Search Results for: essential to the
Question about Gregory of Nazianzus on Divinity, the Son and the Spirit
“This is some writing about that which nothing can be written about. Pretty cool, huh?”
I’ve been reading Gregory of Nazianzus lately, his famous Theological Orations (c. 380 CE), wherein he expounds and defends what scholars call the pro-Nicene consensus about the Trinity – a viewpoint which developed in the latter half of the 4th c. by bishops rallying around the new homoousios term.
In the second oration, he hits this theme hard: God’s essence (the divine nature, the Godhead/deity) is unknowable. What does he mean by this? Only that it isn’t completely knowable (by us, in this life)? He does think that, but he’s saying more than that.Read More »Question about Gregory of Nazianzus on Divinity, the Son and the Spirit
podcast 303 – Rauser’s review of Is Jesus Human and not Divine?
I answer some questions and ask some, in response to this well done book review.
podcast 111 – Dr. Joseph Jedwab on divine omnipresence – Part 1
Theologians say that God is everywhere, which is to say omnipresent or ubiquitous. But why do that say this, and what does the claim mean?
Roger Olson asks: How important is the doctrine of the Trinity?
Theologian Roger Olson asks, How important is the doctrine of the Trinity? He seems to hold, with many others, that …the doctrine of the Trinity is crucial, essential, indispensable to a robust and healthy Christian view of God. But, The problem is, of course, that many, perhaps most, Christians have little or no understanding of the doctrine of the Trinity. And they couldn’t care less. Indeed.… Read More »Roger Olson asks: How important is the doctrine of the Trinity?
Swinburne on analytic vs. continental philosophy
Here’s a gem of a passage from a little-read paper by Richard Swinburne, from this book. This is part of talk he gave at a 2001 conference in Moscow, Russia, co-sponsored by the Society of Christian Philosophers and the Russian Orthodox church. So he’s explaining the wider context of analytic philosophy to them. Sometimes, when we have to explain things to those outside the camp,… Read More »Swinburne on analytic vs. continental philosophy
Constitution Trinitarianism Part 3: The Meaning of “Is”
Is the Son God? In the immortal words of Bill Clinton, “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.” Brower and Rea suggest the following classification of meanings of “is” (in logic, “is” is called “the copula” – that which connects the subject and what’s being said of that subject).
Um, no the Clintons aren’t in the original chart in their paper (71).
And yes, Bill is intrigued by the word “copula”. Read More »Constitution Trinitarianism Part 3: The Meaning of “Is”
podcast 344 – Craig’s Contradictory Christ – Part 2
Evaluating Dr. Craig’s unique take on “two natures” christology, his “Neo-Apollinarian” theory.
Hays’s Nelson Muntz “objection” to unitarian theology
Real arguments vs. pointed questions combined with incredulous tone.
Kimel’s review of What is the Trinity – Part 3
What Origen actually says vs. what trinitarians wish that he’d said.
Steve Hays fails to rebut the charge of tritheism
A would-be teacher on trinitarian topics is merely an incoherent tritheist.
“paterderivationism,” monotheism, and “mono-theos-ism”
A question from the Facebook group a few weeks ago: …One model of the Trinity that I’ve heard articulated–call it “paterderivationism”–says that the way in which the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are homoousios is the same way in which Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus may be called “homoousios”: they share the same kind of nature, though… not the same instance of that nature. According to… Read More »“paterderivationism,” monotheism, and “mono-theos-ism”
podcast 126 – What is an evangelical? With Kermit Zarley
According to recent research, about 3 in 10 Americans are evangelical Christians. But what exactly is an evangelical?
Linkage: Did God the Son change in becoming incarnate?
“Classic” (i.e. mainstream catholic, Platonic) Christian theism holds that God is timeless, and so incapable of any change whatever.
And they add: the Word is God, and the Word became flesh.
Sounds like a change, doesn’t it? First, the Word is simply divine, and a moment later, he’s entered into a “hypostatic union” with a “complete human nature.”
Reformed philosophical theologian James Anderson takes a crack at this one. (HT: Triablogue.) I much like his set-up. I’m less keen on the solution. Short answer: it’s a mystery (apparent contradiction). You’ll have to read his post to see why I chose this pic.
A few quick comments: first, I’m with Read More »Linkage: Did God the Son change in becoming incarnate?
SCORING THE BURKE – BOWMAN DEBATE – ROUND 5 – BOWMAN – PART 2
I still mean to comment on Bowman’s 5th round, but my inner logic nerd was drawn in by some action from round 5 here, comment 19: [Burke:] “This week I hope Rob will show Biblical evidence for the essential relationship formulae of Trinitarianism: 1. Father = ‘God’, Son = ‘God’ and Holy Spirit = ‘God’ 2. ‘God’ = Father + Son + Holy Spirit .… Read More »SCORING THE BURKE – BOWMAN DEBATE – ROUND 5 – BOWMAN – PART 2
Swinburne’s Social Trinitarian Theory, Part 5 – Yes, we can prove it by reason alone
If there’s at least one, there must be exactly three. Q.E.D.
The installment before the last, we saw that Richard Swinburne’s social trinitarian theory is very carefully built so as to satisfy multiple demands of orthodoxy. There is, he argues, a contradiction-free, reasonable trinitarian theory, which fits well with the classic creeds. But we can do even better than that. In Swinburne’s view, there’s a plausible argument for the Trinity based on reason alone. Don’t believe it? Oh, ye of little faith reason. Have ye not read the earlier Richard on this?Read More »Swinburne’s Social Trinitarian Theory, Part 5 – Yes, we can prove it by reason alone
“same god” controversy round-up
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
why I am not a Thomist 2 – the possibility of a non-simple Source
Last time I sketched out the broad, old, deep case for the Christian God being a being. This time, I want to explain where and why I get off the Thomist metaphysical bus before it reaches its destination. The Thomist project looks something like this. (I know this is oversimplified; I don’t think it matters for the subjects before us though. Correct me in the… Read More »why I am not a Thomist 2 – the possibility of a non-simple Source
podcast 304 – The Absolute Basics of the Christian Faith
A Wesleyan ministry tells new Christians about “The Absolute Basics of the Christian Faith.”