Significance of Names and Persons

[Praxeas]

This is part of an old thread at NFCF...unfortunately I don't remember exactly what I posted

Here is another interesting thing I posted at the old and now defunct NFCF...."names" is used in scriptures to show number of persons

Act 1:15 And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about a hundred and twenty,)

A.T. Robertson says
Multitude of persons (ochlos onomatōn). Literally, multitude of names. This Hebraistic use of onoma = person occurs in the lxx (Numbers 1:2; 18:20; 3:40, 43; 26:53) and in Rev_3:4; Rev_11:13.

I am just wondering if perhaps if a Trinity is intended why not say "names" in places like Matt 28:19

Originally Posted by Praxeas

This is part of an old thread at NFCF...unfortunately I don't remember exactly what I posted

Here is another interesting thing I posted at the old and now defunct NFCF...."names" is used in scriptures to show number of persons

Act 1:15 And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about a hundred and twenty,)

A.T. Robertson says
Multitude of persons (ochlos onomatōn). Literally, multitude of names. This Hebraistic use of onoma = person occurs in the lxx (Numbers 1:2; 18:20; 3:40, 43; 26:53) and in Rev_3:4; Rev_11:13.

I am just wondering if perhaps if a Trinity is intended why not say "names" in places like Matt 28:19

I'm not convinced that there is any real significance in the phrase "the number of the names" in Acts 1:15. It appears to be more along the lines of "there were x number of names listed on the membership roll." In Matthew 28:19, the use of "name" seems to suggest authority and not personage, e.g. "stop in the name of the law" is simply a command to stop and provides the authority to issue the command (the authority being "the law").

I have not come across any modern Trinitarian who can adequately explain how the Bible "proves" that Father, Son and Holy Spirit are, to quote some of their statements of faith, "co-equal, co-eternal divine persons."

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Chan

I'm not convinced that there is any real significance in the phrase "the number of the names" in Acts 1:15. It appears to be more along the lines of "there were x number of names listed on the membership roll." In Matthew 28:19, the use of "name" seems to suggest authority and not personage, e.g. "stop in the name of the law" is simply a command to stop and provides the authority to issue the command (the authority being "the law").

I have not come across any modern Trinitarian who can adequately explain how the Bible "proves" that Father, Son and Holy Spirit are, to quote some of their statements of faith, "co-equal, co-eternal divine persons."

You are mostly correct, but still number of names are used to present how many persons were present. This example is used elsewhere too. Name represents the person too and from whom that authority is derived

Originally Posted by Praxeas

You are mostly correct, but still number of names are used to present how many persons were present. This example is used elsewhere too. Name represents the person too and from whom that authority is derived

But we must not mix the two together. In the passage you quoted from Acts "names" appears to be a stand-in for "persons" or "people." In Matthew 28:19, "name" appears to be strictly limited to "authority" or "power."

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Chan

But we must not mix the two together. In the passage you quoted from Acts "names" appears to be a stand-in for "persons" or "people." In Matthew 28:19, "name" appears to be strictly limited to "authority" or "power."

Strictly limited? How?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Chan

But we must not mix the two together. In the passage you quoted from Acts "names" appears to be a stand-in for "persons" or "people." In Matthew 28:19, "name" appears to be strictly limited to "authority" or "power."

In the context sure. But generally speaking people or persons have names. Names represent persons. The name of Jesus represents Him as well as it represents His authority given to him.

In Matthew 28 Jesus starts off with "All power in heaven and earth is given to me...THEREFORE" and what follows the therefore is the part about baptising in the name.

When He was born it was said "shall call HIS name Jesus for HE shall save HIS people from their sins"...

The only reason in Acts they could use names to count persons is because of that principle....persons have names and we give names to persons. The name represents that person, who they are. And in the case of Jesus it represents what he is (savior) and that name represents the authority given to Him personally

Originally Posted by Praxeas

In the context sure. But generally speaking people or persons have names. Names represent persons. The name of Jesus represents Him as well as it represents His authority given to him.

Context is all that matters.

In Matthew 28 Jesus starts off with "All power in heaven and earth is given to me...THEREFORE" and what follows the therefore is the part about baptising in the name.

But notice it says that because all power (which one could say also includes authority) has been given to Jesus, we are to baptize in that power and/or authority. It has nothing with saying the name "Jesus" like some magical incantation as some people insist.

When He was born it was said "shall call HIS name Jesus for HE shall save HIS people from their sins"...

Yes, and the Aramaic form of that name is essentially the same as the name of Moses' successor following the Exodus: Yehoshua or (to use the English equivalent) Joshua.

The only reason in Acts they could use names to count persons is because of that principle....persons have names and we give names to persons. The name represents that person, who they are. And in the case of Jesus it represents what he is (savior) and that name represents the authority given to Him personally

But there is nothing particularly special about the fact that Luke just happened to refer to the names to count persons any more than there is something particularly special about referring to people as "souls" (as in "the ship sank and all the souls onboard were lost").

[mizpeh]

But notice it says that because all power (which one could say also includes authority) has been given to Jesus, we are to baptize in that power and/or authority. It has nothing with saying the name "Jesus" like some magical incantation as some people insist.

Chan,

There is no power or authority without using the name. If you are an ambassador what good is it to go to the head of another country and say I have power and authority unless you say the NAME of the one who you represent and who sent you?

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Chan,

There is no power or authority without using the name. If you are an ambassador what good is it to go to the head of another country and say I have power and authority unless you say the NAME of the one who you represent and who sent you?

So, what is the "name" of the law by which authority a police officer commands a fleeing criminal to stop? God commanded the Old Testament prophets to speak but they didn't go around constantly using God's name in their speaking.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Chan

So, what is the "name" of the law by which authority a police officer commands a fleeing criminal to stop? God commanded the Old Testament prophets to speak but they didn't go around constantly using God's name in their speaking.

More often than not if they represented God to someone else then the prophets did speak in the name of the Lord: Thus saith the LORD is found in over 441 places in the OT in the KJV.

The name of the law is a poor example because it does not represent a person or God.