Is the trinity taught in the bible?

Originally posted by josephw
[b]"I know exactly who Jesus is..."

Then for once have the intellectual fortitude to address Isaiah 9:6.[/b]

Did you want to address my post, which I've put to you twice?
🙂

Originally posted by divegeester
Of course you can completely ignore the entire content of my post if you want to...oh, you just did.

I read your post and will comment again on it.

Excellent post.

"Name" singular.

That's the UNE in Tri-UNE.

Same "name" for the father and of the son and of the Holy Ghost
Who's "name"?

The name Jesus. Why not capitalize Father and Son ?
The NAME is really - Father - Son - Holy Spirit in Matthew 28:19.

"Go therefore and disciple all nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit ..."

The name is really Father - Son - Holy Spirit.

Now drop your atomic bomb on me !!

Show me in scripture anywhere where the disciples who were given this command by Jesus, actually baptised using those words? Nowhere. Every time without exception they baptised in the "name" of Jesus.

I agree fully. But you see this as bringing the belief in the Triune God to a screeching halt like the crash of a great locomotive. LOL.

"In the book of Acts they always baptized in the name or upon the name of Jesus. So Crash! Slam! Crush! Collapse!!! your Trinity belief !"

Well Divegeester, sorry but that fact that we see "upon the name of Jesus" or "in the name of Jesus" in all the records of believers being baptized simply doesn't scream out any DOOM to the belief in the Father - Son - Holy Spirit God and Jesus being the incarnation of God.

Into Jesus is into the Triune God.
Into the Triune God is into Jesus.

This biblical record of some baptisms in Acts and what was said at the time is simply no showstopper to the revelation of the three-one God.

Your taking it as some slam dunk proof that there is no trinity just suggests to me that you are an expert in missing the point. I don't take those passages as the basis of argument about what should be prayed or said at the baptism of a believer.

Jesus is the one "name", singular, given amoung men, by which we may be saved. It is the "name" of the father, and of the son and of the holy spirt.

That's right.
So into the Father - Son - and Holy Spirit is into Jesus.
And into Jesus is into the Father - Son - Holy Spirit.

I think you are majoring in missing the point there.

Originally posted by sonship
Lallalallallaaa not listening, not listening, pretending to reply, llalalalalalal

You haven't in anyway whatsoever addressed my simple concise and scriptural premise. This load of usual waffle from you just reads like lallalalalalalalalal I've got my fingers in my ears.

Which of course, you have.

Originally posted by divegeester
You haven't in anyway whatsoever addressed my simple concise and scriptural premise. This load of usual waffle from you just reads like lallalalalalalalalal I've got my fingers in my ears.

Which of course, you have.

That sounds very triumphant.

Originally posted by sonship
That sounds very triumphant.

I think the way you deliberately silenced DeepThought, one of the most decent and thoughtful posters here, was a good example of you trying to be "triumphant".

Originally posted by galveston75
Some interesting facts on of the trinity:

The Illustrated Bible Dictionary publication admits: “It is not a biblical doctrine in the sense that any formulation of it can be found in the Bible.”

Cardinal John O’Connor stated about the Trinity: “We know that it is a very profound mystery, which we don’t begin to understand.”

The Encyclopædia Br ...[text shortened]... ined, Trinitarians are not agreed among themselves” (Lyman Abbott, editor, 1885, “Trinitarians”.

It all depends on which church you belong to. If you are a J.W., their bible has been revised several times to reflect certain concepts of thinking. These concepts of thinking, based on their theologins will state "it never was in the origional scriptures" . And yet if the so called wise men would read the origional texts of the Jewish scriptures they will find an odd word. When God speaks to Moses and says "I am whom am" there is no real translation of it to English. The "I am" literally is "I's am whom am" . In other words, it is a singular plural noun. It is a word made by the Jews to explain God.

Originally posted by FMF
I think the way you deliberately silenced DeepThought, one of the most decent and thoughtful posters here, was a good example of you trying to be "triumphant".

Me diliberately "silencing" someone ?

lol.

Originally posted by divegeester
Did you want to address my post, which I've put to you twice?
🙂

Not sure what post you're referring to.

The last post of yours I replied to is on page 5, fourth from the bottom.

Originally posted by josephw
Not sure what post you're referring to.

The last post of yours I replied to is on page 5, fourth from the bottom.

My apologies, yes I missed that.

However you seemed to miss the point of my replied about the Mathew scripture you posted which was you defending the trinity doctrine. Did you not want to discuss what I said.

Sonship didn't either, strangely enough.

Originally posted by sonship
That sounds very triumphant.

That's wierd, it amusement rather than triumph as if was me laughing at you dodging of the actual content in my post. It's odd, Josephw doesn't want to discuss it either. I don't mind, it's such an effort to get stiff-necked people to look at something simple which they don't want to see.

Originally posted by divegeester
And yet the man/angel "Jesus" is your saviour...

Sorry young man, you still don't understand.
Jesus was an angel in his prehuman existence.
Nis name was Michael.
When God transfered Jesus' life to Mary's womb,
he was born as a 100% man named Jesus.
He was without sin and gave up his perfect human life for us.
After his death, he ascended to heaven to offer his sacrifice in behalf of mankind.
Since the time of Noah there have been no man/angels.
In Noah's day some of the angels left their proper place, came to Earth, and assumed the form of a man. It was because of them and their offspring, the Nephlim, that God brought the flood of Noah's day.
Those demon angels and their offspring filled the Earth with violence and immorality and God responded by wiping the Earth clean. Only Noah and those who listened to him were saved.
We have the same situation today, violence and immorality fill the Earth.
God will cleanse the Earth one last time.
Then He will not permit these things again.
The legal precedent has been set.

Originally posted by Pudgenik
It all depends on which church you belong to. If you are a J.W., their bible has been revised several times to reflect certain concepts of thinking. These concepts of thinking, based on their theologins will state "it never was in the origional scriptures" . And yet if the so called wise men would read the origional texts of the Jewish scriptures they will ...[text shortened]... m" . In other words, it is a singular plural noun. It is a word made by the Jews to explain God.

🙄

What a load.

Originally posted by divegeester
My apologies, yes I missed that.

However you seemed to miss the point of my replied about the Mathew scripture you posted which was you defending the trinity doctrine. Did you not want to discuss what I said.

Sonship didn't either, strangely enough.

What page is that on?

Originally posted by josephw
What page is that on?

It's the same post you replied to. I laid out the scripture from Mathew demonstrating that the name of "Jesus" is the name of the father and of the son and of the holy spirt. So therefore indicating that the trinitarian explanation of the godhead cannot be right.

I'd say that when I first saw this it was without doubt one of the biggest epiphanies of my entire Christian life.

Edit: sorry, top of page two.

Originally posted by roigam
Sorry young man...

Lol.

When I was in the church system this is exactly how the pompous leaders used to talk.