Constructive Criticism, Part 3

This is part of a series. See part 1, part 2, part 4, part 5, and part 6. Note: links will go live upon publication. After I wrote “Sigma Frame Abandons the Patriarchy,” Jack responded with two comments on his own blog. In “Constructive Criticism, Part 2,” I responded to his tips …

Constructive Criticism, Part 2

This is part of a series. See part 1, part 3, part 4, part 5, and part 6. Note: links will go live upon publication. I don’t regularly and consistently read Sigma Frame or its comments anymore, so when Jack responded to “Sigma Frame Abandons the Patriarchy” with two lengthy comments on his …

Bnonn Tennant on the Trinity

Note: This is part of a series on the Trinity from a rational, non-mystical perspective. See the index here. In “Polytheists on the Trinity,” I noted how belief in polytheism (and mysticism) naturally leads to a softening on the doctrine of the Trinity. But this is not always the case. …

Polytheists on the Trinity

Note: This is part of a series on the Trinity from a rational, non-mystical perspective. See the index here. Back in “Bruce Charlton on the Trinity,” I made this statement: After I wrote that, Charlton answered this, saying: Something fundamental has changed in recent times with the way people think, …

Jesse Albrecht on the Trinity

Note: This is part of a series on the Trinity from a rational, non-mystical perspective. See the index here. I like Jesse Albrecht. I do. He runs the very interesting “Rational Christian Discernment,” which is such a fantastic title for a blog. And he’s even commented on this blog. I …

Bruce Charlton on the Trinity

Note: This is part of a series on the Trinity from a rational, non-mystical perspective. See the index here. I began the discussion on the Trinity with more traditional viewpoints—of James Attebury and James White—for a reason. They all share intellectual, non-mystical approaches to the question of the Trinity and …