TheoLogicaPub Date : 2022-07-22DOI: 10.14428/thl.v7i1.64663
J. Sijuwade
{"title":"A Transformational Incarnation","authors":"J. Sijuwade","doi":"10.14428/thl.v7i1.64663","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14428/thl.v7i1.64663","url":null,"abstract":"This article aims to provide an explication of the doctrine of the Incarnation. A ‘Transformational Model’ of the doctrine is formulated within the metaphysical and ontological framework of Jonathan Lowe (i.e. his Non-Cartesian Substance Dualism and Four-Category Ontology). Formulating this model within this specific framework will enable the doctrine of the Incarnation to be explicated in a clear and consistent manner, and the oft-raised objections against it can be answered.","PeriodicalId":52326,"journal":{"name":"TheoLogica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73850982","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
TheoLogicaPub Date : 2022-06-21DOI: 10.14428/thl.v6i2.52533
M. Wreen
{"title":"The Contradiction Approach to solving Problems about Omnipotence","authors":"M. Wreen","doi":"10.14428/thl.v6i2.52533","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14428/thl.v6i2.52533","url":null,"abstract":"Some philosophers have claimed that the concept of omnipotence is implicitly inapplicable to anything. The well-known “stone problem” is an argument to that effect: whether or not a being can create a stone too heavy for him to lift, there is something that he can’t do, and so he is not omnipotent. Some philosophers have replied that no action that falls under a contradiction lies within the scope of omnipotence. This reply employs what I call the contradiction approach. Many philosophers reject the contradiction approach, arguing that there are closely related problems that it cannot solve. In this paper I argue that, duly extended and modified, the contradiction can solve many such problems and is much more resilient than many philosophers think. However, the approach is not itself omnipotent and ultimately must give to a more metaphysical approach in order to salvage the possibility of omnipotence.","PeriodicalId":52326,"journal":{"name":"TheoLogica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72509255","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
TheoLogicaPub Date : 2022-06-18DOI: 10.14428/thl.v6i2.63563
P. Butakov
{"title":"What Exactly Are the Intra-Trinitarian Relations?","authors":"P. Butakov","doi":"10.14428/thl.v6i2.63563","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14428/thl.v6i2.63563","url":null,"abstract":"The core of a Trinitarian model is the internal layout of intra-Trinitarian relations. Depending on different metaphysical interpretations of the nature of the relations, various patristic authors have produced different and oftentimes incompatible Trinitarian models, and, consequently, conflicting expositions of the doctrine of the Trinity. To elucidate the differences in their Trinitarian theologies, I demonstrate the divergence in their understanding of the divine relations using the contemporary philosophical taxonomy of relations. I analyze the models of Basil of Caesarea, Gregory Nazianzen, and Boethius, and their attempted synthesis by Thomas Aquinas. Each of the patristic Trinitarian models, despite being fully orthodox, uses completely different types of relations, which makes them incompatible. One of the results of this incompatibility is the problem of the filioque, which cannot be resolved without addressing the metaphysics of relations.","PeriodicalId":52326,"journal":{"name":"TheoLogica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81004734","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
TheoLogicaPub Date : 2022-06-13DOI: 10.14428/thl.v7i2.66783
W. Hasker
{"title":"Et Tu, Zimmerman?","authors":"W. Hasker","doi":"10.14428/thl.v7i2.66783","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14428/thl.v7i2.66783","url":null,"abstract":"Dean Zimmerman is an open theist. However, he has constructed an argument to the effect that, if simple foreknowledge (foreknowledge without middle knowledge) did exist, this knowledge would be providentially useful to God. I show that his argument fails: if simple foreknowledge did exist, it would be providentially useless.","PeriodicalId":52326,"journal":{"name":"TheoLogica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76605793","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
TheoLogicaPub Date : 2022-06-10DOI: 10.14428/thl.v6i2.63903
M. Hołda
{"title":"Threefold Hidden God","authors":"M. Hołda","doi":"10.14428/thl.v6i2.63903","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14428/thl.v6i2.63903","url":null,"abstract":"In the context of current discussions on the problem of divine hiddenness in the field of analytic philosophy and beyond, I propose the concept of “threefold Hidden God.” In our times divine hiddenness becomes, so to speak, a divine attribute replacing other characteristics traditionally ascribed to God. Hiddenness, however, is not only an attribute of God understood from the so-called de deo uno perspective. It is possible to think about this attribute also in the Trinitarian context. According to my proposal God can be understood as hidden in three ways: in the laws of nature, in history, and in relationships with humans. This concept of “threefold hidden God” is a reference to the old proposal, originating from Augustine, to seek the traces of the Triune God who is present in man. The search for “threefold hidden God” seems to be more appropriate for our times and seems to be a promising proposal for an even deeper Trinitarian renewal of the analytic tradition.","PeriodicalId":52326,"journal":{"name":"TheoLogica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89844938","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
TheoLogicaPub Date : 2022-05-17DOI: 10.14428/thl.v6i2.66233
R. Pouivet
{"title":"McCabe on the Persons of the Trinity","authors":"R. Pouivet","doi":"10.14428/thl.v6i2.66233","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14428/thl.v6i2.66233","url":null,"abstract":"Some analytical philosophers of religion characterize the persons of the Trinity using a notion of person borrowed from modern philosophy. It is the Cartesian one of the person as a center of consciousness. Herbert McCabe is a theologian who opposed this thesis because he asserts that God is not a person. Nor are the persons of the Trinity persons in that typically modern sense. This leads McCabe to prefer the Thomistic conception of the Trinity, and to propose a form of “mysterianism.”","PeriodicalId":52326,"journal":{"name":"TheoLogica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83531386","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
TheoLogicaPub Date : 2022-05-12DOI: 10.14428/thl.v6i2.63913
D. Bray
{"title":"Richard of St. Victor’s Argument from Love and Contemporary Analytic Theology of the Trinity","authors":"D. Bray","doi":"10.14428/thl.v6i2.63913","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14428/thl.v6i2.63913","url":null,"abstract":"In his De Trinitate (c.1170) Richard of St Victor gives one of the more intriguing examples of trinitarian philosophical theology. Beginning with our common beliefs about and experiences of love, he argues for the existence of three, and only three, divine persons (call this The Argument). This essay explores several points of interaction between The Argument and current discussions in analytic theology of the Trinity. In part one I briefly survey Richard’s views on three topics of interest to philosophical trinitarians, namely, the distinction of divine persons, his model of the Trinity, and intra-trinitarian love. In part two I look at some work in these areas by analytic thinkers. My intention here is to apply some elements of The Argument and to show how its appeal may go beyond that of social trinitarians. I propose that Richard’s argument cannot receive unqualified adoption by social trinitarians and, alternatively, is more appealing to non-social trinitarians than has thus far been recognized. \u0000 ","PeriodicalId":52326,"journal":{"name":"TheoLogica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74867049","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
TheoLogicaPub Date : 2022-05-08DOI: 10.14428/thl.v6i2.63573
Derek S King
{"title":"To whom can God speak?","authors":"Derek S King","doi":"10.14428/thl.v6i2.63573","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14428/thl.v6i2.63573","url":null,"abstract":"The analytic philosopher or theologian is faced with two important tasks when giving an account of Trinity: demonstrate logical coherence and remain faithful to the doctrine as received from the Christian tradition. A good analytic doctrine of the Trinity does both well. This paper examines one modern attempt of this: William Hasker’s pro-Social account. It argues that, despite much good in Hasker’s account, he fails to reckon with difficult passages in the theologian he claims as his greatest ally: Gregory of Nyssa. This paper argues that at least one passage in Gregory is incompatible with Hasker’s pro-Social account.","PeriodicalId":52326,"journal":{"name":"TheoLogica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91342378","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
TheoLogicaPub Date : 2022-05-03DOI: 10.14428/thl.v6i2.64263
A. Loke
{"title":"A critical engagement with N.T. Wright on Natural Theology","authors":"A. Loke","doi":"10.14428/thl.v6i2.64263","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14428/thl.v6i2.64263","url":null,"abstract":"N. T. Wright’s important recent discussion of Natural Theology seeks to redefine traditional Natural Theology on Biblical grounds. I show that Wright’s discussion neglects Biblical passages (e.g., Acts 14:14–17 and Romans 1–2) which imply that God has left ‘witnesses’ (Acts 14:17) in the natural order, and which contradict Wright’s claim that people cannot start with the natural world apart from Christ and infer that God exists. Contrary to Wright, some contemporary versions of the arguments of Natural Theology do not entail ‘classical theism’ as Wright understood it but increase the plausibility of miracles and the Jesus of the Gospels.","PeriodicalId":52326,"journal":{"name":"TheoLogica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90278665","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
TheoLogicaPub Date : 2022-03-30DOI: 10.14428/thl.v6i1.65573
Kutter Callaway, Oliver D. Crisp
{"title":"Restoring Human Nature","authors":"Kutter Callaway, Oliver D. Crisp","doi":"10.14428/thl.v6i1.65573","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14428/thl.v6i1.65573","url":null,"abstract":"Over the past decade, a growing number of theologians and philosophers from a variety of sub disciplines have expressed an interest in the possibilities of a “science-engaged theology.” The specific projects that fall under this somewhat broad conceptual umbrella are rather diverse, but at its most basic, science-engaged theology is a form of inquiry that is deeply engaged with one or more of the sciences in the service of articulating, defending, or critiquing existing theological and philosophical frameworks. Some operating in this fertile domain even seek to construct entirely new theological (and occasionally, scientific) categories in light of the generative insights born from a robust interaction between the sciences and theology.","PeriodicalId":52326,"journal":{"name":"TheoLogica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88143006","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
