If there is potential in God, there is potential in God’s judgment. If there is potential in God’s judgment, satisfaction is not necessary…
But the temptation to “fix” this tension by making the divine essence the transcendent “part” in God, and the Trinity the immanent and complex “part” in God is misguided since it wouldn’t fix any problem at all.
“I am persuaded that one reason why our working-men so universally keep clear of ministers is because they abhor their artificial and unmanly ways.”
By the time I reached the end of this book, I simply didn’t see any God left. All that remained was creature. Such is the end of theistic personalism and/or process theism.
“But who is to say both non-motion and motion couldn’t exist in the Trinity?”
From obviously selective quotation, not only of Thomas, but also of John Calvin, John Owen, and others, to blatant denial of Christian orthodoxy, this book doesn’t so much represent a nuance within the orthodoxy of Reformedom, but a departure from the first principles of Christianity altogether.
Owen, thus, represents a full-fledged Reformed orthodoxy on this matter. There are others, such as Johann Heinrich Alsted, Stephen Charnock, Herman Witsius, and Petrus Van Mastricht. Yet, any differences between them would be mostly accidental and not relevant to the overall point of the present essay.
Turretin… no doubt understood natural theology in relationship to the covenant of works and the covenant of grace.
Franciscus Junius construes the state of man in a twofold manner when he writes that there are “two states of men, namely, the state of integrity when he was created by God and the state of corruption arising from man’s fall by his own choice.”
“In attestation of his wondrous wisdom, both the heavens and the earth present us with innumerable proofs…” ~ John Calvin