The trinity in the Gospels

  • Thread starter Thread starter whyeyeman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
whyeyeman said:
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.
Click to expand...
That doesn’t imply the “synagogue of Satan” will worship you, it means they will worship me (I.e., Jesus/God) in front of your eyes to vindicate your faith in me.

In any case, given that the synagogue of Satan worships a false god anyway and don’t honour the true one, what will it matter if they worship human beings? That would seem an improvement and an affront to their pride that they are at least pointed in the proper direction (towards God) even if by coercion.
 
That’s one way to interpret it. But it only reads like that once you’ve already got the idea in your head that only God can be “proskuneo” worshipped.
 
Acts 2:38 - Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Acts 8:16 - for he had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Acts 10:48 - And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days.

Acts 19:5 - On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
 
whyeyeman said:
And no, it’s dishonest because, for example, it claims that Romans 8:11 says the holy spirit raised Jesus from the dead. This is quite simply a lie. Romans 8:11 reads as follows:

“If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.”

Anyone with basic reading comprehension can see that it doesn’t say that.
Click to expand...
In order to understand why it’s not dishonest, it’s necessary to have an understanding of Koine Greek. In that language, the grammar indicates the kind of conditional statement is being made. Sometimes, it’s a statement that infers that the “if” part is false; others, that the “if” part is unknown. But, sometimes, it infers that the “if” part is true. Therefore, the thrust of the conditional is that, knowing that it’s being asserted that the first part is true, then it’s likewise true that the “then” part is true.

That’s what’s going on here. So, to say that Romans 8:11 asserts that the Holy Spirit raised Jesus from the dead is precisely what the text says!
 
whyeyeman said:
Christ said “I am”, God in exodus said “I am who am”. Not the same
Click to expand...
Not identical, certainly. However, look at the reaction of the Jewish leaders when Jesus makes an “I am” statement. Clearly, they know that He’s making a statement about His divinity – it drives them absolutely bonkers when Jesus says this!

And, if they understood him in that context, what grounds can you claim to assert otherwise?
 
whyeyeman 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 second century.”
Click to expand...
Wherever you’re quote mining, you’re getting it wrong. The Catholic Encyclopedia doesn’t say this. (If you think it does, then perhaps you might want to provide a citation from the Catholic Encyclopedia as found at newadvent.org) After all, if it’s there, then a simple Google search will turn up that verbatim sentence at that site, right? It doesn’t. 😉

Rather, this seems to be a quote from the Encyclopedia Brittanica. (At least, when I Google what you quoted, that’s what it comes up as – in addition to the other folks who have misquoted the Catholic Encyclopedia in the way you have.)
 
Jesus say’s John the Baptist is the greatest man born of woman. So every man born of woman would have Adam as the source of generation. He is revealing that He is generated by God not Adam.
Matt 11-11
Truly I tell you, among those born of women no one has arisen greater than John the Baptist; yet the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.
Click to expand...
So He follows that with the statement below to point the minds of the crowd to what He means when He say’s generation.
Matt 11-16
16 “But to what will I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the marketplaces and calling to one another,
Click to expand...
Below He teaches that His testimony is greater than John’s and reveals where it originates. A testimony greater than John’s can’t be an earthly testimony
John 5-36
But I have a testimony greater than John’s. The works that the Father has given me to complete, the very works that I am doing, testify on my behalf that the Father has sent me.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Acts 13:28 - And though they found in him no guilt worthy of death, they asked Pilate to have him executed.

The Pharisees are hardly known to be correct interpreters of Jesus are they?
 
It doesn’t say that. No translation even attempts to suggest such. And I trust translators more than you.
 
Last edited:
whyeyeman said:
Acts 13:28 - And though they found in him no guilt worthy of death, they asked Pilate to have him executed.

The Pharisees are hardly known to be correct interpreters of Jesus are they?
Click to expand...
It wasn’t just the Pharisees involved there. Luke simply means that Jesus was innocent (expressed as “no guilt worthy of death”) but “they” – the Jewish leaders – still besought Pilate to have him executed. Luke is denouncing their lack of justice and overstep of authority.

You brought this up in another thread…

Cf. "JESUS IS LORD"/ "JESUS IS GOD" controversy - #40 by HarryStotle
 
Last edited:
I posted the second time before you answered the first.

I’ll admit this passage makes sense from both perspectives.
 
whyeyeman said:
Acts 8:16 - for he had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
Click to expand...
This quote actually undermines your entire case.

What it is saying is that because they were ONLY baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus, the Holy Spirit HAD NOT YET FALLEN ON ANY OF THEM. The entire passage:
Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John, who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, for he had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit. (Acts 8:14-17)
Click to expand...
That implies an incompleteness of the baptismal formula because the Holy Spirit hadn’t come upon them BECAUSE they were “only baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.”

That would show the Trinitarian formula for baptism was understood as necessary by the Church very early on.
 
Last edited:
Catholic interpretation is that this is referring to confirmation. They have only been baptized, and now are being confirmed.
 
John 1 explicitly states that Jesus is God.

In John 1:1-5 it states:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.”

And to make sure we understand who ‘the Word’ refers to, John 1:14 states:

“And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.”

I don’t see how those two statements, put together, could be interpreted as anything other than trinitarianism.
 
We might be but God is not bound to the sacraments… Also the separation of confirmation and baptism if I’m not wrong is kind of a more recent thing.

And why are we still discussing all this heresy in so many different threads?
 
Matthew 28:19. Going therefore, teach ye all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.

Jesus did this on purpose. Instead of saying names, Jesus said name. Because God is three divine persons (yet are all one), he could not have said names. This passage clearly shows the Trinity

Then it goes on to say…
28:20. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top