May or May Not be a Trinity

[nathanielfirst]

hello, I am attempting to find a theologian with a certain viewpoint that is close to my own, so that I can defend my beliefs by reference to a more famous person than myself, if I ever have to... the specific belief I am trying to defend is:
I'm a bible christian, having read and reread it and I base my faith from the bible only, I don't virulently dislike any denomination but I base my faith on the book... and I believe that there may or may not be a trinity, there may or may not be predestination, that the holy spirit may or may not proceed from the father and the son or just the father, etc., on many issues where the scripture seems to be ambivalent I believe the may or may not... of course the existence of hell i definitly believe in, that Jesus was baptized and the holy spirit descended etc., I believe but on things like where the scripture contardicts, I think only that it is uncertain and that God even intends it to be so, and that it is important to SAY, maybe, maybe not, and you will probably not know till you die.
that is my view... but can anyone think of an author or theologian who says this? a single person, actually, cuz i figure disciples of christ or someone officially pushes it maybe? A pietist I bet is close but I am trying to be more explicit and rational/logical, 'there IS a seeming contradiction, it isn't Really a contradiction, but it could be one or the other or both in some way and we don't know which'.
thanks much if u know...

 

[Martinius]

How about Isaac Newton? Renowned for his brilliant science, he was also a theologian. He questioned the orthodox definition of the trinity, but not in too public of a manner.

Also check out the following:

Servetus
Emanuel Swedenborg
Martin Cellarius
Lelio Sozzini
Fausto Sozzini
Henry James, Sr.

Of course there were the advocates of non-orthodox trinitarian thought as well as non-trinitarian ideas that were condemned in the early church councils. That process led to the creed that most Christians are familiar with and use today.

I don't know if any of the above left the concept as an open question (maybe or maybe not), but to get from a trinitarian outlook to a non-trinitarian one may have included a period of questioning the orthodox view as the only possible viewpoint. It also may be difficult to find one theologian that shares every one of your positions.

There are some recent bible scholars who discount the trinity as well, but they are not strictly theologians. They approach it from your direction, basing it on what scripture tells us.

Good luck.

 

[cubinity]

I would recommend listening to Dr. Brent Walters. He is a historian who owns one of the largest private libraries of materials on the first century, has taught religion at San Jose State University for about twenty years, and currently hosts a radio program called God Talk on San Francisco's KGO 810AM. The show airs live from 6-9am every Sunday morning, but it can be accessed all week long at www.kgoam810.com/kgo_archives/

 

[plmarquette]

either the dogma ... doctrine....tradition is correct or it is not...
either there are 3 persons in one God or not...
don't have to understand a computer to use it , do you?
don't have to fully understand faith to operate in it....

 

[tulc]

Been here?
Nontrinitarianism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
or here:
Arianism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
tulc(trying to help)

 

[nathanielfirst]

hmmm. I'm not really just whining about the trinity - I am trying too find a 'way of comprehending seeming contradictions in the bible' any and all- I suppose what I'm looking for is a type of theology or a method of theology-

one that says: 'when there are 2 (or more) passages in the bible which seem to contradict each other, and no key to that elsewhere in the scripture, then, 1. the scripture does not contradict itself 2. the answer may be A, or B, or something else, the meaning is unclear 3. It is best not to TRY to divine the meaning of the scripture with your reason - if God should show you what it means, now you know, but your reason isn't enough to unlock the seeming contradiction. 4. even though your reason isn't sufficient for THAT huge task, it is important to use your reason to say, 'there seems to be a contradiction', and identify it, and come up with a response, lest some atheist come along and point out the contradiction first to people, or someone use the seeming contradiction to distort teachings, much like Jehovah's Witnesses use the prohibition against eating blood to prevent blood transfusions- the response is always, there seems to be a contradiction but it is not safe to interpret.
this is like pietism which rejects theological analysis to force that seeming contardiction to mean something, but unlike it in that it allows the reason, the analysis, a positive role - identifies the seeming contradiction and states that it is definitly there, and defends against it.
I suppose i titled this thread absentmindedly - it's not much about the trinity really, more contradictions in general

 

[2ducklow]

hmmm. I'm not really just whining about the trinity - I am trying too find a 'way of comprehending seeming contradictions in the bible' any and all- I suppose what I'm looking for is a type of theology or a method of theology-

one that says: 'when there are 2 (or more) passages in the bible which seem to contradict each other, and no key to that elsewhere in the scripture, then, 1. the scripture does not contradict itself 2. the answer may be A, or B, or something else, the meaning is unclear 3. It is best not to TRY to divine the meaning of the scripture with your reason - if God should show you what it means, now you know, but your reason isn't enough to unlock the seeming contradiction. 4. even though your reason isn't sufficient for THAT huge task, it is important to use your reason to say, 'there seems to be a contradiction', and identify it, and come up with a response, lest some atheist come along and point out the contradiction first to people, or someone use the seeming contradiction to distort teachings, much like Jehovah's Witnesses use the prohibition against eating blood to prevent blood transfusions- the response is always, there seems to be a contradiction but it is not safe to interpret.
this is like pietism which rejects theological analysis to force that seeming contardiction to mean something, but unlike it in that it allows the reason, the analysis, a positive role - identifies the seeming contradiction and states that it is definitly there, and defends against it.
I suppose i titled this thread absentmindedly - it's not much about the trinity really, more contradictions in general

Something my pastor often says is that if you can't figure a verse out, then put it on the middle shelf for later consideration, or until you get the revelation etc.

 

[nathanielfirst]

good advice, I'll let it rest for now