06.23.06
Posted in Theological Issues, Trinity and Incarnation at 10:57 am by Kam Weng
Only a handful of critics go beyond merely asserting the charge of incoherence of the Trinity and provide logical arguments to support their claim of incoherence. . . In any case, the task of logical demonstration is not so straightforward. Note that we assume that the propositions are clear and unambiguous. For example, we assume that the particular statement P or Q adequately and accurately and precisely represents essential aspects of God. But the fact is, we do not have any clear account of human nature that has gained consensus, let alone an account of divine nature. In reality, propositions P and Q are read differently (though implicitly) by different protagonists in logical debates.
Read more...
Permalink
06.09.06
Posted in Augustine, Theological Issues, Trinity and Incarnation at 9:57 pm by Kam Weng
Krisis & Praxis is back online,after three days of service interruption due to breakdown of the server at Streamyx. That it took Streamyx three days to fix the computer problem in the 21st century says a lot about the expertise or seriousness of Streamyx. I am reminded of Augustine’s words that there is no difference between kingdoms (regna) and bands of robbers (latrocinia). I guess Augustine would also put monopoly in the business of computer service provider at the same level with kingdoms and robbers.
Anyway I post here a full exposition of Augustine’s Model of the Trinity, as promised:
Augustine’s goal is to not to prove the doctrine the Trinity given his presupposition that faith precedes understanding and that understanding must inform faith. His ‘De Trinitate’ represents an exercise in understanding what it means to say that God is at the same time Unity in Trinity and Trinity in Unity.
Read more...
Permalink
05.31.06
Posted in Augustine, Theological Issues, Trinity and Incarnation at 9:01 pm by Kam Weng
Summary Diagram of Augustine’s Model of the Trinity – On the Relationship between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit
Read more...
Permalink
05.24.06
Posted in Theological Issues, Trinity and Incarnation at 10:56 pm by Kam Weng
Torrance wants to go beyond the category of substance and applies the term perichoresis (πεÏ?ιχώÏ?ησις, co-inherence, inter-penetrating and mutual indwelling) to highlight the dynamic, spiritual and intensely personal relationships in the Trinity. We are reminded of the model of indwelling love proposed by Augustine. Perichoresis refers to that eternal love between the Father (lover) and the Son (beloved) and the Holy Spirit (Spirit of love that binds both the lover and the beloved).
Read more...
Permalink
05.10.06
Posted in Trinity and Incarnation at 10:30 pm by Kam Weng
A more succinct discussion on Substance (ousia) and Object (hypostasis) is given by G. L. Prestige in his book Fathers and Heretics.
Read more...
Permalink
Posted in Trinity and Incarnation at 10:15 pm by Kam Weng
My earlier essays on the Trinity focused on demonstrating logical coherence rather than conceptual clarification. Admittedly, discussion of logical coherence is appealing, but such discussion can also be beguiling. The discussion maintains an appearance of austere logic, and follows the suggestion that once the logical structure of the argument is unpacked, there will be agreement.
That agreement seldom happens is because the philosophers covertly smuggle in their own meaning of the terms deployed. This in turn results in different criteria of logical coherence. Inevitably, even the best minds fail to resolve the logic of doctrinal agreement.
It is imperative that we should at least be clear about what we mean if we want to use the terms to analyse of the doctrine of Trinity. In this regard, we need to go back to the original formulation of the doctrine in the early Church.
Read more...
Permalink
05.03.06
Posted in Christology (Systematic), Trinity and Incarnation at 7:12 pm by Kam Weng
It must be pointed out that the charge of incoherence of the Incarnation assumes we know the exact nature of human and divine properties to be able to assert that there can be no joining together of human and divine properties in an individual.
John Macquarie’s response to such a presupposition is pertinent, “Part of the trouble with the doctrine of incarnation is that we discuss the divinity and even the humanity of Christ in terms of ready-made ideas of God and man that we bring with us, without allowing these ideas to be corrected and even drastically changed by what we learn about God and man in and through the incarnation.�
Thomas V. Morris’ landmark book, The Logic of God Incarnate suggests the two-minds model as one possible demonstration of the coherence of the incarnation.
Read more...
Permalink
04.20.06
Posted in Christology (Systematic), Theological Issues, Trinity and Incarnation at 12:17 am by Kam Weng
Assuming that we accept the coherence of the concept of the Incarnation (set out in my earlier article dated 15 April 2006), I now proceed to consider the possibility of the Incarnation and explore how God can become genuinely human and yet remain God.
To begin with, God becoming human (a divine individual) means acquiring a human soul that interacts with the world through its bodily senses and functions as the centre that organizes rational thought processes and exercises will power of choice and action. That such functions are limited is of course a normal but not essential (relating to essence) quality of human existence.
Read more...
Permalink
04.15.06
Posted in Christology (Systematic), Theological Issues, Trinity and Incarnation at 12:39 am by Kam Weng
We begin with the Chalcedonian Creed – “We should confess that our Lord Jesus Christ is the one and the same Son, the same perfect in Godhead and the same perfect in manhood, truly God and truly man, the same of a rational soul and body, consubstantial [of one substance] with the Father in Godhead, and the same consubstantial with us in manhood, like us in all things except sin;. . . (Kelly, ECD 339-340)
Read more...
Permalink
Posted in Christology (Systematic), Theological Issues, Trinity and Incarnation at 12:35 am by Kam Weng
The Chalcedon Creed includes the following affirmation:
“We should confess that our Lord Jesus Christ is the one and the same Son, the same perfect in Godhead and the same perfect in manhood, truly God and truly man, the same of a rational soul and body, consubstantial [of one substance] with the Father in Godhead, and the same consubstantial with us in manhood, like us in all things except sin;. . . one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only-begotten, made known in two natures without confusion, without change, without division, without separation, the difference [distinction] of the natures being by no means removed [annulled] because of the union, but the property of each nature being preserved and coalescing in one person [prosopon] and one hypostasis [subsistence] – not parted or divided into two persons [prosopa], but the one and the same Son, only-begotten, divine Word, the Lord Jesus Christ, . . . (J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrine, pp. 339-340)
Read more...
Permalink
« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »
