{"id":6438,"date":"2014-09-11T17:25:21","date_gmt":"2014-09-11T21:25:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/?p=6438"},"modified":"2015-01-24T09:56:26","modified_gmt":"2015-01-24T14:56:26","slug":"continuing-the-conversation-with-robert-bowman-different-selves-same-being","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/continuing-the-conversation-with-robert-bowman-different-selves-same-being\/","title":{"rendered":"continuing the conversation with Robert Bowman – different selves, same being?"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"Thanks to Robert Bowman for his reply<\/a> to my off-target criticisms<\/a>. I thought I understood what he was doing, following in the steps of many a theologian, but evidently I was mistaken in my inferring that he holds to a one-self Trinity. In this post, I make a clarification, then ask two questions.<\/strong><\/p>\n

He says that in trinitarian doctrine,<\/p>\n

the term [“person”] was and is used analogously rather than univocally<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Well, if we mean “person” in the sense of “human being,”<\/strong> then yes, it would apply only analogously<\/strong> to the “Persons” of the catholic Trinity. But when I (and many people nowadays)\u00a0use the term “self”<\/strong> or “person,” I have in mind a concept abstract enough to apply equally to me, to Mr. Bowman, to E.T., to God, or to a gnome. It doesn’t imply either being a human or being non-human – it’s neutral that way. (I prefer “self” in part because people are less likely to think I mean that to imply being a human.) That<\/em> concept, according three-self (“social”) trinitarians, applies literally<\/strong> to the Father, Son, and Spirit. It’s the concept of a being capable of knowledge, intentional action, and friendship. I take it Mr. Bowman grants this, based on his latest post. (If so, then the\u00a0term “locus<\/strong>,” I suggest, is not needed.) Of course, those selves would be much greater than ordinary human selves like Mr. Bowman and me.<\/p>\n

I would then ask him, does that concept, in his view, also apply (literally) to God<\/strong> (that is, to the Trinity, the triune God)?<\/p>\n

In his post Mr. Bowman also says,<\/p>\n

My only objection to this conclusion [that Father and Son are two selves] is that Dr. Tuggy understands self<\/em> as equivalent to entity or being, as requiring that the two be bounded or separated ontologically as two beings. But I agree with his point, which can be restated in this way: the Father is someone, the Son is someone else, and the Son is not the Father. Indeed, this is essential to the doctrine of the Trinity…<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Self<\/em> and being<\/em> are not the same concept, but the concept of a self<\/em> is the concept of a certain kind of being, as mentioned above. By “separated ontologically” I think he means non-identical, that is, not numerically one. Yes, I think that being two selves implies being two beings. I think that Mr. Bowman thinks it a matter of definition that the Trinity requires that the Father and Son be two selves, but one being. So, let me then ask how Mr. Bowman would reply<\/strong> to this argument:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. The Father and the Son are the same God.<\/li>\n
  2. For any x and y, and for any kind F, if x and y are the same F, then x is an F, y is an F, and x = y. (x and y are numerically one)<\/li>\n
  3. The Father = the Son. \u00a0 (1, 2)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    3 follows from 1 and 2, so we can’t say the argument is invalid. Mr. Bowman must reject 3 (and of course we agree that 3 is false; if 3 were true, they could not differ in any way). But 2 is, in my view, self-evident. And 1 is required by the catholic orthodoxy to which he ascribes (and which he considers to be required by the Bible). My way out<\/strong> is to deny 1. Before, I wrongly took him to be denying 1 – not because he’s a unitarian, but rather as a one-self trinitarian. But I’m loathe to think<\/strong> that he both affirms and denies 3 – affirming\u00a0it because he accepts 1 and 2 but denying it because it’s unorthodox. So,\u00a0I would ask Mr. Bowman whether or not he denies 2<\/strong>. I think he must, but it is perilous for me to make that inference, so I ask.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Thanks to Robert Bowman for his reply to my off-target criticisms. I thought I understood what he was doing, following in the steps of many a theologian, but evidently I was mistaken in my inferring that he holds to a one-self Trinity. In this post, I make a clarification, then ask two questions. He says… Read More »continuing the conversation with Robert Bowman – different selves, same being?<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":6443,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[37,21,58,4,38,9,13,3,43],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6438","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-apologetics","category-bible","category-creeds","category-heresy-orthodoxy","category-monotheism","category-philosophy","category-theologians","category-theories","category-unitarianism"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6438","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6438"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6438\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":34671,"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6438\/revisions\/34671"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/6443"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6438"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6438"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6438"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}