Link: Is the Trinity Biblical?
In my study of John last night I referred people to a post by Michael F. Bird, author of the book Evangelical Theology: A Biblical and Systematic Introduction
For what it’s worth, I believe that the trinity expresses a combination of various biblical materials and the experience of the early church in language that is demonstrably not in the Bible. I don’t see this as a problem. In general, when we write doctrinal statements of any sort, they reflect a combination of the way we read scripture, our traditions, our personal and collective experience, and of course the function of our reason. I perceive myself as seeing the connection as looser than Bird asserts, so I’m certainly willing to defend him from critics who say he hasn’t claimed enough. On the other hand, he may have claimed too much, and in this case, perhaps more than needs to be claimed.
Nonetheless his book is fun. Note also that the subtitle illustrates the point I was making. I tend to think that the more systematic our theology gets, the less biblical it is. Being both systematic and biblical seems to me almost a contradiction in terms. The Bible is not systematic. But that’s part of the fun of my current study!
Henry, I’ve just been starting to use your materials, and I’m already not just enjoying them, I’m benefiting. So, thank you. From what I’ve seen so far, you have only a little material on the doctrine of the Trinity. I have a serious study, from the English Bible since the issues are not technical. I’ve published this on a new website that I just established (listed in the field provided on your web page). I have several other articles on my new web page, mostly focused on the spiritual practices, but a couple of these involve the criticism of evangelical/conservative doctrines that I think are in error– like the doctrine of inerrancy and the practice of rationalistic or evidential apologetics. If you are interested, you can read the link “About the author” to see my educational background and what I did professionally. I am retired now. I consulted your own site initially to find material on biblical criticism, and I’ve only just started reading your article on tradition criticism. In my seminary days in the late 70s, at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, we never had any introduction to any of the higher critical methods. In exegesis classes, of course, we had to deal with textual criticism. So, I was thoroughly engaged by your discussion of tradition criticism, as it has a connection to one of my essays called “The Lion.” I had contact with a proponent of tradition criticism, but his presuppositions led him to a thoroughly critical view of the text of the Gospel of Matthew. My essay “The Lion” began as a criticism of his approach, but then it moved to a discussion of biblical inerrancy as that was promoted at Trinity Seminary during the period when I was there, and also continuing in many conservative/evangelical churches and seminaries now.
I just realized I made an error in my web address in a comment I just left. Let me correct it below.