podcast 322 – Review of Erickson’s Making Sense of the Trinity
Review of a learned and insightful yet deeply flawed book.
Review of a learned and insightful yet deeply flawed book.
“I hate wearing this stupid hat.
They didn’t make me a bishop anyways.
At least the cape’s pretty cool.
It’s got St. George’s Cross going on.”
In my last post, I gave some basic definitions for the ‘derivation view’ and the ‘generic view’ of the Trinity, and I said that the historical background for the ‘derivation view’ rests in the Nicene Creed’s claim that
(Q) The Son is begotten from the substance of the Father.
Of course, the meaning of ‘from the substance of the Father’ is not exactly clear, not in a philosophical sense anyways. What exactly is Q supposed to mean? In this post, I want to explain what one interpreter, namely Athanasius, felt was at stake with Q.
Read More »Derivation vs. Generic Theories — part 2: Arianism and the Trinity (JT)
Review of Thomas McCall’s Which Trinity? Whose Monotheism?
Do Genesis 48, 1 Samuel 3, and Jeremiah 1 refute biblical unitarian views on God and Jesus?
Is it true that most ancients lacked the concept of numerical identity?
0.75x 1x 1.25x 1.5x 2x 0:0000:31:29 podcast 50 – Muslim apologist Dr. Laurence B. Brown on the Trinity Apple PodcastsGoogle PodcastsPlayer EmbedShare Leave a ReviewListen in a New WindowDownloadSoundCloudStitcherSubscribe on AndroidSubscribe via RSSSpotify Dr. Laurence Brown is an opthamologist, author, and Muslim apologist. In this episode of The Deen Show (“Deen” is Arabic for “religion” or “religious practice.”), he gave his “Top 10 Reasons Why… Read More »podcast 50 – Muslim apologist Dr. Laurence B. Brown on the Trinity
Responding to YouTube videos by Dr. James White, Mrs. Qureshi, and “The Friendly Banjo Atheist.”
Discussing trinitarian vs. unitarian Christian theologies with Dr. William Lane Craig.
Andrew Davis on the church fathers, the Bible, and finding his way through clashing theologies.
“…the doctrine of the Trinity is not in Scripture per se, but is the result of the Church’s interpretation of Scripture.”
Arguing about what is essential to a trinitarian theology, and about a seemingly incoherent Trinity theory.
I answer some questions and ask some, in response to this well done book review.
In the reign of Constantius II yet another council offered language to replace Nicea…
I see trends in this analytic theology literature somewhat towards relative identity theories, and towards “metaphysical madness.”
Is the “Granville Sharp Rule” + 2 Peter 1:1 and Titus 2:13 “fatal to unitarianism”?
Some critical thinking about Craig’s Trinity theories: his Trinity monotheism and his minimal tripersonal monotheism.
In this episode I respond to the interesting article “What about This View? How to Defend an Anti-Trinitarian Theology,” by evangelical apologist Dr. Robert M. Bowman Jr.
“The Gospel is Trinitarian.” What does this mean, and is it both true and non-trivial?