Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 10/11/2023 in all areas

  1. Another thing to consider is that Christianity didn't begin with a single authority declaring doctrine by fiat. (No Mohammed nor L. Ron Hubbard on board.) So, there was nobody to declare the "official" positions, modern-style, and converts could end up introducing things, intentionally or not. To the Greco-Roman mind, the idea of a mortal starting as a mortal who was the son of a god who was promoted to a man-god later was routine- with Heracles/Hercules being the most obvious example. Add Constantine in a few centuries later, and there's someone with a vested interest in emphasizing similarities to the Roman religion, and manufacturing more connections whenever possible. Add the incentives for those who went along, and the killings of those who didn't, it's surprising anybody was left who was both alive AND refused to dance to Constantine's tune. After that, the only thing missing is accusing the non-believers in a man-god of coming along afterwards and adding their doctrine, calling them all sorts of names.
    1 point
  2. As I was raised Jehovah's Witness, I never believed in the Trinity. Jehovah's Witnesses, unlike the Way, really did draw their theology from Arianism, a theology with a lengthy history and lots of scholarship behind it. I find it intriguing that Bart Ehrman, the former fundamentalist-turned-Bible-scholar-turned-agnostic (and still a Bible scholar) now believes Arianism best reflects the belief of the first century church. Not that he is the final authority on anything, but I find his position interesting because he has nothing to gain from it. It's just what he believes is the best reflection of the available evidence. I think Wierwille's presentation was a joke. It was a work of non-scholarship, the intellectual equivalent of a Chick Tract without the subtlety. Anthony Buzzard's book on the development of the Trinity doctrine is a far superior presentation of Wierwille's position, as was the CES book One God and One Lord (which dishonestly omits Wierwille's book as a source). As for me, my position is completely irrelevant. I merely believe the Trinitarian position won out, became dominant, and successfully cast all opposing positions as the work of the devil, which is hardly an invitation to honest discourse. I believe some of the earliest Christians believed Jesus is God. I also believe others did not. I believe these competing claims (together will all the other early church heresies) reflect the fact that the stories of Jesus and his deeds and his teachings and his claims were quite simply made up decades after they allegedly took place. It's actually the best explanation for the intense division in the early church, IMO.
    1 point
  3. PS. I thought the child actors were remarkable. Very convincing. George
    1 point
  4. I thought it was great. Pretty much like everything Angel Studios puts out. George
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...