至简三位一体与当代“自然神学”:超越简森和普罗提诺的博纳文蒂尔

C. Stringer
{"title":"至简三位一体与当代“自然神学”:超越简森和普罗提诺的博纳文蒂尔","authors":"C. Stringer","doi":"10.1177/10638512221139756","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article I voice and defend Bonaventure's argument from divine simplicity to the Trinity from two versions of its negation, one Christian (Robert Jenson) and one subordinationist/Platonist (Plotinus). I point out that Bonaventure's supremely simple Trinitarianism has internal purchase on the Plotinian system: he makes available arguments that should pull subordinationist Christians/Platonists in the direction of his own view. Moreover, I observe that Bonaventure's metaphysical arguments in favor of the Trinity—exactly those that have purchase on Plotinian systems—would be available, however surprisingly, within contemporary “natural theology.”","PeriodicalId":223812,"journal":{"name":"Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theology","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Supremely Simple Trinity and Contemporary “Natural Theology”: Bonaventure Beyond Jenson and Plotinus\",\"authors\":\"C. Stringer\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10638512221139756\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this article I voice and defend Bonaventure's argument from divine simplicity to the Trinity from two versions of its negation, one Christian (Robert Jenson) and one subordinationist/Platonist (Plotinus). I point out that Bonaventure's supremely simple Trinitarianism has internal purchase on the Plotinian system: he makes available arguments that should pull subordinationist Christians/Platonists in the direction of his own view. Moreover, I observe that Bonaventure's metaphysical arguments in favor of the Trinity—exactly those that have purchase on Plotinian systems—would be available, however surprisingly, within contemporary “natural theology.”\",\"PeriodicalId\":223812,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theology\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10638512221139756\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10638512221139756","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这篇文章中,我从两个版本的否定中,一个是基督徒(罗伯特·简森),一个是从属主义者/柏拉图主义者(普罗提诺),来表达和捍卫博纳旺蒂尔从神的简单性到三位一体的论点。我指出,博纳旺图尔极其简单的三位一体论在普罗提尼体系中有内在的价值:他提出的论据应该把从属主义的基督徒/柏拉图主义者拉向他自己的观点。此外,我注意到博纳旺图尔支持三位一体的形而上学论证——正是那些与普罗提尼体系相关联的论证——在当代“自然神学”中是可以找到的,尽管令人惊讶。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Supremely Simple Trinity and Contemporary “Natural Theology”: Bonaventure Beyond Jenson and Plotinus
In this article I voice and defend Bonaventure's argument from divine simplicity to the Trinity from two versions of its negation, one Christian (Robert Jenson) and one subordinationist/Platonist (Plotinus). I point out that Bonaventure's supremely simple Trinitarianism has internal purchase on the Plotinian system: he makes available arguments that should pull subordinationist Christians/Platonists in the direction of his own view. Moreover, I observe that Bonaventure's metaphysical arguments in favor of the Trinity—exactly those that have purchase on Plotinian systems—would be available, however surprisingly, within contemporary “natural theology.”
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Catholicity and the Catholic Church: Protestant Concerns and (Roman) Catholic Perspectives Supremely Simple Trinity and Contemporary “Natural Theology”: Bonaventure Beyond Jenson and Plotinus Editor’s Note The Grammar of Salvation: The Function of Trinitarian Theology in the Works of Karen Kilby and Robert Jenson Reasons to Say Farewell
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1