Oneness Vs. Trinity Debate

MEE · Oct 9, 2002

Originally posted by tyndale1946:
Well I just dropped by to see what all the ruckus was about and just throw this scripture in for good measure. Oneness you don't know me but everyone else does... I'm Brother Glen and I too am studying the Triune Godhead!

I Timothy 3: 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory... Brother Glen

Bro. Glen, are you saying that 1 Timothy 3:16 shows a Triune Godhead?

MEE

ONENESS · Oct 9, 2002

Originally posted by tyndale1946:
Well I just dropped by to see what all the ruckus was about and just throw this scripture in for good measure. Oneness you don't know me but everyone else does... I'm Brother Glen and I too am studying the Triune Godhead!

I Timothy 3: 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory... Brother Glen

Yea I love that scripture. Where do you get this denotes three seperate persons?

ONENESS · Oct 9, 2002

Originally posted by MEE:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by tyndale1946:
Well I just dropped by to see what all the ruckus was about and just throw this scripture in for good measure. Oneness you don't know me but everyone else does... I'm Brother Glen and I too am studying the Triune Godhead!

I Timothy 3: 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory... Brother Glen

Bro. Glen, are you saying that 1 Timothy 3:16 shows a Triune Godhead?

MEE[/QUOTE]

Hey MEE.

Could you please do me a favour? Could you pray for me about my schooling? Something kind of got twisted around last night and my insturcters saw something and are takeing it totally the wrong way. So could you please pray that everything works out. And even if It does not work out the way I want you will please pray for God to allow me to see his will through all this.

God bless

tyndale1946 · Oct 9, 2002

When God made man he made a three fold man... Body... Soul... And Spirit!... One Man Adam... One Man in Three!... Not three distinct persons... Adam... One Man a three fold creature... He took from Adam a rib and created Eve a three fold creature like the man. Lets us make Man in our image.

In my understanding of image... God was creating Man a three fold being like unto himself... God the Father... God the Son... And God the Holy Spirit. One God in three creating one man in three. Now that being said everyone is entitled the their own way of understanding the trinity and the Godhead. I don't see three separate individuals as one God as this to me is what many of you are implying. Hear old Israel the Lord God is one God!... Do I understand it NO!... I believe it with an eye of faith.

I Timothy 3: 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory... This is my understanding of the scriptures so far... There have been many theologians who have tackled the trinity the triune Godhead but That has not lessened my Faith in the least. I believe as I see it at this time and that is my understanding so far. I will let the article by Elder Wilson Thompson speak later. I've never heard of the Oneness doctrine... I as a Primitive Baptist am not swayed by every wind of doctrine but will weigh it against scripture... Scripture must interpret scripture and harmonize no matter what our biasis may be!... Brother Glen

GrannyGumbo · Oct 9, 2002

ONENESS(Brian)! I pray for you and MEE everyday as I do these around me & I pray for my son, as well. I've begged God to show me a way to help him.

I do not see 3 gods when I pray or think on Jesus. I can't explain it. I see One, but I acknowledge God is the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost. I read the 1825 article by Eld.Thompson with interest. [I don't know much about the Primitive Baptist Faith, except they are a gentle-folk].

I am offering you my apology for antagonizing you. I guess the incident with Brian(my grandson), and finding a prayer cloth tucked away in my bedding, stirred me up, so I'm sorry I have seemed sarcastic.

The more I learn of my Saviour's humility, the more I want to be just like Him.

Don · Oct 9, 2002

If it were so God would have mentioned that he was a trinity or a triune God just has he mentioned everything else was three.

Genesis 1, verse 1 -- the word elohiym is translated God, yet, as has been shown to you before, is a plural intensive word. "Plural," as I'm sure you're aware, usually means "more than one."

Now, since God inspired this phrase to be written the way we find it in Genesis 1, verse 1, then your statement is invalid; i.e., God DID mention that He was more than one.

Why such emphasis on the number three? There is none Don. Not pertaiining to the Godhead. There is such an emphasis on the fact that God is one that you cant exclude that.

Brother, please examine your words. The number three figures in prominently throughout the Bible, just as does the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

Deny this all you want. It'll still be there at the end of the day when you get tired of denying it.

It is so simple to see that Jesus is the supreme Name God. It is so simple to understand that they are all the same person.

Funny, that's exactly what we say about the three-in-one....

Ask yourself why the apostles never baptized any other way than in the Name of Jesus. Ask your self why no where does the bible speak of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost save Matt 28:19. If the trinity was real and it was so important God would have let us know with out haveing to hint around.

It's only hidden to those that choose to not see it. Look at 2 Corinthians 13:14. Ephesians 2:18. Revelation 1:4-6. And of course, 1 John 5:7.

Ask yourself something: Matthew 28:19 does say baptize in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Mark 16 says go and preach; all who believe and are baptized shall be saved, but those who believe not are already damned (no mention of baptizing in any name). Luke 24 says repentence and remission should be preached in His name (no mention of baptizing in His name).

There's this saying I've learned over the years that goes something like this: "Majoring on the minors, and minoring on the majors." Hope you understand what I'm getting at....

When we make a distinction like "you have to be baptized in Jesus' name, and not the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost," you have to ask yourself a question: Are you really going to sit there and tell someone that if they were baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, their baptism was invalid, and they need to be re-baptized?

How can it be an invalid baptism if Jesus Himself said do it this way? If we agree that the Bible is 100% inspired/written by God, then the instructions we find in Matthew 28:19 are more than valid because they are the words of Jesus Himself. To say that they're invalid is to say that the words we find in Matthew are not true. If that's the case, then the entire Bible is suspect and not to be trusted, because now we have to carefully pick and choose which parts are actually correct, and which parts we can simply discard and throw aside.

Is that really what you're after, Brian?

tyndale1946 · Oct 9, 2002

O my brethren, arise from these captivating chains; from this galling yoke; from this bewildering and delusive imposition of antichrist. God is a spirit, not persons; to know God [who is a spirit,] and Jesus Christ the mediator whom he hath sent, is eternal life; not to know three distinct divine persons. It is written, "Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve;" not that we should worship, and serve three distinct divine persons, each one distinctly considered being truly and properly God. Let us worship God in the spirit; not in three distinct persons. Not the second divine person in the Godhead, but God himself, was manifested in the flesh; therefore, the whole fulness of the Godhead; [not the second person in it] dwelt in him bodily. Would we approach to God? We must come by the Mediator, the man Christ Jesus. There is no way to come to the Father but by the Son, as saith Christ, "No man cometh unto the Father but by me. " The Father is in him, and not a distinct person from him, and therefore, no man can come to the Father, but by the man, the mediator, in whom alone man can have access to God. Would you know whether you are born of God or not? Examine yourselves, "for except you have the Spirit of Christ you are none of his." The Spirit of Christ and the Holy Ghost are the same Spirit and not two distinct persons. We have showed from positive scripture that our adorable Immanuel is the "EVERLASTING FATHER," therefore, not a distinct person from him; that he is a quickening spirit; therefore, not a distinct person from the Spirit. From positive scripture language, and parallel texts in the old and new testaments which explain each other; we have showed that the divine Jesus is exclusively the "LORD GOD of the holy prophets." The just God besides whom there is no saviour; the first, and the last; to the exclusion of all first, or third persons distinct from him. We have showed that all we can know of a Trinity in the Deity is manifested in the person or manhood of Jesus Christ, or that in the man Christ, is a trinity of character, or divine operation; or in other words; God is manifested in the flesh, as one God in the trinity of operation, in the accomplishing of his threefold work, of creation, redemption, and regeneration; all of which is performed by One Divine Agent, in a Trinity of character, but not a trinity of distinct divine persons, either real or proper.

We have showed from the scripture language, that Jesus is the Highest, to the exclusion of any other distinct persons equal in height with him. That he is the ALMIGHTY, to the exclusion of all distinct persons, as being equal with him in might. And that he is the ALPHA, and the OMEGA, distinct from whom, there can be no equal person.

An excerpt from The
Triumphs of Truth
Or
THE SCRIPTURE A SURE GUIDE TO
ZION’S PILGRIMS;
In which some of the most important branches of the
Christian theology are illustrated, and proved by plain
Scripture evidence, and defended against impugners.
BY WILSON THOMPSON
Pastor of the Baptist Church; Lebanon, Ohio
1825

If you want to read the articles in there entirety here is the link... Brother
Glen

http://www.primitivebaptist.org/writers/thompson_w/Triumphs%20Of%20Truth/default.asp

tyndale1946 · Oct 9, 2002

Granny I'm glad you read Elder Wilson Thompson article with interest but that was only the tip of it. I gave a link to the whole article and you can print it if you like. Everyone is free to read these and come to your own conclusion. Granny if the one article interested you the entire piece will more than wet your spiritual appetite... Granny you sure not deep inside you there is not a Primitive Baptist trying to get out?

... I can dream can't I?... Brother Glen

[ October 09, 2002, 06:58 PM: Message edited by: tyndale1946 ]

GrannyGumbo · Oct 9, 2002

Naw~Bro.Glen, I'm way too mean to be a Primitive Baptist; altho' they say I do come from a long line of them over in Mississippi...

But that's why I wear my combat boots & camouflage skirts and carry my Sword, that Blessed Old Book, the KJBible...it ain't no telling what/who is trying to get out...or come in!

ONENESS · Oct 9, 2002

Originally posted by Don:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />If it were so God would have mentioned that he was a trinity or a triune God just has he mentioned everything else was three.

Genesis 1, verse 1 -- the word elohiym is translated God, yet, as has been shown to you before, is a plural intensive word. "Plural," as I'm sure you're aware, usually means "more than one."

Now, since God inspired this phrase to be written the way we find it in Genesis 1, verse 1, then your statement is invalid; i.e., God DID mention that He was more than one.

Why such emphasis on the number three? There is none Don. Not pertaiining to the Godhead. There is such an emphasis on the fact that God is one that you cant exclude that.

Click to expand...

Brother, please examine your words. The number three figures in prominently throughout the Bible, just as does the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

Deny this all you want. It'll still be there at the end of the day when you get tired of denying it.

It is so simple to see that Jesus is the supreme Name God. It is so simple to understand that they are all the same person.

Click to expand...

Funny, that's exactly what we say about the three-in-one....

Ask yourself why the apostles never baptized any other way than in the Name of Jesus. Ask your self why no where does the bible speak of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost save Matt 28:19. If the trinity was real and it was so important God would have let us know with out haveing to hint around.

Click to expand...

It's only hidden to those that choose to not see it. Look at 2 Corinthians 13:14. Ephesians 2:18. Revelation 1:4-6. And of course, 1 John 5:7.

Ask yourself something: Matthew 28:19 does say baptize in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Mark 16 says go and preach; all who believe and are baptized shall be saved, but those who believe not are already damned (no mention of baptizing in any name). Luke 24 says repentence and remission should be preached in His name (no mention of baptizing in His name).

There's this saying I've learned over the years that goes something like this: "Majoring on the minors, and minoring on the majors." Hope you understand what I'm getting at....

When we make a distinction like "you have to be baptized in Jesus' name, and not the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost," you have to ask yourself a question: Are you really going to sit there and tell someone that if they were baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, their baptism was invalid, and they need to be re-baptized?

How can it be an invalid baptism if Jesus Himself said do it this way? If we agree that the Bible is 100% inspired/written by God, then the instructions we find in Matthew 28:19 are more than valid because they are the words of Jesus Himself. To say that they're invalid is to say that the words we find in Matthew are not true. If that's the case, then the entire Bible is suspect and not to be trusted, because now we have to carefully pick and choose which parts are actually correct, and which parts we can simply discard and throw aside.

Is that really what you're after, Brian?[/QUOTE]

Genesis 1, verse 1 -- the word elohiym is translated God, yet, as has been shown to you before, is a plural intensive word. "Plural," as I'm sure you're aware, usually means "more than one."

Now, since God inspired this phrase to be written the way we find it in Genesis 1, verse 1, then your statement is invalid; i.e., God DID mention that He was more than one.

Elohiym is plural as you stated, Now lets eximine what you are saying.

Instead of putting "God" in Gen 1:26 lets use the actual word used in Gen 1:26 which is Elohyim.

Gen 1:26 And Elohyim said Let us Make man in Our Image.

Now lets see if I understand your definition of Elohyim.

Elohyim is plural so it represents the persons of God correct?

Thats even better to prove my case. If Elohyim was saying let us, than someone besides Elohyim was there that Elohyim was talking to. So as I said before, if God is a trinity and God was doing the talking, that means someone other than the trinity was there who the trinity was talking to.

So it is easy to see that God was not talking to his other persons here in Gen 1:26.

If Gen 1:26 is letting us know that God was talking to his other persons, Gen 1:27 would read "So God made man in THEIR image. In the image of God they created him. Male and female they created them.

Brother, please examine your words. The number three figures in prominently throughout the Bible, just as does the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

Deny this all you want. It'll still be there at the end of the day when you get tired of denying it.

Father, Son, and Holy Ghost was only stated once in the entire bible and it was used to decribe One Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

Matthew 28:19 does say baptize in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Mark 16 says go and preach; all who believe and are baptized shall be saved, but those who believe not are already damned (no mention of baptizing in any name). Luke 24 says repentence and remission should be preached in His name (no mention of baptizing in His name).

My friend when we look at Mark 16:16

He that beleiveth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that beleiveth not shall be damned.

Why do take just the last part of that scripture as the only thing that one needs to do. Just b/c the latter part does not state baptisim, does that exclude it from the first? No! not at all. Did the writer make a mistake when he wrote "...and is baptized shall be saved"? and then correct himself? Of course not!

Luke 24 you say mentions no where about the Name of Jesus. Than If I might ask you what Name is this referring to? Who was doing the talking, what does the scripture reveal above that. It's very clear that in the context that the Name that Luke was referring to Is Jesus.

We find the fulfillment of that in Acts 2:38 when Peter preached the exact same thing he was told to preach by Jesus himself.

Acts 2:38 fulfills Matthew 28:19, Mark 16:16, Luke 24:45-49 and John 1:5

Jesus gave Peter the keys to heaven. Do you think Peter is going to go against what Jesus told him to Preach? Not at all! In not so many words God told Peter that what ever you do I am going to back it up. Peter understood that Jesus was the Son of God, and understood what the "Son of God" referred to.

If he had a diffrent understanding than that which we have he would have preached it. Did he preach "Baptize in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost or did he Preach Jesus Name? Its very easy to see.

Peter understood that there is no other name given among men under heaven where by we Must be saved.(acts 4:12)

Peter understood that whatsover you do in word or in deed do all in the Name of the Lord Jesus giveing thanks to God and the Father by him.

Another question does that mean that God is seperate than the Father? Its clear that The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are all the same Person. Those titles are just the diffrent ways that God manifested or revealed himself to his people

When we make a distinction like "you have to be baptized in Jesus' name, and not the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost," you have to ask yourself a question: Are you really going to sit there and tell someone that if they were baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, their baptism was invalid, and they need to be re-baptized?

Don this is the majors. This is the way God said to do it. Was it a big deal that the high preists did everything in the temple the exact same way that God told them to? You Bettcha! Could the High Preist skip the alter? COuld he skip the brasen laver? Could he skip the bread? Could he skip the insence? Could he skip the candles? Could he skip the Holy of Hollies? No way! It was set up so presice that if he did one thing wrong they had a rope tied around his ankles with a bell, and if the bell ever quit ringing that was the sign that the priest was dead and in return they could pull him out with the rope.
You asked if I really would sit and tell some one that they needed to be rebaptized if they were baptized any other way than in the Name of Jesus. You bet I would! Why? Because thats exactly what Paul did in Acts 19.

How can it be an invalid baptism if Jesus Himself said do it this way? If we agree that the Bible is 100% inspired/written by God, then the instructions we find in Matthew 28:19 are more than valid because they are the words of Jesus Himself. To say that they're invalid is to say that the words we find in Matthew are not true. If that's the case, then the entire Bible is suspect and not to be trusted, because now we have to carefully pick and choose which parts are actually correct, and which parts we can simply discard and throw aside.

Don what Jesus said to do was 100% correct and 100% inspired by God. Matt 28:19 is valid and they are the words of Jesus himself. So we can go ahead and keep beleiving that the bible is still 100% true.

On the other hand what might not be 100% true is the way we understand what Jesus said. If you would slow down, take your time and read it for what it means, (not what is says) it is so easy to understand.

Please Don, dont shut me out yet. Listen to this and ponder on it as I have done with what you give me.

So many people are taking what Jesus said and repeating it. In other words, so many people are saying "We baptize you in the name of the father and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
That is just repeating the instructions of Jesus.

We put what Jesus said into action when we baptize in that One Name ofThe father and ofthe Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

That is why you can look at the book of acts and understand why not once was it ever recorded that someone was baptized with Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

Is that really what you're after, Brian?[/

What I am after is the Truth and nothing but the Truth so help me God. And I know I am in that truth b/c number one the bible shows it, number two God has confirmed it with me through is word and through my prayers.

Don, i hoped this helped.

Sincerely

Brian

ONENESS · Oct 9, 2002

Originally posted by GrannyGumbo:
ONENESS(Brian)! I pray for you and MEE everyday as I do these around me & I pray for my son, as well. I've begged God to show me a way to help him.

I do not see 3 gods when I pray or think on Jesus. I can't explain it. I see One, but I acknowledge God is the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost. I read the 1825 article by Eld.Thompson with interest. [I don't know much about the Primitive Baptist Faith, except they are a gentle-folk].

I am offering you my apology for antagonizing you. I guess the incident with Brian(my grandson), and finding a prayer cloth tucked away in my bedding, stirred me up, so I'm sorry I have seemed sarcastic.

The more I learn of my Saviour's humility, the more I want to be just like Him.

And you are forgiven my child. LOL Im kidding. You know I forgive you and Im sorry too.

Im not trying to add anything else but I would like to say this too. I know alot of baptist that do the prayer cloth thing. We have never done it but if someone wanted to pray over something and leave it with me it would be such a joy. And I dont care if It came from the Methodest, Baptist, Catholics, Prebs, Luthrens, etc. Pray is prayer no matter who is praying. And God answers prayer. he is not a respector of Persons.

God bless

ONENESS · Oct 9, 2002

Originally posted by tyndale1946:
When God made man he made a three fold man... Body... Soul... And Spirit!... One Man Adam... One Man in Three!... Not three distinct persons... Adam... One Man a three fold creature... He took from Adam a rib and created Eve a three fold creature like the man. Lets us make Man in our image.

In my understanding of image... God was creating Man a three fold being like unto himself... God the Father... God the Son... And God the Holy Spirit. One God in three creating one man in three. Now that being said everyone is entitled the their own way of understanding the trinity and the Godhead. I don't see three separate individuals as one God as this to me is what many of you are implying. Hear old Israel the Lord God is one God!... Do I understand it NO!... I believe it with an eye of faith.

I Timothy 3: 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory... This is my understanding of the scriptures so far... There have been many theologians who have tackled the trinity the triune Godhead but That has not lessened my Faith in the least. I believe as I see it at this time and that is my understanding so far. I will let the article by Elder Wilson Thompson speak later. I've never heard of the Oneness doctrine... I as a Primitive Baptist am not swayed by every wind of doctrine but will weigh it against scripture... Scripture must interpret scripture and harmonize no matter what our biasis may be!... Brother Glen

How are you Bro Glen, Ive seen you around but Im not sure we have met.

God did create us with a body mind spirit. God did create us in his image. If God is three distinct persons or seperate Persons, than would it not make since that we would be three seperat persons as well?

If we look at it as in the terms of relation ships it helps out.

Just like I am a Son, Uncle, and a Brother. I am not seperated b/c I am those three. They are just diffrent relationships to diffrent people.

God is the same way. He is our Father. Is the Son our son or was it his son? And the Holy Spirit is none other Than the Father in his spirit nature.

He was the Father in creation, the son in redemption and the Holy spirit in us today.

Hope I did not confuse you. i am over at my parents and I am not running on much time. So i did kinda skip over a few things and put in the high lights. If I messed anything up I will try to redeem it tomorrow on break.

Godbless

ONENESS · Oct 9, 2002

Originally posted by tyndale1946:
O my brethren, arise from these captivating chains; from this galling yoke; from this bewildering and delusive imposition of antichrist. God is a spirit, not persons; to know God [who is a spirit,] and Jesus Christ the mediator whom he hath sent, is eternal life; not to know three distinct divine persons. It is written, "Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve;" not that we should worship, and serve three distinct divine persons, each one distinctly considered being truly and properly God. Let us worship God in the spirit; not in three distinct persons. Not the second divine person in the Godhead, but God himself, was manifested in the flesh; therefore, the whole fulness of the Godhead; [not the second person in it] dwelt in him bodily. Would we approach to God? We must come by the Mediator, the man Christ Jesus. There is no way to come to the Father but by the Son, as saith Christ, "No man cometh unto the Father but by me. " The Father is in him, and not a distinct person from him, and therefore, no man can come to the Father, but by the man, the mediator, in whom alone man can have access to God. Would you know whether you are born of God or not? Examine yourselves, "for except you have the Spirit of Christ you are none of his." The Spirit of Christ and the Holy Ghost are the same Spirit and not two distinct persons. We have showed from positive scripture that our adorable Immanuel is the "EVERLASTING FATHER," therefore, not a distinct person from him; that he is a quickening spirit; therefore, not a distinct person from the Spirit. From positive scripture language, and parallel texts in the old and new testaments which explain each other; we have showed that the divine Jesus is exclusively the "LORD GOD of the holy prophets." The just God besides whom there is no saviour; the first, and the last; to the exclusion of all first, or third persons distinct from him. We have showed that all we can know of a Trinity in the Deity is manifested in the person or manhood of Jesus Christ, or that in the man Christ, is a trinity of character, or divine operation; or in other words; God is manifested in the flesh, as one God in the trinity of operation, in the accomplishing of his threefold work, of creation, redemption, and regeneration; all of which is performed by One Divine Agent, in a Trinity of character, but not a trinity of distinct divine persons, either real or proper.

We have showed from the scripture language, that Jesus is the Highest, to the exclusion of any other distinct persons equal in height with him. That he is the ALMIGHTY, to the exclusion of all distinct persons, as being equal with him in might. And that he is the ALPHA, and the OMEGA, distinct from whom, there can be no equal person.

An excerpt from The
Triumphs of Truth
Or
THE SCRIPTURE A SURE GUIDE TO
ZION’S PILGRIMS;
In which some of the most important branches of the
Christian theology are illustrated, and proved by plain
Scripture evidence, and defended against impugners.
BY WILSON THOMPSON
Pastor of the Baptist Church; Lebanon, Ohio
1825

If you want to read the articles in there entirety here is the link... Brother
Glen

http://www.primitivebaptist.org/writers/thompson_w/Triumphs%20Of%20Truth/default.asp

Agree 110%, Aman Bro Glen

MEE · Oct 9, 2002

Originally posted by ONENESS:

MEE[/qb]

Hey MEE.

Could you please do me a favour? Could you pray for me about my schooling? Something kind of got twisted around last night and my insturcters saw something and are takeing it totally the wrong way. So could you please pray that everything works out. And even if It does not work out the way I want you will please pray for God to allow me to see his will through all this.

God bless[/QB][/QUOTE]

Sure Brian, I'll pray for you, but I think the answer is already on the way. God always watches out for His own. You've prayed, I'm sure, and I'll pray and then let me know how it turns out! OK?

MEE

MEE · Oct 9, 2002

Originally posted by tyndale1946:
O my brethren, arise from these captivating chains; from this galling yoke; from this bewildering and delusive imposition of antichrist. God is a spirit, not persons; to know God [who is a spirit,] and Jesus Christ the mediator whom he hath sent, is eternal life; not to know three distinct divine persons.....

An excerpt from The
Triumphs of Truth
Or
THE SCRIPTURE A SURE GUIDE TO
ZION’S PILGRIMS;
In which some of the most important branches of the
Christian theology are illustrated, and proved by plain
Scripture evidence, and defended against impugners.
BY WILSON THOMPSON
Pastor of the Baptist Church; Lebanon, Ohio
1825

If you want to read the articles in there entirety here is the link... Brother
Glen

http://www.primitivebaptist.org/writers/thompson_w/Triumphs%20Of%20Truth/default.asp

Bro. Glen that was great! I put the link in favorites so that I could read more of it later.

Since you seem to see God as one and not three persons, try reading what David Bernard has to say about One God. It is wonderful!

http://altupc.com/articles/thename.htm - THE SIGNIFICANCE OF A NAME (from The Oneness of God by D. K. Bernard)

[ October 09, 2002, 10:04 PM: Message edited by: MEE ]

Don · Oct 10, 2002

Thats even better to prove my case. If Elohyim was saying let us, than someone besides Elohyim was there that Elohyim was talking to. So as I said before, if God is a trinity and God was doing the talking, that means someone other than the trinity was there who the trinity was talking to.

Again, you have to ignore scripture for this to be true.

Didn't God use a voice from heaven to talk to Himself? Didn't Christ pray in the garden of Gethsemane to Himself?

What you're trying to project is that I'm putting forth some kind of schizophrenic being; not at all. We've already agreed that God can be a voice, and dove, and a body all at the same time. He can also be three distinct persons--all equal--at the same time, and as evidenced in scripture, carry on conversations between those distinct persons.

Father, Son, and Holy Ghost was only stated once in the entire bible and it was used to decribe One Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

Brian, I gave several scripture references that support the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost being used in more than just Matthew 28:19. I suggest you go back and read them.

My friend when we look at Mark 16:16

He that beleiveth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that beleiveth not shall be damned.

Why do take just the last part of that scripture as the only thing that one needs to do. Just b/c the latter part does not state baptisim, does that exclude it from the first? No! not at all. Did the writer make a mistake when he wrote "...and is baptized shall be saved"? and then correct himself? Of course not!

Please step back a moment.

It is those that hold to simply the first part of the sentence that ignore the second part. I fully accept both the first and second parts; but the second part more fully modifies and explains the first part.

If I take them separately, then I have a conundrum. The first part by itself says I must believe and be baptized; but the second part by itself says if I don't believe, I'm damned.

I don't separate the two; I take them both together. Why would Jesus say that I must believe and be baptized, but then turn right around and say if I don't believe I'm damned, but not mention baptism? Because there's a deeper meaning. Baptism isn't required. Belief is.

Luke 24 you say mentions no where about the Name of Jesus. Than If I might ask you what Name is this referring to? Who was doing the talking, what does the scripture reveal above that. It's very clear that in the context that the Name that Luke was referring to Is Jesus.

Don't twist things, friend. Matthew 28 mentions the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; your point is that we must baptize in the name of Jesus. Luke conspicuously doesn't mention baptizing in either the name of Jesus or in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. In fact, Luke 24 doesn't mention baptizing at all; it says simply that the apostles were instructed to preach repentence and remission of sins (not baptize, but preach).

You asked if I really would sit and tell some one that they needed to be rebaptized if they were baptized any other way than in the Name of Jesus. You bet I would! Why? Because thats exactly what Paul did in Acts 19.

Brian, pay attention: Paul told the disciples that he found in Ephesus that they needed to be re-baptized because they had been baptized unto John's baptism. Unless you can show scripturally that John's baptism was done using the words "in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost," I think you need to re-evaluate your statement.

In the meantime, think on this long and hard, as we've had this discussion before: Is God the Father? Is God the Son? Is God the Holy Ghost? If so, then those that are baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are being baptized in His name. Period. End of discussion.

If you can prove that it's any other name, then please do so.

Final question: Who was Jesus praying to in Matthew 26:42? Mark 14:36? Luke 22:42?

MEE · Oct 10, 2002

Originally posted by Don:

You asked if I really would sit and tell some one that they needed to be rebaptized if they were baptized any other way than in the Name of Jesus. You bet I would! Why? Because thats exactly what Paul did in Acts 19.

Click to expand...

Brian, pay attention: Paul told the disciples that he found in Ephesus that they needed to be re-baptized because they had been baptized unto John's baptism. Unless you can show scripturally that John's baptism was done using the words "in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost," I think you need to re-evaluate your statement.

Scripturally you can't find where baptism was 'ever' done in the titles F,S, or HS. It is not there! The *titles* were NEVER practiced until the RCC changed it in 325 AD.

John's baptism was invalid after the NT Church was born. That is why when Paul found "certain deciples" that they had to be rebaptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins. That is why water baptism, in the name of Jesus Christ, is so important. Having the 'Blood' applied is a must because it is the act through water baptism in which our sins are covered by His Blood. Therefore water baptism plays a part in salvation. Also, repentance and having the Spirit is another part of salvation....but that is another topic.

MEE

[ October 10, 2002, 09:30 AM: Message edited by: MEE ]

Don · Oct 10, 2002

MEE, read Hebrews 11:7. Compare it with 1 Peter 3:20-21. Then carefully read Romans 6:4.

If you need help understanding the role of baptism after that, feel free to private message me, or start another thread.

Brian was trying to link the incident in Acts 19 with those who are baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost (meaning they've come to know Christ as their savior, and are being baptized in His name); this isn't true, because scripture specifically says the disciples in Acts 19 were baptized unto John's baptism. Thus, the "link" in invalid.

[ October 10, 2002, 10:05 AM: Message edited by: Don ]

ONENESS · Oct 10, 2002

Again, you have to ignore scripture for this to be true.

Didn't God use a voice from heaven to talk to Himself? Didn't Christ pray in the garden of Gethsemane to Himself?

What you're trying to project is that I'm putting forth some kind of schizophrenic being; not at all. We've already agreed that God can be a voice, and dove, and a body all at the same time. He can also be three distinct persons--all equal--at the same time, and as evidenced in scripture, carry on conversations between those distinct persons.

.

Did God use a voice from heaven to talk to himself? No, not to talk to himself! God used a voice when Jesus was baptized, but the voice was not for Jesus’ sake. The voice from heaven was for the people’s sake. It was sign for the people. The voice came at the beginning of Christ’s ministry. There were to other occurrences of a voice from heaven and both of those were for the people that were standing by him. Matt 3:17 “This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased, Hear ye him”. And the third time was for the Greeks (John 12:30) And Jesus said that the voice was not for him, but for their sakes.

Was Jesus praying to himself in the Garden? It is very easy for us to see that when Jesus was praying is was not the eternal spirit inside of that man that was praying. It was simply the “Man” crying out in his Humanity “Not my will but thine be done”. And Hebrews 5:7 confirms that.

Hebrews 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;

Ask your self something Don. Does the deity of Jesus need help? No only the flesh does, b/c he was flesh just like you and I. But at the same time Jesus still had his second nature, His Deity. Jesus said “the Spirit is willing but the flesh is weak”. If you view Christ’s prayers as one person talking to another or one person praying to another than it indicates that the 2nd Person in the Trinity is subordinate to the Father. Thus it does not only contradict the doctrine of the Trinity, which states they are “Co Equal”, It also clearly contradicts the Word of God b/c Jesus Said “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the End…”

Brian, I gave several scripture references that support the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost being used in more than just Matthew 28:19. I suggest you go back and read them.

Don and I have given you scripture that says “To the Glory of God and the Father by him” Don, you know I love you brother, but the scripture you indicate to not imply a separation of persons. When one Speaks of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost its all relationship to humanity. The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are all ways that God chose to manifest himself to us.

John 14 Jesus said “I will not leave you comfortless I will come to you”. Jesus is going away but he will come again, not in the form of a man but as the holy Ghost, another relationship, same person, same God, different relationship, Different manifestation.

Please step back a moment.

It is those that hold to simply the first part of the sentence that ignore the second part. I fully accept both the first and second parts; but the second part more fully modifies and explains the first part.

If I take them separately, then I have a conundrum. The first part by itself says I must believe and be baptized; but the second part by itself says if I don't believe, I'm damned.

I don't separate the two; I take them both together. Why would Jesus say that I must believe and be baptized, but then turn right around and say if I don't believe I'm damned, but not mention baptism? Because there's a deeper meaning. Baptism isn't required. Belief is.

When Jesus said the latter part “He that believeth not shall be damned”. What was he meaning? “Believe not what”? Is it just referring to one thing or was he referring to everything he said. He was clearly meaning you must believe everything including “Those that believe and are baptized shall be saved”.

Acts 10 is a perfect example. Peter was very clear on the subject at hand. It was so important that he did not give them a chance at decision. Peter said “Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.

Brian, pay attention: Paul told the disciples that he found in Ephesus that they needed to be re-baptized because they had been baptized unto John's baptism. Unless you can show scripturally that John's baptism was done using the words "in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost," I think you need to re-evaluate your statement.

In the meantime, think on this long and hard, as we've had this discussion before: Is God the Father? Is God the Son? Is God the Holy Ghost? If so, then those that are baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are being baptized in His name. Period. End of discussion.

If you can prove that it's any other name, then please do so.

I cant show you that John’s Baptism was done saying “Father, Son, and Holy Ghost” Because the bible does not teach that. On the contrary the bible does tell us what John was telling the people when he baptized. John said “that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus”

When they heard that the bible tells us that the were rebaptized. How were thy baptized? In the Name of Jesus of Course!

Many churches today like to baptize for the “Same Reason” John Baptized. All the people were doing when John baptized them was giving a public confession that they had repented and that they were going to believe on Jesus.

But on the day of Pentecost we were given new instructions on what baptism In the Name of Jesus was for. It was not longer an outward showing of our faith, but that is was for the remission of sins.

My friend that is why the Apostles made such a big deal about being baptized.

I was not saying all that to show you that John baptized with the Titles Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. I was showing you that to let you know, that the Name of Jesus needs to be said. (Col 3:17 And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.)

In the meantime, think on this long and hard, as we've had this discussion before: Is God the Father? Is God the Son? Is God the Holy Ghost? If so, then those that are baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are being baptized in His name. Period. End of discussion.

I’m just going to use a simple analogy like I have used before.

You are a Father, You are a Son, and You are a Husband I assume. If you give your son a check and tell him to go get it cashed and just sign it with Father, Son, and Husband will they cash it? But if you place your Name on the check then it will become processed. B/c all the authority is in your Name. Not your titles, your name.

It’s the same thing when you and I pray. Do we Pray (some people do) “Dear, our most precious Heavenly Father. We enter your gates with thanksgiving and we enter into your courts with praise, we thank you for all you do and all that you are. Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, I am asking you to please touch my family and… God we know that you alone are worthy of our praise, we know that if you make this happen it will be one more soul added to your kingdom, So Lord, in the Name of The Father, and Of the Son, and Of the Holy Spirit I pray”.

Is that how we pray? No we pray in the Name of Jesus.

MEE has posted book that we should all read. And it can do a whole lot more justice explaining the Name of Jesus than I can.

There is so much power in the Name of Jesus. It’s at the mention of that Name that all tongues will swear and all knees will bow. Its at that Name that Demons are cast out. It that Name that’s the only Name given under heaven among men where by we must be saved.

Final question: Who was Jesus praying to in Matthew 26:42? Mark 14:36? Luke 22:42?

Again this is not the deity crying out to deity, it’s the humanity crying out in prayer. (The flesh is weak, but the spirit is willing)

God bless you Don

[ October 10, 2002, 10:20 AM: Message edited by: ONENESS ]

Chemnitz · Oct 10, 2002

Again this is not the deity crying out to deity, it’s the humanity crying out in prayer. (The flesh is weak, but the spirit is willing)

So according to you Jesus is not truly God. So what good was his death?

Oneness Vs. Trinity Debate

<img src=/me3.jpg>

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

<img src ="/Granny.gif">

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

<img src ="/Granny.gif">

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

<img src=/me3.jpg>

<img src=/me3.jpg>

Well-Known Member

<img src=/me3.jpg>

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member