I’ve been commenting at Triablogue, in typical long-winded fashion, on posts by Steve Hays.
There’s some heat in addition to light, but it gets better as it goes on, and the inimitable James Anderson weighs in.
We discuss probably the favorite unitarian proof-text, John 17:3, as well as contradictions and methodological things.
Perhaps the most interesting point is Steve’s & James’s desire to somehow separate concern with consistency from exegesis. I think that isn’t, can’t, and ought not be done.
Check it out.
Update: some 4 posts so far. Have left lengthy comments.
Update: next to last installment.
Update: last.
Related posts:

podcast 129 – Ehrman and Bird on How Jesus Became God – Part 2

Dialogue with the Maverick Philosopher: God is a being, not Being itself – part 6

podcast 160 - Dr. Graham Oppy on the Conflict between Christianity and Philosophy

podcast 380 - Dr. Dustin Smith on Wisdom Christology in the Gospel of John

Corcoran on the God of Muslims and the God of Christians

God and his Son: the Logic of the New Testament - conference presentation

podcast 32 - review of the movie Son of God (2014)

Is God a Self? Part 3 - Clayton

Richard of St. Victor 2 – God’s goodness requires charity (JT)


Pingback: trinities - What is the Trinity? A Dialogue with Steve Hays – Part 1 (Dale)
Comments are closed.