Partly compiled by David Waltz with some apt comments at Articuli Fidei.
Another sort of review, quoting the above, with some comments.
Latest entry here, with my comment. Can’t keep up with all the posts.
A “tale”? Man, I was hoping for a better story. π
Am I foolish for responding? Quite possibly. I hope not. I care passionately about these issues and have infinite patience for discussing them (though not infinite time); the danger is getting sucked in to one of these.
Update: yes, foolish. I really have to listen more to cynical-Dale. This would’ve helped too. π
Related posts:
Craig wins again
Bill Hasker's reply
Pro and Con books published at once - How'd that happen?
update to "Trinity" in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Kimelβs review of What is the Trinity β Part 4
a new proof of God's existence, with an assist from Dr. Bart Ehrman?
Randal Rauser on "You Sophist!"
Helm on Reason, Theology, Logic, Turretin, and McGrath
SCORING THE BURKE β BOWMAN DEBATE β ROUND 5 β BOWMAN β PART 3
10 steps towards getting less confused about the Trinity - #7 - the deity of Christ vs. the Trinity
Yeah. π
Haha, Dale wins the sympathy vote.
:p
Hey Dale, Some people say that all publicity is good publicity, especially when it goes over the top. π
Dale,
Hays’ interest in you definitely goes far beyond what most people would consider healthy. The more I read him, the more obvious it becomes that he doesn’t understand your theology.
Norelli’s comment is disingenuous, to say the least:
Jesus never receives the worship reserved for God, and the fact that he sits on a divine throne is exactly what we would expect of God’s exalted Son. Every other category listed here is applied to other intermediaries (including the exercise of divine prerogatives) and as you point out yourself, Jesus is unique so we would expect him to enjoy unique privileges.
Norelli just doesn’t get it.
Comments are closed.