podcast 321 – Evaluating Minton’s Three Arguments that Jesus is Yahweh
Can one prove that the biblical Jesus is Yahweh based on his being savior or creator, or his being worshiped?
Can one prove that the biblical Jesus is Yahweh based on his being savior or creator, or his being worshiped?
The key to understanding the innovative New Testament usage of “Lord” is the much cited Psalm 110:1.
In round 4, Burke urges that his views about God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit provide a simpler explanation of the texts. Whereas trinitarians must argue from implications of the text,
By contrast, I argue that the Bible provides us with explicit doctrines about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, which… I have shown to be firmly rooted in OT theology.
Burke has a point here, although it can be overstated. Burke’s theology allows him to stick more closely to the words of the NT and the message as preached, e.g. in Acts. Surely, considered by itself this is an advantage. Trinitarians will argue that it is outweighed by the fact that the unitarian message leaves out other essentials, if somewhat implicit ones. Burke complains that Bowman hasn’t defined “implicit“, but this is a general philosophical issue outside the realm of the debate. Burke emphasizes that his approach is “Hebraic” whereas Bowman’s is “Hellenic”. In some sense this may be true, but I don’t think it advances the debate. It is surely possible that God providentially used Greek philosophy to help uncover the true implications of the NT. Further, both debaters are to some extent using Greek-philosophy-originated concepts and logic. Another place in which they’re talking past one another is this issue of the importance of what is and is not explicit in the NT, and specifically in the preaching of the apostles. Bowman is surely right that, e.g. Peter need not assert every element of the apostolic teaching in one sermon, and that Luke’s summary of that sermon surely wouldn’t include all of it. But Burke is right that if it is an essential part of the faith, and necessary to believe for salvation, that e.g. the Holy Spirit is a fully divine person in God distinct from the Father and Son, then we would expect this to be explicitly taught by the apostles, up front, prior to baptism. And we do not find this. But I don’t believe that Bowman has said that one must believe this to be saved. But if he affirms it, and holds that the apostles teach it, then Burke has a strong argument against him. This is surely a pressing, practical question that should be raised.
It is striking that Acts 2 does not contain Read More »SCORING THE BURKE – BOWMAN DEBATE – ROUND 4 PART 3 – BURKE
A conversation about whether or not the New Testament teaches “Trinity Monotheism.”
Reading the gospel of John in its first-century context is eye-opening!
An apologist tries to tag unitarian Christians with some unwelcome words.
The terms “atheism,” “monotheism,” and “polytheism” seem straightforward enough… BUT important ambiguity lurks in the root term “theism.”
“Then Jesus, filled with the power of the Spirit, returned to Galilee… He began to teach in their synagogues and was praised by everyone.”
Is it the foundational commitment of biblical unitarians that Scripture must be inoffensive to human reason?
A thoughtful Baptist confronts his church about biblical vs. later teachings about God, Jesus, and heresy.
“Dear Christian, I’ve been meaning to talk to you about God and me.”
What do both OT and NT clearly teach about who created?
Some reasons why we should think that the New Testament writers don’t believe that Jesus literally existed before his time in the womb.
Evaluating three proposed reasons why God would be motivated to incarnate.
“… and hope does not disappoint us, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit that has been given to us.”
Jesus is God, and God can’t be tempted… yet Jesus was tempted?
If Jesus is referred to using the word “theos” (God) in the New Testament, does this imply that he is fully divine?