26 of 30 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A Highly Stimulating Work, April 3, 2008
This review is from: Jesus Was Not a Trinitarian (Paperback)
As a member of the Society of Biblical Literature, I can attest to the scholarliness and challenge of this book written from a Socinian viewpoint. It is a sequel to a prior work entitled The Doctrine of the Trinity: Christianity's Self-Inflicted Wound. In the author's own words,'JESUS WAS NOT A TRINTARIAN represents a Socinian view of the Son of God(after Faustus Socinus, 1539-1604)' (page 327). It 'represents that 'marginalized' strand of Christianity which struggles to retain the words of Jesus himself' (page 378).
The book is a tour de force. It is a masterpiece. What the author does with two passages from the Bible (Mark 12:29 [the Shema] and Psalm 110:1) is absolutely amazing. He in effect dismantles the Nicene-Constantinopolitan and Chalcedonian edifice of Trinitarianism which has prevailed in all branches of Christianity since the fourth century and shows persuasively why this is an error of Gentile Christianity unsubstantiatable from the Hebrew Bible and the Greek New Testament and why Judaism and Islam are right to reject it.
Equally breathtaking is his laying of the axe to the root of Augustine's theological tree (page 276). 'In one fell swoop', as it were, he shows how Augustine's commentary on John 17:3 in his HOMILIES ON JOHN is an unwarranted re-writing,--an eisegesis, not an exegesis. The implication is that the rest of his magnificent and towering writings (ON THE TRINITY, THE CITY OF GOD, CONFESSIONS and so on) are seriously flawed, being built on this faulty and feeble foundation. 'It is at this verse that one of the most startling manipulations of the text of Scripture has occurred. The celebrated Augustine, unable to find his beloved Trinity in Jesus'words, decided to rewrite the utterance of Jesus to accommodate a creed about which Jesus knew nothing. Here is how he deals with John 17:3 in his HOMILIES ON JOHN:'And this,' He [Jesus] adds,'is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.' The proper order of the words is, 'That they may know you and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent, as the only true God.''
The book is divided into seventeen sections: between the introduction (pages 1-6) and the epilogue ('A Future for Monotheism', pages 380-384)there are twelve chapters, some of them work which previously appeared
in non-book form (chapters 6, 7 and 12):
1. Foundations for Belief in God and His Son
2. Who Was the God of Jesus and His Followers?
3. Biblical Fact and History Against Dogma
4. The Titanic Struggle of Scholars to Find the Triune God in the Bible
5. The Son of God: Protestant Loss of Jesus' Teaching and His Promotion to Deity [Apotheosis]
6. Jesus as 'My Lord' Messiah: The Golden Key of Psalm 110:1
7. If Only We Had Listened to Gabriel
8. Church Councils, The Da Vinci Code and Modern Scholarship
9. Detective Work and Word Tricks
10. Mathematical Marvels and the Obstruction of Monotheism
11. And Introduction to Dissident Heroes
12. Does Everyone Believe in the Trinity?
Then follow three appendices: On John 20:28, Where Jewish Opposition Breaks Down, and Hebrews 1:10. -- The strongest chapters are six and 12, in which there is massive documentation of the author's point.
'Defining God and His Son biblically remains part of the unfinished work of the Reformation,' says the back cover of the book. It is towards this end that the author writes.
The author dialogues with the finest scholars writing today and deftly employs concessions from them to make his case. If you know of anyone who is struggling with the difficulty posed by the doctrine of the Trinity, I recommend that you buy them a copy of this book. This is definitely one of the most valuable gifts you could ever give to a soul seeking enlightenment.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
11 of 11 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
A plausible but verbose alternative to orthodox Christology, February 16, 2010
This review is from: Jesus Was Not a Trinitarian (Paperback)
In this 424 page book, Anthony Buzzard repeats and expands upon the anti-trinitarian arguments of his earlier work, "The Doctrine of the Trinity: Christianity's Self-Inflicted Wound" (co-authored with Charles F. Hunting). Buzzard points out that there are few Biblical passages (only about six in the New Testament) that plausibly refer to the divinity of Jesus, and that these few are far outnumbered by passages which either distinguish Jesus from God, put Jesus in a subordinate position to the Father, or which attribute human limitations to Jesus. Indeed, many of these anti-Trinitarian passages are attributed to Jesus himself.
Buzzard points out that virtually all of the so-called trinitarian passages in the New Testament are either grammatically ambiguous or subject to plausable, alternatve interpretations. When evaluating the trinitarian passages, Buzzard's premise is that it makes more sense to interpret those few passages in terms of the more numerous non-trinitarian passages, rather than the other way around. Buzzard also emphasizes the unitarian background of Judaism as a reason for doubting the trinitarian interpretation of the gospels; he sees little if any reason to suppose that a radical switch from unitarianism to trinitarianism would have been handled in such an ambiguous manner if it were really intended.
Buzzard's arguments are generally sound, if not air-tight, and elaboration of some points would have been welcome. For example, how does Buzzard explain the trinitarian form of blessing ("In the name of the father, and the son, and the holy spirit"), found in early Jewish-Christian documents such as The Didache? This formulation would seem to imply the personhhood of the holy spirit, which Buzzard denies. Then there is the early Christian belief - which Buzzard accepts - that Jesus will be the judge of the living and the dead at the end of time. Would not this function imply a divine omniscience incompatible with the idea that Jesus is NOT divine? Or would Buzzard say that the Father somehow transfers or bestows this omniscience onto the Son?
There is one other major point that Buzzard sidesteps: in what way is the death and resurrection of Jesus the cause of our salvation. Or was it necessary for salvation? If so, why - why was the death of Jesus necessary for the forgiveness of sin?
Buzzard also touches upon a couple of other points, without developing them. He suggests that the doctrine of the trinity may have arisen as the Gentile church became increasingly estranged from its Jewish origins and sought to distance itself in every way from Judaism. But why was nascent Rabbinic Judaism so hostile to JEWISH Christianity, particularly if some factions of Jewish Christianity remained Torah-observant? Does this suggeest that even Jewish Christinaity was trinitarian at an early date?
Buzzard also mentions the possibility that the later devotion to Mary the mother of Jesus arose to fill the void created by elevating the mediator Jesus to the status of divinity. An interesting point, but it remains undeveloped.
If this book has a flaw, it is its length and repetitiveness. Had I been an editor, I would have sent it back and said, "Cut it in half." It often reads as a collection of essays that were originally written as separate pieces, and then combined without editing or revision. Some points are repeated ad nauseum, fifteen or twenty times throughout the book. Some quotations are repated, in differing forms, within a few pages of each other. The repetition is maddening at times. If the trinitarian passages in the New Testament can be reduced to a mere handful, it would have been much more clear to devote a chapter to each of those passages, or to devote a chapter to each separate book of the New Testament where trinitarian passages occur, rather than to have everything mixed up, thrown together, and repeated over and over.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
24 of 29 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent Analysis Calling For A Major Re-formation, December 29, 2007
This review is from: Jesus Was Not a Trinitarian (Paperback)
Anthony Buzzard has provided a thorough presentation that escapes the paralyzing bondage of the 4th and following centuries' faux-orthodox interpretations of Jesus the Christ. This book exposes the intellectual distortions and rut that has entombed Christology for centuries, because such scholarly honesty would probably have cost "traditional" theologians their jobs, even their lives. Readers are provided with a Jesus truly grounded in the New Testament. In the current post-Christian period, Buzzard's candor may well assist with a resurrection of a genuinely orthodox Christianity, if there is ever to be one. In my roles as a former philosophy professor and retired Episcopal cathedral canon, I heartily recommend "Jesus Was Not A Trinitarian."
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
