Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: Spotify | Email | RSS
Henry Ware Jr. (1794-1843) was a Unitarian minister in Boston from 1807-1830, and then Professor of Pulpit Eloquence and the Pastoral Care at Harvard Divinity School from 1830-1842. He authored not only sermons and works of theology, but also poetry and fiction.
In this 1827 lecture, Ware outlines the case for thinking the authors of the New Testament to be unitarian, rather than trinitarian, in their theology. He argues powerfully and eloquently. I here present it in its entirety, with just a word or two modernized.
At the end of the podcast, I note a minor disagreement I have with it. Still, Ware’s approach here is similar to my recent talk, and I think he has a point or two which I may incorporate, as I turn that talk of mine into book chapter.
Does Ware make a strong overall case? Why or why not? [spp-tweet tweet=”Harvard prof argues that NT authors are unitarian, not trinitarian.”]
Links for this episode:
- Henry Ware Jr.
- Sixteen American Unitarian Tracts
- podcast 156 – Dr. J.R. Daniel Kirk on A Man Attested by God – Part 2
- podcast 155 – Dr. J.R. Daniel Kirk on A Man Attested by God – Part 1
- proskuneo in the LXX
- (divine worship) 1 Samuel 1:19, 1 Samuel 15:25, 2 Samuel 12:20
- (deference to a king or other person) 1 Samuel 25:23, 2 Samuel 1:2
- Did the First Christians Worship Jesus?
- Who Should Christians Worship?
- This week’s thinking music is “Clover” by Little Glass Men.
Related posts:

podcast 168 - The Death of Unitarian Congregationalism

podcast 147 - Dr. Daniel McKaughan on faith - Part 1

Debating John 1: Eusebius vs. Marcellus

dialogue on God, Jesus, and identity with Alvin Kimel

podcast 400: Debate – Tuggy vs. Bird – The New Testament Jesus is Not Divine – Part 2

podcast 126 - What is an evangelical? With Kermit Zarley

LaBreeska's right

Boyd on Incarnation

podcast 192 - Review of Sanders's The Deep Things of God - Part 1


Excellent podcast and reading from Ware’s material.
One thing that always impresses me about the Unitarians from previous generations is that they developed their argumentation from what was available to them in the biblical testimony instead of resorting to speculation about uncorroborated “background” influences or appealing to extra-biblical Jewish writings to “indirectly infer” things that cannot be derived from exegesis.
Comments are closed.