Journal: Westminster Theological Journal
Volume: WTJ 64:2 (Fall 2002)
Article: The Function Of Perichoresis And The Divine Incomprehensibility
Author: Lane G. Tipton

---

WTJ 64:2 (Fall 2002) p. 289

The Function Of Perichoresis And The Divine Incomprehensibility

Lane G. Tipton*

[*Lane G. Tipton is a Ph.D. student in Systematic Theology at Westminster Theological Seminary.]

I. Introduction

Reformed Trinitarian theism best encapsulates the theology of Cornelius Van Til. He says, “Basic to all the doctrines of Christian theism is that of the self-contained God, or, if we wish, that of the ontological Trinity. It is this notion of the ontological Trinity that ultimately controls a truly Christian methodology.”1 Again, “unless we may hold to the presupposition of the self-contained ontological Trinity, human rationality itself is a mirage.”2 The ontological Trinity provides the architectonic principle in Van Til’s theology and apologetic.

However, the doctrine of the Trinity in Van Til’s thought is as controversial as it is foundational. Regarding the Trinity, Van Til makes the following statements, which, when taken together, provide a formulation which John Frame called “a very bold theological move.”3 What is this bold move? Van Til argues:

It is sometimes asserted that we can prove to men that we are not assuming anything that they ought to consider irrational, inasmuch as we say that God is one in essence and three in person. We therefore claim that we have not asserted unity and trinity of exactly the same thing. Yet this is not the whole truth of the matter. We do assert that God, that is, the whole Godhead, is one person.4

Notice that Van Til does not assert that the person/essence formulation is false, or in need of replacement; instead, he argues that the statement “God is one in essence and three in person” does not yield the “whole truth of the matter.” Again Van Til says, “We must hold that God’s being holds an absolute numerical identity. And even within the ontological Trinity we must maintain that God is one. He is one person.”5

WTJ 64:2 (Fall 2002) p. 290

The natural question that arises is, precisely what does Van Til’s formulation provide that is lacking in certain person/essence formulae? In answering this question, I will attempt to place Van Til’s formulation in its broader theological context by examining the central matrix of concepts in Van Til’s theology that bear on his Trinitarian theology, including God’s incomprehensibility and analogical reasoning. In that theological context, I will attempt to elucidate Van Til’s...

visitor : : uid: ()