Both the Trinitarians and the Unitarians have been making "the other side has finally met its match!" claim back and forth for, ohh, the past 1600 years.
VPW joined in with his "Aha!!" claim when he came out with his "Jesus Christ is not God!" book too.
And so it continues, this silly theological 'war' that so many deem to be so important, ... but isn't. -->
I guess when I saw the topic name, I thought Jeff was pointing out a new web site independent of CES or other TWI offshoots. But when you look at the site, it's got CES fingerprints all over the place.
Once Google picks up on it, no doubt other unitarians will feed from it.
I know many good Deists who are rather quite and perhaps timid, but seeing this should bring them out more.
Galen
ET1 SS - USN Retired,
Pilgrim of the Ancient Arabic Order Nobles of the mystic shrine.
"I live in the spirit of prayer. I pray as I walk, when I lie down, and when I rise. And the answers are always coming. Tens of thousands of times have my prayers been answered. When once I am persuaded that a thing is right, I go on praying for it. the great point is never to give up till the answer comes. The great fault of the children of God is, they do not continue in prayer, they do not persevere. If they desire anything for God's glory, they should pray until they get it." - George Mueller
I ran it through VisualRoute, and sure enough, the server's in Indianapolis, IP address: 206.53.239.116. It's an http server running Microsoft IIS/5.0.
Jeff, what would the harm have been in telling us it's a CES site in the first place? I don't think anyone would have cared one way or the other, but it just seems kind of underhanded not to mention it up front.
The fool hath said in his heart, "PFAL is the Word of God..."
I do work for John Lynn and CES and have helped get some of the stuff on the site. Most of the time during my off hours.
This site is owned and ran by an exWay person that goes to a local denominatonal church. A friend of mine in Indy.
Their goal was and is to have a site that reaches out all over the planet and lets people of ALL backgrounds seek the truth on the subject of One God & One Lord.
I really thought of all the folks I "know" in the world. You folks HERE would want to have a chance to read and print off the info on the site.
I'm really not wanting to derail this thread but I have a quickie question for you. Your posting about VisualRoute got me to wondering just how one goes about finding site info when all they have is an IP address or DNS.
What about different whois? Do you really have to buy a product like VisualRoute to find out physical locations when all you know is the address?
I see what you're saying Jeff. CES had nothing to do with the development or implementation of that site.
Nonetheless, the person who put it together is plainly sympathetic to CES (to the extent that every link leads to notes or articles either written by CES or available through CES).
That's not the same as saying "this is a CES site."
But if it WAS a CES site, I can't imagine it looking very different. :)-->
We all need to reevaluate EVERYTHING we learned in twi, even the trinity. If we read the Bible as if Jesus is God, it really has a different flavor, and may clarify some things. Lots of the so called "difficult verses" may still be difficult but let me tell you, it sure makes life interesting. Col. 1:16 and 17 has ALWAYS baffled me. John 3 still baffles me, John 1:1 still baffles me. I am baffled. So is everyone else, if they are honest. To quote a very dear friend of mine "Some of you still won't associate with anyone who believes in the trinity!" How sad!
I have taken the time to read some "systematic theology" books (very difficult & tedious reading, I assure you, but written by some brilliant theologians) to see some other views regarding this hot topic. It is not fair to just hinge everything we believe on one man's views. (VPW's) Wouldn't it be honest to read other people's views and then make an educated decision?
I have the ONE LORD AND ONE GOD book and am reading that also. However, I am trying to allow the holy spirit (whose ministry is to teach "all things" as Jesus said, and to exhort, by the way) to show me the truth in this matter. I WANT TO KNOW ONCE AND FOR ALL!
I believe I am receiving "snippits of truth" from God in this area. I have not put it all together yet, but it is a good study. I believe I am learning more about the Godhead (the Father, Son and holy spirit, whether capitalized or not...who the hell cares?) and that it takes all three to complete the Godhead. If anything we should call it the Godhead instead of the trinity, but again, is this important?
This issue may never be resolved this side of eternity. We may never understand it all, but then again, God is infinite, we are not. Who says we have to figure Him out anyway? We HAD to be right in the Way. I am realizing that we do not always need to be right, but we do need to be humble.
Write down what the Bible says Jesus Christ is sometime. The Word in the flesh, etc. etc. etc.
This may startle you. Remember the Red Thread?
If the whole Bible is about Jesus Christ, we need to rethink all we learned. Have fun!
exousia
[This message was edited by exousia on August 23, 2003 at 20:12.]
TheManOfaThousandScreenNames asks a good question in the previous post. And the irony of his statement “the lessons repeat until they are learned” is not lost (at least on me) since I have repeated what is below is other posts on other threads. It is interesting to see how the same questions continue to be raised. I hope that the question also illustrates that some on GreaseSpot are willing to give the following a fair hearing.
Now, though the Trinity is difficult to understand and teach to others, it is important to realize that it is not a logical contradiction. Though the Trinity is a paradox and a mystery, it is not logically incoherent. And, as such, the Trinity is reconcilable with reason and makes very good sense of the biblical text (which is why it was formally developed by the early Church in the first place). Further, the mysteriousness of the Trinity is not a legitimate reason to refuse to believe in it. It is impossible for us humans as mono-personal beings to understand exactly how a tri-personal being exists because we have no point of reference from which to make observations and analogies to aid our understanding. Of course, this does not mean that such a being cannot exist. We need to rely on God's revelation of Himself to us in Scripture to understand Him in this way and accept it in humility and service. Our first duty is to believe and obey the message, despite the difficulty in trying to understand it.
From the very beginning Christianity understood itself as a mono-theistic faith. And, as such, the early Church had to deal with all the NT and OT passages that seemed to apply the attributes of deity to Jesus (as well as the scores of late first, second and third century Christian writers who called Jesus God). One of the problems that arose as a result of this was that non-believers asked Christians to explain how they could confess Christ as God and continue to remain monotheists. Clearly, this is not an easy issue to deal with and there were many heated debates. Finally, in order to answer this question the early Church realized the need to distinguish between "what" Jesus is and "who" Jesus is. What Jesus is, is God (that He shares in the divine essence just as the Father does). But who Jesus is, is the Son of God. The same distinction applies to God the Father. What the Father is, is God (sharing the same divine essence as Christ). But who the Father is, is God the Father of Jesus Christ. That is why the Father-Son relationship between Christ and the Father was emphasized so strongly by the early Christians. He is Jesus' Father not because of the silly notions that He shares Jesus' DNA or because the Father adopted Him as His Son. Rather, Jesus is the Son of the Father because He shares the same basic nature as the Father. This same distinction also applies to the Holy Spirit. He is distinct from the Father and the Son as being a particular "who" but still remaining the same "what" - i.e. God. So, what Jesus is, is God in essence. But who Jesus is, is the Son. And the same distinction works for the Father and for the Holy Spirit. God is three "whos" and one "what" – one God in three persons.
It is fair to ask why this was so important to the early church and to the church today (apart from its making sense of the biblical texts). Does it matter? The answer yes, but is too often lost in the debate or never thought about. However, the answer is found in the heart of the gospel message. First, the Trinity teaches us that having a personal relationship with God means getting to know the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit in a personal way. We are to have a relationship with a "who", not a "what", which means we are to come to know the Father, and the Son and the Holy Spirit.
Second, the doctrine of the Trinity illustrates the heart and purpose of theology in the Christian life. Theology is not what we know about God, it is how we come to know God. The difference between the two cannot be underestimated. The point of the Trinity is not to get an algebraic understanding of God. Rather, it is how we come to know God in a personal way. Examples of this may be found in two of my theological heroes - Augustine of Hippo and Anselm of Canterbury. Both wrote "theology" in the form of contemplative prayers to God. Augustine used this method in his "Confessions" as well as Anselm in his "Proslogion." [by the way, when Anselm was appointed the Archbishop of Canterbury he almost had to be physically dragged to the appointment ceremony. He thought the duties of that position would interfere with his ministry. However, the wisdom of choosing him echoes in the theology of the body of Christ because of the continued influence of his writings.]
Before I go on, I want to expand on something I implied in the preceding paragraph about an "algebraic understanding of God." I have often seen well meaning people use the 1+1+1=1 example to "explain" the Trinity. Frankly, this is a horrible way to describe the doctrine of the Triune God. Such attempts at "Trinity Math" serve only confuse the issue because they mistakenly imply that the doctrine of the Trinity is illogical and contradictory. However, as I stated above, though it is an enigma, a puzzle, and difficult to understand, it is not incoherent and irreconcilable with reason.
A third way to answer the "what's the point?" question is to show how the Trinity touches every aspect of the Christian life. Correctly taught and understood, the Trinity is the revelation of God's heart (knowing who and what God is - theology). It is also the road map of how to get to God (salvation). It's a blueprint of how the life of a follower of Jesus should be (discipleship), and is even the grammar and vocabulary of how to talk to God (prayer). God the Father sent Jesus Christ, His only Son by nature, to teach us about God's heart and love for us in order that we may become 'adopted' children and joint-heirs with Christ. And it is the Holy Spirit who works within us in order that we may become sanctified and have a life that is qualitatively (though not exactly) like Jesus' own relationship to the Father. Christ is God’s Son by nature, while we are adopted children of God and, as such, fellow-heirs with Him (Romans 8:14-17). Also, it is the Holy Spirit who testifies to our souls that we are, in fact, God's children through the Incarnation (birth, death and resurrection) of His Son, Jesus Christ our who is our Lord and Savior (Phil 2:6-11; Isa.45:23).
So, hopefully the last several paragraphs answers the question of why the doctrine of the Trinity matters, and why it is important to understand God in the Trinitarian sense. It is not only how God has chosen to reveal Himself to us, it is how He actually is.
I am reading a book called "Who Cooked the Last Supper: A Women's history of the world" by Rosalind Miles. She wrote about how the trinity is just a patriarcal society changing a matriarchal society triangle of the "maid-mother-crone" to fit their needs. THe world went from goddess worship to father-one father-worship. People weren't easily fooled into this and so pieces of the old religion were changed so as to allow people easier acceptance of christianity.
They made that kind of claim when Jesus Christ is NOT God came out.
Because VPW could not comprehend the Trinity and he did not like "mysteries" he went to great lengths to prove that it could not be so. But his exposition of John chapter one was always his great problem and he just failed completely to pull it off by throwing different usages of the "word" to try and make it fit his theory.
For him Son (huios) can never be God(theos)and trying to "fit the few verses in with the many" produced some very strange and difficult exegesis. Nor did he actually cover all the passages that he should have.
I am not saying by any means that the Trinity is proved, but neither is is disproved and at the end of the day what does it really matter? It simply makes one group of christians shout "heresy" at another. What is heresy has been made to much of - it comes from the greek aeresis which simply means the holding of a contrary opinion and it seems that for pro or anti it is more opinion based rather than biblically demonstrable.
My apologies, Jeff. Sorry I jumped to the wrong conclusion.
Sudo: VisualRoute's the easiest way to do it, but I'm sure you could find out the same stuff by using Windows' tracert command, or looking up the main domain info on one of the naming service sites.
The fool hath said in his heart, "PFAL is the Word of God..."
I don't think Jeff has to reveal his CES connection to make anyone happy, least of all me.
Let me explain my thinking process.
First, I contribute regularly to CES. Not a huge amount of money, but I do contribute.
Secondly, when I read the title of this thread and the initial post, I honestly thought we were being referred to something new and different. While I am duly impressed with the Web site (it's much more interesting than my own), I noticed right away that it had a very distinct CES flavor. I mean, everything about it screamed CES. I don't have a problem with that.
I apologize, Jeff, if it looked like I was being confrontational.
Trefor, very well put & my feelings exactly. What's the big deal. NEITHER side can present an air tight system. So what results is duelling Bibles. The combatants always lose.
I've long maintained that 1. the Godhead is bigger than man's feeble attempts to pin it down, and 2.
One of the probs with VPW's exegesis I failed to mention was that he went beyond what many Unitarian postions would accept in that he denied the pre-existance of Christ and that gave his position even more problems than merely being anti-Trinity. Merely claiming he existed in God's foreknowledge does not cut the mustard with John 1, Jesus's statement that "before Abraham was I AM" or various other passages including that about Jesus being prophesied to be born in Bethlehem as one whose "goings forth have been from the beginning". When I saw he was unconvincing in that area I had to question his certainties in other areas also.
What surely matters more is the quality of the relationship rather than the definition.
I understand Wierwille's dilemma, though, Trefor. Once you've excluded Jesus as God, then you run into the trouble of Hebrews 1, in which he is explicitly excluded as an angel. If he's not God, and he's not an angel, then his existence began at birth. Had to. So the verses you cite become, in Wierwille's eyes (and my own), the difficult verses that must be interpreted in light of the clear.
I'm not saying I can answer every question (or any question for that matter), but I can see very clearly why Wierwille would have to ditch the Arian model for something even more antithetical to the orthodox position.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
44
33
28
45
Popular Days
Feb 7
41
Feb 21
24
Feb 9
21
Feb 10
14
Top Posters In This Topic
Raf 44 posts
Tzaia 33 posts
Steve Lortz 28 posts
dmiller 45 posts
Popular Days
Feb 7 2005
41 posts
Feb 21 2005
24 posts
Feb 9 2005
21 posts
Feb 10 2005
14 posts
GarthP2000
Jeff,
Both the Trinitarians and the Unitarians have been making "the other side has finally met its match!" claim back and forth for, ohh, the past 1600 years.
VPW joined in with his "Aha!!" claim when he came out with his "Jesus Christ is not God!" book too.
And so it continues, this silly theological 'war' that so many deem to be so important, ... but isn't.
-->
Prophet Emeritus of THE,
and Wandering CyberUU Hippie,
Garth P.
www.gapstudioweb.com
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Except, academically speaking, Wierwille's book is, to use the technical term:
a joke.
Hey Jeff, not to take away from the site (which looks great), but...
I'll be my next year's salary that it was put up by someone deeply involved with CES.
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
I have a strong suspicion that this is Jeff B. from the old Waydale, who works for CES now.
Not that there's anything wrong with that...
The fool hath said in his heart, "PFAL is the Word of God..."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
What suspicion? Of course it's Jeff from CES.
I guess when I saw the topic name, I thought Jeff was pointing out a new web site independent of CES or other TWI offshoots. But when you look at the site, it's got CES fingerprints all over the place.
Again, not that there's anything wrong with that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
Hmm, I rather liked the site.
I logged on and everything.
So whats wrong with it?
Once Google picks up on it, no doubt other unitarians will feed from it.
I know many good Deists who are rather quite and perhaps timid, but seeing this should bring them out more.
Galen
ET1 SS - USN Retired,
Pilgrim of the Ancient Arabic Order Nobles of the mystic shrine.
"I live in the spirit of prayer. I pray as I walk, when I lie down, and when I rise. And the answers are always coming. Tens of thousands of times have my prayers been answered. When once I am persuaded that a thing is right, I go on praying for it. the great point is never to give up till the answer comes. The great fault of the children of God is, they do not continue in prayer, they do not persevere. If they desire anything for God's glory, they should pray until they get it." - George Mueller
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
I ran it through VisualRoute, and sure enough, the server's in Indianapolis, IP address: 206.53.239.116. It's an http server running Microsoft IIS/5.0.
Jeff, what would the harm have been in telling us it's a CES site in the first place? I don't think anyone would have cared one way or the other, but it just seems kind of underhanded not to mention it up front.
The fool hath said in his heart, "PFAL is the Word of God..."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jeff USAF RET
Hey everybody.
This site is NOT a CES site.
I do work for John Lynn and CES and have helped get some of the stuff on the site. Most of the time during my off hours.
This site is owned and ran by an exWay person that goes to a local denominatonal church. A friend of mine in Indy.
Their goal was and is to have a site that reaches out all over the planet and lets people of ALL backgrounds seek the truth on the subject of One God & One Lord.
I really thought of all the folks I "know" in the world. You folks HERE would want to have a chance to read and print off the info on the site.
Forget about John Lynn and CES and all that junk.
That is NOT the point here.
Much love to you,
Jeff
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sudo
Zix,
I'm really not wanting to derail this thread but I have a quickie question for you. Your posting about VisualRoute got me to wondering just how one goes about finding site info when all they have is an IP address or DNS.
What about different whois? Do you really have to buy a product like VisualRoute to find out physical locations when all you know is the address?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I see what you're saying Jeff. CES had nothing to do with the development or implementation of that site.
Nonetheless, the person who put it together is plainly sympathetic to CES (to the extent that every link leads to notes or articles either written by CES or available through CES).
That's not the same as saying "this is a CES site."
But if it WAS a CES site, I can't imagine it looking very different.
:)-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
exousia
We all need to reevaluate EVERYTHING we learned in twi, even the trinity. If we read the Bible as if Jesus is God, it really has a different flavor, and may clarify some things. Lots of the so called "difficult verses" may still be difficult but let me tell you, it sure makes life interesting. Col. 1:16 and 17 has ALWAYS baffled me. John 3 still baffles me, John 1:1 still baffles me. I am baffled. So is everyone else, if they are honest. To quote a very dear friend of mine "Some of you still won't associate with anyone who believes in the trinity!" How sad!
I have taken the time to read some "systematic theology" books (very difficult & tedious reading, I assure you, but written by some brilliant theologians) to see some other views regarding this hot topic. It is not fair to just hinge everything we believe on one man's views. (VPW's) Wouldn't it be honest to read other people's views and then make an educated decision?
I have the ONE LORD AND ONE GOD book and am reading that also. However, I am trying to allow the holy spirit (whose ministry is to teach "all things" as Jesus said, and to exhort, by the way) to show me the truth in this matter. I WANT TO KNOW ONCE AND FOR ALL!
I believe I am receiving "snippits of truth" from God in this area. I have not put it all together yet, but it is a good study. I believe I am learning more about the Godhead (the Father, Son and holy spirit, whether capitalized or not...who the hell cares?) and that it takes all three to complete the Godhead. If anything we should call it the Godhead instead of the trinity, but again, is this important?
This issue may never be resolved this side of eternity. We may never understand it all, but then again, God is infinite, we are not. Who says we have to figure Him out anyway? We HAD to be right in the Way. I am realizing that we do not always need to be right, but we do need to be humble.
Write down what the Bible says Jesus Christ is sometime. The Word in the flesh, etc. etc. etc.
This may startle you. Remember the Red Thread?
If the whole Bible is about Jesus Christ, we need to rethink all we learned. Have fun!
exousia
[This message was edited by exousia on August 23, 2003 at 20:12.]
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
TheManOfa Thousand ScreenNames
Silly question, I know, but how important is the doctrine/dogma of the Trinity to salvation (or anything else for that matter)?
Granted, I'm an outsider looking in, but it just wouldn't seem to matter a whole lot whether you understand God as being 'triune' or as 'one'.
The lessons repeat until they are learned.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
D.A.Reed
Greetings!
TheManOfaThousandScreenNames asks a good question in the previous post. And the irony of his statement “the lessons repeat until they are learned” is not lost (at least on me) since I have repeated what is below is other posts on other threads. It is interesting to see how the same questions continue to be raised. I hope that the question also illustrates that some on GreaseSpot are willing to give the following a fair hearing.
Now, though the Trinity is difficult to understand and teach to others, it is important to realize that it is not a logical contradiction. Though the Trinity is a paradox and a mystery, it is not logically incoherent. And, as such, the Trinity is reconcilable with reason and makes very good sense of the biblical text (which is why it was formally developed by the early Church in the first place). Further, the mysteriousness of the Trinity is not a legitimate reason to refuse to believe in it. It is impossible for us humans as mono-personal beings to understand exactly how a tri-personal being exists because we have no point of reference from which to make observations and analogies to aid our understanding. Of course, this does not mean that such a being cannot exist. We need to rely on God's revelation of Himself to us in Scripture to understand Him in this way and accept it in humility and service. Our first duty is to believe and obey the message, despite the difficulty in trying to understand it.
From the very beginning Christianity understood itself as a mono-theistic faith. And, as such, the early Church had to deal with all the NT and OT passages that seemed to apply the attributes of deity to Jesus (as well as the scores of late first, second and third century Christian writers who called Jesus God). One of the problems that arose as a result of this was that non-believers asked Christians to explain how they could confess Christ as God and continue to remain monotheists. Clearly, this is not an easy issue to deal with and there were many heated debates. Finally, in order to answer this question the early Church realized the need to distinguish between "what" Jesus is and "who" Jesus is. What Jesus is, is God (that He shares in the divine essence just as the Father does). But who Jesus is, is the Son of God. The same distinction applies to God the Father. What the Father is, is God (sharing the same divine essence as Christ). But who the Father is, is God the Father of Jesus Christ. That is why the Father-Son relationship between Christ and the Father was emphasized so strongly by the early Christians. He is Jesus' Father not because of the silly notions that He shares Jesus' DNA or because the Father adopted Him as His Son. Rather, Jesus is the Son of the Father because He shares the same basic nature as the Father. This same distinction also applies to the Holy Spirit. He is distinct from the Father and the Son as being a particular "who" but still remaining the same "what" - i.e. God. So, what Jesus is, is God in essence. But who Jesus is, is the Son. And the same distinction works for the Father and for the Holy Spirit. God is three "whos" and one "what" – one God in three persons.
It is fair to ask why this was so important to the early church and to the church today (apart from its making sense of the biblical texts). Does it matter? The answer yes, but is too often lost in the debate or never thought about. However, the answer is found in the heart of the gospel message. First, the Trinity teaches us that having a personal relationship with God means getting to know the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit in a personal way. We are to have a relationship with a "who", not a "what", which means we are to come to know the Father, and the Son and the Holy Spirit.
Second, the doctrine of the Trinity illustrates the heart and purpose of theology in the Christian life. Theology is not what we know about God, it is how we come to know God. The difference between the two cannot be underestimated. The point of the Trinity is not to get an algebraic understanding of God. Rather, it is how we come to know God in a personal way. Examples of this may be found in two of my theological heroes - Augustine of Hippo and Anselm of Canterbury. Both wrote "theology" in the form of contemplative prayers to God. Augustine used this method in his "Confessions" as well as Anselm in his "Proslogion." [by the way, when Anselm was appointed the Archbishop of Canterbury he almost had to be physically dragged to the appointment ceremony. He thought the duties of that position would interfere with his ministry. However, the wisdom of choosing him echoes in the theology of the body of Christ because of the continued influence of his writings.]
Before I go on, I want to expand on something I implied in the preceding paragraph about an "algebraic understanding of God." I have often seen well meaning people use the 1+1+1=1 example to "explain" the Trinity. Frankly, this is a horrible way to describe the doctrine of the Triune God. Such attempts at "Trinity Math" serve only confuse the issue because they mistakenly imply that the doctrine of the Trinity is illogical and contradictory. However, as I stated above, though it is an enigma, a puzzle, and difficult to understand, it is not incoherent and irreconcilable with reason.
A third way to answer the "what's the point?" question is to show how the Trinity touches every aspect of the Christian life. Correctly taught and understood, the Trinity is the revelation of God's heart (knowing who and what God is - theology). It is also the road map of how to get to God (salvation). It's a blueprint of how the life of a follower of Jesus should be (discipleship), and is even the grammar and vocabulary of how to talk to God (prayer). God the Father sent Jesus Christ, His only Son by nature, to teach us about God's heart and love for us in order that we may become 'adopted' children and joint-heirs with Christ. And it is the Holy Spirit who works within us in order that we may become sanctified and have a life that is qualitatively (though not exactly) like Jesus' own relationship to the Father. Christ is God’s Son by nature, while we are adopted children of God and, as such, fellow-heirs with Him (Romans 8:14-17). Also, it is the Holy Spirit who testifies to our souls that we are, in fact, God's children through the Incarnation (birth, death and resurrection) of His Son, Jesus Christ our who is our Lord and Savior (Phil 2:6-11; Isa.45:23).
So, hopefully the last several paragraphs answers the question of why the doctrine of the Trinity matters, and why it is important to understand God in the Trinitarian sense. It is not only how God has chosen to reveal Himself to us, it is how He actually is.
Grace & peace,
- David
Colossians 1:13-14
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
I dont see the problem here.
We all know that Jeff works for CES.
I at least recognize the book "One Lord one God" as a good book that CES is selling.
Why does he have to 'say' that he is a follower of CES?
Why does anyone care?
Jeff is making his presence known on the internet, and establishing a presence for unitarians.
Good for him and good for his site.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
meganpenworthy
I am reading a book called "Who Cooked the Last Supper: A Women's history of the world" by Rosalind Miles. She wrote about how the trinity is just a patriarcal society changing a matriarchal society triangle of the "maid-mother-crone" to fit their needs. THe world went from goddess worship to father-one father-worship. People weren't easily fooled into this and so pieces of the old religion were changed so as to allow people easier acceptance of christianity.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grizzy
JEFF!!!!!!!!!!!
great to see ya!!!!!!!!!!!
God Bless America; SIZE>
Grizz SIZE>
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheManOfa Thousand ScreenNames
I offer up D.A. Reed's post as a textbook example of how to respond to a question about faith.
:D-->
Mind you, I'm not any closer to believing in God, but his post demonstrates how to explain something without it degenerating into a shouting match.
btw, Jeff, we still have to go hang gliding.
:D-->
The lessons repeat until they are learned.
(Edited to give proper credit)
[This message was edited by TheManOfaThousandScreenNames on August 24, 2003 at 14:26.]
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
Trefor Heywood
They made that kind of claim when Jesus Christ is NOT God came out.
Because VPW could not comprehend the Trinity and he did not like "mysteries" he went to great lengths to prove that it could not be so. But his exposition of John chapter one was always his great problem and he just failed completely to pull it off by throwing different usages of the "word" to try and make it fit his theory.
For him Son (huios) can never be God(theos)and trying to "fit the few verses in with the many" produced some very strange and difficult exegesis. Nor did he actually cover all the passages that he should have.
I am not saying by any means that the Trinity is proved, but neither is is disproved and at the end of the day what does it really matter? It simply makes one group of christians shout "heresy" at another. What is heresy has been made to much of - it comes from the greek aeresis which simply means the holding of a contrary opinion and it seems that for pro or anti it is more opinion based rather than biblically demonstrable.
Trefor Heywood
"Cymru Am Byth!"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jeff USAF RET
Jude 3, anyone?
Who art thou Lord!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
My apologies, Jeff. Sorry I jumped to the wrong conclusion.
Sudo: VisualRoute's the easiest way to do it, but I'm sure you could find out the same stuff by using Windows' tracert command, or looking up the main domain info on one of the naming service sites.
The fool hath said in his heart, "PFAL is the Word of God..."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I don't think Jeff has to reveal his CES connection to make anyone happy, least of all me.
Let me explain my thinking process.
First, I contribute regularly to CES. Not a huge amount of money, but I do contribute.
Secondly, when I read the title of this thread and the initial post, I honestly thought we were being referred to something new and different. While I am duly impressed with the Web site (it's much more interesting than my own), I noticed right away that it had a very distinct CES flavor. I mean, everything about it screamed CES. I don't have a problem with that.
I apologize, Jeff, if it looked like I was being confrontational.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Megan:
That's one idea among many.
I'd LIKE to believe it.
IS there any EVIDENCE cited to try to make the
case, or is this just another writer declaring
their opinion is "the truth" by fiat?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheEvan
Trefor, very well put & my feelings exactly. What's the big deal. NEITHER side can present an air tight system. So what results is duelling Bibles. The combatants always lose.
I've long maintained that 1. the Godhead is bigger than man's feeble attempts to pin it down, and 2.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trefor Heywood
Thanks TheEvan.
One of the probs with VPW's exegesis I failed to mention was that he went beyond what many Unitarian postions would accept in that he denied the pre-existance of Christ and that gave his position even more problems than merely being anti-Trinity. Merely claiming he existed in God's foreknowledge does not cut the mustard with John 1, Jesus's statement that "before Abraham was I AM" or various other passages including that about Jesus being prophesied to be born in Bethlehem as one whose "goings forth have been from the beginning". When I saw he was unconvincing in that area I had to question his certainties in other areas also.
What surely matters more is the quality of the relationship rather than the definition.
Trefor Heywood
"Cymru Am Byth!"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I understand Wierwille's dilemma, though, Trefor. Once you've excluded Jesus as God, then you run into the trouble of Hebrews 1, in which he is explicitly excluded as an angel. If he's not God, and he's not an angel, then his existence began at birth. Had to. So the verses you cite become, in Wierwille's eyes (and my own), the difficult verses that must be interpreted in light of the clear.
I'm not saying I can answer every question (or any question for that matter), but I can see very clearly why Wierwille would have to ditch the Arian model for something even more antithetical to the orthodox position.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.