Posted on 02/05/2007 10:35:59 AM PST by MichaelTheeArchAngel
It's a moot point to argue anyway as God is obviously in heaven, always was, Jesus is in heaven and the HS comes down from heaven. The fact that they bear witness is the important part-- earth or heaven makes no difference because God is everywhere.
While the Johannine Comma may be questionable, Matthew 28:19 is not questionable.
Are you saying that two of the most important verses used to support the trinitarian doctrine have been proven to be falsified????
I'm shocked, I tell you, just shocked! /sarcasm
Maybe Dan Rathers helped write the Bible?
Well, I got out my books on Hebrew to check the reference given me, because I was told I was in error, and this is what I found in regards to Genesis 1:26. Here is the transliteral: "And said Elohiym: making (man or Adam) in our image and likeness." The words "Let us" were not there. Thanks for wasting my time. Here are some additional verses from the N.I.V. bible to think about.
#1. Matthew 26:64. "Yes, it is as you say,"
#2. Mark 14:62. "I am, said Jesus." Did Jesus say yes or I am.
#3. John 8:58. "Before Abraham was born, I am!" Or did Jesus say; Before Abraham was born, I lived.
#4. Micah 5:2. "Out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times.
#1. Matthew 28:19. "Baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," It is recorded in history that the oldest script said, "In my name."
#2. Acts 4:12. "There is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."
#3. Acts 10:48. "So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ."
#4. Acts 19:5. "They were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus."
#5. Romans 6:3. "All of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus ."
N.I.V. 1 John 5:7-8. "7. For there are three that testify: 8. The Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."
Vulgate 1 John 5:7."For there are three that testify in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one."
Textual Commentary on Revelation 1:11.
K.J.V. Revelation 1:10-11. 10. I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, 11 Saying, (I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and,) What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.
The bracketed, emboldened portion of the above KJV text was not in the original text of verse 11, as explained below. The NRSV and TEV versions of this verse accurately reflect in English what was written in the original Greek text of that verse.
NRSV 1:10-11. I was in the spirit on the Lord's day, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet 11 saying, "Write in a book what you see and send it to the seven churches, to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamum, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea."
TEV 1:10-11. On the Lord's day the Spirit took control of me, and I heard a loud voice, that sounded like a trumpet, speaking behind me. 11 It said, "Write down what you see, and send the book to the churches in these seven cities: Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea."
Commentary
Modern translations do not include in Rev 1:11 the following words that are in the KJV version of that verse:
Saying, (I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and,)
The wording at the beginning of the King James Version of Rev. 1:11 is not found in any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned as a footnote in any modern translation. Now the voice of coarse is the Son of Man; and he is the (first and last) god to be born into this world; however he is not the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and End.
K.J.V. 1:12-13. 12. And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks;
13. And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.
Now all of the different bibles tell us that God the Father is a Spirit, and that He is Holy. Therefore one of His many name titles is Holy Spirit.
I hope you're not tring to debate me on these items since, as I stated before, I'm supporting your thesis.
My post was intended for whoever had me research the Hebrew text, saying that the words (Let us) is there. I looked in the Hebrew text he linked me to, and they are not in that Hebrew text. The words (Let us) are not there.
Throughout The Old Testament God refers to himself....and is referred to, as one. John 1:1 reveals that Our Saviour was with God in the beginning. As what? His word! His spokesman!
[Proverbs 30:4] Solomon knew that God had a Son...."Who has gone up to heaven and come down? Who has gathered up the wind in the hollow of his hands? Who has wrapped up the waters in his cloak? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is his name, and the name of his son? Tell me if you know!"
[Colossians 1:15-16] He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. [John 6:62] What if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before! and [John 3:13] No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven, the Son of Man.
To dispute the fact that Our Saviour was not God incarnate is to call scripture false. Even John The Baptist testifies that our Saviour (who was 6 months younger) was God incarnate [John 1:15] John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, "This was he of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me."
So.....if God and his Son both pre existed the world, how come they are not two separate persons? [John 10:30] "I and the Father are one." [Philipians 2:5-7] For, let this mind be in you that [is] also in Christ Jesus who, being in the form of God, thought [it] not robbery to be equal to God, but did empty himself, the form of a servant having taken, in the likeness of men having been made.
As previously stated in earlier posts "Elohim" is, when used in the Hebrew to describe the one true god....a singular noun. It can be used to describe other gods in the plural but generally is used in the singular. Baalberith/Judges 8:33; Chemosh/Judges 11:24; Dagon/Judges 16:23; Ashteroth/I Kings 11:5; Balzebub/II Kings 1:2-3; Nisroch/II Kings 19:37 and the golden calf/Exodus 32:1-31 are all called Elohim in the singular! If anyone were to insinuate that these gods were trinities...or more than one it could easily be disproved. So, why does mainstream Christianity insist that the one true God of scriptures, Elohim, be referred to in the plural?
Jacob wrestled with Elohim [Genesis 32:24-24]....one opponent, not three! Moses is called Elohim [Exodus 7:1]. Was Moses a trinity? Elohim is called Father in the singular [Malachi 2:10].
Only two scriptures come close to supporting a trinitarian view, [1 John 5:7] which everyone by now should know is spurious and [Matthew 28:19].
Does Matthew prove a trinity? No! This is the translation from the Hebrew text, "Shem Tov". Yashua drew near and said, "All power[All Mighty] is given to me in Heaven and Earth. Go you and teach them to carry out all things I have commanded you forever." This translation agrees with that of Eusebius Histories, Book III, Chapter 5, Paragraph 2 Eusebius also tells us in Book III, Chapter 39, Paragraph 16 that according to Papias the Book of Matthew was written in the Hebrew, not the Greek. This is also confirmed by Iraeneus in his "Against Heresies" Book III, Chapter 1, Paragraph 1. And as Iraeneus explains in Paragraph 2, there is one God and one son of God.....the Holy Spirit being the Spirit of God.
Not surprisingly, the original Hebrew of Matthew, according to "Shem Tov" does not indicate a Trinitarian viewpoint....as also would the Torah.... used by the early Jewish believers and taught by the Apostles.
Unfortunately, the Greek manuscripts that we have... that have been used to translate Matthew....are not originals. This is another quote from Eusebius regarding the E.C.F., Origen: "Among the four Gospels, which are the only indisputable ones in the Church of God under heaven, I have learned that by tradition that the first was written by Matthew, who was a publican, but afterwards an Apostle of Jesus Christ, and it was prepared for the converts from Judaism, and published in the Hebrew language."
So, the only two scriptural references to the Trinity doctrine are in doubt! One proves to be spurious and the other, a translation from a different language....and not at all in agreement with the Torah.....of which Our Saviour reminded us: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them!"
To support the idea of a Trinitarian God head you have to use terms not found in the Bible, rely on false scripture based upon twisted interpretations that contradict extremely clear scriptures and create a convoluted theory that no one really understands, forcing it's adherents to declare it a mystery.
So are you saying that Jesus and the Father are the same person or are you espousing the binitarian view?
I am saying that the God Head is not a Trinity. I am also saying that the Apostle Paul mentions the Father and Our Saviour in every single introduction of every epistle he wrote. He never once mentions the Holy Spirit. If the Holy Spirit were a co equal member of the God Head Paul would have been certain to know this. If so, why does he not mention it.....why do the others not mention it?
Likewise Peter never mentions the Holy Spirit in his two introductions. If this were a defining doctrine of the Apostolic church....wouldn't you consider this odd?
As Our Saviour said, "I and the Father are one." [John 10:30]
one what??? Where does it say there the they are "one person". Note that it does not read "I and the Father AM one". If he was the Father, why didn't he say so with the simple words: "I am the Father" --- but he didn't because he wasn't and isn't.
This same thing is stated by Paul in I Corinthians 3:6-8:
"I have planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase... Now he that planted and he that watereth are one".
Is Paul saying that he and Apollos are the same person? Certainly not. It means that they are united in agreement but with different ministries. They complement one another rather than conflict or compete with each other.
And then Jesus prays for his apostles "that they may be one even as we are one". Well, hello. Did John become Peter who became James .... Weren't they all different people with different identities and different ministries and different callings and different destinies??? But they became ONE just as the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit were ONE --- united in agreement and purpose regarding the Gospel but with separate identities, separate names, separate ministries.
Let's read the context. It is during Hanukkah and Jesus is at the temple and the Jews are congregating around him....hoping he'll slip up. [John 10:22-24]
He tells them in so many words he indeed is the Son of God and they attempt to stone him. [John 10:25-31]
They are attempting this because He claims to be God. Jesus answers that indeed it is written that "Ye are Gods"[Psalm 82:6] and scripture cannot be broken. He asks why they accuse him of blasphemy because he claims to be God's Son. [John 10:32-37]
If Jesus was not God incarnate then his sacrifice would have been for naught [Psalm 49:5-9]....but He was [John 1:1] ....And the Word was God.
One what? One God.
[John 10:38] "But if I do it, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father."
Right --- He said that He was the SON of God. Did these Jews ever say: "What do you mean by the word 'Son' of God? God doesn't have a Son. There is only one person up there". No --- They never question him in regard to there being a Father and a Son.
As a matter of fact, even the parables that Jesus told indicate that the Jewish leaders understood that the Father and the Son were two separate persons. They had no problem with the concept. They just didn't like this Son that they had in front of them. He wasn't who they expected.
Jesus and the Father were ONE just like the apostles were ONE and Paul and Apollos were ONE. Just as the apostles were more than one person and Paul and Apollos were more than one person, so Jesus and his Father.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God
A couple questions:
How many time is the word for word (logos) translated directly as "Jesus"?
How many times is it correctly translated communicate?
What is the precise meaning for the word "with" (pros)?
(Pros means something different than para or meta)
How was the logos 'with' God in the beginning?
LOL.....Good one....understatement of the year!
In Deut.6:4, the Hebrew word for 'one' is echad-a compound unity, not a singular one.
there ya go.
Some make the argument that because echad is used in passages such as Gen. 1:5 (evening and morning were "day one [echad]", or "first day"), Gen. 2:24 (a husband and wife shall be "one" flesh) and Ezek. 37:17 (two sticks are to become "one" stick), echad is therefore meant to be understood as some kind of a compound unity. To begin with, such examples make up but a very small minority of the uses of echad, the vast majority being of the variety listed above. It is improper exegesis to define a word on the basis of a small percentage of its usage. But even this extreme minority of usage does not mean that echad actually has a different meaning than a simply one in these passages. In Gen. 1:5, "day" is the word that has "parts" to it (i.e., "evening" and "morning" make up the day), not echad. In Gen. 2:24, "flesh" acts as the collective noun (what the man and the woman as comprise together). [12] The key factor in all such passages - a factor missing from Deut. 6:4 - is that two or more "parts" are mentioned, such that the reader can immediately discern that there is some kind of "coming together" of the people or things mentioned, usually for just one purpose or goal. Echad, in fact, must maintain its meaning of "just one" for these expressions to convey their intended sense. To make our point clear: Deut. 6:4 does not say, "YHWH our God, though three (or two or whatever plural number you like), is one." There is no hint of "coming together" here. The verse says that YHWH our God is plainly, simply, one.
Wooaahh there, Nelly. You just got tripped up in your own words. The key factor is the word "Elohim" which the link admits is a plural form which would be that key factor for the word "echad" to then mean a "compound unity".
Thus the SHAMA of Deuteronomy 6:4 can most definitely teach a compound unity regarding Elohim, especially when compared to the use of the word "ONE" regarding Jesus and his Father in the New Testament, whose relationship would be the model for the compound unity of the apostles: "that they might be ONE even as we are". There were [was] more than one apostle, weren't [wasn't] there?
Ok, I looked and it is not there. (Let us) is not in the Hebrew text you showed me.
The reason the word "Elohiym" is plurl, is because translated it says "God of the living." Living, being the other people of heaven and earth. The word El for God alone is singular.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.