Trinities

What did the famous Justin Martyr teach about Proverbs 8, and why?

Do our earliest surviving post-New-Testament writings interpret Proverbs 8 as being about the pre-human Jesus?

"The Lord created me at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of long ago." Is this famous passage in Proverbs 8 about the pre-human Jesus?

In my view, the fourth has been the most misunderstood gospel.

In this episode we hear Mr. James Lee (PhD student in Philosophy at Syracuse University) present his paper "His Ways (of Being) Are Not Our Ways" at the Society of Christian Philosophers meeting on November 8, 2014 at Niagara University.

A presentation by Dr. Harriet Baber at the 2014 SCP meeting at Niagara University.

Is it a sin to celebrate Christmas, because Christmas is pagan in origin? In this episode I discuss this disputed question, and what I believe the apostle Paul would have to say about this ongoing dispute between Christians.

“Before Abraham, I am.” What did Jesus, or the author of the fourth gospel, mean here? In this episode we hear how some ancient authors interpreted John 8:58, including the famous North African bishop Augustine of Hippo.

John Duns Scotus (d. 1308), nicknamed by tradition "the Subtle Doctor," was one of the most important medieval Christian philosophers, and was notorious for the difficulty of his thought. In this episode, we hear a specialist in medieval philosophy give a conference presentation on Scotus's views on identity (sameness) and distinction (difference).

Nowadays most philosophers and logicians recognize qualitative sameness (aka similarity), which comes in degrees, and numerical sameness (aka numerical or absolute identity), which doesn't come in degrees, and which is a symmetrical, transitive, and reflexive relation. This latter, numerical identity, is a relation which a thing can only bear to itself.

If these are all we have to work with, then we get apparent contradictions from trinitarian claims. For instance, consider this triad of claims:

The Father is God.

The Son is God.

The Father is not the same as the Son.

If the Father is numerically identical to God (1), and so is the Son (2), then it follows (because the relation is symmetrical and transitive), that the Father and Son are numerically identical. (So, 3 is false) The above three claims, so understood, are an inconsistent triad - if any two are true, the remaining claim is false. But arguably, the "Athanasian Creed" requires them all.

That is, interpreting the above triad in terms of numerical identity, there would be this valid argument:

f = g

s = g

g = s (from 2, symmetricality)

f= s (from 1 and 3, by transitivity)

But 4 is a disastrous conclusion. We know that a thing can't, at the same time and in the same way, differ from itself. But according to the New Testament, the Father and Son have differed. To put it differently, numerical sameness forces indiscernibility. If any A just is some B, then A and B can't differ in the smallest way. But the Father and Son do differ, and so they must be non-identical, which is to say, numerically distinct. What does it mean to say, then, that each of them "is God." Perhaps the statements simply mean that each is divine, that each has the divine attributes or a divine nature. Father and Son would then be not numerically identical, but rather similar - that is, like one another, in respect of being divine. But then we have two beings, each of which is divine; this would appear to be two gods. What now?

One response is to make additional distinctions, to argue that our concepts of numerical and qualitative sameness are not enough. This is the course pursued by John Duns Scotus. He holds that we must consider sameness and difference both in the mind, and as it were "on the side of things" in the world, and then he goes on to make further distinctions, which he thinks are relevant not only to theology, but also to more general metaphysics.

Our presenter is Dr. Joshua Blander, Assistant Professor of Philosophy at The King's College in New York City. His paper is called "Being the Same without Being the Same: Duns Scotus on Identity and Distinction." Here is his handout from the presentation, which will help you to follow along.

You can also listen to this episode on stitcher or itunes (please subscribe and rate us in either or both).  If you would like to upload audio feedback for possible inclusion in a future episode of this podcast, put the audio file here.

Links for this episode:

Dr. Joshua Blander

John Duns Scotus

at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

at the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

at the Franciscan Archive

previous  trinities posts

on identity

on the indiscernibility of identicals (and another)

on the minority view in present-day philosophy that there can be numerical sameness without identity

pro

con

episodes on "Before Abraham was, I am." (John 8:58): episode 62, episode 63

The Apostolic Fathers

St. Anselm was the Roman Catholic archbishop of Canterbury, and an important medieval Christian philosopher. He defined the concept of God as "that than which no greater can be thought." Using this concept, he argues that there must actually be such a being; this is his famous "ontological" argument for God's existence. And he also deduces that this being must be eternal, and omnipotent (etc.) - otherwise, he would not be that than which no greater can be thought. Present-day philosophers call this sort of reasoning "perfect being theology."

But what is the key concept? Is it the concept of the greatest being there could possibly be? Or should we argue from the concept of an absolutely perfect being? Or should we start with the concept of a being who is truly worthy of human worship?

In this episode, Dr. Mark C. Murphy, professor at Georgetown University, discusses these deep issues. He argues that the important concept for the Anselmian is absolute perfection.

Here are Dr. Murphy's slides; it is recommended that you view this episode on youtube, as the video there syncs his slides with his talk.

You can also listen to this episode on stitcher or itunes (please rate us there).  If you would like to upload audio feedback for possible inclusion in a future episode of this podcast, put the audio file here.

Links for this episode:

Dr. Murphy's home page

"Does morality depend on God?" and "Why Philosophy of Religion?" Short 2013 videos by the Center for Philosophy of Religion at the University of Notre Dame

"God and Moral Law" - Dr. Murphy's 2012 Plantinga Fellow Lecture

"God Beyond Justice" - Dr. Murphy's 2012 lecture at the My Ways Are Not Your Ways conference

God and Moral Law: On the Theistic Explanation of Morality

Philosophy of Law: The Fundamentals

Natural Law in Jurisprudence and Politics

An Essay on Divine Authority

Natural Law and Practical Rationality (kindle)

Dr. Murphy's papers at PhilPapers

the philosophy of Anselm

Dale's introductory screencasts on two analyses of Anselm's ontological argument

The Society of Christian Philosophers

Peter van Inwagen

Yujin Nagasawa

Jeff Speaks

John Keller

trinities podcast interviews with Dr. Stephen Holmes: part 1, part 2