I know this is quite late…, but still… Could you please elaborate on the idea that there even is such a notion as “personal will” when it comes to the Persons of the Trinity? Dr. Tipton refers to this notion as being well grounded tradinionally, and to me the “traditional” dimension of the idea of divine personal “wills” seems to be lacking…

http://www.booksataglance.com/blog/fifth-updated-edition-trinity-debate-bibliography/

The same is true of 1 Corinthians 10:4. But both these texts speak of the Son’s presence with God’s covenant people, so the incarnation is hinted at.

I get your point. I think the pactum salutis may help us make those important distinctions, but God is of course, not in need of any such help. The idea of the pactum salutis seems like a well meaning but not completely helpful theological convention like that Venn diagram of the Trinity they were talking about.

Camden,

Sorry for the mix up with “name.”

Just before the 40 min mark Lane Tipton says, “While there is an essential unity to God, an essential will, there is also a hypostatic conception of the will.”

Around the 43 min mark he says, “The Father Son and Spirit are distinct willing agents, they are distinct hypostases who will distinctively and particularly as agents in the pactum salutis.”

Now to will is an act – as as far as classical Trinitarianism is concerned, the only divine acts not predicated of the Godhead are generation and spiration. Those two notional acts are the foundations for the relations of origin that constitute the divine persons. Are the acts of will ascribed by Tipton to the Father, Son, and Spirit new notional acts to be compared to generation and spiration?

Camden,

Just to be clear, do you agree with:

1. the Son is conscious of himself not being the Father…

2. the Son wills to come again on a charger…

3. the Father does not will to come again on a charger, and…

4. all three persons will the consumation of all things in Christ?

In a word, doesn’t the one divine will come to expression in a plurality of persons?

Hermonta,

Having only just now read your post I see that mine to CM was superfluous. 🙂

Name* ;-),

The will he possesses as divine is the divine triune will. We can’t pit unity against diversity in the Godhead, which I feel tends to happen when we start comparing the two numerically. Unity and diversity are limiting concepts in our consideration of the Trinity. As Son, he distinctly subsists in the divine essence. And therefore as a distinct hypostasis (person), he exists in a distinct mode (not modalism) of willing. The same is true for his consciousness. The one God is triunely conscious.

I don’t think of this numerically—as in the unity of God is a consciousness, and then the three persons have their own consciousness, leaving us with four consciousnesses. We cannot overstress that this distinction is without separation. The hypostases indwell each other exhaustively, that is, perichoretically, such that each hypostasis fully and distinctly (though not separately) subsists in the divine essence.

Thanks for the question! This is a fascinating and important discussion.

Blessings,

Camden

CM,

I believe the Pactum helps distinguish the eternal will of God from His ontic perfection. God is necessarily triune etc., apart from willing it so. Yet His attributes don’t necessitate the divine decree.

Can’t we say that the eternal and freely willed submission of the Son as understood in the PS reveals a disposition peculiar to Him? In other words, isn’t it incongruous that the Father becomes incarnate in any possible world? I can’t see how one side of the debate can avoid capriciousness within the Godhead.

I believe Letham’s appendices in his work on the Trinity are quite useful and relevant to the present discussion. Related, I appreciate his discussion on Calvin’s understanding of Nicea, in particular as it relates to Gregory Nazianzen. Bob’s reference to Warfield on Calvin drove me back into volume 5, Calvin and Calvinism. Would enjoy discussing off line the eternal generation of person and autotheos.

Thank you Lane for teasing out that each person of the Trinity is a self-conscious person that possess the one undivided will, while recognizing that although All will the Son come, it’s only the Son who wills that He himself come. You wrote a great piece in WTJ years back that addresses what I believe to be the latent modalism in the western church.

Camden,

So are you then saying that God the Son, not incarnate, has only one will?

CM, I think the reason for the pactum salutis is to make a distinction between the what God is by necessity and what God is/does by free choice. How does one drop the pactum salutis and still maintain the distinction between God’s eternal plan of redemption and God’s essential triune attribute (for example).

I would affirm that the Son as God-man possesses two wills: one human will according to his human nature and one triune will according to his divine nature.

Bentley,

Thanks for the correction. I’ll fix it. I saved the article in Pocket, which listed Giles as the author. They must be doing something weird with the author tag on the site.

Thanks again!

Overall, definitely with Trueman, Jones, etc. Really appreciated this podcast.

Great episode. Looking forward to more discussion on the subject.