Is The Trinity Biblical?
From the Christian Research Institute
The Trinity is a basic doctrine of orthodox Christianity. Yet the word "Trinity" is not found anywhere in the Bible. Is the doctrine of the Trinity really biblical?
The doctrine of the Trinity says that there is one All Mighty One (God) who exists eternally as three distinct persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. I can assure you that the elements of this doctrine are all taken directly from the Bible.
The first plank of the Trinitarian platform is that there is only one All Mighty One (God). The Bible could not be more explicit on this point, which it states explicitly about two dozen times. In Isaiah 44:8 Yahweh (The LORD) says that even He does not know of any other (mighty ones)gods!
Yahshua (Jesus) often spoke of the All Mighty One (God) as His Father, and the apostles frequently spoke of "the Almighty One (God) the Father." But the New Testament also insists that Yahshua (Jesus) is The Almighty One (God). For example, Thomas acknowledged Yahshua (Jesus) as, "My Lord(master) and my Almighty One (God)" (John 20:28), and both Peter and Paul spoke of Yahshua (Jesus) as "our All Mighty One (God) and Savior" (2 Pet. 1:1; Tit. 2:13). Yet the New Testament also makes the distinction between the Father and the Son as two very different persons. In fact they tell us that they love one another, speak to each other, and seek to glorify each other (e.g., John 17: 1-26).
The Old Testament refers often to the Holy Spirit as The Almighty One (God) at work in the world, without distinction from the Father. But Yahshua (Jesus) in John 14 to 16 explained that this Holy Spirit would be sent by the Father at the Messiah’s (Christ's) request. The Holy Spirit would teach and guide the disciples, not speaking on His own initiative, but speaking on the Messiah’s 9Christ's) behalf and glorifying The messiah (Christ). Thus, the Holy Spirit is revealed by The Messiah (Christ) to be a third person distinct from the Father and distinct from the Son.
In short, the doctrine of the Trinity is completely and totally biblical, and it is essential that all the Followers of the Messiah Yahshua (Christians) give assent to this doctrine.

Views: 1203

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion


ACTS 2:38, 8:16, 10:48, and 19:5 are four Biblical references that answer this question. If the Biblical record is not enough, please examine the findings of the educated, scholars, and historians.

Britannica Encyclopedia, 11th Edition, Volume 3, page 365 – Baptism was changed from the name of Jesus to words Father, Son & Holy Ghost in 2nd Century.

Canney Encyclopedia of Religion, page 53 – The early church baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus until the second century.

Hastings Encyclopedia of Religion, Volume 2 – Christian baptism was administered using the words, "in the name of Jesus." page 377. Baptism was always in the name of Jesus until time of Justin Martyr, page 389.

Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume 2, page 263 – Here the authors acknowledged that the baptismal formula was changed by their church.

Schaff – Herzog Religious Encyclopedia, Volume 1, page 435 – The New Testament knows only the baptism in the name of Jesus.

Hastings Dictionary of Bible, page 88 – It must be acknowledged that the three fold name of Matthew 28:19 does not appear to have been used by the primitive church, but rather in the name of Jesus, Jesus Christ or Lord Jesus.

IS IT AN ABSOLUTE NECESSITY THAT THE NAME OF JESUS BE SPOKEN OR CALLED OVER A CANDIDATE FOR WATER BAPTISM WHEN HE IS BEING BAPTIZED? For the answer to this question, please read Acts 15:17 and James 2:7 [Greek Linear]. First Century Christians INVOKED OR CALLED the name of Jesus over believers in water baptism. If, as some say, "the name of Jesus means the authority of Jesus', then so much more should the NAME, rather than titles, be called over an individual in baptism. Read Matthew 28:18, Acts 4:12 and Colossians 2:9. Jude 3 is an exhortation to "CONTEND FOR THE FAITH ONCE DELIVERED TO THE SAINTS." See Galations 1:8-9 also. Should anyone dare to change what Christ and the Apostles established?



Which of These Were Practiced
By the Apostles in the Early Church?



JEWS – "Repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ. Acts 2:38.

SAMARITANS – They were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Acts 8:16.

GENTILES – He commanded them to be baptized in the name of Lord Jesus. Acts 10:48.

PETER TAUGHT – There is none other name given whereby we must be saved. Acts 4:12.

PAUL TAUGHT – Whatever you do, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus. Col. 3:17.

Just one scripture stands alone.

Matthew 28:19 was a command by Jesus to baptize in a NAME. The Apostles did not repeat the words of the command, but they did obey it as seen in the scriptures above. Since Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are titles of the mainifestations of the Almighty Spirit and His body, the Apostles understood His SAVING NAME to be JESUS. Can any dare say that the Apostles disobeyed the Lord, or failed to baptize properly? THE NAME OF THE FATHER, SON, AND HOLY GHOST IS LORD JESUS CHRIST. The actions of the Apostles in the Book of Acts prove this to be true.
According to The Bible








The above scriptures are not given to refute Matthew 28:19 where JESUS told Apostles to baptize in the name of the FATHER, & OF THE SON, & OF THE HOLY GHOST. They merely show how the command was interpreted and obeyed by them.

The Apostles knew what most religious leaders of today fail to recognize. First: That the Lord Jesus Christ is the family name. Eph. 3:15. Second: That the FULNESS of the GODHEAD (Deity or God) dwelleth bodily in CHRIST. Col 2:9

They knew the name of the SON was JESUS. Matthew 1:21. They knew that the SON came in the FATHER'S name. John 5:43. They also knew that the HOLY GHOST was the SPIRIT of CHRIST and would come in JESUS NAME. John 14:26.

The name JESUS means JEHOVA SALVATION. Faussets' Bible Encyclopedia. Page 359.
According to History

BRITANICA ENCYCLO. – The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son & Holy Ghost by Catholic Church in the second century. 11th Edition, Vol 3, page 365-366.

BRITANICA ENCYCLO. – Everywhere in the oldest sources it states that baptism took place in the name of Jesus Christ. Vol. 3, page 82.

CANNEY ENCYCLO. OF REL. – The early church always baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus until development of Trinity Doctrine in 2nd century. Page 53.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLO. – Here the Catholics acknowledged that baptism was changed by the Catholic Church. Vol. 2, Page 263.

HASTINGS ENCYCLO. OF REL. – Christian Baptism was administered using the words, "IN THE NAME OF JESUS." Vol. 2, Page 377.
The use of a Trinitarian formula of any sort was not suggested in early Church History. Vol. 2, Page 378.
Baptism was always in name of the Lord Jesus until time of Justin Martyr when Triune formula used. Vol. 2, Page 389.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLO. – Justin Martyr was one of the early Fathers of the Roman Catholic Church. Vol. 8

HASTINGS ENCYCLO. OF REL. – Name was an ancient synonym for "person." Payment was always made in name of some person referring to ownership. Therefore one being baptized in Jesus name became his personal property. "Ye are Christs." Vol. 2, Page 377 on Acts 2:38.

NEW INTERNATIONAL ENCYCLO. – The term "Trinity" was originated by Tertullian. A Roman Catholic Church Father. Vol. 22, Page 477.
The Problem is why can't you say God has three different manifestations instead of saying persons? The term Persons means more than one individual mind ,will ,and being. The trinity doctrine is contradictory in harmonizing with Scripture!!
The reason people continue to insist upon three people in the Godhead is that they do not understand the dual nature of Christ.
Without understanding the dual nature of Christ you may believe that God is two, three or more. If one does not get a clear revelation of the dual nature of the Lord Jesus Christ then he/she may not see how that God is ONE in number, ONE in person.

To understand Christ's dual nature, first you must STOP trying to prove what you believe!

If a man for the first time heard of God and seen a Bible what would he believe? With no preconceived ideas or religious teaching he must be open minded for truth or he will never receive it. The Bible says that "the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishness unto him".

Christ while on earth had two natures. The first was a human nature and number two a divine nature.

He did many things as a man and he did many things as God. Sometimes the Bible refers to him as human but other times it refers to him as God. What you must do is understand which nature is being referred to. If a nature to you is a person then you will have at least two persons of God. In doing this you also will make yourself two persons! If you have the Holy Ghost then you have a divine nature but at the same time you are reminded daily that you have a human nature.

Here are a fews things Jesus did as a man.

1. He was born
2. He slept in a boat
3. He ate
4. He wept
5. He died
6. He was buried

Here are a few things Christ did as God.

1. He spoke to the storm and it stopped
2. He multiplied the fish
3. He raised Lazarus from the dead
4. He made the blind to see
5. He walked on water
6. He raised himself from the dead

The examples can go on and on but I think you get the point. We also received a "divine nature" the Bible says. So when you "walk" in the Spirit as Paul taught, you are walking in that divine nature. In that divine nature miracles are bound to happen! As Jesus did miracles as a man through his divine nature we also can do miracles through that divine nature dwelling in us. As Jesus was the son of God here on earth, we also are sons and daughters of God in this world, we are the physical body of Christ in this world today.

Notice the terminology the Bible uses about Jesus. There are terms for the human nature and terms for the divine nature.

Terms for the human nature.

* flesh
* lamb
* son
* man

Terms for the divine nature

* Spirit
* God
* Holy Ghost
* Father

The terms "flesh, lamb, son and man" point to Jesus' humanity.

The terms "God, Spirit, Holy Ghost and Father" point to Jesus' deity.

Jesus said in John "the works I do I do not of myself, it is the Father that dwelleth in me , he doeth the works." Understand that your flesh cannot do a miracle. Jesus was saying that even about himself. It was the Father in him doing the miracles. Jesus said "the flesh profiteth nothing, it is the Spirit that quickeneth." The two natures fused into one person. Jesus said in John 3, he that is born of the Spirit is Spirit and he that is born of the flesh is flesh".

We at some point get born again and we immediately have two natures. We are born with the nature of flesh but the new birth gives us that divine nature!

John 4:24 tells us that "God is a Spirit". That Spirit (God) spoke a seed into the womb of Mary and this baby to be born was the son of God. When this baby was born, he was born with two natures. He did not have to be born again. Yes, Jesus was born with a human nature and a God nature. 1 Timothy 3:16 says that "God was manifest in the flesh". Who was manifest in the flesh? Jehovah God was! God was revealed in a human body! The invisible Jehovah God was made known to us as a man and we call him the Son of God! This Son of God was Jehovah God of the Old Testament revealed in human form!

Jesus the man was at the same time Jehovah God! Jesus had two natures, one was divine and the other was human. One nature was temporal and the other was eternal. One nature was Spirit and the other was flesh!
It amazes me that people choose to run with the Popes of Rome of whom never had a revelation of God and were never born again. These same preachers and believers believe that God is three persons as the Roman Catholic church has taught for 1,800 years. What most people don’t know, it was a Pope from Rome who changed the water baptism in the 3rd century from “in the name of Jesus Christ” to “in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit”.

It was at the Nicene Counsel of the Roman Catholic church in 325 AD that the teaching of the trinity came about. In the first two centuries after Jesus ascension you cannot find any teachings of Jehovah God as being a trinity. The teaching came about by a backslidden church that began to compromise with the local pagans to bring about religious harmony. The local pagans worshiped multiple Gods by many names. For an example, the mother and child worship (Mary and Jesus) is centuries older than Mary herself. Look in your history and you will see pictures of statues that have been excavated of a woman holding a child. These are much older than 2,000 years! Again the pagans and backslid church of the day both compromised there standards. Of course the pagans were already lost so there compromise did not hurt them any worse. The sad part is that the church was falling further and further from many truths originally held by the early church. This falling away was spoken of by Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2:3

2 Thess 2:3
3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

This falling away of the church was yet to happen and as we can see the Apostle Paul had revelation of it. Much of the church forsook the teaching of the “oneness” of God and water baptism “in the name of Jesus Christ” in the 2nd and 3rd centuries. Do a google search “Nicene Counsel 325 AD”. You can read all about it.

Let me show you why this teaching is so wrong…
The Trinity in a nutshell is “God in three separate persons, all three are Lord and all three are God”.
If the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are three separate persons than…
The Father, Son and Holy Ghost are three separate Lords and
The Father, Son and Holy Ghost are three separate Gods!
The end result of this pagan teaching is that God is three separate persons, three separate Lords and three separate Gods. This is complete heresy!

Everything that I have written here is documented history. The Roman Catholic church admits to having changed the teachings of baptism and the Oneness of God. They admit it and it is in their encyclopedias! They know they did it and don’t deny it. The secular encyclopedias also verify that truth.

Rev 18:4
4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.KJV

Part of chapters 17 & 18 in Revelation is about the coming Roman Catholic church. God is saying “come out of her my people”. Look in your history and you will find where the church of Rome has murdered an estimated 68 million Christians that believed in the oneness of God and were baptized in Jesus name. Google it, it’s there!

The Pope in 1962 at the Vatican Counsel said “we the Mother church are opening our arms for all of our daughters to return home”. Every person that has been baptized in the triune formula is part of the the Roman catholic church. The Pope claims you. You came out of the Catholic church by means of the Reformation. The only church the Popes will not claim is the church that baptizes in Jesus name and believes in the oneness of God.

The true Apostolic church did not come out of the reformation but existed even before the catholic church. The true Apostolic church was founded by the Apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ!

Come out of the Trinitarian teachings, forsake them and cleave only to the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ and his twelve apostles. (The entire Word of God)
The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics:

As to Matthew 28:19, it says: It is the central piece of evidence for the traditional (Trinitarian) view. If it were undisputed, this would, of course, be decisive, but its trustworthiness is impugned on grounds of textual criticism, literary criticism and historical criticism. The same Encyclopedia further states that: "The obvious explanation of the silence of the New Testament on the triune name, and the use of another (JESUS NAME) formula in Acts and Paul, is that this other formula was the earlier, and the triune formula is a later addition."
Edmund Schlink, The Doctrine of Baptism, page 28:

"The baptismal command in its Matthew 28:19 form can not be the historical origin of Christian baptism. At the very least, it must be assumed that the text has been transmitted in a form expanded by the [Catholic] church."
The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275:

"It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but...a later liturgical addition."

Wilhelm Bousset, Kyrios Christianity, page 295:

"The testimony for the wide distribution of the simple baptismal formula [in the Name of Jesus] down into the second century is so overwhelming that even in Matthew 28:19, the Trinitarian formula was later inserted."

The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263:

"The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century."
Hastings Dictionary of the Bible 1963, page 1015:

"The not demonstrable by logic or by Scriptural proofs,...The term Trias was first used by Theophilus of Antioch (c AD 180),...(The term Trinity) not found in Scripture..." "The chief Trinitarian text in the NT is the baptismal formula in Mt 28:19...This late post-resurrection saying, not found in any other Gospel or anywhere else in the NT, has been viewed by some scholars as an interpolation into Matthew. It has also been pointed out that the idea of making disciples is continued in teaching them, so that the intervening reference to baptism with its Trinitarian formula was perhaps a later insertion into the saying. Finally, Eusebius's form of the (ancient) text ("in my name" rather than in the name of the Trinity) has had certain advocates. (Although the Trinitarian formula is now found in the modern-day book of Matthew), this does not guarantee its source in the historical teaching of Jesus. It is doubtless better to view the (Trinitarian) formula as derived from early (Catholic) Christian, perhaps Syrian or Palestinian, baptismal usage (cf Didache 7:1-4), and as a brief summary of the (Catholic) Church's teaching about God, Christ, and the Spirit:..."

The Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge:

"Jesus, however, cannot have given His disciples this Trinitarian order of baptism after His resurrection; for the New Testament knows only one baptism in the name of Jesus (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:43; 19:5; Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 1:13-15), which still occurs even in the second and third centuries, while the Trinitarian formula occurs only in Matt. 28:19, and then only again (in the) Didache 7:1 and Justin, Apol. 1:61...Finally, the distinctly liturgical character of the strange; it was not the way of Jesus to make such formulas... the formal authenticity of Matt. 28:19 must be disputed..." page 435.
The Jerusalem Bible, a scholarly Catholic work, states:

"It may be that this formula, (Triune Matthew 28:19) so far as the fullness of its expression is concerned, is a reflection of the (Man-made) liturgical usage established later in the primitive (Catholic) community. It will be remembered that Acts speaks of baptizing "in the name of Jesus,"..."
The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, page 2637, Under "Baptism," says:

"Matthew 28:19 in particular only canonizes a later ecclesiastical situation, that its universalism is contrary to the facts of early Christian history, and its Trinitarian formula (is) foreign to the mouth of Jesus."
New Revised Standard Version says this about Matthew 28:19:

"Modern critics claim this formula is falsely ascribed to Jesus and that it represents later (Catholic) church tradition, for nowhere in the book of Acts (or any other book of the Bible) is baptism performed with the name of the Trinity..."
James Moffett's New Testament Translation:

In a footnote on page 64 about Matthew 28:19 he makes this statement: "It may be that this (Trinitarian) formula, so far as the fullness of its expression is concerned, is a reflection of the (Catholic) liturgical usage established later in the primitive (Catholic) community, It will be remembered that Acts speaks of baptizing "in the name of Jesus, cf. Acts 1:5 +."

Tom Harpur:

Tom Harpur, former Religion Editor of the Toronto Star in his "For Christ's sake," page 103 informs us of these facts: "All but the most conservative scholars agree that at least the latter part of this command [Triune part of Matthew 28:19] was inserted later. The [Trinitarian] formula occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, and we know from the only evidence available [the rest of the New Testament] that the earliest Church did not baptize people using these words ("in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost") baptism was "into" or "in" the name of Jesus alone. Thus it is argued that the verse originally read "baptizing them in My Name" and then was expanded [changed] to work in the [later Catholic Trinitarian] dogma. In fact, the first view put forward by German critical scholars as well as the Unitarians in the nineteenth century, was stated as the accepted position of mainline scholarship as long ago as 1919, when Peake's commentary was first published: "The Church of the first days (AD 33) did not observe this world-wide (Trinitarian) commandment, even if they knew it. The command to baptize into the threefold [Trinity] name is a late doctrinal expansion."

The Bible Commentary 1919 page 723:

Dr. Peake makes it clear that: "The command to baptize into the threefold name is a late doctrinal expansion. Instead of the words baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost we should probably read simply-"into My Name."
Theology of the New Testament:

By R. Bultmann, 1951, page 133 under Kerygma of the Hellenistic Church and the Sacraments. The historical fact that the verse Matthew 28:19 was altered is openly confesses to very plainly. "As to the rite of baptism, it was normally consummated as a bath in which the one receiving baptism completely submerged, and if possible in flowing water as the allusions of Acts 8:36, Heb. 10:22, Barn. 11:11 permit us to gather, and as Did. 7:1-3 specifically says. According to the last passage, [the apocryphal Catholic Didache] suffices in case of the need if water is three times poured [false Catholic sprinkling doctrine] on the head. The one baptizing names over the one being baptized the name of the Lord Jesus Christ," later expanded [changed] to the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit."

How Much more evidence do you need? The Trinity is Man-made!
Todays Pope Benedict, when he was a cardinal in 1988, actually admitted the Catholic church changed the baptism:

-- The basic form of the (28:19 Trinitarian) profession of faith took shape during the course of the second and third centuries in connection with the ceremony of baptism. So far as its place of origin is concerned, the text (Matthew 28:19 came from the city of Rome."
Quoted from: Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Introduction to Christianity, pp.50-51.
Were you immersed contrary to the Bible? A Roman Emperor insisted that Trinitarian wording be inserted into the Latin Vulgate Bible as it was being written. The chapter explains how the fraudulent text has crept into virtually every modern English version of the Bible, and has even eluded being discovered by sects that dont teach that God is a Trinity. The question becomes: Does it matter whose name you were immersed into?

The Test of Consequence
Mysteries of the Everlasting Kingdom

When we are immersed, do we “put on” the name of the Father, Son and sacred spirit? No. Do we put on the name of Yeshua? (Jesus*) Yes. When we are immersed in the name of Yeshua, according to all the immersion accounts recorded in the Bible, we are quite literally being immersed “into” the name of Yeshua, (I prefer to use the name that His friends, neighbors and family called Him over a translated form).

Galatians 3:27 Those who have been immersed into the Name of Jesus Christ, have put on the fine clothing of the Lord Jesus Christ.

No mention is made in the Bible of any immersion being related to the titles of Father, Son and sacred spirit. Every actual account mentions a clear connection with the person of Jesus Christ, and His atoning sacrifice.
The Test of Practice

Did the Disciples, as they were implementing the “Great Commission” ever once immerse into the Trinity? Never! Did they immerse in the name of Jesus Christ?—Always! (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:48 (inferred); 19:5, etc.) The argument has been made when defending Triune immersion; “I would rather obey Jesus, than to imitate the Apostles.” This kind of reasoning tho, places the Apostles in rebellion, and makes all Apostolic immersions contrary to the inspired Words. If all of His Words are inspired—and they are—then we shouldn't try to put one verse against another, but rather seek to reconcile all of God’s Words in proper context, and rightly apply them to our lives. It is easier to believe that the Disciples followed the final instructions of Yeshua, than to believe that they immediately disobeyed His command!
The Test of Significance

What significance is mentioned in the Bible for immersing believers in the name of the Father, Son and sacred spirit? None. What significance is conveyed toward being immersed in the name of Jesus Christ? First, the Bible teaches that immersion in the name of Jesus Christ is an act of repentance leading to the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38). Second, immersion in His name alone is associated with the promise of Lord's spirit (Acts 2:38, 19:1-5). Third, immersion in the name of Jesus Christ is compared to our personal willingness to be living sacrifices, or even die with Him. (Romans 6:1-4 and Colossians 2:12). Fourth, being immersed into Jesus name is how we “put on” Christ (Galatians 3:27). Fifth, immersion in His name is called the “circumcision of Christ”, and reflects our “putting off” of the man of sin, and becoming a “new creature in our Jesus Christ.” (Colossians 2:11-12, 2 Corinthians 5:17). Immersion in the name of Jesus Christ expresses faith in the physical life of Jesus, the crucifixion of Jesus Christ for our sins, and the remission of sins through His name. Trinitarian immersion can only express faith in Catholic theology itself.
The Test of Parallel Accounts

Matthew 28 is not the sole record in the “New Testament” or The Testimony of Jesus Christ of the “Great Commission”. Luke also recorded this event in great detail. In Luke 24:46-47, he wrote : “And that repentance and remission of sins should be heralded in His name among all nations.” This passage alone, in contradiction to the falsified text, establishes the correct wording of Matthew 28:19, where Jesus spoke and said, “in My name”. Further, the gospel of Mark also records another version of the “Great Commission,” using some of the same patterns of speech: “Go ... into all the world ... preach the gospel ... every creature ...immersed ... in My name...” (Mark 16:15-18) Of course, it is not immersion that “in My name” refers to here, but rather the works that the Disciples would do. Yet compared to Matthew, the similarity is striking, because even tho immersion isn't explicitly mentioned there, Disciples should, nevertheless, be made “in My Name”.

“The command to baptize in Matt. 28:19 is thought to show the influence of a developed doctrine of God verging on Trinitarianism. Early baptism was in the name of ‘Jesus’ [the Messiah]. The association of this Trinitarian conception with baptism suggests that baptism itself was felt to be an experience with a Trinitarian reference. —Williams R.R., Theological Workbook of the Bible, page 29

“Doubtless the more comprehensive form in which baptism is now everywhere administered in the threefold name ... soon superseded the simpler form of that in the name of the Jesus only. —Dean Stanley, Christian Institutions

“The striking contrast and the illogical internal incoherence of the passage ... lead to a presumption of an intentional corruption in the interests of the Trinity. In ancient Christian times a tendency of certain parties to corrupt the text of the New Testament was certainly often imputed. This increases our doubt almost to a decisive certainty concerning the genuineness of the passage. —E.K. in the Fraternal Visitor, Article: “The Question of the Trinity and Matt. 28:19.” 1924, pg. 147-151, from Christadelphian Monatshefte.

In his Literal Translation of the Bible, Dr. Robert Young placed the Trinitarian “names” of Matthew 28:19 in parentheses, to indicate that the words are of doubtful authenticity.

The very account that tells us that at last, after His resurrection, He commissioned His Disciples to go and baptize among all nations, betrays itself by speaking in the Trinitarian language of the next century, and compels us to see in it the ecclesiastical editor, and not the evangelist, much less the Founder Himself.

“The Trinitarian formula (Matt. 28:19) was a late addition by some reverent Christian mind. —James Martineau, Black’s Bible Dictionary, article “Seat of Authority”,

“The obvious explanation of the silence of the New Testament on the triune name, and the use of another formula in Acts and Paul, is that this other formula was the earlier, and that the triune formula is a later addition. —Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics

Professor Harnack in his History of Dogma (German Edition) dismissed the text almost contemptuously as being “no word of the Lord’.”

“Clerical conscience much troubled (see Comp. Bible App. 185) that the apostles and epistles never once employ the triune name of Matt. 28:19. Even Trinitarians, knowing the idea of the Trinity was being resisted by the Church*in the fourth century, admits (e.g. Peake) ‘the command to baptize with the threefold name is a late doctrinal expansion’, but still prior to our oldest yet known manuscripts (fourth Century). It’s sole counterpart, 1 John 5:7 is a proven interpolation. Eusebius (A.D. 264-340) denounces the triune form as spurious, Matthew’s actual writing having been baptizing them ‘in my name’. —F. Whiteley in The Testimony footnotes to Article: Baptism, 1958.

PS There is another Biblical source that dismisses the Trinitarian formula of immersion, the Hebrew version of Matthew. The composite version compiled by Shem Tov, and named after him, is allegedly taken from an original Hebrew source. While Shem Tov, being Jewish, was against the teaching that Yeshua was the Messiah, he nonetheless preserved the entire book for the purpose of railing against it! While a bias against using the name of Yeshua crept in; I find it most interesting that the oldest known manuscripts, that Shem Tov is said to have been using, at least predates the Trinity theory, and therefore has no reference to a Trinitarian immersion. Following is a quote from an article on the Shem Tov:

“Lack of Trinitarian formula for baptism in Matt 28:19-20 [in the Shem Tov] is unique but [at least Yeshua] seems to be in codices that Eusebius found in Caesarea: he quotes (H.E. 3.5.2): “They went on their way to all the nations teaching their message in the power of Jesus for he had said to them, “Go make Disciples of all the nations in My name”. The Shem Tov version of Matthew reads:

“You go and teach them to carry out all the things that I have commanded you forever.”

Should we correct the text of Matthew 28:19? We couldnt find a more serious and sacred symbolism in the Bible. The symbolic value of immersion in Matthew 28:19 is of no less importance than the Ark of the Covenant was in ancient Israel. Uzzah died when he touched it, and few would conclude that his motives were anything but commendable!

Every symbolic action required by The Lord is associated with actual cause and effect. Consider the following cause and effect examples. When Joshua pointed his spear there was victory (Joshua 8:18) Only three victories were given to Joash when he struck the ground only three times (2 Kings 13:19-25). The Passover Lamb had to be without blemish, just as God was, if a household was to be protected from death (Exodus 12:5). None of God's rituals are without true meaning and consequences. When the Lord speaks, it is done! Jesus called Lazarus, and Lazarus arose! In matters of ritual, such as immersion and the Passover, we are dealing with God's rituals, not man’s.

All man made rituals, no matter how well intentioned, when they deviate from the Word of God, are nothing more than unprofitable traditions when, “You reject the Word of God, because of the tradition that you hand down”. ... (Mark 7:13). Obedience to the lord commands, however, will always “cause” a desirable “effect”.

In the matter of establishing the original text of Matthew 28:19, it is certainly important to determine what is genuine and what is spurious, in order to properly obey the Lord's command. After all, that is the essence of the introductory text from Deuteronomy:

Deuteronomy 4:2 You must not add to the Words that I command you, or subtract from them, so that you can obey the Commandments of Yehovah your Elohim that I command you. WE

When we are obedient to the Commandments of Yehovah, we can expect an eternal effect.

The Saints* were taught to anoint the sick “with oil in the name of our Master.” (James 5:14) The result would be “so that you can be healed”. When two or three gather together “in His name”, the result is that He is there with them. As our evidence reveals, Yeshua commanded us to go and make Disciples “in His name”. As a result, He would be with them “always, even to the end of the age.” Anything we do “in His name” directly involves Him. It is no wonder that Paul so clearly charged the Nazarenes or “Christians” in Colossi to “do everything in the name of Jesus Christ.
Ok let's look up history. I just did a simple Google search and found these!
Come-Out-of-Her-My-People" style="margin: 12px auto 6px auto; font-family: Helvetica,Arial,Sans-serif; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 14px; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; -x-system-font: none; display: block; text-decoration: underline;">Come Out of Her My People I Google searched "How did the Trinity Originate?" I found this quite interesting and factual in History! Although this writer is leaning toward a Binitarian View: One God, Two Beings Before the Beginning which is not biblically sound,the points in History that are made are excellent! Many more proofs that the Trinity is not Biblical. Man can make the word say and mean what they want it to say!
This is why we must:
2 Timothy 2:15 (King James Version)
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Check this out!
I surely don't want to be wrapped up in a religion that didn't teach word for word the bible and has come up with some other way to
be saved,adding and taking away from the word!
A Must read!

Did Jesus Christ Teach the Trinity?
Still not convinced?
here is the history in a nutshell. Go ahead and research it for yourself!

The Catholics claim they are the true Church!
But my bible tells me different!
The True church of Jesus Christ started in the bible days!
As you can see here, then many of hundreds of years later..

As you can see The trinity was started by a man named Constantine (look it up for yourself) Don't just take my word for it.
Conclusion: The Trinity is man-made.
People can rightly divide God's word WITHOUT the Trinity!
The catholic church changed God's word into a lie. They won't go unpunished for this.
God will Judge them. This false dotrine is sending many people to Hell.
If you are a follower of the Trinity,Please Seek the Lord in Prayer and ask him is baptism in Jesus name essential? It is. The Pope changed the word of God. Please Study God's word! Thank you for taking the time to search this out for yourself! Your salvation depends on it!
Philippians 2:12 (King James Version)

12Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

God Bless you in Jesus Name!
Love In Christ, Della Morton
Also remember since the pope changed the baptismal formula excluding the name of Jesus. There is no remission of sins without The NAME OF JESUS CHRIST being called over the individual in water baptism!
Many people are deceived!!! It does matter when it comes to salvation!
God Bless!
Don't just take my word for it. Look it up for yourself!
I have provided the references with the page numbers.

Encyclopedia International, 1975 Edition, Vol.18, p.226 - The doctrine of the "Trinity" did not form part of the apostles' preaching, as this is reported in the New Testament.

New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967 Edition, Vol.13, p.1021 - The first use of the Latin word "trinitas" (trinity) with reference to God, is found in Tertullian's writings (about 213 A.D.) He was the first to use the term "persons" (plural) in a Trinitarian context.

Encyclopedia Americana, 1957 Edition, Vol.27, p.69 - The word "Trinity" is not in Scripture. The term "persons" (plural) is not applied in Scripture to the Trinity.

World Book Encyclopedia, 1975 Edition, Vol. T, p.363 - Belief in Father, Son and Holy Ghost was first defined by the earliest general council of churches. This was the First Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D.

New International Encyclopedia, Vol.22, p.476 - The Catholic faith is this: We worship one God in Trinity, but there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son and another of the Holy Ghost. The Glory equal - the Majesty co-eternal. The doctrine is not found in its fully developed form in the Scriptures. Modern theology does not seek to find it in the Old Testament. At the time of the Reformation the Protestant Church took aver the doctrine of the Trinity without serious examination.

Life Magazine, October 30, 1950, Vol.29, No.18, p.51 - The Catholics made this statement concerning their doctrine of the Trinity, to defend the dogma of the assumption of Mary, in an article written by Graham Greene: "Our opponents sometimes claim that no belief should be held dogmatically which is not explicitly stated in Scripture... But the PROTESTANT CHURCHES have themselves accepted such dogmas as THE TRINITY, for which there is NO SUCH PRECISE AUTHORITY in the Gospels"

Many use the human reasoning and logic that the non-Biblical words "trinity", "triune" or "persons" (pertaining to God and/or the Godhead) should be accepted just as the words "rapture" and "Bible" are .... or even the word "sandwich" (for that matter). And, even though "sandwich" is not a Biblical word, I know they're real 'cause I ate one yesterday. So, my point ... or my question ... is, what Biblical words could be used in the place of the words "trinity", "triune" OR "persons" pertaining to God and/or the Godhead? I wouldn't have any trouble at all finding Biblical words to use in the place of "sandwich", "rapture" and "Bible". They are: "bread" and "meat", "caught up" "Word of God" and "book".

Now, if those who embrace the man-made theory of the Trinity can find any words that will do for "truine", "persons" or "trinity" what the words "bread" and "meat", "caught up" "Word of God" and "book" will do for "sandwich", "rapture" and "Bible", I would love to see them. Unless or until they can, I suggest that they stop adding to or taking from (depending on how you look at it) the Word of God by embracing, as dogmatically held doctrine, a theory which is NOT specifically mentioned in the Bible ... and without any Biblical words which could serve as a substitute to describe a "tag-team of wrestlers". And, while the Bible does NOT authorize a belief in three "persons" who jointly form One God, it does accurately describe God as the Father in Creation, the Son in Redemption and the Holy Spirit living in the hearts of believers throughout the New Testament Church Age. There is more Scriptural to support three "forms" of God ... three "manifestations" of God ... three "titles" of God ... three "offices/positions" which God holds or ... three "roles" in which God functions ... than there is THREE PERSONS of God. That is strictly a flawed theory!

If it’s a matter of semantics, "one God in three persons" is an "add on" that people would be wise to just leave off.

My Dad can be very accurately be described as a father, son and husband ... or a teacher, student and administrator. While He functions in more than one capacity and occupy more than one office, and wears a number of different hats, He is still just ONE person. As a matter of fact, He can be in the same room with, and in the presence of, my mother, my Husband and my friends, kids and he can speak, act and function as a father, son and husband without anybody getting confused as to how many persons He is or who is talking.

English was my worst subject in school, but I do remember a few things. For illustration purposes only, it is not proper to link the singular pronoun "He", which refers to one "person", to verbs like: "see", "hear" and "warn" ... which would look like this ... "He see", "He hear" and "He warn". When using the singular pronoun "He", it is necessary to use the verbs "sees", "hears" and "warns" ... "He SEES", "He HEARS" and "He WARNS". In order to use the verbs "see", "hear" and "warn", you must use a noun or pronoun which is "plural" and identifies "more" than one person like, "People" ... "People see", "People hear" and "People warn". Yet, intelligent people who know this rule, but who have been indoctrinated to believe that there are three "persons" of God, ignore this rule when it comes to the word "GOD" (the Hebrew word Elohim).

**IF** the word "GOD" (Elohim) identifies more than one "person", as the trinitarians insist, the Bible should read like this, "God SEE", "God HEAR" and "God WARN" ... AND IT DOESN'T! The word "GOD" is never linked to a verb like that. Instead, the word "GOD" is ALWAYS linked to verbs just as the word "He" (a singular person) is ... like this, "God SEES", "God HEARS" and "God WARNS". Again, I use these particular words for illustration purposes only, but I hope I have made my point ... and that it's CLEAR.

Men started "reading" things into the Scriptures a couple centuries or so AFTER Jesus ascended back up into Heaven, and after the "foot print followers" of our Lord had passed on. As a result, there has evolved all sorts of religious beliefs and denominations. However, in order to get people to stop and think about a few things, I use the Clark Kent/Superman analogy quite a bit. Jesus said and did some of the things He said and did to set an example for those who witnessed it to follow, as well as for those of us who would read about it 2,000 years later. At any rate, the reason I use Clark Kent/Superman is because people are familiar with the scenario. And, although Clark Kent/Superman is a fictitious character, I contend that the Incarnate Christ was, indeed, the REAL Superman. And, as a result, Jesus often spoke of the Father as if the Father where someone other than Himself who was way off in another galaxy or solar system. As a former trinitarian, myself, I understand why those who have been indoctrinated to believe there's two or three of 'em up there believe such, as well as those who interpret ... and try to understand ... the Bible "literally". However, spiritual things are NOT understood with human reasoning and logic. And, Jesus was unlike any one else who has ever walked upon planet Earth. While He possessed the Glory and Power of Deity, He went about as a lowly servant. He had a "human" nature as a result of actually being born of a woman. And, He had a "Divine" nature as a result of Him being God manifested in the flesh. Also, Jesus served as the example ... or the template (so to speak) ... for all Christians to pattern themselves after. And, as a result, He said and did many things for our benefit ... AND to set an example for us to follow. By the way, I am NOT saying Jesus was deceitful, nor that He lied ... far from it. It's just that He could (and did) speak, act and function as any "ordinary" man, at times. And, He also could (and did) speak, act and function as Almighty God, at other times, while here on Earth. Those who have ears to hear, hears what the Spirit saith, and aren't trying to fuel a flawed, man-made, pre-conceived and indoctrinated agenda, will, I believe, come to the understanding as to who Jesus "really" is **IF** they truly hunger and thirst for righteousness. Then, it will be up to them what they do from that point. They can continue on in their traditions and doctrines of men OR they can come out from among them and be ye separate.

Since Isaiah was a MAJOR Messianic Prophet in the Old Testament, my challenge for every "natural" Jew and every professing Christian who believes the man-made theory of the Holy Trinity OR those who believe Jesus was Michael the Archangel or some other inferior subordinate is very simple. I challenge all "natural Jews", all professing Christians who believes the man-made theory of the Holy Trinity, the entire Watchtower Society constituency, the Vatican, and the entire Roman Catholic Church constituency, as well as any and all members and/or associates, past and present, of the various and sundry Protestant denominations, any and all independent Bible students and scholars including the entire constituency of the anything connected to or remotely resembling the Mormon Church ... or anyone else (**IF** I missed anybody) ... to read 11 Chapters in the Book of Isaiah (Chapters 41, 43, 44, 47, 48, 49, 53, 54, 59, 60, and 63) and then provide me with the Scripture(s) they believe supports the belief that the coming (prophesied and promised) MESSIAH would be someone BESIDES Jehovah/God, Himself.

Those of us who embrace the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine understand something very important: The Incarnate Christ was the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last ... God manifest in the flesh. And, these are just a few of the documenting Scriptures I use ... Isaiah 9:6, Isaiah 44:6; Isaiah 48:12; Micah 1:2-3; John 1:1-14; John 10:30-33; John 14:6-11; Colossians 2:8-10; 1 Timothy 3:16; Rev. 2:8; Rev. 21:6; and Rev. 22:13.

Yes, the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity is a flawed man-made theory, and is NOT "sound doctrine" at all. Therefore, upon learning this, a person should ask themselves this question, "Do I want Truth in its entirety, or do I want man's flawed theories and traditions?" Whatever you decide, it is entirely up to you. In the final analysis of things, you and I will be justified or condemned not by just our faith and beliefs alone, but also by the words we speak AND our deeds. Silence can be interpreted as consent. There are sins of omissions and sins of commission. And, there will be lots of "good" people in hell. Being "good" is NOT good enough. If you doubt or dispute that, read Acts Chapter 10. Cornelius was a good man but he still needed salvation.

A very closely related subject to this is the words that are invoked at baptismal services. The name that was alluded to in Matthew 28:19 is the precious name of JESUS. Quoting Matthew 28:19 does NOT fulfill the Great Commission. Those who knew how it was to be done, invoked the precious name of Jesus in Acts 2:37-41; Acts 8:14-17; Acts 10:44-48; and Acts 19:1-6. Jesus was NOT telling His disciples what to "say" in Matthew 28:19, He was telling them what to "do". Besides, nobody was baptized in Matthew 28:19. And, nobody in the entire Bible was baptized in the "titles" of Father, Son and Holy Ghost. We are admonished in Colossians 3:17 to do whatever we do in "word AND deed", to do it all of it in the "NAME of Jesus". And, besides the baptism examples, here are a couple other places (direct "quotes") where the "name of Jesus" was invoked in word and deed instead of the "titles" of Father, Son and Holy Ghost ....

Acts 3:6 Then Peter said, Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk.

Acts 16:18 And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.

History also documents baptism in the name of Jesus ...

Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics (1951). II, 384, 389: "The formula used was "in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ" or some synonymous phrase; there is no evidence for the use of the triune name… The earliest form, represented in the Acts, was simple immersion… in water, the use of the name of the Lord, and the laying on of hands. To these were added, at various times and places which cannot be safely identified, (a) the trine name (Justin)…"

Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (1962), I 351: " evidence .. suggests that baptism in early Christianity was administered, not in the threefold name, but 'in the name of Jesus Christ' or 'in the name of the Lord Jesus.'"

Otto Heick, A History of Christian Thought (1965), I, 53: "At first baptism was administered in the name of Jesus, but gradually in the name of the Triune God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Hasting's Dictionary of the Bible (1898). I, 241: "[One explanation is that] the original form of words was "into the name of Jesus Christ" or 'the Lord Jesus,' Baptism into the name of the Trinity was a later development."

Williston Walker, A History of the Christian Church (1947), page 58: "The trinitarian baptismal formula,,, was displacing the older baptism in the name of Christ."

The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge (1957), I, 435: "The New Testament knows only baptism in the name of Jesus… which still occurs even in the second and third centuries."

Canney's Encyclopedia of Religions (1970), page 53: "Persons were baptized at first 'in the name of Jesus Christ' … or 'in the name of the Lord Jesus'… Afterwards, with the development of the doctrine of the Trinity, they were baptized 'in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.'"

Encyclopedia Biblica (1899), I, 473: "It is natural to conclude that baptism was administered in the earliest times 'in the name of Jesus Christ,' or in that 'of the Lord Jesus.' This view is confirmed by the fact that the earliest forms of the baptismal confession appear to have been single-not triple, as was the later creed."

Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed. (1920), II 365: "The trinitarian formula and trine immersion were not uniformly used from the beginning… Bapti[sm] into the name of the Lord [was] the normal formula of the New Testament. In the 3rd century baptism in the name of Christ was still so widespread that Pope Stephen, in opposition to Cyprian of Carthage, declared it to be valid."

My advice to you is, if you aren't affiliated with one now, that you find yourself a church which embraces, teaches and preaches the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine and baptizes in the precious name of Jesus ... the name that was alluded to in Matthew 28:19 ... and go there, and see (and feel) the difference for yourself!

Any United Pentecostal Church or Apostolic Pentecostal church in your area!

John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

I really hope you will consider what you've read in these articles and Pray. When we meet Jesus one day face to face, we will have to answer to Him what we believe. And I don't want it to be said about me that I didn't follow His Apostles Teachings to be saved but rather traditions of men! Jesus can open the Book and judge us out of it!
By then it will be too late. I am going to end with these verses for you to consider a well.

Colossians 2:7-9 (King James Version)

7Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.

8Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

9For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
In Who? Christ! I don't see three,but One God!

The Lord Bless you! Love in Christ, Della Morton
Surely you've all studied church history? Where did the trinity
come from? How has it changed God's Word since it started? A must see Video.

Find more videos like this on Jesus Loves You!
Are you STILL going at this thread??????????????

And you're STILL wrong?!!!!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Are you STILL going at this thread??????????????



© 2023   Created by Raliegh Jones Jr..   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service