(click image for credit)

This week, an interview with Dr. Scott Williams, an analytic theologian, trained by some of the best out there, who loves to tackle those hard to read medieval philosopher-theologians like John Duns Scotus, Thomas Aquinas, and Henry of Ghent.

Specifically, we discuss this recent paper of his, which I briefly discussed in a previous post.

His main interest is in different versions of "LT" - "Latin," as opposed to eastern or social Trinity theories. He sets out a theory he calls "soft LT" in opposition to a recent theory by Brian Leftow.

Buckle your metaphysical seat belts for this one! Divine nature, divine simplicity, indexicals, life-streams, substance, "persons," incommunicable existents, tritheism - there's a lot going on here. You philosophers out there will enjoy this one.

Thanks to Scott for a good interview, and for his contributions to this blog - speaking of which, here are some previous posts by Scott.

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.)

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 the debate, his position literally and figuratively between the other two discussants, monotheism, whether a non-divine Jesus can make atonement, and his grounds for believing Jesus to be God's human messiah, and not God.

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.)

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, 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.)

I see from his website that Mr. Naga has more recently been in a similar debate, this time one on one, with evangelical apologist Samuel Green. Here it is, below the fold, on Samuel Green's youtube channel.

Bonus: some clips from Islamic apologists who inspired him: Ahmed Deedat, Dr. Zakir Naik, and Shabir Ally.

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 him to define himself, rather than to approach him only through unexamined assumptions. Amen to that.

Thanks to Dr. Power for a good interview.

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.)

Bonus: an engaging television interview with Dr. Power from 2012 where he talks about his background and Muslims.

This episode features this 2013 discussion/informal debate about Jesus in Melbourne, Australia, featuring a trinitarian Christian (Dr. Bernie Power), a unitarian Christian (Pastor Steve Katsaras), and a Muslim (Mr. Shahir Naga).

The audio is a little rough; I've cleaned it up a little for this episode. Here is the video from which this audio is taken. Many thanks to the City Bible Forum in Melbourne for putting on this event, and for their permission to use their audio here.

This discussion been discussed on the Kingdom Ready blog already. Please post other discussion links in the Comments section below.

In the next three episodes of the trinities podcast, I'll interview each debater to get his post-debate thoughts.

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.)

This time, an answer to Nye by Anglican minister and writer William Sherlock (c. 1641 – 1707 - pictured to the left). He offers a unique, but to us surprisingly contemporary rational reconstruction of the claims in the "Athanasian Creed." Did he convince his fellow Anglicans that the "Athanasian Creed" is, after all, self-consistent?

We'll also look briefly at a sort of defense of the "Athanasian Creed" by minister, apologist, and patristic scholar Daniel Waterland ( 1683 - 1740). Following some ancient sources, he is a mysterian, though he offers a defense of its notorious damnatory clauses.

In this battle of the powdered wigs, we also discuss Samuel Clarke's (1675 - 1729) arguments for removing the Creed from the Anglican liturgy, as well as arguments based on the ecumenical councils.

Is this "Creed" one you accept as authoritative? Let us know what you think.

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, the we’ll get it.)

Links for this episode:

* Sherlock's book: pdf, reprint.

* Waterland's A Critical History of the Athanasian Creed, from Volume III of his Works: pdf, reprint.

* Clarke's Scripture-Doctrine of the Trinity: pdf of first, 1712 ed, reprint of the 4th ed. and follow up writings.

As we've seen, the "Athanasian Creed" appears to be incoherent, that is, inconsistent with itself.

One response is to creatively interpret it in a way which does seem coherent. We will explore this approach many future episodes.

Another response is to stick with the other catholic creeds, such as the "Apostles'" and Nicene creeds, rejecting the "Athanasian Creed" as unnecessary and unhelpful.

That's what's argued in this episode, by Anglican minister Stephen Nye (1648-1719). Most of the episode is a reading of most of his 1689 tract, Brief Notes on the Creed of St. Athanasius. Nye is a controversialist with a flair for pointed language; be forewarned that you may be offended by a few things he says here.

In the next episode, we'll hear from other Anglicans defending the "Athanasian Creed" against the arguments of Nye and others, and we'll see how some of Nye's arguments hold up under scrutiny.

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, the we’ll get it.)

Resources:

* Nye's Brief Notes - in a collection from 1691.

* Dixon's Nice and Hot Disputes - a fairly complete history of the fascinating London controversy over the Trinity c. 1687-1698 which was touched off by the above, and a couple other controversial writings by Nye and his friends. The book takes a traditional catholic mysterian stance throughout.

* Walker's Reason and Religion in Late Seventeenth-Century England. A good book, although more interested in issues of religious freedom than in theology.

* The relevant part of current Episcopal Book of Common Prayer. The "Creed" appears here in the appendix of historical documents. But scroll down to the "Articles of Religion" section VIII to see the change discussed in this episode.

In this episode: an interesting historical episode relating to the "Athanasian Creed." It makes a grown man cry.

This creed really "starts up" Christian philosophers; surely, a distinction here, a distinction there, and the appearance of contradiction can be chased away. But, our efforts are not always appreciated, as Abelard learns in the year 1121.

This episode incorporates part of Abelard's famous History of My Calamities. Thanks to my colleague B. for voicing  Abelard.

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 for this episode:

* Richard Cartwright, and his "On the Logical Problem of the Trinity"

* The quote from Wissowatius

* Abelard's entire History of My Calamities

* "Peter Abelard" at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

* Clanchy's Abelard: A Medieval Life

* Brower and Guilfoy (eds.) The Cambridge Companion to Abelard and Brower's exposition of Abelard on the Trinity

* Mews's Abelard and Heloise

This is your introduction to the statement most Christian philosophers start with, when they try to construct a self-consistent and plausible way of interpreting the claim that God is three equally divine "persons". Of uncertain origin, through the middle ages, it rose to prominence in the Roman Catholic, and then in other catholic traditions.

It's credited to this gent here, Athanasius (d. 373), but can't be by him. I neglected to mention that the creed seems to echo language used in several places in the late writings of Augustine (d. 430)

Many thanks to my friend Caroline Roberts for reading the creed for us, and to her husband, the multi-talented Bob Roberts for recording her. Check out Bob's website (also here) if you have any books you need expertly and lovingly rebound. Thanks to their generosity, you'll be hearing Caroline's beautiful voice again in some future creed episodes!

Resources:

* J.N.D. Kelly's classic monograph on the Quicunque. It was his translation from the Latin we used in this episode.

* And the quote re: laughter is from Keith Ward's God: A Guide to the Perplexed, which asserts what I call a one-self Trinity theory.

I should also thank this awesome web-based service: auphonic. This helps me to easily tweak sound quality and distribute through so many venues. Tip: if you have a very rough audio recording of a public lecture or talk, upload it to them and use all their standard processing - it'll come out much more listenable!

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.

After a lot of work, and help from many people, I'm ready to launch the trinities podcast. As I start, I have completed all or parts of about eight episodes, with no shortage of ideas for more episodes. I plan to release an episode each Monday, at least until I need a break.

I'm not looking back.

This first episode is just about me and about my ideas for the podcast. I promise that upcoming episodes will be more interesting!

In this episode, I failed to mention another kind of content: debates. I have some episodes relating to those ready to go. Stay tuned.

Please help get the word out.

You can also listen to this episode on stitcher or itunes (please subscribe and rate us in either or both) or youtube.  If you would like to upload audio feedback for possible inclusion in a future episode of this podcast, put the audio file here.

Finally, you can just listen or download here at trinities: just click the "Audio mp3 button below."

Each episode will be released with a blog post, in many cases containing relevant links.

Thanks for listening!