Is the Latin Social Trinity Defensible?

Faith and Philosophy 38 (4):505-513 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Scott Williams has provided a careful and detailed response to my critique of his Latin Social model of the Trinity. I reply to his defense, and I argue that this model is, in fact, indefensible.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

“Latin” or “Conciliar,” but Still Incoherent.William Hasker - 2021 - Faith and Philosophy 38 (4):540-545.
Time Travel and the Trinity.Brian Leftow - 2012 - Faith and Philosophy 29 (3):313-324.
On Hasker on Leftow on Hasker on Leftow.Brian Leftow - 2012 - Faith and Philosophy 29 (3):334-339.
Constitution and the Trinity.William Hasker - 2010 - Faith and Philosophy 27 (3):321-329.
A Leftovian Trinity?William Hasker - 2009 - Faith and Philosophy 26 (2):154-166.
The Trinity and Extended Simples.Martin Pickup - 2016 - Faith and Philosophy 33 (4):414-440.
A Latin Trinity.Brian Leftow - 2004 - Faith and Philosophy 21 (3):304-333.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-04-15

Downloads
10 (#1,160,791)

6 months
5 (#652,053)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

William Hasker
Huntington University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references