podcast 192 – Review of Sanders’s The Deep Things of God – Part 1
“The Gospel is Trinitarian.” What does this mean, and is it both true and non-trivial?
“The Gospel is Trinitarian.” What does this mean, and is it both true and non-trivial?
Did Jesus only experience the death of another, without dying?
When a Christian is saved, is she thereby deified? This is how Eastern Orthodox theologians describe Christian salvation, and it is a common saying that this is distinctive of Eastern Christian theology, but not of Western. In this episode, Dr. Carl Mosser (Associate Professor at Eastern University, on leave, and a Visiting Scholar at the Center for Philosophy of Religion at the University of Notre Dame) challenges this assumption,… Read More »podcast 59 – Dr. Carl Mosser on salvation as deification
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”?
The “Great Trinity Debate” has been interesting, exhausting, and a bit hard to follow. It would’ve been better to have somewhat shorter posts and required post-rebuttals. As it is, some of the debate has been tucked away in the comments of the posts, while the blog plugs away on other topics. This sort of substantial, quality content shouldn’t be hidden in comments.
I previously called round 3 a draw. But my call was premature; Burke kept punching, in a long set of comments (#4-15), which substantially strengthened his case. Bowman has left them unanswered for about a week, I believe, as I post this. I re-call this round now for Burke.
Revised score up through round 4:
Bowman: 0
Burke: 3
draw: 1
What he does is address some important texts which as usually read, assert or assume the claims that Jesus created the cosmos, or just that he pre-existed his conception. I can’t summarize Burke’s long exegesis, but I’ll hit a few highlights in this post. What he shows, drawing on some recent scholarship, is that the texts in question can be given non-arbitrary, plausible readings which are consistent with humanitarian christology.
Burke also rebuts some of Bowman’s points re: prayer to Jesus. Bowman argues that Christ can’t be a creature, and must be omniscient (hence divine), if he can hear and answer prayers. This argument is hardly a knockdown one.
Read More »SCORING THE BURKE – BOWMAN DEBATE – ROUND 3 Re-evaluated (DALE)
In the New Testament, is the Father God himself, or does the Father rather represent the one God?
Why did Roman rulers and polemicists find early Christianity so alarming, rather than just another religion?
More lessons on how not to do apologetics, from a Master.
In this second part of my conversation with Dr. Larry Hurtado about his book Destroyer of the gods: Early Christian Distinctiveness in the Roman World, we discuss the distinctive “bookishness” of early Christianity
Here’s an overview, with a few comments, of an interesting little public disagreement about Romans 1 and atheism. The discussion was kicked off by evangelical apologist Greg Koukl’s “No Duh” video, where he says that according to Romans 1, all atheists are intentionally suppressing their knowledge of God. Randal Rauser then pointed out a hard to accept implication of Koukl’s claim, which seems to require us to re-think just how… Read More »Are atheists denying the obvious? Koukl vs. Rauser and Feser
In this episode I get post-debate reflections from the (biblical) unitarian Christian debater, Steve Katsaras. He’s the founding pastor of the Red Words Church in Melbourne, Australia . His sermons are regularly podcasted here. If he sounds a little sleepy, that’s my fault; I asked him to talk to me on the same night as the debate, and he graciously agreed. We discuss highlights of… Read More »podcast 9 – post-debate interview with Pastor Steve Katsaras
“And the best thing is, we can take these blocks apart!”
In the last post, I introduced the ‘generic view’ of the trinity, namely the claim that Divinity (that which makes the divine persons God/divine) is shared equally by all three persons and so does not belong to any one divine person more than another. In this post, I would like to highlight some of the issues faced by a generic view.
My point of departure is modern day criticism of the generic view such as that of Colin Gunton and John Zizioulas (to name just a few). These authors are not, in my opinion, the most philosophically astute critics, but nevertheless, they do highlight some of the issues relevant for the generic view.
Read More »Derivation vs. Generic Theories – part 6: Issues for the Generic View (JT)
Equally divine or not? Dr. Craig on generation, procession, and the Logos theologians.
Does my thought experiment offered as an objection to some Incarnation theories only show that a demon too could become a man?
Weighing incompatible definitions of trinitarian theology and unitarian theology.
Which does the Bible teach, that the one God just is the Father, or that the one God is Father, Son, and Spirit?
This time, Dr. Smith’s thoughts on the debate. He argued for the minority view that the New Testament doesn’t teach Jesus’s literal pre-human existence.
Announced on Steve Katsaras’s blog. Both Mr. Katsaras and Mr. Naga did well last time, which was a 3-way discussion: And here’s a later debate between Mr. Naga and evangelical apologist Samuel Green, called Jesus: Mighty Prophet or God with us?