“At the 42:20-55 point – the Unitarians ask that the Unitarian position not be discredited (as some of the Trinitarian comments appeared to try to do) in a “guilt by association” model where the Unitarian position was associated with “Seventh-day Adventist” and “Christadelphians”.”

Dear Bob

I’m wondering if they could add the sum of their views, divide by two, and become Doubletarians?

Please excuse my agnostic humour.

Interesting that faith has so many complex iterations. Is the Nicene Creed prophetic or a construct of man?

Is this God or Man at work. Is it Man inspired by God or political agreement?

Is the debate going on now between the YEC and OEC adventists of the same ilk?

Cheers
Ken

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Clearly the Unitarians think they are arguing their own firmly held beliefs.

At the 42:20-55 point – the Unitarians ask that the Unitarian position not be discredited (as some of the Trinitarian comments appeared to try to do) in a “guilt by association” model where the Unitarian position was associated with “Seventh-day Adventist” and “Christadelphians”.

(At the 1:32:10 point the Trinitarian speaker clarifies the point stating that at one time Seventh-day Adventists were Unitarian but since then are Trinitarian. It should be pointed out – that our formal printed beliefs were first printed in 1872 and did not include the Unitarian doctrine – nor have they ever.)

Greer is in fact enhancing that association idea – by arguing for the Unitarian POV as an SDA, even though our 28 Fundamental Beliefs are NOT unitarian.

43:20 the Trinitarian response (from the 3rd chair) speaks to the point of “cult” and “false prophet” – trying to show that the subject is “truth vs error”. The speaker argues for the pre-existence of God the Son – Jesus Christ. He points out that the Unitarian position denies the pre-existence of Christ.

1:04:20 Greer argues that the Word of God became Jesus Christ – but sets this up by saying that “by the Word of the Lord were the heavens made” is the meaning of Word – in John 1. Making the case that God made Christ as in the OT God’s Word made the World. Thus Greer argues not only that Christ is not God – but that Christ did not exist before his birth.

(And then naturally at 1:07:00-1:08:10 Greer totally butchers John 8 in his attempt to bend and wrench “Before Abraham WAS – I AM” to mean “Before Abraham WAS – he looked into the future and saw my day”. Essentially Greer has to make total nonsense of the text to try and make his point.

When asked to address John 17:5 (at 1:08:20) “glorify Thou Me together with Thyself, Father, with the glory which I had with Thee BEFORE the world WAS” — Greer responds that he would rather talk about John 17:3 instead. “this is eternal life that they may know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom Thou has sent”. And while we can understand why a unitarian would prefer to ignore John 17:5 and only talk about John 17:3 – even at that Greer never addresses the problem that he ALSO has in John 17:3 which is that Jesus Christ was not SENT from God to earth – because according to Greer – he did not exist to BE sent before his birth on earth!

And then of course there is the John 17:5 problem still hanging out there for him should he ever get out of the John 17:3 mess.

It cannot be ignored that when you view the participants they are all arguing for their own firmly held beliefs. (See 2:11:19 – 2:12:19 for an example)

2:27:52 – In the end Geer even goes to the wild extreme of insisting that the pagan Cyrus is the agent of the One true God and therefore is to be received as the One True God (Is 45:14-15) (trying to establish a precident for Greer’s less than biblical case regarding Christ). At this point you would think that the error is so stark that even Greer would wake up.

2:24:20 the Trinitarian speaker again states that the Unitarians believe what they are saying – and that it is not exactly the same as Jehovah’s Witness position but it is a specific Unitarian POV believed by the people at the Unitarian table.

in Christ,

Bob

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Like or Dislike: 0  0

He complains that those opposing him on the other side “hold the positions that you do”.

Clearly the participants THEMSELVES believe that each side is presenting their own firmly held beliefs.

in Christ,

Bob

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Like or Dislike: 0  0

This is it? From these remarks, you reach the damning conclusion that Lee Greer denies Christ’s divinity, and therefore you wish to “expose” him and subject him to public humiliation?

Professor Kent,

If after watching the documentary and the debate, you still come away with “This is it?” then there really is no sense in trying to discuss much of anything with you. People who believe Jesus was God don’t go on documentaries and argue to the contrary. Look at what he says here:

So if one is interested in getting at the real Jesus there is every advantage to investigating the evidence that shows him very much in his biblical context not in his Jewish context. Not as claiming anything like co-eternal, co-existence, with the Father, eternal pre-existence, all power, all those things. These are things which were bestowed on him.

In other words the real Jesus is not co-eternal, co-existence, with the Father, eternal pre-existant, and all powerful. In the documentary and debate he does not promote Jesus as God, but as merely human who did not have any power etc at all, but was just given some by the Father.

You really don’t think Greer thinks Jesus was not God?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Wait a minute–did Professor Kent just say that he believes Satan is divine?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Read this statement more closely:

If one wants to think of Jesus as a divinely empowered hero, divinely empowered messiah, an anointed son, etc. all these things that have deep roots in the Christian tradition, then one is standing on very solid ground. If one wants to see Jesus as claiming that he is God, then one is on the short end of the stick evidence wise. (1:49:28)

Hello?!!! Do you remember those 12 disciples who could not fathom that Jesus was the son of God, much less God incarnate? Jesus told them repeatedly He was the son of God. They saw abundant evidence–much more so than we have access to–but still could not understand his claims. You could very easily take passages out of the Bible itself and make the claim that some of God’s very elect did not believe in Jesus’ divinity.

If you are going to lambast Greer, I want to see a direct quote in which he says, “I do not believe Jesus was divine.” Until then, I think you are digging, digging, digging for one purpose and one purpose only: to smear him.

Like or Dislike: 1  0

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Source: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8436256589572340879&hl=en#

To deny that he was a human being is to deny the historical evidences. The burden of proof should be on those who say he isn’t a human being. He was more than something else other than a human being to demonstrate that. Was he a great religious teacher? Did he claim to be messiah? Was he recognized as messiah? Within Jewish context those are very specific categories. Those are not the same as claiming to be God or being recognized as God or anything like that. so if one is interested in getting at the real Jesus there is every advantage to investigating the evidence that shows him very much in his biblical context not in his jewish context. Not as claiming anything like co-eternal, co-existence, with the Father, eternal pre-existence, all power, all those things. These are things which were bestowed on him. Various parts of these things. like it says all power is given to me in heaven and earth. He is given certain privileges but all of those powers privileges, and authorities are delegated. Even in the gospel of John they are all delegated by God to him. So I think that an advantage of taking Jesus in the strict exegetical sense from scripture is that you’re likely to get something very much closer to the actual Jesus rather then centuries of tradition about him. (19:48)

Greer continues at 45:52.

At 56:22 Greer responds to Isaiah 9:6 by saying, “In the context it seems obvious to a number of scholars that this is a reference to Hezekiah. And later on of course this was taken and adopted in a very homiletical sort of way by Matthew and applied to Jesus.”

If you want to dig for the truth of a thing and risk being at odds, risk being a free thinker. You know that has its advantages; it also has its social burdens at times. People don’t like being dissented from particularly in matters where they should be the most tentative because we can’t see these things, they’re often the most dogmatic. (1:33:10)

Here’s another one:

If one wants to think of Jesus as a divinely empowered hero, divinely empowered messiah, an anointed son, etc. all these things that have deep roots in the Christian tradition, then one is standing on very solid ground. If one wants to see Jesus as claiming that he is God, then one is on the short end of the stick evidence wise. (1:49:28)

For those within the Seventh-day Adventist Church who have forgotten what we believe, or Christianity for that matter, in regard to Christ, here is fundamental belief #4:

God the eternal Son became incarnate in Jesus Christ. Through Him all things were created, the character of God is revealed, the salvation of humanity is accomplished, and the world is judged. Forever truly God, He became also truly man, Jesus the Christ. He was conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary. He lived and experienced temptation as a human being, but perfectly exemplified the righteousness and love of God. By His miracles He manifested God’s power and was attested as God’s promised Messiah. He suffered and died voluntarily on the cross for our sins and in our place, was raised from the dead, and ascended to minister in the heavenly sanctuary in our behalf. He will come again in glory for the final deliverance of His people and the restoration of all things.

Here are the facts about Greer, a biology professor at La Sierra University:

1. Does not believe in the divinity of Christ.
2. Believes all life shares a common ancestry.
3. Teaches at LSU that Genesis 1 & 2 are allegorical.

Does this have any bearing on how he presents the evidence? You better believe it! I am very troubled that a non-Christian, claiming to be a Seventh-day Adventist, is promoting evolution as truth at a Seventh-day Adventist university. It’s one thing to be a non-Christian, but it’s entirely different to be a non-Christian yet claim to be Seventh-day Adventist. Can we really afford to pay church representatives like this?

How can we expect professors who believe and promote such blatantly contrary beliefs at our schools to “help you navigate issues of faith and science, in and out of the classroom, so that your faith in God is strengthened” as LSU claims its professors will/can do?

How many students are we willing to feed through these classes before action is taken? Apparently 100′s if not thousands!!

Like or Dislike: 0  0