Oh, not.  Not you, too, Nick?  I already did this in my post to Gene.  As I mentioned there, I really shouldn’t have to be doing this.  If you are going to present yourself as a biblically-based, responsible  critic of the  trinity, then it is only expected you would already know these passages. Since you have to ask, it appears you really haven’…[Read more]

Let’s be honest here, Nick, you tend to say a wee bit more than just that.

Gene, I have talked to you abut certain issues with the kind of posting.  First, you continue to use inflammatory rhetoric.  Not only is that inappropriate, but it is futile  well.  All it d id good for is starting a big flame war, which has no real scholarly vaule and contribute nothing to our understanding of the Trinity.   If you are going to s…[Read more]

According to your opinion, Nick.  But I thought you were the one who said we shouldn’t pay any attention to human opinions.    What makes yours here such an exception?

Nick, inflammatory posts, such as this one, are totally inappropriate in a solid theological discussion.  If you cannot be respectful of myself and others, then you should not be posting.  If you disagree with something I or  someone else says, then  you should present a  solid case why you disagree and not, under any circumstances, cast asper…[Read more]

Hello, again, Kerwin,

I gather you are going on the penal-substitutionary theory of the atonement. God wanted to forgive our sins, yet seeks revenge.  So someone had to pay for them.  So Jesus volunteered or  ordered to go in our place.  That is a very popular  POV among Christians.  However, it never really got started until the Middle Ages.…[Read more]

Christ makes it very clear, Kerwin, that we are to love and forgive one another.  Forgiveness, at  minimum, means remission of punishment.

Yu know, Nick, it’s interesting.  You claim you just want to go solely on Scripture.  Cut out all the middle men.  Don’t vie a hoot what they say, don’t want to have anything to do with the idolatrous opinions of men.   And then you turn around and blast away at the Trinity, just like major scholars such as Ehrmans, who, by the way, is an athe…[Read more]

Gene, where Ehrmans is in strong disagreement with you is that he believes Scripture is not at all inerrant, not God’s Word, in the traditional sense of the term.  You seem to believe that Scripture  is an  inerrant witness,  all dictated by God and written down exactly as God wanted it, so that nothing else is needed.  Ehrmans is arguing Scri…[Read more]

Can y0u explain to me, Marty, why you believe the biblical passages you cited do not square what   I said abut Jn.?  You just say they don’t.  OK, fine.  But that’s not enough.  Why do you say that? After all,  the  fathers were also aware of these same passages and they saw no problem.  What are you seeing that you feel they have overlooke…[Read more]

Gene,a s I suggested earlier, you maybe should tone it down a bit.  All this name-calling, calling Trinitarians all liars, is pure yellow-dog journalism that has no place in serious theological discussion.  That doesn’t you have to agree with everything, just that you should skip all this hollering and present a solid case.  You say you are jus…[Read more]

Well, Nick, aren’t you the one who is doing this? Right here, you are doing nothing more than entering your own opinions into the dialogue. If you feel this is wrong to do, why are you doing it?

Well, Nick, why don’t you carefully read and consider what I have said and then read Scripture , and get back to me with your answer to this question, and we’ll take it from there? First, however,  as suggested earlier, I would encourage you to take a chapter from your own book and  ask yourself if you felt posting your comments, your homespun th…[Read more]

Hello, Nick,

Why don’t you first ask that question of yourself before you post?

I think that is a very telling point, Andrew.  God is omnipresent in the richest and fullest sense of the term. As Meister Eckhart, once said, “God is more in things than they are in themselves.” I think it of vital  important for Christians to remind themselves of this fact.  Too often, God’s radical transcendence has been identified with God…[Read more]

Sorry, Gene, I have to call your bluff here.  I honestly don’t think you have done a particularly careful study at all of the history of doctrine, most especially the Trinity. You appear to have done some reading.  Fine.  But I am thinking from the standpoint of a serious academic study.  That’s OK.  Certainly not every one has the time to do some…[Read more]

Hello, Marty,

I beg to disagree.  The passages you brought up are subject to more than one interpretation. Also, you failed to bring  up biblical passages that strongly imply the Trinity, such as the prologue to Jn., among others.  You have to remember that the Trinitarians are aware of these and other passages, and have included them in the…[Read more]

We have been all through this before, Nick.  I’m not going to repeat myself.

The Bible makes it very clear that God is a God of love; and when you truly love others, you do not seek to coerce them by threats of terrible punishments.  It is that simple. That doesn’t mean God enjoys everything we do, can’t get angry.  Quite the opposite.  It doesn’t  mean cheap grace, either. Quite the opposite. But it does mean universal salvation.

Hello, Nick,

I already addressed this issue with you.  I do not like repeating myself.  I would suggest you read over more carefully my earlier posts to you.