Clik here to view.
SCORING THE BURKE – BOWMAN DEBATE – Burke 2
There’s a lot of meat in Burke’s second round, and both his and Bowman’s second rounds were cleaner, more free of stray punches than round 1. Here I offer some summaries and brief comments on Burke. In...
View ArticleClik here to view.
SCORING THE BURKE – BOWMAN DEBATE – Bowman 2
In round 2, Bowman descends to close combat on a few central texts. But first, he makes the methodological point that it is too easy to claim simply that your preferred texts are clear, whereas the...
View ArticleClik here to view.
SCORING THE BURKE – BOWMAN DEBATE – Bowman 3
In my comments on his first salvo, I wondered exactly what Trinity doctrine Bowman means to defend. (Some kind of modalism?) After round two, I said that Bowman has owned up to affirming a...
View ArticleClik here to view.
SCORING THE BURKE – BOWMAN DEBATE – Burke 3
In round 3, Burke comes out swinging and swinging. But how much does he connect? In my judgment, somewhat. Here’s an overview of his case, with some critical comments, and at the end I score the round....
View ArticleClik here to view.
SCORING THE BURKE – BOWMAN DEBATE – Round 4 Part 1
In this post I venture to offer some debate advice: be very hesitant to accuse your opponent of a logical fallacy. First, your lack of sympathy for his position can easily cause you to be see ones...
View ArticleClik here to view.
SCORING THE BURKE – BOWMAN DEBATE – ROUND 4 PART 2 – BOWMAN
In part 1 I argued that Bowman attributes a non-existent fallacy to unitarians. After this faltering start, things get better. Continuing his pre-emptive rebuttal, Bowman argues that there is nothing...
View ArticleClik here to view.
SCORING THE BURKE – BOWMAN DEBATE – ROUND 4 PART 3 – BURKE
In round 4, Burke urges that his views about God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit provide a simpler explanation of the texts. Whereas trinitarians must argue from implications of the text, By contrast, I...
View ArticleClik here to view.
SCORING THE BURKE – BOWMAN DEBATE – ROUND 5 – BOWMAN – PART 2
I still mean to comment on Bowman’s 5th round, but my inner logic nerd was drawn in by some action from round 5 here, comment 19: [Burke:] “This week I hope Rob will show Biblical evidence for the...
View ArticleClik here to view.
SCORING THE BURKE – BOWMAN DEBATE – ROUND 5 – BURKE – Part 1
Burke’s fifth round opens some interesting cans of worms. First, he reiterates that the Bible doesn’t explicitly talk of any triple-personed god, but instead calls the God of the Jews the Father. His...
View ArticleClik here to view.
SCORING THE BURKE – BOWMAN DEBATE – ROUND 6 Part 2 – Bowman
In his sixth and final installment of the debate, Bowman turns in his finest performance, making a number of interesting moves, and getting some glove on Burke. First, he tweaks his formula (here’s the...
View ArticleClik here to view.
You’re Foolin’ Yourself and You Don’t Believe It – Part 2
Last time, I mentioned a well done book by evangelical philosopher Gregg Ten Elshoff on the topic of self-deception and the Christian life. He noted that one may easily have a false belief about what...
View ArticleClik here to view.
A clear portrait of the Trinity in action?
As I mentioned some time ago, the ESV Study Bible has a really bad entry on the Trinity, part of its appendix, “Biblical Doctrine: An Overview”. Today, I note that it repeats something I’ve often seen...
View ArticleClik here to view.
Christmas Amazement
God, is that you? Sam Storms, in a post at Parchment and Pen: Conception: God became a fertilized egg! An embryo. A fetus. God kicked Mary from within her womb! Birth: God entered the world as a baby,...
View ArticleClik here to view.
The Standard Opening Move
Is the Trinity contradictory? In reply to such a charge or query, there’s a standard opening move employed by trinitarians who have some training in logic, be they theologian, philosopher, or...
View ArticleClik here to view.
Linkage: Dialogue at Triablogue
I’ve been commenting at Triablogue, in typical long-winded fashion, on posts by Steve Hays. Here, and here. There’s some heat in addition to light, but it gets better as it goes on, and the inimitable...
View ArticleClik here to view.
Daniel Waterland on “The Father is the only God” texts – Part 1
Daniel Waterland (1683-1740) was by all accounts the most important disputant of Samuel Clarke about the Trinity. Waterland spent his career at Cambridge, where he rose through the ranks, eventually...
View ArticleClik here to view.
DANIEL WATERLAND ON “THE FATHER IS THE ONLY GOD” TEXTS – PART 2
The Clarke-Waterland duel went on for many, many pages in several books, getting increasingly snippy. Last time I said that I thought Waterland was a social-mysterian-trinitarian. But I’m not so sure...
View ArticleClik here to view.
On Numerical Sameness / Identity / “Absolute” Identity
I’ve been reading some stuff about identity and relative identity lately, in the process of writing something on relative identity versions of trinitarianism. This post is to share some good finds. In...
View ArticleClik here to view.
A formulation of Leibniz’s Law / the Indiscernibility of Identicals
In discussing the Trinity or Incarnation, I often have an exchange which goes like this: someone: Jesus is God. me: You mean, Jesus is God himself? someone: Yeah. me: Don’t you think something is true...
View ArticleClik here to view.
On an alleged counterexample to Leibniz’s Law – Part 1
In a recent post I put forward my own preferred version of “Leibniz’s Law,” or more accurately, the Indiscernibility of Identicals. It’s a bit complicated, so as to get around what are some apparent...
View Article