Trinities

Humor, used carefully, can be a powerful weapon of argument. In this episode I analyze a little humorous historical fiction called "God's Death: A Counterfactual Historical Reconstruction" which was recently featured on Mark Cain's Unitarian Christian Alliance Podcast.

When I first heard it, I laughed out loud multiple times. But on reflection, I realized that the piece is presenting serious arguments about interpreting the New Testament in comedy form. In this episode I explain what those are and how they relate to some of my work on this topic.

I present the audio in the first segment of this episode; for the full effect, the YouTube version is recommended.

The type of reasoning I discuss in this episode manifestly does not assume the truth of unitarianism. Rather, it comes to the texts looking for what fits or misfits various competing Christian theologies. This way of thinking critically about what we do and do not observe in the New Testament is contrasted with some poor habits of thought we often see in apologetics. Importantly, this way of reasoning can help you to make up your mind about what the New Testament on the whole teaches about Jesus and God even if you're not sure what to make of a few difficult passages.

Links for this episode:

Unitarian Christian Alliance Podcast

UCA podcast episode 19. Credibility and God's Death

Video version: "God's Death - A Counterfactual Historical Reconstruction"

podcast 323 – Did God die on the cross? 

podcast 145 – ‘Tis Mystery All: the Immortal dies! 

podcast 178 – Apologists on how God can die – Part 1

podcast 179 – Apologists on how God can die – Part 2

podcast 180 – Apologists on how God can die – Part 3

podcast 189 – The unfinished business of the Reformation

podcast 191 – Ware’s Outline of the Testimony of Scripture Against the Trinity

podcast 249 – Tuggy vs. Brown debate – The God of the Bible is the Father alone

The Tuggy-Brown debate: Dale’s opening statement

This week's thinking music is "Poor Man’s Groove" by Mr Smith.

Thomas Emlyn was a beloved minister in a Presbyterian church in Dublin, Ireland. But he and a friend decided to investigate some recent controversies about "the Trinity," and eventually Emlyn found himself seeing the New Testament in a unitarian light. Not being a contentious person, he avoided such topics in the pulpit. But when his true convictions came to light, he was immediately forced out, and he even had to flee the country until the controversy died down.

Coming back, in 1702 he wrote this little book to explain his convictions: An Humble Inquiry into the Scripture-Account of Jesus Christ: A Short Argument concerning His Deity and Glory, according to the Gospel. The result? Jail and an unjustly large fine - the result of Ireland's then-current "blasphemy" laws!

In this episode I present some excerpts of the just-published Updated Edition of this lost classic. Beloved by previous generations of unitarian Christians, this edition makes Emlyn's sure-footed, biblical critique of the deity of Christ accessible to today's readers.

There's also an exciting announcement for UCA Partners at the beginning of this episode!

Links for this episode:

Emlyn's An Humble Inquiry @ Amazon

Theophilus Press (UCA blog post)

Emlyn's Works (reprint of 1746 edition)

Emlyn @ the Dictionary of National Biography

You can become a UCA Partner here.

Kegan Chandler's blog Buried Deep

Chandler's Constantine and the Divine Mind

A letter from the Lord Jesus: About God and Me (Revised)

podcast 124 – a challenge to “Jesus is God” apologists

podcast 302 – The Stages of Trinitarian Commitment

This week's thinking music is "Mockingbird (Instrumental)" by David Mumford.

At one point, influenced by the great Christian philosopher Richard Swinburne, Dr. Joshua Sijuwade held to a "social" Trinty. But now, following Beau Branson, he holds to a "monarchical trinitarian" view on which the one God just is the Father, and also there is a divine Son and a divine Spirit.

But he's continued to think about the issues, now influenced by some work by Timothy Pawl and by metaphysician E.J. Lowe. In some ways, he's trying to bring together a Swinburnean view of "the Trinity" with a Bransonian one, as we saw in episode 330.

In this episode Dr. Joshua Sijuwade and I discuss the ideas in his recent article "Monarchical Trinitarianism: A Metaphysical Proposal." In this paper Dr. Sijuwade tries to develop the monarchical model using recent metaphysician E.J. Lowe's 4-category ontology, so as to answer what he calls the multiple-natures problem and the multiple-modes problem. Specifically, he applies Lowe's way of thinking about objects and their properties, as shown in this chart.

I press Dr. Sijuwade on what I think is a more fundamental problem for "monarchical trinitarianism" which is that it appears to assert three gods, as it features three things, the Persons, each of which has all that it takes to be a god. In his replies he explains why he is not concerned about that.

At the very end of this episode I make a couple of important announcements!

Links for this episode:

podcast 330 – Dr. Joshua Sijuwade on the monarchy of the Father

podcast 329 – Dr. Joshua Sijuwade on divine identity

Tim Pawl, "Conciliar Trinitarianism, Divine Identity Claims, and Subordination"

constitutive essence vs. consequential essence

This week's thinking music is "Air" by Jesse Spillane.

In this episode Dr. Sijuwade and I discuss his recent article "Building the Monarchy of the Father".

Topics include:

Links for this episode:

podcast 329 – Dr. Joshua Sijuwade on divine identity

"Building the Monarchy of the Father"

Dr. Sijuwade’s Academa.edu page

John 17:1-3; 1 Corinthians 8:4-6; John 20:17; Hebrews 1:8-9.

David Kelley on How to Evaluate Definitions

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

podcast 242 – Dr. Beau Branson on the Monarchy of the Father – Part 4

podcast 241 – Dr. Beau Branson on the Monarchy of the Father – Part 3

podcast 240 – Dr. Beau Branson on the Monarchy of the Father – Part 2

podcast 239 – Dr. Beau Branson on the Monarchy of the Father – Part 1

podcast 164 – On Counting Gods

podcast 226 – Biblical Words for God and for his Son Part 3 – post-biblical uses of biblical words, and new words

podcast 225 – Biblical Words for God and for his Son Part 2 – Old “Lord” vs. New “Lord”

podcast 224 – Biblical Words for God and for his Son Part 1 – God and “God” in the Bible

Decrees of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215)

When and How in the History of Theology Did the Triune God Replace the Father as the Only True God?

Richard Swinburne on the Trinity (podcast)

Karen Bennett

Jonathan Schaffer

Mullins, "Trinity, Subordination, and Heresy: A Reply to Mark Edwards"

Edwards, "Is Subordinationism a Heresy?"

Neo-Arian Controversy: The Trinitarian Theology of Eunomius

extrinsic vs. intrinsic properties

Marshall and Parsons, "Langton and David Lewis on Intrinsic"

This week's thinking music is "Green Monster" by Jesse Spillane.

Dr. Richard Bauckham has urged, especially in his book Jesus and the God of Israel, that everywhere in the New Testament Jesus is taught to "have the divine identity" or to "belong to the identity of God" or to be "included in the divine identity." Such language has widely proliferated in recent evangelical scholarship.

In a 2013 article to which Dr. Bauckham has never responded, I pointed out that the meaning of this new language is unclear, and that various interpretations run into serious problems.

But of course those were not the only possible interpretations. In his 2020 article "Elucidating Divine Identity" Dr. Joshua Sijuwade suggests that a certain conception of essence can clarify in what sense the biblical Jesus "belongs to the identity of" God. In this episode we discuss his ideas in this article.

In your view, do Dr. Sijuwade's suggestions clarify Dr. Backham's claim that Jesus "belongs to the identity" of God? Why or why not?

Links for this episode:

Sijuwade, "Elucidating Divine Identity," Heythrop Journal, 2020

Dr. Sijuwade's Academa.edu page

podcast 13 – On Bauckham's Bargain (published paper)

podcast 214 – Has Bauckham clarified his “divine identity” theory? – Part 2

podcast 213 – Has Bauckham clarified his “divine identity” theory? – Part 1

podcast 124 – a challenge to “Jesus is God” apologists

Is Jesus Human and Not Divine?

Identity

on "Leibniz's Law" (aka the indiscernibility of identicals)

mereology

composition as identity

Kit Fine

Fine, "Essence and Modality"

Essential vs. Accidental Properties

E.J. Lowe

Worship and Revelation 4-5

podcast 227 – Who Should Christians Worship?

podcast 259 – Who is the one Creator? – Part 2

podcast 258 – Who is the one Creator? – Part 1

podcast 227 – Who Should Christians Worship?

This week's thinking music is "Cardboard Engineering" by Jesse Spillane.

In this episode I discuss thirteen bad reasons for switching one's theology from trinitarian to unitarian, reasons which I've actually encountered "in the wild." Some of these claims are false. Others are true but not relevant enough. Others are vague (false on some interpretations but true on others) but never a good reason for switch.

These reasons are:

I explain in detail why in my view each of these is a bad reason for switching. When I switched, it was not for any of these reasons.

Then I briefly mention two good reasons to switch, and answer some interesting listener questions.

Links for this episode:

You can support the trinities podcast at patreon.com.

The Standard Opening Move [of apologists re: "the Trinity"]

1.4 Trinity as Incoherent

one-self Trinity theories

three-self Trinity theories

An argument against Son-modalism

on confusing Jesus together with God: "A letter from the Lord Jesus: About God and Me," podcast 124 – a challenge to “Jesus is God” apologists, Debate - "Is Jesus Human and not Divine?" - Dr. Dale Tuggy vs. Chris Date

podcast 302 – The Stages of Trinitarian Commitment

podcast 260 – How to Argue that the Bible is Trinitarian

on getting clear about what monotheism is: podcast 164 – On Counting Gods

"When and How in the History of Theology Did the Triune God Replace the Father as the Only True God?"

divine simplicity

papers by R.T. Mullins

The Reluctant Theologian Podcast

podcast 13 – On Bauckham’s Bargain

Finnegan, Platonic Christianity - Rejecting the Kingdom of God as "Crude"

podcast 248 – How Trinity theories conflict with the Bible

podcast 189 – The unfinished business of the Reformation

podcast 191 – Ware’s Outline of the Testimony of Scripture Against the Trinity

podcast 260 – How to Argue that the Bible is Trinitarian

Dixon, Nice and Hot Disputes

podcast 235 – The Case Against Preexistence

podcast 63 – Thomas Belsham and other scholars on John 8:58

podcast 62 – Dr. Dustin Smith on the preexistence of Jesus in the gospel of John

podcast 61 – Dr. Dustin Smith on preexistence in ancient Jewish thought

podcast 80 – Foreknowledge, Freedom, and Randomness

"Three Roads to Open Theism"

Boyd, God of the Possible: A Biblical Introduction To The Open View Of God

podcast 316 – Review of Papandrea, Trinity 101: Father, Son, Holy Spirit

Unitarian Christian Alliance

podcast 281 – Introducing the Unitarian Christian Alliance

The Church of God General Conference

Scattered Brethren Network

podcast 227 – Who Should Christians Worship?

This week's thinking music is "Mai Tai Beach" by Little Glass Men."

In this episode Dr. Licona assumes that, as he argued last time, that the earliest Christians thought that "Jesus is God." In this portion of his lecture he argues that this is explained by the historical Jesus claiming exactly that, which he says is suggested by certain New Testament texts.

At the start of this episode I turn to this scholarly debate to try to get some clarity about what it's supposed to mean, according to Dr. Licona, to say that "Jesus is God."

Dr. Licona gives a quick run through the earliest gospel, Mark, in order to find implications that "Jesus is God." I rebut these, chapter by chapter, using information in Mark and in other roughly contemporary writings, the other New Testament gospels.

Dr. Licona seems to deploy, in part, arguments like these:

The argument is valid, but I argue on New Testament grounds that 1 is false.

Again, he argues:

Again, the argument is valid (and notice that the implied conclusion is the numerical identity of Jesus with God - that's what 1 and 2 imply). But I argue that we lack adequate reasons to agree with premise 2, so this argument should not persuade anyone.

I general, I highlight the New Testament evidence that the earliest Christians thought of Jesus as "a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people." (Luke 23:19)

Along the way Dr. Licona helpfully explains what genre biblical scholars think the gospels belong to and what their "Q" hypothesis is regarding the synoptic gospels.

What do you say? Has Dr. Licona shown that probably the historical Jesus thought that he was God? Why or why not?

Links for this episode:

podcast 326 – Dr. Licona’s historical case that Jesus considered himself to be God – Part 1

Dr. Licona’s page at Houston Baptist University

Dr. Licona’s ministry RisenJesus.com

Religion Soup: "Did Jesus Believe He Was Divine?" Michael Licona and Dale Martin

podcast 256 – Aaron Shelenberger, from trinitarian to unitarian – Part 3

podcast 255 – Aaron Shelenberger, from trinitarian to unitarian – Part 2

podcast 254 – Aaron Shelenberger, from trinitarian to unitarian – Part 1

podcast 13 – On Bauckham’s Bargain

podcast 214 – Has Bauckham clarified his “divine identity” theory? – Part 2

podcast 213 – Has Bauckham clarified his “divine identity” theory? – Part 1

Plutarch

podcast 307 – Two Readings of Mark – popular or esoteric? – Part 3

podcast 306 – Two Readings of Mark – popular or esoteric? – Part 2

podcast 305 – Two Readings of Mark – popular or esoteric? – Part 1

podcast 320 – Thoughts on my debate with Rogers about Mark – Part 2 – interpretive fails

podcast 319 – Thoughts on my debate with Rogers about Mark – Part 1 – culture clash

podcast 318 – Debate with Rogers – Does Mark teach that Jesus is God? – Part 2

podcast 317 – Debate with Rogers – Does Mark teach that Jesus is God? – Part 1

Does Mark teach that Jesus is God?

“Only God can forgive sins.” False.

France, The Gospel of Mark (The New International Greek Testament Commentary)

podcast 189 – The unfinished business of the Reformation

Jesus's argument in John 10

Charles Morgridge on Revelation 4-5

A letter from the Lord Jesus: About God and Me

This week’s thinking music is “Moon Shadow” by Little Glass Men.

Trinitarian and unitarian Christians often argue about whether the Bible teaches that Jesus is the one true God. But in this presentation from a 2017 apologetics conference, Dr. Mike Licona argues that the real, historical man Jesus considered himself to be God, and he argues like a secular historian, not assuming that the biblical writings are inspired.

Dr. Licona focuses on some of the earliest New Testament texts, arguing that they show that the earliest Christians believed Jesus to be divine, i.e. to be the one God. Then he argues that the best explanation of this knowable historical fact is that Jesus himself claimed to be God, something which he suggests is indicated by certain passages in even the earliest New Testament gospel.

In this first part I interact with the critically evaluate Dr. Licona's argument for the first step, that the earliest New Testament writings give us strong evidence for thinking that the earliest Christians thought that Jesus is God. He founds his case on the much-discussed Philippians 2:5-11, and then discusses some passages in Paul's writings where Paul seems to refer to Old Testament prophecies about Yahweh and then applies them to Jesus. Is this Paul's way of implying that Jesus is God himself?

Links for this episode:

Dr. Licona's page at Houston Baptist University

Dr. Licona's ministry RisenJesus.com

Shabir Ally vs. Mike Licona (Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? 2004)

Bart Ehrman vs Mike Licona (Are the Gospels Historically Reliable? 2018)

What was the first century fate of Jesus? Ali Ataie vs. Mike Licona (2006)

The Life of Jesus: History or Mistake? Mike Licona & Matthew McCormick (2016)

"Is Jesus Human and not Divine?" - Dr. Dale Tuggy vs. Chris Date (2019)

Proverbs 18:17; Philippians 2:5-11; Matthew 20:28; Ephesians 4:4-6; Isaiah 45:5; Isaiah 7:10-25; Matthew 1:23; Philippians 1:2; Ephesians 1:3; Ephesians 1:17; 1 Corinthians 15:20-28; 1 Corinthians 11:3; Romans 10:9; Acts 2:36; Joel 2:32; 1 Thessalonians 3:11-14; Zechariah 14:5; 1 Thessalonians 1:9-10; Romans 1:1-7; Galatians 1:11-24; Galatians 2:1-14.

Tuggy and Date, Is Jesus Human and not Divine?

podcast 124 – a challenge to “Jesus is God” apologists

Loke, The Origin of Divine Christology

a reading of Philippians 2:5-11

Where Christology Began: Essays of Philippians 2

podcast 225 – Biblical Words for God and for his Son Part 2 – Old “Lord” vs. New “Lord”

podcast 145 – ‘Tis Mystery All: the Immortal dies!

podcast 320 – Thoughts on my debate with Rogers about Mark – Part 2 – interpretive fails

the Bible teaches that David is God

the Bible on another previous life of Jesus

identity

On Numerical Sameness / Identity / “Absolute” Identity

the apologetics blind-spot on numerical identity

This week's thinking music is "Moon Shadow" by Little Glass Men.

Consider the sentence "This sentence is false." If it is true, then (as it says) it is false. And if it is false, then what it says (i.e. that it's false) must be true. Why not, then, say that the sentence is both true and false?

In this episode Dr. Beall argues that if one says instead that the above sentence is neither true nor false, that may be plausible, but the same answer won't work for this sentence: "This sentence is either false or neither true nor false (aka 'gappy')." If the sentence is true, this requires one side or the other of the disjunction to true - so it must be either false or neither. But if it can't be both true and false, we must reject the first option. And we must reject the second option too, for if it is neither true nor false, then it can't also be (as we're supposing) true. It can't then, be (only) true. But can it be either false or neither? It would seem not. Suppose it is false: that would require the falsity of both disjuncts, both that it is false (d'oh!) and that it is neither. So it can't be false. Could it be neither true nor false? No - because if it were, then the second disjunct would be true, and thus the whole sentence would be true.

It would seem simpler to say that if the sentence is false, then (because the first disjunct would thereby be true) it will also be true. And if it is true - again, this requires at least one disjunct to be true. If we pick the first, then it will be both true and false. And if we pick that it is neither true nor false (the right disjunct) - then it won't be true. So it looks like the one way for it to be true is for it to also be false, and that the only way for it to be false requires it also to be true. It looks like we should say that this sentence is both true and false.

Now if (1) for entirely non-theological reasons we have reason to believe that there can be true contradictions, and if (2) as Dr. Beall explained last time, all the attempts to make a divine-and-human Christ turn out consistent are problematic, and if (3) we have strong reasons to believe that Christ is both human and divine, then, as Dr. Beall argues here, why not just accept that the apparent contradictions of a divine-and-human Christ are not merely apparent but real, but nonetheless true (and false)?

Topics include:

Do you agree that a doctrine of a divine-human Christ should be accepted even though it implies contradictions? Why or why not?

Links for this episode:

The Contradictory Christ (Amazon)

Dr. Beall’s homepage, page at Notre Dame

Spandrels of Truth

Relative Identity and Trinity theories

Joseph Jedwab, "Against the Geachian Theory of the Trinity and Incarnation"

podcast 68 – Dr. Harriet Baber on Relative Identity and the Trinity

podcast 271 – Does your Trinity theory require relative identity?

Simplicity / "Occam's Razor"

an intro to philosophy lecture on "common sense" and radical philosophical claims

(on open theism) - podcast 80 – Foreknowledge, Freedom, and Randomness

podcast 221 – Thomas Reid on human prejudices and common causes of error

podcast 220 – Thomas Reid on First Principles and Common Sense – Part 2

podcast 219 – Thomas Reid on First Principles and Common Sense – Part 1

podcast 263 – Tuggy vs. Date debate – Jesus is human and not divine – Part 1

This week's thinking music is "The Atmosphere" by Little Glass Men.

In this first part of our discussion Dr. Jc Beall from the University of Notre Dame explains some of the motivations behind his suggestion that Christ should be understood as "a contradiction" (i.e. a being about whom some logically contradictory statements are true).

We focus our discussion on what seem to be two implications of divinity and humanity. It seems that an absolutely perfect being, a fully divine being, must thereby be impeccable - such that in principle he can't sin. Whereas it seems that a genuine human being must thereby be peccable - such that in principle one could sin. So then if Christ is both divine and human, he must be both impeccable and peccable. But could anything be both?

Many within the tradition suggest various ways to get around this and other apparent contradictions, ways in which a divine and human Christ could be contradiction-free after all. In this episode Dr. Beall explains why he doesn't accept any of these consistency-preserving theories about Christ.

Topics include:

Are you convinced by the objections to the five approaches to understanding the divinity and humanity of Christ as coherent? Why or why not?

Next time we go into Dr. Beall's view of Christ in depth.

Links for this episode:

The Contradictory Christ (Amazon)

Dr. Beall's homepage, page at Notre Dame

Maundy Thursday

Chalcedonian Creed

podcast 277 – Was Christ tempted in every way?

podcast 166 – Alvan Lamson’s On the Doctrine of Two Natures in Jesus Christ – Part 2

podcast 165 – Alvan Lamson’s On the Doctrine of Two Natures in Jesus Christ – Part 1

podcast 273 – Dr. Timothy Pawl’s In Defense of Extended Conciliar Christology – Part 2

podcast 272 – Dr. Timothy Pawl’s In Defense of Extended Conciliar Christology – Part 1

podcast 144 – Dr. Timothy Pawl’s In Defense of Conciliar Christology – Part 2

podcast 143 – Dr. Timothy Pawl’s In Defense of Conciliar Christology – Part 1

Oliver Crisp, "Compositional Christology without Nestorianism"

Philippians 2:7

a reading of Philippians 2:5-11

podcast 41 – Stephen T. Davis’s Christian Philosophical Theology

podcast 40 – Dr. Stephen T. Davis on Christians in Philosophy

Sarah Coakley, "What Does Chalcedon Solve and What Does It Not? Some Reflections on the Status and Meaning of the Chalcedonian ‘Definition’ "

Richard Cross

review of "Exploring Kenotic Christology"

This week's thinking music is "Cloud Launching" by Little Glass Men.