No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Constitution, identity, and the Trinity: rebuttal to Leftow
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 30 May 2022
Abstract
Brian Leftow continues to argue that the metaphysical concept of constitution cannot be used to explicate the doctrine of the Trinity, as I have attempted to do. He also defends his own, distinctive view of the relation of Jesus to the Father. I maintain that he fails on both counts.
- Type
- Original Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Hasker, W (2013) Metaphysics and the Tri-Personal God. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hasker, W (2021b) The Trinity as social and constitutional: a rejoinder to Brian Leftow. Religious Studies 57, 553–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffman, J and Rosenkranz, GS (2021) Omnipresence. In Goetz S and Taliaferro C (eds), The Encyclopedia of Philosophy of Religion. Hoboken: Wiley Online Library.Google Scholar
Hudson, H (2009) Omnipresence. In Flint, TP and Rea, MC (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophical Theology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 199–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leftow, B (2022) Can the constitution be saved? Religious Studies, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0034412521000512.Google Scholar
McCall, T and Rea, MC (eds) (2009) Philosophical and Theological Essays on the Trinity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar