What Trinitarian churches teach about the Trinity

[Niatero]

Do you know that the term ‘God’ is a SUPERLATIVE ADJECTIVE as well as an ADVERB.

Yes, I know that.

When I say "God," I mean the God of Abraham, not claiming to actually know anything about Him.

 

[Soapy]

Yes, I know that.

When I say "God," I mean the God of Abraham, not claiming to actually know anything about Him.

A SUPERLATIVE ADJECTIVE……!!!!

Like “Supreme”, “Greatest”, “Most High”, “MOST POWERFUL”, “HIGHEST”…

So it can be written “Our GOD is GOD over all GODS”.

The bolded usage is the superlative adjective - the other two usages are as ‘Deity’. Writing it again we get: “Our deity is THE GREATEST (Supreme) over all deities”. And ‘Deity’ is ‘Those who we regard as our spiritual rulers’.

So, in John 1:1 we can see the usage of the Superlative Adjective:

• ‘.., the word was GOD…’

It is saying that THE SPOKEN WORD OF THE DEITY THE JEWS BELIEVE IN IS THE MOST POWERFUL, MOST MAJESTIC, the GREATEST … utterance:

• “Let there be light….’

In the beginning the deity of the Jews SPOKE A MONUMENTAL (superlative adjective) word THAT CREATED ALL THINGS!!

This is how Trinitarians adulterated the scriptures by saying that Jesus (was he Christ then??!!!) created all things … tie that in with what I said before that Jesus spoke exactly what God taught him to say, did what God empowered him (The Anointment by the Spirit of God) to do. This is why the Jews were saying ‘Only God can heal the sick… Only God can raise the dead… only God can forgive sins…. DESPITE Jesus saying that: ‘If you had faith as small as a grain of sand …YOU, TOO CAN DO THESE THINGS… [in fact] You too will do these things AND GREATER THINGS THAN THESE WILL YOU DO!!’

Think about that last point: If man can do greater things than Jesus (who Trinitarians say IS GOD!!) is man going to be greater than God??? Greater than ‘THE SUPREME ONE’?

“God” a Title: a word that is used before someone's name, stating their social rank, qualifications, position in an organization.

What is the NAME of your GOD: The Jewish GOD is named ‘YHWH’… He says of himself: “I am YHWH, your supreme one… You shall have no other God except me!’

There, we see the name of the God of the Jews (“YHWH”) and also the definition by status, rank, qualification, and position… “THE MOST SUPREME RULER”!!!

And, a TITLE always points to a position so, GOD OF THE JEWS, GOD OF THE ISRAELITES, GOD OF THE PHILISTINES, GOD OF THE EGYPTIANS… But because THE NAME OF A GOD is unique to that God there need be no pointer as it is in the name itself.

‘YHWH is my God… YHWH is my MIGHTY ONE’ and another says, ‘But ODIN is my GOD!’. Are there only ONE GOD?
Scriptures has ‘The God of the Jews’ saying: ‘I am God of all whom are called Gods’…. So, yes, there are MANY who are called ‘Gods’. The Scriptures also says: “Though there are many Gods… For us (Beluevers in the God of the Jews) there is ONLY ONE [True] GOD…’. Jesus Christ says: “[Father] Eternal life depends on them believing in YOU, the only TRUE GOD…’.

So there ARE other ‘so called’ GODS (mighty ones, heroes, deities believed to be) but in truth there is ONLY ONE TRUE GOD from the perspective of Jews and Christians (and Muslims).

And this one true God gave his eternal name as ‘YHWH’. But the Son of God (pay good mind to what this means!) is named ‘Jesus’, with a TITLE of ‘The Christ (the anointed one)’… ‘the high priest of God’ as a descriptor. So if Jesus is named as one thing, and THEN is GRANTED a name above all names AFTER HE ACCEEDS TO HIS OWN THRONE… how was he ETERNALLY YHWH before that?

Hmmm…! Interesting what trinity says about that…. Ask and see for yourself how deceit works!!

 

[Brian2]

So, Brian2, you are “caught between a rock and a hard place”!!

You agree that Jesus Christ is NOT the FIRST TO BE BORN OF GOD…

… but you agree that Jesus Christ is ‘firstborn’ in AUTHORITY.

So you have a dilemma.

No I don't.

The trinitarian translators chose the SIMILAR words because it aided their fallacy cause but anyone with intelligence and wisdom can easily see that they are TWO entirely different MEANINGS!!! Are you wise, do you have the intelligence to see that? Great, if you do!!!

Are you saying that the Bible is wrong and that you know what it should have said?

 

[Brian2]

Brian2, ‘Jesus and the Father are one IN AGREEMENT’.

The Son believes in what the Father taught him… and the Father approves of what the Son is doing.

From: John 10:30 Commentaries: "I and the Father are one."
30. I and my Father are one] ‘One’ is neuter in the Greek; not one. Person, but one Substance. There is no ‘My’ in the Greek; I and the Father are one. Christ has just implied that His hand and the Father’s hand are one, which implies that He and the Father are one; and this He now asserts. They are one in power, in will, and in action: this at the very least the words roust mean; the Arian interpretation of mere moral agreement is inadequate. Whether or no Unity of Essence is actually stated here, it is certainly implied, as the Jews see. They would stone Him for making Himself God, which they would not have done had He not asserted or implied that He and the Father were one in Substance, not merely in will. And Christ does not correct them, as assuredly He would have done, had their animosity arisen out of a gross misapprehension of His words. Comp. Revelation 20:6; Revelation 22:3.

Brian2, what does this verse say to you?? What do you understand from it:

• ‘On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you.’ (John 14:20)
• ‘Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.’ (John 17:21)

That Jesus disciples can be one with each other in Christ just as the Son and Father are one.

 

[Soapy]

No I don't.

Best answer - say nothing!!! But that tells the whole story!!!

Are you saying that the Bible is wrong and that you know what it should have said?

No Brian2, I’m talking about YOU!! I asked if YOU were intelligent and wise enough to see that:

• ‘Firstborn’ (The most beloved of the Father)

and:

• ‘First [to be] Born’ (Chronological birth order)

are two entirely different things.

You decide that you dare not answer for the sake of implicating yourself (You took the Fifth!!).

 

[Soapy]

From: John 10:30 Commentaries: "I and the Father are one."
30. I and my Father are one] ‘One’ is neuter in the Greek; not one. Person, but one Substance. There is no ‘My’ in the Greek; I and the Father are one. Christ has just implied that His hand and the Father’s hand are one, which implies that He and the Father are one; and this He now asserts. They are one in power, in will, and in action: this at the very least the words roust mean; the Arian interpretation of mere moral agreement is inadequate. Whether or no Unity of Essence is actually stated here, it is certainly implied, as the Jews see. They would stone Him for making Himself God, which they would not have done had He not asserted or implied that He and the Father were one in Substance, not merely in will. And Christ does not correct them, as assuredly He would have done, had their animosity arisen out of a gross misapprehension of His words. Comp. Revelation 20:6; Revelation 22:3.



That Jesus disciples can be one with each other in Christ just as the Son and Father are one.

So, Brian2, you are saying that if Jesus is in the Father and the Father is in Jesus then that means that Jesus is the father…
- Or is it that the Father is Jesus?

And that if the disciples are in Jesus and Jesus is in the disciples then the disciples are Jesus…?
- Or is it that Jesus is the disciples….?

 

[Brian2]

• ‘Firstborn’ (The most beloved of the Father)

and:

• ‘First [to be] Born’ (Chronological birth order)

are two entirely different things.

I think that in Hebrew it is the same word which can mean both. I think this applies to the Greek also.
So in that case there is no blame on the translators.

If it was not like this then the JWs could not say that "firstborn" has only one meaning and you and I say that there is more than one meaning.

 

[Soapy]

I think that in Hebrew it is the same word which can mean both. I think this applies to the Greek also.
So in that case there is no blame on the translators.

If it was not like this then the JWs could not say that "firstborn" has only one meaning and you and I say that there is more than one meaning.

Please stop injecting JW into debates between you and I. I am not interested in what JW think or dictate in this thread. All you are doing is attempting a distraction since you cannot defend your fallacy ideology.

‘The FIRST BORN’ is also the ‘FIRSTBORN’ to the Father. Why not! He is the only Son so, of course, the first son from the womb is also ‘His greatest love(d Son).

But as the Father has more Sons, he may (and scripturally) finds a deep sinful act perpetrated by the first Son. The Father thence sets aside this first Son (in terms of his love) to set another as his first and greatest love:

• ‘He sets aside the first [Son] in order to establish a second [Son]’ (Hebrew 10:9)

How many examples from scriptures can you point out that exemplify this saying?

Start with Adam… the ‘first Born’ of mankind!!
Who is Adam’s Second?

Why is Jesus Christ called, ‘The Second Adam’ and ‘The Last Adam’?

 

[Brian2]

Please stop injecting JW into debates between you and I. I am not interested in what JW think or dictate in this thread. All you are doing is attempting a distraction since you cannot defend your fallacy ideology.

‘The FIRST BORN’ is also the ‘FIRSTBORN’ to the Father. Why not! He is the only Son so, of course, the first son from the womb is also ‘His greatest love(d Son).

But as the Father has more Sons, he may (and scripturally) finds a deep sinful act perpetrated by the first Son. The Father thence sets aside this first Son (in terms of his love) to set another as his first and greatest love:

• ‘He sets aside the first [Son] in order to establish a second [Son]’ (Hebrew 10:9)

How many examples from scriptures can you point out that exemplify this saying?

Start with Adam… the ‘first Born’ of mankind!!
Who is Adam’s Second?

Why is Jesus Christ called, ‘The Second Adam’ and ‘The Last Adam’?

Hebrews 10:9 has nothing to do with setting aside the first Son in order to establish a second Son.
We do learn from scripture however that the one God chooses to be His firstborn is not necessarily the first one born.
Jesus, a man who was the unique Son of God was not the first man (son of God) but God appointed Him to be His firstborn. (Ps 89:27)
The second Adam is the one from heaven so that we can be adopted children and receive His (Christ's) Spirit in us and become like Christ and be changed from glory to glory so that we can overcome the carnal nature that we have from the first Adam.

 

[Kenny]

If Jesus created the world and IS GOD then why IS GOD granting Jesus the rulership over creation?

Because God gave dominion (rulership) to man.

Genesis 1:26
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Psalm 115:16
The heaven, even the heavens, are the Lord's: but the earth hath he given to thechildren of men.

Man gave the dominion to satan when he sinned making satan the god of this world

Matt 4:8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;
9 And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.

God became man to legally get the authority back as man - giving it back to man as in the beginning...

Matt 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Ultimately, in the end of time, God rules legally (as per His dictates for God is not a liar) - as both God and man.

 

[Soapy]

Because God gave dominion (rulership) to man.

Genesis 1:26
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Psalm 115:16
The heaven, even the heavens, are the Lord's: but the earth hath he given to thechildren of men.

Man gave the dominion to satan when he sinned making satan the god of this world

Matt 4:8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;
9 And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.

God became man to legally get the authority back as man - giving it back to man as in the beginning...

Matt 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Ultimately, in the end of time, God rules legally (as per His dictates for God is not a liar) - as both God and man.

Kenny, …….. desperation has a strangle hold on you!!!

Man, in the beginning, is granted dominion over the animals, fish, birds, and all creeping things…. Thing with life in them.

Satan is a STEWARD (I’m beginning to believe that no one knows what a STEWARD is?) - a STEWARDING ANGEL over the CREATED WORLD…. The created world includes all living things AND ALL NONE LIVING THINGS… animate and inanimate things. A STEWARD sits IN PLACE of the rightful owner WHILE the rightful owner is NOT IN PLACE… If a King is too young to rule (perhaps the previous king died while his son was underage) then A STEWARD is put in place, RULING in place ‘as though King’ until the youngster is of an age to rule:

• ‘Though he is a prince, while he is young he is treated no different to a servant’

When Jesus proved himself as Son of God, GOD handed over the rulership to him as is written:

• “All power and authority has been given to me …”

This must be taken as a certainty of a future event as Jesus had not yet died, been resurrected, taken up to Heaven, and sat down at the right hand of majesty. THEN when Jesus IS seated at the right hand of God, God Put all power and authority in Jesus’ hands for him to ‘rule until all things are put under his feet…’.
And when all things are put under Jesus’ feet (he has conquered all sin, and Satan, and Death, Jesus HANDS BACK the power and authority TO GOD, who gave it to him in the first place. All power and authority DOES NOT INCLUDE power and authority over GOD: Jesus never rules ON the throne of God: ‘EXCEPT for my throne, you are to be Pharoah’…

Satan is a Stewarding Angel over creation which is why he says that he can hand the created world to Jesus IF Jesus worshipped him. Of course Satan lied - that’s not in doubt - but what he lied about was not that ‘It is mine…’ but that he could give it to ‘WHOM HE WILL’. Jesus did not query him since both knew that Satan had to eventually hand the kingdom over to WHOM EVER PROVED TO BE THE FIRSTBORN (Most loved by the Father). Satan tried to say that Jesus did not have to prove himself as that most beloved and acquire the rulership from him IF Jesus bowed down and worshipped him… and avoid the painful suffering, the humiliation, the embarassment of being spat upon, hung from a tree (‘Cursed is he who is hung from a tree!’ A Jews worst nightmare!!) and finally, DEATH!!!!
Jesus defended himself by appealing to the Scriptures: ‘Worship the Father alone - and to him only give sacred service!!’.

And NO ONE in scriptures EVER baptised in the manner claimed by the trinitarian ideology: All baptisms, in fact, even prays, are said ONLY IN THE NAME OF JESUS.

If you can point to a verse where prays of baptism or anything else is carried out ‘In the name of the Father, the Son, and the spirit of God’ then please show me… or else admit that it is a false verse!!! Can you do that?

 

[Muffled]

I’ve decided that it’s time for some lessons about the Trinity. It isn’t as simple as I thought it was. What I mean by “Trinitarian churches” is churches that say they believe in The Trinity, more or less what people call “mainstream churches.” I’ll start with Methodist churches as an example.


- God (www.umc.org)

One key word here is “distinct.”

---

(later)

More examples. The bolding in all of these is mine.

Another example, from the Catholic Answers Encyclopedia


Southern Baptist:


Evangelical Lutheran:


Presbyterian:


Episcopal:


They all say that God is three distinct persons. Some examples of how they explain that are in post #18.

I have issues with the Southern Baptist view that distinct person s does not mean three different ways of viewing God. They are flirting with a three God scenario.

 

[Muffled]

Can you say what you think of this:

1. God is ‘Father, Son, and Holy Spirit’
2. Jesus is God
3. Jesus is ‘Father, Son, and Holy Spirit’

1. God is ‘Father, Son, and Holy Spirit’
2. The Father is God
3. The Father is ‘Father, Son, and Holy Spirit’

1. God is ‘Father, Son, and Holy Spirit’
2. The Holy Spirit is God
3. The Holy Spirit is ‘Father, Son, and Holy Spirit’

I believe it is incorrect. The Southern Baptist view of distinction is better.

 

[Muffled]

The Apostles' Creed does not indicate nor mention the idea of "God as a Trinity --- three persons in one: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. God who is one, is revealed in three distinct persons."

THE APOSTLES'S CREED: I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried; he descended into hell; on the third day he rose again from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from there he will come to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic (universal) church, the communion of the saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and life everlasting. Amen.

It was the other creeds that introduced the idea of the Trinity, the idea of Jesus' preexistence, the idea of the incarnation, and the idea of Jesus being coequal in all ways with Almighty God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

I do not hold to the apostle's creed. I do believe the Nicene creed is the closest to the truth. The apostles creed seems to be confusing the Holy Spirit with the Paraclete. Probably not intentionally but because Holy Spirit is used for the Paraclete so often.

 

[Kenny]

Kenny, …….. desperation has a strangle hold on you!!!

Man, in the beginning, is granted dominion over the animals, fish, birds, and all creeping things…. Thing with life in them.

Satan is a STEWARD (I’m beginning to believe that no one knows what a STEWARD is?) - a STEWARDING ANGEL over the CREATED WORLD…. The created world includes all living things AND ALL NONE LIVING THINGS… animate and inanimate things. A STEWARD sits IN PLACE of the rightful owner WHILE the rightful owner is NOT IN PLACE… If a King is too young to rule (perhaps the previous king died while his son was underage) then A STEWARD is put in place, RULING in place ‘as though King’ until the youngster is of an age to rule:

• ‘Though he is a prince, while he is young he is treated no different to a servant’

When Jesus proved himself as Son of God, GOD handed over the rulership to him as is written:

• “All power and authority has been given to me …”

This must be taken as a certainty of a future event as Jesus had not yet died, been resurrected, taken up to Heaven, and sat down at the right hand of majesty. THEN when Jesus IS seated at the right hand of God, God Put all power and authority in Jesus’ hands for him to ‘rule until all things are put under his feet…’.
And when all things are put under Jesus’ feet (he has conquered all sin, and Satan, and Death, Jesus HANDS BACK the power and authority TO GOD, who gave it to him in the first place. All power and authority DOES NOT INCLUDE power and authority over GOD: Jesus never rules ON the throne of God: ‘EXCEPT for my throne, you are to be Pharoah’…

Satan is a Stewarding Angel over creation which is why he says that he can hand the created world to Jesus IF Jesus worshipped him. Of course Satan lied - that’s not in doubt - but what he lied about was not that ‘It is mine…’ but that he could give it to ‘WHOM HE WILL’. Jesus did not query him since both knew that Satan had to eventually hand the kingdom over to WHOM EVER PROVED TO BE THE FIRSTBORN (Most loved by the Father). Satan tried to say that Jesus did not have to prove himself as that most beloved and acquire the rulership from him IF Jesus bowed down and worshipped him… and avoid the painful suffering, the humiliation, the embarassment of being spat upon, hung from a tree (‘Cursed is he who is hung from a tree!’ A Jews worst nightmare!!) and finally, DEATH!!!!
Jesus defended himself by appealing to the Scriptures: ‘Worship the Father alone - and to him only give sacred service!!’.

And NO ONE in scriptures EVER baptised in the manner claimed by the trinitarian ideology: All baptisms, in fact, even prays, are said ONLY IN THE NAME OF JESUS.

If you can point to a verse where prays of baptism or anything else is carried out ‘In the name of the Father, the Son, and the spirit of God’ then please show me… or else admit that it is a false verse!!! Can you do that?

Creative writing...

 

[Soapy]

Creative writing...

Not ‘creative’… just truthful!

 

[Soapy]

I believe it is incorrect. The Southern Baptist view of distinction is better.

What exactly do you find wrong with the claim:

1. God is ‘Father, Son, and Holy Spirit’
2. Jesus is God
3. Jesus is ‘Father, Son, and Holy Spirit’

Please show your reasoning.

 

[Brian2]

Kenny, …….. desperation has a strangle hold on you!!!

Man, in the beginning, is granted dominion over the animals, fish, birds, and all creeping things…. Thing with life in them.

Satan is a STEWARD (I’m beginning to believe that no one knows what a STEWARD is?) - a STEWARDING ANGEL over the CREATED WORLD…. The created world includes all living things AND ALL NONE LIVING THINGS… animate and inanimate things. A STEWARD sits IN PLACE of the rightful owner WHILE the rightful owner is NOT IN PLACE… If a King is too young to rule (perhaps the previous king died while his son was underage) then A STEWARD is put in place, RULING in place ‘as though King’ until the youngster is of an age to rule:

• ‘Though he is a prince, while he is young he is treated no different to a servant’

When Jesus proved himself as Son of God, GOD handed over the rulership to him as is written:

• “All power and authority has been given to me …”

This must be taken as a certainty of a future event as Jesus had not yet died, been resurrected, taken up to Heaven, and sat down at the right hand of majesty. THEN when Jesus IS seated at the right hand of God, God Put all power and authority in Jesus’ hands for him to ‘rule until all things are put under his feet…’.
And when all things are put under Jesus’ feet (he has conquered all sin, and Satan, and Death, Jesus HANDS BACK the power and authority TO GOD, who gave it to him in the first place. All power and authority DOES NOT INCLUDE power and authority over GOD: Jesus never rules ON the throne of God: ‘EXCEPT for my throne, you are to be Pharoah’…

Satan is a Stewarding Angel over creation which is why he says that he can hand the created world to Jesus IF Jesus worshipped him. Of course Satan lied - that’s not in doubt - but what he lied about was not that ‘It is mine…’ but that he could give it to ‘WHOM HE WILL’. Jesus did not query him since both knew that Satan had to eventually hand the kingdom over to WHOM EVER PROVED TO BE THE FIRSTBORN (Most loved by the Father). Satan tried to say that Jesus did not have to prove himself as that most beloved and acquire the rulership from him IF Jesus bowed down and worshipped him… and avoid the painful suffering, the humiliation, the embarassment of being spat upon, hung from a tree (‘Cursed is he who is hung from a tree!’ A Jews worst nightmare!!) and finally, DEATH!!!!
Jesus defended himself by appealing to the Scriptures: ‘Worship the Father alone - and to him only give sacred service!!’.

And NO ONE in scriptures EVER baptised in the manner claimed by the trinitarian ideology: All baptisms, in fact, even prays, are said ONLY IN THE NAME OF JESUS.

If you can point to a verse where prays of baptism or anything else is carried out ‘In the name of the Father, the Son, and the spirit of God’ then please show me… or else admit that it is a false verse!!! Can you do that?

Matthew 28: 19Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,

And Jesus did not have to prove Himself to be the most beloved.

 

[Soapy]

Matthew 28: 19Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,

And Jesus did not have to prove Himself to be the most beloved.

What are you talking about, Brian2?

Can you show me a verse anywhere in scriptures where anyone baptised in the manner you claim (‘In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit’).

But, they did baptise in he name of Jesus Christ.

So, Brian2, does that mean that:

• ‘The name of the Father’ and ‘The name of the holy Spirit’ is ‘The name of the Son’…

and the name of the Son is:

• “Jesus Christ”?

Here’s what really happened:

• “So he [Peter] ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.” (Acts 10:48)
• ‘Peter replied, “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 2:38)

Brian2, I’ve shown you where a prominent apostles of Jesus baptised in the name of Jesus, only, so please show me your proof that baptism is in the name of ‘The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit’.

And lastly, Jesus DID PROVE HIMSELF to be the most beloved of the Father:

• “The Father loves the Son and has placed all things into his hands” (John 3:35)
• “For the Father loves the Son and shows him all that He is doing.” (John 5:20)
• “The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life” (John 10:17)
• “Behold my Servant*, my chosen one in whom I am well pleased - I will put MY SPIRIT on him and he will fulfi all my desires’ (Isaiah 42:1) *In Hebrew, the best, most trusted, most obedient, most loved, servant is akin to ‘a Son’

Brian2, do you actually know anything worthy about the true scriptures you claim to be debating about? Or are you debating for a fallacy scripture - a different scripture than that of the common Bible scriptures?

 

[Brian2]

What are you talking about, Brian2?

Can you show me a verse anywhere in scriptures where anyone baptised in the manner you claim (‘In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit’).

But, they did baptise in he name of Jesus Christ.

So, Brian2, does that mean that:

• ‘The name of the Father’ and ‘The name of the holy Spirit’ is ‘The name of the Son’…

and the name of the Son is:

• “Jesus Christ”?

Here’s what really happened:

• “So he [Peter] ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.” (Acts 10:48)
• ‘Peter replied, “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 2:38)

Brian2, I’ve shown you where a prominent apostles of Jesus baptised in the name of Jesus, only, so please show me your proof that baptism is in the name of ‘The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit’.

As you said in post

• #131

You want an example of people being baptised in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost and if there are no examples, that means that Matt 28:18 is a false verse.
So you want to show that this part of the Bible is wrong.
But in the same chapter (Matt 28) Jesus said that all authority in heaven and on earth had been given to Him. That means that being baptised in the name of Jesus is being baptised in the authority of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, since "in the name of" means "in the authority of".
You want to show that the Bible is false and all you end up doing is to show that the Bible is true.

And lastly, Jesus DID PROVE HIMSELF to be the most beloved of the Father:

• “The Father loves the Son and has placed all things into his hands” (John 3:35)
• “For the Father loves the Son and shows him all that He is doing.” (John 5:20)
• “The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life” (John 10:17)
• “Behold my Servant*, my chosen one in whom I am well pleased - I will put MY SPIRIT on him and he will fulfi all my desires’ (Isaiah 42:1) *In Hebrew, the best, most trusted, most obedient, most loved, servant is akin to ‘a Son’

Brian2, do you actually know anything worthy about the true scriptures you claim to be debating about? Or are you debating for a fallacy scripture - a different scripture than that of the common Bible scriptures?

I know that Jesus did not need to prove anything to His Father who knew His Son already.
I know that Jesus did not prove anything to us, we believe because of our faith.
I know that without being sinless Jesus could not atone for our sins.
I know that the Father showed to Jesus disciples that Jesus sacrifice was acceptable and that Jesus was sinless, by raising Him from the dead.