Dr. Timothy Pawl has argued that the idea of Incarnation is consistent since we should think the councils understood what one may think are contrary predicates in a way such that a two natured thing may rightly be called both. So if “impassible” means “has a nature that is impassible” and “passible” means “has a nature that is passible,” then Christ will be both “impassible”… Read More »No can eat: a Pawlian parable
This is your introduction to the statement most Christian philosophers start with.
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
0.75x 1x 1.25x 1.5x 2x 0:0000:17:29 podcast 1 – Introduction Apple PodcastsGoogle PodcastsPlayer EmbedShare Leave a ReviewListen in a New WindowDownloadSoundCloudStitcherSubscribe on AndroidSubscribe via RSSSpotify After a lot of work, and help from many people, I’m ready to launch the trinities podcast. As I start, I have completed all or parts of about eight episodes, with no shortage of ideas for more episodes. I plan to… Read More »podcast 1 – Introduction
As we all know, the ideal medium for theological debate is a music video posted on youtube. In the past, we’ve seen the mighty Winterband strking a blow for Oneness Pentecostalism. Trinitarians rapped back with some impressive rhymes. Now, unitarians enter the fray. If I had to pick a theology based solely on the musical quality of these entries (which of course is a great… Read More »Trinity vs. Oneness vs. unitarianism Youtube shootout
We’ve covered this before. Craig slurs the argument, making the conclusion a bit unclear. The point is not really that a three-self trinitarian theology is just somehow superior to a unitarian theology. Rather, the point is supposed to be that the concept of a perfect being who is a self collapses into incoherence; it is perfect, yet (the idea is) lacks a feature any perfect… Read More »Craig’s a priori argument for a three-self Trinity
Here’s a long but engaging interview by Sean Finnegan at his Christian Monotheism website. (Podcast RSS feeds here.) The subject, a young man named Christopher Amelung, underwent the change of theology noted above. He doesn’t recount all of the relevant arguments and exegesis; it’s rather a narrative of his own thoughts, emotions, and relationships. This is not a deconversion story, but a story of a… Read More »Reformed trinitarian to unitarian Christian
Here. On the whole, a well done piece. Craig is indeed a fearsome debater, and a bold and insightful scholar. His devotion to apologetics makes him a bit uncool among professional philosophers. But I would guess that his work is probably read by more average people – Christians, atheists, Muslims, and who-knows-what – than any living philosopher. The reason is that it has many good… Read More »William Lane Craig in the Chronicle of Higher Education
Here are a few observations on my co-blogger Dr. Scott Williams‘s recently published article in the Journal of Analytic Theology, called “Indexicals and the Trinity: Two Non-Social Models.”
There’s a lot going on in the piece – some terminology, some history of theology, and some interesting dialectic with one of the best philosophers working on this topic, Brian Leftow, which centers around the concept of an “indexical” term.
But in this post, I want to narrowly focus on the theory which Dr. Williams suggests to us. This comes in his section 4, pp. 84-8. He calls it “soft LT” (to contrast it with Leftow’s “hard LT”) and I would expound it with the chart here, which I made.
f, s, and h are, respectively the divine persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. d is the divine nature which they share, and which is one component in each of them. The other component in each is some “incommunicable personal attribute” (p. 84), respectively: begetting (b), being begotten (g), and being spirated (p). The ovals show the two parts or components of each divine person. (I take it that the model is committed to denying any classic doctrine of “divine simplicity.”)
None of f, s, h is identical to the divine nature, but each isRead More »Scott Williams’s “soft Latin” theory of the Trinity
Quite funny! This fellow has real comedic talent. It is remarkable, when you step back to consider it, that this video is by a trinitarian. It’s main point is: no one really knows what these traditional words mean (those of the “Athanasian” Creed); we just say them. Trying to understand those words is futile. A striking amount of trust, for a Protestant, in an anonymous… Read More »St. Patrick’s bad analogies
Some interesting comments on philosophy and philosophers by Nigel Warburton, one of the two hosts of the best philosophy podcast, in an interview on the occasion of his resigning his academic post. …that’s just the nature of philosophy. It’s always difficult… If you’re not having trouble then you probably don’t really understand what’s going on. Many people seem not to have trouble, but I know… Read More »Nigel Warburton on contemporary philosophers
After what has been said in the foregoing pages, we are prepared to re-assert, in conclusion, that the modern doctrine of the Trinity is not found in any document or relic belonging to the church of the first three centuries. Letters, art, usage, theology, worship, creed, hymn, chant, doxology, ascription, commemorative rite, and festive observances, so far as any remains, or any record of them… Read More »the concept of a triune God an anachronism in the first three centuries
Theology blogger / author / golf pro Kermit Zarley posts on the Holy Spirit. A few excerpts: During the 2nd and 3rd centuries, there was no consensus among church fathers, called “apologists,” about the constitution of the Holy Spirit. Most of them didn’t think it was important. In fact, there was a widespread fluidity of ideas among Christians about it. Some thought the Holy Spirit… Read More »Kermit Zarley on the Holy Spirit
Bizarrely, many agree with Jesus’s opponents’ assumption in Mark 2.
My paper critiquing the Brower-Rea “constitution” approach to the Trinity has now been published in Philosophy and Theology. I just received the issue this week. Pre-print is on the home page. I worked very hard on this, off and on, for more than two years, and tried (with limited success, I think) to make the discussion intelligible to non-philosophers. It’s a metaphysics-heavy discussion though. My… Read More »publications update
As pretty well summarized here by unitarian Theophilus Lindsey.
In the year 1694 began the great contest concerning the Trinity, betwixt two celebrated doctors of the church, Sherlock and South; each of them reputed and reputing himself orthodox, and each of them espoused by learned and powerful partisans.
Dr. Sherlock expressly asserted, that the three persons in the Trinity are three distinct, infinite Minds or Spirits, and three individual Substances. Dr. South held only one infinite eternal Mind or Spirit, with three Somethings that were not three distinct Minds of Substances, but three modes, faculties, attributes, relations, relative properties, subsistances, as there were variously denominated. Dr. Sherlock was accused, and with great justice, if words have any meaning, of polytheism, or holding three Gods. Dr. South, on the other hand, came under the imputation of explaining away the Trinity, and falling into the Sabellian or Unitarian system: and accordingly some of the Socinians took advantage of the Doctor’s explication of the doctrine of the church, and declared in their writings, that the should not be backward to give their approbation to the Liturgy and the Articles, if that was the kind of Trinity which the language therein used was intended to inculcated.
The university of Oxford, to whom Sherlock was obnoxious on account of his political principles, declared forRead More »the fate of “social” trinitarianism in late 17th c. England (Dale)
Devastating. I have long noted that Augustinian/Calvinist theology is unpopular among Christian philosophers, though many, like me, go through a Calvinist phase (when I was a sophomore and junior in college), before seeing its problems to be hopeless. Walls concisely and fairly sums up what Calvinism is all about, and then shows it to be profoundly problematic, focusing on philosophical problem rather than biblical ones.… Read More »Jerry Walls: What is wrong with Calvinism?
Congratulations to editors Oliver Crisp, Michael Rea, Trent Dougherty and Kevin Diller on the launch of an important new open access journal: The Journal of Analytic Theology. What is “analytic” theology? Good question. Roughly: theology done using the tools of contemporary (typically English-language) “analytic” philosophy. What is that? Here’s one answer by a master practitioner. Also, this journal aims to “explore theological and meta-theological topics… Read More »Important new open access journal: The Journal of Analytic Theology
Ably reviewed by Sean Finnegan. I would add a few philosophical comments: White, like many evangelicals, understands “the deity of Christ” as meaning that Jesus and God are numerically one, that is, numerically identical. He argues that various things the NT asserts about Jesus imply this. (e.g. He is worshiped, called “Lord.”) Conveniently, he ignores the many passages which assert or presuppose a qualitative difference… Read More »White vs. Navas – Does the New Testament teach “the deity of Christ”?
I think I’ve met only two people who have translated the whole New Testament from the original Koine Greek to some modern language. One was an American evangelical missionary, who’d translated the New Testament into some obscure tribal language from South America. The other was the Englishman Ray Faircloth, who runs the biblicaltruthseekers website. (Some of his materials are also available here.)
In both cases, I was impressed. What an acheivement, and what a weight it must be, to try to effectively and accurately render what one regards as the most important texts in human history, the communications of God to humankind.
I was privileged to be able to interview Ray Faircloth a few days ago near Atlanta, Georgia, where we were both in town for a conference. Maybe at a later date I’ll post a few representative passages from his translation.
Congratulations on the publication of your translation of the New Testament, The Kingdom of God Version. How long did this take you?
This took three and half years.
Was that full time?
No, it was in blocks of time, so that you’d get so far, and you’d need to move on to another subject, and come back to it at a later time.
What, in your view, is most distinctive about your Kingdom of God Version?
It’s hard to say one thing, but much of it was attempt to get rid
Read More »Interview with Ray Faircloth, translator of the Kingdom of God Version of the New Testament