Heidelcast 124: I Am That I Am (2)—The Categorical Distinction

Heidelcast

The Creator/creature distinction is fundamental to Christian theology. The Ancient Christian church defended it against the pagan doctrine of the eternality of matter. Scripture is very clear: “In the beginning God…”. On this point, the classical, confessional Reformed theologians built their distinction . . . Continue reading →

We Are Not Merely Discussing Economic Subordination

So Burk argues that Christ’s not grasping for equality with God belongs not only to the economic but to the ontological Trinity. That is an extraordinary claim! He is asserting far more than a simple acknowledgement that the Father and Son are . . . Continue reading →

Bavinck On Divine Simplicity

Now Christian theology has always been more or less conscious of this calling. On the whole, its teaching has been that God is “simple,” that is, sublimely free from all composition, and that therefore one cannot make any real [i.e., ontological] distinction . . . Continue reading →

Voetius Contra Middle Knowledge

From the points which have been so far upheld against middle knowledge it is clear that the whole difficulty in the present controversy reduces to this one point: Could free conditioned things, from eternity indifferent by nature to futurition or nonfuturition, have . . . Continue reading →

Turretin Contra Middle Knowledge

I. Although the knowledge of God is one and simple intrinsically no less than his essence, yet it can be considered in different ways extrinsically as to the objects. But it is commonly distinguished by theologians into the knowledge of simple intelligence . . . Continue reading →

Maybe It Comes Down To Method?

We understand that some strands of Baptist and evangelical life have not typically learned the habit of creedal thinking but have tended to emphasize independent Biblicism and personal exegesis. Perhaps that lies at the root of much of this dispute. But this . . . Continue reading →

Function And Subsistence Are Distinct Categories

Both the unity of the divine essence and the distinction of the persons within that essence are matters of ontology, of the divine being. Some, like Wollebius, define the divine persons as “the essence of God, with a certain manner of subsisting” . . . Continue reading →