The trinity in the Gospels

  • Thread starter Thread starter whyeyeman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Moses said to the Lord, “See, you have said to me, ‘Bring up this people’; but you have not let me know whom you will send with me. Yet you have said, ‘I know you by name, and you have also found favor in my sight.’ Now if I have found favor in your sight, show me your ways, so that I may know you and find favor in your sight. Consider too that this nation is your people.” He said, “My presence will go with you, and I will give you rest.”And he said to him, “If your presence will not go, do not carry us up from here. For how shall it be known that I have found favor in your sight, I and your people, unless you go with us? In this way, we shall be distinct, I and your people, from every people on the face of the earth.”
The Lord said to Moses, “I will do the very thing that you have asked; for you have found favor in my sight, and I know you by name.” Moses said, “Show me your glory, I pray.” And he said, “I will make all my goodness pass before you, and will proclaim before you the name, ‘The Lord’; and I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy. But,” he said, “you cannot see my face; for no one shall see me and live.” And the Lord continued, “See, there is a place by me where you shall stand on the rock; and while my glory passes by I will put you in a cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with my hand until I have passed by; then I will take away my hand, and you shall see my back; but my face shall not be seen.” (Exodus 33:12-23)
Click to expand...
The allusions in Mark 6 to Old Testament theophanies is because this isn’t just a miracle, it is a revelation of God himself to man, a theophany by which Christ is revealing his divine identity to the disciples by means of a miracle – walking on water – that in the Scriptures, at least, would be only something that God could do. More importantly, in the context of the miracle, Jesus takes God’s name as his own.

That is really important. If he is taking the divine name, then he can’t be just a prophet and he can’t just be a messiah. He is also claiming to be YAHWEH himself come in person.

Give one occasion where an angel or a king or anyone else takes I AM (ego eimi [ἐγώ εἰμί]) as their reference to themselves in the context of performing a miracle. In Hebrew culture your name signifies WHO YOU ARE. So by taking the divine name to himself – I AM – Jesus is making a divine claim. He is not just saying, “I am the Messiah!” He is saying, “I am God.”

The Jewish leaders get it, which is why they crucified Jesus for claiming to be God, i.e., blasphemy.
 
Last edited:
Miracles cannot be proof of divinity. For one, we are told in acts that it is “God working through Jesus who did the miracles.” Secondly, Jesus says to his disciples that they will perform far greater miracles than himself.
 
God’s old testament name is not “I AM”. It is “I am who am.” Big difference.
 
whyeyeman said:
God’s old testament name is not “I AM”. It is “I am who am.” Big difference.
Click to expand...
Not as big as you suppose.

The Godhead is I AM WHO I AM. There are allusions to three persons, the Trinity, in that phrasing: I AM (the Son) WHO (the Spirit) I AM (the Father.) Ergo, by using the simple form I AM, Jesus is making reference to his distinct place I AM within the fullness of the Godhead I AM WHO I AM.

Are you certain you have thought this through as well as you suppose?
 
Last edited:
whyeyeman said:
Miracles cannot be proof of divinity. For one, we are told in acts that it is “God working through Jesus who did the miracles.” Secondly, Jesus says to his disciples that they will perform far greater miracles than himself.
Click to expand...
You didn’t answer my previous question, "Why did Jesus permit his disciples to worship him, using the same Greek term proskuneo according to Mark., that Jesus told Satan was due ONLY to God?

If Jesus was not God, but the Apostles worshiped him after he stilled the storm, then they would have been guilty of idolatry. Yet, Jesus permitted them to worship him. Why?
 
Last edited:
“Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” - Matthew 28:19

Notice: ‘n the name’, not ‘in the name’ of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
 
That was added to the gospel in the second century. It originally just said in the name of Jesus. Even “the Catholic encyclopedia” has this written in its entry, so don’t try to deny it.
 
The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics is not the Catholic Encyclopedia.

According to your Wikipedia reference, the ERE claims Matthew was changed, but the CE says the baptismal formula was changed’ not that Matthew was.

The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263: “The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century.”
 
Last edited:
Not also that in revelations 3:8-9 Jesus says this:

“I know your works. See, I have set before you an open door, and no one can shut it; for you have a little strength, have kept My word, and have not denied My name. 9 Indeed I will make those of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews and are not, but lie—indeed I will make them come and worship before your feet, and to know that I have loved you.
 
The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263: “The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century.”
 
It strongly suggests the gospel was changed. Especially considering in the book of acts people baptise in the name of Jesus.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top