Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: Spotify | Email | RSS
In this episode you’ll hear the four opening speeches in a book session at the Evangelical Philosophical Society conference in San Antonio, Texas in November of 2023. The book is One God, Three Persons, Four Views, edited by Chad McIntosh, forthcoming probably deep into 2024. (See UCA podcast #77 for the back story about the book.)
The speakers are the co-authors William Hasker (his paper presented by Dr. McIntosh), Beau Branson, William Lane Craig, and Dale Tuggy. Each one is supposed to explain what is distinctive about his approach to the Trinity. Dr. Hasker presents the basics of his three-self theory, focusing on his claim that the “Persons” really are “centers of consciousness” (selves). Dr. Branson explains his “Monarchical Trinitarianism,” focusing on a number of linguistic distinctions, such as different meanings of “god.” Dr. Craig briefly explains what he claims is a minimal and biblical Trinity theory and what he claims is an unproblematic model of the doctrine of the Trinity amounts to. He also urges that I have failed to rebut his case that Jesus “is God” (i.e. not identical with God, but rather that he has divine-Person divinity, as opposed to god-divinity). Finally, I present my unitarian Christian view, focusing on five of my twenty facts which favor the thesis that the New Testament authors are unitarian over the thesis that those authors are trinitarian.
I provide an opinionated running commentary on the presentations . . . and a few sound effects.
Next time: interactions between the four panelists, and some extra information about Craig’s claim that the New Testament authors had no concept (or no clear grasp of the concept) of identity, which is how he hopes to refute any understanding of New Testament theology on which the one God and the Father are one and the same.
Links for this episode:
Tim Stratton and Free Thinking Ministries
Reading comprehension quiz: Johann 17:1-3
podcast 227 – Who Should Christians Worship?
podcast 78 – Mr. Chad McIntosh on the Trinity as a Functional Person
podcast 351 – Thoughts on my Dialogue with Craig on the Trinity and the Bible – Part 2
podcast 350 – Thoughts on my Dialogue with Craig on the Trinity and the Bible – Part 1
podcast 349 – Craig-Tuggy dialogue on trinitarian vs. unitarian theologies
podcast 246 – Response to Branson Part 4 – the shortcomings of “monarchical trinitarianism”
podcast 245 – Response to Branson Part 3 – Dueling Definitions
podcast 244 – Response to Branson Part 2 – Early Orthodox Trinitarians
podcast 243 – Response to Branson Part 1 – The Orthodox Doctrine of the Trinity
This week’s thinking music is “Into the J” by Admiral Bob.
Dale, thank you for including in your commentary that Trinitiarians are much less angry at their own for not thoughtfully engaging with Trinity doctrine than they are at us for simply holding alternative views. This behavior has baffled and saddened me, and I was so glad to hear you specifically include the accusation in your summary. Loved this series of podcasts!
When he says “3 persons who are properly called god”, in his minimalist definition, it really dodges the whole issue, and assumes an interpretation left to any reader or listener.
If one took his definition in order of appearance in scripture, we would have God the Father (Genesis 1), the Angel of the Lord (Genesis 22), and Moses (Exodus 4:16, 7:1).
Even reading the entire Bible, one could assume by his definition that Samuel (1 Sam 28:13), and Satan (2 Corinthians 4:4) fit the bill, since he didn’t explain what “properly” means.
This reminds me of your debate with Michael Brown. I wish he and WLC would attempt to establish a firm stance rather than retreat and toss “deity of Christ” texts. It’s like rather than establishing a stance and dealing with your 20 facts, they dismiss you in a way that looks like cognitive dissonance, then machine gun or sling emotionally charged “Christ is called god” texts. It is a shame because as you said, WLC, and Dr Brown are “better than that”, but perhaps emotions are getting in the way.
Regardless, great job in standing up for this truth and as always, doing so in love with a Christ-like spirit!
-Matt
Comments are closed.