Posted on 06/27/2016 9:35:58 AM PDT by NRx
Many readers of this blog will be blissfully unaware of a storm that erupted recently among conservative Protestants over the doctrine of the Trinity. For those interested in the details, Christianity Today offers a good account of the issues here. As the dust now settles, it is clear that a number of influential evangelical theologians have for decades been advocating a view of the Trinity that radically subordinates the Son to the Father in eternity and often rejects the idea of eternal generation. They have used this revised doctrine of God to argue for the subordination of women to men in the present, in a manner that has at times had terrible pastoral consequences.
What this recent debate has revealed is that conservative Protestantism is fundamentally divided on the identity of God. Some conservative Protestants hold to the ecumenical doctrine of the Trinity as expressed in the Creed of 381; others wish to use Nicene rhetoric but actually hold positions that run counter to that Creed. Reactions to this revelation have variedfrom serious and constructive engagement to bewilderment that anyone would regard a complicated doctrine like the Trinity as being of any importance. So what are the implications?
It seems clear now that the evangelical wing of conservative Protestantism has been built on a theological mirage. Typically, evangelicalism focuses on Biblicism and salvation as two of its major foundations and regards these as cutting across denominational boundaries, pointing to a deeper unity. But now it is obvious that, whatever agreement there might be on these issues, a more fundamental breach exists over the very identity of God. This in turn points to a host of other implicit disagreements over, e.g., hermeneutics, the role of creeds and confessions, the importance and significance of history, and the usefulness of classical theological categories.
(Read the rest at the linked source.)
I read this and some of the backstory at FT and other sources. Quite interesting.
So, why is a Catholic posting this on FR? To foster goodwill?
Two points... First I am not a big ‘C’ Catholic. (I am assuming you mean part of the Roman Communion.) Secondly, to the best of my knowledge we are not limited to posting or commenting on articles solely about our own religious confession. (Caucus threads being an exception.) Protestants routinely post articles on or about other religious confessions.
`
I’m not disagreeing with anything you’re saying, but I find the notion of making caucus threads to prevent other confessions from comments that could be controversial, while posting controversial articles pertaining to other confessions in a manner allowing contentious postings to be troubling.
O LORD, my heart is not lifted up;
my eyes are not raised too high;
I do not occupy myself with things
too great and too marvelous for me.
But I have calmed and quieted my soul,
like a weaned child with its mother;
like a weaned child is my soul within me.
O Israel, hope in the LORD
from this time forth and forevermore.
Psalm 131, a Song of Ascents. Of David.
There appears to be some objection to this post on the grounds (as best as I can tell) that I am not Protestant. The article was posted as an open thread and is clearly not a flame post as anyone who spends the roughly five minutes required to actually read it can tell. Indeed I think the article, whose author is Protestant and the subject of which is of cross denominational interest, is quite sober and irenic. That said, out of deference to my Reformed FRiends sensibilities I have no objection to pulling it.
Perhaps we should to have a discussion about modifying the posting guidelines for the Religion Forum to reflect this new restriction.
It would have been interesting to know what various people thought about the actual topic, but whatever.
*shrug*
I commented on the piece with Scripture, to mock the “fundamentally divided” eggheads and gurus. Simple believers, don’t get drawn away into unbelief by puffed up fools!
What exactly is the point of the Religion Forum again, please? Aren't we supposed to be intellectually and emotionally competent to discuss differing religious perspectives without offense?
It’s gotten to be a drag on a lot of threads ... arguments about the poster and the source, rather than the content.
Yoo-hoo, intellectually and emotionally competent right over here! I'm also tastefully dressed and I have a good haircut!
From what I can tell, I don't think the divide is a big of an issue that Trueman makes it out to be. It is more subtle. The problem is that, as often is the case, a few theologians go too far afield to try to prove an unrelated point (in this case, the complimentary view of men and women).
Does this mean that there is a huge divide within the Protestant church? From what I can see, the answer is no. It is more of an open thought process by some whose implications have not be fully thought out.
Just my opinion. Grace and Peace
K51
Pinging the two of you since you seem to be interested. See Post #16
I could be wrong, but I think the issue is the inflammatory parenthetical “(Protestants debate Trinitarian theology)”, which is NOT part of the title, is the issue. If this was removed, I think the article stands on its own, regardless of who posted it.
For now, the parenthetical statement looks like flame-bait.
So, why is a Catholic posting this on FR? To foster goodwill?
The author of the article, Carl Trueman, is a conservative Presbyterian.
I think that's a pretty good description. I read Mr. Trueman's post at FT, said, "What?" and followed the story back through several reports and blogs. As far as I can tell, there seems to be some speculative theology going on that could stand to be reined in a bit.
I also got the idea that some of the writers either talked themselves in circles until they confused themselves, or were surprised by the disagreement that arose and took to claiming that they didn't really mean what they'd said. It seems like some backing and filling was taking place.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.