Michael Bird jumps into the Fray: the Trinity Debate (Part 2)

This is the second post on theLAB featuring Michael Bird’s take on the recent Trinity controversy. Be sure to watch Part 1 and also see the Logos Talk Blog posts with perspectives from Peter Leithart and Wayne Grudem

Michael Bird has a way of getting himself into really dangerous situations. This despite the fact that he stopped jumping out of airplanes (with an M-60 machine gun strapped to his back) some years ago.

Bird and his little friend

Today, Mike’s battles are theological. We saw in a previous post that Mike played a major role recently in a debate over the most difficult doctrine of all; the nature of the Trinity. 

In this second video, Mike presents his position on the debate as an egalitarian, concerned for the future of the church and for a right understanding of a very challenging yet cornerstone doctrine. He exhibits a visible consternation for how the debate has played out, especially amongst complementarian theologians.

This debate is critical for the health, ministry, and identity of the church. Mike Bird presents a thoroughly measured and biblical approach, typically seasoned with his inimitable sense of humor. Check it out:

Watch more of the debate, now 40% off, as the key players articulate their positions in this special series, “Tackle the Tough Stuff,” only on Logos Mobile Ed.

Was this article helpful?

Share
Written by
Tavis Bohlinger

Dr. Tavis Bohlinger is Editor-in-Chief of the Logos Academic Blog and Creative Director at Reformation Heritage Books. He holds a PhD from Durham University and writes across multiple genres, including academia, poetry, and screenwriting. He lives in Grand Rapids with his wife and three children.

View all articles
6 comments
  • Nice blog site. Thanks for the video. And…
    Oh my word, this is like beating a dead horse. Grudem and Ware have abherrent theology. We get it. Subordinationism is heresy. However, submission is Biblical. Subordination is rooted in ontology/essence. Submission is rooted in function/action. In addition, Ware and Grudem (like many contemporary theologians) assumed the popular denial of Eternal Generation based on hermeneutical choices that clashed with previous reformed teaching, but fortunately were corrected.
    As it is, Ware and Grudem simply equivocate on the definition of subordination (just as egalitarians equivocate on submission). It’s has been a tiresome game. Thanks and God bless.

  • The problem is that Trinitarianism has assumed consubstantiation at the council of Nicea which was not assumed before. The Eusebians were conservative and only stayed within scripture and not assumption. The most honest thing we could all do is say that it is a mystery whether or not their are con-substantial. Admitting that its an unknown will help us understand what the bible does say and go no further. Choosing a word like homoousios or homoiousios is beyond us in the text. If both sides of Nicea decided to maintain the mystery of the relationship we would not of had the the conflict. Progressives on both sides stepped beyond scripture to assert points that are not given to us.

  • You people are speaking about nothing but theory and using heavy words to say absolutely nothing. This kind of dialogs do not help the lay man who wants to know the Lord personally and intimately.

    God is one. Period. God has revealed Himself in three distinct Persons. Period. God, in His Triune Self has three different roles. Period.

    God is love (1Jn 4:16, 19), therefore God the Father loves God the Son without limits and without boundaries. God the Son receives the love of the Father and infinitely loves God the Father. God the Spirit is that love that completes the circle of love.

    God the Father is not God the Son, while God the Son is not the Father and so on…. God the Father cannot be God without God the Son and God the Spirit; God the Son cannot be God without God the Father and God the Spirit. God the Spirit cannot be God without God the Father and God the Son.

    God is One. The role of the Father is greater than the Son’s and the Spirit, but never better. God the Son’s role is greater than God the Spirit, but not better. God the Spirit is the essence of all the attributes of who God is.

    He is the Spirit of the Father (God) and the Spirit of the Son (Christ). He is also God, the Holy Spirit.

    End of discussion.

    • One follow up remark: I would be careful in making the claim that any of the person’s roles are greater than the other. For each serves the ultimate and glorious purpose of glorifying the Godhead or the unity of God as One.
      Blessings.

  • Eliseo Rodriguez is on point: the nature of God is a mystery, and the scriptures do not provide clarification on many of these things — not anywhere near the level of detail provided in systematic theologies, anyway.

    Logos as a fiscally responsible, market-driven company probably needs to deal with these things. I hope that readers and students will rely more on pure word-message-concept (logos) in scripture than on theology — thus reducing the perceived need to get all this down pat, as though we could. https://blcasey.wordpress.com/2016/12/24/how-would-one-describe-the-indescribable/

Written by Tavis Bohlinger
theLAB