The Tuggy-Brown debate: Dale’s opening statement
Did Dr. Brown adequately rebut my argument from six NT facts?
Did Dr. Brown adequately rebut my argument from six NT facts?
Does Calvinism make God the “author of evil”? Dr. Bignon argues that this charge will not stick.
In this episode, my evaluation of the case made by Shadid Lewis. Does he establish, on grounds which his opponent must affirm, that the Trinity implies polytheism? See Lewis’s arguments as analysed on the post for episode 17. What is the doctrine of the Trinity anyway? Are the persons members of an eternal group of wonderfully unified friends? Or are they aspects or personalities of… Read More »podcast 21 – review of the Lewis-Rogers debate – part 2
About a week after the debate, I interviewed Dr. Bernie Power for his post-debate thoughts. Among other things, he adds an argument from divine perfection to divine tri-unity, and comments on Christian-Muslim discussions and misunderstandings. Asked about Muslim apologists like Admed Deedat and Dr. Zakir Naik, he recommends work by Jay Smith and Sam Green. About Jesus, Dr. Power emphasizes that we need to allow… Read More »podcast 7 – post-debate interview with Dr. Bernie Power
Is compatibilism about human freedom the key to defending Calvinism?
How and why did American Unitarian Congregationalism die?
In his debate with Muslim apologist Shadid Lewis does Reformed Christian apologist Anthony Rogers establish the consistency of the Trinity and monotheism? That is, does he prove that the Trinity doctrine is not a form of polytheism? Is this episode, we examine his arguments, and discuss the Qur’an, abrogation, and whether it always distinguishes Christians from polytheists Rogers’s argument from Genesis 18-19 that Moses taught… Read More »podcast 20 – review of the Lewis-Rogers debate – part 1
This episode is a second post-debate interview, this time with Islamic apologist Shahir Naga. We had a good conversation, discussing, among other things, the worship of Jesus and where Mr. Naga is originally from. Thanks to Mr. Naga for a good interview. He is a seeker of truth, and is a pleasure to dialogue with. You can also listen to this episode on Stitcher or iTunes (please subscribe, rate,… Read More »podcast 8 – post-debate interview with Mr. Shahir Naga
Working through the arguments with an assist from AI.
Mutual interrogations, closing statements, and audio Q&A. In your view, which side won?
A new debate: opening statements and rebuttals.
Here are three more excellent new videos by Notre Dame’s Center for Philosophy of Religion! (subscribe here): Dr. Carl Mosser on deification. What, you as, is that? And isn’t that just a weird Orthodox idea? OK… but what does it mean? And doesn’t this sort of talk raise a bunch of philosophical issues? But seriously… where is this in the Bible? Want more in depth… Read More »Dr. Carl Mosser on deification in theology and in the Bible
Does the Bible ever speak of redeemed humans as “gods”? Many Jews and Christians have thought so. In this episode Dr. Carl Mosser takes us on a journey through this theme in the Bible, including Psalm 82, the New Testament epistles, and the book of Genesis. You’ll have listen to see why I chose a picture of Joseph in his career as the Pharaoh’s right… Read More »podcast 60 – Dr. Carl Mosser on deification in the Bible
Congratulations to both debaters on a fight well fought. (Here’s all the commentary.) Plenty of punches, thrown hard, relatively few low blows – two worthy opponents. Certainly, the fight must be decided on points, as there was no decisive knockout. Both debates are in different ways very impressive, and I learned a lot from both.
Kudos to C. Michael Patton and Parchment and Pen for hosting the debate.
I hope you readers out there enjoyed my commentary on the debate. I sometimes got naggy or nerdy, and always expressed myself with typical lack of tact, but I tried to be helpful, and to show the helpfulness of philosophy and logic in thinking through these things.
In this last post in the series, a few concluding reflections on the debate.
Looking back on this debate, I see that I’ve ended up where I began: wondering what Bowman thinks the Trinity doctrine is. This, after all the debate was about whether or not the Bible teaches that.
Burke argued that the Bible teaches what I call humanitarian unitarianism (he calls it “biblical unitarianism”) – roughly, that the one God of Israel is the Father, whereas the Lord Jesus is a human being and his unique Son, and the Holy Spirit is God’s power. I understand what Burke argued for, and if it is true, then nothing that can claim to be an orthodox Trinity theory is true. But I don’t, in the end, understand Bowman’s view.
I flagged this issue at the start. As the debate wore on, I settled on the interpretation that each of the Three just is (is numerically identical to) God, and yet each of the three is not identical to either of the other two. I stuck with this interpretation, all the way to the bitter end. And yet, I never did like this interpretation Read More »SCORING THE BURKE – BOWMAN DEBATE – Final Reflections
At his self-titled blog Edward Feser, the Catholic philosopher & popular author mounts a negative mysterian defense of the Trinity. It’s worth a read. In my view, most of it is perfectly reasonable, but it goes wrong where he claims that the teaching of Christ as recording in the New Testament logically implies the creedal formulas about the Trinity. The defense of mystery appeals by… Read More »Feser’s Negative Mysterian Defense of the Trinity
In the last two posts, I explained what I mean by ‘pre-existing ingredients’. In the first of those two posts, I said that an ‘ingredient’ in a product is something that is (i) in the product, and (ii) not identical to another ingredient or to the whole product. In the second of those two posts, I explained that an ingredient is ‘pre-existing’ if it’s not… Read More »Arius and Athanasius, part 4 — A definition of creation (JT)
Some responses and a debate challenge.
Not all engagement is good engagement.
“In essentials, unity; in non-essentials liberty; in all things, love.” So far, so good. But, what does Scripture say is essential teaching about Christ and about God?
What, according to Dr. Sanders, is the crisis in contemporary trinitarian systematic theology, when it comes to the Bible?