Announcement

Collapse

Unorthodox Theology 201 Guidelines

Theists only.

This forum area is primarily for persons who would identify themselves as Christians whether or not their theology is recognized within the mainstream or as orthodox though other theists may participate with moderator permission. Therefore those that would be restricted from posting in Christianity 201 due to a disagreement with the enumerated doctrines, ie the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment may freely post here on any theological subject matter. In this case "unorthodox" is used in the strict sense of a person who denies what has been declared as universal essentials of the historic Christian faith. Examples would be adherents to Oneness, Full Preterists, Unitarian Universalist Christians, Gnostics, Liberal Christianity, Christian Science to name a few.

The second purpose will be for threads on subjects, which although the thread starter has no issue with the above doctrines, the subject matter is so very outside the bounds of normative Christian doctrine totally within the leadership's discretion that it is placed here. In so doing, no judgment or offense is intended to be placed on the belief of said person in the above-doctrines. In this case "unorthodox" is used in a much looser sense of "outside the norms" - Examples of such threads would be pro-polygamy, pro-drug use, proponents of gay Christian churches, proponents of abortion.

The third purpose is for persons who wish to have input from any and all who would claim the title of Christian even on subjects that would be considered "orthodox."

The philosophy behind this area was to recognize that there are persons who would identify themselves as Christian and thus seem out of place in the Comparative Religions Forum, but yet in keeping with our committment here to certain basic core Christian doctrines. Also, it allows threads to be started by those who would want to still be identified as Christian with a particular belief that while not denying an essential is of such a nature that the discussion on that issue belongs in this section or for threads by persons who wish such a non-restricted discussion.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Help me! I'm beginning to abandon the Trinity.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Scripture speaks of the death of people and not of the death of their bodies. Here's another example:

    εὐφρανθῆναι δὲ καὶ χαρῆναι ἔδει, ὅτι ὁ ἀδελφός σου οὗτος νεκρὸς ἦν καὶ ἔζησεν, καὶ ἀπολωλὼς καὶ εὑρέθη.
    It was the brother himself, a person, who was dead, not his body. Had Scripture wished to say that the brother's body was dead it would have written the following:


    εὐφρανθῆναι δὲ καὶ χαρῆναι ἔδει, ὅτι τὸ σῶμα τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ σου τοῦτο νεκρὸν ἦν καὶ ἔζησεν, καὶ ἀπολωλὼς καὶ εὑρέθη

    But that's not what Scripture says. There is terrible eisegesis which regularly goes on with certain NT verses in Trinitarian circles based in large part to their ignorance of Koine grammar.
    Last edited by Unitarian101; 11-15-2018, 08:12 PM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Unitarian101 View Post
      Don't know what that's supposed to mean. The reason why the neuter is used is because the verse is speaking of the "death" of the body, and not of a person.
      It's neuter because the noun is neuter. And the "body" is the human body.

      The modifying adjective follows the gender of σῶμα.
      Which is what I said.

      In the exact same way and in the exact same verse the author also speaks of the "death" of faith.
      Correct.

      This time the modifying adjective is feminine because the thing which is said to be "dead" ( or made useless) is faith, πίστις (a feminine noun).
      Right. As I said.

      In neither case is the death of people in view.
      Yes it is. The first part of the simile is talking about human death and how the body dies when the spirit leaves it.

      The word "dead" here simply means "rendered useless."
      In the second case, yes. That's how similes work.

      Are you going to say faith without works actually dies ?
      Is English your primary language?

      Do you get this much at least ?
      I get that you have no clue about basic 9th grade grammar...



      It isn't.
      Yes it is. Commentators have noted its non-standard Greek construction. That YOUR heretical teachers haven't taught it to you is immaterial.
      That's what
      - She

      Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
      - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

      I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
      - Stephen R. Donaldson

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Unitarian101 View Post
        Scripture speaks of the death of people and not of the death of their bodies. Here's another example:



        It was the brother himself, a person, who was dead, not his body. Had Scripture wished to say that the brother's body was dead it would have written the following:





        But that's not what Scripture says. There is terrible eisegesis which regularly goes on with certain NT verses in Trinitarian circles based in large part to their ignorance of Koine grammar.
        You're desperate. Just stop it.
        That's what
        - She

        Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
        - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

        I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
        - Stephen R. Donaldson

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
          It's neuter because the noun is neuter. And the "body" is the human body.



          Which is what I said.



          Correct.



          Right. As I said.



          Yes it is. The first part of the simile is talking about human death and how the body dies when the spirit leaves it.



          In the second case, yes. That's how similes work.



          Is English your primary language?



          I get that you have no clue about basic 9th grade grammar...





          Yes it is. Commentators have noted its non-standard Greek construction. That YOUR heretical teachers haven't taught it to you is immaterial.
          “It’s neuter because the noun is neuter.” In other words the adjective is modifying the “body” of X and not of X . Do you get this, and do you agree with this ?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
            You're desperate.
            Why ?

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Unitarian101 View Post
              “It’s neuter because the noun is neuter.” In other words the adjective is modifying the “body” of X and not of X.
              Nope. "X" is comprised of 2 parts. Body and spirit. There is no difference between the "body of X" and X, except a spirit. When the "spirit of X" is in the "body of X", you have an alive body. When you have no "spirit of X" in the body of X, you have a dead "body of X"

              Do you get this, and do you agree with this ?
              You're purposefully splitting unnecessary hairs to try and obfuscate and deflect.
              That's what
              - She

              Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
              - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

              I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
              - Stephen R. Donaldson

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Unitarian101 View Post
                Why ?
                That's an excellent question. You've been soundly debunked. Yet you continue splitting hairs in an effort to save face. Scripture is clear that when a spirit leaves the body, the body dies, but the spirit does not.
                That's what
                - She

                Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                - Stephen R. Donaldson

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                  Nope. "X" is comprised of 2 parts. Body and spirit. There is no difference between the "body of X" and X, except a spirit. When the "spirit of X" is in the "body of X", you have an alive body. When you have no "spirit of X" in the body of X, you have a dead "body of X"



                  You're purposefully splitting unnecessary hairs to try and obfuscate and deflect.
                  Unfortunately the grammar dictates otherwise. This is even true in English. For instance if we say "the mind of John is dead" we are not saying the same thing as "John is dead."

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                    That's an excellent question. You've been soundly debunked. Yet you continue splitting hairs in an effort to save face.
                    But you have to explain why I was apparently getting "desperate" -- by interacting with my argument from that post.

                    Scripture is clear that when a spirit leaves the body, the body dies, but the spirit does not.
                    This couldn't be further from the truth. Do you have a verse where Scripture speaks of disembodied human spirits living in "Heaven" apart from their bodies after their "death."

                    And talk of "Heaven" (i.e. the New Jerusalem) , it hasn't even descended to earth yet.

                    Comment


                    • Also, if death is a separation of the "spirit" from the body then the so-called Hypostatic Union of the Trinitarian Christ was interrupted when he died . And it get's worse, but that's another conversation..

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Unitarian101 View Post
                        Unfortunately the grammar dictates otherwise.
                        No it doesn't.

                        This is even true in English. For instance if we say "the mind of John is dead" we are not saying the same thing as "John is dead."
                        If his mind is truly dead, i.e. brain dead, yes it means John is dead. Now, if you are using "dead" as a metaphor, like "I'm dead tired", as it is being used in the second half of Jas 2:26, then no, it does not mean literal human death. But the first part isn't a metaphor. It's a real thing being used as a simile for a metaphoric thing.

                        Originally posted by Unitarian101 View Post
                        But you have to explain why I was apparently getting "desperate" -- by interacting with my argument from that post.
                        You've resorted to trying to find unrelated scriptures.

                        This couldn't be further from the truth. Do you have a verse where Scripture speaks of disembodied human spirits living in "Heaven" apart from their bodies after their "death."
                        Rev 6:9
                        Luk 23:42-43
                        Luke 16:19–31
                        Ecclesiastes 12:7
                        2 Corinthians 5:8


                        And talk of "Heaven" (i.e. the New Jerusalem) , it hasn't even descended to earth yet.
                        It doesn't need to have descended yet in order for death to have lost its grip on the souls in Abraham's bosom.

                        Originally posted by Unitarian101 View Post
                        Also, if death is a separation of the "spirit" from the body then the so-called Hypostatic Union of the Trinitarian Christ was interrupted when he died . And it get's worse, but that's another conversation..
                        No. Just... no. Separation at death is not disowning the body. That spirit still belongs to that body. We will not be raised in ANY other body except the one we are born with.
                        That's what
                        - She

                        Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                        - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                        I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                        - Stephen R. Donaldson

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                          No it doesn't.



                          If his mind is truly dead, i.e. brain dead, yes it means John is dead. Now, if you are using "dead" as a metaphor, like "I'm dead tired", as it is being used in the second half of Jas 2:26, then no, it does not mean literal human death. But the first part isn't a metaphor. It's a real thing being used as a simile for a metaphoric thing.



                          You've resorted to trying to find unrelated scriptures.


                          You're not addressing the grammar or the argument though. Would you agree that the statements "The tire of the car is blue " and "the car is blue" are not saying the same thing ? In other words "X of Y is Z" is not necessarily the same as "Y is Z." ? In other words, if someone wishes to tell their readers that "John is dead," they would not do so by writing "Jack's mind is dead" or "Jack's leg is dead," or "Jack's tumor is dead" ?



                          Rev 6:9
                          Luk 23:42-43
                          Luke 16:19–31
                          Ecclesiastes 12:7
                          2 Corinthians 5:8




                          It doesn't need to have descended yet in order for death to have lost its grip on the souls in Abraham's bosom.



                          No. Just... no. Separation at death is not disowning the body. That spirit still belongs to that body. We will not be raised in ANY other body except the one we are born with.
                          One at a time. Explain why you think Rev. 6:9 proves for disembodied human spirits living in "Heaven" apart from their bodies after their "death" ?
                          Last edited by Unitarian101; 11-16-2018, 05:40 PM.

                          Comment


                          • The following goes against the concept of post-"death" disembodied human spirits :

                            καὶ τὰ μνημεῖα ἀνεῴχθησαν καὶ πολλὰ σώματα τῶν κεκοιμημένων ἁγίων ἠγέρθησαν·
                            Matthew 27:52

                            Notice that death is likened to sleep. For starters, can we agree that during sleep our spirit does not literally leave our body ?


                            No. Just... no. Separation at death is not disowning the body. That spirit still belongs to that body. We will not be raised in ANY other body except the one we are born with.
                            How about the bodies of saints which have been annihilated (eg. consumed by fire) ? Also, following goes against red above (for starters):


                            1For we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, an eternal house in heaven, not built by human hands. 2Meanwhile we groan, longing to be clothed instead with our heavenly dwelling, 3because when we are clothed, we will not be found naked. 4For while we are in this tent, we groan and are burdened, because we do not wish to be unclothed but to be clothed instead with our heavenly dwelling, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life. 5Now the one who has fashioned us for this very purpose is God, who has given us the Spirit as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come.
                            Last edited by Unitarian101; 11-16-2018, 08:37 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Unitarian101 View Post
                              You're not addressing the grammar or the argument though.
                              I'm addressing the grammar of James' verse and use of simile. You're desperately trying to deflect to other verses and different grammatical constructs.

                              Would you agree that the statements "The tire of the car is blue " and "the car is blue" are not saying the same thing? In other words "X of Y is Z" is not necessarily the same as "Y is Z." ? In other words, if someone wishes to tell their readers that "John is dead," they would not do so by writing "Jack's mind is dead" or "Jack's leg is dead," or "Jack's tumor is dead" ?
                              And if they wrote "Jack's body is dead", that means Jack is dead. Period. Obfuscating about adjective genders has gotten you nowhere in avoiding that fact.


                              One at a time. Explain why you think Rev. 6:9 proves for disembodied human spirits living in "Heaven" apart from their bodies after their "death" ?
                              You can't read?

                              Originally posted by Unitarian101 View Post
                              The following goes against the concept of post-"death" disembodied human spirits : Matthew 27:52
                              No it doesn't. The dead body is likened to sleep even in our vernacular - the "dirt nap". How the body "sleeps" in death has nothing to do with how the spirit lives forever.


                              Notice that death is likened to sleep. For starters, can we agree that during sleep our spirit does not literally leave our body ?
                              Nor do we actually die in our sleep, so the comparison is yet another simile.



                              How about the bodies of saints which have been annihilated (eg. consumed by fire) ? Also, following goes against red above (for starters):
                              Do you think God can't recompose them?
                              Last edited by Bill the Cat; 11-19-2018, 01:34 PM.
                              That's what
                              - She

                              Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                              - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                              I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                              - Stephen R. Donaldson

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                                I'm addressing the grammar of James' verse and use of simile. You're desperately trying to deflect to other verses and different grammatical constructs.



                                And if they wrote "Jack's body is dead", that means Jack is dead. Period. Obfuscating about adjective genders has gotten you nowhere in avoiding that fact.




                                You can't read?



                                No it doesn't. The dead body is likened to sleep even in our vernacular - the "dirt nap". How the body "sleeps" in death has nothing to do with how the spirit lives forever.




                                Nor do we actually die in our sleep, so the comparison is yet another simile.





                                Do you think God can't recompose them?
                                I’m glad you realize that we are dealing with similes at James 2:26. Do you understand that when someone says the body is useless ( “dead” ) without the soul, it’s NOT the same as saying that death is the separation of the soul from the body ?

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X