Criticism, toleration, and the Trinity

Red Centre, Northern Territory, Australia (photo from trekearth.com)

The following three propositions below, are from my problem of evil questionnaire. God willing, once I pass my PhD dissertation, I shall publish the entire statistical chapter, but for now I will release some of this copyrighted material. I am in the middle of trying to put my introduction together for my doctorate and do not have the time to present material outside of my thesis work.

Religions should not be beyond criticism.

72.8% of respondents supported this concept.

Differing religious views should be tolerated.

56.3% of persons supported this idea.

The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are the same God.

96.7% accepted the Biblical idea of the Trinity

By examining the first two questions together, one can conclude that the majority of respondents think that religions should be criticized but also tolerated. A question arises. In the mind of respondents, how much should a religion be criticized before it is no longer tolerated? I would be interested in reading your comments. I strongly agree with the 72.8% of respondents that supported the notion that religion should not be beyond criticism, and to some extent agree that differing religions should be tolerated. Must all religious philosophies be tolerated? I think not, if a religion advocates murder for example, or is intolerant of the basic rights of others, it should not be tolerated. I do not think that religions that offer human sacrifice should be tolerated. I do however, in a secular Western world, appreciate the right to worship, write and live as a Christian, and realize that those of other religious or non-religious viewpoints should have the same freedom.

One of the purposes of this blog is to look at religious and non-religious views critically, and with tolerance when possible. My own views come from years of scholarly and personal research, and are open for revision, although I hold to certain views and doctrines more strongly than others. There are essentials within Christian faith and philosophy that are non-negotiable in order to actually legitimately call oneself a Christian, in a Biblical sense. In my writing, I often focus on the nature of God and the atoning and resurrection work of Christ. The nature of God within Christianity is essential to understand and accept, as one cannot reasonably, merely believe in a God of choice and attempt to make that the Biblical God. The understanding revealed within the New Testament is that God is of one undivided nature, but yet in unity. Thiessen (1956: 134). Thiessen quotes Deuteronomy 6:4 and Mark 12:29, where God is called one. Thiessen (1956: 134). A comprehensive evaluation of the doctrine of the Trinity could easily be a PhD dissertation, but there are good explanations of the doctrine. Thiessen admits that the word Trinity is not in Scripture, and he writes that the term was perhaps first used by in the Greek as Trias by Theophilus of Antioch (d. 181) and then in the Latin by Tertullian (d. ca. 220). Thiessen (1956: 135). Thiessen explains that the idea behind the Trinity is that from the New Testament there are three external distinctions, in the one divine nature, as they are known to us as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Thiessen (1956: 135). These three persons are not to be confused as being the same or are they of a different substance. Thiessen (1956: 135). Thiessen points out that the Trinity is not Tritheism, as there are not three distinct Gods. Thiessen (1956: 135). He also explains that Biblical Christianity does not hold to Sabellianism (third century) as this would understand God as having three qualities within one person. Thiessen (1956: 135). Sabellianism does not hold to real distinctions existing, but merely names that are used at different times. Erickson (1994: 334). God would work in different modes, and this is known as modalism. Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling. (1999: 79). H.E.W. Turner writes that Sabellianism is an alternate description of modalism which gave the doctrine in its most sophisticated form. Turner (1999: 514). Robert M. Bowman notes that the Trinitarian faith does not allow for the dividing of substance. Bowman (1990: 13). The persons present in the Trinity are not representing three separate beings with differing natures of differing substance, but to Bowman they are three personal distinctions each fully God. Bowman (1990: 13).

BOWMAN, ROBERT M. (1990) Why You Should Believe in the Trinity, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

ERICKSON, MILLARD. (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

GRENZ, STANLEY J., DAVID GURETZKI AND CHERITH FEE NORDLING (1999) Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms, Downers Grove, Ill., InterVarsity Press.

THIESSEN, HENRY C. (1956) Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

TURNER, H.E.W. (1999) ‘Sabellianism’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.