“trinitarians”… Fer it… or agin’ it?
Following up on the previous post - the word “trinitarian” may be an adjective or a noun. The Oxford English Dictionary lists four adjective meanings: (here’s my editing of relevant parts of their entry, emphasis added)
2. Theol. Relating to the Trinity; holding the doctrine of the Trinity (opp. to Unitarian). [...]
Who’s up for a little trinitarian comedy?
Thanks to reader Mike K. for this hilarious link. They beat me to the punch - I’ve been sitting on a post for some time on this exact theme. (Stay tuned.)
I posted a comment asking about this bit:
It’s interesting to note that the English term “Trinitarian” was first used, [...]
Your average theologian’s response to recent Rational Reinterpretations.
Let me take four recent books off my shelf by current theologians. Now I’ll search through them to see if they have any reference at all to some of the more important Rational Reconstructions in the last 25 years or so, namely:
Tom Morris’s (1986, 1989) or Richard Swinburne’s [...]
Yes, this is the real thing. Really.
And it can be yours for a mere $50.
Last time we highlighted one problem with Resolution through Rational Reinterpretation - often, only a metaphysician could love the new-fangled (but precise and seemingly consistent) version of the Doctrine in question. A second concern is that many believers think this “new [...]
Moses Stuart (1780-1852), professor at Andover Theological Seminary,
and NOT a fan of Rational Reconstruction (image credit)
What, if anything, is wrong with with the strategy of Resolution through Rational Reinterpretation? And why are most theologians so cold towards this strategy, while most Christian philosophers love it? Consider this quote by Moses Stuart on one of Leibniz’s [...]
Who are you calling dumb? (image credit)
We’re exploring the response of Restraint - when confronted with an apparently contradictory doctrine, might it not be a good idea for the believer to simply admit that she doesn’t know what it means? Last time we looked at the idea of “implicit faith”. What, if anything, is wrong [...]
“God” in Arabic. (image credit)
A continuing theme in the Christian blogosphere, which we discussed before (God = Allah?) - now Calvin College philosopher Kevin Corcoran, on his blog Holy Skin and Bone, asks:
Is the God of Christians the God of Muslims Too?
Corcoran answers a firm “yes”, and sort of scolds evangelicals who say “no”. He [...]
From prolific philosopher-theologian Keith Ward’s God: A Guide for the Perplexed:
[The so-called Athanasian creed] is usually not now said in churches. One reason for this is suggested by my own experience the last, and only, time I tried to get an Anglican congregation to recite it aloud in church. When they got to the phrase, [...]
“And the best thing is, we can take these blocks apart!”
In the last post, I introduced the ‘generic view’ of the trinity, namely the claim that Divinity (that which makes the divine persons God/divine) is shared equally by all three persons and so does not belong to any one divine person more than another. In [...]
“Gee Hank, it sure is swell that communism won out.
This house belongs to all of us!”
In the last post, I pointed out some of the problems faced by an Athanasian sort of derivation view. If you found such problems to be decisive, then alternatively you could opt for a generic view. In this post, I [...]
What’s up with that weird Angel/bird/snake thing? Is that supposed to be Arius?
At BBC - Radio 4 In Our Time - The Nicene Creed - A somewhat gassy and academic but nonetheless listenable discussion. Here’s the Real Audio file link. (I thought I listened to this in another audio format, but I can’t find any [...]
“You were filming that?”
In the last post, I explained that for Athanasius’s version of the derivation view, when the Father generates the Son, the Father shares his substance with the Son. That means, I took it, that the Father himself becomes a constituent in the Son, similar to the way that a lump of bronze [...]
Now Q comes with spring arm action
and dyno bud (optional)!
The Nicene Creed claims that
(Q) The Son is begotten from the substance of the Father.
The term ‘begotten’ is just an older English term for ‘generated’. In the ancient world, ‘generation’ was a technical term for biological reproduction (e.g., when humans make baby humans, when trees make [...]
“I hate wearing this stupid hat.
They didn’t make me a bishop anyways.
At least the cape’s pretty cool.
It’s got St. George’s Cross going on.”
In my last post, I gave some basic definitions for the ‘derivation view’ and the ‘generic view’ of the Trinity, and I said that the historical background for the ‘derivation view’ rests in [...]
– “Daddy, why do trees branch out?”
– “So you can climb in them, Jimmy.”
Patristic scholars tell us that the doctrine of the trinity was really developed in the 4th century. The question is: what exactly is the ‘development’? If you read many of those scholarly big books on patristic theology, you’ll occasionally come across the [...]
Read it ‘n weep, Arius!
Not sure what it’s doing on LiveScience.com, but it’s a decent article.
We covered this in more theological detail some time back.
So that’s where the magic is.
People interested in ancient heresies - you have to check out this, by “Probably the world’s greatest systematic theologian cartoonist.”
Jack T. Chick has got nothing on our friend Fred! Nice work, Fred.
Background: Fred is goofing on a long-extinct sect that was famously embraced by St. Augustine (354-430 CE) [...]
Does this refer to God?
An interesting discussion, with some links, by philosopher Parableman Jeremy Pierce: Muslims Worshiping God But Not Worshiping God. His view, as against some recent pastors and other folks, is that yes, Muslims do refer to the being that Christians acknowledge as the one true God, when they use the word “Allah”.
[Saith [...]
“I thank thee, O Lord, that Thou hast given me the ability
to quickly read this copy of The Message, and easily discern
what it really means, unlike that jerk Flanders.”
Some interesting and disturbing comments from R.P.C. Hanson, on Bible interpretation in the era of the 4th century “Arian” controversy. This comes near the end of this [...]
