Yes Jesus and the apostles make Trinitarian references all over the place. Additionally the apostolic fathers (the guys right after the apostles, though not inspired) used the same Trinitarian language. Paul himself starts letters with The Father and our Lord Jesus Christ.
Pope Death Watch... WITH A PRIZE!!! Quart of Maple Syrup to the winner!
- Thread starter sirhrmechanic
- Start date
uh yeah the fact that Jesus says in the name of the father, son, and spirt. That has been the long held belief for 2000 years. The burden of proof otherwise is on the oneness people, and there is no textual evidence to support that it is a vailed illusion by Jesus
What words specifically are you speaking of?
Ie examples, because I don’t know specifically what you are referring to so it’s impossible for me to guess at what you are referring too.
I quoted your post, where you quoted Jesus words
“Matthew 28:19- 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.”
Dude you are missing the point he is using a singular noun and plural names in order to show they are distinct persons, but one being. This has been the understanding for 2000 years
Apparently my mind cant comprehend that. Call me simple i guess. I kinda like it this way.
Of course i cant fully understand everything about anything.
But what Jesus says in Matthew 28 sounds simple enough. Then Peter said to get baptized in the name of Jesus.
Did Peter say the wrong thing?
Think of it like this. You are you, your body with all your parts and senses. Ears, eyes, nose hands feet. All perform separate tasks, yet they are all you, singular. You have two hands(plural) that perform tasks for you, but its a singular you.
Look at it kind of like that is that simple enough?
Because you were coming to God through Jesus, which is acknowledging that covenant that Jesus made with man.
Acknowledging grace and forgiveness that he taught.
Or at least that’s how I was taught to understand it
So if i go in a catholic place to get baptized, am i all good if i get sprinkled by the priest “in the names of the father, the name of the son, the name of the holy spirit”
Then it will be in the back of my mind that im not obeying Peter.
Or am i ok if i go to another place that dunks me all the way under the water, in the name of Jesus?
No because baptism doesn’t involve some magic incantation that must be said correctly in order to work. Simon the sorcerer was chastised for thinking something similar. We use God’s name as reverence and as a confession, but the exact wording isn’t what is important. Remember baptism is an outward confession of an internal reality
The fact is Peter is speaking to the people who just crucified Jesus. He says in the name of Jesus Christ (which in Hebrew is messiah) to highlight that it is the man that they just crucified that has power and authority. That it was Jesus they just crucified that was their messiah. What Peter said would not have had such weight if he said be baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Spirit. Jesus says this to emphasize the plurality of the Godhead. With that I always baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Spirit because that is what Jesus said
Baptism doesn’t save you, Grace through faith and not of works saves you. So no matter how you are baptized, if you think that just getting baptized makes you all good and don’t have faith, no you will not be saved. Baptism is not some magic thing you to gain salvation
If the wording or name isnt important, then in acts 19 the people were asked how they were baptized, they said in Johns baptism. Then they got re-baptized in the name of Jesus.
so paul missed the boat?
That is because they did not know of Jesus and what he did, they did not know the gospel. This is an important part
4”And Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus.”
They had not come to the internal reality of following Jesus. Once they did, they were baptized into Him
I am not saying you baptize with any name, like Budah or something, what I am saying is God isn’t going to care if you say Jesus or Father, Son, Spirt since it is an outward sign of an internal truth
But Mark 16:16, Jesus said, he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved…
Gotcha, so in essence what we SAY doesnt matter so much, its what we believe inside?
“Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” Mark 16:16 ESV
Not believing is what condemns us. Jesus doesn’t say those who don’t get baptized and those that don’t believe are condemned. He says only those that don’t believe are condemned. So if I have belief I am not condemned. Baptism was and is important and anyone who believes should be baptized, but it is belief that saves us not baptism.
In baptism Yes it’s not about the words that are said, it is not a magical incantation that if you get wrong it doesn’t work. And yes it is about our faith.
Ephesians 2:8-9: "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast."
If you think baptism saves then it is a work. Works don’t save. He also says it’s so no one can boast. Those that think you need to be baptized to be saved, isn’t that a boast when they say “I am saved because I am baptized”? Isn’t it a boast if you say “I am saved because I got baptized in Jesus name and not the Father, Son, Spirt”?
It is by grace we have been saved through faith
Gotcha, so when Jesus said “he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved”
And peter said “be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ”
Were they were just making suggestions?
And i agree, thats pretty clear that works don't save, but if i don't do some action, ill call it obedience, then my faith is actually dead?
Didnt noah save he and his family by building an ark? Was it works or faith or obedience?
Last edited:
Well on thin about what Peter says in Acts when he says be baptized for the forgiveness of sins. The word “for” (eis in Greek) can be transactional, like I’ll give you $20 for that box of ammo. But it can also be used in a non transactional way. For example, have you ever done anything “for” your birthday? Doing that thing does not grant you or give you your birthday, you do it to remember your birthday.
Now to the Mark quote again, you must read that whole passage.
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” Mark 16:16 ESV
Jesus doesn’t say you are condemned if you don’t get baptized, he says if you have unbelief you are condemned.Baptism is import yes, but it does not save or condemn us
To Noah:
“By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, in reverent fear constructed an ark for the saving of his household. By this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.”
Hebrews 11:7
Works are the fruit of faith, not the root of faith. True faith produces fruit, but they do not save us. As James talked about a faith without works is dead. He didn’t say you are saved by your works, rather he is illustrating that true faith produces fruit
“If you think baptism saves then it is a work. Works don’t save.”
Ok, so works don’t save you. So the building is on fire. You see the flames and can smell the smoke and hear the screams as people scramble out the exits. You BELIEVE the building is on fire you WILL DO something. So what did James mean when he said “show me your faith without your works, and I’ll show you my faith by my works.” How about, save yourself from this untoward generation? How about, let every man work out his own salvation with fear and trembling. Baptism isn’t works, because it isn’t something we do to ourselves. It’s something that is done by someone to us. If it doesn’t matter whether we say “in Jesus Name” or in the titles then why are we even having this discussion. As I mentioned a few pages ago, I am one person but I do multiple jobs- father, son, uncle, friend, truck driver etc. If I write a check I don’t write it in those titles of jobs I do, I just write my name on the line. Again, as cgbills said “it doesn’t matter whether you say a name or father son Holy Spirit” so then why does any of this discussion matter?
Ok, so works don’t save you. So the building is on fire. You see the flames and can smell the smoke and hear the screams as people scramble out the exits. You BELIEVE the building is on fire you WILL DO something. So what did James mean when he said “show me your faith without your works, and I’ll show you my faith by my works.” How about, save yourself from this untoward generation? How about, let every man work out his own salvation with fear and trembling. Baptism isn’t works, because it isn’t something we do to ourselves. It’s something that is done by someone to us. If it doesn’t matter whether we say “in Jesus Name” or in the titles then why are we even having this discussion. As I mentioned a few pages ago, I am one person but I do multiple jobs- father, son, uncle, friend, truck driver etc. If I write a check I don’t write it in those titles of jobs I do, I just write my name on the line. Again, as cgbills said “it doesn’t matter whether you say a name or father son Holy Spirit” so then why does any of this discussion matter?
This^. baptizing them in the NAME (singular). The disciples and ALL of the Jews, even the religious elite, knew that God was only one as he had told them in the Pentateuch. Also as I mentioned a few pages ago about Deuteronomy 6:4
You are completely misquoting and mischaracterizing what I said. Additionally you completely overlooked what I said above I’ll say it again.
Works are the fruit of faith, not the root of faith. True faith produces fruit, but they do not save us. As James talked about a faith without works is dead. He didn’t say you are saved by your works, rather he is illustrating that true faith produces fruit
Also saying baptism isn’t a work because someone does it to you is flawed
Ephesians 2:8-9: "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast."
So if someone baptizing you saves you, doesn’t that allow them to boast? Paul says so no one can boast. He also says it is a gift of God. Someone baptizing you and saving you is not a gift from God, it is a gift from that person.
Thats convenient! Now i can go join my band of swashbucking pirates who told me they are believers, and we can pillage and plunder and we dont have to worry. We believe so we are saved!
Nope not what I said. God clearly shows both things, being baptized in Jesus name and being Baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Spirit. (One was Jesus words, and the other wasn’t so there is that) He does not care which ways you do it because it’s not some magic incantation that doesn’t work if you don’t do it right. He cares about your faith
It matters because Jesus is very clearly giving us the formula for the trinity; three distinct persons that are yet the same God. That’s why the singular word name is used. That is how the church has always understood it. And there is nothing in the text that even suggests that Jesus is making this a vailed command to baptize in his name. If he wanted them to baptize in his name he would have said baptize in my name.
Also as I said before, God was given a name in the OT, it YHWH and Jesus name literally means YHWH saves. Jesus is not the revealed name of God
Further as I said a few pages ago, using analogies about yourself having different positions does not work with God and the divine nature. Finally you just like that other oneness guy fail to address Daniel 7:9-14. I’ll post it again so you can’t ignore it, but it clearly shows a plurality in God.
Daniel 7:9-14. Here we have two distinct and different figures, the Ancient of Days and the Son of man. The ancient of days is described with all the Old Testament descriptions of God and no one but God would be seated on a heavenly throne. The seen is a heavenly throne room. There the Ancient of days is seated and the Son of Man, a distant figure and person in this seen, is brought before the Ancient of Day. Then we see the Son of Man was given: “And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed.”
Daniel 7:14. No one except God has that. Yet we see the Ancient of Days, who is very clearly God and many would argue the Father, giving his power and authority to the Son of Man. These are two distinct persons and both have the power and authority of God. This is also why Jesus refers to him self more than anything else as the Son of Man.
Now I want you to address, not just try to post some other verse to refute it, but actually address what is going on in this verse. I have several others that illustrate the same thing (as others have noted), but you have not actually addressed any of them. Who is the Son of Man? Who is the Ancient of Days? If they are the same person, why would the author very clearly differentiate the two as individual people in the text? Since the text clearly illustrates them as two separate people, why are they both given the honors, attributes, names, deeds and seat of God? You cannot just post another verse of this, you must address the matter in this verse
Last edited:
Why are you all so scared to say the name Jesus? Next you will be like the Jews saying he was not the Messiah, but just a good teacher or one of the prophets. You need to pray and ask God for a revelation of who He is. You don’t have to stay bound by the demonic lies of the trinity. That is an idea spawned by Satan himself.
No sorry the church has never understood it that way and Jesus doesn’t say that. For 2000 years it has been understood as I have said. The burden of proof is on you to prove otherwise. Nowhere in the text of Matthew does it say or allude to that. Maybe it’s as simple as Jesus meant what he said
No I am not scared to say Jesus name. I do it everyday when I pray to the Father in the name of Jesus, just like Jesus modeled for us.
It is very ignorant of you to say that we will deny Jesus as the messiah, as a Trinitarian view actually has a true and fuller understanding of who Jesus is than you. I know exactly who He is
So much of what you have said shows how ignorant you are or Old Testament theology, church history, and the New Testament itself. You could not even articulate what the trinity was.
Just because you go around throwing around personal attacks and mis representing everything thing that has been said to you does not make you right. You and others have blatantly ignored other passages that do not suit your narrative and you repeat over and over the same tired line.
I’ll try this again like I did with the other guy who refused to actually address what was said. This is but one verse of many in the OT that show a plurality in God. We aren’t even touch the NT verses that have been overlooked time and again.
Daniel 7:13. Here we have two distinct and different figures, the Ancient of Days and the Son of man. The ancient of days is described with all the Old Testament descriptions of God and no one but God would be seated on a heavenly throne. The seen is a heavenly throne room. There the Ancient of days is seated and the Son of Man, a distant figure and person in this seen, is brought before the Ancient of Day. Then we see the Son of Man was given: “And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed.”
Daniel 7:14. No one except God has that. Yet we see the Ancient of Days, who is very clearly God and many would argue the Father, giving his power and authority to the Son of Man. These are two distinct persons and both have the power and authority of God. This is also why Jesus refers to him self more than anything else as the Son of Man.
Now I want you to address, not just try to post some other verse to refute it, but actually address what is going on in this verse. I have several others that illustrate the same thing (as others have noted), but you have not actually addressed any of them. Who is the Son of Man? Who is the Ancient of Days? If they are the same person, why would the author very clearly differentiate the two as individual people in the text? Since the text clearly illustrates them as two separate people, why are they both given the honors, attributes, names, deeds and seat of God? You cannot just post another verse of this, you must address the matter in this verse
This phrase or variations of it have been used numerous times in this thread.
Ill just say that saying the church or theologians or religious or spiritually mature or whatever all agree on something, to me that doesn't hold much weight.
It was the religious leaders that had Jesus killed.
It was the religious leaders that freaked out and literally started biting stephen before they killed him.
Globally, the pope is also considered a religious leader, yet he is member of one of the most corrupt groups in existence.
Also, I cant explain what much of prophesy or things in daniel mean. I dont know.
I don’t mean to simply argue all day. You clearly have studied untold more amounts of historical context than i. We clearly have different beliefs on many things.
I dont have to prove it to you.
You dont have to prove it to i.
You believe what you believe.
I believe what i believe.
Cheers
So it’s actually a duality instead of a trinity? You are playing mental gymnastics to try to imagine a god that was invented by people that crucified Jesus because he told them who He is. I’m not attacking you, but I am attacking a lie that is called the trinity. One of your other fellow trinitarians called me a heretic some distance back and I pointed out that your founders of false doctrine did the same to the apostles. I’ve also pointed out verses that CLEARLY state that God is one yet you obscurely and smugly try to claim I’m scared of genesis 18. I’m scared of NO Bible verses. I LOVE EVERY one of them.
Catholics pray to every tom, dick, and harry in the name of sainthood. They pray to Mary, they pray before tombs and former popes and God only knows to or what they pray. They pray for the dead even though the Bible says that as the tree falls so shall it lie. The Catholics are the ones that gave you the trinity. I don’t care if you’re catholic or any other flavor. If you believe the trinity you have your roots in Catholicism. Go to Israel and ask went Jew with a yarmulke on his head if God is a trinity or one God. You will hear One God every time.
The trinity can be understood by long range shooting. We have the barrel, the action, and the chassis. Or we have the rifle, the cartridge, and the target. Or it’s like a cartridge- the case, the bullet, and the propellant. Or it’s like the conditions-the wind, the distance, and the atmosphere. Or it’s like a tripod…
Ok, that’s it. I’m officially leaving this particular thread now. We’ve thoroughly hijacked it from its original lottery of a jug of maple syrup. Wish I had won that though cause I love a couple buttermilk pancakes topped with 3 eggs over easy and covered in maple syrup.
I skimmed, and my brain hurts.
But, I still like guns.
Baptism is an outward expression of an inner commitment of turning ones self over to a new life as a disciple of Christ.
I don't believe we can sinply say a prayer in a handbook and are now 'saved', relying only on Grace due to saying a printed phrase, like some I know personally think they can.
However, we can never get to heaven by just doing a checklist of tasks, like some may believe.
I believe we are saved by Grace after all we can do- and all we can do means improving each day, failing again, repenting, and accepting his Love, plan, and Grace.
Seems like alot of tearing down one religion or another, and drawing lines in the sand.
Seems best if a thread like this ever comes back up to build off what we find in common, not lawyer up getting lost in jargon and egos.
The ancient Jews had the list of do's and don'ts- a checklist. It was about the outward show of it all.
Jesus taught a higher law- all about how you feel about following, doing and believing. An inward reflection about it all.
As for me, I believe him, I try to learn his attributes, and that's enough.
But, I still like guns.
Baptism is an outward expression of an inner commitment of turning ones self over to a new life as a disciple of Christ.
I don't believe we can sinply say a prayer in a handbook and are now 'saved', relying only on Grace due to saying a printed phrase, like some I know personally think they can.
However, we can never get to heaven by just doing a checklist of tasks, like some may believe.
I believe we are saved by Grace after all we can do- and all we can do means improving each day, failing again, repenting, and accepting his Love, plan, and Grace.
Seems like alot of tearing down one religion or another, and drawing lines in the sand.
Seems best if a thread like this ever comes back up to build off what we find in common, not lawyer up getting lost in jargon and egos.
The ancient Jews had the list of do's and don'ts- a checklist. It was about the outward show of it all.
Jesus taught a higher law- all about how you feel about following, doing and believing. An inward reflection about it all.
As for me, I believe him, I try to learn his attributes, and that's enough.
