Dale Tuggy

Dale Tuggy is Professor of Philosophy at the State University of New York at Fredonia, where he teaches courses in analytic theology, philosophy of religion, religious studies, and the history of philosophy.


  1. Roman
    August 22, 2015 @ 5:16 am

    I started listening to Michael Heisers’s podcast the “naked bible,” it’s quite good, I recommend it. I came across and episode dealing with acts 2:42-47,

  2. Walter Russel
    July 15, 2015 @ 12:09 pm

    The Father is “Energy” The Son is “Conscience”, The Holy Spirit is “Free Will”.

    The opposite of absolute nothing (-) is absolute everything (+) that is good; and, absolute everything is “nature itself” as creation, whose subatomic (atom) composition is “energy, conscience, and free will (EC&FW)”. Our composition as energy (with innocence following reincarnation) begins with a commensurate earned healthy supply of energy, conscience, and free will as we are natures energy offspring; otherwise, when we lose conscience, we lose a commensurate amount of free will; without conscience we have no free will and we render ourselves as waste energy through our actions & inactions in the face of nature; one day, to be led by the hidden one as the deceiver, when natures own compatible offspring will inherit creation as a playground.

    As good whole immortal energy, our father is nature, our mother is earth, and our human parents are simply surrogate parents. The sign of the cross (in the name of the father, the son, and holy spirit) was a way for our simple minds to accept the blessed trinity and to begin to understand that “we are energy, conscience, and free will”. In modern times the powerful symbol of faith set that we would later understand conscious, sentient, omnipotent, nature as all creation and our one and only true GOD. Jc told us he is the son of GOD (nature), and that we are all GODs children when we are good and whole by our own trinity nature (trinity: EC&FW) that is a mere fragment of nature itself as creation.

    Evil, is anything and everything not born of “the love of nature” and consistent with it’s trinity qualities; evil is “physically and as energy detri”mental” towards the benefits of any and all nature (creation; including ourselves) that exists as one true “Good GOD,” through a “collective conscience” that is the foundation of all advanced intelligent life forms as positive good energy.

    Atom’s to the naked eye are invisible “electric-like energy” cells with no physical walls”, there are ten kinds of atoms, and all ten are natures “very own building blocks” that manifest all physical creation throughout all the universes and galaxies. Our physical bodies are an organized collection of natures “living electric-like energy atoms” that can even house energy such as us. To be pure in nature, with nature, we must be selfless love; caring, sharing, giving, and taking respectfully; without expectations, and always without excess. When we as each our own energy, achieve a “conscious collective conscience” by nature, those of us with ample earned and saved conscience will be able to consciously ascend, and as a society of individuals (bearing natures perfect trinity of qualities) we will ascend together as a unique species of conscious energy’ that will inherit all creation as our playground. Nature exists to experience through us it’s energy, conscience and free will. Without conscience we lose proportionate free will to become natures rejects as (without brain) mindless rejects (sheeple) to be led away from natures life in shame.

    Conscience, promotes intelligent energy
    Brain, promotes indefinite reincarnations
    We are energy, conscience, and free will
    Energy without conscience voids free will

    Don’t be a real freak to nature,
    cherish conscience; honor free will


  3. Matt13weedhacker
    June 26, 2015 @ 7:36 pm

    Great article Dale. I really enjoyed reading this. Great choice of Scriptures too.

    Here’s an interesting link on: “The Heresy of Clarity” concerning the Tri{3}nity doctrine. Having “Clarity”, or understanding, about the inter-relations concerning the Father, the Son and the holy spirit is considered a: “Heresy,”? What does that tell ya?

    See here:


    And here:


    • Ben Nasmith
      June 26, 2015 @ 9:30 pm

      Glad you found my blog. To be “clear”, I think clarity is a good thing worth pursuing.

  4. Jeffrey Koperski
    June 25, 2015 @ 2:21 pm

    Why isn’t it rational, Dale, for most people to treat the Trinity the way they treat quantum mechanics? They trust the experts. Even the average academic knows that he/she doesn’t have the background to understand the details. The experts say that light is both a particle and a wave (or something close to that). Fine. The experts say that there are three persons in a monotheistic trinity. Fine. We all to do that to some degree or other.

    • Tim Darr
      June 26, 2015 @ 11:33 am

      Jeff – you are proving Dale’s point. Understanding quantum mechanics is not beyond the grasp of the average person (sure, a little math is needed). Like the trinity, there is the popular meme that QM is “a mystery” promoted by the academics. If someone wants to remain ignorant about the trinity or QM, fine. But, if you want to put in the effort, understanding is possible.

      • Jeffrey Koperski
        June 27, 2015 @ 10:40 am

        I don’t think we’re talking about quite the same thing, Tim. When I say ‘QM’, I don’t just mean learning to solve Schrodinger’s equation for textbook systems. I’m talking about understanding the quantum world, including nonlocality, entanglement, irreducible randomness, the measurement problem, and the rest. As Feynman said, “If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don’t understand quantum mechanics.” That said, I think the analogy stands.

    • Roman
      June 29, 2015 @ 7:38 am

      Quantum Mechanics has a Mathematical Foundation over which conceptual “understanding” is very difficult, so trusting the mathematics (or those that know the mathematics) dispite not having a conceptual understanding is fine and rational.
      The problem With the Trinity is what are the Foundations for the theory of the Trinity? Is it scripture? Is it tradition? Is it theological reasoning from scripture and tradition?
      Lets say it’s scripture, well, for those of us who know scripture we can examine it (just as a Mathematician or a phycisit could examine the mathematics underlying Quantum Mechanics), if it’s tradition we can examine the history of the tradition, or if it’s theological reasoning from a Source we can do that as well.
      If you don’t have the time or Resources to examine these questions, then perhaps it is reasonable to just trust the “experts,” but if this is really important, you can examine it yourself, and frankly under examination, and without creedal presuppositions and constraints, the Trinity falls apart, under almost all measures.

    • Dale Tuggy
      June 29, 2015 @ 10:35 am

      I think that it can be rational, depending on the state of your evidence, at least, at the beginning, to trust what one takes to be expert opinion about the Trinity. But I have several concerns here, and there are not always parallels in the scientific cases. One is that wishing or intending to believe something (i.e. whatever those experts believe) is not the same as believing. http://trinities.org/blog/dealing-with-apparent-contradictions-part-6-restraint-implicit-belief-and-stalin/ But it has always been claimed by catholic tradition that the Trinity must be believed.

      Another is that I think the ordinary believer has access to simple information which contradicts Trinity theories, and for which she has more evidence than the weakest link in an argument for a certain take on the Trinity. http://trinities.org/blog/how-trinity-theories-conflict-with-the-new-testament/

      Another factor is disagreement of experts.

      Not that I take this post to rule out any mysterian approach to the Trinity. I take it to be compatible with that. It is a kind of clarity, if we come up with principled reasons for thinking we’re only going to get so far. But I do in the end think these are defensive measures which will not give our minds a place to rest.