Leftow update

Jan 312007
 

It turns out that Brian Leftow, whose work on the Trinity was the subject of a recent 4 part critical exposition here at trinities, is just about to publish some further thoughts on the subject, in this book, currently slated to come out in March 2007. Further, his chapter there is on the exact issue I’ve been pressing: it is called “Modes without Modalism”. I’ll probably post a summary-review here as soon as I manage to get my hands on the chapter. Stay tuned.

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Transition, Theories

Nov 132006
 

As promised, I now hope to run (walk, crawl?) through the gamut of theories of the Trinity propounded by recent analytic philosophers. My aim is to bring these articles to a wider audience, so I’ll try to write clearly, and focus on the what I think is important about the piece. I’ll try to omit needless details, and summarize or skip arguments that would throw non-PhDs. I’ll strive to be fair, but I’ll feel free to criticize as well. You see, they can’t all be true – these theories, taken together, assert much that is contrary or contradictory. So we need to separate the sheep from the goats.

I purposely started with modalist theories, as they are on what you might think of as the far right wing, chistologically speaking. If Christ just is God, he couldn’t possibly be any greater. Or if he’s a mode of God, then whenever you see Christ doing anything, that’s just God himself acting. From here, I’ll start with “Latin” theories, and go “down” or “to the left” from there, till I get to theories on which Jesus isn’t divine in any strong sense. Whenever I’m doing one of these articles, it’ll have the category of “Theories” (see the list of posting categories to the right).

I intend, God willing, to do maybe one posting a week. I’m plenty busy with teaching, family life, and church life, but I think this is doable. If I don’t crap out, I don’t see myself running out of material any time soon. Even if I’m brimming with time and energy, I want to take it slow, to give the discussion time. I really want to hear from all of you!

Article authors are always, always welcome to join in. In fact, unless you don’t want me to, I’ll post your replies (“Tuggy is full of it!”) on the main page under a “Replies” category. I have no doubt that our authors, being philosophers, will have something to say when I start insulting their precious children criticizing their theories. :-) And be assured, I’m very interested in being corrected, and the readers here are very interested in seeing that stupid know-it-all Tuggy get creamed. ;-) Another reminder – on this blog, discussions are never closed. So if I did a hack job on your article a year ago, and you just read it and want to set the record straight, just do it!

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Housekeeping – Wassup

Oct 112006
 

My posting has slowed down a lot lately. Been doing two time-consuming new class preps, etc.

I’ve also been writing some editorials for my local newspaper which are (believe it or not) philosophy of religion themed. For now they’re searchable at the paper, and they’re archived on my friend Steve’s blog. (I’m “The Theist” there.) Steve always writes the opposing (atheistic) piece. One that got a rise out of people was this one (this time, there was no opposing view – just vehement letters to the editor days later).
But stay tuned, I’ve got some interesting Trinity posts brewing.

Housekeeping: non-serious vs. (merely) non-mainstream commenters

Sep 112006
 

I’ve adopted (for the time being) a pretty open policy on the comments. Don’t encourage careless posters, that is, trolls, who drop unsupported controversial claims like firecrackers in order to get attention for themselves. Such a person often thinks of himself as a latter-day Socrates, but shows none of Socrates’ deadly seriousness, moral earnestness, or argumentative aptitude. Ignore their comments, and they’ll get bored and move on to a more reactionary crowd.

Such people are to be distinguished from serious people who hold unpopular views, but are willing to articulate, defend, and at least in principle, even reconsider their views. Such are often dismissed as mindless “cultists”, but I say, listen carefully first, lest you apply that brush-off in a lazy and unkind fashion. Take others as seriously as you’d want them to take you.

troll-web.jpg

Housekeeping: IE release candidate breaks this site

Sep 012006
 

Thanks to my buddy Chard for letting me know about this: If you only see about a paragraph on this blog, it’s because you’re using the latest beta version of Microsoft’s Internet Explorer web browser (the to-be-released Version 7). The solution? Get the free, fenomenal Firefox web browser – go here, and click the “Get Firefox with Google Toolbar” button, lower left. It is possible that this problem will be fixed when I get around to upgrading WordPress, but I won’t have time to do that for awhile.

Update: Thanks to Kenny – it seems that I pasted some dodgy html code into the post from a document made by an older version of openoffice. I’ve redone the Nicea quote, and I think it’s all good now. (I can’t test in Safari.) I hereby apologize to Bill Gates, and do humbly beseech him to refrain from sending a team of Microsoft goons to break my knees.

first Poll – worship

Jul 282006
 

From time to time, I’m going to set up some simple polls for ya’ll to vote in. I’ve decided to set them up outside of WordPress (this blog’s software), so as to avoid various complications. Here’s praying that I don’t run into technical difficulties that are over my head!
I’ve shamelessly stolen the four claims – the inconsistent tetrad – from a posting by Jeff Russell, who has had a very clear and thoughtful discussion of the Trinity here, here, and here. I hope he considers my theft a compliment! :-)

Please click here to vote in or see the results of the first poll.

After voting, at your option you can click “comment on this poll” to return to this posting and comment – just scroll down to “Post a Comment”. As always, if you haven’t commented before, I’ll have to approve your comment before it appears.

You can only vote once – the IP address of your computer is recorded, and no one else using your computer will be able to vote. For now, there’s no time limit on the polls.
Have fun!

Dastardly Spammers

Jul 182006
 

Some spammers and/or their bots seem to have discovered my open comment policy. Henceforth, new commenters will need to have their first comment approved (“moderated”) by me. Thenceforth, that same commenter will be able to post comments at will.

Sorry for the inconvenience. If you comment for the first time, you won’t see it show up immediately, but I should get to it within a day, so please be patient.
Thank you all for your excellent comments!

Dale

Update: as I say it the About section, discussion threads never close. Note that your (approved) comments appear at the upper right, so don’t be afraid to jump in and comment, even if the thread is a little older – maybe you’ll restart it. We’re in no hurry here.

Linkage: blogs an “enemy of thought”

Jun 222006
 

In this recent piece in Books & Culture, I think Prof. Jacobs makes a lot of excellent points.

Can this blog be an exception? (As this blog is, as well as this one.) I hope so! Specifically, I hope that the following factors can minimize the problems Jacobs discusses:

  • posting at a decent pace (no Instapundit-like continuous flow)
  • leaving the comments open
  • occasional weeding out of comments posted by meatheads
  • maintaining an atmosphere of respect
  • narrow focus
  • soliciting comments and guest-postings from other philosophers & theologians who work on this topic

As I’m new at this, any other suggestions from veteran bloggers would be appreciated.

Online as of 6/19/06

Jun 192006
 

Hello, and welcome! This is a blog about doctrines of the Trinity. Yes, there’s more than one such doctrine, as we’ll see. See here for more about this blog, and about me. Please be patient – this is my first blog, and I’ll probably be tweaking things for awhile!

 Newer Entries

Switch to our mobile site