Can the Trinity be Biblically proven?
- Thread starter bluto
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
People are not that different. Some of the brightest and talented people are very shy.
They often withdraw and shine in their own studying and going on the internet and
finding release and expression through this.
We are less of mystery than you might believe. We often spend our lives so isolated
we do not see there are more similarities than differences among us.
One simple issue is abuse and mental illness and trauma. It is staggering what people
go through and how damaged and difficult life can be. It is also why Jesus and love is
a true healing hope we all have if we call out to Him and let Him lead us.
They often withdraw and shine in their own studying and going on the internet and
finding release and expression through this.
We are less of mystery than you might believe. We often spend our lives so isolated
we do not see there are more similarities than differences among us.
One simple issue is abuse and mental illness and trauma. It is staggering what people
go through and how damaged and difficult life can be. It is also why Jesus and love is
a true healing hope we all have if we call out to Him and let Him lead us.
shall I tell you about me?
do you need me to profess myself first?
what if I lied?
what if I exaggerated just to please your selective partial biased fleshly ears?
Will that help you to listen?
no. I don't think it will
rather I believe you have decided for yourself what you would like to believe regarding who I am so as to validate your own idea that you are right by invalidating the speaker based on a subtle (so you think) fleshly judgement with fleshly eyes suggestion of who you think I am
yoi are free to make your own judgements of me
it is fine
it won't change the TRUTH of what I have said
do you need me to profess myself first?
what if I lied?
what if I exaggerated just to please your selective partial biased fleshly ears?
Will that help you to listen?
no. I don't think it will
rather I believe you have decided for yourself what you would like to believe regarding who I am so as to validate your own idea that you are right by invalidating the speaker based on a subtle (so you think) fleshly judgement with fleshly eyes suggestion of who you think I am
yoi are free to make your own judgements of me
it is fine
it won't change the TRUTH of what I have said
The things you have said are not clear, and you want authority without its foundations.
I am just wondering why you are taking this approach.
I am called to just be open and share my heart.
I am not judging you, because I do not know you.
But I am called to love those in the body, to be one with all the family of God.
Now you want to beat me up, and then say it is ok if I hide who I am or even
why I am doing this.
That is the ironic part of following Christ. It is about being out there, letting
people pull you apart or build you up. That is what love does, take that risk.
But you have not learnt this, or grown enough to do this.
That should speak to you about what you really have and its limitations.
If you know what street evangelism is, and testimonies, which is a primer in
sharing the gospel, is all about this aspect of following Christ.
I am just wondering why you are taking this approach.
I am called to just be open and share my heart.
I am not judging you, because I do not know you.
But I am called to love those in the body, to be one with all the family of God.
Now you want to beat me up, and then say it is ok if I hide who I am or even
why I am doing this.
That is the ironic part of following Christ. It is about being out there, letting
people pull you apart or build you up. That is what love does, take that risk.
But you have not learnt this, or grown enough to do this.
That should speak to you about what you really have and its limitations.
If you know what street evangelism is, and testimonies, which is a primer in
sharing the gospel, is all about this aspect of following Christ.
You made my chuckle.
I had an interesting interaction with a member from canada who had a degree in psychology,
who loved to put people in their place, and put people in their place.
When I challenged her about her approach, she said the same things as you.
Over the months it turned out I was 100% correct, though she continually said
"I am not who you think I am."
I do not "think" you are something, I am just pointing to behaviour patterns that
speak of series of issues, that have nothing to do with the gospel but are buried
in "religion".
And to those who stand over me, dismiss my posts, want me to be their disciple and
respect them, it is not something I simply pass over. We have authority in the Lord
for a reason, and these issues are not neutral, minor points like opinions.
We are talking about foundational respect to Jesus, the Father and the Hold Spirit.
It is easy in this arena to become heretical, and apostate, and simply sin.
So if you want to continue your line, then I will continue mine, Praise the Lord,
for He rose from the Dead.
I had an interesting interaction with a member from canada who had a degree in psychology,
who loved to put people in their place, and put people in their place.
When I challenged her about her approach, she said the same things as you.
Over the months it turned out I was 100% correct, though she continually said
"I am not who you think I am."
I do not "think" you are something, I am just pointing to behaviour patterns that
speak of series of issues, that have nothing to do with the gospel but are buried
in "religion".
And to those who stand over me, dismiss my posts, want me to be their disciple and
respect them, it is not something I simply pass over. We have authority in the Lord
for a reason, and these issues are not neutral, minor points like opinions.
We are talking about foundational respect to Jesus, the Father and the Hold Spirit.
It is easy in this arena to become heretical, and apostate, and simply sin.
So if you want to continue your line, then I will continue mine, Praise the Lord,
for He rose from the Dead.
Sorry proveall, God the Father and God the Son are "NOT" separate beings. When you say that your implying two gods and proving to the unitarians, Jw's and oneness Pentecostals that their right and trintarianism is false. Why do you think Jesus said at John 10:30, "I and the Father we are one?" I understand your point but the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all identified in the Bible as "distinct" persons .
Furthermore, you quoting Romans 10:9 was not meant to prove they are separate beings. Look at Romans 9:11 and then look at what Jesus stated at John 2:19, "Jesus answered and said to them, "Destroy this temple, AND IN THREE DAYS I WILL RAISE IT UP."
IN GOD THE SON,
bluto
Furthermore, you quoting Romans 10:9 was not meant to prove they are separate beings. Look at Romans 9:11 and then look at what Jesus stated at John 2:19, "Jesus answered and said to them, "Destroy this temple, AND IN THREE DAYS I WILL RAISE IT UP."
IN GOD THE SON,
bluto
My friend, you are talking about two different things.
Eternal life is entering the Kingdom, but what I am addressing is walking in the Kingdom.
People want to simply reflect that they have arrived, but we are called to walk with
Jesus and this about being with one another.
Loving from the heart is not a passive thing only to do with oneself and God, it is
about all your interactions, literally all of them, including interactions here.
Jesus came to set us free, to enable us to interact with liberation, knowing the
boundaries but also the infinite possibilities of love and sharing with each other.
I am always, and I mean always, astounded at the different treasures each person
brings to the Lord, though they do not realise it, because to them it is all so ordinary.
But Jesus is saying "You are my Holy, purchased people, so walk in it."
So you are wrong sister. We are called to see and know each other, and encourage
each other in Christ and who He is and what He has made us.
The gospels are full of this, and the letters, or did you not notice?
Eternal life is entering the Kingdom, but what I am addressing is walking in the Kingdom.
People want to simply reflect that they have arrived, but we are called to walk with
Jesus and this about being with one another.
Loving from the heart is not a passive thing only to do with oneself and God, it is
about all your interactions, literally all of them, including interactions here.
Jesus came to set us free, to enable us to interact with liberation, knowing the
boundaries but also the infinite possibilities of love and sharing with each other.
I am always, and I mean always, astounded at the different treasures each person
brings to the Lord, though they do not realise it, because to them it is all so ordinary.
But Jesus is saying "You are my Holy, purchased people, so walk in it."
So you are wrong sister. We are called to see and know each other, and encourage
each other in Christ and who He is and what He has made us.
The gospels are full of this, and the letters, or did you not notice?
Below are some Biblical facts yhat may have escaped your notice:
The Biblical documentation of the pre-incarnate Jesus origin and when He became the Son of God/God the Son:
Beginning in Proverbs 8, pertaining to the personification of God's Wisdom, reference is made to specifically to verses 22 through 36, that clearly identify the pre-incarnate spirit of Jesus Christ as the WHO, of the Wisdom of God. [From the NIV].
"The Lord brought me forth as the first of His works, before His deed of old; I was appointed from eternity, from the beginning,
before the world began. When there were no oceans, I was given birth, [Vs 22-24]
when there were no springs abounding with water; before the mountains were settled in place, before the hills, I was given birth, before He made the earth or its fields or any of the dust of the world. [Vs 24-26]
I was there when He set the heavens in place, when He marked out the horizon on the face of the deep, when He established the clouds above and fixed securly the fountains of the deep, [Vs 27-28]
when He gave the sea its boundary so the waters would not overstep His command, and when He marked out the foundations of the earth. Then I was the craftsman at His side. I was filled with delight day after day, [Vs 29-30]
rejoicing always in His presence, rejoicing in His whole world and delighting in mankind. Now then my sons, listen to me; blessed are those who keep my ways. Listen to my instruction and be wise; do not ignore it. [Vs 30-33]
Blessed is the man who listens to me, watching daily at my doors, waiting at my doorway. For whoever finds me finds life and receives favor from the Lord. But whoever fails to find me harms himself; all who hate me love death." [Vs 34-36]
That Jesus is the Wisdom [Power and knowledge] of God is made abundantly clear in 1 Cor.1:24 and Col.2:2-3
[SUP]Col.1:15 [/SUP]"The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation."
Gen.1:1: "In the beginning God created the heaven and earth," Tanakh
Heb.1:1: "In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways,[SUP]2 [/SUP]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."
[SUP]Gen.1:26 "[/SUP]Then God said, “Let us [The pre-incarnate Jesus] make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[SUP][a][/SUP] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.” [Parenthetics mine}
Jesus did not become the Son of God/God the Son until recorded in Mt.1:20 and Lk.1:35 as the Scriptures clearly document in the following OT passages.
God makes it clear in the OT, He is eternal, that there is no other God but He Himself. "....Before me no God was formed, nor will there be one after me." Isa.43:10. And in Isa.44:6, "....I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God." See also Isa.45:5: "I am the Lord and there is no other," and in Ex.3:14: "I AM WHO I AM."
Quasar92
Proverbs 8:22-29
Wisdom is brought forth.
It is given birth.
Now I understand the concept the writer is talking about.
But firstly this cannot be wisdom as an absolute.
Wisdom is an attribute of God himself and is eternal.
So taking this presumption the writer is talking about how
everything is tied together and set with rules and definition
in creation. It is talking about the particular expression of
wisdom, rather than wisdom itself, or else God does not
possess wisdom in of Himself, unless you are suggesting
this.
Equally Jesus does not fit this language.
Wisdom is brought forth.
It is given birth.
Now I understand the concept the writer is talking about.
But firstly this cannot be wisdom as an absolute.
Wisdom is an attribute of God himself and is eternal.
So taking this presumption the writer is talking about how
everything is tied together and set with rules and definition
in creation. It is talking about the particular expression of
wisdom, rather than wisdom itself, or else God does not
possess wisdom in of Himself, unless you are suggesting
this.
Equally Jesus does not fit this language.
You are highlighting an issue which is obvious in one sense.
Did Jesus have a separate identity from the Father prior to the incarnation?
And my answer is I do not know. Some would hold they did, which would make sense.
Love is about fellowship. Can God make himself into more than just the trinity? Maybe.
But there is a large difference between copies of who you are, and independent loving beings
of a similar heart to the Father, but not of His essence.
The Father created us knowing to have fellowship with creatures with free will and the ability
to choose love or power, the risk was always those who touch life will destroy themselves.
But this price was worth eternity with Him. It strikes me if you understand the nature of love
and choice, the door has to be truly open. It is also why I tend towards the lake of fire being
annihilation rather than eternal punishment. Poetic, those who hate God get their desire, the end.
And the trinity reflects Gods nature of community and fellowship and not isolation.
Did Jesus have a separate identity from the Father prior to the incarnation?
And my answer is I do not know. Some would hold they did, which would make sense.
Love is about fellowship. Can God make himself into more than just the trinity? Maybe.
But there is a large difference between copies of who you are, and independent loving beings
of a similar heart to the Father, but not of His essence.
The Father created us knowing to have fellowship with creatures with free will and the ability
to choose love or power, the risk was always those who touch life will destroy themselves.
But this price was worth eternity with Him. It strikes me if you understand the nature of love
and choice, the door has to be truly open. It is also why I tend towards the lake of fire being
annihilation rather than eternal punishment. Poetic, those who hate God get their desire, the end.
And the trinity reflects Gods nature of community and fellowship and not isolation.
E
Have you decided to answer my questions about Is 48 yet?
Where the god of Isreal who created the heavens and the earth was sent by the Father and his spirit?
Who is this, if it is not Jesus?
This is important. Because it would make the God in the burning bush who said his name is I am who I am is jesus hmself.. sent from the father
Where the god of Isreal who created the heavens and the earth was sent by the Father and his spirit?
Who is this, if it is not Jesus?
This is important. Because it would make the God in the burning bush who said his name is I am who I am is jesus hmself.. sent from the father
I only have the book of Dr. HL Wilmington, the "Wilmington Guide to the Bible" and teaches Trinity. Did Dr. Wilmington recant his position on the Biblical stance of the trinity? or that the Falwells' no longer believe in the Godhead? Need to google TRBC...
"What became the basis for “Willmington’s Guide to the Bible” was taken from those sheets.
He has written 20 books beginning in 1974 with “The King is Coming” and continuing through this year. His most recent book is “What the Bible says About the Trinity.” The back of this book describes it as being “one in a series of ‘basic Biblical beliefs’ which have been held by both Liberty University and Thomas Road Baptist Church (TRBC) from their very beginning.”
Eighty years dedicated to God –[/QUOTE]
In addition to Dr.Wilmington being my mentor from Liberty University, I have held memberships in the Presbyterian, the Brethren, the Methodist, the Lutheran and the Baptist Churches, depending om where I was living at the time, all of whom teach the Trinity. Which I did as well for 45 years, until I tired of trying to explain it to others from the Bible, since it did not teach God to be triune, not did Jesus or His disciple ever teach such a thing. I have both volumes of Dr. Wilmington's Guide to the Bile, plus hundreds of both audio and video tapes he provided me during my studies under him. Since you claim to have all the answers, let me see you prove the Trinity from the Bible! Review my post #341, which took years of study and research to develop, together with the following:
What about the assertions trinitarians use as a mainstay of their belief, of 1 Jn.5:7 and Mt.28:19? The fact of the matter is, they cannot be blamed for believing what has been either an insertion, or an alteration of the original text by the author, yet appears in most of the English translations of our Bibles.
However, we should all know the most obvious factor of all; that the term father is only a title. The very same one every man gets when he has produced children of his own. Therefore, reference to "...baptize all nations in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit," trinitarians use to make two persons of their trio, out of God, who is the Holy Spirit and Father, one and the same person, according to Mt.1:20 and Lk.1:35, together with the Son, is false. Our Godhead is only two persons, God, who is the Holy Spirit and Father of Jesus Christ, the Son, according to the Scriptures, not three!
The Scriptural facts to support God to be the Holy Spirit are: Jn.1:18; 4:24; 2 Cor.3:17-18; Col.1:15; Lev.11:44-45; 1
Pet.1:15-16 and 1 Jn.4:12, as Spirit.
That He is also Holy are in: Lev.11:44-45; Lev.19:2; Ps.99:3; Ps.99:5 and 1 Pet.1:15-16.
Let's have a brief look at the history behind these two verses and learn the truth about them. The following is through the courtesy of SDA Global.
But various authorities mention a work entitled Discrepancies in the Gospels, and another work entitled The Concluding Sections of the Gospels.
According to Conybeare:
Eusebius cites this text (Matt. 28:19) again and again in works written between 300 and 336, namely in his long commentaries on the Psalms, on Isaiah, his Demonstratio Evangelica, his Theophany. .. in his famous history of the Church, and in his panegyric of the emperor Constantine. I have, after a moderate search in these works of Eusebius, found eighteen citations of Matthew 28:19, and always in the following form:'Go ye and make disciples of all the nations in My name, teaching them to observe all things, whatsoever I commanded you. '
Ploughman's research uncovered all of these quotations except for one, which is in a catena published by Mai in a German magazine, the Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft, edited by Dr. Erwin Preuschen in Darmstadt in 1901. Eusebius was not content merely to cite the verse in this form, but he more than once commented on it in such a way as to show how much he confirmed the wording "in my name". Thus, in his Demonstratio Evangelica he wrote the following:
For he did not enjoin them "to make disciples of all the nations" simply and without qualification, but with the essential addition "in his name". For so great was the virtue attaching to his appellation that the Apostle says, "God bestowed on him the name above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee shall bow of things in heaven and on earth and under the earth. " It was right therefore that he should emphasize the virtue of the power residing in his name but hidden from the many, and therefore say to his Apostles, "Go ye, and make disciples of all the nations in my name.' (col. 240, p. 136)
Conybeare proceeded, in Hibbert Journal, 1902:
It is evident that this was the text found by Eusebius in the very ancient codices collected fifty to a hundred and fifty years before his birth by his great predecessors. Of any other form of text he had never heard and knew nothing until he had visited Constantinople and attended the Council of Nice. Then in two controversial works written in his extreme old age, and entitled, the one 'Against Marcellus of Ancyra,' and the other 'About the Theology of the Church,' he used the common reading. One other writing of his also contains it, namely a letter written after the Council of Nice was over, to his seer of Caesurae.
In his Textual Criticism of the New Testament Conybeare wrote:
It is clear therefore, that of the manuscripts which Eusebius inherited from his predecessor, Pamphilus, at Caesurae in Palestine, some at least preserved the original reading, in which there was no mention either of baptism or of Father, Son and Holy Ghost. It has been conjectured by Dr. David-son, Dr. Martineau, by the Dean of Westminster, and by Prof. Harnack (to mention but a few names of the many) that here the received text could not contain the very words of Jesus - this long before anyone except Dr. Burgon, who kept the discovery to himself, had noticed the Eusebian form of the reading.
Naturally an objection was raised by Dr. Chase, Bishop of Ely, who argued that Eusebius indeed found the traditional text in his manuscripts, but substituted the briefer wording in his works for fear of vulgarizing the "sacred" Trinitarian wording. Interestingly, a modern Bishop revived the very argument used 150 years earlier, in support of the forged text of 1 John 5:7-8:
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost:and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood:and these three agree in one.
According to Porson (in a preface to his Letters):
Bengel. .. allowed that the words (The Three Witnesses) were in no genuine manuscripts. .. Surely then, the verse is spurious! No! This learned man finds a way of escape. 'The passage was of so sublime and mysterious a nature that the secret discipline of the Church withdrew it from the public books, till it was gradually lost. ' Under what a lack of evidence must a critic labor who resorts to such an argument!?
Conybeare continued, refuting the argument of the Bishop of Ely:
It is sufficient answer to point out that Eusebius' argument, when he cites the text, involves the text 'in my name. ' For, he asks, 'in whose name?' and answers that it was the name spoken of by Paul in his Epistle to the Philippians 2:10.
Finally, the Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics states:
The facts are, in summary, that Eusebius quotes Matthew 28:19 twenty-one times, either omitting everything between 'nations' and 'teaching,' or in the form 'make disciples of all the nations in my name,' the latter form being the more frequent.
Having considered the evidence of Eusebius, let us also consider some other early writers.
Quasa92[/QUOTE]
Quasar92, Do you have Masters degree?
"What became the basis for “Willmington’s Guide to the Bible” was taken from those sheets.
He has written 20 books beginning in 1974 with “The King is Coming” and continuing through this year. His most recent book is “What the Bible says About the Trinity.” The back of this book describes it as being “one in a series of ‘basic Biblical beliefs’ which have been held by both Liberty University and Thomas Road Baptist Church (TRBC) from their very beginning.”
Eighty years dedicated to God –[/QUOTE]
In addition to Dr.Wilmington being my mentor from Liberty University, I have held memberships in the Presbyterian, the Brethren, the Methodist, the Lutheran and the Baptist Churches, depending om where I was living at the time, all of whom teach the Trinity. Which I did as well for 45 years, until I tired of trying to explain it to others from the Bible, since it did not teach God to be triune, not did Jesus or His disciple ever teach such a thing. I have both volumes of Dr. Wilmington's Guide to the Bile, plus hundreds of both audio and video tapes he provided me during my studies under him. Since you claim to have all the answers, let me see you prove the Trinity from the Bible! Review my post #341, which took years of study and research to develop, together with the following:
What about the assertions trinitarians use as a mainstay of their belief, of 1 Jn.5:7 and Mt.28:19? The fact of the matter is, they cannot be blamed for believing what has been either an insertion, or an alteration of the original text by the author, yet appears in most of the English translations of our Bibles.
However, we should all know the most obvious factor of all; that the term father is only a title. The very same one every man gets when he has produced children of his own. Therefore, reference to "...baptize all nations in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit," trinitarians use to make two persons of their trio, out of God, who is the Holy Spirit and Father, one and the same person, according to Mt.1:20 and Lk.1:35, together with the Son, is false. Our Godhead is only two persons, God, who is the Holy Spirit and Father of Jesus Christ, the Son, according to the Scriptures, not three!
The Scriptural facts to support God to be the Holy Spirit are: Jn.1:18; 4:24; 2 Cor.3:17-18; Col.1:15; Lev.11:44-45; 1
Pet.1:15-16 and 1 Jn.4:12, as Spirit.
That He is also Holy are in: Lev.11:44-45; Lev.19:2; Ps.99:3; Ps.99:5 and 1 Pet.1:15-16.
Let's have a brief look at the history behind these two verses and learn the truth about them. The following is through the courtesy of SDA Global.
But various authorities mention a work entitled Discrepancies in the Gospels, and another work entitled The Concluding Sections of the Gospels.
According to Conybeare:
Eusebius cites this text (Matt. 28:19) again and again in works written between 300 and 336, namely in his long commentaries on the Psalms, on Isaiah, his Demonstratio Evangelica, his Theophany. .. in his famous history of the Church, and in his panegyric of the emperor Constantine. I have, after a moderate search in these works of Eusebius, found eighteen citations of Matthew 28:19, and always in the following form:'Go ye and make disciples of all the nations in My name, teaching them to observe all things, whatsoever I commanded you. '
Ploughman's research uncovered all of these quotations except for one, which is in a catena published by Mai in a German magazine, the Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft, edited by Dr. Erwin Preuschen in Darmstadt in 1901. Eusebius was not content merely to cite the verse in this form, but he more than once commented on it in such a way as to show how much he confirmed the wording "in my name". Thus, in his Demonstratio Evangelica he wrote the following:
For he did not enjoin them "to make disciples of all the nations" simply and without qualification, but with the essential addition "in his name". For so great was the virtue attaching to his appellation that the Apostle says, "God bestowed on him the name above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee shall bow of things in heaven and on earth and under the earth. " It was right therefore that he should emphasize the virtue of the power residing in his name but hidden from the many, and therefore say to his Apostles, "Go ye, and make disciples of all the nations in my name.' (col. 240, p. 136)
Conybeare proceeded, in Hibbert Journal, 1902:
It is evident that this was the text found by Eusebius in the very ancient codices collected fifty to a hundred and fifty years before his birth by his great predecessors. Of any other form of text he had never heard and knew nothing until he had visited Constantinople and attended the Council of Nice. Then in two controversial works written in his extreme old age, and entitled, the one 'Against Marcellus of Ancyra,' and the other 'About the Theology of the Church,' he used the common reading. One other writing of his also contains it, namely a letter written after the Council of Nice was over, to his seer of Caesurae.
In his Textual Criticism of the New Testament Conybeare wrote:
It is clear therefore, that of the manuscripts which Eusebius inherited from his predecessor, Pamphilus, at Caesurae in Palestine, some at least preserved the original reading, in which there was no mention either of baptism or of Father, Son and Holy Ghost. It has been conjectured by Dr. David-son, Dr. Martineau, by the Dean of Westminster, and by Prof. Harnack (to mention but a few names of the many) that here the received text could not contain the very words of Jesus - this long before anyone except Dr. Burgon, who kept the discovery to himself, had noticed the Eusebian form of the reading.
Naturally an objection was raised by Dr. Chase, Bishop of Ely, who argued that Eusebius indeed found the traditional text in his manuscripts, but substituted the briefer wording in his works for fear of vulgarizing the "sacred" Trinitarian wording. Interestingly, a modern Bishop revived the very argument used 150 years earlier, in support of the forged text of 1 John 5:7-8:
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost:and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood:and these three agree in one.
According to Porson (in a preface to his Letters):
Bengel. .. allowed that the words (The Three Witnesses) were in no genuine manuscripts. .. Surely then, the verse is spurious! No! This learned man finds a way of escape. 'The passage was of so sublime and mysterious a nature that the secret discipline of the Church withdrew it from the public books, till it was gradually lost. ' Under what a lack of evidence must a critic labor who resorts to such an argument!?
Conybeare continued, refuting the argument of the Bishop of Ely:
It is sufficient answer to point out that Eusebius' argument, when he cites the text, involves the text 'in my name. ' For, he asks, 'in whose name?' and answers that it was the name spoken of by Paul in his Epistle to the Philippians 2:10.
Finally, the Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics states:
The facts are, in summary, that Eusebius quotes Matthew 28:19 twenty-one times, either omitting everything between 'nations' and 'teaching,' or in the form 'make disciples of all the nations in my name,' the latter form being the more frequent.
Having considered the evidence of Eusebius, let us also consider some other early writers.
Quasa92[/QUOTE]
Quasar92, Do you have Masters degree?
In addition to Dr.Wilmington being my mentor from Liberty University, I have held memberships in the Presbyterian, the Brethren, the Methodist, the Lutheran and the Baptist Churches, depending om where I was living at the time, all of whom teach the Trinity. Which I did as well for 45 years, until I tired of trying to explain it to others from the Bible, since it did not teach God to be triune, not did Jesus or His disciple ever teach such a thing. I have both volumes of Dr. Wilmington's Guide to the Bile, plus hundreds of both audio and video tapes he provided me during my studies under him. Since you claim to have all the answers, let me see you prove the Trinity from the Bible! Review my post #341, which took years of study and research to develop, together with the following:
What about the assertions trinitarians use as a mainstay of their belief, of 1 Jn.5:7 and Mt.28:19? The fact of the matter is, they cannot be blamed for believing what has been either an insertion, or an alteration of the original text by the author, yet appears in most of the English translations of our Bibles.
However, we should all know the most obvious factor of all; that the term father is only a title. The very same one every man gets when he has produced children of his own. Therefore, reference to "...baptize all nations in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit," trinitarians use to make two persons of their trio, out of God, who is the Holy Spirit and Father, one and the same person, according to Mt.1:20 and Lk.1:35, together with the Son, is false. Our Godhead is only two persons, God, who is the Holy Spirit and Father of Jesus Christ, the Son, according to the Scriptures, not three!
The Scriptural facts to support God to be the Holy Spirit are: Jn.1:18; 4:24; 2 Cor.3:17-18; Col.1:15; Lev.11:44-45; 1
Pet.1:15-16 and 1 Jn.4:12, as Spirit.
That He is also Holy are in: Lev.11:44-45; Lev.19:2; Ps.99:3; Ps.99:5 and 1 Pet.1:15-16.
Let's have a brief look at the history behind these two verses and learn the truth about them. The following is through the courtesy of SDA Global.
But various authorities mention a work entitled Discrepancies in the Gospels, and another work entitled The Concluding Sections of the Gospels.
According to Conybeare:
Eusebius cites this text (Matt. 28:19) again and again in works written between 300 and 336, namely in his long commentaries on the Psalms, on Isaiah, his Demonstratio Evangelica, his Theophany. .. in his famous history of the Church, and in his panegyric of the emperor Constantine. I have, after a moderate search in these works of Eusebius, found eighteen citations of Matthew 28:19, and always in the following form:'Go ye and make disciples of all the nations in My name, teaching them to observe all things, whatsoever I commanded you. '
Ploughman's research uncovered all of these quotations except for one, which is in a catena published by Mai in a German magazine, the Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft, edited by Dr. Erwin Preuschen in Darmstadt in 1901. Eusebius was not content merely to cite the verse in this form, but he more than once commented on it in such a way as to show how much he confirmed the wording "in my name". Thus, in his Demonstratio Evangelica he wrote the following:
For he did not enjoin them "to make disciples of all the nations" simply and without qualification, but with the essential addition "in his name". For so great was the virtue attaching to his appellation that the Apostle says, "God bestowed on him the name above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee shall bow of things in heaven and on earth and under the earth. " It was right therefore that he should emphasize the virtue of the power residing in his name but hidden from the many, and therefore say to his Apostles, "Go ye, and make disciples of all the nations in my name.' (col. 240, p. 136)
Conybeare proceeded, in Hibbert Journal, 1902:
It is evident that this was the text found by Eusebius in the very ancient codices collected fifty to a hundred and fifty years before his birth by his great predecessors. Of any other form of text he had never heard and knew nothing until he had visited Constantinople and attended the Council of Nice. Then in two controversial works written in his extreme old age, and entitled, the one 'Against Marcellus of Ancyra,' and the other 'About the Theology of the Church,' he used the common reading. One other writing of his also contains it, namely a letter written after the Council of Nice was over, to his seer of Caesurae.
In his Textual Criticism of the New Testament Conybeare wrote:
It is clear therefore, that of the manuscripts which Eusebius inherited from his predecessor, Pamphilus, at Caesurae in Palestine, some at least preserved the original reading, in which there was no mention either of baptism or of Father, Son and Holy Ghost. It has been conjectured by Dr. David-son, Dr. Martineau, by the Dean of Westminster, and by Prof. Harnack (to mention but a few names of the many) that here the received text could not contain the very words of Jesus - this long before anyone except Dr. Burgon, who kept the discovery to himself, had noticed the Eusebian form of the reading.
Naturally an objection was raised by Dr. Chase, Bishop of Ely, who argued that Eusebius indeed found the traditional text in his manuscripts, but substituted the briefer wording in his works for fear of vulgarizing the "sacred" Trinitarian wording. Interestingly, a modern Bishop revived the very argument used 150 years earlier, in support of the forged text of 1 John 5:7-8:
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost:and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood:and these three agree in one.
According to Porson (in a preface to his Letters):
Bengel. .. allowed that the words (The Three Witnesses) were in no genuine manuscripts. .. Surely then, the verse is spurious! No! This learned man finds a way of escape. 'The passage was of so sublime and mysterious a nature that the secret discipline of the Church withdrew it from the public books, till it was gradually lost. ' Under what a lack of evidence must a critic labor who resorts to such an argument!?
Conybeare continued, refuting the argument of the Bishop of Ely:
It is sufficient answer to point out that Eusebius' argument, when he cites the text, involves the text 'in my name. ' For, he asks, 'in whose name?' and answers that it was the name spoken of by Paul in his Epistle to the Philippians 2:10.
Finally, the Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics states:
The facts are, in summary, that Eusebius quotes Matthew 28:19 twenty-one times, either omitting everything between 'nations' and 'teaching,' or in the form 'make disciples of all the nations in my name,' the latter form being the more frequent.
Having considered the evidence of Eusebius, let us also consider some other early writers.
Quasa92[/QUOTE]
Quasar92, Do you have Masters degree?[/QUOTE]
This is HE who came not by water only is sufficient
What about the assertions trinitarians use as a mainstay of their belief, of 1 Jn.5:7 and Mt.28:19? The fact of the matter is, they cannot be blamed for believing what has been either an insertion, or an alteration of the original text by the author, yet appears in most of the English translations of our Bibles.
However, we should all know the most obvious factor of all; that the term father is only a title. The very same one every man gets when he has produced children of his own. Therefore, reference to "...baptize all nations in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit," trinitarians use to make two persons of their trio, out of God, who is the Holy Spirit and Father, one and the same person, according to Mt.1:20 and Lk.1:35, together with the Son, is false. Our Godhead is only two persons, God, who is the Holy Spirit and Father of Jesus Christ, the Son, according to the Scriptures, not three!
The Scriptural facts to support God to be the Holy Spirit are: Jn.1:18; 4:24; 2 Cor.3:17-18; Col.1:15; Lev.11:44-45; 1
Pet.1:15-16 and 1 Jn.4:12, as Spirit.
That He is also Holy are in: Lev.11:44-45; Lev.19:2; Ps.99:3; Ps.99:5 and 1 Pet.1:15-16.
Let's have a brief look at the history behind these two verses and learn the truth about them. The following is through the courtesy of SDA Global.
But various authorities mention a work entitled Discrepancies in the Gospels, and another work entitled The Concluding Sections of the Gospels.
According to Conybeare:
Eusebius cites this text (Matt. 28:19) again and again in works written between 300 and 336, namely in his long commentaries on the Psalms, on Isaiah, his Demonstratio Evangelica, his Theophany. .. in his famous history of the Church, and in his panegyric of the emperor Constantine. I have, after a moderate search in these works of Eusebius, found eighteen citations of Matthew 28:19, and always in the following form:'Go ye and make disciples of all the nations in My name, teaching them to observe all things, whatsoever I commanded you. '
Ploughman's research uncovered all of these quotations except for one, which is in a catena published by Mai in a German magazine, the Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft, edited by Dr. Erwin Preuschen in Darmstadt in 1901. Eusebius was not content merely to cite the verse in this form, but he more than once commented on it in such a way as to show how much he confirmed the wording "in my name". Thus, in his Demonstratio Evangelica he wrote the following:
For he did not enjoin them "to make disciples of all the nations" simply and without qualification, but with the essential addition "in his name". For so great was the virtue attaching to his appellation that the Apostle says, "God bestowed on him the name above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee shall bow of things in heaven and on earth and under the earth. " It was right therefore that he should emphasize the virtue of the power residing in his name but hidden from the many, and therefore say to his Apostles, "Go ye, and make disciples of all the nations in my name.' (col. 240, p. 136)
Conybeare proceeded, in Hibbert Journal, 1902:
It is evident that this was the text found by Eusebius in the very ancient codices collected fifty to a hundred and fifty years before his birth by his great predecessors. Of any other form of text he had never heard and knew nothing until he had visited Constantinople and attended the Council of Nice. Then in two controversial works written in his extreme old age, and entitled, the one 'Against Marcellus of Ancyra,' and the other 'About the Theology of the Church,' he used the common reading. One other writing of his also contains it, namely a letter written after the Council of Nice was over, to his seer of Caesurae.
In his Textual Criticism of the New Testament Conybeare wrote:
It is clear therefore, that of the manuscripts which Eusebius inherited from his predecessor, Pamphilus, at Caesurae in Palestine, some at least preserved the original reading, in which there was no mention either of baptism or of Father, Son and Holy Ghost. It has been conjectured by Dr. David-son, Dr. Martineau, by the Dean of Westminster, and by Prof. Harnack (to mention but a few names of the many) that here the received text could not contain the very words of Jesus - this long before anyone except Dr. Burgon, who kept the discovery to himself, had noticed the Eusebian form of the reading.
Naturally an objection was raised by Dr. Chase, Bishop of Ely, who argued that Eusebius indeed found the traditional text in his manuscripts, but substituted the briefer wording in his works for fear of vulgarizing the "sacred" Trinitarian wording. Interestingly, a modern Bishop revived the very argument used 150 years earlier, in support of the forged text of 1 John 5:7-8:
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost:and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood:and these three agree in one.
According to Porson (in a preface to his Letters):
Bengel. .. allowed that the words (The Three Witnesses) were in no genuine manuscripts. .. Surely then, the verse is spurious! No! This learned man finds a way of escape. 'The passage was of so sublime and mysterious a nature that the secret discipline of the Church withdrew it from the public books, till it was gradually lost. ' Under what a lack of evidence must a critic labor who resorts to such an argument!?
Conybeare continued, refuting the argument of the Bishop of Ely:
It is sufficient answer to point out that Eusebius' argument, when he cites the text, involves the text 'in my name. ' For, he asks, 'in whose name?' and answers that it was the name spoken of by Paul in his Epistle to the Philippians 2:10.
Finally, the Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics states:
The facts are, in summary, that Eusebius quotes Matthew 28:19 twenty-one times, either omitting everything between 'nations' and 'teaching,' or in the form 'make disciples of all the nations in my name,' the latter form being the more frequent.
Having considered the evidence of Eusebius, let us also consider some other early writers.
Quasa92[/QUOTE]
Quasar92, Do you have Masters degree?[/QUOTE]
This is HE who came not by water only is sufficient