1. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    86381
    28 Jun '13 05:351 edit
    Matthew 28:29
    Go therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

    So off they went into the book of Acts where incredibly not one of them ever baptised in this methodology. They all Baptised in the name of Jesus Christ, every time and without exception. Read the scripture again. "Baptise them in the name (singular) of the Father, and of the son and of the Holy Ghost" and they used the name Jesus. His name is the one name given amount men by which which we may be saved. Not Jehovah. Jesus was the invisible god made visible and in him dwelt the "fullness" of the Godhead, not part or a third - the fullness all of god.

    This piece of evidence is irrefutable and a wonderful revelation of the nature of God and the Godhead.
  2. Standard memberAgerg
    The 'edit'or
    converging to it
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    11458
    28 Jun '13 06:19
    Originally posted by divegeester
    Matthew 28:29
    Go therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

    So off they went into the book of Acts where incredibly not one of them ever baptised in this methodology. They all Baptised in the name of Jesus Christ, every time and without exception. Read the scripture again. "Bapti ...[text shortened]... of evidence is irrefutable and a wonderful revelation of the nature of God and the Godhead.
    This piece of evidence is irrefutable and a wonderful revelation of the nature of God and the Godhead.
    "Wonderful" is a matter of opinion, "irrefutable" is just plain wrong
  3. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    28 Jun '13 06:52
    Originally posted by divegeester
    This piece of evidence is irrefutable ....
    So I presume all the people that disagree with you simply do so without refutation?
  4. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    86381
    28 Jun '13 07:02
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    So I presume all the people that disagree with you simply do so without refutation?
    No, wrong choice of words. Certainly it is refutable.
  5. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    28 Jun '13 07:28
    Originally posted by divegeester
    No, wrong choice of words. Certainly it is refutable.
    I am not sure exactly what you were saying is irrefutable, but no one has actually tried to refute it. They have only said that it is not irrefutable and that does not really prove it is refutable. But on the other hand, you now say it is refutable. So I guess no evidence needs to be presented that it is refutable and not irrefutable. Is what I have said here irrefutable or is it refutable? Does this make any sense at all?

    The Instructor

    The Instructor
  6. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    86381
    28 Jun '13 07:35
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I am not sure exactly what you were saying is irrefutable, but no one has actually tried to refute it. They have only said that it is not irrefutable and that does not really prove it is refutable. But on the other hand, you now say it is refutable. So I guess no evidence needs to be presented that it is refutable and not irrefutable. Is what I have said ...[text shortened]... utable or is it refutable? Does this make any sense at all?

    The Instructor

    The Instructor
    As you can well see I've said it is not irrefutable so why are you bringing it up.

    Why don't you address the scripture from your trinitarian viewpoint?
  7. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    28 Jun '13 08:02
    Originally posted by divegeester
    As you can well see I've said it is not irrefutable so why are you bringing it up.

    Why don't you address the scripture from your trinitarian viewpoint?
    I was just trying to be humorous. But I don't see anything that I wish to refute, so I will leave the refuting up to someone that is more interested in refuting it.

    The Instructor
  8. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    86381
    28 Jun '13 08:041 edit
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I was just trying to be humorous. But I don't see anything that I wish to refute, so I will leave the refuting up to someone that is more interested in refuting it.

    The Instructor
    Did the disciple get jesus instruction wrong?

    As you claim to be an instructor yourself I thought you would have a view on this.
  9. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    28 Jun '13 08:43
    Originally posted by Agerg
    [b]This piece of evidence is irrefutable and a wonderful revelation of the nature of God and the Godhead.
    "Wonderful" is a matter of opinion, "irrefutable" is just plain wrong[/b]
    he is aiming this thread at jws and their belief that jesus is less important than god-yahve? at least i think that's what the jws are thinking.


    anywhoo, it is not meant as a debate between atheists and non
  10. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    28 Jun '13 08:51
    Originally posted by divegeester
    Did the disciple get jesus instruction wrong?
    I could be wrong, but I am guessing Jesus' instruction was written in the Gospels which come after the act where I assume you are taking the bit about what the disciples did from. So no, they didn't get it wrong, but rather the gospel writers made up Jesus' instruction after most of the disciples were long dead.
  11. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    86381
    28 Jun '13 09:00
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    I could be wrong, but I am guessing Jesus' instruction was written in the Gospels which come after the act where I assume you are taking the bit about what the disciples did from. So no, they didn't get it wrong, but rather the gospel writers made up Jesus' instruction after most of the disciples were long dead.
    Thanks twhitehead I see your POV as an atheist. I'm more interested in the trinitarian view of this scripture. Not sure what the JWs do about baptism but it will be in the name of Jehovah no doubt.
  12. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    28 Jun '13 10:33
    Originally posted by divegeester
    Thanks twhitehead I see your POV as an atheist. I'm more interested in the trinitarian view of this scripture. Not sure what the JWs do about baptism but it will be in the name of Jehovah no doubt.
    you dont know but you proffer an assumption never the less, sorry dude, I cannot respect that.
  13. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    28 Jun '13 11:081 edit
    Originally posted by divegeester
    Thanks twhitehead I see your POV as an atheist. I'm more interested in the trinitarian view of this scripture. Not sure what the JWs do about baptism but it will be in the name of Jehovah no doubt.
    I think it is standard practice when two verses disagree, to assume that you are interpreting one of them wrongly, and that one, is the one that disagrees with your theology.
    Considering the amount of interpretation required to accept that the Gospels are in any way factual, I think it would be trivial to find some interpretation that resolves your dilemma.
    You of course will not be satisfied with it because it doesn't fit your own theology.
  14. Joined
    19 Jul '08
    Moves
    77354
    28 Jun '13 15:23
    Originally posted by divegeester
    Matthew 28:29
    Go therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

    So off they went into the book of Acts where incredibly not one of them ever baptised in this methodology. They all Baptised in the name of Jesus Christ, every time and without exception. Read the scripture again. "Bapti ...[text shortened]... of evidence is irrefutable and a wonderful revelation of the nature of God and the Godhead.
    None of this matters as "No man has seen God and lived". So you need to redesign your question with the correct facts first.
  15. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    28 Jun '13 17:08
    Originally posted by divegeester
    Did the disciple get jesus instruction wrong?

    As you claim to be an instructor yourself I thought you would have a view on this.
    No, I don't see anything they got wrong. Do you?

    The Instructor
Back to Top