Dr. Timothy George is the founding dean of Beeson Divinity School and a very active evangelical author and editor. I was curious to see if his Is the Father of Jesus the God of Muhammad? also exhibited Islam-Inspired modalism. This is a lucidly written, brief, popular book, which would be a good place for many Christians to pick up a lot of basic information about… Read More »Islam-Inspired Modalism – Part 3
0.75x 1x 1.25x 1.5x 2x 0:0000:28:32 podcast 21 – review of the Lewis-Rogers debate – part 2 Apple PodcastsGoogle PodcastsPlayer EmbedShare Leave a ReviewListen in a New WindowDownloadSoundCloudStitcherSubscribe on AndroidSubscribe via RSSSpotify In this episode, my evaluation of the case made by Shadid Lewis. Does he establish, on grounds which his opponent must affirm, that the Trinity implies polytheism? See Lewis’s arguments as analysed on… Read More »podcast 21 – review of the Lewis-Rogers debate – part 2
Fr. Aiden Kimel has a good and thoughtful post on my Mark posts. I think he concedes my main point: … if we were to isolate the Gospel of Mark from the rest of the Bible, and indeed the Christian Church altogether, and read it just as historical artifact, would we come to the conclusion that Jesus of Nazareth is God? I doubt it. Indeed,… Read More »Mark, evangelicals, and catholics
Our friend Dr. Ed Feser has got himself worked up into full drunken polemicist mode. I earn ridicule and ire normally reserved for Dawkins types. Evidently I touched a nerve by pointing out that most (analytic) philosophers now – reflecting a fairly wide consensus since early modern times – think of God as the greatest being there is or could be, and not as “Being… Read More »why I’m not a Thomist 1 – the Christian tradition that God is a Being
Philosopher Ed Feser thinks my comments about God (here and here) are ridiculous. So, he breaks out his rhetorical brass knuckles, and tries to knock some sense into me. Feser may suspect that I’m trolling, simply dishing out accusation of “atheism” just to get a rise out of people, or to get attention, or just for the joy of annoying others. But I’m afraid the… Read More »Passing Feser’s Laugh Test
Daniel Calder surveys the Top 7 weirdest Christian theologians. Of these, how many are atheists? Consider, for example, John Scotus Eriugena (c.800 – c.877). The author gives an encyclopedia quote which rings true to me. In general, the system of thought just outlined is a combination of neo-Platonic mysticism, emanationism, and pantheism which Eriugena strove in vain to reconcile with Aristotelean empiricism, Christian creationism, and theism.… Read More »7 Weird Theologians
Not “inconceivable” – but rather, “God.” Check out this interesting post, The Dread God Roberts, at our friend Dr. James McGrath’s blog Exploring Our Matrix. (Which amazingly, just had its 10th birthday. He was blogging way before it was cool.) Dr. McGrath describes himself as a Progressive Christian. I commented over there, and he’s replied. The part of his post that got me going was this. Tillich’s… Read More »Atheistic belief in “God”
I argue that the theoretical costs of Bauckham’s theory outweigh its theoretical benefits.
The year was 1986. A young George W. Bush visited a psychic. “You have a great future ahead of you,” said the psychic, peering at the lines in Bush’s palm. “I know! My Daddy‘s vice president after all.” “Someday, you will be famous, for you will invade Iraq. Beware, oh ancient land, for Bush himself is coming to subdue you!” Bush was speechless. He couldn’t… Read More »proving that Bush = Sgt. Speedo
My “On Baukham’s Bargain” has drawn a response from my biggest fan, the Reformed brawler Steve Hays. I reply in the comments there.
Given how many evangelicals have jumped on the Bauckham Bandwagon, I hope that it’ll get some serious discussion in the journals or elsewhere.
Here’s my first reply to his post:
Steve, it’s odd to spend so many words sniping at my summary of what Bauckham holds forth as advantages of his theory. e.g. After the seventh point (of Bauckham’s!) you object, “That’s a diversionary tactic.” Is that an objection to Bauckham?
Read all the way through, then think, and then, finally start objecting.
About the “fatal concession”, I’m afraid you’re mistaken. The time-explicit version of the indiscernibility of identicals is all I need to make the point.Read More »My diabolical “ruse” exposed – drat!
“Yes, Mr. President,” stuttered the Fox White House correspondent, “you’re the only true president.”
In a recent BBC documentary, Story of the Jews, we are told: Born a Jew, like his saviour, was Paul who, within a few years of Jesus’ death began the process of liberating Christianity from the claims of Jewish ritual. Christianity was either universal or it was nothing. So Paul aggressively de-Judaizes the Christian message and there was no surer way of doing that than… Read More »Don’t believe everything you hear in BBC documentaries
We’ve covered this before. Craig slurs the argument, making the conclusion a bit unclear. The point is not really that a three-self trinitarian theology is just somehow superior to a unitarian theology. Rather, the point is supposed to be that the concept of a perfect being who is a self collapses into incoherence; it is perfect, yet (the idea is) lacks a feature any perfect… Read More »Craig’s a priori argument for a three-self Trinity
Quite funny! This fellow has real comedic talent. It is remarkable, when you step back to consider it, that this video is by a trinitarian. It’s main point is: no one really knows what these traditional words mean (those of the “Athanasian” Creed); we just say them. Trying to understand those words is futile. A striking amount of trust, for a Protestant, in an anonymous… Read More »St. Patrick’s bad analogies
Bizarrely, many agree with Jesus’s opponents’ assumption in Mark 2.
Devastating. I have long noted that Augustinian/Calvinist theology is unpopular among Christian philosophers, though many, like me, go through a Calvinist phase (when I was a sophomore and junior in college), before seeing its problems to be hopeless. Walls concisely and fairly sums up what Calvinism is all about, and then shows it to be profoundly problematic, focusing on philosophical problem rather than biblical ones.… Read More »Jerry Walls: What is wrong with Calvinism?
Ably reviewed by Sean Finnegan. I would add a few philosophical comments: White, like many evangelicals, understands “the deity of Christ” as meaning that Jesus and God are numerically one, that is, numerically identical. He argues that various things the NT asserts about Jesus imply this. (e.g. He is worshiped, called “Lord.”) Conveniently, he ignores the many passages which assert or presuppose a qualitative difference… Read More »White vs. Navas – Does the New Testament teach “the deity of Christ”?
I consider comedian Bill Maher to be a fairly funny guy. I don’t care for his politics. But I watched his movie Religulous, and I thought it had some funny and interesting moments. He’s not as smart as he thinks he is. He’s typical of kids who were raised Catholic, who didn’t pay too much attention, and who later sloughed off the whole thing as… Read More »Bill Maher on God and Jesus
I’ve blogged about these folks before. I do not enjoy criticizing apologists, because I think Christian apologetics is important. And the folks at Credo House Ministries seem like good-hearted and hard working Christians who are doing their best to help Christians love God with their minds. And I think Patton is an excellent blogger and writer. But I feel compelled to correct some of their… Read More »Credo House Ministries’ Inaccuracies about the Trinity and the Council of Nicea
Check out this post by Dan Wallace over at Parchment and Pen. I teach religious studies, and regularly encounter this one: Myth 1: The Bible has been translated so many times we can’t possibly get back to the original. Wallace’s answer is absolutely right. #2 is also an important point. Wallace might have added that quotation marks are never in the Greek manuscripts; they didn’t… Read More »Dan Wallace: 5 Myths About Bible Translation