Heretic in the making?

Freak

Freak

New member
Melody recently stated: Thank you for letting us know where you stand. I disagree with your theology (there is no scripture supporting three "persons" in the godhead.) But commend your forthrightness.

Melody, do you deny the triune nature of God? Do you deny God has revealed Himself in three persons-Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? If so, on what basis?
 
Sozo

Sozo

New member
"In the making"? Not hardley.

Melody is wrong on just about everything. I think she has been spending time with Goose!
 
D

deheretic

New member
Yes I also deny the Trinity

Yes I also deny the Trinity

Freak said:
Melody recently stated: Thank you for letting us know where you stand. I disagree with your theology (there is no scripture supporting three "persons" in the godhead.) But commend your forthrightness.

Melody, do you deny the triune nature of God? Do you deny God has revealed Himself in three persons-Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? If so, on what basis?
Click to expand...

On the Basis that Jesus is the Son of Man... The son of god was a concoction of the rabbis to get rid of him, that being the easiest way because it would offend the roman rulers. :think:
 
D

deheretic

New member
Interesting -- I do not see how you arrive at a trinity thread because I am a unitarian, and before you add it i am not into universalism. There are many paths that lead to the salvation of the eternal soul.
 
E

EMETH

New member
deheretic said:
On the Basis that Jesus is the Son of Man... The son of god was a concoction of the rabbis to get rid of him, that being the easiest way because it would offend the roman rulers. :think:
Click to expand...

Bad historical assumption. The Romans were incredibly tolerant (by the standards of the time) of differing faiths within the empire. Roman jurists found the idea of punishing someone for religious opinions to be distasteful in the extreme. Even when Christian's were being persecuted they punished them for refusing to sacrifice incense to the emperors divinity not for being Christians (this legal excuse allowed them to feel that they weren't being intolerant).

One more man with religious claims that were odd to the Romans would have been nothing more than a minor irritation to the Romans as long as the man wasn't stirring up insurrection. It was the term King (and the accusation about being seditious and opposing tribute) that set the Romans off not "son of God". The Romans hated the title King and for anyone within their domains to claim it except for their puppets like Herod was at the very least bordering on treason. Combining the king claim with the false claim of opposing tribute was the way they worked to manipulate the Romans.
 
D

deheretic

New member
You are correct

You are correct

Emeth You are correct the Romans were very tolerant, they could care less, and there was no reason for them to give Jesus even a second glance.

Now what caused the problems was the fact that Jesus was viewed to be a threat to local religious authority that they were willing to go to any length to get rid of him.. the only way to permanently get rid of him was to have him killed, and even to this day if you want someone killed you have got to get the "State" to do it.

The reality of it is that Jesus was viewed as a heretic by the local religious leaders and they wanted to end his heresy the easiest way possible.:execute:
 
E

EMETH

New member
deheretic said:
Emeth You are correct the Romans were very tolerant, they could care less, and there was no reason for them to give Jesus even a second glance.

Now what caused the problems was the fact that Jesus was viewed to be a threat to local religious authority that they were willing to go to any length to get rid of him.. the only way to permanently get rid of him was to have him killed, and even to this day if you want someone killed you have got to get the "State" to do it.

The reality of it is that Jesus was viewed as a heretic by the local religious leaders and they wanted to end his heresy the easiest way possible.:execute:
Click to expand...

Your history is all good except for the bit where you said
The son of god was a concoction of the rabbis to get rid of him, that being the easiest way because it would offend the roman rulers.
Click to expand...

The Jewish leaders wanted Jesus gone but the Jus gladii (the right to execute had been stripped from them, with one exception) so they took him to Pilate and made political accusations against Jesus.
 
D

deheretic

New member
EMETH said:
Your history is all good except for the bit where you said

The Jewish leaders wanted Jesus gone but the Jus gladii (the right to execute had been stripped from them, with one exception) so they took him to Pilate and made political accusations against Jesus.
Click to expand...

That is exactly the point it didn't matter if it was true or not they just wanted rid of Jesus permanently in their eye the end justified the means
 
E

EMETH

New member
deheretic said:
That is exactly the point it didn't matter if it was true or not they just wanted rid of Jesus permanently in their eye the end justified the means
Click to expand...

True enough.

One thing you should know about me deheretic, I love to expound on history so if I am posting in a thread you are likely to see a fair amount of that.
 
F

fzappa13

Well-known member
Funny thing is, though Freak and Sozo were successful in getting Goose removed as a mod some of Goose' concerns still live on in his absence though the two of them are gone. Perhaps there was some merit to his concerns after all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top