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.

3 Comments

  1. Dale
    October 31, 2017 @ 2:47 pm

    Nothing but the sound of chirping crickets from the White camp, since this: http://trinities.org/blog/some-clarifications-for-dr-white/ Really, he ought to debate me, as I can guarantee that my arguments will in no way “assume unitarianism” (which is his standard complaint wielded against any non-trinitarian reading of any biblical text). e.g. http://trinities.org/blog/podcast-189-the-unfinished-business-of-the-reformation/ And although I’m not a Craig-level debater, I ought to be able to do better than some of those White has debated. I don’t think he’d be bored!

    Would gladly debate Dr. Craig – although I think he wants to avoid this topic, as he has stuck his neck out with his own controversial Trinity theory, as opposed to the usual obfuscation. I may contact him at some point.

    Trinity is one topic, and “high christology” is another. But I would be interested in both. There are some possibilities for a hosting venue for somesuch debate with me, but as of now, nothing is concrete. I’m so eager not because I’m some sort of great debater – I’m not – but because I know the strength of my case and the importance of these topics for the body of Christ. It is important, though, to have a worthy opponent – someone who can actually engage my work, and who will actually have a clear enough position to critique.

    The way the evangelical establishment is now, they just prefer to have these topics off the table. Or rather, they can only be put on the table by Muslims and “liberals.” Then we (evangelicals) can bang our cultural identity drum loudly and distinguish ourselves from those outsiders. The mind goes off, when matters are turned to us vs. them. Challenges by insiders, by their conservative Christian brethren, are just beyond the pale.

    But this, of course, is crazy. It’s a sort of crazy we inherited from the 4th c. catholics and the 16th c. Magisterial reformers. We can debate Arminianism vs. Calvinism vs. open theism. We can debate congregational vs. episcopal. We can debate Protestant vs. Catholic vs. Orthodox. We can debate the Protestant canon vs. the Catholic canon vs. the Orthodox canon. We can debate cessationist vs. Pentecostal. Just so, the cause of truth is best served by a free, open, serious, and full debate between the various sorts of trinitarians, oneness, and the various sorts of unitarians.

    White’s excuse that *he* goes by the Bible while others (like me) are all influenced by “philosophy” – that just doesn’t hold water. My views on these topics are primarily (really, nearly completely) Bible-motivated, and he too has been subject to philosophical influences and assumptions. Anyone who’s familiar with my work will notice that I carefully avoid controversial philosophical speculations, while stick carefully to logic, to careful reasoning and common sense. Frankly, White speculates more than I do.

    Reply

    • Aaron
      November 1, 2017 @ 3:22 pm

      Dale,

      I came to see many of the same problems you mentioned above after I carefully studied this for some time. There is a certain amount of grace and wiggle room most will grant for many doctrines, but the doctrine of the Trinity is not one of them to most people. Neither is the case for it nearly as ironclad as some of the other issues people are willing to debate.

      Maybe W.L. Craig would be up for a more in-depth explanation of his “Neo-Apollinarianism” sometime in the future? I read the transcript of the interview where he explained it and I couldn’t get at what the exact difference was between his stance and original Apollinarianism. It seemed the same claims were made but with different inferred conclusions about what this meant for the reality (or lack thereof) concerning Christ’s “humanity.”

      Reply

  2. David Kemball-Cook
    October 31, 2017 @ 8:38 am

    It is interesting about this reluctance of trinitarian theologians to debate with unitarians, when one might think that, if they were so confident in their case, they would be eager to do so. Dale have you had any reply from James White about your challenge to him? What about issuing a more general challenge, spread net wider, WL Craig, the early high Christology people such as Bauckham, Gathercole, Bird, Evans …?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Solve : *
25 × 22 =