<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Good reference work
Review: I enjoyed the book though I thought it could have better defended the truth regarding the Trinity. The authors have some good scriptural arguments but I feel they relied too much on the opinions of other scholars. The book is full of quotes of scholars with very impressive credentials who do not believe the Bible teaches the Trinity. This is okay to some extent as it does show that well educated and thinking persons recognize the paganism of the Trinity, but these men and their views cannot be used as proof that the Trinity is not true. I think they should have spent more time using scriptures to defend their stance rather than the viewpoints of men. In addition, I do disagree with them and their belief that Jesus did not exist before he came to the earth. They seem to think that if Jesus did exist before he came to the earth, he must be God. Since it is obvious that Jesus is not God, they bend over backwards trying to explain away the many scriptures that show that Jesus was in heaven before he came to he earth. It was not necessary for them to revert to such extremes and try to explain away all of the scriptures that attest to Jesus' prehuman existance. Jesus was God's only-begotten son, the firstborn of all creation, the beginning of the creation by God. Being such does not make him Almighty God. Despite this though, the book is very interesting and the many quotes from many different and famous scholars is impressive and sure to be a good addition to any student who wonders if there are scholarly arguments to defend certain Bible translations such as Romans 9:5, Titus 2:13, etc. I recommend it. Another "Must Read" book on this subject is "Jesus-God or the Son of God?", available here at Amazon.com.
Rating: 
Summary: Doctrine of the Trinity, A Review
Review: In this book by Buzzard and Hunting, the authors set out to create for the reader a basis to either accept the existence of the Trinity against all the evidences weighed down against it presented in this book, or to "return" to the solution the authors offer, namely that God's Oneness can, in no way, be used to represent the three Persons of the Godhead. Unfortunately, such a "return" does preclude the authors' presupposition that the only possible categories for representing the infinitude of God's existance are given in this book. In their disjunctive categorization, Buzzard and Hunting uses God's Oneness to annihilate even Biblical references to Christ's Diety (See R. Bauckham in God Crucified, Wm B. Eerdmans).
Rating: 
Summary: A THEOLOGICAL MISUNDERSTANDING
Review: The problem with this book is the common misconception that the Trinity refers to thee separate gods, when in fact it is a theological term for different aspects of God. Yes, it is true the word trinity is nowhere found in the bible, but this misunderstanding of the Trinity is do to language changes over the years. When the word "person" is used in casual speech today, it means one individual being; therefore, the Trinitarian formula three persons in one to the average mind means three gods in one deity. However, this is not what was meant at Niceah; the word "persons" is use to identify three distinct self's in the unity of God. Monotheism, which is the heart of Christianity, is in no way threatened by this formula. The word "monotheism" is not in the bible, but does this mean we do not have one god? We should recognized that early Judaism expresses different aspects God (Wisdom, Torah, His presence, or the Spirit of God ), and if you look at passages form the new testament such as 1 Corinthians 12:4-6 "Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of operations, but the same God which worketh all and all." It seems the Trinity would be the prefect theological term for this passage. We must understand theology is a verbal expression of God. The arguments in this book are weak, and deny Christ's divinity! On page 322, the author clam that Hebs. 1:10 has nothing to do with Christ's part in creation. But what the author fails to see is that this verse is in line with the Old Testament Wisdom Traditions. The problem with this book and others like it, things are taken too literal. For a good start on New Testament theology, I would suggest N.T. Wright, J.D. Dunn, Richard Bauckham, and Gordon Fee these authors are were you should start. Don't waste you money on this book I DID!
Rating: 
Summary: WHat a great BOOK!!
Review: This book is great for those who are seeking truth. This book exounds on the doctrine of the trinity, its origins and what the truth of the matter is-ONE God and One Lord Jesus Christ and they are NOT one. Mr. Buzzard has done some wonderful research and makes very valid, logical explinations.
Rating:
Summary: Simple Enough to Ring True, Scholarly Enough to Stand
Review: This book will probably never be read or debated in circles that would re-open a widespread doctrinal dispute. But that does not diminish its possible effect upon people. This book should come with a warning: WARNING: CAREFUL THOUGHT AND CONSIDERATION OF THIS MATERIAL CAN LEAD TO REJECTION. If individual Christians ever freed themselves from the Councils and Creeds ... (as well as the fear of being labeled a "heretic" by friends and relatives) they would find that this book gives them the chance to confirm what they ALWAYS suspected:. That God and His Only Begotten Son, Jesus... are who the Bible clearly says they are...and that They are not the conglomeration of hundreds of years of speculation about a few difficult verses of scripture. This book gives average folks a chance to replace nonsense with sense. This book does clearly show that plain logic and scholarly work still produce the best reading. If you want to assure that YOUR faith does not stand in man's cunning ability to conjure up imaginative explanations, you should read this book.
<< 1 >>
| 
