Trinities

Is God a self - a being capable of consciousness, knowledge, and choice, like us, but infinitely greater? Or is God a community, or a something-we-know-not-what?

Dr. Holmes's language in his book  The Quest for the Trinity made me think that he would answer: yes, God is a self, and not a community, or a mysterious Something. I took him to be a one-self trinitarian, and I ask him about that issue here. Is he? Well, it's complicated!

We also discuss  the idea that humans are made in God's image and likeness, pro-Nicene trinitarianism, Proverbs 8 and John 17:3.

You can also listen to this episode on youtube.

This and the last interviews are interesting contrasted with my two episodes with Dr. William Hasker, episodes 27 and 28. There is also a relevant series of posts here at trinities from 2010.

Thanks to Dr. Holmes for a couple of really substantial discussions!

In this episode I talk with Dr. Stephen R. Holmes about his 2012 book The Quest for the Trinity: The Doctrine of God in Scripture, History and Modernity (UK title: The Holy Trinity).

In this book Dr. Holmes argues that the much celebrated recent "revival of trinitarian theology" is no such thing. In his view, recent theology has deviated from the course set by the 4th centuries "fathers" ("pro-Nicene" theology) and one should agree with this historical claim whatever one's position on the Trinity is.

Here we discuss his change of heart about the "revival,"  his summary of that late 4th century understanding of the Trinity, whether contemporary evangelicals understand that doctrine, the contrary idea that God is a perfect community of selves, scripture and tradition, the practical adequacy of traditional language about Father, Son, and Spirit, and whether or not one can deduce a traditional Trinity doctrine from the Bible.

You can also listen to this episode on youtube.

Next week, we'll have more conversation with Dr. Holmes.

In this episode, Dr. Davis reads short selections from his 2006 book Christian Philosophical Theology (Oxford University Press). As he said in our interview, this book is probably the best place to look for his mature views. Hopefully Oxford University Press will someday release this in paperback and electronic versions.

He addresses John Hick's and others' "minimal christology" on which Jesus is merely a wise teacher, a guru, the peer of others like the Buddha, the importance of Jesus' resurrection, and his methodology regarding remaining faithful to mainstream Christian orthodoxy. He contrasts two broad religious worldviews, which he calls "Karma" and "Grace." He affirms that God can literally be wrathful. He discusses his understanding of the resurrection to which Christians look forward, and contrasts it with opposing views. He explains his view that the Bible is not inerrant but rather infallible,

These are just bite-sized pieces. A good philosopher, he argues for his conclusions, and answers objections to his claims. The selections focus mostly on his claims; for his offense and defense or behalf of these claims, you'll have to read the book.

Thanks to Dr. Davis for his readings!

You can also listen to this episode on Stitcher or iTunes (please subscribe, rate, and review us in either or both – directions here). It is also available on YouTube (scroll down – you can subscribe here). If you would like to upload audio feedback for possible inclusion in a future episode of this podcast, put the audio file here.

You can support the trinities podcast by ordering anything through Amazon.com after clicking through one of our links. We get a small % of your purchase, even though your price is not increased. (If you see “trinities” in you url while at Amazon, then we’ll get it.)

Musical credits:

Amazing Grace 2011 by Kevin MacLeod

Vivaldi's Credo: Crucifixus by Advent Chamber Orchestra

Franz Danzi's Wind Quintet Op 67 No 3 In E-Flat Major, 2 Andante Moderato, by Soni Ventorum Wind Quintet

In this episode I talk with Christian philosopher Dr. Stephen T. Davis on the occasion of the start of his phased retirement from Claremont McKenna College (and the Claremont Graduate University).

We discuss his advice for Christians going into philosophy, his views on the most important work done in recent Christian philosophy that most Christians don't know about, his advice on writing, and his own work in philosophy.

Have you ever read one of those "Four Views" (or three, five, etc.) books? Steve Davis has something to do with that! He explains here.

At the end of the episode, I and some others share how we appreciate Steve and his work. It's a moving tribute to the life and work of a good philosopher and good Christian. Have something to add? Leave a comment below!

You can also listen to this episode on Stitcher or iTunes (please subscribe, rate, and review us in either or both – directions here). It is also available on YouTube (scroll down – you can subscribe here). If you would like to upload audio feedback for possible inclusion in a future episode of this podcast, put the audio file here.

You can support the trinities podcast by ordering anything through Amazon.com after clicking through one of our links. We get a small % of your purchase, even though your price is not increased. (If you see “trinities” in you url while at Amazon, then we’ll get it.)

Links to Dr. Davis's books:

Encountering Evil, 2nd ed.

Christian Philosophical Theology

God, Reason, and Theistic Proofs

Logic and the Nature of God

Disputed Issues: Contending for Christian Faith in Today's Academic Setting

Risen Indeed: Making Sense of the Resurrection

The Incarnation: An Interdisciplinary Symposium on the Incarnation of the Son of God

The Resurrection: An Interdisciplinary Symposium on the Resurrection of Jesus

The Trinity: An Interdisciplinary Symposium on the Trinity

Encountering Jesus: A Debate on Christology

The Redemption: An Interdisciplinary Symposium on Christ as Redeemer

In this episode, Dr. Craig A. Evans and I discuss the surprising and bold methodological claims about doing history in chapter 4 of Dr. Ehrman's How Jesus Became God.

Along the way we bring up such topics as Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon,  the historicity of the New Testament gospels, the views of David Hume (pictured above) on belief in miracles, the probability of miracles, Paul's religious experiences, writing outside of one's area of expertise, and the usable life of ancient papyri.

Here's part of the discussion of Hume in Paley's Evidences of Christianity that I refer to:

But the short consideration which, independently of every other, convinces me that there is no solid foundation in Mr. Hume's conclusion, is the following. When a theorem is proposed to a mathematician, the first thing he does with it is to try it upon a simple case, and if it produce a false result, he is sure that there must be some mistake in the demonstration. Now to proceed in this way with what may be called Mr. Hume's theorem. If twelve men, whose probity and good sense I had long known, should seriously and circumstantially relate to me an account of a miracle wrought before their eyes, and in which it was impossible that they should be deceived: if the governor of the country, hearing a rumour of this account, should call these men into his presence, and offer them a short proposal, either to confess the imposture, or submit to be tied up to a gibbet; if they should refuse with one voice to acknowledge that there existed any falsehood or imposture in the case: if this threat were communicated to them separately, yet with no different effect; if it was at last executed; if I myself saw them, one after another, consenting to be racked, burnt, or strangled, rather than live up the truth of their account;--still if Mr. Hume's rule be my guide, I am not to believe them. Now I undertake to say that there exists not a sceptic in the world who would not believe them, or who would defend such incredulity.

Instances of spurious miracles supported by strong apparent testimony undoubtedly demand examination; Mr. Hume has endeavoured to fortify his argument by some examples of this kind. I hope in a proper place to show that none of them reach the strength or circumstances of the Christian evidence. In these, however, consists the weight of his objection; in the principle itself, I am persuaded, there is none.

This episode is also available on youtube.

Links:

Paley's Evidences of Christianity.

David Hume's chapter of his Enquiry in which he argues that it is never rational to believe any report of a miracle, modernized by philosopher Jonathan Bennett (starts on p. 55).

Hume's Abject Failure by John Earman.

A blog post on Dr. Bart Ehrman's methodology by Dr. Michael J. Kruger.

How God Became Jesus - the evangelical response book to which Dr. Evans contributed.

Dr. Evans brings to bear some fascinating historical and archaeological evidence.

This is a special Good Friday edition of the trinities podcast: a short pre-concert lecture I was privileged to give before a masterful performance of the 1724 version of Bach's St. John Passion at SUNY Fredonia, directed by my friend Dr. Gerald Gray.

I discuss what the New Testament says about the suffering and death of Jesus, and briefly canvass different approaches to atonement theory in Christian theology.

Does God punish Jesus instead of sinners? Is this death a ransom? A victory? A penance? An example? Why is Jesus compared to a lamb, a scapegoat, or the "mercy seat" of the Ark of the Covenant?

I also comment on Bach's Christian faith, as expressed in this piece.

After my talk, a sample of the glorious music heard that night by a packed house, commemorating this most important death.

You can also listen to this episode on youtube. (Or, here's a video version with my slides.)

Here is the portrait of Bach I refer to towards the end of my talk.

Is the author of John confused about Jesus and God? Does he think that two different beings - the Father, and the man Jesus - are numerically the same as the one true God? Some people think so; putting it gently, they talk of the "tensions" (=apparent contradictions) in the book. But is this author that confused?

Again, some think that John makes Jesus qualitatively equal to God, that is, divine in the same sense that the one God is divine. But John firmly distinguishes between Jesus and his (and our) God, and wasn't this author, and all the early Jewish Christians, monotheistic, believing in the uniqueness of YHWH, as emphatically claimed in Isaiah and Deuteronomy?

How does Dr. Ehrman read the gospel according to John in his How Jesus Became God? And what about Dr. Ehrman's claim that the authors of Matthew, Mark, and Luke considered Jesus to be a lesser god, a lower level divinity, while John has a notably "higher" christology? We discuss these questions and the topic of monotheism in this episode.

You can also listen to this episode on youtube. And here is Part 1 of the interview.

In this episode, a conversation with Dr. Bart Ehrman about his How Jesus Became God, and the evangelical response book How God Became Jesus.

Dr. Ehrman has given other interviews in which he gives an overview of his project in the book. So skipping that, we jump right into some of his more controversial conclusions, and how he arrived at them.

We also discuss the currently popular "christology of divine identity," and the evangelical response book mentioned above.

You can also listen to this episode on youtube.

In next week's episode, we discuss monotheism and the gospel of John.

* You can subscribe to the trinities podcast on itunes. Also, please rate the podcast there, to help other itunes users find it.

* You can also subscribe through Dale’s youtube channel ( that channel also has other educational videos).

* Click here to upload your audio feedback, for possible use in a future episode – .wav, .mp3, and probably any other common audio format should be OK. Try to keep it to a minute or less.

 

In this episode, the final half of my debate with Roman Catholic apologist Mr. William Albrecht. The question: was Tertullian a trinitarian? (Part 1 is here.)

First, we take turns cross-examining one another, and then the closing arguments. I've shortened the audio here,  but have not cut any meaningful content at all.

Who makes the better case? As Fox News says, we report, you decide.

Thanks again to Mr. Albrecht and to the moderator Mr. Austacio for this debate.

You can also listen to this episode on youtube.

You can hear the caller's questions and our answers here at the original broadcast, starting at 1:30.

Know how to make a recording on your smart phone or voice recorder and then upload it from your computer? Then you can leave audio feedback, to be included in a future episode of the trinities podcast. (Any audio format should be OK.)