Divine Simplicity In The Theology Of Irenaeus

This book focuses on Irenaeus as key to the early Christian appropriation of divine simplicity as a philosophical principle, since he is the first Christian source to explain his usage in relation to God. Beyond providing limits for what a simple God can and cannot mean, he also applies this principle to God’s activity (i.e. creating), and to God’s names and powers. There is a growing interest in the early Christian appropriation of divine simplicity: Simons' study is timely as the first book to focus exclusively on the earliest explanation and application.

This book establishes how the doctrine of divine simplicity was interwoven with the formation of a Christian Trinitarian understanding of God before Nicaea. For centuries, Christian theology affirmed God as simple (haplous) and Triune. But the doctrine of the simple Trinity has been challenged by modern critics of classical theism. How can God, conceived as purely one without multiplicity, be a Trinity? This book sets a new historical foundation for addressing this question by tracing how divine simplicity emerged as a key notion in early Christianity. Pui Him Ip argues that only in light of the Platonic synthesis between the Good and the First Principle (archē) can we make sense of divine simplicity as a refusal to associate any kind of plurality that brings about contraries in the divine life. This philosophical doctrine, according to Ip, was integral to how early Christians began to speak of the divine life in terms of a relationship between Father and Son. Through detailed historical exploration of Irenaeus, sources from the Monarchian controversy, and especially Origen’s oeuvre, Ip contends that the key contribution from ante-Nicene theology is the realization that it is nontrivial to speak of the begetting of a distinct person (Son) from a simple source (Father). This question became the central problematic in Trinitarian theology before Nicaea and remained crucial for understanding the emergence of rival accounts of the Trinity (“pro-Nicene” and “anti-Nicene” theologies) in the fourth century. Origen and the Emergence of Divine Simplicity before Nicaea suggests a new revisional historiography of theological developments after Origen and will be necessary reading for serious students both of patristics and of the wider history of Christian thought.

In this work, Jackson Lashier provides a fresh reading of Irenaeus' understanding of God, in dialogue with his opponents and sources, revealing a more developed Trinitarian theology than is commonly accorded the second century in general and Irenaeus in particular.

Divine Simplicity engages recent critics and address one of their major concerns: that the doctrine of divine simplicity is not a biblical teaching. By analyzing the use of Scripture by key theologians from the early church to Karl Barth, Barrett finds that divine simplicity developed in order to respond to theological errors (e.g., Eunomianism) and to avoid misreading Scripture. The volume then explains how divine simplicity can be rearticulated by following a formal analogy from the doctrine of the Trinity in which the divine attributes are identical to the divine essence but are not identical to each other.

That YHWH is numerically one is foundational to the theology of the Hebrew Bible. Christian theologians historically have affirmed that there is a more fundamental type of oneness attributable to God. God is one not merely in the sense of being the only God, but also in the sense of being simple or non-composite, having no parts of any kind. In this way, God is said to be an absolute unity. After a consideration of all the evidence, Barry D. Smith reaches the conclusion that there is no basis for ascribing simplicity to God. The simplicity doctrine is not found in Scripture and the traditional arguments used to establish it are unconvincing. In addition, the recent defenses of the simplicity doctrine prompted by Alvin Plantinga's work Does God Have a Nature? are unsuccessful. It should not be thought, however, that the rejection of divine simplicity means that by default God must be conceived as composite, not even as a perfect composite with maximally great, God-making properties. Rather, there is a third option: God should not be conceived as either simple or composite. The question of in which mode God has attributes or exemplifies properties should be set aside.

Divine Complexity intentionally combines Reformation theology, patristic studies, and modern biblical criticism in order to argue for a social view of the Trinity—the view of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as three distinct persons united in love—as the grounds of the Christian hope in the coming of the "Beloved Community." This book is written with the student of early Christianity and the development of doctrine in mind.

For too long certain scholars have been content to portray Irenaeus of Lyons as a well-meaning churchman but incompetent theologian. By offering a careful reading of Irenaeus' polemical and constructive arguments, God and Christ in Irenaeus contradicts these claims by showing that he was highly educated, trained in the rhetorical arts, aware of general philosophical positions, and able to use both rhetorical and philosophical theories and methods in his argumentation. Moreover, the theological account laid down by his pen was original and sophisticated, supremely so for one of the second century. In contrast to readings that minimize the metaphysical dimension of Irenaeus' theology, Anthony Briggman establishes as pillars of Irenaeus' polemical argumentation and constructive theology his conception of the divine being as infinite and simple, the reciprocal immanence of the Word-Son and God the Father, divine generation, the union of the divine Word-Son and human nature in the person of Christ, and the revelatory activity of the infinite and incomprehensible Word-Son, amongst other features of his theology. Briggman offers a fundamentally new understanding of Irenaeus and his thought.

There has been a recent revival of interest in the doctrine of divine simplicity in systematic and philosophical theology, following decades of intense reflection on the tri-personhood of the Christian God. While recent studies have produced a greater appreciation of patristic and scholastic theologies, they have not yet engaged in dialogue with proponents of the trinitarian revival that emerged in the latter half of the twentieth century in anything other than polemical terms. This book offers a theological defense of the doctrine of divine simplicity through careful reading of both exemplary historical theologians and Robert W. Jenson, an important American contributor to the trinitarian revival. After tracing continuities and discontinuities amongst select historical theologians, the book approaches Jenson with a multivalent account of divine simplicity. The result is a more nuanced interpretation of Jenson’s theology, an account of divine simplicity that responds to perceived problems, and new constructive proposals for divine simplicity in trinitarian theology.