 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
trettep
Lion
Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 910
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:55 am Post subject: |
 |
|
I rejoice that God has shown me a level of Love that exceeds the understanding of others but I don't rejoice that others have not understood that understanding.
Paul |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TBax
King of the Jungle
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 1969
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
I rejoice in the fact that God reveals Himself in His word to reasonable unbiased readers, but I don't rejoice that others use credulity in place of faith, which is based on accurate knowledge. To draw a literal interpretation from a metaphor is folly. 
_________________
Agape,
TBax |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pastor2022
Moderator
Joined: 07 Dec 2006
Posts: 727
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Please get this thread back on topic now. Thanks. God bless.
_________________
Faith is the confident obedience to the Word of God in spite of circumstances or consequences. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rufus
Big Hamster
Joined: 22 Sep 2007
Posts: 96
Location: about 20 miles west of Lake Michigan
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 8:58 am Post subject: Re: Jesus Was Not a Trinitarian (book) |
|
|
| rufus wrote: | I recieved a solicitation from Amazon.com recently for this book:
"Jesus Was Not a Trinitarian" by Anthony Buzzard.
Has anybody read this book? It looks like it was just released in late 2007. If anyone has read this book I'd be interested in your comments, either pro or con. If you could, please cite chapter number and such, as to what it says. I've not yet read it. Thanks. |
I've read all five pages of this thread, and unless I missed something, I have concluded that no one else on the forum has read the book either. Or, at least not posted about it.
If anyone has actually read "Jesus Was Not a Trinitarian" by Anthony Buzzard feel free to post a comment regardless of whether or not you like the book. I've still not read it, but will certainly give it a look if I see it in a bookstore.
Thanks, pastor2022 for the redirect.
Last edited by rufus on Tue Jul 29, 2008 3:50 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
45degreeN
King Kong
Joined: 02 Aug 2005
Posts: 2545
Location: Salem Oregon
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 22, 2008 8:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Without supporting this nut with good money thrown after trash, I did read the first 6 pages (amazon allows this on their web site) and I do recognize that this is hardly the same as reading the whole book.
Even so, the debate here has already exposed all of the arguments available to the intellectually curious and this book is just a rehash of those ages old arguments. Nothing new there at all
Those who know scripture well enough recognize that certain words while they definitely are not in scripture (like trinity and rapture) the concepts are well presented there. It takes a deliberate obfuscation to ignore those concepts and is intellectually dishonest to say that they are not there. Even in OT times the prophets spoke of three beings that together and/or separately were recognized as God.
So my guess is that the author is just being dogmatic in his own way. Supporting his arguments with hackneyed examples that can be interpreted one of two ways
_________________
My boss is a Jewish carpenter.
Read the
www.Christian-Thinktank.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TBax
King of the Jungle
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 1969
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 22, 2008 12:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with 45degreeN that people don't need to spend their money on such a book, but for the opposite reasons.  The concept of the trinity is so clearly not scriptural why read a book to substantiate that? That is like reading a book that proves Jesus believed that God was his Father.
45degreeN used a word I was unfamiliar with so I looked it up.
obfuscation-1. to confuse, bewilder, or stupefy.
2. to make obscure or unclear:
The ironic thing is, that word perfectly describes every explanation of the trinity I have heard. And hardly do two people here agree as to what the "trinity" is.
| 45degreeN wrote: | | Even in OT times the prophets spoke of three beings that together and/or separately were recognized as God. |
I don't believe that is one bit true. 
Scripture please.
_________________
Agape,
TBax |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pete
Tiger
Joined: 31 May 2006
Posts: 873
Location: Arlington Hts., Il. USA
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2008 6:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 45degreeN wrote: |
Those who know scripture well enough recognize that certain words while they definitely are not in scripture (like trinity and rapture) the concepts are well presented there. It takes a deliberate obfuscation to ignore those concepts and is intellectually dishonest to say that they are not there. Even in OT times the prophets spoke of three beings that together and/or separately were recognized as God.
|
If you want to read some deliberate obfuscation, try to make any kind of sense out of the Athanasian Creed. That will give your brain a workout.
At the risk of being intellectually dishonest, there isn't a verse in Scripture that alludes to the Trinity, and to say that Jesus taught it is complete nonsense.
Jesus doctine is clearly expressed in 2 John 9-10: "Whosoever transgesseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son."
10: If there come any unto you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:"
He makes no mention of a third person, coequal God called the Holy Spirit. Why is that? Because there isn 't any. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
45degreeN
King Kong
Joined: 02 Aug 2005
Posts: 2545
Location: Salem Oregon
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2008 8:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Is absence of evidence proof of the negative? "Well He didn't say it this time so I guess He must not be God, even if He said it multiple times before"
Must Jesus always mention his relationship with God every time He opens His mouth to speak. Or is He allowed to just get on with His speaking and let previous remarks count toward His status?
The triune nature of God is something that humans cannot truly understand because it is so unlike us. Even as far back as the OT there are prophetic messages that can only be understood if we accept this nature of God, otherwise we would be left with some very confusing sentence structures and a confused message.
I agree that most creedal statements are rather bizarre and they don't really satisfy me. IMHO it is the height of arrogance to claim to understand God's relationship amongst those three parts but they tried (and failed) to clarify them. But those same creedal statements are not found in scripture they are in the post scriptural time frame by the church fathers.
Even though my point of view is trinitarian, don't hold any animosity against those who choose to express God as a single entity since it truly is impossible to separate them and it makes virtually no difference to me. (as long as their point of view is not required of me dogmatically as a point of salvation.) Our thinking about God can in no way change Him.
_________________
My boss is a Jewish carpenter.
Read the
www.Christian-Thinktank.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TBax
King of the Jungle
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 1969
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2008 11:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
People often say things as if they were true even though there isn't one scrap of evidence.
| 45degreeN wrote: | | Even in OT times the prophets spoke of three beings that together and/or separately were recognized as God. |
I don't believe that is one bit true.
Scripture please.
_________________
Agape,
TBax |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
45degreeN
King Kong
Joined: 02 Aug 2005
Posts: 2545
Location: Salem Oregon
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 3:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Zech 12:10 | Quote: | | "And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son. |
Prophecy as if God were speaking:
a) spirit of grace=Holy Spirit /God (pours out his spirit)
b) first born son=Jesus (also the one they pierced)
c)me =God the father
Sounds very much like three person Godhead all equally God but referred to differently. Gee this is in fact Old Testament isn't it.
If you would bother to read the Christian -Thinktank about the trinity you wouldn't be so sure of your dogmatic position. There is over 20 pages of information specifically about this issue and it all supports in great detail every possible issue about this trinity argument.
_________________
My boss is a Jewish carpenter.
Read the
www.Christian-Thinktank.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ragman13
German Shepherd
Joined: 07 Jul 2007
Posts: 325
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Another passage is
Isa. 63:7-10
| Quote: | | I will tell of the kindnesses of the LORD, the deeds for which he is to be praised, according to all the LORD [Father] has done for us . . . and so he became their Savior. In all their distress he too was distressed, and the angel of his presence [Son] saved them. In his love and mercy he redeemed them. . . . Yet they rebelled and grieved his Holy Spirit. |
_________________
If Jesus Christ were to come today, people would not even crucify him. They would ask him to dinner, and hear what he had to say, and make fun of it. —Thomas Carlyle
Shh. Don't tell anyone that I am a Fundamentalist! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pete
Tiger
Joined: 31 May 2006
Posts: 873
Location: Arlington Hts., Il. USA
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 9:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 45degreeN wrote: | Zech 12:10 | Quote: | | "And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son. |
Sounds very much like three person Godhead all equally God but referred to differently. Gee this is in fact Old Testament isn't it.
If you would bother to read the Christian -Thinktank about the trinity you wouldn't be so sure of your dogmatic position. There is over 20 pages of information specifically about this issue and it all supports in great detail every possible issue about this trinity argument. |
Christian Think Tank doesn’t have a clue about Zechariah 12:10
“And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and supplication.” Someone is speaking in the first person here, who is it? It is Jesus Christ, as is made clear in verse 10: “they shall look upon me whom they have pierced”. The spirit spoken of here is the spirit of Jesus Christ (the mind, of Christ). It is most certainly not a reference to a third person. Joel 2:28; “And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh.” V.29; “… in those days will I pour out my spirit.”
“Spirit” here, is not a reference to a third person. It is an attitude of grace (love and favor of God). 1 Corinthians 2:16; “For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind (Gr. “nous” intellect, understanding) of Christ.” The one who is speaking in the first person in Zechariah is Jesus Christ himself. The "spirit of grace" is just that; an attitude of a Godly mind. It is most cetainly not a third person.
It's Old Testament alright, but it doesn't say what you think it does. The Holy Spirit is the mind of the Father given Chistians through his Like-minded Son. There is no third party involved.
Jesus Christ is our only mediator: 1 Tim. 2:5;"For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pete
Tiger
Joined: 31 May 2006
Posts: 873
Location: Arlington Hts., Il. USA
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 2:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Pete"] | 45degreeN wrote: | Zech 12:10 | Quote: | | "And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son. |
Sounds very much like three person Godhead all equally God but referred to differently. Gee this is in fact Old Testament isn't it.
If you would bother to read the Christian -Thinktank about the trinity you wouldn't be so sure of your dogmatic position. There is over 20 pages of information specifically about this issue and it all supports in great detail every possible issue about this trinity argument. |
Christian Think Tank doesn’t have a clue about Zechariah 12:10
“And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and supplication.” Someone is speaking in the first person here, who is it? It is Jesus Christ, as is made clear in verse 10: “they shall look upon me whom they have pierced”. The spirit spoken of here is the spirit of Jesus Christ (the mind, of Christ). It is most certainly not a reference to a third person. Joel 2:28; “And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh.” V.29; “… in those days will I pour out my spirit.”
“Spirit” here, is not a reference to a third person. It is an attitude of grace (love and favor of God). 1 Corinthians 2:16; “For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind (Gr. “nous” intellect, understanding) of Christ.” The one who is speaking in the first person in Zechariah is Jesus Christ himself. The "spirit of grace" is just that; an attitude of a Godly mind. It is most cetainly not a third person.
It's Old Testament alright, but it doesn't say what you think it does. The Holy Spirit is the mind of the Father given Chistians through his Like-minded Son. There is no third party involved.
Jesus Christ is our only mediator: 1 Tim. 2:5;"For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." Not a second person called Holy Ghost, nor a third called the Virgin Mary, nor a fourth called the pope. nor a fifth called a confessional priest - Christ alone. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ragman13
German Shepherd
Joined: 07 Jul 2007
Posts: 325
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 3:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pete wrote
| Quote: | | “And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and supplication.” Someone is speaking in the first person here, who is it? It is Jesus Christ, as is made clear in verse 10: “they shall look upon me whom they have pierced”. The spirit spoken of here is the spirit of Jesus Christ (the mind, of Christ). It is most certainly not a reference to a third person. Joel 2:28; “And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh.” V.29; “… in those days will I pour out my spirit.” |
So the Spirit here is Jesus? The one that was pierced? The LORD is the one speaking in the verse so that would be God the Father!
Zech. 12:1 | Quote: | | The revelation of the word of the Lord concerning Israel: The Lord – he who stretches out the heavens and lays the foundations of the earth, who forms the human spirit within a person – says, |
And Jesus is the one that was pierced. That would be God the Son! Thank you for your help in pointing that out in your above bold text.
_________________
If Jesus Christ were to come today, people would not even crucify him. They would ask him to dinner, and hear what he had to say, and make fun of it. —Thomas Carlyle
Shh. Don't tell anyone that I am a Fundamentalist! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
45degreeN
King Kong
Joined: 02 Aug 2005
Posts: 2545
Location: Salem Oregon
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 8:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
How can a spirit be pierced? No body!
Obviously you still haven't read the think tank on this one. I consider the author of that apologetic web site a brilliant authority one who has considered all the facts in light of first century culture (not modern day) and attempts to bring the reader to an understanding of what they thought not some dogmatic non-response by way of church leaders.
This whole discussion is so full of dogma rather than real thinking that I wonder sometimes who is writing these posts and for what reason. Defending dogma by repeating it often enough is a useless waste of computer time and reading time for real thinkers.
_________________
My boss is a Jewish carpenter.
Read the
www.Christian-Thinktank.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
