Skip to content

Search Results for: trinitarian or unitarian?

podcast 26 – Pastor Sean Finnegan on “the Holy Spirit” – Part 2

In this episode Sean and I continue our discussion of “the Holy Spirit” in the New Testament, covering such topics as how “the Spirit” relates to worship and prayer in the New Testament, the eternal trinitarian “dance” discussed in recent trinitarian literature, the threefold baptismal formula, and “blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.” Some relevant links: Holmes’s edition of the Apostolic Fathers Ehrman’s Lost Scriptures (with… Read More »podcast 26 – Pastor Sean Finnegan on “the Holy Spirit” – Part 2

three somewhats?

10 steps towards getting less confused about the Trinity – #5 “Persons” – Part 1

In standard formulations of trinitarian theology nowadays, one says that there is (only) one God “in three Persons.” But what does this mean? We can ask about how these “Persons” relate individually or collectively to the one God. How exactly are they “in” him? But more fundamentally, what is meant by “Person” here? Some trinitarians will tell you that the answer is, basically: nothing. The… Read More »10 steps towards getting less confused about the Trinity – #5 “Persons” – Part 1

New book by J.T. Paasch

Congratulations to trinities contributor J.T. Paasch on his new book Divine Production in Late Medieval Trinitarian Theology: Henry of Ghent, Duns Scotus, and William Ockham, now available in the U.K. I trust he’ll let us know when it comes out in the U.S. The Amazon blurb, with bolding gratuitously added by me: According to the doctrine of the Trinity, the Father, Son, and Spirit are… Read More »New book by J.T. Paasch

SCORING THE BURKE – BOWMAN DEBATE – ROUND 3 Re-evaluated (DALE)

The “Great Trinity Debate” has been interesting, exhausting, and a bit hard to follow. It would’ve been better to have somewhat shorter posts and required post-rebuttals. As it is, some of the debate has been tucked away in the comments of the posts, while the blog plugs away on other topics. This sort of substantial, quality content shouldn’t be hidden in comments.

I previously called round 3 a draw. But my call was premature; Burke kept punching, in a long set of comments (#4-15), which substantially strengthened his case. Bowman has left them unanswered for about a week, I believe, as I post this. I re-call this round now for Burke.

Revised score up through round 4:

Bowman: 0
Burke: 3
draw: 1

What he does is address some important texts which as usually read, assert or assume the claims that Jesus created the cosmos, or just that he pre-existed his conception. I can’t summarize Burke’s long exegesis, but I’ll hit a few highlights in this post. What he shows, drawing on some recent scholarship, is that the texts in question can be given non-arbitrary, plausible readings which are consistent with humanitarian christology.

Burke also rebuts some of Bowman’s points re: prayer to Jesus. Bowman argues that Christ can’t be a creature, and must be omniscient (hence divine), if he can hear and answer prayers. This argument is hardly a knockdown one.

Read More »SCORING THE BURKE – BOWMAN DEBATE – ROUND 3 Re-evaluated (DALE)

Pruss on essentially loving beings

I Can’t Stop Loving You – actually, it’s worse than that – I can’t not love you!

Alexander Pruss is an excellent philosophy of religion dude at Baylor. His second PhD dissertation was on possible worlds. Don’t ask me to explain what his first one was on! 🙂 He’s got about a million original ideas on almost as many topics, a lot of which get posted at his creatively-titled blog, Alexander Pruss’s Blog 🙂 as well as at The Prosblogion.

He recently weighed in (comments #8-9) on my attempted argument against social trinitarian arguments. Here are the most relevant bits:Read More »Pruss on essentially loving beings

Quotes: Lewis Ayres on Pro-Nicene 3rd-4th century trinitarianism

 


A simple being containing multiple distinct “persons” – D’oh!

Theologian Lewis Ayres is the author of this worthy book. In it, he hammers the point that the Latin vs. Social trinitarian categories aren’t helpful in understanding post-Constantinople trinitarian theology. I think he’s right about that, though I persist in using the terminology because it is helpful for 20th and 21st century theories. Ayres’s book is a wonderful piece of patristic scholarship, but it is also an extended polemic against social trinitarians. Basically, he thinks that what he aptly calls the pro-Nicene tradition has gotten short shrift in recent theological work on the Trinity, and he very helpfully presents the core of that tradition and bats down a great many mis-readings of it. Obviously, he’s sympathetic to this sort of trinity theory, to put it mildly. This will definitely come up when I discuss social theories.

Here I just wanted to pass on a striking quote, which to me spotlights a central problem that many people have with the mainstream classic Latin or Pro-Nicene tradition.Read More »Quotes: Lewis Ayres on Pro-Nicene 3rd-4th century trinitarianism

on interpersonal love and stick figures (Dale)


Four vivid, moving, memorable depictions of Love.

A post on some previous post commentary – no one can navel-gaze like a philosopher! 🙂 Here’s a pictorial recap, and some additional thoughts on the comments here, in response to Scott and JT. The point of all this: we’re exploring why people who call themselves “social trinitarians” don’t like what they call “Latin” theories, and specifically the claim that those “Latin” theories can’t do justice to the loving relationships between the persons of the Trinity.Read More »on interpersonal love and stick figures (Dale)

General Ulysses S Grant

podcast 78 – Mr. Chad McIntosh on the Trinity as a Functional Person

The Social Trinity may be more social than you thought. In this episode I talk with trinities contributor Mr. Chad McIntosh about his new twist on a “social” Trinity theory – that not only are there three divine persons or selves, but in another but related sense, the Trinity is a person, what he calls a functional person.

podcast 43 – Dr. Stephen R. Holmes on God and humankind

Is God a self – a being capable of consciousness, knowledge, and choice, like us, but infinitely greater? Or is God a community, or a something-we-know-not-what? Dr. Holmes’s language in his book  The Quest for the Trinity made me think that he would answer: yes, God is a self, and not a community, or a mysterious Something. I took him to be a one-self trinitarian, and… Read More »podcast 43 – Dr. Stephen R. Holmes on God and humankind

Debating Dale Starter Pack

Want to debate (or just refute) me? Here are some things you should study.

Islam-Inspired Modalism – Part 3

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

10 steps towards getting less confused about the Trinity – #5 “Persons” – Part 2

It is impossible to ignore that prominently in the New Testament, two members of the trinity/Trinity interact in I-Thou, Me-You ways, as person to person, self to self. Thus, Jesus prays to his Father, and sometimes, the Father speaks about or to Jesus. This seems to presuppose that both Father and Son are selves. And in a few passages, “the Holy Spirit” is said to speak,… Read More »10 steps towards getting less confused about the Trinity – #5 “Persons” – Part 2

Constitution Trinitarianism Part 4: pausing and revisiting some issues

 

rodin1.jpg

“Come on, you tired little brain – don’t fail me now.” (No, I don’t really blog naked – serious thought requires having at least your underpants on.)

Joseph Jedwab does an excellent job (here, comments 3 & 4) pressing me for details, and taking a shot at defending the Brower and Rea theory. I wanted to chew a bit on some issues that Joseph and Ian raise before moving on, offering some corrections and other reflections. (And JT – I want to post your lengthy comment (the second one) as a guest post, so we can discuss the priority issue – email me if you object to this promotion. :-) ) Any bold type that appears in quotes here has been added by me.

To non-philosophical readers: I apologize for the over-long load of philosopher-lingo that follows. You may want to skip this one! Read More »Constitution Trinitarianism Part 4: pausing and revisiting some issues

Yet More Theories of the Trinity

In my recent paper on the Trinity (discussed by Dale and I here and here) I distinguish two ways a thing can meet sufficient conditions of personhood. One way is to behave, function, or perform in such a way as to meet those conditions. So if a robot or group, for example, became morally responsible or rational in virtue of function alone, it would thereby… Read More »Yet More Theories of the Trinity

The Orthodox Formulas 3: the “Athanasian” Creed

The so-called Athanasian Creed (also known by the Latin words it begins with, Quicunque vult) is considered by many to be the very definition of “the” orthodox doctrine. It is of uncertain origin, although many readers think it has a strongly Augustinian flavor (which if true shows it is not from Athanasius himself, who died before Augustine was converted). It has long been considered authoritative… Read More »The Orthodox Formulas 3: the “Athanasian” Creed

Trinity Monotheism Part 9: Some final thoughts and objections

Time to close out this long series with a brief summary of my own observations on and objections to Trinity Monotheism. These aren’t all the one’s I’ve mentioned, but only the ones I think are the most relevant. And I should say that Joseph has raised some others as well, both in his guest post and in his comments. The whole parts issue is a… Read More »Trinity Monotheism Part 9: Some final thoughts and objections