From: Paul S. Dixon (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Mar 12 1998 - 20:47:35 EST
On Thu, 12 Mar 1998 10:48:31 -0700 "Edgar Foster"
>Paul Dixon wrote:
>>>My suspicions are that we should understand TO ONOMA to be repeated
>hUIOU and before TOU hAGIOU PNEUMATOU, so that we get in essence is:
>EIS TO ONOMA TOU PATROUS KAI (TO ONOMA) TOU hUIOU KAI (TO ONOMA) TOU
>I agree, in essence, with your comments Paul. We would probably not
>come to the same theological conclusions, however. Be that as it may, I
see >no need to apply the one ONOMA to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
My basis >for this is the use of KAI. KAI seems to be used here in a
contrastive sense. >This would therefore mean that the Father, Son and
Holy Spirit all have >"names," but they don't have the same NAME. Rev.
3:12 also seems to tie in >with this thought.
>Further, Cf. 1 Cor. 8:5 and its use of KAI:
>EISIN QEOI POLLOI KAI KURIOI POLLOI.
>"There be (so called) gods many AND lords many."
Your taking KAI ... KAI contrastingly in Mt 28:19 seems forced, and
somewhat awkward. If the nuance is contrasting, then the meaning would
be something like: as in the name of the Father, so also in the name of
the Son and (as in the name of the Son) so also in the name of the Holy
At any rate, what difference would this make? The point would still
remain: baptize in the name of the Father and in the name of the Son and
in the name of the Holy Spirit.
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:10 EDT