text till after the Council of Nica-a, supports his view from the practice of Euscbius. This is the view of Kirsopp Lake, E.R.E. ii. 3S0 and Moffatt, The Historical New Test. 1901, p. 647. The historicity of the words as ipsissima verba is denied by Harnack, Clemen, and J. .\. Robinson, Enc. Bif>l., art. " Ixiptisni.' I"'rom the Acts taken literally it would be gathered that apostolic Baptism was simply in tlie Name of Jesus. —(Acts viii. 12-16 ; ix. iS; xxii. 16, etc.) But the threefold formula occurs in the Didachc, ch. vii., and is supported by Jusiin Martyr, Apol. i. 61 and Irena'us, who, however, bases it not on Malt, xxviii. 19, but on tradition. (.\. Harnack, History of Doi^iita, ii. 22.) The textual authority of the text as it stands is unassailable, ani' tlie problem is to reconcile it with the statements in Acts," on page 20 of your source.  http://www.trinitytruth.org/proof-of-the-gospel_eusebius.pdf

 

s there.    Please provide exact page numbers in your quotes from the source you used.   Thanks, Daniel

These quotes below predate your claims,  and the site does give links to the sources. 

"

Ignatius of Antioch (ca. AD. 107-112)

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

… The priests indeed, and the ministers of the word, are good; but the High Priest is better, to whom the holy of holies has been committed, and who alone has been entrusted with the secrets of God. The ministering powers of God are good. The Comforter is holy, and the Word is holy, the Son of the Father, by whom He made all things, and exercises a providence over them all. This is the Way which leads to the Father, the Rock, the Defence, the Key, the Shepherd, the Sacrifice, the Door of knowledge, through which have entered Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, Moses and all the company of the prophets, and these pillars of the world, the apostles, and the spouse of Christ, on whose account He poured out His own blood, as her marriage portion, that He might redeem her. All these things tend towards the unity of the one and only true God. But the Gospel possesses something transcendent [above the former dispensation], viz. the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, His passion, and the resurrection itself. For those things which the prophets announced, saying, "Until He come for whom it is reserved, and He shall be the expectation of the Gentiles," have been fulfilled in the Gospel, [our Lord saying,] "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. (Epistle of Ignatius to the Philadelphians; source)

Chapter II.-Unity of the Three Divine Persons.

There is then one God and Father, and not two or three; One who is; and there is no other besides Him, the only true [God]. For "the Lord thy God," saith [the Scripture], "is one Lord." And again, "Hath not one God created us? Have we not all one Father? And there is also one Son, God the Word. For "the only-begotten Son," saith [the Scripture], "who is in the bosom of the Father." And again, "One Lord Jesus Christ." And in another place, "What is His name, or what His Son's name, that we may know? " And there is also one Paraclete. For "there is also," saith [the Scripture], "one Spirit," since "we have been called in one hope of our calling." And again, "We have drunk of one Spirit," with what follows. And it is manifest that all these gifts [possessed by believers] "worketh one and the self-same Spirit." There are not then either three Fathers, or three Sons, or three Paracletes, but one Father, and one Son, and one Paraclete. Wherefore also the Lord, when He sent forth the apostles to make disciples of all nations, commanded them to "baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," not unto one [person] having three names, nor into three [persons] who became incarnate, but into three possessed of equal honour. (Epistle of Ignatius to the Philippians; source)

Irenaeus (ca. 130-200)

Chapter XVII.-The Apostles Teach that It Was Neither Christ Nor the Saviour, But the Holy Spirit, Who Did Descend Upon Jesus. The Reason for This Descent.

It certainly was in the power of the apostles to declare that Christ descended upon Jesus, or that the so-called superior Saviour [came down] upon the dispensational one, or he who is from the invisible places upon him from the Demiurge; but they neither knew nor said anything of the kind: for, had they known it, they would have also certainly stated it. But what really was the case, that did they record, [namely,] that the Spirit of God as a dove descended upon Him; this Spirit, of whom it was declared by Isaiah, "And the Spirit of God shall rest upon Him," as I have already said. And again: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He hath anointed Me." 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." And again, giving to the disciples the power of regeneration into God, He 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." For [God] promised, that in the last times He would pour Him [the Spirit] upon [His] servants and handmaids, that they might prophesy; wherefore He did also descend upon the Son of God, made the Son of man, becoming accustomed in fellowship with Him to dwell in the human race, to rest with human beings, and to dwell in the workmanship of God, working the will of the Father in them, and renewing them from their old habits into the newness of Christ. (Irenaeus Against Heresies Book III; source)

Tertullian (ca. 160-220)

Chapter XX.-Christ First Delivered the Faith. The Apostles Spread It; They Founded Churches as the Depositories Thereof. That Faith, Therefore, is Apostolic, Which Descended from the Apostles, Through Apostolic Churches.

… Accordingly, after one of these had been struck off, He 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." Immediately, therefore, so did the apostles, whom this designation indicates as "the sent." … (Tertullian The Prescription Against Heretics; source)

Chapter VI.-The Angel the Forerunner of the Holy Spirit. Meaning Contained in the Baptismal Formula.

Not that in the waters we obtain the Holy Spirit; but in the water, under (the witness of) the angel, we are cleansed, and prepared for the Holy Spirit. In this case also a type has preceded; for thus was John beforehand the Lord's forerunner, "preparing His ways." Thus, too, does the angel, the witness of baptism, "make the paths straight" for the Holy Spirit, who is about to come upon us, by the washing away of sins, which faith, sealed in (the name of) the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, obtains. For if "in the mouth of three witnesses every word shall stand:" -while, through the benediction, we have the same (three) as witnesses of our faith whom we have as sureties of our salvation too-how much more does the number of the divine names suffice for the assurance of our hope likewise! Moreover, after the pledging both of the attestation of faith and the promise of salvation under "three witnesses," there is added, of necessity, mention of the Church; inasmuch as, wherever there are three, (that is, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,) there is the Church, which is a body of three. (Tertullian On Baptism; source)

Chapter XIII.-Another Objection: Abraham Pleased God Without Being Baptized. Answer Thereto. Old Things Must Give Place to New, and Baptism is Now a Law.

Here, then, those miscreants provoke questions. And so they say, "Baptism is not necessary for them to whom faith is sufficient; for withal, Abraham pleased God by a sacrament of no water, but of faith." But in all cases it is the later things which have a conclusive force, and the subsequent which prevail over the antecedent. Grant that, in days gone by, there was salvation by means of bare faith, before the passion and resurrection of the Lord. But now that faith has been enlarged, and is become a faith which believes in His nativity, passion, and resurrection, there has been an amplification added w the sacrament, viz., the sealing act of baptism; the clothing, in some sense, of the faith which before was bare, and which cannot exist now without its proper law. For the law of baptizing has been imposed, and the formula prescribed: "Go," Hesaith, "teach the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." The comparison with this law of that definition, "Unless a man have been reborn of water and Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of the heavens," has tied faith to the necessity of baptism. Accordingly, all thereafter who became believers used to be baptized. Then it was, too, that Paul, when he believed, was baptized; and this is the meaning of the precept which the Lord had given him when smitten with the plague of loss of sight, saying, "Arise, and enter Damascus; there shall be demonstrated to thee what thou oughtest to do," to wit-be baptized, which was the only thing lacking to him. That point excepted, he bad sufficiently learnt and believed "the Nazarene" to be "the Lord, the Son of God." (Ibid.; source)

Victorinus (ca. 270-303)

15. "And His voice as it were the voice of many waters."] The many waters are understood to be many peoples, or the gift of baptism that He sent forth by the apostles, saying: "Go ye, teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." (Victorinus Commentary on the Apocalypse of the Blessed John; source)"https://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/badawi_mt28_20.htm

 

Your quote below only appears in threads here, thus it is questionable until you prove it from  http://www.newadvent.org/utility/search.htm?safe=active&cx=000299817191393086628%3Aifmbhlr-8x0&q="The+baptismal+formula was+changed from+the+name+of+Jesus+Christ+to+the+words+Father%2C+Son%2C+and+Holy+Spirit+by+the+Catholic+Church+in+the+fourth+century"&sa=Search&cof=FORID%3A9&siteurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newadvent.org%2Fcathen%2F

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 fourth century."

https://www.google.com/search?q="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+fourth+century"&filter=0&biw=1163&bih=483

http://www.newadvent.org/utility/search.htm?safe=active&cx=000299817191393086628%3Aifmbhlr-8x0&q="baptismal+formula was+changed"&sa=Search&cof=FORID%3A9&siteurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newadvent.org%2Fcathen%2F

 

 

 

 

Edited by Daniel Marsh
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  125
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  2,082
  • Content Per Day:  0.57
  • Reputation:   500
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  04/03/2014
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  09/15/1956


  • Group:  Non-Trinitarian
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  62
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  842
  • Content Per Day:  0.47
  • Reputation:   111
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  04/24/2019
  • Status:  Offline

1 hour ago, Daniel Marsh said:

I followed the links for the above quotes.   I could not find your quote from the Catholic Encylopedia, see links at end.  But, I did find your one quote by (Proof of the Gospel by Eusebius).

He did not write what you wrote or quoted.   That came from a footnote.   Not in the original text by Eusebius. 

" Matt, xxviii. 19. The verse is quoted thus seven times in the Demonstratio with the omission of the reference to Haptism and the Trinity. Conybcarc {Hibbcrt Jottnuil. i. (1902-3) p. 102), wlio holds that the reference was interpolated for doj^malic reasons, and was not fully assured in the text till after the Council of Nica-a, supports his view from the practice of Euscbius. This is the view of Kirsopp Lake, E.R.E. ii. 3S0 and Moffatt, The Historical New Test. 1901, p. 647. The historicity of the words as ipsissima verba is denied by Harnack, Clemen, and J. .\. Robinson, Enc. Bif>l., art. " Ixiptisni.' I"'rom the Acts taken literally it would be gathered that apostolic Baptism was simply in tlie Name of Jesus. —(Acts viii. 12-16 ; ix. iS; xxii. 16, etc.) But the threefold formula occurs in the Didachc, ch. vii., and is supported by Jusiin Martyr, Apol. i. 61 and Irena'us, who, however, bases it not on Malt, xxviii. 19, but on tradition. (.\. Harnack, History of Doi^iita, ii. 22.) The textual authority of the text as it stands is unassailable, ani' tlie problem is to reconcile it with the statements in Acts," on page 20 of your source.  http://www.trinitytruth.org/proof-of-the-gospel_eusebius.pdf

 

s there.    Please provide exact page numbers in your quotes from the source you used.   Thanks, Daniel

These quotes below predate your claims,  and the site does give links to the sources. 

"

Ignatius of Antioch (ca. AD. 107-112)

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

… The priests indeed, and the ministers of the word, are good; but the High Priest is better, to whom the holy of holies has been committed, and who alone has been entrusted with the secrets of God. The ministering powers of God are good. The Comforter is holy, and the Word is holy, the Son of the Father, by whom He made all things, and exercises a providence over them all. This is the Way which leads to the Father, the Rock, the Defence, the Key, the Shepherd, the Sacrifice, the Door of knowledge, through which have entered Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, Moses and all the company of the prophets, and these pillars of the world, the apostles, and the spouse of Christ, on whose account He poured out His own blood, as her marriage portion, that He might redeem her. All these things tend towards the unity of the one and only true God. But the Gospel possesses something transcendent [above the former dispensation], viz. the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, His passion, and the resurrection itself. For those things which the prophets announced, saying, "Until He come for whom it is reserved, and He shall be the expectation of the Gentiles," have been fulfilled in the Gospel, [our Lord saying,] "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. (Epistle of Ignatius to the Philadelphians; source)

Chapter II.-Unity of the Three Divine Persons.

There is then one God and Father, and not two or three; One who is; and there is no other besides Him, the only true [God]. For "the Lord thy God," saith [the Scripture], "is one Lord." And again, "Hath not one God created us? Have we not all one Father? And there is also one Son, God the Word. For "the only-begotten Son," saith [the Scripture], "who is in the bosom of the Father." And again, "One Lord Jesus Christ." And in another place, "What is His name, or what His Son's name, that we may know? " And there is also one Paraclete. For "there is also," saith [the Scripture], "one Spirit," since "we have been called in one hope of our calling." And again, "We have drunk of one Spirit," with what follows. And it is manifest that all these gifts [possessed by believers] "worketh one and the self-same Spirit." There are not then either three Fathers, or three Sons, or three Paracletes, but one Father, and one Son, and one Paraclete. Wherefore also the Lord, when He sent forth the apostles to make disciples of all nations, commanded them to "baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," not unto one [person] having three names, nor into three [persons] who became incarnate, but into three possessed of equal honour. (Epistle of Ignatius to the Philippians; source)

Irenaeus (ca. 130-200)

Chapter XVII.-The Apostles Teach that It Was Neither Christ Nor the Saviour, But the Holy Spirit, Who Did Descend Upon Jesus. The Reason for This Descent.

It certainly was in the power of the apostles to declare that Christ descended upon Jesus, or that the so-called superior Saviour [came down] upon the dispensational one, or he who is from the invisible places upon him from the Demiurge; but they neither knew nor said anything of the kind: for, had they known it, they would have also certainly stated it. But what really was the case, that did they record, [namely,] that the Spirit of God as a dove descended upon Him; this Spirit, of whom it was declared by Isaiah, "And the Spirit of God shall rest upon Him," as I have already said. And again: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He hath anointed Me." 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." And again, giving to the disciples the power of regeneration into God, He 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." For [God] promised, that in the last times He would pour Him [the Spirit] upon [His] servants and handmaids, that they might prophesy; wherefore He did also descend upon the Son of God, made the Son of man, becoming accustomed in fellowship with Him to dwell in the human race, to rest with human beings, and to dwell in the workmanship of God, working the will of the Father in them, and renewing them from their old habits into the newness of Christ. (Irenaeus Against Heresies Book III; source)

Tertullian (ca. 160-220)

Chapter XX.-Christ First Delivered the Faith. The Apostles Spread It; They Founded Churches as the Depositories Thereof. That Faith, Therefore, is Apostolic, Which Descended from the Apostles, Through Apostolic Churches.

… Accordingly, after one of these had been struck off, He 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." Immediately, therefore, so did the apostles, whom this designation indicates as "the sent." … (Tertullian The Prescription Against Heretics; source)

Chapter VI.-The Angel the Forerunner of the Holy Spirit. Meaning Contained in the Baptismal Formula.

Not that in the waters we obtain the Holy Spirit; but in the water, under (the witness of) the angel, we are cleansed, and prepared for the Holy Spirit. In this case also a type has preceded; for thus was John beforehand the Lord's forerunner, "preparing His ways." Thus, too, does the angel, the witness of baptism, "make the paths straight" for the Holy Spirit, who is about to come upon us, by the washing away of sins, which faith, sealed in (the name of) the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, obtains. For if "in the mouth of three witnesses every word shall stand:" -while, through the benediction, we have the same (three) as witnesses of our faith whom we have as sureties of our salvation too-how much more does the number of the divine names suffice for the assurance of our hope likewise! Moreover, after the pledging both of the attestation of faith and the promise of salvation under "three witnesses," there is added, of necessity, mention of the Church; inasmuch as, wherever there are three, (that is, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,) there is the Church, which is a body of three. (Tertullian On Baptism; source)

Chapter XIII.-Another Objection: Abraham Pleased God Without Being Baptized. Answer Thereto. Old Things Must Give Place to New, and Baptism is Now a Law.

Here, then, those miscreants provoke questions. And so they say, "Baptism is not necessary for them to whom faith is sufficient; for withal, Abraham pleased God by a sacrament of no water, but of faith." But in all cases it is the later things which have a conclusive force, and the subsequent which prevail over the antecedent. Grant that, in days gone by, there was salvation by means of bare faith, before the passion and resurrection of the Lord. But now that faith has been enlarged, and is become a faith which believes in His nativity, passion, and resurrection, there has been an amplification added w the sacrament, viz., the sealing act of baptism; the clothing, in some sense, of the faith which before was bare, and which cannot exist now without its proper law. For the law of baptizing has been imposed, and the formula prescribed: "Go," Hesaith, "teach the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." The comparison with this law of that definition, "Unless a man have been reborn of water and Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of the heavens," has tied faith to the necessity of baptism. Accordingly, all thereafter who became believers used to be baptized. Then it was, too, that Paul, when he believed, was baptized; and this is the meaning of the precept which the Lord had given him when smitten with the plague of loss of sight, saying, "Arise, and enter Damascus; there shall be demonstrated to thee what thou oughtest to do," to wit-be baptized, which was the only thing lacking to him. That point excepted, he bad sufficiently learnt and believed "the Nazarene" to be "the Lord, the Son of God." (Ibid.; source)

Victorinus (ca. 270-303)

15. "And His voice as it were the voice of many waters."] The many waters are understood to be many peoples, or the gift of baptism that He sent forth by the apostles, saying: "Go ye, teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." (Victorinus Commentary on the Apocalypse of the Blessed John; source)"https://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/badawi_mt28_20.htm

 

Your quote below only appears in threads here, thus it is questionable until you prove it from  http://www.newadvent.org/utility/search.htm?safe=active&cx=000299817191393086628%3Aifmbhlr-8x0&q="The+baptismal+formula was+changed from+the+name+of+Jesus+Christ+to+the+words+Father%2C+Son%2C+and+Holy+Spirit+by+the+Catholic+Church+in+the+fourth+century"&sa=Search&cof=FORID%3A9&siteurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newadvent.org%2Fcathen%2F

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 fourth century."

https://www.google.com/search?q="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+fourth+century"&filter=0&biw=1163&bih=483

http://www.newadvent.org/utility/search.htm?safe=active&cx=000299817191393086628%3Aifmbhlr-8x0&q="baptismal+formula was+changed"&sa=Search&cof=FORID%3A9&siteurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newadvent.org%2Fcathen%2F

 

 

 

 

Read Last Paragraph, this is from a Booklet the Catholics used to send out to members.   Someone gave the copy I am using to my Grandfather, who passed it to my Father, and now I have it.

catholiccatechismbaptism.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Non-Trinitarian
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  62
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  842
  • Content Per Day:  0.47
  • Reputation:   111
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  04/24/2019
  • Status:  Offline

MORE EVIDENCE:

There is literally a couple hundred quotes claiming Matthew 28:19 was changed!!

These are just some from Biblical Scholars and Professors and from those whose jobs were to simply research the Church history!!

Catholic Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger:
The following quote is often used in support of Matthew 28:19 being corrupted. Note also that the words in parenthesis are added but not by me. It appears Ratzinger was referring to the creed and not this verse. So I would not use this quote in support of a corruption as many have. “The basic form of our (Matthew 28:19 Trinitarian) profession of faith took shape during the course of the third and fourth 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.” — Joseph Ratzinger (pope Benedict XVI) Introduction to Christianity: 1968 edition, pp. 82, 83

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.

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

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 (c AD 180),...(The term Trinity) not found in Scripture...” “The chief Trinitarian text in the NT is the baptismal formula in Mt 28:19...This late post-resurrection saying, not found in any other Gospel or anywhere else in the NT, 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 into the saying. Finally, Eusebius's form of the (ancient) 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:...

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, cf. Acts 1:5 +.

New Revised Standard Version says this about 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...

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 [Trinitarian] formula occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, and we know from the only evidence available [the rest of the New Testament] 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. Thus it is argued that the verse originally read “baptizing them in My Name” and then was expanded [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 expansion.

The Bible Commentary 1919 page 723:
Dr. Peake makes it clear that: “The command to baptize into the threefold name is a late doctrinal expansion. 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.

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 fourth century.

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 triune 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 triune formula was a later development.

“The Demonstratio Evangelica” by Eusebius:
Eusebius was the Church historian and Bishop of Caesarea. On page 152 Eusebius quotes the early book of Matthew that he had in his library in Caesarea. According to this eyewitness of an unaltered Book of Matthew that could have been the original book or the first copy of the original of Matthew. Eusebius informs us of Jesus' actual words to his disciples in the original text of Matthew 28:19: “With one word and voice He said to His disciples: “Go, Baptize and make disciples of all nations in My Name, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.” That “Name” is Jesus.

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.” The same Encyclopedia further states that: “The obvious explanation of the silence of the New Testament on the triune name, and the use of another (JESUS NAME) formula in Acts and Paul, is that this other formula was the earlier, and the triune formula is a later addition.

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.

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 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 Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, page 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 ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but...a later liturgical addition.

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 confessed 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 [false Catholic sprinkling doctrine] on the head. The one baptizing names over the one being baptized the name of the Lord Jesus Christ,” later expanded [changed] to the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Wilhelm Bousset, Kyrios Christianity, page 295:
The testimony for the wide distribution of the simple baptismal formula [in the Name of Jesus] down into the fourth century is so overwhelming that even in Matthew 28:19, the Trinitarian formula was later inserted.

Edited by childoftheking
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...