Widely recognized as the leading Scottish theologian of the twentieth century, Thomas F. Torrance... more Widely recognized as the leading Scottish theologian of the twentieth century, Thomas F. Torrance (1913–2007) was noteworthy as a dogmatic theologian for his influential explication of Trinitarian doctrine as it was developed by Nicene theologians. He was also a prominent figure in ecumenical theology, notably working with Eastern Orthodox theologians towards agreement on the doctrine of the Trinity. Torrance contributed greatly to ecumenical dialogue among Reformed, Anglicans, and Roman Catholics, with his innovative and substantive understanding of the Church and sacraments, as well as nature and grace. Torrance’s expertise was not limited to dogmatics as he was also one of the leading theologians of the twentieth century to publish extensively on the relationship between science and theology. Torrance’s influence is indicated by the increasing number of doctoral dissertations devoted to his theology, the existence of a scholarly society formed to discuss and disseminate his ideas...
This article argues that views of sin and salvation are shaped by one's view of God. Thus, wh... more This article argues that views of sin and salvation are shaped by one's view of God. Thus, whenever it is thought that God is a metaphor that theologians can change to attain a desired social or psychological result, then the true meaning of sin and salvation are lost. Relying on Karl Barth's view of Jesus as the Judge judged in our place, this article argues against ideas that sin can no longer be understood as self-will, and that salvation must be understood only as our working for a better world. Such views fail to recognise that, since only God can reveal God, the true meaning of sin is and remains most visible today in our attempts to redefine God and salvation in social and psychological rather than strictly theological terms.
Over against the bluster of modern Trinitarian theology’s implementation of a view of creation an... more Over against the bluster of modern Trinitarian theology’s implementation of a view of creation and reconciliation that posits a God who is somehow constituted by his relations with us in history, we have here a very substantial and thought-provoking analysis and rejection of such thinking based on the eternal unity in Trinity and Trinity in unity of God affirmed at the Council of Nicaea with its stress on the homoousion of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. While some today consider the question of whether or not God could have been the Triune God without the world to be a mere abstraction, a question without any discernible content, Bruce Marshall demonstrates why this important question has been marginalized by those who consciously or implicitly embrace the logic of Hegelian thinking. But more importantly, he shows exactly why it is imperative to ask and answer that question by pointing to the reality of the immanent Trinity and not to some abstraction that needs to be reconceived in terms of a divine unity that is seen to be the result of certain developments within the historical process. The question of whether or not God could have been God without the world is and remains a crucial question today. And how one answers this question will determine the way one conceptualizes the divine acts of reconciliation and redemption. If God needs the world in any sense to be God, as he would if he were in any way constituted by his relations with us in history, then such a God will also be depicted as one who needs to suffer in order to love and ultimately needs to be redeemed from division, conflict, godlessness, and death in order for our salvation to be a reality. Put succinctly, if suffering, alienation, and death are thought to be part of God’s nature, then God becomes powerless to overcome these indications of sin for us.
In his attempt to link the immanent and the economic Trinity more closely together, Ted Peters se... more In his attempt to link the immanent and the economic Trinity more closely together, Ted Peters seems to limit the task of the Trinitarian doctrine to that of a hermeneutical device needed to comprehend salvation. This basically Rahnerian approach to the mystery of the Trinity, it is argued, could lead to God's freedom being compromised and his nature being confused with the process of salvation history.
elements of the corpus triforme theology (which sees the Body of Christ as a temporal sacrament s... more elements of the corpus triforme theology (which sees the Body of Christ as a temporal sacrament symbolizing the Word’s incarnation in the Old Covenant, in Jesus of Nazareth, and in the unfolding of the new covenant) while rejecting core beliefs like monotheism and the Incarnation. Balthasar believes that the same Gnostic tactic is at work in Christianity today, and therefore he attempts to use Irenaeus’s critique of early Gnosticism as a criterion to diagnose the practice of some modern theologians who adopt positions inimical to the corpus triforme Christology. He sees a clear connection between Gnosticism and modern theologies that have been influenced by Hegel (pp. 139-145). He views Marxism also
This article argues that if Catholic and Protestant theologians, prompted by the Holy Spirit, all... more This article argues that if Catholic and Protestant theologians, prompted by the Holy Spirit, allowed their common faith in God as confessed in the Nicene Creed to shape their thinking and action, this could lead to more visible unity between them. Relying on Barth, the article suggests that the oneness, holiness, catholicity and apostolicity of the church can be understood best in faith that allows the unique object of faith, namely God incarnate in Christ and active in his Spirit, to dictate one’s understanding. Such thinking will avoid the pluralist tendency to eviscerate Christ’s uniqueness and attempts to equate church unity with aspects of the church’s visible existence. These approaches tend to undermine the importance of faith in recognizing that such unity means union with Christ through the Spirit such that it cannot be equated with or perceived by examining only its historical existence in itself and in relation to other communities of faith.
This article will explore the relationship between the commands to love God and love neighbor as ... more This article will explore the relationship between the commands to love God and love neighbor as this has been articulated by two of the most influential theologians of the recent past, Karl Barth and Karl Rahner. Following Barth's insistence on a deliberate and sharp distinction between the immanent and economic Trinity, I will argue that a proper recognition that the immanent Trinity is the indispensable premise of the economic Trinity will lead toward a view that neither identifies nor separates the two commands; such a nuanced position, I will contend, has implications for contemporary theological anthropology. By comparing Barth and Rahner in this way I hope to show how theological presuppositions actually shape what is said about both the Trinity and the commands to love God and neighbor. Rahner believes that "the immanent Trinity is strictly identical with the economic Trinity and vice versa" 1 and thus argues for the "radical identity of the two loves". By contrast Barth believes there must be a clear distinction but not separation of the immanent and economic Trinity, 2 and contends that we creatures need to repent and to be brought into the sphere of God's love by an act of the Holy Spirit. So, he denies that love of God and neighbor can be identified, since love of neighbor is grounded in God's love for us, which frees us to put God first and thus to love our neighbors. I hope to show that whenever a clear distinction between love of God and love of neighbor is not in evidence, then, theological anthropology unintentionally tends toward a Pelagian view of the creator/creature relationship with the result that Christ's
Widely recognized as the leading Scottish theologian of the twentieth century, Thomas F. Torrance... more Widely recognized as the leading Scottish theologian of the twentieth century, Thomas F. Torrance (1913–2007) was noteworthy as a dogmatic theologian for his influential explication of Trinitarian doctrine as it was developed by Nicene theologians. He was also a prominent figure in ecumenical theology, notably working with Eastern Orthodox theologians towards agreement on the doctrine of the Trinity. Torrance contributed greatly to ecumenical dialogue among Reformed, Anglicans, and Roman Catholics, with his innovative and substantive understanding of the Church and sacraments, as well as nature and grace. Torrance’s expertise was not limited to dogmatics as he was also one of the leading theologians of the twentieth century to publish extensively on the relationship between science and theology. Torrance’s influence is indicated by the increasing number of doctoral dissertations devoted to his theology, the existence of a scholarly society formed to discuss and disseminate his ideas...
This article argues that views of sin and salvation are shaped by one's view of God. Thus, wh... more This article argues that views of sin and salvation are shaped by one's view of God. Thus, whenever it is thought that God is a metaphor that theologians can change to attain a desired social or psychological result, then the true meaning of sin and salvation are lost. Relying on Karl Barth's view of Jesus as the Judge judged in our place, this article argues against ideas that sin can no longer be understood as self-will, and that salvation must be understood only as our working for a better world. Such views fail to recognise that, since only God can reveal God, the true meaning of sin is and remains most visible today in our attempts to redefine God and salvation in social and psychological rather than strictly theological terms.
Over against the bluster of modern Trinitarian theology’s implementation of a view of creation an... more Over against the bluster of modern Trinitarian theology’s implementation of a view of creation and reconciliation that posits a God who is somehow constituted by his relations with us in history, we have here a very substantial and thought-provoking analysis and rejection of such thinking based on the eternal unity in Trinity and Trinity in unity of God affirmed at the Council of Nicaea with its stress on the homoousion of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. While some today consider the question of whether or not God could have been the Triune God without the world to be a mere abstraction, a question without any discernible content, Bruce Marshall demonstrates why this important question has been marginalized by those who consciously or implicitly embrace the logic of Hegelian thinking. But more importantly, he shows exactly why it is imperative to ask and answer that question by pointing to the reality of the immanent Trinity and not to some abstraction that needs to be reconceived in terms of a divine unity that is seen to be the result of certain developments within the historical process. The question of whether or not God could have been God without the world is and remains a crucial question today. And how one answers this question will determine the way one conceptualizes the divine acts of reconciliation and redemption. If God needs the world in any sense to be God, as he would if he were in any way constituted by his relations with us in history, then such a God will also be depicted as one who needs to suffer in order to love and ultimately needs to be redeemed from division, conflict, godlessness, and death in order for our salvation to be a reality. Put succinctly, if suffering, alienation, and death are thought to be part of God’s nature, then God becomes powerless to overcome these indications of sin for us.
In his attempt to link the immanent and the economic Trinity more closely together, Ted Peters se... more In his attempt to link the immanent and the economic Trinity more closely together, Ted Peters seems to limit the task of the Trinitarian doctrine to that of a hermeneutical device needed to comprehend salvation. This basically Rahnerian approach to the mystery of the Trinity, it is argued, could lead to God's freedom being compromised and his nature being confused with the process of salvation history.
elements of the corpus triforme theology (which sees the Body of Christ as a temporal sacrament s... more elements of the corpus triforme theology (which sees the Body of Christ as a temporal sacrament symbolizing the Word’s incarnation in the Old Covenant, in Jesus of Nazareth, and in the unfolding of the new covenant) while rejecting core beliefs like monotheism and the Incarnation. Balthasar believes that the same Gnostic tactic is at work in Christianity today, and therefore he attempts to use Irenaeus’s critique of early Gnosticism as a criterion to diagnose the practice of some modern theologians who adopt positions inimical to the corpus triforme Christology. He sees a clear connection between Gnosticism and modern theologies that have been influenced by Hegel (pp. 139-145). He views Marxism also
This article argues that if Catholic and Protestant theologians, prompted by the Holy Spirit, all... more This article argues that if Catholic and Protestant theologians, prompted by the Holy Spirit, allowed their common faith in God as confessed in the Nicene Creed to shape their thinking and action, this could lead to more visible unity between them. Relying on Barth, the article suggests that the oneness, holiness, catholicity and apostolicity of the church can be understood best in faith that allows the unique object of faith, namely God incarnate in Christ and active in his Spirit, to dictate one’s understanding. Such thinking will avoid the pluralist tendency to eviscerate Christ’s uniqueness and attempts to equate church unity with aspects of the church’s visible existence. These approaches tend to undermine the importance of faith in recognizing that such unity means union with Christ through the Spirit such that it cannot be equated with or perceived by examining only its historical existence in itself and in relation to other communities of faith.
This article will explore the relationship between the commands to love God and love neighbor as ... more This article will explore the relationship between the commands to love God and love neighbor as this has been articulated by two of the most influential theologians of the recent past, Karl Barth and Karl Rahner. Following Barth's insistence on a deliberate and sharp distinction between the immanent and economic Trinity, I will argue that a proper recognition that the immanent Trinity is the indispensable premise of the economic Trinity will lead toward a view that neither identifies nor separates the two commands; such a nuanced position, I will contend, has implications for contemporary theological anthropology. By comparing Barth and Rahner in this way I hope to show how theological presuppositions actually shape what is said about both the Trinity and the commands to love God and neighbor. Rahner believes that "the immanent Trinity is strictly identical with the economic Trinity and vice versa" 1 and thus argues for the "radical identity of the two loves". By contrast Barth believes there must be a clear distinction but not separation of the immanent and economic Trinity, 2 and contends that we creatures need to repent and to be brought into the sphere of God's love by an act of the Holy Spirit. So, he denies that love of God and neighbor can be identified, since love of neighbor is grounded in God's love for us, which frees us to put God first and thus to love our neighbors. I hope to show that whenever a clear distinction between love of God and love of neighbor is not in evidence, then, theological anthropology unintentionally tends toward a Pelagian view of the creator/creature relationship with the result that Christ's
Uploads
Papers by Paul Molnar