Christian Essentialism

Download:
 

K. Scott Oliphint returns to Christ the Center to discuss God’s attributes.  Understanding God as He is related to creation is no doubt a complicated task.  Traditionally, theologians have spoken of God’s attributes using the communicable/incommunicable distinction.  While this remains a helpful distinction, Oliphint presents another distinction more closely tied to covenantal theology.  Dr. Oliphint is Professor of Apologetics and Systematic Theology at Westmister Theological Seminary and is the author of Reasons for Faith: Philosophy in the Service of Theology.

Participants: , ,

 
 
 
 

15 Responses to “Christian Essentialism”

  1. Jeff Downs says:

    thank you, thank you, thank you.

  2. Camden Bucey says:

    I figured you would like this one :-)

  3. Jeff Downs says:

    What do you guys think of Van Til definition in the New Schaff-Herzog Twentieth Century Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge “…The three persons of the Trinity have exhaustively personal relationship with one another. And the idea of exhaustive personal relationship is the idea of the covenant.”

    • Camden Bucey says:

      I actually think this definition is slightly problematic. I hear echoes of Ralph Smith here. We can’t say that God is covenantal in se unless we define covenant simply as “relation.” The members of the Trinity become covenantal through the pactum salutis in the decree to save, but I wouldn’t say they are in covenant in their exhaustive personal relationships. The members of the Godhead are perichoretically related (coinhere, mutually indwell) in se, but I don’t see that as covenantal. Among other things, we’ll tend toward a social formulation of the Trinity if we follow this definition.

  4. Jim Cassidy says:

    Jeff,

    That is, of course, a beautiful definition. Though, as it stands, can use some clarification and unpacking.

    Blessings,

  5. I do think that VanTil was speaking in regard to the relationship between the members of of the economic Trinity, albeit, he could have been following Kuyper a bit too much, which is Ralph Smith’s problem. The difference between Van Til and Smith is clear from Van Til’s commitment to Confessional orthodoxy and Confessional Covenant Theology.

  6. Tim H. says:

    I’m not sure that I followed all of this one…

  7. Ryan H says:

    I am a weekly listener to Christ the Center. I have to admit, I had some difficulty following this particular episode. Apparently I am not familiar enough with the vocabulary and issues being thrown around in the discussion of the doctrine of God. What books would you gentlemen suggest to begin to get a better feel for some of the issues discussed (i.e. the nature of the incarnation, the person of God in relation to his immutability, etc.)?

Leave a reply

I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naïve. (Romans 16:17-18)

*

Comments RSS Feed