podcast 270 – Origen’s “one God”
Origen sez: you must say that Father and Son are “one God.” But does he think they are?
Origen sez: you must say that Father and Son are “one God.” But does he think they are?
Would Origen agree with some present-day apologists who urge that Jesus and God are one and the same?
Check out this series of posts at the It’s In the Text blog reviewing The Son of God. In part, Charles Lee Irons, Danny André Dixon and Dustin R. Smith have written excellent essays, drawing their readers in by probing the very heart of ancient documents and dialogue with questions and propositions regarding the identity of Jesus of Nazareth. They have challenged, congratulated and clashed with each… Read More »review of The Son of God @ It’s In the Text
A number of Christian academic bloggers have weighed in on the Wheaton controversy about Dr. Larycia Hawkins, specifically her statement that Christians and Muslims worship the same god. If you haven’t been following the whole thing, blogger Fr. Alvin Kimel summarizes it well in this post at Eclectic Orthodoxy. There, and in a follow-up post, like me he gives an affirmative answer – yes, Christians… Read More »“same god” controversy round-up
“God is greater than man.“ Job 33:12. Every man. All men. Everywhere. Beginning to end. Forever. — John Piper (@JohnPiper) December 17, 2015 My reply is: let us consider this inconsistent triad. Just as a matter of logic, not all three can be true – at least one must be false. But which? Jesus is God. God is greater than any man. Jesus is a… Read More »Is God greater than any man?
At the Stand to Reason blog (this is the apologetics ministry founded by the inimitable Greg Koukl) I’ve been interacting with a few people on the question: Where Did Jesus Claim to Be God? In the current evangelical style, the poster Melinda Penner seems to understand this as equivalent to claiming to be God himself, to saying “I am God.” Never mind whether or not… Read More »Where did Jesus claim to be God?
Because you’re too busy to read the book, here is Dr. John M.G. Barclay review of Dr. N.T. Wright’s enormous Paul and the Faithfulness of God (kindle) in the Scottish Journal of Theology. (H/T Dr. Denny Burke.) Below are some choice bits (emphases added). You’ll have to read the whole thing to learn why there’s a Russian doll here. …the narrative of the Messiah Jesus, who takes on… Read More »Barclay reviews Paul and the Faithfulness of God
“…what purpose God made man himself. As He contrived the world for the sake of man, so He formed man himself on His own account, as it were a priest of a divine temple, a spectator of His works and of heavenly objects. For he is the only being who, since he is intelligent and capable of reason, is able to understand God, to admire… Read More »Lactantius on why God made us
This is a guest post by Mr. Mario Stratta, a frequent commenter on this blog. He works in electronic engineering in Italy, and blogs on theological topics as “Miguel de Servet” at beliefnet. – Dale In the OT we find an obscure reference to the “eternal arms” of God: “The everlasting God is a refuge, and underneath [you] are [his] eternal arms …” (Deut 33:27)… Read More »Word and Spirit: the “Everlasting Arms” of God
At the triablogue, I’ve been discussing with Steve Hays issues arising from this quote from Richard Dawkins: I have never found the problem of evil very persuasive as an argument against deities. There seems no obvious reason to presume that your God will be good. … Most of the Greek pantheon sported very human vices, and the ‘jealous God’ of the Old Testament is surely one… Read More »Discussing Dawkins, God, and evil @ triablogue
Dr. James McGrath has responded to my post on belief in “God” where this amounts to an ineffable Ultimate – which, I claimed, is a variety of atheism. He seems to think that thinking that God resembles humans to any degree or in any way counts as “anthropomorphism.” I think that’s a goofy use of the term, but why quibble about words? So, in James’s… Read More »more thoughts on “God,” atheism, and panentheism
Catholic analytic philosopher Tim Pawl (University of St. Thomas, in Minnesota) argues that this is logically consistent: Jesus has both a divine and a human nature.
His answer is challenged by another talented young Catholic philosopher, Tomas Bogardus, of Pepperdine University. With their permission, I’ve reposted their dialogue from Facebook. I thought it deserved a wider audience.
From that same thread, I learned that Dr. Pawl is working on a book on the metaphysics of the Christology that comes from the “ecumenical” councils. I’ve thought and taught a good bit about those in recent years, and plan to discuss them in upcoming podcasts, so I look forward to seeing this book, and the discussion it will generate.
Which is mightier – this beard or this one?
You decide. I’ll weigh in with a comment later.
Here, unedited but for the addition of a few explanatory links (and a gratuitous picture), is their dialogue:Read More »Tim Pawl: a God-man is possible
In this 2010 post I reacted to an interview by social trinitarian Richard Swinburne. My concern was that Swinburne has a theory on which the Trinity is not itself a person, but in answer to the question “Is God a self?” He answers affirmatively. What gives? Recently a reader e-mailed me with this link (thanks, Anthony). If you look at around 14 minutes, you’ll hear… Read More »Further thoughts on Swinburne’s God-talk
“Well, who created God, then?” Many an atheist has lobbed this one, supposing it to be a devastating objection in question form. In reply, Christian philosopher Paul Copan knocks this one out of the park. Well played, sir. I would add a few points: One of the perfections a perfect being is supposed to have is aseity – existing but not because of anything else.… Read More »Copan answers: Who created God?
Here’s an interesting but tightly wound passage from John Biddle (1615-62) in a book from 1648: Again, though he [Jesus] be a God, subordinate to the most high God, as having received his godhead, and whatsover he hath, from the Father; yet may not anyone thence rightly infer, that by this account there will be another God, or two Gods? For though we may, with… Read More »Biddle: many “Gods” but one God
What if? (What if 1+1 were 2?) By “posts”, of course, we mean “posts or comments on posts”. Read it, live it. Patton is very insightful there. I speak as one sinner to others. There’s something about human nature… if we’re convinced that we’re right about some important subject-matter, we start to think we’re entitled to pour scorn and contempt on those without this supposed… Read More »What if God read your posts?
Last time we looked at a famous argument about Jesus. (If you’ve never had a course in logic, or if it’s been a while, you should review the linked definitions there of “valid”, “invalid”, and “sound” before proceeding – this discussion presupposes that you understand their meanings.)
Consider this argument:
1. Michael Jackson is bad.
2. All bad people should be in jail.
3. Therefore, Michael Jackson should be in jail.
This appears to be a valid argument. Is it?Read More »Jesus and “god” – part 2 – equivocation