David

Christadelphian
  • Content count

    615
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    26

David last won the day on March 18

David had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

347 Excellent

About David

  • Rank
    Expert Poster
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

536 profile views
  1. John 17 Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk
  2. He exhibited the character of God in perfection Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk
  3. Ok, please do when convenient. What does "nature" mean in your citation?
  4. Do you have some references for that?
  5. So we agree then that by "Messiah" the Jews were not referring to Jesus as God.
  6. [1] Incorrect [2] Sorry, I don't believe it. Or it could be an aberration on the furthermost extremity of the bell curve. It seems like you collect every weird and wonderful story and present it expecting it to have traction. Yes, there might be strange CD and you have found them. I live not far from Cooranbong and my children go to an SDA School. If I thought every madness, deviation from SDA doctrine (I will gratuitously throw in that I know an SDA whom does not believe in a supernatural devil based on his own study) and scandal I am privy to were passable as relevant, I could write a lot more. Can I suggest keeping discussion to Scripture and reasoned thinking does most for your credibility? [3] We are bound by our agreement to a statement of faith. We are free to explore Scripture outside that and even to formulating how we might arrive at those conclusions. Some of that work will be first class and powerful; some not so much. There are different versions of the Trinity - does that automatically invalidate all of them?
  7. It is relevant because he explains that the earliest Christians were Jews, the earliest Christians claimed Jesus as the Messiah, and by Messiah "all Jews" understood that to be in reference to a man. This is not the part that most Christians have a problem with - it is the last section of his book that they take issue with. You are asking me to prove a negative which is typically extremely difficult or impossible. Instead, can you show me once piece of evidence that the earliest Christians did believe in the pre-existence? That it was a critical part of the gospel message? If instead, you concede that many first century Christians died in faith without belief in the pre-existence of Christ, then explain why CD need it and why you are so anxious to impose it?
  8. Ehrman is a scholar. Start with that and check his footnotes.
  9. [1] Change of topic. If there was one agreed point of understanding it was that Messiah would be a man (and not God). Saying that they may have disagreed on other particulars is not relevant. [2] Yes, that's why I said earliest. [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Did_Jesus_Exist%3F_(Ehrman)
  10. The earliest Christians were Jews and they claimed Jesus as the Messiah. The Jewish Messiah was neither God nor a supernatural, pre-existent being. He was a man "anointed" to be God's messenger. A starting point for evidence would be the Psalms of Solomon or any book covering the Jewish belief system in the first century BCE and CE.
  11. Sorry, you've lost me. Your reasoning: The consensus of First Century scholarship (historians) has it that early believers did not accept the Trinitarian view of God. But Atheists (journalists, philosophers) don't. Therefore First Century believers did accept the Trinity.
  12. "Go up" to Adelaide. LOL. Whatever you've picked up, Adelaide is not CD HQ. Plus this reply is drifting from the point. Maybe I'm lazy. Maybe I put value on my free time and that doesn't involve flying to Adelaide to correct "conservative" CD. But my point was that whatever anecdotal conversation you might relay does not hold water. Best to stick with Scripture and reason, not gotcha conversations with nameless people.
  13. You're quoting Christopher Hitchens to trump the consensus of first century scholarship?
  14. For this audience, this point is really a straw man. If you think setting up the opinions of "some conservatives in Adelaide" allows one to somehow assume everyone on this forum is bound to that appeal to authority then you don't understand our community. No hearsay evidence please :).