This paper assesses the viability of the model of ”collective action’ for the understanding of the doctrine of the inseparability of trinitarian operations, broadly conceived within a Social-Trinitarian framework. I argue that a ”loose’ understanding of this inseparability as ”unity of intention’ is insufficiently monotheistic and that it can be ”tightened’ by an understanding of the ontology of triune operations analogically modelled after collective actions of a ”constitutive’ kind. I also show that attention to the ”description relativity of action ascriptions’ (...) can potentially move us beyond the impasse of the doctrine of appropriation. Finally, I respond to potential objections. (shrink)

It is widely thought that Augustine thinks perception is, in some distinctive sense, an active process and that he takes conscious awareness to be constitutive of perception. I argue that conscious awareness is not straightforwardly constitutive of perception and that Augustine is best understood as an indirect realist. I then clarify Augustine’s views concerning the nature and role of diachronically unified conscious awareness and mental representation in perception, the nature of the soul’s intentio, and the precise sense in which perception (...) is an active process. (shrink)

Divine temporality is all the rage in certain theological circles today. Some even suggesting that the doctrine of the Trinity entails divine temporality. While I find this claim a bit strong, I do think that divine temporality can be quite useful for developing a robust model of the Trinity. However, not everyone agrees with this. Paul Helm has offered an objection to the so-called Oxford school of divine temporality based on the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. He has argued that (...) this form of divine temporality entails Arianism. In other words, divine temporality suffers from an inadequate doctrine of the Trinity. In this paper I shall first articulate the so-called Oxford school of divine temporality. From there I shall develop some of the Oxford school’s theological benefits that help flesh out the doctrine of the Trinity, and assuage the charge of Arianism. Then I shall offer an examination and refutation of the Arian charge to divine temporality in order to show that the divine temporalist can maintain a robust Trinitarian theology. (shrink)

Material-biological dimension of the image of God in man: The article presents the theology of imago Dei in perspective of scientific vision of human being. Today such vision is determined in the very special way by increasing influence of neurology and cognitive sciences. They claim that rationality and freedom of human being is grounded in the specific biological structures and can be explained by it. From such perspective imago Dei, which was defined by theological tradition as linked to human rationality (...) and freedom, should not be understood as a merely spiritual dimension. New approaches and data of sciences introduce the necessity of rethinking traditional idea of the image toward broader articulation of its material character and nature. Human being, as a corporeal being, is the image of God. Such statement does not imply any kind of inappropriate reductionism or ontological monism and cannot be taken as an intellectual justification of radical naturalism. The article shows how this claim can be proved from the point of view of classical Christian doctrine of creation. (shrink)