Divine Simplicity, Divine Relations, and the Problem of Robust Persons

Religions Pub Date : 2024-07-21 DOI:10.3390/rel15070874
Ronnie Campbell
{"title":"Divine Simplicity, Divine Relations, and the Problem of Robust Persons","authors":"Ronnie Campbell","doi":"10.3390/rel15070874","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, I aim to defend a robust concept of “person” as it relates to the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. I begin by situating the debate in the current context between Social Trinitarianism (ST) and Latin Trinitarianism (LT) and then zero in on Thomas Aquinas’s view of the divine Persons as subsistent relations. I will argue that such an understanding of divine Persons has two significant difficulties. First, Aquinas’s view of a strong doctrine of divine simplicity is susceptible to modal collapse. For on such a view, there are no real distinctions within God; such distinctions are conceptually only. If there are no real distinctions within God, then how can we make sense of the eternal relations within God? Second, I question whether a relation can be equated with a Person. After all, relations do not know things, perform actions, or love in the way Scripture portrays the divine Persons. I will then offer a constructive and more robust view of the divine Person—one that aligns with the control of Scripture. In doing so, I consider two objections, one centering on whether defenders of ST fall into tri-theism and the other on whether divine Persons can indeed work together.","PeriodicalId":505829,"journal":{"name":"Religions","volume":"49 17","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Religions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15070874","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this paper, I aim to defend a robust concept of “person” as it relates to the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. I begin by situating the debate in the current context between Social Trinitarianism (ST) and Latin Trinitarianism (LT) and then zero in on Thomas Aquinas’s view of the divine Persons as subsistent relations. I will argue that such an understanding of divine Persons has two significant difficulties. First, Aquinas’s view of a strong doctrine of divine simplicity is susceptible to modal collapse. For on such a view, there are no real distinctions within God; such distinctions are conceptually only. If there are no real distinctions within God, then how can we make sense of the eternal relations within God? Second, I question whether a relation can be equated with a Person. After all, relations do not know things, perform actions, or love in the way Scripture portrays the divine Persons. I will then offer a constructive and more robust view of the divine Person—one that aligns with the control of Scripture. In doing so, I consider two objections, one centering on whether defenders of ST fall into tri-theism and the other on whether divine Persons can indeed work together.
神圣的简单性、神圣的关系和健全人格的问题
在本文中,我旨在为与基督教三位一体教义相关的 "位格 "概念辩护。首先,我将辩论置于当前社会三位一体论(ST)与拉丁三位一体论(LT)之间的背景下,然后集中讨论托马斯-阿奎那关于神的位格是自存关系的观点。我将论证这种对神性的理解有两个重大困难。首先,阿奎那关于神性简单性的强烈学说观点容易受到模态崩溃的影响。因为根据这种观点,上帝内部并不存在真正的区别;这种区别只是概念上的。如果上帝内部没有真正的区别,那么我们又如何理解上帝内部的永恒关系呢?其次,我质疑关系是否可以等同于人格。毕竟,"关系 "并不像圣经中描绘的神的位格那样认识事物、采取行动或爱。然后,我将对神的位格提出一种建设性的、更强有力的观点--一种与圣经的控制相一致的观点。在此过程中,我将考虑两个反对意见,一个是关于《圣经》的捍卫者是否陷入了三神论,另一个是关于神格是否真的可以一起工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信