Trinities podcast

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 2145
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: Trinities podcast

Post by darinhouston » Thu Jun 06, 2019 8:56 am

I've been out of pocket and owe Matt a few responses. But, I'll say quickly that I've listened to quite a bit of his material now and am more and more impressed by him every day. He seems pretty light on Spirit Christology, which is where I tend to lean even though its proponents have some weak sides. He doesn't have all the answers (and doesn't pretend to), but his collective criticisms of the mainline Trinitarian positions are hard to answer.

Matt thinks he's "quick" to dismiss certain arguments. Maybe in passing conversation, but you can hardly say he's "quick" in his body of argumentation. He's more like Steve in his thoroughness -- but, this possibly does not show in casual conversation or on Facebook. If Matt's position is as I recall, Tuggy does spend a fair amount of time critiquing so-called "social trinitarianism." One can hardly say he dismisses it quickly. I would love to have Matt engage him on a phone call. Tuggy bends over backwards to give his interviewees a platform and it's not so much a debate as Tuggy trying to understand their position better.

Though I like a lot of what Buzzard has to say, I think it is unfair to try and critique Tuggy by association with Buzzard. There is really no association, though they agree on a number of points. He had a friendly interview on the podcast, but he almost never comes up. Though your criticism of Buzzard as a linguist is unfair. Many of these issues are textual issues and his skills bear directly on some of the translation issues that most Trinitarians presume to be straightforward -- also, where do you get the idea that his primary background is in modern languages? From my understanding, his background is primarily biblical languages.

User avatar
Seballius
Posts: 60
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2018 11:19 am

Re: Trinities podcast

Post by Seballius » Thu Jun 06, 2019 12:54 pm

The following quotes (below) are taken from his (Buzzard’s) Wikipedia page, so I am not certain of their accuracy. I was basing my claim of modern languages on his personal testimony. I have listened to Buzzard in debates, podcast, and his group sends me their newsletter. I also read Buzzard’s book “What happens when we die”. He makes some compelling arguments for soul sleep, but I am still undecided on that issue. Most of my interest with Buzzard has been his presentation or thoughts of “the soul” and soul sleep.

When he was with the Church of God Armstrong branch, he taught French and German in their school. He himself has said that he was not a theological teacher (at least at that time). I knew he claimed knowledge of Hebrew, but I did not know he studied Hebrew formally until today. There is no record of him having formally studied NT Greek. Most “cults” who attack the Trinity allow the OT to dominate their theology of the Godhead. In other words, they do not focus on the NT or allow the paradigms/presuppositions of the NT to control their views. My impression of Buzzard is that he does the same.

My own opinion on the Godhead is not totally decided. I have family who are Oneness Pentecostals and for a time I leaned towards that belief. However, The Father and Jesus communicate between themselves, so there are at least two personalities there. Additionally, the Holy Spirit is referred to as a distinct entity/personality and with the “he” pronoun. I personally do not ever see myself agreeing with Buzzard or Tuggy. I believe Jesus is more than an anointed man. I agree with Walter Martin, he used to always say, “Jesus is Jehovah God”.

From Wikipedia about Buzzard:

Buzzard was educated at Charterhouse, and served in the Royal Navy as a sub-lieutenant in the secretarial branch between 1954 and 1956. In 1960 he graduated in Modern Languages in French and German from the University of Oxford.

Buzzard gained a Diploma in Biblical Hebrew from the University of Jerusalem in 1970. He attended the University of London. He gained a Masters in Theology from Bethany Theological Seminary, Chicago, in 1990.
Buzzard taught French and German at The American School in London and taught theology and Biblical languages for 24 years at Atlanta Bible College, McDonough, Georgia (formerly Oregon [IL] Bible College).[2]



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 4914
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Trinities podcast

Post by Paidion » Thu Jun 06, 2019 4:01 pm

Well... Tuggy is a "classic Unitarian" who believes that Jesus was not divine, but was but a "glorified" human being.
My own position is unitarian, but a different kind of unitarian. Jesus Himself was a unitarian of some kind since He addressed His Father in prayer as "the only true God."

(John 17:3, ESV) And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.

Notice He added, "and Jesus Christ whom you have sent," which seems to indicate that He regarded Himself as Someone other than "the only true God." Nevertheless, according to John 1:1 the Logos (who is Jesus) was with "the God" (the only true God) and also was God—not that He was God the Father, but as the Son of God (begotten before all ages, the first of God's acts according to the early Christians), He was God in the sense of being divine. You were begotten by man, and therefore you are man, and are human. Jesus was begotten by God (the ONLY begotten Son of God) and therefore is God, and is divine. Thus while not being THE GOD, He is of the same divine essence as THE GOD.

Classic Unitarians such as Tuggy deny His divinity and consider Him to be but a glorified human being.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 81.

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 2145
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: Trinities podcast

Post by darinhouston » Thu Jun 06, 2019 10:28 pm

Paidion wrote:Nevertheless, according to John 1:1 the Logos (who is Jesus).
This requires proof.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
mattrose
Posts: 1909
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:28 am
Contact:

Re: Trinities podcast

Post by mattrose » Thu Jun 06, 2019 10:43 pm

darinhouston wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 8:56 am
I've been out of pocket and owe Matt a few responses. But, I'll say quickly that I've listened to quite a bit of his material now and am more and more impressed by him every day. He seems pretty light on Spirit Christology, which is where I tend to lean even though its proponents have some weak sides. He doesn't have all the answers (and doesn't pretend to), but his collective criticisms of the mainline Trinitarian positions are hard to answer.

Matt thinks he's "quick" to dismiss certain arguments. Maybe in passing conversation, but you can hardly say he's "quick" in his body of argumentation. He's more like Steve in his thoroughness -- but, this possibly does not show in casual conversation or on Facebook. If Matt's position is as I recall, Tuggy does spend a fair amount of time critiquing so-called "social trinitarianism." One can hardly say he dismisses it quickly. I would love to have Matt engage him on a phone call. Tuggy bends over backwards to give his interviewees a platform and it's not so much a debate as Tuggy trying to understand their position better.

Though I like a lot of what Buzzard has to say, I think it is unfair to try and critique Tuggy by association with Buzzard. There is really no association, though they agree on a number of points. He had a friendly interview on the podcast, but he almost never comes up. Though your criticism of Buzzard as a linguist is unfair. Many of these issues are textual issues and his skills bear directly on some of the translation issues that most Trinitarians presume to be straightforward -- also, where do you get the idea that his primary background is in modern languages? From my understanding, his background is primarily biblical languages.
Hey Darin :)

I apologize if I made it sound like Tuggy is not willing to interact with those he disagrees with. That wasn't my intention. I was just describing my FB interaction with him, which I found a bit disappointing. Quite clearly he is very willing to engage with many who disagree with him.

I doubt I'd fare well in a conversation with him on this subject. It seems to be the subject he spends the vast majority of his time thinking about. My thoughts are spread over many different areas of theology. I'm a bit of a generalist, but he's specifically focused on his view of the trinity. I did enjoy his book for the most part... I just don't agree with him. I'm convinced that the social trinity view is correct. And even if I were persuaded away from trinitarianism, it would be to something more like what Paidion believes than what Tuggy believes.

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 4914
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Trinities podcast

Post by Paidion » Fri Jun 07, 2019 12:24 pm

Darin, you wrote: Paidion wrote:
Nevertheless, according to John 1:1 the Logos (who is Jesus).

This requires proof.
(Revelation 19:13) He is clothed in a robe dipped in blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 81.

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 2145
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: Trinities podcast

Post by darinhouston » Fri Jun 07, 2019 6:27 pm

Paidion wrote:
Darin, you wrote: Paidion wrote:
Nevertheless, according to John 1:1 the Logos (who is Jesus).

This requires proof.
(Revelation 19:13) He is clothed in a robe dipped in blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God.
That is an interesting proof. I admit I’ve never noticed that before. I’ll consider that further. But my initial thought is two-fold. First, it doesn’t say He “is” the Word of God. But that He is “called” the Word of God (consistent with him perfectly embodying the Logos). Second, that it could well be (and is consistent with Scripture) that Jesus wasn’t “always” the Logos but instead “became” the Logos. The Logos “became” flesh when Jesus was born. So, that flesh could rightly be called the Logos "of" or Logos "from" God even if He was not "ontologically" identical to that pre-existent Logos. The Logos describes him. That would be different from His being the Logos (whether from eternity or not).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
steve
Posts: 3340
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm

Re: Trinities podcast

Post by steve » Fri Jun 07, 2019 9:17 pm

I do not argue much about the trinity. Like Matt, it is not my hobby-horse doctrine. As far as I can tell, no one here has attempted to answer or refute the explanations in my "Knowing God" series on the subject. If I have missed it, I would be grateful to have someone point it out.

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 2145
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: Trinities podcast

Post by darinhouston » Fri Jun 07, 2019 9:38 pm

steve wrote:
Fri Jun 07, 2019 9:17 pm
I do not argue much about the trinity. Like Matt, it is not my hobby-horse doctrine. As far as I can tell, no one here has attempted to answer or refute the explanations in my "Knowing God" series on the subject. If I have missed it, I would be grateful to have someone point it out.
I suspect I will have to go back and listen to that with this in mind.

User avatar
Seballius
Posts: 60
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2018 11:19 am

Re: Trinities podcast

Post by Seballius » Fri Jun 07, 2019 11:00 pm

steve wrote:I do not argue much about the trinity. Like Matt, it is not my hobby-horse doctrine. As far as I can tell, no one here has attempted to answer or refute the explanations in my "Knowing God" series on the subject. If I have missed it, I would be grateful to have someone point it out.
I would consider myself a “soft” trinitarian. I do not normally use the word “trinity” and like you I rarely speak or teach on/about the trinity. I do feel that it is the best explanation in consideration of the whole biblical text. I listened to your lecture on the trinity again and you make some strong points. I was also impressed how you treated the other views as well.

I have heard you say that you do not think people have to believe in the trinity to be saved. I agree with you.

What do you think of people like Tuggy (someone who thinks Jesus is an anointed man and not God)?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Post Reply

Return to “The Trinity”