In November 2009, Robert M. Bowman proposed a debate on the Trinity between himself and any non-Trinitarian challenger at his blogsite (www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog). Bowman is a well known evangelical author in the USA who specialises in Christology and has written a number of books on the Trinity and the deity of Christ. He provided a list of criteria that all applicants were required to meet and said if more than one suitable candidate emerged, a vote would be held to determine his opponent. After a few weeks, readers were asked to vote for one of five candidates: myself, Anthony Buzzard (Unitarian), Michael Richardson (Mormon), David Barron (Seventh Day Adventist), and Kermit Zarley (Unitarian). In the poll which followed, I won the most votes and was selected to debate Bowman.
Brother Bill Farrar generously donated two reference books that I needed for research purposes, and purchased several others on my behalf. Brethren Jonathan Burke (my identical twin), Steve Cox, Andrew Perry and Steve Snobelen acted as my support team, proof-reading my arguments before they went online. Each of them spent many hours checking my work for errors, making suggestions, and discussing the progress of the debate. They also provided additional resources (such as commentaries, journal articles and word definitions) when required. I am deeply indebted to these brethren for the wealth of experience, expertise and academic resources they brought to the debate.
Two days before the debate began, Bowman attempted to change the rules, stating that philosophical and historical arguments would not be allowed on the grounds that they were “irrelevant”. He also claimed that I had agreed to these restrictions. I challenged him on this and advised that I would be using both forms of argument regardless of whether or not he considered them to be relevant. Ultimately this proved to be a moot point, since Bowman himself ended up arguing from philosophy and history in response to my arguments.
The debate covered six weeks, with each week devoted to a specific subject:
- Week 1: God
- Week 2: Jesus Christ
- Week 3: Jesus Christ
- Week 4: Holy Spirit
- Week 5: Father, Son and Holy Spirit
- Week 6: Summary and conclusion
Readers were able to post general comments and criticisms throughout the debate, and at the end of Week 6 they were invited to pose questions directly to myself and Bowman.
The format of the debate required us to post a positive argument on each subject, and respond to the opposing argument in the form of rebuttal. Thus, on the first day of the first week, we both presented an opening argument which articulated our respective understanding of God (His identity, characteristics, etc.) and then posted rebuttals throughout the rest of the week. Bowman had originally proposed a limit of 10,000 words for each opening argument but changed this to 5,000 words at my request. There was no word limit for rebuttal. It was agreed that a vote would be held at the end of the debate, to determine a winner.
Bowman’s arguments consisted almost entirely of material copy/pasted from his book (Putting Jesus In His Place). Having purchased a copy of this book in preparation for the debate, I was able to predict his approach to various passages and anticipate the nature of his responses.
The debate was followed by a number of bloggers, most notably Scott Lencke, a pastor at Cornerstone International Church[1] and Dale Tuggy, associate professor of philosophy at SUNY Fredonia.[2] Lencke criticized my arguments from an evangelical perspective, while Tuggy (who confesses a Unitarian Christology) provided a weekly commentary on both sides of the debate and concluded with an analysis of the final outcome (.[3] At the Kingdom Ready website, participants offered commentary, discussion and counter-argument in equal measure.[4]
Responses to the debate at the Parchment & Pen blogsite were very encouraging. Despite a strong and persistent Trinitarian presence, a majority of readers came out in support of the Unitarian position. Some were Unitarians already; some said they were moving from a pro-Trinitarian view to a Unitarian Christology; others said they had no specific Christology prior to the debate, but now favoured Unitarianism over the alternatives. Several people expressed an interest in joining or studying with the Christadelphian community. I was touched by the robust support I received from Unitarians of various backgrounds, including Sir Anthony Buzzard (The Doctrine of the Trinity: Christianity’s Self-Inflicted Wound, 1998), Patrick Navas (Divine Truth or Human Tradition?, 2006) and Kermit Zarley (The Restitution of Jesus Christ, 2008).
The debate ended abruptly when Bowman locked all the threads without warning or consultation while I was still composing my last counter-rebuttal. He also removed my ability to post new threads or edit my posts, which prevented me from responding to his final arguments. When someone asked if readers would still be invited to vote for a winner, Bowman gave an oblique reply and closed the discussion. At the present writing (14.07.10) there has been no vote and no explanation.
I have now commenced writing a book on the Trinity, which will incorporate the material I used in the debate and further develop the arguments from reason, Scripture and history. Readers are welcome to contact me via email (evangelion@thechristadelphians.org) to discuss the debate and/or my upcoming work. I will be grateful for all submissions.
[1] prodigalthought.net [Cited 14/7/2010].
[2] trinities.org/blog [Cited 14/7/2010].
[3] trinities.org/blog/archives/2046 [Cited 14/7/2010].
[4] kingdomready.org/blog/2010/02/02/another-trinitymonotheism-debate [Cited 14/7/2010].
The Sabbath and Israel and Jesus’ work on the Sabbath