Augustine: On the Trinity

Augustine,

doi:10.1017/cbo9781139164658

Cited by 14 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…29 Therefore, 'there is no modification in God because there is nothing that can be changed or lost.' 30 As A.H. Armstrong outlines, noting the relation between the doctrine of creation and divine immutability:…”

Section: Theological Reason and The Doctrine Of Godmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Let us further delve into the dogmatic function of Augustine's account of divine immutability, unveiling its relation to theological reason's orientation to the creature's contemplative end in God and to its speculative and receptive dimensions. Augustine begins De trinitate questioning how, given the inevitability that creatures will speak of God on the basis of the categories of creaturely existence, 37 we can engage in this task in a manner which respects the distinction between Creator and creature. He offers a hermeneutical solution.…”

Section: Theological Reason and The Doctrine Of Godmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Contemplating the One who Remains the Same: Augustine, Swinburne, and Psalm 102 on the Relation between Divine Immutability and Theological Reason

Michelson

2019

Modern Theology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article defends a classical doctrine of divine immutability by contending that the most influential objections lodged against it by theologians and philosophers such as Richard Swinburne–i.e. that divine immutability is speculative rather than practical, is philosophical rather than biblical, and fails to cohere with a ‘personal’ God who relates to creatures–are rooted in a particular construal of theological reason. I diagnose Swinburne’s account of theological reason with the help of Karl Barth’s interpretation of Anselm, and put forth a contrasting account of divine immutability, rooted in a distinct approach to theological reason, through a theological interpretation of Psalm 102, an analysis of the Creator/creature distinction, and an examination of Augustine’s De trinitate.

show abstract

Section: Theological Reason and The Doctrine Of Godmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theological Reason and The Doctrine Of Godmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contemplating the One who Remains the Same: Augustine, Swinburne, and Psalm 102 on the Relation between Divine Immutability and Theological Reason

Michelson

2019

Modern Theology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…be spatially extended) I shall call material objects. The substance that is my desk could not be a desk unless it occupied space…If there is a substance which does occupy space but need not, it does not count as a material object on my definition" (9).…”

Section: The Material-immaterials Divide Revisitedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Omnipresence and the Location of the Immaterial

Inman¹

2017

Oxford Scholarship Online

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I first offer a broad taxonomy of models of divine omnipresence in the Christian tradition, both past and present. I then examine the recent model proposed by Hud Hudson (2009Hudson ( , 2014 and Alexander Pruss (2013)-ubiquitous entension-and flag a worry with their account that stems from predominant analyses of the concept of 'material object'. I then attempt to show that ubiquitous entension has a rich Latin medieval precedent in the work of Augusine and Anselm. I argue that the model of omnipresence explicated by Augustine and Anselm has the resources to avoid the noted worry by offering an alternative account of the divide between the immaterial and the material. I conclude by considering a few alternative analyses of 'material object' that make conceptual room for a contemporary Christian theist to follow suite in thinking that at least some immaterial entities are literally spatially located when relating to the denizens of spacetime.At the heart of many a theistic metaphysic is the view that an exhaustive inventory of reality consists of both material and immaterial entities, and that these two domains interact in some way or other. There is, however, surprisingly little discussion at the intersection of contemporary metaphysics and philosophical theology concerning the precise nature and relationship between the material and the immaterial and its bearing on Christian theology.This was not always the case. Medieval philosophical reflection was replete with discussion on the nature of the relationship between God, angels, and the human soul and the material domain. In fact, according to Robert Pasnau (2011a), the medieval scholastics were largely in agreement that immaterial entities, though lacking in material content are, strictly speaking, spatially located or present in some sense or other when relating to material reality. The question that preoccupied medieval philosophical theologians, then, was not whether such entities were spatially located or present in their dealings with material beings, but rather, how they were located as such. This, of course, assumes an understanding of the material-immaterial divide that is largely foreign to the contemporary context. Yet it is one that is both philosophically interesting, theologically fruitful, and by my lights worthy of serious consideration once again. * For a representative writing sample please consult the introduction, §2, and §4.

show abstract

“…56 This New Testament correlation between the Logos and the transcendental of truth echoes in the work of Augustine, 'When the mind, then, beholds itself in conception, it understands and cognizes itself; it begets, therefore, its own understanding and cognition.' 57 However, Augustine notes that memory and understanding of themselves are insufficient without will, which issues forth in love.…”

Section: B: Truthmentioning

confidence: 99%